Abdullah Badawi announced yesterday (April 21) that the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) will be made a full-fledged commission by year-end. [Bernama]
The reformation plans are mostly focusing on improving the effectiveness and transparency of ACA, but there are a few big questions that remain unanswered. The biggest question is probably on how authoritative the ACA could be after the overhaul.
It’s reported that the final say on prosecution still lies on the Attorney General. Now, what would happen if the AG has ordered to stop an investigation prematurely?
The current AG Abdul Gani Patail has done it before, and who are going to stop AG from doing it again? And what freedom is ACA actually having if this situation is allowed to happen in future?
The reformation has to go hand in hand with other authorities, and there are lots of complications that need to be cleared to ensure a really independent ACA that could operate without any interference. Getting the right people to lead the ACA is another debatable issue too.
It’s a long way to go obviously, but it’s better than doing nothing. We’ll see how things are improve as time goes by.
Besides, reforming ACA is one thing… I think we need to overhaul our law and constitution regarding corruption as well. I believe there are many loopholes in our current system that could be exploited without breaking the law. ACA would be helpless in these situations regardless of how independent they are.
The royal inquiry into the Lingam video clip has started on Monday (Jan 14). 17 witnesses are expected to be called to testify in the Royal Commission of Inquiry, including former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad (full list on Bernama).
Anti-Corruption Agency officials has told the royal commission on the VK Lingam tape that the room featured in the video clip was indeed the lawyer’s living room, as mentioned by businessman Loh Mui Fah during some earlier press interviews.
Loh has admitted that he was the person who talked to VK Lingam in the video, and that the video clip is authentic and was taken by his son in late December 2001. Loh however claimed that neither he nor his son knew how the video clip managed to get into public.
Read the rest of this post »
A new version of Lingam video has been released; the extra 10 seconds at the end of the video shows that Ahmad Fairuz’s name was mentioned… it’s difficult to determine if it was VK Lingam who mentioned AF’s name though.
Read the rest of this post »
Commercial Crimes Investigation Department (CCID) director Datuk Ramli Yusoff was charged in the Sessions Court here Thursday with two counts of failing to make a full disclosure of his assets and another for involvement in business. [Bernama]
Ramli, 55, the country’s third highest ranking police officer hauled up to court by the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA), claimed trial to all the three charges.
In the first charge, he is alleged to have not declared an office lot located at a building in Megan Avenue II at Jalan Yap Kwan Seng here and another office lot on the same floor of the building.
The properties, worth about RM1 million, were held under the name of his two sisters — Rohmah @ Hasmah Yusoff, 58, and younger sister, Roslina Yusoff, who were directors of Bonus Circle Sdn Bhd, an investment holding company.
In the second charge, Ramli is alleged to have not declared the 154,000 shares he had in PERMAJU Industries Berhad, a property company.
For the third charge, Ramli, as a public officer and a police commissioner holding the post of Commercial Crimes Investigation Department director, was bound by the law not to be involved in business as stipulated under Regulation 5(1)(a) of the Public Officers Regulations (Conduct and Discipline) (Amendment) 2002 but was involved in business in his capacity as a director of Kinsajaya Sdn Bhd, a real estate company.
Read the rest of this post »
The Anti-Corruption Agency has finally taken action following alleged corrupt practices in cases highlighted in the 2006 Auditor-General’s Report. [Thestar]
It is still remained to be seen if ACA could actually nail the culprits; their integrity and capability are dubious these days… but at least they are doing something on the positive direction this time.
I hope that they are trying to catch the big fish instead of just the small shrimps though… investigation should be done at every level of the alleged bodies, including the ministries if needed.
Update Oct 25 - Lim Kit Siang has an interesting thought that the sudden flurry of ACA activities might be an intensified public relation and replay of the high-profile pre-election anti-corruption action 4-years-ago.
PKR leader Anwar Ibrahim is received an ACA notice today compelling him to reveal the source behind the Lingam video or risk going to jail. [Malaysiakini]
ACA’s request is not unreasonable, but I am kinda pissed with the one sided investigation so far. The independent panel is failing miserably in determining the authenticity of the video; while ACA is busy chasing after the whistleblower instead of investigating people alleged in the judiciary scandal.
What would you do, if…?
These lead to a question that has always been mingling in my mind… If I have somehow obtained a file (or video) that could prove that some VIPs are involved in some national scandal, what would I do? What would you do in this situation?
Would you just throw all the stuff in the public or would you go to someone like Anwar or Lim Kit Siang and passed on the responsibility to them? ACA is always asking people to give this proof to them instead of political parties… but frankly I don’t have much fate with ACA these days. I have a feeling that if the proof is true, they might close the case prematurely, or to a worse extent… going after me instead.
It would be logical to just past the buck to people like Anwar and then stayed behind the scene… the source of the Lingam tape was probably thinking the same way.
Now, what would Anwar do… would he risk going to jail or risk the safety of the person that entrust him with the video? As the situation has been greatly publicise, it would be unthinkable if the ACA would do any physical harm to the whistleblower… but then, who can guarantee that the whistleblower would not be harassed mentally, or ordered to keep quiet?
Attorney General Abdul Gani Patail has ordered the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) to close 3 high-profile cases (former ACA chief Zulkifli Mat Noor, Inspector-General of Police Musa Hassan and Deputy Internal Security Minister Johari Baharum).
I have no clue if these people are corrupted or not, but I just felt that ACA could do better with their investigation methods.
According to reports ACA has done some investigations in those 3 cases by questioning the alleged parties and checking their bank statements and assets etc… nothing wrong with that; but do you think people will ever admitted to give or accept bribe? Do you think people will use direct banking to transfer money in bribery? Do you think people who accept bribe will put the assets they bought (with those money) under their own name?
Read the rest of this post »