OFFICIALLY TO MRSM

We have let the Indians in Malaysia suffer for too long. We ought to have a programme of affirmative action in place. We ought to have a sound programme for alleviation of poverty for the Indians and radically improve their conditions through political action, education and cultural preservation. We ought to extract the enabling aspects of culture though and perhaps reconstruct the our understanding of the relationship between culture and human progress.

A REPUBLIC OF VIRTUE

by Azly Rahman
http://azlyrahman-illuminations.blogspot.com/

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN

I am happy to read of the achievement of our Malaysian children in their struggle through the rigour of Malaysian education system and through the sometimes excruciating circumstances in life. Indeed they are the cream of Malaysian's aspiring Bumiputera class of aspiring intellectuals who ought to be "offered" places in Malaysia's top schools.

CONGRATULATIONS to the children, their parents, and their teachers.

I think MRSM system, well-equipped with excellent facilities and faculty should be able to meet the needs of these children.

I have a few suggestions that need to be attended to, namely:

1. Go the the website for MARA, especially to the Kemasukan MRSM and begin the application processhttp://www.mara.gov.my/masuk_mrsm

2. Get the school counselor to help with the process

3. Monitor the application by following up with the Bahagian Pelajaran Menengah.

4. Write to the Chairman of MARA insisting how these children will excel in the MRSM system
5. Seek information on the quota allowed for 'non-Bumiputra' children and ask for the rationale.
6. Request for the statistics of the number of non-Bumiputra students who gained admission to MRSM since 1972, the year MRSM was established.

I believe MARA, a progressive governmental body, should be able to provide you and your organization with the relevant information to move forward.

I wish you all the best and congratulations to the higher achievers too. I am also sharing a piece I wrote on the plight of those who need to be rehumanizaed.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No MRSM for 817 flying colours and cream of Tamil school pupils.

The headlines in all there Tamil dailies today 20/11/2009 scream and boast of 817 Tamil school pupils having scored 7As’. So did the Malay Mail sub headlines today “Flying colors” (Malay Mail 20/11/2009 at page 9) with a group of cheering high achieving Indian students in colour photo. New Straits Times sub headlines “ Tamil schools do well” (NST 20/11/2009 at page 13) and also in the Malay newspapers.

The No 1 UMNO Mandore party screams even louder but is unable to deliver or secure them places in the scores of elite MSRM and fully residential schools. We note that another leading UMNO mandore NGO also screams credit but diverts away from the next forward moving step ie place for these 817 Tamil school pupils in the said MRSM and fully residential schools. But what all these newspapers do not report is that all these 817 7As’ scoring Tamil school pupils are excluded to the fully residential elite schools Maktab Rendah Sains Mara (MRSM) throughout the country.

We note that there are 6, 000 places in 54 (Utusan Malaysia 8/11/2008 at page 12) fully residential schools and another 5, 100 places in Maktab Rendah Sains Mara (MRSM) colleges (Utusan Malaysia 19/11/2008 at page 10). But we are not aware of single Indian pupil in any of the aforesaid colleges and schools. Of course UMNO some years ago claimed that there are 10% non Malays in MSRM. But the name list of this 10% has never been made public because UMNO expects us to believe them. No more though after the 25th November 2007 Hindraf Rally! In any event why not publish the names and I/C numbers in the Education Ministry Website if it indeed is the truth. Why is there no transparency?

Article 8 of the same provides for the equal protection under the law.

This our request is in compliance with Article 8 and 12 of the Federal Coctitution which provides that:

Article 8

Equality

1) All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law.

Article 12

Rights in respect of education

1) Without prejudice to the generality of Article 8, there shall be no discrimination against any citizen on the grounds only of religion, race, descent or place of birth –

(a) in the administration of any educational institution maintained by

by a public authority, and in particular, the admission of pupils or students or the payment of fees; or

(b) in providing out of the funds of a public authority financial aid for the

maintenance or education of pupils or students in any educational institution(weather or not maintained by public authority and whether within or outside the Federation ).

This has been UMNO’s 52 year old rule through their Indian political and NGO mandores to keep the Malaysian Indians out of the Nation mainstream education system vis a vis the National Mainstream Development of Malaysia.

These UMNO mandore Indian political parties and NGOs’ get to make something for themselves in return for doing the “perfect” mandore job of highlighting, amplifying and creating a (false) feel good feeling and all round One Malaysia happiness in especially the Tamil newspapers, Tamil Radio and Tamil TV news propaganda. (Note the extensive coverage hereinbelow) and also in the other UMNO controlled print and electronic media.

In the end the Indians have degenerated out of the National mainstream development of Malaysia and thus the critical Indian problems today.

P. Utahyakumar

www.humarightspartymalaysia.com

--

Plea for Malaysian Indians

Azly Rahman

The economic anarchy of capitalist society as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of the evil. We see before us a huge community of producers the members of which are unceasingly striving to deprive each other of the fruits of their collective labour - not by force, but on the whole in faithful compliance with legally established rules. - Albert Einstein in ‘Why Socialism?’ (1949) What do I think of Western civilisation? I think it would be a very good idea. - Mohandas K Gandhi Will Queen Elizabeth II of England pay for the 150-year suffering of Indian Malaysians? How would reparations be addressed in an age in which we are still mystified by newer forms of colonialism - the English Premier League, Malaysian Eton-clones, Oxbridge education, and British rock musicians such as the guitarist-astrophysicist Dr Brian May of the better-than-the-Beatles rock group Queen (and recently appointed chancellor of a Liverpool university)? Who in British Malaya collaborated with the British East India company in facilitating the globalised system of indentured slavery? Will the current government now pay attention to the 50-year problems of Indian Malaysians? We need to untangle this ideological mess and listen to the pulse of the nation. We are hyperventilating from the ills of a 50-year indentured self-designed pathological system of discriminatory servitude of the mind and body, fashioned after the style of colonialism. We need a crash course in the history of reparation, slavery, and the declaration universal human rights. We need to understand the style of British colonialism as it collaborated with the local power elites of any colony it buried its tentacles in and sucked dry the blood, sweat and tears of the natives it dehumanised and sub-humanised. We need to calculate how much the imperialists and the local chieftains gained from the trafficking of human labour - across time and space and throughout history. In short, we need to educate ourselves on the anatomy, chemistry, anthropology and post-structurality of old and newer forms of imperialism. British imperialism has successfully structured a profitable system of the servitude of the body, mind and soul and has transferred this ideology onto the natives wishing to be "more British than their brown skins can handle". We need to encourage our children to read about the system of indentured slavery - of the kangchuand kangani and how the Malays were also relegated to becoming ‘reluctant’ producers of the colonial economy. The Malays’ reluctance led to the British designation "lazy native". We need to also learn from the Orang Asli and the natives of each state and how their philosophy of developmentalism is more advanced that the programmes prescribed under the successive five-year Malaysia Plans. A philosophy of development that respects and is symbiotic with Nature is certainly more appropriate for cultural dignity that the one to which we have been subjected; one that exploits human beings and destroys the environment under the guise of ‘progress’. Caged construction Our history lessons mask the larger issue of traditional, modern and corporate control of the means of production of Malaya. We see the issue of race being played up from time immemorial; issue of convenience and necessity to the sustenance of the status quo and the proliferation of modern local oligopoly and plutocracy. Our history classes have failed our generation that is in need of the bigger picture; ones that will allow us to see what is outside of our caged construction of historicising. Our historians, from the court propagandist Tun Sri Lanang to our modern historians written under the mental surveillance of the ruling parties, have not been true to the demand of the production of knowledge based on social and humanistic dimensions of factualising historical accounts. We need to study the political-economy of the rubber and canning industry and the relationship between the British and the American empire as industrialisation began to take off. The Indians in Malaysia have all the right to ask for reparation and even most importantly they have the rights as rightful citizens of Malaysia to demand for equality and equal opportunity as such accorded to the ‘bumiputera’. Every Malaysian must be given such rights. Failure to do so we will all be guilty of practising neo-colonialism and we will one day be faced with similar issue of reparation; this time marginalised Malaysians against the independent government of Malaysia. How are we going to peacefully correct the imbalances if we do not learn from the history of international slavery, labour migration and human labour trafficking that, in the case of Hindraf, involved millions of Tamils from Tamil Nadu province? I once wrote a piece calling for all of us to help the least privileged of our fellow Malaysians - the Indians. The piece called for the leaders to stop fighting and to help each other as well. I wrote a passage on the need to help each other in the spirit of selflessness and collaboration: “It is time for the other races to engage in serious and sincere gotong-royong to help the poorest of the poor among the Indians. It is time that we become possessed with a new spirit of multi-cultural marhaenism. The great Indonesian leader Ahmed Soekarno popularised the concept of marhaenism as an antidote to the ideological battle against materialism, colonialism, dependency and imperialism. The thought that the top 10 percent of the richest Malaysians are earning more than 20 times compared to the 90 percent of the population is terrifying. What has become of this nation that promised a just distribution of wealth at the onset of Independence?" Not a Hindu problem Now we have a better scenario - we have the rights group that is beginning to pull together,-close ranks and demand for their basic human rights that have been denied. Not only their rights to be accorded places of worship and economic justice, but also the rights to look at history and ourselves and interrogate what actually happened and who actually was responsible for the misery, desolation and sustained abject poverty to which they have been subjected. It is not a Hindu problem - it is universal problem that cuts across race and religion. If we believe in what religion has taught us about human dignity and the brotherhood and sisterhood of humanity, we will all be speaking in one voice rallying for those who demand for their rights to live with dignity. In Hindraf, I believe there are Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Catholics, atheists, Buddhists, Sikhs, Bahais, Jains, etc rallying for the cause. In other words there are human beings speaking up for peace and social justice. It is the right of every Malaysian to lend support to their demands. We have let the Indians in Malaysia suffer for too long. We ought to have a programme of affirmative action in place. We ought to have a sound programme for alleviation of poverty for the Indians and radically improve their conditions through political action, education and cultural preservation. We ought to extract the enabling aspects of culture though and perhaps reconstruct the our understanding of the relationship between culture and human progress. But can the current political paradigm engineer a solution to the problems of the Malaysian Indians, as long as politics - after 50 years - is still British colonialist-imperialist-oppressive in nature? We have evolved into a sophisticated politically racist nation, hiding our discriminatory policies with the use of language that rationalises what the British imperialists brutally did in the open. But our arguments cannot hold water any loner. Things are falling apart - deconstructed. The waves of demands, the frequency of rallies and the excavating of issues drawn from the archaeology of our fossilised arrogant knowledge - all these are symptoms of deconstructionism in our body politics. It is like the violent vomit of a rehabilitating cocaine addict undergoing treatment in a Buddhist monastery somewhere in northern Thailand. We cannot continue to alienate each other through arguments on a ‘social contract’ that is alien from perhaps what Jean Jacques Rousseau wrote about some 300 years ago - a philosophy that inspired the founding of America, a nation of immigrants constantly struggling (albeit imperfectly) to meet the standards requirements of equality, equity and equal opportunity especially in education. How do we come together, as Malaysians, as neo-bumiputeras free from false political-economic and ideological dichotomies of Malays versus non-Malays, bumi versus non-bumi and craft a better way of looking at our political, economic, social, cultural, psychological and spiritual destiny - so that we may continue to survive as a species for the next 50 years? As a privileged Malaysian whose mother tongue is the Malay language and as one designated as a bumiputera, I want to see the false dichotomies destroyed and a new sense of social order emerging, based on a more just form of linguistic play designed as a new Merdeka game plan. Think Malaysian - we do not have anything to lose except our mental chains. We have a lot to gain in seeing the oppressed be freed from the burden of history; one that is based on the march of materialism. We are essentially social beings, as Einstein would emphasise. Our economic design must address the socialism of existence. Let us restructure of policies to help the Indian Malaysians - they are our lawful citizens speaking up for their fundamental rights. Let us help restructure the lives of the poor before they restructure the lives of the rich.

