Chief Secretary Sidek’s failure to carry out Cabinet decision of July 2007 to take action against culprits responsible for RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal

Chief Secretary Sidek’s failure to carry out Cabinet decision of July 2007 to take action against culprits responsible for RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal a factor why Malaysia has worst ranking and score in 15 years in TI CPI 2009

Monday, November 23, 2009

By admin

During the 2010 budget debate on 29th October 2009, I questioned the Cabinet decision to set up a super task force headed by the Chief Secretary to the Government Tan Sri Mohd Sidek Hassan to take over all investigations into the RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal as it represented a “major step backwards in public accountability and good governance”, smacking of a super “cover up” instead of a demonstration of political will to get to the bottom of the “mother of all scandals”.

I argued that what is needed is a Royal Commission of Inquiry to conduct a comprehensive and no-holds-barred investigation into the “mother of all scandals” including relevant Ministerial and Cabinet aspects of the scandal instead of trying to sweep the whole issue back under the carpet.

I also posed the following question:

“In the first place, is Mohd Sidek the most appropriate person to head the super task force on the PKFZ scandal?

“Before Mohd Sidek takes up this appointment, he should explain to the Malaysian public why he had failed in the past two years to carry out the Cabinet decision in July 2007 when it resolved on the RM4.6 billion bailout of PKFZ, including giving retrospective approval to the four illegal Letters of Support unlawfully given by the two previous Transport Ministers, Tun Dr. Ling Liong Sik and Tan Sri Chan Kong Choy, that the Chief Secretary should conduct an inquiry as to how the four Letters of Support could have issued unlawfully and to take the necessary disciplinary actions against the culprits who have now landed the country with a RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal.

“Did Mohd Sidek carry out such an inquiry as not a single culprit had been identified, let alone penalised for the unlawful issue of the four Letters of Support in the past two years?

“Clearly, Mohd Sidek had not carried out the Cabinet instruction or there would not be today a merry-go-round of multiple investigations into the PKFZ scandal, but all without the necessary sweeping powers to get to the bottom of the scandal.

“Can Mohd Sidek succeed where he had failed in the past two years? I hope Parliament is given a specific answer to these questions in the ministerial replies.”

This is the reply that I have received from the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Nazri Aziz, by way of a written answer as he had promised Parliament during the winding-up of the debate on November 9, 2009 for issues he was unable to reply orally because of the constraints of time.

This is Nazri’s response to my budget speech on the PKFZ scandal:

1.

YB Ipoh Timur mencadangkan agar ditubuhkan suruhanjaya diraja untuk menyiasat skandal Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ). Untuk makluman Yang Berhormat, Kerajaan belum bercadang untuk menubuhkan suruhanjaya diraja kerana satu pasukan petugas khas telah ditubuhkan bagi mengemukakan cadangan untuk tindakan susulan Kerajaan berhubung laporan audit PKFZ tersebut.
2.

YB Ipoh Timur ingin tahu sama ada Y.Bhg. Ketua Setiausaha Negara telah melaksanakan keputusan Mesyuarat Jemaah Menteri pada Julai 2007 berkenaan 4 surat sokongan oleh Menteri Pengangkutan ketika itu. Untuk makluman Yang Berhormat, Y.Bhg. Ketua Setiausaha Negara telah pun melaksanakan keputusan Mesyuarat Jemaah Menteri yang dimaksudkan iaitu berhubung 4 surat sokongan daripada Y.B. Menteri Pengangkutan ketika itu.

Nazri’s answers are most unsatisfactory and unacceptable, in particular his answer that the Chief Secretary, Tan Sri Mohd Sidek Hassan had carried out the Cabinet decision in July 2007 to conduct an inquiry as to how the four Letters of Support were issued unlawfully and to take the necessary disciplinary actions against the culprits who have now landed the country with the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal.

If the Chief Secretary had carried out the Cabinet decision in July 2007, there would have been no need for him now to head any PKFZ special task force into PKFZ scandal, as those responsible for abuse of power, criminal breach of trust and malpractices would have already been brought to court to face the full force of the law.

Last Thursday, Sidek issued his first statement as Chairman of the PKFZ Special Task Force – more than two months after its formation by the Cabinet in early September – stating that it agreed that the Transport Ministry asked the Board of Directors of the Port Klang Authority (PKA) to consider the recommendations by the Corporate Governance Ad Hoc Committee on the PKFZ project created by the Ministry earlier.

Sidek said the recommendations could be implemented without involving any amendments to the law.

This was decided by the Special Task Force in its third meeting held on Nov 2.

Sidek said the meeting was also informed of the action taken by the Royal Malaysia Police and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) so far, with the MACC investigation into the PKFZ scandal expected to be completed by the end of the year.

The Cabinet Special Task Force appears to be acting like a postman or reporter than as an alternative to a Royal Commission of Inquiry not only to get to the bottom of the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal but to bring to book the culprits for landing the country with the “mother-of-all-scandals”.

If Sidek had carried out the Cabinet decision of July 2007 to take all necessary action against the culprits responsible for the PKFZ scandal, including former Transport Ministers and Port Klang Authority officers, the PKFZ scandal would not have reached the present magnitude. Furthermore, there would be no need for the Cabinet to establish any Special Task Force to do what should have been done under the Cabinet decision of July 2007.

Undoubtedly, one reason why Malaysia’s has suffered the ignominy of the worst ranking and score in 15 years in Transparency International (TI) Corruption Perception Index (CPI) 2009 must be traced directly to the failure of the Chief Secretary in discharging the task entrusted on him by the Cabinet in July 2007 with regard to the PKFZ scandal.

Extracted from: http://pkfz-scandal.org/2009/11/23/chief-secretary-sidek%E2%80%99s-failure-to-carry-out-cabinet-decision-of-july-2007-to-take-action-against-culprits-responsible-for-rm12-5-billion-pkfz-scandal-a-factor-why-malaysia-has-worst-ranking-a/

Ahmad Zahid, where is your patriotism?

Defence Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi's statement is uncalled for.

Whether he meant to say Chinese and Indians did not have “so strong patriotism” or simply unpatriotic, allow me to ask the honourable minister a very simple question.

Has he ever been enlisted in the army for even a term? Or how many of his children have joined the army?

Please answer us, Ahmad Zahid or put some sense into what you say in public!

I think there is something to hide from, don't you think so?

PI Bala's open letter to AG Gani Patail

P Balasubramaniam Nov 6, 10 1:06pm

Share 36

Dear Tan Sri (Abdul Gani Patail), My name is Balasubramaniam Perumal. I think you may have heard of me. I was Abdul Razak Baginda's private investigator hired by him to protect him from his ex-girlfriend, Altantuya Shaaribu (deceased), sometime in 2006. Remember you charged him for her murder but he got off. Instead, two of the prime minister's bodyguards got convicted. Stranger things have happened, I am sure you would agree.

But I digress. Let me come to the point. I have been made to understand that you have decided to close the case involving two statutory declarations I signed sometime at the beginning of July 2008 in Kuala Lumpur. The contents of these statutory declarations were diametrically opposed. Both could not have been true and therefore one of them was false. I trust that makes sense to you.

The police, I believe, have investigated the circumstances surrounding the making of these two statutory declarations under section 199 of the Penal Code, for an offence which carries a sentence of three years' imprisonment and a fine. This is not a trivial offence.

The police must have interviewed my lawyer, Americk Sidhu, his secretary, the commissioner of oaths who attested my signature and a variety of other witnesses you have mentioned who were somehow intrinsically interwoven in the construction and affirmation of both statutory declarations, one way or another. It has therefore come as a great surprise to me to discover that you have been unable to decipher any wrongdoing from the enormous amount of evidence the police must have been able to accumulate from their investigations.

Please permit me to assist you. Firstly, may I suggest that you re-open this file immediately. I will make it easy for you. Let me admit to you that I did sign a false statutory declaration. Yes, I did. I signed a false statutory declaration. It was the second one, not the first one. The first one was entirely truthful. The second one was a complete pack of lies. I admit this.

This statutory declaration was prepared by some unknown person(s) and I was forced by very thinly veiled threats and intimidation to sign it. I have already made this known to the world at large and I am surprised your office has not picked this up as yet. Everyone else has. If you are unable to ascertain this information which I have just provided to you directly, please feel free to contact me at this email address bala.p.i@hotmail.com and I shall forward to you a copy of the video recorded interview I had in the presence of my lawyers in Singapore last November, and a copy of the transcript thereof. Otherwise you can find this information on all the blogs worth reading (such as Raja Petra Kamarudin's Malaysia Today) and also on 'YouTube' (just type in 'PI Bala' into the search column and you will be surprised what comes up). So you may now consider charging me for making the false second statutory declaration after the clues I have given you. I do however reserve the right to plead not guilty to the charge as I believe I have a very good defence. Your prosecutors will also have to make sure they call all the necessary witnesses to prove their case against me.

These witnesses will have to include the following personalities: i) A lawyer named Arunampalam Mariam Pillai (who coincidentally does legal work for Deepak Jayakishan and Rosmah Mansor's personal companies). ii) A commissioner of oaths (Zainal Abidin Muhayat) who works in the office of Zul Rafique and Partners (Advocates & Solicitors) and who attested my signature when he came to the room in which I was being held at the Hilton Hotel Kuala Lumpur. iii) Deepak and Dinesh Jaikishan (very good friends and confidantes of Rosmah Mansor). iv) Nazim Razak (younger brother of the prime minister), and his wife. v) ASP Suresh (a suspended police officer formerly attached to the IPK headquarters in KL). vi) Officers from the Immigration Department Damansara (who assisted in obtaining urgent passports for my family). vii) A host of journalists and reporters who were present in the lobby of the Prince Hotel Kuala Lumpur when a lawyer called Arunampalam released my second statutory declaration without my permission.

These are just some of the witnesses I can think of but I am sure you know how to do your job so that should be not a problem. I don't want to be accused of trying to teach an old dog new tricks. If for some strange reason my defence is called, I will also be able to provide witnesses to support what I have to say. I need not disclose who these witnesses are at this stage and I am sure you know that as well. I shall now wait for the charge against me to be laid. I will be more than happy to return to Malaysia to defend myself but you will have to ensure that my safety is guaranteed as there are some people who would prefer that I was not around.

Balasubramaniam Perumal

No Mega Tower, We want Disneyland

How many people really visit Malaysia because they want to come and see Petronas Twin Towers? How has the Petronas Towers boosted the country's economy? Tell me, how many tourists are dying to see the Twin Towers when they plan a trip to Malaysia? Why are other countries so successful in attracting tourists when they do not even have a concrete tower?

Malaysia - Scandal, Sodomy and Murder

The PM and DPM should step down over this issue

MP sues gov't for being denied constituency allocations

Aidila Razak
Oct 29, 10
12:55pm

Share 7

Parti Sosialis Malaysia's Sungai Siput parliamentarian Dr D Jeyakumar today became the first elected representative to take the federal government to court for withholding funds allocated for his constituency.

In his judicial review application Jeyakumar, who wrested the seat from MIC president S Samy Vellu in 2008, claimed that he had not seen any of the funds allocated to Sungai Siput since he took over.

He also claims that by withholding the funds, the respondents are going against Article 8(1) of the federal constitution which provides that all persons are equal before the law and entitled to its equal protection.

In his application he notes that in this context, Article 8 (1) provides that “the Special Constituency Allocation be exercised equally and equitably amongst all members of parliament regardless of political affiliations”.

"I wrote to the Implementation Coordination Unit (ICU) of the Prime Minister's Department and was told that RM1.72 million was given (in 2010), including to two schools and a orphanage, but when I called (the alleged recipients) they said they have not received it," Jeyakumar (centre in pic) said.

Named as respondents in the suit are the director-general of the ICU, the director of the Perak State Development Office and the government of Malaysia.

Jeyakumar is applying for the respondents to explain their authority in disbursing the funds from the Special Constituency Allocation at their discretion and to specify the procedure for allocation of funding since 2008.

He is also applying for the disbursement of funds be done equitably among all parliamentarians, and for damages and costs, which are to be assessed.

It's about principles, not about winning

Speaking to reporters after filing his application at the High Court in Kuala Lumpur today, Jeyakumar said that he was acting on principle and was not swayed by his chances of winning.

"People thought we couldn't win in Sungai Siput," he said.

To his knowledge, he said, other Opposition parliamentarians were also facing the same problem, while BN MPs have had their applications for funding approved without much hassle.

"What we want is for them to list out what they use the money for and how much was used, so everyone can see it and query, because otherwise someone can pocket the funds.

"There are 222 parliament constituencies, that's RM222 million of public funds, which should be dealt with transparently," said Jeyakumar, who was accompanied by about 20 supporters, some of them from Sungai Siput.

He has made several applications for funds for the constituency, with detailed breakdown of the allocations for schools, orphanages and societies for the disabled, since 2008.

However, in its 2008 reply, the Perak Development Office simply said: "For your information, the application cannot be considered".

In 2009 and 2010, the office either did not reply or said that it already disbursed these funds to several organisations, some of which told Jeyakumar that they received nothing.

The office claims that it had disbursed RM952,550 in the Sungai Siput constituency in 2008, while the 2009 figure is not known.

View Comments (8)

Change the Federal Government - no second options

The rakyat will have no choice but to change a government that tries to punish the people who voted for Pakatan. In the next General Election, we have to change the Federal Government as well. Look at the complaints around Jalan Wangsa 2/6 raised to Najib's attention, but nothing was done despite this area being under Busro of Umno.

PSM to file class action suit against federal gov't

Humayun Kabir
Oct 28, 10
1:17pm

Share

Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM) is to initiate a class action suit at the Kuala Lumpur High Court tomorrow at 10am against the federal government.

This is for allegedly not distributing the annual RM1 million allocations entitled to to each of the 74 MPs in the opposition camp, for the past three years.

PSM Sungai Siput MP Dr D Jeyakumar (left) told Malaysiakinithis morning that he has not received any of the allocations since 2008 when he defeated MIC president S Samy Vellu in the general election.

In his class action suit tomorrow, the PSM leader wants the High Court to rule that the BN federal government must be accountable and transparent in its allocations of the MP annual funds as public funds are involved.

He is also invoking in his civil suit, Article 8(1) of the federal constitution, which states that all persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection. Hence funds should not be allocated only to BN MPs.

He said the aim of the allocations is for the MP to give public service to the parliamentary constituents.

At present there are a total of 222 parliamentary seats in the August House of which BN holds 140, whereas Pakatan Rakyat members hold 74. The remaining eight are held by independents who have defected from the opposition camp.

Left high and dry

The politician-cum-cardiologist claimed that while the BN MPs get their annual allocations, the Pakatan MPs are left high and dry.

He said that the BN is using this denial of public funds as a tool to tarnish the image of opposition MPs, so that they cannot serve as effectively as the BN MPs.

Jeyakumar said that the majority of voters are not aware that such funds have been purposely withheld.

The Sungai Siput MP claimed that this has been going on since 1975 and wants the court to force the BN government to give the funds legally due to the opposition MPS.

He said that he has been running from pillar to post for the past three years, trying to get answers from Prime Minister's Department and as well as the Perak State Development Department (PSDD) which handles such MP allocations, but only ran into brick walls.

According to Jeyakumar, whenever he presses for the details of the allocations of such funds for his Sungai Siput parliamentary constituency, he is only given vague replies.

He has no idea where the money has gone and suspects something is amiss.

At present PSDD does not give such funds to opposition-held MP areas but instead it goes to BN politicians in the constituencies for distribution.