Who Is the Woman at the Heart of Malaysia’s Anti-Corruption Protests?

Yenni Kwok

TIME

23rd Nov. 2016

On Wednesday morning, hundreds of women in yellow T-shirts marched to the parliamentary building in the Malaysian capital, Kuala Lumpur, demanding the release of activist Maria Chin Abdullah, who was arrested last Friday. They carried banners and placards that said: “Women 4 Maria” and “Free Maria.”

The march marks the fifth day since Chin, chairperson of Bersih 2.0, a pro-democracy and anticorruption coalition group, was arrested last Friday, on the eve of a massive Bersih protest in the Malaysian capital.

Along with Chin, Malaysian authorities also nabbed her Bersih colleague Mandeep Karpal Singh and at least 12 other activists. All have been released, except Chin, the only one detained under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act, or SOSMA, an antiterrorism law that allows detention for up to 28 days without trial. The 60-year-old activist — who suffers from hypertension, high blood pressure and osteoarthritis — is reportedly being held in solitary confinement in a cell without windows and with lights kept on around the clock.

“This amounts to torture,” says a statement from the Joint Action Group for Gender Equality, which organized the women’s march Wednesday.

Rights activists say Chin’s detention is unprecedented. “It’s the first time that a woman human-rights defender has been detained under SOSMA,” Lee Wei San, program coordinator at the All Women’s Action Society (AWAM), tells TIME.

Bersih — which means clean in Malay — has vowed to hold a candlelight vigil every day until she is released. Hundreds of people have been flocking to the vigil each night, including former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, a fierce critic of Prime Minister Najib Razak, and his wife Siti Hasmah. The hashtags #BebasMaria (Free Maria) and #MansuhSOSMA (Repeal Sosma) are trending on Malaysian social media.

Chin, who calls herself a feminist and a human-rights activist, has been part of Malaysia’s women movement for three decades. She helped set up AWAM in 1985 after she returned from her studies in London. She is currently the executive director of Empower, a nongovernmental organization that encourages women and young people to participate in politics and to campaign for civil liberties. (Empower’s office is also the secretariat of Bersih 2.0.) This sort of work has earned much respect from Malaysia’s civil society, especially from women activists.

“She is amazing,” Lee says about Chin. “Through Empower, she got to know women political leaders and have good relations with women leaders in the opposition.”

Chin was born in 1956 in the U.K., where her father was studying at that time, and later grew up in Malaysia. She converted to Islam to marry fellow activist Yunus Ali in 1993 — they had met in the 1970s when he was exiled in London. “We had a lot in common, especially over what was happening in the country. And he was interested in women’s rights, which was quite rare then,” Chin said about her late husband in an interview with Singapore’s Straits Times last year.

In 1987, Yunus was arrested under the Internal Security Act — the draconian law that was later replaced with SOSMA — along with some 100 other dissidents. It became a catalyst for Chin to focus on activism, and she was grateful that her husband “gave me that space for my involvement.” (Yunus died of kidney failure in 2010.)

She took the helm of Bersih 2.0 in 2013, when she was elected to succeed human-rights lawyer Ambiga Sreenevasan — now her legal adviser.

Analysts have pointed out that, unlike its first incarnation, whose leaders were primarily male and Muslim, the relaunched Bersih movement, which held its first rally in 2011, has been led by women unrelated to influential male politicians — an unusual feat in Malaysia.

Last week’s arrest wasn’t Chin’s first in her capacity as Bersih leader. On Sept. 8, 2015, she and eight other activists were arrested and charged for taking part in an allegedly unlawful assembly in March. In the weeks leading to the Saturday rally, she, her sons and colleagues, including Ambiga, received death threats. Chin was unfazed, however.

“We want to make sure that the process towards that election is fair and what the people want,” Chin told TIME on Nov. 16, two days before her arrest. “It’s a struggle that we have to go through.”

“We will continue to list these demands,” she added. “At the end of the day, it’s the people’s power that will create change.”

The scheduled protest on Saturday went ahead despite her arrest the previous night. Tens of thousands of yellow-clad protesters took to the streets in Kuala Lumpur, chanting “Bersih” and demanded the resignation of Prime Minister Najib, whom they accuse of massive corruption.

On Tuesday, her lawyer Ambiga, accompanied by Chin’s three sons, filed a habeas corpus application seeking her release. “My mother is a very strong person,” her second son Aziman Yunus told local media Monday. “If you’re trying to break her will, no, you won’t.”—
 With reporting by Nash Jenkins

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 23 November 2016, 3:19 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Ex-BSI banker trial: Yeo Jiawei amassed S$23.9m in just 15 months after leaving BSI, say prosecutors

Grace Leong

Strait Times

NOV 22, 2016

Among Yeo’s assets were three Singapore properties worth a combined S$6.15 million and two properties in Australia worth S$6.3 million.

SINGAPORE – Former BSI banker Yeo Jiawei’s net worth escalated from S$2 million to nearly S$26 million in just 15 months after he left the Swiss private bank in Singapore, the court heard on Tuesday (Nov 22).

This wealth includes funds earned through “illicit means” and the “taking of secret profits” in transactions linked to Malaysian state fund 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), said prosecutors .

Among Yeo’s assets were three Singapore properties worth a combined S$6.15 million and two properties in Australia worth A$6 million (S$6.3 million), prosecutors said on day 12 of his trial on four charges of obstructing justice by tampering with witnesses.

“I put it to you that it is quite unbelievable to amass so much – S$23.9 million- in just one year and three months, by just acting as an ‘introducer, intermediary, independent consultant or relationship manager’,” Deputy Public Prosecutor Tan Kiat Pheng said in his cross examination of Yeo.

But Yeo, 33, disagreed. “This can be proven by facts,” he argued. “CAD forgot these are referral fees earned from one of the biggest sovereign wealth funds in the world.”

He pointed to former BSI banker Yak Yew Chee earning S$27 million from salary and bonuses from BSI from 2011 to 2015.

But DPP Tan countered: “Yak earned S$27 million in four years. You earned S$23.9 million in one year and three months.”

Yak was sentenced last week to 18 weeks’ jail and fined S$24,000 for forgery and for failing to disclose information on suspicious transactions – the first person to be sentenced here in the 1MDB-linked probe.

Yak was the relationship manager of Malaysian tycoon Low Taek Jho, also known as Jho Low, suspected of playing a key role in the siphoning of billions of dollars from 1MDB.

Yeo on Tuesday defended his earnings as “referral fees that were directly earned”. He said that “Yak took commissions as a private banker. There is a big difference.”

DPP Tan accused Yeo of “playing poker” with the court when he did not admit to using secondary phone lines, meeting his former boss Kevin Swampillai at Springleaf Park on March 20, staying at Jho Low’s apartment in Hong Kong in order to downplay his relationship with Low.

“To prevent the truth about your illicit wealth and dealings from coming out in court, and the CAD investigations, you obstructed the course of justice,” DPP Tan said.

But Yeo said: “Nothing I have done is illegal.”

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 24 November 2016, 5:01 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Sebagai juara hak asasi manusia, Aung San Suu Kyi mesti membuktikan bahawa beliau adalah juara untuk semua lapisan manusia, tanpa mengira kaum, agama, wilayah dan latar belakang

Setakat hari ini dilaporkan sekurang-kurangnya 86 orang telah terbunuh manakala 300,000 lagi telah melarikan diri di tengah-tengah keganasan yang semakin memuncak di wilayah Rakhine, Myanmar.

Human Rights Watch sejak Sabtu lalu telah melaporkan beberapa gambar satelit menunjukkan beberapa perkampungan etnik Rohingya di wilayah tersebut telah dibakar, dan menjadi bukti kepada pembersihan etnik yang tidak boleh dinafikan lagi.

Apa yang lebih mengecewakan ialah kegagalan pemenang Hadiah Keamanan Nobel, Aung San Suu Kyi untuk menawarkan keamanan, bahkan dituduh pula tidak mendengar keluh kesah nasib penduduk Islam Myanmar. Suu Kyi tidak menafikan tuduhan-tuduhan tersebut.

Kegagalan Suu Kyi untuk bersuara bagi pihak etnik Rohingnya yang teraniaya adalah keaiban dan penghinaan kepada hadiah Nobel yang telah dianugerahkan kepada beliau. Apatah lagi setelah partinya yang mengusung nama ‘demokrat’ berjaya meraih kemenangan yang begitu besar tahun lalu, bagi menafikan kekuasaan pentadbiran tentera selama lebih dua dekad lampau.

Walaupun operasi ‘pembersihan’ di wilayah Rakhine digerakkan oleh pihak tentera yang masih menguasai 25% kerusi parlimen Myanmar, kerajaan pimpinan Suu Kyi tidak seharusnya duduk diam, apatah lagi melarikan diri daripada berhadapan krisis pembantaian dan pelanggaran hak asasi manusia pada skala yang begitu besar.

Etnik Muslim-Rohingnya yang didakwa minoriti tak bernegara dan terus diburuk-burukkan oleh nasionalis Myanmar sebagai pendatang Bangladesh meski telah menetap selama bebeberapa generasi di wilayah tersebut tidak sewajarnya terus dilayan seperti haiwan tanpa tempat untuk mencari tempat berlindung.

Myanmar telah sekian lama menafikan hak-hak asasi buat etnik Rohingya, termasuk hak bernegara, berkahwin, beribadat dan mendapatkan pendidikan. Ini seterusnya mengakibatkan mereka ditindas dan memilih untuk melarikan diri, menaiki kapal-kapal menyeberang lautan tanpa mengetahui bila dan di mana mereka akan berlabuh dan menemukan tempat selamat untuk didiami.

Aung San Suu Kyi tidak boleh terus berdiam diri berhadapan penindasan zaman berzaman ke atas rakyat negaranya, apatah lagi setelah menggalas harapan yang begitu besar sebagai pembawa perubahan bagi menghentikan penderitaan etnik Rohingnya. Suu Kyi tidak boleh terus memilih untuk tidak peduli, apatah lagi enggan menyebut perkataan ‘Rohingnya’ dan memilih untuk merujuk etnik tersebut sebagai ‘Bengali’. Sikap yang sedemikian langsung tidak mencerminkan seorang pemimpin yang diharapkan untuk membawa keamanan kepada negaranya, apatah lagi sebagai seorang pemenang hadiah Nobel.

