JPA s’ships – can  Najib Cabinet end the “oppression, injustice” suffered by the  nation’s top scorers or is it even worse than the “half-past six” Abdullah Cabinet?

I have been on the twitter for a week and earlier today, I sent out this tweet:
 “6A1s get PSD eng s’ship – 13, 14 A1s no s’ships: why our Cabinet Ministers allow such nonsense yr in yr out. Sack the whole useless lot!”

This follows the latest revelation by the Deputy Education Minister, Wee Ka Siong, about the PSD scholarships  scandal this year – of the case of a student with 6A1 and 4A2 who obtained a scholarship to study engineering while  students with 13A1s and 14A1s are  given places to do matriculation instead of being awarded with scholarships.

The PSD scholarship uproar this year is all the more inexcusable, for three reasons:

It is a tragedy for nation-building after 52 years of nationhood;

It has torn to shreds the new Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s motto of “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now”.

It is a breach of the solemn promise made by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz  in Parliament in March this year about the end of the  annual national travail at this period of the year of the nation’s  top SPM scorers being victims of an unfair and discriminatory PSD scholarship selection system.

In Nazri’s speech  in Parliament on 18th March 2009, in the committee stage debate on the Prime Minister’s Department on the 2009 second supplementary estimates  on the RM60 billion second economic stimulus package, DAP MP for Batu Gajah Fong Po Kuan together with DAP MP for Rasah, Anthony Loke Siew Fook and DAP MP for Bandar Kuching, Chong Chieng Jen kept intervening on the subject of the unjust PSD scholarship scheme to the nation’s top scorers.

As recorded by the
Hansard of 18th March 2009
, Nazri made this categorical statement:

“Kita bercakap tentang biasiswa JPA. Saya  kata yang itu benchmark nya akan ditentukan oleh JPA supaya untuk mengelak daripada apa yang telah berlaku tahun lepas. Orang yang mendapat keputusan yang cukup baik tidak dapat scholarship tanpa mengira kaum, yang  top student yang dapat tanpa mengira kaum. Kita akan bagi kepada mereka biasiswa secara automatik. Kerana ini persepsi. Sebab katalah kalau dia dapat 13A1, dia tidak dapat sudah tentulah itu satu penganiayaan terhadapnya. Jadi, saya sudah buat keputusan yang top scorer, kita akan beri. Jangan tanya dua kali.”

There cannot be a more categorical statement than this:  Nazri’s solemn undertaking in Parliament that denial of PSD scholarships to top scorers like those getting 13A1s is “penganiayaan” – “injustice, oppression” – and they will all be automatically given scholarships, if not in the course of their choice, like medicine, dentistry and pharmacy, then in other degree courses.

This is what Nazri said at the end of his speech:

“Kemudian, Yang Berhormat Bandar Kuching tanya ramai dapat keputusan cemerlang SPM dan STPM tetapi tidak menerima biasiswa. Apakah jaminan kejadian seperti ini tidak akan berlaku pada tahun ini. Untuk tahun 2009, biasiswa program ijazah luar negara hanya untuk dua ribu tempat dan memandangkan mengikut keputusan SPM 2008, terdapat 1,676 pelajar 1A dalam semua mata pelajaran yang diambil. Oleh itu mustahil untuk memberikan semua biasiswa kepada yang cemerlang terutamanya kerana kebanyakan memohon bidang pengajian perubatan, pergigian dan farmasi, bidang-bidang kritikal di mana terdapat kuota di luar negara untuk bidangbidang ini. Pelajar Malaysia terpaksa bertanding dengan pelajar-pelajar asing lain. Ini masalah praktikal yang kita hadapi iaitu oleh sebab juga kuota di luar negara, universiti mungkin tidak dapat.

Jadi tidaklah boleh kita kata automatik semua akan dapat biasiswa dalam bidang yang dia hendak. Mungkin dalam bidang yang lain, itu mungkin. Jadi kita tidak boleh jamin semua hendak doktor, semua boleh dapat. Belum tentu sebab di luar negara tempat juga terhad dan kita bersaing dengan pelajar-pelajar daripada negara lain.”

The nation-wide outrage at the injustices of this year’s PSD scholarship award is therefore a clear violation of the government undertaking given by Nazri in Parliament in March for an end of such “penganiayaan”.

If the Cabinet meeting tomorrow cannot put right and uphold its earlier decision that top scorers would “automatically” be given PSD scholarships, though not in the course of their choice, then the Najib Cabinet is even worse than the ‘half-past six” Cabinet of the previous Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, as condemned by Tun Dr. Mahathir.

Yesterday, together with DAP MPs Fong Kui Lun (Bukit Bintang), Anthony Loke (Rasah) and Tony Pua (Petaling Jaya Utara), I met the PSD director-general Tan Sri Ismail Adam in  Putrajaya and asked that the full criteria for scholarship selection as well as the full list of scholarship receipients together with their results be published.

Ismail said he needed clearance from his political superiors. The Cabinet tomorrow should authorise and direct the PSD to make public the full criteria for scholarship selection as well as the full list of scholarship receipients together with their results in the name of fairness, accountability and transparency – this is the least that the Cabinet should do at its meeting tomorrow.

In keeping with the Najib motto of “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now”, the Cabinet tomorrow should come up with a swift and just solution to the scandal of the PSD scholarship awards, based on the following three principles:

Firstly, it would be unfair and unjust to withdraw any PSD scholarship which had been awarded last Friday;

 Secondly, all students with 9A1s and above should be awarded PSD scholarships – which means an increased allocation of RM300 million for JPA scholarships from RM700 million to RM1 billion. A special supplementary estimate of RM300 million for 2009 should be presented to the June meeting for this new allocation. There are four Pakatan Rakyat MPs at this forum tonight and we pledge full support for such a supplementary RM300 million allocation for PSD scholarships for the aggrieved top scorers. I don’t think any Barisan Nasional Minister or MP could argue against such an increased allocation when there is gross misuse of public funds – like the RM12 billion Port Klang Free Zone  scandal.

 Thirdly, the whole system of PSD scholarship awards should be revamped from next year onwards to end the perennial complaints every year about the injustices of the awards so that it is in full accord with the slogan “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now”. A Parliamentary Select Committee headed by an Opposition MP should be formed in June meeting of Parliament to completely revamp the PSD scholarship system.

I hope the Cabinet meeting on the PSD scholarships scandal would be more fruitful than the one last week.

After the Cabinet meeting last Wednesday,  MCA President and Transport Minister, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat announced that the Government will review the selection criteria for Public Services Department scholarships and that a meeting the same day would be held among Barisan Nasional component party leaders, the PSD director-general and the Chief Secretary to the Government to discuss the matter and reconsider rejected cases.

However, the most senior MCA Minister was contradicted the next day by  the Public Service Department director-general, Tan Sri Ismail Adam, who categorically stated that there would be no review of the selection criteria for PSD scholarships and that no such meeting mentioned by Ong was ever held.

Ong later explained that the Cabinet directive had probably not yet filtered down to the civil service.

This is a most astounding statement and thrown light on why there is such widespread inefficiency, incompetence and ineptitude both in the Cabinet and the civil service.

When it needs to take close to a week for a Cabinet decision to “filter down” to the PSD, from Putrajaya to Putrajaya, in fact from PM’s Office in Putrajaya to next door in Putrajaya, it does not speak highly of the KPIs whether of the Cabinet Ministers or the top civil servants!

Will Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon, the Minister for KPIs for Ministers, take note?

Malaysians await the outcome of the Cabinet meeting  tomorrow on the PSD scholarships issue with bated breath.

(Speech at the DAP forum “JPA scholarships – seeking a fair and equitable policy” held at the KL/Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall, Kuala Lumpur on Tuesday, 19th May 2009 at 9pm)

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 20 May 2009, 7:04 am and is filed under
Education
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


RM12 billion PKFZ can of worms – time for it to be fully  opened to the glare of Malaysian public and bring to book the culprits

The
 RM12 billion Port Klang Free Zone scandal
 took another twist when it is reported today  that there is a fall-out between the Transport Minister, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat and the man he appointed to clean up and salvage the Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) – Lim Thean Shiang, the Port Klang Authority (PKA) general manager and  PKFZ chief executive.

According to
the Sun
,
Lim tendered his resignation last week
 which was  accepted by Ong on Thursday. In a SMS to the Sun, Lim said his resignation must first be tabled before the PKA board meeting tomorrow for it to take effect.

Is there a suggestion that there might be a coup at the  PKA Board meeting tomorrow and that  Lim’s resignation might be rejected?

It is reported that the fallout between Ong and Lim was over the handling of the PKFZ scandal, both on the publication of the PwC audit as well as
Lim’s briefing to Barisan Nasional backbenchers on May 5 on the project
, which was made without Ong’s approval.

The “secret” briefing by Lim to the Barisan Nasional MPs is most improper and irregular.

Whether with or without his prior approval, Ong must assume full Ministerial responsibility for the “secret” briefing by Lim to the BN backbenchers on the PKFZ scandal, and give a full account to the nation – how many and who were  the BN MPs who attended, the venue, time, how long the briefing, who were the PKA and Transport Ministry officials who attended, and what exactly was  transacted at the briefing.

Was the Official Secrets Act breached in the briefing, as the reason which had been given so far  for the protracted delays in publication of the PricewaterhouseCooper audit report on the PKFZ scandal is that certain aspects of the report is protected by the OSA.

