COMMENT | I asked, pursued, persisted in heritage players case, but to no avail

COMMENT | Only the truth would have saved those involved. Instead of putting all the cards on the table and accepting that wrongs had been committed, they were involved in a game of spin-doctoring and half-truths.

And when the facts came to light, the stink emanated from the home minister’s office and two other departments under its purview - the National Registration Department and the Immigration Department.

Shortcuts were taken, and ministerial discretion was exercised without safeguards, and they came with a caveat: reforms, from clear standard operating procedures to mandatory timelines for renunciation to prevent future abuse.

It was no ordinary rebuke. It came from the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) following an inquiry into how seven foreign footballers became Malaysian citizens without going through the prescribed processes.

On July 11, the EAIC laid bare the irregularities that critics long suspected. Citizenship approvals were rushed through in an unusually short period, entry permits were issued without proper interviews or security screenings, and the Malay language test was mishandled.

Questions remain

Immediately, I wrote a commentary: “Ordinary Malaysians, meanwhile, are left to wonder why their own painstaking applications are treated with suspicion while shortcuts are carved out for outsiders in the name of football glory.”

If the royal commission of inquiry into Tabung Haji uncovered “creative accounting”, there was more that the EAIC exposed in the heritage players controversy.

I immediately wrote: “This fiasco is not just about seven footballers. It is about the betrayal of trust, the corrosion of integrity, and the mockery of citizenship itself. For every Malaysian child born stateless, for every family waiting years for recognition, this episode is a slap in the face.”

“The EAIC’s findings must not end as another report gathering dust. Accountability must be demanded, reforms must be enacted, and those who orchestrated this charade must be named and shamed”

“Is it a Malaysian malaise or a convention that errant civil servants are beyond reproach? Will those whose hands were soiled in such a disreputable exercise walk free? Or perhaps get a promotion and collect a healthy pension upon retirement.”

So, who were the people involved? Who gave the instructions? Who protected the miscreants? The EAIC report carried no such details, and so, I wrote to the EAIC requesting the notes of the proceedings.

Stonewalling continues

Because Section 35 of the EAIC Act stipulates that all hearings are open to the public, I reckoned the notes would be provided. I got an acknowledgement stating that my request would be tabled at the next meeting.

On Monday, I received a reply from EAIC chief executive officer Asliza Ali, which read: “(i) Nature of the Investigation: This investigation was conducted by a special task force rather than through formal hearings. Consequently, no public hearings or corresponding records of proceedings were held or generated for this matter.”

“(ii) Scope of Section 35 of the EAIC Act 2009: For general understanding, the provision for open hearings is intended to allow public access to observe the hearing sessions and does not extend to the public release of internal investigative records or documentation.

“Additionally, Section 35(2) provides guidelines for proceedings to be conducted in private whenever confidential or sensitive information is involved.

“While the commission deeply appreciates your commitment to transparency and good governance, this decision is made to carefully balance public interest with the protection of sensitive operational information and the integrity of our investigative procedures.”

Systemic failure

In the end, I can only say that I tried my best. I asked the questions that needed to be asked, sought the documents that could have shed light on what happened, and pursued the truth through the proper channels.

I did so neither out of malice nor to settle scores, but because matters involving citizenship, public institutions, and the abuse of authority demand nothing less than transparency and accountability.

I may have failed to obtain the answers I sought. The EAIC’s response has closed one door, leaving many of the most important questions unanswered.

Who gave the instructions? Who authorised the shortcuts? Who knew what was happening? And who, if anyone, will be held accountable?

But my failure to get those answers must not be mistaken for a failure to try. I tried. I questioned. I wrote. I sought the records. I pursued the truth.

And if, despite all that, the truth remains beyond reach, then the failure is not for want of trying.

It is a failure of a system that speaks of transparency while keeping the public from seeing what it has every reason to question.

R NADESWARAN says the NRD’s “instant citizenship” approval for foreign (not heritage) footballers has been called out by the EAIC, but offers little comfort to thousands of locals who have been waiting for years, if not decades, for citizenship. Comments: citizen.nades22@gmail.com

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.

COMMENT | Fraud expedited, clean applicants left hanging

SNAPSHOT | Apex court to decide on Syed Saddiq's fate tomorrow; Harapan expected tough Johor polls: Loke

COMMENT | What happens to NRD officials involved in improper granting of citizenship?

'Heritage' players: EAIC finds irregularities, urges review of process, documents

COMMENT | Fast-track approval for imports, rejection for the native-born

COMMENT | If the law supposes that, the law is an ass