Kerajaan pimpinan Suu Kyi sekurang-kurangnya harus membuka jalan bantuan kemanusiaan untuk mereka yang masih terperangkap di wilayah bergolak itu, kalau pun tidak mempunyai kemampuan dan keazaman politik untuk menghentikan pergolakan dan pembersihan etnik atas dasar perbezaan agama dan keturunan.

Sebagai juara hak asasi manusia, Aung San Suu Kyi mesti membuktikan bahawa beliau adalah juara untuk semua lapisan manusia, tanpa mengira kaum, agama, wilayah dan latar belakang, dan bukan sekadar menayangkan ilusi juara hak asasi untuk kaum yang beliau suka sahaja, atau kelompok yang memberi kelebihan atau kemudahan politik untuk dirinya sahaja.

Malaysia juga harus mengambil iktibar daripada tragedi yang melanda Myanmar, bahawa pertelingkahan yang bertitik tolak daripada perbezaan agama dan keturunan boleh membawa akibat yang amat buruk kepada fabrik masyarakat Malaysia yang berbilang agama, budaya dan keturunan.

Untuk ke sekian kalinya saya menyeru rakyat Malaysia semuanya untuk menolak politik perkauman sempit, yang bermodalkan ekstremisme agama dan ketuanan keturunan, supaya negara tidak terjerumus ke kancah keganasan.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 24 November 2016, 6:15 pm and is filed under
Human Rights
,
International
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


MCA stand it cannot support PAS private member’s motion but would support it if the bill was moved by the government most shocking and unbelievable as it is downright unprincipled and irresponsible

The MCA stand, as declared by MCA President, Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai in Parliament lobby yesterday, that MCA cannot support PAS private member’s motion but would support it if the bill was moved by the government (reported by New Straits Times)  is most shocking and unbelievable as it is downright unprincipled and irresponsible.

Such a declaration should reinforce general concerns whether MCA and the other Barisan Nasional parties could be trusted to firmly and uncompromisingly defend and uphold the constitutional principles of a secular democratic Malaysia with Islam as the official  religion of the nation.

This is a matter of grave concern as  it is speculated that the next move of the private member’s motion of the PAS President, Datuk Seri Hadi Awang, is for the UMNO/BN government to take over Hadi’s bill and present it to the March meeting of  Parliament as a government bill.

Has MCA and the other Barisan Nasional parties agreed and authorised UMNO to take over  Hadi’s private member’s motion and present Hadi’s private member’s bill as a government bill of the Barisan Nasional government?

As far as I know, the  Cabinet  had not met  to give UMNO Ministers the authority to take over Hadi’s private member’s bill, or is the so-called Barisan Nasional consensus have ong ceased to exist, and Barisan Nasional exist only in name as UMNO can unilaterally and arbitrarily decide on behalf of all the other 13 BN component parties even on a fundamental question affecting the constitutional rights of all Malaysians?

Barisan Nasional leader should understand that the issue is not who is presenting the bill or motion, whether PAS or UMNO, but whether  the constitutional principles and basis in the Merdeka Constitution 1957 and Malaysia Agreeemnt 1963  establishing  multi-racial, multi-religious,  multi-lingual and multi-cultural Malaysia are upheld or undermined.

Hadi’s statement that his private member’s bill motion is no concern of the non-Muslims is both misguided and unfortunate, and one only needs to refer to his speech in the Terengganu State Assembly in July 2002 that Islamic laws will eventually cover non-Muslims.

He made it very clear that the hudud and qisas laws spelt out by PAS in the Terengganu Syariah Criminal Offences (Hudud and Qisas) Enactment will be imposed even on non-Muslism in the state “when every citizen understands them”.

Speaking at the winding-up of the two-day debate in the Terengganu State Assembly on the Enactment, he said:

“For now, it will apply to only Muslims but when the time comes, the

hudud and qisas laws will be extended to all non-Muslims.”

                                                           L

                This entry was posted on Friday, 25 November 2016, 10:07 am and is filed under
MCA
,
Parliament
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysian ringgit divides experts, with some seeing Trump, 1MDB risks

Leslie Shaffer

CNBC

24 Nov 2016

Malaysia’s currency has tumbled in the wake of the market’s “Trump tantrum,” and analysts disagree on whether that’s just the beginning or near the end.

The ringgit has taken it on the chin since Donald Trump’s surprise win in the U.S. presidential election on Nov. 8.

By Thursday, dollar had climbed as much as 6.5 percent against the Malaysian currency for the month so far, with the greenback fetching as much as 4.4630 ringgit, its highest since September 2015, and is flirting with levels last seen during the Asian Financial Crisis in 1997. On Friday, the dollar was fetching 4.460 ringgit at 10:06 a.m. HK/SIN.

At least one analyst thought the drop was overdone.

“We are looking at a cheap currency,” Tan Min Lan, head of the Asia Pacific investment office for UBS wealth management, said on Thursday. “The current account position is very comfortable. The fiscal balance is very well managed. The monetary policy, as well, [central bank] Bank Negara continues to have a very good standing with international investors.”

Tan said she was concerned about the high foreign ownership of Malaysia’s domestic bonds – at nearly 40 percent on some measurements – but she noted that the country was still rated single-A by the three major credit rating agencies Fitch, S&P and Moody’s.

“For emerging market investors, what they will compare Malaysia with is with your Turkey, and with South Africa and Brazil and Russia. Malaysia actually stacks up very well, if you look at all of the matrix,” the investor said.

While Malaysia’s currency may have been particularly hard-hit, it’s far from alone in selling off post-U.S. election.

Emerging market assets have tumbled in general in the wake of Trump’s upset win, as the dollar surged and U.S. Treasury yields jumped. That hurts emerging-market companies’ ability to service dollar-denominated debt and spurred outflows from the segment on the prospect of higher, less-risky returns on Treasurys.

Additionally, markets have been pricing in Trump’s aggressive rhetoric on curtailing global trade with the U.S., which would disproportionately hurt trade-dependent emerging economies.

But while UBS was sanguine on the ringgit, other analysts were far more bearish.

It’s “much safer” to position for the ringgit to fall further, strategists at National Australia Bank (NAB) advised in a Thursday note titled “Malaysia – Truly awkward,” which played on Malaysia’s tourism advertising slogan, “Malaysia, truly Asia.”

NAB expected that the dollar would fetch as much as 4.85 ringgit at the end of 2017, Julian Wee, senior markets strategist for Asia at NAB and one of the writers of the note, said via email.

NAB pointed to concerns over Bank Negara Malaysia’s warning to foreign banks to restrict trading in offshore non-deliverable forwards (NDFs) on the currency, which had fallen further than the spot rate.

While that move appeared to be only a reinforcement of existing regulations, it spooked traders. Markets tend to be more sensitive to tea-leaf reading over capital controls in Malaysia because the country was first to impose them during the Asian Financial Crisis.

NAB expected that even the central bank’s assurances it wouldn’t impose capital controls wouldn’t stem concerns about the possibility of that occurring. Capital controls would make it difficult or impossible for investors to remove cash from the country, making it less desirable as an investment destination.

“The Malaysian central bank’s attempt to use moral suasion to support its currency threatens to backfire, increasing pressure on the ringgit and potentially hurting growth,” NAB said. “Part of the reason Bank Negara Malaysia resorted to this heavy-handed approach might be that foreign-exchange reserves are uncomfortably low after having been run down in 2014.”

NAB also warned that disrupting the NDF market might “cripple” companies’ ability to hedge foreign-exchange flows, which could have the knock-on effect of hurting exports, economic growth and the external balance.

“The risk of a spiral into vicious circle should not be easily dismissed,” the bank said.

The analysts also disagreed on how much Malaysia’s current political climate might impact the currency.

Investigations and court cases were continuing globally into allegations that billions of dollars were looted from Malaysian state development fund 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB). The long-running scandal has included allegations that diverted funds flowed to Malaysia’s Prime Minister Najib Razak’s personal bank account and to his stepson, Riza Aziz, whose company, Red Granite Pictures, produced the film “The Wolf of Wall Street.”

Najib, Riza and Red Granite Pictures have all denied wrongdoing.

Last weekend, however, the electoral reform group Bersih organized a protest in Kuala Lumpur to demand Najib’s resignation. The rally drew as many as 40,000 protesters according to official estimates, but some claim the crowd was larger.

In the wake of the protest, at least 15 activists and members of the political opposition have since been arrested, including Bersih chairwoman Maria Chin Abdullah, who was taken in under a new security law designed to deal with terrorists.

NAB said the political turmoil didn’t bode well for Malaysia’s currency.

“The simmering political crisis remains and is likely to continue to undermine investor confidence with speculation about elections continuing to swirl,” it said.

But UBS’ Tan was unconcerned about the potential political fallout for the currency, saying that she expected the country’s leadership to remain “more or less status quo.”

“There are on-going issues, but the opposition is in disarray and therefore there is no alternative. And hence a change in government in Malaysia is highly unlikely,” she said.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 26 November 2016, 4:41 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
Finance
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The battle lines in the 14GE is “democracy vs kleptocracy” and  the political challenge is to create an united opposition  coalition committed to constitutional and democratic reforms in Malaysia

Former PAS leader and Kelantan State Assemblyman for Salor Datuk Husam Musa has  predicted that the 14th general elections is likely to be held in March or April, as he expects PAS President Datuk Seri Hadi Awang’s private members’ motion to amend the Syariah Courts (Criminal Juriseiction) Act 1965 or Act 355 to be debated only after the 14th general election.

Husam sees the move by Hadi to table and defer his private member’s bill motion for a second time on the last day of the 25-sitting budget meeting on Thursday as a ruse and “effective gambit”   to create a “win-win” situation for both PAS and UMNO – where PAS can  show that its “355” gambit was not a failure, and where UMNO can “milk” political capital from the issue not only in next week’s UMNO General Assembly but also in the 14GE.

