UMNO Buildings - where did the money come from? MACC should look into it even if UMNO is part of government?

UMNO Buildings - it is there in most towns...even Putra World Trade Centre...so, where did the money coming from? We are not saying that the source of money is from 'illegal sources' - just investigate and tell us that monies come from legitimate sources?

Despite facing financial woes, Umno still owns Putra World Trade Centre (PWTC) and has not sold it off, as rumoured.- NST, 27/12/2018

UMNO is a political party, and political party funds come from membership fees and 'donations'. Are political parties allowed to be involved in business? Can they form political party owned companies and do business? A big worry is that the money may be money from 'corruption', other abuse of powers or is leaking from the government of the day into UMNO?

Party membership remain but a few ringgit annually. If it was RM10 per year, and the party has a million members, that works out to RM10 million per year ...is that sufficient monies to be able to buy buildings all over? 

Maybe the police, MACC and the other relevant law enforcement bodies should be looking into it...

'Donations' to political party or its leaders, may be an issue if they are in the government...is it CORRUPTION? Was it 'consideration' for someone or some company getting a government project?

These are all CRIMES, and it really does not matter whether it was committed recently, 10 years or even 100 years ago - the perpetrators can still be punished - investigate, charge, trial and conviction.

Such corruption and abuse of power is already a crime now - but the Political Funding Act would tighten things and close loop-holes. It would most likely require a disclosure of sources of 'donations' and or 'other payments received'...Maybe a requirement to disclose sources if a party receives more than RM10,000, either in single or multiple transaction. To avoid disclosure, the donations could be RM9,999 in multiple transactions..  

The enactment of the Political Funding Act is crucial to curb corruption, particularly in cases involving donations to political parties...Pasir Gudang member of Parliament Hassan Abdul Karim believes that the Act should be introduced without delay to combat political corruption, ..."I agree that the enactment of the act should be expedited, especially in efforts to eradicate corruption disguised as donations to political parties."This is because a significant number of those involved in corruption cases before the courts are politicians.

What is happening happens maybe in all political parties like PKR, DAP, etc, especially those that are in government - parties sometimes say that they have to spend millions for elections - but where is that money coming from.?

After Najib allegedly claimed once that the billion/s he received was allegedly for for UMNO/BN, Zahid also made similar claims that monies were not sent to him but for some welfare... 

Fugitive financier Low Taek Jho, better known as Jho Low, once informed 1MDB general counsel Jasmine Loo that “a lot of money” had been deposited in Najib Razak’s accounts to fund Barisan Nasional and Umno, the High Court heard today.

If money is for a political party, it must be sent directly to the said political party. 

If it is paid into some leader's account, then it belongs to the account holder...

Have some politicians asked people to donate to the party - but send it to my personal account, and then I will hand over to the party. After the money is sent, would the money be wholly send to the party, or will the politician keep it for himself/herself - and when caught, suddenly say it is not my money but it was for the party. 

Umno president Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi on Tuesday (Aug 23) told the High Court that he was emotionless when he received cheques for RM13.25 million from textile businessman Junaith Asharab Md Shariff because they were for charitable purposes, and that he had never questioned the source of the funds...Zahid said he felt no emotions as the money was to be used to build "Tahfiz schools" and a mosque. - Edge, 23/8/2022

I wonder, if and when they give this money to the party or some welfare - do they reveal the source of the monies. Or do they simply leave the impression that the monies are coming from him/her personally?

Even after receiving welfare aid, be it for flood victims/senior citizens/poor, many people believe that the money is coming from the politician who handed it to them -not the government. The practice of handing over government aid should be done by the relevant Ministry/Department - no more through politicians or political party. 

Political party funds can also be 'hidden' by placement of these monies in 3rd party accounts..

Same with donations to MPs - if it for the Constituency and its work - then the money should directly be banked into the said 'Constituency' account[Law should require every MP/ADUN to open a Constituency Account) - not into the account of said MP or accounts of 'friends'/family?

If someone has made a 'DONATION' to party, Constituency Fund, selected organization linked to a MP, or into the accounts of the MP >  then the question arises  - was it a BRIBE to get some projects or 'preferential treatment' with regard some project, for assistance to avoid investigation, charges, enforcement actions..

