PKFZ scandal – Ong Tee Keat should explain whether it is true that he had on 10th May 2009 as Transport Minister pressured the Prime Minister to approve RM1.2 billion payment as variation of costs for PKFZ

My three questions (No.58 to No. 60 on the 20th day in the current series) to Transport Minister Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat on the RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal today are:

 No. 1. –  A website,
http://pkfz.blogspot.com/
,  has appeared which uploaded exchange of letters to show that on 10th May 2009, Ong had on 10th May 2008 as Transport Minister pressured the Prime Minister  to approve RM1.2 billion payment as variation of costs for the PKFZ project to its turnkey developer, Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd and asked why this information was omitted in the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) audit report on the PKFZ.

Ong should explain whether it is true that he had on 10th May 2008 as Transport Minister pressured the Prime Minister  to approve RM1.2 billion payment as variation of costs for the PKFZ project and confirm the two letters uploaded on this website.

No. 2  – This website also made a very serious allegation – that Datuk Lee Hwa Beng’s tenure as Port Klang Authority (PKA) Chairman ended on 15th February 2009 and that until today the Yang di Pertuan Agong had never given consent to extend or renew Lee’s term, and that Ong is asking the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, to backdate Lee’s appointment. Is this true?

Question No. 3 – Ong has at last admitted on his blog yesterday  that he has gone to France to attend the “prestigious”  Paris Air Show “to meet up with my French counterpart”.

Couldn’t he send his Deputy Minister to the Paris Air Show? What is there so important about the Paris Air Show except as an excuse for a junket at taxpayers’ expense, when there is the important issue of proper parliamentary accounting by him on the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal?

If Ong’s attending the Paris Air Show is so honourable and above-board, why did he hide it from public knowledge instead of declaring publicly in advance that he was going for the Paris Air Show and would miss Parliament meeting and parliamentary accounting of the PKFZ scandal?

Is Ong prepared to submit to a public opinion poll as to whether he had acted responsiby in going off for a junket for the Paris Air Show instead of being in Parliament on the very first day to account for the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal?

In fact, there is no need for a national opinion poll. Just poll the MCA members and I have no doubt that the overwhelming majority of the ordinary MCA members or more than 90 per cent will agree that Ong was being utterly irresponsible in running away to the Paris Air Show instead of giving proper accounting of the PKFZ scandal in Parliament.

Of course, if the MCA Ministers, Deputy Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries and MPs are polled, 99 per cent will agree that Ong was right to go off for the Paris Air Show.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 18 June 2009, 1:26 pm and is filed under
PKFZ
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Umno must abandon old politics and work together with Singapore to bring about prosperity and progress for Malaysia and Singapore

By
Dr Chen Man Hin
, DAP Life Advisor

PM Najib wants more development for Johore and Malaysia by improving relationships with Singapore. His proposal to build a third bridge to link South East Johore with Changi of Singapore was meant to bring economic development for South East Johore and Singapore.

Umno insisted that selling land to Singapore was akin to giving up Malaysia’s sovereignty. This is ridiculous.

Umno should be aware that large quantities of sand and quarry stone have been sold to Singapore for many years. Yet we have not lost our sovereignty.

Umno must realise that the rural population of South Johore – in particular both South East and South West Johore are still quite poor
 because development has not come to these places. These places need foreign investment to build factories and bring in tourists and provide employment and create prosperity.

CO-OPERATION BETWEEN MALAYSIA AND SINGAPORE COULD CREATE A ‘SHENZEN’ FOR JOHORE.

 Umno should organise a study trip to visit Shenzen and see the stupendous transformation of Shenzen from a fishing village to dynamic pulsating economic zone in the like of Hong Kong.

If Umno is sincere in wanting to help the rural population of  South Johore, it should be serious in bring development to these people. Umno has no objections to open up the ISKANDAR development region to foreigners including Singapore, there is no good reason for refusing Singapore to help in the development of South East Johore.

Times have changed. UMNO’s old politics have no place in modern politics. The days of treating Singapore a suspicious intruder are no more. Both countries have to work together. Admittedly there is no love lost love between Malaysia and Singapore. But the hard facts of world wide recession, negative growth in both countries and a 60% drop in foreign investments are compelling reasons for active lasting co-operation between Malaysia and Singapore.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 18 June 2009, 5:19 pm and is filed under
Dr. Chen Man Hin
,
Economics
,
Foreign
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Website launched as part of the effort to get to the bottom of the “scandal of scandals” in the nation’s history

Today, a website on the RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal,
http://pkfz-scandal.org/
 is launched as part of the effort to get to the bottom of the “scandal of scandals” in the nation’s history.

I am very disappointed with the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) decision that its Chairman, Datuk Seri Azmi Khalid need not disqualify himself and step down from the PAC inquiry into the PKFZ scandal, despite a clear conflict of interest, as he was a Cabinet Minister from 2004 to 2008 when the Cabinet took many critical decisions resulting in the ballooning of the PKFZ scandal from RM1.1 billion in 2002 to RM4.6 billion in 2007 and now RM7.5 billion and heading towards the astronomical cost of RM12.5 billion.

I never suggested that Azmi has any personal interest in any PKFZ transaction but as a Minister involved in the decision-making process resulting in the PKFZ project becoming the “mother of  all scandals”, he should be a witness appearing before the PAC to testify why he as a Minister had supported the Cabinet decision in July 2007 to bail out the PKFZ project at the astronomical cost of RM4.6 billion – when the Cabinet should know that it would mushroom further to RM7.5 billion and later RM12.5 billion instead of heading a PAC inquiry into it.

No wonder Azmi does not agree that the PAC should summon the two former Transport Ministers Tun Dr. Ling Liong Sik and Datuk Seri Chong Kong Choy, as well as the former Port Klang Authority (PKA) Chairman and now Deputy Finance Minister, Datuk Seri Chor Chee Heung, to testify before the PAC – a clear case of Azmi protecting BN leaders!

It is clear that Azmi and all PAC members who supported him to head the inquiry into the PKFZ scandal just do not understand the meaning of accountability, transparency, integrity and good governance.

This makes this website to get to the bottom of the PKFZ scandal even more more imperative, and all who have
information about the PKFZ scandal
 are welcome to send them to this website, which is run by webmaster Goh Kheng Teong or to me.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 18 June 2009, 12:24 pm and is filed under
IT
,
PKFZ
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


BN on the defensive in first week of Parliament

We have just ended the first week of Parliament and we see the Barisan Nasional in total defensive, unable to give a proper and satisfactory accounting of the many burning issues in the country resulting in the continuous erosion of public confidence in the credibility, integrity and legitimacy of Datuk Seri Najib Razak as the sixth Prime Minister of Malaysia.

The 25-minute ruckus at the start of the first day in Parliament on 15th June following the swearing-in of the PAS MP for Bukit Gantang, Datuk Seri Mohamad Nizar Jamaluddin, when he shocked everyone with loud and righteous cries of “Hidup Rakyat. Bubar DUN” served one important purpose – to focus national attention on the most shameful episode in the 52-year history of Malaysian parliamentary history, the unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab in Perak based on three “political frogs” who had to hide from the public for fear of popular condemnation for more than four-hand-a-half months!

I confess I was shocked when Nizar, in the podium of the House, shouted “Hidup Rakyat. Bubar DUN” with his raised fist, as I had not expected him to do that, but I was pleasantly shocked, as he had highlighted the deep-seated feelings of all Malaysians concerned about justice and democracy.

In the first week of Parliament, neither the ministerial nor parliamentary teams of Barisan Nasional was able to take the offensive, as they could not give credible or acceptable accounts on all the burning issues of the day, whether:

The undemocratic and illegal power grab in Perak;

The RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal, made worse with the Transport Minister, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat, absconding to Paris to avoid parliamentary accounting;

Public cynicism over the “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now” slogan of Prime Minister Najib, with daily examples reducing it to a joke – like the “annual begging session” with SPM top-scorers denied PSD scholarships despite the government claim that 20% or 400 places out of 2,000 foreign scholarships would be allocated strictly on meritocracy;

Failure of the two RM67 billion economic stimulus packages;

Rampant crime with Malaysians never so unsafe in the country since Merdeka in 1957, and yet with police more concerned with protecting the political interests of the Barisan Nasional, stretching police resources to harass Pakatan Rakyat leaders and NGO activists instead of catching criminals and reducing crime.

The defensive mode of Barisan Nasional in the first week of Parliament is added reason why Najib should seek a motion of confidence to buttress his credibility, integrity and legitimacy as Prime Minister of Malaysia.

Many are baffled and puzzled why the Prime Minister is suddenly raising the subject of “Barisan Nasional-Pakatan Rakyat unity government” talks when earlier it was all about “Umno-Pas unity government” talks.

We are all Malaysians and there is no reason why we cannot sit down to talk about issues concerning the people and nation but to talk about “BN-PR unity government” talks is more than premature.

Let the BN and PR parties sit down to talk about the burning issues I had mentioned just now: the undemocratic coup d’etat in Perak; a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal; how to make Najib’s slogan “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now” really meaningfully; how to unite Malaysians to successfully face the worst global crisis in a century and transform Malaysia into a high-income developed nation; make Malaysia safe for its citizens, tourists and investors; eradicate corruption, etc.

