Malaysia after regime change

— Ooi Kee Beng

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 14, 2012

MARCH 14 — Malaysia had to begin life as a federation because, like all federations, its diversity of polity, culture, history, ethnicity and economy was simply too deep for a centrally controlled regime to be practicable.

That was why the Malayan Union of 1946, hopefully constructed by a colonial power recovering from a devastating world war and that badly needed to simplify its control apparatus, could never succeed. Indirect and de facto colonialism was acceptable, but centralised and direct colonialism was too much for the Malay community to accept.

And yet, as became clear in the aftermath of the 2008 general election, the country nevertheless had in reality become centrally controlled by a coalition centred around Umno (United Malays National Organisation), the party formed in 1946 by Onn Ja’afar to fight the Malayan Union.

The 2008 election results can thus be read as a strong negative reaction by the newly-liberated electorate to this sustained political denial of the country’s historical diversity.

Centralism, as one can imagine, is anathema to a society that is so intrinsically diverse that the hybridism of its culture and history is what so many of its members are proud of. “Malaysianness”, to make any sense, is necessarily about cultural hybridism. Thus, Prime Minister Najib Razak’s slogan, 1 Malaysia, borders on being an oxymoron. Malaysia, by its very nature, is manifold in cultural character, and is all the better for it.

What is also becoming clear globally is that the federal format for organising a modern state is a healthy compromise for counterbalancing the excesses of the nation-state format that seems to be the default model of thought is subject to.

For most societies, and certainly for those in culturally diverse regions like Southeast Asia, the nation-state uniform is too narrow and stiff to wear for too long. It is artificial in essential ways, and is constraining both inwardly and outwardly.

Adjustments to this uptight uniform simply had to be made. The rise of regionalism in recent times — in Europe, in Southeast Asia, and elsewhere — is a tailor’s adjustment to a suit made too tight. What we see happening in Europe are the effects of a regional organisation losing its strength because it had begun moving towards forming a super state instead of just remaining a loose uniform for national identities to feel comfortable in.

ASEAN does not run that risk because the region is obviously too diverse for anyone to seriously think of it in super-state terms. It was formed to lower barriers between newly-formed nation states because these barriers had immediately proved to have been built higher than was good for anyone.

For peaceful relations to develop between these new political entities, a process of friendly dialogue and of limited integration between different actors had to be initiated. This began in 1967, and the organisation has in that sense had respectable success over the last 45 years.

Malaysia has also had respectable success over the last 55 years, but within it, the process of friendly dialogue and of limited integration between different actors has been a difficult one to sustain.

On the one hand, the country was created in a federal format as a necessary expression of the political and ethnic diversity of its people. It would have been foolish to integrate the country too quickly, and certainly not in one fell swoop as the colonialists tried to do in 1946.

On the other hand, a new country always risks disintegration if diversity was allowed to rule the day. And so, government by political coalitions became the new order. Onn Ja’afar’s attempt in 1951 to make Umno represent all ethnicities failed for going too far too fast. His compromise was seen by his followers as a sell-out.

And so, what we ended up with was the Alliance Model. This coalition of communal parties would maintain “the process of friendly dialogue and of limited integration between different actors” and allow centralisation to take place through consociationalism.

This model — especially after becoming the Barisan Nasional (BN) in 1974 — certainly had respectable success. But its path was a difficult one. Umno’s dominance in this model was a given thing acceptable to the supporters of its allies if it stayed moderate, and if it maintained the goal of creating Malaysianness, as opposed to defending and prioritising Malayness. This is key.

That was exactly why Dr Mahathir Mohamed’s Vision 2020 and Bangsa Malaysia were highly successful slogans. In fact, they were coined exactly to conjure a future that was not ethnocentric and a culturally open Malaysia that was economically integrated with the region and the world.

Significantly, racial tensions dropped radically throughout the 1990s in Malaysia, as compared to the period before, and the period after. The Reformasi Movement that began in 1998, as many have noticed, did not turn racial in any essential manner.

It was as if Malaysia had turned a corner, and Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s electoral triumph in 2004 was not based on ethnic issues, but on the promise of reform of governance. Things actually looked very good; and believe it or not, Barisan Nasional styled itself the champion of reform.

But since then, the key lessons learned were forgotten. The undermining of major institutions during the Mahathir period was not reversed, and worst of all, Umno leaders acted with public impunity; Islamist bureaucrats became openly arrogant; governance deteriorated further; and Umno’s allies lost their voice. The coalition existed only in name.

The federation seemed to exist only in name, at least until March 8, 2008. The four years since the political equation changed so radically has seen a reawakening to Malaysia’s true nature. It is a diverse place; that is why it is a special place; and that it is why it is — and always has been — a federation.

Diversity is not disunity. Denial of diversity is what leads to disunity.

The appearance of Pakatan Rakyat (PR) at this time is thus of historical significance, created by the limitations of the BN model over time. Malaysian society’s search for a proper expression of itself has at this moment led it to consider PR as a necessary option. — New Mandala

* Ooi Kee Beng is the deputy director of Singapore’s Institute of Southeast Asian Studies.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 14 March 2012, 7:33 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Mahathir
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Post-2008 general election
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


RM500 buys…

— Lucius Goon

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 13, 2012

MARCH 13 — It is not surprising that PM Najib Razak says that the government will give cash to Malaysians if revenue goes up. He has found out that his disbursement of RM500 has been a success. Nothing it seems keeps Malaysians happy than some lucre in the pocket.

Najib knows this and if it means emptying the coffers to win the election he will do it. The PM a great believer in deal-making knows that RM500 will…

•persuade many Malaysians to have amnesia and forget the catalogue of flip-flops and mistakes from Najib who has inherited mantle of flip-flop king from Abdullah Badawi.

•make Malaysians forget about the string of corruption issues and dodgy deals from the development of land near Martrade (Naza TTDI) to the rm9 billion patrol boats to the super sweetheart West Coast Highway deal (60 year toll concession) to the RM2.2 billion Kidex highway.

•help Malaysians forget about how the power and might of the state was brought to bear on ordinary citizens who were marching for clean elections.

•lull Malaysians into complacency that they forget that Indonesians, Bangladeshis and other foreigners are being “allowed” to vote.

•convince Malaysians that Najib is a decent chap, despite allegations that the powerful and connected and people from his inner circle are making much hay while the sun shines. Forget about the RM24 million ring and the shopping trips.

•get Malaysians to focus on material wellbeing instead of focusing on fighting evil and injustice.

•persuade Malaysians that the government is really prihatin and has the welfare of Malaysians at heart, instead of asking why the national debt has reached unheard of levels and pondering about a government which has to buy its way to power.

•hope that Malaysians forget that everything about this government is about announcements and launches and where consultants are paid mega bucks to recycle ideas as Government Transformation.

Yes, the government hopes that the occasional RM500 will be like a drug to Malaysians and they want us hooked for life.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 14 March 2012, 12:43 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The say sorry game

— Sakmongkol AK47

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 13, 2012

MARCH 13 — Malaysians are learning a new political game- The Apology Game.  The apologiser- in- chief is of course Najib Razak. He has said sorry for those undefined Umno wrongs. Maybe he is sorry he couldn’t plug the gaping hole that allowed RM 1.3 trillion to leave the country. Crooks associated with Umno embezzled money belonging to this country. Its financial mayhem. Saying sorry is sufficient.

Sources of regret

Maybe he is also sorry for the endless list of financial scandals that were caused by Umno. He is sorry for dismembering up the iconic MAS. He is sorry, for destroying the future of Felda. 5 years from now, when Felda doesn’t have the funds to manage and operate the 112,000 settlers in the Felda schemes, the government steps in making up for the loss in revenue. What was the cause of the loss in revenue in the first place?

The ravenous appetite of Umno politician businessmen.

The BN government was stupid enough to agree to the FGV listing because the FGV CEO promises the larger portion of the IPO profits to the PM department and a portion of that profits earned by Felda will be used to pay the sudden windfall. The PMO and the unsuspecting settlers share the same standard- both forfeit long term interests for short term one.

The opposition told the truth.

That means what the opposition has been telling is the truth. That Umno has been a real rogue. The truth is Umno has buggered and sodomised the Malay race.  And pilfered the nation.

The sorry game of Shahrizat

Enter Shahrizat. She is also sorry but her regret takes a different form. Her apology is acted out in the form of sacrificing herself by announcing her resignation from the cabinet. That will make her out as a victim of some nebulous plot hatched by the opposition led by Rafizi Ramli and the PKR lady leader, Zuraidah.

2 months ago, the Oracle told me it was a done deal — Najib has a written note that Shahrizat will go. Maybe Najib secured a promise from Shahrizat to quit and he jotted down her promise in writing.

A little melodrama for political effects.

In the meantime, for public consumption a little drama for the desired political effects is good. Shahrizat was not actually planning to resign. Why should she, when her colleagues are also plundering the nation?  Her mistake was not being clever enough to disguise the thievery that took place within NFC. Her colleagues demanded her head not because RM 50 million or so was siphoned or how the RM 250-million grant was used- they wanted her kicked out for being not clever at concealing the plundering. She did not pay attention in classroom, when they were taught the Art of the Steal.

It is just a shameless game

But know this. To the BN people, saying sorry is just a game. The game starts when someone on the “other side” says or does something that might conceivably offend (though of course it never really does offend). Umno and BN people have everything except honour and scruples.

What did the other side do?  In this case, Rafizi Ramli and his gang unearthed the many shenanigans that took place in NFC. The NFC- National Feedlot Corporation was granted a 250 million grant at 2 per cent interest to import cattle and beef up the cattle rearing industry. Instead, the family of Shahrizat used the funds for non-related businesses such as buying high end condominiums, office buildings, expensive cars and paying astronomical salaries to directors. About these condominiums, Shahrizat claimed ignorance and innocence- though the interior designers whom she engaged will tell you, every minutia of details have to be screened by her such as what bulbs and curtains to use. Yet, she says, she has nothing to do with the extra mural activities of NFC.

The shameless reponse

Shahrizat’s response: publicly claim mortal offence — this secures your position as a victim — and then very publicly demand sympathy.  What she did privately with the connivance of family members, she now wants to make public. It’s the same game all UMNO people play – privatise the profits, make public bear the gult.

She will resign her post if Wan Azizah resigned hers , though how Wan Azizah is connected to the case in point baffled everyone except the Umno herds grazing the pastures of PWTC.  I though Umno will not repeat this inanity, yet Ahmad Maslan just did by linking Wan Azizah to Shahrizat’s refusal to relinquish her wanita Umno post. The MCA has a porn actor as president, Wanita Umno has a person who has nothing to do with what went on in NFC other that going to bed with its CEO.  How can she be involved?

