Fan Yew Teng: A Great Patriot & Champion for the Oppressed

Sdr Fan Yew Teng, passed away peacefully on Tuesday, 7 December 2010, at 1:40pm at Bumrungrad International Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.

Fan is survived by his wife, Dr. Noeleen Heyzer, twin daughters, Lilianne Fan and Pauline Fan, and siblings: brothers, Fan Ken Tang, Farn Seong Than and Fan Chee Tang. sisters, Fan Wai Fong, Farn Fee Leng and Farn Fee Chan.

Fan was Acting DAP Secretary-General from 1969-1970, and had held various important positions in the party, including National Organising Secretary and Editor of the party organ, the Rocket.

Fan was MP for Kampar in 1969, MP for Menglembu and State Assemblyman for Petaling Jaya in 1974.

A memorial service for Fan will be held on Thursday 16 December 2010 at 10:00am at the Holy Redeemer Church, Soi Ruam Rudee, Bangkok, Thailand.

A memorial will also be held in Kuala Lumpur on Wednesday 5 January 2011 at 8.00pm at the YMCA Hall, Brickfields, Kuala Lumpur

RSVPs for the Bangkok memorial service or messages of condolence can be sent to:
[email protected]

                This entry was posted on Friday, 10 December 2010, 6:29 pm and is filed under
Announcement
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Mat Zain insists A-G interferred in ‘black-eye case’

By
Clara Chooi

The Malaysian Insider

December 10, 2010

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 10 — A former investigating officer stood by his recent allegations that Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail had fabricated evidence during the infamous 1998 “black-eye incident” involving Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, and warned he would continue to speak up.

Datuk Mat Zain Ibrahim, who was the investigating officer in the case involving the assault of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim in police custody, made his second appeal in another open letter to Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar today, calling for the 12-year-old case to be reopened.

“I leave it to your discretion, Tan Sri, to make the best decision on behalf of the Royal Malaysian Police (RMP); one that is fair to all parties.

“However I also protect my right to proceed or stop right now, my correspondence pertaining to this issue or to any other issue related to it,” he wrote.

The former KL CID chief said the Home Ministry’s declaration last week that the “black-eye” case would remain closed clearly showed the government’s intention to protect “certain individuals”.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein had told DAP MP Lim Kit Siang last Monday that there was no need to reopen the “black-eye” case as the police had no reason to believe that false evidence had been given during the investigation.

“The RMP has conducted checks on the investigation involving Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim in the ‘black-eye case’ in 1998. There was nothing to indicate the occurrence of false evidence in the investigation,” Hishammuddin had written in a letter to the parliamentarian.

“I apologise because I have to state my opinion here that the current stand of the police in preparing Hishammuddin’s answer is vastly different from its stand when it was handling the investigation in 1998.

“Its stand this time looks intended to protect certain individuals,” Mat Zain said.

He warned that failure to investigate his allegations against the A-G would lead the police force, yet again, to the “brink of collapse”.

Anwar’s “black-eye” incident had done considerable damage to the public’s perception on the credibility of the police force and the Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad administration in 1998, earning the former deputy prime minister much local and foreign sympathy.

“I am sure Tan Sri still remembers how a one-page letter dated September 21, 1953 signed by an acting State Secretary had become one of the main reasons that led to the contamination of Malaysia’s dignity and sovereignty when we were forced to surrender Pulau Batu Putih (Pedra Branca) to Singapore.

“Imagine what the falsification of 65 pages of a document, on the orders of the country’s lawyers, could do to the country’s criminal justice system,” Mat Zain pointed out.

He questioned if the Home Ministry’s response had been prepared in such a manner due to missing documents in the case’s investigation report, which he claimed had been deliberately lost.

“During the investigation, several important documents were lost while in the hands of the A-G and we had to replace them with duplicate copies.

“The entire investigation paper had even temporarily disappeared for about three weeks between October 30 and November 20, 1998, like what I explained in my first letter.

“So it is no wonder if there were limitations in the contents of the investigation report because they were hidden for a long time in the A-G’s Chambers,” he claimed.

Mat Zain continued to question how and where three allegedly “falsified” medical reports, prepared by Dr Abdul Rahman Yusof, could have gone missing when two of the three documents had been used in the royal commission of inquiry probe in 1999.

“These reports were not just one or two pages, which can be overlooked. All three reports were 65 pages in total.

“I am sure Tan Sri is an expert on case laws regarding falsification and how every case of falsification is done deliberately. There is no occurrence of a fabrication this large to have not been done deliberately.

“I would like to stress that the falsification of all three reports was done through careful planning, preparation and a deliberate intention to fulfil clear motives. My diary on the investigation and my minutes can help identify the events of these falsifications,” he said.

Mat Zain related that in the commission’s proceedings between February 22 and March 4, 1999, both Abdul Gani and the late former A-G Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah had separately told Dr Rahman to prepare the first two allegedly falsified medical reports.

“I found out that the findings in the commission’s proceedings had caused Mohtar to panic. He had not known that Abdul Gani had already told Dr Rahman to prepare a report earlier. He was also not aware of Dr Rahman’s background and it is likely that if he would not have appointed him to prepare the report if he had known that Abdul Gani had already done so because any event of falsification can be easily be traced.

“I was later told that Abdul Gani tried to correct the situation. What I can verify for certain is that Dr Rahman himself requested, even begged, my assistants to seek my co-operation to include a third report to neutralise the first two, which I refused,” he claimed.

However, Mat Zain added, when the commission’s findings were printed and presented to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and later declared a public document, it was found that only the second medical report had been included in the document.

“To be fair to Abdul Gani, I do not have information to say that he had a hand in making sure the first report was not included in the final document but I would not be shocked if he was indeed involved because he has a personal stake in it.

“What is worrying here is that if even the royal commission of inquiry’s report can be manipulated, just imagine what can be done to investigation records involving common citizens,” he said.

Mat Zain hoped IGP Ismail would take another look at the case and reminded him that no one had the power to indemnify any individual from criminal liability.

“It is important to look at the fabrications that occurred in the investigation of the ‘black-eye’ case and in all other cases related to it, to identify who the main players are.

“The evidence, whether direct or circumstantial, has been very clear,” he said.

Putrajaya is expected to decide on Monday whether Mat Zain’s revelations would warrant a second round of investigations.

In July 2008, Anwar had filed a police report accusing Abdul Gani, Mat Zain, Musa (then a senior investigation officer in 1998) and Dr Rahman of falsifying a medical report on his black-eye case.

Tan Sri Rahim Noor, the IGP in 1998, had taken the fall for the incident and had admitted he assaulted Anwar following the royal commission of inquiry probe in 1999.

He has since been convicted of the crime and sentenced to two months’ jail and a fine of RM2,000. Rahim has completed his sentence

                This entry was posted on Friday, 10 December 2010, 4:50 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Court
,
Crime
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Mat Zain’s 2nd Open Letter on Anwar’s “black-eye” assault

SURAT TERBUKA KEDUA

Kepada,

YDH Tan Sri Haji Ismail bin Haji Omar IGP,

Ketua Polis Negara,

Polis Di-Raja Malaysia,

Bukit Aman,

50560 Kuala Lumpur.
Melalui:Email dan Pos
Email:
[email protected]

10hb.Disember 2010

YDH Tan Sri,

JAWAPAN KDN MENGENAI INSIDEN MATA-LEBAM.

Assalamualaikum wbt.,Semoga YDH Tan Sri dalam sihat walfiat.

2.	Izinkan saya dengan segala hurmatnya merujuk kepada jawapan YB Menteri Dalam Negeri bertarikh 2.12.2010 kepada persoalan yang ditimbulkan di-Parlimen oleh YB Lim Kit Siang berkaitan isu diatas.

3.	Saya menarik perhatian Tan Sri kepada petikan jawapan tersebut; “Pihak PDRM telah membuat semakan keatas penyiasatan yang melibatkan Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim dalam kes serangan mata-lebam pada 1998.Tiada apa apa keterangan yang boleh menunjukkan berlakunya keterangan palsu dalam penyiasatan tersebut”.Saya memohon maaf kerana terpaksa menyatakan pendapat saya, bahawa pendirian yang PDRM ambil dalam menyediakan jawapan tersebut adalah jauh berbeza,malahan bertentangan dengan pendirian PDRM, ketika menangani siasatan insiden ini pada 1998.Saya wajar menegaskan bahawa pendirian PDRM ketika itu, adalah untuk menjalankan siasatan “without fear or favour;leaving no stone unturned;and to get it over with as soon as possible” dan tidak ada sebarang “cover-up” untuk sesiapa pun.Namun begitu pendirian kali ini nampaknya cenderong kepada melindungi orang-orang tertentu.

4.	Saya berharap pendirian sedemikian yang Tan Sri ambil dalam penyediaan jawapan diatas adalah terbatas yang disebabkan oleh kekurangan bahan rujukan yang sepatutnya berada dalam kertas siasatan kes mata-lebam tersebut. Pada ketika penyiasatan kes ini lagi, beberapa dokumen penting dalam kertas siasatan itu, pernah dihilangkan ketika ditangan Peguam Negara dan kami terpaksa menggantikannya dengan salinan pendua.Malah keseluruhan kertas siasatan berkenaan pernah “dihilangkan” sementara, selama lebih kurang 3 minggu diatara 30.10.1998 hingga 20.11.1998 sepertimana yang saya jelaskan dalam perenggan 16 Surat Terbuka saya kepada Tan Sri pada 22.11.2010. Tidak hairan jika berlaku kekurangan kandungan kertas siasatan itu, kerana ianya tersorok lama di-Jabatan Peguam Negara.
5.	Sebelum saya pergi kepada isu pokok surat ini,izinkan saya menegaskan bahawa diari penyiasatan saya dalam kes ini adalah dibuat “as and when the events unfolded”, sama-ada yang saya rakamkan secara detail atau sekadar mencatitkan perkara mustahak setakat membolehkan saya menyegarkan ingatan saya kepada peristiwa berkenaan.Seperti apa yang kita pernah diajar di-Maktab KKB dahulu, “you see..you recognize;you read..you will know;if you write…you will remember for ever.”.Saya juga ada merakamkan perkara-perkara penting dalam perharian rasmi (official diary) khususnya bagi memelihara kerahsiaan identity individu dan maklumat penting yang saya terima berkaitan siasatan kes ini. Selain daripada diari penyiasatan tersebut saya telah menyediakan summary of evidence dalam minit-minit bertarikh 15.10.1998, 29.10.1998 dan 27.1.1999 yang saya jadikan sebahagian daripada diari penyiasatan, kesemuanya diedarkan mengikut prosidur edaran kertas siasatan,kepada Peguam Negara.Jika terdapat rakaman diari atau minit saya yang palsu atau tidak benar,sudah lama saya telah dikenakan tindakan Mahkamah.

6.	Apabila PDRM baru-baru ini menyatakan, “Tiada apa apa keterangan yang boleh menunjukkan berlakunya keterangan palsu dalam penyiasatan ini”,persoalan yang muncul secara spontan ialah;bagaimana dan dimanakah hendak disorokkan sebanyak tiga(3) laporan perubatan yang telah dipalsukan dalam siasatan tersebut?.Malah dua(2) daripada tiga laporan berkenaan telah dikemukakan dan dipertimbangkan dalam prosiding Suruhanjaya Di Raja menyiasat insiden mata-lebam ini pada tahun 1999,dan laporan Suruhanjaya diistiharkan dokumen public.Laporan-laporan ini pula bukannya sekadar satu atau dua muka surat yang boleh terlepas pandang. Ketiga-tiga laporan ini berjumlah enam puloh lima(65) muka surat kesemuanya.Selain itu ketiga-tiga laporan berkenaan telah saya edarkan kepada;

i)	YAB Perdana Menteri sendiri pada 19.2.2009.

ii)	YA Bhg.Pengerusi Lembaga Penasihat SPRM pada 15.4.2009 dan 7.5.2009

iii)	Ketua Pengarah Kesihatan Malaysia, Pengarah Hospital Kuala Lumpur dan Presiden Malaysian Medical Association pada 7.5.2009.

iv)	Peguam Cara Negara menerusi salinan laporan 15.4.2009 dan 7.5.2009.

6.1.	Saya percaya Tan Sri masih ingat,bilamana satu helai surat sahaja,bertarikh 21.9.1953 yang ditanda tangani oleh seorang Pemangku Setia Usaha Kerajaan Negeri, menjadi antara sebab utama,maruah dan kedaulatan Negara tercemar apabila kita terpaksa menyerahkan Pulau Batu Putih (Pedra Branca) kepada Singapura.Bayangkanlah apa yang boleh enam puloh lima (65) muka surat dokumen yang dipalsukan atas arahan Peguam Negara-Peguam Negara, boleh lakukan terhadap Sistem Keadilan Jenayah kita.

7.	Saya turut yakin Tan Sri mahir dengan case laws berkaitan pemalsuan.Setiap pemalsuan itu adalah dilakukan secara “deliberate”.Tidak ada pemalsuan yang sebegini banyak dilakukan secara tidak sengaja.Saya ingin menegaskan bahawa ketiga-tiga laporan perubatan yang dipalsukan itu dilakukan dengan perancangan, persediaan dan perlaksanaannya dilakukan secara deliberate bagi memenuhi motif-motif yang jelas.Diary penyiasatan saya dan minit-minit berkaitan boleh membantu mengenalpasti sequent of events pemalsuan-pemalsuan ini.

8.	Jika saya yang menjelaskan motif-motif pemalsuan itu dilakukan,mungkin ada pihak yang akan mempertikaikannya atau mungkin ada yang akan mengatakan saya melampau atau bias.Untuk menjauhi tanggapan khilaf sedemikian,apa kata saya jemput Tan Sri menilai sendiri dengan merujuk kepada penemuan Ahli Suruhanjaya Di-Raja Tersebut yang bijaksana, dirakamkan dalam Laporan Volume 1,PART TWO,Item 2 “OVERVIEW” perenggan 2.1.Komen Suruhanjaya ini dibuat berkaitan Press Statement Peguam Negara bertarikh 5.1.1999 yang ditanda tangan sendiri oleh Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah (Allahyarham TSMA) khususnya muka surat 5 Press Statement tersebut:-

:Quote:( 6 baris terakhir muka surat 5 “Overview”)

“Quite simply,this passage meant that Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim(DSA)had made untrue allegations about several injuries sustained by him but more to the point that it had been proved,to the satisfaction of the Honourable the Attorney General,that more than one Police Officer was involved in causing other injuries on certain parts of DSA’s body” ( penekanan saya kepada perkataan dalam “bold & italic”).Unquote.

8.1.	Perkara dalam 2nd limb,quotation diatas yang menyebabkan pertembungan “head-on” antara Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail(TSGP) dengan saya.Jika saya sebutkan nama-nama pegawai tinggi Polis dan berapa jumlahnya yang TSGP katakan beliau ada kuasa untuk menuduh dan atas kesalahan apa berkaitan insiden mata-lebam ini,mungkin saya akan dianggap sebagai seorang penghasut atau batu api. Tiada faedah untuk saya memainkan script usang ini.Bagaimanapun untuk makluman Tan Sri ,pada ketika saya dipanggil memberi keterangan oleh pihak SPRM bulan July 2008 itu,saya disoal juga mengenai “sikap tidak sopan” saya ini.Mungkin ianya tidak penting tetapi sekadar untuk Tan Sri membuat verifikasi jika relevan.

9.	Dalam prosiding Suruhanjaya DiRaja tersebut yang diadakan diantara 22.2.1999 dan 4.3.1999,dua laporan pakar dalam persoalan ini,yang disediakan oleh Dr.Rahman Yusof masing-masing yang diarahkan oleh TSGP pada 26.10.1998 dan satu lagi yang diarahkan oleh Allahyarham TSMA,yang dipercayai disediakan diantara 14.12.1998 dan 21.12.1998 (Ekshibit A9) telah dikemukakan dan diteliti oleh Suruhanjaya. Perkara ini dirakamkan dalam Volume 1,PART FOUR,Item 4(B) The Medical Evidence,perenggan 4.11 dan 4.12.

9.1.	Saya mendapat faham pendedahan dalam prosiding ini telah membuat Allahyarham TSMA merasa cemas.Diberitakan beliau tidak tahu TSGP telah lebih awal melantik Dr.Rahman menyediakan laporan pada 26.10.1998. Allahyarham juga dikatakan tidak diberitahu mengenai latar belakang Dr.Rahman sepertimana yang saya telah jelaskan kepada TSGP.Saya turut percaya sekiranya Allahyarham TSMA diberitahu mengenai kedua perkara ini,tidak mungkin beliau akan melantik Dr.Rahman buat kali kedua oleh kerana sebarang pemalsuan yang dilakukan akan mudah dikesan kerana semua aktibiti siasatan ini dirakamkan secara ketat oleh Pasukan Penyiasat.

9.2.	Saya kemudiannya diberitahu ,TSGP telah memainkan peranannya dibelakang tabir untuk cuba “membetulkan” keadaan.Apa yang boleh saya sahkan ialah Dr.Rahman sendiri memohon, malah merayu kepada pembantu-pembantu saya untuk mendapat kerjasama saya memasukkan laporan ketiga pula untuk “neutralize” laporan pertama bertarikh 26.10.1998 dan laporan kedua sepertimana Ekshibit 9,yang saya tolak.

10.	Perkara yang sangat penting yang saya harapkan Tan Sri mengambil perhatian ialah;

10.1.	Dalam prosiding Suruhanjaya DiRaja tersebut,dua laporan Dr.Rahman yang diarahkan oleh Allahyarham TSMA dan TSGP telah dikemukakan; sepertimana disebut dalam perenggan 9  diatas.

10.2.	Apabila laporan Suruhanjaya tersebut lengkap dicetak dan dipersembahkan kepada SPB Yang Di Pertuan Agong,dan kemudiannya diistiharkan sebagai dokumen public,didapati laporan Dr.Rahman yang diarahkan oleh TSGP tidak ada dalam laporan tersebut.Bagaimanapun laporan yang diarahkan oleh Allahyarham TSMA ada sepertimana Ekshibit A9.

10.3.	Untuk berlaku adil kepada TSGP,saya tiada maklumat mengatakan yang beliau ada peranan sehingga menyebabkan laporan yang beliau arahkan itu digugurkan daripada laporan Suruhanjaya tersebut.Bagaimanapun saya tidak akan terkejut jika beliau terlibat,oleh kerana orang lain tiada mempunyai kepentingan berkaitan laporan ini.Pun begitu saya tidak bimbang dengan ketiadaan dokumen tersebut dalam laporan Suruhanjaya, oleh kerana salinan-salinanya adalah dalam kawalan dan rakaman mengenai pembikinan laporan ini, dalam diari penyiasatan saya adalah lengkap dan jelas.

10.4.	Apa yang patut dibimbangkan ialah;jika laporan penting sepertimana rekod prosiding Suruhanjaya Di-Raja ini,yang akan dipersembahkan kepada SPB Yang Di Pertuan Agong, pun boleh dimanipulasikan,maka bayangkan apa yang boleh dilakukan terhadap rekod siasatan melibatkan rakyat biasa.

11.	Saya berharap Tan Sri akan menimbangkan semula pendirian yang PDRM ambil dalam isu ini.Perkara mantan IGP,TSRN mengaku bersalah dan mengambil tanggung-jawab dan melalui hukuman yang dikenakan keatasnya, TIDAK sepatutnya diungkit lagi.Perkara yang patut dititikberatkan ialah mengenai pemalsuan-pemalsuan yang dilakukan dalam penyiasatan mata-lebam ini,dan pemalsuan-pemalsuan serta penipuan-penipuan yang dilakukan susulan dari itu dan/atau yang berkaitan dengannya dan mengenalpasti siapa pemain-pemain utamanya.Keterangan mengenainya baik keterangan direct mahupun circumstancial  adalah jelas.Saya percaya Tan Sri turut sedar bahawa tidak ada pihak yang mempunyai kuasa untuk indemnify mana-mana individu daripada criminal liability.

