COMMENT Since Barisan Nasional’s strategic communications director Rahman Dahlan declared that RM2.6 billion which had gone into Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s private bank accounts was a ‘donation’, and thereafter, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) ‘confirmed’ it, the entire episode has turned into nothing but a big joke on social media.

Various screenshots have been circulated about ‘donations’ and become the talk of the town. One particular piece that caught my attention was an interview with several billionaires from around the world, who were asked how they made their billions.

They each replied saying that they had come out with some innovations, but gleefully a political figure head replied that he had the best answer, someone just donated RM2.6 billion! It may not have been done in good taste, but literally this is what Malaysians and the rest of the world have been told.

Another one showed a common scene of a traffic policeman stopping a driver and asking, “Straight to the point, how much do you wish to donate?”

If anything, Malaysians have become cynical towards the present regime. It clearly shows the disdain people have towards politicians who should be doing all the right things to earn the people’s respect.

Otherwise, one cannot explain how, within less than a week, there are already so many people poking fun at our politicians out in the social media about this so-called ‘donation’ theory.

Who is to be blame when this is no longer one or two individuals but the entire population. It has become part of our culture that the moment you mention 1MDB, so many ears suddenly pop up and everyone gets excited. Who is to blame?

Changing label simply would not do

Controlling the social media or the Internet is not going to win the hearts of the people, but would turn out to be more detrimental to the government’s own credibility.

This is one reason that even former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad realised that he could not control the flow of information with the advent of information communication technology (ICT). The world is getting ‘smaller’ and the social media is here to stay.

There are certainly better ways to properly educate the Malaysian public about the proper use of the social media, but banning it and controlling how one uses it is as good as saying that the government should also ban Adobe Photoshop because it is used to put together a cynical message.

In fact, social media provides the best way for any politician to know the heartbeat of the nation. A smart leader would use it gauge the sentiments of the people, and see how best to turn it around. The true leader should find out what people are trying to harp on, until their voices are heard.

I guess the bottom line that most Malaysians wish to tell some leaders in the corridor of power is that they cannot blame others for their own folly. Neither can they change the definition of ‘corruption’, but simply re-labelling it as a ‘donation’, although both words may end with the suffix ‘-tion.’

One is ‘haram’; the other is ‘halal’. This is why it has not gone well with Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Najib was the first to claim the money that went into his personal accounts came from a donor in the Middle East. Malaysians would no longer accept such explanations.

This is the same reason why Rahman’s argument has been shot down instantly, not only by opposition leaders but civil society the moment he re-labelled the money as ‘donations’.

Even with the MACC arriving at the same ‘conclusion’ did not help to immediately put the matter to rest; in fact, it appeared more like a shadow play script.

As the proverbial saying goes, Rahman should realise that ‘as good a climber as the squirrel, in the end, it falls to the ground, too.’ What appeared first as a brilliant spark has become the laughing stock in town. It is the perpetrators of such a theory that should be blamed, not the social media or the already cynical Malaysian public.

Najib cannot expect that using the iron fist at this juncture would earn him the respect that was once enjoyed by Umno leaders. This is because the level of cynicism in society has already reached so high, that it would be much better for Malaysians to turn it into a joke than the storming of the Bastille.

Lessons can be learnt from the history books that anyone walking down the road of Louis XVI will end up with the same fate suffered by the French king. His biggest mistake was that he became too indifferent, and he had a wife, Marie Antoinette, who was his biggest liability.

The MACC Act is clear

In retrospect, neither Najib nor Rahman can blame the social media, the Internet or the cynical Malaysian public for turning this into into another joke, because they themselves have failed to even study the the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency Act 2009.

As someone has pointed out, Act 694 clearly defines the word ‘gratification’ as ‘money, donation, gift, loan, fee, reward, valuable security, property or interest in property being property of any description whether movable or immovable, financial benefit, or any other similar advantage.’

While the Act is clear, the act of explaining away the ‘donation’ is hopelessly muddled by ‘half-baked politicians’ (borrowing the words of Dr Mahathir); therefore, the solution is not anywhere near to the end of the tunnel for the current debacle.

Questions have been raised on what is therefore the big difference between the donations given to the DAP building in Penang, for example, and what is funnelled into Najib’s private accounts?

First, the donations which went into DAP’s building funds were meant to provide the political party a building from which it operates and serves the people more efficiently. No political party, for example, can claim that it is able to fund the purchase of their own building through membership subscriptions.

