It has been reported that Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd (KDSB), the turnkey contractor for Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) has challenged the legality and legitimacy of the appointment of Datuk Lee Hwa Beng as the Port Klang Authority (PKA) Chairman.
The deputy CEO of KDSB Datuk Faizal Abdullah has issued an ultimatum to the Transport Minister, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat to produce Lee’s appointment letter as PKA Chairman by 4.30 pm tomorrow (Monday) or face the legal consequences.
According to Faizal, the statutory power or prerogative to appoint the Chairman of PKA is vested with the Yang di Pertuan Agong as provided under the Port Klang Authority Act 1960 and the Minister of Transport has no power to personally decide to extend Lee’s tenure as PKA Chairman at the end of April.
Faizal contended that if Lee’s appointment as PKA Chairman was unlawfully renewed by the Transport Minister and not by the Yang di Pertuan Agong, then Lee’s appointment is null and void and all “tasks and responsibilities” handled by Lee after March 31 this year, when his first appointment expired, would be null and void, including:
-
The publication of the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PcW) audit report on the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal;
-
The various committees set up by PKA following the PcW report and various decisions taken, in particular the PKFZ special task force which reported on the RM500 million to RM1 billion KDSB billing discrepancies and irregularities, leading to the lodging of police report and institution of legal proceedings by PKA against KDSB.
I do not know whether Lee’s appointment as PKA Chairman is lawful or valid, whether Faizal is right that Lee’s appointment had not bee renewed by the Yang di Pertuan Agong as required by law.
But what is very clear is a very blatant attempt by KDSB to block any disclosure and public accountability of the RM12.5 billion PKFZ, the “mother of all scandals” in the nation’s 52-year history in utter disregard of the national interests to promote accountability, transparency, integrity and good governance.
I have differences with Ong Tee Keat and I have been pursuing him both inside and outside Parliament for full and unexpurgated disclosure of the PKFZ scandal, to the extent that I had bombed him with three questions a day for 36 days and 108 questions.
My major difference with Ong is that he is not prepared to make full and total disclosure of the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal, not just at the Port Klang Authority level but all the way to the level of the Transport Minister and the Cabinet.
However, Ong can depend on my full support to oppose attempts by KDSB to put the lid to block accountability and exposure of the causes of the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal, as the limited opening up of the PKFZ scandal must not be rolled back and covered up when what is needed is further opening up of the PKFZ “can of worms” and “swamp of crocodiles”.
(Speech at the DAP Air Puteh Branch dinner at Han Chiang Secondary School Penang on Sunday, 16th August 2009 at 9 pm)
#1 by ekompute on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 11:50 am
“According to Faizal, the statutory power or prerogative to appoint the Chairman of PKA is vested with the Yang di Pertuan Agong as provided under the Port Klang Authority Act 1960 and the Minister of Transport has no power to personally decide to extend Lee’s tenure as PKA Chairman at the end of April.”
This is just what the Chinese call LPPL (lan pa pa lan). The Yang di Pertuan Agong “acts on the advice of the Cabinet or of a Minister or after consultation with or on the recommendation of any person or body of persons (other than the Cabinet)…”
So if there has been a technical mistake, that can easily be resolved retrospectively and with ease.
#2 by ekompute on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 11:54 am
I fully support LKS in that we should not cloud the issue with inconsequential matters such as technical mistakes but just focus on the RM12.5 billion, the “mother of all scandals”.
#3 by yhsiew on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 11:55 am
In the interest of the nation, Ong Tee Keat should put aside political differences and accept Kit’s help to bring culprits of the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal to book.
#4 by pulau_sibu on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 12:00 pm
What nonsense is OTK talking about? The political party from the East wanted to replace MCA? Sarawak is always colonised by the west. Give us a break.
He asked the police to investigate his bank accounts. I doubt if I received the money in cash, I would not put the black money into the bank to create a record.
MCA kakitangan are rather stupid, pretending to be stupid, claiming that they did not receive the money, thus there was no donation from Tiong. What happened if OKT did not pass the money to MCA? Who would have seen it?
Is this business like money laundering?
???????????
???????
????16???????????????????????????????????????“????”?????????????????
?????????????1000???????????????????????????????????????
????1000????????????????????????????????
????“???????????”???????????
???????????????????????“???”?????????????????????
