Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is focused on reforms as part and parcel of his exit plan.

Man on a missionPrime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is focused on reforms as part and parcel of his exit plan.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is focused on reforms as part and parcel of his exit plan. He speaks to R. NADESWARAN and TERENCE FERNANDEZ on the changes he aspires to achieve before he leaves in March, as well as the obstacles in his path, and hopes Malaysians can set their differences aside and think about what’s best for the nation.
theSun: Datuk Seri, you have certain unfinished business which you are trying to settle before you leave office in March. Please tell us what your priorities are.
Abdullah: I’ll come straight to the point. I want to focus on key reforms. I admit that these are reforms which I should have done a long time ago; but what to do? That’s a long story … anyway, here’s what I want to deal with – corruption, judicial appointments commission and the special complaints commission (on enforcement agencies). These are the three important areas which I want to focus on because if we don’t address them, this nation will be in trouble.
Let’s start with corruption.
This has to do with integrity. One of the programmes I had initiated was the National Integrity Institute. This is one initiative, where you try to imbue quality and the credibility in the individual civil servant.
But how does this translate into having a civil service with integrity?
There are two ways to fight corruption – curative and preventive. If you just concentrate on curative, every time you get rid of one person, another fellow will come in. There will be no end. So you must concentrate on preventive. Preventive must go on as then it will deal with the curative aspect. You talk about corruption, it is corrosive, and it will affect our competitiveness, affect people’s belief in us and also affect people’s support for us.
If they don’t support us because they believe we have no integrity, and corruption is rife, semua habis!
But corruption is so widespread. How are you going to tackle something that has been festering for years in the three-four months that you have left?
It is not easy, I know. Some would say almost impossible. Corruption is not confined to the government service, even the private sector … everyone is tainted with some kind of perception of being involved in corruption.
But I assure you that as soon as the MACC (Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission) Bill is tabled in Parliament, (the first reading is on Dec 10) I will see Datuk Abu Kassim Mohamed (ACA deputy director-general) or Datuk Seri Ahmad Said Hamdan (ACA director-general) (who have been tasked with drafting the Bill). They are good men! Very honest. Both of them have promised that they will deliver and they have delivered.
Of course, Parliament is where it will be reviewed and discussed, so I hope everyone will look beyond partisan lines and vote for what is best for the rakyat.
We don’t think you should worry about this. How would Lim Kit Siang, Hadi Awang and Anwar Ibrahim explain to their constituents that they had failed or refused to support something that is good for the rakyat?
This is why I want all of us – from both sides of the divide – to think about what’s in the best interest of the people. Just because you are Opposition you vote against the Bill, this is not the way. But I am confident that everyone, my Barisan Nasional friends and my Opposition friends included, will support it. This is going to change how the ACA works. Mind you, you will see a different kind of ACA. One with clout and one that responds and is answerable to the rakyat.
Anyone who opposes the Bill would have something to hide – especially, if those opposed are from the ruling coalition.
Well, I suppose that would be the public perception.
What about the judicial reforms?
Judicial appointments are equally important. People must believe that the judiciary is a judiciary of integrity. If people have confidence in the judiciary then we won’t have to worry as we have someone who will look after our rights, someone who will defend us, someone we can appeal to.
And in my plan I want to establish a panel that will be responsible for the appointment of judges. That’s why these three are important as they are interlinked – judiciary, ACA and complaints commission These pillars are very, very important.
There was opposition to the composition of the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC). How did you manage to meet halfway with critics; and what guarantees are there that the JAC will perform the functions they are set out to do independently?
Firstly, I would not call it ‘opposition’, but differing opinions. This entity is very important to many stakeholders and as such, all groups have their opinions on what would be the best composition for the Commission. My task is to come to a workable compromise, after much listening and discussion with all major groups.
All groups come with certain assumptions about what will work, based on their research as well as their biases. This is normal – all groups have certain pre-conceptions but we all meet halfway when we discuss and see that the Commission will meet its core function, which is to propose the best names for judicial appointments based on clear criteria.
The JAC’s independence will be seen from the conduct of its members. In terms of procedure, there will be no interference from the Executive in the nominations of the judicial candidates. The members of the Commission will meet among themselves and decide on names based on secret ballot voting. In fact, we need to safeguard against interference or inappropriate pressure from all parties, not just the Executive. But I think this will be limited because there is a clear merit-based criteria as well as the character of the members of the Commission.
But how does one explain the choice of Tan Sri Zaki Azmi as chief justice? You have a former Umno legal adviser who leaped-frogged to the highest judicial position in the country.
