MACC a house of criminals....

Responsibility for the death of political aide Teoh Beng Hock lies squarely on the shoulders of the BN, which created a monster in the form of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), senior DAP leader Lim Kit Siang says.

Lim said the recently released report of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Teoh's death details a "horror" story that clearly outlines the gross abuses of the power MACC wields.

"We let Parliament pass it (the MACC Act of 2009), gave it increased powers and funding, all sorts of support (were) given. What has happened? It became a monster," he told Malaysiakini in an exclusive interview.

Lim, who donned a pair of dark glasses following an eye operation, accused the BN of using the MACC, particularly the Selangor MACC, to further its political agenda in wresting the state back from Pakatan Rakyat rule.

He said the RCI finding - the first document he has personally read since undergoing an operation on his left eye last April - pointed to "utter contempt of the law" by MACC officers and gross abuse of power in carrying out an operation against Pakatan elected representatives that had no basis.

However, Lim's biggest target was the then Selangor MACC deputy director Hishamuddin Hashim, who he accused of serving the will of the BN through the many officers he roped in to carry out the investigation and raids on Teoh's boss, Seri Kembangan state assemblyperson Ean Yong Hian Wah.

Lim went on to accuse Hishamuddin, who was promoted to Negeri Sembilan MACC chief after he was taken off Teoh's case, of leading a "massive operation", with MACC officers who "broke law after law, not only the SOP (standard operating procedures) but all the laws".
He added: "It is very clear. Hishamuddin (left) was the deputy director, but he acted as if he was more powerful than the director, even without referring to the headquarters.

"It cannot be only (an) anti-corruption operation. Definitely this was part of a political agenda, to topple Pakatan in Selangor (by) going for a DAP, Pakatan assemblyperson, and that must be (the) background to it.

"Otherwise, how can a person, a deputy director, have such great powers, acting and believing he can act with utter immunity and impunity? And he is not someone who is a newbie. He's got 19 years in the MACC, and suddenly, he acted so arrogantly.

"I'm sure (this is) because he was serving a political agenda, and that can only mean the BN agenda to topple (Pakatan)."

'Shut down the MACC'

Lim brushed aside claims that the DAP has been milking Teoh's death in custody for political mileage, stressing that the issue at hand was holding the MACC to account, particularly since it was formed to replace the discredited Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA).

As an immediate measure, he said, the MACC should suspend Hishamuddin, investigating officer Mohd Anuar Ismail and assistant superintendent Mohd Ashraf Mohd Yunus - the three officers said to have used "aggressive" and "inappropriate" interrogation tactics on Teoh - besides charging them with breaking several laws in the course of their investigations.

Lim added that the trio, and most of the other MACC officers called to the witness stand during the Teoh RCI, should also be charged with perjury, since the Royal Commission had found that many of them - save for two officers - had lied in their testimonies.

"It's not suicide, we don't accept that... twice the phrase was used, 'MACC officers who were responsible for the death of Teoh Beng Hock'. So it's very clear, even the (RCI) commissioners are unanimous (in) that the MACC officers are responsible for the death of Teoh Beng Hock."

Lim stressed that it was unacceptable for the MACC, which was formed with the aim of restoring public confidence in its ability to operate independently, professionally and efficiently in combating graft, had ended up doing the complete opposite.

Taking the example of the hostile takeover of the Perak state government in 2009, when the MACC investigated the then speaker V Sivakumar for alleged abuse of power, Lim said the three officers involved should likewise be investigated on the same grounds as in Teoh's case.

"The MACC, particularly the Selangor (MACC), has (become a) house of criminals who break laws left, right and centre. (It's) completely lawless.

"This is so ridiculous. If somebody lists down the crimes committed in the whole Teoh Beng Hock episode, I think you will have a very long list.

"I think we should seriously consider closing down the MACC and having another anti-corruption body, if that is possible. If that is not possible, then the only way is for a change in Putrajaya; maybe that (Teoh's case) is the last straw... it is not a question of politics, but a question of survival," Lim said.

source:malaysiakini

Kematian Teoh: BN patut dipersalahan, kata Lim

cheers.

"Diam Lar!"

My sister and I are highly tickled by this irritated person who tells Najib to shut his trap.

It all started on Najib's Facebook page that was advertising his latest blog posting about how it was his responsibility to maintain peace as a leader.

Yes, one can predict how nauseating that article could be when the evidence of political intimidation is out for all and sundry to see.

It must have overwhelmed this person who commented, "Diam lar", or 'shut up' in Malay.

Predictably, his comment was deleted, but not before someone got a screen shot of it and created a community page on Facebook.

Since then, "Diam lar" sites on Facebook have mushroomed. The original "Diam lar" site has, to date, more than 10,000 Likes.

TBH: BAR Council Press Release

On rare occasions, I would publish in my blog other people writing en verbatim. I only do it for writings that deserves special mentioned. The following press release on the 23rd July by BAR Malaysia deserved such honor. What is clear and apparent from the RCI findings is that, the suicide theory is weak and the death occurred while in custody. Based on the RCI findings the trio should be investigated by the RMP and not internally by the MACC. A crime has been taken place and appropriate action must be taken. Failure by the government to mete out appropriate actions following the RCI will have significant political implications. The family of TBH has the basis to sue MACC for the death.

The search for justice and truth must continue

There are a number of key points on which the Malaysian Bar agrees with the report of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Death of Teoh Beng Hock (RCI).

We concur with the following findings of the RCI:

That the RCI was unable to accept that the alleged suicide note had been written by Teoh Beng Hock, and that the undue delay by the authorities in tendering the alleged suicide note at the first available opportunity could not be taken as mere carelessness or neglect, and therefore the authenticity of the note could not be trusted;

(2) That Teoh Beng Hock was, at all material times until his untimely death, in the care, custody and control of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) officers;

(3) That Teoh Beng Hock was not released from the care, custody and control of the MACC officers after his statement had been recorded at approximately 3:30 am, and this failure amounted to cruel conduct and punishment inflicted on purpose;

(4) That Teoh Beng Hock was subjected to aggressive, relentless, oppressive and unscrupulous interrogation and that! the rec ording of his statement was unlawful;

(5) That the majority of the MACC officers exhibited a total lack of consideration for human sensitivities, and that the recruitment process of MACC officers should include a psychological evaluation to assess their suitability for investigative work;

(6) That most of the MACC officers who were involved in the operations on 15 and 16 July 2009, and who gave evidence as witnesses, were neither truthful nor credible, as they had the inevitable habit of lying;

(7) That massive operations launched by MACC Selangor which were headed by then-Selangor MACC deputy director Hishamuddin Hashim against the Pakatan Rakyat members of the Selangor state assembly were grounded on mere belief of information purportedly received over the telephone, and without proper ground work or verification;

(8) That Hishamuddin Hashim was arrogant, given to falsehoods, untruthful and uncompromising, and that he was just too stubborn [such trait was also displayed when he gave evidence before us] to retreat from his mistake in mounting such a massive operation;

(9) That not only was Hishamuddin Hashim involved but he also unleashed his officers to do his bidding in order to get results within that night and morning come hell or high-water, and that Hishamuddin Hashim should be held responsible for the actions taken by him and his officers that led to Teoh Beng Hocks death; and

(10) That the Selangor MACC had shown an extreme lack of cooperation with the police in the latters attempts to investigate complaints of assault and other offences previously made against its officers.

