After eight months of endless chatter, lawyerly posturing, and even a cameo in Parliament, Malaysia’s Expo 2025 pavilion saga has been “settled” - though only in the kind of paperwork haze where problems go to chill but never really die.
On April 26, a seemingly innocuous social media post by Fey Ilyas of Current Media Group (CMB) alleged that the Investment, Trade and Industry Ministry had appropriated his firm’s work without credit or compensation.
The post carried a blunt headline: “The Malaysia Pavilion for Expo 2025 Osaka is built on stolen creative work.” Subheading: “Our proposal was appropriated by MITI without acknowledgement or compensation.”
CMB claimed it had spent two years developing the concept, theme, narrative, and architectural direction - only to see its work “taken” by the ministry.
“We chose to speak up. Because dignity is worth more than access. And because staying quiet only protects the people who keep doing this to others,” CMB’s Fey Ilyas wrote.
Ministry’s foot-dragging response
It was a damning indictment of the ministry, its officers and the system within. The ministry initially issued a statement promising a “thorough investigation” and reaffirming its commitment to integrity. Yet, weeks passed with no progress.
I asked then: “How long and how difficult is it to establish the identity of the firm that submitted the ‘successful’ design?”
Eight weeks later, still no answers. I pressed again: “How much time and manpower are needed to reopen the Osaka file? It should contain submissions, designs, invoices, and payment vouchers.”
Instead, silence. It amounted to a case of lembu punya susu, sapi dapat nama (the cow does the work, the bull gets the credit), I noted.
On Aug 1, Kepong MP Lim Lip Eng raised the issue in Parliament.
In a written reply, Investment, Trade and Industry Minister Tengku Zafrul Abdul Aziz said his ministry was in “active discussions” with the company alleging plagiarism. He stressed that procurement processes had followed established procedures.
Last week, the matter was “settled” with Ilyas signing a non-disclosure agreement. His creative contributions were formally acknowledged.
Covering up shenanigans
But let’s be clear: this is not closure. It is containment.
If the Madani government truly champions transparency, then several questions remain: How did that “successful” company get hold of CMB’s designs, which were submitted to the ministry?
Was the ministry aware that CMB’s design was being used by a third party to complete the pavilion project?
Who in the ministry commissioned the design, who authorised and subsequently accepted and approved the final designs?
Has the ministry taken action against anyone for breach of the Copyright Act, or has it accepted that it failed in its responsibility?
What sanctions, if any, have been imposed on those who used Ilyas’ designs without authorisation?
How does the ministry intend to reassure Malaysia’s creative industry that their work will be respected and compensated?
When Malaysiakini first broke the story in May, I wrote: “In the bad old days, it was said that no good proposals should be submitted to a particular government agency.
“It was claimed that such proposals were copied and passed on to third parties, typically cronies close to the decision-makers.
“Hardly anything in the proposals has changed, except for the cover letter, which indicates that it is submitted as a fresh proposal from a different party.
“Despite being disappointed that their proposals had been ‘stolen’ and being used to rake in millions, most parties did not seek redemption or remedies for fear of being blacklisted by the agency.”
Has the ministry resurrected this practice, and has it returned to haunt Malaysians again?
The Osaka pavilion dispute may have been “resolved amicably”, but the larger issue remains unresolved: the protection of Malaysia’s creative industry from exploitation.
Until these questions are answered, the Madani government’s promise of integrity and transparency rings hollow. - Mkini
R NADESWARAN is a veteran journalist who tries to live up to the ethos of civil rights leader John Lewis: “When you see something that is not right, not fair, not just, you have to speak up. You have to say something; you have to do something.” Comments: citizen.nades22@gmail.com
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.