Why do Malaysians hate migrants?

Syerleena Abdul Rashid

The Malaysian Insider

29 May 2015

When a racial riot broke out in southern Italy sometime in early 2010, the mindless attacks on African immigrants prompted Pope Benedict XVI to respond by reminding people that, “an immigrant is a human being, different in background, culture and tradition, but a person to be respected, and possessing rights and duties”.

Malaysians tend to get emotional when such issues arise and share the same concerns with the rest of the world when it comes down to how we feel about migrants.

Whether you want to believe or not, Malaysia is one of those countries made up of migrants.

My great grandparents were migrants and so were yours. They fled their homeland in pursuit of greener pastures in faraway lands.

Moving and starting a new life is always a tough decision but try to understand the motives behind the choices, the fear, the suffering, and the hopelessness which forces human beings to board rickety boats and plunge forward into a new strange world.

It takes a lot of guts to face that kind of risk and this type of fortitude is simply disappearing in our society.

We have become content, complacent and indifferent. We have become this way because of the misplaced entitlement created by those in the corridors of power.

This misguided suggestion that we are guaranteed something simply by being born has created a nation of whiners where Malaysians would rather outsource reforms to our politicians.

We know racism is horrible but many of us are guilty of allowing it to permeate into our society one way or another.

We may dislike the awful things our local bigots say, we hate it when they call other Malaysians “pendatang” and we just know how evil racism is but strangely, we are okay with xenophobia.

Xenophobia simply means an “intense or irrational dislike or fear of people from other countries”.

Malaysians suffer from large doses of such simply because of how the government condones institutionalised racism.

Malaysians identify themselves based on ethnicity – you’re Malay, Chinese, Indian and as for the rest, well, you’ll have to be content with checking the “lain-lain” box for the rest of your lives.

Xenophobia feeds on perceptions, and one of the most common observations is how those in power make us believe that our country is full of “foreigners”.

I guess we have Project IC to thank for this because now we know how foreigners have been used by the regime to secure position in government – and that makes us a queasy and paranoid.

Xenophobia isn’t just an isolated occurrence. It thrives when economic suffering and social ills become permanent fixtures within a community or society and Malaysians’ negative perception on migrants are reflective of this.

The truth is often a bitter pill to swallow but let’s face it, our economy isn’t healthy – look at how the value of our ringgit has decreased over the past few months and the alarming numbers of bright, capable Malaysians leaving our country for better economic prosperity simply signals a distressing pattern; an irreversible brain drain where no one knows how to prevent.

Our country is losing out and Malaysians are worried.

We worry that these foreign migrant workers will steal our jobs, corrupt our daughters, infect our wholesome lives with their foreign diseases, litter our neighbourhoods and fill our towns with their bizarre, non-readable foreign language. It’s funny how although, Malaysians may disagree with one another over political views or religious matters, we bond quite well over our distrust of migrants.

Our fears get the best (or worst) of us and this allows our hatred to cloud our better judgement.

We need to remove that hatred and begin to create a platform where Malaysians can discuss such matter in a more reflective, rational and civilised manner.

We need to look into our very own insecurities and understand why we are so apprehensive towards them. – May 29, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 1 June 2015, 9:16 pm and is filed under
Human Rights
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why things like 1MDB happen

By P Gunasegaram

Malaysiakini

May 28, 2015

QUESTION TIME
 Malaysia had no major financial scandals – as in billion-ringgit ones – until the infamous case of Bumiputra Malaysia Finance or BMF emerged in the early eighties and captured the imagination of the press and the public.

 Before we are a bit quick to point the finger at former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad  for that, let’s point out that Mahathir became prime minister only in 1981, after BMF, Bank Bumiputra’s wholly-owned Hong Kong subsidiary, started loaning money to George Tan’s Carrian group, eventually amounting to RM2.5 billion in all.

 The loans were made between 1979 and 1983, which means that loans continued to be made to Carrian even after Mahathir became PM, implying that Mahathir cannot be totally absolved.

 Carrian was a rising star in the Hong Kong property market then but subsequently went bust, making it the biggest bankruptcy in Hong Kong at the time. The scale of the scandal was simply enormous and record-breaking, putting Malaysia on the top of the list in terms of banking failure at that time.

 The question is what was a unit of Bank Bumiputra, a bank set up to provide bumiputeras access to funding as part of the effort to increase their participation in business, doing lending money to a Hong Kong property group?

 This was at that time, the largest banking scandal in the world and the interest in it spiked further when a Bank Bumiputra senior officer sent to Hong Kong to investigate was murdered and his body dumped in a banana plantation.

 The end-result of the entire hugely complicated affair was that few people were brought to account and even the main person involved in the scandal, George Tan, spent just three years in jail. BMF’s then chairperson  spent a long time fighting extradition to Hong Kong from the UK.

Eventually he pleaded guilty in Hong Kong, but in an interview with Malaysia’s The Sun in a pub in London, he disavowed any wrong-doing in 2008, saying he was the fall guy. According to Lorrain (photo), Bank Bumiputra was getting deposits of RM50 million a month from national oil corporation Petronas and had nowhere to put it to use. Hence Hong Kong and the Carrian loans.

 Much like 1MDB, it looks like a money-making scheme gone wrong. The underlying problem was a total lack of proper governance at the bank and the movement of money out of it. Was it a desire to make money for the bank and hence for the country or was it a plot to siphon out money for the benefit of individuals?

 There have been many others scandals since – too many to go into detail in this article. Bank Bumiputra’s rescue several times in the billions of ringgit, Maminco, Perwaja Steel, Malaysia Airlines’ sales and repurchase, the Renong debacle, the huge forex losses at Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) in 1992/93 – they all held one thing in common, the breakdown of corporate governance due to political interference.

 The BNM scandal is worth going into in some detail. While official accounts put it at around RM10 billion, other estimates place it at around RM30 billion, the actual figure masked by adjustments to reserves, accounting tricks and even the alleged depreciation of the ringgit to improve BNM’s reserve position in ringgit terms.

Another dubious first

 In BNM’s case, it was a political decision – Mahathir gave the go ahead for BNM to take positions – speculate in other words – on the foreign exchange market, to obtain gains for the country. That’s unheard of for a central bank, and BNM is probably the first and only central bank to have engaged in such activities on such a scale among the central banks of the world – yet another dubious first and a record breaker for Malaysia.

The shame is that except for this one blemish, BNM has been largely a well-managed and run central bank with impeccable people at the top with a reputation for integrity. It has been a reliable watchdog, keeping the nation’s banking system from spiralling down out of control under some of the worst economic conditions.

 But the interfering hand of the politician – in this case Mahathir – and the approval of clearly taboo practices for central banks sullied that and resulted in covert foreign exchange operations that few knew about even within the bank and the huge losses of billions of ringgit eventually which could no longer be hidden.

 It is worth remembering that all of the other ones apart from the BMF scandal occurred during Mahathir’s long 22-year tenure as PM. Even the BMF scandal ran for part of Mahathir’s time, when loans were actually increased to the Carrian group in an attempt to recover money eventually.

 Mahathir’s successor Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had few such large scandals but there were many allegations of patronage made with respect to his son, son-in-law and brother, and also references made to the so-called fourth floor boys – a coterie of close advisers who were supposed to have great influence in decision-making.

 But to Abdullah’s credit, it was under his tenure that the government-linked companies (GLCs) transformation programme was started, an ambitious attempt to reform GLCs many of which were being managed badly with former civil servants at the top.

 Khazanah Nasional, which is wholly-owned by the government, under Azman Mokhtar and which held many of the GLCs under its umbrella spearheaded the transformation, by bringing in professional managers as well as setting KPI targets, standards and rulebooks, amongst others.

 Even the GLCs which were not under Khazanah were subject to scrutiny and new standards. There was a tremendous improvement in performance, accountability and adopting best practices although there was and still is greater room for improvement.

 But his successor Najib Abdul Razak negated a huge part of the transformation when along came 1MDB, first formed as Terengganu Investment Authority or TIA, which in a space of five years had assets, many of them dubious and unverifiable, of RM51 billion and liabilities of RM48 billion. It was built on a towering edifice of debt never before seen in Malaysia, much of it guaranteed by the federal government.

1MDB is wholly-owned by the Minister of Finance Inc and is not subject at all to all the governance procedures required of other GLCs. It operates rather covertly, makes no public reports like Khazanah does yearly beyond what is required by statute and gives very little information of its operations.

 Now evidence has surfaced in the form of an amendment to 1MDB’s memorandum and articles of association (MAA) in August 2009 that requires major financial commitments and other major decisions by 1MDB to be approved in writing by the prime minister.

 If this had continued to be in place the question arises as to whether he had given approval to all of 1MDB’s major transactions. If he has not, that implies that many of 1MDB’s transactions would have been directly against the MAA.

 As we saw this is not the first time such a lack of governance has happened in Malaysia. The question is why does it continue to happen.

The root causes

 One root cause is the continued abuse of the bumiputera agenda. Such was the case with Bank Bumiputra where others took advantage of the bank, set up to help bumiputeras gain access to funding, to channel funds into Hong Kong for their own purposes leading to massive losses of money.

 In subsequent years, Bank Bumiputra continued to lend money to well-connected bumiputra owners many of whom never repaid their loans, eventually making the bank bankrupt. That included Umno which owed Bank Bumiputra RM300 million at one time for loans associated with the Putra World Trade Centre.

 In the guise of helping bumiputeras, much money was siphoned off out of financial institutions but very few people were brought to book. Such practices were accepted as part of the ordinary course of business.

 Other reasons for such covert operations are to raise political slush funds which could be used during elections, although many suspect a huge part of these funds go into individual pockets where they are tacitly accepted as a part of patronage politics. Such reasoning and the channelling of funds into the pockets of party bigwigs around the country muffles criticism of the practices from within Umno.