????????????????????????????????????????????????
?????????12????????????????????????????????15?????????????1?????????????????????????????5?6??????????????????????????????????????
#5 by Bigjoe on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 12:00 pm
House is burning down and he want to shoot water gun? What is freaking going on ? Tiong shot across the bow made sense, this does not. After you shoot cannon, you shoot water gun for what?
Trying to warn that any prosecution will be met with lots of legalese resistance maybe? But OTK don’t want to prosecute, he just have no choice. Otherwise MACC already catch him and Tiong and they are in jail..
So what is the hell is going on?
#6 by Bigjoe on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 12:02 pm
I still say, ask how OTK so easy say he will pay for US$40K from out of pocket??
#7 by k1980 on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 12:06 pm
My bet is that Tiong will be the next mca president when OTK is nailed for corruption. After all, money talks loudest in the mca.
#8 by ekompute on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 12:10 pm
Hi YHSiew, you are asking OTK to dig his own grave? OTK himself is not clean, so how to cooperate? He hasn’t outgrown his joy rides in amusement parks and has now been caught taking what he thought was free joy rides in private jets. And do you believe that this is the only misconduct that he committed?
#9 by dawsheng on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 12:25 pm
However, Ong can depend on my full support to oppose attempts by KDSB to put the lid to block accountability and exposure of the causes of the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal,.. – LKS
Tee Keat is tasked to find a scapegoat, but Tiong is no goat, he’s the crocodile, Najib should’ve known, but there’s no goat in UMNO and MCA, only worms, so the freeloaders is actually without a choice! If you know, once a freeloader, always a freeloader. The MCA President is a freeloader. There’s nothing in your full support which can tempt a freeloader.
#10 by Cinapek on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 12:28 pm
“…But what is very clear is a very blatant attempt by KDSB to block any disclosure and public accountability of the RM12.5 billion PKFZ,…”
I am in absolute agreement. This is what the Chinese described as ” even after fallen to the ground, still try to pick up a handful of sand and throw at the other party…”
Whats the difference? The report is already out. A shit is still shit and still stink no matter how you try to cover it. You might mitigate by admitting that errors were made and you make restitution. Otherwise, lock up all those found guilty and throw the key away.
#11 by ekompute on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 12:34 pm
Wahhh, superb English, dawsheng. I don’t know what a freeloader is, so I have to check the dictionary. For the benefit of those like me, I here reproduce the definition:
Freeloader: someone who takes advantage of the generosity of others
#12 by dawsheng on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 12:36 pm
I do not know whether Lee’s appointment as PKA Chairman is lawful or valid, whether Faizal is right that Lee’s appointment had not bee renewed by the Yang di Pertuan Agong as required by law. – LKS
MCA president insulted the Monarchy, or Agong simply washed his hand’s of the “can of worms”?
#13 by dawsheng on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 12:51 pm
When someone commented that Tiong would one day became MCA President, I thought of it as sarcasm, how is that possible? But when MCA Wanita Chief admitted she also took donation from Tiong, nope, that’s not sarcasm!
#14 by SpeakUp on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 12:55 pm
Who cares if it was properly appointed? What is important is the audit. That starts everything. :)
I must say … DS Tiong got good lawyer who can dig up a lot of stuff. Never underestimate this man. He does work with one of the best corporate lawyers in town who has written leading books. But its only delaying the inevitable.
#15 by Loh on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 12:58 pm
///Faizal contended that if Lee’s appointment as PKA Chairman was unlawfully renewed by the Transport Minister and not by the Yang di Pertuan Agong, then Lee’s appointment is null and void and all “tasks and responsibilities” handled by Lee after March 31 this year, when his first appointment expired, would be null and void, including:
• The publication of the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PcW) audit report on the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal;
• The various committees set up by PKA following the PcW report and various decisions taken, in particular the PKFZ special task force which reported on the RM500 million to RM1 billion KDSB billing discrepancies and irregularities, leading to the lodging of police report and institution of legal proceedings by PKA against KDSB.///– Kit
Granted even that Lee’s appointment was null and void, the publication of the PricewaterhouseCoopers audit report revealing the details cannot be null and void. The work done by PcW represents an enquiry of the facts which is not changed whether Lee was legally appointed or not. Similarly, the work of the task force which reported on the billing discrepancies and irregularities are grounds for MACC to pursue, whether the task force had been legally constituted with regards to the extension of Lee’s tenure.
