I never realise that we may  have a Cabinet Minister who is a “world beater” in having the  world’s lowest IQ for Ministers

I never realise that we may have a Cabinet Minister who is a “world-beater” in having the lowest IQ for Ministers in the world.

This thought struck me when I was told about the New Straits Times report today entitled “’Can DAP deny Pua’s alleged links to Justo?’”

The NST report reads:

“Lim Kit Siang and the DAP leadership have been challenged to deny Tony Pua’s involvement with former PetroSaudi International Ltd former executive Xavier Andre Justo.

“’Can Lim Kit Siang and DAP leadership deny that Tony Pua (DAP Petaling Jaya Utara member of parliament) has nothing to do with Justo and not involved in any way?

“”Yes or no?’ Barisan Nasional strategic communication director Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan posted on Twitter yesterday.”

I am completely befuddled.

I thought Pua could not be clearer when he answered Rahman who asked the first time early this month whether the DAP MP for PJ Utara had met Justo.

I did a Google search to re-read Pua’s reply to Rahman, which was a Malaysiakini report by Adrian Wong dated July 2, 2015, entitled :
“I’ve no clue who Justo is, says Pua’
.

Can we have a Minister who does not have the IQ to understand what Pua answered in the Malaysiakini report?

Even worse, Rahman has got company in the Cabinet, for the Works Minister Datuk Fadillah Yusof also today called on Pua to “make a clear statement on his dealings with Justo”.

However, I am giving Fadillah the benefit of the doubt in that he had not read Pua’s response in Malaysiakini, or we would have two Ministers competing for the crown as the Cabinet Minister with the lowest IQ in the world.

Having the world’s lowest IQ for a Cabinet Minister is bad enough, but it would appear this is not the only failing of Rahman.

If further proofs are needed that Rahman qualifies to be a “world beater” in having the lowest IQ of all Cabinet Ministers in the world, they are to be found aplenty in his tweet and Facebook yesterday, where he even admitted that his “star witness”, former Sarawakian journalist Lester Melanyi is a “scum” in the following revealing words:

“But perhaps being perceived as a scum was precisely the reason why Claire Brown and Sarawak Report chose and hired him to incessantly demonized Sarawak leaders for years and now Dato Sri Najib Razak. After all, it takes a scum to know another scum.”

In one paragraph, Rahman has dismissed not only Lester and Claire as “scums”, but even the Sarawak leaders and Datuk Seri Najib Razak himself – a “scum” Minister serving under a “scum” Prime Minister?

The Lester video “confession” was to premier Rahman’s debut as the Barisan Nasional strategic communication director (especially as nobody even in BN knew about his appointment) but it has proved to be a disastrous outing, not only for Rahman himself but also for the Prime Minister as well.

In fact, the Lester “outing” had been so disastrous that Part II of the Lester video “confession” has to be chopped off.

Many Malaysians, including BN leaders, will like to see Part II of Lester’s video confession to see what other mischiefs Rahman is capable of.

Why kill it?

To compensate for the propaganda disaster of his “Lester debut”, I will not be surprised if Rahman had played a major role in an even bigger “strategic” error, getting the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) to block access to Sarawak Report.

Is this partly prompted by Clare Brown’s annnouncement that she was going to dump all Lester’s emails to her on the Sarawak Report website to dispel Lester’s claim he had helped in falsifying and doctoring 1MDB documents for Sarawak Report, plunging Rahman into  panic stations?

Can Rahman categorically deny that he has no role and nothing to do with the MCMC decision to block access to Sarawak Report website?

Does Rahman now agree that the MCMC blocking access to Sarawak Report website is the worst possible option for Najib, not only because it is ineffective as it will only make more Malaysians learn the art of evading such official blockade on the Internet, but send out the message that Najib has become a national liability and no more a national asset, even if he survived for the moment as Prime Minister of Malaysia?

Rahman is probably hoping to leap up the Najib ladder to replace Jarjis Jamaluddin as Najib’s right-hand man, but he is  clearly too big for his shoes, doing more damage than good to Najib’s already very precarious political image and future.

Another egregrious failing of Rahman is his ignorance of his Ministerial duties and responsibilities to the nation and people, and not just to UMNO.

Can Rahman explain why he is prepared to plumb the depths to defend the Prime Minister from all the allegations of impropriety whether from Sarawak Report, Wall Street Journal or other sources, whether about the 1MDB scandal or other mega-scandals, when he has no idea about their truth or otherwise?

Does Rahman know whether there is any basis in the WSJ report and allegation on July 2, 2015 that US$700 million (RM2.6 billion) had been deposited into Najib’s personal accounts in AmBank in March, 2013 just before the 13th General Election, where the money came from and where they have gone to?

Have Rahman asked Najib in the past three Cabinet meetings since the WSJ report on July 2 why Najib could not make a simple public statement whether RM2.6 billion had been deposited into his personal bank accounts in March 2013 just before the 13th general election, where the RM2.6 billion came from and where and to whom they had gone to.

Can Rahman declare publicly that he and UMNO Sabah had not received a single sen from Najib’s personal accounts in AmBank for the 13th General Election campaign?

                This entry was posted on Monday, 20 July 2015, 12:49 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
IT
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Joining New Hope Movement hardest decision of my life, says Mujahid

by Looi Sue-Chern

The Malaysian Insider

19 July 2015

PAS MP Datuk Dr Mujahid Yusof Rawa made the hardest decision of his life when he launched the New Hope Movement (GHB) with other progressive leaders from the party earlier this week.

The turning point in his political life is likely to see him leave the Islamist party and become a founding member of a new political organisation with his “purged” colleagues.

“It is the most difficult decision of my life. I was born and bred in the politics of PAS. My mother was pregnant with me when my father campaigned in Perlis in 1964.

“When I was born on October 25 that year, my father had to find a name that reflected the challenges he went through. So he named me Mujahid, which means a fighter who doesn’t give up.

“I have to live up to my name with the difficulties I face. It has made me who I am,” the 50-year-old told The Malaysian Insider.

Mujahid and other progressive PAS leaders were ousted by the conservative ulama faction in the party elections last month.

The purge, he said, made them realise that the party was not living up to Islamic principles and had adopted a rigid understanding of the religion, pushing those who wanted to know Islam away.

“Today in the world, Islam is regarded as a terrorist, backward and conservative religion, like what the Isis (Islamic State of Syria and Iraq) is doing.

“It is a responsibility for us to correct the perception and reality. That is what we are trying to do with the new hope,” he said, referring to the new party he and his progressive colleagues are mulling.

It is their hope the new party would be an alternative Islamic party to PAS and subsequently lead to a new opposition coalition to replace Pakatan Rakyat, which collapsed after PAS severed ties with DAP at the muktamar last month.

Mujahid said they wanted to present a fresh image of Islam through the new party to show that it is a religion of peace, compassion and mercy, and one that celebrated diversity.

“It is a big crusade, not about a group of leaders who lost their positions.

“If you ask whether I will choose the party or save Islam, then I choose to save Islam. Political parties come and go but Islam will remain.”

Mujahid said his family were behind him as they, too, saw that PAS had changed.

“When our father was still around, he told my brothers and sisters to always support me because I was the only one who followed him into politics. One of my older sisters joined the PAS women’s wing… of course, she was also ousted in the muktamar.

“That is the best thing… to have family behind you, people who support you and trust you. My siblings believe their little brother won’t do stupid things,” he said of his 10 older brothers and sisters.

Mujahid’s late father Yusof Abdullah, who was better known as Yusof Rawa, was a former deputy minister, former ambassador to Afghanistan, Turkey and Iran, former PAS president and the party’s first spiritual leader.

Mujahid joined PAS in 1992 after returning to Penang from Egypt. He then moved to Malacca, where he became a lecturer and soon developed a serious interest in the party.

He left academia to be a full-time politician in 1999, contesting the Jasin parliamentary seat. He lost again in the 2004 general election when he stood in the Tasek Gelugor parliamentary seat.

But he worked his way up party ranks. He said the only help his father gave him was advice – the only way to go up was to prove himself, to never ask the party for anything, and to leave it to God’s will.

Mujahid soon made it to the PAS Youth national committee before making the PAS central working committee in 2005 and was tasked with handling the national unity bureau.

He set up the non-Muslim PAS Supporters’ Congress and went on to promote the party and encourage better understanding of Islam in a multiracial nation.

He also coined the party’s 2013 general election slogan “PAS for All”, which softened the Islamist party’s hard-line image and gained the support of non-Muslim voters.

Mujahid is also known for his interfaith work, especially his success in engaging with the church and the Christians even when there were tensions between Muslims and non-Muslims over the “Allah” issue.

“The party benefited from such efforts but eventually, PAS stopped moving in the right direction.

“I tried to encourage the practice of engaging other faiths in dialogues and to have mutual respect among all religions but to the party, it was as if those were strange ideas.

“There was not much support and there was talk that we had become part of some Christian agenda, that we were befriending the enemies of Allah… there were all these conspiracy theories.

“It made my work hard but I pushed on and because of that I was labelled a liberal, a pro-Christian.”

Mujahid said he would not have come to the drastic decision of spearheading GHB if there were not a team of like-minded PAS leaders and grassroots members who did not like what PAS had become.

Their roadshows around the country, he said, were being discussed among PAS members and some asked how even former party deputy president Mohamad Sabu could be kicked out after the many sacrifices he had made.

“In Johor, 80% of the grassroots are with us because they don’t like the situation. The PAS Supporters’ Congress, which is my brainchild, will come over to us. Many more will come.”

Amid these developments, Mujahid said life went on as usual in his Parit Buntar constituency, where the electorate cared more whether he could make time for them.

“They don’t care much about what was going on as long as they see you as a good person and a good elected rep who can attend to them. They will only be concerned and upset when they invite you for buka puasa or a kenduri and you don’t show up.”

Like the other progressive leaders, Mujahid has been busy speaking to people around the country about the New Hope Movement and has not been able to hold any interfaith events lately.

