Mahathir has lost control of his puppet

John Garnaut

The Age

July 17, 2015

The ageing dictator thinks the decay in Malaysian politics is all about personal failings.

On Eid al-Fitr, the most festive day of the Islamic calendar in South-east Asia, Nurul Izzah Anwar should be celebrating with her family and visiting her famous father in jail. But Malaysia’s politics are now so combustible, and the name of Anwar Ibrahim so potent, that the family has been barred from resuming its conversation about the future of Malaysia until the fifth day after the breaking of the fast.

But Nurul Izzah, like the rest of middle-class Malaysia, already knows exactly what her father thinks.

“For the first time in our history, a sitting prime minister is under investigation for the misappropriation of funds,” said her father in a statement released by his lawyers this week, referring to a report that showed how $920 million was siphoned from a sovereign wealth fund into a bank account in the name of Prime Minister Najib Razak. “From behind these prison walls, I feel a great concern and worry for my country,” said Anwar Ibrahim. “Corruption, abuse of power, arrogance and appallingly poor governance has brought Malaysia to this state. The utter collapse of the Greece economy is a warning of what can yet happen.”

Post-colonial, multi-racial Malaysia has dragged itself from poverty to prosperity and become one of the most successful nations in south-east Asia. Prime Minister Najib is an urbane Anglophone and an ally of Australia on all key national security questions. For these reasons the Abbott government has gone to great lengths to protect its friendship with Najib, including by shielding it from the fallout of Australia’s largest corruption probe.

But Najib’s Malaysia is now being sucked into a vortex of repression and corruption on a scale that would have made Suharto wince. Some of the corruption scandals have been revealed by Fairfax. One of them, exposed by The Wall Street Journal, is potentially large enough to fund an entire political machine. And it’s not only direct political rivals who believe that Malaysia’s ruling party, which has reigned since 1957, is entering the final stages of regime decay.

Just ask Mahathir Mohamad, the father of modern Malaysia, and the man who brought Najib to power.

“There are so many wrongdoings,” said Mahathir in a video that he posted on his blog a fortnight ago. “And because of that I feel that if Najib continues to stay in power, the country will deteriorate, will be in trouble and unstable and no longer a place where we can live comfortably.”

In Mahathir’s eyes, Malaysia’s problems are all about the personal failings of those who have succeeded him. At times he has come close to saying that Prime Minister Najib and his most famous political prisoner, Anwar Ibrahim, should be trading places. “Anwar should have been the Prime Minister of Malaysia today,” writes Mahathir, in his memoir.

Like so many successful dictators, Mahathir was never able to decide between competence and loyalty and so ended up with neither. The resulting succession feud makes Australian Labor Party politics look meek.

Najib denies taking government money “for personal gain” and has recently returned fire upon his former patron for leaking “grossly defamatory” stories to Fairfax Media and The Wall Street Journal. Mahathir, in turn, traces the problems back further, to 2003, precisely a fortnight after he left office. “I thought the party might use me, ask for my views,” laments Mahathir, in an interview with author Chris Wright for a new book, No More Worlds to Conquer: Sixteen People Who Defined Their Time – And What They Did Next.

Mahathir’s first hand-picked successor, Abdullah Badawi, “who basically I elevated to that position”, had the temerity to exercise his independent judgment. The disregard for Mahathir’s advice was so treacherous that it amounted to “an abuse of power that I could not tolerate so I had to come back”. The old “recalcitrant” leader responded by destroying Badawi and replacing him with another hand-picked protege, Najib Razak, in 2009.

But the Najib experiment didn’t work out either. “I had great hopes for him,” says Mahathir in Wright’s book. “Unfortunately, for the first six months he totally ignored me.”

The word “irony” does not begin to describe the spectacle of the ageing retired dictator lamenting that Anwar Ibrahim is in jail and Najib is prime minister, and not vice versa. Anwar’s courage and competence have never been questioned. And that, of course, is why Mahathir ensured long ago that Anwar would never get his job.

Mahathir sacked his then-deputy and anointed successor and then jailed him on the medieval charge of sodomy at the height of the Asian financial crisis, in 1998. Anwar had just brought in outside auditors to vet a crony oil deal involving Mahathir’s son.

But Mahathir is finding it much harder to unseat Najib than he did with Anwar, Badawi, and several others he destroyed before. The problem is that Mahathir made the position of prime minister virtually impregnable. He destroyed the independence of the police, judiciary and media and gave the prime minister almost unbridled financial powers. Moreover, Najib has worked tirelessly to build his own financial war chest, beyond the webs of Mahathir patronage, albeit at significant political cost. And so, after Anwar Ibrahim was released from jail, and nearly pulled off an extraordinary victory at the 2013 elections, Najib used the dictatorial powers that Mahathir bequeathed to him and threw Anwar in jail on a second lot of sodomy charges.

It’s not hard to see that the decay at the heart of Malaysian politics is no longer about personalities, but institutions, which Mahathir did his utmost to destroy.

That’s why Nurul Izzah Anwar, herself a political star, in the footsteps of both her parents and her grandmother, is willing to forgive the man who jailed her father and will keep the family apart at today’s Eid al-Fitr celebrations. As she told me: “Najib is just an outcome of a system that has been festering for years.”

John Garnaut is Fairfax Media’s Asia-Pacific editor.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 18 July 2015, 4:10 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia should develop a “hysteria index” to monitor which Minister is the most hysterical in the defence of the Prime Minister in face of mounting exposes about the 1MDB and other scandals

A new political phenomenon seems to have developed in Malaysian politics especially at the Cabinet level – with the  competition among Ministers as to who could become more hysterical in the defence of the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak in the face of mounting exposes about the 1MDB and other scandals.

Without going too far back in time, the two Ministers competing to be the most hysterical Minister in the past three days are indisputably the Minister for Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan and the Minister for Communications and Multimedia, Datuk Ahmad Shabery Cheek.

Self-styling himself as Barisan Nasional strategic communications director (which no other BN leader apart from Najib would have heard of), Abdul Rahman went into an overdrive  in championing  a dubious mercenary character thinking that he could deliver a “killer blow” to the Opposition and therefore  found a path leading to his unstoppable political elevation to the stratosphere of Najib’s political empire.

Abdul Rahman sent out hysterical tweets like:

“When BN questioned the credibility of DAP’s sources, @limkitsiang always quick to say “Don’t shoot the messenger, focus on the message!” So?”

“Is Lim worried his star MP could be proven lying about meeting Justo?

I have elsewhere answered his first tweet. My answer to his second tweet is: “Not at all”.

The question is why Abdul Rahman is acting in so shady a manner indulging in a “cat-and-mouse” game instead of openly,  gentlemanly and honorably naming Tony Pua has having lied about meeting Justo.

Abdul Rahman as good as named Pua in his numerous insinuations, so don’t be a coward and take that half step to specifically name Pua especially as the PJ  Utara MP has issued an open invitation in his Facbook posting:
“Come on, don’t be pussies, don’t beat around the bush. No need to wayang”
.

Shabery was equally aggressive in his “hysteria” game to attract Najib’s attention.

He challenged Opposition figures who allegedly met with PetroSaumdi International (PSI) director Xavier Andre Justo in Singapore clearly to deny their involvement to put the matter to rest.

As Thai police have said that Justo had  met with around 10 individuals, one of whom was an UMNO member, in his bid to sell data stolen  from PSI, why is Shabery not also challenging UMNO or  Barisan Nasional on the same matter?

Shabery charged that Justo had been implicated in a conspiracy against Prime Minister Najib, making the matter one of serious nature.

“(If the allegations are true) it is an act to sabotage the country, this is treason against the country,” he added when met at the Hari Raya open house event at the prime minister’s official residence in Putrajaya yesterday.

Treason is the capital offence in the country.

Is the Malaysian Government going to seek Justo’s extradition to Malaysia so that the Swiss can be put on trial?

Has the Attorney-General given his expert advice to the Cabinet on this matter  or is this just a lay-man hysteria of Minister Shabery?

If the Government has no intention to seek Justo’s extradition to stand trial in Malaysia for the capital offence of “treason”, then Shabery’s outburst is just pure “hysteria” and a most irresponsible act.

Malaysia should develop a “hysteria index” to monitor which Minister is the most hysterical in the defence of the Prime Minister from the mounting exposes about the 1MDB and other scandals.

The Abdul Rahman-Shabery Cheek “hysteria” competition cannot and must not be allowed to  deflect public attention from the fact that more than  two weeks have passed after  the Wall Street Journal report on July 2 that  government investigators had found  some US$700 million (RM2.6 billion) deposited into Najib’s personal accounts at AmBank in March 2013, shortly before the dissolution of Parliament on April 3, 2013 in the run-up to the 13th General Election, and nothing satisfactory had been achieved to date.

Not only Malaysians  in the country but the world-wide community now know that after  more than two weeks, Najib still  dare not deny or contradict the multiple allegations, in particular, with regard to the US$700 million (RM2.6 billion) of funds deposited into his personal accounts in 2013, and everybody wants to know where  the RM2.6 billion came from; and where and to whom these RM2.6 billion have gone to.

In their “hysteria” competition, dare Abdul Rahman and Shabery Cheek ask Najib to publicly answer these elementary questions particularly about the  whereabouts of the RM2.6 billion in the WSJ Report?

If these questions of accountability, integrity and good governance continue to hang over the head of the Prime Minister, how can Najib honourably represent Malaysia in overseas trips and international conferences?

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 18 July 2015, 3:29 pm and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


More politics or less in local elections?

– Liew Chin Tong

The Malaysian Insider

17 July 2015

There are two sets of contradictory ideas when it comes to the discussion of local democracy in Malaysia.

While many call for local elections, there are also some activists who call for “less politics, more professional appointments” to local councils.

At a conference on decentralisation in Penang in September 2014, a social activist and local councillor said Malaysians should emulate Seoul for electing an NGO mayor and he went on to argue the ills of having politicians at the council level.

