Najib should explain his role in the 1MDB-Tabung Haji fiasco, in particular whether he had approved or directed LTH in the 1MDB land sale

The Lembaga Tabung Haji (LTH) Chairman Datuk Seri Abdul Azeez Abdul Rahman has announced that following advice from the Prime Minister, the plot of prime land in the Kuala Lumpur city centre which LTH purchased from 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) is to be sold to the highest of three bidders within the next two weeks.

This has however not ended the storm over the scandal and stigma of criminal breach of trust of pilgrim funds to bailout 1MDB, which is acquiring increasing gale force with rising chorus for the resignation of the Chairman and the four top executives of LTH, the termination of the 1MDB-LTH land deal and the refund of the payment made by LTH, and even for the resignation of the Prime Minister himself.

The Prime Minister cannot continue with his policy of elegant silence while giving private and meaningless assurances that  “he will not protect those involved” if there was any wrongdoing.

Even  his cousin-UMNO Vice President, Datuk Seri Hishamuddin Hussein had broken ranks and joined Deputy UMNO President, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and  UMNO Vice President Datuk Seri Shafie Apdal to express concerns about the government’s credibility as to suggest an international, independent auditing firm to examine 1MDB accounts – which tantamounts to a vote of no confidence in Najib’s initiative in early March asking the Auditor-General to  audit the 1MDB accounts.

It is now  more than two months since Najib  had ordered the Auditor-General to independently verify the accounts of the 1MDB but nothing has been heard about its progress. Will the Auditor-General at least table an interim report on its audit of the 1MDB accounts to Parliament when it reconvenes on May 18?

Najib should break his public silence on the RM42 billion 1MDB scandal and explain his role in the 1MDB-Tabung Haji bailout fiasco, in particular whether he had approved or directed LTH in the land deal with 1MDB, selling land 1MDB had acquired from the Federal government four years ago for less than RM64 per square feet and selling it to LTH for  43 times returns at RM2,773 per square feet.

If Najib had not approved the LTH’s land deal with 1MDB, then let him reveal who is the Minister who had given the approval and the reasons why.

As Chairman of the 1MDB Advisory Board, will Najib recommend to the 1MDB to terminate the land transaction with LTH and to refund the payments made by LTH as 1MDB has not fulfilled all conditions of the sale?

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 10 May 2015, 9:26 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Hishammuddin
,
Muhyiddin Yassin
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Permatang Pauh win shows M’sia ready for more women leaders

by Syerleena Abdul Rashid

Free Malaysia Today

May 9, 2015

COMMENT

The voters of Permatang Pauh have spoken. They have chosen dignity over conceit, honesty over corruption, coherence over illogic.

By now, Malaysians from all walks of life have heard of PKR President Wan Azizah Wan Ismail’s victory in the Permatang Pauh by-election. She won with a majority of 8,841 votes and defeated Barisan Nasional’s (BN) Suhaimi Sabudin. Her victory symbolises the yearning Malaysians have for much needed political reforms, ending tyrannical regimes, upholding social justice and above all, restoring democracy.

However for the women of this country, her triumphant return into Parliament symbolises a newfound hope that Malaysians are more than ready to discard traditionalist views and are keen on accepting women in leadership roles. Wan Azizah, herself, acknowledged how essential women’s roles are in supporting socio-political reform movements, “Women’s political, social and economic rights are an integral and inseparable part of their human rights”.

As a multi-cultural country like Malaysia and one on the brink of modernity, we can no longer afford to ignore the important roles women have in contributing to our country’s growth.

Malaysian women make up over 50% of approximately 23 million people and while 51.7% registered voters are women; the number of political representation is still considerably low.

According to reports, the percentage of Malaysian women in parliament is roughly “10% lower than the global average. We still tend to view our society as being somewhat male dominated, therefore sometimes, we come across men who are visibly threatened by the notion of women participating in decision making processes.

Wan Azizah’s return to Parliament also means that our issues as well as interests will be given more weight, more consideration and the respect we rightfully deserve. Her comeback also means – we now have one more woman in Parliament. This self-proclaimed “accidental” politician is seen as a beacon of hope, a figure so well revered and loved. An articulate leader who emanates eloquence and composure; her presence can placate even her darkest enemies.

Never forget that democracy isn’t just about ballot boxes, it is also about providing inclusiveness and taking in differing views from various groups. If Malaysia is to reform itself into a functioning democratic nation – one that is adamant about creating a more just, free and unbiased society; women must be a part of decision making processes and society must allow women to take on leadership roles.

Syerleena Abdul Rashid is DAP Wanita Bukit Bendera Political Education Director and an MBPP Councillor

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 10 May 2015, 7:21 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Parliament
,
women
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Congratulations, Lady of Courage & Commitment!

                This entry was posted on Monday, 11 May 2015, 3:03 pm and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Election
,
Martin Jalleh
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


“Once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” to topple UMNO/BN as Federal Government and seven State Governments in Terengganu, Kedah, Perak, Pahang, Negri Sembilan, Malacca and Johor may be lost if Pakatan Rakyat cannot even survive next month

The biggest news headlines in the past two days have been the RM42 billion 1MDB scandal and its latest edition, the RM188 million 1MDB-Lembaga Tabung Haji (LTH) bailout with LTH paying 1MDB for  1.56 acres of Tun Razak Exchange (TRX)  land at  RM2,773 per square foot, which is 43 times more than 1MDB had acquired from the Federal Government four years ago at less than RM64 per square foot.

Events are unfolding at  rapid pace in UMNO over the ability of Datuk Seri Najib Razak to survive as Malaysia’s sixth Prime Minister and UMNO President.

Just before coming on stage, for instance, I read on the Internet of the blog by former Law Minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim about a top secret meeting in Milan between Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and several UMNO bigwigs to discuss his possible takeover as Prime Minister, but Zaid admitted that this information was unverified and he did not know how reliable was his source.

But what is certain is that Najib has declared war on former Prime Minister Tun Mahathir who had asked Najib to resign as Prime Minister on the ground that UMNO/BN will lose the next polls under Najib, as the Prime Minister had for the first time made a fighting speech in Tawau in Sabah vis-à-vis Mahathir’s attacks on him.

All this raises the question, whether UMNO/BN could be toppled in the next 14th General Elections.

The answer is a categorical and a positive “Yes”, as the results of the 13th General elections in 2013 have not only showed that the Najib Federal Government is just a minority government with 47% of the national vote, but seven State Governments in Peninsular Malaysia, namely Terengganu, Kedah, Perak, Negri Sembilan, Melaka, Pahang and Johor could change hands in the next general elections, as the UMNO/BN has secured less than 55% of the total state votes cast in the last general elections – Perak (45%), Kedah (50%), Terengganu (51%), Negri Sembilan (52%), Melaka (53%), Pahang (54%) and Johor (54%).

However, this “Once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” to topple UMNO/BN as Federal Government and seven State Governments in Terengganu, Kedah, Perak, Pahang, Negri Sembilan, Malacca and Johor could only be achieved if Pakatan Rakat (PR) can continue to grow from strength to strength with increasing and widening support and confidence from the voters in Malaysia.

But all these opportunities  may be lost if Pakatan Rakyat cannot even survive next month!

I will not be able to answer the question whether there will be a Pakatan Rakyat a month from today – and this is an indication of the crisis  Pakatan Rakyat is facing in its seven-year history after achieving the most astounding results in the 13th General Elections, denying the UMNO/BN coalition the majority vote the first time in Malaysian electoral history.

I am still hoping that Pakatan Rakyat can remain as a political force to be reckoned with provided all the Pakatan Rakyat component parties remain true, sincere and faithful to the PR Common Policy Framework as well as the PR consensus operational principle that no one political leader or single political party can make or veto any decision arrived collectively by consensus of all three PR parties.

The Pakatan Rakyat stalemate and crisis have arisen not because of hudud but  because of PAS leadership’s failure to abide by the PR Common Policy Framework and the PR consensus operational principle, and unless both these principles can be restored, it is impossible for PR to continue to be a political alternative to Barisan Nasional and a political force to be reckoned with, as both the credibility and legitimacy of Pakatan Rakyat would have been severely damaged.

I was recently on  a week-long study tour of Jordan and Egypt with four DAP Members of Parliament, Teresa Kok (Seputeh), Liew Chin Tong (Kluang), Zairil Khir Johari (Bukit Bendera) and Steven Sim (Bukit Mertajam) meeting local intellectuals and activists and  with Malaysian students in Amman, Mafraq, Irbid, Karak, Alexandria and Cairo where we learned not only about the political developments in these two countries but also the concerns and aspirations of Malaysian students in the Middle East.

We also visited the Zaatari refugee camp in Jordan near the border with Syria, which houses over 80,000 Syrian refugees fleeing from the violence of the Syrian civil war.

As I told Malaysian students in Alexandria and Cairo, it is a disservice to Islam to lump those who have differences of view with regard to  hudud and its implementation as anti-Islam, as this will not only be lumping the first five Prime Ministers of Malaysia, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak, Tun Hussein, Tun Mahathir and Tun Abdullah, but also UMNO as “anti-Islam”, and even those who had co-operated with UMNO as “anti-Islam” – which would include PAS which had formed a coalition government with UMNO for four years from 1973 to 1977.

Jordan has over 92% Muslim population while Egypt has over 95% Muslim population. Both countries do not have hudud.

The debate in Egypt and Jordan  on whether hudud should be implemented is a very active one.

Are we  to regard the majority of the Muslims in Jordan and Egypt as anti-islam because hudud has not been implemented in both these countries?

Furthermore such an attitude  would have grouped Islamists and Islamic scholars who have differences of views about immediate implementation of hudud as “anti-Islam”.

Renowned scholar Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Chairman of the International Union of Islamic Scholars (Kesatuan Ulama Islam Sedunia) has stressed that Sharia cannot be divided up into sections with some accepted and others rejected as  Sharia must be applied in all its aspects, and not just Qisas and Hudud which represent only a small part of Sharia.

Sharia (the literal meaning of Sharia is “the path Allah intends people to follow”) includes religious, civil, moral, cultural and commercial rulings. It governs personal, family, national and international relations. All these are included under the rubric of “Sharia Law”.

In Egypt, I read the  criticism by Islamic scholars about  “misguided Islamization by demanding that people fulfil their duties before receiving their rights” as “Islamic law is an undivided unity, within which the Hudud form only a small part”.

The Islamic scholars upheld the  priority of Islamic law, which first gives people their rights before demanding their duties.

They contend that the  state should first satisfy the rights of its citizens, which include their natural entitlements to food, clothes, education, health, transportation and housing, and that these basic needs of the people must take priority, in other words, they envisage Hudud at the end, and not at the beginning of the spectrum of duties vis-à-vis rights.

Are these Islamic scholars anti-Islam?

I am not a Muslim and I am not anti-Islam, and the overwhelming majority of non-Muslim Malaysians are not anti-Islam.

