MACC should also probe the connection of Khalid’s son, Khairul Amri, to Gopi, says lawyer Fahri Azzat

KUALA LUMPUR: A senior lawyer has urged Inspector General of Police Khalid Abu Bakar to reveal the content of conversation that Khalid had with the middleman called Gopi, who allegedly played the role of a middleman between gambling syndicates and the police in Melaka.

“The fact is Gopi spoke to the IGP for three minutes. It is not a wrong call. The IGP should disclose the content of conversation. How does Gopi have the IGP’s number and all the other contacts? I don’t have the IGP’s number,” said Fahri Azzat.

Fahri also said that it is incumbent upon Khalid to reveal this information to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

“Khalid should inform the MACC and the MACC should start probing Khalid’s son as well,” he said in reference to Khairul Amri Khalid.

He said this when commenting on Khalid’s admission yesterday of personally knowing Gopi.

“Yes, he is known to me and he is also known to my family,” said Khalid, referring to Gopinathan Krishnan. Better known as Gopi, he is also known to Khalid’s brother and son.

Gopi and two district police chiefs were arrested by the MACC under ‘Operation Gopi’ in Melaka several weeks ago.

Khalid’s admission came following online news portal Sarawak Report’s exclusive report which was supposedly based on Gopi’s phone records.

Having said that, the top cop gave an assurance that he would not protect himself and his family members if there was anything improper in his ties with Gopi.

When asked whether the perception of justice among the people would be affected based on Khalid’s admission, Fahri said that it is not the case.

“People will be more cynical but they do know that the police are working for the government of the day’s political purpose. The perception of justice among the people has not been addressed since the Anwar trials.

Criminal lawyer Farida Mohamad meanwhile felt that the probe on Gopi may be tainted as the public prosecutors rely on the police for investigation.

“There may be bias. The people will speculate that the prosecution and judiciary may be biased since those who serve as prosecutors are normally appointed as judges. The IGP may influence the decision,” she said.

“There will be prejudiced views against the independence of the judiciary. There are chances for investigative mechanisms to be compromised since in many cases it is the police that investigate before handing over the case to the prosecution.”

Also read: IGP admits knowing suspect in protection racket