Anwar to face Sodomy II trial in January

By Debra Chong - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 1 — Exactly like 10 years ago Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim today failed to escape trial for sodomy.

High Court judge Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah here tossed out the PKR adviser's bid to strike out the sodomy charge against him and fixed the trial to be from January 25 to February 25 next year.

The judge said that the High Court has “inherent powers” to set aside the charge against Anwar but ruled that the latter must prove his claims of bad intent and political conspiracy on the part of the Attorney-General's office.

Zabidin added that it was up to the prosecution to decide how they wanted to prove penetration occurred.

The 62-year-old grandfather stands accused of sodomy for the second time in his life; this time, it is with a former male aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, 24.

Anwar's defence lawyers had earlier argued that the charge was a baseless political conspiracy because several government and private doctors had in their reports not found any signs of forced penetration on Mohd Saiful.

But the public prosecutor, led by Solicitor General II Datuk Yusof Zainal Abiden, had last week claimed they had extra medical evidence to show Mohd Saiful had been sexually involved with his ex-boss.

Yusof drew the court's attention to a government-run Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) report which noted finding “a mixture of male DNA from two individuals” through a swabbing of Mohd Saiful's anus.

The senior lawyer from the Attorney General's Chambers added that it had more such forensic and oral evidence to support the sodomy charge.

Anwar was arrested and subsequently charged with committing sex against the order of nature on August 7 last year, just before he bounced back into Parliament after taking back his old Permatang Pauh

seat in a by-election.

The former deputy prime minister had spent six years behind bars for the crime a decade ago before the conviction was reversed.

Despite having assembled some of the finest legal eagles in the city, such as Raja Aziz Addruse, 73, to challenge this second charge against him, Anwar failed to stop the case before it goes to trial.

If the ambitious Anwar is found guilty and convicted this time, he may spend up to 20 years behind bars, which would really snuff out his bid to take over Putrajaya with political allies DAP and PAS.

Anwar will appeal against the High Court's rebuff at the Court of Appeal in Putrajaya tomorrow, his lawyer, Sankara Nair, told reporters later.

“We're quite in a quagmire,” Nair said, looking disturbed.

“How can we craft our defence unless we have all our data?” he added, noting that the High Court judge had chosen to brush aside the defence team's request to stay the trial until the Federal Court had disposed

of Anwar's related appeal to get extra evidence he claims is key to proving he is innocent.

Sankara said that a normal appeal takes about two months to be heard.

He was also upset that Zabidin had ticked off Karpal's call to push the trial to a later date.

Sankara said Anwar's chosen lead counsel, Raja Aziz Addruse, is currently abroad and was only due to return in February.

Sankara added that the defence may also try to rope in the Federal Court to stay the start of trial if their appeal for more proof is not heard before Jan 25.

Anwar himself was highly disgusted by Zabidin's ruling.

The federal lawmaker pointed out that the High Court judge had earlier noted an accused person's fundamental rights to fully defend himself under Malaysian law, but appeared to be pedalling backwards when he fixed trial to start despite knowing of the pending appeal.

“The judge should at least respect his own decision and allow our appeal at the Federal Court,” Anwar told reporters outside the courtroom later, surrounded by his wife and supporters.

“This is the first case in the history of modern times that you prefer a charge of sexual abuse ignoring medical evidence with a conclusive finding of no trace of penetration,” the Permatang Pauh MP pounded.

Anwar continued hitting out against Zabidin, noting the judge had showed a tendency to “protect the prosecution” and repeated his allegation that the present team of lawyers from the Attorney General's Chambers, especially the Solicitor General II who is heading the charge, was involved in cooking up sodomy evidence in Sodomy I involving Anwar's Indonesian adopted brother Sukma Darmawan.

Anwar foresees a “very tough battle” ahead but stressed that he is prepared to fight the sodomy charge to the bitter end “because we have compelling arguments and facts”.

Group holds protest against Nik Aziz

By Adib Zalkapli - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 1 — A group calling itself Jemaah Prihatin Rakyat Kelantan is planning a protest against Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat (left) this morning outside the Kelantan state secretariat in Kota Baru.

A text message calling all Umno members to join in the protest at 10am today, began circulating yesterday.

But a Kelantan Umno Youth official told The Malaysian Insider the protest was an initiative by the NGO and not the party.

The group also planned to hand over a memorandum to the Kelantan mentri besar for allegedly praying for the destruction of Umno and the party president Datuk Seri Najib Razak after the federal government refused to pay oil royalty to the state government. It also wants Nik Aziz who became the mentri besar in 1990 to step down immediately.

The PAS spiritual adviser when delivering the Eid sermon last Friday had prayed for the Najib’s administration to honour state’s right to five percent of the petroleum extracted off its shore.

Nik Aziz also said that he would pray for the demise of Najib and Umno if the Federal government refuses to pay the oil royalty.

Since last weekend, Nik Aziz has been under criticism from Umno and religious scholars linked to the party for the controversial prayer.

The prayer has become the latest instrument used by the state opposition to undermine Nik Aziz’s leadership.

Today, the Umno-owned Utusan Malaysia front-paged a report calling for Nik Aziz’s resignation for allegedly causing uneasiness among the Muslim community.

Nik Aziz has been bogged down by accusations of cronyism and corruption since early this month over the controversial appointment of his son-in-law Ariffahmi Abdul Rahmad as the CEO of Kelantan Mentri Besar Corporation (PMBK) and for receiving sponsorship to perform the pilgrimage in Mecca from a businessman.

He has cancelled the religious trip and ordered his son-in-law to leave the state investment arm following pressure from party leaders and the public.

The various issues surrounding the Kelantan administration had started a debate on succession plan by state PAS leaders.

MCCBCHST on Family Law Reform proposals

MCCBCHST Media Release: 30 November 2009

REPORT ON PROPOSALS FOR FAMILY LAW REFORM TROUBLING

The Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism is very concerned about the comments by Senior Federal Counsel Mohamad Naser Disa, as reported in the Sun newspaper of 25.11.2009, relating to proposed amendments to the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 dealing with the situation where one spouse in a non Muslim marriage converts to Islam.

If the comments accurately reflect the proposed amendments, it shows that the gross injustices currently being committed against non Muslim spouses (mostly wives) by their husbands who convert to Islam, by the Syariah Courts and Syariah authorities, and by the civil courts will continue.

The comments also show clearly the skewered method of approaching these amendments taken by the Federal Government and the Attorney General’s Chambers: the people who are suffering are the non Muslim family members of the convert, especially mothers who are unable to see their children or to expose their children to their own faith. Yet, from the reported comments of the Senior Federal Counsel, the Federal Government seems to mainly be concerned that a man who converts to Islam is being “cruelly treated” because he cannot break his previous marriage contract and get a divorce.

Conversion cannot be used to evade one’s previous obligations

Whilst a person’s right to profess a religion of his choice is inviolate, no one should be permitted to use the fact of his conversion to evade his obligations to his family. The State, however, cannot use this excuse to restrict the fundamental liberty of a person to profess and practise any religion. Importantly, Islam and Islamic law cannot be imposed on a non Muslim who is guaranteed the right to profess and practice his or her own faith in peace and harmony under our Federal Constitution.