He said after he lost his position in the party leadership, Penang Bishop Sebastian Francis told him in a text message that he would pray for him and he must move on.

“The relationship (between us) is still on,” he said, promising that his interfaith work would continue and should be easier in the new party they were mooting with his track record with communities of different faiths. – July 19, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 20 July 2015, 4:59 am and is filed under
PAS
,
Political Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Thoughts At The End of Ramadan – On Being A Muslim

M. Bakri Musa

www.bakrimusa.com

A Muslim is one who subscribes to the five pillars of our faith – attests to the oneness of Allah and Prophet Muhammad, s.a.w., as His Last Messenger (shahadah); prays five times a day; fasts during Ramadan; gives zakat; and conditions permitting, undertakes the Hajj.

      Significant for its absence is any explicit reference to the Koran, the complete and final guide from God “for all mankind, at all times, and till the end of time.”

     The essence of the Koran is Al-amr bi ‘l-ma’ruf wa ‘n-nahy ani ‘l-munkar. It is referred to many times in the text. The approximate translation is, “Command good and forbid evil;” or in Malay, “Biasakan yang baik, jauhi yang jahat.” Succinct and elegant in both languages as it is in the original classical Arabic!

     As this central message is not one of the five pillars of our faith, no surprise then that it is frequently missed by the masses. It is also often lost in the thick tomes of religious scholars, erudite sermons of bedecked ulamas, and frenzied jingoisms of zealous jihadists.

     Enlightened scholars of yore had suggested that the Koran’s essence be the sixth pillar, after and presumably below Hajj. That did not gain traction.

     As my Imam Ilyas reminded us in his Eid khutbah last Friday, those five pillars of Islam demand the least from us. They are the easiest undertakings. Shahadah could be executed in a single breath even for those unfamiliar with the Arabic tongue, while the daily prayers consume a few minutes longer. For those who consider the month-long Ramadan a challenge, consider that millions do without their meals every day, and with no end in sight. As for zakat and Hajj, both have finite and quantifiable costs.

     The greatest challenge for Muslims then is not those five imperatives rather to “command good and forbid evil.” That would demand the most from us. As such, it should be priority number one. For even if you were to diligently perform all those five traditional duties, but if you do not do good and refrain from evil, then all would be for naught.

     There is no point in donating zakat if your wealth is acquired through corruption. Whatever religious “brownie points” you would garner from that seemingly generous gesture could not begin to compensate for the loss to the family whose child had died because the money meant for the local hospital had been siphoned into your pocket. Likewise, you mock the sanctity of the Hajj if on returning you resume condemning your fellow believers even before the cough from your desert-induced irritated throat had not yet cleared up.

     A saying attributed to our prophet has it that a prostitute was admitted to Heaven because she once saved a dog dying of thirst by bringing it a bowl of water. Performing the rituals of the five pillars would not be a regular routine for someone like her. Yet an All-Forgiving and Generous Allah rewarded her for that single good deed.

     If that simple act of kindness is so esteemed, imagine how much more generous Allah would be to a veterinarian! Yet many were outraged when Muslim veterinary students were handling their ‘patient’ pigs and dogs.

     Philosophers through the ages, Muslims and non-Muslims, atheists and believers, have pondered the meaning of good and evil. Believers have also wrestled with the added issues of God’s will and individual responsibility.

     Al-Asha’ari posed this theological dilemma. Imagine a child and an adult in Heaven. The child asked God why the man was given that privilege. The reply was that he had done much good in his lifetime. (Note again the emphasis on doing good!) The child then asked why God had taken him so soon thus preventing him from doing good later in his life. To which the reply was that God knew that the child would become a sinner and thus spared him the terrible fate. Thereupon cries arose from those condemned, “Oh Lord! Why didn’t you take us before we became sinners?”

     While such ponderings make for vigorous class discussions, at the practical level the issue of good versus evil is clear and not at all complicated. Killing, stealing and cheating are all evil; improving the lot of your people, making sure that they have potable water, adequate shelter, good schools and competent healthcare, is good. Putting public funds into your bank account is evil. No equivocation there. Yet many go through contortions to make evil appear good. That in itself is evil.

     Jonathan A C Brown in his book Misquoting Muhammad relates an episode when the Grand Mufti of Al-Azhar was asked by the country’s powerful ruler about passages in the Koran and hadith to make his rule “Islamic.” Bring justice and prosperity to your people, the Grand Mufti replied, and I will find the appropriate verses to sanctify your policies as Islamic.

     Yes, bring justice, improve citizens’ lot, obey the rule of law and respect citizens’ rights, those are the proven paths to an Islamic state; not grandiose mosques, bloated religious departments, or Azzan blasting on your radios.

     As to whether going against a leader who is corrupt and abuses his power is good or evil, ponder the last line of Caliph Abu Bakar’s immortal inaugural speech. “Obey me so long as I obey Allah and His Messenger. And if I do not, then I have no right to your obedience.” (Approximate translation.)

     Do good not only to others but also equally important, to ourselves. That means nurturing and being generous to ourselves, while distancing from those who would harm and abuse us.

     “Others” refers both to the living as well as physical world around us. We can readily comprehend about being good to our fellow humans or other living creatures, but less appreciated is that we must also be good to our physical world. We are but trustees (vice-regents) of this universe, says the Koran.

     Illegal logging is evil not only because it is stealing from the people but also because the activity degrades the environment, causing erosion, silting of rivers, and consequent flooding. You may accrue untold riches from illegal logging and be generous in your zakat but those do not compensate for the miseries you caused fishermen whose fishing grounds are destroyed or families made homeless from the resulting floods.

     I prefer my own Malay translation of the golden rule. Its rhythmic alliteration aside, it is soft and subtle yet no less powerful, in tune with our culture. Biasakan yang baik, or make doing good your habit or norm. Meaning, not because you are commanded to do so, rather it’s in your nature or character.

      Likewise with jauhi yang jahat, or distancing ourselves from evil. We may not always be able to forbid evil, or doing so would impose considerable risks, but we all can move away from evil.

     Biasakan yang baik; jauhi yang jahat is truly a message for all mankind, at all times, and till the end of time. Joyous Hari Raya is an appropriate occasion to be reminded of this.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 20 July 2015, 4:31 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


“Aye” to Rahman’s new appointment as BN strategic communications director as he has made  more than half-dozen strategic errors in six days – at least one a day!

I say “aye” to Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Minister, Datuk Seri Abdul Rahman Dahlan’s new appointment as Barisan Nasional strategic communications director as he has made more than half-dozen strategic errors in six days – a most admirable rate of one strategic mistake a day.

It will not be easy to find such a bull in a China shop on  both sides of the political divide, and it’s a real boon that he has becoming BN strategic communications director.

Just to enumerate half-dozen strategic errors chalked up by the newly-minted BN strategic communications director in his six days in office:

1.	To regard former Sarawak journalist Lester Melanyi as a “god-send” not only to end Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s intractable woes from the long-standing 1MBD scandal but an excellent occasion for him to “debut” as Najib’s new right-hand man replacing Jarjis Jamaluddin and Lim Kok Wing. Rahman broke the first rule in failing to check  on Lester’s antecedents. Within 48 hours, he acknowledged Lester’s dubious character, which was why he could pen the infamous description “it takes a scum to know another scum”, defaming in the process  not only Sarawak Report’s Clare Brown but also the Sarawak leaders of Barisan Nasional and  even the Prime Minister himself.

2.	To accept Lester’s video as gospel truth – or to use Rahman’s own words, “solid evidence of ‘a mission to criminalise Najib and 1MDB” – when other more discerning UMNO/BN leaders have refused to fall prey to Lester’s ramblings and hallucinations. Last Wednesday, his first-day debut as BN strategic communications director, Rahman  made big play of Clare’s alleged incriminating email to Lester confessing to forgery of 1MDB emails and documents but this was only “a one-day wonder” as Rahman  is too ashamed to talk about it now  after  the issue had been  debunked by Clare.

3.	Lester told Rahman that he had worked actively with Sarawak Report’s Clare Rewcastle-Brown to falsify documents for use on the website, but Rahman never asked for examples of such tampered documents – which is a reflection on Rahman’s gullibility and total absence “strategic” sense.

4.	Rahman accepted without question Lester’s claim  that only 10 per cent of the 1MDB documents on Sarawak Report are genuine while the remaining 90 per cent are all “created by Malaysian people, the opposition people”. Rahman  clearly did not  realise the vast implications of such a statement as to ask why it had  not been possible to expose the lies and falsehoods of the various 1MDB allegations for the past five years if 90% of them are baseless? A “strategic” failure indeed.

5.	Blocking of Sarawak Report website by MCMC, which has helped even those not sure about the 1MDB allegations to be convinced that something is very wrong about the whole 1MDB scandal, and in particular the Prime Minister’s role in the various allegations by Sarawak Report, Wall Street Journal, the Australian Age, the New York Times, the London Sunday Times, etc. In fact, I cannot think of a greater “strategic” error than this violation of the 17-year Malaysian Bill of Guarantee to the world of “No Internet Censorship”, especially when the blockage could be so easily circumvented on the Internet.

6.	Seeking to “elevate” criticisms and allegations of the 1MDB scandal  as attempt to “criminalise the Prime Minister”, “topple the Prime Minister” and “an act of national sabotage”. It is a pity that UMNO leaders have not listened to the advice by former Deputy Prime Minister, Tun Musa Hitam, who said in an interview The Malaysian Insider on July 11 that Najib “must respond decisively to serious allegations made against him and his administration over various  issues, including 1MDB fiasco, instead of accusing detractors of seeking to topple his government”. As Musa noted, “toppling leaders and bringing down governments were part and parcel of politics”. I have had great differences with Mahathir and still do, but the Najib camp are doing neither the country nor themselves any service by accusing Mahathir or anyone who demand accountability for the 1MDB scandal and other issues as traitors and disloyal elements. This is indeed a major strategic error.

I will pause here about Rahman’s bounty of “strategic” errors as BN strategic communications director  even before his first week is completed.

