ASSK’s Monday trial – Malaysia/ASEAN should pressure Myanmar junta as ASEAN Charter should not be human rights “whitewash”

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak should lead Malaysia and ASEAN to pressure the Myanmar military junta to release Burmese democracy icon and Nobel Peace Prize  Laureate Aung San Suu Kyi to prove to the world that the ASEAN Charter is no “whitewash” for  the most egregious human rights violations in Myanmar.

Malaysia and ASEAN’s  credibility in international society  are also dragged through the mud when Suu Kyi was indicted with the ridiculous charge of breaching the terms of her house arrest over a bizarre incident in which a US Vietnam veteran who suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder swam to her lakeside house.

Charged under the country’s Law Safeguarding the State from the Dangers of Subversive Elements, which carries jail sentence up to  five years, Suu Kyi faces lengthy and harsh incarceration  in Rangoon’s notorious Insein prison.

The purpose clearly is to stretch her detention past its supposed expiry date this month and through controversial elections due in 2010, an important plank of the Myanmese military junta’s sham “12-step road to democracy”.

Suu Kyi, 63, in fragile health, has been confined for 13 of the past 19 years. As rightly pointed out by the United Nations special rapporteur for human rights in Myanmar, Tomas Ojea Quintana, Suu Kyi’s detention is unlawful, both according to international law and Myanmar’s own domestic legislation.

Suu Kyu cannot under any circumstances be blamed for the intrusion into her home, especially as her house was well-guarded by Myanmese security forces.

The Malaysian Parliamentary Caucus on Myanmar and the Asean Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus (AIPMC)  are gravely concerned about the worsening of the human rights situation in Myanmar and call on Malaysia and ASEAN to take immediate initiatives to remind and ensure that  the Myanmese military junta abide by the ASEAN Charter and its commitment to promote, protect and respect human rights in Myanmar.

What the Myanmese military junta has done is no different from an open renunciation and tearing up  of the ASEAN Charter with regard to its commitment on human rights.

Malaysia and other ASEAN nations cannot stand idly by at such an open desecration of the ASEAN Charter and an emergency meeting of the ASEAN Foreign Ministers’ meeting should be convened immediately, ahead of the ASEAN  Ministerial Meeting (AMM) of Foreign Ministers scheduled in Bangkok in July on the latest ordeal of the Burmese democracy icon, Suu Kyi and over 2,100 political prisoners.

I had tried to meet the Foreign Minister, Datuk Anifah Aman yesterday on the latest persecution of Suu Kyi but was informed that he was in the United States, returning to Malaysia midday Sunday.

I have informed his political secretary, Datuk Norharidi to convey to the Foreign Minister on his return the request of  the Malaysian Parliamentary Caucus on Myanmar and the Asean Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus (AIPMC)  for an urgent meeting before  Suu Kyi’s trial on Monday.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 15 May 2009, 11:57 am and is filed under
Burma
,
Human Rights
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


May 13 tragedy, we should move on

By Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad

1.While we remember the 40th anniversary of the May 13 tragedy, we should move on. It’s time for closure of the sad, very sad incident.

2.The tragic and vicious incident need not have happened had Tun Razak’s message to Dato’ Harun Idris, the menteri besar of Selangor, reached him 30-minutes earlier or had Tan Sri David Tan Chee Khoon and Tun Lim Chong Eu spoken to Tun Razak 30 minutes earlier relaying their decision not to cooperate with DAP to form the state government of Selangor nor worked together in Perak and elsewhere. I was beside Tun Razak when he took the calls from them late past tea time on the fateful evening of 13 May. I recall clearly what Tun Razak told Harun “…the good news is you will continue to run Selangor. Chee Khoon and Chong Eu had just spoken to me that they want status quo preserved. So tell the people gathering at your house to disperse.” Harun thanked Tun and asked him to convey his gratitude to the two statesmen. Between five-to-ten minutes after that Harun rang Tun Razak to say that it was too late. As he was persuading them to disperse news reached the crowd that clashes had begun in Chow Kit Road and surroundings and beyond.

3.Tun Razak asked Harun to calm the gathering and urged him, in strong terms, to attempt his best to stop the clashes from escalating. The rest, as they say, is history. Though Harun and I were not on good political terms I must be fair. I think he did try, but by then, to no avail.

4.I left for home about maghrib. Informed Musa Hitam what happened and he asked his family to rush to my house. Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah and Musa and his family spent the night at my house in Jalan Bukit Bintang, a very Chinese area, and there was no trouble. I assured my Chinese neighbours and they, in turn, assured me we would together maintain peace and confront whoever the outside trouble makers would be. Thank God, the troubles were localized.

5.This is just speculation: Had communications then were as good and advanced as today, I think two things could have occurred: race riots would not have started or they could have become more brutal and widespread.

6.When the Pakatan Rakyat coalition unseated the BN governments in Selangor, Perak, Penang and Kedah last March (08) there were no tensions, perhaps because every one was in a state of shock but plausibly, too, the incoming governments of PKR, DAP and PAS like the defeated ones, were also interracial. The PKR, DAP and PAS alliance should be preserved. The PKR is about the nearest thing to being a genuine multi-racial party. There shall not be another May 13 like-incident if the ruling party coalition and the Pakatan share power or perceived to be sharing power fairly and the government, whether Federal or State, observes the constitution scrupulously, government policy implemented justly without fear or favour where talent is not only recognized but rewarded irrespective of race or religion. The public as well as the private sector must display and reflect that of the society we live in, not what we want it to be. The Bumiputra must accept unequivocally the others are co-owners of this country as much as the others must also accept, recognise and acknowledge unequivocally the Bumiputra is the biggest demographic group and growing, therefore deserves some entitlements, though not at the expense of fairplay.

7.I am not a soothsayer nor a prophet of doom. I strive to tell what I perceive to be the truth. It does seem the future of democracy in our nation is bright. A genuine two-party system is at last evolving after five decades of Merdeka. If the Pakatan Rakyat state governments deliver what they promised and the alliance stay cohesive and the rakyat see the bond or linkage is sustained the alliance can be potentially potent. However, having said that, please make no mistake of misjudging Najib. He is no Badawi; different educational and social background. Najib is Tun Razak’s son, he is more familiar with the wiles of Malaysian voters; he is positively more Machiavellian, positively more able and aware than his predecessor who was badly advised by his family, cronies and toadies in government and the media.

8.If Najib performs well and the economy recovers he is a tough nut to crack. His 1Malaysia is good and if he is not distracted, and properly advised, you all will face a tough time. You must at least be well-prepared and ready. Najib may falter, which I think is not impossible, for he is not infallible. I am also very conscious how fallible I can be.

9.In politics, a week is a long time and logic doesn’t always work. Always work hard and one must always do what one feels is right. The correct and sensible thing to do is to ensure that all Malaysians are treated justly in the public as well as in the private sector. Our democracy can only flourish if we have a strong, free and independent media.

10.Our future is very bright if Najib can deliver what he promises and the Pakatan its pledges. We aren’t going to achieve what we desire. Worse if a nation is perceived to be untransparent, unjust and draconian. I repeat a strong, free and independent media is critical for the future of Malaysian democracy.

11.The future of 1Malaysia looks well if the PM can deliver what he promises and if the economy thrives. This can be done if we can reconcile the past which none should forget with the present we must face, and the future we cannot avoid.

12.Whatever, the electoral test will be in the next general election.

13.Thank you.

CONCLUDING REMARKS ON THE MAY 13 FORUM

I was with Dr Mahathir at his book’s launch. His Letters to World Leaders in Mandarin, so, I didn’t know what the other panelists said.

Najib has done well so far – challenging the rakyat’s mindsets, that we are getting more colour blind, that the society wants equality for all. Good. No sane person will quarrel with that: the question is can he deliver or do Malaysians believe he is a reformer? Indeed, what makes a reformer? Najib is a pragmatist, a realist, devoid of any ideology.

He faces many crucial challenges, realities and new pains especially in Perak. It seems change is imminent, some people seem unaware of this.

If any country is perceived to be unstable that would not be good for foreign investment or trade. In 2008, the ruling party polled just 51 percent of the popular votes. In the peninsula it was below 50 percent, I think, it was 49 percent – I stand corrected. The story next time, unless Najib could reverse the trend, isn’t likely to be very different than that of 2008; actually could even be worse.

The Pakatan will remain to be a force to be reckoned with, at least in 2012 or 2013 and in the future too.

All what Najib is trying to accomplish will be for naught if the country goes back to the days when political and social dissenters couldn’t speak freely and peaceful protests are squelched and media managed and muzzled. I do hope Najib means what he says: more political and media openness.

I think a real political battle which vaguely approximates the best tradition has just begun in earnest; a personal battle between Najib and Anwar, BN and Pakatan; DAP and MCA and Gerakan; the MIC, PPP and Hindraf; UMNO and PAS and the PKR bumiputra. The BN can no longer boast it can now be intensely relaxed as previously.

The outcome of which will decide the nature and feature of Malaysian nationhood.

In the last analysis, who wins or loses, will be decided by the voters’ perception of Najib and Anwar, their ideals and visions.

Thank you.

SPEECH BY TAN SRI ABDULLAH AHMAD AT THE “FROM MAY 13 TO 1MALAYSIA – THE FUTURE OF MALAYSIAN NATION BUILDING” – FORUM

8 PM WEDNESDAY MAY 13 AT THE CIVIC CENTRE MBPJ, PETALING JAYA

                This entry was posted on Friday, 15 May 2009, 11:54 am and is filed under
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Speech by Khalid Samad – May 13 forum (video)

“May 13 to 1Malaysia – Future of Malaysian nation building” forum (video 10)

                This entry was posted on Friday, 15 May 2009, 9:40 am and is filed under
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Speech by Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad – May 13 forum (video)

“May 13 to 1Malaysia – Future of Malaysian nation building” forum (video 9)

                This entry was posted on Friday, 15 May 2009, 9:38 am and is filed under
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Unfair award of PSD scholarships – suspend PSD DG for insurbordination or Ong Tee Keat should resign as Minister for failure to implement Cabinet policy decided in March

Yesterday, MCA President and Transport Minister, Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat announced that the
Government will review the selection criteria for Public Services Department scholarships
 and that  a meeting the same day would be held among Barisan Nasional component party leaders, the PSD director-general and the Chief Secretary to the Government to discuss the matter and reconsider rejected cases.

