VK Lingam Video - Final eight minute recording

VK Lingam Video Part 2

vk lingam scandal video (full length) part 2

Interesting Comment on Appointment of CJ (Abdul Hamid) and Court of Appeal Chief (Zaki Azmi)

Interesting Comment on Appointment of CJ (Abdul Hamid) and Court of Appeal Chief (Zaki Azmi)

Abdul Hamid is new CJ, Zaki is judiciary's No 2

PUTRAJAYA: Acting Chief Justice Datuk Abdul Hamid Mohamad has been confirmed in the top judicial post.
Federal Court judge Tan Sri Zaki Tun Azmi will take over from Abdul Hamid as Court of Appeal president
Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, who made the announcement in a statement yesterday, said both appointments had been consented to by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin upon his advice after consultation with the Conference of Rulers.

Based on the announced Appointment of Abdul Hamid and Zaki


The following was an Interesting Article for us to Ponder upon that i reproduced from another blogger post :-

Will someone try to make sense of this?

The VK Lingam video and his brother’s police reports have shown how deep into that dark black hole the judiciary has fallen.
The government went on a dance about the authenticity of the tape and appointed a 3-man panel to verify the authenticity, instead of heeding the call of civil society to appoint a royal commission of inquiry to look into the depressing state of the judiciary.


The 3-man panel vindicated the civil society call : all 3 panel members also recommended the establishment of a rci and found the video to be authentic.
The government has still not made public the 3 separate reports of the 3 panel members.
The government has announced that it will establish the rci.
The government has not made known the terms of reference of the proposed rci.
The government has not made known the appointees to the proposed rci.

Malaysiakini reports today that the PM has announced that Hamid Mohamed has been confirmed as the new Chief Justice.

After almost 40 years in the judicial service, Hamid is probably the most qualified in the Federal Court to head the judiciary.

Hamid’s stint, though, will probably be very short. He will reach retirement age in April next year and, if extended for 6 months, which has become the norm except, thankfully, in the case of Fairuz, should retire latest by end October or in November next year.

So who takes over when Hamid finally retires?
Who’s next?
The next most senior?

Zaki Azmi, Malaysiakini reports, is going to be the new President of the Court of Appeal, taking Hamid’s place.

If one of the criticisms of Fairuz’s appointment as CJ since the revelations in the VK Lingam is that he had only written in all, 7 judgments as a High Court judge prior to his elevation, Zaki has, to my knowledge, not written any.

Which is understandable given Zaki’s hop, step and jump into the Federal Court in September this year.

Check out the judiciary members directory from the judiciary website HERE.

Let me reproduce below the Federal Court directory which, unless I’m mistaken, ranks the judges according to seniority.
1. The Honourable Dato’ Arifin bin Zakaria DPCM , DPMK, SPSK
2. The Honourable Dato’ Bentara Istana Dato’ Nik Hashim bin Nik Ab. Rahman Dato’ Bentara Istana, SPSK, SIMP, DSMZ, DPMK, DPMT, ASM, KMN
3. The Honourable Dato’ Sri Augustine Paul a/l Sinnappen SSAP, SIMP, DSAP, DIMP, DMSM, KMN, PKT
4. The Honourable Dato’ Abdul Aziz bin Mohamad DPMT, ASM, KMN
5. The Honourable Dato’ Haji Hashim bin Dato’ Haji Yusoff SPSK, DPMK, KMN
6.The Honourable Dato’ Azmel bin Haji Maamor DSNS, PPT
7. The Honourable Dato’ Zulkefli bin Ahmad Makinudin DPMP, SMJ, PIS
8. The Honourable Tan Sri Dato’ Zaki bin Tun Azmi PSM, PJN, DSMT, DSDK, JSM, KMN

The implication of Zaki’s appointment is that notwithstanding his not having a single written judgment to his credit and not even completed 6 months on the Bench ( usually the probationary term in many other industries ), he has been picked over 7 others far more senior than he to be the CJ-in-waiting.

Why?

What gives?

Were we not supposed to be straightening out the judiciary?

If true, the 7 Federal Court judges more senior than Zaki should do the honourable thing and resign.

Something odd about the Malaysiakini report, though.

It states : ‘The King, Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin, has consented to the appointment of the duo on the advice of the prime minister and after consultation with the Conference of Rulers, said Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in a statement. Abdullah said that Abdul Hamid’s appointment took effect on Nov 1 while Zaki’s would be decided later’.

My question. ?

If the Agong has consented to the appointment of both and Hamid’s has been decided to take effect on 1st November, why could not the effective date of Zaki’s appointment, too, be fixed?

Don’t forget that the Agong and the Conference of Rulers declined to appoint two nominees of Fairuz for the office of President of the Court of Appeal and the CJ of Malaya.

Don’t forget that the Agong and the Conference of Rulers declined to give Fairuz his extension.

Don’t forget that Sultan Azlan Shah recently advocated a return to the practise of old of promotions based on seniority.

Yet I’m now told that my Agong and the Conference of Rulers have agreed to bypass 7 other more senior Federal Court judges, have appointed a man barely 3 months on the Bench, but have not fixed the effective date of his appointment?

I don’t buy this.

Something stinks.


Source:
The above post was reproduced from Haris Ibrahim blog post.

HINDRAF Rally Kuala Lumpur Malaysia 25 Nov 2007

HINDRAF rally in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia 25 November 2007

40,000 protest for free and fair elections

VK Lingam Video - Extended clip with proof of Ahmed Fairuz

On November 8, 2007 Anwar Ibrahim released an a... (more)
Added: November 08, 2007
On November 8, 2007 Anwar Ibrahim released an additional segment of the Lingam tape to show that Tun Ahmed Fairuz, former Chief Justice, was indeed the man VK Lingam was talking with on the phone about fixing judicial appointments. Fast forward to the last portion of the video to hear the added segment.

Malaysian Bar Council Walk for Justice rally

Video links CJ to 'appointment fixing' scandal

You Tube Video Clip linking Chief Justice to "Appointment Fixing" Scandal

Below is the link to the You Tube Video Clip linking Chief Justice to "Appointment Fixing" Scandal

http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/content/view/11222/2/

An explosive video clip released today shows senior lawyer VK Lingam in a phone conversation, purportedly with current Chief Justice Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim, allegedly fixing the appointment of ‘friendly’ senior judges.

The eight-minute clip, said to be originally 14 minutes when recorded sometime in 2002, was made public this morning at the office of PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim in Petaling Jaya.Among the matters discussed during the telephone conversation were the potential appointment of Ahmad Fairuz as the Chief Judge of Malaya (CJM) and his promotion as the Chief Justice (CJ), which eventually took place in 2003.In 2002, Ahmad Fairuz was the CJM, in charge of all High Court judges in Peninsular Malaysia, as well as acting President of the Court of Appeal (PCA).

Reading from a prepared statement, Anwar said the revelations proved that his appeals against his sodomy and abuse of power convictions were tainted and that he was denied a proper and fair trial. “Such a scandalous expose... only serves to corroborate our allegations of a political conspiracy of the highest level and corruption of the highest judicial office, seriously bringing into question the impartiality of judicial proceedings involving the affected parties,” said Anwar.

PKR will seek to submit a special appeal to the Conference of Rulers to take appropriate steps. The party will also lodge a report with the Anti-Corruption Agency and a complaint with the Bar Council.Ahmad Fairuz was on the three-member bench which had dismissed Anwar’s appeal against the corruption charge in the Court of Appeal in 2000.

On judicial appointmentsAnwar did not disclose the identity of the person who recorded the video or who had given the clip to the party, but said it had been edited to conceal the identity of a ‘third party’.

The recording shows Lingam walking up and down in a room, talking into a handphone.The inference from the discussion was that “key players” should be nominated for judicial appointments in order to hear cases and deliver judgments accordingly.

A main point of the conversation - believed to be with Ahmad Fairuz in the context of the conversation - was that there appeared to be two camps in the judiciary belonging respectively to former CJ Eusoff Chin and his successor Mohamad Dzaiddin Abdullah.“You see, he (Dzaiddin) has now up for [sic] six court of appeal judges, so that he can put his men before he retires,” Lingam said.

Later in the conversation, he alluded to this matter again, saying: “No, don’t worry, Datuk. I know how much you suffered for Tun Eusoff Chin... and Tun said ‘Datuk Ahmad Fairuz, 110 percent loyalty!’“We want to make sure our friends are there for the sake of the (then-) PM (Dr Mahathir Mohamad) and the sake of the country. Not for our own interest [repeated], we want to make sure the country comes first.”

