Showing posts with label Tunku Abdul Aziz. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tunku Abdul Aziz. Show all posts

Monday, October 4, 2010

Tunku Abdul Aziz on Anwar Ibrahim as PM


The only Malaysian politician, who can, without making a fool of himself, stride the world stage with the right combination of strong intellectual credentials and honesty, is not to be found within the serried ranks of the BN, but in the person of Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysia’s iconic liberal democrat.

As I saw here in Brussels, he had the European parliamentary leadership, figuratively speaking, eating out of his hands. Many have already put the champagne on ice; they clearly see this victim of a rotten political system as the next man to lead the country.


For all our sakes, I hope they are right. Malaysia needs a thorough overhaul and Najib - whom we need like we do a great big hole in our head - is unlikely to understand the dynamics of change for the great leap forward.

He is not only busy watching oversized baggage, but also his back with the sort of loyal friends he has had foisted on him. There simply isn’t much time for anything else while the ship of state springs more leaks by the day...

[Read the full essay here.]

Why Islam And Democracy Are Destined to Coincide
Keynote address by Anwar Ibrahim, Parliamentary Opposition Leader of Malaysia at Brussels, 28th September, 2010

Thursday, July 23, 2009

TEOH TAKES MACC WITH HIM


By Tunku Abdul Aziz

JULY 23 — The death, while under the care of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, in mysterious circumstances of Teoh Beng Hock last week promises to weaken further the already fragile public confidence in the government and its agencies in our country.

Regaining public confidence will not be a walk in the park for the government given its abysmal record of dealing with deaths in police custody. The government should never have adopted such a patently careless and cavalier attitude when dealing with matters of public concerns. The loss of trust in the government and its agencies is extremely unfortunate because by doing the “right thing” they could have earned and retained our respect, confidence and gratitude.

The initial handling of the Beng Hock “death in custody” case by the MACC could hardly be described as professional and this has fuelled a million and one speculations. All this is extremely unfortunate, but understandable. People simply do not trust the very organisations that are supposed to protect them anymore and, for many, the suspicion they harbour is based on their bitter personal experience of official encounters with the country’s enforcement agencies. Can the government fairly blame the people for feeling angry and resentful with the way the police, and now the MACC, apparently conduct their work?


I have never hidden my true feelings about the MACC. I have been critical of this organisation which, a few months ago, I described in my weekly Sin Chew column, as OLD WINE IN A NEW BOTTLE. I wrote in my opening paragraph:

“What a waste of public funds! The creation of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission will go down in history as a feeble and pathetic final clutch at the straws by a sitting duck prime minister best remembered for his inexhaustible supply of good intentions but with nothing to show for them. The MACC was hastily conceived against a murky background of a web of duplicity and deceit. It was a desperate attempt at deluding the people of this country and the world anti-corruption community that the Abdullah Badawi administration still had a lot of fire in its belly to make corruption a high risk and low return business. The whole process was nothing more than a charade, a sleight of hand that we have come to expect from this government. In the meantime corruption continues to be in robust good health.”


I also touched on the much hyped “Hong Kong model” upon which the new corruption fighting machine is apparently based — the less said the better about this. It is clear for all to see that the MACC falls far short of the Hong Kong Independent Commission Against Corruption’s template on at least two counts. The first and most obvious short coming is an absence of a legal provision that will allow a MACC officer to call anyone to account for his wealth and lifestyle that are obviously beyond his known legal income. There is the anti-laundering provision, but this is not the same.

The second is its much touted independence. The MACC is NOT independent. No one believes it is independent because its leadership has allowed it to become a political instrument that is seen by the people to work to the Barisan Nasional agenda. This is because we are manning the MACC with the self-same functionaries who developed second guessing into a fine art form under Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s special guidance. They cannot reasonably be expected to change their work practices which have become almost second nature to them.


I should feel happy because I have been totally vindicated by the recent events but I cannot, in all conscience, bring myself to rejoice amidst a great human tragedy, the totally unexpected death of Teoh Beng Hock, a young loyal Malaysian of great promise who believed passionately in change for a better, safer Malaysia.

If the government wants to retain its legitimacy to govern, it must rededicate itself to the principles of international best practices predicated on justice for all, transparency and accountability in the conduct of the affairs of state. It must clean out its unsavoury stables of corruption because it is corruption that has reduced this country to its present sorry state. As for the MACC, in its present form it is of no use to either man or beast.

Pakatan Rakyat leaders at Teoh Beng Hock's funeral on 20 July 2009

Its senior officers have to accept full responsibility for what has gone so horribly wrong so soon after its establishment. Seriously, they should get on their bicycles in full ceremonial uniform dripping with gold plated buttons and other bits and pieces and ride off into the sunset of shame and degradation.