I have met Park Woon Soon, a human rights lawyer turned social activist turned mayor of Seoul, twice. Park was a renowned human rights activist until 2000 when elections took a firm root in Korea.

He switched to social activism and formed various groups to encourage more participation in the governance of the community’s daily lives. Groups were formed to improve bus routes or community facilities and Park called these “do tanks” as opposed to “think tanks”, which he regarded as talk shops.

I met him for the first time at his Hope Institute in 2010. The second time I met him was at the Seoul mayoral office in August 2012, a year after he won a by-election. He has since become the opposition’s strongest contender for the next presidential election. His rise from NGO mayor to the nation’s No. 1 opposition politician is certainly a fascinating one.

Indeed, in all of Asia’s three most successful democratic transitions from authoritarian rule –namely Korea, Taiwan and Indonesia – local elections have played a crucial part.

Without local democracy, new emerging leaders like furniture exporter Joko “Jokowi” Widodo could not have gained credibility as an administrator which he later used against his opponent Prabowo, who hailed from an elite background.

When there are more politics at the local level, it is possible for more risks and experiments to take place, without having a negative effect on society as a whole (as can sometimes occur once new politicians or political parties assume power).

Of course, popular mayors may not necessarily become good presidents. Taiwan’s Chen Shui-bien and Korea’s Lee Myung Bak are clear examples of such failures.

If we take stock of democratic transitions in Asia, one could even argue that while democracy has brought significant gains in liveability to cities in Korea and Taiwan (and, to a lesser extent, Indonesia), national politics in these countries are still less than optimal in delivering general wellbeing to voters.

At the same decentralisation conference in Penang, a senior Ipoh-based lawyer claimed that “there is no politics in garbage collection hence there should be no politicians at local level of government.”

I gave the lawyer a lengthy reply about how rubbish collection contracts are one of the most important spoils of office for local councillors and how removing those contractors through direct hiring would generate jobs for locals. (I will discuss the changes at the Seberang Perai Municipal Council which ended all outsourced rubbish collection contracts in July 2014 in a future article.)

One of the funniest news of 2014 was when Local Government, Housing and Urban Wellbeing Minister, Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan announced his intention to take over the management of all public toilets in the peninsula.

Apparently the contractual value of cleaning toilets was worth the risk of public ridicule. Hence there is plenty of politics in rubbish collection and even in the cleaning of public toilets!

The advocates of “less politics in local governments” often cite Section 10 (2) of the Local Government Act 1976:

“Councillors of the local authority shall be appointed from amongst persons the majority of whom shall be persons ordinarily resident in the local authority area who in the opinion of the State Authority have wide experience in local government affairs or who have achieved distinction in any profession, commerce or industry, or are otherwise capable of representing the interests of their communities in the local authority area.”

For nearly 40 years since the act has been enforced, there were few councillors who had achieved professional “distinction”. To assume that professionals are better at representing the community’s interests is unrealistic. To assume that one can abolish politics at the local level is simply naive.

The Athi Nahappan Report (1968, pg 3) has this to say:

“As a technique, democracy is slow, cumbrous and expensive. Nevertheless, there is strong force in saying that democracy should continue to be identified with local government in this country as in the case of the Federal and State Governments. True, it has not worked effectively in most local authorities, particularly the Local Councils. The remedies lie not in doing away with democracy but in finding suitable avenues to invigorate it. In Malaysia, the road that democracy has travelled in the field of local government is very short and fragmented, both in terms of space and time. No great damage has therefore been done to warrant complete replacement of democracy. What defects that have been experienced can also be attributed to other causes that need a complete innovation, co-ordination and consolidation to improve the system.”

Hence the argument that we need fewer politicians at the local level of government is flawed and inconsistent with the call for full-fledged local democracy via elections.

Yet to have elections of local governments without rearranging our three-tiered democratic institution is a recipe for disaster. Currently, power is concentrated in the federal government (and actually in the hands of the prime minister) while states have limited powers. On the other hand, local councils have significant powers in dealing with the daily lives of ordinary citizens.

In 2014, 16 local councils’ budgets exceeded RM100 million, and four local councils’ budgets exceeded RM250 million – Penang, Shah Alam, Petaling Jaya and Subang Jaya. Ironically, the 2014 budget for the Perlis government was only RM244.5 million.

If the local councils ceased operations, the consequences would be instantly noticed, as grass cutting, drain clearing, road maintenance and local businesses fall under the purview of the local authorities.

I used to joke that no one would notice so if the state shut down for a year as the state doesn’t control much apart from natural resources (including water), local councils and religious affairs.

The Local Government Act 1976 was designed so that the local authorities serve almost as a branch of the state authorities. Without devolving powers and roles of the federal government to the states, and without redesigning the local councils, local elections would give rise to a competition for power between the states and the local authorities (which is not the intent of those who advocate for local democracy).

Hence local democracy has to come together with the decentralisation and devolution of powers from the federal government to the states to complete the reform.

Should we have more politics at local level? I say “yes”.  – July 17, 2015.

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

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 18 July 2015, 6:15 am and is filed under
Elections
,
Local Goverment
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Silver lining in Low Yat Plaza incident

By May Chee

Malaysiakini

Jul 16, 2015

Was the Low Yat incident something waiting to happen? Or did someone start a spark, hoping to engulf the whole nation in flames?

I don’t know and I don’t care. I’m just glad that it happened.

I’ve always held the belief that bad things happen for a good reason. Provided of course, we learn from them, make reparations and put in place mechanisms to avoid such untoward incidents.

It has been rather difficult for a while now to spread cheer around. However, from the Low Yat incident, in spite of the ugliness displayed by some really irresponsible quarters, others have given us much hope.

I wouldn’t know of all the angels who came to the rescue of those battered, bloodied and disillusioned but I thank you all, for saving our fellow Malaysians and most of all, showing to the whole world out there that we do look out for everyone, irrespective of creed and colour.

Thank you, Fais, for that heartwarming account of your eight-year old friendship with Desmond that stood the test of time because of the mutual understanding, respect and support you both have for and give to each other.

Thank you, the Malay reporters who tried to help Sin Chew Daily crime reporter, Chan Woei Loon, when he was beaten up and the Malay members of the Civil Defence Department (JPAM) who then rushed him to hospital where a Malay doctor treated him.

Thank you, those Malay men who helped push away the mob who attacked China Press photographer, Sam Kar Haur, and saved his life.

Thank you, those Chinese youth who sang Saloma’s “Selamat Hari Raya” in a KTMB train, and the Indian colleagues who played lovely Raya songs at work, bringing much cheer to those around.

I can’t name you all, all of you, our wonderful and brave Malay Malaysians who came forward to save the lives of your Chinese fellow Malaysians, but know that all of us, are indebted to you, forever.

Not only have you displayed great courage and love to save your fellow Malaysians of a different race but all of you have given us much hope. Hope that there’s a place for everyone under our beautiful Malaysian sun.

That we can seek shelter from rain, storm and tyranny under that one big Malaysian umbrella held up by fellow Malaysians, from all walks of life.

Our Malay brothers and sisters during and in the aftermath of the Low Yat incident have shown the rest of us that they do not subscribe to the narrow politics openly displayed by ugly Malaysians and the powers-that-be.

That should quell the fear, resentment and whatever negative feelings and perceptions we have of and for each other.

We are truly one, after all. If we are not there yet, we can be. We just have to work harder, much harder. Don’t ever, give up. Ever.

Amid our fatigue, we have a fountain of life and rest which never runs dry. This rest is not found in shortcuts. On the contrary, where you are crucified, there is a garden where rest is found and the strength to endure.

To the G18, thank God you lost in the recent PAS elections!

A seed must die before a plant can sprout from the ground. Your progressiveness will never find its footing in today’s ulama-dominated PAS. Your demise in PAS will now enable a new life in Pakatan. Something, many Malaysians are hoping and rooting for.

In the midst of gloom, Gerakan Harapan Baru (GHB) came into being, hoping to reboot the now-defunct Pakatan.

I like how you sound; you and your inclusive ideological beliefs, your progressiveness and concern for the people and the fact that your membership is opened to all.

I also loved it when Mat Sabu said that GHB will adhere to the principles of parliamentary democracy and consultation when discussing the Shariah law.

That you will work with all stakeholders including NGOs, etc, and that you will practise Islamic politics which emphasises integrity and trust in governance and administration.

I’m hoping that you, GHB, will be able to shift the differences between the rakyat and that you will be in touch with the reality of today.

I pray that you will be given an understanding mind in governing the rakyat (if and when you are in the position to do so) and to be able to carry out your responsibilities without robbing them of their expectations.

Do not make the mistake of PAS who though in our midst, is a mystery that continues to be inaccessible. I don’t care to meet in secret but face to face with you.

Don’t claim to be a people of God, yet wanting to direct the life of the nation without seeking God’s will. I believe that it’s hardly in His plans to have others swatted away like flies, just so that you can protect your faith. (It’s not enough to seek God’s blessings just for yourselves, to work out your own ambition.)

Don’t subscribe to an arrogant politics which will result in a division of the rakyat. Can you ever hope to govern peacefully, a divided nation? A no-brainer, right?

Everyone prepares his own punishment. There’s no need to look further for whom or why the bell tolls. Definitely, not you, for us.

Don’t imitate that party of old, with more human interests than humble service. If you continue with their folly, you will face alienation from the rakyat and will be unable to regain the trust we once had in you.

Don’t bring us back to the dark ages where primitive peoples thought that they were dependent on the caprice of their gods and accepted the weight of their destiny from which no one can escape.

Your aim, GHB, must be to free the rakyat. You are the liberator. Period.

Last but not least, do not ever, show utter disrespect and contempt for women folk. Do not ever include “camel-talk” in discourses you participate in.

I believe that God created both sexes, not just as a necessary means to communicate life but so that the two might be united in love; the gift of self and shared happiness.

“Woman: she is his companion and not his servant.”

