Malaysia is falling apart under Najib’s administration

 

It is a little over two years since Najib Razak became Malaysia’s sixth Prime Minister and his administration seems to be lurching from recklessness to ruin. His “People First, Performance Now” slogan is falling apart. That is not all that is breaking up, the whole country seems to be disintegrating.

Malaysians are reeling from the latest shock incident where a senior customs officer, Ahmad Sarbani Mohamad, fell to his death, in mysterious circumstances, at the MACC building in Cheras.

The commissioner of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Comission Abu Kassim Mohamad had earlier called for Ahmad Sarbani’s death “not be exploited or manipulated by certain quarters for their personal interests” as “malicious and full of ill-intent.”

Abu Kassim is rather disingenuous. His outfit has failed the public several times before. He is in no position to tell others off.

In fact, it is he and the MACC who should stand aside and allow an independent body to conduct the investigations into all these deaths. In truth, Abu Kassim should tender his resignation for he has failed miserably. Two similar deaths in as many years is a frightening statistic.

The MACC is under the Prime minister’s department. Presumably Abu Kassim takes his orders from the Prime Minister. Thus far, we have not heard anything substantial from Najib about this recent death. Why?

Now that another death has been recorded, Abu Kassim’s record is untenable.

Najib is also to shoulder the blame. It happened under his watch.

The death of someone who goes to assist questioning is one death too many. But two deaths, is more than just a coincidence.

No foreign investor is going to be inspired by all that is happening in Malaysia. And we too are not moved by Najib’s tepid logic.

Does Abu Kassim think that Malaysians have any more trust in its law enforcement agencies?
The police are known to beat up those in custody. Some have died from their beatings. If they don’t beat them up, they shoot to kill. In civilised countries around the world, the police is supposed to protect its citizens, not harm them like in Malaysia.

The death of Ahmad Sarbani couldn’t have come at a worse time. Teoh Beng Hock, a political aide also died in mysterious circumstances having fallen off another MACC building. His death is currently being investigated in a Royal Commission of Inquiry.

Ahmad Sarbani’s colleagues as well as the freight forwarders who used to work with him, had only good words to say about him. One should not speculate but it was said that Ahmad Sarbani was going to post a document today.

Did that document contain information that would reveal all the goings on in the current investigations into the Customs graft probe? Usually, those at the bottom try and protect someone higher up. Could the trail have led to a person or persons unknown, much higher up in the government, like in the Cabinet?

Someone certainly felt that his position needed to be protected at all costs. Ahmad Sarbani probably knew too much. A person with the authority to enter the MACC offices or any other government building, could so easily have slipped into the MACC building undetected or under pretext, and harmed Ahmad Sarjani.

Clearly, Najib’s administration does not inspire foreign investor confidence or even his own citizens.

Thus far, Najib has kept silent on why his administration feels a need to use sex and slander against his political opponents.

Najib’s Cabinet is staffed by politicians who are corrupt. Some of them are alleged rapists. Others in his ruling Umno party are confirmed child rapists.

Najib appoints people who are guilty of money politics to head big government corporations.

Najib’s ministers play the race and religion card and are not at all responsive to the needs of the other religions and races in the nation, as we can see in the Bible debacle.

Malaysia lacks a strong, clean and effective government. But will Najib ever get his act together? Should he even attempt to earn back our trust? Actually, he need not bother.





Mariam Mokhtar

Malaysia Chronicle

Are we one screwed up nation?

Aliran president writes Malaysia is perceived to be one screwed up nation. There is no doubt about it. It is difficult to fathom what is our priority and what we should be concerned about. Should our priority be safeguarding secrets or exposing corruption?

We are taken aback by the NST report on Sept 19 – 'Probe into expose of port govt secrets' – that investigations are underway to determine who was responsible for leaking the cabinet papers on the PKFZ that were posted on the Malaysia Today website.

The information contained in the 18-page document that was made available by this website for the benefit of the public could potentially implicate the cabinet and put the blame squarely on ministers and prime ministers.

This information throws light on why the cost escalated and how the project was grossly inflated. The Port Klang Free Zone project has squandered billions of ringgit of public money and has seemingly received the blessings of people who have been entrusted to be guardians of our finance. People who were expected to be accountable, transparent and responsible have failed us miserably.