11.1.	Tidak salah untuk saya membawa ingatan Tan Sri kepada Januari 1999, dimana kesan daripada pemalsuan dan penipuan yang terkandung dalam Press Statement Peguam Negara bertarikh 5.1.1999 telah membawa PDRM to the brink of collapse. Betapa masyarakat memandang rendah dan hinanya kita ketika itu,sehinggakan timbul cakap-cakap yang orang luar dari kalangan PTD pula akan mengambil alih jawatan Ketua Polis Negara,seolah-olah dalam PDRM tidak ada orang yang layak atau mampu memimpin pasukan.Saya percaya Tan Sri juga ingat situasi ini dan tentunya tahu orang-orang yang terlibat dan bersubahat membawa kita kepada situasi itu.Saya berharap sejarah ini tidak berulang.

12. Apa pun,saya serahkan kepada kebijaksanaan Tan Sri untuk membuat keputusan yang terbaik untuk PDRM dan adil untuk semua pihak.Bagaimanpun saya memelihara hak saya, untuk menyambung atau menghentikan setakat ini sahaja, persuratan berkaitan perkara dalam persoalan ini atau perkara yang berkaitan dengannya.

Salam sejahtera dan selamat maju jaya.Wassalam.

Yang benar,

(Mat Zain bin Ibrahim)

10hb.Disember 2010

                This entry was posted on Friday, 10 December 2010, 3:02 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Nearly 50% of Malaysians feel graft has worsened

by
Aidila Razak

Malaysiakini

Dec 10, 10

Close to half of Malaysians surveyed in a global corruption study felt that corruption is on the rise in the country.

According to Transparency International’s Global Corruption Barometer 2010, 46 percent surveyed believed that corruption has been higher this year than last year, while 19 percent felt it has dopped and 35 percent felt that there has been no difference.

However, out of the 1000 people surveyed by market research agency TNS Malaysia in face-to-face interviews from June 28 to July 26 this year, only 9 percent or 90 admitted to have given a bribe in the past 12 months.

The 90 said that they had bribed either a police officer, or people working in the registry and permit processing, land, medical, utilities, state education departments, judiciary and customs.

This puts Malaysia in the seventh spot among the 22 Asia Pacific countries canvassed, with South Korea leading the pack at only 2 percent of the people interviewed there admitting having done so in the past one year.

Police most affected by corruption

Most Malaysians interviewed felt that the police force is most affected by corruption, followed by political parties , legislative bodies and parliament.

They score 4.1, 4.0 and 3.4 respectively, on a scale of 1 to 5, with 5 being most affected by corruption.

Following that are the public and private sectors, both scoring 3.0 , same as the judiciary.

And NGOs are at 2.9, followed by media at 2.7, the education sector 2.4, armed forces 2.3 and religious bodies were believed to be least affected at 2.4.

Interestingly 48 percent of Malaysian respondents said that they felt that government effort to combat corruption is effective, compared to 20 percent who felt that it was not and 32 percent who saw no difference.

Worldwide, police were the institution found to be most affected by graft with 29 percent of those having dealings with the force saying that they have paid a bribe either to avoid problems or cut red tape.

One in four have given bribes

Alarmingly, however, according to the survey conducted on 91,000 people in 86 countries, an average of one in every four persons worldwide has indulged in this social sin at least once in the year.

Countries with the highest number of reported bribe payments in that period -more than once in every two respondents- were Afghanistan, Cambodia, Cameroon, India, Iraq, Liberia, Nigeria, Palestine, Senegal, Sierra Leone and Uganda.

The Global Corruption Barometer is the largest cross-country survey measuring both perception and experience of graft.

It was released yesterday in conjunction with the United Nations International Anti-Corruption Day

                This entry was posted on Friday, 10 December 2010, 11:37 am and is filed under
Corruption
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Sad MCA leaders’ grasp of Constitution and political principles so shallow – no wonder no MCA Minister dare to  tell Muhyiddin that he was wrong and anti-1Malaysia in declaring he is Malay first and Malaysian second!

After I have thrown back the question to the MCA Youth leader and Deputy Education Minister, Datuk Wee Ka Siong whether there is any provision in the Constitution which bars a Chinese or Malaysian of any race or religion from being Deputy Prime Minister, I would have thought that all the top MCA leaders would have become more educated about the Malaysian Constitution.

But this does not appear to be the case, with Wee continue to persist with the question whether I agree with the Pas Mursidul Am and Kelantan Mentri Besar Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat that only a Muslim can become a Deputy Prime Minister.

It is obvious that my answer is “No” but this seems to be too difficult for the top MCA leaders to understand or fathom.

It is sad that the MCA leaders’ grasp of the Constitution and political principles are so shallow.

No wonder no MCA Minister or Deputy Minister dare to tell the Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin that he was wrong and going against Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s 1Malaysia concept when the Deputy Prime Minister declared that he was Malay first and Malaysian second.

In fact, as a result of Muhyiddin’s anti-1Malaysia declaration, no MCA Minister or Deputy Minister dared to stand up in Parliament to demonstrate full acceptance of 1Malaysia concept by declaring that they are Malaysian first and Chinese second – despite being given so many opportunities by DAP MPs!

                This entry was posted on Friday, 10 December 2010, 4:41 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Constitution
,
DAP
,
MCA
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pakatan:  Choice of DPM will be based on the constitution

Saturday, December 11, 2010

Wong Choon Mei

Malaysia Chronicle

Pakatan Rakyat leaders did not discuss the issue of who would be the Deputy Prime Minister if they won the next general election but they agreed that the decision would be based on the federal constitution – an outcome that will surely be cheered by the non-Malays in the country who have long aspired for political equality.

“The issue (of who will become the next DPM) was not discussed at the leadership council meeting,but we did decide that it will be based on the constitution,” DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang told a press conference.

Kit Siang is the frontrunner among the non-Malay Pakatan leaders believed to be capable of helming this post and Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim himself has said there was no reason why Kit Siang or any other capable non-Malay could not assume such a post.

Nonetheless, such a ‘liberal’ view has been siezed on by the Umno-BN media and played up to arouse the maximum resentment from the Malay community while casting doubt that such an aspiration could really become reality amongst the non-Malays.

Apart from PKR and DAP, the Islamic-based PAS has also been targeted with insinuations that if it allowed a non-Malay to become DPM, then it was selling out on Malay rights.

“There is no need to get excited over this because, have we won the general election yet,” PAS president Hadi Awang, who was also present, told reporters. “The right choice will be made at the right time.”

Among those who have tried to belittle Pakatan’s vision of racial equality include MCA Youth chief Wee Ka Siong, who instead of supporting such a move has been trying his best to whittle down Kit Siang by implying the DAP leader was only having a pipe dream.

“It is sad that the MCA leaders’ grasp of the constitution and political principles are so shallow,” Kit Siang had responded earlier.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 11 December 2010, 7:04 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


“Plum Blossom Spirit” has spread the Malaysian Malaysia movement to build a united, democratic, just and prosperous Malaysia

 by
Dr. Chen Man Hin

The concept of a Malaysian Malaysia has caught the imagination of the people, ever since the struggle for a more just and equal society by the newly formed DAP in 1965.

With the departure of the PAP of Singapore because of the separation from Malaysia, a group of people led by Devan Nair formed a committe to build a new party – the Democratic Action Party.

The first test came when the dap (as yet unregistered)  participated in a by-election in Rahang, Seremban. As Dap was waiting for registration, the symbol of Plum Blossom was chosen to be the by-election symbol.

The DAP won the by election with a stunning majority over the candidates of two other parties – MCA and Labour party.

The victory confirmed that the concept of Malaysian Malaysia had substantial support from the people. From then onwards the “Plum Blossom Spirit”  caught on and this same spirit has inspired Dap leaders to struggle on despite great difficulties and persecution from the Alliance, the then government of M
(Speech by Dr Chen Man Hin at the 45th anniversary of the Rahang by-election victory and the launching of the  DAP “Plum Blossom Spirit campaign” in seremban on 11th December 2010)

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 12 December 2010, 10:30 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
DAP
,
Dr. Chen Man Hin
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Learn from BN’s mistakes, Guan Eng tells DAP

By
Debra Chong

The Malaysian Insider

December 12, 2010

GEORGE TOWN, Dec 12 — Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng said today the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) pact can only retain power if its state governments show policies carried out have helped and not harmed the public, in sounding the rallying cry ahead of the next big fight at the polls against the rival Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition.

“If we are to retain power at the next general elections, then PR must be a people’s government trusted by the people to help and not harm them,” the DAP secretary-general told party members at its state convention here today.

“PR can be trusted by the people not only by showing competency and honesty, but that we are a people’s government that listens to the people, does the people’s work and gives hope to the people,” he added.

Lim noted that the DAP-PKR-PAS administrations had their work cut out for them as years of BN’s “misrule” had hardened the public’s attitude towards government and must work doubly hard to show they are a reliable alternative to the ruling federal coalition.

“After BN’s misrule, the people have learnt not to trust the government. BN’s was not only seen as incompetent and corrupt, its governance was seen as an institution that harms rather than helps the people.

“However showing what we are not is not enough. We must show what we are,” Lim (picture) stressed.

The first-term CM said Penang had taken great strides forward in the two years since the DAP came into power and proudly listed several milestones, including drawing in more direct foreign investments that have open up more jobs than could be filled and putting the Seberang Perai local council’s books back into the black.

But the ambitious Lim said such measures were not enough.

“No genius wants to work for a fool,” he remarked.

“A stupid government or private sector will only drive the best and brightest away.”

Lim cautioned DAP members from falling into the complacency, which he attributed to the BN’s downfall in Election 2008.

“We must boldly lead Penang’s future by embracing moderation, rule of law and a government trusted by the people.

“Whatever our individual abilities and capabilities, we are only as good as the combined intelligence of our team,” he advised.

