Terence Fernandez：公务员受制于人

一马公司丑闻令许多人身败名裂，这不仅击垮了一个拥有60年历史的执政党和政府，还有我国第二任首相家族的声望。

在前首相拿督斯里纳吉涉及一马公司案件审理中，揭露了一些政府高官被迫满足某方要求，修改一马公司的稽查报告，这似乎也毁掉了两个在职业生涯堪称的楷模，前政府首席秘书丹斯里阿里韩沙和前总稽查司丹斯里安比林。

不过，安比林处境似乎获得同情和支持，因为他和其他控方证人的证词表明，他是在不愿意和厌恶下，不得不接受命令篡改一马公司报告，之后才交给国会公共账目委员会审查。

安比林也承认，他在执行有关指示时，将个人感受放在一边。不过，一些人批评，这两人当时正确的作法应是拒绝时任首相纳吉的要求并遵守法律，或至少他们的良心。但是结果会是如何？

首先，他们受到《官方机密法》和《公务员的工作通令》的约束。同时，其他机构如警方及总检察署也已妥协，尤其首相的权力，在马哈迪第一次任相时就已伸展到这些机构。

唯一的途径就是向遵循首相劝告下行事的国家元首反映。当然，他们可以辞职不干，但这也意味著放弃退休福利。他们也很可能被指控试图通过推翻民选政府，而在危害国家安全罪名下被捕。

在当时情况下，什么事都可能发生。阿里韩沙和安比林当时的心态是怎样？

做对的事　谁来保障

别忘了，篡改财务报告的命令是在2016年。而一年前，即2015年7月29日，纳吉开除了原本的副首相丹斯里慕尤丁和时任乡区及区域发展部长沙菲宜，当时两人就质疑纳吉涉及一马公司丑闻。当时调查一马公司的公共帐目委员会也形同解散，一些成员被委为部长及副部长。

更何况，在2015年8月7日，反贪会特别行动组主任拿督巴赫里和策略通讯组主任拿督罗海查被调任至首相署后，阿里韩沙和安比林还能指望谁能给予庇护。巴赫里当时负责调查一马公司的子公司──SRC国际私人有限公司的案件，而罗海查则犯下了接见反对派的罪名。与此同时，反贪会的领导层也大洗牌，首席专员丹斯里阿布卡欣卸任外，副首席专员（防范）拿督斯里慕斯达法被调任为移民局总监。

还有，负责调查一马公司和SRC案件的特工队成员，总检察长丹斯里阿都干尼也于2015年7月27日提前退休。在这些前例下，收到修改一马公司报告命令时，阿里韩沙和安比林，肯定面对著庞大压力（和恐惧？）。当然，作为公共利益守护者，人们可以争议说，我们对这两人有更高的期望。

因此，如何确保作出正确决策／行动的公务员得到保护，尤其其行动可能招致政治人物的报复，在上述的案例中，他们面对的是其最终的上司，即首相本人？

首先，令人欣慰的是，希盟政府是一个政党联盟的政府，在这个联盟中，（不管如何尝试）权力都没有集中在一个人手上。

我们可以像许多国家一样设立公务员监察委员会，甚至维持和加强公共帐目委员会的功能。但是，如果这些成员依然是政治委任，他们就须顾及个人和政党利益，又如何确保公务员不会被牺牲，或者至少不会让公务员如总稽查署的诺莎娃妮被迫采用“创意”方法，留起一份被指示销毁的报告，以还原事实？或在修改一马公司报告的会议上隐藏了录音设备，以便国人有一天知道真相？

让我们以成立于2017年3月负责调查马哈迪在第一次任相时，国行炒外汇损失70亿令吉案件的皇家委员会为例，当时马哈迪和时任财长的敦达因都被由前政府首席秘书丹斯里西迪哈山领导的调查委员会传召。

509大选后，马哈迪及达因回到权力核心，西迪哈山的国油主席任期也届满。该调查委员会的另一些成员，公务员退休基金局（KWAP）首席执行官旺卡玛鲁查玛则被替换，而证券监督委员会主席丹斯里兰吉星的合约则提前两年终止。

如果我们的制度与政治人物无可避免的会犯错，期望公务员维持和推进良好的治理与透明度，似乎是太理想了。尤其现任政府在推行改革议程方面上，可说步态蹒跚，甚至显然缺乏承诺。

《公务员受制于人》（When one's head is on the chopping block ）原文：

THE 1 Malaysia Development Board (1MDB) scandal has resulted in many casualties, not least a 60 year-old ruling party and government, but also the good name of an illustrious family who's patriarch was the country's much loved second prime minister.

Revelations in the trial of former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, that senior civil servants were pressured into amending the 1MDB audit report also seems to put paid the long and exemplary career of two men former Chief Secretary to the Government Tan Sri Ali Hamsa and Auditor General Tan Sri Ambrin Buang.

The latter however seems to have been able to evoke sympathy and support as his and other prosecution witness testimonies revealed his reluctance and disgust in having to accede to orders to tailor the 1MDB audit report to make it look more palatable to public scrutiny of that of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).

Ambrin, it was testified was also told to put his personal feelings at bay and, in other words, look the other way.
Critics argue that the right thing perhaps for these two gentlemen to have done was to deny the request from the prime minister and follow the law or at least their conscience. But what would the outcome have been?

They were bound by the Official Secrets Act and General Orders. Institutions such as the police and the Attorney General's Chambers were compromised as the prime minister wielded such powers over these agencies seen only during Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's first administration.

The only other avenue would have been the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong, who takes advice from the Prime Minister.
They could have resigned. In doing so perhaps giving up retirement benefits. They could have been arrested over trumped up charges of attempting to compromise national security by bringing down an elected government. Anything could have happened.

What would Ali and Ambrin's state of mind have been?

The order to amend the financial report was in 2016.

Just a year prior, on July 29, 2015 Najib fired deputy prime minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and
Rural and Regional Development Minister Mohd Shafie Apdal for questioning their boss, involvement in 1MDB.

The PAC probing 1MDB was also dismantled when PAC chief Datuk Seri Nur Jazlan Mohamed was appointed deputy home minister, along with two other PAC members Datuk Seri Reezal Merican and Datuk Mas Ermieyati Samsudin who were appointed deputy ministers for finance and tourism respectively.

Another PAC member Datuk Wilfred Madius Tangau was promoted to Science, Technology and Innovation Minister.
What protection could the chief secretary to the government and the auditor general hope to receive when on Aug 7, 2015 Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) special operations director Datuk Bahri Mohd Zin and strategic communications director Datuk Rohaizad Yaakob were transferred to the Prime Minister's Department.

Bahri was leading investigations into 1MDB subsidiary SRC International Sdn Bhd, while Rohaizad had committed the cardinal sin of receiving a delegation from the opposition block.

Meanwhile the MACC leadership was also dismantled with Chief Commissioner Tan Sri Abu Kassim Mohamed transferred to UiTM and deputy chief commissioner Datuk Seri Mustafa Ali sent to head the Immigration Department as director general.

Not to be left out, Attorney General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail who was part of the task force to investigate SRC and 1MDB was also put to pasture via early retirement on July 27, 2015.

So with all of these preceding the order to amend the report the pressure (and fear?) on Ali and Ambrin may have been overwhelming.

Granted, as guardians of the public interest, one could argue that we expect better from these two gentlemen.
In the words of a former MACC chief who gave a dressing down to a top government official over the transfers of Bahri and Rohaizad: "The difference between you and I is that you follow instructions while I follow the law."
So how can civil servants be assured of any sort of protection by doing the right thing, even if it means inviting the wrath of a powerful politician, in this case their ultimate boss, the prime minister himself?

For a start, it is reassuring that the Pakatan Harapan Government is a coalition where no power is vested in one person (no matter how hard that one person tries).

We can set up a civil service ombudsman as they have in many countries or even maintain an enhanced PAC. But if they are made up of political appointees who are there to look after individual and party interests, what guarantees are there that civil servants will not be put in compromising positions or at least forced to come up with creative ways to let the truth put as employed by Ambrin who ordered auditor Nor Salwani Muhammad to save a copy of the final 1MDB audit report which they were instructed to destroy? Or Nor Salwani herself who hid a recording device at the meeting to amend the 1MDB audit report so that Malaysians will one day be privy to how those who took an oath to serve King and Country colluded to hide the facts and defraud the people?

Let us take the example of what happened to several members of the Task Force set up in March 2017 to investigate RM7 billion in foreign exchange losses in the 1990s when Dr. Mahathir was prime minister.

Both Dr. Mahathir and then Finance Minister Tun Daim Zainuddin appeared before this task force which was headed by former chief secretary to the government Tan Sri Sidek Hasan. After the May 9, 2018 elections which swept Dr. Mahathir and Daim back into power, Mohd Sidek was replaced as Petronas chairman.

Task Force members Retirement Fund Inc (KWAP) CEO Wan Kamaruzaman Wan Ahmad was also replaced while Securities Commission chairman Tan Sri Ranjit Singh's contract was terminated two years early.

MACC deputy commissioner Datuk Azam Baki who many feel was the rightful successor to Datuk Seri Shukri Abdull as chief commissioner continues to be number two as former senior PKR member Lateefah Koya was appointed instead.

So, while it may seem ideal to expect civil servants and those appointed to positions to maintain and advance governance and transparency, the systems we have in place are as fallible as the people entrusted for these responsibilities.

It does not help that the this is illustrated by the lack of commitment or at least the snail's pace from the present government in pursuing its reform agenda.