KUALA LUMPUR: A Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) officer has been quizzed over his contradicting testimonies in Lim Guan Eng’s graft trial involving the Penang undersea tunnel project.

       MACC recording officer Asst Supt Muhammad Nazree Mansor, who resumed cross-examination by defence counsel Gobind Singh Deo on Thursday (March 24), gave a different response on the late developer Ewe Swee Kheng’s last statement on Aug 14 last year than three other statements that he recorded in 2020.

       Asst Supt Muhammad Nazree was asked if he realised that his statement contradicted his previous ones, and replied no.

       “You agreed yesterday (Wednesday, March 23). Are you making a U-turn now?” asked Gobind.

       The graft-buster then said he was unsure of his previous answer and asked for a reference.

       On Wednesday, Ewe’s Aug 14 statement was read out in the Sessions Court by Asst Supt Muhammad Nazree, who recorded it by hand at Penang MACC headquarters.

       According to the statement, he prompted Ewe on his statement being different from what he told the MACC previously, upon which Ewe replied that he felt compelled to tell the truth as he "had kept too much secret about this" and there would come a time "when things get uncovered” and affect his business.

       Ewe also said he was somewhat worried about his safety for making the revelation and was not harassed by any party into making the statement.

       Ewe, who was supposed to be a prosecution witness in the trial, fell from his condominium’s balcony at Jalan Kelawei in Penang on Oct 5.

       Asst Supt Muhammad Nazree, the 15th prosecution witness, had earlier testified that he recorded Ewe’s statement four times – on July 3, 8 and 9 in 2020 and on Aug 14 last year – but admitted that he did not record the statement in full the last time.

       Asked about this, he said he decided to record the statement by hand as he did not have a laptop at hand when Ewe suddenly said he wanted to make an additional statement to the MACC.

       He added that Ewe’s statement was taken in the auditorium, which had no recording facilities.

       Although there were rooms with recording facilities in the building, he said there were many formalities involved when an officer wanted to use them, including approval by superiors and setting up the video recording equipment.

       Gobind then raised questions over the last page of the handwritten statement, which also contained some typewritten text.

       Gobind: If this is handwritten, how would you know where exactly would Ewe’s statement end, for you to add in the typewritten parts right below?

       Nazree: I have no answer.

       Gobind: Was this statement fabricated by you?

       Nazree: I do not agree.

       During re-examination by deputy public prosecutor Wan Shaharudin Wan Ladin, Asst Supt Muhammad Nazree said he was aware of the contradictions in Ewe’s statements when he was taking them down, and prompted Ewe about it.

       He explained that Ewe had suddenly said he wanted to make an additional statement.

       “I informed my superior about Ewe’s intention and also told him that I did not have my laptop with me because I left it behind when I returned to my hotel room after I was done with another witness earlier.

       “My superior instructed me to record it by hand,” he said, adding that this practice was allowed and there was nothing wrong with it.

       Gobind later asked the court to allow Asst Supt Nazreen to be subject for recall for further proceedings, as he had “clearly contradicted himself during re-examination”.

       Judge Azura Alwi allowed the request.

       The trial continues on April 1.