Please be mindful of the above in every decision you make, my dear GHB. I know you will.

I really hope and I believe that goes for the majority of Malaysians, that you, GHB, will bring to fruition, Pakatan 2.0. There’s no reason why, right-thinking Malaysians wouldn’t support you. We are all behind you.

Here’s wishing my Muslim brothers and sisters, “Selamat Hari Raya Aidilfitri” and may we all be able to celebrate this Raya with much love and gratitude.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 18 July 2015, 8:49 pm and is filed under
Malaysian Dream
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The Low Yat lesson: May 13 sequel unlikely but ethnic fault lines show risk remains

By Ida Lim

The Malay Mail Online

Saturday July 18, 2015

KUALA LUMPUR, July 18 — Malaysia will not likely see a repeat of the May 13, 1969 racial riots but isolated clashes like last weekend’s melee at Low Yat Plaza will not be uncommon in a society still divided along ethnic lines, regional observers said.

Although Malaysians are largely deemed a peace-loving lot, the observers cautioned that racial politics and years of race-based policies have created a lingering resentment among the country’s different ethnic groups.

In such an environment, they said economic gloom and even minor personal disputes could cause ethnic tensions to flare easily.

“So, tremors like we’ve just felt in Low Yat will doubtlessly recur—for the ethnic fault line in Malaysia is widening,” Prof William Case told Malay Mail online.

The academic attached to City University of Hong Kong’s Department of Asian and International Studies said ethnic relations in Malaysia have already suffered over the years, largely due to Umno’s calls for Malay dominance and “aggressive Malay supremacist and Islamist organisations”.

This has created hostilities between the Malays and non-Malays, he said, and contributed to a highly flammable situation.

But unlike the ethnic riots in Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur in 1998 and 1969 where some politicians had failed to rein in the situation, Case said the Umno leaders and the police have no real desire to see “real ethnic showdown and bloodletting” happen here.

“Without top politicians egging them on, or the police giving a green light, I don’t expect to see street brawling erupting in large-scale ethnic rioting in Malaysia any time soon,” Case said, in reference to the Low Yat brawl.

Singapore-based observer Dr Oh Ei Sun said most Malaysians are known to be peace-loving but economic concerns such as “falling income, rising prices, high unemployment or underemployment among the young” create an environment conducive for rioting.

“Political uncertainty will aggravate this, as there will be those opportunistic few who would like to achieve political ends by resorting to violence,” the senior fellow at Nanyang Technology University’s Institute of Defence & Strategic Studies told Malay Mail Online in an email interview.

But Oh said Malaysia has a relatively low vulnerability to violence with only a small group wanting to instigate racial clashes, also noting that the wealth gap between ethnic groups today is no longer as prominent as it was during the 1969 race riots.

Ironically, the survival problems in the country are also drawing Malaysians closer to each other as all races face the same uphill challenges, he said.

“If anything, we see a more mutually understanding society because as Malaysia is urbanising rapidly, people from across the racial lines are facing very similar challenges: falling income, worsening traffic, housing shortage, failing education, etc., all of which, ironically, increase the empathy of Malaysians for each other,” he added.

To prevent ethnic riots from happening again in Malaysia, Oh said Putrajaya’s top priority should be improving socio-economic conditions for all Malaysians, while misunderstandings should be thrashed out in honest and peaceful dialogues.

Australia’s Prof Clive Kessler said racial riots are symptoms of a “regime crisis”, which in Malaysia’s case could happen as the decades-old Umno and Barisan Nasional governing formula comes into question after poor showings in Election 2008 and Election 2013.

Although Malaysians are largely deemed a peace-loving lot, the observers cautioned that racial politics and years of race-based policies have created a lingering resentment among the country’s different ethnic groups. — Reuters picAlthough Malaysians are largely deemed a peace-loving lot, the observers cautioned that racial politics and years of race-based policies have created a lingering resentment among the country’s different ethnic groups. — Reuters picA regime crisis typically happens when there is economic slowdown, political deadlock, an inept or faltering government and falling public confidence, the long-time observer of Malaysia said.

Citizens may take to the streets in anger when they find the old and familiar governing structure no longer works, but such protests could unfortunately turn into ethnic riots in Malaysia due to the entrenched racially-driven politics and racially-structured life here, Kessler said.

Malaysia can only hope on the good sense of most Malaysians, he said, conceding that the danger of ethnic riots is never remote as risks continue to grow.

To truly move on, Malaysia has to face up to the history of the 1969 riots, Kessler said.

But there has never been a clear and adequate analysis of the event as it was more convenient to use it as a bogeyman and threat, he said.

“But so long as the nature of the 1969 crisis is not addressed squarely, Malaysia will never be fully free of those events, their continuing residue and after-effects, it will never manage to get over and put to rest what happened—and to learn the lessons,” the emeritus professor of sociology and anthropology at the University of New South Wales said in an email interview.

The 1969 riots left hundreds of Malaysians injured and dead, while the Low Yat Plaza mob violence last week saw five injured.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 18 July 2015, 7:54 am and is filed under
Malaysian Dream
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Futures markets have much to say about oil’s direction

Gregory Meyer

Financial Times

July 17, 2015

For a brief, brave moment this year there was a sense the worst was over for the oil sector. This week, that feeling evaporated.

Iran’s agreement to curtail its nuclear programme, potentially restoring its place as a leading crude exporter, was just the latest hunk of bearish news thrown at the oil market. Saudi Arabia and Iraq are pumping record volumes. US drillers have again added rigs to probe for oil in shale rocks. China’s furious fuel demand growth is easing. For investors pondering exposure to oil through futures, shares or bonds, standing back seems the safest course.

The $50 a barrel plunge in spot oil prices from a year ago has been breathtaking. But to grasp the industry’s deepening woes, look at what futures markets are saying.

The price of West Texas Intermediate crude delivered in December 2016 has fallen below $60 a barrel, the lowest since any exchange listed that futures contract. Between the financial crisis and last year, the contract levitated between $80 and $100.

Of course, futures markets are not predictive. But the fall in this and other later-dated oil contracts suggests that an era of higher prices has ended. The number of outstanding contracts for December 2016 crude has increased even as its price has tumbled, indicating producers are holding their noses and selling barrels forward on the cheap.

Collapsing futures prices have stymied long-term investments in additional supply in countries from Canada to Brazil. Unless demand is hit by an electric vehicle revolution, a meaningful tax on carbon or another global recession, the resulting shortfall will force oil prices higher — eventually. For now, as the International Energy Agency said in its monthly oil report, “the bottom of the market may still be ahead”.

Investors searching for that bottom would do well to avoid buying commodity futures and similar instruments. The upward slope of the futures market erodes returns as investors must constantly replace expiring contracts with new ones that cost more per barrel. Dealers catering to large commodity futures investors are bearish, with Goldman Sachs forecasting the price of WTI to be $45 in October. Pimco, which manages about $20bn in commodity assets, says peace with Iran will put a cap on long-term oil prices.

As for securities, the choices are not much easier. Oil and gas exploration and development companies issued $21.8bn in equity and $55.7bn in bonds in the first half of 2015, according to Dealogic, to investors eagerly betting on a rebound. For a few heady days in April, energy stocks were beating the broad S&P 500 index.

That optimism has soured.

“As recently as a month ago the building consensus was for a V-shaped recovery for oil prices,” Bill Herbert, co-head of securities at Simmons & Co, the energy investment bank, told me. “Now the script has been completely rewritten. We’re in this purgatory again of oil prices flatter for longer.”

Such gloom arguably presents an opportunity, but for many energy stocks it still comes down to the oil market. Moves in the S&P oil and gas exploration and production (E&P) index, which includes upstream companies such as ConocoPhillips, EOG Resources and Anadarko Petroleum, have a 90 per cent annual correlation with oil prices. Paul Sankey of Wolfe Research calls E&Ps a “hope trade”.

Integrated energy companies such as ExxonMobil and Chevron are more appealing given generally stronger balance sheets, higher dividend yields and hedges against low crude prices in the form of refinery assets. But as Mr Sankey writes, their share prices as a multiple of earnings are “extremely stretched” — ie, not cheap.

Pure refiners seem attractive, especially companies such as Valero and Tesoro able to mop up the US crude surfeit. But at some point they risk turning the glut of crude into a glut of refined fuel. US refiners also live in fear of Washington lifting its ban on crude exports, erasing their cost advantage in the world market.

In fixed income securities, Scott Minerd of Guggenheim Partners made a case this week for energy junk bonds, which offer 8.8 per cent yields on the secondary market and are priced well below par.

“The key will be to distinguish between good and bad credits,” Mr Minerd wrote in a note. To his point, Sabine Oil & Gas, a Houston-based E&P, filed for bankruptcy the day he published it.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 19 July 2015, 5:11 am and is filed under
Oil
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


GHB vs PAS: Antara akhlak dan perjuangan

– Al Amin Mohamed Sultan

The Malaysian Insider

18 July 2015

Gerakan Harapan Baru (GHB) adalah satu pasukan yang sedang bergerak laju dalam mencorakkan warna baru dalam arena politik tanah air.

Ada yang mengatakan mereka ini sebagai serpihan PAS walaupun masyarakat umum lebih memahami mereka ini adalah gabungan individu yang terkeluar daripada kepemimpinan PAS melalui pembersihan terancang dalam muktamar.

Maka, setelah kalah sepatutnya mereka duduk diam-diam sahajalah, buat apa-apa yang rasional dalam terus memajukan parti.

Sayang seribu kali sayang, keputusan yang mereka ambil adalah unik kerana mereka ingin meneruskan agenda yang lebih besar.

Ianya dalam erti kata meneruskan sistem dual parti politik di Malaysia untuk memantapkan blok pembangkang iaitu Pakatan Rakyat yang kini sedang punya pakatan yang longgar terutama daripada aspek sokongan umat Islam melalui PAS.

Blok Pakatan Rakyat ini dilihat aspek yang penting sebagai unit “check and balance” kepada Barisan Nasional iaitu kerajaan yang memerintah sejak daripada kemerdekaan sehingga sekarang.

