Posted on by Kit

“Freedom for Sale” scandal – IGP and Dy Minister forced to “smoke peace-pipe”

The RM5.5 million “freedom for sale” allegations have ballooned out to become a major scandal of the Abdullah premiership, affecting the efficiency, professionalism and integrity not only of the police and the Deputy Internal Security Minister, Datuk Mohd Johari Baharom but also the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi who is also the Internal Security Minister.

This scandal should not have happened if the 125 recommendations of the Royal Police Commission to establish an efficient, incorruptible, professional world-class police service had been taken seriously by the Prime Minister, Cabinet and the Police and the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) been set up and running.

Malaysians are shocked by the revelations of the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Musa Hassan and Johari in their attempt to blame the other party for the RM5.5 million “freedom for sale” scandal.

Subsequent attempts by both of them to retract or clarify their statements have failed to minimize the damage of their earlier utterances which constitute damning evidence that something is very rotten with the administration of justice and the upholding of law and order in the country.

In his clarification yesterday on his Sunday interview where he admitted that he was the target of the RM5 million “freedom for sale” allegations posted on the Internet, Johari said the opinion of the legal adviser or ministry official is sought in cases where the Advisory Board recommends a release or suspension of detention order under the Emergency Ordinance (EO).

Their opinion is for the sake of obtaining the grounds to be applied by the Advisory Board in its recommendation for a release or suspension of detention order, he said.

This clarification was necessary as Johari had accused the police of being sloppy, slipshod and using the EO as “a shortcut to detain suspects who have insufficient incriminating evidence against them”, conveying the picture that as the Deputy Minister, he was the bulwark standing up for the fundamental rights of the detained suspects and a check on the abuses and misuses of power by the police.

Johari gave the example of the 48 EO detention cases from Simpang Rengam detention centre which went before the Advisory Board last month, resulting in the release of 31 and 17 placed under restricted residence.

If the police had been sloppy and slipshod in EO detentions, as in the case of the 48 EO cases last month, Johari cannot disclaim responsibility as he was the one who exercised the ministerial authority to sign and order their formal detention.

Furthermore, the Advisory Board has no powers to order the release or substitution of restricted residence for any EO detainee, but like Internal Security Act cases, only the power to make recommendations — and the Advisory Board’s recommendation whether ISA or EO is not automatically accepted.

How could such a mistaken impression be conveyed — is it the fault of Johari or the reporters? I have studied the transcript of Johari’s interview on Sunday and there can be no doubt that reporters did not make any mistake in correctly reporting what Johari had said. Either Johari had deliberately made a misrepresentation of the division of responsibilities and powers under EO, or he himself did not fully understand the respective allocation of powers and responsibilities under EO.

What is most damaging are other allegations made by Johari about the sloppy, slipshod and most unprofessional manner of the police in carrying out their great powers under the EO — such as late submission of files to him for the formal detention under EO and the police release of detainees under Section 3(1) of EO without informing the ministry.

What the IGP did is even more stunning, making a bald denial that he had made a statement as published in yesterday’s Utusan Malaysia front-page lead story, “Saya mahu BPR siasat Johari”.

In a statement published only by Bernama, Musa said he had neither been interviewed nor had he issued a statement as published.

The Utusan Malaysia story, by-lined Ruhaidini Abd. Kadir, had reported that Musa had said he did not want to enter into a polemic with Mohd Johari over a claim that the police fail to provide sufficient evidence and do not investigate properly criminals referred to under the Emergency Ordinance.

Musa was reported to have called for a fair investigation to be conducted by the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) to determine who was right and wrong in the allegation that Johari received RM5 million bribes for releasing criminal suspects under the Emergency Ordinance.

Who to believe — the Utusan Malaysia journalist Ruhaidini Abd. Kadir or IGP Musa?

I would tend to believe Rahaidini for two reasons:
Firstly, the Utusan Malaysia front-page report yesterday carried a Q & A transcript of the interview with Musa — something which could not be concocted from thin air.

Secondly, if Rahaidini had concocted the interview in yesterday’s Utusan Malaysia, Musa should have declared him a “persona non grata” and ban him from all police interviews and contacts.

But no, Musa continued to entertain Rahaidini, resulting in another front-page by-line story in the Utusan Malaysia, “Polis siasat suspek — Kenal pasti tahan bawah Ordinan Darurat boleh bebas — Musa”.

Musa and Johari may have been forced to publicly “smoke the peace-pipe” but public interests require that the grave questions and allegations which each had hurled against the other party be given full and satisfactory answer instead of being swept under the carpet.

The RM5.5 million “Freedom for Sale” scandal has the unintended consequence of surfacing another equally big scandal — that the country has an Internal Security Minister only in name while Johari as the Deputy Internal Security is the de facto Minister exercising all the EO powers including signing and ordering formal detentions without trial for criminal suspects.

The practice of the deputy minister exercising Ministerial powers is meant to be the exception and not the rule, but here, we have the exception becoming the rule. We have Johari the Deputy Internal Security Minister exercising all the Ministerial powers under the EO with regarding to detention of criminal suspects without trial, because Prime Minister Abdullah is the “absentee” Internal Security Minister as well as “absentee” Finance Minister.

This is a most unsatisfactory state of affairs and must not be allowed to continue. As Abdullah is unable to be a hands-on Minister in both Ministries, he must decide to relinquish one of them not only to be a model for the entire Cabinet, but to be fair to the country and people.

18 Replies to ““Freedom for Sale” scandal – IGP and Dy Minister forced to “smoke peace-pipe””

  1. I am sorry for this deviation from the topic but please do visit this link to read something which is superbly inhumane comment:
    http://www.thesundaily.com/article.cfm?id=17166
    He refers to Health Minister Chua Soi Lek.
    —-
    He said from 2004 to 2007, a total of 240,000 trainees had undergone the programme and the eight deaths which occurred, contributed only to 0.0033% of the mortality rate.

    “Based on the captive population of 240,000 trainees, the rate of death is much more smaller than the general population, which is one death per 1,000. It is the undue publicity that generated the anxiety of the parents,” he said.
    —-

    What the hell? “contributed ONLY to 0.0033% of the mortality rate”? doesnt he know that even 1 death is a big problem for the national training program? If I go by his saying, then he should just commit suicide because his death compared to the whole population of Bodoh-Land is even less than 0.0033% which means that his death will be insignificant. In fact, why not have all the corrput bn members, ACA, judges die. I am again sure that if compared to the population of the country, it will be insignificant.
    Uncle Kit, please grill him for his inhumane comments. Do not let him off with the usual “I was misquoted” lie again.

  2. We must continue to press for the establishment of the IPCMC and not let it die or be forgotten. Is the Attorney General’s office still looking into it?

    There should be a serious attempt to get rid of ‘little Napoleons’ in the government administration. Pak Lah is constantly reminding, wanting and calling for this and that to be done. This indicates he’s is not and never was in control of things and his workers are just ignoring him. All hot air rises and dissipates into thin air with nothing to show for it.

    Co-operation and the delivery systems in the civil service can be greatly improved. What is the KPI of MAMPU the manpower planning unit? A frustrated friend of mine called it MAMPUS and wonder why its only a UNIT? Does it still exist?

  3. Uncle Kit “Who to believe – the Utusan Malaysia journalist Ruhaidini Abd. Kadir or IGP Musa?”.
    This is now a big problem – who to believe when reading news; the news media or the official one by Bernama. The SAME thing happened in the delays in the completion of the Sultanah Bahiyah HOSPITAL. Samy was blamed the Health Ministry for the delays (Bernama, Mar 04). The Health Minister Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek, Monday denied that the delay in the completion of Sultanah Bahiyah Hospital in Alor Star was due to the ministry’s FAULT as it kept revising its scope of services (reported by Bernama, dated 5th March, “Chua DENIES Hospital’s Delay Due To Health Ministry’s Fault”
    And in the NST dated 06 Mar 2007; Ridzwan Abdullah,
    “Delay of Sultanah Bahiyah Hospital project: Health Ministry ACCEPTS blame” If you read one and not the other, you will hold all the wrong believes and perceptions of what is going on. More details at:
    http://powerpresent.blogspot.com/2007/03/sultanah-bahiyah-hospital-delays-samy.html

  4. “Prime Minister Abdullah is the “absentee” Internal Security Minister as well as “absentee” Finance Minister.

    This is a most unsatisfactory state of affairs and must not be allowed to continue. As Abdullah is unable to be a hands-on Minister in both Ministries, he must decide to relinquish one of them not only to be a model for the entire Cabinet, but to be fair to the country and people.”