Husam may be right, but there is another possible scenario – with Parliament meeting in March, but  no debate on Hadi’s private member’s motion.

Instead, the UMNO/BN government will take over Hadi’s private member’s bill, which had not even reached the “first reading” stage in Parliament,  and present it to Parliament as a government bill for first reading.  An all-party Parliamentary Select Committee will then be formed in the March meeting of Parliament to study the UMNO/BN government’s “takeover” of Hadi’s private member’s bill for a report to be  submitted to Parliament, whether  in the July/August or October/November meetings of Parliament.

The first question all the other 13 component parties in Barisan Nasional, whether MCA, Gerakan, MIC or the Sabah/Sarawak BN parties, must answer is why they agree with UMNO for the Barisan Nasional government to “take over” Hadi’s private member’s bill and present it to the March meeting of Parliament as a UMNO/BN government bill for first reading, to be followed by the formation of a Parliamentary Select Committee to study the Bill.

Was this decision for  the BN govenrment to take over Hadi’s private member’s bill the result of a Cabinet meeting and a consensus involving all the Barisan Nasional component parties, or was this another instance of UMNO unilaterally and arbitrarily rail-roading its way and imposing its will on all the other BN parties, as BN consensus have long ceased to exist?

Are all the other BN component parties going to adopt the MCA stand that although  it cannot support PAS private member’s motion, it would support the bill if it was moved by the government, ignoring the larger fundamental  question that it  is not who is presenting the bill or motion, whether PAS or UMNO, but whether the constitutional principles and basis in the Merdeka Constitution 1957 and Malaysia Agreement 1963 establishing multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-lingual and multi-cultural Malaysia are upheld or undermined?

One reason the 14GE may not be held in March or April is that the redelineation of the electoral constituencies presently undertaken by the Election Commission to ensure that UMNO can snatch victory from defeat and win  the next general elections by the worst election gerry-mandering in the nation’s history is not yet ready, as it must be passed by Parliament, though requiring only a simple majority.

Another factor in the timing of the 14 GE could be the 60th National Day celebrations on August 31, 2016 as the major celebration activities being planned would be designed to  create a “feel good” factor to  redound to UMNO/BN electoral benefit in the 14GE.

Be that as it may, the battle lines in the 14GE is “democracy vs kleptocracy” and  the political challenge is to create an united opposition coalition committed to constitutional and democratic reforms in Malaysia where the constitutional rights of the people of Malaysia, as well as the states of Sabah and Sarawak are fully restored.

There have been many reports quoting pessimistic forecasts of political and economic analysts that they do not expect major changes in Malaysia despite the political and economic woes in the country as the opposition is in disarray and the absence of an alternative to the UMNO/BN coalition.

Recent times have not been good ones for analysts and even opinion polls, as evident from the Brexit vote in the United Kingdom and Trump’s triump in the US presidential elections.

It is now  for Malaysians to prove analysts and opinion polls wrong that there could be no political change in Malaysia in the 14GE.

A pre-condition for an effective opposition coalition in Malaysia is that there must agreement  on a minimal common objective – to save Malaysia to ensure that Malaysia does not end up like Zimbabwe as a kleptocracy, Argentina as a failed state and North Korea as an autocratic state where the citizens have lost their basic democratic rights.

There are those in the opposition who do not see anything wrong with Malaysia being regarded world-wide as a “global kleptocracy”,  who want proof that “MO1” mentioned 36 times in the US Department of Justice (DOJ) kleptocratic lawsuit to forfeit over US$1 billion 1MDB-linked assets is the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak or want evidence about  the multi-billion dollar 1MDB global financial scandal or who are not outraged by the abuses of power resulting in the detention of Bersih 5 chairperson Maria Chin allegedly for being a “terrorist”.

These people may physically be in the Opposition, but their heart and soul are with Najib and UMNO and they will never agree to the battle lines in the 14 GE as  between “democracy vs kleptocracy”.

(Speech at the Kampong Jawa, Tawau dialogue on Friday, 25th November 2016 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 26 November 2016, 7:52 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Election
,
Najib Razak
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Trump Tantrum Puts Malaysia in Spotlight

By WILLIAM PESEK

Barron’s

November 24, 2016

It’s time the nation’s embattled leader looked in the mirror and examined his role in the ringgit’s recent plunge.

No country in Asia plays the blame game like Malaysia. When the economy crashed in 1997, it faulted speculators and Jews. When it stumbled in 2013, it fingered the Federal Reserve. When Prime Minister Najib Razak tried to explain away an ongoing corruption scandal, he talked of overseas conspirators. Malaysia’s latest scapegoat? Donald Trump.

Granted, this last deflection isn’t as fanciful as the others. Malaysia has as much, or more, to lose from the president-elect killing the Trans-Pacific Partnership as any nation engaged in the deal. And Trump’s shock victory on Nov. 8 has emerging markets running scared about the direction of American economic and foreign policy.

But blaming Trump for the ringgit’s dismal performance is just shameless. Valid reasons for the currency’s 5% plunge over the last 17 days include an outsized dependence on oil revenue, the failure by a succession of leaders over the last 20 years to restructure the economy and the scandals overwhelming Najib’s government and his party.

Disarray in Putrajaya is eclipsing a reasonably good macroeconomic picture. The economy grew 4.3% last quarter from a year earlier. The problem, though, is a debt-laden national balance sheet, policy paralysis and darkening global trade picture. As Adam Slater of Oxford Economics points out, Malaysia faces capital-outflow risks even if Trump proves to be “benign” for the global economy. Slater lists Najib’s nation along with Colombia, Egypt, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey and Vietnam as weak global links no matter what Trump does, or doesn’t.

It’s time Putrajaya owned that – and looked in the mirror. Instead, it’s once again treating symptoms or “Malaise-ia,” as some economists call it, not the underling ailments. Markets are buzzing, for example, about the return of capital controls, a policy that harkens back to the darkest days of 1997 and 1998. Bank Negara Malaysia recently tiptoed in that direction, clamping down on offshore ringgit trading. The step resulted in confusion and a sense of financial limbo at the very worst moment.

Déjà vu, too. Najib’s team can’t nix the parallels to then-Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad’s 1998 move to peg the ringgit at 3.8 to the dollar and ban offshore currency dealing. Mahathir blamed U.S. billionaire George Soros, his fellow “rogue speculators” and some shadowy cabal of Jews attacking his Muslim-majority nation. Now, the focus is on another American billionaire. But here’s the thing. Malaysia is free to blame the “Trump tantrum” for forcing it to put the training wheels back on. Or it can internalize why, 18 years on, it’s still so vulnerable to the whims of traders.

Global funds hold more than a third of government debt. That could be seen as a sign of openness and Malaysia’s relative attractiveness. But without concrete steps to modernize the economy, it leaves the economy perennially exposed to emerging-market volatility. It’s troubling to see Malaysia again favoring limits on capital over getting under the economy’s hood. If Malaysia goes too far, it risks “scaring away” foreign investors, warns Brown Brothers Harriman.

Another big question is whether Bank Negara will intervene. The good news is that foreign currency reserves are much higher than in the late 1990s, reaching a peak of $141 billion in 2013. The bad: reserves are about 30% below that level, making Governor Muhammad bin Ibrahim think twice about joining peers in Indonesia and India in supporting currencies. It also limits his latitude to cut interest rates (Malaysia left rates alone yesterday).

But Bank Negara isn’t well placed to control the offshore market in the long run. Traders know that, as of Nov. 15, it only had reserves equivalent to 1.2 times short-term external debt – or enough to handle 8.4 months of retained imports. Not exactly where a developing nation wants to be in 2016.

The onus is on Najib’s government to diversify growth sources. It must dismantle an antiquated affirmative-action program that discriminates against non-Malays, killing innovation, depressing productivity and repelling foreign investment. It also must tackle the crony capitalism that concentrates the benefits of growth among the elites.

Scandals surrounding 1Malaysia Development Berhad, the investment program Najib created in 2009, say it all. Rather than get to the bottom of billions of missing dollars – or the $700 million in Najib’s personal accounts – the ruling United Malays National Organisation circled the wagons, obfuscated and blamed oversees interests looking to embarrass Malaysia. And yet overseas investigators in Hong Kong, Luxembourg, Seychelles, Singapore, Switzerland, the United Arab Emirates and the U.S. are unearthing troubling truths at the root of why investors are turning on Malaysia.

Odds are, Trump will end up copping to any number of market calamities in his four-year term. Emerging economies are right to be worried. But if Najib thinks he can put Malaysia’s troubles at Trump’s Oval Office door, he’s sorely mistaken.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 26 November 2016, 12:57 pm and is filed under
Economics
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why is Maria Chin held under Sosma for Bersih receiving puny funds from OSF while Najib goes scot-free for receiving  astronomical  RM4.2 billion from foreigners?

The Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar made a splash of a news earlier this  evening, announcing that Bersih chairperson Maria Chin Abdullah is safe and in good health and that she had been provided with a mattress and pillow due to her feeling uncomfortable sleeping on the wooden floor in her cell.

It is sad that Khalid did not realise that the announcement did not reflect on his sensitivity but the opposite, that it has to take a week for the head of the Police to realise that it is cruel, heartless and insensitive for the IGP not to take all necessary steps to ensure that a defenceless 60-year-old woman should be treated with all the decency and humanity she deserved while under police incarceration, on top of the baseless charge of detaining her whether as a terrorist or a traitor when she should be treated as a patriot par excellence of  Malaysia.

Khalid cannot stop Malaysians from asking, even though not in his presence, as to why Maria Chin is held under Sosma for Bersih receiving puny funds from Open Society Foundation (OSF) while the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak can go scot-free for receiving astronomical RM4.2 billion from foreigners?

Maria Chin and Bersih had always advocated peaceful, non-violent and democratic process to bring about public awareness and public pressures for change, yet she  could be treated like a terrorist to be placed under Sosma allowing for up to 28 days of detention without trial.

What has the nation  become 60 years after Merdeka and 53 years after Malaysia?