The fact that the Faizal went on to question Lee’s appointment rather than responding to the findings show that the company has no defence, and one has to wonder whether MACC chief was also ‘granted loans’ by the company for him to declare that MACC has no more interest on PKFZ. Mohd Sukri Abdul must have imagined that MACC has been established for him to play around with the fate of the citizens; he did not recognise that he had the responsibility to fulfil the legitimate formal objectives of MACC.
#16 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 1:06 pm
TKS dont want to be MCA President, he wants to be the First President of the Republic of Malaysia!!!
#17 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 1:11 pm
How to be the MACC Chief when he is so easily give up!!! Rakyat can see the Wayang kulit very clearly played by him!!!
#18 by i_love_malaysia on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 1:17 pm
I will donate US40K to OTK, by the way, my application to fly passengers by private jet is pending!!!
#19 by pulau_sibu on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 1:41 pm
TKS (LKS is uncle Lim) is such a little boy from a small town. He cannot be the head of a big Malaysian political party.
I am more concerned that BN created this and that companies to launder black money for their political gains, like vote buying. All these money came from the people, of course.
#20 by the reds on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 1:42 pm
I agree with yhsiew! No culprits are allowed to go scot-free from this scandal… I strongly believe OTK alone is not capable to tackle this issue, but need someone who is competent enough (DAP members) to help to combat with KDSB. Bear in mind, Tiong King Sing is no “easy meat”!!!
#21 by HJ Angus on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 1:56 pm
The surest way to bring all the culprits to book is to change the government in the next general elections.
#22 by Loh on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 2:12 pm
In a traffic accident involving two cars, and the driver of one of them has no valid driving licence, would he automatically be in the wrong just because he had no valid licence? Faisal and by extenion Tiong would think so. Their reasoning was simple logic if the person not licnesed to drive did not drive, the accident would not have happened. I believe the court does not take that view. Faisal said that if Lee was not properly appointed, the findings under his instruction are not valid, because there should have been no finding in the first place. Wonder whether that argument came from Tiong’s high power lawyers.
#23 by Leong Yook Kong on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 2:14 pm
We are interested in knowing the truth of the “mother of all scandals” only. We do not care whether Tan Hwa Beng is the legal PKA Chairman or any other Ahmad, Ah Kow or Muthu is the PKA Chairman, the reports will be the same at the end of the day. What is Faizul disputing? If the findings are illegally done, does it means the facts and figures are illegal?
#24 by SpeakUp on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 2:24 pm
Loh … its not about whether the argument is right or wrong, its to make PKFZ face some hurdles. The lawyer is right, Chairman not properly appointed. So throw in some minor issues and let it get jammed a bit.
#25 by ekompute on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 2:47 pm
Hahaha, I overlooked this point. Yes, I agree with Dawsheng. The MCA president should be charged for insulting the Monarchy. By setting the Agong aside, he has indicated that he see the Agong no up. Alternatively, he should be charged for trying to act as Agong. Either way also can.
#26 by ekompute on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 2:52 pm
I can’t understand the logic. Not so simple to me: “If the person not licensed to drive did not drive, the accident would not have happened.”
Errmmm…. how about if the person licensed to drive did not drive, would the accident still happen? Anyway, not important… just mental masturbation, LOL.
#27 by Sony boy on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 3:57 pm
For the country, I support Uncle Kit support to OTK to solve the problem.
From media, I understand recipients did not force Tiong to donate money. Looks like Tiong donated on his free will to whoever he wishes.
My friends is asking:
Where did Tiong get so much money from?
Please advise, Uncle Kit.
#28 by SpeakUp on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 4:43 pm
Sony boy … RM10 million is not much money to many people in Malaysia, that is a reality today. DS Tiong has ventures in China too. Personal ones … he has many businesses here and there.
If you know certain people who have access to certain info, you will be surprised to know that RM10M is not much to spend for some MPs in a GE. They spend many times more than that. :0)
#29 by Jeffrey on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 4:44 pm
“It remains a legal and constitutional mystery whether Datuk Lee Hwa Beng occupies the statutory position legitimately since his statutory term of office expired on March 31, 2009,” Datuk Faizal Abdullah, WBGB’s deputy CEO said, pointing out that under the Port Klang Authority Act 1960 (“Port Authority Act”), only the Yang di-Pertuan Agong was empowered to appoint a chairman of Port Klang Authority(PKA).