The MCCBCHST is gravely concerned that the proposals will indirectly result in Islamic law being forced on non Muslim spouses, especially wives. One example is the reported proposal to limit maintenance payments to his former wife by the husband who is now Muslim to only 3 months. This is the position in Islamic law. But, the non Muslim wife contracted her marriage under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 which provides that a husband must pay maintenance to his former wife until she remarries or dies.

Why is it that the Muslim convert is allowed to avoid his obligations under his previous contract of marriage merely because of his conversion? We are very concerned that rogue husbands will abuse the system, and convert to Islam as an easy excuse to get out of his marital obligations.

Children and the cabinet decision

There must be a clear statement, both in the relevant Syariah legislation and in other legislation, providing that

• A child under the age of 18 cannot be converted to Islam without the permission of both parents

• In any event, that child should have the right to choose his or her own religion upon reaching the age of majority

This was promised by the Cabinet in its decision on 22nd April 2009 based on reports in the newspapers at that time. Sadly, the current proposals do not reflect that promise.

Syariah interference with non Muslims must stop

Another glaring omission in the briefing by the Senior Federal Counsel is the lack of any proposal for the inclusion of a clear prohibition on the Syariah courts and Syariah authorities from making orders, decisions and taking any action whatsoever in respect of children born to parents who were originally non Muslim.

We strongly object to any attempts to make laws applicable to persons professing other faiths “Syariah compliant”. In our respectful view, Syariah law should only apply to persons professing Islam, and should not jeopardize or affect in any way the rights, privileges and liabilities of persons who do not profess Islam.

MCCBCHST Proposals

The MCCBCHST has previously come up with comprehensive proposals for law reforms, which we have submitted to the Attorney General’s Chambers. We have previously published the general principles which should guide those proposals in our Note of Protest dated June 2007 entitled “Unity Threatened by Continuing Infringements of Religious Freedom”. We have constantly reiterated in our meetings with the authorities and other stakeholders that the predominant principles governing any proposal for law reform must be as follows:-

1. Parliament in respect of the Federal Territories and State Legislative Assemblies should pass state laws limiting the jurisdiction of the Syariah Courts and prohibiting Syariah Courts from interfering in matters involving the rights of persons professing faiths other than Islam and giving persons who do not profess Islam an explicit right to seek redress in the civil High Courts if Syariah courts interfere in a non Muslim’s rights.

2. Any marriage that is solemnised under the civil law and all matters pertaining to it (e.g. marriage, inheritance, custody, religious status of minors, etc) should be under the jurisdiction of the civil courts, and should be subject to the civil law.

3. The civil courts must be the final arbiter as long as one party involved in a legal entanglement is not a person professing the religion of Islam.

4. A child cannot be converted to Islam except if both parents agree. Even then, that child must have the right to choose his or her own religion when reaching the age of majority.

5. Any person who has reached the age of majority has the absolute right to choose the religion of his choice. The law must ensure that any such conversion to another religion does not prejudice that person’s family. Any law on conversion must permit reversion to one’s original faith with equal facility.

With respect, the MCCBCHST proposals in the main will be fair to both the spouse converting to Islam and the spouse who does not. We have not made outlandish proposals nor have we asked for more than what non Muslim spouses should be entitled to under a law that is fair and just. We therefore urge the Federal Government, and all State governments, to immediately implement the MCCBCHST proposals in the respective laws.

As always, the MCCBHST is ready and willing to assist the relevant authorities in reaching a just solution to this problem.

Rev. Dr Thomas Philips,
MCCBCHST President

Was Chin Peng played out?

By Deborah Loh
thenutgraph.com

Chin Peng arriving at a hotel in Haadyai for a press conference

MORE puzzling than the Malaysian government's current myopic reaction against the idea of Chin Peng's return is the sketchy outline of events soon after the Haadyai Peace Accords. The peace treaty was signed on 2 Dec 1989 to end hostilities between Malaysia and the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM).

If Chin Peng's version of events is to be believed, it would appear that he was played out, and quite soon after the ink had dried on the peace agreement.

The government's defiance of the signed agreement today is unsurprising given the political climate. But did Malaysian officials, in the early years after the peace accords were signed, intentionally cause delays in order to frustrate Chin Peng's attempts to return?

Chin Peng now believes he was "tricked" and "played" by the Malaysian government, as he tells Malaysian journalists from the Chinese-language media and The Nut Graph at a press session in Haadyai on 27 Nov 2009. The press conference was called in conjunction with the 20th anniversary commemoration of the peace accord. Chin Peng now lives in Bangkok.

Making peace

When asked why he thought the government signed the peace accords at all if it had no intention of letting him return, Chin Peng, who is no stranger to betrayal, offers a pragmatic view.

"The scenario then forced the government to sign the agreement with us. If they had been unwilling, they would have felt alienated by the people. We were also faced with the same situation," the former CPM secretary-general, whose real name is Ong Boon Hua, tells reporters.

A young Chin Peng (Courtesy of Farish Noor)The decades in between the first failed peace attempt in Baling, 1955, and the Haadyai accords in 1989 was a time of flux for world communism. These global events affected CPM's own direction, Chin Peng recalls in his memoirs Alias Chin Peng: My Side of History, published in 2003.

In the later 1980s before Haadyai, Thailand also initiated peace negotiations with the CPM, which was hiding in its southern jungles. Chin Peng recalls that the Thai overtures were coordinated with similar advances for peace from Malaysia. He mentions then Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad authorising Malaysian Special Branch contact with CPM representatives for exploratory talks.

Eventually, there were five rounds of private negotiations between CPM and Malaysia, with the Thais as mediators. Chin Peng notes that significantly, during the negotiations, CPM's role was recognised in the independence struggle leading to Merdeka.

Stalling return?

After the peace accords were signed, Chin Peng says he applied in late 1990 to return to Malaysia, but the application was rejected in December 1991.

Former Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Norian Mai has a different version. He recently told The Star that during the resettlement process in the three years after the peace accords were signed, Chin Peng never stated his intention to return to Malaysia.

Yet, the Home Ministry has also accused Chin Peng of failing to attend a resettlement interview that was fixed for 31 Oct 1992.

Chin Peng now says he "suspects", although he does not dare to accuse the Malaysian government outright, of intentionally reneging on the agreement. "I don't dare to assume that it was intentional ... [Whether] it happened in 1992 or much earlier, I can't remember exactly. I think I was being tricked to go for an interview. They asked me to go to this place, and then the government side didn't turn up. Then they asked me to go to another place ... from one place to another. As far as I can remember, I was being played by them," he tells reporters in Haadyai.

At 85 and of poor health, Chin Peng admits to having a patchy memory. He cannot recall dates of the supposed interview with Special Branch. He speaks slowly with long pauses, as if trying to jog his memory.

But he says he kept to the deadline to inform the Malaysian authorities of his intention to return. Under Article 5 of the administrative agreement of the peace accords, CPM members seeking resettlement in Malaysia had one year from the date of the signing of the agreement to notify the Malaysian authorities.

Chin Peng personally wrote to then Prime Minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi on 14 June 2004 to state that he had met the notification deadline. "It is a matter of record that in 1990 I applied under the guarantees of the Peace Accords to resettle in Malaysia. I had sought direction from the Haadyai-based Special Branch officer handling resettlement matters, and was specifically advised to wait in Haadyai for a call to be interviewed. This call never materialised. Subsequently, I received a letter stating my application had been rejected on grounds that I had failed to present myself to an interview."

The letter to Abdullah never received a response. It is among the correspondence by Chin Peng, his lawyers and the government tendered in court during the hearing for his 2005 application to be permitted to enter and live in Malaysia.

Government fudging

His memoirsChin Peng was to be stood up a second time. In his memoirs, he tells of an offer by a Special Branch officer in Yala in 1999 to "apply for a sightseeing tour". Chin Peng agreed to the offer and expressed wishes to pay homage at the graves of his grandfather, parents and siblings at a Chinese cemetery located near Sitiawan, where he was born in 1924.

He continues in his book: "For some reason or other, things have not worked out yet. It has been a frustrating wait."

Chin Peng and his lawyers followed up on the offer with a series of letters, even disclosing travel arrangements, in 2003 and 2004. Two letters were by Chin Peng directly to Abdullah in his capacity both as premier and as then home affairs minister. Other letters were by his lawyers to former Inspector-General of Police Datuk Seri Mohd Bakri Omar and then Home Affairs Ministry secretary-general Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof, who is today the Election Commission chairperson.

On 25 Oct 2004, Abdul Aziz wrote to Chin Peng's lawyers a letter, without explanation, that their client's request to enter Malaysia was rejected. Chin Peng then began turning to the courts. He lost his final bid in the Federal Court on 30 April 2009.

In the light of these letters, the remarks by Deputy Home Minister Datuk Wira Abu Seman Yusop in June 2009 should be evaluated for accuracy. Abu Seman claims that Chin Peng never resubmitted an application after failing to attend the 31 Oct 1992 interview, and thus violated conditions of the peace deal.

The paper trail of letters culminating in the rejection letter of 25 Oct 2004 suggests otherwise.

Another remark that warrants scrutiny is Deputy Defence Minister Datuk Dr Abdul Latiff Ahmad's statement that it was the CPM, and not Chin Peng himself, which had disarmed, according to conditions under the peace accords.