When Malaysiakini received donations from individuals and organisations, it was done in broad daylight. Donate RM1,000 and you will get your name inscribed on a brick. Nothing to hide.   

Secondly, donations were given by many individuals and channelled through an official account, instead of any individual’s account. Najib should have learnt from the ‘mess’ that adversely - and to some extent unfairly - affecting the reputation and the life of a former TV journalist when she raised funds for her hospital treatment.

One reason why most Malaysians frown at Rahman’s explanation that Najib as party president also doubles up as the trustee, is because using personal accounts without proper accountability has never been accepted in modern times. This is why there are legal provisions to set up trusts and foundations.

Rahman’s explanation raised more questions than answers. Trustees are supposed to account for the money channelled into its account.

To date, there are still no answers as to who contributed the humongous sum of money, and how it was spent, and if not all the money was spent during the last general election, where did the rest of the money go?

When the news broke out, Najib did not behave like a responsible trustee, but was evading the issues. This caused the tension to escalate and more questions raised. On top of that, the removal of former attorney general, cabinet reshuffle and elevation of public accounts committee members add to more suspicion. No amount of explanation can really win back the people unless the investigation is allowed to carry on.

Najib and Rahman should also realise that failure to account for the money that went into a personal account is a breach of trust, which can be either civil or criminal. To tell the people it is none of your business is to cause the people to become more suspicious.

Thirdly, the amount of RM2,600,000,000 is equivalent to the total reserve of the Selangor state government. Coming from one source in the Middle East should have raised alarm, especially when the person, or his motive of donating the money, has never been established.

On top of everyone’s mind is: would our country’s sovereignty be compromised? If yes, what is it? Answers have not been forthcoming. So how to blame the public for the level of cynicism?

Just for illustration

Assuming that you walked into your office one rainy day and found RM2 million in cash when you pulled out the drawer, would stashing it into your bag and telling yourself that it is must be a donation from Santa Claus be the right thing to do since you can heard the jingle bells song in the background and it appeared ‘snowing’ outside?

You would be shocked, and perhaps, you would miss a heartbeat or two. You would want to know why the money was in your desk or whether it was money coming from drug deals or illegal betting. There is no windfall, but rainfall (even a huge storm) will surely follow thereafter.

Such a huge sum of money that was left in your drawer could not be from Santa. There is no free lunch at the end of the day. Chances are that the money is a form of corruption rather than a ‘donation.’ The payback will be weeks or months later, not immediately.

Who knows the one who left the money in your drawer is ultimately the one who also reported to the anti-corruption agency? When that happened, whatever explanation given will just dissipate away because your integrity is gone forever the moment you succumbed to the greed and removed the money from the drawer and hastily rushed home.

Looking back, it would have been different if Najib had made an open declaration right from the moment the money was received. After all, this is the standard operating procedure that is supposed to be practised at all levels, even in the corporate sectors, whenever a gift amounting to more than say, RM500, is received.

If that the money was a donation from someone as rich as Bill Gates, for example, in return for stepping up an anti-software piracy programme, people may accept it.

Honestly, keeping ‘elegantly’ quiet and becoming defensive and evasive until the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) exposed the transaction is what put Najib in deep doo-doo.

This is the root of the problem which Najib and his men will now find extremely difficult to unravel since the people’s cynicism has boiled over.

What makes most people, especially his fellow Umno members, boil within is his sudden removal of Muhyiddin Yassin and the elevation of Zahid Hamidi as deputy prime minister, as a result of which Umno is losing more grounds. Smart move? I do not think so!

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

Related reports

This is Malaiseya

Donations? Why netizens are not impressed

The look and feel of a mafia nation

NGO: Stop harassing media over 1MDB reports

The straw that broke the MACC’s back

Perkasa: Reveal ‘hidden hands’ behind MACC raids

MACC director: By God, I'll find the culprits

Muhyiddin's daughter sings to comfort M'sians

Shahidan: Perlis Umno can invite Najib, Muhyiddin

No gov’t should hijack its investigations

PDRM vs MACC - a test of independence for both

So foreign donation now acceptable for Umno

Kit Siang: ‘Pakatan 2.0’ will be ready soon

Tuan Ibrahim: DPM sacking not helping ringgit

We lost our moral compass, not just two jets

Show voters how RM2.6b donation was spent