Or was the special PKFZ briefing so “secretive” that nothing about  it could be revealed to the public. If so, it is all the more important that all those who attended the “secretive” meeting be made public to avoid any suspicion that the independence of the BN backbenchers had been compromised by the PKFZ ‘secret” briefing and they should  be disqualified from taking  part in any debate or vote affecting the PKFZ question in Parliament.

Be that as it may, Malaysians are tired of the  14-month procrastination by Ong to fulfill his public pledge to “tell all” about the PKFZ scandal and make public the PricewaterhouseCooper audit report which he subsequently ordered.

Public disappointment at Ong’s failure to fulfill his public pledge has become even more acute following media reports, both local and foreign, that the
PKFZ scandal
 had ballooned in cost  in three  stages, viz:

(i)	from RM1.8 billion in 2002 under the then Transport Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Ling Liong Sik (with the Cabinet given the  assurance that not a single sen of public funds would be needed as it was a viable and self-financing private project);

(ii)	to more than double the original cost at  RM4.6 billion under Datuk Seri Chan Kong Choy as Transport Minister ; and

(iii)	to the current frightening figure of RM12 billion under Ong.

The Singapore Straits Times in its report dated May 7, 2009, said that “a financial crisis at Malaysia’s main port agency, which could saddle the government with
losses exceeding RM12 billion (S$5 billion) is shaping up as a major policy test for the administration of Prime Minister Najib Razak
”.

It quoted “senior government officials” that the PricewaterhouseCooper audit report on the PKFZ “will show that losses stemming from bonds issued to finance the project could plunge it into insolvency by 2012.”

The Singapore Straits Times said the PwC report “ also details an array of alleged management irregularities at the free-trade zone development”, including “serious conflict-of-interest breaches between officials of the port authority and executives of private companies with close ties to the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) government”.

The time has come to end all procrastinations and for the RM12 billion PKFZ can of worms  to be fully  opened to the glare of Malaysian public and for everyone, regardless of status or position, responsible for the mega financial scandal to be brought to book and prosecuted in the courts.

Whether from MCA,  UMNO or any other Barisan Nasional  component party, whether big guns or small fries, retired or current politicians including those in the present Najib administration, let them all pay the price for the RM12 billion PKFZ scandal.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 20 May 2009, 1:57 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
PKFZ
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Shad Faruqi’s article on Perak crisis becoming a “hydra-headed monster” should be compulsory reading for Najib and Cabinet

Professor Shad Faruqi’s latest  Star weekly  column
“Reflecting on the Law”
 on
“
Put interest of the nation first
”
 and how the Perak crisis has become a “hydra-headed monster” should be compulsory reading for the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak and his Cabinet.

Shad Faruqi has made many points which I had tried in the past three -and-a-half months  to communicate to the Prime Minister and the Barisan Nasional leaders but to no avail.

For instance, Shad Faruqi started his article thus:

“THE Perak political crisis can be likened to a malignant cancer that is voraciously spreading to the lymph nodes of our other institutions – the Sultanate, the judiciary, the federal executive, the civil service, the police, the law officers of the Crown, the court registry, the Anti-Corruption Commission and the Election Commission.

The longer we wait, the farther the affliction will spread. It is time, therefore, to stop this madness, this divisiveness, this polarisation.”

One consistent point I had made for over three months is that  the constitutional and political impasse has precipitated a new crisis of confidence in credibility, legitimacy and integrity of all the key national institutions of the country, whether the police, election commission, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency, the civil service, the judiciary or the monarchy and impaired  Malaysia’s international image and competitiveness to face up to the world’s worst economic crisis in a century.

In March, I had invoked  the imagery of “
Nero playing the fiddle while Rome burns
” to deplore Najib’s failure to act boldly to end the protracted political and constitutional crisis in the face of the world economic crisis.

Shad Faruqi is now invoking the same imagery when he said:

The country as a whole is more important than the fate of Barisan or Pakatan in Perak.

In Rome, Nero played the fiddle while the city burned. We should not allow that to happen to us.

Perak politicians have no right to paralyse the rest of the country or to distract us from the many urgent and daunting tasks staring us in the face.

Najib should take heed and he should take responsibility for the unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab he had orchestrated in early February by agreeing to dissolve the Perak state assembly to return the mandate to Perakians to elect the government of their choice.

In February 20, I had called for the swift and democratic resolution of the Perak crisis to avoid months of stand-off and stalemate in the Perak political and constitutional crisis – in a manner which could be accepted by all Perakians without poisoning the Malaysian body politic for years and decades so that national energies could be mobilized to face the looming economic crisis.

If my proposal for a snap Perak state elections to held within 30 days had been acted upon by Najib, the Perak political and constitutional crisis would be behind the state and nation for more than two months!

As Shaq Faruqi has perceptively pointed out, the courts cannot supply any satisfactory solutions to the Perak political and constitutional crisis.

Najib should not drag his feet any longer but rise to the occasion to agree to the dissolution of the Perak State Assembly so that the crisis could be behind all Perakians and Malaysians within 30 days.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 20 May 2009, 4:19 pm and is filed under
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Abdul Aziz judgment on Nizar case

Today the Court of Appeal at the Palace of Justice, Putrajaya is hearing the appeal against the landmark judgment of Justice Datuk Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim in the Nizar vs Zambry case delivered last Monday, 11th May 2009 declaring Nizar as the lawful Perak Mentri Besar.

Nizar is not getting a  five-member Court of Appeal panel. The three judges hearing Nizar’s application to discharge Zambry’s “stay order” obtained by a single-judge Court of Appeal within 24 hours of the historic judgment and Zambry’s appeal against the Kuala Lumpur High Court judgment are justices Md Raus Sharif, Zainun Ali and Ahmad Maarop.

As I said in my tweet two hours ago:

“Parties agree that appeal proper b heard 1st and if at the end of hear’g ct cant give decision then discharge of stay will have 2 b heard.”

While we wait for the outcome from the Court of Appeal,  the landmark Abdul Aziz judgment which  illuminates the complicated terrain thrown up by the Perak constitutional crisis is worth reading (
here
).

The following Star report sums up the judgment:

Why MB can’t be sacked – Nizar does not hold office at the pleasure of the Ruler, says judge

By M. MAGESWARI and LISA GOH

KUALA LUMPUR: The mentri besar cannot be dismissed by the Sultan because he does not hold office at the pleasure of the Ruler, the High Court here ruled.

High Court (Appellate and Special Powers) judge Justice Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim said the Sultan could remove members of the Perak Executive Council from their office but not the mentri besar.

He said this in his 78-page judgment, in which he declared Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin as the valid Perak Mentri Besar as his office “has not become vacant”.

The oral judgment was handed down on May 11.

“Article 16(7) of the Perak Constitution says that the mentri besar does not hold office at the pleasure of His Royal Highness,” the judge said in the judgment made available to the press yesterday.

Once a mentri besar is appointed, he is only answerable to the state legislative assembly, he said.

“I hold the view that a vote of no-confidence on the floor of the assembly is required to remove the mentri besar,” Justice Abdul Aziz said.

Nizar filed a judicial review on Feb 13 to challenge the legitimacy of Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abd Kadir as mentri besar and his state government.

Justice Abdul Aziz said he adopted the reasoning in the case of Stephen Kalong Ningkan v. Tun Abang Haji Openg and Tawi Sli in Sarawak, in which the judge ruled that “the Governor may dismiss ministers but may not dismiss the chief minister in any circumstances”.

He noted that under the framework of a constitutional monarchy, the ruler was expected to discharge his constitutional role and functions in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.

The Sultan was satisfied as to who commanded the majority in the state legislative assembly when he concluded that Nizar had ceased to command the confidence of the majority, Justice Abdul Aziz said.

“But the stark fact is that there never was any vote of no-confidence taken against Nizar nor had he had gone to the Sultan to request for a dissolution because he had lost the command of the majority. So, how could one say Nizar had ceased to command the confidence of the majority?” he asked.

The High Court also ruled that it was fine for the Sultan to determine who had majority in the assembly to appoint a mentri besar.

However, the Sultan’s opinion that Dr Zambry was likely to command the confidence of the majority in the assembly was not applicable in deciding that Nizar had lost the majority.

“I would say that the personal opinion or judgment of His Royal Highness is irrelevant,” he noted.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 21 May 2009, 11:43 am and is filed under
Judiciary
,
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


ASEM FMM 9 should endorse the proposal for an international inquiry of 15 years of human rights abuses in Myanmar like those conducted for atrocities in Darfur, Rwanda and Yugoslavia

The reimposition of restrictions on reporters and diplomats attending the trial of Burmese pro-democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi a day after opening up the proceedings yesterday betray the true colours of the Myanmar military junta with regard to its utter disregard to universal principles of human rights and the ASEAN Charter.

The Myanmese military junta must not be allowed to get away with its nefarious agenda, which is to keep Suu Kyi  in continued incarceration  although her six-year illegal detention is to expire in six days time on May 27 and to extend it during next year’s elections.

It is not to ASEAN’s credit that the regional organization has been so mute and helpless to the flagrant violation of human rights in the continued persecution of Suu Kyi, who had already been detained for more than 13 of the past 19 years, as not a single ASEAN head of state or government had said a single word at the first crisis faced by  the ASEAN Charter on the commitment of the individual ASEAN countries to promote and protect human rights.

It is six days to the countdown of expiry of Suu Kyi’s illegal detention on May 27 and all ASEAN governments must put maximum and daily pressure on the Myanmar military junta to release the Nobel Peace Prize Laureatte next Wednesday or face dire consequences.

