Of NFC and corruption by proxy: Shameful but the norm in Malaysia

Many Malaysians have come forward and thrown a fit at the immunity accorded to Shahrizat Jalil, the Women's chief and also Women's minister, in connection to her involvement in the RM250 million National Feedlot Centre financial debacle.

Barisan Nasional leaders have closed ranks and come forward to defend Sharizat, including former prime minister Abdullah Badawi and current Deputy Prime Minister (and heir apparent) Muhyiddin Yassin.

Both seem content in trying to separate Shahrizat from the business dealings of her husband and children, reasoning that the scandal was not Shahrizat’s doing since the one directly involved is husband and co.

"If what Badawi and Muhyiddin are saying is true, then any one who wants to be corrupt just has to siphon out everything using the family's or friends' names and they are not involved and cannot be blamed or prosecuted," PKR vice president Tian Chua told Malaysia Chronicle.

"Look at how rich Mahathir's sons are. Badawi's own family are also extremely rich including Khairy himself. Najib's son Mohd Nazifuddin is now also making waves in the local stock market. Should we declare the activities of the children and family as questionable, but still let the Umno elite continue to rule the country and to keep approving the corrupt deals to benefit themselves. Put the question to Malaysians and let's hear it from the people. Is corruption through proxies okay?"

Shameful but it is the norm in Malaysia

Sad to say, corruption via proxy is the norm in Malaysia and an accepted norm amongst the political elite; but there are separate laws to govern a BN politician versus a Pakatan one. Thus, the answer to the question of whether corruption via proxy is okay or not strictly depends on which side of the political fence you are standing on. And the answers are obvious on this one.

What is glaringly wrong is the way the governmental system under BN has supported the awarding and funding of a project to a house-hold member of a Cabinet minister. This is wrong and goes against the governmental general orders pertaining to the acquisition of wealth for a civil servant.

Shahrizat, being a minister, is a civil servant and paid via public funds from the pooling of Malaysian tax-payers; thus she and her husband are governed by a general order that all government servants have to adhere to.

The “Pekeliling Perkhidmatan Bilangan 3 Tahun 2002 - Pemilikan dan Pengisytiharan Harta Penjawat Awam” governs the acquiring of assets by a civil servant. Once every five years, a civil servant has to state their assets. Shahrizat has to state all her assets and not only her own but also that of her husband.

Filing in the form should not be easy but here’s the catch. Her superior must then decide, can she afford or not to acquire the said assets, and also to inquire how her family can gain such substantial assets? Sources of income have to be stated in the form and screened through by a committee and her immediate supervisor. In this regard, Shahrizat’s supervisor is none other than Prime Minister Najib Razak.

As the immediate supervisor, Najib Razak has to consider the declaration by Shahrizat by taking into account several factors which are stated in Point 15 of the general order.

Point 15 (iii) states - cara perolehan harta tersebut tidak menggunakan kedudukan rasminya atau tidak bertentangan antara kepentingan rasmi dengan kepentingan peribadinya;

Yes, the above point simply says that the property in question was not acquired by leveraging on the applicants' official position and that there should not be any conflicts of interest. Nothing more specific than that.

I help you, you help me

And this is the central question that Shahrizat and her cabinet colleagues have to answer, including Najib and Muhyiddin. Is there concrete proof that when Shahrizat husband and children were given a RM250 million soft loan to run the NFC project, that there was no conflict of interests involved?

And if there were conflicts of interest, Najib as the immediate superior should have taken action as required for by the general order for the property to be declared. If he doesn't, that means there wasn't. So you see, point 14 (iii) sounds good but does nothing concrete. In fact, it enables a 'gang of thieves' so to speak, to co-ordinate their activities and protect each other.

The alleged corruption in the NFC project is not merely one involving a substantial RM250 million loan, instead it is also one involving the abuse of authority and position. And this clearly answers the question, is it okay for corruption via proxy?

No, it is not okay but reality depicts a different picture. This form of corruption has compromised the whole system that it would be wise to replace any hazy general order that seeks to 'monitor' the acquiring of property by a civil servant with one that is clearly spelled-out.

Malaysia Chronicle