Yet the thugs and ruffians in  society, who stormed Parliament  trying to beat up Amanah MP for Shah Alam, Khalid Samad, or disrupted an exhibition by cartoonist Zunar in Penang, are  given the tardy treatment by the police.

The police have shown their professionalism last Saturday when Bersih 5 rally was held in Kuala Lumpur, ensuring that it was incident-free despite threats and provocations by the rowdy Red Shirts.

This is proof that the police personnel could be depended upon to carry out their professional duties to uphold the rule of law and ensure peace and order if there is no political interference, whether by their political masters or their superiors playing the political game of their masters.

There can be no basis to continue the detention of Maria Chin, and I call for the immediate  release of the  Bersih Chairperson without any conditions even before her habeas corpus application goes to court next Tuesday.

[Speech(2)  at the Kampong Jawa, Tawau dialogue on Friday, 25th November 2016 at 9 pm]

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 26 November 2016, 8:56 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAP to launch a RCI into whether dreams and aspirations of Sabahans in forming Malaysia had been fulfilled or betrayed since 1963

I first visited Sabah on May 13, 1969 – the black-letter day for Malaysia when racial riots took place in Kuala Lumpur after the 1969 general elections.

Although I had been accused in the past decade by UMNO cybertroopers of causing the May 13, 1969  racial riots in Kuala Lumpur, I was actually in Kota Kinabalu to campaign  for an independent candidate in the general elections in the Sabah capital, as polling day in  Sabah was to be held a fortnight after the peninsular voting.

It was while I was speaking at the biggest public rally in the history of Kota Kinabalu at the time that I was told that racial riots had broken out in Kuala Lumpur.

My second visit to Sabah was in 1978. After a week-long visit to Kota Kinabalu, Sandakan  and Tawau, I had warned that Sabah faced three grave problems – the illegal immigrant problem, the crime situation and grave problem of corruption.

If my warning 38 years had been taken seriously by the relevant authorities, these three problems will not have worsened over the decades, reaching epic proportions for all these three problems.

In 1978, I estimated that the illegal immigrant population had reached 140,000 – earning me a public rebuke by the then Sabah Chief Minister, Datuk Harris Salleh, who said that such a figure was baseless.

Today, the statistics of total illegal immigrant population is cited as between 1.2 million to as high as two million and despite the Report of Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Illegal Immigrants in Sabah more than two years ago, the solution of the decades-long problem of illegal immigrants in Sabah is nowhere in sight.

The problem of crime in Sabah is equally shocking and preposterous. The Land Below the Wind is famous for being a land of tranquility and harmony, and I can still remember that during my week-long visit to Sabah in 1978, Sabahans reminisced  of the halcyon years in Sabah up to  the fifties when houses can be left unlocked, as  crime was virtually unknown in the state.

But in Sabah today, crime is rampant and ever-present, even striking in the most unexpected moments and places, and Sabahans have lost their fundamental human right to be safe, secure and free in their own homeland.

This morning, accompanied by the Sabah DAP State Chairman and MP for Sandakan, Steven Wong, MP for Kota Kinabalu, Jimmy Wong and DAP

Assemblyman for Sri Tanjong, Chan Foong Hin, I visited the family of one of the five fishermen who were kidnapped by the Abu Sayyaf group in the waters off Dent Haven, Lahat Datu more than four months on July 18.

All these five fishermen, Abdul Rahim Summas, 62, Tayudin Anjut 45, Mohd Ridzuan Ismail 32, Fandy Bakran 26 and Mohd Jumadil Rahim 23, are still in the hands of the Abu Syyaf group, which had demanded a ransom of RM8.5 million for the release of the five.  I am shocked that up to now the authorities, whether Federal or Sabah State governments, have provided no assistance to the five victims of the Abu Sayyaf kidnapping or their families.

Such crime would be completely unheard of and unthinkable before the establishment of Malaysia in 1963.

Corruption has gone from bad in 1978 to just downright evil today, with Malaysia regarded world-wide as a “global kleptocracy” with a “MOI”, while Sabah notorious as one of the leading states guilty of state kleptocracy.

Is this  what the people of Sabah bargained for when Malaysia was formed in 1963?

On 18th March 2010, during the debate on the Royal Address, I proposed in Parliament the formation of a RCI – a Royal Commission of Inquiry – on how the dreams and aspirations of Sabahans and Sarawakians in forming Malaysia had been fulfilled or betrayed in the past five decades as the country would be marking the 50th anniversary of the formation of Malaysia in three years’ time.

My proposal for a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) was ignored, and it is clear that the Barisan Nasional would never establish such a RCI.

In the circumstances, DAP would proceed to establish a RCI into whether the dreams and aspirations of Sabahans in forming Malaysia had been fulfilled or betrayed 53 years ago in  1963, but it would be a RCI with a difference.

It would not be a  Royal Commission of Inquiry as only the government-of-the-day can establish such a Inquiry Commisison, but a Rakyat Commission of Inquiry (RCI) for Sabahans, regardless of race, religion, region or class to speak up on  their hopes and dreams, their aspirations and  disappointments as citizens of Malaysia.

The Sabah RCI will deal with the three mega-problems of illegal immigrants, crime and corruption which I warned about in 1978; the three Batu Sumpah oaths of religion, land and native customs; the 20-Points; as well as the basic concerns of Sabahans on why after five decades of formation of Malaysia and four years before Vision 2020 of Malaysia becoming a fully developed nation, many Sabahans are still deprived of the basic facilities of piped water, electricity, roads, elementary health and educational services.

Let all Sabahans and Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, politics, class or region, co-operate to make this RCI (Rakyat Commission of Inquiry) into the dreams and aspirations of Sabahans when Malaysia was formed in 1963 a success.

There was a Cobbold Commission in 1962  which conducted a survey of the people in Sabah and Sarawak to ascertain the views on the formation of Malaysia.

Let this RCI (Rakyat Commission of Inquiry)  into the dreams and aspirations of the people of Sabah be a second Cobbold Commisson, visiting more places in Sabah.

The Cobbold Commission visited 15 places in Sabah in less than four weeks. May be the RCI should visit at least 30 places in Sabah to come out with a report, which should set out the agenda for Sabah for the next fifty years.

(Speech at the Tawau DAP Branch’s DAP 50th Anniversary Dinner in Tawau on Saturday, November 26, 2016 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 27 November 2016, 6:04 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


If Maria Chin is to be held under Sosma for 28 days because of a puny grant from OSF before 2011, then Najib should be detained for life for receiving RM4.2 billion from foreign sources

Gerakan President Datuk Seri Mah Siew Keong’s had been Minister for nearly two-and-a-half years after he defeated DAP candidate Dyana Sofya in the Teluk Intan by-election on May 31, 2016 with a wafer-thin majority of 238 votes.

Mah’s 30 months in Parliament and Cabinet are marked by three political and economic disasters: firstly, the government’s  increasingly repressive measures highlighted by the  undemocratic detention of Bersih chairperson, Maria Chin; secondly, Malaysia’s ignominy and infamy for being regarded worldwide as a “global kleptocracy”; and thirdly, the unchecked decline in the value of the Malaysian ringgit, reflecting widespread loss of investor confidence in the Malaysian economy and the country’s political leadership.

Gerakan claims to be the “conscience of BN government” but if  Gerakan is able to play this  role,  these three national blackmarks would not have taken place.

The Gerakan is not the “conscience” of the BN government, for Mah’s 30 months as a Cabinet Minister is distinguished by Gerakan  subservice to and compliance  with UMNO’s repressive and kleptocratic policies,  as Mah had not dared to say a single word whether about Maria Chin’s detention or the multi-billion dollar 1MDB global kleptocratic money-laundering  scandal, which catapulted Malaysia into the stratosphere of a “global kleptocracy”.

When will Mah and Gerakan speak up to demand the immediate and unconditional release of Maria Chin, and to condemn her detention under Sosma, which is a clear-cut violation of parliamentary undertaking by the UMNO/BN government that the Sosma legislation would only be used against terrorists and not peaceful NGO activists and political opponents?

Will Mah and Gerakan tell UMNO Ministers and leaders that If Maria Chin is to be held under Sosma for 28 days because of a puny grant from Open Society Foundation (OSF) before mid-2011 which had never been used for any Bersih rally, then the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri  Najib Razak should be detained for life for receiving RM4.2 billion from foreign sources?

Maria  Chin is on record admitting that Bersih had previously received funding from OSF in the form of a one-off grant.

She however denied having received any money from OSF since mid-2011 onwards and said money from the foundation had never been used to fund its rallies.

She stressed that the Bersih movement is  locally funded and fully transparent about its funding.

She said: “Despite many attempts to tie us to foreign interests, we are in fact a completely Malaysian grassroots movement.

“Even when we received funding from OSF, it was merely a token sum meant to be a show of solidarity with international civil society groups.”

She said the  sum of about RM90,000  was minute compared to revenue from its merchandise sales and donations.

In contrast, Najib had not only RM2.6 billion, but in fact a total of RM4.2 billion in his personal banking accounts from foreign sources.

As the astronomical RM4.2 billion is some 50,000 times larger than the puny RM90,000 which Bersih had received from OSF before mid-2011, should Najib be detained for 50,000 times longer than Maria Chin’s detention under Sosma – which will end up with Najib being detained for life?

(Speech at the Teluk Intan DAP Branch dinner to celebrate 50th DAP Anniversary in Teluk Intan on Sunday, 27th November 2016 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Monday, 28 November 2016, 3:19 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
Corruption
,
Elections
,
Gerakan
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Mah and Liow should explain whether they have given an undertaking that MCA and Gerakan Ministers and MPs  would support Hadi’s private member’s bill if it is taken over by UMNO as a government bill

Last Thursday, the MCA mouthpiece, The Star, devoted the whole of its front-page to PAS President, Datuk Seri Hadi Awang’s private member’s motion with the headline
“Solid ‘NO’ to Hadi’s Bill”
, featuring the quotes and pics from leaders of five Barisan Nasional leaders, namely from MCA, Gerakan, MIC, PBB and PBS, including:

*“The bottom line is that MCA will oppose it.  We will not support a Bill from the Opposition, especially from PAS. There can never be two systems of law in this country. We cannot accept it nor close an eye to this.” – MCA President Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai.