 Also much of the public funds are wasted and lucrative contracts and concessions are awarded to privileged businessmen who contribute to party funds. Often, these businesses inflate construction prices to cream off profits while the inflated figures allow them to charge more for services they provide.

 The underlying problem is the system – as long as there is money politics and excessive powers vested in the hands of the executive it will continue to happen over and over again. As long as no one is brought to account for past transgressions, it will encourage more people to cheat; after all what do they have to lose?

 We simply need a commitment to cut corruption and patronage from the top downwards if things like 1MDB are not to happen again. If that’s not forthcoming from the current government despite all the pressure put on it, the public needs to exercise its democratic rights.

 P GUNASEGARAM is founding editor of KINIBIZ which produces an online business news portal and a fortnightly print magazine.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 1 June 2015, 6:39 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Financial Scandals
,
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Ministers should redeem themselves at their meeting tomorrow to prove that Cabinet is not a magic show for a David Copperfield to perform the hat-trick of producing a rabbit from an empty hat

The Malaysian Cabinet is being held in even lower esteem among Malaysians after last Friday’s Cabinet meeting for two reasons:

Firstly, for giving approval to a  1MDB Roadmap when it is clear that no Minister has any clue how  1MDB and the Malaysian Government is going to be saved from 1MDB’s RM42 billion loans scandal; and

Secondly, no resignation by any Minister although the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said that Ministers can resign if they do not support him on the 1MDB issue.

It is simply incredible that the Malaysian Cabinet has degenerated into a magic show for a David Copperfield to perform the hat-trick of producing a rabbit from an empty hat, with no Minister daring to expose the illusion of the whole exercise!

The reason why the UMNO Vice President and Minister for Rural and Regional Development Minister, Datuk Seri Shafie Apdal had objected to the application of the principle of collective Ministerial responsibility on the 1MDB scandal  was that although Ministers had asked questions about the strategic investment firm during Cabinet meetings, Ministers are just unclear as the public over the firm’s opaque deals.

Shafie had said that Ministers wanted answers to the 1MDB scandal as they wanted to know, not for their own benefit, but to explain to the people at large.

Shafie has an important point, although his rejection of the principle of collective Ministerial responsibility is not acceptable.

The question is whether after Friday’s Cabinet meeting approving the 1MDB Roadmap presented by the Second Finance Minister, Datuk Seri Ahmad Husni Hanadzlah, are all Cabinet Ministers prepared to explain to the people about the 1MDB Roadmap?

Nobody thinks so, for the Ministers must be equally at sea as the Malaysian public  on the many questions and controversies that have cropped up just  in the past three days on the 1MDB Roadmap.

For instance, can the Ministers explain to the public  what 1MDB  has to give  in return for Abu Dhabi-based International Petroleum Investment Co (IPIC)’s US$1 billion so that 1MDB can settle its US$975 million syndicated loan?

Does any Minister know, and is there any Minister who dares stand up to declare that he or she knows,  the answer?

Again, when 1MDB President and Group Executive Director, Arul Kanda Kandasamy, denied that IPIC’s US$1 billion mentioned by Husni was “a loan, debt or bailout”, does any Minister know what animal is this US$1 billion of IPIC which is not “a loan, debt or bailout”?

Furthermore, do the Ministers know whether 1MDB is being wound down by next year and its operations transferred to three separate companies as  part of the deal with IPIC and its Aabar Investments unit to remove another RM16 billion debt from 1MDB – as reported by the government mouthpiece Bernama but subsequently denied by Husni?

Even more important, have the Ministers got answers to the most basic question: Why is IPIC’s US1 billion (not “loan, debt or bailout”) necessary in the first place?

IPIC’s US$1bil is to  repay a US$975mil (RM3.5bil) loan, in advance of its due date, to a syndicate of international bank lenders because the consortium of banks led by Deutsche Bank had asked for their US$975mil loan to be repaid by 1MDB less than four months earlier ahead of its due date. The loan was due on Aug 31.

The demand by the consortium  of international banks was prompted  by “incomplete” documents that 1MDB provided as a form of security, rendering the terms of the loan unmet. This alleged breach allows the banks to rescind the loan ahead of the August due date.

The loan was secured via the US$1.103 billion that 1MDB said was being held by its Brazen Sky unit in BSI Singapore, originally from a tranche of offshore deposits it previously kept in the Cayman Islands.

Has the Cabinet received a full report as to whether there is any basis in  the allegation of the whistleblower site Sarawak Report that BSI Singapore had informed the Singapore authorities that the document related to 1MDB’s account in BSI were in fact “false bank statements” and “did not represent a true account of the assets of the 1MDB subsidiary”, resulting in the consortium of international banks rescinding the loan to 1MDB ahead of the August due date?

And if so, what action the Cabinet has taken against such 1MDB irresponsibility and mismanagement?

Most important of all, had the Prime Minister at Friday’s Cabinet meeting explained his role not only on the 1MDB’s US$975 loan being rescinded by the consortium of international bankers ahead of the August due date, but all the important 1MDB decisions by virtue of his being the final approving authority for any 1MDB deal, transaction or investment under the 1MDB Memorandum & Articles of Association (M&A)?

Are the Ministers prepared to redeem themselves at the Cabinet meeting tomorrow  for their negligence and irresponsibility last Friday by ensuring that that there is a clear-cut Save 1MDB Roadmap, which should be made public, so that  there would be answers to the questions as to what IPIC’s US$1 billion lifeline to 1MDB would cost Malaysia, whether 1MDB would be wound down and why 1MDB had given incomplete security as to enable the consortium of international bankers to rescind their US$975 loan ahead of the due date?

Najib should not chair or even be present at such a Cabinet discussion on the 1MDB issue because of conflict of interest as he is the final approving authority for 1MDB deals, transactions and investments.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 2 June 2015, 11:47 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Nik Aziz percaya Pakatan wadah terbaik mencapai objektif politik PAS

 – Zairil Khir Johari

The Malaysian Insider

2 June 2015

Pada Sabtu, 30 Mei 2015, Penang Institute menganjurkan forum peringatan bagi mengenang jasa dan legasi seorang tokoh besar dalam politik Malaysia, Allahyarham Datuk Bentara Setia Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, atau lebih dikenali dengan panggilan Tok Guru.

Forum yang bertempat di The Light Hotel, Seberang Jaya ini menghadirkan tiga orang ahli panel, iaitu ahli Parlimen Kluang Liew Chin Tong, ahli Parlimen Parit Buntar Datuk Dr Mujahid Yusoff Rawa dan Ustaz Nik Omar Nik Abdul Aziz, pengetua Maahad Darul Anuar dan juga anakanda kepada Tok Guru. Forum dikendalikan saya selaku moderator.

Topik yang diwacanakan dalam forum adalah “Islam dan Kepelbagaian,” dan perbincangan malam itu mengupas dengan lebih mendalam keperibadian Tok Guru, khususnya berkenaan persoalan hubungan kaum dan agama serta hubungan parti-parti politik dalam dan luar Pakatan Rakyat.

Wasiat

Tok Guru di akhir hayatnya tidak meninggalkan apa-apa wasiat khusus, baik kepada ahli keluarga atau parti politik yang pernah dipimpinnya, mahupun rakyat secara keseluruhan. Sebagaimana yang ditegaskan Nik Omar, wasiat yang ditinggalkan Tok Guru adalah keseluruhan kehidupan dan perjuangannya, dan hal ini perlu diteladani semua pihak.

Sifat istiqamah yang ada pada diri Tok Guru merupakan iktibar yang penting untuk dicontohi dalam sesebuah perjuangan. Tok Guru dalam pendiriannya terhadap beberapa isu penting seperti isu pelaksanaan hukum hudud, royalti minyak Kelantan dan kebebasan media, sangat jelas dan beliau tidak pernah mengambil langkah “u-turn” dalam setiap pandangan yang diambilnya.

Pakatan Rakyat

Selain dakwah agama, Tok Guru juga penuh beristiqamah dalam perjuangan politik, khususnya melalui Pakatan Rakyat yang dianggap sangat penting kepadanya. Malah, Nik Omar menceritakan ketika Tok Guru terlantar di hospital pada akhir hayatnya, sayangnya terhadap PR masih kukuh.

Menurut Nik Omar, Tok Guru amat menitikberatkan PR sebagai wadah yang paling sesuai untuk mencapai objektif politik PAS serta membawa keharmonian dan kesejahteraan kepada rakyat dan negara. Walaupun setiap parti mempunyai pendirian yang berbeza dalam sesetengah isu, namun matlamat bersama lebih banyak dan harus menjadi dasar kerjasama. Begitulah besarnya kecintaan Tok Guru terhadap hubungan parti-parti politik dalam PR yang terjalin lama.

Kesederhanaan

Kesederhanaan pemikiran Tok Guru dapat dilihat dengan jelas dalam isu perlaksanaan hukum hudud di negeri Kelantan. Sebagai seorang pemimpin politik dan agama, Tok Guru memiliki pandangan, undang-undang syariah adalah sebahagian daripada Islam dan perlu dilaksanakan sebagai salah satu kaedah dalam menangani masalah jenayah yang makin berleluasa.

Rang Undang-Undang Hudud yang dibentang dan diluluskan di Dewan Undangan Negeri Kelantan sejak 1993 walau bagaimanapun tidak dapat dilaksanakan berikutan terdapatnya halangan-halangan teknikal. Namun demikian, Tok Guru jelas sekali tidak mengambil sikap berkeras dalam hal ini. Sebaliknya jelas Nik Omar, Tok Guru lebih gemar mengambil sikap “menerangkan” daripada mengambil sikap “menyerang.”

