Three responses to Najib’s “717 Declaration” –  “Malaysia is an Islamic state and had never been a secular state”

Here are three responses to the “717 Declaration” of Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak that “Malaysia is an Islamic state and had never been a secular state” which deserve serious  thought and study by Malaysians concerned about the future of nation-building in Malaysia.

The first is by Muslim Youth Movement of Malaysia (Abim) that “Malaysia has been an Islamic state in practice ever since Independence” from the following
Malaysiakini
 report:

Abim: We’re an Islamic state in practice

Fauwaz Abdul Aziz

Jul 21, 07 2:15pm

Notwithstanding the constitutional and theoretical debates, Malaysia has been an Islamic state in practice ever since Independence, said the Muslim Youth Movement of Malaysia (Abim).

Its president Yusri Mohamad said the so-called Islamisation process has not introduced any significant novelty.

“On the contrary, it seeks to preserve the religious practices and values of its Muslim citizens.

“The only ‘changes’ that have occurred are in the attitude of those who cannot accept what has already been happening for a long time,” said Yusri when met at Abim headquarters yesterday.

He was commenting on the strong objections expressed following the statement of Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak on Tuesday that Malaysia is not a secular state but an Islamic one.

Najib said Malaysia has never been a secular nation as the government has always been driven by the fundamentals of Islam.

“Islam is the official religion and we are an Islamic state,” Najib told reporters after he opened an international conference on the role of Islamic states in facing the challenges of Islamisation.

No drastic change

This was immediately opposed by various quarters, including BN senior partner MCA, who argued that historical facts and documents showed that Malaysia was a secular state, just as espoused in the Federal Constitution.

Yusri said these quarters fail, however, to acknowledge the fact that the Muslim population in Malaysia has always been sensitive and referred to Islamic laws with regards to such issues as custody over children of mixed-marriages, claims over the deceased, and apostasy.

“Opposition to apostasy, for example, is not anything new or unknown to be prohibited. There has never been a situation where it has been allowed to happen without significant opposition,” said Yusri.

“There has been no drastic change as far as Islamisation in principle is concerned,” he added.

In reference to the first premier Tunku Abdul Rahman, who is often cited as having called for a secular Malaysia, Yusri said the actions and practices of Tunku himself suggest that what he envisioned for Malaysia was far from what is conventionally understood as ‘secular’.

Tunku, who participated in the founding of the Islamic welfare and propagation organisation Perkim, had been actively involved in propagating the religion and facilitated the channeling of public funds to Islamic institutions.

“These are not the actions of a secular leader in a secular state. It’s very clear that his understanding of Islam’s position in the federation was far from what is secular in the conventional sense,” said Yusri.

On concerns that Najib’s statement would impact on the already controversial implementation of Islamic laws, Yusri said detractors of that process “pick and choose a few incidents” to paint a negative and exaggerated picture of the Islamisation process.

No real fear

“The implementation of Islam in Malaysia has always been autochthonous and informed by our own setting and circumstances. There is no real fear of Malaysia undergoing drastic changes on a daily basis and becoming a theocratic oppressive state,” he said.

That Islam as a religion informs and influences public policy in Malaysia does not automatically mean it is any less a modern state, said Yusri.

“An Islamic Malaysia is not the anti-thesis to our desire to be a successful modern state. On that contrary, it is one of the ingredients that can successfully bind the various elements together,” he said.

Yusri also said according to some scholars, Malaysia does fulfill the minimal requirements of an Islamic state in that the religion occupies a special position in the constitution, the Syariah family laws are in place, Muslims’ basic and external religious obligations are carried out, and public funds are used for Islam.

“It is not perfect, there’s a lot to improve upon, but just a Muslim is he who testifies he is so, we are also an Islamic state by the fulfilment of those basic requirements.”

The second is by Bishop Dr. Paul Tan Chee Ing, chairman of the Christian Federation of Malaysia, in a letter to
Malaysiakini
:

A constitutional democracy, not an Islamic state

Paul Tan Chee Ing

Jul 20, 07 5:25pm

The Christian Federation of Malaysia wishes to express its concern at the following remarks of Najib Abdul Razak in response to questions from reporters: “Islam is the official religion and Malaysia is an Islamic state, an Islamic state that respects the rights of the non-Muslims and we protect them.”

As he is the deputy prime minister of the country and for all Malaysians, he should not have made those remarks. The use of the term ‘Islamic state’ is unacceptable to Malaysians of other faiths, on three grounds.

Firstly, the term ‘Islamic state’ is not used in our Federal Constitution to describe the country. By citing Article 3(1) of our Federal Constitution to infer that Malaysia was meant to be an Islamic state runs contrary to the original intention of the Constitution. The Constitution does not provide for a theocratic state.

Secondly, it was never the intention of the social contract entered into at the independence of Malaysia that Malaysia would be an Islamic state. The Constitution was structured to guarantee the right of all religious communities to co-exist and relate with each other on an equal basis as citizens of one and a united country.

Thirdly, to-date, the non-Muslim coalition parties that make up the Barisan National government had never consented nor officially endorsed the use of the term ‘Islamic state’ to describe the country. The deputy prime minister’s statement must therefore be viewed as lacking official endorsement by the government of the day.

We appeal to the deputy prime minister to retract his aforesaid remarks and to the government to refrain from the use of the term ‘Islamic State’ in the description of Malaysia and instead to vigorously advocate the description of Malaysia as a secular constitutional democracy.

The third item is an Opinion piece
“Malaysia: A secular or Islamic state”
 by JUST President, Dr. Chandra Muzaffar in
Malaysiakini
:

Malaysia: A secular or Islamic state?

Chandra Muzaffar

Malaysia is not a secular state within the conventional use of the term. Neither is it an Islamic state in the classical sense.

It is not a secular state since the Malaysian state formulates policies and organises activities from the building of mosques and the administration of the Hajj, on the one hand, to the establishment of Islamic schools and the dissemination of Islamic awareness through public broadcasting channels, on the other, which demonstrate that it is actively involved in sustaining and strengthening the position of Islam in society.

Judicial pronouncements and political utterances from the past which suggest that Malaysia is a secular state do not in any way negate the fact that the state has functioned in a non-secular mode, especially in the last three decades.

Nonetheless, for the majority of contemporary Muslim jurists, Malaysia is not an Islamic state since its constitution does not state that governance is based upon the Quran and Sunnah (the way of the Prophet Muhammad). Neither is syariah the supreme law of the land. Hudud (the Islamic criminal code) is not in force anywhere in Malaysia. These are legal and political attributes of state which are found in almost all those countries that are acknowledged as ‘Islamic’.

More than the actual situation prevalent in Malaysia, there are perceptions of what a ‘secular state’ is, and what an ‘Islamic state’ will be, which have shaped the outlooks of both Muslims and non-Muslims in the country.

For a lot of Muslims, the term ‘secular’ connotes antipathy towards, or worse, rejection of, religion in the life of the nation. Since Islam encompasses all aspects of life, including government and politics, the idea of a ‘secular state’ has become anathema to them. Similarly, for many non-Muslims, an ‘Islamic state’ conjures up a frightening vision of Malay dominance reinforced by religious dogmatism. These perceptions – even if they are misconceived – carry tremendous weight and impact directly upon interethnic ties.

Go beyond labels

This is why it is unwise to insist that Malaysia is a secular state or an Islamic state. There is no need to do this. It will only widen the chasm between the communities. It will exacerbate ethnic tensions.

Why is it necessary to categorise Malaysia as a secular state or an Islamic state when the character of the Malaysian state, its guiding principles and goals, and its vision of the future, have already been spelt out with such lucidity and clarity in the three fundamental documents that were meant to be our signposts in the last 50 years? The most important of these – the Malaysian Constitution – embodies a dozen or so basic principles which tell us what this nation is. In a nutshell Malaysia means:

1.	A parliamentary form of government based upon the concept of one person, one vote

2.	A federal system of governance

3.	A constitutional monarchy

4.	The supremacy of the rule of law

5.	An independent judiciary

6.	Protection of fundamental liberties

7.	Malay as the national and official language

8.	The right to use and study other languages

9.	Islam as the religion of the Federation

10.	Recognition of the right of non-Muslims to practise their religions

11.	The special position of the Malays and other indigenous peoples

12.	The legitimate interests of the other communities

These principles enunciated in 1957 when we achieved Merdeka were reiterated in one form or other in the Rukunegara, the nation’s charter, in August 1970. It is significant that the first of the five principles of the Rukunegara is ‘Belief in God’.

Young Malaysians recite this and the other four principles in school every morning but what is not emphasised at all are the five goals of the Rukunegara – the goals of a united, just, democratic, liberal and progressive nation. Twenty-one years after the Rukunegara, its principles and goals were further elaborated in the nine strategic challenges of Vision 2020 which include the creation of a moral and ethical society.

Three guiding documents

If we reflected upon the Malaysian Constitution, the Rukunegara and Vision 2020, it would appear that they represent a trajectory in the evolution of the nation’s identity and character. It is as if the three documents embody the steady maturation of the Malaysian state and society.

It is important to emphasise at the same time that most of the principles and goals articulated by the three documents do not in any way contradict the universal values of the Quran and the Sunnah. Indeed, in certain respects, they seek to give meaning to some of the eternal concerns of the religion about justice, accountability and ethical conduct.

