Najib in Power:Parliament, Civil Service, Police, Judiciary, and UMNO have failed the Malaysian People

September 20, 2016

Najib in Power:Parliament, Civil Service, Police, Judiciary, and UMNO  have failed the Malaysian People

by  P Gunasegaram

Image result for Najib the crook

After all his failings and lies over his brainchild, 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB), and at least US$3.5 billion (RM14 billion) embezzled from it, and as much as US$7 billion (US$28 billion) unaccounted for, why is it that Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak remains in power?

How could a nation keep a Prime Minister who is directly and indirectly responsible for the biggest fraud in Malaysian history and perhaps the biggest fraud ever in the world in power? The Minister of Finance Inc (Najib is Finance Minister, too) owns all of 1MDB, he was chairperson of the advisory board and the memorandum and articles of association of 1MDB required him to sign off on all major deals.

In other countries that practice true parliamentary democracy, that would have been enough to nail him and kick him out hard if he had not already resigned by then, but not here. Why?

Just because he was Head of UMNO and Barisan Nasional or BN when the coalition won the last elections in 2013, it does not convey on him an automatic right to remain prime minister until the next elections.

A Prime Minister can be removed if he does wrong under the law but for that to work you need independence of both investigating and prosecuting authorities. Najib circumvented that by removing the previous Attorney-General (Gani Patail) under highly suspicious circumstances. At the same time, the country’s corruption-fighting body saw wrenching changes while central bank officials were questioned by the Police for possible leaks of information over that US$681 million “donation” that went into the accounts of Najib at AmBank.

When dissent within his party began to surface, he took action against senior party officials culminating in the expulsion of his deputy Muhyiddin Yassin who, together with former Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad, has now formed a new party.

That served as an example for any others who might want to challenge Najib’s leadership of UMNO and resulted in UMNO top guns and other heads of political parties within the BN coalition keeping mum and voicing their support for Najib.

UMNO party elections have been postponed to after the next general elections, preventing would-be contestants from ousting him. It looks like no one within Umno is capable of organising a revolt or rebellion and to force an extraordinary general assembly which could remove him as party chief and hence prime minister.

That Najib remains PM, and UMNO President, is first and foremost a reflection of the poor leadership at the top of UMNO. Except for Muhyiddin, Shafie Apdal and Mukhriz Mahathir, no significant UMNO leader has opposed Najib over 1MDB and other matters. If enough UMNO top leaders join in the clamour against Najib, Najib will have to go – you don’t even have to wait for a grassroots revolt.

Let’s take it from the top. Najib’s current deputy, Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, continues to make noises of support for Najib. This one-time solid Anwar Ibrahim supporter, jailed under the Internal Security Act (ISA) with Anwar in 1998 under Mahathir’s rule, must know that if UMNO goes into the polls with Najib at the top, its chances of winning would be much eroded. But he does not want to make the mistake his former boss did of moving too hastily.

Image result for Hishammuddin Hussein Onn the idiot

The UMNO Idiotic Minister of Defence

And then, with the exit of Shafie Apdal, comes Hishammuddin Hussein, Najib’s cousin and son of the Third Prime minister, Hussein Onn. Najib was son of the second. If Hishammuddin had his father’s guts, principles and integrity he would have no choice but to voice his opposition to Najib. But no, he does not but condones Najib.

Image result for Khairy Jamaluddin--Man in a Hurry

Ambitious But Unprincipled 

And then there is UMNO Youth Chief Khairy Jamaluddin – suave, dapper and Oxford educated.  A man in so much of a hurry to get to the top that one can’t expect him to be steadfast and upholding and give up what may, yes, get him to the top.

No ‘scrotal gumption’

For all three of them, does good politics dictate that they must support Najib no matter what, even if he allows Malaysia to be turned into a kleptocracy? Do they all not have the “scrotal gumption” – to borrow two words from former Court of Appeal judge Mahadev Shankar – to at least this once put nation and people above their own personal ambitions, and do what’s right even if it is risky?

Who knows, their political ambitions may be furthered if they do that because a majority of Malays themselves are likely to support their actions. Polls indicate Najib’s support among Malays is at an all-time low of 25 percent.

Remember Mahathir’s meteoric rise after he lost his parliamentary seat way back in 1969, criticised then Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman, got expelled from UMNO and then became Education Minister in 1974 after he was given a seat to contest by Tunku’s successor, Abdul Razak Hussein, Najib’s father?