Explaining in Parliament why Chin Peng was still listed as an enemy of the country, Abdul Latiff was quoted by Bernama: "This is because during the signing of the peace accord with the CPM in 1989, he did not sign the agreement to lay down arms. Only the CPM agreed to do so and not Chin Peng."

Considering that Chin Peng's signature and party position as secretary-general are recorded at the end of the peace accords documents, one wonders what Abdul Latiff means.

A copy of the 1989 administrative agreement to end hostilities signed by Chin Peng on behalf of CPM,
together with then Inspector General of Police Tan Sri Rahim Noor's signature

No regrets

Terrorist to some and freedom fighter to others, Chin Peng seems to care little of how history will remember him. He remains convicted of the CPM's struggle, which, from his perspective, was to free Malaya from colonialists, whether Japanese or British. It wasn't an "emergency", it was a war, he declares in his book. As for the armed struggle after independence in 1957, CPM considered that to be a "false" independence by the British.

"It would be arrogant of me to say how I hope history will judge me. It should be left to the people of Malaysia to decide on what I have done with my life," he tells reporters in Haadyai.

"In politics, we all have our own stand. Those who hate me will certainly not want me to return. But whether they like me or not, I think there is no reason for them to oppose my wanting to pay respects to my ancestors in Sitiawan."

He says he would choose the same path of armed struggles against the colonialists if time were turned back. But he adds: "If we had thought that there would be another way at the time, we would have chosen it."

He remains steadfast in the belief that communist principles can form an egalitarian society with the freedom of self-determination. "I have never wavered in my communist belief. Any movement that can bring change to the world will have to face obstacles. This is nothing strange," Chin Peng tells the press.

Hu Jintao (kremlin.ru; source: Wiki commons) On the visit by Chinese President Hu Jintao to Malaysia, he says, "It is a good thing for China and Malaysia to establish friendly relations."

Determined to return

Chin Peng says he has no regrets except for one: that he was "fooled" into thinking he could resettle in Malaysia. He returns to the topic of going back to Sitiawan repeatedly throughout the press conference, chuckling resignedly at times and even managing to smile.

"I have reluctantly accepted [that I will not be allowed into Malaysia]. It is my fate. But I will still push the government to accept me. I am getting older and older and I want to set foot on my hometown. And if they want to arrest me, let them arrest me, banish me.

"I will try to go back to the land of my birth. I will try every way. Smuggle in also can. I don't know if I will succeed, but I want to try."

Perhaps, just as strong as Chin Peng's desire to return home, is his desire to know that he has dealt with honest men. Mahathir, under whose administration the peace deal was signed, now sides with the political status quo not to let Chin Peng return. Former IGP Tun Haniff Omar now considers Chin Peng to have no legal standing in his 2005 suit against the government for defamation, citing the CPM's illegal status. Yet, it was Haniff who signed on behalf of Malaysia in the 1989 agreement to end hostilities.

In his 14 June 2004 letter to Prime Minister Abdullah, Chin Peng wrote: "I also wish to be reassured, before it is too late, that my signing of the Peace Accords on [2 Dec1989] was not a futile exercise. I still wish to believe that solemn undertakings expressed by Malaysia in international agreements are readily recognised as pledges of honour to be respected and that the injustice done to my 1990 application was a misdeed limited in its culpability."

MALAYSIA: State of Sarawak Forests: Gov’t Agency Stands by Report

By Anil Netto,
PENANG, Malaysia, Nov 30 (IPS) - For a long time, activists had believed that rainforests in the vast northwest Borneo state of Sarawak were being logged unsustainably, rapidly making way for tree (acacia) plantations, oil palm plantations, dams and secondary growth. But few listened.

Their position was confirmed when the country’s auditor-general presented to Parliament last month its 2008 annual report criticising forestry management in Malaysia's largest state as "unsatisfactory". Earlier this month Sarawak state authorities denied the auditor-general’s findings.

The report produced a host of findings to back up its conclusion: depleted permanent forest reserves had not been replaced while some proposed forest reserves had not yet been gazetted. There was also no compulsory requirement for all logging license holders to obtain approved environment impact assessment reports before proceeding. Annual cut rates had been exceeded, if all forests were taken into account.

It noted that poor enforcement and monitoring had led to illegal logging and contributed to environmental degradation, especially river pollution, erosion, landslides, mud deposits and floods.

Sarawak's Second Minister of Planning and Resource Management Awang Tengah Ali Hassan (the First Minister is long-serving Sarawak Chief Minister Taib Mahmud) expressed unhappiness with the report. He said it did not reflect the overall situation as the auditors made random conclusions about the long-term management of the state's forests.

"By taking the feedback of the Sarawak Forestry Department, I believe a more balanced and accurate perspective (on the state's forest management) will be registered," he was reported as saying by national news agency Bernama.

Awang Tengah claimed the auditor-general's department did not have the forestry management expertise, and information by the state forestry department was not taken into account in the audit report. He said the auditor-general had written to him on Oct. 29 and had agreed to take into account feedback from the forestry department.

When contacted, a spokesperson at the auditor-general’s department in Putrajaya said the matter has been "resolved"—the department is accepting a commentary from Sarawak authorities but the auditor-general's report still stands.

Senior officials at the Sarawak Planning and Resource Management Ministry and the forestry department could not be reached over the phone for comment at press time.

Sarawak has 12.4 million hectares of forest within its 124,450 square kilometres of territory, of which 4.6 million ha are permanent reserves, 0.88 million ha are fully protected and 4.30 million are state government forests, with the remainder being used for settlements, towns and agriculture.

Earlier this year, the state government announced a target of six million hectares of permanent forest reserve and one million hectares as totally protected areas for national parks, wild life sanctuaries and natural forest reserves. This was described as "clear testimony of the State commitment at sustainable forest management."

The state also announced the establishment of Transboundary Conservation Areas with Indonesia and Brunei encompassing national parks and a wildlife sanctuary. Sarawak has also endorsed 33 forestry-related international treatises such as the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Kyoto Protocol, the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora and the ASEAN Agreement on Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources.

But Raymond Abin, the coordinator of the Sarawak Conservation Action Network— a coalition of environmental and indigenous rights groups in Sarawak—is not convinced.

Logging is big business in Sarawak: it is the world’s largest exporter of tropical hardwood. It does not help that timber concessions are granted to well-connected parties. Oil palm is another major source revenue.

"We don’t have to go far if you see what is happening to most of the rivers in Sarawak, they are all muddy. If you fly from one end to the other, you can see many areas where the forests are being logged," said Abin.

For all the Sarawak government’s efforts, the auditor-general’s report noted that 139,680 ha of permanent reserves were lost between 2003 and 2005, with another 18,322 ha depleted during the period 2006-2008. Between 1990 and 2008, close to a million hectares of permanent forest reserve had been lost, with only 4.6 million hectares remaining. The report noted the state government's announcement of its targeted six million ha of permanent reserve, but pointed out there was no indication when this target would become official.

Auditors found that "logging activity near rivers is one of the main factors for deterioration in turbidity, total suspended solids and dissolved oxygen levels" in the main rivers of Sarawak. "This not only pollutes water resources but requires huge costs to restore." Indeed, the Rejang River (Sibu, Sarikei and Kapit regions), Kemena River (Bintulu), Baram River (Miri), Limbang River (Limbang) and Trusan Lawas River (Limbang) have exceeded acceptable water pollution standards.

Abin added that the indigenous groups could see what is happening around. "You don't need to be an expert: the local people who have been living in the forest or depending on the water for their means of survival—their way of life/livelihood is being gradually destroyed by the logging."

Auditors noted large deposits at the mouth of the Seduan River and Igan River in Sibu "as large as a football field," which it said caused frequent floods in the Sibu area during heavy rains. According to flood records, Sibu recorded a flood level of 0.9 metres in 1997 rising to 1.5 m in 2007. In December 2008, Sibu experienced its worst floods since 1963. The Sibu division of Sarawak had lost over 350,000 ha in permanent forest reserves between 1990 and 2008, the auditors recorded.

They also cited press reports earlier this year that logging activities in Bakun exceeding 40,000 ha had led to severe pollution and deposits at the mouth of the Balui River.

The law requires an environmental impact assessment to be prepared for all licenses in logging areas exceeding 500 ha before logging can commence. But in a sample of 30 permits of areas exceeding 500 ha, the auditors were unable to verify that EIA reports had been prepared before work began. Neither could they find any EIA approvals relating to those permits.

Air surveillance revealed that logging in certain areas had been carried out on slopes exceeding the 45-degree slope threshold allowed and close to riverbanks.

The auditors warned that Sarawak’s rich biodiversity would be gradually destroyed as a result of logging activities. It called for full records on flora and fauna species so that restoration work could be properly undertaken for threatened species.

One of the problems is poor enforcement and insufficient forest rangers, which Awang Tengah said was an "old episode" as corrective and improvement action had been taken.

But Abin belied his claim, saying that fear of harassment deters people from lodging complaints. "They cannot deny that there are a lot of illegal logging activities going on. The problem lies with the authorities, the people who have the power, because of their lack of enforcement."

Press Release: In support of children’s rights to housing, education and play

10 December 2009 marks the 61st anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Human Rights Committee (HRC) of the Bar Council commemorates this anniversary annually through an activity. This year, the HRC has decided to organise a fund-raising charity dinner to raise funds for seven children’s homes under the theme “OUR CHILDREN. OUR HOPE. OUR FUTURE”.