Kekuatan sistem dual parti iaitu kerajaan dan pembangkang adalah penting agar rakyat sentiasa mendapat khidmat yang terbaik. sebagaimana konsep dua peniaga yang akan saling meningkatkan kualiti barangan dan servis kepada pembeli untuk memenangi hati mereka.

Penulis agak keliru dengan reaksi beberapa pemimpin dan organisasi yang mempunyai perbezaan pendapat dengan penubuhan GHB.

Ini termasuklah pandangan terhadap organisasi yang mengusaha dan menyokong penubuhan gerakan ini terutamanya respons daripada PAS.

Setiap organisasi bebas untuk mempunyai perbezaan pendapat seperti mana juga bebasnya sesetengah pihak yang bersetuju dengan penubuhan GHB ini.

Semua pihak bebas untuk mempunyai pandangan mereka sendiri kerana kita berada dalam negara yang menghormati suara orang lain dalam pengamalan sistem demokrasi.

Umum memahami akan ada golongan yang cemas dan tercabar dengan kewujudan pesaing-pesaing baru.

Tetapi mereka sepatutnya melihat dari perspektif positif kerana ianya akan memantapkan lagi satu-satu organisasi itu apabila sudah mempunyai pesaing, lebih-lebih lagi gerakan yang persis kepada perjuangan mereka dengan lebih memahami gerak kerja antara satu sama lain.

Ianya akan lebih mematangkan dan mengharmonikan ruang serta medan perjuangan.

Malahan lebih enak sekiranya dipandang sebagai rakan daripada melihatnya sebagai musuh. Tetapi adakah mereka mempunyai jiwa yang cukup besar untuk berpandangan sebegitu?

Perkara yang lebih penting daripada itu adalah berkaitan akhlak bagi seorang pemimpin.

Kita dapat melihat bagaimana sesetengah pemimpin PAS menyerang karektor dan peribadi individu-individu yang memperjuangkan dan menyokong GHB ini.

Apakah perkara ini akan menjadikan ahli-ahli PAS yang lain lebih taat kepada pemimpin mereka?

Apakah serangan karektor ini wajar dilakukan oleh seorang Muslim kepada muslim yang lain?

Tidak dinafikan teguran dan nasihat boleh diberi untuk untuk dipertimbangkan tetapi bukannya serangan peribadi yang dikhuatiri akan menjadi fitnah.

Apakah kita lupa rumah tangga Rasulullah SAW dan Ummul Mukminin Aisyah RA pernah difitnah sehingga menggoncangkan rumah tangga mereka sendiri.

Itu mereka yang punya iman yang tidak perlu kita cuba untuk banding dengan kita.

Bagaimana mungkin kita yang punya iman setipis kulit bawang berani berbuat perkara-perkara sebegini?

Rakyat semakin pening dengan perang mulut, serangan tulisan, komen-komen tajam yang mana kesemuanya datang satu pakej dengan kata-kata yang menyindir, cercaan, dan perbuatan yang tidak mencerminkan akhlak yang sepatutnya ada pada setiap manusia lebih-lebih lagi muslim apatah lagi yang bergelar pemimpin.

Berlapang dadalah, mereka sedang memilih jalan juang mereka, hormatilah dan doakan mereka.

Sekiranya serangan diteruskan ianya seolah-olah menunjukkan PAS ragu-ragu dengan jalan perjuangan sendiri.Sebaliknya rakyat sedang memerhatikan betapa mesra, berfikiran terbuka dan berakhlaknya kepemimpinan GHB ini dengan tulisan-tulisan yang mengalu-alukan nasihat, pandangan dan cadangan kepada mereka.

Malah memandang segala kritikan dengan positif. Apabila dibandingkan dengan kedua-dua perbezaan ini apakah yang kita mahu jangkakan?

Berkaitan dengan perkara ini, dalam berpuluh-puluh tulisan dan pandangan, penulis amat tertarik dengan penulisan Hasrizal Abdul Jamil, pemilik laman sesawang “SaifulIslam.com” yang sangat popular di kalangan mahasiswa dengan tulisan-tulisan beliau yang menarik dan membumi bermula daripada perjuangan, isu rumah tangga, isu-semasa dan lain-lain.

Beliau punya pendapat yang agak bijaksana dalam isu GHB dan PAS kerana beliau terkait rapat kerana pernah bergelumang dalam PAS dan juga kenal peribadi yang kini memperjuangkan GHB.

Penulis melihat beliau lebih terbuka dan tegurannya juga lebih mengandungi hikmah dan bijaksana.

Malah ada kritikan kepada beliau berkaitan perubahan yang dibawa tidak berjaya kerana idea pembaharuan itu dangkal dan bebal.

Penulis secara peribadi berpandangan idea-idea yang ada penolakan tidak semestinya kerana idea itu dangkal dan bebal.

Ini adalah kerana terdapat pelbagai faktor dalam dan luaran yang menjadi punca kepada idea tersebut ditolak antaranya pentingkan diri sendiri, selesa berada di zon kenyamanan (comfort zone), dan mungkin idea yang dibawa adalah futuristik yang gagal untuk difahami mereka yang mempunyai visi dan misi yang kurang jelas.

Malah sebagai sebagai seorang yang ingin melakukan perubahan besar, janganlah kita terikut dengan nama atau konsep semata-mata yang penting buat permulaannya idea dan pelaksanaan tidak kira apa sekalipun jelmaan namanya.

Sekiranya nama sesuatu projek itu ialah hitam, tidak ada masalah sekiranya impak daripada projek itu adalah keindahan, ketenangan, kekayaan, keamanan dan redha Allah.

Ada apa pada nama? Nama boleh ditukar, boleh dijenamakan bergantung kepada suasana dan persekitaran.

Sekiranya semua memikirkan untuk memberikan nama yang unik dan tersendiri untuk anak-anak mereka, ya mungkin mereka merasakan mereka melakukannya tetapi selepas beberapa ketika mereka akan dapati banyak lagi nama yang sama wujud di muka bumi ini.

Walau apapun yang sedang menjalar, marilah sama-sama kita menjaga akhlak antara kita umat manusia, marilah kita tonjolkan nilai-nilai indah Islam sebagaimana indahnya akhlak junjungan besar Nabi Muhammad SAW sepanjang kehidupannya.

Mengambil contoh peristiwa tentangan kepada dakwah baginda di Ta’if, bagaimana baginda dibaling dengan batu-batu sehingga darah bertakung dalam kasutnya.

Insiden yang menggegarkan arasy Allah SWT, sehingga turunnya Malaikat Jibril A.S, bertanya pada baginda Ar-Rasul apakah mahu ditimpakan bukit yang akan melenyapkan terus kaum itu.

Boleh sahaja Rasulullah mengangguk bersetuju,tetapi alangkah indahnya akhlak ar-rasul yang digelar Al Amin ini:

“Wahai Jibril, jangan lakukannya. Biarlah aku bersabar terhadap kaumku. Semoga Allah akan melahirkan dari zuriat mereka orang-orang yang beriman kepada Allah.”

Rasulullah saw mendoakan kaum Taif, “Ya Allah, berilah petunjuk kepada kaumku. Sesungguhnya mereka tidak mengetahui.

Apakah kita gagah mengatakan kita pewaris nabi sedangkan akhlak ar-rasul kita tidak warisi? Moga Allah berikan hidayah dan taufik-Nya kepada semua daripada kita. Amin. – 18 Julai, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 19 July 2015, 7:39 am and is filed under
PAS
,
Political Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


In Malaysian politics, keep calm and amok on!

by Sophie Lemiere, Guest Contributor

New Mandala

15 JULY 2015

In the wake of a brawl in Kuala Lumpur’s Low Yat Plaza, Sophie Lemière looks at how youth, prejudice and mob violence go hand-in-hand with politics.

The Malay word
amuck
 or
amok
 (rage) is the most famous Malaysian export along with palm oil (praised by Nutella lovers) and rubber (praised by everyone).
Amok
 or to
run amok
 has become a global concept to describe any sudden and ephemeral acts of violence to a killing rage. There is no cultural specificity here; we have sadly seen people running amok from Columbine in the USA to Paris and the beaches of Sousse (Tunisia).

Amok
 is surely the only Malay word the entire world uses, without even knowing its quasi-mystical origins. Anthropologists, psychiatrists and novelists have written extensively on this word, exploring the linguistic roots of
amok
 to the intricacies of a psycho-pathological phenomenon; an unresolved intellectual quest well resumed by Yan Kon[1]. The
“pengamuk”
, the one who suddenly falls into a violent frenzy, was once seen as a hero: a mystical warrior getting his inner strength from god. Malay mysticism and history is filled with epic stories of such great warriors. Today, that heritage may be found in the hybrid tradition of Silat balancing an intense physical practice and mystic-religious beliefs with prayers to invulnerability charms[2]. Sadly today, for most, the
pengamok
 has lost his nobility and is seen simply as a psycho.

This linguistic-mystic maze is now used to describe a non-event: the rowdy gathering of about 200 people at the empire of electronic goods, Low Yat Plaza in Bukit Bintang (Kuala Lumpur’s entertainment district), following the alleged theft of a mobile phone and consequent brawl.

Would it make sense to point out that those gathered were mostly young Malaysian Malays and that the Low Yat Plaza shops were owned mostly by Malaysian Chinese? As the police said: “no violence”, “everything under control”, “nothing racial”. Sure. The gap between the descriptions we are reading in the press and the police statements are echoing the illusion. Of course there is nothing racial when a group of young men run
amok
 over allegations of theft of an expensive hand phone.[3] The pride of the men involved may definitely be higher than the price of the bloody phone. This is not racial but universal.