Five prominent international jurists have proposed that the United Nations Security Council should open an inquiry into 15 years of human rights abuses in Myanmar, like those conducted for atrocities in Darfur, Rwanda and Yugoslavia.

The five jurists,  Judge Richard Goldstone of South Africa, Judge Patricia Wald of the United States, Judge Pedro Nikken of Venezuela, Judge Ganzorig Gombosuren of Mongolia and Sir Geoffrey Nice of Britain, have said in a report released by the Harvard Law School that systematic human rights abuses in Myanmar “strongly suggest Burma’s military regime may be committing crimes against humanity and war crimes prosecutable under international law”.

The jurists wrote that “forced displacement of over 3,000 villages in eastern Burma, and widespread and systematic sexual violence, torture, and summary execution of innocent civilians” justify the establishment of a U.N. commission of inquiry into crimes against humanity and war crimes.

“In the cases of Yugoslavia and Darfur, once aware of the severity of the problem, the U.N. Security Council established a Commission of Inquiry to investigate the gravity of the violations further,” said the report.

“With Burma, there has been no such action from the U.N. Security Council despite being similarly aware of the widespread and systematic nature of the violations.”

ASEAN, Asian and European Foreign Ministers attending the 9th Asia-Europe Foreign Ministers’ Meeting (ASEM FMM 9) in Hanoi next week on May 25 – 26 should endorse the proposal for an international inquiry of  15 years of human rights abuses in Myanmar like those conducted for atrocities in Darfur, Rwanda and Yugoslavia.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 21 May 2009, 5:34 pm and is filed under
ASEAN
,
Burma
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


RM12 billion PKFZ “can of worms” – Ong Tee Keat and MACC, what games are you playing?

Malaysians today are entitled to ask the MCA President/Transport Minister, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) –  What games are you playing with regard to the RM12 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) “can of worms”?

In the latest twist to an unprecedented long catalogue of twists, Ong now says that the question of whether the PricewaterhouseCooper (PwC) report on the PKFZ scandal will be made public rests with the cabinet.

This is  most unbelievable! Wasn’t  it Ong himself who issued a categorical, even commanding, instruction to the Port Klang Authority (PKA) on April 29 to release the PwC audit report on the PKFZ  to the public “within seven days”?

Why one excuse after another since then to justify why the PwC report on the PKFZ has not yet seen the light of day, until the whole responsibility is thrown back to the Cabinet – when Malaysians had been told that the Cabinet had given Ong the greenlight to release the PwC report, which was the reason for Ong’s command on April 29 to the PKA to make public the PwC report within seven days?

There should be no need to remind Ong of the various past pledges he had made in the past 15 months to “tell all” about the PKFZ scandal, and that “paper cannot wrap embers” especially as the PKFZ scandal has become so  infested to become an even bigger “can of worms”, snowballing from a RM1.8 billion scandal in 2002 under Datuk Seri Dr. Ling Liong Sik as Transport Minister, more than doubling to RM4.6 billion under Datuk Seri Chan Kong Choy as Transport Minister and now mushrooming into the astronomical figure of a RM12 billion scandal under Ong’s watch as Transport Minister.

In now saying that the Cabinet has to decide whether to make public the PwC audit report on the PKFZ scandal, is Ong admitting that his powers as Transport Minister has been clipped and his earlier decision for the report to be made public had been overruled by mysterious but powerful forces?

Why is Ong knuckling down to the pressures of those who do not want the PwC Report on the PKFZ scandal to be made public, by agreeing to revert back  the issue to the Cabinet, when the Cabinet had earlier given him the “greenlight” to make public the PwC report?

Shouldn’t Ong take a stand that it is now for the Transport Minister to decide on whether the PwC report on the PKFZ to be made public, and not to pass the buck back to Cabinet?

This is the clear stand Malaysians want from Ong, to be stated boldly in his blog, instead of mumbling about the Najib slogan, “People First, Performance Now” which has achieved remarkable record of a new Prime Ministerial slogan discredited in the shortest period – in fact in less than seven days of its announcement!

The Star today carried the front-page headline report
“
MACC moves in – Commission starts probe into PKFZ project
”
on a team from the Putrajaya MACC starting to interview those involved in the project.

It reported:

It is learnt that a team from the Putrajaya MACC has been investigating and inquiring from those in the know about the project.

Sources familiar with the investigation said the MACC is expected to intensify its probe once it has obtained a copy of the report by accounting firm Pricewaterhouse-Coopers Advisory Services Sdn Bhd (PwC).

They said the MACC would study the report and see if there were new elements which the commission could follow up on.

The MACC is also expected to contact several people in the Port Klang Authority (PKA) as part of its investigations.

MACC director of investigations Datuk Mohd Shukri Abdull confirmed investigations were in progress but declined to elaborate.

What game is the MACC playing, in giving the impression that it has suddenly sprung into action, waiting to investigate into the PKFZ scandal when the PwC report is made public?

Four reports, whether to the police or the Anti-Corruption Agency, had been made by Selangor Executive Councillor, Ronnie Liu when he was head of DAP NGO Bureau in the 18 months  from December 2004 on the PKFZ scandal and there is no reason why the ACA or its present successor the MACC could not lay its hands on all the relevant information and documentation on the PKFZ scandal if it had been thorough, competent and professional in its investigations.

It is most ridiculous for the MACC to strike the stance as is it is an innocent who is getting information about the PKFZ scandal for the first time, and is awaiting the PwC report to get more information for necessary follow-up action.

There should be a full investigation into why the ACA had failed to uncover any improprieties or crimes in the PKFZ scandal despite Ronnie Liu making four ACA or police reports since December 2004 – a ACA “cover-up” which should  regarded as heinous as the PKFZ scandal!

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 21 May 2009, 11:56 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
PKFZ
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Zambry’s first Black 100 Days as squatter/usurper Perak MB – will Perak be Umno’s graveyard and Zambry the cause of Najib’s downfall as the last Umno PM?

Today is Datuk Zambry Abdul Kadir’s 100 days as the squatter and usurper Perak Mentri Besar – and the question on everybody’s mind on Zambry’s first Black 100 Days is whether Perak would be Umno’s graveyard in the 13th national general election and Zambry the cause of Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s downfall as the last Umno Prime Minister in Malaysia.

Professor Shad Saleem Faruqi has coined the most apt and powerful imagery when he likened the Perak political and constitutional crisis to a “
hydra-headed monster that cannot be eliminated by ding-dong judicial decisions
”.

Shad Faruqi opined that recourse to the courts is pointless and called for a stop to “this insane and naked show of unprincipled politics”.

The only way to end the hydra-headed monster of the Perak political and constitutional crisis is to return to first principles of democracy and the Constitution as spelt out by the landmark Justice Datuk Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim judgment on the Nizar vs Zambry case last Monday that once a mentri besar is appointed, he is only answerable to the state legislative assembly and he could only be removed by a vote of no-confidence in the State Assembly and not by the Sultan.

Already, the hydra-headed monster of the Perak crisis has, to borrow another powerful imagery by  and the words of  Shad Faruqi, like “a malignant cancer” is “voraciously spreading to the lympn nodes of our other institutions – the Sultanate, the judiciary, the federal executive, the civil service, the law officers of the crown, the court registry, the Anti-Corruption Commission and the Election Commission”.

Shad Faruqi said: “The longer we wait, the farther the affliction will spread. It is time,  therefore, to stop this madness, this divisiveness, this polarisation.”

Is Najib, the man who  orchestrated the unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab in Perak in early February, prepared to divine the temper of the people, see the sign of the times and heed such a call?

Even Mother Nature is on the side of righteousness – as evident from the shrivelling in less than a month of the 19 saplings planted by usurper Zambry regime directly beneath the famous Democracy Tree in Ipoh which hosted the famous “Tree Perak State Assembly” on March 3, 2009.

If Najib is not prepared to recognise the enormity of his mistake in Perak and cut losses, the hydra-headed monster he created in Perak will mutate and mushroom  into  hydra-headed monster throughout  Malaysia which will  ruin not only his premiership but also Umno rule in Malaysia in the next general election.

In March, I had invoked the imagery of “
Nero playing the fiddle while Rome burns
” to deplore Najib’s failure to act boldly to end the protracted political and constitutional crisis in the face of the world economic crisis.

More than two months later, Shad Faruqi has invoked the same imagery of the Roman emperor.

Najib should take heed and assume  responsibility for the unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab he had orchestrated in early February by agreeing to dissolve the Perak state assembly to return the mandate to Perakians to elect the government of their choice.

If Najib had heard and acted on my call on February 20 for a  swift and democratic resolution of the Perak crisis to avoid months of stand-off and stalemate in the Perak political and constitutional crisis, i.e.a snap Perak state elections to held within 30 days, the Perak hydra-headed monster would have been slain and the  Perak political and constitutional crisis behind Perakians and Malaysians for more than two months!

How long more is Najib going to wait before he faces up to the reality that there is no viable solution  to the Perak crisis other than the dissolution of the Perak State Assembly and the holding of Perak state general elections?

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 21 May 2009, 3:43 pm and is filed under
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


5-minute finding (not judgment) of Ct of Appeal shot-gun session declaring Zambry lawful Perak MB – hydra-headed monster claims another victim

The hydra-headed monster of the Perak crisis has claimed another victim with the 5-minute finding (and not judgment) of Court of Appeal shot-gun session declaring Zambry lawful Perak Mentri Besar.