1989 was a significant year for children’s rights. On 20 November 1989, the United Nations General Assembly adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession, by virtue of Resolution 44/25, the Convention of the Rights of the Child (CRC). This is a landmark international agreement setting out the rights of children all over the world, and the responsibilities of governments throughout the world to promote and protect the rights of children. It covers both civil and political rights, and, equally importantly, the economic, social and cultural rights of children. This includes the right to be brought up in an environment of safety and security, the right to health, the right to education, and the right to playtime and leisure.

2009 therefore marks the 20th anniversary of the CRC. It is also close to the 15th anniversary of Malaysia’s accession to the CRC. Malaysia acceded to the CRC on 17 February 1995, albeit with reservations.

The Malaysian Bar Council is a leading advocate and proponent of human rights in Malaysia. Our work covers both the rights of adults as well as children. We articulate civil and political rights – such as freedom of assembly, freedom of expression, freedom of information and freedom of religion – that are important to both adults and children. But on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the CRC, we are also highlighting the economic, social and cultural rights of children.

We have chosen to highlight the plight of the children living in these seven homes because not enough is being done to alleviate the situation of marginalised children in our country. Malaysia has made great strides in educating and caring for children in this country. But more can still be done, especially for children in homes, orphanages and shelters. Even as we strive to provide the best of educational opportunities and facilities for our own children, we need to stop and spare a thought for those much less fortunate than ourselves. Their basic need for a roof over their heads, food on the table and clothes on their backs cannot be taken for granted. While some of these children are able to go to school, others only receive rudimentary and sporadic education. Children need room to grow, space to play, and the means to enjoy their childhood.

No child, regardless of race, religion, nationality, or economic or immigration status, should be left behind. We cannot afford to say that we will help them only when we and our own have been adequately taken care of. Our common humanity demands no less.

We also call on the Government of Malaysia to withdraw the remaining reservations and to embrace the CRC and its two Optional Protocols in their entirety.


Ragunath Kesavan
President
Malaysian Bar

1 December 2009

Anwar Pushes Amendments To Guarantee Oil Royalties

From The Malaysian Insider
By Leslie Lau

Sila lihat juga Laman Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah

KUALA LUMPUR , Dec 1 — Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim (picture) has given notice in Parliament of an attempt to table a private member’s bill to amend the Petroleum Development Act (PDA) 1974 to guarantee oil producing states revenue from oil royalties from the federal government.

The proposed changes to the law are not likely to be debated in Parliament because the government does not customarily allow the opposition to table law, and will move to block such an attempt.

But the Opposition Leader appears to be using his proposed amendments to apply further pressure on Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s administration to deal with the flap over oil royalties.

Anwar’s amendments seeks to define in clear terms what is meant by “offshore,” which is a crucial element in the current dispute between Putrajaya and the PAS-led Kelantan state government.

Pakatan Rakyat (PR) lawmakers are demanding that oil royalties be made to Kelantan but Najib has only promised “goodwill payment” through federal government projects.

The Barisan Nasional (BN) government’s attitude is different for states held by the federal ruling coalition such as Sarawak, where oil royalties are paid directly to the state.

Anwar is now seeking through the private members bill to define “offshore” as referring to a portion of area in the open sea that falls within the limit of the Exclusive Economic Zone.

He claims that that the three nautical miles boundary only came to the picture by way of inference due to the ambiguity in the definition of the word “offshore”.

The BN government, he claimed, was using the definition of “territorial waters” contained in the Energency Ordinance Act 1969.

Najib has said that Kelantan was not entitled to royalty as the oil is extracted beyond state waters or beyond three nautical miles from the shore.

This argument was again used as the government’s defence in not giving Kelantan royalty by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Nazri Aziz when pressed by the opposition in Parliament last week.

Anwar had also recently invited founding chairman of national oil company Petronas Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah to join a bilateral parliamentary caucus to make amendments to the PDA and ensure relevant state administrations receive oil royalty.

Tengku Razaleigh’s involvement in the opposition campaign to get oil royalty for Kelantan formally started last Wednesday when he said that the state had the right to receive profit from its oil.

The former finance minister was involved in the drafting of the law and the opposition has argued that the law was drafted to ensure that oil-producing states receive a five per cent royalty.

Tengku Razaleigh has said that it was Kelantan’s “constitutional right” to receive Kelantan, which is under PAS control, will instead receive “goodwill payment” for its oil.

Tengku Razaleigh said yesterday that the Najib administration’s refusal to pay the fee to Kelantan has cast serious doubt on the Putrajaya’s “respect for the sanctity of contracts and the rule of law” and has implications beyond just that state.

“Let’s not talk about attracting FDI and increasing domestic investment to take our economy to a higher level when we do not respect our basic obligations,” the Kelantan prince wrote in his weblog yesterday.

This is the second such criticism that the government has reneged on its agreements, the first being for its 20-year-long refusal to allow Communist Party of Malaya chief Chin Peng from returning home under the Hatyai peace accord signed on Dec 2, 1989. The 85-year-old has sued to return home but the courts have ruled against him while the government said it can’t forgive him for his war against the state that killed thousands.

The DAP has criticised the ruling Barisan Nasional for the Chin Peng snub, while its Pakatan Rakyat ally, PAS which has ruled Kelantan since 1990, has asked the Gua Musang MP to head a caucus to press for Kelantan to get the oil royalty for oil and gas extracted off its shores. Tengku Razaleigh has yet to decide but his party leaders have cautioned him against doing so.

Pertuduhan Fitnah Terhadap Saya Semakin Membusuk

Permohonan saya untuk membatalkan pertuduhan fitnah telah pun ditolak mahkamah tinggi. Barisan peguam bela berhujah bahawa pertuduhan tersebut merupakan satu dakwaan jahat dan didalangi konspirasi politik.

Malah dikemukakan bukti penglibatan peguam negara dalam konspirasi kes terdahulu serta penglibatannya dalam pertuduhan terkini. Dilampirkan laporan suruhanjaya “mata lebam” yang menunjuki peguam negara terlibat memalsukan keterangan demi memastikan mereka yang mencederakan saya terlepas dari hukuman.

Manakala mahkamah berpendirian lapuran perubatan sahaja tidak memadai, peguam bela saya berhujah pertuduhan harus membuktikan adanya kemasukan atau tembusan, kerana itu mahkamah perlu mempertimbangkan laporan pusrawi dan hospital kuala lumpur yang jelas menunjukkan tidak berlakunya fitnah liwat itu. Mahkamah juga menetapkan tarikh perbicaraan pada 25 Januari 2009. Peguam Karpal Singh menyebut Mahkamah Persekutuan belum memberikan keputusan bersabit permohonan kami memperolehi dokumen. Hakim Zabidin Mohd Diah dengan bersahaja menjawab “tidak perlu.”

Mahkamah tinggi hari ini juga memutuskan punyai kuasa untuk membatalkan satu pendakwaan bagi mengelak penyalahgunaan kuasa mahkamah: “Safeguard an accused from abuse.”Dihadapkan dengan bukti yang jelas sebegini pun mahkamah memilih untuk berpihak kepada pendakwa.

ANWAR IBRAHIM

Declaration 1128 Cannot Be Refuted, Says MCA Youth Chief

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 30 (Bernama) -- Declaration 1128 approved by supporters of MCA vice-president Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai cannot be refuted even if it has been dismissed by party president Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat, MCA Youth chief Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong said Monday.

He said the delegates at the special briefing held on Saturday had implemented what they should have done.

"Although the party president has dismissed the declaration, it does not matter. They (the delegates) have done what they should have," he told reporters at the lobby of Parliament House, here.

Dr Wee was asked to comment on Ong's dismissal of the declaration, which had wanted fresh party polls to be held within 60 days.

The special briefing had also urged Ong to adhere to the understanding that both factions had agreed to hold fresh polls, he said.

Ong, in dismissing the declaration, had said that any call for fresh elections must follow the party's constitution and be referred to the party's central committee (CC).

On a related matter, Dr Wee expressed regret that Wanita MCA secretary-general Senator Heng Seai Kie had reportedly stated that only 547 MCA central delegates had attended the special briefing, contrary to Liow's statement that the briefing had 1,600 participants.

He said the number stated by Liow was arrived at from the attendance registration book.

Kg Buah Pala: Where's the compensation?

Their houses in Kampung Buah Pala were demolished in September, but nine residents are still waiting for compensation.

Today, their representatives submitted a memorandum to Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng during a break in the state assembly sitting, urging the state government to expedite settlement.

Residents association chairperson and senior citizen Draviam Arul Pillay, 84, managed to meet Lim in the compound of the building, where an exhibition is being held.

Lim smilingly received the memorandum from Sugumaran (left) and shook hands with Draviam.

Some 10 residents had planned to accompany Sugumaran, but were stopped by security personnel at the front gate.

Lim's political secretary Ng Wei Aik tried to receive the memorandum from Sugumaran, but the latter insisted on handing it to the chief minister.

"It has been nearly three months since our houses were demolished. It's unfair to exclude us from compensation when others from Kampung Buah Pala were duly compensated," said Sugumaran.

He indicated the residents may resort to legal action if the state government refuses to entertain their call for an amicable solution.

Asked to comment later, Lim declined to respond.

'Talks in progress'

Sugumaran later told journalists that Deputy Chief Minister (II) P Ramasamy had refused to entertain his request a month ago for a meeting to negotiate compensation.

"Ramasamy told me that there would be no more negotiations with us," he claimed.

Ramasamy (right) declined comment on the allegation, but said the state government is holding talks with the developers to end the stalemate.

"I am confident we will reach an agreement soon," he told Malaysiakini.

