What is Azalina’s beef against Tommy Thomas?

One clear example of victimisation of a former civil servant who did his job fairly and with dedication is that of former attorney-general (AG) Tommy Thomas by an Umno minister, who seems bent on tarnishing his image and politicising what he did.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Azalina Othman Said revealed in Parliament on Tuesday that Tommy Thomas’ letter in 2019 to the so-called heirs of the Sulu sultan to settle a disputed compensation never got cabinet approval, according to a Malay Mail report.

She was responding to MIC leader Senator S Vell Paari’s question on Tuesday in the Dewan Negara, where he had strangely asked the prime minister to state if the cabinet had in 2019 agreed to Thomas’ statement of regret over the government’s action in stopping the yearly payments to the Sulu group.

So what if Thomas had not gotten cabinet approval for the letter? There is no provision in the constitution that the AG has to refer to the cabinet in the performance of his duties. In fact, it says the exact opposite.

Section 145 (3) provides for the AG’s independence. It states: “The attorney-general shall have power, exercisable at his discretion, to institute, conduct, or discontinue any proceedings for an offence, other than proceedings before a Syariah court, a native court, or a court-martial.”

The AG can be called upon to give advice, which is a separate function as provided for in Section 145(2), which states: “It shall be the duty of the attorney-general to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the cabinet or any minister upon such legal matters and to perform such other duties of a legal character, as may from time to time be referred or assigned to him by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the cabinet, and to discharge the functions conferred on him by or under this Constitution or any other written law.”

In January, less than two months after the formation of the unity government, Azalina had said that there will be a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) to investigate Thomas’ book.

Here is what I said in a previous comment: “If this RCI is to make a broad recommendation on law reform, and lord knows that is really needed, why call it an RCI to investigate Thomas’ book? Why not a commission on law and institutional reform and simply mention that allegations and comments made in Thomas’ book will be taken into account? Why put the cart before the horse?”

In the latest case, providing the context throws a lot of light on the Sulu Sultan case. As Azalina herself points out in her reply to Vell Paari’s rather pointed question, it involved a mere RM48,230 covering arrears with a 10 percent interest, and an offer to pay this sum immediately to the Sulu claimants.

This is in exchange for them stopping any arbitration action involving a massive RM14.92 billion. Malaysia will continue to pay RM5,300 per year thereafter, which in the overall scheme of things is a mere pittance.

It will also serve as a defence to the arbitration case in future where an offer was made to rectify the mistake. Surely, the amounts involved are small enough for Thomas to make the decision without reference to the cabinet.

Thomas explained this very clearly in a detailed article titled ‘Explaining the Sulu Claim’. Here’s an extract: “To the best of my knowledge, the government of Malaysia did not publicly explain in 2013 why it ceased annual payments of compensation to the Sulu claimants. This occurred during the administration of Najib Abdul Razak.

“Indeed, until today, a decade later, members of that administration have remained silent, which has led to unnecessary speculation and confusion.

“The often-given unofficial explanation is that Malaysia stopped the payments because of the armed incursion in 2013 into Lahad Datu in Sabah. However, there appears to be no evidence linking the Sulu claimants who were receiving the annual compensation from Malaysia with the armed invaders of Lahad Datu.”

It’s all politics

Now, it becomes clear. The whole issue of this arbitration came about because Malaysia stopped payments in 2013 - Najib’s administration was responsible. The blame fell squarely on the shoulders of Najib, former Umno president and Azalina’s boss. 

Thomas did right by getting rid of Najib’s wrongs. Instead of thanks, he is now blamed when it was Najib’s mistake that led to the whole sorry process. Azalina’s performance in terms of this case and the questionable RCI on Thomas is highly suspect.

Is this the kind of institutional and law reform she is looking for, trying to make political capital out of smearing Thomas’ name to benefit Umno and its leaders past and present? Is the most important thing for her to do immediately after becoming law minister getting cabinet approval for an RCI on Thomas’ book?

Is she playing the Umno card and trying to paint Thomas as a villain in the public eye at least, even if they can’t prove anything against him? That will please her former political boss Najib, who gave her a cabinet position and who now languishes in jail as a result of a prosecution initiated by Thomas.

Former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak

It would also please her current boss, who gave her a cabinet position and who is accidental deputy prime minister in the government - Umno president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi - who is also facing 47 corruption charges. All the other Umno members who were charged in court as a result of action initiated while Thomas was AG would be happy as well.

Zahid has maintained in court that he and some 20 other Umno politicians, including former prime minister Najib, Umno secretary-general Ahmad Maslan, and former federal territories minister Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor were selectively prosecuted by the Pakatan Harapan government. Is this being done to lend credence to that argument?

It is also a matter of great regret that none of the Harapan leaders, including Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, have said anything in support of Thomas, who was AG during Harapan’s previous tenure, and who did a brave job of prosecuting those who were involved in the 1MDB scandal and starting the process of recovering billions of money stolen and suing those responsible.

Instead, they watch mutely as an Umno law minister takes repeated actions against him, and do nothing in his defence. If this is the reward a brave, honest, dedicated, and competent AG gets for doing his job, then the government will find it impossible to find one in future.

If Azalina is indeed short of ideas on what she should do, here are some.

1. Independence of the AG

Look immediately into ensuring the independence of the AG by changing the law to give security of tenure and shield the AG from political interference in his job. But, judging by how she has gone after Thomas, it does not look like she is the one to do it. If the AG goes back to cabinet approval for all he does, he will get nothing done.

2. Institutional reform

Dig out that report done by a committee headed by the late judge KC Vohrah and presented to the Harapan government in 2018 when Dr Mahathir Mohamad was PM. Make that secret document public and look to implement its recommendations. You don’t have to reinvent the wheel - a properly constituted committee has already done it for you.

3. Meaningful law reform

Azalina should look at urgent reforms such as political-funding legislation, repealing the Official Secrets Act, changing the University and University Colleges Act, the Sedition Act, and the Communications and Multimedia Act, all of which have been used in the past by successive Umno governments to stifle, oppress, and control. 

Don’t forget the Societies Act, which permits the home minister to rule on political parties not having elections. As Azalina will recall, the home minister used his discretion to keep the top leadership of Umno intact for six years! What a travesty of democracy. Mind you, this is just a partial list.

4. An RCI on the Sulu claim

If Azalina has a predilection for RCIs, I can suggest two. The first one is to investigate the RM14.92 billion claim by the so-called heirs of the Sulu sultan. This will once and for all ascertain who is to blame for the sad state of affairs. She won’t be likely to do it because it will absolve Thomas of all blame and therefore can’t be used as a political punching bag anymore.

5. An RCI on 1MDB settlements

She can set up an RCI to investigate the 1MDB settlements with Goldman Sachs and the United Arab Emirates, both of which fell far short of the amounts that Thomas was claiming. I am sure that Thomas will be more than willing to testify to this commission.

For background, she can refer to two articles I have written here. 

While there is so much to do in legal reform, it is a matter of great regret that Azalina is focusing on going after the first AG in many years to have actually done something about curbing grand larceny and theft, and bringing prominent people to book.

What has she got against what Thomas has done? - Mkini

---

P GUNASEGARAM says good acts require good motives and intentions.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.