Did she send the wanita baju kurung?

Shahrizat when a step farther- she sends the Umno baju kurung uniform to Rafizi and threatened to sue Rafizi and gang. Whether she actually sent them, we don’t know. She made quite a spectacle when she rolled up the sleeves of her baju kurung- Pakatan naughty boys were actually waiting for her to do an Elizabeth Wong. The blogger Tukar Tiub has made public his regret and said how sorry he is, for not being able to see Shahrizat’s more daring revelation.

She has suffered mortal offence hasn’t she?  Then rope in the media and the new media. When the media machinery becomes engaged — which is essential to her publicity success — then the various reporters and commentators will pile on, supporting her demand, as the politically correct victim, for an apology and punishment for the offending party.  If we were to ask Ibrahim Ali, he would suggest that Rafizi be hanged.

She has been mortally wounded, she is nothing except the woman to the man she goes to bed with. She has nothing to do with his business dealings.

She overlooked one thing.  The media supporting her is an opportunist band of brothers- they will continue covering the “issue,” they’ll pressure the offending party until he or she caves in and issues an apology.  Then the media will decide if the apology is sufficiently sincere — the media may require several rounds of apologies before these arbiters of PC finally accept it.

But if the offending party stands its ground, the opportunistic media practitioners will be ready to do an about turn. Shahrizat feigned anger and combative stance during the Umno GA. She issued challenges and threats. She even tried to widen her defense by alluding to the real possibilities that her colleagues in the party are guilty of even bigger financial thievery. She does all that not because she was offended.  She played the game because demanding an apology and feigning the victim, generates as much media coverage as possible. Why? Because if the offending party caves in and public sympathy swells as a result of media massaging, the whole melodrama will prove you are stronger and more powerful than your opponent.

You see, that is already happening. Umno leaders line up like peons, praising Shahrizat. — http://sakmongkol.blogspot.com/

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 14 March 2012, 12:36 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Felda
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Was Shahrizat’s act really a sacrifice?

by Kee Thuan Chye

March 14, 2012

Shahrizat did not ‘resign’. She knew the time was up, and perhaps the game too.

Let’s get this right. Shahrizat Abdul Jalil did not, in the strict sense of the word, resign. She merely chose to relinquish her position as Women, Family and Community Development Minister just a little ahead of April 8, when her senatorship would expire.

And her guess was probably as good as many people’s that her senatorship would not be extended, given that she’s now a liability to her party, Umno.

Ever since the National Feedlot Corporation (NFCorp) scandal broke out, she has been hounded for the fact that the company belongs to her family. Despite her claims that she had nothing to do with how the NFCorp got a RM250 million soft loan from the government while she was a member of the Cabinet, few people actually believe her.

So, if her senatorship were to be extended, Umno’s chances at the coming general election would have been severely impaired.

So no, she did not ‘resign’. She knew the time was up, and perhaps the game too.

The day after she made the announcement, her husband, NFCorp chairman Mohamad Salleh Ismail was charged with criminal breach of trust and misuse of funds – to the tune of RM49.7 million. She might have known this was coming, so she chose to step down first.

So was her act a noble one?

Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak came out to declare that it was. He said Shahrizat, in resigning, was sacrificing herself for the party and the government.

Pardon my Malaysian, but that’s bullshit.

What sacrifice is it when she has waited so long after the NFC scandal broke out last October before doing what she calls – believe it or not – “the right thing”? What sacrifice is it when she is ‘resigning’ just as her senatorship is about to expire?

Furthermore, why has she chosen to remain as Wanita Umno chief? Why doesn’t she resign from that position as well? If she did that, it might really be a sacrifice.

Big talk

The truth seems to be that her act is not wholehearted. After all, critics had been howling for her to step down for the last few months, but she had stood up against them. At the Wanita Umno assembly in late November, she came out fighting till she looked – in newspaper photographs – red in the face. She even literally rolled up her sleeves!

She insisted she had nothing to do with the NFC issue. “I do my job, my husband does his,” she said. “And he is not in the wrong.” The way the scandal has developed, one wonders if she still truly thinks the same.

She challenged PKR to ask its president, Dr Wan Azizah Ismail, to step down – because her husband, Anwar Ibrahim, had been found guilty and charged with offences “which I don’t even have the heart to say out loud”. She tried to deflect the issue at hand by casting the focus on somebody else.

She talked big and aggressive (a manner that has become de rigueur among many Umno politicians).

She said, “Thirty years I have served in Umno, and I am still strong. Women, the more they age the stronger they become.”

She added, mawkishly, “I believe every woman, mother and wife understands me and is crying with me.” But she must have been mistaken. If anyone cried, it was over her disregard for public accountability.

Shahrizat has not represented herself well at all in regard to the scandal. If she had shown humility, people might have been softer on her. So even now, as she hits her lowest ebb, her image has not improved.

Her colleagues, however, tried to make her smell like a bouquet of roses.

Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein, who is also her party’s vice-president and has a track record for saying inane things, said, “It is courageous of her to leave her ministerial post but at the same time be willing to lead the women’s wing.”

Courageous? For doing something before it was done to her?

He added, “It is a sacrifice … (because) she has not been linked legally to the NFC issue. It looks like she made her decision based on other aspects such as moral, political and personal considerations.”

That’s a contradiction. He’s actually saying she’s following her conscience even though there is no legal case against her involvement in the NFC. Well, if so, her stepping down is all the more NOT a sacrifice but an admission! After all, doing something on moral grounds in response to allegations already implies awareness of wrongdoing.

Public perception against Shahrizat

Puteri Umno chief Rosnah Abdul Rashid Shirlin sounded like a schoolgirl when, in expressing sympathy for Shahrizat, she said the opposition had manipulated the NFC issue.

How do you manipulate something that is already there, that has been done? The opposition did not make the NFC misuse the loan from the government, it merely brought the case out in the open. That’s not manipulation.

Others who chipped in to sing Shahrizat’s praises included Umno information chief Ahmad Maslan, Agriculture and Agro-based Industries Minister Noh Omar, Deputy Education Minister Mohd Puad Zarkashi and Umno vice-president Mohd Shafie Apdal.

Unfortunately, Shahrizat’s name has come to be mixed so much with cow turd that no one can purge it of its stench.

The thing is, perception is often stronger than proof when it comes to politics, so for all that she and the others might say about her not having been involved in NFC – at least in its securing the RM250 million loan – the public jury has already decided the verdict.

The knowing ones among the public are also aware that this ‘resignation’ – packaged with the charging of her husband – is merely aimed at making her party look good. In time for the general election.

Voters might, however, want to take note that the NFC scandal has come about only because there is now an opposition that is strong and willing to expose the filth in Putrajaya. This is something to keep in mind when they go to the polling booths.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 14 March 2012, 8:17 pm and is filed under
Auditor-General Report
,
Corruption
,
Kee Thuan Chye
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Will the charge against NFC boss be an escapade for BN?

— Kim Quek

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 14, 2012

MARCH 14 — It appears that the charge of NFC chairman Mohamed Salleh Ismail in court is a tactical move to get away from the scorching NFC scandal – the same way Barisan Nasional has got away with the RM12.5 billion PKFZ ghost town scandal and the Khir Toyo corruption scandal.

This move is known as the “decoy and silence” tactic, which has been BN’s time-tested strategy to slip away from a high corruption scandal entrapment. It is simply to initiate a peripheral charge to divert attention from the real issue and use the court action as shield to fence-off further attacks on ground of “sub judice”.

This is vividly illustrated in Parliament on March 13, a day after Mohamed Salleh was charged, when Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia absurdly cited the current court case as reason to reject an emergency motion on the NFC project debacle tabled by MP Zuraida Kamaruddin, despite the latter explaining that her issue was with the ministries which approved the project, and not with Mohamed Salleh’s misconduct, which is the subject matter of the current court case.

And on the same day, Agriculture Minister Noh Omar, under whose jurisdiction the NFC project falls, deflected all questions on the scandal on the equally ridiculous suggestion of sub judice; while Barisan Nasional MP Abdul Rahman Dahlan falsely claimed that the court is now the best platform to thrash out the issues, adding that the party that should answer questions is NFC, and not the ministries.

Apparently, BN hopes that with Mohamed Salleh in the dock, the BN government would be left in peace.

A decoy

But what is Mohamed Salleh charged for? He is charged for misusing part of the soft loan meant to spearhead the beef production industry.

And what is the public furious about?  They are angry at the alleged high corruption going on at the highest hierarchy of the Barisan Nasional leadership that has led to this fiasco that saw not only huge public funds – RM250 million and grant RM13 million – going down the drain but also a key food production scheme thwarted.

So who is the bigger culprit – the guardian of public funds or the recipient of these funds? The elected leaders who have betrayed public trust to honestly and prudently manage the country’s resources or the private project developer who has failed?

Obviously the main focus of investigation should be on the former.

The public wants to know why and how a manifestly incompetent party was awarded the contract. And since the appointee is the family of a Cabinet minister, the public also wants to know whether there are elements of corruption?

In this connection, why weren’t the two key decision-makers in this fiasco investigated, namely, then agriculture minster Muhyiddin Yassin and then chairman of committee for high impact projects Najib Razak, who had jointly approved the award?

Will the MACC please answer this question now?

Will the MACC also brief us on the status of its investigation since its start almost four months ago?

The simple answer of “case still under investigation, can’t disclose details to avoid jeopardizing investigation” wouldn’t do, as four months is too long a time to give this lame excuse. In fact, such answer has long been recognised as MACC’s standard ploy to stonewall public inquisitiveness over a high profile BN scandal. If MACC insists on giving such an answer, it will be taken as: “Sorry, we can’t oblige”.

Will BN be off the hook again?

As for the current court case, do not expect that anything meaningful will come out of it, judging from similar cases against BN elite in the past.

Mohamed Salleh is accused of improperly transferring funds from National Feedlot Corporation to another company, National Meat and Livestock Corporation, where improper purchases of assets unrelated to the project were made. As both companies are owned by minister Shahrizat’s family, with the exception that the government has a golden share in the former but not the latter company, such improper transfer of fund cannot be considered a serious fraud. The more serious contention is over the propriety of the asset purchases, which is apparently a violation of the loan agreement. But Salleh is not charged for such violation.

