Rabu, 5 Oktober 2011

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan
Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info
Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News


WIKILEAKS: PENAN TRIBAL LEADER'S DEATH RAISES SUSPICIONS

Posted: 05 Oct 2011 01:00 AM PDT

An official from Borneo Resource Institute (BRIMAS), a Sarawak-based human rights NGO, told poloff villagers' suspicions were strengthened because several weeks prior to his disappearance, a senior member from the Samling company visited the village. The company representative offered money to the villagers for their cooperation with the logging company. After they refused to take the money, the representative warned villagers they faced "dire consequences".

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Classified By: Classified by:  Political Section Chief Mark D. Clark fo r reasons 1.4 (b and d).

Summary

1.  (C) Penan tribal members in the East Malaysian state of Sarawak found tribal headsman and anti-logging activist Kelesau Naan dead on December 17, 2007, after he went missing for two months.  Police initially refused to open an investigation until Malaysia's Human Rights Commission (SUHAKAM) intervened.  Kelesau's death has raised Penan suspicions, as yet unsubstantiated, of possible logging industry involvement and left the indigenous ethnic group without a strong leader to protect their traditional land rights against ongoing logging efforts.  End Summary.

Death of a Tribal Leader

2.    (SBU) Kelesau Naan, a Penan tribal headman in the East Malaysian state of Sarawak was found dead, on December 17, 2007, at a riverbank near his village after missing for two months.  Kelesau was active in protecting indigenous people rights to customary land for over twenty years.  He was a lead witness against the logging industry's efforts to encroach into protected lands.  Kelesau, one of the Penan headmen in the Ulu Baram district of Sarawak, often erected barricades preventing loggers from entering the Penan tribal homeland.  In 1998, several land rights activist persuaded Kelesau and other Penan elders from Baram to file a land rights suit against the state government and Samling, a prominent timber company.  The lawsuit remains pending in the Miri High Court.  Tensions between the indigenous people and logging companies escalated in recent months over logging issues in Upper Baram region.

3.  (C) Kelesau's skull and bones were found on the rocky banks of the Segita River.  He disappeared two months earlier while checking on an animal trap.  His family identified his remains based on Kelesau's traditional bead necklace, watch, and sheath of his machete, found on his body.  Villagers of Long Kerong previously searched the area without finding his body and suspected he was murdered and his remains later placed in the area to make it look like an animal killed him.

An official from Borneo Resource Institute (BRIMAS), a Sarawak-based human rights NGO, told poloff villagers' suspicions were strengthened because several weeks prior to his disappearance, a senior member from the Samling company visited the village.  The company representative offered money to the villagers for their cooperation with the logging company.  After they refused to take the money, the representative warned villagers they faced "dire consequences".

Police Don't Investigate; Family Asks SUHAKAM for Help

4.    (C) Kelesau's son, Nick Kelesau, lodged a police report in Marudi, two weeks after the recovery of Kelesau's skeletal remains.  The BRIMAS official told poloff that police at the district nearest to the Penan village were initially reluctant to accept the police report, which forms the basis for a police investigation.  Police tried to persuade the villagers to drop the case and consider Kelesau's death an accident.  Nick insisted and the police subsequently accepted the report.  However, neither police nor government officials investigated the case.  Instead, police classified the cause of death as "sudden death."

5.  (C) Unhappy over the initial police response, Kelesau's son lodged a report with SUHAKAM.  Nick also claimed a person representing logging companies offered him up to 25,000 Ringgit ($7,820) to retract his statement in which Nick claimed his father was murdered.  The BRIMAS official believed SUHAKAM's intervention, and calls from local NGOs to investigate Kelesau's death, caused Sarawak state police headquarters to take over the investigation from the local police district.  State Police Commissioner Mohamed Salley announced the reopening of the investigation and exhumed Kelesau's remains for analysis on February 29.  Police released the postmortem report on March 17, which stated death resulted from unspecified natural causes.  The pathologist assigned to conduct the autopsy told reporters it was difficult to ascertain the cause of death because the skeletal remains were incomplete.

Comment

6.    (C) At this point, we do not have any further information to suggest foul-play in Kelesau's death, but the circumstances of the case and the local police's initial poor response naturally raise suspicions among the Penan.  The logging industry is politically very well connected in Sarawak.  During the 1990s, two other Penan villagers, both anti-logging activists, similarly disappeared after threats by logging company representatives.  Kelesau's death may well take the wind out of the sails of the Penan's effort to protect their traditional lands.  It remains unclear if other Penan tribal elders or Kelesau's son will take up the mantle.

KEITH (April 2008)

 

The point we are making

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 05:45 PM PDT

One bone of contention with the opposition in Malaysia is the absence of a Shadow Cabinet or Shadow government. Since Malaysia's system is modelled after the British Westminster system, let us do a comparison between Malaysia and the UK to see where we have fallen short, in particular with regards to the Shadow Cabinet.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Malaysia has a population of 27 million.

There are 222 parliamentary constituencies in Malaysia.

Malaysia has 31 Ministers and 40 Deputy Ministers.

(See the full list of Malaysian Ministers here: http://www.pmo.gov.my/?menu=cabinet&page=1797)

 

The UK has a population of 72 million.

There are 650 parliamentary constituencies in the UK.

The UK has 24 Ministers.

(See the full list of British Ministers here: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/prod_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/documents/digitalasset/dg_187701.htm)

There are 27 members in Britain's Shadow Cabinet.

(See the full list of Shadow Ministers here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2010/10/that_shadow_cabinet_in_full.shtml)

 

In Malaysia, we do not have a Shadow Cabinet from Pakatan Rakyat like what is being practiced by the UK and most Commonwealth countries that also practice the Westminster system of government. The strange thing, though, is that after the 1999 general election, Barisan Alternatif did have a Shadow 'government' (not only a Shadow Cabinet but Cabinet committees as well). Now, Pakatan Rakyat somehow does not seem to see the need of continuing with this practice.

Why do we need a Shadow Cabinet or a Shadow government and what purpose will it serve? Well, maybe this extract from Wikipedia can explain it better:

The Shadow Cabinet (also called the Shadow Front Bench or Shadow Ministry) is a senior group of opposition spokespeople in the Westminster system of government who, together under the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition, form an alternative cabinet to the government's, whose members shadow or mark each individual member of the government.

Members of a shadow cabinet are often but not always appointed to a Cabinet post if and when their party gets into government. It is the Shadow Cabinet's responsibility to pass criticism on the current government and its respective legislation, as well as offering alternative policies.

In the United Kingdom and Canada the major opposition party and specifically its shadow cabinet is often called His or Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. The adjective "loyal" is used because, while the role of the opposition is to oppose Her Majesty's Government, it does not dispute the sovereign's right to the throne and therefore the legitimacy of the government. However in other countries that use the Westminster system (for example, New Zealand), the opposition is known simply as The Parliamentary Opposition instead of shadow.

Some parliamentary parties, notably the British Labour Party and the Australian Labour Party, elect all the members of their shadow cabinets in a partyroom ballot, with the Leader of the Opposition then allocating portfolios to the Shadow Ministers. In other parliamentary parties, the membership and composition of the Shadow Cabinet is generally determined solely by the Leader of the Opposition.

In most countries, a member of the shadow cabinet is referred to as a Shadow Minister. In Canada, however, the term Opposition Critics is more usual. (Wikipedia)

 
Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan
Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info
Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News


Sex education, finally

Posted: 05 Oct 2011 10:32 AM PDT

By T.K. Letchumy Tamboo, The Malay Mail

AFTER a six-year delay, sex education is likely to be taught to Year Six and Form Three students next year as a pilot project in several schools in the country.

The decision to introduce social and reproductive health education (SRHE) into primary and secondary school classrooms came about from discussions between the Education Ministry and the Women, Family and Community Development Ministry.

Women, Family and Community Development Minister Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil told The Malay Mail it would be taught as a co-curricular subject after the Ujian Penilaian Sekolah Rendah (UPSR) and Penilaian Menengah Rendah (PMR) examinations.

"We have sent the proposal for the subject to be taught in schools to the Education Ministry and they have agreed, in principle, to study the implementation of teaching the subject in schools.

"Hopefully, it could be implemented next year after the UPSR and the PMR examinations.

"If everything goes well, the implementation of this subject will start as a pilot project first in several schools we have identified."

Sex education in schools was mooted in 2005 as a joint effort by both ministries and got the Cabinet's green light in December 2006.

It received a mixed reaction from various quarters despite its aims of educating the young to respect gender and sexuality, with the ultimate aim of reducing sexual crimes.

The latest developments arose from findings of the two ministries' pilot project, named 'I'm In Control', a sexual reproductive health module introduced to Form Four and Five students from five secondary schools in Kuala Lumpur, Selangor, Penang, Kelantan and Pahang.

It also went on trial at three kafe@TEEN centres, a one-stop service centre providing information and education related to adolescent reproductive health, counselling and medical treatment for reproductive health problems to adolescents, aged 13 to 24.

The module, being tested by the National Population and Family Development Board (NPFDB) from mid-2009 to the end of this year, includes pointers like assertive techniques to avoid premarital sex and how to identify and avoid high-risk situations.

Shahrizat said 308 students attended the workshops.

The pilot project continued last year with 14 more workshops at the same schools and kafe@TEEN centres, in which 597 students took part.

"Feedback from the participating students, teachers and parents was positive," she said.

Shahrizat said further discussions were held between both ministries between February and July to study ways in which SRHE could be introduced and implemented in schools at the national level.

She said the ministry was looking at using different avenues to reach out and make SRHE available to a wider audience through a larger project, called Upscaling Kafe@TEEN Programmes, which began in 2008 and expected to end next year.

"In line with this, 'I'm In Control' workshops have been conducted by selected non-governmental organisations and NPFDB trainers nationwide," she said.

This year, emphasis was given to train trainers on the parents' edition of the 'I'm In Control' module. Two training of trainers (TOT) sessions were held in August involving 88 NPFDB officers, followed by 10 dialogue sessions between parents and teachers until the year-end.

Evaluation of the project's overall effectiveness would be conducted during the final year, 2012.

Earlier this year, SRHE officially became a subject taught in the National Service Training Programme.

The Bersih Truth Hurts

Posted: 05 Oct 2011 10:30 AM PDT

By Douglas Tan via Malaysian Digest

While our Prime Minister receives accolades from most quarters for the repeal of archaic acts such as the Banishment Act 1959 and the Restricted Residence Act 1993, questions must be asked about when the true reforms would be made.
Only now has Najib Razak instructed the Attorney-General to draft the two pieces of alternative legislation to the Internal Security Act (ISA), and he has continued to chide the opposition for claiming to be the champions of the repeal of the act. Clearly, the Prime Minister has not come prepared by announcing that the ISA would be abolished without having anything prepared to replace it.

The circus does not stop there. The Medical Device Authority act gives the police the authority to seize any medical devices as evidence with the approval of the Health Minister. In our system where Ministerial authority for criminal matters should be diminished, the wide scope of the act shows that this Barisan Nasional (BN) government is as authoritarian as ever, and has no intention to change.

Question Time was intriguing as it forced Ministers to come clean with the information behind their recent actions. Actions are not without consequences, and as it transpires, the justification given for their actions are nothing short of laughable.

No rally has been publicized as much as Bersih 2.0, branded by the mainstream media as the July 9th illegal rally. Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein has been put under an enormous amount of scrutiny as to how the event was handled, and now the spotlight has been redirected at him as he attempts to explain the actions taken and the cost.

As we all now know, there were over 11,000 police personnel at a cost in excess of RM2 million borne by the taxpayers. This enormous figure compared with their official claims that only 6,000 people turned up for the rally and that almost 1,700 people were arrested smacks of inefficiency and waste in itself!

Or could it be that there were really 50,000 on the ground that day and the police presence and cost was a proportional response to keep public order? The Home Ministry can argue about the facts, but when it comes to footing the bill, it becomes difficult to justify the sheer cost of it all.

Repealing the ISA would make Malaysia the best democracy in the world, chimes the Prime Minister, but the Home Minister continues to deem Bersih as an illegal organization as they intended to "overthrow the government".

This line of reasoning is a result of paranoia rather than fact. The intent was to reform the electoral system, not to overthrow the government! This is not a justification, rather just a convenient, albeit farfetched, explanation to defend the indefensible.

Finally, Health Minister Liow Tiong Lai once again has egg on his face. After his public denial that no teargas or chemical laced water was shot at Tung Shin Hospital, the Home Ministry report conceding that the police has breached their own Standard Operating Procedures is a massive slap on the face.

After all the fuss about Lim Guan Eng apologizing for his gaff about Johor security, can we also expect an apology from the Health Minister? Or shall we expect more excuses, and the same holier-than-thou hypocrisy that we are used to?

Either way, BN have displayed their true colors yet again by failing to walk the talk. With these half-hearted measures taken to reforms, they are asking for punishment from the Rakyat in the looming General Elections.

 

At variance with the Constitution

Posted: 05 Oct 2011 10:25 AM PDT

By Shad Saleem Faruqi, The Star

The clear intention of the 1957 Constitution was to allocate penal powers to the Federal Government and to confer on the states residual powers over minor syariah offences.

WHENEVER a general election appears to be around the corner, some people find it politically profitable to stoke the embers of controversy about the need for an Islamic state and its accompanying requisite – hudud laws – ie, laws relating to crimes, punishments and rights and duties that are mentioned in the Holy Quran.

Such a season of polemic is with us again and a few observations are in order.

First, it is a fact that since the 80s, many Muslims have been aspiring to give centrality to the Syariah in our legal system.

While this religious quest is understandable, its realisation requires massive legal reconstruction of the basic legal edifice.

We must be open-eyed about these changes and must accomplish them in accordance with, and not in disregard of, the constitutional charter.

Second, respecting the sensitivities and rights of other religious communities and living in peace and harmony with them under a system of just, fair and compassionate governance is also an important requirement of the Syariah.

Example of other Muslim countries where the hudud has been enforced and how hudud's implementation has impacted on war, peace or social harmony needs to be thoroughly studied.

Third, most acts deemed criminal under the hudud are also prohibited under our penal laws.

Whether it is murder, rape, theft, robbery, unnatural sex or incest, the prohibitions of the Syariah are replicated in our law. Supporters of the hudud should note that the major difference is in the severity of punishments, the rules of evidence and of proof.

In some cases, Syariah penalties are less severe. For example, drug offences under the Syariah do not attract mandatory death sentences. The life of a murderer can be spared if the victim's family accepts blood money in compensation.

In Islamic jurisprudence, the law of evidence, the right of the accused to retract a confession and the inadmissibility of the evidence of an agent provocateur grant better protection to the accused than under ordinary law.

On the other side, the severe Syariah punishments of severing of limbs and stoning to death are practised neither in our legal system nor in the vast majority of Muslim-majority nations.

Fourth, the religious and political debate about the hudud in this country seems to be proceeding in blissful disregard of the constitutional scheme of things.

Actually, the Federal Constitution has provided clear guidance about who may legislate for crimes, who may prosecute criminal offences, which courts may try offenders, who is the subject of the law and what penalties may be imposed.

The Constitution is supreme and its imperatives cannot be lightly disregarded.

Who may legislate crimes?

In Schedule 9 List I Paragraph 4, criminal law and procedure, the administration of justice, official secrets, corrupt practices, creation of offences in respect of any of the matters included in the federal list or dealt with by federal law are in the hands of Parliament.

Under Schedule 9, List II, Para 1 the states have a power to create and punish Islamic offences subject to a number of significant limitations.

First, State legislative authority in respect of "creation and punishment of offences by persons professing the religion of Islam against precepts of that religion" is limited by the words "except in regard to matters included in the Federal List". Among matters included in the federal list are civil and criminal law and procedure.

Second, State authority to legislate on Islamic crimes is further qualified by the words "or dealt with by federal law" in Schedule 9 List I Paragraph 4(h).

Betting and lotteries, murder, theft, robbery, rape, incest and unnatural sex are all offences in Islamic law but they are clearly in federal hands because of Schedule 9 List I Item 4(l) and 4(h) and the federal Penal Code.

The clear intention of the 1957 Constitution was to allocate almost all penal powers to the federation and to confer on the states only residual powers over Syariah offences like khalwat, zina, skipping of Friday prayers and failure to observe the compulsory fasts during Ramadan.

Who may be tried before Syariah Courts?

Under Schedule 9 List II Paragraph 1, Syariah Courts are permitted to exercise jurisdiction only over persons professing the religion of Islam.

A non-Muslim cannot be subjected to the Syariah or compelled to appear before the Syariah Courts. Even if he consents, the Syariah Court has no jurisdiction over him because jurisdiction is a matter of law, not of consent or acquiescence.

If my understanding is correct, in an Islamic state, Islamic criminal laws including hudud apply to all citizens. That would pose a great challenge to our existing constitutional jurisprudence and our provisions on freedom of religion.

Is Islam in the State List? Islamic law covers the whole range of civil, criminal, personal and commercial matters.

Islamic law encompasses environmental and international matters. A popular legal myth in Malaysia is that all Islamic matters are within state jurisdiction!

If this were so, then why the explicit limitations on the penal powers of the State Assemblies?

Why the need for detailed exposition in Schedule 9, List II Para 1 (the State List) of family and personal law matters? Why not just have the generic words "All matters covered by the Syariah" in the State List?

If all matters of Islam are in State hands, as some experts are arguing, then whether it is crime, tort, contract, banking, or commercial law, if it involves Muslims, the matter should be in State Assembly hands and triable by the Syariah Courts.

Malaysia would then become "one country, with two systems" – one for Muslims and the other for non-Muslims. This is not what the forefathers envisioned.

To underline the point that in the original scheme of things, Islamic law was shared between federal and state jurisdictions and not everything connected with Islam is in the hands of State Assemblies, one can note Paragraph 4(k) of the Federal List which specifically mentions that "ascertainment of Islamic law and other personal laws for purposes of federal law" are in federal hands.

What punishments may be imposed?

