Posts Tagged graft
International companies are becoming large and growing proportion of the world’s total business due to globalization, which has forced western capitalists to interact with their counterparts in lower-income and developing countries, in the course of expanding business horizons and opportunities. Malaysia realizes that companies do not operate within national boundaries but in multiple countries, each with its own set of norms and rules. In the competition to secure supplies from foreign countries and compete against products and services, companies tend to violate laws and rules especially pertaining to corruption.
Domestic bribery has long been recognized as a crime in almost all countries including Malaysia. However, bribery of foreign officials is of a relatively recent occurrence. The tendency to commit foreign bribery has risen dramatically due to globalization, which has let to a significant increase in international economic activities.
In responding to the growing tendency and in relation to article 16 of the United Nation Convention Against Corruption (UNCAC), which makes explicit reference to the bribery of not only foreign public officials but also officials of public international organizations. Malaysia responded well to offences of bribery by foreign public officials by taking the necessary steps to incorporate a new specific provision for bribery of foreign public officials into the domestic legislation.
Section 22 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 represents Malaysia’s legislative contribution to the international effort to criminalize such conduct. The provision stipulates that any person who by himself, or by or in conjunction with any other person gives, promises or offers, or agrees to give or offer, to any foreign public official, or being a foreign public official, solicits, accepts or obtains, or agrees to accept or attempts to obtain, whether for the benefit of that foreign public official or of another person, any gratification as an inducement or reward for, or otherwise on account of:
- the foreign public official using his position to influence any act or decision of the foreign state or public international organization for which the official performs any official duties;
- the foreign public official performing, having done or forbone to do, or abstaining from performing or aiding in procuring, expediting, delaying, hindering or preventing the performance of, any of his official duties; or
- the foreign public official aiding in procuring or preventing the granting of any contract for the benefit of any person,
commits an offence, notwithstanding that the foreign public official did not have the power, right or opportunity so to do, show or forbear, or accepted the gratification without intending so to do, show or forbear, or did not infact so do, show or forbear, or that the inducement or reward was not in relation to the scope of his official duties. Shall on conviction be liable to an imprisonment for a term not exceeding twenty years and a fine of not less than five times the sum or value of the gratification or ten thousand ringgit, whichever is the higher.
For the purpose of the offence, foreign public official defined as includes any person who holds a legislative, executive, administrative or judicial office of a foreign country whether appointed or elected. Apart from that it also includes a person who exercises a public function for a foreign country and any person who is authorized by a public international organization to act on behalf of that organization.
In addition, the provision covers any act of aiding and abetting in the commission of the offence, conspiring to commit the offence or attempting to commit the offence. Some countries will argue that it is their culture in giving gifts which on their own way may denote respect, appreciation or gratitude, without specifying large and small gifts or the value of the gifts. Thus, in Malaysian, we have within our legislation, that evidence of custom is inadmissible as a defence to an offence of bribery of a foreign public official.
Lobbying by a foreign public official in order to persuade a local public official to act in the supplicant’s is another area that is open to abuse. Lobbying, per se, that does not require a payment and which does not persuade a political figure from violating the social trust of his constituents and his parliamentary code of ethics, is legitimate. However, when lobbying is done with a payment for the same purpose and for the political figure to breach any social trust that he has with his constituents, then it constitutes an offence domestically. The giver and receiver of bribe in such cases commit an offence and would be prosecuted in Malaysia.
Facilitation payments also known as ‘grease payments’ has been described by the OECD as low level payments designed to expedite performance of a ‘routine government action’. It is corrosive in its nature towards sustainable development of a country and the rule of law. Malaysia too has recognized facilitation payments as a form of corruption within the domestic anti-corruption legislation.
The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 provides that the evidence of an accomplice and agent provocateur could be used as admissible evidence in the prosecution of offences of bribery of foreign public officials. This provision would be of invaluable, as one is only to aware that corruption is sometimes regarded as ‘silent crime’ between consenting adults. Hence, if there is any other compelling independent and corroborative evidence, then the giver and receiver of the bribe could be prosecuted, respectively. Plea bargaining is being introduced into the Criminal Procedure Code in Malaysia, which would again enable the cooperation of co-offenders in the prosecution of bribery offences.
Apart from that, there is also within the scheme of the Act, a provision that there is a duty to report all forms of attempted bribery transactions and failure to do so is an offence, which on conviction be liable to a fine of not exceeding one hundred thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or both. If bribery is being solicited or obtained, or an attempt has been made to obtain then failure to report such act, will on conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding ten thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to both. Thus, it is the duty of either the potential giver or receiver to report bribery and failure to do so may land them to a criminal charge.
