WHO GOT THE MONEY THAT ABU SAYYAF DIDN’T?

It's easier to believe that ransom was paid than to buy the story about RM12 million being given to charity.

COMMENT

Malaysians are obviously relieved that four Sarawakian sailors have been freed from the clutches of Abu Sayyaf. However, many must be appalled by the farcical way in which the authorities have tried to explain matters pertaining to the ransom demanded by the militants.

We have heard various versions of what has happened to the RM12 million that the families of the four raised from well wishers and the sale of their own assets.

First came an announcement from the families that they had passed the money to the Special Branch in Sandakan and that it was to be paid to the kidnappers.

The police initially did little to counter the families’ version of the story, but subsequently decided to make a vehement denial that a ransom was paid. Police officials insisted that the militants were pressured into freeing their hostages following a barter trade ban imposed by Malaysia on the Southern Philippines.

Note that this flew in the face of assertions by negotiators and Filipino authorities who have dealt with Abu Sayyaf that it would never release its hostages without a ransom payment.

And then, yesterday, we heard an explanation from Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi in his classic obscure style.

Zahid said the RM12 million was not paid to the kidnappers, but would be passed to “legally and religiously sanctioned” organisations and agencies in the Philippines. He said these organisations, the names of which he could not disclose, were involved in welfare and various other legal activities.

He explained that this was in line with the government’s “pay no ransom” policy. He denied that the money was still with the police. When pressed further, he said he would get the police to release details surrounding the case to the public in due time.

The government probably thinks it deserves a pat on the back for a so-called charitable act that benefits foreign organisations, forgetting that the money was not its own, but came from well-wishing taxpayers and the families of the hostages.

If the government was feeling charitable, why didn’t it channel the money to local welfare bodies and organisations, which are seriously in need of funding? Why give Malaysian taxpayers’ money to foreign bodies? If the government was keeping to its policy of refusing to entertain ransom demands, why did it accept the money from the victims’ families in the first place? Why not ask them to donate it to charity?

The families’ version of what happened to the money is a lot more plausible. They did name the bank it was deposited into and even gave the date and time of the deposit. And remember that the hostages, during a press conference after their release, knelt on the ground in a classic Chinese gesture of respect to people deserving of utmost gratitude, who in this case would be the donors. This reinforced the notion that they were not lying about the ransom being paid.

We await the detailed report from the police that Zahid ordered.