Schedule 9 List II Paragraph 1 states that Syariah Courts "shall not have jurisdiction in respect of offences except in so far as conferred by federal law".

The relevant federal law is the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965. It confines Syariah Court jurisdiction to such offences as are punishable with maximum three years' jail, RM5,000 fine and six lashes. Any state law, including a hudud law, imposing larger penalties would be ultra vires the Act of 1965 and unconstitutional.

In sum, attempts by some States to legislate hudud laws and to impose hudud penalties will bring forth embarrassing constitutional law issues pitting the Constitution against religion.

Two prominent arguments in favour of the implementation of hudud need to be scrutinised.

First, the assertion that application of hudud in Malaya is not new because the Syariah was applied in Malaya in pre-British days.

With all due respect, "syariah" and "hudud" are not interchangeable.

In Malay history, there is centuries of tradition of Muslim personal law but I have difficulty documenting widespread application of hudud in Malaya.

Likewise the assertion is not convincing that because of the vox populi in some parts of the country, we must accept the change.

The Constitution cannot be overthrown by disputed historical assertions or by popular opinion.

Its procedures for amendments are elaborate and must be invoked.

Law must grow and change in accordance with the law and not by the opinion of the people or of self-anointed elites.

> Shad Faruqi is Emeritus Professor of law at UiTM and Visiting Professor at USM.

Right to question hudud law

Posted: 05 Oct 2011 10:24 AM PDT

By Azmi Sharom, The Star

My problem with religion-based law making, is the idea that it cannot be questioned because it is divine in origin. In a democracy, if we can't question the laws that affect our lives, then it is not a democracy at all.

POOR Fulham. Despite thoroughly thrashing Tony Fernandes' Queens Park Rangers 6-0, all the sports headlines were about the other London derby where Tottenham Hotspur edged Arsenal 2-1. I suppose it is all about perception; just what is important and what is not.

As much as I would like to think that the game at White Hart Lane is an indication that the power in North London has shifted to Seven Sisters road, I am ever cautious and am reminded of the saying that a swallow does not a summer make.

Although I suppose in the case of the Spurs-Arsenal rivalry, considering that we have beaten them three times in the last four league clashes, it just may be there is more than one swallow fluttering about.

However, I digress. My earlier point remains and that is the perception of what is important and what is not.

At the moment, there are all sorts of news stories floating about and they point towards one thing, elections.

PAS has once again raised the hudud issue. Frankly, I am not too worried about this matter.

Pakatan Rakyat has stated that they will not go on with hudud unless all the component parties agree.

This seems highly unlikely as DAP will never agree and I am sure there are some voices in Keadilan too who will not be comfortable with hudud.

However, if they do try to introduce it, I will most certainly object.

The reason why I object is encapsulated in Hadi's (PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang) statement in the press on the matter (if it was accurately reported) where he said that hudud cannot be questioned.

Whoa there, "cannot be questioned"? I am sorry, if you have personal beliefs that affect only you and you won't question them, that's all fine and dandy.

But if you are going to introduce something into the public sphere, something that will affect the lives of the citizens, I don't care if the source of what you are introducing is divine, it jolly well better be questioned.

And I don't care if you say I have no degree from Al-Azhar and no goatee to go along with it, I will question any law that any government wants to introduce.

This has been my problem with any religion-based law making, the idea that simply because it is divine in origin means it can't be questioned. In a democracy, if we can't question the laws that affect our lives, then it is not a democracy at all.

And then there is poor Mat Sabu; charged with criminal defamation for questioning the heroism of the policemen who fought at Bukit Kepong.

I checked the Penal Code and sure enough, criminal defamation can be committed against the dead.

It's a bit weird because how far back does this provision extend? I mean in historical matters there will always be different perspectives and differing opinions based on new findings and discoveries.

In case the Government decides to charge me with criminal defamation for questioning the character of one of our early leaders, let me use an American example.

Thomas Jefferson; renaissance man who helped draft the American Constitution and ensured a modern democracy where all men were created equal, or a shameless hypocrite slave owner who fathered numerous children with his female slaves?

Both views are correct and depending on your own take on history the view that will take precedence will differ.

And surely that was what Mat Sabu's statement was; his take on history.

Was it insensitive, probably, should he be prosecuted for it, I don't think so.

However, all these issues are really not that important to me. I think they are just the usual sound and fury that come with politicians posturing in the light that elections are coming.

The real important story for now should be the Budget and more importantly the alternative budget that the Pakatan has unveiled.

It is really good to see Pakatan acting like they have a Shadow Cabinet (although they don't have one really).

We need to see concrete counter proposals from the opposition to not only help us question the Government's Budget but also to assess the alternatives which a different government could give. This is vital in a mature democracy.

I certainly hope that discussions in the next couple of weeks will be about comparing the two budgets for surely that is more important than a hudud law which is unlikely to be implemented and Mat Sabu's supposed lack of patriotism.

Govt concealing new oil profits from Kelantan

Posted: 05 Oct 2011 10:18 AM PDT

(Harakah Daily) - Oct 6: Having denied Kelantan its share of oil royalty for oil extracted from its territory, the Barisan Nasional government is now accused of hiding oil revenues from two oil fields.

Kelantan's State Petroleum Royalty Claims committee chairman Husam Musa said the state was not informed of oil and gas from 24 out of 32 oil fields in Bumi and Suria in Kelantan waters.

"Not only they keep denying the state oil royalty, in fact the state was not told of the latest revenue harvested.

"This is immoral because it amounts to robbing the state of its wealth," he said.

 

 

READ MORE HERE.

‘Truth In Advertising’ – Ta Ann Exposed!

Posted: 05 Oct 2011 10:15 AM PDT

By Sarawak Report

Last week Ta Ann accused The Green Party in Tasmania of false advertising over logging in Sarawak.

But now advertisements promoting Ta Ann's products as 'Eco-wood' have been challenged by a devastating expose of the company's own role in Tasmania!

The report, published today by the Huon Valley Environment Centre of Tasmania, spells out Ta Ann's hypocrisy and it is uncompromisingly titled "Behind the Veneer: Forest destruction and Ta Ann Tasmania's lies". [click for report]

Over 50 pages, the troubling expose details how the Sarawak timber giant's decision to invest in Tasmania was specifically aimed at targeting the growing market for environmentally friendly, sustainable wood products, but has ended up deceiving consumers.

Why Tasmania?


"EIDAI is proud of our ECO-friendly flooring product" – Japanese advertisement for Ta Ann veneer panels sourced in Tasmania

As Ta Ann boss, Hamed Sepawi, himself confessed in 2006, Sarawak has almost completely run out of accessible timber, after 30 years of unrestrained logging by his own cousin and benefactor the Chief Minister.

Tasmania still has extensive hardwood jungles however, and remains one of the most important areas of natural wildlife world wide.

Even more crucially, Australia has received limited accreditation for sustainable timber, compared to Sarawak which is notorious for its destruction of the Borneo jungle.

Hence the constant highlighting of Tasmania as the source of Ta Ann's new 'environmentally conscious' operations.

However, as the investigation makes clear, NONE of the wood that Ta Ann has so far used from Tasmania qualifies as sustainable.

In fact, ALL of the logs so far taken by the company have come from old growth forests, many in high conservation value areas that form crucial habitats for some of the world's most endangered species.  These include Tasmania's Wedge Tailed Eagle, the Quoll and the Tasmanian Devil.

And NO plantation wood is being used by Ta Ann in its veneer processing mills in Tasmania.

 

READ MORE HERE.

Najib's high-tempo pursuits bearing fruit

Posted: 05 Oct 2011 10:11 AM PDT

(NST) - IN a football match, games played in the English Premier League particularly, a recurring tactic of club managers is a high-tempo game -- one sparkling in attacking flair that the opposing side is impelled to defend with little chance to mount their own attacks.

You might want to adopt this football analogy to how politics is played out now. 

Politicians, depending on their positions or if they are top party or government leaders, are always looking for the high-tempo strategies to retain their mandate; galvanising members and supporters; nourishing constituents and producing seminal policies that propel the nation into major global diplomatic and socio-economic players.

One in four is always a good option if your resources are limited, but in Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak's case, he has opted for four out of four, such is the confidence he exudes in recent months.

Najib has emulated the high tempo football strategy in the 30 months since he took office; the tempo of his policies so ascending you'd wonder whether he is able to sustain such highs. Evidently he can. Repealing the tough security laws in the context of Malaysian politics is such a big deal that you'd think the prime minister would have used this stunning gambit as a political endgame to score big in the coming general election.

When Najib took office in April 2009, one of his big ticket policy shifts was repealing the Internal Security Act and other security laws that are relics of the Cold War.

Just when you thought the tempo was feverishly high, he revs it higher with the release yesterday of 125 people held under the Restricted Residence Act 1933 while countermanding police warrants that would have curbed the movements of 200 others. And this in is just the last two weeks.

Of course, in the 30 months since, there had been a series of fast and furious policy and project announcements -- economic liberalisation, exhilarating free speech, especially on race relations, promise of electoral reforms with the formation of the Parliamentary Select Committee and, on Friday, the 2012 Budget to mitigate the worries of the proletariat.

You'd ask: what is Najib's endgame, which people associate with positives for the 13th general election? Curiously, that endgame is nowhere in sight, at least not this year when clearly, Najib is unlikely to call for a snap general election despite the tempting indications he has cast.

You can ignore though the opposition's hoary quarterly predictions that polls are just around the corner in the hope that the prime minister will acquiesce to the tiresomely laughable polls exhortation parlour game. Many strongly feel the prime minister won't call the general election this year although the opposition is cavorting for snap polls purely on the idea that the big gains they were rewarded with on March 8, 2008 have steadily been sapped.

However, Najib, too, has pursued comprehensive endeavours not met squarely as populist gestures: not everyone has been warm to his efforts, including some people within his flanks. 

The response seemed to be mixed and volatile, but from the prime minister's standpoint, that's exactly the reaction he expects on the principle that you simply cannot please everyone but only the ones who urgently need your help.

On that principle alone, Najib is sticking to the big picture, pushing an unstoppable momentum that by now is geared towards the high tempo we are experiencing now.

In assessing the lay of the political land, the prime minister, from his advantageous perch with all those think tanks, agencies and intelligence at his disposal, can "see" everything, from socio-economic demands, problems and solutions, to people hawking political claptrap, landmines and opportunities.

This is Najib's great advantage. Of course, in pushing players forward to sustain that high tempo, the attack-minded team might leave their defence vulnerable to an unexpected counter-attack, one which could concede an unnecessary goal.

Putting on the "football club" manager's hat, Najib has realised this downside but that didn't stop him from shoving an emphatic 'No' to the hudud, demanded by Pas, although certain segments of the Malay/Muslim populace found it agreeable.

His indirectly genial engagement with bad boy rapper Namewee caused some discomfort in the Establishment who felt he was "pushing his luck", as what some bloggers implied.

Perhaps. But Najib believes strongly in positively engaging the alternative crowd with the wild ideas of nation building on the conviction that if he wants to get things done, some political and socio-economic risks are not only necessary but prudent.

Trying to do what's effective for the nation is hard, as Najib would have reconciled now, especially if you continuously get flak from supporters who can't see the big picture, what more the foes.

Even a critic in former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad will appreciate that there are circumstances only a sitting prime minister knows and understands, that he can see what you can't see and has the ability to do the things that you can't fathom.


The Fire Next Time

Posted: 05 Oct 2011 10:03 AM PDT

By Andrew Marshall, TIME

Whom do you call if you want to speak to Southeast Asia? Apply Henry Kissinger's famous question about Europe to the 11 countries that arc from the Himalayas to the Pacific, and an answer is equally elusive. Their economies, cultures and politics differ so dramatically that generalizing about Southeast Asia is a risky business.

But let's do it anyway. Southeast Asians have at least two things in common. First, they all know what it's like to live under authoritarian regimes and rulers. The latter range from brutal autocrats (Burma's recently retired General Than Shwe) to self-styled strongmen (Cambodia's Hun Sen) to leaders who benefit from repressive laws that safeguard the predominance of a single party (Malaysia's Najib Razak).

Second, Southeast Asians are bone weary of authoritarianism, and increasingly unafraid to say so. There is a growing demand for accountability and good governance that the region's elites and demidespots ignore at their peril. To call it a Southeast Asian Spring is an exaggeration. But the movement is youthful and social-media-savvy, and could precipitate changes just as profound as those in the Middle East.(See pictures of battles for Burmese democracy.)

Prime Minister Najib, who casts himself as a moderate, seems to realize this. His party, the United Malays National Organization, leads the National Front coalition, whose decades-old grip on power has sparked protests for electoral reform. In July police violently dispersed what should have been a peaceful rally by some 50,000 members of Bersih 2.0, a group campaigning for free and fair elections. (Bersihmeans clean.) Protesters used Twitter and YouTube to organize the rally and, later, undermine claims that the police acted with restraint.

On Sept. 15, his reformist credentials in shreds, Najib promised to scrap the Internal Security Act (ISA), which allows police to detain suspects indefinitely, along with the much abused Emergency Ordinance. He also vowed to loosen media restrictions and review the laws on freedom of assembly. It's hard to know whether he will keep his promises. But emboldened Malaysians will hold him to them, either at the polls — an election must be held by 2013 — or on the streets.

Najib's announcement provoked a swift defense of the ISA from neighboring Singapore, which also inherited the law from its British colonial days. The ISA is used "sparingly" to arrest terrorism suspects, and nobody has ever been detained only for their political beliefs, said the Singaporean government. That such a defense was felt necessary is telling. In a May election, opposition candidates — who want the ISA scrapped — made historic gains against the People's Action Party, which has ruled Singapore for half a century. The government retains "broad powers to limit citizens' rights and handicap political opposition," said the U.S. State Department in April.(See pictures of Malaysia.)

Indonesians haven't marched in huge numbers since toppling the dictator Suharto in 1998. But popular yearning for good governance could easily fill the streets again. President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's approval rating is plummeting, thanks to corruption scandals implicating senior officials, and an upcoming Cabinet reshuffle will do little to halt it. Indonesia's strong economy won't stave off protests either. Stability requires functioning institutions, free media and an unfettered civil society, as well as economic growth.

Thailand is a case in point. It is now an "upper-middle income economy," with a gross national income per capita of $4,210, according to the World Bank. But it has been free-falling on other indexes, particularly those measuring corruption and media freedom, since the military overthrew yet another government in 2006. The street protests that followed were divisive and sometimes violent. But they encouraged millions of Thais to demand more say in decisions that affect their lives. Thai politicians, with their old-school reliance on patronage and payola, seem destined to fail them.

That goes double for the young. About a fifth of Southeast Asians are ages 15 to 24. Their youthful energy has so far been channeled into dynamic economies — but that doesn't mean the kids are all right, if statistics on unwanted pregnancies and drug use among Thai teenagers are anything to go by. And governments, institutions and firms across Southeast Asia still retain hierarchical structures that stifle youth and innovation.

This is especially true in Burma, where young people are key to reform: they have dominated every street protest since the military seized power in 1962. A nominally civilian government took office in March and has embarked upon reforms, suggesting that even Burma's hard-liners sense history is against them. In a recent interview, democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi ruled out an Arab-style revolt, and not just because violence appalls her. With Southeast Asians finding their voices, inspiration could lie much closer to home.


What we are not and why we can never be

Posted: 05 Oct 2011 04:47 AM PDT

Yes, so why bother? If we know that it is futile, we might as well save all our time, energy and money and just let Barisan Nasional walk in uncontested. Well, in that case, do we even need to hold any elections? Maybe we should consider the Saudi Arabian model instead then. At least there is no cheating and bribing of voters there since there are no voters and no elections.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Come now, RPK, you do know that in Malaysia appointments to the Cabinet are a bit more complicated, what with the PM having to satisfy the demands of the 14 parties that make up the BN. No one likes to have 3 football teams in the Cabinet, but that is the political reality in Malaysia.

The urgency for Pakatan to have a Shadow Cabinet is not there, as compared to the UK. This is because, in the UK, the Opposition Leader is recognised as a legal position, and he/she must be invited to all official functions, especially functions involving the Queen, and the Palace. Otherwise, the British PM has to answer to the Queen.

Indeed, the Opposition Leader in the UK has to be provided with a staff of his own, and that is the law. There are legal provisions, traditions, and conventions, that the Opposition Leader is given equal respect and recognition, equivalent to the PM. The Opposition Leader is sometimes just as powerful as the PM, as his position is ruled by law.

In the UK, the Opposition Leader is an integral part of the tradition and process, when the opening of Parliament is performed. When the Opposition Leader writes to any Govt. Dept., it must be, by law treated as an important correspondence that requires the absolute truth be revealed. Etc, etc, etc. In the UK, Opposition Leaders are knighted by the Queen, and honoured with MBE's, CBE's and the likes, and are even appointed to the House of Lords.

Please watch the PM's Question Time in Parliament, every Wednesday. Do you think that it's ever possible to have that in Malaysia? Will Najib ever will want to face Anwar Ibrahim in Parliament, the way the way the PM and the Opposition Leader do in the UK? After all, we do practice the Westminster Model in Malaysia too, don't we? I think not. What do you think RPK?

In Malaysia however, the Opposition and the Leader is a non-entity, is given no respect, no recognition, not invited to ANY functions, and he can even be framed up with sodomy.

Surely you know these things, RPK, seeing that you are a British Citizen now.

The political reality and situation in the UK is completely different from Malaysia.

Please say it as it is, Sir.

written by Ernest , October 05, 2011 23:10:49

*******************************

The above was what Ernest commented in my article called 'The point we are making'. I decided to pick it up and reply to it because it is both a good as well as negative comment.

It is good because what Ernest said is a fact when it comes to the Malaysian situation. It is negative because he (I assume Ernest is a he) is focusing on what we are not and is accepting that without challenge rather than choose to discuss and explore that: since this is what we are not, and since this is what we should be, how we do strive towards having a mature parliament just like in Britain?

