TASEK PAUH blogspot

Sivarasa and Sim were served with a notice to provide information under Section 22(1)(c) of the Act in the ACA office, here today. It was signed by ACA headquarters Special Action Branch enforcer Chua Lay Choo.

"We understand from the attachment to the notice that they want to know the identity and full details of the source," Sivarasa said.

Both Sim and Sivarasa have one week to comply or face two years jail, a fine of RM10,000 or both.

He said they had not responded yet but will discuss with their lawyers and the party leadership before deciding on their next move.

"They are using the law to reveal the source and ACA justifies it to their need to compile evidence to determine the authenticity of the clip," he said, adding that this will further reduce the public’s confidence in the government agency.

The recording was of a telephone conversation purportedly between a senior lawyer and a "Datuk" believed to be a senior judge.

PKR released the clip – originally 14 minutes long – in a Sept 19 press conference and Sivarasa lodged a report with the ACA the next day.

He said PKR gave the source a guarantee of protection from the start and added that he (Sivarasa) and Sim were willing to take the penalties in efforts to protect the source.

PKR, he said, was disappointed over the directions of the investigations and questioned ACA’s technical investigations to determine the authenticity of the clip.

Investigations in the technical sense can be done if the tape is handed over to its video experts or they could even call the people in the video but they are asking for the details of the source, he said.

Sivarasa said investigations had taken a wrong direction - similar to the nude ear-squat recording in 2005.

Investigations in that incident, he said, were centred on the person who captured the video and not the offence of misconduct where the woman was made to strip and carry out the act.

"I told Chua it is the same here. Instead of investigating the root of the problem – corruption (within the judiciary) – they are going after the source of the video," he said.

Sivarasa and Sim both said that without the formation of a Royal Commission, the source would not be revealed because of a lack of immunity.

Sivarasa and Sim were accompanied by lawyer Amer Hamzah Arshad. sun2surf