All who packed into the Court of Appeal in the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya to hear its judgment in the Nizar vs Zambry appeal could not believe that the whole shot-gun session was over in five minutes of delivery, not of a judgment, but findings of the Court of Appeal.

There was no reasoned grounds of judgment but mere findings of the Court of Appeal in an unanimous decision, i.e. 3 – 0.

As Professor Shad Faruqui had presciently written in his weekly newspaper column, the Perak crisis has become “a hydra-headed monster that cannot be eliminated by ding-dong judicial decisions”, and today, the hydra-headed monster has claimed another victim with the five-minute finding (not judgment) of the Court of Appeal shot-gun session declaring Datuk Zambry Abdul Kadir as the lawful Perak Mentri Besar.

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak told the Singapore press that Barisan Nasional suffered from a public relations problem in not giving proper explanation of the Perak political and constitutional crisis and allowing the Pakatan Rakyat to distort and poison the minds of Malaysians.

Najib cannot be more wrong.  The Barisan Nasional’s problem in Perak is not a “PR” problem but something more basic and fundamental – that the unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab he orchestrated in early February went against all canons of ethics and propriety as well as violates accepted democratic and constitutional principles.

Najib cannot win in the court of public opinion even with the 3-0 Court of Appeal judgment.  All it means is that the restoration of national and international confidence in the independence, impartiality and integrity of the judiciary is still a long distance away.

For Najib’s own good in the next general election, he should be bold enough to admit that he had committed a colossal error of judgment in orchestrating the illegal power grab in Perak and agree to dissolve the Perak State Assembly to return the mandate to the people in a Perak state general election for Perakians to elect the government of their choice.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 22 May 2009, 4:50 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Court
,
Judiciary
,
Najib Razak
,
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Hishammuddin should send the OCPDs of Brickfields and Ampang Jaya to a human rights sensitization course

Malaysians are shocked by the outrageous conduct of the OCPDs of Brickfields and Ampang Jaya, Wan Abdul Bari Wan Abdul Talib and  Abd Jalil Hassan, whose boorish conduct are caught on video, serving as prime examples of police officers who have no notion or respect for human rights or even civil behaviour.

Both of them have brought shame not only to the country, but also to the Royal Malaysian Police Force, in their unprofessional conduct and excessive display of police power – showing utter contempt for elected representatives of the people and ordinary members of the public.

When police officers could summon massive police reinforcements to deal with a small and peaceful group of civic-minded Malaysians lighting candles to send their message of protest to the authorities over the unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab in Perak, something is very wrong with the training of police officers. In fact, something is very wrong with the direction the country is heading.

In not charging the five lawyers and 15 others arrested in connection with a candlelight vigil in Kuala Lumpur on May 7, the Police should have won back some goodwill for their disgraceful detention of the 20 – but all such goodwill had been undone with further spate of arrests of 27 persons for  peaceful candlelight vigils, including DAP MP for Serdang Teo Nie Ching and DAP Selangor Assemblywoman (Teratai) Jenice Lee, and the remand this morning of 16 of them for two days.

I am prepared to send the videos of such disgraceful and unacceptable conduct by the OCPDs of Brickfields and Ampang Jaya to the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein, and Malaysians want to know whether the Home Minister finds such conduct by the  OCPDs of the two police districts in Federal capital acceptable or excusable.

Hishammuddin should send the OCPDs of  Brickfields and Ampang Jaya to a human rights sensitization course or the Home Minister himself should undergo such a course first.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 22 May 2009, 3:04 pm and is filed under
Human Rights
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Nation-Building Cannot Begin from Irrational Premises

 By
Farish A. Noor

It has become ever-so-trendy of late to talk about nation-building in the most inclusive and open-ended of terms. After assuming office more than a month ago, the Prime Minister of Malaysia Najib Razak began speaking at length about the notion of a ‘United Malaysia’ – which was in turn claimed by opposition parties in the country as their idea as well. In Thailand a slew of parties have claimed monopoly over the concept of a singular, united Thailand. While in Burma since the 1960s the aims of nation-building have been the same as they are now: to bring together the disparate array of ethnic, cultural and linguistic groups under the same banner of a singular Burmese identity.

Now there is nothing wrong with nation-building per se (for indeed one cannot imagine any form of governance without some semblance of a nation-building project accompanying it), and there is nothing wrong with wanting to bring different communities together. What has to be questioned critically, however, is this: What is the final aim of such nation-building projects; what are the premises upon which they are based; and can such projects ever get to their appointed destinations if the premises upon which they are laid are somehow faulty themselves?

The call for national unity can be troubling at times, for often we come across cases where nation-building is nothing less than a polite euphemism for the hegemonic cultural dominance of the majority. A case in point would be the experiment in nation-building in Burma following the coup and military take-over in 1963. The military leaders of Burma then spoke at length about the need to bring the diverse nation together, but forgot to mention that practically the entire leadership of the government, army and civil service was dominated by the ethnic Burmans, while other communities like the Shans, Chin, Kachin, Karens etc were effectively left out. ‘Burmese nationalism’ was therefore nothing more than an attempt to impose the specific identity of the Burmese of the Irrawady delta on the rest of the country…

Likewise Thailand’s identity problem stems from the fact that the Thai community is just one of many. Until today, the plight of minorities in Thailand such as the Malay-Muslims of the south is seen as a marginal concern that does not figure very highly in the political considerations of the elite in Bangkok. But as long as the ethnic Thais do not accept the fact that there are many other ethnic, linguistic and religious communities that occupy the same geography as Thailand, how can there be any real progress in the creation of a multicultural Thailand that truly reflects its diversity?

Likewise in Malaysia national unity has been the bugbear of Malaysian politics since the 1960s. But attempts to forge a sense of national unity and national identity have faltered on the rocks of realpolitik for the simple reason that what we have seen thus far is the steady encroachment of the cultural, linguistic and increasingly religious dominance of one ethnic-cultural group in particular. To compound matters even further, the landscape of Malaysian politics has been dominated mostly by political parties that are communal in character and whose natural vote base come from their respective ethnic, linguistic and religious constituencies.

As long as Malaysian politics maintains the communal and sectarian tenor that it has preserved for half a century, how can there be any real progress in nation-building and the sense of a united yet diverse Malaysia? For if the notion of a ‘united Malaysia’ merely foregrounds one ethnic-religious community at the expense of others, one would not be surprised if the minorities in the country react by saying ‘No thanks, we will keep to our ethno-religious ghettoes and we don’t want to be absorbed by your cultural and religious majoritarianism…’

Nation-building therefore has to begin from rational, objective and universal premises – the first of which is the concept of universal and equal citizenship where every single citizen is regarded as equal to another. The state has to remain colour-blind, and blind to the distinctions of race, ethnicity, gender and religion; and adopt instead the role of the secular ‘honest broker’ that does not favour one community over another.

But can this ever happen in countries like Malaysia, Thailand, Burma or even India, Pakistan and Bangladesh one wonders? For too long the bane of post-colonial development has been the perpetuation of essentialised categories of race, ethnicity and religion. And for too long the reproduction of these essentialised categories has been maintained via an irrational, emotional and oft-time bellicose and confrontational discourse of narrow identity politics. Frankly, it is this adherence to the irrational logic of communalism that is one of the root causes of the failure of nation-building in so many parts of the developing world until today. At its most extreme it will take us to the point where the hardening of communal frontiers will render sensible, objective and critical dialogue on common national issues impossible.

But can the political elites of these countries make the changes that are necessary and over-due? Can the political parties of Malaysia, for instance, de-escalate the process of hardening the ethnic and religious boundaries between the communities; and come to the common agreement that the future of the country cannot be the responsibility of only one ethnic or religious group, but the nation as a whole? Can the politicians of Malaysia come to realise that Malaysia today is far more complex than it has ever been, and that to succeed on a national basis means having to abandon the sectarian politics of the past and adopting the inclusive democratic politics of the future?

The rationalist in me can see the problem, and even suggest a solution or two. But in the heated environment of Malaysian politics today, one wonders who will be the first to simply state the obvious: Malaysia will not get anywhere as long as the political parties of the country do not reject, once and for all, race and religion-based politics for the sake of the wider long-term goal of nation-building and democratisation. But being reasonable means being in the minority these days, and like all minority groups the world over, rationalists today are forced to watch the slow failure of nation-building thanks to the politics of unreason that has overcome us.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 22 May 2009, 6:36 am and is filed under
Burma
,
Farish Noor
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Police must change or fail

by Tunku Aziz

MAY 22 — Criticisms of the PDRM (Polis Di-Raja Malaysia) have lately turned ugly: they have been reduced to what amounts to a hate campaign. I believe this attitude is totally counterproductive because as citizens we deserve the police service we get. In other words, unless we are prepared to work with them, they will not succeed.

That said, PDRM must change with the times, and change what is known all over the world as the police culture of impunity. Police training must naturally cover traditional aspects of policing, but in today’s terms nothing is more important than for our police to understand the issue of human rights and the rights of the individual to police protection without regard to race or colour. Officers at every level of the service must subject themselves and their actions to the closest public scrutiny. Members of the public today are no longer mesmerised by the shiny little badges of rank that elbow for space on their very crowded epaulette.

Members of the Royal Malaysian Police belong to an honourable profession that, in our country, is more than two centuries old. The PDRM is older than the London Metropolitan Police (1829) and the New York City Police Department (1843). They are the inheritors of a long and proud tradition of service to the people of this country. And we owe them an enormous debt of gratitude.