However, the most senior MCA Minister was contradicted yesterday itself  by the Public Service Department director-general, Tan Sri Ismail Adam, as reported in today’s New Straits Times, which carried the  headline “’
No review of PSD scholarship selection criteria
’”, viz:

PUTRAJAYA: There will be no review of the selection criteria for Public Service Department scholarships, PSD director-general Tan Sri Ismail Adam said yesterday.

He said he had not received any directive to reconsider the criteria.

Unsuccessful applicants for scholarships had until Monday to appeal, he added.

MCA president Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat said on Wednesday there would be a review of the PSD criteria for giving out scholarships.

Ismail denied there was a meeting among Barisan Nasional component party leaders, the chief secretary to the government and himself, as claimed by Ong.

Ismail also denied Ong’s claims on the current selection criteria.

Who is lying? The MCA President or the PSD DG?

If it is the MCA President, then Ong should resign; but if it is the PSD director-general, then Ismail should be suspended from office immediately for public insurbordination of a Cabinet Minister and the Cabinet!

This period of the year has been described as the “annual begging season” when Malaysians have to beg for scholarships from the PSD although they are entitled to them because of their excellent academic results and meritocracy.

This is followed by the annual rigmarole of Barisan Nasional component parties trying to champion aggrieved students who had been by-passed in the PSD scholarships despite having brilliant academic results, when all these injustices and power abuses would have been prevented if there is in place  a fair and  transparent PSD scholarship system which is not prey to discriminatory regulations or the whims and fancies of individual bureaucrats.

Malaysians were as good as promised that they would be spared this humiliating “annual begging season” this year as there is now  a new Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak and his slogan of “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now.”

This slogan captured beautifully what was wrong with the PSD scholarship awards in the past  years as to turn this period into an “annual begging season” – precisely because they failed to observe all the three criteria of “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now”.

It is an indictment of the hollowness of Najib’s slogan of  “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now” that the “annual begging season” is again being played out after the PSD announced results of its foreign degree scholarships last Friday.

Yesterday, Najib said he wanted to be the  People’s Prime Minister.

He said the government must “listen to the pulse of the nation” which was the reason why he started his walkabouts.

He said
:

“I went to Puduraya (bus terminal) so that I could smell the sweat, the grime and the dust. This is totally different if I were to listen to a briefing on the terminal by the mayor in my air-conditioned room. You are able to look deeply and assess the real situation.

“I do not want formality, red-carpet welcomes, garlands and so on. I just want to continue going down to the ground. Even if there is no (media) coverage, it is OK as I want to be the people’s prime minister.”

This is all well and good and commendable, if he really wants to empathise with the cares and woes of ordinary Malaysians,  why had Najib been insensitive  to the cries of outrage of Malaysian for the past week at the injustices of the PSD foreign degree scholarship awards?

Why had Najib  failed to intervene  personally to resolve the issue even after the subject had been raised in the Cabinet on Wednesday – especially as PSD comes directly under the responsibility of the Prime Minister?

In fact, the present batch of Cabinet Ministers are guilty of serious  remiss of responsibility in failing to resolve the problem at the Cabinet meeting on Wednesday, as Tan Sri Bernard Dompok had announced as far back as March (Star 27.3.09) details of a new PSD scholarship scheme for foreign degrees, viz: 20 per cent or 400 of 2,000 scholarships for excellent students, 60 per cent or 1,200 scholarships for bumiputra and non-bumiputra SPM leavers; 10 per cent for 200 scholarships for Sabah and Sarawak bumiputra SPM leavers; the remaining 10 per cent for disabled students who excelled in their studies.

Why has this new PSD foreign degree scholarship scheme not been implemented? Was there insubordination by the “Little Napoleons” in the PSD?

Even if there had been insurbordination by “Little Napoleons” in the PSD, why were the Cabinet Ministers so ineffective and impotent at the last Cabinet meeting as not able to ensure that the new PSD scholarship scheme decided by the previous Cabinet is carried out without any sabotage or insurbodination?

According to last year’s  SPM results, three students scored 16 1As, two scored 15 1As, six 14 1As, 41 of them scored 13 1As while 229 scored 12 1As.

Have everyone of these SPM top-scorers been awarded PSD scholarships if the new system of meritocracy is in place?  Malaysians are entitled to a clear answer.

In the past week, the press have been full of reports of SPM top-scorers with 14 1As, 13 1As, 12 1As, 11 1As and 10 1As (like the case of  Ma Ye Voon of Seremban which was raised by DAP MP for Rasah Anthony Loke) who had been by-passed in the PSD foreign degree scholarship awards, while others with seven or eight 1As are successful.

The MIC Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk S. K. Devamany had advised those who had failed to secure a PSD scholarship not to despair as there are many other opportunities.

The issue is not about disappointment or sense of despair of students bypassed in the PSD scholarships, but the sense of injustice that they are victims of a system which is blatantly unfair and discriminatory!  What are the Ministers and Deputy Ministers doing  to end such an unfair and unjust system so that unsuccessful applicants for PSD scholarships do not go away nursing a life-long  burning sense of injustice and grievance?

The PSD interviewed 8,363 out of the 15,084 candidates who had applied for 2,000 scholarships under the foreign degree programme between March 31 and April 3. Those unsuccessful have been given until Monday, 18th May, to appeal.

But how  is the PSD going to give scholarships to SPM top-scorers without doing a new injustice, in withdrawing scholarships to the existing batch of 2,000 successful students?

Is the government prepared to increase and even double the number of PSD foreign degree scholarships this year?

The 2009 budget for local and foreign scholarships is RM233 million – which is a small fraction of the gross waste of public funds in other sectors, like the RM12 billion Port Klang Free Zone scandal, for which Malaysians are still waiting for Ong Tee Keat to fulfil his promise to “tell all” and make public the PricewaterhouseCoopers report on the PKFZ scandal.

If the government does not squander public funds in mega-scandals like the RM12 billion PKFZ scandal, it would find no difficulty in doubling or even trebling the budget for PSD scholarships, as the RM12 billion which is reported to be the latest update on the total costs which have to be borne by the taxpayers for the project is some 50 times of the annual PSD scholarship allocation!

I call on Najib to give his personal attention to ensure that all the SPM top-scorers with more than 10 1As are awarded PSD scholarships, as a first step to make his slogan “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now” really meaningful.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 15 May 2009, 3:51 pm and is filed under
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


English can be fun

Spotted in a toilet of a London office:

TOILET OUT OF ORDER. PLEASE USE FLOOR BELOW.

In a London Laundromat:

AUTOMATIC WASHING MACHINES:

PLEASE REMOVE ALL YOUR CLOTHES WHEN THE LIGHT GOES OUT

Outside a London second-hand shop:

WE EXCHANGE ANYTHING – BICYCLES, WASHING MACHINES, ETC.

WHY NOT BRING YOUR WIFE ALONG AND GET A WONDERFUL BARGAIN?

Spotted in a safari park:

ELEPHANTS PLEASE STAY IN YOUR CAR

Seen during a London conference:

FOR ANYONE WHO HAS CHILDREN AND DOESN’T KNOW IT,

THERE IS A DAY CARE ON THE 1ST FLOOR

Notice in a field:

THE FARMER ALLOWS WALKERS TO CROSS THE FIELD FOR FREE,

BUT THE BULL CHARGES

On a repair shop door:

WE CAN REPAIR ANYTHING

(PLEASE KNOCK HARD ON THE DOOR,

THE BELL DOESN’T WORK)

People in other countries sometimes go out of their way to communicate with their English-speaking tourists. Here is a list of signs seen around the world :

At a Budapest zoo:

PLEASE DO NOT FEED THE ANIMALS.

IF YOU HAVE ANY SUITABLE FOOD,

GIVE IT TO THE GUARD ON DUTY.

Doctors clinic, Rome
:

SPECIALIST IN WOMEN AND OTHER DISEASES.

Hotel, Acapulco
:

THE MANAGER HAS PERSONALLY

PASSED ALL THE WATER

SERVED HERE.

In a Nairobi restaurant
:

CUSTOMERS WHO FIND OUR

WAITRESSES RUDE SHOULD WAIT

AND SEE THE MANAGER.

In a City restaurant:

OPEN SEVEN DAYS A WEEK,

AND WEEKENDS TOO.

In a Calcutta Coffee House
:

PEOPLE DISCARDING CIGARETTE

STUBS IN CUPS WILL BE SERVED

COFFEE IN ASH TRAYS

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 16 May 2009, 6:52 am and is filed under
General
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


In God’s name, do the honourable thing, Najib

by
Tunku Abdul Aziz

Malaysian Insider

14.5.09

The last three months have seen a flurry of activity on the Perak political front. All of this was without any doubt occasioned by Najib’s blatantly cynical, barefaced manipulation of human greed. Najib is no novice when it comes to money matters. He succeeded spectacularly in seducing the three most unremarkable and positively unpleasant Pakatan Rakyat characters to declare themselves independent supporters of the Barisan Nasional.

They have, as to be expected, denied most vehemently that they had succumbed to any such unworthy and degrading temptation as money.   Conventional wisdom, on the other hand, says that Malaysian politicians will only transfer their party allegiance for cash, and not principle. I leave you to draw your own conclusion in this particular case.

