Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- A ‘snap poll’ in Malaysia? Political surprise, journalistic cliché
- WIKILEAKS: ‘Abu Sayyaf links turned Dr M red’
- Suaram starts Legal Fund to Probe Submarine Commissions in French Courts
| A ‘snap poll’ in Malaysia? Political surprise, journalistic cliché Posted: 29 May 2011 05:07 PM PDT
Election campaigns in Malaysia — from the announcement of the poll, the proroguing of Parliament, the nomination of candidates, the campaign, the vote, and the declaration of the result of the poll — can accordingly be completed, from start to finish, in about 10 days. The whole business is usually "done and dusted" within two weeks. Clive Kessler, The Malaysian Insider Once again there is talk of an early or imminent election in Malaysia. No surprise, nothing unusual in that. And once again the commentators are considering the likelihood of a "snap poll." Again, no surprise, nothing unusual in that. Just silly. The expression "snap poll" a cliché. And, as ever, hasty recourse to the irresistibly available cliché is a sure sign that clear, fresh and direct thinking about the matter at hand has been avoided, short-circuited. That an "end-run" (to use a cliché!) had been made around the moment of analysis, the need for thought. What is, or was, a snap poll? The term was coined to denote an election that is called suddenly, at an unexpected moment, to take advantage of the element of surprise. The snap poll is to political life, to electoral politics, what Pearl Harbor was to naval warfare. Suddenly, early one morning, unannounced, out of a clear blue sky... It is an encounter, a contest, that is pretty much over before it has begun. It is a fight — and this is the whole point of the manoeuvre or stratagem — that is as good as over from the outset: before the back-footed adversary, here the political opposition, has a chance to get up from its chair, onto its feet, and into action. One has only to think about that for a moment and one thing becomes clear. That the idea, and use of the term, "snap poll" in Malaysia is quite ridiculous. Not just strange, oddly inappropriate, but altogether ludicrous. It is absurd for two reasons. First, all Malaysian elections are in effect snap polls. In 1969 the national election campaign period was a long one. The Tunku wanted to give the people plenty of time to consider the issues, to weigh the choice that they faced. Never again. Since then, all election campaign periods have been brief. Reform of election legislation has made this brevity, this compression or "telescoping" of the political season — a concentration of pressure and, some would say, enforcing an unreflecting rush to political judgment — possible. Election campaigns in Malaysia — from the announcement of the poll, the proroguing of Parliament, the nomination of candidates, the campaign, the vote, and the declaration of the result of the poll — can accordingly be completed, from start to finish, in about 10 days. The whole business is usually "done and dusted" within two weeks. That kind of concentration and rapidity of electoral procedure falls fully within the ambit of the term "snap poll." These are not elections that run for weeks, whose date is announced months ahead or else are calendrically set by law (as in the US) for the election of candidates to a fixed term of office, say four years. You don't need to speculate in Malaysia whether there will be a snap poll. There always is. Every election is sudden and a "quickie", fast to come and fast to be over and gone. The only question is when. When will the government decide to call it? When will it exercise its discretion, avail itself of the incumbent power's prerogative, to "pull the trigger" (another cliché!) or (yet another) to get the contestants to the line and "sound the starter's gun"? That is one reason why the term "snap poll" in Malaysia is a silly misnomer. There is a second. Invariably in Malaysia, once the country is about two to three years further on from its previous election, and the next is felt approaching in two to three years' time, incessant election speculation begins to develop, mount and inexorably intensify. How does this happen? Quite simply, there is a popular interest in the matter. Why not? The citizen wants to know. As a stakeholder in the political community, the citizen wants to be part of, and informed about, the process of deciding the community's common fate — not just a spectator. Always politically adept, the government caters to and assiduously "plays upon" this interest. It does so constantly and continually, raising and lowering the intensity of its hints, feinting and parrying this way and that, as in some exotic sword-dance or wrong-footing silat routine. In doing so (to change our metaphor, or flee into a different cliché), it "plays the rakyat" the way a maestro plays a violin. Its objectives in doing so are several. It wants to "whet and feed" the rakyat's "political appetite." If elections are eventually to be held, the enthusiasm of party workers must be sustained, the political attention of voters must be activated and focused, and people need to be reminded of their political obligations (especially, as