The post of Opposition Leader in Parliament is an official post, one that allows for an office in Parliament House together with staff and whatnot. This means the taxpayers are paying for this job of Opposition Leader plus what other costs involved in maintaining this position. In other words, Parliament recognises the post of Opposition Leader although, as Ernest says, the government may not quite give it the respect due to it.

Okay, Ernest has already told us what we are not. He has also, in his own way (probably inevitably), told us what it should be when he explained how it is in the UK and how in Malaysia this is not followed. Now, what do we do to make sure that what we see in the UK we also see in Malaysia?

I take it that Ernest is trying to tell us that the UK example is a good example. And he is also telling us that the Malaysian example is a bad example. I assume this is what he is saying. So, the next logically step would be to ask ourselves how we can make Malaysia (which is the bad example) follow the UK (which is the good example).

Rather than lament that Malaysia is no good and in Malaysia this is not being done and Malaysians are not mature enough, and conclude that, therefore let us just forget about the whole matter, is not only a negative approach but a defeatist attitude as well.

I am now 61. Say the doctor diagnoses me with cancer and I tell him I am going to die one day anyway so why bother to try to cure me? That is a negative stand and a defeatist attitude. I might as well tell him that God has already decided when and how I will die before I was born. So no doctor can help me live another ten years if it has been decided that I am to die within two years. Old age will catch up on me anyway and never mind how healthy I may be, even without cancer I am going to die of old age. So let's just sit back and count the days till I die.

In that same spirit, Malaysian politicians are not mature. They don't respect the opposition and opposition leaders. Malaysia is not as advanced as Britain. So let us forget about trying to reform or change the system and accept this very primitive system and narrow-minded attitude as the Malaysian way and learn how to live with it.

I suppose, in that same spirit, we can say that Malaysian elections are never fair. They will cheat and bribe the voters and Barisan Nasional is still going to win, never mind how much effort we put into trying to win the elections. So why bother?

Yes, so why bother? If we know that it is futile, we might as well save all our time, energy and money and just let Barisan Nasional walk in uncontested. Well, in that case, do we even need to hold any elections? Maybe we should consider the Saudi Arabian model instead then. At least there is no cheating and bribing of voters there since there are no voters and no elections.

End of problem!

 

WIKILEAKS: PENAN TRIBAL LEADER'S DEATH RAISES SUSPICIONS

Posted: 05 Oct 2011 01:00 AM PDT

An official from Borneo Resource Institute (BRIMAS), a Sarawak-based human rights NGO, told poloff villagers' suspicions were strengthened because several weeks prior to his disappearance, a senior member from the Samling company visited the village. The company representative offered money to the villagers for their cooperation with the logging company. After they refused to take the money, the representative warned villagers they faced "dire consequences".

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Classified By: Classified by:  Political Section Chief Mark D. Clark fo r reasons 1.4 (b and d).

Summary

1.  (C) Penan tribal members in the East Malaysian state of Sarawak found tribal headsman and anti-logging activist Kelesau Naan dead on December 17, 2007, after he went missing for two months.  Police initially refused to open an investigation until Malaysia's Human Rights Commission (SUHAKAM) intervened.  Kelesau's death has raised Penan suspicions, as yet unsubstantiated, of possible logging industry involvement and left the indigenous ethnic group without a strong leader to protect their traditional land rights against ongoing logging efforts.  End Summary.

Death of a Tribal Leader

2.    (SBU) Kelesau Naan, a Penan tribal headman in the East Malaysian state of Sarawak was found dead, on December 17, 2007, at a riverbank near his village after missing for two months.  Kelesau was active in protecting indigenous people rights to customary land for over twenty years.  He was a lead witness against the logging industry's efforts to encroach into protected lands.  Kelesau, one of the Penan headmen in the Ulu Baram district of Sarawak, often erected barricades preventing loggers from entering the Penan tribal homeland.  In 1998, several land rights activist persuaded Kelesau and other Penan elders from Baram to file a land rights suit against the state government and Samling, a prominent timber company.  The lawsuit remains pending in the Miri High Court.  Tensions between the indigenous people and logging companies escalated in recent months over logging issues in Upper Baram region.

3.  (C) Kelesau's skull and bones were found on the rocky banks of the Segita River.  He disappeared two months earlier while checking on an animal trap.  His family identified his remains based on Kelesau's traditional bead necklace, watch, and sheath of his machete, found on his body.  Villagers of Long Kerong previously searched the area without finding his body and suspected he was murdered and his remains later placed in the area to make it look like an animal killed him.

An official from Borneo Resource Institute (BRIMAS), a Sarawak-based human rights NGO, told poloff villagers' suspicions were strengthened because several weeks prior to his disappearance, a senior member from the Samling company visited the village.  The company representative offered money to the villagers for their cooperation with the logging company.  After they refused to take the money, the representative warned villagers they faced "dire consequences".

Police Don't Investigate; Family Asks SUHAKAM for Help

4.    (C) Kelesau's son, Nick Kelesau, lodged a police report in Marudi, two weeks after the recovery of Kelesau's skeletal remains.  The BRIMAS official told poloff that police at the district nearest to the Penan village were initially reluctant to accept the police report, which forms the basis for a police investigation.  Police tried to persuade the villagers to drop the case and consider Kelesau's death an accident.  Nick insisted and the police subsequently accepted the report.  However, neither police nor government officials investigated the case.  Instead, police classified the cause of death as "sudden death."

5.  (C) Unhappy over the initial police response, Kelesau's son lodged a report with SUHAKAM.  Nick also claimed a person representing logging companies offered him up to 25,000 Ringgit ($7,820) to retract his statement in which Nick claimed his father was murdered.  The BRIMAS official believed SUHAKAM's intervention, and calls from local NGOs to investigate Kelesau's death, caused Sarawak state police headquarters to take over the investigation from the local police district.  State Police Commissioner Mohamed Salley announced the reopening of the investigation and exhumed Kelesau's remains for analysis on February 29.  Police released the postmortem report on March 17, which stated death resulted from unspecified natural causes.  The pathologist assigned to conduct the autopsy told reporters it was difficult to ascertain the cause of death because the skeletal remains were incomplete.

Comment

6.    (C) At this point, we do not have any further information to suggest foul-play in Kelesau's death, but the circumstances of the case and the local police's initial poor response naturally raise suspicions among the Penan.  The logging industry is politically very well connected in Sarawak.  During the 1990s, two other Penan villagers, both anti-logging activists, similarly disappeared after threats by logging company representatives.  Kelesau's death may well take the wind out of the sails of the Penan's effort to protect their traditional lands.  It remains unclear if other Penan tribal elders or Kelesau's son will take up the mantle.

KEITH (April 2008)

 

How Pakatan aims to finance its budget

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 11:10 PM PDT

By Syed Jeymal Zahiid, FMT

KUALA LUMPUR: Pakatan Rakyat today defended its "prosperity for all" budget, saying that the fund to finance its RM220 billion allocation would come from various existing revenue sources, loans and other measures to improve income.

The opposition's 2012 "shadow budget" was criticised for being too simplistic, with some analysts saying the amount "was plucked out of thin air" and not based on realistic estimations.

Yesterday, Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim, who unveiled Pakatan's budget, said that as much as RM220 billion will be spent to implement measures that will "add 20% value into the rakyat's money".

PKR strategic director Rafizi Ramli told a press briefing that the amount set by Pakatan is not far from the Barisan Nasional's, which is expected to be in the region of RM230 billion.

Based on improved tax collection and increased revenues from oil and gas in 2011, Rafizi said Pakatan expects total government income for next year to stand at RM181 billion, which will not be far from Putrajaya's estimate.

Although the estimation will not be much, Rafizi said the focus should not be on the difference in income projections but on the ability to reduce dependence on the profit of national oil company Petronas.

"The extent of difference in the amount of government revenue projection will be decided by BN's discipline to keep its hands off from Petronas coffers in the form of dividends" he said.

In June, Petronas, whose RM30 billion dividend payout last year formed nearly half the government's revenue, had reached an understanding with the government to fix the dividend payout ratio at 30% of net profits.

Capping Petronas payout

The move, expected to take effect in 2013, came after Petronas said that the dividend payouts are a constraint on the group's growth plans as significant re-investments are necessary to generate future revenues.

Rafizi said Pakatan is committed to helping Petronas achieve its objective and cap the payout to RM26 billion for 2012 as a measure to inject fiscal discipline.

Pakatan also aims to spend RM6.9 billion to provide senior citizens a bonus of RM1,000 per annum; pay RM1,000 to qualified home-makers yearly; pay RM550 to increase welfare aid per recipient; and giving out RM1,000 childcare allowance for qualified families.

The coalition will also spend an additional RM5.9 billion on public service's emolument with the payment of RM500 allowance to all teachers and also implementing a mininum wage policy of RM1,100 which would immediately benefit some 300,000 civil servants.

This will be financed by low loans, Rafizi said, adding that other policies to increase income like auctioning off approved permits (APs) will also be implemented.

"Auctioning off APs can give us an extra of at least RM1.5 billion," he said, adding that an additional RM5 billion to RM6 billion can easily be acquired by stopping "wastage and leakages of public funds".

 

READ MORE HERE.

PSC: Bersih barred, but members can attend

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 08:40 PM PDT

By Patrick Lee, FMT

KUALA LUMPUR: Bersih 2.0 will not be allowed to attend public hearings at the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on electoral reforms as it is not a registered organisation.

PSC chairman Maximus Ongkili said that only legally registered bodies or "personalities" were allowed to attend.

"Anybody can come, including legal institutions, associations or personalities. Bersih 2.0 is not a registered organisation. They'll have to come as individuals," he told reporters in the Parliament lobby.

He added that Bersih 2.0 chairperson S Ambiga was more than welcome to attend the hearing as a former chairperson of the Bar Council or as herself.

"Parliament works on the basis that personalities or persons or registered organisations. (If you're not) a registered organisation, how can you use the title of (one)?" he said.

Ongkili was briefing reporters on the PSC's upcoming meetings; the first of which would take place on Oct 12, from 12:30pm to 2:30pm.

He said that the committee would hold "two or three" closed-door meetings, whereby members of the group would be allowed to raise "whatever concerns" they have with regard to electoral reforms.

Six public hearings

After this is done, the committee would make decisions on matters it could agree on. "Contentious issues", Ongkili said, would be opened up for public hearings.


READ MORE HERE.

Under fire over AirAsia-MAS deal, Fernandes seen shifting ties

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 08:38 PM PDT

By Debra Chong, The Malaysian Insider

Aviation tycoon Tan Sri Tony Fernandes appears to be moving his allegiance from one former prime minister to another since coming under attack from influential Malay right-wingers over AirAsia's controversial share swap deal with Malaysia Airlines System (MAS).

Having won the public backing of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad last month, the AirAsia boss has now distanced himself from former prime minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and the latter's circle, which was believed to once hold great influence over the government and included Abdullah's son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin and businessman Datuk Kalimullah Hassan.

The ambitious Fernandes has been hard-hit following allegations he is using the national carrier to further his personal aspirations — the latest being the acquisition of English Premier League football club, Queens Park Rangers.

The country's flag carrier will sponsor QPR's home jersey for the next two seasons, while AirAsia's logo will be emblazoned on the team's away and third kits.

In an exclusive interview with Malay-language news portal, Agenda Daily, earlier this week, Fernandes addressed head-on the questions that have cast a shadow on his involvement in the airline industry.

Football-mad Fernandes recounted how his problems started when Khairy, a fellow football lover, said he could bring "My Team" to Old Trafford, the home of Premier League champions Manchester United.

"I said 'great idea', because it was a dream... and from there the problem started," said the businessman who managed to turn a RM1 company into Asia's biggest budget carrier.

When quizzed, he rubbished the suggestion that he owed AirAsia's dramatic success to Abdullah who approved the budget carrier to fly into Singapore.

"No, our first international route was during Dr Mahathir's time. The route we got during Pak Lah's time was the KL-Singapore (that became controversial)," Fernandes was reported as saying.

He also played down his close ties to Khairy, who was seen as having an influence on the fifth prime minister who governed from October 2003 to March 2009 — around the time when AirAsia took off.

"Actually, we didn't get anything, what we got was mostly during Dr Mahathir's and Datuk Seri Najib's time. During Pak lah's era, it was very little," Fernandes said.

 

READ MORE HERE.

Battle for Kelantan: Umno is optimistic

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 07:22 PM PDT

PAS has ruled the state since 1990 and another general election is around the corner. This time around, Umno is confident of dealing a blow, if not capturing the entire state.

The state government had alleged factions, one led by state PAS deputy commissioner III Nik Amar Nik Abdullah and deputy mentri besar Ahmad Yakcop as well as state PAS strongman Takiyuddin Hassan. The other, or rather operating in isolation, was PAS vice-president and state economic czar Husam Musa, whom many in Umno believe, is the political god-son of Nik Aziz.

Hawkeye, Free Malaysia Today

Kelantan Umno is optimistic of performing well in the impending general election because they claim that the PAS-led state government has lost its way due to stale policies and a lack of innovation to spur economic growth.

This gave rise to the possibility of Umno denying a two-thirds majority in the 45-member state legislative assembly while some of its leaders even forecasted a possible takeover of Kelantan.

Many Kelantan Umno leaders believe that Menteri Besar Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat might have overstayed his welcome.

Nik Aziz, 81, besides Sarawak Chief Minister Taib Mahmud, were the only holdover leaders from the 1990 general election.

Most of the PAS spiritual adviser's nemises such as former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad have retired, although the latter tends to offer occasional input and advise to the present federal government.

Nepotism and factionalism

State Umno treasurer Hanafi Mamat confirmed this, saying there was some confidence that Umno could score a breakthrough but expressed caution as Barisan Nasional was often the underdog here.

He said this was because PAS had made a foothold on this east coast state since reclaiming it back in 1990.

If political observers study the nature of Kelantan politics, PAS had ruled the state longer than BN since 1957, he added.

But of late, Hanafi claimed, the momentum seemed to be shifting away from PAS, largely due to Nik Aziz overstaying.

It began to unravel after the hiring and eventual termination of his son-in-law Abdul Arifffahmi Abdul Rahman as CEO to a state subsidiary- the Kelantan Mentri Besar Incorporated Sdn Bhd.

The issue dragged on for weeks in 2009 and resulted in the PAS national leadership having to intervene after a blogger began to slowly expose alleged improper dealings of the state subsidiary.

For once, Hanafi said, the people here saw a level of nepotism in the state administration and then, Nik Aziz's son, Nik Abduh won the PAS Youth deputy chairman's post earlier this year.

"Spiritual empowerment is part and parcel of Kelantan voters. They want their leaders to be seen as holy and righteous. Once, they see another side, a tendancy for abuse or an unIslamic behaviour, they may stop supporting the incumbents. This is where PAS is worried," he said.

Hanafi claimed that the myth of piousness surrounding Nik Aziz had began to fracture and the spillover was evident in the state administration.

The state government had alleged factions, one led by state PAS deputy commissioner III Nik Amar Nik Abdullah and deputy mentri besar Ahmad Yakcop as well as state PAS strongman Takiyuddin Hassan. The other, or rather operating in isolation, was PAS vice-president and state economic czar Husam Musa, whom many in Umno believe, is the political god-son of Nik Aziz.

Factionialism impeded the state government from focusing on development and the state was more than ever, reliant on the repartition of income from outside of Kelantan to generate growth.

Basic utilities such as water and electric supplies were also lacking in large swatches of the hinterland here while the main economic indicators were mostly in the low-end jobs of logging, land transactions, agriculture and cross-border trade.

Another encouraging sign for Umno, was the two by-elections held since 2008.

In Manek Urai, PAS only won with a majority of less than 70 votes while in Galas last year, Umno regained the seat it lost in 2008, largely due to the influence of the long-serving Gua Musang MP Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, Hanafi said.

Currently, Umno or BN held six out of the 45 seats in the legislative assembly.

Hanafi said another indication of support was the gravitation of the large state civil service corps towards Umno.

"I think the public sector is also getting fed up with the lack of movement on state policies. Furthermore, Nik Aziz is frail and at times, has to be hospitalised. This hampers the functions of the state machinery," he said.

After the 2008 general election, Kelantan PAS was expected to play a major role in the national political scene since Pakatan Rakyat was formed and it controlled Kedah, Penang, Perak and Selangor besides Kelantan.

READ MORE HERE

 

Analysts pour cold water on shadow budget

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 07:14 PM PDT

The budget is too focused on pleasing the civil servants instead of finding ways to expand the revenue base, they say.

Centre for Strategic Development chief executive officer Fui K Soong said Pakatan's budget should find ways of increasing the nation's revenue base instead of being too focused on expenditure. She said one way was for Pakatan to formulate policies that would promote growth in the private sector to increase the tax base that would eventually generate more income for the country.

G. Vinod, Free Malaysia Today

While lauding Pakatan Rakyat for announcing its shadow budget for 2012, several analysts said the budget failed to address many fundamental issues plaguing the nation's economy.

Yesterday, Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim announced its RM220 billion shadow budget, themed "Prosperity for All", which he said was aimed at overhauling the country's "flawed" macro and micro economic management.

Anwar also said that, among others, the Pakatan budget would look into assisting the poor by allocating RM22 billion in subsidies for basic goods and ensuring long-term fiscal survival which would focus on trimming the nation's deficit.

Calling it a populist budget, analyst Khoo Kay Peng said the budget was too focused on pleasing the civil servants at the expense of the nation's coffers.

While other countries such as Greece and Japan were trimming down their civil service, Khoo said Malaysia's political parties were more focused on increasing the civil servants' perks to fish for votes.

"I have no issue with increasing their salaries but we must remember that our civil service is over-bloated," said Khoo.

He added that to solve the problem, a massive structural reform was needed to reduce the dependence on foreign labour.

'Strong political will needed'

Khoo said the problem arose when the private sector, in a bid to reduce costs, hired foreigners to fill its vacancies at the expense of locals.

As a result, he said, the local skilled and unskilled workforce was deprived of jobs.

"And fearing a political backlash, the government absorbs these unemployed locals into the civil service," he said.

Khoo added that to solve the problem, both the government and private sector must come together to create jobs and ensure only locals are hired.

"But a strong political will is needed," he said.

Centre for Strategic Development chief executive officer Fui K Soong said Pakatan's budget should find ways of increasing the nation's revenue base instead of being too focused on expenditure.

She said one way was for Pakatan to formulate policies that would promote growth in the private sector to increase the tax base that would eventually generate more income for the country.

'Plucked out of thin air'

Praising Pakatan for introducing a minimum wage for civil servants, Fui reminded the opposition pact that the policy must be linked to an increase in productivity.

"We must remember that a minimum wage policy is a tool to prevent abuses by employers and to look after the workers' welfare; it is not a way to eradicate poverty," she said.

Soong also said that the shadow budget, while explaining expenditure, did not elaborate much on how much income is to be collected to foot the bill and the sources of revenue.

"It didn't address on how to expand our revenue base as well," she said.

READ MORE HERE

 

Wake-up call for Chinese voters

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 07:06 PM PDT

MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek says Malaysians need a New Deal that is fair, democratic, transparent and inclusive to address today's concerns and it should epitomise the core expectations of the people.

While the Chinese are either sitting on the fence or supporting the DAP, Dr Chua warned that the country would see, not a two-party system, but a two-race system. He said if the Chinese voters were blind to the realities of politics in the country, they would sit in the Opposition while the Malays form the Government.

BARADAN KUPPUSAMY, The Star

DATUK Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek has outlined a wide-ranging "New Deal" for Malaysians that include abolishing obsolete laws, relaxing the hold on the media, democratising the economy and liberalising the education system.

The MCA president urged Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, who was at the 58th MCA general assembly over the weekend when Dr Chua called for the reforms, to "take a giant leap forward" and offer the deal to all Malaysians.

"It should not allow the baggage of the past to be a millstone around the necks of our children and grandchildren," he said to the applause of the delegates.

"Malaysians need a New Deal that is fair, democratic, transparent and inclusive of all Malaysians to address today's concerns.

"It should epitomise the very core expectations of the people," he added.

While proposing that outdated and irrelevant laws be repealed, he also proposed permission for public protests at designated places with a transparent police permit application system.

On the all-important economic front, he said cronyism and nepotism when awarding projects should be abolished and affirmative action based on needs and merits be extended to any group that is poor.

On education, the New Deal hopes that mother tongue languages would eventually be made compulsory in all national schools.

Dr Chua also called for Unified Examination Certificate graduates to be admitted into public universities.

On calls for English to be made compulsory, Dr Chua said it is time the Government set a time frame to achieve this.

He also proposed a one-off cash payment to poor Malaysian households to help them tide over the rising cost of living and a monthly allowance for the affected households – a move that many Malays and Indian households would also welcome.

His New Deal is within grasp and achievable for the younger generation who wants to see the country reform.

Dr Chua is banking on these reforms, in part already promised by Najib, to carry the MCA into the next general election and win the support of Chinese voters, who make up the majority in 46 parliamentary constituencies.

He is, in fact, eyeing the young voters.

The MCA performed dismally in 2008, winning only 15 parliamentary seats.

The DAP has since emerged as the champion of the Chinese community, a position once held by the MCA.

The reforms can help the MCA stand its ground against the DAP's accusations that it did not fight for the Chinese community and had only kowtow to Umno all these years.

This is not true as cooperation with Umno and the Government had allowed the MCA to achieve a lot for the people over the years.

One example is the fact that 20,000 youngsters graduate annually from UTAR, a college conceived and built by the MCA.

While the Chinese are either sitting on the fence or supporting the DAP, Dr Chua warned that the country would see, not a two-party system, but a two-race system.

He said if the Chinese voters were blind to the realities of politics in the country, they would sit in the Opposition while the Malays form the Government.

Dr Chua said they were off on a tangent, on their own, nursing anger against the Government.

But, he said, the Government has become inclusive and has started political, social and economic reforms that were gradually transforming the country.

His overall message to the assembly delegates is – if they (the Chinese) refuse to see the reform direction the country is taking they would end up the losers.

Dr Chua has promised that if the Chinese voters, for some reasons, don't give their support to the MCA and if its performance is worse than in 2008, the party will stay out of the Government altogether.

 

Australia concealed KL banknote bribes, says report

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 06:28 PM PDT

(The Malaysian Insider) - Senior Australian central bank officials helped conceal evidence of corruption at two bank subsidiaries accused of bribery to help win overseas contracts to print banknotes, the Sydney Morning Herald newspaper alleged today.

Top Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) officials suppressed damaging information between 2007 and 2008 about payment of secret commissions to middlemen hired by Reserve firms Note Printing Australia (NPA) and Securency to win bank note contracts in Malaysia and Nepal, the report said.

The RBA has a half-share in Securency International, which is being investigated by Australian police, Britain's Serious Fraud Office and Malaysia's Anti-Corruption Commission, prompting calls from some Australian lawmakers for a judicial investigation so far rejected by the government.

"The government will not be running a commentary on these matters while they are still under investigation by the appropriate authorities and there are court proceedings pending," a spokesman for Treasurer Wayne Swan said.

RBA Deputy Governor Ric Battellino, a former deputy governor, Graeme Thompson, and former NPA boss Chris Ogilvy were among officials who knew of the concerns, the Herald said.

Evidence of the cover-ups was contained in dozens of internal documents from the bank and the bank note firms, including many seized by police after executing search warrants, it said, without naming sources.

Police in July charged Note Printing Australia and Securency over alleged payments to officials in Malaysia, Indonesia and Vietnam between 1999 and 2005 following a two-year inquiry.

The RBA and its partner in the Securency joint venture, Innovia Films, are looking for a buyer for the firm, and this year valued its half share at A$54 million (RM164.20 million).

READ MORE HERE

 

Government spent RM1.2b keeping IWK afloat

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 06:21 PM PDT

(The Malaysian Insider) - Putrajaya said today it had spent RM1.2 billion to sustain Indah Water Konsortium's (IWK) operations since nationalising the national sewerage company in 2000.

The finance ministry said in a reply to a parliamentary question from Anthony Loke (DAP-Rasah) that IWK has liabilities amounting to RM2 billion, while its assets were valued at about RM1.2 billion.

"The government has spent about RM1.2 billion to cover IWK's operational deficit due to low sewerage tariffs as compared to the true cost of operations.

"IWK's total liability up to June 2011, most of which are government support loans, is RM1.98 billion," it said in a written reply.

The finance ministry also said that there are no plans to privatise IWK but the Energy, Green Technology and Water Ministry would be restructuring the sewerage industry, reviewing sewerage tariffs and guaranteeing future capital expenditure.

Second Finance Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Husni Hanadzlah had said on September 10 that IWK would be merged with a government unit, confirming a report by The Malaysian Insider.

Ahmad Husni said that the merger process was already underway but declined to disclose the name of the government subsidiary, except to say that IWK would continue to be government-owned after the merger.

The Malaysian Insider reported on September 8 that IWK would be privatised into a consortium led by strategic investment agency 1MDB, some 11 years after the government was forced to bail out the national sewerage company from financial difficulties under its previous owners.

READ MORE HERE

 

Economists see new recession increasingly likely

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 06:03 PM PDT

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The chances of a new U.S. recession are rising rapidly as employment and housing remain depressed and Europe's debt crisis threatens to spill over, according to a number of prominent economists.

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Tuesday described the recovery as "close to faltering," economists at Goldman Sachs said the United States is on "the edge" of recession, and forecasters at the Economic Cycle Research Institute said the country's economy was "tipping" into another downturn.

Bernanke delivered the warning in testimony to the Joint Economic Committee of Congress, saying the Fed -- the U.S. central bank -- is prepared to do more to support the recovery.

Economists at Goldman Sachs lowered their forecast for U.S. economic growth in the first quarter of next year to a paltry 0.5 percent, citing Europe's ongoing debt crisis as a possible catalyst for a U.S. slump.

"The European crisis threatens U.S. economic growth via tighter financial conditions, reduced credit availability and weaker growth of U.S. exports to the region," said Andrew Tilton, economist at Goldman Sachs. "This impact is likely to slow the U.S. economy to the edge of recession by early 2012."

On Friday, the Economic Cycle Research Institute, a business cycle forecasting firm, argued that the economy was already past the point of no return, as was the ability of policymakers to help.

"The most reliable forward-looking indicators are now collectively behaving as they did on the cusp of full-blown recessions, not 'soft landings'," the group said in a report.

For many Americans, the economy never felt as if it had recovered at all. Incomes have remained stagnant while a slump in housing that began more than five years ago shows no sign of letting up.

Growth in the U.S. economy, the world's largest, averaged less than 1 percent in the first half of the year, and the country's unemployment rate has hovered just above 9 percent for several months. Long-term joblessness is at a record, despite unprecedented monetary easing by the Federal Reserve.

The Conference Board, an industry group, recently argued the chances of recession, while still below 50-50, have risen in recent months.

"There is a growing risk that sustained weak confidence could put downward pressure on demand and business activity, causing the economy to potentially dip into recession," said Ken Goldstein, an economist at the firm.

 

The point we are making

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 05:45 PM PDT

One bone of contention with the opposition in Malaysia is the absence of a Shadow Cabinet or Shadow government. Since Malaysia's system is modelled after the British Westminster system, let us do a comparison between Malaysia and the UK to see where we have fallen short, in particular with regards to the Shadow Cabinet.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Malaysia has a population of 27 million.

There are 222 parliamentary constituencies in Malaysia.

Malaysia has 31 Ministers and 40 Deputy Ministers.

(See the full list of Malaysian Ministers here: http://www.pmo.gov.my/?menu=cabinet&page=1797)

 

The UK has a population of 72 million.

There are 650 parliamentary constituencies in the UK.

The UK has 24 Ministers.

(See the full list of British Ministers here: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/prod_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/documents/digitalasset/dg_187701.htm)

There are 27 members in Britain's Shadow Cabinet.

(See the full list of Shadow Ministers here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/pm/2010/10/that_shadow_cabinet_in_full.shtml)

 

In Malaysia, we do not have a Shadow Cabinet from Pakatan Rakyat like what is being practiced by the UK and most Commonwealth countries that also practice the Westminster system of government. The strange thing, though, is that after the 1999 general election, Barisan Alternatif did have a Shadow 'government' (not only a Shadow Cabinet but Cabinet committees as well). Now, Pakatan Rakyat somehow does not seem to see the need of continuing with this practice.

Why do we need a Shadow Cabinet or a Shadow government and what purpose will it serve? Well, maybe this extract from Wikipedia can explain it better:

The Shadow Cabinet (also called the Shadow Front Bench or Shadow Ministry) is a senior group of opposition spokespeople in the Westminster system of government who, together under the leadership of the Leader of the Opposition, form an alternative cabinet to the government's, whose members shadow or mark each individual member of the government.

Members of a shadow cabinet are often but not always appointed to a Cabinet post if and when their party gets into government. It is the Shadow Cabinet's responsibility to pass criticism on the current government and its respective legislation, as well as offering alternative policies.

In the United Kingdom and Canada the major opposition party and specifically its shadow cabinet is often called His or Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition. The adjective "loyal" is used because, while the role of the opposition is to oppose Her Majesty's Government, it does not dispute the sovereign's right to the throne and therefore the legitimacy of the government. However in other countries that use the Westminster system (for example, New Zealand), the opposition is known simply as The Parliamentary Opposition instead of shadow.

Some parliamentary parties, notably the British Labour Party and the Australian Labour Party, elect all the members of their shadow cabinets in a partyroom ballot, with the Leader of the Opposition then allocating portfolios to the Shadow Ministers. In other parliamentary parties, the membership and composition of the Shadow Cabinet is generally determined solely by the Leader of the Opposition.

In most countries, a member of the shadow cabinet is referred to as a Shadow Minister. In Canada, however, the term Opposition Critics is more usual. (Wikipedia)

 

The ONE ring still confounding all

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 04:32 PM PDT

Nazri Aziz has tried to explain away 'Rosmah's diamond ring' but some are still sceptical about the one ring's Malaysian journey.

(Free Malaysia Today) - A former PKR supreme council member Badrul Hisham Shaharin says that Minister in the Prime Minister Department Nazri Aziz's explanation of the RM73 million "Rosmah's diamond ring" has a hollow ring to it.

Yesterday, Nazri said in a written reply to Segambut MP Lim Lip Eng that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), after checking with the Customs Department, "confirmed that there was no such purchase of the ring".

He also admitted that the ring was brought to Malaysia for a private exhibition display and sent back after four days.

Badrul Hisham said he is also diappointed that Nazri did not mention about allegations that there were also diamond-fitted bangles.

"I am not making any accusation but it is about time Rosmah provided an explanation and not just say 'it's all nonsense and they envy me,'" he said.

He said thare is still a cloud hanging over the allegations as Nazri has failed to address the screenshots from the Customs office computers which clearly indicate that Rosmah as the recipient of the diamond ring.

Screenshots of the alleged Customs computer displays also revealed that the ring did not have import duties.

The diamond ring episode started in July, when a blog called "MiloSuam" claimed that a diamond ring worth a whopping US$24 million (RM73.48 million) was sent to Rosmah sometime in April by New York-based fine jewellers, Jacob & Co.

After a few days another blogger called "Semut and Papan Kekunci" published photographs of Rosmah wearing bangles that were strikingly similar to Jacob & Co's "Zebra Safari Collection".

A check by FMT with Jacob & Co revealed that the Safari collection bangles were worth nearly RM1.65 million.

READ MORE HERE

 

Dam will damn us, say villagers

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 02:23 PM PDT

By Queville To, The Malaysian Insider

KOTA KINABALU: The villagers of Kampung Tambatuon in Kota Belud unanimously rejected the state government's offer of an "annual gratuity" of RM500,000 as well as a study tour to Kedah as an inducement to make way for the construction of a dam in their village.

The mostly farming community, who have been battling the government relocation, plan pointed out that they are already earning far more from their agriculture activities which include padi and rubber plantations as well as orchards.

The amount offered by the state government works out to about RM500 for each of them annually. The village currently consists of 898 villagers.

According to Singkui B Tinggi, the former village chief of the picturesque and fertile village located at the foot of Mount Kinabalu, most villagers are currently earning between RM5,000 and RM10,000 per month.

He noted that a majority of the villagers there owned rubber plantations ranging from 10 acres to more than 20 acres, besides farms for other agriculture produce.

Two Barisan Nasional elected representatives have been pushing for the construction of a dam at the site which they said could generate RM500,000 for the villagers.

In a statement issued on Tuesday, Singkui disclosed that the decision to reject the offer made by Kedamaian state assemblyman Herbert Timbun Lagadan in July this year was reached at an emergency meeting held by the Tambatuon Dam Action Committee (TDAC) at the village's mini hall on Sept 11.

"We hereby reject all the offers made to us by Herbert and Abdul Rahman Dahlan (MP for Kota Belud). We do not wish to sell our village," he said.

He reminded the two that the villagers voted for them in the last general election so that they could further improve the economy of the place, rather than threaten their livelihood and destroy their village.

Poor irrigation, not water shortage to blame

The Village Action Committee recently also submitted a memorandum on the matter to Chief Minister Musa Aman and his deputy Joseph Pairin Kitingan.

Kampung Tambatuon is nestled on the banks of Sungai Kadamaian and Sungai Kilombon which are fed by waters running off Mt Kinabalu.

The place is popular with tourists who flock to the village to see the unique "tagal" practice in Sabah, a sustainable freshwater fishing practice that allows harvesting only once a year.

Since news of the proposed construction of the RM450 million dam first surfaced early last year, it has drawn strong protests and criticism from hundreds of villagers, environmentalists and academics.

 

READ MORE HERE.

RR orders to be lifted for 125 as first security law is repealed

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 02:06 PM PDT

By Shannon Teoh, The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 5 — Datuk Seri Najib Razak said today that 125 restricted residence orders will be lifted once the first of the security laws is repealed under his latest reforms.

Calling it "obsolete and irrelevant," the prime minister said that 200 warrants due to be served under the Restricted Residence Act will also be cancelled by the Home Ministry.

"Virtual communication has become an alternative to individuals who are limited in physical contact," he told Parliament.

The prime minister said, "The home minister will free all 125 individuals under Restricted Residence orders immediately. Simultaneously, the Home Ministry will also cancel more than 200 warrants that have not been served."

Najib is also due to table the repeal of the Banishment Act later today.

The repeal of the two laws kicks off Najib's reform package as announced in his Malaysia Day address.


READ MORE HERE.

Putrajaya says Malaysia was colonised, disputes MPN’s version of history

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 02:01 PM PDT

By Clara Chooi, The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 5 — Putrajaya finally resolved today the confusion over Malaysia's historical past and rubbished claims that the country had never been colonised by the British.

Education Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin told Parliament today that although the Malay Rulers had retained their sovereignty while under British rule, they were compelled to accept advice from their colonisers, a clear indication that the country "was not free".

"On the question of whether Malaysia was colonised, the answer is — yes. I take that stand although there are some views stating otherwise.

"If we study historical facts carefully, we will know that our celebration of Merdeka is not in vain because we were colonised.

"The Malay Rulers had to accept the advice of the British commissioner or resident and this means we were not free," he told the House.

Muhyiddin, who is also deputy prime minister and Umno deputy president, was responding to a supplementary question from Azmin Ali (PKR-Gombak), who had pressed for a response from Putrajaya on the issue.

Azmin had pointed out that the recent claim by the National Professors' Council (MPN) that Malaysia was never colonised by the British and the government's subsequent silence had caused confusion among Malaysians, particularly students who are scheduled to sit for SPM examinations next month.

MORE TO COME

It's hard for me to say I'm sorry

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 01:33 PM PDT

Do we not all have public and private opinion that differs? Do we not bitch behind clients/bosses/colleagues/spouse/relatives? If a Singaporean got robbed in Malaysia and bitched about it in Stomp, can UMNO BN be consistent enough to chase the Ah Beng down and demand an apology?
By Lee Wee Tak
Perhaps UMNO and BN think getting Lim Guan Eng to apologise represent a major coup. If UMNO BN thinks this represent a significant political triumph and would swing loads of votes from Pakatan, I am not fully convinced. If all politicians have to apologise for all private statement and personal opinion, then they would have no time to service the rakyat properly.

Do we not all have public and private opinion that differs? Do we not bitch behind clients/bosses/colleagues/spouse/relatives? If a Singaporean got robbed in Malaysia and bitched about it in Stomp, can UMNO BN be consistent enough to chase the Ah Beng down and demand an apology? If UMNO BN thinks Voyeurism politics is the way to go, then let's make that an official election manifesto for voters to identify with.

I love my hometown of Seremban. I mentioned to my friends that Port Dickson is a boring holiday place and I preferred Phuket and Langkawi. Do I need to apologise for my personal opinion? Isn't democracy about differing opinions? Shouldn't the federal and state administration that are empowered and enabled to develop Port Dickson should apologise for failing to deliver?
UMNO-BN demanded, and the Johor Sultan gotten the apology from Guan Eng. The fact that Lim Guan Eng apologized, showed that maturity, humility and an awareness the world does not revolve around his own ego.
If you want apologies and remorse, look no further than the following events and wonder if an apology from the culprits would ever be forthcoming.

      1)  Noh Omar, then as Deputy Education Minister
In 2007, when Ean Yong Hian Wah submitted a fairly innocuous memorandum to the then Deputy Minister Noh Omar with regards to violent conduct by a teacher in a secondary school on behalf of the abused student's parents, Noh Omar appeared to lose control of his faculties and verbally abused Ean Yong, crumpled the official memorandum and threw it away, before it was picked up by his officer. He accused Ean Yong and the DAP of interfering in a school disciplinary matter. Noh Omar even exclaimed at one stage that he will not handle any case referred via the party.
·         Should Noh Omar apologise for his violent and uncalled for behavior which did not solve the issue at hand and probably terrified the young student who went there as a bully victim seeking help?


2)      Ahmad Ismail, the wonder drug for BN harmonyin Penang
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arWnZtE3TdA
Ahmad Ismail called Chinese "penumpang" obviously inconsistent with so many recent (i.e. close to GE time) praises from Najib and Nazri about the appreciated role of Chinese as main tax payers. Penumpang? Malaysian Chinese purchase their property in accordance with laws passed by UMNO-BN law makers and unless in cases of default, paid every ringgit and sen for their property.
You can see in the video, Ahmad Ismail's recalcitrant and arrogant refusal to apologise and the unruly supporters behind him.
Should he apologise to all who are offended by him? Since he has failed to apologise, should the UMNO higher up do so for him for the sake of a few more Chinese votes?

3)      That legendary Najib video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwNLT428PqU

In the Sibu by-election, Najib's legendary speech "you help me, I help you" seems to infer to me that perhaps he agreed to some lousy advice that Chinese in Sibu are easily bought and equate their sacred vote to by election dead man angpow. The Chinese there have replied by voting against BN, should Najib apologise for underestimating them and painted to the world, an extremely regrettable of how democracy is being played out in Malaysia?

4)      Temple demolition
Before UMNO BN lost Selangor, according to the Hindraf source above, numerous Hindu temples were demolished, defaced, relocated next to sewerage tanks, burnt to the ground, deities forcibly removed, police report ignored and what not.
While UMNO BN have signal to "retake Selangor at all cost", a simple apology and pre-election promise of not to do this again seems to be beyond them.

Malaysia In The Next Era

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 01:23 PM PDT

By LH Chew

Sometimes it makes me wonder if we really have the guts to take the first step to make the change. We like to lament how bad things are, how the government took us for a ride, how innocent people who simply wants to see reforms were 'terrorised', the corruption, the money leakage, and all sorts of ills, yet we still want to stick with BN election after election.

Yes, BN had ruled for more than 50 years, and we have been eating the same set of dishes for that long, should we not have a different taste now? Previously, I wrote in my article 'A New Dawn In Malaysia, Hopefully' which was published in Malaysia Today last December and I mentioned if we voted an alternative government into place and they do not perform as what the rakyat expected, we can always kick them out in the next election. But if we do not even try, will you see any changes? If there is no change, there is no change.

Sure, changes come with risks, as it has been proven in many other countries when they changed the government, but if we do not take risks, do you expect your life is going to improve? There is no such thing as a free lunch and we know that. Take Taiwan for example. It was ruled by KMT for more than 50 years and the people voted for a change in government in 2000. Unfortunately what they got was a miserable 8 years under the rule of the new government. The new government became even more corrupt and they abused their power more than the previous government. But the civil service did improve and the civil servants for once really became a 'servant' to the people, they became more polite and humble.

After experimenting with an alternative government, Taiwan decided to vote back KMT because during those 8 years in the wilderness, the KMT transformed and reformed and listen more to the people. In other words, they suddenly became more people-friendly. We need to keep ourselves in mind that there is no such thing as a perfect government and we cannot expect when we are given a drumstick, we want the whole chicken. With a reformed KMT back in power, there was less turmoil in the society and the economy did get going and the peoples' lives did see improvement.

So, if our Pakatan Rakyat brothers and sisters claim they can do a better job than the BN government, let them try. If they do not live up to what they said they can do, we will simply kick them out in the next election. But we first must bite the bullet and let them form the government. What is the point of complaining about the state of affairs if we continue voting in the BN government. If we do so, then we should just shut up and take all these unpleasantness in our stride.

We have already read in the alternative media, the exposures related to abuses of power that were swept under the carpet and selective prosecution. We want all these 'crooks' to see the light of the day. We want a fairer society. But if we keep sticking with the BN government, we are not sure if we can see some remedies to these ills.

Indeed Pakatan Rakyat do have some good people in their line-up and hopefully when they form the government, they will live up to their expectations. Yes, there were many 'kataks' too as back in 2008, Pakatan Rakyat just grab any live bodies to stand for them but these unworthy members should have been weeded out when they jumped ship. We want to see those who remained in Pakatan Rakyat prove their worth.

So, hopefully come GE13, we can all wake up to a new government. Let us not just talk about it, just do it!

Maybe UMNO should court HINDRAF

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 01:10 PM PDT

PR had a free ride under the HINDRAF banner for GE12 and yet today they won't even engage with them. People are not blind and they do understand what racism is. 

By Jakun Malaysia

 
With the election on the horizon, everyone seems to be wary of the direction of the nation with the usual politicing taking centre field.

The public who seems to know everything that happens around us which ends up in kedai kopi gossip seems to read too much into the gimmickry both by UMNO and PR. The showdown comes and goes and nothing changes for the general public in terms of policies or the betterment of the society.

UMNO, having castigated HINDRAF with anything and everything that they could find under the advice of their mandores was eventually brought down in GE12 with unexpected loses in the election.

They even went to the extent of legalising and inaugurating the superficial political movement that calls itself MMS within a month of its application although MIC would have naturally been against it. Imagine how desperate UMNO was?  As far as PPP is concerned, it is a shade of its originators, the Seenivasagam brothers, so it does not even deserve a mention like other Indian-based parties like IPF and god knows how many more Indian party splinters.

Let's look at Sabah & Sarawak; you have four different parties in each respective state being a part of the coalition with guaranteed either parliamentary or state seats.

Looking into the decision-makers in West Malaysia which is definitely multicultural, official coalition partners with some chicken feed by the UMNO supremos are only MCA, MIC, GERAKAN & PPP.

Now you have twenty-one other officially registered parties and one unregistered party ie (HRP). Naturally, you can guess whose affliance the leaders of these parties are fed except for PSM. You don't see them much in public until election time.

PR thinks with its three (3) parties they have the cat in a bag although if not for the uprise of HINDRAF they would be standing high and dry like what happened in 1990 & 1999.

PR had a free ride under the HINDRAF banner for GE12 and yet today they won't even engage with them. People are not blind and they do understand what racism is.

UMNO may have committed atrocities, courtesy of Dr Mahathir in the past, but they had their brothers in arms ie the rest of the elite and cari makan middleclass non-Malays who equally neglect the poorer brethren of their society. I don't know whether UMNO has learnt its lesson, but I can see that they are trying to make amends like accepting a superficial party like MMS into their fold and approving PSM and KITA. Maybe UMNO wants to make a change, maybe it was misdirected by their mandores like how PR is, who knows, when it is a bread and butter issue for the society?

 

In semblance to Suqiu, if many would remember, their demand was similar to HINDRAF back in 1999 but naturally eclipsed by the one and only Dr Mahathir after inflicting fear and favor in exchange.    

Fortunately HINDRAF is immune to fear and favor, and that carried the spirit of consciousness for the community and the torch is still there after 4 years by its spirited followers. If PR thinks that this is not relevant, then I think it is high time UMNO makes an attempt to engage HINDRAF and lay down a blueprint if they feel that even after 54 years of faults and errors through their mandores, they have the humility to ensure they are the best movement to ensure the progress of its people irrespective of origin.

Putrajaya ditches Chinese US$1b Pudu Jail plan for local developers

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 09:40 AM PDT

By Jahabar Sadiq, The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 5 — The Najib administration has dropped a mainland Chinese developer's US$1 billion (RM3.2 billion) redevelopment plan for Pudu Jail in favour of splitting the eight-hectare prime land into parcels to be developed by mainly Bumiputera companies, sources say.

The Malaysian Insider understands that Pudu Jail land owner, UDA Holdings Bhd, has been instructed by its shareholder, the Ministry of Finance (MOF), to set up a special purpose vehicle (SPV) to oversee the redevelopment and carve up the land with two parcels to be given to Bumiputera companies and one to a non-Bumiputera firm.

"UDA Holdings received a letter from the MOF in July rejecting the Chinese bid despite a majority board decision to recommend their plan," a source told The Malaysian Insider, referring to China's Everbright International Construction Ltd's bid.

A source said the eight-hectare piece of prime land will be split into three parcels under different developers. — vitruvianman.blogspot.com pic
UDA Holdings chairman Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed confirmed the MOF directive but declined further comment. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak is also the Finance Minister with Datuk Ahmad Husni Hanadzlah as the Second Finance Minister.

It is understood that the Pulai MP chaired an UDA Holdings board meeting yesterday to work out the terms of reference for companies interested in redeveloping the site, which became Kuala Lumpur's main prison from 1895 until its formal closure in 1996.

"The board is working out the terms for the new bids and it will take some time," another source told The Malaysian Insider, adding the requirements were set by the MOF.

UDA Holdings had recommended Everbright as its partner for the redevelopment after a shortlisting process had been completed with Everbright's bid providing an integrated commercial and transport hub worth RM2 billion, three times the value of the land. The other bids from local companies were not impressive or gave similar returns, a source said.

The board had planned an integrated commercial and transport hub as the site is near the proposed 100-storey Warisan Merdeka tower, the Jalan Shaw Light Rail Transit (LRT) station, the planned Klang Valley Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) and UDA's own Pudu Sentral bus terminal.

 

READ MORE HERE.

PKR and DAP yet to reach consensus on S'wak seats allocation

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 07:27 AM PDT

(The Sun Daily) - Sarawak PKR and DAP are still unable to agree on the allocation of seats for each party to contest in the coming general election due to overlapping claims.

Despite having the second round of meeting on Sunday to finalise the allocation issue, both parties were unable to agree on "a small number of seats".

Sarawak PKR chief Baru Bian, however, expressed confidence that the allocations would be settled before the general elections.

"But we are in an advanced stage of coming up with solutions," he said today at a press conference.

"The overlapping claims involved a small number of seats."

Baru, who is also the state assemblyman for Ba'Kelalan, said the negotiations between PKR and DAP was a lot easier this time around compared to the run-up to the April state elections.

He said PAS was not represented at the second meeting as it had no overlapping claim on seats with the DAP.

"However, PKR and PAS are both claiming a few seats. So, PKR will hold separate meeting with PAS later," he added.

Baru also dismissed reports that he will contest in the Baram parliamentary constituency in the coming election.

"I want to make is very clear here that I am not a candidate. We have two qualified persons in mind, one is a lawyer and the other, a soil scientist," he added.

He said the two had been very active on the ground, trying to get the feedback.

PKR and DAP are eyeing between 12 to 15 seats each, out of 31 parliamentary seats in Sarawak.

PAS is expected to contest two or three Muslim/Malay areas.

 

SUBJECT: UMNO YOUTH OFFICIAL ON HEATED PARTY CONTESTS AND MONEY POLITICS

Posted: 04 Oct 2011 01:00 AM PDT

Money politics would be key to candidates' success, Suffian commented, as "this is the way UMNO does business," and UMNO delegates would expect compensation. UMNO politicians from Sabah in particular were known for their willingness to sell their support. Suffian recalled earlier party elections in which delegates took home cars, motorcycles, appliances, stock options in government-linked companies, and pre-paid credit cards, in addition to cash. 

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Classified By: Political Section Chief Mark D. Clark, reason 1.4 (b and d).

Summary

1.  (C) Many UMNO party branches and divisions could nominate a Najib/Muhyiddin ticket despite Prime Minister Abdullah's confirmation that he will stand for reelection in the December party contest, UMNO party youth official Suffian Awang told us on June 17.  Eleven candidates would vie seriously for three UMNO vice president slots, while there could be a three-cornered race for the powerful Youth chief position.  Suffian stated matter-of-factly that heated party contests would enrich UMNO delegates as candidates would utilize old-style money politics to buy support.  End Summary.

Grassroots to Endorse Najib/Muhyiddin

2.  (C) Mohamed Suffian Awang, Youth division leader from Kuantan for the ruling United Malays National Organization (UMNO) party, provided polchief on June 17 with purported "grassroots" perspectives on upcoming UMNO leadership contests.  Suffian, who also sits on the UMNO Youth national executive council, anticipated that upcoming UMNO branch elections (July-August) and division elections (October-November) would result in nominations for current Deputy Prime Minister/Deputy UMNO President Najib Tun Razak to replace embattled Abdullah Badawi as party leader, together with nominations for UMNO Vice President Muhyiddin Yassin to fill the number two slot. 

UMNO divisions would endorse a Najib/Muhyiddin ticket even though PM Abdullah has made it clear he will stand for reelection in UMNO's national elections in December and Najib has publicly reaffirmed his loyalty to Abdullah.  "The grassroots will have their say," and support Najib to replace Abdullah, Suffian said, echoing a message we have heard repeatedly, including from Najib's political secretary (reftel).

3.  (C) Suffian emphasized that Muhyiddin in particular has clearly committed himself to gaining election as the UMNO Deputy President "come what may."  Suffian also remarked that UMNO veteran leader Tengku Razaleigh's campaign to gain nominations to challenge Abdullah for the UMNO presidency has attracted some grassroots attention, as evidenced by the UMNO crowds Razaleigh has gathered as he tours the country.

4.  (C) Within UMNO, Suffian contended PM Abdullah came in for recent criticism as an inconsistent leader, including the sudden announcement of the fuel price increase which contradicted the government's earlier plan for a price rise in August.  Many in UMNO saw Abdullah's approach to reforms as catering to an opposition agenda, not an UMNO agenda, and there was widespread UMNO dislike of de facto judicial reform Minister Zaid Ibrahim.

Stiff Competition for VP Slots

5.  (C) Beyond the struggle for party's top two positions, the UMNO election cycle will feature fierce competition for the three elected Vice President slots.  Suffian believed there were 11 senior leaders seriously competing for three VP positions at this point, namely five cabinet members (Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar, Education Minister Hishamuddin Hussein, Foreign Minister Rais Yatim, Higher Education Minister Khalid Nordin, and Minister without portfolio Ahmad Zahid Hamidi); Chief Ministers from four states (Ghani Othman of Johor, Ali Rastum of Malacca, Mohamad Hasan of Negeri Sembilan, and Adnan Yaakob of Pahang); and two former Chief Ministers (Shahidan Kassim of Perlis and Abdul Rahim Tamby Chik of Malacca).

Race for Youth Chief

6.  (C) Suffian said the contest to replace Hishamuddin Hussein as the powerful UMNO Youth chief currently appears to be a three-cornered race featuring Mahathir's son Mukhriz, PM son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin and former Selangor Chief Minister Khir Toyo.  Khir Toyo was positioning himself as a man of the people as opposed to Mukhriz and Khairy whose positions depending on their family connections.  Khir Toyo's reputation had suffered, however, after UMNO's shocking loss of Selangor state to the opposition parties.

Show Me the Money

7.  (C) UMNO activists and would-be delegates to the national party elections were ecstatic with this year's stiff competition because it meant that they would collect larger payments from candidates, Suffian stated matter-of-factly.

Money politics would be key to candidates' success, Suffian commented, as "this is the way UMNO does business," and UMNO delegates would expect compensation.  UMNO politicians from Sabah in particular were known for their willingness to sell their support. 

Suffian recalled earlier party elections in which delegates took home cars, motorcycles, appliances, stock options in government-linked companies, and pre-paid credit cards, in addition to cash. 

(Note: Some UMNO delegates at the 2004 national party elections received compensation roughly equivalent to $95,000 in today's valuation, according to Embassy sources.  End Note.)

Comment

8.  (C) Suffian is not a first-tier UMNO leader but we report his statements as representative of comments we have heard from a number of UMNO voices, particularly those who want to see Najib replace Abdullah by year's end.  Najib recently and publicly restated his loyalty to Abdullah and his support for an orderly transition.  Najib, however, has not spoken out yet against "grassroots" efforts to nominate a Najib/Muhyiddin ticket for the December elections, efforts that Najib's own camp appears very willing to encourage.

KEITH (June 2008)

 

Police fired tear gas, broke rules in Tung Shin incident

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 10:56 PM PDT

(The Malaysian Insider) - KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 4 — Riot police broke their own standard operating procedures (SOP) by firing tear gas when dispersing Bersih 2.0 rally marchers at the Tung Shin Hospital on July 9, a Health Ministry investigation has concluded.

Home Ministry secretary-general Tan Sri Mahmood Adam said tonight that errant policemen would be referred to the police's disciplinary board.

"The investigation results concluded that there were unethical actions which were beyond the SOP of the Royal Malaysian Police when enforcement was performed on rally participants who were wrongly using the hospital premises," Mahmood said in a statement.

Putrajaya and police had earlier denied any wrongdoing despite proof given by Bersih and those at the rally.

The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) is now waiting for police to answer questions into the incident after a complaint from Bersih, which held the rally to call for free and fair elections.

Police had absolved themselves of any wrongdoing during the July 9 rally after setting up six internal teams to investigate claims of police brutality that followed after nearly 1,700 were arrested, scores injured and an ex-soldier died during chaotic scenes in the capital.

 


READ MORE HERE.

How The Hunter Became The Hunted

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 09:44 PM PDT

By Masterwordsmith

We can see how DSAI, LGE, Mat Sabu, Nik Aziz, etc. are under attack and issues like Hudud, Communist, Bukit Kepong, etc, are raised and Pakatan is scrambling like the Americans at Pearl Harbour.

Sun Tzu has already taught us that the best form of defense is attack. This was Pakatan's forte in the past and they seem to have lost it. In sharp contrast, this is what BN is doing now.

Once upon a time before GE 12, Pakatan Rakyat had the luxury of attacking the government (and its leaders) with an endless array of issues. In fact, they never seemed to run short of ammunition to attack the government  which was on the defensive, busy defending themselves and warding off blow after blow.

Naturally, the internet was aflame with the corruption scandals which plagued the Malaysian government while the MSM had a field day painting picture perfect scenarios on the ground to create a 'feel good' ambiance in total indifference to the prevailing sentiment in cyberspace.

In the country's 12th GE, opposition parties took 82 seats in the federal parliament, compared to 20 seats in the 11th GE (2004). Significant political casualties for the coalition included the minister of works; the minister of women, family and community development; and the minister of information. Five of the 13 state legislatures also fell to opposition control.

Since Pakatan Rakyat clinched the tsunami victory in 2008, they seem to have run out of steam. In reality, it is not easy to maintain that level of being on the offensive all the time.

Eventually, Pakatan slowed down in their offensive as they also had to cope with the brass tags of governance. However, what they did not expect was how the government has turned around and started attacking the opposition and in a bitter twist of fate, it is the opposition that is busy defending itself now as the government is giving them a taste of their own medicine.

What we see today is the slow decapitation of Pakatan Rakyat whereby the status quo is slowly, steadily and stealthily weakening the coalition by their continual onslaught on selected leaders, starting with Anwar Ibrahim, Mat Sabu and now Lim Guan Eng. Who is next?

Initially, the opposition worked closely with the 'alternative media'. And then the reversal of fortunes began when Pakatan gradually became a bit sombong and seemed to have regarded some in the alternative media as the enemy.

So, the alternative media and Pakatan have taken separate routes which do not seem to converge at all.

Since then, BN-Umno have mobilised the pro-govt Blogs and alternative media into a coordinate force and theirs will be a force to be reckoned with!

The harsh reality is that today, BN is where Pakatan Rakyat used to be a few years ago!

If one were to scrutinize the situation, BN has recognised the value of the alternative media. They learnt their lesson well from the result of the 2008 GE where BN got an unforgettable whacking.

In the mean time, Pakatan has left the alternative media behind or left them out of their plans. In fact, some perceive that Pakatan, however, views the alternative media as a nuisance and would rather distance itself from it.

 

READ MORE HERE.

Rakyat mahu bersatu, tetapi bersatu di luar BN

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 09:39 PM PDT

ASPAN ALIAS

Di dalam sesebuah negara seperti negara kita yang penduduknya terdiri dari berbilang kaum, yang paling penting kita mesti perjuangkan ialah membina masyarakat dan rakyat yang bersatu dan muhibbah.

Di dalam negara kita dini hari kita sedang melihat keruntuhan dan kejatuhan tahap perhubungan kaum yang merbahaya. Perhubungan di antara kaum ini kini sudah sampai keperingkat yang terendah malahan lebh rendah dan merbahaya dari keadaan sebelum 13 Mei 1969 dahulu.

Laungan dan bisikan rasis yang di amalkan oleh pemimpin-pemimpin yang tidak berkepimpinan merupakan penyebab utama kenapa penyakit membenci di antara satu kaum dengan kaum yang lain sudah sampai ke tahap yang sangat menyakitkan. Oleh kerana kelemahan pimpinan yang tidak di hormati oleh rakyat berbilang kaum maka parti-parti yang rasis yang menganggotai BN sedang sibuk memukul gendang perkauman untuk mendapat sokongan kaum yang mereka masing-masing pimpin.

Semasa kepimpinan negara mempunyai kredibiliti yang tinggi kerana sifat 'magnanimity' mereka yang tinggi dahulu, mereka berani untuk mengambil sikap yang jelas untuk melakukan usaha mencapai penyatuan rakyat. Tun Abd Razak berjaya membawa semua pemimpin berbilang kaum kemeja perundingan dan menyatakan dengan terus terang yang 'national unity' itu ada matlamat terakhir bagi negara kita.

Tun Razak dan pimpinan beliau berani menyatakan perpaduan kaum itu adalah perkara yang terpenting untuk dicapai. DAN itu pun 'ultimate' negara. Kepimpinan semasa itu berani mendapatkan persetujuan semua pemimpin kaum di negara ini untuk negara melalui dasar-dasar yang jelas bagi mencapai matlamat perpaduan kaum itu. Pemimpin-pemimpin UMNO sebagai parti yang utama semasa itu faham tentang keresahan rakyat yang menyebabkan berlakunya kejadian 13 Mei '69 itu.

Di sinilah lebihnya pemimpin pra Mahathir. Mereka mampu menyelami masalah rakyat yang berbilang kaum ini. Apabila mereka tahu dan faham semua masalah rakyat ini maka barulah mereka lakukan tindakan dengan menggubal dasar-dasar yang boleh menyelesaikan masalah itu. Ini memang asas ilmu pengurusan; 'one has to understand problems up to specific even before thinking of solving them'.

Pemimpin kita berjaya menyelami segala masalah rakyat yang berbilang kaum, maka pimpinan pun dengan mudah menggubal dasar-dasar untuk membentuk proses-proses ke arah matlamat 'national unity' itu.

Tun Razak dan barisan kepimpinannya berjaya mendapat sokongan semua kaum untuk beliau melaksanakan DEB dan pencapaiannya ialah melalui beberapa proses yang telah dipersetujui oleh semua kaum.

Pertamanya untuk membasmi kemiskinan tanpa mengira kaum. Keduanya untuk menghapuskan cara mengenali satu-satu kaum itu melalui fungsi ekonominya. Kerajaan tidak mahu lagi Melayu di kenali sebagai pekebun dan petani kecilan yang duduk di desa-desa. Kaum Cina tidak hanya dipersepsikan sebagai gulungan peniaga sahaja dan kaum India tidak digambarkan sebagai hanya pekerja ladang kepunyaan bangsa asing dan taukay besar-besar sahaja. Ketiganya untuk merapatkan jurang pendapatan di antara yang berada dengan tidak berada.

Keempatnya untuk membesarkan serta melebarkan kek ekonmi negara dan menyusun pembahagian harta kekayaan negara mengikut kaum secara equitable (bukan equal).

Bumiputra di berikan kemudahan dan galakan untuk mencapai 30 peratus penyertaan di dalam bidang ekonomi dan industri dan bukan bumiputra sebanyak 40 peratus dan selebihnya untuk bukan rakyat Malaysia.

Dasar ini telah di persetujui oleh semua pihak termasuk yang bukan bumiputra kerana proses pembahagian dan menambah penyertai bumiputra itu bukannya dengan mengambil alih atau merampas hak bukan bumiputra tetapi sebaliknya dengan membesarkan kek ekonomi tadi untuk bumiputra mengusahakan pencapai matlamat pegang kekayaan serta equiti negara sehingga 30 peratus menjelangnya tahun 1990.

READ MORE HERE

 

Noose Tightens in French Defense Scandal

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 09:13 PM PDT

Asian dimension as French state-owned arms company faces murder, bribery allegations

Breham said Razak Baginda's company Perimekar had received the commission for "supporting the contract," which he said was a euphemism for unexplained costs, and also for "housing the crew" of the submarines in France. Perimekar was wholly owned by another company, KS Ombak Laut Sdn Bhd, which in turn was also controlled by Razak Baginda. His wife Mazalinda, a lawyer and former magistrate, was the principal shareholder, according to the French lawyers. 

Written by John Berthelsen, Asia Sentinel

After years of inaction and coverup, details are emerging in France of the sale of armaments by the French state-owned defense contractor DCNS to countries across the world including Pakistan, Malaysia, Chile, India, Taiwan and Saudi Arabia, with bribes and kickbacks built into DCNS's budget, ensnaring politicians across the globe.

Allegations involving DCNS, formerly known as DCN, range from murder to bribery and corruption and go from defense procurement officials in each of those countries to some of the top politicians in France.

Under the French legal system, prosecutors under the control of the Ministry of Justice must make a preliminary enquiry, during which no one has access to the files, so that any information the police have obtained cannot be shared. The prosecutors have been stymied for years by the ministry. However, investigators appear to be losing their awe of politicians all the way up to President Nicholas Sarkozy.

In September, for instance, Nicholas Bazire, 54, the best man at Sarkozy's wedding to supermodel Carla Bruni, was arrested and charged with misuse of public funds in the 1995 presidential campaign of Edouard Balladur. Sarkozy was Balladur's campaign spokesman and budget minister at the time. Another friend, Thierry Gaubert, Sarkozy's cabinet chief when he was budget and communication minister, was arrested earlier. Sarkozy is seeking avoid the appointment of an instruction judge in an effort to keep the cases under control. But the political knives may be out for Sarkozy.

That increases the chances that investigating judges will allow prosecutors a more detailed look at DCNS's books to probe kickbacks in Pakistan, where 11 French submarine engineers were killed in a bomb attack, and Taiwan, where a number of murders and suicides have been recorded in connection with the sale of frigates to Taiwan's navy. The details can be found here.

William Bourdon, the leader of a three-lawyer team investigating Malaysia's US$1 billion purchase of submarines from DCNS for the Malaysian reform organization Suaram, earlier told Asia Sentinel he hoped his team would have access to the files by October. Bourdon was summarily deported from Malaysia in July after giving a speech in Penang describing some of the details of the allegations.

Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak was defense minister at a time when Malaysia bought two Scorpene-class submarines from DCNS. Included in the transaction was a €114 million commission paid to Perimekar Sdn Bhd, a company owned by Najib's close friend, Abdul Razak Baginda. The transaction has been mired in controversy since 2006, when Altantuya Shaariibuu, a party girl and translator ostensibly hired to help in the contract, was murdered after demanding US$500,000 from Razak Baginda, her jilted lover, for unspecified reasons. Razak Baginda was acquitted of her murder under unusual circumstances without having to provide a defense. Two of Najib's police bodyguards were convicted and sentenced to death. They have appealed the verdict.

Joseph Breham, a lawyer with Solicitors International Human Rights Group and a member of Bourdon's team, said in London last week that DCNS often budgeted as much as 8 to 12 percent of its total receipts as "commissions" paid to grease sales of armaments in third-world countries. Breham's speech was reported for the Malaysia website Malaysiakini by Miriam Mokhtar.

Malaysia bought two Scorpene submarines from DCNS for about US$1 billion and leased a third from a DCNS subsidiary for training. Of that, the €114 commission was paid to Razak Baginda's company, Perimekar Sdn Bhd.

Breham said Razak Baginda's company Perimekar had received the commission for "supporting the contract," which he said was a euphemism for unexplained costs, and also for "housing the crew" of the submarines in France. Perimekar was wholly owned by another company, KS Ombak Laut Sdn Bhd, which in turn was also controlled by Razak Baginda. His wife Mazalinda, a lawyer and former magistrate, was the principal shareholder, according to the French lawyers.

Breham questioned why such vast sums could be paid to Razak Baginda's company. The €114 million obtained by Ombak Laut, he said, was more than the amount paid by France to all of its primary school teachers for a year. He also revealed that DCNS's former finance director had written memos in which he alleged that €31 million of the €114 million had been used for "commercial engineering", a term Breham said had no legal meaning.

Breham said that in France, before 2002, any money used to bribe foreign officials was tax deductible. When the former finance director of DCN made a claim for the €31million allegedly used to bribe the Malaysians for the purchase of the Scorpenes, the Minister of Budget questioned such a large bribe, although he did eventually authorize the tax break.

READ MORE HERE

 

As John Lennon said: IMAGINE

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 08:12 PM PDT

Let us imagine that the debate between Gan Ping Sieu of MCA and Lim Guan Eng of DAP is held. Let us also imagine that the Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM) helped organise this debate and that both leaders accepted the invitation to the debate. Let us then imagine what transpires in this debate.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

MCA vice president challenges Guan Eng to hudud debate

(The Star) -- MCA vice-president Gan Ping Sieu has issued a challenge to DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng to a public debate on hudud.

He told reporters in Parliament lobby Tuesday that the debate would be on how DAP was going to stop PAS from implementing hudud law in the country.

Gan said the debate was necessary because during campaigning at various by-elections, DAP had been portraying PAS as a moderate, liberal and professional party.

However, he said PAS' recent statement on implementing hudud law showed that it was "ignoring DAP", its partner in Pakatan Rakyat.

"I wanted to hand him an official letter on my challenge to him on Monday and today. But he was not around in Parliament. So, I will send my letter via registered mail," he said. 

Gan said for courtesy sake, he would let Guan Eng choose the venue, time and mediator for the debate.

*****************************

Gan Ping Sieu: DAP says that PAS is a moderate, liberal and professional party. However, as the evidence shows, PAS just goes and does what it wants. It does not care about DAP. DAP can say one thing but PAS goes and does the opposite.

This shows that PAS does not respect DAP. In fact, it shows that PAS does not respect the opposition coalition, Pakatan Rakyat, as well. Even the Opposition Leader, Anwar Ibrahim, does not respect DAP when he said that, in principle, he agrees with PAS, in that the Islamic laws of Hudud should be implemented, although he admitted that this is his personal view and not the consensus of Pakatan Rakyat.

DAP has certainly lost face. PAS and Anwar are sending a message to DAP that it is not relevant and that its views are not important. The message that they are sending to DAP is that DAP can take it or leave it. And if DAP is not happy about this matter, then it can leave Pakatan Rakyat, just like it did once before when the same controversy erupted during the time of Barisan Alternatif.

Pakatan Rakyat talks about consensus. DAP talks about consensus. What consensus? When PAS announced that it is still committed to its aspiration of implementing Hudud, was that based on consensus or based on just what PAS wants?

If PAS implements Hudud, how will the Chinese in Malaysia fare? Will the rights of the Chinese be protected? Will prostitution, nightclubs, karaoke joints, pork, gambling and liquor be banned? Will the wishes of the Chinese no longer matter?

DAP is selling out the Chinese just because it seeks power. DAP will do anything just to get into power, even sell out the Chinese. DAP is a traitor to the Chinese community. DAP talks about defending the rights of the Chinese and yet it works with PAS, which is a party that is dangerous to the Chinese.

Maybe Guan Eng can explain what is going to happen to the Chinese community if Hudud is implemented in Malaysia. And if Guan Eng says that Hudud will never be implemented, then maybe he can explain how DAP can prevent that from happening since PAS has not relented in its mission to implement Hudud and still treats this as the priority of the party.

 

Lim Guan Eng: First of all, MCA must note that while Pakatan Rakyat does things on the basis of consensus, this does not mean we deny each party the right to express its views. Unlike in Barisan Nasional, where no party can make any statement that Umno will not allow and whatever they say is just echoing whatever Umno says, in Pakatan Rakyat we do not stifle the freedom of anyone to express their opinion. That is why PAS is allowed to say what it wants to say, even if the rest of the parties in Pakatan Rakyat may not share this view.

Democracy is not about allowing you to say something that I agree with. That is not democracy. Democracy is about allowing you to say something that I disagree with. No doubt DAP does not agree with Hudud. PAS, however, supports Hudud. So we allow PAS to talk about Hudud and to state its aspirations regarding Hudud. If we stop PAS from saying all this, then DAP would be violating the principles of democracy.

You cannot view this as PAS not respecting DAP by saying something that DAP does not agree with. You have to view it as DAP respecting the right of PAS to say something that DAP does not agree with. To agree is easy. Anyone can do that. But to agree to disagree is the hard thing to do. And that is what Pakatan Rakyat is able to do and which Barisan Nasional is not able to.

I know this is a very difficult concept for MCA to understand because this is not practiced in Barisan Nasional. In Barisan Nasional, MCA can't say something that Umno is opposed to. MCA can only say something that Umno likes to hear. If MCA says something that Umno is unhappy with, then there will be screams for MCA to get out of Barisan Nasional or that MCA should be sacked from Barisan Nasional or that the Chinese should go back to China and so on. This is not how we do things in Pakatan Rakyat.

This talk about Chinese rights is outdated. In Pakatan Rakyat, we do not talk about Chinese rights or Indian rights or Malay rights like you do in Barisan Nasional. In Pakatan Rakyat, we talk about the rights of all Malaysians irrespective or ethnicity. Even when we talk about Hudud we talk about how it will be accepted by all Malaysians and not how it is accepted or reject by any one ethnicity.

What MCA does not seem to understand is that Islamic Sharia laws have been around since before Merdeka. This law used to be the secondary laws in Malaysia and only touches on Islamic matters, and even then only in cases where the common laws do not address, in particular matters concerning marriage, divorce, death, inheritance, and so on. It does not cover crimes, traffic offenses, and whatnot. For that we have the common laws, which override the Sharia laws.

In the past, the common law courts took precedence over the Sharia courts. However, Barisan Nasional, which MCA is a member of, changed this when it made the Sharia courts at par with the common law courts. This confusion was something that Barisan Nasional created and MCA is part of Barisan Nasional. Why did MCA support this move to upgrade the status of the Sharia courts and now we have ambiguity between which court has more power to decide on matters concerning the Sharia?

Can you see that Barisan Nasional, meaning also MCA, is the culprit that started all this confusion? Now you blame us for what you did.

The Sharia laws of Hudud are very specific. It covers only certain violent and serious crimes like robbery, murder, rebellion, apostasy, consuming of intoxicating substances, illicit sex, and slander.

Now, we already have laws governing robbery, murder and rebellion. So these laws will take precedence over Hudud. In fact, the common law punishment for rebellion is even worse. Can you remember we hanged the Al Maunah people who were charged for rebellion a few years ago? Under Hudud, they would not have been hanged. They would have been given a chance to repent and if they repented then they would be pardoned and allowed back into society. But instead we hanged them for rebellion.

Under Hudud, even Chin Peng would have been allowed home since he has already signed a peace treaty with Malaysia back in 1989. Would not Hudud have been better in cases such as these?

On the consumption of intoxicating substances, we already have laws for that as well. If you were to be arrested with drugs above a certain limit, even if you do not consume it but only possessed it, you would be hanged. Under Hudud, possession is not a crime. Only consumption is. And you would not be hanged.

However, with or without Hudud, intoxication and illicit sex are already crimes under the Sharia. Muslims would be punished for this, even now. Non-Muslims are not covered under these laws just like they would not be under Hudud as well.

We must remember, pork, liquor, gambling, illicit sex, and any activities that Islam considers immoral, are only forbidden for Muslims. Non-Muslims can continue being as immoral as they would like to be. Chua Soi Lek admitted publicly that he was the man in the porn video. Since he is not a Muslim, nothing happened to him. If he is a Muslim, then he would have been brought before the Sharia court since he had confessed to being the man in the video. 

According to the Constitution, Islam is the religion of the Federation. According to the Constitution, the Rulers are the head of Islam. According to the Constitution, each state has power over Islam, and this means Islamic Sharia laws as well. So it is up to the states how it would like Islam to be implemented.

If MCA finds this unacceptable, and since MCA is part of the government, then MCA can always get Parliament to amend the Constitution to rectify this. Why does MCA not do this? Why keep quiet?

DAP and PAS are not part of the government. MCA and Umno are. So go amend the Constitution to remove the powers of the states as well as the Rulers and bring Islam under the federal government. MCA and Umno have the power to do this. Why is this not being done? Then, once this is done, PAS can no longer talk about Hudud because Islam will no longer come under the states but will be under the Prime Minister and Parliament.

Anyway, PAS normally contests only one-third the seats in Parliament and it never wins all the seats it contests. It is, therefore, impossible for PAS to amend the Constitution that will allow Hudud to be implemented. PAS will need Umno and the other Muslim MPS from Pakatan Rakyat to combine their votes to get a majority in Parliament. And we all know this will never happen. 

So what is the issue here? Is this a real issue or a red herring? MCA is just trying to distract the people from the fact that it is irrelevant and is going to get wiped out in the coming general election. MCA is trying to treat this Hudud issue as its 'talian hayat'. Let's see whether the voters buy this ploy.

 

Tun M: Pakatan's Alternative Budget is like an "Empty Pocket"

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 06:17 PM PDT

(Bernama) - "It's easy when we want to spend the money which we don't have," is what former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said when asked to comment on the tabling of the alternative Budget by the opposition Pakatan Rakyat.

It was reported that Pakatan Rakyat would table its annual budget today, three days ahead before the federal government presents its 2012 Budget.

The opposition coalition's budget is said to be an alternative budget before the 2012 Budget is tabled by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak in Parliament on Friday. Najib is also Finance Minister.

"It's always easy to spend the money which is not under our control. We can do anything (like) promising to give 20 percent oil royalty.

"Yes, we can make the promise as we are not the government. Make promises, so long you win the elections (general election).

"It is common, even (US President Barack) Obama promised to close Guantanamo Bay in Cuba, but until now the detention center has not been closed yet. But he was elected," said Dr Mahathir to reporters after delivering a keynote address at the 8th Kuala Lumpur Islamic Finance Forum 2011 here today.

Dr Mahathir also served as finance minister when he was the prime minister for 22 years.

 

See the difference?

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 05:56 PM PDT

Who says I am always cheong hei? Sometimes, when a picture is worth a thousand words, I can be very brief. Anyway, maybe the five photos below can tell the story that I want to tell today.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Dato Onn Jaafar, the founder of UMNO, visiting the rakyat in the kampong

 

What it costs today

 

David Cameron, the then British Opposition Leader and now the Prime Minister, going to office

 

David Cameron, the then British Opposition Leader and now the Prime Minister, going to Parliament

 

Boris Johnson, Mayor of London


Hudud: Federal vs state legislative powers

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 05:26 PM PDT

While I acknowledge and admit that the respective State Legislative Assembly ("SLA") has the power to legislate on matters pertaining to Islam, I am somewhat doubtful that the SLA may pass any kind of law which creates offences and prescribes punishment for those offences in accordance with the tenet of Islam, especially when such offences and punishments are already created and prescribed by the Parliament.

Art Harun, The Malaysian Insider

I have stated in my article, "Of wet dream, nightmare and Marty McFly" that the implementation of hudud is a Constitutional impossibility until and unless two-thirds of our Members of Parliament would vote to amend the Federal Constitution to allow it to happen. I also grimly stated in that article that the time when such Constitutional amendment is moved would be the first time when our Members of Parliament would vote solely or predominantly along racial and religious lines regardless of party policy or party whip.

The Bar Council has since issued a statement which basically echoes my opinion. Lim Chee Wee, the Bar Council's President was quoted as saying:

"Hudud cannot be implemented within the current constitutional and legislative framework."

My friend, the learned Professor Aziz Bari was reported to have disagreed with the Bar Council's view. The learned Professor was quoted to say:

"The key here is Islam, not criminal law."

The learned Professor pointed out that the Federal Constitution has set out the respective jurisdiction and powers of the Federal and State legislature. As the powers to legislate on matters pertaining to Islam rests with the State, he argued that the State, including Kelantan, may pass hudud laws accordingly. He also refuted that such a move would result in double jeopardy for Muslim wrongdoers as, in his words:

"In other words, two systems is not a problem and we are not the only country in the world where this duality prevails."

I have the highest respect and regard for the learned Professor but I beg to differ on his opinion on this matter.

While I acknowledge and admit that the respective State Legislative Assembly ("SLA") has the power to legislate on matters pertaining to Islam, I am somewhat doubtful that the SLA may pass any kind of law which creates offences and prescribes punishment for those offences in accordance with the tenet of Islam, especially when such offences and punishments are already created and prescribed by the Parliament.

The Federal Constitution divides the legislative powers between the Parliament and SLA quite clearly. The Parliament, or loosely, the Federal government, has the power to legislate over matters specified in List 1 (or otherwise known as the "Federal List") of the 9th Schedule of the Federal Constitution. The SLA on the other hand may legislate on those matters in List II (also known as the "State List") of the 9th Schedule. In addition, there are matters which may be legislated by both the Parliament and the SLA. These are contained in List III of the 9th Schedule (also known as the "Concurrent List").

Included in the Federal List is, among other things, "civil and criminal" law; the constitution of all courts other than the Syariah Courts and the jurisdiction and powers of all such courts.

That much is clear. All this while, it is the Parliament which creates and defines all criminal offences as well as prescribing all punishment for those offences. There is no doubt about that. (In this respect, there are already laws governing murder, theft and slander, which are three of the hudud offences prescribed by the Quran. The only hudud offence which is not criminalised by the secular law is adultery).

In the meantime, the SLA may pass laws relating to several Islamic matters. Let's reproduce the whole paragraph 1 of the State List, so as not to cause any confusion*:

Except with respect to the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Labuan,

i. Islamic law and personal and family law of persons professing the religion of Islam, including the Islamic law relating to succession, testate and intestate, betrothal, marriage, divorce, dower, maintenance, adoption, legitimacy guardianship, gifts, partitions and non-charitable trusts; Wakafs and the definition and regulation of charitable and religious endowments, institutions, trusts, charities and charitable institutions operating wholly within the State; Malay customs. Zakat, Fitrah and Baitulmal or similar Islamic religious revenue, mosques or any Islamic public places of worship;

ii. creation and punishment of offences by persons professing the religion of Islam against precepts of that religion, except in regard to matters included in the Federal List;

iii. the constitution, organisation and procedure of Syariah courts, which shall have jurisdiction only over person professing the religion of Islam and in respect only of any of the matters included in this paragraph, but shall not have jurisdiction in respect of offences except in so far as conferred by federal law;

iv. the control of propagating doctrines and beliefs among persons professing the religion of Islam;

v. the determination of matters of Islamic law and doctrine Malay custom. (emphasis is mine).

* The above provision is actually contained in one paragraph. I have broken it into several parts denoting the different areas of Islamic matters which the SLA may legislate to maintain clarity.

The learned Professor opined that "power on Islamic law belongs to the State." He then referred to the decision of our Supreme Court (then, the highest Court in Malaysia) Mamat bin Daud vs Govt of Malaysia where the Court held that a provision in the Penal Code which impacted on Islamic law was invalid as the Parliament had no power to legislate over Islamic matters. The learned Professor therefore challenged the Bar Council's view that the Kelantan State does not have the power to enact the hudud law.

It is quite clear from the State List reproduced above that various Islamic matters are within the purview of the SLA. The decision in Mamat bin Daud reinforces the view that strict adherence to the respective lists by the Parliament and the SLA in enacting laws is called for. In that case, a provision was included in the Penal Code by the Parliament which makes it an offence for anybody to cause religious disunity. The purport of that section was to maintain public order, a matter which is quite obviously within the purview of the Parliament. However, in a 3-2 majority decision (with the late Eusoffee Abdoolcader, among others, dissenting), the Supreme Court held that that provision impinges on Islamic matters, which is in the State List and consequently the Parliament had no power to legislate on it.

It follows from that decision that the Court jealously guarded the purview, width and breadth of the respective Federal and State lists. No amount of encroachment will be allowed by either the Parliament or the SLA on each other's powers. Although the offence created by the Parliament in that case falls under public order, which comes under the purview of the Parliament, the Court still viewed that as an encroachment of the SLA's power to legislate on Islamic matters.

It is therefore clear and obvious that the Court took a strict and stringent approach in determining the rights and powers to legislate of the Parliament and the SLA.

READ MORE HERE

 

Just wanted to say sorry

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 04:53 PM PDT

Lim Guan Eng has apologised to H.H. the Sultan of Johor for what he was alleged to have said, which apparently upset (murka) His Highness. Kompas too has apologised to Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak regarding the Russian Mafia link story. Now it is my turn to apologise to 'First Lady' Rosmah Mansor. 

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

US$24m ring returned after 'a few days', minister tells Parliament

(The Malaysian Insider) - Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz told Parliament today no payment had been made on a US$24 million (RM77 million) ring linked to the prime minister's wife.

In a written reply to Lim Lip Eng (DAP-Segambut), the Minister in the Prime Minister's Department said the Royal Malaysian Customs confirmed that the ring was "returned" after "a few days" to the company that owns it.

Datuk Seri Najib Razak denied on August 21 that his wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor bought the diamond ring or that his Kazakhstan in-laws are linked to the "Russian mafia" as reported by Indonesia's top-selling daily, Kompas.

Kompas has since apologised to the prime minister for its August 4 report but the mystery remains as to why the ring from New York jeweller Jacob & Co. was addressed to Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, according to pictures widely circulated on the Internet.

Questions had arisen as to whether Rosmah's name had been used without her knowledge by criminal elements as part of their illegal activities. To date, the government has yet to identify who brought the ring into Malaysia.

Jacob & Co. founder Jacob Arabo, whose custom diamond-encrusted wristwatches and chunky jewellery once adorned Hollywood A-listers like Leonardo DiCaprio and hip-hop stars Kanye West and Jay-Z, is no stranger to such allegations.

The Bukharian-American jeweller, described by the New York Times as the "Harry Winston of the hip-hop world", has twice tangled with US federal law enforcement agencies.

In a column on August 4, Kompas described Rosmah's ties with soon-to-be in-law Maira Nazarbayev as close although it provided no evidence to support its claims and added, "Maira Nazarbayev, who lives a lifestyle a la Imelda Marcos, supposedly has links to the Russian mafia".

Maira is the former wife of Kazakhstan President Nursultan Abishuly Nazarbayev's brother, Bolat Nazarbayev. Nooryana Najwa, the 22-year-old daughter of Rosmah and Najib, was recently betrothed to Maira's son, Daniyar, who was her college sweetheart.

Rosmah has faced repeated allegations that she has a penchant for a lavish lifestyle ever since it became apparent that Najib would succeed Tun Abdullah Badawi as prime minister.

**************************************

The Umno Bloggers and Cyber-troopers allege that I do not have the gumption to say sorry whenever I am wrong. That is not true. When I am wrong I will say sorry. And it appears like I was wrong with regards to the story regarding Rosmah Mansor's RM77 million diamond ring. 

Lim Guan Eng has apologised to H.H. the Sultan of Johor for what he was alleged to have said, which apparently upset (murka) His Highness. Kompas too has apologised to Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak regarding the Russian Mafia link story. Now it is my turn to apologise to 'First Lady' Rosmah Mansor. 

I can see that I was wrong when I said that Rosmah bought that RM77 million ring. So, for that, I must apologise. It is now clear that it was not Rosmah who bought that ring. I don't know who actually bought it. But to accuse Rosmah of buying it when it was not she who bought it was wrong.

And I was also wrong to say that Rosmah imported that ring into Malaysia. Rosmah did not import it. Someone sent it to her. Of course, we can only suspect who that was. However, since we do not have any evidence that it was this particular person it would be wrong for me to mention his name.

I mean, just because I suspect that it may have been a certain young Malaysian tycoon of Chinese ethnicity who has received a lot of favours from the government does not make this a fact. It remains merely that, a suspicion. And if I mention his name and I am proven wrong later, then again I may have to apologise. So let that name remain unnamed.

Anyway, the ring has since been returned to sender. So that ends the matter once and for all. Maybe we can now allow this matter to rest.

Z54-QHEZN6E

SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z54-QHEZN6E

 

Like the RFS, Taib cannot stop the RARA getting into Sarawak

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 04:02 PM PDT

THE PEOPLE'S PARLIAMENT

Yes, Radio Free Sarawak is back on the Sarawak airwaves, after a short break, and on a new radio frequency.

To catch up with Papa Orang Hutan and his team, go HERE.

Last week, following the launch of the Rakyat Reform Agenda (RARA) roadshow in KL on 19th September, 2011, the Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM) took its RARA roadshow to Sabah and Sarawak.

On 27th and 28th September, we successfully held forums in Kota Kinabalu and Tawau respectively.

To read the news report following the forum in Tawau, click on the news clipping here.

On 29th, September, 2011, as you all might already know by now, I was refused entry into Kuching, Sarawak where, at 7pm that same night, MCLM was to host its RARA forum at the Grand Continental Hotel.

The show, nonetheless, went on.

READ MORE HERE

 

‘Cops sought money for detainee’s release’

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 03:56 PM PDT

A businesswoman claims that several police officers threatened to detain her brother under the Emergency Ordinance if she fails to pay them.

(Free Malaysia Today) - A businesswoman has lodged a police report alleging extortion by several police officers. In her report lodged in Klang, Chong Choi Yoke, 31, claimed that policemen from the USJ district police headquarters wanted money from her to ensure that her brother was not detained for two years under the Emergency Ordinance.

Relating the matter on behalf of Choi Yoke, her lawyer Keppy Wong (photo) said her brother, Chong Voon Han, was detained by the USJ police on Sept 22 after he had gone to the IPD (police district headquarters) to assist in an investigation.

"Voon Han went there after he was told that the police were looking for him in his office to assist in a probe. He voluntarily went to the police station and was detained on the spot," said Wong.

Hearing of Voon Han's arrest from his girlfriend, Choi Yoke went to the IPD but was denied permission to see him.

On Sept 25, a group of policemen brought Voon Han to his sister's house on the pretext of searching for something. However, she was shocked to see bruises and swelling on her brother's face.

"Voon Han told his sister that he was assaulted in detention and asked her to give the officers RM500 so that the beating will stop.

"However, she managed to fork out only RM200 and bought a few packs of cigarettes for them (officers)," said Wong, who is also Kampung Cheras Baru DAP chairman.

Later the same day, she received a call from her brother asking her to bank in RM100 to an account which she complied with.

Also on the same day, Choi Yoke received a call from an officer known as ASP Rony who told her to meet him at the Taipan police station.

There, Wong said, Choi Yoke was told by Rony that the police had no case against Voon Han as the latter had a strong alibi.

"Instead of releasing him, Rony threatened to detain Voon Han under the EO unless his sister agreed to pay him some money. Feeling helpless, Choi Yoke told Rony that she can only afford about RM3,000," claimed Wong.

Bleeding from the head

Two days later, Voon Han was brought to the Petaling Jaya Sessions Court to get his remand extended. There, Wong said, Choi Yoke saw her brother was bleeding from the head.

"The officers also told Choi Yoke to buy food fit for 10 men and deliver it to the Taipan police station," alleged Wong.

She was also told by her brother at the court that Rony wanted about RM10,000 to secure his release.

READ MORE HERE

 

Bersih 2.0 warns of bigger wave

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 03:52 PM PDT

If the election is called before reforms are implemented, Bersih 2.0's Wong Chin Huat says Malaysians will be irked and a 'greater tsunami' may happen.

(Free Malaysia Today) - Bersih 2.0 has warned the government that if the general election is called without electoral reforms put in place, another wave will come crashing.

Bersih 2.0 steering committee member Wong Chin Huat said Malaysians would not take kindly to elections being held before recommendations by the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on electoral reforms were implemented.

"You'd probably see Bersih 3.0 in whatever form, and it'll turn out to be a greater tsunami," he told reporters in the Parliament lobby today.

"The government should respect the institutions of Parliament and (allow them to) run its course… If you call for elections in the next six months before the PSC actually finishes its work, you are killing the PSC," he said.

Yesterday, the government moved a motion to set up a nine-member panel to look into electoral reforms.

The move, which was promised by Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak followed the heavy-handed crackdown against the July 9 Bersih 2.0 protest, which saw more than 1,700 people arrested.

Science, Technology and Innovation Minister Dr Maximus Ongkili (Kota Marudu MP) was named as the panel's chairman while the other four were Kapit MP Alexander Nanta Linggi, Kangar MP Mohd Radzi Sheikh Ahmad, Alor Gajah MP Dr Fong Chan Onn and Hulu Selangor MP P Kamalanathan.

Opposition MPs sitting on the panel are PKR deputy president Azmin Ali (Gombak MP), PAS treasurer Hatta Ramli (Kuala Krai MP) and DAP Youth chief Antony Loke (Rasah MP). Independent MP, Wee Choo Keong (Wangsa Maju), would also be on the panel. The committee had its first meeting this morning.

READ MORE HERE

 

Give NGOs 15% of seats, Pakatan told

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 03:47 PM PDT

A NGO leader says the time has come for the opposition bloc to form a power-sharing alliance with these groups.

(Free Malaysia Today) - Pakatan Rakyat has been urged to consider allocating seats for NGOs to contest in the coming general election.

In making the call, Malaysian Indian Progressive Association (MIPAS) president A Rajaretnam said that Pakatan should earmark 15% of seats both at the federal and state levels.

Speaking to FMT, he explained that NGOs were important to form a government and therefore Pakatan must join forces with them.

Rajaretnam also pointed out that NGOs had played a crucial role in helping the opposition secure its biggest ever victory in the last general election.

"However, after the election, Pakatan overlooked the NGOs," he said.

Three-cornered fights

He said that in the next general-election, there would probably be three-cornered fights due to the emergence of a third force.

He explained that the third force came about after Pakatan-friendly NGOs grew fed-up with the opposition bloc.

"The NGOs were upset when several Pakatan MPs became BN-friendly, the Pakatan state governments' refusal to give space and voice to NGO's and certain Pakatan leaders becoming too arrogant after winning in the election.

"For example, after Pakatan won Selangor, they promised to allocate 40 seats in 10 local councils for NGOs. However, a report shows that half of the so-called NGO seats are occupied by party members.

"We strongly believe Pakatan can form a better government compared to BN, but they must return to the grassroots," he added.

READ MORE HERE

 

Nazri: No case on Rosmah’s RM73m ring

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 03:44 PM PDT

Customs Department has confirmed to the MACC that no such ring was purchased.

(Free Malaysia Today) - Rosmah Mansor is not being investigated by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) over the US$24 million (RM73 million) diamond ring fiasco.

Minister in the Prime Minister Department Nazri Aziz said in a written reply to Lim Lip Eng (DAP- Segambut) that the MACC, after checking with the Customs Department, "confirmed that there was no such purchase of the ring".

"After a few days, the ring was returned to the company owner," the reply added.

On July 13, pro-Pakatan Rakyat NGO Solidariti Anak Muda Malaysia (SAMM) president Badrul Hisham Shaharin lodged a report with the MACC over the US$24 million ring allegedly acquired by Rosmah.

Just a day before, pro-opposition bloggers claimed that the ring, known as "Natural Fancy Blue Gray Cushion Cut Diamond Ring", was sent to the premier's wife by the New York-based fine jewellers Jacob & Co in April this year.

The ring allegedly passed through the Kuala Lumpur International Airport Customs and was cleared by a Customs operations manager known as A Krishnan.

Screenshots of the alleged Customs computer displays also revealed that the ring did not have import duties imposed on it. The same display also indicated the value of the ring to be US$24.4 million.

READ MORE HERE

 

Hudud: MCA wants debate with Guan Eng

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 03:41 PM PDT

MCA is keen to know how DAP will stop PAS from its stated desire to implement the law.

(Free Malaysia Today) - MCA vice president Gan Ping Sieu has challenged DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng to debate hudud now that Pakatan Rakyat has failed to reach a consensus on it.

"He can name the place and time, but he should not take too long to respond," said Gan told reporters at the parliament lobby today.

Gan said that DAP has always portrayed itself to be a democratic, liberal and professional party.

However it needs to explain PAS' insistence on implementing hudud, a stance at odds with DAP's principles.

Gan also added that the MCA has always been accused of undermining and demonising PAS, but the latter's stand on hudud shows that it still haboured aspirations for a theocratic state.

"It is serious matter. It is unfair to Muslims and also non-Muslims. This is an issue close to the hearts of the people, especially the Chinese community," said Gan.

"During campaigns at by-elections, the DAP promotes PAS as moderate, inclusive and open- minded, but its stand on hudud shows that the party is back to its old ways," he said.

'Only Karpal has been vocal'

Asked why Lim was the candidate chosen, Gan said that Lim was constantly throwing challenges to others.

Gan said that he had already made the offer to debate the issue but since there was no reply from Lim, he said a registered letter via mail will be forwarded to him.

Gan also took a stab at the DAP leaders, most of whom he said have been silent over the matter.

READ MORE HERE

 

More than RM1 mil a month for VVIP plane

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 03:38 PM PDT

The government spends more than RM1 million every month on a rented aircraft for ferrying VVIPs.

(Free Malaysia Today) - In the first eight months of the year, the government has spent more than RM9.1 million in flight costs on a single aircraft to ferry official VVIPs.

In a written response, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz said that the government had been renting an Airbus A319 from Malaysian Airlines System (MAS) Berhad since Aug 3, 2007.

The airplane, he added was for the use of "government VVIPs" such as Yang Di-Pertuan Agong Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin, Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin.

"From January to August 2011, the frequency of use of this plane covered 155 sectors in the country and abroad with costs totalling RM9,158,430.45, which cover the plane's fuel costs, parking and handling charges, meals and flight crew logistics," he said.

Nazri was responding to Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah Anwar, who asked the PM's Department, which rented the aircraft, to state the costs incurred.

It is not known if these flight costs included Najib's travel expenses for this year, which were also revealed in Parliament.

FMT previously reported that Najib and his wife Rosmah Mansor spent slightly more than RM17 million from 2008 to June this year.

Up to RM5.42 million was spent for Najib's travels from January to June this year.

READ MORE HERE

 

No judicial review for Teoh suicide verdict, court rules

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 01:13 PM PDT

By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal, The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 4 — The family of the late Teoh Beng Hock today failed to challenge the Royal Commission of Inquiry's (RCI) conclusion that the Selangor DAP political aide committed suicide in 2009.

Teoh's family filed the application for judicial review against the RCI on August 24.

The RCI, which was chaired by sitting Federal Court judge Tan Sri James Foong, found that Teoh had been driven to suicide after relentless questioning by investigators from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

The five-man panel wrapped up its report on June 15 after hearing testimony from 70 witnesses in its bid to unravel the mysterious circumstances behind Teoh's death at the then Selangor MACC headquarters on July 16, 2009.

Judge Datuk Rohana Yusof ruled today that an RCI could not be subjected to a judicial review, as the court was bound by an earlier federal court decision.

Lawyer Gobind Singh Deo, who is representing the Teoh family, told The Malaysian Insider the decision was made in chambers.

Senior federal counsel Shamsul Bol Hassan represented the RCI, whose commissioners were named as respondents.

"The judge's decision was based on the federal court's decision in Datuk V. K Lingam's appeal, where they ruled that recommendations of the RCI are not subject to judicial review," he said.

Gobind said the only option the family had right now is to challenge the federal court's decision in Lingam's case, but said that he was not sure whether they wanted to do that.

"There is still the revision application on the coroner's open verdict, which will take place the day after tomorrow," Gobind said.

Before the RCI was formed, a coroner's inquest had in January returned an "open verdict" ruling out both suicide and homicide.

 

 

READ MORE HERE.

Of subliminal indoctrination and inept social media strategies

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 09:09 AM PDT

By Edwin Yapp, ZDnet

In a report I filed a couple of weeks ago, the Malaysian government, through ICT industry regulator, the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC), blocked the airing of a public service announcement (PSA) urging citizens to exercise their constitutional right to vote in Malaysia's next general election.

The PSA, called "Undilah," (which means "Please Vote" in Malay), is an attempt by an independent film maker and musician Pete Teo to highlight the need of all Malaysians above the voting age of 21-years of age to exercise their constitutional right to vote. 

Shot in black-and-white, Teo's video begins with a popular politician, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah narating, among other things, about the problems Malaysians face in the country, and how important it was for citizens to vote in the impending elections because Malaysians should love the country. Malaysia is due to call its election within a year. 

The report noted that MCMC had asked two of the largest local broadcasters to pull off the broadcast but at the time of that report, no reasons were given as to why MCMC had been asked to do that. 

Since then, several developments have emerged, with MCMC attempting to explain itself as to why it did what it did. Two politicians have also weighed in on the matter, including the minister in charge of communications. 

The industry regulator had noted in a press statement that it blocked the broadcast because the four-and-a-half-minute clip had ostensibly "yet to obtain approval from the Film Censorship Board," which incidentally, is under the purview of the Home Ministry, not the Communications Ministry. "As such,  the PSA should have been aired on TV until approval is obtained," read the MCMC statement. 

Later in the week, the Member of Parliament of Kota Belud, a constituency in Sabah, East Malaysia, alleged that the video clip had scenes in which negative innuendos about the government were being shown. 

MP Abdul Rahman Dahlan pointed out that certain scenes appeared to be "not so pleasant to BN, the ruling coalition," reported news portal, The Malaysian Insider (TMI). "There are some elements that ridicule the establishment." Finally, the Communications Minister himself commented on, and outright branded the clip as having elements that were against the incumbent government. The video, he said, was unsuitable for broadcast as it contains "subliminal messages" aimed at influencing viewers. 

While analyzing these recent developments, one can't help but wonder about the various comical scenarios that have arisen out of this entire debacle. 

Firstly, the jurisdictional issue. In Malaysia, the broadcast industry is not regulated by MCMC but by the Home Ministry. So what business does the MCMC has in pulling the broadcast of the clip in the first place is anybody's guess. Perhaps it can be argued that since Teo's clip first came out over the Internet, the MCMC was consulted on the matter. 

But even if this were the case, the reasoning doesn't seem to jive with the one given, that is, it's an issue with censorship. If indeed the clip had not yet been given the green light, it isn't within the purview of the MCMC to do anything about it. Should not the Home Ministry be in charge of that? 

To make matters worse, Teo, the producer of the video had told TMI that he hadn't even applied for approval from the Film Censorship Board in the first place, so why is there a need to overreact? "We haven't got approval because we haven't applied for it. There is no need to apply for it when we haven't even spoken to the broadcasters," he was quoted in local news portal Malaysiakini

This inconsistency in dealing with the issue shows that the government may have acted hastily and not thought through what should be the appropriate action, thereby giving the perception that the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.  

Secondly is the alleged negative innuendos that exist in the clip, the most significant of which was brought up by Abdul Rahman. The MP charged that Teo had mischievously included the character of Jabba the Hutt, a fictional character from the Star Wars movie fame, but allegedly juxtaposed it against the Malaysian prime minister, Najib Razak, implying that the scene mocked him. 

"It's just a zany thing I do in all my videos. Does this mean that other people sitting at the bus stop are also mocking the PM? I'd like them to explain to me how it insults him," Teo told TMI, adding that he had pears randomly appearing in previous videos he produced. 

To me, these missteps by the government and its officials only go to show that it is increasingly worried about the power of Internet-media and the reach and impact it has on the electorate. 

But perhaps the most damning thing is the fact that the incumbent government doesn't understand how to deal with the new media except to keep applying a previously tried and tested technique of censorship in a bid to curb the impact of such a viral video. Case in point: By vilifying Teo's video and suggesting that it has subliminal messages that have been mischievously inserted into the video serves only to draw more attention to that scene, which might otherwise not have happened in the first place. 

It's apparent that the battle for the hearts and minds of Malaysia's next general election will be fought significantly more in cyberspace than it did back in 2008, when the opposition managed to increase the number of seats in Parliament by almost fourfold. 

With the democratization of the tools new media has brought to the world, more and more people are being reached through the viral ways of the new and social media. And censoring the media isn't going to win the government any favours. 

The faster the government learns this, the better it is for the country.

 

Despite cheap China loan, local funds underwrite Second Penang Bridge

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 08:56 AM PDT

By Jahabar Sadiq, The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 4 — Putrajaya has decided to forgo a cheap US$800 million (RM2.6 billion) loan from China to build the Second Penang Bridge, and has instead asked the state-owned Bank Pembangunan to further underwrite the construction of the 24km bridge which is now due in 2013.

The Malaysian Insider understands that the RM4.3 billion Malaysia-China joint-venture project has not drawn any funds from the loan granted in July 2007 when Tun Abdullah Badawi was prime minister. The interest rate for the loan was set at three per cent for 20 years.

"The Ministry of Finance (MOF) has not taken one sen of the loan but has asked local banks to provide the balance of the funds," a source told The Malaysian Insider.

No reason was given for not taking the loan, which was seen as a sign of closer ties between the Asian giant and Malaysia, especially for Penang, which has a sizeable Chinese population.

Another source confirmed that Bank Pembangunan has been told to give out a further loan apart from the RM1.7 billion issued to the joint-venture between the Beijing-owned China Harbour Engineering Company (CHEC) Ltd and UEM Builders Bhd, which is owned by state asset manager Khazanah Nasional Berhad.

"Bank Pembangunan is now providing most of the money in place of the Chinese loan," he added.

It is not known if the use of local funds could be a crimp for loans for other infrastructural projects in the country including the Klang Valley Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) for which the first line linking Sungai Buloh and Kajang could cost up to RM50 billion.

The Second Penang Bridge is managed by the Finance Ministry's Jambatan Kedua Sdn Bhd and has been fraught with issues over a lack of urgency in its construction by the Chinese, who were keen to show their engineering capabilities beyond the Middle Kingdom.

The final figure of RM4.3 billion was agreed upon after the government had to put its foot down and set a benchmark after initial calculations showed that the cost of the project could go as high as RM4.8 billion. Both UEM and CHEC have argued that the cost of the bridge has increased from RM3.6 billion in 2006 because of the sharp increase in the cost of materials, especially steel.

READ MORE HERE

 

Making sense of PAS’s move

Posted: 03 Oct 2011 06:48 AM PDT

DAP national chairman Karpal Singh should be commended for reiterating that his party is not in favour of PAS's proposition to implement the hudud, and for calling a spade a spade. The same, however, cannot be said of Pakatan Rakyat supremo Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim who has been reported as saying that at the personal level, he is supportive of the hudud.

Thinking Malaysians should therefore probe deeper into what is the real basis of the working relationship between parties in Pakatan Rakyat. Ideological coherence is definitely not the answer. While all fingers point to marriage of convenience as a plausible explanation, we should not forget that the DAP had on more than one occasion requested a separation. Nevertheless, since the political climate prior to the run up to the 12th general election in 2008 was stacked against Barisan Nasional, PAS and the DAP had decided to put aside their differences by omitting PAS's Islamic state agenda in their 2008 election manifesto.

PAS's partners in Pakatan Rakyat must be wondering how long this ad hoc alliance will last, now that the former's spiritual leader is insisting that hudud be implemented come what may. This is indeed mind boggling as PAS had decided in its recently concluded muktamar that the party is now struggling to set up a welfare state as opposed to an Islamic polity.

While political pundits have offered various explanations for this sudden turn of events, we have yet to stumble upon a satisfactory answer. Why is PAS endangering Pakatan Rakyat's chances of winning the next general election by resorting to an old strategy that has been proven to be ineffective among moderate Muslims and non-Muslims? It could well be that PAS has come to a realisation that the party's image as an Islamic party has been bruised by its decision to embrace the welfare state agenda; but by going back to its original struggle to set up an Islamic polity, the party risks alienating moderates who had supported Pakatan Rakyat candidates in the last general election. This is the central dilemma that PAS has to deal with.

PAS's identity as an Islamic party is pursued sub condicione – on condition that its pursuit does not jeopardise the party. In the course of articulating its goal, we have witnessed how PAS's stand vis-à-vis hudud has become more vague. The PAS ideology which was manifest becomes latent. More importantly, a permanent gap opens up between official aims and PAS's behaviour. The relationship between aims and behaviour never completely disappears; it attenuates. The correspondence of PAS's behaviour with its official aims is constantly reaffirmed by its leaders – amongst the many courses of action possible to achieve its official aims, those which are compatible with its stability will be selected.

For instance, the recurrent pattern we find in the relationship between PAS and DAP Рthe split and reconciliation is better understood as the result of articulation, rather than a substitution of aims. On the one hand, PAS's original aim of implementing the hudud is constantly evoked as it is the basis of the party's identity, but on the other hand, the chosen courses of action guarantee organisational stability without taking credibility away from the notion that PAS is still "working" towards its original aim. By invoking hudud, PAS hopes to maintain its legitimacy in the eyes of its supporters. The implementation of hudud will continue to influence PAS, to play an essential role both in its internal processes and in the relationship between PAS and its environment for a long time. We are nonetheless left to wonder if its invocation of hudud this time around is a mere fa̤ade.

Dr Azeem Fazwan Ahmad Farouk
Senior Lecturer and Chairman
Political Science Section
School of Social Sciences
Universiti Sains Malaysia

 

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net
 

Malaysia Today Online

Copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved