PKFZ: Why the U-turn?

April 17, 2012

PKFZ: Why a U-turn?

R. Nadeswaran (04-16-12)@www.thesundaily.my

NUMEROUS reports from accountants as well as lawyers appointed by a Port Klang Authority gave Malaysians an discernment in to a Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal that will cost taxpayers a whopping RM12 billion.

Enough has been said as well as written upon it as well as as a matter of policy, this columnist took a perspective that a law must take a march as well as any further comment, observation or decree would be seen as an overkill as well as a replication. The position taken was that unless there were new developments, it would be a waste of profitable space delving in to an practice of exercise as well as reminding readers of a infamous acts as well as omissions.

This mount was to change dramatically dual weeks ago Apr 4 to be exact. A cursory glance during a record marked "Work in Progress" that had not been perused for some-more than eighteen months prompted a call to someone familiar with disciplinary hearings of lawyers. "What happened to a complaint lodged by PKA upon a law organisation that acted for both parties?" was a casual question. The answer was stunning: "Didn't you know? The complaint was cold dual weeks ago!"

PKA chairman Datuk Teh Kim Poh is an aged crony you were in a same secondary as well as primary schools as well as a phone call resulted in a assembly during his PKA office. As I walked in, he was talking to a senior physical education instructor about benefaction negotiations, saying he longed for to be benefaction since "they brag our staff".

! We had m et in London late last year when he attended a World Ports Conference as well as after a prevalent compliments, you came to a serious stuff. Why did PKA repel a complaint? Teh was momentarily stunned. The subject had taken him by surprise. He longed for to know who had told me about a house assembly as well as a preference that was taken only 10 days earlier. The outmoded thinking as well as philosophy is that information as well as discussion upon each decision, however wrong, should be taken to a grave. But a letter to a Bar Council was a passed giveaway. It had been signed, sealed as well as sent in super-fast time three days after a meeting. How you wish PKA had acted during such speed when it came to "real issues" similar to buying as well as tenders.

First, it was a hostile declare theory. In what box will a lawyers who prepared a agreement be compulsory to testify? Besides, lawyers know their obligations when giving justification underneath oath. Some, when stumped for answers, look for reinforcements as well as this was no typical situation, as well as an additional physical education instructor stairs in to a arena.

Why, Teh asks a officer, did PKA repel a complaint? "Mr Kee (the former general manager) does not want to testify. So there are no witnesses," he replies.

But wasn't Kee destined to lodge a complaint? After all, Kee was never in a design when a agreement was sealed as well as when a purported crack took place. He merely acted for as well as upon behalf of PKA. All that needs to be tendered during a hearing is a agreement. So why a big fuss?

Shouldn't recommendation have been taken from a Attorney-General's Chambers for such a extreme step? The PKA is a government body as well as it is prevalent for recommendation be taken from government counsel. Why afterwards did it decide arbitrarily to ignore a preference of a previous house that saw it fit to have a complaint?

Kee's successor, David Padman, understandably was in a spot as well as needed guidance as to what to do next. He could have been destined to benefaction a PKA's box with a papers in a possession, or during worst, be destined to find a recommendation of a A-G. Instead, a house chose to enter upon upon a preference that cannot be noticed in any alternative way though as a annulment of a sound as well as reasonable preference done by a predecessors.

The subject upon a minds of most Malaysians is: Is a current house keen to move to book those concerned for a colossal detriment or will it have further attempts to sweep all underneath a runner to benefit a few?

R. Nadeswaran is not just unearthing a past though preventing a couple of tasteless events happening in a future. He is editor (special as well as inquisitive reporting) during theSun as well as can be reached at: citizen-nades@thesundaily.com

Related articles

Like this:

Be a initial to similar to this post.
Read More @ Source



More Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus |
Courtesy of Bonology.com Politically Incorrect Buzz & Buzz

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)