It is these failings that they want to keep hidden by going after those who had a hand in revealing their complicity in this sordid affair.

They are not interested in investigating the element of corruption that is raised in this expose but they are only intent on punishing those responsible for leaking the corruption involved in the PKFZ project.

Is this why the OSA was legislated - to protect the corrupt and the guilty?

Shouldn’t the investigation focus on the incriminating contents of the document and bring to book all those who are guilty of corruption?

But the police and the Attorney-General are allegedly directing their energy elsewhere to nail those who had the audacity to expose this corruption.

Shouldn’t what was exposed be of interest to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission? Wouldn’t this be of vital importance in their investigation?

But let it be known that history has shown that the messenger may be stopped but the message can never be suppressed.






P Ramakrishnan
President
Aliran

Oh Maika, I am but a FOOL.................!!!

Would you jump at the chance of purchasing a GLC share for RM5.00 if that particular share is actively trading at the KLSE at RM6.15? What if you were offered 10 million of that GLC company shares?

Let me calculate a bit here. Every share I take up would reap me an automatic profit of RM1.15. If I were to sell the share immediately at a loss of 5 sen (at RM6.10) at the KLSE and after the subsequent deduction of the 0.15% remisier’s commission (brokerage fee) and 0.05% clearing fee, I would still end up earning RM1.028 per share. I could even negotiate with my remisier as to his commission if I were to trade 10 million shares, possibly down to something like 0.05% because he will still be making RM30,500 from these transactions – not a bad payday from one customer but not as good as the owner of the 10 million shares who potentially could make RM10.28 million.

On 29 September 1990, Maika Holdings was specially offered 10 million Telekoms shares at RM5.00 per share by the Malaysian Government. Then Finance Minister DSAI told Parliament that Maika informed the Finance Ministry that they only had the financial resources to take up 1 million shares and proposed that the remaining 9 million shares be allocated to three MIC-linked companies of which the Government acceded to (3 million shares each).

The three companies were Clear Way Sdn Bhd, a RM2 shell company incorporated in October 1988 with two shareholders (Reman a/l Subramaniam and Muniady a/l Sadayen), S.B. Management Services Sdn Bhd, a RM2 shell company incorporated in December 1989 with two shareholders (S. Balasubramaniyam a/l M.S. Survei and Sothinathan a/l Sinna Govinder) and Advance Personal Computers Sdn Bhd (RM250,000 paid up capital) with four shareholders (S. Balasubramaniyam a/l M.S. Survei, Sothinathan a/l Sinna Govinder, R. Selvendra and Isphare Kumar).

SBMS and APC shares the same office at Damansara Town Centre and the same shareholders whilst R. Selvendra is a director of Maika Holdings.

It was also discovered that as on 6 October 1990, the Arab-Malaysia Merchant Banking Berhad had approved a RM50 million loan to finance Maika’s acceptance of the entire 10 million RM5.00 Telekoms shares from the Finance Ministry. Two days later on 8 October 1990, the Maika Board of Directors decided that they were able and willing to take up the entire offer of the10 million Telekoms shares.

In February 1992, rumors abounded that Maika did not obtain the entire 10 million Telekoms shares that was allocated by the Finance Ministry. A journalist from Watan disclosed that “there could have been some hanky-panky in the allocation of Telekoms shares to Maika Holdings.” This was followed up in April 1992 by a Tamil magazine, Thoothan which disclosed that there could have been some discrepancy in the distribution of the 10 million Telekoms shares allocated to Maika by the Finance Ministry.

Until the declaration by then Finance Minister DSAI in Parliament on 6 May 1992 after being questioned by DAP’s Lim Kit Siang, nobody knew that 9 million Telekoms shares had been diverted to three companies instead to Maika. MIC President Samy Vellu immediately left the country “on sick leave” to America. (Tun Daim Zainuddin was the Finance Minister in 1990.)
On 8 May 1992, the Anti Corruption Agency (ACA) led by Federal Territories ACA Director, Nordin Ismail, raided these three companies.

