A Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency official who earlier served as the head of a vessel operating from Tanjung Sedili, Johor was reportedly fined RM 10,000 at a sessions court in Kuching, Sarawak on Friday (30 July) over accepting a series of bribes last year, according to the Borneo Post.
Tamisan Tumen, who had the rank of Second Warrant Officer, pleaded guilty to the charge under Section 165 of the Penal Code and agreed to pay the fine.
Court documents quoted by the Borneo Post noted Tumen accepting bribes totaling RM $8,000 via a series of online transactions from an individual with a “Datuk Seri” title between April to December in 2020.
He received the bribes as an inducement for not taking action against the vessel owned by the individual which had incomplete documents.
Nur Nisla Abdul Latif, a deputy public prosecutor for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, urged the court to issue a heavier penalty against Tumen due to the seriousness of the offence as it has been committed by a government servant.
Tumen had failed to protect the nation’s waters, she said.
Photo credit and source: Borneo Post
Published: 2 August, 2021
Additional topics of bunker contamination and OCM services discussed at VPS’ Fuel Management Challenges – The Year of 2021 & Beyond webinar on 23 September; Manifold Times summarises the session.
‘The JMs have failed to discharge their duties by blindly helping the Banks mount a false case against the Defendant,’ wrote defence lawyers representing former IPP Director Dr Goh Jian Hian in court statement.
Lead prosecutor Andreas Myllerup Laursen aims for a fine and a prison sentence in the so-called Syria case scheduled to commence in Odense, Denmark on 26 October, writes the Danish publication.
In a modern re-telling of the story of David versus Goliath, local bunker barge owners/charterers successfully resisted claims brought in the Singapore courts by Phillips 66 for misdelivery of bunkers.
Bunker barge owners and operators; traders and suppliers; banks, including players in other countries, will have to re-examine respective operations, advises Helmsman Associate Director Jonathan Tan.
Vopak BL was a non-essential document with no contractual force and had no effect as a contract of carriage or as a document of title, states written Judgement issued by Singapore Court of Appeal.