Don’t MCA and its president check the law – at least the basic of it pertaining to authority and power? Surely MCA is not short of lawyers!
The last we hear is that the previous 2 ex MCA Presidents as Transport Ministers issued “letters of support” outside their authority to the market intending them to be binding (to get Rating agency’s rating) when actually they could be binding only if issued by the Finance Ministry after Cabinet approval! Apa Lah!
The following issues now need to be looked deeper into:
Firstly, although it is widely reported that PKA chairman Datuk Lee Hwa Beng appointment expired on March 31,2009 – because according to Faizal, his “statutory term of office” expired and that Datuk Seri Ong Tee Kiat (“OTK”) had reappointed him chairman on April 29, 2009), it must be asked whether there is actually a “statutory term” under Port Authority Act for PKA chairman (once appointed by Yang di-Pertuan Agong) expiring on March 31,2009, for the issue of renewal/extension to arise!
They should check again because what is explicit in Port Authority Act is that tenure of service of ordinary members of PKA (other than Chairman and General Manager) is one year subject to eligibility of re-appointment.
I wonder where is it provided that the Chairman (as distinct from ordinary members) is also subject to a statutory tenure as Faizal seemed to say ?
Secondly, even if OTK exceeded ministerial powers to renew Lee Hwa Beng’s tenure, in the interest of public disclsoure and accountability as it relates to:-
· the publication of the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PcW) audit report on the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal;
· the various committees set up by PKA following the PcW report and various decisions taken, in particular the PKFZ special task force which reported on the RM500 million to RM1 billion KDSB billing discrepancies and irregularities,
the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the advice of PM and Cabinet, on the further advice of MCA President/Minister can ratify retrospectively the renewal on April 29, 2009 – in same manner Cabinet/MOF ratified retrospectively the “Letters of Support” issued by previous MCA Transport Ministers, ultra vires.
#30 by Jeffrey on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 5:23 pm
Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd (KDSB)’s position is more than just legal technicalities. It appears there is dissatisfaction about neutrality or impartiality of the Chairman who is also MCA stalwart.
The MalaysianInsider writer (Debra Chong) on Aug 16 wrote: ‘Wijaya Group’s deputy CEO is upset at the many comments Lee has issued in public on behalf of the PKA board, often shoving the blame on the developer.’
‘Faizal condemned Lee and PKA for charging ahead and publicly insinuating that KDSB may have committed fraud totalling millions before first showing it the report of its Special Task Force on the findings of the PKFZ scandal. “He’s bullying us,” he charged, but claimed ignorance on the reason though he suggested it could be to push forward for a political position. “ Why don’t they want to give it to us or even just publish it on their website?” he asked. Faizal explained that the difference in the numbers was merely a “contractual dispute” which cropped up often in business deals, and which would be settled in a straightforward way in court. “We are ready and eager to go to court,” he said.
He added that he did not mind if the port authority also raised the alleged fraud case to the attention of the police and the national anti-graft body as long as it followed the gentlemanly procedure of showing the report before shooting from the hip. “It means there is malice intention (sic) on them,” he said.’
See link :http://themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/malaysia/35316-kdsb-questions-hwa-bengs-appointment-as-pka-boss
#31 by SpeakUp on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 5:43 pm
“Don’t MCA and its president check the law – at least the basic of it pertaining to authority and power? Surely MCA is not short of lawyers!” … short of good lawyers la … just do only. Think later.
“Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd (KDSB)’s position is more than just legal technicalities. It appears there is dissatisfaction about neutrality or impartiality of the Chairman who is also MCA stalwart.”
But its true in a way as to what the Chairman has stated about a con job happening. Ask people who are working there, they know why the VOs were issued. Also, there are already rumours that the deliverables were not delivered as promised. So why want to pretend to be so innocent when its all tainted from the Ministers to Chairman to project partners.
#32 by johnnypok on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 7:45 pm
Sarawak gangster showing his color?
