Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin must defend Parliament's honour and dignity by reprimanding the Election Commission for treating the highest legislative institution of the land with utter contempt

During the objection hearings to the new voters being transferred to Segamat’s still unbuilt army camp, an Election Commission (EC) registrar had rejected the Parliament Hansard as evidence saying that it “cannot be believed”.

The objections are being raised in regards to the inclusion of 1079 new army voters in the Segamat constituency as list in the EC’s third quarter supplementary electoral roll. The ongoing issue had been raised by Kluang MP Liew Chin Tong because the new army camp in Segamat is not even complete but the army personnel and their spouses have already been added to the electoral roll in that constituency.

During the Budget debate in Parliament on November 27, Seremban MP Anthony Loke had asked for confirmation if the army camp was still under construction or if it had been completed.

In response the Deputy Minister of Defence, Datuk Johari Baharum said that the camp was still under construction and when question further, said that the camp was not complete. As recorded on page 136 of the Hansard, the Deputy Minister said “belum siap” when asked to confirm the status of the army camp.

Yet, the registrar chose to reject the Hansard as evidence.  This is a clear case of contempt against the Parliament.

The Parliament Hansard is the official record of Parliamentary proceedings. Even in court, Parliamentary proceedings are admissible as evidence. Section 78 (1b) of the Evidence Act 1950, which states the proof required for official documents, states that

…the proceedings of Parliament or of any of the federal legislatures that existed in Malaysia before Parliament was constituted or of the legislature of any State— by the minutes of the body or by the published Acts of Parliament, Ordinances, Enactments or abstracts or by copies purporting to be printed by the authority of the Government concerned.

The Act clearly says that Parliamentary proceedings are proved by the minutes of the session, which takes the form of the Parliamentary Hansard and nothing else.

If the judiciary accepts the Hansard as hard evidence, who is the EC to reject the official Parliamentary document?  For the EC registrar to say that the Hansard cannot be believed, they are saying that Parliament proceedings themselves cannot be believed.

We call upon the Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin to reprimand the Election Commission for the latter’s contempt and we call upon the EC to reprimand the responsible Registrar above and immediately act to rectify the injustice by reopening the objection proceedings in Segamat.

The failure of the EC to do the above would only further prove that the EC is not the independent institution conceived by our Constitution.  Instead, it is merely a paw of Barisan Nasional.

Read more!

The Police must stop abusing irrelevant and oppressive laws to investigate and persecute Senai state assemblywoman for merely questioning if the Johor Menteri Besar was involved in an act of corruption

On 27 November, DAP Senai elected representative, Wong Shu Qi had asked in the Johor State Assembly whether it was true that Khaled had received RM12 million from a developer to change the Bumiputera status of a residential plot of land to non-Bumiputera.  Wong said the allegations against Khaled had surfaced in March and were based on witness statements in an investigation by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

As a result of her question, she has not only been thrown out of the state assembly and is in the process of being referred to the Rights and Privileges Committee, the Police have commenced investigation against what she asked.

Firstly, the investigation by the Police demonstrates a clear abuse of power on its part by failing to respect the sanctity of the Johor state assembly.

The Federal Constitution, the highest law of our land, clearly states that assemblymen are immune from things said in state legislative proceedings.  Clause 72(2) of the Constitution states that:

No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly of any State or of any committee thereof.

The reason for this protection needs no explanation – but for the benefit of our law enforcers – elected representatives must be empowered to state and ask without fear or favour regardless of how scandalous and sensitive the subject matter might be. This process exists to ensure transparency and accountability in national and state administration.

If one can’t even ask questions of our leader’s in the state assembly, then where else can we ask to ensure the righteousness and integrity of our Government?

Are the Police of the opinion that the Menteri Besar of Johor is above the law, to the extent that even questioning his alleged involvement in a corruption case is criminal?

Worse, the Police are clearly clutching at straws to investigate and persecute Wong.  Wong has purportedly committed an offence under Section 203A of the Penal Code provides that anyone who discloses purportedly leaked information to any other person shall be punished with fine of not more than one million ringgit, or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year, or with both.

The problem here is what leaked information is illegal?  When fraudulent contracts signed by 1MDB with Petrosaudi International and Aabar Investment PJS Limited involving billions of dollars were exposed, does it mean that every person who had written about it – from analysts to politicians to both online and off-line media are all guilty of the above crime?

That would only result in the complete collapse of Malaysia’s natural justice system where the whistleblowers are persecuted while those involved in crimes against the tax-payers get away scot free.

Wong is also investigated under Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act, which refers to “improper use of network facilities or network service, etc.”

The fact that a leaked witness statement relating to the corruption allegations against Datuk Seri Mohamed Khaled Nordin might amount to ‘communication which is obscene, indecent, false, menacing or offensive in character with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person’ is clearly an outrageous abuse of the law.

My question to the Police and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission remains the same – have they initiated and commenced investigations against Dato’ Seri Khaled Nordin based on the very witness statement which is being used to charge another member of the Johor administration for corrupt practices?

If the Johor Menteri Besar is indeed innocent, let the investigations prove that to be the case and clear Dato’ Seri Khalid’s name.  However, the fact that no investigations have been carried out against the Menteri Besar, but those who had the courage to question the case even within the protect confines of the state assembly are persecuted, only serve to confirm the suspicions in the minds of the rakyat as to Dato’ Seri Khalid’s guilt or innocence.

Read more!

Sedangkan Menteri Besar Johor Dato’ Seri Khaled Nordin tidak mengaku salah, SPRM mesti menjalankan siasatan penuh untuk membersihkan nama beliau

Semalam, Menteri Besar Johor Datuk Seri Mohamed Khaled Nordin telah menafikan dakwaan yang beliau terlibat dalam rasuah berkaitan hartanah di negeri itu.

"Saya menafikan sekeras-kerasnya tuduhan tak berasas tersebut. Ia adalah fitnah, tidak benar dan tidak bersangkutan dengan saya.

"Pentadbiran saya tidak menerima apa-apa suapan, tidak akan menerima apa-apa suapan dan akan menentang segala usaha untuk memberi apa jua bentuk suapan kepada saya dan pentadbiran saya," katanya.

Minggu lalu, saya telah menyoal Suruhanjaya Pencegah Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) kenapa tidak menjalankan siasatan ke atas Menteri Besar Johor berdasarkan dokumen kenyataan saksi SPRM, Amir Shariffuddin Abd Raub, yang bocor di internet.

Datuk Seri Mohamed Khaled dituduh menerima sebanyak RM12 juta daripada Amir pada tarikh-tarikh yang tertentu, berkaitan dengan kes rasuah bekas exco kerajaan negeri Datuk Abdul Latif Bandi awal tahun ini.

SPRM kemudian mengesahkan kebocoran dokumen tersebut, walaupun Amir mendakwa kenyataannya dalam dokumen yang tersebar itu tidak lengkap dan telah membuat laporan polis.

Kami menyambut baik penafian keras daripada Menteri Besar Johor.  Kenyataan yang telah dibuat di dalam Dewan Undangan Negeri tersebut adalah jauh berbanding dengan sikap Perdana Menteri Dato’ Seri Najib Razak yang sehingga hari ini, masih enggan membuat sebarang kenyataan kepada Dewan Rakyat mengenai jumlah wang melebih RM2.6 bilion yang masuk ke dalam akaun peribadinya.

Akan tetapi, jika Menteri Besar benar-benar tidak bersalah, kenapa SPRM langsung tidak menjalankan sebarang siasat terhadapnya supaya kebenaran dapat ditetapkan dan kes ini boleh ditutup?

Apatah lagi, jika kenyataan saksi Amir Shariffuddin digunakan untuk mendakwa kes Datuk Abdul Latif, bukankan ianya penting bahawa kenyataan beliau adalah benar dan boleh dipercayai (“credible”) pada keseluruhannya?

Maksudnya jika kenyataan Amir di mana beliau telah menyerahkan sebanyak RM12 juta kepada Dato’ Seri Khaled adalah tidak benar, ia bermakna bahawa kenyataan Amir tidak boleh sama sekali digunakan terhadap Datuk Abdul Latif.  Akan tetapi, jika kenyataan Amir boleh dipercayai dan berasas kukuh untuk digunakan mendakwa Datuk Abdul Latif, maka bahagian-bahagian yang melibatkan Menteri Besar Johor juga mesti disiasat.

Oleh itu, kami menyeru supaya Dato’ Seri Khaled meminta SPRM membuka siasatan terhadapnya secara terbuka supaya SPRM dapat mengesahkan penafiannya.  Ini adalah penting untuk menyakinkan rakyat jelata bahawa tuduhan tersebut adalah benar-benar tidak berasas dan nama baik Menteri Besar Johor dapat dipulihkan.

Pada masa yang sama, kami terus menyeru SPRM menyiasat tuduhan rasuah terhadap Menteri Besar Johor supaya institusi SPRM menjalankan tugas mereka dengan penuh integriti, dan tidak dilihat berat sebelah.

Ia juga akan memastikan supaya kes Datuk Abdul Latif yang bergantung antaranya kepada kenyataan Amir tidak akan terjejas akibat perkara ini.  Pada masa yang sama, jikalau kenyataan saksi Amir adalah tidak benar, SPRM mesti menambahkan dakwaan terhadap beliau kerana memberi kenyataan palsu.

Read more!

Why hasn’t the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission investigated Johor MB, Datuk Seri Khaled Nordin?

The whole of Malaysia have now seen the MACC investigation documents which have been leaked this week, implicating corruption by the Johor Menteri Besar (MB), Datuk Seri Khaled Nordin.  The documents comprised of the witness statement taken by MACC during its investigation into Johor state executive councillor Datuk Abdul Latif Bandi. The documents come from the Commission’s interview with Amir Shariffuddin bin Abdul Raub, who was also charged with Datuk Latif in April this year.

MACC had investigated the two in relation to a land graft scandal, where the two had received multiple bribes amounting to RM30 million from developers in return for their assistance in changing the status of bumiputera lots as well as reducing the 7.5% charge levied upon developers.

As shocking as the initial news of their investigation was, the biggest shocker is found in the witness statement (relevant pages attached), where Amir admitted to delivering nearly RM12 million in cash to the Menteri Besar in return for the MB’s help in the necessary land changes.

The MACC has effectively confirmed the authenticity of these documents when Deputy MACC commissioner Dato’ Sri Azam Baki’s said yesterday that the documents were sent to the lawyers of one of the defendants in the case.

Now that the MACC has acknowledged the documents, they will have to explain their failure to investigate the MB, who is similarly implicated according to the witness statement.

The first account given by Amir was for an alleged transfer of RM4 million in September 2013. That kickback would come from the developer MB Land, which had solicited Amir’s help in converting the land status and waiving the charge.

Following that successful deal, Amir says he was approached by other developers for similar favours. Each of these deals would also include multiple alleged kickbacks to the Mentri Besar. For a deal by IJM Group, Amir stated that he instructed his lawyer Zul Azam to cash in a cheque worth RM1 million. He then handed over the money in a backpack as instructed by Datuk Khaled. That was done on 14 November 2013.

Subsequently, Amir also admitted to paying the MB, a total of RM9.7 million in cash over 10 transactions between 16 April 2014 and 4 May 2016. Those payments were for facilitating a land deal for Scientex Sdn. Bhd. The report specifically highlighted 5 of those transactions made on 16 April 2014, 1 October 2014, 20 October 2014, 2 December 2014 and 17 June 2015.

With such concrete evidence in front of their own noses, why hasn’t the MACC investigated Datuk Seri Khaled Nordin?

Worse, the MACC has decided it was more appropriate to ‘kill the messenger’ by filing a police report over the purported leaks.  In turn, the Johor state assembly (DUN) disgraced itself by acting in cahoots in its attempt to silence the issue by throwing out Senai state assemblywoman Wong Shu Qi in the DUN.

In fact, all the companies which have paid the alleged bribes must be investigated, and if guilty, charged and punished as well.  After all, the MACC has often opined that the giver of bribes is as guilty as those who receive.

The question is, is the Johor MB immune to investigations and prosecution just like Dato’ Seri Najib Razak is, in the case of the multi-billion ringgit scandal, 1MDB?  While the MACC abdicated from its responsibility to investigate the Prime Minister by shoving the responsibility to the Police, what is MACC’s excuse this time?

Where is the ‘all hands on the deck’ haste and urgency in the MACC just like the way it dealt with alleged and even trumped up corruption charges against opposition figures?  Or will this remove, once and for all, the façade that the MACC is an independent investigating institution which will act without fear or favour; and that it is merely an extended paw of UMNO to oppress the opposition while protecting its political masters?

Read more!

"Private Sector Initiative" Not Justification for Direct Negotiations

Earlier this week, I have questioned the award of the RM1 billion Johor commuter train project to Metropolitan Commuter Network (MCN), a subsidiary of Malaysia Steel Works (KL) Bhd (Masteel) by the Malaysian government without open tender.

Masteel has responded via a press statement to say that “other bidders had not been prevented from submitting their bids to the government”.  It added that “it was a private sector initiative, as opposed to a government-driven project”.

Let me first make it clear that it is the right for any private company to submit any number of unsolicited bids for any types of projects to the Government.  However, the unsolicited bids by these companies do not in themselves justify direct negotiations between the Government and these companies.

The Federal Government, in this case represented by Public-Private Partnership Agency (UKAS) in the Prime Minister’s Department, must still place emphasis on transparency and accountability in the award of any contracts. And the best mechanism to ensure that the interest of the public are fully protected especially in projects such as this, is via open, transparent and competitive tenders.

What is more, this RM1 billion project involves the provision of a 20-year RM700 million soft loan to the concessionaire.  The question that needs to be asked to the Prime Minister’s Department is, if the Government has to fund 70% of the project, why bother privatising it in the first place to a 37-year concession?

As admitted by Masteel CEO, Datuk Seri Tai Hean Leng himself, MCN will take “12 to 13 years to recover its costs”, which means that the concessionaire will have the remaining 24 to 25 years to make lucrative returns for their project.

Masteel has also defended itself in our claim that the company is mainly involved in steel manufacturing, and has no prior experience in train services.  The company argued that it has “experience in complex mechanical and electrical hardware and automation” which gives them “the relevant experience in operating trains are trains are relatively simple mechanical system compared to steel mills”.

It is not my place to judge the competence of Masteel and whether it will be able to manage rail systems despite having no prior experience in such projects.  However, based on the company’s own reply that “experience in complex mechanical and electrical hardware and automation” is sufficient, then I am certain that scores of other companies would be equal to the job.  Certainly in this case, there would then be little justification for a direct negotiation because the project apparently requires very little specialised expertiese as “trains are relatively simple mechanical systems”.

Therefore given Masteel feedback, the direct negotiations must stop immediately and the Prime Minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak himself must insist that the project be tendered openly and competitively.

Despite news articles being posted on Masteel on website entitled “Masteel Gets Nod for Iskandar-Singapore Rail Link”, the company has now clarified that “at the time of writing, MCN is still undergoing the process of obtaining the necessary approvals fro various ministries and has not been granted full approval to undertake the project.”

This clarification is welcome as we can now call upon the Government to ensure that this RM1 billion project which has yet to be awarded, be tendered openly instead of being directly negotiated.  It is only by ensuring that all projects awarded by the Government are at the best value, can the interest of the commuters and Malaysians be protected – e.g., the commuter fares will be at the lowest possible.

In the open tender exercise, we would strongly encourage the Government to invite Masteel to take part in the tender to prove that it is the most competent party offering the lowest prices to implement the project.

Read more!

Sistem Rel Iskandar RM1 billion Diswastakan Secara Rundingan Terus

Perdana Menteri Dato’ Seri Najib Razak telah berjanji untuk menjalankan sistem tender terbuka dalam semua perolehan kerajaan untuk meningkatkan ketelusan dan mengurangkan rasuah. Akan tetapi kontrak kerajaan bernilai berbilion-bilion ringgit masih ditawarkan secara rundingan terus tanpa sebarang tender terbuka selepas pilihanraya umum ke-13.

Syarikat Malaysian Steel Works (Masteel) Bhd telah mengumumkan pada 31hb Mei 2013 melalui Bursa Malaysia bahawa mereka telah menghadiri satu mesyuarat dengan Jawatan Kerjasama Awam Swasta (UKAS) yang dipengerusi oleh Menteri Kewangan Kedua, Dato’ Ahmad Husni Hussain.

Dalam mesyuarat tersebut, anak syarikat Masteel iaitu Metropolitan Commuter Network (MCN) telah diberikan kebenaran untuk memuktamadan struktur pinjaman mudah sebanyak RM700 juta daripada pihak kerajaan untuk membina satu sistem rail yang baru di Iskandar Malaysia. Sistem rel ini akan melingkungi 20 stesyen termasuk Kulai, Gelang Patah, Nusajaya, Johor Baru dan Masai.

MCN merupakan satu syarikat usahasama di mana Masteel memiliki 60%, manakala syarikat KUB Bhd di mana UMNO mempunyai kepentingan, memiliki 40%.

Dalam satu temuramah dengan The Edge Malaysia bertarikh Jun 17, CEO Masteel, Dtauk Seri Tai Hean Leng telah menjelaskan bahawa MCN akan melabur sebanyak RM300 juta untuk melaksanakan projek ini dengan pinjaman “soft loan” RM700 juta daripada kerajaan.  Mereka akan diberikan konsesi untuk menjalankan sistem komuter ini selama 37 tahun walaupun MCN akan dapat “break even” selepas 12 tahun.

Sebahagian daripada konsesi tersebut termasak sekeping tanah sebesar 14.3ha di Kempas, Johor yang akan diberikan kepada MCN untuk bukan sahaja membina depot, tetapi juga untuk membina bangunan komersil.  Mengikut kata Datuk Seri Tai, “tanah ini adalah tanah pilihan kerana ia bersebelahan dengan Setia Tropicana”.

Kami ingin mempersoalkan asas pihak kerajaan telah memilih syarikat Masteel untuk projek rel ini secara rundingan terus.  Mengapa pihak kerajaan tidak menjalankan tender terbuka untuk projek sebegini? Soalan juga tertimbul di mana apakah keperluan untuk menswastakan projek ini jika kerajaan perlu membiayai 70% daripada kos pembinaan melalui pemberian pinjaman mudah?

Tambahan lagi, syarikat Masteel bukan merupakan syarikat yang berpengalaman dalam bidang rel.  Aktiviti utama Masteel adalah pembuatan dan pembekalan pelbagai jenis keluli di Malaysia.  Syarikat tersebut yang hanya memperolehi keuntungan bersih RM24 juta pada tahun 2012 tidak pernah terlibat dalam kerja-kerja pembinaan dan pengoperasian rel.  Adakah syarikat Masteel merupakan syarikat yang terbaik untuk melaksanakan projek RM1 bilion ini dengan bantuan kerajaan sebanyak RM700 juta?

Pihak kerajaan perlu menjelaskan rasional untuk meneruskan tawaran projek secara rundingan terus, terutamanya bila ia kerap-kali ditawarkan kepada syarikat-syarikat yang tiada berpengalaman dan tidak mempunyai dana kewangan yang mencukupi. Apatah lagi pihak kerajaan perlu memperuntukkan pinjaman yang cukup besar walaupun pihak konsesi akan dapat menerima pulangan modal dalam jangka masa singkat.

Pihak PEMANDU telah mengemukakan Pelan Transformasi Kerajaan (GTP) pada tahun 2009 untuk mempertingkatkan ketelusan dan akauntabiliti dalam segala perolehan kerajaan, demi mengurangkan pembaziran dan rasuah.  Akan tetapi sampai hari ini, kita dapat melihat bahawa kerajaan hanya cakap tak serupa bikin.

Pada masa yang sama, Perdana Menteri Dato’ Seri Najib Razak sendiri telah berjanji supaya “reformasi” akan diteruskan jika BN dipilih semula sebagai kerajaan.  Adakah kesemua ini merupakan janji-janji kosong di mana pihak kroni BN akan diberikan kepentingan dan kekayaan.

Read more!