COMMENT Two recent developments deserve attention now: First, Abdul Khalid Ibrahim’s indication that the takeover of Selangor’s water concessionaires will be completed soon, which has prompted many to ask ,“What’s the rush?”.

There implication, therefore, is that there is some element of impropriety or corruption in the takeover.

        

Second, one of the lawyers representing Khalid in his suit against Bank Islam, Mathew Thomas Philip ( left ), interestingly released a letter containing some details on the settlement between Bank Islam and Khalid, which was finalised some months ago.

Many from PKR made the insinuation that Khalid ‘gave’ Putrajaya the water deal in exchange for ‘help’ in settling his Bank Islam loan.

I have often compared this accusation that there was wrongdoing in the Bank Islam settlement to someone accusing me of cheating on my girlfriend, with no specific evidence, time or place. If I didn’t do it, how am I supposed to prove that I didn’t?

Am I to provide details and recordings of every single one of my movements, 24 hours of 365 days of every year I have been alive in order to prove something in the negative?

I think natural justice states that an individual is innocent until proven guilty, and that the onus is on the accuser to provide evidence of guilt, beyond reasonable doubt.

How much is Splash worth?

The latest in the series of accusations against Khalid as the deal approaches completion is that he is ‘rushing’ to complete it, implying that he is desperate to sign a deal some feel compromises the interests of the rakyat.

That is certainly one possibility.

Another possibility is that Khalid intends to wrap up the deal before the new menteri besar attempts to buyout Splash, one of the water concessionaires, at its asking price of RM2.5 billion, instead of the RM250 million Khalid believes it is worth.

Some theories have it that this was the major impetus of the Kajang Move (it must be noted however, that there is no solid evidence to support such a theory - innocent until proven guilty should be applied consistently).

Wan Azmi Wan Hamzah, a major shareholder of Splash, has admitted that when Khalid refused to see him on the differences of opinion on Splash’s valuation, he asked his old friend Anwar Ibrahim to facilitate a meeting with Khalid.

The meeting did not end the way Wan Azmi hoped, apparently. If I’m not mistaken, this took place in either late December 2013 or early January 2014, just before the Kajang Move.

When the Kajang Move was first launched, many of us were confused as to why Anwar and PKR would go to such a length to pursue such an odd objective. After learning of the meeting between Khalid, Wan Azmi, and Anwar, it seemed perhaps a little less confusing, for me at least.

Unanswered questions

I am happy to report that I had a number of very civil discussions on Twitter regarding the timing of this water deal.

I saw a number of people asking what the rush was in a ‘caretaker’ menteri besar signing the water deal. Among those I engaged with were lawyers and lawmakers with sterling track records in the fields of activism and civil society.

In response to their comments on the water deal, I asked at least three of these eminent activists: “What do you think the proper valuation of Splash should be? RM250 million? Or RM2.5 billion?”

No one seemed able or inclined to provide an answer. When I wondered aloud whether the Splash valuation was a large part of the Kajang Move, more than one person responded that “The new menteri besar and exco must be accountable to the people.”

I most wholeheartedly agree with this truism, but I truly fail to see what this has to do with anything.

‘Caretaker’ is certainly one way to look at Khalid’s current position, but by the letter of the law, he is the menteri besar of Selangor until a new one is appointed, and Khalid therefore has to discharge his duties as such.

What should Khalid’s priorities be?

It is worth noting, at this point, that Khalid’s offer to the water concessionaires, valued at RM9.65 billion in total, is a figure that has not changed one bit since 2012.

In this regard, it is worth asking whether the deal that is about to be signed by Khalid is a new initiative that he is not mandated to do, or the culmination of a project that began even before the last general election?

The only ones who seem inclined to increase the price of water concessionaires are PKR , their supporters, and of course, the water concessionaires themselves.

I fail to see anyone else who believes that the rakyat’s money should be used to ensure a bigger payout for people who are already extremely rich.

Maybe, by signing the water deal on the same terms he has been proposing for years, Khalid is trying to prevent exactly that.

Assuming we accept that premise (which readers are equally free to reject), then there are contending moral obligations facing Khalid.

These include whether he is more morally obligated not to make major decisions since the people consider him a ‘caretaker’ menteri besar, or whether he is more morally obligated to finish what he started years ago, and safeguard the rakyat’s coffers from being pillaged.

Bank Islam settlement ‘within range’

Finally, on the Bank Islam matter, a few things are worth noting. First, the lawyer Philip essentially says that Khalid Samad did not an honour a request to keep their discussion confidential.

Second, many news portals reported the letter with a headline saying something like “Khalid sued Bank Islam first”. While that may be significant, that will not come as news to anyone who has bothered to do even the most cursory research into the case.

Third, Philip states that in 2007, before Khalid became menteri besar, an out of court settlement was ‘part of the overall plan’ put together by Khalid’s legal team.

Perhaps, most importantly, Philip goes on to say that the quantum of the final settlement that was reached between Khalid and Bank Islam was ‘within the range that we had originally advised’.

Now, if you were inclined to suspicion, you could say that Philip is lying, or is some sort of paid mercenary. It is, after all, fashionable in Malaysia today to say that of anyone whose opinion you don’t like.

However, if we take Philip on his word, we could interpret this as meaning that the suit between Bank Islam and Khalid resolved itself according to due process, separate from anything to do with Selangor, and in a manner that had been predicted by his lawyers as early as 2007.

Of course, some people simply do not like Khalid, and will continue to cast all manners of aspersions on the water deal, Bank Islam and so on.

However, until convincing evidence is tendered to support such claims, I, for one, find PKR’s reasons for removing him - in an even greater rush than the water deal - to be without basis, and in contravention of both due process as well as principles of natural justice.

NATHANIEL TAN is saddened that not enough people enjoyed this video as much as he did. He tweets @NatAsasi .