Clearly they don’t make young UMNO leaders like they did before. And clearly too UMNO politics were rather devious even then. And MCA and MIC, what say you? Does Liow Tiong Lai for a moment think that the ordinary Chinese think his support for Najib is justified? What about the Indians, Dr S Subramaniam, do you think they support Najib right now?

Over in Sabah and Sarawak, do Kadazans and Dusuns and others actually support Najib? And shouldn’t leaders of parties like PBS and PBB be more circumspect of their support for Najib as leader of the coalition? How about it, Joseph Pairin Kitingan and Adenan Satem? Is it not time to make your views felt?

Umno after all had only 88 seats out of 133 seats at the end of the last elections in 2013 in the 222-seat Parliament. UMNO cannot rule without its partners no matter what some of their leaders say.

The combined opposition had one more than UMNO with 89 seats. If all of UMNO’s partners moved over to opposition, the government is toppled. In fact, if only 23 out of 44 defect, down comes Najib’s government. Surely they are collectively in a position to make some threats but why don’t they? Lack of scrotal gumption again?

He could be removed by Parliament – by a vote of no-confidence which will precipitate general elections if enough people vote with their conscience and not along party lines.

Image result for Malaysia'a dysfunctional Parliament

Najib stays in power because not enough elected representatives from the ruling coalition will say a word against him, let alone vote against him. UMNO has failed the people, MCA has failed the people, MIC has, and likewise Gerakan. The East Malaysian parties have also failed the people.

Ultimately, Malaysia’s elected representatives in Parliament collectively failed the people – they let a terribly tainted Prime Minister continue in office. Now all that is left is for the people to pressure the representatives to do their job and if they do not, kick them out unceremoniously when the time comes.  That will teach them to do the right thing the next time around.

Johor’s Intellectual HRH Sultanah Zarith Sofiah launches Visions for Peace

May 13, 2016

Johor’s Intellectual HRH Sultanah Zarith Sofiah launches Visions for Peace

by Zaid Ibrahim

The Star Online

Malaysia needs an extensive communications channel committed to explaining concepts which remind us of the value of multiculturalism, diversity and understanding.

Permaisuri of Johor Raja Zarith Sofiah Idris Shah tonight launched a book entitled 'Visions for Peace' at the KLGCC Bukit Kiara in Kuala Lumpur April 23, 2016. — Bernama pic

Johor’s HRH Raja Zarith Sofiah Sofiah with Datin Halimah Zain Yusuf of PCORE

THE launch of the book Visions for Peace by the Permaisuri of Johor, Raja Zarith Sofiah Sultan Idris Shah, who is also patron of the Association of Voices of Peace, Conscience and Reason (PCORE), at the Kuala Lumpur Golf and Country Club on April 23 was memorable for many reasons.

The main attraction for me was Raja Zarith’s speech, which was short but full of courage and hope. “I have often lamented on the erosion of values and principles which stand in the way of our hopes and dreams for a better Malaysia,” she said.

It was especially poignant when she asked, “Why should we not uphold these noble values? Why should we not have lofty principles to guide us in life? Why should we not be guided by the tenets which our faiths and religions teach us?”

This was a brave and timely call, especially when many are already asking if it is not already too late. The continued struggle by the people for Malaysia’s heart and soul, between the religious and secular, is the source of our difficulties. While some are comfortable with democracy, and want to accept the reality of multiculturalism, believing that we can find true peace and unity only by harnessing the strength of our diversity, others are totally opposed to this idea. They prefer the “unity” of one racial or religious group over all others and seek to maintain control on the basis of identity.

Some believe in the value of fairness and human rights, as evident in our religious obligations to treat all of God’s creations with fairness and justice, but others see this as inimical to their beliefs and even as a threat to their culture and morality; even posing a threat to their positions as “political masters” of the land.

Many believe that democratic rights and common values should be the foundation of society and are willing to trust political leaders elected by the people to manage the affairs of the country.

Many others, however, are making equally strong demands for a religious country where theologians are the true leaders of the land and where democracy is desirable only if politics can be won by the new class of leaders whose claim to fame lies in their “divinely inspired” knowledge.

As a result, the narratives of the past – the Rukun Negara, democracy, human rights, religious freedom and fundamental liberties – are spoken about today without conviction and only in terms of their “limited” application.

Religious morality has become the new tool of social differentiation, which makes it impossible to integrate the various communities in our country. It’s indeed laudable and gratifying that HRH Raja Zarith and her team of dedicated reformists have initiated a movement to bring back the values of the “old school” into the lifeblood of the country, as a modern and civilised democracy where people are guided by reason and conscience and want to live in peace and harmony.

At the book launch, it was evident that PCORE was made up of well-educated Malaysians who could provide a fresh outlook to help the country move forward. I did observe, however, that many who attended the launch (including myself) were in their 50s and 60s – many were ardent voices of reason and moderation, perhaps because they were educated under the “old school system”, have an open mind and live in middle class suburbs.

I just hope the young and those living elsewhere in the country share the same mindset. It is a blessing that we have as leaders of the moderate movement those privileged elites who are willing to engage with political leaders on major issues and make the case of reform in key areas such as education and politics.

At the same time, the message articulated in the book and other PCORE seminars needs to penetrate the far reaches of the country so every Malaysian regardless of background has the opportunity to listen to these views.

The effectiveness of PCORE as a group will be more widespread if they have the ability to influence and lobby policymakers effectively. Politicians will take notice of public initiatives only if they sense that support for such initiatives is strong and that the lobbyists are influential individuals themselves.

Towards this end, I suggest that Visions for Peace and other works be translated into Bahasa Malaysia (if not already done) and that the chapters on various topics such as unity, multiculturalism, harmony, balance of the environment and social cohesion be read and explained over a special radio service.

Malaysia needs an extensive communications channel committed to explaining concepts such as those articulated in Visions for Peace to remind us of the value of multiculturalism, diversity and understanding.

These broadcasts should be made on a regular basis and I call on the Government to allow the establishment of a dedicated national radio station, which I think could be managed admirably by PCORE.

The significance of radio is two-fold: if the Government truly believes that fresh ideas on national unity, diversity and democracy are important, then it must be willing to be a partner in disseminating these ideas. The Government should not fear a fresh view of these concepts if it is useful for national development.

For PCORE, radio can be a useful tool to spread the message of moderation, conscience and reason while discussions and debates on air about some of the key issues will help enlighten people who are otherwise subjected only to a fixed line of thinking.

Unless PCORE has the tools and is allowed by the Government to have access to these tools to do its work in spreading new ideas, its ability to change values and mind-sets, and its efforts to help give voice to those seeking to find the light at the end of the tunnel, will be limited and this would be most unfortunate.


What The Country, Especially The Malay Must Decide And Do

April 24, 2016


What The Country, Especially The Malay Must Decide And Do – By Matthias Chang

Zakir Naik: Peace Preacher or Hate Monger

April 20, 2016

(@KLIA on the way back to Phnom Penh)

Zakir Naik: Peace Preacher or Hate Monger

by Dr. Lim Teck Ghee

Dr. Zakir Naik, the controversial Muslim televangalist, is no stranger to Malaysia. He was here first in 2012 to deliver lectures in Johor Baru, Shah Alam, Kuantan and Kuala Lumpur. According to the organizers of the first lecture series, their objective was to promote harmony among people of various religions.

He is now into his second lecture tour series here. Presumably his objective to spread the message of peace, love and brotherhood among the various religions and Islam remains unchanged.

But perhaps his presence is also to emphasise the superiority of Islam over other religions; and as stated in the website of the Islamic Research Foundation of which he is President and founder, “about the truth and excellence of Islamic teachings – based on the glorious Qur’an and authentic Hadith, as well as adhering to reasons, logic and scientific facts”?

His main claim to fame (and contrariety)  in Malaysia comes from being recipient of the Ma’al Hijrah Distinguished Personality award by Yang di-Pertuan Agong Tuanku Abdul Halim Mu’adzam Shah in 2013 for his significant service and contribution to the development of Islam. He has also received various other awards and honours – all from Islamic governments or organizations.

That said, his standing with some non-Muslim governments and organizations is less creditable and more controversial. The religious television channel, Peace TV, which acknowledges him as its main ideologue as well as driving force, has been banned by his own government, the Indian government, for its anti-Indian malicious content.

This is a reasonable statement

The station has also been in trouble with various broadcasting authorities for some of its content and Dr. Zakir himself has been banned from entry to the United Kingdom, Canada and Singapore – in the UK, for allegedly “engaging in unacceptable behaviour by making statements that attempt to justify terrorist activity and fostering hatred.”

It could be that Dr. Zakir has been unfairly targeted and victimized for his religious zealotry and popularity with the Muslim community. He has claimed, for example, that he has been quoted out of context for his views on terrorism.

But if he has been misquoted or has recanted for his earlier views on Al Queda and his support of Islamic terrorism, what are his perspectives on Islam and other religions which have enabled him to gain such a huge following among Muslims all over the world, and have him placed so high up on the pedestal?

Peace Preacher or Hate Monger.

Critics who have followed his lectures and preaching – Dr. Zakir, following the example of Christian telemarketers, describes himself as “a dynamic international orator of Islam and comparative religion – have expressed concern over his conservative and extremist views on a wide range of subjects, including apostasy and the propagation of other faiths in Islamic states, both of them major issues in Malaysia.

On the former, he is said to have argued that Muslims who convert from Islam should not necessarily receive death sentences, but that under Islamic rule those who leave Islam and then “propagate the non-Islamic faith and speak against Islam” should be put to death. Another source states that according to Dr. Zakir “there is no death penalty for apostates in Islam, until the apostate starts to preach his new religion; then he can be put to death.”

On the latter, Dr. Zakir has noted that while he appreciates that people of other religions allow Muslims to freely propagate Islam in their country, “the dissemination of other religions within an Islamic state must be forbidden because (he believes) other faiths are incorrect, so their propagation is as wrong as it would be for an arithmetic teacher to teach that 2+2=3 or 6 instead of 2+2=4.”

Similarly Dr. Zakir has argued, “regarding building of churches or temples, how can we allow this when their religion is wrong and when their worship-ping is wrong?”

Similarly, The Times of India in a profile piece on Dr. Zakir has argued that “the Wahabi-Salafist brand of Islam, bankrolled by petro-rich Saudi Arabia and propagated by preachers like Naik, does not appreciate the idea of pluralism.”

The article quotes Muslim scholar Wahiduddin Khan: “Dawah, which Naik also claims to be engaged in, is to make people aware of the creation plan of God, not to peddle some provocative, dubious ideas as Naik does.”

He adds: “The wave of Islamophobia in the aftermath of 9/11 and the occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan have only added to the Muslims’ sense of injury. In such a situation, when a debater like Zakir Naik, in eloquent English, takes on preachers of other faiths and defeats them during debates, the Muslims’ chests puff with pride. A community nursing a huge sense of betrayal and injustice naturally lionises anyone who gives

A community nursing a huge sense of betrayal and injustice naturally lionises anyone who gives it a sense of pride. Never mind if it’s false pride.”

Whether Dr. Zakir should have the right to be in Malaysia and to speak on comparative religions may be controversial but in our part of the world apparently lacking appropriate Islamic “wise” men and leaders to look up to, hopefully it is not false pride that Dr. Zakir is peddling but the doctrinal and institutional re-caliberation of the religion so that Malaysians can be reassured of its contribution to our religious and racial peace and harmony.


MACC Trounced :The Ultimate Victory for ROSLI DAHLAN

April 5, 2016

MACC Trounced :The Ultimate Victory for ROSLI DAHLAN

by Din Merican

Lawyer Rosli sought Justice and won

This afternoon was supposed to be the continuation of the trial of Rosli Dahlan vs MACC where more of the MACC witnesses were supposed to take the witness stand and be grilled in cross examination. But all that fizzled out when the MACC floundered and admitted defeat.

Sources close to the prosecution revealed that since last November the MACC and A-G Chambers have been wooing Rosli to seek a settlement. Then, the courting  became more intense with the MACC representatives even visiting Rosli. Then when it became inevitable that its witness MACC officer Mohan was going to be grilled and roasted, the MACC threw the towel.

This Mohan is a corrupted officer who handcuffed Rosli until he bled,  and this is what happened to him:

MACCs Abu Kassim eats the humble pie

To cut the story short all those who fixed Rosli 8 years ago have met their retribution, their divine karma. Kevin Morais was killed buried and cemented in a drum. Gani Patail sacked so unceremoniously from his once all powerful post of Attorney General. What goes around comes around. And today is the ultimate victory for Lawyer Rosli when the MACC and government apologise to him in open court to a packed court gallery.

Never before has a government enforcement agency bowed to a private individual who sued it. But, Rosli’s case is not the usual case. It is a case of intrigue, of one man’s long and grueling battle against the whole machinery of the government. Like the movie David v Goliath,  when God is on your side, you can’t lose. So I say to Rosli – you have been very steadfast in your fight for the truth and God has rewarded you with victory.I am proud of what you have  accomplished in the cause of justice and congratulate you on your victory.

See below the MACC’S apology to Rosli which was read in witness box  in open court by Senior Assistant Commissioner MACC Saiful Ezral.


Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia dengan ini menyatakan seperti berikut:

1. Pada 11 Oktober 2007, Badan Pencegah Rasuah yang kini dikenali sebagai Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (“SPRM”) telah menangkap dan menggari Peguam Rosli Dahlan di pejabatnya di firma guamannya Tetuan Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill sehari sebelum Hari Raya Aidilfitri dan dikenakan pendakwaan.

2. Peguam Rosli Dahlan telah dilepaskan dan dibebaskan oleh Mahkamah dari pertuduhan tanpa dipanggil pembelaannya.

3. Peguam Rosli Dahlan telah mengambil tindakan guaman terhadap akhbar arus perdana iaitu Utusan Malaysia, The Star dan News Straits Times dan SPRM kerana memfitnahnya dengan menerbitkan cerita palsu mengenai  penangkapannya dengan keputusan yang berikut:

a) Pada 14 Januari 2013, Star Publications (M) Sdn Bhd telah membayar sejumlah ganti rugi yang tidak didedahkan dan telah menerbitkan satu pernyataan permohonan maaf di dalam akhbar “The Star” dan “The Star Online” seperti yang berikut:


In October 2007 we had published 2 news articles about the arrest and prosecution of Lawyer Rosli Dahlan with the titles “ACA ARRESTS SINGAPORE LAWYER” and “LAWYER CHARGED WITH HIDING INFORMATION ON HIS ASSESTS” respectively.

We acknowledge that the words used in the articles refer to Lawyer Rosli Dahlan and they were untrue and should be clarified as follows:

1. That he is not a Singapore Lawyer and is in fact a Malaysian lawyer;

2. That he does not hold a PR Status  and in truth is a Malaysian citizen;

3. That he is not and has never been a nominee for the senior police officer under investigation nor for that matter any other police officer;

4. That he had not failed to file a declaration required by the Anti- Corruption Agency and in truth and in fact had filed a statutory declaration dated 20.09.2007 under section 32(1)(c) of the Anti Corruption Act 1997 declaring that he does not hold any assets for any police officer within the period stipulated by the notice served on him;

5. That he was never issued with any order to declare his spouse’s assets nor was his spouse asked to make any declaration of her assets; ,

6. That he is not connected to nor did he hide any assets of nor was charged for hiding any assets of the senior police officer who was then under investigation by the ACA.

Our said news articles have conveyed the meaning that Lawyer Rosli Dahlan was a foreign lawyer who had acted in manner contrary to the proper behavior and ethics of an advocate and solicitor

We wish to clarify that we did not intend to cast any such negative imputation against the character or reputation of Rosli Dahlan and any such imputation is greatly regretted. If such imputation was conveyed in the article, we hereby unreservedly and unconditionally apologise to Rosli Dahlan for any distress or embarrassment that he may have suffered as a result of the publication.”

b) Pada 26 Februari 2013, The New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Bhd dan SPRM telah didapati bersalah dan diperintahkan oleh Mahkamah Tinggi untuk membayar ganti rugi sebanyak RM 300,000 dan kos kepada Peguam Rosli Dahlan; dan

c) Pada 6 April 2015, Utusan Malaysia telah mencapai penyelesaian dengan Peguam Rosli Dahlan dengan membayar ganti rugi yang tidak didedahkan dan telah sekali lagi mengulangi permohonan maaf tidak berbelah bahagi dan tidak bersyarat kepada En Rosli Dahlan dengan membacakan permohonan maaf di dalam mahkamah terbuka dalam terma-terma yang berikut:


Dibacakan oleh Pengarah Undang-Undang Utusan Malaysia En Shirad  Anwar:

1. Pada 12 Oktober 2007 semasa umat Islam membuat persiapan menyambut Hari Raya Aidilfitri, kami telah menerbitkan sebuah rencana bertajuk “Peguam Polis Gagal Isytihar Harta Didakwa Hari Ini” berkenaan tangkapan dan dakwaan terhadap Peguam Rosli Dahlan (kemudian daripada ini dirujuk sebagai “Artikel tersebut”).

2. Sejurus selepas penerbitan Artikel tersebut, apabila dituntut oleh Peguam Rosli Dahlan, kami telah di antara lain, pada 15.4.2008, menerbitkan di muka surat 4 akhbar Utusan Malaysia, satu Permintaan Maaf tidak berbelahbagi dan tidak bersyarat kepada Peguam Rosli Dahlan (kemudian daripada ini dirujuk sebagai “Permintaan Maaf tersebut”) yang intipati Permintaan Maaf tersebut adalah seperti berikut:-

3. Bahawa kami telah membuat dakwaan yang tidak benar terhadap Peguam Rosli Dahlan seperti berikut :

3.1 Bahawa beliau adalah seorang rakyat Singapura yang menjalankan amalan guaman di Malaysia, sedangkan beliau sebenarnya dan sememangnya seorang rakyat Malaysia.

3.2 Bahawa beliau telah melanggar undang-undang negara dengan sebab enggan membuat perisytiharan harta, sedangkan beliau sebenarnya telah membuat perisytiharan yang berkenaan.

3.3 Bahawa beliau menyembunyikan harta-harta milik pegawai kanan Polis yang sedang di siasat pihak BPR, sedangkan beliau tidak ada berbuat sedemikian.

3.4 Bahawa beliau merupakan seorang yang bersifat jahat dan bertindak dengan curang dalam menggalangi siasatan BPR, sedangkan beliau senantiasa berkerjasama dengan BPR dan perlakuan dan tindakannya adalah dalam batasan undang undang.

3.5 Bahawa Artikel tersebut telah memberi gambaran yang salah, iaitu bahawa Peguam Rosli Dahlan merupakan seorang peguam rakyat asing yang bertindak dengan sebegitu rupa yang berlawanan dengan sifat seorang peguambela dan peguamcara yang penuh beretika.

3.6 Bahawa kami menyesal akan perbuatan kami itu dan menyedari akan kesan buruk yang telah berlaku kepada Peguam Rosli Dahlan dan bahawa Artikel tersebut yang dikarang dan disiarkan itu bersifat sensasi dan publisiti yang telah melampaui batasan etika kewartawanan di sekitar berita ketika itu mengenai siasatan terhadap YDH Dato’ Pahlawan Haji Ramli bin Haji Yusuff, yang pada masa itu memegang jawatan Pengarah Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah, Polis DiRaja Malaysia.

4. Kami sekali lagi, atas permintaan dan dengan kebenaran dan persetujuan nyata daripada Peguam Rosli Dahlan, mengulangi intipati Permintaan Maaf tersebut seperti yang dinyatakan di atas dan sekali lagi memohon maaf yang tidak berbelah bahagi dan tidak bersyarat kepada Peguam Rosli Dahlan atas kandungan yang tidak benar dalam Artikel tersebut.

5. Kami juga kini sedia maklum bahawa Peguam Rosli Dahlan telah pun dilepaskan dan dibebaskan secara mutlak oleh Mahkamah dari kesemua pertuduhan yang dibuat terhadapnya sebelum ini oleh BPR yang kini dikenali sebagai Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (“SPRM”).”

6. Peguam Rosli Dahlan juga telah mengambil dua tindakan sivil seperti yang berikut:

a) Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur Guaman Sivil No. S 21-249-2009
Rosli bin Dahlan -lwn- Tan Sri Abu Kassim Mohamed, Anthony Kevin Morais, Kerajaan Malaysia & 15 Lagi

b) Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur Guaman Sivil 21NCVC-84-11/2013
Rosli bin Dahlan -lwn- Tan Sri Abdul Gani bin Patail, Tan Sri Musa Hassan, Tan Sri Abu Kassim, SPRM, Kerajaan Malaysia & 8 Lagi

6. Pada 2015,Defendan Ke-6 Mendiang Kevin Anthony Morais telah mati dibunuh dan Peguam Negara Tan Sri Abdul Gani bin Patail ditamatkan perkhidmatannya.

7. Mengambil perhatian perkara-perkara tersebut di atas, SPRM memutuskan kes ini tidak perlu dipanjangkan dan tidak membawa manfaat kepada rakyat dan negara Malaysia untuk terus dipertahankan.

7. Maka, SPRM bagi pigak semua Defendan-Defendan dalam perkara ini telah mencapai penyelesaian dengan Peguam Rosli Dahlan di mana beliau menarik balik semua tuntutan dan kami menyatakan kekesalan di atas kejadian ini.

8. Maka SPRM dan kesemua Defendan-Defendan dengan ini menyatakan penyesalan kami diatas kejadian yang menimpa Peguam  Rosli Dahlan.

9. Kedua-dua pihak Plaintif dan Defendan-Defendan bersetuju bekerjasama menegakkan keluhuran undang-undang dan mempertahankan kedaulatan Perlembagaan Persekutuan Negara Malaysia.

Gua Tolong Lu Lu Tolong Gua ( I help you, you help me) Brazilian Style sparks Street Protests

March 18, 2016

Gua Tolong Lu Lu Tolong Gua ( I help you, you help me) Brazilian Style sparks Street Protests

by Bruce Douglas

 Najib-Rosmah Partnership with a Samba Twist

Calls secretly recorded by investigating Judge suggest the President gave her predecessor a government role to avoid prosecution on corruption charges.

In the latest of a series of explosive revelations that could bring down the Brazilian government, a secretly recorded phone call between former President Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva and his successor, Dilma Rousseff, suggests his appointment to a ministerial position on Wednesday ( March 16)  was motivated by a desire to avoid prosecution in Brazil’s worst-ever corruption scandal.

Judge Sergio Moro, the lead prosecutor in Operation Lava-jato, a two-year investigation into corruption at the state-run oil company, Petrobras, released nearly 50 audio recordings to the media on Wednesday evening, prompting chaotic scenes in congress as opposition deputies demanded Rousseff’s resignation.

On Thursday morning (March 17) Lula was sworn in as a cabinet minister amid chaotic scenes inside and outside the presidential palace in Brasília.

Supporters inside the gallery where the ceremony took place started chanting his name as he walked in, while an opposition congressman who shouted “shame” was quickly bundled out. In a surprising development, a low-level federal judge in Brasília issued an injunction suspending Silva’s nomination, though government officials expected it to be overturned swiftly by a higher court.

Thousands of protesters congregated outside the presidential palace where government supporters, dressed in the red colours of the ruling Partido dos Trabalhadores, squared off against protesters dressed mainly in the yellow and green strip of the Brazilian football team.

On Wednesday night tens of thousands of Brazilians had gathered in São Paulo, Brasília, Belo Horizonte and other major cities to demand the president’s resignation. In Brasília, riot police fired tear gas and stun grenades at more than 5,000 demonstrators outside the presidential palace and Congress building. Many waved banners calling for Lula’s arrest. Thousands more demonstrators packed the main Avenue Paulista in São Paulo.

Earlier in the day (March 17), Lula was appointed cabinet chief in a controversial move that Rousseff said would strengthen her government, but which critics argued was an attempt to shield the former President, who is under investigation for corruption and money-laundering, from prosecution.

Under Brazilian law, government ministers can be tried only in the “privileged forum” of the supreme court. Opposition activists believe any trial in Brazil’s highest court is likely to progress much more slowly than in the federal court.

They also believe that the supreme court justices – many of whom were appointed by Lula and Rousseff – may prove far more sympathetic than Moro. The judge, from the southern city of Curitiba, has already handed down a number of severe sentences for some of Brazil’s top businessmen who have been found guilty of involvement in the Petrobras scandal.

In the most damaging conversation, recorded on Wednesday afternoon, Rousseff tells Lula that she is sending him over his ministerial papers “in case of necessity”. The Brazilian media and opposition have interpreted the remarks to mean that she was giving him the papers quickly so that Lula could show them to police to avoid detention.

A note published on the presidential palace website late on Wednesday disputed the opposition’s interpretation of the call. It states that Rousseff sent Lula the terms of office for him to sign in case he was unable to attend the swearing-in ceremony, due to take place in Brasília at 10am on Thursday. It also said that the presidency would be pursuing legal action against Moro.

The former President is accused of receiving benefits-in-kind from construction companies involved in the Petrobras scandal. Prosecutors allege he is the real owner of two luxury properties registered in the names of others. Lula denies the charges.

On March 4, he was briefly detained by police in São Paulo and taken in for “coercive questioning”, along with his wife, Marisa Letícia, and his eldest son, Fábio Luiz. On his release, a highly emotional Lula told supporters he had felt he had been “kidnapped” and questioned why Moro had used such an aggressive tactic when he had repeatedly offered to testify over the case.

That same day he also vented his frustrations to Rousseff, in another phone call that was secretly recorded by investigators and released by Moro to the press on Wednesday evening.

In that recording Lula lambasted Moro’s actions as “an unprecedented firework display”, after Rousseff noted the coincidence of damaging revelations being leaked to the press the day before his detention.

Lula added that the prosecutors in charge of the case “think that with the press leading the investigative process they are going to re-found the republic. We have a totally cowardly supreme court, a totally cowardly high court, a totally cowardly parliament … a speaker of the house who is fucked, a president of the senate who is fucked, I don’t know how many legislators under threat, and everyone thinking that some kind of miracle is going to happen.”

Notably, however, in that same conversation Lula also said “he would never enter government to protect myself”.

Moro’s decision both to record the phone conversations between the former and current President and to release them to the press has come in for severe criticism, even by those appalled by Lula’s decision to join the government.

The judge justified the decision by stating that the conversations were in the public interest. “Democracy in a free society requires that the governed know what their governors are doing, even when they try to act in the dark,” he wrote.

Moro also said he believes Lula had advance warning of the raid on 4 March and may have known his phone was tapped.

The latest revelations will intensify yet further the political polarisation in the country. By midnight on Wednesday there were reports of demonstrations against the government in at least 17 of Brazil’s 26 states.. In Rio de Janeiro, Adriana Balthazar, from the Vem Pra Rua protest movement, told the newspaper Folha de São Paulo that if Rousseff did not resign, there would be further protests. Other opposition activists want to organise a general strike starting next week.

In tense scenes at Thursday’s demonstrations a police cordon establishing a 50 metre gap between the two groups broke down, as anti-government activists broke through the police lines to taunt the other side.

“I came here for free,” they chanted, referring to the widespread allegation that PT supporters are in the pay of the government. “Fascists, fascists,” the government supporters shouted back. Police on horseback moved in on several occasions to restore order as firecrackers exploded and threats were exchanged.

The judge’s decision to to record and release the phone conversations between Dilma Rousseff and Luiz Ignacio Lula da Silva has come in for criticism.

Photojournalist Karina Zambrana, 26 said she was attending today’s pro-government protests in defence of democracy. “This is a very dangerous moment,” she said. “The major media organizations in Brazil are whipping people into a frenzy so they want war. We don’t want war. We are here for democracy.”

Civil servant Dimitri Silveira, 33, said he was not looking for conflict but that protesters were seeking to provoke government supporters. “We don’t want conflict. We want to defend our democratically-elected president but it seems all of our country’s institutions – the Police, the Judiciary – are against us,” he said.

Anti-government activists, however, have vowed to continue demonstrating until Rousseff leaves office.

“[This government] are robbing us and they have no shame,” Gustavo Bertosi, a 23-year old law student said.Asked whether he thought there was the possibility of conflict between the two sides, he smiled and said yes.

Ernesto Junior, 42, who described himself as a failed businessman, said “I just want what is best for the country. It’s not about right or left. No one can accept what is going on.”

Last Sunday, millions of Brazilians took part in the largest anti-government protests the country has ever seen. A pro-government rally is planned for Friday.

On top of the corruption allegations, Brazil is suffering from its worst recession in at least 25 years, with the economy shrinking 3.8% last year, and the forecast for 2016 similar. More than a million Brazilians protest against ‘horror’ government.

Rousseff is also facing separate impeachment proceedings, accused of illegally using state banks to plug budget deficits. Another case against her, in the supreme electoral court, claims her presidential campaign in 2014 was financed with cash from the Petrobras scandal. Last week, Rousseff insisted to the press she had no intention of resigning.

Brazil’s entire political class is now in the firing line. Opposition politicians who attempted to join Sunday’s anti-government protests were booed and forced to leave. Alongside Lula and Rousseff, Brazil’s vice-president, speaker of the house, president of the senate and main opposition leader have all been accused of involvement in the Petrobras corruption scandal.

Transcript of call between Rousseff and Lula, 16 March

Rousseff: Hello.

Lula: Hello.

Rousseff: Lula, let me tell you something.

Lula: Tell me, my love.

Rousseff: It’s this, I am sending Messias [Jorge Rodrigo Araújo Messias, Deputy Head of Legal Affairs at the cabinet office] round with the papers, so that we have them, just in case of necessity, that is the terms of office, right?

Lula: Uh-huh. Ok, ok.

Rousseff: That’s all, wait there, he is heading there.

Lula: OK, I’m here. I’ll wait.

Rousseff: Right?

Lula: OK.

Rousseff: Bye.

Lula: Bye, my love.