MAS scandal: The gov’t must let the truth be told

Mat Zain Ibrahim | Feb 22, 2012

Malaysiakini

I am referring to the report made by MAS against Tajudin Ramli to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) almost three years ago. This report has been in the public domain since Aug 23, 2010, when it was first published by Malaysia Today. It’s still there until today.

On May 20, 2009, Shahari Sulaiman, then the managing director of MASKargo, on the instructions of MAS management, lodged a report with the MACC. He alleged that when Tajudin Ramli took over MAS in 1994, the national airline company had RM600 million cash in reserves but when he left, the company had accumulated losses to the tune of RM8 billion. Former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad quoted the losses at RM9.4 billion as at 2000.

MAS also gave details of Tajudin’s various fraudulent dealings and also raised allegations of collusion between the police and the Attorney-General’s Chambers and in fact naming the parties alleged to be involved in the same report.

However, the report falls short of alleging the inaction of the former prime minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, who is now MAS adviser, although it gave details of those senior MAS management who were present during the briefing by the former police director of the Commercial Crime Investigation Department (CCID), on March 26, 2007 at the Prime Minister’s Office. One of them is Idris Jala who is now a cabinet member.

To my mind, the report is very comprehensive, concisely explained and overall, a watertight report. The drafts must have gone through very thorough vetting sessions by MAS senior management team, before the complainant was instructed to file the report. One need not be a qualified lawyer or an accountant to analyse the report.

After having sighted the report, the public can judge for themselves, whether the government of the day have been fair, transparent and honest to the rakyat or otherwise, at least in the manner they handled the MAS issue.

After making MAS prepare such a report and throwing and exposing all the dirts about Tajudin Ramli and his associates, and blaming everyone else except themselves, not forgetting the people who got into trouble for doing some honest jobs for them, Danaharta and the government-linked corporations (GLCs) involved happily settled the matter out-of-court with Tajudin Ramli, unconcerned of public outrage.

It’s difficult to fathom the rationale behind the government’s move in ‘advising’ the GLCs to settle the suit with Tajudin, whereas the evidence of wrongdoing against the latter was overwhelming. Had the cabinet not have any intention of taking any actions against Tajudin or whoever else, then MAS should not have lodged such report in the first place.

In fact, on Dec 7, 2009 Danaharta and two of its subsidiaries had won a RM589.14 million award against Tajudin. Prior to the award, Tajudin’s counterclaims against Danaharta and several others was struck off.

On top of that, in October last year, Minister in the PM’s Department Nazri Aziz himself announced that based on investigations, Tajudin was found to have breached Section 131 of the Companies Act 1965,which involves disclosure of interest. This offence carries a penalty of seven years imprisonment or a fine of RM150,000 or both.

With that kind of advantage over Tajudin Ramli, how could the government claim they might lose to him?

On page seven, which is the last page of MAS’s report, one will not miss the name Shahidan Shafie being mentioned several times, and the parts he played in the scandal.

The mention of the name Shahidan Shafie should remind all, of the widely reported 2010 Haj trip, performed by Abdul Gani Patail, the attorney-general, his wife and son (who is reported to be with the AG’s Chambers) together with one Shahidan Shafie, a proxy of Tajudin Ramli. This Shahidan Shafie refers to the one and the same person alleged in the MAS report.

The public can also now decide whether it was proper for the AG and his family to be found in the company of Shahidan Shafie even though in holy Mecca, whilst the latter was still under MACC’s on-going probe for his part in the MAS scandal.

An out-of-court settlement agreement by itself is not an offence. In fact such settlements are encouraged in civil disputes. However if such agreement includes an understanding to conceal an illegal act or a mutual understanding to suppress evidence of any criminal wrongdoing of any person, which is a criminal act on it’s own, then such agreement is deemed a criminal conspiracy. (Section 120A Penal Code).

Based on the facts and circumstances that are clearer now, I believe the citizens can see for themselves and decide, whether the settlement agreement reached between Danaharta & several GLCs vs Tajudin Ramli last week, was a legitimate commercial decision or a clear-cut criminal conspiracy of the highest order, to screen certain people from legal punishment and to suppress evidence of criminal wrongdoing.

For those who think that it was a clear-cut criminal conspiracy, no one can stop them from lodging a police report if they wish to, or they may go through their respective MPs from both sides of the political divide, so that the matter could be raised during the next Parliament sitting, due in about three weeks time.

Should nothing be done, then the rakyat can expect another whitewashing exercise on May 10, when MAS meets face-to-face with Tajudin Ramli.

A similar approach is likely to be adopted by the government in dealing with the National Feedlot Corporation (NFC) fiasco, judging from the pre-emptive moves and statements that are already in place.

Under the circumstances surrounding the settlement agreement, as an ordinary citizen, I for one verily believe they warrant a public inquiry.

——————————————————————————–

MAT ZAIN IBRAHIM is former Kuala Lumpur Criminal Investigation Department (CID) chief.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 23 February 2012, 7:42 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Crime
,
Good Governance
,
Law & Order
,
Transport
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


My debate transcript

— Lim Guan Eng

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 23, 2012

FEB 23 — First of all, I would like to thank the organisers for this live televised debate. Televised debates mark a new chapter in Malaysian political democracy because it is an important element in the democratisation process. I hope that from today onwards, televised debates will be a common phenomenon in the Malaysian democratic system just like in Europe and the United States.

Thus, I believe what Malaysians really want to see is a debate between Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, to see who really deserves to be prime minister. Whoever isn’t brave enough to debate, don’t hope to think of becoming prime minister.

Chua Soi Lek suggested that DAP is being used by PAS. If we observe Umno amongst the Malays, Umno claims that PAS is being used by DAP. Therefore, I believe this self-contradictory statement is a dirty tactic employed by BN. I wish to stress here that Pakatan Rakyat component parties, be it PAS, PKR or DAP, we never use each other. We are only prepared to be “used” by the people! At the same time, we are also not anti-Malay or even anti-non-Malay; we are merely against a government that is riddled with corruption!

I feel that today’s theme, “Is A Two-Party System Becoming a Two-Race System?”, is quite strange. Because, there already exists a two-race system at the present moment, and we want to change it into a two-party system. This two-race system, which is BN’s long-held ideology since independence until now, has BN dividing the people into Malays and non-Malays, this is a “divide-and-rule” strategy. The Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin had said, “I am a Malay first, then only a Malaysian.” Is this 1 Malaysia or is this Bluff (Tipu) Malaysia? This is indeed a two-race system.

On the other hand, a two-party system is premised on ideology, ideals and principles, without racial discrimination because we are all Malaysians.

In BN, Umno only takes care of the Malays, MCA only takes care of the Chinese, MIC only takes care of the Indians, Gerakan… I don’t know takes care of who???…. That’s BN with their “you take care of your race, I take care of my race”. That is a two-race system! Conversely, in a two-party system, we are all brothers and sisters, we take care of each other; every Malaysian is part of one big family!

Umno always proclaims “Malay Supremacy”. Does the MCA not see this, hear this or feel this, and thus are not brave enough to stand up to them? Hence, we still hear that the Chinese are immigrants (pendatang) and do not deserve equal rights.

PR is different from BN. We don’t want “Malay Supremacy”, what we want is “Rakyat (People) Supremacy”! Anwar not only speaks about “Rakyat Supremacy” in front of non-Malays, but he also says the same thing to the Malays. Will Umno leaders dare to stop proclaiming “Malay Supremacy” and instead support “Rakyat Supremacy”.

When the people or PR leaders expose abuse of power or corruption and question the police or the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, we are accused of challenging the Malay institutions — this is a two-race system, because corruption does not discriminate against the colour of one’s skin. The late Ahmad Sarbaini, the Customs officer who lost his life, is he not a human being?

Pakatan Rakyat wants to abolish corruption, BN wants corruption. PR wants to ensure leaders who are honest and a government that is clean, including public declaration of assets of government leaders, open tenders, now this is a two-party system! Most importantly, the real corrupt officers must be caught, and not slandering the poor innocent Teoh Beng Hock.