On 10 May 1992, Deputy Finance Minister Abdul Ghani Othman said that it was entirely up to these 3 companies “to ensure that the Indian community benefited” and that it was Maika that had recommended these 3 companies and not the Ministry of Finance, and henceforth did not question the status of these 3 companies.

On 11 May 1992, Maika Chairman, Tan Sri G. Pasamanickam held a news conference to publicly announce that he knew nothing about the allocation of the 9 million Telekoms shares to the 3 companies. He also said that he “might bring up this matter” in the monthly Maika board meeting which was scheduled to be held two days later (on the 13 May 1992).

On 12 May 1992, MIC Working Committee member, Dr K.S. Nijhar called for the resignation of the Maika Board of Directors.

On 14 May 1992, Maika members were assaulted when peacefully picketing outside Maika Holding’s HQ in Petaling Jaya. MIC Selangor Assemblyman for Seri Cahaya, S. Sivalingam, was allegedly the leader of a group of Indians that assaulted the Maika members.

On 15 May 1992, MIC President Samy Vellu held a conference (after his return from the US) and said that Maika has never recommended that the 9 million Telekoms shares be allocated to the 3 aforesaid companies. Furthermore, SV said that Maika was never allocated the entire 10 million Telekoms shares but only a part of it due to its past dismal performance. SV also claimed that as of 5 October 1990, Maika had abandoned the offer of the entire 10 million shares but instead approved the purchase of only 1 million Telekoms shares. He also said that the allocation of 3 million shares each to Clear Way, SBMS and ACP were decided by the Ministry of Finance and that none of these companies belonged to him or any of his family members and that he did not have an interest in any of these 3 companies. He also informed the press that these 3 companies had pledged to donate the entire net proceeds of the share sales to Tafe College and proceeded to issue documents of these share sales and the Tafe College building accounts. When as by the press why he sold these shares, SV stated for a fact that he panicked after the trading price of Telekoms fell to RM5.30. As for the assault of Maika members, SV declared that he would himself have “walloped” the Maika shareholders if he had been at the scene then.

It was also later discovered that all these 3 companies had loans from CIMB (through Rashid Hussein Nominees Sdn Bhd) to purchase the Telekoms shares, utilizing these shares as collateral and with conditions that the share prices cannot dip below RM6.50.

On 7 November 1990, CIMB invoked this clause and force-sale the 3 million Telekoms shares held by Clear Way at RM5.95 per share. Telekoms was trading at RM6.00 at that time. CIMB did the same for the other 5.5 million Telekoms shares held by APC and SBMS at between RM5.75 and RM5.95 per share. Wait a minute here! Why only 5.5 million and not 3 million shares each? Well, APC/SBMS managed to hold back 500,000 Telekoms shares. How it was able to do so if CIMB was invoking their loan clause to force-sell these shares is unbelievable but Samy provided no explanation (APC/SBMS sold another 420,000 of these Telekoms shares on April 1992 at RM11.20). Another thing, why did Samy say 6 million shares and not 3 million shares each? Are these supposedly two companies in fact operating as one?

On 17 May 1992, Maika Managing Director, Tan Sri Rama Iyer, contradicted Samy Vellu saying that the latter has not “told the truth” in his explanation of the Maika Telekoms Scandal. Rama Iyer said that he had personally called the Treasury (after being instructed by Arab-Malaysia Merchant Banking Berhad) and had verbal confirmation from Munirah Abdullah Ng (Treasury Officer) that Maika has been allotted 10 million Telekoms shares by the Finance Ministry and that she had a letter to that effect. Rama Iyer also said that he immediately dispatched a senior Maika officer to collect this letter which was dated 27 September 1990 and then approached AMMBB Managing Director Datuk Malek Merican on 4 October 1990 to raise the loan of RM50 million to finance the share allocation in full.

Rama Iyer also said that then Maika Chairman, Tan Sri C. Selvarajah concurred with his actions and asked him to inform the MIC President to tell him of the share allocation by the Ministry of Finance, which he did the next day (at 6.10am). However, during the telephone conversation, SV told Rama Iyer that “there must have been a mistake as the offer to Maika was just for 1 million Telekoms shares and not 10 million Telekoms shares. When Rama Iyer contradicted SV stating the Finance Ministry letter, SV told him that the other 9 million Telekoms shares were for allocation to “other MIC bodies” and that he would contact the Finance Ministry to clarify the matter.

