Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

The untold story of the Lahad Datu incident
Talking to a ten-year old
Conjecture, imagination and suspicion
The Chinese and Indians screwed up
Malaysia at the crossroads
The Deepak-Bala marriage: in Deepak’s own words
Umno Incorporated (part 4)
Umno Incorporated (part 3)
Umno Incorporated (part 2)
Umno Incorporated (part 1)

The untold story of the Lahad Datu incident

Posted: 24 Mar 2013 01:00 AM PDT

On 16th July 2012, Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim flew to Jakarta to meet Nur Misuari -- who is very close to Anwar since the days when Anwar was in the government -- and the military commanders of the MNLF. The meeting was held in the Crowne Plaza Jakarta hotel and was arranged by an Indonesian Member of Parliament -- another close friend of Anwar -- at the behest of Anwar. A second meeting was held in Manila on 4th August 2012 to finalise and seal the agreement.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

I wrote about this matter eight years ago back in 2005. However, many of you were probably not yet readers of Malaysia Today in 2005 so you most likely did not read what I wrote then.

For those of you who can remember what I wrote, it was a very long story indeed but basically it was about the links between the Muslim leaders in the Malaysian government and the Muslim leaders in the Philippines and the role that Malaysia played in the 'internal affairs' of the Philippines.

Most Malaysians do not understand the difference with Sulus, MNLF, MILF and Abu Sayyaf -- as they do not know the difference between the PLO and Hamas. Nevertheless, let me simplify it by saying that they are all merely splinter or rival groups of the Muslims in the Philippines who are seeking self-determination, just like the Palestinians in the Middle East are. And Malaysia, being a Muslim country, sympathises with the Muslims of the Philippines -- as it does with the Muslims of Southern Thailand -- and is helping in any way it can to resolve both the Philippines and Southern Thailand issues.

Along the way, however, something went wrong. As I had written in 2005, certain promises were made that were not delivered. And this has a bearing on the Sabah 'IC issue' (you do not need a RCI for me to tell you that). And that resulted in the Sipidan hostage crisis and the involvement of Libya in helping to eventually resolve the crisis after many months of deadlock.

A reported RM50 million changed hands to secure the release of the hostages, the cost which Libya underwrote. Of course, no one is going to admit to this although they will not be able to explain how and why the hostages were eventually released.

But all that happened decades ago. We are talking about the start of the crisis in 1970, when many of you were not even born yet, and the hostage crisis 30 years later in 2000. Since then everything has been very quiet -- that is until last year when this whole thing was resurrected in preparation for the coming general election.

And this was what happened recently.

Anwar's and Nur Miusari's links go way back to the time Anwar was in government

A second meeting was held in Manila on 4th August 2012 to finalise and seal the agreement. Anwar flew to Manila on flight MH 704 and if you were to check these flight details you can confirm that Anwar did make this trip, as he did the trip to Jakarta just two weeks or so earlier.

In that meeting, Anwar told Misuari that he needs the latter's help to win the coming general election. Pakatan Rakyat was confident of winning at least 82-85 of the 165 seats in West Malaysia. It was the 57 seats in Sabah, Sarawak and Labuan that he was not confident of winning.

Pakatan Rakyat needs to win at least 30 of those 57 East Malaysian seats to be able to form the federal government with an extremely slim but comfortable enough majority. (Anwar can always increase this majority later with crossovers from Barisan Nasional once they form the government). And for that to happen Anwar needs the support of the Muslims in East Malaysia, in particular in Sabah, many of them Filipino Muslims with Malaysian citizenship and voting rights.

Anwar promised Misuari that in the event Pakatan Rakyat takes over the federal government, Sabah and Sarawak would be given autonomy, as what they had been fighting for over 42 years since 1970. These two East Malaysian states would also be given 20% oil royalty, an increase of 15% from the current 5%. This would ensure that these two states would become very wealthy -- an estimated RM4 billion a year for each state.

Furthermore, all the non-Malaysian Filipinos in East Malaysia would be given Malaysian citizenship -- or at the very minimum permanent resident status -- so that they could seek employment in Sabah. Jobs for them will also be assured.

Nur Misuari agreed to these terms and subsequently appointed Haji Ibrahim Omar as the MNLF coordinator or 'unofficial ambassador' to Sabah to help Anwar garner the support of the Filipino Muslims in that state.

And that was why the Malaysian government hesitated to take drastic action when trouble first emerged in Lahad Datu. The government knew that there was more than meets the eye in this whole episode although it was not too clear yet at that time how this incident fit in to the bigger scheme of things.

To leave things alone is certainly out of the question. But taking military action would only play into the hands of the conspirators and convince the Filipino Muslims in Sabah that they must unite behind Anwar to gain autonomy from the federal government.

Yes, the Lahad Datu incident was certainly a 'wayang', as the opposition claims. Very few Malaysians would deny that this is so. Many Malaysians are also convinced that there are certain 'dalang' behind this incident. What they do not know is: who is the dalang? Well, Malaysia Today has just revealed the untold story and I challenge the Malaysian government to deny the authenticity of what I have just revealed.

Another point to consider is whether the 'war of words' between the MNLF and MILF is another wayang. By perpetuating this conflict, which will result in the torpedoing of the peace process, this gives them an excuse for continuing the armed conflict. However, the relationship between the MNLF and the other splinter groups does not appear as ruptured as what it shows behind the scenes, if the above photograph is anything to go by.

My conclusion to this whole thing is that there are many plots and sub-plots and at the end of the day we really do not know who is playing whom.

2. Columnist claims Misuari helped Sulu siege to derail Bangsamoro peace deal: http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/55284-columnist-claims-misuari-helped-sulu-siege-to-derail-bangsamoro-peace-deal

3. Anwar claims of BN plot to implicate him in Sulu clampdown: http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/55320-anwar-claims-of-bn-plot-to-implicate-him-in-sulu-clampdown

4. Sulu military commander captured: http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/55327-sulu-military-commander-captured

5. Lahad Datu: Kg Tanduo chief's son is coordinator for Sulu group, say police: http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/55326-lahad-datu-kg-tanduo-chiefs-son-is-coordinator-for-sulu-group-say-police

6. Sultanate: 8 terror accused are Malaysians, not Pinoys: http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/55315-sultanate-8-terror-accused-are-malaysians-not-pinoys

7. There's much at stake in Sabah: http://malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/guest-columnists/55346-theres-much-at-stake-in-sabah

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

Hostage crisis in the Philippines

(CNN, 23rd April 2000) - Abu Sayyaf gunmen attack a Malaysian dive resort on the island of Sipadan, seizing 21 hostages.

The hostages -- 10 tourists and 11 resort workers -- were taken to an Abu Sayyaf camp on the southern Philippine island of Jolo.

Over the following months all but one of the hostages, a Filipino, were released, allegedly after ransoms of up to US$1 million per hostage were paid to the kidnappers.

READ MORE HERE: Libya and the Jolo Hostages (20th August 2000) http://212.150.54.123/articles/articledet.cfm?articleid=126

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

AFP mum over sultanate's Sabah intrusion

The intrusion occurred just as former Malaysian leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, also Pakatan Rakyat de facto leader, proposed that Sabah be granted autonomy.

(AFP, 16th February 2013) - ZAMBOANGA CITY: Philippine military officials kept silent over the daring intrusion of dozens of Filipinos into the eastern Malaysian state of Sabah, where authorities surrounded them and were negotiating for their peaceful surrender as of press time.

Reports said that the men are members of the sultanate of Sulu province and North Borneo and the Moro National Liberation Front (MILF), and that some of them were armed.

The Filipinos were believed to be active in the campaign to reclaim the Malaysian oil-rich island, which is part of the sultanate.

"The Department of Foreign Affairs has the sole authority to give a statement about that," Col. Rodrigo Gregorio, spokesman for the Western Mindanao Command, told The Manila Times.

The Philippine Embassy in Kuala Lumpur and the Department of Foreign Affairs in Manila have not issued any official statement about the situation in Sabah's Lahad Datu town, where some 100 Filipinos, many of them wearing military uniforms, were holding out.

Foreign Affairs spokesman Raul Hernandez said that they are still trying to ascertain and complete the facts of the Sabah incident.

The Sultanate of Sulu obtained Sabah from Brunei as a gift for helping put down a rebellion on Borneo Island. The sultanate of Sulu was a Muslim state that ruled over much of the islands off the Sulu Sea. It stretches from a part of the island of Mindanao in the east, to North Borneo, now known as Sabah, in the west and south and to Palawan province, in the north.

The Sultanate of Sulu was founded in 1457 and is believed to exist as a sovereign nation for at least 442 years. Malaysia, which is now brokering peace talks of Manila and the MILF, still pays a token to the heirs of the sultanate of Sulu around 6,300 ringgits each year.

Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said that they will do their best to prevent any bloodshed. Gen. Tan Sri Ismail Omar, police inspector, and Sabah Police Commissioner Datuk Hamza Taib, said that the Filipinos arrived in speedboats and that police and military forces have encircled the men.

"In terms of strength, we have the upper hand in combat power to arrest them, but the government opts for negotiation to break the stalemate so that they leave peacefully to southern Philippines," the prime minister was quoted as saying by the Malaysian news agency Bernama.

"We have more and less identified the group. But let the police negotiate with them and hopefully, it will bear fruit and succeed. This is because they cannot go anywhere, they have been surrounded . . . They have no choice and have to find a solution," he added.

The intrusion occurred just as former Malaysian leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, also Pakatan Rakyat de facto leader, proposed that Sabah be granted autonomy.

Sultan Muhammad Fuad Kiram I, the sultan of Sulu and the sultan of Sabah, said that Malaysia illegally occupied Sabah. "Sabah is still the property and sovereign patrimony of the sultan of Sulu and the royal sultanate of Sulu to this day," he said in the website of the royal hashemite sultanate of Sulu, which is accessible at http://www.royalsulu.com.

He said that the sultanate supports "a free and independent Sabah [which] will be under our reign and our heirs and successors according to law of succession as the reigning sultan of Sabah."

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

Authorities urged to reveal if Sulu militants are 'Project IC' Malaysians

(The Malaysian Insider, 21st March 2013) - PKR has urged the government to reveal if the Sulu militants who invaded Sabah last month were given blue identity cards (ICs) under Project IC.

The Sulu sultanate said yesterday that Agbimuddin Kiram — the brother of self-proclaimed Sulu Sultan Jamalul Kiram III — was never issued a blue IC, but admitted that he had worked as an assistant district officer in Kudat on Sabah's north.

"The confirmation (by the Sulu sultanate) raises worries among many quarters whether the armed group in Lahad Datu involves Malaysians originating from the Philippines who hold blue identity cards," PKR strategy director Rafizi Ramli (picture) said in a statement today.

"This matter raises the possibility of threats to national security, as a result from certain parties allegedly linked to (former Prime Minister) Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad who allegedly gave citizenship without due process," he added.

Dr Mahathir, Malaysia's longest-serving prime minister who was in power from 1981 to 2003, has been accused of spearheading the so-called "Project IC", in which citizenship was allegedly given to immigrants for their votes.

PKR said yesterday that Agbimuddin was appointed in the civil service in 1974, based on a 1975 Sabah government payroll dug up from the state's archives.

The Sulu sultanate's spokesman, Abraham Idjirani, reportedly said yesterday that Agbimuddin was still alive after fresh clashes against Malaysian security forces that killed two Sulu militants yesterday.

The Sulu sultanate's "raja muda" or crown prince had led a 200-strong band of gunmen into Lahad Datu last February 9 and turned the Sabah east coast into a violent battleground in their bid to retake the state.

Rafizi also urged the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) on illegal immigrants in Sabah to continue its proceedings to expose the illegal issuance of ICs in the Borneo state.

The RCI is due to resume on April 15, according to RCI secretary Datuk Saripuddin Kasim.

The RCI, which was formed on August 11 last year, has an additional six months to complete its probe after receiving the Yang di-Pertuan Agong's consent.

Former Sabah National Registration Department (NRD) officers have testified at the RCI that blue ICs were sold to Filipino, Indonesian and Pakistani immigrants in Sabah.

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

Misuari cautioned not to take advantage of Lahat Datu episode

(Daily Express, 21st March 2013) - Kuching: Deputy Foreign Minister Datuk Richard Riot on Wednesday cautioned former Moro National Liberation Front leader Nur Misuari not to try and take advantage of the Lahad Datu episode to advance his personal selfish agenda.

In rebuking Misuari's claim that Sabah rightfully belonged to the so-called Sultan of Sulu, he said, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak had made it categorically clear that the State was part of Malaysia and no one should question its sovereignty and territorial integrity as a legitimate part of Malaysian territory.

"My advice to Misuari is, if he is a peace-loving man as he desperately claimed to be and if he really loves and cares for his Bangsamoro, he should support and join the efforts towards the peace agreement within the framework that was signed recently between the Philippines government and Bangsamoro for long-lasting peace in Mindanao," he told a media conference here.

Cautioning Misuari to heed the Malay proverb, "jangan menagguk di air yang keruh" literally translated as "not to fish in murky water," he urged him to devote his remaining energy and time to the peace accord for the good of his fellow countrymen and government of the Philippines, to which he owed his loyalty.

He said the promotion of peace was one of the pillars of Malaysia's foreign policy and, for which, the country would vehemently protect and defend every inch of Sabah against foreign aggression and any hostile action.

"We have witnessed that turmoil and instability in Southern Philippines have certainly brought no advantage to anyone but only to burden Malaysia and other neighbouring countries having to host those fleeing their homes for safety and better lives," Riot said.

There was nothing that Malaysia desired for its neighbours more than for them to enjoy peace, stability and prosperity, he said.

For that reason, he said, Malaysia had been actively involved in peace keeping missions all over the world and willing to broker peace efforts in neighbouring countries, particularly in the Philippines.

He said the warm bilateral relationship between both countries was reflected when the regional governor of the autonomous region in Muslim Mindanao, Mujir S Hataman, paid him a courtesy at his office in Putrajaya in October last year.

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

Lahad Datu: Misuari's claim a lie, says MILF

(The Star, 21st March 2013) - The Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) has denied the claim that the Malaysian Government had used it to strengthen its claim on Sabah.

MILF secretariat head Mohammad Ameen also dismissed claims by former Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) chairman Nur Misuari that Malaysia was responsible for promoting disunity among the Moro people.

"This is a total lie and completely fabricated. Misuari has committed a sin for making such an irresponsible and callous statement against both the MILF and the Malaysian Government.

"He should rectify and atone for this," Mohammad was quoted as saying in a news report by the Luwaran News Centre yesterday.

He was responding to Misuari, who accused Malaysia of being a "stumbling block" in efforts to unite rival Moro groups in southern Philippines.

Misuari also said that the MILF was "the instrument of Malaysian colonialism" and that it was Malaysia which was "pulling the strings" behind the MILF.

Mohammad pointed out that it was Malaysia who called for the formation of the Bangsamoro Solidarity Conference (BSC) in 2002 to unite the MNLF and MILF factions, as well as to promote a common position among them, especially in their dealings with the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).

"How could Malaysia use the MILF to strengthen its claim to Sabah when Sabah has never been made part of the agenda of the peace talks since 2001?" said Mohammad.

He said Malaysia did not volunteer to facilitate the peace talks between the MILF and the Philippine Government, but it was the then president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, in 2001, who requested Malaysia to act as a negotiator.

Mohammad questioned why Misuari was so eager to raise the Sabah claim now when throughout his 21 years of peace talks with the Philippine government, he had never raised the issue.

"It is a pity that Misuari is blaming everyone else for the failure of his leadership and growing irrelevance to the Bangsamoro struggle to self-determination," he said.

"As a leader, Misuari has nothing more to prove. It is better for him to rest, write his memoirs, and allow the new breed of leaders to lead the Bangsamoro people towards the fulfilment of their true aspirations."

Talking to a ten-year old

Posted: 21 Mar 2013 06:19 PM PDT

The NEP is not just about stocks and shares and listings on the stock exchange. The NEP is about the aspirations of a two-prong attack: reducing the gap between the haves and the haves-not and reducing the disparity between the different races. Hence, while the Bumiputera ownership of stocks and shares or listed companies may have met a shortfall, what about the rest of us, which the NEP is also about? Are we still short in those areas as well, as we may be in corporate wealth?

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Never mind whether I write a short article (The Chinese and Indians screwed up) or a longer article (Conjecture, imagination and suspicion), the average Malaysian still does not understand what I am trying to say. This only goes to show the low comprehension level of most Malaysians. And these are the same people we are depending on to make the right decision in the coming general election.

God help Malaysia when we need to put the lunatics in charge of the asylum and the monkeys in charge of the zoo.

Now, allow me to speak to you as I would to a ten-year old. The events of 1982 and 1992 that I talked about in the two previous articles regarding the New Economic Policy (NEP) were specific to the Malay Chamber of Commerce, which I was not only a member of but I also sat in the Central Committee.

Hence the discussion focused on issues of concern to the Malay Chamber -- and that would be the Bumiputera share of the corporate wealth of Malaysia. It does not involve other issues such as land, housing, education, jobs, etc. The Malay Chamber represents the Malay business community and the job of the Chamber (just like in any Chamber of Commerce anywhere else in the world) is to focus on the needs and aspirations of its members.

Hence it speaks on behalf of only the members of the Chamber. It would not, for example, be speaking on behalf of the taxi drivers, trishaw pullers, lorry owners, petty traders, teachers, bank employees, civil servants, ex-servicemen, ex-policemen, etc., who all have their own associations to represent their interests.

It is like, say, the Association of Chinese Barbers. This association does not represent all Chinese or all barbers. It represents only its members. So to say that the association should not speak on behalf of all Chinese or on behalf of all barbers (the Malay and Indian barbers included) is silly. And in that same spirit to say that the Chinese Chamber of Commerce does not represent all the Chinese in Malaysia is equally silly. Of course it does not. If you are not a member of that Chamber then it does not and cannot represent your interest or your views.

Now, what Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad tried to do in 1982 was to act as matchmaker between the Malay and Chinese Chambers of Commerce so that both Chambers can work closely to resolve issues of concern to the Malay businessmen and women. If the business community can work together to resolve their issues, then the government can ease off and not get involved with what were clearly 'business issues'. And if the relationship works and there is close cooperation between both business communities, then the government can leave the businessmen and women alone and not force policies down their throats.

When it did not work, ten years later in 1992, the government organised a Bumiputera Economic Congress where everyone can get involved. This was not to be a Congress where the Malays make demands and hold the government to ransom. It was to be a Congress where everyone can come to a mutual agreement on what to do. This is not about what the Malays want. It is about what the Malays, Chinese, Indians and others jointly want. It was to seek a consensus of all the races and not listen to the demands of just the Malay business community, and only those who are members of the Malay Chamber on top of that.

The Malay argument was that after so many years of the NEP the Malay share of the corporate wealth increased from just 1% to 4% while that of the Chinese increased from 30% to 60%. The Chinese, however, argued that, in terms of percentage, the Chinese corporate wealth only doubled while that of the Malays increased four times. Hence the Malays saw four times the growth that the Chinese saw.

In terms of growth the Chinese are, of course, correct. The Malay wealth increased four times while that of the Chinese only doubled. In absolute figures, though, the Chinese are far ahead of the Malays at 60% compared to only 4% for the Malays.

Then there was another issue that the Chinese raised. Are you looking at Malay wealth based on par value at the time the shares were issued or at market capitalisation? At par value, say RM1.00 per share, the figure would be lower compared to market capitalisation, say, RM10.00 per share. Hence, are we comparing apples to apples?

The second point was: are you looking at Malay wealth based on what they currently still hold or based on what they were originally given, which had already been sold and at a huge profit on top of that. In other words, is your calculation based on current shareholdings or based on what has passed through the hands of the Malays? What the Malays currently hold in terms of stocks and shares may be only 10% or less of what they originally received. And the 90% or more, which the Malays have since sold, would have been sold at a profit, which is not reflected in the calculation of the corporate wealth of the Malays.

Hence, in short, what formula do we use to decide how wealthy the Malays are? And unless we can agree on that formula, and hence arrive at the correct bottom-line, how do we even begin to resolve the problem when we do not even know what the problem is.

(Now do you see why short articles do not work? There are many issues to an argument that need to be raised).

Now, remember that we are still talking about just the corporate wealth or corporate share of the Malays in comparison to the other races. But not all of us have stocks and shares or own companies listed on the stock exchange. Hence this debate, argument, disagreement, or whatever, does not involve all of us. What if you are a makan gaji (salaried employee), student, farmer, smallholder, fisherman, trishaw puller, food stall operator, etc? Whether it is 4%, 19%, 30% or 60% is of no concern to you. This is merely the concern of the Malay, Chinese and Indian Chambers of Commerce, and in particular to the members of those Chambers.

Yes, those are social issues that the social scientists need to address and which the Chambers of Commerce does not talk about. Do more Malays receive an education now than before? Do more Malays get to go to university now than before? Are more Malays employed now than before? Are more Malays living above the poverty level now than before? Do more Malays own homes now than before? Do more Malays own cars now than before? Do more Malays live in the urban areas now than before? Are there more Malay professionals now than before? And so on and so forth.

So there is more to the NEP than just stocks, shares and listed companies. But the story I told you in the previous two articles concerns the Malay and Chinese Chambers of Commerce and even then specific to events in 1982 and 1992. But it appears like many of you just do not understand this. And this is why many of you posted comments that had nothing to do with the issue.

First understand what is being written and then comment. And the issue was regarding the Malay and Chinese Chambers of Commerce and the events of 1982 and 1992 and what Dr Mahathir tried but did not work out mainly because the Malays and Chinese could not agree on the formula to apply and hence what the solution should therefore be.

And instead of trying to find the middle ground -- as in any 'peace process' there would always be a middle ground -- the Chinese chose to remain silent and not participate and allowed the government to do what it wanted.

That, in a nutshell, is the message I am delivering. However, those wearing blinkers would be hard-pressed to see this message.

Conjecture, imagination and suspicion

Posted: 19 Mar 2013 08:56 PM PDT

Long before 1970, the Chinese, led by Siew Nim Chee, the economic adviser to Lim Goh Tong, approached the Finance Minister, Tan Siew Sin, to propose a sort of economic policy to help the Malays. The Chinese realised that sooner or later there would be turmoil in the country if the economic imbalance between the Chinese and the Malays were not addressed.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Yesterday's article, The Chinese and Indians screwed up, was a good experiment in readers' mentality, comprehension skills, and IQ level.

Firstly, I cut my normal 3-4-page article to just one page in response to some readers who complain that they cannot understand long articles. If they feel that a 3-4-page essay is too long to understand, imagine what they would say if I wrote a 200-page thesis. This thesis would probably be lost on most of them.

Apparently, even if the article is a short one-page article they still do not understand what I am saying, as most of the 146 comments have proven. Hence it is not the length of my articles that is at fault but the brain of the readers that is to be blamed. Short article or long article, they still do not understand what they read.

Secondly, yesterday's article was in response to the whining, moaning, bitching, grumbling, lamenting and complaining regarding the New Economic Policy (NEP). When I revealed what happened in 1982 and then what happened again in 1992, most readers were caught off-guard. They were not aware about the 1982 and 1992 episodes. However, not wanting to admit their ignorance, they started posting comments that were way off the mark.

And most of these comments were not based on facts or eyewitness accounts but were based on conjecture, assumptions, guessing and speculation. I was there in 1982 and 1992 and was involved with what happened. Those who posted comments were not, but they still posted comments as if they knew what happened for a fact.

Thirdly, everyone assumes that the failure of the NEP was solely and entirely the fault of Umno and the Malays. Now that I reveal that the Chinese and Indians had been given an opportunity to correct the faults in the NEP and even end it and replace it with something else, but they did not do so, the readers deviate from the issue and raise all sorts of lame excuses such as the fear of Operasi Lalang, about Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad being a dictator, that even if the Chinese and Indians speak up no one would listen, and so on.

Let me tell you something else that most of you are probably not aware of.

Long before 1970, the Chinese leaders, led by Siew Nim Chee, the economic adviser to Lim Goh Tong, approached the Finance Minister, Tan Siew Sin, to propose a sort of economic policy to help the Malays. The Chinese realised that sooner or later there would be turmoil in the country if the economic imbalance between the Chinese and the Malays were not addressed.

Siew Sin, however, did not take up the idea and when May 13 erupted in 1969, those Chinese who were in the know and who had tried to do something actually blamed Siew Sin for the race riots.

That's right, while you blame Umno and Tun Razak Hussein for May 13, the Chinese who had attempted to avoid such a thing as May 13 blamed Siew Sin for not listening and for not doing what the Chinese had proposed.

Ironical, don't you think so?

When Dr Mahathir took over as Prime Minister, he tried to get the Chinese to 'take over' the job of reducing the economic imbalance between the Malays and the Chinese so that the government could end the NEP in 1990. The Chinese, however, thought that this is not their job to nurture the Malays. Let the government worry about the Malays. Why should the Chinese worry about it?

The Bumiputera share of the 'corporate pie' in 1970 before the implementation of the NEP was just 1%. Hence the target was set at 30% although the Bumiputera population was 60%. By the time Dr Mahathir took over in 1981, the Bumiputera share had grown to 4% -- or 19% if you include the 15% share of the trust agencies and GLCs. By 1990, it still remained at the same level as in 1981. In short, it had stagnated mainly because of the economic slump of 1985-1987.

The main question and bone of contention then was can the 15% share of the trust agencies and GLCs be added to the 4% personal share of the Bumiputeras considering that the trust agencies and GLCs belong to the government and therefore to the nation? For example, does Petronas belong to the country or to the Malays?

That was one main disagreement between the Malays and the government. The government says that the Bumiputeras own 19% of the corporate pie while the Malays insist it was only 4% -- since what is owned by the nation does not belong to the Malays individually.

Nevertheless, while the argument was about whether it is 4% or 19%, whatever the case may be it was still short of the 30% target.

In 1991, the Malay Chamber of Commerce wanted to organise the Third Bumiputera Economic Congress to discuss the NEP. Dr Mahathir summoned the Committee to his office to inform us that the government will take over the organising of the Congress.

I was in that delegation to the PM's office and was appointed as the spokesman. I was told to protest the move by the government to 'hijack' the Congress. However, there were no two ways about it. The government will take over and there was to be no further discussion on the matter. Furthermore, we were told that the government was going to invite everyone to participate in the Congress.

When we were told this we protested. I stood up to argue that how can we call it the Bumiputera Congress when the non-Malays were going to be part of the Congress and would decide on what the new post-NEP policy was going to look like? But Dr Mahathir's decision was final. The government will be organising it and the non-Malays were going to be part of it. Accept that or the government will proceed without the involvement of the Malay Chamber of Commerce.

We were mad as hell but could not do anything about it. Clearly the Malay Chamber had lost its monopoly on the NEP. The non-Malays were now going to have a say in what happens post-NEP. And that was when many of us in the Malay Chamber swung over to Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah's Semangat 46.

Dr Mahathir and Umno had 'abandoned' the Malays and had opened up the new policy post-NEP to the non-Malays. This was a betrayal of the Malay cause; the way we saw it then. And Dr Mahathir was no longer regarded as the trustee of the Malays.

Surprisingly, Dr Mahathir had 'given the non-Malays a knife' but they did not use it. Dr Mahathir was in the mood to end the NEP and replace it with something else. We did not know what that something else was going to look like but surely with the non-Malays having a say in what it was going to be could not be something favourable to the Malays.

But the non-Malays did not pick up the knife offered to them. Dr Mahathir was clearly very angry. His response was that the government had given us the opportunity to sort this out amongst ourselves and since we had failed to do that then we have given the government no choice but to unilaterally decide what the new post-NEP policy was going to look like.

In 1990, Barisan Nasional won only 53.4% of the votes and 70.55% of the Parliament seats (and lost Kelantan to PAS-Semangat 46).

In 1992, the Third Bumiputera Economic Congress was held.

In 1995, Barisan Nasional won 65.2% of the votes (the highest ever: even better than in the 'historical' 2004 general election) and 84.38% of the Parliament seats.

The 'message' from the 1995 election result was that the people were happy. Hence I decided to leave the Malay Chamber of Commerce. It was futile to continue if the people were happy with the government and all our effort regarding what to do with the NEP, or post-NEP, had gone to waste.

Now you know why I get very vocal and abrasive with people who shout and scream about the NEP. And don't even try to give excuses as to why all this happened. I know what happened. I was there. You were not. And all your comments and views are based on conjecture, assumptions, guessing and speculation.

The Chinese and Indians screwed up

Posted: 18 Mar 2013 08:03 PM PDT

There is some chatter going on in the Internet regarding the New Economic Policy (NEP) so I thought that maybe I would address this issue. Some readers, however, have said they are incapable of reading my 3-4-page articles. Some say they only read the titles and then start posting comments based on the title. For the sake of these people who want to read brief articles, today I shall try to be as brief as possible.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

In 1981, Tun (then Dato' Seri) Dr Mahathir Mohamad took over as Malaysia's Fourth Prime Minister.

Soon after he took office he invited members of the Malay and Chinese Chambers of Commerce for dinner at the Equatorial Hotel in Kuala Lumpur. He then placed five Malays and five Chinese at each table for ten and made us all sit alternate to one another.

Dr Mahathir then told the Malays that the NEP had run for more than 11 years and had less than nine years to go before it ended. And, as promised, it will end in 1990 because it is not fair to the non-Malays to extend it beyond 20 years. Hence the Malays need to be prepared to face this day.

Dr Mahathir also told the Chinese that they would need to work with the Malays and help them achieve the aspirations of the NEP so that the government can end the NEP in 1990 as planned. If the NEP ended far short of the target, then this might create a lot of dissatisfaction, which is not good for the stability of the country when one race harbours a grudge against another.

In 1991, Dr Mahathir proposed that the Third Bumiputera Economic Congress be held at the PWTC where the various races, political parties from both Barisan Nasional and the Opposition, Malay-Chinese-Indian Chambers of Commerce, associations, societies, movements, NGOs, etc., could sit down for three days to discuss the ending of the NEP and how the government should face the post-NEP era and address the various short-comings in the social reengineering experiment of 1970-1990.

(SEE MORE HERE: http://www.pmo.gov.my/ucapan/?m=p&p=mahathir&id=210)

At this Congress, which was held in January 1992, the audience was shocked by the public quarrel between Anwar Ibrahim, the then Finance Minister, and Rafidah Aziz, the Trade and Industry Minister. These two Ministers plus the other members of the Cabinet could not agree on a common policy.

The non-Malay members of the Congress, in particular the Chinese and Indians, did not put forward any proposals and attended the session merely as silent observers. They just listened to what the Malay participants had to say without contributing any ideas.

Eventually, the Congress ended without any concrete proposals other than the 20-point Memorandum from the Malay Chamber of Commerce (which Raja Petra Kamarudin presented to Tan Sri Sanusi Junid), which the government accepted as merely an Addendum to the main Resolution from the Congress proper, which was that the Congress left it to the government to resolve the issue of what to do in the post-NEP era.

For all intents and purposes, the Congress failed because the Cabinet Ministers, the non-Malay participants, the members of the Opposition parties, and the Chinese and Indian Chambers of Commerce, did not contribute any ideas and proposals that the government could consider and adopt as Malaysia's new policy post-NEP.

Malaysia at the crossroads

Posted: 13 Mar 2013 07:41 AM PDT

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat its mistakes. So Umno ensures that the Malays never forget history and that once upon a time Malay territory was colonised for 446 years before it saw independence again mainly because the Malays were not united and that it is possible this can happen again if the Malays do not remain united.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Why do we need to learn history? One reason would be because those who do not know or forget history are doomed to repeat its mistakes. My usual example would be Hitler. He repeated Napoleon's mistake and thus suffered Napoleon's fate. Nevertheless, looking at things on hindsight is always easy. Everyone can be an expert on hindsight. It is whether one has foresight that matters.

The second reason for learning history would be so that one can develop analytical skills. Are you able to look at history from an unbiased and critical eye and analyse the events for what they were at that particular time and place? Most times we would judge history from our own point of view. And our own point of view would be influenced by our value system. And this value system would, in turn, be influenced by society's norms depending on era and region.

For example, how would you view the Conquistadors of the 1500s -- soldiers, explorers and adventurers in the service of the Spanish and Portuguese Empires? They were initially set up to recapture the Iberian Peninsula that was under Muslim control known as Al Andalus. Over the next 200 years they sailed through most of the world to conquer new territories on behalf of Spain and Portugal.

For all intents and purposes, the Conquistadors were professionally trained soldiers or mercenaries who were very ruthless. The Conquistadors were motivated by just two things -- religion and wealth -- and their objective was to spread Christianity at the point of the sword and to colonise new territories and rob those territories of its wealth.

Today, we would probably call these people pirates and terrorists. However, 500 years ago, they were considered Christian warriors and patriots who plundered the world and eradicated the anti-Christ with the blessing of the Pope in Rome. But how would you, the student of history, judge the Conquistadors? Would you apply today's value system and call them pirates and terrorists or the value system of those days and call them warriors and patriots in the service of God?

You would most likely say, who cares? What relevance is the Conquistador of the 1500s to Malaysia of 2013 where our concern is the coming general election and what the outcome of it is going to be? Well, it may have more relevance than you suspected and it may have more bearing on the coming general election than you had imagined.

First of all, the Conquistadors would not have existed had the Muslim army not occupied part of Christian Europe. Had the Muslims stayed in the Middle East then Christian pride would not have suffered and there would have been no reason to form a mercenary army to retake conquered Christian land.

Then, once this Christian army had fulfilled its task of driving the Muslims out of Europe, it embarked on its own conquest of the world and ventured into Africa, South America, China, India and South East Asia.

In April 1511, Afonso de Albuquerque set sail for Melaka with a force of 1,200 men and a dozen and a half ships. On 24th August 1511, they conquered Melaka and it became a strategic base for Portuguese expansion in the East Indies. The Portuguese, however, did not conquer Thailand. Instead, in that same year, the Portuguese established diplomatic relations with Thailand by sending an ambassador, Duarte Fernandes, to the court of King Ramathibodi.

Why did the Portuguese conquer Melaka but not Thailand? Well, mainly because Thailand was united and had a strong king while Melaka was divided and the other Sultans in Perak, Kedah, Riau, etc., did not come to the aid of the Sultan of Melaka.

In short, as Umno always tells the Malays, the disunity of the Malays resulted in the fall of Melaka and eventually the entire Malay Archipelago was colonised by the western powers -- starting with the Portuguese then followed by the Dutch and finally the British.

To the non-Malays this may not be a significant point. To the Malays, however, this point is very relevant. Malay disunity resulted in the Malays becoming an occupied race. It was not until Umno was formed in 1946 did the fortunes of the Malays change for the better.

So, as far as the Malays are concerned, history is very clear about the issue. No Malay unity and the Malays become second-class citizens in their own country. Malays unite under the umbrella of Umno and the Malays retake the country that they lost.

Now, how do you address this belief? Umno is constantly reminding the Malays about what happened in August 1511 and why it happened. Umno is also constantly reminding the Malays about what happened in August 1957 and why it happened. And to the Malays this makes sense.

You may argue that what happened in 1511 is so long ago and is no longer relevant. Try telling the Irish that what happened in 1641 is so long ago and is no longer relevant. It is still relevant as far as the Irish are concerned and they can never forgive nor forget the events of 1641 when the English 'colonialists' led by Oliver Cromwell invaded Irish land. Hence, if the Malays are being silly then so are the Irish. History may, over time, be forgiven but it can never be forgotten.

This is a very difficult subject to broach mainly because it involves emotions and sentiments. And you can never rationalise emotions and sentiments. You must also never challenge emotions and sentiments head on. You need to carefully navigate around them. And the Malays are very emotional and sentimental, with feudalistic to boot. And Umno has mastered the skill of playing on the emotions and sentiments of the Malays.

No, this is not a non-Malay-bashing article. This is not an article bashing anyone for that matter. This is about what Sun Tzu said: know your enemy. And the 'enemy' here is the heart and minds of the Malays. You can't fight this type of 'enemy'. You have to win over this 'enemy'. The question is: do you know how?

The coming general election is going to be one of the most crucial general elections in Malaysian history. If Umno gets kicked out this may be the end of Umno for a long time to come. Hence Umno cannot afford to lose this election. But how do we convince the Malay voters that the defeat of Umno does not translate to Melaka falling to the Portuguese in 1511?

Well, this is the job for the politicians and I am not a politician.

The Deepak-Bala marriage: in Deepak’s own words

Posted: 10 Mar 2013 12:00 AM PST

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Deepak Jaikishan was called to the MACC office a few times. This is already public knowledge and is no secret. What is still a secret, though, is what did Deepak tell the MACC? Until today we have not been given the gist of Deepak's statement. And what we are also not being told is why after more than a month still no action is being taken.

From what we know, based on the newspaper reports, Deepak's first couple of visits to the MACC office came to naught. Deepak told the MACC that he was 'not yet ready' to give his statement and went home, promising to return another day. Finally, on 25th January 2013, Deepak gave his statement to the MACC. However, until now, no one knows what he told the MACC. Neither Deepak nor the MACC are talking.

We are still trying to get our hands on a copy of the MACC report, and there is a strong possibility that that may happen very soon. In the meantime, while we try to get our hands on that report, maybe we can share with you the gist of what, according to our Deep Throat, Deepak told the MACC. Let us see whether this part of Deepak's story is going to appear in his 'official statement'.

What our Deep Throat said appears consistent with what Bala said in his exposé at the Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH) on 27th February 2013 plus what he related in his Singapore interview (which you can see on YouTube) and in the London press conference earlier. It is also consistent with Deepak's interviews with Malaysiakini and Free Malaysia Today.

The only part that remains hazy is: did Bala contact Deepak or did Deepak contact Bala that resulted in the meeting in Rawang that same evening that the first SD was released? Both claim that 'the other person' initiated the meeting. Nevertheless, the rest of the story appears consistent -- except for the part that Bala was allegedly promised RM700,000 by M. Puravalen as payment for the first SD, which Bala has thus far never mentioned but which Deepak says did happen.

Anyway, read what our Deep Throat has to say about the matter.

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

In October 2006, Bala was in Razak's office at the time when they received a phone call from Puravalen (picture above). Puravalen said he had something very urgent to discuss with Razak concerning Altantuya. Razak then agreed to meet Puravalen who arrived not long after that.

Puravalen told Razak that the police were about to arrest him (Razak) for the murder of Altantuya. Razak suddenly went pale and started to panic.

Puravalen told Razak not to worry and that he will handle this matter provided that he (Razak) agreed that he (Puravalen) will act for him as his lawyer. Later Razak's family found out that Puravalen was actually linked to Kalimullah and was feeding information to the 'other side' (Karpal Singh included) through Kalimullah. Razak's family suspected that Puravalen, who is very close to Sivarasa, was trying to fix up Razak so they decided to sack Puravalen and replace him with Shafee Abdullah.

In July 2008, Puravalen was the one who introduced Bala to Sivarasa and Americk. Sivarasa then arranged for Bala to meet DSAI to discuss signing a SD to directly implicate Najib and Rosmah to Altantuya's murder. Bala met DSAI twice, the first time a few days before the SD was signed and the second time on the SD day itself wherein he sat beside DSAI and gave his PC flanked by his lawyer.

The first time Puravalen brought Bala to meet DSAI, he was promised RM700,000.00 if he agreed to come up with the SD by 1st July 2008. DSAI had agreed to pay the RM700,000.00 through Puravalen and the payment was to be made in two stages -- Part A, RM200,000.00, immediately and Part B, RM500,000.00, after the PC. On 1st July 2008, Bala made the SD and proceeded to conduct the PC on 3rd July 2008, organised by DSAI and his lawyers at the PKR HQ.

Unfortunately for Bala, after the PC, Puravalen only paid him RM100,000.00 although he had received RM200,000.00 from DSAI. Puravalen told Bala that DSAI had instructed for the balance to be paid after a few days. The balance RM500,000 Puravalen pocketed all to himself without Bala knowing. This angered Bala and he tried to contact DSAI through his lawyer, Americk, and other people he knew in PKR such as Sivarasa. But DSAI never responded at all to him because DSAI believed that Bala was fully paid.

At the same time, Bala started getting calls from the Brickfields Police Station and he became worried that the police will lock him up again like the last time during the Altantuya case. He started to panic as DSAI was not responding to him and the lawyer had just cheated him of his only income to enable him and his family to leave Malaysia. Bala doesn't know that Puravalen cheated him.

Bala, the next day after waiting for DSAI or his lawyer to call him, realised that he had been cheated of his promised money by DSAI and the lawyers. He then contacted Deepak through a mutual friend, Suresh, and asked to meet Deepak so that he could relate what had happened. Deepak informed Suresh that he will first discuss this matter with Rosmah and get back to him ASAP.

That afternoon, Rosmah called Deepak regarding the SD matter and the discussion got to Bala. Deepak told Rosmah what he had found out from Suresh and she asked Deepak to try and help to resolve the attempt to frame her husband with the murder case. Deepak told Rosmah he will speak to Bala directly and get a true picture of the entire events and how this thing can be resolved. Deepak spoke to Bala on the phone number given by Suresh and asked him if he was prepared to tell the truth of about SD conspiracy, which was now being exploited as a political asset by Najib's competitors.

However, Bala was reluctant to do so as he said he didn't want to trust any politicians as DSAI had cheated him on the amount of money promised and at the same time he was worried that Najib's people were going to get him arrested again like during the Razak Baginda case. Deepak told Bala don't worry because if he was willing to tell the truth he will be protected and will not be harassed by the police. He can get this assurance.

After a long chat, Bala was still unconvinced and told Deepak he will call back later. Deepak then called Rosmah and reported the entire conversation to her. She then told Deepak to come to the Putrajaya house and meet her husband to explain all the matters. Deepak went to Putrajaya, Sri Satria, and met Najib and Rosmah on the first floor lounge and detailed his conversation with Bala. Najib asked Deepak to convey to Bala that it was important that he speak the truth and tell about RM700,000 promise by DSAI.

The reason DSAI had asked Bala to make the SD was because to stop Najib from taking over PM post from Pak Lah and DSAI informed Bala that he needed Najib and Rosmah to be directly implicated. The timing was perfect and DSAI wanted this whole thing to implicate Najib and Rosmah to prevent him from becoming PM and thus allowing him to succeed with his September 16th plan to get the MPs in Sabah to defect so that he could become PM as they were demoralised at that time under PM Badawi's administration.

Deepak met Bala in Rawang at about 9pm and they had a long discussion about the entire affair involving the SD and his experience during the time he was employed by Razak Baginda. The next day Bala signed his second SD to contradict the first SD that he had signed.

Private investigator P. Balasubramanian's interview in Singapore

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uXX0l1V_Ms4

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZdiTk48400

Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tVzHDuyzyE

Deepak Jaikishan's statement corroborating Bala's story

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q2o7lIVH1Dg

Previous news reports on the matter

1. Lawyer Puravalen to give police statement in PI Bala case http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/bar_news/berita_badan_peguam/lawyer_puravalen_to_give_police_statement_in_pi_bala_case.html

2. Lawyer M. Puravalen claims libel by NST, seeks apology or will sue http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/lawyer-m.-puravalen-claims-libel-by-nst-seeks-apology-or-will-sue

3. Explain alleged conspiracy, duo told http://www.nst.com.my/nation/general/explain-alleged-conspiracy-duo-told-1.127878

Umno Incorporated (part 4)

Posted: 06 Mar 2013 12:00 AM PST

In Realmild's accounts, the money appeared as a loan to the company from the shareholders of the company. Then the 'loan' was wiped out or written off in exchange for another company called Radicare Sdn Bhd. But then in the books it shows that Radicare was sold for merely RM2 and not RM200 million or whatever amount of 'shareholders' advances' that still reflected in the books at that time.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

The Daim-Anwar team

In 1992, Anwar Ibrahim, who had just taken over the Finance Minister's job from Tun Daim Zainuddin, made his move to control the mainstream media in preparation to challenge Tun Ghafar Baba (picture below) at the end of 1993 for the post of Deputy President of Umno and hence for the post of Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia as well.

Anwar's first move was to use Realmild (M) Sdn Bhd as the vehicle to acquire the media conglomerate, NSTP, and the Umno-owned TV station, TV3. Anwar's four nominees or 'fronts' for this exercise were Abdul Kadir Jasin, Mohd Noor Mutalib, Ahmad Nazri Abdullah and Khalid Ahmad. And they did this through a management buyout or MBO costing RM800 million, the largest MBO ever in Malaysian corporate history.

However, Realmild was too small to 'swallow' a media conglomerate to the tune of RM800 million so they had to beef up the company's balance sheet. And they did this by injecting cash of about RM200 million into the company.

But then who owns this RM200 million and where did the money come from? Did the RM200 million belong to Abdul Kadir Jasin, Mohd Noor Mutalib, Ahmad Nazri Abdullah and Khalid Ahmad and if so how did they acquire this money when their tax returns do not show that they had earned that much money?

That is the first mystery. RM200 million appeared from nowhere and with no tangible evidence to account for it. But the even bigger mystery, however, is what happened to that money later and how did it just disappear as mysteriously as it had appeared?

That is the second mystery.

And to camouflage this whole thing they signed a Settlement Agreement on 3rd August 1999, which the public or auditors were not told about. Basically, this Settlement Agreement was the camouflage to wipe the books clean and to not have to explain where the RM200 million came from and where it went to later.

I suppose this is what they mean by telling a lie to cover another lie.

Umno Incorporated (part 1)

Umno Incorporated (part 2)

Umno Incorporated (part 3)

Posted: 05 Mar 2013 12:00 AM PST

On 3rd August 1999, a 'Settlement Agreement' was signed between Nazri Abdullah and Mohd Noor Mutalib, the majority shareholders of Realmild at the time, and the company, Realmild (M) Sdn Bhd. The purpose of the Agreement was to 'write-off' the RM148 million 'shareholders' advances' -- which was shown as RM182 million in the 1997 Annual Report but got reduced a year later. Hence RM34 million had somehow 'disappeared' over that one-year or so.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

When Munir Majid (picture above) approved the injection of Realmild (M) Sdn Bhd into MRCB it was based on projected profits of RM70 million expected from projects in-hand and RM42 million from projects yet to be secured. It was the first time ever that the watchdog Securities Commission gave an approval based on the mere speculation that MRCB would most likely secure projects in the future. More importantly, the 'injection' actually ended up as a reverse takeover.

The whole exercise was touted as a management buyout (MBO) and the four people involved -- known Umno cum Anwar Ibrahim cronies (just like Munir Majid himself) -- were Abdul Kadir Jasin, Mohd Noor Mutalib, Ahmad Nazri Abdullah and Khalid Ahmad (picture below).

This was clearly not just a simple 'Ali Baba' exercise but a case of Ali Baba and his forty thieves. After the RM800 million Realmild MBO (see part 2 of this series), they injected the whole thing into MRCB and ended up getting a company worth more than a billion for nothing. That is the beauty of selling a bigger company with large liabilities to a smaller company. You clear your liabilities (the buyer takes over your liabilities) and you end up getting shares in the enlarged group free-of-charge.

One year after Anwar Ibrahim fell out of favour and ended up behind the walls of the Sungai Buloh prison, Realmild changed hands. Anwar was now out so his nominees -- Dato' Ahmad Nazri Bin Abdullah and Mohd Noor Bin Mutalib -- were forced to sell off their interests in the company to another Umno nominee.

And this is where it begins to get even more interesting.

The former head of the Penang Malay Chamber of Commerce, Abdul Rahman Maidin (picture above), alleged that he lost RM40 million on the 7.101 million Realmild (M) Sdn Bhd shares he purchased, which were said to actually belong to Umno and not to the people he bought the shares from.

What happened thereafter appears to be very hazy.

But where did this RM182 million (or RM148 million) come from and whose money is it? And where did this RM182 million (or RM148 million: less the RM34 million 'discount') go after that? Furthermore, what do they mean by 'shareholders' advances'?

Apparently, this money was siphoned out to pay off Rahman Maidin's debts of RM84 million. Hence did he really lose RM40 million as he claims or did he, in fact, make RM148 million (or RM182 million according to the 1997 accounts) as what the accounts and the Settlement Agreement show?

In return for this write-off, the outgoing shareholders of Realmild would receive 49% equity in Radicare Sdn Bhd, a company that was given the government concession to equip and commission hospitals and provide hospital support services that included clinical waste management, cleansing services, linen and laundry services, facilities engineering maintenance, and biomedical engineering maintenance.

Now, in the hearing more than two years ago, this Settlement Agreement was not declared. And it was not declared mainly because this was a cover-up for a fraudulent exercise to siphon out money. It was meant to camouflage an illegal transfer of funds. And you can read below the details of the Agreement, which definitely requires further explanation.

More puzzling is the statement in Realmild's June 1999-2000 accounts where it states in Note 27: "Subsequent to year end the company disposed its entire equity interest in an associated company Radicare (M) Sdn Bhd, for a consideration sum of RM2."

This means Realmild's interest in Radicare was sold for only RM2. But the Settlement Agreement states a figure of RM147,970,621.40. So, is it RM2 or RM147,970,621.40?

This can only mean that RM147,970,621.40 was paid but only RM2 went to the company. The balance must have gone into someone's pocket -- in this case that would be Rahman Maidin since he denies that he was Umno's nominee or that the interest he held in the company actually belongs to Umno.

Something is terribly not kosher here and it looks like everything has not been fully declared in the court hearing of 2010. Rahman says one thing but the accounts show something else. And there are too many unexplained issues that have remained unexplained.

Was the Settlement Agreement, therefore, kept from public knowledge because it was a cover-up for some missing money and hence leading to something illegal?

Umno Incorporated (part 1)

Umno Incorporated (part 2)

Posted: 04 Mar 2013 12:00 AM PST

In January 1993, Realmild (M) Sdn Bhd, a private company controlled by the management of NSTP and TV3, acquired 48 per cent of NSTP and 43 per cent of TV3 in a deal worth a whopping RM800 million -- it might still be the largest management buyout in Malaysia to date. Realmild was then controlled by four individuals closely linked to Deputy Premier then Anwar Ibrahim -- namely Abdul Kadir Jasin, Mohd Noor Mutalib, Ahmad Nazri Abdullah and Khalid Ahmad. The four were executives in the NSTP group, two of them -- Kadir and Nazri -- headed the English and Bahasa Malaysia sections respectively of the newspaper group.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

In 1992, Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysia's Finance Minister, approved the management buy-out (MBO) of New Straits Times Press Holdings Bhd (NSTP), the largest media group in the country, and also public-listed TV3. Anwar directed Munir Majid of the Securities Commission to approve the injection of Realmild into MRCB, which led to Realmild Sdn Bhd controlling four listed companies -- MRCB, Malakoff, TV3 and New Straits Times Press Bhd.

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

MRCB's chequered past colours its future

(KinBiz, 21 February 2013) -- MRCB started out as Perak Carbide Sdn Bhd in 1969. In the early days, Teh Hong Piow, the Public Bank founder was among the shareholders of Perak Carbide.

Perak Carbide was renamed MRCB in 1981 after a change in its core business from the production of carbide to property development and investment.

In the 90's MRCB morphed into a political animal, controlling New Straits Times Press Holdings Bhd (NSTP), then a giant publishing company, the largest media group in the country, and also publicly traded TV3.

The MRCB story is often used to exhibit how corporate Malaysia works.

Realmild was then controlled by four individuals closely linked to Deputy Premier then Anwar Ibrahim -- namely Abdul Kadir Jasin, Mohd Noor Mutalib, Ahmad Nazri Abdullah and Khalid Ahmad. The four were executives in the NSTP group, two of them -- Kadir and Nazri -- headed the English and Bahasa Malaysia sections respectively of the newspaper group.

The four flipped Realmild's assets into MRCB in a reverse takeover.

Some say the corporate moves were an attempt by Anwar, manoeuvring to control the media before the impending Umno vice presidential elections in 1993.

With its political clout, MRCB grew to own such choice assets such as 20.2 per cent in Commerce Asset Holdings Bhd which owned Bank of Commerce Bhd (now CIMB)—via NSTP, a chunk of power generation companies like Malakoff Bhd, Sepang Power and Port Dickson Power among a whole host of other large assets.

In 1996, MRCB and Keretapi Tanah Melayu formed a joint venture to develop 77 acres of prime land in Brickfields which is MRCB's flagship KL Sentral, and two years later the government even forked out a support loan of RM336 million to build the station.

However things took a turn for the worse in 1998, when Anwar fell from grace and when the Asian financial crisis started to bite. Lacking in political clout, MRCB's downward spiral was a painful one exacerbated by the financial crisis of 1997-1998.

For its financial year ended August 1999, the company suffered losses of about RM1.45 billion from RM235.39 million in revenue.

As at August 1999, MRCB was saddled with short-term borrowings of RM923 million while the company long term debt commitments were RM473 million. On the other side of the balance sheet MRCB had cash and bank balances amounting to RM38 million.

For the year ended August 1999, MRCB's interest payments on borrowings was RM118 million, about three times the company's net profit.

After Anwar's fall from grace in Sept 1998 when he was removed as finance minister and deputy prime minister and charged with sodomy, Abdul Rahman Maidin, a close associate of former finance minister Daim Zainuddin, was brought in to run MRCB in July 1999.

Daim had been collared in by then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad to help deal with the financial crisis. Daim headed the powerful National Economic Action Council then.

But the slide continued. Daim himself appeared to have a rift with Mahathir and some of those who were close to him were removed from their position after their stakes in key companies were taken over by the governments. This included Halim Saad of Renong, Tajudin Ramli of Malaysia Airlines and Celcom (then under TRI) and Rahman Maidin at MRCB.

MRCB management went into professional hands with Abdul Rahman Ahmad and Shahril Ridza Ridzuan becoming managing director and executive director respectively in 2001.

Eventually MRCB was acquired by EPF in an apparent rescue of the group.

The EPF ended up with a chunk of MRCB's stock in a debt for equity swap, after Realmild was unable to service borrowings from EPF. A large portion of EPF's shareholding was obtained in January 2005, when the pension fund acquired a 20 per cent block of shares increasing its shareholding to 30.35 per cent then. Realmild ceased to be a major shareholder after that.

Shahril eventually became CEO of MRCB and left end-2009 after eight years. Following that Mohamed Razeek Md Hussain Maricar took over but left in August last year. Since then, MRCB has been without a CEO. Shahril himself became chief investment officer at EPF in 2010.

Under professional management, much was achieved at MRCB and the KL Sentral development has attracted much interest and has seen property prices climb. But it looks like now EPF has embarked on a path to inject entrepreneurship into MRCB.

This has happened through the proposed injection of Nusa Gapurna which has about 33 acres of prime land located in Petaling Jaya, Old Klang Road and Subang pegged with a gross development value of RM5.7 billion. Part of the plan is for Salim to eventually become managing director of MRCB.

EPF in a statement to KinBiz said: "The model is similar to that of SP Setia or Mah Sing, where an entrepreneur holds a significant stake and works on behalf of all the institutional and minority shareholders.

"The ultimate combination for the EPF is economically neutral as it had a 40 per cent stake in both businesses and will continue to have approximately the same stake in the combined entity going forward."

EPF as a related party cannot vote on this deal, meaning it will be left to the minorities to decide.

Analysts and observers however question the move to bring in Salim and ask whether Salim has the right credentials to run MRCB. After all it can be rightly argued that MRCB has far more expertise developing properties than Salim himself. So why opt for him at this juncture?

Umno Incorporated (part 1)

Posted: 03 Mar 2013 12:00 AM PST

Rahman said he then purchased all the stakes in Realmild from Khalid, former Berita Harian Sdn Bhd group editor Ahmad Nazri Abdullah, former New Straits Times Sdn Bhd group editor Abdul Kadir Jasin and former NSTP director Mohd Noor Mutalib. The four were at that time aligned with then Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, before Anwar fell out of favour with Mahathir in 1998, at the height of allegations of sodomy against him.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

The problem with public hearings, court cases and trials is that not everything is fully revealed in an open court, in particular the goings-on behind the scenes and the shenanigans in the corridors of power.

Some of you may have read the three news reports below back in 2010. For those who have not, first read these reports and then in part two of this series we will reveal what has not been reported. After all, Malaysia Today dabbles in the untold story or the story that those in the corridors of power would rather remain hidden.

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

Abdul Rahman Maidin

'Shocked to learn Realmild shares belonged to Umno'

(Malaysiakini, 2 September 2010) -- Former Penang Malay Chamber of Commerce chairperson Abdul Rahman Maidin told the commercial division of the High Court in Kuala Lumpur today that he had to bear losses of RM40 million for the 7.101 million shares he purchased in Realmild (M) Sdn Bhd, which were said to belong to Umno.

Realmild owns majority shares in conglomerate Malaysia Resources Corporation Bhd (MRCB), which once owned the gold mine media giant New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd (NSTP) and Sistem Televisyen Malaysia Bhd (which operates TV3, among others).

Rahman, who was a director of Realmild when he purchased the stake in the company, is being sued for RM10 million by a former company stakeholder, Khalid Ahmad.

Also a former chairman of MRCB and former executive vice-chairman of NSTP, Rahman said sometime at the end of 2001, he was instructed by then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad to transfer all the Realmild shares in his name to Syed Anwar Jamalullail, without any consideration, and that he resigned from the two companies on Jan 8, 2002.

"I was told that the Realmild shares belonged to Umno. I was extremely shocked as I never at any time knew that Umno was the true owner of the shares."

"I undertook the acquisition of Realmild shares purely from a corporate and commercial standpoint. I raised funds for this exercise through my personal financial means, without any assistance from any political entity," Rahman said in reply to questions from his lawyer Alex de Silva. Eugene Jayaraj Williams is also acting for Rahman.

Told that the shares belonged to Umno

Rahman said he informed Mahathir that he had paid RM40 million for the purchase of the Realmild shares.

"He (Mahathir) told me there was no reason why I had to pay the money when the shares never belonged to the individuals concerned as they belonged to Umno. Therefore, he said, no payment will be made to me because the shares always belonged to Umno."

"I also met Nor Mohamad Yaakob, (then economic adviser to Mahathir), and he subsequently confirmed that the shares were to be transferred out by me, without me receiving any consideration as the shares belonged to Umno," he said.

Asked by Khalid's counsel Ahmad Fadzil Mohd Perdaus why he did not institute action against his client and three other Realmild directors, from whom he had purchased the stake, Rahman said he obviously had to believe the (then) prime minister.

"Furthermore, I did not want to do anything that would implicate the premier. That is why I did not want to proceed with any further action. I would rather take a loss," he said.

Tun Daim Zainuddin

Daim offered stake in Realmild

Recalling how he came to own the Realmild shares, Rahman said he was approached by the then Finance Minister, Daim Zainuddin, sometime in 1999.

Daim had asked him whether he was interested in taking charge of MRCB by undertaking and completing a management takeover.

"Daim knew me as chairman of the Penang Malay Chamber of Commerce. I expressed keen interest in taking up this challenge, and Daim told me he would leave the mechanics of taking control of MRCB to me.

"I readily accepted this opportunity as this was a major career advance. It was my understanding that this was a pure corporate exercise," he said.

The four were at that time aligned with then Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, before Anwar fell out of favour with Mahathir in 1998, at the height of allegations of sodomy against him.

Rahman said he took steps for the takeover of MRCB by raising funds through personal financial means.

He had paid RM30 million for Ahmad Nazri's stake, and another RM5 million each to Khalid and Mohd Noor.

Ahmad Nazri, a former director of Realmild, told an earlier hearing that he owned an 80 percent stake in Realmild, with 70 percent of it held in trust.

"I was holding (the stake) in trust for Dr Mahathir. The trust was prepared by legal firm Amin & Co. A copy of the trust was given to Dr Mahathir, another to Anwar and I kept a copy."

A. Kadir Jasin

Rahman: I did not pay the remainder

Rahman, also testified before Justice Mary Lim that he did not pay the remaining amount to Khalid as he had been told by Mahathir not to make any payment.

"I met the plaintiff (Khalid) and informed him of my discovery about Umno's ownership of the Realmild shares. The plaintiff admitted to me that he was aware of Umno's ownership of the Realmild shares, but he said the Umno ownership did not apply to his five percent stake, or 355,050 shares."

Saying Khalid was not entitled to the claim, Rahman said the Khalid had misrepresented to him the ownership of the 355,050 shares as these shares never belonged to Khalid.

"I verily believe that he (Khalid) knew all along that Umno was the real owner of the shares and that these shares could be directed to be transferred to any third party at any time based on the instructions of Umno leaders. This also demonstrated the wrongful actions of Khalid in suppressing material information and proceeding in this action against me," he said.

"I am also seeking recovery of the RM5 million I had paid Khalid, based on his misrepresentation as to the ownership of the shares," he said.

To another question from Khalid's lawyer, Rahman said he was unable to pay the balance (the remaining RM10 million) because he was concentrating on reviving MRCB, which was facing billions of ringgit in debt.

"MRCB owed (money) to over 30 banks and it was in a bad shape. That was the reason I did not have money to pay him (Khalid).

"I also do not agree that I owe Khalid RM10 million, as stated in the statement of claim, and do not agree that the purchase price of his portion of the shares was RM15 million," he said.

Khalid Ahmad

Khalid's suit

Khalid, a former director of Realmild and former managing director of NSTP, who was present in court today, had claimed that he owns five per cent of the Realmild shares and he had accepted Rahman's offer to buy his shares.

He said Rahman had paid RM5 million, and that both sides had agreed to the total selling price of the shares at RM15 million, which had been reduced from an initial value of RM30 million.

Khalid claimed that the price of RM15 million was agreed upon after the part-payment of RM5 million was made by Rahman, and that the remaining sum was to be paid within a year.

He said he had asked Rahman many times to pay up the remaining RM10 million, but Rahman had failed to do so.

He is seeking the RM10 million , interest at eight per cent, costs and other relief deemed fit by the court.

Rahman in his statement of defence claimed the shares were owned in trust Umno and that he was asked to relinquish all his stake in Realmild to Syed Anwar.

Hence, he said, the amount owed was void or a mistake of fact, and was therefore seeking back the RM5 million he had paid to Khalid, as he had suffered a loss.

Earlier, Syed Anwar testified for Rahman and said got to know from Nor (Mohamad Yaakob), who was then second finance minister, that Rahman's shares in Realmild were held in proxy by Umno.

"My major task when taking over Realmild and MRCB was to turn them around," he said.

Justice Lim fixed Oct 4 for submissions.

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

Nazri Abdullah

Realmild-Umno links judgment on Dec 10

(The Malaysian Insider, 29 October 2010) -- When the High Court here hands down its judgment on the disputed sale price of Realmild Sdn Bhd's shares on December 10, all eyes will be trained on the grounds — whether Umno, the senior party in the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN), has been ruled to be the shadowy company's real owner.

In taking their quarrel over the sale price of Realmild's shares from a decade ago, former company directors Datuk Khalid Ahmad and Datuk Seri Abdul Rahman Maidin have showed how the political giant has fed and sustained its tight grip on power through control of several conglomerates starting from the early 1990s.

The suit was mooted by Khalid in March 2005 against his successor, Abdul Rahman, to claim RM10 million in payment for a block of the company's shares.

But Abdul Rahman made a counter-claim to be refunded the RM5 million he already paid, after being told by former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad that Umno owned all Realmild's shares and the appointed directors were only nominees acting in the party's trust.

The nexus between Umno and certain conglomerates has been revealed in the court hearing that started in August this year involving the past shareholders of Realmild, the shadowy company that took over media giant The New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Bhd in 1993, and Malaysian Resources Corporation Berhad (MRCB).

A number of high-flying corporate figures have entered the witness stand, most notably Tan Sri Syed Anwar Jamalullail, younger brother to the Raja of Perlis Tuanku Syed Sirajuddin Ibni Al-Marhum Tuanku Syed Putra Jamalullail who also held the position of Yang di-Pertuan Agong at the time of the contentious takeover.

Khalid is suing Abdul Rahman for RM10 million over the sale of a five per cent stake in the company in 1999, which took place during a shake-up and buy-out related to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's sacking from government.

Abdul Rahman had paid RM5 million but later reneged on the remainder.

The silver-haired industry captain testified in court that Dr Mahathir, who was prime minister at the time of the buy-out, told him that the shares actually belonged to Umno.

Abdul Rahman, a former Malay Chamber of Commerce Penang president, also claimed to have received instructions from Tun Daim Zainuddin and Tan Sri Nor Mohamad Yakcop had previously instructed him to undertake a management buy-out of MRCB by purchasing the 7,101,001 ordinary shares in Realmild.

But Khalid maintained the five per cent stake was his own although he acknowledged that the majority stake was part of an "Umno trust".

The other directors in Realmild then were former Berita Harian group editor Datuk Ahmad Nazri Abdullah, New Straits Times group editor Datuk Abdul Kadir Jasin, and Mohd Noor Mutalib, who replaced Khalid as NSTP managing director in February 1993.

Realmild, originally a RM2 company, was then already the majority shareholder of MRCB, which is now developing the KL Sentral commercial and transport hub in Brickfields.

Representing Khalid is lawyer Ahmad Fadzil Mohd Perdaus.

Alex De Silva and Eugene Jeyaraj Williams acted for Abdul Rahman.

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

Tan Sri Syed Anwar Jamalullail

Realmild formed to protect Umno's interests, court told

(The Malaysian Insider, 30 October 2010) -- Realmild Sdn Bhd was a brainchild of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim when he was in government as a means for Umno to protect its business interests, a lawyer told the High Court here today.

The former deputy prime minister had also hand-picked four media people — Datuk Khalid Ahmad, Datuk Kadir Jasin, Datuk Ahmad Nazri Abdullah and Mohd Noor Mutalib — to be its first shareholders and act as nominees for the ruling party, said Alex De Silva.

"In 1992, Realmild was formed in Malaysia. Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim created it as a new Bumiputera vehicle to take care of Umno's interests.

"This is the genesis of Realmild," De Silva said in making the case for his client Datuk Seri Abdul Rahman Maidin.

Khalid, a former TV3 boss, is suing Abdul Rahman to pay up the remaining RM10 million of RM15 million the former claims was the agreed sale price for the block of shares.

But Abdul Rahman disputes the amount — he told the court the agreed price was RM10 million and he had paid half before finding out from Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who was then Umno president, that he did not have to pay.

Now Abdul Rahman wants his money back.

De Silva argued today that Khalid, as the seller, was not in a position to demand payment for the sale of a block of Realmild Sdn Bhd's shares wholly held in trust for Umno.

"My submission is that none of them were actually running MRCB. They were just put there by the powers-that-be...to take care of MRCB, NST and etc.

"It's completely illogical for Umno or anyone to own only 70 per cent [of the shares] and for 30 per cent to be shared out among the others," he added, noting previous testimony from another successive Realmild director, Tan Sri Syed Anwar Jamalullail, showed that Umno owned all the shares.

Syed Anwar is the younger brother to the Raja of Perlis Tuanku Syed Sirajuddin Ibni Al-Marhum Tuanku Syed Putra Jamalullail who also held the position of Yang di-Pertuan Agong at the time of the contentious takeover at the turn of the millennium.

Anwar who happened to be in court today for his Sodomy II trial, was evasive when asked to comment on his role in the Realmild-Umno deal.

"Seventy per cent was held by Dr Mahathir. It has nothing to do with me," said the 63-year-old politician, now PKR's advisor.

Khalid's RM10 million suit against Abdul Rahman, over the sale of a five per cent stake in the company in 1999 took place during a shake-up and buy-out related to Anwar's sacking from government.

"Yes, I was supportive of it back then but 30 per cent of the shares was owned by Khalid, Kadir, and Nazri, Mohd Noor," Anwar said.

"It was only when I exposed them in court, Dr Mahathir called for Realmild surrender 70 percent," he added.

Asked if he saw the controversial 100-storey Menara Warisan announced by Prime Minister Najib Razak reflected in Umno's continuing bid to protect the party's interests, the Opposition Leader remarked: "All mega deals protect the interests of the Umno elite".

"Realmild is a classic example, proven, it was led by Dr Mahathir. I'm convinced there are cronies involved," he said.

Back in court, De Silva stressed that Realmild was a "sendirian berhad" (private limited company) with four ex-NST journalists and accountant who became stakeholders of MRCB, a public-listed company, supposedly bought from Renong Berhad for RM800 million.

"It's clear as daylight none of the shareholders had the means or capacity to do so," De Silva said.

"Yes, they testified they raised the money on their own. [But] nobody wakes up one morning and says, 'Yes! I'm going to take over NST and TV3. Can you do this on your own? Impossible!

"My Lady, from the start of the scene, government hands or Umno hands were involved...to keep the media under control of Umno.

"It was not for personal benefit but for the benefit of the party. That's why Realmild took control from Renong. That's the genesis of Realmild," Abdul Rahman's lawyer repeated for emphasis.

De Silva also pointed out that none of the four had exercised their rights as owners after the buy-over from Renong and instead continued their daily duties as news men, which was typical of nominees.

Trial judge Datuk Mary Lim asked if they were nominees, whether it meant they can't transfer the title deeds to the shares; and whether it would not then require the defendant to show he had a title to pass on.

"Not necessary. What we are looking at is the concept of real ownership," De Silva replied, before adding, "Who were the real owners?"

He moved to back his argument by pointing to the large number of lucrative projects given to Realmild's construction subsidiary, MRCB, including building a power plant.

"MRCB was bestowed and granted huge government contracts and loans, subsequently...in 1997, the government awarded MRCB the KL Sentral project...two years later, they got a support loan of RM336 million," De Silva cited.

"All these point effectively to the fact they were formed by the government because MRCB was effectively owned by Umno," he argued further.

"Yes, the shares were held in their names, but when instructed to transfer, they transferred.

"And they all transferred all, together," he said slowly, lending emphasis to his submission.

But lawyer Ahmad Fadzil Mohd Perdaus, in pushing the case to be ruled in the plaintiff Khalid's favour, submitted that Abdul Rahman had failed to show documentary evidence that proved an Umno "trust" existed, adding the defendant's entire argument was pulled from oral testimony by parties not brought to court, including the former prime minister.

Ahmad even suggested that Abdul Rahman should have taken legal action against Dr Mahathir to recover his money instead of claiming it from Khalid.

"Why the defendant chose not to take action when he found out about the trust?

"His line, his basis is what was told to him by the PM [then, Dr Mahathir] that he would not get his money back and that the shares belonged to Umno," Ahmad said, referring to Abdul Rahman's testimony in court.

"It's not for the defendant to say the plaintiff held it in trust, held it as a nominee...that he was not accountable to pay...

"The transfer was valid. He was the registered owner, legally, and [it was] common for nominees to transfer shares to [their] principals; it's not for defendant to say no.

"If such a case, defendant still liable to pay for the purchase price as agreed upon for the transfer of shares at the material time," Ahmad concluded.

A total of five witnesses were called.

Verdict is fixed for December 10 at 9am.

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Ahad, 24 Mac 2013