Police question Ambiga for one hour over links to Soros-funded organisation

KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan has been questioned by police for about one hour here Thursday over links to the Open Society Institute (OSI), which is part of the Open Society Foundations (OSF) founded by hedge fund billionaire George Soros.

"I only know that I was called in as the former Bersih chairman for matters relating to funding and OSI," she said.

Ambiga, who was Bersih 2.0 chairman from 2010 until 2013, said she was being investigated under section 124C of the Penal Code for activities detrimental to Parliamentary democracy.

"They keep alleging that we want to topple the Government. Just to be clear, our main demand is fair and free elections. We would be mad to do something like that," she said when met outside the Bukit Aman police headquarters.

She said the funding for Bersih 2.0 was the focus of the investigation and the issue was not new and had been raised before in 2012.

She said they had taken an English-language newspaper to court over the allegations then, and the publication had apologised for it.

She added that Bersih had always been transparent about its funding.

"We have always made it clear that Bersih 2.0 received US$25,000 (RM110,675) in funds from OSI in 2011 and US$9,690 (RM42,897) from the National Democracy Institute (NDI).

"Both sums were used in election-related projects and neither OSI nor NDI are banned by the Government," she said.

Bersih to sue TV3 on 'RM3.2b from Soros' claim

Bersih has decided to sue TV3 for alleged defamation on the TV channel's claim that the electoral reform movement received RM3.2 billion from American financier George Soros.

"We have handed TV3 a letter of demand to ask it to retract and apologise, but it said it will not to do that, so we are proceeding with legal action," Bersih chief Maria Chin Abdullah told reporters in Kuala Lumpur today.

She said about a week prior to the Bersih 5 rally on Nov 19, TV3 broadcasted a news segment where it claimed the movement received RM3.2 billion from Soros, without attributing any source to the claim.

She said TV3 also did not seek Bersih's comment on the issue.

"We were not given the right of reply," she said.

Bersih sent its letter of demand to TV3 a few days before Maria was arrested under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act (Sosma), on the eve of the Nov 19 Bersih 5 rally.

"They (the lawyers) had to wait till I came out (of detention) for further instructions, so I told them to proceed, since TV3 does not want to retract," Maria said.

Bersih filed the suit against TV3 at the beginning of this week, she said, and it is now waiting for a date to be fixed.

Interrogated on the donation

When she was detained under Sosma, Maria said, she was interrogated on whether Bersih's donation sum of RM2.6 million was part of the purported funding from Soros.

"No. All these are actually from the RM100 or RM1,000 that people give us… which we have announced and discussed in a press conference," she said.

Separately, in Suaram's 2016 human rights report, the civil society said that this was a relatively good year for freedom of assembly in Malaysia.

"There was a growing acceptance by government agencies that the public have a right to peaceful assembly.

"Rather than the usual hostile crackdown involving arrests and detention of activists and participants of an assembly, 2016 has been marked by reduced hostility between police on duty and participants of an assembly," the report states.

However, though there were no crackdowns on participants, Suaram noted that organisers were called in for questioning after peaceful rallies.

It also said that it was unfortunate the police and the Attorney-General's Chambers seemed to be relatively tolerant of the red-shirts, despite their clear intent to instigate violence throughout the Bersih 5 convoy drives.

The seven-week convoy was aimed at raising awareness on the Bersih 5 rally.

Ambiga seeks access to Maria before Tuesday's hearing

Bersih chairperson Maria Chin Abdullah's lawyer Ambiga Sreenevasan is urging police to allow access to her client before Tuesday's habeas corpus hearing.

Ambiga said Maria's lawyer and family members have not been allowed to see her since last Sunday.

"Please give us access to Maria for instructions on legal matters before her case on Tuesday.

"Have been trying to no avail," she said in a tweet to inspector-general of police Khalid Abu Bakar.

She added that an official request has also been sent.

Maria is held under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act, which allows detention without trial for 28 days.

She was arrested on Nov 18, the eve of the mammoth Bersih 5 rally which attracted at least 40,000 people in Kuala Lumpur, to demand clean elections and clean government.

Her family said they have not received any information on Maria and do not know her whereabouts.

It is believed that she is held at the Batu police camp in Kuala Lumpur, where the now defunct Internal Security Act detainees were once held before they are moved to the Kamunting Detention Centre in Perak.

Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) visited her last week and said she was held in solitary confinement in a windowless cell, which only has a woooden bed with no mattress and access to cold water for washing.

Her family said the light is constantly on in her cell, disrupting her sleep.

Police said they nabbed her over documents found in the raid at the Bersih office, connected to American billionaire George Soros-linked Open Society Foundations.

Bersih refutes this, saying that there was no such document seized during the raid, according to the list of items seized provided by police.

Survey: M'sia's polls boundaries worst in world

 

Malaysia has the worst electoral boundaries in the world and among the worst set of election laws, the Electoral Integrity Project (EIP) found.

This places Malaysia among countries with 'low electoral integrity' ranking 114 out of 127 nations surveyed along with the likes of Angola, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe, and Egypt, EIP's 2014 report said.

It trails far behind neighbour Indonesia, which ranks 51^st for its presidential elections. The Philippines and Thailand rank 91^st and 88^th place respectively.

Malaysia was dragged down by its score for voting boundaries, where it scored 28 out of 100 – the worst in the world. The average global score was 64.

International and domestic experts who responded to EIP's survey after GE13, said Malaysia's electoral boundaries discriminated against some parties, favoured incumbents and were not impartial.

Similarly, Malaysia was in the bottom five in electoral laws by scoring a dismal 33, far behind the global average of 64, the report found.

It was only better than Syria, Belarus, Tajikistan and Equitorial Guinea.

Repondents were asked to rate Malaysia's laws for fairness to smaller parties, whether the laws favoured governing parties and restricted citizens' rights.

Malaysia, however met the world average for voting process, with respondents saying there were few cases of violence during polls or fraudulent votes case, a simple voting process, and option to vote for overseas Malaysians.

Putrajaya loses bid to claim damages from Bersih over 2012 rally

Malay Mail
by PATHMA SUBRAMANIAM

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 30 — The Malaysian government today lost in its civil suit against electoral reform group Bersih 2.0, as the High Court ruled that the latter was not liable for property damage during the group’s sit-in protest on April 28, 2012.

High Court judge Datuk John Louis O’ Hara, in his decision today, said that although the Peaceful Assembly Act is constitutional the Bersih 2.0 steering committee,  is not responsible for the damages caused.

Justice O’Hara also dismissed the government’s claim for RM110,543.27 in property damages as the “acts and omissions of the cops invariably contributed and resulted in the damage.”

“I find the plaintiff’s (the government) claim not to be proved on the evidence and I dismiss the plaintiff’s claim for a declaration, special damages and interest.

“It’s clear to this court that the damages that occurred only happened after the first defendant had called off the rally,” said O’Hara, referring to Bersih 2.0’s former chairman Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan.

“Moreover, it was not shown to the satisfaction of the court that the damages that occurred were actually caused by the legitimate participants of the rally or by an independent agent,” he added.

