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.
Tuesday 21 October 2008
RM 2.4 Billion Subsidy for Telekom HSBB
The RM 2.4 billion Telekom HSBB (High Speed Broadband) subsidy
Please take note that in my previous posting title
RM 11.31 Billion High Speed Broadband (HSBB) awarded without Tender
dated 4th Sept 2008.
I have highlighted that there are 2 other Tenderer interested in the HSBB Project and has submitted with a much lower bid i.e
(1) HSBT presented a lower-cost proposal on Aug 21, but it was told to submit a detailed proposal to CCB in a week. It was said to have presented a concept paper and the committee chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak wanted to look at its detailed proposal before making a decision. (3 Aug 2008)
(2) A third proposal to wire up the country with high-speed broadband (HSBB) infrastructure at only RM5bil has surfaced, compared with Telekom Malaysia Bhd’s (TM) RM11.3bil and High Speed Broadband Sdn Bhd’s (HSBT) RM18bil proposals (The Star Biz : 4 Aug 2008)
".....However, some industry players are questioning why HSBT was rejected just on this technicality as its proposal would save RM2.4 billion in taxpayers’ money."
Now the Opposition YB Lim Kit Siang has raised the issued of RM 2.4 Billion Subsidy by the Government in Parliemen on 14 October 2008. Read the following extracted of his speech in Parlimen on 14 Oct 2008.
Speech (2) by Lim Kit Siang on the 2009 Budget in Parliament on Tuesday, 14th October 2008:
Extracted from DAP Website.
Why is Telekom subsidised with RM2.4 billion of tax payer’s money for the HSBB project when an alternative proposal do not require subsidy?
Why wasn’t there an open tender to choose the best proposal? Why does the government think Telekom is the best company to role out HSBB in spite of the fact that Telekom failed to achieve the national objective of high internet penetration after more than 10 years?
Simple economics will tell that a competitive environment will produce the results the country wants.
Besides failure to deliver the numbers (high internet and broadband penetration) and despite the fact that Telekom is a laughing stock because TMnet is well known for bad quality of service, the government persist to award the next generation broadband project to Telekom.
HSBT (High Speed Broadband Technology Sdn Bhd) has offered to build a similar network without subsidy. Even if the government deems HSBT inexperienced to carry out such a large project, wouldn’t the fact that their not requiring a subsidy tell them a subsidy may not be required?
Why then does the government need to provide public funds especially in this financially troubled time? The money will be better spent on the rakyat.
Since public money is involved, why wasn’t there an open tender? The govt should justify the rationale and provide details.
To make it worse, Telekom’s HSBB network is only a partially open network when it is known globally that such an infrastructure should be open and accessible to other broadband providers such as in S’pore.
Furthermore, the government did not have specific terms for the sharing of the HSBB network with other service providers.
Telekom has said screening will be done to allow competition that adds value to the industry, country and consumer. The term ’screening’ is bad enough while the part on adding value is open to interpretation.
A similar initiative, “Equal access plan for fixed line phone” introduced a decade ago supposedly to encourage competition in the ISP industry failed miserably. It played to Telekom’s hand to stunt the rise of serious competitors.
It is amazing that the government continued to allow Telekom to use vague words when Telekom has shown this bad faith previously. Doesn’t the government learn?
In spite of openly talking about increasing internet penetration and quality, the failure of Telekom to deliver still encourages the government to dish out the same and to support Telekom further.
There is no real competition for broadband in the country. Can anyone say that Telekom’s 95% share of the market shows Malaysia has liberalised the broadband service provider industry effectively?
What the country needs to propel itself forward in the information age is true liberalisation and not simply pay lip service to it. The HSBB project awarded to Telekom will only strengthen their already dominant position.
Will the government force Telekom to adopt open access where any service provider can use the HSBB network to reach their customers when it is constructed? This is the way to create competition to provide the best service at reasonable prices, vital in order to develop the content and IT industry here.
A few questions to conclude:
• Isn’t the RM2.4 billion subsidy unfair, Telekom is already too dominant?
• Why allow Telekom to defer third party full access to the HSBB network for 7 years when Telekom is already the dominant player? It will be their right if they funded it 100% themselves but with public funds, there should be no delay at all.
• Will the government listen to all stakeholders – the public, IT industry and broadband industry as to the best way forward for the HSBB project through a study because it is now a public project with public funds involved?
• Why is the government protecting the revenue of one entity Telekom when true liberalisation will develop the industry, potentially returning revenue many times more for the country?
• Will the government put in a proviso in the agreement with Telekom HSBB project to ensure open access to all service providers at reasonable price that includes annual audit by a third party? Failing this, will the govt ensure since there is interest, for at least one more HSSB provider within a year?
Competition must be created.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Lim Kit Siang, DAP Parliamentary leader & MP for Ipoh Timor
Please take note that in my previous posting title
RM 11.31 Billion High Speed Broadband (HSBB) awarded without Tender
dated 4th Sept 2008.
I have highlighted that there are 2 other Tenderer interested in the HSBB Project and has submitted with a much lower bid i.e
(1) HSBT presented a lower-cost proposal on Aug 21, but it was told to submit a detailed proposal to CCB in a week. It was said to have presented a concept paper and the committee chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak wanted to look at its detailed proposal before making a decision. (3 Aug 2008)
(2) A third proposal to wire up the country with high-speed broadband (HSBB) infrastructure at only RM5bil has surfaced, compared with Telekom Malaysia Bhd’s (TM) RM11.3bil and High Speed Broadband Sdn Bhd’s (HSBT) RM18bil proposals (The Star Biz : 4 Aug 2008)
".....However, some industry players are questioning why HSBT was rejected just on this technicality as its proposal would save RM2.4 billion in taxpayers’ money."
Now the Opposition YB Lim Kit Siang has raised the issued of RM 2.4 Billion Subsidy by the Government in Parliemen on 14 October 2008. Read the following extracted of his speech in Parlimen on 14 Oct 2008.
Speech (2) by Lim Kit Siang on the 2009 Budget in Parliament on Tuesday, 14th October 2008:
Extracted from DAP Website.
Why is Telekom subsidised with RM2.4 billion of tax payer’s money for the HSBB project when an alternative proposal do not require subsidy?
Why wasn’t there an open tender to choose the best proposal? Why does the government think Telekom is the best company to role out HSBB in spite of the fact that Telekom failed to achieve the national objective of high internet penetration after more than 10 years?
Simple economics will tell that a competitive environment will produce the results the country wants.
Besides failure to deliver the numbers (high internet and broadband penetration) and despite the fact that Telekom is a laughing stock because TMnet is well known for bad quality of service, the government persist to award the next generation broadband project to Telekom.
HSBT (High Speed Broadband Technology Sdn Bhd) has offered to build a similar network without subsidy. Even if the government deems HSBT inexperienced to carry out such a large project, wouldn’t the fact that their not requiring a subsidy tell them a subsidy may not be required?
Why then does the government need to provide public funds especially in this financially troubled time? The money will be better spent on the rakyat.
Since public money is involved, why wasn’t there an open tender? The govt should justify the rationale and provide details.
To make it worse, Telekom’s HSBB network is only a partially open network when it is known globally that such an infrastructure should be open and accessible to other broadband providers such as in S’pore.
Furthermore, the government did not have specific terms for the sharing of the HSBB network with other service providers.
Telekom has said screening will be done to allow competition that adds value to the industry, country and consumer. The term ’screening’ is bad enough while the part on adding value is open to interpretation.
A similar initiative, “Equal access plan for fixed line phone” introduced a decade ago supposedly to encourage competition in the ISP industry failed miserably. It played to Telekom’s hand to stunt the rise of serious competitors.
It is amazing that the government continued to allow Telekom to use vague words when Telekom has shown this bad faith previously. Doesn’t the government learn?
In spite of openly talking about increasing internet penetration and quality, the failure of Telekom to deliver still encourages the government to dish out the same and to support Telekom further.
There is no real competition for broadband in the country. Can anyone say that Telekom’s 95% share of the market shows Malaysia has liberalised the broadband service provider industry effectively?
What the country needs to propel itself forward in the information age is true liberalisation and not simply pay lip service to it. The HSBB project awarded to Telekom will only strengthen their already dominant position.
Will the government force Telekom to adopt open access where any service provider can use the HSBB network to reach their customers when it is constructed? This is the way to create competition to provide the best service at reasonable prices, vital in order to develop the content and IT industry here.
A few questions to conclude:
• Isn’t the RM2.4 billion subsidy unfair, Telekom is already too dominant?
• Why allow Telekom to defer third party full access to the HSBB network for 7 years when Telekom is already the dominant player? It will be their right if they funded it 100% themselves but with public funds, there should be no delay at all.
• Will the government listen to all stakeholders – the public, IT industry and broadband industry as to the best way forward for the HSBB project through a study because it is now a public project with public funds involved?
• Why is the government protecting the revenue of one entity Telekom when true liberalisation will develop the industry, potentially returning revenue many times more for the country?
• Will the government put in a proviso in the agreement with Telekom HSBB project to ensure open access to all service providers at reasonable price that includes annual audit by a third party? Failing this, will the govt ensure since there is interest, for at least one more HSSB provider within a year?
Competition must be created.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Lim Kit Siang, DAP Parliamentary leader & MP for Ipoh Timor
Sunday 19 October 2008
RM2.3 billion Eurocopter deal - as presented in Parlimen
RM2.3 billion Eurocopter deal – why no proper short-listing and a bidder which is higher by RM1.256 billion chosen
The following speech by YB Lim Kit Siang was extracted from DAP website:-
Speech (3) by Lim Kit Siang on the 2009 Budget in Parliament on Tuesday, 14th October 2008:
The first thing Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi did as Defence Minister was to announce on 26th September that the Defence Ministry has agreed to acquire new helicopters from European helicopter manufacturer, the Eurocopter, to replace the Nuri.
This RM2 billion deal lacks accountability and integrity.
Four helicopters had been “short-listed” by the Ministry of Defence to replace the fleet of Sikorsky S61-A4 Sea Kings better known as the Nuri.
The four are the Eurocopter Cougar EC725, Sikorsky S92, Agusta Westland EH-101 Merlin and the Russian-made Mil Mi-17 Hip.
However, Abdullah shocked everyone with his announcement as the “short-listing” had not been completed and the pricing of the EC725 is not competitive compared with the other helicopters.
The pricing offered by the “short-listed” helicopters are:
Eurocopter Cougar EC 725 - Euro 463.44 juta (RM2.317 billion);
Sikorsky - US$427.20 juta (RM1.45 billion)
Canadian Kelowna Flightcraft Ltd. Model Kazan MI-172 buatan Russia
- US$312 juta (RM1.061 billion)
This means that there is a difference of RM1.256 billion between Eurocopter Cougar EC 725 with the lowest bidder, the Kazan MI-172 KF – in other words, with US$600 million the Royal Malaysian Air Force can buy 26 units of Kazan helicopters and not just 12 Cougar helicopters.
In his speech yesterday, the Opposition Leader, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim referred to the complaint by the Chairman of Mentari Services Sdn. Bhd. Kapt (B) Dato’ Zahar Hashim about the irregularity of the Eurocopter decision, and this is not just confined to the Kelowna Flightcraft Limited, Canada which submitted the bid for the Russian helicopter but also the other “short-listed” bidders as well, viz:
• Proses penilaian belum selesai tetapi dengan secara tiba-tiba arahan diberi oleh pihak tertentu supaya Letter of Intent (LOI) dikeluarkan kepada Eurocopter. LOI tersebut ditandatangan oleh seorang pegawai paras menengah di Kementerian Pertahanan dan bertarikh 15th September 2008 iaitu dua hari sebelum Datuk Seri Najib Razak berpindah dari Kementerian Pertahanan ke Kementerian Kewangan.
• Kerja yang sudah selesai adalah penelitian dokumen-dokumen tender yang dikemukakan oleh penender-penender. Penilaian fizikal iaitu memeriksa permis dan kilang penender-penender dan melakukan penerbangan ujian (test flights) belum dilakukan oleh kerana kebenaran dari pihak atasan di Kementerian Pertahanan dan Kementerian Kewangan untuk berbuat demikian belum diperolehi. Sewajarnya, penilaian fizikal adalah lebih mustahak dari penilaian dokumen-dokumen (documentary evaluation) dan anggota-anggota yang terlibat berasa hairan apabila mengetahui bahawa LOI telah dikeluarkan sebelum penilaian fizikal dilakukan.
• Proses pengeluaran LOI kepada Eurocopter agak luar biasa dan bertentangan dengan prosedur yang telah diamalkan selama ini. Biasanya LOI dikeluarkan setelah proses penilaian secara menyeluruh selesai dan sebuah jawatankuasa yang dianggotai oleh wakil-wakil dari Kementerian Kewangan dan Kementerian Pertahanan capai kata sepakat tentang produk yang terbaik bersesuaian dengan belanjawan yang telah diperuntukkan. Mereka turut berpendapat bahawa adalah menakjubkan bahawa LOI bagi kontrak yang bernilai melebihi Dua Bilion Ringgit ditandatangan oleh seorang pegawai Kerajaan bertaraf Setiausaha Bahagian dan bukan seorang yang bertaraf sekurang-kurangnya Timbalan Ketua Setiausaha.
The following are therefore the issues and questions:-
• Technical evaluation process did not follow standard international practice and was not transparent.
• Short-listing of the aircraft not as normally practiced in such tender process.
• What is the criteria for evaluating these aircraft. Is it following standard evaluation process in technical terms. Has it carried out any flight evaluation of all the aircraft.
There have been cases where manufacturers have not been able to prove what they have written in paper when flight test was carried out. There has also been instances where the manufacturers had used a different and higher performance aircraft than was specified in the written technical paper during flight test. This is why it is VERY important that a flight test valuation is carried out to ensure they comply with the specs given in the written documents.
I understand that the EC725 selected is a 40-year old aircraft, certified in the 60s and 70s. It has been modified and upgraded all these while and given a new name and term. Can this EC 725 be guaranteed to last another 40 more years with all the modifications and upgrading anticipated?
If RMAF is buying this 40-yr old aircraft, then it might as well keep the Nuris, modify and upgrade them now. It will cost only a fraction of a new aircraft, especially taking into account the Sikorsky offer had reported by Berita Minggu of 1st June 2008, viz:
Syarikat pengeluar helikopter terkemuka dunia, Sikorsky Aircroft Corporation (Sikorsky) membuat tawaran kepada Kementerian Pertahanan untuk membeli kembali 29 helikopter Nuri atau Sikorsky S-61-A4 Sea Kings, jika Malaysia membuat keputusan membeli helicopter barunya, Superhawks S-92 untuk kegunaan Angkatan Tentera Malaysia (ATM).
Eksekutif Jualan Serantau Sikorsky bagi Asia, Scott Pierce, berkata tawaran itu dibuat melalui bida dikemukakan syarikatnya kepada kementerian berkenaan, selepas Malaysia mengumumkan tawaran tender terbuka antarabangsa berhubung pembelian helicopter baru bagi pasukan itu.
Katanya, jika Malaysia memutuskan terus menggunakan Nuri bersama helicopter terbarunya, Sikorsky yang juga anak syarikat United Technologies Corporation (UTC), menyatakan komitmen membaik pulih atau meningkatkan khidmat Nuri di Negara ini.
“Sikorsky sedia membeli semua baki Nuri daripada TUDM untuk dijual kepada mana-mana pihak yang berminat, tetapi juga TUDM masih mahu menggunakan Nuri bersama helicopter S-92, kita sanggup membaik pulih dan meningkatkan helicopter berusia lebih 40 tahun itu, termasuk menukar daripada kokpit konvensional kepada kokpit kaca (digital).
“Tugas balik pulih Nuri akan membabitkan pemindahan teknologi terkini dan kepakaran kepada orang tempatan”, katanya kepada Berita Minggu pada temu bual di sini, baru-baru ini.
I am not a spokesman for Sikorsky, but this offer warrants an explanation from the Ministry of Defence as to the critera for the final selection of Eurocopter among the four “short-listed” bids.
The government had allocated US$600 million (RM1.93 billion) to buy an initial fleet of 12 helicopters, which will be in service until 2050.
Last year, the government cancelled a defence deal with the European aerospace giant EADS (European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company) for 197 helicopters to the country’s army following adverse observations by Indian watchdog authorities over alleged irregularities in the defence bidding process.
According to published reports, Eurocopter allegedly used a local firm, Global Vectra Helicorp, to help broker the deal despite a ban in India on the use of middlemen in defence deal.
Eurocopter was also accused of presenting a civilian helicopter instead of a military version for statutory field trials by the Indian army.
But what should attract the attention and concern of Parliament is that the EADS deal to sell 197 Eucopters to the Indian government was a US$600 million which the Indian government subsequently cancelled.
Parliament and the nation are entitled to know why for the same amount of US$600 million, the Indian government was offered 197 Eurocopters as compared to 12 Eurocopters to Malaysia.
In the name of accountability, transparency, integrity and good governance, I call for the immediate suspension of the RMAF helicopter award to subject it to a proper and above-board procurement process.
The following speech by YB Lim Kit Siang was extracted from DAP website:-
Speech (3) by Lim Kit Siang on the 2009 Budget in Parliament on Tuesday, 14th October 2008:
The first thing Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi did as Defence Minister was to announce on 26th September that the Defence Ministry has agreed to acquire new helicopters from European helicopter manufacturer, the Eurocopter, to replace the Nuri.
This RM2 billion deal lacks accountability and integrity.
Four helicopters had been “short-listed” by the Ministry of Defence to replace the fleet of Sikorsky S61-A4 Sea Kings better known as the Nuri.
The four are the Eurocopter Cougar EC725, Sikorsky S92, Agusta Westland EH-101 Merlin and the Russian-made Mil Mi-17 Hip.
However, Abdullah shocked everyone with his announcement as the “short-listing” had not been completed and the pricing of the EC725 is not competitive compared with the other helicopters.
The pricing offered by the “short-listed” helicopters are:
Eurocopter Cougar EC 725 - Euro 463.44 juta (RM2.317 billion);
Sikorsky - US$427.20 juta (RM1.45 billion)
Canadian Kelowna Flightcraft Ltd. Model Kazan MI-172 buatan Russia
- US$312 juta (RM1.061 billion)
This means that there is a difference of RM1.256 billion between Eurocopter Cougar EC 725 with the lowest bidder, the Kazan MI-172 KF – in other words, with US$600 million the Royal Malaysian Air Force can buy 26 units of Kazan helicopters and not just 12 Cougar helicopters.
In his speech yesterday, the Opposition Leader, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim referred to the complaint by the Chairman of Mentari Services Sdn. Bhd. Kapt (B) Dato’ Zahar Hashim about the irregularity of the Eurocopter decision, and this is not just confined to the Kelowna Flightcraft Limited, Canada which submitted the bid for the Russian helicopter but also the other “short-listed” bidders as well, viz:
• Proses penilaian belum selesai tetapi dengan secara tiba-tiba arahan diberi oleh pihak tertentu supaya Letter of Intent (LOI) dikeluarkan kepada Eurocopter. LOI tersebut ditandatangan oleh seorang pegawai paras menengah di Kementerian Pertahanan dan bertarikh 15th September 2008 iaitu dua hari sebelum Datuk Seri Najib Razak berpindah dari Kementerian Pertahanan ke Kementerian Kewangan.
• Kerja yang sudah selesai adalah penelitian dokumen-dokumen tender yang dikemukakan oleh penender-penender. Penilaian fizikal iaitu memeriksa permis dan kilang penender-penender dan melakukan penerbangan ujian (test flights) belum dilakukan oleh kerana kebenaran dari pihak atasan di Kementerian Pertahanan dan Kementerian Kewangan untuk berbuat demikian belum diperolehi. Sewajarnya, penilaian fizikal adalah lebih mustahak dari penilaian dokumen-dokumen (documentary evaluation) dan anggota-anggota yang terlibat berasa hairan apabila mengetahui bahawa LOI telah dikeluarkan sebelum penilaian fizikal dilakukan.
• Proses pengeluaran LOI kepada Eurocopter agak luar biasa dan bertentangan dengan prosedur yang telah diamalkan selama ini. Biasanya LOI dikeluarkan setelah proses penilaian secara menyeluruh selesai dan sebuah jawatankuasa yang dianggotai oleh wakil-wakil dari Kementerian Kewangan dan Kementerian Pertahanan capai kata sepakat tentang produk yang terbaik bersesuaian dengan belanjawan yang telah diperuntukkan. Mereka turut berpendapat bahawa adalah menakjubkan bahawa LOI bagi kontrak yang bernilai melebihi Dua Bilion Ringgit ditandatangan oleh seorang pegawai Kerajaan bertaraf Setiausaha Bahagian dan bukan seorang yang bertaraf sekurang-kurangnya Timbalan Ketua Setiausaha.
The following are therefore the issues and questions:-
• Technical evaluation process did not follow standard international practice and was not transparent.
• Short-listing of the aircraft not as normally practiced in such tender process.
• What is the criteria for evaluating these aircraft. Is it following standard evaluation process in technical terms. Has it carried out any flight evaluation of all the aircraft.
There have been cases where manufacturers have not been able to prove what they have written in paper when flight test was carried out. There has also been instances where the manufacturers had used a different and higher performance aircraft than was specified in the written technical paper during flight test. This is why it is VERY important that a flight test valuation is carried out to ensure they comply with the specs given in the written documents.
I understand that the EC725 selected is a 40-year old aircraft, certified in the 60s and 70s. It has been modified and upgraded all these while and given a new name and term. Can this EC 725 be guaranteed to last another 40 more years with all the modifications and upgrading anticipated?
If RMAF is buying this 40-yr old aircraft, then it might as well keep the Nuris, modify and upgrade them now. It will cost only a fraction of a new aircraft, especially taking into account the Sikorsky offer had reported by Berita Minggu of 1st June 2008, viz:
Syarikat pengeluar helikopter terkemuka dunia, Sikorsky Aircroft Corporation (Sikorsky) membuat tawaran kepada Kementerian Pertahanan untuk membeli kembali 29 helikopter Nuri atau Sikorsky S-61-A4 Sea Kings, jika Malaysia membuat keputusan membeli helicopter barunya, Superhawks S-92 untuk kegunaan Angkatan Tentera Malaysia (ATM).
Eksekutif Jualan Serantau Sikorsky bagi Asia, Scott Pierce, berkata tawaran itu dibuat melalui bida dikemukakan syarikatnya kepada kementerian berkenaan, selepas Malaysia mengumumkan tawaran tender terbuka antarabangsa berhubung pembelian helicopter baru bagi pasukan itu.
Katanya, jika Malaysia memutuskan terus menggunakan Nuri bersama helicopter terbarunya, Sikorsky yang juga anak syarikat United Technologies Corporation (UTC), menyatakan komitmen membaik pulih atau meningkatkan khidmat Nuri di Negara ini.
“Sikorsky sedia membeli semua baki Nuri daripada TUDM untuk dijual kepada mana-mana pihak yang berminat, tetapi juga TUDM masih mahu menggunakan Nuri bersama helicopter S-92, kita sanggup membaik pulih dan meningkatkan helicopter berusia lebih 40 tahun itu, termasuk menukar daripada kokpit konvensional kepada kokpit kaca (digital).
“Tugas balik pulih Nuri akan membabitkan pemindahan teknologi terkini dan kepakaran kepada orang tempatan”, katanya kepada Berita Minggu pada temu bual di sini, baru-baru ini.
I am not a spokesman for Sikorsky, but this offer warrants an explanation from the Ministry of Defence as to the critera for the final selection of Eurocopter among the four “short-listed” bids.
The government had allocated US$600 million (RM1.93 billion) to buy an initial fleet of 12 helicopters, which will be in service until 2050.
Last year, the government cancelled a defence deal with the European aerospace giant EADS (European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company) for 197 helicopters to the country’s army following adverse observations by Indian watchdog authorities over alleged irregularities in the defence bidding process.
According to published reports, Eurocopter allegedly used a local firm, Global Vectra Helicorp, to help broker the deal despite a ban in India on the use of middlemen in defence deal.
Eurocopter was also accused of presenting a civilian helicopter instead of a military version for statutory field trials by the Indian army.
But what should attract the attention and concern of Parliament is that the EADS deal to sell 197 Eucopters to the Indian government was a US$600 million which the Indian government subsequently cancelled.
Parliament and the nation are entitled to know why for the same amount of US$600 million, the Indian government was offered 197 Eurocopters as compared to 12 Eurocopters to Malaysia.
In the name of accountability, transparency, integrity and good governance, I call for the immediate suspension of the RMAF helicopter award to subject it to a proper and above-board procurement process.
Saturday 18 October 2008
MCA Election Results 2008 : The New MCA Team 2008-2011
MCA Election Results 2008 : The New MCA Team 2008-2011
President: Ong Tee Keat won 1,429 votes vs Chua Jui Meng 917 votes
Deputy President: Chua Soi Lek won 1,115 votes vs Ong Ka Chuan 1,001 votes, Donald Lim Siang Chai 209 votes, Lee Hack Teik 10 votes.
Vice Presidents:
Kong Cho Har won 1,798 votes
Liow Tiong Lai won 1,725 votes
Ng Yen Yen won 1,659 votes
Tan Kok Hong won 1,329 votes
Ministership and Deputy Ministership losers: Ong Ka Chuan, Chor Chee Heung.
Central Committee members (in order of top votes obtained)
(1) Lee Wei Kiat
(2) Wong Foon Meng
(3) Tan Chai Ho
(4) Tan Cheng Liang
(5) Hou Kok Chung
(6) Lee Chee Leong
(7) Gan Ping Shou
(8) Yu Chok Tow
(9) Wong Nai Chee
(10) Lee Sing Chooi
(11) Wee Jeck Seng
(12) Gan Tian Loo
(13) Yeow Chai Thiam
(14) Chong Itt Chew
(15) Hoh Khai Mun
(16) Ti Lian Ker
(17) Liew Yuen Keong
(18) Wong Mook Leong
(19) Paul Kong Sing Chu
(20) Edward Khoo Keok Hai
(21) Tee Siew Kiong
(22) Loh Seng Kok
(23) Wong Siong Hwee
(24) Por Choo Chor
(25) Loke Yuen Yow
...
President: Ong Tee Keat won 1,429 votes vs Chua Jui Meng 917 votes
Deputy President: Chua Soi Lek won 1,115 votes vs Ong Ka Chuan 1,001 votes, Donald Lim Siang Chai 209 votes, Lee Hack Teik 10 votes.
Vice Presidents:
Kong Cho Har won 1,798 votes
Liow Tiong Lai won 1,725 votes
Ng Yen Yen won 1,659 votes
Tan Kok Hong won 1,329 votes
Ministership and Deputy Ministership losers: Ong Ka Chuan, Chor Chee Heung.
Central Committee members (in order of top votes obtained)
(1) Lee Wei Kiat
(2) Wong Foon Meng
(3) Tan Chai Ho
(4) Tan Cheng Liang
(5) Hou Kok Chung
(6) Lee Chee Leong
(7) Gan Ping Shou
(8) Yu Chok Tow
(9) Wong Nai Chee
(10) Lee Sing Chooi
(11) Wee Jeck Seng
(12) Gan Tian Loo
(13) Yeow Chai Thiam
(14) Chong Itt Chew
(15) Hoh Khai Mun
(16) Ti Lian Ker
(17) Liew Yuen Keong
(18) Wong Mook Leong
(19) Paul Kong Sing Chu
(20) Edward Khoo Keok Hai
(21) Tee Siew Kiong
(22) Loh Seng Kok
(23) Wong Siong Hwee
(24) Por Choo Chor
(25) Loke Yuen Yow
...
Eurocopter EC725 : 4th Highest of seven bid selected (RM 605 Mil higher than lowest bid)
Eurocopter EC725 : 4th Highest of seven bid selected (RM 605 Mil higher than lowest bid)
Eurocopter EC725 of RM 1.1 Billion selected against lowest bid of RM 494.9 million (RM 605 Million higher i.e more that 2.2 x times the lowest bid)
" The decision to procure helicopters from Eurocopter was done following proper procedure and was not influenced by any party, Defence Ministry secretary-general Datuk Abu Bakar Abdullah said. "
Abu Bakar said the tender was closed on Feb 12 this year and at noon the same day, the tender committee opened the seven tenders received while being witnessed by representatives from companies that had taken part.
The tender offers received were:
T521/07/A/001: £341.88mil (RM2.08bil); (2nd Highest)
T521/07/A/002: RM663.1mil; (6th Highest)
T521/07/A/003: €104.6mil (RM494.9mil); (Lowest)
T521/07/A/004: US$220.5mil (RM777.45mil); (5th Highest)
T521/07/A/005: US$708.3mil; (RM2.49bil); (Highest)
T521/07/A/006 (Eurocopter): €233.24mil (RM1.1bil); (4th Highest)
T521/07/A/007: US$348.17mil (RM1.22bil). (3rd Highest)
PETALING JAYA: The decision to procure helicopters from Eurocopter was done following proper procedure and was not influenced by any party, Defence Ministry secretary-general Datuk Abu Bakar Abdullah said.
The ministry chose the Eurocopter EC725 because the company had a complete tender offer that obtained the highest marks based on technical evaluation, an offset package and it offered a reasonable price, he said.
“Eurocopter also offered a system that was proven, and this also fulfilled the army’s specifications,” he said in a statement yesterday.
The Government, he said, had no influence on prices that were offered by the company as bidding was done via an international open tender process.
Abu Bakar said the Royal Malaysia Air Force (RMAF) prepared specification documents for utility helicopters capable of search and rescue that were also capable of being upgraded to combat search and rescue aircraft.
On Oct 10 2007, the Economic Planning Unit approved the decision to buy new helicopters and an international open tender was announced on Nov 7, he said.
“To make it easier for prospective suppliers to put forth their offers, the RMAF held a briefing during the Langkawi International Maritime Airshow on Dec 6 and explained that it was important for suppliers to include an offset package.”
Abu Bakar said the tender was closed on Feb 12 this year and at noon the same day, the tender committee opened the seven tenders received while being witnessed by representatives from companies that had taken part.
The tender offers received were:
T521/07/A/001: £341.88mil (RM2.08bil);
T521/07/A/002: RM663.1mil;
T521/07/A/003: €104.6mil (RM494.9mil);
T521/07/A/004: US$220.5mil (RM777.45mil);
T521/07/A/005: US$708.3mil; (RM2.49bil);
T521/07/A/006 (Eurocopter): €233.24mil (RM1.1bil);
T521/07/A/007: US$348.17mil (RM1.22bil).
“The documents were then split up into three parts for the technical evaluation committee, offset evaluation committee and price evaluation committee to evaluate,” Abu Bakar said.
He said the committees’ conclusions were tabled at a Tender Board meeting on July 22 and was then forwarded to the Finance Ministry on Aug 4.
The Defence Ministry received the green light on Sept 3.
“The letter of intention could have been issued at any time after Sept 3 and it was a coincidence that it was issued on Sept 15,” he said.
Eurocopter EC725 of RM 1.1 Billion selected against lowest bid of RM 494.9 million (RM 605 Million higher i.e more that 2.2 x times the lowest bid)
" The decision to procure helicopters from Eurocopter was done following proper procedure and was not influenced by any party, Defence Ministry secretary-general Datuk Abu Bakar Abdullah said. "
Abu Bakar said the tender was closed on Feb 12 this year and at noon the same day, the tender committee opened the seven tenders received while being witnessed by representatives from companies that had taken part.
The tender offers received were:
T521/07/A/001: £341.88mil (RM2.08bil); (2nd Highest)
T521/07/A/002: RM663.1mil; (6th Highest)
T521/07/A/003: €104.6mil (RM494.9mil); (Lowest)
T521/07/A/004: US$220.5mil (RM777.45mil); (5th Highest)
T521/07/A/005: US$708.3mil; (RM2.49bil); (Highest)
T521/07/A/006 (Eurocopter): €233.24mil (RM1.1bil); (4th Highest)
T521/07/A/007: US$348.17mil (RM1.22bil). (3rd Highest)
PETALING JAYA: The decision to procure helicopters from Eurocopter was done following proper procedure and was not influenced by any party, Defence Ministry secretary-general Datuk Abu Bakar Abdullah said.
The ministry chose the Eurocopter EC725 because the company had a complete tender offer that obtained the highest marks based on technical evaluation, an offset package and it offered a reasonable price, he said.
“Eurocopter also offered a system that was proven, and this also fulfilled the army’s specifications,” he said in a statement yesterday.
The Government, he said, had no influence on prices that were offered by the company as bidding was done via an international open tender process.
Abu Bakar said the Royal Malaysia Air Force (RMAF) prepared specification documents for utility helicopters capable of search and rescue that were also capable of being upgraded to combat search and rescue aircraft.
On Oct 10 2007, the Economic Planning Unit approved the decision to buy new helicopters and an international open tender was announced on Nov 7, he said.
“To make it easier for prospective suppliers to put forth their offers, the RMAF held a briefing during the Langkawi International Maritime Airshow on Dec 6 and explained that it was important for suppliers to include an offset package.”
Abu Bakar said the tender was closed on Feb 12 this year and at noon the same day, the tender committee opened the seven tenders received while being witnessed by representatives from companies that had taken part.
The tender offers received were:
T521/07/A/001: £341.88mil (RM2.08bil);
T521/07/A/002: RM663.1mil;
T521/07/A/003: €104.6mil (RM494.9mil);
T521/07/A/004: US$220.5mil (RM777.45mil);
T521/07/A/005: US$708.3mil; (RM2.49bil);
T521/07/A/006 (Eurocopter): €233.24mil (RM1.1bil);
T521/07/A/007: US$348.17mil (RM1.22bil).
“The documents were then split up into three parts for the technical evaluation committee, offset evaluation committee and price evaluation committee to evaluate,” Abu Bakar said.
He said the committees’ conclusions were tabled at a Tender Board meeting on July 22 and was then forwarded to the Finance Ministry on Aug 4.
The Defence Ministry received the green light on Sept 3.
“The letter of intention could have been issued at any time after Sept 3 and it was a coincidence that it was issued on Sept 15,” he said.
Full Text of Ong Ka Ting's speech at 55th MCA Convention
The full text of MCA president Datuk Seri Ong Ka Ting’s speech at the 55th MCA Convention at Dewan San Choon, Kuala Lumpur
ON behalf of the MCA party, I convey my deepest appreciation to Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, the Prime Minister and Barisan Nasional chairman, for being here with us once again and for officiating MCA’s 55th annual general assembly on this auspicious morning. I also welcome and extend my gratitude to Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, the Deputy Prime Minister and Barisan Nasional deputy chairman as well as to all leaders and representatives from Barisan Nasional component parties for attending MCA’s annual general assembly this morning.
Honoured ladies and gentlemen,
It is a historic moment to have Barisan Nasional chairman Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi as our honoured guest who will officiate the MCA general assembly. This is because this is the last time he will officiate MCA’s general assembly and this is also my last MCA general assembly as president of the party.
On behalf of MCA, I wish to take this opportunity to convey my highest appreciation to Datuk Seri Abdullah for all the help and support he has given to the MCA thus far as Prime Minister in tackling the various challenges faced by the Chinese community specifically and also the Malaysian community on the whole. The MCA appreciates the Prime Minister’s sincerity and determination in his commitment to continue several important efforts before he retires.
Among them are the judicial reform, the reform and enhancement of anti-corruption efforts and reforming the police force.
The MCA welcomes the Prime Minister’s commitment to these important efforts and hopes that component parties will be truly involved in an effective manner to fix all current weaknesses in these three fields so that we can restore public confidence in Barisan. I previously represented MCA in raising several suggestions in Parliament on April 30, this year, on these three issues:
* MCA suggested that the Government enhance the judiciary system including setting up a Judicial Commission that is truly independent so that issues regarding the appointment and promotion of judges can be done in a transparent manner without taking into account race or religion. The Barisan government should enhance the judiciary system to restore the people’s confidence.
* The MCA hopes that efforts to curb corruption especially the restructuring of the Anti-Corruption Agency via the setting up of the Malaysia Anti-Corruption Commission will be truly effective in preventing and combating corruption. It is high time for us to act firmly without taking into account which side is involved in the corruption, be it political leaders, influential people or those in high positions. The performance and achievements of organisations such as the ICAC in Hong Kong should be used as a reference in our efforts to improve ways to combat corruption.
* Security problems and the effectiveness in combating crime is closely related with the efficiency of the police force and public awareness. The Government should have a more open attitude towards the 125 suggestions by the Royal Police Commission to create a royal police force that is more efficient, transparent, not bribeable, professional and fair. One reform that will convince the people is to reconsider the suggestion to set up the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC). Y.A.B. Datuk Seri Prime Minister and Y.A.B. Deputy Prime Minister, please act firmly in bringing changes and reforms to these three important issues that was just mentioned. The rakyat are really anticipating it. MCA will continue to be with our two leaders in making these reform efforts a success.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Malaysians of various races have sent us a strong signal through the voting trends in the results of the 12th general election on March 8. From the feedback received by the MCA, the rakyat have a negative perception towards the Barisan Nasional government in various aspects during the last general election.
Among them are:
i) They are not satisfied with the problem of corruption and misuse of power by politicians and government officers. Those entrusted to hold this trust seemed to have broken the trust of the people. There are also very negative perception towards the non-transparent manner in the awarding of government contracts and there were also leakages in the usage of government allocations when implementing development projects, acquisition or services.
ii) They feel disgusted and angry that a handful of politicians in Barisan Nasional had been arrogant and passionate in making statements or speeches that were racially-motivated or had threatened other races. There were also some politicians who became very wealthy not long after holding a party position or being made local councillors.
iii) Many people are also worried about their safety and the safety of their loved ones especially when they kept reading crime-related news like cases of snatch theft, robbery, break-ins, assault and brutal murder.
iv) The increase in the price of goods and higher cost of living following the higher fuel prices even before March 8 has inconvenienced the people especially the low and medium income earners, a group which represents the majority of our population.
v) The handling of religious issues by the authorities often portray a picture that the freedom of religion is not practised as stated by government leaders including Y.A.B. Prime Minister.
vi) Many non-bumiputra traders, entrepreneurs, developers or investors constantly feel frustrated because they feel constrained and not being treated fairly by certain ministries, departments or government agencies in the issuance of licences, permits, loans or tender opportunities.
The relevant authorities seem to enjoy using excuses of government economic policies based on prejudicial interpretation and narrow-minded thinking.
In this event, the MCA has corrected several issues at the Cabinet level or through discussions with the Y.A.B. Prime Minister or Y.A.B. Deputy Prime Minister. Among the examples are the relaxing of government procurement and services policy to enable non-bumiputras to participate in the activities for limits below RM50,000 per item and to prevent the authorities from attempting to impose guidelines to curb foreign investment in the distributive trade.
If we want to ensure that our country’s economy grows at a satisfactory rate, we must ensure that all traders, entrepreneurs and investors, small or big, are able to participate in all sectors in the economic development of our country. The implementation of an affirmative economic policy should be based on a principle that does not sideline others and it should be done by making the economic cake bigger and by encouraging joint ventures between races.
The implementation of this policy should not limit any trader or investor who tries to expand their business or investment based on success achieved by their own efforts.
The Barisan Nasional government should re-look and re-evaluate the various weaknesses or misappropriation in the implementation of the economic policy which is different than what was promised to our multi-racial community. It is time the Government liberalised the economic policy to make Malaysia truly competitive.
vii) The issue of building new SJK (C) and the lack of development allocation for SJK (C), SJK (T) and mission schools have also been raised by the Chinese and Indian communities all this while. Before the general election on March 8, 2008, the Government had approved the building of six new SJK (C) and the relocation of 13 SJK (C).
Recently, the MCA suggested that the Government fund the construction costs and rebuild these SJK(C) as soon as possible. Besides that, the MCA also suggested that the Government institutionalise the building of new SJK (C) where needed and to always provide sufficient allocation.
There are other matters that I do not have the time to raise one by one. Actually, all the issues I have raised above are issues that had caused the loss of votes for Barisan Nasional in the last general election.
What is worrying the MCA party is that although we have raised these issues many times to be addressed by the Government, the solution has not reached a satisfactory level. The situation is worsened when the public have the perception that the power sharing within Barisan Nasional is actually not effective or fair.
Umno is seen as a party that is far more dominant than other component parties. The Barisan Nasional leadership needs to fix this situation through a practice that includes the involvement of component parties when making all important decisions and not for it to be seen as if Umno is the only party that decides on important policies and other parties are only asked to defend it later in the spirit of Barisan Nasional.
The power sharing slogan that is often spoken of is still seen as a mouthed slogan only. I have led MCA for almost five years and five months. The MCA central committee members and I have worked tirelessly and have discussed these important issues for at least five to six hours during each of our meetings.
Many MCA presidential council meetings have also been held to focus attention on issues that are not only related to the important rights of the Chinese community but also related to many universal issues that the non-Chinese are paying attention to. We have tried our best to tackle various issues but as long as there is no solution that convinces the people, then we will not get their support.
Y.A.B. Prime Minister, I still remember two days after I made the announcement not to defend my position as MCA president, I went to see Y.A.B. Datuk Seri to inform you of my decision as a sign of respect. In that meeting, Y.A.B. said that when I no longer hold the position as MCA president, I will be able to hear more feedback from the common people and I was asked by Y.A.B. to keep him informed of the people’s voice. I wish to state here that what I have touched on just now is really the feedback that I heard from the people. I did not even have to wait until I have stopped being the MCA president.
Actually, in the last seven months or so, my daily life is like an ordinary person, that is without any protocol or being escorted by bodyguards or security guards. I am always eating and drinking in the same table and breathing together with ordinary people so much so that they are not shy to express their feelings to me. All of us in Barisan Nasional must seriously consider the people’s grouses and act effectively to bring about changes.
Barisan Nasional must change before we are changed or replaced. After the March 8 general election until now, the people’s perception has yet to recover and Barisan Nasional reforms have yet to show evident results. Half-truth political criticisms have confused the rakyat and have raised many questions. The recent use of the ISA on those who did not jeopardise the country’s safety has also brought a very negative effect towards the Government. MCA suggests that the Government re-look the ISA in a comprehensive manner.
Meanwhile, the use of the ISA that does not follow the objective of the original drafting of the Act should be stopped. This Act is long behind time. It should be replaced by an Act that is not easily misused or causes the people to feel unsafe. The United States’ financial crisis and its economic effect has not only greatly impacted the world economy but can also bring about side effects to us.
Barisan Nasional cannot wait or act slowly. We need to reduce political squabbling in Barisan Nasional or within the country. The people are tired and fed up with the tricks and politicking that they read and watch in the media every day.
The Barisan Nasional leadership must join forces in providing a more focused leadership and clear direction as well as to be seen as firm and effective in tackling economic challenges and all of its side effects.
Barisan Nasional must also involve experts or professionals and experienced industry representatives to meet and brainstorm ideas so that an action plan can be formulated in a quick and accurate manner. We need to immediately stop giving any government contract or projects through direct negotiations to companies with no solid track record, we need to stop all form of leakages and wastage of government funds and to be thrifty when the Government uses taxpayers money.
The economic policy has to be further liberalised and the equity condition that limits expansion should be scrapped to enable companies in Malaysia to become more competitive especially given the very challenging economic situation at present. The Government must re-study the policy on the giving of APs, subsidy and price control.
In this context, open market competition should be allowed and at the same time, the Government must channel the appropriate source to the lower income group to ensure they benefit from the expanding economy and are not left out of the country’s economic wealth.
A healthy political culture
Malaysians of all races now want to see a ruling party that is truly clean and trustworthy. The Federal Government formed by Barisan Nasional parties must not only be seen as corrupt-free and trustworthy but it must also be really clean and sincere in its practices and actions.
To successfully restore the image and to give new hope to the people of Malaysia, we need to start by changing and reforming within the component parties of Barisan Nasional, especially parties that are the pillars of Barisan Nasional - that is Umno, MCA and other influential parties.
MCA’s leadership in the last several years have tried to practice a healthy political culture within the party. A healthy political culture is a culture that is free from corruption and one of integrity.
Therefore, I place high hopes that this spirit of a clean and healthy political culture will be strongly supported by all MCA delegates. I am confident that the delegates will realise that any form of unhealthy campaigning such as money politics, twisting of facts and the use of dirty tactics by defaming or hitting below the belt are methods that can damage the party and should be strongly rejected without a doubt.
Today, all MCA members are placing hope on the delegates to choose a leadership team that is of calibre, integrity, trustworthy, dedicated, honest, effective and one that constantly holds on to pure values.
The leadership team that will be chosen has to shoulder a huge responsibility in bringing changes to face the current political challenges that is so complex and not easy.
Thus, the central committee that will be formed must always be united and be able to work well with one another. MCA no longer has the time or space for internal conflicts and bickering within the party given that we are in a political situation that is most challenging.
ON behalf of the MCA party, I convey my deepest appreciation to Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, the Prime Minister and Barisan Nasional chairman, for being here with us once again and for officiating MCA’s 55th annual general assembly on this auspicious morning. I also welcome and extend my gratitude to Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, the Deputy Prime Minister and Barisan Nasional deputy chairman as well as to all leaders and representatives from Barisan Nasional component parties for attending MCA’s annual general assembly this morning.
Honoured ladies and gentlemen,
It is a historic moment to have Barisan Nasional chairman Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi as our honoured guest who will officiate the MCA general assembly. This is because this is the last time he will officiate MCA’s general assembly and this is also my last MCA general assembly as president of the party.
On behalf of MCA, I wish to take this opportunity to convey my highest appreciation to Datuk Seri Abdullah for all the help and support he has given to the MCA thus far as Prime Minister in tackling the various challenges faced by the Chinese community specifically and also the Malaysian community on the whole. The MCA appreciates the Prime Minister’s sincerity and determination in his commitment to continue several important efforts before he retires.
Among them are the judicial reform, the reform and enhancement of anti-corruption efforts and reforming the police force.
The MCA welcomes the Prime Minister’s commitment to these important efforts and hopes that component parties will be truly involved in an effective manner to fix all current weaknesses in these three fields so that we can restore public confidence in Barisan. I previously represented MCA in raising several suggestions in Parliament on April 30, this year, on these three issues:
* MCA suggested that the Government enhance the judiciary system including setting up a Judicial Commission that is truly independent so that issues regarding the appointment and promotion of judges can be done in a transparent manner without taking into account race or religion. The Barisan government should enhance the judiciary system to restore the people’s confidence.
* The MCA hopes that efforts to curb corruption especially the restructuring of the Anti-Corruption Agency via the setting up of the Malaysia Anti-Corruption Commission will be truly effective in preventing and combating corruption. It is high time for us to act firmly without taking into account which side is involved in the corruption, be it political leaders, influential people or those in high positions. The performance and achievements of organisations such as the ICAC in Hong Kong should be used as a reference in our efforts to improve ways to combat corruption.
* Security problems and the effectiveness in combating crime is closely related with the efficiency of the police force and public awareness. The Government should have a more open attitude towards the 125 suggestions by the Royal Police Commission to create a royal police force that is more efficient, transparent, not bribeable, professional and fair. One reform that will convince the people is to reconsider the suggestion to set up the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC). Y.A.B. Datuk Seri Prime Minister and Y.A.B. Deputy Prime Minister, please act firmly in bringing changes and reforms to these three important issues that was just mentioned. The rakyat are really anticipating it. MCA will continue to be with our two leaders in making these reform efforts a success.
Ladies and gentlemen,
Malaysians of various races have sent us a strong signal through the voting trends in the results of the 12th general election on March 8. From the feedback received by the MCA, the rakyat have a negative perception towards the Barisan Nasional government in various aspects during the last general election.
Among them are:
i) They are not satisfied with the problem of corruption and misuse of power by politicians and government officers. Those entrusted to hold this trust seemed to have broken the trust of the people. There are also very negative perception towards the non-transparent manner in the awarding of government contracts and there were also leakages in the usage of government allocations when implementing development projects, acquisition or services.
ii) They feel disgusted and angry that a handful of politicians in Barisan Nasional had been arrogant and passionate in making statements or speeches that were racially-motivated or had threatened other races. There were also some politicians who became very wealthy not long after holding a party position or being made local councillors.
iii) Many people are also worried about their safety and the safety of their loved ones especially when they kept reading crime-related news like cases of snatch theft, robbery, break-ins, assault and brutal murder.
iv) The increase in the price of goods and higher cost of living following the higher fuel prices even before March 8 has inconvenienced the people especially the low and medium income earners, a group which represents the majority of our population.
v) The handling of religious issues by the authorities often portray a picture that the freedom of religion is not practised as stated by government leaders including Y.A.B. Prime Minister.
vi) Many non-bumiputra traders, entrepreneurs, developers or investors constantly feel frustrated because they feel constrained and not being treated fairly by certain ministries, departments or government agencies in the issuance of licences, permits, loans or tender opportunities.
The relevant authorities seem to enjoy using excuses of government economic policies based on prejudicial interpretation and narrow-minded thinking.
In this event, the MCA has corrected several issues at the Cabinet level or through discussions with the Y.A.B. Prime Minister or Y.A.B. Deputy Prime Minister. Among the examples are the relaxing of government procurement and services policy to enable non-bumiputras to participate in the activities for limits below RM50,000 per item and to prevent the authorities from attempting to impose guidelines to curb foreign investment in the distributive trade.
If we want to ensure that our country’s economy grows at a satisfactory rate, we must ensure that all traders, entrepreneurs and investors, small or big, are able to participate in all sectors in the economic development of our country. The implementation of an affirmative economic policy should be based on a principle that does not sideline others and it should be done by making the economic cake bigger and by encouraging joint ventures between races.
The implementation of this policy should not limit any trader or investor who tries to expand their business or investment based on success achieved by their own efforts.
The Barisan Nasional government should re-look and re-evaluate the various weaknesses or misappropriation in the implementation of the economic policy which is different than what was promised to our multi-racial community. It is time the Government liberalised the economic policy to make Malaysia truly competitive.
vii) The issue of building new SJK (C) and the lack of development allocation for SJK (C), SJK (T) and mission schools have also been raised by the Chinese and Indian communities all this while. Before the general election on March 8, 2008, the Government had approved the building of six new SJK (C) and the relocation of 13 SJK (C).
Recently, the MCA suggested that the Government fund the construction costs and rebuild these SJK(C) as soon as possible. Besides that, the MCA also suggested that the Government institutionalise the building of new SJK (C) where needed and to always provide sufficient allocation.
There are other matters that I do not have the time to raise one by one. Actually, all the issues I have raised above are issues that had caused the loss of votes for Barisan Nasional in the last general election.
What is worrying the MCA party is that although we have raised these issues many times to be addressed by the Government, the solution has not reached a satisfactory level. The situation is worsened when the public have the perception that the power sharing within Barisan Nasional is actually not effective or fair.
Umno is seen as a party that is far more dominant than other component parties. The Barisan Nasional leadership needs to fix this situation through a practice that includes the involvement of component parties when making all important decisions and not for it to be seen as if Umno is the only party that decides on important policies and other parties are only asked to defend it later in the spirit of Barisan Nasional.
The power sharing slogan that is often spoken of is still seen as a mouthed slogan only. I have led MCA for almost five years and five months. The MCA central committee members and I have worked tirelessly and have discussed these important issues for at least five to six hours during each of our meetings.
Many MCA presidential council meetings have also been held to focus attention on issues that are not only related to the important rights of the Chinese community but also related to many universal issues that the non-Chinese are paying attention to. We have tried our best to tackle various issues but as long as there is no solution that convinces the people, then we will not get their support.
Y.A.B. Prime Minister, I still remember two days after I made the announcement not to defend my position as MCA president, I went to see Y.A.B. Datuk Seri to inform you of my decision as a sign of respect. In that meeting, Y.A.B. said that when I no longer hold the position as MCA president, I will be able to hear more feedback from the common people and I was asked by Y.A.B. to keep him informed of the people’s voice. I wish to state here that what I have touched on just now is really the feedback that I heard from the people. I did not even have to wait until I have stopped being the MCA president.
Actually, in the last seven months or so, my daily life is like an ordinary person, that is without any protocol or being escorted by bodyguards or security guards. I am always eating and drinking in the same table and breathing together with ordinary people so much so that they are not shy to express their feelings to me. All of us in Barisan Nasional must seriously consider the people’s grouses and act effectively to bring about changes.
Barisan Nasional must change before we are changed or replaced. After the March 8 general election until now, the people’s perception has yet to recover and Barisan Nasional reforms have yet to show evident results. Half-truth political criticisms have confused the rakyat and have raised many questions. The recent use of the ISA on those who did not jeopardise the country’s safety has also brought a very negative effect towards the Government. MCA suggests that the Government re-look the ISA in a comprehensive manner.
Meanwhile, the use of the ISA that does not follow the objective of the original drafting of the Act should be stopped. This Act is long behind time. It should be replaced by an Act that is not easily misused or causes the people to feel unsafe. The United States’ financial crisis and its economic effect has not only greatly impacted the world economy but can also bring about side effects to us.
Barisan Nasional cannot wait or act slowly. We need to reduce political squabbling in Barisan Nasional or within the country. The people are tired and fed up with the tricks and politicking that they read and watch in the media every day.
The Barisan Nasional leadership must join forces in providing a more focused leadership and clear direction as well as to be seen as firm and effective in tackling economic challenges and all of its side effects.
Barisan Nasional must also involve experts or professionals and experienced industry representatives to meet and brainstorm ideas so that an action plan can be formulated in a quick and accurate manner. We need to immediately stop giving any government contract or projects through direct negotiations to companies with no solid track record, we need to stop all form of leakages and wastage of government funds and to be thrifty when the Government uses taxpayers money.
The economic policy has to be further liberalised and the equity condition that limits expansion should be scrapped to enable companies in Malaysia to become more competitive especially given the very challenging economic situation at present. The Government must re-study the policy on the giving of APs, subsidy and price control.
In this context, open market competition should be allowed and at the same time, the Government must channel the appropriate source to the lower income group to ensure they benefit from the expanding economy and are not left out of the country’s economic wealth.
A healthy political culture
Malaysians of all races now want to see a ruling party that is truly clean and trustworthy. The Federal Government formed by Barisan Nasional parties must not only be seen as corrupt-free and trustworthy but it must also be really clean and sincere in its practices and actions.
To successfully restore the image and to give new hope to the people of Malaysia, we need to start by changing and reforming within the component parties of Barisan Nasional, especially parties that are the pillars of Barisan Nasional - that is Umno, MCA and other influential parties.
MCA’s leadership in the last several years have tried to practice a healthy political culture within the party. A healthy political culture is a culture that is free from corruption and one of integrity.
Therefore, I place high hopes that this spirit of a clean and healthy political culture will be strongly supported by all MCA delegates. I am confident that the delegates will realise that any form of unhealthy campaigning such as money politics, twisting of facts and the use of dirty tactics by defaming or hitting below the belt are methods that can damage the party and should be strongly rejected without a doubt.
Today, all MCA members are placing hope on the delegates to choose a leadership team that is of calibre, integrity, trustworthy, dedicated, honest, effective and one that constantly holds on to pure values.
The leadership team that will be chosen has to shoulder a huge responsibility in bringing changes to face the current political challenges that is so complex and not easy.
Thus, the central committee that will be formed must always be united and be able to work well with one another. MCA no longer has the time or space for internal conflicts and bickering within the party given that we are in a political situation that is most challenging.
Wednesday 1 October 2008
Open Letter to PM : Zaid Ibrahim
Zaid calls for repeal of ISA in open letter to PM
KUALA LUMPUR, SEPT 30 - Datuk Seri Zaid Ibrahim, who quit as de facto Law Minister because he wasn't getting any support for his proposed reforms, has written an open letter to the Prime Minister calling for the abolition of the ISA.
Zaid says in the letter that the government has failed the people in repeatedly reneging on Tunku Abdul Rahman's promise that "the ISA would never be used to stifle legitimate opposition and silence lawful dissent".
Here is his letter in full:
IN our proclamation of independence, our first prime minister gave voice to the lofty aspirations and dreams of the people of Malaya: that Malaya was founded on the principles of liberty and justice, and the promise that collectively we would always strive to improve the welfare and happiness of its people.
Many years have passed since that momentous occasion and those aspirations and dreams remain true and are as relevant to us today as they were then. This was made possible by a strong grasp of fundamentals in the early period of this nation.
The federal constitution and the laws made pursuant to it were well founded; they embodied the key elements of a democracy built on the rule of law. The Malaysian judiciary once commanded great respect from Malaysians and was hailed as a beacon for other nations.
Our earlier prime ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein Onn were truly leaders of integrity, patriots in their own right and most importantly, men of humility. They believed in and built this nation on the principles and values enunciated in our constitution.
Even when they had to enact the Internal Security Act (ISA) 1960, they were very cautious and apologetic about it. Tunku stated clearly that the Act was passed to deal with the communist threat.
"My cabinet colleagues and I gave a solemn promise to Parliament and the nation that the immense powers given to the government under the ISA would never be used to stifle legitimate opposition and silence lawful dissent," was what the Tunku said.
Our third prime minister, Tun Hussein Onn, reinforced this position by saying that the ISA was not intended to repress lawful political opposition and democratic activity on the part of the citizenry.
The events of the last three weeks have compelled me to review the way in which the ISA has been used. This exercise has sadly led me to the conclusion that the government has time and time again failed the people of this country in repeatedly reneging on that solemn promise made by Tunku Abdul Rahman.
This has been made possible because the government and the law have mistakenly allowed the minister of home affairs to detain anyone for whatever reason he thinks fit. This subjective discretion has been abused to further certain political interests.
History is the great teacher and speaks volumes in this regard. Even a cursory examination of the manner in which the ISA has been used almost from its inception would reveal the extent to which its intended purpose has been subjugated to the politics of the day.
Regrettably, Tunku Abdul Rahman himself reneged on his promise. In 1965, his administration detained Burhanuddin Helmi, the truly towering Malay intellectual, a nationalist who happened to be a PAS leader. He was kept in detention until his death in 1969. Helmi was a political opponent and could by no stretch of the imagination be considered to have been involved in the armed rebellion or communism that the ISA was designed to deal with.
This detention was an aberration, a regrettable moment where politics had been permitted to trump the rule of law. It unfortunately appears to have set a precedent and many detentions of persons viewed as having been threatening to the incumbent administration followed through the years.
Even our literary giant, ‘sasterawan negara’ the late Tan Sri A Samad Ismail was subjected to the ISA in 1976. How could he have been a threat to national security?
I need not remind you of the terrible impact of the 1987 Operasi Lalang. Its spectre haunts the government as much as it does the peace-loving people of this nation, casting a gloom over all of us. There were and still are many unanswered questions about those dark hours when more than a hundred persons were detained for purportedly being threats to national security. Why they were detained has never been made clear to Malaysians.
Similarly, no explanation has been forthcoming as to why they were never charged in court. Those detainees included amongst their numbers senior opposition members of parliament who are still active in Parliament today.
The only thing that is certain about that period was that Umno was facing a leadership crisis. Isn’t it coincidental that the recent spate of ISA arrests has occurred when Umno is again having a leadership crisis?
In 2001, Keadilan ‘reformasi’ activists were detained in an exercise that the Federal Court declared was in bad faith and unlawful. The continued detention of those that were not released earlier in the Kamunting detention facility was made possible only by the fact that the ISA had been questionably amended in 1988 to preclude judicial review of the minister’s order to detain.
Malaysians were told that these detainees had been attempting to overthrow the government via militant means and violent demonstrations. Seven years have gone and yet no evidence in support of this assertion has been presented. Compounding the confusion even further, one of these so-called militants, Ezam Mohamad Noor, recently rejoined Umno to great fanfare, as a prized catch it would seem.
At around the same time, members of PAS were also detained for purportedly being militant and allegedly having links to international terrorist networks. Those detained included Nik Adli, the son of Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, the menteri besar of Kelantan. Malaysians were made a promise by the government that evidence of the alleged terrorist activities and links of these detainees would be disclosed. To date no such evidence has been produced.
The same formula was used in late 2007 when the Hindraf 5 were detained. Malaysians were told once again that these individuals were involved in efforts to overthrow the government and had links with the militant Liberation Tiger of Tamil Eelam of Sri Lanka. To date no concrete evidence have been presented to support this assertion.
It would seem therefore that the five were detained for their involvement in efforts that led to a mobilisation of Indian Malaysians to express, through peaceful means; their frustration against the way in which their community had been allowed to be marginalised. This cause has since been recognised as a legitimate one. The Hindraf demonstration is nothing extraordinary as such assemblies are universally recognised as being a legitimate means of expression.
In the same vein, the grounds advanced in support of the most recent detentions of Tan Hoon Cheng, Teresa Kok and Raja Petra Kamarudin leave much to be desired. The explanation that Tan Hoon Cheng was detained for her own safety was farcical. The suggestion that Teresa Kok had been inciting religious sentiments was unfounded as was evinced by her subsequent release.
As for Raja Petra Kamarudin, the prominent critic of the government, a perusal of his writings would show that he might have been insulting of the government and certain individuals within it.
However, being critical and insulting could not in any way amount to a threat to national security. If his writings are viewed as being insulting of Islam, Muslims or the Holy Prophet, he should instead be charged under the Penal Code and not under the ISA.
In any event, he had already been charged for sedition and criminal defamation in respect of some of his statements. He had claimed trial, indicating as such his readiness and ability to defend himself. Justice would best be served by allowing him his day in court more so where, in the minds of the public, the government is in a position of conflict for having been the target of his strident criticism.
The instances cited above strongly suggest that the government is undemocratic. It is this perspective that has over the last 25 plus years led to the government seemingly arbitrarily detaining political opponents, civil society and consumer advocates, writers, businessmen, students, journalists whose crime, if it could be called that, was to have been critical of the government.
How it is these individuals can be perceived as being threats to national security is beyond my comprehension. The self-evident reality is that legitimate dissent was and is quashed through the heavy-handed use of the ISA.
There are those who support and advocate this carte-blanche reading of the ISA. They will seek to persuade you that the interests of the country demand that such power be retained, that Malaysians owe their peace and stability to laws such as the ISA. This overlooks the simple truth that Malaysians of all races cherish peace. We lived together harmoniously for the last 400 years, not because of these laws but in spite of them.
I believe the people of this country are mature and intelligent enough to distinguish actions that constitute a ‘real’ threat to the country from those that threaten political interests. Malaysians have come know that the ISA is used against political opponents and, it would seem, when the leadership is under challenge either from within the ruling party or from external elements.
Malaysians today want to see a government that is committed to the court process to determine guilt or innocence even for alleged acts of incitement of racial or religious sentiment. They are less willing to believe, as they once did, that a single individual, namely the minister of home affairs; knows best about matters of national security.
They value freedom and the protection of civil liberties and this is true of people of other nations too.
Mr Prime Minister, the results of the last general election are clear indication that the people of Malaysia are demanding a reinstatement of the rule of law. I was appointed as your, albeit short-lived, minister in charge of legal affairs and judicial reform.
In that capacity, I came to understand more keenly how many of us want reform, not for the sake of it, but for the extent to which our institutions have been undermined by events and the impact this has had on society.
With your blessing, I attempted to push for reform. High on my list of priorities was a reinstatement of the inherent right of judicial review that could be enabled through a reversion of the key constitutional provision to its form prior to the controversial amendment in 1988.
I need not remind you that that constitutional amendment was prompted by the same series of events that led not only to Operasi Lalang but the sacking of the then Lord President and two supreme court justices.
Chief amongst my concerns was the way in which the jurisdiction and the power of the courts to grant remedy against unconstitutional and arbitrary action of the executive had been removed by Parliament and the extent to which this had permitted an erosion of the civil liberties of Malaysians.
It was this constitutional amendment that paved the way for the ouster provision in the ISA that virtually immunises the minister from judicial review, a provision which exemplifies the injustice the constitutional amendment of 1988 has lent itself.
I also sought to introduce means by which steps could be taken to assist the judiciary to regain the reputation for independence and competence it once had. Unfortunately, this was viewed as undesirable by some since an independent judiciary would mean that the executive would be less ‘influential’.
I attempted to do these things and more because of the realisation that Malaysia’s democratic traditions and the rule of law are under siege. Anyway, there is nothing wrong with giving everyone an independent judiciary and the opportunity to a fair trial.
This is consistent with the universal norms of human rights as it is with the tenets of Islam, the religion of the federation. Unchecked power to detain at the whim of one man is oppressiveness at its highest. Even in Israel, a nation that is perpetually at war the power to detain is not vested in one man and detention orders require endorsement from a judge.
If there are national security considerations, then these can be approached without jettisoning the safeguards intended to protect individual citizens from being penalised wrongfully. In other jurisdictions involved in armed conflicts, trials are held in camera to allow for judicial scrutiny of evidence considered too sensitive for public disclosure so as to satisfy the ends of justice.
If this can be done in these jurisdictions, why not here where the last armed struggle we saw, the very one that precipitated the need for the ISA, came to an end in the 1980s?
Any doubts as to the continued relevance of the ISA in its present form should have been put to rest by the recommendation by the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) that the ISA be repealed and an anti-terror legislation suited to the times enacted in its place. Containing as it did a sunset clause in its original times, the ISA was never intended to be a permanent feature on the Malaysian legal landscape.
Through its continued use in the manner described above and in the face of public sentiment, it is only natural that the ISA has become in the mind of the people an instrument of oppression and the government is one that lends itself to oppressiveness.
Its continued use does not bode well for a society that is struggling to find its place in the global arena. It does not bode well for the democracy that is so vital for us to develop sustainably.
Mr Prime Minister, I remember very clearly what you once said; that if one has the opportunity to do what is good and right for the country, then he must take on the task. I respect you deeply for that and if I were confident that I would have been able to do some good for Malaysia, I would have remained on your team.
Sir, you are still the prime minister and you still have the opportunity to leave your footprint in Malaysian history. I urge you to do so by repealing the ISA once and for all.
Let us attempt to fulfil that solemn promise made by our beloved first prime minister to the people of this country.
Yours sincerely,
Zaid Ibrahim
KUALA LUMPUR, SEPT 30 - Datuk Seri Zaid Ibrahim, who quit as de facto Law Minister because he wasn't getting any support for his proposed reforms, has written an open letter to the Prime Minister calling for the abolition of the ISA.
Zaid says in the letter that the government has failed the people in repeatedly reneging on Tunku Abdul Rahman's promise that "the ISA would never be used to stifle legitimate opposition and silence lawful dissent".
Here is his letter in full:
IN our proclamation of independence, our first prime minister gave voice to the lofty aspirations and dreams of the people of Malaya: that Malaya was founded on the principles of liberty and justice, and the promise that collectively we would always strive to improve the welfare and happiness of its people.
Many years have passed since that momentous occasion and those aspirations and dreams remain true and are as relevant to us today as they were then. This was made possible by a strong grasp of fundamentals in the early period of this nation.
The federal constitution and the laws made pursuant to it were well founded; they embodied the key elements of a democracy built on the rule of law. The Malaysian judiciary once commanded great respect from Malaysians and was hailed as a beacon for other nations.
Our earlier prime ministers, Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak and Tun Hussein Onn were truly leaders of integrity, patriots in their own right and most importantly, men of humility. They believed in and built this nation on the principles and values enunciated in our constitution.
Even when they had to enact the Internal Security Act (ISA) 1960, they were very cautious and apologetic about it. Tunku stated clearly that the Act was passed to deal with the communist threat.
"My cabinet colleagues and I gave a solemn promise to Parliament and the nation that the immense powers given to the government under the ISA would never be used to stifle legitimate opposition and silence lawful dissent," was what the Tunku said.
Our third prime minister, Tun Hussein Onn, reinforced this position by saying that the ISA was not intended to repress lawful political opposition and democratic activity on the part of the citizenry.
The events of the last three weeks have compelled me to review the way in which the ISA has been used. This exercise has sadly led me to the conclusion that the government has time and time again failed the people of this country in repeatedly reneging on that solemn promise made by Tunku Abdul Rahman.
This has been made possible because the government and the law have mistakenly allowed the minister of home affairs to detain anyone for whatever reason he thinks fit. This subjective discretion has been abused to further certain political interests.
History is the great teacher and speaks volumes in this regard. Even a cursory examination of the manner in which the ISA has been used almost from its inception would reveal the extent to which its intended purpose has been subjugated to the politics of the day.
Regrettably, Tunku Abdul Rahman himself reneged on his promise. In 1965, his administration detained Burhanuddin Helmi, the truly towering Malay intellectual, a nationalist who happened to be a PAS leader. He was kept in detention until his death in 1969. Helmi was a political opponent and could by no stretch of the imagination be considered to have been involved in the armed rebellion or communism that the ISA was designed to deal with.
This detention was an aberration, a regrettable moment where politics had been permitted to trump the rule of law. It unfortunately appears to have set a precedent and many detentions of persons viewed as having been threatening to the incumbent administration followed through the years.
Even our literary giant, ‘sasterawan negara’ the late Tan Sri A Samad Ismail was subjected to the ISA in 1976. How could he have been a threat to national security?
I need not remind you of the terrible impact of the 1987 Operasi Lalang. Its spectre haunts the government as much as it does the peace-loving people of this nation, casting a gloom over all of us. There were and still are many unanswered questions about those dark hours when more than a hundred persons were detained for purportedly being threats to national security. Why they were detained has never been made clear to Malaysians.
Similarly, no explanation has been forthcoming as to why they were never charged in court. Those detainees included amongst their numbers senior opposition members of parliament who are still active in Parliament today.
The only thing that is certain about that period was that Umno was facing a leadership crisis. Isn’t it coincidental that the recent spate of ISA arrests has occurred when Umno is again having a leadership crisis?
In 2001, Keadilan ‘reformasi’ activists were detained in an exercise that the Federal Court declared was in bad faith and unlawful. The continued detention of those that were not released earlier in the Kamunting detention facility was made possible only by the fact that the ISA had been questionably amended in 1988 to preclude judicial review of the minister’s order to detain.
Malaysians were told that these detainees had been attempting to overthrow the government via militant means and violent demonstrations. Seven years have gone and yet no evidence in support of this assertion has been presented. Compounding the confusion even further, one of these so-called militants, Ezam Mohamad Noor, recently rejoined Umno to great fanfare, as a prized catch it would seem.
At around the same time, members of PAS were also detained for purportedly being militant and allegedly having links to international terrorist networks. Those detained included Nik Adli, the son of Tuan Guru Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat, the menteri besar of Kelantan. Malaysians were made a promise by the government that evidence of the alleged terrorist activities and links of these detainees would be disclosed. To date no such evidence has been produced.
The same formula was used in late 2007 when the Hindraf 5 were detained. Malaysians were told once again that these individuals were involved in efforts to overthrow the government and had links with the militant Liberation Tiger of Tamil Eelam of Sri Lanka. To date no concrete evidence have been presented to support this assertion.
It would seem therefore that the five were detained for their involvement in efforts that led to a mobilisation of Indian Malaysians to express, through peaceful means; their frustration against the way in which their community had been allowed to be marginalised. This cause has since been recognised as a legitimate one. The Hindraf demonstration is nothing extraordinary as such assemblies are universally recognised as being a legitimate means of expression.
In the same vein, the grounds advanced in support of the most recent detentions of Tan Hoon Cheng, Teresa Kok and Raja Petra Kamarudin leave much to be desired. The explanation that Tan Hoon Cheng was detained for her own safety was farcical. The suggestion that Teresa Kok had been inciting religious sentiments was unfounded as was evinced by her subsequent release.
As for Raja Petra Kamarudin, the prominent critic of the government, a perusal of his writings would show that he might have been insulting of the government and certain individuals within it.
However, being critical and insulting could not in any way amount to a threat to national security. If his writings are viewed as being insulting of Islam, Muslims or the Holy Prophet, he should instead be charged under the Penal Code and not under the ISA.
In any event, he had already been charged for sedition and criminal defamation in respect of some of his statements. He had claimed trial, indicating as such his readiness and ability to defend himself. Justice would best be served by allowing him his day in court more so where, in the minds of the public, the government is in a position of conflict for having been the target of his strident criticism.
The instances cited above strongly suggest that the government is undemocratic. It is this perspective that has over the last 25 plus years led to the government seemingly arbitrarily detaining political opponents, civil society and consumer advocates, writers, businessmen, students, journalists whose crime, if it could be called that, was to have been critical of the government.
How it is these individuals can be perceived as being threats to national security is beyond my comprehension. The self-evident reality is that legitimate dissent was and is quashed through the heavy-handed use of the ISA.
There are those who support and advocate this carte-blanche reading of the ISA. They will seek to persuade you that the interests of the country demand that such power be retained, that Malaysians owe their peace and stability to laws such as the ISA. This overlooks the simple truth that Malaysians of all races cherish peace. We lived together harmoniously for the last 400 years, not because of these laws but in spite of them.
I believe the people of this country are mature and intelligent enough to distinguish actions that constitute a ‘real’ threat to the country from those that threaten political interests. Malaysians have come know that the ISA is used against political opponents and, it would seem, when the leadership is under challenge either from within the ruling party or from external elements.
Malaysians today want to see a government that is committed to the court process to determine guilt or innocence even for alleged acts of incitement of racial or religious sentiment. They are less willing to believe, as they once did, that a single individual, namely the minister of home affairs; knows best about matters of national security.
They value freedom and the protection of civil liberties and this is true of people of other nations too.
Mr Prime Minister, the results of the last general election are clear indication that the people of Malaysia are demanding a reinstatement of the rule of law. I was appointed as your, albeit short-lived, minister in charge of legal affairs and judicial reform.
In that capacity, I came to understand more keenly how many of us want reform, not for the sake of it, but for the extent to which our institutions have been undermined by events and the impact this has had on society.
With your blessing, I attempted to push for reform. High on my list of priorities was a reinstatement of the inherent right of judicial review that could be enabled through a reversion of the key constitutional provision to its form prior to the controversial amendment in 1988.
I need not remind you that that constitutional amendment was prompted by the same series of events that led not only to Operasi Lalang but the sacking of the then Lord President and two supreme court justices.
Chief amongst my concerns was the way in which the jurisdiction and the power of the courts to grant remedy against unconstitutional and arbitrary action of the executive had been removed by Parliament and the extent to which this had permitted an erosion of the civil liberties of Malaysians.
It was this constitutional amendment that paved the way for the ouster provision in the ISA that virtually immunises the minister from judicial review, a provision which exemplifies the injustice the constitutional amendment of 1988 has lent itself.
I also sought to introduce means by which steps could be taken to assist the judiciary to regain the reputation for independence and competence it once had. Unfortunately, this was viewed as undesirable by some since an independent judiciary would mean that the executive would be less ‘influential’.
I attempted to do these things and more because of the realisation that Malaysia’s democratic traditions and the rule of law are under siege. Anyway, there is nothing wrong with giving everyone an independent judiciary and the opportunity to a fair trial.
This is consistent with the universal norms of human rights as it is with the tenets of Islam, the religion of the federation. Unchecked power to detain at the whim of one man is oppressiveness at its highest. Even in Israel, a nation that is perpetually at war the power to detain is not vested in one man and detention orders require endorsement from a judge.
If there are national security considerations, then these can be approached without jettisoning the safeguards intended to protect individual citizens from being penalised wrongfully. In other jurisdictions involved in armed conflicts, trials are held in camera to allow for judicial scrutiny of evidence considered too sensitive for public disclosure so as to satisfy the ends of justice.
If this can be done in these jurisdictions, why not here where the last armed struggle we saw, the very one that precipitated the need for the ISA, came to an end in the 1980s?
Any doubts as to the continued relevance of the ISA in its present form should have been put to rest by the recommendation by the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) that the ISA be repealed and an anti-terror legislation suited to the times enacted in its place. Containing as it did a sunset clause in its original times, the ISA was never intended to be a permanent feature on the Malaysian legal landscape.
Through its continued use in the manner described above and in the face of public sentiment, it is only natural that the ISA has become in the mind of the people an instrument of oppression and the government is one that lends itself to oppressiveness.
Its continued use does not bode well for a society that is struggling to find its place in the global arena. It does not bode well for the democracy that is so vital for us to develop sustainably.
Mr Prime Minister, I remember very clearly what you once said; that if one has the opportunity to do what is good and right for the country, then he must take on the task. I respect you deeply for that and if I were confident that I would have been able to do some good for Malaysia, I would have remained on your team.
Sir, you are still the prime minister and you still have the opportunity to leave your footprint in Malaysian history. I urge you to do so by repealing the ISA once and for all.
Let us attempt to fulfil that solemn promise made by our beloved first prime minister to the people of this country.
Yours sincerely,
Zaid Ibrahim
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)