The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commissioner (MACC) Chief Commissioner Azam Baki has opened the Pandora’s Box.
Azam has not only plunged the MACC into its worst confidence crisis, not only in the 12-year history of MACC and 55-year history of Malaysia’s anti-corruption agency, he has raised the question about the usefulness of the five purportedly “independent” committees to ensure the MACC’s integrity and performance and to protect the citizens’ rights.
There is the MACC’s Anti-Corruption Advisory Board which allegedly cleared Azam of interest-of-conflict allegations publicly made more than two months ago without conducting any investigations but purely on Azam’s explanation, acting completely outside its statutory powers under the MACC Act 2009.
Two questions arise:
Firstly, what made the Chairman of the MACC Anti-Corruption Advisory Board Chariman Abu Zahar Ujang and the other Board members believe that they have the power to declare that the MACC Chief Commissioner innocent with regard to the conflict-of-interest allegations made publicly more than two months ago – and shockingly, without any investigation?
Secondly, what made Azam Baki believe that the MACC’s Anti-Corruption Advisory Board has such powers to declare him innocent with regard to the conflict-of-interest allegations, prompting him to declare that he was only answerable to the MACC Anti-Corruption Advisory Board and dismissing in the process the respective roles of Attorney-General, the courts, Parliament and the people of Malaysia!
When the Chairman and members of the MACC Anti-Corruption Advisory Board and the MACC Chief Commissioner could be so blur and confused about powers of the MACC Anti-Corruption Advisory Board under the MACC Act 2009, how could Malaysians expect the MACC to be a world-class anti-corruption agency?
It is clear that the MACC’s Anti-Corruption Advisory Board does not and cannot have the last say whether Azam is cleared of the conflict-of-interest allegations.
Azam’s demand for RM10 million damages and a public apology from the whistleblower, Lalitha Kunaratnam does not ipso facto clear him of innocence of the conflict-of-interest allegations.
Is Azam prepared to go on leave until this legal suit against Lalitha Kunaratnam is completed?
I agree with academician Edmund Terence Gomez that Azam should withdraw the letter of demand against Lalitha and instead appear before the Parliamentary Special Select Committee on Agencies under the Prime Minister’s Department to clear himself of the conflict-of-interest allegations. Is Azam prepared to do so?
Prime Minister Ismail Sabri is convening a special parliamentary meeting on January 20, 2022 on the floods disaster in the country.
Is the Parliamentary Special Select Committee on the Agencies under the Prime Minister’s Department capable of meeting next week so that its report on the conflict-of-interest allegations against the MACC Chief Commissioner could be tabled in Parliament on January 20, 2022?
The Parliamentary Special Select Committee on the Agencies under the Prime Minister’s Department should invite NGOs concerned about the issue, whether Bersih, Center to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4), Transparency International Malaysia, Rasuah Busters or Suaram to send representatives to participate in its hearing on the conflict-of-interest allegations against the MACC Chief Commissioner.
(Media Statement by DAP MP for Iskandar Puteri Lim Kit Siang in Gelang Patah on Friday, 7th January 2022)
Bolehkah Jawatankuasa Pilihan Khas Bagi Agensi-Agensi Di Bawah Jabatan Perdana Menteri bermesyuarat minggu depan dan membentangkan laporan mengenai dakwaan konflik kepentingan terhadap Ketua Pesuruhjaya SPRM di Parlimen pada 20 Januari?
Ketua Pesuruhjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) Azam Baki telah membuka kotak Pandora.
Azam bukan sahaja telah menjerumuskan SPRM ke dalam krisis keyakinan yang paling buruk, bukan sahaja dalam sejarah 12 tahun SPRM dan sejarah 55 tahun kewujudan agensi anti-rasuah Malaysia, beliau telah menimbulkan persoalan tentang lima fungsi jawatankuasa yang dikatakan “bebas” untuk memastikan integriti dan prestasi SPRM serta melindungi hak rakyat.