Lingam himself had been embroiled in controversy after photographs emerged of him and Chin on holiday together in New Zealand in 1994. However, Eusoff denied any wrongdoing. At one point, the lawyer also indicated that earlier efforts to appoint judges aligned to Chin had been thwarted by former finance minister Daim Zainuddin.“You know that’s the same problem that Tun Eusoff Chin has. He tried to do all this and yet, he has run out of soldiers.

He couldn’t do it because many are from the other camp. Last time was unfortunate because Tun Daim was doing everything, sabotaging...”Lingam then revealed that “they are going to organise a campaign to run you down; but you just keep quiet. Don’t say anything. Even (when) the press asks you, say ‘I leave it to God’. That’s all."

Also implicated in the conversation were business tycoon Vincent Tan and then-Minister in the PM's Department and current Tourism Minister Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor.Based on what Lingam let drop, both Tan and Adnan had apparently played an instrumental role in the appointment of judges as well to secure the honorific title of ‘Tan Sri’ for Ahmad Fairuz.

“I will also get Tan Sri (Vincent) to remind PM to put a Tan Sri-ship this year, lah. This will elevate you, you know,” said Lingam.Towards the end of the conversation, Lingam acknowledged that “you have suffered...so much you have done, for the election, Wee Choo Keong, everything. How much nobody would have done all this”.

Following the 1995 general election, Ahmad Fairuz had upheld a petition contesting DAP candidate Wee’s victory as Bukit Bintang member of Parliament. The ruling saw the Barisan Nasional candidate Dr Lee Chong Meng being declared the winner.Lingam could not be contacted for comment. His office said that he was abroad and is only due back later this month.When contacted this afternoon, the personal assistant to the CJ relayed a message that he wanted to have a look at the video before saying anything. However, subsequent calls to the office were not answered up to 5pm.

Read also

Abdul Hamid is new CJ, Zaki is judiciary's No 2 in Malaysiakini 5 Dec 2007
Majlis Peguam batal perarakan Hari Hak Asasi Manusia in Malaysiakini

MCA's Fong negotiates a reprieve for pig farmers

Police personnel pulled out of Paya Mengkuang New Village, Melaka at 4.05pm, easing the worries of pig farmers who had expected to see all their animals forcibly culled today.

Dr.M : Malay will Regress without NEP

Ethnic Malays Have Frittered Away Opportunities, Mahathir Says
By Stephanie Phang and Angus Whitley (Bloomberg)

Mahathir speaks in an interview
July 19 (Bloomberg) -- Ethnic Malays have blown the opportunities given to them under the country's 36-year-old affirmative action policy and still need preferential treatment, former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad said.

NEP Privileges
The race-based program gives the group privileges over ethnic Chinese and Indians for government contracts, homes and company shares in a bid to redistribute wealth. Without the policy, ethnic Malays, or Bumiputeras, will slip further behind, risking a return to racial violence in the Southeast Asian nation, Mahathir, 81, said in a July 17 interview.

Malays have not responded to NEP
``The Malays have not responded to the efforts made by the government and because of that, the disparity remains,'' said Mahathir, who stepped down in 2003 after 22 years in power. ``When you're coming up from behind to catch up, you have to run faster, you have to make more effort.''


NEP Hindered Malaysia Trade Talks with US
Mahathir and his successor, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, scrapped some elements of the 1971 New Economic Policy program to lure investment. The program hindered Malaysia's trade talks with the U.S. this year, while opposition parties and some analysts say the rules crimp competition and should be dropped completely.

NEP? Charity?
``There's more than enough headway given to the Bumiputeras now,'' said Maznah Mohamad, a senior research fellow at the University of Singapore. ``The NEP has been reduced to a kind of charity scheme. That is not good for any economy.''


Bumiputeras, which literally mean ``sons of the soil,'' are given more places in public universities and discounts on home purchases. Hypermarkets and department stores must allocate 30 percent of shelf space for goods made by Bumiputera suppliers, and foreign retailers have to set up local companies that are 30 percent-owned by Bumiputera shareholders.
The program was devised after bloody clashes between ethnic Malays and Chinese on the streets of Kuala Lumpur in 1969.

Selling Contracts
Some ethnic Malays failed to develop their own business expertise, choosing to sell to other races the government contracts set aside for them, or auction specially allocated permits to import cars, Mahathir said.

Proverty Rate
The poverty rate in 2004 among Bumiputeras was 8.3 percent, compared with 2.9 percent for ethnic Indians and 0.6 percent for Chinese, according to the government. Ethic Malays owned 19 percent of the nation's corporate equity that year, while the Chinese had 39 percent and Indians 1.2 percent.

The greatest failure of Malaysia, which this year marks 50 years of independence from British rule, is not correcting the economic disparity, Mahathir said.

Still, pursuing the policy risks angering local Chinese and Indians, he said. Without it, Malays, who account for about 60 percent of the 27 million population, may struggle, he said.

`Bad Results'
``That is the dilemma,'' Mahathir said from his office on the 86th floor of the Petronas Twin Towers in Kuala Lumpur. ``We can say let's take it away, then I'm quite sure they will regress. One way or the other, we are going to get bad results.''

Policies favoring ethnic Malays led to ``significant protectionism'' in industries including automobiles, agriculture, services and in government contracts, Thierry Rommel, the European Commission's envoy to Malaysia, said last month.

Malaysia must reconsider the program to facilitate a Southeast Asian free-trade accord with the European Union, Rommel said.

The Malaysian government's reluctance to change policies that benefit the Malay majority and yield to demands to increase access to government contracts are among the issues that delayed the signing of a free-trade agreement with the U.S., its largest trade partner, this year.
Missed Deadline
The two nations missed a March 31 deadline to complete the talks and now plan to reach an agreement in the first half of 2008. Malaysia has ruled out discussing policies that favor its Malay majority in the talks.

``The domestic policies will be outside the ambit'' of the free-trade agreement, Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak told reporters in Kuala Lumpur on July 17. ``We hope that eventually we will find an agreement with the United States.''

But is it True that NEP has yet to be achieved?
Concern about the race-based policy's validity grew last year after a report by the Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute said Malays may own as much as 45 percent of Malaysia's corporate equity, higher than the government's estimate of 19 percent in 2004 and surpassing the New Economic Policy's goal of 30 percent.

Source : Bloomberg
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=am0uXeUgf8tE

Read also news by Mahathir in Malaysiakini

Hisham: MCA Stop making statements on secular state

MCA to stop making statements on Malaysia being a secular state: Umno Youth Chief Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein

Ranau: Umno Youth Chief Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein Friday asked MCA to stop making statements on Malaysia being a secular state. He said though it was nothing new, such claims would not benefit anyone.
"I'm not naive enough to allow this issue to go on," he told reporters when asked to comment on the issue after opening the Ranau Umno delegates conference.

So is Malaysia a secular State?
MCA Secretary-General Datuk Ong Ka Chuan had said the party had ample evidence to show that Malaysia was a secular state, including several important events leading to the country's independence and formation of Malaysia.
He had cited notes prepared by the Colonial Office dated May 23, 1957 at the London Conference Talks.

But Najib claim Malaysia was never a Secular State
Various groups have also disagreed with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak's remarks that Malaysia was never a secular state, saying that the Deputy Prime Minister had ignored the country's constitutional history and social contract.

Bar Council President : Malaysia was not an Islamic State
Bar Council Malaysia president Ambiga Sreenevasan had said one only need to look at the Articles in the Federal Constitution, the system of government and administration of justice to show that Malaysia was not an Islamic state.

Najib had said Malaysia is an Islamic state that adheres to the fundamentals of Islam and having a Constitution which states Islam as the official religion. He said that being an Islamic state did not mean that the rights of non-Muslims were not respected.

.- Bernama

What MCA Replied in their Website
:A secular state is the basis of our Federal Constitution


Having reviewed the archives involved in the process of drafting the Federal Constitution, MCA Secretary General Dato’ Ong Ka Chuan stressed that Malaysia is a secular state, as this was the consensus and social contract agreed upon by our forefathers.

According to the Alliance’s memorandum to Reid Commission dated 27 September 1956 on page 19, “The religion of Malaysia shall be Islam. The observance of this principle shall not impose any disability on non-Muslim nationals professing and practising their own religion, and shall not imply the State is not a secular State.” This was an unequivocal original intention of UMNO, MCA and MIC.