The Malaysian Bar, however, does not concur with the finding by the RCI that Teoh Beng Ho! ck had c ommitted suicide. Such a finding, in our view, is unsupported by the facts and the evidence.

Contrary to the statement made by Minister in the Prime Ministers Department Dato Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz, forensic psychiatrist Professor Paul Mullen did not testify that Teoh Beng Hock had a weak character that had led to him taking his own life. Professor Mullen also did not conclude that Teoh Beng Hock had committed suicide; rather, his testimony stated that in [his] opinion, what we learned of Teoh Beng Hocks personality and behaviour do not suggest any increased risk of suicide. He further opined that the context of the events that had taken place was not one which, in [his] experience, leads to suicide in custody, as he had not been made aware of anything to explain panic and distress sufficient to drive [Teoh Beng Hock] to conclude his honor had been irreparably tarnished.

This is in stark contrast to what the Minister reportedly stated during the release of the RCIs report, namely that Teoh Beng Hock had truly committed suicide based on his character that had changed from a low-risk group to a high-risk group for suicide after undergoing a continuous and aggressive questioning session. Professor Mullens testimony does not provide the basis for the RCIs finding of suicide, such as that described in the section titled conclusion on forensic psychiatric aspects in the RCIs report.

It is noted that the RCI found the following:

That the time of death had been between 7:15 am and 11:15 am on 16 July 2009;

That Teoh Beng Hock had not been released at 3:30 am and been left alone sitting on a sofa after his statement had been recorded, as Hishamuddin Hashim had issued a written circular the previous month that witnesses and visitors in the Selangor MACC office sh! ould be accompanied at all times;

That Teoh Beng Hock had been subjected to a fourth interrogation session after 3:30 am by Hishamuddin Hashim and his officers, which was aggressive and relentless. In addition, the RCI rejected the evidence of MACC officer Raymond Nion that he had seen Teoh Beng Hock lying down unattended on a sofa at approximately 6:00 am;

That the fourth interrogation session was probably between 3:30 am and 7:00 am; and

That the window from which Teoh Beng Hock is said to have fallen out was located conspicuously. In view of the above, and that there was no evidence whatsoever produced at the RCI hearing of Teoh Beng Hocks whereabouts or movements after 6:15 am, and the staff of the Selangor MACC office would have begun arriving by 8:00 am, to surmise that Teoh Beng Hock had committed suicide between 7:15 am and 11:15 am requires a leap in logic and an assumption of facts not in evidence.

The Malaysian Bar also notes that the joint expert psychiatric report of Dr Badiah Yahya and Dr Nor Hayati Ali the experts engaged by MACC who were present during most of the court proceedings and had interviewed Teoh Beng Hocks family members, housemate and work colleagues stated:

We did not have any evidence on how the investigation was conducted as there were no written questions posted to [Teoh Beng Hock] or audio recording as to ascertain the amount of pressure that he experienced. It is not known whether he had experienced in his mind the effects of being possibly prosecuted on the allegations, whether it would have been devastating for him and/or his organisation. This should require more information on what was said and done in the period taken [sic] into custody until he was found dead.

It is very clear to the Malaysian Bar that full responsibility ! for Teoh Beng Hocks death lies squarely and solely on the MACC, and that immediate action must be taken to hold the culpable officers accountable for their behaviour. In this regard, we welcome the reported statement by Dato Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz, that appropriate action would be taken against the officers through the process of law without delay. The authorities should investigate the relevant MACC officers for possible offences under sections 304 and 304A of the Penal Code, namely for culpable homicide not amounting to murder and for causing the death of TBH by negligence, respectively.

The Malaysian Bar also calls on the Government of Malaysia and MACC to consider:

• offering an unqualified written apology to Teoh Beng Hocks family, and to the citizens of Malaysia, for his death; and
  
• making reasonable recompense to Teoh Beng Hocks family in respect of his death.
  

The Malaysian Bar extends its heartfelt sympathy once again to Teoh Beng Hocks family and loved ones.

Lim Chee Wee

President

Malaysian BAR

Hindrafs case against the British government

FMT LETTER

From Subramaniam Bharathy, via e-mail

Imagine this scenario: Hindraf wins suit against Her Majestys government screams the headlines of theGuardian newspaper inLondon onSept 19, 2014. The judge had declared the day before at the High Court that there has been gross negligence on the part of the British Colonial government in the way they had failed to entrench the interest of the Indians inMalaysiaas they departed as rulers of Malayain 1957.

The case itself had been a grueling one with the full weight of the British establishment thrown against the claims by an unbending and resolute Hindraf. When the case began, it was viewed as no more than a frivolous claim within British legal circles. Only as the case proceeded and facts began to emerge about the specific manner by which the British Colonial government had gone about devolving power to the local elite and how it had colluded with them to the utter detriment of the minority Indians did it become obvious that this was going to make a serious dent to the reputation of the British.

The arguments from Hindraf based on the facts had been very intense and deep about the inner motivations of the colluding colonial master and their successor Malay elite and how it served their mutual interest to keep the Indian poor exactly where they needed to be. The revelations had caused the moralising British government serious embarrassments already.

The counsels representing Hindraf had understood from the very beginning that there would be sufficient evidence about collusion against the Indian poor between the departing British government and the elite to whom the power was going to be handed over. It was all really very simple. The Indian poor were nothing more than tools for profit. The British had brought them in just for that. Now for the British to get out ofMalayagracefully and with their interests intact they needed to patch together a nation-state out of the ji! gsaw puz zle of ethnicity, of class and of geography.

They needed to keep every one happy, most of all the Malay elite to whom they were handing over effective power. The Constitution and the other instruments of government they were leaving behind had enough in them to do this job. Unfortunately for them, the deliberations had been recorded and had captured the collusion, sometimes subtle, sometimes gross. In fact the local elite had been goaded in ways that only an imperial power with100s of years of ruling through treachery and deceit could know. The congruence of interests had been cleverly woven into the Constitution and into the structure of the instruments of government. The trajectory was set.

The counsels on the British government side argued that the British government could not be held liable.So much more had happened in the 50 some years since, so how can they be singled out in that jungle. Besides there are so many situations around the world of this type that it would be a hornets nest now, to apportion blame to a long gone colonialist government.This would have been an acceptable argument except for the fact that the outcome of deprivation and marginalisation could have been easily predicted and it would have been incumbent on any departing competent colonial government to set in place structures and processes to avoid the inevitable future adverse outcome.

The parliamentary democracy system works on numbers and money. It would not have taken much to see just where the Indian poor stood in this system. It was not as if this was not known there were so many documented inputs to the British Administrators to that effect just in that period. All that did not matter. That would have disrupted the smooth transition the Britishers were planning. They did not want to ruffle the Malay elites feathers.

The British had much at stake in Malaya. The overall system of governance designed and left behind by the British even at its nascent stage made it possible ! for the Malay elite to disobey the social contract, with impunity. The strongest being always in the right, the only thing that mattered was to become the strongest. This the Malay elite quickly did. Disobedience becomes legitimate. Parliamentary democracy was all very convenient. This trajectory could be traced back to its origins in the collusion.

You have the net effect today on the Indian marginalised, the disobediencewith impunityof the Malay elite to the provisions in the Constitution, the post colonial development of the various instruments of government, the gaping ambiguities and omissions in the Constitution and the collusion that occurred at the very beginning, which is so well documented and there you have the case for Hindraf.

Was the outcome therefore any surprise? Will such an outcome be any surprise?

Using biometric, EC concedes phantom voters exist....

Pakatan Rakyat said today the Election Commission's (EC) planned biometric system is an indirect admission that phantom voters are a norm in elections - an issue often raised by the opposition coalition.

However, the coalition opposes its implementation, citing financial and time constraints on top of a lack of checks and balances.

In a statement issued by the Pakatan secretariat, it credited the "indirect admission" by Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, who has backed the planned system, to the Bersih 2.0 rally held on July 9.

"The EC's move to introduce a biometric system as a way to prevent phantom voting and double voting is a sign that even BN hardliners in the government cannot ignore the strong message brought by (electoral reform group) Bersih 2.0.

"For this, we should congratulate hundreds of thousands of Malaysians who took the cause of Bersih 2.0 to their hearts and participated in one of the largest peaceful rallies in our nation's history.

"Without their perseverance and courage, the EC and BN would continue in their denial mode," it said.

Political parties rendered useless

However, Pakatan stressed that it is opposed to the planned biometric system because it would render political parties useless in keeping check on the voting process.

"The responsibility and power currently vested in each party's polling agents to vet voters and be vigilant of phantom voting and double voting, is transferred ultimately to a computer system.

"Any moves that eliminates the ability of each political party to participate in vetting the election process runs against the demands of Bersih 2.0."

Furthermore, Pakatan pointed out a biometric-based voting system will cost the country hundreds of millions of ringgit without the guarantee that it would be implemented in time.

"Such a system will face various technical hiccups and security risks (and) an effective, transparent and fool-proof system will not be ready by the next general election in 2013," it added.

The statement said that the biometric system is built around a false premise that a person with an identity card is automatically a valid voter.

This will allow a huge number of foreigners issued with identity cards to vote in the next general election, it said.

Instead, Pakatan reaffirmed Bersih 2.0's long-held demand to use indelible ink as a solution to phantom voters rather than a complicated biometric system.

"The EC should go back to the demands of Bersih 2.0, especially the use of indelible ink, as this solution is widely used, cheap, effective, and will empower political parties to play its role in ensuring that elections are free and fair," the statement read.

The statement was jointly issued by PAS election director Dr Mohd Hatta Ramli, DAP international secretary Liew Chin Tong and PKR director of strategy Rafizi Ramli.

source:malaysiakini

Pakatan kata SPR mengaku pengundi hantu wujud

cheers.

EC admit UMNO BN cheats ?

Pakatan says EC concedes phantom voters exist

Pakatan Rakyat said today the Election Commission's (EC) planned biometric system is an indirect admission that phantom voters are a norm in elections - an issue often raised by the opposition coalition.

However, the coalition opposes its implementation, citing financial and time constraints on top of a lack of checks and balances.

In a statement issued by the Pakatan secretariat, it credited the "indirect admission" by Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, who has backed the planned system, to the Bersih 2.0 rally held on July 9.

"The EC's move to introduce a biometric system as a way to prevent phantom voting and double voting is a sign that even BN hardliners in the government cannot ignore the strong message brought by (electoral reform group) Bersih 2.0.

"For this, we should congratulate hundreds of thousands of Malaysians who took the cause of Bersih 2.0 to their hearts and participated in one of the largest peaceful rallies in our nation's history.

"Without their perseverance and courage, the EC and BN would continue in their denial mode," it said.

Political parties rendered useless

However, Pakatan stressed that it is opposed to the planned biometric system because it would render political parties useless in keeping check on the voting process.

"The responsibility and power currently vested in each party's polling agents to vet voters and be vigilant of phantom voting and double voting, is transferred ultimately to a computer system.

"Any moves that eliminates the ability of each political party to participate in vetting the election process runs against the demands of Bersih 2.0."

Furthermore, Pakatan pointed out a biometric-based voting system will cost the country hundreds of millions of ringgit without the guarantee that it would be implemented in time.

"Such a system will face various technical hiccups and security risks (and) an effective, transparent and fool-proof system will not be ready by the next general election in 2013," it added.

The statement said that the biometric system is built around a “false premise” that a person with an identity card is automatically a valid voter.

“This will allow a huge number of foreigners issued with identity cards to vote in the next general election,” it said.

Instead, Pakatan reaffirmed Bersih 2.0's long-held demand to use indelible ink as a solution to phantom voters rather than a complicated biometric system.

"The EC should go back to the demands of Bersih 2.0, especially the use of indelible ink, as this solution is widely used, cheap, effective, and will empower political parties to play its role in ensuring that elections are free and fair," the statement read.

The statement was jointly issued by PAS election director Dr Mohd Hatta Ramli, DAP international secretary Liew Chin Tong and PKR director of strategy Rafizi Ramli. - Malaysiakini

Of Raja Nazrin, Real Stories & Regal Rhetoric

Raja Petra has told us his “real story” to the above questions. It has something to do with your succession to the Perak throne and also to save the financial empire of one of members of your royal family. Is RPK’s story accurate? Will you tell us the “real story”?

By Martin Jalleh

Your Royal Highness (YRH),

Recently, during a talk themed: “The role of Malay rulers in nurturing unity” held in Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) in Shah Alam, YRH declared that “rulers should not be shielded from the truth and must be told the real story”.

May I, with due respect to YRH, tell you the truth that many of us (especially those who are sons and daughters of Perak) find it very hard to believe that you meant every word that you said during the talk. Some, in responding to the article highlighting your talk, have asked you to “walk the talk”!

Much as we would really like to consider what you had proclaimed as “rare wisdom” from a ruler and intellectual, very unfortunately, the tragic manner in which the Perak royal family handled the Perak Constitutional Crisis (PCC) reduces your speeches to mere “regal rhetoric”.

You were so very right when you said that “rulers should never be surrounded by people with personal interests who are willing to use them as tools”. If only the Perak royalty had displayed and determinedly demonstrated such astuteness during the PCC!

It was the public’s perception that His Royal Highness (HRH) Sultan Azlan Shah had allowed himself to be surrounded by the PM and his cohorts and to be used as a political tool. HRH also denied the ousted Perak MB Nizar Jamaluddin of an audience at a very crucial point.

By writing this open letter to you I run the risk of Umno or Perkasa members making police reports against me but I am confident enough that YRH will not allow these elements to make use of you, as they have so often and unashamedly done so, out of political expediency.

To confirm the hypocrisy of the Umno elite, you should consult your royal colleague and veteran Umno leader, Tengku Razaleigh, who during the height of the PCC strongly suggested that it is Umno who has harmed the Malay rulers more than anyone else!

In sharp contrast to your professed openness, Umno, through the Attorney-General’s (AG’s) Chambers has gone to extremes to do the opposite. Take for example the AG’s appeal against a High Court’s decision to acquit Karpal Singh of a charge of sedition against the Perak Sultan.

Unbelievably the DPP told the Court of Appeal that: “People have the legal right to take Sultans to court but to speak openly of it is seditious…as this would inflame the sentiments of laymen who did not have a good grasp of the law”!

Understandably, the AG and his Chambers are suspected of suffering from the inflammation of the brain, which in many respects is as bad as “yellow fever”.

Bitter & Brutal Truth

YRH, you stressed that: “Rulers should be willing to accept the fact, no matter how bitter, as justice could not be uphold without the truth”? Logically, you would need to be willing to accept the fact, no matter how bitter, that hardly anyone takes you seriously these days.