Kampung Buah Pala, once known as the Tamil High Chaparral, was demolished to make way for a luxury condominium project called the Oasis.

The joint-venture project is undertaken by the landowner - Koperasi Pegawai Kerajaan Negeri Pulau Pinang - and private developer Nusmetro Venture (P) Sdn Bhd.

They have agreed to build 24 double-storey houses for the former villagers, excluding the nine residents who have opted for a cash settlement.

Obama ready with Afghan strategy

After three months of deliberation, Obama is set to announce his Afghan war strategy on Tuesday [EPA] Barack Obama, the US president, has briefed key allies on his new strategy for the war in Afghanistan a day before he is expected to announce it. The new plan is expected to include sending 30,000 more US troops as well as setting a time frame to exit Afghanistan. After three months of deliberations, Obama will outline his plan in an address to the American public on Tuesday from the US military academy at West Point in New York. Pentagon officials hope that Nato member states will supplement the US increase with up to 10,000 of their own troops and trainers - pushing the overall number of extra troops close to 40,000. 'Not open-ended' Washington hopes the boost, which is expected to be phased in over the next 12 to 18 months, will create conditions that will eventually allow the number of US troops to be scaled back. "You will hear the president discuss clearly that this [support for the war] is not open-ended," Robert Gibbs, a White House spokesman, said on Monday. "This is about what has to be done in order to assume that the Afghans can assume the responsibility of securing their country," he said. General Stanley McChrystal, the US and Nato commander in Afghanistan, told politicians that a troop reduction could begin by 2013, while the White House said it expected US forces out of the country by 2017 or 2018. Rob Reynolds, Al Jazeera's correspondent in Washington, said the troop numbers are less important than Obama's goals. "I think Obama is going to have to reintroduce the American people to exactly what these goals are - whether he is going to scale them up or down," Reynolds said. Obama's 'contradiction' Reynolds said there is a contradiction in what the president is saying. "He is saying it is not an open-ended commitment and yet he is going to finish the job, which implies the troops will be there for as long as it takes. "If the goal is to completely eradicate the Taliban, that would require more troops than I think any army has." Obama on Monday briefed Kevin Rudd, the Australian prime minister, in an Oval Office meeting and spoke with other leaders, including Gordon Brown, the British prime minister, the French and Russian presidents and the Italian prime minister. "The president believes the situation in this region is a shared international challenge, so building on the work he's been doing in this regard," Gibbs said. "The president will be in close consultation with our friends and allies throughout the day." Obama's discussions with the leaders of Nato member countries came on the same day that Brown pledged to send 500 more British troops to Afghanistan.

Najib, bro must come clean on PI's allegations - Malaysiakini

Karpal Singh has called on Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and his younger brother Nazim to set the record straight with regards to the recent revelations related to private investigator P Balasubramaniam.

"The allegations are serious in nature and should be answered. Najib must answer. His silence would be seen as an admission of guilt," the senior lawyer said.

Karpal, who is also DAP national chairperson, had previously represented Shaariibuu Setev, the father of slain Mongolian national Altantuya.

Last week, Ipoh Timur MP Lim Kit Siang, said Najib should stop ignoring the allegations of his involvement in the gruesome murder.

In interviews appearing on the internet, Balasubramaniam maintained that his first statutory declaration, which implicated the premier, was correct.

Malaysiakini had also published an interview with his lawyer, Americk Singh Sidhu.

'Push for criminal defamation'

Meanwhile, Karpal said Nazim should "push for criminal defamation" against the private investigator if the allegations were untrue.

"It should not be let off silently. Questions have been raised and they should be answered," he added.

Describing the latest turn of events as "very disturbing", Karpal said he also regretted that a molotov cocktail was thrown into lawyer Manjeet Singh Dhillon's home on Nov 18.

Manjeet, a former Bar Council chairperson, was the other lawyer besides Americk who witnessed Balasubramaniam's tape interviews.

Karpal said if the premier and his brother do not clear the air, the allegations would continue to linger on.

Similarly, he said to one Deepak who had also been quoted by Balasubramaniam, must also come out to clarify his position.

Asked if he had informed Shaariibuu of the latest development, Karpal said he had not and would consider the matter in entirety first, before informing his client.

Shaariibuu had filed a RM100 million suit on June 4, 2007, seeking damages over his daughter's death.

In the statement of claim, the family said her death had caused them mental shock and psychological trauma, entitling them to be compensated with exemplary and aggravated damages.

Ex-police chief backs Chin Peng's right to return - Malaysiakini

exclusive Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) leader Chin Peng, 85, has a right to return to Malaysia at least on a social visit, said former inspector-general of police Abdul Rahim Noor.

This, he said, is provided for in the Hatyai Peace Accord signed on Dec 2, 1989 between the CPM and Malaysian government to end some 40 years of communist insurgency.

“I go strictly by the spirit of the agreement. First of all, (it) covers all levels of CPM members from the bottom-most to the highest-most,” he said in an interview to mark the 20th anniversary of the treaty on Wednesday.

“If you consider Chin Peng as the highest leader in the hierarchy, then it covers (everyone from him) right to the bottom-most (personnel).”

Chin Peng, who real name is Ong Boon Hua, was born in Sitiawan, Perak, but now lives in southern Thailand. His recourse to the Malaysian courts to be allowed to return has failed, and the government has since reiterated that he is barred from doing so.

Abdul Rahim, 66, said the terms allow those born in then Malaya to return home if they chose to.

“But they had to give the government indication within 12 months from the date of the peace agreement, whether they (would) come back or not.

“Those who failed to do so, or (who) for some reason (felt) they didn't want to come back (permanently), would still be allowed to come back any time on a social visit, but not for good to settle down in this country.

“I think it is on this basis of the agreement that a vast majority of them were allowed (to return), young and old.”

The peace treaty was signed by Chin Peng, Rashid Maidin and Abdullah CD (representing CPM) and home ministry secretary-general Wan Sidek Wan Abdul Rahman, IGP Hanif Omar and army chief Hashim Mohd Ali who represented the Malaysian government in Hatyai, Thailand.

Abdul Rahim expressed surprise at the government's refusal of this right to Chin Peng, as well as the recent court decision to block his return.

“I don't know if Ching Peng did apply to come back within the specified period of time - the 12 months effective from the time of the peace agreement.

“Assuming that he did not apply to come back within that period, based on the agreement he should (still) be allowed (in) on a social visit.”

'Arguments baseless'

Government leaders and former security personnel have objected vehemently to Chin Peng's return, based on his decision not to dissolve CPM - still considered an illegal organisation under Malaysian law - and because of atrocities committed by its personnel.

Responded Abdul Rahim: “I fail to understand this. The fact is that the government had deemed it fit to sign the peace agreement, although (it) was fully aware that the CPM had been a illegal (organisation) since 1948.

“(It is) a party whose permit for existence was not renewed in 1948, and yet the government deemed it fit to enter into a peace treaty to end the (insurgency).

“Therefore, logically, both sides must respect (the agreement). To the best of my knowledge, Chin Peng's side has observed every (one of the) terms and conditions of the peace treaty.”

Abdul Rahim said many army personnel have visited the 'peace villages' in Thailand, but have not seen any indication that the ex-CPM members who live there are likely to revert to communist ideology.

“The CPM has observed the peace treaty. So (what about us?) I think the government has done well to the extent that those who came back were given allowances. They were not arrested under ISA (Internal Security Act) and one or two are even lecturers in a local university.

“It is only Chin Peng (right) who has not been allowed to return. Here, let me remind you that I am (speaking as a) professional man, and (that) I refer to the peace treaty.”

Army veterans should understand that they were representatives of the armed forces when the agreement was signed, and that the aim was to settle the insurrection in an amicable manner, he said.

“I am sure (they) knew the implications – the short, medium and longer range implications – of the peace treaty. They would have advised the government that (signing) it would have been a slur on the armed forces, or something like that.

“To me in any war, in an armed conflict, big or small, there must be casualties...If you say the army, police personnel and civilians suffered the most, ask the CPM (and) they would say the same thing - 'what about me and my people?'

“So to me, views expressed by (associations representing) veterans and ex-police (personnel) are just emotional.”

Abdul Rahim also asked why ex-CPM leaders like Abdullah CD and his wife Suriani have been allowed to enter the country on a social visit pass, and had even been granted an audience by the Perak sultan.

“Abdullah CD in his memoirs had gleefully admitted that he was behind the attacks on police station in west Pahang.

“Were conditions (imposed on Abdullah and Suriani) to provide documents to prove they were born (in Malaya, as Chin Peng has been told to do)?

“It is unfair what they are doing to that old man (Chin Peng). As a professional, I believe that the government should keep its end of the bargain,” said Abdul Rahim.

In another development, opposition leaders Anwar Ibrahim and Lim Kit Siang both urged the government to honour the Haadyai agreement and allow Chin Peng to visit his hometown in Sitiawan.

They said that the government's credibility will be affected adversely if it reneged on the commitments and undertakings in the Haadyai agreement.

Reaching out to all, Hindraf’s theme for third year

Malaysiakini - Vox Populi

Kris Khaira: Timber companies in Borneo steal from the vulnerable through illegal logging because of profit. For the same reason, oil palm plantations pay their workers of all races, including Indians, obscenely low wages. The common enemy here is capitalism, a system that prioritises profit over people.

Gibran: Hindraf is not racist; it started by taking up the plight of the suppressed Indians. If they are successful, the ramifications will be great because this allows other marginalised communities like the disabled, single mothers and the like to bring up their issues.

