Perangi Rasuah Satu Ibadat

oleh : SAIFULIZAM MOHAMAD  |

BANYAK pihak tidak menyedari usaha mencegah rasuah adalah satu bentuk ibadat berpanjangan dalam menentang kebatilan.

Rasulullah SAW memberi me­sej yang cukup jelas kepada umatnya iaitu setiap pelaku rasuah sama ada pemberi mahupun penerima akan menerima azab seksa yang amat pedih di neraka kerana dosanya yang cukup besar di sisi Allah SWT. Ibnu Umar RA meriwayatkan Rasulullah SAW bersabda yang bermaksud; “Pemberi rasuah dan penerima rasuah akan masuk ke dalam neraka.”

Dato Sri Hj Zakaria JaffarHadis Rasulullah itu menarik minat seorang mahasiswa perakaun­an dari Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) sesi 1977-1981 untuk menyertai Badan Pencegah Rasuah (BPR).

Baginya, sebarang usaha untuk memastikan umat Islam tidak terjerumus ke lembah kehancuran di­sebabkan rasuah adalah satu bentuk ibadat yang pasti ada ganjaran di sisi Allah SWT sekiranya dilakukan dengan seikhlas hati.

Individu dimaksudkan itu ialah Timbalan Ketua Pesuruhjaya (Peng­urusan dan Profesionalisme) Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malay­sia (SPRM), Datuk Seri Zakaria­ Jaffar yang juga seorang akuntan bertauliah.

Selepas menabur bakti lebih 33 tahun, beliau akan menamatkan perkhid­­matannya dalam SPRM di usia 58 tahun pada 29 Julai ini.

Ketika ditemui di pejabatnya di Putrajaya, baru-baru ini, Zakaria berkata, sebaik sahaja menamatkan pengajian di UKM pada 1981, beliau terus memohon menyertai BPR meskipun mempunyai pilihan kerja yang lebih lumayan setaraf kelulusannya dalam bidang perakaunan.

“Jika hendak diikutkan saya boleh menerima gaji lebih lumayan jika bekerja di tempat lain sebagai akauntan bertauliah. Namun itu bukan keutamaan kerana apa yang lebih penting saya perlu memilih pekerjaan yang membolehkan saya beribadat sepanjang masa,” ujarnya.

Selepas berjaya dalam temuduga beliau diminta melapor diri di ibu pejabat BPR pada 2 Ogos 1982 sebagai pegawai penyiasat di cawangan ekonomi.

“Penempatan saya di cawangan ini mungkin ada kaitan dengan kelulusan saya. Di cawangan ekonomi, kes-kes yang disiasat berprofil tinggi dan amat sensitif,” katanya.

Zakaria berkata, sepanjang berada dalam cawangan itu beliau diberi peluang menyiasat beberapa kes besar antaranya skandal BMF di Hong Kong yang juga anak syarikat Bank Bumiputra Malaysia Berhad (BBMB) ketika itu, di samping kes Perwaja Steel membabitkan tokoh korporat Tan Sri Eric Chia yang memakan masa lebih lapan tahun.

Zakaria turut berkongsi tentang tiga prinsip asas yang perlu ‘digenggam’ oleh semua pegawai penyiasat ketika menjalankan tugas iaitu;

n Need to know basis yang ber­mak­sud hanya anggota dan pe­gawai terlibat yang tahu me­ngenai satu-satu kes malah ahli keluarga masing-masing pun tidak mengetahuinya. Tujuannya menjaga kerahsiaan kes yang disiasat.

n  Kill first explain later. Ungkapan ini bermaksud pegawai pe­nyi­a­­sat akan berusaha mendapatkan dokumen atau bukti dengan apa cara sekalipun tanpa perlu beri penjelasan untuk tujuan siasatan tetapi perlu dilakukan tanpa melanggar undang-undang.

n First light enter pula bermaksud tangkapan dibuat terhadap suspek sebaik sahaja dia baru bangun tidur di waktu pagi. Pada waktu ini kebiasaannya suspek tidak bertindak agresif ketika ditangkap.

“Ketiga-tiga prinsip ini menjadi panduan kepada pegawai penyiasat kita ketika menjalankan siasatan terhadap satu-satu kes sehingga kes berkenaan dibawa ke mahkamah,” katanya lagi.

Berbalik kepada penglibatannya dalam beberapa kes utama Zakaria berkata, antara yang cukup memberi kesan kepadanya satu kes pecah amanah melibatkan seorang Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif (CEO) sebuah syarikat milik kerajaan (GLC).

Setelah mengumpulkan semua bahan bukti beliau mengarahkan sebuah pasukan diketuai oleh seorang pegawai penyiasat ke rumah CEO itu kira-kira pukul 4 pagi untuk mela­kukan tangkapan sesuai dengan prinsip first light enter.

Bagaimanapun, dalam kes tersebut kata Zakaria, tiada tangkapan dibuat sehingga menyebabkan beliau amat marah kepada pasukan tersebut.

“Namun demikian apa yang menghairankan saya pegawai penyiasat pula tiba-tiba yang menangis. Dia kata suspek akan datang ke pejabat pukul 8 pagi ini untuk serah diri.

“Selepas suspek menyerah diri, barulah pegawai penyiasat saya ini bercerita. Katanya semasa tangkapan mahu dibuat, lampu yang mula-mula dibuka adalah di ruang tamu dan bukannya di bilik tidur,” ujarnya.

Selepas lampu dibuka kata Zakaria, pasukan itu menyerbu ke dalam rumah tersebut dan apa yang menyentap perasaan pasukan tersebut, mereka melihat di sisi CEO itu anak-anaknya yang sedang lena tidur di samping seorang nenek.

“Anak yang paling kecil menangis mahukan susu. Pada ketika itu barulah pasukan itu diberitahu bahawa isteri CEO itu baru meninggal dunia dua minggu lalu kerana menghidap barah payu dara manakala nenek itu ibu mertuanya,” ujarnya.

Zakaria melihat kes itu dalam pelbagai sudut antaranya balasan dunia yang mungkin diterima akibat melakukan rasuah. Akhirnya selepas melalui perbicaraan CEO itu dibebaskan.

Kes lain yang turut terkesan di hati Zakaria melibatkan suspek yang akhirnya berubah menjadi insan lebih baik.

“Satu kes berlaku di Sarawak iaitu semasa saya bertugas di sana. Satu hari saya telah mengarahkan satu tangkapan dibuat terhadap seorang pegawai kanan kerajaan dalam bidang media.

“Pegawai penyiasat yang terlibat dalam kes tersebut seorang Iban dan tangkapan dibuat ketika pegawai berkenaan mengadakan kendu­ri untuk ke Mekah. Pegawai yang ditahan ini benar-benar aib. Beliau akhirnya dibenarkan ke Mekah untuk tunaikan haji.

“Beliau kemudian dibicarakan dan dibebaskan. Saya bertemu de­ngan pegawai berkenaan di Pondok Pasir Tumbuh Kelantan dan di saat saya bertemu dengannya beliau benar-benar menghambakan diri untuk mencari ilmu akhirat sehingga meninggal dunia,” katanya lagi.

Inilah antara kes yang memberi kesan kepada Zakaria. Walaupun kesnya kecil tetapi pengajarannya begitu banyak.

Dalam pada itu beliau mengakui kegiatan rasuah di negara ini masih berlaku tetapi dikategorikan sebagai masih terkawal.

Meskipun begitu ujar beliau, usaha untuk membendungnya perlu dilakukan bersungguh-sungguh supaya tiada lagi berlaku pencerobohan tanah secara haram seperti yang terjadi di Cameron Highlands dan beberapa kes lain yang dibongkar oleh pihak media.

“Kita pun dalam proses membuka sebuah pejabat tetap di Ca­meron Highlands. Selepas diluluskan kelak kita akan menempatkan beberapa anggota dan pegawai SPRM di kawasan tanah tinggi itu bagi memantau kes-kes pencerobohan tanah di sana,” katanya lagi.

Beliau turut melahirkan rasa gembira apabila tahap keyakinan rak­yat terhadap keupayaan SPRM menjalankan tugas-tugas pencegah­an rasuah semakin me­ningkat dari setahun ke setahun.

Berdasarkan kajian, beliau ber­kata, berbanding tahap keyakinan orang ramai terhadap SPRM pada 2009 cuma 30 peratus, kemudiannya meningkat 39 peratus (2010); 42 peratus (2011); 54 peratus (2012); 65 peratus (2014) dan tahun ini dijangka mencecah 70 peratus.

“Secara umumnya rakyat semakin percaya kepada kewibawaan SPRM dalam menjalankan kerja-kerja membendung, mencegah dan menyiasat segala kegiatan ber­kaitan rasuah.

“Kita akan balas kepercayaan ini dengan memberikan komitmen menghapuskan kegiatan rasuah yang boleh dianggap salah satu musuh utama negara,” ujar bapa kepada 11 anak ini.

Pada masa sama katanya, 27 juta rakyat Malaysia perlu bersama-sama SPRM memerangi perbuatan jijik rasuah itu supaya kegiatan tersebut akhirnya dapat diben­dung sekali gus meletakkan Malaysia pada kedudukan baik dalam senarai laporan CPI.

Meskipun bakal bersara, beliau tetap komited dengan perjuangannya untuk memerangi rasuah dan sedia menerima jemputan daripada mana-mana pihak khususnya pihak media untuk bercakap mengenai gejala tersebut dan kesannya kepada masyarakat dan negara. Tidak boleh disangkal sayang dan kasih Zakaria kepada SPRM tidak berbelah-bahagi.

“Darah yang mengalir dalam tubuh saya ini hanya tertulis dua perkataan sahaja iaitu BPR dan SPRM,” katanya mengakhiri sesi temu bual ini.

Selamat bersara Datuk Seri!

PDF    Send article as PDF   

, , , , , ,

No Comments

Aku Insan Biasa…

Oleh: Faridah Mahabob
Idea Asal: Mohd Firdaus Ramlan

Lautan yang mana tidak bergelombang

Bumi yang mana tidak ditimpa hujan

Aku seperti mu ada waktu diburu

Oleh dosa-dosa masa nan lalu

Bait-bait lagu ini sering bermain di fikiran.

Orang selalu kata untuk maju kita harus terus langkah ke hadapan. Jangan menoleh ke belakang. Tetapi tidak bagi aku. Aku harus sentiasa menoleh ke belakang. Hanya dengan begitu aku mampu mengingatkan diriku.

Aku anak orang susah. Bapaku bersawah demi menyara hidup dan membesarkan aku adik beradik. Walaupun hidupku tidaklah semiskin kais pagi makan pagi, namun aku juga tidak pernah merasai kemewahan hidup. Aku melangkah ke menara gading berbekalkan pinjaman daripada Perbadanan Tabung Pendidikan Tinggi Negara (PTPTN). Selebihnya aku hanya dibekalkan dengan wang saku sejumlah RM50 sahaja. Aku mula cemburu dengan rakan-rakan lain yang mampuberbelanja besar dan menggunakan barang-barang berjenama sedangkan aku perlu berjimat cermat.

Aku sematkan tekad dan berazam, suatu hari nanti aku akan lebih kaya dan lebih bergaya daripada rakan-rakanku sekarang. Berbekalkan ijazah dalam bidang perundangan, aku mula mendaki sedikit demi sedikit. Daripada seorang yang bergelar juruacara mahkamah hingga bergelar majistret.

Kerjayaku sangat mengujakan. Malahan aku sentiasa bersemangat untuk memberikan khidmat yang terbaik untuk pelanggan-pelangganku. Malangnya itu hanya sementara. Alam pekerjaan rupa-rupanya mengundang lebih banyak cabaran dan dugaan. Godaannya juga lebih kuat. Saban hari, aku bertemu dengan insan-insan yang pelbagai ragam.

Akhirnya aku tewas…

Aku gagal mempertahankan integriti diriku. Bergaul dengan rakanrakan yang rata-ratanya terjebak dengan budaya-budaya tidak sihat, lantas membuatkan aku turut terjerumus. Apatah lagi kuasa wang juga menggelapkan mataku.

“Malangnya itu hanya sementara.

Alam pekerjaan rupa-rupanya

mengundang lebih banyak cabaran

dan dugaan. Godaannya juga lebih

kuat. Saban hari, aku bertemu dengan

insan-insan yang pelbagai ragam.”

Tekad yang ku tanam, cuba aku penuhi. Bergelar seorang majistret memudahkan aku untuk memenuhi keinginanku. Aku tidak lagi peduli pada hukum halal dan haram. Aku tidak kisah apa kata orang sekelilingku. Janji hidup aku mewah. Hutang aku langsai.

Aku bermula dengan kesalahan trafik, kesalahan yang paling kecil. Jika difikirkan kos bicara dan kos peguam lebih berbaloi jika diselesaikan di luar mahkamah. Sedikit demi sedikit aku memahirkan diriku dalam permainan ini.

Aku rasa nikmatnya kesenangan dengan cara begini. Daripada sekotak rokok, akhirnya aku mula mengenakan cas yang aku rasakan berbaloi. Pada permulaannya aku sekadar bermain dengan nilai-nilai yang kecil dan semakin lama semakin besar sehingga mencecah puluhan ribu ringgit.

Aku tahu apa yang aku lakukan ini satu kesalahan, tetapi aku juga enggan berganjak. Isteriku pernah jua bertanya kerana merasakan seperti ada yang tidak kena dengan pendapatan yang aku terima. Namun aku nafikan. Bak kata pepatah, sepandai-pandai tupai melompat, akhirnya jatuh juga ke tanah.

Aku akhirnya ditahan oleh SPRM atas maklumat daripada seseorang. Pelbagai helah aku gunakan untuk menafikan kesalahan tetapi terpaksa juga akur apabila aku didapati bersalah di Mahkamah Rayuan.

Ibarat sudah jatuh ditimpa tangga. Aku bukan sahaja didapati bersalah, malahan aku kehilangan segala-galanya. Keluargaku terlibat dalam kemalangan yang mengorbankan ibu, bapa dan adikku. Aku kehilangan semua harta dan kemewahan. Mujurlah isteriku masih setia dan terus bersamaku.

Kini, walaupun aku telah dibebaskan, namun rasa penyesalan ini akan terus membelengguku seumur hidup. Hanya dengan cara membantu SPRM, berkongsi pengalaman hidupku, dapat mengurangkan sedikit bebanan kesalahan yang aku lakukan.

Nota tambahan :

Mohd Firdaus dituduh atas dua kesalahan menerima rasuah berjumlah RM8,000 sebagai balasan membebaskan seorang individu dengan bon berkelakuan baik selama dua tahun dengan cagaran RM1,000.

Bagi pertuduhan pertama, Mohd Firdaus dijatuhkan hukuman penjara tiga tahun dan denda 15,000 (atau 12 bulan penjara). Bagi pertuduhan kedua pula, beliau  ijatuhkan hukuman tiga tahun penjara dan denda RM25,000 (atau 18 bulan  penjara). Hukuman penjara diperintahkan berjalan serentak.

Setelah menjalani hukuman, kini beliau aktif mendidik masyarakat mengenai  jenayah rasuah dengan berkongsi pengalaman beliau.
PDF Creator    Send article as PDF   

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

ACA’s Investigation On Rosli Dahlan Legally Right, Said Prosecutor

KUALA LUMPUR, 9 June – The former Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), Kevin Anthony Morais today confirmed there was no evidence that leakages of information were allegedly made by the Anti-Corruption Agency’s (ACA) officers.

Anthony Kevin Morais

Anthony Kevin Morais

In a written a letter to Rosli, Morais had also narrated that the investigation under Section 21/4 ACA Act 1997 showed there were no breach of provision was committed by the ACA officers on the matter.

 

On his second day of cross examination, Morais was asked to testify whether he was aware about the leakages of information on investigation details pertaining to Rosli Dahlan by the ACA’s officers.

 

Morais told the court upon receiving a complaint from Rosli Dahlan on the said matter, he had conveyed the information to then ACA Investigation Director Shukri Abdull (now the MACC Deputy Chief Commisioner (Operations) Datuk Seri Shukri Abdull) after receiving consent from his superior Nordin Hassan.

 

Morais stressed that Shukri had investigated the matter and informed him that there was no evidence that the leakages was made by ACA’s officers at that point of time.
In a written a letter to Rosli, Morais had also narrated that the investigation under Section 21/4 ACA Act 1997 showed there were no breach of provision was committed by the ACA officers on the matter.

 

During the cross examination by the Plaintiff’s lawyer Cheetan Jethwani on the issuance of notice to Rosli,  Morais stressed that he was not involved in the investigation as it was beyond his jurisdictions as a DPP.  Morais reiterated his duty was bound within the law and all his orders came after a thorough case study was conducted in accordance to the law.

 

“If the session court finds the reasons given was insufficient I respect it but as a prosecutor related to the case, I am rest assured there was a need to release the notice to Rosli as it was sufficient to assist the on-going investigation,” he stressed.

 

Yesterday, Morais had denied that the notices had been issued for improper motives and insisted, “They were issued based on investigations and in accordance to the law.”

He added that he had reason to believe that a crime had been committed under Section 11(a) of the then Anti-Corruption Act 1997 based on investigations carried out by investigating officer Saiful Ezral Ariffin.

 

Morais also ward off claims by Jethwani that investigation was carried out against Rosli to stop him from advising former Bukit Aman Commercial Crime Investigation Department Director Datuk Ramli Yusof who was being investigated for owning excessive wealth.

 

When asked if the whole investigation was a conspiracy to remove Ramli from the Royal Malaysia Police’s hierarchy, Morais denied the allegation and said he did not know who Ramli was and the hierarchy of the police force.
Morais’s cross examination at the KL High Court completed at 11.45 am and the court session will continue in the afternoon with another defense witness will take a stand.

Create PDF    Send article as PDF   

, , , , , ,

No Comments

Report Dapat Reward

oleh : Faridah Mahabob

Melaka merupakan sebuah negeri yang semakin maju dan membangun. Pelbagai usaha yang telah dilakukan untuk menaiktaraf Melaka sebagai sebuah negeri yang bukan sahaja terkenal dan masyhur dengan sejarah Kesultanannya bahkan juga terkenal sebagai sebuah bandar yang berteknologi tinggi.

Report Dapat Reward

Report Dapat Reward

Memandang jauh ke arah arus pembangunan dan kemodenan pada hari ini, Ketua Menteri Melaka, YAB. Datuk Seri Ir. Haji Idris bin Haji Haron, tidak menolak akan wujud ruang dan peluang  berlakunya rasuah. Oleh yang demikian, beliau bersama barisan Exco Negeri Melaka mengadakan permuafakatan bersama Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) bagi menangani permasalahan ini.

Melalui perbincangan yang diadakan, Pejabat Ketua Menteri Melaka telah memutuskan untuk memberi ganjaran kepada kontraktor yang membuat aduan sekiranya wujud unsur-unsur rasuah atau berlakunya salah guna kuasa oleh pegawai daripada mana-mana agensi di Melaka. Ganjaran yang diberikan bukanlah dalam nilai ringgit sebaliknya mereka akan diberikan tender yang lebih baik daripada yang sedang mereka usahakan.

Menurut YAB. Datuk Seri Ir. Haji Idris, ganjaran ini bertujuan untuk mendidik orang awam terutama mereka yang terlibat dalam tender projek-projek kerajaan agar tidak gentar untuk membuat aduan sekiranya ada berlakunya salah laku rasuah. Tambah beliau, melalui usaha ini, beliau percaya jenayah rasuah di Melaka dapat dikurangkan. Langkah awal telah dijalankan oleh Kerajaan Negeri Melaka dengan penubuhan tiga Pusat Informasi SPRM di Majlis Bandaraya Melaka Bersejarah, Majlis Perbandaran Alor Gajah dan Majlis Perbandaran Jasin. Untuk makluman Pusat Informasi ini dibuka bagi memudahkan orang awam menyalurkan aduan mereka.

YAB. Datuk Seri Ir. Haji Idris berkata, sebagai seorang Ketua Menteri adalah merupakan tanggungjawab beliau untuk meneruskan apa yang telah dilaksanakan oleh Ketua Menteri terdahulu.

“Memulakan sesuatu adalah lebih mudah daripada mengekalkan sesuatu yang telah sedia ada”.

Justeru, untuk mengekalkan apa yang telah sedia ada di Melaka seterusnya memajukannya, anasir-anasir buruk seperti jenayah rasuah dan salah guna kuasa perlu dibanteras.

Sewajarnya usaha yang dilaksanakan oleh Kerajaan Negeri Melaka ini dicontohi oleh negeri-negeri lain di Malaysia. Memetik kata Y.Bhg. Tan Sri Johan Jaafar, Pengerusi Panel Perundingan dan Pencegahan Rasuah (PPPR), “untuk mengubah persepsi rakyat Malaysia tentang rasuah, memerlukan kerjasama daripada semua pihak dan semua lapisan masyarakat. Persepsi tidak akan berubah jika hanya dengan usaha SPRM semata-mata.”

PDF Printer    Send article as PDF   

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

MACC’s DPP Kevin Insists Notices To Lawyer Rosli Properly Issued

KUALA LUMPUR, 8 June – Kevin Anthony Morais, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC)’s deputy public prosecutor, today stressed that issuance of notices against lawyer Datuk Rosli Dahlan were done according to the law.

Anthony Kevin Morais

Anthony Kevin Morais

Testifying at the High Court here today, Morais said that he still had valid grounds to issue the notices.

Denying that the notices had been issued for improper motives, he insisted:

“They were issued based on investigations and accordance to the law.”

Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) was upgraded as MACC, an independent Commission in 2009.

Morais added that he had reason to believe that a crime had been committed under Section 11(a) of the then Anti-Corruption Act 1997 based on investigations carried out by investigating officer Saiful Ezral Ariffin.

Section 11(a) provides that any agent who corruptly accepts or obtains any gratification as an inducement or a reward for doing any act in relation to his principal’s affairs or business commits an offence.

Morais, former Deputy Director of MACC’s Legal and Prosecution Division claimed that he issued the notices premised on that suspicion.

Denying that the notices had been issued for improper motives, Morais as quoted by Free Malaysia Today insisted, “They were issued based on investigations and accordance to the law.”

Rosli had been charged in the Sessions Court in October 2007 for allegedly failing to declare his assets pursuant to notices dated July 17, 2007 and August 16, 2007 issued by Morais.

He was, however, acquitted in December 2010 without his defence being called.

Morais acknowledged that Sessions Court judge Abu Bakar Katar had rejected the reasons given by him for the issuance of the notice.

He also admitted the notices issued to Rosli and Datuk Ramli Yusoff, former Bukit Aman Commercial Crime Investigation Department Director, were inter-connected and that Judge M Gunalan had found that he had issued the notices “under strange circumstances in that it was based purely on the unsubstantiated and unsupported allegations by a complainant with dubious character having antecedents.”

“I was informed by the prosecutor who handled the case that the judge did not accept my reasons for issuing the notices,” Morais testified during cross-examination, “but I do not agree”.

Denying that the notices had been issued for improper motives, Morais insisted, “They were issued based on investigations and accordance to the law.”

He added that he had reason to believe that a crime had been committed under Section 11(a) of the then Anti-Corruption Act 1997 based on investigations carried out by investigating officer Saiful Ezral Ariffin.

Section 11(a) provides that any agent who corruptly accepts or obtains any gratification as an inducement or a reward for doing any act in relation to his principal’s affairs or business commits an offence.

He needed to declare his assets to enable the Anti-Corruption Agency to investigate whether he held any assets for Ramli, Morais said.

“However, in (Rosli’s) written reply, he did not comply with the orders but instead gave his opinions and raised questions on the matter,” he said.

The trial continues on Tuesday, June 9, 2015.

PDF Download    Send article as PDF   

, , , , , , , , ,

No Comments

Institutionalised corruption

By : NST 4th June 2015

EIGHTY per cent is a huge fraction of a total and when that many percentage points of any organisation is corrupt the picture is frightening. More terrible is the information that the problem cannot be rectified because the law is inadequate and those who must act will not. Why? It would not be a surprise if the whole caboodle is somehow implicated.

Institutionalised corruption

Institutionalised corruption

Unfortunately, this is no supposed situation, a figment of the imagination. According to the Special Branch, this is the picture revealed as a result of 10 years of “covert, deep-cover surveillance and intelligence gathering” of the nation’s border checkpoints. The officers of the enforcement agencies stationed at these checkpoints are on the take.

They include those from the Immigration Department, the Malaysian Maritime Enforcement Agency, the Anti-Smuggling Unit and the police’s General Operations Force. And, many of these officers are on the payroll of syndicates smuggling drugs, weapons and humans, too. It is as if they moonlight as enforcement officers.

This is institutionalised corruption fused with organised crime and pervades the agencies. So insidious is the problem that when an officer was asked to name names of those involved, his reply was: “…easier if you asked us for the names of officers who were not on the take”. And thus is pronounced the most spine-chilling problem that this country faces.

Is it any wonder that there are death camps on the border and that street crimes are becoming ever more violent, with armed criminals becoming the norm rather than the exception? Corruption is poking holes into the country’s security. And, what if these agencies are corrupt wherever they operate, not merely in border areas?

Meanwhile, the 20 per cent not involved are, according to the Special Branch report, the pious, religion being the shield keeping seduction at bay. But they are a paltry number at risk of dangerous elements who are legitimately equipped to kill. They are, therefore, not the natural recourse to correcting the situation.

Even if they were at the upper echelon, it is questionable whether they can move their corrupt minions to comply with any order to clean up their act.

The home minister, rightly outraged by the revelation of the extent of corruption, has spoken of a changeover of the guards at the border areas. A shake-up is indeed absolutely necessary, but will replacing the agencies with the military work as intended? Is the soldier any more upstanding than the other uniformed services?