[Teoh Beng Hock, right, had a promising career in politics and, at 30, was looking forward to beiing a young father and husband. Pic from his Facebook album]

Monday, May 25, 2009

PDRM: A tale of the tail wagging the dog


By Tunku Aziz | Malaysian Insider | 25 May 2009

MAY 25 — The only reasonable conclusion I can draw as a reasonable man from the PDRM raid on the DAP headquarters last Saturday evening is that the police leadership need their heads examined for signs of mental degeneration.

It was Euripides (480–406 BC) the Greek playwright who said, “Those whom God wishes to destroy, he first makes mad.” Police behaviour in recent times has convinced me more than ever that there is something rotten in the state of our country, with apologies to William Shakespeare.

The beleaguered police, as far as we are concerned, are in moral retreat. It beggars the imagination that with all the relentless assault on their reputation, they do not seem to care one iota about public opinion.

This is frightening self-indulgence. To be deaf to public strictures is really a symptom of a deep malaise associated with a diseased culture of impunity that has brutalised the police psyche.

For the guardians of the law to show nothing but utter contempt, disregard and disdain for the legitimate concerns about their actions, often bordering on the criminal, is indeed a serious breach of stewardship and public trust, the antithesis of ethical policing in a democratic society.

I plead guilty to being one of the harshest critics of the police. I am hard on them because I so desperately want them to succeed. At the same time, I can claim to be their admirer when they not only operate within the law, but, more to the point, when they are seen to be both law-abiding and respectful of the rights of every individual under the law.

I want a police service that is among the best that I can be proud of, and not “the best police force in the world that money can buy.”

As a keen observer of the police in action, I can say without fear of contradiction that the standards of policing took a dramatic fall from grace when the greatest-ever Malaysian IGP, Tun Hanif Omar, stepped down.

Hanif (left) was not only a thoroughly competent officer but an ethical one, and, therefore, was able to withstand political pressure, even from Mahathir Mohamad, the prime minister of the day whose meddling ways were directly responsible for the dismemberment of many of the country’s most important institutions.

Hanif could stand up to the bully because of his strong personal values: he offered to resign on at least two occasions. His letters of resignation were turned down. As with all bullies, you cannot back down or they will climb on your head.

Sadly, subsequent IGPs, with the exception of Tan Sri Mohd Bakri Omar (right), have, by common consent, been a great disappointment and a disgrace to the uniform.

I have, in keeping with the times, been referring to PDRM as a police service in previous speeches and writings in order to help soften its image. On reflection, I may have been a trifle premature because PDRM is obviously not yet ready to be accorded that designation: it still has a lot of house cleaning to do before it can join the ranks of the police in other parts of the civilized world where accountability is the foundation of ethical policing.

7 May 2009: Perak State Assembly Speaker V. Sivakumar unceremoniously removed from his seat by plainclothes policemen

PDRM must perforce remain a police force that carries with it all the unsavoury connotations of an organisation that has lost its way. With proper leadership, and the necessary political will, PDRM can still find salvation.

It is a great pity because there are thousands upon thousands of honest to goodness people whom we admire, trying very hard to do an honest day’s work to serve the nation, and we salute them for their courage, loyalty and devotion to duty. They are, however, badly officered which leads me to my favourite conclusion that there are no bad policemen and women, only bad officers.

The rot started when ethically deficient, unprofessional officers allowed, without a murmur, the politicisation of the force by Mahathir who used it as a handy tool to manipulate the system in order to advance his own political ambitions.

Brickfields OCPD Wan Bari Wan Abdul Khalid barking at Legal Aid Bureau lawyers
who came to the aid of those arrested for "illegal assembly"


In return, many people believed, rightly or wrongly, that senior officers were given protection against possible prosecution for corruption. A very senior ACA officer, himself not above a bit on the side, now mercifully, in comfortable, contented retirement, claimed in private that he could have put at least 20 corrupt top police officers behind bars without too much trouble, but could not for reasons best known to himself.

As long as we allow the police to dictate terms to us, in particular over the implementation of the IPCMC (Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission), the highlight of the Royal Commission to Enhance the Operation & Management of the Royal Malaysia Police’s report, we will always be subject to police excesses.

It is a sad commentary that both Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Najib Razak have seen nothing wrong with the police insubordination of threatening dire repercussions if this important recommendation for the good of both the citizens and the police in a new, open society is “forced” upon them.

Pic courtesy of The Nut Graph

The police, many feel, have got too big for their boots. Has the “People’s Prime Minister” the interests of the people at heart? Given the state of affairs in our country today, may we humbly urge Najib to keep the police on a short leash, and not allow the tail to wag the dog.
Tunku Aziz, one of the prime movers in setting up Transparency International Malaysia, in happier times was regarded by Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi as "one man (who) was able to harness his personal passion and deep commitment to the values of ethics and integrity, give it a larger purpose and meaning, and turn it into a force to transform society for the better." Why then was he left out of the MACC Advisory Group? He is regarded as being too outspoken for comfort and, therefore, difficult to handle.