The Malaysian police service is like no other in the world. What little I know of police forces in some parts of the world suggests that in many respects, ours is as good as the best, but as the report of the Royal Commission on the Enhancement of the Management and Operation of PDRM has pointed out, there is a lot of room for improvement so as to bring the standards of policing in Malaysia in line with best international practices.

As a member of the Royal Commission appointed to inquire into the police service, I despair of the decision of the government to soft pedal on the most important recommendation in the whole report — the creation of an independent oversight body to help protect the police protect itself against unwarranted criticisms. The government, and the police, no less, must accept that no police force in the world has ever succeeded in policing itself, and PDRM is no different. I may be forgiven for concluding that the government has made, in a manner of speaking, a right royal “dog’s breakfast” of much of the report. Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi pussyfooted around this recommendation, but let us see whether our self-proclaimed reforming crusader, the current prime minister, has the stomach to force this through.

I can understand why the senior ranks are suspicious of any suggestion that they perceive as “outside interference.” The Knapp Commission (1972) on the New York police had this to say: “Two principal characteristics emerge from this group loyalty: suspicion and loyalty directed at any outside interference with the department. This mixture of hostility and pride has created what the (Knapp) Commission has found to be the most serious roadblock to a rational attack on police corruption: a stubborn refusal at all levels of the department to acknowledge that a serious problem exists.” I spent a year in New York as Special Adviser to the UN Secretary-General in 2006, and was able to follow developments in the New York Police Department, and nothing substantial has changed since that report was released in 1972. Let us move from New York to London.

Sir Robert Bunyard, a former Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary, describes police culture as follows:

“The culture of police groups has always been particularly strong, partly because the police occupy a unique and ambiguous role in society but also because they feel the need to defend themselves against what is seen as a hostile world.” Not really very different from the way many police officers in PDRM have reacted to the royal commission report.

A common belief or notion, which appears to be deeply embedded in the police psyche, is that of impunity, forgetting that the powers given to them are purely for the purpose of enforcing the rule of law and maintaining public order. Many of them also sometimes forget that they are not above the law, are indeed creatures of the law, and it is their duty to uphold the law, and not subvert it, however great the temptation might be.

Effective policing depends on public support, and public support will be withheld or even withdrawn if there is no confidence in the integrity of the police as a whole. It is important for them to realise that they are an intrinsic part of the society which it is their duty to serve, and all of their actions must be directed towards the public good.

Their distinctive blue uniform sets off very complex emotions and reactions in different people. As police officers they are either respected or feared. Naturally, how they choose to be treated is entirely a matter for them to decide.

The important role they play in our criminal justice system cannot be overemphasised. It is all the more important that they maintain the highest ethical and moral standards, particularly in handling cases that could lead to a possible prosecution.

We often hear complaints about questionable methods used by the police when gathering evidence, methods that will not bear close examination. Nothing is more calculated to alienate the public than the belief, rightly or wrongly, that the police are careless about protecting citizens’ rights. Members of the public are becoming better educated and know their rights under the law. What all this means in practice is that the police must change from a perceived culture of impunity to one grounded in efficiency, transparency, honesty and accountability.

We do expect, I admit, rather a lot of our men and women in blue. We make demands on them that we would never dream of imposing on ourselves. They work under conditions which are far from ideal, often exposed to great hardship and danger, and yet do we ever stop to think about their welfare and that of their families?

I can tell you that nothing much has changed in 50 years as far as their accommodation, for example, is concerned. Instead of living in wooden barracks, they now live in crammed one- or two-bedroom concrete cubicles. Police families tend to be large, and the chances of living with dignity as a family unit are not part of their terms of employment.  Domestic pressures under such living conditions defy the imagination, and it was for me, on official visits to many police stations in different states, a humbling experience to talk to police personnel and to see their patience and forbearance of an existence that is not in keeping with today’s minimum expectations.

The nature of police work is such that it would be totally dishonest and disingenuous for anyone to suggest that it is no different from all the other components of the civil service. It is different, dangerous and debilitating of mind and body. The police service should be treated as a separate and distinct service, and the officers, men and women should be paid a rate for the job that reflects the true nature of their work.

Police work is not every one’s idea of fun and games, and in fact I have often said that anyone determined to join the police should have his or her head examined. But for all that, thank God that there are thousands of them who have decided to devote their lives to the care of the citizens of this country so that we can go about our work or business knowing that they are there watching over our security and safety.

I have often heard it said that if the police are paid more, the armed forces might be upset. My remedy for that is for members of the armed forces to join the police and have a taste of police life.

(Much of the material has been drawn from my own speeches and writings. The comments remain as relevant today as when they were first made four years ago.)

                This entry was posted on Friday, 22 May 2009, 11:50 am 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.


Time for the government to be colour-blind and to end ethnic profiling for scholarships

If the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak is serious about his slogan of 1Malaysia, then the time has come for the government to be colour-blind and end ethnic profiling for scholarships.

The Barisan Nasional government had promised that there would not be a recurrence this year of the perennial problem of Public Service Department (PSD)  scholarships selection creating grave injustices and public alienation but this is not the case.

I am very disappointed that after the Cabinet meeting on Wednesday, there had been no announcement whatsoever about the solution to this year’s nation-wide uproar at the unjust PSD scholarship awards, and the MCA President and Transport Minister, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat had been particularly quiet after various statements about a solution for the aggrieved students who failed to get scholarships despite clear merit in their results.

May be Ong is preoccupied with the RM12 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) scandal, on the breach of his repeated promise to make public the PricewaterhouseCooper audit report on it. However, many are saying that the  gross wastage of public funds and mega financial scandals are interconnected with issues of PSD scholarships and government services, as for example  the RM12 billion squandered on PKFZ would have amply provided scholarships to all the over 8,000 applicants who applied for PSD foreign degree scholarships  this year.

Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin is talking about limiting the number of subjects a SPM candidate can  take, but this is a very ad hoc and limited approach  which does not go to the root cause of the problem of a fair, just, efficient and transparent PSD scholarship selection system.

Limiting the number of SPM subjects will not  end the annual ruckus over the PSD scholarship awards unless there is a total revamp of the system to make it fair, just, efficient and transparent where meritocracy is given top priority, coupled with a needs-based programme.

The purpose of this roundtable is to kickstart a national debate on the need for a total revamp of the PSD scholarship selection system, whether scholarships should be awarded only at the SPTM level, a flexible programme to allow for change of courses, and  the loopholes and weaknesses evident  in the present system.

There is also a need to have an effective and transparent system so that Malaysians can monitor the PSD and the implementation of the various ministerial policy pronouncements.

For instance, the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz had announced in Parliament the PSD scholarship  ratio of 55:45 for bumiputras to non-bumiputras for foreign degrees, that all top-scorers with 13A1s and 14A1s will automatically get scholarships as it is otherwise a great injustice, and that there is no quota for the PSD scholarships for local universities.

As these ministerial policy pronouncements are not translated into practice, there must be a transparent system of PSD scholarship selection so that Malaysians can monitor it.

It was revealed in Parliament that in the past six years from 2003 to 2008, Petronas awarded 1,035 scholarships for foreign universities, made up of 87% or 901 scholarships for bumiputras and 13% or 134 scholarships for non-bumiputeras.

Petronas and all government-linked scholarships should follow the PSD example of a scholarship  ratio of 55:45 for bumiputras to non-bumiputras to pave the way for the end of ethnic profiling for public scholarships if the Najib motto of “1Malaysia” is to be meaningful.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 22 May 2009, 2:05 pm and is filed under
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Khir Toyo – Suspend him from Selangor State Assembly but not his  assemblyman’s allowances

The Selangor State Assembly should not suspend Datuk Seri Dr. Mohd Khir Toyo’s state assemblyman allowances even if it endorses the Selangor State Assembly Rights and Privileges Committee recommendations to punish and suspend the former Selangor Mentri Besar from the Assembly  for grave breach of privileges.

The Selangor State Assembly Rights and Privileges Committee has recommended that Khir be suspended for a year from the state assembly without state assemblyman’s allowances and privileges  for not attending an inquiry conducted by the state’s Select Committee on Competence, Accountability and Transparency (Selcat) in March on the disbursement of state agency funds to Balis – the Wives of Selangor Assemblymen and MPs Welfare and Charity Organisation.

Khir is also found guilty of three other charges of making disparaging remarks and negative statements about Selcat in the media and on his blog, with the recommended sentence of six months’ suspension each, with all  the suspensions to run concurrently.

Four other Barisan Nasional assemblymen Datuk Warno Dogol (Sabak Bernam), Datuk Mohd Idris Abu Bakar (Hulu Bernam), Mohd Isa Abu Kassim (Batang Kali) and Datuk Marsum Paing (Dengkil) have also been found guilty of attacking Selcat in the media,  all to be  suspended six months each without allowances and privileges.

These findings and recommendations of the Rights and Privileges Committee will be presented to the July meeting of the Selangor State Assembly for endorsement before  they could take effect.

The Selangor State Assembly should not suspend Khir Toyo’s allowances – or the allowances of  the other four Barisan Nasional Assemblymen – even if it endorses the recommendations of the Selangor State  Assembly Rights and Privileges Committee to punish the former Selangor Mentri Besar and the other four Barisan Nasional Assemblymen for gross breach of privileges.

The Selangor State Assembly can suspend Assembly members  from attending the Assembly for gross breach of privileges but it should not suspend their allowances as State Assembly members  are elected by the voters to represent them at the state government level and voters should not be placed in a limbo of not  having an elected Assemblyman to represent them as an intermediary with the state government even if he is suspended from State Assembly sittings.

