Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

---

• Insecurity in eastern Sabah raises questions!
• What PK promises, BN has already delivered
• Who’s in, who’s out?
• Sodomy 3: What if it’s an inside job?
• Sulu claim – A sad, tragic lie
• Political rivals in a strategic battle
• ASEAN non-interference and the Sabah conflict
• Ini Kali Kah? It's touch-and-go for the Opposition
• Never a Suluk Filipino for CM
• Muzzling the judiciary
• Hindraf providing CPR for Indians
• Ini Kali Lah, if toothless MACC acts -- Taib Memang Kena!
• Will Najib stay and battle or leave?
• Indians: A lost cause?
• Stop the Buku Jingga lie
• GE13 – Make the right choice
• When the Fog of War lifts on Lahad Datu Standoff!
• Political suicide or stroke of genius?

Insecurity in eastern Sabah raises questions! Posted: 22 Mar 2013 10:35 PM PDT   Putrajaya must not also belabour under the delusion that interfering in southern Philippines is the way to prevent the so-called Sabah claim being raised or to prevent the secession of Sabah from the Malaysian Federation. Nur Misuari, the leader of the MNLF, has already made it clear in recent days that Malaysia is a stumbling block to lasting peace in the southern Philippines. Joe Fernandez Hoteliers in Sabah are grumbling increasingly loudly that tourists are canceling too many bookings in the wake of the Lahad Datu Standoff and the on-going mopping up operations by security forces. They worry that things may become a whole lot worse for the hospitality industry in the state before turning for the better, if at all, in the near future. The state has some 25,000 hotel rooms to help the hospitality industry rake in some RM5.2 billion last year from nearly three million visitors. The forecast revenue for 2015, according to Sabah Tourism Board chairman Tengku Zainal Adlin, is RM15 billion on the high side. That amounts to a quarter of the RM60 billion per annum that Malaysia presently collects from tourism receipts. Clearly, the travel industry is high income lifeblood for the Sabah economy which already suffers the drain of most of its resources and revenues to Putrajaya. Palm oil and the oil and gas sectors are other bright spots. Timber is a sunset industry. Foreign missions in Malaysia, erring on the side of caution, have reportedly either extended previous Travel Advisories or issued new ones urging caution if travelling to eastern Sabah. However, travellers may not make any distinction between the Sabah east and west coasts. They may not make any distinction either between Sabah and the rest of Borneo. They fear being the target of kidnappings.   Visiting Peninsular Malaysians uneasy in Kota Kinabalu The Abu Sayyaf, a breakaway from the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF), has engaged in kidnappings along the east coast in the past. The victims were only freed after Malaysia, and also foreign Governments, met the ransom demands of the kidnappers. Kidnapping is the method used by Abu Sayyaf to force the Malaysian Government, its sponsor, to pay up when its funding for operations was delayed. It's sheer blackmail! The state and federal governments are fighting back with a joint RM500,000 Recovery Fund to revitalize the travel sector in the wake of Lahad Datu. This sum amounts to peanuts if kidnappings for ransom resume along the east coast. In Kota Kinabalu, no one will get the impression that one is in imminent danger of any kind. Life, limb and properties are safe. Still, most visiting Peninsular Malaysians have long expressed their fears when visiting the Sabah capital, warily noting the presence of illegal immigrants all around them. Their perennial question: "How can you people allow this (illegal immigration) to go on?"   Government must stick together in security, sovereignty, integrity It can be said candidly that the security situation in Sabah, except for the continuing influx of illegal immigrants, has always been under control. The confidence of the authorities can be gauged from the fact that there was no reason to declare any special security zone or command until the decision was made in the wake of Lahad Datu to set up the Eastern Sabah Security Command (Esscom). Illegal immigrants were not considered by Putrajaya as a security threat, a point which will be disputed by Sabahans. One reason for the otherwise excellent security in Sabah was the very fact that the nearest trouble spots were all in the southern Philippines, quite some distance away from the Sabah mainland. Also, the known involvement of Malaysia directly as a facilitator in the peace process in southern Philippines, and indirectly as the prime backer of the rebel forces, "kept Sabah safe". Putrajaya has to rethink its foreign policy and security initiatives with particular reference to the Manila Government if the troubles in the southern Philippines are not to swamp and sweep away Sabah in troubles sweeping both sides of the Sulu Sea. It was naïve on the part of Putrajaya to defy the United Nations Charter and engage in acts as alleged, whether overtly or covertly, to compromise the sovereignty and territorial integrity of a fellow member state of the United Nations. How the Manila Government deals with its Muslim citizens in the country's south is no concern of Malaysia. Governments must stick together even if they are allegedly mistreating their own citizens.   MNLF cannot be Manila's sole partner for peace in southern Philippines Putrajaya must not also belabour under the delusion that interfering in southern Philippines is the way to prevent the so-called Sabah claim being raised or to prevent the secession of Sabah from the Malaysian Federation. Nur Misuari, the leader of the MNLF, has already made it clear in recent days that Malaysia is a stumbling block to lasting peace in the southern Philippines. The heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate don't have a leg to stand on in Sabah. Neither does Malaysia, points out Nur Misuari. For the immediate future, the security threat in Sabah is the resumption of kidnappings along the east coast by the Abu Sayyaf who are likely to act in concert with the so-called Royal Sulu Army (RSA). Only the MNLF can restraint both these groups although its troops were also involved, privately Nur Misuari claims, in the Lahad Datu Standoff. In return, Nur Misuari would want Malaysia for starters out of the southern Philippines. He also wants Malaysia out of Sabah and Sarawak but that's another matter and one for the people of the territories concerned to decide. Misuari's claim that Sarawak used to belong to his great great grandfather and that he wants it back does not hold water. Here, Malaysia will have to rely on the Manila Government to restrain Nur Misuari. However, there's no way that Manila can restrain Nur Misuari if Malaysia continues to root for the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), another MNLF breakaway, as the Philippines Government's sole partner for peace in southern Philippines. Disproportionate flow to Putrajaya concern of Sabahans Matters have been compounded by Manila declaring in recent days that it will pursue the so-called Sabah claim. It's known that a Power of Attorney, the sole instrument by which a previous Sultan of Sulu transferred his "sovereignty" over Sabah to the Philippines, has since expired. The decision by Jamalul Kiram III, the so-called Sultan of Sulu, to send his rag-tag forces into Sabah in recent weeks apparently followed failed negotiations with Putrajaya to squeeze more money from Malaysia for Sabah. At present the descendents of the nine heirs jointly share a measly RM5,300 per annum from the Malaysian Government in accordance with a 1939 High Court of Borneo declaration. Nur Misuari may not be engaged in the struggle in the southern Philippines and eastern Sabah for money, unlike Abu Sayyaf and the heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate, although he has admitted being trained, armed and financed in the past by Malaysia. His covetous reference to the fabulous wealth, resources and revenue of Sabah must not be taken too seriously. The issue of the disproportionate flow to Putrajaya is one for Sabahans to resolve. However, the money factor involving foreigners must also be removed to ensure long term peace, stability and security in Sabah. The oil and gas platforms out at sea, the plantations, and timber camps, besides the tourist traffic, all need to be protected from any even low-key guerrilla warfare which may be waged in eastern Sabah by the terrorists to exact more money from Malaysia "for Sabah".   Joe Fernandez is a mature student of law and an educationist, among others, who loves to write especially Submissions for Clients wishing to Act in Person. He feels compelled, as a semi-retired journalist, to put pen to paper -- or rather the fingers to the computer keyboard -- whenever something doesn't quite jell with his weltanschauung (worldview). He shuttles between points in the Golden Heart of Borneo formed by the Sabah west coast, Labuan, Brunei, northern Sarawak and the watershed region in Borneo where three nations meet.

What PK promises, BN has already delivered Posted: 22 Mar 2013 10:25 PM PDT   Abrihim Malawaki, Malaysian Review   A close examination of PK's election Manifesto will reveal that 80  per cent of its promises have already been fulfilled--by the BN Government. The remaining 20 per cent are non--deliverables.  We shall soon see why. Let's look at PK's promises one by one. 1. To create one million jobs in the agricultural, construction and service sectors... There are currently 1.58 million foreign workers in these sectors.  If locals are willing to take over their jobs, there will already be 1.58 million vacancies.   2.  To implement a minimum wage of RM1,100 a month. The BN Government has proposed a minimum wage of RM900 a month in Peninsular Malaysia. Some SMEs are resisting this because they say they will be adversely affected. If the market cannot afford RM900, can it afford RM1,100?   3.  To set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry to improve the education system. The BN Government has been regularly reviewing the education system to meet the demands of the domestic market as well as to face the challenges of globalisation.  Remember the major study called the Razak Report?  And now, there is the Malaysian Education Blueprint 2013-2025.   READ MORE

