Crackdown Against Pakatan and NGO Leaders

May 23, 2013

by Koh Jun Lin@http://www.malaysiakini.com

PKR Vice-President and Member of Parliament for Batu Tian Chua as well as Anything But Umno (ABU) Chief Haris Ibrahim, were arrested seperately this afternoon, in relation to a recent anti-electoral fraud ceramah in Kuala Lumpur.

They were later joined by former Batu Berendam MP and PAS member Tamrin Ghafar (right), who also spoke at the forum, after he, too, was arrested by the police in Bangsar this afternoon. All three were taken to the Jinjang Police station.

At a press conference later, Kuala Lumpur CPO Mohmad Salleh confirmed the trio’s arrest under Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act. This is in relation to speeches that they have made during the talk at the Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH) on May 13.

Tian Chua, via Twitter, said he was taken  at the low-cost carrier terminal (LCCT) in Kuala Lumpur, just as he was about to pass a security check point.
He was catching a flight to Kuala Terengganu for the ‘Blackout 505 rally’ scheduled to be held there tonight. The Batu MP claimed that he was informed he was being detained under Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act 1948.

Meanwhile, according to PSM secretary-general S Arulchelvan (right, in photo), Haris (centre) was picked up by five Policemen as he was lunching with friends in Segambut, including Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia’s (SABM) Jayanath Appudurai.

Jayanath informed Malaysiakini that the group was approached about noon by five police personnel.

“I overheard them saying something about the Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH) and Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act.I believe the arrest was on the same grounds as that of Adam Adli Abdul Halim,” Jayanath said.

Haris was one of the speakers at the post-electoral forum, organised by Suara Anak Muda Malaysia (SAMM) that was held at KLSCAH on May 13.

It was during this forum that 23-year-old student activist Adam (left in photo) made an allegedly seditious speech for which he arrested last Saturday and charged in court this morning.

In fact, Haris, who is also a lawyer, was present in court earlier today to show support for Adam.

Lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, who is at the Police station, confirmed the arrest of Tamrin, who is the son of former Deputy Prime Minister the late Tun Ghafar Baba. “He is in front of me now,” said Malik Imtiaz.

Meanwhile, Solidariti Anak Muda Malaysia (SAMM) chief Badrul Hisham Shaharin, better known as Chegubard, tweeted that a team of Police officers had been to his mother’s home in Seremban, looking for him.

The prominent blogger – who is also a PKR grassroots leader – had been a speaker at the forum, as well as being its organiser.

When asked if all of the speakers at the forum would be arrested, Kuala Lumpur’s top cop remained coy in his response. “We will look at how the investigations go and see,” Mohmad said

Malaysian Cabinet formed but legitimacy crisis continues

May 15, 2013

Malaysian Cabinet formed but legitimacy crisis continues

By Anil Netto

PENANG – Large crowds have turned out in protests in major cities on peninsular Malaysia in response to a general election marred by allegations of irregularities and vote-buying. As the protests spread across the country, the Opposition coalition Pakatan Rakyat’s challenge has the potential to destabilize Prime Minister Najib Razak’s new government.

Despite winning less than half of the national vote, BN now controls 10 out of 13 federal states due to its careful carving of constituencies.

In the central state of Selangor, some 100,000 thronged a stadium in the first major protest three days after the May 5 polls. Thousands more attended a simultaneous protest at the Rusila Mosque in Terengganu on the peninsula’s east coast. These were followed by another large turnout of close to 100,000 at another stadium, in the northern state of Penang, on May 11.

On Sunday night, some 30,000 crammed into the streets of Ipoh, the capital of the state of Perak, for yet another rally. More rallies are expected this week, including in Johor Bahru in the south and Kuantan on the east coast of the peninsula. Smaller groups of Malaysians have congregated in cities abroad, including in Melbourne, Taiwan, and Singapore.

At all the rallies participants have dressed in black to symbolize a democracy “blackout”. The de facto Pakatan Rakyat (PR) leader Anwar Ibrahim and other coalition politicians have made several rousing speeches decrying fraud and irregularities at the polls. They have also made their case with international audiences, including in interviews with big global broadcasters.

In a campaign that highlighted rampant corruption and cronyism in the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition, the PR won almost 51% of the popular vote at the polls. But with constituencies gerrymandered to favor less-populated rural areas traditionally held by BN, PR won only 40% of parliament’s 222 seats. (BN captured 133 parliamentary seats to the PR’s 89.)

PR retained the state governments of Penang and Selangor, both developed states that it has governed since 2008, and the rural east coast state of Kelantan and lost narrowly in the northern state of Kedah.

Despite winning less than half of the national vote, BN now controls 10 out of 13 federal states due to its careful carving of constituencies. In Perak state, which PR captured in 2008 only to lose power after a few of its elected representatives defected, the BN won only 43% of the popular vote but still captured the state assembly, winning 31 state seats to the PR’s 28.

Subramaniam Pillay, a steering committee member of the civil society Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (BERSIH), notes that the last time constituencies were redrawn was in 2003, and that only a simple majority in parliament and the state assemblies is required to redraw electoral boundaries – though a two thirds majority is required to increase the number of seats.

PR’s three component parties are expected to challenge the results in some 30 parliamentary constituencies where the BN won with small majorities. They have 21 days from the date the results are officially gazetted later this month to submit court petitions.

They could also file more general suits relating to vote-buying and constitutional issues related to the conduct of a caretaker government. Bersih, which has staged massive street rallies in the past against BN’s perceived manipulation of the electoral system in its favor, has said it would set up a “People Tribunal” to investigate the allegations of fraud and irregularities.

Najib, for his part, claimed a “Chinese tsunami” (a reference to the ethnic Chinese who represent 25% of the population) voted down BN candidates in many urban areas. Utusan Malaysia, owned by Najib’s United Malays National Organization (UMNO) party, took the cue with a headline splashed on its front and back pages asking “What more do the Chinese want?”.

BN’s insistence on viewing the country’s fast-changing political landscape through a race-tinted lens is consistent with its old style of politics, which is theoretically based on power-sharing among race-based political parties in BN but in reality is dominated by the ethnic Malay-led UMNO.

The contrast with the PR’s self-proclaimed “new politics” could not be more pronounced. Multi-ethnic demonstrators have said they represent a “Malaysian tsunami” that wants good governance, clean and fair elections and an end to corruption, and an end to the BN’s practice of exploiting ethnic divisions.

“Some commentators here have missed the whole point: we are not saying the opposition will take over the government or whether the elections results can be verified and fraud detected,” said Jeremiah Liang, who left a comment on a blog. “No. The real change is that the people of Malaysia, from all races and mostly urban, starting with Selangor and then to other states, are saying to the incumbent government: You have lost the people’s mandate to lead and to govern.”

The Police have responded by threatening to investigate 28 speakers at recent rallies for sedition, an offense, punishable by imprisonment, that the BN has long used to stifle criticism of its rule. The organizers of the various rallies will also be investigated for allegedly violating the Peaceful Assembly Act, which requires they give 10 days notice to the police before staging rallies. Should the government make mass arrests, the situation could tilt towards instability, some analysts believe.

To what extent election fraud, including allegations of voting buying in the crucial North Borneo states of Sabah and Sarawak, can be proven with sufficient evidence to overturn the results remains questionable. PR parties will face significant constraints to scrutiny in interior and difficult-to-access rural areas long controlled by BN politicians.

However, in one significant expose, the social reform group Aliran found people lining up for payments ranging from 150-200 ringgit (US$50-67) over the weekend in a few nondescript locations based on vouchers received before polling day. Some of those lining up for payments but who didn’t receive cash were told they would only receive payment if the BN candidate in their area won.

Others says the real source of fraud lies in the integrity of the electoral rolls. The BN’s granting of identity cards or citizenship documents to migrants in Sabah that allow them to vote had been the subject of a royal commission of inquiry but was postponed ahead of the election.

The Election Commission, meanwhile, has received flak for using indelible ink that disappears with mild scrubbing. With 260,000 military and police personnel eligible for early voting five days before official polling, the issue has raised concerns that BN-loyal security officials may have voted more than once.

The PR’s focus on electoral irregularities and gerrymandering may mask somewhat the coalition’s failure to deliver its clean governance message in grass roots rural areas. Many of the rural voters receive their news from television, radio and newspapers tightly controlled by the BN-led federal government, while few have access to more independent Internet-based news.

If PR did get its message across, it may not have resonated with rural voters as it did with urban ones. For instance, its pledges to reduce highway tolls, provide free higher education and usher in good governance lacked popular resonance in remote areas of Sabah and Sarawak where direct BN populist hand-outs maintained voter loyalty.

Among rural voters and some urban voters there were no doubt concerns that they would lose out if the BN’s affirmative action policies were replaced by the PR’s promise of more meritocracy in the distribution of state funds. While PR had indicated it would adopt a more needs-based – rather than race-based – approach, old insecurities remain.

Other weaknesses in the PR campaign included disputes over seat allocations among component parties that led to several multi-cornered contests that split votes in pro-PR areas. The late selection of PR candidates also gave them little time to familiarize themselves with the area and electorate in Malaysia’s short campaign period.

Despite these weaknesses, Anwar has announced plans to hold more rallies. While it still seems unlikely these will morph any time soon into a larger Arab Spring-like movement that overturns the result, the rallies and the allegations add to the pressure on Najib, who is clearly struggling to come to terms with the erosion of BN popular support.

Anil Netto is a Penang-based writer.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/SEA-01-150513.html

Singapore and Malaysia- A Tale of Two Nations

May 13, 2013

by Mariam Mokhtar@http://www.malaysiakini.com

The greatest fear of the Singapore government is a Malaysia that is better governed and less corrupt. The extraordinary events in Malaysia over the past few years, plus the courageous stand of her citizens in the last few days, has been closely monitored from across the causeway.

If the infection spreads, the pent up feelings of Singaporeans may be unleashed. The two nations have a shared history.

Singapore may be a first world nation, but when it comes to an outpouring of feelings, the Singaporeans still look up to their cousins in Malaysia.

