Who should be blamed over political funding issue? – Walter Sandosam

What is wrong has to be put right. Those who flout the law should be punished to the full extent of the law. If the Malaysian legal framework is lacking in laws to bring to justice the accused, then appropriate laws should be introduced so that there is clarity on what constitutes an offence and what does not.

Without these basics, we will all be just blowing hot air when commenting on issues based on our self-defined norms of good conduct, morals and ethical behaviour which is acceptable in our Malaysian society.

Political funding has always been recognised as an avenue for corruption to thrive. Money politics is, after all, the mother of corruption which breeds its own spin-offs and which then permeates every echelon of society.

Sadly in Malaysia, notwithstanding the efforts of independent agencies namely the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, the fight against corruption has become more challenging.
The lack of transparency and accountability when taken together are the most potent combination of toxic elements which go against the grains of good governance in an increasingly corrupt world both from the perspectives of the electorate and civil society.

The recent announcement of the setting up of a committee to study the  regulation of political funds has been met with much interest by various quarters - some in support and others who have greeted this initiative with much scepticism.

Issues of timing have been brought in as it follows hot on the heels of the revelation that a sizeable amount of funds had been given as a "donation" to a party leader's personal account prior to the 2013 general election.

Timing aside, the crucial issue is whether or not such reform to the current funding landscape is a good initiative.

The legal question that is at the heart of the matter is whether any laws have been broken in a political entity soliciting and receiving "donations" from a third party. The Bar Council opines that "donations" can be classified as "gratifications" and hence prosecutable under the MACC Act 2009.

This stance is but a legal opinion. There is a lack of clarity here with arguments   on what constitutes "gratification" and what does not. This is further aggravated if it is proved that the accused had used said funds for a greater cause and not for personal benefit.

Without transparency, one can't help but be suspicious of the origins of the money which enters the political arena. One is never sure whether the proceeds are from illicit and/or illegal activities.

The identity of the donor and the country of origin, if from an external source, also become part of the equation. The extent of influence that these unnamed donors can and will have on domestic politics adds further to the uncertainty.

Currently there is no legal framework on political financial disclosure. This is a fact. It has allowed for questionable inflows and all are suddenly aghast just because of the sums involved. If it were smaller, will we be so agitated?

Suddenly there are tales of webs of conspiracy and accusations of toppling elected leaders, so much so that we have forgotten what are the circumstances that has allowed such an unsatisfactory state of affairs to emerge.

Collectively we only have ourselves to blame as there is no law. If there is no law on political donations, then how can one be accused of breaking the law.

Ethics, morality and good governance should fall within a legal framework.

It is in this context that the initiative on funding reform has to be supported.

Transparency International Malaysia supports the move, commenting "better late than never".

The opposition as usual is disunited in this sphere. However, a major opposition component party has indicated that it will be discussing this within their own hierarchy before a stand is announced.

It has long been recognised that political funding is open to possible abuse and consequentially to feed corrupt activities on both sides of the political divide. What has happened to the virtuous manifestations on transparency and good governance? What were the challenges to more clarity?

Let not this golden opportunity pass us by again as it has been said that some years ago a similar initiative was proposed but did not get support from the opposition. This is a chance to get things on a more proper footing with a legislative framework to be in place before the next general election.

The Bar Council opines that this initiative will distract from the current focus on the RM2.6 billion issue.

Let's get real here. Are we so intellectually challenged that we are not able to focus on more than one issue at a time?

One must take into cognizance that the Bar Council is currently undertaking initiatives to help make MACC more independent. This is commendable.

Lest one forget though, that at the end of the day, no matter how independent the investigators are, the right to prosecute lies solely with the Attorney-General. The Bar Council could look at the merits of this.

Surely we, as the rakyat, can multitask. If the government is hell bent on diverting focus away from current issues by "indulging in side issues as a smokescreen" as claimed by certain quarters, surely it could devise other "distractions" which are more attention grabbing. This opinion is shallow.

It would be even more pompous to claim that this viewpoint represents the views of a majority of Malaysians.

Pursue the RM2.6 billion issue to the end and with as much vigour as can be mustered. At the same time, one has to look to the future.

This reform initiative should be considered independently on its own merits. It needs to be given its due worth and recognition as 2018 is drawing near.

Political corruption did not occur overnight. It is a consequence of years of questionable behaviours from corrupt politicians. This is the most appropriate time for lawmakers to set the legal framework for political donations.

The show must go on with or without participation from opinionated quarters based on their perceptions of reality and what needs to be conditions precedent.

They have only themselves to blame if laws are crafted without their input. As in marriage vows they should forever hold their peace.

We must be able to separate the "wood from the trees" and curb money politics. – August 23, 2015.

* Walter Sandosam reads The Malaysian Insider.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/who-should-be-blamed-over-political-funding-issue-walter-sandosam#sthash.Hfz0ZbAm.dpuf