The Curious Contrast In Ways To Handle Graft

---

 

Offers of freebies are aplenty for people in position of power and influence.
So are opportunities to make huge sums of money, and even the tightest legislation does let slip some shenanigans.
Case in point is former Singapore transport minister S Iswaran, who was produced in court this week to answer to a total of 27 charges of corruption.
Iswaran was arrested by the city state’s Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) in July last year.
He is accused of corruptly accepting close to half a million Singapore dollars — the equivalent of RM1.6 million — from property developer Ong Beng Seng mostly to advance the latter’s business interests.
Apart from cash and valuables, Iswaran is also accused of receiving items such as tickets to plays and football matches as well as to the Singapore Formula 1 Grand Prix that, incidentally, was introduced to the island republic by Ong himself.
Among others, Iswaran is alleged to have received tickets to five English Premier League football matches, among which are a Liverpool-Arsenal tie and another between West Ham United and Everton.
He was also allegedly given tickets to musicals and plays such as “The Book of Mormon” and “Harry Potter and the Cursed Child”.
Singapore is notorious for its no-nonsense stand on corruption. It pays its public officials handsomely so they are not tempted to put their hands into the cookie jar.
Across the Johor Causeway, the attitude towards similar deceptions seems to be a lot more relaxed.
Malaysia does have its share of crooked public officials and businessmen, presumably a lot more than the island down south.
Our courts are kept busy daily just hearing corruption cases and, truth be told, there have been instances of even big names being made to pay for their crimes.
One is, of course, our erstwhile prime minister Najib Razak, who is now serving time in Kajang.
But by and large, many somehow get a reprieve. Charges are routinely dropped halfway through a trial and the accused person is set free.
One that comes to mind is Ahmad Zahid Hamidi who was given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) on 47 charges of corruption involving millions of ringgit.
He is president of Umno, which is a partner in Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s unity government.
While Iswaran has had to resign, Zahid, who has yet to be acquitted, has moved on to become one of two deputy prime ministers.
Until today, no reason has been given for the decision to grant him a DNAA, leading to a public outcry that has become irksome for Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat.
Earlier this week, she took umbrage at allegations that the judiciary was responsible for such outcomes.
She pointed out that it is the public prosecutor that decides on whether or not to drop charges. Once the charges have been dropped, she said, it is inevitable that the judiciary has to grant a discharge.
On the other hand, Attorney-General Ahmad Terrirudin Salleh said the public prosecutor is not required to give reasons for withdrawing criminal charges.
The difference in the tolerance level for corruption between the two sides of the causeway is glaring.
In Singapore, failing to declare receiving a ticket to a play is enough to land a public official in trouble.
Even Harry Potter’s magic wand cannot make the charge disappear in a whiff of smoke.
But in Malaysia, it magically goes away.  FMT
The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.

---