Yesterday, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Azmi Khalid, gave a most unsatisfactory reply to my question relating to the RM2.4 million cash caper of the Selangor Mentri Besar, Tan Sri Muhammad Taib in Brisbane on December 22 last year, when he was arrested and charged in a magistrate’s court the next day for violating an Australian law requiring any person leaving the country with more than A$5,000 to make a declaration.
He was unable to say whether the Anti-Corruption Agency had interrogated Muhammad Taib, whether the ACA had acted on the copy of the Brisbane Courier Mail reported dated December 31 which I had sent to the ACA Director-General which contradicted the public explanation given by the Selangor Mentri Besar as to the source and origin of the RM2.4 million, and why the ACA is so reluctant to send a team to Brisbane to check up on the veracity of the Brisbane Courier Mail report.
Yesterday, Datuk Azmi Khalid said nobody should pass any opinion about Muhammad Taib as the case in the Brisbane magistrate’s court had not been closed and the court proceedings were still pending. He cannot be more wrong.
Malaysians are not as interested in the outcome of the Brisbane magistrate’s court case as in the origin, source and purpose of the RM2.4 million cash found on Muhammad Taib’s person at the Brisbane International Airport before leaving for New Zealand, especially as Muhammad Taib had publicly admitted to having the cash and his subsequent explanations have raised more questions than provided answers.
Muhammad Taib had said that the RM2.4 million belonged to his brothers and were for the purchase of property in Gold Coast, Brisbane meant for their children so that they have a place to stay when they go to Australia to further their studies.
Muhammad Taib said that he had gone to Gold Coast to transact the property deal for his brothers Dato Othman and Dato Raduan but had to bring back the money because both of them were not there to sign the Sale and Purchase Agreement - which is a most incredible explanation, as it cannot be reconciled with Muhammad’s statement that his two brothers could not join him on the trip as their children were getting married.
I do not want to query here why a top UMNO leader in the Pasukan Wawasan and advocate of the New Malay not only has no confidence in Malaysia and the national education system, but what is worse, prefer to choose a “redneck” country like Gold Coast, Brisbane rather than prestigious educational centres in Australia for higher education, but Parliament is entitled to know about the discrepancies that have arisen with regard to Muhammad Taib’s explanation of the origin, source and purpose of the RM2.4 million cash.
The Brisbane Courier Mail dated December 31, 1996, a copy of which I had sent to the ACA Director-General Datuk Shafie Yahya, carried the heading of “MP’s $1.2 mil for property purchase” (which is apparently a mistake as it should be ‘MB’ and not ‘MP’) under the by-line “SEAN PARNELL and world agencies”. It carried the following report which contradicted Muhammad Taib’s version of the orign, source and purpose of the RM2.4 million cash:
“It had been believed the money was intended to purchase furniture and fittings for
Muhammad’s new Gold Coast home.
“A near-completed house at Sovereign Islands is built on land registered to Muhammad’s wife, Asbi Rohani binti Asnan.
“The 740 sq.m. lot was purchased in June for $459,000 and Muhammad is believed to have contracted Gold Coast builder Eric Roth to build a house.
“Mr. Roch said yesterday he met the owner of the house earlier this month - a man he presumed to be Muhammad - but has otherwise dealt with Gold Coast solicitor Robert Lehn.
“’Everything I’m doing I’m not actually doing with him (Muhammad), I’m dealing directly with the lawyers,’ he said.
“’I’ve only met the guy (Muhammad) once, the owner, and Robert Lehn of course I have constant negotiations with...but everything goes through his trust account and is paid by cheque to me. I go down and pick it up and deposit it in my account.
“’I don’t know about anything else and I don’t want to get involved’.
“Mr. Lehn, who Mr. Roth said has the power of attorney for the owner of the house, refused to comment.”
The question the ACA must answer is why it is finding it so difficult to check on the facts given in the Brisbane Courier Mail report, whether Muhammad had bought property in Gold Coast with a near-completed house at Sovereign Islands, which is about 20 km from Surfers Paradise, the City of Gold Coast and whether Muhammad Taib had misled the Prime Minister and the whole nation with his public explanation.
The ACA’s handling of the RM2.4 million caper of Muhammad Taib would establish whether it has new freedom of action after the speech by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at the UMNO General Assembly last October, when he shed tears in his very moving call for an uncompromising war against money politics and high-level corruption to save the country from ruination.
Recently, there was a news report about the Federal police Narcotics Department branch seizing about RM1.2 million in cash and property including three houses and three cars from a 48-year-old man believed to have been purchased using money obtained from the sale of dadah.
The seizure of property was carried out under section 28(1) of the Dangerous Drugs Act (Forfeiture of Property) 1988, under which the property owner has three months to prove that he had bought the houses and cars using legal means.
It was reported that the Police had seized more than RM51.83 million worth of properties, including 20 houses, 19.13 ha of land, vehicles, jewellery and cash since the enforcement of the Dangerous Drugs Act (Forfeiture of Property) in 1988.
The question that must be in the minds of many Malaysians who read this report is when the Anti-Corruption Agency would be empowered with powers to seize and confiscate ill-gotten properties involving those holding high government and political office as a result of corruption - which are completely disproportionate to their known sources of income and for which there could be no explanation that these assets had been amassed using legal means.
The Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, had recently said that there would be amendments to the Prevention of Corruption Act.
Will the Bill to amend the Prevention of Corruption Act be presented to the current meeting of Parliament and would it include powers to seize and confiscate assets and properties of high political and government leaders which are disproprotionate to their known sources of income and for which they could not satisfactorily explain had been acquired by lawful means?
The Prime Minister, in his moving speech at the last UMNO General Assembly, had said that corruption was even worse than drugs, and if this is the case, the ACA should at least have powers similar to those of the Narcotics Department to seize the ill-gotten gains and wealth of those holding high political office.
Unfortunately, as at present, the ACA has no independent powers to act “without fear or favour” to uphold the anti-corruption laws as far as those holding high political office is concerned.
This is why Malaysia’s standing in the Transparency International’s international corruption perception index is so low, falling from No. 23 place out of 41 countries in 1995 to No. 26 place out of 54 countries in 1996.
One of ACA’s chief responsibilities should be to improve Malaysia’s ranking in the 1997 TI international corruption perception index to within the first 20 least corrupt nations in the world.
However, if the ACA handling of Muhammad Taib’s RM2.4 million case strengthens the national and international perception that the ACA has no powers to conduct independent investigatons in cases involving top political leaders, then Malaysia’s ranking in the 1997 TI’s international corruption perception index may slip lower than those of previous years - which would be a big shame for Malaysia in general and the ACA in particular.
To show that the government is serious about fighting corruption in high places, I call for a White Paper to be tabled in Parliament on the outcome of ACA invetigations into the origin, source and purpose of the RM2.4 million found on the Selangor Menteri Besar, Tan Sri Muhammad Taib, at the Brisbane International Airport on Dec. 22 1996