On 6 October 1990, Maika received a letter dated 5 October 1990 from AMMBB offering RM50 million to finance the purchase of the 10 million Telekoms shares. On 8 October 1990, the entire Maiko Board had a meeting and officially approved the purchase of the entire 10 million Telekoms shares. A few days later, Maika received a letter from the Finance Ministry stating that the initial letter of offer for 10 million Telekoms shares was officially retracted and that only 1 million Telekoms shares were on offer for Maika.

On 20 May 1992, Opposition leader LKS produced evidence that Paari Vel was in fact the managing director of APC. In an APC namecard bearing Paari Vel’s name and designation as the MD, the London office address was listed at K.K. Marketing Limited of 12, Whittington Road, Wood Green, London N22 4YD, England. (K.K of K.K Marketing stands for Kumar Kandasamy whose son Isphare Kumar is listed as a shareholder of APC.) BTW, Paari Vel is Samy Vellu’s son.

Also on this day, LKS proceeded to tear apart SV’s documents on the share sales of the 3 companies. One, Clear Way’s accounts did not specify the 0.05% clearing fee. Two, its share financing interest was documented at 14.75% when CIMB was only charging 11.25%. On the SBMS cum ACP accounts (no trouble was taken to separate them), it was stated that some of the proceeds of the sale of the Telekoms shares were used to purchase 3 million Renong shares (no mention at what buying price) and this time the share financing interest was calculated at 14.5%. No reasons were also given as to why SBMS/ACP was able to retain 500,000 of the Telekoms shares.

As for the Tafe College Building (TCB) accounts, LKS questioned the validity of these accounts as simple arithmetic (like addition) were done incorrectly (much like the Home Ministry’s recent poll on ISA). The total income of RM15,468,003.73 were tabulated as from the Federal Government (RM8 million), donations from MIC branches (RM300,000), Clear Way contribution (RM2,318,003) and from SBMS/ACP (RM4,850,000). The correct figures should be RM15,468,003 not RM14,468,003.73 – where did the 73 sen come from? The total expenditure is even worse! The TCB accounts stated that a total of RM24,662,528 were used. The correct addition comes to only RM24,112,528. Where did the difference of RM550,000 go?

Additionally SV stated that the total expenditure incurred was RM24,662,528 and the total payments made was RM15,690,808 and the outstanding is RM9,914,524.27. Simple subtraction of the two figures show an outstanding of RM8,971,720 and not RM9,914,524.27. If indeed the total outstanding is RM9,914,524.27, where did the additional RM942,804.27 go?

Lastly, the trading price of Telekoms shares had never fell to RM5.30 as stated by SV during the press conference on 15 May 1992. Between November 7th and November 15th, Telekoms traded at a low of RM5.85 and a high of RM6.15 and Between November 16th and November 27th, Telekoms traded at a low of RM6.00 and a high of RM6.90. From December onwards, Telekoms never traded under RM7.00.

It must be also noted that the remisier handling these transactions was also a director to both SBMS and ACP. By the way, the brokerage fee for the 8.5 million Telekoms shares came to a total sum of RM505,470.00.

On 24 May 1992, Maika’s offices were broken into and their offices ransacked. Documents in pertinent to the Telekoms shares allocation went missing. The guard was also assaulted. Earlier in the week, employees of the weekly Thoothan magazine were attacked at their Jalan Ipoh office premises (this magazine was giving prominent coverage to the Maika Telekoms shares Scandal and on one of its headlines, the magazine called SV a liar and a thief).

In 1994, then chairman of MIC public claims committee, V. Subramaniam (also known as Barat Maniam) made a startling public accusation. He charged that the accounts were fabricated to make it appear as if all the profits from the sale of Telekom shares were channelled to Maju Institute of Education Development (MIED). V. Subramaniam declared, "I have come out with this statement to prove that Samy Vellu is a thief. He has stolen (Telekoms) shares from the Indian community."