It is not difficult to see that the present drama is a carefully crafted stratagem involving the concerted effort of MACC, police and the Attorney-General, to extricate BN from a potentially crippling predicament on the eve of an impending election.

Will BN succeed again this time under the nose of a resurgent opposition alliance and an activated civil society?

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 14 March 2012, 7:49 pm and is filed under
Auditor-General Report
,
Corruption
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Don’t cry for me Argentina: Shahrizat resigns!

— Sakmongkol AK47

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 15, 2012

MARCH 15 — The other night as I was surfing the Astro channels, I came upon an interview with a crying woman. She was crying because Shahrizat Abdul Jalil had announced she would resign her Cabinet post. The poor crying woman was also saying — if Shahrizat resigns, then Nik Aziz must also resign. I suppose she was alluding to the case involving Nik Aziz’s son in law. The SIL was cleared.

The woman need not worry. If it’s a case involving opposition politicians and those related to them in question, the government machinery will leave no stones unturned to get to the bottom of the case.

Let me share with you the thoughts of a frequent visitor to my blog. This person shows he is a concerned Malaysian, mindful of the future of our country. He comments under the penname of OneMalaysian.

Here is a woman, whose husband clearly got RM250 million in very soft loans from the government to rear cows to meet 40 per cent of beef demand, but who instead took that money, spent a little bit on the actual project, and used the rest to invest in properties in Kuala Lumpur and Singapore, and to pay astronomical and undeserved salaries to her family.

Her husband has no background in rearing cows or producing meat. So why give him RM250 million when FELDA actually has a subsidiary that does? Why does the government give RM250 million to a well-to-do Bumiputera family when there are thousands of Malays living in rural Malaysia who clearly deserve just such a loan?

It is obvious, therefore, that Salleh, the husband, would not have got the loan if not for his wife’s position in the Cabinet and in Umno. Did she have no knowledge that that loan was given to her husband? Do we believe that she did not lobby for it? If it is true that she had nothing to do with the NFC project, are we to assume that the Cabinet and Muhyiddin drew lots from a big hat containing about 10 million Malay names and out popped Salleh’s name. He was the lucky Malay who got the loan. It could well have been Ariff Sabri, but sorry, Sakmongkol.

This is outright abuse of power by those who gave her family the loan. It is corruption because she had abused her position in the Cabinet. It is morally wrong because RM250 million could have been used to help the poor Malays, who deserve such help more than Shahrizat and her wealthy family.

And now, listen to what the PM and DPM say when she finally “resigns”. It was a sacrifice! Give me a RM250 million soft loan that may never be repaid and I will resign from any position! “Magnanimous”, that’s the word Muhyiddin used to describe her resignation. Hah? You abuse RM250 million of public money, resign reluctantly, and that is magnanimous?

And look how weak and immoral the PM is. Cabinet members serve at his pleasure. And if they don’t resign when they should, he has absolute power to sack them. But Najib seems powerless. He has to wait for her senatorship to expire, and then leave, that is, at her pleasure, not his. We cannot have such a weak, powerless, immoral PM governing this country. It is not good for the ordinary Malays, and not good for anyone else, except the Shahrizats of Malaysia.

If this sad NFC episode does not shake the ordinary Malays out of their stupor and see their leaders as thieves and not their benefactors and protectors, then nothing else would.

Res ipsa loquitur? — sakmongkol.blogspot.com

* Sakmongkol AK47 is the nom de plume of Datuk Mohd Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz. He was Pulau Manis assemblyman (2004-2008).

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 15 March 2012, 4:16 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Fixed dates for elections

— P. Ramakrishnan

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 14, 2012

MARCH 14 — Aliran executive committee members have a discussion before making their submissions to the Parliamentary Select Committee on Electoral Reforms

Elections should not be a cat-and-mouse game. It should never be a guessing game either. There should be a definite predetermined date that is publicly disclosed so that everyone knows the date of the next general election.

This is practised by a number of countries which have a fixed date for the election. Among them are Norway and Switzerland with fixed dates. Canada and its provinces (Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, New Brunswick, Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland and Labrador, and Northwest Territories) have implemented fixed-term elections too.

In the United Kingdom the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 fixes the general election on the first Thursday in May every five years. Elections to the European Parliament occur every five years in June.

Presidential elections in the United States occur every four years on the first Tuesday after the first Monday of November. Germany, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory (ACT) have semi-fixed terms in that dissolution at any time in mid-term is allowed only to resolve serious deadlock.

It is noted that “predetermined or fixed election dates have the advantage of fairness and predictability”. Though the Barisan Nasional may not be in favour of this (as under the present practice, it can surprise the Opposition by calling for a snap election when the circumstances are favourable to it, the BN must be realistic and see the advantage in this when it becomes the Opposition after the 13th GE!

Too much time and money is wasted in trying to create a favourable situation to call for an election. The recent budget is a good example of how voters are being bribed for the BN’s benefit. Households earning less than RM3,000 were in no better position in 2009, 2010 and 2011 but this is being attended to only in 2012 just before the 13th GE!

The RM500 may assist them in January but does their hardship disappear after that? What about the next 11 months? If this was a long-term solution for the whole of this year and the years after that, then there is no ground to accuse the BN of bribing the voters!

We recommend fixed dates for elections. — aliran.com

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 15 March 2012, 3:49 pm and is filed under
Elections
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Mr Prime Minister, debate this!

by Praba Ganesan

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 15, 2012

MARCH 15 — So Najib does not like to debate. But why not?

Some people don’t like to eat oranges, we let them be.

So I suppose if some have the right to not like round juicy objects which are hard-going — peeling with your hands and all (so prole!) — you can equally extend this right to Datuk Seri Najib Razak in other arbitrary matters, such as refusing to debate publicly about our country’s current path and how to raise the bar as a progressive society.

However, the prime minister has to keep some consistency, just so the historians characterise him right later.

He should start by closing down Parliament. This is an institution intended to encourage our finest political minds to have laborious, unyielding and rarely funny discussions about the country, mostly by disagreeing.

The idea was, I hope it still is, that by getting people to argue their own side or opinion or position and putting them up against others who do not quite agree with them, then more equitable, meaningful ideas are given life. That by talking about something with great discipline we discover better ways to do the things we already do or even things we should be doing. They debate, so our lives become better.

But this is dangerous, since debate is not part of Malaysian culture or Malaysians are not ready for it.

So since Parliament exists for debate, then the prime minister has to stop it. For eventually things like the Prime Minister’s Question Time will lead to, hold on, yes, oh yes, debate.

Second, he might want to explain if he does genuinely dislike debates, then why is it that he is talking through our TV sets everyday of our lives. More so, lining up with him there’s a whole bevy of people — his deputy and a motley crew of ministers — all nudging each other aside so they get more airtime on TV stations.

They clearly like to talk, and talk a lot, just like Najib. And it does seems, Najib has so much to say, all the time.

So what’s missing here, between these talking engagements and loathing this debate thing — where, surprise, surprise, people are also speaking.

This is most ponderous. Most mystifying. Almost worthy of hiring consultants with jargon guns.

Ah, they talk back. In this debate thing, people talk back to what the prime minister says. They would say in these debates “that will never happen while they are in power” other nasty things like enquire about Najib’s ideas and thoughts. Horror, grief, shame, people asking Najib about the contentious bits in his policies.

Najib must go awhirl at the mere mention of such a reality. Fleeting thoughts pass him, he wonders, what happened to those good old days when feudal lords spoke and the rest listened?

I say, you say

The deputy prime minister does point out that leaders don’t need to engage those in power, they just need to service the people.

On the face of it, it has some merit, but let’s take a step back and consider it. Why do we debate?

This is what I used to tell my students, pardon if it sounds patronising.

A long time ago, when human societies were shaping up — living in caves, clubbing animals and chasing their partners — might was right. Primacy was established by brute strength. Scoring on a date back then took a completely different dimension.

At this point, the students would look at me puzzled.

It dawned through trial and error, or more apt — hit and miss — that all the violence was starting to wear everyone down.

There must have been this enormously dramatic moment, when someone screamed, “Hey, can we stop? I’m tired of waking up sore. Why don’t we just talk about it and decide?”

Thus the first debate probably started. Two individuals or groups wanting the same thing having to talk about which or what should prevail, that reason should be the guiding light since interests are at odds.

Through a series of discourses, societies find their communal reason or purpose.

Communal reason or purpose is not inherited, it is conversed. Which is why great societies are associated with traditions of speech, debate and engagement. Conversely, when those societies forcibly remove speech, debate and engagement, decay sets in.

They derive their purpose from the intellectual stimuli produced by contrasting ideas.

Summary: A beating is not the only solution. Sometimes you can just talk about it.

But things don’t just resolve themselves because a different way has emerged. Human society, as advanced as it seemingly is, has without fail is confronted with the choice of reason or force.

Obviously, those with force, power, resource or whatever you may call it shudder when they face reason. Even if they fear not reason, they realise if reason is excluded their superior force will always the day.

They seek ways to reduce the need for discourse and increase the focus on force-resource. Relying on their monopoly over carrot and stick to douse our collective will to argue our case.

Hey, us on the other side of the track

I’ve known guys like Najib all my life. They like to win by not competing. Why compete when you can declare yourself the winner, over and over?

But do people like Najib know the rest of us? They think everything is about managing the masses. Sure, we want food on our tables and our healthy children having a place to sleep.

However we have ideas, just like the prime minister or even his personal driver. In a democracy where there is universal education, people without ideas will be scarce. In abundance are those who disagree, and here’s the news Tengku Adnan, if you are unwilling to deal with a Malaysia that disagrees with you more often than not, then your political viability has already expired years ago.

All that is denying a full-on, nationwide debate of everything is the state’s physical might. But every day that is becoming less and less relevant. The debate, this conscious discussion on this country’s conscience will continue on, general election or not.

A general election is not “the end all and be all” of a country, its people are.

I refuse to live in a country where the privileged shut me out of the discussion because we did not go to the same school or play hop-scotch in the same gated community.

This doggedness is not just in me, it is in many of my countryman, which is why by the day it is becoming far more uncomfortable for the elitist community always thinking their resources will keep them above the law, and certainly above any need to defend their positions.

Najib can choose to eat oranges but not debate, but the time to choose is slowly drawing to a close in Malaysia.

He must know that trying to win on his terms, without needing to intellectually defend his positions under pressure, is a fubar.

He may keep some votes and stop the bleeding by staying away from debates, but he must know the votes he loses from now on will never return.

