MADPET is for the Abolition of Death Penalty, an end of torture and abuse of rights by the police, an end to death in custody, an end to police shoot to kill incidents, for greater safeguards to ensure a fair trial, for a right to one phone call and immediate access to a lawyer upon arrest, for the repeal of all laws that allow for detention without trial and an immediate release of all those who are under such draconian laws.
What 3R issue did Mukmin, who
highlighted plight of Bajau Laut, justify the usage of Sedition Act?
When Sedition Act used, inform suspect
of which of the Section 3(1) seditious tendency it is, not just the Section 4
offence that is vague
When Human
Rights Defender Mukmin Nantang, that highlighted the recent Bajau Laut
evictions, was arrested and investigated under Sedition Act, was it about the 3R issues (rulers, race,
religion) or some other offence under the Sedition Act?
If anything,
it may be a criticism of the State authorities that were responsible for the questionable
eviction of hundreds of Bajau Laut people from their homes in the Semporna
district in Sabah, where houses were also burned by the authorities.
The
government has assured us that Sedition Act would only be used for 3R issues
(rulers, race, religion), not for criticism of government.
Prime
Minister Anwar Ibrahim said in September 2023 that "I do not agree that the Sedition Act should be used against those who criticize
the prime minister and the government, but we will not tolerate anyone who
tries to incite or slander to the point of touching on the 3R issues (rulers,
race, religion) ... let the police take action.” (Malaysia Now, 4/9/2023)
So, did the
police act use the Sedition despite the government assurance that it will not
be used safe for when it concerns 3R?
MADPET
(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) has previously called for a
moratorium on the use of the Sedition Act pending abolition.
At least a moratorium on the use of the Act save for 3R issues.
Clearly assurance or vague representations by the Prime Minister or government is
not enough to stop the police from using the Sedition Act not just for 3R
crimes.
A suspect right to know
the specific section of the Act violated – just saying Sedition Act is wrong
When the
police arrest, it is required that the police inform the suspect CLEARLY what the
alleged offence is including under what Section of a particular Act. The police
cannot simply say vaguely under that the offence is investigated under an Act
like Penal Code or under Sedition Act.
‘He [Sabah Police Commissioner Datuk Jauteh
Dikun] added Mukmin was investigated
under the Sedition Act on issues relating to the demolition of squatter homes…’(Star,
28/6/2024) Media reports perused just says ‘Sedition Act’ without mention of
which section was breached, or whether It was sedition against royalty, or
concerning race or religion.
Article 5(3)
of the Federal Constitution states, ‘Where a person is arrested, he shall be
informed as soon as may be of the grounds
of his arrest…’, and this means that one has to be informed of what law
he/she broke – which section and which Act. Just saying ‘on issues relating to the
demolition of squatter homes’ is not good enough. A suspect has the right to
know what exactly what is the offence for which he/she is being investigated.
Police cannot
simply arrest people, and only later after investigation decide on what is the
crime and under which provision of the law.
Saying offence under
Section 4(1) not enough - Tell the suspect which seditious tendency under Section
3(1), i.e. about King/Rulers, Race or Religion?
For Sedition Act, which criminalizes seditious
tendencies just stating that he is being
investigated under even section 4(1) is INSUFFICIENT, the police need to go further
and say which seditious tendency with reference to Section 3(1) and inform
the suspect or witness whether the "seditious tendency" is a tendency
(a) to
bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against any Ruler or
against any Government…(c) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite
disaffection against the administration of justice in Malaysia or in any State;…(e) to promote feelings of ill-will and
hostility between different races or classes of the population of Malaysia;
Section 4(1) is
VAGUE simply says, that ‘(1) Any person who-(a) does or attempts to do, or makes any preparation to do, or conspires
with any person to do, any act which has or which would, if done, have a seditious tendency;(b) utters any seditious words;…’ which is just too general, and leaves the suspect or witness in the dark as
to whether it is about any of the 3R issues or something else altogether.
What exactly is
the ‘seditious tendency’ or ‘seditious’ talking about with regards the offences
under Section 4(1)? Was it about causing disaffection with the King or
promotion of ill feelings between races?
Suspect or
witness entitled to CLARITY of the offence being investigated.
Thus, police shall tell the suspect or witness, what Sedition Offence is,
and what exactly is the seditious tendency he/she is being investigated on with
reference to Section 3(1)
MADPET reiterates its call for the REPEAL of the draconian Sedition Act.