He called on party members to pit their strength together, reminding them that the ruling coalition owned several established media channels and would use them to break the DAP’s “team spirit”.

“BN’s efforts will fail if we stand united.

“But if we fall into BN’s trap and publicly diminish our own selves without first discussing such issues internally, then we risk losing the people’s trust we have worked so hard to earn,” Lim said, in what may have been a veiled reminder of the political turmoil that befell its alliance partner in Selangor following PKR’s recent party elections.

The reform party helmed by Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail appeared to have lost much support, especially among its urban base, following highly publicised allegations of vote-buying.

The DAP leader stressed that “integrity in leadership is crucial towards fighting corruption.”

The 12-year-old party – the youngest in the PR pact – has been repeatedly hauled up over the integrity of the candidates it fielded in Election 2008 who won but later defected after being embroiled in sex and corruption scandals.

PKR has lost five MPs and DAP, one.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 12 December 2010, 5:58 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Penang
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia in the Era of Globalization #44

By
M. Bakri Musa

Chapter Six: Malaysia: Assets and Liabilities

Other Colonial Legacies

The other enduring British colonial legacy – a professional army – saw Malaysia through many a crisis, from the konfrontasi against Indonesia in the early 1960s and the 1969 race riot, to the constitutional crisis of the 1980s, and the recent unrest over the Anwar affair. Through it all the military remained neutral and loyal to its elected civilian commanders. Malaysia has not fallen into the trap visited upon many previously colonized countries where the army is part of the problem. In Indonesia, the military is the only viable institution; unfortunately it squandered that unique trust by actively meddling in civilian matters. What was once a noble and highly regarded institution is now no different from the nation’s other corrupt and ineffective institutions. Indonesia’s armed services are less the guardian of the nation but more a constant threat to its stability. Malaysia is fortunately spared such a fate.

When the British first mooted the idea of a native army shortly before World War II, there was considerable skepticism among the top brass on the fighting capability of Malays. The prevailing stereotype then was that Malays were passive, carefree, and would not readily submit to the rigors of military discipline. When the first battalion of The Malay Regiment was formed, there was considerable pessimism. But to the surprise of the British officers, the experiment was a resounding success. Malays took to the military like ducks to water, and the Malay Regiment was quickly expanded. The Regiment was the last and most tenacious defender of Singapore against the Japanese onslaught. The unit was also exemplary during the later communist insurgency. Today that service has a deservedly fine reputation. The definitive treatise has yet to be written on this noble endeavor but when it is, I suggest that its success was also attributed to other rather mundane details. Let me elaborate.

During my youth it was the fantasy of many of my compatriots to join that regiment. What attracted them was not the warrior instinct or the noble patriotic zeal to defend the nation, rather the simple fact that the regiment had as the standard uniform attractive military fatigues as well as a dashing traditional Malay costume of white baju and green samping! I remember these raw recruits returning to the village after boot camp; their uniforms would never leave them. They wore it everywhere. There was something in that spick and span uniform and polished boots that excited these youngsters. And of course the colorful regimental baju and samping would swoon the local maidens. These more than anything else were what made the Malay Regiment a thundering success. Bored by their unstructured lives in the village and stuck in their sarong all day, these youths clamored at the chance to be disciplined and having a structured existence, and at the same time looking great – the aspiration of any hot-blooded young man!

This observation does not in any way detract or denigrate the strength of character and bravery of those Malay soldiers who put their lives on the line for love of their country. I salute every one of them. That a simple uniform could bring out the warrior instinct and discipline of young Malays is awe-inspiring.

I have always wondered why we do not capitalize on this trait. Many of the social problems of Malay youths today could be solved if we provide structured training and learning environment, complete with smart uniforms. America is experimenting with military schools for its inner cities and the programs work well, cutting down the discipline problems and dropout rates. As an aside, many leading Malays like Prime Minister Mahathir attribute their success to the habit of hard work and strict discipline they learned under Japanese rule.

Malaysians, and Malays in particular, are attracted to and enamored with uniforms. Watch those department stores’ salesgirls. Outside their uniforms they are just a bunch of giggly girls, but once in uniform they suddenly look and behave professionally! It is as if they have this need to declare their group solidarity and sense of belonging. Even ministers have their own official garbs, no doubt to differentiate themselves from the garden-variety politicians.

An independent judiciary is another prized British legacy. Any society will have conflicts among its members; hence there must be reliable and fair mechanisms for resolving them in a civil manner without resorting to violence. The more complex the society is, the more the need for such mechanisms. It is not surprising that in America, the courts are such a prominent feature and lawyers a dominant force.

The tradition of excellence of the colonial justice system continued after independence. To its credit, Malaysia’s early leaders understood the necessity for excellence in the judiciary and appointed only out standing individuals to the bench. The nation’s first “native” chief justice, Tun Suffian Hashim, was the epitome of brilliance, integrity, and fairness. This was no happenstance. He was well prepared, having attended Cambridge and had wide experience in various fields. He not only maintained the British tradition of excellence and independence, but also elevated the judiciary to greater heights. His legacy is such that his many successors appeared greatly diminished by comparison.

This hard-gained reputation of the judiciary was compromised in the 1980s during the constitutional crisis over the role of the King. Tun Suffian’s successors were not up to the task when the issue finally reached them for adjudication. Instead of being the ultimate and impartial arbiter of that dispute, the judges themselves were embroiled in it. That particular crisis saw the sacking of the chief justice, an unprecedented act by the political leadership. An independent reviewing tribunal comprised of eminent jurists from other Commonwealth countries reaffirmed the prime minister’s action in firing that judge.

More telling was the fate of the fired jurist. He subsequently dabbled in politics, perhaps unable to make a career of his legal experience, and was resoundingly rejected by the electors. He was defeated by, of all persons, an untried junior female lawyer. That more than anything was reflective of the caliber of the man.

The third legacy of the British was the English fluency of Malaysians. Unfortunately, instead of building on this great asset, the nation squandered it. Malaysian leaders succumbed to the small mindedness of the language nationalists who in their obsession with the Malay language threw away the nation’s greatest asset: its citizens’ proficiency in English. The “zero sum” mindset of the nationalists was simply this: for Malay language to survive, English must be squashed. The reality is that fluency in one language enhances fluency in another. Had the situation been handled more creatively, Malaysians today would have been fluent not only in English but also Malay. Instead, today’s young (especially Malays) are handicapped or trapped by their lack of English fluency.

Malays, in their obsession with anti-colonialism, forget that it was the British who romanized the Malay script. Previously it was written in the Arabic script, jawi. That simple move of Romanizing the Malay script enabled the language to expand easily to accommodate modern scientific terms. The Roman script also gave Malay a readymade advantage in this computer age. Imagine the handicap languages like Arabic and Chinese have in adapting to the modern keyboard.

The British also imprinted on Malaysians the value of trade and free enterprise. Britain to be sure has not always embraced such sentiments. There was a time when mother England was enamored with socialism and bent on state ownership of the various means of production. All those socialists succeeded at were to take the “great” out of Great Britain. Fortunately, today’s Labor Party under Tony Blair is a far cry from its former self.

Malaysian leaders, unlike those of many other colonies, do not subscribe to the fantasies of socialism. The first Prime Minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, set the tone towards free enterprise very quickly. Had he not done so, Malaysia’s fate could have easily been like that of India – economically stagnant and inward looking.

When driving along Malaysia’s modern highways one is again reminded by another British legacy. Along the verdant countryside are rows and upon rows of neatly planted rubber trees. Seeing the ubiquity of these plantations one easily forgets that the specie was not native to the country but brought in by the British. Malaysia is now fighting a tough battle against synthetic rubber. I have long thought of a great commercial for natural rubber that would tap on the “Back to Nature” and the Green Earth movements. One would have one half of the ad show a typical American rubber factory, rusty with thick clouds spewing out its chimneys; another, a picture of a green bucolic rubber plantation in Malaysia. The caption on the first would be “Your rubber plant!” the second, “Our rubber plant!” The tag line would be, “Be Natural! Support the Natural Rubber Industry and Keep our Environment Green!” That would definitely sell!

Malays must also be thankful to the British for getting rid of some of the unsavory aspects of our culture. For one, the British abolished slavery and indentured labor. Even during my youth I heard stories of young men being conscripted by the palace over minor transgressions (usually for not being sufficiently deferential) to do manual labor and be royal “gofers.” Generations of Malay families have been indoctrinated to believe that their permanent place in the grand scheme of things is to be slaves of the nobility and royal class. Young village maidens who were generously endowed or for some reason caught the fancy of the sultans were similarly collected for the palace harem. To the affected family this was not necessarily a tragedy; on the contrary it was a splendid opportunity for the injection of royal genes into the family tree. Nobody however, bothered to query the maidens. Thanks to the British, these and other odious cultural practices are now long gone.

Not all however. The British perversely strengthened the Malay feudal system and values. Traditional Malay society was strictly stratified, based on one’s heritage and birth. There was very little social mobility: once a peasant always a peasant. Traditional Malay society with its system of nobility and embellished titles was reminiscent of the British earls, lords and squires. So enamored were Malay leaders with the British aristocracy that the first item of business in the newly independent Malaysia was to have a system of civil honors and titles like Tun’s, Tan Sri’s, and Datuk’s. Endless hours of top-level meetings were convened to deal with this presumably most pressing issue. Tunku Abdul Rahman apparently spent hours researching classical Malay literature to find just the right titles and honorifics. He was also reported to be involved personally in designing the fancy ministerial garbs and other official attires. All in an attempt to ape the elaborate gowns of British lords and dukes.

The modern world may be into globalization and with it the recognition and rewarding of merit, but Malay society is still stuck in its feudal ways of elaborate titles and emphasis on birth and heritage. The royal honors list keeps growing longer and longer every year. This is a great liability, a barnacle that impedes the progress of Malays. Instead of seeing a lessening of these useless preoccupations, Malays are even more enamored with and consumed by them. Non-Malays too have become afflicted by this “Malay Malady,” all aspiring to become members of the native aristocracy, Malay hulubalang (knights) wannabes!