If we cannot even sit down to talk about these burning issues to find solutions to them, any talk of “BN-PR unity government” is utterly unrealistic.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 19 June 2009, 1:03 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
,
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Did OTK regard the post of Transport Minister as just a postman or delivery boy for PKA without any ministerial responsibility to ensure that the RM1.2 billion variation order demanded by Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd for PKFZ was proper and legitimate?

My three questions (No.61 to No. 63 on the 21st day in the current series) to Transport Minister Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat on the
RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal
 today are:

No. 1: Yesterday I had asked Ong to confirm authenticity of the exchange of letters which appeared on the website, http://pkfz.blogspot.com/, showing that on 10th May 2008, he had written to the Prime Minister seeking approval for RM1.2 billion payment as variation order for the PKFZ project to its turnkey developer, Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd (KDSN).

In his response from Paris in his blog, confirming the authenticity of the exchange of letters, Ong said that he was merely relaying the Port Klang Authority (PKA) board’s decision to the then Prime Minister, Datuk Seri (now Tun) Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

Ong said: “I was then into my ministerial job for less than two months and the PKA board’s decision was made even before my time. Besides, the PricewaterhouseCoopers had not even started their position review work.”

He added that the variation order was approved by the PKA board in 2008 and had written to him asking him to write to Abdullah to apply for the additional funding.

He noted that at that time PKA was also at risk of defaulting payment as the deadline to meet its financial obligations was approaching.

I am stumped by the sheer arrogance and utter sense of irresponsibility of Ong’s reply, adopting a position disclaiming all responsibility for the RM1.2 billion KDSN variation order.

I want to ask Ong whether he regarded the post of Transport Minister as just a postman or delivery boy for PKA without any ministerial responsibility to ensure that the RM1.2 billion variation order demanded by KDSN for PKFZ was proper and legitimate?

Has he forgotten that one month before he endorsed the RM1.2 billion KDSN variation order, he had publicly declared in early April 2008 that he would “tell all” about the PKFZ scandal, how the project had ballooned to RM4.6 billion – yet one month later, Ong was merrily endorsing another RM1.2 billion PKFZ development cost variation order without batting an eyelid?

Wasn’t Ong aware that even if he wanted to endorse KDSN’s RM1.2 billion PKFZ variation order, he had to take it to the Cabinet for approval as this was one of the specific conditions of Cabinet approval for the PKFZ project in 2002 – that every RM100 million variation in the development costs of PKFZ would require prior Cabinet approval?

Here there was a not just a RM100 million variation order but one which exceeded the RM100 million limit by 12 times!

When did the Cabinet alter its 2002 decision that every RM100 million variation in the development costs of PKFZ require prior Cabinet approval (binding the two former Transport Ministers, Datuk Seri (now Tun) Dr. Ling Liong Sik and Datuk Seri Chan Kong Choy) as to exempt the RM1.2 billion variation order during the time Ong as Transport Minister from being endorsed by the Cabinet?

Ong could not claim that he did not know about this specific Cabinet condition for the PKFZ project on the ground that he was not in the Cabinet in 2002, as I had repeatedly mentioned this Cabinet condition in Parliament since 2007!

Ong also could not claim that he did not have the time to submit the RM1.2 billion PKFZ variation order to Cabinet for approval.

Ong was appointed Transport Minister on Tuesday,18th March 2008, and there were eight Wednesdays (when Cabinet met) before Ong sent off his endorsement letter asking for approval for the RM1.2 billion variation order from the Prime Minister.

Why didn’t Ong bring up this RM1.2 billion PKFZ development cost variation order demanded by KDSB at any one of these eight Cabinet meetings before he shot off his letter to the Prime Minister asking for approval to release the RM1.2 billion payments?

If this is not Ministerial dereliction of duty, I do not know what it is!

Question No. 2: I welcome the announcement by the Transparency International Malaysia president Datuk Paul Low’s announcement of his resignation as a life member of MCA, so as not to compromise his appointment as Chairman of PKFZ ad hoc committee on corporate governance and his impartiality in investigating the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal.

I had publicly stated that I had not doubted Paul Low’s integrity and was prepared to give him the opportunity to “walk the talk” on making a significant contribution to improving the system of governance and integrity in government agencies.

The only question is whether Paul Low and the PKFZ ad hoc committee on corporate governance will be allowed to fully probe into all the past PFKZ misdeeds,misuse of powers, conflict of interests, corrupt practices or all forms of malpractices which landed the country with a RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal though it started off as a RM1.1 billion project in 2002 under Transport Minister, Tun Dr. Ling Liong Sik before quadrupling more than four times to RM4.6 billion in 2007 under Datuk Seri Chan Kong Choy as Transport Minister.

This question is pertinent as Ong had declared after the announcement of the PKFZ ad hoc committee on corporate governance that “we have had enough of investigations”, implying that Pau Low and his committee would not be able to probe into any past misdeeds of the PKFZ scandal.

Can Ong answer this question?

No. 3 – The first week of Parliament has ended and MPs are still not given copies of the PwC report on the PKFZ and the appendices, although this was virtually promised by Ong through the PKFZ official website.

Let me ask Ong one specific question: Will the PwC report and appendices be given to MPs before the current meeting ends on June 30th?

                This entry was posted on Friday, 19 June 2009, 1:11 pm and is filed under
Parliament
,
PKFZ
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Muhyiddin the latest political leader to do the somersault to become the champion of “Umno-Pas unity government talks” and repudiate Najib’s 1Malaysia concept

Deputy Prime Minister and Umno Deputy President, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin is the latest political leader to perform the somersault – taking a diametrically opposite position from the one he had postured only a few days or even a few hours ago!

Speaking in Kuala Krai this morning, Muhyiddin said Umno wants talks on a unity government to be sped up and asks PAS leaders to forget past conflicts in the interest of the unity of Muslims in the country.

He  said he wanted the talks to materialise because he feared that if the matter was allowed to drag on, it would create disunity among the Muslims.

He declared: “We will not impose any conditions and we accept whatever terms set by PAS. As far as I’m concerned, we have to be open.”

The Umno deputy president urged PAS spiritual leader Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat to forget about the conflicts between PAS and Umno in the ‘70s, when both parties cooperated to form the Kelantan state government and the national government.

“As Muslims we are encouraged to forgive. That was in the past,” he said.

He even expressed the hope that the meeting between Umno and PAS could take place  “in the next few days, anytime, no problem.”

This is a fantastically speedy  turnaround for Muhyiddin who had been adopting a very critical and even sceptical stance to  the Umno-Pas unity government proposal.

From his  first public stance in  Sri Kembangan  on June 9 wanting Pas to explain what it meant by a unity government; to the critical position in Langkawi on June 13 questioning the seriousness of Pas in proposing Umno-Pas unity government as “Until today, there is nothing concrete” and predicting that the proposal would not become a reality because of “differences within Pas itself and the other Opposition parties”, Muhyiddin has transformed himself to become the foremost champion for Umno-Pas unity government talks, abandoning all his earlier reservations and  pre-conditions to propose the holding of immediate Umno-Pas unity government talks “in the next few days, anytime, no problem” on “whatever terms set by PAS”.

Pressing for such a Umno-Pas unity government meeting in the next few days, Muhyiddin said

that initially the meeting should be between PAS and Umno only before the matter was discussed in a comprehensive manner with component parties of Barisan Nasional (BN) and the opposition alliance.

Many questions come to the surface. Is Muhyiddin speaking for the Prime Minister and Umno President Datuk Seri Najib Razak, and if so, why such a desperate hurry and even unholy haste?

Did Najib and Muhyiddin get the approval of the leaders of the other Barisan Nasional component parties, in particular MCA President, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat, Gerakan President Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon, MIC President, Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu that Umno to conduct such “Umno-Pas unity government talks” or is there just no necessity for such prior consultation as MCA, Gerakan, MIC and the other Barisan Nasional component parties are just pawns, digits and ciphers which just do not matter or count in the Barisan Nasional scheme of things?

Thinking Malaysians must be asking however how Umno’s support for “Umno-Pas” unity government talks reconcile with what Najib claims to be the underlying philosophy of his premiership –“1Malaysia” concept.

Surely, Najib does not expect Malaysians to take his talk on “1Malaysia” seriously when the first fruit of the Najib premiership is “Umno-Pas unity government talks”!

It would appear that it is none other than  Muhyiddin who is making the strongest repudiation of the “1Malaysia” concept!

                This entry was posted on Friday, 19 June 2009, 3:41 pm and is filed under
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Unity government: A case of mid-summer madness

By
Tunku Abdul Aziz

It must have to do with the unusually hot weather we are experiencing that has brought about a touch of mid-summer madness among one or two senior members of PAS who have decided against their better judgment to break ranks to engage Umno in talks about the prospects of forming a national unity government. Otherwise why would reasonably sane people want to risk peer condemnation and denunciation by doing the unthinkable? This is the most charitable explanation I can offer.

We need a national unity government like we need a hole in the head. The thought of sleeping with the ethically debased and morally detestable Barisan Nasional government is simply too abhorrent to contemplate. Are we such reckless and irresponsible gluttons for punishment that in spite of having endured the Umno excesses in social, economic and political terms these last three decades, we are now asking for more of the same? That, believe it or not, is what we will get for our trouble. Umno will be more than happy to oblige.

They have nothing to lose and everything to benefit from our mindless gamble with our future. Why are some of us so eager to go to bed with a political party that has not one redeeming feature left to justify our risking our hard-earned reputation? Where are our much trumpeted principles of honesty and integrity? Are we no different, after all, from the Umno that we
 despise? Don’t we care two hoots about the people up and down the country who campaigned and voted for us and gave us five states to govern because they were disgusted and fed up with the Umno majority government and its antics?