*“We remain opposed to Hadi’s Bill. Having two separate legal systems…will not only create confusion and an open-ended environment for opportunists but also tear the country apart.” – Gerakan President Datuk Seri Mak Siew Keong.

*“MIC vehemently opposes Hadi’s Bill. We need a proper dialogue to hear the views of Muslim and non-Muslim MPs. We do not want two contradictory legal systems. The Federal Constitution is the supreme law of the land.” – MIC deputy president S.K. Devamany.

But something happened before Parliament reconvened on Thursday morning, setting in motion a series of events in the next few months for all the Gerakan, MCA and MIC Ministers and leaders to start “eating their words”.

Mah and Liow were both in Parliament on Thursday morning  when Hadi stood up to amend his private member’s motion and bill, and it would appear that both Mah and Liow knew beforehand what Hadi was going to amend, and that they had agreed to Hadi’s amendment.

For this reason, I call on Mah and Liow, as well as the leaders of the other BN parties, to explain clearly and unambiguously, whether it is true that they had agreed to support Hadi’s amended private member’s motion provided Hadi’s private member’s bill is taken over by UMNO as a government bill in the March meeting of Parliament. This means Hadi’s private member’s motion and bill will disappear from the parliamentary agenda.

The leaders of Gerakan, MCA, MIC and the Sabah/Sarawak BN parties seem to have a problem understanding the meaning of “Barisan Nasional consensus” – which must be a decision collectively agreed by all the BN component parties and not one which is  just imposed by UMNO hegemony.

Let Mah, Liow and the leaders of the other BN parties confirm or deny that they had agreed and authorised UMNO to take over  Hadi’s private member’s motion, and that  their MPs would vote in support in Parliament so long as Hadi’s private member’s motion is  replaced by an official bill of the Barisan Nasional government!

[Speech (2) at the Teluk Intan DAP Branch dinner to celebrate 50th DAP Anniversary in Teluk Intan on Sunday, 27th November 2016 at 9 pm]

                This entry was posted on Monday, 28 November 2016, 4:49 pm and is filed under
Gerakan
,
MCA
,
MIC
,
Parliament
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


US ‘troubled’ over Malaysia’s detention of activist and Najib critic

Guardian

24th November 2016

Maria Chin Abdullah, who has called for resignation of prime minister Najib Razak, in solitary confinement under law intended to curb extremism

The United States has said it was troubled by the arrest of a Malaysian activist and critic of prime minister Najib Razak.

Maria Chin Abdullah, the chair of pro-democracy group Bersih, was detained on Friday under Malaysia’s Security Offences (Special Measures) Act, or Sosma, a law that was introduced in 2012 to fight security and extremist threats.

She was arrested a day before a demonstration that Bersih had organised for Saturday, when tens of thousands of Malaysians marched in the capital, Kuala Lumpur, demanding that Najib step down over his alleged involvement in a financial scandal.

“We are troubled by the ongoing detention and solitary confinement of Maria Chin Abdullah under national security laws,” Alicia Edwards, a spokeswoman for the US state department, told Reuters in an emailed statement.

The US is also concerned about the Malaysian authorities’ arrest of a number of other organisers, activists and politicians ahead of and during the demonstration, she said.

Nearly a dozen activists and opposition leaders were arrested a day before the rally but they have all been released except Chin Abdullah. Several were also detained on the day of the rally.

“The United States remains committed to the strong and growing partnership we have with Malaysia. In the spirit of that partnership, US officials routinely and strongly voice our concerns about the rule of law, human rights, and fundamental freedoms with the government of Malaysia, and we will continue to do so,” Edwards said.

Maria, who is 60, is being held in solitary confinement in a cell 4.5m (15 feet) by 2.4m (8 feet), where two light bulbs are turned on 24 hours a day, Bersih has said, adding that the cell does not have a window or a bed.

Under Sosma, she can be detained for 28 days without trial.

The Malaysian human rights commission on Wednesday said the arrest under Sosma was unjustified.

Several other rights groups have said the use of Sosma for an organiser of a peaceful rally is abuse of power and that the Malaysian government is trying to suppress dissent by using draconian laws.

Najib has faced criticism since the Wall Street Journal reported last year that around US$700m from state fund 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) was diverted into the personal bank account of the prime minister.

Lawsuits filed by the US justice department in July said over $3.5bn was stolen from 1MDB, which was founded by Najib, and that some of those funds flowed into the accounts of “Malaysian Official 1”, whom US and Malaysian officials have identified as Najib.

Najib has consistently denied wrongdoing and has consolidated power by sacking critics within his ruling party and cracking down on dissenting opposition party leaders, activists and lawyers.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 28 November 2016, 9:02 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Observer view on corruption, repression and violence threatening fragile democracies

Observer editorial

27th November 2016

Malaysia, Thailand and Burma are all suffering a backwards slide from the basic standards expected of modern-day representative democracies. While the reasons vary, the results are similar: growing public unrest, increased state repression, negative economic effects, weakened institutions and reputational damage.

Malaysia vividly exemplifies these phenomena. The former British colony has never been a faultless democracy. The United Malays National Organisation, representing the ethnic Malay majority, has held power since independence in 1957. The mostly non-Muslim, ethnic Chinese and Indian minorities, whose ancestors were shipped in by the British as cheap labour, have suffered historical discrimination, yet this furore has little to do with history, race or religion. It is about probity in government – which appears to be sorely lacking.

The problem centres on Najib Razak, the prime minister, who is alleged to have benefited from the disappearance of $3.5bn from a state-owned investment company called 1MDB. Last year, the Wall Street Journal reported that $700m was diverted to Najib’s personal bank account. In July, the US justice department alleged wrongdoing by “Malaysian Official 1”, identified as Najib. For his part, Najib flatly denies any wrongdoing.

However, his administration has delayed a parliamentary investigation, purged internal critics and further intimidated Malaysia’s much put-upon independent media. Demonstrators have been attacked by pro-Najib thugs and protest organisers arrested. Last week, the US expressed concern about the continuing detention under counter-terrorism laws of Maria Chin Abdullah, chairwoman of the Bersih pro-democracy group. No one has been charged over the missing funds.

This scandal has gone on for too long. Najib’s leadership has grown toxic. For the good of his country and its creaking democracy, he should stand down, at least until an independent inquiry has established the facts of the 1MDB matter. Sadly, the likelihood of that happening is slim. If Najib can survive in office, he will.

In this respect, his behaviour resembles that of neighbouring Thailand’s military bosses who, having seized power in a coup in 2014, ostensibly because democracy was not working, have grown adept at finding ways of clinging to arbitrary power. General Prayuth Chan-o-cha, the coup’s leader, who styles himself as prime minister, promised reconciliation and an abundance of happiness for the Thai people.

Instead, he has presided over a repressive political and media climate, an underperforming economy, a gerrymandered constitution entrenching military control and an upsurge in violence among the disadvantaged Muslim minority in the impoverished south. Now, uncertainty caused by the recent death of King Bhumibol Adulyadej has thrown into doubt the junta’s promise to hold elections next year, although officials are adamant that the polls will go ahead.

There is speculation that parliament, which will meet in extraordinary session this week, will invite Crown Prince Maha Vajiralongkorn to ascend the throne, despite concerns about what is politely described as his “colourful” lifestyle. Yet even these limited efforts to normalise the political and constitutional situation could fail, given Prayuth’s volatile, paranoid personality. The crown prince is said to have been close to Thaksin Shinawatra, the popular, former (elected) prime minister. Elevating the prince might threaten Prayuth’s stranglehold on power.

In Burma, disappointment attends the performance of Aung San Suu Kyi, the democracy campaigner who swept to power last year after decades of ill-treatment by the military (which renamed the country Myanmar). It is too soon to say that hopes have been dashed, but her failure to stand up for the oppressed Rohingya Muslims, victims of a renewed and lethal military assault since October, has dismayed her many supporters in the west.

Up to 30,000 Rohingya have been displaced in the north-west and aid suspended to 150,000 under the military lockdown. Meanwhile, renewed clashes between the army and ethnic minority groups are reported in Shan state – another return to the bad old days.

When it comes to reuniting a fractured country and rolling back the twin, malign influences of the military and Buddhist chauvinism, Suu Kyi’s powers are strictly limited. It seems clear that, like other parts of south-east Asia, the Burmese road to democracy is a long one, featuring numerous wrong turnings and dead ends.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 29 November 2016, 4:24 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Will Maria Chin be re-arrested after her habeas corpus case had been officially disposed off?

I told Bersih Chairperson Maria Chin after the moving “singing in the rain” at the corner of Jalan Raja, nearby Dataran Merdeka, last night by Bersih supporters that she had to thank the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak for making her an “instant heroine”.

Maria Chin expects to be arrested again by the authorities but she had pledged that this will not shake her spirits and her commitment to fight for fair elections and democracy in Malaysia, as well as the abolition of Special Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 (Sosma).

Will Maria Chin be re-arrested after her habeas corpus case had been officially disposed off this afternoon?

The Prime Minister and the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar should give an assurance that Maria Chin will not be re-arrested as she had been released ten days after her detention.

Will Najib or Khalid give such an assurance?

I had said that Maria Chin’s detention came under the definition of  3Vs – vicious, vengeful and vindictive.

If Maria Chin is re-arrested, then the authorities will be doubly vicious, vengeful and vindictive.

Maria Chin’s release did come  as a surprise, especially on the eve of the UMNO General Assemblies this year.

Was Maria Chin’s release because of her habeas corpus application today or was it because the authorities have finally conceded  that she is no terrorist (and Parliament had been specifically  assured in 2012 that fighting terrorism  would be the sole ground for the invocation  of Sosma provisions) and that she posed no threat and was not engaged in any activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy under Section 124C of the Penal Code.

Instead of detaining and investigating Maria Chia for engaging in activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy, the authorities should recommend that Maria Chin be given proper recognition for her activities safeguarding and promoting parliamentary democracy, as ensuring that elections are fair, clean and democratic.

But this does not seem to be case, if three police actions yesterday  are taking into consideration, viz:

•	the police raid of  the office of women’s group Persatuan Kesedaran Komunti Selangor (EMPOWER) in Petaling Jaya under Section 124C of the Penal Code for activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy and also under SOSMA;

•	the police summoning of five Pakatan Harapan leaders for questioning  at the Travers Police Station in Kuala Lumpur on the Bersih 5 rally, namely  the chief  of PH secretariat Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah; PH State Assembly members Ng Suee Lim (Sekinchan, Selangor); Dr. Xavier Jayakumar (Sri Andalas, Selangor), Norlela Ariffin (Penanti, Penang)  and Selangor PKR Youth chief Afzainizam Rahman.

•	Police investigation of Northern region Bersih co-ordinator and former Penang State Exco Dr. Toh Kim Woon over the “Free Maria” gathering at Penang Esplanade on Sunday and the Candlelight Vigil over Maria’s detention in Penang on Nov. 21.

I am surprised that the authorities seem to be persisting and even expanding their  investigations into alleged Bersih funding  by George Soros and the Open Society Foundation (OSF).

I had said that if  Maria Chin is to be held under Sosma for 28 days because of a puny grant from Open Society Foundation (OSF) before mid-2011 which had never been used for any Bersih rally, then the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri  Najib Razak should be detained for life for receiving RM4.2 billion from foreign sources.

Maria  Chin is on record admitting that Bersih had previously received funding from OSF in the form of a one-off grant.

She however denied having received any money from OSF since mid-2011 onwards and said the money from the foundation had never been used to fund its rallies.

The  Bersih movement is  locally funded and fully transparent about its funding.

In contrast, Najib had not only RM2.6 billion, but in fact a total of RM4.2 billion in his personal banking accounts from foreign sources.

As the astronomical RM4.2 billion is some 50,000 times larger than the puny sum  which Bersih had received from OSF before mid-2011, should Najib be detained for 50,000 times longer than Maria Chin’s detention under Sosma – which will end up with Najib being detained for life?

Will reason and good sense now  prevail instead of a hot-house atmosphere artificially generated as if traitors are to be found crawling all over the country behinds bushes and trees?

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 29 November 2016, 9:05 am and is filed under
Bersih
,
Najib Razak
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A Malaysian Political Cartoonist on Facing His Fears, and Prison, for Art

By MIKE IVES

New York Times

NOV. 29, 2016

HONG KONG — When protesters disrupted an art exhibition by Zulkiflee Anwar Ulhaque, a political cartoonist, at the George Town Literary Festival in Malaysia on Saturday, he assumed that the police would want his help identifying those responsible.

Instead, said Mr. Zulkiflee, who goes by the name Zunar, he was questioned by the police, detained for a day and informed that he was under investigation for producing cartoons that purportedly defamed Prime Minister Najib Razak.

It was not the first time Mr. Zulkiflee, who already faces nine charges of sedition and is barred from leaving the country, has courted trouble with his pen. His cartoons frequently target Mr. Najib, who is accused of taking millions of dollars from a state investment fund. Mr. Najib has faced widespread calls to resign, most recently at an anticorruption demonstration this month that drew tens of thousands in Kuala Lumpur, the capital.

In an interview, Mr. Zulkiflee, 54, discussed how social media has become an increasingly important channel for political dissent in Malaysia, and why he continues to use his art to investigate corruption and injustice without dwelling too much on the risks.

Do you feel that the climate for creating your art has changed in recent years?

People are really not happy with the government — more and more people — but there are laws stopping them from being in the front row and being very, very vocal. So they will use any type of form, of tool, to express their view or protest. So now, social media is something that is a very effective tool. People are starting to be creative in social media by using drawings, cartoons, posters or video clips.

The government feels this is very dangerous for them, so they start to introduce laws. As an example, the Sedition Act was introduced by the British government in 1948. And in 2012, the prime minister made an open pledge to Malaysia that he would abolish the Sedition Act, live on TV. But he uses it more now, and it’s going to be strengthened.

Do these kinds of regulations affect your creative process?

I’m facing so many laws three laws have been used against me so far. But one thing I keep in my mind — one very, very important thing — is that the biggest enemy for anyone in the world is self-censorship. For me, talent is not a gift but a responsibility. People ask, do I have fear? Yes, I have fear, I’m human. But responsibility is bigger than fear. So I don’t want to really think what the government will do next to me. I just concentrate on what I’m supposed to do. That can help me continue and draw more cartoons. If I start to think about law, I start to think about prison, I start to think about government action, I will definitely start to practice self-censorship — and this is no good. So I will draw as usual.

Your cartoon about the person in chains with the Sedition Act around his neck and the Penal Code as handcuffs …

That’s a self portrait.

What were you trying to say there?

You see that three laws, which I mentioned earlier, have been used against me. First is Sedition Act, second is penal code, third is Printing Presses and Publications Act. I was chained with these laws — hand, neck and leg. But if you go to my shirt, you can see my philosophies there. Among them are “I will keep drawing until the last drop of my ink” and “How can I be neutral … even my pen has a stand.” So this drawing shows that even though there’s a law to stop me, even though there’s a regulation to stop me, even though they tried to ban my books — actually, not tried, they already banned my book — I will keep drawing. That is why, without hands, I still use my mouth or my teeth to draw. This is to show the philosophy and determination to fulfill my duty as a cartoonist in Malaysia.

You have said that you are expecting a 10th sedition charge. Even without that, you’re looking at upward of 40 years as a maximum prison sentence. How do you feel about the prospect of potentially having to serve so much time?

You have to understand this is a politically motivated charge, it’s got nothing to do with the law. In Malaysia, it’s very, very difficult for us with politically motivated charges. You just need to look at what happened to the opposition leader’s case in Malaysia, Anwar Ibrahim. Even though he had strong evidence and witnesses, it was political. It will be very difficult for us to fix that. But this is a very important case for me to create awareness around the world about the state of freedom of expression and human rights in Malaysia. I’m going to face it.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 30 November 2016, 5:27 am and is filed under
Media
,
Najib Razak
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


When will  Malaysia break into the dominance of Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan and Japan in rankings of TIMSS for math and science or is this a mere pipe-dream?

Is the Education Minister, Datuk Seri Mahdzir bin Khalid happy with the results of Malaysian students in the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) 2015 made public worldwide yesterday?

The Education Ministry director-general Tan Sri Dr. Khair Mohamad Yusuf seems to be quite ecstatic and easily satisfied with  the results of Malaysian students in TIMSS 2015, when the results should be cause for grave concern for all educationists and parents in Malaysia.

In a way, Khair is right in that the TIMSS 2015 results was an improvement on the TIMSS 2011, as Malaysia scored 465 in mathematics and 471 in science, which is a significant improvement from 2011, when it was 440 and 426 respectively, for 14-year-old Form 2 students.

However, this is the second worst score for 14-year-old Malaysian  Form 2 students  in five TIMSS results since 1995, as shown by the following marks achieved by Malaysian students in the TIMSS series:

	Maths

	Science

1999

	519

492

2003

	508

	510

2007

	474

471

2011

	440

	426

2015

	465

	471

While such improvements in math and science in TIMSS 2015 by Malaysian students are most welcome, it still fall short of the attainment  of Malaysian Form 2 students in the earlier TIMSS series, especially in 1999 and 2003.

Does the Education Ministry understand what is the problem and has it a got a blueprint to restore the standards of Malaysian students in math and science to the level 16 years ago by the next TIMSS 2019?

The TIMSS 2015 results contain hidden dangers for  the government’s goal in the Malaysian Education Blueprint 2013-2025 for Malaysia to elevate itself into the top third of countries participating in international assessments like Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) AND TIMSS.

The top third of the 39 countries in  TIMSS 2015 for mathematics and science  for 14-year-olds, with marks out of 1,000,  are:

Maths

1.

Singapore

621 marks

2.

South Korea

  606

3.

Taiwan

599

4.

 Hong Kong

594

5.

Japan

        586

6.

Russia

538

7.

Kazakhstan

   528

8.

Canada

527

9.

Ireland

523

10.

England

518

10.

United States

518

12.

 Slovenia

516

13.

Hungary

514

Malaysia with 465 marks is now ranked No. 22 and must out-perform ten other countries in TIMSS 2016 to be in the top one-third of nations participating in the international assessment, namely:

14.

 Norway

	512

15.

 Israel

	511

15.

Lithuania

	511

17.

 Australia

	505

18.

 Sweden

501

19.

 Italy

494

19.

 Malta

	494

21.

 New Zealand

 493

For science, the top one-third of the first-league nations are:

Science

1.

Singapore

	597

2.

Japan

	        571

3.

Taiwan

	569

4.

 S.Korea

	556

5.

Slovenia

	551

6.

Hong Kong

	546

7.

Russia

	544

8.

England

	537

9.

Kazakhstan

     533

10.

United States

	530

10.

Ireland

	530

12.

Hungary

	527

13.

Canada

	526

Currently with 471 out of 1,000 marks for science, Malaysia is  ranked 24 out of 39 nations assessed. Malaysia will have to beat the following ten countries to rank among the   top one-third countries, viz:

14.

 Sweden

	522

15.

 Lithuania

	519

16.

 New Zealand

	513

17.

 Australia

	512

18.

 Norway

	509

19.

 Israel

	507

20.

 Italy

	499

21.

 Turkey

	493

22.

Malta

	481

23.

 United Arab Emirates

477

Has the  Education Ministry a blueprint for Malaysian Form 2 students to beat their counterparts from Hungary to New Zealand in the case of mathematics and from Canada to United Arab Emirates in the case of science in TIMSS 2019, and if so, let the Education Minister make public such a blueprint.

When the TIMSS 2015 results were made public yesterday, there was a collective groan in the West that  “US and UK students still lag Asian peers on international math and science exam” – except that US and UK students perform better than Malaysian student in both subjects.

The Education Ministry and his officials in the Education Ministry should ask why every four years,  Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan and Japan should continue to dominate the rankings for TIMSS math and science tests, and when Malaysia is going to break into their ranks to be a powerhouse for math and science  in international assessments – or is this a mere pipe-dream as far as Malaysia is concerned?

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 30 November 2016, 3:11 pm and is filed under
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Will IGP Khalid say that he does not rule out arrest of Najib for receiving foreign funding, like Maria Chin?

The Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar has said that he has not ruled out the possibility of Bersih chairperson Maria Chin Abdullah being re-arrested.

The thought that immediately struck me was whether Khalid would ever say that he does not rule out the possibility of arresting  Datuk Seri Najib Razak for receiving foreign funding, as being alleged against Maria Chin.

The answer is of course a clear-cut and categorical “No”

Can Khalid answer why he would never make such a statement about Najib when he had no problem making it against Maria Chin?

Especially when  Najib had himself claimed that the RM2.6 billion deposited into his personal banking accounts were from foreign sources?

Had the Police ever questioned Najib about the “foreign funding” of RM2.6 billion in Najib’s personal banking accounts, what has happened to these funds, and Najib’s claim that he had subsequently returned RM2.03 billion to the “foreign donors”?

I am not suggesting that Najib should be questioned or detained under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012, as is the case of Maria Chin, but had the police ever investigated Najib on the issue?

Najib’s claims of RM2.6 billion “foreign funding” in his  personal banking accounts and the subsequent “return” of RM2.03 billion  had been disputed by the US Department of Justice (DOJ) in its lawsuit to forfeit over US$1 billion 1MDB-linked assets in the United States, United Kingdom and Switzerland as a result of US$3 billion international conspiracy of embezzlement, misappropriation and money-laundering of 1MDB funds.

Did the Police carry out further investigations on Najib  as a result of the US DOJ lawsuit disputing the Prime Minister’s claim that the RM2.6 billion in his personal banking accounts were from “foreign sources” and not part of the 1MDB international conspiracy of money-laundering, and if no, why not?

These are some of the questions milling in the minds of ordinary Malaysians when they read Khalid’s statement that Maria Chin’s re-arrest cannot be ruled out, which cry out for clarification from the powers-that-be.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 1 December 2016, 12:40 pm and is filed under
Bersih
,
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Challenge to Najib to list out DAP’s Three Big Lies after I have exposed Najib’s three “Big Lies” in his UMNO presidential speech yesterday

At the joint opening of the annual assemblies of UMNO’s Wanita, Youth and Puteri wings on Tuesday night, the Acting UMNO Deputy President, Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi sought to draw parallels between the Opposition’s propaganda efforts with the leaders of Nazi Germany.

He recounted how Adolf Hitler and his propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels had a grip on German citizens through carefully crafted propaganda strategies.

Zahid said: “It was based on lies… Hitler once wrote: ‘If you are going to tell a lie, tell a big one and if you tell it often enough, people will begin to believe it’.

“Through creative radio and film propaganda, they succeeded in controlling the minds of more than 80 million people.”

Anyone doing a Wikipedia search will find the following explanation:

“A big lie is a propaganda technique. The expression was coined by Adolf Hitler, when he dictated his 1925 book Mein Kampf, about the use of a lie so ‘colossal’ that no one would believe that someone ‘could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.’ Hitler asserted the technique was used by Jews to unfairly blame Germany’s loss in World War I on German Army officer Erich Ludendorff.”

Hitler’s Propaganda Minister, Joseph Goebbels perfected Hitler’s “Big Lie” theory: “Make the lie big, make it simple, keep saying it, and eventually they will believe it” to the extent that he created the Fuhrer myth and the image of Hitler as the Messiah-redeemer.

Are we seeing a repetition of the “Big Lie” theory in modern-day Malaysia, with the UMNO leadership warning about the “Big Lie” theory but with the UMNO President, Datuk Seri Najib Razak becoming  the biggest exponent of the “Big Lie” propaganda?

Najib impudently  told three colossal “Big Lies” in his UMNO Presidential Speech yesterday, viz:

1.	That the 14th General Elections will be a contest between UMNO and DAP;

2.	That the DAP is anti-Malay or  anti-Islam.

3.	The “nightmares” Malay will suffer if UMNO loses power in the next general elections.

These three “Big Lies” fit the Hitler/Goebbels definition that “if you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.”

Lets  take a look at  Najib’s three “Big Lies” and the rebuttals:

1.	14th General Election not a battle UMNO vs DAP. It will be a battle between the Barisan Nasional led by UMNO and the Pakatan Harapan coaliltion of DAP, PKR and Parti Amanah together with Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (Bersatu) to save Malaysia from a kleptocracy by defending the founding Constitutional principles of a democratic, just and united plural Malaysia.

2.	DAP is not anti-Malay or anti-Islam. DAP is not a Chinese party as right from the beginning of our formation 50 years ago, we were committed to the principles and vision of a Malaysian party, led by Malaysians and serving the interests of all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region.

This was why in the very first general election contested by DAP in 1969, two Malay State Assemblymen were elected, and down the decades, there had been Malay Members of Parliament and State Assembly representatives under the DAP banner.

This was also why in the first general election contested by the DAP in 1969, and now after the 2013 General Elections, the DAP has more Indian Members of Parliament than MIC.

But this does not make DAP a political party only for the Indians as DAP remains unequivocably as a party for all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region.

3.	Malays will not have “nightmares” if UMNO loses power in 14GE, as Najib tried to create scare and panic among  the Malays that they will lose  political power to the Chinese.

Whatever happens in the 14GE, whether Najib is toppled as Prime Minister or UMNO loses the Federal Government, the Malays in Malaysia will continue to exercise political power in the country as there is no way they will lose their political power.

The demographic reality is the surest guarantee that the Malays will not lose political power whatever happens to Najib or to UMNO in the next general elections.

In 1970 Malaysia’s population comprised 44.32% Malays, 34.34% Chinese, 8.99% Indians, 11.89% non-Malay Bumiputeras, 0.67% others.

In 2010, the percentage of Malays in the Malaysian population increased to 55.07%, Chinese reduced to 24.34%, Indians dropped to 7.35%, non-Malay Bumiputeras maintained at 11.94% and 1.3% others.

During the 13th general election, 52.63% of the voters were Malays, 29.68% Chinese, 7.31% Indians, 8.96% non-Malay Bumiputeras and 1.43% others.

Out of the 165 Parliamentary seats in Peninsular Malaysia, 114 are Malay majority seats representing some 70%, 22 Chinese majority seats (13%) and 29 mixed seats. There is not a single Indian majority seat.

With the triple factors establishing overwhelming Malay predominance in the Malaysian political scene – the demographic make-up of the general population, the electorate and the parliamentary constituencies – can Najib and UMNO propagandists explain how the Malays will lose political power, whatever the scenario in the 14GE?

How Malays who dominate in 70% of the parliamentary seats in Peninsular Malaysia will lose political power to the Chinese, who are in the majority in only 13% of the parliamentary seats?

There is no doubt that Najib and UMNO are facing the greatest crisis of survival in their lives, for a recent poll has shown that the popularity rating of the Najib UMNO-led government is at an all-time low – below the 50 per cent mark for the first time, down to some 30 per cent.

But the real prospects that Najib can lose not only the popular vote (which UMNO/Barisan lost in the 2013 general election securing only 47% of the total votes cast) as well as  the majority of the parliamentary seats (which through an undemocratic electoral system, enabled Najib to secure 60 per cent of the parliamentary seats in the 13GE although with 43% of the votes, and therefore entering Malaysian history as the first minority Prime Minister in the country) can be no justification for the UMNO leadership to resort to the Nazi propaganda doctrine of “The Big Lie”.

It is a national tragedy that instead of redeeming his position as the first minority Prime Minister of the country, by heading a government which really cares for the people and nation, which is clean, incorruptible, consultative, democratic, fully guided by the principles of accountability, transparency and good governance, Najib had done the reverse.

This is why Malaysia had in the past few months suffered the ignominy and infamy of being regarded worldwide as a “global kleptocracy”, which neither  the UMNO/BN-dominated Parliament nor the UMNO General Assembly had the patriotism or national calling to either rebut and refute or to purge and cleanse Malaysia’s reputation of such infamy and ignominy.

As DAP National Political Education Director and MP for Kluang Liew Chin Tong had noted, Najib studiously avoided in his UMNO presidential speech four issues that are of great concern to millions of ordinary Malaysians, including the overwhelming majority of the 3.5 million UMNO members: the Goods and Services Tax (GST), 1MDB global kleptocratic money-laundering scandal, the sharp decline of the ringgit’s value, and the higher cost of living.

Najib should return to the real issues facing Malaysians, including the Malays.

I have exposed Najib’s three “Big Lies” in the Nazi-style  propaganda.

I challenge Najib, in his winding-up of the UMNO General Assembly debate tomorrow, to list the three Big Lies which DAP had told about him and the UMNO leadership.

If Najib is unable to list out the three Big Lies that are being disseminated by DAP and DAP leaders, then Najib’s UMNO Presidential speech yesterday stands exposed as a distasteful  example of “Big Lie” Nazi propaganda in modern times.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 2 December 2016, 10:37 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
DAP
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Abu Dhabi SWF gets entangled in 1MDB scandal

By Bradley Hope and Nicolas Parasie

The Wall Street Journal

02 December 2016

When Barclays needed to raise capital in 2008, the Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund, known as IPIC, invested more than $5 billion in the UK bank. Through a subsidiary, IPIC acquired holdings in German auto maker Daimler and Swiss commodities powerhouse Glencore. It helped finance the ultraluxury New York skyscraper One57, nicknamed the Billionaire Building.

Driving IPIC was Khadem Al Qubaisi, a nightclub aficionado with slicked-back hair, a taste for the good life and close ties to princes who rule the emirate.

In June, Abu Dhabi’s crown prince abruptly ordered an end to the 32-year-old sovereign wealth fund’s existence as a standalone firm, saying it would be merged with another state entity.

Al Qubaisi? He now sits in an Abu Dhabi jail, fired and under investigation for money laundering, corruption and other possible offenses, according to people familiar with his situation.