Public sentiments for HRH Sultan Azlan Shah are the same. Perakians had placed their hopes high on HRH – whom they had held in high regard. But he seemed to be swayed by Umno’s political subterfuge and scheming. Public perception of his impartiality plummeted thence after.

YRH so rightly pointed out that: "In all conflicts, no one party is right all the time and no one party is wrong all the time.” HRH Sultan Azlan Shah (a former Lord President though he was) was wrong in his personal discretion and his straying beyond his parameters of power during the PCC.

No one presented the brutal and bitter truth so honestly, clearly and professionally than respected retired judge N H Chan who bravely declared that HRH had “sidestepped” provisions of the Perak Constitution and made a “fatal error”.

YRH also very accurately pointed out in your talk that: "The credibility of some national instruments require recovery of perception and need improvement in line with current world dynamics to restore confidence in the people."

During and after the PCC, key democratic institutions were manipulated by the powers that be to contain, cripple and crush legitimate dissent. They degenerated to the point that the public no longer trusted them. This was especially true of the judiciary.

The judiciary sunk so low during the PPC, as to allow itself to be intimidated, its independence and impartiality interfered with, and its integrity reduced to ignominy. Today the reputation of the judiciary or whatever is left of it, has been sullied irreparably.

Very ironically on 31 Oct. 2007 I had in an Open Letter thanked HRH Sultan Azlan “for portraying the truth about the state of the country's judiciary and your accompanying clarion call for major reforms in the judiciary…”

I wrote: “Today, we have become a laughing stock. We are second to none when it comes to kangaroo courts and court jesters like the de facto Law Minister. The judgments of our courts are often quoted in political satire and online comic scripts.” Nothing has changed still then!

Just as the “credibility of some national instruments require recovery of perception and need improvement”, I am sure you will agree that the credibility of the royalty also requires recovering of perception and regaining public confidence!

Perhaps, YRH, this can only happen if the people are told the “real story”. Just as the rulers need to be given the true picture, the public also needs to hear the “real story” to make a wise and good decision in the next General Elections.

YRH, please tell us the “real story” on why there was such an undue and indecent haste by HRH to dismiss the leader of a popularly elected coalition? Why was there such an unholy haste to recognize, install and swear in a government against the expressed wishes of the people?

Raja Petra has told us his “real story” to the above questions. It has something to do with your succession to the Perak throne and also to save the financial empire of one of members of your royal family. Is RPK’s story accurate?

Will you tell us the “real story”?

Tengku Razaleigh & Friends

by Zaid Ibrahim

The launch of Angkatan Amanah Merdeka (Amanah) last Friday by Tengku Razaleigh was not well reported by the mainstream media. That’s not at all surprising, but it’s still regrettable. Any movement—political or otherwise—that seeks to promote unity in the country deserves support from all quarters. We are a divided country; that is obvious for anyone to see. To know that some of our erstwhile leaders (mainly from BN) are getting together to declare “enough is enough” and target the present malaise gives hope to many Malaysians.

I was not invited to the launch but imposed myself by calling the organisers and asking if I could attend. Fortunately, they were gracious about it and I was there together with some 200 others being fêted with speeches about how rotten things have become and what needs to be done. I was seated next to Nurul Izzah Anwar and that was special too. I have always liked her very much and being able to have a friendly chat with her about politics after many months was memorable.

There was a lot of speculation about Tengku Razaleigh’s game plan or motive behind launching Amanah. Some say it’s his way of keeping his hope of becoming the next PM alive. Others are less kind, and say he is clutching at straws to keep himself relevant at a time when his influence within UMNO is fast receding.

I am inclined to see the action of Amanah’s promoters as noble and sincere. They want to remind people that we must not abandon the principles upon which this nation was founded. They seem to be saying that we must not try to reengineer or remodel this country on new imperatives, forgetting along the way all that has kept this nation together for so long. The call is for a more decent and trustworthy Government — who can dispute the relevance of that?

I would prefer Tengku Razaleigh to be more explicit and direct about his plans. In this country there is no middle path that one can take and still hope to make an electoral impact, which is necessary especially if one is looking at effecting a political transformation. One is either with BN or with Pakatan Rakyat.

Kita is a new political party that is willing to take a different and more risky route, but our “business model” is different. We focus on issues that have divided us like the NEP, religious freedom, the secular state, democracy, etc, and other similarly sensitive issues because we feel that addressing and understanding them are key to our future stability. Our manifesto touches on all these issues that BN and Pakatan shy away from. But these issues do not win elections in the short term. I do not believe Tengku Razaleigh and his friends are going to articulate them and be ideological in the way that we are.

Amanah, I am sure, will be pragmatic in their approach and this is why I was somewhat surprised that its promoters did not endorse the Pakatan Rakyat platform, at least on substantive issues. This will give them the momentum and the enthusiastic crowds on their nationwide tour. Otherwise, who will listen to them but a handful of smart urbanites, who are probably already converted to their line of thinking? Supporting Pakatan does not mean we subscribe to all of their policies or approve of all their leaders. But making Pakatan stronger will transform the political dynamic, which hopefully will bring some positive changes.

BN supporters will be too afraid to show their faces, even if they are sympathetic. Change in UMNO will only happen if they have a leader who believes in and truly wants a political transformation (as opposed to an administrative one). More importantly, this leader cannot be afraid of the attendant risks. It will not happen as a grassroots movement as that would be viewed as a rebellion and would therefore be dealt with very harshly by the leadership. It’s unlikely, therefore, that BN supporters will openly flock to Amanah in droves to show their disapproval of the present BN incumbents.

Of course, I suspect BN will still win the next General Election. The postal ballot and the Felda/Felcra seats will give them almost half of what they need to form the majority. Those who join the reformist bandwagon must accept that change will take time and will therefore not happen soon. Thinking of Putrajaya now and clamouring over who is going to be PM or DPM is premature. Being united on the core issues is what the Opposition needs more urgently, and this is where the experience of Amanah’s promoters can be useful. Bringing unity and clarity on substantive policies that make up the Opposition’s platform is what leaders like Tengku Razaleigh can contribute.

Unless, of course, Amanah is thinking of change from within; by that I mean change in fundamental attitudes and values of UMNO/BN, and not just change in having a new PM. Is that possible? If so, how? My own assessment is that the change in UMNO will only happen at the Politubro level; through a power struggle. The top leaders may change but the party remains the same. So its unlikely that Amanah can make any difference from within. Will Tengku say enough is enough to UMNO? I too doubt that will happen.

Response to Wong Chun Wai: Why Malaysians are angry

By Tan Seng Hai

This is in response to Wong Chun Wai's “On the beat” column (“Of Angry Birds and angry Malaysians”: Sunday Star 24 July 2011) where he asked Malaysians to stop being angry on the many issues affecting the nation. It was a very well written piece, well placed and sounded almost logical and rational to those who read only the mainstream media.

Allow me to give Wong 10 good reasons why Malaysians are angry … in fact Malaysians are very, very angry.

1.0 We are angry that we have been denied our constitutional and democratic rights to a peaceful gathering. We are angry at the police brutality on a frail, tender 65 year old auntie who was sprayed with chemically laced water and tear gassed for exercising her democratic rights when she was walking alone to demonstrate peacefully what she believes in.

2.0 We are angry at the lies, the bias reporting and the cover-ups by mainstream media (the Star included) to serve their political masters. We are angry at the way the mainstream media demonise BERSIH 2.

