PKR reveals Proof of Phantom Voters

May 20, 2013

COMMENT: When I went to the polling station at SMK Seafield, Subang Jaya with my wife, Dr. Kamsiah on May 5, I thought I was an isolated case of a voter whose name had been inadvertently deleted during the updating of the electoral roll. I had voted there in 2004 and 2008. I had known in advance that my name was not in the roll, but some friends told me that I should go there early and appeal to the officer in charge so that I could be granted my democratic right to vote. But still my right to vote was denied. So I could not have the pleasure of having the infamous indelible ink on my forefinger!

I also discovered that I was not alone. 20 eligible voters before me had suffered the same fate. I left the polling station disappointed. Later that election night, I consoled myself that DAP’s Hannah Yeoh and her colleague for the Parliamentary constituency had won convincingly. –Din Merican

In a series of exposes on electoral fraud, PKR today revealed a case where eight individuals in various constituencies were denied the right to vote as someone else had cast the ballots using their identities.

I was of those victims who could not vote , here standing at the polling station in SMK Seafield, Subang Jaya where I had voted in 2004 and 2008

Speaking at a press conference today, PKR strategy director Rafizi Ramli said that the individuals affected had lodged police reports on the matter and are still waiting for action from the authorities.

“This shows that the existence of identical MyKads given to various individuals so that they can become phantom voters,” he alleged.

Pakatan Rakyat had alleged that the recent general election was marred with irregularities and had embarked on a series of rallies to inform the public of the matter.

The opposition pact also added that they would file election petitions for about 30 parliamentary seats.

Discredits electoral process

The parliamentary constituencies based on Rafizi’s list were Sungai Petani, Rembau, Kuala Selangor, Serdang, Kemaman, Tumpat and Shah Alam.

Rafizi, who is also Pandan MP, said that although the opposition had won in some places mentioned, the alleged phantom voters were widespread in other areas while many have yet to lodge police reports on the matter.

“Nevertheless, the moment you have phantom voters, it discredits the entire electoral process.

Why are they so happy? They think they had done the duty. They should be ashamed of themselves, the moment you have phantom voters, it discredits the entire electoral process.

“But the issue is also bigger than phantom voters. It also shows that there is something wrong with how MyKads are being given out by the National Registration Department (NRD),” he said.

Rafizi urged the Election Commission (EC) and the NRD to explain the matter so that they could be judged in the court of public opinion.

“Let them come up with another foolish statement like the ones they gave on the indelible ink fiasco. I also urge Khairy Jamaluddin, our newly appointed [Youth and Sports] minister, to explain this as it also involves his Rembau constituency,” he said.

On his next course of action, Rafizi said that he would try to get the eight individuals to also sign statutory declarations (SD) on the matter to take it up when filing the election petitions.

He added that the EC and NRD should at least issue a statement to address the anomaly rather than keeping mum. “They need to be held accountable. At least acknowledge the problems instead of being in denial,” said Rafizi who vowed to reveal more findings on electoral irregularities soon.

SHEER Arrogance: New Home Minister tells unhappy Malaysians to emigrate

May 16, 2013

Sheer Arrogance, Zahid Hamidi

Newly-appointed Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said Malaysians who are unhappy with the country’s political system should leave the country, stressing that loyal citizens should respect the Rule of Law.

In his first opinion piece printed in Utusan Malaysia since receiving the portfolio yesterday, Ahmad Zahid wrote that the illegal gatherings held across the country by Pakatan Rakyat was a form of escapism and the denial of the fact that it failed to take control of Putrajaya.

The Minister added that the Opposition was over-confident with the support it received from voters.

Despite the fervour shown by their supporters, some PR leaders acknowledge that no concrete change will manifest from continued rallies. — File pic Malaysian Insider

“Even if it is true that the Opposition had claimed a greater majority, the measurement used by the opposition had been manipulated to follow the list system or the single transferable vote system,” he said in column entitled “Perhimpunan haram sebab tak terima hakikat gagal kuasai Putrajaya.” (Illegal gathering because refuses to accept failure in controlling Putrajaya)

“Malaysia inherited the political system from the United Kingdom and many Commonwealth countries also use the first past the post system where political parties contesting in the election will only have one representative in each constituency with the principle of a simple majority of votes,” he added.

Malaysia inherited the political system from the United Kingdom and many Commonwealth countries also use the first past the post system where political parties contesting in the election will only have one representative in each constituency with the principle of a simple majority of votes !

He said opposition leaders, especially those from PKR and DAP, have been irresponsible in confusing young Chinese voters and their followers who are “politically blind” to dress in black to protest against the result of the 13th general election which they believe is for them due to the popular vote.

“If these people wish to adopt the list system or the single transferable vote used by countires with the republic form of government, then they should migrate to these countries to practise their political beliefs. Malaysia is not a country to translate their political beliefs, even if they are really loyal to this country, they should accept the political system and the existing system to form a government as enshrined in the Federal Constitution,” he said.

He said PR must recognise and accept that the voters have rejected their rule in accordance to the first past the post system.

“Illegal gatherings organised as roadshows are just an escapism by the opposition to run away from the fact that they have failed to capture Putrajaya. The Opposition was actually over confident with the support of the voters and manipulated the various issues with false promises in its manifesto that they know will not be able to implement,” he said.

He also pointed out that PAS President Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang had already accepted the results  and disagreed with the illegal gatherings by PKR and DAP.

“People are getting fed up with the behaviour of a number of opposition leaders who are dragging in the young, especially those of Chinese descent, by fanning the flames of hatred and racism in a pluralistic society which has already fostered a sense of harmony. The Opposition is also questioning the authority of the Election Commission (EC) which had allegedly manipulated the votes. It is an outrageous accusation when the EC have observed most of their demands including the use of indelible ink that is only used by the third world countries,” he said.

Winner of seats, not votes

May 15, 2013

by Azmi Sharom@http://www.thestar.com.my

WHEN criticising laws and policies in this country, one of the stock answers that one is faced with is that the majority voted for the government in power, therefore, they are obviously happy with those said laws and policies. The majority rules after all.

Since 1969 Malaysia has a government whom the majority of voters did not choose.

I’d like to see anyone try that line of argument with me now. Not since 1969 has Malaysia had a government whom the majority of voters did not choose.

The popular vote in the 13th general election had 47% voting for Ba­risan Nasional, 51% for Pakatan Rak­yat and the remainder to Indepen­dents. The difference in numerical terms shows Pakatan with almost 390,000 more votes than Barisan.

These numbers are almost the mirror image of figures during the 12th General Election when BN won, so theoretically it should now be Pa­k­atan’s turn to govern.

Yet in GE-13, Barisan lost only se­v­en seats (my calculations are based on results of the 2008 elections before the frog-like behaviour of a handful of MPs) and are thus still holding the majority of seats in Parliament.

This is a weird situation of course and one that a teacher would be h­a­r­d pressed to explain to a class of nine-year-olds. Odd as it is, this is a possible outcome when one uses the first past the post system. However, such abnormalities are usually found in political systems where there are more than two political parties or coalitions.

In those situations the possibility of votes being split are more numerous thus leading to the possibility of a government with less than 50% of the popular votes but more seats in the legislature.

In our situation, because by and large there are only two major players (the Independents and smaller parties had a minimal impact in terms of vote splitting), the popular vote should reflect the number of seats in Parliament. Yet it did not.

So the question here is how can the system that we use (one used all over the world) lead to what on the face of it is an unfair result.

The answer is that although in the first past the post system the risk of a party having a majority of seats with a minority of popular votes is always there, the way to avoid such absurdities is to ensure that all the constituencies are appro­ximately t­h­­e sa­me size in terms of voter numbers. This is obviously not the case in Malaysia.

The discrepancies of voter numbers can be huge; this is particularly so when comparing the rural and urban areas with the latter having far more registered voters (although this is not necessarily the case all the time; urban Putrajaya is tiny in terms of voter numbers).

Naturally, rural areas are more sparsely populated than urban areas and therefore a certain degree of flexibility is required when delineating constituency lines. Rural areas will by sheer demographic and geographic realities have fewer voters in them.

However, the difference must not be ridiculously high. The general guideline is that a discrepancy must not be more than 15% and thus when drawing the boundaries of the constituencies, this factor ought to be considered.

This is clearly not the case. To give you an idea as to how big the discrepancies can get; the difference between Kapar (144,159 voters) and Putrajaya (15,791 voters) is just over 900%.

In effect, in the smaller constituencies, a person’s vote carries more weight than in the larger ones and it is no coincidence that the ruling coalition finds its support largely in small constituencies. This is not a satisfactory situation but it is one that can be fixed because the moment has come for a re-delineation exercise in this country. What perfect timing.

The Election Commission (EC) is charged with the exercise although the final acceptance of their recommendations lies in the hands of parliament (and the state legislatures in the case of state seats).

Why is it so difficult for the EC to do the right thing?

This is an opportunity for the EC to do the right thing and make good recommendations. They must if they are to recover any shred of dignity following their performance in the GE13. The fiasco with the so-called indelible ink is one example of how poorly handled things were.

The fact that the ink can be was­hed off (due to the “diluted” version used) has been attributed to the non-shaking of bottles (yes, seriously); Islamic teaching (although in India and Pakistan there appears to be no complaints about using the ink from the hundreds of millions of M­u­s­lims there); in the interest of health, apparently the ink can mess up your kidneys or give you cancer or something equally horrible (which is jolly thoughtful of the EC, but perhaps a tad paranoid and over-protective).

It was ludicrous to say that it does not matter if the ink is washable because you can only vote once with your identity card. What if someone has phantom like tendencies and has more than one identity card?

Which leads us to the EC’s terribly blasé treatment of genuine fears that phan­tom voters existed; another e­x­am­ple of them behaving in a manner that does not engender public confidence.

I am unsure if the EC will redraw the constituency boundaries in a fai­rer manner, and I am even more un­s­ure if the ruling party will accept any­thing that in their minds will be a disadvantage to their grasp on power.

What I am sure about is this country runs the risk of being a joke if something is not done to fix this. Unfortunately, it w­o­n’t be a funny joke and there is the probability of an un-amused and furious populace.

Democratic practices done properly are what ensure peace, not façade democracies which do not ultimately respect the peoples’ choice. When will those with the responsibility and the power stop t­h­i­n­king in petty terms and realise this? When will they show that they truly care about the nation?

This is what the Chinese want

May 8, 2013

by Ong Hean Teik

The Utusan Malaysia headline of May 7 posed an interesting and pertinent question of what more do the Chinese in Malaysia want. It is a pity that Utusan is unable to see that what the Chinese want is, in fact, what the educated urban Malaysian voter wants, regardless of race or religion. There are three important characteristics lacking in the Barisan of today.

Any other mainstream media writing what has been written by Utusan Malaysia would have lost their licence to publish a long time ago.

Intelligent, courageous leadership

The Chinese comprise only 30 per cent of Malaysian voters, yet Pakatan Rakyat won 51 per cent of the total votes cast. By saying that the election result was because of the Chinese voters, the Barisan Nasional leadership demonstrates an inability to objectively face reality.

Barisan’s acceptance of Zulkifli Nordin as its direct Shah Alam candidate similarly shows a lack of intelligence and courage. Here is a lawyer who does not feel that dialogue and discussion can resolve matters, having forcefully disrupted a Law Society seminar a few years ago. He has vowed loyalty to, and then turned on, his previous political parties (PAS and PKR). He has publicly belittled an ancient religion with a million Malaysian followers.