If there is still a need, enact more new laws to deal with the 3R issues, since
there already exist laws in the Penal Code and other laws that already deal with
the 3R (royalty, race, religion) issues.
MADPET calls for the government to impose an immediate MORATORIUM on the
use of the Sedition Act pending repeal.
With regard
the alleged injustice that has befallen
the Bajau Laut community, who are also ‘Bumiputra’ or natives of Sabah, the
government must immediately stop the eviction that displaces these people from
their homes, sources of income and livelihood. No eviction until proper
investigation to ensure that their Human Rights are respected. Wrong to
evict without provision of an alternative place to live, which the affected or
displaced community can agree to.
Charles Hector
For and on behalf of MADPET(Malaysians Against
Death Penalty and Torture)
KOTA KINABALU: Activist Mukmin Nantang, who has been vocal on issues related to the Palau and Bajau Laut communities, was summoned by the police to give his statement.
He was, however, released on police bail at around 1.20pm yesterday after he gave his statement to the Semporna police.
Sabah Police Commissioner Datuk Jauteh Dikun confirmed that Mukmin was brought in for questioning and was released on police bail after his statement was recorded.
He added Mukmin was investigated under the Sedition Act on issues relating to the demolition of squatter homes.
It is believed that Mukmin was brought in for questioning over comments he made online about the eviction of the Bajau Laut settlements in Semporna previously.
Hundreds of illegal Palau and Bajau Laut settlements, built on state land and gazetted marine park areas, were demolished during the operation.
When contacted, Mukmin said he was called in to facilitate a probe under the Sedition Act in relation to a TikTok video that allegedly linked him with the Bajau Laut community.
“That video that was uploaded does not belong to me. I cannot specify which video this is because it will affect investigations,” he added. - Star, 28/6/2024
Zero tolerance for acts of incitement, says Anwar
The
prime minister says he does not agree with the use of the Sedition Act
on those who criticise the government, but that attempts to incite the
people using the 3R issues are not acceptable.
Bernama
2 minute read
Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim speaks at a ceramah in Simpang Jeram, Johor, Sept 3. Photo: Facebook
The
government will not tolerate any attempts to incite the people to cause
divisions among the races, says Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim.
Anwar said he was not afraid and was open to criticism, but that
inciting the public to create conflict in the country's multiracial
society was not acceptable.
"I do not agree that the Sedition Act should be used against those
who criticise the prime minister and the government, but we will not
tolerate anyone who tries to incite or slander to the point of touching
on the 3R issues (rulers, race, religion)... let the police take action.
"You can criticise anything and anyone... but if you use sentiments,
incite the Malays to hate the Chinese, incite people to use religion to
accuse others of infidelity... I stress that I will not tolerate it," he
added at the Madani Unity ceramah in conjunction with the Pulai
parliamentary by-election at Taman Uda Utama, Perling, last night.
The event was also attended by Amanah president Mohamad Sabu, Johor
Menteri Besar Onn Hafiz Ghazi and the Pakatan Harapan (PH) candidate for
the Pulai parliamentary seat, Suhaizan Kaiat.
Anwar, who is also PH chairman, said the people must reject parties that only play up politics of hatred and extremism.
He said they rely on the sentiment that DAP is preventing the
government from helping the people, especially the Malays, whereas DAP
had always supported all initiatives for the people regardless of race.
"DAP is with PH. If DAP rejects the Federal Constitution, we (PH)
will fight it (DAP), if it does not accept Islam as the federal
religion, we will oppose… but instead, they accept," he said.
Meanwhile, Anwar said the government would continue to govern the
country based on the Madani Economy to safeguard the welfare of the
people, even if the initiatives introduced are rejected or belittled by
the opposition.
"Because we made these changes (policies and initiatives to help the
people) they (the opposition) can't stand it... they want to say that we
(the government) are not doing our work, when they know we are doing
it.
"They can continue to dream of taking over the federal government, at
a time when the unity government continues to work to save the country
and the people with the Madami Economy (framework)," he said.
Anwar also said that the government would prevail for the full term
based on the performance of the economy and the influx of new foreign
investments into the country.
He said the success achieved in over eight months since the formation
of the government was the result of the focus and energy of all parties
involved.
The by-elections for the Pulai parliamentary seat and Simpang Jeram
state seat follow unexpected vacancies due to the death of the incumbent
Salahuddin Ayub, who was also the domestic trade and cost of living
minister, on July 23.