That some members of the top PAS leadership could even think of getting under the blanket with BN, and Umno in particular, is extremely worrying. We must never lose sight of the fact that when voters across the nation threw their very considerable support behind the DAP, PAS, and PKR on that fateful day of March 8, 2008, they wanted change, not just any change, but the sort of transformation that would put paid to the unbridled, wonton political corruption that has left this country in total disarray on every conceivable front.

Yes, this country with all the natural resources at its disposal could quite easily have been catapulted to the top of the high-income countries league table without too much difficulty under a different management. Talking about making Malaysia into a high-income country under BN is self-deluding, and Najib knows it. He must know that corruption and competitiveness make strange bedfellows. Najib, who must know a thing or two about corruption in Umno, must realise without any prompting from me that unless he is prepared to confront corruption decisively, he can kiss goodbye to any dream of a prosperous Malaysia on par with the likes of Singapore, Hong Kong, Korea and Japan in our corner of the globe.

That vast numbers of people wanted an incorruptible government was precisely the reason why they cast their votes against the BN component parties to deny them their accustomed two-thirds majority that they had had taken for granted as if it was their divine right. The magical two-thirds gave them the legitimacy to trample on our rights to good governance. They did not give us the votes so that we may traffic with the likes of Umno. They wanted us to act and behave differently and to give substance to the notion of public duty in the public interest.

To be seen associating with Umno whose moral reputation is in tatters is tantamount to giving comfort and succour to the corrupt in our midst, and betraying the trust and confidence of the rakyat in our integrity. That cannot do our own reputation any good at a time when people are starting to ask what is it that we are doing that is going to make a difference to their lives. We had better have the answers ready, sooner rather than later.

What do we hope to achieve by working with Umno when we have absolutely nothing in common with them that will benefit the nation. Umno has been stuck in the same old corruption groove as long as I can remember, and it wants to remain where it is because corruption is the opium that feeds its soul and dulls its sensibilities. Is this really where we see ourselves fitting in? PAS has to think through all this very carefully because it owes to its supporters, well-wishers as well as its partners in Pakatan Rakyat a clear and unequivocal explanation for this aberration. Or there more to this than meets the eye?

We who have long been in the opposition should know how difficult it is to earn public confidence, and surely we do not need this madness now to terrify those sitting on the fence from coming down on our side. If earning confidence is difficult, think how much more difficult it is to retain it. We must not put our supporters’ goodwill to the test by this highly risky and dangerous venture. The consequences are too terrible to imagine.

Umno will like nothing better than see us sow the seed of our own destruction. That party and its leadership have fritted away their ethical capital and have no moral authority to lead this nation. We have and we must protect our reputation by distancing ourselves from the scams and scandals that dog their every step.

A national unity government is totally irrelevant because there will be no change in the way the affairs of this country are managed unless the BN government is shown the door at the first opportunity.

Let us work towards that objective by coming up with practical and sustainable policies based on social justice and equality of opportunity for all Malaysians that will transform this country into one that will have an honoured place at the top table of the world’s respected nations. My advice to Umno is that there is life beyond corruption.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 19 June 2009, 10:08 am and is filed under
Tunku Abdul Aziz
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Is Ong Tee Keat going to say in his Ministerial statement on Monday that he is taking legal action against me and therefore there is no need for him to give any accountability for the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal?

My three questions (No.64 to No. 67 on the 22nd day in the current series) to Transport Minister Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat on the
RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal
 today are:

No. 1: In his blog from Paris, Transport Minister and MCA President, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat has threatened to sue me for standing up for the public interest to get to the bottom of the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal. He is trying to put words into my mouth, claiming that he had been defamed. That is his business.  He can do what he like, whether he wants to sue me or not.

The turnkey developer of PKFZ has also announced its intention to initiate a series of legal proceedings against Ong, the Port Klang Authority (PKA) Chairman, Datuk Lee Hwa Beng, PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), newspapers and others over the PKFZ scandal.

The public interest to get into the bottom of the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal to find out how a RM1.1 billion scandal under Datuk Seri (now Tun) Dr. Ling Liong Sik in 2002 could quadruple to RM4.6 billion under his successor, Datuk Seri Chan Kong Choy in 2007, again double to RM7.453 billion and heading towards the astronomical cost of RM12.453 billion under the watch of Ong as Transport Minister should not be blocked or buried by a pile of litigation suits.

If it takes 10 or 20 years to dispose of all the litigation that could be instituted over the PKFZ scandal, does it mean that nobody should ask any question or  no answer need be given demand as to the causes and culprits of the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal until 2019 or 2029?

Where will Ong be in 2019 or 2029?

Is Ong going to Parliament on Monday, as directed by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak,  to say in his Ministerial statement that as he intends to institute legal action against me over the PKFZ scandal, there is no need for him to give any answer or accounting and that all should  wait for the outcome of such legal proceedings?

This is my first question to Ong today, whether he would ever use legal action as an excuse that he need not give any accounting for the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal, whether in Parliament or outside?

Question No. 2: Yesterday  the website
http://www.malaysiafreenews.com/
 carried the following posting:

“PWC’s report on PKFZ shows that the PKA’s board of director had on 5 February 2008 approved the payment of RM1.2billion to KDSB, this is inclusive of 8.5% variation cost and the initial construction of RM95million however this is not inclusive of the professional fees of RM0.12billion.

“According to the said report, this payment is RM32million higher than the estimation of 63million made by surveyor earlier. This shows that the Board of Director had approved the payment in toto as requested by KDSB, but if fails to indicate or mention whether Ong supported the payment and made suggestion that the Cabinet should pass it.

“Food for thought, the PKFZ fiasco started as early as 2004, why did Ong support the payment to KDSB, does he not have to be responsible for this?”

What has Ong to say to this question. Will there be a reply by Ong to this query in his Ministerial statement in Parliament on Monday?

Question No. 3 – In September 2006, I spoke up in Parliament and outside commending Ong for speaking out against the “leakage” and misappropriation of public funds where only RM3,000 worth of work were delivered for a RM30,000 renovation for SJKC Kung Yu in Muar.

Does Ong think that his commendable stand in 2006 to expose the “leakage” of 90 per cent or RM27,000 of public funds in a RM30,000 school renovation is sufficient to justify his failure to “investigate all” and “tell all” about the RM12.5 billion PKFZ “mother of all scandals”?

How many RM30,000 school renovation work can be done with RM12.5 billion? Answer is 416,666 such projects!

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 20 June 2009, 11:03 am and is filed under
PKFZ
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Lee Kuan Yew keeps corruption at bay

By
Tunku Abdul ziz

In

MySinchew

I BEGIN with a confession. I may be fairly described as a dyed in the wool admirer of Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore’s Minister Mentor. I am pleased that his recent visit to our country went well. He was received and treated as an honoured visitor, in the grand palaces and everywhere else he went, as well he should, because Lee undoubtedly played an important and historic role in the creation of Malaysia as a political entity. That is a historical fact.

I am glad that Lee gave Mahathir a wide berth. It would have left a bad taste in the mouth if he had asked to meet the bitter old man of Malaysian politics. Mahathir could have been relied upon to be obnoxious and boorish as only Mahathir knows how. His reference to Lee as the little emperor from a small Middle Kingdom is vintage Mahathir, dripping with venom and uncharitable innuendoes. The man, Mahathir I mean, is a total disgrace to the Malay sense of gracious hospitality and traditional decorum. I suppose the kindest thing to do is to ignore Mahathir and let him continue to entertain the sad fantasy that he is an indispensable part of our country’s process of governance.

Lee Kuan Yew is far from perfect. His record on human rights and media freedom is well documented, and there is not a great deal to choose between his and ours. We should wipe off that feeling of smugness. On balance, though, Lee runs a tight ship and Singapore’s pre-eminent position as a modern, affluent and corruption free society owes entirely to his vision and his determination. What he has achieved for his country in the face of the hopelessly impossible challenges says a great deal about his single minded devotion to public duty in the public interest. Enriching himself or his family has never been part of his game plan.

He has never wavered in his belief right at the outset that corruption, humanity’s greatest curse, was not going to be a feature of Singapore’s governance model. His administration is both clean and efficient, and Singapore’s economy is among the most competitive in the world. Judged against most indicators, Singapore is among the top global performers. While we wallow in corruption and are daily buffeted by one financial scam after another, the ‘Little Red Dot’ – the highly offensive name former President Habibi of Indonesia gave Singapore – continues to notch one accolade after another. Singapore has shown that size does not matter.

I am often asked the reason for my being such a loyal Lee Kuan Yew fan. It goes a long way. As I have said, he is not without a blemish or two, but no man has done more to curb corruption in public life as Lee, to the eternal gratitude of his people who are well served by a corruption free civil service and political leadership. The benefits for Singapore have been enormous in reputational terms. Investors know that their investments are safer in Singapore than in many other jurisdictions because Singapore operates a justice system that is incorruptible.

Singapore has succeeded in curbing corruption to a degree that is rarely achieved elsewhere in Asia, except possibly Hong Kong. Singapore does not need a bloated anti-corruption bureaucracy such as we have with our ineffectual Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission that is a drain on public funds. But what Singapore has in large measure is political will riding on the shoulders of a remarkable leader whose abhorrence for corruption takes on an almost messianic crusade. When we think of Singapore before Lee Kuan Yew, what comes to mind was a country that was a corrupt colonial backwater, filthy, ugly and smelly, not unlike Hong Kong at that time in its history.