Tools of investigation for the offence of bribery of foreign public officials are enshrined in the Act. A glimpse of these powers would indicate that there are explicit provisions overriding banking secrecy laws and professional legal privilege. Further, the Act provides that officers of the Commission have the power to obtain information in the course of investigation for an offence under the Act, including bribery of a foreign public official, about property that reasonably believed to have been acquired through proceeds of bribery. The information may be secured from the suspect himself, his relatives or associates, or any other person whom the anti-graft officer has reasonable ground to believe can assist in the investigations. Failure by any party to provide the information required is a criminal offence, and may face a criminal charge. On conviction may liable to imprisonment and fine.
If it is established that the suspect against whom the information is sought is an officer of a public body in Malaysia and is in excess of wealth against his present and past emoluments and all other relevant circumstances, then the said officer of a public body, can be prosecuted for the excess wealth. The officer of the public body shall on conviction be liable to an imprisonment for a term not exceeding twenty years and a fine which is not less than five times the value of the excess or ten thousand ringgit, whichever is the higher.
The Act also provides well defined powers to freeze the assets of a suspect and subsequent forfeiture. Where the offence is proved against the accused person, but the property cannot be traced or is disposed, the court can order the accused to pay a penalty, the sum of which is equivalent to the amount of the gratification. The penalty is over and above the punishments provided for under the Act.
The officers of the anti-graft Commission in Malaysia are constantly required to attend capability-building programmes in order to enhance their investigative skills and to network informally with counterparts of theirs from other jurisdictions. Such networking would invariably facilitate cross-border investigations. The investigative programmes are organised domestically under the auspicious of the Malaysia Anti-Corruption Academy, or internationally.
Corruption, as we all know is a crime without boundaries. Hence, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission has also beefed up international investigation unit to cope with this new phenomenon, bribery of foreign public officials.
Last and not least, Malaysia is committed in taking important steps to facilitate rightful recoveries of proceeds of bribery and is prepared to set aside the obstacles of differing legal regimes, political chauvinism, suspicions and cultural differences, and adopt a common stand on the eradication of this new phenomenon, the offence of bribery of foreign public officials.
(The article was adopted from presentation by Mr Anthony Kevin Morais, Senior Deputy Public Prosecutor attached to the MACC, who made the presentation at an international conference – Shaping a New World: Combating Foreign Bribery in International Business Transactions which was held at Hyatt Hotel, Nusa Dua, Bali, Indonesia, organized by Corruption Eradication Commission (CEC), Indonesia in collaboration with the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD).
Written by: SAC Muhammad Salim Sundar, Head of Corporate Communication, MACC.
by : SylvesterLKC
Few days ago I went to somewhere in Ampang for my medical check-up. After the check-up of course I went back. Just before the junction the traffic was quite heavy, and that was unusual. Seems like an operation by the authority. They stop some of the cars and some move on, unluckily I was being stopped. I wind down; asking the officer what is the matter.
“You’re not wearing your seat belt.”
”But my officers said that they saw you not wearing.”
”But I did”, I replied.
”So?” I added.
He silent for a while then letting me go.
They really wanted it so much? But why let me go? Either they were scared, or they don’t want it. Which one you think?
The point is, they want bribery, and they want money. But, most of the time they only target at those who offended the regulations. They are targeting at their mind, that if the offenders pay, they will escape from legal action. When it comes to certain situation, these who take bribery will stop their action of taking; scare being caught. They already know when and where to take.
There are certain times where authority goes on operation again. Obviously they want to take, but they will not ask for it, they waited for the offenders to give, or offer. I heard this from someone, this offender was caught speeding, and then he slipped a note of 50 to the window pane while the officer checked his license and ID. After returning them, the note is gone and the officer let him go with an advice, don’t repeat it again.
The point is, there is already a mutual understanding between the giver and the taker. A simple collaboration without speaking. This was thought to have no proving evidence, but from the related authority, they had found ways to prove.
This is the old way, but always the choice of takers. They are the people who stand high on the top, or almost; both governmental and private agencies. These people will give order to the subordinate to do the action, and this subordinate will order someone else to do the job, so and so. The chain could involve more than 10. So if anything happen, that taker will give some money to the middle one, as a form of compensation so he would give himself out. The chain breaks, the taker’s safe.
The point is, people wanted to take, but scare being caught at the same moment, so he made a chain. But indeed, chain doesn’t really help. If the authority or the officials have the willpower to investigate, fully enough to eradicate corruption, I am sure that no matter how high you stand, you will be taken down, too.
Think again before you give. Think again before you take.
While ushering in the lunar year of Rabbit, politicians with or without public portfolio alike have been busy hopping from house to house on their annual Chinese New Year visits. The concept of Open House for all our Malaysian festivities is indeed a creative and laudable practice that is truly our homegrown tradition in Malaysia.
Perhaps, beyond all the stereotype seasonal greetings and pleasantries, we should do ourselves an honest audit of our prevailing depth of mutual understanding and sense of mutual appreciation for one another’s culture and norms in our social fabric.
Of late, racist slurs seem to be on the rise. Politicians from both sides of the divide have been endeavoring to outperform one another. If this is to be done in the interest of the people, healthy competition would certainly serve as a boon to the nation.
But so far what has been unfolding in front of the people is nothing but protracted political squabble laced with endless finger-pointing and mudslinging. Both sides are apparently interested only in proving the decadence in their opponents.
To the discerning Malaysian public, the degree of decadence in any politicians or political parties is of course worth alarming but mere expose of such decadence would unlikely render us more competitive in our pursuit of success in the global perspective.
The Malaysian voters cast their votes to seek good governance with sound check and balance in place. They don’t do it simply to catapult certain individuals to public portfolio, to make them instant millionaires. Neither would they want to install them to hog the limelight through mudslinging.
True, political decadence that exists in the form of corruption, power abuse and malpractices in the implementation of policies must be exposed and addressed. This should transcend partisan lines.
However, in the Malaysian perspective, our partisans seem to have developed a common habit of mounting offensive selectively against their rivals’ wrongdoings especially alleged graft involvement. But to the same malpractices within their own camp, they would either turn a blind eye or stubbornly cling to the same old denial syndrome. Much less would they endeavor proactively to address the issue.
Perhaps, this is deemed suicidal as it is said to be tantamount to shooting in one’s own foot. But I would say this is a real test to our commitment to upholding integrity. Anything falling short of that would only reveal the hypocritical nature and lip services of the politicians who use anti-graft merely for their own political gain.
Generally speaking, the graft malaise is not the monopoly of parties entrenched with power as many might have thought. Much to my dismay, many individual politicians or even parties having had their first taste of power have in many cases proven failed to resist such a graft temptation.
Honestly, upholding integrity is part and parcel of the public office holders’ duties and not something spectacular that warrants rewards. This is similar to our common norm that stealing common properties is an offence in the eyes of law. We don’t need to honour individuals for abiding the laws in this respect but those who flout them would certainly have to pay a price for their misdeeds.
Over the years, we have been taught that all men are equal before the laws. But in reality, this would in most cases remain a distant ideal. This provides us with room for further improvement in our anti-graft fight in the Year of Rabbit.
By NURBAITI HAMDAN
KUALA LUMPUR: Former Immigration deputy director-general Yusof Abu Bakar has been jailed a total of 56 years and fined a total of RM620,000 by a Sessions Court.
Judge Abu Bakar Katar, however, ordered the sentences on 14 bribery charges to run concurrently. Thus, Yusof will be required to serve only six years. The judge allowed an application by Yusof’s counsel for a stay pending appeal to the High Court.
Last Thursday, Yusof was found guilty of the charges involving RM121,500 over the approval of visit passes of Chinese nationals two years ago. He allegedly received the money from a sales manager between March 21 and June 25, 2008.
The offences were committed at his office in Putrajaya, at a hotel in Jalan Bukit Bintang and at the Caltex petrol station in Jalan Pudu. All the charges were under Section 11 (a) of the Anti-Corruption Act 1997 and punishable under Section 16 of the same act.
Abu Bakar had imposed the lowest jail term at two years and the highest at six years and the lowest fine at RM10,000 and the highest at RM92,000 for the 14 charges.
Earlier, Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohd Sophian Zakaria of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) objected to the application for a stay of execution, saying the defence had failed to show any special circumstances in the oral application.
UNIVERSITI KEBANGSAAN MALAYSIA
Oleh Zulkefle Bin Abd Hamid
Robert Klitgaard (2008) dalam artikelnya yang bertajuk “Universities Have the Responsibility to Tackle the World’s Toughest Problems” menyatakan kajian-kajian mengenai rasuah yang dilakukan di universiti merupakan salah satu daripada wadah yang paling berkesan untuk merungkai kekusutan jenayah keji ini dan “success stories” mengenainya hendaklah dikongsi.
Selaras dengan saranan beliau maka saya sebagai salah seorang daripada lapan pelopor Sarjana Sains Sosial (Pengajian Rasuah), Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) yang telah lulus dan dianugerahkan Ijazah Sarjana masing-masing pada 8 Ogos 2010 ingin berkongsi secara ringkas pengalaman sepanjang mengikuti pengajian ini. Daripada lapan orang lulusan tersebut, empat orang daripadanya adalah pegawai dibiayai sepenuhnya oleh Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM).