Najib’s single act of subterfuge has been remarkable for the damage, and repercussions, to the Malaysian body politic, quite apart from damaging further his own already seriously bruised reputation. If he thought what he had done was an example of cutting edge political sophistication, I suggest he should think again. He has by his reckless adventure only succeeded in portraying himself as nothing more than a common garden variety, and not the statesman that we thought he would become given his father’s honoured place in our history and his family credentials.

 In the event, he seems to me to be no better than Mahathir, the rough neck street fighter. What a bad start for someone who begins his premiership on a discordant note, encumbered with enormous baggage to boot: any chance of redeeming himself has gone down the Sungai Perak, baggage and all. However, all is not lost. If he has any sense of self-worth, justice and integrity, he should take immediate steps to untangle the political mess he created. My father’s injunction to me as a very playful boy was, “Don’t start something you can’t finish.”

It is still relevant and appropriate advice, in my view, to give particularly to Najib who desires so devoutly to be loved and embraced as a people’s prime minister. He should practise what he is preaching so fervently about the importance of “feeling the pulse” of the people. If his close advisers are not telling him what really is going on in the towns and cities, big and small, as well as in the poor and neglected villages and hamlets up and down the country, then let me tell him some inconvenient truths about Perak that he might not particularly want to hear.

The people of Perak and, by extension, the overwhelming majority of the people of this country, want to see an immediate end to the unseemly and totally disgraceful and disgusting display of political opportunism by the UMNO-BN axis that has dragged the much loved Sultan of Perak into political controversy that could have been avoided in the first place. His Royal Highness could have been spared the indignity of being reviled and ridiculed if Najib had thought more carefully about the fallout from his politically immature act.

 As a responsible “people’s prime minister”, he has a duty to the people and the Sultan of Perak to return some semblance of order to their State which has since become the butt of some very unkind jokes. Najib does, of course, recognise that what the people want is for the State Assembly to be dissolved so that fresh elections may be held. He is on record as admitting this as a way out of the current impasse, but claims that it is really up to the Sultan to decide.

We naturally respect his concern not to be seen to interfere with royal prerogatives. However, we wish he would stop playing poker and drop the hypocrisy because the reality is that he exercises considerable influence in matters of state, and he jolly well knows it.

The Perak crisis is pregnant with potential for mischief making, and you do not have to be the director of the special branch to know that unless something was put right quickly, the seething public anger could be exploited by enemies of state to the detriment of our nascent democracy, peace and security. Najib must finish the dirty job he started by going back to the people. His Royal Highness the Sultan will not stand in the way of a just and popular solution. This is the only way to stop the rot that has already paralysed the government of Perak. Another day’s delay to dissolve the State Assembly is another opportunity lost to return Perak to political sanity. Najib cannot just sit tight and look the other way hoping the crisis he fomented would just blow away.

The choice for the prime minister is a simple one: either elect to conduct himself like a common, opportunistic politician and face the dire consequences of his perfidious behaviour  or a statesman who is concerned more with nation building on a lasting basis than opting for short term political gains that may well turn out to be illusory. His 1 Malaysia, already riddled with contradictions and inconsistencies, will not amount to anything if the Perak crisis remains stuck in limbo. The ball is in his court.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 16 May 2009, 6:34 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Tunku Abdul Aziz
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Najib improperly intefering with Court of Appeal hearing on Nizar vs Zambry case

It is most improper and irresponsible for the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak to try to influence the Court of Appeal hearing on Thursday on the Nizar-Zambry case, undermining judicial independence and integrity.

This is the first time in my memory in the past 43 years that a Prime Minister had made a public pronouncement on a matter which is the very subject of litigation before an appellate court, as if the Executive is sending out a  clear, unmistakable and even threatening message to the Judiciary of the executive interests in a case pending before the Appellate court.

And if such impropriety had not happened in the past 43 years, it would not have happened in the first nine years of the nation’s independence, as Bapa Malaysia and the first Prime Minister, Tengku Abdul Rahman would have been  very careful and meticulous in ensuring that there could not be any speck of suspicion that the Executive was interfering with the judiciary.

Hasn’t Najib heard the doctrine of the separation of powers among the executive, legislature and judiciary and the principle of the independence of the judiciary and the need for the Executive not only to respect, but also to be seen to respect, the integrity of the judiciary?

None of the previous five Prime Ministers had gone so far as to openly dictate to the judiciary how to it should adjudicate cases involving the Executive – despite the judicial darkness of the past two decades.

Why is Najib prepared to commit such a flagrant and blatant act of Executive disrespect and contempt for the Judiciary in such  public and international  manner?

In his statement  yesterday to reporters at the Coral Triangle Initiative Summit in Manado, Indonesia, Najib defended the power grab in Perak in early February, declaring that the Sultan of Perak had acted lawfully in appointing  Datuk Zambry Abdul Kadir as the Perak Mentri Besar.

How could Najib as Prime Minister acted so improperly and irresponsibly  when he should know that this is precisely the constitutional issue which is  before the Court of Appeal on Thursday, as Kuala Lumpur High Court Justice  Datuk Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim had handed down a landmark constitutional judgment that the Sultan of Perak has the prerogative to appoint  the Mentri Besar and but no constitutional power to dismiss the Mentri Besar?

The Kuala Lumpur High Court declared that Datuk Seri Mohamad Nizar Jamaluddin is the lawful and legal Perak Mentri Besar as he could only be removed by a no confidence motion  in the Perak State Assembly, which was never done.

Why did Najib act in so improper and ill-advised a manner as his statement, though made outside the country, would be seen as an undisguised arm-twisting of the judiciary, when public confidence in the judiciary is already at such a low ebb?

Najib seems to be very desperate in having to act in such a manner, which is clearly improper, ill-advised and downright wrong.

Are the Court of Appeal judges who are going to hear Zambry’s appeal against the Abdul Aziz judgment in favour of Nizar prepared to publicly declare that they would not be influenced even  one iota by Najib’s Manado statement – not only just professing it but to judge without any regard to the Prime Minister’s wishes and intentions?

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 16 May 2009, 4:04 pm and is filed under
Court
,
Judiciary
,
Najib Razak
,
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


The unfair PSD scholarship awards

Letters

by
Lye Hoke Tan

The unfair PSD scholarship awards issue, it happens all the times. I graduated from Chung Ling High School in Penang at 2004. Before 2004, I didn’t notice much about this problem, I just heard it from my high school teachers complaint it to us, I didn’t know it was so serious until it happened to my friends around.

Well, I can see this happens every year. Every year, to the same victims (Chinese Top Students), at the same time(after SPM results released), the same thing happen continuously in our country. Every year, I see the problems occur non-stop, it seems like unsolved cases even though those ministers, parties promised it could be solved. I have lost my confidence over their creditability, how can you give scholarship to someone, who his/her result is poorer than the others, just because of the skin colour.

Is PSD blind? They failed to see As every where every year, PSD prefer B and C? Maybe, as our government always has funny and “incredible” systems to rule this country. The funniest thing is, they DARE to repeat this “carelessness” every year, non stop. The media reported the same issue every year, what a shame!

The same thing happened during 2004, I have a friend, she got 13A1, she was also one of the top student had lunch with our ex-PM, Pak Lah, but the point is she failed to get JPA. When she told us she failed to get it, we got shocked. If top student like her by having 13A1 failed to get JPA, then we wonder how are we going to get it? Maybe we have to blame for our parents aren’t Datuk & Datin.

The next day, she went to the press, same stories like what it happens today. So, the next few days, she got the JPA. This is how our PSD works, OMG!

Those smart guys failed to get straight As, some of them just got 10As (but still much more better than those who are  able to get JPA), so we chinese students definitely will fail to get the scholarship.

Okay, fine. They continue Form 6. They did well in form 6, they got scholarship bond from Singapore. They study there, graduate there, work there and get PR there. Some of them went to Hong Kong, Australia, Japan with scholarship bond too. Some of them will never come back to work in Malaysia, they get the PR there and stay there.

Again, we produce professionals for foreign country. Is our country still developing? If yes, don’t we need professionals to develop this country? or maybe we have more than enough professionals. So, it doesn’t matter where this professionals go.

To get a scholarship, sometimes it depends on your skin colour, your family background. You have to be strong in politics, you have to be rich, your parents have to be Datuk or Datin. This is how PSD works!

It is so hard for non-bumi to enter Local Uni due to the quota system (They can lower the local uni standard just to fulfil their quota. Sighs!) , so the blindness of PSD doesn’t sound strange to us any more.

Thank you!

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 16 May 2009, 2:50 pm and is filed under
Education
,
Letters
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Aung San Suu Kyi’s Monday trial – Malaysian Cabinet should condemn Myanmar junta on Wednesday

ASEAN should condemn the Myanmar military junta if its proceeds tomorrow with the arbitrary  trial of Nobel Peace Prize Laureatee and Burmese pro-democracy icon, Aung San Suu Kyi  despite world-wide protests and release her from the notorious Insein Prison.

The revocation of the licence of a top lawyer, Aung Thien, barring him from defending Suu Kyi is ominous sign of the length the Myanmese military junta is prepared to go ensure that she remains in detention despite the expected expiry of her six-year house arrest on May 27 and to keep her sidelined ahead of the junta’s promised elections in 2010 as part of its sham seven-step “roadmap to democracy”.

Malaysia should take the lead in such ASEAN condemnation which should be formally decided by the Cabinet at its meeting on Wednesday.

Malaysia should also convene an emergency meeting of the ASEAN Foreign Ministers to consider the measures that the regional organisation can take against such flagrant violation of the ASEAN Charter, particularly the commitment given by ASEAN nations to protect and promote human rights in their respective countries.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 17 May 2009, 4:34 pm and is filed under
ASEAN
,
Burma
,
Human Rights
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


BN SC tomorrow – dare UMNO, MCA, Gerakan and MIC leaders speak the truth to Najib to cut losses in Perak and face state general election?

