Nothing funny about comedy of errors over top graft-buster
From Walter Sandosam
The lodging of police reports should not be taken lightly as it has serious consequences to already overstretched police resources. It should not be used to intimidate or settle scores.
It is normally done when other avenues to resolve have not borne fruit – hence a report would form the basis of a criminal or civil suit in a court of law to seek redress.
In a different light, the recent resignation of the first female police commissioner of the London’s metropolitan police after a string of controversies that undermined public confidence in the force is an interesting read.
It is reported that the mayor of London and the public had lost confidence in her on the perceived inability to tackle a host of issues on policing culture ranging from racism and bullying to misogyny.
Pointedly, this shows that confidence in certain institutions are critical to their existence.
The “running down” of an institution in Malaysia, for supposedly political purposes, does not hold much water to the unbiased observer, much less the contention that it is well designed or well planned. The consequence of a number of unrelated events, akin to a Shakespearean tragedy, some comedic and defying logic, has led to this dismal state of affairs.
Ironically, this has coincided with the drop in perception index rankings.
A concern escalated by an eminent professor of an independent oversight panel was bamboozled by inept management. The chairman – an ex-senior civil servant – did not obviously foresee the possible implications of the lack of inertia, reminiscent of some government departments, in responding to the issue speedily. This was compounded by a much delayed pronouncement by the board chairman which was summarily distanced by his own members after drawing much flak.
The Securities Commission (SC) was drawn into the melee and the comment that stands out is that the SC could not “conclusively establish” the subject matter of a controversy relating to the Securities Act. Presumably, the response had not been sufficiently thought through.
The SC, of which certain officers had reports lodged on them on other unrelated issues at the same time, came out with a statement to add clarity the next day. Some deem the clarification lacking in merit.
It is also reported that a Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) did not follow due lawful process on the “invitation” to the personality involved. This notwithstanding that the meeting could have breached the Dewan Rakyat’s standing orders; not discounting possible subjudice on an ongoing legal matter. How silly can the PSC be!
Along the way, there is confusion as to whether only one individual is the subject matter of this episode or a whole institution is involved given support statements being issued.
Hence, we are in this predicament. It is on the heels of a civil suit on a whistleblower and a police report being lodged on the contents of a statement of defence. Dutifully, it has been classified as no Further Action (NFA).
What is the public expected to think? The oversight bodies, which have a role to play to ensure that an institution is independent and that it functions effectively with integrity and transparency, have themselves lost their integrity.
They have failed miserably and more damagingly cast aspersions on their competence to continue to serve. Their continued presence is but a mockery.
This is most regrettable given these bodies are now seen to be impotent while maintaining a stoic silence unlike the subject of the controversy who continues to engage the media.
Trust and public confidence in institutions are singularly paramount issues in any society which subscribes to a legal framework. If this is compromised, cooperation from the public will be found wanting to facilitate the work of the institution. This is wretched.
Walter Sandosam served on two separate oversight panels of the MACC over a span of six years since its inception.
No comments:
Post a Comment