Bermula daripada bulan Julai 2008 hingga Disember 2009, kami telah didedahkan kepada pelbagai tajuk kursus. Pembelajaran adalah melalui kuliah, lawatan pemeriksaan tapak dan lawatan sambil belajar. Tajuk-tajuk kursus yang diajar melalui kuliah adalah seperti Kriminologi; Undang-Undang dan Jenayah Rasuah; Etika, Governan dan Rasuah; dan Penyiasatan dan Pengurusan Rasuah. Forensik Penyiasatan pula merangkumi Forensik Komputer, Forensik Pembinaan dan Forensik Perakaunan. Gambaran sebenar ruang dan peluang perlakuan rasuah dalam bidang pembinaan diperlihatkan kepada kami menerusi lawatan pemeriksaan tapak di Johor Bahru. Bagi Projek Penanda Arasan, kami telah membuat lawatan sambil belajar ke Singapura untuk memahami, mendapatkan idea, mengkaji “best practices” Corrupt Investigation Bureau (CPIB), Singapore Police Force dan Capitaland dalam menyumbang kepada kelestarian Singapura di tangga kelima Corruption Perception Index (CPI).
Sebagai salah sebuah Universiti Penyelidikan di Malaysia, kami diperlukan oleh UKM untuk menyedia dan melaksanakan Projek Penyelidikan Pengajian Rasuah. Tajuk-tajuk tesis berkenaan adalah seperti berikut:-
|1.||Zulkefle Bin Abd Hamid||SPRM||Motif Informer Bekerjasama Dengan Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia: Satu Kajian Kes.|
|2.||Rosdi Bin Hassan||SPRM||Pencarian Maklumat Berkaitan Rasuah: Satu Kajian Exploratory Dalam Kalangan Pegawai Penyiasat Bahagian SiasatanIbu Pejabat SPRM Putrajaya.|
|3.||Jamil Bin Mohd Dahalan||SPRM||Program-Program Pencegahan Rasuah Di Bawah SPRM: Satu Kajian.|
|4.||Ab Muneim Bin Ibrahim||SPRM||Prosedur Pelucuthakan Harta Mengikut Akta Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia 2009.|
|5.||Liong Sau Lai||PDRM||PDRM dan Jenayah Rasuah Dalam Kalangan Pegawai Rendah Polis.|
|6.||Abdul Halim Bin Yaacob||PDRM||Skim Kawalan Disiplin dan Dadah: Peranan Penyelia Terhadap Subordinat.|
|7.||Nor Yatimah Bte Yamin||TNB||Peranan dan Fungsi Penggerak Etika: Kajian Kes Dalam Memerangi Isu Rasuah.|
|8.||Tahir Bin Khalib||Pesara SPRM||Pengalaman Pengadu Bekerjasama Lagi Dengan SPRM: Satu Kajian Kes.|
Rintisan ini diharap akan menjadi pemangkin kepada pembangunan diri kami sebagai modal insan dan seterusnya memberi manfaat kepada organisasi masing-masing.
by : UKM Newsportal
UKM produced first corruption busters at Masters level
Tuesday, 10 August 2010 18:21
By Abdul Ghani Nasir
BANGI, 10 AUGUST, 2010 – The fight against corruption has been given more bite with eight officers getting their Master’s degree in Corruption Studies from Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia today.
Each of the graduates carried out detailed studies on every aspect of corruption dan learned more about the scourge. Is it hoped that their studies, analysis and visits to a foreign country will make them better equipped, more analytical and capable while being more sensitive when carrying out their duties. This is the first such programme here.
Those receiving their degrees were Jamil bin Mohd Dahalan, Zulkefle bin Abd Hamid, Ab Muneim bin Ibrahim, Tahir bin Khalib, Rosdi bin Hassan, Abdul Halim bin Yacob, Nor Yatimah binti Yamin and Liong Sau Lai. Except for Tahir, 59, who is retired and studied to increasing his knowledge, seven of his classmates are still working.
Jamil, 43, served the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency for 20 years and came back to UKM after studying for his bachelor’s degree in business administartion.
The task of fighting corruption is always attractive to him as his father is a former soldier who instilled disipline in his son. For this thesis Jamil wrote about the various programes formulated by SPRM to fight corruption and hoped the commission would be given responsibility of prosecution.
He, however, admitted that in every prosecuting case, they must not be any doubt and every case should be ‘water-tight’.
Nor Yatimah, 43, who possessed a diploma in public administration is now pursuing a bachelor’s degree in juirspudence resolved to fight corruption in the country.
She wrote a thesis – Roles and functions of whistle blowers: Case studies especially in combating corruption.
Whistle blowers, she said, is a concept with regards to efforts to expose malpractices, misconduct, practices and/ or omission and not lawful which happened in an organisation.
With this regards the sincerity of the informer to expose corrupt practices of someone is very important to expedite investigation.
Nor Yatimah felt everybody should hate and feel ashamed in being corrupt in order to ensure our country is free from corruption.
One of the subject in their studies is benchmarking which requires them to go to Singapore to study how the Police Force, Capital Land (a GLC company) and the CPIB, the agency which investigates corruption in the republic helps the goverment there to fight corruptices.
Zulkefle, 43, told how the former Prime Minsiter of Singapore, Lee Kuan Yew willingly allowed the CPIB to investigate for wrongdoings in their purchasing their houses in the Orchard Road area a few years ago.
Investigations continued despite the fact taht the Prime Minister then, Goh Chok Tong was not that happy with the episode. The CPIB investigations showed no wrongdoings on the part of both Lee and his son, the Deputy PM at that time.
Zulkefle who got his Bachelor of Bussiness Administration degree from Ohio University United State wrote his master’s degree thesis on The Motive of Informers Cooperate with SPRM: A case study.
Assistant Superintendant of Police, Liong Sau Lai, 34,felt that the people will be more confident and support efforts to eradicate corruption when leaders give undivided support and will not compromise.
For an officer who had served the force since 2000, Liong refuted any suggestion that policemen are easy to bribe.
“It this is true most of them should be rich but they are still as they are today with small pay and are not prosperous,’ said the wife of a businessman who wrote a thesis on – PDRM and corruption among the lower ranking policemen.|
Rosdi Hassan, 46 and his colleague Abdul Muneim , 40 felt that corruption were still condoned by some and it eradication needed the co-operation of all if it was to succeed. Rosdi obtained his first degree in education from Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris in 1998. His thesis was – ‘Searching for information concerning corruption: ‘Exploratory study among investigating officers in the investigation division SPRM Headquarters, Putrajaya’.
Muneim who had served SPRM for 13 years wrote his master’s thesis on – ‘Procedures in seizing assets according to the SPRM Act 2009’.
Halim Yaacob, 46 is now more confident in his work at the Police College, Cheras. Halim who is the Head of Religious and Counselling wrote on –‘Controlled Scheme on Discipline and Drugs: The role of Supervisors towards Subordinates’.
Courtesy of TheStar Online
Tuesday July 27, 2010
KUALA LUMPUR: Corruption cases involving civil servants have declined, said Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) deputy chief Datuk Zakaria Jaafar.
This was shown in the figures from 2007 to last year, he said at an anti-corruption drive launched by Federal Territories and Urban Wellbeing Minister Datuk Raja Nong Chik Raja Zainal Abidin yesterday.
Zakaria warned that the giving as well as the taking of bribes were both serious offences and they carried the same punishment.
In his speech, Raja Nong Chik said the campaign, themed We Hate Corruption, serves as a warning to the public that civil servants are not easily bribed and have high integrity.
“Almost 90% of bribe givers are those who had previously committed crime and had faced enforcement action for various offences, including smuggling, illegal logging and mining, distribution and misuse of drugs and human trafficking,” Raja Nong Chik said in his speech.
Raja Nong Chik also said that the campaign, jointly organised by the MACC and Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL), is one of the ways to increase the integrity and efficiency of the civil service, specifically among enforcement officers who largely deal with the public.
Mayor Datuk Seri Ahmad Fuad Ismail said DBKL started its own Integrity Unit in March 2008 to organise integrity strengthening programmes for its officers and staff.
To mark the event, 14 officers from DBKL, the National Anti-Drug Agency (AADK) as well as from the police, immigration and the fire and rescue departments received special MACC awards for integrity.
An anti-corruption exhibition is being held at the Menara DBKL lobby until July 30.
Oleh : MalaysiaKini
Panel Penilaian Operasi SPRM bersetuju dengan cadangan SPRM untuk menutup tiga kertas siasatan kes berprofil tinggi dan tidak mengambil tindakan lanjut.
Pengerusi Panel Penilaian Operasi SPRM, Tan Sri Hadenan Jalil, berkata kes berkenaan adalah membabitkan Menteri Kesihatan, Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai; bekas Menteri Pengangkutan, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat dan Menteri Besar Selangor, Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim.
Panel bersetuju kertas siasatan berkenaan ditutup kerana faktor-faktor tertentu, antaranya tiada saksi.
Dalam kes Ong, bekas presiden MCA itu didakwa menerima derma RM10 juta daripada Tiong King Sing dari Kuala Dimensi.
Kes kedua pula membabitkan kereta jenis Alphard yang diberikan kepada isteri Menteri Kesihatan, Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai.
Pada sidang media hari ini, panel itu bersetuju untuk menutup dua kes pertama kerana kekurangan bukti.
Bagi kes yang membabitkan Khalid pula, panel beranggapan tiada amalan rasuah kerana ia adalah majlis orang ramai.
Sejak kita dihidangkan dengan cerita-cerita panas berhubung kerakusan si pencuri pasir di Selangor, terdapat juga beberapa suara-suara sumbang yang menggesa SPRM untuk mengambil tindakan segera ke atas kes ini.
Kenapa dan mengapa SPRM pula digesa untuk mengambil tindakan segera ke atas isu pasir ini? Mengapa tidak digesa dan dihentam agensi-agensi yang sepatutnya bertanggungjawab terus perihal isu kecurian pasir ini, contohnya Exco yang terbabit, Pejabat Tanah dan Galian (PTG), Majlis Daerah, Pejabat daerah, Jabatan Alam Sekitar, PDRM dan Jabatan Pengangkutan Jalan.
Mengapa bila kes penjualan arak di negeri Selangor suatu ketika dulu, beberapa Exco Selangor dilihat menjadi hero mengeluarkan pelbagai kenyataan dan turut turun padang. Kenapa pula bila melibatkan isu pasir, semuanya senyap macam tikus mondok? Atau mereka ini sebenarnya cuba menjaga periuk nasi masing-masing. Mana pergi Exco-Exco yang dulunya melenting tak tentu hala seperti Ronnie Liu, Elizabeth Wong dan Theresa Kok. Mengapa berdiam sahaja YB? Apakah isu pasir ini tidak penting, tiada elemen national interest dan tidak ada news value untuk diperjuangkan.
Kenapa YB Kapar turut berdiam diri sejak pendedahan yang dibuat di media kononnya banyak sangat bukti-bukti yang melibatkan amalan rasuah dalam syarikat yang dilantik Kerajaan Selangor bagi urusan pasir. Di mana dan apakah tindakan yang dibuat oleh Kerajaan Negeri dalam soal ini? Kenapa didiamkan sahaja? Jika tiada penyelewengan dan rasuah sebagaimana yang didakwa YB Kapar, kepada kecurian pasir ini dilihat semakin berleluasa.
Bagi agensi-agensi kerajaan yang disebutkan di atas, mengapa berdiam diri dan takut bertindak? Adakah mulut, kaki dan tangan kalian semua diikat oleh pihak-pihak terlibat bagi mengelakkan sebarang tindakan. Di mana letakkan nya maruah diri, integriti dan kredibiliti agensi-agensi yang terlibat yang jelas membayangkan mereka bersekongkol dengan pencuri-pencuri pasir ini.
Tindakan YB Yaakop Sapari menahan lori-lori pasir yang bergerak pada sebelah malam di Puchong amat dipuji. Mana perginya penguatkuasaan? Mana perginya JPJ atau PDRM? Bukankah peraturan jelas memperuntukkan masa tertentu untuk pergerakan lori-lori pengangkut pasir ini. Takkanlah Ketua Setiausaha Negara sendiri kena turun padang untuk jalankan operasi khas. Tan Sri KSN wajar ambil tindakan tegas ke atas Ketua-Ketua Jabatan berkaitan kerana gagal menjalankan amanah yang dipertanggungjawabkan dan turut bersekongkol dengan penjenayah.
Kes kecurian pasir bukan tugas hakiki SPRM. Tidak ada pun dalam undang-undang SPRM 2009 memperuntukkan kuasa SPRM untuk siasat kes kecurian pasir. Diharapkan SPRM tidak menyahut gesaan pihak-pihak terbabit untuk siasat kes pasir kerana selama ini pun ada antara suara-suara sumbang mengatakan semua tindakan SPRM berkaitan pasir khususnya di Selangor adalah konspirasi untuk jatuhkan Kerajaan Negeri.
Mengapalah isu-isu kecurian pasir ini tidak begitu kronik di lain-lain negeri yang terlibat seperti Perak dan Johor. Ini kerana Kerajaan Perak dan Johor amat serius mengambil langkah pencegahan terhadap isu ini dengan memanggil semua agensi-agensi yang terlibat untuk duduk semeja bagi mengatasinya. Bukan macam Selangor yang asyik berpolitik sehingga semua tindakan dianggap konspirasi cuba jatuhkan mereka. Adakah rasuah yang dimasukkan ke dalam akaun dan perkhidmatan seks yang diterima dianggap konspirasi juga? Semasa terima duit dan buat maksiat tidak terfikir pula bahawa ia berdosa dan konspirasi. Dah habis duit dan lepas merasa baru terasa ia konspirasi. Hanya tuhan sahaja yang tahu apa dalam fikiran mereka yang terlibat. Siapa makan cili dia rasa pedas.