The by-elections will be held simultaneously with early voting on Sept 5, followed by polling day on Sept 9. - Malaysia Now, 4/9/2023
MACC should be under Parliament, and
no more under the Prime Minister
A simple amendment requiring Parliament’s
approval, prior to the advice of PM to King can easily be done
MADPET (Malaysians Against Death
Penalty and Torture) is of the opinion that it is best that the Malaysian
Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) that is currently under the Prime Minister's
Department or Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, be placed under Parliament so that it will become independent and more effective
in fighting corruption, irrespective of whether the alleged perpetrator is Anwar
Ibrahim himself, political leaders or politicians in now government party or others.
Now, MACC is perceived by some that it is TOOL of the government of the day,
which seems to target Opposition, ‘old enemies’ and/or critics of the Prime
Minister or the government.
Enough of ‘promises’ with
no follow-up actions
Again on 18/6/2024, Anwar Ibrahim ‘repeats’ ‘The government will examine
the implications of a proposal to place the Malaysian Anti-Corruption
Commission (MACC) under the jurisdiction of Parliament, said Datuk Seri Anwar
Ibrahim.’(Star, 18/6/2024).
More than 14 months ago, on 28/3/2023, PM Anwar Ibrahim told Parliament
that ‘Putrajaya is willing to relinquish
its discretion in appointing the chief commissioner of the Malaysian
Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to Parliament… as long as there is a
mechanism decided…’ in Parliament. (The Edge, 28/3/2023). Since then, the
government did little (or nothing) to crystalize this mechanism for Parliament’s
involvement, or to amend the MACC Act to empower Parliament to decide on the
MACC Chief, and thereafter the King appoints.
MADPET is disappointed false hopes, promises and/or assurances given by
PM Anwar Ibrahim and Pakatan Harapan leaders for reform, which then is not
followed up or is delayed until god knows when. Worse case there is a total
U-turn, for example about the promise to repeal Sedition Act and bad laws, and
even Local Council(government) elections.
Amend to require prior
approval of Parliament, before PM tenders advice to King or PM/Minister directly
appoints
The amendment needed which MADPET proposes is, (5)(1) that ‘The Yang
di-Pertuan Agong shall, on the advice of the Prime Minister, after obtaining prior approval of
Parliament, appoint a Chief Commissioner of the Malaysian
Anti-Corruption Commission for such period and on such terms and conditions as
may be specified in the instrument of appointment.’. That is all.
Prior approval of Parliament process will include vetting process conducted
by some Parliamentary Appointments Committee, which will be comprised of
Government Back Bencher MPs and Opposition MPs, who will do a thorough
examination of the nominees for the position of MACC Chief Commissioner to
determine the qualifications and suitability for the said positions through also
a question and answer session which is
best telecast live. The recommendation of such Parliamentary Appointments
Committee will then be voted by Parliament.
The mere presence of public vetting
procedures could also deter prime ministers from making unsuitable or unpopular
appointments in the first place.
This process of Parliamentary approval has legal precedence in other
countries to determine that only qualified and suitable candidates are
appointed to certain positions. It is practiced also in the US, Ghana and other
jurisdictions.
In Ghana, for example, such a process is practiced for even Minister and
Deputy Minister candidates.
Art 78(1) of the Republic Of Ghana Constitution says that Ministers of
State shall be appointed by the President with
the prior approval of Parliament from among members of Parliament or
persons qualified to be elected as members of Parliament, except that the
majority of Ministers of State shall be appointed from among members of
Parliament.
Art 79(1) (1) The President may, in consultation with a Minister of
State, and with the prior approval of
Parliament, appoint one or more Deputy Ministers to assist the Minister
in the performance of his functions.
Hence, for the appointment of Chief Commissioner of MACC, members of the
3 statutory monitoring bodies of MACC - the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board (Section
13 MACC Act), Special Committee on Corruption (Section 14) and The Complaints Committee
(Section 15), a simple amendment requiring the PRIOR approval of Parliament before
appointment is needed.
Same goes for the 2 other oversight bodies, being Operations Review
Panel (ORP) and the Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel (CCPP) which are
established through administrative order, whereby members now are appointed by
the Prime Minister.
5 Oversight Bodies – Good
on Paper But Does It Work?
Azam Baki, the current MACC Chief Commissioner disagrees that MACC be
placed under Parliament's purview. He pointed out that the agency is already monitored by five independent
oversight bodies. (NST, 17/6/2024).
