We met early April at La Bordega in Bangsar. Bull suggested I should instead sign a Statutory Declaration, as that would be stronger. They can ignore my article but they can’t ignore a Statutory Declaration.
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
From the 12th to the 22nd September 2008, I was detained at the Police Remand Centre (PRC) where most ISA detainees spend their first 60 days of detention. Suddenly, on the morning of the 22nd, I was told that my interrogation, which was held from the 17th to the 21st, is going to end and that they have to finalise their report that same day.
That was the first surprise.
I was supposed to sign my statement the following day -- on the 23rd. Instead, I was packed off to Kamunting the morning of the 23rd without being allowed to sign the statement cum confession.
That was the second surprise.
What was it that the higher-ups were so scared about that they wanted to keep my confession cum statement from those who were supposed to review it and decide whether I can be released or should be sent to Kamunting for further detention? I really don’t know because they never told me.
Anyway, here is part of my interrogation by the Special Branch -- what they asked and what I replied.
The last time you were detained for 54 days, is that correct?
Yes, it was from 11 April to 6 June 2001. I think it was about 54 days.
You were not sent to Kamunting right?
That’s correct.
That’s because you cooperated. So if this time you also cooperate then there is a good chance you will also not be sent to Kamunting. You might be allowed to go home like the last time.
(I just nod)
We find your Statutory Declaration very hard to believe.
Why do you say that?
Well, we don’t think what you said about Rosmah being at the murder scene is correct.
How do you know?
It is highly unlikely. Rosmah is very rich. She has plenty of money. Why would she want to take the risk of going there personally? She can pay someone to do the job. No need for her to go there herself.
Well, that’s what I was told, that she went there personally.
We don’t think so. It doesn’t make sense for her to go there herself.
Okay, if you say so, but I know what I was told.
Who told you?
Lt Kol Azmi Zainal Abidin. He is the number two in the Special Branch of the Military Intelligence.
Yes, we know who he is.
So, that means you can ask him yourself then since you know him.
But how do you know he was telling you the truth? He could be setting you up.
I admit I don't know Lt Kol Azmi that well. But he is always in Ku Li’s office. He is very close to Ku Li. And Anwar Ibrahim also knows him very well.
So you are not really that close to Lt Kol Azmi. That means you don’t know whether you can trust him. We feel he is setting you up as the fall guy.
Maybe if I had to just trust him then I wouldn't dare take that risk. I mean; I don’t know him well enough to trust him all the way. But the person who introduced us is a very old friend. I’ve known him for about 45 years, longer than I’ve known my wife. And I trust my friend. My friend gave me his personal assurance that the story is legit.
Who is that friend?
Nik Azmi Nik Daud. We call him Bull. He works for Ku Li. I also asked Din Merican to check with Anwar whether I can trust Lt Kol Azmi with my life. Those were the exact words I used.
What did Anwar say?
Anwar replied you should never trust anyone with your life. However, Lt Kol Azmi’s information is very reliable. I also asked John Pang, who also works for Ku Li, to check with Ku Li whether Lt Kol Azmi’s information is reliable. I told John what Lt Kol Azmi told us and asked him to inform Ku Li about it. John confirmed that Lt Kol Azmi told Ku Li the same thing and that the information is reliable.
So that is why you signed the Statutory Declaration?
No. Actually, initially, I wanted to just write an article, like usual. But Bull asked to meet first before I write anything. So we met early April at La Bordega in Bangsar. Bull suggested I should instead sign a Statutory Declaration, as that would be stronger. They can ignore my article but they can’t ignore a Statutory Declaration.
Then you signed it?
No. I still did not sign it yet. I was worried about the repercussions. We would be forcing the government to act and they might come down hard on me. As Bull said, they can ignore my article but they can’t ignore a Statutory Declaration. Bull called for a second meeting on the Sunday before I signed the Statutory Declaration. We met at the Selangor Club Dataran Merdeka for lunch.
And then?
I told Bull I was a bit worried about signing a Statutory Declaration because the government will surely arrest and charge me if I do. I felt an article would be safer. But Bull disagreed. He felt an article was not strong enough. Bull said if anything happens to me they would go to court to testify that what I had signed is the truth. Bull assured me they would not allow me to rot in jail. So, on the 18th June, I signed the Statutory Declaration.
Are you sure they will come forward to testify in your trial?
That’s what Bull told me and I trust him. As I said, I’ve known him for 45 years.
Okay, let’s see whether they do or not. But we think they will not. They will not come forward to testify at our trial.
Maybe. Maybe what you say is true. I don’t know. Let’s see. After all I have already been charged and my trial will soon start. Let’s see whether they keep their word and testify at my trial. But I am confident they will because they have given me their assurance.
We believe you have been set up as the fall guy. Maybe they want to get rid of you.
I don’t think so. Anyway, we will know soon enough once my trial starts. It is going to be a most interesting trial indeed once the truth surfaces. Don’t you think so?
Didn’t Najib’s people approach you to make a deal?
You mean to buy my silence? Yes, they did.
Who?
Datuk Jamaluddin Jarjis.
JJ?
Yes.
When?
It was not long after I was charged for sedition, before I signed the Statutory Declaration. JJ phoned and said he wanted to meet. I knew he was working for Najib so I agreed. We met at the car park outside Kelab Taman Perdana. My wife drove me there and waited at a distance. She was worried that it may be a trap and she wanted to be cautious in case they were setting me up, or something like that.
JJ arrived about 6pm and asked me to get into his car. He was alone. I waved to my wife and signalled her to go home and she wrote down JJ’s car number plate in case I disappeared or whatever.
We drove to a roadside stall in Jalan Ipoh and sat there and talked. JJ told me that Najib had asked him to meet me to make a deal. I asked him whether Najib really knows we are meeting and whether he had endorsed or sanctioned the meeting and JJ replied that our meeting was on Najib’s instructions.
We spent about an hour talking. The bottom line is he wanted me to stop writing about Najib and Altantuya. He also asked me whether I could delay my sedition trial until Najib becomes the Prime Minister. Once Najib is installed as Prime Minister they will drop the charges against me. I will also receive a monthly allowance of RM30,000 for my cooperation. He didn’t say for how long though.
I asked him how to delay the trial and he replied I can always get a medical certificate to confirm I am not fit enough to attend trial. I told him if I delayed the trial then the legal costs would increase and he offered to pay all the legal fees. He asked me to get my lawyers to issue an invoice and he would pay the cost, whatever it may be.
I told my lawyers about this incident so that at least some other people know about it.
So, what happened to the deal?
Soon after that I signed my Statutory Declaration. That was my way of saying no deal. After that they arrested me and charged me for criminal defamation. I suppose that was their way of replying to my reply.
Wouldn’t it have been better for you to accept the deal? After all, Najib is soon going to be the Prime Minister.
Maybe. But it’s too late now isn’t it? I have already burned my bridges behind me.
The above is a small portion of my questions and answers session with the Special Branch over the five days of interrogation. This, plus a lot more, was compiled into a report, which I was supposed to sign on the morning of 23 September 2008 -- but which never materialised for some strange reason. I am probably the first ISA detainee in almost 50 years who made a statement (confession) but was never asked to sign it.
Monday, 4 May 2009
Friday, 17 April 2009
Letter to YB (We do not ask you to be grateful to us)
To YB, from your Boss
by Dr Hsu Dar Ren,
Published in Malaysia Insider
APRIL 15 –
Dear Yang Berhormat,
You do not know me although I know about you, since you are such a famous person.
I am just one of the millions of voters in this country we call our home. I am one of those who have voted regularly and, through this process of voting, selected our representatives to form the government.
You are one of the representatives elected by the people , even though the votes are secret and you would not know how each and every one of us voted.
You won because majority of the people in your area voted for you, and your party won the majority of the seats in Parliament, which is the place where all the representatives elected by people like me meet to think how to govern this country on our behalf.
Although you owe your position, your trappings of power and your wealth to our votes, you do not need to be grateful to us.
We do not ask you to be grateful to us. We just want you to do the job – the one that you wanted and asked for, and that we have given you – well.
Just like in a company, if a CEO and his team can do a good job and earn good dividends for shareholders, the shareholders will be happy and reward the team with another extension of tenure.
But, when the management team is not functioning well, and the company prospects are affected, the shareholders have the right to choose another team to replace the team.
The situation is the same here. We voted you and your team to power so that you can carry out projects and policies that benefit all of us.
It is our right, as your ultimate boss, to have schools built, and hospitals that are well manned, and roads well paved, and drains that flow.
It is our right to have protection against harm provided by the security forces which are funded by us.
It is our right to earn a decent living by having licences given to us by the very people that we put in place in the first instance.
It is our right to have a well-run civil service, since the civil servants are our employees, so to speak.
So, as the ultimate boss, we expect development; we expect progress. These development and progress must be continuous and should not be on an ad hoc basis.
Projects paid for with money taxed from us should not be used by your team as gifts to buy our votes or withheld as blackmail during elections, by or general.
As the ultimate boss, it is our right to throw out of office any representative who is not heeding the wishes of the people, who is not functioning well, and who is on the take. This is our right as citizens.
And please do not say we are not grateful if we did not vote you, since to function well is part of your job description, and you have to fulfil your job description in order for us to vote you in again, and not through using projects to exchange for our votes.
If you are too busy to remember all that I have written, just remember one thing.
The people – and I am one of them – are the real Boss. Your Boss.
Thank you for your precious time.
Hsu
(A boss)
___________________________________________________________________
Dr Hsu Dar Ren is a medical doctor and blogs on socio-economic issues; he believes that a fair and equitable society with good governance is the key to the future of this country.
by Dr Hsu Dar Ren,
Published in Malaysia Insider
APRIL 15 –
Dear Yang Berhormat,
You do not know me although I know about you, since you are such a famous person.
I am just one of the millions of voters in this country we call our home. I am one of those who have voted regularly and, through this process of voting, selected our representatives to form the government.
You are one of the representatives elected by the people , even though the votes are secret and you would not know how each and every one of us voted.
You won because majority of the people in your area voted for you, and your party won the majority of the seats in Parliament, which is the place where all the representatives elected by people like me meet to think how to govern this country on our behalf.
Although you owe your position, your trappings of power and your wealth to our votes, you do not need to be grateful to us.
We do not ask you to be grateful to us. We just want you to do the job – the one that you wanted and asked for, and that we have given you – well.
Just like in a company, if a CEO and his team can do a good job and earn good dividends for shareholders, the shareholders will be happy and reward the team with another extension of tenure.
But, when the management team is not functioning well, and the company prospects are affected, the shareholders have the right to choose another team to replace the team.
The situation is the same here. We voted you and your team to power so that you can carry out projects and policies that benefit all of us.
It is our right, as your ultimate boss, to have schools built, and hospitals that are well manned, and roads well paved, and drains that flow.
It is our right to have protection against harm provided by the security forces which are funded by us.
It is our right to earn a decent living by having licences given to us by the very people that we put in place in the first instance.
It is our right to have a well-run civil service, since the civil servants are our employees, so to speak.
So, as the ultimate boss, we expect development; we expect progress. These development and progress must be continuous and should not be on an ad hoc basis.
Projects paid for with money taxed from us should not be used by your team as gifts to buy our votes or withheld as blackmail during elections, by or general.
As the ultimate boss, it is our right to throw out of office any representative who is not heeding the wishes of the people, who is not functioning well, and who is on the take. This is our right as citizens.
And please do not say we are not grateful if we did not vote you, since to function well is part of your job description, and you have to fulfil your job description in order for us to vote you in again, and not through using projects to exchange for our votes.
If you are too busy to remember all that I have written, just remember one thing.
The people – and I am one of them – are the real Boss. Your Boss.
Thank you for your precious time.
Hsu
(A boss)
___________________________________________________________________
Dr Hsu Dar Ren is a medical doctor and blogs on socio-economic issues; he believes that a fair and equitable society with good governance is the key to the future of this country.
Thursday, 16 April 2009
Altantuya Murder : Sirul Azhar Statement
Murder of Altantuya : Sirul Azhar Statement
This statement appears in Asia Sentinel (20 Mar 2009). It is surprising that the police, the Attorney General and other government authorities remained silent on this matter after this police statement was revealed more than a week ago. Since there has been no official denial from the police that this is a faked document, we can only assume that it is genuine. It appears no one is reading the electronic newspapers and the blogs. Even the local newspapers are silent on such a stunning revelation.
All the UMNO politicians, including Mahathir, has been silent on the issue. Mahathir continues to make statements and comments as if he never read it. He continues to attack Badawi and his sil. If there is not a single courageous man of integrity in UMNO, then how can we expect them to run the country in a fair an objective manner? Najib, whose involvement in the issue, becomes more apparent, has not made a single statement on the report.It appears that everything is rotten from the top downwards and the entire administration is at fault. The kopi-tiam talks are all about this.
A few brave men like RPK write about it. How can people expect justice from them when there is a national cover-up. This issue is one of justice, human morality and ethics. It is an open confession of murder. It is in everyone's mind and is at the tip of his tongue. We have descended to the depths of human existence. We have become a hypocritical society and a failed nation.
Published and Extracted from Asia Sentinel Website
http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1779&Itemid=178
Written by Our Correspondent
Friday, 20 March 2009
Report No : 7380/06
Station : Travers
Name : Sirul Azhar bin Haji Umar
IC No : RF125591
Race : Malay
Date/Place of Birth : 29-1-1971
Age : 35 years male
Occupation : Police officer
Address of workplace : UTK, Bukit Aman
Name of father : Haji Omar bin Haji Hassan
Address of father : Deceased
Recording Officers : Insp Nom Phot a/l Prack Dit at Office D6, 3rd Floor, Bukit Aman on 9th November 2006 at 1307 afternoon.
Interpreter-from-to-
On 19th (sic) November 2006 I was asked by the investigating officer K/ASP Tony Anak Lunggan to record the statement of a Malay inmate named Sirul Azhar Bin Haji Omar Kp RF 125591. The inmate was then brought to me and I ordered the release of his handcuffs.
I then interviewed the inmate who appeared to be proficient in Malay. I also found the inmate in good health. I then read out the warning under Section 113(1)(a)(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code to the inmate as follows ;-
IT IS MY RESPONSIBILTIY TO WARN YOU THAT YOU ARE NOT OBLIGED TO SAY ANYTHING OR TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
BUT WHATEVER YOU SAY WHETHER IN ANSWER TO A QUESTION OR NOT SHALL BE GIVEN AS A STATEMENT.
S. Do you understand the warning that has been read and explained to you?
J. Yes I understand.
S. Do you have any questions about the warning?
J. No.
S. Do you want to give a statement?
J. Yes I want to give a statement.
S. What do you want to tell me?
J. As a member of the Special Action Unit (UTK) on an undetermined date 5 or 6 days before the incident on 19th October 2006 while I was in my office I received a telephone call from Tuan Azilah (Azilah) the officer above me requesting that I meet him in Central market. I could not meet him at the time because I was together with Tuan Khairy as his driver.
At that time, I was driving Tuan Khairy to deliver hampers in Selayanga and Batu Caves. On my way to there roughly after 12 noon I received another call from Azilah who asked me where I was and I told Azilah I may be late coming back as I was assisting an officer and I replied I would call him back after completing my duties.
At around 3.00pm, after dropping off the officer at the office in Bukit Aman, Azilah telephoned me again and told me to meet him in Central Market.
At about 3.15pm I met Azilah at Central Market. He instructed me to observe Malaya Hotel where the woman who was disturbing the businessman [sic] stayed. Azilah also informed me there were three women staying in a room on the 8th floor, the number of which I am unable to recollect.
After that I went together with Azilah in my car, a Satria bearing registration number WEA 4717 to look for Malaya Hotel. On the way there, Azilah talked about a reward of between RM50,000 and RM100,000 if the case was settled. Azilah and I however failed to locate the hotel after circling the area many times.
After failing to locate the hotel, Azilah and I returned to Central Market and while we were there, Azilah asked an artist at Central Market for directions to Malaya Hotel.
The artist, who was Malay, drew a plan of the location of Malaya Hotel .
After that Azilah and I walked towards Malaya Hotel. We reached Malaya Hotel at 4.00pm.
When we arrived at Malaya Hotel, Azilah invited me to go to the 8th floor of the hotel. After we reached the 8th floor Azilah showed me the room that was occupied by the woman who was disturbing Razak.
While on the 8th floor, Azilah asked me to "shoot to kill" all three women in the hotel room and asked that I stay in any one of the rooms on the 8th or 7th floor or any other floor with all lodging expenses borne by Azilah.
I informed Azilah that I would not be able to do it because of the presence of CCTV (closed circuit television cameras).
After that Azilah and I took the stairs to the 7th floor to find a suitable room to stay. After looking at the room, I found it to be unsuitable and Azilah and I returned to Central Market.
Upon arriving at Central Market, Azilah ordered me to use my car and drive to Razak's residence to observe the residence. At about 4.30pm Azilah and I were driving when Azilah pointed Razak's residence to me.
I then drove my car and reached a petrol station near the Puduraya area. Azilah filled the petrol tank with RM30 worth of petrol. After filling the petrol, Azilah and I drove back to Razak's residence in Damansara Heights.
After observing Razak's residence, Azilah and I returned to Central Market to enable Azilah to get his car.
After dropping Azilah at Central Market I went to the UTK office in Bukit Aman. After that I did not contact Azilah again.
On 19th October 2006 at about 8.30pm while I was at home in Kota Damansara, Azilah contacted me via his mobile phone and asked me to go to Razak's house immediately. Azilah also mentioned there was a Chinese woman who was causing a commotion in front of Razak's house.
I was ready at about 8.40pm and drove my jeep bearing registration number CAC 1883 towards Razak's house in Damansara Heights.
Upon arriving in Damansara Heights, I stopped my jeep a distance away from Razak's house. After parking my jeep, I walked towards the entrance of Razak's house.
When I arrived in front of Razak's house I saw Azilah together with a Malay woman in front of the house. There was a car and Azilah was outside the car and the Malay woman was inside the car.
I saw a Chinese woman talking to an Indian man whom I did not recognize and also a Chinese taxi driver who was seated inside the taxi and security guards inside Razak's house.
I then entered the car which was a red Proton Wira and sat in the passenger's seat. While I was seated in the car, I saw Azilah persuading the Chinese woman with the help of the Malay woman to sit in the same red Proton Wira Aeroback where I was seated.
The Chinese woman entered the car and sat behind me while the Malay woman also entered the car and sat behind Azilah who was in the driver's seat.
While Azilah, the Chinese woman, the Malay woman and I were seated in the car, the Chinese taxi driver came and asked for the taxi fare from the Chinese woman. Azilah gave him RM50 but the Chinese man demanded an additional RM150 because he said he had to make several trips. Azilah then gave the Chinese man RM100.
After that Azilah drove the Wira car towards my jeep. Upon reaching my jeep, I alighted from the car and drove my jeep out of Damansara Heights towards Kuala Lumpur. During the journey, Azilah called and said we would have to transfer the Chinese woman to my jeep and said that we should look for a spot.
When I arrived at Jalan Duta I stopped my jeep by the side of the road and got down from the jeep and I asked Azilah whether the spot was suitable to do the transfer. Azilah replied that it was not suitable and suggested Bukit Aman instead.
I then went ahead to Bukit Aman followed by Azilah closely behind and arrived at Bukit Aman at about 10.00pm.
Upon reaching Bukit Aman, I stopped my car at the back of the Bukit Aman officers' mess and Azilah together with the Malay woman brought the Chinese woman to my jeep. I noticed the woman was refusing to get in while being pushed into the back of my jeep.
After the Chinese woman got into my jeep, Azilah entered my jeep and sat in the passenger seat. I drove out of Bukit Aman followed by the red Proton Aeroback which was driven by the Malay woman.
I could no longer see the red Proton Aeroback driven by the Malay woman once we had passed the entrance to Bukit Aman.
Along the journey, Azilah asked me to find a place to "shoot to kill" the Chinese woman. Before arriving at Jalan Duta I noticed the back left tyre of my jeep was punctured. I drove through the Smart Tag lane at the toll booth and stopped on the left hand side of the road to change the tyre.
While I was changing the tyre, I noticed two Road Transport Department (JPJ) officers on duty but I continued to change the tyre with Azilah's help.
After changing the tyre, I drove to my house in Kota Damansara to take the explosives that I had kept there. After taking the explosives I got into the jeep and drove to Sungai Buloh and Kuala Selangor before arriving at the Punchak Alam forest reserve at about 11.00pm.
At the Punchak Alam forest reserve as I was bringing the jeep to a stop, I felt a pain in my stomach and got out of the jeep and relieved myself (defecated) not far away from the jeep. After I had relieved myself, I went back into the jeep and at the same time I saw Azilah outside the jeep carrying a bag containing an M5 weapon and silencer from the jeep that was located at the foot rest of the passenger seat and gave it to me ordering me to "shoot to kill" the Chinese woman who was inside the jeep.
After asking for the Chinese woman's articles, the Chinese woman surrendered her jewellery. She then asked to be allowed to urinate. Azilah brought her down from the jeep and I saw the Chinese woman urinating by the side of the jeep.
After urinating, she saw the weapon that I was holding. I saw that she was in a state of fear and she pleaded not to kill her and said she was expecting.
At the same time, Azilah wrestled the woman to the ground and I could see that she had fallen and was in an unconscious state. I opened fire towards the left side of the woman's head.
After the Chinese woman was shot, Azilah removed all her clothes and I took a black garbage bag and Azilah put all the Chinese woman's clothes into the bag.
After putting all her clothes into the bag, Azilah noticed movements in the Chinese woman's arm and ordered me to fire another shot but the gun did not fire. I then emptied the weapon and loaded the gun again and fired another shot at the same area which was the left side of the woman's head. I then took a black plastic garbage bag and with Azilah's help put the bag over the Chinese woman's head to prevent blood from spilling.
After that I lifted the hands of the victim while Azilah lifted the legs of the victim and we carried the victim into the woods. Azilah then carried the bag containing the explosives and handed it to me. I took the explosives and attached it to the victim's head while Azilah attached the explosives on the victim's legs up to the abdomen.
Azilah then pulled the long wire towards the jeep and I altered the position of the jeep so that it faced away from the woods and drove the jeep about 15 meters from the victim.
After the detonation of the explosives, I pulled the excess wire into the jeep and left the scene and headed towards Bukit Aman.
Azilah and I arrived at Bukit Aman at approximately 12 midnight. At the UTK office, Azilah handed me approximately RM430. After that I had a bath and changed clothes and put the clothes that I wore during the incident together with the victim's clothes into a plastic bag.
After that, I entered the jeep and drove the jeep to a rubbish container in the Bukit Aman area near a construction site. I threw some of the victim's belongings and the wire that was used to detonate the explosives together with the empty bag that contained the explosives into the container.
After throwing the things, I drove the jeep out of Bukit Aman and head towards my house in Kota Damansara. I threw the victim's clothes and my own clothes along the way to my house.
I arrived at home at about 1.00am and to lay down to rest and slept. After that I did not have any contact with Azilah until I was sent back from Pakistan and was arrested.
S. To whom did the MP5 weapon and silencer belong to?
J. The weapon belonged to the UTK Bukit Aman and was for my use.
S. What do you mean by the word "jimat"?
J. Jimat means "shoot to kill".
S. Are you telling the truth.
J. Yes it is the truth.
The statement was read back to Sirul Azhar Bin Haji Omar KPT/Paspot RF 125591.
S. Do you wish to make any amendments or additions to your statement after the statement has been read to you?
J. No
S. Are you giving this statement voluntarily?
J. Yes
The recording of the statement ended on 9th November 2006 at 1635 hrs.
Wednesday, 15 April 2009
Press statement by Elizabeth Wong (15 Apr 09)
Press statement from Elizabeth Wong
Written by Elizabeth Wong
Wednesday, 15 April 2009 16:51
Press Statement
15 April 2009
These past two months have been more than an ordeal, one which I would never have wished for any citizen to have to suffer through.
I have been stripped bare publicly – both figuratively and literally – by force and against my will. My personal life has been violated and assaulted by none other than criminals. Even up to this evening, I continue to receive threats from unknown persons.
This is not a scandal, as some have suggested, but a clear criminal act. This is no less a form of criminal intimidation, a form of political violence, and one which, if I chose to retreat into silence, would in turn indirectly affect women, especially women politicians.
Gutter politics is not and should not be part of our political culture, and for those who depend on exploiting and supporting such a crime, is an indication of the kind of politicians and persons they are.
I stand for a person’s right to privacy. I stand for ‘New Politics’ – a politics that encourages intellectual discourse, reasoned polemics and ideological debates, not one which resorts to gutter-level politicking which seek to smear, to slander and to violate one’s privacy to score political points.
This is the hardest decision that I have to make in my life and it is with the greatest humility that I accept the Selangor state’s offer to remain in office.
I wish to thank Menteri Besar and the Selangor Exco, my staff, my fellow ADUNs, fellow politicians from Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional, PKR leaders, the Women’s wing of PKR and the grassroots, and my legal team for their support and guidance.
Respectfully, I wish to thank HRH the Sultan of Selangor for his guidance.
I am humbled by the encouragement and support shown by the media, my family and friends, the NGOs, the tens of thousands of people who signed the petitions on my behalf and who wrote to me, and especially my constituents who stood by me in these trying times.
I also wish to thank the Police for their professionalism in addressing the issue at hand and I look forward to them apprehending and charging the criminals soonest.
My only wish is to serve my constituents and the state to the best of my abilities and with the help and cooperation of the people, to make this state, this country a better place for all. The struggle continues, and our work has just begun.
ELIZABETH WONG
ADUN BUKIT LANJAN
EXCO for Tourism, Consumer Affairs and the Environment
Wednesday, 15 April 2009 16:51
Press Statement
15 April 2009
These past two months have been more than an ordeal, one which I would never have wished for any citizen to have to suffer through.
I have been stripped bare publicly – both figuratively and literally – by force and against my will. My personal life has been violated and assaulted by none other than criminals. Even up to this evening, I continue to receive threats from unknown persons.
This is not a scandal, as some have suggested, but a clear criminal act. This is no less a form of criminal intimidation, a form of political violence, and one which, if I chose to retreat into silence, would in turn indirectly affect women, especially women politicians.
Gutter politics is not and should not be part of our political culture, and for those who depend on exploiting and supporting such a crime, is an indication of the kind of politicians and persons they are.
I stand for a person’s right to privacy. I stand for ‘New Politics’ – a politics that encourages intellectual discourse, reasoned polemics and ideological debates, not one which resorts to gutter-level politicking which seek to smear, to slander and to violate one’s privacy to score political points.
This is the hardest decision that I have to make in my life and it is with the greatest humility that I accept the Selangor state’s offer to remain in office.
I wish to thank Menteri Besar and the Selangor Exco, my staff, my fellow ADUNs, fellow politicians from Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional, PKR leaders, the Women’s wing of PKR and the grassroots, and my legal team for their support and guidance.
Respectfully, I wish to thank HRH the Sultan of Selangor for his guidance.
I am humbled by the encouragement and support shown by the media, my family and friends, the NGOs, the tens of thousands of people who signed the petitions on my behalf and who wrote to me, and especially my constituents who stood by me in these trying times.
I also wish to thank the Police for their professionalism in addressing the issue at hand and I look forward to them apprehending and charging the criminals soonest.
My only wish is to serve my constituents and the state to the best of my abilities and with the help and cooperation of the people, to make this state, this country a better place for all. The struggle continues, and our work has just begun.
ELIZABETH WONG
ADUN BUKIT LANJAN
EXCO for Tourism, Consumer Affairs and the Environment
Tuesday, 14 April 2009
Open Letter to PM and Cabinet
Open Letter to Prime Minister and Cabinet
YAB Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Cabinet Ministers, Putrajaya.
YAB/YB,
Firstly, let me start by congratulating Datuk Seri Najib Razak for his appointment as Prime Minister and all the Ministers of the first Najib Cabinet.
The Najib Cabinet saw the removal of seven Ministers in the old Abdullah Cabinet, namely Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar (Home); Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said (Tourism), Senator Tan Sri Muhammad Muhammad Taib (Rural and Regional Development), Senator Datuk Amirsham Abdul Aziz (Prime Minister’s Department), Datuk Ong Ka Chuan (Housing and Local Government), Datuk Mohd Zin Mohamed (Works) and Datuk Seri Zulhasnan Rafique (Federal Territories).
No one shed any tears for the dropping of the seven Ministers in the Abdullah Cabinet.
However, Malaysians are outraged at the new set of Ministers in the Najib Cabinet, for they are not only another set of “old faces” but include 11 new Ministers or Deputy Ministers who entered Parliament from the backdoor of the Senate.
Worse still, they include “political rejects” like Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon, Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil, Datin Paduka Chew Mei Fun and Datuk Dr. Awang Adek Hussin who were trounced by the electorate in last year’s political tsunami in the March 8 general elections, making the Najib Cabinet even more unrepresentative and unpopular than the second and last Abdullah Cabinet.
As a result, no new Cabinet in the nation’s 52-year history could have got off with a worse start than the present one.
On 25th March 2008, I had sent an urgent fax to the Prime Minister on the eight matters which the second Abdullah Cabinet should focus on at its first meeting the next day to show that it was capable of responding to the March 8 political tsunami and be on top of the changes demanded by Malaysians.
These eight issues concern the immediate and unconditional release of the five Hindraf leaders, restoration of national and international confidence in the independence, integrity and quality of the judiciary; comprehensive parliamentary reforms and modernisation; an all-out drive to eradicate corruption; leadership by example on integrity by Ministers and Deputy Ministers; the establishment of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC); public inquiry into the RM4.6 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) bailout scandal and an all-party inquiry to enhance Malaysia’s international competitiveness to enable the country to successfully face the challenges of globalization.
If the second and last Abdullah Cabinet is to be evaluated on its success based on the key performance indicators (KPIs) on the eight issues I had outlined, the assessment must be one of dismal failure.
The new Najib Cabinet cannot disclaim responsibility for the dismal failure of the old Abdullah Cabinet to carry out meaningful reforms, as 25 of the 29 Ministers in the Najib Cabinet or a walloping 86.3 per cent were in the old Abdullah Cabinet, with two as Deputy Ministers!
I am taking this opportunity on the eve of the first working meeting of the Najib Cabinet tomorrow to ask the new (actually mostly old) Ministers to focus on eight issues:
1. Convene emergency meeting of Parliament before end of April to secure a motion of confidence from the majority of Members of Parliament, not only for the most unpopular and unrepresentative Cabinet in the nation’s history but also in view of the national and international crisis of confidence over Datuk Seri Najib’s credibility, integrity and legitimacy as Prime Minister.
Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi secured a motion of confidence in Parliament in his first week as the fifth Prime Minister in November 2003 while Datuk Hussein Onn convened an emergency meeting of Parliament to secure a motion of confidence in his first fortnight in office as third Prime Minister, when succeeding Tun Razak in January 1976 when Tun Razak died of leukaemia in London.
2 Spell out clearly whether the new Najib motto of “1Malaysia” is just a camouflage for “Ketuanan Melayu”, itself a camouflage for “Ketuanan Umnoputras” – which was quite explicit in the Mingguan Malaysia interview of Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin.
The MCA response that Muhyiddin’s interview is contrary to Najib’s “1Malaysia” lacks credibility, especially with Muhyiddin’s pledge yesterday to help Najib achieve his vision of 1Malaysia.
The least the Najib Cabinet should do tomorrow is to repudiate Muhyiddin’s retrogressive and racist views in his Mingguan Malaysia as not representing the 1Malaysia objective, that 1Malaysia is not equivalent to the “Ketuanan Melayu” concept, and the whole Cabinet should apologise for Muhyiddin’s interview if Muhyiddin is not prepared to make a personal apology over it.
3. Declare corruption as Public Enemy No. 1 and ask all Ministers who are not prepared to support an all-out war against corruption to resign.
The big difference between the first 11 days of the first Abdullah premiership with that of Najib is that Abdullah had already repeatedly declared a war against corruption, while Najib had not even mentioned “corruption” once in the past 11 days.
In his maiden speech on his fourth day as Prime Minister, made in Parliament on November 3, 2003, Abdullah pledged to lead a government that was “clean, incorruptible, modest and beyond suspicion” – none of these four qualities had even been mentioned by Najib in his 11 days as Prime Minister!
It is sad public knowledge that the Abdullah premiership failed to “walk the talk” and chalked up an abysmal failure in anti-corruption efforts, as reflected in the plunge of Malaysia’s Transparency International Corruption Perception Index from No. 37 in 2003 to No. 47 in 2008.
But this failure cannot be blamed on one person, Abdullah, but must be shared by the new Najib Cabinet as over 86 per cent of the Najib Cabinet were in the previous Abdullah Cabinet.
4. Give top priority to the economic crisis.
The Najib Cabinet should focus on rallying and uniting all Malaysians to face the worst global economic crisis and stop playing political games which only divide the people and undermine Malaysia’s resilience and capability to recover from the economic crisis in the shortest possible time. This is why the two economic stimulus packages of RM7 billion and RM60 billion respectively had failed to make any significant impact to address the economic crisis because their conception and implementation were driven by politics rather than economics.
5. End the undemocratic, unethical, illegal and unconstitutional power grab in Perak.
The worst example of the Najib premiership playing divisive politics when the country is facing a deepening economic crisis following the global financial meltdown is the undemocratic, unethical, illegal and unconstitutional power grab in Perak. The Cabinet should heed the clear messages in the Bukit Gantang and Bukit Selambau by-elections on April 7 and end the two-month political and constitutional stalemate by returning the mandate to the Perak voters. Dissolve the Perak State Assembly and hold Perak state general election so that the people of Perak and Malaysia can unite to “fight economics” instead of “fight politics”.
6. Police must get back to their first job to ensure personal safety of citizens, visitors and investors and check spiralling crime.
The latest case of a Singaporean, Kalaiarasan Thorasamy, 42, butcher, who was killed on his way to visit his nephew in Johore on Sunday night when he was set upon by a gang of parang-wielding men, together with a spate of horrible crimes in Johore Bahru in the past few days, have again accented the notoriety of Johore Bahru as the crime capital in the country – and the failure of the police to carry out its most basic responsibility to reduce crime and to make Malaysians, visitors and investors safe in the country.
It was to ensure that Malaysia has an efficient, incorruptible, professional world-class police service which could keep crime low and uphold human rights that the Royal Police Commission announced by Abdullah in his First 100 Days recommended the establishment of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC).
One of the biggest failures of the Abdullah premiership is its inability to implement the IPCMC proposal.
The Najib Cabinet cannot send a clearer message that it is serious about implementing the Royal Police Commission proposals for an world-class police service, to keep crime low and end police abuses like the Kugan death in police custody, than to announce that it is committed to the establishment of IPCMC.
7. Repeal ISA and all draconian and undemocratic laws. To demonstrate that Najib is sincere and serious about a “comprehensive review of the Internal Security Act”, the Cabinet tomorrow should make a three-point commitment, viz:
that the government would not resort to the ISA detention-without-trial law pending the review and announce the suspension of the detention-without-trial provisions of ISA for two years;
that the ISA review, which include the repeal, is part of a comprehensive review of undemocratic, repressive and draconian laws including the Police Act, the Printing Presses and Publications Act, the Official Secrets Act, the Sedition Act, etc.
that the “comprehensive review” would be conducted by an independent and credible Royal Commission comprising members respected by Malaysians for their human rights record and work.
8. First-World Parliament
- full commitment to comprehensive parliamentary reform and modernization including an Opposition MP to head the Public Accounts Committee, ministerial status for Parliamentary Opposition Leader, a full Select Committee system headed by Parliamentarians where every Ministry is shadowed by a Select Committee and the allocation of Opposition Days in Parliament where the parliamentary business is decided by the Opposition.
YAB Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Cabinet Ministers, Putrajaya.
YAB/YB,
Firstly, let me start by congratulating Datuk Seri Najib Razak for his appointment as Prime Minister and all the Ministers of the first Najib Cabinet.
The Najib Cabinet saw the removal of seven Ministers in the old Abdullah Cabinet, namely Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar (Home); Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said (Tourism), Senator Tan Sri Muhammad Muhammad Taib (Rural and Regional Development), Senator Datuk Amirsham Abdul Aziz (Prime Minister’s Department), Datuk Ong Ka Chuan (Housing and Local Government), Datuk Mohd Zin Mohamed (Works) and Datuk Seri Zulhasnan Rafique (Federal Territories).
No one shed any tears for the dropping of the seven Ministers in the Abdullah Cabinet.
However, Malaysians are outraged at the new set of Ministers in the Najib Cabinet, for they are not only another set of “old faces” but include 11 new Ministers or Deputy Ministers who entered Parliament from the backdoor of the Senate.
Worse still, they include “political rejects” like Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon, Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil, Datin Paduka Chew Mei Fun and Datuk Dr. Awang Adek Hussin who were trounced by the electorate in last year’s political tsunami in the March 8 general elections, making the Najib Cabinet even more unrepresentative and unpopular than the second and last Abdullah Cabinet.
As a result, no new Cabinet in the nation’s 52-year history could have got off with a worse start than the present one.
On 25th March 2008, I had sent an urgent fax to the Prime Minister on the eight matters which the second Abdullah Cabinet should focus on at its first meeting the next day to show that it was capable of responding to the March 8 political tsunami and be on top of the changes demanded by Malaysians.
These eight issues concern the immediate and unconditional release of the five Hindraf leaders, restoration of national and international confidence in the independence, integrity and quality of the judiciary; comprehensive parliamentary reforms and modernisation; an all-out drive to eradicate corruption; leadership by example on integrity by Ministers and Deputy Ministers; the establishment of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC); public inquiry into the RM4.6 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) bailout scandal and an all-party inquiry to enhance Malaysia’s international competitiveness to enable the country to successfully face the challenges of globalization.
If the second and last Abdullah Cabinet is to be evaluated on its success based on the key performance indicators (KPIs) on the eight issues I had outlined, the assessment must be one of dismal failure.
The new Najib Cabinet cannot disclaim responsibility for the dismal failure of the old Abdullah Cabinet to carry out meaningful reforms, as 25 of the 29 Ministers in the Najib Cabinet or a walloping 86.3 per cent were in the old Abdullah Cabinet, with two as Deputy Ministers!
I am taking this opportunity on the eve of the first working meeting of the Najib Cabinet tomorrow to ask the new (actually mostly old) Ministers to focus on eight issues:
1. Convene emergency meeting of Parliament before end of April to secure a motion of confidence from the majority of Members of Parliament, not only for the most unpopular and unrepresentative Cabinet in the nation’s history but also in view of the national and international crisis of confidence over Datuk Seri Najib’s credibility, integrity and legitimacy as Prime Minister.
Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi secured a motion of confidence in Parliament in his first week as the fifth Prime Minister in November 2003 while Datuk Hussein Onn convened an emergency meeting of Parliament to secure a motion of confidence in his first fortnight in office as third Prime Minister, when succeeding Tun Razak in January 1976 when Tun Razak died of leukaemia in London.
2 Spell out clearly whether the new Najib motto of “1Malaysia” is just a camouflage for “Ketuanan Melayu”, itself a camouflage for “Ketuanan Umnoputras” – which was quite explicit in the Mingguan Malaysia interview of Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin.
The MCA response that Muhyiddin’s interview is contrary to Najib’s “1Malaysia” lacks credibility, especially with Muhyiddin’s pledge yesterday to help Najib achieve his vision of 1Malaysia.
The least the Najib Cabinet should do tomorrow is to repudiate Muhyiddin’s retrogressive and racist views in his Mingguan Malaysia as not representing the 1Malaysia objective, that 1Malaysia is not equivalent to the “Ketuanan Melayu” concept, and the whole Cabinet should apologise for Muhyiddin’s interview if Muhyiddin is not prepared to make a personal apology over it.
3. Declare corruption as Public Enemy No. 1 and ask all Ministers who are not prepared to support an all-out war against corruption to resign.
The big difference between the first 11 days of the first Abdullah premiership with that of Najib is that Abdullah had already repeatedly declared a war against corruption, while Najib had not even mentioned “corruption” once in the past 11 days.
In his maiden speech on his fourth day as Prime Minister, made in Parliament on November 3, 2003, Abdullah pledged to lead a government that was “clean, incorruptible, modest and beyond suspicion” – none of these four qualities had even been mentioned by Najib in his 11 days as Prime Minister!
It is sad public knowledge that the Abdullah premiership failed to “walk the talk” and chalked up an abysmal failure in anti-corruption efforts, as reflected in the plunge of Malaysia’s Transparency International Corruption Perception Index from No. 37 in 2003 to No. 47 in 2008.
But this failure cannot be blamed on one person, Abdullah, but must be shared by the new Najib Cabinet as over 86 per cent of the Najib Cabinet were in the previous Abdullah Cabinet.
4. Give top priority to the economic crisis.
The Najib Cabinet should focus on rallying and uniting all Malaysians to face the worst global economic crisis and stop playing political games which only divide the people and undermine Malaysia’s resilience and capability to recover from the economic crisis in the shortest possible time. This is why the two economic stimulus packages of RM7 billion and RM60 billion respectively had failed to make any significant impact to address the economic crisis because their conception and implementation were driven by politics rather than economics.
5. End the undemocratic, unethical, illegal and unconstitutional power grab in Perak.
The worst example of the Najib premiership playing divisive politics when the country is facing a deepening economic crisis following the global financial meltdown is the undemocratic, unethical, illegal and unconstitutional power grab in Perak. The Cabinet should heed the clear messages in the Bukit Gantang and Bukit Selambau by-elections on April 7 and end the two-month political and constitutional stalemate by returning the mandate to the Perak voters. Dissolve the Perak State Assembly and hold Perak state general election so that the people of Perak and Malaysia can unite to “fight economics” instead of “fight politics”.
6. Police must get back to their first job to ensure personal safety of citizens, visitors and investors and check spiralling crime.
The latest case of a Singaporean, Kalaiarasan Thorasamy, 42, butcher, who was killed on his way to visit his nephew in Johore on Sunday night when he was set upon by a gang of parang-wielding men, together with a spate of horrible crimes in Johore Bahru in the past few days, have again accented the notoriety of Johore Bahru as the crime capital in the country – and the failure of the police to carry out its most basic responsibility to reduce crime and to make Malaysians, visitors and investors safe in the country.
It was to ensure that Malaysia has an efficient, incorruptible, professional world-class police service which could keep crime low and uphold human rights that the Royal Police Commission announced by Abdullah in his First 100 Days recommended the establishment of an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC).
One of the biggest failures of the Abdullah premiership is its inability to implement the IPCMC proposal.
The Najib Cabinet cannot send a clearer message that it is serious about implementing the Royal Police Commission proposals for an world-class police service, to keep crime low and end police abuses like the Kugan death in police custody, than to announce that it is committed to the establishment of IPCMC.
7. Repeal ISA and all draconian and undemocratic laws. To demonstrate that Najib is sincere and serious about a “comprehensive review of the Internal Security Act”, the Cabinet tomorrow should make a three-point commitment, viz:
that the government would not resort to the ISA detention-without-trial law pending the review and announce the suspension of the detention-without-trial provisions of ISA for two years;
that the ISA review, which include the repeal, is part of a comprehensive review of undemocratic, repressive and draconian laws including the Police Act, the Printing Presses and Publications Act, the Official Secrets Act, the Sedition Act, etc.
that the “comprehensive review” would be conducted by an independent and credible Royal Commission comprising members respected by Malaysians for their human rights record and work.
8. First-World Parliament
- full commitment to comprehensive parliamentary reform and modernization including an Opposition MP to head the Public Accounts Committee, ministerial status for Parliamentary Opposition Leader, a full Select Committee system headed by Parliamentarians where every Ministry is shadowed by a Select Committee and the allocation of Opposition Days in Parliament where the parliamentary business is decided by the Opposition.
Friday, 10 April 2009
Altantuya. Why? So many Unanswered Question?
Why did Altantuya have to die?
Malaysian Insider April 9, 2009
Why. That is the start of many questions that have yet to be answered in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder trial.
The Shah Alam High Court today convicted two policemen for her October 2006 death. We now know the who, when, what, where and how of the entire murder. Inspector Azilah Hadri and Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar have a right to appeal the sentence which carries the mandatory death penalty.
The trial has ended but we still don’t know the whys.
Why did the prosecution or defence not call the police aide to Datuk Seri Najib Razak who recommended the policemen to political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda?
That was the tenuous link the opposition have picked on to link the prime minister to the killing. There have been wild allegations that have even appeared in newspapers across the world, including statutory declarations and cautioned statements, that have haunted Najib since the beginning of the sensational case.
Why did Altantuya hound Abdul Razak? That she even risked coming to this country to meet him but to no avail.
Why didn’t he just lodge a report for harassment? But went and asked a favour from a friend in the police force.
Why did the policemen commit the crime? She was an interpreter in a country far from home and surely no threat to anyone but she died a horrible death. Why?
Why did Abdul Razak’s private investigator P. Balasubramaniam disappear after filing two statutory declarations that contradict each other? And why is he still missing?
All we know is that she is dead and two people have been convicted of her murder.
We also know the trial has broken records such as being the most number of days for hearing at 159 and the most number of witnesses at 84 during the prosecution case and just two during the defence stage.
And according to police records, Azilah has been detained in prison for 891 days and Sirul, for 895 days.
But in none of those days or from among the witnesses and the accused have any of these questions been asked and answered.
And that is really what it is about, why did Altantuya have to die?
Malaysian Insider April 9, 2009
Why. That is the start of many questions that have yet to be answered in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder trial.
The Shah Alam High Court today convicted two policemen for her October 2006 death. We now know the who, when, what, where and how of the entire murder. Inspector Azilah Hadri and Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar have a right to appeal the sentence which carries the mandatory death penalty.
The trial has ended but we still don’t know the whys.
Why did the prosecution or defence not call the police aide to Datuk Seri Najib Razak who recommended the policemen to political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda?
That was the tenuous link the opposition have picked on to link the prime minister to the killing. There have been wild allegations that have even appeared in newspapers across the world, including statutory declarations and cautioned statements, that have haunted Najib since the beginning of the sensational case.
Why did Altantuya hound Abdul Razak? That she even risked coming to this country to meet him but to no avail.
Why didn’t he just lodge a report for harassment? But went and asked a favour from a friend in the police force.
Why did the policemen commit the crime? She was an interpreter in a country far from home and surely no threat to anyone but she died a horrible death. Why?
Why did Abdul Razak’s private investigator P. Balasubramaniam disappear after filing two statutory declarations that contradict each other? And why is he still missing?
All we know is that she is dead and two people have been convicted of her murder.
We also know the trial has broken records such as being the most number of days for hearing at 159 and the most number of witnesses at 84 during the prosecution case and just two during the defence stage.
And according to police records, Azilah has been detained in prison for 891 days and Sirul, for 895 days.
But in none of those days or from among the witnesses and the accused have any of these questions been asked and answered.
And that is really what it is about, why did Altantuya have to die?
Najib's Ploy : ISA Statistic and Release by past PM
Najib's ploy
10 Apr 09 : 9.00AM
By Jacqueline Ann Surin
jacquelinesurin@thenutgraph.com
LEST we allow our new prime minister to get away with a slick public relations exercise, here are some cold hard statistics about previous prime ministers and the Internal Security Act (ISA).
In July 1981, two weeks into office as prime minister, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad released 21 ISA detainees. As he himself candidly admitted on 5 April 2009, he thought it would be good for him. It probably was for his public image then.
But what did Mahathir subsequently do during his 22 years in power? According to Suaram, under Mahathir's administration, 1,500 people were arrested under the ISA. Most notable of these arrests were the 100-plus Malaysians who were arrested in 1987 under Operasi Lalang.
But Mahathir wasn't the only one to start off a premiership on such a good footing. In November 2003, after almost a month of being prime minister, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi released 15 detainees. Subsequently, however, under his administration between October 2003 and April 2009, there were 105 new arrests.
And so, Datuk Seri Najib Razak isn't really doing anything extraordinary as Malaysia's new and sixth prime minister. His release of 13 ISA detainees on 5 April follows a route Malaysians should now be familiar with.
The question, of course, is what will Najib do after this?
Three foreigners — one from India and two from Myanmar — were the first to be released from ISA detention on 5 April
and were taken away in an Immigration Department vehicle (Pic by Raj Kumar, courtesy of theSun)
Let's be real
The ISA violates human rights. No matter what the rhetoric may be about national security and public order, no government should have the absolute power to detain someone without trial for an indefinite amount of time.
And while Najib has promised a review of the ISA, it has been made clear that abolishing it is not in his pack of cards. Worse, the new administration hasn't even committed to a specific timeframe about when this review will be concluded. Instead, it has assured the public that it will take time.
This begs the question about the government's sincerity in respecting civil liberties and putting people first. Proposals for amending and/or abolishing the ISA have, on countless occasions, been submitted to the government. Even if the government cannot trust human rights groups to have the nation's best interests at heart, they can at least trust the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam).
Syed Hamid Albar Since 2003, Suhakam has been proposing to the government that the ISA should be abolished. Indeed, then Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar indicated on 8 April 2009 that Suhakam's report may be used as a basis for the government's review. Hence, since the government wouldn't need to start from scratch, it should be able to commit to a timeframe of when it will complete its review of the ISA. This, in fact, would be in line with part of Najib's slogan, "Performance Now".
Najib has also said that his move to release the 13 detainees was to demonstrate a caring government that was not repressive. Let's get real. To begin with, no "caring government" should detain people without trial. But the Malaysian government has, repeatedly, in clear abuse of human rights. And Najib was very much a part of both the Mahathir and Abdullah administrations when ISA detentions were executed. Unlike Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, who resigned in opposition to the ISA, Najib has through his years in government done nothing to oppose the detentions.
And yet the new premier is now asking us to view him as a leader with heart because he released 13 people. How about the remaining 27 detainees being held at the Kamunting detention centre? As it is, Najib has refused to comment about further releases. Surely his benevolence, if it were genuine, should extend to others who remain in detention, too?
Mmm, brownies Brownie points
No, Najib shouldn't be given brownie points for releasing 13 ISA detainees who shouldn't have been detained in the first place.
But brownie points are exactly what Najib expects, as evidenced by his statements surrounding his first act as prime minister. The subtext to Najib's message to the rakyat is: "I'm a good guy. I released the 13 detainees." It's no different from what an ex-boyfriend of a former classmate of mine once said to her: "You're lucky you're in a relationship with me. I don't beat you."
Apparently, Malaysians should be thankful we have Najib as our new prime minister because he has released 13 ISA detainees and is looking at reviewing, instead of abolishing, the colonial relic from the days of Malaya's Emergency.
But really, Najib should only be allowed to score brownie points if he didn't make this about him. Those detainees, and the ones remaining at Kamunting, deserve to be released, not because Najib is competing with Santa Claus for popularity, but because it was wrong to have detained them in the first place.
Now, if only Najib could say that, and act fully in accordance with that principle, he would deserve the brownie points he seeks from the rakyat.
Visit The Nut Graph to read the rest of the story.
10 Apr 09 : 9.00AM
By Jacqueline Ann Surin
jacquelinesurin@thenutgraph.com
LEST we allow our new prime minister to get away with a slick public relations exercise, here are some cold hard statistics about previous prime ministers and the Internal Security Act (ISA).
In July 1981, two weeks into office as prime minister, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad released 21 ISA detainees. As he himself candidly admitted on 5 April 2009, he thought it would be good for him. It probably was for his public image then.
But what did Mahathir subsequently do during his 22 years in power? According to Suaram, under Mahathir's administration, 1,500 people were arrested under the ISA. Most notable of these arrests were the 100-plus Malaysians who were arrested in 1987 under Operasi Lalang.
But Mahathir wasn't the only one to start off a premiership on such a good footing. In November 2003, after almost a month of being prime minister, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi released 15 detainees. Subsequently, however, under his administration between October 2003 and April 2009, there were 105 new arrests.
And so, Datuk Seri Najib Razak isn't really doing anything extraordinary as Malaysia's new and sixth prime minister. His release of 13 ISA detainees on 5 April follows a route Malaysians should now be familiar with.
The question, of course, is what will Najib do after this?
Three foreigners — one from India and two from Myanmar — were the first to be released from ISA detention on 5 April
and were taken away in an Immigration Department vehicle (Pic by Raj Kumar, courtesy of theSun)
Let's be real
The ISA violates human rights. No matter what the rhetoric may be about national security and public order, no government should have the absolute power to detain someone without trial for an indefinite amount of time.
And while Najib has promised a review of the ISA, it has been made clear that abolishing it is not in his pack of cards. Worse, the new administration hasn't even committed to a specific timeframe about when this review will be concluded. Instead, it has assured the public that it will take time.
This begs the question about the government's sincerity in respecting civil liberties and putting people first. Proposals for amending and/or abolishing the ISA have, on countless occasions, been submitted to the government. Even if the government cannot trust human rights groups to have the nation's best interests at heart, they can at least trust the Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam).
Syed Hamid Albar Since 2003, Suhakam has been proposing to the government that the ISA should be abolished. Indeed, then Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar indicated on 8 April 2009 that Suhakam's report may be used as a basis for the government's review. Hence, since the government wouldn't need to start from scratch, it should be able to commit to a timeframe of when it will complete its review of the ISA. This, in fact, would be in line with part of Najib's slogan, "Performance Now".
Najib has also said that his move to release the 13 detainees was to demonstrate a caring government that was not repressive. Let's get real. To begin with, no "caring government" should detain people without trial. But the Malaysian government has, repeatedly, in clear abuse of human rights. And Najib was very much a part of both the Mahathir and Abdullah administrations when ISA detentions were executed. Unlike Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, who resigned in opposition to the ISA, Najib has through his years in government done nothing to oppose the detentions.
And yet the new premier is now asking us to view him as a leader with heart because he released 13 people. How about the remaining 27 detainees being held at the Kamunting detention centre? As it is, Najib has refused to comment about further releases. Surely his benevolence, if it were genuine, should extend to others who remain in detention, too?
Mmm, brownies Brownie points
No, Najib shouldn't be given brownie points for releasing 13 ISA detainees who shouldn't have been detained in the first place.
But brownie points are exactly what Najib expects, as evidenced by his statements surrounding his first act as prime minister. The subtext to Najib's message to the rakyat is: "I'm a good guy. I released the 13 detainees." It's no different from what an ex-boyfriend of a former classmate of mine once said to her: "You're lucky you're in a relationship with me. I don't beat you."
Apparently, Malaysians should be thankful we have Najib as our new prime minister because he has released 13 ISA detainees and is looking at reviewing, instead of abolishing, the colonial relic from the days of Malaya's Emergency.
But really, Najib should only be allowed to score brownie points if he didn't make this about him. Those detainees, and the ones remaining at Kamunting, deserve to be released, not because Najib is competing with Santa Claus for popularity, but because it was wrong to have detained them in the first place.
Now, if only Najib could say that, and act fully in accordance with that principle, he would deserve the brownie points he seeks from the rakyat.
Visit The Nut Graph to read the rest of the story.
Friday, 3 April 2009
MCA Proposal to Acquire PLUS Bhd
MCA supports the proposal to acquire the shares of PLUS Bhd
31/03/2009
Press Release
Issued by MCA Spokespersons Sdr Lee Wei Kiat and Sdr Wong Nai Chee on a proposal to acquire 100% shares of PLUS Bhd
1. The issues relating to highway are always the subject matter of controversy among the general public because it affects the lives of everyone in particular public road users
2. Since the government announcement of declassification of highway agreements with effect from 1st January, 2009, the lawyers from the MCA Youth Legal Affairs and Parliamentary Research Bureau had embarked on the tedious work of reading all the highway agreements located at the library of JKR building, KL. The lawyers were able to read all 22 highway agreements together with their supplementary agreements offered for reading to the public.
3. Having perused all the highway agreements, we are of the view that there are four issues that necessitate further deliberation at the cabinet level and explanations needed:-
- Propriety of direct negotiation
Since the inception of the highway agreement in 1988 (the PLUS project) and late venturing into 1990s, the highway projects are no longer regarded as infrastructure projects which require special skills which only several companies in the country could provide. It is therefore inappropriate to conduct the exercise of this type of projects by way of direct negotiation. Direct negotiation in the light of this background smacks of corrupt practices and abuse of power.
· Rationale of granting loans to private concession companies by the Federal Government
Some of the highway agreements show that loans were given to the companies by the Federal Government without any security. For example, an interest free RM80 million support loan was granted by the government in the SILK agreement and that there was no where in the agreement that imposes the obligation of the concession company to provide any security in return. The conduct of utilizing public money to finance a private company in a lucrative project like this is questionable.
· Compensation payable by the Government
In the event the request for toll hike is not permitted when it falls due, the government would have to compensate the companies according to a formula that bears the element of projected revenue in the calculation. This is in actual fact a form of guarantee assumed by the government under the agreement to ensure the return of investment made by the concession companies! Either way, the concession companies will always have the last laugh.
· Verification of traffic volume
The element of traffic volume is an element in deciding the projected toll rate under the agreement. The projected toll rate will in turn determine the quantum of compensation payable by the government in the event toll hike is not permitted. Therefore, we are unsure how the traffic volume was agreed upon by the government during the stage of negotiation. Was the figure verified? What underlying assumptions were made in agreeing to the traffic volume figure? Did the government investigate the authenticity and reliability of the traffic volume proposals given by the concession companies?
Viability of PLUS acquisition
4. Therefore, MCA is of the opinion that it is in the best interests of the people to acquire the shares of the concession company in PLUS.
5. The government has an effective interest of 74% in PLUS leaving another 26% in the market. Assuming a share price of RM3.50 to RM4.00 per share is offered for the acquisition of the remainder shares, the total acquisition price is between RM4.55 billion to RM5.2 billion. The remaining shares could be acquired via Khazanah and upon completion, the Government would hold 100% stake. In terms of profit after tax margin inclusive of Government compensation, the PLUS business yields a profit margin of above 50% from 2004 to 2008.
6. The toll rate currently is set at 14.96 sen per km and by 2038 the toll rate is expected to increase until 29.16 sen per km which is double. As such, a trip from KL to Penang costing RM86 one way would cost RM168 by 2038.
7. From the financial aspect, PLUS has been generating a profit of RM400 million to RM600 million yearly form the financial year 2004 to 2007, even if the gross compensation from the Government for not increasing the toll is excluded. Meanwhile the cash flow generated from operations excluding any receipt from Government compensation for not increasing the toll is RM1.1 billion to RM1.4 billion yearly from 2004 to 2007. This clearly shows that if PLUS is taken over and held by the Government and EPF, the possibility of waiving toll increase can be carried out both financially or legally. Even if there is any toll increase it would not be based on contractual rates but more to sustain operations of the company and for loan repayment purposes.
Currently, the Government has been compensating PLUS yearly and the amount has been increasing yearly as follows:
Gross compensation
2003 RM 295’mil
2004 RM 307’mil
2005 RM 171’mil
2006 RM 654’mil
2007 RM 680’mil
2008 RM 730’mil
8. As at 31/12/08, the long term borrowing of PLUS amounts to RM9.4 billion and the dividend announced for financial year 2008 is RM725 million. If the entire amount is channeled for repayment of debts, PLUS can settle the long term borrowing in 13 years MAXIMUM based on the financial results as at 31 December 2008.
9. In summary by acquiring the remaining shares of PLUS, the Government would be able to establish policies and measures to ensure that the people are not burdened. The once-every-three-years toll hike can be avoided and any increase can be based on operational needs rather than contractual needs. Politically, it would signify a significant change in the Government and shows that the Government cares and listen to the people.
31/03/2009
Press Release
Issued by MCA Spokespersons Sdr Lee Wei Kiat and Sdr Wong Nai Chee on a proposal to acquire 100% shares of PLUS Bhd
1. The issues relating to highway are always the subject matter of controversy among the general public because it affects the lives of everyone in particular public road users
2. Since the government announcement of declassification of highway agreements with effect from 1st January, 2009, the lawyers from the MCA Youth Legal Affairs and Parliamentary Research Bureau had embarked on the tedious work of reading all the highway agreements located at the library of JKR building, KL. The lawyers were able to read all 22 highway agreements together with their supplementary agreements offered for reading to the public.
3. Having perused all the highway agreements, we are of the view that there are four issues that necessitate further deliberation at the cabinet level and explanations needed:-
- Propriety of direct negotiation
Since the inception of the highway agreement in 1988 (the PLUS project) and late venturing into 1990s, the highway projects are no longer regarded as infrastructure projects which require special skills which only several companies in the country could provide. It is therefore inappropriate to conduct the exercise of this type of projects by way of direct negotiation. Direct negotiation in the light of this background smacks of corrupt practices and abuse of power.
· Rationale of granting loans to private concession companies by the Federal Government
Some of the highway agreements show that loans were given to the companies by the Federal Government without any security. For example, an interest free RM80 million support loan was granted by the government in the SILK agreement and that there was no where in the agreement that imposes the obligation of the concession company to provide any security in return. The conduct of utilizing public money to finance a private company in a lucrative project like this is questionable.
· Compensation payable by the Government
In the event the request for toll hike is not permitted when it falls due, the government would have to compensate the companies according to a formula that bears the element of projected revenue in the calculation. This is in actual fact a form of guarantee assumed by the government under the agreement to ensure the return of investment made by the concession companies! Either way, the concession companies will always have the last laugh.
· Verification of traffic volume
The element of traffic volume is an element in deciding the projected toll rate under the agreement. The projected toll rate will in turn determine the quantum of compensation payable by the government in the event toll hike is not permitted. Therefore, we are unsure how the traffic volume was agreed upon by the government during the stage of negotiation. Was the figure verified? What underlying assumptions were made in agreeing to the traffic volume figure? Did the government investigate the authenticity and reliability of the traffic volume proposals given by the concession companies?
Viability of PLUS acquisition
4. Therefore, MCA is of the opinion that it is in the best interests of the people to acquire the shares of the concession company in PLUS.
5. The government has an effective interest of 74% in PLUS leaving another 26% in the market. Assuming a share price of RM3.50 to RM4.00 per share is offered for the acquisition of the remainder shares, the total acquisition price is between RM4.55 billion to RM5.2 billion. The remaining shares could be acquired via Khazanah and upon completion, the Government would hold 100% stake. In terms of profit after tax margin inclusive of Government compensation, the PLUS business yields a profit margin of above 50% from 2004 to 2008.
6. The toll rate currently is set at 14.96 sen per km and by 2038 the toll rate is expected to increase until 29.16 sen per km which is double. As such, a trip from KL to Penang costing RM86 one way would cost RM168 by 2038.
7. From the financial aspect, PLUS has been generating a profit of RM400 million to RM600 million yearly form the financial year 2004 to 2007, even if the gross compensation from the Government for not increasing the toll is excluded. Meanwhile the cash flow generated from operations excluding any receipt from Government compensation for not increasing the toll is RM1.1 billion to RM1.4 billion yearly from 2004 to 2007. This clearly shows that if PLUS is taken over and held by the Government and EPF, the possibility of waiving toll increase can be carried out both financially or legally. Even if there is any toll increase it would not be based on contractual rates but more to sustain operations of the company and for loan repayment purposes.
Currently, the Government has been compensating PLUS yearly and the amount has been increasing yearly as follows:
Gross compensation
2003 RM 295’mil
2004 RM 307’mil
2005 RM 171’mil
2006 RM 654’mil
2007 RM 680’mil
2008 RM 730’mil
8. As at 31/12/08, the long term borrowing of PLUS amounts to RM9.4 billion and the dividend announced for financial year 2008 is RM725 million. If the entire amount is channeled for repayment of debts, PLUS can settle the long term borrowing in 13 years MAXIMUM based on the financial results as at 31 December 2008.
9. In summary by acquiring the remaining shares of PLUS, the Government would be able to establish policies and measures to ensure that the people are not burdened. The once-every-three-years toll hike can be avoided and any increase can be based on operational needs rather than contractual needs. Politically, it would signify a significant change in the Government and shows that the Government cares and listen to the people.
Chinese DPM urge MCA
MCA Urge Prime Minister Dato' Sri Najib to create a Chinese DPM and BN Deputy Chairman Post
Press Statement by MCA Deputy Secretary General Dato’ Loke Yuen Yow urging newly installed Prime Minister Dato’ Sri Najib bin Tun Abdul Razak to create a post for a Chinese Deputy Prime Minister and BN Deputy Chairman
MCA Deputy Sec-Gen urges PM Dato’ Sri Najib to create Chinese DPM & BN Deputy Chairman posts
MCA Deputy Secretary-General Dato’ Loke Yuen Yow today urged the newly installed Prime Minister of Malaysia , YAB Dato’ Sri Najib bin Tun Abdul Razak to create a post for a Chinese Deputy Prime Minister and a Chinese Deputy Chairman of Barisan Nasional. He further suggested that the MCA President be appointed to the said portfolios.
He said, “Malaysians of all races have long accepted and rendered their full support to the ideology of an administration based on power sharing in the country. However, after 52 years of national independence, we continue to feel that the so-called power sharing is just a mere slogan rather than a practical situation which we all yearn to become true one day. Hence, Malaysians are rather frustrated and dissatisfied with our real situation now as it is merely empty talk.”
He added that, “the creation of a Chinese Prime Minister’s position will not only help to realize the true ideology of a power sharing administration, it will also denote that the government is gives importance to the role and contributions made by the Chinese towards the process of nation building. Also, if given the portfolio, the MCA President could in his capacity in cabinet, help to draw up a fairer and a more justifiable policy which is beneficial to all especially in areas relating to the Chinese in the fields of economics and education.”
Dato’ Loke pointed out that MCA had represented the Chinese in the struggle for the nation’s Independence together with UMNO and MIC in 1957. “Hence, in the process of nation building, the contributions made by both MCA and the Chinese community are huge and tremendous.”
At the same time, he reiterated that the MCA President should also be appointed as the Deputy Chairman of the Barisan Nasional Supreme Council. “This will truly manifest the real scenario of power sharing in the administration of Dato’ Sri Najib.”
“As a far-sighted leader with brilliant political leadership, Dato’ Sri Najib should see the importance and necessity of creating both positions of a Chinese Deputy Prime Minister and a Chinese Deputy Chairman of Barisan Nasional of which the MCA President should be appointed to both portfolios,” the MCA Deputy Secretary General added.
Press Statement by MCA Deputy Secretary General Dato’ Loke Yuen Yow urging newly installed Prime Minister Dato’ Sri Najib bin Tun Abdul Razak to create a post for a Chinese Deputy Prime Minister and BN Deputy Chairman
MCA Deputy Sec-Gen urges PM Dato’ Sri Najib to create Chinese DPM & BN Deputy Chairman posts
MCA Deputy Secretary-General Dato’ Loke Yuen Yow today urged the newly installed Prime Minister of Malaysia , YAB Dato’ Sri Najib bin Tun Abdul Razak to create a post for a Chinese Deputy Prime Minister and a Chinese Deputy Chairman of Barisan Nasional. He further suggested that the MCA President be appointed to the said portfolios.
He said, “Malaysians of all races have long accepted and rendered their full support to the ideology of an administration based on power sharing in the country. However, after 52 years of national independence, we continue to feel that the so-called power sharing is just a mere slogan rather than a practical situation which we all yearn to become true one day. Hence, Malaysians are rather frustrated and dissatisfied with our real situation now as it is merely empty talk.”
He added that, “the creation of a Chinese Prime Minister’s position will not only help to realize the true ideology of a power sharing administration, it will also denote that the government is gives importance to the role and contributions made by the Chinese towards the process of nation building. Also, if given the portfolio, the MCA President could in his capacity in cabinet, help to draw up a fairer and a more justifiable policy which is beneficial to all especially in areas relating to the Chinese in the fields of economics and education.”
Dato’ Loke pointed out that MCA had represented the Chinese in the struggle for the nation’s Independence together with UMNO and MIC in 1957. “Hence, in the process of nation building, the contributions made by both MCA and the Chinese community are huge and tremendous.”
At the same time, he reiterated that the MCA President should also be appointed as the Deputy Chairman of the Barisan Nasional Supreme Council. “This will truly manifest the real scenario of power sharing in the administration of Dato’ Sri Najib.”
“As a far-sighted leader with brilliant political leadership, Dato’ Sri Najib should see the importance and necessity of creating both positions of a Chinese Deputy Prime Minister and a Chinese Deputy Chairman of Barisan Nasional of which the MCA President should be appointed to both portfolios,” the MCA Deputy Secretary General added.
PR Letter to Agong : Defer Najib Appointment
Surat Pimpinan Pakatan Rakyat Kepada DYMM SPB Yang di-Pertuan Agong
@anwaribrahimblog
By Anwar Ibrahim
Categories: Demokrasi, Pakatan Rakyat, Politik and malaysia
28 Mac 20091 Rabiul Akhir 1430
Mengadap Seri Paduka Baginda Yang di-Pertuan Agong
Al-Wathiqu Billah Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin Ibni Almarhum Sultan Mahmud al-Muktafi Billah Shah
Yang bersemayam di atas takhta Kerajaan Malaysia dengan beberapa amat kebesaran dan kemuliaannya.
Assalamualaikum dan Salam Sejahtera,
Ampun Tuanku,
Dengan hormat dan takzimnya patik sekalian merafa’kan sembah dan berdoa kehadrat Allah Subhanahu Wata’ala, mudah-mudahan Seri Paduka Baginda Yang di-Pertuan Agong sentiasa berada dalam keadaan selamat dan kesejahteraan.
Ampun Tuanku,
MEMOHON PERKENAN UNTUK MENANGGUHKAN LANTIKAN PERDANA MENTERI BARU SEHINGGA NAMA BELIAU DIBERSIHKAN OLEH SURUHANJAYA BEBAS
Patik sekalian mewakili semua 81 Ahli Parlimen Pakatan Rakyat dengan penuh takzim ingin merafa’ sembah mengenai rancangan YAB Perdana Menteri untuk mengadap Seri Paduka Baginda pada 2 April ini bagi menyatakan hasrat meletakkan jawatan dan menyerahkan jawatan beliau kepada YAB Timbalan Perdana Menteri yang merupakan Presiden UMNO yang baru.
Ampun Tuanku,
Jawatan Perdana Menteri ini merupakan suatu jawatan tertinggi dalam negara yang menjadi maruah sesebuah negara. Jawatan yang sebegitu penting seharusnya diberikan kepada individu terpilih yang bersih dan tidak dipersoalkan integritinya.
Baru-baru ini terdapat banyak skandal yang mengaitkan nama YAB Timbalan Perdana Menteri seperti komisyen pembelian kapal selam Scorpene yang melibatkan negara Peranchis. Yang paling mengejutkan adalah peristiwa pembunuhan seorang wanita Mongolia yang dikatakan turut mengaitkan nama beliau. Perkara di atas telah tersebar ke seluruh dunia dan diulas di banyak akhbar dan majalah seluruh dunia.
Oleh kerana perkara di atas begitu banyak diperkatakan dan memandangkan jawatan Perdana Menteri begitu penting buat negara ini, adalah amat wajar sekiranya Seri Paduka Bagida menangguhkan lantikan Perdana Menteri yang baru ini sehingga segala dakwaan berkenaan disiasat oleh sebuah Suruhanjaya Bebas dan nama beliau dibersihkan demi menjaga maruah negara ini.
Ampun Tuanku,
Patik sekalian akhiri warkah yang tidak sepertinya ini dengan sekalung penghargaan ke atas keprihatinan dan pertimbangan Seri Paduka Baginda Yang di-Pertuan Agong. Mudah-mudahan Allah Subhanahu Wata’ala melanjutkan usia Seri Paduka Baginda Yang di-Pertuan Agong dan seluruh kerabat Tuanku dan semoga sentiasa berada di dalam kesejahteraan dan kebahagiaan yang berkekalan.
Amin Ya Rabbal ‘Alamin
Ampun Tuanku,
Patik sekalian dengan segala hormat takzimnya;
Bagi pihak Ahli Parlimen Pakatan Rakyat
YB Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim
Ketua Pembangkang
merangkap Ketua Umum Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR)
YB Dato’ Seri Haji Abdul Hadi Awang
Presiden Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS)
YB Lim Kit Siang
Ketua Ahli Parlimen Democratic Action Party (DAP)
SENARAI AHLI PARLIMEN PARTI KEADILAN RAKYAT
1. YB Ahmad bin Kassim
2. YB Dato’ Rashid Din
3. YB Dato’ Johari Abdul
4. YB Gobala Krishnan a/l Nagapan
5. YB Zulkifli Nordin
6. YB Tan Tee Beng
7. YB Dato’ Zahrain Mohamed Hashim
8. YB Mohd Yusmadi Mohd Yusoff
9. YB Mohsin Fadzli b Hj Samsuri
10. YB Dr Michael Jeyakumar Devaraj
11. YB Dr Lee Boon Chye
12. YB Abdul Aziz Abdul Kadir
13. YB Amran Abdul Ghani
14. YB Saifuddin Nasution Ismail
15. YB Dato’ Dr Zainal Abidin Ahmad
16. YB William Leong Jee Keen
17. Yb Mohamed Azmin Ali
18. YB Zuraida Kamaruddin
19. YB Gwo-Burne Loh
20. YB Hee Loy Sian
21. YB Sivarasa a/l K Rasiah
22. YB Manikavasagam a/l Sundaram
23. YB Abdullah Sani Abdul Hamid
24. YB Chua Tian Chang
25. YB Wee Choo Keong
26. YB Nurul Izzah Anwar
27. YB Tan Sri Dato’ Abdul Khalid Ibrahim
28. YB Dato’ Kamarul Bahrin Abbas
29. YB Azan Ismail
30. YB Fuziah Salleh
SENARAI AHLI PARLIMEN PARTI ISLAM SEMALAYSIA
31. YB Ustaz Nasir Zakaria
32. YB Haji Mahfuz Omar
33. YB Dr Mohd Hayati Othman
34. YB Firdaus Jaafar
35. YB Che Uda Che Nik
36. YB Ustaz Haji Taib Azamuddin Md Taib
37. YB Dato’ Haji Kamarudin Jaafar
38. YB Dato’ Haji Abd Halim Ab Rahman
39. YB Dato’ Wan Abdul Rahim Wan Abdullah
40. YB Siti Zailah Mohd Yusuf
41. YB Salahuddin Haji Ayub
42. YB Ustaz Haji Nasharudin Mat Isa
43. YB Muhammad Husin
44. YB Dr. Haji Mohd. Hatta Ramli
45. YB Ustaz Mujahid Haji Yusof Rawa
46. YB Mohd Abdul Wahid Endut
47. YB Dr. Dzulkifli Ahmad
48. YB Dr Che Rosli Che Mat
49. YB Khalid Abd Samad
50. YB Dr. Hajjah Siti Mariah Mahmud
51. YB Dr. Lo’ Lo’ Haji Mohd. Ghazali
SENARAI AHLI PARLIMEN DEMOCRATIC ACTION PARTY
52. YB Lim Guan Eng
53. YB Dr.Tan Seng Giaw
54. YB Chong Eng
55. YB M.Kulasegaran
56. YB Fong Kui Lun
57. YB Tan Kok Wai
58. YB Chow Kon Yeow
59. YB Teresa Kok Suh Sim
60. YB Prof.Dr.P.Ramasamy
61. YB Ngeh Koo Ham
62. YB Nga Kor Ming
63. YB Karpal Singh
64. YB Fong Po Kuan
65. YB Teo Nie Ching
66. YB Gobind Singh Deo
67. YB Chong Chieng Jen
68. YB Loke Siew Fook
69. YB Tony Pua Kiam Wee
70. YB Jeff Ooi Chuan Aun
71. YB Charles Santiago
72. YB M.Manogaran
73. YB Sim Tong Him
74. YB John Fernandez
75. YB Liew Chin Tong
76. YB Dr.Hiew King Cheu
77. YB Lim Lip Eng
78. YB Er Teck Hwa
@anwaribrahimblog
By Anwar Ibrahim
Categories: Demokrasi, Pakatan Rakyat, Politik and malaysia
28 Mac 20091 Rabiul Akhir 1430
Mengadap Seri Paduka Baginda Yang di-Pertuan Agong
Al-Wathiqu Billah Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin Ibni Almarhum Sultan Mahmud al-Muktafi Billah Shah
Yang bersemayam di atas takhta Kerajaan Malaysia dengan beberapa amat kebesaran dan kemuliaannya.
Assalamualaikum dan Salam Sejahtera,
Ampun Tuanku,
Dengan hormat dan takzimnya patik sekalian merafa’kan sembah dan berdoa kehadrat Allah Subhanahu Wata’ala, mudah-mudahan Seri Paduka Baginda Yang di-Pertuan Agong sentiasa berada dalam keadaan selamat dan kesejahteraan.
Ampun Tuanku,
MEMOHON PERKENAN UNTUK MENANGGUHKAN LANTIKAN PERDANA MENTERI BARU SEHINGGA NAMA BELIAU DIBERSIHKAN OLEH SURUHANJAYA BEBAS
Patik sekalian mewakili semua 81 Ahli Parlimen Pakatan Rakyat dengan penuh takzim ingin merafa’ sembah mengenai rancangan YAB Perdana Menteri untuk mengadap Seri Paduka Baginda pada 2 April ini bagi menyatakan hasrat meletakkan jawatan dan menyerahkan jawatan beliau kepada YAB Timbalan Perdana Menteri yang merupakan Presiden UMNO yang baru.
Ampun Tuanku,
Jawatan Perdana Menteri ini merupakan suatu jawatan tertinggi dalam negara yang menjadi maruah sesebuah negara. Jawatan yang sebegitu penting seharusnya diberikan kepada individu terpilih yang bersih dan tidak dipersoalkan integritinya.
Baru-baru ini terdapat banyak skandal yang mengaitkan nama YAB Timbalan Perdana Menteri seperti komisyen pembelian kapal selam Scorpene yang melibatkan negara Peranchis. Yang paling mengejutkan adalah peristiwa pembunuhan seorang wanita Mongolia yang dikatakan turut mengaitkan nama beliau. Perkara di atas telah tersebar ke seluruh dunia dan diulas di banyak akhbar dan majalah seluruh dunia.
Oleh kerana perkara di atas begitu banyak diperkatakan dan memandangkan jawatan Perdana Menteri begitu penting buat negara ini, adalah amat wajar sekiranya Seri Paduka Bagida menangguhkan lantikan Perdana Menteri yang baru ini sehingga segala dakwaan berkenaan disiasat oleh sebuah Suruhanjaya Bebas dan nama beliau dibersihkan demi menjaga maruah negara ini.
Ampun Tuanku,
Patik sekalian akhiri warkah yang tidak sepertinya ini dengan sekalung penghargaan ke atas keprihatinan dan pertimbangan Seri Paduka Baginda Yang di-Pertuan Agong. Mudah-mudahan Allah Subhanahu Wata’ala melanjutkan usia Seri Paduka Baginda Yang di-Pertuan Agong dan seluruh kerabat Tuanku dan semoga sentiasa berada di dalam kesejahteraan dan kebahagiaan yang berkekalan.
Amin Ya Rabbal ‘Alamin
Ampun Tuanku,
Patik sekalian dengan segala hormat takzimnya;
Bagi pihak Ahli Parlimen Pakatan Rakyat
YB Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim
Ketua Pembangkang
merangkap Ketua Umum Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR)
YB Dato’ Seri Haji Abdul Hadi Awang
Presiden Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS)
YB Lim Kit Siang
Ketua Ahli Parlimen Democratic Action Party (DAP)
SENARAI AHLI PARLIMEN PARTI KEADILAN RAKYAT
1. YB Ahmad bin Kassim
2. YB Dato’ Rashid Din
3. YB Dato’ Johari Abdul
4. YB Gobala Krishnan a/l Nagapan
5. YB Zulkifli Nordin
6. YB Tan Tee Beng
7. YB Dato’ Zahrain Mohamed Hashim
8. YB Mohd Yusmadi Mohd Yusoff
9. YB Mohsin Fadzli b Hj Samsuri
10. YB Dr Michael Jeyakumar Devaraj
11. YB Dr Lee Boon Chye
12. YB Abdul Aziz Abdul Kadir
13. YB Amran Abdul Ghani
14. YB Saifuddin Nasution Ismail
15. YB Dato’ Dr Zainal Abidin Ahmad
16. YB William Leong Jee Keen
17. Yb Mohamed Azmin Ali
18. YB Zuraida Kamaruddin
19. YB Gwo-Burne Loh
20. YB Hee Loy Sian
21. YB Sivarasa a/l K Rasiah
22. YB Manikavasagam a/l Sundaram
23. YB Abdullah Sani Abdul Hamid
24. YB Chua Tian Chang
25. YB Wee Choo Keong
26. YB Nurul Izzah Anwar
27. YB Tan Sri Dato’ Abdul Khalid Ibrahim
28. YB Dato’ Kamarul Bahrin Abbas
29. YB Azan Ismail
30. YB Fuziah Salleh
SENARAI AHLI PARLIMEN PARTI ISLAM SEMALAYSIA
31. YB Ustaz Nasir Zakaria
32. YB Haji Mahfuz Omar
33. YB Dr Mohd Hayati Othman
34. YB Firdaus Jaafar
35. YB Che Uda Che Nik
36. YB Ustaz Haji Taib Azamuddin Md Taib
37. YB Dato’ Haji Kamarudin Jaafar
38. YB Dato’ Haji Abd Halim Ab Rahman
39. YB Dato’ Wan Abdul Rahim Wan Abdullah
40. YB Siti Zailah Mohd Yusuf
41. YB Salahuddin Haji Ayub
42. YB Ustaz Haji Nasharudin Mat Isa
43. YB Muhammad Husin
44. YB Dr. Haji Mohd. Hatta Ramli
45. YB Ustaz Mujahid Haji Yusof Rawa
46. YB Mohd Abdul Wahid Endut
47. YB Dr. Dzulkifli Ahmad
48. YB Dr Che Rosli Che Mat
49. YB Khalid Abd Samad
50. YB Dr. Hajjah Siti Mariah Mahmud
51. YB Dr. Lo’ Lo’ Haji Mohd. Ghazali
SENARAI AHLI PARLIMEN DEMOCRATIC ACTION PARTY
52. YB Lim Guan Eng
53. YB Dr.Tan Seng Giaw
54. YB Chong Eng
55. YB M.Kulasegaran
56. YB Fong Kui Lun
57. YB Tan Kok Wai
58. YB Chow Kon Yeow
59. YB Teresa Kok Suh Sim
60. YB Prof.Dr.P.Ramasamy
61. YB Ngeh Koo Ham
62. YB Nga Kor Ming
63. YB Karpal Singh
64. YB Fong Po Kuan
65. YB Teo Nie Ching
66. YB Gobind Singh Deo
67. YB Chong Chieng Jen
68. YB Loke Siew Fook
69. YB Tony Pua Kiam Wee
70. YB Jeff Ooi Chuan Aun
71. YB Charles Santiago
72. YB M.Manogaran
73. YB Sim Tong Him
74. YB John Fernandez
75. YB Liew Chin Tong
76. YB Dr.Hiew King Cheu
77. YB Lim Lip Eng
78. YB Er Teck Hwa
Thursday, 2 April 2009
Interview with Pak Lah (Abdullah Badawi final Interview as PM)
Pak Lah's final interview with the media as PM
Wednesday, 01 April 2009 12:13pm
©The Star
by Royce Cheah
Q: How do you feel about the way Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad turned up at the Umno general assembly? It was supposed to be your grand farewell, But he stole the show.
They’ve known me for a long time, so what. When your time’s up , it’s time to go. I do not demand too much. That is my behaviour. No fanfare necessary. What has been done has been done.
Q: Did the two of you say anything to each other?
Was so rushed. I don’t remember anymore. Not very significant.
Q: Best achievement?
Winning the 2004 election
Q: Greatest regret?
Worst election result in 2008
Q: After so many PMs. We have gone through so many stages of development. Where have you taken us in these six years. How much progress?
The emphasis has been given, especially with emergence of the young generation, on human capital. People did not care about this before me. To add value to workers.
For people to learn/relearn and unlearn. I have done Islamic studies - and it is all about improving yourself. Muslims were ahead of their time before. It surpassed a lot of what was done by previous civilizations. Ahead of their time with inspiration from the Quran.
But if you stop, you do not progress anymore and if you forget, then decadence will set in.
It is also about reducing disparity in many forms. Not just income - some are better educated, some are not. There is also disparity in economic sectors - agriculture for example.
Progress doesn’t necessarily mean focus on industrialisation. As the country develops - services sector is the focus. But that’s also why I promoted agriculture. We look at it as a base for the development of agro-based industry in a big way. It’s not just about planting. We’re talking about food security policy. It’s a new approach. When we have this together with the corridor development. It will help bridge disparity.
We don’t want pockets here and there without development.
Also, if you want to compare with Singapore. Talk about Klang Valley or Kuala Lumpur against Singapore. You can’t compare the whole country with Singapore then lament the fact we can’t do well. You cannot compare it like that and then make the conclusion that we are terrible and they are better. It should take into account complexity, land size, population and so on. Singapore is also almost a one-race population. I’m not here to talk badly about others. But if you want to compare. Compare correctly.
In the end it is about equitable distribution of quality opportunities and not just about handouts. We cannot just help people with handouts. There are times we have to, for example the social safety net.
If there is no equitable quality opportunities - then it is discrimination. This government cannot be accused of that.
Otherwise everyone will go to KL. We have to distribute and decentralise. Which then leads to quality of life which has been the struggle of mankind throughout history.
Q: You talked about progress Muslims made in earlier years and how we must emulate their efforts. But we must examine the Islam practised then. It was so free, lots of freedom to research, to think and implement. When you introduced Islam Hadhari, I thought this would bring it back to that era. But under you, Islam has gone to be more repressive. Just look at the lectures given by the ustaz on RTM1, they are so narrow and parochial.
It is a big problem - overseas the idea is welcome. Even Indonesia. But here it is all in a mess. Because we are fighting each other politically. Some PAS members do not like the idea. It is a battle that goes on. Changing of the mind. To do anything like that is not easy.
I have given myself that role. When I talk about democracy and freedom of discourse, it is not an easy job to do. But you have to allow people to enjoy it.
When people like it, the freedom, they think it is very nice. But I would have managed it better. I think up to now, nobody can silence the papers anymore. I don’t like the word takut (scared). Takut is not the way. Being reasonable is very important as well as being correct. Scaring does not work.
Q; Do you regret being more open?
I do not regret. but maybe I could have given more guidance. Like slowing it down when it was too fast. But now there is this unfettered freedom. Expression can come in any form. But I think you realise there has to be some control. You can impose the control on youself. Depends on what kind of values you have. Freedom, but wanting to do pornographic things, that’s not the kind of freedom I would like to see. Must have some values and self-respect. Freedom cannot be exercised without some moral limitation.
Then you are creating a big problem. You are creating anarchy.
Q: Has the freedom been a political asset for the Opposition?
Asset is not the word. To me, I have not been saying enough on this. Maybe in my retirement I will talk like this. Not to criticise Najib. But there has to be at some stage political education for all. For everybody, not only for BN or Umno. How we exercise freedom, freedom of speech and press freedom. Its all part of politics.
How to handle race relations. The young generation is coming up, with no sense of history. No real understanding of the reason why we must have this and must have that and as such what is being said by them is confused.
But I’m not saying it has to be cast in stone. What is the reason to change? If you want to change, it has to be change for the better.
Q: Why did you give freedom for such long time considering what was happening?
I’m not the type of person that when something goes out of line - slam - I shut them up. I can do that, but I’m not like that.
Q: Have people misused the freedom to some extent?
Yes. Some groups have used this freedom and used this freedom as protection. Throwing stones, etc, behind this freedom. These are cowards. Correct names but false IC numbers on whatever they sign off on. It is the exercising of the freedom to lie. Is that genuine freedom? Or abuse of freedom?
Q: Do you think you could have done more if Tun Dr Mahathir had not started to attack you very early on. Do you think you could have handled him better by not scrapping the crooked bridge to Singapore?
To him the bridge was more important than anything else. The rest (of what he said in public) was an elaboration of attacking me.
He did say that if the bridge was built he would stop attacking. So I stopped it and the rest is just him elaborating.
Q: Why didn’t you stop the bridge immediately when you took over?
I did not come in with a pre-conceived idea about that, That I would stop it. This is one issue that Cabinet discussed repeatedly. There was no money, deficit was up and we want to spend on the bridge?
People are watching the deficit. It was at 5.3%. If deficit goes up, do you think we’ll have the money for the stimulus package? We were at 3.2% that’s why it could go up to 4.8%.
Q: On hindsight, do you think you could have handled him better?
Maybe maybe maybe. But I just don’t care. How many times did I respond to him? Very rarely.
Q: When the transition of power took place, was there any agreement between you and Datuk Seri Najib? Will you become angry if he doesn’t do what was promised?
No-lah, I will not. I will not. I will not.
I just work on the basis of believing that if you do something that is good, if it continues to bring good, then there is no good reason why it should be stopped. There will be adjustment, maybe approach it differently. If you have a policy that takes 20 or 30 years to achieve results, along the way there will be a lot of adjustments.
Don’t change the main policy, but just how we get there.
Do you think we can reach Vision 2020 with the kind of problems we are having?
It will be so difficult. We have to double up our efforts.
Q: I think in your six years, there are a lot of missed opportunities. You won such a huge mandate, so many things you could have done.
Yes, missed opportunities in the sense that I could not do many things I wanted to do.
My election manifesto was actually a plan for the second half of Vision 2020. I never had any ambition to be there to declare that Malaysia is a developed country. I expect continuity.
Q: What stopped you from achieving some of the things?
I’ve been doing (things). Some I started earlier and some started later. You cannot implement the entire 2004 manifesto. In the beginning, it was so difficult. I don’t want to force it and create havoc. I’ve chosen a lot of things that have to do with changing of the mind and attitude.
Somebody actually wrote to me to tell me to do things that are visible and not invisible things.
Q: Do you think it’s fair to judge you based on six years when Tun Dr Mahathir’s first six years were difficult?
His first six years were terrible. Well, a little bit longer would have been greater. But it’s not the long and short of it, it’s what you can do in that period.
Q: You said you won’t be the interfering ex-PM, but you are still the MP. First-time in the history of Malaysia. How would you perform your role as legislator?
I would expect an MP to be supportive of the government to which he belongs, that is generally speaking. But there are certain things that if you are not happy, you can always chat over a cup of tea. I even do that with my ministers. I hate to scold people in front of anyone. I don’t do that.
I call and have a chat. Then some people cry. That’s how I deal. I don’t like it because God says if we embarrass people, then we will be embarassed.
Q: I find that you are soft-hearted. You do things to make people happy. Say if people come to your house, then you will entertain them. Then people elsewhere are waiting for you at another place.
That is one of my weakest (traits). My late wife used to scold me. She would say go, people are waiting for you. You entertain them, people are waiting for you there.
These people did not make an appointment with you. After this I won’t have that problem anymore.
Q: Will you miss these visits?
I can fill my time with so many things. I can adjust to it.
Q: Easy to let go? Some don’t find it easy to let go.
There is this changing of roles in life. You start to be somebody, then you become somebody. Life is about changing roles. You go through life and you keep on changing roles. No need to lament the fact when you have to change the role. Accept it. What you do as a young man, what you do as an adult, what you do as an older man. If you accept this fact, as you progress and you know at every stage there is something you can do, you still lead a useful life. You can still contribute. The question is, what do you do with yourself.
If you want to tear your hair and scream. There is a lot you can do. That is your choice.
When you are PM, there are a lot of things that you miss. Sometimes you want to do certain things. You just miss those things.
Q: I hope you are prepared for this.
I don’t think I am going to be affected in anyway. The pomp and all that. Pomp and pageantry don’t matter.
Q: Write a book?
Haven’t thought about that
Q: All the roles you have played, which role have you enjoyed the most?
I enjoyed whatever I did. I was happy in the Ministries I worked in. The PM’s role was very exciting. I enjoyed it.
Wednesday, 01 April 2009 12:13pm
©The Star
by Royce Cheah
Q: How do you feel about the way Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad turned up at the Umno general assembly? It was supposed to be your grand farewell, But he stole the show.
They’ve known me for a long time, so what. When your time’s up , it’s time to go. I do not demand too much. That is my behaviour. No fanfare necessary. What has been done has been done.
Q: Did the two of you say anything to each other?
Was so rushed. I don’t remember anymore. Not very significant.
Q: Best achievement?
Winning the 2004 election
Q: Greatest regret?
Worst election result in 2008
Q: After so many PMs. We have gone through so many stages of development. Where have you taken us in these six years. How much progress?
The emphasis has been given, especially with emergence of the young generation, on human capital. People did not care about this before me. To add value to workers.
For people to learn/relearn and unlearn. I have done Islamic studies - and it is all about improving yourself. Muslims were ahead of their time before. It surpassed a lot of what was done by previous civilizations. Ahead of their time with inspiration from the Quran.
But if you stop, you do not progress anymore and if you forget, then decadence will set in.
It is also about reducing disparity in many forms. Not just income - some are better educated, some are not. There is also disparity in economic sectors - agriculture for example.
Progress doesn’t necessarily mean focus on industrialisation. As the country develops - services sector is the focus. But that’s also why I promoted agriculture. We look at it as a base for the development of agro-based industry in a big way. It’s not just about planting. We’re talking about food security policy. It’s a new approach. When we have this together with the corridor development. It will help bridge disparity.
We don’t want pockets here and there without development.
Also, if you want to compare with Singapore. Talk about Klang Valley or Kuala Lumpur against Singapore. You can’t compare the whole country with Singapore then lament the fact we can’t do well. You cannot compare it like that and then make the conclusion that we are terrible and they are better. It should take into account complexity, land size, population and so on. Singapore is also almost a one-race population. I’m not here to talk badly about others. But if you want to compare. Compare correctly.
In the end it is about equitable distribution of quality opportunities and not just about handouts. We cannot just help people with handouts. There are times we have to, for example the social safety net.
If there is no equitable quality opportunities - then it is discrimination. This government cannot be accused of that.
Otherwise everyone will go to KL. We have to distribute and decentralise. Which then leads to quality of life which has been the struggle of mankind throughout history.
Q: You talked about progress Muslims made in earlier years and how we must emulate their efforts. But we must examine the Islam practised then. It was so free, lots of freedom to research, to think and implement. When you introduced Islam Hadhari, I thought this would bring it back to that era. But under you, Islam has gone to be more repressive. Just look at the lectures given by the ustaz on RTM1, they are so narrow and parochial.
It is a big problem - overseas the idea is welcome. Even Indonesia. But here it is all in a mess. Because we are fighting each other politically. Some PAS members do not like the idea. It is a battle that goes on. Changing of the mind. To do anything like that is not easy.
I have given myself that role. When I talk about democracy and freedom of discourse, it is not an easy job to do. But you have to allow people to enjoy it.
When people like it, the freedom, they think it is very nice. But I would have managed it better. I think up to now, nobody can silence the papers anymore. I don’t like the word takut (scared). Takut is not the way. Being reasonable is very important as well as being correct. Scaring does not work.
Q; Do you regret being more open?
I do not regret. but maybe I could have given more guidance. Like slowing it down when it was too fast. But now there is this unfettered freedom. Expression can come in any form. But I think you realise there has to be some control. You can impose the control on youself. Depends on what kind of values you have. Freedom, but wanting to do pornographic things, that’s not the kind of freedom I would like to see. Must have some values and self-respect. Freedom cannot be exercised without some moral limitation.
Then you are creating a big problem. You are creating anarchy.
Q: Has the freedom been a political asset for the Opposition?
Asset is not the word. To me, I have not been saying enough on this. Maybe in my retirement I will talk like this. Not to criticise Najib. But there has to be at some stage political education for all. For everybody, not only for BN or Umno. How we exercise freedom, freedom of speech and press freedom. Its all part of politics.
How to handle race relations. The young generation is coming up, with no sense of history. No real understanding of the reason why we must have this and must have that and as such what is being said by them is confused.
But I’m not saying it has to be cast in stone. What is the reason to change? If you want to change, it has to be change for the better.
Q: Why did you give freedom for such long time considering what was happening?
I’m not the type of person that when something goes out of line - slam - I shut them up. I can do that, but I’m not like that.
Q: Have people misused the freedom to some extent?
Yes. Some groups have used this freedom and used this freedom as protection. Throwing stones, etc, behind this freedom. These are cowards. Correct names but false IC numbers on whatever they sign off on. It is the exercising of the freedom to lie. Is that genuine freedom? Or abuse of freedom?
Q: Do you think you could have done more if Tun Dr Mahathir had not started to attack you very early on. Do you think you could have handled him better by not scrapping the crooked bridge to Singapore?
To him the bridge was more important than anything else. The rest (of what he said in public) was an elaboration of attacking me.
He did say that if the bridge was built he would stop attacking. So I stopped it and the rest is just him elaborating.
Q: Why didn’t you stop the bridge immediately when you took over?
I did not come in with a pre-conceived idea about that, That I would stop it. This is one issue that Cabinet discussed repeatedly. There was no money, deficit was up and we want to spend on the bridge?
People are watching the deficit. It was at 5.3%. If deficit goes up, do you think we’ll have the money for the stimulus package? We were at 3.2% that’s why it could go up to 4.8%.
Q: On hindsight, do you think you could have handled him better?
Maybe maybe maybe. But I just don’t care. How many times did I respond to him? Very rarely.
Q: When the transition of power took place, was there any agreement between you and Datuk Seri Najib? Will you become angry if he doesn’t do what was promised?
No-lah, I will not. I will not. I will not.
I just work on the basis of believing that if you do something that is good, if it continues to bring good, then there is no good reason why it should be stopped. There will be adjustment, maybe approach it differently. If you have a policy that takes 20 or 30 years to achieve results, along the way there will be a lot of adjustments.
Don’t change the main policy, but just how we get there.
Do you think we can reach Vision 2020 with the kind of problems we are having?
It will be so difficult. We have to double up our efforts.
Q: I think in your six years, there are a lot of missed opportunities. You won such a huge mandate, so many things you could have done.
Yes, missed opportunities in the sense that I could not do many things I wanted to do.
My election manifesto was actually a plan for the second half of Vision 2020. I never had any ambition to be there to declare that Malaysia is a developed country. I expect continuity.
Q: What stopped you from achieving some of the things?
I’ve been doing (things). Some I started earlier and some started later. You cannot implement the entire 2004 manifesto. In the beginning, it was so difficult. I don’t want to force it and create havoc. I’ve chosen a lot of things that have to do with changing of the mind and attitude.
Somebody actually wrote to me to tell me to do things that are visible and not invisible things.
Q: Do you think it’s fair to judge you based on six years when Tun Dr Mahathir’s first six years were difficult?
His first six years were terrible. Well, a little bit longer would have been greater. But it’s not the long and short of it, it’s what you can do in that period.
Q: You said you won’t be the interfering ex-PM, but you are still the MP. First-time in the history of Malaysia. How would you perform your role as legislator?
I would expect an MP to be supportive of the government to which he belongs, that is generally speaking. But there are certain things that if you are not happy, you can always chat over a cup of tea. I even do that with my ministers. I hate to scold people in front of anyone. I don’t do that.
I call and have a chat. Then some people cry. That’s how I deal. I don’t like it because God says if we embarrass people, then we will be embarassed.
Q: I find that you are soft-hearted. You do things to make people happy. Say if people come to your house, then you will entertain them. Then people elsewhere are waiting for you at another place.
That is one of my weakest (traits). My late wife used to scold me. She would say go, people are waiting for you. You entertain them, people are waiting for you there.
These people did not make an appointment with you. After this I won’t have that problem anymore.
Q: Will you miss these visits?
I can fill my time with so many things. I can adjust to it.
Q: Easy to let go? Some don’t find it easy to let go.
There is this changing of roles in life. You start to be somebody, then you become somebody. Life is about changing roles. You go through life and you keep on changing roles. No need to lament the fact when you have to change the role. Accept it. What you do as a young man, what you do as an adult, what you do as an older man. If you accept this fact, as you progress and you know at every stage there is something you can do, you still lead a useful life. You can still contribute. The question is, what do you do with yourself.
If you want to tear your hair and scream. There is a lot you can do. That is your choice.
When you are PM, there are a lot of things that you miss. Sometimes you want to do certain things. You just miss those things.
Q: I hope you are prepared for this.
I don’t think I am going to be affected in anyway. The pomp and all that. Pomp and pageantry don’t matter.
Q: Write a book?
Haven’t thought about that
Q: All the roles you have played, which role have you enjoyed the most?
I enjoyed whatever I did. I was happy in the Ministries I worked in. The PM’s role was very exciting. I enjoyed it.
Wednesday, 1 April 2009
MCA : Government to buy back PLUS
MCA wants government to take back PLUS
@ www.theedgemalaysia.com
Written by Nadia S Hassan
Wednesday, 01 April 2009 00:25
KUALA LUMPUR: MCA will urge the government to privatise toll concessionaire PLUS Expressways Bhd as the move will prove beneficial for the people, a spokesman said.At a briefing yesterday, MCA central committee member Wong Nai Chee said it could be done through the government's investment arm Khazanah Nasional Bhd, which holds 63.88% of PLUS (inclusive of shares held under UEM Group Bhd), according to the latter's annual report.
"Assuming a share price of RM3.50 to RM4 per share offered for the acquisition of the remaining shares not owned by the government, the total acquisition price is between RM4.55 billion and RM5.2 billion," said Wong.
He said the MCA would bring up its proposal at the upcoming monthly Barisan Nasional (BN) management meeting. MCA would also look at raising a dialogue with the Ministry of Works on the matter. Wong said the government had an effective interest of 74% in PLUS through Khazanah and the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) Board (which holds 9.59% stake in PLUS as at April 30, 2008), leaving another 26% in the market."
The proposed offer price takes into account not only the historical movements of PLUS' share price, but also the company's fundamentals. The move would also ensure that the company would become more sociably responsible, and not just have profitability in mind," said Wong.
His calculation implies that Khazanah does not buy out the EPF. Between 2003 and 2008, the government paid PLUS some RM2.8 billion in compensation.A back of the envelope calculation showed that the acquisition cost mentioned indicated a potential acquisition price of between RM3.39 and RM3.92 per share, or at least 15% premium to PLUS' prevailing market capitalisation of RM14.75 billion. PLUS closed two sen lower at RM2.94 yesterday. Wong added that making PLUS 100% government-owned would not prove a burden as the company was profitable. "PLUS has been generating a profit of RM400 million to RM600 million yearly from the financial years 2004 to 2007, even if the gross compensation from the government for not increasing the toll is excluded."
"In terms of profit after tax margin inclusive of government compensation, the PLUS business yields a profit margin of above 50% from 2004 to 2008," Wong said."The cash flow generated from operations excluding any receipt from government compensation for not increasing the toll is RM1.1 billion to RM1.4 billion yearly from 2004 to 2007. "This clearly shows that if PLUS is taken over, the possibility of waiving toll increase can be carried out both financially or legally. It would also overcome the problem of minority rights in the future," said Wong.
@ www.theedgemalaysia.com
Written by Nadia S Hassan
Wednesday, 01 April 2009 00:25
KUALA LUMPUR: MCA will urge the government to privatise toll concessionaire PLUS Expressways Bhd as the move will prove beneficial for the people, a spokesman said.At a briefing yesterday, MCA central committee member Wong Nai Chee said it could be done through the government's investment arm Khazanah Nasional Bhd, which holds 63.88% of PLUS (inclusive of shares held under UEM Group Bhd), according to the latter's annual report.
"Assuming a share price of RM3.50 to RM4 per share offered for the acquisition of the remaining shares not owned by the government, the total acquisition price is between RM4.55 billion and RM5.2 billion," said Wong.
He said the MCA would bring up its proposal at the upcoming monthly Barisan Nasional (BN) management meeting. MCA would also look at raising a dialogue with the Ministry of Works on the matter. Wong said the government had an effective interest of 74% in PLUS through Khazanah and the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) Board (which holds 9.59% stake in PLUS as at April 30, 2008), leaving another 26% in the market."
The proposed offer price takes into account not only the historical movements of PLUS' share price, but also the company's fundamentals. The move would also ensure that the company would become more sociably responsible, and not just have profitability in mind," said Wong.
His calculation implies that Khazanah does not buy out the EPF. Between 2003 and 2008, the government paid PLUS some RM2.8 billion in compensation.A back of the envelope calculation showed that the acquisition cost mentioned indicated a potential acquisition price of between RM3.39 and RM3.92 per share, or at least 15% premium to PLUS' prevailing market capitalisation of RM14.75 billion. PLUS closed two sen lower at RM2.94 yesterday. Wong added that making PLUS 100% government-owned would not prove a burden as the company was profitable. "PLUS has been generating a profit of RM400 million to RM600 million yearly from the financial years 2004 to 2007, even if the gross compensation from the government for not increasing the toll is excluded."
"In terms of profit after tax margin inclusive of government compensation, the PLUS business yields a profit margin of above 50% from 2004 to 2008," Wong said."The cash flow generated from operations excluding any receipt from government compensation for not increasing the toll is RM1.1 billion to RM1.4 billion yearly from 2004 to 2007. "This clearly shows that if PLUS is taken over, the possibility of waiving toll increase can be carried out both financially or legally. It would also overcome the problem of minority rights in the future," said Wong.
Wednesday, 18 March 2009
Zaid Ibrahim : Najib Cant Be PM (Full Text of Speech)
ZAID IBRAHIM: NAJIB CAN'T BE PM
"If truth be told, Najib can't be PM"Zaid Ibrahim March 18, 09 1:51pm
@ Magickriver Blog
Full text of former law minister Zaid Ibrahim's hard-hitting speech at the Royal Rotary Club of Kuala Lumpur on 18 March 2009.
This is the second time I have been invited to address a Rotary Club. Thank you for the honour. Given the times we live in, perhaps it might be appropriate for me to speak about the leadership transition that has been foisted upon us Malaysians.
I say ‘foisted’ because neither me nor anyone in this room had any role or say in the choice of the person who will lead Malaysia next. We were mere bystanders in a political chess game. And yet the transition is a subject of great consequence to the nation, one I would say is of great national interest.
Leadership is definitive; the individual who assumes the mantle of leadership of this nation, whomever that may be, is one who for better or worse will leave his mark on us. His will be the hand who guides us to greater success, or possibly gut-wrenching disaster.
Save for the dawn of Merdeka, never in the history of this country has the choice of prime minister been so crucial: Malaysia is in crisis. We are facing tremendous economic challenges with unavoidably harsh socio-political consequences.
Our much undermined democracy is once again being assailed by those who would prefer a more autocratic form of governance.Our public institutions are hollowed out caricatures, unable to distinguish vested party interests from national ones, unable to offer the man in the street refuge from the powerful and connected.
Our social fabric that took us from colony to an independent nation and on through the obstacles of nation building has reached a point where it sometimes feel like we are hanging on by a thread. This is the Malaysia we live in.
PM’s resignation ill-fated
This is the Malaysia which Abdullah Ahmad Badawi leaves behind. Our prime minister will resign later this month - an ill-fated decision. I say ill-fated not because he has been a great prime minister and we would lose irreplaceable leadership, that is regrettably not the case as all things said and done Abdullah could have done much more for Malaysia.
Rather, I say that his resignation is ill-fated because his departure will expose the country to forces which may take us down the road of perdition faster than ever. Much has been said of Pak Lah being a weak leader. However, what his critics have not adequately addressed are the consequences of replacing him as prime minister with the anticipated incoming president of Umno, Najib (Abdul) Razak.
It is an undeniable truth that the average Malaysian is anxious about the anticipated transition. Many would prefer it did not happen.
There are two reasons why this is so. The first has to do with the reasoning underlying Umno's demand for the transition itself. The second has to do with Najib personally.We must recall that after the 2008 general election - a great success for the nation but a fiasco for Umno – one of the chief complaints by the powers-that-be within Umno was that Abdullah’s feeble leadership led to the concept of Ketuanan Melayu being challenged and ultimately undermined.
His critics also lashed out at him for the latitude given to civil society, a move which they believed weakened a key aspect of Umno's political leverage. It followed in Umno's mind that in order to regain lost ground, it was necessary to reassert its ideology with greater strength.
There was nostalgia for Mahathir's heavy-handed style of leadership and a return to the times when the party cowed many into subservience and submission. The conservatives in Umno yearned for a return to Mahathirism, hoping that it would become a cornerstone of the leadership transition plan. There has been much speculation and punditry on whether a return to the Mahathir era would be good for Malaysia.
Difference between then and now
Let me offer some of my own insight to this debate. The major difference between then and now is this: in most instances, Mahathir was harsh and dictatorial if he believed it was good for the country. But an authoritarian style of government under anyone else would be dictated by the need for self preservation and very little about the country’s interest.
The evidence is all around us. After March 8, (2008) when the prime minister ceased being the home minister, the threats of reprisal have escalated and a climate of fear re-cultivated. The detention of Raja Petra Kamarudin, Teresa Kok and Tan Hoong Cheng exemplify this turn for the worse, this appetite to use the sledgehammer.
The shameful power grab in Perak and wanton disregard for public opinion over how BN wrested control of the silver state make many people shudder at the prospect of a return to the dark days. If that was not depressing enough, we have had to bear witness to the police and the newly-minted Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) displaying their allegiance and support to the BN when all we needed and craved for were honest brokers.
It stands to reason that in the mind of the average Malaysian, having suffered a significant loss last March, Umno is on a rampage to regain what it lost by any method available and the man who is expected to lead it to victory is the man who succeeds Abdullah: Najib (Abdul) Razak.
A prime minister must have the confidence of the majority of the rakyat. In order for this to be the case, his integrity must be beyond question; not only must he be such a person character, he must be seen to be such a person. The office of prime minister is one of great trust, he who holds that office cradles the nation in his palms.
For this to be the case, there cannot be anything in the mind of the greater public that, correctly or otherwise, associates him with matters of criminality, wrongful action, improper conduct or abuses of power. In short, he must be beyond reproach in his dealings both official and private.
"If truth be told, Najib can't be PM"Zaid Ibrahim March 18, 09 1:51pm
@ Magickriver Blog
Full text of former law minister Zaid Ibrahim's hard-hitting speech at the Royal Rotary Club of Kuala Lumpur on 18 March 2009.
This is the second time I have been invited to address a Rotary Club. Thank you for the honour. Given the times we live in, perhaps it might be appropriate for me to speak about the leadership transition that has been foisted upon us Malaysians.
I say ‘foisted’ because neither me nor anyone in this room had any role or say in the choice of the person who will lead Malaysia next. We were mere bystanders in a political chess game. And yet the transition is a subject of great consequence to the nation, one I would say is of great national interest.
Leadership is definitive; the individual who assumes the mantle of leadership of this nation, whomever that may be, is one who for better or worse will leave his mark on us. His will be the hand who guides us to greater success, or possibly gut-wrenching disaster.
Save for the dawn of Merdeka, never in the history of this country has the choice of prime minister been so crucial: Malaysia is in crisis. We are facing tremendous economic challenges with unavoidably harsh socio-political consequences.
Our much undermined democracy is once again being assailed by those who would prefer a more autocratic form of governance.Our public institutions are hollowed out caricatures, unable to distinguish vested party interests from national ones, unable to offer the man in the street refuge from the powerful and connected.
Our social fabric that took us from colony to an independent nation and on through the obstacles of nation building has reached a point where it sometimes feel like we are hanging on by a thread. This is the Malaysia we live in.
PM’s resignation ill-fated
This is the Malaysia which Abdullah Ahmad Badawi leaves behind. Our prime minister will resign later this month - an ill-fated decision. I say ill-fated not because he has been a great prime minister and we would lose irreplaceable leadership, that is regrettably not the case as all things said and done Abdullah could have done much more for Malaysia.
Rather, I say that his resignation is ill-fated because his departure will expose the country to forces which may take us down the road of perdition faster than ever. Much has been said of Pak Lah being a weak leader. However, what his critics have not adequately addressed are the consequences of replacing him as prime minister with the anticipated incoming president of Umno, Najib (Abdul) Razak.
It is an undeniable truth that the average Malaysian is anxious about the anticipated transition. Many would prefer it did not happen.
There are two reasons why this is so. The first has to do with the reasoning underlying Umno's demand for the transition itself. The second has to do with Najib personally.We must recall that after the 2008 general election - a great success for the nation but a fiasco for Umno – one of the chief complaints by the powers-that-be within Umno was that Abdullah’s feeble leadership led to the concept of Ketuanan Melayu being challenged and ultimately undermined.
His critics also lashed out at him for the latitude given to civil society, a move which they believed weakened a key aspect of Umno's political leverage. It followed in Umno's mind that in order to regain lost ground, it was necessary to reassert its ideology with greater strength.
There was nostalgia for Mahathir's heavy-handed style of leadership and a return to the times when the party cowed many into subservience and submission. The conservatives in Umno yearned for a return to Mahathirism, hoping that it would become a cornerstone of the leadership transition plan. There has been much speculation and punditry on whether a return to the Mahathir era would be good for Malaysia.
Difference between then and now
Let me offer some of my own insight to this debate. The major difference between then and now is this: in most instances, Mahathir was harsh and dictatorial if he believed it was good for the country. But an authoritarian style of government under anyone else would be dictated by the need for self preservation and very little about the country’s interest.
The evidence is all around us. After March 8, (2008) when the prime minister ceased being the home minister, the threats of reprisal have escalated and a climate of fear re-cultivated. The detention of Raja Petra Kamarudin, Teresa Kok and Tan Hoong Cheng exemplify this turn for the worse, this appetite to use the sledgehammer.
The shameful power grab in Perak and wanton disregard for public opinion over how BN wrested control of the silver state make many people shudder at the prospect of a return to the dark days. If that was not depressing enough, we have had to bear witness to the police and the newly-minted Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) displaying their allegiance and support to the BN when all we needed and craved for were honest brokers.
It stands to reason that in the mind of the average Malaysian, having suffered a significant loss last March, Umno is on a rampage to regain what it lost by any method available and the man who is expected to lead it to victory is the man who succeeds Abdullah: Najib (Abdul) Razak.
A prime minister must have the confidence of the majority of the rakyat. In order for this to be the case, his integrity must be beyond question; not only must he be such a person character, he must be seen to be such a person. The office of prime minister is one of great trust, he who holds that office cradles the nation in his palms.
For this to be the case, there cannot be anything in the mind of the greater public that, correctly or otherwise, associates him with matters of criminality, wrongful action, improper conduct or abuses of power. In short, he must be beyond reproach in his dealings both official and private.
Without intending any accusation, it is regrettable that in the collective mind of the rakyat, Najib is not such a person. If a referendum were to be conducted on the subject or if the prime minister was to be elected directly by the rakyat, I do not think Najib would succeed.
The reason for this is obvious: the rakyat has doubts, fuelled by the unanswered allegations against him and his unwillingness to confront these allegations.
It is not a mere trifle in the minds of the rakyat that despite a direct challenge from a member of parliament in the august House recently, the deputy prime minister remained silent, not even denying the implicit accusation made against him and demanding that it be repeated outside the chamber in the tried and tested method of refutation employed by parliamentarians throughout the world.
It has not assisted the cause of the incoming prime minister that the MP concerned was suspended for a year on a motion tabled by a fellow minister without the member having been afforded an opportunity to defend his position.
Evidence of SMS text-messages
Consider this. Commissions were paid to an agent for the procurement of submarines through the Defence Ministry, Najib (then) being the defence minister. It is unthinkable that he had no knowledge that the agent was his adviser and aide, Abdul Razak Baginda. The commission paid out was exceedingly large, in excess of RM500 million.
The defence minister was dutybound to direct enquiries to see if there had been any impropriety in the way the contracts were awarded when news of the commission surfaced; after all the price of the submarines would be considerably lower without the need for such commissions.
Taxpayers, you and I, have paid for those submarines at a price that in all probability factored in the commission. Taxpayers are yet to be told of an inquiry let alone the result of such an inquiry.
Consider the Altantuya Shaariibuu affair. A young woman was brutally murdered, her corpse destroyed by explosives.These explosives are not the usual type of explosives, yet no inquiry was held to determine how they were available to these killers.
Those accused of her murder are police officers serving in the Unit Tindakan Khas, a highly specialised unit who amongst other things serve as bodyguards to the prime minister and the deputy prime minister.
Amidst evidence that the accused were employed to protect the PM and the DPM, they were directed to (Abdul) Razak Baginda through the aide of the deputy prime minister. Amongst other things, we have heard of the senior investigating officer admitting that the deputy prime minister was an important witness and yet no statement was taken.
It is not unreasonable to think that this is irregular, more so when evidence of SMS text-messages from the deputy prime minister concerning material matters have surfaced. The text-messages cannot be ignored, proverbially swept under the carpet.
Even if they do not establish - or are not capable of establishing - any culpability on the part of Najib, these issues must be addressed.
The air must be cleared, it is thick with accusations and doubts which can only undermine the office of the prime minister if he were to assume it. The deputy prime minister's cause has not been aided by the fact that charges were preferred against (Abdul) Razak Baginda only after public outcry, the manner in which the prosecution was conducted and the decision of the High Court acquitting (Abdul) Razak Baginda not having been appealed.
Power grab an unmitigated disaster
The Perak affair was an unmitigated disaster for the nation. It is no secret that Najib led the charge there and is still overseeing matters.
In the minds of Malaysians, Perak is synonymous with the deputy prime minister. They now equate him with the high-handed tactics that were employed to seize power, tactics that included the disappearances of the three crucial assemblypersons and the blockading of the legislative assembly by the police.
In doing so, they equate the DPM with the hijacking of democracy, the only persons saying otherwise being those persons who have associations with Umno. In their minds, no responsible leader would allow for the undermining of the institutions of state and the constitution of this nation.
They ask, rightly so, whether this is the kind of leadership that Malaysians can expect from Najib when he becomes the prime minister.
With all of this, and more, how are we not to feel anxious? How are we to sleep peacefully at night? I know that I cannot. The situation is desperate and the air is pregnant with tension. We need the state of affairs to be resolved in a way that is in the best interests of the nation and the rakyat.
To an extent, this is a matter for the Barisan Nasional. I urge its members to put politics aside and think things through. We all want a better future, a safer and more prosperous life for our children, all of them, a Malaysia where our children can reach for the stars with the certainty that there is nothing to stop them from being the Malaysians they want to be.
Let the king be kingmaker
I do not believe that the Barisan Nasional will do what is necessary. Politics has a tendency of making those who embrace it cynical. The answer lies elsewhere, with His Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
In this case, His Majesty plays the role of ‘kingmaker.’ The discretion to appoint the prime minister who succeeds Abdullah lies with His Majesty. Though His Majesty is required under the constitution to appoint the person who commands the confidence of the majority of the members of parliament, it is a matter for His Majesty's judgment.
Never before has such a heavy burden being laid on His Majesty to make a brave and correct choice.
For King and country, I urge His Majesty to take into consideration the prerequisites to appointment and the concerns of the rakyat. There is no constitutional obligation on His Majesty to appoint the president of Umno as the prime minister. There are still well qualified members of parliament from Umno who can be appointed PM to bring us back from the brink.
Malaysia needs someone whom the rakyat can throw their weight behind without reservation. Someone they can trust and respect. Someone who has no scandal to distract him and thereby gain respect from the international community.
These are difficult times and be prepared for worst times to visit us. Malaysia needs a leader who will unite the country in the face of the adversity. Divided, we are weak. I am loath to say it, but for the reasons I have set out am compelled to say that Najib will most certainly divide us and in doing so, will nudge us closer to the edge
.Some of you may say that all efforts to promote the national interest are at this stage an exercise in futility. If truth be told, I am tempted to slip into cynical hopelessness too. I am fighting the temptation to give up for one simple reason: Malaysia and all that it represents. This is a blessed country, a country too valuable for us to turn our backs on.
Zaid urges King not to make Najib PM
Zaid urges King not to make Najib PM
@Malaysia Insider
KUALA LUMPUR, March 18 - Datuk Zaid Ibrahim has made an impassioned plea to the King to not appoint Datuk Seri Najib Razak as prime minister, and instead appoint someone else from Umno "to bring us back from the brink."
The former de facto law minister urged the King to used his judgment to appoint as PM someone who is "beyond reproach in his dealings both official and private," in a scathing attack on his former Cabinet and party colleague.
"A prime minister must have the confidence of the majority of the rakyat…For this to be the case there cannot be anything in the mind of the greater public that, correctly or otherwise, associates him with matters of criminality, wrongful action, improper conduct or abuses of power," he said in a speech to the Rotary Club here today.
Zaid's remarks will certainly put pressure on Najib as he prepares to take power first as Umno president next week before taking over from Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi as prime minister the following week.
The former minister's comments also come a day after Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad also piled on the pressure on Najib by saying he did not shine as a deputy prime minister and acknowledging the baggage he carries into the job.
In his speech, Zaid also made reference to what has been described as the kind of baggage that no other Malaysian leader had on entering office.
He has been linked on the internet and by political rivals to the brutal murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu although he has firmly denied involvement and there is no evidence to tie him to the death.
Najib's popularity rating also stands at just 41 per cent, according to a recent poll by the independent Merdeka Centre.
Zaid said that while he did not intend any accusation, he felt that Najib was not beyond reproach in the collective mind of the rakyat.
"The rakyat has doubts, fuelled by the unanswered allegations against him. It is not a mere trifle in the minds of the rakyat that despite a direct challenge from a member of parliament recently, the deputy prime minister remained silent," he said.
Zaid also cited the RM400 million in commissions reportedly paid by the Defence Ministry while Najib was minister for the procurement of submarines, and pointed out that Abdul Razak Baginda, the DPM's friend was an agent in the deal.
The Altantuya murder was also cited by Zaid, who pointed out that there were many unanswered questions which the public deserved to be told about.
He also described the recent power grab in Perak as an unmitigated disaster.
"They (the public) now equate him with the high-handed tactics that were employed to seize power.
"With all of this and more, how are we not to feel anxious? How are we to sleep peacefully at night?"
Zaid said that while the King is required under the Constitution to appoint the person who commands the confidence of the majority of the members of parliament, it is a matter for His Majesty's judgment.
"There is no constitutional obligation on His Majesty to appoint the president of Umno as the prime minister.
"There are still well qualified members of parliament from Umno who can be appointed PM to bring us back from the brink."
@Malaysia Insider
KUALA LUMPUR, March 18 - Datuk Zaid Ibrahim has made an impassioned plea to the King to not appoint Datuk Seri Najib Razak as prime minister, and instead appoint someone else from Umno "to bring us back from the brink."
The former de facto law minister urged the King to used his judgment to appoint as PM someone who is "beyond reproach in his dealings both official and private," in a scathing attack on his former Cabinet and party colleague.
"A prime minister must have the confidence of the majority of the rakyat…For this to be the case there cannot be anything in the mind of the greater public that, correctly or otherwise, associates him with matters of criminality, wrongful action, improper conduct or abuses of power," he said in a speech to the Rotary Club here today.
Zaid's remarks will certainly put pressure on Najib as he prepares to take power first as Umno president next week before taking over from Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi as prime minister the following week.
The former minister's comments also come a day after Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad also piled on the pressure on Najib by saying he did not shine as a deputy prime minister and acknowledging the baggage he carries into the job.
In his speech, Zaid also made reference to what has been described as the kind of baggage that no other Malaysian leader had on entering office.
He has been linked on the internet and by political rivals to the brutal murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu although he has firmly denied involvement and there is no evidence to tie him to the death.
Najib's popularity rating also stands at just 41 per cent, according to a recent poll by the independent Merdeka Centre.
Zaid said that while he did not intend any accusation, he felt that Najib was not beyond reproach in the collective mind of the rakyat.
"The rakyat has doubts, fuelled by the unanswered allegations against him. It is not a mere trifle in the minds of the rakyat that despite a direct challenge from a member of parliament recently, the deputy prime minister remained silent," he said.
Zaid also cited the RM400 million in commissions reportedly paid by the Defence Ministry while Najib was minister for the procurement of submarines, and pointed out that Abdul Razak Baginda, the DPM's friend was an agent in the deal.
The Altantuya murder was also cited by Zaid, who pointed out that there were many unanswered questions which the public deserved to be told about.
He also described the recent power grab in Perak as an unmitigated disaster.
"They (the public) now equate him with the high-handed tactics that were employed to seize power.
"With all of this and more, how are we not to feel anxious? How are we to sleep peacefully at night?"
Zaid said that while the King is required under the Constitution to appoint the person who commands the confidence of the majority of the members of parliament, it is a matter for His Majesty's judgment.
"There is no constitutional obligation on His Majesty to appoint the president of Umno as the prime minister.
"There are still well qualified members of parliament from Umno who can be appointed PM to bring us back from the brink."
Tuesday, 17 March 2009
Selangor Assembly wants MACC to be fair
Selangor Assembly wants MACC to be fair
Tuesday, 17 March 2009 10:34am
©The Sun by Karen Arukesamy
SHAH ALAM (March 16, 2009) : The Selangor state assembly today passed a motion urging the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) should "seriously and freely" investigate all corruption and abuse of power allegations according to merits without case preferences.
Also passed was a motion to declare the freedom for the state and its subsidiary companies to make contributions in the interest of social responsibility to those they deem fit to receive these as laws and policies allow.
The first motion brought to the Dewan by Dr Abdul Rani Osman (PAS-Meru) while the second was brought by Dr A.Xavier Jayakumar (PKR-Seri Andalas).
In his speech when tabling the motion Xavier said that the state hoped that state owned companies will be involved in programmes that benefit the people in the state especially the poor- as part of its Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programmes.
Raising the issue pertaining 46 cows that were donated to Bandar Tun Razak mosques and suraus by a Perbadanan Kemajuan Negeri Selangor (PKNS) subsidiary which became the subject of scrutiny by the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) he said: "MACC was so quick to investigate and say that there was a strong case and evidence of abuse of power against the Menteri Besar when not even a single cent when into his pocket."He said comparatively this did not happen when numerous reports of abuse were lodged against the former Menteri Besar with clear cut evidence.
Later during his support for the motion tables by Abdul Rani, Ng Suee Lim (DAP-Sekinchan) called for the MACC to be placed under the purview of Parliament instead of the prime minister’s department to ensure its independence and fairness to all parties.
"If it is under the prime minister’s department and say the prime minister and his deputy are allegedly involved in corruption – will MACC dare investigate their bosses?" he asked.
"It seems like the MACC is only interested in investigating small cases but do not dare touch big cases involving Barisan Nasional leaders," Ng said.
Citing the Malay acronym, Ng said MACC is more like Suruhanjaya Pelindung(protector) Rasuah Malaysia instead of Pencegahan (Prevention) and that all it is worried about are ‘cars and cows’.He also said that when Sungai Panjang (Datuk Seri Mohammad Khir Toyo’s constituent) touches on the ‘cows and cars’ issue, MACC took immediate action."What is the connection between the two? I suspect there is some kind of connection between them," Ng said, challenging Mohammad Khir to respond.
Tuesday, 17 March 2009 10:34am
©The Sun by Karen Arukesamy
SHAH ALAM (March 16, 2009) : The Selangor state assembly today passed a motion urging the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) should "seriously and freely" investigate all corruption and abuse of power allegations according to merits without case preferences.
Also passed was a motion to declare the freedom for the state and its subsidiary companies to make contributions in the interest of social responsibility to those they deem fit to receive these as laws and policies allow.
The first motion brought to the Dewan by Dr Abdul Rani Osman (PAS-Meru) while the second was brought by Dr A.Xavier Jayakumar (PKR-Seri Andalas).
In his speech when tabling the motion Xavier said that the state hoped that state owned companies will be involved in programmes that benefit the people in the state especially the poor- as part of its Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programmes.
Raising the issue pertaining 46 cows that were donated to Bandar Tun Razak mosques and suraus by a Perbadanan Kemajuan Negeri Selangor (PKNS) subsidiary which became the subject of scrutiny by the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) he said: "MACC was so quick to investigate and say that there was a strong case and evidence of abuse of power against the Menteri Besar when not even a single cent when into his pocket."He said comparatively this did not happen when numerous reports of abuse were lodged against the former Menteri Besar with clear cut evidence.
Later during his support for the motion tables by Abdul Rani, Ng Suee Lim (DAP-Sekinchan) called for the MACC to be placed under the purview of Parliament instead of the prime minister’s department to ensure its independence and fairness to all parties.
"If it is under the prime minister’s department and say the prime minister and his deputy are allegedly involved in corruption – will MACC dare investigate their bosses?" he asked.
"It seems like the MACC is only interested in investigating small cases but do not dare touch big cases involving Barisan Nasional leaders," Ng said.
Citing the Malay acronym, Ng said MACC is more like Suruhanjaya Pelindung(protector) Rasuah Malaysia instead of Pencegahan (Prevention) and that all it is worried about are ‘cars and cows’.He also said that when Sungai Panjang (Datuk Seri Mohammad Khir Toyo’s constituent) touches on the ‘cows and cars’ issue, MACC took immediate action."What is the connection between the two? I suspect there is some kind of connection between them," Ng said, challenging Mohammad Khir to respond.
No evidence of MACC’s neutrality
No evidence of MACC’s neutrality
Monday, 16 March 2009 10:32am
©The Sun by R. Nadeswaran
A DAY before members to the various committees of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency were announced, a journalist was asked: “Do you think it is an honour to be appointed to the committee?”
“Of course it is an honour. Have you been appointed?”
“Yes. Come tomorrow and I will give you an interview.”Colleague Giam Say Khoon related this telephone conversation to office-mates three weeks ago and was asked:
“Did you do the interview?”
“I was covering Parliament and I told him to call the editors.”
He never called because if anyone one of us had picked up the phone, this publicity-seeker would have gotten an earful.
A week after the names were announced, someone else called me to compliment me on a comment which I had made in one my columns on the MACC and its efficacy.
“Don’t worry,” said the caller. “Since I am there, pass us the information. We will push for it,” to which my retort was: “I have lost faith in the MACC. Having supported its setting up, (and I make no apologies for it) I now discover it has become an arm of the political process.” That was a loaded comment and the response was muted.
Last Saturday, another member of the panel urged Malaysians to allow the MACC to do its work professionally without judging them unfairly. “The public must support rather than criticise and condemn. Judge them by their track record and give them a chance,” the NST quoted Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam as saying.
It did not end at that. Then, he dropped the most over-used statement which requires an honorary mention in that Book of Records: “If there is evidence, bring it but don’t criticise unfairly if there isn’t, because otherwise, the MACC can also be accused of abuse by taking action when there’s not enough evidence. It is a difficult position for them. They are damned if they do, and damned if they don’t. But everyone must always help and not hinder.”
No one will suggest that the president of Transparency International Malaysia has become an apologist for the MACC, but when investigations are carried out at break-neck speed for one section of the population while another section is perceived as protected, no amount of words can put the situation right.The MACC, or its predecessor the Anti-Corruption Agency, has in files scores of reports of alleged abuse in land alienation by a former mentri besar.
One bigparcel of land ended up in the hands of a company controlled by teenagers and yet, we have not heard a whimper on the progress of the investigations for the past five years.
And the deputy prime minister has reiterated that anyone making false reports or statutory declarations containing false statements would be charged. So, if the charges made in these reports are false, then charge those who made such reports.
Allow me to labour on this point for sake of wanting this issue to be viewed in clarity.
If the alienation of land (at a fraction of market prices) meant for lowcost housing to the wife of former Port Klang assemblyman Datuk Zakaria Mat Deros is not abuse of power, what is?
What about a minister travelling the world over with a personal trainer in tow?
What about inflated contracts being given out without following procedures?
What about the police harassing this writer for exposing the wrongdoings of the wives of VIPs?
What about the rombongan who got a state-owned company to pay for their trips to enjoy their second childhood – getting acquainted with Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck?
No, Tan Sri, the list is endless.
What more evidence is needed then the Selangor State Assembly being told of the shenanigans of its state-owned company which doled out money and money’s worth to selected people? Surely, the answers to questions raised did not come from thin air.
The vouchers, the invoices, the receipts, the cheque butts and other relevant documents, fortunately were not shredded in the aftermath of the tsunami ofMarch 8. They survived, thanks to inefficient mopping-up operations.
No evidence?This message is worth repeating. The MACC’s credibility has been undermined by a series of bloopers.
Like Navaratnam’s predecessor at TI-M, Tunku Abdul Aziz said, it’s old wine in a new bottle. But all is not lost. The MACC cannot turn the clock back and start afresh. But it can act so as to change public perception. To do that, it must be seen to be independent, acting without fear or favour. It must project itself as having no links to anyone including the prime minister and his deputy or any other VVIPs. In all fairness to Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said, she is innocent and she is right in saying that, as she has not been asked to give a statement to the MACC.
But her highly-publicised private visit to the PM’s residence accompanied by her father has set tongues wagging. For all we know, she is innocent, but people who saw pictures of her on the doorsteps of Sri Perdana will draw their own conclusions. The PM has repeatedly stated that he will not interfere with MACC’s operations and Azalina’s private visit may have nothing to do with the arrest of her aide who was in possession of RM70,000.
But public perception is different. Many say that she went there to seek his help with “her problems”. I don’t believe the PM will stop the MACC from doing its job. “The law must be allowed to take its course,” he was quoted as saying.People form opinions based on what they digest from various sources. We cannot compel them to change their perceptions. Good perceptions of the MACC will come about only if the people read, see and hear the “good side”. Otherwise, the meaning of the word has to be changed.
R. Nadeswaran will continue campaigning for an efficient and independent machinery to fight corruption.
He is editor (special and investigative reporting) at theSun.
He can be reached at citizen-nades@thesundaily.com
CitizenNades by R. Nadeswaran
Monday, 16 March 2009 10:32am
©The Sun by R. Nadeswaran
A DAY before members to the various committees of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency were announced, a journalist was asked: “Do you think it is an honour to be appointed to the committee?”
“Of course it is an honour. Have you been appointed?”
“Yes. Come tomorrow and I will give you an interview.”Colleague Giam Say Khoon related this telephone conversation to office-mates three weeks ago and was asked:
“Did you do the interview?”
“I was covering Parliament and I told him to call the editors.”
He never called because if anyone one of us had picked up the phone, this publicity-seeker would have gotten an earful.
A week after the names were announced, someone else called me to compliment me on a comment which I had made in one my columns on the MACC and its efficacy.
“Don’t worry,” said the caller. “Since I am there, pass us the information. We will push for it,” to which my retort was: “I have lost faith in the MACC. Having supported its setting up, (and I make no apologies for it) I now discover it has become an arm of the political process.” That was a loaded comment and the response was muted.
Last Saturday, another member of the panel urged Malaysians to allow the MACC to do its work professionally without judging them unfairly. “The public must support rather than criticise and condemn. Judge them by their track record and give them a chance,” the NST quoted Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam as saying.
It did not end at that. Then, he dropped the most over-used statement which requires an honorary mention in that Book of Records: “If there is evidence, bring it but don’t criticise unfairly if there isn’t, because otherwise, the MACC can also be accused of abuse by taking action when there’s not enough evidence. It is a difficult position for them. They are damned if they do, and damned if they don’t. But everyone must always help and not hinder.”
No one will suggest that the president of Transparency International Malaysia has become an apologist for the MACC, but when investigations are carried out at break-neck speed for one section of the population while another section is perceived as protected, no amount of words can put the situation right.The MACC, or its predecessor the Anti-Corruption Agency, has in files scores of reports of alleged abuse in land alienation by a former mentri besar.
One bigparcel of land ended up in the hands of a company controlled by teenagers and yet, we have not heard a whimper on the progress of the investigations for the past five years.
And the deputy prime minister has reiterated that anyone making false reports or statutory declarations containing false statements would be charged. So, if the charges made in these reports are false, then charge those who made such reports.
Allow me to labour on this point for sake of wanting this issue to be viewed in clarity.
If the alienation of land (at a fraction of market prices) meant for lowcost housing to the wife of former Port Klang assemblyman Datuk Zakaria Mat Deros is not abuse of power, what is?
What about a minister travelling the world over with a personal trainer in tow?
What about inflated contracts being given out without following procedures?
What about the police harassing this writer for exposing the wrongdoings of the wives of VIPs?
What about the rombongan who got a state-owned company to pay for their trips to enjoy their second childhood – getting acquainted with Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck?
No, Tan Sri, the list is endless.
What more evidence is needed then the Selangor State Assembly being told of the shenanigans of its state-owned company which doled out money and money’s worth to selected people? Surely, the answers to questions raised did not come from thin air.
The vouchers, the invoices, the receipts, the cheque butts and other relevant documents, fortunately were not shredded in the aftermath of the tsunami ofMarch 8. They survived, thanks to inefficient mopping-up operations.
No evidence?This message is worth repeating. The MACC’s credibility has been undermined by a series of bloopers.
Like Navaratnam’s predecessor at TI-M, Tunku Abdul Aziz said, it’s old wine in a new bottle. But all is not lost. The MACC cannot turn the clock back and start afresh. But it can act so as to change public perception. To do that, it must be seen to be independent, acting without fear or favour. It must project itself as having no links to anyone including the prime minister and his deputy or any other VVIPs. In all fairness to Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said, she is innocent and she is right in saying that, as she has not been asked to give a statement to the MACC.
But her highly-publicised private visit to the PM’s residence accompanied by her father has set tongues wagging. For all we know, she is innocent, but people who saw pictures of her on the doorsteps of Sri Perdana will draw their own conclusions. The PM has repeatedly stated that he will not interfere with MACC’s operations and Azalina’s private visit may have nothing to do with the arrest of her aide who was in possession of RM70,000.
But public perception is different. Many say that she went there to seek his help with “her problems”. I don’t believe the PM will stop the MACC from doing its job. “The law must be allowed to take its course,” he was quoted as saying.People form opinions based on what they digest from various sources. We cannot compel them to change their perceptions. Good perceptions of the MACC will come about only if the people read, see and hear the “good side”. Otherwise, the meaning of the word has to be changed.
R. Nadeswaran will continue campaigning for an efficient and independent machinery to fight corruption.
He is editor (special and investigative reporting) at theSun.
He can be reached at citizen-nades@thesundaily.com
CitizenNades by R. Nadeswaran
Selective Prosecution Against Karpal Singh - Bar Council
Press Release: Sedition Act is an affront to democracy
(Source : The Malaysia Bar Website)
The Bar Council is shocked and troubled that the Attorney-General has proceeded to charge YB Karpal Singh under the Sedition Act 1948 (“Act”) for his statements on the issue of the removal of the Perak Menteri Besar Dato’ Seri Nizar Jamaluddin by HRH Sultan Azlan Shah and the events that have unfolded in that state.
The Bar Council has been steadfast in its view that the Act is a draconian and archaic piece of legislation that undermines democratic institutions and is an absolute affront to democracy. Along with other authoritarian and repressive legislation, the Act severely encroaches upon the public enjoyment and exercise of fundamental civil liberties. The prosecution of YB Karpal Singh will be widely perceived as being selective and an attempt to pacify the partisan calls from certain influential sections within UMNO who were pushing for his prosecution. They have even outrageously called for the revocation of his citizenship.
It is abundantly clear that YB Karpal Singh had only voiced his opinion that the decision of a Ruler of a State in this area of constitutional law and practice is justiciable. At no time did he voice disrespect for or challenge the institution of the monarchy in any way. True to his calling as an advocate and solicitor, YB Karpal Singh had, without fear or favour, spoken of the possibility of a legal remedy and not advocated any recourse outside the ambit of our Constitution. This is surely permissible under the Constitution and cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, amount to sedition.
Many issues of public concern have arisen in the wake of the unprecedented events unfolding in Perak. Legal and public opinion are divided as to what is legally permissible and what is morally right. We urge the government to demonstrate its commitment to the rule of law and to democratic processes by encouraging open discourse on issues of concern to the Malaysian public. Any attempt to stifle public opinion by resorting to the Act is a sure act of regression that is antithetical to democratic principles.
We strongly urge the government to seriously review the Act with the aim of its eventual total repeal. We are concerned with the series of recent prosecutions against those exercising the freedom of speech and call for an immediate end to such harassment.
The charge against YB Karpal Singh must be immediately withdrawn.
Ragunath Kesavan
PresidentMalaysian Bar
17 March 2009
(Source : The Malaysia Bar Website)
The Bar Council is shocked and troubled that the Attorney-General has proceeded to charge YB Karpal Singh under the Sedition Act 1948 (“Act”) for his statements on the issue of the removal of the Perak Menteri Besar Dato’ Seri Nizar Jamaluddin by HRH Sultan Azlan Shah and the events that have unfolded in that state.
The Bar Council has been steadfast in its view that the Act is a draconian and archaic piece of legislation that undermines democratic institutions and is an absolute affront to democracy. Along with other authoritarian and repressive legislation, the Act severely encroaches upon the public enjoyment and exercise of fundamental civil liberties. The prosecution of YB Karpal Singh will be widely perceived as being selective and an attempt to pacify the partisan calls from certain influential sections within UMNO who were pushing for his prosecution. They have even outrageously called for the revocation of his citizenship.
It is abundantly clear that YB Karpal Singh had only voiced his opinion that the decision of a Ruler of a State in this area of constitutional law and practice is justiciable. At no time did he voice disrespect for or challenge the institution of the monarchy in any way. True to his calling as an advocate and solicitor, YB Karpal Singh had, without fear or favour, spoken of the possibility of a legal remedy and not advocated any recourse outside the ambit of our Constitution. This is surely permissible under the Constitution and cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, amount to sedition.
Many issues of public concern have arisen in the wake of the unprecedented events unfolding in Perak. Legal and public opinion are divided as to what is legally permissible and what is morally right. We urge the government to demonstrate its commitment to the rule of law and to democratic processes by encouraging open discourse on issues of concern to the Malaysian public. Any attempt to stifle public opinion by resorting to the Act is a sure act of regression that is antithetical to democratic principles.
We strongly urge the government to seriously review the Act with the aim of its eventual total repeal. We are concerned with the series of recent prosecutions against those exercising the freedom of speech and call for an immediate end to such harassment.
The charge against YB Karpal Singh must be immediately withdrawn.
Ragunath Kesavan
PresidentMalaysian Bar
17 March 2009
Gobind Singh Suspended - For Questioning Najib Link to Altantuya Murder
Parliament becomes kangaroo court
(Extracted from Lim Kit Siang Blog)
Parliament convened as a court of justice this morning to decide the fate of DAP MP for Puchong, Gobind Singh Deo, over what transpired in Parliament last Thursday but it operated as a kangaroo court as Gobind was not even allowed the floor to defend himself.
For the first hour, Pakatan Rakyat MPs raised one objection after another against the motion to suspend Gobind for one year as MP without pay and privileges, from the propriety of the motion whether from the standpoint of the Parliamentary Standing Orders, the Houses of Parliament (Privileges and Powers) Act 1952 or the Federal Constitution, to questions including double jeopardy and sub judice but they were all brushed aside by the Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin.The Speaker also rejected the amendment by the DAP MP for Ipoh Barat, M. Kulasegaran to the motion by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz so as to refer Gobind to the Committee of Privileges over the charges cited in the motion: that Gobind had breached parliamentary privileges in alleging the involvement of the Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak in the Altantuya Shariibuu murder case.
(Extracted from Lim Kit Siang Blog)
Parliament convened as a court of justice this morning to decide the fate of DAP MP for Puchong, Gobind Singh Deo, over what transpired in Parliament last Thursday but it operated as a kangaroo court as Gobind was not even allowed the floor to defend himself.
For the first hour, Pakatan Rakyat MPs raised one objection after another against the motion to suspend Gobind for one year as MP without pay and privileges, from the propriety of the motion whether from the standpoint of the Parliamentary Standing Orders, the Houses of Parliament (Privileges and Powers) Act 1952 or the Federal Constitution, to questions including double jeopardy and sub judice but they were all brushed aside by the Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin.The Speaker also rejected the amendment by the DAP MP for Ipoh Barat, M. Kulasegaran to the motion by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz so as to refer Gobind to the Committee of Privileges over the charges cited in the motion: that Gobind had breached parliamentary privileges in alleging the involvement of the Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak in the Altantuya Shariibuu murder case.
I told the House that questions about Najib’s involvement in the murder case are public interest issues, which have been raised not only in the House, but in the country and internationally.
These questions are not parliamentary contempts or parliamentary privileges, in view of the many circumstances giving legitimacy to these queries which Najib had failed to avail himself of the right to reply in the House to dismiss or clarify, including:
- Testimony by the investigating officer of the murder case that Najib was an important witness but he had not been questioned;
- Court testimony of a photograph showing three persons, including Najib and Altantuya;
- Statutory declaration by a private investigator on Najib’s relationship with Altantuya;
- The involvement of members of the police elite unit guarding the deputy prime minister in the murder case.
Pakatan Rakyat MPs staged a protest walk-out when Gobind and other PK MPs, apart from Anwar and myself, were not allowed speak in the debate – and the motion suspending Gobind for one year without pay and privileges was passed by the Umno/Barisan Nasional in Parliament.
Thursday, 5 March 2009
Liberation French Newspaper Allegation
The French Liberation newspaper reveals intriguing details and updates of the Altantuya Shariibuu case (today - 5 march 2009). The writer Arnaud Dubus (a journalist based in Thailand) has visited Ulanbataar and Kuala Lumpur, and returns with several new information regarding the case. I managed to get the English translation of his story. One compelling paragraph states that:
A report from the Malaysian police, written on 19th november 2006 and which has been kept secret until now, reveals dry and precise descriptions as to how this young woman, a member of Asian high society, has been killed. In this document, one of the killers, a policeman of the Malaysian Special Branch named Sirul Omar, replied to the questions of an officer at a police station close to the murder scene. “When the Chinese woman saw that I was taking a gun, she begged me to spare her, saying she was pregnant. Azilah (the commanding officer of Sirul) grabbed her and [threw] her on the ground. I immediately shot the left side of her face. Then Azilah took off her clothes and put them in a black plastic bag. Azilah noticed that her hand was still moving. He ordered me to shoot again, which I did”, said Sirul. This is the first confirmation of Altantuya’s assassins’ identity. “Then we carried her body into the woods. Azilah wrapped the explosives around her legs, her abdomen and her head, and we exploded her.
Details of the English Version of the report: The Altantuya Shaaribuu’s Case : How and why she was killed? is published in Susan Loone's Blog (Read More)
A report from the Malaysian police, written on 19th november 2006 and which has been kept secret until now, reveals dry and precise descriptions as to how this young woman, a member of Asian high society, has been killed. In this document, one of the killers, a policeman of the Malaysian Special Branch named Sirul Omar, replied to the questions of an officer at a police station close to the murder scene. “When the Chinese woman saw that I was taking a gun, she begged me to spare her, saying she was pregnant. Azilah (the commanding officer of Sirul) grabbed her and [threw] her on the ground. I immediately shot the left side of her face. Then Azilah took off her clothes and put them in a black plastic bag. Azilah noticed that her hand was still moving. He ordered me to shoot again, which I did”, said Sirul. This is the first confirmation of Altantuya’s assassins’ identity. “Then we carried her body into the woods. Azilah wrapped the explosives around her legs, her abdomen and her head, and we exploded her.
Details of the English Version of the report: The Altantuya Shaaribuu’s Case : How and why she was killed? is published in Susan Loone's Blog (Read More)
Tuesday, 21 October 2008
Najib Allegation Police Report (wt 21 pages evidence)
Opposition group alleges corruption in report against Najib
By Debra Chong
(Extracted from Malaysia Insider Website)
KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 21 – PKR Youth leader Badrul Hisham Shaharin led a group of five people in lodging a police report today against Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak for corruption.
The group claimed they provided the police with evidence in connection with a number of deals to procure military equipment while Najib was Defence Minister.
Najib has been at the brunt of a series of allegations since he became the front-runner to succeed Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi as Umno president and Prime Minister.
Allegations of impropriety have surfaced over the proposed acquisition of Eurocopter helicopters for RM2.3 billion and the RM4.6 billion Scorpene submarines deal.
The group which made the police report today calls itself the Sekretariat Anak Muda Malaysia (SAMM).
They claimed to have supplied police with 21-pages of evidence implicating the DPM, including documents proving the authenticity of several text messages between Najib and lawyer Datuk Shafee Abdullah.
A series of text messages, which purportedly implies the deputy prime minister had interfered in the police investigations into the murder of Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu in 2006, was published recently in jailed blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin's Malaysia Today website.
Shafee was then acting for Abdul Razak Baginda, Najib's close associate who was subsequently charged for abetting in the murder.
Today, SAMM demanded that police reopen the investigations on Najib's alleged involvement with the murdered victim to show whether he had abused his position and power.
"We filed the report so that the proper procedures can begin," said Badrul, the spokesman for SAMM. "Otherwise, the police will say 'without an official complaint, we cannot start official procedures'."
"We just want to help the police with their investigations. We are providing them some supplementary documents to give them a head start."
The other four, who co-lodged the report at the Dang Wangi district police station here, are Aiman Athirah Al Junaidi, the information chief for national Pas Muslimat; president of Gerak Ramlan Abu Bakar, blogger Amin Iskandar and Wan Anis Adnan.
By Debra Chong
(Extracted from Malaysia Insider Website)
KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 21 – PKR Youth leader Badrul Hisham Shaharin led a group of five people in lodging a police report today against Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak for corruption.
The group claimed they provided the police with evidence in connection with a number of deals to procure military equipment while Najib was Defence Minister.
Najib has been at the brunt of a series of allegations since he became the front-runner to succeed Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi as Umno president and Prime Minister.
Allegations of impropriety have surfaced over the proposed acquisition of Eurocopter helicopters for RM2.3 billion and the RM4.6 billion Scorpene submarines deal.
The group which made the police report today calls itself the Sekretariat Anak Muda Malaysia (SAMM).
They claimed to have supplied police with 21-pages of evidence implicating the DPM, including documents proving the authenticity of several text messages between Najib and lawyer Datuk Shafee Abdullah.
A series of text messages, which purportedly implies the deputy prime minister had interfered in the police investigations into the murder of Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu in 2006, was published recently in jailed blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin's Malaysia Today website.
Shafee was then acting for Abdul Razak Baginda, Najib's close associate who was subsequently charged for abetting in the murder.
Today, SAMM demanded that police reopen the investigations on Najib's alleged involvement with the murdered victim to show whether he had abused his position and power.
"We filed the report so that the proper procedures can begin," said Badrul, the spokesman for SAMM. "Otherwise, the police will say 'without an official complaint, we cannot start official procedures'."
"We just want to help the police with their investigations. We are providing them some supplementary documents to give them a head start."
The other four, who co-lodged the report at the Dang Wangi district police station here, are Aiman Athirah Al Junaidi, the information chief for national Pas Muslimat; president of Gerak Ramlan Abu Bakar, blogger Amin Iskandar and Wan Anis Adnan.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