My opponent always says: “Other races become government, Chinese become opposition”. This is totally wrong. In truth, “BN MCA becomes opposition, PR DAP becomes government” is what worries MCA. Not only does the Chinese support PR to bring change, the Malays do so as well, if not PR would not have been able to gain 40 per cent Malay support and the political tsunami would not have happened. Without the political tsunami I believe I would not have the opportunity to stand here as the chief minister of Penang and Chua would not have the chance to become the president of the MCA.

In a democratic system, a two-party system requires alternating governments. Let the BN fall and become the opposition, let PR rise to become the government. If PR does not rule well, then the people have the right to change again after five years. This is a two-party system, with alternating parties ruling, only then will the people have a better life.

Question from the moderator:

The Chinese community have welcomed a two-party system since 1980. If we refer to the 2008 results, the amount of votes given to BN and PR are about the same. This shows that half the people are happy with BN while the other half harbour hopes for PR. Does this mean that both parties have achieved a two-party system? How would your party seek to win the other half?

Answer from LGE:

If PR is given the chance to rule, our policy will bring benefits to the people. Today, inflation is rising, our income is not enough to make ends meet. We want to reduce the people’s burden. If we become government, we will abolish the North-South Expressway and the Penang Bridge tolls. We will also increase oil royalties from five per cent to 20 per cent for Sabah and Sarawak.

I know, since Penang gave RM100 to senior citizens every year, BN has copied. Not only BN has copied, MCA too has copied. So, besides thanking Chua, they (MCA members) should also thank the Penang state government. If we take power at the federal level, we wish to inform all 2.1 million senior citizens in the country that we promise to give RM1,000 every year. These are the benefits of alternating governments. They are judged on their policies. We want to become a policy state not a police state.

Answers for the Q&A session:

LGE:
 Was that Perak exco Ma Han Soon? I think we all know that when PR was the government in Perak, it was PR which started the initiative to grant land to schools and permanent land titles to new village residents and the poor. However, since BN became government, this has been abolished. Because of that, I feel that you have no right to question anyone.

On the question of the Penang state government making empty promises, I wish to stress that we have fulfilled all our election promises. On why the Sungai Nyior toll has not been abolished, we must remember that this is under the power of the federal government. We have not taken over the federal government, so be patient…. When we have taken over the federal government, of course we will abolish it, as well as the North-South Expressway and the Penang Bridge tolls. However, even though we have not abolished the Sungai Nyior toll, we have built a road to bypass the toll plaza, so it is the same, no need to pay toll.

The success of Penang, I believe, has been proven. After March 2008, everyone can see, touch and feel the changes that have happened. In Peninsular Malaysia, the first dual lingual road signs in Chinese were erected in Penang. The first Tamil road signs in Malaysia are also in Penang. For the first time in Penang, we also have road signs in Arabic, all due to the success of the PR government. Penang’s success in combating corruption is also notable, resulting in praise from Transparency International. If there are people who are guilty, we will not let them get off scot-free, and the fact the Penang has zero corruption has been recognised by an international organisation. When we say we don’t take money, we don’t take money. Thank you.

Questions to each other:

CSL:
 We hear populist policies, giving RM100, abolish this, abolish that… Can you, on this stage, tell us what is the community development and economic model of Pakatan Rakyat so that Malaysia can escape the low-income trap and achieve high-income status, including implementing the promises in the Buku Jingga?

LGE:
 I believe this is the difference between myself and Chua. He is not anxiously concerned about corruption, while I am very anxiously concerned about corruption. We need to have a framework for administrating the country’s affairs. What is the plan to bring economic development? I wish to use the Penang model as an example.

This is the result of the Penang Pakatan Rakyat state government’s practice of “money makes money”. This system stresses four key aspects. First, “money raise money” through co-operation between the private and public sectors (Public Private Partnerships) in executing development projects. Secondly is “money earns money” through an open tender system, the state government can cut costs. Third is “money creates money” through innovation and creativity. Finally, “money saves money”. If we don’t take money, for sure there will always be money to be saved.

Therefore, the Penang state government has enjoyed a budget surplus every year for four years, and is able to give back to the people through our Senior Citizens Programme with RM 100 every year, and RM1,000 one-off to beneficiaries of senior citizens who pass away. Even newborn babies get RM200 under our Golden Child Programme. When Barisan Nasional was ruling Penang, not a single sen was given, but with the principle of “money makes money”, we have given benefits to the people of Penang, and this is actually an anti-corruption dividend!

In addition to that, in Malaysia, I believe that if we abolish corruption, we will be able to save a lot of money and give back to the people. This is our promise, Penang is the best proof! If we dare to fight corruption, we will definitely have money. Thank you.

Answers to the Q&A and Conclusion, LGE:

First of all, I would like to rebut certain accusations that the Penang state government has not given land to Chinese schools. I feel this is not only lying to yourself but also lying to others. This is because we have proof, even the schools can verify that the Pakatan Rakyat government has given land. Don’t forget, the Pakatan Rakyat state government has now institutionalised allocations to all school streams, not just Chinese schools, also Tamil schools, Sekolah Agama Rakyat or religious schools and private Chinese schools. Before, there was nothing, and now they receive yearly allocations.

Here, I would like to make a plea to all Malaysians. Be brave enough to change, we must not surrender our destiny to fate. We deserve equal opportunities. No longer must we kneel down and beg. We must boldly rise up with dignity to seek change! We do not want to be lied to anymore, change now! Look, the MCA president too has changed, for the first time he is debating with the Rocket. But this debate is not as important as whether MCA dares to say “No” to Umno?

Why say “No” to Umno? Because Umno uses racial and religious sentiments, including supporting Perkasa to inflame and divide the people! Secondly, Umno abuses laws that impinge upon human rights. Umno condones corruption, Shahrizat’s case with the cows is only the tip of the iceberg. Even more serious, in the last 10 years, RM1 trillion of illicit funds (corruption money) has been illegally taken out of the country. How do we account for this? This is why we want a two-party system.

As what the former MCA president Ong Tee Keat described MCA’s co-operation with Umno. He said, “Before at least MCA could eat the leftovers dishes on the table, but now the best they can hope for are the breadcrumbs.”

Many Malays have not enjoyed the fruits of development of this country. They don’t get RM250 million to raise cows, because most of the “good fruits” have been eaten by BN cronies, leaving to the people only the “dead” fruits.

The problems faced by the Chinese community, I believe, everyone knows there are many problems. Besides the problem of the private school certificates (UEC) not being recognised, Chinese schools do not get enough allocation funds, teachers who are not proficient in Chinese are sent to Chinese schools, there are also problems with temporary teachers that have not been resolved. But issues of unequal access to the economy and jobs, I believe are not only faced by the Chinese, but also by other races. That is why we have to take this chance to work together with the other races to bring about change.

What we stress now is about the future of our children. The future of my generation has already been robbed by BN for 50 years, don’t let our children’s future be robbed as well. Therefore, we are awaiting the chance to change.

This morning before I came, I told my daughter that if given the chance, I would like to be the voice of her generation. I hope to provide policies that will enable you to live here and not to migrate. We must give importance to talent. Remember, only by appreciating, emphasising and choosing talent can the future of Malaysia be bright and prosperous.

Look at South Korea, in 1970, their average per capita income was only US$260 in 1970 Malaysia was better, we had US$380 then. However, South Korea has now surpassed Malaysia. Now, our average income is US$7,760 while South Korea has reached US$20,000! Why has South Korea become a high-income nation while Malaysia has failed? The main factor is that South Korea is a democratic country, practices a two-party system, has an alternating change of government. Therefore, if we want to change, if we want Malaysia to become a high-income nation, we must be brave to rise up for change, we must be brave to realise a two-party system. This path is not easy, but I wish to remind everyone, our co-operation with PAS, PKR is based on a written manifesto. It has been announced in public, PAS has their ideology, DAP has our ideology, but don’t forget, PAS has never caused the death of a single Chinese. Let us be strong, will ourselves to change. Even though the path may be difficult, but for the sake of our younger generation, we must complete this journey of change!

* Lim Guan Eng is the Penang chief minister and DAP secretary-general

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 23 February 2012, 7:20 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Lim Guan Eng
,
MCA
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


NFCorp directors in the dark

R. Nadeswaran

[email protected]

23 February 2012

KUALA LUMPUR (Feb 23, 2012): The National Feedlot Corporation (NFCorp) bought luxury condominiums without the approval of the board of directors. Three government representatives who sit on the board were not consulted or told about the purchase.

Alias Mohd Yassin and Manaf Hussein represented the Agriculture and Finance Ministries respectively while Datuk Mat Ali Hassan was appointed by virtue of him being the Negri Sembilan state secretary.

These appointments were made to “safeguard the interests of the federal government and stakeholders and the state government as it provided the land.”

“At no time were these directors told of the purchase of the condominiums and other so-called investments and neither were they aware of it until the matter was reported in the media,” a source close to the investigations said.

It is a statutory requirement that the board approve any “investment” through a resolution.

The government representatives, the source said, were kept totally in the dark although they attended the board meetings regularly. They were not updated on the drawdown of funds from the RM250 million soft loan provided by the government.

The investigations also revealed that each of the government representatives were paid directors’ and meeting allowances of RM700 each month.

As for the massive sums allegedly paid as salaries and perks to other directors, investigations showed that such emoluments and day-to-day affairs and management were left in the hands of the CEO Wan Shahinur Izmir Mohamed Salleh, who is the son of Women, Family and Community Development Minister Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil.

The government-appointed directors had no say on such matters.

Two weeks ago, Wan Shahinur Izmir claimed the loan agreement did not stipulate any express prohibitions on investments and insinuated that the company could do what it deemed fit with the loan. However, this may not be correct in its entirety as any movement of money or major decisions had to be approved by the board of directors.

According to the investigators, documents that were seized from the company showed that no such resolution was proposed or passed during board meetings. Investigations are expected to be wrapped up in the next few days.

In December 2007, the government had approved a RM250 million soft loan to enable the NFCorp to start a feedlot centre in Gemas, Negri Sembilan. The corporation’s executive chairman, Datuk Seri Dr Mohamed Salleh Ismail is Shahrizat’s husband, and their children are on the board of directors.

The NFCorp controversy unfolded after the 2010 Auditor-General’s Report said the RM250 million National Feedlot Centre cattle breeding project which it runs had not met the targets set by the government.

Following this, allegations that the company had misused some of the money from the loan to purchase condominiums in Bangsar and property in Putrajaya surfaced, and reports were lodged with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and the police.

Shahrizat, who has come under pressure to resign over the case, applied for three weeks’ leave from her ministerial duties last month to “allow investigations into the NFCorp to be completed”. She has since resumed her duties.

On Feb 8, she was summoned by MACC to give her statement.

Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin announced last month that it would appoint an auditor to scrutinise NFCorp’s books in light of accusations made against the company, but dismissed calls for a royal commission of inquiry into the NFC.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 23 February 2012, 11:54 am and is filed under
Auditor-General Report
,
Corruption
,
Good Governance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pakatan states proof of economic success, proper governance, say leaders

By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 23, 2012

PETALING JAYA, Feb 23 — High investment figures, budget surpluses and reduction of debts in Pakatan Rakyat (PR) states are proof that the federal opposition is ready to take a shot at governing the country, its leaders have asserted.

PR leaders told participants at a DAP fund-raising function here last night that while Barisan Nasional (BN) could only resort to giving one-off RM500 aid to Malaysians while still pouring out billions of ringgit worth of taxpayers’ money in projects which are shrouded in secrecy, PR states have managed to save money as well as increase investment and productivity in less than four years.

Leading the fray was Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng, who gave the 3,500-odd crowd a blow-by-blow list of the state’s achievements and successes since 2008, and stressed that unlike BN, PR’s policies were not “divided by race” and that their goal was to help all Malaysians.

“Malaysia will become bankrupt because of cronyism, corruption. The (current) federal government debt is RM456 billion. If Malaysia goes bankrupt, who pays? Najib? Rosmah? It’s you and me, ordinary people,” exclaimed Lim to loud cheers from the Chinese-majority crowd.

The Bagan MP said the issue of debt should be a concern for all Malaysians, and pointed out how his state administration had managed to reduce Penang’s debt level from RM630 million in 2008 to just RM30 million last year.

“We have also recorded budget surpluses every year, turned around loss-making (state) government companies and local authorities,” added the Penang CM.

Nurul Izzah highlighted the government’s move in borrowing RM1.5 million from the EPF to help unqualified home buyers.Lim pointed out that three PR states (Penang, Selangor and Kedah) were listed in the top five states which recorded the highest levels of approved manufacturing investment last year.

The Ministry of International Trade and Industry released figures this week that showed that the federal opposition-controlled states of Penang and Selangor had recorded the highest levels of approved manufacturing investment in 2011, at RM9.1 billion and RM8.74 billion respectively.

This is the second year in a row that Penang and Selangor have topped the ranks for approved manufacturing investment and a sharp contrast to 2009 when Sarawak attracted the highest levels of manufacturing investment and Penang came in fourth.

Kedah, another PR state, came in fifth in 2011 with RM6.13 billion, behind BN-controlled Sarawak which was in third place at RM8.45 billion and Johor with about RM6.5 billion.

“Who says investors won’t come if Pakatan Rakyat rules Malaysia?” asked Lim.

International Trade and Industry Minister Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamed had said that Penang had done well since the 1980s due to strong support from the federal government.

He also said that not all federal opposition-controlled states had done well.

PKR vice-president Nurul Izzah Anwar hit out at Mustapa for his remarks, and asked what the minister has done for Kelantan since he is the Jeli MP.

“What has Tok Pa done to assist the Kelantanese except deny them RM800 million in oil revenue?” she said last night.

“You judge a government, its leader based on his Cabinet,” said Nurul Izzah, who charged that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak took “good care” of his own people in reference to inaction over the National Feedlot Corporation (NFCorp) issue involving Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil and her family.

She also highlighted the government’s move in borrowing RM1.5 million from the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) to help unqualified home buyers purchase low-cost homes from Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL), and questioned the 6.5 per cent interest rate to be imposed on home buyers.

“The loan will be managed by a special purpose vehicle (SPV) which will be led by Raja Datuk Nong Chik Raja Zainal Abidin. The SPV gets one per cent in terms of service charge,” she said.

DAP national publicity secretary Tony Pua said BN and Umno leaders have resorted to publicly attacking PR governments without basis, citing the Bayan Mutiara land sale as an example.

“They keep talking about how it was negotiated… the highest bidder won the open tender. What was negotiated was the payment option for the bidder. Instead of paying over a period of eight years, we wanted payment to be over five years,” said Pua.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 23 February 2012, 8:19 am and is filed under
Lim Guan Eng
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Sabah RCI confirmed, scope to be finalised soon, says BN source

By Clara Chooi

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 23, 2012

KOTA KINABALU, Feb 23 — Putrajaya is finalising the terms of reference for the royal commission of inquiry (RCI) into the problem of illegals in Sabah, a state Barisan Nasional (BN) leader has confirmed, dispelling rumours that Datuk Seri Najib Razak had backtracked on the highly-anticipated decision.

The Malaysian Insider was informed that the only reason why the prime minister had not announced the RCI during his visit here last week was to allow for further input from Sabah BN component parties and the state government in the panel’s terms of reference and composition.

Claiming to have sighted the minutes of the Cabinet meeting, the leader confirmed that federal ministers had agreed to the formation of the RCI on February 8 and had tasked Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz to co-ordinate the scope of the RCI investigation.

At the Cabinet’s last meeting on Wednesday, February 15, a day before Najib’s Sabah trip, Nazri tabled a rough draft of the RCI’s terms of reference for discussion, the leader said.

“It was discussed but the terms of reference were not finalised because Cabinet wanted input from Sabah BN parties and the state government.

“And for that (reason), despite the huge expectation that the PM would announce the RCI on February 16, he was simply not ready to announce it,” the BN leader told The Malaysian Insider yesterday.

The leader pointed out that if Najib had announced the formation of the panel during his trip, the prime minister would have been criticised for being unable to offer clear answers on the panel’s scope of investigation and its members.

“Don’t forget, this issue has become a political hot potato. Everyone is talking about it. And it has been going on for years and years. Najib cannot make an announcement without giving some details,” said the leader.

But the leader admitted that Najib’s unexpected silence on the issue had not only angered but also embarrassed Sabah BN leaders, particularly those in UPKO and Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS), who have been trumpeting their success in pushing for the RCI.

The prime minister’s failure to keep his party comrades across the South China Sea informed of the progress of the RCI had also caused much confusion, the source added.

“Unfortunately, no one explained why there was no announcement on the RCI. We were all so anxious to find out what happened,” the leader said.

When Najib, who was scheduled to speak to the media after a function in Tungku, near Lahad Datu, cancelled his press conference and left for Kuala Lumpur, rumours began to arise over the prime minister’s hurried departure.

Internet news reports screamed of the possibility that Najib had backpedalled on the Cabinet’s decision, some even claiming of a “secret meeting” of Umno warlords who warned the prime minister that BN would lose a sizeable chunk of votes if the RCI were to crack down on the state’s massive population of illegals.

Opposition party leaders jumped at the opportunity to trumpet to the public their assertion that Sabah-based parties in BN hold no clout in the ruling pact.

DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang demanded to know if Sabah BN leader Tan Sri Bernard Dompok’s announcement on February 10 that the RCI had been approved by Cabinet was merely “hot air”.

One BN PBS leader told The Malaysian Insider that one rumour even alleged that it was Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad who urged Najib against forming the RCI.

“Why didn’t he announce it? Why? We were all wondering. There were rumours all over. And yes, we were very disappointed. Even more disappointed than the opposition,” said the leader.

The leader noted that during Najib’s meeting with Sabah BN, the prime minister had indicated the possibility that this could be his last visit to the Land below the Wind before federal elections are called.

“But then he added that he could pay another visit… if federal elections are not called. It was expected that the RCI would be announced. There was no indication otherwise,” the leader said.

The unchecked influx of illegals in Sabah has been a longstanding problem in the BN-ruled state, and has usually been blamed for the rise in social, economic and security problems suffered by the locals here.

According to replies provided in Parliament last year, Sabah’s populace numbered 651,304 in 1970 and grew to 929,299 a decade later. But in the two decades following 1980, the state’s population rose significantly by a staggering 1.5 million people, reaching 2,468,246 by 2000.

Media reports said that as of 2010, this number has grown further to 3.12 million, with foreigners making up a sizeable 27 per cent or 889,799 of the population.

Opposition leaders have long raged against the BN government for this population explosion, alleging that illegals have been allowed into the east Malaysian state, and given MyKads and voting rights to help the ruling coalition cling to power.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 23 February 2012, 1:12 pm and is filed under
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Something’s rotten in Kuantan

— Sam Peh

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 23, 2012

FEB 23 — Now let me get this straight: The Atomic Energy Licensing Board (AELB)) need not worry what the international community or investors think about getting Lynas out of Malaysia.

It only think about Malaysians — the same chaps who pay the salaries of Raja Abdul Aziz Raja Adnan and other civil servants. According to the director-general of Lynas, he only goes by the facts.

So do I. The facts are that AELB has given Lynas a temporary operating licence and allowed them to put up a multimillion ringgit plant without a long-term plan for the disposal of toxic waste.

No company in the WORLD has devised a foolproof storage system and to think that some company from Australia has achieved a world breakthrough in storage is a joke. And to think that they have been given a temporary operating licence.

And let me remind you that if not for the pressure by the Opposition, the AELB and MITI would have given Lynas a full licence without batting an eyelid despite obvious holes in the waste storage.

Even now I can tell you that this TOL is an eyewash, because are we to understand that the government is going to reimburse Lynas for the multimillion ringgit plant?

So Raja Aziz can carry on his wayang and sound like he actually knows what he is talking about. Another fact is that he can put whatever spin he wants about the revenue-sharing plan with Lynas (0.05 per cent of Lynas revenue) but no regulator worth its salt should put itself in a position of conflict.

The simple fact is that something stinks about this project and the government’s handling of it.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 23 February 2012, 11:39 pm and is filed under
environment
,
Lynas
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Waging a jihad for ‘Malay interests’?

By
Dr Mustafa K Anuar
, honorary secretary of Aliran

Taking on Perak mufti Harussani Zakaria, Mustafa K Anuar points out that it is certain actions by Muslim politicians and bureaucrats – their involvement in corruption, for instance – that are actually smearing the image of Islam.

Controversial Perak mufti Harussani Zakaria called on Muslims (possibly, in this context, only to be read as Malays) to go on a jihad to defend Islam, Malays and the institution of the Malay Rulers, which, apparently to him, are under siege.

The basic question that begs to be asked here is, are Islam, the Malays and the institution of the Malay Rulers indeed under severe threat (presumably by the “Others”?) that it merits a jihad of sorts? Are there still instances of economic injustice among some Malays? If it is true that these Malays are economically worse off, then it begs the question why? What has the BN government been doing ever since it came to power more than 50 years ago? Why has there been increasing income disparity within the Malay community itself, let alone the economic disparity between ethnic groups?

Who really clipped the wings of the Malay Rulers to some degree over the years? Remember, for instance, the Constitutional Crisis that witnessed the face-off between the royalty and the then prime minister, Mahathir Mohamed? Do you recall the mammoth Semarak rallies to vilify and ridicule the royalty? And do you recall which political party it was that had a few of its members pooh-poohing the Terengganu Sultan during the Mentri Besar crisis in the state a few years ago?

As for Islam, there are grey and conflicting areas, such as the “body snatch” cases and the conversion of minors, which require serious and committed dialogues between Muslim leaders and those of other faiths. There are, of course, certain actions by Muslim politicians and bureaucrats that actually smear the very image of Islam, such as their involvement in rampant corruption, unwavering slander in public and infliction of social injustice to fellow Muslims and non-Muslims alike. And these people often say and do things in the name of the religion. In short, they themselves give Islam a bad name as they do not lead by good example.

So while conducting self-reflection and perhaps sociological studies on the above matters, the mufti and people of similar wavelength may want to take heed of what the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said of jihad: there’s a greater jihad that is more difficult, and that is the inner struggle against one’s ego, selfishness, greed, and evil. This personal action would go some way in resolving the problems of endemic corruption, slander and social injustice, among others. In the spirit of this internal struggle, Muslims in this country should join hands with their fellow citizens of other faiths to fight for social justice and against the corruption that has entrenched itself into the fabric of our beloved society.

Additionally, the Perak mufti and his brethren may want to draw up a comprehensive strategy, if they haven’t yet, to help combat the scourge of corruption in our midst as it obviously affects the Ummah in many ways. After all, isn’t corruption haram in Islam, just as pork and poco poco are?

Another thing: in the context of our multi-ethnic society, this so-called religious calling, which is tainted with ethnic sentiments, might give rise to unnecessary doubt about the universality of Islam. One, particularly a Muslim, should always be guided by the following verse in the Holy Book which celebrates universalism and moral uprightness and doesn’t put a premium on ethnic origin and social status:

O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other (not that ye may despise each other). Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And Allah has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things). (Qur’an, Surah 49:13)

Allah created nations and tribes so that we can discover our commonality, respect our humanity and live in brotherhood in complete harmony.

Surely a Muslim worth his or her salt would defend and promote this important injunction.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 23 February 2012, 10:42 am and is filed under
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


A plea for unity

— Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 24, 2012

FEB 24 — I am indeed honoured to have been invited to speak to all of you gathered here this morning on a subject of great importance for the continued preservation and survival of our nation.

As all of you are aware, our nation became free from the fetters of colonial domination about five-and-a-half decades ago.

Sadly and strangely, after 55 years of independence, I think we are farther apart now than we have ever been before.

On August 31, 1957 our freedom from the shackles of a colonial past was greeted with euphoria by the different races who came together on the basis of a common vision for a shared future.

We then had a prime minister who believed that the purpose of independence was the pursuit of happiness for the different races in the country, and our success in that pursuit was to him the ultimate test of our success as a nation.

Tunkuʼs vision for the newly independent nation was based on the “greatest happiness principle”, a subject of intense political discourse in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Europe.

Like the enlightened political philosophers in the western world, our father of independence believed that governments existed to provide for the happiness of the people, and nothing more.

“For us in the Alliance we have no dogma other than to ensure happiness for the people,” the Tunku once said.

Tunku recognised that individual happiness was tied up with collective happiness, and that sometimes we needed to sacrifice our own comforts willingly so that people from another community were not deprived of happiness.

Like Jeremy Bentham, the great English philosopher would have it, Tunku therefore favoured policies that would bring the greatest happiness to the greatest number of Malaysians.

In his words, “what I gave to one, I also gave to others. In this way, we made everybody happy. This has always been my aim.”

In fact, according to him, “that is what I live for, to ensure peace, happiness and prosperity for our Malaya which we all love so well.”

Tunkuʼs policies were tied up with the golden rule that we must have respect for one another and treat others just as we wish others to treat us.

This golden rule was an important principle in an interdependent, multi-ethnic society such as ours.

Tunkuʼs basic concept of happiness is best expressed in his favourite maxim, “live and let live”.

It is a maxim that calls for acceptance of people as they are, although they may have a different way of life. Tunku applied the maxim in the public domain.

Tunku was a real father to the nation, as expressed in these words, “… I am a happy prime minister and I have cause to be so. I can feel the pulse of this nation; I am not the prime minister of this nation, but the father to all the peoples who live here.”

If Tunku had boasted that he was the happiest prime minister in the world, it was only because the people were happy. In Tunkuʼs words at that time, “I pray and hope that this happy state of affairs will continue for all times.”

Unfortunately, however, Tunkuʼs dreams were dashed to dust by the events of May 13, 1969.

This once happiest prime minister expressed the pain he felt as Father of Merdeka as he relived those traumatic moments:

“I have often wondered why God made me live long enough to have witnessed my beloved Malays and Chinese citizens killing each other.”

Such was the man that Tunku was. He was the moving spirit of the nation.

Tunku has long gone, and today his premiership is a distant memory. Since the time he left, inter-ethnic relations have taken a turn for the worse on all fronts.

Today, we have a regime that promotes the concept of 1 Malaysia with all its contradictions.

We have an official document that explains the 1 Malaysia concept as a nation where every Malaysian perceives himself as Malaysian first, and by race second.

However, we have a leader who openly transgresses his own official policy by declaring that he is “Malay first” and “Malaysian second”.

The statement comes as a severe blow not just to the concept of 1 Malaysia, but also as a nullification of Jiwa Malaysia or the National Spirit that Tunku was trying hard to inculcate.

No wonder that people can no longer recognise the jiwa — they just donʼt feel as though they are fully Malaysian.

It is strange that after 55 years of freedom, we have not learnt the simple art of living together as brothers and sisters.

The countryʼs source of strength is unity, and this source of strength has been slowly whittled away over the years.

We have become a nation of strangers, as evidenced in the fields of politics, the economy, education and the civil service.

The strong presence of communal political parties in the country is chiefly to be blamed for the sad state of race relations in the country. These political parties invariably support racial policies and imbibe racial sentiments among the people whom they represent.

In their day-to-day administration of the country, the powers that be often give scant regard to the constitutional provision contained in Article 8(1) which states that “all persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law”; and Article 8(2) which states that “there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion, race, descent or place of birth in any law relating to the acquisition, holding or disposition of property or the establishing or carrying on of any trade, business, profession, vocation or employment”.

One major sore point in the area of race relations is the New Economic Policy, whose original intention to create unity has been subverted to become a major source of disunity not only between the various races but also among the Malays and Bumiputeras in general.

The New Economic Policy, which was conceived in 1971 not long after the Tunku had retired as prime minister, was primarily created to address poverty, and to raise the level of Malay participation in the economy.

It was intended for all Malaysians, and not just for the Malays or Bumiputeras.

As a former finance minister, let me emphasise that it was never the intention of the NEP to create an incubated class of Malay capitalists.

If we visit the government departments or universities, we wonder where all the non-Malays have gone.

After 1969, suddenly there was this attempt to recruit mostly Malays into the civil service.

It is tragic that the civil service does not reflect the racial composition of the Malaysian population, as the predominant presence of only one race tends to engender a sub-culture that is antithetical to the evolution of a dynamic and efficient civil administration in the country.

Our school system is not as it used to be. The non-Malays prefer to send their children to vernacular schools, as the national schools have assumed an exclusively Malay character.

Needless to say, national schools have become even less attractive to the non-Malays as English is no longer used in the teaching of mathematics and science.

The situation will be very different if all discriminatory practices in the education system were to be abolished, and a common system of education for all is adopted.

National unity is the one area that we cannot afford to ignore, and the real genesis of national unity, I submit, is from an unlikely source: Parliament, warts and all.

It is the Parliament that has the final say in charting the direction the country is heading to.

We must have a strong and resolute government which recognises the needs of all Malaysians, and formulates the right policies for the propagation of a cohesive and integrated society.

If Parliament enacts policies that are just and fair for all Malaysians based on meritocracy and need, more than half the battle for national unity would be won.

In this respect, the rakyat as voters must realise that in the ultimate they alone hold the key to the future of this country.

* This is the text of the speech by Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah at the Breakfast Meeting at the Kuala Lumpur Convention Centre organised by Paddy Schubert Sdn Bhd on February 24, 2012.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 24 February 2012, 2:57 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
nation building
,
NEP
,
Razaleigh Hamzah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib says Sabah RCI still ‘under consideration’

Abdul Rahim Sabri

Malaysiakini

Feb 24, 2012

Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak has apparently refuted claims that a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) on the alleged citizenship-for-votes scam in Sabah had already been approved.

“We are considering it,” said Najib in a curt reply to a question on whether the RCI would be established after chairing the Umno supreme council meeting last night.

Najib’s response came as a surprise as high-profile Sabah BN leaders had claimed that cabinet had approved the establishment of the RCI on Feb 8.

The Sabah BN leaders had speculated that Najib would officially announce the RCI during his two-day visit to the state last week.

However, he left Sabah after a two-day visit with no  mention of the RCI.

United Pasokmomogun Kadazandusun Murut Organisation (Upko) secretary-general Wilfred Madius Tangau told Malaysiakini yesterday that the RCI was already in the bag and only its terms of reference remained to be ironed out.

According to him, Upko had already submitted its proposals on the terms of reference to de facto law minister Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 24 February 2012, 10:28 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Stateless Indians gain right to be buried as Malaysians!

— P. Ramakrishnan

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 24, 2012

FEB 24 — The plight of ignorant and uneducated Indians is legendary and deserves sympathy and compassion. From a humanitarian point of view, a caring and compassionate government would have rendered services to relieve them of their misery. But that doesn’t seem to be the case in Malaysia.

For various compelling reasons these deprived poor Indians had failed to secure an identity card and were unable to register the birth of their children. Those working in rubber estates and oil palm plantations and those struggling to survive in slum areas never understood the requirements of the law or the implications of non-compliance of the law.

Under such circumstances, they had failed to observe the law. This unfortunate situation condemned them to a pathetic stateless misery for decades. These are the people, born and bred in Malaysia, who remain as stateless persons forced to suffer the indignities of poverty and endure the misery inflicted on them by an uncaring and unsympathetic government.

With a little show of humanity and compassion on the part of the government, they would have been rescued from their misery and could have been assisted to live the life of an ordinary citizen with hope and opportunity. Unfortunately, this did not happen. There have been instances when they found it difficult to get jobs or a decent shelter above their heads or a place in school — all because they did not comply with the law. When these ignorant and desperate people subsequently tried to register the birth of a child or apply for an identity card, they faced lots of obstacles from an uncaring and totally unsympathetic and hostile bureaucracy. They were given the run around and made to wait endlessly without any relief.

