If it ‘agrees to disagree’ so often, can Pakatan ever rule Malaysia?

by Sheridan Mahavera

The Malaysian Insider

9 February 2015

The fact that Pakatan Rakyat needs a special meeting to trash out differences on whether to have local council elections is an admission that they have found another critical issue where they have to “agree to disagree”.

Analysts said this raised questions of whether the six-year-old coalition was cohesive enough and ready to rule this country, as local council elections, unlike hudud, were in their common manifesto.

Hudud, the Kelantan Shariah criminal law, is special because it was passed in 1993 by the PAS-dominated state government and preceded PR’s formation in 2008.

Local government elections, some PR leaders said, were agreed upon by all coalition partners in the 2013 in its common policy framework, which is a manifesto of sorts.

So if these three parties are fighting over something they had already agreed upon as a coalition, one wonders what other points of agreement they are going to fight about if it took over federal power in the 14th general election.

“If this internal turmoil keeps going on, one wonders if they really are ready to replace Barisan Nasional,” said political scientist Dr Maszlee Malik.

Different mentalities

To be fair, said PAS leader Youth chief Suhaizan Kaiat, local government elections were not specifically mentioned in the policy framework.

“What was agreed to was ‘strengthening democracy at the local level’,” said Suhaizan, when met after the PR presidential council meeting yesterday.

The council meeting, which was done against a backdrop of acrimony between PAS and DAP, decided that the coalition would hold a series of special meetings to discuss local government elections and the Kelantan hudud bill.

This follows weeks of PAS and DAP leaders trading barbs over local council polls.

The debate hit a raw nerve when PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang said that such a move would worsen ethnic divisions and lead to another May 13 race riot.

Suhaizan said there were differences of opinion among the leadership over whether to implement local council polls.

While some like Hadi and PAS secretary-general Datuk Mustafa Ali said PAS did not agree, others like former Terengganu state executive councillor Datuk Abdul Mutalib Embong and Sepang MP Hanipa Maidin supported it.

Maszlee, who is an assistant professor at the International Islamic University, said this difference of opinion reflected the contrasting mentalities between PAS leaders.

Maszlee said Hadi’s opinion of local council polls and the way he looked at it from a racial lens was the minority view in PAS.

Hadi’s exclusivist mentality was not just common among PAS leaders, Maszlee said. It developed in other older PR leaders who became politically conscious and active when their parties were operating on their own.

Younger PR leaders, especially those who became active after the 1998 reformasi era, have internalised coalition politics and were comfortable working through their parties’ different ideologies, he said.

“The younger leaders are more mature. The racial argument against local council polls is baseless. It is only Hadi’s opinion,” said Maszlee.

This difference in mentality among PAS leaders Maszlee said, was even present in the Kelantan hudud issue.

“There is a debate on what is the priority. The mega floods left Kelantan devastated and some leaders believe that this (issue) should be dealt with first.”

A unified vision

Those different worldviews also lead to different visions for what PR leaders want the coalition to stand for and what kind of Malaysia it wants to shape if it wins federal power.

Hudud and local government elections are inter-connected issues, said another political analyst Dr Wong Chin-Huat.

“One vision is more democratisation of the state and more Islamisation at the social level, where people become more pious individually.

“The other is an Islamisation of the state, through religious laws. You choose pious leaders to rule over everyone else and this reduces the need for more democracy,” said Wong, who is heads of Political and Social Analysis of the Penang Institute.

With hudud, Wong said, it was too important and its effects far-reaching to just leave it to the PR presidential council to work it out.

To allow Kelantan to do it would change federal-state power relations, relations behind different classes of citizens and ultimately the shape of the country.

“For instance, when Sabah and Sarawak formed Malaysia together with the peninsula in 1963, they did not agree to have such laws. So you have to take into account their views.

“And also the views of non-Muslims, because what happens when a crime involves a non-Muslim victim and a Muslim perpetrator?

“The debate about this must be civil, rational and inclusive and can’t just involve PR leaders but the whole society,” said Wong.

To settle these differences and finally reach a unified vision for PR, Maszlee said, required a mentality missing from PR’s old guard.

“I believe that people like Hadi, (DAP parliamentary leader) Lim Kit Siang and even (PKR de facto leader Datuk Seri) Anwar Ibrahim should step down and let the newer generation shape the PR.”

More importantly, Wong said, PR had to convince society to believe in its unified vision first before the coalition implemented it politically.

“For instance, if you implement Shariah law before there is societal change to accept it, society will reject it. Which is why a debate and decision on it must involve all citizens.” – February 9, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 9 February 2015, 7:28 am and is filed under
DAP
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
,
PKR
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Merit in suggestion that younger post-Merdeka generation of leaders should begin to take over leadership positions in DAP, PKR and PAS

In another 12 hours, we will witness another crucial milestone in a 17-year conspiracy to crush and destroy a Malaysian patriot and nationalist who have dedicated his entire life to the betterment of our country in furtherance of freedom, justice and human dignity.

If the 17 years of energy, effort, time and resources  mobilized single-mindedly by the authorities for the  destruction of one man had been devoted towards answering his challenge in the realm of ideas and public policies with regard to justice, freedom, development and human dignity, Malaysia would have been a much better and successful nation today!

Tomorrow, Anwar Ibrahim may leave the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya a free man or he may begin his third spell of incarceration.

Whatever the outcome, we want to assure Anwar that the battle for justice, freedom, human dignity and particularly in Malaysia, unity, harmony and peace of our multi-racial, multi-religious, multi-lingual and multi-cultural population  will press on until victory is achieved.

In fact, his incarceration will fire up Malaysians all over the country to a greater commitment and  greater efforts to push forward the national agenda for change to save Malaysia from joining the ranks of failed states if the nation continues with the present policies of political oppression,  economic injustices, environmental despoliation, moral degradation where even Ministers cannot know the difference beween Right and Wrong, worsening race and religious relations, rampant corruption and the collapse of good governance and the basic principles of accountability and transparency.

Pakatan Rakyat is the embodiment of Anwar’s greatest success in the national agenda for change, scoring unimagined victories first in the 2008 and then in the 2013 General Elections where Anwar was denied his destiny as the Seventh Prime Minister of Malaysia because of an undemocratic electoral system as Pakatan Rakyat secured 52% of the national vote.

The Pakatan Rakyat has made Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, region, age or gender, dare to hope and dream again the Malaysian Hope and  Dream where the rich diversity of race, religion, language and culture which had found confluence in Malaysia could be leveraged into important building blocks to create a great Malaysian nation which can be a model for the world not only in political democracy, economic prosperity and justice, a good education system, quality of life and most important of all, as an united, peaceful, harmonious and vibrant plural society.

But Pakatan Rakyat is very much a work in progress, and there is no guarantee that it would not falter and fall and would definitely  be able to succeed in fulfilling the hopes and aspirations placed on it by Malaysians.

It is undoubtedly the task and challenge of the component parties of PR, and their leaders, to make a success of PR.

We do not hide the fact that PR is afflicted with our  greatest crisis since our formation seven years ago, even more challenging than the first crisis PR faced in September 2011, which nearly led to the end of PR.

If PR had broken up over the hudud controversy in September 2011, then the historic result of the 13th General Elections on May 5. 2013  which saw PR winning 52 per cent of electoral vote and reducing the Najib federal administration into a minority government, with PR winning 89 Parliamentary seats and 229 state assembly seats (excluding Sarawak) would not have been achieved.

If PR now breaks up before the next polls, it is anybody’s guess as to what would be the outcome in the 14th General Elections to be held in three years’ time.

It is precisely because PR embodies the hopes of generations of Malaysians for change and Malaysia’s rendezvous with greatness, that DAP leaders are prepared to walk the last mile to make Pakatan Rakyat work – and I believe this is also the common sentiments and commitments of  PKR and PAS leaders at the unprecedented promises and challenges presented by the PR experiment.

PR can only sustain and succeed if we adhere to two fundamental principles which had been the secrets of the PR success in the past six years – strict adherence  to the PR Common Policy Framework which had formed the bedrock common principles of the three component parties in the coalition, and the operational principle of consensus regarding the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council as the highest policy-making body for PR.

Yesterday, we have agreed to an early Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council meeting on two issues, the Kelantan hudud law and local council elections and that there would be no developments on these two issues unless and until the green light is given by the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council.  This would mean that any PAS parliamentary private member’s bill or Kelantan Pas proposal to  the Kelantan State Assembly will have to be brought to the PR Leadership Council first.

The Malaysian Insider in a report by Sheridan Mahavera, asked: “If it ‘agrees to disagree’ so often, can Pakatan ever rule Malaysia?” – a question which deserves  deep pondering by Pakatan Rakyat leaders but which I do not propose to address tonight.

What I wish to touch on is the view of political scientist Dr. Maszlee Malik, assistant professor at the International Islamic University, who suggested the need for a more unified vision and more inclusive mentality among PR leaders from the three component parties – as compared to “exclusive mentality” among older PR leaders who became politically conscious and active when their parties were operating on their own.

Younger PR leaders especially those active after the 1998 reformsi era have internalized coalition politics and were comfortable working through their parties’ different ideologies.

He suggested:  “I believe that people like Hadi, (DAP parliamentary leader) Lim Kit Siang and even (PKR de facto leader Datuk Seri) Anwar Ibrahim should step down and let the newer generation shape the PR.”

I do not want to discuss Mazlee’s interesting viewpoints and reasoning  here, but to take it from another angle.

I think Mazlee’s suggestion for the “old guards” to  withdraw from the front-line to allow the younger generation to  take over the reins of leadership has considerable merit.

The present average age of the Malaysian Cabinet is 58.5 years with over half the Cabinet more than 60 years old – ranging from Idris Jusoh and Douglas Uggah Embas’ 60 years to Muhyiddin Yassin’s 68 years – with Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak at 62.