Likewise, those who subscribe to a secular vision of society which is not antagonistic to the Divine, would applaud the fact that the Constitution, the Rukunegara and Vision 2020 uphold such principles and goals. In other words, when we go beyond labels such as ‘secular’ and ‘Islamic’ and connect with the substance of our three principal documents we will discover that there is a degree of congruence between the two positions.

This is why as we observe the 50th year of our Merdeka, we should reiterate our trust and confidence in the three documents that speak to the spirit of the Malaysian people and their shared destiny. To embroil ourselves in the unending controversy about whether we are a secular state or an Islamic state is to forfeit our future.

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 22 July 2007, 11:55 am and is filed under
Constitution
,
Politics
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Any MCA Senator who dare to remind Najib/Hishammuddin the first 3 PMs rejected Islamic State?

Will  MCA Ministers demand in  Cabinet on Wednesday the  retraction  of   Internal Security Ministry Publications Control and Al-Quran Texts Unit  “ban” to allow for responsible debate of Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najiib Razak’s

“717 Declaration”
that  “Malaysia is Islamic state and was never a secular state” especially when it is undemocratic, unauthorized  and clear abuse of power?

It is shocking that in the past five days, MCA Ministers and leaders regard the “ban” as emanating from the most lawful and highest authority, while no one in the UMNO and UMNO Youth paid any heed to the so-called “ban” whatsoever — explaining the warning by the Umno Youth leader, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein to MCA leaders to “shut up” and stop making statements of Malaysia being a secular state as well speeches and statements by others including the Umno Youth deputy leader Khairy Jamaluddin and Umno Information chief, Tan Sri Muhammad Muhd Taib giving their distorted version of the Merdeka constitution and  “social contract”.

It is most unfortunate that the Dewan Rakyat is not in session when Najib made his highly controversial and divisive “717 Declaration” which had no constitutional basis whatsoever, or DAP MPs would have rectified the distortion and rewriting of constitutional history and developments in Parliament immediately.

The Dewan Negara is in session but no Senator whether from MCA or any other Barisan Nasional component party has the conviction or gumption to stand up in the Senate to question the legality of the “ban” and to  demand to know who had issued and authorized the directive but also to put on record the true history and constitutional basis of Malaysian nation-building.

Is there any Senator from MCA or any other Barisan Nasional component party who dares to stand up in Senate before it ends tomorrow evening to remind Najib and Hishammuddin and to put fully and squarely on record that the nation’s forefathers, including the first three Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein Onn rejected Malaysia as an Islamic state as they were fully committed to the fundamental nation-building principle of  Malaysia as a democratic, secular multi-religious nation with Islam as the official religion but not an Islamic state?

                This entry was posted on Monday, 23 July 2007, 2:59 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Appoint Minister with 24/7 responsibility for “all-out war against crime” – give him 6 months to show results or step down from Cabinet

Today’s media coverage  on the crime front has again illustrated how after up to 42% pay rise and increased allocations, the Royal Malaysian Police have failed its most fundamental duty — to keep Malaysians and visitors safe from crime and free from the fear of crime.

These are some of the crimes highlighted in today’s media:

	A 19-year-old girl student who went to a 24-hour clinic in Ipoh at 1.20 am on Sunday morning for treatment was abducted  by two parang-wielding robbers at the clinic and gang-raped;

(Sin Chew)

	A Miri woman tourist in Penang who was severely wounded when she suffered seven cuts when two armed men on a motor-bike targeted her for snatch-theft in Georgetown after supper at a hawker centre on Friday night at about 10 pm.
(Nanyang)

	An Australian businessman who makes frequent trips here becoming a snatch theft victim in Malacca  in his current visit —  at Taman Melaka Raya at around 8.30 pm on July 15.

(The Star)

 What has happened to the important recommendation of the Royal Police Commission two years ago for a sustained nation-wide drive against crime “until crime levels have reached a point considered no longer alarming”, with the  immediate target of “a minimum 20 per cent decrease in crimes” within the first 12 months after the Report?

In its report submitted in May 2005, the Royal Police Commission said it was completely unacceptable that the incidence of crime had increased dramatically in the previous few years from 121,176 cases in 1997 to 156,455 cases in 2004, an increase of 29 per cent –  seriously denting  Malaysia’s reputation as a safe country.

Today, however,  the crime situation is even  worse than before the Royal Police Commission Report, shooting up by 9.7 per cent from 156,455 cases in 2004 to 171,604 in 2005, and a further 15.7 per cent in 2006 to 198,622. If there is an annual 5.11 per cent increase for 2007 as recorded for the first six months of the year, then the total crime index would break the 200,000 mark and reach a record-high of 208,772 cases!

Malaysians have lost count of the number of times Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had declared an “all-out war against crime” since becoming Prime Minister 45 months ago and Home Minister eight years ago with direct responsibility for the police portfolio — not only with completely no results, but with  the opposite result of escalation of the crime wave.

This has proved to be one of Abdullah’s great failures —  a responsibility which the Cabinet must fully share in the transformation  of Malaysia from a safe country to a nation where crime and fear of crime have come to haunt and hound the lives of Malaysians, tourists and investors.

I call on the Cabinet to be serious about the problem of crime and fear of crime and assume full political responsibility to ensure that the many promises of the Prime Minister for an “all-out war against crime” is carried out.

The biggest weakness today is no one can be held politically responsible for the success or failure of the police to fight crime and eradicate the fear of crime.

The Cabinet should appoint one Minister to be specially in charge of an “all-out war against crime”, who is 24/7 responsible to end the menace of crime and fear of crime in the country and  who must bear full political responsibility inside and outside Parliament for the success or failure of the police in  this campaign.

He should be given six months to begin to show results, failing which he should be removed not only from this responsibility but also from the Cabinet.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 23 July 2007, 1:16 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Axe finally coming down in Malaysian cyberspace – after Raja Petra, who’s next?

Is the axe finally coming down in the Malaysian cyberspace after the four-day arrest of Nathaniel Tan with the high-level Umno police report against  Raja Petra Raja Kamaruddin, the  webmaster of the popular political website,
Malaysia Today
?

In his article “
A game of cat and mouse”
on his website yesterday, Raja Petra had floated the theory put to him by “people in the intelligence community” that Sabah Chief Minister Musa Aman and Inspector-General of Police Musa Hassan had met Prime Minister  Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi who is currently in Australia to “discuss
Malaysia Today
, plus get Pak Lah’s blessing and permission to close
Malaysia Today
 down and arrest me” in view of the “damage
Malaysia Today
has inflicted on the image of Sabah, the Royal Malaysian Police, and Pak Lah personally”.

Are the instruments of repression of the past regime, which had never been dismantled, being re-activated against criticism, dissent and expose of abuses of power and corrupt practices in the run-up to the coming general election?

Criminal law should not be abused to arrest, intimidate and silence any one, including  Raja Petra for his many exposes against top police and political leaders who should avail themselves of the right and remedy to institute civil proceedings of defamation to vindicate their reputation and clear their name if Raja Petra is guilty of making baseless allegations against them.

I call on the Prime Minister to stand firm against opening the floodgates to allow criminal laws to be  abused for personal, political or partisan purposes.

Otherwise, the question uppermost in the minds of Malaysians will be “After Raja Petra, who’s next?”

This is Malaysiakini’s story on Umno’s police report against Raja Petra:

Umno lodges report against Malaysia Today

Jul 23, 07 2:46pm

Umno has filed a police report against political website Malaysia Today for allegedly publishing disparaging remarks against the King and Islam.

The report was filed at the Dang Wangi police station by Umno information chief Muhammad Muhammad Taib this afternoon. He was accompanied by some 30 people.

When contacted, Dang Wangi district police chief ACP Mohamad Zulkarnain Abdul Rahman confirmed that a report was lodged.

“We will investigate the matter,” he said.

Taib told reporters later that the report was regarding remarks published on the website on July 11 and several other articles.

He claimed that the postings and articles were disrespectful to the King and Islam. According to him, they had the potential to create unrest in the country and strike fear in the people.

“The reports contain criminal elements which could incite anyone and cause fear. Maybe these people (bloggers) had forgotten that Malaysia is a country with many sensitivities,” he said.

Taib said such postings and articles could have a negative influence on the younger generation and urged for the police to take swift action.

Conspiracy theory

In an article published on Malaysia Today, Raja Petra wrote on the possibility of efforts being mounted to close his website down and have him arrested.

In the article titled ‘A game of cat and mouse’, he claimed that the “intelligence community” informed him that Sabah Chief Minister Musa Aman and Inspector-General of Police Musa Hassan had met Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in Australia recently to discuss this matter.

Malaysia Today had published numerous articles containing allegations of corruption and abuse of power against the chief minister and police chief, which had since been denied.

The website had also been highly critical of the prime minister and his son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin, who is also Umno Youth deputy chief.

Meanwhile, Raja Petra, when contacted later, declined to comment on the report.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 23 July 2007, 4:19 pm and is filed under
Human Rights
,
IT
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Another Malaysian Messenger in the Firing Line

By Farish A. Noor

A word, once uttered, can seldom be withdrawn. This is true for most of us and particularly true for politicians who forget that we now live in an age of modern communications technology where every sentence, every utterance, even every burp, hiccup and indiscreet bodily emission will be recorded for posterity.