For the vast majority of them, it was an impossible task to obtain the necessary documents that would have eased their lives. Every attempt to secure a future for them only hit a blank wall. It was such a hopeless situation that many, out of sheer frustration, gave up hope and stopped trying. What else could they do when after 20, 30 years nothing happened?

During this time, the government was always in a position to help them and ease their lives. With a little understanding of their circumstances, with the stroke of a pen, they could have been elevated from their suffering. A little merciful gesture would have rescued them from their abject poverty and made their lives meaningful. But why was nothing done all these many decades?

Is this why the prime minister termed the granting of citizenship and handing over of identification documents to these poor suffering Indians “historic”? He made no mention of the pathetic situation which was forced upon them by the bureaucracy and the Barisan government. He did not express any regret for not having acted very much earlier. He could have addressed their plight in 2009 when he became the prime minister, or the year after in 2010 or even after that in 2011. But he did nothing. Was it because these were not election years?

What could not be resolved in the last 30 years or so is now miraculously and suddenly resolved — because the election is around the corner. The Indian vote is crucial for the BN. That, some cynics claim, explains this change of heart and charity!

It was reported that 5,593 Indians received their MyKad and 4,023 Indians received their citizenship (New Straits Times, February 15, 2012). It was no comfort that so many Indians were suddenly legitimised. How is it that, out of the blue, so many Indians had no difficulty in obtaining these important documents in 2012? How is it, this time around, they did not encounter the obstacles that had plagued them previously? How is it that their nightmare vanished, as it were, with a snap of the fingers!

We have this 72-year-old woman, Parvathi Marimuthu, who was genuinely elated to receive her MyKad and could not contain her joy: “I am now a proud Malaysian citizen.” But she had to wait 29 years to receive her MyKad!

Then there is 73-year-old L. Ramasamy, “who was truly overwhelmed after overcoming countless barriers to get his blue MyKad” so suddenly. In his own words: “I have been here since the year Malaysia received independence…” And yet nobody spared a thought for him or bothered to render a little help that could have made all the difference to his life.

Spare a thought for 76-year-old Saharunisah Arshad, who over a period of 35 years had been applying unsuccessfully: “I was a single mother bringing up two children, and earning a living was indeed a challenge without proper identification.” How this old lady would have struggled and suffered — simply because the government did not care.

Another happy person is 65-year-old L. Nangalethemy, born and bred in Malaysia, and who finally received her citizenship after previous failed attempts. Why was her application not entertained earlier? On what grounds did she qualify now?

The prime minister, who was present, proudly stated: “They will now be able to enjoy healthcare services at government clinics for just RM1 and seek employment in the public sector.” He also mentioned that the recipients would now be able to exercise their rights as citizens and gain access to basic government service previously denied then including education and welfare.

What is the point in giving them this privilege when they are in their late sixties and seventies, when they are too old to work, when they are unable to obtain a bank loan or travel in search of a better life? Even if welfare aid is extended to them, how long can they enjoy this when they are so advanced in age? Will this aid be granted immediately or will they have to wait indefinitely, perhaps until the 14th general election?

They have no proper shelter above their heads since they cannot afford one and were not qualified legitimately to own one as they were stateless. Will the BN government now provide some form of shelter for them?

They have no savings and they have no benefits from EPF or Socso for as stateless persons they were not eligible to contribute to these agencies. How do they survive in this late stage of their lives?

Who will compensate them for their wasted years and lost opportunities? Aren’t they entitled to some form of a relief from the BN government, which had robbed them of a livelihood?

Mr Prime Minister, what these unfortunate Indians have gained in the twilight years of their lives, after decades of deliberate denial and deprivation, is the right to be buried as Malaysians! — aliran.com

                This entry was posted on Friday, 24 February 2012, 2:43 pm and is filed under
Indians
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Time for a full audit and accounting of the RM100 billion losses in the financial scandals of the 22-year Mahathir premiership

Malaysians are shocked and outraged by the cynical comment of former Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad who sought justification for the government’s bail out MAS which resulted in a loss of public funds on the specious ground that there were worse cases of bailouts after he stood down.

As example, he alleged that his successor Tun Abdullah lost about RM8 billion when he cancelled the double tracking and electrification project between Johor Baru and Padang Besar.

This is the classic perverse Mahathirish illogic that could righteously argue that so long as there is a greater financial scandal in later administrations under his successor-Prime Ministers, there is no need for him to feel remorse, guilt or responsibility for the colossal loss of public funds or for the lack of accountability, transparency, integrity and good governance with regard to the earlier financial scandals under his watch.

This is completely unacceptable.

The time has come for a full audit and accounting of the RM100 billion losses in the financial scandals of the 22-year Mahathir premiership especially as the Najib government does not seem to have learnt any lesson from them.

The MAS bailout in December 2000 was one of the financial scandals of the Mahathir administration. It has been described as the first “double government bail out” in the world of a troubled company as well as of its principal shareholder – firstly, RM1.8 billion to bailout Tajuddin paying RM8.00 per share for his 29.09 per cent stake in MAS or more than double its market price then; and secondly, some RM10 billion to bail out losses incurred by MAS after Tajuddin’s takeover from 1994 to 2000.

But the bailouts of Tajuddin and MAS do not seem to have ended under Mahathir’s premiership and have continued right into the Najib administration.

Malaysians are entitled to know whether the tentacles of Mahathir’s misgovernance in the MAS scandal have reached into the present Najib administration as to result in another bailout for Tajudin, in the form of the cancellation or nullification of the Kuala Lumpur High Court judgment of Dec. 7, 2009 ordering Tajudin to pay Pengurusan Danaharta Nasional Bhd RM589.14 million with 2 per cent annual interest above the base lending rate of Malayan Banking Bhd backdated to Jan 1, 2006.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 24 February 2012, 5:11 pm and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Another cock-and-bull story from Mahathir

Kee Thuan Chye | Feb 25, 2012

Malaysiakini

COMMENT

Dr Mahathir Mohamad should talk straight or just shut up.

Whenever he rebuts allegations of wrongdoing during his tenure as prime minister, he appears to sound not only defensive but deceptive as well.

Now he says the government’s bailout of Malaysia Airlines (MAS) in 2000, during his premiership, was “not the worst”. What does that mean? Is he saying that the bailout was all right simply because it was not the worst?

If he is still of sound mind and can understand this, let me say it is not all right. So what if it was not the worst act of using public funds? It was nonetheless committed. Should only the worst be held accountable?

That bailout cost Malaysians RM1.8 billion. And the government paid for the MAS shares at more than double their market price. Why was this so?

Well, Mahathir has become famous for blaming others; this time, he points to the Finance Ministry – for recommending the purchase at such a price. Has he forgotten he was the country’s chief executive officer then, and that it wouldn’t have gone through without his say-so, no matter which ministry or individual recommended it?

He says MAS had to be saved from bankruptcy because it was “necessary”. But why was MAS privatised to Tajudin Ramli in the first place when the latter had had no track record in the airline industry? Whom would Mahathir blame for this?

And what about the other bailouts? Bank Bumiputra, Renong, and Proton, which was bought by Petronas from DRB-Hicom when the latter was deep in debt?

Mahathir is always right

Mahathir tries to justify the MAS bailout by comparing it to the cancellation of the double-tracking project by his successor, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. But that doesn’t make it right. Would making such a comparison absolve Mahathir from the questionable use of public funds under his watch?

Did Mahathir have a personal stake in that project to make him so angry towards Abdullah for cancelling it, and therefore so unforgiving of the latter?

The way he’s been slamming Abdullah, almost at every chance he gets, indicates he has a personal axe to grind with the man. But he’s been doing it so often now that it’s really getting tiresome.

The thing about Mahathir is, he is always right and everyone else wrong. Less than two weeks ago, he refuted allegations that when he was prime minister, he cowed the judiciary.

Has he forgotten that in 1988, his ruling party, which then enjoyed a two-thirds majority in Parliament, passed an amendment to Article 121 of the Federal Constitution which effectively removed the judicial power from the courts and made the judiciary subservient to Parliament?

When former chief justice Dzaiddin Abdullah brought up three weeks ago that this was so, and de facto Law Minister Nazri Aziz agreed, what was Mahathir’s response? “This is fitnah (slander),” he said. But why is it fitnah when the amendment was indeed made and we have seen the consequences of it?

To deflect from the real issue, Mahathir blamed Nazri for getting personal. “Nazri … you know, he never likes me,” he said. But what about Dzaiddin? Mahathir doesn’t mention it, but does Dzaiddin not like him too?

So that’s how Mahathir avoids facing up to the truth – use emotional prattle, throw the focus off himself onto others, make it seem that others are against him and that they want to run him down.

To aim insult at Nazri and aggrandise himself, he also said, condescendingly and arrogantly, “Let him be. It doesn’t hurt me. Let dogs bark, but mountains don’t crumble.”

He even asserted that he was blameless in the sacking of then Lord President Salleh Abas, which Dzaiddin claimed was due to the disagreement between Mahathir and Salleh over the role of the courts. Whom did Mahathir blame instead?

“It was the Agong (king) who wanted [Salleh] removed,” he said. That must have got people rolling on the floor with laughter. Given Mahathir’s track record in relation to royalty, are we to believe that he would have acceded to the request of removing Salleh if indeed the Agong had made it?

Not responsible for ISA arrests too

How did we entrust a man who talks like that with the nation’s most important job for 22 years? If we weren’t vigilant then, we should be vigilant now and make sure we don’t put into that office someone as reluctant to be accountable as that.

Mahathir was unwilling to be accountable for Operation Lalang too. Regarding that infamous swoop on 106 citizens in 1987 that detained them under the Internal Security Act, he passed the buck to the police.

He said: “Well, I would have handled it differently, except that the police wanted to do these things because they say it is necessary …” He washed his hands of the matter. He was effectively saying the police did it.

But if that was so, how come when it came to authorising the detention of 40 of the 106 to two years, Mahathir, who was also the home minister then, signed it? Did the police twist his arm and force him to do it too?

He is even down on record to have said, “I actually met all of the opposition members (beforehand) and assured them that they would not be arrested.”

But Lim Kit Siang, who was among the 40 detained for two years, has attested that he never met Mahathir beforehand. What does Mahathir have to say to that?

Perhaps it’s best not to ask him that question or he might come up with something that looks like a Uri Geller feat. Or Lim might get blamed for this too!

Actually, it’s not good to ask Mahathir any questions. Or to give him so much coverage in the media. He should be allowed the space only if he talks sense or if he admits to whatever mistakes he has made. But then infallible as he is, such an admission looks unlikely to happen.

The way it looks, the mountain is not going to crumble. If it does, the world would end – for Mahathir.

——————————————————————————–

KEE THUAN CHYE is the author of the new book ‘No More Bullshit, Please, We’re All Malaysians’.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 25 February 2012, 7:28 pm and is filed under
General
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Loan agreement shows NFCorp broke terms, says Pua

By Yow Hong Chieh

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 25, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 25 — DAP MP Tony Pua today revealed the loan agreement signed by the National Feedlot Corporation (NFCorp), which he claimed proved the company had violated conditions attached to the RM250 million facility.

The DAP publicity chief pointed out that Clause 3 of the agreement clearly states that the federal loan should be used to “part finance the project as described in the First Schedule of this agreement”.

The First Schedule states that use of the loan must be “consistent with the government of Malaysia’s policy of developing, promoting and nurturing the production of beef and beef products through the National Feedlot Centre as a centre for commercial and integrated cattle feedlot”.

“It cannot be more obvious. Use of the funds can only strictly be used to part finance the setting up of the centre and nothing else,” Pua told reporters at DAP headquarters here.

“So all the claims made by the executives and directors of NFCorp that they can use the money for anything is complete rubbish.”

He added that this point was reinforced by Clause 18.1(b), which states that as long as the loan is in existence, NFCorp must use the borrowed monies “for the purpose as stated in Clause 3 of this agreement”.

Pua also took to task the Agriculture and Agro-Based Industry Ministry for allowing NFCorp to draw down on the special loan account, noting that such requests have to be accompanied by a progress report from the company.

The progress report must be signed off by an authorised technical committee chaired by an official from the ministry, according to the agreement.

“They have to sign the progress report. So the fact that the drawdown has taken place despite the fact that NFC has failed to meet its targets… (shows that) the Ministry of Agriculture is equally culpable for the mess,” he said.

NFCorp must also provide monthly bank statements to the Finance Ministry on a quarterly basis with a statement setting out how the loan monies were used, Pua said, and questioned why the ministry allowed the loan to continue.

“Unless NFCorp submitted false reports. Then that would be definitely criminal. Now, we don’t know if they submitted false reports at this point in time.

“It is the Ministry of Finance that has to verify the contents of those reports,” he said, adding that the ministry official who briefed the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) on NFCorp stated that no mention of property purchases had been made in any report.

The Petaling Jaya Utara MP also asked why the ministry has not frozen the loan as Clause 4 of the agreement states that repayment shall begin three years after the first drawdown, which took place in January 2008.

“We are now in February 2012. Our understanding is that they have not made a single sen in repayment. We are way past the three-year grace period,” he said.

“Why is it they have not paid? Why is it the Ministry of Finance has not taken action on the late payment? And why has the loan not been terminated or put into default status?”

The publicly-funded NFCorp hit national headlines following the Auditor-General’s Report last year and has continued to hog the limelight after it was linked to federal minister Datuk Seri Shahrizat Jalil’s family.

PKR has made several claims of abuse over NFCorp’s federal loan involving over RM62 million spent on land, property and expenses unrelated to cattle-raising.

Shahrizat’s son and NFCorp executive Wan Shahinur Izmir Salleh has insisted that the company had made better use of the money by investing in property during a break in business operations after Putrajaya’s decision to suspend construction of an abattoir that would have been rented to the company.

Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin announced last month that Putrajaya would appoint an auditor to scrutinise NFCorp’s books in light of accusations made against the company but dismissed calls for a royal commission of inquiry into the issue.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 25 February 2012, 2:39 pm and is filed under
Auditor-General Report
,
Corruption
,
Good Governance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Lynas: Long-term public relations nightmare

— by Strategia

The Malaysian Insider

Feb 25, 2012

FEB 25 — It all began many years ago with MIDA (MITI) that reportedly lured and attracted this controversial polluting Lynas rare earth industry to Malaysian shores. Apparently, some promises have been made.

Then the fiasco began. Firstly, the fast-tracked approval of the sloppy PEIA by the DoE. The RIA was not even completed then. Secondly, only upon public outcries was the quietly approved and equally sloppy RIA was made available to the public by AELB. Note that the PEIA and RIA are not up to international best practices and standards, showing clear deficiencies. More public outcry over the poor governance and the regulatory bodies’ substandard competency. The government had to invite an international review panel from the IAEA to quell public anger over Lynas. The IAEA panel put forth a slew of recommendations for Lynas as well as for the Malaysian government’s regulatory bodies — showing up their deficiencies.

What a public relations nightmare for both Lynas and the incompetent Malaysian regulatory bodies!

Then, more fiasco.
Various government departments and unqualified politicians made unsubstantiated claims about the safety of Lynas’ rare earth operations and radioactive products. Reports of payment to Putrajaya … a further blow to the credibility of Lynas and Malaysian government agencies. Lynas’ planned rare earth operation lacks, inter alia, a credible waste management plan, making it necessary for the government to perform a much belated public review of a new document on the Lynas new waste management plan. A “wayang kulit”, as merely days after the public review deadline, AELB issued a temporary operating licence or TOL to Lynas. More public hue and cry. AELB corrected its statement, saying it was a CONDITIONAL TOL. Strange incredible conditions. AELB credibility dashed. More public hue and cry. Another public relations nightmare!

In the meantime, Lynas grows desperate. Its shares slid upon news of the postponement of the start date of operations. Lynas high officials gave thinly veiled statements. Credibility of Lynas is further damaged. Public protests against Lynas are not expected to stop until Lynas gets out of Malaysia. Lynas seems to be a pretty good election issue nowadays.

Meanwhile, other companies are making headway to break China’s monopoly on the controversial rare earth industries. Reportedly, rare earth facilities are opening up in South Africa, Kazakhstan, etc. Siemens may not need Lynas anymore as the German government has made inroads with the Kazakhstan government for rare earth supplies. More importantly, the high-tech industries that use rare earths are gradually finding alternatives. Already wind turbines have alternatives to rare earth products. Price of rare earth products is expected to fall, and so would Lynas’ share value.

Lynas will suffer further setbacks and losses if it insists on operating in Malaysia, going by the increasingly strong and widening protests against it nationwide. Public protests are expected to rise further. It is time for Lynas to take stock of its long-term strategies. Malaysia’s “restive” public is too risky for Lynas. And Lynas is too risky for the Malaysian government. Both sides should learn to let go. Now.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 25 February 2012, 3:53 pm and is filed under
Lynas
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib – is RM589 million out-of-court settlement of Tajudin Ramli’s debts proof Malaysians today are still paying for RM100 billion Mahathir  financial scandals?

Malaysians are entitled to a frank and honest answer from the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak whether the RM580 million out-of-court settlement of Tajudin Ramli’s debts is proof that Malaysians today are still paying for the RM100 billion financial scandals perpetrated in the 22 years Tun Dr. Mahathir was the Prime Minister. And if so, they want to know of other such instances.

More and more Malaysians are asking this question as there is total lack of transparency, accounting, explanation or details for the RM580 million out-of-court settlement with government-linked corporations (GLCS), raising the question whether the Barisan Nasional government has achieved another entry in the Guinness Book of Records in being the first government in the world to surrender a court judgment for RM580 million.

One big controversy among Malaysians today is who is to be believed, Mahathir or Tajudin Ramli about the “double bail-out” of MAS.

Tajudin had claimed through his affidavits that former premier Mahathir had made him buy MAS to help bail out Bank Negara after the central bank suffered massive foreign exchange losses due partly to speculation in foreign currency markets as a “national service” with an “Overriding Agreement” to indemnify him against any losses suffered. This has been denied by Mahathir.

Four reasons have been advanced by those who believe that Tajudin’s claims are more credible, viz:

 (1) Tajudin would be out of his mind to buy at RM8 something trading at RM3.50 then.

(2) Tajudin would do so if he was protected by an overriding agreement as he claimed.

(3) the overriding claim appears credible because the government did subsequently buy back from him at twice market price which the  government  was  not otherwise obliged to do so.

(4) affidavits are sworn statements to court and false statements constitute perjury, a punishable offence.

As Prime Minister, Najib would know what actually transpired and Malaysians want him to tell the country  the truth, whether it is Mahathir or Tajudin who is lying and whether criminal action would be instituted against Tajudin if he had committed perjury in his affidavits.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 25 February 2012, 2:17 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Perhaps Lynas should turn back

— Tay Tian Yan

The Malaysian Insider

February 24, 2012

Feb 24 — I recently met director Tan Chui Mui. She told me she had moved her studio from Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.

KL is too small in the world of film-making; Beijing is somewhat larger.

Tan needs a bigger space to develop her career and fulfil her dreams.

She has won several awards in international film festivals. She is so young and there are lots of potentials she could exploit outside the country.

She does come back to her native Kuantan every now and then, not so much for making a movie, but for her hometown.

Lynas Corp plans to set up a massive rare earth refinery plant in Kuantan, and Putrajaya has issued a conditional temporary licence to the Australia-based firm.

Waste materials from the processing of rare earth could be radioactive, everyone knows that. Both the Malaysian government and Lynas have reassured the public that necessary precautions would be adopted to ensure zero leakage of radioactive substances.

Kuantan residents do not feel assured. They are not willing to stake their health and safety.

Tan took the lead in opposing the proposed plant by making a short documentary “Survival Guide in Radioactive Village,” which has been screened at the Rotterdam Film Festival and soon at other film festivals worldwide.

During the Chinese New Year, she organised a candlelight vigil at Teluk Chempedak near Kuantan to protest against the rare earth plant.

Despite her age, her powerful resolution and determination have moved the hearts of many.

Indeed, the world outside is indefinitely large while her hometown is so small. Just because it is small, and is the one and only, it has to be protected at all costs.

Even if the rare earth plant is certified safe, unforeseen circumstances could still happen. And if it does, it could wreak dreadful havoc on the little town.

Australia spans 7.7 million square kilometres. It is the sixth largest landmass in the world and about 20 times bigger than Malaysia, although it only has 22 million inhabitants, fewer than us.

With such a so much land and much of uninhabited, it wouldn’t be hard for Lynas to pick a place to set up a rare earth plant in Australia. In the event of a leakage, the destruction could be contained to minimum.

Kuantan is just a small town of about 30km in diameter but inhabited by some 700,000 people who have nowhere to escape if any untoward incident takes place.

By choosing Kuantan over Australia and transporting the raw rare earth ore over more than 5,000km across the sea, Lynas will have to incur much higher costs and time.

Australians should have a keener business sense than this, I believe.

They definitely do. But they also place their homeland’s safety above monetary gains.

To set up a rare earth plant in Australia, Lynas may need to pass the rigid environmental evaluation as well as acceptance from the general public.

While Malaysia has proposed that the radioactive waste be transported back to Australia, the same might not be practical as cross border transportation of industrial waste is strictly prohibited under the international law, while Canberra has made it very clear that it will not take back the waste.

Malaysia is neither a rare earth producer nor a major consumer. To make the country a transit point for international rare earth supply will only do Kuantan more harm than good.

Perhaps Lynas should turn back and look inward, given the fact that its homeland is blessed with such an enormous land mass. — mysinchew.com

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 25 February 2012, 9:35 am and is filed under
Lynas
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tell us everything, Najib

— Sam Peh

The Malaysian Insider

February 25, 2012

FEB 25 — Once again, Prime Minister Najib Razak disappoints with a ridiculous statement, aimed at absolving Mahathir Mohamad, the champion of double-speak.

Najib said that the government will consider releasing correspondence between Mahathir and his Israeli counterpart Ehud Barak, to show that Mahathir did not soften Malaysia’s stance on Palestine.

Obviously, Najib wants to do that because otherwise his statement against Anwar Ibrahim for saying in an interview that the security of Israel should be guaranteed unmasked him as Jew sympathiser would be hypocritical. It is also possible that since Mahathir seems to be running the country, Najib has really no choice.

I suggest that since Najib is on disclosure mode, he also consider revealing facts that are far more important to Malaysians such as:

1) The confidential agreement between Danaharta and Tajudin Ramli which allowed the favoured businessman to stop paying RM590 million to the government agency. Can you imagine any government giving up a court award of RM590 million?

2) The correspondence between a company which allowed it to get a RM2.2 billion road deal. Oh I forgot, the main actors in this deal is the Umno lawyer Hafarizam Harun and former Chief Justice Zaki Azmi. No open tender just an award.

3) The minutes of a Public Accounts Committee meeting where government officials disclosed information about the National Feedlot Corporation where it was alleged that Muhyiddin Yassin’s role in promoting the project was disclosed.

4) The true details of the bloated West Coast Highway where it is alleged that an Indian businessman close to the PM and a royal with a penchant for delivering speeches are beneficiaries.

These are just some examples which the PM would be better advised addressing because it involves taxpayers’ money.

I am not talking about salacious details on disclosing commission paid on the submarine deal or how a model’s immigration records were erased. Unlike the correspondence between Mahathir and Barak, the examples I quoted involve taxpayers’ money.

So how about it, Najib?

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 25 February 2012, 9:11 am and is filed under
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.