Some 90 per cent of Malaysia’s 30  million people are born after Merdeka on August 31, 1957. The age make-up of Malaysia’s population are: 0-14 years  28.8%; 15 -24 years 16.9%; 25 0 54 years 41.2%; 55 – 64 years 7.6%; 65 years and over – 5.5%/

Isn’t it time for a more youthful population to take over the leadership levels in all spheres of Malaysia’s national life?

If we have a Cabinet which, with certain exceptions, comprise Ministers who are post-Merdeka born, we will immediately do away with half the Cabinet – people whom Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad had condemned as “half-past six” and Tun Daim Zainuddin dismissed  as “deadwood”.

With a more youthful Cabinet will be less prone to disasters like the Home Minister Zahid Hamidi’s infamous letter to the FBI to vouch for the character and integrity of a gambling kingpin and the Agriculture and Agro-based Industry Minister Ismail Sabri Yaakob making racist calls on Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses.

Let us look at Tunku Abdul Rahman’s Merdeka Cabinet in 1957, which had an average age of 43.3 years – with Prime Minister Tunku 54 and Finance Minister H.S.Lee 57 the oldest members while the youngest were Education Minister Khir Johari 34 and Deputy Prime Minister Abdul Razak Hussein 35.

If the post-Merdeka generation takes over  greater responsibility for the future of PR and the nation, then we are talking about people like Azmin Ali, 51, Saifuddin Nasution 52, Nurul Izzah, 35, Rafizi Ramli 38 in PKR; Husam Musa 56, Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man, 55, Salahuddin Ayub, 54 in PAS;  Lim Guan Eng 55, Teresa Kok 51,  Anthony Loke 39, Chong Chieng Jen 44, Tony Pua 43 and Liew Chin Tong 37, Gobind Singh Deo and Dyana Sofya Mohd Daud  in DAP.

I am not suggesting any immediate action but I think there is merit in the suggestion that the older leaders like Hadi, Anwar and myself begin to withdraw from the front lines in favour of the post-Merdeka generation.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 9 February 2015, 9:31 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Which Minister is prepared to bell the cat and  move a motion in Cabinet on Wednesday to demand that Ismail Sabri should apologise for his racist call on Malay consumers to boycott Chinese business or be sacked from the Cabinet

The Cabinet is meeting on February 11, its sixth meeting in the new year of 2015, after playing truant for three weeks from Dec. 18, 2014 to 6th January 2015 with Ministers going all over the world on holidays in the midst of the worst floods catastrophe in living memory in Malaysia – and even the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, who had to cut short his golf holidays in Hawaii, could not recall all his Ministers to return home which was why the Cabinet could not meet on Dec. 31, after missing an earlier Wednesday Cabinet meeting of Dec. 24, 2014.

The February 11 meeting in two days’ time is shaping up to be a very important Cabinet meeting – the last opportunity for the 35-Minister Cabinet to redeem itself and salvage whatever is left of its credibility by righting a terrible wrong it committed at its last Cabinet meeting in sanctioning, condoning and defending the Agriculture and Agro-based Industry Minister, Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri’s racist call to Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses.

What is deplorable and unforgivable is for the 35-Minister Cabinet to do something which all religions and all sound education systems in the world would deplore – to claim and demand that a rabid racist call on Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses which is clearly wrong and threatening the very fabric of Malaysia’s plural society is not only right, but must be accepted as right by all Malaysians.

It is a stand that no religion or education system can accept.

Ask the five million primary and secondary school pupils, the over a million undergraduates in public and private universities, and the over 100,000 teachers and academic staff in our universities, and I am confident that  the overwhelming majority of them will say that what Ismail Sabri said  is wrong, dishonest, unethical and immoral, and that the Cabinet in sanctioning, condoning and defending Ismail Sabri’s racist call was also wrong, dishonest, unethical and immoral.

The Ismail Sabri episode, which has escalated into a national and international scandal, is not a complex matter but  a very  simple issue of Right and Wrong, and in this most basic of tests, Ismail Sabri and the entire Cabinet had failed!

A wrong is a wrong and cannot become right, otherwise what is the use of all the religious and moral values and teachings, whether in schools or at home?

All Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or station,  are taught to admit where they have done a wrong and to seek forgiveness for the mistake they have made.

Why should Ismail Sabri be an exception?

If I had committed a mistake like Ismail Sabri, I would have no hesitation to admit my error, apologise and ask for forgiveness. The last thing I would do is to compel others to sanction, condone or defend my mistake, as the Cabinet did last Wednesday.

The question now is which Minister is prepared to bell the cat and move a motion in  Cabinet on Wednesday to demand that Ismail Sabri should apologise for his racist call on Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses or be sacked from the Cabinet.

Will such a Minister and those Ministers who will support such a motion speak up?

                This entry was posted on Monday, 9 February 2015, 11:21 am and is filed under
Education
,
Najib Razak
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Facing possible jail time, Anwar concedes Pakatan’s future with younger leaders

By Zurairi AR

Malay Mail Online

February 10, 2015

PETALING JAYA, Feb 10 — Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim conceded last night that the future of Pakatan Rakyat (PR) lies with its young leaders, hours before the Federal Court delivers a decision that might spell the end of his political career.

Speaking to over 1,000 supporters on the grand finale of the “Rakyat Hakim Negara” tour to drum up support for him, Anwar admitted that the recent friction among PR leaders was caused by old wounds that have festered over time.

“Sometimes, the older leadership is dragged by issues that are old and outdated … It is important that we give way to the young leadership in PR, because they are more forward-looking,” Anwar said from a stage erected on Dataran Petaling Jaya here.

“We should ensure that this new and young group can see the future of Malaysia with confidence, and not with outdated mindset that can pit one with each other.”

The disagreement over the third vote is the latest flashpoint to threaten the relationship between PAS and DAP, whose leaders have already been trading barbs over the Islamist party’s plan to enforce hudud Islamic penal law in Kelantan.

A long-overdue presidential council meeting was held by PR on Sunday, but had merely deferred the discussion of the two thorny issues to a later date.

At a dinner before Anwar’s speech last night, DAP veteran Lim Kit Siang said the young PR leaders who started out after the 1998 Reformasi era were more comfortable of working in a coalition and work out their differences despite each party’s ideologies.

“Isn’t it time for a more youthful population to take over the leadership levels in all spheres of Malaysia’s national life?” Lim asked during a benefit dinner before the rally.

“I am not suggesting any immediate action but I think there is merit in the suggestion that the older leaders like Hadi, Anwar and myself begin to withdraw from the front lines in favour of the post-Merdeka generation.”

The rally last night also saw speeches by among others PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu, Selangor Mentri Besar Azmin Ali, and PKR secretary-general Rafizi Ramli, in addition to music performances and poem recital by National Laureate Datuk A. Samad Said.

Today, the Federal Court will deliver its decision on whether to uphold an earlier ruling by the Court of Appeal to overturn Anwar’s acquittal of a charge of sodomising his then-aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan six years ago.

The appellate court also slapped a five-year jail sentence on the opposition leader, who had previously spent six years behind bars before he was acquitted in 2004 of sodomising his wife’s driver, Azizan Abu Bakar.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 10 February 2015, 7:42 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


LIVE: Anwar’s 5-year jail sentence upheld

BY THE MALAYSIAN INSIDER

10 February 2015

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s sentence of five years’ jail was upheld by the Federal Court today, ending his public office as oppositon leader and Permatang Pauh MP.

The Federal Court dismissed applications by the defence to lessen the five-year jail sentence imposed by the Court of Appeal and also rejected prosecution’s appeal to enhance the prison term.

Earlier, before sentence was passed, Anwar attacked the five-man bench which convicted him today accusing them of “bowing to their political masters and becoming partners in crime in the murder of the judiciary”.

Anwar told the bench led by Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria that a full statement was issued by the Prime Minister’s Office barely minutes after the judgment was delivered.

“In bowing to political masters they have disgraced themselves and have become partners in crime in the murder of the judiciary,” Anwar said, before Arifin asked lead defence counsel Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram to tell Anwar to stop.

But Sri Ram told Arifin that his client had the right to address the court, to which Arifin retorted, “yes, on the appeal but not to condemn the court”.

But the opposition leader continued attacking the judiciary, adding “you had the opportunity to right the wrong but you chose to remain on the dark side”.

At this juncture, Arifin and the rest of the bench walked out.

Anwar continued to speak and shouted into the microphone: “I will again, for the third time, walk into prison but with my head held high.

“I will not be silent and will fight for freedom and justice and will never surrender,” Anwar said.

Lawyers had earlier said Anwar could even be sentenced to just one day in jail or bound over, as provided under the punishment for Section 377B of the Penal Code.

The prosecution led by Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah was appealing for a longer jail sentence, which can go up to 20 years.

Mitigation and sentencing for Anwar, who will turn 68 this August, had begun with Sri Ram telling the Federal Court bench there was no good reason to enhance Anwar’s sentence.

Sri Ram  also said that the court could use its discretion to give the opposition leader a lighter sentence under the law. “He is not an ordinary individual. His contribution when he was with the government to this country is numerous and far reaching.

“Even in the opposition, he has made significant contributions to advancing democratic principles and awakening the conscience of the majority of Malaysians,” Sri Ram said in pleading for a lighter sentence.

Get updates here (latest at the top):

* Anwar’s family leaves the court complex. Their car is surrounded by supporters.

* Anwar being taken away from the court complex. Crowd turned unruly and started to hurl bottles and scuffling with the police. Police gave final warning.

* Outside the court, the Federal Reserve Unit again sound the siren to warn supporters to behave and disperse.

* One of Anwar’s lawyers, Latheefa Koya, says Anwar will be taken to the Sungai Buloh prison.

* Anwar carries his one-year-old grandson and kisses him. The police take Anwar into custody but allow his family to have lunch with him.

* Anwar’s father-in-law wipes away tears while his brother Idrus said: “This kind of court, no need to comment lah. I dare not hear what Anwar is going to say.”

* Selangor Menteri Besar Azmin Ali cries as Anwar hugs him.

* Siren from riot police could be heard as supporters outside shout “reformasi”.

* Anwar looks cheerful, so does his daughter Nurul Izzah.

* Shouts of “reformasi” in court.

* When the judges returned, they upheld Anwar’s sentence of five years’ jail meted out by Court of Appeal.

* Anwar continues to speak from dock as judges leave courtroom, after Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria asked him to stop condemning the judiciary.

* Judges walked out as Anwar attacked judiciary from the dock. “This is a complete fabrication and a political conspiracy to stop my politcal career. A full written statement was available on PM’s office website minutes after you delivered the judgment even before the sentencing.”

* Anwar stands up to speak from the dock. “I’m shocked with this decision,” he said. “I maintain my innocence.”

* Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah said that a five-year sentence was wrong in principle, adding that the sentence imposed on Anwar cannot be lesser that his six-year sentence for his first sodomy charge. – February 10, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 10 February 2015, 5:04 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Judiciary
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


On eve of verdict, Anwar vows to fight on even in prison

by Anisah Shukry

The Malaysian Insider

10 February 2015

Hours before the Federal Court delivers its verdict on his sodomy appeal, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim vowed that the fight for a better Malaysia would continue even if he was behind bars.

The opposition leader told a crowd of about 2,000 who gathered at Padang Timur, Petaling Jaya last night that he was prepared for such an outcome and would accept the prison sentence as a sacrifice that he must pay to save Malaysia.

“The moment we say we surrender or accept defeat, that is the end of the struggle. But we will continue to fight.

“God willing, I will be acquitted. But if I am imprisoned, we will still fight. We will never surrender,” he told the final leg of the “Rakyat Hakim Negara” (The people are the judge) tour series last night.

Anwar said he had refused numerous offers to seek asylum in other countries and chose to face the Federal Court to set an example to the people to stand up to cruelty and oppression.

“If the struggle for change requires a little sacrifice, then I must come forward. If I want the youth to come forward, then I, Anwar, no matter how bitter it is, 67 years old, must be willing to face the country’s leaders and say, ‘yes, I am prepared’.

“No amount of project or money will alter my position because I am committed to save, together with Malaysians, to save this great country Malaysia that we love.”

But the PKR de facto chief was confident that the Federal Court’s verdict tomorrow would be in his favour, saying he was innocent of the charges against him.

“The journalists who interview me keep asking, what would happen if I went to prison? I said to them, who would dare throw me into prison? I am innocent!”

Earlier, PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu in his speech urged Pakatan Rakyat (PR) to remain united regardless of the verdict, so that Malaysians would have a viable alternative to the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN).

“Let us not break apart, Umno would love it if we broke apart. Whether Anwar is in or outside prison, we will continue to stay in Pakatan Rakyat,” said Mohamad.

DAP stalwart Lim Kit Siang, who also took the stage, said the court’s decision was not just a test for Anwar but also the judiciary and the government.

He said should Anwar be jailed, the public must help PR topple the government in the next election so that they could free him.

“Malaysia is on trial. I don’t know what will happen tomorrow, but let us make a commitment. If Anwar goes to prison, from tomorrow onwards, we will gather the strength and mobilise the public and fight for the freedom of Anwar.

“In the 14th general election, we will topple the government and free Anwar. Thirty million Malaysians to free Anwar and bring about change to Malaysia,” said the Gelang Patah MP.

The High Court in 2012 acquitted Anwar of a charge of sodomising his former aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, but the Court of Appeal last year reversed the findings of the trial court and sentenced the Permatang Pauh MP to five years’ jail.

Anwar is on bail pending today’s decision by the Federal court bench chaired by chief justice Tun Arifin Zakaria. – February 10, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 10 February 2015, 7:34 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The 35-Minister Cabinet tomorrow will have second and final opportunity to demonstrate whether they are “We Are All Ismail Sabri” or “We Are All not Ismail Sabri”!

The 35-Minister Cabinet tomorrow will have a second and final opportunity to demonstrate whether they are “We Are all Ismail Sabri” or “We Are All Not Ismail Sabri”!

Cabinet Ministers should stop equivocating and end their hypocritical stances, as beating their breasts in public promising to “claim justice for the Chinese community” for the smear by the Minister for Agriculture and Agro-based Industry, Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri, against the Chinese community but the astounding revelation later by the Defence Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein that neither the MCA nor MIC Ministers at the Cabinet meeting last Wednesday had asked Ismail to retract his racist statement or resign from the Cabinet.  No mention whatsoever about the Gerakan Minister’s role in Cabinet!

Yesterday, after a week of procrastination, the police had finally recorded a statement from Ismail Sabri for his racist call to Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses.

Malaysians are still intrigued and puzzled why the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar insists on wasting police time and resources on an investigation into the Minister for Agriculture and Agro-based Industry when the Cabinet last Wednesday had sanctioned, condoned and defended Ismail’s racist call to Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses.

Is the IGP seriously suggesting that the Police will dare to find the Prime Minister and the entire Cabinet wrong in sanctioning, condoning and defending Ismail’s racist call, and to submit such an investigation report to the Attorney-General for further action?

Who could envisage the Attorney-General charging in court not only Ismail, but also the Prime Minister and the entire Cabinet for  sanctioning, condoning and defending Ismail’s racist call on Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses?

The scenario will be very different if the Cabinet tomorrow declare in unequivocal terms that the 35-Minister Cabinet is not endorsing, condoning or defending  Ismail’s statement with the proclamation “We Are All Not Ismail Sabri”!

Will the Cabinet issue a statement after its meeting tomorrow clarifying that the Cabinet  had not pre-empted and is not interfering with police investigations or the Attorney-General’s prosecution powers under the Constitution in the Ismail Sabri episode?

While I have grave doubts about the rigmarole of the police staging a show of investigations into Ismail Sabri when their hands are fully tied by the Cabinet decision last Wednesday (unless the Cabinet is willing to give a categorical public assurance that police are at liberty to investigate and the Attorney-General to prosecute Ismail Sabri), I am nonetheless firmly of the view that the police should not tarry in immediately launching full-scale investigations into the  purported death threats made against him.

Even an errant Minister who had made the completely unacceptable  racist call on Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses is entitled to protection of life and liberty under the law, and this must not be denied to Ismail!

Yesterday, former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad  softened his initial disapproval of Ismail’s racist call on Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses when he urged the public to carefully evaluate Ismail’s call before passing judgment, saying  “What we read in the newspapers is not enough”.

As a result, I have taken the trouble to search for Ismail’s original FaceBook posting, which has become the most notorious FaceBook posting of any public personality (definitely a Cabinet Minister)  in Malaysia, so notorious and self-incriminating that Ismail has even deleted it!

Re-reading Ismail’s original FaceBook posting suggesting Malay consumers should boycott Chinese businesses, it represents  a grave breach of a Minister’s oath of office to serve all Malaysians regardless of race or religion and  must therefore be condemned in the strongest possible terms – and it is no business of the Cabinet to sanction, condone and defend Ismail’s statement as the Cabinet did last Wednesday.

May be the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak should ask every Cabinet Minister whether he or she is committed to be a Minister for all Malaysians, and not just for one race, religion or region, and to ask those who are not prepared to be a Minister for all Malaysians to immediately submit their resignation letters.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 10 February 2015, 7:21 am and is filed under
Crime
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


After Anwar convicted, Bar Council chief says Malaysians live in ‘strange world’

The Malay Mail Online

February 11, 2015

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 11 — “Glaring anomalies” in the conviction of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim for sodomy is feeding suspicions that his case was one of political persecution rather than criminal prosecution, Malaysian Bar president Christopher Leong said today.

Although acknowledging it was too early to comment on the Federal Court’s decision to jail Anwar for five years on a charge of sodomy yesterday, Leong pointed out that Anwar’s accuser, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, was not prosecuted despite the decision to prosecute the opposition leader for consensual anal sex.

“It is notable that Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was not charged under Section 377C of the Penal Code for forced sodomy or sodomy rape, although there may appear to have been some allegation of coercion made in the proceedings.

“This has also given rise to questions or concerns as to why the complainant, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, who was alleged to have been a participant in the act of sodomy, was not charged for abetment under Sections 377A and 377B, read together with Section 109, of the Penal Code,” Leong said in a statement today.

The Federal Court that yesterday upheld Anwar’s conviction under Section 377A had said that consent was not an ingredient of the offence. Mohd Saiful alleged that he was forced into the act by Anwar in 2008.

Malaysia’s apex court also decided that Mohd Saiful was a “credible witness”, concurring with both subordinate courts that his testimony was reliable.

Leong also noted the rarity of prosecution using the laws that criminalise “carnal intercourse against the order of nature”, which include both oral and anal sex,

“Given this, it is remarkable that Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has been prosecuted and convicted twice for an alleged offence of sexual acts between adults wherein the charge does not contain elements of coercion,” he added.

“These glaring anomalies fuel a perception that Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has been persecuted, and not prosecuted.”

Anwar’s conviction yesterday has invited questions over Malaysia’s judicial independence, with US and Australia leading the criticism of the decision to send Anwar to jail over a charge that he vehemently insists is a political ploy to end his career.

Suspicions were fuelled by the timing of a press statement issued by the Prime Minister’s Office affirming Malaysia’s judicial independence minutes after the Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria announced that Anwar’s appeal was rejected and while the court was still in session.

The timing prompted Anwar to excoriate the court for “selling their souls to the devil” and “bowing to the dictates of the political master”, in the process becoming “partners in crime for the murder of judicial independence and integrity.

The Federal Court yesterday upheld the Court of Appeal’s 2014 ruling that had reversed Anwar’s acquittal of sodomising former aide Mohd Saiful, also sentencing him to five years’ jail.

Anwar will now lose his Permatang Pauh parliamentary seat as the law bars anyone fined over RM2,000 or imprisoned more than one year from serving as a lawmaker.

The decision also leaves the Pakatan Rakyat federal opposition pact without a leader.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 11 February 2015, 1:27 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Judiciary
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia again in the international doghouse over the rule of law, democracy and human rights – no more  terrible start for Malaysia this year as member of UNSC and Chairman of ASEAN

The 5-0 unanimous decision of the Federal Court yesterday rejecting Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s appeal was not only a dishonour to Anwar’s 47-year patriotic service in furtherance of justice, freedom, human dignity and Malaysian nation-building, it was also a disservice to Malaysia’s international reputation as well as Vision 2020 for Malaysia to join the ranks of developed nations in five years’ time.

Thanks to the Federal Court on Anwar’s appeal yesterday, Malaysia is again in the international doghouse over the rule of law, democracy and human rights –no more terrible start this year for Malaysia with the double responsibility as member of the United Nations Security Council and Chairman of ASEAN.

The United States, United Kingdom, Canadian and Australian governments, the European Union (EU)  as well as international press and human right bodies have all raised the red flag about Malaysia’s descent to a “rogue” state.

The White House national security council spokesperson Bernadette Meehan said the United States was “deeply concerned” with Anwar’s conviction and is concerned about the rule of law in Malaysia.

The United Kingdom’s foreign and commonwealth office said that apart from the integrity of the rule of law, Malaysia must embrace moderation and tolerance to succeed.

The High Commission of Canada in Kuala Lumpur notes that Anwar’s conviction has come at a time when “Canada and other countries have conveyed concerns regarding selective prosecutions, including the Sedition Act 1948”.

Even the Singapore Business Times editorialised that “public confidence in the judiciary has slipped to the point that few were shocked with yesterday’s outcome”.

In fact, the unprecdented statement from the Prime Minister’s Office, minutes after the Chief Justice Tun Ariffin Zakaria announced the court’s unanimous rejection  of Anwar’s appeal, but  before the sentencing had been announced, only escalated national and international doubts about whether there is true independence of the judiciary and just rule of law.

This resulted in Anwar’s bitter tirade from the dock at the judges “for selling their souls to the devil” and “bowing to the dictates of the political, master”, in the process becoming “partners in crime for the murder of judicial independence and integrity”.

This led to the unprecedented “walk out” of the Federal Court by all the five Federal Court judges – a dubious “first” in the 58-year  history of Malayan/Malaysian judiciary!

No wonder, the Malaysian Bar president Christopher Leong was moved to comment that the “glaring anomalies” in Anwar’s conviction for sodomy is feeding suspicions that Anwar’s case was one of political persecution rather than criminal prosecution.

For instance, why was Anwar’s accuser, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan,  not prosecuted despite the decision to prosecute the opposition leader for consensual anal sex as the Federal Court had held that consent was not an ingredient of the offence.

Furthermore, the  rarity of prosecution using the laws that criminalise “carnal intercourse against the order of nature”, which include both oral and anal sex, with Anwar prosecuted and convicted twice for an alleged offence of sexual acts between adults wherein the charge does not contain elements of coercion.

With Anwar’s five-year jail sentence, he will be 72 years before he is released and he will be disqualified from holding an elective office for another five years after release, unless the UMNO/Barisan Nasional government is toppled in the 14th General Election.

The heart-rending scenes  of  Datuk Seri Wan Azizah Ismail, Nurul Izzah and her five siblings and Anwar’s grandchildren  in the Federal Court when Anwar’s appeal was dismissed and the sentence passed brought back to me similar heart-breaking memories of 17 years ago in the Federal Court in Kuala Lumpur.

At that time, the victim of selective prosecution was Lim  Guan Eng, then MP for Kota Melaka, who was being punished for championing the rights of a 15 year-old Malay girl in Melaka, and who  lost his final appeal and was immediately sent off to Kajang Prison to serve his 18-month jail sentence.

The whole Lim family was in court but we were utterly helpless like Azizah and her family in the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya yesterday.

The battle for justice, freedom and human dignity – the causes which Anwar had dedicated his whole life – must burn stronger in the hearts and  souls of all Malaysians until such injustices and abuses are  nightmares of the past.

As I said at the “Rakyat Hakim Negara” dinner in Petaling Jaya on the eve of the Federal Court decision on Anwar’s case on Monday night, Pakatan Rakyat is the embodiment of Anwar’s greatest success in the national agenda for change.

Pakatan Rakyat scored unimagined victories first in the 2008 and then in the 2013 General Elections where Anwar was denied his destiny as the Seventh Prime Minister of Malaysia because of an undemocratic electoral system as Pakatan Rakyat secured 52% of the national vote.

The three component parties in Pakatan Rakyat, DAP, PKR and PAS, as well as the countless NGOs and NGIs (Non-government individuals) who had given unstinting support to PR in the past seven years, must all be prepared to walk the last mile to ensure the success of Pakatan Rakyat.

Let me repeat the pledge I made on behalf of DAP on the eve of Anwar’s third incarceration:

”We do not hide the fact that PR is afflicted with our  greatest crisis since our formation seven years ago, even more challenging than the first crisis PR faced in September 2011, which nearly led to the end of PR.

“If PR had broken up over the hudud controversy in September 2011, then the historic result of the 13th General Elections on May 5. 2013  which saw PR winning 52 per cent of electoral vote and reducing the Najib federal administration into a minority government, with PR winning 89 Parliamentary seats and 229 state assembly seats (excluding Sarawak) would not have been achieved.

“If PR now breaks up before the next polls, it is anybody’s guess as to what would be the outcome in the 14th General Elections to be held in three years’ time.

“It is precisely because PR embodies the hopes of generations of Malaysians for change and Malaysia’s rendezvous with greatness, that DAP leaders are prepared to walk the last mile to make Pakatan Rakyat work – and I believe this is also the common sentiments and commitments of  PKR and PAS leaders at the unprecedented promises and challenges presented by the PR experiment.

“PR can only sustain and succeed if we adhere to two fundamental principles which had been the secrets of the PR success in the past six years – strict adherence  to the PR Common Policy Framework which had formed the bedrock common principles of the three component parties in the coalition, and the operational principle of consensus regarding the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council as the highest policy-making body for PR.”

The greatest tribute we can pay to Anwar starting on his third incarceration is to reaffirm these two fundamental principles which held the secrets of the PR success, for it will lead the PR from strength to strength – what our political opponents in UMNO/BN fear most and are trying their utmost to destroy PR integrity and viability by the destruction of these two fundamental PR principles.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 11 February 2015, 4:52 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Judiciary
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pakatan on knife-edge now Anwar in jail

The Malaysian Insider

11 February 2015

The jailing of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim dashes the dreams of millions of Malaysians yearning to oust the country’s authoritarian regime, unless his shell-shocked opposition movement can bridge deep differences without his unifying presence, analysts said.

The opposition, now without a leader, must continue its fight against a government that, despite a worsening reputation at home and abroad, is digging in its heels and looks unlikely to face any serious international repercussions for throwing the opposition leader behind bars.

Since it was formed seven years ago, the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) alliance has had little in common other than a desire to defeat Umno, which has ruled with a tight grip since independence in 1957.

PR’s ability to seize unprecedented swathes of parliament in recent elections allowed it to push aside questions over its cohesiveness, but no longer, said Ibrahim Suffian, Malaysia’s leading political pollster.

“Anwar’s jailing forces them to deal with those problems now. The question is whether they can,” he said.

PR members are at each other’s throats over policy and leadership differences.

The main source of discord is PAS, which is calling for harsh shariah law in a state it governs and pressing for more influence in the largely progressive opposition.

Shariah is strongly opposed by PAS’s partners – DAP dominated by ethnic Chinese, and Anwar’s centrist PKR.

The internal differences nearly caused PR’s collapse last year in a bitter dispute over Selangor, and have prevented formulation of a post-Anwar succession plan.

All eyes are now on whether PAS progressives can wrest control from a conservative leadership in June party polls. Suffian gives them a 50-50 chance.

“It’s all up to PAS. If the moderates can’t take over, Pakatan will probably break up,” he said.

That would be a crushing disappointment to millions of voters.

While living standards have soared under Umno over the decades, disgust runs high over corruption, crony capitalism, rights abuses, and the destruction of once-rich rainforests by government-linked logging and agricultural interests.

Laying bare the national mood, PR won 52% of votes cast in 2013 elections, though Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak clung to power thanks to a skewed parliamentary system.

Anwar, 67, was jailed for five years, and faces a further five-year politics ban after his release, over a sodomy conviction he calls a government conspiracy.

Speculation has risen that outrage of the affair could finally vault PR to power.

But with their undisputed standard-bearer now eliminated, the coalition must survive a leadership battle expected to be bruising, said Bridget Welsh, a Malaysia politics analyst.

“Who leads Pakatan is a question that will be very difficult to resolve, and has already fueled a lot of division even before the Anwar decision,” she said.

Speculation has centred on Anwar’s longtime protege Mohamed Azmin Ali, considered among the only possible consensus candidates.

But he lacks Anwar’s charisma on the stump and it remains to be seen whether he will appeal to other PR members.

“I don’t deny we have some problems at the top leadership, but I think now is the right time for Pakatan to move forward based on a common framework that we have agreed before,” Azmin said yesterday.

“We have to make sure Pakatan remains intact and a formidable force in the coming general elections (due by 2018).”

But unseating Umno remains a formidable task.

Najib’s reputation has plummeted due to issues including his government’s treatment of Anwar and for allowing an explosion of dangerous politically motivated racial and religious rhetoric by Umno-allied forces.

A scathing New York Times report this week detailed the profligate jet-setting lifestyle of Najib’s retinue, and the murky dealings of a sovereign fund launched and chaired by the prime minister in which hundreds of millions of dollars appear unaccounted for.

The United States led international criticism of the Anwar ruling Tuesday.

But Washington – which seeks bolstered alliances in Southeast Asia amid China’s rise – indicated it would go no further, touting its “strong partnership” with Malaysia.

Najib, meanwhile, is secure within Umno, and his government is expected to continue digging in as it loses votes.

It launched a crackdown after the 2013 elections that has seen dozens of people, mainly opposition figures, hit with various questionable charges, and critics say they expect an upcoming parliamentary redelineation exercise to serve Umno’s interests, further bullet-proofing its hold on parliament.

“At the end of the day, they don’t give a damn what the rest of the world has to say as long as they keep getting their money and hold on to power,” said John Malott, a former US ambassador to Malaysia.

“They will be tough to push out even if PR resolves all of its troubles.” – AFP, February 11, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 11 February 2015, 7:39 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Second pre-Cabinet Open Letter – prove Cabinet  is not “half-past six” with “deadwood” Ministers by ensuring that Ismail Sabri retract and apologise for his racist call to Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses or cease to be a member of the Cabinet

To the Prime Minister and the Cabinet,

11th  February 2015

This is my second pre-Cabinet  Open Letter in my 49 years in politics for Malaysia is in critical times and the Cabinet must show leadership and example, which it had failed to provide.

Last week, I had listed several major failures of the Cabinet in the first month of the new year 2015, viz:

•	Failure to conduct major  and proper public inquiry such as a Royal Commission of Inquiry  into the very botched-up disaster management, whether response, relief or reconstruction of the 2014 Floods, the worst floods catastrophe in living memory in Malaysia, resulting in 25 dead, a million flood victims, quarter of a million evacuees in flood relief centres and billions of ringgit of losses.

•	Moral and Political Cowardice in failing to address the scandal of the Home Minister Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi’s gross breach of Ministerial propriety, code of conduct and even violation of Official Secrets Act when he wrote the infamous letter to the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) vouching for the character and integrity of an alleged gambling kingpin Paul Phua standing trial in Las Vegas, Nevada for illegal gambling, contradicting the earlier Malaysian police account to FBI – without the consent or knowledge of the Inspector-General of Police, the Foreign Ministry, the Cabinet and the Prime Minister.

•	Failure  to repudiate and reprimand the Urban Well-being, Housing and Local Government Minister, Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan for his irresponsible and reckless statement that the restoration of local government elections could worsen racial polarisation as  no other Local Government Minister had ever made such a statement in the past 50 years since the suspension of local government elections on March 1965 on the ground of threat from Indonesian Confrontation.

•	Failure to stop the crackdowns against human rights, whether against  university students and academicians, like the refusal to renew the contract of the University of Malaya deputy vice chancellor Professor Dr. Mohd Hamdi Abdul Shukor because of his refusal to support UMNO, the punitive action against the UM8 student leaders in the University of Malaya for organising a political talk or against freedom of expression, like police raid of the office of Malaysiakini’s cartoonist Zulkiflee Anwar Hague, better known as Zunar, in police investigations under the Sedition Act.

The Cabinet has chalked up another two major failures since the Cabinet meeting last Wednesday, viz:

•	Cabinet Ministers sanctioning, condoning and defending Agriculture and Agro-based Industry Minister, Datuk Seri Ismail’s racist call to Malay consumers to boycott Chinese business with the 35 Ministers virtually uniting and endorsing behind Ismail with “We Are All Ismail Sabri” declaration when it should be a “We Are All Not Ismail Sabri” statement.

•	The statement from the Prime Minister’s Office yesterday, in less than half an  hour of the Federal Court decision to dismiss Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s appeal and even before the sentencing, claiming that “exhaustive and comprehensive due process…is now complete” when it had not been completed, raising grave questions about whether the Executive had been privy to the decisions of the Federal Court, and the important ensuing questions about whether there is truly independent judiciary and just rule of law in Malaysia.

These half-dozen major issues should be revisited by the Cabinet, and if not all today, it should at least act on one issue and prove that  the Cabinet is not “half-past six” with “deadwood” Ministers by ensuring that Ismail Sabri retract and apologise for his racist call to Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses or cease to be a member of the Cabinet.

Former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad  has urged the public to carefully evaluate Ismail’s call before passing judgment, saying  “What we read in the newspapers is not enough”.

As a result, I have taken the trouble to search for Ismail’s original FaceBook posting, which has become the most notorious FaceBook posting of any public personality in Malaysia, so notorious and self-incriminating that Ismail has even deleted it!

Re-reading Ismail’s original FaceBook posting suggesting Malay consumers should boycott Chinese businesses, it represents  a grave breach of a Minister’s oath of office to serve all Malaysians regardless of race or religion and  must therefore be condemned in the strongest possible terms – and it is no business of the Cabinet to sanction, condone and defend Ismail’s statement as the Cabinet did last Wednesday.

I suggest that all the 35 Ministers today should re-read Ismail Sabri’s original FaceBook posting, and the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak should ask every Cabinet Minister whether he or she is committed to be a Minister for all Malaysians, and not just for one race, religion or region, and to ask those who are not prepared to be a Minister for all Malaysians to immediately submit their resignation letters.

Ismail had defended his racist call to Malay consumers to Chinese businesses, claiming that his statement had been taken “out of context”.

I do not think there is another Cabinet in Malaysian history whose Ministers have made more excuses about their statements taken “out of context” to escape responsibility and liability for their reckless and insupportable statements and assertions.

Defence Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein used the excuse of taken “out of context” to justify his outrageous and completely unacceptable statement that Ismails’ racist call was “not as bad as ISIS atrocities”.

Home Minister, Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi sought frequent refuge under the excuse of being “taken out of context”, as in September last year when claimed his statement on non-Malays increasingly arrogant for daring to insult the Bumiputera majority was “taken out of context”; and in October 2013, when he said his “police shoot first, ask questions later” remark was taken out of context.

The Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister are not strangers to this  ruse and excuse of having been “taken out of context”, and Najib’s most infamous example was his praise for ISIS at an UMNO dinner  in July last year.

Is it asking too much for Malaysians to expect the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister and the entire cohort of 35 Cabinet Ministers to be more careful and even circumspect in their public pronouncements so that they are not so prone to be “taken out of context”?

In any event, Ismail was not taken out of context when he made the racist call to Malay consumers to boycott businesses, and the Cabinet today must not shirk its duty to take a stand on behalf of all Malaysians.

May be, what I said at a dinner on Monday night, the  eve of Anwar’s Federal Court decision, is worth consideration by the Cabinet – my suggestion that “old guards” withdraw from the frontlines to allow the post-Merdeka generation to take over the reins of leadership in all spheres of national life.

The present average age of the Malaysian Cabinet is 58.5 years with over half the Cabinet more than 60 years old – ranging from Idris Jusoh and Douglas Uggah Embas’ 60 years to Muhyiddin Yassin’s 68 years – with Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak at 62.

Some 90 per cent of Malaysia’s 30  million people are born after Merdeka on August 31, 1957. The age make-up of Malaysia’s population are: 0-14 years  28.8%; 15 -24 years 16.9%; 25 0 54 years 41.2%; 55 – 64 years 7.6%; 65 years and over – 5.5%/

Isn’t it time for a more youthful population to take over the leadership levels in all spheres of Malaysia’s national life including the Cabinet?

If we have a Cabinet which, with certain exceptions, comprise Ministers who are post-Merdeka born, we will immediately do away with half the Cabinet – people whom Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad had condemned as “half-past six” and Tun Daim Zainuddin dismissed  as “deadwood”.

With a more youthful Cabinet will be less prone to  disasters like the Home Minister’s infamous letter to the FBI to vouch for the character and integrity of a gambling kingpin and the Agriculture and Agro-based Industry Minister making racist calls on Malay consumers to boycott Chinese businesses.

Let us look at Tunku Abdul Rahman’s Merdeka Cabinet in 1957, which had an average age of  43.3 years – with Prime Minister Tunku 54 and Finance Minister H.S.Lee 57 the oldest members while the youngest were Education Minister Khir Johari 34 and Deputy Prime Minister Abdul Razak Hussein 35.

I end hoping that the Cabinet will do its duty to the nation and all Malaysians today.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 11 February 2015, 9:01 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Something? No, some things are rotten in Malaysia

COMMENTARY BY THE MALAYSIAN INSIDER

11 February 2015

The inimitable Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad didn’t quite hit the nail on the head when he paraphrased Shakespeare to say something is rotten in Malaysia.

One, it is not about people not being paid for so-called work done. Or their permits pulled. Or their proposals copied. Or local white knights having their bids to take over companies rejected without even a look.

Two. It isn’t something. It is a lot of things.

here do we begin?

Something is rotten because after what happened in 1988, there are still red flags about our judiciary.

Despite briefings to diplomats yesterday, Western nations were as quick as the Prime Minister’s Department in releasing their view of the administration of justice in the Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim sodomy verdict.

The Prime Minister’s Department insists the judiciary is independent but the foreign offices of the Western countries are still taking a jaundiced view of that institution.

Something is rotten because the country’s racial and religious equilibrium has been damaged. What was Dr Mahathir’s vision of Bangsa Malaysia and Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s 1Malaysia has been cast aside for political expediency.

Something is rotten because after years and money poured down the system, there are still complaints that only one race dominates the business scene. Will a boycott help at a time when the country needs everyone to pitch in?

Do politicians still have to bring in race to make a point about monopolies and such, if there is a point to be made at all? If there is a point to be made, it is simple. Explain the need for approved permits for almost everything imported.