#33 by Loh on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 7:59 pm
ekompute,
What I tried to say was that when a person was not licensed to drive, he should not drive, and so if he had followed the law, he could not have been involved in accident. That I thought was simple logic. So, Kuala Dimensi deputy CEO must have argued the same way that if Lee had not been appointed, they would be no studies, and all those reports should not have existed if Lee followed the “law”.
Well the argument was not important, I was thinking aloud on what went through Faisal thinking process.
#34 by Onlooker Politics on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 8:36 pm
“Ask people who are working there, they know why the VOs were issued. Also, there are already rumours that the deliverables were not delivered as promised.” (Speakup)
Speakup,
PKFZ project is a huge project. I believe there must be an Architect and a Professional Consultant Engineer involved in overseeing the completion of certain phases of the project. If the VO had been agreed upon before delivery, then most likely the reason of requiring the VO would be mentioned in the minutes of site meeting, where the representatives from the Architect, from the Professional Consultant Engineer and from the Contractors should have attended. Usually shortly after the site meeting had been held, the copies of the meeting minutes would be distributed to all parties involved in the meeting, as a record for the follow-up work to be implemented.
If the External Auditor from PriceWaterhouseCooper and PKA chairman Lee Hwa Beng (I believe he is a qualified accountant) found that the VO claim was questionable, then most likely there would be some hanky panky things happening in relation to the suspected fititious claim. I would strongly stand behind YB Kit to give full support to Ong Tee Keat for further digging of the PKFZ scandal.
#35 by monsterballssgoh on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 9:36 pm
hahahahahaha…This is fun!!
MCA said the have plenty of money…some RM2billion…..no need donations.
OTK is suing Tiong….and will withdraw…if Tiong apologize.
Why so nice..sue is sue…go all out la.
He has no choice….he needs to sue..to apply an advantage…in a court case.
It is like a murderer pleading not guilty….to but time.
Do you think Tiong exposed OTK took RM10 million from him….a lie?
Great to see UMNO and all support OTK.
It is indirectly telling OTK…no RM10 million into MCA.
Can you imagine Tiong is such a lowdown snake…telling such great lies?
Lets wait for his Tiong’s response……since he said..he has solid proof..OTK took the money.
Bank transfer proof is the best.
Lets hope no private negotiations …right now …always end up with no arrests.
OTK or Tiong must be arrested.
WHO??
#36 by a2a on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 10:51 pm
It is not recommended those people owned and running big business be elected to involve in government policy.
It is not public interest.
It is a personal interest of oneself.
#37 by Onlooker Politics on Monday, 17 August 2009 - 11:11 pm
Dato Seri Tiong King Sing confirmed in a press conference that his political party, namely Sarawak Progressive Democratic Party, has long since possessed the ambition to expand from East Malaysia to West Malaysia.
Perhaps Sarawak Progressive Democratic Party can start up a division in Putrajaya first, with MCA’s Youth Chief Wee Ka Siong crossing over to become the division president and MCA’s Wanita Chief Chew Mei Fun crossing over to become the division deputy president. I believe sooner or later many MCA division presidents will want to follow Wee Ka Siong and Chew Mei Fun to cross over to Sarawak Progressive Democratic Party because Dato Seri Tiong can at least promise them that they no longer have to worry about money problem.
Anyone can simply criticise that Dato Seri Tiong is good for nothing and has nothing to offer but the only luxury thing which noone else except Dato Seri Tiong alone can afford is to throw a big stack of donation paper notes (RM100 each) on your face and tell you to keep your big mouth shut! And I believe many MCA members would be happy to have the donation paper notes being thrown on their face!
#38 by vsp on Tuesday, 18 August 2009 - 4:35 am
Final verdict: MACC declares that there is no case to answer as Datuk Lee Hwa Beng appointment expired on March 31, 2009 and that he has no grounds to act. Never mind what the PriceWaterhouse report says, but technicality is of the essence in the administration of justice in Bolehland. Truth and facts are of secondary importance. Since in Bolehland, technicality is normally invoked over facts, no crime has been committed. That’s is why Kuala Dimensi is very confident to rely on this device. It’s time-tested and has saved many a crook’s hinds over the years.
Am I joking? One has to visit the long litany of past cases not to dismiss such an eventuality.
#39 by SpeakUp on Tuesday, 18 August 2009 - 10:50 am
vsp … eeerrrr … that cannot happen. Whether LHB was properly appointed etc is not an issue for corruption.