What has now become a maxim of politics was amply demonstrated recently by the remarks of the Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, Najib Tun Razak, who claimed during a press conference in Kuala Lumpur that Malaysia is an ‘Islamic state’ that has ‘never been affiliated’ to a secular position and that that Malaysia’s development ‘has been driven by our adherence to the fundamentals of Islam’. (Bernama, 17 July 2007) Needless to say, the Deputy Prime Minister’s remarks were a cause of concern for many Malaysians who — for the past fifty years or so — have been living under the assumption that the country was a constitutional democracy and not a theocratic state.

In due course protests issued from all quarters, ranging from the Malaysian urban liberal elite to the leaders of the mainly non-Malay non-Muslim parties of the country; demanding clarification on the issue and a re-statement of the fundamentally secular basis of Malaysia’s politics. As public frustration increased, the Malaysian government reacted as it is wont to do. While the Malaysian Prime Minister is on holiday in Australia, the government issued a blanket media ban on all discussion of the matter, on the grounds that it can only lead to even more public anger and misunderstanding between the racial and religious communities of the country; despite the fact that the source of the misunderstanding and discomfort was the Deputy Prime Minister’s remarks in the first place.

Notwithstanding the overt ban on media discussion of the Islamic state issue, however, Malaysia’s internet community has been active in keeping the question alive and well on dozens of websites and blogs all over the country. Indeed as developments over the past few years have shown, it is the internet where most of the really interesting and meaningful political discussions have been and are taking place.

The Malaysian authorities have been decidedly apprehensive about the role that the internet can play in deciding the tone and tenor of Malaysian politics, and for this reason numerous conservative politicians of the ruling National Front coalition have been calling for a curb on the activities of bloggers and those who post their ideas in cyberspace. The accusation most often levelled against them being that they spread ‘lies’ against the state and tarnish the image of the leaders of the country; a charge that resonates well in some other repressive states where dissent is likewise treated as a security threat, such as North Korea and China.

Just a week ago a Malaysian blogger — Nathaniel Tan — was arrested and taken in for questioning by the police due to some postings related to allegations of corruption against politicians in the country. Now that a blanket ban has been used to close the forum of public debate on the Islamic state issue, worries have been raised about whether this marks yet another attempt to clamp down on cyberspace and silence the bloggers and cyber-writers.

Following the arrest and subsequent release of Nathaniel Tan, another prominent Malaysian cyber-writer, Raja Petra Kamarudin, who runs the hugely popular www.Malaysia-today.net site has had a police report filed against him by Muhammad Taib, former Chief Minister and member of the ruling UMNO party. The UMNO leader claims that Raja Petra, through his articles and postings on Malaysia-today.net had insulted the king, degraded Islam and incited hatred in the country.

As yet it is not known which of Raja Petra’s postings are said to have been insulting to King and country, though he dismisses the accusations as being baseless. According to Petra: ‘This has nothing to do with allegations about misrepresenting Islam, though such an accusation is the most convenient since when I write about religion I am expressing my personal opinions which are subjective and can therefore be discussed. But what really upsets them are my exposes on corruption in the country, which have been backed up with documents I have posted on the site. How can they refute that?’

Indeed, Raja Petra’s site has been receiving hundreds of thousands of hits daily precisely because of his exposes on corruption among politicians, businessmen, Malaysian criminal networks as well as the Malaysian police force; the last of which has taken a battering over the years due to a series of scandals and exposes related to cases of police brutality, deaths in custody and of course the now-infamous beating of the former Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia Anwar Ibrahim.

Activists, journalists and legal experts are now worried about what this may hold for the future, for the arrest of Nathaniel Tan and the police report against Raja Petra would suggest that moves are being made to silence the messengers on the internet. In the words of prominent Malaysian lawyer Malik Imtiaz: ‘it would be regrettable if this latest action is part of a wider campaign to close down the public domain of speech and discussion on crucial matters such as Malaysia’s constitution and the question of whether Malaysia is an Islamic state.’

In the midst of this, the Malaysian government’s reaction has been one of denial and retaliation instead. The country’s state-controlled TV channel RTM1 featured an editorial piece condemning local Malaysian newspapers that ’cause trouble’ by raising sensitive issues on race and religion; while leaders of the ruling UMNO party continue to mouth a rhetoric of ethno-nationalism that is replete with communalist sentiments. The contradictions are clear, as is the paralysis of a government whose leader is on holiday while the messengers remain in the firing line.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 24 July 2007, 9:26 am and is filed under
Farish Noor
,
Human Rights
,
IT
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Can I sue the Malaysian goverment?

by Damien Thanam

Two weeks ago I heard from TV3 news and read in the papers how close we (Malaysia) are to the China and to prove this diplomatic brotherhood, the People’s Republic of China is ready to allow one of its state run bank to loan a generous RM850 million for the construction of the 2nd Penang Bridge..

It was a proud moment for the Chief Minister of Penang & our top leaders as they are very sure that they have secured that amount from the soon-to-be No. 1 country in the world if China’s economic growth is steady in its current up-trend momentum.

But the people of Malaysia will be in-debt with China for a long period with the announced so-called generous interest rate that is being given for this loan. As a Malaysian, I would like to ask my government in particular its fund managers i.e Prime Minister who is also the Finance Minister, Deputy Prime Minister, the Second Finance Minister, the Governor of Bank Negara and Inspector General of Audit –

*Why did the government waste RM400 million (actual amount unknown) for nothing to pay the developer of Gerbang Perdana after scrapping a project that was nearing completion?

*Is the government going pay an estimated RM500 million to the contractors of the scrapped incinerator plant in Broga too?

The above two settlements alone could avoid the Penang Bridge loan from China & with an additional RM50 million to be used to upgrade environmentally-friendly public transportation in the Northern region.

Wasn’t the cost of building the 2nd Penang Bridge included in 9th Malaysia plan, if yes, then why is the goverment taking a loan to build it? If not, why wasn’t it?

The government has also awarded (as far as I know) a USD7 billion plus, 300 kilometres oil-and-gas pipeline project to a company with a paid up capital of RM100,000.00 and posted a loss of 150% more than what the company was shown to be paid up for!

What will happen if the pipeline project gets scrapped, will Malaysia have to pay USD3.5 billion to this company for a project that it has not even laid a single brick for?

The fund managers of this country have shown that they are not in anyway qualified or worst, are stealing from the funds!!

I would like to know as a Malaysian, can I sue these fund managers or government of mine for mismanaging the income of this country and not being able to provide a decent explanation for the millions being paid out for stupid management & planning!!

Damien Thanam

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 24 July 2007, 2:49 pm and is filed under
Good Governance
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Crime wave in Ipoh

The crime wave  and the fear of crime in Ipoh as elsewhere in the country  – escalating and not tapering off, as illustrated by the following report:

NST Online

2007/07/24

Teenager at clinic robbed and raped

By : P. Chandra Sagaran

IPOH: She was sick and went to a clinic at 2am. There, she was kidnapped by two parang-wielding men who took her on a terror ride and then raped her.

The teenager was later abandoned in Tanjung Malim, about 140km away.

City police chief ACP Jalaludin Ibrahim said the girl had gone to the clinic in Ipoh Garden on Saturday with a friend.

While waiting to be treated, two men entered the clinic and held up the two friends and a nurse, robbing the clinic of RM1,900 and the women of two handphones.

“The men then grabbed the victim and pushed her into a BMW 3 series car parked outside the clinic.

“The girl was taken on a terror ride before being raped. She was abandoned at 6.30am in Tanjung Malim,” said Jala- ludin.

She later sought help from passers-by and lodged a report. She was sent to the Tanjung Malim Hospital for a medical examination.

Jalaludin yesterday released the photofits of two men in their 20s whom they believe can assist in investigations.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 24 July 2007, 10:23 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Ipoh Timor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Will police be equally diligent to investigate a report against Najib under Sedition Act for his “717 Declaration”?

Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said the government has not made a “special decision” to
clamp down on bloggers
 but advised Malaysians not to break any laws.

Referring to the police report lodged by Umno Information Chief  Tan Sri Muhammad Muhammad Taib against the
Malaysia Today
news portal, Najib said it was up to the authorities to investigate whether any law had been contravened.

Najib may be technically right that the government has not made any such decision for a crackdown on bloggers, but clearly the Umno leadership has made such a decision which explains why the report against
Malaysia Today
 is in the name of the Umno Information Chief, one of the top Umno leaders.

When the Umno leadership decides, who dares to say that the government has not decided?

If Umno has made a decision to crack down on the bloggers, who will believe that the government has not made a similar decision although the non-Umno Cabinet Ministers and leaders may be completely in the dark about the matter?

When a lowly officer from the  Internal Security Ministry Publications Control and Al-Quran Texts Unit can unilaterally and arbitrarily issue a directive to ban media reporting of responses to Najib’s
“717 Declaration”
 which affects only MCA and non-Umno Ministers and leaders, what further proof is needed that on the 50th Merdeka anniversary of the nation, the Barisan Nasional “power-sharing” concept is at its most attenuated form in the nation’s history!

After his report against
Malaysia Today
 and its webmaster, Raja Petra Kamaruddin,
Muhammad
 said:  “May be they (
Malaysia Today
) forget that there are many sensitivities in this country. Such people want to destroy the peace in the country.”

Will the authorities  be as diligent to investigate if a report is lodged that Najib had contravened the Sedition Act for his
“717 declaration”
  that Malaysia is an Islamic state and had never been a secular state, jettisoning the Merdeka social contract which had been upheld by the first three Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein  and trampling on the sensitivities of Malaysians?

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Dr.
Maximus Ongkili
, said yesterday that the Parliamentary Select Committee on National Unity and National Service will formulate a code of ethics to stop politicians from using racial issues for political mileage.  Ongkili is chairman of the committee.

Is Ongkili prepared to propose that the Code should specify examples of racial or sensitive issues which undermine national unity and multi-ethnic relations — such as  the highly controversial and divisive
“717 Declaration”
 of Najib?

This is because  Najib’s declaration  that Malaysia is an Islamic state driven by Islamic fundamentals and is not and had never been a secular state is not only without constitutional basis but highly sensitive  as it flies in the face of the 1957 social contract and the life-works of the first three Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein Onn to build a secular Malaysia with Islam as the official religion.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 24 July 2007, 1:44 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Police
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Malaysian Parliament now the world’s No. 1 anti-bloggers Parliament?

Less than 24 hours of an
assurance
by the Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak that  the government has not made a “special decision” to clamp down on bloggers, two pronouncements were made contradicting it and heralding such a  clampdown.

One was made by Najib himself and the other by the “de facto”  Law Minister, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz who declared a war against bloggers in the last sitting of Senate yesterday during the winding up of the debate on the Electronic Government Activities Bill 2007.

Declaring that
“The time for talk is over, now is the time to act”
, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department  Nazri said the government would be taking legal action against bloggers who flagrantly belittled Islam or the Yang di Pertuan Agong.

He said that apart from the three laws that could be used against the bloggers, the Internal Security Act, Sedition Act and Section 121b of the Penal Code, the government was also looking at formulating new laws allowing it to monitor and act against offending bloggers in areas not provided by these legislation.

Speaking at the Malaysian Press Institute Press Awards Night,
Najib
said the government was deeply troubled by the growth of “irresponsible” alternative media.

It is sad that the Senate yesterday was turned into an anti-bloggers forum  marking an administration which is unable to live up to the 2004  general election pledge of an open, accountable and transparent governance.

Why was there not a single  Senator yesterday to stand  up to caution restraint, moderation, reason and sanity  instead of allowing the blogging bashing to run full steam, with the Umno Information chief, Tan Sri Muhammad Muhammad Taib who had lodged a police report against Raja Petra Kamaruddin, webmaster of the Malaysia Today news portal, singing an anti-bloggers duet with Nazri?

Has the Malaysian Parliament become the world’s No. 1 anti-bloggers Parliament?

Apart from taking action against bloggers for  flagrantly belittling  Islam or the Yang di Pertuan Agong, what are the other “offences” which would be regarded as fair play for the blogging clampdown?

The anti-bloggers invectives by Umno leaders suffer from a serious credibility problem as to their real motives, as

	firstly,  there is the question whether there is any basis for Muhammad’s police report that Malaysia Today had been guilty of belittling Islam and the Yang di Pertuan Agong; and

	secondly, whether this was just an excuse for Umno leaders to launch a crackdown against Raja Petra and Malaysia Today  because of their  series of  exposes of abuses of power and corruption implicating high-level leaders in Umno, Barisan Nasional, the police and the public service.

As the  series of exposes of abuses of power and corruption implicating high-level leaders in Umno, Barisan Nasional, the police and the public service had never been taken seriously by the government, whether by way of a full public investigation or through defamation suits by the aggrieved individuals,  the grave credibility question about the ulterior motive and real agenda of  the  crackdown on Raja Petra and Malaysia Today must be answered satisfactory  by the powers-that-be.

This is the first question the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi must answer on his return to his duties on Friday from his private holidays in Australia.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 25 July 2007, 11:30 am and is filed under
Human Rights
,
IT
,
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


8-hr questioning of RPK – Police nothing better to do?

Totally incredible!  Webmaster of popular news portal Malaysia Today, Raja Petra Kamaruddin questioned for eight hours by the police yesterday but not a single question about the articles that he had written and all about the comments posted on the blogs!

The question everybody is asking  is: Hasn’t the Police more important things to do than to harass Raja Petra and bloggers like reducing crime and eradicating the fear of crime — or investigate Raja Petra’s detailed allegations in his many articles  about power abuses and high-level corruption by political leaders and public officials?

Is the Police an independent and professional service to uphold law and order to catch criminals without fear of favour  including the high-and-mighty in politics and government or is it just an instrument of the powers-that-be to carry out its dirty work to victimize and harass critics and dissent?

At a time when public confidence have been greatly shaken by the failure of the police to control crime or to eradicate the fear of crime which have spiraled out of control in  the country, the spectacle of the police wasting scarce resources to harass Raja Petra and bloggers while staying scrupulously clear of showing any interest in Raja Petra’s many serious allegations of corruption in high public places is not calculated to enhance the police’s public standing or image.

Can the Prime Minister, the Cabinet, the Police, the Anti-Corruption Agency and the Attorney-General explain why no investigation whatsoever had been launched into the myriad of corruption allegations on the Malaysia Today news portal, which would have justified the opening of  scores or even hundreds of corruption files?

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 26 July 2007, 1:37 pm and is filed under
Human Rights
,
IT
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Have 3 generations of Malaysians been living under a lie in the past 50 years?

When an emergency meeting of the Barisan Nasional leaders was held yesterday, the rumour mills worked overtime from speculation about the future of the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to a very imminent general election even with dates about dissolution (August 2, 2007) and polling (August 17, 2007).

I did not give credence to both as the subject which I immediately thought of was the “717 Declaration” of Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak that Malaysia is an Islamic state and not and had never been a secular state, which he made on July 17, 2007.

I was reminded of the earlier “929 Declaration” by the then Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at the Gerakan national delegates conference on Sept. 29, 2001 that Malaysia was an Islamic state.

Although Mahathir’s unilateral, arbitrary and unconstitutional declaration received instant endorsement by two top Barisan Nasional leaders present at the function, namely Datuk Seri Dr. Lim Keng Yaik (then Gerakan President) and Datuk Seri Dr. Ling Liong Sik (then MCA President), an emergency meeting of the Barisan Nasional Supreme Council had to  be convened within a week on Oct. 5, 2001 as questions were raised as to how such an abandonment of a  fundamental cornerstone of Malaysian nation-building could be made without  proper consultation and full  mandate of the leadership and membership of all the Barisan Nasional component parties as well as the Malaysian public.

What happened yesterday was a replay of the Barisan Nasional Supreme Council emergency meeting to give endorsement to the unilateral, arbitrary and unconstitutional “929 Declaration” of Mahathir — this time, to bring everyone in Barisan Nasional into line to give unquestioned support to  Najib’s equally unilateral, arbitrary and unconstitutional “717 Declaration”.

Malaysiakini
reported that at the Barisan Nasional meeting yesterday, Gerakan acting president Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon, who was attending a Barisan Nasional meeting for the first time after taking over the Gerakan leadership  from Keng Yaik on April 18, expressed opposition to the notion  of Malaysia being deemed an Islamic State.

This was after Najib sought the input from all the Barisan Nasional leaders on his “717 Declaration”. However, Najib ended the discussion with the directive that there should not be any debate or public discussion on the subject and to “leave the matter as it stands”.

How serious was Tsu Koon’s  objection  to Najib’s “717 Declaration” when he had given full support to Mahathir’s “929 Declaration” six years ago?  This becomes a bigger question when Tsu Koon, together with MCA and other non-Umno BN leaders agreed and  allowed Najib to impose a total clampdown on any questioning of his “717 declaration”, whether in the mainstream or alternative media — clearly placing party and individual interests above national interests.

With Malaysia preparing to celebrate our 50th Merdeka anniversary, there is one  crucial  and critical question about nation-building we must ask ourselves   – Have  three generations of Malaysians been living under  a lie  in the past 50 years that Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion when it was all along an Islamic State?

Fifty years ago, there had been no doubt whatsoever as to what had been agreed by the major communities   in the  Merdeka “social contract” on the attainment of independent nationhood in 1957 about Malaya and then Malaysia being a secular state with Islam as the official religion but not an Islamic state.

The first three Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein were on public record that the nation was always conceived as a secular state with Islam as the official religion but never as an Islamic State.

This was clearly spelt out in the Alliance Memorandum which was quoted by the Reid Commission Report. Those in the 1956 Alliance Committee which formulated this memorandum were Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak, Tun Ismail, Tun H.S. Lee, Tun Leong Yew Loh, Tun Ong Yoke Lin, Tun Tan Siew Sin, Tun Lim Chong Eu and Tun Sambanthan.

Tun Omar Ong Yoke Lin, who just celebrated his 90th birthday, and Tun Lim Chong Eu are the two surviving members who drafted the Alliance memorandum to the Reid Commission  on Sept. 27, 1956, which said:

 “The religion of Malaya shall be Islam. The observance of this principle shall not impose any disability on non-Muslims professing and practicing their own religion, and shall not imply the state is not a secular state.”

Are both of them prepared to come forward to reaffirm that Malaya and Malaysia had been  conceived as a secular state with Islam as the official religion and never as an Islamic State?

What has happened in the past 50 years that what was crystal-clear and indisputable about the nation being a secular state with Islam as the official religion could almost overnight be  totally jettisoned with the “929 declaration” by Mahathir and now the “717 declaration” by Najib?

Why had Najib and the Umno Youth leader Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hashim repudiated their father’s lifework to create a secular Malaysia with Islam as the official religion and staking out a position both Tun Razak and Tun Hussein would have deplored — that Malaysia is an Islamic state?

There are those who felt that the unilateral, arbitrary and unconstitutional jettisoning of the cornerstones of nation-building has made the 50th Merdeka anniversary celebrations meaningless and there is  nothing to celebrate.

I do not agree. The 50th Merdeka anniversary is an occasion which belongs to all Malaysians and not to  any single political party or even to  the government of the day. For this reason, all Malaysians should commemorate it  and in  the present circumstances, there is no more meaningful way to commemorate the 50th Merdeka anniversary than for Malaysians to reaffirm the Merdeka social contract that Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and to reject the notion of Malaysia as an Islamic state.

We must debunk fallacies and falsehoods about the campaign to uphold the Merdeka social contract for a secular Malaysia.  There is the allegation that supporting a secular Malaysia is being anti-Islam and even anti-religion.  This is because the word “secular” has been corrupted to mean “anti-Islam”, “anti-religion” atheist or godless.

“Secular” does not mean anti-religion, or the Malaysian Consultative Council for Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikkism and Taoism  (MCCBCHTS) would not have defended a secular Malaysia.

“Secular” does not mean anti-Islam as borne out by a research finding in Indonesia last year that  the majority of Indonesians, over 90 per cent of whom are Muslims, believe a secular state is more suitable for the country than an Islamic or Western-style liberal system.

Let us all ponder whether three generations of Malaysians have been living under a lie that ours is a secular state with Islam as the official religion when we had always been an Islamic State as claimed by Mahathir’s “929 Declaration” and Najib’s “717 Declaration”.

If three generations of Malaysians had not been living under a lie, then we must reclaim our heritage and reaffirm the Merdeka social contract that Malaysia had always been conceived as a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic state.

Any attempt to transform  Malaysia into  an Islamic state cannot be done by surreptitious means by way of unilateral, arbitrary and unconstitutional declarations whether by Mahathir or Najib, but must be  through the consent of all political parties and Malaysians.

Let Umno and Barisan Nasional put Mahathir’s 929 declaration” and Najib’s “717 declaration” that Malaysia is an Islamic state and not and never had been an secular state to a national referendum to ascertain whether they could secure popular endorsement from Malaysians, regardless of race, religion or territory.

(Speech at the DAP forum
“An Islamic State after 50 years?”
 at the KL Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall on Wednesday, July 25, 2007 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 26 July 2007, 11:50 am and is filed under
Constitution
,
Politics
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Parliamentary Roundtable – reaffirm Malaysia a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic State

A Parliamentary Roundtable to reaffirm the  Merdeka social contract and Malaysia Agreement that Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic State will be held in Parliament on Friday, August 10, 2007 at 10 am.

All political parties, professional and civic organizations, NGOs and NGIs are invited to the parliamentary roundtable to give special meaning and significance to the 50th Merdeka anniversary celebrations.

For over four decades in the history of nation, there had been no doubt or question whatsoever, whether in Parliament, Cabinet, government or outside about the secular basis of Malaysia as spelt out by the  Merdeka social contract reached by the forefathers of the major communities on the attainment of independence in 1957 and  the Malaysia Agreement which brought Sabah and Sarawak into the federation in 1963.

That fundamental nation-building cornerstone of  Malaysia conceived as a secular state with Islam as the official religion, is not only to be found in the constitutional documents and the highest judicial pronouncements of the land, it also represented the life-work and commitment of the first three Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein.

However, in the past few years, the secular basis of Malaysian nation-building has come under repeated challenge.

On the occasion of the 50th Merdeka anniversary, the time has come for all Malaysians to reclaim their national legacy and heritage by reaffirming the Merdeka social contract and Malaysia Agreement that Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic State.

Or have the fundamental basis of Malaysian nation-building suffered such a serious erosion that we cannot find sufficient Malaysians, whether NGOs or NGIs, to reaffirm the Merdeka social contract and Malaysia Agreement that Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic State.

Organisations, NGOs and NGIs, interested in attending the Parliamentary Roundtable, plse contact  and register with Lau Weng San, 016-3231563.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 27 July 2007, 3:01 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Peer-moderated blog

This blog will adopt peer-moderation for comments. As word filters and other measures are not bombproof, on the odd occasion malicious comments can still slip through. You are invited to be the blog’s final line of defence against possible sabotage by malicious comments. If you spot a comment that you feel is inappropriate, please send an email to
[email protected]
  pointing out which comment may be offensive. Let’s work as a team. Thanks.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 27 July 2007, 9:27 am 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.


RM27m cop, RM34m cop and corruption allegations against top cops – Is IGP Musa prepared for independent inquiry?

Today’s
New Straits Times
report

“ACA probes cop with RM27m assets”

has refocused public attention on corruption in the police force and raised the question whether the Royal Police Commission’s three key recommendations that the nation should have an  efficient and professional world-class police service to reduce crime, eradicate corruption and respect human rights have made any appreciable progress in the past two years.

According to the
NST
,  a senior police officer at Bukit Aman is being investigated by the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA)  for abuse of power and failing to declare RM27 million worth of assets.

It is understood that the officer is also a company  director and the RM27 million fortune was amassed illegally.

The
NST
 report said:

Sources familiar with the case said ACA officers from Putrajaya took a statement from the officer at his office yesterday.

“The officer, who is in his 50s, is a director of a company which was awarded a project in April to develop an area in Lahad Datu,” a source said.

“Several villagers voiced their opposition to the project when the company staff went to the area to do surveying work.

“The police officer allegedly ordered the villagers to be arrested,” the source added.

The ACA started its investigation following an anonymous telephone call about two weeks ago.

Malaysians are reminded of the Royal Police  Commission report on police corruption:

“The public believes that police personnel are vulnerable and this encourages the public to offer bribes in order to avoid any inconvenience, legal action or paying heavier fines.”

The public are also reminded of the  case of the “RM34 million” senior police officer mentioned in  the Royal Police Commission Report, which said:

“A retired police officer alleged that corruption was rampant within PDRM. He claimed that many officers had assets several times over their known income.  According to the complainant, it was common knowledge that a particular senior officer made an asset declaration amounting to RM34 million and he was surprised that no action was seen to have been taken.”

(p. 278)

Up to now there has been no satisfactory explanation and accounting of this case, although it had been subsequently reported that the assets  declared by the senior officer concerned was RM4 million and not RM34 million.

What is of concern about the latest report of the “RM27 million” senior cop is a picture that nothing substantive had taken place to create a culture of integrity and zero-tolerance for corruption in the police force, one of the three main police objectives recommended by the Royal Police Commission Report.

Is the “RM27 million” cop reported by the NST  the first case of ACA probe of police officers with assets several times over their known income in the past two years after the Royal Police Commission Report calling for priority for campaign  to wipe out corruption in the PDRM?

Although the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Musa Hassan made a highly-publicised statement in December last year warning policemen against  living beyond their means, his credibility  suffered a huge dent when nothing was  done with regard to the very serious allegations of corruption made against the nation’s top cops, including Musa, in articles by Raja Petra Kamaruddin in the news portal, Malaysia Today.

Instead, Raja Petra was subjected to harassment and victimization with the eight-hour police questioning two days ago, not on what he wrote, in particular the various allegations and exposes of abuses of power and corruption involving high-profile political, police and government officials, but for comments left by visitors.

Musa and the PDRM  must get their act together to demonstrate that they are fully committed to the National Integrity Plan and are prepared  to set a good  example of probity  to restore public confidence in an incorruptible police service by welcoming an independent inquiry into all  serious allegations of corruption against top cops.

Alternatively, he should invite the Parliamentary Select Committee on Integrity to conduct a full probe into all the allegations of corruption and abuses of power  which had been made against him and other top police cops, to demonstrate that they have nothing to hide.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 27 July 2007, 11:15 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Another brutal crime in Ipoh

Another brutal crime in Ipoh — 22-year-old hairstylist whose semi-naked body was found sprawled at her salon in Taman Perpaduan, Tambun, Ipoh on Friday.

Sunday Star
 yesterday reported:

The body of Ooi Choo Lee was discovered by her father Ooi Ah Hee, 57, when he went to check on her after she repeatedly failed to answer his phone calls.

Choo Lee was found sprawled in the toilet of the shop at about 4am yesterday.

She had apparently been strangled and was believed to have been raped.

Ah Hee said he had rushed from Sungkai, about 120km away, where he worked, to check on Choo Lee.

“I thought she was at the supermarket when she didn’t answer the first time at 8pm (Thursday).

“But when there was still no answer much later, I decided to go to Ipoh.

“She had always been told to keep her phone turned on,” he told reporters at the Ipoh Hospital mortuary here.

Choo Lee was from Sungai Petani who moved to Ipoh two years ago.

Only last week, a teenager was kidnapped, robbed and raped in Ipoh by two parang-wielding men when she went to a 24-hour clinic at 2 am for treatment.

The crime wave and the spiraling fear of crime in Ipoh, as elsewhere in the country, must be checked and eradicated to make the streets, public places and homes safe again.  This must be the No. 1 national agenda — a safe Ipoh and a safe Malaysia for the people, tourists and investors!

The Parliamentary Caucus on Human Rights and Good Governance should hold its fourth public hearing on “Fight Rising Crime” in Ipoh to raise greater  parliamentary, police and public consciousness on the grave problem of crime and public safety in Ipoh. I will discuss with the Parliamentary Caucus Chairman and other Committee members to schedule  such a public hearing.

                This entry was posted on Monday, 30 July 2007, 2:53 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Ipoh Timor
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Is Abdullah strictly liable for seditious postings on PMO website?

“Watch your blogs, warns PM”
  was the headline of
Sunday Star
on the warning by the  Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in Kuantan on Saturday that bloggers are not immune from the law, whether their websites are hosted overseas or otherwise.

Does this warning apply to the Prime Minister himself, in view of
disclosures
 on the blogosphere that the Prime Minister’s official  website had hosted a very incendiary and seditious article inciting racial hatred, ill-will and animosity among the Malays and Chinese in the country?

This article, written in Bahasa Malaysia and purported to be by one
“DR. NG SENG”
, clearly an “agent provocateur” camouflaging as a Chinese,  had been on the Prime Minister’s Office  website for more than 20  months since Nov. 14, 2005 on the “ucapan  takziah” for the late Datin Paduka Seri Endon Mahmood archive.

Blogger
Ronnie Liu
will be lodging a police report on the seditious and inflammatory “DR. NG SENG” article today.

Although the seditious article, together with the entire “ucapan takziah” archive, has been removed from the Prime Minister’s Office website this morning, the fact remains that the seditious article had been publicly available on the website for over 20 months and a grave crime had been perpetrated.

Who must be held responsible for the seditious article on the official website of the Prime Minister?

Is Abdullah strictly liable for seditious postings on the Prime Minister’s Office website to the extent that he could be charged and tried for sedition?

This would appear to be the implication from the  comments of Abdullah, who appears to be declaring  the principle of strict liability for bloggers and website principals.  Is this the position of the Prime Minister and the government?

Will the Police haul up  Abdullah to record  a statement following Ronnie’s police report?  I am not suggesting that Abdullah should be arrested, charged and tried in court for the seditious “DR. NG SENG” article on the website of the Prime Minister’s Office, although these  would be the logical results  if under the law there is the principle of strict liability for the seditious materials which are posted on the official website of the Prime Minister’s Office.

Apart from the Prime Minister,  is there anybody else who should be held  liable under the principle of strict liability which seems to have found favour with the  Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister, Cabinet Ministers and Umno leaders  who have made public statements in the current “blog war” between Umno and  Raja Petra Kamaruddin’s Malaysia Today news portal.

Or shouldn’t there be different degrees of responsibility between articles posted by the webmaster and principal of the blogs and websites, and comments left by visitors — with a mechanism allowing inflammatory and seditious comments to be removed when they are brought to the attention of the webmaster/principal  so as not to dampen the robustness and vibrancy of Malaysian blogosphere?

Or will Ronnie’s police report just be ignored completely — in contrast to the police report of the Umno Information chief, Tan Sri Muhammad Muhammad Taib against Raja Petra, which saw  the police swinging into action within 48 hours — subjecting Raja Petra to eight hours of questioning without asking a single question about his articles?

                This entry was posted on Monday, 30 July 2007, 1:10 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
IT
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Welcome Jeff Ooi to DAP  – let it be a catalyst for more bloggers to take political stand

Welcome, Jeff Ooi, Malaysia’s pre-eminent blogger to DAP and Malaysian politics!

Jeff has created waves in the Malaysian blogosphere. We await a tsunami from him in the political arena.

Jeff’s statement of the reasons for joining  the DAP is an eloquent expression of patriotism of a Malaysian, illustrating that patriotism is an integral part of all Malaysians and not the monopoly only of those who hold office or high positions. This makes the 50th Merdeka anniversary particularly significant.

Recently, one
political upstart
said:

“It is the law of the jungle and we need to take action against one ‘monkey’.

“I think the other ‘monkeys’ will also get scared.

“They are not above the law.”

This upstart was referring to Malaysian blogs.  Apart from his  loyal following, he will not find much agreement from bloggers.

It is regrettable to see the use of such  derogatory language and the debasement in the standard of public discourse.

Many however will agree if his  description is applied to public and political life, especially with regard to corruption, crime and public accountability and transparency where the rule of law appears to have been replaced by the law  of the jungle.

There will also  be considerable agreement as to the identity of such “monkeys” in the law of the jungle of public life and politics.

But will any action be taken against one “monkey” so that the other “monkeys” will also get scared and the country can begin to see the restoration of integrity, efficiency and effectiveness in public and political life?

I do not want to use the “monkey” language but this will be one of the challenges of Jeff Ooi, together with others in the political arena, to fight back the creeping law of the jungle and to restore the rule of law in Malaysian political and public life.

It has been said that Jeff Ooi’s decision to join the Opposition is a loss to blogging.

It should  not be so. It should be a gain to both  politics and blogging in Malaysia, enriching both.

I will like to see more politicians taking  up blogging and more bloggers entering politics.

After all, blogging particularly socio-political blogging  is not an end by itself but a means to an end and a time must come when bloggers must decide whether they should “dirty their hands” and  make the transition from advocacy of  their political ideals in cyberspace to enter the political terrain to be able to  directly translate their ideals into action.

There is the perception that  politics is dirty. It it is not politics that is dirty.. Politics is  an honourable calling demanding  conviction, passion, selflessness and sacrifice.  If politics is regarded as dirty, it is the  politicians who make politics dirty. Let bloggers get directly involved in politics to cleanse and rid it of “dirty”, unscrupulous and unprincipled politicians!

This welcoming party for Jeff Ooi to is significant both for Malaysian blogging and Malaysian politics.

It coincides with  the  50th Merdeka anniversary celebrations which should be a milestone to assess both our achievements and failures in five decades of nation-building so as to chart the nation’s  course for the coming decades. It also takes place in the midst of a “war on  blogs” declared by the powers-that-be, demonstrating that the those in power have not come to terms with the influence and implications of the new media.

We are at the end of the fourth year of the Abdullah premiership which had received the unprecedented mandate of 91% of parliamentary seats in the 2004 general election. There is now a full-blown crisis of confidence over the lack of political will of the Prime Minister to honour his reform pledges and agenda to lead a clean, incorruptible, efficient, accountable, trustworthy and democratic administration which is highly competitive to face the challenges of  globalisation  with world-class institutions like world-class civil service, world-class  police, world-class universities, world-class judiciary, world-class Parliament, etc staffed by towering Malaysians.

But we have yet to make a real start in  this direction while in many instances, we have regressed and gone backwards.

We, including bloggers, have to pick up the pieces. I call on more bloggers to emulate Jeff Ooi to make the 50th Merdeka anniversary a catalyst for a political commitment to create an united, progressive, democratic and just Malaysia where all Malaysians are proud of the country and  can walk tall in the world.

I look forward to see Jeff Ooi and other bloggers taking their places in the next  Parliament and State Assemblies  to create a better Malaysia for ourselves,  our children and our children’s children.

(Speech at the
“Jeff Ooi’s Welcoming Party”
 as member of DAP in Petaling Jaya on Tuesday, 31st July 2007 at 11 am)

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 31 July 2007, 2:02 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
IT
,
Politics
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


50 Years of Merdeka – rumblings, rantings, reflections

This 50years independent of my country Malaysia …

by Nizam Mashar

What else should we expect from this country of ours …

50 years of independent, even 50 years of independent,

when a child sees frogs and birds as monsters,

and McD, Big Bird Sessame, Sinchan and Barbie as their friends and buddy,

when man and women, “car”ing while the hens are sleeping and back when the owl had rest,

for the dime, dollars, cent, ringgit and rupiah,

and more more more more,

for what ever cost; friends, family, corruption, nepotisme, oppression

… are another bussiness plan of the day,

when the academia, write and research, -for the sake of the world NOOOOOOOOT,

its for the three little word,

read me PhD, spell me PhD, write me PhD,

and the glitters that comes with it,

the benefit of my studies are for the TNCs whose paying me,

or the government who spend money to put me unreadable thesis in the library,

what farmers? what fishermans? what people? … they are no scholars who intellectually capable to pronounce PhD.

When business maintain…

Business as Usual…

The word “sustainable development” can always be put anywhere in the “EMP” (“environmental managment plan”),

The independent scientist in our payroll; says them; can always put the label on our containers saying “Safe and Healthy ” with enriched vitamin C,

and of course nothing to worry …

As the man, woman, tua, muda, child, youth, have been cast the make believe spell of our Advert Mania and “Macam-macam ada”

when the sivil servant is read as political servant,

which eat, drink and what ever had been “aku janji”,

and the fear of demotion, salary cut, transfer, ISA, AUKU, and macam-macam lagi,

is far ever important than the nation, the people and their least dignity

… if ever they still have one …

when the UMNO is still,

using race and religion to run the country,

with fear and subsidy,

sleepy and stupidity,

of i dont know and ZZZZZ,

while the Khair I, is all about his cronies,

ASIA AIR, PURA SINGA, and KEMUTLAH,

when the time comes “he say”

I will bring my PEMUDA on the street,

for a stooge show on Palestine, against USA colonization of IRAQ, and apa lagi u want ?

I can stage u of what u please …

Irony … a leader with not a tear shed, sweat fell, and too much to request a stain of blood … for Malaysia, for Malaysia …

I wish i dont have this fear,

of the greens of my country, bulldozed,

the malays, chinese, indians etc asking each others blood,

death and hatred under the name of religion,

the wealth of the Nation … is not ours, not ours,

How i wish, i dont have this fear,

Go away bogey man … I want to sleep, and cast this nightmare way,

to the far-far away land, away from the Boleh land …

i just wish …

[zamashari write,

looking at the sun set at the rice field of NOrth Corridor for might be the last time, which  will soon be owned by Monsanto, Syngenta, Sime Darby and others …]

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 1 August 2007, 3:37 pm 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.


Open Invitation to Malaysians – August 10 Parliamentary Roundtable to reaffirm 50-year nation-building principle that Malaysia a secular state with Islam as official religion

I have today sent invitation to political parties, professional, civic, religious and human rights organizations and MPs  to a Parliamentary Roundtable on Friday 10th August 2007 in Parliament at 10 am to reaffirm the Merdeka social contract and the Malaysia Agreement on the occasion of the 50th Merdeka anniversary the fundamental nation-building principle that Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic state.

I am also issuing an Open Invitation to all Malaysian organisations and citizens to the Parliamentary Roundtable as follows:

Dear Malaysian,

OPEN INVITATION to Parliamentary Roundtable on Friday 10th August 2007 to reaffirm Merdeka social contract and Malaysia Agreement on the occasion of 50th Merdeka anniversary  that Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as official religion and not an Islamic state

_______________________________________

When Malaya achieved independence in 1957 and Malaysia was formed six years later in 1963, a national social compact was reached that the nation shall be a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic State.

The Merdeka social contract and Malaysia Agreement that Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic state was given expression in the Federal Constitution, articulated by the founding fathers of the nation including the first three Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein and given full recognition by the highest court in the land.

For over four decades, there was national consensus of the secular character of Malaysian nation-building which was  only disrupted in the past six years, raising questions about the national commitment to protect and sustain this fundamental cornerstone of Malaysian nation-building.

A Parliamentary Roundtable to reaffirm  the Merdeka social contract and the Malaysia Agreement that the nation is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic state is being convened in Parliament on Friday, 10th August 2007 at 10 am. (Bilik Taklimat)

This is to send out a clear and unequivocal message on the occasion of the 50th Merdeka anniversary of the nation in 2007 that  the Merdeka social contract and the Malaysia Agreement that Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic state must continue to be the bedrock of the  Malaysian nation-building process.

You are invited to the Parliamentary Roundtable to endorse the reaffirmation of the Merdeka social contract and Malaysia Agreement that Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic state.

I apologise for the shortness of time.  Kindly inform my office of  your ability to accept this invitation or your representative to the Parliamentary Roundtable by Wednesday, 8th August 2007.  (Contact persons  Lau Weng San 016-3231563, 03-79578022; Wong Chow Onn 016-2681483).

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

Lim Kit Siang

Opposition Leader

Parliament

1st August 2007

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 1 August 2007, 12:08 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Malaysia not Islamic state – Bernard Dompok commended, which BN Minister next who dare to speak the truth?

I congratulate
Tan Sri Bernard Dompok
, UPKO President and Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, for his honesty, courage  and conviction in speaking the truth today that Malaysia is not an Islamic state.

On the occasion of the nation’s 50th Merdeka anniversary (but 44 years of the Malaysian Federation for Sabah and Sarawak), Bernard has made Sabahans and all Malaysians proud.

At  the launch of ‘The Merdeka Statement’ by the Centre for Public Policy Studies in Kuala Lumpur, Bernard said the nation’s founders did not have in mind an Islamic state when  the Federation of Malaysia  was formed in 1963.

He said: “I think my colleagues in the government will forgive me for saying that I will not agree that we are an Islamic state.”

Bernard is right.  That Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic state was one of the fundamental principles of nation-building in the Malaysia Agreement 1963 for the establishment of Malaysia with Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore, which left the federation two years later in 1965.

What is most shocking is that for past six years, no Sabah or Sarawak leader, whether Minister or Deputy Minister, whether at the national or state level, had come forward to state such a simple historical truth.

Bernard must be commended for being the first Minister from Sabah and Sarawak with the political principle, conviction and integrity to speak up to defend and uphold the fundamental principle of nation-building in the establishment of Malaysia. The question is which next Minister or Deputy Minister, whether at national or state level, Sabah or Sarawak, will now emulate Bernard to speak and defend the truth.  From PBS in Sabah or SUPP in Sarawak?

This  crucial issue concerns not just Sabah and Sarawak but the whole Malaysian nation — for the fundamental principle that Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic state was  not only the crux of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 but also of  the Merdeka social contract leading to the attainment of national independence 50 years ago.

In Peninsular Malaysia, which Minister or Deputy Minister and  from which political party, whether MCA, MIC, Gerakan, PPP or even Umno, is courageous and honest enough to step forward  to speak the truth — that Malaysia was never conceived to be an Islamic state but as a secular state with Islam as the official religion.

If the first three Prime Ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein could commit themselves to a Malaya and later  Malaysia which is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic state, why have the current generation of Umno leaders deviated from this fundamental nation-building principle?

I have sent out invitations to all Ministers, Deputy Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries and Members of Parliament inviting them to a Parliamentary Roundtable on Friday 10th August 2007 in Parliament at 10 am to reaffirm the Merdeka social contract and the Malaysia Agreement on the occasion of the 50th Merdeka anniversary the fundamental nation-building principle that Malaysia is a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic state.

Let us put aside our political and other differences and come together next Friday  simply as Malaysians to reaffirm what the forefathers of the major communities had agreed in the Merdeka social contract and the Malaysia Agreement that Malaysia shall be a secular state with Islam as the official religion and not an Islamic state.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 2 August 2007, 3:09 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Should Malaysia’s RM11 billion health service be privatized?

by YELVERTON

And so the Aussies have ventured to set right our stone-aged health care system to see if we can kill less people. Looks like Malaysians cannot do anything right for themselves these days. Certainly any proposal has to be better then anything our clueless Ministry of Health officials can come up with but unfortunately the Aussies have failed to emphasize on one main factor… who holds the money? And is the MOH, currently so inefficient that ambulances run out of petrol midway to an accident scene, willing to take their fingers off the pies of equipment purchases, bloated IT budgets and crumbling hospital buildings.

When Thatcher ruled and decided the NHS needs new directions she became hopelessly unpopular to the glee of Labour. But Blair didn’t do a good job either. He stuffed down doctor’s throats MMC’s (Modernizing Medical Careers) without their consent not unlike Malaysia’s notorious Private Healthcare, Facilities and Services Act immediately alienating doctors provoking them to march in mass protests in London and Glasgow in March this year. This was followed by the resignations of Professor Alan Crockard as national director of Modernizing Medical Careers, Alex Liakos as adviser to the MMC and Professor Shelley Heard as MMC National Clinical Advisor prompting the Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt to apologize both in public and parliament.

The BMA (British Medical Association) unlike our muted MMA (Malaysian Medical Association) rightly pointed out that apologies were not enough as the entire training system has been put into jeopardy as changes have clearly not been thought through, throwing the futures of doctors and consequently healthcare into disarray. Till this day if you walk into any NHS hospital you will find notices advising doctors not to cooperate in the MMC. This move has also seen British doctors flying off to Australia and New Zealand for a “better rounded training”. Clearly Labour had forgotten the guile of Aneurin Bevan, the Guru who was instrumental in the successful initial implementation of the NHS.

Today the NHS is a shadow of Clement Attlee’s Labour government’s creation following the aftermath of World War 2. When William Beveridge floated this principle of a “cradle to grave” philosophy in 1948, the idea was if full employment can be ensured in Britain, then the cumulative taxation collected could help fund the NHS. Health was deemed a social need not to be compromised and in tandem with Britain’s inert principles of being a caring society.  However Attlee soon ran into serious trouble when funding from the US stopped after Japan was defeated. But Attlee had an advantage in Aneurin Bevan, his newly appointed Health Minister. Bevan quickly analyzed that he has to first win the doctors over to his side for he reasoned correctly that without doctors, there would be no health service. He offered consultants lucrative payment structures and later stated, “I stuffed their mouths with gold.”

Britain at that time was like Malaysia today. Millions who could not afford private healthcare had to put up with third rate services at state run hospitals. Now, every single person had access to quality health care that is financed through progressive taxation. Till this day, Labour considers the creation of the National Health Service its proudest achievement. Thatcher introduced General Managers into the system and her government subsequently defined the populace as an “internal market”. Health Authorities ceased to run hospitals but “purchased” care and services. GPs became “fund holders” and were able to purchase care for their patients. The “providers” were termed independent trusts.

Despite Blair’s promise to reverse Thatcher’s “privatization” of the NHS, he in fact with Gordon Brown, strengthened it. It suddenly dawned on Labour that healthcare was not cheap. This included the rising costs of medical technology and medicines, the desire to increase standards and an ageing population. Instead they renamed their reforms with terminologies such as detailed service standards, strict financial budgeting, revised job specifications, practice-based commissioning (fundholding again in reality), closure of surplus facilities and emphasis on rigorous clinical and corporate governance including restructuring medical training.

Furthermore Blair’s Government, whilst leaving services free at point of use, has encouraged outsourcing of medical services and support to the private sector. Under the Private Finance Initiative, an increasing number of hospitals have been built by private sector consortia. But Blair and Brown failed to see Bevan’s logic as to what happens to doctors if the system is privatised. The most famously quoted study is the one by a consultancy company which works for the Department of Health that showed that for every £200 million spent on a privately financed hospital results in the loss of 1000 doctors and nurses.

Oops… ..the erstwhile creator of one of Britain’s biggest asset and icons has got itself tangled so badly that at last call orders were out by the Labour government that the ultimate and if possible speedy target should be that the trusts or authorities or whatever term you would like them called — should be absolutely independent. Labour doesn’t want its baby anymore. It’s an unbelievable headache. And what of its consequences if you want to be paid. Waiting lists cannot exceed six months. So doctors just post their patients to private hospitals where the same surgeons get them done and get the NHS to pay for it which will lead to… ..you guessed it… hospitals and trusts running a financial deficit and getting into debt.

Government’s, especially in the West, can rise or fall only on the issue of healthcare. So will privatization of the healthcare system work in Malaysia work or will it, like how the British and US governments have discovered, be the beginning of a very slippery road to rising premiums, increasing budget allocations and ultimately insolvency? Should we wait for time to tell or should we just go ahead with the privatization and let the next generation worry about it? Or maybe we should let the government proceed with the privatization and let the electorate decide at the next election.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 2 August 2007, 1:43 pm and is filed under
Health
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


Wanted – White Paper on “All-Clean Verdict” for Musa, Zulkipli and Johari

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi should present a White Paper giving a full report exonerating the Deputy Internal Security Minister, Datuk Seri Johari Baharum, the Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan and former Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) director-general  Datuk Seri Zulkipli Mat Noor as the first step of the government’s national integrity policy of “zero tolerance for corruption”.

Although Abdullah expressed relief on Saturday that both Musa and Zulkipli had been cleared of corruption by the Attorney-General Tan Sri  Abdul Gani Patail, he also made two remarks which were not in keeping with his pledge to lead a clean, incorruptible, open, accountable and  transparent administration, viz:

	That these corruption allegations should  no longer be debated following the closure of investigations by the Attorney-General;

	His retort when pressed for details of the investigation reports: “Don’t ask me about the contents of the investigations. That is not my job.”

As Prime Minister, Abdullah should realize that the final responsibility of a clean and incorruptible administration rests with him and not with the Attorney-General, and he has the duty and responsibility to satisfy himself about the integrity and incorruptibility of Musa and Zulkipli in view of the critically important posts they were entrusted with.

Gani has ordered the ACA to close their investigations into Musa and Zulkipli. Was this at Gani’s own behest or was it on the directive of the Prime Minister, who would have been informed beforehand that the Attorney-General would be publicly clearing Musa and Zulkipli of corruption.

If the latter why, and if the former, has Abdullah asked the Attorney-General why he had abused his powers in issuing such an order.

As Attorney-General, Gani has the absolute discretionary power  “to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for an offence, other than proceedings before a Syariah Court, a native court or a court-martial”.

Where does Gani derive the power to order the ACA to stop corruption investigations?

The Attorney-General is vested by the constitution with the discretionary power to decide that based on existing corruption investigations, there is no or insufficient evidence for him to institute criminal proceedings against Musa and Zulkipli but how could he direct the ACA to close their investigations and disregard any  relevant evidence  subsequently uncovered?

This presupposes that the investigations into Musa and Zulkipli had been thorough, professional and comprehensive.

Whistleblower and former Sabah ACA director Ramli Abdul Manan, who had lodged the corruption reports against Zulkipli, had made a  most pertinent criticism when he described the Attorney-General of acting more like Zulkipli’s defence counsel than a public prosecutor and asked why the Attorney-General had not invoked Section 32 of the Anti-Corruption Act 1997 to demand information about the assets of Zulkipli and his next of kin.

Ramli also made the very important point that he was not recalled to counter check on the information on the assets of Zulkipli.

Ramli had earlier said Gani should not make the  decision about investigations into Zulkipli as “they had been close friends while serving in Sabah”.  Was this why Gani also dismissed the 25 allegations of corruption against the Sabah Chief Minister,  Datuk Seri Musa Aman, made by Dr. Jeffrey Kitingan, one of which implicated Zulkipli?

Did Gani as Public Prosecutor invoke Section 32 of the Anti-Corruption Act 1997 to investigate into the assets of Musa and his next of kin? If not, how can Gani satisfy himself that there had been a full and professional probe?

Furthermore,  what is the outcome of investigations on the corruption  allegations implicating Musa and top police officers with organised crime?

The announcement of “All-Clean Verdict” (New Straits Times front-page headline) for Musa and Zulkipli since Friday should have given a great boost to the image of integrity and incorruptibility not only of the police force, the ACA but the entire administration.

Unfortunately, the reverse has taken place, with more questions asked whether there is a “cover up” because of the lack of transparency about the corruption investigations.

This is why Abdullah should present a White Paper giving a full report on  the exoneration not only on Musa and Zulkipli, but also Deputy Internal Security Minister Datuk Seri Johari Baharum who had been investigated in connection with  RM5.5 million allegations, to convince Malaysians that these three investigations were fully independent, credible and professional and should be accepted as evidence of the administration’s commitment to a zero tolerance for corruption and not the reverse.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 2 August 2007, 12:46 pm and is filed under
Corruption
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.


2nd series of public hearings of PSCI – Malaysians can pass judgment  on “All-Clean Verdicts”

It is a strange phenomenon.  With the “All-Clean Verdict” pronounced by the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail for the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Musa Hassan, the Deputy Internal Security Minister, Datuk Johari Baharum and the former Anti-Corruption Agency Director-General, Datuk Zulkipli Mat Noor, the country should be suffused by the aroma  of cleanliness and integrity that three top officers of the land accused of corruption have been proved clean and pure.

The  perfume of cleanliness and integrity from the “All-Clean Verdict” should be blowing all over the country and be  the high-water mark of the Abdullah premiership which had started some four years ago with the promise to make eradication of corruption and the promotion of integrity its top priority — especially as it has nothing  else to show on this score, after the escape of the 18 “big fishes” into the South China Sea.

Unfortunately, this is not the case.  More questions have been raised  instead about national integrity confined  not just to the independence, professionalism and credibility of the “All-Clean Verdicts” and their investigations, but the very independence, impartiality and professionalism of the Anti-Corruption Agency, the Attorney-General’s Chambers and the police.

This is why in the first week of Parliament beginning on August 27, I will be asking the Prime Minister to explain why   the Attorney-General’s “All-Clean Verdict” for Musa, Johari and Zulkipli   on corruption allegations have raised more questions about the government’s commitment to “zero tolerance for corruption” and  whether he will  introduce legislation to have an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) and an independent ACA.

The Malaysian public will have an opportunity to give their views about this strange phenomenon as well as to pass judgment on the National Integrity Plan in the second series of public hearings of Parliamentary Select Committee on Integrity in four states this month, viz

Johor Baru
	–	August 8 – 10 am

(Bilik Gerakan Tun Razak, Dewan Undangan Negeri Johor, Johor Bharu)

Malacca
           –            August 9 – 10 am

(Bilik Gerakan Tun Mutahir, Dewan Undangan Negeri Melaka, Melaka)

Ipoh
		– 	August 15 – 10 am

(Bilik Gerakan Negeri, Dewan Undangan Negeri Perak, Ipoh)

Alor Setar
	–	August 16 – 10 am

(Bilik Gerakan Dewan Undangan Negeri Kedah, Alor Setar, Kedah)

The National Integrity Plan (NIP), launched by Abdullah in May 2004, proclaimed a five-point NIP Target 2008.

Its first target is to “effectively reduce corruption, malpractices and abuse of power” with the specific objective of improving Malaysia’s ranking in the Transparency International (TI) Corruption Perception Index (CPI) from 37th place in 2003 to at least 30th position in 2008.  We have been heading in the opposite direction in the past three years, falling to 39th placing in 2004 and 2005 and plunging to 44th placing in 2006, with all signs of further drop this year.

Its other targets are:

2. Improve efficiency in the public service delivery system and overcome bureaucratic red tape.

3. Enhance corporate governance and business ethics.

4. Strengthen the family institution.

5.. Improve the quality of life and people’s well being.

The NIP stated that achievement of  Target 5 will be measured among other things “Reduction in the incidence of crimes in the society, especially serious crimes, crimes against property and sexual crimes. Such reduction is a measure of safety in the community.”

                This entry was posted on Friday, 3 August 2007, 1:07 pm and is filed under
Corruption
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.                You can
leave a response
, or
trackback
 from your own site.