Who’s in, who’s out? Posted: 22 Mar 2013 03:59 PM PDT ELECTION CANDIDATES: While some incumbents are ready to make way for new faces, others are coy on whether they intend to seek re-election Ili Liyana Mokhtar, NST AS the 13th general election draws closer, speculation is rife on who will be fielded and who won't. While some incumbents have declared that they were making way for new faces, there were those who have remained coy when asked whether they still wanted to give the 2013 general election a go. There are also those who have hinted that they wished to see action again in what promises to be the most keenly contested general election in Malaysian history. Though many have indicated that they did not wish to be nominated for a seat, there were those who offered the oft-used statement that the prerogative lies with Barisan Nasional (BN) chairman and Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak. BN has 141 representatives in the Dewan Rakyat, of which 75 have served more than three terms. From the current cabinet, one minister who has announced that he would not contest the next election is Energy, Green Technology and Water Minister Datuk Seri Peter Chin Fah Kui. The Sarawak United Peoples' Party president, who has served the Miri constituency for six terms, was earnest when he said he wanted to make way for young blood. However, Chin has also indicated that he would continue to helm the BN component party until his term expires. "Twenty-six years as a member of parliament is long enough and it's time to hand over the baton to a younger person," he was reported as saying. Former ministers who are likely to bow out include the likes of former international trade and industry minister Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz. The six-term Kuala Kangsar MP has made it known that she would not be contesting the Kuala Kangsar parliamentary seat because of the age factor. "If you ask me, no, I don't think I will (contest). I am 68, going on 69. I'm retired. It is time to let the younger candidates step in." But Rafidah, who is former Wanita Umno chief, said she was ready to play a supporting role in the party. "I can still contribute, but not through an official (government post)," she has said last year. She first contested and won the Selayang parliamentary seat in the 1978 general election. Four years later, she moved to the Kuala Kangsar constituency and has successfully held on to it since then. Party sources have speculated that either Wanita Umno deputy chief Datuk Kamilia Ibrahim or first-term Bukit Chandan assemblyman Datuk Wan Mohamad Khairil Anuar Wan Ahmad will contest the seat. Rafidah's successor in Wanita Umno, Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil, is also unlikely to be fielded. She stepped down from the women, family and community development ministerial post last year after she was dragged into the National Feedlot Corporation issue. Another former minister who has indicated that he would likely bow out is former housing and local government minister Tan Sri Ong Ka Ting (Kulai). The former MCA president indicated in 2011 that he was not interested in contesting this time. Following suit were Tebrau MP Teng Boon Soon and two Johor executive council members Tan Kok Hong (Bekok) and Hoo Seong Chang (Paloh). Five-term MP and former MCA president Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat (Pandan) is also uncertain of being fielded. Though he has indicated he would like to contest, MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek has announced that the Pandan seat could see a new face being fielded. The positions of former prime minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (Kepala Batas) and Land Public Transport Commission chairman Tan Sri Syed Hamid Albar (Kota Tinggi) have also become subjects of speculation. Former natural resources and environment minister Datuk Seri Azmi Khalid (Padang Besar) and former home minister Datuk Seri Radzi Sheikh Ahmad (Kangar) have also indicated that they could be in their last term but have left the decision to Najib. One deputy minister who has said that he would not contest in the polls is Deputy Works Minister Datuk Yong Khoon Seng. The five-term MP had represented Padawan and then Stampin in Kuching. Another former deputy minister from Sarawak who is unlikely to contest is Datuk Sulaiman Abdul Rahman Taib. The Kota Samarahan MP stepped down as deputy tourism minister in December 2009 for personal reasons. Jerantut MP Datuk Seri Tengku Azlan Sultan Abu Bakar is also not expected to make himself available this time. The former deputy transport minister, who is a three-term MP, has also said that he would not seek nomination. Deputy Higher Education Minister and Temerloh MP Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah said he hoped to be fielded in the same constituency. The first-term parliamentarian, who took over the constituency from his predecessor, Mohd Sarit Yusoh, said: "I'm hoping to stand again, so that I can continue my work here, but, of course, the decision lies with the leadership." Two former menteris besar who have indicated that 2008-2013 would be their last term are Jertih assemblyman Datuk Idris Jusoh (Terengganu) and Pengkalan Hulu assemblyman Datuk Seri Tajol Rosli Mohd Ghazali (Perak). Maran MP Datuk Ismail Abd Muttalib, when asked whether he would be seeking re-election, said it was not his say whether he should be retained or not. "This is not a question that should be directed at me. Someone should be fielded based on the track record in the constituency and what the people want. "Ultimately, the leadership will decide what is for the best," said the 59-year-old when contacted yesterday. As for two-term Sri Gading MP Datuk Mohamed Aziz, who has also served as state assemblyman for several terms, he said it was up to the party president to decide whether veterans should continue as the people's representatives. "We should not be announcing the candidates beforehand as it is not our job," said the 72-year-old.

Sodomy 3: What if it’s an inside job? Posted: 22 Mar 2013 03:28 PM PDT Just bear in mind that the hunting season within PKR and Pakatan has already begun and the hunted is Anwar himself. I would be so bold as to say that this attempt to implicate Anwar this time round has its roots from within Pakatan… from deep down the bowels of Pakatan where a deep-seated dislike for the prime minister-designate exists and may even thrive among a hardcore few. CT Ali, FMT Let the games within Pakatan Rakyat begin. From my personal experience, when your father is not that wealthy, there is no infighting within the family to get what you think is your "fair" share of his money. Let the first million roll in and then it's a free for all to get into his good books. By the time the second and third million is in his bank, all hell will break lose. If the father is resolved that money will not break his family asunder, then maybe all will be well. If the father plays favourite, then life for everyone in the family will be, to say the least, interesting. This is the situation in Pakatan Rakyat today. Each passing day seems to bring it closer to the jewel in Putrajaya, with which the prime minister-designate, Anwar Ibrahim, is to be crowned with. The ebb and flow of party politics within Pakatan coalition now starts to coalesce – not merging all factions into one seamless entity that will confront Barisan Nasional for the seat of government during the 13th general election but into factions and groups: one that wants Anwar to be the prime minister-designate, and the other that does not. The ambitious ones within Pakatan know they have to make their move now, but they must do so covertly. What have they started to do? They need to build upon the foundations laid by BN, even if the foundations languish at gutter level. They start by besmirching Anwar's personal character. Another sodomy tape would be a good place as any to start. Of course, our gut instinct would be to round up the usual suspects – Najib Tun Razak, Muhyiddin Yassin, the Three Datuks, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, or anyone in Umno. But, methinks, this time around if the fallout from Sodomy Two has taught Najib & Co anything, it is to make sure that if a Sodomy Three were to happen, it must happen ala Dr Chua Soi Lek – where events overtook any possibilities of a defence corridor being thrown around Chua (nasi sudah jadi bubur) – and all Chua could do then was to resign. This Sodomy Three images that have been put onto the public domain lack clarity and those that matter – the rakyat – are already questioning its authenticity. Sodomy Three lacks the "Oomph" that only money can provide to make the release of the images from the video to be a "national event". It has all the hallmarks of a half-hearted attempt to destabilise Anwar within the Pakatan coalition and also within his own PKR. In short, it looks like an inside job by insiders within Pakatan or PKR – who are making mischief for Anwar by releasing the so-called Sodomy Three images. This Sodomy Three "incident" does not seem to have any of Umno or BN "trade mark". READ MORE HERE

