COMMENT Former Transport Minister Ling Liong Sik was charged in court yesterday. It sent shocks through the MCA. MCA must now feel betrayed.
After all Ling was one of us - us being one of more important leaders of the Barisan Nsional in those halcyon days.
Indeed, Ling was PM of Malaysia for a few hours when Dr Mahathir Mohamad was partyless for the “few hours” when old Umno was deregistered and a new Umno was being formed.
What if Ling had at the time said “go and fly kite. Saya PM sekarang. You orang keluar BN”?
So, personally for Ling – this must feel like a betrayal. He must be feeling most betrayed.
There was one piece of news however that attracted my attention. It was s statement in his charge sheet.
According to the charge sheet, the Finance Ministry had already valued the land at RM25psf - inclusive of compounded interest - and this fact was withheld from the Cabinet by the accused.
(NB: Ling was charged under Section 418 of the Penal Code with misleading the Cabinet between Sept 25 and Nov 6, 2002, into agreeing to purchase 999.5 acres of land on Pulau Indah for a project, now known as PKFZ, at a price of RM25psf on a deferred payment basis for a 15-year period, at a 7.5 percent interest rate. The cumulative interest paid would total RM720 million at the end of the repayment period. He was also offered an alternative charge, under Section 417 of the Penal Code, for the same offence.)
Expect to be stabbed
I am not sure how a Cabinet meeting is conducted. Usually in an exco meeting for example, all papers would be prepared by the secretary to that meeting.
For a Dewan Undangan Negeri (state assembly), the papers are prepared by the MMK secretary, who is the secretary to the exco, usually a state administrative officer.
I am thinking, the principle must be the same- files and papers prepared by the Cabinet secretary.
That being the case, a copy of the file note containing the valuation price of the land must be in all the files.
Unless, the file for the PKFZ topic for that day was prepared by Ling alone and that the only information for decision that fateful day, came from Ling alone. That would be highly unusual.
Unusual because at all material time, the Finance Minister at that time, had in his possession all information about the land to be bought by PKFZ.
He would make this information available to all Cabinet members at that meeting. Or in preceding meetings.
The Finance Minister would have spotted the blatant discrepancy unless he went along with Ling. Other alert members would have spotted it too.
All Cabinet members liable too?
All Cabinet members present at that meeting at that time would now have to discover that particular document provided by whoever it was at that time, from his/her own personal files, and produce them in court. So all you SUSK (private secretaries) prepare to look for the file of that meeting for your minister.
This means everyone at that meeting on the day Ling presented his notes would have to appear before court to testify. Now everyone will stab Ling.
If the only paper informing the value of the land came from Ling, then everyone was deceived.
Or did everyone agree in unison with the facts presented by Ling. It would be interesting also to know, whether the Finance Minister then, who had the real information, went along with Ling. Or did he object?
If the entire Cabinet agreed with Ling despite having the real facts, then the entire Cabinet is vicariously liable. Ling is now feeling, most betrayed. Is there is no honour among thieving friends?
(Note: Ling is the second MCA president to be charged. The first was Tan Koon Swan)
No comments:
Post a Comment