    Apparently Abdullah thought he could be like Mahathir. The difference is Mahathir had control whereas Abdullah would like to believe he had control.

    The purpose in holding on to the different portfolios is so that he has the last say in the decision-making process. It works only if he has the kind of control Mahathir had. It makes a mockery of the system because clearly these are major portfolios requiring attention.

  5. Extending Count Dracula point:
    PM AAB will continue to trumpet that “I’m in control”.
    OK, OK, MR PM, if you insist, if you say so.

    But to almost all Malaysians, they’ll follow your words, and then bite back to remind him with “That’s only a PERCEPTION and does not reflect reality” Those would be familiar words to him, I’m sure…..

  6. When IGP Musa and Deputy Minister Johari are forced to publicly “smoke the peace-pipe”, the promise by Pak Lah of zero tolerance for corruption goes up in smoke.

    The police acted in the beginning because they couldn’t reconcile why 3 organised crime gangsters were released. The particulars revealed of them in Free Malaysia Website must have tallied with facts known to police for them to have acted. Johari has gone on the offence to criticize police SOP to confuse the issue as part of his defence. As Kit said, “Johari cannot disclaim responsibility as he was the one who exercised the ministerial authority to sign and order their formal detention”, he has exercised Ministerial powers in EO cases more as a rule than an exception and might have misrepresented “the division of responsibilities and powers under EO” between his office and the police.

    The first reaction of the IGP as recorded on the front page of NST a few days ago was that the allegations might not be entirely baseless. The police might need the help of the people who posted the website to help in investigations. The problem is that these people would not dare to assist. We don’t have a witness protection scheme here. Organised crime might eliminate them for collaborating with the police.

    Under the circumstances, the Premier should give support to the IGP. He should not give conflicting signals. When he was abroad he told the police to get to the bottom of the allegations. When he was back he gave the opposite signal that 85% of allegations of corruption were baseless. He consoled those implicated by saying that if they were innocent, they had nothing to fear. He even said that they might continue with their present job heedless of public concerns that their continuance in high office would compromise impartiality and resolve of the investigators to whom those investigated are still the bosses.

    Getting the IGP to smoke peace-pipe with Deputy Minister is play down the scandal of allegations (whether or not they are true). Suddenly there is a series of allegations one after another first with Chief Justice admitting prescience of black sheep in judiciary, then his Director General of ACA quickly followed by his own Deputy Minister under his ministerial portfolio.

    It is like his clarion call to fight corruption opens the Pandora Box from which springs all kind of surprises that makes a mockery of his call.

    Now his efforts at “damage control” by broking a temporary truce peace between police and his deputy minister whose allegations and counter allegations against each other reflect negatively on himself are by themselves becoming more scandalous in their own right damaging to political careers of his political allies than the underlying problem of the original allegations against the parties implicated.

    If he does not show resolve and wisdom in handling these hot issues objectively and fairly, his own stature as the ultimate authority where the buck stops will be irreparably impaired.

    Other people’s scandals will become his own scandal. It will not be just him taking on too many ministerial port folio as absentee minister delegating to persons not up to mark.

  7. Smoking from one pipe and shared between two warring factions has its origin in the native American culture. It is their equivalent of signing a peace treaty, an invention of the White Man – only the White Man broke every damn treaty they sign with the Indians.

    “Smoking the peace pipe” in the Malaysian context in this case is like getting two factions who overstepped their enthusiasm (in wanting to deceive the public) to ‘puff the magic dragon’ in the hope that they get high enough to forget the problems facing them.

    Well they’re about to get a rude awakening. Once the ‘puffing’ is over and the ‘dragon’ is nowhere to be seen, they’ll still have to reckon with the wrath of the Malaysian public whose blood curdling cry is likely to exceed that of the native Americans.

  8. When is IGP Musa going to question Kong Cho Heng(younger brother of YB Dato’ Kong Cho Ha, Deputy Minister of Science and Technology), Chin Shui On and Moo Sai Chin on their release from police custody?

  9. In the press today PM Abdullah Ahmad was reported to have said that both the DG ACA and the Dep Minister can stay on their jobs until the allegations are proven.

    What a great “moral” support from the CEO of Malaysia who was the “chief champion” of graft buster.

  10. YB Kit,

    I am have posted this comment earlier under the thread RM5 million “Freedom for Sale” Scandal – Call for Royal Commission and re-posting it in this related thread as well.

    Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said that until investigations were completed Deputy Internal Security Minister Mohd Johari Baharum would remain in office. “We do not necessarily have to ask him to resign,” Abdullah added.

    The point here is that asking him to go on leave of absence pending conclusion of investigation is not the same as asking him to resign, as if he were already presumed guilty without due process of law.

    For investigations to be independent and have credibility, they must be “seen” to be so.

    Here the Prime Minister has dismissed a suggestion that there could be interference in the investigations of Johari because the probe is not conducted by the police force in relation to which Johari oversees as Internal Security Ministry. The probe is handed over to and conducted by the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) supposedly separate from the police force and reporting direct to the Prime Minister.

    But the rub is this : the ACA itself has its image of being an independent watchdog against corruption severely compromised when its own director general Zulkipli Mat Noor comes under investigation for corruption and since he, like Johari, is not asked to go on leave of absence – and could thereby arouse suspicion of interference in any investigation conducted by the ACA even on another person like Johari – how could the problem be satisfactorily resolved by having a ‘compromised’ ACA investigate Johari?

    Theoretically speaking, as long as Johari remains in position at the helm of police force exercising oversight functions, and Zulkipli likewise in the ACA, there is no way the situation can reinforce public perception of independent investigation on either Johari or Zulkipli, if assuming (for purposes of discussion only) both are hypothetically guilty.

    The reason is because Johari may be viewed to be in a vantage position to influence the police force to go easy on their investigation on Zulkipli in exchange for Zulkipli’s doing likewise in the ACA in their investigations of Johari, quid pro quo – theoretically of course!

    This is a double bind Catch 22 situation.

  11. Why Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi must keep for himself 2 ministerial posts to himself besides the top-most post of prime minister; and becoming the shameful “absentee” Internal Security Minister as well as “absentee” Finance Minister?

    He is neither an economist nor a person with deep financial knowledge and skills to be fit for finance portfolio; nor is he a lawyer or legally trained person to be an interior minister.

    Neither is Abdullah Ahmad in any way indisposable to the additional ministerial posts, there are plenty of much more qualified and competent people around compared to him to take up the 2 portfolios.

    As the “absentee” Internal Security Minister as well as “absentee” Finance Minister, he is a persona non grata in the 2 ministeries.

    He won’t be able to perform nor to contribute when he is so constantly flying around the globe with his executive jet.

    He is drawing the salaries of the 2 ministerial posts and enjoying the attendant perks thereof of the 2 additional posts.

    When he is shouting in front of the public on improving public delivery system, yet he is setting a poor example of that, a lame duck minister occupying the 2 additional ministerial posts besides the highest one he held.

    It is a real mockery and a laughing stock of the Abdullah’s administration, sickening!

  12. “The point here is that asking him to go on leave of absence pending conclusion of investigation is not the same as asking him to resign, as if he were already presumed guilty without due process of law.” as per Jeff

    Shahrir Samad said Zulkipli was cleared after investigation years earlier and so why now?

  17. REPEAL THE INTERNAL SECUERITY ACT (isa) OR SET UPAN INAEPEDENT COMMISSION TO PREVENT THE ABUSE OF THE ACT. FROM THE RECENT COMMENTS OF THE DEPUTY INTERNAL SECUERITY MINISTER 48 detaines PLACED UNDERTHE EMERDENCY ORDINANCE ACT (EO) WAS ALL RELEASED .31 FREED 17 WAS PLACED UNDER THE RESTEICTED RESIDENCE ACT (RA) BY THE ORDER OF THE COURT OF APPEAL . IS THERE AN ABUSE OF POWER ? IS THERE JUSTICE ? OR THE APPEAL COURT IS WRONG ? ARE THE DETAINEES BEING VICTIMS ? THE RESULT CLEARY SHOW SOMETHING IS NOT RIGHT . JUSTICE TO ALL THE DETAINEES ! THIS MIGHT ONLY BE A TIP OF THE BUD . SINCE THE NEWLY APPOINTED HIGHEST LAW ENFORCER TOOK OFFICE IT SEEMS THAT ONLY THE EMERGENCY ORDINANCE (EO) WAS USE INVESTIGATE ! REPEAL THE ACT OR HAVE A INDEPENT COMMISSION. http://WWW.FREEWEBS.COM/KOOLIM

Leave a Reply