But when a group of angry people demonstrates in front of the very same building in support of the alleged angry petty thief calling for “justice”; one may wonder the reason why, if not racial, they would do so? But again, in Malaysia, where political parties are “race-based”, where the national identity card states ones religion, where some get more than others because of a slight genetic differences (that may be solved by religious conversion though!), where members of parliament are urging some of their fellow citizens to go back to their great-great-great-great-great grandparents’ country, and where certain national leaders  claim their ethnic membership before their citizenship[4], we need to understand once and for all that there is nothing racial, and even less racist in Malaysia. Indeed, everything is political.

The
pengamok
 here might not be the one we think. As we know, in Malaysia, politics have for long run amok, and at a faster rate than the people. The Low Yat Plaza’ craziness which naturally pleases the media and scares Malaysian mothers and tourists is far from being an isolated or irrational phenomenon. It is the symptom of a well-orchestrated system. Between
Amok
 and
Politik
 lays the rationality of
Politok
.

Politok
 in action

Politok
 is a system where the idea of “prejudice” – dividing “us” and “them” is nurtured at every level of society. This rhetoric is widely spread by majoritarian ethno-nationalist organisations and ethno-centric political parties. All society’s “wrongs”, from economic disparities to homosexuality, are simplified to the extreme and unattended but always explained by the same idea: “some” have stolen the wealth and the land, “they” threaten culture and religion, “they” have imported drugs and prostitution, so “we” must “resist”. In Europe, “they” were the Jews in 1930s, “they” were Italians in the 1950s, today “they” are the Romas, the Muslims, the refugees and so on. “They” are always the minority, a convenient punching bag to channel the frustrations of the ethno-centric majority. In Malaysia, the culture of “prejudice”, and all its attached concepts – justice, revenge, resistance, power – is used as justification for political, sociological and economical behaviour from which emerge populist state policies to “uplift” the so-called “prejudiced group”.

The myth of prejudice in Malaysia

The myth of resistance and prejudice has nurtured many young Malaysian Malays. It begins with the teaching of a distorted version of Malaysian history systematically erasing a large part of the country’s multi-ethnic heritage[5] and instilling political propaganda. Every individual experience is then perceived through the prism of this myth around which one builds their vision of the world.

Moreover, the discrepancies existing between what young Malays are made to believe as “a genuine and sovereign people” of the land and what they can actually achieve – limited by a poor educational system – in a highly competitive job market is significant pressure and frustration.[6] We are here only unveiling one aspect of a schizophrenic system leaving aside repressions of sexuality, lack of religious freedom, media censorship and self-censorship, political repression of opponents, corruption of government leaders and so on.

Political scientists generally fear the emotional parameter and avoid it in their research as if political behaviours were only made of “dependent” and “independent variables” and other jargons and agonising analytical tools. The use of violence such as demolishing or burning religious sites or instigating riots to alter political behaviour, and where insurgents (acting on their own or on the behalf of a third party) know their actions will generate a reaction from a targeted population is widely recognised. Nevertheless political scientists rarely explain the reason why these behaviours change.[7] Emotions are clearly relevant to politics, and in this case they are central.

Anger, frustration, pride… to fight this prejudice, “conscious Malays” choose to join a political party or a ‘non-governmental organisation’ (NGO). What best than an organisation of one’s own to defend ones community’s interests? It is for that very simple reason, that some young Malays join
Pekida
: to defend the Malays.

In a system where the redistribution of the wealth follows scrupulously the lines and orders of the patronage system, it seems for many that hard work and education is not the required skills. And here lies the second motivation of the youthful members of Pekida: to build a network in a desperate attempt to correct a failed system. The switch from NGO activism to political action and violence then is an easy one. Within a short span of time, young members feel empowered by a quasi-sacred mission to protect their own, and to restore justice at any cost or almost.

Pekida
 and politics in Malaysia

Pekida
 is a “non-profit” and “non-governmental” religious organisation. The organisation and its link to the political sphere were first revealed in August 2014 by the Malaysian press when the police orchestrated the biggest and most mediatised crackdown on gangs ever made in Malaysia. Soon, the alleged links between the ruling party and gangs leaders affiliated to Pekida were discarded and on several occasion UMNO leaders have renewed their support of the organisation.[8]

Pekida
 claims officially 50,000 members, but this figure does not include the underground groups whose leaders mostly claim allegiance to the ruling party.
Pekida
 members are for most, Malaysians (and registered voters). There has not been any investigation on
Pekida
 groups or other Malay NGOs for their activities in the same manner that the Registrar of Societies is now targeting Christian organisations, but again remember there is nothing racial. Several groups of individuals claiming their membership to
Pekida
 are involved in political demonstrations and episodes of violence; they are
connivance
 militants offering their services to political parties in exchange
for money or favours
. The collusion between underground network and politics, selling your muscle for “work” or political violence is among the oldest jobs in the world.
Preman
 in Indonesia,
Mafiosi
 in Italia,
Yakuza
in Japan, the entrepreneurs of violence have many names.

The leadership of
 Pekida
 perpetually denounces the existence of deviant branches, and claims non-responsibility in outburst of violence: irresponsible indeed. Surprisingly, the organisation has never been under any investigation nor has it tried to re-name itself. To be clear, the ambiguous nature of
Pekida
, its link to the political arena, the service rendered to UMNO during political campaigns and the potential violence of its members is old news.

But the visibility of the potential for violence of disenfranchised youths that join the ranks of Pekida is what should attract attention. Indeed, the question is how to channel the frustration of disenfranchised youths bored outside of the busy election time? And when side incomes and rare state allowances are insufficient to open the golden doors of Low Yat Plaza?

Disenfranchised youth to
connivance
 militants or entrepreneurs of violence out of job; all the symptoms of a dangerous system. Again the
pengamok
 might not be the one we think. The study of Yak Kon, finally mentions that other suggested causes of
amok
 include: febrile delirium, tuberculosis, syphilis, epilepsy and opium intake. A thorough study of the entire Malaysian system and its leaders would then require a rather funny and difficult data collection.

Meanwhile keep calm and
amok
 on!

Sophie Lemière is a political anthropologist at the European University Institute in Italy. She holds a PhD and a Masters in Political Sciences from Sciences-Po (France) and is on a comparative journey between Malaysia and Tunisia where she continues to do fieldwork. She is the editor of
Misplaced Democracy: Malaysian Politics and People
.

—

[1] British Journal of Psychiatry (1994) 165, 685-689

[2] Observations and interviews with Silat practionners and claiming membership to affiliated Pekida groups. Numerous Pekida members are recruited in silat associations. Video of rituals may be seen on youtube.

[3] Clarification of the incident by Malaysia’s Inspector General of Police http://www.kinitv.com/video/20678O8

[4] See Greg Lopez, “We are not Racists!” At http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2011/11/30/were-not-racists/

[5] See Dr Ranjit Singh Malhi Open Letter in The Star at http://www.thestar.com.my/Opinion/Letters/2015/03/13/Glaring-bias-in-history-book/, the CPI article series on the NGO and Scholars initiative of Reclaiming Malaysian History at http://blog.limkitsiang.com/2011/05/19/reclaiming-our-truly-malaysian-history/

[6] The youth in question was unemployed and had disabled parents. http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/youth-at-centre-of-low-yat-brawl-charged-with-theft-claims-trial

[7] Roger Petersen and Sarah Zukerman, Anger, Violence and Political Science in M.Potegal, G. Stemmler, C. Spielberg (eds.), International Book of Anger: Constituent and Concomitant Biological, Psychological, and Social Processes, Spinger 2010, 561-583.

[8] See http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2011/12/16/najib’s-split-personality/

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 19 July 2015, 4:18 am and is filed under
Law & Order
,
Malays
,
Malaysian Dream
,
Najib Razak
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia PM Najib ready to take on raging bull Mahathir

Rowan Callick

Asia Pacific Editor

The Australian

July 18, 2015

Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak has been under political siege for the two years since support for his UMNO-led coalition, which has ruled since independence in 1957, slid to less than 50 per cent at the last election.

The attacks — from outside and from within his own political camp — have intensified in recent months, becoming increasingly more personal, with a series of claims of corruption.

He has now begun to fight back, launching — and threatening to launch — defamation cases within Malaysia and overseas, including against Fairfax newspapers in Australia and The Wall Street Journal.

The opposition grouping led by Anwar Ibrahim attracted more voters at the 2013 general election, but failed to win power due to the gerrymander that gives rural ethnic Malay voters an overwhelming advantage.

Mr Anwar was jailed in February for five years for sodomy, in a legal process that was widely condemned. So he’s out of the way. But, with Mr Anwar about to turn 68, the succession to his leadership was already under discussion. And the unrest has not gone away.

The besieged government has taken an increasingly militant Islamic tack, apparently seeking to split the Islamic party PAS, or at least its key supporters, away from the Anwar-led opposition grouping.

Such actions have intensified the bitterness within the Malaysian political scene.

A group of 25 prominent citizens including former judges, top public servants and diplomats, has responded by launching a series of extensively publicised statements condemning “developments that undermine Malaysia’s commitment to democratic principles and the rule of law, breed intolerance and bigotry, and have heightened anxieties over national peace and stability”.

They attacked the government’s “use of the Sedition Act as a constant threat to silence anyone with a contrary opinion”.

Attempts at rational discussion and conflict resolution have become difficult, they say.

The plunge in the prices for oil and gas — key Malaysian exports — has deepened this gloom, derailing moves, including the introduction of a 6 per cent GST, to make the government’s finances more sustainable.

Singapore-based analysts IMA Asia say that members of the UMNO old guard, led by former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad, who just turned 90, “aim to topple Najib, who has plundered the public purse more than usual according to his detractors”.

A troubled sovereign wealth fund Mr Najib launched, 1MDB, which accumulated $12 billion in debts, is central to this sometimes necessarily convoluted debate. London-based website the Sarawak Report and Journal claimed that about $800 million in 1MDB-related funds went through Mr Najib’s personal accounts.

The group Citizens for Accountable Governance Malaysia has linked accounts at AmBank, whose founder Hussain Ahmad Najadi was shot dead two years ago, to the 1MDB case.