Dictatorship could be described as the new democracy in our neck of the woods; UMNO Baru’s Najib Abdul Razak together with his Singaporean counterpart, Lee Hsien Loong, have every reason to be rattled by the ‘Anwar Ibrahim phenomenon’.

Not since independence has Malaysia been rocked by a political force which has captured the rakyat’s sense of frustration at the nation’s existing archaic order.

The older generation are weary of the wanton waste of resources, the lack of discipline shown by its leaders and the disintegration of society. The young yearn for a new order where their contributions are acknowledged, where everyone is treated as equals and where they are rewarded for hard work, rather than their connections or lineage.

Anwar has articulated their needs and galvanised the rakyat into action. Two weeks ago, some Malaysians residing in Singapore were cautioned by the Singapore Police for reminding Malaysians to return home to vote. A few days ago, some were arrested in Merlion Park for protesting about the fraud perpetrated during GE13. The Singaporean government does not like its citizens to have a mind of their own.

Najib wants Malaysia to be “the best democracy in the world”, but the hallmarks of his version of democracy are cheating, intimidation and bribery. In Singapore, the authorities also intimidate and take legal action against anyone who dares besmirch the characters of its leaders.

In Malaysia, insecure Malays reject the DAP because of the implied threat that Malaysia will be swallowed up by Singapore. Their fears are enhanced by some Chinese Malaysians, who look up to an idealised version of Singapore. Singapore absorbed many of them into learning institutions, gave them scholarships and jobs. These Malaysians forget that the price paid for Singapore’s transformation into a first world nation has been high.

‘Soulless inhabitants’

What use are towers that reach up to the sky when deep down, its inhabitants lack a soul?  Children suffer from mental health issues because of academic pressures. Adults complain of a poor work-life balance. Many Singaporeans are unhappy and a number of them have migrated.

When Anwar held a talk at the London School of Economics a few years ago, the event was oversubscribed and several hundred participants were accommodated in an adjoining lecture theatre to listen to him via video link.

The audience were mainly young adults in their early twenties, but the most amazing thing, was that a sizeable proportion were Singaporeans.

Many people disagreed with me, when in an article, I mentioned the possibility that Singapore feared a strong, successful and less corrupt Malaysia, and that the People’s Action Party (PAP) would prefer UMNO Baru to govern Malaysia, rather than an Anwar-led administration.

Without a doubt, Singapore is clean, its public transport is efficient, the entertainment and the promotion of the arts is good, English is widely spoken, it is very safe, local and international cuisines are easily available, and the island state is an important international transport hub.

In many ways, Singapore is like Malaysia. Both have state-controlled media, its Armed forces are dominated by one race, and they are ruled by autocratic governments. The cost of living is high, housing and car ownership are expensive.

Both Malaysia’s UMNO Baru government and the Singapore PAP have alienated themselves from the population.

Although change is within the grasp of the ordinary Malaysian, change in the near future is only a dream for many Singaporeans. Wasn’t it Lee Kuan Yew (left) who once said, “…I spent a whole lifetime building this, and as long as I am in charge, nobody is going to knock it down.”

Like Dr Mahathir Mohamad, will Lee ever relinquish his hold on the island?

Last month’s Global Witness exposé highlighted the flip-side of the financial world of Singapore. It appears that dodgy South-East Asian governments and drug barons find Singapore a convenient place to launder money.

To add to Singapore’s woes, there are the worldwide syndicated football rigging and sex scandals which have rocked the world.  Only the naive would think that corruption does not exist in Singapore – they are simply better at concealing their underhanded practices. An acquaintance who handled the Malaysian side of business for a Singapore firm, alleged that he was given a sizeable allocation to sweeten any business deals in Malaysia.

The Singaporeans like to project a clean image, but it is the Malaysians who gets the bad  reputation.

The government of Singapore is concerned by the moral awakening in their people, but they fear most the economic repercussions if UMNO Baru were to be replaced. If Anwar’s administration gave Malaysians meritocracy, and excellent learning institutions were open to all, the majority of Malaysians would not need to go to Singapore to study.

No more brain drain?

There are tales of children being woken up at 4am to travel to Singapore to go to school because their parents could not enrol them in a local Malaysian school. Bright children are deprived of scholarships because they belong to the wrong race or religion. Families are broken up when some family members moved to Singapore for employment.

Singapore has every right to be scared if UMNO Baru were ousted. The brain drain would stop. If working conditions in Malaysia were improved, the daily migration of workers to Singapore would be stemmed and Singapore might suffer a shortage of workers. If corruption was reduced, Malaysia would attract more foreign investment.

The feeling of xenophobia is high in Singapore, and is mostly directed at the Chinese from the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Singaporeans consider them to be loud, brash, arrogant and lacking in culture. They are wary of their government’s desire to attract more people from the PRC to increase the dwindling population, to take care of the elderly and to bolster the economy.

The recent wave of xenophobia in Malaysia was generated by UMNO Baru because it gave away identity cards (ICs) to foreigners – like the Filipinos and Indonesians – in exchange for votes to stay in power.

Leaders in UMNO Baru have lost valuable Malaysian land to the Singaporeans, such as the Pedra Banca island off Johor and the land swap deal involving Keretapi Tanah Melayu (KTM) land in Singapore.

To increase their land mass, Singaporeans have obtained sand from Malaysia, through legal and illegal means. The buying power of the Singapore currency means that they can buy property cheaply in Malaysia and in some places, have priced the locals out of the housing market.

In Ipoh, Singaporeans have built skyscrapers beside limestone hills and many locals fear that this has set a precedent and before long, the natural beauty of Ipoh will be marred forever. The Perak UMNO Baru seem oblivious to the concerns of the locals.

A clean and efficient government can improve our economy, but UMNO Baru will continue to hamper our progress. Without cronyism and corruption, Malaysia will emerge a stronger, richer nation, no longer the poor relation of Singapore.

Muhasabah Lahad Datu

April 6, 2013

oleh Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang@http://www.themalaysianinsider.com

5hb April, 2013–Peristiwa berdarah di Lahad Datu menjadi ujian kebijaksanaan kerajaan dan kesetiaan seluruh rakyat terhadap negara.

Walau pun berbeza kaum, agama dan fahaman politik, namun tugas mempertahankan negara apabila diceroboh dan keselamatannya diganggu gugat adalah kewajipan bersama mengikut agama, adat dan akal yang waras.

Maka Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS) dan seluruh ahlinya mendoakan Allah melimpahkan rahmat kepada anggota keselamatan yang terkorban dan dimasukkan ke dalam kalangan para syuhada, sekurang-kurangnya syahid akhirat dan disembuhkan mereka yang tercedera, serta dikembalikan keamanan dan keselamatan negara.

Walau bagaimana pun muhasabah wajib dilakukan terhadap kerajaan yang diamanahkan menjaga keselamatan negara. Dalam hal ini pihak tentera dan polis tidak boleh dipersalahkan, kerana banyak asas dari sudut politik yang kukuh menunjukan bahawa peristiwa seperti itu tidak sepatutnya berlaku.

Pasukan keselamatan juga tidak sepatutnya menjadi mangsa korban musuh yang tercipta dengan sebab kecuaian politik mereka yang memimpin negara sejak mencapai kemerdekaan lebih 50 tahun yang lalu.

Persoalan asas yang kita ingin tanya ialah: “Mengapa asas keharmonian yang sedia ada di daerah itu tidak dijaga dan dibina dengan baik?”

Hakikatnmya ialah, kedudukan serantau, kejiranan, serumpun, sekelurga dan se agama cuma dipisahkan oleh sempadan geografi dua negara. Malaysia mempunyai hubungan kejiranan dengan Filipina, dan sama-sama menjadi anggota ASEAN sejak penubuhannya pada 8 Ogos 1967 lagi.

Orang-orang Suluk, atau grup etnik Tausug pula mempunyai hubungan keluarga, agama dan budaya yang sama dengan sebahagian besar penduduk keturunan Sulu di Sabah yang sukar dipisahkan. Hubungan rapat ini menjadikan aktiviti keluar-masuk antara rakyat kedua-dua negara berada pada kedudukan yang paling sukar untuk dikawal secara keras oleh pasukan keselamatan yang bertugas.

Tragedi ini berlaku kerana pihak politik yang berkuasa tidak menyelesaikan akar-usul masalah ini secara bijaksanaan sehingga berlakulah kemalangan yang sangat menyayat hati itu. Di samping kemarahan membara terhadap penceroboh yang tidak beretika, namun sifat kemanusiaan tetap berada dalam setiap orang yang berperasaan.

Muhasabah wajib dilakukan dengan meneliti dan memahami kerana beberapa perkara.

Pertama, pemisahan secara sempadan negara yang berbeza dimulakan oleh penjajah asing terhadap rantau ini, mereka sengaja meninggalkan bom jangka selepas mereka meninggalkan tanah jajahan dengan niat jahat, setelah mereka melaksanakan agenda pecah dan perintah di zaman penjajahan dahulu. Bukan sahaja pembahagian rantau ini di antara penjajah Inggeris, Belanda dan Sepanyol dan selepasnya Amerika juga mengambil tempat di Filipina secara khusus.

Kedua, perjanjian juga di buat oleh penjajah ini secara menipu sultan-sultan dan raja-raja yang dilemah dan dihilangkan kedaulatannya.

Ketiga, setelah masing-masing mencapai kemerdekaan dengan negara yang berbeza dan mempunyai kedaulatannya, mengapa segala syarat perjanjian yang sudah lapuk di zaman penjajah yang sudah pulang ke negeri masing-masing, dengan pihak yang sudah diletakkan dalam lipatan sejarah masih lagi wujud? Mengapakah pihak kerajaan dalam negara kita ini masih menghidupkan lagi perjanjian seperti ini?

Keempat, negara Malaysia dan Filipina pula yang terlibat secara lansung dalam perjanjian damai yang memberi kuasa otonomi kepada bangsa Moro di Mindanao. Mengapa terlepas pandang terhadap wiliyah dan kepuluan yang lain bersamanya, sehingga penyelesaiannya tidak lengkap dan masalahnya tidak selesai?

