by Lim Guan Eng

(Petaling Jaya, Monday): The best way for Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to rebut Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s allegations of abuse of power and malpractices in his administration is to make the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) independent and not a department answerable to the Prime Minister but answerable only to Parliament. The Prime Minister should not allow Tun Dr Mahathir’s criticisms of being unduly influenced and controlled by his son-in-law Deputy UMNO Youth President Khairy Jamaluddin’s coterie of elitist advisors to distract Badawi from continuing a liberal and fair administration.

To black out Mahathir’s comments in the local press when what Mahathir said about going all the way right to the source of can of worms is given wide coverage in the foreign press is short-sighted and contrary to his principles of justice and democracy in accepting criticisms, no matter how unfair. It will also allow Mahathir to raise doubts about Badawi’s commitment to be more open and liberal, ignoring the fact that Mahathir arrested opposition leaders unlike Badawi.

Worse it demonstrates the reversion to the Mahathir’s regime tactics of of oppression and curbs of press freedom. So far only the foreign press, The Sun and the online website news portal have printed the latest attacks by Mahathir on Badawi. If the comments of a former Prime Minister can be blacked out, not only is there no difference between Badawi and Mahathir but what hope is there for press freedom and human rights in Malaysia?

Badawi has said that the government would explain fully but there is nothing he can do if Mahathir refuses to accept them. More worrying are the allegations of abuse of power, malpractices, corruption and even betrayal of national interest underlying Mahathir’s queries on the issuance of APs to the selected few, the loss of more than RM 500 million when MV Agusta was sold for only one euro by Proton to a 2-euro company and the cancellation of the scenic bridge which Mahathir claims was a sell-out and submission of national interests to Singapore.

Mahathir added a new element of the lack of political will in tackling corruption by Abdullah when he said that he had approved that at least one person be charged for corruption before he stepped down. Mahathir said he did not understand why the prosecution was stopped after he stepped down.

This new allegations adds a new twist to the long-running saga of Mahathir angrily undermining Abdullah in the most public of fashions. Leaving aside the political bitterness, lack of gratitude and betrayals are the issues how public funds are misused, how political patronage are parceled out to the select few, political patronage that can save the corrupt from being persecuted and the abuse of power preventing government agencies from executing their duty and upholding the law.

For a person who made integrity and battling corruption the centerpiece of his administration, Mahathir’s expose of Badawi’s lack of political will in charging at least one person for corruption will knock down Badawi’s credibility and question his personal commitment. For this reason not only must Badawi explain Mahathir’s latest allegations, he must also carry out institutional reforms to entrench integrity, accountability and transparency. Amongst the institutional reforms are to make the ACA independent and accountable only to Parliament with powers to initiate prosecutions and the establishment of the Independent Complaints and Police Misconduct Commission to curb police abuses.

(26/06/2006)