The problem, however, is whether these 5 bodies, being 3 Statutory bodies
and 2 established through administrative order. are even independent and functioning
as required - a question that was
highlighted in the case of Edmund Terence Gomez, then a member of the Consultation
and Corruption Prevention Panel(CCPP). He alleged that he asked the then
Chairman of CCPP for a meeting to discuss urgent matters, presumably about the
Azam Baki scandal, but the Chairman failed to call the meeting, even when an
alleged ‘whistleblower’ was ready to attend. Terence also wrote to the then MACC
Anti-Corruption Advisory Board Chairman on three separate occasions, but these
also failed to elicit any response. (Malay Mail, 28/12/2021). If a member of
the Panel cannot get the Panel to meet on what he considered important, would
others with relevant evidence be able to do so.
In short, MADPET is of the opinion that it USELESS to have such monitoring or oversight bodies in name, but in
fact it fails to achieve its intended purpose, be it by reason of wrong
person/s being appointed, lack of transparency and poor monitoring by
Parliament and/or the people generally.
A perusal of internet, including the MACC’s website, shows no public records of meetings, let alone
decisions made or actions taken.
Something is wrong, and that is why one needs good Chairpersons and
members of MACC oversight bodies, and a requirement that oversight bodies actions
and reports are transparent.
It is absurd that these 5
oversight bodies report ONLY to MACC (the entity being monitored) and the Prime
Minister, and not to the Malaysian public and Parliament.
Azam Baki’s Scandal?
An important issue still unanswered is was whether Azam Baki (a public
officer) had violated the Public Officers (Conduct And Discipline) Regulations 1993,
and including the related Service Circular Number 3/2002 – Ownership and
Declaration of Assets by Public Officials, which prevents a public servant from
owning more than RM100,000 worth of shares in any company.
What was the decision of the relevant Disciplinary Board – as Azam Baki was alleged to have more than the amount of
shares permitted to be held by a public officer? Did he declare his assets as
and when required?
Recall that it was alleged that between 2015 and 2016, Azam Baki became
the owner of 930,000 shares in Gets Global Bhd as at April 30, 2015, and a further
1,029,000 shares as at March 31, 2016. It was also alleged that Azam, as at
March 21, 2016, also owned 2,156,000 warrants in publicly listed Excel Force
MSC Bhd. Azam ‘did not deny the stock transactions. Instead, he claimed the
trades had been executed by his brother using Azam’s share-trading account.’
Some law enforcement agencies like the Securities Commission oddly said
no crime was committed, but the question of whether Azam Baki, being a public
officer, committed a misconduct remains unanswered. The effectiveness of the 5
monitoring bodies also can be questioned.
Anwar appoints Azam
Baki as Chief Commissioner for 1 years, then another 1 year
After, his term ended, surprisingly the new-PH led government under Anwar
Ibrahim re-appointed Azam Baki for a 1 year term, and again from 12/5/2024,
Azam Baki was reappointed for 2nd 1 year term. Parliament was not consulted.
Surely, there would be other officers of the MACC that could have been
appointed as Chief Commissioner.
Security of Tenure – A fixed
term with no contract extensions
Another issue was these short 1-year terms, would this not compromise
the independence of the Chief Commissioner of MACC. Will Azam Baki’s term be
renewed one year at a time for so long that he remains ‘loyal’ to the Prime
Minister? This compromises the
independence of MACC, and may propagates that the perception that the MACC is
just another tool of the government.
This is why all these appointments to MACC positions of power should
need prior Parliamentary approval to restore the image and independence of
MACC. MACC should also be required to report to Parliament maybe annually at
the very least.
MADPET calls for immediate amendments
to the law, that will remove the role of the Prime Minister or any Minister in
the appointment of the MACC Chief Commissioner, and the members of the various
oversight monitoring bodies. All appointments should require prior
Parliamentary Approval.
MADPET calls for Security of Tenure,
whereby the law fixes clearly the tenure of the Chief Commissioner, which could
be retirement age or a 6-year term. There ought to be no extension of the term
of office.
To restore the public perception of MACC, it is best that the MACC be
placed directly under Parliament, as this is a must after former Prime
Ministers and other Ministers have been found to commit crimes while holding
office. Only, after the fall of the Barisan National(BN) in 2018, were these
leaders exposed, investigated, charged, tried and convicted. If Prime Minister
Anwar commits a crime, we want him to be investigated, charged and tried now –
not after he ceases to be Prime Minister. Hence, why MACC must be independent
from the Prime Minister and the current administration.
MADPET also calls for the immediate
removal of Azam Baki as MACC Chief Commissioner to restore public confidence for an INDEPENDENT MACC. Another can
easily be appointed as MACC Chief.