Sulu claim – A sad, tragic lie Posted: 22 Mar 2013 03:25 PM PDT Sabah became the vision of the last gold coin that could win back the possibility of rising again, getting back the worth of a name: the venerable House of Kiram. Only a country can claim another country or a part of another country. This therefore means Sulu has no locus standi to claim Sabah. The power of attorney that was given to Macapagal by the Sulu Sultan to give Macapagal the "authority" to claim Sabah on Sulu's behalf (now withdrawn) has very questionable validity. Raymond Tombung, FMT The Sabah claim will continue to be raised by the Phlippines and Sulu as it is powerful and emotive international issue which many leaders from Manila will find convenient to bleed for political mileage. And the many "sultans" in Sulu will continue to cast their hungry eyes at Sabah, considered to be "the last gold coin" and aspire, albeit hopelessly, to try and achieve the impossible. But Malaysians, especially Sabahans, should be able to give a cogent argument on the issue of this claim and in favour of Sabah. All Malaysians and Sabahans need is three or four historical facts, events or political realities to win the argument. So let's always keep clear knowledge of the following: 1. The controversy arising from the 1878 treaty between Jamalul Alam and British North Borneo Company. It can strongly be argued that it was a "cession" and not a "lease" as claimed by Filipinos. Note that any argument on the matter was decisively clarified and settled when on April 22, 1903, Sultan Jamalul Kiram signed a document known as "Confirmation of cession of certain islands" in which he says the 1878 treaty was a CESSION. The "confirmation" of the 1878 treaty says specifically that "We, the Sultan of Sulu, state with truth and clearness that we have ceded to the Government of British North Borneo of our own pleasure all the islands that are near the territory of North Borneo… This is done because the names of the islands were not mentioned in the 22nd January, 1878 [treaty]… that the islands were included in the cession…" 2. The purpose of the Madrid Protocol of 1885 was to recognise the sovereignty of Spain in the Sulu Archipelago and also for Spain to relinquish all claims it might have had over North Borneo. Article III of the protocol states that "The Spanish Government renounces… all claims of sovereignty over the territories of the continent of Borneo, which belong, or which have belonged in the past to the Sultan of Sulu [Jolo]…." 3. The signing of the Carpenter Agreement on March 22, 1915 in which Sultan Jamalul Kiram II was stripped off all temporal (worldly) power and retained only the empty title of Sultan. His claimed ownership of North Borneo was of no concern to the American colonists. 4. The Macaskie Dictum (Judgment) of 1939. This judgment doesn't settle the argument although Macaskie said the annual payment was cession money and not rental money and that the nine plaintiff heirs were entitled to. These payments, however, in no way had anything to do with territorial property. This is because a later translation by the Filipinos of the original 1878 treaty (written in Malayan Jawi) said the agreement was a "pajak" which they say meant "lease". (Today "pajak" can mean "purchase"). But even this judgment was preceded by the addition "cession" of 1903 and the Madrid Protocol of 1885. Power of attorney questionable 5. The Sulu "sultans" cannot claim Sabah because there is no more a Sulu sultanate and there is no more any real sultan. The only legitimate royal group in Sulu are the descendants of the nine heirs who went to Macaskie in 1939. 6. Sulu (a region of the Philippines without any national sovereignty) cannot claim Sabah which is part of Malaysia – a sovereign nation. Only a country can claim another country or a part of another country. This therefore means Sulu has no locus standi to claim Sabah. The power of attorney that was given to Macapagal by the Sulu Sultan to give Macapagal the "authority" to claim Sabah on Sulu's behalf (now withdrawn) has very questionable validity. Maybe this is one of the reasons why Manila had not really pursued the claim using the so-called power of attorney. 7. Manila had denied and re-recognised the sultanate a number of times, but this does not change the fact that there has been not been any sultanate to speak of since the Carpenter-Kiram Agreement of 1915. 8. By July 15, 1946, the British government had taken over North Borneo when the North Borneo Company could no longer manage it after the devastation of World War II. The company had the right to hand over North Borneo to whoever it wanted because the country had been ceded to it in 1878 (and confirmed by the confirmation of cession in 1903 and the nullification of Sulu's ownership of the country by the Madrid Protocol of 1885). 9. Many Brunei historians actually argue that Brunei never gave away any part of North Borneo to Sulu. And there is no document whatsoever to prove this cession. 10. After Sabah became part of Malaysia and Malaysia's sovereignty was recognised by the United Nation and the world, that had effectively superceded and nullified any claim on Sabah. If Sulu, by a very long shot, gets back Sabah, will it be able to pay Malaysia all the billions utilised to develop Sabah since 1963? ICJ confirmed Sabah's status Sulu cannot be so arrogant and shameless to think that it can simply and freely take back a piece of land it "owned" 135 years ago after it has been developed by someone else for half a century. 11. The International Court of Justice (which is an arm of the United Nation) had recognised and confirmed Sabah as part of Malaysia when it made a verdict in 2002 that Sipadan and Ligitan islands belonged to Malaysia (and not Indonesia). This confirmation of ownership cannot be reversed in favour of Sulu (judgments of the ICJ cannot be appealed). 12. Whatever the arguments are, all the past agreements and treaties – whether they were valid, arguable or controversial – are now effectively useless historical references because they have been superseded by bigger and more important events. Therefore the argument by Harry Roque, a law professor at University of the Philippines, who says that a legal principle known as "uti posseditis juris" "accords pre-eminence of legal title over effective possession as a basis of sovereignty" is useless and ineffective due to this superceding by bigger events in history. Also, this pre-eminence of legal title is a double-edged sword because it can also be applied to Malaysia. 13. Prof Dr Ramlah Adam recently said: "They cannot claim [Sabah] just based on history. For example, the Siam government handed Kedah, Perlis, Kelantan and Terengganu over to the British and [today] cannot claim the states." Prof Emeritus Khoo Kay Kim said that if the Philippines' argument can be accepted, then "Singapore should be returned to Johor and Penang be returned to Kedah". And for that matter why does Brunei not claim Sabah as well because there is a Brunei argument that it never gave Sabah to Sulu? Or why doesn't Indonesia claim Peninsular Malaysia and southern Thailand? After all, weren't these regions under the Srivijaya Empire in the eighth century? 14. Sabahans do not want to be part of the Philippines, as confirmed by the findings of the Cobbold Commission. Even today Sabahans feel a lot of trepidation at the mere thought of being under the so-called Sulu sultanate. If a referendum is held to seek Sabahans' preference between Malaysia and the Philippines, many would dare say the foregone conclusion is for most preferring to stay on in Malaysia. READ MORE HERE

Political rivals in a strategic battle Posted: 21 Mar 2013 04:37 PM PDT Based on BN's election preparation progress, the changes in Pakatan Rakyat's strategy and Najib's cautious style, the date to dissolve the Parliament might be further postponed as the BN wants to make a sally only when it has greatest confidence.  Lim Sue Goan, Sin Chew Daily BN has made an all-out effort to create a feel-good atmosphere but its political strategy is not as flexible as Pakatan Rakyat's. Pakatan Rakyat has started to unveil its candidates and display its strength. BN, meanwhile, is still carefully selecting candidates and considering constituency exchanges, causing election campaign activities in some constituencies to now lag behind. Take the DAP as an example. Some candidates have been decided such as Negri Sembilan DAP chairman and Lobak state assemblymen Anthony Loke, who will be contesting the Chennah state seat, party parliamentary leader Lim Kit Siang will contest the Gelang Patah parliamentary seat and Himpunan Hijau chairman Wong Tack will contest the Bentong parliamentary seat. Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had also announced on Wednesday some PKR parliamentary candidates. His daughter Nurul Izzah will seek re-election in Lembah Pantai and PKR strategic director Mohd Rafizi Ramli will contest the Pandan parliamentary seat. Also, five Sarawak parliamentary candidates have also been decided. There are also some signs showing the deployment of PAS candidates, including party vice-president Salahuddin Ayub who will be contesting in Johor while former Perak Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin will be contesting the Changkat Jering state seat. As for the BN, the candidate list remains unclear. It was reported that MCA vice-presidents Datuk Seri Dr Ng Yen Yen and Gan Ping Sieu would not be contesting in their original or preferred parliamentary constituencies. Gan's supporters even rushed to the MCA headquarters with the hope to change the situation. There might be undercurrents in Kluang forcing Gan to shift and contest in Tebrau. However, he has been rejected by members of the local division. Umno is eyeballing the Wangsa Maju parliamentary seat while the MCA is not willing to make a concession. Regardless of who is going to be fielded to contest the seat, it will trigger discontentment of the other party. If this is not suppressed, it would be unfavourable to BN, and PKR candidate Datuk Dr Tan Kee Kwong could then wait for redemption. In addition, there are also different views on whether former MCA president Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat will seek re-election in the Pandan parliamentary constituency under the BN banner. Pakatan Rakyat leaders are also taking the strategy of making a breakthrough to drive its election campaign. The decision to field Lim Kit Siang in Gelang Patah has disrupted the MCA's original plans. Who would be fielded by BN to counter the DAP's attacks in Chinese-majority constituencies? No one among MCA candidates can rival Lim. The MCA is now hastily defending against the DAP's strong attack. Lim has started to canvass for votes in Gelang Patah and once the Parliament is dissolved, he can then help his compatriots in other states or constituencies. After Lim shifted to contest in Johor, Anwar said he might not seek re-election in Permatang Pauh and instead may contest in Perak or Selangor. Permatang Pauh is the political base of Anwar and thus, regardless of who is contesting, the seat will be kept. It can help to create a momentum and seek an additional seat if Anwar contests in other states. It might be a move to confuse BN when Anwar said he might leave Penang to contest in other states, but it has reflected that the Pakatan Rakyat's strategy is more flexible. If Pakatan Rakyat leaders disperse to different frontline states, BN will have to develop a different strategy to cope. Basically, the three component parties of the Pakatan Rakyat have placed their leaders in different states, while Umno's mentri besar candidate for Selangor remains a mystery. BN has been too dependent on coalition chairman Datuk Seri Najib Razak's personal charm while the image of individual leaders is not obvious enough. Another example showing that Pakatan Rakyat's election preparation progress is ahead of BN's is that Pakatan Rakyat revealed its election manifesto on February 25. Based on BN's election preparation progress, the changes in Pakatan Rakyat's strategy and Najib's cautious style, the date to dissolve the Parliament might be further postponed as the BN wants to make a sally only when it has greatest confidence.

ASEAN non-interference and the Sabah conflict Posted: 21 Mar 2013 02:08 PM PDT   Yet while the regional organisation has trumpeted its 'central role' in maintaining peace, security and stability in a region which has experienced both internal and intra-member conflicts since post-independence, it is has so far been 'silent' on the Sabah crisis.   Imelda Deinla, New Mandala The recent incursion into Sabah of more than 200 armed groups styling themselves as the Royal Army of the Sultan of Sulu has put another challenge to ASEAN's claim to its centrality in the region. There seems to be consensus that the Sabah conflict has become another flashpoint that has broader regional security implications for members of ASEAN. Yet while the regional organisation has trumpeted its 'central role' in maintaining peace, security and stability in a region which has experienced both internal and intra-member conflicts since post-independence, it is has so far been 'silent' on the Sabah crisis. The United Nations through Ban Ki Moon issued a statement two weeks after the incursion urging parties to end the violence through dialogue and to seek a peaceful resolution of the conflict. Member countries were more adamant in not expressing their views with the exception of Indonesia's President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono who remarked during a state visit to Hungary on 6 March 2013 that a diplomatic approach must be pursued in the future and called on ASEAN's current chair, Brunei Darussalam, to take a proactive move to resolve the conflict peacefully. There are two ways to interpret ASEAN's lack of visibility in the Sabah crisis. One is that there is no willingness among member countries to 'regionalise' the conflict and a preference for treating it purely as an internal security matter primarily for Malaysia. In this way, the principle of non-interference on sovereignty is maintained. The fact however that the conflict involves cross-border actions and personalities from Malaysia and the Philippines belies its characterisation as an 'internal' matter. However, this is also indicative of an evolving pattern following the failure to reach a consensus on the South China last year, and the muted statements of ASEAN involving the skirmishes between Thai and Cambodian forces at the Preah Vijear temple in 2011. Read more at: http://asiapacific.anu.edu.au/newmandala/2013/03/22/asean-non-interference-and-the-sabah-conflict/

Ini Kali Kah? It's touch-and-go for the Opposition Posted: 21 Mar 2013 01:34 PM PDT   Between Umno and PKR/Pas, the great majority of the older generation Malays would vote for the former. The majority of the younger generation and new voters remain to be seen. Will they buy the pemimpin yang di sanjung tinggi crap?  Joe Fernandez We are forgetting the older generation Malays who want 100 per cent the NEP to be retained although the majority of them have nothing but their two you know what. But like gamblers or lottery ticket buyers or alcoholics, they all hope to benefit someday when they become YBs or even PM and can put their hands in the National Cookie Jar under the guise of affirmative action and/or bringing so-called development to the people. East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet. The great majority of the Malays in Malaya will not vote the same way as the great majority of non-Malays. Malays think that to vote as the non-Malays would only benefit the latter and thereby it's a loss to them somehow. Between Umno and PKR/Pas, the great majority of the older generation Malays would vote for the former. The majority of the younger generation and new voters remain to be seen. Will they buy the pemimpin yang di sanjung tinggi crap? The Indians, who decided in 67 of the parliamentary seats in 2008, remain an unknown quantity this time except for the younger generation and new voters who are all largely anti-government. In 2008, 85 per cent of the Indians voted against BN. Yet BN still managed to form the Federal Government with the help of Sabah and Sarawak where they lost only two parliamentary seats. This time BN can lose 14 parliamentary seats in Sabah and Sarawak in a delayed tsunami provided the Opposition -- read Anwar -- can get their act together. Anwar's thinking in Sabah: "Never mind if I lose. Jeffrey must not win so that Muslim domination of Sabah can continue." He expects Umno in Sabah to cross over to PKR if PR seizes Putrajaya. Sarawak is one-to-one but what about Sabah? Anwar is being bull-headed in Sabah instead of withdrawing gracefully in favour of the local parties. Sabah does not need PR or BN. PKR and Pas will not win even one seat in Sabah. In Sarawak, PKR will win only one parliamentary seat -- Mas Gading -- if Star doesn't take it, Dap six and Pas none. If PKR and Pas withdraw from Sabah, the Opposition can win seven parliamentary seats including two by Dap. At the same time, if left alone or ignored by PR, less Indians can be expected to vote against BN this time. The Indians should vote against all incumbents. They don't need MIC or Hindraf because the Indians will not benefit whoever -- whether BN or PR -- is in power. Hindraf should remain an NGO and apolitical. Even more Chinese this time will vote for the Opposition. The Chinese don't need the BN or its development. What is important is that the ruling party does not get a two-third majority. The Opposition will retain Kelantan and Penang but what about their other two states and Perak? It's 50:50. That's why Kit Siang is moving to Johor and Anwar may move to Perak, if not Selangor. There's a need to rattle Umno. The Opposition has a chance to seize Terengganu, Perak and Negri Sembilan. Change in Malaysia will depend on the younger generation and new voters, the Indians and Sabah and Sarawak. At least BN in Malaya can be wiped out. Umno will survive. BN's free money policy is merely saving some of the money that would have otherwise been lost to corruption. Better to make the majority happy than the corrupt minority. BN will not stop the corruption completely because that's why they are in politics. The GE will be sometime between May 10 and mid-Oct after Parliament expires on April 28 undissolved. Just as not more than six months must lapse between one parliamentary sitting and another parliamentary sitting, not more than six months must lapse between one parliament and another if it expires undissolved. The GE needs to be called within two months only if Parliament is dissolved. The longer the GE is delayed, the better for Umno in Malaya but not in Sabah and the worse for BN in the country. The longer that the GE is delayed, the worse for PR including Dap in Sabah and the better for the local Opposition parties.

Never a Suluk Filipino for CM Posted: 21 Mar 2013 01:01 PM PDT   Even if there are circumstantial cases against the Amans in Sabah, Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak is unlikely to rock his 'fixed deposit'. Selvaraja Somiah, FMT The Suluk Filipinos are after Musa Aman's head in their renewed bid for the Chief Minister's post. But this time, Musa is not alone. He is taking Foreign Minister and brother Anifah Aman along for the ride. Many want to see Anifah destroyed along with Musa to minimise any possibility of the younger brother taking up the challenge of being the chief minister if ever the opportunity presents itself. Anifah is getting closer by the day to the chief minister's post as he has since chalked up an enviable record as foreign minister. Having made his money and tonnes of it before he went into politics, Anifah has since stayed out of business and professional dealings which would cast aspersions on his character and his integrity in public service. So, the critics would appear to be barking up the wrong tree on Anifah. Both the Suluk Filipinos and opposition PKR have alleged that Anifah is Musa's "real nominee", who is involved in all sorts of shady dealings involving timber. Even the recent arrest of Manuel Amalilo aka Mohammad Suffian Syed, who scammed 15,000 Filipinos of 12 billion pesos (RM895 million) in a ponzi scheme in the Philippines, is purportedly engineered by the Aman brothers. But those who know Anifah will swear that the Kimanis MP is one shrewd operator and scrupulous about the way he arranges his public and private life. Aside from Anifah, Deputy Chief Minister Joseph Pairin Kitingan is the only other leader who will get Musa's support as his successor. But Pairin was chief minister from 1985 to 1994 and is unlikely to accept his old post even if offered. So even if there are circumstantial cases against Musa and Anifah, current Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak is unlikely to rock his "fixed deposit" state of Sabah just because some Suluk Filipino (read: Semporna MP Shafie Apdal) got too big for his boots and wants to be chief minister. Dream on It is common knowledge here that Shafie, who is also a federal-level minister and an Umno vice- president, is eyeing the chief minister's seat. Shafie is a Suluk and his "turf" Semporna is undoubtedly infested with illegal immigrants, from the nearby Sulu Archipelago in the Philippines. But be assured no Suluk Filipino will ever become chief minister of Sabah. Why? Because the local native Dusuns in particular — including the Kadazans and Muruts – would not allow it. Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/03/22/never-a-suluk-filipino-for-cm/

Muzzling the judiciary Posted: 21 Mar 2013 12:37 PM PDT   Over the past half a century the lines of separation of powers between the three have been blurred by numerous amendments to the constitution affecting some 700 pieces of legislation.  Bob Teoh, Sin Chew Daily Is our parliament muzzling the judiciary or the judiciary muzzling itself? This poser was highlighted by a recent High Court ruling where the court itself decided it has no power to review or provide remedy to bad laws made by the legislative. We are taught in a parliamentary democracy there are three branches of government, the legislative, executive and the judiciary, all acting to keep each in check and balance so none encroach into the sanctity of the Federal Constitution as the supreme law in the country. However, over the past half a century the lines of separation of powers between the three have been blurred by numerous amendments to the constitution affecting some 700 pieces of legislation. Some of these seemed to go beyond the scope or ultra vires the constitution. These are mainly in the areas granting powers of absolute discretion to executive action. To make matters worse, these executive powers are not subject to judicial review. In other words, the judiciary is muzzled. This is no doubt a violation of the supremacy of the constitution. But this did not stop the judiciary from playing its role in providing remedies to those seeking it. It is not uncommon then to see that the judiciary in some instances has refused to be muzzled. We have seen the courts intervening and providing remedies even in cases under the draconian (now defunct) Internal Security Act. In the area of press licensing under the Publications and Printing Presses Act (PPPA), the minister has the absolute discretion to grant or to revoke such licenses. This executive action is not open to judicial review. However, in rare instances, the courts have intervened and provided remedies in the public interest. A case in point is the high profile Catholic Herald case. The High Court in Kuala Lumpur decided in 2009 that the minister was wrong in imposing a condition that the Malay version of the publication is not allowed to use the word 'Allah' otherwise its publishing licence would not be renewed. The judgement is currently under appeal. There have been some attempts at law reforms. For instance the ISA has been replaced by another law. The PPPA has also been amended, where among other things, the absolute discretion of the minister in press licencing has now been removed. The decision of the High Court in Shah Alam recently is indeed a setback. Has the judiciary muzzled itself? In an application brought Klang MP Charles Santiago for a review of the principal and supplementary electoral rolls for his parliamentary constituency was dismissed by the court. He said that he had raised sufficient grounds to show the existence of phantom voters in the electoral rolls. The court said it was bound by the Section 9A of the Elections Act 1958, in that it cannot review a gazetted electoral roll. It said the Federal Court previously ruled that a gazetted electoral roll is final and cannot be questioned in court. Responding to the decision, Santiago said the court had failed to address the key issue that Section 9A is ultra vires the Federal Constitution. Section 9A, which was introduced into the Elections Act 1958 after the High Court in Kota Kinabalu declared the Likas by-election of 2001 null and void as there were discrepancies in the electoral roll. As a result, former Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Seri Yong Teck Lee lost his seat but he regained it with a larger majority in a subsequent by-election.