Today, Singapore has shown the world that by confronting corruption decisively, and by putting in place systems and policies specifically to make unethical public behaviour a high risk and low return business, a country will become competitive which is the name of the game in the globalised economy. How do we fare by comparison?

The government, in spite of protestations to the contrary, tolerates corruption in all its manifestations. I am not just talking about money changing hands. That is bribery, but equally insidious is bending the rules and exploiting loopholes with a view to defrauding the nation’s coffers. The Port Klang Free Zone scandal is a case in point, and yet we are being told to move on without any of the perpetrators being called to account for their part in this multi-billion ringgit swindle. The government must do its duty in ensuring that those responsible are brought to justice. A scandal of this order of magnitude even for a country such as ours that is so used to living cheek by jowl with grand corruption on a daily basis beggars the imagination. We wait with bated breath to see what Najib will do in this case. Or is he no different from Mahathir and Badawi?

Through sheer force of character, and leading by example, Lee Kuan Yew has been able to make a difference to the lives of his people. Singapore is able today to punch way above its weight. It is a respected name, human rights NGOs may disagree, and I for one wish Singapore well in its relentless fight against man’s most debilitating social ill.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 20 June 2009, 7:57 pm and is filed under
Tunku Abdul Aziz
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Muhyiddin pushing for Umno-Pas unity government makes a total mockery of Najib’s 1Malaysia concept, undoing 52 years of Malaysian nation-building by five previous Prime Ministers

At the meeting of DAP MPs in Kuala Lumpur on Wednesday, I said that Malaysian politics is in the throes of great flux and even lightning change.

This has been borne out by Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin pushing for Umno-Pas “unity government” talks, trying to expedite an Umno-Pas meeting “in the next few days, anytime, no problem”, even sugarcoating it by declaring that Umno “will not impose any conditions and we accept whatever terms set by PAS”.

If any political leader or observer had been asked before Muhyiddin’s overture in Kuala Krai yesterday whether the No. 1 or No. 2 Umno leader could have made such a public proposition to PAS, nobody would have answered in the positive.

So what game is Muhyiddin up to?

Muhyiddin’s political gambit is all the more  intriguing as his latest mentor, former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad  had on the same day expressed his disapproval of the proposed unity talks between Umno and PAS, saying he did not think that the country wants a government which is 100 per cent Malay.

What makes Muhyiddin’s stand even more intriguing is that the Deputy UMNO President should know that even with their full parliamentary representation, Umno with 78 MPs and Pas withy 24 MPs only total 102, which is still 10 short of the requisite majority in the 222-member Parliament!

Why then is  the Deputy Prime Minister publicly making the call for Umno-Pas “unity government” talks, knowing that it is not possible to form an all-Malay Umno-Pas government with only 102 parliamentary seats – when the political and nation-building costs would be phenomenal.

This is because Muhyiddin’s pushing for Umno-Pas unity government  immediately discredits by making  a total mockery of Najib’s 1Malaysia concept, undoing 52 years of Malaysian nation-building by five previous Prime Ministers.

Why then is the Deputy Prime Minister prepared to be so irresponsible to pay such a heavy price in political and nation-building costs?

There could only be two reasons: firstly, the top Umno leadership sees in the present political scenario a golden opportunity to divide PAS and split the Pakatan Rakyat; and secondly, Umno continues to play the role of the political hegemon in the Barisan Nasional, with the other BN component parties whether MCA, MIC, Gerakan, SUPP, PBS  totally irrelevant as mere puppets, digits and ciphers.

This episode illustrates the great difference between Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat.  PR is a coalition of equals among DAP, PKR and PAS.  BN however continues to be a political grouping headed by a hegemon, Umno, while the other component parties have no say whatsoever in charting their policies and future directions.

Pakatan Rakyat leadership council will meet on Monday and will discuss for the first time the so-called Umno-Pas “unity government” talks, and the sudden subject of “BN-PR unity government” talks.

I do not see any problem with talks but only with the purpose of the talks.

We are all Malaysians and there is no reason why we cannot sit down to talk about issues concerning the people and nation but “Umno-PAS unity government” is inimical to the whole concept of Malaysian nation-building while “BN-PR unity government” talks is more than premature.

Let the BN and PR parties sit down to talk about the burning issues confronting the country like the protracted political and constitutional crisis in Perak caused by the unethical, undemocratic and illegal  coup d’etat in Perak; a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal; how to make Najib’s slogan “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now” really meaningfully; restoration of public confidence in the independence, impartiality and integrity of the judiciary and key national institutions like the Police, the Elections Commission, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency (MACC); parliamentary reforms to have a First-World Parliament; how to unite Malaysians to successfully face the worst global crisis in a century and transform Malaysia into a high-income developed nation; make Malaysia safe for its citizens, tourists and investors; eradicate corruption, etc.

If we cannot even sit down to talk about these burning issues to find solutions to them, any talk of “Umno-Pas unity government” or  “BN-PR unity government” is either detrimental  to the cause of Malaysian nation-building or utterly unrealistic and just a political ploy to undermine democracy  and to  impede the  process of political change heralded by the political tsunami in the March 8, 2008 general elections.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 20 June 2009, 12:12 pm and is filed under
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


The spectre of crime in the daily lives of Malaysians

Letters

(This email is reproduced completely unedited, in its pristine atrocious English for two reasons: firstly, it seems to have become the standard Malaysian English; secondly, the subject of the spectre of endemic crime which haunts the daily lives of Malaysians refuses to be buried  by the distraction of the atrocious English used, for the writer is able to communicate his genuine cry from his heart  and to strike resonance among the Malaysian public.

(Both issues must be addressed: how to improve the command of English language among Malaysians, but even more important, how to start reducing crime to make Malaysia safe again for its citizens, tourists and investors. – Kit)

Greetings to all Member of Parliament,

I write this mail to you all for a reason of snatch thieves in KL has been rising more and more in front of my eyes. Here’s a few incident:

1. I was having my lunch at KL near Tune Hotel. After having my lunch, I was carrying my notebook on my hand and a motorcycle pass through me coming from behind attempt to steal my notebook, but they failed. Then they run away with their motorcycle as fast as they can to another road.

2. I was working on a roadshow at Taman Melawati around CIMB Bank area. My colleagues was walking around promoting something, and heard a voice of shout from a Malay lady and when my colleague saw her, her bag was already with the thief.

3. The incidents where pregnant lady was snatch and she lost her life.

I’m really sad about this issue is happening in our country. As a rakyat, I can’t do much but to aware you all as MP that this is happening in our city. There is no solution AT ALL for this kinda crime, because the thief attack on people walking by the road side and once they snatch, their small little bike will bring them run through small roads where we can’t access. I can’t afford to see this continue happening in our city and country.

Can you all bring up this issue and solve this out? Get the person in charge to come out with some kinda solution. If government can ask everyone who used prepaid line to register their line, because they want to catch loan shark, I’m sure they can do something about snatch thieves as well.

And please question Datuk Hishamuddin as well on what the police is doing while all this is happening. Since he love to protect the police, I guess this question should go to him. Now, all I see in the news everyday is publishing statistic of crime rate and telling us the conclusion whether is getting better or worse. If is getting better, then police will not need to do anything. If is getting worse, they will advise us to be careful. But is this the right solution? In Singapore, if a pregnant lady lost her life because she was snatch, the Commissioner will have to find out who is the thief, or else he will lose his seat as Commissioner. But what is our country’s police doing? Catching activist, doing things that is not needed by the country and not fulfilling their role as a police, moreover they are pay by us.

Please do something about this, there are already life lost, money stolen and etc. I believe more and more worse story will come.

My role as rakyat,

Yap

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 20 June 2009, 7:11 am and is filed under
Crime
,
Letters
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Make English a compulsory pass subject for SPM, STPM and matriculation to end and reverse the unchecked decline of English standard in the country in the past three decades

One of the greatest failures of the past two premiership of Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad (for 22 years) and Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (Tun Abdullah) was  their failure to enhance the country’s international competitiveness by ending and reversing  the unchecked decline of English standards in the country and to ensure that Malaysian students master English as “necessary for communication and essential to keep abreast of developments in the technical fields such as engineering and science”.

Globally English is so widely spoken, it has often been referred to as a “world language”, the lingua franca of the modern era. While English is not an official language in most countries, it is currently the language most often taught as a second language around the world to the extent that it has ceased to be the exclusive cultural property of “native English speakers”, but  a language that is absorbing aspects of cultures worldwide as it continues to grow.

It is a sorry spectacle in the past three decades to see the headlong decline of English standards in Malaysia, which was once the envy of other countries, undermining Malaysia’s economic prosperity and well-being in crippling our international competitiveness in the era of globalization.

The new Education Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, who is also Deputy Prime Minister, shocked himself and the nation when he revealed early this month that he had not known that English is not a “must pass” subject for SPM and calls for public feedback on the matter.

Where was Muhyidden all these decades when  he was climbing up the Umno political greasepole that he knows nothing about the grave problem of the decline of English in Malaysian schools and universities and that English is not a compulsory pass subject for SPM?

Malaysians can only worry about the future of education under such a Minister for Education!

Seven years ago, I had specifically proposed that English should be made a compulsory pass subject for SPM, STPM and matriculation examinations, as it would have the most far-reaching effects in generally raising the standard of English in schools.