In 1999, SV appointed his son Vell Paari (of the K. Sujatha fame) as CEO of Maika Holdings. From a high of RM106 million in 1984, Maika’s assets fell to about RM32 million in 1992 (after the Telekoms shares scandal) and is in the process of selling off all its assets today (due to massive debts). Vell Paari remained as the CEO of Maika Holdings until today and said that he would step down once “he has cleaned up Maika…” (more like clean out though).
SV was cleared by the ACA over the Maika Scandal and nobody was arrested over it. The 66,000 Maika shareholders are still holding their breath waiting for an explanation by the Maika Board. As for the Maika-Telekoms share scandal, nothing was ever heard of it. S. Sothinathan is now the MIC vice-president and former MP for Teluk Kemang.

In October 2006, the MIC Johor assemblyman for Tenggaroh, the late S. Krishnasamy assaulted the DAP MP for Ipoh Barat, M. Kulasegaran at the Maika annual general meeting at the Legend Hotel in KL. Even though Kulasegaran lodged a police report, no action was taken against Krishnasamy.

A bit about Maika. Maika Holdings was once touted as the miraculous economic vehicle to elevate the Indian poor from the shackles of poverty. Launched by MIC in 1982 as their investment arm, the original plan was to ensure that at least RM30 million worth of shares were subscribed to but so successful was the promotion campaign that by 1984, RM106 million was raised from almost 66,400 shareholders with SV being the largest shareholder with 2.8 million shares. From then onwards, it was downhill all the way.

Let me continue the song, “Oh Maika, I am but a fool, Darling I love you, though you treat me cruel…..”

Hakim Joe
Malaysia Today.com(MT)

Malaysia's Port Storm - The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission dances gingerly around a huge scandal

Malaysia's Anti-Corruption Commission has been tireless in the pursuit of wrongdoers, particularly those from the opposition Pakatan Rakyat coalition that controls Selangor, Malaysia's richest state. But somehow – perhaps just an oversight – the MACC has been dawdling for five years on a case that appears to be one of the biggest scandals ever to hit a country that has generated some spectacular ones.

That is the RM7.45 billion (US$2.12 billion) cost to turn Port Klang, the seaport 70 km. west of the capital of Kuala Lumpur, into a national transshipment hub to rival the Jebel Ali Free Zone in Dubai. Its directors say it is likely to default on billions of ringgit in loans, with the possibility, according to an auditor's report, that accumulated interest could drive the cost to a whopping RM12.45 billion.

Conceived in 1999, the Port Klang Free Zone was yet another massive development scheme put forward by former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad although he had left office before the real carnival began. The project appears to have ignited a virtual feeding frenzy for politicians from the Barisan Nasional, or ruling national coalition.

The port development was awarded as a turnkey project without competitive bid to well-connected political cronies of the United Malays National Organisation and the Malaysian Chinese Association, the two biggest components of the Barisan Nasional. Project outlays, originally projected at RM1.95 billion, ballooned to RM3.52 billion, with interest accounting for another RM3.9 billion by 2012. The parties to the contract have fallen on each other, describing illicit payments and filing lawsuits. The squabble appears set to wreck what is left of the MCA, already in disastrous shape after the electoral drubbing it took in March 2008 elections.

The case stands in vivid contrast to the MACC's zeal in prosecuting opposition politicians from the Selangor state government. As many as six or seven have had their office records dealing with constituency expenditures taken away for investigation. The most publicized of those was State Executive Councilor Ean Yong Hian Wah, whose aide, Teoh Beng Kock, died on July 16, either by suicide or other means, after undergoing a marathon questioning session in the MACC offices over RM2,400 worth of flags the lawmaker handed out to his constituents during a Merdeka (Freedom) Day celebration.

An anonymous letter written on MACC stationery was released to the press last week, accusing Hishamuddin Hashim, an MACC deputy director for Selangor state, of conspiring with Mohammad Khir Toyo, a leading United Malays National Organization politician and former chief minister in Selangor state, to start corruption probes into opposition politicians. Khir Toyo has denied the charge. Opposition Democratic Action Party officials have been accused of fabricating the letter. Its origin is currently under investigation by police.