Hindraf providing CPR for Indians Posted: 20 Mar 2013 03:32 PM PDT Wealthy, middle class, and educated Indians must find ways to help Hindraf solve the problem of working class Indians. By Suguman Narayanan, FMT The best analogy that I can provide to illustrate the situation of working class Indians is that of a man who just experienced a heart attack. When someone suffers a heart attack, he or his family will channel all resources to saving his or her life, other concerns become secondary, at least for the moment. That is exactly what Hindraf is doing—providing CPR (cardiopulmonary resuscitation) for working class Indians. Can Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat see themselves doing anything like this? In the past, some Indians have fought for Indian rights. Some went unnoticed while others gave up half way because of fear or were bought-over. Today one man took it beyond limits never experienced before. One man decided to sacrifice his life for the cause. That man spent five years away from home, lonely and cold in a little cramped apartment. He could not watch his kid growing up. How many of us are willing to be physically separated from our spouses and kids? This man took the challenge. He never gave up. Today he has decided to give his life for the cause. He is no other than Hindraf chairperson, P Waythamoorthy, who is currently staging a hunger strike. The strike is in its 10th day and is fast taking a toll on his health. Soon his organs will fail! Hindraf is merely asking for the minimum. The request for a RM4.5 billion budget to solve immediate problems faced by Indians may seem like a huge amount. If you read the Hindraf Blueprint, you will realise that the demands are extremely minimal. For instance when RM4.5 billion is spread across 57 years (due to 57 years of neglect), it amounts to RM79 million a year. The annual national budget of the federal government is RM250 billion. Can you honestly say that what Hindraf is asking for is excessive– hardly 2% of the annual national budget. It is not about race Is what Hindraf asking for unreasonable? I do not need to elaborate on what this means compared to the enormous amounts spent elsewhere. It's a no-brainer. Now, is it unreasonable for Hindraf chairperson Waythamoorthy staging a hunger strike? Is it too much to demand for a 1.8% budget for a community of 8% (The percentage of Indians in Malaysia could probably be larger than 8%)? READ MORE HERE

Ini Kali Lah, if toothless MACC acts -- Taib Memang Kena! Posted: 20 Mar 2013 01:02 PM PDT   Taib survived the 1987 elections and at least seven million hectares of timber concessions allegedly came to be controlled subsequently by Taib's family, henchmen and cronies (of which no less than five million hectares came under the domination of the top five robber baron timber lords who had reimbursed the state government money used for the elections).  Joe Fernandez The Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) has been uncharacteristically quick to say that they will look into video reports apparently implicating long-serving Sarawak Chief Minister Abdul Taib Mahmud in allegedly shady land deals which, from all accounts, have resulted in considerable lost revenues to the state and Federal coffers while virtually robbing the affected kampung folks of their Native land. http://bit.ly/16ESEVU http://www.globalwitness.org/insideshadowstate/ The Global Witness's investigative reporting has turned up evidence on film which the authorities will be unable to ignore or sweep this time – Radio Free Sarawak is already going to town with the expose video -- under the carpet: (1) that Taib abused his considerable powers in illegally seizing land from the Natives and allocating them to family members, among others, for only a modest premium payable to the state government; (2) that such land was subsequently sold by his family members and/or others to certain other parties for hefty sums; (3) that only 10 per cent of the purchase price was allegedly paid in Sarawak and the rest in Singapore where a "China Wall" helps to evade the Real Property Gains Tax (RPGT) in Malaysia; (4) that documents were reportedly "falsified" by the lawyers involved – created is the word used -- to show that the lands were held majority by a simple villager picked at random but only on paper. In fact such properties were majority owned by foreigners, an infringement of the laws in Malaysia. If the lands seized were state land occupied by squatters, as claimed by Taib's cousins in the video, why the need to register in the name of a simple villager?; and (5) that Taib allegedly received kickbacks indirectly from such deals.   Singapore will have to probe Global Witness video expose The MACC cannot ignore that tax evasion for one is a serious offence and that the state government too may have lost in terms of premiums. All these revenues lost would have to be recovered. The police and the state government too would have to probe that landowners lost their properties in the said deals. There's also the issue of circumvention of the laws on locals having majority ownership of land. These lands, now in the hands of plantation companies, would have to be returned by the Court and/or the state government to its rightful owners. The companies can only go after whoever misled them into purchasing the said lands. However, they themselves are guilty of circumventing land ownership laws and being a party to tax evasion. The authorities in Sarawak and Singapore, the latter priding itself on having a squeaky clean reputation, have to bring in the two Taib cousins, the lawyer, another party, all featured in the Global Witness video evidence, and other parties named by these suspects. Already, the Sarawak Bar has publicly pledged to investigate the lawyers and/or lawyers featured/named in the Global Witness video.   Taib made cousin Norah MP showing no feud with Rahman Taib will have to be roped in for his statement and the Government Departments concerned investigated and Abdul Rahman Yakub, Taib's predecessor maternal uncle, called in as a material witness known to the errant parties. Taib, in his defence, pointed to his widely-publicised "estranged relationship" with his uncle and implied that he couldn't therefore be handing out favours to his cousins, Rahman's children, also his mortal enemies. Taib appears to be blaming Rahman for the Global Witness report. That theory doesn't hold water unless everything featured in the Global Witness video was play acting in a giant conspiracy of sorts against Taib and in the process thereby implicating themselves in criminal wrong-doing. Yet, there are credible reports based on documents that at the height of the so-called feud, Taib was busy giving out and/or renewing timber concessions to his cousins, the daughters of Rahman. One daughter, cousin Norah Abdul Rahman, is now even tipped to take over from Taib as Chief Minister, according to Rahman apologists. How did Norah become Tanjung Manis MP if there's a feud between Taib and Rahman, as the Chief Minister claims? Tanjung Manis is the Halal Hub of Sarawak.   Rahman laid out the plunder of Sarawak plan for Taib The 1987 Ming Court Affair, cited by Taib apologists in his defence, was not the result of any so-called feud between Taib and Rahman. The Ming Court Affair - I was there -- was the result of the Malays in the Bumiputera wing of Taib's Parti Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu (PBB) rebelling against him for not doing enough for the Malay economy (read PBB Malays). The wing includes Muslim Melanau, Taib's community after his Christian Melanau grandfather converted to Islam. The Sarawak Malays are mainly Bidayuh living along the coast of the 1st Division and mainly Iban living along the coasts of the other Divisions who converted to Islam several hundred years ago. The Pesaka wing is Dayak including non-Muslim Melanau. Between 1981 and 1987, Taib had evidently managed to antagonize PBB rebel members by one-sidedly supporting and giving contracts and concessions to a new group of crony capitalists who were mostly Foochow Chinese, from or close to the Sarawak United People's Party (Supp), and mainly involved in the timber and construction industries. Ironically, it was his uncle who had started this trend, to become Chief Minister in 1970. He had to depend on the support of Supp and thereby thwart the James Wong-led Sarawak National Party's (Snap) attempt to come back to power in the state.   Rahman bought time for Taib to call for snap elections The PBB rebels made the cardinal mistake of consulting Rahman on their plans to throw out his nephew by introducing a no confidence motion against him in the state assembly. Rahman, to buy time for his nephew and thereby arousing the suspicions of quite a few rebels, suggested that they be led by him and meet secretly at the Ming Court Hotel in Kuala Lumpur to plan their moves properly. In the meantime, it emerged that Rahman quickly tipped off Taib who got the Governor's consent to dissolve the state assembly for a snap election and thereby stave off the no confidence motion. The rebels, growing uneasy in KL, wanted to return quickly to Kuching but Rahman kept stringing them along to buy time. The rebels under the label Permas, joined by Parti Bansa Dayak Sarawak (PBDS) led by Leo Moggie Anak Irok, felt betrayed by Rahman but had to put on a brave front in public. Privately, they were kicking themselves since they were far away from the state assembly in Kuching where they had planned to introduce the no confidence motion against Taib. There was no reason for them to assemble in KL for any meeting. Taib obtained 28 seats in the snap election that followed, while the Opposition managed a credible 20 i.e. PBDS 15 and Permas 5. Taib was saved by the seats of Supp, a party which he subsequently tried to neutralise by inviting PBDS to return to the state Barisan Nasional (BN).   Taib's road to wealth unlimited with 1987 state election After the elections, Permas leader Nor Tahir's house in Satok, Kuching, was raided by Federal authorities who found and confiscated more than RM90 million in unaccounted for cash. Nor Tahir was a former Forestry Minister, a post taken over by Taib. Nor Tahir passed away not long after that of an apparent heart attack. It appears that some RM150 million of state government money shifted out from Bank Utama after nomination day and may have been used by PBB to fund his election campaign. One deal allegedly struck was that five timber barons would each pay fork out RM30 million, to reimburse the RM 150 million, if BN won the elections. In return they would not only get to keep the concessions they already had but they would also be given many more - and Taib would also make much more, the RM30 million each being just a small down-payment. Taib survived the 1987 elections and at least seven million hectares of timber concessions allegedly came to be controlled subsequently by Taib's family, henchmen and cronies (of which no less than five million hectares came under the domination of the top five robber baron timber lords who had reimbursed the state government money used for the elections).   Taib may have to step down before 13th General Election The so-called feud between Taib and Rahman, the Ming Court Affair revealed, was a sandiwara (drama) to identify their political enemies and eliminate them. Former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad himself once openly referred to the so-called Taib-Rahman feud as a sandiwara. The Democratic Action Party (Dap) and the Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) are beating the drums of war on this theme in the wake of the Global Witness expose video. Many Malays, caught up in the so-called Taib-Rahman feud, were eliminated by this sandiwara. Now the karmic cycle has turned full circle, and Taib once again faces the grim prospect of yet another MACC probe against him. It won't be that easy for him this time to get off Scott free as there are many names, including family, implicated with him from Sarawak to Singapore and beyond. If he's innocent, what about the others involved including family?   Heads will have to roll after Global Witness video expose If the others are found guilty, how can he be innocent since everything, advertently or inadvertently, began with him approving the land deals at stake? There's every possibility that Taib would have to step down as Chief Minister if the 13th General Elections are further delayed. He has once again, as in the 2011 state election when the BN lost several seats to Dap, PKR and an independent, become a hot potato and a definite political liability. MACC, the Sarawak state government, and the Singapore authorities would not need too much time to get to the bottom of the matter and bring charges against all the errant parties. The results of the Sarawak Bar Council probe are expected to be known within a matter of weeks.   Joe Fernandez is a mature student of law and an educationist, among others, who loves to write especially Submissions for Clients wishing to Act in Person. He feels compelled, as a semi-retired journalist, to put pen to paper -- or rather the fingers to the computer keyboard -- whenever something doesn't quite jell with his weltanschauung (worldview). He shuttles between points in the Golden Heart of Borneo formed by the Sabah west coast, Labuan, Brunei, northern Sarawak and the watershed region in Borneo where three nations meet.

Will Najib stay and battle or leave? Posted: 20 Mar 2013 12:53 PM PDT   Is the Lahad Datu incident a planned disturbance to allow Najib to declare a temporary state of emergency to enable him to clamp down on the opposition leaders? Awang Abdillah, Free Malaysia Today  Umno was caught off guard when the people punished it in the 12th general election. The disastrous results of the 2008 general election alarmed former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad. The 2008 results showed that the opposition may be able to unseat the Umno-led government in the 13th general election, propelled by people's power. This reality is playing itself out in the latest political developments engulfing Najib. In Sabah, the people there are very dissatisfied with the federal government policies, especially on the issue of large numbers of foreigners being given instant Malaysian ICs. Even with the instant ICs, there is no assurance that these foreigners would vote for Umno-Barisan Nasional in the coming polls. In which case the much vaunted BN fixed-deposits of Sabah voters – locals and Filipinos – alike are now ready to punish Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and his Umno. In Sarawak, with Taib Mahmud still at the helm, the political scenario could turn fluid where the BN component parties would adopt a wait-and-see approach, depending on the outcome of the election. The Chinese voters are ever ready to punish Najib and Taib by voting out Sarawak United People's Party (SUPP). The natives may jump on the bandwagon to vote in Pakatan Rakyat in a number of constituencies. In Peninsular Malaysia, the BN component parties, especially Gerakan and MCA, are as good as dead. Within Umno there are two factions trying to outdo one another. Planned disturbances? Come election time, there would be acts of sabotage and counter-sabotage against candidates of both factions. The Chinese, Indian and Malay voters are ready to punish Najib, Umno, Mahathir and his Perkasa. Najib, as such, is being engulfed by uncertainties and threats of people's punishment. He has to prepare a contingency plan that will empower him to clip the opposition's wings. This will probably be carried out in between the dissolution of Parliament and the election dates. Once the dates are announced many believe Najib may deploy the false flag tactic by creating superficial controlled disturbances in certain parts of the country and blame them on the opposition. This is just an excuse to declare a temporary state of emergency to enable him to clamp down on the opposition leaders and subsequently lift it. These Najib-hatched "incidents" would give him an excuse to declare a state of emergency later – thereby suspending polling temporarily – accuse and consequently arrest the Pakatan leaders. Because Najib is now so hard-pressed, he may choose the general election date with a two-pronged strategy: remind the Malays to stay united under Umno or lose political power; and scare the other communities of race riots unless they support the BN. Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/03/21/will-najib-stay-and-battle-or-leave/

Indians: A lost cause? Posted: 20 Mar 2013 12:50 PM PDT   They'll have to decide if they want stick to the tsunami they helped create in 2008 or revert to BN which is still treating them unfairly after 55 years. Ali Cordoba, Free Malaysia Today  The third largest community in Peninsular Malaysia is the Indian community, but it is one of the least protected and is the community that suffered the worst forms of ostracism and racism in the country. Will this change with Pakatan Rakyat in power? Grouped under the MIC, the Indians have seen very little light at the end of the tunnel so much so that they were forced to pursue their own quest for recognition and assimilation as Malaysians. Many of the stories we hear about the Indians in Malaysia are as heart-breaking as the Tamil and Hindi movies on the silver screens in local cinemas. While these Bollywood movies almost always end with a hero rising and establishing justice and equality, in Malaysia the stories end with jail terms, deaths in custody or in joblessness. Do Malaysian Indians need a national hero who would brave the vagaries of life and politics to represent and fight for them? The Hindraf promoters would tell you they are, like other Indians, ostracised and bullied due to their brave attempts at representing Indians on the political scene. A typical conversation between a new "Malaysian" from a western African nation and an Indian staff in a bank, ends with the Indian woman asserting that her rights and freedom are not guaranteed in Malaysia. She would politely inform the African man that her fate was even worse than the migrants who flood the country every year. Migrants better off Indonesian migrants will be granted ICs (red or blue) in the long run while Nigerians and Western Africans are now being granted long-term visas and/or Permanent Residence status – which is the red IC – while Indians are still struggling to get ICs. While the West African man protested that he was jobless despite having a long-term "spouse" visa, the Indian woman retorted that she managed to get a job only after lobbying some politicians. She added that she was not working in a sane or fair environment, where some of her colleagues would at times behave like bullies or show disdain for her colour and creed. It was never safe for an Indian, man or woman, she added, to hold a job in Malaysia because of the ostracism against Indians and people of her pigmentation, which she would insist included the Africans and even other Muslims who are not Malays. Despite the odds, the resilient Indian community has survived and remains ever hopeful. It wants a greater and fairer share of the economic pie. It wants equality, more freedom and recognition of its rights in the country. Most young Indians do not understand that in a deal made in the 1950s and consolidated in the 1960s, the non-Malays were relegated to either "second or third class" citizens. The Indians fell into the latter category. They had to struggle at all levels of society to get better jobs, better education and the freedom to be who they want without prejudice. From the days of VT Sambanthan, the fifth president of the MIC and one of the founding fathers of Malaysia, the lot of the Indians has not really improved Gone are the days when the Alleycats dominated the Malaysian music charts, gone are the local Indian heroes in the local television programmes, and the innuendo continues. There's no great Indian political leader left in the country, perhaps due to desertion of the Indian cause. Or is it that, with the stringent Malay-Chinese dominance, the Indians are being sidelined for good in local politics, thus affecting the community's quest for survival in modern Malaysia? Just like the Malays and the Chinese, Indians in Malaysia are politically divided. Under Sambanthan, there was strong unity of the Indians under the MIC banner and this led them to support the BN for ages. Until the formation of Hindraf, it was impossible to tell whether the Indians would support an opposition party or group, but in 2008 the Indians took a drastic step. The vast majority voted in favour of Pakatan. That move appears to have backfired somewhat with BN acting adamantly against pro-opposition faces. Did this vote for the opposition cause a fall-off in favours for Indians within the BN? Did the BN go on to sideline the Indians by cutting off job opportunities for them and giving them to migrants from India and Nepal, for example? Or is it that the Indians are fed up with low level jobs? In a country where the Indians have to question whether they have the "right" to fight for their own welfare and whether they have enough freedom to speak and vote for whomever they want, the future for them does not seem bright. Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2013/03/21/indians-a-lost-cause/

Stop the Buku Jingga lie Posted: 19 Mar 2013 07:12 PM PDT Hindraf chairman P Waythamoorthy pens his political thoughts while on his 11th day of hunger strike. By P Waythamoorthy, FMT Today is the 11th day of my hunger viratham (hunger strike). I continue to feel weaker with each passing day. The variety of visitors is broadening. Among the visitors yesterday were several politicians. I would like to thank all the politicians who visited me to show their concerns for my condition during my viratham. However what I would also like to tell all my politician friends is that the time spent in coming all the way to the temple in Rawang to visit me probably is better spent in lobbying within their respective political parties to get their bosses to endorse the Hindrag Blueprint. This is the best way for them to show concern. The condition for my going off the hunger strike is very clear: The Malaysian government led by Najib Tun Razak must endorse Hindraf's 5-Year Blueprint in a binding manner to commit to a plan of implementation of all the six proposals in the blueprint as long as they remain the government, or The government-in-waiting of the Pakatan Rakyat led by Anwar Ibrahim must endorse the blueprint in a binding manner and commit to its implementation, should they be forming the next federal government. My request to my politician friends is to help us to realize the blueprint. Today I would like to lay out some of my thoughts on Pakatan's Buku Jingga and Hindraf's Blueprint. It is a lie to say that the Buku Jingga covers Hindraf blueprint proposals. Xavier's photo opportunity visit I would like to make mention of an incident with one PKR politician Dr Xavier Jeyakumar who visited me yesterday. When asked by one of the other visiting wellwisher as to why Pakatan was reluctant to sign the blueprint, he replied with a question of his own: "Why should we sign your blueprint when it is all in our Buku Jingga?" The wellwisher then requested Xavier to show where exactly the Buku Jingga covered the Hindraf blueprint proposals. She got silence for the answer. We were left wondering if Xavier had made that long trip just to convince me to drop our demands for the blueprint endorsement because Pakatan had it all covered. Isn't it making a mockery of my basic purpose for the hunger strike, which Xavier made an occasion of, to visit? He being a professional politician just came for the photo opportunity, that is all. If he really felt as he answered, then there clearly was no other purpose for his visit. In any case, I would like to make it very clear that the Buku Jingga consists of the Common Policy Platform of the parties representing the Chinese interests and a section of the Malays and the Pakatan Agenda which covers eight broad areas and a 100 day action plan. In all these, what you get other than broad statements of intent are some targets. There is no serious discussion in the Buku Jingga about the plans for realising any of these. Another great lie The Buku Jingga broad statements and goals just cannot cover the specific proposals of Hindraf's blueprint. It is apples and oranges. Pakatan politicians have to stop lumping together what is logically incompatible. It is a lie. There is no way any Pakatan politician can answer the lady yesterday to show where the blueprint proposals are covered in the Buku Jingga. They are not! The NEP had the stated goal of poverty eradication and economic restructuring so as to eliminate the identification of ethnicity with economic function. The NEP policy document much like the Buku Jingga stated their intentions in these kinds of broad statements, but then we all know how much of a lie the NEP had become. It became a vehicle for hijacking the national resource – sapu bersih. In fact NEP was initiated in 1970, just the time the massive displacement of the Indian plantation workers began. Instead of eradicating poverty for the Indian plantation workers, they were pushed deeper into a poverty trap by the development plans arising from the NEP. RM1.1 trillion were spent in the 10 development plans in the name of NEP. How much of that went to eradicating poverty among the displaced estate workers? READ MORE HERE

GE13 – Make the right choice Posted: 19 Mar 2013 04:44 PM PDT The choice at GE13, to me, is clear. A new government will assuredly give us reform. By Kee Thuan Chye Voters, you have to decide soon. The 13th general election has to be held at the latest within two months of April 28, when the current government's term expires. It may even be called next month if Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak has the gumption for it. Meanwhile, if you haven't decided yet which coalition – Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat – should win federal power for the next five years, consider this. After 55 years of ruling this country, where has BN got us? The country is more divided than ever. We have been polarised on racial and religious lines for decades, but now we are divided by political leanings as well. What about our economic progress? According to International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates, Malaysia's GDP per capita based on the Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) methodology amounted in 1980 to US$2,331. South Korea's was lower at US$2,302, and Taiwan's was slightly higher at US$3,571. But in 2011, South Korea's figure rose to US$31,220 (an increase of 1,255%), Taiwan's to US$37,716 (up 956%), while Malaysia's stood at US$16,240 (up 596%). What happened? How did South Korea overtake us and in 2011 record a figure that is double that of ours? Some people say the GDP (PPP) per capita is not so comprehensive, so let's look at per capita income instead. In 2011, South Korea's per capita income was US$22,424 and Taiwan's was US$20,083. How much was Malaysia's? US$9,656. Again, half that of South Korea's, and also Taiwan's. Najib pledges to make us a high-income nation with a per capita income of US$15,000 in 2020. By that time, what do you think the per capita incomes of South Korea and Taiwan would be? Furthermore, would US$15,000 still qualify as high income then? By the way, our neighbour, Singapore, that used to be part of Malaysia, has a per capita income of US$46,241, which is almost five times ours. And they don't have natural resources like we do. In the last few years, the government has hardly been talking of making Malaysia an advanced nation, which is the goal of Vision 2020, tabled in 1991. It has been more than 20 years since, enough time to consolidate efforts to attain the goal, but we are apparently not near it. The talk these days is only about becoming a high-income nation instead. That's not the same as becoming an advanced nation. Corrupt practices and economic leakages Clearly, wastage, leakages, imprudent government spending and, above all, corruption have retarded our growth. And the problem is compounded by the ruling party itself being mired in corruption. Is BN therefore likely to address this issue in a serious and concerted manner? Has it been doing so, apart from hauling in a few culprits from time to time? Shouldn't we bring in a new government that is not so entrenched in this system of corrupt practices and economic leakages? If we should, the 13th general election may be the only time to do it. Because if BN wins again, it is likely to gerrymander the electoral boundaries afterwards to its advantage and make it even harder for the opposition to win future general elections. In which case BN will be ruling Malaysia for many more years to come. Would it then be likely to bring reform? Or would it rather continue to maintain the status quo to ensure it holds on to power and reap the rewards of being in government? However, if the opposition coalition, Pakatan, were to win, what would be the biggest benefit to Malaysians? I think it would be the concretisation of the reality that a two-coalition system can work and is here to stay. And isn't this what we need? If not for the March 8, 2008, electoral result, would we be feeling as important as we do today as the people who decide who should govern us? Would we be feeling that our votes do count? Would the government be listening to us as much? A two-coalition system provides for a stronger opposition, and this is always good for applying pressure on the ruling party to do what is right and what is of benefit to the rakyat. When BN had its two-thirds majority, it enjoyed a monopoly. It could push anybody aside and any laws through Parliament. It could be arrogant. Even now, it still is but less so. Do you think that if BN were not voted out come GE13 so that it would experience what it's like to be in the opposition, it would be able to reform itself in order to serve the people better rather than its own interests? Look at Umno, the biggest party in the BN coalition. It is dominated by warlords – big ones and small ones. To them, losing their fiefdom is losing almost everything. Holding office, even a relatively small one, opens the door to potential riches for the office holder and his supporters. The bigger the office, of course the greater the wealth. He will therefore not want to give it up. That is why Umno's leaders are going around appealing to the party's members not to sabotage candidates selected to stand at GE13; the leaders know that those who are deprived of the opportunity will be envious of those who supplanted them, and they will be motivated to seek revenge against the latter. This may be cutting off their noses to spite their faces because the act of sabotage can result in a defeat for the Umno candidate and therefore the party, but they don't care. The point is, they lost their chance to stand – and with it their passport to wealth, like the extra percentage they load onto the costs of public projects to line their own pockets with or the kickbacks they get for giving approvals. Their supporters, who will also lose out in terms of influence, business opportunities, etc, will go along with their act of sabotage. Why else is our prime minister merely half-hearted in weeding out corruption? Because it's too deeply rooted within his own party. So how can we continue to give our votes to such a party or its coalition partners, like the MCA, the MIC, Gerakan, PBB, PBS, etc? READ MORE HERE

When the Fog of War lifts on Lahad Datu Standoff! Posted: 19 Mar 2013 12:55 PM PDT   Patriotism in Sabah begins with Sabah and does not end with Malaysia.   Joe Fernandez  We have not heard the last of the Lahad Datu Standoff if it degenerates, as it appears more than likely now, into prolonged guerrilla warfare as in the southern Philippines, but perhaps more low-key. There's a huge security vacuum in Sabah.   Witness the fact that 1.7 million foreigners, mostly illegal immigrants, flooded into Sabahby 2005 alone to dwarf the 1.5 million local population as Putrajaya looked the other way in a wink wink relationship with rogue elements. It's unprecedented in world history.   An estimated 800,000 of the foreigners including illegal immigrants are Suluks, many with MyKads which in the absence of state government sanction as the initiating party on a case by case basis, they are not entitled to obtain and not eligible to hold in Sabah. They may be matched in number only by the Bugis from Sulawesi in Indonesia. There's no love lost between these two large immigrant groups, the local Suluks in particular in the east coast having a strong sense of proprietorship, but that's another story.   Nature, according to the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle, abhors a vacuum. (Aristotle was a student of Plato, a Greek philosopher, and a teacher of the Macedonian Alexander the Great who became King of the Greeks. Plato, in turn, was a student of Greek philosopher Socrates.)  The reasons for Lahad Datu, given the fog of war, may keep changing during the course of such a conflict.  The first casualty in a war is the truth.   Beheadings, mutilations a Public Relations disaster of highest magnitude   However, to accuse Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim of having a sinister hand in Sabah and Sulu is a simplistic notion, if not cheap politics of hitting below the belt, which will not camouflage Putrajaya's sins in Borneo and the southern Philippines. It will not cover up the fact that the Administration has blood on its hands on both sides of the Sulu Sea. Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) vice president Tian Chua was right to imply Putrajaya's bloody hands in his numerous statements reported recently on Sabah.   It cannot be denied that the current security situation in Sabah was created solely by Putrajaya which is responsible for the matter. For starters, they dillydallied for three weeks in an act of extreme weakness if not desperation and to play politics with the issue because security in Sabah until recent days was under the Prime Minister's Department -- so more illegal immigrants can come in and enter the Electoral Rolls -- and not under the Police or Armed Forces.  Who trained the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) and gave them safe havens inSabah? MNLF leader Nur Misuari's recent statement on these issues must be taken seriously as he, more than Putrajaya, gets the benefit of the doubt in a balance of probabilities. By the same token, we don't know whether the Sulu terrorists admitted to carrying out beheadings and other mutilations in Sabah during the on-going Lahad Datu Standoff. The Suluks have more to lose for such dastardly acts, if true. It would be a Public Relations disaster of the highest magnitude; play into Putrajaya's already bloodied hands, and turned the local population against them.   The truth, as usual, may be somewhere in between.   There may be rogue elements involved, if not on one side, then the other.   Or, it could be a distasteful display by the population within that specific locality for any number of reasons.   We can only await a special Parliamentary session on the crisis, a Royal Commission of Inquiry or a White Paper with bated breaths. Meanwhile, Tian Chua's sedition case should be stayed and not be used for cheap politics by the Najib Administration.   Malaysia has no stomach for war in Sabah after southern Philippines   In a reversal of the high stakes cheapo war game played for so long in southernPhilippines by Malaysia, Sulu "terrorists" in Sabah or from Sulu -- or freedom fighters in their language -- will have safe havens in the southern Philippines if the flare-up in Sabahcontinues. They will also have access to arms, men and material from the MNLF and its breakaway Abu Sayaff, noted for its kidnappings along the east coast of Sabah.  Malaysia will have no stomach for such a war after being allegedly engaged, overtly and covertly, in the long-simmering conflict in the southern Philippines.   If push comes to shove, and if there are no "beheadings" and similar atrocities on the part of the militants, the people of Sabah will not back Malaysia in a war against the Suluks, whether in Sabah or from Sulu. Put it down to their historical grievances over the unfinished business of Malaysia in Sabah and Sarawak and their ties to the Suluks. The Suluks, if they take advantage of the widespread anti-Malaysia feeling in Sabah and Sarawak, will be like the fish swimming in a sea of popular support. Patriotism in Sabah begins with Sabah and does not end with Malaysia. The "heirs" know that possession is nine-tenths of the law when it comes to the negotiating table for a diplomatic and political solution. Even so, the Suluks in Sabah or from Sulu would have to unconditionally surrender any territory seized when the country (Sabah) regains its independence.   Defunct Sulu Sultanate no leg to stand on in Sabah   The "heirs" of the defunct Sulu Sultanate -- citing marginalisation and disenfranchisement -- may grab at least Felda Sahabat centred around the Tungku Township in Lahad Datu, this being part of the territory in the Sabah east coast which covers the waterways where Sulu used to extort tolls from the terrified traffic along them. This would force The Issue on Sabah & Sarawak: the UN would have to address the fact that No Referendum was held in Sabah, Sarawak, Brunei and Malaya on Malaysia. Already, the UN has offered in the wake of Lahad Datu to intervene in Sabah. The Cobbold Commission in 1962 was not a Referendum but a sampling of community leaders. Ironically, only the Suluk and Bajau communities polled agreed to Malaysia. The others, including the Orang Asal, were against the idea of Malaysia in Borneo to facilitate on demographic grounds the merger between Chinese majority Singapore and non-Malay majority Malaya. Singapore held a Yes or No Vote on independence through merger with Malaya viaMalaysia. Brunei stayed out of Malaysia at the 11th hour largely because of a rebellion in the sultanate against the idea of Malaysia. The defunct Sulu Sultanate, of course, does not have a leg to stand on in Sabah or parts of it.   It has no private property rights to Sabah or any part of it.   It cannot claim sovereignty over Sabah.   Suluk marginalisation, disenfranchisement does not equate Sabah claim   All the "heirs' have is the 1939 Mackasie Ruling of the High Court of Borneo which recognises their right to collect RM 5, 300 per annum collectively from the Sabah Government. This is a token or fragment of history having largely only symbolic significance. The defunct Sulu Sultanate's so-called transfer of sovereignty over Sabah not so long ago to the Philippines Government by Power of Attorney -- now expired -- is a nullity from the very beginning in international law.   The sovereignty of Sabah rests with its people.  The Sulu Sultanate died out, recorded the Madrid Protocols of 1877 and 1885, when its last Sultan died without leaving a male heir. Spain which was ruling the Philippines gave up all or any territorial claims in North Borneo under the Protocols with the United Kingdom and Germany. Read:   http://www.lawnet.sabah.gov.my/Lawnet/SabahLaws/Treaties/Protocol%28Madrid%29.pdf The Suluks in Sabah, claiming marginalisation and disenfranchisement since 1963, given the continuing influx of Bugis illegal immigrants in particular and Usno being deregistered to make way for Umno, is another matter altogether. This cannot be related to the so-called Sabah claim.   Sabah became British colony after World War II   The Brunei Sultanate has denied giving any part of Sabah to the Sulu Sultanate.  Read:  http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/special-reports/54937-sabah-and-the-sulu-claims  http://www.bt.com.bn/golden-legacy/2013/03/07/sabah-and-sulu-claims  The entire land area of Sabah belongs to or potentially belongs to the Orang Asal under Adat as Native Customary Right (NCR). Adat and the Orang Asal came long before the Sulu Sultanate's "Agreement" with the British North Borneo Chartered Company which obtained a Crown Charter from the Queen of England to rule Sabah on her behalf. Sabah was never conquered in a battle or war by any party except by the Japanese during World War II, and this too was an unprovoked war in Sabah and therefore amounted to war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. The Japanese in Sabah were "defeated" by the British and subsequently surrendered. So, by a legitimate Act of Surrender, War and Conquest, Sabah became British Territoryuntil it was returned to the Orang Asal and other Sabahans on 31 Aug, 1963 by self-determination. Even so, the Colonial Office in London agreed to purchase Sabah from the British North Borneo Chartered Company for 1.2 million pounds sterling.   Sarawak independent for 150 years under a Rajah   Malaysia (Malaya) does not have leg to stand on either in Sabah or Sarawak. Sabah and Sarawak, two independent countries, were dragged by the Malayan and British Governments against their will into Malaysia on 16 Sept 1963.  Sarawak became independent on 22 July, 1963 after a brief period of British colonial rule after World War 11 during which the Japanese occupied the country. Sarawak was an independent country under a Rajah for over 150 years before the Japanese marched in.   In an interview with Veronica Pedrosa of al Jazeera on Sun 17 Mar, 2013 at his home in Mindanao, Nur Misuari -- tagged the original Muslim rebel by the station -- said Malaysiahad no right to be in Sabah and Sarawak. http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/talktojazeera/2013/03/201331421944766446.htm l He challenged Malaysia to appear before the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and prove its case on Sabah and Sarawak.  He said that Malaysia was a colonial occupying power in Sabah and Sarawak and accused it of using the MNLF-breakaway Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) as an instrument of its colonial policies.  He said peace would only come to the southern Philippines when Malaysia is removed from the equation.  He expects MNLF-Manila peace talks to resume sometime this month in Jakarta. On Sabah and Sarawak, Nur Misuari hinted that Malaysia "will be inviting some crisis" if it does not end the colonial occupation of these countries. The chickens are coming home to roost   Even so, pending UN intervention; the Registrar of Societies (ROS) should allow the registration of Usno to pacify the Suluks in Sabah.  It should also rule that the parti parti Malaya have no business being in Sabah andSarawak. This is a violation of the 1963 Malaysia Agreement, one of the many constitutional documents making up the unwritten Constitution of Malaysia. It would become clear once the fog of war lifts that the presence of such parties in Sabah is among the reasons, albeit indirectly, for the Lahad Datu Standoff. The chickens are also coming home to roost after the Election Commission, on the directive of a self-serving Putrajaya, naively divided the Electoral Rolls in Sabah as composed of Muslim Bumiputera, non-Muslim Bumiputera, Chinese and others.  The so-called Muslim Bumiputera on the Electoral Rolls is packed with illegal immigrants at the expense of local Muslims. The non-Muslim Bumiputera category tries to drive a wedge between the majority Christian Orang Asal and minority Muslim Orang Asal when they are related to each other.   Further Reading: http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/guest-columnists/55007-malaysia-a-failure-in-sabah-sarawak http://malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/guest-columnists/55144-sabah-security-in-fits-and-starts http://malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/guest-columnists/55148-jeffrey-wants-orang-asal-allies-as-force-to-be-reckoned-with-in-mainstream-politics   Joe Fernandez is a mature student of law and an educationist, among others, who loves to write especially Submissions for Clients wishing to Act in Person. He feels compelled, as a semi-retired journalist, to put pen to paper -- or rather the fingers to the computer keyboard -- whenever something doesn't quite jell with his weltanschauung (worldview). He shuttles between points in the Golden Heart of Borneo formed by the Sabah west coast, Labuan, Brunei, northern Sarawak and the watershed region in Borneo where three nations meet.

Political suicide or stroke of genius? Posted: 19 Mar 2013 12:42 PM PDT   Pakatan's decision to field Lim in Gelang Patah, Johor, analysts say, is to win all Chinese majority seats in the southern state.   Mohsin Abdullah, fz.com  PAKATAN'S move in putting Lim Kit Siang to contest Gelang Patah is obvious. Political analysts say it's to win all Chinese majority seats in the state of Johor. Not only Gelang Patah. Using Lim's "image" and "stature" to garner the votes.   Still, before that, the analysts as well as strategists within Pakatan itself agree that the major challenge now is to get the entire Pakatan fraternity, in particular the grassroots in Johor, to "see the big picture".   The big picture, of course, is winning GE13 and forming the federal government. But isn't that obvious? Why reiterate the need to see the big picture? If not for anything else, it's to "pre-empt any chance" of an "implosion" arising from the move of bringing in Lim to Johor.    Pakatan strategists agree "there can be problems", citing the recent PKR-DAP spat as an example. Other "potential  time bombs" could be a PKR backlash as Gelang Patah has always been their's to contest and MCA man turned PKR leader Datuk Chua Jui Meng's "disappointment" of being overlooked after eying the Gelang Patah candidacy for some time. Enter the big picture.   "If they understand the bigger picture, no one needs to throw a tantrum," said a DAP headquarters source. PAS GE13 director Dr Hatta Ramli agrees that Pakatan supporters should see the bigger picture but "at the same time leaders should appreciate the contribution and sacrifices of grassroots and local leaders".   Lim's Gelang Patah candidacy was announced by Opposition Leader cum PKR Ketua Umum Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim himself. "I believe Anwar speaks for his party and this is for the good of Pakatan," said Hatta.    Already word has it that Chua will be given the relative safe seat of Bakri to contest. And said Hatta: "I'm not ruling out other compromises to sooth any ill feeling".   According to a Chinese political affairs watcher, DAP is confident of winning in constituencies where PKR candidates had failed previously. And Gelang Patah is one of them. "So DAP managed to convince Anwar to give them the seats to contest."   According to another political observer,  Pakatan aims to win 15 parliamentary seats in Johor which will help in its quest of taking over the federal administration. "Pakatan feels winning the parliamentary seats in Johor is realistic. If they do win the state government, it will be a big bonus."   The DAP source has this to say: "Johor is a front line state for DAP in GE13. And the best person to lead the attack is Lim Kit Siang. He is anak  (a child of) Johor. Like the Malay saying "sirih pulang ke gagang (going back to his roots)."   And, said the political observer, Lim needs to win Gelang Patah as well as help the opposition pact win all Chinese majority seats. "With him leaving the safe seat of Ipoh Timur, it shows DAP is serious in Johor."    The observer went on to say:  "All the while the Chinese in the state have not been part of the political tsunami, but this time the DAP feels it's going to be different."   The Chinese political affairs watcher however said it's not going to be easy for DAP, and in particular Lim, in Gelang Patah. But to the DAP source, Gelang Patah is tough "but winnable for Pakatan".   Still the Chinese political affairs watcher said while "most Chinese voters are rumoured to have made up their minds to kick out BN out of Johor, we must not lose sight of the fact that the majority of Malay and Indian voters are likely to defend BN".  And he also pointed out there are no parliamentary seats in Johor which have more than 60% Chinese voters.   Yet a PAS activist has an interesting theory, something he has been saying for quite some time. And I've written about this last year. It's worth repeating. He said that in the 1999 general election, Umno lost the Malay votes due to the sacking of Anwar by then PM Datuk Seri (now Tun) Dr Mahathir Mohamad and what saved BN then was the Chinese votes as admitted by Dr Mahathir himself. Read more at: http://fz.com/content/political-suicide-or-stroke-genius#overlay-context=

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

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net