In the war of perception, Rahman is  creating a hot-house atmosphere as if any meeting with the Swiss citizen and former PetroSaudi International (PSI) IT director, Xavier Andre Justo, immediately makes one a criminal and even a traitor.

I have never heard of Justo until the New Straits Times scoop of June 24 and  I do not know who have met Justo, but I see Rahman continuing to make one strategic error after another.

Rahman is expecting me to bail him out of the deep hole he has dug himself. There is no reason why I should throw Rahman a safety net for his numerous strategic errors.

If occasion arises,  I will continue to write more about Rahman’s other strategic faults.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 July 2015, 12:28 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


GHB is not PAS 2.0

 — L.S. Yap

The Malay Mail Online

July 20, 2015

JULY 20 — The fear that the new Islamic-leaning party Gabungan Harapan Baru (GHB) will be another religious party advocating theocracy is unfounded. There is a tendency amongst secularists to resort to fear mongering to skew the direction of national politics. The story is a familiar one: the participation of the religious political parties will pave the way for the degeneration of our democracy into a religious theocracy.

However, these fears are built on the assumption that the GHB and PAS can be simplistically banded together as Islamic parties for Malays. This is an unhelpful generalisation, with the dangerous potential to obfuscate rather than elucidate.

While PAS can be said to be principally a religious movement with its participation in democracy an instrument to achieving its objectives, GHB is a political party with religion to provide it with legitimacy. Politics is employed by PAS to give greater force to its religious movement, whereas religion is carefully used to legitimise the political mission of GHB.

In other words, religion is the raison de’etre of PAS, while the democratic wishes of its members, not religion, is the primary concern of GHB. Nowhere is this more clear from the top down and bottom up party structure of PAS and GHB respectively.

The hierarchical ranks of the PAS party structure reinforces top down communication. This is because religion is often used to smother contradictory claims made by dissenters. The Shura council, first established with the aim of a consultative role has become the dominant decision making authority, superseding even the constitutionally empowered body of elected representatives, the Central Executive Commitee (CEC).

These sentiments are echoed by Khalid Samad, a former CEC member of PAS and a key leader in spearheading the GHB initiative. According to him, “The Shura Council should only act as our reference or advisor. It can only decide on certain matter, not on daily operations”.

Moreover, during the Selangor Mentri Besar crisis, it was learnt that the Shura council made the unilateral decision to endorse PAS candidates for the top post. In the process, the CEC was sidelined. This seemingly innocent move actually demonstrates how deeply religious principles has pervaded party culture. It reduces accountability of decisions made by PAS leadership since members of the Shura Council do not have to go through a process of election and the mechanism of democratic accountability has been overridden.

Religion is used to override the constitution, and the party has descended into a dictatorial top down rule.

On the other hand, the composition of leadership in GHB are mostly ‘professionals’ who lack religious credentials. By severing the formal link between religion and party, GHB offers a much more democratic, bottom up party structure. By virtue of severing this crucial link, it can be expected that GHB’s conception of political Islam will be different from that offered by PAS.

This is similar to the New Komeito political party in Japan, part of the ruling coalition in Japan along with the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). Since the 1970s, it has maintained only informal ties with its parent Buddhist organisation Soka Gakkai. Through the dissociation of ties, religious authorities are unable to dictate party direction. However, in order to appeal to its strong Buddhist support base, the New Komeito continues to embody humanitarian Buddhist principles in its policy advocacy.

By advocating highly abstract Buddhist ideals, the New Komeito is able to simultaneously appeal to both its traditional Buddhist supporters and non-religious voters. This is the democratic constraint imposed on religious political parties. The incentive of electoral success provides a check against anti-democratic tendencies of religious theocracy, since religious political parties are motivated by increasing seats won during elections.

Despite being in its infancy, the GHB, set up to fill a vacuum of Malay votes in Pakatan Rakyat 2.0 is much more oriented to our democratic party system than PAS is.

What has emerged from our analysis is that GHB is not merely PAS 2.0. While both are religious parties in that they share Islamic ideals, GHB is likely to be a democratic party with informal ties to religion through its strong Islamic voter base. Meanwhile, since religion is sanctified in the party constitution of PAS, PAS is primarily a religious movement.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 July 2015, 7:00 am and is filed under
PAS
,
Political Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Keris waving: A decade later

— Liew Chin Tong

The Malay Mail Online

July 20, 2015

JULY 20 — A decade ago on 20th July 2005, the then Umno Youth chief Hishammudin Hussein gave his infamous keris-wielding speech during the Umno Youth General Assembly, in a gesture that has come to symbolise Umno’s turn to right-wing politics since then.

His act of Keris waving is arguably the image that defined the last decade of Malaysian politics. Coupled together with Umno’s right turn, it paved the way for Umno’s dramatic decline.

The Keris waving act was part of the push to the right by certain groups within Umno  during the 2005 Umno General Assembly.

The resolution of the said General Assembly was the introduction of a “Malay Agenda” and the reintroduction of the New Economic Policy, which had been downplayed in the early 1990s .

The keris waving act and Umno’s right turn did not gain Umno much new Malay support as the Malay middle ground dislikes harsh and extreme acts.

Umno’s so-called “Malay Agenda” did not improve the lives of ordinary Malays in the last decade but instead resulted in more severe wastages, scandals and corruptions in the name of advancing Bumiputra economic interests.

The recent 1Malaysia Development Berhad scandal is but the tip of the iceberg.

Umno’s persuit of right-wing rhetoric has dramatically worsened ethnic relations in the last decade. The seeds of the Low Yat incident were arguably sowed a decade ago during Umno’s turn to the right.

But electorally, taking a harsh racial line has not helped Umno at all, as proven in the 2008 and 2013 General Elections.

By championing extreme positions in public policies and rhetoric since a decade ago, Umno has kissed a permanent goodbye to ethnic Chinese and Indian voters.

Umno is also seen as bidding farewell to the Dayak in Sarawak and Kadazans in Sabah.

The one symbolic act a decade ago that symbolised Umno turning to the right , also spelled the death of Barisan Nasional.

I often wonder what goes on in the heads of Barisan Nasional strategists.

Between the announcement of Vision 2020 in February 1991 and July 2005, there was a period of 14 years when national politics were relatively non-racial and Umno leaders were at least seen trying to project an inclusive image, whatever the substance was.

The Middle Ground approach paid off for Barisan Nasional electorally.

The last decade since July 2005 has been wasted in terms of an inclusive nation-building agenda.

It is time for us to build a new Malaysia again, starting from the middle.

* Liew Chin Tong is DAP National Political Education director and MP for Kluang.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 July 2015, 7:03 am and is filed under
Hishammuddin
,
Malaysian Dream
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Menjawab mereka yang skeptikal isu parti baru

Khalid Samad

Malaysiakini

20 Jul 2015

Kebelakangan ini saya banyak ‘terbaca’ tulisan seorang yang bernama Fathi Aris Omar. Tulisannya telah ‘diwhatsappkan’ kepada saya oleh seorang kenalan yang meminta saya memberi komen balas.

Jarang saya berminat untuk respon tulisan orang yang tidak saya kenali, tetapi setelah membaca beberapa tulisannya, saya merasakan ada keperluan untuk saya respon bukan sahaja kepada beliau tetapi kepada mereka yang turut berfikiran skeptikal seperti beliau.

Skeptikal dan sinis

Saya lihat saudara Fathi begitu skeptikal dan agak sinis terhadap penubuhan sebuah ‘parti Islam’ sehingga sanggup juga melayani andaian dan tuduhan bahawa parti baru ini mungkin akan dijadikan alat oleh DAP.

Bahawa kononnya parti Islam ini boleh disergah-sergah dan dijadikan ‘junior partner’. Tuduhan sebegini lebih sesuai ditaja oleh penulis upahan Umno/BN dari seorang yang saya difahamkan adalah penyokong Pakatan Rakyat.

Maka adakah persepsinya terhadap DAP mungkin telah diwarnai prejudis yang diceduk dari silibus BTN atau ‘otak Umno’?

Malangnya kebelakangan ini, dilihat ada juga beberapa pimpinan PAS yang menzahirkan corak pemikiran yang sama.

Sebenarnya kalau tidak setuju sekalipun, tidak perlu dibuat tuduhan murahan dan simplistik seperti itu. Lebih baik memberi tumpuan pada persoalan perbezaan pandangan dan berusaha memahaminya dari menabur tanggapan yang negatif sebegini.

Walaupun saya faham kebimbangan Fathi berhubung kemungkinan kemunculan sebuah parti baru dalam masa terdekat ini dan bagaimana ia mungkin menjejas peluang Pakatan, namun tidak perlu untuk beliau atau sesiapa sahaja menjadi agen BN dengan menyebar prejudis terhadap DAP.

Dua soalan yang perlu dijawab

Buat masa ini saya tidak mahu menjawab segala andaian dan persoalan yang ditimbulkan dalam tulisan saudara Fathi. Saya merasakan tidak perlu untuk menjawabnya.

Bagi saya, yang perlu adalah untuk beliau sendiri dan sesiapa sahaja yang skeptikal terhadap parti Islam baru untuk menjawab, secara ikhlas dan jujur, dua persoalan yang ditimbulkan oleh dirinya sendiri dalam tulisannya.

Dua soalan ini sekiranya dijawabnya secara jujur mungkin akan dengan sendirinya menghilangkan sebahagian besar dari kegelisahan yang telah beliau timbulkan dalam tulisan beliau.

Dua soalan yang ditimbulkan dalam tulisan Saudara Fathi tetapi mungkin tidak sanggup dijawabnya adalah:

1. “Apakah PAS mampu mempertahankan kerusi-kerusinya khususnya di pantai barat Semenanjung?”

2. “Apakah PAS dapat dipercayai untuk menyakinkan kita bahawa ia masih releven sebagai pembangkang sekali lagi khususnya di pantai barat Semenanjung?”

Kedua-dua soalan ini telah ditimbulkan dalam tulisannya yang pertama. Saya terus membaca tulisannya yang kedua dan ketiga berhubung isu pembentukan parti baru dengan harapan bahawa 2 persoalan ini akan dijawabnya sendiri.

Malangnya ia terus tidak dijawab! Saya tidak boleh menolak kemungkinan bahawa saudara Fathi khuatir sekiranya dia menjawabnya, maka jawapannya adalah ‘TIDAK’ bagi kedua-dua soalan tersebut.

Mungkin oleh kerana ingin meneruskan sikap skeptikal dan sinisnya, maka beliau tidak mahu menjawabnya. Boleh dikatakan ia bagaikan keadaan ‘denial’ atau penafian terhadap kenyataan yang telahpun disedarinya dan juga sebahagian besar penyokong Pakatan dan PAS.

Implikasi jawapan ‘tidak’ bagi soalan (1)

Sekiranya jawapan kepada soalan pertama adalah ‘TIDAK’ maka sudah pasti persoalan ‘parti baru’ menjadi sesuatu yang sangat releven! Lebih-lebih lagi apabila diakui bahawa parti baaru yang mendukung konsep seperti “PAS for all” mempunyai peluang lebih cerah untuk mencapai kemenangan!

Hakikatnya, jawapan ‘TIDAK’ adalah atas disebabkan sikap dan pendekatan yang ditunjukkan pimpinan utama PAS terhadap rakyat dan Pakatan Rakyat kebelakangan ini telah berubah!

Hasil dari perubahan ini maka PAS akan kehilangan undi Melayu dan bukan Melayu dan oleh itu mungkin akan kalah di kawasan yang telah ia menanginya sebelum ini. Sekiranya begitu, maka tidakkah penubuhan parti baru yang meletakkan Islam sebagai dasar perjuangannya merupakan usaha ke arah memenang atau mengekalkan kembali kerusi ini untuk Pakatan di kawasan tersebut?

Atau adakah dianggap kekalahan dan kemenangan BN di kerusi ini tidak penting dan mampu ditampung oleh kemenangan di kerusi PKR dan DAP. Tidakkah saudara Fathi sedar, bahawa prestasi PKR juga akan turut terjejas oleh ‘perangai’ PAS, lebih-lebih lagi sekiranya PKR dilihat terlalu tunduk kepada PAS?

Implikasi jawapada ‘tidak’ bagi soalan (2)

Yang lebih tragis lagi adalah sekiranya jawapan kepada soalan kedua turut dijawab ‘TIDAK’. Ini bermakna PAS sudah tidak boleh dipercayai untuk terus releven sebagai pembangkang di Pantai Barat Semenanjung. Dalam erti-kata lain, tiada jaminan PAS akan kommitted kepada PR setelah menang.

Oleh itu, kredibiliti PAS sabagai sebuah parti yang kommited kepada Pakatan turut akan dipertikaikan berdasarkan pengalaman lalu dan sekiranya begitu maka tidakkah penubuhan parti baru yang perjuangkan Islam merupakan penyelesaian kepada dilema ini?

Apa guna susah payah memenangkan PAS; tetapi selepas menang, peristiwa seperti 2008 dan lebih jelas lagi selepas 2013 akan berulang kembali? Mungkin juga dahulu masih terdapat lagi golongan ‘progresif’ untuk menghalang, tetapi sekarang?

Sekiranya secara ikhlas saudara Fathi dan sesiapa juga yang menyokong perjuangan Islam untuk boleh menjawab bahawa jawapannya adalah sebaliknya, iaitu PAS tetap akan tetap menang dan boleh dipercayai tetap releven sebagai pembangkang di Pantai Barat, maka beliau dan sesiapa sahaja berhak bersikap skeptikal dan sinis terhadap persoalan pembentukan ‘parti baru’.

Tetapi sekiranya jawapannya adalah ‘TIDAK’, sepertimana sewajarnya, maka sepatutnya saudara Fathi menyambut baik dan menyokong usaha penubuhan parti baru ini.

Saya cadangkan supaya saudara Fathi menjawab dua soalan yang ditanya dirinya sendiri dan selepas itu melihat kembali segala persoalan sampingan yang ditimbulkannya.

Termasuklah persoalan tindakan DAP yang ingin ‘memaksa’ PKR membuat pilihan antara PAS dan ‘golongan progressif’. Fathi menganggap ia tiada kena-mengena dengan PKR. Adakah sikap tersebut wajar?

Sekiranya dijawab dua soalan tadi terlebih dahulu, mungkin Fathi akan faham bahawa persoalan pertelingkahan di antara PAS dan DAP yang dianggap tidak ada kena mengena dengan PKR adalah sebaliknya.

Ia persoalan kemantapan dan potensi kemenangan Pakatan Rakyat yang jelas hubung-kaitnya secara terus dengan PKR! Oleh itu sikap yang tegas dari PKR amat sangat diperlukan dan itulah sebabnya DAP bagaikan ‘memaksa’.

Persoalan menarik rambut dalam tepung

Adakah saudara Fathi menganggap suasana ‘menarik rambut dalam tepung’ merupakan keadaan dan suasana yang ideal yang ingin dikekalkan dan dibanggakan, di mana PKR ditempelak PAS berkali-kali dan PKR tidak bertindak balas?

Walaupun rambut tidak putus dan tepung kononnya tidak berselerak tetapi adakah suasana sebegitu menambahkan keyakinan rakyat terhadap Pakatan Rakyat?

Adakah memadai dengan PKR tidak bertindak balas, tidak seperti DAP dengan kaedah ‘tokong’nya, untuk meyakinkan rakyat bahawa Pakatan merupakan gabungan yang mantap?

Tidakkah sepatutnya Saudara Fathi dan rakyat Malaysia secara amnya mengidamkan satu suasana di mana wujudnya sikap saling menghormati dan kejujuran dalam berpakat di antara parti politik di negara kita ini? Ini boleh direalisasikan dengan kewujudan ‘parti baru’ ini.

Saya tidak hairan DAP inginkannya dan dengan itu usaha ini disokong oleh mereka. Saya dan rakan-rakan juga inginkannya, bukan kerana DAP tetapi demi masa depan negara.

Yang saya hairan ialah sikap saudara Fathi yang seolah-olah berpuashati dengan amalan ‘tarik rambut dalam tepung’ dan leka melakukannya.

Sekadar kewujudan Pakatan, walau dalam apa keadaan sekalipun, tidak akan menjamin kemenangannya dalam PRU ke-14. Keadaan dan kualiti kewujudannya adalah juga penting! Kalau sentiasa menarik rambut dalam tepung, dalam setiap keputusan dan tindakan, sudah pasti kelemahan pakatan itu jelas untuk ditonton semua.

Nilai tambah parti baru

Saudara Fathi turut bertanya, apa ‘added value’ yang dibawa oleh parti baru ini? Sebenarnya ia bukan soal added value tetapi lebih ‘memaksimakan nilai atau value sedia ada’ yang diusahakan. Pakatan merupakan harapan rakyat untuk mengalahkan BN.

Tetapi Pakatan sudah tidak lagi wujud secara rasmi. PAS dan DAP tidak mungkin berdamai dan ada yang tidak inginkan mereka ini berdamai! Maka nilai Pakatan Rakyat sudah tidak seperti dulu. Sudah jatuh merudum.

Rakyat sudah tidak lagi yakin untuk memberi undi kepada mereka selagi satu gabungan yang mampu berkerjasama tidak diwujudkan. Walaupun sokongan dan keinginan untuk perubahan sememangnya ada, tetapi rakyat tidak sanggup keluar dari mulut buaya masuk ke mulut singa.

Mereka mahu menyaksikan satu gabungan dan kerjasama yang kukuh. Ini yang sedang diusahakan selama ini melalui PAS. Tetapi pimpinan PAS tidak memahami dan tidak inginkannya.

Di sini peranan ‘Parti Baru’! Mengisi kelompangan ini. Membentuk Pakatan 2.0 yang mampu berkerjasama secara jujur. Bermusyawarah dan tidak ponteng mesyuarat serta tidak ‘reverse’ keputusan mesyuarat. Membina keyakinan rakyat. Mendapat undi rakyat. Mengalahkan BN.

Beza ‘Parti Baru’ dengan PAS hanya satu. Akidahnya sama, dasar perjuangan sama, kefahaman terhadap Islamnya sama. Yang membezakan hanyalah kejujuran berkerjasama dan komitmen kepada kaedah tahalluf siyaasi dan konsep Pakatan.

Persoalan terakhir

Yang terakhir saya ingin bertanya saudara Fathi dan mereka yang masih lagi skeptikal satu soalan mudah, soalannya begini:

Dalam keadaan kita mengakui bahawa yang sedia ada adalah tempang dan tidak mencukupi untuk menjamin kemenangan, tiba-tiba kita berhadapan dengan peluang untuk mencapai sesuatu yang lebih baik! Tidakkah sepatutnya kita mengusahakannya? Dan segala rintangan perlu dilihat sebagai cabaran yang perlu dihadapi secara bersama?

Perlu ada keberanian dan keyakinan diri. Bahawa yang lebih baik itu boleh tercapai sekiranya diusahakan bersama dan segala tohmahan dan persepsi negatif akan dapat ditangani. Bukan sekadar melalui kata-kata, tetapi melalui aksi dan tindakan.

Perlu juga ada keyakinan terhadap pertolongan dari Allah. Bahawa Allah yang Maha Mengetahui dan Maha Berkuasa akan menjayakan usaha hambaNya yang dilakukan secara ikhlas dan bersungguh-sungguh.

Saya yakin, dengan sokongan dan kerjasama semua pihak, insyaAllah kita akan berjaya! Berjaya mewujudkan satu Pakatan dan kerjasama yang mampu mengalahkan BN dalam PRU-14.

InsyaAllah. Ini jauh lebih baik dari kita mempertahankan gabungan yang sudah tiada, yang kita semua akui bahawa mempunyai harapan cerah untuk kalah.

KHALID SAMAD MP Shah Alam dan bekas anggota jawatankuasa PAS pusat. Artikel ini disiarkan dalam blognya semalam.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 July 2015, 6:06 am and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
,
Political Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tribute to Ho Kay Tat and shame to Liow Tiong Lai

The publisher and Group CEO of The Edge Media Group, Ho Kay Tat put it very bluntly that  when faced with evidence that what was supposed to be a joint venture that will bring economic benefits to the country turned out to be nothing more than a scheme to scam billions of ringgit from Malaysia by a small group of Malaysians and their foreign partners, the Edge Media Group had two choices:

1) Drop the matter like a hot potato and walk away, or

2) Get hold of everything so that the truth can be uncovered.

To their eternal credit as well as the gratitude of all decent and honest Malaysians who want to be able to hold their heads high in a country  where ethical, moral and religious values are not just meant for the pulpits but are the compass of everyday living, the Edge decided to pursue the truth.

This is the time for all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, region, gender, age  or even politics, to give full support to the Edge journalists over whom hang the Sword of Damocles  for their search for the truth in the 1MDB scandal and make it known to all and sundry that Malaysians will walk all the way with them in the search for the truth.

If high-handed and arbitrary actions are taken against the Edge, then it is time for Malaysians to stand up for their citizenship rights to defend the constitutional principles upon which this nation was founded.

At the same time as Malaysians pay tribute and express support and solidarity with  Ho Kay Tatt and the journalists in the Edge, we must express our shame and outrage at the stand taken by Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai, the MCA President and Transport Minister, in defending the government’s move to block access to the whistleblower site Sarawak Report.

Nobody advocates absolute freedoms and all media, whether printed or electronic, must act responsibly and have no right to fabricate news.

What is totally unacceptable is Liow’s rejection of the maxim that a person is innocent until proven guilty by declaring that Sarawak Report has now to clear up the issue  on whether it had fabricated documents for its articles critical of 1MDB, when the onus is on 1MDB and  the Government to prove the existence of fabricated documents.

Liow has tomorrow’s Cabinet meeting to undo his betrayal of the constitutional principles on which  this nation’s founding fathers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak, Tun Tan Cheng Lock and Tun V. T. Sambanthan founded this nation in 1957, joined by Sarawak and Sabah founding fathers in the formation of Malaysia in 1963.

All journalists in the Star should  dissociate themselves from the stand taken by Liow Tiong Lai, who as MCA President is also  head of the Star, on the government decision to block access to Sarawak Report.

A darkness is descending on Malaysia.

This a time for all Malaysian patriots, regardless of race, religion, region, age, gender or politics to be prepared  to exercise their constitutional rights to stand up and speak up  for truth,  justice and freedom in Malaysia.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 July 2015, 6:42 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Good Governance
,
Media
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


We could not walk away on finding out about the scheme to cheat Malaysia of billions of ringgit

The Malaysian Insider

21 July 2015

The Edge had reported extensively on 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) in 2013 and 2014 as it emerged that the government-owned entity had run into financial difficulties.

Information was, however, scarce and limited because its annual audited financial reports were consistently late.

Our journalists have met various contacts and pored through whatever available information they could get hold of in search of the truth.

Early this year, we were told someone was willing to share information that will shed light on 1MDB’s joint-venture with PetroSaudi International. We were not told who he was before we met him.

This person, whom we shall not name, showed us thousands and thousands of emails and document attachments.

We read scores of them and were convinced of their authenticity because of the sheer volume and the email trails.

We subsequently had an IT forensic expert confirmed that there was no reason to worry that they were fakes.

What we read shocked us. What was supposed to be a joint venture that will bring economic benefits to the country was nothing more than a scheme to scam billions of ringgit from Malaysia by a small group of Malaysians and their foreign partners.

At that point, we could do one of two things:

1) Drop the matter like a hot potato and walk away, or

2) Get hold of everything so that the truth can be uncovered.

We decided we had to pursue the truth.

As Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Tun Musa Hitam and Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah said recently, those who have information that can lead to the truth must speak out and not look the other way. Not reporting a wrong doing is a crime.

Even Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin have said they want to get to the truth.

As a media group, we believe we have a public duty to do, no matter how difficult and dangerous it may be for us.

Meeting contacts to gather information is what media professionals do all the time in pursuit of a story. There is nothing wrong or sinister.

We were not involved in any theft, we did not pay anyone, and we did not tamper any of the emails and documents we were given.

In fact, we have secured the data so that no one can tamper with them. This can be independently verified by the authorities.

Some of the information have been used in articles we have published in the last few months. Some were just too sensitive to be used. None of the articles have been challenged by anyone named in these stories.

Indeed, we believe our articles have been of help to the various government agencies looking at 1MDB.

There is no political agenda or conspiracy in what we have done. In fact, we have engaged with various politicians and government officials who have sought our help to get a better understanding of what had happened and the situation 1MDB is in today.

The easiest thing we could have done after coming across what we found, was to walk away. Why look for trouble? But we could not do that.

We chose to take the difficult path, one that we knew will be fraught with risks to ourselves personally and to our organisation, which now faces the possibility of action by the Home Ministry.

On Monday, we handed documents, printed emails and a hard disc to Bank Negara. Today, the same set was given to the Commercial Crime Investigation Department (CCID) of the Police. I also gave a statement to CCID.

We are comforted that the various investigators, the Auditor-General, the Public Accounts Committee, Bank Negara, the police, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and the Attorney-General have given their commitment to uncover the truth without fear or favour.

It is, indeed, their responsibility and their duty to the people of Malaysia to do just that. Just as it was our duty to pursue the story.

Ho Kay Tat

Publisher & Group CEO

The Edge Media Group – July 21, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 July 2015, 5:22 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Media
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Will Cabinet tomorrow discuss the violation of Malaysia’s Bill of Guarantee to the world of “No Internet censorship” in blocking access to Sarawak Report or no Minister would dare to express disagreement?

Will the Cabinet tomorrow discuss the violation of Malaysia’s 17-year Bill of Guarantee to the world of “No Internet censorship” in blocking access to Sarawak Report website or no Minister would dare to express disagreement?

In fact, it is not only the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak who is under a “cloud” with regard to his commitment to the principles of accountability, transparency, integrity and good governance (which are supposed to be the foundation principles of his highly-hyped National Transformation Programme), the integrity of the  entire Cabinet is also under question.

This will be the first time in Malaysian history that the integrity of the entire Cabinet has come under a cloud.

Yesterday, I asked the newly-minted Barisan Nasional strategic communication director and Minister for Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government, Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan whether he could “declare publicly that he and UMNO Sabah had not received a single sen from Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s personal accounts in AmBank for the 13th General Election campaign”, referring in particular to the Wall Street Journal (WSJ)  report of July 2 that Malaysian government investigators have found US$700 million (RM2.6 billion) deposited into the Prime Minister’s personal bank accounts in March 2013  just before the dissolution of Parliament and  the holding of the 13th General Election.

It is no surprise that there is thunderous silence from Abdul Rahman on this question.

In fact, this question should also be directed to all Ministers in the Cabinet.

Can  every  Cabinet Ministers declare whether or not he or she had received any funding from Najib through the Prime Minister’s personal accounts in AmBank for the 13th General Election campaigning, and if so, to state the amount and whether the Cabinet Ministers concerned would  not participate in any Cabinet discussion or decision relating to the WSJ report on July 2 and 1MDB scandal, in view of their conflict-of-interest position?

Yesterday,  former Prime Minister Tun Mahathir blogged about the WSJ report that RM2.6 billion deposited into Najib’s personal accounts in Marcy 2013, saying:

“ There is no denial that money was deposited in the private account. The explanation to UMNO is that it was for the elections. UMNO seems satisfied. Don’t they know that Government money cannot be used to help a political party to win elections? But the money was from donation. Who donated 2 billion Ringgit? No answer.”

What is the response of the high-powered  special task force investigation into the WSJ report and 1MDB into this revelation by the former Prime Minister?

Were the funds in Najib’s personal accounts used for 13th General Election campaigning by all Barisan Nasional candidates or only for UMNO candidates?

If the former, there would not a single  Cabinet Minister who would qualify to be involved in any Cabinet discussion or decision relating to the WSJ report and 1MDB as every Cabinet Minister would be  tainted with “conflict-of-interest” situation.

If it is the latter where only UMNO candidates benefitted from the funding in Najib’s personal bank accounts, then all the UMNO Ministers, including the Prime Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin should  withdraw and  not participate in any Cabinet discussion or decision relating to the WSJ report and 1MDB scandal.

In such a situation,  a Minister from Sarawak or Sabah should chair the Cabinet meeting to decide what should be the appropriate government response to the WSJ report and 1MDB scandal.

Among the questions such a non-UMNO Cabinet should decide is whether the “special task force” should be replaced by a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the WSJ allegations and the 1MDB scandal.

This is because nobody really knows what are terms of reference, powers, scope or even worse, the composition of the “special task force”, whether it comprises four or only three agencies – whether the Attorney-General Chambers’ is part of the “special task force” or only  Bank Negara Malaysia, the Royal Malaysian Police and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission.

When the “special task force” was first announced, Malaysians were told that it comprised four agencies and would be headed by the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Gani Patail.

But this appears to be contradicted when former Attorney-General Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman on Thursday called on Gani to dissociate himself from the special task force, as it was not desirable for Gani, as the public prosecutor, to be a member of the task force.

Abu Talib reminded Gani that the role of the public prosecutor concerning investigations was to determine whether there was sufficient evidence to charge offenders, and this was a check-and-balance principle that ensured justice for all.

In a joint statement on the same day by the other three Tan Sris on the special task force, namely, Bank Negara Malaysia governor Tan Sri Zeti Akhtar Aziz, Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission chief commissioner Tan Sri Abu Kassim Mohamed, they stressed that  there is no issue of the Attorney-General influencing the ongoing probe into the WSJ report and 1MDB as the Attorney-General is only referred to for guidance and legal advice to ensure the investigation is done holistically and in accordance to the law.