UMNO making way for Ibrahim Ali to contest the Pasir Mas constituency is similarly bad judgement, showing its acceptance and approval of a crude man who prides himself with using vulgar words in public interviews.

Principled means acting in accordance with morality and showing recognition of right and wrong.

To give them such special honour and credit shows a lack of intelligent reasoning and an inability to stand up against the loud extremist faction of the party.

Attributing the election outcome to a “Chinese tsunami” is illogical in the face of concrete facts and data. PAS won an additional seven state seats in Selangor, all in Malay majority areas.

Lim Kit Siang could not have achieved a majority of over 14,000 votes in Gelang Patah without good support from Malays who form 35 per cent of the electorate there.

Similarly the UMNO-backed PERKASA extremists were conclusively rejected in Pasir Mas (96 per cent Malay) and in Shah Alam where Malays make up 70 per cent of the electorate.

To blindly spin the 2013 election outcome to suit its raced-based founding philosophy of 1947shows up a political party that wants to be stubbornly unwise. Unless UMNO’s leadership can find the courage to face facts, the party may become redundant and obsolete for the educated 21st century voter.

Respect for and recognition of rights

Academic studies have consistently shown that increased income brings more happiness and satisfaction only up to a certain point. When a society progresses out of poverty into middle class, increasing income does not increase satisfaction proportionately. It is the psychological aspects of living that produces a better quality of life.

Whatever the radiation scientists claim, the people of Bentong (45 per cent Malay, 44 per cent Chinese) will ask why a factory run by an Australian company is unsuitable for Australia or Damansara Heights but can be located in their backyard.

In 2008, Health Minister Liow won Bentong by over 12,000 votes. This year he retained Bentong with less than 400 votes against a political novice who is a green activist. The urban electorate, Chinese or Malay, seeks respect and recognition of their right to a safe living environment.

MCA contested in 37 parliamentary seats and managed to win seven in GE13.

In Penang, the 1 Malaysia Charity organisation hosted numerous concerts and dinners in support of Barisan candidates. At their functions, T-shirts, beer, hawker food and lucky draw gifts were given free.

Initially there was merriment and wonder at this new campaigning style; this then became anger and disgust when even cash incentives were handed out. The electorate felt they were treated with disrespect, as if their rights, dignity and vote were up for sale.

Numerous development issues had plagued the Penang DAP government in the months leading up to the election, and the increased majority they subsequently obtained can only be explained by the strong rejection what the other side represents. Money cannot buy happiness, and similarly, the urban electorate set out to show that money cannot buy their vote in Penang.

The urban electorate in Malaysia is obviously better off economically compared to the rural dwellers. They have reached a stage when extra economic incentives can no longer easily win their approval.

Instead they asked for respect, and an acknowledgement of their right to an inclusive, peaceful existence in the country. They seek recognition as a legitimate electorate with the right to choose the governing party. Blaming and insulting them for voting against the Barisan will only guarantee the DAP and Pakatan a brighter future.

Competent and efficient institutions

There is no doubt that relative to those who were once our equivalent, we Malaysians have fallen behind. The Singapore dollar which was equivalent to the ringgit in the 1970’s is today 2.5 times higher. Malaysia beat South Korea and Japan in the 1972 Olympic football qualifying rounds; today we are nowhere near these 2 World Cup Finals participating countries.

Malaysians have fallen behind in economy, education and sports.

Universiti Malaya had topped the list of universities passing the United States medical qualifying examination in 1969, ahead of Melbourne and Singapore University. In 2011, Universiti Malaya was ranked 401 out of the 500 universities in the Shanghai Jiao Tong University’s Academic Ranking of World Universities.

The educated, smart-phone holding, internet-surfing, urban voter is aware of world-wide trends and wants to experience the best that life can offer. When the governing party is unable to develop the country to its full potential, its popularity will drop.

As demonstrated by the Noble prize winning Dr Ivan Pavlov, animals respond to incentives, and man is no exception. A system that promotes those who agree with and pamper those in power while sidelining those working hard to pursue competency will breed inefficient malfunctioning institutions. Even those not under their direct employment will be affected by these incompetent institutions.

Malaysians want a competent and efficient institutions.

When the police force is politicised and crime rate increases, more money will have to be spent on personal and household security. Even Datuk Nazir Razak admitted that he had hesitated coming back to Malaysia because of concerns about his children’s education. When the middle class spends on private education or healthcare, votes for the governing party will drop.

Conclusion

The Chinese now make up only 25 per cent of Malaysia’s population and to be named as the cause of major developments in the country is to be hurtful to this minority and insulting to the majority. On the other hand, government statistics show that Malaysia’s urban population has increased from 62 per cent in 2000 to 71 per cent in 2010.

No amount of rhetorical whitewashing can hide the fact that the poor performance of Barisan in the 2013 election is due to its failure to win the heart and mind of the urban voter. The faster it faces reality and move away from its obsolete race-based mindset, the better its prospects for the next electoral battle.

* Dr Ong Hean Teik is a consultant cardiologist in Penang. He reads The Malaysian Insider.

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insider.

Disturbing Questions surrounding GE13 polling

May 7, 2013

by Bridget Welsh@http://www.malaysiakini.com

GE13 SPECIAL: The GE13 results are in and the BN has managed to hold only power, winning by a 22-seat majority. This result is the worst performance for BN in Malaysia’s history.

For the first time, the incumbent government has lost the popular vote nationally (in 2008, it was only on the peninsula). The BN coalition has still managed to hold onto power. This piece, in a series analysing the election results, looks at the concerns raised regarding the electoral process and the potential impact these issues may have had on the final results.

In analysing the fairness of any polls, one asks whether the irregularities in the process could have affected the final outcome. Were the problems enough to change which coalition would have formed government? These issues will be debated and assessed in the days and weeks ahead. Let me share some preliminary observations that suggest that in this election, some things appear not to be quite right.

Integrity of electoral roll

This was the longest wait for an election, and both sides were extremely active in registering new voters, especially in the urban areas where the party machinery was well honed.

Even factoring in the more robust voter registration efforts, changes in electoral procedures to register people where they live rather than where they are from, population demographics, and possible housing developments in different seats, the increased numbers in the electoral roll are significantly not in line with historical patterns of voter registration. This out-of-line pattern is in every state, except Negeri Sembilan.

The figure that stands out in voter increase occurred from 2004 to 2008 in Sabah. The questions about the electoral roll in Sabah have been long standing, and are the subject of the ongoing Royal Commission of Inquiry into Immigrants.

These increases from 2004 through 2008 are by any measure – huge – in places such as Liburan, where caretaker Chief Minister Musa Aman state seat is located, in Semporna, the seat of Shafie Apdal and in Ranau currently held by Ewok Ebin.

Yet, after 2008, while the numbers have dropped, there is still on average 21% new voters in Sabah seats, a high number not in line with demographic trends. Migration appears to continue be a factor shaping voter numbers in Sabah in this GE13, despite calls to tighten the flows.

We also find that new voters have flooded states like Selangor, Pahang, Terengganu and Johor in GE13. The average increase in voters nationally between 2004 and 2008 was 8.2%. In the run-up to GE13, the voters registered doubled to 19.4%. The national and statewide averages however obscure the differences among different seats within states. It is clear that some seats have been special recipients of new voters.

Much has been made of the 28% of new voters in Lembah Pantai. This seat is actually on the low side compared to others. Consider the whopping 61.5% increase in Tapah, recently re-won by BN, or Subang with 52% new voters, won by Pakatan with a larger majority this election but shaped heavily by Pakatan’s registration of new voters.

A total of 90 seats, or 41% of all parliamentary seats, have more than 25% new voters. Many of these were in races with tight contests in 2008, and continued to have tight contests in GE13. The new voters has advantaged the opposition in urban areas, but benefitted the BN in rural and semi-rural areas or in states where the machinery of the opposition is comparatively weak, such as Johor.

Such races also won by BN that had large number of voters include Cameron Highlands (20%), Pasir Gudang (39%) and Tebrau (45%) in Johor. While some of the increase in the latter two seats might be explained in part by development, bizarrely there are sharp increases in voting populations in the remote interior state of Pensiangan (33%) and remote coastal seat of Kota Marudu (32%) in Sabah. These abnormal high increases raise questions.

The placement of new voters is even more intriguing when studying the actual polling stations results. Many new voters are concentrated in more less populated areas within constituencies, often in rural and semi-rural seats.

 

This is where the questions over the large number of unexplained voters grouped in bunches in places like Bachok (21% new voters and won by PAS with less than 1% margin) and Bukit Gantang (29% of new voters and won by PAS with 2% margin) come in.

It appears that the localised remote placements of new voters may have had an impact. For example, the placement of 3,600 new voters in a remote Felda schemes occurred in Segamat, which was won by the BN with a 1,217 majority. The voting in this Felda scheme was over 90%, with one stream at 99%. In 2004, the voter turnout in this area was much lower.

This spike pattern of voter turnout in particular polling stations was found in Terengganu in 2004, when the BN wrested back the state, and questions were raised at that time as well.

Spike patterns out of line

This GE13 spike in voter turnout at the local level is being witnessed in specific places across the country. With the national level of turnout at 80%, the spike patterns that are well out of line with historic patterns of voting behaviour raise questions, even accounting for the overall rise in participation and voter turnout.

Another pattern in the placement of new voters beyond tight races involves prominent leaders getting large shares of new voters, such as Najib Razak’s own seat Pekan with 38% new voters, or Rompin represented by Jamaluddin Jarjis at 29% new voters. It remains unclear why these largely rural constituencies would have such large voter increases.

Generally out-migration areas such as Perak and Pahang receiving large numbers of new voters does not conform with population patterns. Why are places with people leaving to work outside get sharp increases in voters?

The lack of clear transparent explanations on why voters are registered in some areas in such high numbers this election, compared to past patterns in these areas, understandably raises questions.

Many seats that were lost by the opposition or were in tight races have large number of new voters, including, including Tanah Merah (24%) and Balik Pulau (25%), although in some cases the opposition picked up or retained seats with large voter increases in these seats, such as Kota Raja (47%) and Kuala Nerus (25%), among others.

This issue of voter registration and voter turnout levels needs further study, with more information on who are these new voters and their pattern of voting. The fact is that the polling station results will show the spikes at the local level and careful study will tell us statistically the impact of these new voters on electoral outcomes.

The Electoral Commission (EC) and electoral administration as a whole are facing a real trust deficit. A reliable electoral roll is essential for any fair elections. Repeatedly questions have been raised about the veracity of many new voters.

Election watchdog Merap and others have time and again drawn to the questions of electoral roll integrity. Before the polls, these matters were essentially ignored or dismissed. To date, the scope of phantom voters and questionable placement was not fully known. Now the results themselves will show the impact at the local level.

This is why the sharing of all results through the Borang 14 is essential in order to make a systematic and thorough assessment. Preliminary reviews of results are already raising red flags as they have shaped the outcomes at both the parliamentary and state levels.

Early and postal voting

Queries about the early and postal voting have also emerged. Here the question is about double voting, with individuals having the opportunity to vote twice. Postal voting numbers increased in this election. Historically, there have always been questions about the veracity of postal voting, with reports questioning that this voting is secret and others arguing over the accuracy of the results.

There have been improvements in recent years over postal voting involving polling agent access to this process in many locations. Yet, even with these improvements, questions about whether postal voting is fair and accurate remain.

In this election, further questions emerged over the numbers and placement of these postal voters in different constituencies. Many tight races, such as Sibu, had increases in postal voters. In some cases, the list of names of new postal voters were reportedly not provided openly.

Early voting, an estimated 240,000 people, is also a new addition for this election and being queried. Early voting includes many Malaysians within Malaysia, such as the wives of army officers and journalists who can vote before polls.

There was not a clear distribution of the list of early voters provided nationally, and in some cases even individual candidates were not able to access the names of who were the postal and early voters.

No clear explanation was given to why some constituencies received early voters and others did not. Importantly, this information was not properly shared so that it could be verified. Furthermore, there were unexplained instances when the numbers of early and postal voters increased. In Lembai Pantai, for example, the number stated was 200, but 600 showed up. How did this happen?

Given the reality that the indelible ink was in many cases not indelible, the possibility of double voting exists. On voting day there are numerous reports of individuals finding out that someone had voted fraudulently using their name, leading to concerns also about electoral disenfranchisement.

The indelible ink was in many cases not indelible.

There were also reports of non-Malaysians being transported to the polling stations by buses and even flown in, some of these believed to be phantom voters. The scale and impact of these on the results is not yet clear, but given the combination of a non-transparent early and postal voting process in various locations and non-indelible ink issues on election day, and sightings of non-Malaysians in contentious seats, troubling questions are being raised.

The close results make these issues and questions more salient. A total of 72 of seats (or 32%) were won by less than 10% margins of turnout. Twenty percent of seats, 44 seats, were won with less than a 5% margin. The closeness of these races could easily have come down to a few voters. These razor-thin margin seats were won by both sides, but given the questions raised about the process of voting in these close seats, they need to be carefully reviewed.

To date, the total number of seats affected by either non-transparent new voter increases and early voting allocations and unexplained incidents of disenfranchisement appears to be more than the actual margin of victory for the BN. These reports need to be properly vetted and verified, but fundamental questions remained.

A spoilt-vote victory

Finally, this brings up the questions on the election night itself. There are queries surrounding the recounts and spoilt votes. How many recounts which overturned the results at the last moment were there? In Perak, for example, three state seats – three is a famous number in Perak – Alor Pongsu, Manjoi and Pangkor results were overturned at the last minute. Questions were also raised at Kamunting as well.

The need for transparency at the final count is essential for a fair election. When the EC asks people to leave and there are new ballot boxes seen outside of a polling station, as was reported in Lembah Pantai, there are questions. It is not fully clear what exactly happened with the recounts in Perak and elsewhere – as there were numerous recounts nationally this election – but the climate of distrust that has permeated the assessment of the election process raises doubts.

In the days ahead, a better sense of the numbers and recounts will emerge. With reports of sudden changes in the voting results such as Bentong and Labis, questions are being raised. Many people cannot understand how a result that was statistically a large margin ahead could be overturned. These need to be clarified, particularly in Bentong where the margin was larger.

Part of the problem is that in some cases, the number of spoilt votes exceeded the actual majority in places where recounts took place. Here are some of the seats at the parliamentary level where this happened: Kuala Selangor, Cameron Highlands, Bachok, Bentong, Sungai Besar, Kota Merudu and Baram won by the BN and Sepang and Kuala Nerus won by the opposition. Another seat with high spoilt votes is Segamat, at 950.

What distinguishes these close recounts from the famous cases of Lim Kit Siang and Karpal Singh losing in 1999 with more spoilt votes than the majority, is the process of the administration of the indelible ink in this election – before marking the ballot paper – thus staining the papers and contributing to higher spoilt votes.

This pattern of higher spoilt votes than actual margins of victory was also replicated at the state level as well in many areas, where only a few seats mattered for who should win state power. The process of administering the ink appears to have had an impact on the results in some areas.

It is important to be careful when reviewing the election results and not rush to judgement about what happened and why. It is also important to see the election holistically. The focus here has not touched on the use of money in the campaign, which was rampant, labeled ‘bombing’ in Sabah, or the mainstream media reporting.

The aim has been to raise the preliminary questions revealed in the results and the impact actual numbers of voters associated with the election. As the evaluation of the election moves forward, the call to answer these questions will only increase and intensify. Further study and analysis is essential.

Nevertheless, from the non-indelible ink and spikes in voter turnout to being not allowed to vote, concerns with the electoral process itself are not sitting right with many in the public, and this is not just supporters on one side or another. Transparent and truthful answers are both needed and welcomed.

DR BRIDGET WELSH is Associate Professor of Political Science at Singapore Management University. She is travelling around Malaysia to provide her GE13 analyses exclusively to Malaysiakini. Bridget can be reached at bwelsh@smu.edu.sg.

HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT EVERY SINGLE RECOUNT RESULTS IN BN GETTING A HIGHER VOTE COUNT?

May 7, 2013

 HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT EVERY SINGLE RECOUNT RESULTS IN BN GETTING A HIGHER VOTE COUNT?

by Jason Lim

This election is so freaking confusing and non-transparent. I can’t find impartial information anywhere, even if I were trying to just find the facts. How come the Counting Agents are silent? Why are numbers different depending on the sources I visit? I decided to form my own conclusions and pulled the entire result list from the SPR website and collated them, in the sincere hope that SPR is as factual as it gets. Several observations have me rather irked, and I hope all of you, my friends, as thinking, rational people consider these facts.

i) EC said voter turnout was around 80%, among the highest, if not the highest in the world. My spreadsheet has it at 84.6%. Every time I hear something like “Highest in the world” I get really suspicious. However, there being no compulsory registration, I will take this with a pinch of salt.

ii) The balance of power is hanging on a very thin edge, and it is vexing to think that it is POSSIBLE that a small sleight of hand can shift the balance. Let me give an example: There were 25 parliamentary seats that PR lost on a margin of less than 2000 votes. The actual number is 26,916 votes across 25 seats. This means if only 2,931 people( less than half a % of registered voters) voted for the Opposition, PR would be in power now. For those who don’t believe me I encourage you to do your homework, the seats are: 003,012,018,026,029,053,058,067,078,089,092,093,096, 118,119,140,142,144,146,158,159,168,177,182,220

iii) By my calculation, for parliamentary votes BN has 47.4%, PR 50.9%, Others 1.7%

Why do my numbers seem different as compared to various sources? I’m not saying anything about gerrymandering if that’s what you’re thinking, but I do question the transparency of information. The entire rakyat should be able to scrutinize the process and be able to access the information readily. SPR gives me the behind-closed-doors white smoke from the chimney kind of feeling.

iv) Why do all the recounts seem to favour a certain party? As I do not have first hand information(read: say something counting agents), I will not speculate on this one.

It’s just sad that the ruling coalition cannot attempt to reassure the public that the results are fair and transparent by a very simple SHOW AND TELL, yet they choose SMOKE AND MIRRORS. I choose to view internet news as biased and sentimentalist, but seriously, all the public is looking for is the truth. I mean, why cover up and secretly deliver ballot boxes if they belong to a particular centre? Just show it and deliver it with your head held high!

Despite being well prepared with generators in case of power failure, this still existed during re-counting of ballot papers.

I don’t like the POSSIBILITY that the democratic process in Malaysia was hijacked.

The reason the same thing didn’t happen with Lembah Pantai is the efforts of Bangsarians to prevent fake ballot bags to get through.

For those interested in the full spreadsheet you can download it with macros removed:

Doc1

State data now available: Doc 2

 

Jason Lim*

*The author is a graduate student at the University of Melbourne, Australia

BN Ministers have no Common Sense, so let’s boot them out for good!

April 5, 2013

On March 22, Borders Bookstore won its judicial review against three recalcitrant government defendants namely JAWI, the Minister of Home Affairs and the Minister in the PM’s Department for Religious Affairs in the controversial case involving the book “Allah Liberty & Love” by Canadian writer Irshad Manji.

Nik Raina and her lawyer, En. Rosli Dahlan

I even hailed the Tudung Judge Dato’ Zaleha Yusof for her moral courage in making a bold judgment that I thought had restored some sense and sensibility into our government’s administration. See this link to my previous article: HERE

Malaysians were relieved that a senseless case had ended. That was what we all thought. But apparently not!

It now appears that JAWI, the Home Affairs and Religious Ministers and the Attorney-General do not have any common sense nor any sensibility. I am told that despite receiving a polite letter from the Malaysian premier legal firm of Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill for the case to be withdrawn, JAWI has not done so.  See the letter below:

And the most scandalous thing is that A-G Gani Patail is instigating JAWI not to respect Judge Zaleha’s decision. The Syariah criminal charge against Nik Raina is still not withdrawn. Contrary to what we think, Nik Raina is still an accused person in the Syariah case. She is still the enemy of Islam. That is how vindictive JAWI, the BN Minister for Home Security and BN Minister for Religious Affairs and A-G Gani Patail have become towards Nik Raina. They want to drag her life into hell through eternity. That is why A-G Gani Patail filed an application to stay the Order given by Judge Zaleha. See below the application filed by AG Gani Patail:

What is most laughable in that application is to see JAWI saying- “Kami akan mengalam¡ múdarat yang serius dan seterusnya mengalami ketidak-upayaan untuk menempatkan semula kepada kedudukan yang asal” which means JAWI, the Home Minister and the Religious Ministers are saying that they will suffer if they cannot be allowed to prosecute Nik Raina, the poor victimised Malay manager.

JAWI akan mengalami múdarat yang serius dan seterusnya  ketidak-upayaan untuk menempatkan semula kepada kedudukan yang asal jika gagal melakukan sesuatu terhadap kes Nik Rania.

Hello! What is wrong with you people? Are you suffering from brain damage to say that in a formal court application? Obviously, A-G Gani Patail is taking the court process as a joke to be saying that. They should all be punished for contempt of court!

To make it worse, that was not how A-G Gani Patail behaved when Razak Baginda was acquitted for the murder of the Mongolian beauty Altantuya Sharibbu. In that sense, Nik Raina is treated worse than a murder accuse. So the saying that everyone is equal before the law is not true. In the Malaysian criminal justice system, you are treated according to who you are. So, if you Razak Baginda who is a close confidante of the Prime Minister, you will get preferential treatment.

Razak who hired the UTK Police sharpshooters to blow up Altantuya was freed while the UTK personnel were convicted. A-G Gani Patail did not appeal against Razak Baginda and Razak is now living in absolute luxury in London from the billions of ringgit commissions that he made from the Scorpene submarines sold to the Royal Malaysian Navy.

We have always suspected that the Scorpene submarines cannot dive, remain submerged nor defend our coastal line. And now all our suspicions are proven true. How do we know that? Well, in the invasion of Lahad Datu by the Filipino terrorists, we have seen that these terrorists can enter and leave our territories and waters at will. They can enter undetected and leave despite a sea blockade. And throughout the whole battle episodes, we have not once seen the Scorpene in action.

That is how the BN Defence Ministers have fleeced the public coffers in the name of buying sophisticated weaponry to protect the country. When the time comes to defend the country, it is the “tulang empat kerat” of our brave soldiers that are defending the motherland and not the sophisticated weaponry bought to line the pockets of these politicians!