Yes, but he was Umno legal adviser long before he was appointed (to the Bench). Anyone can engage him as a lawyer, but I know him as a man of integrity. He doesn’t mess up his work and has done a good job, so if he is assigned to another job, I know he will do it right.
He has already said that he won’t have anything to do with Umno. And he is ordering a lot of changes. He is a good man who provides leadership.
Was he your only choice?
Of course, I had a few people in my mind. I won’t discuss this of course, but he was the best candidate. The critics will make noise if he rules against them. But if he rules in their favour, he is a good judge, right? But anyway, the
judicial appointments committee will go through the names and see who will be on the Bench, and as long as we have good people on the panel, we will have good people on the Bench.
Datuk Seri when you speak of the reforms to these three pillars of justice, you must also address the public’s perception of the Attorney General (A-G)’s Chambers. As it stands, the A-G’s Chambers is viewed as the government’s legal adviser, so when it comes to cases that involve politicians and government personalities, there is the perception that the A-G is biased.
These concerns will be addressed through the reforms to the judiciary and the ACA that will take place.
Sir, if the system does not provide fair prosecution, your whole plan will fail. One good example: When Raja Petra Kamaruddin was released, the A-G’s Chambers appealed, but when Abdul Razak Baginda was acquitted, the A-G decided not to appeal. It is about public perception.
We will see what form of mechanisms to use. We haven’t lost touch with that. As in the anti-corruption initiatives, the senior public prosecutor can decide on the charges.
There was resistance to the setting up of a complaints commission on the police before. Why would those opposed to any sort of reform to enforcement agencies, especially the police be any different now?
I don’t think that anyone is opposed to ‘reform’. But different groups want to be heard, to give their input into the design of the reform. That is why the situation now is very different. The police have been more involved, as well as other enforcement groups. There are many things to be worked out but the important guiding philosophy for me is that the Bill must be workable – it must be acceptable to both the police, the ex-Royal Commissioners as well as other civil society groups. As in all things, this means coming to a workable compromise. It is a difficult process, but it is worthwhile.
When you started off five years ago, we were all supportive of you. What went wrong along the way? Was there opposition to your reforms and plans?
Reforms are not easy. I have tried so, so very hard and it is not easy. I know. I tried with the IPCMC (Independent Police Complaints and MisconductCommission) , see how difficult it was? You can’t just rush in and bulldoze through and have a "I don’t care a damn" attitude.
So there were elements out to sabotage your efforts.
I wouldn’t call it that but it was not easy to get people on the same page.
But you had 90% of the mandate – not just from Umno, but from the rakyat! People who would normally vote Opposition voted for Barisan Nasional. You could have capitalised on this overwhelming support.
Yes, my dear friend, but my survival is in Umno! If Umno doesn’t want me what can the 90% do? That is the system, unfortunately. This is not like (electing) the president of the United States who is appointed directly by the people (laughs).
Maybe you need to reform Umno first before you reform the agencies.
Ah well …
Pemudah was one of your master strokes. (Chief Secretary to the Government) Tan Sri Mohd Sidek Hassan is doing a great job, but do you think it’s a bit too late?
Well, I won’t deny it, but we could have started earlier. It is doing well. But you must remember my manifesto in 2004 was not a manifesto to be implemented in four years. That manifesto is for the second half of the period towards 2020. That’s the national mission! National mission is not for a four-year period. Without national mission you cannot achieve much.
And what is this national mission?
In talking about national mission, it must be based on the premise of developing our human capital. I’m not talking about human resource, but quality human capital. We have to make sure they are dedicated, physically resilient, have moral integrity … these qualities we must have. If we don’t have quality human capital, forget about national mission! You can have quality machines that can do all the work but ... machine is there (and) you don’t want to use it or don’t know how to use it, (are) lazy, can’t be bothered! Thirty functions, but you only use three, mana boleh pakai?
Creativity and innovation is the way. Machines just do the work for you. If you are stupid, the machine will not be able to do the work also.
Human capital development is about education and developing a first class mentality, a value added mentality. The clerks work differently today than the clerks of yesteryears. There is a revolution in the development of human capital now. Management gurus are everywhere! This is how we can go forward, by adding quality and value. It is going to be difficult, but we can do it.
It sounds all good, but we need a tangible beginning. Where do we start?
Close the disparity gap. We should not talk about ethnic gap, we must talk about economic gap … When I introduced the corridors of development, they were for equal distribution of …
Wealth?
