Can Najib hold two portfolios?

Stephen NgPublished: May 13, 2015 8:00 AM | Updated: May 14, 2015 1:26 AM

COMMENT Universiti Utara Malaysia’s Professor Mohamed Mustafa Ishak is quoted by an online portal as saying that the federal constitution is not “specific” in the prohibition against any individual holding dual positions .

“We cannot say that the practice is (therefore) wrong,” he argued. “There’s nothing in the federal constitution which frowns on such a practice.”

He pointed out that in Malaysia, since former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad held the dual portfolio as prime minister-cum-finance minister, the practice has been “accepted.”

Even with the current fiasco involving the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), Professor Mohamed Mustafa is saying that Najib’s dual portfolio is “a matter of debate whether the posts should be separated”.

Sweeping statement

For someone of his stature as head of the political, security and international affairs cluster at the National Professors Council, it is surprising that Professor Mohamed Mustafa ( photo ) could make such a sweeping statement without quoting the sources upon which he based his statement.

It is as good as telling the whole world what kind of academicians we have in our public universities.

It is now left to the public to judge whether such a practice of dual portfolio is acceptable, and definitely, it is not any ‘jaguh kampung’ telling us that it is ‘okay’ because it has since 1998 become the norm.

What I wish to remind my fellow Malaysians is that a learned historian, politician, and writer, John Dalberg-Acton, had once said: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Rings a bell?

When you have one individual who is prime minister, finance minister and also chairperson of a board of advisers, the formula is too powerful not to believe that any form of corrupt practice would not happen. Put even Lim Guan Eng in that position, just for argument’s sake, there is no guarantee that we will not have a similar fiasco as 1MDB.

In the context of Ferdinand Marcos, the then-president of the Philippines, his wife Imelda Marcos ( photo ) was also the first governor of Metropolitan Manila; therefore, I do not disagree with Professor Mohamed Mustafa that there is no guarantee of checks and balances even when two individuals are holding the different posts but, it is, in my opinion, much easier for such a scandal to happen, when it involves only one individual.

Although the federal constitution made no specific mention about such a practice, we know that it is founded on separation of powers. Even the country’s government and judiciary are supposed to be separate, what more a powerful cabinet post and the position as the country’s prime minister!

I am perplexed when Professor Mohamed Mustafa failed to even deal with potential conflict of interest, abuse of power and the need for checks and balances, which may arise when an individual has too much powers in his hands.

Good example

Professor Mohamed Mustafa should have taken cognisance that, although the federal constitution did not make specific mentions about prohibition of dual positions, the founding fathers of this nation were clear about the separation of powers, which is in fact, a tenet upon which this nation is founded.

We have the record of how a former finance minister during Tunku Abdul Rahman’s era, had the guts to reject the Tunku’s request for a certain sum of money for a particular project, citing that there was no money in the annual budget.

However, instead of sacking his finance minister Tan Siew Sin, the honourable Tunku conceded and merely complained that he had a finance controller who was too tight in his grip on the country’s finances.

Out of this we should have learnt the importance of check-and-balance in managing the country’s finances, which should be championed as good governance under Najib’s own Government Transformation Programme. Professor Mohamed Mustafa has sadly glossed over such an important aspect in good governance.

Cabinet’s blind support?

Instead, we hear that even the cabinet is left in the dark over the controversial sale of land by 1MDB to Tabung Haji. This was revealed by a cabinet minister, Wee Ka Siong, albeit after the prime minister had claimed that he had the cabinet’s full backing in the 1MDB fiasco.

Why is it that the finance minister did not see it fit to report to the cabinet and the prime minister himself that 1MDB has plans to sell 1.58 acres of the Tun Razak Exchange (TRX) land to Tabung Haji, a fund that is sensitive to the Muslims at large?

Wouldn’t two heads be better than one? This is exactly what Transparency International-Malaysia (TI-M) has time and again pointed out in its press statements urging the prime minister to vacate his finance portfolio.

Has Najib even heeded the urging, despite the push for his Government Transformation Programme and Economic Transformation Programme? Then, someone like Idris Jala ( photo ) would have run them in vain after spending years working on them, only to tell us that we have been successful in bringing down our poverty to one percent of the country’s population.

In the same breadth, Paul Low, who is currently in charge of integrity, good governance and transparency in Najib’s cabinet, should now tell us and stand his ground on whether TI-M is right in pushing the agenda; or else he will just lose his own credibility which must have taken him many years to build. All his efforts to whitewash the Barisan Nasional government as having political will in this and that, would be nothing but window-dressing.

STEPHEN NG is an ordinary citizen with an avid interest in following political developments in the country since 2008.

Related stories

Speak up, Umno man tells 1MDB

1MDB predecessor tried to use T'ganu's oil and gas

Umno division leader calls for Azeez's head

Najib's 'ask why' goes awry