The Attorney-General Idrus Harun should clarify whether the redacted sections in the two declassified reports on the RM9 billion littoral combatant ships (LCS) scandal had nothing to do with defence secrets but protect the “Big Shark” in the LCS scandal and hide the connection of the Scorpene submarine with the LCS procurements.
The Cabinet next Wednesday should summon the Attorney-General to appear before it and explain the reasons for the redactions in the two reports on the RM9 billion LSC scandal – the Ambrin Report of the Special Investigation Committee on Public Governance, Procurement and Finance the LCS (JKUSTUPKK) and the report of the forensic audit of the LCS procurement (2011-2014) carried out by Alliance IFA (M) Sdn. Bhd..
If there are no defence secrets in the redacted sections in the two reports, and the redactions were meant purely to hide the identity of the mastermind behind the RM9 billion LCS scandal and the connection of the Scorpene submarine and LCS procurements, the Cabinet should overrule the Attorney-General and order the redacted sections of the two reports which contain no defence secrets to be declassified and made available to the public.
It is completely ridiculous that even the list of abbreviations in the forensic audit report had been redacted in the case of one abbreviation.
Anyone who visit the Sarawak Report website and read the forensic audit report can make an intelligent guess as to what abbreviation had been redacted.
If it is so easy to guess what is the abbreviation in the forensic audit report’s abbreviation list which had been redacted, what is the purpose of the redaction?
In fact, the clumsy redaction has only raised more questions!
I had asked Zahid Hamidi, the UMNO President who was Defence Minister at the relevant time of the LCS procurement from 2009 to 2013 why on July 11, 2011, he had overturned his own decision as recommended by the Royal Malaysian Navy (RMN) to contract six Dutch-made Sigma LCS and chose the Scorpene manufacturer’s six French-made Gowind LCS without consulting the Navy, the end-user.
In fact, the RM9 billion LCS was so contractor-centric instead of end user-driven, that the Navy never knew that the decision to pprocure Sigma LCS had been overturned until informed by the contractor.
No wonder the then head of Royal Malaysian Navy, Admiral Abdul Aziz Jaafar said in one of his 10 letters of protest – five to the Defence Minister and two to the Prime Minister which were all ignored – that “there is no precedent of the design being decided by the main contractor and not the end-user”.
Abdul Aziz said “something was gravely wrong” as the navy and not the contractor should be setting the terms of the LCS contract but the Royal Malaysian Navy was “fighting a losing battle”.
Idrus Harun should explain whether the redacted sections of the two reports would provide an answer to this question which I had repeatedly asked Zahid and which Zahid had repeatedly avoided.
Has abuses of power, breaches of trust, malpractices and corruption become defence secrets in Malaysia?
(Media Statement by DAP MP for Iskandar Puteri Lim Kit Siang in Gelang Patah on Saturday, 3rd September 2022)