We in Malaysia should therefore not make the mistake of lumping those who have differences of view with regard to  hudud and its implementation, whether Muslims or non-Muslism as anti-Islam, creating the  myth of an enormous number of people in Malaysia who are “anti-Islam” than is really the case.

The greatest political challenge facing Malaysians today is whether we can build on the momentum created by Pakatan Rakyat in the past seven years, based on the PR Common Policy Framework, to continue to hold high an inclusive policy which is capable of uniting and mobilizing Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or region to achieve our Malaysian Dream of a united, free, just, harmonious and progressive society for all – starting with the toppling of the UMNO/BN Government in Putrajaya and in the seven states of Terengganu, Kedah, Perak, Pahang, Negri Sembilan, Malacca and Johor in the 14GE.

(Speech at the “Kukuhkan  Pakatan, Hancurkan Barisan” ceramah perdana at Padang Perdana, Kota Bahru on Sunday, 10th May 2015 at 10.30 pm)

                This entry was posted on Monday, 11 May 2015, 1:54 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Najib Razak
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Political Islam
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Are we a Nation of Sheep?

By Martin Jalleh

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 12 May 2015, 2:27 pm and is filed under
Martin Jalleh
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Merdekakan Minda Melayu (Liberate The Malay Mind)

M. Bakri Musa

12.5.2015

Malays need to have minda merdeka (free or liberated mind). We do not need another Melayu Baru (New Malay), Glokal Malay (contraction for global and local), Ketuanan Melayu (Malay hegemony), revolusi mental (mental revolution), and other tired slogans. Those would all be for naught if our collective minds remained trapped with their distorted views of the past and present. Facing the future with a closed mind is not the way either, at least not with any hope for success.

        The famed Indonesian writer Pramoedya Ananta Toer published his highly-acclaimed Buru Quartet novels soon after his release from Pulau Buru prison. When asked during a book tour in America how he was able to craft such a wonderful work of art while being imprisoned under the most inhumane conditions, Pramoedya replied, “I create freedom for myself!”

        This is what a free mind can do. Your body may be imprisoned and confined to total darkness for 24 hours a day save for a ray of light peeking through the keyhole, as Pramoedya was, but no one could imprison your free mind. Under such cruel circumstances a mind that is not free could easily disintegrate, going wild and berserk, which justifies the continued isolation and inhumane treatment.

        Likewise, Malays must create freedom for ourselves. Merdeka Minda Melayu! (Liberate The Malay Mind!) This should be our new battle cry, its rhythmic resonance and arresting alliteration trumping even Hang Tuah’s immortal Takkan Melayu Hilang Di Dunia! (Malays shall never disappear from this Earth!)

        Implicit in my choice of the title for this book is the recognition that the Malay mind has long been entrapped. The challenges our community has been grappling with all along can directly or indirectly be attributed to the fact that our collective consciousness has been caged and consequently closed off to seeking out new and innovative solutions.

        Contrary to the assertions of many, our problems are not rooted in the presumed deficiencies of our biology or culture. Nor are they caused by colonialism (traditional or the neo-variety), the pendatangs (immigrants), capitalism, globalization, or even our supposed lack of unity. We have been led to believe that these are problems, not opportunities. They will remain so as long our minds are trapped. If we liberate our minds we will then be able to view these challenges as opportunities, and begin to explore them as such. That would be more productive, and the results would be more to our liking.

        We have been addicted to the comfort of life underneath the proverbial coconut shell for far too long. Now with the shell breached by globalization and the digital waves, it is dawning upon us that our “comfort” is anything but. There is a far greater, more open, and definitely wondrous universe out there that we have been missing.

        Life under the coconut shell is no longer sustainable; for many it is already intolerable. We can either topple this shell ourselves or risk having it done by external forces. With the former we would be in command of our destiny; we could choose the timing, manner, and consequently the outcome. With the latter, we would be at the mercy of events and circumstances beyond our control; we would be reduced to being victims, begging for the kindness and benevolence of others.

        Saddam Hussein and his Republican Guards certainly thought they were very comfortable in the desert, secure under their well-camouflaged shells. That is, until those shells were literally blown apart by outside forces.

        The Malay coconut shell cannot be physically destroyed as it is only metaphorical – our closed minds. Besides, with the huge pores already created by globalization and the digital revolution, many have already successfully emerged from underneath that shell. The biggest danger is not so much that our shell will be toppled by outside forces or through agitations from within, rather that the world would ignore and leave us to rot underneath it, with only the mushrooms to sustain us.

        This would be the fate that awaits those with a closed mind. Perhaps we could rationalize that by adopting a “leave us alone” philosophy. Such an option however, is not for us to choose but for others to impose.

        If we do not merdekakan minda kita, that is, liberate our minds, others will define our destiny for us.

        In short, the future of Malays depends on, in Pramoedya’s words, our ability to create freedom for ourselves. We would achieve this goal not through endless and meaningless mass exhortations from our leaders rather individual at a time. A Malay with a liberated mind is his or her own leader. We can dispense with the current crop of leaders with trapped minds.

Adapted from M. Bakri Musa:  Liberating The Malay Mind, ZI Publications Sdn Bhd, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia, 2013

Next week:  Changing The Malay Narrative

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 12 May 2015, 10:04 pm and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
Malays
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Right and proper thing for Najib to do is to seek a vote of confidence when Parliament reconvenes on Monday

(Scroll down for BM version of this statement / Terjemahan BM di bawah)

The right and proper thing for Datuk Seri Najib Razak to do is to seek a vote of confidence as Prime Minister when Parliament reconvenes on Monday.

Although there is no precedent of a “no confidence” motion in Malaysian Parliament in the past 56 years, there is a precedent for a “vote of confidence” motion on the Prime Minister, which was moved in the Dewan Rakyat on January 27, 1976, by then Dato Hussein Onn when he became Malaysia’s third Prime Minister after the death of his predecessor, Tun Razak.

There had earlier been a suggestion that Pakatan Rakyat MPs should table a motion of no confidence against the Prime Minister when Parliament reconvenes on May 18 especially as the ballooning RM42 billion 1MDB scandal will involve not only all Malaysians but future generations.

Apart from the question of its practicability, as there is a great likelihood that such a motion under the present circumstances would not be able to navigate through the Parliamentary Standing Orders to surface as a motion to be debated and decided by MPs in Parliament, there is now the added problem that it may not even secure the full vote of PR MPs.

As nobody really believes all the “big drama” enacted after the Umno Supreme Council meeting yesterday that “things are never so well in Umno” and “support for Najib never so strong” or  Najib’s declaration that “no one can tear me and Muhyiddin apart” and that “Those slandering us don’t love UMNO” – reducing not just former Umno Ministers but UMNO’s longest-serving Prime Minister into instant traitors of Umno – as the first minority Prime Minister in the country, Najib should seek a motion of confidence from Parliament on Monday to prove to the nation and the world that he still enjoys the confidence of the majority of MPs in the country.

Is Najib bold enough to seek such a vote of confidence from Parliament on Monday or he is fearful that an accident might occur and he might lose a vote of confidence  on Monday and suddenly cease to be Prime Minister?

——————–

(Teks Bahasa Malaysia)

Langkah terbaik dan paling tepat untuk diambil oleh Najib ialah mendapatkan undi percaya apabila Parlimen kembali bersidang Isnin nanti

Langkah terbaik dan paling tepat untuk diambil oleh Datuk Seri Najib Razak ialah mendapatkan undi percaya selaku Perdana Menteri apabila Parlimen kembali bersidang Isnin nanti.

Walaupun belum pernah ada dahuluan usul tidak percaya dalam Parlimen Malaysia sepanjang 56 tahun lalu, terdapat dahuluan bagi usul undi percaya terhadap Perdana Menteri, yang telah diusulkan di Dewan Rakyat pada 27 Januari 1976 oleh Hussein Onn (ketika itu Dato’) apabila beliau menjadi Perdana Menteri Malaysia ketiga selepas kematian Tun Razak.

Sebelum ini juga terdapat cadangan supaya Ahli-ahli Parlimen Pakatan Rakyat membentangkan usul tidak percaya kepada Perdana Menteri apabila Parlimen kembali bersidang 18 Mei nanti, terutamanya memandangkan skandal RM42 bilion 1MDB yang kian membelon bakal melibatkan bukan sahaja semua rakyat Malaysia hari ini, tetapi juga generasi akan datang.

Selain daripada soal kesesuaian, kerana besar kemungkinan usul sedemikian dalam keadaan sekarang bukan sahaja sukar melepasi Aturan Mesyuarat untuk dibahas dan diputuskan oleh Ahli-ahli Dewan Rakyat, malah kini terdapat masalah tambahan di mana agak sukar untuk mendapatkan sokongan penuh kesemua Ahli-ahli Parlimen Pakatan Rakyat.

Memandangkan tidak ada sesiapa yang percaya dengan sandiwara yang dipentaskan selepas mesyuarat Majlis Tertinggi Umno semalam yang kononnya ‘keadaan tidak pernah sedemikian baik dalam Umno’ dan ‘sokongan untuk Najib tidak pernah sebegitu kuat’ atau pernyataan Najib bahawa ‘tidak ada sesiapa yang boleh memisahkan saya dan Muhyiddin’ dan bahawa ‘mereka yang memfitnah kami, tidak sayangkan Umno’ – yang menjadikan bukan sahaja bekas-bekas menteri Umno, malahan juga bekas Perdana Menteri yang paling lama berkhidmat sebagai pengkhianat Umno – sebagai Perdana Menteri minoriti pertama dalam negara, Najib wajar membawa usul percaya di Parlimen pada hari Isnin demi membuktikan kepada negara dan dunia bahawa beliau masih menikmati kepercayaan majoriti Ahli Parlimen negara ini.

Adakah Najib cukup berani untuk membawa usul percaya di Parlimen pada hari Isnin nanti atau adakah beliau risau akan berlaku sesuatu yang tidak diduga dan beliau tewas dalam undian percaya pada hari Isnin nanti serta tidak lagi menjadi Perdana Menteri?

(Kenyataan media di Kuala Lumpur pada hari Selasa 12 Mei 2015)

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 12 May 2015, 6:05 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Umno-BN battle royal

 – Koon Yew Yin

The Malaysian Insider

12 May 2015

A titanic power struggle is currently taking place in the country. In one corner of the ring is former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and his mainly Umno supporters who have decided to kick the Prime Minister out of power for a variety of reasons, including the 1MDB fiasco and for personal wrong doings and unresolved scandals of which the Altantuya one tops the list.

In the other corner stands Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak with the Umno and Barisan Nasional establishment behind him.

So far, Dr Mahathir has not been able to win this political fight of the decade, despite having many in the audience on his side and cheering him on. Although it is still early in the battle, it looks like the Prime Minister will survive. This is because unless Dr Mahathir can deliver a killer knockout punch – perhaps in the way of some new revelation such as from the 1MDB investigations or from the fugitive Sirul Azhar that can incriminate Najib or his family – the Prime Minister – just like Mayweather in his fight against Manny Pacquiao – is dodging and side-stepping all of Dr Mahathir’s punches.

Najib is confident that he will still be standing at the end of the fight. He is also confident that he will be the winner because he has the parliamentary convention and rules on his side in remaining as the Prime Minister.

According to the British system which guides our system here, mid-term transitions in the Prime Minister’s position may occur when the Prime Minister resigns, is incapacitated, or dies in office. We can see that not only is Najib determined to fight all the way to the end of the battle but he has vowed not to surrender.

He has also effectively counter punched by lining up the Umno Supreme Council and various state leaders in his corner. He has also neutralised one of Dr Mahathir’s potential big punchers by lining up Muhyiddin, the Umno deputy president and deputy prime minister and the man who is supposed to act as Prime Minister in a temporary capacity until the leadership of the government is determined, by his side.

How to view the Big Fight and what can we do about it?

How should the Malaysian audience view this fight and what can we do about it? It is my strong opinion that we should not support Dr Mahathir or the prime minister.

Both leaders have been toxic for the country. We see that Dr Mahathir is coming out with criticism of the corruption, abuse of power, bail outs, and other faults and misconduct of the Najib regime. But we all know that Dr Mahathir was responsible for an even bigger basket of dirty laundry that has cost Malaysians billions of dollars to clean up.

When we do the accounting for what the two leaders have cost the country in terms of lost tax payers money from corrupt, bad or crony-driven deals, we will find that Dr Mahathir is presently still ahead. His list of dirty laundry includes: BMF, MAS, Proton, Perwaja and IPPs and many others. As to enrichment of family member’s Dr Mahathir is also far ahead.

How did his son, Datuk Mokhzani, become the ninth richest man in Malaysia so quickly? According to Zamil Ibrahim, president of the party Kita, Dr Mahathir needs to shine a light on how his children amassed so much wealth so quickly. “You can’t get this world record [in wealth accumulation] in any part of the world. Only Dr Mahathir can explain.”

For those who want to support Dr Mahathir, I also wish to point out that the replacement prime  minister will have to meet with Dr Mahathir’s approval. If they turn out to be either Muhyiddin or Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi or even his own son, Datuk Seri Mukhriz, whose name has been brought up as the dark horse, the new Prime Minister will be equally disastrous for the country.  Both Muhyiddin and Zahid have their skeletons in the cupboards and they are not small skeletons!

Let the fight continue

So I say,  let the fight continue. Let it go on whether for 15 or 30 rounds. Let them fight until they knock each other out of the ring. Let’s see what dirty trick they will use to punch the other side out of contention. Let’s hear more revelations of scandals, bribes, commissions, kickbacks, bailouts, payouts! Let’s find out which cesspool is deeper and more full of s***!

It’s the Umno and Barisan battle royal and all Malaysians have an unprecedented ringside view.  – May 12, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 12 May 2015, 5:13 pm and is filed under
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Scandalous and Shameless Conflict of interest

By Martin Jalleh

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 13 May 2015, 1:21 pm and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Martin Jalleh
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Transkrip Ucapan Lim Kit Siang semasa Ceramah Perdana di Padang Perdana pada 10 Mei 2015

Terima kasih MC YB Baihaki dan YDP PAS Kota Bharu, YB Cikgu Rahim, Timbalan Presiden PAS YB saudara Mat Sabu, S/U Agung PKR YB Rafizi, YB Zuraida dan pemimpin- pemimpin Pakatan Rakyat, saudara- saudara dan saudari, selamat malam salam sejahtera dan salam ubah.

Dalam dua tiga hari ini apa menjadi tajuk berita besar, dua tiga hari ini, skandal 1MDB dan masalah skandal penjualan tanah di KL kepada Lembaga Tabung Haji bukan? Itu tajuk berita besar dan selepas itu pun ada lagi satu dua tajuk besar.

Hari ini nampaknya ada satu blog yang ditulis oleh Zaid Ibrahim, bekas Menteri. Dia kata daripada Jepun dia dapat maklumat bahawa ada satu perjumpaan sulit di Milan. Kenapa di Milan? Siapa ada di Milan? Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Tan Sri Muhyiddin sekarang berada di Milan Itali. Dia ikut Zaid Ibrahim, dia dapat maklumat bahawa ada satu mesyuarat sulit Tan Sri Muhyiddin dengan Tengku Razali mengenai kemungkinan untuk menjatuhkan Najib sebagai Perdana Menteri.

Benar tak  benar dia kata pun tak tahu. Dia tak tahu, saya pun tak tahu lah. Tapi apa yang kita tahu ialah Perdana Menteri kita di Tawau Sabah hari ini malam ini. Dan dia sudah mula berperang dengan Tun Dr Mahathir. Dan dia cabar Dr Mahathir bahawa jangan kacau dia, dia rela lawan balik. Mungkin esok apabila dia jumpa dengan Ketua Bahagian Umno akan perkembangan yang berikut.

Tetapi dengan perkembangan- perkembangan semacam ini, bolehkah kita tumbang Umno dan BN di masa depan? Bolehkah? Mungkinkah? Kali yang pertama dalam sejarah Malaysia 58 tahun. Kali yang pertama kita lihat kemungkinan bahawa kita boleh tumbang Umno dan BN. Dan ini kita boleh lihat daripada keputusan PRU13 di mana parti- parti Pakatan Rakyat, PAS, PKR dan DAP. Kita memperolehi majoriti pengundi- pengundi sungguhpun kita kalah daripada segi kerusi parlimen oleh kerana persempadanan kawasan- kawasan pilihanraya tidak adil dan tidak demokratik.

Dan bukan sahaja di masan depan, kalau kita ikut trend ini, mungkin kita boleh sampai ke Putrajaya. Tetapi ada tujuh negeri pun mungkin boleh jatuh. Betul? Kedah boleh jatuh? Terengganu boleh jatuh, Pahang, Negeri Sembilan, Melaka dan satu negeri sampai PRU2013 dilihat sebagai satu negeri tak mungkin parti- parti pembangkang untuk pecah.

Johor, Johor sekarang sudah dekat, kita boleh pun memerintah di Johor mengikut keputusan PRU13. Betul? Tetapi prasyarat ialah bahawa Pakatan Rakyat kekal. Bolehkah Pakatan Rakyat kekal? Teruskan. Kalau saya ditanya saya pun tak tahulah. Sama ada Pakatan Rakyat boleh kekal atau tak boleh kekal. Lagi satu bulan akan menentukan masa depan sama ada rakyat Malaysia boleh tukar tumbang Umno dan BN dalam PRU yang akan datang.

Baru- baru ini saya dengan 4 ahli parlimen DAP, YB daripada Kluang Chin Tong, YB daripada Bukit Bendera Zairil Khir Johari, YB daripada Seputeh Teressa dan YB daripada Bukit Mertajam Steven Sim. Kita ada pergi Jordan dan Mesir untuk jumpa tukar fikiran dengan pelajar- pelajar kita di Jordan lebih kurang 2 ribu orang. Ada pelajar- pelajar kita di Jordan dan pun di Mesir. Saya dengar mungkin lebih kurang 10 ribu pelajar- pelajar di Mesir dan kita ada tukar fikiran dan belajar mengenai perkembangan politik di Timur Tengah.

Dan mereka kita ada sangat frank tukar pandangan dan ada soalan- soalan dikemukan dan mereka ada tanya mengenai masalah- masalah politik di negara kita sama ada Pakatan Rakyat boleh kekal. Masalah- masalah yang sekarang Pakatan Rakyat menghadapi. Kenapa Pakatan Rakyat tak boleh terus bersatu padu.

Masalah sebenarnya bukanlah hudud. Masalah ialah sama parti- parti di Pakatan Rakyat boleh jujur dan ikhlas untuk mengotakan apa yang kita sudah janji. Apabila kita tubuh Pakatan Rakyat 2008, bahawa kita bersetujui mengenai dasar bersama. Dasar bersama mengenai masa depan menyelamatkan Malaysia.  Supaya kita mengembalikan demokrasi, kebebasan, keadilan dan supaya negara boleh menjadi satu negara yang adil dan makmur untuk semua rakyat. Itulah masalah.

Oleh kerana kalau ketiga- tiga parti Pakatan Rakyat tak boleh pegang apa yang kita sudah janji, bagaimana kita boleh dapat sokongan dan harapan keyakinan orang ramai. Dan dalam pertukaran kita sama ada di Jordan atau di Kaherah, masalah-masalah yang timbul ialah mengenai hudud. Saya bukan orang Islam tetapi dalam Jordan dalam Mesir, Jordan 92% penduduk- penduduk orang Islam. Di Mesir 95% penduduk- penduduk orang Islam. Dan pun di Jordan dan di Mesir tidak ada hudud.

Dan ada pun pandangan, ada pertikaian, ada debate sama ada patutkah untuk utamakan hudud atau tidak. Dan saya bacalah dalam apabila saya melawat pergi Jordan, melawat selain daripada Amman pergi Mafraq pergi Karak, Irbid dan baca bahawa adalah sarjana- sarjana dan ustaz- ustaz ulama’- ulama’ Islam ada berpendapat bahawa hudud sebahagian kecil daripada undang- undang syariah dan adalah syarat2 sebelum ia dilaksanakan. Syeikh Qaradawi Ketua Kesatuan Ulama Islam Sedunia pun ada berpendapat bahawa kalau undang- undang syariah tidak boleh dilaksanakan, masa tak sampai untuk melaksanakan hudud.

Dan pun ada prioriti keutamaan, saya baca bahawa kalau mahu melaksanakan hudud perlulah ada syarat- syarat di mana basic needs, keperluan pokok semacam pekerjaaan, semacam perumahan semacam kesihatan dan transport lain- lain semua dibekalkan –  keselamatan. Semua diberikan sebelum kewajipan –  hak- hak diberikan sebelum kewajipan dituntutkan. Itu bukan saya kata. Apa saya baca di Jordan dan di Mesir. Dan ada pandangan dalam pertukaran fikiran dengan pelajar- pelajar saya ada kata bahawa kalau kita tidak ada persetujuan dengan perkara ini, bukan oleh kerana kita anti Islam. Adakah masalah di Jordan di Mesir masalah anti Islam? Bukan tetapi mengenai sama ada sesuai atau tak sesuai. Khasnya dalam Malaysia satu masyarakat majmuk. Apabila kita ada perlembagaan dan ada prinsip- prinsip utama dimaktub, itu hal- hal yang lain.