Untuk menyelesaikan permasalahan seputar persoalan hudud ini, maka perlunya kepada perbincangan dan dialog yang berterusan, baik dalam kalangan orang Islam mahupun dialog antara penganut agama yang berbeza. Bagi Nik Omar, PR adalah wadah yang paling sesuai untuk perbincangan dan dialog disuburkan. Isu hudud tidak boleh dijadikan isu yang mampu untuk memecah-belahkan hubungan baik yang terjalin di dalam PR. Tok Guru dalam hal ini sentiasa memberi komitmen yang tinggi untuk memastikan PR terus kukuh.

Tok Guru juga adalah tokoh yang meraikan kepelbagaian dan tidak pernah berpegang kepada idea perkauman. Hal ini dimanifestasikan di dalam kepimpinannya yang sentiasa menjaga hubungan baik dengan masyarakat yang pelbagai. Lantaran itu, Tok Guru sangat disenangi masyarakat Kelantan secara khusus dan rakyat Malaysia secara amnya, baik Muslim dan bukan Muslim. – 2 Jun, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 2 June 2015, 4:02 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Race, religion, royalty, reality and MAS

By Mariam Mokhtar

Malaysiakini

Jun 1, 2015

MAS is not a commercial enterprise, but an offshoot of a government department, and run along government lines. It takes its orders from politicians, it bows to various political demands, it can never be re-structured unless the torrid cocktail of political patronage and building personal empires is eliminated.

After years of Ketuanan Melayu and Biro Tata Negara (BTN) spewing division, with claims that the Malays are God’s chosen people, it is ironic that the saviour of MAS is a German, Christoph Mueller.

What a slap in the face of the rakyat, the planes in the fleet are being sold off, to save some money, and yet Najib Abdul Razak and the self-styled First Lady of Malaysia (Flom) wastes millions of ringgit on a new aeroplane for ministerial junkets.

Our politicians bled MAS dry and now Mueller wants to perform a cull and punish the employees, instead of the politicians and fat cats, who sit on the management board.

It is outrageous that the people in positions of authority refuse to take any responsibility for their failures, and will probably be retained with a more lucrative package.

Khazanah is a bloated entity of smart alecs, who somehow could not translate their well-earned Oxford and Cambridge degrees into commercial and managerial success. Most Malaysians feel that the Khazanah boys simply protected the interests of their political masters and the cronies.

Herr Mueller should realise that Malaysia has enough capable people to run the show. The political will to effect changes is lacking, because the Umno Baru slogan is based on the 3 Rs – race, religion and royalty.

When Malaysia-Singapore Airlines (MSA the precursor of MAS) was flying, and in the years after MSA split into SIA and MAS, there were capable Malaysians at the helm of MAS and SIA.

Today, we know that some Malaysians successfully lead organisations abroad, others have risen to become high commissioners and ministers of their adopted countries, and heads of foreign companies. These men and women were rejected by the Malaysian government because they belonged to the wrong race.

Mueller was given the job of revamping MAS. He listed various parameters which he said contributed to the losses in MAS. The rakyat and many decent MAS employees could have told the government the same thing, and saved the taxpayer a small fortune, but their complaints and concerns fell on deaf ears.

Tackling the three Rs

How will the new MAS – MAS Bhd, tackle the three Rs – race, religion and royalty?

Will MAS Bhd reject members of the extended royal entourages, whom the rakyat complain hog their seats (despite confirmed bookings), jump queues and allegedly are allowed to pay a much reduced or perhaps, no excess baggage fees for their van loads of shopping?

Will MAS Bhd employ Malaysians from a cross-section of society, and not predominantly Malays?

Will MAS Bhd be prepared to refuse demands of Muslim conservatives, who wish to stop the serving and sale of liquor on board, and also instigate a uniform change?

Last week, Mueller confirmed that for many years, MAS paid-out for hundreds of types of allowances, overtime claims, salaries and over-priced contracts.

Despite an internal whistleblower facility, to encourage staff members to disclose unsafe or illegal practices within the airline, many employees feared they would be blacklisted.

Yesterday, Nur Jazlan Mohamed (photo), of the Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC), told The Malaysia Insider that it has no authority to investigate the accounts of Khazanah, MAS or any other government-linked company (GLC).

Nur Jazlan said, “This is what happened when PAC started to probe KLIA2 which comes under Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd, a GLC under Khazanah, where until today the government has yet to direct the auditor-general to conduct an audit on its construction”.

Nur Jazlan agreed with the Union of Flight Attendants Malaysia (Nufam), that MAS management should be punished for the waste and said “…the MAS board of directors has to be held accountable, if there had been any wastage. The government representative in the board is the one who should be looking after the interest of the people in this case, and the interest of the employees.”

Mueller must ensure that there is no political interference in the re-vamped MAS. Pigs may yet fly, before the PAC is able to scrutinise MAS and punish those who are responsible for its failures.

Maybe Mueller has been employed to restore the coffers of MAS, so that Umno Baru can milk it, again, in a few years’ time.

MARIAM MOKHTAR is a defender of the truth, the admiral-general of the Green Bean Army and president of the Perak Liberation Organisation (PLO).

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 2 June 2015, 9:15 pm and is filed under
Airline
,
Mariam Mokhtar
,
Transport
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


What my proposal for a post-BN, post-PR “Save Malaysia” grand  coalition is and is not

As my proposal for a post-BN, post-PR “Save Malaysia” grand coalition continues to be the subject of controversy and misunderstanding, deliberate or otherwise, let me clarify what the proposal “is” and “is not”, and the background for such a proposal.

Firstly
, I had said that the proposal for a post-BN, post-PR “Save Malaysia” grand coalition is based on the premise that the two existing political coalitions in the country, Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat, have lost  all public trust, credibility and legitimacy, in which case, Malaysians must think the unthinkable and move beyond the present political scenario dominated by two political  coalitions in a post-BN, post-PR phase of Malaysian politics.

We need not tarry here as to why and how the two political coalitions, BN and PR, could lose all public trust, credibility and legitimacy.

Clearly, if anyone of the two political coalitions, BN or PR, can continue to command public trust, credibility, legitimacy and support of Malaysians, then we have not arrived at the post-BN, post-PR phase of Malaysian politics.

Secondly
, what the post-BN, post-PR “Save Malaysia” grand coalition “is not”.

It is not a copy of the “UG” (Unity Government between UMNO and PAS to protect Malay unity) Government which had been proposed on-and-off since the 2008 General Elections.

For clarity and emphasis, let me reiterate that I am not advocating any “unity government” between DAP and UMNO or BN, or even more far-fetched, any DAP-PKR-MCA-Gerakan coalition.

Those who thought of such possibilities simply do not understand the meaning of a “post-BN, post-PR” scenario, where even UMNO could “self-destruct” as recently warned by former Deputy Prime Minister Tun Musa Hitam.

Thirdly
, what the post-BN, post-PR “Save Malaysia” grand coalition “is”.

It is not exclusive for any one race or religion but  fully inclusive of all Malaysian races, religions and regions, in other words, a multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-regional new Malaysian coalition government comprising Muslims and non-Muslims, Malays and non-Malays, and Malaysians from Peninsular Malaysia, Sarawak and Sabah.

Going beyond the existing political coalitions and parties, the post-BN, post-PR “Save Malaysia” grand coalition will comprise  MPs from both insides of the political divide as well as both sides of the South China Sea, Sabah, Sarawak and Peninsular Malaysia, to defend constitutionalism and rule of law with a new Prime Minister and a new Malaysian Government.

Based on the present parliamentary position, the new Prime Minister can come from Sarawak, Sabah or Peninsula Malaysia, from whichever political party, can be man or woman, who enjoys the support of the majority of the 222 Members of Parliament –  committed  to  Save Malaysia and defend the Federal Constitution and the rule of law.

The “Save Malaysia” Grand Coalition must not be an opportunistic get-together but must be based on a programme of principles and the national interests.

I had consistently proposed that such a “Save Malaysia” Grand Coalition be based on the Pakatan Rakyat Common Policy Framework to  protect the fundamental features of the Malaysian Constitution, restore the independence of national institutions and promote integrity, freedom,  justice and dignity in the country.

The post-BN, post-PR “Save Malaysia” grand coalition should also  have a visionary and forward-looking programme to restore Malaysia’s greatness and allow Malaysia to punch above its weight in many areas of human endeavour, whether political, economic, social, educational, information technology or environmental – creating a clean, incorruptible government of excellence which upholds the rule of law and human rights.

As I said in my speech to Malaysian students in Alexandria in April, one of the top agendas of the post-BN, post-PR “Save Malaysia” grand coalition must be the release of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim from Sungai Buloh prison to be back in the mainstream of Malaysian politics.

When I said I am prepared to work with Tun Mahathir to “Save Malaysia”, it is on the basis of the principles and national interests which I had spelt out.

Is this idea of a post-BN, post-PR “Save Malaysia” grand coalition, going beyond the existing political coalitions and parties, a practical and achievable concept?

This will be the greatest challenge facing Malaysians.

Only time will tell whether it is feasible or not.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 2 June 2015, 5:58 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Politics
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


What’s at stake in the PAS election?

– Liew Chin Tong

The Malaysian Insider

2 June 2015

The fault lines in PAS election this Thursday (June 4) are very stark. Incumbent president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang has asked members to choose between his loyalists and what his camp dubbed as “DAP sympathisers”, and in reply, former Perak menteri besar Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin has said in jest that the choice was actually between DAP sympathisers and Umno puppets.

Last Saturday, I was speaking at a forum with Nik Omar Nik Aziz, the eldest son of Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat. It just struck me that even within the family of the former PAS spiritual leader there are some different views: Nik Abduh claimed that his father was never against working with Umno while Nik Omar held a contrasting view.

The lines are drawn between those who aspire to win Putrajaya and those who only want to keep Kota Baru; between those who are prepared to work with other opposition parties to topple an already corrupt and monolithic Umno in the next general election for broader reforms and those who want to work with Umno for immediate implementation of hudud; and between those who see Malaysia as a multiethnic/multi-religious project and those who think of Malaysia as a single ethnic/religious entity.

The party poll is unlikely to end the conflict as it is too deep-seated, at least dating back to events unfolded in 1998. This Thursday could be a fresh beginning for PAS, for better or worse.

The birth of PAS

PAS was formed in 1951 by the ulama group in Umno which included both the grandfather and father of former prime minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. Most Umno members severed ties with PAS in 1954 when Umno banned dual membership in anticipation of the first federal election in July 1955 which saw Umno winning 51 out of 52 seats, and PAS winning the only remaining seat.

The first post-independent general election in 1959 was a shocker to Umno with PAS winning the state governments of Kelantan and Terengganu. Umno took Terengganu back to its fold via crossovers of PAS reps in 1961. It was not until 1999 that PAS regained Terengganu.

The Kelantan state power, which lasted until the 1977 crisis, was far more important to PAS. The leader in Kelantan Datuk Asri Muda was effectively the most powerful person in PAS 1959 until 1982 when he was deposed in a party coup though he only became party president officially in 1971. Throughout Asri’s leadership, PAS competed with Umno on which party was more effective as Malay champion.

PAS became Umno’s coalition partner in 1973 and joined the expanded ruling coalition Barisan Nasional in 1974 when it was launched just before the general election. PAS was sacked from Barisan Nasional in November 1977 after the party objected to a Parliamentary bill to impose emergency rule in Kelantan. It was triggered by federal government exploiting a protracted leadership crisis in Kelantan with PAS state assemblymen having voted a no-confidence vote against Menteri Besar Datuk Mohamad Nasir, who received tacit support from Umno. PAS lost Kelantan in the subsequent state election in March 1978. In other words, PAS was cheated by Umno.

With PAS working with Umno in the 1970s, there was a vacuum of leadership among the Malays especially among the younger generation. Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and leaders from Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (Abim) were seen as the alternatives to Umno.

Anwar campaigned for PAS in the 1978 general election and was offered the leadership of PAS by Asri on several occasions. But he joined Umno a week before the April 1982 general election and became the face of Islam for Umno for sixteen years until he was sacked in September 1998.

In October 1982, in a response to Umno which has adopted the Islamic façade with Anwar and in the attempt to rejuvenise the party, the “young Turks” of PAS forced Asri Muda out of the presidency at the (non-election year) muktamar. Eventually, half of PAS’s senior leadership was sacked in January 1983 by the new leadership including four out of its five MPs, leaving Nik Aziz as its sole MP nationally.

In order to differentiate the new leadership from the previous one, “kepimpinan ulama” (leadership by religious scholars) became the theme. What the label actually means has been contested ever since.

Between 1982 and 1998, while PAS was rejuvenated, it was a relatively small opposition party with a base concentrating in the northern Malay-belt states of Kelantan, Terengganu, Kedah and Perlis. The leadership consists of religious scholars and activists while the membership was formed by mostly independent farmers and traders who either support PAS for Kelantanese regional identity vis-à-vis the federal government or genuinely wanting to see a more pious and religious society. They were not thinking about winning federal power as it was unimaginable anyway.

Reformasi’s idealism for PAS

The sacking of Anwar in 1998 changed PAS permanently. A year after the fateful September, PAS claimed that its membership almost doubled from 450,000 to 800,000. Many who joined were nouveau riche and professionals of the New Economic Policy generation and geographically concentrating in the west coast cities. They hated Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Umno but probably didn’t trust Anwar either, hence PAS.

In the 1999 general election, with the massive Malay swing against Umno, PAS won 27 parliamentary seats as well as the state government of Terengganu in addition to the Kelantan government which it held since 1990.

With the influx of new members and the emergence of new leaders not trained as religious scholars, the talk of ulama versus professionals became the theme of each party election since reformasi. In essence, it is not so much of the educational background of a person but the political outlook.

President Datuk Fadzil Noor was eager to push PAS to move beyond its base and reach out to the wider Malay audience, as well as the non-Malay voters. In his words, PAS had to “mainstream” itself.

It’s the battle between the purists and the mainstreamers.

The untimely demise of Fadzil Noor in June 2002 resulted in Hadi taking over the helm and allowing the party to fall back to its default position of securing the base with a hardline programme. PAS lost badly in the 2004 general election, including losing the Terengganu government.

Between 2004 and 2008, the hardliners were tamed after the massive loses and moderate elements were able to steer the party in the directions of the now diminished Partai Keadilan Sejahtera of Indonesia and the AK Party of Turkey, hence the term the “Erdogans”.

Return of the conservatives

The 2008 tsunami was a great shock. PAS increased its seats from 6 in 2004 to 23 in 2008 but many in the conservative wing were unhappy because Parti Keadilan Rakyat won 31 while DAP had 28. In several instances when Umno was attempting to form a “unity government” with PAS at state and federal levels, some were keen.

With Umno and its associates and press pushing for the “race, religion and royalty” 3R identity politics agenda, many in PAS were wary of non-racial new politics promoted by others in Pakatan.

Apart from the older purists and the mainstreamers, a new generation of young Turks who grew up entirely in the milieu of the 1982 rejuvenation has come of age. Some of them are indeed children of leaders. The rather hardline 1982 batch schooled their political offspring entirely in a closed PAS political environment from kindergarten to university with very little interactions with the wider society. The form the new hardline group in this current battle.

The lines are stark and unlikely to end with the election. The outcome of the election would have huge implications for PAS, Pakatan Rakyat and Malaysia. Realignment of forces may be the next on the cards. – June 2, 2015.

* Liew Chin Tong is DAP’s national political education director and Kluang MP.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 2 June 2015, 6:51 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


10 Questions on 1MDB for dummies for Cabinet Ministers at their meeting today

Bravado is no answer to the mountain of queries by Malaysians  as to why Cabinet Ministers had not raised questions about the propriety, accountability and transparency of the various deals in the  RM42 billion 1MDB scandal at the last Cabinet meeting on Friday.

“Do you think Nazri can be threatened?” is sheer bravado and does not answer the question why Ministers, according the Minister for Tourism and Culture, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz himself, were satisfied and happy with the  second Finance Minister, Datuk Seri Ahmad Husni Hanadzlah’s explanation on the 1MDB Roadmap and that no minister, including the Rural and Regional Development Minister Datuk Seri Shafie Apdal, voiced any objection at last Friday’s Cabinet meeting – when it is obvious that any ordinary person cannot be happy with Husni’s explanation of the 1MDB Roadmap.

Either the Ministers were living in a different  planet and did not know the almost daily queries about the RM42 billion 1MDB scandal or they just buried their heads in the sand like ostriches to shut out the mountain of  1MDB queries for the past few years.

The Ministers will be guilty of the height of irresponsibility and negligence  if they had given approval to the 1MDB Roadmap without  understanding the issues of propriety, accountability and transparency of the numerous deals in the  1MDB imbroglio, out of fear of stepping on the toes of Datuk Seri Najib Razak Prime Minister-cum-Finance Minister.

The Ministers must make amends for their gross sins of irresponsibility and negligence on the 1MDB Roadmap at the Cabinet meeting this morning, and the following ten questions on the 1MDB for dummies should be among the questions which  Ministers should pose on the 1MDB Roadmap at today’s Cabinet:

1.	1MDB President and Group Executive Director, Arul Kanda Kandasamy, denied that Abu Dhabi-based International Petroleum Investment Co (IPIC)’s  US$1 billion mentioned by second Finance Minister Husni Hanadzlah in the 1MDB Roadmap  was “a loan, debt or bailout”. What animal is this US$1 billion of IPIC which is not “a loan, debt or bailout”?  A grant, gift or present?

2.	What 1MDB has to give in return for IPIC’s US$1 billion so that 1MDB can settle its US$975 syndicated loan?

3.	Is 1MDB  being wound down by next year and its operations transferred to three separate companies as  part of the deal with IPIC and its Aabar Investments unit to remove another RM16 billion debt from 1MDB – as reported by the government mouthpiece Bernama but subsequently denied by Husni?

4.	Why is IPIC’s US1 billion (not “loan, debt or bailout”) necessary in the first place? Does mean that the consortium of banks led by Deutsche Bank was right when they rescinded their US$975 million loan to 1MDB ahead of their due date on August 31 because 1MDB provided “incomplete documents” as security, i.e. “false bank statements” on the US$1.103 billion being held by 1MDB’s  Brazen Sky unit in BSI Singapore, originally from a tranche of offshore deposits it previously kept in the Cayman Islands.

5.	What punitive action had been taken against the 1MDB officials for such irresponsible and criminal mismanagement resulting in the consortium of banks rescinding 1MDB’s  US$975 million ahead of its due date?

6.	Whether the Prime Minister under the 1MDB  Memorandum and Articles of Association (M&A) is the final approving authority, and whether he must bear responsibility for the early rescinding of 1MDB’s US$975 million  loan by the consortium of international bankers.

7.	If the Prime Minister is the final approving authority for any 1MDB deal, transaction or investment under the 1MDB Memorandum & Articles of Association (M&A),  ask the Prime Minister for  a full report to the Cabinet on all his 1MDB dealings in the past six years as the final approving authority for 1MDB deals, transactions and investments. Who will now be the final authority on the 1MDB Roadmap – the second Finance Minister Husni or Najib as provided in the 1MDB M&A?

8.	 How 1MDB could pile up RM42 billion debts in six years when  Najib is  the final approving authority for all these transactions?

9.	The full relationship of Najib and the “mover and shaker” of the RM42 billion 1MDB scandal, Jho Low.

10.	Whether Najib should chair or even be present at any  Cabinet discussion and decision on the 1MDB issue because of conflict of interest as the Prime Minister  is the final approving authority for 1MDB deals, transactions and investments.

Malaysians hope the Cabinet Ministers will speak up on the 1MDB scandal at the Cabinet meeting today.

Last Friday, Najib asked Ministers to resign if they do not support him on the 1MDB issue.