3.0 We are very angry at the double standards of the police in arresting activists and opposition politicians. While some self proclaimed nationalists and race champions openly spew seditious statements to incite religious and racial hatred and no action was taken against them, others were arrested for merely wearing yellow T-shirts.

4.0 We are angry with the Home Minister and the IGP for their handling of the recent series of events occuring in the country. We are angry with the lies and denials they make in light of clear evidences from photos and videos.

5.0 We are angry at the continual police harassment and intimidation of civil society groups and activists who are perceived as a threat to the political hegemony of the current BN government. The arrest of the 22 Parti Sosialist Malaysia (PSM) members on trumped up charges of trying to revive communism and rebelling against the Ruler is blatant police harassment and intimidation.

6.0 We are angry at the Home Ministry and the Police for using the outdated and This draconian Emergency Ordinance (EO) to detain the PSM 6 without trial. We are angry that they have been detained on flippant charges of trying to revive communism, waging war against the Ruler and inciting people to join BERSIH 2.

7.0 We are angry at Prime Minister Najib for his hyprocrisy in saying one thing and flipping it the very next moment. We are angry at him for having an audience with the Pope to improve bilateral ties and immediately on returning back to Malaysia, he publicly questioned the Malaysian Christians by saying “We wish to tell our friends, the Malaysian Christians… if they respect us, we will also respect them.”

8.0 We are angry that Royal Commissions after Royal Commissions have been set up and recommendations have been made to improve our institutions but no significant changes have been made. We have not forgotten the Royal Commissions to investigate the Lingam video, police brutality on Anwar Ibrahim while in police custody and Teoh Beng Hock’s death while in MACC custody.

9.0 We are very angry that there are too many deaths in custody of several authorities and nobody is held accountable and responsible for the deaths. We are angry that 1535 detainees have died in police custody between 2003-2007, 1300 illegal foreigners have died in immigration detention camps between 2002-2008 and 2 deaths in MACC custody most recently. We are angry that one death is one too many and wonder how many hundreds more went unreported and unnoticed.

10.0 We are angry that the draconian Internal Security Act (ISA) and the EO continue to be used and abused by the authorities. We are angry that there are still 25 persons detained without trial under ISA and 819 persons detained under the EO.

Wong Choon Wai asked “Can we stop being angry people and try to make sense of the issues affecting the nation?” But the real gem of his article was when he asked “Or better still, just laugh at them (the issues)?” I wonder if Wong has found it in his heart to laugh at Auntie Anne Ooi (Auntie BERSIH) or the PSM 6 who are facing the uncertainty of being put in solitary confinement indefinitely without trial. Or laugh at the Teoh Beng Hock and Sarbani issues? Datuk Wong, I wonder if you are laughing.

Queen Elizabeth arrested ?

10 arrested for 'greeting' PM in yellow at KL Sentral

from Malaysians Must Know the TRUTH by Malaysians Must Know the TRUTH

Ten people, including an aide to Ampang MP and a PKR youth leader, were arrested at the KL Sentral this afternoon for wearing yellow and wanting to handover a memorandum on the Bersih 2.0 demands to Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak.

Mohd Fareez Kamal Intidzam, the aide to Zuraida Kamaruddin, was arrested by a group of policemen before Najib's arrival.

"Ironically, one of us was wearing a Malaysian jersey and I myself was wearing the 'Patriot' colour of red and we were arrested," Fareez told Malaysiakini.

The 10 have been taken to the Travers police station.

Besides Fareez, PKR Youth deputy information chief Rozan Azem Mat Rasip was also among those arrested.

Najib and several cabinet ministers were on the Express Rail Link, heading from Putrajaya to KL Sentral to distribute the Jalur Gemilang in a run-up to the national day celebrations on Aug 31.

[More to follow]

EC got no power whatsoever ...

EC no. 2 grilled in public over 'powerless' claim

from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News by Combat

(Harakah Daily) - "We are powerless" and "we don't make decisions" summarise the explanation by Election Commission deputy chairman Wan Ahmad Wan Omar yesterday's packed public dialogue organised by Malay daily Sinar Harian at the Shah Alam headquarters of its publisher Karangkraf.

Titled "What next after July 9", the forum, moderated by NGO activist Wan Saiful Wan Jan, also featured Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia's Shamsul Amri Baharuddin.

Giving his reasons on why the EC could not fulfill Bersih's eight demands for electoral reforms, Wan Ahmad was at pains to emphasise that the Commission was not a law-making body and as such was powerless to amend laws. Several times during his explanation, the audience jeered at him, prompting the organising committee members to appeal for calm.

Wan Ahmad described the EC as an "election management" body.

“The most we can do is to propose the law to the AG (Attorney General) Chambers. The law drafted by AG Chambers will go to Parliament for debate.

"The government in power, anyone who rules the country, will have the advantage to determine the policy of the government,” he told in response to questions on EC's reluctance to positively respond to Bersih.

Passing the buck to the Attorney General, Wan Ahmad, who many times referred to the audience as "Pakatan Rakyat" much to the chagrin of the moderator, said any party that wished to push for electoral reforms must approach the "right person".

"So you please understand the process of law making in the country,” he added.

Asked by Wan Saiful whether the problem was with Barisan Nasional as the federal government, Wan Ahmad only attracted more jeers from the crowd when he said it was the government's right as it had been voted by the people.

“If you all become the government also, you all will do the same thing,” he remarked, before quickly adding that EC should not viewed as enemy.

Pressured by the crowd's response, Wan Ahmad than went on the offensive:

“You do not understand that the EC operates under many other laws like the Police Act, the Sedition Act. Don’t push the blame on us... maybe those present are not ready for a discussion like this."

'EC should not act like BN'

Ambiga meanwhile refuted claims that Bersih 2.0 was an opposition outfit, and said that it had earlier invited all political parties to play a role in the movement.

“Had the government (parties) come aboard, there would be a wonderful discussion between all parties, but they chose not to. That’s their decision. The opposition chose to come abroad and support us and I am grateful for their support.

"Not just opposition, other NGOs, ordinary Malaysians... If you look at the profiles of the people who were out there (in July 9 rally), the ordinary Malaysians have been the supporters of Bersih.

"Why is everyone treating the opposition like they are not rakyat Malaysia? I don’t understand. They are also rakyat Malaysia,” she stressed.

"So, who is staying out and who’s in? That’s my question," asked Ambiga.

Ambiga also chided Wan Ahmad for accusing Bersih of treating the EC as an enemy.

“Datuk Wan, you said we are treating EC as the enemy. I think you are treating us as the enemy,” she replied to applause from the crowd.

Ambiga added that EC should be above partisan politics and not behave like it was Barisan Nasional.

“I think that’s where the problem is,” she quipped.

"No power"

On the claim that EC was powerless to push for electoral reforms, she cited clauses from the Federal Constitution which stated that EC was a powerful body.

Ambiga said that Article 115 (2) spelt out that public authorities must cooperate and assist with the EC in discharging its duties.

MACC a house of criminals, says Kit Siang

from Lim Kit Siang by Kit

By Joseph Sipalan and Lee Way Loon | Jul 27, 11
Malaysiakini

INTERVIEW Responsibility for the death of political aide Teoh Beng Hock lies squarely on the shoulders of the BN, which created a monster in the form of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), senior DAP leader Lim Kit Siang says.

Lim said the recently released report of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Teoh’s death details a “horror” story that clearly outlines the gross abuses of the power MACC wields.

“… we let Parliament pass it (the MACC Act of 2009), gave it increased powers and funding, all sorts of support (were) given. What has happened? It became a monster,” he told Malaysiakini in an exclusive interview.

Lim, who marks 45 years in active politics this year, accused the BN of using the MACC, particularly the Selangor MACC, to further its political agenda in wresting the state back from Pakatan Rakyat rule.

He said the RCI finding – the first document he has personally read since undergoing an operation on his left eye last April – pointed to “utter contempt of the law” by MACC officers and gross abuse of power in carrying out an operation against Pakatan elected representatives that had no basis.

However, Lim’s biggest target was the then Selangor MACC deputy director Hishamuddin Hashim, who he accused of serving the will of the BN through the many officers he roped in to carry out the investigation and raids on Teoh’s boss, Seri Kembangan state assemblyperson Ean Yong Hian Wah.

Lim went on to accuse Hishamuddin, who was promoted to Negeri Sembilan MACC chief after he was taken off Teoh’s case, of leading a “massive operation”, with MACC officers who “broke law after law, not only the SOP (standard operating procedures) but all the laws”.

He added: “It is very clear. Hishamuddin (below, left) was the deputy director, but he acted as if he was more powerful than the director, even without referring to the headquarters.

“It cannot be only (an) anti-corruption operation. Definitely this was part of a political agenda, to topple Pakatan in Selangor (by) going for a DAP, Pakatan assemblyperson, and that must be (the) background to it.

“Otherwise, how can a person, a deputy director, have such great powers, acting and believing he can act with utter immunity and impunity? And he is not someone who is a newbie. He’s got 19 years in the MACC, and suddenly, he acted so arrogantly.

“I’m sure (this is) because he was serving a political agenda, and that can only mean the BN agenda to topple (Pakatan).”

‘Shut down the MACC’

Lim brushed aside claims that the DAP has been milking Teoh’s death in custody for political mileage, stressing that the issue at hand was holding the MACC to account, particularly since it was formed to replace the discredited Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA).

As an immediate measure, he said, the MACC should suspend Hishamuddin, investigating officer Mohd Anuar Ismail and assistant superintendent Mohd Ashraf Mohd Yunus – the three officers said to have used “aggressive” and “inappropriate” interrogation tactics on Teoh – besides charging them with breaking several laws in the course of their investigations.

Lim added that the trio, and most of the other MACC officers called to the witness stand during the Teoh RCI, should also be charged with perjury, since the Royal Commission had found that many of them – save for two officers – had lied in their testimonies.

“It’s not suicide, we don’t accept that… twice the phrase was used, ‘MACC officers who were responsible for the death of Teoh Beng Hock’. So it’s very clear, even the (RCI) commissioners are unanimous (in) that the MACC officers are responsible for the death of Teoh Beng Hock.”

Lim stressed that it was unacceptable for the MACC, which was formed with the aim of restoring public confidence in its ability to operate independently, professionally and efficiently in combating graft, had ended up doing the complete opposite.

Taking the example of the hostile takeover of the Perak state government in 2009, when the MACC investigated the then speaker V Sivakumar for alleged abuse of power, Lim said the three officers involved should likewise be investigated on the same grounds as in Teoh’s case.

“The MACC, particularly the Selangor (MACC), has (become a) house of criminals who break laws left, right and centre. (It’s) completely lawless.

“This is so ridiculous. If somebody lists down the crimes committed in the whole Teoh Beng Hock episode, I think you will have a very long list.

“I think we should seriously consider closing down the MACC and having another anti-corruption body, if that is possible. If that is not possible, then the only way is for a change in Putrajaya; maybe that (Teoh’s case) is the last straw… it is not a question of politics, but a question of survival,” Lim said.

Duric: Malaysia are scared of Singapore

from MalaysianDigest.com - Malaysian News and Current Affairs

Ahead of their 2014 World Cup second-round qualifier at the Bukit Jalil Stadium, Aleksandar Duric was confident of beating Malaysia.

The Lions enjoyed a 5-3 victory over their arch-rivals, with Duric chipping in with a brace, and according to reports in the Straits Times, the naturalised Singaporean striker was confident that his side would come through victorious, saying: "Malaysia are under huge pressure. They're running scared of us.

"We've the two-goal advantage, but they're making it seem like the heat is all on us for the second leg", he added.

However, he was aware that it would not be an easy fight in the Bukit Jalil, especially with the return of Malaysia's first-choice centreback, Aidil Zafuan Abd Radzak, who missed the first leg as a result of an injured ankle.

Speaking to the New Straits Times after training in Bangi on Monday, Duric revealed: "I have faced him on several occasions before."

"He is a tough defender to play against. If he plays, I will have a harder time.

"Aidil's return is a huge boost to Malaysia as he is an experienced player.

"Both of us will have different missions on Thursday (tomorrow). As for me, my job is to score goals while his will be to stop me. I am looking forward to this challenge."

The 41-year-old striker believes that his experience will make the difference.

"I've scored against some of the best defenders over a span of 12 years in this region and none of them managed to stop me from getting my name onto the score-sheet.

"Aidil is a good player but he will need to be at his best to stop me," Duric crowed.

The Tampines Rovers striker did warn his team-mates that they would need to stay focused in the hot cauldron that the Bukit Jalil Stadium could become.

"Our young players must stay focused throughout the match. Fans can be quite intimidating at times. As for me, I am used to it."

He also gave an insight towards what kept him going in football for so long.

"I eat the right food and also train hard. I do not stay up late. My love for football keeps me going", Duric revealed.

While Duric was confident of Singapore's chances, Malaysian coach K.Rajagobal was equally ebullient of Malaysia's ability to overturn the deficit, despite the Lion's "foreign legion" of Duric, Qiu Li, Shi Jiayi, Daniel Bennet, and Fahrudin Mustafic."They are Singapore's lifeline. We will pay some attention to them but we will not go overboard," said Rajagobal at Wisma FAM.

"Our priority is to score goals and defend well. I will not resort to man-to-man marking as the system will not work for a team who need to win the match."

Rajagobal believes his players are ready for the challenge.

"My young players made mistakes on the artificial turf in Singapore and lost the match... but this is not an excuse. We played badly in the first half but did better after the breather," he added.

"I have gone through the video with the players to see what went wrong. A few players who did not play well, were also advised to buck up. Overall, everyone is eager."

The former Malaysian international raised the stakes by calling on his compatriots to show up at the Bukit Jalil to support their team.

"I want Malaysians to come in large numbers and play their part in this crucial tie as we play better in front of our fans."

He also revealed Malaysia's long-term plans beyond the qualifier.

"My target is to help Malaysia qualify for the Asian Cup. My main objective is to prepare a formidable team for this challenge.

"We need to do our best in the World Cup qualifiers as a good performance will help in the players' development. It is also important that we at least beat Singapore."

Anwar: Flip-flop reasoning justifies release of PSM 6...

Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim today said that the inconsistent reasoning given for the detention of six PSM members under the Emergency Ordinance, is reason enough for their release.

In a statement on his blog today, Anwar said that the fact that the reason for detention was changed from "involvement with subversive activity" to "planning the Bersih 2.0 rally" shows that the arrests have no basis. "It is apparent that this is solely the government's trick to malign Bersih 2.0," he said.

The six - Sungai Siput MP Dr D Jeyakumar, M Sarasvathy, Choo Chon Kai, M Sugumaran, A Letchumanan and R Saras Babu-have been detained under the Emergency Ordinance since July 2.

They were nabbed during a PSM roadshow to campaign against what they see as BN's bad governance.

Waging war

The police had initially said that they were arrested for planning to wage war against the King, but in a recent habeas corpus application said it was because they were key movers of the Bersih 2.0 rally.

The habeaus corpus hearing was, however, adjourned to Aug 5, five days after the 30-day detention order expires; but the order can be renewed for another 30 days by the police.

Demanding the immediate release of the six, who he believes are victims of "political manipulation", Anwar said the matter has gained urgency as there is now suspicion of abuse.

He said this is especially since the detainees were denied a meeting with representatives of the National Human Rights Commiss! ion (Suh akam).

Families of the six have also been denied access since July 15 and have been finally given allowance to meet today at 11am after several requests.

The families are currently meeting the detainees at the Dang Wangi, Selayang, Travers, Jinjang, Kepong and Petaling police stations respectively.

"Pakatan Rakyat has resolved to heighten our campaign to explain to the public nationwide the oppressive nature of detention without trial... under the Emergency Ordinance.

"This archaic and oppressive law no longer serves to protect the country but is manipulated to muzzle dissenting voices," Anwar said.

source:malaysiakini

Anwar minta KDN bebas segera enam tahanan Ordinan Darurat

cheers.

Manusia Mana Membiarkan Tangan Mereka Dicalit Sebelum Mengundi Dengan Rela?

Dalam perdebatan SPR-BERSIH semalam, wakil SPR, Wan Ahmad menyatakan dakwat kekal tidak dilaksanakan sebelum 2008 kerana mereka mendapat laporan bahawa dakwat yang sama telah diseludup masuk ke Malaysia.

Khabarnya dakwat tersebut akan digunakan untuk mencalit tangan pengundi-pengundi sebelum pengundi dapat mengundi.

Soalan saya kepada wakil SPR tersebut adalah:

1.0 Siapakah manusia di dalam Malaysia yang akan sengaja membiarkan tangan mereka dicalit dengan sebegitu mudah?
2.0 Berapa ramai kah pengundi-pengundi yang dengan rela membiarkan tangan mereka dicalit sebelum hari mengundi?
3.0 Kalau berlaku pemaksaan, tidakkah boleh orang yang dipaksa itu membuat laporan polis sebelum hari pengundian?
4.0 Adakah pencalit-pencalit ini akan masuk ke dalam semua rumah-rumah di Malaysia di waktu orang sedang tidur dan mencalit tangan2 pengundi sebelum mereka bangun dari tidur?
5.0 Kalau sudah dapat maklumat berkaitan penyeludupan, mengapa tiada yang ditangkap? Apa guna maklumat kalau tidak tangkapan?
6.0 Mungkin juga dakwat-dakwat itu diseludup untuk kegunaan percetakan kecil-kecilan dan bukannya untuk pilihanraya? Apa bukti ia diseludup untuk sabotaj proses pilihanraya?

Ertinya, SPR dengan mudah membatalkan dakwat kekal sebelum pilihanraya 2008 TANPA ADA ASAS YANG KUKUH. Hanya khabar-khabar angin semata-mata.

Buktinya lagi, tiada seorang pun yang ditahan untuk siasatan berkaitan dengan penyuludupan dakwat kekal tersebut. Kalau maklumat penyeludupan itu benar, nescaya telah berlaku tangkapan dan tahanan atau sekur! ang-kura ngnya beberapa orang telah disoal siasat.

Kalau tiada yang ditangkap atau disiasat, ertinya SPR bertindak atas khabar-khabar angin semata-mata. Saya cabar SPR membawa keluar bukti bahwa telah berlaku penyeludupan dakwat kekal sebelum pilihanraya 2008 lepas.

Dan yang lebih menyedihkan, RM2.4 juta wang rakyat Malaysia telah hangus akibat SPR bertindak atas khabar2 angin semata-mata. RM2.4 juta boleh membeli 40 buah rumah kos sederhana untuk 40 keluarga miskin.

Janganlah Timbalan Pengerusi SPR cuba berselindung dengan alasan-alasan dangkal kamu. Susah bagi rakyat Malaysia untuk mempercayai SPR bukan alat kepada UMNO dan Barisan Nasional.

Tulang Besi

Umno cant risk sacking Ku Li

Why is Umno quiet about Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah and his Amanah? The answer is that they simply cant do anything about it.

Even among Umno members there is increasing disquiet about how things are managed.

Saifuddin Abdullahs recent out-of-line statements and Khairy Jamaluddins conscientious objections are only tips of the icebergs.

Tengku Razaleigh is merely pointing out the realities. He is still an Umno member so what can Umno do at the moment?

Umno cant sack a person of his stature without precipitating its own implosion. So go ahead- sack him and it will make the days of many.

Tengku Razaleigh is of course mindful of the possible repercussions of his actions. He may not be fielded as an Umno candidate in the next elections. He may lose the support of Gua Musang Umno.

Current Umno leaders inconsequential

The last time I spoke to him, he was telling me of these reservations. I pointed out to him that his victory doesnt just depend on Umno votes.

It depends on the rakyat. Given the history of seeing only 60 % of Umno members voting for their own candidates and 60 % of Malays voting for non Umno candidates in the last general election, I would rate his chances as being above average.

The opinion of the present Umno leadership is quite simply inconsequential. So that is why Umno is quiet about the whole thing.

At the moment this is what Amanah provides. Amanah provides platform for speaking out against the abuses on the Merdeka heritage.

The assault on fair and free elections. Because the means by which we achieve our end, to get a clean and fair government, is also the end itself.

The clean and fair government which is the end, must be justified by clean and fair means.

We want to speak out! against the endemic corruption that has engulfed this country.

We want to speak out against the assault on the judiciary which has caused public distrust and the haplessness, the divisiveness of the people because of opportunistic racism and all that.

Clarion call

The Amanah platform now serves primarily as a clarion call for people to set aside their partisan politics and see what the country has become into.

The beneficiaries of an independent country are now witnessing the blatant abuse of what has been bequeathed to them by our founding fathers.

While it serves as a clarion call or sounding board, the cudgels will be picked up by others hopefully.

True, Tengku Razaleigh hasnt got the organizational structures at the moment, but only because its only just launched and its not a political organization.

But more important, I think, by launching Amanah, Tengku Razeleigh is signaling his readiness and willingness to offer leadership.

The writer is a former Umno state assemblyman and an FMT columnist. This is an excerpt is from his sakmongkolak47 blog

Need a place to go yellow this weekend? Head out to SABMs Inaugural Rakyat Voices Series

Come and share your views on what we, the citizenry, can do and should do, and what you as an individual want and will do to take us beyond the euphoria of Bersih 2.0, 9th July, 2011.

Share your thoughts. Share your hearts. And win friends to walk with you on this new path we are treading.

Want to know more about this happening event?

Click on the image.

Artikel Tulang Besi di Malaysiakini

NOTA EDITOR: Selamat membaca

Persaingan Melayu untungkan rakyat

Abdul Rahman Talib
Jul 26, 11
11:25am

Kongsi 84

Sejurus selepas pilihan raya 2008, agenda perpaduan Melayu tiba-tiba muncul dari mulut ahli-ahli politik dan NGO Melayu seluruh Malaysia.

Kalimah perpaduan Melayu menjadi siulan banyak ahli-ahli politik, terutamanya dari parti yang memerintah.

Malahan, Jun tahun lalu, Ketua Penerangan Umno Datuk Ahmad Maslan (kiri) dilaporkan berkata:

"Usaha-usaha pertemuan dan perbincangan bersama antara Umno dan PAS harus diteruskan. Pandangan-pandangan manusia boleh berubah, apabila kita 'cop' seseorang itu, tidak selamanya dia begitu. Mungkin Mat Sabu baik, itu saya tak tahulah," ujarnya mengulas kemenangan Timbalan Presiden PAS Mohamad Sabu.

Ahmad diminta mengulas kemungkinan pintu rundingan kedua-dua parti itu yang gagal sejak zaman Nasharuddin Mat Isa menjadi timbalan presiden PAS.

Persoalan yang timbul sekarang, benarkah Melayu berpecah? Sepanjang wujudnya Malaysia dan Perlembagaan Persekutuan, PAS dan Umno sering berada di pihak yang berbeza.

Dari pilihan raya pertama lag! i, PAS s udah bertanding melawan Umno. Ada calon Umno yang dikalahkan PAS. Malah, nama besar seperti bekas perdana menteri Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad dan bekas speaker Dewan Rakyat Tun Zahir Ismail juga pernah menerima nasib itu.

Pendek kata, di mana Umno meletakkan calon, di situ ada calon PAS yang melawan. Jarang kita dengar Umno melawan calon parti lain. PAS lawan tradisi Umno. Justeru, yang menang sama ada PAS atau Umno.

PAS-Umno sentiasa berlawan

Dengan kata lain, selama mana wujud demokrasi di Malaysia, PAS akan berlawan dengan Umno. Hanya selepas 2008 sahaja isu perpaduan Melayu bermain di bibir politikus, terutamanya dari parti pemerintah.

Bagi saya, perpecahan bukanlah perkataan yang tepat bagi menerangkan fenomena PAS dan Umno dalam konteks pilihan raya Malaysia. Bagi saya, perbezaan PAS dengan Umno adalah satu persaingan, bukannya pepercahan.

Justeru, tidak wujud perpecahan Melayu. Oleh itu, perpaduan Melayu juga tidak perlu dibangkitkan.

Mari kita ambil misal sebuah pejabat. Antara semua pekerja dalam pejabat itu, terdapat seorang pekerja yang malas, tidak produktif dan sering datang lambat.

Adakah kita patut mengekalkannya sebagai pekerja ataupun memecat pekerja tersebut? Sudah tentu dia patut dipecat.

Soalan saya lagi: Sekiranya pekerja itu seorang berbangsa Melayu, patutkah beliau dipecat? Adakah kita memecat Melayu itu bermakna kita menentang perpaduan Melayu?

Hujah saya, perpaduan tidak harus menjadi alasan untuk membiarkan kebobrokan berterusan.

Alasan perpaduan tidak harus dijadikan alasan untuk mengekalkan orang yang korup, pemakan rasuah, penyalahguna kuasa, pemeras, pembohong dan mereka yang mempermainkan agama.

Perpaduan seharusnya tidak menjadi penghalang kepada proses pembersihan kepimpinan ! bangsa M elayu dari mereka yang korup dan rasuah. Jikalau tidak, perpaduan tersebut bukanlah perpaduan tetapi satu bentuk penipuan.

Setelah lebih 50 tahun berlawan, saya tidak nampak mana-mana bangsa Melayu rugi. Malahan, saya melihat bangsa Melayu mendapat mendapat keuntungan yang banyak dari persaingan antara PAS dan Umno ini.

Susah saya hendak melihat kerugian kepada bangsa Melayu yang terhasil akibat dari persaingan ini.

Perpaduan untuk kalahkan DAP

Kalau kita perhatikan retorik yang dilayangkan selepas 2008, tidak nampak sebab yang jelas mengapa PAS dan Umno mesti bersatu. Adakah penyatuan PAS dan Umno akan menjamin pentadbiran negara yang bersih dari rasuah?

Adakah penyatuan itu akan menaikkan taraf ekonomi Melayu? Adakah penyatuan ini akan menaikkan pegangan ekuiti Melayu? Adakah penyatuan akan menaikkan bilangan perniagaan yang dipunyai Melayu? Dan banyak lagi soalan-soalan praktikal seperti ini tidak dijawab dan tidak dihuraikan oleh promoter agenda ini, selepas 2008.

Atas sebab itulah panggilan perpaduan Melayu ini hanya retorik kosong semata-mata. Ia tiada isi dan tiada asas yang kukuh.

Mungkin Ahmad mempunyai asas yang jauh lebih kukuh apabila beliau berkata penolakan agenda perpaduan adalah memenangkan DAP dan Karpal Singh (kiri). Ertinya, Ahmad mahukan perpaduan PAS-Umno untuk mengalahkan DAP dan Karpal.

Seluruh bangsa Melayu di Malaysia tidak jelas siapa sebenarnya yang akan untung dari perpaduan PAS dgn Umno? Adakah bangsa Melayu itu sendiri yang beruntung ataupun hanya beberapa kerat kepimpinan dari kedua-dua parti yang mendapat laba? Persoalan ini tidak jelas dan tidak pernah dijawab.

Sekiranya Umno menyimpang dan tidak mampu menjalankan tugas memimpin orang Melayu, maka PAS boleh menggantikannya. Begitu juga sebaliknya.

Mengapa orang Melayu perlu! terus m engekalkan kepimpinan atau parti yang sama walaupun parti tersebut telah rosak dan bobrok.

Kelebihan persaingan

Kalau kedua-dua PAS menjadi rosak, sesiapa juga boleh menubuhkan parti baru dan menggantikan kedua-dua parti tersebut.

Yang utama adalah kepimpinan orang Melayu itu mestilah adil, berilmu, berkemampuan, berkelayakan, bersih, bijaksana, beragama dan amanah.

Hari ini kita mula melihat kelebihan persaingan antara parti-parti Melayu.

Jumaat lepas, Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Razak membuat kenyataan berikut:

"Mereka (Pakatan) beri RM100 riuh sekampung. Kita sudah beri berbilion ringgit pada rakyat. Cuma pihak sebelah sana pukul gendang lebih kuat saja," katanya.

Najib merujuk kepada program kerajaan negeri Selangor dan Pulau Pinang yang memberi wang kepada warga emas dan mereka yang miskin.

Ia menunjukkan persaingan sedang wujud antara kedua-dua parti utama di Malaysia. Yang untung dari persaingan ini adalah rakyat Malaysia.

Atas dasar inilah, saya berpendapat perpaduan Melayu hanya merugikan orang Melayu itu sendiri. Yang untung hanyalah beberapa kerat pemimpin parti-parti politik sahaja.

Abdul Rahman Talib merupakan pengelola blog politik terkenal Malaysia Waves. Beliau belatarbelakangkan bidang kejuruteraan, tetapi meminati politik semenjak di bangku sekolah. Beliau percaya, menilai politik dari sudut empirikal lebih utama dari ideologi semata-mata. Abdul Rahman boleh dihubungi di cabearth3@yahoo.com.

Artikel ini merupakan pandangan peribadi penulis dan tidak semestinya menggambarkan pendirian rasmi Malaysiakini.