The Theatre of Nonsense

July 6, 2010

www.freemalaysiatoday.com

The Theatre of Nonsense

By Stanley Koh

COMMENT: Verbal garbage seems to be piling up everywhere lately, polluting the political environment with perverse logic and stupid rhetoric. Politicians talk as if they are oblivious of the reality that Malaysian voters are becoming more politically mature and can sniff the rubbish coming out of their mouths.

A Malaysian Politician

To win public trust and respect, politicians not only have to keep their grabbing hands away from the till, but also refrain from massaging or manipulating public perception. They should critically re-assess the misguided mantra that politics is perception.

When the man holding the reins of power publicly and unthinkingly accuses the opposition of lying, is he saying that the record of the ruling establishment is as clean as a white sheet of paper? Or is he saying that those in power are incapable of lying?

When the ruling regime publicly urges voters to continue supporting the establishment simply because the party in power has been tested numerous times, is it addressing idiots or Malaysians of average intelligence?

There are all kinds of liesbluffs, white lies, contextual lies, emergency lies, exaggerations, fabrications, barefaced lies, vicious liesand our politicians from both sides of the divide are guilty of all of them.

When a politician deliberately leaves his listener or reader with a misconception by not providing all the relevant facts, he is lying by omission.

When a ruling regime wants to protect powerful warlords despite serious allegations and documentary proof of their ownership of properties worth billions of ringgit, it can do so only by hiding the facts th! at are n ot yet public knowledge and ignoring the accusations, no matter how plausible.

By flaunting their perverse logic and idiotic claims in the press and on TV, our politicians only affirm the truth of the saying that stupidity is not a handicap in politics.

Could the problem be that there is a growing gulf of intelligence between political leaders and the Malaysian public?

Take for instance the accusation against certain media players that they were undermining the institution of Malay rulers in highlighting the plight of workers who received their salaries late. The royal families had nothing to do with it.

The responsibility of paying salaries lies with the ruling government. You cannot fault Malaysians for wondering why politicians are so keen to display their stupidity.

Blatant display of stupidity

Malaysians generally do not expect their leaders to be extra intelligent, but they do deserve to be spared the embarrassment of having those they voted for display their stupidity so generously in public.

The least they expect of their representatives is honesty in highlighting legitimate grouses that are pertinent to national interest, not superficiality or deception in making accusations against their political rivals.

How about the minister who warned against the dangers of twittering? Does one have to be a moron to be in the federal Cabinet?

And then there was the official who declared his support for sports betting, arguing that it would generate revenue and ignoring the social implications.

There seems to be no end to the blatant display of stupidity and sheer ignorance in public utterances. Talk is cheap, but it can be costly to political careers in these days of a politically wiser electorate.

When the opposition coalition is made to look as though it is ridden with problems, does it mean that the BN is trouble-free despite the theatrical infighting in MCA and MIC?

If an opposit! ion lead er can be publicly chastised for being friends with a fugitive, shouldnt it be pertinent for Malaysians to ask what the relationship between PERKASA and UMNO is? Our political language is increasingly becoming contradictory, deceptive and hollow.

The 20-year rule

The ruling regime rebukes the opposition for wanting to take over the government, as if this is a bad thing. What, then, should be the objective of an opposition party or coalition?

On the other side of the coin, the opposition parties should ask themselves whether they are indeed fighting for the wellbeing of Malaysians or merely trying to fulfil their dream of power.

A ruling party or its opposition can change public perception only when it is willing to deal with the truth with honestly, integrity and credibility.

In these times, when citizens mature in their thinking more quickly than their political leaders, it is imperative that conscientious voters unmask the intentions hidden behind open utterances.

When politicians believe winning is all that matters and try to justify unjustifiable means to self-vested ends, or when truth is sacrificed to political expediency, voters must beware. Some historians say it takes 20 years after an event has occurred to perceive it correctly. So we should know better now. Both Mahathirism and BN rule have gone on for more than 20 years.

Stanley Koh is the former head of MCA research unit.

Letter & Opinion From Joe Public

A hook from Hisham, uppercut KJ, and vodka triple-shot Fed Crt

Art Harun

I just love my country. Its people. Its leaders. And its Courts.

In one morning, I could shed some tears and I could laugh out loud. Then I could be drowned in a state of disbelief. Jaw-dropping kind of disbelief.

I read three pieces of news this morning.

Firstly, Minister Hishamuddin was quoted by the Malay Mail imploring Malaysians, particularly "political party leaders" to appreciate the efforts by the "enforcement agencies, especially the police."

Minister Hishamuddin, an UMNO vice-President, was quoted as saying:

"The effort to maintain peace and order in the country continues today by the present security and law enforcement agencies including the police. But the police are often criticised and condemned by society and one was even bitten by a 'wakil rakyat' (elected representative).

If these attacks against the police continue, how can be (sic) teach about nationhood to the younger generation?"

I agree with him. Credit must be given to the police as and when it is due.

But Minister Hishamuddin should understand that various sections of the society - and this is not limited to political party leaders only - would criticise the police when the police have overstepped their boundary by acting recklessly; or when the police have failed to carry out their duty properly; or when they perpetuate acts of crimes or where they have acted without common decency.

Not all criticisms are justified and I admit that. And some of them are of course politically driven. But surely the police should take proper criticisms on their chin, look at themselves and strive to be better. That is the only hope that the people have.

The police must learn to understand that all the powers that they wield come with responsibilities. The powers are there for a purpose. And when those responsibilities an! d purpos e are not met, or perceived not to be met, there will be critics.

The critics which the police get however do not negate from all the efforts, the hard work and the commitment, past or present, shown by the police in discharging their duties. I am sure the people appreciate those things.

Just after reading the above news, I stumbled on another piece of news related to the police. Yang Berhormat Khairy Jamaluddin, the UMNO Youth President, lambasted the police for not taking any action to arrest Raja Petra Kamarudin, reports the Malaysian Insider.

He apparently said :-

Where is the action from the police? Datuk Seri Najib Razak has said the police will be responsible for apprehending Raja Petra. The Inspector-General of Police has said he will get information on Raja Petras location, but RPK is going around in public. Yesterday, RPK was not in hiding; he had attended a Friends of Pakatan Rakyat event in London,

He continued :-

Even if they cannot arrest him there, the relationship (between the Malaysian police) and Scotland Yard is there, through the extradition agreement. The British police can arrest RPK and bring him back to Malaysia.

Are they (the police) unaware, or choose not to know RPKs movements and location? You have to ask the right questions.

I want to help the police here."

I really hope Minister Hishamuddin would not take YB Khairy's criticism wrongly. He does have a point to make.

On my part, quite frankly, I do not have a clue why some parliamentarians, leaders and people in authority seem to be obsessed with RPK, his whereabouts, who he is meeting and who is "sponsoring" him. I mean, these topics are even discussed with a certain level of seriousness - which is quite rare, actually - in the Parliament!

On current count, RPK has apparently been sponsored by Kalimullah Hassan; Anwar Ibrahim, Zaid Ibrahim, PKR and Pakatan Rakyat. And I am sure some people think the Zionist and some Jewish movements are also "sponso! ring" hi m.

Isn't there other better and more beneficial things to discuss then who is sponsoring RPK?

I fully understand - and support - what YB KJ has said.

Meanwhile, the Federal Court was not to be left out today. In a decision which is set to "shock and awe" many people, including me, the Federal Court as allowed some clerics from Negeri Sembilan to challenge the constitutionality of a Negeri Sembilan enactment which require the clerics to obtain license to preach Islam, the Malaysian Insider reports.

While the decision is welcome, it makes me wonder what has jolted the Federal Court to suddenly come out with this decision.

The Federal Court's sloth-like willingness to allow any kind of application, appeal or case which challenges any Islamic enactment by any state is well known and is in fact expected by lawyers, litigants and observers.

In matters relating to Islam, it has time and again shirked its judicial responsibility and function by declaring that it has no jurisdiction in matters pertaining to Islam, citing article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution.

This unwillingness or reluctance by our Courts (not restricted to the Federal Courts only) is a blight - among many other blights - on our judiciary. It would thus not be out of place to say that judicial activism is a foreign concept in Malaysia.

And so the Federal Court's decision to allow those clerics to raise the constitutionality of the provisions requiring a license to preach Islam is most welcome. It is my opinion that such provisions are repugnant against the freedom of speech which is guaranteed by the Constitution.

The Federal Constitution is also clear on the fact that only the Parliament - as opposed to the State Legislative Assembly - has the power to limit freedom of speech in accordance with the Constitution.

Judicial activism is a hallmark of a vibrant democracy. A most famous Judge, Lord Denning, in Packer v Packer famously said :-

"What is the argument on t! he other side? Only this, that no case has been found in which it has been done before. That argument does not appeal to me in the least. If we never do anything which has not been done before, we shall never get anywhere. The law will stand still whilst the rest of the world goes on; and that will be bad for both."

Our Judges should bear in mind what Lord Devlin said :-

"Governments come like water and go with the wind". "The prestige of the judiciary, is the reputation for stark impartiality to be kept up in appearance as well as, in fact. It is not at the disposal of any Government. It is an asset that belongs to the whole nation."

Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari, an Hounarable Judge of the Supreme Court of India, in a lecture delivered at the Belekar Memorial Lecture Series, organised by High Court Bar Association, Nagpur on August 31, 2002, said :-

"This traditional role of the judiciary is to uphold the law. A constitutional court is expected to discharge constitutional duty to enforce the provisions of the Constitution. In a constitutional democracy, the judiciary is an essential part of the Government and a third source of power. Its function is not merely restricted to deciding impartially the disputes before them in accordance with law. Its more important function may be described as "underpinning the stability of constitutional system and protect it from attacks by resisting attempts to change it."

In far too many instances, I am afraid to say, our Courts have been unwilling to unshackle itself from old and trusted interpretations of the law. New issues are sometime dismissed summarily. When faced with issues which are - for whatever reasons - deemed too sensitive, the Courts quickly cowers within the shadows of article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution and shirk its duties and responsibilities. In many more cases, the Courts find no reason to explore new arguments, let alone consider, analyse and dissect contemporary constitutional arguments proffered by Counsels.
In some instances, Counsels are told - with a wave of a hand - to "move on" to other issues. When a decision is made on those issues, they are just dismissed summarily, as if those arguments are not even worth mentioning. All such judgments or decisions are almost always unanimous and to complete the misery, no ground of judgment is ever provided.

It makes us feel that public interest cases are not welcome. That good and current constitutional arguments are not welcome. That the Courts are unwilling to listen. Let alone consider these new and current arguments.

That it is as if there are bogeymen lurking somewhere under the bench of the Courts, giving endless fear to those who occupy the bench.

If so, I would like to repeat Lord Denning's statement :-

"If we never do anything which has not been done before, we shall never get anywhere. The law will stand still whilst the rest of the world goes on; and that will be bad for both." - http://art-harun.blogspot.com/

Click here to read more
Letter & Opinion From Joe Public

Extraditing RPK: Pakatan flays Hisham for trying to blame Britain

Wong Choon Mei, Malaysia Chronicle

Pakatan Rakyat has slammed Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein for trying to shift to the British authorities the blame for the failure of Malaysian police and foreign affairs ministry to extradite top blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin from London, where he is now living.

Raja Petra fled Malaysia after writing several bone-shaking revelations about Prime Minister Najib Razak, his wife Rosmah Mansor, their friend Razak Baginda and the trio's alleged involvement in a high-profile murder-and-graft case.

To me, it is the Malaysian authorities who are getting more and more cranky. There is no logic in the way they react, they seem to be beating out each fire that erupts with a different extinguisher. There is no consistency at all and this is what gives rise to the perception that there is something really fishy going on," PAS legal adviser Hanipa Maidin told Malaysia Chronicle.

"The lack of action, or rather, the active suppression of action to not stir up more revelations has been glaring. Why did Najib stop the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission from going to London and recording a statement from Bala? Why did they blame Petra but don't do anything to extradite him? Until we get a good explanation, not flimsy excuses or passing the buck, the nation and the world will doubt Najib even more.

Independent probe or resign, please
Pundits also say that to a large extent, Najibs Umno party was to blame for the huge negative publicity arising from the case that has tarnished the country's image. They accused the party's Supreme Council of fearing to offend Najib, when instead, they should have demanded that their president submitted himself to a thorough and independent probe.

The 2006 murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu, a beautiful 28-year old Mongolian translator, and her involvement in an alleged R! M570 mil lion kickback from Najib's purchase of two Scorpene submarines have drawn huge national and international attention. The French authorities are already investigating their own firms involved in supplying the submarines for possible corruption against Malaysian taxpayers. However, the Malaysian agencies themselves have done nothing concrete at all.

Meanwhile, PKR secretary-general Saifuddin Nasution called on Prime Minister Najib to resign if he refuses to allow a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the murder-and-graft case.

As the prime minister, we have to accord him all respect and fairness. We should not just be blinded by the bad publicity and immediately demand his resignation. He is innocent until proven guilty, but he must subject himself to a thorough and independent investigation, Saifuddin told Malaysia Chronicle.

Najib must not expect his countrymen to sweep the dirt under the carpet. That is old politics, Umno politics, not Pakatan politics. So please do the honorable thing, dont keep disgracing the country. Insist on an independent investigation to clear your own name, or step down gracefully.

It is the fault of the Brits!
So far, few in the ruling Umno-BN coalition have dared to question Najib or urge him to instruct the MACC to initiate a thorough probe. Of late, those aligned to him including Hishammuddin have tried to suggest that Raja Petra was behind the plan to embarrass Najib.

A meeting had been set up in London and the MACC was due to go there to record a statement from P Balasubramaniam, a private investigator hired by Baginda. It was Bala, who had 'blown the whistle' on Najib, his wife Rosmah and Baginda via a statutory declaration made in 2008 (see below).

A surprise exception who did not try to offer excuses for Najib was Umno Youth Chief Khairy Jamaluddin, who recently asked why the Malaysian authorities were making Raja Petra their bogeyman but not doing anything to bring him to book.

On Tuesday, Hishammuddin told the pre! ss that it was not the fault of the Malaysian agencies.

If the stand and the policy of the country in question do not permit a person to return, to bring the person back to face action or to face the law, what other choices do we have? said Hishammuddin, referring to Britain, where Raja Petra is currently living.

Do we enter this country and kidnap him? Do we smuggle him out like he is a terrorist? This is not our way in Malaysia.

Click here to watch video of press conference held in 2008: Stunning claims linking Najib to Altantuya

STATUTORY DECLARATION
I, Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal a Malaysian Citizen of full age and residing at [deleted] do solemly and sincerely declare as follows :-

1. I have been a police officer with the Royal Malaysian Police Force having jointed as a constable in 1981 attached to the Police Field Force. I was then promoted to the rank of lance Corporal and finally resigned from the Police Force in 1998 when I was with the Special Branch.

2. I have been working as a free lance Private Investigator since I left the Police Force.

3. Sometime in June or July 2006, I was employed by Abdul Razak Baginda for a period of 10 days to look after him at his office at the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang between the hours of 8.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m each working day as apparently he was experiencing disturbances from a third party.

4. I resigned from this job after 2 days as I was not receiving any proper instructions.

5. I was however re-employed by Abdul Razak Baginda on the 05-10-2006 as he had apparently received a harassing phone call from a Chinese man calling himself ASP Tan who had threatened him to pay his debts. I later found out this gentleman was in fact a private investigator called Ang who was employed by a Mongolian woman called Altantuya Shaaribuu.

6. Abdul Razak Baginda was concerned that a person by the name of Altantuya Shaaribuu, a Mongolian woman, was behind t! his thre at and that she would be arriving in Malaysia very soon to try and contact him.

7. Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that he was concerned by this as he had been advised that Altantuya Shaaribuu had been given some powers by a Mongolian bomoh and that he could never look her in the face because of this.

8. When I enquired as to who this Mongolian woman was, Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that she was a friend of his who had been introduced to him by a VIP and who asked him to look after her financially.

9. I advised him to lodge a police report concerning the threatening phone call he had received from the Chinese man known as ASP Tan but he refused to do so as he informed me there were some high profile people involved.

10. Abdul Razak Baginda further told me that Altantuya Shaaribuu was a great liar and good in convincing people. She was supposed to have been very demanding financially and that he had even financed a property for her in Mongolia.

11. Abdul Razak Baginda then let me listen to some voice messages on his handphone asking him to pay what was due otherwise he would be harmed and his daughter harassed.

12. I was therefore supposed to protect his daughter Rowena as well.

13. On the 09.10.2006 I received a phone call from Abdul Razak Baginda at about 9.30 a.m. informing me that Altantuya was in his office and he wanted me there immediately. As I was in the midst of a surveillance, I sent my assistant Suras to Abdul Razak Bagindas office and I followed a little later. Suras managed to control the situation and had persuaded Altantuya and her two friends to leave the premises. However Altantuya left a note written on some Hotel Malaya note paper, in English, asking Abdul Razak Baginda to call her on her handphone (number given) and wrote down her room number as well.

14. Altantuya had introduced herself to Suras as Aminah and had informed Suras she was there to see her boyf! riend Ab dul Razak Baginda.

15. These 3 Mongolian girls however returned to Abdul Razak Bagindas office at the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang again, the next day at about 12.00 noon. They did not enter the building but again informed Suras that they wanted to meet Aminahs boyfriend, Abdul Razak Baginda.

16. On the 11.10.2006, Aminah returned to Abdul Razak Bagindas office on her own and gave me a note to pass to him, which I did. Abdul Razak Baginda showed me the note which basically asked him to call her urgently.

17. I suggested to Abdul Razak Baginda that perhaps it may be wise to arrange for Aminah to be arrested if she harassed him further, but he declined as he felt she would have to return to Mongolia as soon as her cash ran out.

18. In the meantime I had arranged for Suras to perform surveillance on Hotel Malaya to monitor the movements of these 3 Mongolian girls, but they recognized him. Apparently they become friends with Suras after that and he ended up spending a few nights in their hotel room.

19. When Abdul Razak Baginda discovered Suras was becoming close to Aminah he asked me to pull him out from Hotel Malaya.

20. On the 14.10.2006, Aminah turned up at Abdul Razak Bagindas house in Damansara Heights when I was not there. Abdul Razak Baginda called me on my handphone to inform me of this so I rushed back to his house. As I arrived, I noticed Aminah outside the front gates shouting Razak, bastard, come out from the house. I tried to calm her down but couldnt so I called the police who arrived in 2 patrol cars. I explained the situation to the police, who took her away to the Brickfields police station.

21. I followed the patrol cars to Brickfields police station in a taxi. I called Abdul Razak Baginda and his lawyer Dirren to lodge a police report but they refused.

22. When I was at the Brickfields police station, Aminahs own Private Investigator, one Mr. Ang arrived and we! had a d iscussion. I was told to deliver a demand to Abdul Razak Baginda for USD$500,000.00 and 3 tickets to Mongolia, apparently as commission owed to Aminah from a deal in Paris.

23. As Aminah had calmed down at this stage, a policewoman at the Brickfields police station advised me to leave and settle the matter amicably.

24. I duly informed Abdul Razak Baginda of the demands Aminah had made and told him I was disappointed that no one wanted to back me up in lodging a police report. We had a long discussion about the situation when I expressed a desire to pull out of this assignment.

25. During this discussion and in an attempt to persuade me to continue my employment with him, Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that :-

25.1 He had been introduced to Aminah by Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak at a diamond exhibition in Singapore.

25.2 Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak informed Abdul Razak Baginda that he had a sexual relationship with Aminah and that [deleted by nat out of respect to the family of the deceased].

25.3 Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak wanted Abdul Razak Baginda to look after Aminah as he did not want her to harass him since he was now the Deputy Prime Minister.

25.4 Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had all been together at a dinner in Paris.

25.5 Aminah wanted money from him as she felt she was entitled to a USD$500,000.00 commission on a submarine deal she assisted with in Paris.

26. On the 19.10.2006, I arrived at Abdul Razak Bagindas house in Damansara Heights to begin my night duty. I had parked my car outside as usual. I saw a yellow proton perdana taxi pass by with 3 ladies inside, one of whom was Aminah. The taxi did a U-turn and stopped in front of the house where these ladies rolled down the window and wished me Happy Deepavali. The taxi then left.

27. About 20 minutes later the taxi returned with only Aminah in it. She got out of the taxi and wa! lked tow ards me and started talking to me. I sent an SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda informing him Aminah was here. I received an SMS from Razak instructing me To delay her until my man comes.

28. Whist I was talking to Aminah, she informed me of the following :-

28.1 That she met Abdul Razak Baginda in Singapore with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.

28.2 That she had also met Abdul Razak Baginda and Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak at a dinner in Paris.

28.3 That she was promised a sum of USD$500,000.00 as commission for assisting in a Submarine deal in Paris.

28.4 That Abdul Razak Baginda had bought her a house in Mongolia but her brother had refinanced it and she needed money to redeem it.

28.5 That her mother was ill and she needed money to pay for her treatment.

6. That Abdul Razak Baginda had married her in Korea as her mother is Korean whilst her father was a Mongolian/Chinese mix.

28.7 That if I wouldnt allow her to see Abdul Razak Baginda, would I be able to arrange for her to see Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.

29. After talking to Aminah for about 15 minutes, a red proton aeroback arrived with a woman and two men. I now know the woman to be Lance Corporal Rohaniza and the men, Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azahar. They were all in plain clothes. Azilah walked towards me while the other two stayed in the car.

30. Azilah asked me whether the woman was Aminah and I said Yes. He then walked off and made a few calls on his handphone. After 10 minutes another vehicle, a blue proton saga, driven by a Malay man, passed by slowly. The drivers window had been wound down and the driver was looking at us.

31. Azilah then informed me they would be taking Aminah away. I informed Aminah they were arresting her. The other two persons then got out of the red proton and exchanged seats so that Lance Corporal Rohaniza and Aminah were in the back while the two men were in the front. They drove off and that ! is the l ast I ever saw of Aminah.

32. Abdul Razak Baginda was not at home when all this occurred.

33. After the 19.10.2006, I continued to work for Abdul Razak Baginda at his house in Damansara Heights from 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 a.m. the next morning, as he had been receiving threatening text messages from a woman called Amy who was apparently Aminahs cousin in Mongolia.

34. On the night of the 20.10.2006, both of Aminahs girl friends turned up at Abdul Razak Bagindas house enquiring where Aminah was. I informed them she had been arrested the night before.

35. A couple of nights later, these two Mongolian girls, Mr. Ang and another Mongolian girl called Amy turned up at Abdul Razak Bagindas house looking for Aminah as they appeared to be convinced she was being held in the house.

36. A commotion began so I called the police who arrived shortly thereafter in a patrol car. Another patrol car arrived a short while later in which was the investigating officer from the Dang Wangi Police Station who was in charge of the missing persons report lodged by one of the Mongolians girls, I believe was Amy.

37. I called Abdul Razak Baginda who was at home to inform him of the events taking place at his front gate. He then called DSP Musa Safri and called me back informing me that Musa Safri would be calling handphone and I was to pass the phone to the Inspector from Dang Wangi Police Station.

38. I then received a call on my handphone from Musa Safri and duly handed the phone to the Dang Wangi Inspector. The conversation lasted 3 4 minutes after which he told the girls to disperse and to go to see him the next day.

39. On or about the 24.10.2006, Abdul Razak Baginda instructed me to accompany him to the Brickfields police station as he had been advised to lodge a police report about the harassment he was receiving from these Mongolian girls.

40. Before this, Amy had sent me an SMS informing me she was ! going to Thailand to lodge a report with the Mongolian consulate there regarding Aminahs disappearance. Apparently she had sent the same SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda. This is why he told me he had been advised to lodge a police report.

41. Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that DPS Musa Safri had introduced him to one DSP Idris, the head of the Criminal division, Brickfields police station, and that Idris had referred him to ASP Tonny.

42. When Abdul Razak Baginda had lodged his police report at Brickfields police station, in front of ASP Tonny, he was asked to make a statement but he refused as he said he was leaving for overseas. He did however promise to prepare a statement and hand ASP Tonny a thumb drive. I know that this was not done as ASP Tonny told me.

43. However ASP Tonny asked me the next day to provide my statement instead and so I did.

44. I stopped working for Abdul Razak Baginda on the 26.10.2006 as this was the day he left for Hong Kong on his own.

45. In mid November 2006, I received a phone call from ASP Tonny from the IPK Jalan Hang Tuah asking me to see him regarding Aminahs case. When I arrived there I was immediately arrested under S.506 of the Penal Code for Criminal intimidation.

46. I was then placed in the lock up and remanded for 5 days. On the third day I was released on police bail.

47. At the end of November 2006, the D9 department of the IPK sent a detective to my house to escort me to the IPK Jalan Hang Tuah. When I arrived, I was told I was being arrested under S.302 of the Penal Code for murder. I was put in the lock up and remanded for 7 days.

48. I was transported to Bukit Aman where I was interrogated and questioned about an SMS I had received from Abdul Razak Baginda on the 19.10.2006 which read delay her until my man arrives. They had apparently retrieved this message from Abdul Razak Bagindas handphone.

49. They then proceeded to record my statement! from 8. 30 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. everyday for 7 consecutive days. I told them all I knew including everything Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had told me about their relationships with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak but when I came to sign my statement, these details had been left out.

50. I have given evidence in the trial of Azilah, Sirul and Abdul Razak Baginda at the Shah Alam High Court. The prosecutor did not ask me any questions in respect of Aminahs relationship with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak or of the phone call I received from DSP Musa Safri, whom I believe was the ADC for Datuk Seri Najib Razak and/or his wife.

51. On the day Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested, I was with him at his lawyers office at 6.30 a.m. Abdul Razak Baginda informed us that he had sent Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak an SMS the evening before as he refused to believe he was to be arrested, but had not received a response.

52. Shortly thereafter, at about 7.30 a.m., Abdul Razak Baginda received an SMS from Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and showed, this message to both myself and his lawyer. This message read as follows :- I am seeing IGP at 11.00 a.m. today matter will be solved be cool.

53. I have been made to understand that Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested the same morning at his office in the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang.

54. The purpose of this Statutory declaration is to :-

54.1 State my disappointment at the standard of investigations conducted by the authorities into the circumstances surrounding the murder of Altantuya Shaaribuu.

54.2 Bring to the notice of the relevant authorities the strong possibility that there are individuals other than the 3 accused who must have played a role in the murder of Altantuya Shaaribuu.

54.3 Persuade the relevant authorities to reopen their investigations into this case immediately so that any fresh evidence may be presented to the Court prior to submissions at the end of the ! prosecut ions case.

54.4 Emphasize the fact that having been a member of the Royal Malaysian Police Force for 17 years I am absolutely certain no police officer would shoot someone in the head and blow up their body without receiving specific instructions from their superiors first.

54.5. Express my concern that should the defence not be called in the said murder trial, the accused, Azilah and Sirul will not have to swear on oath and testify as to the instructions they received and from whom they were given.

55. And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same be true and by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declaration Act 1960.

SUBCRIBED and solemnly )

declared by the abovenamed )

Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal ]

this day of 2008 )

Before me,

.

Commissioner for Oath

Kuala Lumpur
Letter & Opinion From Joe Public

Questions for our #1

NB: In Malaysia, the #1 is always the head of the elected government, not some unknown people who happen to be born in the right hole. It's for this reason, the PM's wife is the First Lady. Wonder why some unknown figures wanted lower themselves to become a "Lady" ... isn't it bizarre? This is a personal view of the FuckYeahMalaysia community.

Najib's Speech to Pekan Umno on 4 July 2010

from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News by admin-s

By Dr Tan Kee Kwong

Dear Dato Seri Najib,

I read your speech to Pekan UMNO in the NST with great interest. It is quoted you said, "Don't just help ourselves or our friends and party members, but put those who are poor and needy first. If we do this, the people will see UMNO as being helpful to the people." If you and UMNO really mean that, you will win the next GE hands down!

Sir, how do you explain what happened in March 2008 ie the Political Tsunami right after the fantastic victory achieved by the BN in 2004? How do you explain the results of the recent Sibu by-election? In Sibu, in addition to fighting the BN, PBB and SUPP, the Pakatan Rakyat had to counter the many twists and turns of the SPR ie Elections Commission!

OFFSHORE PATROL VEHICLES (OPV's)
This was way back in 1998. The timing was also very critical for Malaysia. At that time George Soros attacked the regional currencies of South Korea, Thailand, Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia etc. Also at that time, Anwar Ibrahim was sacked as Finance Minister and Daim brought back as Finance Minister. Daim immediately awarded the very lucrative contract of RM5.2 billion to build six OPV's to PSC Shipyard Berhad.

Later on, we found out in the PAC of Parliament that before PSC even started the physical construction, MOF gave PSC a cheque of ONE BILLION RINGGIT.

As the PAC meeting went on, we were shocked to find out that THREE POINT EIGHT BILLION was paid by MOF when not even ONE OPV was delivered to the Navy.

I remember even the UMNO members of the PAC committee were agahast! Then we went on to question the KSU of the Defence Ministry of the RM600 million unaccounted for. His reply was very clear and sharp - This RM600 miliion was used to pay the debts of his OTHER projects!

Now I understand that the OPV contract is given to another company to finish at a total cost to the BN Government of 7.5 billion, a cost overrun of 2.3 billion. Is this what you mean by Rakyat diutamakan? As far as I know, no one has been charged, fined or jailed. How did this mess help the poor and needy?

TRENGGANU INVESTMENT AGENCY (TIA)
Right after the political tsunami of March 2008, the political elites conjured up many ways to screw the the country. The thinking is at the next GE BN may not be in charge of the Federal Government of Putrajaya. This TIA involves the payment of Wang Ehsan from Petronas to the State Government of Trengganu, roughly about 600 to 700 million per year. So some smart guy said, "Let us raise bonds worth FOUR billion and get Bank Negara and the Federal Government to back these bonds." And so they did in about end of 2008.

I am reliably informed that for a huge sum like this, a commission of 3% is normally paid. In this case, the commission paid was 12.5%. What they did with the balance ie 3.5 billion was even worse. They invested in an anak syarikat of a Saudi oil firm. The only asset of this anak syarikat is an oil and gas company in Kazakstan!

I want to ask Najib and the Cabinet:
a. Wang Ehsan is meant to help the poor people of Trengganu, not for any other purpose, certainly not to misuse it and raise bonds.

b. Why was this abnormally high amount of 12.5% commission paid?

c. Is this investment in Kazakstan secure?

d. Which stupid fool ignores the first rule of investment ie put all 3.5 billion in only one country and only one project. We learnt in PRIMARY school "don't put all your eggs in one basket".

Long but not exhaustive list of scandals:
1.BMF in HK - 4 billion

2. Bank Bumiputra bail out 2x

3. PKFZ - 4.2 billion but may cost 10 billion

4. Perwaja Steel - 15 billion

5. MAS shares - Govt bought at $8 ringgit when market price was $3.5 ringgit

6. School claasrooms & computer labs - 10 billion, direct nego. How much did the Government actually get?

7. Halal Hub - 2 billion spent, nothing done, only 200 million left

8. Armoured carriers - 8 billion going to be spent. By industry standards, a good armoured car will only cost half a million. Mindef will spend 30 million for each armoured carrier!

Mr Prime minister, is this what you mean by Rakyat Diutamakan? In your own words, how are all the scandals mentioned above going to help the poor and needy? Please explain to all the Rakyat jelata.

The Ghost of Altantuya refuses to go away

Bala thrilla still the entree, early polls the starter despite BN spin

French prosecutors have told Malaysian civil rights group SUARAM that they are optimistic of being able to prosecute French defense firm DCNS, which sold the Scorpenes to Malaysia. If found guilty, it paves the way for SUARAM to claim back on behalf of Malaysian taxpayers the huge commission that was paid to Baginda's firm.

Wong Choon Mei, Malaysia Chronicle

Is the BN really going to call for snap elections so soon or are they just trying to drown out an embarrassing London press conference where shocking details of Prime Minister Najib Razak’s alleged role in the Altantuya-murder and submarines-graft case are bound to be dredged up.

“The way the BN leaders have come out one after another in the past few days is very aggressive, as though Najib will be dissolving Parliament soon. I find this suspicious because elections will be early but not immediate,” Padang Serai MP N Gobalakrishnan told Malaysia Chronicle.

“My feel is the 13th GE will be held together with the Sarawak state elections. I am looking at May 2011 at the latest. But nowhere within the next two or three months as the BN is suggesting.”

War drums sounded

Indeed even political analysts doubt the BN was serious despite the relentless beating of the war drums.

“BN needs to get their house in order before going to the polls. I think the Sarawak state polls will be held by year’s end, while the GE will be held in 2012,” said Dr Sivamurugan Pandian, of Universiti Sains Malaysia.

Among the latest top leaders to come out and warn their supporters to get ready are MCA president Chua Soi Lek and Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein, while Najib himself approved an extra RM500,000 in funds to all BN MPs to help them win over voters.

Given the nation's record-high fiscal deficit and the government's stretched liquidity position, the extra allocation fueled already-sizzling speculation of snap polls. Yet despite generating tangible excitement, Najib and his minders have not been able to steal the thunder from this week’s main event – the so-called Bala thrilla in London.

The main course is still ... the Bala thrilla!

Private investigator P Balasubramaniam will be holding a press conference at the Holiday Villa on Wednesday, where he is expected to give further details of his statutory declaration made in 2008 that implicated Najib and his wife Rosmah Mansor in the Altanutya Shaariibuu murder.

He had also revealed their connection to the defense ministry’s purchase of two high-cost Scorpene submarines, where a kickback amounting to RM570 million was allegedly paid to a firm controlled by Najib’s friend Razak Baginda.

"This is the main course. Everybody is looking forward to it because it has all the ingredients that make up a classic - sex, intrigue, money and murder," Batu MP Tian Chua told Malaysia Chronicle.

Read more at: http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/2010/07/bala-thrilla-still-main-course-early.html

Najib finally admits our economy is fucked up

Already into July, Najib finally admits slower economy for H2

Wong Choon Mei, Malaysia Chronicle

In a move analysts have already warned of more than half a year ago, Prime Minister Najib Razak has finally admitted that his rosy economic growth forecast for Malaysia may fall short of target due to upheaval in the foreign debt markets.

“Even in April, Bank Negara was talking about upgrading 2010 full-year GDP growth target of 4.5 to 5.5 percent. Najib himself was saying that with the right foreign exchange policy, the target could be raised by at least 2 percentage points,” a senior economist at a large local bank told Malaysia Chronicle.

“But for most of us, back in November, when there was worry about the Dubai bonds, we were already forecasting the possibility of a pullback in the second half of 2010. What is strange is that when the Greece sovereign debt crisis finally erupted in February, Najib and Bank Negara still didn’t factor the risks in. They seem to be doing it only now, in the first month of the second half itself. We hope this won’t be the trend, they are supposed to be pro-active not retrospective.”

Almost at checkmate

On Tuesday, Najib, who is also Finance Minister, warned that economic growth may slip in the July to December period.

“It is important for us to have robust domestic demand to spur and balance the economy,” he said during a Budget 2011 consultation at the Finance Ministry.

Malaysia’s economic or GDP growth grew a scorching 10.1 percent per annum y-o-y in the January to March period of this year, and is expected to chalk an average 8 percent in the April to June period. How the economy performs in the final six months (H2) will determine if the full-year growth rate can hit the 4.5 to 5.5 percent band. Few hold out any hopes for Najib’s projection of an extra two percentage points in growth any more.

But it is not a numbers game that Malaysians should be watching or aiming for. The actual figures record real-life economic activities that were transacted in the country. The official forecasts are a guide to the sort of demand Malaysian businesses can expect and should prepare themselves for.

No doubt, the government can pump-prime economic activity by sloshing in more money and deals as it has done in the past to prevent recessionary conditions. But this may not be a luxury Najib can afford anymore.

“It may not be checkmate yet but we are not far. The government itself has warned we could go bankrupt in 9 years, just like Dubai and Greece have already done so. If we cannot export our way out of debt or our domestic demand cannot replace the slack in foreign demand, then we are in for hard times,” another financial analyst from a stockbroking firm told Malaysia Chronicle.

“In the past, the government could still step in with money from our savings or borrow to kickstart projects that can enliven the economy. But now, we have record-high debts and there is pressure to trim the fiscal deficit. The money spent on previous projects like Proton, the bailouts for MAS and all those GLCs have been wasted. It is like a Bermuda Triangle there, the money invested by the government just disappears and doesn’t circulate back into the rest of the economy. The SMEs and the moms-and-pops entrepreneurs never get to see it.”

How did 1,500 buggers died in our Police's hands if not due to brutality?

Explain the 1,500 custodial deaths, demands DAP MP

By Rahmah Ghazali

KUALA LUMPUR: The home ministry should clear the air regarding the 1,500 custodial deaths that reportedly occurred between 2003 and 2007, said DAP MP Gobind Singh Deo.

The Puchong MP further rapped Deputy Home Minister Wira Abu Seman Yusop for “being not aware” of the figures when the matter was raised in the House.

This is despite the fact that a UN report on issues concerning Malaysian detention centres had been forwarded to another deputy minister Lee Chee Leong early last month.

The UN group was in Malaysia for about a week in June visiting prisons and studying detention reports.

According to Gobind, the Malaysian detainees' plight was highlighted on the BBC website on June 18, but this was not picked up by the local media.

“I raised this in Parliament on June 23 with the deputy minister (Abu Seman) by referring to the BBC report… and he didn’t seem to know much about it,” said Gobind.

The lawyer was also disappointed when Abu Seman’s only reply was: “The authorities will investigate if you lodge police reports. Only then we will take appropriate action.”

Gobind said: “This involves the integrity of Malaysia's legal and detention laws and that's all he can come up with!

"The ministry is aware of the (preliminary) report as it has been presented by UN. They (UN) cannot wait for a police report every time there is a problem."

Gobind also said Abu Seman’s answer was “disturbing” as thus far no action has been taken although these deaths had been occurring for five years.

“Until now, the minister is unable to give reports and details. Hishammuddin (Hussein) must tell us how these 1,500 people died while in the custody of the police,” said Gobind.

Contradictory reporting by Bernama and BBC

Gobind was also disappointed with government-owned media agency Bernama which he said failed to address the detainees' plight, compared to BBC.

On the same day as the BBC report on the UN group’s observation of Malaysian detention centres, Gobind said Bernama gave a “contradictory view”.

Bernama, on June 18, reported that Malaysian detainees are being treated well according to the UN group.

Besides reporting on the 1,500 deaths, the BBC said that former detainees were “scared” of the Malaysian police and that the government was asked to repeal security laws that allow detention without trial.

According to the UN group, as reported by the BBC, almost all those it interviewed said they were tortured or mistreated in Malaysia’s detention centres.

Almost all complained of beatings, being confined in cramped spaces without light, and had filthy water thrown at them.

“Both can’t be right," said Gobind. "One report says the detainees were well treated, while another says otherwise. There is clearly a contradiction,” said Gobind.

UMNO wants to you live a fucked up life

A deliberate backwardness: This is how Umno-BN stays in power

Why are the majority of the Malay and other bumiputra communities still lagging behind even though their so-called champion, Umno, has been continuously victorious in the past general elections?

By Viktor Wong, Malaysia Chronicle

Why is it that after more than 50 years of independence, the majority in the Malay and the other bumiputra communities still lag behind? Why is that after more than 50 years, they are still suffering from backwardness despite hundreds of government corporations and agencies specially established to enhance their livelihood?

Or perhaps the key question to ask should be, why are they still lagging behind even though their so-called champion, Umno, has been continuously victorious in the past general elections?

Even until now, many in these communities do not have access to the basic comforts that their counterparts in the urban areas take for granted, as a matter of right as citizens of this country. Yes, many Malays and bumiputra still live in areas that do not get water or electricity. Neither can they afford basic education for their young and have to live in old and dilapidated huts. The New Economic Policy (NEP) did not reach them at all. Why and how come?

Sadly, the answers are very much connected to how Umno brought about their continuous electoral victories and the methods they adopted to maintain their influence in the villages and other rural parts of our nation.

One of the main factors contributing to the party's success is to keep the communities they claim to represent in the dark - for decades. And we are not just talking about the lack of electricity. There is a greater darkness - from the standpoint of education, blackouts of information and distribution of deliberate misinformation.

Indeed, the rural folk have been denied the pace of development enjoyed by the town and city dwellers - quite often, it is deliberate. For example in the development of information technology, or rather, the lack of so as to make sure that the rural communities are solely dependent on government TV and RTM channels for their daily consumption of news and data. In the eyes of the official media, everything about Umno and BN is good and benevolent, all others especially Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim are traitors and enemies of the state.

Also, despite all the cheap funding and loan facilities offered under the so-called bumiputra schemes, special share option schemes, special economic assistance, by and large, the majority of the Malays and bumiputra do not get to tap these opportunities to create a better livelihood for themselves. Instead, the facilities end up being enjoyed only by the Umno elite and the families of the mid-level leaders. These people become wealthier and more powerful, finally entrenching themselves into the "golongan bangsawan".

What about the non-Umno members and the ordinary man-in-the-street bumiputras? No doubt, some of them have been lucky enough to get some benefits, but the fact is most of them do not. That is why the poor are still very poor today, those uneducated are still uneducated, while those living in backwardness are still totally backward.

Yet, despite these terrible conditions and outright marginalization, why do they still vote and support Umno-BN?

The reasons are simple. One of these is because they are constantly fed information and data sourced only from RTM, Utusan Malaysia and Berita Harian. No Internet - this means they are unable to get any news from opposing or independent sources. The excuses given by the government include no coverage, or coverage is too expensive, or the villagers will just have to wait.

That is the official line but what they don't tell you is that they don't really need any sudden explosion of progress in their traditional bastions of support. After all, to these Umno-BN leaders, prolonging their vested personal interests come first. As far as they are concerned, independent sources of information and news are lies anyway - defamation in disguise from traitors and so on!

So, brainwashed is the word. Malaysian villagers and rural folk, due to limited development through the decades, have been co-opted into supporting Umno-BN blindly and continuously. This is why many of the rural constituencies are still firmly controlled by Umno leaders and their local warlords. The votes for Umno are indeed 'controlled, manipulated and guaranteed' in these areas.

Read more at: http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/2010/07/blog-post_9294.html

A hook by Minister Hishamuddin; an uppercut by YB KJ and a vodka triple shot by the Federal Court!

I just love my country. Its people. Its leaders. And its Courts.

In one morning, I could shed some tears and I could laugh out loud. Then I could be drowned in a state of disbelief. Jaw-dropping kind of disbelief.

I read three pieces of news this morning.

Firstly, Minister Hishamuddin was quoted by the Malay Mail imploring Malaysians, particularly "political party leaders" to appreciate the efforts by the "enforcement agencies, especially the police."

Minister Hishamuddin, an UMNO vice-President, was quoted as saying:

"The effort to maintain peace and order in the country continues today by the present security and law enforcement agencies including the police. But the police are often criticised and condemned by society and one was even bitten by a 'wakil rakyat' (elected representative).

If these attacks against the police continue, how can be (sic) teach about nationhood to the younger generation?"

I agree with him. Credit must be given to the police as and when it is due.

But Minister Hishamuddin should understand that various sections of the society - and this is not limited to political party leaders only - would criticise the police when the police have overstepped their boundary by acting recklessly; or when the police have failed to carry out their duty properly; or when they perpetuate acts of crimes or where they have acted without common decency.

Not all criticisms are justified and I admit that. And some of them are of course politically driven. But surely the police should take proper criticisms on their chin, look at themselves and strive to be better. That is the only hope that the people have.

The police must learn to understand that all the powers that they wield come with responsibilities. The powers are there for a purpose. And when those responsibilities and purpose are not met, or perceived not to be met, there will be critics.

The critics which the police get how! ever do not negate from all the efforts, the hard work and the commitment, past or present, shown by the police in discharging their duties. I am sure the people appreciate those things.

Just after reading the above news, I stumbled on another piece of news related to the police. Yang Berhormat Khairy Jamaluddin, the UMNO Youth President, lambasted the police for not taking any action to arrest Raja Petra Kamarudin, reports the Malaysian Insider.

He apparently said :-

Where is the action from the police? Datuk Seri Najib Razak has said the police will be responsible for apprehending Raja Petra. The Inspector-General of Police has said he will get information on Raja Petras location, but RPK is going around in public. Yesterday, RPK was not in hiding; he had attended a Friends of Pakatan Rakyat event in London,

He continued :-

Even if they cannot arrest him there, the relationship (between the Malaysian police) and Scotland Yard is there, through the extradition agreement. The British police can arrest RPK and bring him back to Malaysia.

Are they (the police) unaware, or choose not to know RPKs movements and location? You have to ask the right questions.

I want to help the police here."

I really hope Minister Hishamuddin would not take YB Khairy's criticism wrongly. He does have a point to make.

On my part, quite frankly, I do not have a clue why some parliamentarians, leaders and people in authority seem to be obsessed with RPK, his whereabouts, who he is meeting and who is "sponsoring" him. I mean, these topics are even discussed with a certain level of seriousness - which is quite rare, actually - in the Parliament!

On current count, RPK has apparently been sponsored by Kalimullah Hassan; Anwar Ibrahim, Zaid Ibrahim, PKR and Pakatan Rakyat. And I am sure some people think the Zionist and some Jewish movements are also "sponsoring" him.

Isn't there other better and more beneficial things to discuss then who is sponsorin! g RPK? < /p>

I fully understand - and support - what YB KJ has said.

Meanwhile, the Federal Court was not to be left out today. In a decision which is set to "shock and awe" many people, including me, the Federal Court as allowed some clerics from Negeri Sembilan to challenge the constitutionality of a Negeri Sembilan enactment which require the clerics to obtain license to preach Islam, the Malaysian Insider reports.

While the decision is welcome, it makes me wonder what has jolted the Federal Court to suddenly come out with this decision.

The Federal Court's sloth-like willingness to allow any kind of application, appeal or case which challenges any Islamic enactment by any state is well known and is in fact expected by lawyers, litigants and observers.

In matters relating to Islam, it has time and again shirked its judicial responsibility and function by declaring that it has no jurisdiction in matters pertaining to Islam, citing article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution.

This unwillingness or reluctance by our Courts (not restricted to the Federal Courts only) is a blight - among many other blights - on our judiciary. It would thus not be out of place to say that judicial activism is a foreign concept in Malaysia.

And so the Federal Court's decision to allow those clerics to raise the constitutionality of the provisions requiring a license to preach Islam is most welcome. It is my opinion that such provisions are repugnant against the freedom of speech which is guaranteed by the Constitution.

The Federal Constitution is also clear on the fact that only the Parliament - as opposed to the State Legislative Assembly - has the power to limit freedom of speech in accordance with the Constitution.

Judicial activism is a hallmark of a vibrant democracy. A most famous Judge, Lord Denning, in Packer v Packer famously said :-

"What is the argument on the other side? Only this, that no case has been found in which it has been done before! . That a rgument does not appeal to me in the least. If we never do anything which has not been done before, we shall never get anywhere. The law will stand still whilst the rest of the world goes on; and that will be bad for both."

Our Judges should bear in mind what Lord Devlin said :-

"Governments come like water and go with the wind". "The prestige of the judiciary, is the reputation for stark impartiality to be kept up in appearance as well as, in fact. It is not at the disposal of any Government. It is an asset that belongs to the whole nation."

Justice D.M. Dharmadhikari, an Hounarable Judge of the Supreme Court of India, in a lecture delivered at the Belekar Memorial Lecture Series, organised by High Court Bar Association, Nagpur on August 31, 2002, said :-

"This traditional role of the judiciary is to uphold the law. A constitutional court is expected to discharge constitutional duty to enforce the provisions of the Constitution. In a constitutional democracy, the judiciary is an essential part of the Government and a third source of power. Its function is not merely restricted to deciding impartially the disputes before them in accordance with law. Its more important function may be described as "underpinning the stability of constitutional system and protect it from attacks by resisting attempts to change it."

In far too many instances, I am afraid to say, our Courts have been unwilling to unshackle itself from old and trusted interpretations of the law. New issues are sometime dismissed summarily. When faced with issues which are - for whatever reasons - deemed too sensitive, the Courts quickly cowers within the shadows of article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution and shirk its duties and responsibilities. In many more cases, the Courts find no reason to explore new arguments, let alone consider, analise and dissect contemporary constitutional arguments proffered by Counsels.

In some instances, Counsels are told - with a wave of a hand - to "move on"! to othe r issues. When a decision is made on those issues, they are just dismissed summarily, as if those arguments are not even worth mentioning. All such judgments or decisions are almost always unanimous and to complete the misery, no ground of judgment is ever provided.

It makes us feel that public interest cases are not welcome. That good and current constitutional arguments are not welcome. That the Courts are unwilling to listen. Let alone consider these new and current arguments.

That it is as if there are bogeymen lurking somewhere under the bench of the Courts, giving endless fear to those who occupy the bench.

If so, I would like to repeat Lord Denning's statement :-

"If we never do anything which has not been done before, we shall never get anywhere. The law will stand still whilst the rest of the world goes on; and that will be bad for both."

Letter & Opinion From Joe Public

PM extends APCO? Pakatan says insult to Muslims, will fight it

Wong Choon Mei, Malaysia Chronicle

Pakatan Rakyat leaders slammed news that the Najib administration has renewed its contract with APCO, an international strategy and communications firm with Zionist links, for at least another year, warning that such a move would further divide Muslims.

If the news is true, then it shows Prime Minister Najib Razak doesnt have any respect at all for the Muslim community here and in the rest of the world. Malaysians have already held so many public protests and demonstrations against using a firm with such Zionist connections, PKR secretary-general Saifuddin Nasution told Malaysia Chronicle.

Yet Najib is arrogant enough to insist on retaining them. Why and what sort hold they have on him is something must be investigated. Malaysian Muslims are not anti-Jew but our foreign policy clearly prohibits dealings or visits to Israel. It is part of the global stance taken by the Islamic world to protest their atrocities against humanity especially the Palestinians.

Saifuddin was responding to an article in The Malaysian Insider, quoting unnamed government sources as saying that the firm had been retained. The Najib administration has renewed its contract with APCO Worldwide for at least another year, said the government source.

Renewal the reason behind the press attacks against Anwar?

APCO was paid RM77 million for work done from July 15, 2009 to June 4, 2010. The hugeness of sum added to the public anger after Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim revealed in Parliament APCOs corporate background, showing many of the firm's top advisers and managers were previously high-ranking officers in the Israeli secret service.

Anwar's revelation greatly embarrassed the PM and his minders, and they retaliated by referring Anwar to the parliamentary disciplinary committee. He faces suspension for an indefinite period of time if! the com mittee the majority of which are from the government finds him guilty.

Of late, Anwar has also come under a coordinated attack from the press, which has accused him of having apologized to Jewish leaders in the U.S. for pressuring Najib to terminate APCO's contract. Anwar has denied ever doing so.

It is obvious APCO has some sort of pull on Najib. It has also done things for Najib that to the ordinary Malaysian is a sheer waste of money but to him and his wife Rosmah, it is a good job. For example, they have helped to swing Najib his visit to President Obama and also the recent New York humanitarian award and advertisement glorifying Rosmah, Saifuddin.

But most of all, we denounce it for the part in the latest attack against Anwar. You can see how the local press - Utusan, Berita Harian, NST, Star - have all rushed to echo some of the foreign articles that we believe were written with the help and instigation of APCO. Does APCO and Najib think that with just a few articles, they have discredited Anwar enough in the eyes of the Muslims? And that they can now dare to continue with their contract for another year or two? We will put these questions to the people, I promise.
Letter & Opinion From Joe Public

Islamic Governance by Word and Deed

PAS must prove by its word and deeds that Islamic governance is just, said Khalid Samad, the party's Shah Alam head.

The Shah Alam member of parliament was responding to remarks by DAP chairman Karpal Singh recently that he still believed Malaysia was a secular state with Islam as the official religion, and ruled out any compromise to based on federal constitution.

It is his (Karpal's) right. (We) can't force him. It is up to us to prove by word and deed that Islamic governance is just, posted Khalid on Twitter.

Prior to that, PAS Murshidul Am Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat said Karpal's statement on Islamic state was his "personal opinion".

I have yet to hear anything official from DAP except for some statements from certain individuals, said the Kelantan Menteri Besar.

Last week, Khalid was quoted as saying that the Islamic state can be implemented at the state level.

"If the majority of the people in one state agree to the setting up of an Islamic State, it will then be implemented in that state," he was reported by the Malay Mail as saying.

Khalid, who was admitted at the University Malaya Medical Centre in Petaling Jaya, was discharged yesterday (4th July 2010).

On his health, Khalid said he was warded due to unstable angina.

Courtesy of HarakahDaily
-Pejabat YB Khalid Samad- www.khalidsamad.com
Letter & Opinion From Joe Public

EC is not Superman

By Pathmawathy @ MalaysiaKini

The problem could be solved, some say, if the EC is given an upper hand in independently determining what constitutes a bribe.

It should also have an enforcement and prosecution unit, rather than to have to liaise with the Malaysia Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) or the attorney-generals chambers in taking action.

However, Abdul Aziz said the ECs main duties are to manage and organise elections, to prepare and revise the electoral role and to review the constituency boundaries.

The EC is the expert in matters of elections for prosecution, there are better people at it, but it doesnt mean we wash our hands off (allegations that crop up).

We have friends in the other departments and they will help when we need help. If they are not willing to do so, then that is another story entirely.

He said current laws, cooperation and smart partnership with external enforcement units are good enough now to tackle the allegations.

As such there is no necessity to enhance the ECs enforcement and prosecution powers in ensuring that candidates campaign in a responsible and accountable way.

This is politics

In Sibu, critics saw red in Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razakspromise that he would solve the flooding problem if constituents voted for BN candidate Robert Lau Hui Yew.

Asked to comment, Abdul Aziz said: When he (Najib) said You help me, I help you he wasnt talking to an individual, he was speaking to a large crowd

To say it is bribery, it has to be proved in court. It mu! st be pr oved that it influenced the voters and it has to be made known that the elector voted for the candidate because of this. But how do we prove it? Votes are confidential Im not a lawyer, so let the court decide.

To a lay (person) it may look like corruption (but) this is politics. For example, PAS used to say If you join our party, this is real Islam, otherwise no heaven for you. In China, there are 30 million Muslims. If they dont join PAS (does it mean) they wont go to heaven?

He conceded that the Election Offences Act 1954 clearly states what constitutes a bribe, but said the EC requires indisputable evidence in order to press for action by the MACC.

Citing the use of state resources, which is prohibited, he said: They have official functions in the same location as (where) the election (is being held).

If we ask they say I had an official function so I used the official car. After that (they) go campaigning. Both the opposition and the government do this, (but) when we (question them), we are rebuked (for it).

Abdul Aziz added that the dos and donts of campaigning are made clear to the agents of the contesting parties and candidates.

Welcome back Sim Kwang Yang | Expiry date: 2010-07-28 | Renew/Upgrade | Edit profile |LogoutENGLISHMALAYTAMILHOT TOPICSADVERTISING|ABOUT US|JOIN US|CONTACT US|FAQ|RSS|SCHOOL|PROMOTIONSearchHomeNewsColumnsOpinionLettersVideoVoizeMobilekiniBooksSMSLibraryKomunitikiniPropertyJobsKonsumerkiniTravelEC is not SupermanS Pathmawathy
Jul 5, 10
12:11pmEXCLUSIVE In the face of criticism that it is not doing enough to ensure free and fair elections, the Election Commission (EC) insists that it is overwhelmed just having to conduct the process.

We specialise in it (elections) if we (were to) take care of everything we (would be) very powerful (but) we cant do everything, EC chairperson Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof said, resorting to an analogy to explain the stance.

We must understand this the body does not function with one organ and one organ doesnt manage all the functions. The nose is for breathing, the ears are for listening and so on. If we only had one body part, say just the nose, we would have to use it to listen, to see (and) to eat with everything would be so much easier then and there would be no worries.

But God didnt create us in that way. Why? Simply because we cannot be like Superman. Doctors have to be doctors, lawyers have to be lawyers otherwise a doctor would be doing the task of a doctor, lawyer and engineer.

Eleven by-elections have taken place since the general election in 2008 and the EC has come under continuous pressure as being toothless and incompetent in tackling alleged bribery and vote-b! uying.
In the Hulu Selangor by-election which BNs P Kamalanathan won, losing rival Zaid Ibrahim has filed an election petition to invalidate the outcome on the basis that there was widespread corruption during the campaign.

The problem could be solved, some say, if the EC is given an upper hand in independently determining what constitutes a bribe.

It should also have an enforcement and prosecution unit, rather than to have to liaise with the Malaysia Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) or the attorney-generals chambers in taking action.

However, Abdul Aziz said the ECs main duties are to manage and organise elections, to prepare and revise the electoral role and to review the constituency boundaries.

The EC is the expert in matters of elections for prosecution, there are better people at it, but it doesnt mean we wash our hands off (allegations that crop up).

We have friends in the other departments and they will help when we need help. If they are not willing to do so, then that is another story entirely.

He said current laws, cooperation and smart partnership with external enforcement units are good enough now to tackle the allegations.

As such there is no necessity to enhance the ECs enforcement and prosecution powers in ensuring that candidates campaign in a responsible and accountable way.

This is politics

In Sibu, critics saw red in Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razakspromise that he would solve the flooding problem if constituents voted for BN candidate Robert Lau Hui Yew.

Asked to comment, Abdul Aziz said: When he (Najib) said You help me, I help you he wasnt talking to an individual, he wa! s speaki ng to a large crowd

To say it is bribery, it has to be proved in court. It must be proved that it influenced the voters and it has to be made known that the elector voted for the candidate because of this. But how do we prove it? Votes are confidential Im not a lawyer, so let the court decide.

To a lay (person) it may look like corruption (but) this is politics. For example, PAS used to say If you join our party, this is real Islam, otherwise no heaven for you. In China, there are 30 million Muslims. If they dont join PAS (does it mean) they wont go to heaven?

He conceded that the Election Offences Act 1954 clearly states what constitutes a bribe, but said the EC requires indisputable evidence in order to press for action by the MACC.

Citing the use of state resources, which is prohibited, he said: They have official functions in the same location as (where) the election (is being held).

If we ask they say I had an official function so I used the official car. After that (they) go campaigning. Both the opposition and the government do this, (but) when we (question them), we are rebuked (for it).

Abdul Aziz added that the dos and donts of campaigning are made clear to the agents of the contesting parties and candidates.

Filed under: Alternatives, corruption, Politics Tagged: Anak Sarawak Bangsa Malaysia, Barisan Nasional, BN, Malaysia Politics, Sarawak, Save Sarawak
See What Barisan Nasional Gotta Say?

A Reminder: Say NO to Racism Everywhere, not just @ The World Cup

July 5, 2010

The Narcissism of the Small Difference

In ethno-national conflicts, it really is the little things that tick people off.

By Christopher Hitchens ( June 28, 2010)

Reviewing the sudden spasm of violence between the Uzbek minority and the Kyrgyz majority in Kyrgyzstan recently, many commentators were at a loss to explain why the two peoples should so abruptly have turned upon one another.

Explanations range from official pandering to Kyrgyz nationalism, to sheer police and army brutality, to provocations from Taliban-style militias hoping to create another Afghanistan, but none go very far in analyzing why inter-communal relations became so vicious so fast. As if to make the question still more opaque, several reports stressed the essential similarityethnic, linguistic, culturalbetween the Kyrgyz and Uzbek populations.

But that in itself could well be the explanation. In numerous cases of apparently ethno-nationalist conflict, the deepest hatreds are manifested between people whoto most outward appearancesexhibit very few significant distinctions. It is one of the great contradictions of civilization and one of the great sources of its discontents, and Sigmund Freud even found a term for it: the narcissism of the small difference. As he wrote, It is precisely the minor differences in people who are otherwise alike that form the basis of feelings of hostility between them.

The partition of India and Pakistan, for example, which gives us one of the longest-standing and most toxic confrontations extant, involved most of all the partition of the Punjab. Visit Punjab and see if you can detect the remotest difference in people ! on eithe r side of the border. Language, literature, ethnic heritage, physical appearancevirtually indistinguishable. Here it is mainly religion that symbolizes the narcissism and makes the most of the least discrepancy.

I used to work in Northern Ireland, where religion is by no means a minor business either, and at first couldnt tell by looking whether someone was Catholic or Protestant. After a while, I thought I could guess with a fair degree of accuracy, but most of the inhabitants of Belfast seemed able to do it by some kind of instinct. There is a small underlay of ethnic difference there, with the original Gaels being a little darker and smaller than the blonder Scots who were imported as settlers, but to the outsider it is impalpable. Its just that its the dominant question locally.

Likewise in Cyprus, it is extremely hard to tell a Greek from a Turk. The two peoples have been on the same island for so long that they even suffer from a common sickle-cell blood disease called thalassemia. I once interviewed a doctor who specialized in the malady, and he solemnly told me that, from a blood sample, it was not possible to tell if the donor was Greek or Turkish. I had to stop myself from asking him if he had hitherto thought that different nationalities were made out of different genetic material. There have been almost no recorded cases of intermarriage between Greek and Turkish Cypriots, and the island remains sternly partitioned.

In his book The Warriors Honor, Michael Ignatieff spent some time trying to elucidate what it was that made soldiers in the Balkan Warsphysically indistinguishable from one anotherso eager to inflict cruelty and contempt upon Serb or Croat or Bosnian, as the case might be. Very often, the expressed hatred took the form of extremely provincial and local rivalries, inflamed by jealousies over supposed small advantages poss! essed by the other. Of course, here again there are latent nationalist and confessional differences to act as a force multiplier once the nasty business gets started, but the main thing to strike the outsider would be the question of How can they tell? In Rwanda and Burundi, even if it is true, as some colonial anthropologists used to claim, that Hutu and Tutsi vary in height and also in the delimitation of their hairlines, it still doesnt seem enough of a difference upon which to base a genocide.

In Sri Lanka, where again it takes a long time to notice that Tamils are prone to be slightly smaller and slightly darker than the Sinhala majority, it is somehow the most important information that either population possesses. And it doesnt take long for one population to start saying that the other one has too many children, takes too much leisure, is too casual about hygiene.

Every time he heard a Shiites or Sunni Iraqi saying that religion didnt really count, said my friend Patrick Cockburn in his book on Baghdad, he noticed that every single one of them knew the exact faith allegiance of everybody else in the room. And if you want to see an expression of sheer racial disdain, try giving to an Iranian Shiites the impression that you think he and his Iraqi co-religionists are brothers under the skin.

The next example of this phenomenon will be among the most serious as well as the least dramatic. One of the most unobtrusive differences in the worldthe line that separates French from Flemish-speaking Belgiansis about to be forcefully reasserted in a bid to split Belgium in two. If this secession occurs, then the headquarters country of NATO and the European Union will rather narcissistically cease to exist, undone by one of the smallest distinctions of all.

So pity the Uzbeks and Kyrgyz as they peer suspiciously at one another during a sudden time of scarcity and insecurity. Th! eir mutu al miseries may be just beginning. And all this contains the true ingredients of tragedyand of irony. One of the great advantages possessed by Homo sapiens is the amazing lack of variation between its different branches. Since we left Africa, we have diverged as a species hardly at all. If we were dogs, we would all be the same breed. We do not suffer from the enormous differences that separate other primates, let alone other mammals.

As if to spite this huge natural gift, and to disfigure what could be our overwhelming solidarity, we manage to find excuses for chauvinism and racism on the most minor of occasions and then to make the most of them. This is why condemnation of bigotry and superstition is not just a moral question but a matter of survival.http://www.slate.com/id/2258127

Letter & Opinion From Joe Public