This was when Mahathir asked Malaysians  for their feedback as to whether they  want a re-introduction of the English medium school system to arrest the decline of the standard of English, after he found to his horror during a trip to the United States that with Bahasa Malaysia, Malaysians were unable to interact with foreigners internationally in a way  which was productive.

I had at the time called on the Cabinet to  establish an all-party committee to launch a nation-wide campaign to promote the learning and use of English among the people to restore Malaysia’s international competitiveness edge lost as a result of the unchecked decline in the standard of English in the past few decades – so that this problem was tackled in a non-partisan manner transcending the pressures of political party competition.

However, all these suggestions came to nought.

The Cabinet at its next meeting should take the bold and long-overdue decision to make English a compulsory pass subject for SPM, STPM and matriculation courses, supported by the necessary infrastructure to improve the learning and teaching of English in the schools.

For a start, for the first five years in making SPM a compulsory pass subject, students who fail English and therefore fail the whole SPM examination should be required to only repeat the single subject of  English to entitle them to a SPM pass, unlike the present ruling requiring the student to repeat the entire SPM examination, including subjects they had passed.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 21 June 2009, 10:23 am and is filed under
Education
,
Muhyiddin Yassin
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Ong’s last chance to “tell all” about the causes and culprits of the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal to salvage his reputation even at the price of losing his Ministership

My three questions (No.67 to No. 69 on the 23rd  day in the current series) to Transport Minister Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat on the
RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal
 today are:

Question No. 1: Finally, the Transport Minister, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat is appearing in  Parliament tomorrow to give an accounting on the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal, after absconding overseas to the Paris Air Show when he should have stayed behind to appear before Parliament when it started its meeting last Monday. It is a great embarrassment and shame that the MCA President has to be forced to appear before Parliament to give a ministerial statement on the PKFZ scandal on the directive of the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

My first question today to Ong is whether his Ministerial statement would contain answers to the
Five Questions on the PKFZ which I had posed to him on 9th April
 last year, viz:

Was it true that when the Port Klang Authority and the Transport Ministry insisted on buying the 1,000 acres of Pulau Indah land for PKFZ at RM25 psf on a “willing buyer, willing seller” basis, in the face of strong objection by the Attorney-General’s Chambers and the Treasury which had recommended that the land be acquired at RM10 psf, the Cabinet had given its approval subject to two conditions: (i) categorical assurance by the Transport Minister that the PKFZ proposal was feasible and self-financing and would not require any public funding; and (ii) that every RM100 million variation in the development costs of PKFZ would require prior Cabinet approval.

In the event, the first condition was breached when the PKFZ project ballooned from RM1.1 billion to RM4.6 billion requiring government intervention and bailout while the second condition was breached with the original PKFZ development costs of RM400 million ballooning to RM2.8 billion without any prior Cabinet approval ever sought for every RM100 million increase in development costs.

The Transport Minister had unlawfully issued four Letters of Support to Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd (KDSB), the PKFZ turnkey contractor — to raise RM4 billion bonds, which were regarded as government guarantees by the market. The Transport Minister had no such powers to issue financial guarantees committing the government, as it could only be issued by the Finance Minister and only after Cabinet approval. The first Letter of Support was issued by the former Transport Minister, Tun Dr. Ling Liong Sik on May 28, 2003, which was Liong Sik’s last day as Transport Minister while the other three were issued by Kong Choy.

Whether it wasn’t true that in recognition that the four unlawful “Letters of Support” of the Transport Minister had nonetheless given implicit government guarantee to the market that the Cabinet in mid-2007  gave retrospective approval for the unlawful and unauthorized four Letters of Support by the Transport Ministers in the previous four years creating RM4.6 billion liability for the government in the bailout of PKFZ.

Why no action had been taken against the two previous Transport Ministers, both Liong Sik and Kong Choy, as well as the government officials responsible for the unlawful issue of the four “Letters of Support” – getting the government embroiled in the RM4.6 billion PKFZ scandal?

If Ong’s Ministerial Statement tomorrow does not give clear and unequivocal answers to these Five Questions, which I had posed in Parliament as far back as November 2007, then Ong’s Ministerial statement would have failed the test of fulfilling the most basic standards of ministerial responsibility and accountability.

Question No. 2:

On 3rd June, 2009 in Question No. 16, I had pointed out that the MCA leadership, through three Transport Ministers since 2002, viz Datuk Seri (now Tun) Dr. Ling Liong Sik, Datuk Seri Chan Kong Choy and Ong, four MCA Port Klang Authority (PKA) Chairmen, viz: Tan Sri Dr. Ting Chew Peh, Datuk Yap Pian Hon, Datuk Chor Chee Heung and Datuk Lee Hwa Beng must bear responsibility for the national shame and colossal losses represented by the PKFZ scandal  and asked, in particular why Chor has not stepped down or suspended from his present post of  Deputy Finance Minister, as he had been named by the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) report as one of those involved in potential conflicts of interest.

I now ask whether Ong agrees that the former MCA President Datuk Seri (now Tan Sri) Ong Ka Ting, should also join the seven MCA leaders named above to  give an accounting of the role they played in the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal, as Ka Ting was Acting Transport Minister for a month from 29th May to 30th June 2003.

Will these eight MCA leaders who had variously occupied important positions as Transport Minister or PKA Chairman in the history of the PKFZ scandal come out with a Joint Memorandum on the role played by everyone of them in the “mother of all scandals”?

Third Question.

Yesterday, PKA Chairman Datuk Lee Hwa Beng denied the allegation in the  website,
http://pkfz.blogspot.com/
 that his tenure as PKA Chairman had lapsed on 15th February 2009, and he lashed out at me for taking this blog allegation as “gospel truth” and alleged that I am guided by “half-truths and hearsay” in my statements.

To be frank, I had grave doubts about the allegation of the website
http://pkfz.blogspot.com/
.

This was because The Edge weekly (April 27 – May 3, 2009) which carried the cover story of “Total PKFZ bill – RM8 billion?” published a letter Lee responding to the Edge expose, saying that he was unable to respond to the report  as his term as PKA Chairman “had technically expired on March 31 this year”.

This was why my
media statement of April 28, 2009
 posed this question to the Transport Minister:

“Can Ong explain his Ministerial inefficiency and incompetence in allowing the post of PKA Chairman to remain vacant from March 31, when he should have known that it is important to either re-appoint Lee or appoint a new Chairman so that no one could make the excuse that no decision could be made during the month of April on the publication of the PwC report on PKFZ scandal as the post of PKA Chairman is vacant!”

There was no answer from Ong but
he promptly re-appointed Lee as PKA Chairman on April 29, 2009
.

Lee said in his statement yesterday: “It is essential that there is no leadership gap at the PKA Board so that the smooth running of the Authority and the well-being of Port users are ensured.”

But there was a gap in the position of PKA Chairman left vacant for a month in the critical development of the PKFZ. Why was this so?

There was another reason  why last Thursday, I had  posed Question 59:  “No. 2 – This website also made a very serious allegation – that Datuk Lee Hwa Beng’s tenure as Port Klang Authority (PKA) Chairman ended on 15th February 2009 and that until today the Yang di Pertuan Agong had never given consent to extend or renew Lee’s term, and that Ong is asking the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, to backdate Lee’s appointment. Is this true?”

As this website had achieved the scoop of uploading the exchange of letters to show that on 10th May 2009, Ong had written to the Prime Minister to approve RM1.2 billion payment as variation orders for the PKFZ project to its turnkey developer, Kuala Dimensi Sdn. Bhd, it has won the right for its question about Lee’s re-appointment as PKA Chairman to be properly answered or denied.

The second part of the  question – the  website’s allegation that  Lee’s re-appointment had not been given the Royal consent and Ong is asking the Prime Minister to backdate Lee’s renewal, has not been answered.

I had given Ong a very friendly warning way back in April 2008, warning  him not to be the third Transport Minister whose reputation “would be marred and tarred by the RM4.6 billion PKFZ scandal if he reneges on his pledge to ‘tell all’ soon”.

Ong would not be in the sorry plight he is in today if he had heeded my friendly advice. Although it is very late, it is not impossible for Ong to salvage his reputation, but his Ministerial statement tomorrow’s would be his last chance to come clean and tell all on the causes and culprits of the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal even if it means losing his Ministerial post!

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 21 June 2009, 3:26 pm and is filed under
Parliament
,
PKFZ
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Pakatan Rakyat foremost task – resolve first crisis of confidence by sending out clear message that PR parties committed to “new politics” and reject “old politics” of “divide-and-rule”

Tomorrow, Pakatan Rakyat parties must resolve the first crisis of confidence faced by PR in  14 months after the political tsunami of the March 8 general elections by sending out a clear and unmistakable message to Malaysians that Paktan Rakyat rejects the old Malaysian politics based on “divide-and-rule” and the fear factor by standing up solidly for “new politics” in representing the interests of all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or territory.

Recently, UMNO strategists have been very successful in planting doubts among Malaysians who had created the political tsunami which saw Pakatan Rakyat winning five state governments and ended the Barisan Nasional two-thirds parliamentary majority and terminated Umno political hegemony in Malaysian politics whether they had made the right choice.

Pakatan Rakyat leaders’ foremost task and greatest challenge at the PR leadership council meeting tomorrow is to assure these architects of the 2008 political tsunami that they had not made the wrong choice, that PR is prepared to move forward to give meaning to the “new politics” of the future and to put the old politics of the past 52 years solidly behind us.