So Najib, care to debate now?

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 15 March 2012, 11:00 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Not sub judice to discuss NFC in Parliament, court ruling shows

By Clara Chooi

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 14, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, March 15 — The Dewan Rakyat Speaker’s reliance on the rule of sub judice to shut down discussion of the National Feedlot Centre (NFC) scandal in Parliament is flawed, a recent court decision shows.

The High Court, in a contempt suit filed by Syarikat Bekalan Air Selangor Sdn Bhd (SYABAS) against a Selangor government lawyer and PAS organ Harakah last year, had held that the courts must be cautious in applying the sub judice law and must also take into consideration constitutional provisions on the freedom of speech.

According to the judgment sighted by The Malaysian Insider today, Justice Ariff Yusof, when rejecting the application, had stressed that the common law rule on sub judice must be moulded “in the light of fundamental liberties provisions”.

“The court cannot believe the sensitivities of the average Malaysian can be so different so as to incline the court to adopt a completely different juristic approach which relegates freedom of expression below the sub judice rule,” he had said.

In the July 2011 case, SYABAS had cited lawyer Fahda Nur Ahmad Kamar and Harakah chief editor Ahmad Lutfi Othman for contempt over a statement published by Harakah on December 7, 2010 in an article “SAR bantu kempen bantah kenaikan tariff air (Religious schools help in campaign against a hike in tariff rate)”.

SYABAS had relied on the sub judice rule when attempting to prove contempt, saying the published statement amounted to a direct attack on its credibility and could interfere with the course of justice in its ongoing suit filed in 2010.

But Ariff had explained that sub judice or contempt of court would be applicable only when discussions outside of court attack the integrity of a judge or cast aspersion on the administration of justice.

He added that it was also unlikely that a professional judge hearing a case would be influenced or bothered other criticisms or debate.

Ariff had also pointed out to SYABAS that, prior to the suit it filed in 2010, the matter in question — protests against water tariffs — was already a part of a “wider public discourse”, which was actively carried in the electronic and print media. “Indeed, the whole issue of privatisation of water resources had been discussed at length by members of the public well before the filing of the SYABAS suit in 2010.

“The practical reality and law have somehow to find an accommodation based on considered principles,” the judge had held.

The decision of this court was upheld by the Court of Appeal last November and, as it stands, is the current judicial position on sub judice.

Similarities can be drawn between the SYABAS matter and the ongoing NFC scandal.

For one, the controversy has been widely discussed in the media for over four months now, before it entered the courts on Monday when National Feedlot Corporation chairman Datuk Seri Mohamad Salleh Ismail was charged with criminal breach of trust (CBT).

Despite this, Dewan Rakyat Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia disallowed an emergency motion by PKR’s Zuraida Kamaruddin yesterday to discuss the RM250 million scandal in the House, citing the ongoing case.

“At first I allowed it to be read but now the matter has been brought to court. So I cannot do as I please.

“It cannot be discussed as it has been brought to the judiciary,” Pandikar had explained.

But on the face of it, Zuraida’s motion and the ensuing debate would not have fallen foul of the sub judice law.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 15 March 2012, 4:09 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Court
,
Judiciary
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


When ministers talk nonsense

— Abdul Haleem

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 14, 2012

MARCH 14 — One of the prolonged illnesses, which afflicts Malaysian politics, is ministers coming out with stupid if not absurd statements. Usually it is followed by a sudden flip flop.

Today, we have our Tourism Minister saying foreigners are shunning the Malaysia My Second Home (MM2H) programme, because they do not perceive the country to be peaceful and stable. Bernama reported Datuk Dr Ng Yen Yen blaming recent street demonstrations for hindering promotional efforts for MM2H. She even said that “this is the key barrier preventing foreigners from staying in Malaysia for long period.”

I have a question for her. When did we launch the MM2H programme and since then how many street demos have we seen in Malaysia? Just because she is running out of ideas to explain her ministry’s failures she should not assume Malaysians will just accept her idiotic answers. An SPM student would be able to cook up more concrete reasons than her. Or perhaps this MM2H was a failure from day one.

Just in case she is unaware of them (she is busy promoting Malaysia), let me give her some of the possible reasons why foreigners are not showing interest in MM2H.

Malaysia is NOT SAFE. Read about Nurul Nadirah who went missing, only for her charred remains to be found a couple of days later? This is not the first time we have found a missing toddler’s remains in a gruesome condition.

The Malaysian Government acts with NO SENSE. Grammy winners’ concerts get cancelled at the eleventh hour. Why? She had an offensive tattoo? To whom? And after all that it turned out not to be a real tattoo at all. Any official apology for those who bought tickets and were not offended by the tattoo? Let’s not go into the number of movies, books, T-shirts that we have banned. We even censor song lyrics and we DID censor a certain phrase that appeared in The Economist.

Bad Traffic System — We have a SMART tunnel which is not so SMART. I can’t recall if it’s been SMART from day one. A two-hour heavy downpour in downtown KL is enough to bring the entire city to gridlock.

A corrupt and inefficient Public Service — Do I need to elaborate further?

We are ranked 45th on the Global Cities Competitiveness Report and 60th on the Worldwide Corruption Perceptions index. The Little Red Dot by comparison ranked third and fifth place respectively.

The list goes on but my point here is stop giving us stupid answers.

By the way, some time back in January our PM boasted Malaysia has the “best package” as a country, just go
here
 to read about it.

I am sad that even this is not helping Dr Ng promote the nation. Sigh!

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 15 March 2012, 6:25 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Tourism
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Ex-cop says tribunal probe will implicate A-G, Musa in ‘black eye’ case

by Clara Chooi

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 16, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, March 16 — A former senior policeman wants Datuk Seri Najib Razak to set up a tribunal to investigate Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail and Tan Sri Musa Hassan, saying that this would find the duo guilty of fabricating evidence in Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s “black eye” incident.

Datuk Mat Zain Ibrahim, who was the investigating officer in the “black eye” case, claimed today that both men were never investigated for “evidence fabrication” and had only been cleared of “abuse of power” allegations.

He claimed this could be a “new lead” that would warrant the formation of the tribunal.

The former KL CID chief said only a tribunal endorsed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong could conduct a probe on Abdul Gani as the latter is currently the Attorney-General. Musa is a former Inspector-General of Police.

But Mat Zain predicted Najib’s refusal to heed his request, pointing out that Abdul Gani and Musa’s conviction would prove that Anwar had been victimised during the 13-year-old case.

“I believe that once it is proven that Gani and Musa fabricated evidence used during trial until it led to Anwar’s jail sentence, then this would in turn prove that Anwar has indeed been victimised all this time.

“When this happens, not only would Gani and Musa face the possibility of imprisonment of up to 21 years, the government’s credibility would also be destroyed,” Mat Zain said in an open letter addressed to Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar and copied to Najib today.

Despite this, Mat Zain said Najib and his government could not continue protecting Abdul Gani and Musa, claiming that proof of the duo’s guilt was too strong to be challenged and “even more conclusive than DNA”.

He even alleged that Najib was fully aware of this but was likely too afraid of the consequences to ensure both men are brought justice.

Explaining his claim that Abdul Gani and Musa have not been investigated for fabricating evidence, Mat Zain alleged that the first investigation by graftbusters into Anwar’s July 1, 2008 report that evidence was fabricated in his “black eye” case was a “decoy”.

This, he explained, was because the report was classified under section 15 of the Anti-Corruption Act 1997 for “abuse of power for gratifications” and not for “giving or falsifying evidence” under section 192 of the Penal Code.

“As far as I know, the ingredients to prove fault under section 15 of the ACA Act is vastly different from the offence of falsifying evidence under the Penal Code… Section 15, in my experience, is totally irrelevant to the investigation on false evidence,” he said.

Mat Zain added that if Abdul Gani and Musa had nothing to hide at the time, they should have been the ones to advice the then Anti-Corruption Agency that its investigation scope was flawed.

“In short, Gani and Musa, Dr Abdul Rahman and I (the four suspects named in the ACA probe) were never, I repeat, were never, investigated for allegations of evidence fabrication according to section 192 of the Penal Code,” he said.

Mat Zain, who has been leading a one-man campaign against Abdul Gani and Musa, also declared full responsibility for his statements today, saying he was aware of the risks and consequences of his actions.

He said he was ready to testify in a “no-holds-barred” fashion before the tribunal for the sake of resolving the more-than-a-decade-old matter “once and for all”.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 16 March 2012, 2:05 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Constitution
,
Corruption
,
Crime
,
Law & Order
,
Najib Razak
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Lynas, hazardous waste and rotting fish head

— Rama Ramanathan

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 16, 2012

MARCH 16 — Malaysians are wondering why Lynas is transporting concentrated ore from Australia to Malaysia. Many think they know the answer. I’ve made up my mind too, but it’s not because of the science/technology behind Lynas. It’s because I believe the old saying: fish begins to rot from the head; more on that later.

Do you think there are any other companies which transport ore out of Australia?

The answer is YES! There is a company listed on the Canadian stock exchange which operates a mine-cum-concentration plant in Western Australia and ships out lead ore, mainly to China.

Why do they ship ore out instead of processing it at home?

I suspect the main reason is the world commodity price of lead. The cost of building and operating a refining (smelting) plant must be balanced against the uncertainties of price and the very real possibility that the lead ore deposits will run out before the investment can be recovered.

There’s also the issue of getting workers who will work in remote areas, with heavy and restrictive masks and garments. And the heightened sensitivity of a population which is unwilling to accept risks which are tolerated in other countries.

The same population will clamour for the benefits of lead. Do you know that lead-acid batteries account for 80 per cent of global lead consumption? Do you know that lead is the most reclaimed metal in the world? Do you know that lead poisoning is accepted by many poor people in Third World shipwrecking yards because this work at least enables them to have and feed families for several years?

The population will also clamour for return on investment in their stocks in mining companies. Mining is a capital-intensive and risky business, with governments having the power to instantly shut down mining and related operations. Pension funds expect good returns from their investments in companies which supply metals essential for our enjoyment of cars and protect us from electric power outages.

Magellan Metals in Australia is owned by Ivernia, a Canadian company. Magellan operates a mine located near Wiluna town, almost in the centre of Western Australia.

After raising funds from various sources, investigating technology and obtaining approvals from government agencies, Magellan began sinking money into the project. Magellan cut roads, built equipment, put up buildings and commissioned them.

In October 2005 Magellan began to operate its open-cast mine and processing facility and commenced to ship concentrated ore about 1,000km by land to the port of Esperance and thereafter by sea to China.