Something is rotten when Malaysia still depends on commodities and oil for its revenue, years after industrialisation has replaced the agrarian and mining economy. Are we a nation that makes anything apart from shuffling paper?

Yet, when reading Dr Mahathir’s blog entry posted yesterday, it appears that he is still concerned about special interests individuals and groups, not the country at large.

Malaysia is more than these individuals, sir.

And the elephant in the room there is about money. Who gets the money, who makes the money from contracts, concessions and corporate manoeuvres? Malaysia is more than that, sir.

And Malaysians are still not used to the stench, sir, although some have run away from the stink.

The rest of Malaysia will deal with it, even they are demonised or imprisoned for their efforts to allow everyone to breathe the sweet air of liberty. – February 11, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 11 February 2015, 1:13 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Judiciary
,
Mahathir
,
Malaysian Dream
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Where is Malaysia heading after the Anwar verdict?

by Sheridan Mahavera

The Malaysian Insider

11 February 2015

As Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim begins his second jail term, Malaysians need to take a hard look at where the nation is heading, say analysts, as his controversial trial challenges the integrity of its political and justice systems.

The verdict would also tarnish Malaysia’s image abroad, said political scientist Professor James Chin of the University of Tasmania, especially since the nation is trying to convince the world that it is a respectable member of the influential United Nations Security Council and as chair of the Asean community.

But the most vital repercussions of the verdict are at home, among the public who are already deeply polarised and irreconcilable after the 13th general election.

Analysts said there will probably not be a repeat of the chaos that followed Anwar’s first sodomy trial in 1998, but yesterday’s verdict is likely to worsen the political divide in society and make a big impact in the next general election.

Trust deficit

Anwar was sentenced to five years in prison after the Federal Court upheld the guilty verdict of sodomising his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan.

The verdict immediately drew widespread condemnation from international human rights groups, such as Human Rights Watch (HRW), the International Commission of Jurists and even the UN’s Human Rights Office.

They said it was a politically motivated trial using a law, Section 377 of the Penal Code, deemed archaic.

HRW said Section 377 had only been used seven times since 1938.

Anwar is so far the only person to have been tried and convicted twice, under the law, in recent memory.

Chin said Putrajaya realised the verdict would be bad for the image of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak overseas.

“It confirms that the ruling government is using the courts for political prosecution. The government knows that this is bad international PR for Najib but they are willing to live with this.

“To them, getting rid of Anwar is more important,” said Chin, the director of UTAS’s Asia Institute.

Minutes after the court delivered its verdict, Putrajaya said the due process shown throughout the seven-year period in which the case has gone on proved that the judiciary was independent.

But that Anwar happens to be the face of a political coalition that threatens the reign of Najib’s Barisan Nasional (BN) makes it hard for people to objectively see whether the justice system is really working.

In 1999, Anwar was charged with the same offence, in a trial filled with claims of tainted evidence. He was subsequently acquitted of the charge in 2004.

This public distrust was revealed in a Merdeka Center poll in October last year while Anwar’s case was being heard at the Court of Appeal.

In the survey, 48% of respondents had little to no confidence in the judiciary, compared with 38% who said they were confident.

The difference in opinion, said Merdeka Center executive director Ibrahim Suffian, reflected the political divide that emerged after the 13th general election.

The PR won 52% of the popular vote but was not able to form the government, thus creating a sense that the BN cannot be trusted to ever be fair when it comes to dealing with the opposition.

“That wall between those who trust the government and those who don’t just became higher by a few feet today,” said Ibrahim.

Since the distrust in the judiciary also translates into distrust towards the Najib administration, it would be harder for the BN to win back the support it lost in the last general election, he said.

“The verdict could create more sympathy towards Anwar and this could be harnessed into more support for the opposition. People will move on as time goes by but these feelings can be sparked again during the next general election,” he added.

Beyond Anwar

But beyond political personalities and elections, the verdict, said Herizal Hazri of the Asia Foundation, should force people to think about the direction of the country and the health of its institutions.

Herizal said that the struggle must go on, not because it involved Anwar.

“If you believe the verdict is fair, then you should work to ensure that everyone gets thorough due process in court like Anwar did.

“If you do not believe that it fair, then you should work to make the system better,” said Herizal, who is the foundation’s Malaysia representative.

Instead of just believing in political conspiracies, Herizal said Malaysians must look at the systemic problem, which in this case could be the charge of sodomy itself.

Much of the criticism towards Anwar’s trial from human rights groups was that this offence still exists in Malaysia, where adults of the same gender can go to jail for consensual sexual intercourse.

“The ICJ recalls that sodomy cannot be considered a recognisable criminal offence under international human rights laws and standards,” said the International Commission of Jurists in its response to the verdict.

Herizal said he was not campaigning for keeping or scrapping sodomy as an offence but that Malaysians should start thinking about the issue.

“It’s like electoral reform. Should we campaign for it only because we want certain parties to win or are we campaigning so that we will have a better system to choose our government?”

Although it is more sensational to think of whether Anwar’s verdict will have a big political pay-off for opposition coalition Pakatan Rakyat, Herizal said the more important issue should be how to make the country’s institutions better.

If Malaysians achieve that, it would ensure that anyone, whether he is a political icon or not, would get a fair chance in court. – February 11, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 11 February 2015, 2:01 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


An open letter to Ismail Sabri

By Syerleena Abdul Rashid

Malaysiakini

Feb 10, 2015

With all due respect, I am not here to tell you how to do your job nor am I here to criticise you – I am a firm believer that everyone is entitled to their own opinions but one must be made aware of the consequences it may bring. There is an old Arab proverb which states “Arrogance diminishes wisdom”, and as a leader much like yourself, you must be made fully accountable for the things you said and the people whom you may hurt in the process.

But politics aside, I write this not as a political opponent – not today, but only as a mere Malaysian who has seen how demoralised and worn out most Malaysians have become because of the hatred, fear and lies that seem to perpetuate our country.

It fills me with great sadness that our beloved country is slowly but surely heading down a path our founding fathers fought hard against. When they created the federation, they had a vision where Malaysians could live together in harmony and prosper together.

And here we are in 2015, just five years shy from Wawasan 2020. Can we safely say that we can truly become a developed nation by then? Are we comfortable with stripping away our ethnicity in order to achieve the glorious concept of a Bangsa Malaysia? Are we at ease with each other’s religious differences and are we able to prevent any inkling of religious supremacy?

A majority of Malaysians, especially the Malay/bumiputeras, still live in economic disparity. We see the system perpetually abused the cronys, the elite and the opportunists. Our founding fathers created a system that ensured help was given to those who needed it the most it but somehow, somewhere along the way, the system became corrupted. Now those who really are in need of such assistance have been neglected, ignored and rendered insignificant.

Our economy is not where it was two decades ago. Malaysia was once known as the one of the Rising Tigers of Asia but due to severe mismanagement and abuse, we lost the chance to pursuit the same riches Singapore, Hong Kong and South Korea now boasts.

The unemployment rate of our country now stands at 2.07 percent, a figure that has remained unchanged since 2012 – or so we have been told but surely, for a country with vast resources and opportunities, shouldn’t these figures decrease?

With many economists predicting 2015 will be a fiscally challenging year for Malaysians, we are faced with the colossal feat of preparing for the worst and I dare use the word “worst” because we are confronted with a rather bleak future. The implementation of the goods and services tax (GST) will no doubt trigger inflation and this alone will lead to an adverse domino effect.

Trapped in a low-income cycle

You see, Malaysians are trapped in a low-income cycle; according to the Employees Provident Fund (EPF), approximately 62 percent of monthly contributors earn less than RM2,000 and 96 percent below RM6,000. We are very far from achieving the high income nation our prime minister envisions.

Most of us can’t afford to buy houses and are neck deep in car loans and student loans. We are made to spend more, pay more while our salaries are inexplicably low.

The structure that exists in this country only seemingly benefits those who are already well off and those who are in the good books of the elite few. Our national debt now stands beyond 55 percent and the household debt has increased to more than 87 percent which happens to be one of the highest in the world.

We still want to know the relevance of 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) and what has happened to the RM42 billion that rightfully belongs to all of us and not just to the elite.

Arrogance is a trait no leader should embody. As a matter of fact, arrogance is detested in Islam.  In the Qur’an, verse 17:37 states: “And walk not on the earth with conceit and arrogance. Verily, you can neither rend nor penetrate the earth, nor can you attain a stature like the mountains in height.”

Leadership stresses upon the importance of guidance and humility – not someone who constantly berates and abases the people he or she is meant to serve; compassion is about selflessness and empathy – authentic values all leaders must have. A leader is often thought to be someone mentally and emotionally strong, kind, and thoughtful and has a sense of articulate elegance when they communicate.

The true face of racism and bigotry does not bear the image of DAP, PKR, PAS or anyone who dare speak up against tyranny but rather, is only the manifestation of hard right wing insecurities – founded on the unbearable fear of losing every ounce of power and influence, and your remarks, my esteemed minister, simply reflects the indoctrinated prejudices that your group believes in.

Our problems are not the Chinese businesses or the Chinese middlemen but only the system that has failed this nation. Leaders must never demonise fellow citizens by pitting us against one another nor should they ever attempt to stoke the fire of discontent and exploit the hopelessness some marginalised communities might have. Most of us felt your comments, which targeted some Malaysians of Chinese ethnicity were uncalled for and rude.

A minister should always refrain from saying hurtful things and must always be made to remember that with great power comes a great responsibility and your responsibility is to lead by example, so please stop the name calling, stop the slander and start figuring a way out of this quagmire.

