MACC should launch a full-scale investigation into the PMO Statement in the New York Times attributing the Prime Minister’s expenditure, including the multi-million dollar purchases of his wife, to his inheritance or is MACC a mere “paper tiger”?

The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission should launch a full-scale investigation into the Prime Minister Office’s Statement in the New York Times of February 9, 2015 attributing the Prime Minister’s expenditure, including the multi-million dollar purchases of his wife’s jewellery and shopping sprees, to his inheritance or is the MACC a mere “paper tiger”?

The PMO statement to New York Times said:

“Neither any money spent on travel, nor any jewellery purchases, nor the alleged contents of any safes are unusual for a person of the prime minister’s position, responsibilities and legacy family assets.”

The PMO statement in the New York Times had greatly offended and outraged the four brothers of the Prime Minister, Johari, Nizam, Nazim and Nazir who, in a rare private statement expressed worry that the name of their father, who was known for his frugality, would be tarnished by such talks of family assets.

They said: "We are extremely concerned that some recent news articles and postings have given rise to speculation as to the nature and extent of the inheritance that our late father, Abdul Razak, had left behind.

"We wish to put on record that Abdul Razak was a highly-principled man, well known to all who knew him for his frugality and utmost integrity and any statement or inference to the contrary would be totally false and misleading to his memory and to his service and sacrifices for the nation.

"We take issue with anyone who taints his memory, whatever the motive. We would also like to add that our whole family is united on this issue."

I have gone on pubic record to vouch that Tun Razak was known for his frugality and utmost integrity as I had on no occasion in my years in Parliament from 1971 – 1976 when Razak was the Prime Minister to raise any issue casting any doubt on his integrity.

The reputation of Malaysia’s second Prime Minister for frugality and integrity are fully borne out in the special collection of essays compiled by the Yayasan Tun Razak “Tun Abdul Razak – A Personal Portrait”, which was published in 2005 to mark Razak’s 30th death anniversary.

Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad, who was Razak’s political secretary and close confidante, wrote: “He (Razak) died a relatively poor man because he did not succumb to the temptations of money.” (p. 57).

Datin Kalsom binte Tan Sri Taib, long-time family friend of the Razak family and whose husband, Datuk Shafee Yahaya was Razak’s private secretary for six years immediately after May 13 until just before Razak’s passing, wrote:

“Shafee also recalls Tun’s high sense of integrity and accountability. He remembers one incident when Tun did not allow Toh Puan Rahah to change the curtains and re-upholster the furniture in the living area of their official residence, Sri Taman, even though the curtains and furniture were showing signs of wear and tear. The simple furnishings in Sri Taman reflected Tun’s thrift and respect for public funds.” (p. 65)

(Shafee ended his public career as Director-General of Anti-Corruption Agency where he ran afoul of the then Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad in 1998 for carrying out his anti-corruption duties against the Director-General of of EPU).

This was Najib’s own testimony of his father’s frugality and integrity in his essay “A Hard Act to Follow” which he contributed in the collection of essays in memory of Tun Razak:

“To my father, a good public image was vital and public opinion mattered a great deal to him. Sometimes it is a very difficult act to follow. Whatever he did, he did not want it to be misinterpreted or to be seen that he was abusing his position. Of course, I am talking in the context of his time.

“I remember when as children, we wanted so much to have a swimming pool. But it took him a month of deliberating, rather agonizingly at that, before he turned us down. After looking at a few estimates submitted by the Jabatan Kerja Raya, he eventually said, ‘No, I don’t want it. People might talk – nanti apa orang kata?’

“That was Tun Razak. He did not enjoy the trappings of power. The cigars he smoked were relatively cheap. He did not have expensive habits like acquiring cars. But he played golf and he was happy.

“Even when I was studying in England, he did not want to visit me that often because nanti apa orang kata. Even as the son of the Prime Minister, I had to taker chartered flights back, not commercial flights”. (pp 236-7)

Uncharacteristically, the rare statement by Najib’s four brothers defending the reputation of frugality and integrity of their father, the second Prime Minister of Malaysia, was blacked out by the UMNO/BN-owned or controlled mainstream media in the country, and it took Najib almost a week before endorsing the brothers’ joint statement by describing his father a principled and frugal person.

What then is one to make of the PMO statement in the New York Times, viz:

What are these “alleged contents of any safes” which the PMO Statement was referring to, claiming that it was not “unusual for a person of the prime minister’s position, responsibilities and legacy family assets”?

Can MACC initiate full-scale investigations into Najib or must the MACC first get the “green light” from Najib himself?

Lim Kit Siang DAP Parliamentary Leader & MP for Gelang Patah