the powers of the day in every country see the matter, to acknowledge gratitude for benefits already and most recently received). Governments, by toying with speculation about imminent elections, also seek to "test the waters" (what, another cliché!) concerning their own popularity. They raise the hypothetical possibility of a snap poll to measure their own situation and prospects, "to see how they are running." They also use the measured and very controlled encouragement of election speculation to "fly various kites": in other words to assess likely public reaction to certain provisional policy initiatives, as well as the popular acceptability, persuasiveness and effect of possible campaign stratagems and rhetorical innovations, such as new slogans. Not least of its purposes in toying openly with ideas of an imminent poll is to dismay, disorient and "bamboozle" the opposition: to keep its strategists preoccupied with the short-run possibility, however unlikely, of having soon to face the polls and so force it to redirect and consume large amounts of its scarce energies and time. Election speculation, no matter how fabricated or implausible, usefully distracts the opposition. It diverts the government's opponents from pursuing necessary longer-term tasks, such as the development of defensible policies and from necessary, and necessarily time-consuming, political planning. Talk of early elections forces the opposition to operate in "rush mode", even "panic mode", not "thoughtfulness mode." It keeps the opposition "tied in knots." By this logic, there may be an "inverse" relation between election speculation and the likelihood of an imminent poll. The louder the talk of a "snap poll", the less likely an early election may be. Until, of course, the last indulgence in such talk, the last tactical flirtation with the idea before the election is finally called. But by then the clock has largely run down, time is running out, and the calling of the election usually comes as no surprise... After years of keen anticipation and bated breath, what you hear in the end is often just a sigh of relief. So in sum, every Malaysian election is both, in one sense, a "snap poll" and, in another, not, since no Malaysian election ever can be. Every election comes at the end of a two-to-three year-long cycle, or barrage, of election speculation. A snap poll, a surprise, beyond all expectations, out of a clear blue sky? Hardly!
|
| WIKILEAKS: ‘Abu Sayyaf links turned Dr M red’ Posted: 29 May 2011 04:00 PM PDT
However, his attack against the Time magazine over the article was moderate as he was not personally mentioned and wanted to keep a lid on the possible links, said US diplomats. The Time article appeared in its April 10, 1995 issue, alleging that Southern Philippine Muslim extremist group Aby Sayyaf was receiving arms, money and training for Islamic groups in various countries, including Malaysia. K Kabilan, Free Malaysia Today Dr Mahathir Mohamad was unusually moderate in his attacks against two articles which appeared to criticise his government in the Time and Fortune magazines in early 1995 as he was "not personally mentioned in the stories". Also, Mahathir was not keen to pursue his attacks against the Time magazine article in particular as it involved his government's alleged links with the Abu Sayyaf movement from the Philippines. "Given the murky general history of Moro-Malaysian dealings, he may feel it best not to go into too many details," wrote US diplomats based in the US embassy here in their confidential cable to the US State Department in Washington. The confidential cable was dated April 13, 1995. The cable was leaked by whistleblower site WikiLeaks and handed over to FMT today. The US diplomats felt that Mahathir was quick with his anti-West attacks when the two articles were published, especially since the general election was imminent then. However, they noted his reaction was "moderate and apparently shortlived". The US diplomats felt the main reason for Mahathir's muted attack on Time and Fortune was largely due to the fact that he was not personally targeted in the two articles. The diplomats also mentioned that Mahathir could have been mindful that his recent anti-British and anti-Australian outbursts had not given him clear-cut victories. They said that they felt that the Malaysian government did not wish to make an issue of the Time article, especially considering the historical ties between the Moro movement and Malaysia. The Time article appeared in its April 10, 1995 issue, alleging that Southern Philippine Muslim extremist group Aby Sayyaf was receiving arms, money and training for Islamic groups in various countries, including Malaysia. The article further claimed that Abu Sayyaf used training camps in Malaysia and was expecting arms shipments from Malaysian supporters. Western media campaign Mahathir's reaction to the article was to immediately label it as "part of a campaign by the western media to discredit Malaysia" to deter investment and tourism. The Time article came just after another article in the Fortune magazine which had said that the Malaysian currency was facing risk. ***************************************** C O N F I D E N T I A L KUALA LUMPUR 001919 |
