Wrong to appoint PAC members as Ministers?
The term “gratification” under the MACC Act includes “any office,” which surely must include ministerial positions, while the term “public body” must by definition include the PAC.
Mark Clements, FMT
Former Public Accounts Committee (PAC) chairman Nur Jazlan Mohamed is reported today to have told the Malaysian Insider that the appointments of four members of the bipartisan parliamentary committee investigating 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) was a “promotion” which they deserved.
Speaking of the appointments of Wilfred Tangau, Reezal Merican, Mas Ermiyatie Shamsuddin and himself to the Cabinet last week, Nur Jazlan suggested that “people should look positively at the promotions as they are to refresh the leadership ranks with younger and better people who have served PAC well.”
Yesterday also saw Barisan Nasional strategic director Abdul Rahman Dahlan ask if “it (was) fair to deny (Nur Jazlan) the opportunity to advance his political career,” according to Malaysiakini. He went on to justify Nur Jazlan’s acceptance of a deputy ministerial post by saying that he ought not to be deprived of the opportunity.
So, it seems clear then that the four PAC members’ appointments were “promotions” and “opportunities” for them to “advance” their “political careers,” which they took. But should they have?
The system of separation of powers enshrined in the Federal Constitution means that Parliament is independent of the Executive, and operates as a check and balance towards it.
The PAC was specifically entrusted by Parliament with an investigation into the conduct of 1MDB, a state -owned company for which the Executive was fully responsible. Any act which would amount to a sabotage of the performance by the PAC of its functions ought to be seen as a contempt of Parliament.