Remember Lim Guan Eng was alleged to buy a house at below market value, from someone linked to entities that got some projects > Thus the possibility of bribes, corruption, etc

GIFTs or even a paid dinner/vacation can be corruption. Thus MPs or Ministers or even public officers should not receive GIFTS or paid dinner/drinks from any person/s - for it may be corruption? Thus, the need to DECLARE all Gifts received, and a clear law that such gifts/monies shall be considered State property.

Our PM Anwar Ibrahim may have received many gifts - so, what happened to these gifts. Is there a mechanism or a law that requires the declaration (or Public Declaration) of gifts, and the fact that any gift/monies/benefits do not belong to the said Minister/member of administration or MP - Failure to declare receipt of gifts/monies should be made an offence. 

When our Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim meets foreign diplomats/leaders, and is given gifts - That is a gift for the Prime Minister of Malaysia, not Anwar personally ???

The Penal Code has several offenses that apply to public officers, and reasonably should also apply to members of the administration(PM and his/her cabinet, and other appointees and personal staff too)  

161 Public servant taking a gratification, other than legal remuneration, in respect of an official act

162 Taking a gratification in order, by corrupt or illegal means, to influence a public servant

163 Taking a gratification, for the exercise of personal influence with a public servant

164 Punishment for abetment by public servant of the offences above defined

165 Public servant obtaining any valuable thing, without consideration, from person concerned in any proceeding or business transacted by such public

Section 161, Penal Code, amongst others, state - Whoever, being or expecting to be a public servant, accepts or obtains, or agrees to accept or attempts to obtain, from any person, for himself or for any other person, any gratification whatever, other than legal remuneration, as a motive or reward for doing or forbearing to do any official act, or for showing or forbearing to show, in the exercise of his official functions, favour or disfavour to any person, or for rendering or attempting to render any service or disservice to any person, with the Government, or with any member of the Cabinet or of Parliament or of a State Executive Council or Legislative Assembly, or with any public servant, as such, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years or with fine or with both.

In Malaysia, one wonders about how many reports have been made of bribery attempts by our Prime Minister, Ministers, Deputy Ministers or their staff of BRIBERY ATTEMPTS? If no, did they all take BRIBES or they did not want to report...All they need to do is report attempts, then the relevant law enforcement will proceed to investigate >>> Is it a Malaysian Culture of not reporting bribe attempts?

25  Duty to report bribery transactions MALAYSIAN ANTI-CORRUPTION COMMISSION ACT 2009

(1) Any person to whom any gratification is given, promised, or offered, in contravention of any provision of this Act shall report such gift, promise or offer together with the name, if known, of the person who gave, promised or offered such gratification to him to the nearest officer of the commission or police officer.

(2) Any person who fails to comply with subsection (1) commits an offence and shall on conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding one hundred thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or to both....

Anwar Ibrahim, has anyone attempted to BRIBE you? Did you report it? If not, why?

Political Funding Act is something Malaysia needs to DETER corruption and abuse of power - it should not just be for political parties, but also MP/ADUN/Senators, members of Cabinet, Constituencies 

Datuk Seri Najib Razak menegaskan derma yang diterimanya daripada orang kenamaan Arab Saudi bukan untuk membeli undi bagi menghadapi Pilihan Raya Umum Ke-13 (PRU-13). Sebaliknya beliau berkata, RM2.6 bilion itu untuk kegunaan keperluan parti  termasuklah pemasangan papan iklan.- Malaysia Gazette, 4/2/2020

We talked about UMNO, but the problem may with all parties that became government or part of government. The problem still lies with the fact that the MACC Chief is ultimately chosen by the Prime Minister > will the anti-corruption body be able to investigate the sitting Prime Minister or Ministers? 

LAWS alone is not enough - we also need INDEPENDENT Law Enforcement, particularly independent of the PM and executive branch of government.

Public Asset Declaration(when they come into power) and then subsequent PUBLIC Asset Declaration annually(or once in 2 years) - it a mechanism to DETER or Prevent those with power to EARN or get more monies/wealth than their salary/allowances when in power. It was a mechanism to prevent abuse of power, CORRUPTION. It is made PUBLIC so that if any Minister or MP lies, member of the public that knows there are other 'hidden' accounts/wealth can highlight it or bring to the relevant authorities. Do we need a PUBLIC ASSET DECLARATION ACT - that would also penalize false declarations?

Public Asset Declaration was introduced by past governments - but it was just ONE declaration, and without regular declarations - it is difficult for the Public to Monitor.

When Anwar became PM, they did not have ANY Public Asset Declaration(where anyone can view the contents of the said declaration) - his 'excuse' then was they were revising the format of the Public Asset Declarations - it is May 2025, almost 30 months - and nothing yet? 

Anwar himself claimed that he made an ASSET Declaration - but it was NOT a public ASSET DECLARATION. - where can the public view his Declaration? How much is his monthly income?

The PKR president has declared a house and three plots of land worth RM10.35 million and around RM829,000 in cash and savings.... Most of PKR’s 72 candidates for the general election (GE15) have declared their assets as part of the party’s campaign against corruption, - FMT, 9/11/2022

BUT that was not a PUBLIC Asset Declaration (I did not see it. Was it online as past previous public declarations of assets by former governments?) 

Remember that PUBLIC ASSET DECLARATION is not to access how rich or poor a Minister or MP is. It is a MECHANISM to Deter corruption and abuse of power whilst in power to enrich oneself, family and friends - That is why the 1st Public Asset Declaration as soon as you come in power/office which will tell the Public what your wealth is, and then there must be a 2nd, 3rd, 4th or 5th (preferably annually) - to prove to the Public that your increased wealth is by legitimate means and by wrong means.

When a MP or Minister makes a PUBLIC Declaration - allowing all members of the public to see what was declared as personal and family wealth - and, if you LIE, then any member of the public can highlight this...

Some do try to hide wealth in foreign bank accounts, in 'other peoples' accounts, or even in other people's names. Remember, our MACC Chief's 'scandal' - he said the shares in his share trading account was his brothers. Let us take it as true, that means, was the brother hiding his wealth. If false, was Azam Baki? Income and wealth gained are TAXED - so, did Malaysian people lose tax ... Who declared the wealth gained? Azam or brother. This is an example of someone hiding wealth under someone else's name. 

MACC asks for an Asset Declaration because they reasonably suspect that the law has been violated. So, was Anwar asked by MACC to declare his assets - was MACC suspicious that Anwar may have broken the law?

ASSET DECLARATION - If MACC ask, one suspected of an offence? Investigate LEAK of MACC Data - and how Anwar's aide got access to info?

In the past, it was a 'political gimmick' by some parties to send their list of candidates to be fielded in elections to MACC (or Anti-Corruption Agencies) - and, then the party alleges that their candidates are 'CLEAN" - all now proven long, after PM Najib and some others have been charged, tried and convicted for corruption offences.

It is also an ABUSE OF POWER - MACC and police have no power or justification vetting any election candidates for any political party ... Law Enforcement's duty is to investigate persons who are suspected to commit crimes of corruption, etc , then charge them in court, prosecute them until the court convicts. It is not an agency to VET candidates, etc.

Thus, we need a Political Funding Act and other laws strengthened to address Corruption and abuse of power(by those given power by the Rakyat, trusting them to handle our monies wisely)

Consider a Public Asset Declaration Act.

MACC/Police should investigate now where political parties get 'too much' monies to be able to have buildings, land, etc - some of which may be held under the name of the party(or the party-linked companies PLC), or under the name of proxies.  

See earlier posts:-

Did Fahmi lie, mislead or 'confuse' people - he says ‘many MPs’, including himself, have declared their assets? WHEN? Was it a Public Asset Declaration after GE15? Or did MACC ask you...

ASSET DECLARATION - If MACC ask, one suspected of an offence? Investigate LEAK of MACC Data - and how Anwar's aide got access to info?

 

 

 

Political funding: Transparency must

Published on: Sunday, May 18, 2025

By: M Shanmugam

MACC chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki (front, centre) showing cash amounting to RM170 million and some 16kg of gold bars worth almost RM7 million seized from the homes and houses of four former aides of Former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri (Photo by Shahrill Basri/The Edge)

In a space of just four months, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has raided houses linked to two politicians and recovered millions.

The first case was in Selangor in October last year, when MACC seized S$1.5 million from these places following the arrest of two persons, including a former executive of Mentri Besar Selangor Inc (MBI).

The money is reported to be graft paid to a prominent politician in relation to sand mining contracts in the state and meant for political purposes.

Last week, MACC displayed RM177 million in cash and valuables seized from the houses during its investigations into four ex-aides of former prime minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri. The investigations were in relation to the spending of RM700 million on promotional activities related to the Keluarga Malaysia campaign that Ismail ran during his tenure as prime minister.

Interestingly, in both instances, the money seized was largely in foreign currency.

In the Selangor case, it was mostly in Singapore dollars. As for cash seized last week, only 14 million was in ringgit. The rest was in foreign denominations. There were also gold bars worth RM16 million.

Why was the cash seized denominated mostly in foreign currency? Was it because the bulk of the money changed hands overseas? And how did so much cash in foreign currency find its way into the country?

What’s astounding is the vast amount of cash still swirling around politicians after the 2018 general election, especially when the possibility of a shift in political alignment arises.

Hence, when the balance of power changes in Putrajaya, politicians who are not friendly with the government of the day but are holding vast amounts of cash that they cannot account for are easy targets.

They can easily be implicated in offences related to money laundering and abuse of power.

In the probe into the RM177 million case, Umno has distanced itself from the cash uncovered. This is very unlike the case involving the now-jailed Datuk Seri Najib Razak where more than RM114 million was found in a condominium in May 2018 after BN lost power.

Apart from cash, police seized jewellery and valuables such as hand bags from Najib’s house, estimated to be worth RM800 million.

Umno and Najib had claimed that the money belonged to the party and not to the latter personally. According to reports, the money was returned in August 2021, which coincidentally was about the time Ismail took over as prime minister from Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin.

In both the Selangor MBI and Keluarga Malaysia cases, so far there is no single political party that has claimed the money.

Irrespective of that, what would be more interesting to know is where the money came from and whether the source of income can be justified. In most such situations, the money is said to come from business individuals and corporations.

In the past, Tan Sri Syed Mokhtar Albukhary had been named as giving donations in cases involving Umno president Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi and Muhyiddin.

Syed Mokhtar, through his companies, had donated to Zahid Hamidi’s foundation and Bersatu, when Muhyiddin was its president.

In Zahid’s case, he was also charged with receiving bribes from three companies amounting to RM42 million for allegedly helping them obtain a MyEG Services Bhd (KL:MYEG) project.

In the case of Umno treasurer Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor, property developer Tan Sri Chai Kin Kong of Aset Kayamas Sdn Bhd was implicated in giving him political donations to the tune of RM2 million.

The outcome of the cases against the politicians has been different in each situation.

Ahmad Zahid was given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) on charges related to criminal breach of trust and money laundering that allegedly was transacted via his foundation, Yayasan Akalbudi, in September 2023.

In 2021, when the government was under the rule of Pakatan Harapan 1.0, Tengku Adnan’s corruption case was dismissed.

As for Muhyiddin, in September last year, the prosecution was successful in its appeal at the Court of Appeal to restore charges against him involving RM232.5 million.

The charges were related to abuse of power when he was the prime minister between March 2000 and August 2021. Because of the differing outcomes, the current administration of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has come in for a lot of flak for allegedly practising selective prosecution.

This is especially after Zahid’s DNAA, which continues to haunt the Anwar administration.

However, Anwar has defended himself against the allegations of selective prosecution, saying that he does not interfere with the judiciary and that the key people in charge when Zahid was given the DNAA were appointed by his predecessors.

The present Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimum Tuan Mat was appointed in 2019 when Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad was the prime minister. In 2023, when Zahid was given a DNAA, Tan Sri Idrus Harun was the attorney-general and Tan Sri Azam Baki the chief commissioner of MACC.

Both were appointed in 2020 after Muhyiddin became the prime minister.

It is still early days to understand how RM177 million in cash came to be in the possession of Ismail’s aides.

But what is clear is the need for legitimacy and transparency in political funding. The Political Funding Act, which has been much talked about, has yet to be tabled in parliament.

Currently, matters related to political funding, such as donations, are governed largely by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act and Anti-Money Laundering Act. Both come under the purview of MACC, which is the most powerful and feared government agency these days.

According to a political party treasurer, a general election would involve at least RM800 million being spent. This is on the basis that each division needs up to RM5 million before the election machinery starts to roll. There are 222 parliamentary seats and the total amount comes to more than RM1 billion.

This is a lot of money to be transacted through opaque dealings in the name of donations. Which is why transparency in political funding is a necessity and no longer an option.

M Shanmugam (m.shanmugam@bizedge.com) is a contributing editor at The Edge Daily Express, 18/5/2025