The status and honour of the offices of the Prime Minister  and Finance Minister had been tainted and besmirched when Najib answered on behalf of two “fugitives from justice”  from a fully-owned government company  SRC International who have absconded from the arms of the law for the past four months

The status and honour of the offices of the Prime Minister and Finance Minister had been  tainted and besmirched when Datuk Seri Najib Razak answered in Parliament on behalf of two “fugitives from justice” from a fully-owned government company, SRC International, who have absconded from the arms of the law for the past four months.

On Oct 21, in his capacity as Finance Minister, Najib answered the DAP MP for Kulai, Teo Nie Ching, that based on information provided by SRC International, its managing director Nik Faisal Airiff Nik Othmann Kamil and director Datuk Suboh Mohd Yassin “are making preparations to be interviewed by MACC soonest to help in the investigations”.

This is most ludicrous and outrageous – not only as pointed out by Nie Ching, as if Nik Faisal and Suboh needed four months to prepare for the interview with MACC.

For some four months, both Nik Faisal and Subah had been “fugitives from justice”, absconding from the arms of the law in Malaysia, as since early July, the multi-agency Special Task Force into the 1MDB and RM2.6 billion “donation” mega scandals had not been able to locate both for purposes of investigation.

In a media statement dated August 22, 2015, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) had asked the SRC duo and businessman Low Taek Jho, better known as Jho Low, to contact it immediately to assist in the investigations connected with SRC International Sdn Bhd.

The MACC also requested that members of the public with any information on the whereabouts of these three persons to contact Assistant Commissioner Rosli Husain or Assistant Commissioner Norkhafizin Isa or the nearest MACC office.

MACC in its statement dated October 22, again urged SRC duo to come forward to get their statements recorded.

Former police special branch deputy director Datuk Abdul Hamid Bador had  in August  alleged there were efforts to hide the main witnesses with regard to the SRC International probe. Without divulging names, Hamid said one of the main witnesses previously hid in Indonesia and Thailand, and is now in New Zealand.

“There are efforts to hide the main witnesses. They are those wanted by MACC,” he had said.

Nik Faisal and Suboh are  sought by the authorities to assist in the ongoing probe into RM42 million channelled into Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s bank accounts.

Apart from the RM42 million, MACC is also investigating the RM4 billion Retirement Fund Inc loan to SRC International.

RC International was a subsidiary of 1MDB until it was placed under the Finance Ministry in February 2012.

The question uppermost in Malaysian minds is why both Nik Faisal and Subah are still on the government’s payroll as managing drector and director of SRC International after absconding from the arms of the law for four months, and even more shocking and outrageous, why Najib had allowed the offices and status of Prime Minister and Finance Minister to be  tainted and besmirched  by  his answering in Parliament on behalf of two “fugitives from justice”!

This is the first time that the Prime Minister and Finance Minister of a country had assumed responsibility and ownership for “fugitives from justice” as to speak on their behalf in Parliament.

Najib owes the Malaysian people a full explanation for such extraordinary parliamentary conduct as if Ministerial front-benches have become spokesmen for “fugitives from justice”.

How low have government leaders in Malaysia fallen!

(Speech at the Plentong Kopitiam Ceramah in Johor Jaya on Saturday, Oct. 31, 2015 at 10 am)

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 31 October 2015, 2:50 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Barisan Nasional MPs in the PAC who have been beneficiaries in the RM2.6 billion Najib “donation” scandal should declare their pecuniary interests and withdraw from participation in any PAC discussion, decision or investigation into the twin mega scandals on 1MDB and RM2.6 billion ‘donation”

Former MCA President, Datuk Seri Chua Soi Lek has made startling revelations about the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s RM2.6 billion “donation” scandal in his personal banking accounts before the 13th General Election.

Malaysiakini yesterday reported the former MCA President as throwing some light on where some of the RM2.6 billion in Najib’s personal bank accounts had gone to.

Chua recollected how Najib had in a BN Supreme Council meeting before the 13th general election made an “unprecedented pledge to fund BN component parties”.

Chua had said:

“I must admit, during the BN supreme council meeting approaching the May 5 general elections, he (Najib) in his capacity as prime minister and BN chairperson, did reveal that in that election, BN will support its component parties’ finance.

“I remember clearly, I was the first to thank him.

“I said I have joined politics for more than 20 years and have gone through five general elections, (we) have never received a single sen from BN before.

“So everyone agreed and many thanked him. When the election came, he delivered – he was able to disburse some funds (to the component parties).”

This is quite a shocking revelation by the former MCA President, in the light of two swirling mega scandals – the 1MDB and the RM2.6 billion “donation” scandals – which have wrought such damage on Malaysia’s body politics resulting in the worst prolonged crisis of confidence, not only in Malaysia but also internationally, with such awful consequences on the value of the Malaysian ringgit, the stock market, foreign capital flight and foreign investment in the country.

Najib’s 1MDB and RM2.6 billion “donation” scandals are the root causes of the scale, magnitude and duration of the crisis of confidence plaguing Malaysia today, to the extent that even the Malay Rulers have come out with a statement on Oct. 6 calling for 1MDB investigations to be completed as soon as possible and for “appropriate stern action” to be taken against the culprits of these scandals.

Now, we are told by the former MCA President of MCA during the 13th General Election that Barisan Nasional parties as well as Barisan Nasional candidates in the last general elections, which would include all Barisan Nasional Ministers and Members of Parliament elected in May 2013, were implicated in Najib’s RM2.6 billion “donation” scandal.

Arising from Chua’s revelations about the expenditures of the RM2.6 billion in Najib’s personal bank accounts, I want to make three calls:

Firstly, I call on all Barisan Nasional parties, including every one of the Sarawak BN parties, to declare how much each party had received from Najib’s RM2.6 billion personal banking accounts for 13th General Election campaigning;

Secondly, I call on all Barisan Nasional Members of Parliament who had been beneficiaries of Najib’s RM2.6 billion “donation” accounts for the 13th General Election campaign to declare their pecuniary interests and the amounts they received; and

Thirdly, I call on all the Barisan Nasional Members of Parliament who are members of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) to declare their pecuniary interests in Najib’s RM2.6 billion “donation” accounts and to withdraw from participation any discussion, decision or investigation into the twin 1MDB and RM2.6 billion scandals to avoid any conflict-of-interest situations. This should in fact be the first item of business of the PAC when it meets in Parliament tomorrow.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 1 November 2015, 8:54 pm and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Mr Speaker, Sir: Nobody buys your story

P. Ramakrishnan

Aliran

1st Nov 2015

On 22 October 2015, the Speaker of Parliament, Pandikar Amin Mulia, claimed that he did not suspend Kit Siang – MPs did. Thinking Malaysians did not believe him. He must have been aware of it. As a result, he returned to the same topic to explain himself further and differently. Nobody believed him in the first instance and therefore there was a need to explain this unconvincing tale twice.

Exactly a week later, on 29 October 2015, he claimed that Parliament punished Kit Siang – not him. This time around he fared no better. Nobody bought his story. He was not only confusing he was also unconvincing!

He can come up with any number of versions to this shameful episode but he will not be absolved from the fact that he played a central role to Kit Siang’s suspension.

It was the Speaker who demanded the apology from Kit Siang. It was the Speaker who threatened that a motion would be tabled if Kit Siang failed to apologise. MPs did not say that. The Parliament did not say that. It was the Speaker who insisted and persisted in this issue. Malaysians remember what actually happened in Parliament. This was clearly reported for all to read.

It is not quite right to claim that Parliament punished Kit Siang. It was the Barisan Nasional MPs who did it in supporting the Speaker’s demand for an apology. The MPs did not act on their own volition. They acted on behalf of the Speaker.

The Speaker caused the motion to be tabled. He accepted the motion so that a decision could be taken. Any further explanation to extricate himself from his involvement in this unjust suspension will not work. People will not buy his story. Probably they will say, “Tell it to the marines!”

To add further to the confusion, the Speaker was reported as having said, “There’s nothing personal in politics, nothing personal. The question is, has he forgiven me?”

This is actually baffling! You ask for forgiveness when you have done something wrong to a person. What has the Speaker done to expect Kit Siang to forgive him? Was this an admission of a perceived wrong done to Kit Siang that prompted him to ask this question?

Malaysians may be wondering if the Speaker was just babbling!

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 1 November 2015, 9:03 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Support for the call by G25 Group of Eminent Malays for the separation of the powers of the Attorney-General as legal adviser to the government and that of Public Prosecutor to ensure that political influence is not brought to bear on prosecutorial decisions

The call by the G25 Group of Eminent Malays for the transfer of the prosecutorial powers of the Attorney-General to an independent office of the Director of Public Prosecutions deserves support and action by Parliament.

The G25 Group statement said:

“There is a fundamental conflict of interest in the functions and powers of the AG, which enables him to take action against national interests.

“It is poor governance that the AG is the legal adviser for the government of Malaysia and also the final arbiter on decisions to prosecute.”

The conflict-of-interest and the subordination of national interest to sectional and political interests that can arise as the result of the Attorney-General being vested with these two functions and powers has been most vividly and dramatically highlighted by investigations into the two mega-scandals of 1MDB and the RM2.6 billion “donation” in Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s personal banking accounts – resulting in the shocking sacking of the Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail on July 28 amidst controversy that the Attorney-General’s Chambers was preparing to charge the  Prime Minister Najib for corruption in connection with the 1MDB scandal,   the dissolution of the multi-agency Special Task Force into the 1MDB scandal and the three-month stoppage of Public Accounts Committee from continuing its 1MDB investigations.

Putting aside for the moment the question of fact,  Malaysians must wrestle with the question of law  and whether under our present system, the Attorney-General can initiate prosecutions against the Prime Minister for corruption.

The G25 Group had not used this issue to ground its call for the separation of powers of the Attorney-General as the chief legal adviser of the government and the Public Prosecutor, but used instead the Attorney-General’s Chambers’ refusal to prosecute 1MDB for providing inaccurate information and failing to give full disclosure when it sought approval from Bank Negara for overseas investment.

This was despite the central bank’s recommendation for legal action against 1MDB,which was rejected by the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

It is noteworthy that this decision not to prosecute was made  by the new Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohamed Apandi Ali who replaced Gani Patail as Attorney-General.

Would Gani Patail have approved Bank Negara’s recommendation for legal action against 1MDB?

Gani may be able to throw light on these two issues when he make his first public appearance since his sacking three months ago as Attorney-General at the Bar Council forum  “SOSMA – Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing” in Kuala Lumpur on Tuesday night.

Malaysia will only be following the development of best practices in good governance in other  countries, as the separation of the powers of  Attorney-General as Public Prosecutor and chief legal adviser for the government is being practised  by an increasing number of countries to avoid any public perception that political influence could be brought to bear on prosecutorial decisions.

Malaysia’s common-law traditions should not be an excuse for putting up with the risks of blatant abuses of power exemplified by the removal of  Gani Patail  as Attorney-General and the  refusal to prosecute those responsible for the 1MDB scandal.

Canada in 2006 passed the Federal Accountability Act which delegates responsibility over prosecutions to a Director of Public Prosecutions. Such a Director is appointed by a committee including representatives from all political parties and the Canadian equivalent of our Malaysian Bar. Any directives by the Attorney-General to the Director must be in writing and be published in the Canadian Gazette.

Even the United Kingdom has seen calls for reform. In 2007, both the Constitutional Affairs Committee and its successor Justice Committee of the British Parliament strongly recommended security of tenure and delegation of powers over individual cases to prosecution Directors.

(Speech at the DAP Ceramah Kopitiam held at Stulang, Johor Baru on Saturday, 31st October 2015 at 2 pm:)

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 1 November 2015, 10:57 am and is filed under
Constitution
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


What makes Lim Kit Siang run?

By Kee Thuan Chye

Malaysiakini

30 Oct 2015

‘Defying the Odds’ is an odd book. It can’t seem to decide whether to be a biography of Opposition powerhouse Lim Kit Siang, a showcase for his key speeches and letters or a view of Malaysian politics through Kit Siang’s lenses and from two vantage points, i.e. May 13, 1969, and March 8, 2008, two of the watershed moments of the country’s political history.

In the middle of it is an interview with Kit Siang done by the book’s author, Ooi Kee Beng, but it’s not one that is done specially for this book, which makes its appearance all the more odd. It has been culled from another, an earlier book titled ‘The Right to Differ: A Biographical Sketch of Lim Kit Siang’ (published in 2011), which is a lengthy interview Ooi did with Kit Siang, interspersed with the Kit Siang’s letters, statements and speeches and the same photos as those of the current book.

In the original context, the interview explored and revealed a bit of Kit Siang’s life and much of his political struggle, which would have been apt there, but in ‘Defying the Odds’, it merely repeats many of the facts and issues already presented in this book’s earlier chapters. It makes ‘Defying the Odds’ appear chheong hei (Cantonese, meaning long-winded) saying again what has been said a few times before.

On the whole, the book might have worked better if presented throughout in the narrative mode, which is what Ooi (photo) employs nicely in the first chapter, ‘Heading for Jail’.

It begins: “The year is 1969. The plane drones over southern Johor, monotone propellers lulling its few passengers to sleep … Violent rioting had broken out in Kuala Lumpur on the same evening that Kit, as he is affectionately known, had left for the Sabahan city of Kota Kinabalu.” It gives the promise of an interesting story about to be told.

Right till the end of that first chapter, the promise is well-sustained. But when the next two chapters come on, the narrative gives way to the polemics of Lim Kit Siang the politician. They are filled with little more than the letters he wrote and the speeches he gave during the tumultuous aftermath of the May 13 racial riots, including his lengthy address in Parliament in February 1971.

Variations on the same themes

Reproducing large parts of these documents adds tedium, especially because each of them espouses views that are somewhat similar, give or take a few minor points. They appear like variations on the same themes.

The themes are noble, no doubt about that. In fact, the most edifying things one could draw from the book are the foresight Kit Siang had about Malaysia as early as five decades ago, how prophetic his prognosis of a Malaysia torn by racialism has turned out to be, and – this is what makes the difference between a politician and a statesman – how passionate and consistent he has been regarding his beliefs.

Kit Siang has been a champion of multiracialism and multiculturalism from the time he was at school. Today, he is still an ardent advocate of those. The other strong beliefs he has been speaking up for since he was voted a member of parliament in 1969 are freedom of speech, justice, affirmative action based on needs rather than race, good governance and the importance of democracy for Malaysia.

But if these themes could have emanated from a narrative showing Kit Siang the politician in action and how he came to be what he is, instead of from reproduced chunks of polemic written or spoken by him that merely serve to tell us his ideas, then ‘Defying the Odds’ would have been an eminently readable book.

We don’t get a comprehensive portrait

As it is, we get sketches that give us only a sense of what Lim Kit Siang is about. We don’t get a comprehensive portrait, a deep insight into the man, what he went through, the sacrifices he made. We don’t feel his pain, his joy.

Ooi did a sterling job when he wrote ‘The Reluctant Politician’, the bestselling biography of the late former deputy prime minister Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman. He did extensive research for it, which included interviewing Ismail’s close friends and relatives to obtain a more rounded picture of his biographical subject. He could have done the same for ‘Defying the Odds’.

After all, Kit Siang’s contribution to Malaysian politics is massive. He is arguably the man who has practically defined the DAP with the ideas he espouses, not only for the party but also for the country. He has also been constantly dynamic in taking up challenges that have not only set inspiring examples for his party colleagues but also blazed a powerful trail for the party.

This he has done most prominently by standing for election in difficult constituencies, defying the odds against him in some of them, like the most recent foray into Gelang Patah at the last general election in 2013 (GE13). By doing so, Kit Siang discouraged, by his own example, complacency within the party.

In a few contests, he suffered defeat. His defeat in the 1999 general election, which deprived him of a seat in Parliament for the first time in three decades, must have been particularly painful. He might have won if he had stayed on in his safer seat of Tanjong, but he decided to take the risk of standing in Bukit Bendera in order to spearhead the Opposition’s campaign to break the ruling coalition’s political hegemony. Kit Siang lost to Gerakan’s Chia Kwang Chye by a margin of only 104 votes.

He also stood for the state seat of Kebun Bunga at the same time, but was trounced by Teng Hock Nan.

Many of Kit Siang’s hopes have not been realised

To be sure, Kit Siang’s political life has been one characterised more by defeat or failure than success. Despite his personal electoral victories and the heights to which the DAP has currently climbed after winning a record 38 parliamentary seats at GE13, he has failed in many instances.

Many of the hopes he has expressed in the interest of free speech, justice, good governance and racial unity have not been realised. He has been detained under the Internal Security Act twice – in 1969 and 1987. He was convicted of five charges under the Official Secrets Act in 1979.

In October 2015, Kit Siang was suspended from Parliament for six months for allegedly making disparaging remarks against the Speaker and refusing to accede to the latter’s demand for an apology.

A few months earlier, he was assaulted by a group of people while taking part in a forum in a coffeeshop in Johor. They threw cups, plastic bowls and a broom at him and yelled, “Go home, Kit Siang!”, “Communist chauvinist!” and “Go die!” The forum was abruptly aborted.

After all his decades in politics, this must have been extremely demoralising. So what keeps him going? Despite his failure in bringing about the realisation of his dream of a Malaysia for all Malaysians, why does he persevere?

We have to take our hats off to him for trying for so long. Never giving up his struggle – and clearly not for personal gain – is Kit Siang’s claim to greatness.

He deserves a book that lives up to his stature.

* ‘Defying The Odds’ is a 248-page book by Ooi Kee Beng that was recently pulished by Marshall Cavendish.

* KEE THUAN CHYE is the author of the new books ‘Unbelievably Stupid!’ and ‘Unbelievably Stupid Too!’

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 1 November 2015, 8:48 pm and is filed under
DAP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


As 2020 deadline looms, Malaysian students fail to shine in science

by Boo Su-Lyn

The Malay Mail Online

November 2, 2015

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 2 ― Less than 13 per cent of those who sat for the Form 3 PT3 examination last year scored at least a C in both science and mathematics, Putrajaya has revealed, despite Malaysia’s aim to achieve developed nation status in less than five years.

The Education Ministry also said that the average percentage of secondary school students who qualified for the science stream, based on their results of the previous Form 3 PMR examination, only hovered around 30 per cent over the past 10 years, though Malaysia has been aiming for a 60:40 ratio of science/ technical/vocational and arts students since 1970.

“The most probable reason for this could be the new format for the PT3 science and maths papers,” Education director-general Datuk Seri Dr Khair Mohamad Yusof told Malay Mail Online in a recent email interview, in explaining the PT3 science and maths results.

“There were very few multiple choice questions which most students are very familiar with; and the test items demand a lot of thinking on the part of the students to gauge their understanding of the subject matter rather than regurgitating rote-learned concepts.

“It does not encourage teaching to the test and teachers need to engage the students in the learning process by asking more higher-order thinking questions. It is hoped that this kind of format will encourage the students to learn meaningfully and in future, the PT3 results will become better,” he added.

PT3, which replaced PMR last year, sparked controversy with a plunge in the number of students who scored straight As to reportedly just 83 out of 450,000 PT3 candidates, from thousands over the past years in the previous PMR exams. All PT3 papers had subjective questions unlike PMR.

Khair said students who scored at least a C in both science and mathematics in PT3, at least Band 4 in the school assessment in both subjects, and who showed an interest in learning science based on the psychometric test, were allowed to enrol in the science stream.

