Media Statement

14 February 2022

Tan Sri Azam Baki should stop giving flimsy excuses for refusing to appear before the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on Agencies under the Prime Minister’s Department.

He was quoted in several news reports today saying that he has only received an “invitation” to appear before the PSC and not a subpoena.

It is normal practice for the parliament Secretary to issue a letter to government officials to attend PSC meetings. In October 2020, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) issued a similar letter to Azam Baki to attend a meeting, in which he complied and attended the meeting. Why should it be any different now as both the PSC and PAC function under the same parliamentary rules and procedures?

In any case, whether the letter is an “invitation” or a “subpoena” is a secondary issue. The PSC is more interested in examining the substance of Azam Baki’s share ownership and whether or not he has breached any laws or government regulations. This is a matter of public importance that needs immediate attention. Otherwise, the integrity of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) will continue to deteriorate.

Azam Baki also mentioned that the PSC failed to adhere to Parliament rules, that his share ownership issue was not referred to the Dewan Rakyat to the PSC for discussion. This is a complete error in understanding how PSCs function in parliament.

PSCs are formally established by parliament via a motion in the Dewan Rakyat. The motion sets up the terms of reference of the PSCs. Each PSC is then empowered to formulate its own agenda and work as long as it is within the scope of the terms of reference.

For example, the PSC on Agencies under the Prime Minister’s Department has called various agencies, such as NADMA, Permodalan National Berhad, and Insolvency Department, to its meetings without any issue. It is illogical and impractical for the Dewan Rakyat to pass individual motions for each of the PSC’s meetings.

Furthermore, the PSC has sought the opinion of the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department before issuing the letter to Azam Baki. As far as I am aware, the Minister has no objection to it.

Azam Baki need not assume that he is an expert on the rules and procedures of parliament. He should leave the matter to MPs and comply with the PSC’s instructions.

In any case, I will be requesting for the PSC to issue a subpoena to Azam Baki to attend the meeting under Standing Order 83(2) and Section 16 and 17 of the House of Parliament (Privileges and Powers) Act 1952.

Thereafter, there shall not be any more legal or technical doubt. If Azam Baki refuses to comply with the subpoena, he will be in contempt of parliament.

Khoo Poay Tiong
MP Kota Melaka