By Terence Gomez
As the controversy surrounding 1MDB unfolds with numerous unexpected turns, one of Umno’s key spokesmen, Abdul Rahman Dahlan, has written a lengthy letter to enlighten Malaysians about what he sees as the core problem at hand: the mode of financing of politics and the urgent need to reform it.
Abdul Rahman’s primary intent in this letter is to show how opposition parties had derailed the requisite reforms that Najib Razak had endeavoured to introduce soon after he became Prime Minister. Interestingly, in an apparent attempt to discredit former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, Abdul Rahman confirmed UMNO’s longstanding practice of accumulating funds in a secret account, held by the party president.
With this disclosure, two questions arise: first, was the money in this secret account deployed during the last general election, thereby violating election laws? Second, by raising this point about the financing of politics and UMNO’s secret account, is Rahman suggesting that since Najib could not reform the grossly inadequate regulatory system that oversees party funding, he decided to use it in Barisan Nasional’s (BN) favour to win the last closely contested general election? In this election, the BN lost the popular vote, but managed to form the government by retaining sufficient seats in parliament.
Abdul Rahman Dahlan
In his letter, published in Malaysia’s leading newspapers on 1 August 2015, Rahman, a minister in Najib’s cabinet – offering his views in his capacity as the BN’s Director of Strategic Communication – drew attention to a meeting held between Transparency International (TI) and members of the opposition parties in Parliament on 1 December 2010.
TI had initiated a project to review the financing of politics and to prepare relevant recommendations to eradicate processes that were hindering the conduct of fair elections. I had been appointed by TI to help implement this project. At that time, the president of TI was Paul Low, now a minister in the Prime Minister’s Department. Abdul Rahman disclosed, at this meeting with TI, that opposition parliamentarians were not in favour of mandatory full disclosure of all funding sources as this would deter their contributors from financing their parties.
The views held by the opposition, as outlined by Abdul Rahman in his letter, are in my recollection accurate. However, what he did not mention was that soon after this meeting, the TI team was scheduled to discuss their reform recommendations with members of BN’s Backbenchers Club.
Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz
Only one person showed up for this meeting: Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz, in his capacity as Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department. It merits mention that the chairman of the Backbencher’s Club at that time was then deeply implicated in the PKFZ scandal.
At this meeting, Nazri acknowledged that Malaysia’s general elections were free but not fair as political parties did not have equal access to funds. He asserted that donors to Umno were registered, but some of them preferred to remain anonymous. Nazri agreed with some of TI’s recommendations, including direct state funding of parties to reduce, even halt, the latter’s dependence on business for money to run their campaigns; to prohibit ownership of the media by parties; and to institute full disclosure of political donations.
However, Nazri, like the opposition, did not welcome TI’s recommendations. Why would Nazri adopt this stance when, as Abdul Rahman states, Prime Minister Najib was then actively recommending reforms, which included instituting a Political Parties Act that had provisions to regulate the financing of politics?
Nazri’s primary concern was TI’s recommendation that power be devolved to oversight agencies such as the Election Commission (EC), as well as the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and the Attorney General’s Chambers. After this meeting had ended, I mentioned to the Minister that if his government wanted Malaysians to believe that public announcements about improving the financing of politics were credible, this devolution of power had to be instituted. In all subsequent government plans, including the New Economic Model, the Economic Transformation Plan and the 10th Malaysia Plan, this devolution of power was not recommended nor instituted.
Abdul Gani Patail
Following the 1MDB crisis, what is evident is how imperative it is to ensure that agencies such as the MACC and the AG’s Chambers are autonomous and accountable to the legislature. Today, one cannot help but wonder if this devolution of power had then been implemented whether the unexpected and unceremonious removal of Abdul Gani Patail as the AG would have occurred while he was heading the task force investigating the 1MDB controversy which has seriously implicated the head of the executive branch of government.
As Abdul Rahman had pointed out, a key lesson of the 1MDB crisis is that reforms involving the financing of politics are imperative. All parties must have the political will to institute genuine reforms and the recommendations by TI can serve as the point from which these discussions can commence. However, the need to institute these reforms should not detract attention from what is extremely pressing now: an impartial investigation into the 1MBD crisis that should not be hindered in any way.
And, in keeping with the spirit of disclosure – and accountable governance – as correctly professed by Abdul Rahman, the government must reveal the findings of the investigations into the 1MDB crisis. The government could start with the release of the Auditor General’s interim report of his investigation into this crisis.
________________________________________________________________________
Terence Gomez is based at the University of Malaya. He is the author of Politics in Business: Umno’s Corporate Investments and Malaysia’s Political Economy: Politics, Patronage and Profits.
You must be logged in to post a comment.