Opportunity! Not wealth! Opportunities … this is what developing the human capital is all about – providing equal opportunities to create wealth. Good quality schools in the villages that can produce brilliant students, but if you get lousy schools, teachers not trained … where in the urban areas, you have good schools, but in the rural areas, lousy schools. This is injustice, that’s why the equal distribution of opportunity is important. We are talking about the economic gap not the ethnic gap. This is the whole idea of the economic corridors.
You talk about human capital development, but are all parties within the BN on the same page on this? It seems that politicians prefer popular figures than those who can actually do the work. Look at the MIC, there are so many intellects out there who are willing to contribute to the upliftment of the Indian community. However, they complain that they can only do so through the MIC.
The system can prevent; the system can promote. It depends on the people and the leadership. But yes, I agree that you must have people who can work. It is not a popularity contest. There used to be accusations that the leadership is anti-intellect. But now, in the cabinet there are many I think who are qualified to do the job.
The component parties in the BN after the last elections are being increasingly aware of the importance that the party has to rebuild its credibility and its capability to serve.
You visited the Immigration Department soon after taking office. Your initiatives brought a lot of support and we saw some changes in the administration of the department. But then your officers and even some ministers were not on the same page. One said set up task force; others said set up committees, while some did not move at all! What went wrong where?
I know! I know! Different people have a different view of how their departments should be running. Some people tackle issues differently. While I may want to see immediate results others may want to take their time in doing things.
But should they not be given goals and deadlines?
This is how I do it: I tell them these are the objectives given to you, the period given to achieve. How you do it is up to you but I want it. I want this! And that you have to deliver to me. Maybe to some it is not an appropriate style, it has its weaknesses as some people need to be taught, to be guided. I have a tendency where I put down the objectives; I give you the budget to do it; so I want it done.
One thing we seldom see is that even with change in ministers, it is the same civil servant who implements things. But if civil servants become subservient to the administration, to the ministers, then there is a tendency of putting paid to your plans.
The setting up of Pemudah is based on the fact that if you want everyone to do their jobs correctly, you have to spell it out in detail. General rules result in so many interpretations and this leads to delays. Pemudah goes into details on what needs to be done and how it needs to be done.
Pemudah deals with the system. You must get the systems right, regulations right, instructions must be written out and understood clearly. We cannot leave everything to the imagination or everything to the initiative. We have to prescribe it. On the subject of motivation and self improvement, it is handled by other agencies like Intan and the National Integrity Institute to ensure the quality of civil servants and that this is the right man for the job in terms of attitude towards work. This is back to human capital again. How to add value to the person who is going to undertake all these tasks!
So it is up to the individual on how he views his job and if he has the backbone to stand up to superiors who work contrary to the national mission?
The whole institution is to the rakyat. Everyone works for the rakyat but the culture of the work is that you have to work as a team and you cannot be working for yourself or some individual. You must be loyal to the team, you try to dribble by yourself like in football, you will never go through.
Datuk Seri, we didn’t have the space to write for such a long time. People can now voice their opinions more vocally and publicly. Do you regret loosening the reins?
All this freedom of speech and all that ... I have given the space but it must commensurate with responsibility … a sense of balance and proportion is very, very important.
If you want to exercise your right to speak, yes, go ahead, but you must be mindful of your responsibilities. You claim the right to speak; you must also listen to others.
Every PM wants to be remembered for something. Is this your legacy? The reformation of Malaysia?
I don’t know if people are conscious about leaving a legacy or just doing the right thing while you have a chance to do so. This is what I am doing. If the people say what Pak Lah is doing is good, then good-lah! So when I decided on the development of the soft infrastructure – the heart, the human being – a long-time colleague of mine said: "Tell Pak Lah he chose something to do that people find it difficult to see.
"Ask him to do something that people can see. Human capital development nobody can see!"
But it is okay because I believe that 2020 cannot be achieved without a quality, dynamic human capital.
Some opine that in pursuing development during the Mahathir years, this nation had lost its soul and values, and Pak Lah is trying to regain our lost identity as a people with high moral and ethical values. Is that a correct assessment of the last five years?
If I have to do something I will. You do something when you are given a task, the value of what you do whether it is good or not, it is for the people to judge. If they like good, if not too bad.
But yes, it is very difficult to change some mindsets and I wish I had started on some of these (reforms) earlier. I hope everyone as human beings just remembers to do what is right, no matter how difficult it may seem.
Updated: 10:10AM Thu, 04 Dec 2008