SYERLEENA ABDUL RASHID currently serves as Bukit Bendera Dapsy secretary, Bukit Bendera DAP Wanita political education director and is an MPPP councillor.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 12 February 2015, 5:00 am and is filed under
Malaysian Dream
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Call for an eight-year commitment by three PR component parties to maintain the two principles which had been the recipe for PR success in its first  six years – PR common policy framework and the operational principle of consensus

In the past two days, the predominant feeling of ordinary Malaysians of reason, common sense and good will is one of pain and shame at the injustice and outrage of the spectacle of a nationalist and  patriot like Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who had devoted 47 years of his life to the struggle for freedom, justice, human dignity and national unity,  should be  sentenced to a five-year jail term, returning to prison for a third incarceration in his life.

Ask Malaysians who are the top political leaders, past and present, they think should be languishing in jail for five years, many different names would be mentioned, but Anwar’s name will not be among them.

Anwar is now 67 years old. After the five-year jail sentence, he will be disqualified from standing for any elective office for another five years, knocking him out of the electoral arena till he is 77 years old.

This is cruel, heartless, repressive and oppressive, and only People’s Power can cut short Anwar’s present travail if the UMNO/BN federal government can be toppled in the 14th General Elections in three years’ time.

Malaysians nationwide should transform their pain and sorrow into strength and energy to knock out the Umno/BN Federal Government in the 14th General Elections, as this seems to be the only way to save Anwar from the decade of darkness of his third incarceration and disenfranchisement of his civil rights to vote and to stand for elections.

I call on all Malaysians throughout the country to demonstrate their support, sympathy and solidarity (the 3Ss) with Anwar and to leave no stone unturned to secure his early release through a change of Federal Government in Putrajaya in the 14GE in three years’ time.

The greatest tribute we can give to Anwar’s struggle and sacrifices in his 47 years of upholding justice, freedom,  human dignity and  national unity is for Pakatan Rakyat to be  more united  and successful than in the past.

We cannot and should not  hide the fact that PR is afflicted with our  greatest crisis since our formation seven years ago, even more challenging than the first crisis PR faced in September 2011, which nearly led to the end of PR.

PR can only sustain and succeed if we adhere to the  two fundamental principles which had been the secrets of the PR success in its first  six years – strict adherence  to the PR Common Policy Framework which had formed the bedrock common principles of the three component parties in the coalition, and the operational principle of consensus regarding the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council as the highest policy-making body for PR.

If we stay loyal to  these two fundamental principles, PR will be able to grow from strength to strength to fulfill the hopes of generations of Malaysians for change and Malaysia’s rendezvous with greatness.

For this reason, I propose a eight-year commitment by the three PR component parties to continue to uphold these two fundamental principles of PR common policy framework and the operational consensus mechanism, and to put aside whatever differences we have for the next eight years, as we had done in the first six  years.

The eight years is derived from three years to the 14GE from now  and the five years after the 14GE, as PR will be making a commitment to Malaysians as to the policies we are committed to implement if PR achieve power in Putrajaya after the 14GE.

If the PR component parties of DAP, PKR and PAS  are prepared to make this eight-year commitment to forge a common struggle, and to put aside all issues not in consonance with the PR Common Policy Framework and the consensus principle,  we would have found the formula to ensure that Pakatan Rakyat is poised for a serious bid for Putrajaya to fulfil the hopes and aspirations of Malaysians for change for the better for the people and nation.

(Media Conference Statement (2) when visiting Pasar Pagi Simpang Kuala in Kota Darul Aman, Alor Setar together with the local State Assemblyman, Teoh Boon Kok, the Kedah DAP State Chairman and SA for Derga, Tan Kok Yew, and Vice Chairman of DAP Malaysia Dream Committee, Dr. Tajuddin Shafee)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 12 February 2015, 3:40 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Dr. M – you started all the rot in Hamlet in your 22 years as Prime Minister

Former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad has declared that I am not a communist but he called me an “authoritarian”.

I do not know whether I should thank Mahathir for clearing me of the “communist” charge which is  still hurled against me by UMNO cybertroopers together with other lies and falsehoods like being the cause of May 13 race riots in 1969.

Mahathir wants probably to clear his name for he would look extremely foolish to have allowed a “communist” to operate freely in Parliament, having been Prime Minister for 22 years and Home Minister for nearly 15 years.

If I had been a “communist”, then Mahathir would be a failure as a Prime Minister and Home Minister not to know it.

I am intrigued by his accusation that I am an “authoritarian” and wants my son, Guan Eng, to replace me.

I would not accuse Mahathir of senility although he is capable of pretending to be senile and even pretend to suffer from amnesia, which was quite a show that he staged during his appearance at the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Lingam Videotapes, when he suffered from so many lapses of amnesia which had not been repeated.

Mahathir said I want Guan Eng to replace me.

Was he referring to Guan Eng following my footsteps of being detained by him under the Internal Security Act (ISA), and subsequently “graduating” to be imprisoned in the Kajang Prison for 18 months and disqualified as MP and disenfranchisement of civil liberties like the right to vote and stand for elective office  for five years when he championed the rights of a 15 year-old girl in Malacca?

Or was Mahathir referring to Guan Eng becoming Penang Chief Minister? May I remind  Mahathir that I was never Penang Chief Minister?

Or was he referring to Guan Eng as DAP Secretary-General? Can I remind Mahathir that I ceased to be DAP Secretary-General in 1969 and Guan Eng became DAP Secretary-General in 2004.

Furthermore, Mahathir should be reminded he was responsible for the dragnet of mass arrests of ISA detention without trial,  the infamous Operation Lalang, in October 1987; that he single-handed destroyed the independence, impartiality and professionalism not only of the judiciary, but also of other important national institutions like the police, the Elections Commission, the anti-corruption agency, and the civil service?

Need Mahathir to be reminded that it was under his premiership, that Malaysia began to suffer from rampant corruption in high political places and massive abuses of power by those in authority?

After the Federal Court’s shocking dismissal of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s appeal and sent him back to prison for the third time on Tuesday, February 10, Mahathir blogged, quoting Hamlet, declaring  that something is rotten in Malaysia.

Yes, something is rotten in Malaysia – as evidenced by a patriot like Anwar Ibrahim being sent to jail for the third time despite devoting 47 years of his life fighting  for justice, freedom, human dignity and national unity.

If Malaysians are asked as to who are the top political leaders, past and present, who should be languishing in jail for five years, different names would be mentioned but Anwar Ibrahim would not be among them.

This shows the rot in Malaysia, but it is a rot which was started during Mahathir’s 22-year premiership, and by Mahathir himself!

Today, Mahathir is obsessed with the toppling of Najib as Prime Minister, but this is not because he wanted to stop the rot in Malaysia, to restore the independence and integrity of the judiciary and a just rule of law; to end the subversion of the independence and professionalism of national institutions whether the civil service, the police, the elections commission or anti-corruption agency; eradicate rampant corruption; restore  ethics and honesty in public life; re-establish a good education system or restore Malaysia’s economic competitiveness.

Mahathir wants Najib out as the Prime Minister for Malaysia, not to stop the rot which was started by him during his premiership, but for an agenda personal to himself.

This is the rot of Hamlet in Malaysia!

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 12 February 2015, 12:57 pm and is filed under
Mahathir
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia in International Doghouse After Sodomy Verdict

By Martin Jalleh

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 12 February 2015, 7:00 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Court
,
International
,
Martin Jalleh
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


PMO has no business declaring judiciary as independent, say lawyers

by V. Anbalagan

The Malaysian Insider

12 February 2015

No amount of affirmation by Putrajaya will boost the judiciary’s image as an  independent body, lawyers said, pointing out that such confidence in the institution of justice must come from the public and litigants.

The lawyers, who were commenting on the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) swift statement in response to opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s guilty verdict on Tuesday, said it was unusual and unnecessary.

More so when the statement tried to defend the judiciary by saying that it is independent and that the judges “had reached their verdict only after considering the evidence in a balanced and objective manner.”

Lawyer Amer Hamzah Arshad said there was no necessity for the PMO to do so although Anwar’s appeal is considered a high profile case that had attracted international attention.

“No such statement was issued when the Federal Court in a 4-3 ruling rejected the Catholic Church’s leave application to appeal against the right to use the word Allah in a weekly newspaper,” Amer said.

Similary, he said there was no response from Putrajaya when the Federal Court last month allowed the government’s appeal and sentenced to death two former police commandos for the murder of Mongolian model Altantuya Shaariibuu.

Amer said the only way the judiciary could assert it is an independent arbiter was in the conduct of a trial or appeal and finally reflected well in its grounds of judgment.

He said that since the bench took eight days to hear the appeal and slightly more than two month to deliver its verdict, all the five judges should have written separate judgments.

“There is nothing wrong with coming to a unanimous ruling but the public wanted to know the reasoning of the judges who heard the appeal,” he said.

Another lawyer, R.Kengatharan said he too was perplexed why the need for the government to roll out a statement as soon as the opposition leader’s conviction was affirmed by the apex court.

“When MAS aircrafts (MH370) went missing and another (MH17) was shot down, the official response came days later,” he said.

Kengatharan said every citizen would assume that the judiciary was independent but if they wanted to draw another conclusion, that was public perception.

He also questioned whether the statement was made after consulting Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and whether he endorsed it.

Kengatharan said that statement could amount to contempt of court because it was made before the judicial process to decide the measure of punishment for Anwar was concluded.

Lawyer S.N.Nair said the statement was unwarranted as no foreign countries had condemned that verdict or the judiciary.

“Why was there a knee jerk reaction for this case,” he asked.

He said even if the judgment was criticised, it was for the judiciary to defend itself without fear and favour.

“But ultimately, it is the public and litigants who should endorse whether the Malaysian judiciary is credible and free to decide according to law,” he said.

The PMO’s swift response to Anwar’s guilty verdict has raised eyebrows, after it was released just minutes after the Federal Court announced its decision.

Anwar and several Pakatan Rakyat leaders at the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya had also raised this matter before the five-member bench on Tuesday.

In response to this, PMO said that it had prepared statements in advance for either outcome: conviction or acquittal, adding that Putrajaya had no prior knowledge of the Federal Court’s decision to convict the opposition leader.

On Tuesday, a five-man Federal Court bench dismissed Anwar’s appeal against conviction for having carnal intercourse with his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan.

The bench led by Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria, later affirmed the five-year jail term imposed by the Court of Appeal last year. – February 12, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 12 February 2015, 7:13 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Judiciary
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


QC’s verdict: Apex court erred in jailing Anwar

By Hafiz Yatim

Malaysiakini

Feb 11, 2015

With controversy still simmering over yesterday’s Federal Court verdict throwing Anwar Ibrahim into jail, an independent observer has described the judgement as ‘superficial, failing to adequately deal with key issues brought up by the defence team’.

Inter-Parliamentary Union observer and Queen’s Counsel Mark Trowell pointed out that Chief Justice Arifin Zakaria’s findings on the DNA material effectively ignored the testimony of Professor Dr David Wells and Dr Brian McDonald both who raised serious doubts as to the integrity of victim Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan’s DNA samples.

“It was not sufficient to brush their opinions aside by saying neither (Wells or McDonald) had recently carried out DNA extraction. That is a job to be performed by a laboratory technician. They are both senior scientists sufficiently skilled and experienced in giving an opinion about the DNA extraction process performed by the government chemists and the adequacy of their testing.

“They weren’t disadvantaged by not actually performing the extraction themselves (which is a criticism made by the CJ) because they heard the testimony of the government chemists and were able to give their free expert opinion on it. That is what experts do,” he said.

 Trowell – who is also an observer for Lawasia and the Australian Law Council – said federal court’s finding that the chain of custody for the samples was not broken by the conduct of the investigation officer DSP Jude Blacious Pereira was inconsistent with the facts and the law.

Turned air-conditioner on

 He told Malaysiakini that a court that properly and reasonably considered the evidence would have excluded the DNA samples because of Pereira’s’s conduct which was ‘sloppy and unprofessional’.

“The trial (High Court) judge was right to reject the DNA evidence,” said Trowell, who had attended Anwar’s Sodomy II trial from the beginning.

 McDonald had questioned the ‘pristine condition’ of the samples taken from Saiful’s anus – done approximately 56 hours after the sodomy incident – which were then kept for close to two days by Pereira before being handed over to the Chemistry Deprtment.

While Hospital Kuala Lumpur doctors who examined Saiful had asked the policeman to keep the samples in a freezer, he had merely kept them in his steel drawer besides switching on the air-conditioner in his office.

 Trowell, author of the book ‘Sodomy II: The Trial of Anwar Ibrahim’, said without the DNA evidence, there was no corroboration or independent evidence to support Saiful’s testimony.

“As the trial judge correctly concluded that (the DNA samples) was something that could not be relied upon while Pereira’s account was suspect and unreliable.

“The CJ also passed over so many inconsistencies which tainted Saiful’s account making it something that could not be accepted,” he added.

‘Fanciful suggestion’

 Justice Arifin – in his judgment yesterday – had turned down the notion of Saiful’s DNA samples being compromised, saying Pereira had adhered to the Inspector-General’s Standing Orders (IGSO) that required him to put proper markings and labels on the exhibits.

He added the bench, on seeing the sealed plastic bag with Saiful’s  DNA samples placed in them, noted that it had been snipped open by Pereira and that he had kept the snipped portion of the plastic bag to show transparency in his actions.

“Furthermore, Dr Seah Lay Hong in her testimony confirmed that she did not detect any tampering of the seals of the exhibits marked B to B10.

 “We, therefore, find that there was no break in the chain of custody of those exhibits,” he emphasised.

“As such, we agree, with the Court of Appeal that the integrity of the samples was not compromised.

 “In view of our finding that there was no break in the chain of custody for the evidence, the fanciful suggestion of Anwar’s counsel that the DNA evidence had been planted is therefore unsustainable,” Justice Arifin ruled.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 12 February 2015, 4:45 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Judiciary
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Thirteen Questions for Najib to answer to salvage the  credibility, independence and professionalism of Malaysian judiciary

The credibility, independence and professionalism of the Malaysian judiciary was gravely sullied by the extraordinary Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) statement on Feb. 10 defending the Federal Court decision on the Anwar Ibrahim case even before the completion of the Federal Court judicial process.

Yesterday, the government came out in defence of the PMO’s lightning quick response to the Anwar Ibrahim judgment by the Federal Court, saying it is normal procedure to prepare statements in advance.

A government spokesperson, in an email communique, to Malaysiakini said:

“It’s clear that the politicians, lawyers, communications teams and journalists involved with this case prepared text for guilty and not guilty verdicts.

“Similarly, the government prepared a statement in advance for either outcome. This is entirely standard professional practice, especially in a case that involves public interest.

“To suggest otherwise is intentionally misleading.”

Who is the Najib government bluffing?

Here are 13 Questions for Najib to answer to salvage the  credibility, independence and professionalism of Malaysian judiciary which had been gravely sullied by  the extraordinary PMO statement on Feb 10 defending the Federal Court decision on Anwar case even before the completion of the judicial process.

1.	Can the government explain how the PMO could issue a statement defending the Federal Court decision to dismiss Anwar Ibrahim’s appeal within minutes of the Chief Justice, Tun Arifin Zacharia’s announcement and even before the  sentencing, claiming that “exhaustive and comprehensive due process…is now complete” when in fact it had not been completed?

2.	Secondly, the PMO  has probably the world’s greatest genius in its employ, who is also the fastest speed reader in the world – as the Chief Justice had taken two hours  to read out his judgment but the PMO “genius” took only a few minutes to digest the complicated technical and legal jargon and arguments in the judgment to  come out with a statement in  response.

3.	 The PMO Statement said: “In this case, exhaustive and comprehensive due process has been followed over many years. That process is now complete, and we call on all parties involved to respect the legal process and judgment.”  The PMO office statement is in fact the best proof of the disrespect and  blatant tampering with the due legal and judicial process. Why did the Prime Minister countenance it?

4.	Does the PMO really expect the people to believe that it had prepared a statement in advance for either outcome, i.e. a prepared text for guilty and not guilty verdicts.  Is the PMO prepared to immediately release the “not guilty” draft statement to prove that it really existed?

5.	How many times have the PMO prepared a statement in advance for either outcome of guilty or not guilty in criminal cases, and to stat the number of such statements issued by the PMO under the premiership of  (a) Najib Razak; (b) Tun Abdullah Badawi and (c) Tun Mahathir Mohamad.

6.	Why did the PMO prepare and release a statement in the Anwar Ibrahim case when the government claimed that the case was brought by a private individual and had nothing with the government? How many such “private individual” cases had there been in the past where the government had issued a statement at the conclusion of the case, and to cite the cases and the PMO statements involved?

7.	The PMO statement said: “The judges will have reached their verdict only after considering all the evidence in a balanced and objective manner.” How can the PMO make such a judgmental statement without reading or studying the Federal Court verdict – which took the Chief Justice two hours to read out but the PMO statement was issued within minutes, even before the completion of the judicial process with the passing of the sentence?

8.	The PMO statement further stated: “Malaysia has an independent judiciary, and there have been many rulings against senior government figures.”  Name the “senior government figures” comparable in station to the Parliamentary Opposition Leader, like the Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and Cabinet Ministers who had been found guilty and jailed under the law in the past 34 years under three Prime Ministers?

9.	The PMO statement said: “The police report against Anwar Ibrahim was brought by a private individual – Anwar’s employee and personal assistant – not by the government. As the victim of a serious sexual assault, he had every right to have his case heard in court.”  Was this allegation in the PMO statement accusing Anwar of brutal rape which does not jive with the case brought by the prosecution against Anwar – consensual sex – made with the approval of the prosecution team headed by Datuk Shafee Abdullah or Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail?  Why is the PMO upping the attack against Anwar by claiming that Anwar was guilty of brutal rape against Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azan when Anwar was charged under a section of the law that deals with consensual sodomy.

10.	Is the PMO statement pre-empting criticisms against Anwar’s conviction for sodomy because of the many “glaring anomalies” which feed suspicions that Anwar’s case was one of political persecution rather than criminal prosecution, as for instance, why Saiful was not prosecuted similarly for consensual sodomy.

11.	What is the reason for Najib’s discriminatory handling of cases of Anwar and the chief protagonists in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder case,  Abdul Razak Baginda, Chief Inspector Azilah Hadri and Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar, and in particular why there was no PMO statement at the end of the murder trial at the Federal Court which  raise serious doubts about Najib’s credibility and commitment to the causes of justice and moderation.

12.	Who will  bear full responsibility for the PMO statement on Anwar Ibrahim’s case – the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, the Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail or  the Public Prosecutor-under-fiat Datuk Shafee Abdullah, or two or all three of them? Malaysians are entitled to know whether the Prime Minister, the Attorney-General or the Public Prosecutor-under-fiat, or two or all three of them,  had been consulted, given consent or had prior knowledge of the PMO statement or is it another case like the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Abdul Zahid Hamidi’s infamous letter to the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) vouching for the character and integrity of an alleged gambling kingpin standing trial for illegal gambling in Las Vegas, Nevada, contradicting the earlier police report to FBI and sent without knowledge or agreement of the Inspector-General of Police, the Foreign Ministry or the Prime Minister?

13.	Is it true that the PMO statement is the product of Najib’s “PR guru”, former APCO Malaysia boss Paul Stadlen, who is paid several millions of ringgit a year by the government to mastermind the Prime Minister’s communications operations, as alleged by the Sarawak Report website.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 12 February 2015, 6:40 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Judiciary
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.