Is Malaysian Parliament one-sided and partial where Ministers and senior government leaders like PAC Chairman cannot be referred to Committee of Privileges for lying and the Speaker only a “yes men” to such breaches of parliamentary privileges?
Is the Malaysian Parliament one-sided and partial where Ministers and senior government leaders like Public Accounts Committee (PAC) Chairman cannot be referred to the Committee of Privileges for lying and the Speaker only a “yes man” to such breaches of parliamentary privileges?
The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Azalina Othman had committed a double contempt of Parliament when:
- firstly, she lied when replying to the DAP MP for Bagan Lim Guan Eng on Monday that PAC members were informed about the deleted lines from the PAC Report on 1MDB because of correspondence from Bank Negara on April 6 that its information was “confidential for the purpose of intelligence only and not for court usage or public report”; and
- secondly, when she defended her first lie with another lie by claiming that DAP MP for PJ Utara and PAC member Tony Pua’s statement that the PAC Chairman, Datuk Hasan Arifin had “never at any point of time communicated with PAC members on any developments subsequent to the meeting on April 4” before the PAC Report on 1MDB was presented to Parliament on April 7, 2016 was “untrue and without any basis”.
In their joint statement in Parliament on Thursday, the Deputy Chairman of PAC, Dr. Tan Seng Giaw (MP – Kepong) and the four opposition PAC members have confirmed that they had never been informed of any Bank Negara correspondence of April 6 before the tabling of the PAC Report on 1MDB on April 7.
The PAC Chairman Hasan Arifin has also committed a grave breach of parliamentary privilege in tampering with the PAC report on 1MDB.
This is the first time I agree with Perkasa bureau for integrity, anti-corruption and abuse of power which argued that the words in the PAC final report deleted unilaterally and arbitrarily by Hasan touched on a major issue –the “original sin” of the 1MDB global financial scandal on the identity of the owner of the company that 1MDB diverted billions of ringgit from its supposed joint venture investment with Saudi firm PetroSaudi International.
The deleted sentence referred to the disclosure from Bank Negara that Good Star’s owner is not a PetroSaudi but a private individual.
Shouldn’t action be taken against Hasan Arifin for the grave breach of parliamentary privilege as PAC Chairman in unilaterally and arbitrarily tampering with the PAC Report on 1MDB as agreed by the final PAC meeting of April 4?
Or are Parliament and the Speaker “blind, mute and deaf” to Azalina’s double contempt of Parliament and Hasan Arifin’s grave breach of parliamentary privilege in unilaterally and arbitrarily tampering with the PAC Report on 1MDB, because Parliament in Malaysia is one-sided and partial and no Minister or senior government leader like the PAC Chairman can be referred to the Committee of Privileges like lying and other breaches of parliamentary privileges?