Certainly, there appears to be plenty about the Port Klang development for the MACC to investigate. The project is mired in controversy and name-calling, with Tiong King Sing, the head of Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd, the company given the turnkey contract to build the massive facility, saying he had paid RM10 million in three installments to Ong Tee Keat, the head of the MCA, "for activities related to the MCA. Tiong is a leader of the Sarawak Progressive Democratic Party and head of the influential Backbenchers Club in the Dewan Dakyat, or parliament. Ong, also the transport minister, is offering to sue Tiong for his assertion that he had channeled money to Ong. Other MCA stalwarts are seeking to oust Ong from his leadership position, further fracturing the party.

Kuala Dimensi in turn is wholly owned by Wijaya Baru Sdn Bhd, which is the main contractor to Kuala Dimensi. Wijaya Baru is controlled by Wijaya Baru Holdings Sdn. Bhd. Azim Mohd Zabidi, the former UMNO treasurer, is chairman of Wijaya Baru Global Bhd. Chor Chee Heung, former deputy was former deputy home minister under Mahathir, who was home minister and fiance minister at the time. Chor was the Wijaya Baru Global non-executive deputy chairman from April 2004 till July 2007.

"This Port Klang FreeTrade zone is a colossal mess, with billions upon billions gone missing. It was earmarked for the MCA and the Chinese community," said a lawyer with links to the United Malays National Organization. "Many MCA/Chinese contractors benefitted from the deal. It has been an issue for the last six years, but only now has it become explosive."

Opposition member Ronnie Liu, a DAP official, lodged a police report with the MACC on the scandal as early as 2004. The DAP has lodged a series of other reports in the intervening years, said a spokesman for the Pakatan Rakyat, the opposition coalition headed by Anwar Ibrahim. None of the requests, the spokesman said, elicited any response from the authorities. Recently Ahmad Said Hamdan, the chief commissioner for MACC, declined to answer questions in a parliamentary accounts selective committee hearing into the Port Klang scandal, saying the case is still under investigation.

The story was broken wide open, however, with the recent publication of a 51-page confidential report into the port's finances by the international accounting firm PriceWaterhouseCoopers. The report, dated Feb. 3, was "not intended for general circulation or publication. It must not be reproduced, republished, copied, distributed, excerpted, disclosed, quoted, alluded or referred to, whether in whole or in part, to any other party in any way without prior written consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory Services Sdn Bhd (PwCAS)." However, selected parts were indeed excerpted, disclosed, quoted, alluded or referred to by the opposition, and since been given wide distribution.

Among other things, according to the report, which was obtained by Asia Sentinel, "…significant project costs, weak governance and weak project management have severely undermined the viability of the project. It is imperative that (the Port Klang authority) take immediate actions to restructure the (ministry of finance) soft loan of RM4.632 billion to avoid a potential default in 2012. The Government of Malaysia would need to make a concerted effort to turn the Port Klang Free Zone into a viable venture."

The report names a veritable rogue's gallery of MCA and other officials involved in the development of the project including two former transport ministers, Ling Liong Sik, the former MCA head, and Chan Kong Choy; three former Port Authority chairmen, the former UMNO treasurer Azim Mohd Zabidi, the first woman general manager of the authority, O.C.Phang and the project executor, Tiong King Sing.In addition to awarding the contract to Kuala Dimensi without competitive bid, the land purchase was never vetted by the Malaysian cabinet, although it cost RM1.088 billion against a market value of the land of only RM442 million. Kuala Dimensi "may have overcharged PKA for interest by between RM51 million and RM309 million in connection with the purchase of the land," the report said.

According to another report, The 1,000 acres for the port were purchased by the government from Kuala Dimensi at RM 25 per square foot, or RM 1.8 billion inclusive of interest, giving Kuala Dimensi a capital gain of RM 993 million because it in turn had purchased the land from the Pulau Lumut Development Cooperative for only RM 95 million -- RM 3 per square foot. An UMNO assemblyman, Abdul Rahman Palil, was both the Pulau Lumut Development Co-operative chairman and a port director in 2002 when the land for the free zone was sold to the port authority. The then-transport minister rejected an assertion by the Malaysian Attorney General that the land could be acquired for "public purpose" under the Land Acquisition Act at RM 10 per square foot.