Perkembangan pendidikan, ekonomi dan sosial terbiar dan terus terbiar, kerana kerajaan UMNO lebih menumpukan kepentingan politik mengejar kerusi mendapat takhta dan harta semata-mata, tanpa perhatian terhadap pendidikan, ekonomi dan social di kawasan berkenaan. Rakyat miskin terus di rumah dalam air sejak turun temurun, hanya segelintir di daratan dengan kemudahan yang terhad tanpa penyelesaian.

Semua kecuaian tanpa cakna ini boleh menempah kesan negatif dalam kehidupan dan boleh mencetuskan ketegangan berbagai kaum. Semua perkara ini perlu dimuhasabah dengan adil dan ikhlas walaupun tercalar diri sendiri.

Tindakan ketenteraan mempertahankan kedaulatan negara, langkah menjaga keselamatan rakyat wajib dilaksanakan dengan berhemat, dalam masa yang sama jalinan hubungan tersebut di atas wajib diperbetulkan.

Jangan ikut contoh buruk yang pernah dilakukan oleh penjajah semasa darurat dahulu, penyelsaiannya secara mengepung dan memaksa semata-mata tanpa pendekatan yang lain. Perlu difahami bahawa perasaan manusia tidak boleh dikepung dan dikongkong sepanjang masa, walau pun jasadnya dikepung dan dikongkong secara paksaan .

Peristiwa 13 Mei 1969 wajar menjadi iktibar apabila ianya ditangani sendiri oleh pemimpin di masa itu. Ditubuhkan Jawatankuasa Muhibbah melibatkan kerajaan dan seluruh pemimpin masyarakat, agama dan kaum yang berpengaruh tanpa mengira perbezaan agama, kaum dan politik. Seterusnya ditangani secara politik, ekonomi, pendidikan dan lain-lain.

Konfrantasi dengan Indonesia juga dapat ditamatkan dengan pendekatan ini, walau pun ada yang terkoban dan cedera, akhirnya berakhir dengan damai tanpa dendam.

Janganlah pihak kerajaan UMNO-BN terus menerus berdegil tidak mengaku kesilapan atau mahu menangguk di air keruh, kerana kedua-duanya akan menenggelamkan kita semua, atau laksana Pakistan yang melahirkan Bangladesh.

* Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang adalah Presiden PAS.

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.

 

Malaysia at (yet another) crossroads

April 1, 2013

The DRUM Opinion

by Gerhard Hoffstaedter and Greg Lopez

While Malaysia has achieved admirable economic success under its dominant coalition government, this has come at the expense of human rights and the free press. Now, the opposition is offering greater transparency, write Gerhard Hoffstaedter and Greg Lopez.

The Malaysian government and its multiple state governments have become caretaker governments and elections will have to be called before June 28, 2013 if the country wants to maintain the semblance of an electoral democracy.

Everything is at stake at these elections. Malaysia has been ruled as a country by one coalition since independence in 1957 and its hold on political power has been tenacious. The economy and society remains formidable.

Opposition coalitions have tried at every election to make inroads in a system clearly stacked against them. In 2008, there was a real breakthrough, with the opposition capturing five out of the 13 states of the federation and breaking the ruling coalition’s psychologically important 2/3 majority it had become accustomed to.

It is not easy to categorise the two opposing coalitions and its members, as they are disparate, complex, and, with multiple agendas, often fractured. The ruling coalition is run by UMNO, the United Malays National Organisation, with other constituent parties largely serving the Chinese and Indian populations as well as some indigenous communities of Sabah and Sarawak.

This consociational model of politics provided each major ethnic group a share in the political domain under the leadership of the Malays and an increasingly Islamicised UMNO. In return, the basic social, cultural and economic rights of the non-Muslims were guaranteed. With a plethora of positive discrimination for the Malays to become upwardly mobile, a new Malay middle class was created, which secured a peace between and among what in Malaysia are referred to as racial groups.

This coalition and its grasp on power has maintained this status quo, which has served the elite very well and achieved real economic success, at least on a national level, with Malaysia almost eliminating absolute poverty, recording impressive socioeconomic outcomes, building state-of-the art infrastructure, and achieving upper middle income status in less than half a century after independence.

However, outward peace and economic success were built on enduring human rights violations, a lack of a free press, corruption, and the capitulation of the civil sphere to reactionary and extremist nationalist and religious zealots.

The Opposition promises to unmake some of these strictures and aims to provide a more transparent form of governance, which it demonstrated in two of Malaysia’s most populous, rich and industrialised states – Selangor and Penang – which it has governed since 2008.

But the Opposition coalition is a looser coalition, made up of a predominantly Chinese party with socialist ideologies, Malaysia’s only Islamist party, and the People’s Justice party, headed by former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim. He remains a divisive figure in Malaysia. His democratic credentials (as well as his economic liberal ones) are well known in the West, but in Malaysia punters are more concerned with his sexuality. The ruling coalition will continue to pursue any opening it can to destabilise his appeal as elder statesman.

Prime Minister Najib, meanwhile, is ignoring corruption charges in a French court over kickbacks in the purchase of French submarines and, more disconcertingly, questions about his involvement in the murder of a Mongolian model in Malaysia, who had acted as a translator in the said French submarine deal.

The campaign thus far has been fought by chipping away at both leaders’ capacity to elder statesmen and their ability to lead a divided country. The ruling coalition has, upon advice from an American PR company, rolled out a more inclusive image of its administration and vision for Malaysia, epitomised under its “1Malaysia” concept that now features on shop fronts, medical centres and government offices.

It has not, however, reined in the divisive reactionary movements and NGOs that call for Sharia to be the supreme law in the country or that continue to call non-Malays ‘sojourners’ in ‘their’ land.

To overcome the divided body politic, it will require a leader of substance and integrity. For many, that continues to be Anwar Ibrahim, while others are less sure. But without any alternatives, the stage is set for a bruising and expensive campaign with the highest of stakes and the lowest of strategies – in terms of quality – to get there.

Australia has largely been able to accommodate and deal with even the intransigent Mahathir, so continuing with a Najib administration will suit it just fine. In fact, Najib signed off on the Malaysia solution, or refugee swap deal, has furthered economic ties, and has been a gracious host to Australian delegations, bar one.

Independent Senator Nick Xenophon learnt the hard way, being the wrong person at the right time for Najib Razak and UMNO to show their mettle domestically. UMNO moving into overdrive in the home stretch made it clear that there is a magic, invisible line foreigners should not cross when ‘meddling’ in Malaysia’s affairs.

Any commentary on the democratic process in Malaysia is not sought from the officials and Australian interventions, even in election observation, is not tolerated. These are the limits of good neighbours like Malaysia in its current political climate.

If the Opposition wins, it is unlikely that there would be any fundamental departure in the overall Australia-Malaysia relationship as it is on solid footing. If anything, it would further improve bilateral relations as the opposition coalition’s stated aspirations of social justice are quite similar to Australia’s core values.

There are two outstanding issues currently – the Malaysia solution and the Lynas rare earth plant. In relation to the Malaysia solution, Australia would have to renegotiate and reassess its border protection plans as at present the opposition coalition does not have a clear refugee policy other than stating its commitments to current international norms. They may sign a range of international conventions including ones that would protect the rights of the refugees, and require that Australia process them onshore.

However, in signing the various international conventions, the ‘Malaysia solution’ would also meet the requirements of the Australian High Court decision and leave open the possibility of renegotiating them. The Lynas issue is more complex as it involves an approved investment. The issue has created a groundswell of popular domestic dissent, but the opposition has been ambiguous on what it would do if it comes into power.

But for now, all we can do is wait for the election to be (finally) called.

Gerhard Hoffstaedter is a lecturer in anthropology in the School of Social Science at the University of Queensland, and the author of Modern Muslim Identities: Negotiating Religion and Ethnicity in Malaysia. View his full profile here. Greg Lopez is a visiting fellow at the department of political and social change, Australian National University. View his full profile here.

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4603166.html

King Ghaz and the Question of the “Sabah Claim”

March 30, 2013

by Dato Hamzah Abdul Majid*

Fast forward to a morning in July 1962, I was reporting for duty at the Ministry of External Affairs (now Ministry of Foreign Affairs-Wisma Putra). The Ministry was located at the (then) Selangor State Secretariat Building (now Bangunan Sultan Abdul Samad), directly opposite  the (Royal) Selangor Club.  It shared the  building with the Treasury and a few other government departments.

Meeting King Ghaz (The Boss) of Foreign Affairs and his Professionals

I reported to the Assistant Secretary (Administration) Encik Hanafiah Ahmad (later Chief of Tabung Haji and now Tan Sri). A slight gentleman with glasses, he was friendly and helpful. With all the formalities completed, Encik Hanafiah took me to YM Tengku Ngah Mohamed, the Deputy Secretary of Ministry.

The pipe smoking Tengku Ngah informed me that I would be assigned to the Ministry’s Political Division reporting to my immediate superior, Principal Assistant Secretary (Political Division) Raja Aznam Raja Ahmad (later Tan Sri), a well- educated Malay aristocrat with impeccable manners.

Raja Aznam briefed me on the role of the Ministry and its structure, Right at the top was the Prime Minister (Tengku Abdul Rahman) and concurrently  Minister of External Affairs. The top  Diplomatic Service Officer was the Permanent Secretary, Encik Muhammad Ghazali Shafie.

Raja Aznam took me to the Permanent Secretary’s Office where I was introduced to the redoubtable Matthew Josef, Personal Assistant to the Boss. Josef looked at me and said, “The Permanent Secretary is expecting you. Come in, he will see you now, Good Luck.“

With that he took me into the Boss’ spacious wood-panel office. Directly in front of me were a set of sofa and 2 deep armchairs. To my left was a large somewhat semi-circular desk. Behind the desk was the Man himself. I recognised him at once. The same ear of a man that I met five years earlier in the Radio Malaya studio–in command, confident, even arrogant.

He then asked me if I knew that we had a diplomatic issue with Indonesia and the Philippines  over our intention to invite North Borneo and Sarawak  to form Malaysia. I told him only from I read in the newspapers. Again that glare. He snapped, “then, write me a brief summary of how you understand the situation…Get to work.”

Zainal Abidin Sulong and Jack de Silva

Raja Aznam introduced me to Zainal Abidin Sulong (later Tan Sri) who had just returned from a posting in the United Nations, New York. Zainal was an excellent office mate–well informed, calm, hardworking and with a sense of humour. He was always busy drafting. From time to time, the Boss would barge into the room and growl instructions to him.

Zainal (left)  would slowly stand up. listen patiently and, when the Boss left, quietly resume his work. He was widely liked and respected. His knowledge of the personalities involved in North Borneo, Sarawak, Singapore, Brunei and Indonesia was encyclopedic, and the Boss depended heavily on him.  Next to the Boss, I would say Zainal was to play an exceedingly important role in the formation of Malaysia.

In the next room was Jack de Silva, a Catholic and strongly anti-Marxist. He  had served as First Secretary  in our High Commission in London. Articulate, gregarious, chain smoking, Jack was a hard driving officer with a mercurial temperament and a prolific drafter of documents and reports. I got my ‘sea legs’ in the ministry while sharing the small office with Zainal.

Tunku’s Singapore Statement on the Formation of Malaysia

On May 27, 1961, the Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman had made a historic statement in Singapore proposing the formation of Malaysia. The (then) Federation of Malaya was intent on inviting British North Borneo (now Sabah) and Sarawak to join in and from a new nation, Malaysia.

Initially, the Philippine government did not react. But after the election of Diosdado Macapagal as president in December 1961 the “Sabah Claim” emerged as a factor. It had been on the “back burner” for a while, as it was an issue only between the Philippine and British governments.

The  “Sabah Claim”

Now with the formation of Malaysia becoming reality, the clamour in the Philippine media grew stronger. The momentum built up quickly, and emotions morphed into policy.

Indonesia, headed by President Sukarno regarded North Borneo and Sarawak as part of Indonesian Kalimantan and claimed to be the rightful heir when the British finally withdrew.

Thus Sukarno and Macapagal joined forces in opposition to the Tunku’s proposal. Macapagal (left) hoisted a Philippine “claim” on Sabah and Sukarno vowed to “ganyang” (crush) Malaysia.

Both Indonesia and the Philippines regarded the idea of Malaysia as a “Neo-colonialist plot”. They claimed that the British no longer had any moral authority to hold on to the two colonies and were using the concept of Malaysia to perpetuate their influence in the region.

The Boss  was the main figure in the gathering storm, helping Prime Minister and his illustrious Deputy, Tun Abdul Razak, and tasked to design and implement a strategy to bring about the formation of Malaysia.

A team of competent and dedicated officers in the ministry was assigned to assist the Boss. They did a Herculean task of keeping in touch with events and developments in North Borneo and Sarawak, in the United Nations,in our neigbouring countries, and among our allies.  It was a small but effective and ably led team.

Sometime in April, 1963, the Boss told me that there would be a meeting of top diplomatic officials of Malaya, Indonesia and the Philippines at the Padre Faura (the Philippine Foreign Ministry) in Manila. He would lead the Malaysian Delegation and I was to attend it as a member.

The Boss said, “You can stay with Bertie (now Dato Albert Tallala). You know Bertie, don’t you? I think you both the same University (in Dublin). Bertie (left) had graduated the year before I joined.

On the morning of the meeting, the Boss, Ambassador Zaiton Ibrahim Ahmad, First Secretary Hashim Sam-Latiff were greeted by Pete Angora Aragon, Chief of Protocol at the Padre Faura and taken to the reception room where Philippine Undersecretary Salvador P. Lopez and the Indonesian First Deputy Foreign Minister Dr. Suwito Kusumowidagdo were waiting. The three men greeted one another warmly. Lopez was the very epitome of Philippine charm and bonhomie and Dr Kusumo was all smiles. Each diplomat tried to project an air of earnest amity.

Right of Self Determination

This meeting was in every sense historic. It was the first time that the three adversary countries actually sat down at the official level to try to solve their problems diplomatically and avoid a military conflict. From the outset the Boss took the position that the two territories should not be viewed as pieces of real estate, devoid of human inhabitants, to be carved up and divided cynically by neighbouring countries.

There was need to ascertain the wishes of the people of the two territories, as was undertaken and reaffirmed by the Cobbold Commission in its Report dated August 1, 1962.

But both the Philippines and Indonesia did not accept the Cobbold Report as the last word on the wishes of the people of North Borneo and Sarawak.

Clearly, these officials could decide on the issue after several days of deliberations (April 9-17, 1963). It was finally agreed that the meeting would recommend to their respective governments that the Foreign Ministers of the three countries should meet early in May. They further agreed to recommend that the Foreign Ministers meeting should be followed by a meeting of the Heads of Government of the three countries.

Two more Tripartite meetings followed. One  was at the Foreign Ministers’ level on June 7-11, 1963, where our side was led by the Deputy Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak. The Philippine delegation was led by Vice President Emanuel Pelaez, Dr. Subandrio headed the Indonesian side. The Ministers reaffirmed in the Manila Accord (Clause 10) the principle of self-determination and “would welcome the formation of Malaysia provided support of people of the Borneo territories is ascertained by an independent and impartial authority, the Secretary-General of the United Nations or his representative”.

As quid pro, Malaysia “undertook to consult the Government of the Borneo territories with a view to inviting the Secretary-General of the United Nations or his representative to take the necessary  steps in order to ascertain the wishes of people of those territories.” (Clause 11).

Clause 12  reflected the long discussion on the issue of the Sabah claim and the subdued compromise that the Foreign Ministers “took note” of the Philippine claim to North Borneo and its rights to pursue it in accordance with international law and the peaceful settlement of  disputes. This was another fig leaf that we could live with, but it was  to lead to lingering tensions with the Philippines.

The successful June 7-11 Foreign Ministers meeting paved the way for the Summit Meeting of Malaya’s Tunku Abdul Rahman, Indonesia’s President Sukarno and Philippine President Macapagal which produced the Manila Declaration of August 5, 1963. The Heads of Government of Malaya, Indonesia and the Philippines “welcomed” the formation of Malaysia.

Eventually, with the fall of Sukarno and with the installation of the New Order government led by General Suharto, Malaysia reached an amicable solution with Indonesia. However, normalisation of relations with the Philippines took longer as the issue of the Sabah claim lingered on. In fact, bilateral relations underwent some strains over the issue.

Malaysia will not enter into any further dialogue on the Question of the Claim

A defining bilateral meeting was held in Bangkok, Thailand on July 15, 1968. The Philippine delegation was led by Ambassador Guerrero, an aggressive diplomat who played hardball. The Malaysian delegation included the brilliant lawyer R.Ramani (who was also our Permanent Representative to the United Nations), Zainal Abidin Sulong and Zain Azraai.

This meeting did not start, nor did it end for that matter, too auspiciously.The Philippine delegation began with tactical moves to cause delays and with sweeping dicta and claims. It declared that its claim on Sabah was valid based on history and on its own security arrangements and made clear that it would not entertain any further clarifications sought by Malaysia.

The Boss rose to the occasion and demolished the Philippine claim with devastating logic and I quote:

“…Our questions indicated that we wished to challenge your basic assumption that the Sultan of Sulu had in fact sovereignty over the territory. his rights and powers over which he purported to convey to Dent and Overbeck in 1878. We did receive any precise answer from you on this question; and you were unable to point to anything in support of the Sultan’s claim to sovereignty, except to say in the vaguest terms that the Sultan of Brunei had ceded the territory to him, and you mentioned several dates when such cessation was understood to have taken place…

“We drew your attention to various authorities which cited different dates when the Sultan of Sulu acquired some rights and powers over the territory. Was it therefore in 1650, or was it in 1704, or was it about 1836, or near 1842, or was it 1878? You yourself gave several possible dates. It did not seem to occur to you that each particular date destroyed every other date and the fact of cession was, thereby, at the highest, left in doubt. Nor were you able to indicate the circumstances of his acquisition, whether rebellion in the territories of Brunei, a war of succession or an act of capitulation…

“We drew your attention to the documents of that time…Whether your case should not go no further than mere assertion of Sulu sovereignty…You are unable to do so, and we did not any intelligible answer from you as this, except that you had not heard of the Anglo-Philippine Talks in London in 1963…

“… in fighting subversion and terrorism Malaysia has the best record in this region…Malaysia has a good record of cooperation with Thailand and Indonesia on these matters. It is common knowledge that Malaysia and Thailand have a working arrangement on the Malaysian/Thai border…likewise along the Malaysian/Indonesian border.”

He concluded his long address with…

“Let me say this once again, Excellency. Do not pursue your claim to Sabah in order to satisfy these economic and security needs. These can only be fulfilled through cooperation with us. But your persistent pursuit of the claim will destroy that cooperation and therefore will not achieve for you the very things which you desire most for your economy and security…

“Therefore, let us maintain the good relations between our two countries and discuss our common needs. But at the same time let it be clearly understood that my Government will not enter into any further dialogue on the question of the Claim, or with that claim as its basis”.

__________________

*The above by Dato Hamzah Abdul Majid is an abridged and edited excerpt of his tribute titled King Ghaz: Personal Recollection, which appears in the National Archives publication titled King Ghaz: A Man of Time (2010) edited by Dato Seri Utama Dr. Rais Yatim.

I have chosen parts that deal with the Philippine Claim on Sabah. It is intended to provide a historical account of what happened during the period leading to the formation of Malaysia in 1963. Dato Hamzah was a member of the Malaysian foreign policy team led by (Tun) Muhammad Ghazali Shafie that dealt with the struggle to form Malaysia.

Filipino politicians are now apparently using the Lahad Datu Incursion as a pretext to revive  this issue  of the Sultan of Sulu’s claim on Sabah which is now a sovereign state in Malaysia. As far as Dato Hamzah and I are concerned, this matter should be put to rest in the interest of good relations between the Philippines and our country. Sabah belongs in Malaysia and the Philippines must learn to respect the wishes of the people of Sabah to be part of Malaysia.–Din Merican

Also read this :http://www.dlsu.edu.ph/research/journals/apssr/pdf/200712/4Fernandez.pdf

Who is the Enemy?: Certainly not us Malaysians

March 28, 2013

by Dr. Kua Kia Soong@http://www.malaysiakini.com

COMMENT: As the Global Day of Action on Military Spending, GDAMS 3.0 (April 15, 2013) approaches, it is time for Malaysians to ask: Who are Malaysia’s enemies and what appropriate weaponry do we need?

One would think this is the first question the Ministry of Defence should ask in the multi-billion decisions to procure armaments now that the arms merchants are here again for LIMA 2013. Yet our National Defence Policy has never even been properly debated in Parliament.

Just a few months ago, the Ministry of Defence would not have said that Malaysia’s enemies were among the Suluks who have been coming back and forth between Southern Philippines and Sabah all these years.

After all, hadn’t we helped to train MNLF fighters there against Marcos in the seventies? Wasn’t this the reason why the Home Minister Hishamuddin Hussein(right) said that the invaders at Lahad Datu were “neither militants nor terrorists” during the two or three weeks that they were already there?

And haven’t we got a “Rapid Deployment Force” (10 Paratrooper Brigade) ready to be dispatched to any flashpoint? One wonders what flashpoint scenarios they are trained for?  Are they ready to be deployed only when there are secessionists fighting to take East Malaysia out of the federation? They certainly hadn’t been prepared for the Sulu Sultan’s army to “turn”.

Don’t be surprised if the “defence analysts” in the Ministry have now shredded all their previous analyses about Malaysia’s perceived “enemies”. With the new-found enemies of the Malaysian state, the arms lobby has at last found a raison detre for their fabulous arms procurements.

Heck, didn’t we finally get the chance to use our F18 fighter bombers and Hawk 208 fighter jets against this so-called “rag-tag army”? Wouldn’t armoured cars and tanks and mortars have sufficed in that four square kilometer area of land against that motley crew? In the end, were Malaysians given a clear picture of the efficacy of those fighter jet sorties?

Whatever the reasons for sending in the fighter bombers and jets, the international arms merchants have now come to town to peddle their wares. The French have started advertising their ‘Rafale’ fighter jets in our mainstream newspapers, alongside bargains by ‘Giant’ and ‘Tesco’ for the attention of Malaysians.

BAE are also desperately trying to flog their ‘Typhoon’ jet fighters in a RM10 billion deal they hope to clinch with a “Buy 1 – Get 1 free” gambit. They lost out recently to the French when the Indian government opted to buy 126 Rafale fighter jets instead, and are still fuming.

But do we need any fighter jets at all, considering their cost is spiraling way out of control and they so quickly become obsolete? They will be even more obsolete when future air wars are fought using drones (Unarmed Aerial Vehicles)!

Malaysians should be aware that the latest (US) F35 fighter jets cost at least half a billion ringgit a piece? Can we keep up with the race? What race? Who are we racing against? Who are our enemies?

Appropriate vessels for RMN

When the bombardment finally began at Lahad Datu, it was mentioned that the navy had formed a cordon to prevent the intruders from getting away. It became clear that there has never been a cordon to prevent any intruders from getting INTO Sabah all these years.

Looking at the geography of the area, it is evident that our two submarines (costing more than RM7 billion) sitting pretty in Sepanggar Bay and our six New Generation Patrol Vessels (costing RM9 billion) were not the most suitable vessels in such circumstances.

This mismatch raises the question of the need for our navy to prioritise the deployment of appropriate alternative vessels.  As part of the RM5 billion arms deal signed between Dr Mahathir and Margaret Thatcher in 1989, we procured two corvettes built by the Yarrow shipbuilders costing RM2.2 billion. (NST, Novembe 11, 1991).

At the time, the Royal Malaysian Navy said they required sixteen offshore patrol vessels but due to financial constraints, the RMN could only afford four or five of these locally-built OPVs. Mindef had budgeted RM85 million per OPV. (NST, November 25,1991).

Now, in the light of the latest incident at Lahad Datu, Malaysians will be in a better position to see the appropriate vessels that would be more suitable to secure the Sabah coastline.

Before the Lahad Datu incident, the main “enemies” testing the capacity of our armed forces were the pirates in the South China Sea and the Straits of Malacca.

There were no bigger “enemies” than those seafaring marauders. Are state-of-the-art fighter jets and submarines the appropriate defence equipment against pirates? These would likewise be inappropriate if “international terrorists” and suicide bombers choose to target Malaysia.

So, exactly how are decisions made in the Ministry of Defence to purchase the submarines, the corvettes, the frigates (costing billions) instead of more effective patrol boats to guard our coastlines?

ASEAN needs to take ZOPFAN more seriously

There is no end if we choose to embark on an arms race with our neighbouring countries. We simply cannot afford such an arms race and it is time ASEAN countries seriously talk about disarmament and joint defence agreements instead of an arms race within ASEAN.

Our economic priorities need to be diverted away from military production toward production for human needs, and public expenditure diverted to more and better social services throughout ASEAN.

Any disputes over territories should be settled through international arbitration as was done over Pulau Batu Putih with Singapore. The dispute of the Spratly Islands should be resolved the same way.

M’sian people not the enemy

The Lahad Datu incident should act as a wake-up call for the Malaysian government that seems preoccupied with treating its own people as the enemy. When we bear in mind that throughout the tenure of the Internal Security Act since 1960, more than 10,000 people had been incarcerated for being “threats to national security”.

But hardly any have been charged for any crimes involving violence against the state. Then again, there have been at least two cases of Malaysians who have been killed in neighbouring countries for alleged terrorist activities. Yet, none of them were ever arrested under the ISA!

This goes to show that our intelligence service has been focusing on the wrong suspects. As a former ISA detainee who was incarcerated for being a “threat to national security”, I can vouch for the wanton wastage of security personnel on Malaysians who are simply not “enemies of the state”.

When I think of the number of state operatives who had been spying on me, arresting me, guarding me, interrogating me, accompanying me on family and hospital visits, I immediately wonder how they could be better deployed to prevent crimes being committed and watching out for the real enemies of the state.  And when we multiply the cost 10,000 times since 1960, we will realize the enormous waste of human resources that could be better put to use!

It was recently reported in the New York Times (March 13, 2013) that Malaysia is among 25 countries using off-the-shelf spyware to keep tabs on citizens by secretly grabbing images off computer screens, recording video chats, turning on cameras and microphones, and logging keystrokes:

“Rather than catching kidnappers and drug dealers, it looks more likely that it is being used for politically motivated surveillance,” security researcher Morgan Marquis-Boire was quoted by NYT as saying.  This is what I mean when I say our intelligence service is not focused on the job but wasting valuable resources spying on and apprehending the good guys!

Indeed, if the Malaysian state had only focused on the job of catching the real criminals, Malaysia would be a much safer place instead of being the “nation of guarded communities” it has become today.

Militarism serves ruling class

Apart from the huge commissions that can be creamed from multibillion ringgit arms contracts, the ruling class requires militarism to contain the oppressed and disgruntled sections of the population.

A strong military is necessary to prop up the ruling class. At the same time, the military-industrial complex promotes the development of a specially favoured group of companies engaged in the manufacture and sale of munitions and military equipment for personal gain and profit. These armaments companies have a direct interest in the maximum expansion of military production.

Arms production is a green issue

Military spending and arms production are very much green issues. The military- industrial complex not only produces toxic products, they produce weapons that kill indiscriminately. LIMA and other defence fairs are certainly not congruent with Malaysian leaders’ stated commitment to peace and spiritual values.

The green movement has a responsibility to work toward an end to the culture of war. This involves re-ordering our financial priorities away from wasteful and destructive arms production and procurement to the social well-being of the people.

Ultimately, working towards a culture of peace is a vision that is only attainable in a society that respects human dignity, social justice, democracy and human rights.

Chinese Navy makes waves in South China Sea

March 28, 2013

by Calum MacLeod and Oren Dorell, USA TODAY 6:49p.m. EDT March 27, 2013

BEIJING – The appearance of a Chinese navy flotilla at an island chain 1,120 miles from its home shores is a clear sign that the new Communist regime is moving to enforce its claims to the entire South China Sea, experts said Wednesday.

James Shoal is 50 miles from the coast of Malaysia, one of several countries that have appealed to the United States for help in countering China’s aggressive attempt to seize 1 million square miles of fishing and energy resources.

The Chinese military drills in the southernmost part of the sea show that the Obama administration’s “Asia Pivot,” which the White House said will refocus U.S. defense assets from the Middle East to East Asia, has produced few results for countries such as the Philippines and Japan, says Michael Auslin, an East Asia specialist at the American Enterprise Institute.

“We’re losing credibility with our allies and friends by not getting involved,” he says. “China has interpreted U.S. inaction as a green light to go forward.”

The flotilla includes China’s most advanced amphibious landing ship. Sailors on the ship’s helicopter deck declared their loyalty to the ruling Communist Party and vowed to “struggle arduously to realize the dream of a powerful nation,” said Xinhua, the Chinese state news agency.

In 2010, China planted a monument on the shoal declaring it the Chinese territory of “Zengmu Reef.” The act was part of China’s claims to all islands, fishing grounds and energy resources in a sea shared also by Vietnam, the Philippines and Taiwan. The South China Sea is also a major transit route for global shipping; half of all cargo in the world passes through the sea.

Malaysia says China’s claims are bogus and merely an attempt to seize resources such as possible oil and gas deposits that are well within the internationally recognized coastal territory of Malaysia.

Stephanie Kleine-Ahlbrandt, Northeast Asia director for the International Crisis Group, a non-profit working in conflict prevention, said the naval exercise is consistent with China’s “shift from a land-focused power to a maritime power.”

The strategy has been pushed over the past two years, during which China has grown more assertive over its maritime claims, she said.

Gary Li, a senior analyst with IHS Fairplay in London, described the flotilla mission “a surprisingly strong message” from the new Chinese leadership recently installed under President Xi Jinping.

“It is not just a few ships here and there, but a crack amphibious landing ship carrying marines and hovercraft and backed by some of the best escort ships in the fleet,” he told the South China Morning Post, adding that jet fighters had also been used to cover the task force.

“We’ve never seen anything like this that far south in terms of quantity or quality.”

Auslin said the United States should respond in its longstanding role of ensuring the sea is not controlled by any single nation. He said the White House should increase the frequency of U.S. warship formations in the area to show China “we’re going to be present.” It would also boost the confidence of allies that the U.S. is standing up to challenges from their mighty neighbor, he said.

The White House has said it wants all sides to settle their disputes peacefully through international legal structures. But in light of Chinese behavior that many in the region view as aggressive, that sends a message that the United States will not confront China, Auslin says.

China’s behavior could undermine 100 years of U.S. policy that “might makes right” cannot prevail in sea lanes open to all, Auslin said.

“Do we want to see that environment change to where relations between countries are determined by the strongest? That’s the 19^th century world,” he said.

MacLeod reported from Beijing; Dorell from McLean, Va.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2013/03/27/china-military-south-china-sea/2023947/

Nurul Izzah takes on Federal Territory Minister

March 24, 2013

by  Wong Choon Mei, Alaa Soleiman, Malaysia Chronicle

When Nurul Izzah Anwar won the Lembah Pantai parliamentary seat in 2008, she became the toast of the nation. Her political enemies from Prime Minister Najib Razak’s UMNO lost no time trying to tie her up in controversy.

Make her life difficult, they certainly did. They also dented her political standing with their accusations. Even so, just ask around the length and breadth of Malaysia – who do the people think will be the first woman Prime Minister of Malaysia or even the first Prime Minister to come from the Pakatan Rakyat Opposition, and her name will invariably crop up.

Why? Well, the combination of reasons most commonly cited are, firstly, Nurul’s political heritage, her intelligence and savvy, an enviable image of being someone you can trust. And of course, there’s her good looks, decorum and fine sensitive features – crowd winners by any account. Many of those offering their opinions would also complete their assessment by comparing her to Thai premier Yingluck Shinawatra.

Yingluck, they are quick to point out, won the Thai premiership not just based her political street smarts and family standing but also because of her undeniable beauty and freshness in outlook. As the Thais hungered for change after long years of political stubbornness and stalemate, Malaysians too may not be unwilling to accept a new face of politics, where a softer and more people-centric approach is central, and finally ending the chapter on ham-fisted rule and despotic tactics by yesteryear strongmen like Mahathir Mohamad and Lee Kuan Yew.

New politics and the era of change

Be that as it may, this year, Malaysia will hold its 13th general election and Nurul’s most immediate challenge will be to defend her parliamentary seat won against all odds in 2008.

The daughter of Malaysian political stalwart Anwar Ibrahim, she will turn 33 this November. Nurul is expected to face the Lembah Pantai UMNO chief, Raja Nong Chik, a man who at 60 is not only twice her age but old enough to be her dad.

Ironically, the political roller coaster and grind that Nurul was put through the past 5 years have prepared her well to face UMNO’s contender for the Lembah seat. Nurul is not fazed by Nong Chik, who is also the Federal Territories Minister. She gives back as good as she gets.

At a ceramah (political rally) held at Kampung Baru, the proudly Malay enclave in Kuala Lumpur near to the Petronas Twin Towers, Nurul minced no words telling the crowd that they had to reject UMNO and its ‘sore loser’ ways if Malaysia was to be ‘saved’ from further economic harm and social damage.

“The SOP (standard operating procedures) of the UMNO-BN is to blame the Opposition when things don’t go right. 15 years ago, it was Anwar Ibrahim. They labelled him an American agent, a Jewish agent and now it seems, he has become a Sulu agent. Please don’t be influenced by their madness, think of the future for the future of your children,” Nurul told the small but enthusiastic crowd that had braved a steady drizzle to hear her speak on Thursday.

“And (this can be seen again) in the context of Wilayah Persekutuan, 10 seats were won by PR – DAP, PAS and Keadilan (in the 2008 election). The people chose DAP, PAS and Keadilan. This is a clear indictment. UMNO in 1969 could not get a majority in Selangor. Kuala Lumpur was under Selangor. Of 28 seats, only 14 were won by the Alliance and the rest they lost. And when they lost and came under pressure, they thought of the concept of Wilayah Persekutuan.”

She also hit out at Nong Chik, who has been accused of devising dubious means to oust her and covertly padding up the Lembah Pantai electoral roll with BN supporters. Pointing out Nong Chik’s unelected status as he did not stand in any election in 2008, but was appointed a Senator by Prime Minister Najib Razak, Nurul exposed the FT Minister’s background and why he was able to get so many development programs going.

“The Minister doesn’t even need to get elected… who gets all the contracts in Kuala Lumpur. Check a bit. Who has such absolute power … no need to get approval or budget. He can even kick out the Mayor and replace his own sidekick,” said Nurul.

“Let me tell you about Geng Rosmah. From their Island & Peninisular days, 3 close friends Shahrizat Jalil, Rosmah Mansor and Raja Nong Chik, their friendship has lasted till now. This is why all they can announce so many development projects and activities.

To the delight of the audience, Nurul went on to lambast her Lembah Pantai predecessor Shahrizat Jalil, whom she won the seat from and who has been embroiled in the RM250 million Cowgate scandal.

There is no such thing as Revenge 

Nurul also shared a glimpse of how her life was affected by the 1998 persecution of her father by the then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, who sacked and jailed Anwar on false charges of sodomy. Anwar, who has denied sodomizing his wife’s driver, was acquitted in 2004 after serving 6 years in jail. Sad to say in 2008, Najib and his wife Rosmah Mansor were accused of rehashing a similar scandal against Anwar.

“Former IGP (Rahim Noor) hit Anwar until his eye swelled, he was handcuffed, and hit repeatedly. But that night, an ordinary policeman with low rank helped to wipe the blood from him (Anwar). So there is no such thing as revenge That is what separate us from BN. To Dato Seri Najib and to Hishammuddin, you don’t know us at all,” she said to loud cheers from the crowd.

 From their response, the crowd which was 90% Malay seemed willing not only to hear Nurul out but to support her. And this is a significant development. Despite inroads made by the Opposition, the Kampong Baru area is still basically an UMNO enclave. Many of the residents have relatives who are in some way or other connected to the ruling party but the rapport is clearly dwindling. Like Malays around the country and who form the predominant electorate, those in Kampung Baru appeared willing to let their guard down and move towards a society where there is less racial prejudice.

In his prime, Anwar had been the darling of the Malay community until his career was derailed by Mahathir’s sodomy charges. As Nurul had said in her speech, since then Anwar has been tarred by various accusations that he was pro-Israel or would sell out the Malays to the Chinese should his coalition ever win the federal government. As his oldest daughter, Nurul too has felt the impact of such rhetoric aimed to create disaffection amongst the Malays towards Anwar and his party.

For example, when Nurul wrote a 3-part essay Malaysia or Malay-saja (Malaysia or Malays only), the UMNO press including Malay rights extremist Ibrahim Ali attacked her for not ‘defending’ her own community, even demanding that she be charged for Sedition and treason. However, they were not able to shake her.

“We believe in justice, in reforms. We want reforms to the system in the country, an A_G (Attorney General) who is fair. Let those who are guilty be punished by the courts, let those who are guilty be sent to the lock-ups, let those who are guilty like Ibrahim Ali be punished but don’t let him be free to sow hatred in Malaysia,” said Nurul.

BR1M proves BN’s economic failure

A first-term Member of Parliament, Nurul also attacked Najib’s prized cash aid scheme of doling out RM500 to each household that earns less than RM3,000 per month. The BR1M scheme has been called an election goodie by the Opposition but the BN has promised to make it a recurring annual affair.

“Think 55 years of BN rule, 60% qualify for BR1M, imagine how many are poor. 40% earn less than RM1,500, 60% earn less than RM3,000. That statistic alone shows BN has failed us as Malaysians,” she said.

Warning of economic doom, the Lembah Pantai MP ended her speech by calling on the crowd to support the Pakatan Rakyat coalition in its quest to win the federal government.

“Kali in bantu kami sampai ke Putrajaya (help us to make it to Putrajaya). I fear in GE14, it might too late. Bankruptcy or worse can befall our country.”

 

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.”

Najib sees early achievement of Vision 2020 Goals

March 20, 2013

by Barry Porter@http://www.bloomberg.com

Prime Minister Najib Razak said the nation may reach high-income status two years ahead of target, as he seeks to convince voters of his economic achievements before elections due within weeks.

Gross national income could rise to RM1,931 per capita (US$15,000) in 2018, earlier than a target of 2020, Najib said in a televised speech late yesterday. The measure has increased 49 percent since 2009, to RM12,838 (US$9,970) last year, the government estimates. Najib also pledged to give annual cash handouts to low-wage earners.

“The time has come for Malaysians to make a decision and I hope you make the right choice,” said Najib, 59, without indicating when the election will be held. He must dissolve Parliament by April 28 and hold a vote by the end of June.

Najib, who inherited a country in recession when he replaced Abdullah Ahmad Badawi as leader in 2009, is focusing voters on his efforts to boost investment and improve incomes as he seeks a popular mandate for the first time. The ruling National Front coalition won the last election in 2008 by its narrowest margin in more than five decades, prompting Abdullah to hand over the leadership mid-term.

A nation is considered high income when GNI per capita meets or exceeds RM16,066 (US$12,476), according to the World Bank. In 1991, former premier Mahathir Mahathir laid out a 30-year plan known as Vision 2020 aimed at earning Malaysia high-income status by the end of the current decade.

Investment rises

Malaysia’s total investment grew 19.9 percent in 2012 compared with 6.5 percent in 2011, accounting for 26.7 percent of gross domestic product, according to a report on the nation’s so-called Economic Transformation Program released by the Prime Minister yesterday. Private investment climbed 22 percent to 139.5 billion ringgit (US$45 billion) in 2012, driven by spending on manufacturing, services and mining, according to the report.

“Najib’s comparative advantage is to try to portray himself as an economist and an economic success, which may hit home in middle-class areas,” Bridget Welsh, Associate Professor of political science at Singapore Management University, said by phone. “He’s mostly concerned about a public relations image. The Opposition tends to focus on ordinary people and micro issues, like wages and the cost of living.”

Infineon Technologies AG, Europe’s second-largest maker of semiconductors, said in May it will spend 4 billion ringgit over 10 years to expand its wafer-fabrication facilities in Malaysia’s north. Germany’s Evonik Industries AG plans to start a specialty chemicals manufacturing venture with Petroliam Nasional Bhd. within a US$20 billion refining and petrochemicals complex in southern Johor state.

‘Track record’

Najib can use the economic program to argue that “the current administration has got a track record in organizing big public projects and getting the private sector involved,” said Gerald Ambrose, who oversees the equivalent of RM5.31 billion (US$1.7 billion) as managing director of Aberdeen Asset Management Sdn in Kuala Lumpur.

Since taking charge, Najib has streamlined bureaucracy and opened up more industries to foreign investors. His government identified RM1,389 billion (US$444 billion) of private-sector-led projects to help champion in the current decade, ranging from oil storage to a mass railway, under the economic plan.

Malaysia’s economy grew at the fastest pace in 2 1/2 years last quarter as Najib boosted spending ahead of the election that will test his grip on power. GDP rose 6.4 percent in the three months through December from a year earlier, after a revised 5.3 percent gain in the previous quarter.
Poverty, education

“We must not rest on our laurels,” Najib said in the report. “Malaysia must continue to address issues such as poverty, labour productivity, environment sustainability and education, while factors in the external economy are likely to remain demanding in the foreseeable future.”

The architecture, engineering and quantity-surveying services sub-sectors are expected to be ready for liberalisation exercise this year, Bernama reported, citing Pemandu’s report.

Southeast Asian nations from Indonesia to the Philippines have shown resilience to the faltering global economy as local demand rises. Najib has increased government expenditure, extending cash handouts to low-income families and raising civil servants’ salaries in the lead-up to voting.

Government revenue was the highest on record last year at an estimated 207 billion ringgit, enabling the government to afford socio-economic programs and give money to the poor, according to the report by the government’s Performance Management and Delivery Unit, or Pemandu.

The budget deficit narrowed from 6.6 percent of GDP in 2009 to 4.5 percent last year and is expected to shrink to 4 percent this year as the government seeks to balance the budget by 2020, according to the report.

Resurgent Opposition

Najib’s National Front coalition is facing a resurgent Opposition led by Anwar Ibrahim, which currently holds 75 seats in Malaysia’s 222-member parliament. The prospect of an even closer election result has helped make the FTSE Bursa Malaysia KLCI Index the worst performing Asian benchmark this year, Citigroup Inc. said in a report this month.

The benchmark stock index has dropped 4.1 percent since closing at a record on Jan 7. It ended 0.3 percent higher yesterday before the report. The ringgit climbed 0.2 percent to 3.1255 per dollar. Its 2.2 percent drop this year makes it Asia’s fifth-worst performing currency among 11 tracked by Bloomberg.

Najib is more popular than his government, according to the Merdeka Center for Opinion Research. His approval rating slipped to 61 percent last month from 63 percent in December, according to a survey of 1,021 voters conducted January 23 to February 6 on the country’s peninsula. By contrast, 48 percent of respondents said they were “happy” with the government, according to the poll published February 26.

-BLOOMBERG

http://www.kinibiz.com/story/corporate/9933/gtp-etp-2.0-target-can-be-achieved-by-2020.html

Sulu: Stop Payment of Cession Money by New Court Order

March 18, 2013

by Athi Shankar (03-16-13) @http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com

The DAP has urged the Attorney General Abdul Gani Patail to obtain a High Court order in Kota Kinabalu to discontinue Malaysia’s cessation payment to heirs of Sultan Sulu over Sabah.

Chairman Karpal Singh called on Gani, who hails from Sabah, to spring to action immediately and file the necessary application as public interests demanded him to do so.

Senior parliamentarian Karpal noted that the cessation payment was on the authority of a 1938 order by then High Court of North Borneo.The order allowed a petition of nine Sulu heirs to receive and share among themselves RM5,000, or now RM5,300, as annual payment.

The 1938 order actually has reinforced the payment that commenced very much earlier when the British took over Sabah.Kadir Mohamad, Agent for Malaysia in the ICJ case between Malaysia and Indonesia, said that Kuala Lumpur needed to continue honouring the 1938 judgment on the ground that any violation of that order can be challenged in court by interested parties.

Karpal conceded that a court order must be complied with unless it was set aside judicially.“Contravention of a court order amounts to contempt of court and is punishable by committal to prison,” said Karpal, a veteran lawyer.

But, he said with the passage of time and with Sabah having joined Sarawak and Peninsular to form Malaysia, and recognition by Manila of Malaysia as a sovereign state by having ambassadorial level representation in the country, the Philippines cannot lay any claim to Sabah.

He said Malaysia was internationally recognised with Sabah as a sovereign state in the Federation of Malaysia since the North Borneo territory opted to join Malaysia on August 31, 1963.

“It’s ridiculous to continue paying the Sulu heirs when Malaysia and Sabah are independent and sovereign states,” Karpal told newsmen during a routine visit to his Bukit Gelugor parliamentary constituency here today.

‘Respect sacrifices of our forces’

He said the cessation payment was different from the “annual royalty” being paid by Penang to Kedah, as both these provinces were part of a sovereign Malaysia.

He said the fact that the payment has been continuously made for 131 years does not mean, having regard to passage of time and change of circumstances, that the case cannot be reopened with a view to the payment to be discontinued.

He stressed that the continued annual cessation payment pursuant to the 1938 order required review to discontinue the payment and this can be done by the High Court in Kota Kinabalu.

He referred to a 2011 Federal Court decision on Harcharan Singh Piara Singh vs Public Prosecutor where unanimously ruled that a a court of first instance, including High Court, must be equipped with residual jurisdiction to rehear and reopen its own earlier decision in a fit and proper case.

He said  that the cessation payment constitutes a fit and proper case for the High Court in Kota Kinabalu to review the 1938 decision and order it to be discontinued.

“The country’s sovereign should not be allowed to be compromised in any way. The sovereignty should and must stand pristine,” stressed the DAP supremo.

On the sedition charge against PKR vice-president Tian Chua for allegedly making statements linking the Federal government to the Lahad Datu shooting, Karpal acknowledged that the Batu MP had denied making such remarks.

But, he stressed that the DAP stand was clear that no one should make a statement insulting the armed forces, especially when they were defending the nation’s independence and sovereignty against alien forces.

He said the DAP stand was that all Malaysians should stand united against intrusions by foreign forces.“The DAP is united against any intrusions. The sacrifices of the armed forces must be respected, appreciated and honoured by all Malaysians. It’s wrong to insult the role of armed forces,” said Karpal

Sabah Insurgency: A Setback for Malaysia’s Role as Regional Conflict Mediator

March 17, 2013

Sabah Insurgency: A Setback for Malaysia’s Role as Regional Conflict Mediator

by Dr. Johan Saravanamuttu* (March 15, 2013)

The month-long crisis in Sabah, which has seen an incursion of rebel fighters from the Philippine island of Sulu into Malaysia’s northern-most state on the island of Borneo, is a stark reminder that Southeast Asia remains engulfed in unresolved territorial disputes and conflicts.

Malaysia has been deeply involved in several of these conflicts as both a stakeholder and a mediator. The Sabah crisis now presents Malaysia with a thorny domestic security challenge that also has implications for its regional role.

As a member of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), Malaysia has so far subscribed actively to the ASEAN principle of “pacific settlement of conflicts” espoused in the organization’s 1976 Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, of which Malaysia was a founding signatory. Malaysia played a major role, as both host and mediator, in the negotiations that recently brought the conflict in the southern Philippines to a peaceful resolution.

On October 15, 2012, after 15 years of negotiations and 27 rounds of talks in Kuala Lumpur, the Philippine government and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front signed a comprehensive peace accord establishing a political settlement to the Islamic insurgency in the Muslim-majority region of Mindanao.

Malaysia also recently agreed to help try to broker an end to the conflict involving Muslim insurgents in four provinces in the deep south of Thailand. In a state visit to Malaysia on Feb. 28, 2013, Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra agreed to begin talks in Kuala Lumpur with the “Barisan Revolusi Nasional” (“National Revolutionary Front”), the main Muslim group involved in southern Thailand’s conflict.

In the past decade, Malaysia has also peacefully resolved external territorial disputes with both Indonesia and Singapore. Indonesia took a dispute over the islands of Sipadan and Ligitan off the Sabah coast to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which in 2002 deemed the islands to be Malaysian. Singapore and Malaysia settled the dispute over Pedra Branca, called Pulau Batu Puteh in Malaysia, in 2008, again through the ICJ, with Singapore retaining the island.

Malaysia still has claims in the Celebes and South China Seas involving other Southeast Asian states and China. In all these instances, Malaysia has maintained a stance of peaceful conflict resolution and, where expedient and possible, has brought matters to international arbitration.

As an internal conflict with an external dimension, the current crisis in Sabah constitutes a hybrid case of the region’s conflicts and territorial disputes. When Sabah was included into the new Federation of Malaysia in 1963, Manila maintained that Sabah belonged to the Philippines instead. However, after a U.N. observer team ascertained that the majority of Sabah’s people supported joining Malaysia, the Philippines stopped pressing its claim, though no Philippine government ever formally rescinded it. Over the years, the dispute was shelved due to good relations between the two states.

But in the current crisis, a century-old sovereignty claim over Sabah has been revived by Jamalul Kiram III, the self-proclaimed sultan of Sulu, an autonomous Philippine island province in Mindanao that historically included the area of north Borneo now known as Sabah. Kiram says that his ancestors merely leased and did not cede the territory to the British in 1878.

On February 12, more than 200 fighters of the self-styled “Royal Sulu Sultanate” landed in Malaysia, near the southeast Sabah coast, and holed themselves up in a nearby village, ignoring calls by Philippine President Benigno Aquino to return home.

In Malaysia’s initial Police response, 12 armed men were killed along with two Malaysian Policemen. Malaysia then conducted air strikes on the village and sent in some seven army battalions, killing 32. Other incidents occurring nearby left five Malaysian policemen dead. At the time of writing, the Malaysian authorities have rounded up almost 100 intruders and the death toll has reached 63, including two Malaysian soldiers, making the crisis the most serious military action involving Malaysian forces since the communist insurgency of 1948-1960.

More ominously, Malaysia, a promoter of regional conflict resolution for Muslims, is for the first time engaged in a shooting war with Muslim insurgents within its own territorial boundaries.

With the initial standoff having given way to a series of one-sided skirmishes, the Sabah situation risks becoming an internal Malaysian insurgency, with the Tausugs — the main ethnic group from Sulu in the Philippines, where they are known as Suluks — as the principle protagonists. The crisis is further embedded in the fluid character of local politics in Sabah, where large numbers of the population are Muslim.

In recent hearings held by a Malaysian Commission of Inquiry on illegal immigration in Sabah, it was revealed that Kuala Lumpur had awarded Malaysian citizenship to hundreds of thousands of Muslims from the southern Philippines for the sake of gaining an electoral advantage for the ruling party, the United Malays National Organization (UMNO).

For years, UMNO has considered Sabah to be a “fixed deposit,” safely delivering 24 seats to the ruling coalition in the 222-seat national parliament. The large Filipino Muslim population in Sabah that helped deliver these seats in the past could now turn against its former protector and patron, with implications for the UMNO’s supremacy in national politics in the general election that must be held by late-June.

Given Malaysia’s prized role as regional peacemaker, it is a bitter irony that the pendulum of internal conflict has swung from Mindanao to Sabah, with the gloomy prospect of the Malaysian government facing a long-term low-intensity war with the Suluks and their supporters. That would not only represent a disruptive distraction in the run-up to the general elections, but also a huge blow to Malaysia’s role as a promoter of regional conflict resolution.

Dr.Johan Saravanamuttu is a Visiting Senior Research Fellow at the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore.

http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/

Be Grateful and Loyal to our Security Forces

March 16, 2013

Be Grateful and Loyal to our Security Forces in Lahad Datu

by Tunku Abdul Aziz@www.nst.com.my

STEADFAST: They are in the front line risking life and limb to protect the nation

THE Royal Malaysia Police engaged in a series of life-and-death operations against Sulu terrorists in Lahad Datu and Semporna, Sabah,  have  once again demonstrated that peace and internal security cannot be taken for granted.

While admittedly the task of securing the borders of Sabah will be near to impossible given its geography, we have been somewhat cavalier, particularly in dealing with the movements of the people from southern Philippines.

It is both ironic and galling that while the Suluks are moving in and out at will, West Malaysians who are putting their lives at risk fighting to defend Sabah are treated as foreigners as far as Immigration control formalities are concerned.

Our Immigration laws have to be tightened to make it more difficult for illegal immigrants and other criminal elements from using Malaysia as a base for human and drug trafficking.

Malaysia has earned, and deservedly so, an unsavoury international reputation as a centre for racketeering and trafficking activities. Our enforcement of laws at entry points is at best cursory and at worst derisory. The Kuala Lumpur International Airport is the soft underbelly of our Immigration control. We have made it all too easy for foreign nationals to enter, in a bid to promote tourism. All perfectly understandable, but is the tourist dollar mightier than national security?

The Police have responded magnificently to the deadly threat posed by the (Sulu) terrorists and it is comforting to see how well they and their military counterparts have been working side by side.

It requires a high level of trust and understanding for two security forces with their different traditions and modus operandi to harmonise the complex operational elements of command and control.

There are not many countries in the world where such an effective integration exists between the Army and the Police in dealing with threats to internal security.

Questions were asked why the Army was not called into action as soon as the incursion was discovered.

The country was not invaded by a foreign army: public order and internal security falls within the jurisdiction of the police and the army is used in support of civil authority on request. This arrangement has worked well in the past.

Let us listen to what others had to say about our Police Force, with its long tradition of public duty in the interests of the nation.

According to Gen (Sir Rob) Lockhart, Director of Operations during the early phase of the Malayan Emergency: “The Police have been and are the spearhead of our attack as well the main source of our defence against the bandits in Malaya.”

Gen (Sir) Gerald Templer (above), who later assumed full military and civil control as high commissioner of the Federation of Malaya, paid this compliment: “I have great affection and admiration for the Royal Federation of Malaya Police force and its component parts.

“They are the people who have been continuously at the business of fighting militant communism all through the long 10 years of the Emergency in their country.”

According to J.W.G. Moran, the author of Spearhead in Malaya, “up to the end of 1965, 2,890 Police personnel were killed in action, as against the military force’s 518. During the same period, the communist casualties totalled 11,718, out of which 8,678 were bagged by the Police jungle forces”.

Nothing much has changed as far as our Policemen and women are concerned: they are there in the front line, at the sharp end, risking life and limb to secure and preserve peace and order for all citizens, irrespective of race, politics or religion.

They deserve our gratitude for their steadfast loyalty and commitment in protecting lives and properties under all circumstances.

I am pleased that the government has seen it fit to improve the conditions and services of the Police and Armed Forces. They perform a thankless job for such small material recompense. We are able to go about our business in peace and safety because they are there when we need them.

The Opposition’s cyber troopers, who hide behind the cyber skirt demonising those who face constant danger in protecting us, should desist from politicising what is a serious threat to the security of our nation.

If you are incapable of showing patriotism to your country, that is your business, but go elsewhere where you will be happy to peddle your pathologically obsessive hatred for the forces of law and order.This country is better off without you.

Musa’s candor is bipartisanship’s grist

March 15, 2013

By Terence Netto@http://www.malaysiakini.com

COMMENT: Finally, (Tun) Musa Hitam had something to say about the party of change (read: Pakatan Rakyat) and, by implication, the party of the status quo which, needless to say, is BN.

It’s not his style to have declined to say something, given the gravity of the issues before the electorate and of the decision that voters must make at GE-13.

To have avoided making a comment would have been contrary to his instincts as a politician, albeit a retired one, and his stature as an elder statesman in Malaysian councils.

Someone in his situation could not be expected to have let current matters pass without comment of the objective sort. UMNO man though he is, a reflexive partisanship is just not his style.

When matters facing the nation are fraught, Musa can be expected to lift anchor and float intriguingly in the space between a concern for the where the country is headed and the understandable partisanship of a party man.

One remembers the remarks he made when there was a rush by Malays to join PAS in the aftermath of Anwar Ibrahim’s sacking from government and UMNO in late 1998. The expulsion and public humiliation of the former Deputy Prime Minister became an international cause celebre and generated a tidal movement towards signing up for PAS.

After observing the phenomenon for some time – a year on from September 1998, PAS had doubled its membership from 400,000 – Musa confessed to being amazed at the magnetism of the Islamic party, whereupon one of the party’s columnists, Subky Latif, offered to “sediakan borang” (fetch Musa a membership form).

Of course Musa, admiring though he was at the rush to sign up with PAS, wasn’t going to join the cavalcade. But his readiness to observe and remark candidly on the phenomenon was reflective of a trait all democrats ought to have: common sensical acknowledgment of easily attributable happenings.

Absent this quality, the competitive process in a democracy will be reduced to a raucous shouting match and is bound to become a turnoff to voters.

The trait of candid acknowledgment of easily ascribable phenomena is sine qua non of all parties to the democratic process in which competing coalitions vie for the privilege of ruling the country.

Musa’s last hurrah

In his most recent instance of unabashed recognition of compelling realities, Musa was reported to have said that Pakatan Rakyat won’t want to bankrupt the Treasury simply because they would want to be returned to power at GE-14 should they win GE-13.

So even if certain planks in the Pakatan manifesto appear impossible to fulfill, Musa was saying that a desire to be returned to power would slow, if not halt, a gallop to the fiscal precipice.

Pakatan cannot hope for a more candid acknowledgment from one from the other side of the country’s political divide about their seriousness as contenders for national governance not just now but for decades to come.

Pakatan have in Musa a credible candidate for the role of speaker of the Dewan Rakyat should it gain Putrajaya at GE13.

This is not to suggest that Musa was angling to be appointed to the role by his recent remarks on Pakatan’s viability.

Some time ago, Subki Latif suggested Musa for the role on the basis of his credibility as a personage on the national political scene.

Pakatan would embellish its claims to bipartisanship by appointing Musa to the role should they win power at the next polls.

And Musa would relish a last hurrah in national affairs as fair-minded interlocutor between two competing coalitions which are likely to run each other close at the general election.

Parliament would be an elevated arena for debate on issues. Rare would be the repeat of demeaning instances of the past when unparliamentary language and actions debased the arena.

Musa would have just the right combination of elegant speech and enlivening humour to steer proceedings along elevating channels. He will be 79 next month; there’s no reason these days to think that a person would be past it in his ninth decade in this world.

A prospective role in Malaysia’s 13th Parliament’s elevation would bring his career to a coda that recalls the poet Robert Frost’s lines on old age:

No memory of having starred
Atones for later disregard
Nor keeps the end from being hard
Better to go down with boughten friendship at your side
Than with none at all. Provide, Provide.