Either the MCA Deputy President Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai does not understand simple English (which has become quite commonplace at all levels of the Barisan Nasional political structure) or he is just being deliberately obtuse because he has a political axe to grind.
What is this political axe for Tiong Lai to “grind”? What else but competing with MCA President Datuk Chua Soi Lek for Tun Dr. Ling Liong Sik’s MCA delegates’ vote-bank in the upcoming MCA party elections in December rather than striving for a new political culture of public integrity with zero tolerance for corruption.
I do not think my statement entitled “Duo message of 2014 Budget – Malaysia continues to be land of ‘heinous crime without criminals’ and Ministers enjoy immunity and impunity for Ministerial dereliction of duties” on the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s acquittal and discharge of Liong Sik for cheating the government over the multi-billion ringgit Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) project scandal is so complex or difficult to understand as to confound Tiong Lai.
As I said in my statement, “Without going into the details of the case against Liong Sik, the Kuala Lumpur High Court decision carries two messages which have a direct bearing on the 2014 Budget, Najib’s National Transformation Plan and the future direction of the Malaysian nation and economy”, viz:
*Malaysia continues to be a land of ‘heinous crimes without criminals’, with Malaysians victimized by mega corruption and scandals which neither the government nor the anti-corruption agency, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), could do anything to combat when confronted with ‘grand corruption’ involving ‘big sharks’ instead of ‘ikan bilis’ in the Malaysian corruption waters; *Cabinet Ministers are now given a blank cheque to enjoy immunity and impunity for whatever dereliction of duties in the course of official duties, including up to Cabinet level.
I have no doubt if the 2,400 MCA national delegates had been asked in a secret ballot whether they agree with me on these two messages from the KL High Court decision and the 2014 Budget, the overwhelming majority of the MCA delegates would have expressed their agreement.
All Malaysians with eyes to see and ears to hear realise that Malaysia must cease to be a land of “heinous crimes without criminals” where “grand corruption” is allowed to gallop on unchecked if Malaysia is to start anew with a new political culture of public integrity with zero tolerance for corruption. Undoubtedly and indisputably, the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal fails on counts.
The Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Justice Ahmad Asnawi said in his decision that former Transport Minister cannot be held accountable for any mistakes, misleading information or inaccuracies in the preparation of the ministry’s documents on the PKFZ land acquisition as he was not the ministry’s “numero uno” (number one) but only the “transporter”.
The judge said: “If any, the blame should be apportioned wholly and squarely upon the officers of the Transport Ministry who drafted the prepared the same”.
As former Health Minister and someone who hopes to get back to the Cabinet as soon as possible, does Liow agree that a Minister is not “numero uno” in his Ministry and need not be held responsible for any matter in his Ministry which he champions, whether in public, in Parliament or even up to Cabinet level?
It would appear that under the slogan of “Endless Possibilities” of the Najib administration, the Barisan Nasional is coining a new principle of ministerial responsibility, or to be more correct, a new principle of ministerial irresponsibility – that a Minister is not “numero uno” in his Ministry and need not be responsible for any Ministerial dereliction of duty!
If Liew is of the view that a Minister is not “numero uno” in his Ministry and he embraces the obnoxious principle of ministerial irresponsibility, is he of the view that the Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Ghani Patail should now arrest, charge and prosecute “the officers of the Transport Ministry” below the level of the Transport Minister responsible for the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal?
Or will Liew claim that the PKFZ scandal falls into the unique Malaysian category of “heinous crime without criminals” in Malaysia and need not be pursued any further to ascertain who were the persons or persons responsible for the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal?
Is this the MCA and Barisan Nasional’s official stand, that the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal is a “heinous crime without criminals” and need not be pursued further to find out the culprits responsible for the PKFZ “mother of all scandals”?