Suspending state assembly members from the State Assembly for gross breach of privilege is appropriate punishment.

It is only recently that the Barisan Nasional embarked on the unhealthy and undemocratic practice not only in suspending members from the legislature but also their allowances.

This is a deplorable practice which Pakatan Rakyat-controlled  legislatures should not follow.

There can be no dispute that Khir had been guilty of gross breach of privileges in boycotting the Selcat inquiry into the Balkis financial scandal and he has only himself to blame if he is suspended from the Selangor State Assembly for defying the Assembly’s concerns about good governance, in particular with regard to   accountability and transparency in the Balkis financial scandal..

Khir’s
contention
 that it was unfair to make him face an inquiry chaired by his political nemesis does not hold water.  Is Khir prepared to face an independent public inquiry specially set up to inquire into the Balkis scandal?

If so, let Khir  show his sincerity and honesty by announcing  that he and his wife are  prepared to  attend and fully co-operate with  such a separate  public inquiry set up to probe into  the Balkis scandal.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 23 May 2009, 7:22 am and is filed under
Good Governance
,
State Assembly
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Perak – the epicentre of Umno fault-line

by
Augustine Anthony

22.3.09

(This article was written in anticipation of the Court of Appeal judgment in Nizar vs Zambry)

The judgment of Justice Abdul Aziz Abd. Rahim in the case of Nizar vs Zambry has attained clairvoyance status.

It had positioned the institution of rulers above politics, dignified the sultans and preserved the revered constitutional monarchy for generations to come.

In the ancient times the announcement of gestation or birth of crown prince will usually send sages and spiritual leaders into solitude in meditation and prayers in the harsh wilderness with the hope that the ruler to come will be benevolent to the subjects. History bears testimony of such adoration with monuments and poems of virtues and valour of such kings.

Today more than a billion souls, Hindus, Christians and Muslims all in India salute the great emperor Asoka knowingly or unknowingly when they rise in veneration of the majestic Indian national flag, the centre of it bears the wheel of Asoka.

But not all Rulers invite admiration. Scorn and disdain of the people witnessed the extinction of absolute monarchy in many parts of the world and replaced with power to the people by new systems of constitutional monarchy or an outright republic of a nation.

Power is placed in the hands of people’s representatives but authority is given not to deny the will and wishes of the people.

But the hearts of men are so easily corrupted.

Neither constitutional monarchy nor the presidency of a republic could remove the abuse of power and expansion of corrupt playing fields of those in whose hands the people have placed their power and authority that were removed systematically from the absolute monarchs.

Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely, so the saying goes.

The creation of constitutional monarchy and a system of parliamentary democracy with people’s power concentrated in the hands of UMNO in the last 52 years only goes to show that indeed UMNO enjoys the goodwill of the people of Malaysia.

But all that is about to change.

The epicentre of UMNO’s power shattering phenomenon is hidden deep in the emotions of the Perakians. It may well be UMNO’s fault line that may trigger the next and decisive Tsunami. A sea of people with their emotion translated into tidal waves of anger may well bring about permanent destruction to the once invincible fortress that now lies damaged at the shoreline built by UMNO painstakingly for more than 50 years led by many of their visionary leaders of the past.

But wait!  Alas, those political leaders opposed to UMNO who now ride these tidal waves of anger (except for some notable veterans), are poor surfers unable to comprehend the deep current and direction of the  waves. Tidal waves are fast and furious. Either you surf it or sink in it.

Many of these surfers are amateur opposition new kids on the bloc with the new found fame of Yang Berhormat. They try very hard to impress the undecided and uncertain people who had swung to the opposition in anger during the 2008 general election.

These YB’s must bear in mind that it takes more to continue winning the hearts and minds of the people than apple distribution in parliament house or bicycle paddling to the parliament entrance or constant holding of candle light in vigils and screaming “Saya YB, Saya YB” when apprehended by the law enforcement officers or even offering prayers to the ghost of unknown Ghengis Khan descendant who was blown to smithereens.

Many of these meaningless publicity stunts exhibited by these poor surfers are not only amusing but alarmingly annoying.

Internal squabbles aplenty, in short the Opposition’s value to people is fast descending to junk bond status.

While the surfers struggle at the high sea, close to shoreline the current Chief Architect surveys the damaged fortress and the coming of the tidal waves. Both he must confront and contain swiftly.

This Chief Architect is formidable, commanding an army of bureaucrat’s allegiance. His monumental fortitude sends uncluttered vibrations that he is determined to stay for more than one term as the commander in chief of the government of Malaysia.

The RAHMAN theory must die or UMNO will die. Die UMNO, this, the Chief Architect cannot and will not allow.

Najib Razak is a bangsawan pedigree. A Razak creation. Born and bred in the ways of leadership. As the son who enjoys the unseen goodwill left behind by the then chief architect of NEP in the 1970’s, he now enjoys the ancient cryptic command of the universe; the Vedas call it positive karma.

His reading of people’s anger is correct. He knows that he needs time to waft like gentle breeze to soothe the angry and humid emotion of the people. His weekly meet the people sessions is just about the right antidote in times like these. Just like his father.

His less than one hundred days in the seat of power shows that he is moving in the right direction.

Will Najib initiate the correct moves to dissolve the Perak State Legislative Assembly? Every thought is pointing to the inevitable. Dissolution of the Perak State Legislative Assembly is imminent.

To save UMNO or to squander the goodwill of the Malaysian?

It is your turn to think, YAB Dato’ Sri Najib Tun Razak

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 23 May 2009, 1:35 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


STOP PRESS: DAP HQ Raided!

First time in the 42 years history of DAP, police raided our HQ.

11 plain clothes police came to the HQ this evening around 6.25pm, brought along with them one HQ staff, Ooi Leng Hang, who was arrested last Thursday at the Teratai vigil and who is still under remand.

The police did not have any warrant of search with them, and the office was not opened. We suspect they forced Ooi to let them in.

They took away a CPU, a 19″ monitor (obviously these officers are computer illiterates), some DVDs, a keyboard and a tablet.

Party leaders, Tan Kok Wai, Fong Kui Lun, Gobind Singh and Lim Lip Eng, who were alerted of the raid, managed to reached the HQ before the police left, which was about an hour later.

The leaders are holding a press conference in the HQ now.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 23 May 2009, 7:53 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


The DAP HQ Raid : Video

You can see how the police demonstrate their “Performance Now” work ethic here:

http://www.youtube.com/dapvideo

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 23 May 2009, 8:03 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
DAP
,
Human Rights
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Aung San Suu Kyi – AIPMC to meet in Bangkok to demand  ASEAN governments take tough stand to secure her  release

The United Nations Security Council has called for the release of Burmese pro-democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi and all  political prisoners in Burma and expressed its concern over her current trial.

In a unanimous statement, the 15-council members expressed their concern about the “political impact” of the trial of Aung San Suu Kyi charging her with violating the terms of her house arrest.

What is Malaysia and ASEAN doing to express in the strongest possible terms that Aung San Suu Kyi should be released on Wednesday May 27 on the expiry of her six-year illegal detention or the Myanmar military junta must face condemnation by the other ASEAN states?

There are two important international meetings in the next few days where the Suu Kyi question will feature prominently in their agenda, the Asia-Europe Foreign Ministers’ (ASEM) meeting in Hanoi on Monday and Tuesday to be followed by the  ASEAN-EU Foreign Ministers Meeting in Pnom Penh on Wednesday and Thursday.

ASEAN should not just be at the receiving end at such international meetings, merely responding to demands that ASEAN should  put pressure on the Myanmar military junta to release Suu Kyi and all other political prisoners as well as embark on a genuine democratization and national reconciliation process.

ASEAN should make  it clear to the Myanmar military junta that with Suu Kyi being dragged through  a sham trial and facing another five-year detention, ASEAN has reached the end of her patience.

The ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus (AIPMC) will meet in Bangkok tomorrow to demand that ASEAN governments convey  in the strongest possible terms to Myanmar junta  that Suu Kyi should be released on Wednesday May 27 on the expiry of the six-year illegal detention coupled with a “get-tough” approach if the Myanmar military junta continues to be unyielding  and recalcitrant.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 24 May 2009, 7:52 pm and is filed under
ASEAN
,
Burma
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Education DG bluffing when he suggested  limiting subjects for  students  in SPM exam can transform education system into quality world-class

The Education director-general Datuk Alimuddin Mohd Dom is simply bluffing when he suggested  limiting students sitting Sijil Pelajarian Malaysia examination to not more than 10 subjects can transform the education system into a quality world-class one.

This is too simplistic and unprofessional an approach.

When Deputy Prime Minister and Education Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin

proposed on Thursday that the number of subjects each student could take in the SPM examination be limited, it was  his idea of putting  an end to the perennial complaints of  injustices in the award  of Public Service Department scholarships, where students with 11, 12, 13 and even 14A1s are denied scholarships as compared to students with fewer distinctions.

There have  bouquets and brickbats for Muhyiddin’s suggestion for limiting the number  of SPM subjects a student can take, but the proposal does not really address the issue of injustices and lack of transparency in the PSD awards – which are the root causes of the perennial annual national outrage over the PSD scholarship selections.

But how could  the Education director-general make the quantum leap as to claim that Muhyiddin’s proposal to limit  the number of SPM subjects a student can take in an examination could  transform the education system into a quality world-class one?