Tomorrow is the first Barisan Nasional Supreme Council meeting of Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak and it is shaping up to be an acid test whether the BN Supreme Council is going to be a new meeting of equals or of just like the past, between the Umno hegemon with subservient characters from the other Barisan Nasional component parties.

The May 31 Penanti state assembly by-election in Penang will be on the agenda, but even more important is the three-and-a-half-month-long Perak political and constitutional crisis which have brought one national institution after another into disrepute as well as undermined Malaysia’s international image and competitiveness.

Not only Pakatan Rakyat parties of DAP, PKR and PAS, but also independent organisations and NGOs like Suhakam, Bar Council, Council of Churches, Chinese guilds and associations, but also individual leaders from BN component parties have spoken up for the only viable solution to the Perak constitutional and political impasse – dissolution of the Perak State Assembly to return the mandate to Perakians in state wide general elections.

The question is whether Umno, MCA, Gerakan and MIC top  leaders dare to speak the truth to Najib at the Barisan Nasional Supreme Council meeting tomorrow that Najib should put national interests above party and personal interests, cut losses in Perak and face Perak state general elections to allow the people of Perak to decide their own political future.

The Perak  political crisis would have been behind the country for two months if my proposal in mid-February for a dissolution of the Perak State Assembly and the holding of Perak state general elections within 30 days been heeded by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak –  with Perakians and Malaysians able in the past two months to single-mindedly focus on acting in unison to face the world’s economic crisis in a century!

It the tragic to see the Perak political and constitutional crisis being dragged out for three-and-a-half months without any proper solution which respects the sovereign rights of the Perakians to elect the state government of their choice in sight.

What is worse, with each passing day, more and more damage is being done to the credibility, integrity and legitimacy of key national institutions, whether the police, the Election Commission, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency, the civil service, the media, judiciary,  the monarchy and the office of the Prime Minister!

Or dare Najib own up to the BN Supreme Council meeting tomorrow that the unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab he orchestrated in Perak in early February has turned out to be his greatest mistake in his preparation to become the sixth Prime Minister, and demonstrate the courage to rectify colossal  error by proposing the dissolution of Perak State Assembly and the holding of new state general elections?

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 17 May 2009, 12:32 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


I will be fair to PSD director-general but he must be fair to all PSD scholarship applicants

I have replied to the email from the Public Services Department director-general Tan Sri Ismail Adam asking that I be fair to him, inviting him to the DAP forum on JPA scholarships in Kuala Lumpur on Tuesday to explain another year of JPA scholarship injustices to aggrieved students, parents and the public.

This is Ismail’s email which I received yesterday:

“When I have the permission and opportunity, I’ll explain the whole story. Until then please be fair to me.

“Perception without having an understanding and perspective of the issue can bring about conclusion that may not be right or fair. I understand the unfortunate ones can be emotional. But be fair in your comments.

“Just ponder. Over 8000 students are qualified to be considered for 2000 scholarships which are allocated for medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, engineering, bio tech and other sciences, social sciences, law, acturial science and other subjects critical for the country.

“We want well rounded students to go overseas. So co-curriculum and interviews are also important. Interviews are done by professionals in the govt service not by JPA officers.

“Then we have to provide for students from Sabah, Sarawak and from poor families. Some schools do not allow students to take more than 10 subjects. Are they inferior to students who could take 15 subjects? Then there is the appeal period. take all these into perspective first .

“Have a nice day.

“Ismail”

In my email reply to Ismail today, I said that I am always prepared to be fair to him, but why is the PSD under his charge  not prepared to fair to the students, their parents and the Malaysian public  in again putting them through the agony of another “annual begging season” when Malaysians have to beg for scholarships from the PSD although they are entitled to them because of their excellent academic results and meritocracy.

This is followed by the annual rigmarole of Barisan Nasional component parties trying to champion aggrieved students who had been by-passed in the PSD scholarships despite having brilliant academic results, when all these injustices and power abuses would have been prevented if there is in place a fair and transparent PSD scholarship system which is not prey to discriminatory regulations or the whims and fancies of individual bureaucrats.

Furthermore, I asked Ismail why he was not fair to the new Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak who had come out with the slogan “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now” and the pledge to be the People’s Prime Minister, which constitute  implicit but unmistakable  promise to Malaysians that they would be spared this humiliating “annual begging season” for PSD scholarships  this year!

I also explained to Ismail that the problem is not too many students are chasing a limited number of government scholarships, but the great and legitimate sense of injustice felt not only by the disappointed students and their parents but also by the Malaysian public at a system which is blatantly unfair and discriminatory which does not fulfil the definition of “meritocracy”!

Is the PSD director-general aware that the failure of the PSD and the  Ministers and Deputy Ministers to end such a longstanding,  unfair and unjust system which cause the unsuccessful applicants for PSD scholarships to nurse  a life-long burning sense of injustice and grievance is one of the major causes of national disunity and racial polarisation in the country?

The DAP public forum on “JPA Scholarships – seeking a fair and equitable policy” is meant to obtain feedback from aggrieved students, current and former local and overseas scholars, academics and the general public, will be held at the KL & Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall in Kuala Lumpur on Tuesday, 19th May 2009 at 8 pm.

Panellists are

•	Lim Kit Siang, DAP Parliamentary leader,

•	Anthony Loke Siew Fook, MP for Rasah and DAPSY Chief,

•	Tony Pua, MP for Petaling Jaya Utara,

•	Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad, PAS Research Centre Director and MP for Kuala Selangor

•	Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad, Selangor ADUN for Seri Setia

Dr Goh Cheng Teik, eminent academic, former deputy minister and interviewer for Harvard University admission programme in Malaysia will also be a special guest for the evening.

I hope Ismail will come to the forum to address the public outrage and explain another year of JPA scholarship injustices, and I will withhold  all criticisms of Ismail and JPA until after his appearance at the Tuesday forum.

In my email, I also informed Ismail that  together with  other Pakatan Rakyat  MPs, I will be visiting him at the JPA office in Putrajaya at noon tomorrow as it is the final day for appeal by aggrieved JPA applicants – and more time must be given for the appeal so that a new start can be made this year on the fair and just award of JPA scholarships.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 17 May 2009, 11:28 am and is filed under
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Is JJ the best choice for the plum appointment of Malaysian Ambassador to the US?

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak should explain whether Datuk Seri Jamaludin Jarjis is the best choice for the plum appointment of Malaysian Ambassador to the United States.

Would Jamaludin be representing the interests of Malaysia or just Najib Razak, which are two completely different agendas.

The Malaysian Insider reported early this month that Jamaludin’s appointment has been submitted to the Obama administration and is being vetted by the US State Department.

News of Jamaludin’s appointment as Malaysian Ambassador to the United States has created not only general public concern but raised the eyebrows of many in the establishment, whether political or  the civil service.

The first question is how a politician who was  finally dropped from the first Najib Cabinet because of his highly  controversial record could be deemed to be appropriate and suitable for the choice overseas appointment as the nation’s Ambassador to the US?

It is reported that Jamaludin will enjoy the status of a minister in his new appointment. Is this Jamaludin’s back-door entry into the Cabinet after having failed to get in from the front door?

If Malaysia practises the United States system of subjecting all prospective  ambassadorial appointments to Congressional  public hearings, scrutiny and approval, there could be no doubt that Jamaluddin would not be able to successfully pass through such a gauntlet.

The reason being put forward for Jamaludin’s nomination to be ambassador is that he has a “good network” in the US.

It is public knowledge that Jamaludin’s record of  “good networking” in the US is not something which could bear public scrutiny, whether for his” role in the labyrinth  of  seedy Washington lobby politics when he was Tenaga Nasional Chairman but also for the controversial remarks he made about Malaysian Indians while on a trip to the United States a couple of years ago as Minister for Science, Technology and Innovation.

Is Jamaludin prepared to publicly apologise for the latter episode?

In view of Jamaludin’s other  equally infamous controversial roles, Najib should convince Parliamentarians and the Malaysian public that Jamaludin is the nation’s best choice as Ambassador to the United States.

How could someone who was dropped “with a bang” in the last Abdullah cabinet reshuffle, and not deemed to be suitable to be in the first Najib Cabinet despite all speculation because of his close connection with the new Prime Minister, be regarded as the most ideal “flag bearer” for Malaysia in the US?

Would Jamaludin be able to represent the national interests and not just the interest of one man, be he the Prime Minister of Malaysia, in Washington?

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 17 May 2009, 9:21 am and is filed under
Foreign
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Why is Zambry getting ‘special treatment’?

(When I spoke  at the public forum “From May 13 to 1Malaysia – The Future of Malaysian Nation Building” at the Petaling Jaya Civic Centre on Wednesday, 13th May 2009, I had posed two questions, viz:

1. Why the Court of Appeal could fast-track to hear within three hours  Datuk  Zambry Abdul Kadir’s application for “stay” of Justice Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim’s landmark  judgment delivered on 11th May that Nizar was the lawful Perak Mentri Besar  and grant it in another hour; while it was  snail-pace in needing five days to hear Datuk Seri Mohd  Nizar Jamaluddin’s application to discharge Zambry’s “stay”; and

2. Whether Malaysians can expect justice in cases involving top Umno leaders when there is an Umno Chief Justice, Tan Sri Zaki Azmi?

This proved to be an understatement, as last Friday, it was announced that Nizar’s  application to set aside the stay order, filed on 13th May,  was postponed from May 18 to May 21 – the hearing date for Zambry’s appeal.

Zambry required less than three hours after  filing  his application to get a single-judge Court of Appeal to hear his “stay” request, while Nazry requires eight (from the earlier five) days to get his application to discharge the “stay” order heard.

Is this justice.

No wonder Leong Cheok Keng, Nizar’s solicitors, raised a very pertinent question in his six-point statement below, framed by Malaysiakini as

“Why is Zambry getting ‘special treatment’?”:

By
Leong Cheok Keng

16th May 2009

1.	My client is truly disappointed that his much awaited hearing on 18.5.2009 has been adjourned by the Court.

2.	I received the letter from the Registry of the Court of Appeal at about 4pm yesterday on 15.5.2009 which says that it has been re-scheduled to 21.5.2009 and it will be heard together with the appeal proper. The apparent reason is that since the hearing of the appeal is imminent, my client’s application for the discharge of the stay order might as well be adjourned and there is now no urgency to hear the same.

3.	Without any explanation given by the Court, the public will be left with the perception that the Court is once again going out of its way to accommodate the Appellant and putting my client at a disadvantage.

4.	My client would like the issue of whether the Appellant, Zambry did or did not have the right in law under section 43 and 44 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 to obtain the relief of a full blooded stay despite not having made a formal written application to the High Court which made the declaration that my client is the lawful and valid Menteri Besar. On 11.5.2009, when Zambry’s lawyer’s oral application for a stay was refused, he was clearly asked by the High Court to put in a written application, which the lawyer did not do.

5.	An explanation is also appreciated from the Court Registry as to why an application from my client is being delayed consistently when compared to Zambry’s application which was fixed for hearing and a decision made not more than 24 hours after the Judgment of the High Court? The hearing commenced within 3 hours of filing and stay order pronounced within 2 hours of hearing.

6.	I also await eagerly the grounds of the one-man Court of Appeal panel for granting the “stay” order.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 18 May 2009, 12:37 am and is filed under
Court
,
Judiciary
,
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Anifah broke new ground as Foreign Minister – admit internationally Najib’s credibility problem because of Mongolian C4 murder case

New Foreign Minister, Datuk Anifah Aman broke new ground when he admitted internationally the credibility problem faced by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak because of the Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu C4 murder case but he failed to bring it to a closure.

It was remarkable that Anifah raised the subject although he  was not specifically asked about the Mongolian murder case in his joint press conference with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Washington on Friday, as the question posed to him was for his comment on Parliamentary Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim facing another sodomy trial, starting from July 1 and fixed for 24 days, which the US State Department in the annual human rights report described as  “politically motivated”.

Apart from declaring “utmost faith in our judicial system”, Anifah launched into a political attack on Anwar. Anwar had responded to it through his lawyers.

What interests me is that without being asked specifically, Anifah raised the Altantuya Shaariibuu C4 murder case, yet failing to  address the host of serious questions and allegations haunting and hounding Najib about his involvement in the murder case.

Since Anifah has internationally admitted to Najib’s credibility problem stemming from the Altantuya Shaariibuu C4 murder case, is he prepared to propose at the Cabinet the establishment of a Royal Commission of Inquiry or even an independent international inquiry to once and for all clear Najib of all the haunting and hounding allegations dogging the Malaysian Prime Minister, whether in international circles or even inside the country?

Two other issues which Anifah adverted, though tangentially, in his joint press conference with Hilary Clinton were the independence of the judiciary and corruption in Malaysia, but he failed to give any  convincing case that in both instances, Malaysia is making progress in achieving greater national and international confidence in restoring a just rule of law and a truly independent judiciary as well as improving in national integrity efforts to eradicate corruption.

Anifah should be better prepared to make a convincing case to the international community that Malaysia has reason to be proud of improvements in restoring national and international confidence in the independence, impartiality and integrity of the judiciary as well as in combatting corruption as both are important factors in determining Malaysia’s international competitiveness to attract foreign investments.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 18 May 2009, 11:23 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Enhance, Not Review the Teaching of Science and Mathematics in English

by
M. Bakri Musa

Minister of Education Muhyuddin Yassin is doing our nation a great disservice in further delaying the critical decision on the of teaching science and mathematics in English (TSME, or its Malay acronym, PPSMI –Pengajaran dan Pembelajaran Sains dan Matematik Dalam Bahasa Inggeris) in our schools.  His indecision merely compounds the uncertainty, especially among educators, parents and students.

            What he should be doing instead is to explore ways of enhancing the implementation of the policy, not review it.  He should be focusing on finding ways to get more competent teachers, explore innovative teaching techniques, and provide inexpensive textbooks.  He should also be busy eliminating such expensive but ineffective teaching gimmicks as the “computerized teaching modules” with their laptops and LCDs that our teachers are unable to handle.  Those machines are now either stolen or crashed because of viruses and dust.

            The conditions of our students today have not changed from 2003 when the policy was first introduced.  If any they are worse.  Whatever the rationale was for adopting the policy back in 2003, it is still very much valid today.

          Today’s many critics of the policy are latecomers.  Where were they when the policy was first mooted six years ago?  These critics have yet to answer the basic question on whether the policy itself is flawed or that the deficiencies are with its implementation.  They are unable to answer this important question as they are entirely confused over the issue.  Their opposition is based more on emotions rather than rational thinking.

            Consider the joint statement of our five living National Laureates in Literature.  First, the facts they cited were clearly erroneous.  Stating that most Nobel Prize winners are from non-English-speaking countries is not only incorrect but missed the essential point that most of those luminaries are English literate.  Similarly our National Laureates’ plea that we should emulate the Scandinavian countries missed the important point that their students and citizens are all fluently bilingual if not multilingual, with English being the most common second language.  Indeed we should emulate the Scandinavian countries and ensure that our students are truly bilingual.

            The Laureates’s concerns are grossly misguided.  No one is questioning the status of the Malay language, or its importance in nation building.  We all subscribe to that.  It is unclear from their statement whether they are against our students learning a second language or against English as that second language.

            They went on to make the totally irrelevant point that Mandarin would soon replace English as the most widely spoken language.  Having made that observation, they failed to follow up on it.  That is, even the Chinese government is now encouraging, no, forcing their students to learn English.

            These laureates and other critics missed the essence of the current policy, which is to enhance our students’ ability to read and understand English.  It is not the policy’s intention that we should learn English at the expense of Malay.  In short, the policy aims to expand our students’ intellectual horizon, not curtail it.

            The laureates’ muddled thinking only produces only muddled conclusions.

            In truth, it is too early to pass any judgment on the wisdom of the policy.  Any policy, especially one pertaining to education and social matters, takes time to discern its effects.  To evaluate this policy credibly, one would need to let at least three to five cohorts of students finish the program.  Meaning, a time period of about 15 years!  Consider that we are only now recognizing the damaging effects of our educational reforms that were introduced back in the 1970s!

Yet we have “researchers” from the Universiti Perguruan Sultan Idris (UPSI) confidently declaring the policy “ineffective” barely four years after the policy was implemented.  Earlier, just a few months after the policy’s adoption, a Ministry of Education’s “study” pronounced the remarkable “improvement” in test scores of our students taught under the new program.  Who do these folks think they are kidding?

I could not get a copy of the Ministry’s paper, but I have the UPSI professors’.  Suffice to say that it would never appear in the pages of refereed journals, except perhaps the Ulu Langat Bulletin of Education.  Frankly if I had been an academic, I would be embarrassed to append my name to such a shoddy paper.

This policy would not have triggered its many belated critics had the leadership showed more resolve and greater commitment.  They became vociferous and assertive only when former Minister of Education Hishamuddin misguidedly re-opened the issue.  Why he did it is best left for him to answer, but I venture that the then looming UMNO leadership contest had plenty to do with it.  Old Hishamuddin needed to display his nationalistic manhood once again, especially after the spectacular flop of his earlier unsheathing the keris.

Flawed Implementation

I have not seen any change in the Ministry of Education operations since or in response to the adoption of the policy.  I would have thought that at least there would be a dozen English-medium teachers’ training colleges by now to provide for the necessary trained teachers.  Likewise our universities should be expanding the number of classes in science and mathematics taught in English so there would be an ample supply of graduate teachers competent to implement the new policy.

Similarly, the ministry should have by now commissioned textbook writers and publishers.  Failing that, I would have expected these officials to be contracting with established foreign publishers to buy their texts.

The fact that none of these measures have been undertaken reflects incompetence or lack of commitment to the new policy, or both.  The fault then lies not with the policy but with those entrusted with the awesome responsibilities of carrying it out.

Those Malay language nationalists and other strident critics of TSME fail to recognize one glaring reality.  That is, our current educational policy is failing our students and our nation.  Those who can or have other options for their children have already abandoned our system.  We see this especially among the non-Malays.  Increasingly, more and more Malays are also following suit.  This leaves those poor village folks who have no other choice; they are trapped in the current system.  And they are almost all Malays.  They are the ones left out, victimized by their own kind, the language nationalists on one side and the incompetent education bureaucrats on the other.

If not for the public sector and the various GLCs acting as employers of last resort, graduates of our current educational system would simply be without jobs.  There is however, a limit to the government’s capacity as employer, and we are already way beyond that point.

For a society to advance, it must first come to terms with itself.  A major part of that exercise involves recognizing our own weaknesses, for unless we acknowledge that we cannot even begin to overcome them.  Malays must recognize that a major problem with our community is that we are not competitive, not even in our native land let alone the global arena.  A major contributor to this sorry state of affairs is our defective education system that continues to produce graduates who have abysmal language and mathematical skills, as well as being science illiterate.

We have completely indoctrinated our young and ourselves with a “zero-sum mentality,” that learning another language could only come at the expense of our own.  Worse, we have gone further and mentally programmed our young that fluency in another language is not an asset but an expression of hatred for one’s own.  In so doing, we exposed our own collective limited intellectual capacity, and an inability to expand it.  That is the sorry part.

We are only deluding our young by appealing to their base emotions.  Exhortations of Ketuanan Melayu will never make them competitive or guarantee them a place under the sun, not even the sun in our Tanah Melayu.  Unless we are competitive, we cannot survive, let alone be Tuan.  On the other hand when we are competitive, we would be Tuan even in lands other than Tanah Melayu.

The other part of the exercise involves our willingness to learn from others, especially those more advanced.  The ancient Arabs learned from the Greeks, the medieval Europeans from the Arabs, and the Japanese from the West.  It saddens me that our luminaries by their actions and words are sending precisely the wrong message to our young.  That is, we have nothing to learn from others.

Our political leaders are too preoccupied with their own short-term political survival and gamesmanship instead of leading the way forward.  Unfortunately our children’s children will bear the burden of our current leaders’ stupidities.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 18 May 2009, 9:22 am and is filed under
Bakri Musa
,
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


PSD scholarship awards – noon meeting with Ismail Adam scheduled

A noon meeting with the Public Services Department Director-General Tan Sri Ismail Adam in Putrajaya has been scheduled on the subject of another round of injustices in the PSD scholarship awards, out of line with the “1Malaysia” slogan of Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

The subject has provoked national debate and soul-searching. I reproduce three  emails below:

(1)	From Allan Tan Kean Yang

Warm greetings. I’m from Penang, an 11A1’s, 1B3 SPM 2009 scorer. I’d be pleased if you could kindly consider

my appeal for the JPA scholarship. The results are as below:

Malay Language – A1

English Language – A1

1119 English – A1

Chinese – B3

Additional Maths – A1

Modern Maths – A1

Moral Studies – A1

Physics – A1

Chemistry – A1

Biology – A1

History – A1

English for Science and Technology – A1

I’m also shortlisted for the JPA interview at Kepala Batas. Yet, I failed to get the scholarship for KEJURUTERAAN course to UK and those English-based medium countries.

Besides, I’m actively involved in my cocurriculum activities, a Deputy Head Prefect in Chung Ling High School, Penang; a school representative for Chess Club to participate in Chess OPEN tournaments; a Leo Secretary for Leo Club of CLHS; I’ve also have had national PENGLIBATAN as well as states PENGLIBATAN and achievements.

I’m quite disappointed that I’m not being offered even a local scholarship in which some of them who did not do as good as me in the SPM Exam get one.  I doubt that I did badly for the interview, not to mention I was a National Service  trainee at Balik Pulau White Resort for the 1st Batch.

Last but not least, thanks for considering my appeal and all the best to y’al

on the 19th May 2009 as seen from this link.

http://tonypua.blogspot.com/2009/05/jpa-scholarship-scheme-seeking-fair.html

Thanks for fighting for our rights.

(2)	From Meng Beh:

This is nothing new and happens every year.

 What is MCA and Gerakan do ? Can they be more proactive, rather than re-active?

Why must they wait till people’s complain then react?

 That’s why chinese is so fed-up and give up hopes to MCA and Gerakan.

 This is their responsibility to ensure that all good student ( regardless of race) will obtain the scholar ship to further thier study.

And please do not try to claim credit. — please do not expect a vote of support when election come…this is thier responsibility and accoutability, do not hope to use it to exchange for vote.

(3)	From Tang Mei San: –

The annual grouses on the unfair PSD scholarship awards are followed by the government’s annual promise to be fair and just in allocation. Almost inevitably, the MCA will step out to help voice the stories of disgruntled and unsuccessful applicants, promising appeals and calling for more equal allocations.

It’s hard to not think that the PSD Scholarships have became an instrument for MCA to gain political mileage, considering the fact that their annual “efforts”, while outright and loud, has never once succeeded in solving the problem.

In Chua Soi Lek’s blog posting on PSD Scholarships, I agree with him that it is impossible to satisfy all top students and I also concur with him that a string of distinctions cannot be an effective measure to determine the student’s eligibility for a scholarship.

But at the end of Chua’s posting, he resorted to the same old calling for more scholarships – an annual calling by the MCA that Malaysians have yet to see its effectiveness.

The root of the problem with the PSD scholarships is the perceived wide incongruity between the government’s promises to be fair in allocation and the reality in awarding. It is this perceived unfairness that has been the ground of the annual grouses by top students and their parents.

I dare not say that the reality in the PSD is justice and that the people’s perception has merely been unreasonably fueled by the media and political parties. But the point is, none of us have a tinge of clear understanding of what is happening since the PSD has never clarified the criteria used in awarding the scholarships.

Hence, I think a good initiative to reduce the intensity of the grouses will be for the PSD director-general to clarify on the system and criteria of awarding, whether they are based on results, merit, race, family income etc.

Another important step to be taken is to explain to unsuccessful applicants what are the viable alternatives to the PSD scholarships, as I am very sure that the PSD cannot be the one and only channel to a tertiary education. This, I think, should be the priority of political parties, rather than trying to outdo each other in calls for more justice.

I also often wonder if the top students and their parents would start learning about the leaders in the government and opposition were it not for the sake of appealing for scholarships. As we the people often accuse our politicians for being corrupted and excessive politicking, I think there are many of us who are only in our ADUNs and MPs’ service centres for self-seeking purpose. Just another food for thought…

                This entry was posted on Monday, 18 May 2009, 10:13 am and is filed under
Education
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Public Forum : JPA Scholarships – Seeking A Fair & Equitable Policy

Watch live video from DAP Malaysia on Justin.tv

JPA Scholarships – Seeking A Fair & Equitable Policy

    Venue: KL & Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (
MAP
)

    Date: 19th May 2009 (Tuesday)

    Time: 8.00 pm

Live webcast :
http://tv.dapmalaysia.org

The panellists will include:

Lim Kit Siang, DAP Parliamentary Leader and MP for Ipoh Timor,

Anthony Loke Siew Fook, MP for Rasah and DAPSY Chief,

Tony Pua, MP for Petaling Jaya Utara,

Dr Dzulkifli Ahmad, PAS Research Centre Director and MP for Kuala Selangor

Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad, Selangor ADUN for Seri Setia

Dr Goh Cheng Teik, eminent academic, former deputy minister and interviewer for Harvard University admission programme in Malaysia will also be a special guest for the evening.

In addition, for students and scholars who are not able to make it for the forum (e.g., if you are overseas or if you live outstation, you are welcome to submit written submissions to the panel. Please write to: dapscholarship (at) rocketmail (dot) com.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 18 May 2009, 2:13 pm and is filed under
Announcement
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


6As get PSD scholarship for engineering but 13, 14As no scholarships – whole Cabinet should be sacked for allowing such nonsense year in year out

This is simply outrageous – a student with  6A1s getting a Public Services Department (PSD) scholarship to study engineering while students with 13A1s and 14A1s not getting any scholarships!

The whole Cabinet should be sacked for allowing such nonsense, year in year out!

It is none other than the Deputy Education Minister, Datuk Dr. Wee Ka Siong, who
revealed
 this shocking example of the gross injustices and sheer perversity of the PSD scholarship scheme, which makes Malaysians wonder about the quality of the  political and civil service leadership in the country.

The Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now” was torn  into shreds by the JPA scholarship exercise this year, with thousands of the young generation’s best and brightest burning with protest in their hearts at the injustices of the JPA scholarship system, which is likely to remain with them for life influencing their outlook and mindset.

A typical case is 18-year-old Chin Ee Lyn, former student of SMK Convent Taiping (9A1s and 2As) who is unsuccessful in applying for a JPA scholarship to do accountancy in the UK.  She is  also not  given a “consolation prize” of an offer for matriculation.

Chin  has had straight A’s for all her public exams and was the top scorer in the state of Perak for her PMR exam.

She recently completed National Service in Kem Sungai Bakap.  In school she was a well-rounded achiever. Her co-curricular achievements include being the head of  library,  prefect, vice-president of the karate club, president of the tennis club, and in the editorial board of her school magazine.

She was also a member of a choir which was the district champion, and received a bronze medal in a state-level Perak Goshin-ryu tournament. She received a merit award in the Wordsmith Competition – Search for Malaysia’s Best Teenage Writer in 2007.

Yesterday, together with DAP MPs Fong Kui Lun (Bukit Bintang), Anthony Loke (Rasah) and Tony Pua (Petaling Jaya Utara), I met the PSD director-general Tan Sri Ismail Adam at PSD headquarters at Putrajaya.

Conveying the nation-wide outrage at the injustices of the current PSD scholarship exercise, we asked that the full criteria for scholarship selection as well as the full list of scholarship receipients together with their results be published in the interests of fairness and transparency.

I also personally invited Ismail to the public forum on PSD scholarship awards to be held at the Kuala Lumpur/Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall tonight so that he could address the queries and grievances of the disappointed students and their parents.

On both questions, Ismail said he needed clearance from his political superiors.

After the noon meeting yesterday, I faxed to Ismail an official  invitation to the public forum tonight. I hope he would be able to personally attend the public forum after getting the necessary clearance.

As for the authorization  for the  publication of the  full criteria for scholarship selection as well as the full list of scholarship receipients together with their results in the name of fairness, accountability and transparency – this is the least that the Cabinet should do at its meeting tomorrow.

If the Cabinet tomorrow could not even take a policy decision to authorize and direct the PSD to make public the full criteria for scholarship selection as well as the full list of scholarship receipients with  the individual results, then the first Najib Cabinet is beyond redemption!

In keeping with the Najib motto of “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now”, the Cabinet at its meeting tomorrow must come up with a swift and just solution to the scandal of the PSD scholarship awards, based on the following three  principles:

•	Firstly, it would be unfair and unjust to withdraw any PSD  scholarship which had been awarded last Friday;

•	Secondly, all students with 9A1s and above should be awarded PSD scholarships – which means an increased  allocation of RM300 million for JPA scholarships from RM700 million to RM1 billion.  A special supplementary estimate of RM300 million for 2009 should be presented to the June meeting for this new allocation and the government can be assured of support from Pakatan Rakyat MPs.  I don’t think any Barisan Nasional Minister or MP could argue against such an increased allocation when there is gross misuse of public funds – like the RM12 billion Port Klang Free Port scandal.

