What If A Whistleblower Has Evidence Against Pm Psm Asks Azalina

---

PSM has criticised Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Azalina Othman Said over the government’s stand with regard to whistleblowers who turn to the media instead of enforcement agencies.
“If the MACC and the government will only investigate a case if the whistleblower approaches the MACC first, it implies that a matter is only considered truthful and worthy of protection if it is reported directly to the authorities.
“But what if the whistleblower has allegations of corruption or serious misconduct against the sitting prime minister or the MACC chairperson?
“Does this mean they must hand over all their evidence to these very individuals before seeking protection? Isn’t that an absurd proposition?” asked PSM deputy chairperson S Arutchelvan in a statement.
Yesterday, Azalina told Parliament that there are no plans to amend the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010 (Act 711) to allow whistleblowers to go to the media before lodging a report with enforcement authorities.
She argued that going to an enforcement agency must be the first step for whistleblowers.
According to her, this would allow the agency to determine if the information given is essential and whether it should be classified under an older case or whether a new case should be opened.
Arutchelvan (above) said there are numerous instances where people come to his service centre because they fear that if they lodge a report with the police or disclose their information to the authorities, the authorities might leak their details to the perpetrators, exposing them to further abuse.
Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Azalina Othman Said“Our usual advice is for them to go public, as public exposure could be their best form of protection. Otherwise, they are left with no choice but to remain silent, go into hiding, and live in fear,” he added.
Fear being silenced
Arutchelvan pointed out that whenever PSM leaders and members are called in for questioning over a public assembly, they are told that the police do not need a public complaint to investigate - they can initiate their own report and act proactively.
“So why do the police and MACC insist on waiting for a formal complaint before launching an investigation or offering protection?
ADS“Yesterday in Parliament, the opposition questioned the price of helicopters rented by Malaysia in comparison to those purchased by Poland. Can't the authorities initiate an investigation on their own, or do they require someone to lodge an official complaint first?” he added.
In the case of the Sabah whistleblower, Arutchelvan said the former chose to expose his allegations, which involved ruling politicians, through Malaysiakini instead of going to MACC.
“Why should going to the media or social platforms to reveal the truth be viewed negatively? Isn't the media supposed to be the fourth estate, a pillar of democracy?
“Azalina claims that whistleblowers will not be protected if they go to the media first. But in reality, many whistleblowers turn to the media precisely because they fear being silenced while seeking protection.
“Where is the contradiction if the ultimate goal is to uncover the truth and address the allegations?” he queried.
Arutchelvan said If the Madani government wants to earn the people’s trust, it must not only ensure that its institutions are independent and fearless but also create an environment where citizens feel safe approaching the authorities without fear or pressure.
“Until then, people will continue to seek alternative ways to have their voices heard,” he added. - Mkini

---