KUALA LUMPUR: The Defence Ministry has dismissed as untrue allegations by Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz that all armed forces land in the country had been swapped with a company purportedly controlled by three people.

In a statement, the ministry’s strategic communications unit said, in general, the ministry utilised various measures in development projects for the armed forces, including privatisation through land-swapping deals.

“The successful application of companies (involved in development projects for the armed forces) follows the procedures set by the Public Private Partnership Unit (Ukas). Every project involves different companies which do not have anything to do with one another.

“Every privatisation project which uses the land-swap deal method has to be discussed in detail by a ministerial committee and by a Ukas committee before it can be brought before the cabinet for approval in principle.

The Defence Ministry has dismissed as untrue allegations by Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz that all armed forces land in the country had been swapped with a company purportedly controlled by three people. (NSTP file pic)
The Defence Ministry has dismissed as untrue allegations by Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz that all armed forces land in the country had been swapped with a company purportedly controlled by three people. (NSTP file pic)

“Once this approval in principle is given, the project proposal then has to be brought once again before the Ukas committee chaired by its director-general. It also has to be brought before the Public Private Committee chaired by the Chief Secretary to the Government.

“There are several stages which any proposal needs to go through before it can be brought before the cabinet once again for every detail to be examined.”

The statement said any land swap deal involving armed forces land had also gotten the approval of the “end user”, namely the army, Royal Malaysian Air Force and Royal Malaysian Navy.

It said there were many things which needed to be taken into consideration when placing military bases.

“These include whether the location is strategic, base security, whether the location is appropriate for the duties base personnel will be conducting, as well as the security of the residents in surrounding areas. Therefore, camps and bases need to be placed in more appropriate places (than they may occupy at present),” it said.