It is indeed shocking that in less than 100 days, the new Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s slogan of “1Malaysia” is openly trampled upon by none other than the Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, who unabashedly announced two days ago that Umno will not impose any conditions for Umno-Pas unity government talks and is even prepared to “accept whatever terms set by PAS”, hoping to railroad such a meeting “in the next few days, anytime, no problem”.

What has happened to all the talk about Bangsa Malaysia and a united Malaysian nation, especially during the 50th Merdeka Anniversary two years ago?

What would be the reaction of Umno leaders if political parties in the country, embracing both those in government and opposition, call for national conferences and talks to promote “Chinese unity”, “Indian unity”, “Kadazan unity” or “Iban unity”?

The MCA’s response to Umno’s promotion of “Umno-Pas unity government talks” is that it could also hold talks with DAP on Chinese unity. DAP is not interested in holding talks with MCA on Chinese unity, as the DAP is a multi-racial Malaysian party though we can have talks with MCA on corruption, injustices in the “annual begging session” for Malaysian top-scorers to get Public Services Department (PSD) scholarships, the RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal,  lack of judicial independence or even on  Umno hegemony.

But would Umno allow this? I can still remember that in 1987, when MCA and Gerakan leaders met DAP leaders and Chinese educationists on the controversy over the sending of headmasters and senior assistants not conversant with Mandarin to Chinese primary schools, Umno reacted in rage  and MCA and Gerakan leaders were severely punished!  It even became justification for the notorious Operation Lalang mass Internal Security Act arrests, with over 100 people detained.

Malaysians are entitled to ask how Najib’s 1Malaysia call could be  reconciled with “Malay unity” and Umno-Pas unity government talks.

After 52 years of nationhood, isn’t it time that everyone talk about Malaysian unity instead of Malay unity, Chinese unity, Indian unity, Kadazan unity or Iban unity?

When DAP was formed 43 years ago, we made it very clear right from the beginning our commitment to a Malaysian Malaysia, where all political parties should work towards Malaysian unity rather than Malay unity, Chinese unity, Indian unity, Kadazan unity or Iban unity.

When will Najib, Muhyiddin, UMNO and other  Barisan Nasional leaders follow in the footsteps of DAP 43 years ago?

In the ongoing psy-war, Umno leaders accuse Pas leaders of being afraid of DAP and PKR leaders while MCA and Gerakan leaders accuse DAP of kow-towing to Pas leaders. This shows the utter hypocrisy and dishonesty of the political wiles of the leaders from Umno, MCA, Gerakan and MIC.

I call on Najib to come out strong and clear that his 1Malaysia stands for Malaysians unite and not Malays unite, Chinese unite, Indians, unite, Kadazans unite or Ibans unite. If Najib is not prepared to come out with such an equivocal stand, then his 1Malaysia concept is utterly meaningless.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 21 June 2009, 2:51 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Political H1N1 hits Malaysia!

@limkitsiang – Twitter
record of Bayu Tinggi, Klang DAP fundraising dinner:

900
 cops ‘attend’ DAP dinner in Klang – Star
http://tr.im/pgTV
 Some 10,000 police manhrs wasted by IGP 2stop ord DAP dinner IGP nothing 2do?

06/22/2009 08:53 AM

1 final pt.
 Musa Hassan’s term as IGP ends in Sept. He wants another renewal. Actually he shld be sacked instead of his term renewed.

06/21/2009 11:11 PM

B4 signing off
 4nite,pay tribute 2Klang ppl 4 refusing 2cow down 2police bullying tactics.Believe majority of police don’t agree w IGP order

06/21/2009 11:01 PM

Hear Ops
 “No dinner” order came from very top – IGP himself. Can Musa Hassan explain why he tarnished national image w such stupid action?

06/21/2009 10:54 PM

2 questions
 asked when I go round table-by-table: why Najib so frightened to allow speeches; what has Ong Tee Keat to hide in PKFZ scandal.

06/21/2009 10:51 PM

Over 300 police
 but how 2stop 3k people getting into sealedoff area? Police manhrs lost in fighting crime criminal!

06/21/2009 10:35 PM

Cld only
 cover 2/3 of tables all in high spirits but very angry with BN govt payback time next elections what a start 4Najib’s 1Malaysia

06/21/2009 10:30 PM

300 tables
, 3000 handshakes. Long way to go!

06/21/2009 09:24 PM

I’m
 going round w party leaders table by table 2thank n apologise 4police action

06/21/2009 09:03 PM from mobile web

1st
dish has come out 4 most extraordinary dinner n on Father’s Day What has happened 20alaysia? Will 6

06/21/2009 08:44 PM from mobile web

Gobind
Charles Ronnie Au Yang Philip here don’t know whether dinner will have added dish of police chemical water

06/21/2009 08:29 PM from mobile web

Malaysians
Malays Chinese Indians men women children taking their places 300 tables in good spirits peacefully though w some confusion

06/21/2009 08:20 PM from mobile web

Arrived
@ Bayu Tinggi dinner supporters r here dinner banned? How 2 throw away dinner 4 3k peopLe? At least let people eat!

06/21/2009 08:02 PM from mobile web

Don’t
 get arrested on Father’s Day,my daughter Ming told me.Who wants 2get arrested?But it can happen how sad Malaysia!

06/21/2009 07:36 PM from mobile web

World’s
 1st case of political H1N1-Hishamuddin1Najib1.Wear black lite candles sing b’day cake song dinner speeches all cannot.1BlackMalaysia

06/21/2009 06:37 PM from web

DAP
MP Charles n Boon Hock negotiated w police. No avail Even dinner with no speeches also cannot.Not bothered dinner 4 3kpeople go 2waste!

06/21/2009 06:29 PM from web

Bayu
Tinggi Klang a war zone 6 FRU trucks 2 water cannons Police armed with M16s Area sealed off.Terrorist attack? No.Becos of DAP 3K dinner

06/21/2009 06:05 PM from web

Will
police cause trouble 2nite at DAP Klang 3k-dinner Bayu Tinggi (Klang MP office)? 2 FRU trucks just arrived in Klang. C u there 2nite.

06/21/2009 04:45 PM from web

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 21 June 2009, 9:17 pm and is filed under
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


What Malaysians need is not another look at the 125 proposals of Police Royal Commission of Inquiry four years ago but another Police RCI to address a very worsened crime crisis in the country

New Sunday Times today carried the front-page headline “
Royal Commission Report on Police: Another look at the 125 proposals
” together with more than two-pages of interview with the new Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein.

What Malaysians need is not another look at the 125 proposals of the Dzaiddin Police Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) four years ago but another Police Royal Commission of Inquiry to address a very worsened crime crisis in the country as well as to inquire what happened to the 125 proposals of the Dzaiddin RCI in the past four years.

I was quite excited at first that Hishammuddin had given long interview of what he is going to do as Home Minister but after reading its contents, I am most disappointed that Hishammuddin has nothing new or innovative  to say as to how he is going to restore to Malaysians, visitors and investors their lost rights for more than a decade to be free from crime and the fear of crime.

Kudos goes to Hishammuddin as the first Home Minister to acknowledge that crime has got out of control in Malaysia, when he admitted that “many Malaysians did not feel safe in their neighbourhoods anymore with rising crime levels”.

Unfortunately, he is still in denial with regard to the radical police reforms that must be instituted if the Barisan Nasional government is to perform its most elementary duty, to ensure the safety of person and property of all Malaysians, visitors and investors!

No great purpose will be achieved by taking another look at the 125 proposals of the Dzaiddin Police RCI as the government and police had failed in the past four years to fulfill the objective of the Police RCI to create an efficient, incorruptible, professional world-class police service.

There were not only no progress in the past four years, there were  serious deterioration in the three core police functions proposed by the RCI, viz: to reduce crime, eradicate corruption and uphold human rights.

In the past five years, the Police had been fighting a losing war against a rising crime index, which worsened from 156,315 cases in 2003 (which RCI described as intolerable and unacceptable as likely to frighten off investors and diminish the quality of life of Malaysians) to crash through the 200,000 crimes a year by 2007!

Police corruption had worsened over the years and police violation of human rights today are the most serious in the past five years, illustrated by rampant and blatant police abuses of power and misallocation of police resources, especially  in arresting peaceful protestors for wearing black, light candles, sing birthday song while crime galloped on  unchecked!

Tonight at the Klang DAP anniversary 3,000 people dinner, the police has withdrawn an earlier permit issued for DAP leaders to address the dinner crowd, taking the ridiculous line that Malaysians can eat but no speeches are allowed! Will the police cause trouble at the Klang Dinner tonight?

Who must bear responsibility for the utter failure of the police in the past five years to measure up to the three core functions outlined by the RCI in its 125 reccommendations, the key of which is the establishment of the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) which  remains aborted today because of the opposition of the police leadership?

If Hishammuddin is serious about key performance indicators (KPIs) which the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, is touting as one of the defining features of his premiership, the Home Minister must admit that the KPIs of the Police are a most dismal one when weighed against the 125 recommendations and three core functions proposed by the RCI.

Who then must take responsibility if not the Inspector-General of Police?

Is Hishammuddin prepared to go for a total revamp of the police service starting with a new Inspector-General of Police or is the culture of impunity and failure continue to hold sway in the Barisan Nasional Government.