Malaysians want Ministers to resign if they dare not raise the people’s concerns and worries about the 1MDB scandal in the Cabinet, and  are incapable of answering their queries on the 1MDB scandal claiming that apart from Husni, they are banned from speaking on the 1MDB issue!

Banning Cabinet Ministers from speaking and explaining to the public about the 1MDB issue is an insult to the integrity and intelligence of  Ministers and make a total mockery of the principle of collective Ministerial responsibility.

Ministers might as well go around with lips sealed with the wording “1MDP” so that all Malaysians know that they cannot talk about the 1MDB scandal.

Are we having a Cabinet of sheep before Malaysia becomes a nation of sheep?

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 3 June 2015, 8:53 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Death camps are a ‘blight on the soul of the nation’

— MCCBCHST

Malay Mail Online

June 2, 2015

JUNE 2 — The Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHST) is deeply saddened by the discovery of mass graves of migrants at the Malaysian/Thai border in Perlis. We are distressed to read reports that they were victims of abuse and torture at the hands of human traffickers and that several members of our police force may have been complicit.

The exploitation, torture and killing of our fellow human beings at these “death camps” on Malaysian soil are a blight of our nation and humanity. These victims deserve more than the indignity of un-mourned deaths and unmarked graves and their souls call for our prayers and for justice.

As such the MCCBCHST calls on Malaysians of all faiths to hold prayer sessions for the solace and rest of the victims and to ask for those responsible for these “death camps” to be brought to justice.

We call upon regional and national leaders to legislate and enforce sustainable humane solutions to the long-standing challenge of refugees, migrants and stateless people being exploited and abused by human traffickers across our borders.

As a Nation that places “Belief in God” as the first principle of the Rukunnegara we are obliged by the demands of our different faiths to address the spiritual debt we owe to the souls of the victims. The desecration of violence on the soil of our nation must be purified by our prayers and our commitment to act against those who have perpetrated this crime against humanity.

We therefore call for :

1. careful identification of the remains and endeavours to trace their families

2. the dignity of the burial and rites be administrated and mourned

3. all faith communities to pray and others to spend time in quite reflection over this terrible discovery.

4. An Independent Investigation be carried out, so that perpetrators of this heinous crime be brought to justice and that this will never happen again.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 3 June 2015, 8:34 am and is filed under
Human Rights
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


MALAYSIA: AS THE ECONOMY WEAKENS, AUTHORITARIANISM CREEPS IN

by Nithin Coca

Equal Times

2 June 2015

First, it was the opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim. Then, senior journalists and editors at the country’s top independent media website.

Bloggers followed, even a political cartoonist.

Over several months, Malaysia’s leaders have, piece-by-piece, used colonial-era laws to turn the country, long considered one of the shining lights of south-east Asia, firmly towards authoritarianism.

“Over the past year, the government has harassed, targeted and even imprisoned a wide range of individuals considered possible ‘threats’ – including opposition politicians, human rights defenders, lawyers and journalists,” said Josef Benedict, Asia-Pacific Campaigner for Amnesty International, based in Malaysia’s capital city of Kuala Lumpur.

Behind this unprecedented crackdown are signs of a ruling party losing grip on power, as its rule, built on an economy dependent on natural resource exports and a fragile racial and religious balance, threatens to unravel.

Fragile growth

Malaysia (then Malaya) gained independence from Britain in 1963.

Two years later, the split with Chinese-majority Singapore made Muslim Malays the majority in the country at 55 per cent of the population, versus 30 per cent for Chinese-Malaysians, and eight per cent for Indian-Malaysians, with the rest including the indigenous Orang Asli and immigrants.

This split allowed Perikatan (the Alliance Party), later renamed Barisan Nasional (BN, or National Front), led by the United Malays National Organisation (UNMO), to take power. It has ruled the country ever since.

In fact, elections weren’t even close. Until 2008, BN had a two-thirds majority in parliament, allowing it to change the constitution at will.

This period paralleled Malaysia’s rapid economic growth, which averaged 6.5 per cent from 1957 to 2005, led chiefly by exports of natural resources.

This was all fine as long as resource prices were high enough to keep everyone happy.

Petrol revenues provide upwards of 40 per cent of Malaysia’s yearly governmental budget, while Malaysian palm oil conglomerates account for 39 per cent of global palm oil production, forming the bulk of Malaysian exports from 1970 to 2000.

Put together, these two resources made up nearly a third of exports, and a large majority of government revenues.

Since 2012, however, there has been a dramatic drop in prices for both palm oil and crude oil. Though the economy remains strong due to consumer consumption, the ability of BN to spend as it has may no longer be feasible.

That is why, in 2013, Malaysia saw the closest election in its history.

The opposition – a fragmented group led by Anwar Ibrahim – actually won 53 per cent of votes, but gerrymandering allowed BN to, amazingly, hold 60 per cent of parliamentary seats.

“The Barisan Nasional-led coalition government’s dominant position is under threat like never before,” Benedict said.

“Since it narrowly won the 2013 general elections, authorities have led a disturbing crackdown on freedom of expression in an apparent bid to tighten its grip on power.”

With prices falling even further last year, and signs that the opposition was gaining strength, the clampdown increased.

“The flurry of sedition accusations levelled against journalists, activists and opposition politicians have had a chilling effect on free expression in Malaysia,” said Shawn Crispin, Bangkok-based senior south-east Asia representative to the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ).

Recent arrests are a clear signal “to all the country’s journalists that authorities are watching and willing to crackdown on what’s perceived as critical reporting,” Crispin added.

Democracy or authoritarianism?

The biggest news happened in February, when Anwar Ibrahim was sentenced to 10 years in jail on what many believe to be trumped-up charges of sodomy and corruption.

“The fact that Anwar was convicted in a preposterous trial illustrates the ruling coalition’s fundamental insecurity and unwillingness to face serious questions about their performance, as well as their desperation to hold on to power, regardless of the ramifications to Malaysia’s integrity,” Serene Lim, Program Coordinator with SUARAM, a Malaysian human rights organisation, said in a statement.

Many observers believe the moves are an attempt by BN leaders to remove barriers to its continued rule.

“I believe that the motive largely lies with Prime Minister Najib Razak as a means for self-preservation,” said Joseph Sipalan, assistant news editor with Malay Mail Online and chairman of the Institute of Journalists Malaysia.

“His priority now is to stamp out anything that could potentially threaten him.”

Malaysia’s next elections are not due until 2018 – plenty of time for BN to strengthen its grip on power and further move the country further away from democracy.

Moreover, Malaysia remains an important trading partner for many world powers, including China and the United States, ties that appear to have muted global reaction to its crackdown.

“Silence by the international community will in effect just send the message that the Malaysian authorities have a blank cheque to keep violating human rights,” said Benedict.

For now, the opposition isn’t standing down – 10,000 people rallied against the government crackdowns as well as plans to shore up revenues through a new goods and services tax.

The media, despite the threats, is still reporting.

Shannon Teoh, President of the Foreign Correspondents Club of Malaysia, believes the government can do little to stop journalists from doing their job in the long term.

“Once the genie is out the bottle, is it not going to go back in,” he said, noting a large increase of media outlets in Malaysia over the past 10 to 15 years.

“It is going to get harder for the government to shut down sites. New ones will start. The government can try to limit it, but things will get out.”

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 4 June 2015, 5:59 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Elections
,
Human Rights
,
Judiciary
,
Media
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Now that the government has finally admitted that the PM is the final approving authority for 1MDB transactions, are Cabinet meetings in March and May on 1MDB chaired by Najib valid, proper and legal because of  conflict of interest?

For the first time in six years, the government, through the Second Finance Minister, Datuk Seri Husni Hanadzlah in his TV1 interview on “1MDB: Di mana wangnya?” last night, has finally admitted that Datuk Seri Najib Razak as the Prime Minister is the final approving authority for 1MDB deals, investments and transactions.

Husni said the Prime Minister represents the Government, which is why his written approval is needed for any financial deal undertaken by the 1Malaysian Development Bhd (1MDB).

This is a very lame and poor excuse, for by this reasoning, there must be umpteenth government companies which have the same provision as 1MBD which provides under Clause 117 of its Memorandum and Articles of Association (M&A) that the Prime Minister must give his written approval for any 1MHD deals, including the firm’s investments or any bid for restructuring.

If the Prime Minister has to give his “written approval” for the  deals of  umpteenth government companies, he would have little time to be Prime Minister proper.

As far as I know,  1MDP is the first case where the Prime Minister’s “written authority” is needed for any financial deal undertaken by a  government company. I understand there is a second such case  of a government company with such a provision which also happened under Najib’s tenure as Prime Minister.

I am prepared to stand corrected, but can  Husni, who seems to be relishing his role in a new bout of transparency of the Najib government, clarify this matter and if I am right, explain this phenomenon as well as  identify the second company which has this 1MDB Clause 117 provision requiring the Prime Minister’s “written consent” before any deal or restructuring before the country is landed with another major financial scandal.

For the past six years, Najib acted as if he was quite in the dark about 1MBD’s  many controversial and opaque transactions, claiming that he was  not involved in the day-to-day running of the company as he was only Chairman of the 1MDB Advisory Board.

Najib owes the country and people an explanation why he had put up a pretence in the past six years that he was quite in the dark about the 1MDB deals, transactions and investments when he fact he had been  intimately involved as the final approving authority  in the 1MDB deals, transactions and investments.

Parliament has been kept in the dark about Najib’s pre-eminent role  in 1MDB for the past six years.

When was the Cabinet first informed that the Prime Minister was  in fact the final approving authority for all the controversial and opaque 1MDB deals, transactions and investments as he was intimately involved in all of them and cannot disclaim ignorance?

I have a strong suspicion the Cabinet Ministers did not know about Najib’s  final approving authority role for the 1MDB deals, transactions and investments until the past few days in June.

This not only raises the question why Najib had hidden the fact  from Cabinet and Parliament that he was the final approving authority for 1MDB when for the past four years the 1MDB scandal grew to become the biggest financial scandal in the nation’s history, but also the question of the propriety, validity and even legality of the Cabinet decisions on the 1MDB questionn  – one on 4th of March which declared the 1MDB deals as aboveboard and second one on  29th May which approved the 1MDB Roadmap after it was presented by Husni last Friday.

On Tuesday (June 2) night, Cabinet Ministers had a secret three-hour briefing on the 1MDP at Hotel Majestic, Kuala Lumpur.

This Cabinet briefing on the 1MDB was so secretive that Husni, who gave the briefing,  denied that the briefing for Ministers was about 1MDB when he was met at Hotel Majestic, and he had reason to be as secretive as possible about giving the Ministers a briefing on 1MDB on Tuesday night, for such a briefing to Cabinet  should have been taken place before the Ministers met last Friday and approved the 1MDB Roadmap.

It is now very clear that when the Ministers approved the 1MDB Roadmap at the Cabinet meeting last Friday on May 29, the overwhelming majority of the Ministers did not understand the MDB issues involved and the Ministers gave “blind” support for the 1MDB Roadmap, especially after  Najib had asked Ministers who do not agree with his handling of 1MDB to hand in their resignations.

Under such circumstances, it is no surprise that Ministers who did not even understand how Najib was handling the 1MDB issues gave their full support.

Why was it necessary to give Cabinet Ministers a three-hour special briefing on the 1MDB as happened at Hotel Majestic, Kuala Lumpur on Tuesday (June 2) night?

Such a  briefing should take place before the Cabinet was asked to adopt the 1MDB Roadmap on May 29, and not four days later on June 2.

This is really putting the cart before the horse!

It is also intriguing why it is necessary six years after the operation of 1MDB to appoint Husni as the Cabinet spokesman on 1MDB?

Is this because Najib has no confidence that  his Ministers cn talk sense about the 1MDB scandal even after the three-hour briefing on 1MDB by Husni on Tuesday night?

It is clear that the 35 Ministers can be divided into three groups on the 1MDB issue:

Firstly the handful who understand the 1MDB scandal, including its impropriety especially with regard to the lack of accountability and transparency but are prepared to overlook them because of loyalty to Najib and to their Ministerial posts;

Secondly, the handful who believes that 1MDB is a disastrous scandal and can lead to the downfall of UMNO/BN government, and want even the whole 1MDB Board to be sacked.

Thirdly, the majority of the Cabinet Ministers who do not want to understand or know what is happening in the 1MDB scandal so long as they keep their Ministerial positions.

In the leaked recording of his speech to four UMNO divisions on May 16, Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin maintained the view that it was unacceptable that 1MDB could pile up RM42 billion debts in a few years and he wanted the whole 1MDB Board to be sacked.

Now that Muhyiddin knows that Najib is the  final approving authority for 1MDB deals, transactions investments, would  Muhyiddin advocate that Najib should be sacked for allowing 1MDB to pile up RM42 billion debts in a few years?

The consequences of 1MDB scandal goes beyond the toppling of UMNO/BN government.

Husni had spelt out the costs and consequences of 1MDB scandal in his television interview last night when he said Malaysia must resolve the 1MDB debt issue or risk a negative chain of events, including a possible downgrade to the country’s credit outlook or a plunge in value of the ringgit.

Husni said if Putrajaya is forced to shoulder the 1MDB debt of RM42 billion on top of its development expenditure of RM52 billion for next year, it would cause the government to fail to meet its targeted Budget 2015 deficit of 3.2 per cent and revert to over 4 per cent instead.

He warned: “What will happen? Our ratings will drop, when our ratings drop, our companies borrow from abroad, our currency value will drop like in 1998 then, when our ringgit at one point was over RM4, how to pay debts?

“In our context, the main thing is we must solve the issue of debt so the people do not have to worry.”

Husni has cogently and eloquently summed up the case of patriotic Malaysians, like DAP MP for PJ Utara Tony Pua and PKR MP for Pandan, Rafizi Ramli who had been blowing the whistle in the past four years about the dangers and risks of thej controversial and opaque deals in the 1MDB scandal.

The country should be honouring and paying tribute to Pua and Rafizi for repeatedly sounding the warning, although under very difficult circumstances, about the risks and dangers of the 1MDB scandal.

The person who should be in the dock for exposing the country to the risks of of a chain of economic disasters like the nosedive  of the Malaysian ringgit  to 1998 levels and   a plunge in the country’s credit is instead on a road show to drum up public support to show that he is even more popular than the country’a longest-serving Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir during Mahathir’s 22 years as Prime Minister.

This is  why Malaysia is in such shambles as  this is  not the way to govern and lead  the country to realise Vision 2020 and join the ranks of developed nations in 2020!

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 4 June 2015, 5:21 pm and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib should present Ministerial statement in Parliament on Monday  how as final approving authority, he had allowed 1MDB scandal to balloon into a RM42 billion scandal in six years

Now that it has been established beyond a shadow of doubt, with the Second Finance Minister, Datuk Seri Husni Hanadzlah finally admitting publicly in his TV1 interview on the 1MDB on Wednesday night that the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak is the final approving authority for 1MDB deals, investments and transactions, Najib should present a Ministerial statement in Parliament on Monday to explain how he had allowed the 1MDB scandal to balloon into a RM42 billion scandal in six years.

Among the issues Najib should explain in his Ministerial statement on 1MDB to Parliament are the following nine items:

1. What  were the reasons for the amendment  in August 2009 of the Terengganu Investment Authority (TIA)’s Memorandum and Articles of Association Agreement to include Clause 117 stipulating that “the Prime Minister must give his written consent for any TIA deals, including the firm’s involvements or any bid for restructuring” to pave the way for TIA’s becoming  a federal agency the following month with name change to 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB)?

2. Why was the information  about  the Prime Minister as the final approving authority for all 1MDB deals, transactions and investments leading to 1MDB becoming the biggest financial scandal in the nation’s 58 year history in six years withheld from Cabinet and Parliament in the past six years?

3. the number of times each year since 2009  that Najib had given “written consent” under Clause 117 of the 1MDB M&A Agreement, and the details of every such decision.

4. whether Najib had personally given “written consent” as Prime Minister under Clause 117 of the 1MDB M&A to the following deals:

*the initial USD1 billion investment in Petrosaudi International Limited.

*the additional USD1billion in loans extended to Petrosaudi.

*the US$1.16 billion (RM4.2 billion) which went into the account controlled by Jho Low (made up of payments of first US$700 million  in 2009,  then US$160 million in  2010 and finally US$300 million  in 2011 – all to Good Star Limited, a company controlled by Jho Low).

*the siphoning of  USD260 million from 1MDB  for the acquisition of 53% shareholding in Utama Banking Group (UBG) from the latter’s substantial shareholder, Sarawak Governor Tun Taib Mahmud’s family vehicles.

*the raising of  bonds amounting to USD6.5 billion by paying fees in excess of 10 per cent to Goldman Sachs International.

*the costly guarantee sought from Abu Dhabi’s International Petroleum Investment Corporation (IPIC) for USD3.5 billion of these bonds.

*the decision to move US$1.1 billion from Cayman Islands to a bank in Singapore.

*the deal with Mongolia-based company Gobi Coal & Energy Limited (GCE).

*the sale of Tun Razak Exchange land to the Lembaga Tabung Haji.

5. The number of occasions where Najib as Prime Minister has refused to give “written consent” to 1MDB deals, citing the instances.

6. The number of Cabinet meetings since 2009 which took decisions on the 1MDB, giving the dates and the decisions.

7. The actual relationship between Najib and Jho Low in the entire history of the 1MDB imbroglio.

8. What are the other companies which have a similar clause providing that the Prime Minister is the final approving authority of the company’s deals, transactions and investments.

9. The number companies, listing them, where the Finance Minister is the final approving authority of the company’s deals, transactions and investments.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 5 June 2015, 11:06 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Will Najib sack Khalid as IGP for gross incompetence and lack of professionalism where police could not maintain order, security and national harmony in an indoor dialogue involving 1,500 people in the very sanctum of UMNO headquarters?

In one fell swoop, the painstakingly-orchestrated and highly-funded campaign to present Datuk Seri Najib Razak as the most popular Prime Minister in the nation’s history, and in the process, to claim that he has popular endorsement  for his  controversial handling of the RM42 billion 1MBD scandal, collapsed as a result of the  misjudgment over the 1MBD “Nothing2Hide” Forum at the UMNO sanctum at Putra World Trade Centre this morning.

Despite his boast of “Bugis warrior spirit”, Najib developed cold feet at  the last minute and dared not show up at the forum when it was confirmed that his 1MDB critics, especially  former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir, would show up for a “high noon” encounter with him.

What is most reprehensible is Najib’s roping in the police, and the preparedness of the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar to “play ball” by tweeting a police order to cancel the 1MDB “Nothing2Hide” forum on the grounds of public order and national harmony.

Something is really very amiss with  the Royal Malaysian Police when it  cannot even maintain order,  security and national harmony in an  indoor forum attended by some 1,500 people in the very sanctum of UMNO headquarters!

The last-minute “tweet” cancellation of the 1MDB “Nothing2Hide” forum featuring the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, had nothing to do with order, security and national harmony, or even police capability to maintain order and security in an indoor forum in the very sanctum of UMNO headquarters, but have everything to do with providing the Prime Minister with an excuse for not turning up at the 1MDB “Nothing2Hide” forum.

Najib has only himself and the IGP to blame if even more Malaysians are now convinced that the Prime Minister has a lot to hide with his last-minute decision to be absent  at the 1MDB “Nothing2Hide” forum after all the huge publicity about his “Tell All” session this morning.

Adding salt to injury, Khalid has now claimed that the Prime Minister was disappointed with his decision to pull the plug  on the 1MDB “Nothing2Hide” forum as it was his decision for “safety and security reasons, as well as to preserve harmony”.

Najib should sack as Khalid for gross incompetence and utter lack of professionalism when the police could not even ensure order, security and harmony in an indoor dialogue involving some 1,500 people  in the very sanctum of UMNO headquarters building.

Were there any signs that the 1,500-odd Malaysians  who attended the aborted 1MDB “Nothing2Hide” forum at the PWTC this morning were potential candidates to breach order, security and national harmony?

I have very strong and long-standing differences with Tun Mahathir, but it is a sorry and shameful spectacle to see the former longest-serving Prime Minister treated so shabbily by the police as if he is a lowly rabble-rouser and anti-national element out to stir trouble at the first available opportunity.

Furthermore, why was Mahathir not allowed to speak to the crowd who had turned up for the 1MDB “Nothing2Hide” forum.

Would Mahathir’s speech lead to serious breach of order, security and national harmony or would it just cause great embarrassment to the sitting Prime Minister?

May be Mahathir should be thankful that the Internal Security Act has been abolished or he might find himself a guest of His Majesty’s Government, in the way he had abused it during his tenure as Prime Minister.

How could Najib conduct any 1MDB “Nothing2Hide” dialogue when he had ducked this issue in Parliament in the past few years.

Instead of indulging in a public relations exercise, Najib should present a Ministerial statement in Parliament when MPs reconvene on Monday to explain how he had allowed the 1MDB scandal to balloon into a RM42 billion scandal in six years, followed by a two-day debate focussed on the RM42 billion 1MDB scandal.

In such a debate,  Najib could demonstrate his  “Nothing2Hide” qualities on the 1MDB scandal and the Second Finance Minister, Datuk Seri Husni Hanadzlah could elaborate the Save 1MDB Roadmap adopted by the Cabinet on May 29.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 5 June 2015, 1:09 pm and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


My forecast that Pakatan Rakyat  might not be around in two weeks’ time seems to have come true and what is left are the funeral rites

A fortnight ago, I gave my most pessimistic forecast that in two weeks’ time, there may not be a Pakatan Rakyat left.

It would appear that my worst-scene forecast for Pakatan Rakyat has come to pass  and all that is left are the funeral rites.

Today, the PAS 61st annual congress passed a motion to sever ties with the DAP and yet remain in Pakatan Rakyat (PR) without debate.

With this PAS Muktamar motion, Malaysian politics has entered into unchartered waters with immediate consequences.

In Penang for instance, the PAS Muktamar motion will make it impossible for PAS representatives to continue at  the various levels of Penang State Government.

In Selangor, the worst scenario will include a Selangor state general elections.

It is very difficult to foretell  how political developments will develop in the near future, but whether there is Pakatan Rakyat or not, Malaysians must remain constant, consistent and loyal to the  the goals for justice, freedom and human dignity that  they aspired and voted for in the 13th General Election when they united for the first electoral change in the seat of federal power in the nation’s history.

This is why I came to contest in Gelang Patah parliamentary seat – in pursuit of the Malaysian Dream where Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region, unite to make a great nation of Malaysia, through political, socio-economic, educational and nation-building reforms.

The Battle of Gelang Patah in the 13th general elections two years ago was not for one parliamentary seat, but to rally the people of Gelang Patah to spearhead a political whirlwind in Johore and Malaysia to bring about political change in Malaysia.

Pakatan Rakyat succeeded in winning 53% of the electoral vote but because of undemocratic  gerrymandering, PR was denied the majority of the parliamentary seats and federal power in Putrajaya.

Otherwise, the Prime Minister today is not Najib but Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who would be presiding over an agenda of Ketuanan Rakyat instead of being incarcerated in Sungai Buloh Prison.

What has happened is undoubtledly a victory for the UMNO strategists and plotters in their conspiracy to divide and  destroy PR with the twin  lure of UG government between UMNO and PAS and the implementation of hudud in Kelantan.

Now that Najib has succeeded in seeing the destruction of PR, he will not deliver as far as parliamentary approval for the PAS private member’s motion on the implementation of hudud in Kelantan.

In fact, the motion is not even  on the parliamentary order paper when Parliament reconvenes on Monday.

Najib is facing a life-and-death political struggle and he cannot alienate the 48 Barisan Nasional MPs in Sabah and Sarawak without whose support he will not be able to continue as Prime Minister.

Najib knows that he will lose the  support  of the 48 BN MPs in Sabah and Sarawak if UMNO gives parliamentary  support to  the PAS private member’s motion on hudud implementation in Kelantan.  In fact, Malaysia may even disintegrate as Sabah and Sarawak will feel that fundamental undertakings in the Malaysia Agreement 1963 are not being honoured.

It is simple logic what will dictate Najib’s choice between the 21 PAS MPs or the 48 BN MPs in Sabah and Sarawak.

Whether there is Pakatan Rakyat or not, the Malaysian Dream must go on. Those who support the Malaysian Dream, of an inclusive vision of Malaysia belonging to all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region, who can come together in a common national endeavour to build an united, harmonious, free, just, democratic  and strong Malaysia which can take its rightful place in the international arena, must continue to slog on.

The Malaysian Dream envisions a clean and incorruptible Malaysia – and the RM42 billion 1MDB scandal epitomises what is wrong with Malaysia which continues to be governed by a decadent  UMNO/BN government.

The pursuit of the Malaysian Dream must continue, whether there is a PR or not, as we owe to future generations of Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region, to build a better future for them.

(Speech at the dumpling festival ceramah at Gelang Patah on Saturday 6th  June 2015 at 2 pm)

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 6 June 2015, 4:05 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib’s “Nothing2Hide” forum has infamously boomeranged  into a Public Relations disaster and its time the Prime Minister have a “tell all” session in Parliament to demonstrate that he has really nothing to hide in the RM42 billion 1MDB scandal

Prime Minister Datuk Seri  Najib Razak’s “Nothing2Hide” forum scheduled this morning has infamously boomeranged into a Public Relations disaster and its time the Prime Minister have a “tell all” session in Parliament to demonstrate that he has really nothing to hide in the RM42 billion scandal.

Never before in the nation’s history has the Prime Minister become the butt of national jokes, to the extent that Najib’s failure to show up at the 1MDB “Nothing2Hide” forum this morning has become an instant  and foremost national news, overshadowing all other developments in the country, including the worst earthquake which hit Ranau and Mount Kinabalu areas this morning and the PAS Muktamar in Kuala Selangor.

In one fell swoop, the painstakingly-orchestrated and highly-funded campaign to present Najib as the most popular Prime Minister in the nation’s history, and in the process, to claim that he has popular endorsement for his controversial handling of the RM42 billion 1MBD scandal, has been destroyed by the farce of  Najib’s “no show” on the grounds of the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar’s tweet directive to cancel the forum – after it was known to all that former Prime Minister Tun Mahathir would be at the forum.

It does not speak well for Najib’s “Bugis warrior spirit” or the Royal Malaysian Police’s prowess and professionalism that it could not ensure order and security in an indoor dialogue involving some 1,500 people.

Nobody believes that the last-minute cancellation of the 1MDB “Nothing2Hide” forum has anything to do with  order and security – but everything to do with Najib’s political security.

Najib had hidden from the Cabinet and Parliament for six years that he is the final approving authority for 1MDB deals, enabling him to avoid accountability and responsibility since 2009 by pretending that he was not involved in the 1MDB deals, transactions and investments.

Now that the second Finance Minister Datuk Seri Husni Hanadszlah has finally admitted over TV on Wednesday night – a secret kept from Cabinet and Parliament for past six years – that Najib is not only the Chairman of the 1MDB Advisory Board but under the 1MDB Memorandum & Articles of Association agreement, the final approving authority for any 1MDB deal since 2009, Najib must “tell all” in Parliament about his  personal responsibility for 1MDB ballooning to become the country’s biggest financial scandal.

Najib cannot delegate his responsibility to account to Parliament and the nation why 1MDB has ballooned to become a RM42 billion scandal in six years to Husni as it is Najib and not Husni who is the final approving authority for 1MDB.

However, Husni has also many things to answer for as he has made numerous astounding statements in his TV interview, since his appointment as Cabinet spokesman on 1MDB.

For instance, Husni said in his  TV interview that 1MDB CEO Arul Kanda Kandasamy skipped the Public Accounts Committee hearing on 1MDB  on May 25 because he had a prior appointment in Abu Dhabi to secure funds for 1MDB to meet its debt obligations.

What then was the reason for Arul’s predecessor, Datuk Shahrol Ibrahim Halmi to “ponteng” from the PAC meeting?  Did Shahrol accompany Arul to Abu Dhabi to secure US$1 billion from Abu Dhabi’s International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC) to repay  early the US$975 million loan that was due in August to avoid the cross default of the entirety of its RM42 billion in debt that would have occurred should the consortium of banks  declare 1MDB to be delinquent?

Husni’s TV interview is a bundle of contradictions and a great play of words, especially in his claim that the 1MDB Roadmap approved by the Cabinet on May 29 was only a rationalisation and restructuring exercise for 1MDB assets, and were not efforts to “save” the controversy and debt-laden company or government.

Arul has denied that IPIC’s US$1 billion  in the 1MDB Roadmap was “a loan, debt or bailout”.

Do the Cabinet Ministers know what is  this US$1 billion “animal” which is not “a loan, debt or bailout” – and can Husni explain why the three-hour briefing for Cabinet Ministers on 1MDB was held four days after the Cabinet had approved the 1MDB Roadmap on May 29, and not before?

Are Najib and Husni prepared to be grilled by MPs when Parliament resumes on Monday on the 1MDB scandal by way of  special debate on the 1MDB?

This will be  the greatest test whether Najib really has Nothing2Hide on the 1MDB scandal.

(Speech  at the Stulang DAP Dinner in Johor Baru  on Friday, 5th June 2015 at 9pm)

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 6 June 2015, 8:34 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The PAS purge of the progressives

By Bridget Welsh

Malaysiakini

Jun 6, 2015

COMMENT
 The results have definitely spoken – the progressive, national-oriented pro-Pakatan Rakyat faction inside PAS has been wiped out from leadership positions in all of the party organs.

The outcome was not unexpected, but the ugliness of the muktamar even surpassed the nastiness of the vicious campaign before the polls. The implications of this outcome will deepen the ongoing divisions of the opposition, effectively severing Pakatan irreparably and empowering Umno.

This outcome was exactly what Umno wanted and assisted in with its infiltration of PAS. Ironically the electoral sweep by party leader Abdul Hadi Awang and his ulama hatchet men will feed into the continued leadership crisis within Umno. With Pakatan fractured, schisms and splits within Umno also deepen.

In short, the results of the PAS elections have contributed to Malaysia’s ongoing political crisis across the political divide and highlighted the deficit in quality national leadership to address the challenges ordinary Malaysians face.

The blame game has already begun. There are many at fault – PAS leaders from both factions, Umno, DAP and more. Labels of ‘losers’ and frustrations are likely to rise, as the noise of Malaysian politics gets louder with internal pettiness that serves to disenchant and anger the general public.

Dreams have died, or so it seems. The blame game is an inevitable outcome of polarised politics within Pakatan and in PAS itself. Few want to look inside, to reflect and move forward, as the overwhelming perception is a split is necessary and ties have been broken.

Politics of righteousness

Everyone thinks they are in the right. Those who have supported the ulama victory believe they are carrying out god’s work through hudud, and protecting their leader and party from attacks from outside.

The progressives believe they offer wisdom in bringing PAS out of its insularity and forging a national role based on democratic principles of fairness, inclusion and justice.

PAS’ outsiders equally tie their criticisms to a defence of the constitution, the value of trust in keeping one’s promises to one another and to the voters, and the dream of a viable alternative government.

All sides frame their ‘righteous’ interpretations in such a way that there is no middle ground, no mutual understanding and, in some cases, no respect.

The implications of this have been zero-sum politics, with limited outreach among groups. This in part explains the strength of the ulama group, who fought hard to annihilate their opponents since their losses in the last electoral bout. The polarising dynamic pushed people to take sides, and those in the middle such as Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man were painted as the ‘enemy’.

The pattern of ‘with us or against us’ and the destructive take-down politics has become the dominant paradigm of politics since 1999. In this party election, it found itself in PAS, with the ironic implication that it will hurt the group that has been most active in promoting this mode of politics in their fight against Umno – the other Pakatan parties, PKR and DAP.

Forces of destruction

Heavy emphasis in explaining the results has been on the ‘chai’ or list. The system does account in part for the decisiveness of the split between progressives and ulama groups. But there were other important factors taking place as well.

Foremost of these is the composition of the delegates themselves. Unlike previous muktamar, the 1,162 voting delegates this time were not party stalwarts nor were they party campaigners to the same degree as has been the case in the recent party polls.

A total of 571 delegates, about 49 percent, were new faces. Many did not sit in the trenches of Pakatan campaigns, nor walk the Bersih rallies. They come from inside of the party, the religious schools and internal party organs, especially influenced by the ulama wing.

Comparatively less exposed and more religiously conservative, their views of non-Muslims and the outside world are more suspicious and deeply parochial. This conservative clan is representative of Malays who stick to their own, who rarely move out of their circle of friends in religious classes and who live in their own echo chamber of social media. They are unlikely to read this article.

The emergence of PKR as an attractive alternative for ‘modern’ Malays, the revitalisation efforts by Umno among youth and Umno’s infiltration of religious institutions has meant that PAS has been grooming leaders from inside and in relative isolation.

The outcome can be seen that many of these insular delegates were at the muktamar, tactically placed in their positions from the party divisions in the campaign process.

A second factor that cannot be dismissed is the prominent role that DAP played in trying to sway the party outcome. Increasingly as Pakatan has evolved, there have been more interventions in shaping outcomes in other parties – from Kajang to this muktamar.

This hurt the progressive faction, with those seen as close to DAP such as Mohamad Sabu, who was one of the most affected. Rather than see him as a bridge for PAS for dialogue with outsiders, the Umno-like portrayal of the DAP predominated with the party – it was seen as too dominant and aggressive.

The more the DAP leaders made statements about PAS leaders, the more they negatively impacted the faction they aimed to empower.

The inability of the progressives to hush DAP leaders was seen as impotence and complicity, feeding the anger among the majority of PAS delegates. DAP chose to cater to its political base rather than understand the damage these actions would cause to the political base of the progressives.

Back to the past

Finally, responsibility can be found with the progressives themselves. The perception outside is that they were not strong or tactical enough. Keep in mind that the progressive group has played the driving role in the party leadership since 2004, when the conservative ulama’s dismal record in governance led to a massive electoral defeat in GE11.

This pattern of losses for an ulama-led PAS at the national polls will likely repeat itself in the next GE – as the group has an extremely limited basic understanding of economics or governance, with some of them tainted with the stench of corruption that is coming out of Kelantan and other areas of PAS governance. Hudud will not win them votes.

The progressives on their part however misstepped in not strengthening their leadership position within the party after the last muktamar and after GE13. They did not nurture the middle ground in the party effectively, and while they made ground in the last few months, their interventions were too late and in some cases backfired.

Acting in defensive rather than engagement mode, the Umno-style view of PAS as losing ground among Malays and kowtowing to the DAP took root, feeding insecurities and contributing the latest results.

In this difficult leadership challenge of moving PAS forward in confidence and more collectively, the progressives failed. It has placed PAS ironically in the same position it was before the progressives got the highest support in history in 1999 and back to when the party was seen as a pariah by the majority of Malaysians, as was the case in the 1980s and in GE11 when conservative ulama dominated the PAS party organs.

Tough choices ahead

It is said that out of crisis there is opportunity – and this party crisis for PAS is no exception. There is no real salve for these sorts of deep open wounds in the short term. We learn the most in life from our failures, not our successes. The question will be what lessons are being learned and how they can be actualised.

The ulama have played a political game in their relationship with Pakatan. On the one hand, they have passed motions that call to quit the coalition, yet on the other, they claim they will stay in Pakatan. This Umno-like double-speak shows that some PAS leaders are living in a ‘have your cake and eat it’ dream world, mistakenly believing that they can vote for separation and yet somehow try to save the marriage.

This sort of fantasy-like thinking shows how far gone this insular group is from actually playing any credible national leadership role.

The progressives will have to set the course ahead. They have important platforms as elected parliamentarians and assemblymen, and individually and collectively are among the most popular PAS leaders nationally. If PAS was a more democratic and transparent party, they would still hold positions of power.

The progressives face difficult choices, knowing that in the history of their party no one who has left PAS has politically survived and that as a group they still are the only bridge to connect the insular extreme clan to the national landscape. Maintaining dialogue and connections will have to be balanced with differentiating themselves and defending their principles for a more inclusive, democratic and just Malaysia.

It will be a bumpy road ahead, with the options of loyalty, voice or exit on the horizon. Many are calling for the progressives to leave PAS and for the conservative ulama-led PAS be expelled from Pakatan. Exits can take many forms and in the case of Pakatan, a split is now inevitable.

It’s crucial not to allow anger to overshadow careful reflection, to assure that bridges remain for dialogue and to remember that the stakes involve the future of democracy in Malaysia.

BRIDGET WELSH is a senior research associate of the Center for East Asia Democratic Studies of the National Taiwan University, where she conducts research on democracy and politics in Southeast Asia.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 6 June 2015, 10:03 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pandikar should agree to an urgent motion  in Parliament to allow televised PAC hearings on 1MDB scandal as a first step to parliamentary reforms in Malaysia

Members of Parliament from both sides of the House are in full support of the Speaker, Tan Sri Pandikar Aman Mulia to push for parliamentary reforms to eradicate Parliament’s negative image of “rubber stamp” of the Executive and to ensure separation of powers is in place.

The Speaker should not wait until next year to test out whether proposals for parliamentary reforms could be accepted and implemented by the Executive, as  parliamentary reforms which meet immediate public needs should be carried out without any delay.

One such immediate parliamentary reform  is for the Public Accounts Committee hearing particularly on the biggest scandal in the country – the RM42 billion 1MDB scandal – to be held in public and to bde televised live, as is the position of Dewan Rakyat proceedings.

DAP MP for PJ Utara, Tony Pua has reported from Malta where he attended the Fifth Westminster Workshop organised by the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association for Public Accounts Committee that some three quarters of Commonwealth countries hold their Public Accounts Committee hearings in public today, in full presence of the media.

In fact, nearly all  African Commonwealth Parliaments practised public hearings for their PACs.

It is a real shame that Malaysia, which claims itself to be  more democratic and developed than the African Commonwealth nations, is  actually more undemocratic and lacking in  the basic principles of parliamentary accountability and good governance.

The Speaker is chairing a meeting tomorrow on parliamentary reforms  and the DAP MP on the committee, Anthony Loke (Seremban), will propose that the Speaker agree to an urgent  parliamentary motion to allow televised PAC hearings on 1MDB scandal as a first and immediate step to parliamentary reforms in Malaysia.

This is particularly pertinent and relevant for two reasons:

Firstly, there is  no greater public interest issue  in the country today than the RM42 billion 1MDB scandal; and

Secondly, the  Minister  for Youth and Sports, Khairy Jamaluddin said today that the government has no problem with televising of PAC’s hearings on 1MDB, as this is solely within the prerogative of the Speaker.

What then is Pandikar waiting for? The ball is in the Speaker’s court.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 7 June 2015, 5:07 pm and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.