Published: Nov 12, 2024 10:00 AM
YOURSAY | ‘Does being a whistleblower mean nothing in Malaysia?’
Whistleblower sends letter to PM, implicates state's 'top leader'
Koel: This alleged corruption involving a state leader is a major embarrassment. Time is of the essence.
What are all the authorities waiting for? Is this case implicating more politicians?
Tiptoeing around the problem and trying to bury it in some govt bureaucratic procedures means that the crooks in question are already alerted and prepared.
We urgently need quick and decisive action.
Failing to move quickly on this will lead to more questions and assumptions about the authorities and attempts to cover it all up.
Oct: It is an uphill battle for the whistleblower to proceed without guarantees from the government as the accusations are implicating VVIPs and sitting politicians.
The tables can be turned against him if the government has to intervene. MACC knows that this incident may paint the government black.
It can also lead to the downfall of the government. This could be the reason why MACC wants to tread carefully.
Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim must think carefully as this incident, if proven to be true, might bring about the downfall of his government.
This is a hot potato. No sitting government politician has even been jailed. Anwar will keep his elegant silence.
He would rather go around the world to show his solidarity for Hamas and Palestinians but seldom offers the right solution for local issues.
GanMu: Writing to Anwar is a waste of time. The simple reply to this letter will be that the prime minister will not interfere in the way MACC acts on issues.
He respects their right to independence. It is really strange, as eradicating corruption is so close to his heart.
Here is one case where he can immediately focus his attention and go after corrupt people to prove to us, that he means business.
Yet he has not said anything.
V S: The Whistleblower Protection Act 2010 must protect the complainant if the case is genuine.
The MACC can easily verify this with facts that have been presented to them and a follow-up investigation.
The MACC seems unaware of such corrupt practices in the country, and now private citizens seem to know more about corruption than the agency.
The agency is also very selective in acting on such reports, forcing a whistleblower to request the prime minister’s protection. It is high time for Anwar to revamp this agency with more competent people to curb corruption.
Coward: So it seems that MACC is prepared to give protection, it’s just that the protection can be revoked.
That's different from what has been reported before. The difference is subtle, but I think it is material here.
In this particular case, I think MACC is in the right.
They are worried that the whistleblower has another agenda that is against the spirit of whistleblowing law.
Hence, they cannot guarantee protection that cannot be revoked. And that is the norm.
Most agreements in whistleblowing and whistleblower laws allow revocation if the whistleblower does not come clean, including other motives.
There are cases of protection being revoked overseas. The bar for revoking protection must be high.
If he feels he will be mistreated, then going public will afford him some protection.
Equally, if he is trying to game the public, then he will face the wrath of the public.
Unfortunately, because of the sum involved, his credibility is zero, and then he might feel that's the price to pay for what he wants to get out of this.
Dr Suresh Kumar: I read the Whistleblowers Protection Act 2010 (Act 711). Nowhere does it say that the protection of a whistleblower could be revoked if they are involved in the offence?
I stand corrected though. As I said earlier, if they are involved, protection should be granted to encourage future whistleblowers to come forward regardless of their involvement in the offence.
If you use intimidatory language from the get-go, no one will be brave enough to come forward and crimes will continue unabated.
In the absence of independent institutions and incompetent men/women who helm these compromised institutions, and the colossal failure and refusal of the “reformist” prime minister to initiate the much-touted reforms, we have no choice but to give some leeway.
These traitors have gone against the oath they took and the mandate given by the electorate. They must be punished!
MarioT: It is a very precarious position for a person willing to reveal the purported corrupt practices of certain assemblypersons.
These state representatives have the power and influence while the whistleblower has none but is equipped with only the courage to reveal everything.
If Anwar is firm and determined to weed out corruption in the administration, he should guarantee protection to the whistleblower and let the law take action against those involved.
A Little Bit Crazy: Those involved can turn around to say it is political funds, even if they are charged in court, so what?
Under the current political situation, supporters will argue it is a political trap, defamation. In the end, discharge not amounting to acquittal.
Anyway, just expose it on social media. Let the public know, and the whistleblower will be safe. If not, things can happen.
I have probably watched too many movies, but don't trust anyone, even your loved ones.
Look at the RM20 million kidnapping case recently where the victim’s wife was charged.
Lizard: The so-called whistleblower protection versus influencer powerful politician suspected of wrongdoing seems funnier than it looks.
Doesn't Malaysia have the means to protect the whistleblower? Does being a whistleblower mean nothing in Malaysia?
Are politicians or VIPs the ones that the authorities need to protect? Something is wrong somewhere.
No comments:
Post a Comment