On a personal note, I have a lot to be grateful for British colonial rule. Had I been growing up in Malaysia today, I would probably end up as a menacing Mat Rempit, harassing motorists on our highways. Thanks to the British colonial for building an English school in my town, and my parents’ sacrifice to enroll me in it, I was able to get a superior education. That opened the door to the wider world for me.

Next: Our Plurality An Asset

                This entry was posted on Monday, 13 December 2010, 10:09 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
globalisation
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


We have to speak up

By
P. Ramakrishnan

December 13, 2010

We have every reason to be concerned. We wonder where this nation is heading for and what is in store for us. From the civil servant to the Umno politician, it is the same story: the non-Malays are “pendatang” and don’t have any citizenship rights. The rights conferred by Article 8 of the Federal Constitution are not respected or protected.

When an extreme group like Perkasa questions the citizenship rights of the non-Malays, the national leadership does not take them to task. When extreme elements in Umno berate and denigrate the non-Malays, the top Umno leadership does not chastise them. When one Umno delegate at the recently concluded general assembly had the temerity to suggest that the non-Malays be given the right to do business but should be denied the right to vote, nobody pointed out that it was against the constitution and that he should not be talking through his nose!

It is this disturbing silence when atrocious things are said which affect our unity that is worrying. It is this unbecoming conduct that encourages the extreme elements amongst us to be outrageous in their conduct and prompts them to continue with their seditious remarks.

It is this vocal minority that is predominant in our society and influences the trend of policy. Our political leaders dare not condemn them outright.

Utusan Malaysia fans the race baiting and gives the widest publicity without bothering to be responsible or sensible. When the powers-that-be that own and control this press do not force it to fall in line, what do we make of this?

A nation can make or break depending on the unity of its citizens. Today our unity is threatened. And if concerned voices and responsible leaders and caring Malaysians do not rise up and speak up, we will be a fragmented nation. By our silence, we will contribute to the chaos that may ensue. — Aliran

*
P. Ramakrishnan is president of Aliran.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 13 December 2010, 12:46 pm and is filed under
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAP, in turn, postpones party polls

Hazlan Zakaria

Malaysiakini

Dec 14, 10

The DAP today announced that it will postpone its party polls for 12 months to prepare for snap-elections which the party believe is just around the corner.

“(This is to) to put the party in general election mode, so all resources and efforts should be directed towards preparations,” said party secretary-general Lim Guan Eng during a press conference in parliament.

He said that the party’s central executive committee is compelled to consider the decision in the view that both Umno and the MCA has postponed their own party polls recently, which he believed is “a clear signal that a snap election will likely be called”.

Lim explained that the party’s governing body invoked clause eight of the party constitution that empowers it to declare a postponement to party polls.

He said that party elections which is due to be held by August 2011 will now be postponed until August 2012, effecting states which had not yet held their AGMs and the national AGM of the party.

Lim related that the powerful committee, in its unanimous decision, has decided that it is paramount to pool its resources and efforts to face the upcoming electoral contest and not be distracted by other matters.

The party secretary-general also said that the party will be holding a general election workshop on Jan 16 2011 to prepare and learn about the general election.

Early this month, Premier Najib Abdul Razak, who is also Umno president, announced that the party will postpone its party elections. This was followed by a similar announcement by the MCA.

Both postponements spread rumours like wildfire that the general election is just around the corner as BN components seemed to set aside internal strife to concentrate for a bigger battle.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 14 December 2010, 5:36 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Keeping March 8 alive

by
Stephanie Sta Maria

Free Malaysia Today

Tue, 14 Dec 2010

FMT EXCLUSIVE
The day had not begun particularly well for Kee Thuan Chye. A friend – once a staunch supporter of political change – had confided that he was contemplating reverting to the “devil he knew” in the next general election.

“I was very upset,” Kee said. “After staying for so long on the track of change, he is giving up because he has lost faith in Pakatan Rakyat’s ability to get its act together to govern this country.”

It was the sort of sentiment that the former journalist found deeply troubling as it preyed on a simmering disquiet that the tide behind the March 8 tsunami may be turning again, this time in favour of the ruling party. And that, in Kee’s view, would spell imminent political tragedy for Malaysia.

March 8 is a historic date that Kee holds close to his heart. Two years ago he paid tribute to it with a book entitled “March 8: The Day Malaysia Woke Up”, an anthology of the voices that believed in and voted for change.

Now a second edition of that volume has hit the shelves. Only this time it bears the title “March 8: Time For Real Change”.

“The new title is apt for these times and besides, the publisher liked it!” he said, the corners of his eye crinkling. “But seriously, the next general election is approaching and there is an urgency now to talk about real change. There is also a need to assess all that has happened in the past two and half years.”

“The real purpose of a second edition is, of course, to keep the March 8 spirit alive. That is extremely important because Malaysia has not been the same since that day.”

Defining moment

There is a marked distinction between the spirit of March 8 and that of reformasi (the basis upon which PKR was formed). In drawing a line between the two, Kee declared that the former was much bigger in that it involved the country’s future while the latter was intertwined with the “Anwar personality”.

“March 8 was the defining moment when Malaysians realised that they had been taken for a ride for decades and that it was time for change,” he added. “It was a very important watershed which has to be commemorated.”

“Our spirit is different now and we must maintain it because with it comes the spirit of standing up for our rights. Of defying with a cause and of even showing healthy disrespect for authority when it is necessary. We have been docile and unquestioning for far too long. March 8 changed all that.”

Some 60% of the second edition is new material that was cobbled together within an impressive five months. But if the earlier sentiment of Kee’s friend is any indicator of a waning adrenaline, then it begs the question of whether this new volume is a boon or a bane. Kee already knows the answer.

“I think the enthusiasm is still there though it may be flagging a little now,” he said quietly. “I asked someone the other day whether a book like this would still sell and he said that people are a little tired of March 8 because of all the politicking that followed it.”

Nevertheless, he forged ahead in fierce determination to do his bit in keeping the enthusiasm pulsing. To keep fanning that spirit that pushed people to raise and debate issues, exercise their rights and lobby for change.

“There are some very good and even brilliant ideas in this edition,” he promised. “And good advice for the next general election. There are good assessments of the chicanery that has been going on since March 8, and good summaries of how we have come to where we are now. The book will also remind people to think hard about their vote at the next general election.”

This hard thinking, unfortunately, may be sparked less by Barisan Nasional’s gaffes than by PKR’s recent antics. Even Kee voiced alarm over the less than savoury image that the BN is painting of the opposition coalition.

“Pakatan is losing ground and public confidence,” he noted. “Perception is so important in politics. DAP and PAS are very solid. PKR is the only weak link and it really has to buck up fast. There’s not much time left. It has to go to the ground to convince the people, especially the fence-sitters, that the opposition is still a viable option.”

Irrelevant concern

Many have questioned whether Pakatan is ready to take over the government but to Kee, this is an irrelevant concern. He believes that if one is thrown into the deep end of the pool, one will learn to swim. He also believes in giving the underdogs a chance.

“There is never a time when one is ready,” he asserted. “You have to approach the moment and when the moment arises you have to rise to the occasion. You have to give people a chance.”

“If it doesn’t work out there will be another election five years later. But it’s always worthwhile to take that chance because if you don’t, the change may never happen or it will happen too slowly.”

The most pressing need, according to Kee, is to remove a coalition that has been in power for 53 years so it knows what it is like to wear the other shoe. In the best-case scenario, that newly minted opposition will be forced to reform itself and the people would be presented with two stronger choices in the next general election. And in his opinion, two choices are enough.

“We don’t need a Third Force,” he said plainly. “It would be better for those who want to be part of this Third Force to offer themselves as candidates to Pakatan instead.”

“The Third Force here won’t be like the Tea Party in America. They had two years to build their profile and were very active and well organised. And even then quite a number didn’t get elected. Frankly I don’t know if the Third Force will do well because many of them will be unknown.”

Kee pointed out that many of the Third Force candidates would also be greenhorns in the political arena with only integrity for their sword and shield.

While he acknowledged that this would lessen the likelihood of defections, he warned that being person of integrity and a politician were two different matters altogether.

“It isn’t enough to just have integrity,” he reasoned. “You also have to be politically savvy. A person with integrity alone will get disillusioned very quickly. But if they want to continue with this Third Force, then they should make a pact with Pakatan. Even if it doesn’t win the next election at least we have a strong opposition.”

And if Pakatan stays on a losing streak? Kee, who has long refused to migrate, laughed.

“I’m still hoping that if there is a new government then perhaps the political reform can happen. But if there is still no change, I should really pack my bags and leave.”

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 14 December 2010, 5:04 pm and is filed under
Kee Thuan Chye
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Putrajaya closes door on ‘black-eye’ issue

The Malaysian Insider

By
Clara Chooi

December 14, 2010

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 14 — Putrajaya has closed the door for good on Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s 1998 “black-eye incident” despite allegations of evidence fabrication against Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail.

In its highly-anticipated explanation to Parliament today, the government clearly side-stepped the damning accusations made by former investigating officer Datuk Mat Zain Ibrahim that Abdul Gani had falsified documents in the case, brushing aside the former’s two recent open letters.

Instead, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz told the House today that there was no need for Mat Zain to complain that the independent panel formed to investigate the evidence fabrication had failed to clear his name in the incident.

This, said Nazri, was because Mat Zain had never been the subject of the panel’s probe and had merely been called forth as a witness to testify.

“The MACC’s (Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission) advisory board, though its letter to Datuk Mat Zain on July 23, 2009, had already stressed that there was no need for the independent panel or the MACC to clear Mat Zain’s name, seeing as he was not the subject of the investigation in the first place,” he said.

Nazri also said that the panel had been constitutional, despite Mat Zain’s claim that the Solicitor-General had no right to appoint the members.

In his first open letter to Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar, Mat Zain had claimed that the right to appoint a tribunal only lay with the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, based on the prime minister’s advice.

The A-G, he added, had deceived the Cabinet into believing that the S-G could act in his stead and appoint the members as deputy public prosecutors under the Criminal Procedure Code.

In July 2008, Anwar had filed a police report, accusing Abdul Gani, Mat Zain, Musa and a Dr Abdul Rahman Yusof of falsifying a medical report on his black-eye case, which alleged that his injuries had been self-inflicted.

Three independent panel members comprising Federal and Court of Appeal judges later cleared Abdul Gani and Musa of the allegations, but the status of Mat Zain and Dr Abdul Rahman remained uncertain.

“But the 2-1 majority decision on Abdul Gani meant that one of the panel members found testimony linking Abdul Gani to wrongdoing. However, both Abdul Gani and Musa were cleared of all allegations,” Mat Zain had said in his later.

Mat Zain had filed a RM30 million defamation suit against Anwar in 2008 to clear his name after the Pakatan Rakyat leader claimed that Abdul Gani, who was a senior DPP then, and Musa, who was an investigating officer, had fabricated evidence against him in the black-eye assault.

But Nazri insisted today that the appointment of the panel members by the S-G had been constitutional, claiming that it had been in accordance with section 376(2) of the CPC, read together with section 376(3).

“If you study section 376 of the CPC carefully, only one legal stand can be seen, which is that the S-G has the power to appoint DPPs.

“Please allow me to read the Act,” he said and proceeded to read several CPC provisions, which states, “The A-G shall be the Public Prosecutor and shall have the control and direction of all criminal prosecutions and proceedings under this code. The S-G shall have all powers of a DPP and shall act as Public Prosecutor in case of the absence or inability to act of the A-G. The Public Prosecutor may appoint fit and proper persons to be DPPs who shall be under the general control and direction of the Public Prosecutor and may exercise all or any of the rights and powers vested in or exerciseable by the Public Prosecutor by or under this Code or any other written law except any rights or powers expressed to be exerciseable by the Public Prosecutor personally and he may designate any of such DPPs as Senior DPPs.”

Nazri pointed out that the Act clearly gave power to the S-G to act as the Public Prosecutor in the event that the A-G could not act as one.

“In this case, Abdul Gani was the subject of the investigation and because of that, it was not fair or appropriate for him to appoint the members of the panel.

“Due to this, the S-G had taken over the power to do so and this was valid,” he said.

At the conclusion of Nazri’s explanation, Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timor) stood up to protest that the explanation was unsatisfactory but his attempt was thwarted by the Dewan Rakyat Speaker.

Among other allegations, Mat Zain has accused the A-G of being guilty of falsifying the medical reports in the incident through “careful planning, preparation and a deliberate intention to fulfil clear motives”.

In his second open letter, he also slammed Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein for attempting to silence his claims when the latter told Lim in a written response recently that the case had been closed and would not be reopened.

This, he said, showed that the government had an intention to protect certain individuals in the incident.

Mat Zain also said that the royal commission of inquiry’s investigation report on the issue in 1999 had not included all three medical report, which totalled 65 pages.

“To be fair to Abdul Gani, I do not have information to say that he had a hand in making sure the first report was not included in the final document but I would not be shocked if he was indeed involved because he has a personal stake in it.

“What is worrying here is that if even the royal commission of inquiry’s report can be manipulated, just imagine what can be done to investigation records involving common citizens,” he had written.

Mat Zain had also expressed hope that IGP Ismail would take another look at the case and reminded him that no one had the power to indemnify any individual from criminal liability.

“It is important to look at the fabrications that occurred in the investigation of the ‘black-eye’ case and in all other cases related to it, to identify who the main players are.

“These evidences, whether direct or circumstantial, have been very clear,” he said.

Tan Sri Rahim Noor, the IGP in 1998, had taken the fall for the incident and had admitted he assaulted Anwar following the royal commission of inquiry probe in 1999.

He has since been convicted of the crime and sentenced to two months’ jail and a fine of RM2,000. Rahim has completed his sentence.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 14 December 2010, 5:09 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Corruption
,
Crime
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The unfinished Malaysian corruption story

By
Tunku Abdul Aziz

I was honoured last month by the Australian Corporate Lawyers Association with an invitation to deliver the International Keynote Address at their 2010 Conference at the Sydney Hilton.

Three hundred corporate lawyers participated in the two-day conference, with some 400 attending the ACLA Awards Dinner. I was invited to perform a similar task last year by the association, but to my regret and utter shame, I was forced to cancel, at great cost to my Australian hosts, my appearance in Melbourne, their 2009 conference venue.

I found myself a reluctant patient at the Gleneagles Hospital in Kuala Lumpur, with a serious lung infection. The doctor pumped, yes, pumped enough antibiotics into my body to float a destroyer and maybe keep our two valiant submarines happily submerged forever.

It transpired that I had picked up a virus in the Netherlands while attending an ethics conference at the Amsterdam Free University. I was very surprised, to say the least, when I received a repeat invitation from ACLA very early this year. I asked the organisers, in jest, if they realised that they were taking a risk as the same thing might happen again.

Overcoming Corruption: A Regional Challenge was the title of my address. I assured them that there was really no need to feel concerned about the state of health of corruption in the region.

In Malaysia, in particular, in spite of a flurry of activity to put on display the full panoply of anti-corruption paraphernalia, it is all form and no substance, as with most things we see in this land of the Morning Glory. If they wanted my honest opinion, I would say without fear of violent contradiction that corruption in Malaysia was not only alive and well: it was in indecently robust good health. The latest TI Corruption Perceptions Index says it all.

I treated them to a amusing little anecdote about the then newly appointed President of the World Bank, James Wolfensohn, who at a meeting with senior colleagues, said that something had to be done to reduce corruption in borrowing countries in Asia, Africa and South America. He said that many saw the Bank as part of the problem of corruption. His advisers told him that he should not ever again mention “corruption” as this would upset the Bank’s many clients. The fact that they were all corrupt, and kleptomaniacs to a man, did not seem to matter.

The subject was a taboo in polite society. When Wolfensohn, feeling a little hot under the collar, asked what he should call it then, he was told, quite unabashedly, to refer to it as a ‘C’ word. The point of this true story is that we have all come a long way since and, in a perverse sort of way, so has corruption. Corruption never sleeps.

Malaysia is, ethically speaking, in dire straits. Mahathir founded his administration on corruption, lies and subterfuge. He lied to the nation about the many schemes that were blatantly dishonest. Worse, they were criminal, such as gambling with the EPF money, your money and mine, to corner the international tin market and later the country’s reserves to speculate on the currency market, pitting himself in the latter case against George Soros. The country lost billions. Mahathir succeeded in planting and nurturing a culture of impunity and disinformation that, even long after he left office, has continued to flourish. Of course, the man who cut his business teeth minding a stall at the Pekan Rabu in Alor Setar during the Japanese Occupation can explain all this away by saying that whatever he did, it was done in the national interest. We have heard it all before.

The lawyers represented, and advised, many large Australian companies. They knew their stuff, kept themselves abreast of the region’s economic, social and political developments. There was not an awful lot I could tell them that they did not know already about our appalling standards of public ethics, and the pervasive nature of corrupt practices that both define and circumscribe the way we conduct our business transactions both in and out of the corridors of power. They had heard about our many agencies that provide ample opportunities for the acquisition of personal wealth and abuse of power.

What amazed them, though, was the report about some of our frontline immigration officers stashing away millions of dollars of bribe money. Corrupt officials do not enforce the law, and this has led to easy access into the country of drug and human traffickers and other illegals. And our corruption has turned Malaysia into a conduit for human trafficking into Australia. When we add to this the corruption in the ruling elite, the police, the judiciary, the customs and other key institutions, we have a thoroughly ugly picture of a country fuelled and driven by ethically reprehensible behaviour. I warned the Australians that we welcome their investment, but it only fair to warn them that doing business in Malaysia required more than the usual due diligence because Malaysians were surprisingly adept at turning corruption into a low risk and high return business venture for themselves, “leaving you holding the baby.” The system tolerates and encourages it.

We have, as a nation, been truly sold down the “river of no return” by Mahathir, who now continues to set his version of the moral tone of this country. In what capacity I neither know nor care any more. Flood or pestilence, it is business as usual. In this country, we privatise and politicise everything, including corruption.

A lady in the audience asked if there was anything that could be done to take Malaysia back to the pre-Mahathir values. The short answer is yes, there is. It is possible by turfing out the present administration so that a thorough and complete review of policies and procedures could be put in train to ensure relevance, with mechanisms for checks and balances firmly put in place. All institutions will have to justify their existence and those that are no longer relevant will be closed down. Institutions that have been rendered dysfunctional will be strengthened. The deadwood and the corrupt will be encouraged to take early retirement and meritocracy will be the sole criterion used to determine suitability to lead.

I am absolutely convinced that transforming the administration is not only desirable, but absolutely essential if this country is to succeed in claiming its right to a seat at the top table, among the clean nations that will shape the future of the world. Change, and complete change, is the answer. Malaysians must decide the kind of future they want.

I am anti-national by Najib’s latest definition because I speak the truth in a foreign country about Malaysia’s unsavoury reputation for massive corruption. I suppose living off corruption as many of our leaders do with panache and impunity is part of being a true Malaysia.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 14 December 2010, 10:34 am and is filed under
Articles
,
Corruption
,
Tunku Abdul Aziz
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A ‘black-eye’ for Malaysia

The Malaysian Insider

In an ideal world, Putrajaya’s word would be law.

It could, if it wished, feel that all is well. It decided that today by deciding to throw out allegations of evidence fabrication in Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s 1998 “black-eye incident”.

In its highly-anticipated explanation to Parliament today, the government clearly side-stepped the damning accusations made by former investigating officer Datuk Mat Zain Ibrahim that Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail had falsified documents in the case, brushing aside the former’s two recent open letters.

Instead, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz told the House today that there was no need for Mat Zain to complain that the independent panel formed to investigate the evidence fabrication had failed to clear his name in the incident.

This, said Nazri, was because Mat Zain had never been the subject of the panel’s probe and had merely been called forth as a witness to testify. The minister also said that the panel had been constitutional, despite Mat Zain’s claim that the Solicitor-General had no right to appoint the members as that prerogative only lay with the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, based on the prime minister’s advice.

The Barisan Nasional (BN) government is obviously playing with the letter of the law, not the spirit of the law.

At one time, it could have gotten away with it. But not anymore.

These are the days of whistleblowers and WikiLeaks. Where documents and evidence presented by the likes of Mat Zain will surface. And vehement denials and assertions on points of law will not matter.

Simply because the people won’t believe it.

The perception is that there is a cover-up. That there are dishonest officials prowling in Putrajaya.

For them, the government must come clean on this. Questions have been raised by none other than the police officer investigating the ‘black-eye’.

He is asking tough questions and making some serious allegations. Among other allegations, Mat Zain has accused the A-G of being guilty of falsifying the medical reports in the incident through “careful planning, preparation and a deliberate intention to fulfil clear motives”.

Mat Zain also said that the royal commission of inquiry’s investigation report on the issue in 1999 had not included all three medical report, which totalled 65 pages.

Do we need WikiLeaks to find us these documents?

Does the country actually need another ‘black-eye’, just like what happened when Anwar was assaulted in September 1998? The former deputy prime minister might have lost the bruise of that horrid assault but Malaysia has yet to recover from it, by the looks of today’s decision.

And it won’t. Not until BN puts to rest all allegations, speculations and questions about the ‘black-eye’ incident.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 15 December 2010, 10:31 am and is filed under
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Anwar, Karpal, Sivarasa and Azmin to be suspended from Parliament for 6 months

From
@limkitsiang
:

Pandemonium Parliament w sudden new motion 2suspend Karpal Sivarasa Azmin as MPs 4six mths against Standing Orders/ rules of natural justice

If BN w simple parl majority can abuse its powers violating all rules n principles, what it cld not do when it gets back 2/3 majority?

Speaker Pandikar fails 2explain what is “public interest” he exempts rule Minister’s motion need 7days notice 2suspend Karpal Sivarasa Azmin

Parlment being dragged out over surprise motion agnst standing orders 2suspend another 3PR MPs 4six mths – unprecedented in Msian Parliament

What happened in Parl proves Acton’s aphorism corruption of power – strongest reason Y BN shld not get back 2/3 P majority n must b replaced

Motion 2suspend MPs Karpal Sivarasa Azmin 4six mths – 3 not told of charges or referred 2Cttee of Privileges. Travesty of justice n Parlmnt

Earlier in prolonged pandemonium/altercation Sivarasa Azmin were suspended by Speaker Pandikar. Most disgraceful day in Msian Parl history

Pakatan accuses BN of brute force MP suspensions

By Clara Chooi (The Malaysian Insider)

December 15, 2010

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 15 — Pakatan Rakyat (PR) lawmakers cried foul today over the impending suspensions of four of its MPs, accusing Barisan Nasional (BN) of attempting to strengthen its parliamentary power through brute majority.

The opposition MPs said they were “shocked” when they saw the inclusion of a motion notice in today’s Order Paper, calling for the six-month suspension of three MPs — Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor), Azmin Ali (PKR-Gombak) and R. Sivarasa (PKR-Subang) — from the House over the Israel-APCO issue.

The three will join Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is also facing the boot from the House for six months for claiming earlier this year that public relations consultancy APCO Worldwide had been behind both the 1 Malaysia and One Israel concepts.

Yesterday, Anwar was the only MP recommended for punishment over the issue in the final report by the House’s Rights and Privileges Committee.

Karpal, who is also a committee member, was recommended to receive severe “admonishment” for allegedly insulting Dewan Rakyat Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia, the committee’s chairman.

“You witnessed the drama in Parliament just now. Yesterday, when we were in discussion with Karpal, we only received confirmation that he would be admonished.

“But today, we were shocked to see these new recommendations of suspensions. This means, everyday, things change. The facts may be the same as before but today, they want to suspend three others for six months,” Anwar told a press conference in Parliament.

He accused the ruling coalition of using brute majority to bulldoze through their decisions and strengthen their power in Parliament.

“This is why we would like to record our disappointment here and our strong rejection on the Speaker’s agreement to allow this to happen.

“We are aware of the arrogance of Umno-BN but to use the Speaker’s chair as their channel, this is wrong,” he said.

The motion against Karpal, Sivarasa and Azmin by a Minister in the Prime Minister’s department today states that the three had violated Standing Order 85.

The regulation stipulates that any statement recorded before the House’s powerful Rights and Privileges Committee must be embargoed until its final report is tabled before Parliament.

“On December 6, the Gombak MP, through an emergency motion under Standing Order 18(1) had touched on the statements and a letter that was furnished to the committee on December 3.

“The MPs from Bukit Gelugor and Subang had also insulted and violated the rights and privileges of an MP. It is an insult to the House,” it was said on the Order Paper.

The additional suspension orders on the Karpal, Azmin and Sivarasa sparked off further furore within the opposition bench in the House, and dominated much of this morning’s session.

Dewan Rakyat Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia did not have the opportunity to open the floor for debates on the second reading of the amendments to the Road Transport Act 1987 which was scheduled for today.

MORE TO COME

Suspensions will give BN two-thirds majority

Dec 15, 10 2:46pm (Malaysiakini)

Pakatan Rakyat claim that the expected suspension of four of its MPs tomorrow will lead to BN regaining its two-thirds majority in Parliament.

Rasah MP Anthony Loke (seated left) said that the implications of this are huge and the consequences dire for Pakatan.

“Maybe this opportunity will be used by BN to amend the Federal Constitution or re-draw the electoral boundaries,” he told reporters at the Parliament lobby today.

A motion to suspend Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim for six-months was tabled yesterday in a bid to censure him for claiming that Apco Worldwide – a public relations firm that advises the Najib administration – was linked to the Zionist regime.

Following this, he was referred to the Rights and Privileges Committee which recommended for Anwar’s suspension despite not hearing his defence.

Following public criticism of the committee’s investigation by three Pakatan MPs – Azmin Ali (PKR-Gombak), R Sivarasa (PKR-Subang) and Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor) – they were alleged to have broke an embargo on the committee’s report and a motion will be tabled today to suspend them for six months as well.

Loke said that Dewan Rakyat Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia had “allowed the federal government to use their majority as they like”.

“Tomorrow they will pass a motion to suspend Anwar and now three more MPs from Pakatan. I see a hidden agenda here.

“This will give a huge political implication to Pakatan in the Parliament because now there are 77 MPs and if four are suspended that means over the next six months, we will lose our one-thirds number in the House. We will only have 73 in MPs,” he said.

[More to follow]

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 15 December 2010, 3:25 pm and is filed under
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pure Puppetry in Parliament

By
Martin Jalleh

See how well the Speaker of Parliament in Bolehland performs to every pull and push by the hideous hands of the Umno political Masters in parliament.

So pliantly and passionately Pandikar Amin plays and dances to their every tug and tune, much to Umno’s great delight, pleasure and purpose.

So pleasingly the former Kota Marudu Umno division chief mouths and moves at every prompting, with perfect poise and pace, assisted by his deputies and political props in Parliament.

So slavishly he parrots and faithfully acts out the self-serving script of his political Masters (who believe they are superior beings) and whom he knows could at any time pull the plug on him!

See how he panders to Umno without question or pause. Parliamentary principles, procedures and processes are pooh-poohed. Policies and amendments are pushed through by brute majority.

Alas, with each passing day, the Speaker’s great pretence at being independent and impartial in the country’s supreme law-making body increasingly protrudes and becomes glaringly prominent!

As Speaker of Parliament, Pandikar Amin has become so painfully predictable! But apparently he is a stranger to the sense of shame!

He has allowed himself to be reduced to a pygmy Speaker, one who easily loses his cool and control and who is intelligent enough only at sending out and suspending Opposition MPs, especially those who refuse to bow and bend at his bidding and behest.

His reputation plummets as he ensures that Umno’s agenda takes precedence over Parliament. The people elected their political representatives. He has made it his primary role to throw them out on Umno’s orders!

Such is the sad story of a man who pathetically allows a government which for the past 53 years has shamelessly perfected and practised the art of political manipulation or puppetry, to bulldoze its way through sheer majoritism!

Such was the tragedy that the Speaker was willingly led by the nose by the Minister in the PM’s Department who is also the overseer of parliamentary affairs and the de facto (read as “defective”) Law Minister, one who has no equal in his contemptuous behaviour in parliament.

The suspending of Anwar and the three prominent MPs from Parliament can only be seen as the pinnacle of Umno’s arrogance. It also reflects very poorly on the PM who has been promising radical and relevant changes in the country.

Umno has not changed at all. It still makes use of the nation’s key democratic institutions in their dirty and desperate political game to cling on to power and to contain, cripple and crush legitimate dissent and/or to hinder genuine change advocated by the Opposition.

Najib’s purported change and his attempts to portray the BN as an agent of change is only but hypocrisy par excellence! He is in fact the chief puppeteer!

                This entry was posted on Friday, 17 December 2010, 2:55 pm and is filed under
Martin Jalleh
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


What is not democratically possible can be done undemocratically!

By
P Ramakrishnan

Malaysians today witnessed another sordid attempt to make a mockery of the parliamentary system as four opposition MPs were suspended in highly undemocratic circumstances, writes P Ramakrishnan.

What is not democratically possible, it seems, can be achieved undemocratically. We witnessed this despicable undermining of parliamentary democracy in the shameful episode of the Perak debacle.

We have witnessed today (16-12-10) another sordid attempt to make a mockery of the parliamentary system in the quest for power.

The pattern is obvious; the method is devious. It is undoubtedly a deliberate attempt to secure the two-third majority the BN lost in the 12th General Election in March 2008.

Apparently, in this attempt justice is being trampled upon with impunity and shamelessly. The lust for power drives the BN to adopt unethical means to pulverise the Opposition by the tyranny of the BN majority.

It is a pity that the august institution of Parliament was reduced to a shambles, ignoring totally the sacred principles of natural justice. There was not even the pretence of going through the motion of a civilized debate. It was bizarre!

How could the Parliamentary Rights and Privileges Committee deny Anwar Ibrahim the right to be heard and defend himself? How could this Committee come to any conclusion by refusing to hear Anwar’s right of reply? How could this Committee lay any claim to being fair, unbiased and guided by the principles of justice when it did not even allow Anwar to be represented by his Counsel?

The Chairman of this Committee was the Speaker of Parliament. According to the records of the Hansard, the Speaker had assured Anwar that he would be given the opportunity to defend himself at the rights and privileges committee meeting.

Yet as Chairman of the Committee, he did not honour his word and permit Anwar to appear before the Committee to defend himself.

He cannot claim that “there was a motion from the committee member, saying that there was no need to listen to the defence… And then, I put it to vote. That was all. I didn’t vote in the committee.” There is no merit in his statement.

He had a solemn duty to guide the Committee to observe the principles natural justice. He had violated this sacred duty by seemingly allowing himself to be led by his nose. His task does not simply imply that he only presides without exercising responsibilities of a chairman entrusted to him. He cannot justify his action by simply stating, “I was just a chair of the rights and privileges committee… I didn’t vote.”

As Speaker, he does not vote either but that does not mean he cannot exercise his discretion to come out with a ruling. Doesn’t he as Speaker over-rule motions submitted for debate and uphold certain points raised by the MPs?

Doesn’t he have certain authority as Chairman to ensure that the conduct of the Committee is rooted in justice?

Karpal had a point when he pointed out that there was a conflict of interest in the Speaker when he chaired the House session. Pandikar was the Chairman of the committee which recommended Anwar’s six-month suspension from Parliament. How can he be neutral in this issue when he presides as Speaker? Karpal rightly pointed out, “You have lost your moral authority to sit in the chair.”

From what was reported, Karpal was to be admonished according to the report of the rights and privileges committee. How then did it take a turn and suddenly become suspension from Parliament? Who twisted this fact to punish Karpal? The suspension of Azmin and Sivarasa was also very peculiar. They were not asked to show cause and neither were they allowed to defend themselves. No sufficient notice was given; instead the whole charade was rushed through as if the BN just wanted to get over with this nasty episode.

Without a tinge of conscience the tyranny of the majority prevailed for a purpose. The BN now is within sight of a two-thirds majority in Parliament. If it achieves that, it can do whatever it wants without a care for the rights of the minority. The Federal Constitution is in danger of being mutilated, as has been the case, under the BN.

We are reminded of what Edmund Burke said about tyranny: “The greater the power the more dangerous the abuse.” As some wit once said, a government that fails to honour the law on which it is based only invites rebellion. No sane Malaysian wants to go that way.

P Ramakrishnan is president of Aliran

                This entry was posted on Friday, 17 December 2010, 3:03 pm and is filed under
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Five cardinal injustices perpetrated by outrageous Parliamentary six-month suspension of Anwar, Karpal, Azmin and Sivarasa

The outrageous parliamentary six-month suspension of four Pakatan Rakyat leaders, Parliamentary Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim (Permatang Pauh), DAP National Chairman Karpal Singh (Bukit Gelugor), PKR Deputy President Mohd Azmin Ali (Gombak)  and PKR lawyer R. Sivarasa (Subang) in   international consultancy firm APCO’s role in the “1Israel” “1Malaysia” controversy committed five cardinal injustices, viz:

Firstly, although Anwar was referred to the Parliamentary Committee of Privileges, he was denied of the full opportunity to substantiate his parliamentary speech linking 1Malaysia to APCO and the One Israel concept as the Barisan Nasional majority in the Commtitee of Privileges perversely decided to rely solely on a letter from APCO as the basis to penalize Anwar.

Secondly, the refusal of the Chairman of the Committee of Privileges, Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia to accept the minority report prepared by Karpal and Sivarasa as part of the report of the Committee of Privileges to the House, demonstrating bias, unfairness and utter disregard of parliamentary conventions and accepted practices.

Thirdly, without giving Karpal, Azmin and Sivarasa notice and  the fundamental right to be heard as referring them to the Committee of Privileges before charging them in Parliament for parliamentary contempt alleging that they had revealed information privy to the Committee of Privileges  – going against the principles of natural justice.

Fourthly, forcing through the passage of  the motion to suspend Anwar Ibrahim as MP for six months without any debate, which is completely unprecedented and unheard-of not only in the Malaysian Parliament but also in Parliaments of developed democracies.

Fifthly, the blatant conflict of interest committed by Pandikar in chairing the parliamentary proceeding to suspend Anwar, Karpal, Azmin and Sivarasa when he is also the Chairman of the Committee of Privileges and therefore party to the punitive actions against the four PR leaders.

I was not in Parliament on Thursday as I was in Bangkok with Dr. Chen Man Hin, Fong Kui Lun and Lee Kaw to attend the funeral service of Sdr. Fan Yew Teng, a great patriot who had always been a champion of the oppressed.

The outrageous parliamentary proceeding on Thursday to trample on all parliamentary conventions and practices and breach the fundamental rules of natural justice to suspend the four PR leaders from Parliament for six months is the latest proof that the Barisan Nasional government has not learnt from the lessons of the 308 political tsunami in the 2008 general elections which was a clear vote for national reforms to end the arrogance of power of unbroken Umno/BN rule for over half a century and that Umno/BN is incapable of change despite all the sloganeering of 1Malaysia, Government Transformation Programme, New Economic Model and Economic Transformation Programme.

It is now left to the Malaysian people to use their vote in the next general elections, which is not far away, to administer the full lesson by sending an unmistakable message that the country needs wide-ranging reforms and institutional changes, including Parliament, if Malaysia is to fulfill her promise to take her rightful place in the international arena as an united, competitive,  progressive and prosperous nation in the international arena.

(Speech the Serdang DAP Branch anniversary dinner in Selangor on Friday, December 18, 2010)

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 18 December 2010, 11:21 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
DAP
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysian History Syllabus: Delusion, Amnesia, Inertia and Arrogance

by
Dr. Lim Teck Ghee

A few days ago, two senior academics involved in the writing of history textbooks emerged from the shadows with the public allegation that the history textbooks in the country are biased and littered with errors. According to Dr. Ranjit Singh Malhi, one of the two authors, “secondary text books have been used to promote political interests”.  Ng How Kuen, the other concerned author, expressed his fear that making history a compulsory pass subject would mean that students would have to subscribe to the official version of events or risk failing the entire examination.

It is said that history is written by the victors but it is also true that we get the history we deserve. The disclosure that the teaching of history in schools has been skewed and has a political agenda – besides suffering from distortions and errors – is not the first time this issue has been brought to the public’s attention.

Earlier attempts to highlight the issue of what constitutes the true history of Malaysia and what is passed off as officially sanctioned history in the schooling and larger public system such as the BTN courses may have begun with a bang but they have all ended with a whimper.

If we go by previous experience we can expect the following response:

•	Bureaucratic foot-dragging and feigned ignorance on the issue

•	Justification and cover up of the existing history text books and syllabus system and attempts to prevent any public discussion and reform

•	Use of the mask of impartiality and superior knowledge to deflect criticism

•	Attacks on the credibility of whistle blowers

•	Deafening silence from key stakeholders, including the academic community, political parties and professional organizations.

Why is the great majority of our Malaysian public not concerned about the version of history that is being propagated in the schools?  Why do they close their eyes and their minds to the distorted history that is being taught to their children and grandchildren?  Do they not realize the consequences of the victory of a history that is radically different from the history that they themselves learnt when they were in school not so long ago? Is the history that they studied so wrong that it needs to be substantially changed in emphasis, content and scope? What is their stand on the development of a propagandistic and truncated history which is increasingly infiltrated by the forces of Islamization and crass nationalism, and where the four major diseases that afflict Barisan Nasional – delusion, amnesia, inertia and arrogance – are prominently evident and force fed into young minds?

The answers are complex but they essentially boil down to the apathy and lack of concern, especially amongst the educated and elite groups of our society on these important issues that are crucial to our survival as a rational and thinking society. Underscoring this ‘tidak apa’ attitude is the dominant factor of self-interest and self-preservation. Those involved with writing history text books and are in the know about the deplorable and compromised standards of their peer group want to protect their lucrative side-employment. Others such as academics or teachers of the subject in the schools do not dare to speak out for fear of being labeled as ‘anti-national’ or as in the case of those in the public universities, for fear of running foul on the Universities and Universities Colleges Act which will be selectively enforced on them should they write or speak publicly on issues where they are out of line with the official position.

It is no coincidence that the great majority of academicians and opinion writers that are regularly trotted out in the mainstream media are those that seek to justify or reinforce the current status quo.  These sycophants have not only academic or intellectual immunity but they also enjoy perks akin to those enjoyed by business cronies of the Barisan Nasional. If there is any reaction from the academic community to the two whistle blowers, we can expect their comments to come from those who will toe and reinforce the official position and circumvent from the main issue of the Islamization and politicization of the Malaysian history school syllabus. Dissenters, on the other hand, have to face the possibility of lost or delayed promotions and other forms of punishment not easily discernible to the public eye.

“Shut up, mind your own business” and ‘cari makan’ (even though it may be through rent-seeking, queue-jumping, plagiarism and other unethical practices) have been the credo of the great majority of the professional elite in Malaysia.  It is a culture that has served them well personally but at what cost to the nation?

Malaysian history must be based on facts and the scrupulous depiction of historical reality.  The writing of text books should not be left to those that regard it as a business or their political agenda and are prepared to bend the truth so that it meets with the vision of an Islamic and UMNO dominant Malaysia.  Unless we are prepared to fight for a scholarly, honest, reliable and representative history, we will end up with a future – as well as a past – that reflects the dominant ethnic and religious culture and community, and marginalizes or erases the contributions of other cultures and communities.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 18 December 2010, 10:33 am and is filed under
Articles
,
Education
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.