One would therefore assume that the special task force is not a four-agency but a   three-agency body, and that the Attorney-General is not head of the special task force.

But comments from Cabinet Ministers in the past few days show that  as far as they are concerned, the Attorney-General is still head of the special task force.

What is the actual situation –  Is the Attorney-General the head of the special task force or not, and if not, who is the head?

It does not inspire confidence that the Najib Government is serious in wanting to get to the bottom of the WSJ report and 1MDB scandal when Malaysians cannot get a quick answer to such a simple and straightforward question.

The strongest reasons why the special task force should be replaced by a Royal Commission of Inquiry of independent and credible Malaysians are firstly, the special task force comprise officers who are subordinate to the Prime Minister who is the subject  of the inquiry; and secondly, all the four agencies, the Attorney-General Chambers, Bank Negara Malaysia, the Royal Malaysian Police and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission should themselves be the subject of investigation for their negligence and failure to act promptly to uphold the law with regard to the substance of the  WSJ report and 1MDB scandal.

With such an ominous  background, one should not only ask whether the Cabinet tomorrow would  overrule the  Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) for violating  Malaysia’s 17-year Bill of Guarantee to the world of “No Internet censorship” and direct it to stop  blocking access to Sarawak Report website, but whether all the Ministers, UMNO and non-UMNO, would declare their interests – whether they are  tainted from participating in any Cabinet discussion and decision on the WSJ report and 1MDB scandal because they had received funding from Najib’s personal bank accounts for the 13th General Election campaigning.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 July 2015, 10:10 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Seeking a meeting with Najib on establishment of Royal Commission of Truth and Reconciliation on the Low Yat Race Riot  to ensure that there will be no recurrence of race riots because of petty crimes

I have written to the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak seeking a meeting on the establishment of a Royal Commission of Truth and Reconciliation on Low Yat Race Riot to ensure that there will be no recurrence of race riots because of petty crime.

In my email to the Prime Minister, I also suggested that the terms of reference of the Royal Commission of Truth and Reconciliation on the Low Yat Race Riot should include the following seven items:

•	How Malaysia can be a world model of a successful, united, peaceful and  harmonious multi-racial, multi-lingual, multi-religious and multi-cultural nation;

•	Whether the police could have acted pre-emptively to prevent the petty crime of mobile phone theft from being transformed into a race riot involving a few hundred people;

•	The attack on journalists;

•	The role of social media with Ministers blaming it as a main culprit of the Low Yat Mob  Incident;

•	Whether one major cause of the Low Yat riot was the incessant incitement of hatred as a result of  irresponsible politics of race and religion in recent years.

•	Whether the Low Yat Incident is proof of the failure of nation-building policies,  particularly the Prime Minister’s 1Malaysia signature policy and decades of Biro Tata Negara’s “racist” courses.

•	A blueprint to ensure that there will be recurrence of race riots from petty crimes, which is particularly important for a plural society like Malaysia.

Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz , former Cabinet Minister who was Minister for International Trade and Industry for two decades, had spoken up in the aftermath of the Low Yat Race Riot and warned that  Malaysia has everything to lose if it ever sees a repeat of the deadly May 13 race riots.

Rafidah will make an ideal chairperson for the Royal Commission on Truth and Reconciliation on Low Yat Incident, and there are many eminent and respected Malaysians who could make great contributions as  members of this commission, including Perlis mufti Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin, former Cabinet Minister  Tan Sri Dr. Rais Yatim, former Attorney-General Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman, former top civil servant Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam, NGO leader Datuk Seri Ambiga Sreenivasan, National Laureate   Samad Said and Bishop Paul Tan Chee Ing, Catholic Bishop for Malacca-Johor.

Malaysia as a country should discard the bad national habit of “denial syndrome” or  “sweeping under the carpet” unpleasant and unhealthy national events instead of facing frontally with the problems plaguing the country to deal with the root causes so as to find a long-term solution.

This was  the prevalent government attitude all these decades and why  there was no commission of inquiry to identify the causes of the  two major race riots of May 13, 1969 in Kuala Lumpur after the 1969 general election and the 2001 Kampong Medan riot in Selangor so as to prevent any future recurrence, but one example of “sweep things under the carpet” after another!

Sporadic  events and outbursts  after the  Low Yat Incident have highlighted  the folly of continuing with such “sweep things under the carpet” mentality and ignoring the root causes and the supporting factors conducive to the outbreak of racial incidents –  which must be taken seriously in a plural society like Malaysia.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 July 2015, 2:07 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Malaysian Dream
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Is it really new hope?

– Wan Saiful Wan Jan

The Malaysian Insider

21 July 2015

This Raya week marks the beginning of a more concerted effort by some towering figures in PAS to set up a new political party.

Calling themselves Gerakan Harapan Baru (GHB) or New Hope Movement, they have started a nationwide tour to speak to the public in all states across Malaysia.

The events in Kelantan and Perlis on Sunday received a very warm reception. Turnout was very good and people that I spoke too who attended the events were clearly excited.

PAS’s response to GHB is expected. They see it as a threat and they are painting GHB with bad light. This is sheer hypocrisy.

Various individuals in PAS, including their president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang, have gone overboard to insult their former colleagues who lost in the party elections in June.

Hadi was even quoted to use words such as “barua” and “tolol” when referring to the GHB leaders, albeit without mentioning them directly.

Some others claimed that the outcome of the party polls is a sign that God is helping PAS to “cleanse” the party.

But when they realise that GHB could become a threat, PAS changed their tack and started to get upset.

They are now saying that it is sinful to leave PAS to form a new party, despite earlier saying that they want them out anyway.

If GHB does end up forming a new party, the one person who will take the biggest blame will be Hadi. He will be remembered as a president who is completely impotent to prevent the break-up.

History will also record Hadi as one of the main causes of the break-up. When this party members were insulting each other, he did not urge restrain but he joined them.

I have never seen a party president who just does not care about the fate of his own party like Hadi.

Having said that, I must also put it on record that Hadi remains as one of the Islamic scholars that I respect.

Unfortunately when it comes to political acumen, Hadi has lost his marbles and I regret that he will be remembered for this political failure.

The GHB movement has committed to forming a new party. This will come with many hurdles and it will not be easy.

Registering a new party is a challenge by itself. Then there is the problem of grassroots machinery. The party will have to work hard to create their own campaign teams on the ground and this too is no easy task.

When I heard the results of the June party elections, I was hoping that those who lost would remain in the party.

I would have preferred if they allowed the conservatives full and free reign for two years.

That way, everyone will eventually realise that the conservatives are nothing but empty heads who have no real ideas to offer the country.

And during the two years, I was hoping that the progressives would turn themselves into an organised force to win back important posts in the next party election, just before the 14th general election.

But the PAS progressives seem very certain that the party is beyond redemption.

I have now realised that too. The reality is, PAS has always been a conservative party and they have only allowed the progressives to hold certain positions temporarily without the party changing its nature.

The progressives have miserably failed to change the party when they had the chance.

Ultimately, the progressives charted their own demise in PAS when they mistakenly refuse to educate party members about what progressiveness means.

They even refused to acknowledge the need to do it when they had the chance.

The formation of a new political party could signify a major shift in Malaysian politics.

But looking at the messages coming out from GHB leaders, I worry about another mistake that they are now making.

They are positioning themselves as a competitor to PAS. One of the GHB leaders, Khalid Samad, said that the only difference between them and PAS is their commitment to working with other partners and their commitment to the Pakatan Rakyat concept.

He also said that in terms of belief and understanding towards Islam they are the same.

This “PAS-but-different” strategy means that they are pitting themselves not against their bigger political enemies but against PAS.

Of course, PAS will go ape because this also means GHB will focus on stealing PAS’s members and voters.

When two parties who are supposedly on the same side fight each other, the only beneficiary is the party on the other side.

I do understand that the GHB leaders are looking at the next general election and therefore they want to fill in the gap left by PAS. But this is too short-sighted.

It would have been much better snd more sustainable if GHB were to position themselves as completely different from PAS and from all other parties in Malaysia.

Their real sign of success is if they can attract not just current PAS members, but also the progressives from Umno, PKR, DAP, Gerakan, Sarawak’s PBB, and all the other parties plus those who are not yet in any party.

Then only will they add real value to Malaysian politics.

Malaysians are tired of ethno-religious politics and obsession with one political overlord.

Malaysians are looking for a party that fight for universal values who will champion the rights of all of us.

Many are waiting to see if GHB can turn their Islamic rhetoric into universal messages acceptable to all.

This is the real challenge faced by those who want to take Malaysia into the next stage.

We may believe in different things. We are a diverse country and each one of us may lean towards different directions.

But we will all gather around those who can project a message of hope and unity.

If GHB positions themselves as just another Islamic party rivalling PAS, then I doubt they will survive in the long term. – July 21, 2015.