Terdapat Lembaga Penasihat Pencegahan Rasuah SPRM yang didakwa membebaskan Azam daripada dakwaan kepentingan konflik yang dibuat secara terbuka lebih dua bulan lalu tanpa menjalankan sebarang siasatan tetapi bersandarkan semata-mata kepada penjelasan Azam, bertindak sepenuhnya di luar kuasa berkanun di bawah Akta SPRM 2009.
Dua persoalan timbul:
Pertama, apakah yang membuatkan Pengerusi Lembaga Penasihat Pencegahan Rasuah SPRM Abu Zahar Ujang dan ahli Lembaga Pengarah lain percaya bahawa mereka mempunyai kuasa untuk mengisytiharkan bahawa Ketua Pesuruhjaya SPRM tidak bersalah berhubung dakwaan konflik kepentingan yang dibuat secara terbuka sejak dua bulan lalu – dan yang mengejutkan, tanpa melakukan sebarang siasatan?
Kedua, apa yang membuatkan Azam Baki percaya bahawa Lembaga Penasihat Pencegahan Rasuah SPRM mempunyai kuasa sedemikian untuk mengisytiharkan beliau tidak bersalah berhubung dakwaan konflik kepentingan, mendorong beliau mengisytiharkan bahawa beliau hanya bertanggungjawab kepada Lembaga Penasihat Pencegahan Rasuah SPRM dan dalam proses itu menolak peranan Peguam Negara, mahkamah, Parlimen dan rakyat Malaysia!
Apabila Pengerusi dan ahli Lembaga Penasihat Pencegahan Rasuah SPRM dan Ketua Pesuruhjaya SPRM boleh menjadi begitu kabur dan keliru tentang kuasa Lembaga Penasihat Pencegahan Rasuah SPRM di bawah Akta SPRM 2009, bagaimana rakyat Malaysia boleh mengharapkan SPRM menjadi agensi anti-rasuah bertaraf dunia?
Jelas sekali bahawa Lembaga Penasihat Pencegahan Rasuah SPRM tidak dan tidak boleh membuat keputusan secara tuntas tentang sama ada Azam dibebaskan daripada dakwaan konflik kepentingan.
Tuntutan Azam untuk ganti rugi RM10 juta dan permohonan maaf secara terbuka daripada pemberi maklumat, Lalitha Kunaratnam tidak dengan sendirinya membersihkan beliau daripada sebarang kesalahan berhubung dakwaan konflik kepentingan.
Adakah Azam bersedia untuk bercuti sehingga saman undang-undang terhadap Lalitha Kunaratnam ini selesai?
Saya bersetuju dengan ahli akademik Edmund Terence Gomez bahawa Azam harus menarik balik surat tuntutan terhadap Lalitha dan sebaliknya menghadap Jawatankuasa Pilihan Khas Bagi Agensi-Agensi Di Bawah Jabatan Perdana Menteri untuk membersihkan dirinya daripada dakwaan konflik kepentingan. Adakah Azam bersedia untuk berbuat demikian?
Perdana Menteri Ismail Sabri sedang mengadakan mesyuarat khas parlimen pada 20 Januari 2022 mengenai bencana banjir di negara ini.
Adakah Jawatankuasa Pilihan Khas Bagi Agensi-Agensi Di Bawah Jabatan Perdana Menteri boleh bermesyuarat minggu depan supaya laporan mengenai dakwaan konflik kepentingan terhadap Ketua Pesuruhjaya SPRM dapat dibentangkan di Parlimen pada 20 Januari 2022?
Jawatankuasa Pilihan Khas Bagi Agensi-Agensi Di Bawah Jabatan Perdana Menteri perlu menjemput NGO yang prihatin terhadap isu itu, sama ada Bersih, Pusat Memerangi Rasuah dan Kronisme (C4), Transparency International Malaysia, Rasuah Busters atau Suaram untuk menghantar wakil bagi menyertai sesi pendengaran mengenai dakwaan konflik kepentingan terhadap Ketua Pesuruhjaya SPRM.
(Kenyataan Media Ahli Parlimen DAP Iskandar Puteri Lim Kit Siang di Gelang Patah pada hari Jumaat, 7 Januari 2022)