Case closed, get on with life, but says who?

After nearly a year the country has been asking for answers to all the questions raised on 1MDB and huge amounts of money funneled into Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s personal accounts, suddenly all the answers (and for that matter, incredulous answers, too) are told in just one press conference.

Attorney-general Apandi Ali’s disclosure of the investigation carried out by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency (MACC) has indeed saved the day for Najib, which Najib himself has been unable to answer for nearly a year despite being asked the questions by several people.

Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad was his fiercest critic but has since quietened down, and Muhyiddin Yasin who had faced the axe when he questioned Najib is also silent; we are left with only people like Lim Kit Siang, Rafizi Ramli and Tony Pua who are voicing out the people’s sentiments.

There is nothing new about these sentiments - they are being heard over and over again in mamak shops and on social media. For now, it is all questions, no answers.

Jailed opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim may have something to say about Apandi’s shocking revelation. None of us were told, and Najib did not even say it, that he had, in fact, returned the remainder of the money donated by former King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.

Why would an Arab king be so concerned about the political tsunami that hit Malaysia in 2008?

Of course, a dead person would not be able to answer this, but the onus is now on the authorities in Saudi Arabia to carry out their investigation and tell us the true story, especially being a Muslim nation which should set the good example. The truth has to be told.

In earlier news reports, we had learnt that the remainder of the money had in fact been channeled to Najib’s personal account in Singapore, and that the money has since been frozen. So, this ‘allegation’ by Wall Street Journal (WSJ) is a lie then? How then do we interpret the mind blowing disclosure by Apandi that Najib had indeed returned the money to the late King Abdullah?

Why did Najib not say it from the very beginning when he was being queried? He could have showed us the evidence to counteract the allegations made by both Sarawak Report and WSJ? Why did Najib not proceed with the case against WSJ?

Why did he not turn up at the Nothing2Hide seminar to clear his name with the police firmly on the ground to avoid any clashes? Why did he not answer it in Parliament when he had the chance, instead delegating it to his deputy who only gave a very brief report with no opportunity for questions and answers? Is this a government that is only capable of engaging in a monologue?

We understand that the international community was watching us when the allegations were made by WSJ. Najib’s silence over the matter would have wrecked the confidence of the international community in this nation, and I would have imagined that as prime minister, Najib would have done all that he could to save his reputation as well as the nation’s. Did he?

The ringgit has been depressed since the WSJ news hit the world. What Najib had failed to do before Apandi’s disclosure is a sure act of malfeasance, and this is inexcusable, especially since many of us are adversely hit by the falling ringgit.

An Apple laptop, for example, costs over a thousand ringgit more within a year (I ended up not buying it); and consumable products from the United States such as the vitamins that we used to purchase have all shot up in prices. On top of that, the Goods and Services Tax (GST) continues to make things more expensive. Even books (with GST) are now more expensive compared to a year ago.

The rising cost of living brings down the standard of living here in Malaysia. Compared to neighbouring countries such as Singapore where the income of its citizens is several-fold higher, we are still paupers by the end of the month after paying the bills and spending it on groceries.

Do you think now people will buy the AG’s story? Sorry, I am personally sceptical myself when I read the answers given by our good AG’s Office, because it does not appear to fit into entire fabric of ‘evidences’ (or jigsaw puzzles) that we have been collecting from various sources.

All these allegations were never answered adequately by the man caught in the midst of the controversy, and now, do you expect us to believe one man’s answer-all-in-one session? Thank you for being creative.

Although the MACC has carried out its investigations, it is the AG’s prerogative and absolute power to prosecute or close a case. This is as stipulated in Article 145 of the federal constitution.

We urge the parliamentary Public Accounts Committee to undertake the check-and-balance, and ask for a copy of the investigation reports from both the MACC and Bank Negara to be given to the committee for further study. We want to know what was written in the report.

I believe most people would trust Tony Pua, Lim Kit Siang or Rafizi Ramli, than what the AG said in his press conference. Let these men study the papers and verify the authenticity, then tell us the outcome of their own investigations.

Absolute power corrupts

From time to time, we have emphasised the need to revise Article 145, because it provides too much power on the attorney-general, making him the absolute decision-maker in all prosecution cases.

This is dangerous, as we all know the saying, “Absolute power corrupts absolutely.” When a particular office is vested with too much power, there is no proper check-and-balance, and it could lead to corruption.

For this reason, organisations such as Transparency International-Malaysia (TI-M) have urged the lawmakers to change Article 145 of the federal constitution, and to make the MACC only answerable to Parliament.

Understandably, this cannot be done until there is a total change of the federal government. For this reason, TI-M and others such as the Bersih 2.0 steering committee should lobby for the change in the constitution, if we want to see the MACC going after the big fish.

We cannot continue to allow too much power to be placed in one office. For this reason, cases involving corruption in the corridors of power will never be prosecuted, especially since the AG is being handpicked by the sitting prime minister.

This is a case in point. Najib is being investigated by the MACC. After the investigation has been carried out, the file is passed on to the AG’s Chamber. And the AG is being picked by Najib himself after former AG Abdul Gani Patail was dropped unceremoniously.

How then would the ordinary people trust the system, when there is no proper check-and-balance in place? Although Najib may be cleared by Apandi, will Najib command the people’s confidence? Will people buy into Apandi’s disclosure of the investigation report? What else is there in the report that we are not aware of?

I am sure the rakyat have a thousand and one questions to ask, but this is not the place to ask these questions. Already, on social media and over a teh tarik, I can see people are already talking about it.

Parliament should take this up seriously, as we currently do not have much confidence in the present administration, especially when the ringgit is down, cost of living has gone up, and the economy of the country appears to be on auto-pilot.

We have to watch it to make sure that Islamic State (IS) does not exploit our current situation, where I am sure seven out of 10 people are dissatisfied with Najib’s explanations in the past year. Most people are simply unhappy that we have been duped time and again.

Investigations by external parties

If we do not have satisfactory answers to the many questions being raised, perhaps, the only cause of justice that we will hope to see is when some foreign investigative powers take this matter further.

We have been waiting for the outcome of the investigation by various bodies including the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), the Independent Commission against Corruption (Icac), and other agencies from Switzerland and Singapore. We will need the WSJ and Sarawak Report, and other media agencies, to step up their own investigations until the truth is unearthed.

International relations is one thing, but justice must be carried out, and seen to be done. If the truth cannot be revealed through the local channels, we expect the various authorities investigating the matter overseas to be up-front, especially since it involves a leader of the country.

By leader, I mean someone who is supposed to set a good example for the rest of the nation. Just because of good international relations, any form of money-laundering involving its leaders should not be swept under the carpets. Let the truth prevail at the end of the day!

---

STEPHEN NG is an ordinary citizen with an avid interest in following political developments in the country since 2008. -Mkini