As a result, the report said, interest on a soft loan from the Ministry of Finance "will increase the project outlay from RM4.947 billion to RM7.453 billion. Unless the MOF soft loan is restructured, total outlay for the project will increase to RM12.453 billion.

And, five years into the project, it remains only 14 percent occupied and "revenue generated is inadequate to cover its operating expenses." The zone is expected to be in cash deficit from 2012.

The MACC said recently that it had formed a 30- member panel to investigate further.




Asia Sentinel.com

UMNO Stalwart Questions Malaysian Aide’s Death

Teoh Beng Hock, an aide to a Malaysian opposition assemblyman, was found dead on July 16 on the roof of a building next to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission after eight hours of questioning in a case in which he was only a witness. It appeared he had thrown himself off the 14^th floor of the MACC headquarters. The 28-year-old Teoh’s death has kicked off widespread outrage against the government in Malaysia. Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, the former finance minister and a long-time stalwart in the United Malays National Organisation, wrote this open letter, which appeared in the Chinese-language newspaper Sin Chew Daily.

An Open Letter From Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah

Mr Teoh Beng Hock's death marks a watershed in the attitude of the public towards their government. The government has plumbed a new low in loss of credibility. Many people have come up to tell me in anger or despair that they feel their country has gone off the rails. People who previously considered themselves apolitical have been roused into active engagement.

There have been too many deaths under custody. But this death is particularly disturbing because Mr. Teoh died after interrogation by a specially commissioned watchdog agency, inaugurated with fanfare last year by the outgoing administration. The very agency set up to combat the abuse of power has
become in the public eye a symbol of the abuse of power.

Mr. Teoh was a mere witness. He was questioned about the possible misuse of funds by his employer, a state assemblyman, to buy flags for the last Merdeka celebrations. The sum in question was RM2,400. He was questioned for eight hours through the night. He was found dead the following day outside the MACC's headquarters.

Mr Teoh, 30, would have registered his marriage last weekend. His fiancée is two months pregnant.

If the Perak debacle (eds: in which the ruling national coalition induced three opposition Assembly members to change sides, overthrowing the state government) members to reminded us of the importance of the Constitution, the death under suspicious circumstances of Mr Teoh Beng Hock has brought home in a heart-wrenching way how much we need our public institutions to be independent and law-abiding. A shocked public is demanding answers, and rightly so.

Questions about how Mr Teoh died cannot be shut down with the usual warning that it is "liable to confuse the public" because the public is already confused. We are confused about how an idealistic young man with everything to live for can enter the headquarters of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission as a witness one day and be found dead outside the next.

Questions about the death of Mr Teoh cannot be swept aside with the paternalistic instruction to leave it to the authorities to investigate," because the death of Mr Teoh appears to be just the result of “leaving it to the authorities investigate." It is precisely the independence of the investigating authorities that people are questioning.

Questions about the death of Mr Teoh cannot be suppressed with the warning "not to speculate" when the investigating authorities were apparently able to prognosticate, ahead of their own investigations, that foul play was not involved, and some leaders appear to have special knowledge that Mr Teoh jumped to his death of his own accord.

Questions about the death of Mr Teoh cannot be evaded with the low tactic of racializing the issue because the death of Mr Teoh touches us all as citizens, brothers and sisters and fathers and mothers. None of us wants to live under a government apparatus that cannot be trusted to be independent and to tell the truth.

Questions about the death of Mr Teoh cannot be suppressed with authoritarian prohibitions because they are about the integrity and independence of institutions that belong to the people. Those ministers who talk down to the people may have forgotten who put them into government and pays their wages, and whose questions they were put there to ask. And to answer.

To ask such questions is not to "politicize" the issue but to exercise our ownership of an issue that touches each and every one of us as citizens: our basic institutions are rotted out, and we are headed down the path of a failed state.

It is our right and indeed our duty as citizens to keep asking questions when someone dies under circumstances that put the entire government under a shadow. As we ask these questions let us accept our joint responsibility to push uncompromisingly for an overhaul of the key institutions that have rotted through under exactly the kind of authoritarianism that would prohibit discussion of the circumstances of the death of Mr Teoh Beng Hock.