I was shocked to read Alimuddin’s  assertion that Muhyiddin’s proposal was consistent with the ministry’s vision to transform the education system and the curriculum, when the perennial complaints about the PSD scholarship selections and the quality of the national education system are  two completely different issues.

If the government is serious in wanting to end the perennial complaints about injustices of PSD scholarship awards, then it must put in place a  fair, just, transparent and efficient PSD scholarship system.

Is the government prepared to undertake  a fundamental revamp of the scholarship selection system  to introduce a common university entrance examination, whether STPM or matriculation; and to base PSD scholarship selection based on this common university entrance examination results.

Since the beginning of this decade, the Education Ministry had been talking about its vision for a world-class education system to face the challenges of globalization, liberalization and information and communications technology but with very little results.

For instance, the Education Development Blueprint 2000-2010 to build a world-class education system and promote national unity had proposed fundamental  changes to the national education system, such as:

•	The P-12  system to shorten the current 13-year school system to 12.

•	Shorten the secondary school period from five to four years.

•	The abolition of the Penilaian Menengah Rendah (PMR)  examination for Form Three students.

•	Streaming into arts and science at Form Two instead of Form Four.

What have happened to all these proposals which were described as magic formulae to transform the Malaysian national education system into a quality world-class one?

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 24 May 2009, 9:02 am and is filed under
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Emergency assembly an option to end Perak crisis? Forget about it Najib, impasse will get worse. Only option – hold elections now!

Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak said today that an
emergency meeting
 of the Perak State Assembly is an option to end the political and constitutional impasse in Perak.

Let me tell Najib – forget about it, as such an emergency Assembly meeting is no viable option and it could only make the impasse worse,  dragging the nearly four-month-old  political and constitutional crisis and stalemate indefinitely into the future.

What is worse, the protracted political and constitutional crisis and stalemate will stand as the strongest testament  debunking Najib’s slogan of “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now”.

What right has anyone to talk about 1Malaysia when he is incapable of promoting 1Perak, in fact single-handedly responsible for the political and constitutional  impasse in  orchestrating the unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab since early February?

Najib should bite the bullet and agree that the only way to end the political and constitutional impasse in Perak is to dissolve Perak State Assembly and return the mandate to Perakians in a state-wide general elections so that Malaysians can turn from the Perak stalemate to reunite to face the worst global economic crisis in a century.

Najib should learn the lesson why Michael Martin became the first House of Commons Speaker for 300 years to resign, even giving up his seat as MP – because he had lost all moral authority to continue in the office after the UK parliamentary expenses scandal.

There can be no dispute that Datuk Zambry Abdul Kadir has no “moral authority” in the first place  to become Perak Mentri Besar unless he wins the mandate in a general election.

How can Zambry ground his moral authority on three “frog” state assembly members in Perak who have gone into public hiding in the past four months as they dare not even   show their faces in their constituencies except under heavy security protection, for they know that the ordinary public have not forgiven them for their  dishonourable  betrayal of public trust and mandate.

No amount of political shenanigans and judicial contortions can give Zambry any moral authority, which can only be found in a new polls in Perak.

Najib should spare the key national institutions in the country from further damage, as he would be  doing  even more harm to all the key national institutions in undermining public confidence in their credibility, integrity and legitimacy in his stubborn refusal to accept the hard reality that the only viable democratic and honourable option to resolve the Perak constitutional crisis is to dissolve the  Perak State Assembly and .hold new state general elections.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 24 May 2009, 3:34 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Najib must apologise for what five previous Prime Ministers had not done –  police raid on DAP Hqrs as if DAP is a terrorist organization like Al Maunah

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak should apologise for what five previous Prime Ministers had not done in the 43 year history of the DAP –  police raid on DAP Hqrs as if the DAP is a terrorist organization like Al Maunah.

I was enroute to Air Kala for a DAP branch function  and had stopped in Sauk for dinner for its famous fresh-water fish, jerawat and malau, when I received a phone call  at 6.27 pm  from DAP IT manager, Goh Kheng Teong that a police party of 12 in plainclothes had brought along a handcuffed DAPSY political education director Ooi Leng Heng in a police raid of DAP hqrs.

I was unable to tweet the outrageous police action as I could not access the Internet with Maxis 3G and I later authorized Goh to update the twitter on my behalf.

Why has Najib, who had committed himself to an open and democratic premiership only seven weeks ago, allowed the police to go on a rampage to the extent of doing  things which the previous five Prime Ministers had not allowed the police to do for 43 years – a police raid on DAP Hqrs as if the DAP is a terrorist organization like Al Maunah.

Al Maunah immediately came to mind as I was in Sauk, which was made famous or notorious by the Islamic cult nine years ago, for its was the site of the four-day  stand-off between Al-Maunah and the security forces after the former made an audacious raid on July 2, 2000 on a Malaysian Army Reserve camp and stole weapons from the armoury.  Three were killed in the stand-off while three leaders of Al-Maunah were subsequently executed after a trial on charges of “waging war against the King”.

The question many are asking is whether with Najib as Prime Minister and Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein as Home Minister, the cousins are taking the country quickly down the slippery slope of a police state, where the rule of law and human rights are trampled upon indiscriminately without any compunction.

Nobody believes that the police are not aware of the sensitivities of a police raid on the DAP Hqrs, or  that it would have taken place without the “greenlight” from the highest authorities.

Who  from the “top” gave the “greenlight” for the police raid on DAP Hqrs? Is the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Musa Hassan, whom I had said many a time should resign because of his dereliction of duties, party to it?

The police raided the DAP Hqrs without a search warrant.   The police came to the DAP Hqrs like “thieves in the night” without any notice whatsoever. It was fortunate that the DAP Hqrs was not empty and unoccupied at the time, as Goh and another Hqrs staff Ng Yon Kok were  still in headquarters at the time.

Imagine what could have happened if the DAP Hqrs were completely empty of staff during the police raid, when the police would have a  field day to search and do whatever they like in the Hqrs.

Is this in keeping with the Police Standard Operating Procedures when they want to search sensitive places like headquarters of political parties?

Will the Police ever think  of conducting police raids on Umno, MCA, MIC, Gerakan Hqrs  let alone in circumstances like “thieves in the night” completely without notice and when they are completely unoccupied, so that they might be able to do whatever  they like there?

Gerakan President and the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon has been talking about KPIs (key performance index) for Ministers. Is he prepared to be frank with Najib and Hishammuddim that their KPIs will suffer grievously with such unprecedented police raids on the DAP Hqrs?

Are there any  MCA, MIC  or even UMNO Ministers who dare to condemn the police raid on DAP Hqrs yesterday or place this subject on the Cabinet agenda on Wednesday?

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 24 May 2009, 10:54 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Human Rights
,
Najib Razak
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Losers On All Sides

By M. Bakri Musa,

It reflects how low the public’s respect for our judiciary is that a unanimous reversal by the appellate court of a High Court’s decision should be greeted with such widespread scorn.

We must await the Appeal Court’s written judgment so we could weight its wisdom, legal and otherwise, and compare it to that of High Court Judge Aziz Rahim who made the initial ruling in Nizar vs. Zamry.  Justice Aziz gave his within a week. Let us hope the Appeal Court judges, being more senior and higher in the judicial pecking order, would do better and come out with theirs faster.  After all they have to set the proper example.

At least the Appeal Court had the common sense to have a quorum of three to hear the appeal.  It would have been better on a case of such import involving fundamental constitutional issues to be heard with the full quorum.  At least those judges showed better judgment if not common sense than Appeal Court Judge Ramli who in his wisdom decided to hear by himself the appeal on the associated stay of execution.

Regardless, this case is headed to its final level of appeal.  Let us hope that the Federal Court would hear this case with its full quorum and not just the minimal.  While that is not a legal requirement, it is from the perspective of public credulity.  At a time when the image of our judiciary is anything but pristine, this would be an opportunity to restore some credibility.

Thus far these are what we have.  In favoring the plaintiff, Justice Aziz Rahim effectively declared that the Sultan of Perak Raja Azlan Shah erred in appointing Barisan’s Zamry as the state’s Chief Minister to replace Pakatan’s Nizar.  Justice Aziz cited principally the precedent of the 1966 case of Stephen Ningkan vs Abang Openg.

What is unique here is that Raja Azlan Shah is no ordinary sultan, having served as the nation’s highest judge from 1982 to 1985.  In this decision, Justice Aziz is in fact telling the former chief justice that the country’s statutes and legal precedents do not support the sultan’s action.  More simply and directly stated, the sultan was wrong

This precedent was set during Raja Azlan Shah’s tenure as a judge, long before he ascended to the Perak’s throne.  Meaning, he should be fully aware of the precedent and its attendant legal reasoning when he deliberated on Najib Razak’s (as head of Perak’s Barisan) request to have Zamry replace Nizar.

The only possible explanation for Raja Azlan’s ignoring that precedent must be that he felt that it did not apply to him as a Malay sultan.  After all how could a sultan be compared to a mere mortal, the governor of a state?  In Malay culture, a sultan is God’s representative on earth; his mandate comes directly from heaven.  It is not for mere mortals to trifle with it.  Sultans have daulat, a special status denied those common-blooded governors!  Unfortunately for our sultans, that is not what is provided for in our constitution.

This delusion of having a special mandate from high above is of course an affliction affecting not only our sultans but also all hereditary leaders everywhere, save the most enlightened.