Mr Najib is also suing opposition MP Tony Pua and Chan Chee Kong, owner of the Mediarakyat website, over the 1MDB allegations.

The case of the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu, a Mongolian woman who played a role in negotiations for the 2002 purchase of French submarines, while Mr Najib was defence minister — clouded by claims of kickbacks to Malaysian officials — remains unresolved.

Fairfax has published articles alleging corruption in an Australian property purchase involving state-related firm Mara Inc, and in the Malaysian purchase of polymer currency from a firm owned by the Reserve Bank — the latter in which the newspapers linked Mr Najib.

But it is hard to topple the Prime Minister, IMA says, “despite an array of colourful UMNO characters who might take his place”, and despite the bureaucracy becoming distracted by this political parade. That six years ago Dr Mahathir played the key role in forcing the resignation of then prime minister Abdullah Badawi makes some UMNO officials reluctant to appear mere ciphers by repeating the same process.

However, says IMA, “at some point, UMNO may force Najib out, dump his cronies, and aim to settle business down under a new regime that will be much the same”.

The terrible fate of flights MH370 and MH17 attracted sympathy for the government which owns Malaysia Airlines and which bears no responsibility — but also resonated with more superstitious citizens, as a sign of celestial unease.

Mr Najib, about to turn 62, is an urbane Anglophile from a blue-ribbon political family.

His core conundrum is that he has already deployed the usual tactics to neutralise oppositions — mobilising Islamic extremists to denigrate them as irreligious, amplifying the ideological and organisational splits within their coalition, charging outspoken critics under the colonial Sedition Act to silence them.

But even employing all of these has failed to seal off the air of crisis that continues to surround his government.

This indicates that the bigger, underlying threat comes from within, which must mean — given his continuing hold over a crucial cadre of UMNO loyalists — from Dr Mahathir.

The answer now emerging, is to call his bluff — if such it is. Dr Mahathir says Malaysians “no longer trust” Mr Najib. Now Mr Najib needs to test whether they still trust Dr Mahathir.

That involves challenging the various corruption claims in court. In Singapore — about which Malaysian politicians traditionally harbour both respect and mistrust — the ruling PAP governments have long used defamation proceedings to silence critics.

The hearings — with the first, against Harakah, a daily newspaper published by opposition party PAS, over the 1MBD allegations, due next Thursday in Kuala Lumpur — also provide Mr Najib with the opportunity to present his side of the stories, and to assail his critics and enemies from a platform that is, in the legal sense, privileged.

Malaysia’s balance of power thus hangs uneasily between besmirched institutions and leaders, with clear air beyond reach for now.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 19 July 2015, 4:59 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Not just Low Yat Plaza but whole of Malaysia is a time bomb if race hatred, religious intolerance, breakdown of rule of law and collapse of good governance not resolved urgently

Utusan Malaysia today said Low Yat Plaza is a  ticking “time bomb” waiting to explode.

I say it is not just Low Yat Plaza but the whole of Malaysia is a time bomb waiting to explode if  race hatred, religious tolerance, breakdown of rule of law and the collapse of good governance are not resolved urgently.

I fully agree with former Prime Minister Tun Abdullah who yesterday expressed the hope that everyone would bury the hatchet to strengthen the relationship among the different races in the country.

This is why I had called for a Royal Commission of Truth and Reconciliation on the Low Yat Race Riots last Sunday to ensure that there would be no recurrence of a petty crime of theft of a mobile phone mushrooming into a race riot involving hundreds of people.

Malaysia cannot continue to adopt the  “sweeping under the carpet” mentality, which was why there had been no  Commission of Inquiry into the May 13, 1969 race riots to learn from the disasters of our history  to ensure an united, peaceful and better future for all Malaysians.

There is an urgent need for a Royal Commission on Truth and Reconciliation on the Low Yat Race Riots  whose  primary objective is to prevent any recurrence of the incident whether in Kuala Lumpur or elsewhere in multi-racial Malaysia of a petty crime mushrooming into a racial riot, and its terms of reference should include:

·       Whether the police could have acted pre-emptively to prevent the petty crime of mobile phone theft from being transformed into a race riot involving a few hundred people;

·       The attack on journalists;

·       The role of social media with Ministers blaming it as a main culprit of the Low Yat Incident;

·       Whether a major cause of the Low Yat riots was the incessant incitement of hatred as a result of  irresponsible politics of race and religion in recent years.

There are many Malaysians of distinction, who could command the confidence of Malaysians in their independence and credibility, to serve on the Royal Commission of Truth and Reconciliation on Low Yat Race Riots to present a blueprint to prevent any recurrence of the incident in future.

Former Cabinet Minister who was Minister for International Trade and Industry for two decades, Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz, who warned after the Low Yat riots  that  Malaysia has everything to lose if it ever sees a repeat of the deadly May 13 race riots, would make an ideal  Chairman of the Royal Commission of Truth and Reconciliation.

There are other distinguished Malaysian personages who could serve on the  Royal Commission, including Perlis mufti Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin, former Cabinet Minister  Tan Sri Dr. Rais Yatim, former Attorney-General Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman, former top civil servant Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam, NGO leader Datuk Seri Ambiga Sreenivasan, national laureate Samad Said and Bishop Paul Tan.

(Speech at the Penang DAP Hari Raya Aidilfitri Open House in Kepala Batas on Sunday 19th  July 2015 at 2 pm)

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 19 July 2015, 4:32 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Malaysian Dream
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Pakatan Rakyat would have been wiped out in the 14GE if it had contested the next polls in total disregard of the violation of the PR Common Policy Framework by one of the component parties

Three days ago, I posed the question whether PAS could lose Kelantan in the next 14th General Election.

I said that based on the 13th General Election performance,  if there is a 4% swing of voters against PAS in Kelantan in the next poll, PAS will lose power in the state it had governed for 25 years since 1990.

Is a 4% swing in a state an unlikely happening?

In the 13th General Election in  Kedah, PAS and Pakatan Rakyat lost the Kedah State Government because there was a 3.8% swing of the voters against PAS.

The voter swing against PAS was even more overwhelming as it was nearly four-fold during the 2004 General Election in Terengganu, where there was a 15% swing of voters against PAS, sweeping out the Terengganu PAS State Government after only one term of Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi as the Terengganu Mentri Besar.

Pakatan Rakyat is no more, and time will tell whether this is a blessing in disguise or otherwise.

There is no doubt however that Pakatan Rakyat would have been wiped out in the next general election if it had contested the next polls in total disregard of the violation of the PR Common Policy Framework by one of the component parties.

In fact, if there had been a violation of the PR Common Policy Framework before the 13th General Election, the results on May 5, 2013 would have  been very different – and PR would have even lost the Selangor state government, reverting  back to UMNO/Barisan Nasional.

According to one calculation, the 89 Parliamentary seats nation-wide and 229 State Assembly  seats in Peninsular Malaysia won by Pakatan  Rakyat would have been slashed to 46 Parliamentary seats nation-wide and 134 State Assembly seats in Peninsular Malaysia.

Selangor’s 44 State Assembly seats (made up of DAP 15, PAS 15 and PKR 14) would have been slashed to 21 seats (DAP 11, PKR 5, PAS 5) and lost  the State Government to UMNO/BN; while Johor’s score of 18 State seats (DAP 13, PAS 4, PKR 1) would have been pulverised to only 4 seats, all DAP with nil seats for PKR and PAS.

The results in other states will be equally grim, with PAS’ five state assembly seats in Perak slashed to one, PAS’ three seats in Pahang  slashed two, PAS’ one seat in Malacca reduced to zero.

The PAS Muktamar resolution on June 3 to sever ties between PAS and DAP, coupled with PAS repeated violation of the PR Common Policy Framework, resulting in the death of Pakatan Rakyat, has created a new political scenario.

There is now great expectation among the people throughout the country awaiting the Gerakan Harapan Baru (GHB) movement to  rekindle new hopes of political change in Malaysia – hopes many had  feared would  be buried with the death of Pakatan Rakyat on June 3, 2015.

[Speech (2) at the Penang DAP Hari Raya Aidilfitri Open House in Kepala Batas on Sunday 19th  July 2015 at 2 pm]

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 19 July 2015, 5:49 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Kelantan
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Political Islam
,
Selangor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Some questions about the Low Yat riots

By P Gunasegaram

Malaysiakini

Jul 15, 2015

QUESTION TIME
 For the past few months, the country has been gripped by the 1MDB scandal and mesmerised by all the stories and the allegations made. Meantime, the self-styled strategic development fund, with accumulated debts and payables of as high as RM46 billion, shows no tangible way out of the morass it is in.

Questions were raised as to why it should raise so much of borrowed money mainly to invest in dubious portfolios which it has not properly disclosed in its accounts or anywhere else. Combined with allegations made of money being siphoned off into accounts  of businessman Jho Low, which have not been properly rebutted, it provided for a series of unsettling stories.

Even rating agencies’ ratings on Malaysia had to depend on how serious the problem at 1MDB was. To help stem the long slide in the ringgit, the central bank, Bank Negara Malaysia, had to come out publicly to state, although somewhat obliquely, that 1MDB did not pose a systemic risk to Malaysian banks, although some banks’ profitability could be affected.

And then came The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) shock report alleging that US$700 million (RM2.67 billion) were moved into Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s bank accounts at AmIslamic Bank. No such allegation had ever been made against a Malaysian prime minister before.

Najib’s response was weak – the prime minister’s office only said that the prime minister has never taken any money for personal gain without specifically denying the allegations made in the journal. A letter by his lawyers to Dow Jones, the owners of the WSJ, confused rather than elucidated when it asked WSJ to clarify the report to say if it implied that the money came from 1MDB. The WSJ did not say that.

As the nation reeled from this shock announcement and the lack of zeal and specificity in refuting it, the riot at Low Yat happened. The authorities can cry out until they are blue in the face that the incident was not racial but they cannot deny in the face of video evidence that it had very strong racial overtones.

Such an incident happening in the heart of the city, the Golden Triangle area, barely a few hundred metres from the Kuala Lumpur police headquarters, is a severe indictment of the safety standards of our streets and public places which already have a bad reputation in terms of snatch and street crime.

KL residents are asking what this means for the future and what kind of precautions they should take when visiting public places while overseas visitors are querying if Kuala Lumpur  is a safe place to visit.

These introduce a new dimension to uncertainty in the country, raising it to new levels with the potential to further affect public and investment confidence unless stiff, stern measures are taken to restore public order and ensure that incidents such as these do not happen again.

The inspector-general of police’s version of the events, as reported in The Star, was basically as follows.

A theft of a mobile phone happened at Low Yat Plaza on July 11. The two persons who stole it were apprehended with the help of  attendants at another shop called Oppo and handed over to the police. One tested positive for drugs and was held but the other released inexplicably without the investigating officer consulting his superior.

The released person claims to his friends that he was cheated, he and his friends seek revenge against those in the Oppo store, there is a brawl and goods worth RM70,000 are damaged. The men are chased away.

The next day, July 12, some 100 people, incited by posts online, gather at Low Yat Plaza at around 6.30pm, and want to seek justice. The crowd is dispersed by the police but start rioting at 12.45am July 13, and at 4.45am they assault an unmarried couple near Low Yat Plaza. Seven people were injured, including three members of the media.

Police arrested 19 people, one of whom is a mobile shop retailer involved in the riot. The IGP debunked the story of a fake phone being sold, saying it was cooked up by the suspect.

Instigation and encouragement?

How did a theft of a mobile phone become twisted into a racial issue? Surely there has to be instigation and encouragement by various parties. Videos on the Internet clearly show that racial epithets were hurled and chants made, making the incident clearly a racial one.

There were reports of involvement of Malay NGOs and extremist groups such as Isma, on whose  website there was an article uploaded today titled ‘Low Yat is only a gentle reminder’.

Thus while the riot – which is what it was – was sparked off by a theft and nothing more or less than that, it had become twisted into a racial issue by the intervention of outsiders and extremists. Video clips on the Internet showed intimidation and violence.

Police officers watched without intervening as a group of rioters vandalised a car and roughed up some people. Why were reinforcements not called in to control and apprehend the rioters, especially when the Kuala Lumpur police headquarters is nearby?

By the IGP’s own accounts, people started gathering in Low Yat Plaza at around 6.30pm on July 12 but rioting occurred some six hours later at 12.45am on July 13. That would have given more than ample time for the police to have obtained reinforcements and controlled the situation.

After all, the police have much experience dealing with hugely bigger crowds numbering in the tens of thousands and have on many occasions responded very forcefully, sometimes unreasonably so, against mainly peaceful demonstrators. Why did they have to treat these trouble makers, who were violent and attacked innocent people, so gently?

With the resources at their command, the police could have nipped this event in the bud and prevented it from turning this ugly.

The way to stop racism is to be tough on racists – develop an intolerance for all extremists on any side of the various divides and schisms we have in this diverse country of ours. That must be shown not only in terms of words but in terms of action.

The police must act in a manner which is beyond reproach and be completely fair and impartial at all times. Nobody, but nobody, should be allowed to take the law into their own hands with self-defence the only justification for violence.

It may be too much to believe that this incident was created to divert attention from the more important issues facing the country but the fact that many can think along those lines indicates that there is a lack of confidence in the system. Can we blame Malaysians for thinking that when generations of politicians themselves have repeatedly played the race card and made themselves out to be champions of their own race when what we badly needed were Malaysian champions.

It is only when the rights of all people in the country are equally well-protected and unequivocal action taken against those who are racist and discriminatory, no matter who,  that we will see a fall in racism. In other words, racism has to be punished.

Until then, we are going to be held to ransom, as we were by the Low Yat riots, to extremists who at the slightest pretext organise their people to react, threaten, intimidate and even resort to violence in their severely misguided view that this is the way to keep minorities in check. They are an affront to all those who are truly Malaysian.

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

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 19 July 2015, 5:00 am and is filed under
Law & Order
,
Malaysian Dream
,
nation building
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Zahid owes Malaysians an  explanation and apology for the canard that “several Malaysians” had directed Justo to tamper with the PSI emails and documents when it is not true

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) report and allegation of July 3, 2015 that Malaysian government investigators have found US$700 million (RM2.6 billion) deposited into Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s personal bank accounts in AmBank in March 2013 just before the dissolution of Parliament and the holding of the 13th General Election was a stone that killed two birds – both a boon and a  bane for the UMNO/BN coalition.

It was boon for  the besieged MARA Chairman, Datuk Seri Annuar Musa, the Minister for Rural and Regional Development, Datuk Seri Salleh Apdal and to a lesser degree, the Prime Minister himself for it completely overshadowed the breaking story of the RM100 – 200 million  MARA Inc property corruption in Melbourne.

Calls for the sacking of the MARA Chairman and Board of Directors for their gross negligence and irresponsibility over MARA Inc’s property corruption scandal  in Australia were completely drowned by the tidal waves created by the WSJ report. (Has Annuar, whose tenure as MARA Chairman ended yesterday,  been rewarded with re-appointment as MARA  Chairman?)

But it was more of a bane for the powers-that-be in the UMNO/BN coalition for it virtually killed the painstakingly-orchestrated campaign to turn the tables after some five years of being under attack on the 1MDB scandal and to go on the offensive by fully exploiting the arrest in Thailand of the Swiss national and former IT executive of PetroSaudi International (PSI), Xavier Andre Justo on June 22.

On 24th June in Malacca, Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi announced that based on information obtained from the Thai authorities investigating the case,  several Malaysians were alleged to have directed Justo to manipulate and tamper with information stolen from his former employers, PSI.

He said the government may arrest these Malaysians and allow their extradition to Thailand, but added that there had yet to be any formal request for extradition.

This has now proved to be a lie, as the Thai Police have said that Justo had admitted to the Thai police blackmailing of PSI, using the thousands of emails and documents stolen from the company, but he denied tampering with the documents.

The Royal Thai Police Commissioner of Office of Information and Communication Technology Lt Gen Prawut Thavornsiri said on Thursday: “He didn’t make any changes to the documents and sent the original documents (to the buyer) as digital copies.”

For weeks, the Home Minister, the Inspector-General of Police and the Umno/BN Government generally made fools of themselves with the story of “blackmail by tampered email”, as they seem incapable of understanding that there could be no blackmail if the emails had been “tampered” or doctored – as any such “blackmail” could be simply foiled by denying their truth or veracity.

Now that the truth are finally established, that Justo never tampered with the PSI emails and documents, and the tale of “several Malaysians alleged to have directed Justo to manipulate and tamper with information stolen from his former employers, PSI” was a pure concoction and figment of imagination, Zahid owe an explanation and apology to Malaysians for this canard and lie.

How did this lie come about. Was it concocted by Zahid himself, or was he misled by the Inspector-General of Police or some other Police officer without checking on its veracity?

Shouldn’t someone take responsibility for this canard and lie and pay the price for it?

It does not escape notice that the UMNO mouthpiece, New Straits Times, had been carrying out a blitzkrieg campaign of demonization and falsehood  after its “exclusive” report on Justo’s arrest in Koh Samui on June 22,  as for instance, saying:

“Based on several accounts, Justo allegedly got hold of thousands of corporate documents and emails, and later sold them by way of doctoring and tampering so as to create value for the higher bidder.” (June 29, 2015);

“He (Justo) was also alleged to have tampered with certain e-mails to paint PetroSaudi’s business relationship with 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) in a bad light”. (June 30, 2015).

“Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar said they had requested a chance to question Justo over claims that he had tampered with certain emails to put PetroSaudi’s image and that of 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) in a negative light.” (July 1, 2015).

As the repeated offender in spreading this canard and lie that Justo had tampered with emails and documents, New Straits Times is not displaying journalism at its best but gutter falsehood as its worst!

This is why the editorial comment of the NSTP Group Managing Editor A. Jalil Ahmad last Sunday (July 12, 2015) on
“A Cabinet shake-up soon?”
 was so funny and ironical.

Jalil had quoted Indonesian President Joko Widodo when hinting to Indonesia’s top editors that he might reshuffle his nine-month-old cabinet as he needed people he could trust.

Joko had said: “My (ideal) staffers would be those who, when they speak, the public believes them, investors believe them, the markets believe them. Their words are irrefutable.”

In Malaysia, we have not only a Prime Minister and a Cabinet whom the highest percentage of the citizenry in the nation’s history  find untrustworthy, this applies to most of the print media as well, with New Straits Times competing with Utusan Malaysia – both in the stable of UMNO media – for the top spot as the most untrustworthy newspaper in the country.

The recent attempt to reactivate the “Justo offensive” with the addition of the “Lester” offering to regain the initiative by the UMNO/BN government in the long-drawn-out 1MDB scandal, with Ministers suddenly in fits of hysteria, yelling about treason and national sabotage, cannot make any mark on an increasingly suspicious Malaysian public about the sincerity and transparency of the Najib administration.

This is especially the case when after more than two weeks, Najib is still unable to do the simplest of things: to say yes or no to WSJ allegation that RM2.6 billion had been deposited into the Prime Minister’s personal bank accounts in March 2013 just before the 13th general elections, and where the RM2.6 billion came from and where and to whom they had gone to.

All the Justos and Lesters in the world will not be able to help Najib regain national confidence and international legitimacy when he cannot even answer the simple questions as to whether RM2.6 billion had been deposited into his personal bank accounts, where the RM2.6 billion came from and where it has gone to.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 19 July 2015, 10:08 am and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Najib Razak
,
Police
,
Zahid
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Art Harun: Sarawak Report ban is laughable and tragic

FMT Reporters | July 20, 2015

Lawyer takes aim at Najib and says the PM prefers to shoot the messenger rather than probe the wrongdoings he has been accused of

PETALING JAYA: The decision by the Malaysian Communication and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) to block access to the Sarawak Report (SR) website on the grounds of national security and public order is both laughable and tragic, said lawyer and human rights activist Art Harun.

In a blog posting where he goes at the prime minister and the government with guns blazing, Art accused Najib Razak of preferring to “shoot the messenger” and asked, “Has that (the ban) got to do with the immediate witch-hunting by our authorities against those who dare publish ‘facts’ rather than investigating the wrong-doings that are so apparent from those facts?”

He was referring to the expose by the Sarawak Report and The Wall Street Journal that USD700 million of 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) funds had found its way into the private bank accounts of Najib.

He said the reasons of “national security” and disrupting “public order” that the MCMC had offered to justify the ban was “laughable” even if they rationalised that the website had a tendency to publish “unverified facts”.

He said real issues of national security were when Sulu gunmen invaded the country, killing 18 policemen and when death camps with mass graves were found within the country’s borders earlier in the year.

“Or was the Low Yat ruckus caused by Sarawak Report’s articles?” he asked snidely.

“Unverified facts? Slanderous and in fact libellous statements? Our Prime Minister has not been shy to bring court actions against those whom he thinks have defamed him.

“Why doesn’t the Prime Minister or the whole government sue the pants off Sarawak Report and its administrators? And perhaps obtain an injunction to stop them from further publishing all these unverified facts?”

Saying the ban went against everything the PM had spoken of at the International Conference on the Global Movement of Moderates (ICGMM), in particular the issue of democracy and governance, he argued, “In this day and age, our government would do better if it could think why is it that many Malaysians and foreigners choose to believe the ‘unverified facts’ published by Sarawak Report rather than falling for the ‘verified facts’ forced unto the world by those who are entrusted with the job of verifying such facts?”

He also said that until the present time, SR’s allegations had not been “effectively nor properly denied” and added, “If the facts were unverified, why not deny it in clear, unequivocal and absolute terms? Why hide between jargons and lawyer’s letters to seek ‘explanation’? Deny it and be damned with it.”

                This entry was posted on Monday, 20 July 2015, 4:58 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
IT
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Citizen Nades – Come clean on issues

R. Nadeswaran

Sun

19 July 2015

IN the course of a career spanning over four decades, this writer had the opportunity to meet gang leaders, thieves, drug addicts, rapists and even a murderer. The man who painted the now-demolished Pudu Prison wall – a man convicted for a drug offence – was a regular visitor to the office after his release.

There were also encounters with another “elitist” group including con-sultans, spin-doctors, lobbyists and even bag carriers and cowherds with bags of money masquerading as middlemen.

Like the undertaker who sees everyone as a potential client, the journalist views most people as a source of information. Thus, there is this need to associate with people from varying backgrounds. Information from these sources, which has to be verified, can sometimes lead to a big story.

From a legal standpoint, it is not an offence to meet anyone. Having a coffee or a beer with any of them is no less than having a tete-a-tete with a minister or a senior government official. The principle that “I have a right to choose whom I want to associate with” comes into play.

Therefore, there seems to be a witch-hunt of sorts for those who met former Petro-Saudi official Xavier Justo, now in custody in Thailand.

Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar has threatened to arrest opposition leaders who had met Justo unless they come forward to give a statement.

First, what offence has Justo committed in Malaysia, and second, is there any law which prevents Malaysians from meeting a foreigner?

To add to the drama in this gigantic battle of public perception, the journalistic fraternity seems to have been sucked into this quagmire called 1MDB.

Never mind the missing billions and the reports by the Public Accounts Committee and the auditor-general. We have been side-tracked deliberately or otherwise into a side-show with reports from our northern neighbours. A Swiss national has suddenly become the focus of the subject of contention instead of addressing the real issue.

From fake and doctored emails to confessions and pay-outs, the profession is coming under scrutiny. Seasoned journalists can sense sinister motives and “paid-for” work with their years-long experience and spot any shortcomings.

That is why the statement by BN strategic communications director Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan, who is housing and wellbeing minister, has to be put under the microscope.

He had suggested that the “confession” of Lester Melanyi should be given prominence over the so-called editor’s credibility.

I know little about Lester except that he lost his job at the Sarawak Tribune in 2006 after he allowed the publication of caricatures that offended Islam. Therefore, I would not attempt to say anything about him and his integrity or credibility.

All that can be concluded are from statements from his previous “employer” and his interview with Malay Mail Online where he admitted being paid to make the confession. Every journalist worth his salt thinks about his own credibility before he puts pen to paper. At the back of their minds there is this unwritten obligation – to provide accurate and unfettered information and express his or her valid opinion – however unacceptable they are to their readers.

The government, on the other hand, must recognise the role of an independent and vibrant media which provides valuable feedback from the people.

Against such a background, this government and some its leaders have uttered words which have resulted in the public suffering from “trust deficiency” syndrome.

This stems from the dissemination of truthful information not only on the 1MDB issue but also in various other categories of governance including corruption and the procurement system. The credibility of some of our leaders is at stake.

The government can continue shouting itself hoarse by asking us not to believe what appears in cyber space. But as the prime minister himself admitted, the days of “the government knows best” are over.

No one will pay heed to the spinning and the propaganda and no one will believe what comes from official sources. Nothing will change unless the government comes clean on the various issues and challenges facing the nation.

For a start, the cards should be put on the table, starting with not just 1MDB but other areas of governance where transparency and accountability are severely lacking.The leaks, the over-pricing of contracts and the involvement of cronies have all been well documented and are in the public domain.

The people, having digested them, have formed their own opinions and thoughts. Nothing will change that except the truth.

This is perhaps the first step in getting the public to trust and put their faith in the government and its leaders. If this cannot be done, let us forget about developed nation status and a better quality of life for all Malaysians.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 20 July 2015, 6:47 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Good Governance
,
Media
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


For his best self-interest, Najib should immediately direct MCMC to stop blocking access to Sarawak Report or he is transforming 1MDB scandal from a local into an international scandal of first magnitude

What a Hari Raya “gift” from the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak – blocking access to the Sarawak Report website and overnight undergoing  three  transformations for Malaysia’s “Father of Transformation”, viz:

•	Transforming the RM42 billion 1MDB scandal and the posts on the Sarawak Report website  from a local scandal into an international scandal of the first magnitude;

•	Transforming Najib from a Nothing2Hide to Everything2Hide Prime Minister, all in a matter of 45 days from June 5, 2015 – the date of Najib‘s ill-fated and aborted 1MDB “Nothing2Hide” forum at Putra World Trade Centre, Kuala Lumpur.

•	Transforming Najib from the most Internet-savvy Prime Minister of Malaysia into Malaysia’s most frightened-of-Internet Prime Minister, even violating Tun Mahathir and the Malaysian Government’s 17-year-old Bill of Guarantee of  “No Censorship of Internet”.to the world.

Najib is very ill-served by his coterie of highly and even over-paid “Public Relations” consultants including the new-fangled Barisan Nasional strategic communications director to believe that blocking access to the Sarawak Report will be the end of his 1MDB woes, which had hounded and haunted him for the past five years but never in as intense and pressuring a manner  as  in the past five months, since Sarawak Report claimed at the end of February that it had obtained access to thousands of emails and documents relating to 1MDB transactions.

I had at the time immediately called for a full public  inquiry where the Editor of Sarawak Report, Claire Rewcastle Brown could  be invited to give her testimony, together with the thousands of 1MDB transactions and email which have come into her possession,  to get to the bottom of the 1MDB scandal.

It is indeed very  telling that after five long months, despite the resources of the entire Federal Government,  neither 1MDB nor Najib had been able to point out  a single 1MDB email, document or posting on the Sarawak Report which was the result of doctoring or tampering of email or document.

Even the “star witness” who  is the latest to appear on the public scene “confessing” that he had “worked actively” with Clare Brown to “falsify documents” for use on Sarawak Report has not been point to a single instance of such doctored, tampered or tainted document!

In blocking access to Sarawak Report, Najib and MCMC are virtually announcing to Malaysians and the world that the Prime Minister is not as  guiltless as he wants the people to believe with regard to  the myriad of allegations which have been made against him, as Najib has not been able to rebut them at all.

I do not think many Malaysians access the Sarawak Report, and MCMC is doing Sarawak Report a great favour by publicising Najib and MCMC’s fear of  the Sarawak Report contents – and one does not fear lies and falsehoods but only the truth!

In blocking access to Sarawak Report, the Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) advised the public to be cautious when sharing information on social media, especially material which are not certain to be true.

The MCMC said: “The contents could be fake. Such contents could  affect the peace and cause national instability, disrupt public order and  affect economic stability.”

The MCMC should direct such advice to Cabinet Ministers and top government officials like the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi and the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar, who had been very prone recently  to purvey unverified material as gospel truth.

If MCMC is serious about blocking access to websites which published unverified information, it would have a lot of work to do – even closing down government and UMNO/Barisan Nasional websites, particularly Utusan Malaysia, which are guilty not only of posting unverified information but downright lies and falsehoods.

My advice to Najib is to allow common sense to prevail, that blocking access to Sarawak Report is not going to end his 1MDB woes but the opposite, plunging his credibility and legitimacy to even unimagined depths, which is not good for him as Prime Minister and for the nation as well.

For his best self-interest, Najib should immediately direct MCMC to end the blocking of access of Sarawak Report, as his remedy  to debunk the myriad of allegations whether about 1MDB or other scandals, whether by Sarawak Report, Wall Street Journal (WSJ) or other sources, is to tell the truth (like answering the basic questions whether RM2.6 billion had been deposited into his personal accounts, where the monies came from and where the monies had gone to – raised by WSJ 18 days ago).

Najib should know that speaking the truth is the only answer to all the myriad of allegations as all the Justos and Lesters cannot save him or exempt him from his personal  duty to public accountability and transparency of his office and responsibility as Prime Minister.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 20 July 2015, 8:37 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
IT
,
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.