Urgent to tell the truth !

THE greatest tribute that Malaysians can pay to the memory of Kevin Morais and others like him who had sacrificed their lives fighting against the abuse of power is to protect and strengthen those institutions tasked with ensuring that integrity and good governance define our identity as a nation.

Each and every one of those institutions – from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to Bank Negara – is under some sort of stress and strain today. Fulfilling their amanah (trust) – doing what they are required to do by law and convention – has become a major challenge. Why are they in such a situation today?

One, we continue to be burdened with a neo-feudal psychology which accords precedence to unquestioning loyalty to a leader, however wrong he may be, over allegiance to values, principles and institutions associated with integrity. The neo-feudal leader himself expects such blind loyalty and cultivates it assiduously through material rewards and allurements.

Two, in a society where communal consciousness is pervasive there is always a tendency among a significant segment of society to demonstrate fidelity to communal identities, institutions and personalities. Such fidelity often results in the subordination of values such as integrity and honesty.

Three, when loyalty to communal identity becomes obsessive, it is not difficult to whip up fear and hatred of the other to a point where collective fear overwhelms concern for integrity or righteousness. The manipulation of fear, by no means confined to ethnic and religious sentiments, is sometimes a tool that elites employ in order to perpetuate their power.

Four, when a party has been dominant for a long while – as the Barisan Nasional was until 2008 – and has not been held in check by a culture of accountability and transparency, it develops a mindset that is dismissive of anything that questions its exercise of power. Integrity is often the victim of such a mindset.

Five, a major episode in the life of a nation that devastates the integrity of a vital institution of governance can weaken the principle and practice of amanah in society as a whole for decades to come. This is what happened in Malaysia in 1988 when the head of the Judiciary was removed on flimsy, fabricated charges and senior judges dismissed.

For all these reasons, institutions which are expected to preserve and protect values and principles such as truth, justice, integrity and honesty have not been able to function as well as they should. The investigations into 1MDB and the RM2.6bil in the Prime Minister’s personal bank account which have been hampered and hindered by various moves and manoeuvres underscore this.

In more concrete terms, the PAC has been immobilised. There is still no action on the report submitted by Bank Negara to the Attorney-General which called for enforcement. There has been very little progress in apprehending key individuals wanted in both the 1MDB and RM2.6bil investigations.

The Prime Minister has yet to sue the Wall Street Journal for alleging financial improprieties on his part. Those who are concerned about integrity in public life are understandably disillusioned about the whole situation. This may explain why some of them may have sought external avenues to address the malaise.

There is no doubt at all that foreign actors who are focusing upon the current controversies in Malaysia have their own agendas. Given the orientation of the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times and the Washington Post, one is not surprised that they are exploiting the controversies to achieve their own goals which may include regime change in Putrajaya – a possibility which I had alluded to in an article on Feb 17.

Apart from Prime Minister Najib Razak’s explicit support for Hamas which has incensed Israel and its backers in the United States, it is also quite conceivable that Malaysia’s military cooperation with China reflected in the four-day joint naval exercise between the two nations in the strategic Straits of Malacca from Sept 18 – the biggest that China has conducted with any Asean state – has upset some circles in Washington DC.

It has also been argued that the targeting of Najib in the US media may be part of the attempt to ensure that Malaysia signs up to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) Agreement.

Whatever the motives, it is obvious that the Malaysian Government’s acts of commission and omission on 1MDB and the RM2.6bil account have provided foreign manipulators with a lot of ammunition to hit Najib.

This is why it is extremely urgent to tell the whole truth. The yet to be completed report of the Auditor-General which would be the basis for the reconstituted PAC to finish its work, and the finalisation of the MACC’s investigations, together with Bank Negara’s report which is with the Attorney-General, should reveal the truth about 1MDB and the RM2.6bil account. Foreign investigations may also help.

The Malaysian people should send a clear message to our Government. The investigations into the two related controversies should be closed and the whole truth should be made known to the nation and the world by the end of this year.

To allow the controversies to drag on into 2016 will only bring our nation to the edge of the precipice.

DR CHANDRA MUZAFFAR Kuala Lumpur

(Dr Chandra Muzaffar has been writing and speaking on integrity in public life since the nineteen seventies.)


Related posts:

Malaysian Deputy Public Prosecutor, Kevin, an angel was abducted, killed and cemented in drum by hired men

KEVIN Morais (pix) was a pure professional, highly ethical, very hardworking and humble. He possessed no ego of any form. In his work he ...

Separate the Attorney-General’s powers to correct a flaw in Malaysian legal system !

Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail Revise Attorney-General's powers There is a flaw in our system, inherited since before Independence, tha...

Sue or don't sue WSJ's report: RM2.6bil was moved to PM Najib Tun Razak's bank accounts?

KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia—Malaysian investigators scrutinizing a controversial government investment fund have traced nearly $700 million ... 

 Fighting corruption must be serious !

 1MDB probe gains momentum, a ...

PETALING JAYA: The probe into claims that funds were channelled into the personal accounts of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak heated up when the task force investigating the matter froze six bank accounts and ...

Corporate Lawyer charged with inside trading

KUALA LUMPUR: A corporate lawyer involved in almost all major corporate deals in the country has been charged in the Sessions Court here with seven counts of insider trading involving Sime Darby, UEM, VADS and Maxis shares.

Datuk E. Sreesanthan,(pix), 52, who has been practising for more than two decades, is the second high-profile figure to be charged this week after Datuk Seri Ahmad Zubair Murshid, who was brought to court by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission.

Zubair, the former Sime Darby Bhd president and group chief executive officer, was charged on July 17 with two counts of committing criminal breach of trust over land in Sarawak, incurring losses of over RM100mil.

Sreesanthan appeared calm while sitting outside the courtroom on Friday for about 30 minutes before Securities Commission (SC) prosecutors determined which court to charge him in.

The lawyer, who was dressed in a black suit and checked shirt, claimed trial to the seven charges, read as three different cases to reflect the different shares involved and time frame in which they were alleged to have been committed.

Sreesanthan is accused of buying shares while in possession of information that was not generally available, which on becoming generally available, a reasonable person would expect to have a material effect on the price and value.

He allegedly bought the shares using insider information, which would have given him the benefit that the share price would change before that information became public.

The alleged offences occurred at Bursa Malaysia Securities Berhad, at Bukit Kewangan here between Oct 9, 2006 and April 27, 2008.

Under the first three charges, Sreesanthan is alleged to gave acquired 75,000 units of Sime Darby Berhad shares while in possession of insider information on the proposed acquisition of several real estate and plantation companies by Synergy Drive Sdn Bhd between Oct 9 and Nov 12, 2006.

In the next two charges, he is accused of insider information involving 250,000 units of Maxis Communication Bhd shares on the proposed conditional take-over by Binariang GSM Sdn Bhd to acquire all the voting shares in Maxis and Maxis' proposed privatisation between April 25 and 27, 2007.

Under the sixth and seventh charges, he is accused of buying 200,000 units of UEM World Berhad and 100,000 units of VADS Berhad shares while in possession of insider information on Feb 13 and Sep 18, 2008, respectively.

If convicted under the Securities Industry Act 1983 and Capital Market and Services Act 2007, Sreesanthan could be fined a minimum of RM1mil and jailed up to 10 years.

SC prosecutor DPP Rosmawar Rozain said the offences were non-bailable but urged the court to set it at RM500,000 for each case if it used its discretion to offer bail.

“The investigation into the case has taken some time and expense,” said Rosmawar, adding it was a serious offence and that the court should force Sreesanthan to surrender his passport.

Counsel M. Puravalen said the prosecution had not put forward any factor that his client was a possible flight risk.

He said his client was a family man holding a steady job in his law firm, and had been practising law for 23 years.

“The bail amount should not be excessive,” said Puravalen, who proposed bail be set at RM50,000 for each case.

The prosecution applied for a joint trial of the three cases but the defence asked for a deferred decision as it had not received instructions from Sreesanthan.

Sessions judge Jagjit Singh set bail at RM300,000 for all the charges and ordered Sreesanthan to surrender his passport.

He fixed Sept 20 for case management in three separate courts.

By QISHIN TARIQ The Star 21 July 2012

A war against corruption!

Much like transformation itself, rooting out corruption is a marathon rather than sprint

WHEN we talk about corruption, we are not talking about a fight against corruption or a battle against corruption. We are talking about a war against corruption fought on a broad front with many battles, some lost and some won, over a period of years before eventual victory.

No country has done it overnight and for many it is an ongoing war that must be waged relentlessly. Hong Kong took 10 years. It is endemic in countries around the world and it is in the most advanced and structured of societies that the war against corruption has been most telling.

But here in Malaysia, many of us expect that it can be crushed and eradicated in a short period of time and all it takes is political will. Yes, political will is necessary but it is not the only condition. Many things need to be put in place and real results will take time.

This is one aspect of transformation where we have to constantly battle against unrealistic expectations – people want results yesterday but we can’t give it to them immediately. Not today, not tomorrow, not even in the next month, because the war against corruption is one of the most difficult and, beyond time, it takes a considerable amount of effort, by many, many parties.

This is further complicated by a problem of measurement. The prevalence of corruption is not easily measurable. When we take action against corruption, the number of people brought to book will be higher but this does not necessarily mean that corruption has decreased.

For better or worse, we have to rely on perceptions of how corrupt we are, both from our own public and how foreigners see us. Sometimes, there are situations which skew the final results against us as we shall see shortly.

There is absolutely no doubt that we need to step up the war against corruption especially since the two most common indicators, Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI) and the Global Corruption Barometer survey, show no significant change over the last two years – 2010 and 2011. But still we have made some progress when we take a closer look at the figures.

In 2010, Malaysia’s CPI score was 4.4 as the average score of nine surveys. Then, in 2011, Malaysia’s CPI score was 4.3 as the average score of 12 surveys. This means that three additional surveys were added. Our ranking slid to 4.3 from 4.4. (No country obtained 10 points – the highest. New Zealand topped with 9.5 while Singapore was fifth at 9.2.)

The movement in the CPI score (minus 0.1) was due to these additional three surveys, which had very low scores, thus bringing the average down. If these three surveys were not added, Malaysia’s CPI score would have moved up tremendously. One of the new surveys included was the Transparency International Bribe Payer’s Index.

This survey showed that Malaysians have a high tendency to pay bribes when they work or operate in other countries. I am certain that without that particular survey, our CPI would have increased. Because it is perceived that Malaysians working overseas bribe, it affects the CPI of the country itself.

Additionally, our ranking was 60 out of 183 countries in 2011 against 56 out of 178 countries in 2010. In Asean, we were placed at the third spot after Singapore and Brunei.

In terms of the barometer survey in 2011 conducted by Transparency International in 2011, 49% of the Malaysian public felt that the Malaysian Government’s fight against corruption is effective or extremely effective, a marginal improvement from 48% in 2010. This, however, is a vast improvement from 2009 when only 29% Malaysians thought that the Government’s effort on corruption was effective.

Overall, the two surveys show that we have made some progress in terms of the perception of corruption in the country and the number of people who have confidence that something is being done.

People like to say we must go for the big fish first. But it is not as simple as that. The process of gathering evidence is not easy and the very presence of corruption can make this process more difficult and even impossible in practice.

But what we need to do first is to put building blocks in place, a more bottom up approach which seeks to put in place a framework for good practices and a mechanism to report and root-out any corruption that takes place. It may look like we are starting small, but we are not. We need to put the right foundations in place.

Here are some examples of building blocks we have put in place:

● Whistle blower provisions: Implementation guidelines were issued in March last year. Agencies are already processing complaints of improper conduct under the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010. To-date, there are 28 cases;

● Integrity pact: The Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) project was to be the first large-scale project to implement the full Integrity Pact including monitoring and oversight elements. An oversight body was established involving the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC). An independent external monitoring system headed by the Auditor-General, with external party involvement, was formed to ensure adherence to the terms of the Integrity Pact. Full implementation of the Integrity Pact is only carried out on big projects with a high monetary value, so as to justify the cost of implementation;

● Faster prosecution: To hasten prosecution, 14 special corruption courts were set up since February last year and more than 250 cases have been processed;

● Naming and shaming website: The MACC has set up a website to list those who have been successfully prosecuted for corruption offences. This offers a ready database for interested parties and acts as a further deterrence to corruption. There are 710 listings to date (2010: 284; 2011: 96; and 2012: 13);

● Open, competitive tenders: Wherever possible we have open competitive tenders with set procedures for government procurement. For increased transparency, there is the MyProcurement Portal which lists 5,157 government contracts online in 2011; and

● Reduction of red tape in business licence applications: We are reducing the number of licences required from 780 to 375 and saving RM730mil in compliance costs. Such reduction of red tape reduces opportunities for corruption.

These are just a sampling of the measures being implemented. Over time we aim to build a wall against corruption by putting in place measures to stop its occurrence in the first place. This is as important as prosecution. Indications are some of the measures taken have directly helped government revenue. For instance, following MACC’s investigations into the Malaysian Customs Department, customs tax collection rose to a high of RM30.4bil last year. The highest previously recorded was RM28.6bil in 2008. This year, Customs expects to collect RM32bil.

In addition, the changes and reforms that we have put in place are also slowly showing results with foreign investors. According to a survey by the American Chamber of Commerce (AmCham) in Singapore, perception of corruption in the region, a long-standing issue, has greatly improved, with only 35% of respondents reporting dissatisfaction in 2011 compared with a high of 63% in 2010.

Consulting firm A.T. Kearney has also recognised Malaysia as among the top 10 countries in the Foreign Direct Investment Confidence Index for 2012.

We are taking serious efforts to fight corruption and we know the payback will be large. We are starting with the building blocks and then we will do more. Much like transformation, it is a marathon rather than a sprint. We need time.

You can do your own part by simply refusing to be part of any corrupt practices and, of course, reporting it when you come across it. That will help tremendously.

● Datuk Seri Idris Jala is CEO of Pemandu, the Performance Management and Delivery Unit. He also Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department. Reasonable comments related to this column are welcome.

Related posts:
Malaysia could go bankrupt by 2019? 
Malaysians, work hard to succeed ! 
Competition begins at home 
Malaysisia changes over the last 42 years; quanity yes ...