In reversing the decision, the Appeal Court effectively sided with the sultan.  The sultan alone could decide whether the Mentri Besar still commanded the confidence of the Assembly.  Presumably the sultan had special divine powers to read the minds of the legislators and how they would vote before there was any voting!

In his decision, Justice Aziz Rahim made some uncomplimentary remarks about the role of the State Legal Advisor (SLA).  Indeed the role of the permanent establishment as represented by the police and State Secretary, in addition to the SLA, merit an even greater scrutiny as they reflected the degradation of our pubic institutions.  I await the Appeal Court’s written judgment to see whether those wise judges will also comment on this equally pertinent issue raised by Justice Aziz.

Had leaders of the permanent establishment been more professional and less partisan in discharging their duties and obligations, they could have acted as buffers and be the restraining force that would have prevented this crisis from escalating.  Instead they became part of the problem, and a major one at that, instead of the solution.

As to the SLA’s claim of neutrality, Justice Aziz “will take it with a pinch of salt.”  The SLA admitted to being “instructed” from the respondent’s solicitors in wording his affidavit, a term that took Justice Aziz by surprise. One would have thought that being a legal advisor and thus professionally trained, the SLA would act on his own judgment.  Alas those are the qualities of our top officials.

Political, Not Legal Problem

All disputes could ultimately be decided by the courts.  However whether some should, is another matter.  A perfectly rational and easily comprehensible reason could be advanced on whether certain disputes are best resolved outside the court system.  This ongoing dispute in Perak is one such case.  It is essentially a political dispute, and as such it would have been best resolved in the political arena.  No less a veteran politician than Tengku Razaleigh has said this, and I agree with him.

At the other end of the spectrum, Law Professor Shad Saleem Fariqi said it well and correctly.  “… [T]his political crisis in Perak is like a “hydra-headed monster that cannot be eliminated so easily by ding-dong judicial decisions.”

Since the case has landed in court, it still could have played a crucial role in resolving it, had the various participants and institutions been more professional and less partisan.  Imagine had the court expedited the case and Justice Aziz rendered his decision prior to May 7th, before that disastrous legislative session where the Raja Muda delivered his speech.  The nation would then have been spared the ugly spectacle.  Now that singular repulsive episode will forever be engraved as part of the Malaysian democratic tradition.

Had the principal players demonstrated a modicum of restraint and (dare I say it?) wisdom, and delayed the session till after the court’ decision, that too would have spared our nation that shameful blemish.

Najib’s appealing the case only added to the volatility and uncertainty; it is a major distraction and at a time when the nation can least afford it.  Even if Barisan were to ultimately prevail, the price – political and otherwise – will be severe.  More significantly, it will set yet another precedent on the enhanced powers for our sultans.  After the humiliation then-Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi suffered at the hands of the Sultan of Trengganu not too long ago, a reversal of Justice Aziz’s decision will legitimize and cement the sultans’ enhanced powers.

On the other hand, if Barisan were to lose, this judgment would further strengthen the earlier precedent.  At the most elemental level, it would establish once and for all that the powers of the sultan within a state are no different than that enjoyed by a governor.

While I would welcome such a development, those who cling to the idea of Ketuanan Melayu or that Malay sultans have a “special” if undefined role in the nation, must pause and ponder the vast implications of such a development.  I doubt very much that Najib Razak in his hasty pursuit of immediate short-term gains has reflected on this critical point.

This case has thus far only created losers on all sides.  It already exposed the sorry ineffectiveness of our institutions, in particular the permanent establishment.  It has revealed the inadequacies of the monarchy in ensuring a smooth transfer of power.  It rekindled the sorry memory of the constitutional mess we went through in the 1980s.  Most of all the pitiful losers are the people of Perak.  Their leaders, from the elected ones in the Assembly, to the hereditary ones in the palace, and the professionals in the permanent establishment, have all failed the people of Perak.

To be reminded that these leaders are paid for by the citizens’ hard-earned cash would merely add the proverbial salt to the still-raw wound, one that has yet to stop bleeding much less begin to heal.

This case awaits its final adjudication at the highest level.  When it started the first judge, Judicial Commissioner Mohammad Ariff Yusof, recused himself as he was formerly associated with PAS, Nizar’s party.  Now on its final stage, the sitting Chief Justice is Zaki Azmi, up until a few years ago a legal advisor to UMNO, a party in this dispute.  Will Justice Zaki heed the example of Judicial Commissioner Ariff?  It is on such simple and elemental matters that the credibility of our judicial system hangs.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 25 May 2009, 12:06 pm and is filed under
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Malaysian Ambassador to US – why Ghazzali and JJ on the short-list?

Foreign Minister Datuk Anifah Aman told the
Sunday Star
yesterday that former Ambassador to the United States 1999 – 2005, Tan Sri Ghazzali Sheikh Abdul Khalid is among the four persons being considered for the plum post of ambassador to the United States.

Anifah, who said he would submit the shortlist to the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak within a week, expressed “shock” that the Washington posting had not been filled for about a year when the US is the country’s biggest trading partner.

In announcing that Ghazzali is  in the  short-list of four persons for the top-notch dipolomatic posting to be submitted to the Prime Minister, Anifah has gone against his public claim that he would get the best people to serve the country in the various diplomatic postings abroad.

Anifah cannot be so naïve as not to know the reason why the post of Malaysian Ambassador to the US had been vacant since June 20 last year after the retirement of Datuk Rajmah Hussain, a career diplomat, or he is casting aspersion on the competence and professionalism of his predecessor as Foreign Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Rais Yatim.

Although Anifah conspicuously refused  to be reappointed Deputy Minister after the March 8 general election last year  on the ground that  he was senior enough to be made minister, he had previously been Deputy Minister for Plantation Industries and Commodities and had traveled extensively to Latin America, Europe, America, Africa and Asean and together with his political connections would have been privy to all the diplomatic grapevine  about the strong  Wisma Putra and Washington  objections to Ghazzali’s re-apppointment as Ambassador to US under two Foreign Ministers, Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar and Rais despite support from  the Putrajaya fourth floor.

Ghazzali was Malaysian Ambassador to US  from 1999 to 2005 and  left Washington under a cloud because of his connections to former Republican Party  lobbyist Jack Abramoff as well as his role in the persecution of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

It was during Ghazzali’s previous tour of duty that the Malaysian Embassy in Washington delivered 1.2 million dollars to Abramoff to procure a 30 minute meeting in the White House  between Prime Minister Tun Mahathir Mohamad and President George W. Bush in 2002.

Abramoff was sentenced to five years and 10 months in prison in 2006 after pleading guilty to fraud, tax evasion and conspiracy to bribe public officials.

Although Wisma Putra decided to terminate Ghazzali’s term as Ambassador to US in 2004, Khairy Jamaluddin’s influence prevailed and he was given  further extensions of his appointment.

Ghazzali attempted to obtain yet another extension at the end of 2005 but failed. He was retired at the end of 2005 but given a post as special envoy for the proposed US-Malaysia Free Trade Agreement with an office in Wisma Putra.

In early 2008, with the impending retirement of  Rajmah as Ambassador to US, a new lobby campaign begun for Ghazzali’s re-appointment to this plum post, in the teeth of strong objections from the career diplomats in Wisma Putra as well as great reservations in Washington – spanning three Foreign Ministers, Hamid, Rais and now Anifah.

Many bloggers have expressed great concern as to whether Malaysia’s national interests and  international reputation would be served by Ghazzali’s re-appointment to the plum diplomatic post in Washington considering his controversial and even scandalous past.

Former US Ambassador to Malaysia,  John Mallot, have even gone on public record in August 2008 with the following statement:

“In March 2006 I wrote in Malaysiakini about the illegal activities of Jack Abramoff and his connection to the Malaysian Embassy and Mahathir Government.

”There is no doubt in my mind that what the Malaysian Embassy did with Abramoff violated US laws. Diplomats cannot be arrested or prosecuted, but they still must obey the laws of the country to which they are assigned.

“What Ghazzali and his Embassy did was to collude with Abramoff to ‘hide the hand’ of the Malaysian Government and avoid the legal requirements of the Foreign Agents Registration Act. Abramoff and his colleagues were working on behalf of the Malaysian Government and certain Malaysian business people to influence American opinion, so they were required to register as foreign agents.

“But Abramoff did not follow the law. He had the Embassy send the money to the ghost think tank, which was really just a beach house in Delaware. The money was then sent back to Abramoff and his associates, with the so-called think tank listed as the client, not the Malaysian Embassy. In effect, this was money laundering. It is impossible for Ghazzali to deny that he had any knowledge or role in this. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were transferred from the Embassy to the bogus think tank.

“A final point. No country can send someone as Ambassador unless the other country agrees to accept them. So even if it is true that Ghazzali has convinced some people in KL that he should return as Ambassador to Washington, the US Government must agree to this. I hope that the Malaysian Government does not embarrass itself by putting forward Ghazzali’s name.”

With such a controversial background, why is Ghazzali still in Anifah’s short-list?

Anifah should explain why Ghazzali is on the short-list to be re-appointed as Ambassador to the United States despite his controversial diplomatic past,  involvement in the Abramoff scandal and strong objections in Washington

One of the first questions I will ask in next month’s parliamentary meeting starting on June 15 is for the names and reasons for the  short-list for appointment as Ambassador to US, and why Ghazzali, as well as Datuk Seri Jarjis Jamaluddin who was dropped from the Cabinet in the last two Cabinet reshuffles, are still deemed fit to get into the shortlist.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 25 May 2009, 7:36 am and is filed under
Foreign
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.