•	Thirdly, the whole system of PSD scholarship awards should be revamped from next year onwards to end the perennial complaints every year about the injustices of the awards so that it is  in full accord with the slogan “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now”.   A Parliamentary Select Committee headed by an Opposition MP should be formed in June meeting of Parliament  to completely revamp the PSD scholarship system.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 19 May 2009, 3:25 pm and is filed under
Education
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Aung San Suu Kyi’s trial – “Grave concern” by Thailand, ASEAN Chair welcome but grossly inadequate

The statement of “grave concern” by
Thailand
, as the ASEAN Chair, about  the fragile  health and  perilous personal safety and freedom  of  Burmese pro-democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi is welcome but grossly inadequate.

While the reminder to the Myanmar military junta about the call of ASEAN leaders for the immediate release of Aung San Suu Kyi is appropriate, it is meaingless unless ASEAN leaders are prepared to take concrete measures to address the first crisis faced by the ASEAN Charter which  had committed the member ASEAN nations to protect and promote human rights in their respective countries.

As Chair of ASEAN, Thailand should convene an emergency top-level meeting of ASEAN, whether of heads of governments or foreign ministers, to consider what should be their proper response to the first crisis faced by the ASEAN Charter.

Which  ASEAN country will set the lead to move from expressing concern to condemn the Myanmar military junta for such egregious violation of human rights in Burma, in particular to use the ruse of an American who recently swam to her lakeside home to put her on a sham trial so as to extend her unlawful incarceration which is scheduled to end next Wednesday on May 27, 2009.

Thailand, as ASEAN Chair, should take the lead to pressure the Myanmar military junta to release Aung San Suu Kyi on May 27, 2009 or face the consequences of total disregard of the calls by ASEAN leaders since May 2003, and repeated violations of promises made by Myanmar military junta, to release her from house arrest.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 19 May 2009, 6:50 pm and is filed under
ASEAN
,
Burma
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Do you know why the Federal Court is not giving a written judgment in the Perak debacle?

by
N H Chan

The answer can be simply put. It is because Article 72 (1) of the Federal Constitution is written in unambiguous language which even a child can understand. As I have said before in an earlier article that the words, “The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court”, mean what they say. Nothing can be plainer than that. No one in his right senses would try to interpret the obvious meaning of the words in Article 72, unless he wants to say the words mean something else. But the Federal Court was not prepared to do that. And the reason is because they do not want to be known as Humpty Dumpty judges.

Remember Humpty Dumpty in Lewis Carrol‘s,
Through the looking Glass?
:

“But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean ‘a nice knock-down argument’,” Alice objected.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean – neither more nor less.”

So the judges of the Federal Court did the unthinkable. They blatantly refused to apply the constitutional provision as it stands. They ignored it altogether. But by so doing they have committed the cardinal sin of not administering justice according to law. It is the duty of every judge, indeed it is his only function, to administer justice according to law. And the law, in this context, is Article 72 (1) of the Federal Constitution which is the supreme law of the land. Said Lord Denning,
What Next in the Law
, p 319:

Parliament is supreme. Every law enacted by Parliament must be obeyed to the letter. No matter how unreasonable or unjust it may be, nevertheless, the judges have no option. They must apply the statute as it stands.

Since the judges of the Federal Court, especially the infamous five, have refused to apply Article 72 (1) as it stands, they have, as a result, impaled themselves on the horns of their own dilemma.

They have, so to speak, placed themselves between the devil and the deep sea. Either way their position is untenable. By refusing to apply Article 72(1) of the Federal Constitution as it stands they would be guilty of a misuse of power. As put by Lord Denning, ibid, p 380:

May not the judges themselves sometimes abuse or misuse their power? It is their duty to administer and apply the law of the land. If they should divert it or depart from it and do so knowingly – they themselves would be guilty of a misuse of power.

And, in this country, this could be a ground for the judges to be removed from office. This is what section 2 of the
Judges’ Code of Ethics 1994
says:

2. (1) This Code of Ethics shall apply throughout the period of his service.

(2) The breach of any provision of this Code of Ethics may constitute a ground for the removal of a judge from office.

And section 3 (1)(d) says:

3. (1) A judge shall not –

(d) conduct himself dishonestly or in such a manner as to bring the Judiciary into disrepute or to bring discredit thereto;

Judging by the unfair treatment of Nizar in his encounter with the Federal Court, public opinion has no doubt that the judges of the Federal Court has brought discredit to the Judiciary. The words of section 3(1)(d) are so clear and easy to understand that we do not need any court of law to explain it to us ordinary folk. We know what the words mean. By not administering and applying the law, which in this case is the supreme law, of the land as it stands the errant judges have brought discredit to the judiciary – a ground for their removal from office.

And if the Government of the day failed to listen to the voice of the people then they have placed themselves in jeopardy of losing the next general election or any bye-election or any State election in the future.

And finally, what about Ramly JCA the judge who had acted with indecent haste when he granted a stay to Zambry of the well considered judgment of Abdul Aziz J. Zambry was appealing against the High Court judge‘s declaratory order in favour of Nizar. Like the judges of the Federal Court, he has not given any reason for his decision. Ramly JCA granted the stay of the declaration which Nizar had obtained against Zambry. The judge was unable to explain why he granted the stay. As any lawyer will tell you it is unusual to stay a declaratory order. If such a stay is to be granted, there are legal arguments to be considered from both sides and the judge will have to say why he prefers the argument of one side as against the other. The people’s perception of him as an unfair judge is the same as that of the errant judges of the Federal Court. Ramly JCA is in no better position than his seniors in the Federal Court.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 19 May 2009, 5:53 pm and is filed under
Judiciary
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Is Najib prepared to emulate his father Razak and order Zambry to vacate and stop squatting in  the Perak MB Office?

The
reasons
 given by the Prime Minister and Barisan Nasional chairman Datuk Seri Najib Razak why the Barisan Nasional is not contesting the Penanti state assembly by-election in Penang on May 31 does not bear scrutiny.

Najib said the  Penanti by-election  is not an election provided for by the Constitution but a political game being played by the Opposition and the BN did not want to play to their tune.

He declared:
“Barisan’s priority is to serve the people and work to revive the country’s economy.”

What political gobbledegook!

Everybody knows that the real reason the Barisan Nasional is not contesting Penanti is that Najib is frightened of “doing a treble” by-election defeat since becoming Prime Minister on April 3, or a fifth Barisan Nasional setback in 15 months since the March 8 political tsunami in last year’s general elections.

MCA, Gerakan and MIC leaders were also in mortal dread of the Penanti by-election especially after their disastrous outing in the recent Bukit Gantang by-election, which caused the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, to  say that Umno must go on its own to regain the support of non-Malay voters and not depend on other Barisan Nasional component parties as BN only secured 11% of the Chinese votes  and 9% of Indian votes in the Bukit Gantang by-election.

Where are the MCA, Gerakan and MIC leaders to hide their faces if in the Penanti by-election, they did even worse than in Bukit Gantang by-election securing less than 11% of the Chinese votes and 9% of the Indian votes – although Indians only constitute 2.4% of the 15,384 Penanti electorate?

Najib had defined constitutional requirement for a by-election as death or disqualification of an elected representative whether because bankruptcy or criminal conviction.

But this is not borne out by Barisan Nasional’s own record.  Just to give one example. In May 1997, BN created two simultaneous by-elections, one parliamentary and one state assembly in Selangor,  so that Datuk Abu Hassan Omar could relinquish his post as Minister for Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs to become Selangor Mentri Besar after Tan Sri Muhamad Muhamad Taib was forced to step down after his RM3 million financial caper in Brisbane, Australia.

Najib is right when he said that there had been one previous instance where BN had not contested in a by-election.

This happened during the time of his father, Malaysia’s second Prime Minister  Tun Abdul Razak, in February 1975.

At the time, the DAP MP for Menglembu, Fan Yew Teng, was convicted of sedition in a retrial  by the Kuala Lumpur High Court and the  government resorted to the unprecedented step of declaring the Menglembu parliamentary seat vacant and a writ of by-election was issued although Fan was appealing to the Federal Court against conviction.

I immediately despatched a letter to Razak on Feb. 20, 1975 protesting against the “usurpation of the parliamentary process by unconstitutional and unparliamentary acts” and urged him as Prime Minister “to uphold the rules of natural justice, accepted form of parliamentary practice and the sanctity of the Constitution by staying the holding of a by-election of the parliamentary constituency of Menglembu”.

Razak replied  in a letter dated 23rd February 1975  stating his disagreement with my contention that the holding of the by-election would prejudge Fan’s appeal and concluded:

“7. I resent your insinuation that there is an attempt to usurp the powers of Parliament by unconstitutional and unparliamentary acts having regard to the fact that the Speaker as well as the Election Commission had acted properly and duly in accordance with legal advice of the Attorney-General’s Chambers.”

I had contended 24 years ago that the writ of election issued by the Election Commission for the holding of the  Menglembu Parliamentary by-election was improper, illegal, unconstitutional and unparliamentary.

Although Sdr. Fan Yew Tong has been convicted of a sedition charge in the High Court, he has given notice of appeal to the Federal Court, from where there was  a further avenue of appeal to the Privy Council.

I had posed the following questions in February  1975:

“Should Fan win in his appeal either at the Federal Court or Privy Council appeal level, how is Fan to be restored to his parliamentary seat of Menglembu, should a by-election be held now causing a new member to be elected?

“Surely, the Elections Commission is  run by intelligent men, who can foresee such a absurdity being created. No procedure should create injustices, either to Fan, or to the new member, and this can only be done by waiting until the completion of the entire appeal process.”

When Fan  was earlier  convicted on the same sedition charge in 1971 (he was then MP for Kampar which he won in 1969 general elections) in the High Court, he was suspended from the House but no by-election was held.

Subsequently. Fan appealed and won at the Federal Court and the Privy Council, with the latter ordering a retrial,  and Fan  was restored back his Parliamentary seat of Kampar.

By the time of his High Court conviction at the retrial in 1975, Fan had switched constituencies in the 1974 general election and was the MP for Menglembu.

I had questioned the  Election Commission why it ignored this precedent set by itself in 1971, and chose deliberately to disqualify Fan in the retrial when Fan was  still appealing against his conviction.

However, to demonstrate that the BN was not behind the usurpation of parliamentary privileges and the  illegal,  unconstitutional and unparliamentary holding of a by-election when Fan was still appealing against his conviction, Razak announced that BN would not field a candidate in the Menglembu by-election.

Nomination of candidates for the Menglembu by-election  was  held on Feb. 27, 1975  with  the DAP candidate challenged by independent candidates.

Three days before the polling on March 15, 1975, the High Court gave a declaration sought by the DAP that there was no vacancy in the Menglembu constituency and stopped the by-election.

There is a striking similarity between the illegal  and unconstitutional usurpation of parliamentary process in trying to force a by-election when there was no vacancy in the parliamentary constituency of Menglembu in 1975 with the unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab in Perak when there was no vacancy in the Perak Mentri Besar office in February 2009.

All talk about “Barisan’s priority is to serve the people and work to revive the country’s economy” are poppycock when it is Najib and BN who  precipitated the three-and-a-half month Perak constitutional and political impasse undermining public confidence in one national institution after another as well as impairing Malaysia’s international image and competitiveness.

Is Najib prepared to emulate his father Tun Razak and distance the office of the Prime Minister from the illegal and unconstitutional power grab when there was no vacancy in the Perak Mentri Besar’s office from February until now?

How can Najib allow the usurper Datuk Zambry Abdul Kadir to re-occupy the Perak Mentri Besar’s office for ten  days from May 12 to May 21 after Justice Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim’s landmark judgment on May 11, 2009 that Datuk Seri Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin is the lawful Perak Mentri Besar, and when  the “stay order” of the single-judge Court of Appeal on May 12  did not legitimise Zambry from a “usurper” MB to become lawful “MB”?

The Month of Infamy for Perak and Malaysia has produced two dark and shameful episodes – firstly, the May 7 Day of Infamy when the Perak Speaker, V. Sivakumar was physically dragged out of the Assembly by police officers and goons; and secondly, the Infamy of the  “Ten days of May” when a doubly illegitimate Zambry re-squatted in the Perak Mentri Besar’s Office from May 12 to 21, 2009.

I do not believe Tun Razak would have allowed Zambry to act in so  utter  disregard of all notions of decencies as to squat so shamelessly in the Perak Mentri Besar’s office when he has no legitimacy whatsoever.

Tun Razak would have boldly accepted the reality that after the single-judge Court of Appeal “stay order”, Perak has no Mentri Besar who could occupy the Mentri Besar’s office and would have ordered Zambry to respect the law and decencies and not to continue to act as Squatter Mentri Besar.

Just as Razak decided that BN should not contest in the controversial Menglembu by-election 24 years ago, is Najib prepared to ask Zambry to vacate and to stop squatting in the Perak Mentri Besar’s Office?

Is Najib prepared to end the agony and travails of Perak and the nation caused by the Perak crisis by dissolving the Perak State Assembly and return the mandate to Perakians to elect the state government they want?

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 19 May 2009, 1:23 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Perak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


2 reasons why Wong Foon Meng’s appointment as Senate President not appropriate

MCA President Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat disclosed that Senate  Deputy President Datuk Wong Foon Meng will assume duties as Senate President from 6th July 2009 when the six-year term of  incumbent Tan Sri Dr. Hamid Pawanteh expires.

The appointment of Wong as the MCA nominee for Senate President is a surprise for two reasons:

Firstly, it is against parliamentary convention and practice for a front-line party official to be appointed to positions like Speaker of Dewan Rakyat or President of Dewan Negara – which is why the present Speaker, Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia resigned his post as divisional Umno Chairman on his appointment to chair the Dewan Rakyat.  Is Wong going to resign as MCA Secretary-General?

Secondly, Wong will be appointed only to serve a mini-term of  eight short months from July 6, 2009 as Senate President as he is a second-term Senator whose term expires on 12th April 2010 and there will not be a third reappointment.

In contrast, the present Senate President Dr. Hamid was appointed Senator on 7.7.2003 to serve two full  terms totaling six years as Senate President.

Hasn’t MCA another nominee who could serve as Senate President for two full terms of six years, such as former MCA Ministers, Dr. Ting Chew Peh or even Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting (although this will mean a by-election in Kulai) or former Dewan Rakyat Deputy Speaker Datuk Lim Si Cheng?

Or is the MCA only allowed to “warm the seat” of the Senate President for a brief spell of eight months before the MCA nominee has to vacate it because of the expiry of his term as Senator?

Ong Tee Keat should be more serious about such appointments and should even consider nomination of qualified and eminent Malaysian Chinese who need not be MCA members  to be appointed as Senate President.

Where does it say in the Constitution that the Senate President must be members of MCA or other Barisan Nasional component parties?

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 20 May 2009, 3:13 pm and is filed under
MCA
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Ganesan’s presence caused and contributed to State Assembly ruckus

By P Ramakrishnan |  President Aliran

18 May 2009

The claim by self-proclaimed Speaker of the Perak State Assembly, R Ganesan, that he had no choice but to summon the police into the House at the height of the ruckus during the May 7 sitting, is dubious and deceiving (Sunday Star 17 May 2009). There is no merit in his claim.

In the first instance, his entry into and his very presence in the Assembly is questionable. How on earth did Ganesan get into the Assembly? The Assembly building was out of bounds to all except the elected members of the Assembly.

There was a police cordon to prevent all the others from entering the Assembly. A 500 metre no-access zone was declared and anyone found anywhere near this perimeter were either chased away or were arrested when they resisted the police orders.

Even Perak Members of Parliament were denied access to the Assembly. Veteran MP Lim Kit Siang was refused entry into the building in spite of the fact that he had come with the invitation letter from the Speaker to attend the Assembly sitting.

Likewise, Kulasegaran and Dr Jeyakumar, both elected MPs from Perak were turned away. That’s how strict the police were. They stringently enforced this ruling of refusing permission to all and sundry.

Smuggled in?

So the natural question is: How did Ganesan gain entry into the building. Who authorized his presence in the Perak State Assembly? How did he by-pass the police security arrangement? How did he hood-wink the police? How come the police did not detect him? Was he smuggled in? Was he planted in the building the previous day?

Is it possible that the police were working hand in glove with illegitimate MB Zambry and BN Assemblymen and facilitated Ganesan’s presence in the building?

Ganesan had no business to be inside the Assembly.  One can safely conclude that his appearance and continued presence in the Assembly prompted and provoked a situation which went beyond control.

Secondly, contrary to his claim that he had no choice but to call in the police, if indeed he was the Speaker of the Assembly as he claims, he could have adjourned the Assembly sitting, following which he and his cohorts could have left the Assembly.

This simple action would have prevented the Assembly from becoming chaotic and unruly. Since he did not do this, it can be rightly construed that he had contributed to the topsy-turvy situation.

The illegitimate MB and the Barisan Nasional Assemblypersons by smuggling in Ganesan had incited the unruly behaviour.

Illegally Elected?

Thirdly, the way Ganeson was ‘elected’ Speaker was also questionable. According to Speaker V Sivakumar, the Assembly had not been convened. In other words, the Assembly was not in session.

Sivakumar had stated that he would not convene the Assembly as long as those ordered out of the House were still inside. That was his stated position. That being the case, how was Ganesan elected when the Assembly was not in session?

Can a group of BN Assemblymen get together privately in one corner of the Assembly building when the Speaker was still occupying his chair and elect someone else? We have a situation when an outsider appears mysteriously in the building and he was elected Speaker when the Assembly had not officially convened.

This was not the only absurd situation we had on 7 May. On that day, we also seemed to have had two Speakers and two Menteris Besar at the same time in the same building!

The Standing Orders of the Assembly were thrown to the winds and the proper procedures that had to be followed were totally ignored. And that was the reason why things turned ugly, unruly and chaotic on May 7.

A BN-Police conspiracy?

Ganesan further contributed to the chaos by ordering the police to forcibly evict Sivakumar from the Assembly. What were the police doing inside the Assembly? Ganesan did not send someone to invite the police to do his bidding. They were already there waiting for his orders. Isn’t that very strange!

By calling on the police to drag out the duly elected Speaker from the Assembly, Ganesan had defiled and desecrated the sanctity of the Assembly. It is an unforgivable sin that he had committed that must be roundly condemned. We should never introduce thuggish behaviour into the legislative assembly where the rule of law should have been paramount and should have prevailed at all times.

What transpired as a result of Ganesan’s conduct raises many serious questions. Why did the police obey him? How did they know he was the new speaker? Was there an announcement that Sivakumar was ousted?

Or was this part of a pre-prepared and pre-rehearsed script? The way things fell into place would indicate that there was a scheme to capture the Perak state government, if necessary, by force. The plot was hatched studiously and implemented without a care for the rule of law.

This is a dangerous precedent and it should not be tolerated. It must be condemned in the strongest terms. There must be retribution for this outrageous behaviour.

Perakians will remember this shameful episode in their proud history and they will punish all those who frustrated the democratic will of the people.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 20 May 2009, 10:46 am and is filed under
Perak
,
Police
,
State Assembly
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.