| Suaram starts Legal Fund to Probe Submarine Commissions in French Courts Posted: 29 May 2011 11:17 AM PDT
SUARAM's latest application, once approved by the court, would allow it to become party to the enquiry and have official access to every element of the enquiry, including access to the evidence which allegedly links DCNS to the issuing of commissions to government officials. By Dr Kua Kia Soong (Director of SUARAM) SUARAM's efforts to probe suspected commissions involved in the submarines purchase in the French courts are starting to bear fruit. The Malaysian courts have failed to shed light on the grisly murder of Altantuya and the reasons for her murder. Although two former bodyguards of the Prime Minister have been charged and sentenced, their motives for the murder have not been probed by the Malaysian court. SUARAM believes that there is more to the murder of Altantuya and that what is in question is at least RM500 million in commissions associated with the RM7 billion Scorpene submarines deal. This has grave consequences for both Malaysian and French tax payers. SUARAM applied through its French lawyers as a civil party for a judicial review in November 2009. As Malaysia's leading human rights organization, it has always fought for human rights and "People before Profits" issues. Furthermore, SUARAM's latest publication, "Questioning Arms Spending in Malaysia: From Altantuya to Zikorsky" by its director, Dr Kua Kia Soong, gives it the locus standi for filing this petition in the French courts. This case concerns the sale of two Scorpène submarines and an Agosta submarine to the Malaysian government, a contract worth approximately one billion euros, that was signed in 2002 with the Malaysian DCNS (former DCN, Department of Naval Construction) and Thalès. The French Inquisitorial Judicial SystemUnlike the British (and Malaysian) system, the French inquisitorial system has an examining or investigating judge. The examining judge can conduct investigations into serious crimes or complex enquiries. As members of the judiciary, they are independent of the executive branch. The judge questions witnesses, interrogates suspects, and orders searches or other investigations. The examining judge's goal is to gather facts, and as such their duty is to look for all the evidence. Both the prosecution and the defence may request the judge to act and may appeal the judge's decisions before an appellate court. Judges in the Paris Prosecution Office have been probing a wide range of corruption charges involving similar submarine sales and the possibility of bribery and kickbacks to top officials in France, Pakistan, Taiwan and other countries, including Malaysia. Recently, Parisian prosecutors, led by investigating Judges Francoise Besset and Jean-Christophe Hullin, have been investigating allegations involving senior French political figures and the sales of submarines and other weaponry to governments all over the world. SUARAM's latest application, once approved by the court, would allow it to become party to the enquiry and have official access to every element of the enquiry, including access to the evidence which allegedly links DCNS to the issuing of commissions to government officials. The case is still at the enquiry phase and the new application is to upgrade it to the "instruction phase" where an investigative judge would be appointed. Malaysia's Scorpene Submarines' ScandalThis scandal involving Malaysia's purchase of two Scorpene submarines is of concern also to French tax payers because it involves France's biggest defense conglomerates, the state-owned shipbuilder DCN. DCN's subsidiary Armaris manufactures the Scorpene submarines sold to Malaysia among other countries. It has already been brought up in the Malaysian Parliament that €114 million (RM500 million) has been paid to a Malaysia-based company called Perimekar, for "coordination and support services" for the submarines transaction. Perimekar was wholly owned by another company, KS Ombak Laut Sdn Bhd, which in turn was controlled by Najib's aide, Razak Baginda. Baginda's wife Mazlinda was the principal shareholder in this company. Perimekar was registered in 2001, a few months before the signing of the contracts for the sale and the company did not appear to have the financial resources to complete the contract. None of the directors and shareholders of Perimekar have any experience in the construction or maintenance of submarines. Altantuya Shaariibuu, a 28-year-old Mongolian translator and Razak Baginda's jilted lover, had allegedly participated in negotiations over the purchase of the submarines. By her own admission in a letter found after her death, she was attempting to blackmail Razak Baginda for US$500,000. She was shot in October 2006 and her body was blown up with military explosives by two bodyguards attached to Najib's office after Razak Baginda went to Najib's chief of staff, Musa Safri, for help in stopping her demands. What were Altantuya's Killers' Motives? After being acquitted in November 2008 under questionable circumstances of participating in her murder, Razak Baginda left the country for England. The bodyguards were