I will propose to the Pakatan Rakyat leadership council tomorrow that PR give top priority to the runaway crime incidence and ensuring the safety of Malaysians, visitors and investors by launching a nation-wide campaign to restore to all their fundamental rights to be free from crime and the fear of crime.

Is Hishammuddin sincere and serious in calling for public support in the battle against crime?

If so,  is he prepared for a start  to support the formation of an Opposition-headed  Parliamentary Select Committee on Home Affairs to focus on police, crime and security comprising MPs from both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat?

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 21 June 2009, 6:40 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Pakatan Rakyat’s Stand on Unity Government

Press Release

Pakatan Rakyat Council of Leaders

22 June 2009

The Pakatan Rakyat Council of Leaders today Monday, 22 June2009 held a meeting at the office of the Opposition leader and agreed on the following:

1.	All the component parties of Pakatan Rakyat reiterate their commitment to each other and to strengthen the coalition in order to help form the future Federal Government

2.	The Pakatan Rakyat Council of  Leaders reaffirms our rejection of the idea of forming a Unity Government with UMNO/Barisan Nasional which is clearly a malicious and desperate attempt to compromise the integrity of the increasingly popular Pakatan Rakyat

3.	Pakatan Rakyat agrees to adopt an open approach and is willing to hold discussions with the leaders of Barisan Nasional on issues of national interest such as economic recovery, improving the quality of education, restoring the integrity of the judiciary, abrogation of the Internal Security Act (ISA), the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal, abuse of power by the police leadership during times of increasing crime, eradication of corruption, establishment of good governance and to hold immediately a free and fair election to resolve the Perak crisis.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 22 June 2009, 3:07 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


The Poison of “Unity” Government

by
M. Bakri Musa

The two Malay political parties – UMNO and PAS – are battling each other to convince us that each is better than the other in advancing the “Malay agenda.”  The two are like ageing fighters stuck with their same old tired moves.  They are oblivious of the fact that we are fed up with their act; their lack of vigor and imaginative new strategies.

            In a clumsy if not desperate attempt for new moves they concocted a ‘vision’ for a ‘unity’ government based on the two parties!  Left unstated is the question:  Unity for what and against whom?

            I wish that they would expend their efforts on making our people competitive, and thus lifting us out of poverty.  That is the most important Malay agenda today.  Better yet, I would prefer that they just exit the ring and let others run the show for a change.

            I fail to see how this ‘unity’ government would make Malays more competitive.  The track record for UMNO is for all to see.  Corruption is now rampant, as well as the erosion of the integrity of our institutions and the deepening polarization of Malaysians.  The Melayu Baru (New Malay) of UMNO has now morphed into Melayu Barua (Malay scoundrels).

            As for PAS, after decades of ruling Kelantan, the young still has to leave the state to seek a better life.  The state is regularly plagued with such diseases as cholera.  Tok Guru Nik Aziz may be pious and religious, with honesty and humility thrown in massive doses, but he is completely inept in running a modern state.  Apparently his humility does not extend to his intellect for he has not seen fit to seek competent help in such ‘secular’ matters.

New Political Reality

UMNO and PAS are so used to fighting each other that they have forgotten what it is they are fighting for.  While they are busy fighting each other, the world has passed them by.  Today with the increasing plurality of the Malaysian electorate, securing the majority Malay votes would not necessary translate into political power, at least at the national level.

            In a rare display of political wisdom, PAS recognized the need to reach beyond by, for example, fielding non-Malay candidates in the last election and establishing a new wing within the party for non-Muslims.  However, whatever inroads the party may have made with non-Malays have since evaporated with its ill-conceived pursuit of a “unity government” with UMNO.

            UMNO, a slow learner, has yet to recognize this new political reality.  Thus it treats its non-Malay coalition partners in Barisan with undisguised contempt.  UMNO leaders are quick to brandish their kerises, preferably dripped with ketchup for dramatic effect, at the slightest provocation.

            Chauvinistic appeals of Ketuanan Melayu to win Malay votes might still work, but only regionally in Kedah, Perlis, Kelantan, and Trengganu.  Unfortunately those are not exactly the economic or power centers of the nation.  In terms of population, landmass, and most importantly economic activities, the contributions of those states to the national total are at best miniscule.

            The elements overrepresented in those states are poverty and the underdevelopment of the people, and the overwhelming majority of whom are, sadly, Malays.  Oh, yes, combined those four states have nearly half (four out of nine) of the sultans.  For some, that is a source of endless pride.

            As for the much-vaunted Malay agenda or even Ketuanan Melayu, I am at a loss as to what exactly these Malay politicians are fighting for.  If it is for retaining the Malay language, sultans and other key elements of Malay culture, including and especially Islam, those are already enshrined in our constitution.  Even if non-Malays were to oppose that, there is not much that they could do about it.  By themselves they could never secure the necessary two-third majority needed to amend the constitution.

            The only way for non-Malays, or anyone else for that matter, to do away with those constitutional provisions would be to bribe Members of Parliament (Malays and non-Malays) to amend the constitution.  Then just to be sure, also bribe the Senators and also the King and sultans so they too would agree with the changes.

            The price tag would be cheap.  The late Tun Ghaffar once suggested that for a few hundred million ringgit you could buy the entire UMNO Supreme Council.  With a billion or two you could get the whole parliament and the Council of Rulers.

            The colonial British secured the entire country for considerably much less, even after factoring in for inflation and devaluation (of both the sterling and ringgit).  Flattery made up for what they could not afford in gold.  The British offered fancy titles like the Knighthood of some Medieval Order to our leaders and sultans to win them over.

            The corollary to my observation is that if we Malays truly wish to preserve our cherished special privileges, we better start electing honest and incorrupt leaders.  Corrupt leaders would not only sell off those special privileges, they will also sell away our country.

Unity for What and Against Whom?

Following the Barisan election rout of March 8, 2008, the fear that the coalition, specifically UMNO, would lose power at the national level was palpable.  This desperation led misguided souls in UMNO to seek those in PAS who had been longing for power.  This quest for a ‘unity government’ was nothing more than UMNO securing an insurance policy for its continuing hold on power; for PAS, it was a seductive teasing on the taste of power.

            It is ironic that the pursuit of a “unity government” resulted only in sowing distrust within the existing coalitions.  In pursuing PAS, UMNO succeeded only in straining relations with its long-time Barisan partners.  PAS meanwhile managed only to poison its still frail Pakatan Rakyat coalition with PKR and DAP.  Worse, as we are now seeing, it also threatens the unity of PAS.

            The proponents for this “unity government” have obviously not done their due diligence or any downstream analysis.  Those UMNO warlords would not take kindly to sharing their bounty with their new kopiah-clad upstart colleagues.  Far from ‘purifying’ UMNO, PAS would end up being just as corrupt as UMNO.

            It is remarkable that both Tun Mahathir and Tok Guru Nik Aziz are against the idea.  I do not know their individual motives, but the fact they are both in rare agreement should serve as a cautionary note.

            If the disintegration of UMNO and PAS were the consequence of this “unity” movement, I could not care less.  However, the initiative would poison race relations in the country on a scale comparable to the May 1969 tragedy.  Indeed the venom has already seeped out.  That should concern everyone.

            This “unity government” scheme is nothing more than a crude and greedy power-grab by the UMNO and PAS pair.  It is not to be confused with Tun Razak’s version following the May 1969 tragedy.  Then it was truly a unity initiative, with the wise Tun opening up the old Alliance coalition to all willing participants.

            This latest scheme is the ugliest manifestation of Malay ultra chauvinism.  It would lead not to unity but greater polarizations among Malays as well as between Malays and non-Malays, and at a time when we can least afford it.

            Even if UMNO were to merge with PAS, the new coalition would still never command a two-third majority in Parliament.  At last count, even if every Member of Parliament with a Malay-sounding name were to vote in “unity,” that would still fall far short of a supra majority needed to amend the constitution.  The political calculus has changed irreversibly.

            The central reality is that Malays will have to advance with and not at the expense of non-Malay Malaysians.  Likewise, non-Malays would advance along with and not at the expense of Malays.  The unity that we should all strive for must not only be among Malays but also among Malaysians.  We can begin that process not by pursuing a “unity government” but decreasing the rhetoric that polarizes our society.  Demanding that our political leaders be civil and courteous to each other would be an excellent beginning.  Oh yes, please also keep those kerises sheathed!

            It amuses me that the most vigorous proponents of this “unity government” in UMNO and PAS are also the shrillest and most divisive voices before they discovered this ‘unity’ religion.

A New Direction For Malays

Instead of wasting time and effort in chasing the mirage of Malay ‘unity’ and in the process unnecessarily alienating others, Malay leaders should focus on the more difficult and critical problem of enhancing Malay competitiveness.  This problem cannot be solved simply by shouting slogans of Malay unity or Ketuanan Melayu.  Instead we need leaders who are smart, competent, diligent, and above all, not corrupt.

            Look at the schools Malay children attend.  How can we expect them to learn English or science when we do not provide them with competent teachers?  Examine the institutions run predominantly by Malays, the civil service for example.  As Malays we should be ashamed of this.  We need these institutions to be effective as they are a key to making Malays competitive.

            The list is endless.  What is limited, and severely so, is the willingness to acknowledge, let alone solve them.  I have yet to hear something sensible from either PAS or UMNO leaders.  So far PAS wants Malays not to learn English and to ban Sisters in Islam.  Well, that is an advancement of sorts; at least they are not harping on hudud.  As for UMNO leaders, they cannot even decide whether to continue teaching science and mathematics in English.

            Malay leaders should not be deluding the masses with half-baked ideas of “Malay unity.”  These leaders succeed only in deluding themselves.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 22 June 2009, 8:18 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
PAS
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


The regurgitation of not administering justice according to law in the written  judgment of Nik Hashim FCJ in Jamaluddin & ors v Sivakumar

Flashback

To refresh your memory, I refer to the report in the New Straits Times of Friday, April 10, 2009:

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court has declared that three assemblymen who quit their parties are still members of the Perak state legislature.

This follows an unanimous ruling by a five-men bench yesterday which ruled that “The Election Commission is the rightfulll entity to establish if there was a casual vacancy in the Perak state legislature,” said Federal Court judge Tan Sri Alauddin Mohd Sheriff.

Sitting with him were Datuk Arifin Zakaria, Datuk Nik Hashim Nik Abdul Rahman, Datuk Sen S Augustine Paul and Datuk James Foong.

Last month, Party Keadilan Rakyat’s Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi (Bebrang) and Mohd Osman Jailu (Changkat Jering), together with DAP’s Hew Yit Foong (Jelapang), filed an urgent application for the Federal Court to decide their matter.

The three wanted a declaration whether it was the Election Commissioner or the Perak Speaker (V Sivakumar) had the final say in determining a vacancy. In February, Sivakumar, using resignation letters signed by the three, had declared the seats vacant.

He informed the Election Commission, but the commission refused to hold by-elections on the ground that there was ambiguity over whether the assemblymen had resigned voluntarily.

Following this newspaper report, I wrote an article which was posted on several portals on the Internet titled “
When justice is not administered according to law
“. This is what I said:

Was the Federal Court right? Before you can judge the judges of the highest court in the country, it is necessary for me to apprise you of the law applicable to the question which is the Constitution of Perak.

I then pointed out that the law which is applicable is Article 31, Clause (5) of the Perak Constitution which reads:

XXXI. (5) A person who resigns his membership of the Legislative Assembly of this State or any other State shall, for a period of five years beginning with the date on which his resignation takes effect, be disqualified from being a member of the Legislative Assembly of this State.

By this provision, Article 3 1(5), I pointed out in my article that an assemblyman who resigns his membership of the Legislative Assembly is disqualified from being a member of the Assembly for a period of five years from the date of his resignation.

In my article, I also showed that Article 33(1) says:

XXXIII. (1) If any question arises whether a member of the Legislative Assembly has become disqualified for membership, the decision of the Assembly shall be taken and shall be final.

This is what Article 33(1) means. It means that when a question arises whether a person is disqualified from being a member of the Assembly, the decision (meaning “the vote”) of the Assembly is final.

Incidentally, Article 35 stipulates that an assemblyman can resign by simply writing to the Speaker. This is what it says:

XXXV. A member of the Legislative Assembly may resign his membership by writing under his hand addressed to the Speaker.

I concluded my article with this observation:

The above is simple enough for all of us to understand. But then, all of us are wondering how on earth the Federal Court could have decided that the “The Election Commission is the rightful entity to establish if there was a casual vacancy in the Perak state legislature”? Don’t you all feel superior to the judges of the Federal Court because you know the correct answer whilst the highest court gave a wrong decision. So you see, when you know how to judge the judges you would be able to separate the wheat from the chaff among our judges. The chaff, you will discover, may not be up to your expectations.

The regurgitation in the judgment of Nik Hashim FCJ

The dictionary meaning of “regurgitate” is “repeat information without understanding it”. Almost everyone knows, because they have read the above article which informed them of the relevant law applicable, which is that it is the assembly who decides the question of the disqualification of a member of the assembly and not the Election Commission. It is only when a member has been disqualified would there be a vacancy in the assembly. Now that we, the ordinary people, know the law we could very easily judge the competence of these judges of the Federal Court. Recently, they have handed down a written judgment dated 8 June 2009 which was delivered by Nik Hashim bin Nik Abd Rahman FCJ as the judgment of the court. The judgment appears to be oblivious of the fact that the general public is now aware of the law applicable. Since the people has been apprised of the law it would be foolish for any judge to give a judgment which is nothing but hogwash – it was crassly insensitive of the judges to try to pull the wool over the eyes of the knowing public. But to our surprise, this is exactly what Nik Hashim FCJ did. As usual the Federal Court has missed the point again. Recently, we discovered it was Augustine Paul FCJ who has this propensity. Now it is Nik Hashim FCJ who has the same propensity. He said:

The issue relating to question No (1) is whether it is the Election Commission or the Speaker who has the right to establish if there is a casual vacancy of the State Legislative seats. To answer the question, we have to consider the provisions of Article 36(5) of the Perak Constitution and section 12(3) of the Elections Act 1958, and the meaning of the words “casual vacancy” and the word “establish”.

Article 36(5) of the Perak Constitution states:

“A casual vacancy shall be filled within sixty days from the date on which it is established by the Election Commission that there is a vacancy”

Section 12(3) of the Elections Act 1958 reads:

“In relation to a vacancy which is to be filled at a by-election, a writ shall be issued not earlier than four days and not later than ten days from the date on which it is established by the Election Commission that there is a vacancy.” (emphasis added)

A “casual vacancy” is defined in Article 160(2) of the Federal Constitution to mean –

“a vacancy arising in the House of Representatives or a Legislative Assembly otherwise than by a dissolution of Parliament or of the Assembly.”

The word “establish” is defined in the Oxford Advanped Learner’s Dictionary, 6th Edition to mean:

“to discover or prove the facts of the situation; ascertain.”

And the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary defines the word “establish” to mean:

“to place beyond dispute; to prove.”

In considering the Perak Constitution, the provisions of the other State Constitutions and the Federal Constitution need to be considered. By comparison, the State Constitutions of Kelantan (Article 46(5)), Malacca (Article 19(5)), Pahang (Article 26(5)), Penang (Article 19(5)), Perlis (Article 55(5)), Sarawak (Article 21(5)), and Kedah (Article 53(5)) contain provisions similar to Article 36(5) of the Perak Constitution which states that “A casual vacancy shall be filled within sixty days from the date on which it is established by the Election Commission that there is a vacancy”, whereas the Constitutions of the State of Johor (Article 23(5)), Negeri Sembilan (Article 56(5)), Selangor (Article 70(5)) and Terengganu (Article 44(5)) provide that a casual vacancy shall be filled within sixty days from the date on which it occurs.”

And blah blah blah, the verbiage continues from page 11 to page 18 of his 20 page judgment where he concluded, thus:

Hence we unanimously ruled that the decision of the respondent Speaker declaring the three State seats of N59 Behrang, N14 Changkat Jering and N31 Jelapang vacant was unlawful and therefore null and void as the decision was contrary to Article 36 (5) of the Perak Constitution. Accordingly, our answer to to question No 1 is in the affirmative. Having answered the question we found that there is no necessity to answer question No 2.

Now that you know the law which is applicable, you are in a position to judge the five judges

What do you think of the quality of these judges of the highest court in the country? You must think that after all the rigmarole and after all the effort in writing this 20 page judgment, they could have done better. But no, they still missed the point altogether. All of us ordinary folk knew the answer. But not these five judges.

Of course, the point is Article 330) of the Perak Constitution which says that when a question arises whether a person is disqualified from being a member of the Assembly, the decision (meaning “the vote”) of the Assembly is final. It is not the Speaker nor the Election Commissioner who determines if a person is disqualified from being a member of the assembly.

If a person resigns his membership of the Legislative Assembly, he shall be disqualified from being a member of the Assembly for five years from the date of his resignation: see Article 31(5).

Article 35 only says that a member can resign simply by writing to the Speaker.

So that if any question arises as to the resignation of the three turncoat assemblymen – a person who resigns his membership of the assembly is disqualified for five years from being a member of the legislative assembly – the decision of the assembly by a vote being taken on their disqualification shall be final.

It is only after a member of the assembly has been disqualified for membership of the legislative assembly that a vacancy of the member’s seat in the assembly arises. It is only then that a casual vacancy arises. And by Article 36(5):

XXXVI. (5) A casual vacancy shall be filled within sixty days from the date on which it is established by the Election Commission that there is a vacancy.

In my article which I wrote shortly after the oral decision of the Federal Court in early April of this year, I have even pointed out the misreading of Article 36(5) by the highest court in the land. This is what I said:

A casual vacancy means an occasional vacancy which can be filled simply with a by-election. But the question whether the turncoat assemblymen have resigned or not will have to await the outcome of the decision of the Assembly which decision shall be final: see Article 33(1). It is only upon receiving the decision of the Legislative Assembly will the Election Commission be able to establish that there is a vacancy. As it turns out the Federal Court have put the cart before the horse – in this case, just the cart without the horse – which is that the court has held that it is for the Commission to establish that there is a casual vacancy without waiting for the decision of the Assembly whether the three turncoat assemblymen have been disqualified for membership of the Assembly by resignation.

By not administering justice according to law is this Federal Court’s besetting sin. The judges of this court have, therefore, breached s 3(1)(d) of the Judges’ Code of Ethics 1994 for bringing the Judiciary into disrepute or to bring discredit to it, which is a ground for their removal from office by virtue of s 2(2) of the Code of Ethics.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 22 June 2009, 6:49 pm and is filed under
Court
,
Judiciary
,
NH Chan
,
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.