Justice O’Hara noted that the government should use Section 7(a)(v) of the Act — which states a participant shall refrain from causing damage to property — against the “actual perpetrators of the damage”.

“Vicarious liability does not affect the organiser based upon the facts and evidence in this case,” he added.

But the judge rejected Ambiga’s counter claim that Section 6(2)(g) was unconstitutional, saying that the former Bar Council president, who challenged the constitutionality of the section did not manage to show how their rights were affected.

Section 6(2)(g) states that organisers are responsible to ensure that “the assembly will not endanger health or cause damage to property or the environment”.

O’Hara denied the defendants claims for cost except the group’s former steering committee member, Dr Wong Chin Huat, who was awarded RM21,000 in damages — partly for unlawful arrest, detention and assault during the April 2012 rally.

The judge also awarded Wong another RM30,000 in costs.

On May 23, 2012, the government sued Bersih 2.0 under Section 6 (2)(g) of the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) 2012, claiming compensation for alleged damages to property — including 15 police vehicles — during the rally.

The government had sought for special damages of RM110,543.27 from the then Bersih 2.0’s co-chairs Ambiga and A. Samad Said and 13 other committee members.

A total of 52 witnesses were called for this case, with 33 testifying for the government and 19 testifying for Bersih 2.0.

Zaidi: No grudges against those who sacked me

INTERVIEW Major Zaidi Ahmad may never fly a fighter jet again after being discharged from the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF), but the pilot said that he holds no grudges against those who had him sacked.

Zaidi appeared devastated when the military court announced that he would be discharged, but still reciprocated when the prosecution team comprising RMAF officers offered to shake his hand.

"We don't want to be hostile. In the concept of dakwah (missionary work) in Islam, today they may not stand with us, but perhaps they will in future.

"So, let us maintain that relationship," he told Malaysiakini.

He was found guilty of speaking to the media without the military council's authorisation and disclosing a RMAF about disciplinary action against him.

Zaidi, after voting in the last general election, had lodged a police report over the Election Commission's (EC) supposed indelible ink which could be easily washed away.

His action gained widespread media attention, landing him in hot soup with the RMAF.

Even though Zaidi said he was prepared for the worst during his trial and expected to be sacked at the very least, he appeared visibly sad after his sentencing.

Painful reality

Acknowledging this, Zaidi said despite his preparedness, the reality of him losing 26 years of service with the RMAF finally sunk in.

"Of course I was sad, I served for 26 years in the military and rarely took days off... but I was repaid in this manner.

"It is sad but I accept it, what else can be done? I accept the reality," said the 47-year-old father of four.

Zaidi also had kind words for Colonel Saadon Hasnan, who presided over the five-men panel which convicted him.

"I have never worked with him before, but we both have the same spirit as pilots.

"The spirit of pilots is where we are trained to be brave, independent and resilient in facing tough situations.

"It is just that our political affiliation may be different... most people are more comfortable conforming to the system," he noted.

Saadon had courted controversy after he allegedly asked Zaidi to become a rubber tapper in a Facebook comment while the trial was ongoing.

Zaidi has refused to appeal his sacking - citing bias - and his lawyer has filed a judicial review at the Kuala Lumpur High Court over the military court's alleged injustice.

From piloting to politics

The sacking was a bitter pill to swallow as Zaidi's childhood dream had always to be a pilot.

As a child, Zaidi would never miss a chance to catch fighter jets flying over his home village of Kampung Permatang Tengah, Kedah, heading to the RMAF's Butterworth air base in Penang.

Nonetheless, Zaidi said he has left the RMAF satisfied, as he had climbed up the ranks to become a pilot instructor.

Zaidi added that he is worried about his family's livelihood, but is earning a source of income through direct selling, on top of authoring a book with another in the works.

The norm for pilots who have ended their career with the RMAF would be to join the civil aviation industry, but Zaidi said this is an unlikely path for him to take.

Zaidi is fixed on "contributing to the political process", adding that he has received offers to join PKR, PAS and DAP.

However, Zaidi said he still needs to wait for his civilian identity card, and has yet to decide which political party he will join.

"When the present party ruling the government is not fit to rule any more, you need to come out with an alternative and obviously the alternative is Pakatan Rakyat," he said.

Zaidi noted that even in Pakatan there were "glitches", but said he is prepared to help the coalition in terms of military advice.

He added that he will strive for the truth even in politics, as he did while in the military.

"If tomorrow I am sacked from Pakatan for speaking the truth, so be it," he said.

Part 1: Willing to die for Malaysia, but not lie for Umno

---

This interview was jointly conducted by Nigel Aw and Ahmad Fadli KC.

In airman’s sacking, law experts see military authorities breaching natural justice, constitution

Malay Mail
by YISWAREE PALANSAMY

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 16 — Malaysia’s armed forces had failed to abide by the rules of natural justice and the Federal Constitution in the recent sacking of airman Major Zaidi Ahmad for blowing the whistle on the weaknesses of the electoral ink touted as indelible in the 2013 polls, law experts said last night.

Speaking at a forum organised by electoral reforms watchdog Bersih 2.0 here, Malaysian Bar vice-president Steven Thiru said that natural justice forms the cornerstone of the country’s supreme law.

He pointed out that the military tribunal that tried and sentenced Zaidi does not function “within the four corners of the constitution”, but stressed that even without that, the special court has a duty to dispense justice according to existing law.

“You will be surprised to know that the Military Court can imprison and even sentence a service personnel to death. It has very wide powers,” the lawyer said.

“There must be rights for both parties to be heard and a breach of the rule of natural justice can render the decision unlawful,” he added.

Steven said that in Malaysia, the right to work is not a contractual right alone but is also a constitutional right as it is essentially a person’s right to live.

Alluding to Zaidi’s case, the lawyer suggested that the dismissal of the airman who had served 26 years with the military was an example of this breach of natural justice.

“If you are going to sack someone therefore, you have to grant the person the right to be heard and you cannot get rid of someone in breach of natural justice as you will also breach his constitutional right,” he said.

The Bar Council man was not alone in his view.

Universiti Selangor law lecturer Dr Abdul Aziz Bari noted the tradition of following superior orders and natural justice sometimes conflict with each other in the military.

However, he said that the Federal Constitution as the country’s highest law, takes precedence to orders issued by a superior military officer, especially in Zaidi’s case.

“In this, I don’t see the logic as to how Major Zaidi was dismissed because he disregarded a superior order, because we have a constitution and what he did is legit under the constitution.

“He was just exercising the moral duty of a responsible citizen by lodging a police report. We are dealing with a situation whereby a public authority like the Election Commission failed to do its job,” the academic said, adding, “So where does his fault really lie?”

Abdul Aziz said that even orders issued by the military must be based on the law and be just, adding that morality cannot be set aside.

“Moral imperative must prevail otherwise, what’s the point of the Federal Constitution?” he asked, alluding to the question of bias raised by Zaidi’s defence team during the latter’s court martial last year.

On November 5, 2014 Zaidi’s lawyers had applied to dissolve the military court panel which presided over his disciplinary case for publicly complaining about the indelible ink, claiming that there has been “real bias”.

Mohamed Hanipa Maidin, the lead counsel for Zaidi, said that his client had found a comment in response to an October 20, 2014 article by news portal Malaysiakini, allegedly made by one of the judges in this case which would indicate bias.

In Zaidi's affidavit that was sighted by reporters, the comment was posted on October 21 under the name of one “Saadon T'son”, with the remark being “Klu tak nak jd tentera duduk kampung motong getah jer.” (If don't want to be in the military, just stay in the village and tap rubber.”

Steven pointed out that with the shadow of bias hanging over the military tribunal, it would have been proper for the person alleged to have voluntarily stepped down.

“Usually, the person implicated as having a strong notion against or for the case must disqualify themselves. He or she may not be biased but there is a likelihood of bias… justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done and even if the judge carries on with the ruling, questions will still arise, even though their judgement was right,” Steven said.

He pointed out that while the tribunal reserves the right to dismiss Zaidi, it has to take note of another implied rule, that the decision imposed must commensurate with the offence.

“The question that must be asked now is if the dismissal was harsh,” Steven said.

On Monday, a five-man panel in the Military Court here found Zaidi to be guilty of two charges — publishing an article without the consent of the Defence Ministry, and revealing the contents of official documents on the indelible ink without authorisation from the Malaysian Armed Forces Council.

The airman who had served for 26 years was sentenced to be dismissed from the military.

Indelible ink was introduced in Election 2013 as one of the main safeguards against repeat voting, but the scandal surrounding its easy removal transformed it into a symbol of the widespread electoral fraud allegedly perpetrated to keep the Barisan Nasional coalition in power.

What about the real culprits behind the indelible ink fiasco, asks PKR

After whistleblower Major Zaidi Ahmad's dismissal from the Armed Forces, PKR and election watchdog Bersih 2.0 want to know what has been done to penalise the real culprit – the company that supplied the controversial ink that washed off easily, leading to claims that the May 2013 general election results were compromised.

PKR's Rafizi Ramli told The Malaysian Insider that even if the contract for the supply of the ink was given to a government crony company, the supplier should have delivered the right product.

"Even if the company that supplied the ink was a crony (of Putrajaya), the least they could have done is to make sure that the ink was indelible," the Pandan MP said.

"And if Major Zaidi was punished for merely stating the truth, then a more severe or harsher punishment should be given to those who are responsible for the whole mess in the first place."

Rafizi, who is PKR secretary-general, had revealed in Parliament last year that the indelible ink contract was given to a Mohamed Salleh Mohd Ali, who is closely linked to country’s leadership and the Election Commission’s (EC) top officials.

He said Integrated Challenger Malaysia Sdn Bhd, one Mohamed Salleh’s companies, not only secured the contract to supply the ink but also T-shirts and caps for GE 13 in May 2013. Salleh, he had said then, was a “pro” at conducting direct negotiations with the government. He had even secured contracts from the Defence Ministry.

The PKR lawmaker had earlier revealed that his investigations showed that the contract for the ink supply was given to a company owned by a Singaporean who had no expertise on the matter.

He also disclosed that the company did not have the capital for the job and had met a Kampung Baru businessman to acquire a RM7 million loan.

Rafizi further demanded the resignation of the entire EC as the public had lost confidence in it.

He told The Malaysian Insider that the EC officials who had chosen Integrated Challenger as the ink supplier should also be hauled up.

"Until today, no one has been held accountable for the supreme wrong that happened. No one in the EC has been hauled up or punished for selecting this company to supply the ink."

He said after GE 13, even the EC had admitted it had made a mistake in ordering the substandard ink.

"In that sense, I cannot understand why someone is being penalised for stating the plain truth, which was reinforced by the thousands of reports nationwide about the ink," Rafizi said.

"Contrastingly, the punishment given to Major Zaidi and his subsequent sacking from the military gives the impression that one will penalised for stating the truth."

Zaidi, 45, was yesterday dismissed from the Royal Malaysian Air Force after 26 years of service for breaching two standing orders by giving a media statement without the consent of the Defence Ministry, and for leaking confidential information without the consent of the Armed Forces Council.

The gist of his media statement was the indelible ink used in the general election washed off easily, thus allegedly compromising the integrity of the polls.

"The politically motivated conviction and punishment, I believe, is to send a signal to the public that if you tell the truth that puts the ruling government in a bad light, you will be penalised," Rafizi, who is also PKR vice-president, said.

"Major Zaidi is one of the brave ones who dared to come forward to tell the truth."

Election watchdog Bersih 2.0 also highlighted the fact that despite Zaidi's efforts, no action has been taken against the EC to date.

"No one from the EC has ever had to account for this sham. Nothing has ever come from the hundreds of police report lodged against the EC over this, except for this particular one, which resulted in punishment for the whistleblower instead of the wrongdoer," it said in a statement.

"Major Zaidi has played his role as a citizen to highlight the biggest scandal among the irregularities that marred the 13th general election. For that, he has paid a heavy price, while Malaysia, too, has lost a fine soldier."

Bersih said it was "extremely disappointed" with the verdict, adding that the army man had only lodged a report over the failure of the indelible ink as he did not want the elections to be marred.

"Bersih 2.0 knows how committed Major Zaidi is as a citizen, a family man, and a soldier. It is precisely because of his personal, professional and societal commitment that he lodged a police report over the failure of the indelible ink during early voting in the 13th general election.

"He also wanted to protect the military’s image from being tarred alongside that of the EC – because, to him, keeping silent would be complicit to the farce being perpetuated on the people.” – January 13, 2015.

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/what-about-the-real-culprits-behind-the-indelible-ink-fiasco-asks-pkr#sthash.IfFiwWo0.dpuf

It is the armed forces and the Najib government which had been dishonoured by Major Zaidi’s conviction and the travesty of justice in sacking him for standing up for the truth

By Lim Kit Siang Blog,

Major Zaidi Ahmad “dishonourably discharged” from the armed forces by a court martial for blowing the whistle about the washable “indelible ink” in the 13th General Elections?

How can a person be “dishonourably discharged” for doing an honourable thing, as speaking and standing up for the truth in a nation that cherishes truth and moral values?

It has been said that justice is truth in action. In Major Zaidi’s case, we see truth in action being penalized, making the court martial proceeding a travesty of justice and blot on the moral conscience of the country.

It is the armed forces and the Najib government which had been dishonoured by Major Zaidi’s conviction and the travesty of justice in sacking him for standing up for the truth.

Major Zaidi did not tell any lie or falsehood when he revealed that the indelible ink used in the 13th General Election could be washed off.

Bersih has rightly pointed out that “”Nothing has ever come from the hundreds of police report lodged against the Election Commission over this except for this particular one, which resulted in punishment for the whistleblower instead of the wrongdoer”.

The Election Commission owes in particular Major Zaidi Ahmad a duty of full recompense, as Major Zaidi Ahmad had neither told a lie nor a falsehood.

The fault is not Major Zaidi Ahmad but must be fully and absolutely borne by the Election Commission.

The Election Commission should fully compensate Major Zaidi Ahmad for all the monetary losses in remuneration and pension entitlements as a result of the unjust decision by the court martial today.

At this moment of national moral crisis in the country, when lies, falsehoods, chicanery and dishonesty seem to rule the roost in public life instead of honesty, probity and industry, Malaysia needs more Major Zaidis at all levels of government instead of drumming them out of public service.

If there is any case where the Defence Minister or even the Prime Minister should intervene to ensure that Major Zaidi can continue his sterling service in the military, this is the one.

Is Hishammuddin or Najib capable of such greatness?

FRU caused permanent injury, High Court told

 

As a result of a permanent injury - caused by the police during the first Bersih rally in 2007 - he has had to use a walking stick, a 38-year-old freelancer related to the Kuala Lumpur High Court today.

Aleyasak Hamid @ Hassan, from Kajang, Selangor said that he was an innocent bystander and had merely wanted to observe the Bersih rally when the incident on Nov 10, 2007 occurred.

He added that he was at the Kampung Baru mosque for afternoon prayers, and then he asked his aunt to send him to Dataran Merdeka, as he had never watched a big rally before.

"She dropped me at Kamdar Jalan Tuanku Abdul Rahman. From there, I walked with the crowd towards Dataran Merdeka, and there I saw people reciting the doa and selawat. The situation was orderly, controlled and peaceful," he noted.

"Suddenly, I heard shouts of ‘run, run!’ and watched the Federal Reserve Unit (FRU) approaching. Initially I sat at Dataran Merdeka, then after hearing the commotion I started to run, but fell near the big flower pots by the side of the road.

"Then the FRU officers surrounded me and kicked at my ribs. They stepped on my left knee and then I heard a ‘pop’ sound - I knew then that my knee was fractured," he told the court in answering to questions from his lawyer Latheefa Koya.

Aleyasak (left) was testifying in his suit where he named the Kuala Lumpur police chief, the Dang Wangi OCPD, the inspector-general of police and the government as defendants.

The plaintiff added that he could not run from the authorities following the fracture and he pleaded to the FRU to stop assaulting him.

Aleyasak said he shielded his face with his arm to prevent further assaults by the police.

“I pleaded to them to carry me to the police truck as they asked me to move there. However, my calls went unheeded and I walked to the truck in pain while the police continue to hurl verbal abuses at me. When I arrived at the truck, a policeman kicked my fractured knee and it hit the truck,” he said.

Surgery two days later

The plaintiff said surgery was performed on his leg at the Kuala Lumpur Hospital (HKL) on Nov 12, and he had to undergo follow-up treatment at HKL and also at the Kajang Plaza Medical Centre till today.

Aleyasak said he lodged a police report over the incident, a day after the rally but till today no action has been taken.

He said that as a result of the injury, he could not do his job at a pest control company as he no longer had the strength to climb high places and lift things.

“As a result of the injury, I had to do odd jobs to support my family and by selling nasi lemak, goreng pisang (banana fritters) and giving tuition. My pay is not stable and depends on my personal business,” he said, adding that he also find it difficult to find a permanent job as a result of the injury.

“I am saddened that I could not be a a good father to my child as I cannot run or do activities which require physical strength,” Aleyasak said about the extent of his injury.

He produced reciepts for his treatment at HKL and Kajang Plaza Medical Centre and also the for the purchase of his walking stick as evidence in the trial.

The hearing continues before Judicial Commissioner Azizul Azmi bin Adnan tomorrow with testimonies from the former HKL doctor who treated him and two police officers.

Bersih wants cops in on Zaidi's 'bias' trial

After Sedition Act flip-flop, how now for Najib’s election reform?

Following Putrajaya's about-turn on the Sedition Act repeal, questions now hang over another of Datuk Seri Najib Razak's promised reforms – to place the Election Commission under parliamentary oversight.

Announced less than a month after the May 5 general election last year, the plan to have a bipartisan committee oversee the EC to address concerns over its alleged bias now appears to have hit a snag.

EC chairman Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof said the plan would not be happening any time soon.

"It is still being carefully studied," he told The Malaysian Insider when asked about the progress made so far since Najib's announcement last year to remove the EC from the purview of the Prime Minister's Department.

Aziz said it would not be easy to implement the reform as it required constitutional changes.

Najib made the announcement on June 1, last year in a speech for the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong's birthday celebration in Istana Negara.

In the 13th general election (GE13) a month earlier, the ruling Barisan Nasional had gained under 47% of the popular vote although it won 133 seats in the 222-member Dewan Rakyat.

The opposition, Pakatan Rakyat, received 51% of the popular vote and 89 seats.

“The government has decided to transfer the control and functions of the EC to a special committee consisting of MPs from all political parties, either from the government or the opposition,” Najib said then.

“With this move, it is hoped that the impartiality of the Election Commission is no longer questioned and that the confidence of the people towards the commission can be strengthened,” Bernama had reported him saying.

Aziz also told The Malaysian Insider that apart from amending the Federal Constitution, such a move would also need the support of two-thirds of the MPs in the Dewan Rakyat.

“Everything is still at an early stage of planning," he said, adding that the EC was also trying to avoid a controversy similar to when it decided to implement the use of indelible ink.

"Although the intention may be good, we still need to study this plan carefully, all the pros and the cons.

"In the past, even with the slightest mistake, EC was attacked mercilessly. This time, we have to tread carefully," he said.

Najib's announcement had come amid accusations that the EC had favoured the BN and had even helped the 13-party coalition keep its unbroken grip on power. The polls last year saw indelible ink used for the first time in Malaysian polls but claims of gerrymandering and malapportionment by the EC remained.

Responding positively to the proposal, PR had suggested that it was willing to lead the committee "to ensure the exercise has genuine intention of restoring the public’s confidence in the EC".

EC should report to Parliament

Merdeka Center executive director Ibrahim Suffian said the criticism against the EC was the reason the plan to put it under parliamentary oversight needed to be executed.

"There are those who say EC is not free because it is under the purview of the Prime Minister's Department. We are now more aware about democracy, that was why NGOs were pushing for more transparency and fairness from the election regulator," Ibrahim said.

Ibrahim, who was also involved in election monitoring work for the polls last year, said the selection and appointment of EC members should also be done more fairly without any direct involvement of the prime minister.

"When it is under the Parliament, appointments of members of the commission, the selection and appointment process will be decided by a bipartisan panel.

"So the chances of the EC being seen as a neutral party increase."

Election reform group Bersih 2.0 has clear ideas as to how Najib's proposal should be implemented.

Its chairperson, Maria Chin Abdullah, said the EC should become an executive body similar to the National Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) which has its own budget and administration.

"We want EC to be placed under the Parliament Act, just like Suhakam. For Suhakam, it is specifically under the Human Rights Commission Act.

"This way, EC will report directly to the Parliament and become an executive body," said Maria.

She added that by doing so, the election regulator would have the power to investigate and present its findings in Parliament.

"It is important for EC to have the power to act against misconduct, or at least the power to investigate. Once they can conduct an investigation, they will have to present their report and it can then be debated.”

Aziz, however, continued to defend the EC's independence, insisting that it was not controlled by any party, adding that placing the commission under parliamentary purview would not resolve charges of bias against the EC.

"They (the opposition) always think that the EC is not independent, but even if it is under the Parliament, there will be someone who is in control, for example, the Speaker.

"They may make the same charges again if the decision that is made by the Speaker is not favourable to them," he said.

The EC, formed in 1957 under the Federal Constitution, falls under the purview of the Prime Minister’s Department.

Najib has said that the elections regulator was neither a government department nor agency but a statutory body whose members received the same protection as Federal Court judges.

After the contentious GE13, PR had organised several rallies throughout the country, accusing BN of “stealing” the elections as the coalition had lost the popular vote for the first time since 1969, but still retained federal power. – December 2, 2014.

- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/after-sedition-act-flip-flop-how-now-for-najibs-election-reform#sthash.AcRWnbMn.dpuf

Focus on objections now, protest later, says Bersih

 

Electoral reform group Bersih says its immediate priority ahead of the Election Commission’s (EC) plan to gazette the constituency redelineations will be to take opportunity of the objection period.

Bersih chief Maria Chin Abdullah said while mass rallies, which the NGO is renowned for, are still on the table, it will only come after that.

Maria (left) said the government has also become more "sophisticated" by allowing protests to take place but ignoring the demands made.

Hence, more "creative ways" are needed, she added.

"We want to get as many people as possible to object if we find that the redelineation is really unfair.

"If a lot of people object, the Election Commission (EC) will have to rethink: What on earth is it drawing, if so many people are objecting," Maria told a press conference in Kuala Lumpur today.

She was responding to a suggestion that the electoral reform movement should press for its demands on redelineation through street protests.

The federal constitution stipulates a 30-day objection period after a redelineation exercise is announced, where affected local authorities, state governments and groups of at least 100 voters can submit objections.

The EC is required by the constitution to hold an inquiry to hear these objections, and both Tindak Malaysia and Bersih are running separate programmes to recruit and train volunteers on how to file such objections.

'Mass objection tantamount to referendum'

Tindak Malaysia is also appealing for volunteers to help photograph the new redelineation maps once it is put on public display in each constituency, so that it can be compiled for analysis.

This would allow the group to analyse and mathematically determine whether the voters in each state would be evenly distributed among its constituencies based on the new maps, and formulate counter-proposals.

A computer programme that helps automate the process is also in the works.

The redelineation exercise is expected to begin by the end of the year, and both groups are concerned that EC’s proposed electoral boundaries would be malapportioned and skew the results of future elections.

Concurring with Maria, Tindak Malaysia founder PY Wong said a mass objection against the EC’s proposals would be tantamount to a referendum against the commission and would be more effective than street protests.

“Imagine this - 111,000 objectors (100 each from half of Malaysia’s parliamentary constituencies) are virtually similar to a referendum. So if you want your say, sign up as an objector now.

“If we have half-a-million objectors, that is a massive message to the EC - get your act together, because we are serious this time,” he said.

BERSIH: Ahli Parlimen patut lantik speaker

'Parliamentary democracy will collapse'

 

The parliamentary democracy system in Malaysia will "collapse" if the majority party is unable to choose its own nominee for the Selangor menteri besar position, warned electoral watchdog Bersih today.

Its chairperson Maria Chin Abdullah said if an "unelected body" chooses the head of government, the nation's future after the 14th general election will be uncertain.

"Bersih 2.0 calls upon all parties to respect the rules of the game, enshrined not only in the established Westminster constitutional conventions, but also explicitly in Selangor state constitution which stipulates that any assemblyperson must ‘command the confidence of the majority of the members of the assembly’.

"We remind all parties that what is at stake in the Selangor menteri besar crisis is not about who is the best candidate for the chief executive office.

"It is about whether our parliamentary democracy – the very basis of our constitutional monarchy - can continue to function, not only now for Selangor but possibly also at the federal level after the next election," she added in a statement.

She said that "extra-constitutional means" may be attractive to all parties in a prolonged power struggle, while forgetting that the whole episode might destabilise the nation.

Selangor Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah is slated to appoint a new menteri besar on Tuesday, but it is widely expected that the new MB will not be PKR president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, who is PKR and DAP's choice for the post.

Wan Azizah also has 30 signed statutory declarations by state assemblypersons backing her in the 56-member state assembly.

Speculation is rife that PKR deputy president Azmin Ali may be appointed.

Time for Parliament reform

In 2011, Malaysians were promised by the Najib Abdul Razak administration that there will be “functional and inclusive democracy”, which he solemnly declared in his Malaysia Day message.

However, making the Parliament function and inclusive is an uphill task and only rarely exciting. One such rare instance was the Parliamentary Select Committee on the Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code in 2004, where parliamentarians went round the country soliciting views and debating with the public.

The other time was by the Select Committee on National Unity and National Service. Since 2004, we have not experienced any such consultations.

There are many issues of concern surrounding the Parliament and not surprisingly, people have lost faith in the process of law and policy making.

In a study carried out by Ngeow Yeok Meng, et al on ‘Politeness and Ethnic Sensitivities in the Malaysian Parliament’ (2008), she found that out of 222 MPs, 5 percent or 10 MPs were found to be involved in using negative remarks to attack others or to defend themselves, with name-calling using animals such as pigs and snakes or adjectives like “biadap” (rude) and so forth. Not to mention unchecked sexist remarks by parliamentarians such as Bung Moktar Radin.

The larger assault to parliamentary democracy other than name-calling is of course the deliberate acts to silence debates, making one wonders what is still left of democracy in the Parliament.

Recently, N Surendran (Padang Serai) and Fuziah Saleh (Kuantan) were slapped with six-month suspensions for simply questioning the speaker’s decision. Their suspension was not given sufficient time for Parliament to debate but rushed through by the speaker.

In 2011, the passing of the Peaceful Assembly Act was completed within seven days of its introduction. The opposition MPs walked out in protest at the limited time allowance for debate on the amendments to the bill.

We also have a situation where, within one day, eight bills were rushed through on April 19, 2011, including crucial bills like the Election Offences (Amendment) Bill 2012, Universities and University Colleges (Amendment) Bill 2012, and Printing Presses and Publications (Amendment) (PPPA) Bill 2012.

As a result of bad law-making, students and academicians are now taken to task, suspended or persuaded to even take early retirement for expressing views deemed to be anti-government. Also, the PPPA still hovers over media companies’ existence with avenues remain closed for constructive amendments.

All these are but symptoms of an executive-controlled Parliament, with powerful and unelected (i.e., unpunishable by voters) speaker, partisan and arbitrary agenda setting, last-minute tabling of bills, inadequate debate time, unanswered or poorly answered parliamentary questions, no room for non-governmental business, insufficient resource support for MPs, and last but not least, lack of public consultation, access and participation in legislative processes.

Now, what “functional and inclusive democracy”, if we do not even have a functional and inclusive parliament? And, if the August House is but a rubber-stamp of the executive?

Urgent need for reform and public confidence-building

Parliamentary reforms need to happen to restore public confidence. It will restore effective legislative function, give MPs a more meaningful space to debate and counter-propose in the formation of laws and public policies, allow for public feedbacks as well as to ensure we truly have a working, “functional and inclusive” parliament.

Bersih 2.0 and like-minded civil society groups are now working on a comprehensive agenda on parliamentary reform. We would like to invite all concerned members of the public to share with us their knowledge and insights. Here are some of the issues we are looking into.

1. Reform of speaker’s power

The speaker and deputy speakers now enjoy unchecked power and their partial decisions confirm their representation of the interests of only one coalition, and not the entire Parliament. To make matters worse, the speaker is not even an elected parliamentarian so much so he can never be punished by voters!

Hence, it is timely to review the Standing Order that govern the day-to-day running and rules of debates in Parliament, the discipline and code of conduct of MPs, and public businesses.

2. Non-governmental business

In place of the speaker and his deputies’ unquestionable discretion, there must be a bi-party or multiparty mechanism to set the agenda of the House. The parliamentary session now is exclusively occupied by governmental business such as bills tabled by ministers, leaving no room for non-governmental businesses.

Reforms must take place for government backbenchers and opposition parliamentarians must be able to push their agenda. These include (a) greater priority to private members’ bills to ensure they are debated; (b) “voting by division” on every bill and conscience voting so that MPs can take individual positions and not be held back by party whips; (c) recognition and access to ministerial information for shadow cabinet; and (d) “opposition week” for the opposition to raise issues.

3. Ample time for questioning and debates

Time allocation must be reasonable that it is not used as a convenient excuse to bury the opposition or backbench questions. To begin with, question time should be extended to ensure a maximum number of questions - especially the difficult ones - get to be answered orally. There should also be Prime Minister’s Question (PMQ) Time so that the prime minister can be scrunitised and grilled by opposition MPs and government backbenchers.

For tabling of bills, MPs must be given ample time to study the bills and prepare for the debates by way of stakeholder consultation amongst others. Only then, parliamentarians can play the role of lawmakers to propose amendments when necessary and not just be reduced to the rubber-stamp of the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC), which is now the de facto lawmaking body.

This would mean more days that the Parliament should convened in a year.  In 2012, the Dewan Rakyat met for 68 days or precisely 560 hours 58 minutes. Divided by 222 MPs, on an average an MP had only 2 hours 31 minutes 37 seconds to speak and be heard of the entire year in 2012.

This also comes back to the size of the Parliament. The more MPs, then the less time each of them can speak, and they are more inclined to go for their 15 minutes of fame rather than deliberating on laws and policies substantially.

4. Parliamentary committees

Modern Parliaments set up standing and select committees to facilitate division of labour amongst MPs. This is however under-utilised in the Malaysian Parliament, and most members of the public have probably only heard of one standing committee, the Public Accounts Committee.

With members from across parties, standing committees can be set up to monitor ministerial business or to formulate specific laws or policies. One important advantage of such committees is that they facilitate public access and participation in the legislative and policy-formulation process through mechanisms like hearings, making the political system more consultative.

5. Research support for MPs

MPs are usually left to their device to carry out their own law and policy researches with little or no support in terms of staff and availability of data or information. A handful of Parliament staff are allocated and shared by 222 parliamentarians and this limits building substantive debates that could happen. Budgets need to be set aside to build capacity and support from resource staff.

Parliamentary reform hand-in-hand with electoral reform

At the end of the day, what we really need is an institutional reform of Parliament so as to rebuild it to represent the democracy that we want. The problem will not get fixed even if we see a change of government.

This requires political will, not just from the political parties, but also from the public. Parliamentary reform must be seen as an inseparable extension to electoral reform.

Really, what is the point of fighting for free and fair elections if that would only deliver us dysfunctional parliament and legislatures?

---

MARIA CHIN ABDULLAH is the chairperson for the Coalition for Free and Fair Elections 2.0 (Bersih 2.0) and the executive director of Empower. She believes politicians are bad masters if not made good servants through free, fair and competitive elections. Bersih 2.0 is having a fund raising dinner to support its work on free and fair elections. More information here.

 

Bersih 2.0 dedah kepada Obama, Najib punca ekstremis kaum dan agama berleluasa

 

Dalam perbincangan dengan Presiden Amerika Syarikat Barack Obama, Pengerusi Bersih 2.0, Maria Chin Abdullah mendedahkan kepincangan pentadbiran Datuk Seri Najib Razak. – Gambar The Malaysian Insider, 28 April, 2014.

Pengerusi Bersih 2.0, Maria Chin Abdullah mengambil kesempatan pertemuan dengan Presiden Amerika Syarikat (AS) Barack Obama untuk mendedahkan kepincangan pentadbiran Datuk Seri Najib Razak sebagai punca ekstremis agama dan kaum berleluasa di Malaysia.

Maria yang turut aktif dalam gerakan hak asasi manusia di Malaysia berkata, slogan demokratik dan kesederhanaan yang dilaungkan oleh Najib hanya topeng semata-mata.

"Saya ambil peluang ini untuk menegaskan Malaysia bukan sebuah negara demokratik dan tidak sederhana, saya beritahu beliau (Obama)," kata Maria kepada The Malaysian Insider di Kuala Lumpur malam tadi.

"Kami berbincang dalam tempoh 50 minit... perbincangan berkenaan undang-undang dan akta tekanan, termasuk tahanan tanpa bicara seperti Akta Hasutan.”

Dalam pertemuan itu, Maria juga sempat berkongsi dengan Obama bagaimana pentadbiran Najib bermain politik agama selepas gagal mendapatkan sokongan majoriti rakyat Malaysia.

"Kerajaan sedia ada ini adalah sebuah kerajaan minoriti, dan kerana tidak mendapat sokongan kerajaan, terpaksa membina asas berdasarkan agama Islam hingga menyebabkan ekstremisme agama berlaku," kata beliau.

Maria juga menerangkan mengenai kemelut dalam isu kalimah Allah, serbuan dan serangan ke atas gereja dan mengenai usaha Najib menyokong pelaksanaan hukum hudud.

"Jika tiada perubahan yang tulen sekarang, ia pasti akan membawa kepada perpecahan dalam negara kerana isu agama dan kaum," katanya.

"Dalam isu ini, kerajaan mesti menghentikannya jika mereka mengiktiraf masyarakat yang pelbagai kaum, tetapi mereka tidak lakukannya."

Selain politik agama, Maria juga mendedahkan penemuan Tribunal Rakyat yang dijalankan oleh Bersih 2.0 di mana banyak berlaku kepincangan dalam Pilihan Raya Umum ke-13 lalu.

"Kami juga bawa isu tentang senarai pemilih, penipuan, rasuah, kempen berbentuk ugutan yang membantu kerajaan minoriti mengekalkan kuasa," katanya.

Selain Maria, antara yang berpeluang bertemu Obama di Hotel Ritz Carlton, Kuala Lumpur semalam adalah Pengerusi Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia (Suhakam) Tan Sri Hasmy Agam, peguam dan aktivis hak asasi manusia Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, Presiden Majlis Peguam Malaysia Christopher Leong dan ahli majlis Honey Tan, Pengerusi dan Pengarah Islamic Renaissance Front (IRF) Dr Ahmad Farouk Musa, Pengarah Eksekutif Sisters In Islam (SIS) Ratna Osman dan wakil Majlis Gereja-Gereja Malaysia (CCM), Rev Dr Herman Shastri.

"Isu rampasan Injil berbahasa Melayu juga diberi perhatian dan saya bangkitkan mengenai jurang sempit yang dihadapi penganut agama Kristian di sini, di mana kami sering terperangkap dalam tekanan antara majoriti lawan minoriti," kata Dr Herman.

Selain itu, isu-isu seperti pendakwaan berat sebelah oleh Putrajaya serta pelaksanaan undang-undang baru yang bertentangan dengan hak asasi manusia juga dibincangkan.

"Kami juga bangkitkan mengenai penggunaan Akta Hasutan sebagai alat dakwaan bermotifkan politik ke atas Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim dan juga aktivis sosial.

"Pengerusi Majlis Peguam, Christopher Leong menjelaskan secara terperinci mengenai penggunaan akta yang menindas dalam negeri serta pengenalan akta baru yang membawa perbicaraan tanpa bicara atau Akta Pencegahan Jenayah (PCA)," kata Maria.

Malah, semasa perbincangan itu, pihak Suhakam juga memberitahu Obama mengenai kuasa terhad yang diberikan kepada mereka, kata Maria lagi.

Lebih mengecewakan lagi, Maria berkata Najib juga tidak mempunyai keberanian dan mengambil inisiatif untuk bertemu dengan kumpulan sivil, walhal Obama sanggup meluangkan masa hampir sejam berbincang dengan mereka.

"Kami juga beritahu Obama, Perdana Menteri tidak pernah berjumpa dengan kami.

"Tapi beliau ambil masa hampir sejam untuk bertemu dengan kami, malah menjemput kami," kata beliau.

Obama tiba di Malaysia pada Sabtu dalam siri lawatan tiga harinya serta mengadakan mesyuarat dua hala dengan Malaysia.

"Kami juga menerangkan berkenaan situasi hak asasi di Malaysia, dan meminta AS tidak lagi menggelar Malaysia sebagai negara demokratik dan negara sederhana, kerana ia memberi kesan kepada tugas hak asasi manusia," kata Maria.

"Kita memerlukan transformasi demokratik.”

Maria berkata, Obama mempunyai tahap diplomasi yang tinggi dan akan mengambil tindakan lanjut terhadap segala isu yang dibangkitkan mereka.

Hari ini, Obama akan berlepas ke Filipina sebagai destinasi terakhir lawatannya ke Asia sebelum pulang ke AS. – 28 April, 2014.

Ambiga schools Dr M on nation's real foes

 

"Corruption, abuse of power, destruction of fundamental institutions, erosion of human rights, racism and extremism... Do you want me to go on?" asked S Ambiga.
          
Responding to Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the former Bersih chairperson said the elements mentioned above, and not street protests, are what cause instability in a nation.

"And as far as Malaysia is concerned, these are the factors that have caused and are causing instability," Ambiga added.

Without the slightest doubt, Ambiga told Malaysiakini, Mahathir and the Election Commission (EC) are aware that elections are not free and fair in Malaysia.

"They know what the people want, but they lack confidence (of winning) if the election is free and fair.

"It is they who are destroying democracy, and you can quote me on this in the strongest possible terms," said the lawyer, who has led two mammoth Bersih rallies in the past.

Form RCI on GE13

Challenging the government to establish a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) into the last general election if it felt that the contest was free and fair, Ambiga argued that holding elections does not mean that true democracy exists.

In his latest blog posting, Mahathir trained his guns on the Bersih rallies when expressing his views on the perils of street demonstrations.

Among others, he accused Bersih of organising the rallies, which clogged the major arteries of Kuala Lumpur and drew international attention, to discredit and topple the government.

However, Ambiga reminded Mahathir that street demonstrations are a fundamental right, provided for by the Federal Constitution.

"How can anyone say a fundamental right creates instability?

"Street demonstrations allow citizens to vent their views in between elections, and is practised in healthy democracies," she added.

The former Bar Council president said she agreed with Mahathir that a change in government should come through the ballot box.

"It was never Bersih's intention to bring about a change in government through street protests and we have always stressed that we believe in peaceful protests.

"But on that note, change through the ballot box can only take place if elections are free and fair," she added.

Ambiga also said the Bersih People's Tribunal, set up to look into the last general election, came up with a damning indictment on the elections.

"People want to bring change through the ballot box. They want to work within the system, but when the system is so unfair, what do you expect the people to do?" she asked.

Disappointed but not surprised

Meanwhile, current Bersih chairperson Maria Chin Abdullah said she is disappointed with Mahathir’s comments but not surprised.

According to her, attempting to quell critical voices has always been the former prime minister's modus operandi.

Like Ambiga, Maria also reminded Mahathir that freedom to assemble is enshrined in the constitution.

"We recognise that there should be limitations to freedoms, for example there should be no hate speeches. But these limitations must adhere to international standards.

"The limitations cannot be based on the criteria of wanting to stifle dissent or views that the powers that be do not agree with," she told Malaysiakini.

Maria also noted that time and again, Mahathir, BN leaders and their demagogues have accused Bersih of attempting to overthrow the government.

"I wish to challenge that accusation. Governments come and go, that is a democracy.

"But when you hear something critical, you should not immediately brand it as an attempt to overthrow the government

"Even if Pakatan Rakyat comes to power, we will also be critical if something is not right," she added.

Anwar, Karpal convictions are attacks on parliament – Suaram and Global Bersih

The Malaysian Insider

The message from law advocates the world over is clear - the prosecutions of Anwar Ibrahim and Karpal Singh under archaic and rarely used laws are legally unwarranted and the convictions a travesty of justice.

It is the view of Suaram and Global Bersih that these statements depict selective persecutions that seek to mask assaults on democracy, Malaysia's system of parliamentary representation and opposition MPs.

Statements criticising or questioning the convictions have been made by the US State Department, United Nations, Malaysian Bar, Law Society of England and Wales, Haldane Society, Australian Bar, the International Commission of Jurists, the International Federation of Human Rights, Lawyers for Liberty, Commonwealth Lawyers Association, LAWASIA, Law Society of NZ, Lawyers Rights Watch of Canada, retired Malaysian Court of Appeal and High Court judge NH Chan and Human Rights Watch.

Suaram and Global Bersih jointly call on Prime Minister Najib Razak, Home Affairs Minister Zahid Hamidi, Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail and elected members of the Dewan Rakyat to urgently move to repeal the outdated legislations that led to their convictions and allow the duly elected members of Parliament to return to their electoral duties.

Suaram and Global Bersih hope that Karpal's 24 March appeal against his fine will eventually see truth and justice prevail to allow the MP for Bukit Gelugor to resume representing his constituents in parliament.

We hope that justice for Karpal will also pave the way for Anwar to fulfill his parliamentary duties.

In Karpal's case, the 166,000-strong Law Society of England and Wales has already written to Prime Minister Najib Razak to point out it is not seditious to "show any ruler has been misled or mistaken in any of his measures" under Malaysia's Sedition Act.

Suaram and Global Bersih believe Anwar's conviction for sodomy is just as shocking for the speed at which the three judges overturned the previous acquittal, found for a guilty verdict and handed down sentence - all in 90 minutes.

It behoves Suaram and Global Bersih to point out that while an "alternative PM" has been summarily and efficiently stripped of his ability to lead Parliament and country, the murder of Mongolian woman Altantuya Shaariibuu, a case that allegedly implicates a serving prime minister, Najib, remains unresolved after several years.

These convictions must be seen worldwide as going beyond mere attacks on Anwar Ibrahim and Karpal Singh as individuals.

These are attacks on the respective offices of the leader of the opposition and the leader of the biggest component party in the opposition alliance.

Suaram and Global Bersih therefore see these convictions as blatant attacks on fundamental principles of democracy that underlie the parliamentary process.

Suaram and Global Bersih can only look upon the two convictions as early steps in the first Operation Lalang of the millennium, and we harbour no doubt that opposition figures, human rights defenders and student and youth leaders such as Tian Chua, Suhaimi Shafie, Tamrin Ghafar Baba, Hishamuddin Rais, Haris Ibrahim, Adam Adli, Muhamad Safwan, who also face similar convictions for sedition, will suffer the same fate.

Suaram and Global Bersih will work as an alliance on behalf of democracy-loving Malaysians, and collaborate to bring further attention to these cases.

We pre-emptively reject any statement that our joint action will undermine Malaysia's aspirations as a developing nation, or that Suaram or Global Bersih are unpatriotic, or traitorous.

Suaram and Global Bersih are, in fact, exposing Malaysian politicians and groups that seem intent on dragging the country into an abyss where all pretence at rule of law, democracy and equality will be abandoned.

We are grateful for the public stance of the US State Department and the United Nations, who have joined esteemed and impartial law associations and rights advocacy groups to question the convictions and their motivation.

We note the comment of the US State Department on Anwar's conviction:

"The decision to prosecute Mr Anwar, and his trial, have raised a number of concerns regarding the rule of law and the independence of the court."

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) has held that the judicial processes appeared directed at sidelining Anwar from politics. "The timing of the case obviously and the speed with which they moved through the conviction and sentencing and not hearing the mitigation case at all...All this suggests very strongly that there is a political motive to this."

LAWASIA said it could not freely accept that the prime motivator in the prosecutions was the pursuit of justice.

The law association added that the circumstances of the cases appear to show that outmoded provisions in the legal system may be used to hinder the democratic processes to which the Malaysian people have a right.

"This decision certainly casts doubts on the independence and impartiality of the Malaysian judiciary and tarnishes the reputation of the country’s legal system."

The International Federation of Human Rights said, “the conviction of Anwar Ibrahim is the latest chapter of the ruling coalition’s political vendatta against him, which has been going on for more than 15 years” and Karpal Singh has been persecuted under the Sedition Act for merely expressing a legal opinion that a decision of monarch can be scrutinized in a judicial process in accordance to the rule of law.

From the Australian Bar statement:

"This further undermines the rule of law in Malaysia."

Human Rights Watch:

"This really is...trying to knock out the opposition using the courts and weaken them further so that they cannot cause problems."

" The politically motivated prosecutions of Karpal Singh and Anwar Ibrahim appear to be nothing more than cudgels wielded by the government to make up for losses at the polling booth."

Speaking on Voice of America, HRW deputy director Phil Robertson said the verdicts appear to undermine judicial independence. Mr Robertson said: "You've taken down the head of the opposition in Anwar and you've taken down the president of the Democratic Action Party which is the second largest party in the opposition."

The Malaysian Bar:

"Karpal’s conviction under the 'archaic and draconian' Sedition Act 1948 has raised the spectre of selective government prosecution."

Lawyers Rights Watch Canada:

"By seeking to impose criminal punishment and professional restrictions on Mr Singh for peacefully exercising his right as a citizen and his duty as a lawyer and a parliamentarian, Malaysia is contravening the international law obligations it has assumed as a member of the United Nations, of the Commonwealth and of Asean."

The former Malaysian Court of Appeal and High Court judge, NH Chan, also questioned the basis of the Anwar judgement in a blistering blog-attack on the three judges who ruled against the opposition leader. He said "citizens...are stunned by the ignorance of our judges".

Below are links to various statements that have criticised Karpal's and Anwar's convictions, as well as reports on the statements.

​​

The US State Department

 ​​

​​

The International Commission of Jurists

 ​​

​​

The Malaysian Bar

 ​​

​​

Human Rights Watch

 ​​

​​

Lawyers for Liberty

 

International Federation of Human Rights

Commonwealth Lawyers Association

LAWASIA

Australian Bar

Law Society of NZ

Lawyers Rights Watch of Canada (LRWC).

United Nations

Retired Malaysian Court of Appeal and High Court judge NH Chan

Anwar, the charismatic leader of the opposition coalition, was convicted for sodomy on 7 March, and Karpal's conviction followed four days later, on 11 March.

Karpal, 73 and wheelchair-bound, was National Chairman of Malaysia's largest opposition party, the Democratic Action Party (DAP),a multi-racial lynchpin in Anwar Ibrahim's tri-partite coalition, Pakatan Rakyat (PR). He resigned his position on 29 March 2014 as a result of his conviction. – April 3, 2014.

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

Bersih says nay to taxpayers money for Perkasa

Joining the chorus of dissenting voices, the Coalition of Free and Fair Elections (Bersih) has today urged the government to clarify if taxpayers' money or party funds are being channeled to Perkasa.

Malay supremacist group Perkasa had disclosed last week that some of its programmes have been funded by government-related agencies.

It later told Sinar Harian that funds were to help BN win the next general elections.

Bersih's president Maria Chin Abdullah (right) said today that the distinction between taxpayers and political party money was an important matter.

"Parties should be giving the money and it should not come from government, which is taxpayers' money," she told Malaysiakini.

"If the government admits to giving money to Perkasa, this would be shocking. Perkasa incites hatred and racist statements - does government actually support that or not?"

BN partners join in chorus

Other political parties Gerakan, MCA, DAP and PKR have issued similar statements calling for funds to Perkasa to be investigated and immediately stopped.

Umno supreme council member Isa Samad had said that since it was formed Perkasa has received plenty of aid from Umno.

Maria said that the Election Commission has the power to step in if there are signs of government machinery being abused to skew elections in favour of any political party. But she added that Bersih has lost faith in the EC.

After taking over the Bersih helm this month, Maria started a petition for the Agong to step in and replace the EC's existing members. This would be handed over next month after gathering signatures from as many NGOs as it can.

In the past, Maria said Bersih had noted that there had been many public complaints about BN usurping taxpayer's money to help in their polls campaigns but to no avail.

The grouses included BN using government vehicles and equipment, and promising development funds for projects even after the dissolution of Parliament.

She said that Bersih had also queried the timing of handing out BR1M aid - making it seem like part and parcel of the election campaign.

"The government should also be accountable so that their giving to NGOs is not for political purposes," Maria said.

"I wouldn’t object to NGOs taking taxpayers’ money but when they take funds to carry out political work, especially a racist thing, I totally disagree."