Azam challenged to give facts and figures to justify his statement yesterday that “Bribery, power abuse cases in Penang worrying”

The Chief Commissioner of Malayan Anti-Corruption Commission, Azam Baki, is challenged to give facts and figures to justify his statement yesterday that “Bribery, power abuse cases in Penang worrying”.

Regardless of the state concerned, bribery and power abuse cases must be wiped out if they are “worrying”.

Has Azam Baki the facts and figures to justify his statement?

Which is the most corrupt and the least corrupt state in the country?

The MACC chief should not make irresponsible statement against any state without facts and figures.

He said the MACC had received 312 information of accepting bribes and 147 on abuse of power in Penang.

What are the figures for the other states in Malaysia and what is the time-frame that Azam is talking about.

How many persons have the MACC charged in court for bribery and abuse of power in Penang and what were the figures for the other states?

Further, whether this refers to the Federal government or the State Government.

This is one subject the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on Agencies under the Prime Minister’s Department should call up Azam to explain and elaborate.

The PSC on Agencies under the Prime Minister’s Department has many uncompleted and new business for which an urgent meeting in the first week of the October Parliament is justified so that it could submit its first report to the Dewan Rakyat by October itself.

The many uncompleted and new business of the PSC on Agencies under the Prime Minister’s Department include:

• Azam Baki‘s conflict-of-interest in owning a vast amount of corporate equity which had not been publicly disclosed;
• Azam’s statement nearly two month ago that the MACC would soon announce the findings of its investigation into the failed RM9 billion contract for six littoral combat ships (LCS) which began several years ago, but nothing has happened so far;
• Azam’s statement in July that Transparency International (TI)’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI) does not necessarily reflect the actual corruption situation of a country and that the CPI measures the perceptions of corruption in the public sector in different countries and wasn’t factual nor based on evidence. Does Azam’s criticism of TI CPI meant that MACC now does not support the National Integrity Plan target for Malaysia to be among the top 30 countries in the world in public integrity with the least corruption?
• The PSC should ask what MACC is doing to ensure that Malaysia does not lose out to Indonesia, China and India, as well as more countries in the Organisation of Islamic Conference (OIC) in the TI CPI series by the end of this decade;
• Outcome of MACC investigations into individuals named in the Ultra Kirana Sdn. Bhd. (UKSB) ledger as disclosed during the corruption trial of UMNO President and former Home Minister, Zahid Hamidi.

There are therefore at least six outstanding items on the MACC on the plate of the PSC on Agencies under the Prime Minister’s Department.