Securities Commission is the fifth casualty of the Azam-gate, losing all credibility and legitimacy – we must not allow more casualties of Azam-gate whether Parliament, Parliament Speaker, MoU, Parliamentary Select Committees, the Attorney-General or the Police!

(Versi BM)

Azam-gate has claimed another casualty – the Securities Commission – which has lost all credibility and legitimacy as the fifth victim after the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC); the MACC Chief Commissioner, Azam Baki; the Cabinet and the Prime Minister Ismail Sabri.

We must not allow more casualties of Azam-gate whether Parliament, Parliament Speaker, the confidence-supply-reform (CSR) memorandum of understanding (MoU), Parliamentary Select Committees, the Attorney-General or the Police!

The Cabinet yesterday had proved me right – that only an imbecile will regard the Securities Commission statement on a Thaipusam public holiday on Tuesday evening as fully clearing the MACC Chief Commissioner Azam Baki of any breach of the law and a declaration that Azam was therefore innocent.

The Ministers proved that they had done more than the proverbial three monkeys – ears that hear not, eyes that see not and mouths that speak not – by going one step further, to justify the simply unjustifiable!

Hence no immediate post-Cabinet announcement of what the Cabinet decided on Azam-gate, but more arm-twisting until a second Securities Commission statement was released at about 6 pm contradicting its statement 24 hours earlier from the SC “not able to conclusively establish that a breach under Section 25(4) SICDA has occurred” to “the SC arrived at the decision that was no breach” of Section 25(4) of SICDA 1991.

How the SC could perform a miracle within 24 hours to transition from “not able to conclusively establish a breach” to “arrived at the decision that there was no breach” is in a different realm altogether and need not tarry us here.

What should concern us is that Azam-gate has claimed another casualty in the ever-widening scandal, which has again made Malaysia the object of international odium and infamy.

One thing is absolutely clear – Azam Baki has lost all authority, legitimacy and credibility to be MACC Chief Commissioner as he cannot be the chief example of integrity and accountability in the public service!

Can Azam Baki be “whiter than white” on integrity and accountability after being enmeshed in Azam-gate?

The second Securities Commission statement has enmeshed Azam Baki in more scandals and controversies – like his own statement that his trading account was used by his brother to acquire shares in two companies in 2015 and that he had no interest in the matter.

I can imagine that Azam is going through tremendous pressure from the Azam-gate, but can Azam imagine the greater tremendous pressure that the MACC is undergoing at the same time?

If he loves MACC and wants the MACC to play its statutory role “to promote the integrity and accountability of public and private sector administration by constituting an independent and accountable anti-corruption body” (MACC Act 2009), he has only one option open to him – to resign or go on leave until the Azam-gate is fully investigated and he can continue to be a example of integrity and accountability in public and private sector administration and not to drag more agencies and institutions into public odium and infamy – national and international.

The Prime Minister has finally broken his silence on the Azam-gate when he said late last night that the opposition should accept the decision of the Securities Commission (SC), which cleared top graft-buster Azam Baki of any wrongdoing in his ownership of corporate shares.

Is Ismail Sabri so obtuse that he cannot see that the Securities Commission’s second statement had sparked more controversies undermining the integrity and accountability of more officials, agencies and institutions?

I have been asked whether the Azam Baki debacle would lead to the end of the confidence-supply- reform (CSR) Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed between Prime Minister Ismail Sabri and the four Pakatan Harapan leaders on Sept. 13, 2021.

Whether the CSR MoU should be ended before July 2022 should be based on whether the CSR MoU terms are being complied with and whether the Ismail Sabri government has crossed “red lines” to make it impossible for the continuation of the CSR MoU.

The CSR MoU is not an endorsement of the Perikatan Nasional Government which varies fundamentally from the vision of the Pakatan Harapan parties of PKR, DAP, Amanah and UPKO for a united Malaysia, the PH support of the nation-building principles embedded in the Malaysian Constitution 1963 and the Rukun Negara 1970 highlighting the need for a national consensus that Malaysia is a multi-racial, multi-lingual, multi-religious and multi-cultural nation where there is no room for hegemony by any race or religion, the system of constitutional monarchy and parliamentary democracy which upholds the doctrine of separation of powers, the rule of law, spiritual and moral values as abhorring and eliminating corruption and abuses of power, respect for human rights, press freedom, good governance and an effective and efficient government.

The contents of the CSR MoU is a public document and there are no secret clauses.

If any party to the CSR MoU fails to comply with its terms, then either party is entitled to end the MoU.

For instance, I understand that the Ismail Sabri government does not want to comply with one of the important terms of the CSR MoU, and if so, this will trigger a situation where one of the parties will have to consider whether there is any purpose in continuing the MoU.

It has been said that there had been no CSR MoU for the first half-a-century of the nation and that Pakatan Harapan parties have ceased to be Opposition parties as they have been co-opted by the Ismail Sabri government.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

No CSR MoU was possible in the first half-a-century of the nation because Malaysia was under the rule of a political hegemon – UMNO – which increasingly became more high-handed, dictatorial, racialistic and corrupt over the decades until Malaysia suffered the international infamy with the 1MDB scandal which was described by a US Attorney-General at the time as “kleptocracy at its worst”.

Critics of the CSR MoU failed to realise that it is the historic decision of the 14th General Election on May 9, 2018 which ended the UMNO political hegemony which produced conditions for the CSR MoU.

It was because Ismail Sabri was the weakest Prime Minister in the nation’s history that produced the conditions that made the CSR MoU possible.

Of course, we should not become slaves of the CSR MoU.

Five conditions were among the factors which made the CSR MoU possible and necessary:

1. The end of UMNO political hegemony on May 9, 2018 where no single political party enjoys a simple majority in Parliament and which created a situation where CSR MOU was feasible. The MOU was unheard-of in the past six decades because UMNO exercised political hegemony.

2. The CSR MoU stopped the PH’s numbers of parliamentarians being used in the “Game of Thrones” of Government parties in the conspiracy to be Prime Minister, as whatever the combination and permutation, Anwar Ibrahim would not be named Prime Minister whether by PN or BN before the 15th GE.

3. The CSR MoU was to unite the efforts of all Malaysians to end the exponential increase of Covid-19 cases and deaths. There were 24,599 Covid-19 cases and 393 fatalities on August 26, 2021, five days after Ismail Sabri was sworn in as the ninth Prime Minister of Malaysia, If this exponential daily increase of Covid-19 cases and deaths had not been stopped, we might have cumulative totals of five to 10 million Covid-19 cases and 100,000 – 200,000 Covid-19 deaths at the end of 2021 instead of 2.75 million Covid-19 cases and 31,500 Covid-19 deaths on Dec. 31, 2021.

4. Pakatan Harapan insisted that the PN government allocate RM45 billion to help Malaysians affected by the Covid-19 pandemic.

5. A minimal political consensus for the start of institutional and parliamentary reforms in the country.

It was agreed in the CSR MoU that there must be parliamentary reforms like the establishment of more parliamentary select committees and to amend the parliamentary standing orders to make the parliamentary select committees work meaningfully.

Azam-gate will be a test case for the CSR MoU whether the parliamentary special select committee on Agencies under the Prime Minister’s Department can function meaningfully.

I am in rare agreement with former Prime Minister, Najib Razak, who had brought Malaysia to the infamy of a kleptocracy, that we have received another fatal blow in our attempt to buck-up to achieve the status of a world-class great nation before Malaysia’s Centennial in 2063 – the decision of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) from the US and Tsinghua University of China to choose Indonesia and not Malaysia to set up a joint university campus.

We seem to continue in the downward spiral to a kakistocracy after becoming a kleptocracy – as recently illustrated by the MIT-Tsinghua University decision, Azam-gate, the floods disaster and Malaysia’s poor performance in the two-year Covid-19 pandemic.

Are we heading to be a failed state in the next few decades?

What is the stand of UMNO, Bersatu and PAS on Azam-gate?

(Media Statement by DAP MP for Iskandar Puteri Lim Kit Siang in Kuala Lumpur on Thursday, 20th January 2022)

Suruhanjaya Sekuriti adalah mangsa kelima skandal Azam, hilang semua kredibiliti dan legitimasi – kita tidak boleh membenarkan lebih banyak terkorban akibat skandal Azam, tidak kira Parlimen, Speaker Parlimen, MoU, Jawatankuasa Pilihan Khas Parlimen, Peguam Negara atau Polis!

Skandal Azam telah mengorban satu lagi mangsa – Suruhanjaya Sekuriti – yang telah kehilangan semua kredibiliti dan legitimasi setelah menjadi mangsa kelima selepas Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM); Ketua Pesuruhjaya SPRM, Azam Baki; Kabinet dan Perdana Menteri Ismail Sabri.

Kita tidak boleh membiarkan skandal Azam ini mengorban lebih banyak entiti tidak kira Parlimen, Speaker Parlimen, memorandum persefahaman (MoU) keyakinan-pembekalan-reformasi (CSR), Jawatankuasa Pilihan Khas Parlimen, Peguam Negara atau Polis!

Kabinet semalam telah membuktikan yang saya betul – bahawa hanya orang dungu yang akan menganggap kenyataan Suruhanjaya Sekuriti pada cuti umum Thaipusam pada petang Selasa sebagai membersihkan sepenuhnya Ketua Pesuruhjaya SPRM Azam Baki daripada sebarang pelanggaran undang-undang dan pengisytiharan bahawa Azam tidak bersalah.

Para menteri membuktikan bahawa mereka telah melakukan lebih teruk berbanding tiga monyet bijak – telinga tidak mendengar, mata tidak melihat dan mulut tidak bercakap – dengan melangkah lebih jauh, membenarkan perkara yang tidak wajar!

Oleh itu, tiada pengumuman segera selepas mesyuarat Kabinet tentang apa yang diputuskan oleh mereka berhubung skandal Azam, tetapi lebih banyak berbelit-belit sehingga kenyataan kedua Suruhanjaya Sekuriti dikeluarkan kira-kira jam 6 petang yang bercanggah dengan kenyataannya 24 jam sebelumnya; daripada “tidak dapat memastikan secara konklusif bahawa pelanggaran di bawah Seksyen 25(4) SICDA telah berlaku” kepada “SC mencapai keputusan bahawa tiada pelanggaran Seksyen 25(4) SICDA 1991”.

Bagaimana SC boleh melakukan keajaiban dalam masa 24 jam untuk beralih daripada “tidak dapat mewujudkan pelanggaran secara muktamad” kepada “sampai pada keputusan bahawa tiada pelanggaran” adalah sangat pelik.

Apa yang patut kita bimbangkan ialah skandal ini telah mengorbankan satu lagi mangsa yang sekali lagi memburukkan nama Malaysia di mata dunia.

Satu perkara yang jelas – Azam Baki telah kehilangan semua kuasa, legitimasi dan kredibiliti untuk menjadi Ketua Pesuruhjaya SPRM kerana jelas bahawa beliau tidak layak untuk menjadi tokoh utama integriti dan akauntabiliti dalam perkhidmatan awam!

Bolehkah Azam Baki mengembalikan integriti dan akauntabilitinya selepas terperangkap dalam skandalnya?

Kenyataan kedua daripada Suruhanjaya Sekuriti telah mengundang lebih banyak skandal dan kontroversi membabitkan Azam Baki – seperti kenyataan Azam sendiri bahawa akaun pelaburannya telah digunakan oleh adiknya untuk membeli saham dalam dua syarikat pada 2015 dan bahawa beliau tidak mempunyai kepentingan dalam hal berkenaan.

Saya boleh bayangkan bahawa Azam sedang menghadapi tekanan yang luar biasa, tetapi bolehkah Azam bayangkan tekanan yang lebih hebat yang sedang dialami oleh SPRM pada masa yang sama?

Jika beliau menyayangi SPRM dan mahu SPRM memainkan peranannya “untuk menggalakkan integriti dan akauntabiliti pentadbiran sektor awam dan swasta dengan membentuk badan pencegahan rasuah yang bebas dan bertanggungjawab” (Akta SPRM 2009), beliau hanya mempunyai satu pilihan – letak jawatan atau bercuti sehingga beliau disiasat sepenuhnya dan beliau boleh terus menjadi contoh integriti dan akauntabiliti dalam pentadbiran sektor awam dan swasta dan bukan untuk mengheret lebih banyak agensi dan institusi ke dalam kancah kebencian dan fitnah sama ada di peringkat nasional mahupun antarabangsa.

Perdana Menteri akhirnya membuka mulut berhubung skandal Azam apabila beliau berkata lewat malam tadi bahawa pembangkang harus menerima keputusan Suruhanjaya Sekuriti (SC), yang membersihkan Azam Baki daripada sebarang salah laku dalam pemilikan saham syarikat korporat.

Adakah Ismail Sabri terlalu dungu sehingga tidak dapat melihat bahawa kenyataan kedua Suruhanjaya Sekuriti telah mencetuskan lebih banyak kontroversi yang menjejaskan integriti dan akauntabiliti lebih ramai pegawai, agensi dan institusi?

Saya telah ditanya sama ada kemelut Azam Baki akan membawa kepada berakhirnya Memorandum Persefahaman (MoU) keyakinan-pembekalan-reformasi (CSR) yang ditandatangani antara Perdana Menteri Ismail Sabri dan empat pemimpin Pakatan Harapan pada 13 September 2021.

Sama ada MoU CSR perlu ditamatkan sebelum Julai 2022 harus berdasarkan sama ada syarat MoU CSR dipatuhi dan sama ada kerajaan Ismail Sabri telah bertindak melampaui batas sehingga menyukarkan pelaksanaan MoU CSR diteruskan.

MoU CSR bukanlah suatu bentuk pengesahan terhadap Kerajaan Perikatan Nasional yang secara asasnya berbeza daripada visi parti-parti dalam Pakatan Harapan iaitu PKR, DAP, Amanah dan UPKO untuk melihat sebuah Malaysia bersatu, sokongan PH terhadap prinsip pembinaan negara yang terkandung dalam Perlembagaan Malaysia 1963 dan Rukun Negara 1970 menekankan perlunya konsensus nasional bahawa Malaysia adalah sebuah negara berbilang kaum, bahasa, agama dan budaya di mana tiada ruang untuk hegemoni oleh mana-mana kaum atau agama, sistem Raja Berperlembagaan dan demokrasi berparlimen yang menjunjung doktrin pengasingan kuasa, kedaulatan undang-undang, nilai kerohanian dan nilai moral yang menolak dan menghapuskan rasuah dan salah guna kuasa, menghormati hak asasi manusia, kebebasan akhbar, tadbir urus yang baik dan kerajaan yang berkesan dan cekap.

Kandungan MoU CSR adalah dokumen awam dan tiada klausa rahsia.

Sekiranya mana-mana pihak dalam MoU CSR gagal mematuhi syaratnya, maka mana-mana pihak berhak untuk menamatkan MoU tersebut.

Sebagai contoh, saya faham bahawa kerajaan Ismail Sabri tidak mahu mematuhi salah satu syarat penting dalam MoU CSR, dan jika ya, ini akan mencetuskan keadaan di mana salah satu pihak perlu mempertimbangkan sama ada terdapat sebarang keperluan dan tujuan dalam meneruskan MoU.

Dikatakan bahawa tidak wujud sebarang MoU CSR dalam setengah abad pertama negara ini terbentuk dan parti Pakatan Harapan telah tidak lagi menjadi parti Pembangkang kerana mereka telah diserap ke dalam kerajaan Ismail Sabri.

Ini tidak benar sama sekali.

MoU CSR tidak wujud dalam tempoh setengah abad pertama penubuhan negara kerana Malaysia berada di bawah pemerintahan hegemoni politik UMNO yang diktator, perkauman dan korup selama beberapa dekad sehingga Malaysia menderita di peringkat antarabangsa dengan skandal 1MDB yang disifatkan oleh Peguam Negara AS pada masa itu sebagai “kleptokrasi paling teruk”.

Pengkritik MoU CSR gagal menyedari bahawa keputusan bersejarah Pilihan Raya Umum ke-14 pada 9 Mei 2018 yang menamatkan hegemoni politik UMNO dan seterusnya memaksa pelaksanaan MoU CSR.

Ismail Sabri adalah Perdana Menteri paling lemah dalam sejarah negara sehinggakan MoU CSR itu dilaksanakan.

Sudah tentu, kita tidak sepatutnya menjadi hamba kepada MoU CSR.

Lima peristiwa yang membolehkan MoU CSR itu wujud dan diperlukan:

1. Berakhirnya hegemoni politik UMNO pada 9 Mei 2018 dan tidak ada mana-mana parti yang mempunyai majoriti mudah di Parlimen, wujudlah satu situasi di mana MOU CSR ini diperlukan. MOU ini merupakan satu perkara yang tidak pernah didengari sebelum ini dalam enam dekad sejarah negara kerana hegemoni politik UMNO.

2. Kita berjaya menghentikan angka-angka Ahli Parlimen PH di Parlimen daripada digunakan dalam “Perebutan Kuasa” parti-parti kerajaan untuk menjadi Perdana Menteri kerana tidak kiralah apa pun kombinasinya, PN atau BN tidak akan sama sekali menamakan Anwar Ibrahim sebagai Perdana Menteri.

3. MOU CSR ini adalah usaha untuk menyatukan rakyat Malaysia untuk menghentikan peningkatan mendadak jangkitan dan kematian akibat Covid-19. Terdapat 24,599 kes dan 393 kematian pada 26 Ogos 2021, lima hari selepas Ismail Sabri mengangkat sumpah sebagai Perdana Menteri. Sekiranya trend ini berterusan, kita mungkin akan mencapai sejumlah lima ke 10 juta kes Covid-19 terkumpul dan 100,000 – 200,000 kematian akibat Covid-19 menjelang 31 Disember, dan bukannya 2.75 juta kes dan 31,500 kematian yang dicatatkan.

4. Pakatan Harapan mengesa kerajaan PN memperuntukkan RM45 bilion untuk membantu rakyat Malaysia yang terjejas akibat pandemik Covid-19.

5. Konsensus politik yang minimum untuk permulaan reformasi institusi di negara ini.

Telah dipersetujui dalam MoU CSR bahawa perlu ada reformasi parlimen seperti penubuhan lebih banyak jawatankuasa pilihan parlimen dan untuk meminda perintah tetap parlimen untuk menjadikan jawatankuasa pilihan parlimen berfungsi dengan lebih bermakna.

Skandal Azam akan menjadi ujian bagi MoU CSR sama ada jawatankuasa pilihan khas parlimen mengenai agensi-agensi di bawah Jabatan Perdana Menteri boleh berfungsi secara bermakna.

Saya jarang bersetuju dengan mantan Perdana Menteri, Najib Razak, yang telah membawa Malaysia kepada keburukan kleptokrasi, bahawa kita telah menerima satu lagi tamparan hebat dalam percubaan kita untuk bertahan bagi mencapai status negara hebat bertaraf dunia sebelum Ulang tahun ke-100 Malaysia pada 2063 – keputusan Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) dari AS dan Tsinghua University of China memilih Indonesia dan bukan Malaysia untuk menubuhkan kampus universiti bersama.

Kita nampaknya terus terjerumus ke dalam kancah kakistokrasi selepas menjadi kleptokrasi – seperti digambarkan baru-baru ini oleh keputusan Universiti MIT-Tsinghua, skandal Azam, bencana banjir dan prestasi buruk Malaysia dalam pandemik Covid-19 selama dua tahun.

Adakah kita akan menjadi negara yang gagal dalam beberapa dekad akan datang?

Apakah pendirian UMNO, Bersatu dan PAS mengenai skandal Azam?

(Kenyataan Media oleh Ahli Parlimen DAP Iskandar Puteri Lim Kit Siang di Kuala Lumpur pada hari Khamis, 20 Januari 2022)

  1. No comments yet.

You must be logged in to post a comment.