In this second of this three-part interview, the PAC chairperson reveals the reasons why the committee could not proceed with two high-profile investigations.

Malaysiakini: You seem to be quite disillusioned with how things are run in the country, to the extent that sometimes you don't even feel there is a need to talk about it in Parliament.

Shahrir: I believe that as long as I do my work well, I am contributing. Talking in Parliament will not necessarily achieve the results that you want. Talking in Parliament has its purpose, I do stand up to make a point sometimes.

It's not right for you to say that I am disillusioned because if you look at the way I work, I work equally hard and am still trying to achieve my responsibility as the PAC (Public Accounts Committee) chairperson. There is already too much publicity (about me) and that's not so good. I should space myself out and be heard only when I should be heard.

When Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi took power in 2003, he said in one of his speeches that he will make Parliament a vibrant pillar of democracy. But to date, for instance, very few opposition motions have been accepted to be debated, it is very much still like a rubber stamp.

We cannot measure it (by) the number of opposition motions accepted. If I look at it my way, the success of Parliament is when it becomes less partisan (although) this might be too idealistic. Some of my opposition friends get upset with me when I tell them that they should just talk, concentrate (on the questions) and in getting the answers, rather than trying to take potshots at a particular minister.

You can see when it's (Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department M) Kayveas or (Works Minister S) Samy Vellu, it's always (DAP chairperson) Karpal Singh who will do the attacking and start asking questions regardless of whether the questions are of any use or not. While political point scoring is nice and entertaining, especially in a Westminster style, it doesn't bring us forward.

I will take pride in what the PAC has become, it's not partisan at all. It's not about any political party wanting to score points. We are focused on the work and in getting to the root of the problem. Parliament can achieve a lot without hot air, and emphasise on public debate. Looking back, there has been tremendous changes and success (since Abdullah took over), not revolutionary ones, but it was not the same Parliament (as before).

But you do face problems in the PAC - you have said there is political pressure.

That's normal. But it doesn't stop me (from doing my job). I admit there is political pressure - (threat of) not going to vote for me and comments about me being the PAC chairperson by party leaders. The issue is whether despite all that, I still do my work? You can't say that I have succumbed to it (the pressure). There was a minister who said I shouldn't talk (before a probe is completed). Carry on-lah, I know what I am doing. Political pressure is nothing new.

On the investigation into the merger of ECM Libra and Avenue Capital, what has happened to the probe?

(The case of) ECM Libra was very interesting. Let me tell you what happened. I as the PAC chairperson introduced in our committee meeting (a system) where everyone has the chance to ask questions, and the last words come from me. It's very open and regulated.

With ECM Libra, we wanted to have evidence from the Finance Ministry. The problem with witnesses (from the ministry was) a letter from lawyer Matthias Chang (who threatened) if we discuss the case, it will be contempt of court. This led the ministry's legal adviser to advise the officers that if you speak to PAC on this matter, you might be committing contempt, although our opinion was that they have immunity (for testifying before PAC).

But since this has never been tested, we decided to invite the minister to overcome this problem. He (Second Finance Minister Nor Mohamed Yakcop) came and he was there to answer our questions but unfortunately, [pauses] no questions were asked.

Why?

Don't blame me. The other innovation I did was to have (the) minutes (of meetings), (which) will guide us on what to follow up. Prior to the meeting with the minister, the minutes were there, it also showed questions that were left unanswered, everybody got a copy of it. I have guided everybody to a point that anyone could have picked up from where the minutes left off but... nobody did.

Yourself?

Why do I always have to do the work? [Laughs]

You got the minister to testify before the committee.

I know, but again this is my point why do I always have to be the one to do the work. I have done the structure, everyone is given open and equal opportunity, very fair.

In the United States for instance, when they have a committee of inquiry meeting, the chair also asks questions.

Yes, but not just the chair, the members also ask questions.

Why do you think they didn't ask any questions?

I don't know. I think I am a very funny character - I tried to get the process right, I gave everybody a chance to ask questions, when in the past it wasn't always like that, the minutes were there to make sure (that members) were guided and always on track, so the question is 'why don't you ask questions?'

So the case is closed?

No, if there is a request, we can always go on. Our issues with the ECM Libra-Avenue Capital merger are very simple - whether the government made any money by selling the shares, was the process right and is there any basis for corruption.

What are your views on these issues?

My personal view is that there was no corruption but there was a case of conflict of interest and (can be) questionable, maybe (this is) because (of) the relationship of the prime minister as the finance minister, I told him. On the process, all parties that were involved (in the probe) seemed to be happy.

I don't want to go into the personal part about it. I am not so excited (about the personality involved). The question is was he (Abdullah) ever involved in the negotiation, which I believe and assume he wasn't. But because of his position as the finance minister... there will always be the question, who do you give the benefit of doubt in that position. Now the question has become academic because (Abdullah's son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin) has sold his shares.

But the case raised so much public interest.

Why are you interested and over-interested in Khairy?

He is popular now.

You can't deny that this man is moving and doing well. He has taken all the knocks, whatever nasty stuff thrown at him, he has taken (them) and going on as he wishes, according to his conviction and job. He is far more ambitious and envisioned than me.

How about the RM6.75 billion project of the offshore patrol vessels highlighted in the Auditor-General's report lately?

When we (PAC) talked about OPVs in 2005, we were clear in our minds that we don't expect action to be taken so fast. We were looking at the priorities and our decision was related to what the Finance Ministry wanted to do with the third, fourth, fifth and sixth vessel which are yet to be completed. It may mean there is additional allocation or they may scrap away the remaining four.

They have to decide, not for the PAC, they have to do the valuation and decide what's the best solution. Other aspects is whether there should be further investigations. We were promoting that further investigations could be done at the government level or the corporate level.

There is a level of how much time and how deep we can go, and (whether) the investigation can produce evidence which can stand up in court and lead to prosecution. I can tell you that enforcement officials came to see me. It (the process) may take time. On the OPVs (however), I am sure the records have been destroyed.

What kind of records?

All the company records and stuff like that, we don't get enough records.

So there won't be a chance for prosecution?

We have to look for something else, (like) governmental records.

But the OPV project is still ongoing...

The (question involved) the first part of (the project), which is done by PSCI. It's hard, it's not easy. Just like the Matrade (building), it's a project which dragged on for too long and there was no early intervention. By the time the body decomposed, you don't know what's the cause of death.

Shahrir: Records on vessel deal 'destroyed'

Tomorrow: Elections: To run or not to run?

Part One

Shahrir: Judicial hangover from 1988 crisis

Q&A: 'No strong reasons to sack Salleh'