NFC scandal makes mockery of Malaysian rule of law
Since the whole world, not to mention Malaysians, have already had access to the minutest details of NFC’s offences – including the exact breaches of the loan agreement – through the Internet, what further information does the AG want before he would consent to prosecution? If this is not an act of willful obstruction of justice, then what is?
Kim Quek
Controversial women’s affairs minister Shahrizat Jalil’s so-called resignation on April 8 once again brought to limelight the Barisan Nasional government’s utter impotence to deal with a crisis of high corruption allegation.
Almost five months after the National Feedlot Corporation (NFC) scandal broke out, when the public has already been flooded with innumerable details of criminal improprieties that have leaked out incessantly, the only outcome that we have seen is this departure of Shahrizat from the cabinet. And even this event is not an act on the part of anybody; Shahrizat was not sacked, nor did she resign, her status as minister merely becomes legally void when her term as a senator comes to an end on April 8, as under our constitution only a member of parliament or a senator can become a minister.
Though a corruption of RM250 million is no big deal by Barisan Nasional (BN) standards, it is the contemptuous disregard for corruption laws by the BN top hierarchy and the criminal negligence of our civil servants that have irked an increasingly disillusioned public. Topping it all, is the reluctance of our law-enforcing bodies – Malaysian anti-corruption commission (MACC), police, attorney general – to act against the culprits.
To start with, the family of Shahrizat should never have been awarded this pivotal project to transform the beef production and supply industry, as it has neither the financial capacity nor the business wherewithal to undertake it.
And not surprisingly, once landed suddenly with this windfall on its lap – the RM250 million soft loan and the RM13 million grant – the Shahrizat family ran wild with splurging by buying luxurious assets such as high-end condos and premium land, as well as operating high class restaurants and supermarkets at home and oversea; while failing to fulfill its primary objective which is to develop the feedlot industry as contractually stipulated.
SCANDAL IN PERSPECTIVE
To put this scandal in proper perspective, the potential criminal offences fall into two parts: the dubious award of the project, and its questionable execution.
There was obvious favoritism and conflict of interests when such a plum contract was granted to the family of a cabinet minister, more so when that family is manifestly unqualified to receive it.
In any corruption case of this nature, there is always a giver and a taker. In this case, Shahrizat is considered the beneficiary when her family became the recipient of the loan, grant and project contract, for it is obvious that her husband and children couldn’t possibly have been considered since they had no merits of their own to justify such consideration. That leaves us with the only possible explanation: Shahrizat’s connection to the decision-makers in the cabinet.
That there was heavy favoritism is further evidenced from the cavalier and irresponsible manner with which the project was granted. There was apparently no proper project paper submitted prior to the award, otherwise the finance ministry would not have eventually suspended disbursement pending the completion of a “viability and business model project study” in 2011 – three years after the loan was granted – when the project seemed to have moved only at snail’s pace, as reported in the Auditor General’s latest report. Further, there was the highly irregular indulgence of allowing the loan and grant to be disbursed well before the project agreement was signed.
How do you call the award of such an important project involving hundreds of million of public funds without even the existence of a proper project study and proposal? If it is not collusion, corruption and criminal negligence of the highest order, then what is?
Who are the decision makers – the givers – in this corruption case? They are the then agriculture minister Muhyiddin Yassin and the high impact project committee headed by the then deputy prime minister Najib Razak.
It is the duty of the MACC to scrutinize the entire decision-making process and bring both culprits – the giver and the taker – to books. Regrettably, nothing seems to have come out from their investigations.
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE, BREACH OF TRUST
With regards to the highly questionable execution of the project, possible criminal offences are found in a) willful negligence by government officials to monitor and control the implementation of project and disbursement of loan and grant, and b) breach of trust by NFC in miss-use of public funds in contravention of both the loan agreement and the project agreement.
While offences under a) fall under the jurisdiction of MACC, offences under b) are being pursued by the police.
To date, there is no sign that MACC has even started on its investigation on the government officials involved.
As for the police, they have completed their investigation, but prosecution is being stalled by the attorney general, who has repeatedly returned the police investigation report in the past few months, each time asking for “further investigation”, the last such request being made more than a month ago.
Since the whole world, not to mention Malaysians, have already had access to the minutest details of NFC’s offences – including the exact breaches of the loan agreement – through the Internet, what further information does the AG want before he would consent to prosecution? If this is not an act of willful obstruction of justice, then what is?
While this tragic comedy of merry-go-round is going on with regards to the resolution of this high corruption crisis, Malaysians should have no more illusion of what Prime Minister Najib Razak can or cannot do to restore the rule of law to this country.
