Minister says he does not order ACA to investigate
Bernama (22/5/08): Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz said he had not been ordering the Anti-Corruption (ACA) Agency to investigate any case or to take statements.
He said the ACA, however, did contact him regarding a statement made by a Barisan Nasional Member of Parliament that he was offered money by the opposition to cross over.
"Since the ACA had contacted me, I asked them to get in touch with the Kota Belud MP and make a report.
They did not ask for permission (to investigate). They just informed (about the MP's statement) to facilitate their work," he said in the Dewan Rakyat today when winding up the debate on the King's address.
"If I was not informed about it, how would I be able to reply to Lim Kit Siang's (DAP-Ipoh Timur) questions on the issue," he said in reply to Mahfuz Omar (PAS-Pokok Sena) who had asked whether the ACA had to seek permission each time it wanted to act.
On May 15, Kota Belud MP Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahalan revealed that he was offered a large sum of money "that could last for three generations" if he defected to the opposition.
Nazri was also bombarded with questions, especially from opposition lawmakers, as to why the use of delible ink for voters was cancelled only three days before the March 8 general election, why there were conflicting statements between the prime minister and the Election Commission (EC) chairman on the matter, from where the ink was bought and what happened to it now.
He explained that the cancellation was because of the legal implications if some voters refused to be tainted with the ink (on their finger) while they had the right to vote under the Federal Constitution.
He said the use of indelible ink was to prevent multiple voting by any voter but if some voters refused the ink use, then it would defeat its purpose.
Opposition leader Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail (PKR-Permatang Pauh), Fong Po Kuan (DAP-Batu Gajah), Khalid Samad (PAS-Shah Alam), Dr Zulkifli Ahmad (PAS-Kuala Selangor) and Mahfuz all stood up to ask who had lied and who was responsible in the matter.
Nazri said when the Attorney-General informed the cabinet that the use of the indelible ink would have legal implications, it rejected the use and informed the EC about it.
"The cabinet had conveyed its rejection but it did not mean that it ordered the EC not to use the ink. Rejection and ordering are two different things," he added.
He said the ACA, however, did contact him regarding a statement made by a Barisan Nasional Member of Parliament that he was offered money by the opposition to cross over.
"Since the ACA had contacted me, I asked them to get in touch with the Kota Belud MP and make a report.
They did not ask for permission (to investigate). They just informed (about the MP's statement) to facilitate their work," he said in the Dewan Rakyat today when winding up the debate on the King's address.
"If I was not informed about it, how would I be able to reply to Lim Kit Siang's (DAP-Ipoh Timur) questions on the issue," he said in reply to Mahfuz Omar (PAS-Pokok Sena) who had asked whether the ACA had to seek permission each time it wanted to act.
On May 15, Kota Belud MP Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahalan revealed that he was offered a large sum of money "that could last for three generations" if he defected to the opposition.
Nazri was also bombarded with questions, especially from opposition lawmakers, as to why the use of delible ink for voters was cancelled only three days before the March 8 general election, why there were conflicting statements between the prime minister and the Election Commission (EC) chairman on the matter, from where the ink was bought and what happened to it now.
He explained that the cancellation was because of the legal implications if some voters refused to be tainted with the ink (on their finger) while they had the right to vote under the Federal Constitution.
He said the use of indelible ink was to prevent multiple voting by any voter but if some voters refused the ink use, then it would defeat its purpose.
Opposition leader Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail (PKR-Permatang Pauh), Fong Po Kuan (DAP-Batu Gajah), Khalid Samad (PAS-Shah Alam), Dr Zulkifli Ahmad (PAS-Kuala Selangor) and Mahfuz all stood up to ask who had lied and who was responsible in the matter.
Nazri said when the Attorney-General informed the cabinet that the use of the indelible ink would have legal implications, it rejected the use and informed the EC about it.
"The cabinet had conveyed its rejection but it did not mean that it ordered the EC not to use the ink. Rejection and ordering are two different things," he added.
0 comments:
Post a Comment