* Wan Saiful Wan Jan is chief executive of the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 July 2015, 4:43 am and is filed under
PAS
,
Political Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Puisi panjang harapan baru

A Shukur Harun

The Malaysian Insider

21 July 2015

Teman-temanku yang dikasihi

Petang itu aku berdiri di anjung masjid

Menyaksikan senja merah beransur hilang

Membawa pulang Ramadhan Kareem

Kutulis puisi ini dalam dakapan

Aidilfitri yang harum semerbak

Menebarkan kasih sayang sesama umat

Teman-temanku yang dikasihi

Detik yang lalu jangan ditangisi

Kerana ia bukan lagi bersama kita

“If you cry because the sun has gone out of your life”,

Your tears will prevent you

from seeing the stars,”

kata penyair dunia Rabindranath Tagore

Teman-temanku yang dikasihi

Dengan rahmat yang tersembunyi

Kita ditemukan dengan bahtera baru

Bernama Harapan Masa Depan

Sebuah badan politik bernuansa Islam

Yang akan memulakan perjalanan jauh kita

Untuk mendukung harapan rakyat

Teman-temanku yang dikasihi

Kamu ini bukan dari kumpulan terbuang

Tetapi emas tempawan yang tinggi nilainya

Kerana jasa dan pengorbanan

Keringat dan airmatamu selama ini

Terukir dalam sejarah dan tak akan terpadamkan

Kamu hadir dan mengalir mewarnai politk tanah air

Teman-temanku yang dikasihi

Kamulah juragan yang akan mengemudikan

Bahtera politik baru ini untuk sampai ke seberang

Di sana rakyat sedang menunggu penuh harapan

Merindukan keadilan, demokrasi dan kemakmuran

Bukan api perkauman dan kebencian

yang membakar segalanya

Teman-temanku yang dikasihi

Mari kita membawa rakyat kepada kehidupan baru

Kerana rakyat sudah lama

Terperangkap di lembah kemiskinan, ketidakadilan

Ketika pemimpin politik lama

Terus bergelut dengan krisis

Kerana mengamalkan politik kuno

Teman-temanku yang dikasihi

Kamulah sebenarnya pewaris

Wawasan pemimpin besar

Datuk Mohd Fadhil Noor dan Datuk Seri Nik Abd Aziz

Tokoh permata nilam

Yang meniupkan kasih sayang antara rakyat

Dengan politik “mewajahah silmiah”

Teman-temanku yang dikasihi

Di atas robohnya kota Melaka

Kita bangunkan jiwa merdeka

Di atas matinya Pakatan Rakyat

Kita bangunkan harapan baru

Untuk memenuhi janji

Kepada rakyat

Teman-temanku yang dikasihi

Kamu pemimpin Gerakan Harapan Baru

Jangan berlengah lagi

Seperti kata penyair Usman Awang

“Di depan duri di belakang api

Kita tidak boleh undur lagi.”

Seperti juga kata pujangga,

“You can’t cross the sea merely by standing

And staring at the water.”

Jangan lagi pandang ke belakang

Pandanglah ke depan

Di sana dunia baru sedang menanti. – 21 Julai, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 July 2015, 7:14 am and is filed under
Malaysian Dream
,
Political Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


RENUNG SIASAH (1)

Pak Samad

6 Julai 2015

Melayu dalam Dieypi

dituduh hanya Pak Pacak;

belum pun dimulai diari

dakwat sudah pun merebak.

Jerit ampu dari saku,

rindu diri jadi insan;

bisik khidmat dari qalbu:

tak pula yang lain setan.

Cuma hati runcing runsing

bulan puasa ada samseng?

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 July 2015, 5:13 am and is filed under
Pak Samad
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


RENUNG SIASAH (2)

Pak Samad

7 Julai 2015

Dewan Rakyat seeloknya

didakap haruman luhur;

pagi ini tengek baunya

sebab dihalang berjujur.

Atas lantai tepi Dewan

pembangkang tabah berlawan

disuluhnya sarang tipuan

dipetiknya kebenaran.

Maruah sebuah Dewan

tampak mula dirongakkan.

A. SAMAD SAID

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 July 2015, 7:01 am and is filed under
Pak Samad
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


RENUNG SIASAH (3)

Pak Samad

11 Julai 2015

Dewannya lusuh yang mega

hadirin rerata muda;

berbuka senikmat rasa

Kit dan aku antaranya.

Di atas pentas nan syahdu

Dyana, Rara bersyarah;

apa dilalu, dirindu

dibayangkan secanggihnya:

Mereka ingin memetik

Impian Bangsa yang molek.

11 Julai 2015 A. SAMAD SAID

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 July 2015, 7:26 am and is filed under
Pak Samad
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The new coalition of Malaysian progressives – whether Pakatan Rakyat 2.0, New Pakatan Rakyat or Harapan Rakyat – will be sequel to 13GE battle in 14GE  to   rekindle hopes and aspirations of Malaysians for political change in Putrajaya

Five days ago, I posed the question whether PAS could lose Kelantan in the next 14th General Election.

I said that based on the 13th General Election performance,  if there is a 4% swing of voters against PAS in Kelantan in the next poll, PAS will lose power in the state it had governed for 25 years since 1990.

Is a 4% swing in a state an unlikely happening?

In the 13th General Election in  Kedah, PAS and Pakatan Rakyat lost the Kedah State Government because there was a 3.8% swing of the voters against PAS.

The voter swing against PAS was even greater and more overwhelming during the 2004 General Election in Terengganu, where there was a 15% swing of voters against PAS, sweeping out the Terengganu PAS State Government after only one term of Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi as the Terengganu Mentri Besar.

There is no doubt that Pakatan Rakyat (PR) would have been wiped out in the next general election if Pakatan Rakyat had contested the next polls in total disregard of the violation of the PR Common Policy Framework by one of the component parties, with hudud as a controversial issue in the election campaign.

In fact, if there had been a violation of the PR Common Policy Framework before the 13th General Election, with hudud as a controversial issue, the results on May 5, 2013 would have  been very different – and PR would have lost the Selangor state government which would have reverted  back to UMNO/Barisan Nasional while at the national level, UMNO/BN would have regained  parliamentary two-thirds majority with far-reaching long-term political consequences.

The 1999 GE, where the non-Malay vote would have otherwise turned against the BN if the BN was not so successful in painting the image that a vote for the then Barisan Alternatif was a vote to support an Islamic state, should be a constant reminder what would have happened if hudud had been a controversial issue in the 13th General Election.

In such circumstances in the 13GE, the effect among Malay voters would be negligible, but the effect on non-Malay support would be quite devastating, leading to a loss of non-Malay voter support of  up to 20%.

Assuming an increase of 1% Malay support and decrease of 20% support among non-Malay voters in the 13th General Election, the ensuing political scenario on both the national and various state  scenes would be far-reaching.

Under such a scenario, instead of winning of a total of 89 Parliamentary seats or 40% of the total parliamentary seats, PR’s parliamentary score would have been slashed to 46 seats or 21%, with the UMNO/BN coalition regaining two-thirds parliamentary majority, enabling it to redelineate electoral constituencies to perpetuate its undemocratic hold on political power.

At the State Assembly level, the 229 State Assembly  seats in Peninsular Malaysia won by Pakatan  Rakyat would have been slashed to 134 State Assembly seats.

Although PR would retain Penang state government with 25 State Assembly seats (DAP 17, PKR 7, PAS 1) as compared to the 13GE total of 30 (DAP 19, PKR 10, PAS 1) , the Selangor state government would be lost back to Umno/Barisan, with the 13GE result of 44 PR seats (DAP 15, PAS 15, PKR 14) slashed to 21 (DAP 11, PAS 5, PKR 5).

The results in the other West Coast states would have been equally devastating.

In Johore, instead of the breakthrough winning 18 PR State Assembly seats (DAP 13, PAS 4, PKR 1) in the 13th General Election, the state  would revert back  to a “fixed deposit” state, with PR winning only 4 state assembly seats – all from DAP with nil seats for both PKR and PAS.

In Perak, the PR score of 28 state assembly seats (DAP 18, PKR 5, PAS 5)  in May 2013 would be slashed to 17 (DAP 14, PKR 2, PAS 1);  in Pahang, the PR  total of 12 seats (DAP 7, PAS 3, PKR 2) reduced to 4 (DAP 2, PAS 2, PKR 0); in Negri Sembilan, PR’s score of 14 (DAP 11, PKR 3, PAS 0) reduced to 6 (DAP 6, PKR 0, PAS 0); and  in Malacca, from 7 (DAP 6, PAS 1, PKR 0) reduced to 3 (DAP 3, PAS 0, PKR 0).

The PAS Muktamar resolution on June 3 to sever ties between PAS and DAP, coupled with PAS repeated violation of the PR Common Policy Framework resulting in the death of Pakatan Rakyat, has created a new political scenario.

There is now great expectation among the people throughout the country awaiting the Gerakan Harapan Baru (GHB) movement to launch a new political party to  rekindle new hopes of political change in Malaysia – hopes many feared had been  buried with the death of Pakatan Rakyat on June 3, 2015.

A new coalition of Malaysian progressives is awaiting to be born and DAP will co-operate with all progressive political forces and parties like PKR and the new party which progressive PAS leaders have announced will be formed in the next few weeks to form this new political coalition to save Malaysia from becoming a failed state because of rampant corruption, socio-economic injustices and the collapse of good governance in the country.

The new political coalition  –  whether Pakatan Rakyat 2.0, New Pakatan Rakyat or Harapan Rakyat  or whatever the name finally decided upon – will be a sequel to the  13GE battle in the 14th GE to   rekindle the hopes and aspirations of Malaysians for political change in Putrajaya.

(Speech to Penang  DAP State and branch  leaders at a meeting on the post-PR scenario and the future of Malaysia on “Re-Aligning Malaysia, Re-Imagining DAP” held   in Penang on Tuesday, 21st July 2015 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 July 2015, 6:48 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
,
PAS
,
Penang
,
PKR
,
Political Islam
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tony Pua, Rafizi Ramli and Tong Kooi Ong looking at criminal charges which may sent them to jail for up to 20 years

The police have said that DAP MP for PJ Utara Tony Pua, PKR MP for Pandan Rafizi Ramli and Edge Media Group owner Tong Kooi Ong are being investigated under Section 124 of the Penal Code.

A senior police source has confirmed with Malaysiakini that the three are being probed for alleged activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy.

Pua, Rafizi and Tong are looking at criminal charges which may sent them to jail for up to 20 years.

The offences of “activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy” are new-fangled offences in Sections 124B to 124N  introduced by the Penal Code (Amendment) Act 2012 which was passed by Parliament in 2012, given the Royal Assent on 18th June 2012 and gazetted on 22nd June 2012.

The main provisions are:

Section 124B: “Whoever, by any means, directly or indirectly, commits an activity detrimental to parliamentary democracy shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to twenty years.”

Section 124C: “Whoever attempts to commit an activity detrimental to parliamentary democracy or does any act preparatory thereto shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to fifteen years.”

Section 124D (1): “Whoever, by any means, directly or indirectly, prints, publicises, sells, issues, circulates or reproduces any document or publication detrimental to parliamentary democracy shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to fifteen years.”