convicted but no motive was ever established for their actions. The submarine deal was never brought up in court during the murder trial which saw prosecutors, defense attorneys and the judge judiciously keeping Najib's name out of the proceedings. A private detective hired by Razak Baginda to protect him from Altantuya's advances filed a statutory declaration after the trial indicating that Najib had actually been the victim's lover and had passed her on to Razak Baginda. He later retracted this story in a second statutory declaration. The detective, P. Balasubramaniam, said later that he was forced to leave Kuala Lumpur. He eventually emerged from hiding in India to say that he had been offered RM5 million (US$1.57 million) by a businessman close to Najib's wife to leave town. He also said he had met Najib's younger brother, Nazim and was told to recant his testimony. Contradictions in Malaysian Government's Story From the investigations so far, there appears to be contradictions in the Malaysian government's side of the story regarding the payment of 114 euros to the Malaysian company Perimekar. The Deputy Minister of Defence had told the Malaysian Parliament that this was paid by the French. According to sources cited by the plaintiffs, it was not the company Armaris that paid 114 million euros to Perimekar, but rather the Malaysian government, "with the sole purpose of circumventing the OECD Convention." This contract was signed in 2002 after the OECD Convention came into force in France in 2000, which punishes corruption of foreign public officials with ten years' imprisonment and a 150,000 euro fine. Following this complaint, a preliminary investigation was conducted by the prosecution: the hearings were made and searches were made at the premises of DCNS and Thalès. As was the case for contracts won by the DCN for submarines to Pakistan and frigates to Taiwan, there are increasing suspicions of "reversed commissions" to French political parties. After Suaram had filed an initial suit at the Paris court in 2009, the state prosecutor Jean-Claude Marin then opened a preliminary investigation. At the time, it was suspected that a bribe of 114 million euros had been paid by the company Armaris (a subsidiary of DCNI and Thalès) to Malaysian parties through the company Perimekar. DCN Officer Confirms CommissionsIn September 2008, during the course of the Karachi Case also involving DCN, the note books of Gérard-Philippe Menayas, former chief financial officer of DCN, who was indicted in the case, also confirmed the suspicions of hidden commissions. In his memorandum, Menayas mentioned the Malaysian submarine contract as follows: "Since the entry into force of the OECD Convention regarding the fight against corruption in September 2000, only two contracts have been signed; the first with India, and the second with Malaysia in 2002. These two contracts are the result of commercial actions undertaken prior to the OECD Convention. Furthermore, they are both suspected of non-compliance with this Convention. I have evidence to support this".(http://www.rue89.com/2011/04/02/sous-marins-malaisiens-la-piste-des-retrocommissions-se-precise) Furthermore, it appears there were three commissions instead of one paid for the sale of submarines. In addition to that of 114 million euros, there are two further instalments, one paid by DCN to the commercial networks of Thalès, for over 30 million euros, corresponding to "commercial fees relating to the negotiation and execution of the contract". This second commission was paid by Thalès to a recipient, who remains unknown, in order to convince the Malaysian government of the need to conduct additional work. The third commission was for 2.5 million euros. According to Gerard Philippe Menayas: "Until the OECD Convention against corruption came into force in France, no contract for the sale of defence equipment to an emerging country could take place without the payment of commissions to policy makers (euphemistically called 'commercial fees for exports')." Finally, according to the complaint filed by the firm Bourdon, Suaram's lawyer, the company Gifen, which was established by Jean-Marie Boivin in Malta, intervened in the negotiations "so as to facilitate the money transfers in this case", and particularly finance the trips of Baginda and Altantuya. SUARAM Appeals for Legal FundsSUARAM hopes the French justice system will reveal more than what the Malaysian judicial system has failed to deliver so far and will bring justice and closure to the family of Altantuya, and force the French and Malaysian Governments to account to their peoples regarding the commissions on the submarines contract. When the case goes to the French court, the prosecution can then contact an examining magistrate and the trial can start. SUARAM's case in the French courts will involve considerable legal fees. Thus far, the French lawyers have offered their services pro bono. When the case proper begins, we will need to afford the necessary legal fees. Thus we are appealing to justice-loving and socially conscious Malaysian tax payers to contribute to this submarine commissions legal fund.
|
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan