Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Amangate: Umno sinks into deeper quagmire
- No end to crisis in Kedah
- Tidak salah jadi ‘Cina pisang’
- Political funding: A reality check
- After mega dinner, mega disaster awaits the MCA
- The UEC: An Interminable Election Issue
- The Murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu
- PKR must end Azmin-Khalid conflict
- Najib shoots pre-election messengers
- Free speech fanaticism
- What’s the tit-for-tat for RM40m?
| Amangate: Umno sinks into deeper quagmire Posted: 19 Oct 2012 06:52 PM PDT
The S$16 million cash seized on 14th August 2008 was only released at the end of the statutory retention period limit of three years, when ICAC failed to wrap up the case due reportedly to Malaysian government's refusal to extend co-operation in the investigation. If there was no case as claimed by Nazri and Najib, would the Hong Kong authorities have kept the money for the full legally allowable period of three years? Kim Quek Parliament should consider censuring Minister Nazri Aziz for giving completely contradictory answers in parliament within the short interval of one week in respect of the contraband S$16 million cash seized in Hong Kong International Airport which both Nazri and Prime Minister Najib Razak denied that it was Sabah Chief Minister Musa Aman's money, claiming it was donation to Sabah Umno. It should also consider rebuking Prime Minister Najib for having irresponsibly denied that the illegal attempt by Michael Chia Tien Foh to board the plane with the contraband cash was not an act of smuggling cash in breach of law, simply because Nazri has made some dubious statements in parliament. On Oct 11, answering MP Chua Tian Chan, Nazri stated that the Attorney General (AG) had decided that corruption was not proven, based on the reports submitted by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC). Nazri further stated that, based on this outcome of MACC's investigation, Hong Kong's Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) did not take any further action. However, answering MP Tan Kok Wai on Oct 11, Nazri said investigation carried out on the case was not done by MACC, but by Hong Kong's Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC), which had subsequently stated that there was no corruption in this case. One moment, it was MACC's investigation that led to AG's verdict of no corruption. But the next moment: no, it was not MACC, but ICAC which investigated and concluded that there was no corruption.
The contradictions are puzzling. Could it be that Nazri thought our AG and MACC's credibility might not be good enough for Malaysians, and decided to attribute the findings to the world famous ICAC noted for its anti-corruption prowess, hoping to get better reception from Malaysians? Otherwise, how could he reconcile the two completely contradictory statements? In fact, Nazri not only has problem reconciling these two different statements, but he also has problems reconciling both these statements against a MACC statement a few days earlier. On Oct 5, MACC's deputy chief commissioner (operations) Shukri Abdul said that investigation on the Hong Kong contraband cash case was still ongoing as its review panel requested for further investigation. Apart from these multiple contradictions thrown by Nazri to parliament, his claim that ICAC has concluded that there is no corruption is also fishy. This is evident from the fact that the S$16 million cash seized on 14th August 2008 was only released at the end of the statutory retention period limit of three years, when ICAC failed to wrap up the case due reportedly to Malaysian government's refusal to extend co-operation in the investigation. If there was no case as claimed by Nazri and Najib, would the Hong Kong authorities have kept the money for the full legally allowable period of three years? In fact, Michael Chia was arrested and investigated for both offences of money smuggling and money laundering.
Sneaking out the country with large amount of cash in breach of law is called smuggling money. I fail to see how Najib could claim it was not smuggling just because his minister Nazri has answered some questions in parliament – and badly answered at that, I must add. Answering a question in a press conference on Oct 19 whether there was any basis to claims that the money was smuggled or laundered through Hong Kong, Najib answered curtly: "No. It has already been explained in parliament". By that, Najib was of course referring to Nazri's duplicitous answers abovementioned. It is most unbecoming of the prime minister to base his answer to such a serious scandal on such a shady foundation. Members of parliament should seek the following from Nazri in parliament, in addition to asking him to explain the many contradictions in his abovementioned statements: 1. Full disclose of the communications between the governments of Hong Kong and Malaysia on this issue; in particular a) whether ICAC has forwarded its findings to MACC including the money flow chart trailing the Sabah timber corruption money all the way to Musa Aman's UBS AG account in Zurich, b) whether ICAC has requested for inter-country co-operation, c) whether ICAC has categorically stated that there was no corruption in the case and that it has ceased to pursue the case further. 2. When did MACC start its investigation, and whether it is still on-going. If so, why it has not been able to complete the task after such a lengthy investigation. 3. What role the AG has played in this case – in relation to the Hong Kong authorities and in relation to the Malaysian government, in particular, MACC. Unless Nazri is forthcoming with satisfactory answers, he should be censured and referred to parliamentary select committee (privileges and power) for further probing.  |
| Posted: 19 Oct 2012 12:13 PM PDT
Kedah is in the throes of an administrative crisis as tensions between Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Azizan Abdul Razak and his state secretary Datuk Rasli Basir worsen amid attempts to make the top civil servant resign. Joceline Tan (The Star) DATUK Seri Azizan Abdul Razak was in a relaxed mood as he mingled with the dignitaries sending off the King and Queen who were leaving for the Haj in Mecca. The Kedah Mentri Besar seems to have recovered from his poor health; he looked steady on his feet and has even put on some weight. But rumours about his tenure continue to irritate him. Last Wednesday, journalists were calling up his office to ask about reports that he was resigning that afternoon. It was completely untrue and the news portal that published the news has since apologised. Azizan has no plans to resign. Instead, he is demanding the resignation of his state secretary Datuk Rasli Basir. Kedah is currently embroiled in an administrative crisis that has drawn parallels to the one that had preceded the appointment of Tan Sri Sanusi Junid as Mentri Besar back in the 1990s. The current crisis has caused the state administration to come to a near standstill and there are endless accounts of how state matters, especially land applications, have stalled for months. At one level, the crisis is about the fallout between the Mentri Besar and the state secretary. At another, it is about PAS trying to assert control over the Kedah civil service. The Mentri Besar and his state secretary have locked horns for much of the past year and witnesses have watched them argue openly at meetings. They are barely on talking terms and Rasli was not allowed to visit Azizan when the latter spent weeks in hospital. Their fractured ties and animosity are an open secret in the state. But it erupted into the open following Rasli's decision to transfer one of his district officers (DO) Ahmad Fisol Md Nor from Kubang Pasu to Kuala Muda. It seemed like a routine transfer but it has erupted into a political issue with PAS politicians claiming that Rasli has no right to order the transfer as Ahmad Fisol is also Kubang Pasu District Council chairman. They said that while the DOs come under the power of the state secretary, district council appointments come under the political purview of PAS. As such, they are claiming that Rasli has overstepped his powers in taking Ahmad Fisol out of his chairman post. The PAS side apparently like Mohd Fisol who is said to be sympathetic to the party's cause. Several district councillors have since staged protests against Rasli, holding up banners calling for his resignation. They are demanding that Rasli reverses the transfer of Ahmad Fisol. However, Rasli is standing firm. But the story behind the story is that PAS had been uncomfortable with Rasli from the day they came to power. Read more at: http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/10/20/focus/12198874&sec=focus |
| Tidak salah jadi ‘Cina pisang’ Posted: 19 Oct 2012 11:28 AM PDT
Proses pencinaan berlaku daripada sekolah rendah sehingga ke peringkat institusi pengajian tinggi. Jika semua ini terus dibiarkan berlaku, tidak ada ertinya nama Malaysia, kerana identiti Malay (Melayu) sudah tidak wujud lagi. Yang ada, hanya menonjol Chinesesia. Ridhuan Tee Abdullah, The Malaysian Insider Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Razak baru-baru ini mengatakan, Malaysia adalah satu-satunya negara di luar China yang mengiktiraf pendidikan Cina sebagai sebahagian daripada sistem pendidikan kebangsaan. Beliau juga menegaskan, ketika menjadi Menteri Pelajaran, Akta Pendidikan 1996 diwujudkan menggantikan Akta Pelajaran 1961. Akta Pelajaran 1961 amat ditakuti kerana memberi kuasa penuh kepada Menteri Pelajaran untuk menukar sekolah jenis kebangsaan Cina (SJKC) kepada sekolah kebangsaan. Akta Pelajaran 1996, memberikan signifikan amat besar kepada pendidikan Cina. Kerajaan secara langsung mengiktiraf kewujudan Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan Cina (SJKC), Sekolah Menengah Jenis Kebangsaan Cina (SMJKC) dan Sekolah Persendirian Cina (SPC) sebagai sebahagian daripada sistem pendidikan kebangsaan yang bersifat kekal. Sekadar makluman, selepas 1996, lebih banyak sumber kewangan diperuntukan pendidikan Cina. Pada masa itu, terdapat 78 sekolah menengah Cina yang memilih untuk mematuhi silibus dan pengajaran kerajaan dan ia menjadi SMJKC, manakala 60 lagi kekal sebagai SPC. Ini tidak termasuk sejumlah hampir 1,300 SJKC yang diterima masuk sebagai sistem pendidikan kebangsaan. Bilangan SJKC terus bertambah setiap tahun melalui bantuan kerajaan sepenuhnya. Akta 1996 yang lunak ini membolehkan kerajaan memberi bantuan kewangan, fiskal dan sumber perancangan kepada sistem pendidikan Cina. Namun, sedarkah kita bahawa akta ini juga ditentang oleh NGO Cina seperti Dong Jiao Zong, kerana mereka tidak mahu langsung sekolah Cina diganggu-gugat. Mereka mahu beroperasi dengan penuh kecinaan. Najib turut menjelaskan kedudukan terkini permohonan pembinaan sekolah menengah persendirian Cina di Kuantan, Pahang seperti yang dituntut komuniti di kawasan tersebut. Syarat yang dikenakan adalah pelajar-pelajar ini wajib mengambil Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) dan jika pelajar mahu mengambil peperiksaan Sijil Peperiksaan Bersama (UEC), itu terpulang kepada mereka. Kerajaan juga menyediakan peruntukan kira-kira RM100 juta untuk membangunkan SJKC di seluruh negara. Selain itu, kerajaan turut menawarkan biasiswa kepada pelajar-pelajar terbaik UEC dan menyelesaikan segera isu kekurangan guru di SJKC. Itu pun masih ditentang kerana mereka mahu UEC diiktiraf sepenuhnya tanpa mengambil SPM. Sebagai timbal balas, Perdana Menteri menaruh harapan melihat masyarakat Cina di negara ini fasih berbahasa Melayu. Persoalannya, bolehkah harapan Najib ini dipenuhi oleh komuniti Cina, terutama kumpulan ultra kiasu, setelah kerajaan memberi begitu banyak kemudahan dan begitu bertoleransi. Tiada negara di dunia ini yang begitu bermurah hati dan bertoleransi seperti apa yang negara kita lakukan. Persoalannya, kenapa tidak dihargai? Apa jua cadangan kerajaan untuk penambahbaikan sekolah Cina adalah ditentang habis-habisan. Toleransi yang tidak ada tolok bandingnya ini masih lagi diterima. Apa yang dimahukan oleh orang Cina? Apakah mereka mahu tinggal di pulau sendiri seperti Singapura dan sasaran mereka hari ini adalah Pulau Pinang. Read more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/tidak-salah-jadi-cina-pisang-ridhuan-tee-abdullah/ |
| Political funding: A reality check Posted: 18 Oct 2012 02:28 PM PDT
Let's face it. All political parties, including those in the opposition, receive donations and contributions from their supporters. Otherwise how would they carry their vast organisation and nationwide activities, which need to be sustained throughout the five-year gap between elections? Abdul Rahman Dahlan, The Malaysian Insider When Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz recently made an announcement in Parliament reflecting on the decision of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and Hong Kong's Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) in clearing Datuk Seri Musa Aman of the alleged corruption charges, a cynical smile cracked my face: the opposition must be finding themselves in a very awkward position now. While previously they have had a field day attacking Musa's alleged abuse of power and corruption, the same announcement has coerced them into changing their "attack-with-extreme-prejudice" strategy. A few days after the announcement, the opposition conveniently shifted the attack from Musa to political funding for Umno. Source of the condemnation — this time around — includes calls that such funding is preposterous, labelling such funding as unacceptable and that a royal commission of inquiry must be called in instantly. While I leave the opposition to their agenda, let's peel some underlying truth within the fabric of Malaysian politics. It is not illegal for any Malaysian to give money to a political party of his or her choice — or to anybody for that matter. Should the donor wish to remain under the cloak of anonymity, the request should be respected as long as the donation stays within the confines of the law. But the opposition's world thrives on the axis of inequality and double standards. Allow me to illustrate my point. When the donation falls into Umno's coffer, the source must be revealed immediately. But have you heard the opposition declaring the sources of donation they have received so far? We all know that the opposition, too, receives political donations from all and sundry. How ironic! For instance, take the spanking new multi-million ringgit DAP headquarters in Penang, which the DAP decided to acquire within two years after assuming office in Penang. The Penang DAP headquarters building is reported to have cost about RM3.5 million. According to the Penang DAP chairman, the money was collected through donations. Apparently millions have been collected to date. When I asked a senior DAP leader on Twitter who financed the building, he replied in no uncertain terms that the millions collected were from the DAP's well-wishers and loyal supporters. It is interesting to note that when individuals give money to the DAP, it is called "sincere donation" but when the same treatment is accorded to Umno, the opposition cries "Foul!" and accuses Umno of cronyism, corruption and abuse of power. Ironically, while Musa is accused by the opposition of looting and pillaging Sabah's rich timber areas, it was his incessant drive to protect the timber and the forest from being plundered by the irresponsible few that made him the darling of environmental groups from around the world. These organisations consistently heap praises on Musa's forest conservation programmes. Forest areas are being replanted at a record pace under Musa's watch, making hundreds of thousands of previously logged areas green again within 30 years. In fact, during his tenure as chief minister, Musa gazetted more forest areas with lucrative timber profits and placed them under the protection of the State Assembly to ensure that no chief minister — including himself — could unilaterally give permission to log the protected areas without express approval from the State Assembly! The same fervour is seen in Musa's handling of the state's huge reserves of minerals such as coal, silica, gold and limestone which, if mined, are potentially worth billions to the state's coffer. When asked why he does not utilise these resources, which could potentially increase the state's revenue instead of spending effort and money on his conservation agenda, Musa frankly replied: "Sabah at the moment is already blessed with oil money, so let's keep the forest and minerals for our children's and grandchildren's future." Now if you go by what is being alleged by the opposition in Parliament, you would think Sabah finances were in utter mess — plundered by corrupt leaders and at the same time causing millions of its people to go destitute and live in a broken society. That is far from the truth. The fact of the matter is under Musa as the chief minister, Sabah has grown by leaps and bounds. The cash reserves of the state are at an all-time high, surpassing even the two most industrialised states in Malaysia (Selangor and Penang) and still growing strong as we speak. If the chief minister was corrupt to the core as painted by the opposition, the state would be penniless. It doesn't take a genius to empty the state coffers if one is a "vacuum cleaner" as alleged by the opposition.
|
| After mega dinner, mega disaster awaits the MCA Posted: 18 Oct 2012 02:08 PM PDT
Now what has the MCA to say about Utusan's lies and dirty reporting — nothing! The silence of the MCA in response to the racist brainwashing engaged in by Umno speaks volumes about the low quality and lack of backbone of the MCA's leaders — past and present. Koon Yew Yin, The Malaysian Insider It was reported in The Star that several thousand people attended the mega dinner in the Ipoh Stadium, organised by the Perak MCA, on October 14. In his speech, Dr Chua Soi Lek, the MCA president, urged the guests to vote for Barisan National because it had established a solid foundation dating back to independence. He also said that the DAP would not be able to defend the Chinese even if Pakatan Rakyat took over power because it is subservient to PAS and PKR. At the function, Dr Chua presented RM500,000 to 44 Chinese primary schools and six national-type secondary schools or RM10,000 for each school. Various thoughts come to my mind on reading the report of the mega dinner. One is of disbelief that MCA leaders can stoop so low in using public funds for Chinese education in their attempt to win a few seats in the coming elections. But we should not be surprised especially when we look at the MCA's track record in the 2008 general election in Perak where it won only one state and three parliamentary seats. A chairman of one of the Chinese schools told me that he did not attend the dinner because he did not want to appear so stupid as to accept the RM10,000 bribe to vote for the MCA. Learning from the senior partner, electoral bribery appears to be the main item in the standard operating procedure manual of the MCA for the coming election. But unlike Umno in the peninsula, and Taib Mahmud and Musa Aman in Sarawak and Sabah who have billions in their political slush funds, the MCA can only throw out crumbs — such is the party's impotency and poor standing in BN and the governmental system. See No Evil, Speak No Evil, Hear No Evil With regard to Dr Chua's statement that the DAP is subservient to PAS and PKR, it is necessary to remind MCA supporters that almost every act of the Perak Pakatan Rakyat administration before BN unfairly regained control was criticised by the mainstream press, especially by Utusan Malaysia and Berita Harian. Chinese readers of the Malay papers and media will be familiar — and must be thoroughly disgusted — with the racist campaign of hate and poison poured out on a daily basis by Umno, the MCA's partner, which owns the mainstream Malay papers. Now what has the MCA to say about Utusan's lies and dirty reporting — nothing! The silence of the MCA in response to the racist brainwashing engaged in by Umno speaks volumes about the low quality and lack of backbone of the MCA's leaders — past and present. We now see that the Malays are being peddled the line that the Pakatan Rakyat is selling out to the non-Malays and that there is a Christian plot to take over the country. These dirty tricks and political spinning have not only continued but have gotten worse. Increasingly racial and religious extremist sentiments are coming to the forefront which all of us need to condemn if our country's social fabric is not to be torn apart. But does the MCA dare to speak out? No, instead it is a party to these dirty tactics. National Education: Monumental MCA Failing It is pathetic to see the MCA going round the country and throwing out crumbs to the Chinese schools. During the past 50 years, not only has the MCA failed Chinese education dismally but it has also been a leading partner in the decline of our national school system. Today our national schools are characterised by regressive language and religious dogmas, dismal performance, low standards and unemployable products. No middle- or upper-middle-class parent — whether Chinese, Malay, Indian or from any community — would want to have their young children schooled in the sekolah rendah kebangsaan and sekolah menengah if they can help it. This national disgrace has the MCA as one of its leading players. The party has held the deputy minister of education portfolio for umpteen years. Can the MCA point to any educational innovation that it has introduced? Can the MCA point to any educational policy of merit, fairness, and tolerance that it has been responsible for since independence? The Chinese deputy minister of education or Dr Chua may be good at giving speeches to Chinese schools and giving out chicken feed funds but when it comes to helping determine the course of national educational policy in key areas, their position is more like that of the office boy. Let's take the National Education Blueprint report. Now what is the MCA to say about the establishment of the matriculation college system which has discriminated against the deserving non-Bumiputeras. Malaysian public universities offer a one-year matriculation programme. These courses have largely catered to the Bumiputera population and are deemed as having a much lower standard, qualifying criteria and final examination requirement for entry into university. This situation is in contrast to that which non-Bumiputera students face as they are required to sit for the much tougher two-year STPM in Form 6. Now how did this system come about if the MCA has not been a willing accessory to the educational discrimination and injustice.
|
| The UEC: An Interminable Election Issue Posted: 18 Oct 2012 01:30 PM PDT
The fact that the MQA has yet to do a proper accreditation of the UEC when other foreign universities have done so since the Eighties is not saying very much for "1 Malaysia" is it? Dr Kua Kia Soong, Former principal of community-run New Era College, 19 October 2012
In every general election since 1975 when the Malaysian Independent Chinese Secondary Schools' (MICSS) Unified Examination Certificate (UEC) was first run, the UEC has been an election issue. The 13th general election is no exception. I should know about the UEC. When I first came back to Malaysia from my studies in the UK in 1983, I was contracted by the former Chairman of the United Chinese School Committees' Association of Malaysia (Dong Zong), Lim Fong Seng to enable the UEC to be recognized all over the world. This I did with alacrity and within two years, notable universities in the US, Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand and Singapore had recognized the UEC after the standard accreditation procedures. In most cases, their representatives visited our office and the Independent schools of which there were sixty in West and East Malaysia. Occasionally, I went to visit the key educational institutions abroad. Today, more than 400 foreign tertiary institutions around the world already recognize the UEC and our MICSS students are found in countries all over the globe, including France, Germany and Russia. Ever since the Eighties, the National University of Singapore has been poaching hundreds of top UEC students not only for their academic excellence but also for their trilingual capabilities in an effort to balance their other Anglophile Singaporeans.
ACADEMIC ACCREDITATION, NOT RACIAL POLITICS So why has the BN government doggedly refused to recognize the UEC all these years? In 1975, when the MICSS decided to hold its first Unified Examination, the Chinese education leaders were summoned to Parliament by then Education Minister Dr Mahathir and were told in no uncertain terms to cancel the examination "or else…!" They carried on regardless of the consequences and the UEC has been held every year since then without ever springing a leak in any examination papers! Clearly, the reason for UMNO's position is their hegemonic position of imposing a Malay-centric education system with Bahasa Malaysia as the main medium of instruction. It should be pointed out at the outset that BM and English are compulsory language papers in the UEC and many MICSS schools also run the SPM at the fifth secondary year. Consequently, through these years the UEC has become a political issue since UMNO refuses to recognize the MICSS system which is wholly supported by the community and not by the government. The community is thus paying double taxation when, apart from paying income tax, they also financially support this mother tongue education system. Should the recognition of UEC remain a political issue when the BN government recognizes all foreign certificates based on their accreditation by the Malaysian Qualifications Authority (MQA)? How else do foreign students gain admission into our institutions of higher learning? The fact that the MQA has yet to do a proper accreditation of the UEC when other foreign universities have done so since the Eighties is not saying very much for "1 Malaysia" is it? Thus an issue such as the recognition of the UEC should from the very start have been easily handled by the MQA instead of being treated as a political football by politicians all these years. As we have seen in the recent harassment of SUARAM through the government's directive to six government agencies, there should be a standard operating procedure for government agencies such as the MQA to carry out their job – in this case, the accreditation of the UEC – without political interference. The result of the accreditation process should then be made known and the UEC recognized or rejected accordingly. QED!
THE NEW KUANTAN MICSS & UEC As a political gesture to win the Chinese vote, the BN government has recently approved a new secondary school in Kuantan to be governed by the Chinese community there although the letter of approval has stipulated that the new school would run the SPM. The Prime Minister Najib Razak has since said that these Kuantan students can sit for the UEC (The Sun 18 October 2012). The sincerity of the government on this issue is in serious doubt when we bear in mind that to date hundreds of operators have already been given permits to open English-language international schools in Malaysia. Why the glaring double standards? Why do private English-language schools have a special immunity that non-profit-making community-run MICSS cannot enjoy? Dong Zong, under the leadership of Triple Doctor Yap Sin Tian (he has three PhDs!) has tried to maintain a "purist" position by insisting that this new Kuantan school is not strictly an MICSS just because of the stipulations of the approval letter. They have said that therefore, Dong Zong would not allow its students to sit for the UEC. As the person contracted by Dong Jiao Zong to help set up the tertiary-level New Era College for the MICSS in 1995, I see these as hypocritical and double standards. The stipulations for the new Kuantan secondary school are no different from the approval given to New Era College in 1997 – they merely reflect the BN government's (problematic) educational policy. The Dong Jiao Zong leadership did not reject the offer to New Era College then but proceeded to start the college in 1998 according to the curriculum we had planned. It is therefore shocking that even after the Prime Minister Najib Razak has said that these Kuantan students can sit for the UEC and the new stakeholders in the Kuantan school have committed to be an MICSS, the Dong Zong leaders still insist that they will not allow the Kuantan school students to sit for the UEC. Such a legalistic position is reactionary and would make the Father of the UEC, the late Lim Fong Seng turn in his grave. The reasons behind Dong Zong's "purist" position is highly dubious when we consider that some MICSS such as the Kuala Lumpur Chong Hwa, Kuen Cheng and others have been running the SPM concurrently with the UEC all these years. Since when have the Dong Zong leaders been so concerned to strictly follow the government's definition of a MICSS?
MAKING THE UEC WIDELY AVAILABLE From a visionary point of view, Dong Jiao Zong should be lobbying for the UEC to be as widely available as other examination certificates at least in Malaysia and Southeast Asia instead of restricting its currency as in the case of the new Kuantan School. To conclude, the reputation of the UEC will be intact as long as the examination board is professionally run, the quality of the MICSS is maintained and the certificate is associated with academicians and leaders of integrity. Chinese educationists should never fail to bear in mind that, of all the values instilled in students by education, perhaps none is as essential as academic integrity. Academic dishonesty – such as the pursuit of bogus PhDs - is a serious violation of the trust upon which an academic community depends. |
| The Murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu Posted: 18 Oct 2012 01:10 PM PDT Six years on, troubling questions remain about the Mongolian beauty's death, and who ordered it John Berthelsen, Asia Sentinel It will be six years tomorrow since bodyguards for now-Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak dragged the Mongolian translator and party girl Altantuya Shaariibuu out of a car in a patch of jungle near the Kuala Lumpur suburb of Shah Alam. As she begged for her life and apparently that of her unborn child, they knocked her unconscious, then shot her twice in the head. That was Oct. 19, 2006. According to court testimony, Chief Inspector Azilah Hadri and Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar, members of the elite Unit Tindakan Khas, both assigned to Najib's office, then wrapped Altantuya's body in C4 plastic explosives and blew her up, possibly to mangle her remains so badly that the fetus would be destroyed. Read more at: http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4908&Itemid=178
|
| PKR must end Azmin-Khalid conflict Posted: 17 Oct 2012 03:04 PM PDT Swift action by PKR to end the conflict between Azmin and Khalid will portray the party as a truly democratic one. Amir Ali, FMT The conflict between PKR deputy president Azmin Ali, seen as the culprit in a long-standing and shameful political squabbling, and Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim risks destroying the image of the party in the wake of the coming general election. In a democratic party, there will be such conflicts of interest that will arise from time to time but it is rare that such power struggle will spill over in the public arena via the media. The very reason for the usual "secrecy" behind these internal struggles is that political parties tend to act fast in order to nip in the bud any dissension. However, in the case of the Azmin-Khalid conflict which is now focused on the menteri besar's political secretary Faekah Husin, the conflict has been allowed to go on for far too long. In order to end such conflicts immediately, PKR should have created a committee to resolve these issues internally and swiftly. The committee must be composed of the grassroots and party leaders from other states who have the interest of the party at heart, not the interest of any of the personalities involved. It should not involve de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim since he is known to be close to Azmin who was his personal secretary in the past. Party president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail should also not be part of the committee as she is said to be close to Faekah. Independent observers, too, can be invited to such a committee to deliberate on the issues involved in order to represent the people's views in such conflicts. The purpose of such a committee will be to listen to the grouses by the leaders in the conflict and the reasons for the differences in their views. The culprit should be punished by the party leadership after the submission of the report by the committee. Murky political waters As part of the punishment, the culprit should be suspended or even fired from all party and state posts in order to send a strong message. It is only through such discipline that PKR will rise as a truly democratic party. This will encourage the masses to see the party in a new light, a democratic one.
|
| Najib shoots pre-election messengers Posted: 17 Oct 2012 12:54 PM PDT
Anil Netto, Asia Times PENANG - Malaysiakini, a leading independent news portal, and Suaram, a human-rights organization, have come under heavy government pressure in the run-up to what is expected to be a hotly contested general election in Malaysia. Both independent groups have reported on politically damaging scandals surrounding Prime Minister Najib Razak and his ruling United Malays National Organization (UMNO) party. Home Minister Seri Hishammuddin Hussein has said the investigations are not linked to Suaram's actions in the submarine scandal. He and other government critics have charged that Suaram's and Malaysiakini's receipt of foreign funds, including from the US Congress-supported National Endowment for Democracy, has undermined their independence and influenced their agendas. In particular, Malaysiakini's link with the Media Development Loan Fund, which owns a 29% holding in the news portal, has recently been put under the spotlight in the state-influenced mainstream media. One of MDLF's funders is the Open Society Foundations, a US-based organization founded by philanthropist and financier George Soros that promotes the development of civil society in developing countries. Soros has long been a convenient whipping boy in Malaysia. In the early 1990s during the Mahathir Mohamad administration, Malaysia's Bank Negara bet on the British pound against Soros' position and ended up losing unknown billions of ringgit. The bad blood behind the scenes bubbled over when the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis broke out, with Mahathir famously referring to Soros as a "moron" for his alleged role in undermining the region's currencies, including the ringgit. But the charges of associating with Soros don't have the same political resonance today. Malaysiakini noted last week that Najib himself met with Soros two years ago during a visit to New York. Still, UMNO politicians are taking aim at Western funding agencies to target critical civil-society and media groups and distract popular attention from their own political troubles ahead of national polls, which must be held by the first half of next year. Read more at: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/NJ18Ae01.html |
| Posted: 17 Oct 2012 12:26 PM PDT
Different countries may define blasphemy differently but some common elements must be there. There must be a clear intention to wound religious feelings, a likelihood of breach of public order, and an element of religious insult or vilification. Prof Shad Saleem Faruqi, The Star THIS column on Oct 4 on "Hate speech hypocrisy" had argued that the right to free speech is not unlimited and carries concomitant responsibilities.My article elicited a number of responses, some very learned, and I welcome them and wish to respond. Sarachandran wrote that the perception among Muslims of their persecution is genuine and based on an objective overview of world happenings. But "how would we weave into this paradigm the unprovoked destruction of priceless Buddhist iconic images by the Taliban and the mere murmuring protestations by the world community and deafening silence of enlightened Muslims?" I totally agree with Sarachandran that we must not be selective in our condemnation and must take a stand against all atrocities no matter who the violator is and who the victim. The first function of freedom is to free someone else. Two readers asked about blasphemy against other religions besides the state religion. The answer to this has to be that the law must not be selective. It must shield all religions against vilification. For example, the Malaysian Penal Code in section 298 contains the general offence of wounding religious feelings. The provision protects all faiths. It must be acknowledged, however, that around the world the law on blasphemy is either discriminatory in its reach or administered unequally. For a long time till its repeal in 2007, the UK law on blasphemy defined the offence only in relation to the Church of England. Though the law was rarely enforced, the same effect was achieved by convicting those who insulted Jews under the common law offence of breach of peace. However, when a Muslim citizen of Britain, humiliated by Salman Rushdie's Satanic Verses, filed a police report, the public prosecutor got cold feet. The citizen then tried to initiate a private prosecution but the High Court rejected his application. In Greece and South Africa, blasphemy is only against the Christian Church. In the European Union, despite laudable activism in the cause of human rights of non-Muslims, constitutional jurisprudence is not free of anti-Islam bias. For example, Muslims girls are prosecuted for wearing the hijab. Mosques with minarets are vigorously opposed because that would ruin the skyline. Reader Buyung Adil raises a question about "who will define blasphemy?" My view is that the offence must be defined by law and tried before non-sectarian, civil courts. Different countries may define the offence differently but some common elements must be there. There must be a clear intention to wound religious feelings, a likelihood of breach of public order, and an element of religious insult or vilification. Mere disagreements with or respectful criticism of religious rulings should not be prosecuted. What penalty must be prescribed? One reader strongly argued against the death penalty and I totally agree. Fines along with counselling and community engagement sessions may be adequate. The purpose should be to re-educate and banish the ignorance that leads to the prejudices on which hate speech is based. Reader Buyung also asks the provocative question: "Why aren't Buddhists, Hindus, Catholics, Protestants, Confucianists, Bahais, Zoroastrians creating violent terrorism over acts of blasphemy?" This is a very large and involved question and only a few points can be explored. First, it is probably true that deep, unquestioning veneration for their faith is more widespread in Muslim societies. The militant secularism (e.g. the banning of Bible-reading in public schools as in the United States) is impossible in Muslim societies. Secondly, it is not true that other civilisations do not indulge in religious-racial violence and persecution. In the US, firebombing of black churches by white racist groups is known. Right-wing Christian groups destroy abortion clinics and shoot dead the patrons. The Ku Klux Clan used to lynch blacks. During George Bush's government, nearly 7,000 Muslims were profiled, detained and harassed. Was there no religious violence in Ireland till the 70s – inquisitions and burning of heretics; Jew-baiting and discrimination against Catholics; and the holocaust in Europe? Are not Europe and the UN to be blamed for the genocide in former Yugoslavia? Who committed and who helped the slaughters in Sabra, Shatila and Jenin? In India, religious, caste and tribal violence is endemic. The Babri mosque was razed to the ground and Muslims were butchered in Gujarat with political and police connivance. In Sri Lanka, race/religious violence claimed more than a hundred thousand lives. In Thailand and the Philippines, religious violence by both sides is well known. Thirdly, reader Buyung implies that terrorism is a speciality of Muslims. Much depends on how one defines terrorism. America's actions in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Vietnam, Kampuchea, Laos, Afghanistan, Iraq, Gautemala, Chile, Panama, Nicaragua, Cuba, El Salvador, Colombia, Congo/Zaire, Haiti, Somalia, Iran, Grenada, Costa Rica and Dominican Republic can also be defined as terrorist. Israel's brutalities in Palestine and Lebanon are flagrant violations of international law. Actually, humanity has a bloody record and no civilisation can claim superiority in this area. What has happened today is that through selective demonstration and fear-mongering, the topic of Islamic terrorism is allowed to demonise a religious community. |
| What’s the tit-for-tat for RM40m? Posted: 17 Oct 2012 12:23 PM PDT
CT Ali, FMT "Every political party has the right to receive political donations" so said Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak. I agree that it is the right of any political party and any Barisan Nasional politicians (you must not forget to say that) to accept donations. You received RM4,000? Okay lah! What about RM40,000? Still okay. And RM400,000 is very okay… the generous donor must at least get a "thank-you" letter from Najib himself. How about RM4 million? Wow! Must at least have lunch and/or dinner with the prime minister. And RM40 million? Mi Casa. Su Casa! (My house is your house or make yourself at home!) Granted that there would be more than one or two businessmen donors who would willingly part with their hard-earned RM40 million, then take all of them to dinner. Though, of course, if you have given them more than billions in business profits, then it is they who must take you out to dinner. While chewing on that Wagyu beef (tender, tasteful and wonderfully wrapped in rice paper and tripled seared on an iron grill at RM100 an ounce), they might even ask you respectfully if they can give you more… money, that is. That Wagyu beef is too expensive. Of course, there is that small matter of the Wagyu cows being given beer to give them that special "oomph" but you don't think about these minor religious transgression when dining with millionaires. This is the thing with Najib – he knows how to behave in social circles and he knows just what to say. You can fault his wife, his handling of the Defence Ministry, Perak, Sibu, National Feedlot Corporation (NFC) and a host of other "Najib expletive deleted debacles" but not his family pedigree. But he sure has to come down to earth as we approach the 13th general election – tyres for taxi drivers and now RM9 million in "gifts" for the Sikh community. I wonder how that RM40 million donation to Sabah Umno (not to Chief Minister Musa Aman) is going to be spent. I guess keeping the Umno's "jentera" (machinery) happy is more important than the Sikhs. Did the MACC probe this matter? Now, prime minister, no matter what you say about a political party's right to give or take donations, if you have any common sense, what would be the quid pro quo for such a generous donation? Quid pro quo means a more or less equal exchange or substitution of goods or services: "a favour for a favour" and the phrases with almost identical meaning include "give and take", "tit for tat", "this for that", and "you scratch my back, and I'll scratch yours". It is almost beyond belief that you can dismiss this matter with a one-liner "every political party has the right to receive political donations". No wonder your deputy, Muhyiddin Yassin's friends are already staking out their preferred rooms on the fourth floor of the prime minister's office. Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2012/10/18/whats-the-tit-for-tat-for-rm40m/ |
lawyers and initiated a high-level judicial investigation into the Scorpene deal. Malaysiakini has provided considerable coverage of the exposes surrounding the deal, as well as countless other instances of alleged corruption and abuse of power in Najib's administration.
| You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan