Azam Baki and MACC 'Scandal' - the issue then was just not about whether he broke the LAWS and committed an offence. It was also whether there was a breach of PUBLIC OFFICERS (CONDUCT AND DISCIPLINE) REGULATIONS 1993.
Securities Commission came out saying no offence committed? What about the other law enforcement agencies..
Was there a MISCONDUCT committed - how did the Disciplinary process go? Was the 'breach' not even dealt because the alleged perpetrator was Azam Baki, or was there a disciplinary process? Questions unanswered to date..
On the issue of shares, Azam maintained that he did not commit any wrongdoing nor was there a conflict of interest on his part and had explained to the anti-corruption advisory board panel on the matter.
“I explained to the panel that my trading account was used by my brother for his shares tradings and I have no interest nor have any part in this. The shares were bought in the open market and my brother had financed the purchases on his own,” said Azam.
“The shares of the companies which he purchased were not involved in any investigations carried out by the MACC. All the shares had been transferred to my brother's own trading account,” he added.
So, was there no MISCONDUCT because his 'share account' was used for his brother - and since really the shares were not his, the Public Officer did not commit any 'misconduct'. Hence, NEW DEFENCE for public officers - when caught with shares about the permissible limit, you can say it was really not yours although it was in YOUR account - it was my mom's, my sister's,....
Concluding that shares in one's OWN shares' account is not the belonging of the named owner is MOST DANGEROUS - so, will we next be hearing politicians claiming that monies in their personal bank account is not theirs - but their political party, or their charity, or their mothers, sisters, brothers... DANGEROUS...DANGEROUS...DANGEROUS...
The Azam Baki issue also raises concerns of the 5 statutorily provided mechanisms ... how effective it was? How does these Boards/Committees function? Can a member call for a meeting? Or does the Chair only have the power to call for a meeting?...Service Circular Number 3/2002 – Ownership and Declaration of Assets by Public Officials, which prevents a public servant from owning more than RM100,000 worth of shares in any company.- no response yet from the government about this...
...the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board (ACAB), the Special Committee on Corruption (SCC) and Complaints Committee (CC) is made through the provision of the law while the Operations Review Panel (ORP) as well as the Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel (CCPP) are established
It all started with Terence Gomez, a member of the Consultation
and Corruption Prevention Panel (CCPP) wanting the Chairman of the CCPP
to call for a meeting of the CCPP to discuss and decide on a certain
issue - BUT, the said Chairman(Borhan Dolah), on his own,
apparently decided not to call for a meeting - hence leading to
Terence's resignation and the disclosure for his resignation.
So, now what does PM Anwar's reappointment of Azam Baki signify? ....more so since many issues are still outstanding? MACC may need an RCI to see how things can be improved? How the 'Check and Balance" mechanisms may be reformed - can a member get the Committee/Panel/... to meet or is the Chair 'all mighty' and can decide when there will be a meeting ...and what issues will be discussed...
It all started with Terence Gomez, a member of the Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel (CCPP) wanting the Chairman of the CCPP to call for a meeting of the CCPP to discuss and decide on a certain issue - BUT, the said Chairman(Borhan Dolah), on his own, apparently decided not to call for a meeting - hence leading to Terence's resignation and the disclosure for his resignation.
Was there any 'DEAL'? Will MACC be 'compromised' after this reappointed?
Are we happy about how Anwar dealt with the 'Azam Baki MACC Scandal'?
See earlier posts:-
No comments:
Post a Comment