Reid Reports 1957 did not provide an article declaring Islam as the religion of the Federation. Justice Abdul Hamid from Pakistan opined that the Alliance’s proposal should be adopted because it was ‘innocuous’.

Ong mentioned that, the deliberations by the Working Party (comprising the Alliance, Rulers’ representatives & High Commissioners), held meetings after reviewing the Reid Report.
The first meeting held on 22 February 1957 attended by Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Abdul Razak, Tun Omar Ong Yoke Lin, Tun V.T. Sambanthan and others stated that the Alliance desired a statement to be inserted that ‘… the States should be secular, ...’

During the 19th meeting held on 17 April 1957, the Chief Minister (Tunku) said, however that ‘the whole Constitution was framed on the basis that the Federation would be a secular State.’
Notes prepared by the Colonial Office dated 23 May 1957 at the London Conference Talks mentioned, ‘The members of the Alliance delegation stressed that they had no intention of creating a Muslim theocracy and that Malaya would be a secular State.’

Furthermore, when Tun Tan Siew Sin spoke in Parliament on 10 July 1957 in support of the Constitutional bill that although Islam would be the official religion, he said that ‘this does not in any way derogate from the principles, which has always been accepted, that Malaya will be a secular state and that there will be a complete freedom to practise any other religion’.

Dato’ Ong Ka Chuan concludes that the documents and facts shown above have given a true picture for Malaysia, whereby a secular state is the foundation of the formation of Malaya, and this consensus made by our forefathers, who shed much sweat and toil in the progress of peacefully negotiating for independence, should always be remembered and obeyed.
-MCA online-

What the Opposition Say

Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein Is Wrong To Say That Article 121(1A) Makes Malaysia An Islamic State And Should Learn From His Own Father And Malaysia’s 3rd Prime Minister, Tun Hussein Own, Who Declared That Malaysia Is Not An Islamic State.
Press Statement
by Lim Guan Eng, DAP

(Petaling Jaya, Tuesday): Education Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein is wrong to say in the Utusan Malaysia today that Malaysians have no right to question, oppose or challenge BN’s position that Article 121(1A) of the Federal Constitution makes Malaysia an Islamic state. Hishamuddin appears to have forgotten that it was his own father, former Prime Minister Tun Hussein Onn who declared that Malaysia is not an Islamic state.

As a lawyer, Hishamuddin should know that the Federal Constitution is the supreme law of the federation as stated in Article 4 (1). No one is questioning Islam as the religion of the Federation under Article 3. However at no point was Malaysia an Islamic state nor Article 121(1A) made Malaysia an Islamic state as it only removed the previous control and jurisdiction of civil courts over syariah courts. It is ridiculous how Hishamuddin can stretch, distort and even pervert Article 121(1A) as converting Malaysia into an Islamic state.

Hishamuddin should learn from his father that our Federal Constitution is secular with Islam as the religion of the country. Tun Hussein Onn’s position is similar to the stance taken by our first Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman and 2nd Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak. This was reaffirmed by the highest court of our land, the Supreme Court in the Che Omar Che Soh case in 1988. In that judgment, Tun Salleh Abas ruled that the syariah law was not the basic law of the land and that the constitution was the supreme law. Unless there is a constitutional amendment Malaysia is and never was an Islamic state.

For Hishamuddin to even bar Malaysians from discussing Article 121(1A) is not only undemocratic, it also violates the basic human rights of freedom of speech. Even the Sedition Act or Article 10(4) of the Federal Constitution made no mention of not being able to discuss Article 121(1A). There are four sensitive matters that even Parliamentarians do not enjoy immunity and can not question relating to citizenship rights under Part III of the Federal Constitution, the position of national language and mother tongue-language under Article 152, special position of Malays under Article 153 and the status of Rulers under Article 181.

No mention is made of Article 121(1A) precisely because any questioning is not related to challenging the status of Islam as the religion of the Federation. Any questioning of Article 121(1A) relates to the rights of non-Muslims when matters relating to Islam are decided by the syariah courts. In matters affecting non-Muslims DAP adopts the position that if the religion of the subject-matter is not in dispute then the syariah courts have the right of jurisdiction. However if the religion of the subject-matter is in dispute and affects non-Muslims, then the civil courts should decide.

DAP does not oppose Islam as the religion of the Federation. However DAP strongly opposes Malaysia as an Islamic state where Islam is the main guiding philosophy for BN which is not stated in our constitution but seen as discriminatory towards non-Muslims.

DAP urges MCA, Gerakan, MIC and SUPP to oppose Hishamuddin’s extremist attempt to rewrite history and pervert our Constitution without making the necessary constitutional amendments that make Malaysia an Islamic state. DAP support the rights of NGOs in Article 11 to hold forum to promote the right to religion and basic rights of non-Muslim in consonant with our basic human and constitutional right of freedom of religion.

DAP strongly condemns the attempts by extremist Muslim organizations and regrets that PAS and UMNO has united to restrict the democratic right of expression, erode the rights of non-Muslims and turn Malaysia into an Islamic state. If non-Muslims can not even question Article 121(1A) when they are adversely affected and their right to freedom of religion, then BN must bear full responsibility for turning Malaysia into an Islamic state where non-Muslims do not enjoy equal political and economic rights.

So is Malaysia a Secular State? Your Say?

Source : Malaysia Today, Malaysiakini and
MCA website,
http://www.mca.org.my/ENGLISH/COMMENTARIES/Pages/AsecularstateisthebasisofourFederalConstitution.aspx

DAP Malaysia Website
http://www.dapmalaysia.org/english/2006/july06/lge/lge404.htm

KL Flood 11 June 2007: Where is SMART Tunnel when we need it most?

KL was flooded on 11 June 2007




Where was the SMART Tunnel when we need it most



Had it been ready, the RM1.9bil Stormwater Management and Road Tunnel Project (SMART) would have prevented Sunday’s floods that inundated the city centre.


Drainage and Irrigation Department deputy director Ahmad Fuad said the floods around Dataran Merdeka and Masid Jamek were caused by Sungai Kelang bursting its banks at the confluence of Sungai Gombak.

“A storm which causes the river to overflow – that is exactly what the SMART flood tunnel is being built to overcome,” he said at a press conference organised by Kuala Lumpur City Hall here yesterday.

Ahmad said had the tunnel been operational, it would have been used to divert 95% of the water in Sungai Kelang to a lake in Sungai Besi and prevented the flood.

The road portion of SMART was opened to traffic but the floodwater diversion component will only be operational next month.



Excess water would be held at a retention pond in Kampung Berembang in Ampang and channelled into the tunnel, which will release the water into a deep pond near Tanan Danau Desa.

RM 2 Toll for SMART Tunnel.
(Point to Ponder : Why are we paying Toll when to floodwater diversion work is not yet completed)
Users of the Stormwater Management and Road Tunnel (SMART) will be charged a RM2 toll from 11.59pm on June 14, Works Minister Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu said.

He said the toll would be increased again in three years, adding that the price was right as the tunnel concessionaire had forked out RM640mil to build it.

Noting that there was no Government subsidy involved, he said: “In any part of the world where tunnels are built, the toll is higher.

“It is also an alternative route. Road users can continue to use the existing highway but if you need to speed up your journey, then use the tunnel,” he told reporters after opening a meeting of senior Works Ministry officers.

Read also news by Malaysiakini
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/68486

Dr Mahathir : It is a mistake to remove Tunku Mahaleel

Govt must continue defending Proton: Mahathir

Proton must not lost it national carmaker identity

PUTRAJAYA:
The government must continue to protect Proton to ensure that it does not lose its identity as a national carmaker, Proton adviser and former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said yesterday.

When asked by reporters whether the government should continue protecting Proton, he said: “Ini tugas kerajaan yang lebih berkuasa, kalau kerajaan tak nak sokong Proton, matilah Proton
(This is the responsibility of the government, which has more power, if it doesn’t support Proton, then Proton will collapse).”

Dr Mahathir made the remarks when reporters met him after he had welcomed the Merdeka de’ Everest 2007 expedition team at the Perdana Leadership Foundation here.

Of Course....Proton need a Techinical Partner
When asked whether Proton really needed a technical partner, the former prime minister said: “Well, of course, Proton needs a technical partner but I don’t know why the negotiations (between Proton and Volkswagen) broke down.”


Khazanah Nasional Bhd, the government’s investment arm, owns around 43 percent of Proton and it said recently that talks are ongoing with VW and General Motors Corp.

