The 2015 Sabah earthquake which struck Ranau with a magnitude of Richter 6.0 on 5th June lasted for 30 seconds, but it killed 18 people on Mount Kinabalu and caused some 90 aftershocks for the following next three weeks.
Similarly, the convulsions in the very sanctum of Federal government in Putrajaya in the last days of July, which saw the sacking of the Attorney-General and Deputy Prime Minister on 28th July and the arrests and harassment of top government officers in key institutions are still having their aftershocks – like yesterday’s sudden and abrupt transfer out of the Special Branch (SB) of the deputy director of the police intelligence agency, Datuk Abdul Hamid Bador to the Prime Minister’s Department reporting directly to the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak!
Abdul Hamid, who had been with the Police force for 37 years, was completely in the dark on the reasons for his abrupt transfer to the Prime Minister’s Office, reminiscent of the sudden transfer of two Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) directors, Bahri Mohd Zin (special operations division) and Rohaizad Yaakob (strategic communications) at the height of the recent stand-off between the Police and MACC over investigations into 1MDB and the RM2.6 billion Najib personal accounts, which also saw the most extraordinary solat hajat (special prayers) by MACC officers seeking divine intervention to allow MACC officers to carry out their anti-corruption duties.
Although the immediate and punitive transfer of Bahri and Rohaizad out of MACC to the Prime Minister’s Department had been cancelled because of adverse public reactions, penalties are being considered to punish the two MACC directors – which the powers-that-be should know could not be kept secret but would have to be fully explained and accounted for when Parliament reconvenes on October 19 for the 2015 Budget meeting.
And what of Abdul Hamid?
Can the Police or the Prime Minister’s Department offer an explanation for such sudden and abrupt transfer?
As part and parcel of the continuing convulsions and aftershocks from the cataclysmic “Last Days of July 2015”, the new Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohamed Apandi Ali gave a “warning to everybody”, saying ominously: “Be careful. I will be watching”.
Mohamed Apandi must be the first Attorney-General in Malaysia to have suddenly resigned as Federal Court judge overnight to become the first legal officer of the land, and to start off with a “warning to everybody” that he is “watching”.
How ominous, undemocratic and 1984-ish!
Mohamed Apandi better realise that in a parliamentary democracy, the 30 million Malaysians are also watching him as to whether he is discharging his constitutional duties as Attorney-General with independence, integrity and professionalism.
In the first place, Mohamed Apandi should explain whether he had started off his tenure as Attorney-General making a public statement which is far from the truth when he said that the purported corruption charge sheet against the Prime Minister was a fake?
Surely Mohamed Apandi is aware of the Star Online interview of the Barisan Nasional Strategic Communications Director and Minister for Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government, Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan who as good as admitted that there was an attempted coup against the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak by “criminalising him and topple him from office”, particularly his less-than-subtle admission when he described the “cloak-and-dagger” power play in Putrajaya in the last days of July, viz:
“There are two theories out there. One is the one you mentioned that this is a deliberate attempt to stop, delay or interfere with the investigations (on 1MDB).
“But there is also another theory that there has been a deliberate attempt to criminalise the Prime Minister.
“This is what the new AG (Tan Sri Mohamed Apandi Ali) was saying with regards to the (purported) draft charge sheet (against the Prime Minister). Apandi sent out a statement saying that the Attorney-General’s chambers is very concerned that there is a deliberate attempt to criminalise the PM and force him out of the office. If you are a politician of course you would take some pre-emptive steps so that it doesn’t happen.
“I am not privy to that information. I leave it to the PM and the AG who made that comment and also to the IGP whether or not there is an attempt to criminalise the PM. But it sure looked like it. Because there was an allegation of a draft charge sheet but MACC said ‘Wait a minute we have not completed our investigation. So how could there be a draft charge sheet when the investigation has not been completed?”
Further on in his Star Online interview, Abdul Rahman said: “Given that scenario what would you do? You would take drastic action wouldn’t you?
“Okay, take these people out first, so that things will get back to normalcy and see what will happen next.
“If you could appreciate that scenario then you would understand the flurry of action taken by the prime minister.”
Mohamed Apandi should confirm whether his predecessor Tan Sri Gani Patail was one of the people “taken out first”; who were the other government officers also “taken out” as a result of the “Last Days of July in Putrajaya”; whether this process of people “taken out” has ended; and finally, whether his own appointment as the new Attorney-General was among the “flurry of action taken by the Prime Minister” referred by Abdul Rahman in the Star Online interview.
There are two other questions which Mohamed Apandi should explain to the satisfaction of Malaysians in a system of parliamentary democracy and information era:
Firstly, why did he agree to the “taking out” of Gani Patail as Attorney-General, who had served three Prime Ministers and only two month short of mandatory retirement on reaching 60 years old.
Secondly, why did he disband the multi-agency Special Task Force comprising Bank Negara Malaysia, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, Royal Malaysian Police and Attorney-General’s Chambers when the Cabinet had been assured that the Special Task Force would get to the bottom of the two scandals of 1MDB and RM2.6 billion Najib personal accounts, whether he had consulted or informed the Cabinet or the Prime Minister before he disbanded the Special Task Force.
Finally, would he agree that the Prime Minister should present a White Paper in Parliament on Oct. 19 on the convulsions of the “Last Days in July in Putrajaya” and their aftershocks, whether affecting Bank Negara Malaysia, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency, Royal Malaysian Police and the Attorney-General’s Chambers and how they had affected investigations into the twin scandals of 1MDB and the RM2.6 billion Najib personal accounts.