Section 124E (1): “Any person who, without lawful excuse, has in his possession any document or publication detrimental to parliamentary democracy or any extract therefrom, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years.”

If any MP had asked whether the expose of the 1MDB scandal or any other scandal involving Ministers or even the Prime Minister could come under the new Penal Code offences of “activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy”, he or she would be regarded as mad or totally deficient in mental capacity.

Now, it would appear that madness has become a normality in certain circles in government.

Yesterday, I had said: “A darkness is descending on Malaysia.”

I had not expected the darkness to descend so fast.

I want to ask  Datuk Seri Najib Razak: Mr. Prime Minister, what are you turning Malaysia into?

Why do you want turn patriots into criminals?

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 July 2015, 7:26 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Law & Order
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


What Europe should learn from Malaysia and other Asian crises

— William Pesek

Malay Mail Online

Tuesday July 21, 2015

JULY 21 — Asian leaders could be excused a degree of exasperation over the ongoing Greek mess. China’s slowdown and stock-market chaos are worry enough; the last thing the export-dependent region needs is a Europe in chaos. Worse, European leaders seem intent on misreading or ignoring lessons from Asia’s own brush with collapse.

Greece’s financial odyssey

Of course, the circumstances in 1997 were quite different. Where Greece is insolvent, Asia then was illiquid. As capital fled, Thailand, Indonesia and South Korea suddenly couldn’t pay foreign-currency debts, much of it short-term. Still, there are at least three lessons officials in Athens and Brussels can learn from Asia’s post-crisis repairs.

One: The debate over austerity is a distraction. Pundits quarrelling over Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras’s motivations, or whether German Chancellor Angela Merkel has a heart, are missing the real issue: structural reform.

Asian countries are “watching the Greek crisis unfold with a mixture of envy and schadenfreude,” Korea University economist Lee Jong-Wha wrote in a recent op-ed. “When they experienced their own financial crisis, they received far less aid, with far harsher conditions. But they also recovered much more strongly.”

Protesters hold European Union and Greek flags during a Pro-Euro rally in front of the parliament building in Athens, Greece, July 9, 2015. — Reuters pic

Protesters hold European Union and Greek flags during a Pro-Euro rally in front of the parliament building in Athens, Greece, July 9, 2015. — Reuters pic

They did so not because of the harsh conditions imposed by the International Monetary Fund, which caused great pain among ordinary citizens, but despite them. For all the differences between their economies, Greece shares many similarities with 1997 Korea: endemic corruption, widespread tax avoidance, rigid labour movements, huge underground economies and oligarchs hoarding national wealth. Korea recovered by openly admitting the magnitude of its public and private debts and the amount of available cash in government coffers. Weak corporate links and politically connected banks were allowed to fail. Efforts were made to introduce greater transparency to the family-owned industrial groups known as chaebol, whose profligate ways had helped topple the economy. Tax collection became a national obsession, as did sacrifice: Millions of Koreans donated heirlooms, wedding rings, gold bars and artworks to help replenish the treasury. In April, Deutsche Welle ran a piece headlined “Koreans’ Gold Donations — a Model for Greeks?”

Two: Smaller economies are collateral damage. As Ian Bremmer predicted correctly in 2012 with “Every Nation for Itself: Winners and Losers in a G-Zero World,” the biggest players get their way. The US borrows, spends and exports its profligacy around the globe. Tokyo’s 35 per cent devaluation has turned Japan’s yen into Asia’s answer to the peso, neighbours be damned. Predatory trade practices mean China will long export infinitely more than it imports. Germany calls all the shots in Europe. That’s why, like Thailand, Indonesia and Korea, Greece’s only choice is to modernize its economy.

Here, Malaysia presents a cautionary tale. The country managed to avoid an IMF bailout by imposing Greece-like capital controls. But 18 years later, the perceptions of cronyism, dysfunction and opacity that prompted capital to flee persist in many quarters. The mushrooming scandal surrounding state investment company 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) seems to underscore the lack of reform in a resource-rich nation with as much potential as any in Asia.

Even if Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak is innocent—as he insists—of charges that nearly US$700 million (RM2.6 billion) in 1MDB funds flowed into his personal accounts, the government’s handling of the crisis suggests Malaysia is stuck in the 1990s. Greece can leave the euro, or stick it out. What it can’t do is defend the status quo and hope to remain competitive or relevant.

Three: Bite the bullet now, not later. In 1998, Korea’s real gross domestic product plunged 6.7 per cent. In 1999, it surged 9.5 per cent. Money returned because investors saw Seoul acting boldly to build a more open and sustainable economy. The reforms didn’t go far enough; the chaebol are still too dominant and stymie innovation. Yet by 2003, as Korea University’s Lee points out, the government had shuttered some 776 financial institutions. Five years into its crisis, how much has Athens done to purge its excesses?

The rest of Europe can go ahead and write more checks to Greece, demand that Athens cut this and slash that. But things will end badly for the euro zone if Greece doesn’t address its underlying problems. Asia’s experience is proof that denial and ill-timed austerity fix nothing. — Bloomberg

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 July 2015, 4:38 am and is filed under
Finance
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A Scandal In Malaysia Spurs Credibility Crisis

By Giulia Zino

Forbes

7/21/2015

SINGAPORE – Malaysia has generated a considerable volume of negative press coverage over the past year, but none as eye-catching as the recent scandals surrounding controversial debt-ridden sovereign investment company 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB). After brewing for months, the 1MDB saga took a startling turn on July 2 when the Wall Street Journal published details of leaked bank documents, apparently showing that nearly $700m had been channelled through the investment company and directly into the personal accounts of Prime Minister Najib Razak.

Najib established 1MDB in 2009 with the visionary aim of facilitating investment and trade with the Middle East, and of developing a new financial district in Kuala Lumpur. Najib chairs 1MDB’s board and also heads the Ministry of Finance, which fully owns the company. 1MDB has collected a portfolio of 16 power and desalination plants in Asia and the Middle East and launched two ambitious, high-profile real estate developments in downtown Kuala Lumpur, accumulating debts of MYR 42bn ($11bn) along the way. Critics have centred on the company’s auditing problems: particularly MYR 8.24bn ($2.17bn) allegedly hidden somewhere in the Cayman Islands, its bond issuance program, and allegations that it has overpaid for its Malaysian power assets, essentially bailing out politically connected independent power producers.

The July 2 report dealt a huge blow for the ruling party, the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), and brought to a head a long-brewing struggle within the party to oust the prime minister. Conservative circles surrounding former prime minister and UMNO kingmaker Mahathir Mohamad have relentlessly tried to eject Najib, whose weakness and unpopularity they view as extremely detrimental for the party’s survival. Najib appears far too compromised to see the end of his term in 2018, even if the multiple ongoing investigations do not directly implicate him in wrongdoings within 1MDB.

The most tangible impact of Najib’s removal would be felt in the cabinet, the bureaucracy, and government-linked and state-owned companies, where some personnel changes would be all but inevitable. The local business community would also see some victims Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin is Najib’s likeliest successor, and would almost surely sideline tycoons close to the prime minister (and his formidable and highly unpopular wife Rosmah Mansor) in favor of his own cronies. This is a concern for foreign businesses in Malaysia, as most rely on their local partners’ or agents’ political connections.

Otherwise, it will very much be business as usual in Malaysia. Muhyiddin is known to harbor markedly more nationalist and pro-ethnic Malay views than Najib, but UMNO as a whole is a pragmatic party that would be unlikely to depart from the current administration’s pro-business and pro-FDI stance. However, some of Najib’s pet projects and initiatives – particularly his flagship Economic Transformation Programme (ETP) – would be quietly shelved under a conservative leadership.

The 1MDB scandals are greatly distracting the government from broader economic problems. Malaysia has been the biggest loser in Asia Pacific from lower global prices for oil and particularly natural gas, and is grappling with high government debt, a large fiscal deficit, Asia’s highest household debt and one of its worst-performing currencies. The government has ambitious plans to transform Malaysia into a developed, high-income nation by 2020 — a vision that dates back to the Mahathir years—but the plan appears overly optimistic and the numbers do not add up.

Also at stake are the reputations of the otherwise respected Bank Negara (the central bank) and some of the larger domestic banks. They have come under fire for failing to notice or facilitating suspiciously high transactions and transfers in Najib’s accounts.

Social unrest remains a real possibility — especially if the public feels the investigation into Najib and 1MDB is inadequate. The influential Coalition for Free and Fair Elections (Bersih) has threatened a fourth wave of protests if Najib does not step down; previous Bersih rallies regularly ended in violence.

Perhaps more worryingly, the heated political climate increases the scope for religiously or ethnically motivated acts of violence, like the riots earlier this month in the Bukit Bintang neighbourhood of Kuala Lumpur. UMNO has increasingly nurtured a siege mentality and presented the party as the only true protector of Malay interests, worsening communal tensions. UMNO’s strategy requires the preservation of an image of external threats. These threats can be domestic, such as other religious and ethnic groups, or they can be foreign, such as the influence of Western culture. One effect of the latter is the potential for boycotts against products from Western countries perceived to have acted disrespectfully toward Islam.

An increasingly conservative society has also become a breeding ground for radical Islamist groups and individuals. Police have arrested at least 107 terrorist suspects, most with no previous record of involvement in terrorism-related activities, making it difficult for authorities to anticipate or prevent one-off attacks. A terrorist attack would have the potential to cause significant public alarm in a country that is relatively unaccustomed to terrorist violence.

The 1MDB scandal, combined with all of the contingent challenges that it affects, puts in sharp relief the fundamental challenge facing Malaysia’s leaders. The image the country is keen to portray to the outside world—that of a modern, moderate and multi-ethnic country — is increasingly losing credibility.

Guilia Zino is a senior analyst for Southeast Asia at Control Risks, the global risk consultancy. For more analysis, sign up for a free trial of our risk monitoring services.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 23 July 2015, 5:52 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Malaysian Dream
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.