In March 2007 Magellan had to suspend operations because it was discovered that lead dust had leaked while being transferred at Esperance port.

It was birds who signalled the problem. A parliamentary inquiry later concluded that about 9,500 birds had died due to poisoning by Magellan’s lead carbonate.

The Magellan mine resumed production and shipment after conducting a root cause investigation, developing a solution and testing its effectiveness.

The root cause was found to be the method of transporting the lead concentrate. The solution was to develop and prove a method of transporting the concentrate in wet form, within water and dust proof bags, within sealed containers.

The method — a demonstration of persistence and ingenuity — was approved by the regulators. The solution also included inspection and certification by independent auditors at various stages of the process.

Shipments resumed, beginning with stockpiles stored near Wiluna.

In September 2009 the first shipment left Fremantle port. Yes, Fremantle about 1,000km from Wiluna, not Esperance. Fremantle gave Magellan approval in February 2009.

It’s been reported that the containers travelled by rail through 22 areas of relatively high population density before arriving at the port to commence the sea journey to China.

Despite best efforts to design the packaging to be spill-proof, despite the monitoring by independent auditors of each package and container, despite public release of lots of inspection data — including audit reports — to the general public on Magellan’s website, the result was not what was expected; sometimes the bar is set too high.

On December 15, 2011 Magellan informed the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) of lapses in its management plan. Among other things, the plan required Magellan to inform the EPA within 12 hours of discovering any loose lead in the containers. Magellan said it had failed to do so. Further investigation revealed loose lead may have been detected as early as October 2009.

On December 31, 2011 the Australian environment minister ordered Magellan to stop shipments of lead concentrate between the Wiluna mine and Fremantle.

On February 23, 2012 the ban was lifted: after a review concluded that 28 monitoring results for air quality in transport containers did not exceed prescribed limits. The review was conducted by an independent Sydney-based scientist who had formerly worked for the CSIRO (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation). [We too have had experts review Lynas.]

What can we learn from the Magellan experience? What do we learn about Australia? What do we learn about technology and the need for continuous improvement? What inferences can we draw about Malaysia’s potential experience with Lynas?

We learn that life is never free of risk. We learn that to satisfy our “needs”, other people often work in “bad” situations: that’s the history of estate workers and tin miners in the making of Malaysia. We learn that investment is needed, and those who invest expect to make a profit. We learn that countries need to share risks.

We learn that we cannot anticipate all problems, we have to take calculated risks — often through periods of trial with extensive monitoring: remember the temporary operating licence for Lynas. We learn the importance of regulations, regulators and political will. We learn we must be vigilant.

In my first paragraph I said fish begin rotting from the head. In nations, when it comes to issues of policy and regulation, the head is the government of the day.

We live in Malaysia: where civil servants are subject to the Official Secrets Act; where civil servants are reminded to be “grateful” to Umno-BN for their education; where the political leanings of civil servants are assessed by the government; where the prime minister and his associates make “money deals” to buy votes; where people are detained for wearing yellow T-shirts; where ministers who are involved in unseemly ways with cows are protected; is the head rotting?

It’s not about Lynas. It’s about industry. It’s about the independence and courage of regulators. It’s about political will. It’s about a nation which estimates that in 2005 it produced close to 600,000 tons of toxic and hazardous waste. Is the body rotting? Will the civil servants wake up? Can we stop the rot?

                This entry was posted on Friday, 16 March 2012, 12:34 pm and is filed under
Lynas
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib sedang menunaikan janjinya

— Aspan Alias

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 15, 2012

15 MAC — Semalam saya ke Pekan, Pahang, berceramah bersama Tuan Haji Mohamad Sabu dan Datuk Mohd Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz di sebuah rumah di Sungai Miang, kalau tak salah saya. Kehadiran yang menunggu kami sangat menggalakkan dan saya agak terkejut juga melihat kedatangan begitu ramaiyang kesemuanya terdiri dari orang tempatan. Saya bergembira kerana bersebab.

Pertamanya kami ditunggu oleh begitu ramai rakyat tempatan dan saya tidak menyangka sambutannya begitu baik dan menggalakkan, kerana kawasan itu adalah kawasan Parlimen Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Razak. Yang hadir itu adalah dari setiap lapisan penduduk di Pekan dan mereka semuanya fokus mendengar apa yang kita perkatakan.

Keduanya inilah pertama kali saya sampai berceramah di Pekan sejak hampir 30 tahun dan seperti di kawasan-kawasan lain, Pekan juga mempunyai rakyat yang prihatin terhadap apa yang berlaku dalam sekitar politik negara. “Response” yang menggalakkan itu menunjukkan yang perkembangan terkini politik negara juga dirasai oleh penduduk bandar diRaja ini.

Tetapi seperkara yang saya tidak enak yang kami alami semasa ceramah tersebut, pihak yang berwajib tidak mengambil tindakan yang seadilnya terhadap pihak yang diganggu oleh pihak pimpinan Umno bahagian Pekan.

Umno Pekan telah mengadakan pula satu ceramah yang dihadiri oleh 70 orang dikampung disempadan pagar bersebelahan tempat kami berceramah dengan menghadapkan corong pembesar suara mereka betul-betul terhadap kami.

Pembesar suara itu dipasang dengan sekuat-kuatnya untuk mengganggu ceramah kami tetapi mereka yang hadir itu tetap juga mendengar apa yang diperkatakan oleh pihak kami dengan tekun. Saya merasakan sangat budaya mengganggu kegiatan pihak Pakatan Rakyat itu sememangnya memberikan lebihan kepada kami dan sesiapa yang hadir semalam diceramah kami telah menzahirkan perasaan marah mereka kerana pihak Umno berusaha keras untuk memberi peluang orang ramai tempatan mendengar pandangan dari pihak kami.

Tindakan mereka itu pastinya telah memberikan simpati dan menambahkan sokongan dari orang ramai. Umno tidak mampu lagi berbahas dengan hujah yang meyakinkan, maka mereka sekarang mengganggu kerja pihak lain. Dalam kes semalam ini, pihak penganjur majlis telah menaikkan poster beberapa hari yang lalu tentang kedatangan kami.

Maka bergegaslah cawangan Umno di tempat kami bakal memberikan ceramah itu membuat program mereka di sebelah tempat majlis kami semata-mata untuk mengganggu perjalanan majlis kami yang telah di atur berbulan sebelum ini. Mereka tidak segan dan silu untuk mengganggu kami dan perangai serta sikap mereka itu amat tidak wajar dalam sistem demokrasi yang negara kononnya amalkan.

Tetapi saya yang hadir di dalam majlis itu amat merasakan bahawa Umno kini sudah hampir ke penghujung hayatnya. Kita bukannya pandai untuk menelaah apa yang akan berlaku kepada Umno tetapi tingkah dan lakunya sendiri yang menunjukkan mereka yang parti yang mereka pertahankan itu sudah tidak bermaya untuk menghujah sesuatu isu itu dan mereka mengambil langkah terakhir, iaitu dengan menggunakan cara samseng dan menggangu majlis orang lain.

Ini merupakan kali kedua dalam tempoh seminggu saya mengalami gangguan seperti ini. Pada 10 Mac yang baru lalu ini, kami telah diganggu oleh kumpulan 20 orang di Seri Menanti, Negri Sembilan dan semalam saya mengalaminya buat kali kedua di Pekan Pahang. Selepas ini tidak tahu apa cara dan bila pula akan mengalami gangguan seperti itu lagi.

Kalau kita uruti sejarah yang lampau jika sesuatu pihak yang berkuasa itu bersifat dan berkelakuan seperti ini, tindakan kumpulan seperti selalunya merupakan dalil jelas yang mereka akan kehilangan kuasa yang selama ini mereka perolehi sejak berdekad-dekad dahulu.

Sekuat mana pun kumpulan yang berkuasa, melakukan tindakan yang jenayah seperti ini merupakan dalil jelas yang mereka akan kehilangan kuasa dan akan dipandang sepi oleh rakyat. Bacalah sejarah mana sekali pun “consequence” yang terakhir yang akan dialami oleh kumpulan samseng seperti ini ialah kekalahan dan kerugian yang mereka akan alami.

Tindakan mereka ini hanya memberikan keyakinan rakyat yang Umno serta Barisan Nasional itu sudah tidak ada cara dan jalan lain untuk mempertahankan kedudukan mereka selain dari melakukan kerja-kerja hina seperti ini.

Saya teringat kepada kata-kata Ketua Bahagian Pekan ini suatu ketika dahulu, “Kita akan pertahankan Putrajaya dengan cara apa sekali pun”. Mungkin cara mereka lakukan terhadap kami semalam adalah salah satu dari cara yang dimaksudkan oleh Ketua Bahagian Pekan ini.

Janjinya yang ini nampaknya akan ditunaikannya. Janji ini nampaknya akan menjanji agenda utamanya.. Salah seorang yang hadir semalam berkata kepada saya, “biarkan bro. Janji lain sudah lah selalu ‘flip-flop’ biarlah janji yang ini yang ditunaikannya Nak tunaikan janji lain belum tahu lagi kemampuannya untuk menunaikannya” katanya sambil menyindir. — aspanaliasnet.blogspot.com

                This entry was posted on Friday, 16 March 2012, 12:11 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Is Najib prepared to establish a judicial tribunal to investigate serious allegations against AG Gani Patail and former IGP Musa Hassan for subversion of the law and perversion of the course of justice?

How long is the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, to remain “blind deaf and mute” to the mounting pressures for a judicial tribunal to investigate serious allegations against the Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail and former Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan for subversion of the rule of law and the perversion of the course of justice?

The latest Open Letter by former senior police officer, Datuk Mat Zain Ibrahim  to Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Ismail Omar copied to the Prime Minister has brought the long-simmering scandal of serious allegations about the complicity of the chief legal officer of the land in the subversion of the rule of law and the perversion of the course of the justice to the centre of national and international attention.

Mat Zain revealed that on February 19, 2009, he had briefed and passed evidence to Najib over Gani and Musa’s “misconduct” in fabricating evidence in the Anwar Ibrahim “black eye” incident 13 years ago.

Musa was the investigating officer in the Anwar Ibrahim Sodomy I case while Abdul Gani led the prosecution. Mat Zain was the investigating officer in the black-eye incident.

Mat Zain said he was prepared to give “no holds barred” testimony under oath before a judicial tribunal when and if it is informed.