The same goes for our internal or homeland security. The inept Home Minister said that these terrorists were harmless and toothless sarong clad old men. Believing that what the Home Affairs Minister said was true, our Policemen put their guard down and treated these foreign terrorists more kindly than they treated the BERSIH 3.0 rally goers. And in the end, it cost horrifying deaths to our Policemen who were brutally killed and mutilated by these harmless toothless old men.

So I say – let us honor our fallen heroes. Let us honor our fallen soldiers and policemen. But Never shall we honor or give credit to the BN politicians and Ministers who have caused these unnecessary deaths. We weep for the families of these fallen heroes, their wives and children. But we must also hold those who caused these wanton deaths accountable. We must!

Now that Parliament has been dissolved on April 3, these politicians will have to go back to the ballot box to seek the people’s mandate. It is time that we tell them who is master. It is time that we shape the fate of this country for the next 4 years. It is time that we, the People of Malaysia tell these inept leaders that they are no longer wanted.

It will be the job of the political parties to tear each other to pieces during their political rallies. But we too can play a role. It is time that we hold all these politicians and the Ministers to be answerable for the deaths of Teoh Beng Hock, Kugan, Ahmad Sarbaini and many others. The persecutions of Anwar Ibrahim, Rosli Dahlan, Datuk Ramli Yusuff and many other innocent Malaysians can happen to anybody when you have morally depraved politicians in power and an A-G beholden to them.

Whatever your status in the country, whatever your race, whatever your religion, your enemy is the one who is turning your country into a disaster zone and the sooner you vote those crooks out of power the sooner you can save your nation and get something better.

We can influence the political parties to offer to the people not only winnable candidates but also candidates whom have seen in the public domain to display impeccable strength of character and moral uprightness.

Gen (Rtd) Md Hashim Hussein is currently is the PKR’s candidate for Johor Baharu parliamentary seat.

The outcome of Lahad Datu could have been different if former CCID Chief Dato’ Ramli Yusuff gets elected into parliament and becomes Home Minister and former army chief Gen (Rtd) Md Hashim Hussein becomes Defence Minister. These are the people that we should get PAS, PKR and DAP to put into Parliament and boot out the BN Ministers who have no common sense to run the country !

Datuk Ramli  was charged by Musa Hassan for using the Police Cessna while he was conducting the aerial survey and boarder patrol to prevent Filipino infiltration which could have avoided the Lahad Datu incident !

Politicians among 1,500 who own offshore companies

Politicians among 1,500 who own offshore companies – Malaysiakini

EXCLUSIVE: Top Malaysian politicians, their family members and well-heeled associates are among those owning secretive offshore companies in Singapore and the British Virgin Islands, according to an explosive cache of leaked documents.

They include former Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s son Mirzan, Federal Territories and Urban Well-being Minister Raja Nong Chik Zainal Abidin and Michael Chia, the alleged ‘bagman’ for Sabah Chief Minister Musa Aman.

The files, which were obtained by Washington-based International Confederation of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) and examined by Malaysiakini,show more than 1,500 Malaysians owning offshore companies in Singapore – dubbed as the new Switzerland – as well as the British Virgin Islands (BVI), an international tax haven.

The ICIJ list comprises a curious mix of Forbes-listed tycoons, parliamentarians, retired politicians, civil servants and their spouses, members of royal families, famous and infamous businesspeople, underworld kingpins and even former beauty queens.

While some of the offshore companies carry out legitimate transactions, others are likely to be part of the RM871.4 billion estimated by Washington-based financial watchdog Global Financial Integrity (GFI) to have been lost through illicit outflows over a 10-year period.

In 2010 alone, GFI reported that close to RM200 billion of dirty money was siphoned out of Malaysia, putting the country second only to Asian economic powerhouse China in global capital flight.

The leaked ICIJ files provide secret records of offshore holdings of people and companies in more than 170 countries and territories.

“The hoard of documents represents the biggest stockpile of inside information about the offshore system ever obtained by a media organisation. The total size of the files, measured in gigabytes, is more than 160 times larger than the leak of US State Department documents by Wikileaks in 2010,” says ICIJ.

However, despite the extensive data, this is not the complete list of all off-shore companies around the world. Indeed, it is only the tip of the iceberg.

Nevertheless, it allows members of the public, for the very first time, to sneak a peak into the secretive world of anonymous wealth.

Raja Nong Chik

According to the leaked documents, Raja Nong Chik, who is Lembah Pantai UMNO chief, is a prominent shareholder and director of RZA International Corporation, a British Virgin Islands entity incorporated on Aug 21, 2007, through Singapore.

The company is a mirror of Malaysian entity Kumpulan RZA Sdn Bhd, a 1997-founded company dealing in real estate and equities investment.

Raja Nong Chik set up the offshore entity with his father, Raja Zainal Abidin Raja Tachik, a number of his sisters and brothers as well as other family members. Most of them are also shareholders and directors of Kumpulan RZA Sdn Bhd.

Prior to his senatorship, Raja Nong Chik was a corporate figure who founded and managed an engineering firm for 20 years.

Contacted by Malaysiakini, the minister confirmed that RZA International was set up by his father, who will turn 96 this year, “for the purpose of holding legitimate offshore investments for the family”.

However, the minister did not elaborate on the offshore investments made by his family through the company. He added that RZA International was de-registered in 2009.

“The company was not used to obscure activities of Kumpulan RZA Sdn Bhd, and neither was it used to circumvent taxes or hide transactions overseas,” Raja Nong Chik said in an email to Malaysiakini.

Mirzan Mahathir

Mirzan Mahathir, the eldest son of Mahathir, is also among those the ICIJ list as director and shareholder of three off-shore companies.

Mirzan’s major commercial vehicle in Malaysia is Crescent Capital Sdn Bhd, an investment holding and independent strategic and financial advisory firm. He is the company’s chairperson and chief executive officer.

A Forbes-listed entrepreneur, Mirzan holds a non-executive director position in Philippines-based San Miguel group, which has raised eyebrows in Muslim-majority Malaysia, as beer brewery is a core businesses of San Miguel.

One of Mirzan’s offshore entities is called Crescent Energy Ltd, a Labuan offshore company incorporated on Dec 16, 2003, originally named Mainline Ltd and with an authorised share capital of US$12,000 (RM37,000).

Mirzan became a director and main shareholder six days later and the company was renamed Crescent Energy on May 16, 2008.

Another Labuan offshore company, Utara Capital Ltd, in which Mirzan is named as sole shareholder and director, was incorporated on Aug 19, 1997, with an authorised share capital of US$15,000.

The third company, Al Sadd Investments Pte Ltd. was also a Labuan offshore company. It was established on May 14, 2009, with an authorised share capital of US$12,000. Mirzan is listed as the sole shareholder and director of Al Sadd Investments.

Malaysiakini has approached Mirzan’s office for his comments on these offshore companies, but his aide said he was unable to respond on the matter as he was out of town.

Michael Chia

Another prominent personality on the list is Chia Tien Foh, who is better known as Michael Chia – the shadowy business tycoon allegedly linked to Sabah Chief Minister Musa Aman.

Chia, too, has three offshore companies in which he is listed as either as director or shareholder. One of them was CTF International Ltd , with ‘CTF’ seen as the initials of Chia’s full name. It was incorporated on April 18, 2007, in the British Virgin Islands.

CTF International gained notoriety when it was named by whistleblower website Sarawak Report of being a conduit in channelling millions of ringgit to a Hong Kong account allegedly linked to Musa.

However, Musa (left), has denied any business ties with Chia (right).

CTF was de-registered in 2008. The other two offshore companies owned by Chia are Ravenswood Development Ltd and Ark Capital Technologies Ltd.

In addition, Chia’s wife Yap Loo Mien and another woman, who is alleged to be his mistress, Yap Siaw Lin, also appear on the list as key shareholders in three separate British Virgin Islands entities.

Loo Mien owned two companies – Perfect Minds Incorporated and StarWater Corporation – while Siaw Lin owned Splendor Success Worldwide Ltd.

Malaysiakini contacted Chia through the address stated in his company registration documents for comments, but there has been no response.

Iron-clad secrecy

According to a former officer with of the Inland Revenue Board (IRB), crooked Malaysians parked their money offshore to enjoy either significantly lower or even no taxes, and where the income is illegal, they are protected by a wall of secrecy.

Such ploys, said the officer who was a tax investigator, may not always succeed as Malaysia has a double taxation agreement, with close to 80 countries, that provides for the exchange of information on investigations involving the prevention or detection of tax evasion or fraud.

This includes Singapore, where some of the offshore companies are based.

The island republic has been labelled by Sarawak corporate lawyer Alvin Chong (right) as the “new Switzerland” in a recent video clandestinely filmed by London-based NGO Global Witness.

The retired officer, who worked with the IRB for more than 20 years, added that while the setting up of offshore companies was, in itself not illegal, such companies could be used to evade taxes.

“For example, a payment can be made for a seemingly legitimate service, like consultancy for the procurement of submarines, but it is paid to a company set up overseas, where the recipient pays a lower tax.

“Singapore and Hong Kong, with corporate tax rates of about 17 percent compared with Malaysia’s 25 percent, are popular parking lots,” he said, speaking on condition he not be named.

Tax evasion

One of the methods of tax evasion was explained by Chong in the Global Witness video – on how to avoid paying capital gains tax relating to Sarawak’s doggy land deals.

According to the former tax officer, offshore companies often include many layers of ownership through nominees to camouflage and “water down the link” to the original owner.

As such, he said the act of setting up offshore companies in tax havens often raises red flags.

“Someone can say that their company is set up at the British Virgin Islands, for example, but the money they use to set up the BVI company, or more importantly, the operations channeled through these tax havens could raise suspicion as being not genuine and invite an IRB probe,” he said.

“If the MACC (Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission), IRB or the police want information from their Singapore counterparts, for example, the latter are obliged to give, at least under the Malaysia-Singapore DTA (double taxation agreement),” he said.

But most tax havens are not signatories to DTA agreements and they operate outside international law.

Moreover, it is also up to the Malaysian authorities to decide whether to pursue the case and seek the necessary information from their counterparts abroad.

---

Aidila Razak, Kuek Ser Kuang Keng, Wong Teck Chi and Steven Gan contributed to this report.

 

THE BORDERS/IRSHAD MANJI BOOK CASE: SENSE AND SENSIBILITY PREVAILED!

March 22,2013

by Din Merican

I have become friends with Nik Raina Nik Abdul Aziz, the poor Malay Borders Bookstore

manager who, on  May 30, 2012, was charged with much fanfare in the Syariah Court for purportedly distributing anti-Islam books. The book in question was by a Canadian writer Irshad Manji titled “Allah Liberty and Love”.

That immediately made Nik Raina an enemy of Islam. In Malaysia, nobody wants to be an enemy of Islam. It did not matter that Nik had not read the book nor understood what it is about. It did not matter that she was a mere employee and had no control over the books sold in the Borders Bookstore. It did not matter that nobody knew that the book was against Islam. It did not matter that nobody knew about any ban on the book, because it was not banned at that time.

Once the Jabatan Agama, in this case Jabatan Agama Wilayah Persekutuan (JAWI), charged her in the Syariah Court, she became Islam’s No.1 Enemy. That was what happened to Nik Raina since May 2012 until this morning when I received the good news that Borders Bookstore, Stephen Fung and Nik Raina have been vindicated by High Court Judge Dato’ Zaleha Yusuf. News spread very fast that Judge Zaleha had chastised JAWI for displaying religious madness in their action against Borders, Stephen and Nik Raina.

Nik Raina and her lawyer, En. Rosli Dahlan

Immediately I was impressed because I have seen this judge. Dato’ Zaleha wears the tudung. This must be one brave Malay lady tudung Judge to vindicate the enemies of Islam in her court of law.

More than that, she dared to chastise JAWI and two Ministers namely the Home Minister, Hishammuddin Hussein, and the Agama Minister, Jamil Khir Baharom for not correcting JAWI. But why was this judge so brave to vindicate people branded by JAWI as the enemies of Islam? And why vindicate? For what? What wrong have they done? So, let’s understand the facts a bit.

Apparently, some time before the incident, JAWI and Islamic scholars from JAKIM had reviewed the Irshad Manji book and prepared a thick report counting out 1001 reasons why Irshad Manji is an enemy of Islam and thus all her writings are blasphemous. If JAWI had their way they would burn Irshad Manji on the stake and make her books a bonfire.

Anyway, JAWI then approached the Minister of Home Affairs to ban the book because under the Printing and Presses Act, only the Home Minister can ban books. For some reason, the Home Minister slept on it like how he slept on the job when more than 100 Filipino terrorists took over Lahad Datu.

In Lahad Datu, the Home Minister justified the continued presence of these terrorists on Malaysian soil by saying that they are harmless toothless sarong clad old men, that is, until our security forces men were brutally killed and mutilated. In the end, we had to call on jet fighters and the army to bomb the three villages to get rid of these harmless toothless old men.

The inaction of Home minister Hishamuddin Hussein in this case is almost similar to his late action  to table a white paper on the Lahad Datu episode. It should have been done during the early stage of intrusion. The matter has prolonged long enough and many security personnel had lost their lives. The people had also waited too long for answers, but in the end they were disappointed as none had been forthcoming.

So, JAWI being irritated with the inaction by the Home Minister decided to take things into their own hands and orchestrated a dramatic raid on Borders Bookstore at the Gardens Mid Valley Mall. Just like the siege of Bahgdad when the Mongolian horde stormed a Muslim city, the JAWI commandos stormed Borders Bookstore with a horde of photographers and reporters as if it was a fortress of anti-Islam books. Like in a Jihad (Holy War), JAWI needed to capture some POWs (Prisoners of War), otherwise it would not be a successful war campaign.

But JAWI had a problem because Borders is owned by a company, Berjaya, and they dare not arrest the owners of Borders because that would be Tan Sri Vincent Tan. So they went after the General Manager who is Stephen Fung. Again, that was a problem because Stephen is a Christian and JAWI has no powers over non-Muslims. So, JAWI went down the chain of command and to their delight found that the store manager is a Muslim. So that’s how Nik Raina got embroiled.

But that was not the end of JAWI’s problem. After interviewing Nik Raina, JAWI discovered that Nik Raina had neither power over nor knowledge about the book. You see, at that time JAWI had not announced to the public of the findings of their thick report that the book is anti-Islam because that report was official secret meant only for the eyes of the Home Minister. And the Home Minister had forgotten to gazette a ban on the book as anti-Islam. So, on the day of the raid and Nik Raina’s arrest, nobody knew that the book was banned. But JAWI didn’t care. JAWI was in a rush to announce the success of their raid, so they needed to charge someone, anyone. JAWI refused to listen to reason and even refused legal representation to Nik Raina. So that’s why Nik Raina was charged, because it was convenient to do so.

But JAWI underestimated that Berjaya is now under a new leadership, Dato Robin Tan. Robin Tan may be Vincent Tan’s son, but he is a man of the brave new world and could not stand to see his company and his employees being bullied and kicked around. Also, Borders’ COO is a feisty Australian trained lawyer, Yau Su Peng. So, between them, they decided to look around for a lawyer who is qualified to appear in the Syariah Courts and the Civil Courts; who will not be cowed to appear against the bullying and intimidating tactics of the Ketua Pendakwa Syarie; a lawyer who is not afraid of the establishment. Enter my young friend, Lawyer Rosli Dahlan!

No one can be perfectly free till all are free; no one can be perfectly moral till all are moral; no one can be perfectly happy till all are happy.

To give support to Nik Raina, my wife and I have attended the court sessions in the Syariah Courts and the Civil Courts. I have seen how committed and passionate Rosli is in defending Nik Raina. I have heard him articulating why JAWI’s action was misguided and the madness of JAWI and the Ketua Pendakwa Syarie in pursuing the matter. I have heard him imploring the Civil Courts not to be intimidated by the Syariah authorities and persuading them not to abdicate their constitutional duty.

Thus, I was most happy today that Judge Dato Zaleha was moved by Rosli’s closing Submissions that JAWI’s actions set a dangerous precedent that any state religious body can simply deem a publication to be contrary to hukum syarak without the public being aware of it. And that was what that had stirred controversy, created a conflict of laws situation and gave Malaysia unnecessary international acclaim for illogical religious enforcement action.

From my sources in Borders, I have obtained a copy of Rosli’s Submission in which he implored the Judge “to reinstate reason into this already tumultuous situation so that some sense and sensibility can prevail to calm our multi-racial and multi-religious Malaysian society which has been disturbed by an unwarranted fear stirred by JAWI and the lack of moral courage and political will by the Minister of KDN and Minister Agama to correct the obvious wrongs committed by JAWI.”

I salute Tudung Judge Dato’ Zaleha for her moral courage in making this bold Judgment. More than that, Malaysians now can have more confidence in the new Judiciary where Judges are not afraid to restore sense and sensibility which is much needed in our government’s administration!

_____________

DECISION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW APPLICATION: KUALA LUMPUR HIGH COURT CIVIL NO. R2-25-137-06/2012

Brief Grounds by Yang Arif Dato’ Zaleha Binti Yusof on 22.02.2013, 9:37 a.m.:

“This is going to be the gist of my decision.

This case involves the review of the Respondents’ action in raiding and searching the premises of the 1st Applicant and seizing publication therein and examining the Applicants and subsequently arresting and prosecuting the 3rd Applicant.

The Respondents here are public authorities and the Applicants are aggrieved and have been already affected by the Respondents’ action. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that this Court has a supervisory jurisdiction over the decision and acts of these bodies. This application also involves the interpretation of law that relates to fundamental liberties thus it is clear to me that the Applicants are entitled to file this application under Order 53 of the Rules of Court and this Court has jurisdiction to hear it. To me the question of this Court encroaching into the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court does not arise as it is the Civil Court that has jurisdiction to review.

Well the actions of the Respondents affect the Applicants who are a company, a non-Muslim and a Muslim respectively. Section 1 subsection (2) of Syariah Offences Act clearly provides that the Act shall apply to persons professing the religion of Islam and corporation is not included in the definition of Muslim under the Syariah Administration Act.

As submitted by the learned counsel for the Applicants, the High Court in Potensi Bernas Sdn Bhd v. Datuk Badaruddin Datuk Mustapha had decided that Syariah Court has no jurisdiction over a non-muslim and that a company being a creature of the statute does not profess any religion. Similary in Latifah Mat Zin v. Rosmawati Sharibun & Anor, the Federal Court had held that an application to the Syariah Court can only be made if both parties are Muslim. Since the Syariah law is only applicable to Muslim therefore the actions taken by the 1st Respondent against the 1st and 2nd Applicants in my opinion were clearly illegal.

On action against the 3rd Applicant, no doubt she is a Muslim, however does that alone justify the 1st Respondent’s action against her? She is a merely a Store Manager and the person who is responsible for the collection of titles and range of stock of books and publications displayed and sold in the 1st Applicant’s Bookstore is the 2nd Applicant and not her, and this has not been disputed.

 Matters pertaining to publication, printing and printing presses fall within item 21, List I of the Ninth Schedule read together with Article 74 of the Federal Constitution. If we look at item 1 of List II of the Ninth Schedule, the State is given power to create and punish offences by persons professing the religion of Islam against precepts of Islam except in regards to matters included in the Federal List. No doubt the creation of punishment of offences against the precepts of Islam can be enacted by the State Legislature. However clear reading of Item 1 of List II of the Ninth Schedule as I mentioned just now shows that the State cannot enact laws in regards to matters included in the Federal List. Since matters pertaining to publication, printing and printing presses fall within List I ie. The Federal List, the validity of section 13 of the Syariah Offences Act is questionable as it is ultra vires the Printing Act and the Federal Constitution. Even if it is a valid law what amounts to contrary to Islamic Law is also questionable as it is too wide. Members of the public must be made known what publication is contrary to Islamic Law or precepts of Islam. Otherwise as the Learned Counsel for the Applicants have submitted, a Muslim employee who works in a bookstore that also sells Christianity Bible, books on Buddhism or Hinduism or any other religion besides other books which as we know now they are many such bookstore would be committing an offence. Hence there need to be notification by the Respondents as to what books and publication are contrary to Islamic Law.

It must be noted that at the material time the publications or books in question was not subject to any Prohibition Order by KDN. The Prosecution Order was only issued 3 weeks after the raid. Bear in mind the provision of Article 7 of Federal Constitution which provides that no person shall be punishable for an act or omission which was not punishable by law when it was done or made.

Section 13 of the Syariah Offences Act must be in conformity with the Federal Constitution especially the said Article 7. The Court of Appeal in Multi-Purpose Holdings Berhad v. Ketua Pengarah Hasil Dalam Negeri the Parliament does not intend its act to violate the Constitution. Hence, a statute must be read harmoniously with the Constitution to avoid any conflict between them which will result in the statute becoming void. Adopting that approach, the Act must, in my judgment be read prospectively to prevent the appellant in that case and those similarly circumstanced from becoming retrospectively criminally liable. Applying that principle I am of the opinion that the criminal charge against the 3rd Applicant in the Syariah High Court is an infringement of Article 7. Further there is nothing in the Syariah Offences Act which provide for any State Religious Body to prohibit any publication. It only creates an offence to publication. As submitted both by the Respondents and Applicants, whenever there is a conflict between a law enacted by the Parliament and a law enacted by the State Legislature, the Court has to follow and adopt a harmonious interpretation of the law. The only logical approach is for Section 7 of the Printing Act to support Section 13 of the Syariah Offences Act ie. notification to the public first, then only the enforcement action.

We live in multi-religious and multi-racial society, such approach would be harmonious and avoid any tension, controversy and conflict into the society and law.

To conclude, I agree with the submission of the Applicants and therefore allow this Application in Prayer (a) to (i) of Enclosure 6.”

“No order as to costs.”

MACC: What more evidence you need ?

Video expose implicates Sarawak CM, kin in alleged land graft

A new video implicates Taib and his family in shady land deals.KUALA LUMPUR, March 19 — An international activist organisation provided today video proof of shady land deals in Sarawak that implicates the state’s Chief Minister Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud and his family, with parts of the clip aired on the Al-Jazeera news channel at 10am.

In a covert investigation, Global Witness (GW) captured on video dealings with Taib’s cousins and several other intermediaries to acquire thousands of hectares of forest land that the London-based activist said revealed the systematic corruption and illegality that lay at the heart of Malaysia’s biggest state.

“This film proves for the first time what has long been suspected — that the small elite around Chief Minister Taib are systematically abusing the region’s people and natural resources to line their own pockets,” said Tom Picken, forest team leader at Global Witness, in a statement released today.

“It shows exactly how they do it and it shows the utter contempt they hold for Malaysia’s laws, people and environment.”

In a 16-minute video clip, GW investigators, who posed as foreign investors, recorded snippets of their conversation with Taib’s cousins and lawyers, to purchase the land for hefty profit and which the environmental campaigner said would displace thousands of the indigenous people living there.

A recorded conversion with sisters Fatimah Abdul Rahman and Norlia Abdul Rahman — who are the daughters of the state’s former Chief Minister Tun Abdul Rahman Ya’akub and first cousins with the incumbent CM — provided a very telling glimpse into the means of how business is conducted in Sarawak to enrich the ruling elite.

Fatimah: Ample Agro belongs to my family, but my sisters, the four elder ones are in the company. The Land and Survey Department, they are the ones who issue this licence… Of course it’s from the CM’s directive but I can speak to the CM very easily.

GW: Can you?

Fatimah: Yes.

GW: And you think he’ll agree?

Fatimah: Yeah, he was the one who gave us the land. He’s my cousin [laughs]. His mother and my father are sisters and brothers, siblings. He’s my cousin so it’s quite easy.

The sisters said they were owners of 5,000 hectares of land given to them for a nominal sum by Taib, and which they were looking to sell under their company, Ample Agro, which they admitted to be a shell company.

GW: You’re proposing basically, Ample Agro, which is your company OK, sell your company, rather than the land. And your company owns the land?

Norlia: Yes… I bought that company as a shell company for this land.

Their lawyer, Alvin Chong, was also recorded in the video telling the GW “investors” how to evade real property gains taxes.

Another lawyer, Huang Lung Ong of Huang & Company Advocates, was also recorded trying to sell land for his uncle, a prominent businessman in Sibu, Datuk Hii Yii Peng, said to have close ties with Taib, saying that at least 10 per cent of the sale price would have to go to the chief minister as commission.

In its statement, GW alleged that senior government officials and a timber company executive said it was standard practice in Sarawak for companies to pay a personal fee to Abdul Taib in return for approval of timber and plantation licences.

London lawyers representing the chief minister have denied the allegations, the NGO reported.

“The Government of Sarawak issues licences for land in very controlled circumstances,” the law firm, Mishcon de Reya, was quoted as saying. “This is an administrative exercise, not political patronage.

“Our client never demands or accepts bribes for the grant of licences and leases.

“He has not issued any ‘directive’… illegally to benefit his cousins.”

Taib, 76, has been Sarawak chief minister for 32 years, having taken office in March 1981.

His personal wealth has stirred much controversy, with detractors alleging he gained much of it through dubious means.

 

ROSLI DAHLAN’S DEFAMATION SUIT: NST JOURNALIST ADMITS “WE COLOR THE STORY!”

March 14, 2013

ROSLI DAHLAN’S DEFAMATION SUIT: NST JOURNALIST ADMITS “WE COLOR THE STORY!”

by Din Merican

Modern technology is so wonderful. You don’t have to be present at the scene of an incident to know what happened.The internet has ensured that information can no longer be the monopoly of a few. Thus, government leaders and those who hold public offices have to be very careful in their public conduct. If they misbehave, the world will know.

Another badly misbehaved case, by the DPP and MACC.

Similarly, mainstream media can no longer claim dominance in reporting news, or whatever propaganda they call news. If in the past the mainstream media can report lies and hope not to be caught out, or when they are caught out, they bury the news about how they have lied, now the mainstream media can no longer do that. There are now alternative media that will report the lies perpetrated by the mainstream media. Thus, everyone must tell the truth. No one must lie, especially not in court because court proceedings are now electronically recorded.

In my piece on February 28, 2013 entitled “THE LIES AND DECEIT BY THE NST: SUE THE BASTARDS ROSLI!”, I told readers that all the shenanigans in court proceedings are now caught on camera. So, Judges, private lawyers and government lawyers have to behave themselves when conducting cases. That was how the Malaysian Anti Corruption Agency (MACC) Legal Director, Dato Razak Musa, was seen trying to strangle himself to death in the Teoh Beng Hock Inquest. That is also how I knew that the Attorney General Chambers’ Team defending the Malaysian Anti Corruption Agency (MACC) in the defamation suit brought by Lawyer Rosli  Dahlan was led by one short Senior Federal Counsel (SFC) by Tuan Hj Azizan. That was how I knew that the said SFC spoke not only bad English but also displayed bad behaviour in court.

Apparently that trial continued yesterday, 13.03.13. Again none of the mainstream media reported this trial. This must be an auspicious date for Rosli because what I saw in the cd recording blew my mind. It exposed the lies perpetrated by The NST against Rosli .

The cd recording showed The NST senior journalist V Anbalagan in the witness box proudly admitting that it was The NST that broke the RM27m Cop story which was then picked up by the other media. NST was eager to publish the story without verifying it because it was afraid other newspapers would steal the scoop.

Anbalagan also made a startling revelation that he and other NST reporters were fed with information about the investigation by an ACA officer who was involved in that investigation despite knowing that it is an offence to leak such information.This caused the SFC Tuan Haji Azizan to dispute Anbalagan’s witness testimony because the ACA had been denying Rosli’s accusation that there was a breach of the law when the ACA deliberately leaked information on the investigation in order to smear his name. Now the ACA is caught doing exactly what they have been denying in the past.

Rosli’s counsel, Chetan Jethwani had a field day cross examining Anabalagan who admitted that he wrote the story implicating Rosli in hiding assets of a Senior Police Officer in order to “add color” to make it more interesting for readership! In another part, Anbalagan shifted blame to his editors by saying that it was his editors who wrote the title “Cop RM27m assets: Lawyer Held” and not him.

Then the blame game started between lawyers for The NST and the A-GC team. They started pointing fingers at each otherfor the erroneous and false stories that were published about Rosli. On the one hand, NST pleaded privilege and justification because they published the story based on information provided to them by the ACA. On the other hand, the A-GC is saying that the NST created their own stories and not based on any information provided by the ACA or its officers. This reminded me of the title of an African novel by Chinua Achebe – “Things Fall Apart”.

Things were falling apart for The NST and Anbalagan  because when asked to provide his journalist notes of the meetings and conversations that he had with the ACA source, Anbalagan said he did not keep any of these notes and had destroyed them despite knowing in 2008 that Rosli was already suing The NST and other major newspapers for all lying.

Watching the cd of these court proceedings are very entertaining. It is also very telling that these newspapers- Utusan Malaysia, The Star and The NST have a pact not to report these court cases because it really showed`how they have lied in their report about Dato Ramli Yusuff and Lawyer Rosli Dahlan. And yet, while Utusan Malaysia  and The Star have publicly and unreservedly apologised to Rosli, The NST and MACC remained adamant not to do so.

I now understand why Rosli is so angry. I now understand why Rosli is seeking vindication by filing these civil suits . There is a Malay proverb-  “Terlajak perahu boleh diundur, terlajak kata buruk padahnya”.

In this case, the things done by The NST was not “terlajak” or inadvertent. These were deliberate lies to “colour” the story to excite readership, to increase sale and to destroy a man’s reputation. We saw that in Anwar Ibrahim’s Sodomy I and Sodomy II trial. As we approach the last days of Parliament before G-E 13 is announced, there will no doubt be more of such smear campaigns.

We must, therefore, be clear in our minds not to be coloured by these lies as we cast our ballot papers!

Lessons for Singapore: Malaysian Armed Forces vs Sulus Gunmen in Sabah

March 8, 2013

LESSONS FOR SINGAPORE: Malaysian Armed Forces versus Sulu Gunmen in  Lahad Datu, Sabah

By David Boey

SINGAPORE – A week ago, Malaysia’s Defence information officers were busy ramping up publicity for the Malaysian Army’s 80th Anniversary celebrations – a happy occasion that culminated in a massive show of force by Tentera Darat Malaysia (Malaysian Army) in Port Dickson.

After their 80th Anniversary their pace of work increased dramatically with real operations in the East Malaysian state of Sabah.

After a weekend on duty, their pace of work increased dramatically with real operations in the East Malaysian state of Sabah. Ongoing operations by Malaysian security forces against Filipino gunmen in Lahad Datu, Sabah, mean that it will be sometime yet before information officers from Cawangan Perhubungan Awam (Public Relations Department) at Kementerian Pertahanan (Kementah, the Malaysian Ministry of Defence) can enjoy a restful weekend.

The exposure to real operations in Sabah will reward Kementah’s information officers with firsthand experience managing hearts and minds operations during an unfolding operation that has international dimensions.

Add in the timing of the operation, which was triggered during the run-up to the Malaysian General Elections, and the information officers entrusted to handle media operations will get a chance to learn invaluable lessons in calibrating domestic political considerations during an unfolding operation other than war.

While it is early days yet before defence observers can compile a credible blow by blow account of the assault, here are some preliminary thoughts on the situation:

1. Malaysia’s mainstream broadcast media, RTM, worked commendably fast in producing the clip with rousing martial music and TV footage aired at the end of Tuesday night’s news bulletin that canvassed support for Malaysia’s Fallen Heroes.

This is the type of psychological defence response that the Malaysians are good at, having picked up valuable lessons from the British during the Emergency years.

2. The casual attitude to personal protection equipment by Malaysian soldiers and General Operations Force Field Police has been noted by defence observers.

The casual attitude to personal protection equipment by Malaysian soldiers and General Operations Force field police has been noted by defence observers.

During the three-week long standoff against a force which claims to have 200 gunmen and even after blood was shed, Malaysians deployed for security duty do not seem to care much for their own personal protection.

* Body armour is rarely seen. When worn by some officers, the body armour appears to be of the soft body armour type which is not designed to withstand full metal jacket projectiles discharged from firearms or mortar rounds.

* Headgear in the form of ballistic helmets is almost never worn. And let’s not even go into protective eyewear like goggles.

This apparently cavalier attitude during live operations is baffling when measured against mountains of defence science literature which underline how lives can have been saved from ballistic protection.

If the officers are content to deploy for operations unaware of the life-saving potential of ballistic protection, then this indicates a failure of the curriculum in Malaysia’s military education system.

If the officers are aware but sent their men into action ill-equipped, then the After Action Review (AAR) should perhaps look at how to address the shortfall in such equipment.

Medical reports on the Malaysian security forces killed in action should indicate the cause of death, whether by penetrations from firearm projectiles (if so, the estimated calibre), shrapnel or non-penetrating trauma caused by blast damage.

A frank report would reveal the possible root causes of casualties during the Sabah operation and could suggest the type of protection needed to reduce casualties during the next operation.

3. Concomitant with the above observation is the poor quality of firearms used by the Police General Operations Force. Their M-16 5.56mm rifles are aimed using iron sights. There appears to be no option for optical sights (for example, a Picatinny rail) that can improve marksmanship or, more importantly, allow Malaysian police officers a rudimentary night-fighting capability.

4. Even after a deadly ambush, it is noteworthy that armoured vehicles appear to be in short supply in Sabah. Vehicle patrols by the Police there continue to be mounted in unarmoured Land Rovers and trucks. Again, this begs the question what happened to lessons learned during the Emergency?

Even after a deadly ambush, it is noteworthy that armoured vehicles appear to be in short supply in Sabah but not during exhibitions.

5. The tit-for-tat cyber attacks, said to have been the work of computer hackers from Manila and Kuala Lumpur, are a sign of things to come during a Period of Tension (POT) or OOTW (which is what the Sabah operation has evolved into).

Singapore must therefore prepare itself for such a virtual world onslaught as part of its business continuity plan. It should perhaps also study options to pay back with interests anyone who opens an account with Singapore using cyber attacks.

6. At a more basic level of security preparedness, it would be ill-advised for the Singaporean Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Defence and Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) to display the level of tolerance shown by the Malaysians during this episode.

A three-week standoff against armed intruders said to have conducted active operations on home ground and shed blood is a trigger point Singapore’s government should never de-sensitise itself to.

Our circuit breaker must be designed to trip much faster so that a swift and decisive response can be unleashed.

Malaysia has been named among 54 countries which have helped the US’s Central Intelligence Agency by hosting secret torture cells and participating in illegal deportation of detainees to and from US custody without any legal process.

The writer, a former defence correspondent for the Straits Times, maintains Senang Diri, a blog about Singapore defence matters (http://kementah.blogspot.sg/).

-AsiaOne

THE LIES AND DECEIT BY THE NST: SUE THE BASTARDS, ROSLI!

by Din Merican

On January 14,, I reported about The Star newspaper publishing an unusual public apology to Lawyer Rosli Dahlan for defaming him. Unusual because it was the longest public apology that I have ever read being given by a mainstream national newspaper to an individual. The Star also paid damages and cost to Rosli. Unusual also, because other than posting that apology in their newspaper, The Star did not report anything about the trial.

The Star had to eat the humble pie by admitting that the story posted in 2007 by their editor Dato’ Lourdes Charles was a fabrication and a smear campaign against Lawyer Rosli Dahlan who was then defending Dato’ Ramli Yusuff who was facing a trumped up charge  by AG Gani Patail, then IGP Musa Hassan and the MACC .

Yesterday, I was pleasantly surprised to read that Dato Ramli Yusuff has finally filed a legal suit against former IGP Musa Hassan for defamation. Musa had recently surfaced to reinvent his image as a crime crusader. He wanted to be a Batman whereas we all know that he is actually a Badman, the baddest IGP Malaysia ever had.

Musa was the IGP who brought total disrepute to the Polis DiRaja Malaysia. The IGP who was linked to the underworld and who brought criminal charges against 6 junior officers because they discovered his links with the triads. The IGP who made a false anonymous blog against Deputy Minister Dato Johari Baharom in order to ward off investigations against himself. And when that failed, Musa suspended and charged the Director of CCID, Dato’ Ramli Yusuff so that his underworld link, the Chinaman known as Tengku Goh can be released.

I was also pleasantly surprised to receive in my mailbox a cd. When I sat down with my wife to watch the cd, I realised it was a recording of the court proceedings that has been going on since Tuesday and ended yesterday. It was the court proceedings where Lawyer Rosli Dahlan is suing The NST, its editors and the MACC and its editors. This has been going on for three days and not a single mainstream newspaper reported it.

As I continued watching the cd, I understood why there was no news report about this trial. The evidence against the NST and the MACC was so compelling damning. It showed the NST blaming the MACC for giving them false information to publish the “RM 27 Million Cop Story” which then became the RM 27 Million Lawyer story posted on 12^th October 2007. It also showed the MACC trying to exculpate itself by claiming that the story the MACC posted on their official website was actually based on the excerpt of the NST news report. Gosh! Instead of defending the case together, they were actually blaming each other!

That is what thieves and liars do.  They steal together and when they get caught, they blame each other. That was the comical scene you can watch in this cd and more, of how the lawyers for the NST and the MACC fumbled through their way in this court case.

In this court proceeding, you see that Rosli Dahlan is represented by just one lawyer, Chetan Jethwani, while the NST have 2 lawyers from an UMNO law firm and the MACC have 4 senior government lawyers from the AG Chambers. You will see how the leader of the government team of lawyers is led by a shorty counsel, a goateed and bearded Tuan Haji Azizan, with a shrill shouting voice. You will see how disrespectful this Shorty Tuan Haji Azizan behaved towards Rosli’s counsel and witnesses.

You will see how badly Shorty Tuan Haji Azizan’s spoken English is that one shudders to think how worse is  his written English. With such bad English, it is no wonder why the AGC loses cases badly. But it is more worrisome to think that because of such bad English, these government lawyers may not have understood what they read in the law books and the statutes. Could they have misunderstood who is the good guy and who is the bad guy?

Was that why they brutally arrested Lawyer Rosli Dahlan who was just needed as a witness in this case but did not arrest Tan Sri Tajudin Ramli in the MAS case when Rosli was acting for MAS to recover the multi-billion  losses caused by Tajudin to MAS? Was that why they kept Rosli under continued detention in the MACC dungeon in this case but were so eager to release that criminal Tengku Goh from Restricted Residence exile?

There was also the comical scene of Shorty Tuan Hj Azizan scolding Rosli’s witness, Dato Hj Hasanudin who is the Chairman of Masjid AlGhufran. Shorty Tuan Hj Azizan’s English was so bad that he can’t even be understood in his scolding. Usually, scolding or shouting expletives in English is so easy to do. I find it easier to F…someone in English than in Malay, if you know what I mean.

Shorty Tuan Hj Azizan was also very rude to another witness, Amir Hussin, who was merely telling his version of things which was not to Shorty’s liking. It was gratifying that in one part, witness Amir Hussin testified that while he initially believed The NST and the other mainstream newspapers, he began to distrust their reports after reading Din Merican’s Blog which presented facts and news in a more balanced way. Hearing this from a witness in a court proceeding is very motivating that my writings have achieved its purpose – the promotion of truth and justice.

The A-GC team should have just been led by Puan Siti Badariah and Puan Mastura who appeared in the cd well behaved and composed. In the end, bad behaviour like the one shown by Shorty Tuan Hj Azizan only lends discredit to the A-GC and the government. Having seen this cd and my own personal observation in the Borders case where bookstore manager Nik Raina is being prosecuted by aggressive A-GC prosecutors, I can now understand why things go badly wrong for the government.

So, now we know that whenever the mainstream press is dragged through in a court room for telling lies in their newspapers, there will be suppression of that news. The same mainstream press that shouts out aloud about freedom of the press; about qualified privilege; about justification and fair reporting; practices the total opposite when treating individuals like Rosli Dahlan who is seeking to clear his name for the lies that had almost destroyed his career and life. They will bury his story. They will not give him his full vindication unless he sues them and make them accountable for their lies and deceit.

Now I understand why lawyers are fond of that phrase: Sue The Bastards!

Super Syed Mokhtar eyes MAS

February 22, 2013

Super Syed Mokhtar eyes Malaysia Airlines (MAS)

by Jose Barrock@www.kinbiz.com

Businessman Syed Mokhtar Albukhary is proposing to the Federal Government to take over national investment arm, Khazanah Nasional Bhd’s 6.3 percent equity interest in ailing Malaysia Airlines, sources said.

While details of the businessman’s proposed takeover are not known, part of the deal may involve a long-term fuel subsidy by the government for as many as 60 years, they added.  However, one source close to Syed Mokhtar denied such a proposal to take over MAS. “We are strongly denying it….This is all just election play,” he said.

However two separate sources confirmed that such a deal is being contemplated at the moment although details are sketchy because it is still early yet. Khazanah did not respond to questions sent. At present, Syed Mokhtar’s airline related assets include the Sultan Ismail Airport in Johor, which is owned by Senai Airport Terminal Services Sdn Bhd. This was acquired from Malaysia Airport Holdings Bhd, another Khazanah controlled entity, for RM80 million in 2003.

Johor Port

He also controls two ports, Port of Tanjung Pelepas Sdn Bhd and Johor Port Bhd, both under his flagship MMC Corp Bhd. He is also understood to be close to buying Penang Port Sdn Bhd. MMC is also doing a due diligence of Keretapi Tanah Melayu, the state controlled train operator.

Syed Mokhtar controlled DRB-Hicom Bhd last year took over auto maker Proton Holdings Bhd, and postal services operator Pos Malaysia Bhd. This adds on to DRB-Hicom’s existing banking, property and automobile distribution and assembly business.  The businessman’s current thrusts seem to be hinged on entering into all the key transportation and logistic areas in  Malaysia. But his reach extends far beyond that.

Many choice assets under Syed Mokhtar

 Syed Mokhtar’s flagship company is MMC in which he has a 51.76 percent equity interest. MMC’s interests include power generation via Malakoff Bhd, the two ports and engineering and water distribution among a whole host of others assets.

Recently Puncak Semangat Sdn Bhd, a company believed to be linked to the businessman was awarded the lion’s share of the 2.6 GHz spectrum for 4G-LTE (long term evolution). Puncak Semangat bagged 40 MHz, while the other seven were only awarded 20 MHz.

Recent news reports have speculated that Syed Mokhtar is looking to take over NCB Holdings Bhd’s port operation arm Northport (M) Bhd, after he bid for Penang Port Sdn Bhd.  Other than MMC and DRB his other vehicle is Tradewinds (M), which has plantations, sugar distribution and a monopoly of rice distribution via Padiberas Nasional Bhd.

The businessman had also attempted to buy PLUS Expressways Bhd from Khazanah, but that attempt was thwarted by Khazanah owned UEM Group Bhd and the Employees Provident Fund (EPF).

Many market watchers are questioning why so many choice assets are being sold to Syed Mokhtar. Hs aides defend the moves.  “But to his credit, he takes control of the assets via bidding higher than other players.

For example about 10 years ago, Syed Mokhtar’s private company Restu Jernih (Sdn Bhd) bought 32 percent of Pernas (International Holdings Bhd which has since morphed into Tradewinds) for close to RM500 million (RM497 million) or about RM2.10 a Pernas share and 64 sen per Pernas warrant from Perbadanan Nasional Bhd. ….it was not a sweetheart deal, he paid much more than the market price for the company,” an aide of Syed Mokhtar says.

At that time he forked out more than a 200 per cent premium for the shares and warrants of Pernas.  Pernas was set up in 1969 to promote Malay capital ownership, but the lumbering giant corporation failed in its agenda, and bled losses for the longest time.

As such the deal was viewed by many as a bailout.  Some bankers view Syed Mokhtar as a systemic risk, with his ballooning debts. While debt levels are high, his businesses are sustaining and performing well. For instance, his flagship MMC, as at end September 2012, had RM17.72 billion in long term borrowings, while the company’s short term debt commitments stood at RM4.04 billion. Much of this debt level comes from 51 percent in power generation unit Malakoff Bhd.

DRB-Hicom meanwhile as at end September had non-current liabilities of RM4.07 billion and short term debt of RM2.27 billion.  Tradewinds (M) had long-term liabilities of RM2.04 billion and short term borrowings amounting to RM1.74 billion.

Mixed misfortunes

For the nine months ended September last year, Malaysia Airlines suffered a pre-tax loss of RM477.96 million from RM9.89 billion in sales, a loss per share of 14.48 sen. However Malaysia Airlines in its notes which accompany its financials said that it recorded an operating profit of RM4 million for the third quarter ended Sept 30, 2012, compared to RM191.8 million in operating losses, for the quarter ended Sept 30, 2011.  An analyst from a bank backed research outfit said that Malaysia Airlines in the past, had several problems, such as aging airplanes, and legacy issues, such as flying to many unprofitable destinations.

He says that things however are picking up, and he highlights the break even in operating profit in September last year. “The management is doing something right obviously,” he said. The analyst added that he expects the airline to post “convincing profits” in the final quarter of FY2012.

Tajuddin Ramli  MAS’ story is a sad one riddled with cases of mismanagement. Last year former controlling shareholder and executive chairman of MAS, Tajudin Ramli settled out of court three lawsuits the national carrier had against him.

Tajuddin who was closely linked to former Finance Minister Daim Zainuddin was the poster boy for Malay entrepreneurs, and was the airlines Executive Chairman from 1994 to 2001.  His entry into MAS in 1994 came about when the Government sold 32 percent of MAS to his vehicle Naluri for RM1.79 billion.

Then in 2000, the Government acquired Naluri’s 29 percent stake in MAS for RM8 per share, which was double its market price then.  After much legal wrangling, a High Court decision in December 2009 ordered MAS’ Chief to pay Danaharta, the state asset management manager, RM589.14 million plus two per cent interest per year over the base lending rate backdated to January 1, 2006.  But eventually Tajuddin settled out of court, for an undisclosed sum. Tajuddin meanwhile has claimed that his purchase was forced “national service”.

PKR: Politics of Principles Vs. Politics of Feudalism–Part II

October 12, 2012

Part II

PKR: Politics of Principles Vs. Politics of Feudalism

by Nathaniel Tan (10-12-12)@http://www.malaysiakini.com

COMMENT: It may be hard to completely free any democratic system based around electing representatives from feudal elements. Even I, an individual who makes his living from the Selangor government under Khalid Ibrahim, could be seen to be writing this article merely as a performance of my feudal duties.

I confess I hesitated somewhat, thinking about the consequences of putting my name to an article that will appear to take sides – blacklisting by certain party factions, possible enmity from old friends and acquaintances, and so on.

I reasoned however, that if we allow this culture of fear to restrain us, then the rest of what we fight for becomes worthless anyway. In any case, I will leave it to my words and to the reader to determine my objectivity or lack thereof.

In comparing our options for future menteris besar and leaders of our country however, the question of core, essential values certainly comes into play, and I daresay there is a big difference as to the level to which they play feudal politics.

The choices an individual makes and the paths he or she take through life obviously have a profound impact on their character and behaviour.

Here, it is relevant to compare the career politician versus the non-career politician – the former having always been in politics (usually starting in one’s early twenties as a secretary of some sort to a bigshot politician), the latter for whom active politics is a later vocation.

Career politicians tend to view everything from a political angle – such of course is their training and upbringing. Every decision they make calculates and takes into consideration political implications – for their career, their party, their public image and so on.

In and of itself, this is not necessarily a bad thing – merely a professional byproduct.

The danger only begins when an excess of thinking in this manner consciously or subconsciously causes one to put political concerns or ambitions (such as how to gain access to resources in order to build a giant political base of underlings) before matters of principle.

Khalid: Just do the right thing

Khalid is seen to sit at the opposite end of this spectrum. He seems to have spent precious little time building a feudal base or political network of any sort, a move many consider unwise.

In fact, the degree to which he does not seem to factor in political calculations and implications into his decisions – whether it be regarding his party or his public image – is sometimes a cause of frustration to his staff.

The man’s insistence on doing what is right instead of doing what looks right does sometimes make life difficult for those whose job it is to make him look good.

Khalid seems to adhere first and foremost to a simple, almost naive philosophy: just do the right thing. Everything else – what people may think of you now, what ‘message’ a certain action sends, or what effect this may have on one’s personal political career – seems always to fade into the background.

Selangor’s current Menteri Besar is far from perfect – I’m sure there are a hundred things he could do better or differently, and I’m sure many wish he would be more open to suggestion.

Certainly, the things written in this article do not apply to all of Khalid’s detractors or critics – it would be horribly inaccurate to paint them all with the same brush. Many, no doubt, have valid criticisms to make.

Many more however, have resorted to acting in the manner of dogs of war let slip by puppeteering lords. You only have to look closely at the networks, the choice of language, and the glaring lack of substance with regard to policy discourse to differentiate between those who want a better Selangor for everyone, and those who merely want their lord to replace the incumbent.

Consistent principles

Imperfect though Khalid is, I think time has shown that there are things he cares deeply about.

His ideology is not complicated, but it is consistent: that there is a proper, professional way of running things, and that there is a proper, professional way to ensure that what belongs to the rakyat, reaches the rakyat.

Where others view success in terms of how much they control, Khalid is a man who views success as a job properly done – he takes pride not in how much he influences, but in seeing things done in a manner consistent with just, sustainable principles.

If there is one thing the man hates, it is people who makan gaji buta (profit without working). He has very exact views on what constitutes a reasonable profit margin, and pursues the elimination of the Ali Baba middlemen class with a vengeance.

As you can imagine, this attitude does not always sit well with people who believe that a government has certain ‘financial obligations’ to party members who helped put them there. Perhaps such quarters think that with another man in power, things will be a little more well oiled.

Khalid’s insistence on proper principles first, and everything else later makes him a unique oddity amongst the many politicians we have had the blessing or misfortune to rise to the top.

True to form, throughout this latest round of controversy, he has played the perfect gentleman – much as he has his entire tenure as Menteri Besar. Will this strategy be enough to keep him from being removed by forces within the party as a candidate in Selangor?

Only time will tell, but it would appear that until that moment comes, Khalid will still be working quietly but diligently, trying to do the right thing.

Yesterday – PKR: Politics of Principles Vs. Politics of Feudalism–Part 1

What Dr Mahathir told war survivor Soros

September 27 ,2012

by Steven Gan of Malaysiakini. com

EXCLUSIVE: Former Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad told billionaire financier George Soros, a survivor of the Second World War, how he had personally witnessed a British soldier being killed by Japanese troops.

In a three-page personal letter he wrote to Soros six years ago to seek the support of his then-nemesis for his Perdana Leadership Foundation’s global anti-war efforts, Mahathir recalled the unforgettable incident in Alor Setar during the Japanese invasion of Malaya.

“The bayoneting death of a young British soldier by the Japanese in my hometown had left a lasting impression on me,” Mahathir wrote in his January 11, 2006 letter, a copy of which is with Malaysiakini.

“It may seem a minor incident but I cried for this young boy, 8,000 miles from home and family, feeling the bayonet piercing his body. And he screamed two or three times. And then there was silence. I was a teenager and I could not help imagining the thing happening to me. How could we kill people so cruelly and feel no sense of guilt.”

According to author Barry Wain in his book, Malaysia Maverick, this was one of the traumatic events that shattered Mahathir’s teenage innocence, and “thoroughly politicised him and changed the course of his life”.

Horrors of war

Soros himself is no stranger to the horrors of war. Born in Budapest, Hungary, to a Jewish family, he survived the Battle of Budapest, where German and Soviet troops fought house-to-house during the last days of the Second World War. In 1947, still a teen, Soros migrated to post-war England.

Mahathir had written to Soros to urge the much-maligned currency speculator to join him in his Global Peace Forum, which sought to criminalise war and outlaw it as an option to settle international conflicts.

“I write to invite you to lend your name to this effort to achieve the ultimate human rights – the right to life,” Mahathir says in his January 11, 2006 letter.

Both Octogenarians – Mahathir is 87 and Soros, 82 – have had a bitter war of words, with Mahathir calling Soros a “moron” and blaming the currency speculator for igniting the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis, while Soros hit back by describing the Malaysian Premier as a “menace to his country”.

Mahathir also says in the letter: “We regard killing a person as a crime punishable with the most extreme punishment.It seems to me hypocritical – on the one hand, regarding killing as murder and a serious crime, and at the same time training our young men to kill people, ordering them to kill and glorifying their deeds.”

‘Identical views’

In highlighting their common war-time experiences both men had witnessed when they were in their teens, Mahathir had hoped that the billionaire philanthropist would “lend his name” to the global anti-war movement.

“Whatever may be the differences between us, we seem to have identical views on war, i.e. on killing people in the pursuit of a national agenda.”

It is not known what Soros had said in his response to Mahathir, but it is likely to have been a polite “no”, given that he did not join the Global Peace Forum.

Mahathir met with Soros in Kuala Lumpur 11 months after his letter to the billionaire financier, during which the two foes buried the hatchet.

Following the meeting, Mahathir said he accepted that Soros was not involved in the devaluation of Malaysia’s currency. However, four days ago, Mahathir dug up the hatchet and took another stab at Soros, claiming that the international financier was seeking regime change in Malaysia.

The enmity between Mahathir and Soros can be traced back to the early 1990s when Bank Negara Malaysia – then considered by financial observers as a rogue central bank for dabbling heavily in high-risk currency speculation – lost a whopping RM5.7 billion to the likes of Soros.

Yesterday: Dr M asks for Soros’ help in peace project

Double Standards in Sentencing

August 23, 2012

by Azmi Sharom (08-22-12)@www.thestar.com.my

There are times we hail court decisions and there are times we find them bizarre. But if we ignore the incredible disparities in some court decisions, it is only at our own peril.

HOSLAN Hussein (left) gets one year in jail for inaccurately chucking (he missed) his slippers at a judge. Noor Afizal Azizan gets a fine and zero jail time for raping a 13-year-old girl.

It boggles the mind. Hoslan’s sentence, in my view, was very harsh and over the top. But even if one were to believe that the sanctity of the courts is so fragile that a punitively deterrent punishment is required for the flinging of footwear, it is impossible to ignore the incongruous disparity in the punishments meted out to these two men for crimes of such vastly different seriousness.

Much has been said about the judge’s unbelievable comment when sentencing Noor Afizal. Apparently being a national bowler with a bright future is enough to let you escape jail time for rape.

Actually, what is this “bright future” the judge is thinking about? The man is a child rapist; he confessed to it. He should not be allowed to represent the country in anything at all.

And in case you think there are mitigating issues in this case, namely that the sexual act was supposedly consensual, allow me to argue otherwise. In this case, the girl was under the age of consent. This means the crime committed is statutory rape. The issue of consent does not even arise in such cases.The reason for this is because we as a society have long ago determined that the young girls of our community deserve protection.

It does not matter in the slightest that children mature at different rates; what matters is that in general, this society believes that girls under the age of 16 are not yet ready to make decisions regarding their own sexual activity.

There are mental, psychological and also physiological elements to this need for protection. The sexual act by itself could have implications for a child’s well-being, but a child from our society would surely be traumatised in the event that she got pregnant and had to face either childbirth or abortion. Furthermore in immature bodies, the experience can also be seriously harmful physically.

I use the term “a child from our society” because I realise the age of consent will differ from nation to nation and culture to culture. But in the case of statutory rape, there is no room for comparative anthropology. What matters is what we value for our girls.

I always believe that Malaysians care for our children. We want them to have a sound and safe childhood so that they can go to school and build a strong foundation for their future.

This is why we want to protect them for as long as possible, for it is this safety that helps to establish an environment where they can mature and flourish at a pace which we believe is healthy.

The Judge in making his decision could not possibly have been thinking about this bigger picture.

For if he had, he would have realised that his judgment was not only about Noor Afizan and the girl he violated, but also about all the girls in this country and our collective concern for them.

The Judge has in effect dealt a blow to one of the few noble values that the people of this country universally accept — that our children should be cared for and be protected.