MADPET also calls for Parliamentary
Approval, including public vetting, of all persons before they are appointed Ministers
and Deputy Ministers – as we
want clean and efficient Ministers.
Charles Hector
For and on behalf of MADPET
(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)
Govt to study implications of proposal to place MACC under Parliament, says PM Anwar
Nation Tuesday, 18 Jun 2024 3:33 PM MYT
BUKIT MERTAJAM:
The government will examine the implications of a proposal to place the
Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) under the jurisdiction of
Parliament, said Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.
The Prime Minister
said the strict conditions regarding the proposal also need to be
reviewed first before any decision could be made on the matter.
"That (placing MACC under Parliament) needs to be discussed... we need to examine the stringent conditions (before deciding)," he
told reporters after attending a Hari Raya Aidiladha gathering hosted
by his old friend Hamzah Mat Isa in Mengkuang Semarak here Tuesday (June
18).
He also noted that the MACC now appears to be more 'aggressive' compared to the past.
Anwar said that although MACC is still under the Prime Minister's Department, it is the responsibility of the agency to conduct investigations if there is misconduct, regardless of an individual's status.
"Right
now, what is important is to investigate, have clear evidence and
prosecute. That is crucial. Then use technical arguments, don't avoid
the truth. I don't care, don't fabricate, don't oppress. If there is
evidence, respond; if there are facts, respond. That is what matters,"
he said.
Last
Sunday, MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki, when appearing as a
guest on a podcast with a news publication, disagreed with the proposal
to place the MACC under Parliament.
He said the MACC is the only agency monitored by five independent bodies, while Hong Kong's Independent Commission Against Corruption is monitored by four oversight bodies.
Meanwhile,
the Prime Minister also pledged to make Cherok Tokun an outstanding
Madani Village under the initiative to adopt it as his foster village.
Earlier,
Anwar and his wife, Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, spent about 45
minutes mingling with and greeting guests at the event. - Bernama - Star, 18/6/2024
Govt willing to let Parliament decide on MACC chief's appointment, says Anwar
ByChester Tay / theedgemarkets.com
28 Mar 2023, 02:53 pm
Photo by Mohamad Shahril Basri/The Edge
KUALA
LUMPUR (March 28): Putrajaya is willing to relinquish its discretion in
appointing the chief commissioner of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption
Commission (MACC) to Parliament in order to strengthen the
competitiveness of the anti-graft agency, Prime Minister Datuk Seri
Anwar Ibrahim said on Tuesday (March 28).
“It (the
appointment) is dependent on the advancement of Parliament, as long as
there is a mechanism decided [here], after recommendations by TI-M
(Transparency International Malaysia) or other bodies, studied by the
Attorney General’s Chamber or government agencies, and subsequently
moving [the proposal] to the Select Committee,” he told the Dewan
Rakyat.
Anwar was
responding to Masjid Tanah Member of Parliament Datuk Mas Ermieyati
Samsudin, who asked whether the government will bring the matter of
appointment or renewal of the MACC chief commissioner to a special
committee under Parliament.
“If it is
not [brought under Parliament], wouldn’t it reflect that the PM’s
reform agenda no longer exists? An appointment made by Tambun [Member of
Parliament Anwar] will create speculation that there is a certain deal
being made by Tambun,” she told the august house.
In
response, Anwar said if Parliament can establish a process and mechanism
for the appointment of the MACC chief commissioner before the end of
the tenure of the incumbent Tan Sri Azam Baki, he would have no issue
implementing it.
“First of
all, I need to clarify that the appointment of the [current] chief
commissioner of the MACC was made by Pagoh (former PM Tan Sri Muhyiddin
Yassin). That needs to be clear, as [Azam] is recognised as someone
capable and independent by Pagoh.
“If this
process [by Parliament] can be established, then I have no issue with
this process. But this process should be respected,” he added.
Earlier, Mas Ermieyati also asked whether the government would place the entire MACC under the jurisdiction of Parliament.
However, Anwar pointed out that under the current laws and regulations, the MACC is deemed to be an independent body already.
“That was
why when I took over, I decided not to make any changes to the MACC
chief commissioner, who was appointed by Pagoh, to not create a
perception that a new PM will appoint a new MACC chief commissioner.
That was why I maintained him.
“The current laws guarantee the independence of the MACC, and it is not subject to instructions from the PM,” he stressed. - The Edge, 28/3/2023
Azam’s contract as MACC chief extended
FMT Reporters-
This is the second one-year extension to Azam Baki’s contract as MACC chief commissioner.