Seakan-akan menjadi satu trend di kalangan masyarakat dan pemimpin-pemimpin politik dalam membahasakan sesuatu isu mengikut musim-musim tertentu. Pendedahan berhubung isu pasir ini menjadi panas seketika di awal tahun 2010 ini bilamana SPRM mendedahkan siasatan ke atas 42 orang yang ditangkap seluruh negara berhubung amalan rasuah bagi mendalangi kegiatan mencuri dan menyeludup pasir ke negara jiran. Namun cerita ini, panas seketika dan didiamkan sahaja tanpa apa-apa tindakan susulan yang benar-benar serius untuk mengekang permasalahan ini.
Sekali lagi isu pasir ini timbul bilamana Ahli Parlimen Kapar menimbulkan syak wasangkanya terhadap amalan rasuah dan penyalahgunaan kuasa yang dikatakan berlaku dalam syarikat yang diberikan tanggungjawab untuk menguruskan isu pasir di Negeri Selangor. Panas seketika dan hasil berdolak-dalik pemerintah, ia senyap seketika.
Sejak kebelakangan ini isu pasir ini sekali lagi timbul dan menjadi semakin panas sehingga dibahaskan di Dewan Undangan Negeri Selangor dan di Parlimen. Apa yang disesalkan adalah terlalu banyak kenyataan-kenyataan yang dikeluarkan oleh pelbagai pihak berhubung isu pasir ini.
Satu pihak mengatakan ini tanggungjawab Negeri, Di pihak lain pula menuduh persekutuan yang sepatutnya bertanggungjawab. Ia tak ubah seperti mana lirik dalam lagu kanak-kanak Bangau Oh Bangau. Masing-masing cuba mengelakkan tanggungjawab dan sering mencari kesalahan orang lain sebagai punca. Akhirnya yang merana adalah rakyat yang mana kehidupan mereka semakin terancam disebabkan pencemaran alam sekitar yang teruk disebabkan kegiatan mencuri pasir.
Seharusnya episod tuduh menuduh ini dihentikan kerana ia amat memalukan. Sebagai rakyat, saya merasakan Kerajaan negeri Selangor wajar bertanggungjawab sepenuhnya dalam hal ini. Ini kerana yang di ceroboh adalah tanah dalam bidang kuasa mereka sendiri. Kenapa harus menyalahkan orang lain pula bila mereka sendiri gagal menguruskan hal rumah tangga sendiri? Bukankah dalang di sebalik kegiatan mencuri pasir ini sebenarnya adalah syarikat yang dibentuk oleh Kerajaan Selangor sendiri? Siapa sebenarnya yang mempunyai kepentingan dalam keanggotaan syarikat tersebut?
Saya berasa amat hairan kerana kerakusan menceroboh, mencuri dan menyeludup pasir ini dapat dikawal di lain-lain negeri. Kenapa pula di Selangor, semakin didedah semakin dalam pula lombong-lombong pasir terbentuk? Apakah ini kesannya kekebalan pegawai-pegawai negeri dan pemimpin-pemimpin mereka? Manakan tidak, bila sahaja dipanggil untuk membantu siasatan oleh pihak berkuasa, alasan diberikan ialah konspirasi menjatuhkan Kerajaan Negeri. Sampai bilakah Kerajaan Negeri Selangor mahu berselindung di sebalik isu konspirasi ini bagi menutup segala kelemahan dan kepincangan kepimpinan mereka? Negeri Selangor memerlukan kepimpinan negeri yang prihatin dengan kebajikan rakyat, isu alam sekitar, kemajuan dan pembangunan yang seimbang bukannya tokoh korporat yang hanya mengejar serta mementingkan keuntungan semata-mata.
Isu pasir ini tidak akan selesai sekiranya kesemua pihak yang menuding jari tidak duduk semeja membincangkan langkah dan penguatkuasaannya.
The Malaysian Police Force, most of time being called as man in blue, are well trained with much emphasize on values and integrity. These individuals are willingly sacrificing their selves to safe guard the community and nation. They put duty a head of their family and leisure. Nevertheless, there are a handful few who do not uphold the integrity instilled in themselves, by involving in a number of activities especially corruption for self gain. This rare breed has tarnished the good names of the force. Otherwise, in totality these lots were the nation’s heroes who are there to keep peace and order.
Due to the rare cases of corruption involving a small number of individuals in the force, these lots were perceived to be corrupted without exceptions. When a traffic cop stops a motorist for traffic offences, he is perceived to trying to obtain gratification. Likewise, when there are activities or incidences of gambling, illegal lottery, punters, illegal road racings, house breakings and even drug users then again these lots were accused of being corrupt. Not many of the civil society blame the culprits but the Police.
The Police force themselves are to be blame for the misconstrued facts for not enforcing the law empowered to them. They seem to have not taken actions against many law-breakers. The public expects the Police force to wipe out crime, illegal lottery, loan sharks, prostitution dens, illegal massage parlours, drug pushers so on and so forth. Even though in reality, they have been successfully solving many crimes and illegal activities but in the eyes of the public they had not done enough due to the many criminal and illegal activities in the surroundings of the neighbourhood. There are still drug addicts loitering in the neighbourhood, there are thefts, house breakings, illegal road racings, prostitute dens, night clubs and karaoke with many immigrants while the force had been approved with addition manpower, upgrading of ranks of their personnel, new vehicles, new stations and even fund allocations. These new and additional resources did not commensurate with what they have done since.
One can see many banners and advertisements or even leaf-lets and fliers being hanged or distributed on loans with hand-phone numbers for the potential borrowers. The public perceive these advertisements are by loan sharks but the Police seem had not been able to apprehend them or they themselves are in the take. Thus, the Police force has no other choice but work harder to eradicate all these criminal and illegal activities.
The Police force must not only be effective in fighting crimes but must also be seen and felt really effective by the public. The public will only perceive that the force is effective if they feel safe, if there are no criminal or illegal activities in their neighbourhood and of course if the personnel do not involve in malpractices.
Sometimes back in late April 2010, the Inspector General of Police and other head of enforcement agencies on the initiative of the MACC had signed a pledge to fight the givers. Likewise, all the State Police Chief had done the same in their respective states. The MACC prior to the ceremony and subsequent to the signing of the pledge had announced through radio, television and print medias that they had launched a campaign in the fight against the givers. The public had been warned not to try to bribe the civil servants especially the enforcement personnel. However, there are not many news on the arrest of the bribe givers that had been reported especially cases of alleged offering of bribes to Police personnel. There had not been many charges for offences of bribery to Police personnel.
Check with the MACC showed that for year 2010 till mid June there were about 144 arrests made against the givers of bribe. The statistics showed that there were 38 arrests by the headquarters, 32 in Johore, 17 in Negeri Sembilan, 9 each in Selangor and Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur, 8 in Pahang, 7 in Perak, 4 each in Kedah, Penang and Sabah, 3 each in Labuan, Sarawak and Malacca, 2 in Terengganu, 1 in Perlis and none in Kelantan. Analysis made on the total number of arrest showed only 80 out of the 144 arrests were related to Police. 58 arrests were for bribery involving traffic offences, 9 were for trying to avoid criminal charges, 10 for drug related offences and 3 involving theft.
Surely the 80 arrests made related to bribery to Police personnel is not acceptable when compared to the total number of the force manpower which is around 800,000 and worst still when there were no arrest made by the police in most of the states. Are we going to say that there were no attempts to bribe Police personnel? Otherwise, the public is given no other choice but to perceive that the Police personnel are still in the take or corrupted. This fact can easily be confirmed by a simple survey from a sample of respondent questioned if they had ever offered or even given bribe to police to avoid being taken action for offences that warrants an action by the police.
In comparison, there were still many numbers of arrests against police personnel for offences of corruption. Till date, the MACC has reported a total of 45 arrests against police personnel for various malpractices. This shows that the police is not sincere in the fight against corruption. They were in fact not shown any indications that they are really serious in eradicating corruption within the force. They seem do not care if they were labelled as ‘corrupted lots’.
The revealed statistics shows that either the police are not serious in the fight against corruption or they were reluctant to arrest or report any offers of corruption for not wanting to loose their ‘corrupt’ incomes. This view is further confirmed by a recent exposure by the TV3 crew on granite Lorries alleged monthly payments of RM300.00 for a sticker that assures no action by the enforcement agencies which includes the police and the Road Transport Department. Many news highlights showed that the police only reports corruption when it conducts joint operations with the MACC. Without the presence of the MACC officers it seems there were no offers of bribe to them. There were only a significant number of arrests made by the police themselves against the givers of bribe.
The Inspector General of Police and the Chief Police Officers of the states have to issue directives to their subordinates to not hesitate to make arrest against any bribe givers. They even can make it compulsory for every contingent to make sure a certain number of arrests were reported monthly. The contingents that reports the most number of arrest against the bribe givers shall be given a recognition by letters of appreciation. Such contingents should also be rewarded with extra fund allocations for their welfare and enhancing facilities either to the stations or living quarters.
The police have no other choice but to report as many bribery attempts as possible to avoid perception that they were corrupted lots. Reporting attempts of bribery will give a new image to the police and the public will surely support the force in their fight against crime. The public has shined away from reporting crime or to tip off the police on any criminal activities because they distrust the police integrity. Further more when reports or information given to the police were not taken action and sometimes the informants were harassed by the criminals.
Police integrity and accountability is the utmost value that will ensure a wind of change towards the perception against the force.