MACC - You cannot operate from a vacuum

The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is angry, so I gather, because the Prime Minister has agreed to set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry into their interrogation procedures and methods they employ.

The MACC officers feel that they are not getting the support they believe they have a right to from the Prime Minister. There are two aspects about all of this that really trouble me:

One, on the question of the RCI, the MACC is being unacceptably presumptuous even to think that it has a right to determine whether there is any necessity or need for a group of independent eminent citizens to be appointed to look into the way our anti-corruption boys and girls conduct themselves. Their attitude is symptomatic of a deep problem inherent in the mental makeup of these MACC functionaries who seem to have great difficulty in understanding and accepting their place in the larger scheme of things.

There is also the fear that their much proclaimed professionalism cannot in truth bear close public scrutiny. I can understand their feeling of being abandoned like an unwanted diseased pet or a rag doll after the Teoh Beng Hock affair.

After all, haven’t we, by default, allowed them to develop a culture of their own, one of impunity?

However, circumstances have caught up with them, as they have a habit of doing, and now they are being held accountable for their actions, probably for the first time, and don’t they resent it?

They must now cooperate and support the work of the RCI. My advice for what it is worth is for them to focus on simply doing a better job and not straying into areas that do not concern them. As with all public servants, they have to remember that they must operate within the law because they are, after all, creatures of the law. They must expect the law to apply equally to them.

Another aspect that troubles me is that they expect, as a birthright, government support irrespective of the merit of their case or their actions. I can understand their feeling of being unfairly treated after all these years of doing little chores for the likes of Tun Mahathir Mohamad, Tun Abdullah Badawi and even the current Prime Minister.

This, mind you, is what is perceived by the public, rightly or wrongly, as the principal work of the MACC when they are not out scooping up ikan bilis. I know, of course, that this is not true, but try convincing the public. Perceptions may not have any basis in fact, but they are real.

The MACC must be prepared to put all of its actions under public gaze. We are not interested to know who they are investigating and why, but we have every right to expect them to act in strict adherence to the law, and in faithful observance of the principles of human rights and dignity.

If they have to use force and inflict torture in as part of their investigation procedure, then they are not in the wrong organisation.

I am of an age when I remember quite clearly the Japanese occupation and the methods the Japanese devised to interrogate their suspects. I will not go into any detail, but suffice to say they were not human.

Now, do not get me wrong. I am not suggesting that the MACC interrogators use similar methods, but there again the public perception is that questionable methods have been applied by the MACC. All this suggests that members of the community at large do not trust the MACC to do the right thing by the people they deal with.

Like their counterparts in the police, the MACC is part of the larger community within which they operate. How well they succeed in their assigned roles, duties and functions depends on public support, cooperation and confidence.

As we know, confidence is a fragile commodity. It is not something you can buy off a supermarket shelf. It is difficult enough to earn it, and even more difficult to retain it. People will want to be convinced that their trust will not be misplaced.

On current showing, I fear both the MACC and the Royal Malaysia Police have a lot of confidence building ahead of them.

The police, in spite of claims by the IGP and others to the contrary, have not changed one bit. The Royal Commission that inquired into the police service, for all practical purposes, might as well not have been appointed judging by the outcome.

The police will continue to be regarded, again rightly or wrongly, as an oppressive occupation force. I know this is not entirely true but it is up to the police to prove the public wrong by reversing these negative perceptions by being seen to act properly.

It will not be easy, but under the right leadership, it can be done. Part of the problem with the police leadership culture is that the top echelons of the service are not good listeners; they take criticisms personally.

There is also a highly developed tendency to assume that they know everything there is to know about policing. Being thirty years in the police or any service, merely means doing the same rotten things over and over again for thirty years. It surely is not a good enough qualification to lead a modern service with emphasis on integrity, efficiency and a heightened sense of the rights of the people they have to deal with in the course of their work.

We who pay the piper should be calling the tune, and not the other way round. The Minister of Home Affairs might want to get on the podium and wave the baton, or in this case a really big stick, to keep both the police and the MACC playing to a strict ethical tempo. It would be a nice change for once.

by Tunku Abdul Aziz