This is another “new lead” justifying the establishment of such a tribunal, as last week, the former Commercial Crime Investigation Department (CCID) chief Datuk Ramli Yusof also volunteered to testify before such a tribunal  against Gani and Musa, accusing both of gross abuses of power and misuse of the Anti-Corruption Agency to fix him and his men after a probe into a shady kingpin arrested by his team.

In his Open Letter today, Mat Zain said that both Gani and Musa were never investigated for “evidence fabrication” and had only been cleared of “abuse of power” allegations.

Would Najib prove Mat Zain right who predicted that the Prime Minister would not establish a judicial tribunal as Gani and Musa’s convictions would prove that Anwar had been victimised during the 13-year-old case which led to Anwar’s jail sentence?

Mat Zain said:  “When this happens, not only would Gani and Musa face the possibility of imprisonment of up to 21 years, the government’s credibility would also be destroyed.”

Najib should heed Mat Zain’s warning that the Prime Minister could be held for criminal misconduct if he chooses to continue to ignore or hide other people’s crime which is already within his knowledge.

Najib should come to Parliament to personally state whether he is prepared to initiate action for the establishment of a Judicial Tribunal into the serious allegations of the subversion of the rule of law and perversion of the course of justice made against Gani and Musa by former  top police officers in the land.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 16 March 2012, 4:49 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Crime
,
Najib Razak
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib wants Selangor, badly

— Gomen Man

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 16, 2012

MARCH 16 — There is a reason why Najib Razak is going to Selangor nearly every week: Getting back the country’s richest state is the minimum passing mark he has set himself in the coming elections.

Umno insiders say that Najib and his strategists do not believe Barisan Nasional (BN) can regain its two-thirds control of Parliament, but think that winning back Selangor will assuage Umno members and prevent a coup attempt against him.

And that is why Najib is using money like water in Selangor and spending nearly every weekend in some district there. And that is also why Pakatan Rakyat (PR) has reason to be worried about the sudden increase in the number of voters in constituencies in the state.

As it stands, Najib is confident that he will still be the prime minister and that he will do slightly better than Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. But not everyone in Umno believes that Najib’s advisors are giving him the right information, with some betting that anything between six and 10 parliamentary seats will fall in Sarawak, and that a good number of seats in Johor will also be lost.

On the flip side, Umno is confident that Kelantan will be retaken and Perak will stay with BN. Najib is due to visit Perak tomorrow and meet folks in Beruas and Ipoh, among other places, to convince them that his coalition is the best for the state.

But it is Selangor where Najib knows his fortunes lie. If the state remains with PR, Najib will have to look over his shoulders. A few days ago, he told the Selangor poor that they have to vote BN for poverty-eradication programmes to continue. Funny, where were these programmes in all the years that BN kept Selangor?

This is why you’ll see many reports of illegal sand excavations in Selangor. The newspapers are involved in making PR look as bad as possible. There will be cases of water problems, uncollected garbage and even social issues that will be blamed on Khalid Ibrahim and his cohorts.

All this for Najib and BN to look like saviours. Because Najib needs to win the country’s richest state and ensure PR will not use the wealth to expand their influence.

So Najib needs to sell himself and be seen with the people. As it is, there is a huge debate over who will be BN’s choice for a mentri besar if it retakes the state. Najib knows the history of most Selangor mentris besar. Even the most inexperienced unknown made sure he extracted more than sand from the state’s highest political and executive office.

Najib will keep visiting Selangor until its Election Day. And election day is when he is sure he can win back Selangor. It could be soon unless PR bucks up in their first term and do what they have promised.

This prime minister wants to win Selangor so badly and he might get it back unless the people remain vigilant.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 16 March 2012, 10:05 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Selangor
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Surat Terbuka – SALAHLAKU GANI PATAIL : MENUBUHKAN TRIBUNAL???

Mat Zain bin Ibrahim

16 Mac 2012.

Kepada;

YDH Tan Sri Ismail Hj.Omar,

Ketua Polis Negara,

Bukit Aman,

Kuala Lumpur.

[email protected]

YDH Tan Sri,

SALAHLAKU GANI PATAIL : MENUBUHKAN TRIBUNAL???

Saya meramalkan bahawa PM Najib, TIDAK akan menasihatkan YDP Agong untuk menubuhkan Tribunal, menyiasat tingkah laku Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail,Peguam Negara,walaupun beberapa banyak pendedahan salahlaku jenayah telah dibuat terhadap beliau sejak 13 tahun yang lampau.

PM Najib lebih rela memansuhkan undang-undang ISA dan Ordinan Dharurat,atau menubuhkan Suruhanjaya Di-Raja Siasatan dalam kes lain.Malah beliau bersedia membenarkan suami Shahrizat dituduh di-Mahkamah dan jika terdesak, akan sanggup membiarkan Sharizat dan anak-anak mereka juga dituduh kerana bersubahat.

Namun,dalam keadaan apa pun,PM Najib tidak akan membiarkan penubuhan Tribunal, jika penubuhan tersebut adalah untuk menyiasat Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan mantan Ketua Polis Negara,khasnya berkaitan memberi atau merekacipta keterangan palsu dalam sesuatu penyiasatan atau pendakwaan.

Anwar Ibrahim pernah membuat laporan polis pada 1.7.2008, mendakwa berlaku pemalsuan keterangan dalam penyiasatan insiden mata-lebam, melibatkan Gani Patail,Musa Hassan,seorang Dr.Rahman dan ACP Mat Zain (diri saya sendiri).Laporan itu pula digembar gemburkan, disiasat oleh sepasukan khas dari Badan Pencegah Rasuah (kemudian SPRM) serta mendapat liputan media seluasnya.

Begitu pun saya menyatakan, bahawa siasatan tersebut telah diklasifikasikan sebagai kesalahan “Salahguna kuasa”dibawah Seksyen 15 Akta Pencegah Rasuah 1997, tetapi bukan kerana kesalahan “Memberi atau mereka keterangan palsu” seperti terdapat didalam Seksyen 192  Kanun Keseksaan.

Setahu saya, ingredients untuk membuktikan kesalahan dibawah Seksyen 15 Akta BPR adalah jauh berbeza dengan yang wajib dibuktikan untuk kesalahan ‘memberi atau mereka keterangan palsu dibawah Kanun Keseksaan.Malah Sek.15 Akta 575 itu pada pengalaman saya, tidak releven langsung dengan siasatan mereka keterangan palsu.

Saya telah dipanggil sekurangnya 5 kali memberi keterangan kes ini, selain daripada pemeriksaan dilakukan dikediaman saya pada 4.7.2008 dimana pihak BPR mengambil beberapa banyak dokumen berkaitan siasatan ini. Saya ada menyuarakan pendapat saya kepada pegawai penyiasat kes, mengenai salah arahtuju siasatan dan menunjukkan dokumen-dokumen mana yang patut difokuskan, jika mengikut pengalaman saya.

Selepas itu,seorang pegawai perakam baru diarahkan untuk merakamkan semula percakapan saya dibawah seksyen 112 Kanun Prosidur Jenayah(CPC).Itupun untuk siasatan dibawah Seksyen 217 Kanun Keseksaan, yang juga lari serta tidak memenuhi ingredient dakwaan mereka keterangan palsu, seperti terdapat dibawah seksyen 192 KK.

Saya tidak mempersoalkan kemampuan dan kecekapan BPR/SPRM menjalankan siasatan dalam kes-kes rasuah dan salahguna kuasa dibawah Akta mereka.Dalam siasatan ini mereka lebih mahir dari polis.Namun dalam kes-kes di-bawah Kanun Keseksaan pula, mereka harus akui bahawa itu adalah bread and butter polis.

Contoh terbaik dan terkini ialah; apabila satu pengaduan berkaitan pecah amanah jenayah (CBT) dibuat terhadap keluarga Shahrizat Jalil berhubung skandal NFC.Pihak SPRM sendiri yang menghantar kes itu kepada pihak polis dengan mengakui kes CBT dibawah Kanun Keseksaan, bukan bidang mereka.

Sepatutnya Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan sendiri yang menasihatkan pihak BPR bahawa penyiasatan mereka tidak teratur jika mereka berdua tidak ada apa-apa yang hendak disembunyikan,dan tidak menunggu orang pencen seperti saya untuk melakukannya.

Hakikatnya,Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan,Dr.Rahman serta termasuk juga saya sendiri
tidak pernah
, diulangkan
tidak pernah
, disiasat kerana dakwaan merekacipta keterangan palsu, mengikut keperluan seksyen 192 Kanun Keseksaan.

‘Whitewashing exercise’.

Alasan bahawa polis tidak boleh menyiasat kes yang melibatkan Ketua Polis Negara sendiri adalah mengarut.Dalam kes mata-lebam 1998,saya cuma berpangkat ACP ketika dilantik menyiasat kes melibatkan KPN sendiri dengan dua orang pembantu berpangkat ASP sahaja.

Kami mampu menyiasat without fear or favour, serta mengemukakan cadangan yang telus dan betul,hanya untuk dilengahkan dan dimanipulasikan, selain daripada beberapa keterangan dipalsukan oleh Gani Patail dan Allahyarham Peguam Negara ketika itu,dengan dipermudahkan oleh Musa Hassan.

Saya mengulangi kenyataan yang pernah saya buat menerusi beberapa surat terbuka saya,bahawa perlantikkan Panel Bebas oleh Peguam Cara Negara (SG),dan membersihkan Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan menerusi Parlimen adalah satu whitewashing exercise sahaja.

Kandungan Kenyataan Menteri (Ministerial Statement) yang panjang lebar dibacakan oleh YB Menteri di-Jabatan Perdana Menteri dalam bulan Disember 2010,adalah mengelirukan.

Kenyataan Menteri menegaskan Dr.Rahman dan saya, bukan sabjek penyiasatan SPRM mengesahkan bahawa siasatan menyeluruh tidak dijalankan, kerana kami berdua turut dinamakan sebagai saspek bersama Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan dalam laporan polis yang telah dibuat itu.Jika siasatan tidak meliputi Dr.Rahman dan saya, bermakna siasatan tidak lengkap.

Saya tidak meletakkan kesalahan kepada YB Nazri Aziz, kerana beliau sekadar membacakan sahaja laporan yang disediakan oleh Jabatan Peguam Negara, yang berada dibawah kawalan dan arahan Gani Patail.Tambahan pula YB Nazri Aziz belum menjadi ‘Menteri Undang-Undang’ ketika Panel Bebas dilantik dan membuat keputusan membersihkan Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan berdua.

Jika Gani Patail sanggup menggunakan beberapa laporan palsu dalam RCI mata-lebam yang beliau sedar akan dipersembahkan kepada SPB Yang Di-Pertuan Agong,maka apatah lagi untuk sekadar menipu Jemaah Menteri dan rakyat biasa.

Itu pun dijangka, Kerajaan akan berkeras mempertahan Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan bersih daripada salahlaku jenayah seperti yang diumumkan .Walaupun begitu,hakikatnya ialah;bahawa kedua mereka hanya dibersihkan bagi kesalahan ‘salahguna kuasa’ dibawah Akta BPR sahaja dan tidak bagi dakwaan kesalahan lain.

Saya menekankan; Gani Patail,Musa Hassan,Dr.Rahman dan termasuk diri saya sendiri, belum boleh dibersihkan daripada dakwaan kesalahan mereka keterangan palsu dalam penyiasatan insiden mata-lebam 1998 oleh kerana TIDAK ADA penyiasatan yang dilakukan menurut Seksyen 192 Kanun Keseksaan.Oleh itu, status Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan masih lagi sebagai saspek-saspek utama,sama dengan Dr.Rahman dan Mat Zain.

PM DIRAMALKAN TIDAK AKAN MENASIHATKAN YDP AGONG MENUBUHKAN TRIBUNAL.

Menurut Perlembagaan Persekutuan,hanya Perdana Menteri seorang sahaja yang boleh membuat representasi kepada YDP Agong, untuk menubuhkan suatu Tribunal yang mengandungi Ahli-Ahli sepertimana yang ditetapkan, bagi mengadili tingkahlaku seorang Peguam Negara,sepertimana perbekalan Artikel 145(6) dibaca bersama Artikel 125(3) Perlembagaan.

PM tidak perlu mendapat kelulusan Parlimen atau dari Jemaah Menteri atau apa-apa Order to Investigate atau Sanction to Prosecute daripada Peguam Negara, untuk melaksanakan kuasa ini.Pada pendapat saya, Parlimen atau mana-mana Menteri pun tidak boleh menjawab bagi pihak PM berkaitan Tribunal kerana mengikut Perlembagaan, kuasa menasihatkan YDP Agong untuk menubuhkan Tribunal adalah hak ‘exclusive’ PM seorang diri.

Dari segi pembuktian salahlaku memalsukan keterangan seperti yang didakwa,telahpun berada dalam pengetahuan dan simpanan PM Najib sejak 19.2.2009, ketika beliau masih lagi seorang Timbalan Perdana Menteri.Soal menjustifikasikan tindakan PM tidak timbul.Diharap YAB PM telah dinasihatkan beliau boleh dikaitkan dengan salahlaku jenayah, jika terus menyembunyikan salahlaku jenayah sesaorang.

Saya menekankan, dengan bukti-bukti yang terdapat dalam kertas siasatan insiden mata-lebam dan dokumen-dokumen dalam Laporan Suruhanjaya Di-Raja siasatan insiden sama,saya pasti 100%, Tribunal jika ditubuhkan, akan mendapati dakwaan terhadap Gani Patail kerana kesalahan  mereka beberapa keterangan palsu, adalah benar dan betul.

Pada pendapat saya,kemampuan untuk membuktikan bahawa Gani Patail dan pengsubahatan Musa Hassan dalam memalsukan beberapa keterangan dan penggunaannya dalam prosiding-prosiding kehakiman terhadap Anwar Ibrahim, merupakan perkara yang sangat dibimbangi oleh PM Najib sendiri dan Kerajaan keseluruhannya.

Mungkin atas kebimbangan inilah, PM Najib dan Kerajaan sedaya upaya, akan melindungi Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan daripada dibawa kehadapan mana-mana juga prosiding kehakiman, jika terma rujukkannya, adalah untuk menyiasat kesalahan membuat atau merekacipta atau memberi keterangan palsu dalam penyiasatan atau pendakwaan, khususnya jika melibatkan Anwar.

FAKTOR ANWAR IBRAHIM.

Saya percaya umum dapat menyimpulkan,bahawa apabila Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan dibuktikan telah memalsukan beberapa keterangan dan menggunakan dalam perbicaraan, sehingga menyebabkan Anwar Ibrahim disabitkan kesalahan dan dihukum penjara, maka sekaligus dan dengan sendirinya, membuktikan bahawa memang benar Anwar telah teraniaya selama ini.

Apabila ini berlaku,bukan sahaja Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan akan berhadapan dengan kemungkinan dijatuhkan hukuman penjara selama tempoh berjumlah sehingga 21 tahun,malahan kredibiliti Kerajaan akan musnah sama sekali.

Apa pun keadaannya,PM Najib dan Kerajaan tidak boleh terus melindungi Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan.Keterangan untuk mensabitkan mereka dengan kesalahan merekacipta keterangan-keterangan palsu,seperti yang sedia ada dalam tangan PM sendiri, serta lain-lain yang telah didedahkan, adalah terlalu kukuh untuk dicabar.Malah lebih konklusif dari DNA.Saya tekankan bahawa mereka berdua tidak ada defense.

KEADILAN AWAM.

Kesalahan membuat atau memberi keterangan-keterangan palsu seperti yang dilakukan oleh Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan, bukan kesalahan terhadap mana-mana individu persaorangan. Kesalahan yang mereka lakukan adalah terhadap Keadilan Awam itu sendiri dan Negara.

Saya menegaskan bahawa mereka berdua yang memilih untuk melakukan kesalahan-kesalahan jenayah itu secara sengaja, dengan kemahuan dan untuk kepentingan dan faedah diri mereka sendiri.Mereka tidak boleh mengaitkan mana-mana pihak ketiga atau mana-mana pemimpin Negara dahulu atau sekarang dalam tindakan mereka.

Saya sendiri yang telah menyampaikan pesanan dan arahan mantan Perdana Menteri Tun Mahathir Mohammed, secara lisan dan bertulis kepada Peguam Negara dan Gani Patail persendirian, serta pucuk pimpinan PDRM ketika itu, bahawa beliau(Tun Mahathir) tidak mahu sebarang ‘cover-up’ dilakukan oleh mana-mana pihak yang mengendalikan kes siasatan melibatkan Anwar Ibrahim.

Selain itu,saya telah memberi amaran lisan dan bertulis kepada Gani Patail , bahawa jika beliau terus menggunakan khidmat Dr.Rahman Yusof sedemikian itu,akan timbul ‘complications’ dikemudian hari kelak.Namun Gani Patail tidak menghiraukan amaran itu dan terus melakukan apa yang telah berlaku.

KESIMPULAN.

Saya mengambil tanggung jawab atas kebenaran segala fakta yang terkandung dalam surat ini.Saya sedar akan risiko dan konsekuennya, sekiranya terbukti kenyataan-kenyataan saya adalah tidak benar atau palsu.

Sepertimana juga orang lain,saya juga mempunyai hak untuk diberi pendengaran yang adil dan membersihkan diri saya dari dakwaan serious mereka keterangan palsu yang dinamakan bersama Gani Patail,Musa Hassan dan Dr.Rahman dalam siasatan insiden mata-lebam seperti yang diadukan oleh Anwar Ibrahim pada 1.7.2008 itu.

Lebih-lebih lagi sebagai seorang Islam,saya sedar,saya tahu dan saya melihat dengan mata dan kepala saya sendiri, bahawa dakwaan yang dilontarkan terhadap Gani dan Musa seperti yang dilaporkan itu, adalah benar dan betul.

Saya bersedia memberikan keterangan ‘no holds barred’ secara bersumpah dihadapan Tribunal bila dan jika dibentuk,supaya tidak ada sebarang keraguan lagi dalam perkara ini,untuk membolehkan Negara mengorak langkah kehadapan, tanpa terbantut dengan karenah Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan lagi.

Tidak salah bagi saya untuk meminta diri saya sendiri disiasat kerana dakwaan mereka keterangan palsu ketika menjadi Ketua Penyiasat insiden mata-lebam 1998,memandangkan Parlimen sendiri mengesahkan saya bukan sabjek penyiasatan SPRM dan tidak boleh dibersihkan daripada dakwaan tersebut, sedangkan pesalah-pesalah tegar yang sebenar telah dibersihkan pula.

Sebaiknya jika Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan dapat berpadu tenaga, untuk meminta PM membenarkan Tribunal dibentuk supaya kemelot ini dapat diselesaikan once and for all,daripada terus dibiarkan membelenggu rakyat.

Kini saya serahkan kepada kebijaksanaan YAB Perdana Menteri untuk membuat sesuatu keputusan yang betul,adil dan saksama, bersandarkan kepada peraturan Undang-Undang; sepertimana rayuan bertulis saya kepada beliau pada 19.2.2009.

Yang salah itu tetap salah,yang benar itu kita katakan benar.

Salam sejahtera.

Mat Zain Ibrahim.

16.03.2012.

Salinan:

YAB Dato Seri Najib bin Tun Abdul Razak,

Perdana Menteri,

Pejabat Perdana Menteri Malaysia,

Putrajaya.

[email protected]

                This entry was posted on Friday, 16 March 2012, 3:12 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Constitution
,
Crime
,
Law & Order
,
Najib Razak
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Putrajaya waffles on Lynas

— Ali Kadir

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 17, 2012

MARCH 17 — Somebody in the government thinks he is pretty smart by announcing the setting-up of a parliamentary select committee on Lynas’s rare earth plant in Gebeng.

This is a familiar tactic by the Najib government. When they are caught in a pickle, they scramble for a way out. And what is really shocking is how quickly they change their tone from steadfast defence of a stance, policy or project to building consensus, all in the name of votes.

Last year, Najib Razak and his colleagues ridiculed and demonised Bersih 2.0 and the calls for free and fair elections. Then, when they realised that the rakyat were with Ambiga Sreenevasan and friends and that they were onto a hiding, they set up a parliamentary select committee.

Now, after months of defending the Lynas project and even taking over the role of spokesman and defenders of the Australian company, they are once again buckling. No less than Najib vouched for Lynas, saying that the project was scientifically and factually safe.

I have no problem with a government that can stand up for its principles and defend unpopular policies, but how do Malaysians respect leaders who shiver and wilt at the slightest hint that they could lose some votes?

If the government did not have the resolve in the first place, why give Lynas a temporary operating licence even though the company has not put in place a system of waste management?

There is nothing more frustrating than a wishy-washy government. Not that Malaysians believe that much will come of this parliamentary committee; it is a public relations exercise since its findings will come out in three months while Lynas has a licence for a two-year trial run.