Azam Baki was appointed MACC chief commissioner on March 9, 2020. (Bernama pic)
PETALING JAYA: Azam Baki’s contract as the
chief commissioner of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission has been
extended for one year.
This is effective May 12, said chief secretary to the government Zuki Ali.
“The Yang di-Pertuan Agong has consented to
reappointing Azam as the MACC chief commissioner for a one-year period,”
Zuki said in a brief statement.
Azam’s contract was due to end on Sunday.
He was appointed MACC chief commissioner on
March 9, 2020 following the resignation of his predecessor, Latheefa
Koya, after the fall of the former Pakatan Harapan government.
In late 2021, Azam made headlines following
allegations that he owned shares and warrants. He denied any wrongdoing,
but several watchdog groups and PH leaders called for an investigation
to be opened into the matter.
However, then law minister Wan Junaidi Tuanku
Jaafar said the issue was resolved after the Securities Commission
Malaysia decided that there was no case.
After the unity government’s formation, Prime
Minister Anwar Ibrahim defended his decision not to replace Azam, saying
he wanted to break the convention that a change of guard in the agency
was necessary whenever a new prime minister was appointed.
Azam was then given a one-year contract extension on May 10 last year. - FMT, 10/5/2024
Report: Economist Terence Gomez quits MACC panel to protest inaction over Azam Baki’s alleged share ownership
MACC
chief commissioner Datuk Seri Azam Baki speaks to members of the media
during a press conference in Kuala Lumpur May 4, 2021. — Bernama pic
By KENNETH TEE
Tuesday, 28 Dec 2021 9:18 AM MYT
KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 28 — Edmund Terence Gomez has resigned from the
Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) Consultation and
Corruption Prevention Panel in protest of its inaction against chief
commissioner Datuk Seri Azam Baki’s alleged ownership of millions in
publicly traded stocks.
According to Free Malaysia Today,
Gomez said he had written thrice to MACC’s Consultation and Corruption
Prevention Panel chairman Borhan Dollah to push for a meeting to be
convened to discuss the “critical issue of national interest” as early
as November.
Despite Borhan having initially responded immediately and agreed for a meeting to be held, it never materialised.
Gomez, a professor of political economy at Universiti Malaya's Faculty
of Economics and Administration, added that he was first made aware of
the allegations against Azam in articles published at a website, and
then wrote to Borhan about them several times.
In his resignation letter dated December 27, Gomez said disturbing
questions had been raised about the “nexus between business and law
enforcement” and a “conflict of interest” situation before“suggesting a
trend in this institution that must be investigated promptly”.
“I stressed that the information that I had received was deeply
troubling as it was based on extensive research. The author of these
news reports had also listed her name, indicating she was available to
discuss this matter with the panel,” Gomez had written.
Besides
Borhan, Gomez said he had also written to the MACC Anti-Corruption
Advisory Board chairman Tan Sri Abu Zahar Nika Ujang on three separate
occasions, but these also failed to elicit any response.
Gomez further noted that Azam has yet to issue any public statement nor
had he responded to statements made by several MPs in Parliament on his
business dealings that were made on December 14.
Even though he had resigned, Gomez was also quoted as saying he is currently pushing for the panel’s response.
“The letter was sent to the press to publicise this reluctance to act
on an important issue. The press has to help us keep this matter in the
public eye until an independent investigation is done.
“The prime minister should also act on this matter to protect the integrity of the MACC,” he said.
Gomez was previously appointed to the panel for a two-year term from June 1, 2020 to May 31 next year.
On December 14, Sivarasa filed an urgent motion seeking the Dewan
Rakyat to discuss Azam's alleged ownership of close to two million
shares in a publicly listed company.
Sivarasa claimed that Azam,
as MACC's investigation director between 2015 and 2016, became the owner
of 930,000 shares in Gets Global Bhd as at April 30, 2015, and a
further 1,029,000 shares as at March 31, 2016.
He also claimed
Azam, as at March 21, 2016, also owned 2,156,000 warrants in publicly
listed Excel Force MSC Bhd while the latter’s younger brother owned
3,728,000 shares in Gets Global. -Malay Mail, 28/12/2021
How the Azam Baki share saga unfolded
Malaysian
Anti-Corruption Commission chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki speaks
to the media during a special press conference in Putrajaya January 11,
2022. — Bernama pic
By R. LOHESWAR
Friday, 14 Jan 2022 4:59 AM MYT
KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 14 — Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC)
chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki has been embroiled in a share
trading controversy that is now the subject of at least two
investigations.
Azam is being investigated by the Securities
Commission for allowing his brother to operate his share-trading account
and has been summoned by a parliamentary select committee over the same
matter.
Here is a timeline of the controversy.
Edisi Siasati
In October 2021, an anonymously-operated Twitter account named Edisi Siasat began posting allegations of irregularity at the MACC and the police, eventually naming Azam as among those involved.
It alleged Azam purchased millions of shares in a company back in 2015,
questioning how a civil servant was able to afford these.
Activist Lalitha Kunaratnam reports on controversy
In it, she cited publicly accessible records to show stock trading activities purportedly of Azam and his brother, Nasir Baki.
Lalitha went on to question if Nizam had declared his millions of
shares as required under Section 10 of the Public Officers Regulation
(Conduct and Discipline) 1993.
The section states that all public
servants must declare both movable properties, such as money in bank
accounts, motor vehicles, jewelleries, firearms, shares, warrants,
stocks, bonds and securities, as well as immovable properties, such as
land, landed properties, and of course, business ownership or
directorship.
Edisi Siasat becomes Edisi Khas
After it backed Lalitha on her allegations, Edisi Siasat was repeatedly reported to Twitter, leading to its eventual suspension on November 28, 2021.
The person or persons behind the account continued to communicate with
followers using a previously established Telegram account, in which it
was alleged the corruption reached the highest levels of the Home
Ministry.
It further claimed the ministry was protecting Azam as it was allegedly aware of the corruption involving other officials.
On December 1, 2021, the account reemerged on Twitter, this time under the handle of Edisi Khas.
Upon its return, it accused several ministers of collusion to protect Azam.
Edisi Khas posts shareholding records
On December 9, 2021, Edisi Khas
posted a shareholding analysis of Gets Global Berhad (formerly known as
KBES Berhad) that detailed the equity of its top 30 stakeholders as of
March 31, 2016.
This appeared to show Azam as the owner of over a million shares and his brother, Nasir, as that of 3.7 million more.
It also posted further documents that appeared to name Azam as the owner of 2.1 million warrants in Excel Force MSC Berhad.
MPs call for probe on Azam Baki’s sahreholdings
On December 14, 2021 PKR MP Sivarasa Rasiah filed an urgent motion for
Parliament to discuss the allegations against Azam but this was rejected
by the Speaker
Two weeks later, six federal lawmakers proposed
an independent investigation by a parliamentary select committee into
the controversy.
MACC panel member Terrence Gomez quits
On December 27, Professor Edmund Terrence Gomez announced he was resigning from the MACC Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel, alleging inaction over the allegations surrounding Azam.
Gomez said his three emails to panel chairman Borhan Dollah and MACC
Anti-Corruption Advisory Board chairman Tan Sri Abu Zahar Nika Ujang
failed to elicit any response.
Azam finally breaks silence
On January 5, Azam responded to the allegations at last but did not deny the stock transactions.
Instead, he claimed the trades had been executed by his brother using Azam’s share-trading account.
He further claimed he previously explained this to Abu Zahar, who accepted his explanation.
However, Azam saying he allowed his brother to use his trading account
appeared to be an admission of his violation of the Securities Industry
(Central Depositories) Act (SICDA).
Securities Commission summons Azam
The Securities Commission (SC) said the same day that it would summon
Azam and others involved to explain his remarks about allowing Nasir to
trade using his account.
The SC said Section 25 of the SICDA
required every securities account opened with a central depository to be
in the name of the beneficial owner or authorised nominee while Section
29A required all trades to be effected only by the beneficial owner or
authorised nominee.
Azam demands damages, apology from Lalitha
On January 6, Lalitha disclosed that Azam’s lawyers had served her with
a letter of demand for a public apology, retraction, and RM10 million
in damages over the allegations she made against him.
PM Ismail Sabri addresses controversy
On January 8, Prime Minister Ismail Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob at
last commented on the controversy involving Azam Baki, whose commission
came under the former’s authority.
Ismail noted that the relevant authorities were investigating the matter, including the SC and the MACC.
MACC advisory board members disavow Abu Zahar’s comments
On the same day, six MACC advisory board members distanced themselves from Abu Zahar’s remarks that cleared Azam of any wrongdoing in the controversy.
The six — Tan Sri Ismail Omar, Datuk Seri Azman Ujang, Datuk Seri
Akhbar Satar, Datuk Hamzah Kassim, Datuk David Chua Kok Te and Prof
Datuk Dr Mohammad Agus Yusoff — said that the Abu Zahar’s statement did
not reflect the decision of the board as a whole.
Azam says will not resign over controversy
On January 12, Azam said he will not resign and insisted he could only
be removed as the MACC chief by the Yang diPertuan Agong.
PSC summons Azam
On January 12, members of the Parliamentary Special Select Committee
(PSC) on Agencies under the Prime Minister’s Department said it has summoned Azam to explain himself over the controversy.
Keen to dispel MACC as govt tool, Azam Baki
says investigated one minister in Anwar Cabinet for corruption but no
evidence to charge
Chief
Commissioner of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, Tan Sri Datuk
Sri Haji Azam Baki acknowledged that public perception about the MACC
is still skewed and many see it as a political tool even though the
government has changed twice since he was first appointed to lead the
commission in March 2020. — Picture by Miera Zulyana
By Anis Zalani
Monday, 17 Jun 2024 12:30 PM MYT
KUALA
LUMPUR, June 17 — A member of the current Cabinet under Prime Minister
Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has been investigated by the Malaysian
Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), its chief Tan Sri Azam Baki revealed
in a talk show aired today.
However, he did not name the
minister’s identity, saying that despite thorough investigations, no
substantial evidence was found to press charges.....Malay Mail, 17/6/2024
MACC monitored by five independent bodies - Are they really independent?
Anti-Corruption Advisory Board (Section 13)
(a) to advise the Commission on any aspect of the corruption problem in Malaysia;
(b) to advise the Commission on policies and strategies of the Commission in its efforts to eradicate corruption;
(c) to receive, scrutinise and endorse proposals from the Commission towards the efficient and effective running of the Commission;
(d) to scrutinise and endorse resource needs of the Commission to ensure its effectiveness;
(e) to scrutinise the annual report of the Commission before its submission to the Special Committee on Corruption; and
(f)
to submit its comments to the Special Committee on Corruption as to the
exercise by the Commission of its functions under this Act.
Special Committee on Corruption(s.14) - members of the Senate and the House of Representatives
(a) to advise the Prime Minister on any aspect of the corruption problem in Malaysia;
(b) to examine the annual report of the Commission;
(c)
to examine the comments of the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board as to the
exercise by the Commission of its functions under this Act; and
(d)
to seek clarifications and explanations on the annual report of the
Commission and the comments of the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board.
Complaints Committee (s.15)
(a)
to monitor the handling by the Commission of complaints of misconduct
which is non-criminal in nature against officers of the Commission; and
(b)
to identify any weaknesses in the work procedures of the Commission
which might lead to complaints and where it considers appropriate to
make such recommendations as to the work procedures of the Commission as
it deems fit.
The formation
of the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board (ACAB), the Special Committee on
Corruption (SCC) and Complaints Committee (CC) is made through the
provision of the law while the Operations Review Panel (ORP) as well as
the Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel (CCPP) are established
through administrative order.
Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel (CCPP)
To
advise the Commission, in enhancing the effectiveness of inspection and
consulting activities upon the practices, systems and work procedures of
both the public and private sectors which may be conducive to the
occurrence of corruption;
To
advise the Commission, in enhancing the effectiveness of public
education activities towards increasing the awareness on corruption and
support on anti-corruption efforts;
To
advise the Commission, in enhancing the effectiveness of anti-corruption
activities through the mechanism of strengthening integrity in both the
public and private sector;
To
advise the Commission on some of the best practices in the fields
related to the implementation of consultation and anti-corruption
activities;
To assist the Commission as the key communicator in
garnering support from the public, the media and the sectors identified
towards the prevention efforts by the Commission; and
To
submit its comments on the Commission’s undertaking of its function on
consultation and anti-corruption under the MACC Act 2009 to the
Anti-Corruption Advisory Board.
Operations Review Panel (ORP)
To receive and seek clarification regarding statistics of Investigation Papers opened by the Commission;
To receive and scrutinise reports from the Commission regarding Investigation Papers exceeding 12 months of investigation;
To receive report from the Commission regarding all cases where
suspects arrested are released on bail bond by the Commission exceeding
six months;
To receive reports on closure of Investigation Papers and to advise:
on improving investigations due to weaknesses;
on reviewing whether further investigation is required; and
To scrutinise, examine and endorse proposals to enhance the
Commission’s investigation operations to the Anti-Corruption Advisory
Board.