Proton incurred a full-year pre-tax loss of RM619.9 million for the financial year ended March 31, reflecting the grim operating environment for the national carmaker.

It was a MISTAKE to remove Tengku Mahaleel
Referring to the losses incurred by Proton, Dr Mahathir again maintained that it was a mistake for the carmaker to have removed its former CEO, Tengku Tan Sri Mahaleel Tengku Ariff, as he had succeeded in bringing profits in the past.

Source :-
Extracted Partially from
http://www.theborneopost.com/?p=19306
– BERNAMA

Read also news by Malaysiakini
Malaysiakini
Govt must protect Proton
Jun 9, 07 3:31pm
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/68406

IDR: Economic Diplomacy and Bilateral Relationship

Malaysia-Singapore Relations: Economic Diplomacy and the IDR
by
Johan Saravanamuttu 01 Jun 2007
Published by http://www.opinionasia.org/ (Used with permission)

Meeting between Malaysian and Singapore premiers and Formation of Joint Ministerial Committee
Whichever way one looks at it, the recent meeting in Pulau Langkawi in mid-May between the Malaysian and Singapore premiers, Abdullah Badawi and Lee Hsien Loong, and their cabinet-level entourages was a diplomatic coup of no minor proportion. The centerpiece of the diplomatic success was no doubt the agreement to set up a Joint Ministerial Committee with oversight over economic cooperation in the Iskandar Development Region (IDR) in the state of Johor in Malaysia, separated from Singapore by a 1km long causeway.

Smart Cards
It was unexpected that both sides so quickly agreed to the introduction of ‘smart cards’ to facilitate the two-way traffic of Malaysians and Singaporeans to the IDR.

Batu Putih Dispute : To accept ICJ Ruling.
There was even icing on cake, which came in the shape of a categorical statement that both governments would accept the ruling of the International Court of Justice on the Pedra Branca (Pulau Batu Putih) dispute, a rocky island outpost contested by both countries by November of this year. Without doubt, the event marks the high watermark of Singapore-Malaysia over some two decades of bumpy and oftentimes acrimonious relations. It is particularly interesting that in this era of globalisation, economic diplomacy has seemingly led the way to perhaps the most significant turn in Malaysian-Singapore relations, in recent years.


According to the Malaysian prime minister, more could be in the offing after this new warming up of relations. Even prior to the diplomatic retreat, there was already talk of a new fast train link between Kuala Lumpur and Singapore undertaken by the YTL Corporation of Malaysia, and the building of “several bridges” linking Singapore and Malaysia (much like in New York and Manhattan) to supplement the overcrowded 1 km causeway and the underutilised Second Link.

Beyond the media report.
Going beyond the hype of media reports, I would like to explore a little more thoroughly the idea of whether the IDR could be a realistic economic project for Singapore’s long-term economic involvement in Johor and, by extrapolation, Malaysia in general. Along with that, could it provide a fillip to other foreign investments into the IDR?
Using the Malaysian premier’s own analogy, could the whole project develop into a relationship much like a Hong Kong’s with Shenzhen? If so, then the IDR could indeed become a prime and actual example of how economic diplomacy would pave the way for sustainable economic relations between Malaysia and Singapore in years to come.

However, by the same token, the IDR could also become the Achilles heel of a relationship often wrecked on the shores of irreconcilable ‘national’ economic interests, as witness the unresolved water supply issue and the much earlier parting of the ways of Malaysia and Singapore airlines. Much could go wrong if the political players fail to resolve or manage differences that have come with a baggage of historical irritations in Malaysia-Singapore relations.

Facts and Figure on IDR
Let us start with some facts about the IDR, which, to say the least, are quite spectacular. The region spans an area of 2,217 sq. km., which is about thrice Singapore’s size. Reportedly US$105 billion is to be expended in the IDR, although we are not told over what period of time. We are told that the committee overseeing the IDR will be chaired by the Malaysian premier himself and one its members will be the doyen of the Johor UMNO (the anchor party in the national coalition), Tan Sri Musa Hitam.

Key Players : Khazanah Holdings and UEM Land
Furthermore, the main stakeholder of the IDR will be Malaysia's national investment company, Khazanah Holdings, while the primary developer would be UEM Land, a major Malaysia government-linked-company.

In a seminar in Singapore on 23 May, the Managing Director of UEM Land, Wan Abdullah Wan Ibrahim, was upbeat about the prospect of private sector investment from across the border. He said that by the year’s end, some S$38.5 million would be purchased by Singaporeans in industrial lots in the IDR.
(1) Nusajaya
The Nusajaya area, the first to be developed, will see the establishment of an industrial park, a waterfront precinct, theme parks, an educational city, a medical park and residential areas.
(2) Medical faculty to be run by Newcastle University
Plans are in place for a medical faculty to be run by Newcastle University and a private institution run by iCarnegie of Carnegie Mellon University.

All of this sounds like a jolly good start. However, a reality check reveals several possible hitches. If one were to take Shenzhen as the model, clearly many criteria do not obtain in the IDR.

First, a joint ministerial committee is far from being the equivalent of a governmental authority with full decision-making powers. Admittedly, the Malaysian government has said it will relax various governmental norms including keeping in abeyance the dreaded stipulations of affirmative action and quotas. Still, Johor and UMNO politics could get in the way.

Some rumblings by detractors of the Abdullah Badawi government, not least of all the former premier Mahathir, have already dubbed the project as a ‘sell-out’ to Singaporean interests.
More serious would be the questions regarding Malaysian human resource capacities. Malaysia has a poor track record with respect to ‘mega’ projects and clearly, the IDR constitutes as one.

From most accounts, the Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) and Cyberjaya, constructs of the Mahathirian era, have remained in limbo. What could push the IDR (also known as the “Southern’ Corridor”) beyond the kind of problems that have stalled the MSC? Would it be the economic diplomacy factor? The hallmark of such diplomacy is to let economics lead the way rather than politics. But could Malay or Malaysian politics stall such a process?

In the current era of globalisation and open borders, it is has become axiomatic that private sector collaboration is the driver for economic cooperation and integration. If the IDR could prove to be the lynchpin for the beginnings of the economic integration of this region of Johor, to the industrial and financial hub of Singapore, the venture may well work. A bilateral economic zone is evidently a much better formula than the ASEAN ‘growth triangles’ initiative, which have not made much progress.

The ultimate vision for the IDR-Singapore economic zone would be a customs union, where tariff and non-tariff barriers are harmonised, or even a common market that presages the free flow of capital and labour. For now, however, it remains for the architects and purveyors of the new economic diplomacy on both sides to put their money where their mouth is.
Johan Saravanamuttu is Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS), Singapore and was the former Dean (Research) at the Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM).

Johan Saravanamuttu is Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS), Singapore and was the former Dean (Research) at the Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM).

Read also Opinion by Khoo Kay Peng in Malaysiakini
Malaysiakini
IDR and real reform
Khoo Kay PengMay 23, 07 11:32am
http://www.malaysiakini.com/opinionsfeatures/67594

Altantuya Trial : Explanation by Attorney General Raises more Questions than Answers

Altantuya Trial: A whole lot of shuttlecock


Thursday, 07 June 2007, 06:15pm
Contributed by Amer Hamzah Arshad and Fahri Azzat
Source : http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/content/view/9264/2/

Altantuya Trial : Explanation by Attorney General Raises more Questions than Answers

The latest explanation by the Attorney General, Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail on the sudden change of the prosecution team - from Salehuddin Saidin and Noorin Badaruddin to Tun Majid Tun Hamzah and Manoj Kurup - raises more questions than it gives answers, especially in relation to his appreciation of the law and possession of common sense.

The Attorney General very well knows that there has to be a deeper involvement other than a game of badminton before Salehuddin Saidin and Noorin Badaruddin are to be declared unfit. If they were seen going on holidays or picnics with their respective families and taking snapshots for keepsakes, at least that would have been understandable.

Change in the prosecution personnel is nothing more than a pure ‘public relations exercise’
Therefore, when the Attorney General claims that he made a change in the prosecution personnel for this case, supposedly in order ‘to ensure a fair trial’, it is nothing more than a pure ‘public relations exercise’.

The Attorney General also forgets that an expeditious trial is part and parcel of a ‘fair trial’ and his public relations stunt which got the trial adjourned for two weeks has in itself caused an injustice to the court, to the accused, to the witnesses, to the family of deceased and the public who had every expectation of the trial commencing on the date fixed.

Let us recollect how the High Court was taken by surprise on Monday morning when a new ‘team’ of prosecutors walked into the High Court and informed the parties concerned that ‘they’ will be taking over conduct of the criminal prosecution in the Altantuya’s case from thereon.
(1) No prior Notice is Given
No prior notice was given to anybody despite the fact that all of those concerned were aware of the existence of modern modes of communication. So clearly, the Attorney General felt there was no need to extend the courtesy of calling the respective counsel for the accused persons to inform them that they would be seeking an adjournment on the first day of trial.

(2) no reasons whatsoever were afforded
As if that were not bad enough, no reasons whatsoever were afforded to the High Court or to any of the parties concerned. This clearly also shows that the Attorney General could not be bothered about what the trial judge thought of the change because if he did, he would have turned up himself or given an explanation for the change on the day itself instead of subsequently coming up with two press statements to explain this glaring faux pas. Because of the clear lack of courtesy by the Attorney General, the new ‘team’ had to seek an adjournment.

(3) Attorney General did not even brief his new ‘team’ properly
To compound matters, the Attorney General did not even brief his new ‘team’ properly. When Tun Majid Tun Hamzah was asked by the High Court judge whether the new ‘team’ could work with the previous ‘team’ in order to ensure there will be no disruption to the proceedings (as the new ‘team’ had yet to familiarise themselves with the facts), the new lead prosecutor was unable to reply. One wonders what instructions were being given in the Attorney General’s Chambers.

Then fast forward to Wednesday evening.

AG Clarification : Only the lead prosecutor, Salehuddin Saidin, was being replaced
The Attorney General then ‘clarified’ that only the lead prosecutor of the previous team, namely Salehuddin Saidin, was being replaced.

The Reason : Playing Badminton ?????
The reason given this time was because Salehuddin Saidin had been seen playing badminton with the trial judge, Datuk Mohd Zaki Md Yasin. As a result, the Attorney General claims that Salehuddin Saidin had to be replaced supposedly in order to avoid any untoward allegation or adverse public perception against his officers and department as well as the court.

When did that incident happen? No one knows. What were the details of this event? It was not released. Was there more to just a game of badminton? We don’t know.
What we do know is that this so-called attempt by the Attorney General to ensure a ‘fair trial’ (we don’t know what that means to him), has now unfairly cast aspersions on the credibility of both Salehuddin Saidin and Justice Datuk Mohd Zaki Md. Yasin.
To say that both these men cannot attain a high sense of professionalism and ethics in the course of their business simply because they had a game of badminton is clearly to insult their ability and credibility and our intelligence and sensibilities.

If playing badminton with a judge is enough for a senior Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) to be deemed unfit to prosecute the murder case of Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu because it purportedly creates a negative perception, then what about the Abdul Gani himself (when he was a DPP) and another DPP who were alleged via a statutory declaration to having requested Dato’ Nallakaruppan to fabricate evidence against Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim, which then formed the basis of an application for them to be disqualified? (nb: See Zainur Zakaria v PP [2001] 3 CLJ 673).
Shouldn’t Abdul Gani as a DPP then, as well as the other DPP, be replaced as well? After all, they are accused of worse things – illegal things – as opposed to a mere game of badminton?

Why wasn’t there any consistency? Or do the Attorney General’s Chambers in Malaysia apply these principles of integrity selectively?
Can such principles be applied in that fashion?And if it is true that it was intended for only Salehuddin Saidin to be replaced in the first place, then why was the other DPP, Noorin Badaruddin, also taken off from the conduct of the case as announced by Tun Majid Tun Hamzah on Monday?
Why wasn’t she part of the ‘new’ team as suggested by the High Court judge in order to avoid any unnecessary disruption of the trial?
What ‘games’ did she play with the judge so as to warrant her exit from the case?

All of a sudden, from replacing the ‘team’ as was announced on Monday, the matter has now been reduced to merely replacing the lead prosecutor of the previous ‘team’.
It wouldn’t come as surprise if subsequently, Noorin Badaruddin will be brought back into the prosecution team.
In any event, one could not help to assume that perhaps Salehuddin Saidin was merely made a scapegoat in order to mask the actual reason for the change.
One also cannot help assume that the real reasons stated for these shenanigans are not what the Attorney General wants us to believe.And if the Attorney General is so concerned about the negative perception that would arise as a result of the badminton ‘flings’, what about the negative perceptions that could arise if, hypothetically speaking, one of the senior DPPs in the new ‘team’ used to work and serve together with the trial judge as DPPs in a particular state or if the said senior DPP also used to share the same abode during their stints as DPPs in that particular state?
What about the social and sports functions held between the Attorney General’s Chambers and the Judiciary?
Surely there must be some camaraderie between the said senior DPP and the trial judge. Wouldn’t these ‘hypothetical’ examples give rise to negative perceptions as well?
In the ordinary course of proceedings, if there is any real concern about the impartiality in the manner of which the trial will be conducted arising from the relationship between any of the parties with the trial judge, it is a common practice for an application to recuse the trial judge to be made.
But then again, this is no ordinary trial, this is a ‘sensitive’ case where so many parties have been either changed or replaced.
The only party which has yet to be replaced is the accused and the Attorney General.
As the latter’s explanation has found to be wanting on so many levels, it is perhaps now time for a change of the Attorney General instead.

Source:
Malaysia Bar Chamber Website
Thursday, 07 June 2007, 06:15pm Contributed by Amer Hamzah Arshad and Fahri Azzat
Source : http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/content/view/9264/2/

Read also News in Malaysiakini

AG should prosecute Altantuya case
Jun 7, 07 11:09am
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/68289

and also from Malaysiakini Malaysiakini.tv

Lawyer charges interference in murder case
The lawyer for a senior policeman on trial for murdering a Mongolian woman withdrew on Monday and alleged interference in the case.
Zulkifli Noordin said he could no longer act in defence of Chief Inspector Azilah Hadri.
Read the full story at Malaysiakini.com.
http://www.malaysiakini.tv/?vid=1126

Badawi to Marry Jeanne (Eurasian; Former Sister-in-Law)

Malaysian PM Abdullah to remarry on Saturday

Abdullah Badawi to Marry Jeanne Abdullah (Jeanne Danker - Eurasian, former Sister-In-Law of Endon)

Rumours is True : PM Abdullah get married

IN KUALA LUMPUR - ONE of Malaysia's worst-kept secrets is officially out in the open, after Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi announced yesterday that he will be marrying Madam Jeanne Abdullah this Saturday.Rumours of the wedding have been circulating for months, and Datuk Seri Abdullah was clearly pleased to confirm them, joking with reporters: 'A happier prime minister can do a lot of good work.'A small private ceremony attended only by immediate family will be held for the 67-year-old Prime Minister and his 53-year-old bride at his official residence in Putrajaya.

Madam Jeanne relationship with late Endon Mahmood ?

Madam Jeanne used to be the supervisor of his official residence, as well as a former sister-in-law of his late wife Endon Mahmood.
Datin Seri Endon and Datuk Seri Abdullah had been married for 42 years, before she lost a three-year battle with breast cancer on October 20, 2005.
His first wife's family will be among the guests on Saturday.
Datuk Seri Abdullah informed the King and Cabinet of the impending nuptials yesterday, and The Straits Times understands that a small reception for Cabinet ministers and chief ministers will be held next Wednesday.

PM fall in love in less than a year (know Jeanne for more over 2 decades)

He said he had known Madam Jeanne for over two decades but 'only fell in love with her less than a year ago'.
'She can be my companion and will take care of me,' he said, when asked why he decided to marry her.
He said he still loved his late wife, but was also falling in love with his new bride.

Who is Madam Jeanne?
[- born as Jeanne Danker to a Eurasian Family
- former sister-in-law of late Endon (formerly married to Endon younger brother) ]
Madam Jeanne, who was born a Danker to a Eurasian family, was formerly married to Datin Seri Endon's younger brother.
They have been divorced for about 15 years.
She has two daughters, Nadiah and Nadene, from her earlier marriage.

Khairy on his father-in-law:
Meanwhile, Datuk Seri Abdullah's son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin said the wedding would 'bring a lot of joy to the family'.'I, my wife Nori, my brother-in-law and his wife are happy with the news. We fully support his decision.'Bernama also quoted Mr Khairy as saying: 'We have known auntie Jeanne for a long time and we are very close.'He consulted all of us and we have given our blessing.'

Source :

The Straits Times, Singapore
By Carolyn Hong, Malaysia Bureau Chief and Chow Kum Hor, Malaysia Correspondent
Quoted from
http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/content/view/9261/2/

Read also
Confirmed! Pak Lah to re-marry from Malaysiakini
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/68240#l

Family gives blessing to wedding from Malaysiakini
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/68279

Bumiputera Discriminated ?

Bumiputera Discriminated ?
Anyone has anything to say and comment?

The following is a reply by a self proclaimed Petronas Staff posted in Malaysiakini to
"It’s not just Maybank" posted in Malaysiakini byCH OngMay 9, 07 2:33pm
http://malaysiavoices.blogspot.com/2007/05/discrimination-policy-by-glc.html

Unspoken discrimination towards silent bumiputeras
Posted by
Petronas Staff
in Malaysiakini
May 21, 07 2:03pm
http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/67500


Refered to Boycott of Bumi-Controlled GLC, i.e Petronas
(Refer to previous post
http://malaysiavoices.blogspot.com/2007/05/discrimination-policy-by-glc.html)

I refer to the countless of letters in malaysiakini recently condemning discriminatory policies by bumiputera-controlled GLCs. We have been seeing emotional and irrational letters from readers calling for a widespread boycott of bumi-controlled GLCs, such as Petronas. One writer that called for a non-bumis boycott of Petronas gas stations must have some rusted metal stuck in his brain.


Does the writer even has a tiny cognisance of the faithful Chinese and Indians in both the lower and upper level managements of Petronas who work passionately and selflessly in the pursuit of returning the energy received from Mother Earth back to each and every Malaysian?
(Malaysia blogger : Any comment from Chinese and Indians working in Petronas/ GLC?
Point to Ponder : How many Non-Bumi is working in Petronas/GLC? Anyone care to provide the statistic? Any discrimination is employment of N0n-Bumi staff in GLC Company?)

Has the writer ever sought any clarification from any Petronas officials on the blatant assumption that Petronas service stations are 100 percent monopolised by bumiputeras?
(Malaysia blogger :
ANYONE CARE TO PROVIDE STATISTIC ON THE CLAIM OF 100% PETRONAS SERVICE STATIONS MONOPOLISED BY BUMIPUTERA?
ANY NON-BUMI PETRONAS SERVICE STATION OWNER TO DIS-JUSTIFIFY THIS CLAIM?
OR ANYONE ACTUALLY COME ACROSS ANY NON-BUMI OWNED PETRONAS?
No Offend to anyone but Just Point to Ponder? Hope someone can give some clarification?)

Referring to the letter from Malaysian Truly Asian, the most obscene double standard is that all of the influential opinion leaders, both in the mainstream and alternative media, from the non-bumiputera community are discouraging more bumiputeras from standing up and speaking up for a just Malaysia. These people quickly brush off allegations of discriminatory practices by non-bumiputera controlled companies as if these injustices were ‘justifiable’ retaliation for the NEP’s ‘discrimination’ towards the non-bumiputeras.

I have heard a story of an ambitious bumiputera entrepreneur who can’t survive in KL’s most popular IT retail plaza due to his suppliers’ price discrimination and price fixing and artificial barriers to entry. Or of a competent, highly respected professor of a very specialised field, groomed in one of the highest learning institutions in the US, whose prospective employment with private colleges was made arduous and even impossible because he is Malay and the leading interviewers were Chinese.

Or of a hard-working Malay stockist of a large, long-established direct marketing company whose waitlisted, high-demanded items were diverted to the Chinese stockists without any concrete reasons. One does not have to be an economist to acknowledge that companies in the private sector, big or small, tend to employ people of a certain race with an undisclosed quota.

The GLCs ultimately score better when compared to the non-GLCs in that they nearly have a work force that reflects the racial composition of the country at the macro and micro level.
(Malaysia Blogger : Is this TRUE? Interesting FACTS to find out? Anyone?)

Almost all of the employment ads that I have seen in a popular Johor Baru shopping complex explicitly seek Chinese-only candidates (with some of the ads appearing only in Chinese) when most of the customers do not speak Chinese (or even appear Chinese). The products have nothing to do with the Chinese culture and such ads freely appear in the classified advertisements section of so-called ‘pluralistic’ newspapers.

The voices of the discriminated bumis are unheard of in both Malay-controlled and non- Malay-controlled media, with the former treating such issues as the ‘little things’ that the Malays have to bear in return for the secured opportunities that the NEP provides, and the latter ignoring the problems as if they were totally unheard of before the introduction of the NEP. Cartels and unhealthy business practices, after all, existed in the colonial period and the early years of Merdeka. It takes more than rants and slogans to institutionalise equal opportunity in its truest sense. Boycotts will only exacerbate the problem.

Source
Posted by
Petronas Staff
in Malaysiakini
May 21, 07 2:03pm
http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/67500


Malaysia Blogger has no intention to side either parties in issues raised above but few that it will be very interesting for readers to stop, think and ponder on the few questions raised by Malaysia Blogger.

Feel Free to comments

Discrimination Policy by GLC

It’s not just Maybank
Posted in Malaysiakini by
CH OngMay 9, 07 2:33pm

Maybank issues

Maybank's policy that legal firms must have at least 50 percent bumiputera equity in order to qualify for appointment to it's panel of lawyers is similar to that being practised by other GLCs over the years.

However the other GLCs do not announce their discriminatory policies. They simply implement such policies.

Petronas Discriminatory Policies.
I have not come across Petronas service stations being operated by non-bumiputeras.

I am a non-bumiputera professional in private practice without a bumiputera partner and my professional services are not welcomed by Petronas. Because of Petronas' discriminatory policies I have stopped patronising Petronas service stations. If only all non-bumiputera Malaysians stopped patronising Petronas service stations, then perhaps the Petronas management will rethink their discriminatory policies.

Boustead's property division discriminatory policies

I used to buy petrol from BP service stations but since BP has been bought over by Boustead, I have stopped patronising them. I don't even know what they are called now. The reason is that I found out Boustead's property division also practised discriminatory policies when appointing consultants. In the early eighties, when Sime Darby's property division was headed by a non-bumiputera (an Indian gentleman), I was appointed to provide professional services. As soon as bumiputeras took over, my services were no longer welcomed and required.

Also in the early eighties my company was a customer to bumiputera company. This company was an associate company of Island and Peninsula. However when I approached Island and Peninsula with the intention of getting my company registered as a provider of professional services, I was told clearly that my services were not welcome because my company did not have any bumiputera partners. I then did some research and discovered that generally the so-called GLC property companies being run by bumiputeras practise discriminatory policies. Since then I have never considered buying any property from such companies. All the above are facts which I am aware of. All these GLCs may well be practising other discriminatory policies which I am not aware of and which I shall not speculate on.

I have been a customer of Maybank, for both banking and credit card services, for more than 25 years. Since Maybank has decided to openly practise discriminatory policies, I have also decided to take steps to terminate my accounts with Maybank, and I shall definitely let them know my reason for terminating my accounts. I believe that if all non-bumiputeras let all these GLCs know how they feel about their discriminatory policies, by way of action and not just words, then perhaps they will not be so arrogant.

Gerakan Youth chief Mah Siew Keong's statement: "In many smaller towns, a lot of lawyers are a one-man show. If the 50 percent bumiputera equity (policy) is enforced, then it means all those lawyers operating alone will not be allowed to do any work for the bank," only shows that he is weak and dare not condemn outright Maybank's discriminatory policy.

Is he suggesting that in big towns and cities where most legal firms are partnerships rather than one-man shows, it is then OK for Maybank to practice it's discriminatory policy?

Source:
Posted in Malaysiakini byCH OngMay 9, 07 2:33p
http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/66999
The above comment was extracted from Malaysiakini website, Letter to Malaysiakini.

Malaysia Blogger has not verified whether the above claim is correct but it is subjected to the readers to think for themself and make their own judgement.

Foundation for the Future - Anwar Ibrahim

Foundation for the Future

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has denied having a hand in getting the high pay rise for Shaha Ali Riza, girlfriend of World Bank president Paul Wolfowitz.

The former deputy prime minister, who is the chairman of Foundation for the Future, said he did not appoint Shaha Riza to the foundation. “She was first assigned by the World Bank, through the US State Department, to the foundation in late 2005, before I became chairman. “The executive committee decided in mid-December 2006 to regularise the appointment so that Shaha (Riza) advised directly from the World Bank and not the State Department,” he said in a statement.

The following is a Statement from Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim on Foundation for the Future :-


The Foundation for the Future was first announced in Bahrain in November 2005 by foreign and development ministers of the broader Middle East, North Africa, Europe and the United States. The Foundation is an independent set-up, involving governments and civil society to support civil society organisations in their efforts to foster democracy and freedom in the broader Middle East and North Africa.

From the onset, the Foundation obtained pledges of US$56 million. Thus far the Foundation only received funds from Turkey, the United Kingdom and Jordan, among others. The US has not disbursed any funds to the Foundation.

I was invited to join the board of the Foundation in mid 2006 together with representatives from Morocco, Kuwait, Iraq, Spain, Syria, Turkey, Lebanon, US, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Switzerland and Qatar.

The other board members include Kamel Abu Jaber, advisor to the Jordanian Foreign Minister; Dr. Cornelio Sommaruga, former President of the International Committee of the Red Cross; Professor Ibrahim Kallin, advisor to the Foreign Minister of Turkey; and Sandra Day O’ Connor, former US Supreme Court justice.

The first board meeting was convened in Doha, Qatar at the invitation of Sheikh Hamad Bin Jassim Bin Jabr Al-Thani, the Foreign Minister and presently Prime Minister of Qatar on 15 July 2006, and I was unanimously elected as the first honorary chairman. The decision was to set up the headquarters in Beirut.

However, in the Board Meeting on 4 December 2006 in Amman, Jordan, I met the Jordanian Foreign Minister Abdelelah Al-Khatib, who endorsed the setting up of the regional secretariat in Amman due to the delay in the Beirut headquarters as a result of the Israeli attack on Lebanon. The next board meeting will convene in 29-30 May 2007 in Bahrain, Lebanon.

I did not appoint Ms. Shaha Ali Reza to the Foundation. She was first assigned by the World Bank through the US State Department to the Foundation in late 2005 before I became Chairman. The executive committee of the decided in mid 2006 to regularise the appointment so that Shaha advises directly from the World Bank and not the State Department.

The board will issue a full statement after the meeting in Bahrain next week. However, due to the incessant propaganda from the UMNO controlled-media, I have decided to issue this statement. If there is no clarification by the media on the matter, the Foundation will not hesitate to institute legal action against the relevant parties.

Anwar Ibrahim
Foundation for the Future Chairman
May 20th 2007


News reports had said that Anwar had written to a letter to Robin Cleveland, Wolfowitz’s counsellor at the World Bank, last October, asking for Riza to be transferred from the State Department to the foundation. The move raised her pay by 36% from US$133,000 (RM452,250) to US$193,590(RM658,255). In his press statement, Anwar said the setting up of the Foundation for the Future was announced in Bahrain in November 2005. The aim was for an independent body, comprising governments and civil societies to support non-government organisations (NGOs) in developing democracy and freedom in the Middle East and North Africa. He said US$56mil (RM190.5mil) was promised to the foundation but to date, it had only received funds from Turkey, the UK and Jordan, and none from the US. Anwar said he had been invited to join the board of the foundation in mid-2006 along with representatives from Morocco, Kuwait, Iraq, Spain, Syria, Turkey, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Switzerland and Qatar. At the first board meeting, he said he was unanimously chosen as the chairman.

Umno Youth deputy chief Khairy Jamaluddin had said on Sunday that Anwar must explain his role in the controversy involving Wolfowitz and Riza, clarify his relationship with Wolfowitz, and explain his motives for heading a foundation “bankrolled” by the US. "Anwar has to explain because this is an irregularity and abuse of power at the international level," he said.

Proton Losses RM 1 Billion of cash in 9 months

Proton Losses RM 1 Billion of cash in 9 months

"For the first nine months of FY2007, Proton’s net loss stood at RM590.45 million. "

With about RM1 billion of its cash pile gone in nine months, national carmaker Proton Holdings Bhd is urgently in need of a foreign partner to turn its fortunes around.

However, after months of negotiations with major global automotive players, Proton has yet to make any significant progress in securing a partnership deal and talks appeared to have come to a grinding halt.

Analysts believe that the situation has become critical for the national car project and painful decisions have to be made now to stop Proton from "bleeding" further.

Second Finance Minister Tan Sri Nor Mohamed Yakcop on May 15 said no progress had been made, but again said that the engagement of a strategic partner “will be resolved soon.”

Without elaborating, he said the government has yet to make a decision on the much-hyped foreign strategic alliance for Proton, and has also not set a deadline to conclude any agreement.

The government had earlier missed its own end-March deadline to strike a deal with a foreign carmaker for a partnership in Proton, fuelling speculation that talks with German carmaker Volkswagen AG, one of the suitors for Proton, had failed.

Nor Mohamed's statement comes in the wake of analysts' forecast that Proton will suffer a net loss of at least RM600 million for its full-year results for the financial year ended March 31, 2007 (FY2007), and this is the more optimistic part of the forecast spectrum.

For the first nine months of FY2007, Proton’s net loss stood at RM590.45 million.
Proton's sales over the last few years had declined to just about over 30% of domestic market share from a high of over 60% previously. Export sales, meanwhile, are nothing much to shout about.

Rosnani Rasul of TA Securities said Proton’s cash was rapidly depleting, down to RM627 million as at end Dec 31, 2006 from RM1.59 billion in March last year.

“What Proton needs fast is either a partner to lift it up with technical support or at the least, newer fuel-efficient models to compete with the likes of the new ViVA from Perodua,” she said.

She said that Proton’s year-to-date car sales volume of 110,000 units until February this year suggested that it was likely to miss TA Securities’ FY07 target of 125,000 units
“At best, we believe March sales are expected to reach between 8,000-10,000 units thanks to the newly launched model 'Proton Saga Merdeka Version'.

"Based on industry input, the demand for the latest model by Proton is expected to be a hit as the price offered at RM27,000 is affordable and appealing to the lower-income group,” she said.
However, Rosnani said given the slump in Proton car sales, the net loss would be at RM755 million, adding that its car sales for the year could at best be 120,000 units even with the Savvy and Waja Facelift models.

She said the only possible silver lining still in the horizon was the willingness of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to meet VW's chairman Ferdinand Piech.

“But a decision has to be made real fast, lest Proton financially bleeds further,” she quipped.
Aseambankers Research head Vincent Khoo said it was no easy task finding a partner to a company that was at the very heart of the national automotive industry, in that the livelihood of some 30,000 hinged very much on Proton’s survival.

“It is challenging to find a solution that will solve Proton’s financial needs for its turnaround and simultaneously fulfil the socio-economic duty of supporting the ancillary businesses that so depend on Proton,” he said.

Khoo said it was a tough situation for the government as the selection of a strategic partner for Proton must take into account not just shareholder interests, but that of those dependent on Proton.

“For Proton, its cash has dwindled a lot and before long, it would be in a net debt position. A decision must be made fast,” he said.

Source :
The Edgedaily.com, May 15, 2007
http://www.theedgedaily.com/cms/content.jsp?id=com.tms.cms.article.Article_900aff98-cb73c03a-135f44e0-76689ac8

Mahathir Prefer Najib to Abdullah

Tun Mahathir "Najib Better Than Abdullah"
But Decided on Abdullah based on Seniority

Najib would not have scrapped the Singapore Bridge Project.



KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia:
Former Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad ended an unspoken truce and launched a new attack on his successor, saying he is not the most qualified person to lead the country.
Mahathir, whose enmity with Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi surfaced last year, said in an interview published Wednesday that Abdullah's deputy, Najib Razak, was "the better candidate."

Mahathir told independent news Web site Malaysiakini.com that before he retired in 2003 after 22 years in power, he had considered handing the office to Najib instead of Abdullah.

"If it is a comparison between (Abdullah) and Najib, I would say that (Abdullah) was less qualified," he said. "But I also thought that he (Najib) was, maybe, a little bit young, so he should give an older person a chance. That was why I decided on Abdullah."
Asked whether he believed Najib, 53, is still the best person to lead Malaysia, Mahathir said, "I think if Najib is not so afraid of losing his (current) position if he displeases the prime minister, he would make a good prime minister."

Mahathir's comments appeared to be aimed at driving a wedge between the 67-year-old Abdullah and Najib, both of whom have repeatedly voiced confidence in each other and denied speculation of any friction. Malaysia's Cabinet and ruling party leaders have also said they support Abdullah completely.

Mahathir's main aide did not immediately answer calls on his mobile phone. Abdullah's aides could not be reached for comment.

Mahathir began attacking Abdullah for alleged nepotism and weak governance in mid-2006, but the 71-year-old elder statesman has largely steered clear of open criticism following a mild heart attack in November.

Mahathir has not presented proof to back up his allegations, and Abdullah has refrained from retaliating against Mahathir while vehemently denying the accusations.

Mahathir beleived that Najib would not have scrapped the Singapore Bridge Project.
In his interview with Malaysiakini, Mahathir said he believed Najib, who has also served in recent years as defense minister, would not have aborted Mahathir's vision of building a new bridge to neighboring Singapore.

"I think our world views will be slightly different, but by and large, they are more or less the same," Mahathir said. "I wouldn't say, for example, that Najib would drop the bridge. He was talking about building the bridge to the very last moment."

Najib was on a visit to the United States, and his aides could not be reached for comment.
Abdullah announced the scrapping of the bridge project last year, saying Malaysians were unhappy with Singapore's preconditions for the plan. Mahathir has accused Abdullah of compromising national interests and being too afraid to negotiate properly with Singapore

Source:
International Herald Tribune
May 9, 2007
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/05/09/asia/AS-POL-Malaysia-Mahathir.php

Court Complex Cracks in Jalan Duta

Court Complex Cracks in Jalan Duta
3rd Case of Government Building Failures / Damages / Cracks in a months

(1) On April 28, the multi-purpose hall of the Entrepreneur and Co-operative Development Ministry in Putrajaya was damaged when the ceiling was brought down by water from a burst pipe.
(2) On April 11, the Immigration head office in Putrajaya was flooded when a pipe connected to a water tank broke.
(3) On May 3, the Court Complex in Jalan Duta Cracks

Cracks show up on Jalan Duta court complex wall

KUALA LUMPUR: Cracks have begun appearing on a wall at the Kuala Lumpur court complex in Jalan Duta, less than a week after parts of a ceiling fell in the building.

The cracks, measuring more than 3m long, are on the fourth floor corridors opposite Magistrate’s Court Four.

It was not immediately known what caused them.

On Monday, it was believed that leaks from sewage pipes and sprinkler systems had caused some asbestos ceiling tiles to fall in the secretarial room of Civil High Court judge Datuk Abdul Malik.

This is the third case of damage to ceilings and burst pipes involving a government building in the last one month.

Entrepreneur and Co-operative Development Ministry in Putrajaya was damaged

On April 28, the multi-purpose hall of the Entrepreneur and Co-operative Development Ministry in Putrajaya was damaged when the ceiling was brought down by water from a burst pipe.

Immigration head office in Putrajaya was flooded

On April 11, the Immigration head office in Putrajaya was flooded when a pipe connected to a water tank broke.

The Works Ministry will assemble a team of experts to investigate the faults at the court complex in Jalan Duta, the Immigration Headquarters building in Putrajaya and the Entrepreneur and Co-operative Development Ministry building, also in Putrajaya.

Works Minister Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu said yesterday the team would deliver a preliminary report on Monday for him to present to the Prime Minister at the cabinet meeting on Wednesday where further details, including repair costs, would be discussed.

On the appearance of cracks at the court complex, Samy Vellu said he had received a report on the matter.

Johawaki Sdn Bhd, contractor for the court complex, said in a statement that the ceiling did not collapse at the Jalan Duta court complex.

A 0.6m by 1.2m fibre board ceiling and a 0.2m diameter light fitting fell, it said.

It said the damage had been fixed and that a maintenance crew would be present on the site during the company’s defect and liability period which expires on Feb 26.

Source:
Malaysia Bar Website
http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/content/view/8775/2/

Also on Court Complex in Jalan Duta (Extracted from Malaysiakini)
World's biggest court complex in Jalan Duta lacks of parking bays

This world's biggest court complex in Jalan Duta, Kuala Lumpur, will house 30 High Courts, 21 Sessions Courts and 26 Magistrate's Courts and will be operational in May 2007.

Amusingly, the 77-court complex will only have 500 parking bays for the public and lawyers. It is situated in a place not accessible by Light Rail Transport (LRT) or good public transport facilities. It is a catastrophe waiting to happen.

Source :
Malaysiakini, April 5, 2007
http://www.malaysiakini.com/opinionsfeatures/65519

More on ECM Libra Avenue Bhd and Tony Fernandez

Tune Air Sdn Bhd acquired 40 million shares in ECM Libra Avenue Bhd

( AirAsia Bhd's Datuk Tony Fernandez is a majority shareholder of Tune Air and Tune Money )

Tune Air Sdn Bhd acquired 40 million shares in ECM Libra Avenue Bhd, at 95 sen each in a married deal on April 13, sources say. It is believed that the block was acquired from Tan Sri Azman Hashim who emerged as the largest shareholder in ECM Libra Avenue in February, after acquiring blocks from the Ministry of Finance Inc.

Malaysia Blogger Personal Opinions/ Question?:
Why do MoF sales the equity blocks to Tan Sri Azman Hashim.

Why Do Tune Asia Sdn Bhd acquire share in ECM Libra Avenue?

It is not clear if Tune Air acquired the 4.8% block directly or through one of its units. Either way, sources say, this deal does not involve Tune Money Sdn Bhd, which is the Tune group's financial services arm. It is not yet clear what Tune Air's intentions are behind the acquisition, though sources say there are plans for it to increase its stake in ECM Libra Avenue in the future. According to industry sources, Tune Air's interest in ECM Libra Avenue is not new and is something that has been "on the burner" for some months. "Even before Azman entered the picture, there was already talk that Tune Air could have a place in ECM Libra Avenue in the future," says a source. Tune Money is a no-frills financial services company which will offer pre-paid credit cards, low-cost insurance and unit trust products. Its managing director is Tengku Ali Zafrul Abdul Aziz, who was the managing director of Avenue Capital Resources Bhd. On the other hand, ECM Libra Avenue is a full-service universal broker which has applied to become an investment bank. AirAsia Bhd's Datuk Tony Fernandez is a majority shareholder of Tune Air and Tune Money. The Edge was unable to reach him last Friday. Industry sources point to the difference between the two models and say they cannot understand the rationale behind Tune Air's move.
However, a source says, there is no link between Tune Money and ECM Libra Avenue right now. "One is a business venture of the Tune group, the other is an investment."

Meanwhile, when contacted by The Edge, T Jayaratnam, ECM Libra Avenue's deputy CEO, said he was unaware of any shareholding changes because these were moves at shareholder level. However, he added that there had been internal and operational changes within the group. "Bank Negara [Malaysia] is currently evaluating our application to become an investment bank," Jayaratnam said in a telephone interview last Friday. He said the group was being repositioned as a new player in the investment banking sector.

Chief among the changes is the return of Datuk Kalimullah Hassan as executive chairman and chief executive of ECM Libra Avenue. Lim Kian Onn will be the managing director. Kalimullah sold down his 6.75% stake in ECM Libra Avenue in August last year to 4.8% because he "was forced to take the step by the unwarranted focus on the company by politicians".

Malaysia Blogger : Point for Ponder?
Which Politicians forced him to take the steps to sold down his share? Why?

At the time, it looked like the ECM franchise created in 2002 by Kalimullah, Lim and David Chua had crumbled. Chua exited the group at the same time Kalimullah sold down his stake, leaving Lim at the helm of what looked like a sinking ship. Key employees left the group after the completion of the merger between ECM Libra Bhd and Avenue Capital, leaving a vacuum in what is a people-intensive and sensitive industry. Jayaratnam, an experienced merchant banker, was appointed in October 2006. "Since then, I have been looking at the whole group to facilitate our transformation into an investment bank. When the merger [between ECM Libra and Avenue] was first completed, there was some confusion on direction and people were affected. But, now after we have reassessed our strengths, we have brought new people on board. We are now more structured," Jayaratnam said. He said that in the first quarter of this year, ECM Libra Avenue topped the league tables for secondary placements with a total value of US$146 million (about RM499 million).

Asked about persistent rumours on capital repayments, Jayaratnam said: "We are looking at how to enhance shareholder value and how best to allocate capital to maximise value. To operate as an investment bank, we need capital and we have identified other areas where we can utilise our capital best. Like private equity, for example. You only pay back capital when you do not have any other opportunities to create value. But now this is really an equities environment and we are looking at all our options."

SOurce : Extracted from Theedgedaily.com
http://www.theedgedaily.com/cms/content.jsp?id=com.tms.cms.article.Article_4fcf52d8-cb73c03a-18c8aea0-a6aee541