Hindraf’s success is pertinent - we could best equate it with the civil rights movement in US in the 60s, once the African-Americans obtained equal rights other marginalised groups started fighting for their rights too. Let us support this movement.

Paradox: Dear Penan brothers, be prepared! Hindraf will join forces with you to help your struggles. Now, this is what we call the real ‘Bangsa Malaysia’. Kudos to Hindraf!

Pau Line Yaacob: Hindraf is on the right path. Many misunderstand them as being a race-based organisation but there is no harm in raising the issues of your community.

Pairin raises KadazanDusun issues as well. Would you call him racist and not seeing larger Malaysian issues? Similarly Hindraf speaks for the marginalised Indians. In fact they are going a step further to incorporate the natives from Borneo. Well done.

SPRM Akui Ahli Politik Paling Kerap Terlibat Rasuah

(SelangorKini) - Transparency International Malaysia(TI-M) sebulat suara bersetuju bahawa ketelusan memainkan peranan penting dalam memastikan amalan rasuah tidak berlaku di kalangan ahli politik menjelang pilihan raya.

Seminar mengupas isu politik wang itu juga turut menyaksikan pelbagai pandangan daripada panel berhubung langkah mengatasi amalam berkenaan.

Antara cadangan yang diutarakan dalam seminar berkenaan adalah dalam membanteras amalan rasuah ini, ia tidak seharusnya disandarkan penuh kepada polis semata-mata.

“Cara yang terbaik yang boleh saya cadangkan ialah tidak meletakkan tanggungjawab memerangi rasuah ke atas pihak polis”,kata Proffesor Jon S.T. Quah,Perunding Anti Rasuah Singapura.

Manakala Datuk Wira Wan Ahmad,Timbalan Pengerusi Suruhanjaya Pilihanraya pula berkata,“Faktor kegagalan dalam memastikan ketelusan dalam pengurusan wang politik antaranya adalah sikap ahli politik itu sendiri dan juga partinya yang menjalankan aktiviti tidak sah untuk menang undi dalam sesuatu pilihanraya”.

Pengarah Bahagian Kecemerlangan dan Professional Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM),Abdul Wahab Abdul Aziz, pula mengakui bahawa kebanyakkan kes penyelewengan wang di negara ini terjadi dikalangan ahli politik.

“Parti plitik adalah sektor yang paling banyak terlibat dengan rasuah. Sebanyak 42% parti politik terlibat dalam rasuah mengikut kajian yang dibuat”,katanya.

Seminar sehari ini adalah antara usaha Tranparency International memerangi jenayah politik yang melibatkan jutaan ringgit akibat penyalahgunaan wang terutama ketika musim pilihanraya.

304,358 M'sians Migrated To Other Countries From March 2008 Till Aug 2009

(Bernama) - The Dewan Rakyat was today told that 304,358 Malaysians migrated from March 2008 till August this year.

Deputy Foreign Minister Senator A. Kohilan Pillay said the figure for 2007 was 139,696 citizens.

“Among the factors for their migration were because of education, brighter career or business prospects as well following their spouses for Malaysians who married foreigners,” he said when replying to a question for Chua Tee Yong (BN-Labis) on the matter.

To a supplementary question from Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad (PAS-Kuala Selangor), Kohilan said the Science, Technology and Innovations and Human Resources ministries were making efforts to get Malaysians abroad to come home among others through a “brain gain” programme.

DAY 2 – 25 MARCH 2003 (Part 2)

He told me, "If you can say that he made sexual advances at you, we can make some money." I got very upset. Then he said, "Relax. Why don’t you say that you brought some girls and boys for him."

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Fernando then read out the evidence of Jamal Abder Rahman who, on Monday, 3 April 2000, during the course of Anwar’s trial, testified as follows:

Fernando: Did you provide limousine services to Dato’ Seri Anwar?

Jamal: Yes, every time he visited Washington DC.

Fernando: Did you yourself drive these VIP’s around?

Jamal: Yes.

Fernando: In September 1998 did you go to the Malaysian Embassy in Washington?

Jamal: Yes, I did.

Fernando: Did you meet a Malaysian diplomat by the name of Mustapha Ong?

Jamal: Yes.

Fernando: During that meeting what transpired?

Jamal: He asked me to go to New York for business.

Fernando: When?

Jamal: The following day, at 6.00 am.

Fernando: In your limousine?

Jamal: No, in my private car, a Cadillac.

Fernando: What transpired during the journey?

Jamal: We drove off and just before the Delaware Bridge, he asked me if Dato’ Seri Anwar had made any sexual passes at me. I told him, "You must be joking!" Then he said, "You can make some money."

He told me, "If you can say that he made sexual advances at you, we can make some money." I got very upset. Then he said, "Relax. Why don’t you say that you brought some girls and boys for him."

I said, "Look here Mr Ong, leave me alone; I don’t care about Malaysia, I don’t care about nobody right now. We are going to New York for business. Let’s finish the business and I don’t want to hear the subject no more!"

When we drove on New York, he tried to convince me further and in the meantime I was thinking to myself, do I know two Anwar Ibrahim? He (Ong) told me, "There is a videotape in Malaysia everybody by now knows Anwar Ibrahim from the videotape; why don’t you say so."

I said, "If you have a videotape, why the heck do you want me for?" He replied, "So that the Americans will know too!"

When we arrived in New York, I dropped him off at a diplomat’s apartment. I think it was on the 13th street, East Side. The Malaysian diplomat came down holding a very small booklet and passed it on to Mustapha Ong and they were talking in Malay. I did not understand them. Ong put his hand on my shoulder, trying to convince me to spend the night there. I refused. I wanted to go back to Washington. Mustapha showed me the booklet and asked, "Why dont’t you sign this and we can make up to US$ 200,000. Don’t be crazy."

I said: "You are looking at the most crazy man in the world. That’s me." And I told him: "You change the name from Jamal to Mustapha Ong and say that Anwar Ibrahim made sexual passes ... made love to you. Say anything and you make the money!" I then said, "Have a good day!"

I left and went back to Washington DC ... straight. Then I went to see the Malaysian Ambassador, one Dato’ Dali.

I told Dato’ Dali what transpired during the journey. He was very upset. He said, "Jamal, I assure you I have nothing to do with it. The Embassy has nothing to do with it." And he was very upset; I could see the fire on his face. He said, "You should have slapped him on the face." I said, "I should have done that."

He told me to forget the whole thing. Three months passed and the whole thing kept coming to my mind. I wanted to get if off my chest. I went to see one Sheikh Thahar, a friend of Dato’ Seri Anwar.

He is the president of an Islamic University in Northern Virginia. Leaders from all over the world go to see him. He is a friend of Faruqi (a world-reknown Islamic scholar). I made three attempts to see him but was not successful. Then I made a phone call. I told him I wanted to see him. He said, "What for." I told him, with respect to Dato’ Seri Anwar. "How fast can you come?" he said.

Subsequently I drove down from Washington and met him at 2 pm. I told him what happened. He told me, "Why don’t you see the Malaysian Ambassador." I told him I had seen him (the Ambassador) three months previously. He said, "I will get in touch with you tomorrow". The next day, he phoned me and asked me if it was okay with me, I could make an affidavit before a lawyer about what happened.

Then I said to him, "What you want me to do, I will gladly do." I went with his son to see a lawyer and told the lawyer what happened and he wrote it down. The lawyer asked me if I was prepared to take a lie-detector test. I said, "If you want me to take a lie-detector test, I take a lie-detector test, if you want to put me to sleep I’ll go to sleep."

Fernando: Did you sign an affidavit?

Jamal: Yes. Then I left.

Fernando: Then what happened?

Jamal: I think Sheikh Thahar got in touch with somebody in Malaysia subsequently. Then Sheikh Thahar asked me, "Are you willing to go to Malaysia if you can." I said, " I am willing, if I can." Sheikh Thahar thought I was afraid. I said, " I am not afraid of anyone. I have fear only for God."

Fernando: Did Sheikh Thahar say anything about religion?

Jamal: He said, "If you shut out the truth, you are the devil’s brother!"

Fernando: Did Dato’ Seri Anwar make any passes at you or sodomise you at any time?

Jamal: No sir, he did not, he never did and never will!

Fernando: So this man wanted you to fabricate this evidence, did he not?

Jamal: I think so.

Fernando: On the way to New York from Washington, did Ong ask you to meet anybody or propose to meet anybody?

Jamal: Yes, he did.

Fernando: What did he say to you?

Jamal: He asked me to meet somebody from Abdullah Badawi’s staff so that I can collect the money but I refused.

Fernando: Why did he want you to see somebody from Abdullah Badawi’s staff?

Jamal: I understood, by that, if I say what they wanted me to say, I will get the money.

Read Part 1 at: DAY 2 – 25 MARCH 2003 (Part 1) (UPDATED with BM Translation)

Najib and Cabinet should do what is right – honour the Hatyai Agreement and allow Chin Peng home to visit his hometown in Sitiawan

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, should do what is right – honour the Hatyai Agreement and allow Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) leader Chin Peng home to visit his hometown in Sitiawan.

It reflects most adversely on the credibility and international standing of Malaysia for the Malaysian government to renege on its solemn commitments and undertakings in the Hatyai Agreement.

When the Hatyai Agreement was signed 20 years ago, both signatories agreed to move on and this is what the Malaysian government and country should do – allow Chin Peng home to visit his parents’ graves in Sitiawan.

