Why must Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) wait for Public Accounts Committee (PAC) recommendation for further investigation into former Transport Minister Tan Sri Chan Kong Choy for possible offence of criminal breach of trust in the RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal when the first report was lodged with the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) as far back as 2004?
Isn’t this testimony of the failure, ineffectiveness and impotence of MACC and its predecessor ACA?
These are the questions I posed to the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz in the ten minutes he touched on corruption in the government winding-up on the budget before he ended his reply for lunch-break today.
I remarked that Nazri was defending the status quo of a worsening corruption problem in Malaysia instead of spearheading an attack on corruption, as is happening in Indonesia.
Nazri was in his classic mode of denial and also disagreed that there is need for a parliamentary motion to adopt the PAC report on the PKFZ scandal for all MPs to take a stand on the PAC recommendations.
Earlier in his reply, Nazri created an uproar when he said that V.K. Lingam of “correct, correct, correct” infamy had not broken any law in brokering the appointment of judges.
As Malaysian Insider reported:
Now Nazri says VK Lingam broke no law
By Syed Jaymal ZahiidKUALA LUMPUR, Nov 9 — Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz sparked an uproar in Parliament today when he said “judiciary fixer” V.K. Lingam had been let off the hook “because he had broken no law”.
Nazri also suggested that Lingam breached no laws as he might “have just acted to fix the appointment of judges as if he was brokering the appointment of senior judges to impress people”.
“I am not denying that it was Lingam in the tape. But I am also saying that there are a lot of conmen in this world. Who knows he might have just acted when he was calling the so-called judges to impress,” said Nazri in his ministerial winding-up speech on the 2010 Budget debate.
Nazri argued that from the legal perspective Lingam could have merely made a suggestion as to who should be appointed to senior posts in the judiciary.
“I am here to stress that there is nothing to stop the prime minister from receiving suggestions from any parties. Should anyone act to advise the prime minister on the appointment of judges, this act itself cannot be taken as an offence.
“Unless it’s clear that the action (by Lingam) was clearly aimed at conspiring to subvert the judiciary or made to get favours… (but) the findings of the commission found none of this,” said the minister.
Opposition MPs had during the debate session demanded answers as to why the Attorney-General had decided to take “no further action” towards Lingam despite the findings of a royal commission set up to probe the infamous “correct, correct, correct” video recording that allegedly saw the senior lawyer brokering the appointment of judges.
The royal commission had proposed that action be taken against Lingam and several others purportedly involved in the recording including former Chief Justice Tun Eusoff Chin, Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim and tycoon Tan Sri Vincent Tan, a close friend of former premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
Nazri revealed that investigations by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) on the figures named also found no conclusive evidence that there was any form of power abuse by any of them.
His remarks invited scathing criticism from the opposition benches.