I stand corrected. There is something worse than a wishy-washy government: A wishy-washy government that is also devious.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 17 March 2012, 10:41 pm and is filed under
Lynas
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Shahrizat’s departure: What sacrifice?

Yap Mun Ching | Mar 14, 2012

Malaysiakini

The announced departure of Women and Family Development Minister Shahrizat Abdul Jalil could not have come a moment too soon given the depth and breadth of the Cowgate scandal which has now festered for months.

It brings relief to many who have deplored the slow reaction of enforcement authorities in acting decisively to address the unfolding mess which has focused international spotlight on gross corruption in Malaysia.

In commenting on Shahrizat’s ‘resignation’, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak disappointingly described the action as one of sacrifice in the interest of the government and the party.

Najib had justified his statement on grounds that there is “no proof so far that she had committed any offence in terms of law”.

In the light of the statement by National Feedlot Corporation CEO Wan Shahinur Izmir Salleh, Shahrizat’s son, admitting that the company had used funds meant for the development of a cattle business to purchase luxury condominiums, the prime minister, it would seem, has overstepped his attempts at neutrality.

If Shahrizat sacrificed for anything at all, it would be to raise some pertinent questions about the state of governance in Malaysia.

While there has been much focus on how Shahrizat’s family purportedly misused a RM250 million government soft loan, much less attention has been given to how the loan was approved in the first place.

Burning questions

In regulations on corporate governance, it is clearly stipulated that family members of the managers of a public-listed company are prohibited from benefitting from contracts awarded by the company to avoid a conflict of interest.

How can it be then that governance of billions in taxpayers’ money can fail this simple test?

The Australian government’s Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines, for instance, calls for agencies to recognise and deal with any conflicts of interest, including perceived conflicts of interest (emphasis added).

Other burning questions arise.

In awarding the contract, has the Agriculture Ministry, as the ministry responsible, checked the background of the NFC to verify whether it has a proven track record of running a cattle business before awarding it a generous RM250 million loan to develop a national beef industry?

What were the terms and conditions governing the issuance of the loan?

If Wan Shahinur (left) has any ground to stand on (a claim disputed by Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua), how prevalent is this practice of using government loans not for stated national interest purposes but to purchase luxury cars and condominiums?

If a layman can spot these glaring loopholes, what then is the attorney-general doing about it?

Not exactly resigning

Shahrizat’s decision to leave office can also hardly be framed as a resignation.

In fact, the minister will be staying on until the expiry of her term as senator, which means that she will only be leaving and not resigning.

By staying until her term expires, she will still be entitled to any pensions and benefits associated with her.

This brings me to my last point, which is that the decision to have Shahrizat in government was not at all the people’s intention.

The Wanita Umno chief lost her Lembah Pantai parliamentary seat to opposition MP Nurul Izzah Anwar in 2008 and is therefore not an elected representative of the people.

The responsibility for her being in a position that allowed the scandal to take place should be laid squarely on those who made her minister and cabinet member.

This is a lesson to be borne in mind in the next general election.

It is one thing if a qualified professional is appointed through senatorship to high office but it is another to elevate a politician who was once an elected representative and a minister but subsequently rejected by the people.

If a government cannot choose its leaders well, it should at least listen to the people.

——————————————————————————–

YAP MUN CHING was a former Malaysiakini journalist.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 17 March 2012, 7:42 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Into the lion’s den

— Sakmongkol AK47

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 17, 2012

MARCH 17 — I went back into the lion’s den last Wednesday, March 14. I took part in my first ceramah as a DAP member in Pekan Pahang in a kampung called Kampung Sungai Miang. The ceramah was organised by the local PAS chapter at a house belonging to a PAS supporter. The house has a big compound and was able to accommodate a large crowd. The two other speakers at the ceramah were my fellow DAP colleague Aspan Alias. The other was PAS firebrand, deputy president Mat Sabu.

I spoke with a Pekan slang. This is the seat of our PM. He is the MP for Pekan with its four ADUNs. He is the man with the 69 per cent approval rating. He is the man who coined so many acronymed initiatives. A smorgasbord consisting of strange morsels termed as NKRA, ETP, PDP, NEM, and so many others. We have lost count. He is the one speaking about 1 Malaysia and who taught adults and children alike to show up one obscene finger.

I have proven one point. While Najb’s personal rating goes up 60 per cent, Umno’s rating has gone down. And that night on March 14, the response shown by Pekan Umno did not do justice to the man who gets a 69.

While we were holding the ceramah where more than 600 attended, Umno was given permission to do a ceramah barely 100 yards away. The attendance? Not more than 60 people. Of course, if you count the drinks and refreshments, the empty chairs, the lamp posts, the chickens, more than 100 attended the Umno ceramah.

Is this the best Pekan Umno Pekan can do? It just proves my point. Pekan Umno is just Najib personified, no Najib, no Pekan Umno. That’s how he wanted it. Pekan Umno Pekan survives and revolves around him. Below him, Pekan Umno is just an empty shell — a paper tiger pretending to roar and prowl. That night they only managed to purr like a kitten.

We had to carry on with our ceramah in spite of the speakers blaring in our direction. Speaker after speaker from JASA (the professional whores owned by Umno) shouted obscenities and repeated the standard issue of Umno propaganda crafted by the cerebrally challenged deskbound eunuchs at the JASA office. Hello JASA, you are meant to serve the people not Umno.

Now allow me to answer an article from a fellow blogger who I thought can muster a little bit more analytical substance. Alas, he has shown himself to be just another party apparatchik.

My critical assessment of Najib and Umno was taken as criticisms of:

1) Najib the PM

2) Najib the Umno president

3) Najib — one of the four chieftains at the Pahang royal court.

My criticism was also taken to be an attack on the Pahang royalty. As I had received my Datukship from the Sultan of Pahang, accordingly because I assailed one of His Royal Highness’ four chieftains, my action is taken as an attack on the Sultan himself (?).

Are we living in ancient times?

This is the problem with Umno apparatchiks. I am as loyal a subject to HRH the Sultan of Pahang as any other Umno dumbasses. Even DAP members are loyal subjects to the King. The King is King to all Malaysians and not King only to Umno people.

If my initial ceramah can cause this kind of consternation so as to invite the bizarre response of escalating the fight with Umno and its president as a fight against the three items listed above, then it only shows Umno is in deeper shit that we thought. The office of the PM is only a TOL — not a permanent title. The PM serves as long as his party receives support from voters. If in the next elections more Malays reject Umno like in 2008, then my wish that Najib must be given a victory in Pekan so that he goes to Parliament as opposition leader will come true.

I have no wish to expend my thinking on items 2 and 3. — sakmongkol.blogspot.com

* Sakmongkol AK47 is the nom de plume of Datuk Mohd Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz. He was Pulau Manis assemblyman (2004-2008).

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 17 March 2012, 10:29 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why women are marching on March 18

— Ivy Josiah

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 17, 2012

MARCH 17 — Tomorrow, a coalition of organisations called Wanita Suara Perubahan will gather at the Padang Astaka in Petaling Jaya. The staff, members and volunteers of the Women’s Aid Organisation (WAO) will also be marching proudly as part of Wanita Suara Perubahan with thousands of women from all over Malaysia demanding a clean government.

We will all be wearing white gloves. The gloves represent clean hands and symbolise clean government and as the country prepares for next general election, we want our elected representatives to commit to ensuring a clean government for Malaysia.

We want our political leaders to accept and realise the demands of women, which include: a government free from corruption, the introduction of a decent living wage, a better quality of life, an end to gender-based violence, the repeal of laws that restrict public assemblies and the establishment of free and fair elections.

Our demand for a corruption-free and accountable government is critical, as women are particularly vulnerable to the consequences of corruption, racism, exploitation, divisive politics and a curtailment of civil liberties. Millions of ringgit have been misspent that should have been used to ensure adequate housing, health, transportation, education, living wages and environmental protection. Women suffer the consequences of unjust laws as well as poor enforcement of laws relating to personal safety and gender-based violence.

● A clean government does not squander money.

● A clean government includes its citizens in decision-making through genuine and open consultation.

● A clean government ensures the impartiality and efficacy of public institutions, including the judiciary, the anti-corruption watchdog and the police force.

● A clean government ensures the safety of its citizens from gender based violence.

● A clean government ensures that citizens can exercise their right to assemble peacefully.

● A clean government has a mandate to govern only when elections are free and fair.

* Ivy Josiah is executive director of WAO.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 17 March 2012, 12:19 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Elections
,
women
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Guan Eng rallies DAP members, says survival at stake in GE-13

By Clara Chooi

The Malaysian Insider

Mar 18, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, March 18 — Lim Guan Eng today called for extra vigilance from DAP members to counter Barisan Nasional’s (BN) vote offensive, reminding them that the party’s political survival would be at stake in the coming polls.

Predicting that the 13th general election would be the country’s “dirtiest” in history, the DAP secretary-general said it was crucial for party members to stay resilient in the face of attacks from the ruling BN pact.

“DAP urges all leaders and members to redouble efforts to ensure that Pakatan Rakyat (PR) wins the next general elections so that DAP can remain a party in power in state governments and hopefully in the Federal government too.

“The danger signals are evident that the 13th general election will be the dirtiest in Malaysian history,” Lim said in a statement here in conjunction with DAP’s 46th anniversary today.

The Penang Chief Minister took a swipe at BN leaders for allegedly using money politics and misusing government machinery to shore up political support, saying it was a classic replay of past tactics.

Even worse, said Lim, BN leaders have now resorted to using “menacing tactics” to cow the opposition.

As examples, he noted that PR leaders like Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu and himself have experienced threats of personal harm and violence during public events.

“Even PKR vice-president Nurul Izzah Anwar was threatened harm by a BN man in Pahang.

“It is not Malay culture but also not Malaysian culture for a man to threaten a woman with physical bodily harm,” he complained.

Lim also railed against the recent incident involving his 15-year-old son who was accused of sexually molesting a female classmate.

“Even though the so-called lady victim had publicly stated that this is false as she had never met my son or me, no action has been taken by the police against Umno Online and Umno bloggers who publicised these lies,” he pointed out.

“For this reason DAP leaders and members must remain vigilant against such BN’s shameless 4M (money, media, machinery, menacing PR leaders) and 4R (race, religion, royalty and rigging the Election Commission) tactics.”

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 18 March 2012, 2:34 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
,
Lim Guan Eng
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.