Dan saya rasa mustahak khasnya dalam Malaysia, perkara ini tak dillihat sebagai anti Islam atau bukan anti Islam. Saya, mungkin saya rasa bahawa mengikut perlembagaan, tak sesuai ada pelaksanaan hudud. Itu bukan oleh kerana saya anti Islam. Tetapi kalau kita melihat ini sebagai anti Islam dan pro Islam, saya rasa ini tidak memberi apa- apa kebaikan kepada masyarakat kita. Adakah pemimpin- pemimpin Perdana Menteri, lima Perdana Menteri yang kita ada, Tunku Abdul rahman, Tun Abdul Razak, Tun Hussin Onn, Mahathir 22 tahun dan Tun Abdullah mereka anti islam? Adakah Umno anti Islam? Kalau Umno anti Islam oleh kerana rasa bahawa hudud tidak sesuai untuk masyarakat majmuk dan mengikut perlembagaan Malaysia, adakah apa- apa parti yang bekerjasama dengan Umno pun anti Islam? Tak mungkin, tak mungkin.

Parti PAS pun pernah bekerjasama dengan Umno tahun 73 ke 77. Saya rasa kita perlulah fikir lebih mendalam dalam perkara ini. Apa yang mustahak ialah bahawa kalau kita mahu mempastikan bahawa kita ada satu kerajaan yang baik, ada good governance pemerintahan yang baik. Tidak ada 1MDB skandal MDB, tidak ada penyelewangan semacam Lembaga Tabung Haji dan lain- lain. Kita perlulah ada satu kerajaan yang boleh mempastikan rakyat boleh menikmati keadilan, kebebasan dan kemajuan. Tak kira apa kaum, tak kira apa- apa agama. Kita dalam Malaysia kita perlu mengakui inilah satu masyarakt majmuk dan saya rasa ini mustahak dan kali yang pertama dalam 58 tahun kita ada peluang. Kita melihat peluang boleh tumbang kerajaan Umno dan BN tetapi kalau dalam satu bulan ini oleh kerana perkembangan- perkembangan politik dalam tanah air kita Pakatan Rakyat tidak boleh dikekalkan, kita akan hilang peluang ini. Peluang yang emas once In a lifetime- once in a lifetime tak mungkin kemungkinan ini berlaku begitu masa yang singkat.

Dan saya pun harap, saya pun lama dalam politik. Tahun depan 50 tahun saya dalam politik. Apa saya harap lihat ialah bahawa dalam PRU masa depan Pakatan Rakyat boleh kekal, Pakatan Rakyat boleh tumbang Umno dan BN dan ada satu kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat di Putrajaya dan 8 negeri Malaysia. Kalau ini boleh berlaku, ini sejarah. Bolehkah? Itulah benteng dan saya rasa inilah mustahak untuk masa depan Malaysia. Barulah kita boleh berjaya. Saya dalam, apabila saya jumpa aktivis- aktivis di Jordan dan di Mesir, saya ada tanya mereka. In the Islamic world, dalam dunia negara- negara Islam apa negara mereka ada harapan, ada harapan besar nama- nama negara. Mereka ada namakan Tunisia, oleh kerana ada Ghannouchi di sana. Mereka ada namakan Turki. Mereka ada menamakan Malaysia.

Mereka harap Malaysia boleh membagi satu contoh untuk dunia Islam. Dan saya rasa ini kita boleh buat. Oleh kerana dalam Malaysia adalah masyarakat majmuk, bagaimana perlu Islam di Malaysia boleh memberi contoh kepada dunia bahawa boleh adapt dan sesuai dengan masyarakat majmuk untuk dunia supaya bukan sahaja kita belajar daripada timur tengah tetapi negara- negara timur tengah boleh belajar daripada Malaysia. Bolehkah? Dan saya rasa ini pun harapan saya dan saya harap bahawa di masa depan selepas satu bulan kita ada harapan yang tinggi bahawa kita tidak binasakan harapan- harapan yang kita ada untuk perubahan besar di tanah air kita.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 13 May 2015, 6:00 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
PAS
,
Political Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


We thought we could tweet our way to a socialist paradise. The election changed that

Suzanne Moore

Guardian

11 May 2015

As the Labour bubble burst amid a volley of disbelieving posts on election night the echo-chamber limitations of Twitter and Facebook became all too clear

One of the biggest shocks of this election is the realisation that you can’t get a socialist paradise on Earth by tweeting. Or even by putting up really angry statuses on Facebook. Who knew? Actually, as people who do this kind of thing all follow each other, it seems that many of them still don’t realise. In the echo chambers some of us inhabit online, everyone not only votes Labour but crows about it in 140 characters.

I love social media and think it is brilliant in all kinds of ways for connecting us, but its limitations have been clearly shown in this election. Declaring one’s allegiances is fine if you understand who you are declaring them to. No one really does. Hope soon changed on election night into disbelieving, angry tweets. Is there an emoji for howling? All of this happened in self-selecting universes.

We all of us inhabit bubbles, and in the current postmortem at least we can see more clearly what some of those bubbles are.

 There is the London bubble: “London is the world and it is basically Labour.” There is the ancestor-worship bubble: “Let’s go on about unions and how my mam always voted Labour.” There is the Blairite bubble: “What everyone needs is not to share but to own some shares.” There is the “I told you so” bubble: “Ed lost the election way back in 2010.”

All of these views are available on old media, and very much so on social media too. They each entail a purity untainted by leaving any of these bubbles.

Twitter and Facebook function to reinforce, rather than challenge, opposing views. Spats can get nasty, of course – but did anyone who was going to vote Ukip get swayed by Labour because of a bunch of know–alls on Twitter? I plead guilty to this sort of behaviour myself because everyone is a know-it-all on Twitter. Now I watch lefty mates declaring they are going to unfollow anyone remotely conservative, and I am dismayed. If you can’t even have a conversation with someone who votes differently to you, how do you begin to imagine you might bring them back to your way of thinking?

Waves of such agitation run through social media, but it is largely left-leaning and inward-looking and backslapping. It’s also full of consolation, sparks of brilliance and the best jokes, but its sense of self-importance needs puncturing .

The king of self-importance, Russell Brand himself, was deemed to be influential partly because of his enormous Twitter following. Now he admits he didn’t know what he was doing endorsing Ed! Wow, is the pope even religious? It turns out that the correlation between Twitter followings, and, er, actual votes, is somewhat mystical.

Many of us got things wrong, not just the pollsters. The ones who got it a bit right are those who stepped out of the bubbles. A lot of media reported the debate going on within the media, or on TV. All meta-meta, but when I watched the filmed reports of my colleagues, John Harris and John Domokos, going round the country – talking to people instead of tweeting at them – the sense of doom and uncertainty was apparent. The England that was not keen on Labour was there in those shopping-centre car parks, those emptied-out Ballardian landscapes. This feeling I recognised from talking to Ukip supporters during happy hour in a theme pub in Ramsgate.

The gap between what people were saying, and how this was reflected so little on social media, is something we need to understand. Or we literally are talking to ourselves.

I don’t have the answers – but whatever the left now is, or how it may reconstitute itself, I know for sure we may have to get out of the house. The revolution will not be hashtagged.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 13 May 2015, 12:07 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Facebook
,
Twitter
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Fivefold increase in GDP if every Malaysian teen educated, study claims

The Malay Mail Online

Thursday May 14, 2015

KUALA LUMPUR, May 14 ― A new study claims that Malaysia’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP) could multiply by as much as 500 per cent if the country is able to ensure that every single 15-year-old achieves a basic level of education.

The study on global school rankings by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimates Malaysia’s growth potential at 505 per cent of its current GDP, indicating a direct correlation between education and economic growth.

The report, jointly written by Stanford University’s Eric Hanushek and Ludger Woessman of Munich University, said that a country’s standard of education is a “powerful predictor of the wealth that countries will produce in the long run”.

It also warned that countries that maintain poor education policies and practices will remain in a “permanent state of economic recession”.

Comparatively, Singapore ― which took first place out of the 76 countries included in the report on mathematics and science proficiency ― will improve its GDP by 86 per cent if it were to achieve 100 per cent delivery of basic education among 15-year-olds.

On the other end of the spectrum, Ghana, which placed last in mathematics and science proficiency, stands to see its growth figures improve by 38 times if it implements an effective education system.

Others that stand to gain exponentially from drastic improvements to delivery of basic education are South Africa (2,624 per cent), Honduras (2,016 per cent), Morocco (1,591 per cent), Oman (1,427 per cent), Botswana (1,303 per cent), Macedonia (1,137 per cent), Peru (1076 per cent) and Qatar (1,029 per cent).

The potential growth projections are ranked inversely to each country’s rank in mathematics and science proficiency in the new OECD study.

Malaysia is ranked 52nd out of the 76 countries.

According to World Bank figures, Malaysia’s GDP stood at US$313.2 billion (RM1,129.4 billion) as at 2013.

The country is currently pursuing an ambitious transformation programme spearheaded by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, with the goal of achieving developed nation status with a gross national income (GNI) per capita of US$15,000 by 2020.

Malaysia, however, has been struggling to convince its best and brightest to work in their home country, with the World Bank estimating in a 2011 report that one in every 10 Malaysians with tertiary education migrate.

A study by the Penang Institute released in June last year claimed that the impact of brain drain on the country could also lead to a serious fiscal impact of some RM8.4 billion per annum after considering the effects of both immigration and emigration, tax revenues, consumption taxes from brain drain and levies the government collects from foreign labour.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 14 May 2015, 8:17 am and is filed under
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


I have been waiting for three days for proof that in my speech in Kota Bahru on Sunday, I had “hina Islam, hina hudud, hina Muslim, hina PAS” and none has been forthcoming, but  I am prepared to wait for another 48 hours

(Scroll down for BM version of this statement / Terjemahan BM di bawah)

I have been waiting for three days for proof that in my speech at the “Kukuhkan Pakatan, Hancurkan Barisan“ Ceramah Perdana organised by PAS Kota Baru on Sunday, I had “hina Islam, hina hudud, hina Muslim, hina PAS”, but none had been forthcoming.

But I am prepared to wait for another 48 hours for such proof to be furnished.

In fact, the transcript of my speech in Kota Baru is  available on the Internet, on blog, tweet  and FaceBook, and it should not be too difficult to point out where I had “hina Islam, hina hudud, hina Muslim, hina PAS” if I had in fact done so.

I thank Malaysians who have encouraged me with their comments that it was clear from the transcript that I had not  been guilty of anyone of these three misdemeanours in my speech in Kota Bahru, for instance, the following comments on the DAP Facebook:

Pelaut Tua
 sya dgr ucapan lks dari mula sampai habis…apa yg kurang ajarnya….lks tak tentang hudud pun, tak anti islam pun,..soal bolih atau tak bolih laksana hudud dalam negara yg majmuk bolih dibincang kemudian

Afifi Albarr
 Tak faham, apa yang kurang ajarnya? Dia tak hina Islam, dia tak hina hudud, dia tak hina Muslim, dia tak hina PAS, dia cakap benda-benda yang ulama Islam sendiri cakap.

Norol Hayati
 Sy pun tak faham…kat mane dlm transcript ucapan lks yg menghina islam dan kenyataan yg kurang ajar? He makes effort to study and understand islam….kita ni yg islam bagilah contoh terbaik dan try to educate non muslim about the beauty of islam…sy rasa malu pulak baca komen2 by nik amar sekiranya betul statement tu dtg dr dia.

Akilah Yusoff
 Dengar betul2 la apa Kit Siang kata.. Aku tak tahu part mana yg menghina islam tu..

If I had committed any errors in my speech in Kota Baru on Sunday, whether in my reference to Sheikh Yusuf Al-Garadawi or Rashid al-Ghannushi, I am prepared to learn and stand corrected. But no such correction had surfaced in the past three days.

I am surprised that my speech in Kota Baru had sparked a torrent of emotional and irrational reactions from some PAS leaders, to the extent that it is reported that some PAS leaders in Kelantan are considering banning DAP leaders from speaking in the state.

But I will wait for another 48 hours before I respond to some of the issues raised over my speech in Kota Baru.

——————–

(Teks Bahasa Malaysia)

Sudah tiga hari saya nantikan bukti yang menunjukkan bahawa ucapan saya di Kota Bharu pada hari Ahad lalu telah ‘menghina Islam, hina hudud, hina Muslim, hina PAS’, tetapi belum kelihatan bayangnya. Tapi tak apa, saya boleh tunggu 48 jam lagi

Sudah tiga hari saya nantikan bukti yang menunjukkan bahawa ucapan saya di ceramah perdana “Kukuhkan Pakatan, Hancurkan Barisan” yang dianjurkan PAS Kota Bharu pada hari Ahad lalu telah ‘menghina Islam, hina hudud, hina Muslim, hina PAS’, tetapi belum kelihatan bayangnya.

Tapi tak apa, saya sedia menanti 48 jam lagi sehingga bukti dakwaan tersebut dikemukakan.

Malah, transkrip ucapan saya di Kota Bharu boleh didapati di internet, di blog, Twitter dan juga Facebook; dan sepatutnya tidak begitu sukar untuk menunjukkan di mana yang saya ‘menghina Islam, hina hudud, hina Muslim, hina PAS’ sekiranya benar saya berbuat demikian.

Saya amat berterima kasih dengan rakan-rakan rakyat Malaysia yang telah memberikan kata-kata semangat bahawa jelas dari transkrip ucapan tersebut bahawa saya tidak membuat sebarang kesilapan dalam ucapan di Kota Bharu itu, seperti yang boleh dilihat di komen-komen berikut di laman Facebook rasmi DAP:

Pelaut Tua
sya dgr ucapan lks dari mula sampai habis…apa yg kurang ajarnya….lks tak tentang hudud pun, tak anti islam pun,..soal bolih atau tak bolih laksana hudud dalam negara yg majmuk bolih dibincang kemudian

Afifi Albarr
Tak faham, apa yang kurang ajarnya? Dia tak hina Islam, dia tak hina hudud, dia tak hina Muslim, dia tak hina PAS, dia cakap benda-benda yang ulama Islam sendiri cakap.

Norol Hayati
Sy pun tak faham…kat mane dlm transcript ucapan lks yg menghina islam dan kenyataan yg kurang ajar? He makes effort to study and understand islam….kita ni yg islam bagilah contoh terbaik dan try to educate non muslim about the beauty of islam…sy rasa malu pulak baca komen2 by nik amar sekiranya betul statement tu dtg dr dia.

Akilah Yusoff
Dengar betul2 la apa Kit Siang kata.. Aku tak tahu part mana yg menghina islam tu..

Sekiranya saya ada membuat sebarang kesilapan dalam ucapan saya di Kota Bharupada hari Ahad, sama ada dalam rujukan saya terhadap Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi ataupun Rashid Ghannoushi, saya bersedia untuk belajar dan diperbetulkan. Tetapi tidak ada pun teguran memperbetulkan saya sepanjang tiga hari lalu.

Saya terperanjat apabila ucapan saya di Kota Bharu itu telah menimbulkan reaksi penuh emosi dan tidak rasional daripada beberapa pimpinan PAS, hatta ada laporan bahawa beberapa pemimpin PAS Kelantan mempertimbangkan untuk mengharamkan pimpinan DAP daripada berceramah di negeri itu.

Tetapi saya akan bersabar selama 48 jam lagi sebelum saya memberi respon kepada beberapa isu yang dibangkitkan berkait ucapan saya di Kota Bharu.

(Kenyataan media di Kuala Lumpur pada hari Khamis 14 Mei 2015)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 14 May 2015, 5:11 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


MAIWP lawyer’s contention that Islamic Law is above constitution raises disturbing question of Prime Minister and Cabinet’s commitment to the fundamental constitutional principle that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land

(Scroll down for BM version of this statement / Terjemahan BM di bawah)

The contention by the lawyer of the Majlis Agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan (MAIWP) to the Federal Court today that all Islamic enactments are excluded from fundamental liberties in the Federal Constitution raises disturbing questions of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet’s commitment to the fundamental constitutional principle that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land.

While the Federal Court has set August to hear the arguments on “a new point of monumental importance” in the case of lawyer  Victoria Jayaseela Martin’s appeal in the Federal Court, seeking the right to practise Islamic law in the Shariah Court, the questions about the Prime Minister and the Cabinet’s commitment to the fundamental constitutional principle that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land must be asked and answered.

The  MAIWP is a government body, whose Chairman is Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom,  Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department in charge of Islamic Affairs; the Deputy Chairman,  Dato Othman Mustapha, Ketua Pengarah JAKIM and  ex officio members include the Attorney General Tan Sri Gani Patail, the Datuk Bandar and  representatives from the Chief Secretary and  the Inspector-General of Police.

It is reported that the postponement of the Federal Court hearing of the case today to August will also give the Attorney-General’s Chambers time to decide which position to take.

This is most ridiculous as the Attorney-General is an ex-officio member of MAIWP.

Did Gani Patail agree to the legal argument to be presented to the Federal Court on behalf of MAIWP that all Islamic enactments are excluded from fundamental liberties in the Federal Constitution and the inapplicability of Article 4 that the Constitution is the supreme law of Malaysia or was the Attorney-General kept completely in the dark until today?

Furthermore, has the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Jamil Khir Baharom, given his approval to the contention by the MAIWP lawyer in the Federal Court attacking the supremacy of the Constitution as the law of the land?

Is this also the stand of the Prime Minister and the Cabinet?

The Prime Minister and the Cabinet cannot plead ignorance to such a “monumental” attack on the constitution, especially as it is presented as made with the approval of a Cabinet Minister.

Any lawyer can argue any “monumental” interpretation of the Constitution as to undermine its core principles, but it is a different matter if such a contention is presented in the Federal Court in the name of the Government or Cabinet or any part thereof.

Such a development  would  be unheard of under the five previous Prime Ministers of Malaysia from 1957 to 2009.

Can Datuk Seri Najib Razak explain why it is happening under his watch as Prime Minister?

———————

(Teks Bahasa Malaysia)

Hujahan peguam MAIWP bahawa undang-undang Islam melampaui Perlembagaan membangkitkan persoalan membimbangkan terhadap komitmen Perdana Menteri dan Kabinet terhadap prinsip-prinsip asas Perlembagaan serta kedudukan Perlembagaan sebagai undang-undang tertinggi negara

Hujahan peguam Majlis Agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan (MAIWP) di Mahkamah Persekutuan hari ini bahawa kesemua enakmen Islam dikecualikan daripada hak-hak asasi yang termaktub di dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan membangkitkan persoalan membimbangkan terhadap komitmen Perdana Menteri dan Kabinet terhadap prinsip-prinsip asas Perlembagaan serta kedudukan Perlembagaan sebagai undang-undang tertinggi negara

Sementara Mahkamah Persekutuan telah menetapkan bulan Ogos untuk mendengar hujahan yang sangat penting dalam kes rayuan peguam Victoria Jayaseela Martin yang memohon hak untuk beramal di Mahkamah Syariah, persoalan tentang komitmen Perdana Menteri dan Kabinetnya terhadap prinsip-prinsip asas Perlembagaan serta kedudukan Perlembagaan sebagai undang-undang tertinggi negara mesti dijawab.

MAIWP adalah sebuah badan kerajaan yang dipengerusikan Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom, Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri yang bertanggungjawab ke atas hal-ehwal Islam; manakala timbalan pengerusinya ialah Dato Othman Mustapha, Ketua Pengarah JAKIM, dan mempunyai anggota ex-officio yang terdiri daripada Peguam Negara Tan Sri Gani Patail, Datuk Bandar dan wakil-wakil daripada Ketua Setiausaha Negara dan Ketua Polis Negara.

Dilaporkan bahawa penangguhan pendengaran kes tersebut di Mahkamah Persekutuan hari ini ke bulan Ogos nanti akan turut memberi masa bagi Jabatan Peguam Negara memutuskan pendirian apa yang bakal diambil.

Ini sangat mengarut memandangkan Peguam Negara adalah anggota ex-officio MAIWP.

Adakah Gani Patail bersetuju dengan hujahan yang akan dikemukakan kepada Mahkamah Persekutuan bagi pihak MAIWP bahawa semua enakmen Islam adalah dikecualikan daripada hak-hak asasi yang termaktub di dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan bahawa Perkara 4 yang menyatakan Perlembagaan adalah undang-undang tertinggi negara adalah tidak terpakai; atau adakah Peguam Negara langsung tidak dimaklumkan tentang hujahan tersebut sehingga hari ini?

Selanjutnya, adakah Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri Jamil Khir Baharom telah bersetuju dengan hujahan oleh peguam MAIWP di Mahkamah Persekutuan yang menyerang keluhuran Perlembagaan sebagai undang-undang negara?

Adakah ini juga pendirian yang diambil oleh Perdana Menteri dan Kabinet?

Perdana Menteri dan Kabinet tidak boleh berkata mereka tidak tahu tentang serangan yang begitu hebat terhadap Perlembagaan, terutamanya setelah ia dikemukakan dan dibuat dengan persetujuan salah seorang menteri Kabinet.

Mana-mana peguam pun boleh menghujahkan sebarang tafsiran terhadap Perlembagaan yang melemahkan prinsip-prinsip terasnya, tetapi lain pula halnya sekiranya hujahan tersebut dibuat di Mahkamah Persekutuan di atas nama Kerajaan atau Kabinet atau mana-mana bahagian yang berkaitan dengannya.

Kejadian seperti ini langsung tidak pernah didengar di bawah lima Perdana Menteri Malaysia sebelum ini sejak 1957 sehingga 2009.

Bolehkah Datuk Seri Najib Razak memberi penjelasan kenapa hal sebegini boleh terjadi ketika tempoh beliau berjawat sebagai Perdana Menteri?

(Kenyataan media di Kuala Lumpur pada hari Khamis 14 Mei 2015)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 14 May 2015, 3:51 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


What stories will Najib leave behind?

By Eric Loo

Malaysiakini

May 13, 2015

I don’t know how she died, but I remember how she lived her life. I still feel her cheery presence from her Facebook posts and emails, the last one I received a month ago. It’s surreal. Which got me thinking. What stories will we leave behind after we’re gone? Then, I thought about our prime minister. What public memories will he leave when he passes on, from the values he lives by to the political decisions he has made since 2009?

In the documentary ‘A Leader’s Legacy: Tun Abdul Razak’, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak says of his father: “I have a sense of pride knowing my father passed away in the service of the nation. There can be no other service greater than that.” Indeed.

Najib proudly presented his reformist agenda when he succeeded Abdullah Badawi in 2009.  To the United Nations in 2010, Najib projected a globalist moderate persona. His realpolitik at home, however, shows a Janus-faced figure, Machiavellian even, in reaching his political ends, amoral they may seem in the public eye.

These keywords hence come to mind when I think of Najib’s administration: Altantuya, Scorpene submarines, Abdul Razak Baginda, government executive jets, Rosmah Mansor’s lavish lifestyle, 1MDB debts, and other scandals listed in the Sinar Project.

Wealth accumulation from mega business deals through political connections has hence ranked Malaysia third in The Economist’s Crony Capitalism Index 2014 after Hong Kong and Russia.

I’ll remember Najib as the prime minister for his 1Malaysia vision and National Transformation Programme, his associated schemes (BR1M, PR1MA, 1MDB) and pithy slogans (People First Performance Now; Endless Possibilities).

I’ll remember him as the only prime minister to have commissioned multimillion ringgit public relation consultancies to spin his media image at home and abroad – to the extent of availing a personal audience with President Barack Obama in the White House in April 2010, and a round of golf in Hawaii with Obama in December 2014.

I’ll remember Najib for outdoing his predecessors in suing journalists for defamation, and slapping the Sedition Act at academics, civil activists and political opponents. And, under his administration, institutions meant to be the people’s watchdogs against corruption and crime – the judiciary, the police, and the rule of law – are used to serve the interests of the politically well connected.

Growing trust deficit

The growing trust deficit among the racial groups, attributed to Najib’s consistent refusal to repudiate the Islamist ideologues, and his resort to racial politics to justify his amendments to the security laws will see him leave a murky legacy vastly different from his father who died in 1976 of leukemia in London at age 53 after serving six years as prime minister.

Bapa Pembangunan Abdul Razak Hussein left his legacy in the New Economic Policy (NEP), implemented in 1971 following the race riots in May 1969.

I can’t recall any of our prime ministers who have sincerely attempted to stamp out the systemic corruption in government, and reviewing the parameters of the NEP, succeeded by the National Development Policy after 1990, and renamed New Economic Model by Najib in 2009.

Perhaps, except for Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (Pak Lah, photo) who led Umno to its greatest electoral victory in 2004 (65 percent of the popular vote, 90 percent of the seats in Parliament), one year after he succeeded Mahathir Mohamad.

I’ll remember Pak Lah for establishing the Malaysian Institute of Integrity and the National Integrity Plan as part of the ‘punitive and preventive measures’ in eradicating public corruption and improving accountability in the civil service.  But four years into his tenure, Abdullah’s anti-corruption initiatives lost its steam, buckled under political pressures to placate the Umno factions and business cronies.

I’ll remember Pak Lah for pointing out how the Malays would fail to progress as long as they rely on the bumiputera policies to move ahead.

Speaking at the 2004 Umno general assembly, he said, “Bumiputeras realise that they are relying on crutches and want to do away with the crutches; but they are afraid to discard them. Because of this fear, they revert to old habits, looking for quick fixes and blaming others. If such attitudes are allowed to flourish, then bumiputeras will get even weaker. A continuing reliance on crutches will further enfeeble, and we may eventually end up in wheelchairs.”

In a speech to the Harvard Club of Malaysia on May 5, 2005, Abdullah described himself as a “not only a man of intentions (but also) a man of deeds, not one for display or fanfare or harsh words”.

He chided Malaysia for its “1st class infrastructure, 3rd class mentality” and how Malaysians needed to seriously undergo a “system-wide change” in how we do things and measure success – benchmarked, not by mega-sized megalomaniacal projects but by developing the country’s intellectual, spiritual and social capitals.

Comparing a country to three parts of a computer

Pak Lah’s hardware-software compatibility analogy reminds me of Thomas Friedman’s book, ‘Lexus and the Olive Tree’ (1999). The New York Times columnist compared a country to three parts of a computer. First, there is the ‘hardware’, the basic shell around each country’s economy: free-market hardware, communist hardware and hybrid hardware.

Second is the ‘operating system’, which are the broad macro economic and social policies of any country. This ranges from central planning in communist countries to capitalist free markets, and a combination of socialism, free markets, state-directed, and crony capitalism.

And third is the ‘software’. This is the rule of law, public accountability, civil governance and a political-economic environment that ensures every person has fair and equitable opportunities to realise their full potential.

Under Najib’s administration, the operating system is corrupted. I’ll remember Najib as a wannabe reformist, a pretend global moderate who had succumbed to the political pressures from Umno right-wingers, danced to the beat of the Umno-sponsored NGOs, and ultimately blinded himself from his 1Malaysia vision.

ERIC LOO left Malaysia for Australia in 1986 to work as a journalist. He currently lectures at University of Wollongong, Australia, and serves on the advisory committee of UPI Next, a journalism education and training platform run by United Press International. He edits a refereed journal Asia Pacific Media Educator and conducts journalism training workshops in Asia. Email:
[email protected]

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 14 May 2015, 7:57 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Multi-religious society: Destructive or constructive?

Dyana Sofya

The Malay Mail Online

May 15, 2015

MAY 15 — Last month, I had the honour of being selected to participate in the Australia-Malaysia Institute (AMI) Muslim Exchange Programme Visit.

The purpose of the programme was for us, the participants, to discover different perspectives on current cultural issues in an increasingly multi-ethnic and multi-religious migrant society such as Australia.

Through the programme, we were also able to exchange ideas and experiences with various communities there.

As the main objective of the programme was to broaden our understanding of inter-community relations, the state of Victoria was an obvious place to visit. Victorians originated from more than 200 countries, speak more than 230 languages and dialects, and follow more than 130 religious faiths. While their origins couldn’t be anymore diverse, they all migrated with one aspiration in mind – to find a better life for themselves and their children.

A memorable highlight of the visit was when we had afternoon tea and lamingtons (a traditional Australian treat of sponge cake squares coated in chocolate and grated coconut) at a kosher café in Balaclava.

As interesting as the lamingtons were, we were more enthralled by the conversation we had with Abraham, a rabbi and Mohsin, an imam.

Recalling how they first met, Imam Mohsin related that he had been asking the local council for a place to assemble in order to conduct weekly Friday prayers for the small Muslim community in Balaclava.

However, response was not positive due to anxiety over the Islamic State threat and other unfounded militant sentiments associated with Muslims. The council was afraid that the premise would be used for malicious rather than religious purposes.

Rabbi Abraham, having noticed the situation, wrote a letter on behalf of the small Jewish community (also a minority) to support Imam Mohsins’s plea to practise his religion. After further discussions, the local council agreed and Muslims in Balaclava were granted a place to assemble for their weekly Friday prayers.

This was a beautiful story of people from different faiths respecting and supporting each other’s right to practise their own religion peacefully.

Meanwhile, little did we realise that back home, Malaysia was experiencing a totally different kind of religious engagement. A church in Taman Medan had its weekly Sunday mass interrupted by a group of politically motivated “ethno-religious protesters” who showed up with placards, demanding for the removal of a cross affixed to the exterior of the building.

The cross was then voluntarily removed by the church, for fear of further threats. As news broke of this incident, demands by the public for the police to intervene were met by a defiant IGP’s pronouncement that there was nothing seditious about the group’s demonstration as no one had been harmed.

Thankfully, the Selangor Menteri Besar saved the day by exhorting that there was nothing wrong with a cross or any religious symbole on the building’s façade.

Religions as the unifying force

In today’s world, religions seem to be a dividing factor rather than a unifying one. This is true even within a country that has only one religion, as different interpretations of that faith can cause conflict and intolerance. Throughout history, we have seen clashes between Christianity and Islam, the Protestant-Catholic feud within Christiniatiy, the Shunni-Shia divide within Islam, amongst others.

As much as religion can be used as a force of good, it can also be easily abused by bigots and rabble-rousers. This is because religion can easily arouse emotions of love or hate, construction or destruction, peace or war, depending on the intent and purpose of its preachers.

Hence, when it comes to managing multi-religious interaction and relationships, it is important to refrain from arguing over exclusive religious claims or attempting to convert others directly, but rather to use it as an opportunity to promote mutual respect, understanding and recognition of different faiths and spiritual traditions. More importantly, we should focus on the commonality that is present in each and every religion – values of goodwill, love, justice and peace.

I believe that by allowing fellow Malaysians to practise their religions, whatever they are and however different they may be, would not shake my conviction but instead strengthen my own belief in God and His beautiful ways.

After all, I have been taught that Islam clearly accepts people’s right to follow the religion of their choice, as stated clearly in the Holy Quran: “Let there be no compulsion in religion” (2: 190) and “to you your religion, to me mine” (109:6).

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 16 May 2015, 8:02 am and is filed under
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The hell refugees go through for freedom

by Syerleena Abdul Rashid

The Malaysian Insider

15 May 2015

Imagine this.

You are forced to leave your country, your home and everything you grew up with. As much as you would wish you could stay, you simply cannot.

The country you grew up in and the government entrusted to protect its citizens are unable to.

In some cases, it is the government itself that prosecutes its very own citizens because of some deeply rooted destructive bigotry or some horrifically oppressive regulation created by traditional warlords.

You’re forced to leave behind relatives apart from your intermediate family but of course, that is usually debatable.

If you’re well off, you can afford to escape with your loved ones; if not, you’re forced to leave them behind and pray that somehow you can return someday to rescue them.

You end up paying your “journey to freedom” with your life savings to someone who promised to take you to some far off land that can ensure economic prosperity, security and above all – a better life.

But as soon as you board that boat, you find yourself in a situation so sinister, all you want to do is escape.

You find yourself living amongst hundreds of others who share similar experiences like you, onboard a ship and stripped away of all human rights.

You end up living on a boat for the next several months in very cramped conditions, given very little food and water.

You see men, women and children abused, in ways, first world countries can never understand or dread to even imagine.

In between bouts of sea sickness and slumber, you find yourself wondering if this is what hell is like.

By definition, a refugee is a person who has fled their home country because of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, or political opinion; refugees are also recognised as being a member of a persecuted social category of persons.

The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) recognises the Rohingya as refugees, which grants them a special status far different than illegal migrants.

Unfortunately, Malaysia does not recognise such status and as a result, the Rohingya refugees in Malaysia are treated as criminals and subjected to additional oppression.

At present Malaysia has about 150,000 refugees and asylum seekers with more than 45,000 are Rohingya.

The actual numbers are predicted to be much higher as there are still a significant amount of undocumented refugees.

According to UNCHR, in between January to March this year, approximately 25,000 Bangladeshis and Rohingya Muslims have smuggled their way across the seas and these numbers have doubled increased significantly over the past years.

In a recent report, Malaysian Deputy Home Minister Datuk Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar had the audacity to say, “We have been very nice to the people who broke into our border. We have treated them humanely but they cannot be flooding our shores like this.”

Wan Junaidi clearly doesn’t understand the humanitarian crisis that has the whole world wagging its finger at Malaysia. Such a statement shows how callous, detached and uncaring some of our ministers can be.

People tend to confuse refugees with migrants and unlike the latter, refugees do not enjoy an sort of protection from their home countries.

Refugees have simply lost all protection and sending them back home is simply too dangerous.

Sending them home is similar to sentencing them to death.

Ministers like Wan Junaidi make it difficult for Malaysia to recognize the significance of the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and just how important it is for human beings to simply care for one another.

Fact is we have an international crisis where our country is a part of this.

It is no longer their issue but our problem. The Malaysian government can no longer afford to close an eye and must provide a healthier way of how we treat refugees and asylum seekers. – May 15, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 16 May 2015, 7:06 pm and is filed under
Human Rights
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


If anybody should apologise, it should be those who are destroying PR in unilaterally and arbitrarily violating the PR Common Policy Framework and the operational PR principle of consensus, offering up to UMNO and Barisan Nasional a route to salvation

It is a week since my speech at the “Kukuhkan Pakatan, Hancurkan Barisan” Ceramah Perdana organized by PAS Kota Baru last Sunday, and I have still to be shown where I had “hina Islam, hina hudud, hina Muslim, hina PAS” in my speech although both the transcript and the video of my speech in Kota Baru are available on the Internet.

Instead, some PAS leaders have continued their heavy artillery over my speech in Kota Baru, culminating in the demand by the PAS Syura Council secretary demanding that I apologise to PAS members for my speech questioning the proposed implementation of hudud law in Kelantan.

I have been wondering in the past week why my speech at the “Kukukhan Pakatan, Hancurkan Barisan” ceramah had elicited such irrational, emotional and even panicky reactions especially by  certain Kelantan PAS leaders.

May be some Kelantan PAS leaders believe that the issue of hudud implementation in Kelantan is the only trump card they have to save PAS from losing Kelantan after being power for six terms from the 1990 general elections, but it does not speak much for their  democratic credentials and commitment for them to take the position that any decision taken by the Kelantan State Assembly is sacrosanct and cannot be debated or questioned.

Do they want me to be untruthful and even hypocritical in pretending that the hudud issue would be the saviour not only of PAS but also of Pakatan Rakyat – in Kelantan and in all other states as well as nationally  in the next general election?

I would in fact owe the people of Kelantan and Malaysia an apology if I had failed to speak truthfully and honesty at the “Kukukhan Pakatan, Hancurkan Barisan” ceramah, pointing out that Pakatan Rakyat would lose the “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” to topple UMNO and Barisan Nasional not only in Putrajaya but in seven states, namely Terengganu, Kedah, Perak, Pahang, Negri Sembilan, Malacca and Johor if Pakatan Rakyat could not  build on the breakthrough and momentum achieved in the 13th General Election two years ago.

If hudud had been a hot controversial issue in the 13th General Election on May 5, 2013, the UMNO/Barisan Nasional coalition would not only have regained its two-thirds parliamentary majority, Pakatan Rakyat would have lost Selangor apart from Kedah, and Johor would have reverted as an invincible UMNO/Barisan Nasional “fixed-deposit” state.

Past general elections have proven that hudud issue was never a vote winner for PAS, and Terengganu provides the best illustration.

In the 10th General Election in 1999, PAS and PKR won all eight parliamentary and 28 out of 32 state assembly seats in Terenganu because of the backlash against UMNO arising from Anwar Ibrahim’s “black eye” and the Reformasi movement.

But despite the passing of the Terengganu state hudud enactment in 2001 (which caused the break-up of Barisan Alternative), PAS and PKR only managed to retain 1 out of 8 parliament seats and 4 out of 28 state assembly seats in the 11th General Election in 2004 – losing the Terengganu State Government in the process.

If hudud was a leading campaign issue in the 13th General Elections in 2013, PR would not have achieved the good electoral results of 89 Parliamentary seats and 229 State Assembly seats, as any increase in Malay support for the Pakatan Rakyat parties would be negligible while the loss of non-Malay support for PR candidates would be very significant.

DAP, PAS and PKR achieved their best parliamentary and state assembly results during their tripartite co-operation in the 1999, 2008 and 2013 General Elections as compared to all previous general elections.

In the case of PAS, from a regional party confined largely to its “northern” heartland of Perlis, Kedah, Kelantan and Terengganu, PAS had gone “national” in the 13th General Election with parliamentary and/or State Assembly representation in every state in Peninsular Malaysia, except for Negri Sembilan.

All these gains will go to nought if hudud had been a hot controversial issue in the 2013 general election, or if Pakatan Rakyat is forced to disintegrate because of the failure to uphold the PR Common Policy Framework.

The issue of “Kukuhkan Pakatan, Hancurkan Barisan” would be chimerical if Pakatan Rakyat ends up on the rocks, as the victors will be UMNO/Barisan Nasional, while the losers will be the healthy democratic development in Malaysia leading to the ousting of UMNO/BN from Putrajaya and seven state government in the 14th General Elections.

The ball is in PAS’ court, whether it is  prepared to reaffirm its commitment to the PR Common Policy Framework and stop unilaterally pushing for hudud implementation which is both against the PR Common Policy Framework and the PR principle of consensus in the highest PR decision-making process since the formation of PR in 2008.

If anybody should apologise, it should be those who had unilaterally and arbitrarily violated the PR Common Policy Framework and the operational PR principle of consensus in the past six years, offering up to UMNO and Barisan Nasional a route to salvation by destroying PR.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 17 May 2015, 1:41 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib naïve to think that his FAQ would put to rest the queries about the motives for the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak is very naïve to think that his FAQ on his blog would put to rest queries about the motives for the murder of Mongolian woman Altantuya Shaariibuu nine years ago.

It would in fact have the opposite effect – firing up anew questions why there had been  a “conspiracy of silence” in the past nine years by the relevant authorities and persons involved to avoid inquiring as to the motives for Altantunya’s murder.

The contention in Najib’s  FAQ on Altantunya’s murder that the nine-year-old case had been “investigated, tried and concluded in the Federal Court” and two persons had been found guilty of the crime of carrying out the heinous deed of killing Altantunya  can be no acceptable arguments as to why there should not now be a  full-scale inquiry into two public interest questions:

•	Who ordered Altantuya to be killed; and

•	Whether there had been  a nine-year “conspiracy of silence” involving the Police, the Attorney-General and the judiciary as well as others to avoid probing into the motives for the killing of Altantuya.

Both these questions are not academic but very live, relevant and pertinent questions affecting national and international confidence in the integrity and professionalism of national institutions and   the rule of law in the country, as well as the credibility and reputation of the Prime Minister.

All right-thinking and patriotic Malaysians are of one mind – that the conviction of two former special commandos Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azhar Umar for the murder of Altantunya had left behind the biggest “Whodunnit” mystery in the nation’s history: Who ordered Altantuya to be killed?

In his FAQ on Altantuya’s murder, Najib said:

“What is important is that the judgment brings justice to everyone, most importantly to the family of the victim, to the accused and even to me.”

Najib cannot be more wrong. The Federal Court judgment in January convicting and passing death sentence on Azila and Sirul had not brought justice to Altantuya’s family and the two accused.

Is Najib prepared to make available facilities to Altantuya’s family and the two accused for them to state whether they accept that the Federal Court judgement had finally brought “justice” to them?

I do not believe Najib is prepared to make such facilities available to Altantuya’s family or the two special police commandos, for he knows that Altantuya’s family as well as the two convicted and their families would be shouting “foul” to high heavens that the Federal Court judgment had not brought “justice” at all.

In fact, the Federal Court judgment had not even brought justice to Najib himself, which is why four months after the Federal Court judgment, he is still haunted and hounded by the issue to the extent that he had to do an unprecedented act, a Prime Minister resorting to a FAQ in his blog to clear his name.

Unless a satisfactory answer is found, Najib must be psychologically prepared for Altantuya’s murder to dog him for the rest of his public life.

Najib said he had stated many times that he had nothing to do with Altantuya’s murder and he had even made Sumpah Laknat.

It is Najib who is doing himself a great injustice, and the question uppermost in everyone’s mind is why he is opposed to a full inquiry as to who had ordered Altantuya’s murder since he  had reiterated that he did not know Altantuya and was not involved directly or indirectly in the Mongolian’s murder.

If Najib is really concerned about “justice” for himself, he should order a full investigation as to who had ordered Altantuya’s murder and why there had been a nine-year “conspiracy of silence” to avoid finding the answer to this crucial question.

Najib said it is “unfair to force me to investigate this case again and demand to know who, if anyone, had ordered the killing”.

He said: “I am not involved and do not know anything about it. The court has determined who was guilty of the murder. That should be the end of the story.”

Najib should accept the reality that the Federal Court judgment is not the “end of the story” and it is not “unfair” for Malaysians to demand that there should be an investigation into the case again and demand to know “who, if anyone, had ordered the killing”.

Accepting Najib’s claim that he was not involved in Altantuya’s murder and did not know anything about it, is he prepared to allow Parliament to decide whether there should be a Royal Commission of Inquiry with two terms of reference: (i) Who ordered Altantuya to be killed; and (II) Whether there was   a nine-year “conspiracy of silence” involving the Police, the Attorney-General and the judiciary as well as others to avoid probing into the motives for the killing of Altantuya?

These two issues are public interest questions and has nothing to do with Tun Mahathir’s campaign to demand that Najib resign as Prime Minister.

Even if Mahathir should come around to the view that it is all right for UMNO and the country for Najib to continue as Prime Minister, these questions still cry out for answer.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 18 May 2015, 3:52 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Najib Razak
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Is anger towards Hadi under Islam and any of the  religions of the world permitted because he has been untruthful, insincere and dishonest in repeatedly violating PR Common Policy Framework and PR consensus operational principle?

(Scroll down for BM version of this statement / Terjemahan BM di bawah)

I am surprised and shocked that PAS President Datuk Seri Hadi Awang has invoked religion to say that it is an obligation for Muslims to vent their anger at DAP for opposing the implementation of hudud in Kelantan.

This is a very dangerous, divisive and retrograde step which can only undermine the process of Malaysian nation-building to create an united and harmonious multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-cultural Malaysian citizenry.

Is anger towards Hadi permitted not only under Islam but any of  the religions in the world for being untruthful, insincere and dishonest in repeatedly violating Pakatan Rakyat Common Policy Framework and Pakatan Rakyat consensus operational principle – which is why the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council is in a crisis and has not met for more than three months as Hadi had unilaterally and arbitrarily disregarded the decisions of the PR Leadership Council or overruled PAS leaders who had attended in his absence, arrogating to himself a veto power over the PR Leadership Council?

Hadi first acted with utter dishonesty and insincerity during the May 2013 General Elections when he authorized PAS candidature to contest in six state assembly seats in the country which were allotted to PKR, resulting in three-cornered fights and the loss of PR in these seats.

The second time was Hadi’s overruling of the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council decision on August 17, 2014 which was attended by the top leaderships of DAP, PKR and PAS (although Hadi was absent) that the PKR President Datuk Seri Wan Azizah Wan Ismail be appointed as Selangor Mentri Besar.

The third time was Hadi’s breach of his personal commitment at the PR Leadership Council meeting of Feb. 8, 2015 that any amendment to the 1995 Kelantan Syariah Criminal Enactment and any private member’s bill motion in Parliament on hudud implementation would first be presented to the PR Leadership Council.

The fourth time was when the 2015 Kelantan Syariah Criminal Enactment was presented and  passed by the Kelantan State Assembly on March 19,  without reference to the PR Leadership Council, and the fifth time was when Hadi himself presented a private member’s bill motion in Parliament on hudud implementation in the March/April meeting of Parliament also without reference to the PR Leadership Council.

The sixth time was the re-presentation of Hadi’s private member’s bill motion to the May/June meeting of Parliament, again  without reference to the PR Leadership Council.

I expect Hadi to be played out by the UMNO leadership again and his private member’s bill motion will suffer the same fate in the current parliamentary meeting as in the previous Parliament, where it would not be given priority to be debated and voted upon.

Is Hadi going to invoke the wrath of the Almighty against the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak and the entire UMNO/Barisan Nasional  national leadership for again playing him out on the private member’s bill motion in  the current Parliament?

Pakatan Rakyat is facing a crisis of survival not because of hudud, but whether PAS under Hadi is prepared to keep to the solemn promise to be committed to the Pakatan Rakyat Common Policy Framework and the PR consensus operational principle which all the three component parties, DAP, PKR and PAS have sworn would bind them.

If the PR Common Policy Framework or PR consensus operational principle could be unilaterally destroyed by anyone of the three PR component parties, then the basis for the continuation of PR has ceased to exist.

The greatest challenge facing PR today is not hudud but whether this PR Common Policy Framework and PR consensus operational principle can be salvaged and restored, or whether PR has just become history!

Hadi is not being honest or truthful when he said that DAP had agreed to the implementation of hudud in Kelantan.

The Joint Statement of Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council of Sept. 28, 2011 on hudud had made it very clear that while the three PR parties of DAP, PKR and PAS had “agreed to disagree” as to what had happened in the past, referring specifically to the Kelantan Syariah Criminal Enactment 1993 and the Terengganu Syariah Criminal Enactment 2003 passed before the formation of Pakatan Rakyat, the three parties agreed that for the future, all policies involving PR and their implementation must have the agreement of all three parties.

Hadi knew the import of the PR Leadership Council Joint Statement on hudud on Sept. 28, 2011 which explained his speech in Hulu Terengganu in May 2012 as well as in various parts of the country before the 13th General Elections where he said that hudud was not a PAS and PR priority as it could only be implemented if adequate conditions were met.

If I am wrong that Hadi does not have the numbers in Parliament to pass the private members’ bill motion as he would be played out again by UMNO, then the very unity,  survival and integrity of the Malaysian Federation would be at stake as the nation would be facing the greatest crisis since its formation in 1963, with  Sarawak and Sabah feeling  betrayed that the fundamental condition for their forming the Malaysian federation – that Malaysia will be a secular state – had  been violated.

——————-

(Teks Bahasa Malaysia)

Adakah kemarahan terhadap Hadi dibenarkan, bukan sahaja menurut agama Islam tetapi juga agama-agama lain di dunia, kerana beliau tidak berlaku jujur, tidak ikhlas dan khianat apabila terus menerus melanggar Dasar Bersama Pakatan Rakyat serta prinsip konsensus Pakatan Rakyat?

Saya terkejut dan tidak sangka Presiden PAS Datuk Seri Hadi Awang sanggup menggunakan alasan agama untuk mengatakan bahwa adalah menjadi tanggungjawab umat Islam untuk menyatakan kemarahan terhadap DAP kerana membantah pelaksanaan hudud di Kelantan.

Ini sangat berbahaya, memecahbelah dan merupakan satu langkah ke belakang yang hanya akan melemahkan proses pembinaan negara bagi membentuk sebuah masyarakat yang bersatu dan harmonis, meski berbilang kaum, agama dan budaya.

Adakah kemarahan terhadap Hadi dibenarkan, bukan sahaja menurut agama Islam tetapi juga agama-agama lain di dunia, kerana tidak berlaku jujur, tidak ikhlas dan khianat apabila terus menerus melanggar Dasar Bersama Pakatan Rakyat serta prinsip konsensus Pakatan Rakyat – yang menjadi sebab kenapa Majlis Pimpinan Pakatan Rakyat berada dalam krisis dan tidak bermesyuarat lebih tiga bulan memandangkan Hadi secara unilateral dan sewenang-wenangnya mengabaikan keputusan Majlis Pimpinan, atau membatalkan pandangan pimpinan PAS yang hadir ke mesyuarat mewakili beliau, merebut kuasa veto ke atas Majlis Pimpinan?

Perbuatan tidak jujur Hadi berlaku buat kali pertama sewaktu Pilihanraya Umum Mei 2013 apabila beliau memberi kuasa kepada calon-calon PAS untuk bertanding di enam kerusi Dewan Undangan Negeri yang telah diperuntukkan kepada PKR, mengakibatkan pertembungan tiga penjuru serta kekalahan bagi Pakatan Rakyat di kerusi-kerusi ini.

Kali kedua Hadi membatalkan keputusan Majlis Pimpinan ialah pada 17 Ogos 2014, yang dihadiri oleh pimpinan utama DAP, PKR dan PAS (walaupun Hadi tidak hadir) bahawa Presiden PKR Datuk Seri Wan Azizah Wan Ismail akan dilantik ke jawatan Menteri Besar Selangor.

Kali ketiga ialah apabila Hadi memungkiri komitmen beliau sendiri kepada Majlis Pimpinan dalam mesyuarat pada 8 Februari 2015, bahawa sebarang pindaan kepada Enakmen Jenayah Syariah Kelantan 1995 dan sebarang rang undang-undang persendirian di Parlimen berkenaan pelaksanaan hudud mestilah terlebih dahulu dibentangkan kepada Majlis Pimpinan.

Kali keempat pula ialah ketika Enakmen Jenayah Syariah Kelantan 2015 dibentang dan diluluskan oleh Dewan Undangan Negeri Kelantan pada 19 Mac, tanpa merujuk kepada Majlis Pimpinan; dan kali kelima ialah apabila Hadi sendiri mengemukakan usul rang undang-undang persendirian di Parlimen berkenaan pelaksanaan hudud dalam sidang Mac/April, juga tanpa merujuk kepada Majlis Pimpinan.

Kali keenam pula ialah kemunculan semula rang undang-undang persendirian Hadi dalam sidang Parlimen Mei/Jun, sekali lagi tanpa merujuk kepada Majlis Pimpinan Pakatan Rakyat.

Saya menjangka Hadi akan sekali lagi dipermainkan oleh kepimpinan Umno dan rang undang-undang persendiriannya akan berhadapan nasib yang sama dalam sidang kali ini sebagaimana nasibnya dalam sidang sebelum ini, apabila ia tidak diberi keutamaan untuk dibahas mahupun diundi.

Adakah Hadi akan membangkitkan kemurkaan Tuhan terhadap Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Razak dan seluruh kepimpinan Umno/BN kerana sekali lagi mempermainkan beliau dalam hal rang undang-undang persendiriannya di Parlimen?

Pakatan Rakyat berhadapan krisis bukan kerana hudud, tetapi kerana sama ada PAS pimpinan Hadi bersedia untuk berpegang kepada janji dan kekal komited kepada Dasar Bersama Pakatan Rakyat serta prinsip konsensus yang telah dipersetujui oleh ketiga-tiga parti komponen DAP, PKR dan PAS.

Sekiranya Dasar Bersama Pakatan Rakyat serta prinsip konsensus boleh dimusnahkan oleh mana-mana satu daripada tiga parti komponen Pakatan, maka asas untuk meneruskan Pakatan Rakyat sudah tidak lagi wujud.

Cabaran terbesar yang dihadapi Pakatan Rakyat hari ini bukanlah hudud tetapi sama ada Dasar Bersama dan prinsip konsensus ini boleh diselamatkan dan dipulihkan, atau Pakatan Rakyat hanya akan tinggal sejarah!

Hadi tidak jujur apabila menyatakan bahawa DAP telah bersetuju dengan pelaksanaan hudud di Kelantan.

Kenyataan bersama Majlis Pimpinan Pakatan Rakyat pada 28 September 2011 berkenaan hudud dengan jelas bahawa sementera ketiga-tiga parti DAP, PKR dan PAS telah ‘bersetuju untuk tidak bersetuju’ dengan apa yang telah terjadi pada masa dahulu, merujuk secara spesifik kepada Enakmen Jenayah Syariah kelantan 1993 dan Enakmen Jenayah Syariah Terengganu 2003 yang diluluskan sebelum pembentukan Pakatan Rakyat, ketiga-tiga parti bersetuju bahawa pada masa akan datang, semua dasar dan pelaksanaan yang melibatkan Pakatan Rakyat mestilah mendapatkan persetujuan ketiga-tiga parti,

Hadi menyedari kepentingan kenyataan bersama Majlis Pimpinan Pakatan Rakyat berkenaan hudud pada 28 September 2011 yang menjelaskan ucapannya di Hulu Terengganu pada bulan Mei 2012, serta di beberapa tempat lagi sebelum PRU ke-13 di mana beliau menyebut bahawa hudud bukan keutamaan PAS dan Pakatan Rakyat, kerana ia hanya boleh dilaksanakan sekiranya syarat-syarat tertentu dipatuhi.

Sekiranya saya salah dan Hadi tidak mempunyai angka sokongan yang cukup di Parlimen untuk meluluskan rang undang-undang persendirian kerana dipermainkan Umno, maka perpaduan, survival dan integriti Persekutuan Malaysia menanggung risiko apabila negara berhadapan krisis terbesar sejak ia ditubuhkan pada 1963, dengan Sarawak dan Sabah kedua-dua rasa dikhianati apabila syarat asas pembentukan Persekutuan Malaysia – bahawa ia menjadi sebuah negara sekular – dicabuli.

(Kenyataan media di Parlimen pada hari Selasa 19 Mei 2015)

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 19 May 2015, 4:47 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.