Fifth phase of DAP – form  Malaysian federal government with Pakatan Harapan in the 14th General Election

Young  and idealistic Malaysians came together fifty years ago to form the Democratic Action Party not because of perks, position or power but because of our common beliefs in justice, freedom and national unity out of our diverse races, religions, languages and cultures in the country and out of our love and patriotism for Malaysia as we believe Malaysia can become a great nation and a show-case to the world for successful and harmonious plural nation building.

We never thought that we would be around for fifty years, but we were engaged not in a battle for a day but for ages, as we are committed in  a long-term mission to realise our vision of a great nation founded on the principles of justice, freedom, democracy, integrity and good governance.

The five-decade history of DAP, which will be fully 50 on March 18, 2016, the date of our registration, can be divided into four phases:

Phase 1 (1966 – 1969): Founding of Party.

Phase 2 (1969 – 1986): Establishment of DAP as the first Pan-Malaysian political party with parliamentary representation not only from Peninsular Malaysia, but also Sarawak and Sabah.

Phase 3 (1986- 2008): Consolidation of DAP as a major political party in Malaysia.

Phase 4 (2008 – 2016): Coalition State Government in Penang and  Selangor (and for a year in Perak 2008-2009).

We must aim for greater heights to make the 50th anniversary of DAP even more worthwhile and meaningful – to form the Federal Malaysian Government in Putrajaya in the 14th General Election under the Pakatan Harapan coalition.

We must work towards the party’s fifth phase to start with  the 14GE when DAP as part of Pakatan Harapan form the Federal Government of Malaysia.

This must be one of three objectives of the DAP post-50th Anniversary.

The other two are:

•	Debunk the lies and falsehoods against the DAP, in particular that the DAP is anti-Malay and anti-Islam.

•	Further development and growth of  DAP as a political party for all Malaysians, both in policy direction and at all levels of party leadership and representation.

DAP needs increasing efforts to debunk lies and falsehoods about the DAP being anti-Malay and anti-Islam, as this is a last desperate attempt to avert UMNO from defeat in the 14th General Election in 2018.

UMNO propagandists are hard at work to spread fear that Malays will lose their political power if UMNO loses in the 14GE, and as a consequence, Islam will also suffer as a victim.

Both of thse are  dangerous and baseless fallacies – firstly, that the defeat of UMNO in the 14th General Election will result in Malay losing political power in country and secondly,  the defeat of UMNO will  result in the defeat of Islam in Malaysia.

If the electoral system had been really “one man, one vote, one value”, UMNO would now  be in the Opposition benches and the Prime Minister today would be Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and not Datuk Seri Najib Razak;  the country would have been spared the catalogue of political and socio-economic scandals plaguing the country, including Najib’s RM2.6 billion “donation” scandal; the RM55 billion 1MDB scandal which have caused Malaysia to be ranked third in the world’s “worst corruption scandals in 2015”; the implementation of the Goods and Services Tax (GST) adding to the hardships of low-income Malaysians already sandwiched between rising cost of living and falling incomes; and horror of horrors, the National Security Council Bill which usurps the constitutional powers of the Yang di Pertuan Agong on the proclamation of an emergency, the Cabinet and 13 State Governments.

So far, nobody in UMNO and its propaganda apparatus has been able to give a decent reply to the question asked by National Laureate Pak Samad as to how Malays would lose political power if UMNO is defeated in a general election.

If Pakatan Harapan succeeds in winning Putrajaya in the 14GE, one of its top priorities will be to do better than UMNO/BN to look after the rights and interests of all Malaysians, including Malays, Chinese, Indians, Ibans, Kadazans and Orang Asli as we do not want to be a one-term Federal Government but  to have the confidence and support of the Malaysian electorate to continue to enjoy the mandate in Putrajaya in the subsequent general elections.

The Pakatan Harapan Federal Government will compete with UMNO and Barisan Nasional to have a better record in upholding the fundamental features of the Malaysian Constitute and looking  after the rights and interests of all Malaysians, whether Malays, Chinese, Indians, Ibans, Kadazans, Orang Asli and the question of Malays or any community losing political rights, or Malays and Islam under threat,  will not arise.

Pakatan Harapan will ensure that the defeat of UMNO will not be a threat or disaster for Malays or Islam, or for that matter, for any race or religion in the country.

(Speech at the Penang DAP Veterans Dinner at Starview Restaurant, Penang on Sunday, 3rd January 2016 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Monday, 4 January 2016, 2:10 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Pakatan Harapan
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Iranian Protesters Ransack Saudi Embassy After Execution of Shiite Cleric

by Ben Hubbard

New York Times

JAN. 2, 2016

Iranian protesters ransacked and set fire to the Saudi Embassy in Tehran on Saturday after Saudi Arabia executed an outspoken Shiite cleric who had criticized the kingdom’s treatment of its Shiite minority.

The cleric, Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, was among 47 men executed in Saudi Arabia on terrorism-related charges, drawing condemnation from Iran and its allies in the region, and sparking fears that sectarian tensions could rise across the Middle East.

The executions coincided with increased attacks in Saudi Arabia by the jihadists of the Islamic State and an escalating rivalry between the Sunni monarchy and Shiite Iran that is playing out in conflicts in Syria, Yemen and elsewhere. Sheikh Nimr was an outspoken critic of the Saudi monarchy and was adopted as a symbolic leader by Shiite protesters in several Persian Gulf countries during the Arab Spring uprisings.

The execution of Sheikh Nimr is widely seen as part of the growing rivalry, and Shiite leaders in different countries — in Iran, in particular — condemned it.

“It is clear that this barren and irresponsible policy will have consequences for those endorsing it, and the Saudi government will have to pay for pursuing this policy,” said Hossein Jaberi-Ansari, a spokesman for Iran’s Foreign Ministry.

The state-run Saudi Press Agency reported late Saturday that the Saudi Foreign Ministry had summoned the Iranian ambassador to Riyadh to give him “a statement of protest in severe language” because of the “aggressive” statements made by Iran about the executions. The ministry called them “blatant interference in the kingdom’s affairs.”

The ministry also said it held Iran responsible for protecting the Saudi Embassy in Tehran, the Saudi Consulate in the city of Mashhad and their employees, the news agency reported, citing an unnamed Foreign Ministry official. Protesters tore down a flag from the Saudi Consulate in Mashhad on Saturday.

In Tehran, protesters broke furniture and smashed windows in an annex to the embassy, a witness who was reached by telephone said. The protesters also set fire to the room, said the witness, who would provide only his first name, Abolfazl, because he had been involved in the protest.

The protest turned violent after participants began throwing fire bombs at the embassy and then broke into the compound. The police arrived and cleared the embassy grounds of protesters and extinguished the fire, he said.

The semiofficial Iranian Students’ News Agency said the crowd had been chanting “Death to the Al Saud family,” which rules Saudi Arabia, before some protesters entered the embassy and threw papers from the roof. It did not mention the fire or destruction of embassy property. Pictures of a ransacked office and flames inside the building that matched the description of the scene by Abolfazl were widely circulated on social media.

The Iranian Students’ News Agency said that the protesters had been removed from the embassy, but that a large number remained outside amid a heavy security presence.

The executions in Saudi Arabia were the first of 2016 and followed a year in which at least 157 people were put to death, the Muslim kingdom’s highest yearly total in two decades.

In addition to Iran, criticism of Sheikh Nimr’s execution also came from Shiite politicians and clerics in Iraq, the Houthi rebel movement in Yemen and the Lebanon-based militant group Hezbollah. In Iraq, Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi wrote on Twitter that he was “shocked” and “saddened” by his death. “Peaceful opposition is a fundamental right,” he wrote. “Repression does not last.”

Hundreds of Shiites took to the streets to protest in eastern Saudi Arabia and in Bahrain, witnesses said.

Saudi officials denied that sectarianism had played any role in the executions.

“This means that Saudi Arabia will not hesitate to punish all terrorists,” said Anwar Eshki, a retired major general in the Saudi Army who is the chairman of a research center in Jidda.

When asked about Sheikh Nimr, General Eshki replied, “In Saudi Arabia, there is no difference between the criminals.”

Most of those executed on Saturday had been convicted in connection with deadly attacks by Al Qaeda in the kingdom about a decade ago. Four, including Sheikh Nimr, were Shiites accused of violence against the police during protests.

In recent weeks, the Saudi government appeared to be preparing the public for the executions. Reports that they were imminent had appeared on Saudi news websites, and Al Arabiya, a Saudi-owned satellite channel, recently aired a multipart documentary that dramatized the kingdom’s fight against Al Qaeda.

On Saturday, some Saudis, including journalists at a government news conference, thanked officials for carrying out the death sentences. The top cleric, Grand Mufti Sheikh Abdulaziz Al Sheikh, called them a “mercy to the prisoners” because the executions would save them from committing more evil acts.

But some Western analysts said that executing Sheikh Nimr along with Qaeda militants conflated his outspoken activism with a grave national threat.

“This is indicative of the hard-line tilt the regime has taken,” said Frederic Wehrey, an analyst at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace who has traveled in Shiite parts of Saudi Arabia.

Sheikh Nimr, said to be in his mid-50s, was from Awamiyah, a poor town surrounded by palm groves in eastern Saudi Arabia and known for opposition to the monarchy.

He studied in Iran and Syria, but rose to prominence for fiery sermons after his return in which he criticized the ruling family and called for Shiite empowerment, even suggesting that Shiites could secede from the kingdom.

This gained him a following mostly among young Shiites who felt discriminated against by Persian Gulf governments. When these young people joined Arab Spring protests in Bahrain and eastern Saudi Arabia in 2011, Sheikh Nimr became a leading figure.

During a sermon in 2012, Sheikh Nimr mocked Prince Nayef bin Abdulaziz, who had been the Saudi interior minister and had recently died.

“He will be eaten by worms and suffer the torments of hell in the grave,” Sheikh Nimr said. “The man who made us live in fear and terror; shouldn’t we rejoice at his death?”

Prince Nayef’s son, Mohammed bin Nayef, is now the crown prince and runs the Interior Ministry, which carries out death sentences.

The Saudi authorities arrested Sheikh Nimr in July 2012, while the kingdom was leading a regional push to end the pro-democratic activism of the Arab Spring. These efforts included sending tanks to prop up the Sunni monarchy in Bahrain, which faced protests led by the country’s Shiite majority.

Shiites also protested in Saudi Arabia’s oil-rich Eastern Province, where many Shiites live and complain of discrimination.

Hundreds of people demonstrated in the province after video footage emerged of Sheikh Nimr’s arrest that showed him bleeding while in custody. The government said he had been wounded in a shootout. Sheikh Nimr faced charges including sedition and was sentenced to death in October 2014.

Despite his fiery tone, his supporters and others who followed his career said he had not called for violence.

“To lump this guy with terrorists is a stretch,” Mr. Wehrey said. “To my knowledge, he never called for armed insurrection.”

The executions came as Saudi Arabia sought to battle comparisons between its application of Shariah law and that of the Islamic State, the Sunni extremist group. Most of the executions on Saturday were by beheading; they were not public, unlike most Saudi executions.

On Saturday, an image was posted on the website of the supreme leader in Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, depicting what appeared to be an Islamic State fighter about to kill a hostage and a Saudi executioner with a sword, with the question “Any differences?”

Saudi officials say their government puts to death only people who have been convicted of grave crimes, unlike the Islamic State, which kills hostages and releases grisly videos.

But human rights groups have criticized the Saudi justice system for denying the accused access to legal counsel during interrogation and indicting suspects on vague charges like adopting extremist ideology or undermining state stability.

John Kirby, a State Department spokesman, said the United States government was concerned that Sheikh Nimr’s execution “risks exacerbating sectarian tensions at a time when they urgently need to be reduced.”

“We reiterate the need for leaders throughout the region to redouble efforts aimed at de-escalating regional tensions,” he said in a statement.

The last mass execution of similar scale in Saudi Arabia was in 1980, when 63 jihadists were put to death after they seized the Grand Mosque in Mecca.

The executions of at least 157 people in 2015, a year that began with the inauguration of a new monarch, King Salman, were a sharp increase from the 90 people put to death in 2014. Saudi officials have said that the increase reflects a backlog of death sentences that had built up in the final years of the previous monarch, King Abdullah.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 4 January 2016, 6:17 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Islamic state
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Poor MCA – so irrelevant and so lost that it is even following the lead of liars to scrape the bottom of the barrel

Poor  MCA, so irrelevant and so lost in the woods of Malaysians politics that it is even following the lead of liars to scrape the bottom of the barrel!

This is not only my  reaction, but the response of most Malaysians who came across new report like the one headlined:
“MCA Youth join in to bash DAP over alleged Israeli link”
.

I do not blame the MCA and MCA Youth for feeling so irrelevant and so lost, for what else can they do when MCA has established the most unenviable record of being  the first political party in Malaysia which has a majority of members who do not vote for the MCA and Barisan Nasional in a general election?

Similarly, I will not waste any more time on the so-called Pro-Barisan Nasional NGOs Coalition whose president Zulkarnain Mahdar  said that DAP should sue the Penang Chief Minister’s former special officer Mohamed Razali Abdul Rahman who alleged DAP of being offered RM1.2 billion in return for an Israeli base in Port Dickson if the opposition managed to capture Putrajaya in the last general election.

I cannot think of a more scatter-brained idea than a Israeli naval base in Port Dickson but that is a separate story.

Mohamad Razali was never Penang Chief Minister, Lim Guan Eng’s “former special officer” nor was he ever in any capacity connected to the Penang Chief Minister.

When a person could even lie about his own position, claiming to be a former special officer to the Penang Chief Minister when it was a total lie, we can imagine whether he could be believed and trusted  when he made wild and preposterous allegations about  an Israeli offer of RM1.2 billion to DAP in the last general election in exchange for an Israeli naval base in Port Dickson – when nobody but him had such top secret!

His right place is not in the courts, but a mental hospital!

This preposterous allegation was made four years ago.

If there is any iota of truth, the Police would have pounced on the DAP and DAP officials would have no peace whatsoever in the past four years over the matter.

This was why I said yesterday that those who were so desperate as to try to resurrect Razali’s baseless and preposterous allegations four years ago are in fact suggesting that the police had been guilty of a gross negligence of duty and that the Inspector General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar should be disciplined for grave breach of professionalism if there is any basis in Razali’s allegation.

The Pro-Barisan Nasional NGOs Coalition has shown its true colours as a totally discredited organization not worthy of any attention, when it could regard the lies of  a liar as gospel truth, and I shall not waste any more time on it.

More noteworthy is the intellectual, moral, religious and political vacuity of a senior political leader who could believe in such lies and falsehood as to now recycle them, when for the past four years, he and his political “soul mates” had no problems with such “security” and “Muslim sensitivity” concerns as none of them had once asked the DAP about such wild allegations when they were with the DAP in the same political coalition.

So be it. But lets move on.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 4 January 2016, 11:54 am and is filed under
DAP
,
MCA
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Ramadi: Series of IS counterattacks target Iraqi forces

BBC

2 January 2016

Fighters from so-called Islamic State (IS) have continued to pursue counterattacks on the edges of Ramadi a week after the city was recaptured by Iraqi troops.

Most of the attacks were outside central Ramadi to the north and east, spokesman for the US-led coalition, Col Steve Warren, told the AFP news agency.

He said Iraqi government forces had so far successfully repelled every attack.

On Friday the group attacked a military base near the city.

The Iraqi government said a week ago that it had “liberated” Ramadi from IS. The jihadist group had held the city since May.

Col Warren said they had not yet seen IS “mass enough combat power to move Iraq off their positions”.

The BBC’s Thomas Fessy, who has just returned from Ramadi, says a tough fight continues in the city and government forces have been taking casualties.

“The national flag is back in most of the city, but on the frontline we saw the black IS banner flying – defiant – less than a hundred metres away from the Iraqis'”, he added.

A military spokesman said Friday’s attack on a military base was carried out by suicide car bombers and fighters wearing explosive belts.

The army fought back with the help of air strikes by the US-led coalition.

The attack is the biggest launched by IS against Iraqi forces since Ramadi’s recapture.

BBC World Service Middle East analyst Sebastian Usher says the assault shows the scale of the task confronting Iraqi government forces – as troops are faced with an unknown number of IS fighters still holding out on the outskirts.

Over the weekend Iraqi troops and allied Sunni tribal fighters helped civilians to safer places in Ramadi.

Their homes were crushed in the fighting and many had been hiding in the rubble for days, our correspondent says.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 4 January 2016, 6:35 am and is filed under
Islamic state
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Two  questions for Najib on his twin mega scandals – what were 1MDB’s total debts before “rationalization” and why no one charged court for  1MDB’s multi-billion ringgit losses?

I have resumed my tour of parliamentary constituencies as part of the “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang & Mana RM2.6 billion?” nation-wide campaign, following my suspension from Parliament for six months on Oct. 22, in pursuit of the question “Mana RM2.6 billion?”.

Kluang yesterday was the 56th and Pulai today the 57th Parliamentary constituency I am visiting in the new year of  2016, and both visits have shown that the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak could not be more wrong when he claimed in his New Year message that his RM2.6 billion donation and RM55 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals have been resolved and are no more issues in the country.

In fact, the opposite is the case, as both scandals remain foremost issues among Malaysians, especially as they had been responsible for the most shameful episode in the 58-year history of the nation – Malaysia’s third placing in the world’s “worst corruption scandal in 2015”!

Although it will not be possible for me to visit all the 222 Parliamentary constituencies in the country during the period of my 180-day six-month suspension from Parliament, I will try to visit more than 150 Parliamentary constituencies in the country by the time I am allowed to return to Parliament – with a strong and unmistakable mandate from Malaysians from all over the country, embracing all races, religions and regions in the country, to demand that Najib must fully account for his twin mega scandals.

Najib had tried to bury “once and for all” his twin mega scandals in his New Year message, but his effort could not survive 24 hours.

He claimed that he had honoured his promise in June last year to resolve the 1MDB problem, alleging that with the latest agreement announced on 31st December for the sale of 60 per cent equity in Bandar Malaysia to a joint local and international consortium – composed of Iskandar Waterfront Holdings at 60 per cent and China Railway Engineering Corporation at 40 per cent – 1MDB will see its debts reduced by approximately RM40.4 billion, which represents the overwhelming majority of 1MDB’s debt.

Leaving aside for the moment the details of the 1MDB “rationalization programme” to reduce 1MDB debts, as they are indirect bailouts by the Federal Government,  there are two questions which Najib needs to answer.

The first is what are the total debts of 1MDB before the “rationalization programme”.

If the oft-used figure of total debts of 1MDB is RM42 billion, Najib is in a way right in claiming that the reduction of approximately RM40.4 billion of its debts represents the overwhelming majority of 1MDB’s debts.

But up to now, both the Prime Minister and 1MDB had been very shy and far from sincere and truthful in revealing the relevant facts about the 1MDB, especially about the total debts of 1MDB before the sale of Edra to China  General Nuclear Power Corp Ltd. (CGN) at the end of November, claiming 1MDB debts have been reduce by RM17 billion.

This is because the RM42 billion figure is not the latest figure, as it represents 1MDB’s total debts as at the end of March 2014 – 1MDB’s last audited accounts.

According to Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin in his last speech as Deputy Prime Minister on July 26, the total 1MDB debts were more than RM50 billion. By late November last year, before the sale of Edra to CGN, the total 1MDB debts could have reached RM55 billion.

If the total debts of 1MDB before its so-called “rationalisation programme” is RM55 billion, 1MDB has still a gargantuan outstanding debt of some RM15 billion to be resolved.

This is the first question that Najib must answer.

The second question is about corporate governance and accountability, why with massive debt hole of some RM55 billion, no one had been sacked or charged for gross mismanagement or corruption.

Is the 1MDB scandal entering the Guinness Book of Records  as the “foremost heinous crime without a criminal” in Malaysia?

I fully agree with former Cabinet Minister, Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz, that despite its “billions”, 1MDB has not contributed to the country’s economic growth.

It has failed in its original objective to be a strategic development company to forge global partnerships and promote foreign direct investment, as it is undoubtedly the single most damaging cause for capital flight and  loss of investor confidence in Malaysia.

The failure of 	1MDB is in fact the personal failure of Najib as Prime Minister of Malaysia, because 1MDB is his brainchild (conceived with Jho Low), with him as the only person in Malaysia who is responsible for all the company’s  key decisions and investments – which is why it is Najib, and not the latest 1MDB CEO, Arul Kanda Kandasamy, who must give a full and satisfactory accounting for the twin mega scandals which have “crowned” Malaysia with the world’s third “worst corruption scandal  in 2015”.

When will Najib give such a full accounting?  Will he do so before the Special Parliament on the TPPA on 26th and 27th of January?

(Speech at the DAP Pengkalan Rinting “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang & Mana RM2.6 billion?” kopitiam ceramah at Taman Perling, Pulai on Sunday, 3rd January 2016 at 10 am)

                This entry was posted on Monday, 4 January 2016, 9:10 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Good Governance
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


European Sympathies Lean Toward Iran in Conflict with Saudi Arabia

by Sewell Chan

New York Times

JAN. 4, 2016

LONDON — In the days since Saudi Arabia inflamed tensions with Iran by executing 47 people, including a Shiite cleric, European observers have been quick to condemn the action, reflecting broader concern across the Continent about Saudi policy and its role in the tumult rolling through the Middle East.

Opposition in Europe to the death penalty — and harsh corporal punishment, including the flogging of a Saudi blogger who has become something of a cause célèbre in Europe — is just one element of the criticism of the Saudi monarchy. Even as European governments continue to view Saudi Arabia as a vital if problematic stabilizing force in the region, as well as a rich market for European arms and other products, European opinion has grown increasingly critical of Saudi support and financing for Wahhabist and Salafist preachers who have contributed to the Sunni extremist ideology that has fueled Al Qaeda and the Islamic State.

In addition, the European Union and six major world powers reached a deal in Vienna over the summer to contain Iran’s nuclear program, and Iran is seen as essential to ending the five-year-old civil war in Syria, which has fueled a surge of migrants to the Continent, the highest number since World War II.

So for many Europeans, Iran — long a pariah because of its anti-Western rhetoric and its nuclear program — has suddenly become, at least in comparison with Saudi Arabia, an object of sympathy.

“As long as Saudi Arabia is lead by its obsession to put Iran in its place, all attempts at peace in the Middle East will fail,” Rainer Hermann, a Middle East expert in Germany, wrote in a column in the newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, warning that Saudi Arabia might destroy the carefully wrought attempt to halt Iran’s nuclear program.

While it was difficult to gauge broad public attitudes, a review of elite opinion — as expressed by political leaders on social media, commentators in major publications, and a few experts in interviews — suggests that many Europeans blame Saudi Arabia for instigating the latest dispute by executing the cleric, Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr. The crisis quickly escalated with the ransacking of the Saudi Embassy in Tehran on Saturday and with the decision of Saudi Arabia and several of its allies to sever diplomatic ties with Iran.

Carl Bildt, a former Swedish prime minister who was a central player in resolving the Balkans conflicts in the 1990s, warned on Twitter that the decision to execute the cleric “doesn’t bode well for the stability of the Kingdom” and called Saudi Arabia’s decision to cut ties to Iran “a distinctly bad move.” (He added, “It goes without saying that Iran gravely neglected its duties to protect Saudi diplomatic premises.”)

European governments were more circumspect in their criticism — but not much more. The French Foreign Ministry said it deplored the executions. The European Union’s top diplomat, Federica Mogherlini, said they had the “potential of inflaming further the sectarian tensions that already bring so much damage to the entire region.”

Britain, a major supplier of weapons to Saudi Arabia, was the most cautious in its criticism of the executions. Its government’s statement on the situation came from a junior minister, Tobias Ellwood, not from the foreign secretary, Philip Hammond. Mr. Ellwood said that Britain was “firmly opposed to the death penalty” but also chastised Iran for failing to prevent the attack on the Saudi Embassy.

Reprieve, a leading human rights organization in Britain, criticized Prime Minister David Cameron’s Conservative government as too tepid toward the Saudi executions, saying it should “not turn a blind eye to such atrocities.”

In an editorial, Le Monde noted that France supplies arms to Saudi Arabia but also that it has improved relations with Iran — whose president, Hassan Rouhani, had planned a state visit to France that had to be delayed because of the Paris terrorist attacks in November.

The newspaper, noting “centuries-old confrontation between Arabs and Persians,” compared the clash of Iran and Saudi Arabia to that of Europe’s great powers in the period leading up to the World War I.

In an interview, Vali R. Nasr, the dean of the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies in Washington and an authority on the Sunni-Shiite regional conflict, said that Western opinion in this case was weighted in Iran’s favor — in part because of the European Union’s desire for rapprochement with Iran.

“Europeans think the dispute is serious but they think — and so does the White House — that Saudis don’t want reconciliation with Iran, want to exclude Iran from all regional discussions and want to provoke Iran into an action that would then derail engagement with West,” Dr. Nasr said. “This crisis was started by Saudi, and Riyadh was quick to use it to break ties, which means end to any broad regional engagement like the Vienna talks.”

Guillaume Xavier-Bender, a trans-Atlantic fellow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, said in an interview that “Europeans are worried that this will escalate and keep on escalating.”

He also expressed alarm that countries with mixed populations — Syria and Yemen, where civil wars are raging, and Bahrain, where a Shiite population is governed by a Sunni monarchy — could fall into even further chaos.

For average Europeans, “it’s the executions themselves that are revolting to the general public.” Policy makers, he said, were more focused on not losing the momentum of the European détente with Iran.

“Iran has been, relatively, good in implementing the nuclear deal so far, and elections are coming next month,” Mr. Xavier-Bender said. “The normalization of relations with Iran is almost going too well. So Saudi Arabia is now making a show of force.”

Claire Barthelemy contributed reporting.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 January 2016, 6:15 am and is filed under
International
,
Islam
,
Islamic state
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


How Saudi Arabia and the Islamic State find common ground in beheadings

By Adam Taylor

Washington Post

January 4, 2016

Over the past year, Saudi Arabia has faced recurrent criticism that its ultraconservative interpretation of Islamic law is not so far off from what is practiced by the Islamic State, an extremist organization that proclaimed its “caliphate” across parts of Syria and Iraq in June 2014. The criticism clearly irks some Saudi officials, who have threatened legal action against social media users who make the comparison with the Islamic State.

This weekend’s announcement that Shiite cleric Sheik Nimr Baqr al-Nimr was among 47 people executed in Saudi Arabia in a day has added considerable fuel to the fire, however. Saudi authorities have acknowledged that some of those executed were beheaded — a technique widely used and publicized by the Islamic State.

In just one sign of broader official outrage at the execution of Nimr, the website of Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, released an image that contrasts the Saudi kingdom’s use of beheadings with the Islamic State’s decapitation videos. “Any differences?” it asks, showing a Saudi executioner with a sword standing over a kneeling man.

The idea that Nimr could have been beheaded will only inflame sectarian tensions in the Muslim world, with Shiites remembering the way that Husayn ibn Ali, the third Shiite imam, was beheaded by the Sunni Umayyad caliphate in the seventh century.

While the dispute between Saudi Arabia and Iran is part of a larger sectarian rivalry in the Islamic world, it is hard to deny that Saudi Arabia is bucking the trends when it comes to beheadings. Much of the world stopped using beheading as a method of execution in the modern era, yet the Saudi kingdom not only continues to behead people but may actually be increasing the number of beheadings. Groups that monitor executions in the gulf kingdom say beheadings in Saudi Arabia have reached their highest level in two decades, part of a broader increase in the number of executions in the country.

There are only a handful of other nations that still have laws that allow the state to behead people, including Qatar and Iran. In practice, these measures are rarely, if ever, carried out: The last reported beheading by the Iranian state occurred in 2001, and local activists say the penalty is no longer used (the country does continue to execute hundreds of people each year, mostly by hanging). Although beheadings were long favored in many parts of Europe and Asia and in some cases fell out of use only relatively recently — France last used the infamous guillotine in 1977, for example — almost all governments have now moved away from beheadings, either replacing it with other execution methods or simply doing away with capital punishment altogether.

Meanwhile, strict punishments have remained a key part of the Saudi legal system, which is rooted in the ultraconservative Wahhabi school of Islam. The system is based on judges’ interpretation of Islamic law, most of which is set out in the Koran or in the Sunnah, a record of the teachings and practices of the prophet Muhammad. In practice, judges often have significant discretion, though Saudi leaders have also been known to step in to offer pardons in extreme and unpopular cases.

It was only relatively recently that beheadings came to be associated with Islamist terror groups and insurgencies. In 1996, Chechen rebels beheaded a captive Russian soldiers after he refused to convert to Islam — an event that may well have sparked a resurgence in the use of this tactic among non-state groups. The beheading of Daniel Pearl, a Wall Street Journal reporter, in 2002 was filmed by Pakistani militants and its footage widely shared, setting another precedent for beheadings. Over the past two years, the Islamic State has made its decapitation videos a gruesome calling card in its propaganda fight to control the Middle East.

The Islamic State often appears to use extreme violence such as beheadings as a way to provoke its enemies further into conflict and draw more gore-hungry recruits. At the same time, it also views itself as a legitimate religious authority and has cited various parts of scripture to justify its more extreme actions, despite considerable criticism and rebukes. Given that beheadings are mentioned in the Koran and that in some accounts of his life, Muhammad is said to have personally approved mass beheadings, some conservative clerics argue that beheadings are religiously justified, though they remain highly contentious with many Islamic authorities.

The Saudi kingdom views the Islamic State as a real threat to its stability, and the extremist group views the kingdom as an illegitimate state run by apostates, yet their use of beheadings ties the two enemies together. Saudi officials have responded forcefully to those who say there is “no difference” between their legal system and that of the Islamic State by emphasizing their processes rather than their punishments.

“When we do it in Saudi Arabia, we do it as a decision made by a court,” Maj. Gen. Mansour al-Turki, an Interior Ministry spokesman, told NBC News last year. “The killing is a decision. I mean it is not based on arbitrary choices, to kill this and not to kill this.” Saudi swordsmen have bragged about their skill at making the execution relatively quick. “People are amazed how fast [my sword] can separate the head from the body,” executioner Muhammad Saad al-Beshi told Arab News in 2003.

Critics view it differently. “Beheading as a form of execution is cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and prohibited under international law under all circumstances,” Juan Méndez, a U.N. special rapporteur on torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, said at a news conference in 2014 while urging Saudi Arabia to halt its executions. Amnesty International, a group that opposes the death penalty in general, has pointed out that beheadings are sometimes used as punishment for relatively minor crimes and that trials that result in beheadings are often flawed.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 January 2016, 10:14 am and is filed under
International
,
Islam
,
Islamic state
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Iran, Emerging From Sanctions, Faces More Isolation After Embassy Attack

by Thomas Erdbrink

New York Times

Jan 4, 2016

TEHRAN — When a Saudi state executioner beheaded the prominent Shiite dissident Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr on Saturday, the Shiite theocracy in Iran took it as a deliberate provocation by its regional rival and dusted off its favored playbook, unleashing hard-liner anger on the streets.

Within hours of the execution, nationalist Iranian websites were calling for demonstrations in front of the Saudi mission in Tehran and its consulate in the eastern Iranian city of Mashhad.

The police, outmanned, looked the other way as angry protesters set the embassy ablaze with firebombs, climbed the fences and vandalized parts of the building.

Now, Iranian leaders are suddenly forced to reckon with whether they played into the Saudis’ hands, finding themselves mired in a new crisis at a time they had been hoping to emerge from international sanctions as an accepted global player. Iran might have capitalized on global outrage at the executions by Saudi Arabia, but instead finds itself once again characterized by adversaries as a provocateur in the region and abroad.

“They knew we couldn’t look the other way,” said Fazel Meybodi, a cleric from the Iranian holy city of Qum, one of the world’s main centers of Shiite theology. “That they would actually go ahead with killing him? That caught all of us by surprise.”

After the embassy attack, Saudi Arabia officially severed diplomatic ties with Iran, and Bahrain and Sudan followed suit on Monday. The United Arab Emirates, one of Iran’s most important regional trading partners, decided to downgrade its relations.

The moves formalized the Sunni-Shia polarization that has fueled the chaotic proxy wars and maneuvering across the Middle East. And they seemed to put pressure on the United States and other Western nations to choose between their Saudi allies or the Iranians right at a time when those countries had been more closely engaging with Iran in hopes of easing the war in Syria.

Just in December, the Saudi and Iranian foreign ministers sat directly across from each other during a high-level meeting in New York to talk about Syria. Talks among the warring parties in Syria, overseen by a United Nations mediator, Staffan de Mistura, are scheduled to start on Jan. 25 in Geneva. There was little clarity before about who would represent either the Syrian government or the various opposition groups fighting it, and now, after the diplomatic schism, there seemed to be even more confusion.

The United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, spoke by phone on Monday with the foreign ministers of Saudi Arabia and Iran, condemning both the execution of Sheikh Nimr and the attack on the embassy in Tehran. Mr. Ban — who has repeatedly urged the two countries to cooperate on regional conflicts — called the break in Saudi-Iranian relations “deeply worrying.”

Iran sent a letter to Mr. Ban saying it had taken “necessary measures, including the increase in the number of security forces,” to protect the Saudi mission, adding that 40 protesters had been arrested.

The Saudi ambassador to the United Nations sought to temper apprehensions about whether the new tensions would bear negatively on the already fragile peace talks for Syria and Yemen. “From our side it should have no effect because we will continue to work very hard to support the peace efforts,” Ambassador Abdallah Y. Al-Mouallimi said. Some Iranian officials had hoped that January would become a celebration of Iran’s growing importance.

After years of hard negotiations, sanctions over Iran’s nuclear program were to be lifted. Once the nuclear deal is implemented, “Our great people will experience peace and the opening of the country’s economy to the world,” President Hassan Rouhani promised in a speech to the nation December. Some “reactionary” countries in the region had tried to block the nuclear agreement, he said, hinting at Israel and Saudi Arabia. “But they have failed.”

Now, some Iranians are wondering whether Saudi Arabia has again gained the upper hand in the new diplomatic crisis.

“Saudi Arabia killed Mr. al-Nimr at this sensitive juncture in time to widen the gap between Sunni and Shiite Muslims,” said Mr. Meybodi, the Iranian cleric in Qum. “Unfortunately they had predicted our overreaction, and now they are using it against us to try to isolate Iran once again.”

Sheikh Nimr was not only a leading opposition figure in the Saudis’ Sunni kingdom but also a symbol of Shia activism abroad. After he was sentenced to death by the Saudi judiciary in 2014, Iran warned of “dire consequences” if Sheikh Nimr were to be executed.

Beyond Mr. Nimr’s case, however, there have been several flash points between Iran and Saudi Arabia in recent months, with the nuclear deal and the wars in Syria and Yemen driving most of the tension.

Within Iran, there was also intense anger over the Saudis’ handling of the annual pilgrimage to Mecca. Before the summer, Iran temporarily halted pilgrimages to the holy city after accusations that Saudi security officials had sexually abused two Iranian teenage boys. Then, in September, hundreds of Iranians were among those killed in a stampede by pilgrims near Mecca.

Saudi opposition to the nuclear deal and lifting of sanctions again Iran has driven more hard feelings here. Many Iranians were quick to point out Saudi Arabia’s alignment of interests with Israel, a hated enemy.

“Both countries are opposed to the nuclear deal, both want it to fail,” said Hamid Reza Taraghi, a political analyst and conservative politician. “During the nuclear talks we witnessed John Kerry shuttling between Israel and Saudi Arabia, hoping to appease both of them. We know of the secret trips of Saudi officials to Israel. Their only goal is to limit Iran, which of course they are unable to do.”

Some of the Iranians who rioted at the Saudi Embassy said they had friends fighting against Saudi-backed extremist groups in Syria.

“We shouted: ‘Death to the house of al Saud!’” said Abolfazl, a protester who refused to give his family name out of fear of punishment. “We showed our anger and threw whatever we could find. There were police, but there were too few.”

Iran’s own internal tensions are playing out in the crisis, as well.

There was far from universal support within Iran for the nuclear deal, which some criticized as giving away too much to foreign interests. Now, with parliamentary elections scheduled for February, and with an upcoming election of the clerical council that in theory will choose the next supreme leader, the hard-liners are sure to use the issue, and the crisis with Saudi Arabia, to pummel allies of President Rouhani and others who favored the nuclear accord.

“What group here in Iran benefits politically from storming an embassy?” a former member of the Iranian National Security Council, Aziz Shahmohammadi, asked rhetorically. He was suggesting that the answer lay with the hard-liners — a loose alliance of clerics, ideologues and military commanders. “Such people are even against foreign soccer coaches to train our teams.”

The embassy attack played into their agenda of opposition to President Rouhani, whom Mr. Shahmohammadi said was clearly blindsided by the riot.

“For them this might lead to electoral gains, an example that Iran is better off isolated. But they are missing the big picture here: We need and want peace and calm,” he said.

The act of cutting ties seems a simple one, but the consequences can be far-reaching. “We are moving increasingly towards conflict,” Mr. Shahmohammadi said.

“This is bad for the entire region — in Syria, in Yemen, and to a lesser extend in Lebanon and Iraq as well,” he added. “Cutting ties is fanning the flames in a region already on fire.”

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 January 2016, 10:33 am and is filed under
International
,
Islam
,
Islamic state
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


MACC’s “name and shame” website should be closed down as it only shames Malaysia when the person responsible for Malaysia to be ranked third in world’s “worst corruption scandals in 2015” is not mentioned

I thank the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) for its quick response to my speech at the “Mana RM2.6 billion?” kopitiam ceramah in Kulai on Sunday, explaining that only those who are convicted of corruption are placed on the MACC’s “name and shame list” on its website  and not those being investigated.

This is exactly the point I was making, that the MACC’s “name and shame” data base does not make any significant contribution to the battle against corruption, especially against grand corruption, when the person responsible for Malaysia to be ranked third in the world’s “worst corruption scandal in 2015” is not even mentioned.

Can MACC point out any “shark” in its “name and shame” database of over 700 names  or explain how it could claim to have any successful anti-corruption campaign when it had not been able to nab, prosecute and convict any  “shark” apart from “ikan bilis” with the MACC entering its eighth year of operation after taking over from its predecessor, the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) with more powers, funds and personnel than ACA?

Three months have passed since the Malay Rulers made their unprecedented Oct. 4 statement expressing concern about three national issues causing the grave crisis of confidence battering Malaysia for several months – the 1MDB scandal, the rule of law and national unity in the country.

Not a single one of these trinity of the Malay Rulers’ concerns had been attended to, as the country is entering the new year with a more intractable crisis of confidence arising from these triple issues:

•	Najib’s 1MDB and RM2.6 billion donation twin mega scandals causing Malaysia to be ranked third among the world’s “worst corruption scandals in 2015” without any light at the end of the tunnel that resolution of both twin mega scandals are in sight, at any time soon;

•	Rule of Law facing unprecedented challenge with the “thief in the night” passage of the pernicious National Security Council Bill by the Dewan Rakyat on Dec. 3, which paves the way for a Prime Ministerial dictatorship usurping the constitutional powers of the Yang di Petuan Agong, the Cabinet, the Sawarak, Sabah and the 11 State Governments in Peninsular Malaysia;

•	Worsening racial and religious polarization in the three months since the Malay Rulers’ Statement on Oct. 4.

Although Najib  claimed in his 2016 New Year  Message that his RM2.6 billion donation and RM55 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals have been resolved and are no more issues in the country, the Prime Minister cannot be more wrong.

This is because in my continued tour of parliamentary constituencies after my six-month suspension from Parliament – Kluang was the 56th and Pulai the 57th Parliamentary constituencies over the weekend – I have found that Najib’s twin mega scandals remain the foremost bugbears of the people.

Najib has failed in his attempt to bury “once and for all” his twin mega scandals in his New Year message, for there are even more questions about them than last year.

Let me mention three:

1.	What were the total debts of 1MDB before the “rationalization programme” starting with the sale of Edra to China  General Nuclear Power Corp Ltd. (CGN) at the end of November and ending with the sale of 60 per cent equity in Bandar Malaysia to a joint local and international consortium – composed of Iskandar Waterfront Holdings at 60 per cent and China Railway Engineering Corporation at 40 per cent on Dec. 31.  It could not be RM42 billion, which were 1MDB’s total debts as at the end of March 2014 – 1MDB”s last audited accounts.  Had the total debts of 1MDB before the rationalization exercise reached RM55 billion?

2.	Why with 1MDB’s  massive debt hole of some RM55 billion, no one had been sacked or charged for gross mismanagement or corruption.

3.	Why the RM2.13 billion discrepancy from China Railway Group Limited’s filing with the Hong Kong Stock Exchange that the Sino-Malaysian venture paid RM5.28 billion for the 60% stake in Bandar Malaysia as compared to  1MDB’s announcement that that deal was priced at RM7.41 billion.

MACC’s “name and shame” website should probably be closed down as it only shames Malaysia when the person responsible for Malaysia to be ranked third in world’s “worst corruption scandal in 2015” is not mentioned.

Furthermore, it is also a sad reminder that the MACC seems to be a complete outsider in the nation’s worst financial scandal in history, with more questions than answers with the passage of time – with MACC either in the dark or just impotent to check corrupt practices.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 January 2016, 8:24 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Munshi Abdullah – Exemplar of a Free Mind

M. Bakri Musa

www.bakrimusa.com

Malay society has no shortage of formal leaders. First we have the hereditary leaders, from the sultan down to his various lowly chieftains including the local datuk lembaga (lord admiral). This pattern of leadership has a long history in our society.

     Then came the religious leaders, of more recent vantage, introduced in the 15th Century with the coming of Islam to the Malay world. More recently and fast gaining a pivotal role, are political leaders.

     With modern political institutions, especially democratic ones, we should expect a more frequent emergence of fresh leaders. This is not necessarily so. China is far from being a democratic society yet its People Congress gets more infusion of fresh talents with each party’s election. Compare that to the United States Congress, the self-declared exemplar of representative government. You are more likely to get a new member of the old Soviet Politburo than you are to get a new member of US Congress.

     UMNO, the premier Malay political organization, is on par with the old Soviet Politburo in nurturing new talent.

      Despite modernity, both hereditary and religious leaders still have a strong hold on Malays.

      The problem with both types of leadership is that they are by nature conservative; each successor maintaining and replicating the pattern set by his predecessor. With hereditary rulers, this could be the matter of genetics or familial upbringing. With religious leaders, the pattern of training or learning. It is the rare student who would deviate from his teacher’s path to blaze a new trail. This is especially so with the Islamic tradition of learning where the emphasis is on taqlid (to follow or to imitate).

     Stated more succinctly, do not expect much innovation or expressions of free-mindedness from such leaders.

     Human society however, is complex. One does not need to have a formal role as leader, or be anointed as one, to have an impact on society. Often such de novo leaders, unburdened by tradition or expectations, exhibit remarkable free-mindedness and can be transformative.

      One such leader in Malay society was Munshi Abdullah. Today he is held in low esteem and dismissed as a brown Mat Salleh (an epithet for Englishman) by our revisionist historians and self-proclaimed champions of Ketuanan Melayu. They even ridicule his “impure” Malay heritage.

      These present-day Malay nationalists, still trapped in the relics of their old anti-colonial mental prison, are perturbed that Abdullah’s free-mindedness let him collaborate with the colonialists. Abdullah even translated the bible! Today he would have been labeled a murtad (apostate) and sent to a re-education camp – Islamic style. Worse, he could be imprisoned without trial for an indeterminate period. Imagine the loss!

     Bless the old colonial English for letting Abdullah be who he was. Mushi Abdullah should also thank his lucky stars that he was born during colonial times and not in today’s Malaysia.

     To the free-minded Abdullah, working with the colonialists of his time meant the opportunity to expand his intellectual horizon and learn of the advances of the West. Most of all he wanted to understand what made the British tick. He did not ignore but instead nurtured his innate human nature of being curious and inquisitive.

     When the British invited him to visit a colonial warship for example, he was not a mere casual visitor. He recorded his experiences, complete with drawings of the contraption, and then challenged his readers to wonder what was it about British minds that made them invent such awesome machines. If the miracle of steel did not astound the visitor, ponder the fact that the British could even make it float!

     Today, more than a century and a half after his death, we are still benefiting from Abdullah’s writings and wisdom. We do not remember who the sultan was at Abdullah’s time, but we remember Abdullah through his written words.

     Today we sent many of our leaders and also would-be leaders abroad, a few to the great universities of the world.  What do they bring back?

     Abdullah’s free-mindedness enabled him to appreciate the advancements of the British, as with their warships and books. He was not at all embarrassed to acknowledge that his own people were far behind. To Abdullah, there was nothing to be ashamed about that; he looked upon it as an opportunity to learn from and catch up with them. Far from shunning the British he worked closely with them, leading many today to contemptuously dismiss him as a colonial hired hand.

     Yes, he was handsomely compensated for teaching our language to the English, but he was also providing a valuable service them. Now those colonials could better communicate with and understand our people.

     Abdullah learned much from the British. No, he did not learn how to forge steel or make it float, but he learned something much more profound. He saw how those colonials communicated with each other, their style of writing, and their penchant for documenting their experiences. Abdullah too began doing that, writing about his travels and experiences. And he did it in the style of the British – direct, factual, and with the minimal of formalities. With that, Abdullah transformed Malay literature.

      Up until then Malay writings, as with our letters to the sultans and high officials, were heavy on formalities, with rigid highly stylized forms of salutations that would fill the entire page and often obscure the message. Abdullah initiated the direct and factual style of writing, emulating the British.

     As for Malay literature, up until his time it had been nothing more than the stylized repeating of phrases and proverbs, facts liberally mixed with imagination and conjecture, and written in the indirect third person as in the various Hikayats. Abdullah was the first to write directly and with a personal (first person) perspective, as with his Hikayat Abdullah.

     Such are the powers of those with a free mind; they brazenly pave new paths so others may follow. What our Malay community needs now is not a new culture, another “mental revolution,” or even greater mindless assertions of Ketuanan Melayu but more of those individuals with free minds as exemplified by Munshi Abdullah, especially among our leaders.

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

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 January 2016, 6:28 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
Malays
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib’s RM2.6 billion ‘Donorgate’ rocks Malaysia

By
Khairul Khalid
 | Kinibiz

DECEMBER 22, 2015 8:00AM

________________________________________________________________________

The sensational expose on a RM2.6 billion transfer into Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s personal bank accounts rocked Malaysia in 2015. Will there be more twists and turns to the “Donorgate” scandal in 2016?

In 2015, “donations” took on new dimensions in the Malaysian lexicon. There are still more questions than answers about the RM2.6 billion transfer – purportedly from a mysterious Arab donor – directly to Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak.

The shocking expose by the American newspaper Wall Street Journal (WSJ) last July is arguably the biggest bombshell ever dropped on a sitting Malaysian prime minister in recent memory.

Najib never denied transfer

The WSJ story revealed that Najib had received US$700 million (roughly RM2.6 billion at last July’s exchange rates) in his AmIslamic Bank accounts. These funds were transferred through several banks and companies, allegedly linked to 1MDB.

Although Najib initially threatened a lawsuit for the WSJ expose, no legal action has materialised so far. WSJ has stood firm by its story.

Since the RM2.6 billion story broke, the allegations stated in the WSJ story have never been directly disputed by the prime minister, who has only claimed that he did not take any funds for personal gain. He also stated vaguely that “I did not betray the country” and these allegations are “political sabotage”.

This month, Deputy Prime Minister Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi told the Parliament that the RM2.6 billion was a political donation. He said that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) confirmed this and had identified the donor.

“Malaysia has no law that says political donations must be declared or to stop them,” said Zahid.

Zahid’s explanation was not well received. Many had anticipated Najib to personally clarify the issue. Minister Azalina Othman Said defended the PM’s absence, citing attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali’s advice for Najib not to address the RM2.6 billion issue personally in Parliament because it would be sub judice.

Sub judice means that a particular case or matter is under trial or being considered by a judge or court.

Funds linked to 1MDB?

According to WSJ, the bulk of the transfers came from two transactions of US$620 million and US$61 million (to make a total of US$681 million) in March 2013 ahead of the Malaysian general elections in May 2013.

The report alleged that the transfers were made in two tranches from a British Virgin Island company called Tanore Finance Corp through Falcon Private Bank in Singapore.

Falcon’s website says that since 2009, the Swiss-based private bank, founded in Zurich in 1965 as Ueberseebank and renamed AIG Private Bank in 1998, is owned by the International Petroleum Investment Co (IPIC) of Abu Dhabi.

“The cash came from a company registered in the British Virgin Islands via a Swiss bank owned by an Abu Dhabi state fund. The fund, IPIC, has guaranteed billions of dollars of 1MDB’s bonds and in May injected US$1 billion in capital into the fund to help meet looming debt repayments. A spokeswoman for IPIC couldn’t be reached for comment. The British Virgin Islands company, Tanore Finance Corp, couldn’t be reached,” the WSJ report said.

The report also said that RM42 million was transferred from SRC International, an energy company owned by the Finance Ministry and previously by 1MDB, through two intermediate transactions (see chart) to Najib’s accounts.

Unnamed Arab donors

However, about a month after the WSJ revelations, MACC all but confirmed the transfer, although its findings declared that the RM2.6 billion was political donations by unnamed donors from the Middle East, not 1MDB.

“Findings from report in relation to RM2.6 billion funds were handed over to the attorney-general, where the RM2.6 billion allegedly deposited into the prime minister’s personal accounts was merely from donors, in lieu of (from) 1MDB fund (sic),” said MACC in a statement.

MACC did not explain how it came to these conclusions. In November, Public Accounts Committee chief Hasan Arifin also denied any links of the funds to the 1MDB controversy.

“The RM2.6 billion transferred into Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s personal account is not related to 1MDB. I must say that 1MDB and the RM2.6 billion are entirely different subjects,” he told a press conference in Parliament.

Asked how he came to this conclusion, Hasan said this was in the auditor-general’s interim report on 1MDB. However, this report has not been made public, despite intense clamour to do so.

AmBank’s RM53 million penalty

In November, AmBank (the local bank that was allegedly the recipient of the RM2.6 billion transfer) suddenly announced that it was paying a massive penalty of RM53.7 million to Bank Negara Malaysia.

Was this massive fine related to transgressions on the RM2.6 billion transfer as many have speculated?

AmBank said that Bank Negara’s penalty was for non-compliance with “certain regulations”. On top of the fine, AmBank is setting aside RM100 million over four years to improve its processes and governance.

According to AmBank, the penalty was related to Section 234 of the Financial Services Act 2013 and Section 245 of the Islamic Financial Services Act 2013 respectively. Each Section empowers Bank Negara to take action, including the power to impose monetary penalty, if it finds non-compliance with the respective Act and associated regulations.

At the time of writing, neither AmBank nor Bank Negara has provided details of these non-compliances. But if Bank Negara was kept in the dark about the transfer, and AmBank had failed to declare the transaction, there is a strong chance that the hefty fine was linked to the RM2.6 billion.

Legal implications of “donation”

If true, what are the implications of such a “donation”, especially on a sitting prime minister?

Section 23(1) of the MACC Act states: “Any officer of a public body who uses his office or position for any gratification, whether for himself, his relative or associate, commits an offence.”

Under the heading “Presumption in certain offences”, Section 50(1) of the same Act states: “Where in any proceedings against any person for an offence under Section 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22 or 23 it is proved that any gratification has been received or agreed to be received, accepted or agreed to be accepted, obtained or attempted to be obtained, solicited, given or agreed to be given, promised or offered, by or to the accused, the gratification shall be presumed to have been corruptly received or agreed to be received, accepted or agreed to be accepted, obtained or attempted to be obtained, solicited, given or agreed to be given, promised or offered as an inducement or a reward for or on account of the matters set out in the particulars of the offence unless the contrary is proved.”

In other words, any payment made to a public official is assumed to be a gratification unless proven otherwise.

Najib has to prove that the RM2.6 billion is not a gratification. The MACC Act seems to indicate that even if that RM2.6 billion was a donation, there may still be grounds for prosecution.

The penalty for an offence under Section 23 is “imprisonment for a term not exceeding twenty years and a fine of not less than five times the gratification”. In this case, the penalty for the undisclosed RM2.6 billion donation may amount to a staggering RM13 billion.

GE13 could be invalid

There are other political implications if the RM2.6 billion was used for the general election, as some leaders from Najib’s ruling political party Umno have claimed. The maximum that could be spent per candidate for any general election is only RM200,000 for a member of parliament and RM100,000 for a state assemblyman.

There are grounds for claims that the Election Offences Act may have been violated.

The worst case scenario is that if the RM2.6 billion was used entirely for elections, the whole of General Elections 2013 may be invalidated. If this is the case, it would have deep political ramifications on Najib’s grip on power.

Tomorrow:
Will Najib survive the RM2.6 billion fallout?

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 January 2016, 10:08 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Saudi action “resets geopolitical chessboard” in Middle East, says expert

By Anakhanum Khidayatova

Trend

4 JANUARY 2016

Saudi Arabia and Iran have been engaged in a Cold War via proxy, in its most recent manifestation, since the Arab Spring, in Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and in other countries around the world through humanitarian aid and dawa (outreach), Theodore Karasik, the Middle East analyst and senior advisor to Risk Insurance Management in Dubai, told Trend Jan. 4.

“This Cold War entered a dangerous, highly confrontational phase in the past few days. The Kingdom, in mid December, prepared the steps for today, with Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman announcing a Sunni Muslim Alliance. With the Saudi execution of the “terrorist extremist” Sheikh Nimr al-Nimr, who was the spiritual leader of Saudi Shiites in the Kingdom’s Eastern Province, the sectarian divide grew immediate into a deep chasm”- he said.

The expert also said that Saudi Arabia’s Sunni Muslim Alliance is now fully activated with the al-Nimr execution.

“The Kingdom is throwing down the gauntlet on Iran’s behavior and Riyadh seeks to expose the Islamic Republic’s perfidy in Arab lands. More importantly, Saudi Arabia, as Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques, is now seeing who will rush to Riyadh’s side under the mantra of Sunni Islam. Immediately, the GCC states– except Oman– came to the Kingdom’s side, as did Sudan and several other countries. The coming days, and perhaps weeks, will see whether all 30 plus members of the Sunni Military Alliance will declare a so-called bayat to the Saudi Kingdom as the face off continues with Iran” – he said.

The expert also said that Saudi Arabia is angry with Iran; so angry that Riyadh seeks to not only tear down the Islamic Republic’s ability to re-emerge on the global economic arena with the lifting of sanctions but also wants to guarantee that the February 2016 parliamentary elections swing 100 percent to the principalists and the IRGC. “From Riyadh’s thinking, Iran’s true colors need to be shown to the world. This aggressive Saudi policy is likely to affect the region for some time to come”- he said.

“Thus, in the Middle East, the Saudi action, in one stunning move, reset the geopolitical chessboard on a host of negotiations, especially the future of Syria, as well as set the possibility for higher oil prices if the Cold War becomes a Hot War. A Hot War, whether asymmetric or through enhanced proxy actions up to and including bombing campaigns or targeted assassinations, will boost the price of oil in order to help Saudi Arabia’s partners earn necessary income into their state coffers”- he said.

“But there is also a serious loss. Gone is any hope for coordination on fighting the Islamic State not only in the Levant but in other arenas. Iran is a necessary part of that fight but for Gulf Arabs, Tehran is seen as a bigger threat. That fact may be a strategic and tactical error that will give Daesh a free pass until the group is dealt with in an accurate kinetic and counter-narrative approach. Russia and Iran were on the right path while Saudi Arabia and others were supporting extremists and terrorists who bastardized their own Wahhabist creed. Thus, Saudi’s aggressive stance against Iran masks the radical disturbances within the Sunni ummah itself” – Karasik said.

Expert also said that Its clear that Russia may benefit the most from the sectarian eruption. The Kremlin is already offering to negotiate between the two sides. That approach by Moscow is all well and good.

“But there is a bigger question here: the future of the Saudi Kingdom. Unlike Iran, whose cohesion is, for the most part guaranteed, the Al-Saud’s Arabia is under great political and economic stress up to including internal dissent at various levels of Saudi society in various corners of the country (the south, the Hijaz, the Nejd, and the Eastern Province) up to intra-princely disputes that may now break into the open. Russia sees that Saudi Arabia is in trouble, and President Putin is known to have threaten the Kingdom during various high-level meetings with Saudi rulers.

Overall, patience will be a key here for Moscow, and given the Kremlin propensity to side more with Shiites because of their patient virtues, a Saudi over-extension of its Sunni alliance may backfire in a black hole that forces the Al-Saud from power and sees the Kingdom evaporate”- he said.

Saudi Arabia’s execution of a prominent Shiite cleric led to violent protests at the Saudi embassy in Tehran, which led to a breakdown of relations between the two countries.

Saudi Arabia previously cut air traffic with Iran, and said that it intends to cut all commercial ties.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 5 January 2016, 6:48 am and is filed under
International
,
Islam
,
Islamic state
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malacca DAP must continue to help lead Malaysia towards a new future – where Malaysians can regain  confidence to be able to compete with the rest of the world instead of fighting among ourselves over a diminishing national economic cake

Malacca had always played a leading role in DAP’s 50-year campaign to create a new and better Malaysia – where Malaysians can regain confidence to be able to compete with the rest of the world instead of fighting among ourselves over a diminishing economic cake.

Malacca was one of the six founder DAP branches after the party was registered on March 18, 1966, the other being Seremban, Kuala Lumpur, Petaling Jaya, Johor Baru and Penang.  The formation of the DAP branch in Ipoh made these seven branches the Magnificent Seven in the first year of the DAP’ s political struggle in 1966.

No other state could claim to have a special relationship with the 50 year struggle of the DAP, as four out of the five DAP Secretaries-General had special associations with Malacca, starting with DAP’s first Secretary-General C.V. Devan Nair (who was at the time DAP MP for Bangsar and later became President of Singapore), myself, Kerk Kim Hock and Lim Guan Eng who together served as Secretary-General of DAP  for some 47 of the party’s 50-year history.

Right from the very beginning, DAP was formed as a political party with a commitment and vision for all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region.

This was why the first three by-elections contested by the DAP before the 1969 general elections were UMNO strongholds – Kampung Baru in Selangor in January 1967 (where the UMNO candidate Ahmad Razali Mohamad Ali won and went on to become Selangor Mentri Besar in 1982),  Tampoi in Johor in September 1967 and the Segamat Utara parliamentary by-election in Johor in October 1968 (where the UMNO candidate, Musa Hitam, won and went on to become Deputy Prime Minister in 1982).

The DAP  contested the first general election in 1969 with less than 3,000 members but we secured some 300,000 votes, an average of 100 votes per member – in sharp contrast to the MCA in the 13th General Election in 2013, claiming to have over a million members but which could not muster more than  300,000 votes from its one-million membership!

This is the new political scenario in Malaysia. Although the MCA boasts of over a million members, the overwhelming majority of MCA members did not vote for MCA or Barisan Nasional candidates because they were patriotic, loyal, idealistic and thinking Malaysians who put national interests and those of their future generations above those of the petty interests of a handful of MCA/BN leaders – and this is also why the other BN parties like Gerakan and MIC were also rejected, not only by the voters at large but by their own members in the last  general election.

This should be replicated for UMNO in the 14th General Election.

A former UMNO Minister whom I met recently  said that although Datuk Seri Najib Razak is stronger than ever as UMNO President after the recent Parliament meeting where he sailed through without a hitch  with his 2016 Budget and the UMNO General Assemblies where he imposed his political will despite opposition by former UMNO stalwarts like Tun Mahathir and Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, Najib’s popularity among UMNO members and the Malays in general are not so sure and secure.

Najib can buy the support of the 300 to 400 UMNO “hulubalangs” who dominate the UMNO Supreme Council and the various levels of UMNO divisional leadership, but he will not be able to buy the support of the three million UMNO members and 21,000 UMNO branches.

This is why opposition and disaffection against Najib will intensify in the coming months and years, although they may not threaten Najib’s stranglehold on the levers of power in UMNO, both in party and government.

The  300-400 UMNO chieftains in the Prime Minister’s pockets will  agree with Najib when he claimed in his 2016 New Year Message that the RM2.6 billion donation and RM55 billion 1MDB twin mega scandals have  been resolved and no more issues in the country, but I do not think the 30 million Malaysians,  the three million UMNO members or 21,000 UMNO branches are so gullible as to believe such empty propaganda.

Najib’s twin mega scandals continue to make headlines, if not in the UMNO/BN owned and controlled media, but on the social media – with Malaysia even named as third in the world’s “worst corruption scandals in 2015”.

The greatest challenge for Pakatan Harapan  in the 14th General Election is how to reach out to the three million UMNO members so that they could join all Malaysians in a campaign to “Save Malaysia”, not to save any individual leader or political party, but the save the nation from rampant corruption, widespread socio-economic injustices and the failures of Najib’s  nation-building policies.

(Speech at the “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang & Mana RM2.6 billion?” ceramah at Malacca DAP State  premises at Lorong Pandan, Malacca on Tuesday, 5th January 2016 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 6 January 2016, 9:40 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Harapan
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


My experience at the Impian Edu-Camp

Helen D’Cruz

Malaysiakini

5 Jan 2016

It was a rainy afternoon as we drove into Kg Sorak Sumpong, Serian in the outskirts of Kuching. It took us about an hour and a half drive from Kuching to reach this Bidayuh village. We were the 10 volunteers and two Impian officials who were going to run a holiday education camp for the children of the village.

At first sight of the village, I was disappointed, having expected to be taken into the interiors of Sarawak and given an opportunity to live in longhouses. As it turned out this looked like one of the new villages often seen in West Malaysia.

It was soon apparent that due to some miscommunication, we were not expected at the village that week. However, this was quickly sorted out and we were placed with three host families. The only married couple in the group was given a bedroom to themselves in one home. This was considered very gracious of the host as there were 11 family members in that house.

Two of the guys were housed close to a pigsty and padi drying area. The rest of us were graciously given the living room and one bedroom in another house. Most of us slept on mats spread out on the floor.

For all my bravado of being able to live in longhouses and having to use pit latrines (as my son candidly remarked when he first heard of my trip), I was surprised at the relief I felt when I saw that the house had a sitting, flush toilet. The bathroom had a tank that ran the entire length of one wall brimming with fresh cool, mountain water. We were so impressed actually having been given far more than we had anticipated.

The first day, we were taken into Serian town, a twenty-minute drive from the village and treated to a sumptuous dinner of local fare. Besides a briefing earlier in the evening, nothing much else was done. We were left to settle into our new surroundings, bond with our host families and rest as many of us had left for Kuching very early in morning from West Malaysia.

The next morning, we were up early as we were expected to start preparations for the camp at 8.30am. We used scoops to bathe and had one yelling from the bathroom “I love this, I love this” as she delighted in the fresh cool water. It was hilarious and surprisingly no one wished for a water heater.

We then sat down for breakfast prepared by our host. There were noodles, fried rice and coffee and tea.

At our next briefing, the chores to be undertaken during the camp were delegated and we were paired to handle them. We were expecting some 60 students. Lessons for the camp were prepared and again we paired up for the English, Science and Maths lessons that were going to be conducted.

Diverse group with the same mission

Most of us were first time volunteers for this sort of camp and were not teachers either. Many were professionals however, in other fields. We had volunteers in their mid-twenties up to one who was over seventy. It was such a diverse group but all having the same mission.

Later, we were again taken into Serian town, this time to explore and have a taste of the ‘Teh si peng special’ a three-layered milk tea which is known as one of the hidden treasures of Kuching. There is a layer of melted palm sugar at the bottom, followed by milk and finally the tea on top.

The usual way is to mix it all up and drink it. But one decided to pull her straw through all three layers and have the best of different flavours in her mouth before swallowing the tea. I tried it this way too and must agree with her. Perhaps, that day a new trend of drinking teh si peng started.

We tried the famous and much-talked-about kolo mee. I must admit that I am not taken up with this noodle dish of Sarawak.

Next we had a taste of the Sunny Hill ice cream. It was operating under the management of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Sarawak and from whence the proceeds go towards the development and operation of the Ayer Manis Adventist school. Again the liquid palm sugar poured over the ice cream together with a generous amount of nuts was too much to resist.

We then drove on to a waterfall nearby. That was indeed a treat. The water was so clean and clear and we were tickled with little fish nibbling at our feet. Whilst some of us relished this natural spa, some others squirmed at the nibbles. Nonetheless, all who got into the water agreed that it was a great way to be spending time in Sarawak.

So far this was a dream holiday I felt, having no clue of the tough work that was to begin the next morning.

On Thursday morning, we were again up early to be at the multi-purpose hall to welcome the students who we would spend time with the following three days. Registration started and though the camp was meant for seven to 12 year olds, there were several who were six and up to 15 years of age. It was too difficult to turn away these eager faces and a decision was made to accept all who came. In the end, instead of 60, we had 90 young ones under our wings.

The program for the day started with an ice-breaker, the famous chicken dance. The children seemed to enjoy this. Then they sang the Sarawak state anthem with gusto but it was when the Negara-Ku was sung that I teared up. It was one of the very few occasions that I felt like crying when our national anthem was sung.

With all that is going on politically, it just came to mind that these innocent kids were being robbed of a wonderful country without them even being aware of it.

Times of bonding

The first day was English day and we had the children split up in five groups moving from station to station, learning a different lesson at each station. All went smoothly the first day and though it was really hot in the hall, we managed. We had breakfast and lunch with the kids and these were times of bonding, too. The food was prepared by volunteers from the womenfolk of the village.

After lunch, we continued with activities like story-telling, colouring and reading. Dance items in preparation for the cultural night were also discussed.

At 2 pm we dispersed. The volunteers stayed on for briefing and preparation for next day which was to be Science day. We then took a break and drove out to the Kg Panchor Dayak Hot Spring. I was not ready to dive in and was happy to soak my feet in the different pools with varying temperatures. A good end to a day of standing on one’s feet more than usual.

That night our host family had prepared a dinner like none any of us had had before. They decided that we should taste their indigenous fare and not only did we view it as a privilege, we felt honoured. So we sat down to a meal of two types of chicken of which one was stuffed into bamboo with ‘bunga kantan’ shoots and cooked on an open fire. There was fish roe seasoned and stuffed into bamboo and roasted, patin in tempoyak, sayur manis and kangkong.

There was also glutinous rice (pulut) cooked in bamboo that tasted very different from the lemang we get in West Malaysia. Now that was a feast.

That night, all the volunteers gathered in the house of my host family just to spend some time together and also to complete preparations for the next day’s lessons. In the midst of it all a large spider decided to pay us a call. The reactions of some of the volunteers were so hilarious and I still chuckle when I think of the incident.

It was so evident then, who was used to nature and who just spoke of nature. There is certainly no place for spiders in the lives of city folk it was apparent that night.

The next day, the science sessions were of great interest to the students. The simple experiments we allowed them to carry out, like the lava lamp, the neutralisation process using vinegar, soda bicarbonate and a balloon, the float and sink experiment, observation of insects and the skeleton song for body parts kept the students engrossed for hours.

The eagerness of the students to participate was not lost on the teaching volunteers who wished they could do more with these kids.

Dinner that Friday night was the last dinner with our hosts. Again the indigenous cuisine of ikan keli roasted on an open fire, some of the fish cooked in bamboo with tempoyak, unripe papaya shredded and seasoned, young tapioca shoots with the usual condiments of tempoyak, salted fish and bird’s eye chilies left us satiated and wishing for more kampong days.

Durian eating sessions

It was the durian season and throughout our six days there, we had several durian eating sessions thrown in between the other activities. I am sure that had resulted in extra kilograms being heaved onto the planes when we headed home.

The highlight of the camp was the cultural night held on the last night we spent at the village. We planned a few activities with the children and invited their parents. Impian Sarawak also wanted to present the villagers who had hosted us in their homes and cooked for us at the camp with mementoes.

We were truly touched by so many things done by the locals, that night. It was a surprise to meet Julian Tan Kok Ping, the DAP MP of Stampin, who had taken the time and made the effort to spend a few hours with us at the village that evening. It was much appreciated by both the volunteers and the villagers. Edward Luak, the local DAP representative, was with us not only on that night but was at the village almost every day to ensure we were alright.

At the start of the night we were asked to meet at the entrance of the village. Together with Julian, Edward and other important people of the village, we had to walk to the community hall, a distance of about 200 meters. Gongs were beaten and along the pathway, on both sides, lined up were our children from the camp, their parents and other villagers who shook our hands and said “Thank You”.

As we entered the hall, we were garlanded with beads by maidens all dressed up in traditional costumes. It felt surreal – this combination of music, handshakes, garlands! What have I done to deserve this? Was what was running through my mind at that time.

There was a feast laid out. There was a live band in attendance and we took part in a traditional dance of the Bidayuh. The band played on late into the night as the young and old danced with abandon. The night was light and joyous and seemed a grand affair – far grander than any send-off expected by the volunteers.

Commendable work

Impian is on the quiet doing a lot of commendable work both in West and East Malaysia. They run education camps, not that the kids will score As but to let them know that learning can be fun. They run medical camps to bring medical care to the interiors of Sabah and Sarawak. They build roads to make travel a little easier for the locals. They lay pipes so that homes may have the basic necessity of water met.

Impian is always looking for volunteers to help out in their projects. However, one must be mindful if you volunteer. The commitment must be sincere and one has to be prepared for any situation including but not limited to unhygienic conditions. Should a volunteer drop off mid-way, you have not only deprived another of the opportunity to serve but put the project at risk of failure.

For me personally, the whole episode was a great eye-opener. We take so much for granted and yet many of our brethren in Sarawak live with so little. I feel I gave so little yet received in abundance. The emotions evoked, the feelings unprecedented, the desire to do more are some of the handouts we volunteers took back. I am sure, just like me, the others will not forget our six days in Kg Sorak.

Finally, I would like to pen here my and my co-volunteers’ deep appreciation and gratitude to the camp leaders, Adrian Cheah and Cheryl Cheah, who were with us all the time and made sure that we were in want of nothing. Thank you and God Bless you for the good work that you and Impian are doing and at the same time you are making inroads into the hearts of the people irrespective of race and religion.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 6 January 2016, 11:49 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Impian Malaysia
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Education Minister should ensure that Malaysian taxpayers do not have to pay for  RM3 million mistake in reprint of Year Six History textbook which showed Malacca in the east coast above Terengganu

Education Minister, Datuk Seri Mahdzir Khalid should ensure that Malaysian taxpayers do not have to pay for the RM3 million mistake in reprint of Year Six History textbook which showed Malacca in the east coast above Terengganu.

It is shocking as to how such a basic mistake, which should not be made under any circumstances, could be made despite the various levels of checks and counter-checks, from the choice of the author to the writing of the  text, including the title to the diagrams and content to the last page.

Clearly, the whole system of checks and counter-checks have broken down in the education ministry, which does not reflect well on the professionalism of the Education Ministry, departments and agencies like the Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka (DBP) delegated with such tasks.

The DBP director general Datuk Dr. Awang Sariyan has said that reprinting the history text would cost RM3 million.

Mahdzir should present a White Paper to Parliament when it meets in March to explain how such a shocking effort could happen, who are the persons and agencies responsible and what action had been taken to ensure that Malaysian taxpayers would not have to pay for the RM3 million mistake.

In this connection, Mahhdzir owes Malaysians an explanation as to why the mistake of putting Malacca in the east coast above Terengganu could be corrected but why the omission of Wong Pow Nee in the formation of Malaysia, as one of the members of the Cobbold Commission which recommended positively on the establishment of Malaysia in 1963, could not be  rectified?

MCA leaders and Ministers like its President Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai and Deputy President, Datuk Wee Ka Siong, had repeatedly said that school texbooks must  “truly reflect” the nation’s history, and that they would ensure that Wong’s role in the formation of Malaysia would be accorded full recognition in the school history texts.

Why are the MCA Ministers and leader silent now when the omission of Wong’s role in the history texts are not being rectified?

(Speech at the “Solidarity with Lim Kit Siang & Mana RM2.6 billion?” kopitiam ceramah in Jasin on Tuesday, 5th January 2016 at 7 pm)

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 6 January 2016, 1:48 pm and is filed under
Education
,
History
,
MCA
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Will Najib survive the RM2.6 billion fallout?

Story by
Khairul Khalid
 | Kinibiz

DECEMBER 23, 2015 8:00AM

The political purge that followed the WSJ revelations stunned the public and sent shockwaves among Umno grassroots. Can Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak survive the RM2.6 billion backlash?

________________________________________________________________________

Just a few weeks after the sensational Wall Street Journal (WSJ) expose in July, alleging that RM2.6 billion was transferred directly into Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s bank accounts, major reshuffles in key government posts shocked the nation again.

The most prominent were the triple whammy dismissals of attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail, deputy prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin and federal minister Mohd Shafie Apdal.

Retribution in RM2.6 billion ‘Donorgate’

Were these casualties political retribution in the RM2.6 billion “Donorgate” scandal linked to Najib? The public seemed to think so.

Attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail was suddenly removed in an announcement by the chief secretary to the government, Ali Hamsa. The official reason given by the government was Gani’s health issues, but Gani himself seemed blindsided by his abrupt departure.

There were also rumours that just before he was dismissed, Gani was about to make an unthinkable move – filing formal charges against the prime minister for the RM2.6 billion transfer. Online portal Sarawak Report published alleged drafts of charge sheets against the prime minister for the RM2.6 billion transfer.

Charge sheet vs Najib?

In November, Charles Suresh Morais (brother of slain senior deputy public prosecutor Kevin Anthony Morais) sensationally claimed that Kevin was working on the charge sheet before he was brutally murdered. These allegations have also been denied by the government.

Shortly after Gani’s departure, deputy prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin was ousted and replaced by Ahmad Zahid Hamidi. Another prominent federal minister removed was Shafie Apdal. All were staunch critics of Najib’s handling of the RM2.6 billion “donation” expose as well as the debt-ridden 1MDB.

Muhyiddin sacking problematic

The unceremonious dismissal of all three – Gani, Muhyiddin and Shafie – was even more surprising considering that they were all long-serving stalwarts of Najib’s ruling party Umno.

Gani served under three prime ministers. His tenure dated to the time of former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad. Gani was also lead prosecutor in former deputy prime minister Anwar Ibrahim’s first sodomy case and became attorney-general in 2002.

He was also appointed head of the task force investigating 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB). As attorney-general, he had the sole authority to decide on prosecution in the country.

Others in the task force were governor of Bank Malaysia Zeti Akhtar Aziz, the inspector-general of police Abdul Khalid Abu Bakar, and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission chief commissioner Abu Kassim Mohamad.

The sacking of Muhyiddin was arguably the most problematic politically for Najib. At the time of writing, despite being sacked from the number two post in the government, Muhyiddin is still deputy president of Umno. Najib, other than being prime minister, is also president of Umno.

There have been rumours of a move to oust Muhyiddin from all party posts to curtail his influence that has grown despite his sacking.

The Mahathir factor

Other than being a staunch party loyalist, he has strong grassroots support in the southern state of Johor, a perennial Umno bastion. Muhyiddin’s dismissal led to strong protests from several Umno divisions in the state. In November, 81 branch chiefs from eight Johor Umno divisions called for Najib’s resignation.

Perhaps the common strand in all three axings was their perceived closeness to Mahathir, Najib’s former mentor-turned-nemesis. The former PM has openly and repeatedly called for the ousting of Najib, citing the RM2.6 billion donation and 1MDB scandals.

The common perception is that these political purges by Najib were bold yet necessary. Najib was seen as consolidating his position in the government and reducing Mahathir’s influence.

Will Najib survive?

The prime question now is: will Najib’s position become increasingly untenable, forcing Umno to bring him down, or will he miraculously survive the aftermath of the RM2.6 billion scandal?

There were other sudden reshuffles that raised eyebrows, such as the change in heads in various departments of the Police Special Branch as well as the appointment into the government of four members of the parliamentary Public Accounts Committee investigation into 1MDB, including its chairman Nur Jazlan Mohamed who was appointed deputy home minister.

Although the opposition has applied constant pressure on Najib, they have not struck any decisive blows yet. There have been proposals of a vote of no-confidence against Najib, but that was quickly shot down by Parliament speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia.

Even Mahathir joined in the chorus, claiming that a vote of no-confidence is a democratic right, quoting Article 43(4) of the Federal Constitution:

“If the prime minister ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the House of Representatives, then, unless at his request the Yang di-Pertuan Agong dissolves Parliament, the prime minister shall tender the resignation of the Cabinet.”

Scandal won’t fade away

In November, the opposition tried to send a signal of no-confidence against Najib by voting down Budget 2016 but failed. The Budget was passed at policy stage with 128 votes in favour and 74 against. This month, it passed the committee stage.

There have been other suggestions. Some have proposed cutting a behind-the-scene deal with Najib to facilitate a smooth change of power and leadership. Some have even suggested ensuring safe passage for the prime minister overseas. So far, these have not materialised.

Najib may have time on his side. He does not have to call for a general election before Aug 24, 2018. Regardless, the RM2.6 billion scandal will not likely fade away easily. Based on the seismic events of 2015, more fireworks are expected for the prime minister next year.

Yesterday:
Najib’s RM2.6 billion ‘Donorgate’ rocks Malaysia

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 6 January 2016, 8:35 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.