The Education Ministry official also said there could be “special cases” of students who get at least a C and D in both subjects in PT3, at least Band 4 in the school assessment, and who show an interest in learning science based on the psychometric test, who would be allowed to enrol in the science stream.

Local daily The Star reported last December that the school assessment ranged from Band 1 (the ability to recall information) to Band 6 (the ability to have higher order thinking skills and knowledge). The new school-based assessment system (PBS) was introduced to reportedly decrease the focus on examinations, with students now being continuously assessed in academics, evaluated on co-curricular activities and sports, as well as going for psychometric tests to identify their interests and aptitude.

Khair said the Malaysia Education Blueprint 2013 – 2025 has outlined strategies through various initiatives to enhance science teaching and learning, including pre-service training and ongoing professional development for teachers.

“The focus of science teaching and learning is Inquiry-Based Science Education (IBSE), which has been a worldwide trend for quite some time now, and teachers have to ensure science practical/experimentations as well as project-based or problem-based learning are implemented in the classrooms.

“When students solve real-life problems and can relate the science concepts to their everyday lives, only then will they actually enjoy learning science and motivated to pursue science at the tertiary level,” said Khair.

Declining students in hard science

The National University of Malaysia (UKM) said the number of science students in its science and technology faculty has been dropping due to the lack of job opportunities, though there is still “very high” demand for its engineering, medicine, dentistry, pharmacy and allied sciences programmes.

“The demand for accounting graduate is much more than physics graduate. While accounting graduates can get a good job just after graduating, the physics graduate sometime has to wait for several months,” UKM deputy vice chancellor (Academic & International Affairs) Prof Datuk Ir Dr Riza Atiq Abdullah O.K Rahmat told Malay Mail Online in an email interview.

Other public universities ― University of Malaya (UM) and Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) ― however said the number of science students has not been declining at their respective institutions, pointing out that they had intentionally opted to take in fewer science undergraduates to focus on postgraduate programmes.

“A few years ago, we decided to take in fewer undergrad science students to concentrate on postgraduate programs. However, this 2015/16 session we decided to take in a higher number of undergraduate students to ensure that we would have sufficient numbers for our postgraduate programs,” UM deputy vice-chancellor (Academic & International) Prof Dr Awang Bulgiba Awang Mahmud told Malay Mail Online in an email interview.

“We are also now opening our programmes to students with qualifications other than the usual matriculation/ Form 6 qualifications like A-levels, Diploma and International Baccalaureate. Ideally, we would like to see sufficient students to form the feeder for our postgraduate programs,” he added.

UTM deputy vice-chancellor (Academic & International) Prof Dr Rose Alinda Alias similarly said the enrolment of undergraduates in UTM’s science faculty halved from 1,887 students in the 2005/06 session to 981 in the 2014/15 session not because of a lack of demand, but due to the university’s strategy to reduce the undergraduate intake for all programmes upon becoming a research university in 2010.

“What has changed is that the balance has shifted from a 87 per cent undergraduate (UG), 13 per cent postgraduate (PG) in 2005; it is now almost equal between UG and PG,” Rose Alinda told Malay Mail Online in an email interview, pointing out that the number of master’s and PhD students in the science faculty totalled 1,026 in the 2014/15 session.

“There has been a significant six-fold increment in postgraduate enrolment, especially for PhD programmes in science stream. There is no quota for postgraduate enrolment and there has been a significant increase in number of applications for (the) PG programme,” she added.

According to Rose Alinda, the enrolment of postgraduates in UTM’s science faculty more than tripled over the past decade from 291 in the 2005/06 session to 1,026 in the 2014/15 session.

Lack of scientists

Academy of Sciences Malaysia (ASM), an agency under the Ministry of Science, Technology & Innovation, said Malaysia currently only has 85,000 science and technology graduates, but 500,000 are needed by 2020 if Malaysia wants to achieve developed nation status.

“Until today, we’ve yet to have proper planning for science graduates. What kind of jobs can they get? What are the salary schemes?” ASM council member Datuk Dr Halimaton Hamdan told Malay Mail Online in an interview.

She said in the 1980s and and 1990s, the government did not encourage students to take up hard sciences as there was a greater need for engineers, architects and doctors then.

“We’re lacking in physicists, chemists, biologists and mathematicians,” she said.

ASM acting CEO Hazami Habib highlighted the lack of research and development (R&D) in industries in Malaysia, noting that in other countries, their governments only contributed to basic sciences like chemistry, physics and maths, while businesses funded applied science.

“In Malaysia, it’s still very heavy on the government contributing to all because industries have no R&D,” she said in a joint interview with Halimaton.

According to Halimaton, the government should spend 3 per cent of the GDP on R&D, noting that R&D spending comprised only 1.16 per cent of the GDP in 2013.

In Budget 2016, the allocation for higher education next year was cut by RM2.4 billion from RM15.785 billion this year to RM13.378 billion.

Perception of no money in science

Parent groups blamed the lack of science students in Malaysia on the perception that there were no jobs available in science fields and also on the abolition of the policy of teaching science and maths in English, known as PPSMI.

“When we read newspapers or see the news or see who is successful, students hardly get to see or relate success to the subject of science ― creating a perception that there’s no future or money in science-related professions,” Parent Action Group for Education (PAGE) chair Datin Noor Azimah Abdul Rahim told Malay Mail Online.

“While the government speaks of available jobs, parents don’t see them. We haven’t got sizeable corporates like the US to undertake research, then produce. We still heavily rely on the government for that. Government hospitals too are a major consumer of medicines. We should be creating, producing and exporting,” she added.

Shamsudin Hamid, coordinator of Association of Parents and Individuals Towards Revising the Education System (Aspires), said school students found it difficult to understand science textbooks in Malay as internet resources were in English.

“Their main difficulty is understanding the definitions,” Shamsudin told Malay Mail Online.

He also said there appeared to be no science labs in most schools nowadays.

“How can you have experiments when you don’t have labs? It’s all theory, theory, theory. If you go back to the 60s and 70s when every school had science labs, that’s different. Now they don’t. They may have a computer lab; even that is perfunctory,” said Shamsudin.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 2 November 2015, 7:49 am and is filed under
Budget Debate
,
Education
,
university
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAP winning hearts and minds in Sarawak’s remotest areas

by Sheridan Mahavera

The Malaysian Insider

31 October 2015

In the villages of Peninsular Malaysia, the DAP still gets a bad rap, but in an increasing number of out-of-the-way places in Sarawak, the opposition party has been received with open arms.

On September 27, it completed a water supply project for Kampung Long Luping in Lawas, a little Orang Ulu hamlet close to the Indonesian border in central Kalimantan.

This comes just months before the Sarawak state elections, which have to be held on or before September 20, 2016.

Aside from a candidate in the 13th general election, the DAP has no local representative or office in Lawas, which at three hours by rutted dirt road, is the closest town to Long Luping.

That the DAP is now well regarded among the Orang Ulu tribes speaks of how the party has successfully penetrated into the remotest parts of Sarawak, a volunteer with the party’s initiative called Impian Sarawak said. “Ulu”, coincidentally, is a Malay term for “remote”.

But this milestone also has consequences. Federal opposition ally PKR, who has also done a lot of work among rural communities, bristles at the thought of the DAP contesting rural seats.

The Sarawak Barisan Nasional (BN) government has also intensified a propaganda campaign to vilify the DAP among rural Sarawakians just like it has done in the peninsula.

Word of mouth

The DAP’s bigger footprint among the rural folk of Sarawak is due to the Impian Sarawak initiative, where it helps poor communities with small scale infrastructure projects.

In many of its projects, activists or members would recommend a deprived village to the Impian Sarawak team for help.

In the case of the Orang Ulu areas, the schemes came by word of mouth and it was villagers themselves who asked for one, said Dr Baru Langub “or Dr Bob”, an Orang Ulu DAP leader based in Miri, Sarawak.

A community leader in Kampung Long Luping heard about how Impian Sarawak had helped install a gravity-fed water system in nearby Kampung Long Sukang and asked for the Impian Sarawak contact number.

The earlier water system in Kampung Long Sukang was also installed after a leader in that village heard about the Impian Sarawak programme from a friend in Limbang. That friend in Limbang lived in a longhouse where Impian Sarawak had installed a similar water system.

In many past Impian projects, volunteers had to deal with fears among villagers that the Sarawak BN government punished residents who worked with opposition parties.

“In Long Luping and Long Sukang, the villagers were open to working with us,” said Dr Bob.

“We had asked the BN for 10 years to help us with the water supply to our village. They always said ‘wait, wait’. It never arrived,” said Balang Lawai, a community leader from Long Luping.

The two villages had similar problems. Each village has one water system that was shared between its respective primary school and its homes.

Between 6pm and 6am there would be no water supply to the homes in both villages as it would be routed to the respective schools, both of which have hostels.

From 6am to 6pm all water would be channelled to the village and the schools would get none. During dry seasons, teachers had to take the students to bathe in a nearby river because there was not enough water, a parent named Leban Sakai said.

With the new systems both villages and their respective schools now have 24-hour running water.

Long Sukang community leader Yaris Semayong claimed that the DAP has garnered a lot of goodwill from these two water projects and that villagers have finally woken up to the possibility of choosing someone other than the BN to govern.

“For the Orang Ulu, we do not choose based on race or religion, just on who is best at serving the people,” the 54-year-old farmer said.

Backlash and consequences

Despite the best efforts and the benefit it brings, there has been some backlash from Sarawak authorities as well as the state government attacking Impian Sarawak in the local media.

Long Sukang’s Yaris claimed he was pressured from the Lawas district office to cancel the village’s project. He resisted, and the villagers and the Impian Sarawak team were able to complete it.

The better rapport with villagers through Impian Sarawak is driving the DAP to consider contesting in rural Sarawak and this sets up potential clashes with the PKR.

Sarawak DAP chief Chong Chieng Jien confirmed that the party is aiming to contest in 30 seats in the state elections next year, up from the 11 it currently occupies.

The DAP has won almost all of the urban seats in Sarawak’s big coastal cities of Kuching, Sibu, Miri and Bintulu.

“So the logical assumption is that the DAP is now looking to expand into some of Sarawak’s smaller towns in the interior, otherwise where are they going to find an additional 19 seats?” said a Sarawak PKR leader who requested anonymity.

The possibility of a clash between the two opposition parties is high because unlike in the peninsula, the state DAP is not in a formal coalition with PKR.

“The PKR has put a lot of effort into building the party’s base in rural areas ever since the last state elections (in 2011). They have a lot of members now among Sarawak’s tribes,” said a DAP leader from southern Sarawak who requested anonymity.

“If we do not settle our seat conflicts and go up against them and the BN, it can be very bad.”

But the bigger obstacle is still Sarawak BN. Dr Bob claimed that Sarawak BN ministers would accuse Impian Sarawak projects of being defective. There was even a report in a Sarawak newspaper alleging that villagers had to pay an upfront fee of RM250 per person for each project.

In reality, the cost of materials and operations for Impian Sarawak projects are borne by the DAP through public donations. Villagers only have to help install the project with the DAP volunteers who come to implement it.

“The BN says they want to do everything to take back opposition seats,” said Dr Bob, adding that this increased concern is not a bad thing.

“I tell the villagers, if BN wants to do that then good. Demand everything from them, roads, water, electricity and make sure they deliver them before you cast your vote. After all, those things are from the rakyat’s money, not from the BN’s own pocket.” – October 31, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 2 November 2015, 8:12 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Lessons From The Past

M. Bakri Musa

www.bakrimusa.com

October 20 2016

The coming of Islam, European colonization, and the pursuit of independence – these were transformational events in our culture that resulted in the toppling of the Malay collective coconut shell. In all three instances our culture had served us well in guiding us through uncharted waters.

     Yet, and this seems perverse, in our current tribulations we are far too inclined to blame our culture. I suggest that instead of forever berating and blaming the presumed inadequacies of our culture, it would be far more meaningful and productive if we were to analyze and learn how our culture had dealt with the major events of the past, and apply those insights to our current challenges.

     If I were to grade the performance of our culture to the three transformational events in our history, I would give an exemplary A-plus for the path we chose towards independence, an A-minus for our reception to the coming of Islam, and a respectable B for our performance during colonization.

     As for that brief period of Japanese Occupation, the fact that we survived was blessing enough. Indeed we did better; we maintained our honor and integrity. Contrary to the fears expressed by the likes of Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew who wondered out loud whether during a time of famine his Malay neighbors would spare him their last grains of rice, rest assured that Malays willingly shared what little we had even with our once oppressors, as Jean Paget experienced in “A Town Like Alice.”

     A grading exercise is only meaningful if accompanied by some useful comments. I gave a perfect score for our pursuit of independence because it was done right in every respect. We chose the right leaders and they chose the right strategy; it was also the right timing. Our approach was pragmatic, and that proved productive.

     The path we chose reflected the best elements of our culture. It emphasized fairness and generosity, and we put both to good use by working together with the other communities to achieve our goal. We kept our eye on the ultimate prize, and we were willing to make the necessary compromises in order to reach our final destination. We did not consider the give and take of negotiations as a sign of weakness, rather of strength. Timbang menimbang, as we say, of being fair and balanced.

     With such a mindset we were able to work readily with non-Malays towards independence. We did not consider the exercise of collaboration as expedience, a sign of weakness, or the price we had to pay but as a positive endeavor towards a common goal. Had we been consumed with the “purity” of our goals and had been unwilling to compromise, we would still be a British colony today and be left even further behind.

     That said, the path we chose towards independence was far from smooth. There were tough negotiations and last minute snags not only between Malays and non-Malays as represented within the Alliance, but also among Malays, specifically between UMNO (which at that time represented the overwhelming majority of Malays) and the sultans. Ultimately commonsense prevailed, and with a united front within Alliance and with the sultans, the negotiations with the British were successful.

     There were other equally passionate nationalistic leaders. With no disrespect to them, none measured up to Tunku, Tun Razak, and his team in Alliance. Had we hitched our fate on Burhanuddin Al Helmy, another giant of a leader, we would be like Indonesia today; with Malay girls desperate to find work as maids in neighboring countries. I do not question Burhanuddin’s anti-colonialist credentials but his avowed goal was union with Indonesia.

     Had we latched on to Ahmad Boestaman, he would have embraced Chin Peng in a grand gesture of socialistic reconciliation, a strategy so loved by those who think that problems could be solved by simply forgetting or ignoring differences. Sukarno did that with Aidit, leader of the Indonesian Communist Party, and was nearly done in, as was Indonesia.

     Chin Peng was also for independence, but his goal was to realize the aspiration of a Greater China as revealed in some ancient maps found in the musty tombs of long-gone emperors. Chin Peng and Burhanuddin were alike in their thinking and strategies; the former, communism and China; the latter, Islam and Indonesia.

     Tunku too tried this reconciliation route, but after meeting Chin Peng at the Baling Peace Talks in December 1955, quickly gave that idea up. Tunku remembered well the basic rule to any negotiation: stick to your principles. He intuitively recognized Chin Peng for what he was and wisely decided that it would not be prudent to share a blanket with a cobra.

     Our culture’s response to the coming of Islam was exemplary in many ways. We saw its innate beauty and evident verity, and embraced the faith enthusiastically. Yet in so doing we did not dismiss or abandon our then existing ways and identity. Our exuberant acceptance of this new faith did not preclude us from continuing our traditional practices and adat (customs). The genius of our ancestors was to creatively harmonize the two, not picking and choosing what we like from each and discarding what we deemed unsuitable, rather the artful fusion of both. We did not become less of a Muslim or Malay in so doing but better human beings and our society the better for it.

     The closest modern equivalent to our exuberant embrace of Islam would be the current Chinese accommodation to capitalism and globalization. Just as our ancestors created their own “Islam with Malay characteristics” as it were, separate from those of the Arab, Persian or Indian variety, likewise today’s China enthusiastically embraces capitalism albeit “with Chinese characteristics,” a unique brand identifiably different from the American, British or Scandinavian strain. It is capitalism nonetheless and has brought unimaginable benefits to the Chinese, just as Islam did to Malays.

     I did not grant top marks to our ancestors’ embracing Islam because in their eagerness they failed to grasp fully its vast universe beyond the spiritual and theological. They did not fully appreciate the tremendous non-religious contributions of the Arabs to the arts and sciences through Islam. Consequently there were no Malay translations of texts beyond the religious and hikayat (legends). Nor did our ancestors emulate the highly successful trading practices of those early Arabs.

     Our ancestors also failed to appreciate the full breath and diversity of Islamic theological thoughts, or of Islam’s tolerance to dissenting viewpoints, at least in its early years. Our culture’s failure in that arena would handicap us in our subsequent dealings with the inevitable differences in interpretations within our faith. We impute evil motives on those with whom we disagree; we are too eager to label as apostates those who disagree with us.

      We became so enamored with those Arab traders and so eager to emulate them that we closed ourselves to other equally valid interpretations and practices of Islam. We let ourselves be colonized mentally in that we would view any other version of Islam as being bida’a, an adulteration of the faith.

     Our embrace of the Arabs could not be more different than our reaction to the Europeans. Our culture was right in recognizing colonization’s inherent evil nature. No human group has a right to subjugate others under any pretext, be it noblesse oblige or the presumption of a supposed “white man’s burden.”

     We should fight evil (and colonization was that) but in doing so we should also recognize our own weaknesses. If we realize that our enemy is overwhelming and that there can be no meaningful or possible way for us to prevail, then we should be prepared to make the necessary accommodations to that harsh reality. There is no need to sacrifice our people needlessly. Life is precious; adapt and live for another day.

     The powers of the colonialists were indeed awesome, and we would be nothing but easy prey had we aggressively resisted. In such instances our first priority should be to ensure our collective survival. With time we could learn from our adversaries and only then perhaps could we build a credible force to challenge them.

     As per the wisdom of our Koran, when we see evil we must use our hands to combat it, meaning, do so physically. Failing that we should use our tongue, that is, voice our disapproval. When even that is not feasible, then we should disapprove of it in our hearts, though that is the path least favored by Allah. Stated differently, we should not senselessly sacrifice our precious lives to a lost cause and that there is infinite human capacity to adjust while remaining true to our faith. We saw that in Stalin’s Soviet Union and elsewhere.

     British colonialism was a formidable force and we could not possibly prevail. We could not challenge it with our hands; we were no match for their guns and cannons. We could voice our disapproval, but their prisons too had infinite capacity. Thus we were left to disapproving it only in our hearts, and we did.

     When it became clear that we were vastly outmatched by colonialism, our people responded in the only way they could. They resorted to using the “weapons of the weak,” borrowing James C. Scott’s words.

Next: Our Schizophrenic Response to British Colonialism

Adapted from the author’s latest book, Liberating The Malay Mind, ZI Publications Sdn Bhd, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia , 2013.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 2 November 2015, 4:38 pm and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
History
,
Malays
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malay Schizophrenic Response to British Colonialism

Bakri Musa

[email protected]

Oct 28 2015

Malays actively shunned and refused to participate in the various colonial endeavors even those that could potentially benefit us. Instead we undertook a form of passive resistance, utilizing what John C Scott refers to as “weapons of the weak.”

While these everyday forms of passive resistance may not grab headlines, nonetheless they are akin to the cumulative accumulation of the coral reefs. In the aggregate and over time they exert a profound impact. When the ship of state runs aground on such reefs, attention is directed to the shipwreck and not to the aggregations of petty acts that made those treacherous reefs possible.

So was the Malayan Union initiative shipwrecked upon a reef of resentment and resistance that had quietly been building up and concretized over time.

     Of course the weapon of the weak had its price. As those brave little acts of defiance did not fit the colonials’ narrative of us as being “nature’s gentlemen,” they had to invent new ones. Thus was born the myth of the lazy native that later became the colonialists’ convenient justification for bringing in those indentured laborers.

     Those tribulations notwithstanding, we should realize that even in the most evil system there are slivers of good and of individuals with goodwill within it. In our rightful condemnation of colonization we must also be aware of the good colonization had brought to our society, whether those were intentional or merely unintended consequences.

     Then there were those enlightened colonial officers who were sympathetic to our cause. There was for example, R J Wilkinson who was instrumental in setting up Malay College in 1905, and Richard Winstedt, the Sultan Idris Training College in 1922.

     The British also outlawed some of the more odious aspects of our culture, like slavery and indentured labor (orang hamba). They also brought in modern education and the rubber industry. Yes, they also burdened our land with a race problem that we are still grappling with.

     Seeing that we could not possibly prevail if we were to frontally confront the colonials, nonetheless we could have through our leaders arranged a workable accommodation instead of shunning the colonials entirely. Then they would not have to import those cheap foreign labors. More importantly, the colonials then would not have to concoct those ugly myths about us.

     With our leaders’ encouragement we could have participated in those colonial ventures and learned something from them, much like Munshi Abdullah did. Likewise, had we not projected wholly evil motives on the part of the colonials we could have encouraged our children to attend the much superior English schools. Had we done so, our community would not have been left so far behind come time of independence.

     After all, our leaders (including and especially the sultans) readily corroborated with the colonials. They unabashedly absorbed the ways of the English and lapped up any scrap of British title bestowed upon them. The sultans and aristocrats did not hesitate in sending their children to English schools, even their daughters to those “convents.”

     Our leaders should have likewise encouraged the rakyats to do the same and not have double standards – one for them and another for the rest. Our leaders were hypocrites in being shameless anglophiles while condemning the colonials in front of the rakyats.

     This was in stark contrast with the way we dealt with the coming of Islam. Both leaders and rakyats were honest with each other; we were all on the same wavelength, each supporting the other in their collective and united response to this new force.

     Another reason I did not give top marks to our encounter with colonization was this. We failed to differentiate the significant differences between the various colonizers. They may all be Europeans, but there were vast differences between the Dutch and Portuguese on one hand, and the British on the other. For the Dutch, look what they did to Indonesia; for the Portuguese, Angola and East Timor.

     As far as colonials go, the British were slightly on the benign side; their Anglo Saxon ethics and sense of fairness are worthy of our emulation. Besides, being the nation that ushered in the Industrial Revolution they had something to teach the world, and that included Malays.

     Had we embraced the technological modernization that the British had to offer just as enthusiastically as we did the spiritual values of Islam, we could have had the best of both worlds; the British for our material and worldly needs; Islam our spiritual and “other worldly” yearnings.

     That we did not embrace the modernization brought in by the British reflected our own insecurity with Islam. We feared that the infidel colonials would “contaminate” our Islamic values. By not partaking in the educational and other opportunities afforded by the British (scarce as they were), we put ourselves at a significant disadvantage vis a vis the other communities in Malaysia that harbored no such reservations.

      Imagine had we enthusiastically utilized the British influence to enhance our literature and language, or learn trading skills from the nation of shopkeepers. Our national language would by now be fully developed and we would be accomplished entrepreneurs. Instead, we were obsessed with maintaining the “purity” of our language to the extent of avoiding obvious words like “radio” preferring instead our very own native and “pure” tetuang udara (lit. pouring out air), no matter how awkward that sounded.

Ironically, Malay language expanded exponentially only after independence when we, without reservations adopted wholesale English words even when there were perfectly adequate Malay ones!

      As for trading skills, we missed out on the Arabs and again with the English. No wonder today we have only the pseudo variety of entrepreneurs in our midst.

Next: Imagining Otherwise

Adapted from the author’s latest book, Liberating The Malay Mind, ZI Publications Sdn Bhd, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia , 2013.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 2 November 2015, 4:49 pm and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
History
,
Malays
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


No “Lazy Malays” During The Japanese Occupation

M. Bakri Musa

www.bakrimusa.com

Oct. 6, 2015

The Japanese Occupation briefly interrupted British colonial rule. Japanese troops landed in Kota Baru in the early morning of December 8, 1941, and surrendered some 43 months later. That was only a blink in our history but to those who suffered through that terrible period, it was eternity. As brutal as it was, Malays as a culture and community survived.

     There was one significant but not widely noted disruption and humiliation of Malay culture during that period. The Japanese, despite their reverence for their own Sun God Emperor, had little use or respect for Malay sultans. At least the British maintained the facade of respect even though those sultans were essentially colonial puppets.

     The colonials saw in the institution of Malay sultans an effective means of indirect rule. The British knew full well the reverence Malays had for our sultans. The British must have learned a thing or two from observing kampong boys herding their kerbaus (water buffaloes). Pierce a ring through the lead buffalo’s nose and then even a toddler could effectively control the herd by pulling on the rope tied to that lead beast’s ring.

     That essentially was the British approach to controlling the Malay herd; pierce a ring through their sultan’s nose. The rope may be of silk and the ring of gold, but the underlying dynamics are the same.

     The Japanese on the other hand totally ignored the sultans. They did not even bother going through a formal ceremony of “de-recognizing” the sultans. The surprise was not how quickly and easily the sultans ceded their power, rather how unceremoniously those sultans lost their honor and prestige among their own subjects.

     I once saw a documentary shown in the village by the Information Department about the royal installation of the first Agong. He happened to be the Yang di Pertuan Besar of Negri Sembilan, my state. The next morning I overheard a group of Malay women chatting with my mother. They were making fun of the pompous ceremony depicted in that film.

     Those villagers did not see a Queen as the rest of the country did. Instead they saw their former fishing mate made pretty and regal. They remembered her only as a woman wrapped in her wet tattered sarong arguing over a fishing spot in the river during the Occupation. Neither pretty nor regal! My mother remembered her as particularly inept with her tanggok (fishing net). If not for the generosity of fellow villagers, the future queen and her husband would have starved during the Occupation.

     There was something else amazing about those shared fishing trips my mother and the other villagers had with the future queen, and that was the obvious absence of royal fuss or protocol. Only a few months before the Japanese invasion, those members of the royalty could with a click of their fingers command a villager to do their bidding. He would then have to stop whatever he was doing, stoop low, crawl towards the raja and express what a great honor it was to be a slave of the sultan! And if he were to inadvertently make eye contact with the sultan, may Allah have mercy on him for the sultan certainly would not.

     All that royal pomp and ceremony together with other elaborate palace rituals vanished overnight under the Japanese. The remarkable thing was, and the villagers did not fail to notice this, how quickly those former royals adapted to their new plebian status! They were not above bickering over a coconut or their favorite fishing hole.

      The Japanese also had a profound effect on the behavior of ordinary Malays, especially the youths. Once as a youngster a few years after the war, my father and I were strolling in the village when we encountered a bunch of unemployed Malay boys hanging around and making a nuisance of themselves. Behind them was an abandoned field covered with overgrown brush.

     My father commented that such a scene would have been unthinkable during the war. Those idle youths would have been conscripted and sent to work on the infamous Death Railway in Burma, never to return. So everyone, especially able-bodied young men, knew better than to loiter. Likewise the owners of idle but otherwise tillable land; they risked being punished and their land confiscated.

     Yes, the Japanese did all those terrible things, scaring young men to go into hiding. However, boys will be boys; they will defy authorities despite the cruelty of the punishments. Indeed if you keep the young repressed for too long, they will eventually blow up, as we saw in Egypt and Tunisia recently, and what Malaysia is now experiencing.

     The Japanese were smart enough to go beyond simply meting out cruel punishments. They set up many vocational training centers and those youths eagerly enrolled. Whether that was out of passion for learning and acquiring useful skills or merely fear of being caught idle, I know not. Perhaps both! Whatever it was, they became highly skilled.

     My cousin, an unemployed teacher during the war, took up carpentry. He became sufficiently accomplished to build for his family a fairly decent house. Another villager became a tailor, and he continued his business after the war. Yet a third became a radio repairman and later expanded into heavy equipment, a skill he learned from the Japanese. All those young men became productive, each with their own enterprises. There were no GLCs or a benevolent government ready to employ them; they started their own businesses.

    As revealed in a recent History Channel documentary, P. Ramlee’s talent was first discovered and honed while attending a Japanese Naval College in Penang. To “catch” these young men, the Japanese used the ruse of giving out free movie tickets. After the movie those young Malays were then led to waiting trucks to be sorted according to their abilities. Young Ramlee was fortunate not to be sent to work on the Death Railway. That was a tribute to the Japanese skill in spotting talent.

     During the Japanese Occupation every square inch of tillable land was cultivated. Even poor soil was tilled, to grow the hardy ubi kayu (tapioca), a cheap but not very good source of starch and calorie. Consumed too much and you would get beri-beri from Vitamin B deficiency. Similarly, every inch of the rice field was cultivated. Had the Japanese discovered short-season rice then, there would have been double and triple plantings per year.

     Malays worked very hard then; there were no “lazy natives” despite all the produce going to the Japanese. The consequences of being idle were too horrendous to contemplate.

     Even my father, who always complained of how difficult it was for him to learn English, quickly became facile with Japanese and proficient with kanji. The reason for my father and other Malays becoming fast learners was clear; the very effective Japanese teaching technique – learn, or else! That “or else” was the most powerful motivator!

     As for our cultural values during that terrible period, I refer readers to that wonderful movie “A Town Like Alice,” based on Nevil Shute’s novel of the same title. It is the story of a group of British women who were abandoned by their husbands in the rush to escape the onslaught of the Japanese. Those women later found refuge in a Malay village and were subsequently adopted en mass by the villagers.

     Earlier I mentioned my Chinese-looking friend. In the villages today there are plenty of such individuals of my vintage, especially women. Their parents had given them up during those trying times. Those were the lucky ones.

     The Chinese were not the only ones to do that; so did some Europeans. They willingly gave up their babies and young ones to escape the Japanese unencumbered. There was the spectacular case (spectacular because she triggered a deadly riot in Singapore after the war) of Maria Hertogh or Nadra Binte Ma’arof, depending upon your biases and sympathies.

     Her Dutch mother gave her up for adoption to a Malay family during the war. When it was over she tried to reclaim her child who by now had become fully attached to her adopted family. The ensuing ugly court battle spilled into the community, pitting the natives against the ruling colonials. In the end the ruling colonial trial judge followed his tribal instinct instead of the evidence presented, and awarded custody to the biological mother. In so doing the judge ignored the now important sociological concept of parenthood.

     Han Suyin’s gripping novella Cast But One Shadow, though under a different setting, re-chronicles that drama.

     The Japanese Occupation, terrible though it was, offered many useful lessons. It also revealed many positive and resilient aspects of Malay culture. For one, as mentioned earlier, there were no lazy Malays then; we were all very productive. For another, as can be seen from the movie “A Town Like Alice,” even during times of severe deprivation we maintained our values and willingly shared whatever little blessings we had with others, including those who were once our oppressors.

     There is one other significant aspect to the Japanese Occupation now forgotten but nonetheless bears highlighting. That is, the Japanese effortlessly destroyed a significant part of Malay culture – our institutions of royalty. The Japanese did not purposely do so; they simply found no significance to the sultans and simply ignored them. Yet our culture and society survived. That should tell us something of the value and utility of these sultans.

     Today when I see these sultans and other members of the royal family lording it over the rest of us, I wish someone would kindly remind them of their fathers’ and grandfathers’ fate during the Occupation. If that could happen then, it could happen again. Such a reminder might just curb some of their excesses.

Next: Path Towards Independence

Adapted from the author’s latest book, Liberating The Malay Mind, ZI Publications Sdn Bhd, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia , 2013.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 2 November 2015, 4:00 pm and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
Constitution
,
Malays
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Once docile Sarawak native villagers turning anti-BN activists

by Sheridan Mahavera

The Malaysian Insider

2 November 2015

Iban farmer Jimmy Saban did not care much about politics until the day government men, some of them armed with guns, came to take away the land that’s been in his clan and family for generations.

Saban is one of the growing numbers of unassuming farmers, foragers and peasants who are now anti-Barisan Nasional activists, and whose fervent talks against the Sarawak government could be a factor in the coming state elections.

What distinguishes 61-year-old Saban from the middle-class, urbanised opposition activist is that he is a farmer, just like those he speaks to.

Most importantly, he has seen first-hand how tribes people lose their lands in shady deals by private companies who are often backed by the state authorities.

Saban’s story of how tribal lands are still being unscrupulously taken away counters the narrative that is being churned out by chief minister Tan Sri Adenan Satem’s administration and that of the federal BN.

Ever since taking office, Adenan has won praise from Sarawakians for saying he wanted to recognise ancestral claims or native customary land rights (NCR).

In the 11th Malaysia Plan and the recent Budget 2016, Putrajaya also earmarked money for what they claimed as measures to secure NCR land.

Saban and many other farmer-activists are out to challenge these claims and show that Adenan and Putrajaya do not mean what they say.

Duped

Three of the activists interviewed are from different tribes in different parts of Sarawak. But their stories are remarkably similar.

They were either apolitical or BN supporters, until they claimed the Sarawak government betrayed them.

Saban and the residents of three longhouses along Sungai Pandan claimed that in 2007 they were duped by state government officers into relinquishing their claims to their ancestral lands.

“They told us to fill and sign these forms to confirm our lands these belonged to us. We signed. One week later they came and seized our land. They took the land for an acacia plantation company,” claimed Saban, whose longhouse is three hours by boat from Bintulu.

The villagers believed the form was altered after they signed it to show that they had relinquished claims to those lands.

He said the 46 families lost about one third of 4,000 ha which they claimed was theirs. The land seized was planted with oil palm, pepper, fruit and vegetables, all of which was destroyed.

“This land is what I survive on. The crops feed me, my wife and my grand-daughter,” said Saban.

In a video recording the farmers took of the 2007 land seizure, men in dark blue uniforms of the Sarawak local council were seen tearing down storage huts the farmers had built.

The officers went about their work as men in light blue police uniforms stood guard with M-16 assault rifles.

Female villagers cried and pleaded with some of the local council officers to stop the demolition and have pity on them.

‘My toe nails got ripped out for BN’

In Bengoh, some 45 minutes from Kuching, Bidayuh villager Gracey Kibik became an activist when she saw how her community was being duped in negotiations to resettle villagers in the Bengoh dam project.

“(Sarawak government) first told us we had to move from our old villages to higher ground to make way for the dam. But when we set up a new settlement, they told us we could not stay, we had to move again. That was when I knew there was something fishy,” said Kibik, 48, of Kampung Muk Ayun.

Far in the northern highlands, Yaris Semayong (pic, right) related how he had been a committed BN supporter and activist and had canvassed for votes for Sarawak BN in the 90s.

“During one of the campaigns, I walked so much that I ripped out one of my toe nails. That’s how dedicated I was,” said the 54-year-old Lun Bawang farmer from Kampung Long Sukang.

Semayong was slowly turned off by BN when he saw how the Sarawak government did not deliver on its promises and that their state assembly representatives were self-centred.

“Then I started supporting (Sarawak PKR chief) Baru Bian, who I knew since he was little and who helped a lot of people with NCR cases.”

Changing sentiments

These days, Saban, Kibik and Semayong are active speakers and campaigners in the ceramah and programmes of Sarawak’s opposition parties and non-governmental organisations.

Kibik gives talks all over Sarawak, Sabah and to peninsular Orang Asal communities who are in conflict with their respective local governments or private companies.

Her experience in the Bengoh dam project is widely sought after by other communities in East Malaysia who are being displaced by similar dam projects.

Saban travels the length of Sungai Pandan to share with other longhouses the experience of how his longhouse lost their land and how they can prevent it from happening to them.

Semayong, meanwhile, helps bring small infrastructure projects, such as gravity feed water systems or micro-hydro schemes, which are sponsored by opposition parties, into villages in the Lawas highlands.

“Small projects help people see that the PKR or DAP can deliver,” said Semayong, claiming that in the surrounding villages, only their chiefs remained BN supporters. Everyone younger than 50 is an opposition voter, he claimed.

Although rural sentiments towards the BN and opposition have gradually changed, the three activists admitted that support for the opposition was not necessarily a sure thing in the coming state elections.

When asked what would really determine how the villagers would vote, all three responded the same way.

They frowned, held up one hand, and rubbed their thumbs against their index and middle fingers. – November 2, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 2 November 2015, 11:28 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The infusion of the cream of Dayak community into DAP a major and historic development in DAP’s 50 year mission to be an inclusive all-Malaysian political party representing  all ethnic groups and regions in Malaysia

The infusion of the cream of Dayak community into DAP at the signing of the DAP Dayak Blueprint ceremony at the Sarawak DAP headquarters in Kuching yesterday marked a major and historic development in DAP’s 50-year mission to be an inclusive all-Malaysian political party representing all ethnic groups and regions in Malaysia.

Right from beginning from our formation half a century ago, DAP founding members and leaders have dedicated themselves to the fulfilment of the Malaysian Dream.

DAP founding leaders and members had  pledged to transcend ethnic, religious, cultural, linguistic and socio-economic differences among Malaysians to build a Malaysia where democracy, good governance and socio-economic justice could flourish allowing every Malaysian, regardless of race, religion or region  to achieve his or her fullest potential for the collective good and greatness of the nation.

This was why from the beginning of the first DAP general election contest in 1969, DAP had fielded a multi-racial slate of candidates for parliamentary and state assembly seats in Peninsular Malaysia, with Chinese, Malay and Indians elected as Members of Parliament or State Assembly representatives in Peninsula Malaysia.

The DAP is also  the first Pan-Malaysian political party, with branches and members  not only in Peninsular Malaysia also in Sarawak and Sabah.

In the 2013 General Election, the first DAP Kadazan  elected representative was elected to the Sabah State Assembly, and it is our hope that the first DAP Dayak elected representative will be elected to the Sarawak State Assembly in the forthcoming Sarawak state general elections expected to held in the first quarter of next year.

The mission of DAP to be an inclusive all-Malaysian political party representing all ethnic groups and regions in Malaysia had not been an easy one – in a political environment where the exclusive message of race and religion seemed so all-enveloping and pervasive.

Our political foes try to undermine and puncture the power of our message of an all-encompassing inclusive Malaysian Dream by demonising the DAP as a political party for one race or even one religion, but like all lies and falsehoods, they cannot stand the test of time.

The accusation the DAP is a purely Chinese or Christian party is a lie, as  even in the first general election contested by the DAP 44 years ago in 1969, DAP had more Indian Members of Parliament than MIC in  government.

In fact, the DAP was the party which created Malaysian history in having the first Indian State Assembly Speaker in Perak in 2008 and to create the post for the  first Indian Deputy Chief Minister in Penang since 2008.

I visited Sarawak after being released from my first Internal Security Act detention in  October 1970 where I met former Sarawak SNAP Chief Minister Stephen Kalong Ningkan and the then SUPP Chairman, Ong Kee Hui before SUPP became a government party to discuss the political scenario in Malaysia.

On behalf of the dozen Dayak professionals who signed the DAP Dayak Blueprint and joined the DAP yesterday, the renowned native customary rights (NCR) land lawyer, Paul Raja said the Dayals were at one time a “potent political force” in Sarawak as well as national politics, but over the past 50 years, it had become a “spent political force” veering on irrelevance.

These historic wrongs must be corrected.

The Malaysian Dream cannot be fulfilled if there is any ethnic community, including the Dayak community, which is marginalised from the mainstream of national development.

For this reason, the DAP Dayak Blueprint launched by the cream of Dayak community on politics, land reform, Dayak socio-economic, educational and infrastructure development,  the promotion of Dayak identity and the full honouring of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 deserves support not only of the Dayak community, but all Malaysians whether in Sarawak or  at the national level.

The dozen Dayak personalities who represent the cream of the Dayak community who have joined forces to promote the Malaysian Dream of DAP are: Paul Raja, Philip Tero (Sarawak Dayak Graduates Association founding member), Richard Lias (secretary general of Dayak National Congress), Baba Emperan (businessman), Ali Basah (lawyer), Frankie Bedindang (ex-Walikota of Kapit), Douglas Alau (former university lecturer and former executive secretary of PBDS), David Kalom (former deputy director of a statutory body), Granda Aing (businessman), Robert Tella (former Lt. Commander in the navy), Edward Agong (former teacher) and Gabriel Ajan (former Petronas employee).

                This entry was posted on Monday, 2 November 2015, 2:25 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Peaceful Path We Chose Towards Independence

M. Bakri Musa

www.bakrimusa.com

13th October 2015

The third defining moment in Malay culture was the peaceful path we chose towards independence. The Malay world was turned upside down with colonization; it altered the physical as well as social landscape. The latter was even more profound and threatening.

     Despite that, and defying the trend of the time, we opted for this peaceful path through negotiations and collaborations in pursuit of our independence.

     If one were to stroll along the countryside of pre-colonial Malaysia, there would of course be no paved roads. One would have to literally cut a swath through the thick jungle. The only practical route for travel was by rivers and waterways.

     The British built roads and replaced the thick jungle with neat rows of identical, boring but highly productive rubber trees. As for the rivers, once teeming with fish, they were now like kopi susu (cafe au lait) from the contamination of brown sediments from the ubiquitous tin mines.

     Those earlier mines were of the cheap, primitive and labor-intensive hydraulic variety. Water under high pressure was blasted onto the hillside to get to the heavier tin ore underneath the surface. The thin but rich topsoil would be washed away, polluting streams and rivers.

     The rubber estates on the other hand presented a serene scene. However, behind that cool green scenery, the rubber industry too was (and still is) highly polluting. If you happen to be anywhere near a rubber factory where those sheets are being dried, if the offensive stench does not get you then the acrid smoke certainly will. Processing the seemingly pure white latex is also extremely toxic, requiring corrosive formic acid and vast quantities of water that then also pollute the streams and water tables.

     To colonial economists, that pollution is merely an externality; remediation efforts would only reduce profits. Besides, the victims were Malay villagers anyway. For them however, the streams that previously provided much-needed proteins through their fish were now barren. Worse, with the silting came frequent devastating floods.

     The degradations of the environment offended not just the esthetics but also physical senses. Yet what really affected Malay sensibilities were the equally dramatic, fast moving, and very unsettling changes to the social landscape. Malays felt an existential threat by the presence of the massive hordes of foreigners brought in to work the tin mines and rubber estates.

     This monumental change to the social landscape would have remained hidden and subtle had it not been for the tumultous changes in the mining industry. Those primitive, labor-intensive hydraulic mines soon gave way to the efficient, mechanized, floating dredges. Suddenly thousands of coolies were no longer needed and forced to leave the mines. They settled on Malay lands.

     Soon hitherto Malay towns like Ipoh and Kuala Lumpur changed character in dramatic ways. Instead of Azzan you would hear gongs; instead of the fragrance of the lady-of-the-night flowers we had the eye-searing smoke from burning joss sticks.

     With English schools being built in towns and non-Malays eagerly enrolling their children, no doubt influenced by the successes of the Queen’s Chinese, it did not take long for non-Malays to control the modern sectors of Malaysian life, especially the economy.

     It was this social change that Malays found threatening and motivated our leaders to seek independence as soon as possible so our destiny would be under our control. This nationalistic zeal was further emboldened when we saw the ease with which the British were routed during World War II.

     Malaysia’s peak struggle for independence was fortuitously timed with the period of worldwide de-colonization. The shame of colonization finally struck the conscience of the Western world, mocking their very concept of being civilized. Colonization betrayed the hollowness of their supposedly humanitarian Christian principles.

     That realization alone was not enough for the British to give up their resource-rich colony. The country now was no longer exclusively Malay; it had a substantial immigrant population. The British had just gone through the harrowing experience with the Indian independence and the ensuing horrific human tragedies. The stain and stench of that epic human-made catastrophe was still heavy on British hands. They were not about to let that happen again to any of their other colonies.

     Fortunately Malay leaders at the time, at least the more thoughtful and enlightened ones, were aware of the British dilemma. The only way the country could achieve independence was to convince the colonials that those non-Malays would not be massacred once the civilizing presence of the British was gone, and that Malays could live side by side with non-Malays, or at least tolerate their presence. In short, our leaders assured the British that the Indian horror would not be repeated on the Malay Peninsula.

     Wise Malay leaders like Tunku Abdul Rahman and Tun Razak sought formal workable relationships with like-minded leaders from the Chinese and Indian communities. The Tunku and Tun Razak sought those leaders who were not among the recent immigrants who tended to be chauvinistic and thus unacceptable to Malays. Rather they chose those who had been in Malaysia for generations and were in tune with Malay sensitivities – the Straits Chinese and old established Indian leaders. Thus was born the Alliance Party, comprising the United Malay National Organization (UMNO), Malayan Chinese Association (MCA), and Malayan Indian Congress (MIC).

     Alliance’s resounding success in the first general elections of 1955 in which its only manifesto was the country’s independence convinced the British that this group of leaders would not turn the country into a miniature Indian nightmare.

    To be sure, they were not the first to aspire leading Malaysia towards independence. For Malays, there were the traditional village leaders who scored high on the nationalism zeal but were pathetically inept in their strategic thinking. They were also woefully ignorant in the art of modern statecraft.

     If those were not already significant weaknesses, they were also ignorant of British ways. How could they when they had never left their kampong or could hardly speak English? The key to winning a war is to know your adversary, as Lao Tze put it in his The Art of War. Those village Malay leaders were severely handicapped in that regard.

     Their other weakness, and a very significant one, was that while they were committed to getting rid of colonial rule, their goal was not the country’s independence but its subsequent union with neighboring Indonesia in a grand Melayu Raya (Malay Union). Knowing how dysfunctional that young republic was (still is, half a century later) that strategy did not strike a chord even with Malays. Had Indonesia been successful, things would have been different.

     Similarly there were leaders in the Chinese community agitating for Malaysia’s independence. Like the Malay nationalists, those leaders, principally in the Malayan Communist Party (MCP), were not interested in the country’s independence but its incorporation in a Greater China, as supposedly claimed in some moldy documents of ancient Emperors. As for leaders of the Indian community, they were consumed with affairs in the subcontinent.

     In the end, the path chosen by Alliance leaders proved successful. Their overwhelming electoral victory was a powerful but not the only factor to their success in gaining independence. Those leaders also knew the ways of the English and exploited that insight. Instead of relying exclusively on the goodwill of colonial bureaucrats, those leaders also cultivated Members of Parliament, especially those from the Labor Party who were sympathetic to the Malaysian cause.

     The other Malay nationalists were kampong-bred and not savvy enough to negotiate the tricky path towards independence. As for Chin Peng, leader of the MCP, while he was familiar with the ways of the British having fought with them against the Japanese and proven himself sufficiently worthy of a British royal award, the OBE, nevertheless Britain was not about to let one of her richest colonies be turned over to a communist even if the Labor Party had been in power.

     The Alliance prevailed because of its leaders’ political suaveness and familiarity with the British. Those leaders’ commitment to capitalism and democracy, as well as their proven track record of working across racial lines, convinced the British that Malaysia would be in good hands. Those colonialists were right.

     Today with the waning popularity of Barisan Nasional, successor to the old Alliance, revisionist historians would like us to believe that it was all those leftist rabble rousers and terrorists who should get the credit for the nation’s independence.

     I do not intend to demean or dismiss the huge contributions of such towering nationalists on the left as Ahmad Boestaman and on the right as Dr. Burhanuddin Al Helmy by my remarks. They were among the first to dare imagine a world of freedom, to ignite the passion for merdeka. More importantly, they kept that fire burning.

     Consider Datuk Onn; he more than anyone else was responsible for galvanizing the Malay masses. It was he who frontally took on the British and his own sultan in aborting the Malayan Union Treaty that would have made Malaysia a permanent British dominion.

     In the end as with everything else, it is the result that counts. UMNO leaders like Tunku Abdul Rahman and Razak Hussein in their wisdom sought the cooperation of the other communities, and using their political skills and personal talents captured the ultimate prize. If both were alive today, I am certain that they would generously share the credit with the other nationalists. I just wish that their successors in the current UMNO would be just a wee bit charitable and not hog all the glory.

Next: Lessons From The Past

Adapted from the author’s latest book, Liberating The Malay Mind, ZI Publications Sdn Bhd, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia , 2013.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 2 November 2015, 4:19 pm and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
History
,
Malays
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


10 questions I would pose to 1MDB President, Arul Kanda during the “live discussion, talk show or debate”

Tony Pua

DAP MP for PJ Utara

3rd November 2015

1MDB President, Arul Kanda has during his press conference on Saturday, informed Malaysians that “I will meet YB Tony Pua for live discussion, or talk show, or debate, without any condition.”

I would like to announce that the Members of Parliament for Kulai and Serdang, Teo Nie Ching and Dr Ong Kian Ming will be representing me to conduct the necessary discussions with the team from 1MDB to finalise the format and details of the proposed “live discussion, or talk show, or debate” between the 1MDB President, Arul Kanda and myself.

While we wait for the much anticipated face-off, I would like to offer Arul Kanda the heads up, so that he can prepare the necessary answers whether during replies or debate speech.  This way, Arul cannot feign ignorance or pretend that the documents were unavailable with him to provide the necessary answers.  Therefore, let me disclose here the 10 questions which I will ask during the “live discussion, or talk show, or debate”:

1. Why did Bank Negara withdraw its approval for 1MDB to transfer more than US$1.8 billion overseas?  Was it because most of the funds were transferred to an account which is unrelated to the 1MDB joint venture project with Petrosaudi International Limited as revealed in the leaked Board meeting minutes which Arul Kanda has acknowledged to be true?  How much was transferred to this unrelated account? Did this unrelated account belong to Good Star Limited and who owns or controls Good Star Limited?

2. Is it true that 1MDB had invested the initial US$1 billion cash to acquire 40% of 1MDB-Petrosaudi while Petrosaudi only need to invest its rights to certain oil reserves in the Caspian Sea and in Argentina for its 60% stake?  In addition, were the rights to the Caspian Sea oil reserves terminated by Petrosaudi within 2 months after the signing of the joint venture agreement, which meant that Petrosaudi secured their 60% stake without investing anything significant?

3. Is it true that 1MDB had proceeded to sign the joint venture agreement with Petrosaudi in a rush, without securing the necessary Board of Directors approval at that point of time as revealed in the same Board minutes?

4. 1MDB Financial Statements dated 31 March 2013 and 2014 stated that US$1.4 billion was held as a deposit by International Petroleum Investment Corporation (IPIC) as a condition for IPIC to guarantee 1MDB’s US$3.5 billion bond issue.  However, the IPIC Financial Statements dated December 2013 and 2014 audited by Ernst & Young did not disclose any such condition for the provision of the guarantee.  The balance sheet of IPIC also did not reflect any such refundable deposit received or held.  Why hasn’t 1MDB sought IPIC to clarify where the money has gone?

5. Did 1MDB pay US$993 million from the US$1.22 billion it partially redeemed from the Cayman Islands investment fund AND another US$975 million borrowed from Deutsche Bank led consortium to terminate options 1MDB granted to Aabar Investments as part of another condition by IPIC to guarantee 1MDB’s US$3.5 billion bond issue?  What exactly is the total sum paid and payable to Aabar or IPIC?  Why is it that IPIC disclosed in its December 2014 Financial Statements that 1MDB still owes IPIC a sum of US$481 million for the said termination?

In addition, if the US$993 million from the US$1.22 billion redeemed from Cayman Islands was not paid to Aabar or IPIC, where did the money go?

6. It has been disclosed in 1MDB’s financial statements, parliamentary replies and media releases that 1MDB Global Investment Limited borrowed US$3 billion in March 2013 for the purposes in investing in a 50:50 joint venture with Aabar Investments Limited where the joint venture will invest in the development of Tun Razak Exchange.  The question is, how come more than US$1.5 billion of the borrowings have been utilised for purposes other than specified as disclosed in the March 2014 Audited Accounts, particularly since the joint venture has yet to be activated to date?

7. Arul Kanda had earlier informed Malaysians and 1MDB Directors, according to the above leaked minutes, that the balance of the Cayman Islands investment amounting to US$1.108 billion was fully redeemed and was held in cash in BSI Bank Singapore.  However, the 1MDB President has since admitted that the redeemed amount was not cash but they were “fund units” worth US$940 million.  Why are these “fund units” which were redeemed from the Cayman Island fund still in the form of “fund units” and not in cash or, raw assets like property and shares?  If they were in “fund units”, doesn’t it mean that the Caymans fund was never redeemed in the first place?

8. Arul Kanda announced the “debt for asset-swap” deal with IPIC where the latter assumes some RM16 billion of 1MDB’s debts in exchange for 1MDB’s assets. IPIC has already advanced more than US$1 billion in the deal.  Where is 1MDB going to produce these RM16 billion worth of assets to transfer to IPIC by 30 June 2016?

The Ministry of Finance (MoF) has also indemnified IPIC in the “debt of asset-swap” arrangement.  Does it mean that if 1MDB fails to produce the necessary RM16 billion worth of assets by 30 June 2016, the MoF would have to compensate IPIC accordingly?

9. Arul had declared that the disposal of its subsidiary, Edra Energy will allow it to remove RM16-RM18 billion of 1MDB’s debt.  However, the total debts associated to 1MDB’s energy arm amounts to approximately RM36 billion, comprising of US$3.5 billion of bonds, RM5.7 billion of direct loans and more than RM8 billion of inherited loans.  Hence reducing up to RM18 billion of debt via the disposal of Edra Energy will still leave 1MDB with more that RM18 billion of outstanding debt associated with its energy acquisitions.  Therefore how will the sale of Edra solve 1MDB’s cash flow problem since there’ll be no assets left to pay the balance of the RM18 billion debt?

10. Did the Federal Government issue a “letter of support” in May 2015 to Bank EXIM to borrow US$150 million (RM600 million) where the funds was utilised by 1MDB to pay for its land acquisition from Tadmax Resources Bhd for approximately RM300 million?  If so, what was the balance of the proceeds from the borrowing used for?

All of the questions are financial in nature, and none of the questions are political.  No confidential Public Accounts Committee information has also been utilised to raise the above questions.  All information are derived from publicly available sources.  Hence this is not a case of scoring political points but one which is meant to expose the truth since Arul has consistently insisted that 1MDB has “nothing to cover up”.

Let me reiterate that I firmly believe that the biggest winners from the live discussion will be Malaysians out there who have been frustrated, perplexed and perhaps confused by the shenanigans which appear to have taken place in 1MDB.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 3 November 2015, 8:59 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Financial Scandals
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


After three-month derailment, PAC under new Chairman is dragging its feet on 1MDB investigations with no sense of urgency or priority – making total mockery of the concern of the  Malay Rulers, 30 million Malaysians and the majority of three million UMNO members

The first meeting of the newly reconstituted Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC) under a new Chairman Datuk Hasan Arifin is a  great national let-down, as after three-month derailment, the PAC is dragging its feet and procrastinating on 1MDB investigations with no sense of urgency or priority and making a total mockery of the concern of the  Malay Rulers, the 30 million Malaysians and the majority of the three million UMNO members.

I suggest that the PAC Chairman Datuk Arifin and the newly-appointed PAC members should be provided with a copy of the Malay Ruler’s unprecedented statement of Oct. 6 calling for the 1MDB investigations to be completed “as soon as possible” and for “appropriate stern action” to be taken against all found to be implicated.

The Malay Rulers’ statement should  be compulsory reading for Arifin and the new PAC members for it articulated not only the  concern of the Malay Rulers, but the 30 million Malaysians including the majority of the three million UMNO members on  the inordinate procrastination of 1MDB investigations.

Arifin and the PAC members should be mindful of the concern of Malay Rulers at the negative repercussions of  inordinate procrastination of 1MDB investigations on  the prolonged and ongoing “crisis of confidence” causing  the “plunge in the value of the Malaysian ringgit, impacting the country’s financial market and the economic climate negatively and at the same time adversely affecting the world’s view of Malaysia”.

The Malay Rulers expressed their fear that if the 1MDB scandal was not “wisely handled” and “allowed to drag on”, it could “jeopardize the country’s economy and the livelihood of the people”, and urged all enforcement agencies and regulatory institutions to be “worthy of God’s trust and the people’s faith with transparency, credibility and integrity”.

In deciding on a policy of procrastination on 1MDB investigations, as no decision had been made on when to summon the 1MDB chief executive Arul Kanda Kandasamy, its former head Shahrul Halmi, and other key 1MDB personalities and operatives, the PAC is guilty of dragging its feet and not having the necessary sense of urgency and priority as expected by  the Malay Rulers, the 30 million Malaysians and the majority of three million UMNO members.

If the PAC investigations into 1MDB had not been derailed, and the PAC not cannibalized with the removal of the PAC Chairman and three other members by the simple expedient of promoting them as Minister and Deputy Ministers in the sudden shock Cabinet reshuffle of July 28, which was also saw the sacking of Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, Cabinet Minister, Datuk Seri Shafie Apdal, the Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail, the dissolution of the multi-agency Special Task Force on 1MDB and internal convulsions like arrests or instant transfers in key enforcement agencies, the PAC would have been very advanced in its 1MDB inquiries getting testimony from current and former 1MDB CEOs and key executives.

One would have thought that the PAC, after three-month derailment, would have acted with speed to catch up on lost time, trying to complete in the next three weeks what it would have accomplished in the  past three month if PAC work had not been sabotaged.

It is most shocking that the new PAC Chairman has no sense of urgency or priority whatsoever about the 1MDB investigations as the most important subject before the PAC, and to catch up on precious “lost time”.

.

From the “pace” of PAC proceedings set by Arifin, the PAC may not even get into any 1MDB investigations in the next few months!

MPs and the 30 million Malaysians, as well as the majority of three million UMNO members, are entitled to ask Arifin what is the timetable and timeframe for  1MDB investigations by PAC under him as chairman, and if he is not “seized” with a sense of  urgency and priority about the 1MDB investigations, he should resign as PAC Chairman to be replaced by someone else who has such a sense of urgency and priority.l

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 3 November 2015, 10:06 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.