Among the deals Al Qubaisi engineered at IPIC was one with 1Malaysia Development Bhd, or 1MDB, the embattled Malaysian state fund from which billions of dollars are missing, at least $800 million of which some investigators have said flowed into personal accounts of Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak.

Investigators trying to trace the money missing from 1MDB believe Al Qubaisi played a central role in diverting some of it, using his control of the Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund to conduct money laundering and embezzlement, according to people familiar with probes that are under way in several countries.

Far from just a Malaysian affair, the 1MDB scandal is unfolding as potentially one of the largest international financial swindles ever. A look at Al Qubaisi’s dealings with 1MDB through the Abu Dhabi fund helps illuminate the scandal’s global reach, from Singapore and Switzerland to the Middle East, Hollywood and Las Vegas. This account is based on interviews with people familiar with the various investigations or with the activities of Al Qubaisi and IPIC, as well as on documents reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

Abu Dhabi has said little about Al Qubaisi’s situation. “We are committed to bringing him to justice,” a member of the United Arab Emirates’ ruling Al Nahyan family said in a rare interview. Al Qubaisi hasn’t been charged.

Najib, who set up 1MDB seven years ago to spur local development, has denied wrongdoing. Malaysia’s attorney general cleared the prime minister early this year, saying money that flowed into his accounts in 2013 was a legal donation from Saudi Arabian royalty and most was later returned.

The US Justice Department agrees most of the money left Najib’s accounts but says it instead moved back into the shell company from which it had arrived, leaving its ultimate destination unclear. The department has said most of the hundreds of millions sent to the prime minister’s accounts originated with 1MDB. The Malaysian fund declined to comment.

The Justice Department’s Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative went to court in July to seek forfeiture of more than $1 billion of mostly US assets the department says were acquired with money stolen from the Malaysian fund. It was the kleptocracy initiative’s largest-ever asset-seizure case.

Abu Dhabi’s IPIC – International Petroleum Investment Co – dates to 1984, when United Arab Emirates founder Sheik Zayed Al Nahyan set it up to plow oil profits into the global petroleum industry. One of his sons, Sheik Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, later became chairman.

Al Qubaisi, who hails from a prominent Abu Dhabi family, became managing director of IPIC in 2007, where he oversaw its expansion and built its flashy headquarters tower in Abu Dhabi, the UAE capital.

Al Qubaisi, now 45 years old, travelled the city with several Egyptian assistants who opened doors for him and tended to his needs. He bought a personal stake in an Italian Formula One racing team and had IPIC subsidiaries sponsor it.

IPIC began investing beyond oil, such as in the transaction with Barclays, which was lucrative for both IPIC and Sheik Mansour, who was granted warrants. As a vehicle for doing large deals, IPIC acquired a local energy investment company called Aabar Investments PJS.

Al Qubaisi, part of Sheik Mansour’s inner circle, wielded broad authority. He held power of attorney at IPIC and Aabar, enabling him to sign contracts. He managed the sheik’s personal investment company, one unit of which invested in Las Vegas nightclubs. Aabar provided hundreds of millions of dollars in loans to that unit.

Out of view of IPIC’s directors, Abu Dhabi investigators believe, Al Qubaisi embarked on increasingly audacious schemes to enrich himself, according to people familiar with the matter and to documents reviewed by the Journal. On some deals, the people said, Al Qubaisi or an associate asked counterparties or intermediaries for side payments.

In a lawsuit filed against IPIC over fees, a consulting company alleged that Al Qubaisi asked for a kickback relating to an IPIC attempt to acquire hotel company Four Seasons Group in 2009. Pierre Maroun, a co-founder of the consulting firm, said in an interview that Al Qubaisi asked him during a Riyadh-Abu Dhabi flight for a $300 million kickback. In the fee lawsuit, IPIC’s lawyers denied the allegations. No deal for the hotel company was done.

Another executive said he had a meeting with Al Qubaisi at a mansion in the south of France, where, according to the executive, Al Qubaisi conducted business in a swimsuit while scantily clad women paced the rooms.

The deal that linked the Abu Dhabi fund with 1MDB began after Malaysia’s Najib visited Abu Dhabi in 2009. Malaysian media said he announced the emirate would invest $1 billion in Malaysia’s real estate, hospitality and energy businesses via the 1MDB state fund.

Abu Dhabi handed the energy part of this plan to IPIC. Instead of contributing money, however, IPIC supplied a guarantee on $3.5 billion of 1MDB bonds, making them easier to sell.

In return, 1MDB agreed to pay $1.4 billion of what was called “collateral” to IPIC’s Aabar unit. Al Qubaisi signed the deal without board approval, people familiar with it said.

The $1.4 billion of 1MDB money never reached Aabar, the Justice Department said, but instead was paid to a firm with a name nearly identical to Aabar’s that Al Qubaisi and Aabar’s CEO, an American named Mohamed Badawy Al Husseiny, had set up in the British Virgin Islands.

From that offshore firm, the Justice Department alleged in its July lawsuits, the diverted 1MDB cash was distributed to intermediaries, which sent it on to still other intermediaries, until hundreds of millions of dollars reached Najib, his stepson and others.

One of the others cited by the Justice Department was Jho Low, a Najib confidant who had helped to set up 1MDB. US prosecutors have described Low as in the thick of the alleged fraud, helping orchestrate schemes to siphon away money. He is a subject of criminal investigations in the US and Singapore, according to people familiar with them. Low has denied any wrongdoing.

The Najib stepson is Riza Aziz, one of the producers of the 2013 hit movie “The Wolf of Wall Street,” made with money the Justice Department has said was misappropriated from 1MDB. Aziz and his production company have denied wrongdoing, saying they had no knowledge that any money received had originated with 1MDB.

The Justice Department said in its July asset-seizure lawsuits that $473 million originating with 1MDB was transferred to a Luxembourg account owned by Al Qubaisi. The civil suits, filed in California federal court, said Al Qubaisi subsequently used some of the money to buy a $51 million New York penthouse and two Los Angeles mansions worth a combined $46 million.

The suits also said about $67 million of 1MDB money was transferred to two accounts owned by Al Husseiny, who was the Aabar CEO.

In asset-seizure lawsuits, parties who believe they legitimately own the assets can contest the Justice Department’s claims, a process that is now under way with the pending July suits. The suits are filed against the property itself and don’t include any individuals as defendants.

Like Al Qubaisi, Al Husseiny was forced out of IPIC and has come under investigation in Abu Dhabi for money laundering and other possible offenses, said people familiar with the investigation. He, too, is held in jail, they said. Husseiny hasn’t been charged.

Besides the $1.4 billion of bond-guarantee collateral, an additional nearly $1 billion of 1MDB money also vanished into the British Virgin Islands firm with a name very like Aabar’s, according to documents reviewed by the Journal and to people familiar with the investigations.

This was money 1MDB sought to pay to IPIC’s Aabar unit to cancel some options on energy assets. Investigators are still tracking this nearly $1 billion.

At one point, investigators believe, Al Qubaisi and Al Husseiny had put more than $8.8 billion of IPIC’s money potentially at risk through guarantees of 1MDB-related deals and loans, according to people familiar with the probes. IPIC has said some of the guarantees weren’t authorised. It is locked in a commercial dispute with 1MDB.

In other lines of inquiry, as described by people familiar with the 1MDB probes:

• Al Qubaisi’s management of Sheik Mansour’s investment business has led to a focus on Las Vegas. A restaurant company controlled by the sheik’s business spent $207 million building the Omnia nightclub at Caesars Palace and a club called Hakkasan Las Vegas, where British singer Rita Ora sang “Happy Birthday” to Al Qubaisi in 2013, according to someone who was there.

US investigators are looking into whether any funds diverted from 1MDB were indirectly provided to the restaurant company, Hakkasan Ltd, said people familiar with the probe. There is no suggestion of wrongdoing by Hakkasan, which said its capital had no connection with 1MDB. The firm has said the Justice Department confirmed Hakkasan is “not the subject or target of their 1MDB investigation”.

• Investigators are examining whether 1MDB money ultimately transferred to an Al Qubaisi-controlled account was used to make payments on Sheik Mansour’s 482-foot yacht, the Topaz, whose eight floors include a swimming pool, cinema and two helicopter pads. Sheik Mansour didn’t respond to requests for comment.

• IPIC owns Swiss-based Falcon Private Bank, and investigators are looking at whether Al Qubaisi and Al Husseiny used it to facilitate some transactions at issue. Swiss and Singaporean regulators recently fined Falcon for money-laundering breaches, including an alleged transfer of 1MDB money into Najib’s accounts. A Swiss regulator said the dealings were driven by “two representatives of the bank owners,” which a person familiar with the case said meant Al Qubaisi and Al Husseiny. Falcon declined to comment.

By 2015, Al Qubaisi’s wealth included bank accounts across the world, homes in France, private jets and about $31 million worth of automobiles in Switzerland, including a Bugatti Veyron and a Pagani Huayra. In his office, he kept fine cigars in a box emblazoned with his initials, KAQ. At least some of the assets now are frozen, including tens of millions of dollars in a Luxembourg bank account.

Around March of 2015, during a dispute between Al Qubaisi and a former employee, photos were published online showing him cavorting in a St. Tropez nightclub with a semi-nude woman sitting in a giant drinks glass. It was behaviour of which the UAE ruling family took a dim view.

During this period, fraud suspicions relating to missing 1MDB money were emerging. In April 2015, Abu Dhabi’s emir removed Al Qubaisi from IPIC without explanation.

In June of this year, IPIC reported a net loss, attributed to low oil prices, and said it was taking a $3.5 billion provision related to bond guarantees given to 1MDB. Abu Dhabi authorities said they had decided to merge IPIC into another state fund, Mubadala Development Co. They described the move as part of a strategic vision to streamline emirate-owned companies and funds.

People with knowledge of the discussions said Al Qubaisi’s ouster, caused in part by the 1MDB scandal, was a critical factor in accelerating the plans. Two months later, he and Al Husseiny were arrested.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 3 December 2016, 9:06 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.