Furthermore, to rely on the military is tantamount to literally declaring war on criminals. While attractive, the proposed solution might have the impact of creating a dangerous situation. Whither the civilians in these locations? Will night curfew, say, be imposed? Corruption must end but when, as alleged, it has become institutionalised, how?

In some countries, facing the firing squad is considered a solution, especially when justice is somewhat summary. Such a move, however, is too drastic.

Whatever the case, the enemy within needs to be routed out. But, is the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission fully equipped to fight this level of corruption?

Read More : http://www.nst.com.my/node/86930

Free PDF    Send article as PDF   

, , ,

No Comments

DON’T DOUBT, MAKE MACC GREATER

By ROHAIZAD YAAKOB
•Rohaizad Yaakob is Director, Strategic Communication Division, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission

• Rohaizad Yaakob is Director, Strategic Communication Division, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission

It is interesting to read Form over substance in fighting graft, which appeared in MalaysiaKini today. We wish to forward our thanks to TKChua for sharing his thoughts and concern about the war fighting corruption in Malaysia.

I understand where the writer comes from based on his thoughts and concerns but allow me to share my view in this case, especially in regards to the MACC’s roles and responsibilities, and its effectiveness in fighting corruption.

As a dynamic organisation there is always a room for argument in regards to the MACC’s roles and effectiveness in fighting corruption at large.  From my humble understanding, I like to bring my points to answer two components: one on the question that there is no improvement since the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) was upgraded as an independent commission – Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) in 2009. And, the second concern is related to the following question – whether there is a need to give a greater power to the MACC.

In fact, the MACC has already moved far ahead beyond the expectations of the people since 2009. The statistics itself is evidence. The number of convictions during the MACC (2009-2014) has tripled to 1,234 cases compared to 429 cases from 2003-2008 – during the ACA era. In addition, the conviction rate has increased from 54 per cent in 2009 to 84 per cent in 2013, where the conviction rate stands around 80 per cent since last two years. This shows that Malaysia has achieved the international standard.

Since embarking in its Transformation Programme in 2009, the MACC also has recorded efficiency in-term of investigation. The MACC managed to complete 85 per cent of the cases during the current year. This is an increase from 74 per cent in 2011. There are other evidences to prove the MACC had achieved tremendous gains since its establishment in 2009.

In the meantime, as the people want a country that is free from corruption, we must let the people understand and differentiate between corrupt cases and otherwise.

The writer had also cynically argued about the existence of independent panels that monitors the running of the MACC. These panels consist of 46 members all together, that representing the general public, and had contributed to the development of the MACC. For example, one of the oversight bodies, Operations Review Panel (ORP) has been recognised by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC). The ORP has recommended 60 cases which were considered no merit for prosecution by the Public Prosecutor, to be revised. Eight cases were managed to be brought to the court. This development is a concrete proof that MACC Act 2009 has given a new dimension and has enhanced the effectiveness of the MACC.

The writer questioned whether the MACC should be given more power. The answer is yes. This is not only the MACC’s wish. But this was also the request forwarded by various stakeholders such political parties, professional bodies and non-government organisations which insisted that the MACC should follow ICAC Hong Kong, KPK Indonesia, and even the China anti-corruption agency, to ensure the MACC has greater credibility and capability to combat corruption.

As new developments taking place, if we were to achieve greater heights, we should consider to give additional strength to the MACC as any other organisation, where we have witnessed formulation and amendments of various laws and regulations since we gained independence.

The establishment of the ACA to replace the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) in 1982 was to ensure that investigation into corruption cases were handled effectively and just focusing on corruption cases only. This was also due to the fact the public had expected the NBI to look into all matters even if it was not related to corruption.

Subsequently, the MACC Act was approved by the Parliament in 2009 to ensure that a new commission that is transparent and independent is established in Malaysia. This was also as result of public’s demand and political will of the government. However, at that time there was no concrete step to give the MACC with adequate power. Most of the provisions were inherited from the previous act.

Various developments since 2009, not only at the domestic level but also at the international arena, had insisted that there is a need to give greater strength and power to the MACC.  This includes provision by UNCAC to establish a special service commission.

As the MACC faces limitation under the current act, suggestion to empower the MACC also came from the independent oversight bodies especially the Parliament Special Committee on Corruption and the Anti-Corruption Advisory Board. This suggestion emerged after the court’s decision that there is no provision in the MACC Act to request anyone to complete the declaration of the asset until there is element of reasonable to believe corruption offences has been committed.

One of the suggestions is the amendment to Section 36 of the MACC Act 2009. Currently, the MACC does not possess the authority to demand for the declaration or property by anyone unless required in an investigation under an offence stipulated in MACC Act 2009.  Section 36 of the MACC Act requires investigation in relation to any offences of corruption made in advance by the officer of the MACC and should reasonable grounds are found that any said property held or acquired by the suspects is the result of corruption; only then notice demanding declaration of the property can be issued.

Section 36 is not similar to Section 10 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance (PBO), Hong Kong, exercised by the ICAC Hong Kong. The latter however allows the ICAC Hong Kong to investigate if they found any person with unusual rich but in Malaysia not. Thus, the MACC also need a new provision to compel any person living beyond means – possessing properties or adopting a lifestyle disproportionate his known sources of income may lead to a perception that his wealth is acquire through dubious means, to declare their assets.

Based on previous experience especially as a result of a court decision, the MACC often faces constraint to investigate under Section 36 of the MACC Act.

But to commence an overt investigation on his acquisition or possession, investigation first to be carried out and found that any property is held or acquired by him as a result or in connection with an offence under MACC Act 2009. We need to show the acquisition is by unlawful means first. To do that there must be a basis that there is an unlawful activity before an investigation can commence. In short, in a murder case a dead body will trigger an investigation but in corrupt investigation, ownership of big bungalow can trigger covert enquires to be conducted but it cannot be a starting point of investigation for him to declare his assets.

On the other hand, the provision on misconduct in public office is much needed to address issues of leakages and wastages in the financial management of government agencies due to the lack of integrity and commitment in exercising their duties and responsibilities. This legal provision, which was introduced in Australia and Hong Kong to prosecute public officials who have failed to exercise their duties with integrity, has been in existence for the past 15 years in Hong Kong whereby through its Common Law, public officials can be prosecuted for acts involving corruption even when evidences may not be strong or substantial. The outcome of such legal provision has been effective in curbing corruption and misconduct among public officials as evident in the numerous cases and convictions.

In view of this, such a provision is worth to be considered in Malaysia to ensure that public officials are penalised for such misconducts and corrupt act that have resulted in losses in national revenues.

The writer also cynically posted a question: “When you see a building that was not supposed to there, you know someone has taken some money to approve it. When you see uncollected rubbish, you know someone was paid but did not do his job. When you see opulent living beyond comprehension, you know someone has easy money.” This shows that the writer wants the MACC to investigate every happening in Malaysia although the allegations do not always related to corruption.

Corruption must be combated from all fronts including through moral, psychological and spiritual means.

 

  • Rohaizad Yaakob is Director, Strategic Communication Division, Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission
PDF    Send article as PDF   

, , , , , ,

No Comments

YES, MACC MUST PROBE UNUSUALLY RICH, BUT…

By: Walter Sandosam
the writer : Walter Sandosam

Walter Sandosam

Referring to the report entitled “MP: Enough evidence to probe PM’s wealth’ and ‘MACC’s job is to probe the unusually rich’ in Malaysiakini recently, it is noted that many readers opined that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) should have initiated its investigation against anyone based on various information given.

Indeed everyone knows that corruption is one the most potent hindrance to the economic development of a country; it undermines the rule of law, weakens trust in public institutions and challenges democratic principles. This is a universal reality.

Nevertheless, one of the constraints the MACC faces is to continue to investigate the financial and property ownership of an individual who has excessive wealth suspected of corruption.

The MACC does not have any legal provision at present to compel a person with excessive wealth which does not match the income on their job position to declare his or her assets without reasonable grounds to believe, based on investigations carried out by an officer of the Commission. This is clearly stated in Section 36(3) of the MACC Act 2009.

Though Section 36(3) of the Act seeks to secure an explanation of an apparent affluence of a public official, this section is unlike the provisions of Section 10 of the Prevention of Bribery Ordinance of Hong Kong.

Section 36(3) does not operate independently but must be read in conjunction with  Section 36(1) of the said Act. Section 36(1) reads as follows:

Notwithstanding any written law or rule of law to the contrary, an officer of the Commission of the rank of commissioner and above, if he has reasonable ground to believe, based on the investigation carried out by an officer of the Commission, that any property is held or acquired by any person as a result of or in connection with an offence under this Act.

An ‘offence under the Act’ is defined as:

…owns, possesses, controls or holds any interest in any property which is excessive, having regard to his present or past emoluments and all other relevant circumstances…liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding twenty years; and a fine which is not less than five times the value of the excess, if the excess is capable of being valued, or ten thousand ringgit, whichever is the higher

Section 36(3) reads as follows:

Where the officer of the Commission of the rank of commissioner and above has reasonable grounds to believe that any officer of a public body who has been served with the written notice referred to in subsection (1), such officer of the Commission may by written direction require him to furnish a statement on oath or affirmation explaining how he was able to own, possess, control or hold such excess and if he fails to explain satisfactorily such excess, he commits an offence…

From the above, it is clear that there must be reasonable grounds to believe that an offence under the Act has been committed, before investigators from the Commission can embark on investigations, in respect of excess wealth of public official. Thus far, there is no evidence proffered by anyone of any offence that has been committed by the individuals concerned under the MACC Act 2009 in order to trigger any kind of investigations, for excess wealth against them.

It is the intention of the Legislature that claims of excess wealth, is not in itself an offence that warrants investigation.

In this regard, it is imperative to ensure that section 36 of the MACC Act 2009 is amended to enable the Commission to compel individuals to declare their assets. Currently, there is no such provision. It is therefore important for members of Parliament to support the amendment to the law and the Federal Constitution to increase the Commission’s independence and effectiveness in fighting graft.

PDF Creator    Send article as PDF   

, , , , , , , ,

No Comments

SSM Tandatangani CIP, Bukti Komitmen Berterusan.

Sumber : www.sprm.gov.my/cip-ssm2015.html

KUALA LUMPUR, 10 Mac – Suruhanjaya Syarikat Malaysia (SSM) hari ini menjadi agensi keempat di bawah Kementerian Perdagangan Dalam Negeri, Koperasi dan Kepenggunaan (KPDNKK) yang memeterai Ikrar Integriti Korporat (CIP) sebagai salah satu komitmen berterusan kearah tadbir urus yang berintegriti dan telus.

Menterinya, Dato’ Sri Hasan Malek berkata selain dianggap sebagai bukti komitnen, ikrar ini sejajar dengan inisiatif berterusan SSM dalam konteks memperkasakan integriti di agensi tersebut.

SSM Tandatangani CIP, Bukti Komitmen Berterusan.

SSM Tandatangani CIP, Bukti Komitmen Berterusan.

blog3 blog2 blog1(Galeri Gambar Penuh : http://bit.ly/1Af6hrd )
Rakaman Sidang Media : http://youtu.be/FdX2t_F9QQw )

Katanya, ini kerana soal  integriti serta amalan perniagaan beretika bukanlah suatu perkara baru pada agensi berkenaan memandang telah melaksanakan beberapa inisiatif kearah persekitaran perniagaan berintegriti.

“Terdahulu, kita telah terbitkan dua buah buku dalam konteks amalan baik menjalankan perniagaan sebagai panduan kepada peniaga menjalankan perniagaan secara baik.

“Ini sahaja sudah memperlihatkan keseriusan SSM dalam memberi komitmen kepada kepentingan integriti dalam perniagaan,”katanya ketika berucap pada majlis berkenaan.

Pada majlis yang diadaka  di Dewan Tun Razak, Menara Berkembar Bank Rakyat itu, Hasan hadir bagi menyaksikan majlis menandatangani integriti diantara Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif SSM, Zahrah Abd Wahab Fenner dengan SPRM yang diwakili oleh Timbalan Ketua Pesuruhjaya (Pencegahan), Datuk Mustafar Ali.

Menyentuh kepada beberapa insiden membabitkan integriti pegawai di bawah kementerian berkenaan, Hasan menegaskan bahawa pihaknya tidak akan berkompromi sekiranya mereka yang terbabit dikenakan tindakan.

“Saya harapkan mereka tidak terlibat dalam apa yang disebut dan jika benar  mereka terlibat saya tidak akan bersubahat.

“Jika didapati bersalah, beri hukuman yang setimpal kerana perbuatan sebegini (tidak berintegriti) membahayakan negara,” katanya.

Create PDF    Send article as PDF   

, , , , , ,

No Comments

CAKAP MEMANG SENANG – Isu Ikan Bilis Ikan Jerung – Komen Tan Sri Datuk Seri Megat Najmuddin

Temubual bersama Tan Sri Dato Megat Najmuddin Bin Datuk Seri Megat Khas

Ahli Lembaga Penasihat Pencegahan Rasuah SPRM (LPPR)

8 September 2014 di Akademi Pencegahan Rasuah (MACA)

Itu cakap senang, ikan bilis, jerung, itu semua cakap dan omong-omong kosong pada saya lah. Meraka tahu tidak siapa jerung? Siapa yang dikatakan jerung itu, orang politik ke, pegawai tinggi kerajaan ke, siapa? Jadi adakah ini bermakna lepaskan ikan bilis dan tangkapkan saja yang kita tumpukan masa kita kepada jerung sahaja. Tak betul juga kan? Sama ada RM 50.00 atau RM 500,000 atau RM 5, 000,000, undang-undang itu telahpun dilanggar.

Tan Sri Datuk Seri Megat Najmuddin menjawab kepada pertanyaan wartawan mengenai kes ikan bilis dan ikan jerun g SPRM

Tan Sri Datuk Seri Megat Najmuddin menjawab kepada pertanyaan wartawan mengenai kes ikan bilis dan ikan jerung SPRM

Dan sebagai suatu bahan anti rasuah, kita harus melaksanakan tugas kita apabila undang-undang itu dilanggar sama ada kecil, pertengahan, besar atau “super” besar, tetapi yang penting ialah bukti, yang penting ialah saksi, mana nak cari. Kalau jerung dia lebih pandai kan, dia ada “lawyer” terpandai, akauntan yang terpandai, “adviser” atau penasihat yang terpandai mungkin “international” yang bertaraf antarabangsa, kita tak ada.

Kita tiada “expertice”  dalam perkara ini apabila kita terpaksa pergi keluar negeri. Kalu saya jerung saya akan ambil duit saya di luar negeri , “ I wouldn’t doing it here”  dan tak akan saya nak buat dan ambil duit itu depan orang ramai, kita akan selindung kekuatan saya. Apabila jerung dia lebih cerdik, itulah masalah dia.

Kita memerlukan kerjasama,laporan, bukti, saksi daripada orang ramai yang tahu dalam perkara ini. Cakap memang senang, “talk cheap” maaflah saya rasa emosi sedikit kerana benda ini tak betul, senang nak cakap lah, saya pun boleh cakap macam itu, budak kecil pun boleh cakap macam itu. Tapi kita lihat dari segi hakikatnya, realitinya “behind this is not easy” bukan benda mudah, cakap senang.

Tonton Video Beliau di http://youtu.be/Wfinw5ZyP_o Cakap memang senang – Isu ikan bilis ikan jerung – komen Tokoh Korporat Negara

PDF Printer    Send article as PDF   

, , , , ,

No Comments