Press Release: Safeguard fundamental liberties of witnesses

The Malaysian Bar welcomes the High Court’s recent ruling that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission can only question witnesses between 8.30am and 5.30pm. This decision recognises and protects witnesses, who have the right not to be interrogated outside of office hours. The Court’s reasoning, which is based on the Federal Constitution’s provisions that safeguard an individual’s fundamental liberty, is to be commended.

Even detained persons have the right not to be interrogated during the night and to be allowed adequate rest. Rule 20 of the Lockup Rules 1953 provides that detainees “shall be locked up for the night by 6.30 p.m. and shall rise and be dressed by 6.30 a.m.”

Witnesses in an investigation should, at a minimum, be accorded the same protection and rights. They cannot be compelled to give testimony outside of office hours, but may be allowed to do so if they are agreeable to such an arrangement, and they should always be permitted access to legal counsel of their choice during questioning.

The High Court’s ruling in no way diminishes the duty of law enforcement agencies to preserve law and order both day and night, as many other tasks can be conducted outside of office hours. Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan’s reported statement that “it would be pointless to operate round-the-clock if police could not record statements from witnesses after office hours” appears not to take into account the plethora of tasks that law enforcement personnel engage in aside from the questioning of witnesses.

The High Court’s decision is a positive step forward in safeguarding human rights and improving the practices of law enforcement agencies. The result will, in the long run, enhance the credibility of such agencies.


Ragunath Kesavan
President
Malaysian Bar

30 November 2009

Judicial transformation

The Star
By Risen Jayaseelan & Daljit Dhesi

Chief Justice Tun Zaki Azmi has initiated reforms that include making the judiciary more efficient and cases to be heard faster.

A PLETHORA of issues have dogged the Malaysian judiciary over the years. Its independence has been questioned since the 1988 judicial crisis and until today, the judiciary’s critics continue to raise issues of how judges are selected and the lack of openness in the process of empanelment, that is the internal process of deciding which judge or judges sit in particular cases.

That isn’t all. Malaysia’s judicial system has also been seen as being inefficient. Long postponement and disposal of cases has been the norm. With files apt to go missing and allegations of corruption among court staff, it is no wonder that Malaysia ranked poorly with regard to the ease of doing business here.

In 2008, the World Bank ranked Malaysia in 59th place, out of 181 countries, when assessed in terms of the ease of enforcing contracts. Singapore was ranked 13th in that same report.

But a sea change is taking place and at the heart of it lies Tun Zaki Azmi, the Chief Justice of Malaysia (CJ) set on removing inefficiencies in courts, even if it means “dragging the judiciary and the Bar (Council), kicking and screaming.” (Those aren’t exactly Zaki’s words but he did use it in a speech last month at the appointment of new judges, quoting a past CJ of Singapore, who had embarked on similar changes with the Singaporean judiciary in the late 1990s.)

Zaki, a long-time practising lawyer who had quickly risen the ranks to become CJ last October, is changing the judiciary in a very McKinsey-type management style.

He has set key performance indicators for judges, giving them a target number of cases to hear every year; he has also “encouraged” some non-performing judges and court staff to leave and demoted others, drumming up the message to shape up or ship out; he has brought in new judges from private practice, many of whom are non-Malay and has personally ensured that the lackadaisical file management system in courts have been upgraded. Zaki is also known to personally visit courts to see that all is up to mark.

Unprecedented openess

Zaki has also established an open dialogue with the Bar Council that is unprecedented. “The relationship between the Bar and the CJ has never been this good. The CJ seems very ‘consultative’,” says Ragunath Kesavan, the Bar Council’s president.

Backlog of cases across all courts have been coming down as cases are being disposed of quicker with judges disinclined to give postponements without just reasons, as per Zaki’s instructions.

There has been a 100% increase in clearing of backlog cases in the Appellate and Special Powers Division of the High Court since January and between 50% and 60% increase in the Commercial High Courts.

“Zaki’s efforts to revamp the judiciary are commendable. The delay in commercial dispute resolution is a problem that the private sector has complained about for years,” says Tan Sri Yong Poh Kon, who heads Pemudah, the task force set up to look into improving the public services delivery system.

Armed with statistics to prove that improvements have been made, Zaki has given at least three face-to-face interviews in the last week alone, first with the Bar Council, followed by a daily newspaper and then with StarBizWeek.

It would be unfair to say Zaki is out to “blow his own trumpet”.

Indeed, Zaki is not entirely comfortable with having too much attention on himself, preferring to include as many Federal Court judges as he can to join in the interviews. In all three interviews, Zaki was joined by the Chief Judge of Malaya (who ranks third in the judiciary and oversees the High Courts) Tan Sri Arifin Zakaria. (There were other Federal Court judges present in the two newspaper interviews.)

Zaki was asked to give the interviews after lawyers and the Bar Council protested about the fast pace the judges were taking, on the grounds that postponements were not being granted despite valid grounds. Zaki’s efforts, it seems, were a bit of a shock to the system. In legalese, Zaki was moving from an era of “justice delayed is justice denied,” to one where “justice hurried is justice buried,” as some lawyers are apt put it.

Zaki says the changes are not as drastic and draconian as some make it out to be. “It is left to the discretion of the judge. If unreasonable refusals (for postponements and adjournments) have been made, the party concerned can apply for a revision or appeal. But remember that we are coming from an era where the delays in our courts have been at unacceptable levels. I know of cases which have been postponed for up to 33 times.”

Zaki’s blueprint for change was drawn mainly from Singapore’s experience. Similar problems had dogged their judiciary, with regard to delays and the lack of case management and in true Singapore-style, a management-oriented approach was embarked on in the 1990s, which has eventually led to Singapore having “one of the most efficient and effective systems in Asia, perhaps in the world,” as stated in a World Bank report.

Business-styled change

Zaki’s business-like approach has won him the support of the Government. By his calculations, it costs the Government at least RM1mil a year to pay a High Court judge. He justified a RM70mil investment in an e-courts system (see page 21) on the basis that it will eventually bring about savings as fewer judges will be needed. The e-courts system is expected to speed up the hearing of cases by three to four times, says Zaki.

For now though, Zaki is hiring more judges to help clear the current backlog of cases, and getting some of the new recruits from the pool of practising lawyers. The Malaysian judiciary has been said to lack experienced lawyers on the bench, which had been the norm in its early days, drawn from the practice in Britain.

That is changing as Zaki has appointed a handful of senior practising lawyers as Judicial Commissioners (JC), who are typically on a two-year contract.

The JCs stand the chance of being elevated to a full fledged High Court judge after their two-year term.

A problem remains with regard to keeping the best and letting the bad ones go. Like in all government-type organisations, Zaki faces the challenges of how to rid the system of the non-performing judges.

The Umno-lawyer legacy

It wasn’t a smooth beginning though for Zaki’s CJ role as his appointment drew a lot of criticism. When he was made a Federal Court judge in September 2007, he bypassed the convention of first serving in the High Court and the Court of Appeal. But that was less of an issue compared with the fact that the seasoned corporate lawyer was also seen as having close ties to Umno, having been the party’s legal adviser.

“After all that hoopla, I didn’t want to speak to the press anymore,” recalls Zaki, whose father the late Tun Azmi Mohamed was Lord President from 1966 to 1974.

Zaki, the country’s 12th CJ, seems to have overcome that shyness and was prepared to take all questions, even the difficult ones, in his stride in this interview with StarBizWeek.

While the judiciary’s revamp from an efficiency and administrative standpoint cannot be faulted, it is still moot if it is wholly independent. For example, even though the way judges who are appointed today goes through a Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) that includes eminent past members of the judiciary and current judges, the influence of the Prime Minister is very much present. The UK’s JAC has done away with the involvement of the executive in the judge selection process, while in the United States, the President still appoints senior judges.

Adds lawyer Edmund Bon, chairman of the Bar Council’s Constitutional Law Committee, “The process of empanelling still leaves much room for improvement. It should be more transparent.”

A recent Federal Court decision not to grant a request for a full 11-member bench to hear a high profile political case had drawn criticism, as the case, an appeal, will be heard by five judges, all of whom had at some point presided over hearings related to the same case.

Zaki says such criticism is unjustified. “In cases involving the Government and private parties, in many times, the Government has lost. So we judges have decided against the Government.”

When pressed to comment on empanelling, Zaki says that when cases involve the Government, “I do not interfere. My appointment and position has been associated with Umno and other allegations.”

Apparently, the empanelling in the hot political cases is left to the president of the Court of Appeal, in effect the second highest honcho in the judiciary, Tan Sri Alauddin Mohd Sheriff.

White collar crime

Yet another grouse was that white-collar criminals were not receiving punishment commensurate with the offences committed, with many perpetrators merely receiving fines that were small when seen in the light of the profiteering they possibly enjoyed or financial losses they caused to others.

Zaki conceded that the Securities Commission (SC) chairman, Tan Sri Zarinah Anwar, had raised the issue that such cases were proceeding rather slow in the courts. He says action was swiftly taken to create a separate commercial court in the Sessions Courts to hear such cases.

He also says that part of the reason why harsher punishment (for white collar crimes) was not meted out is because the prosecution has not pressed for a heavy sentence.

“In any event, there is always the avenue for appeal (against the light sentence),” adds Arifin.

Positive implications of revamp

No one though can argue with the zest with which Zaki is reforming the Malaysian judiciary and all the good that can come out of it. From a foreign direct investment standpoint, Zaki’s moves are just what the doctor ordered.

“Studies by several international development institutions including the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, has shown that how commercial disputes are handled through the judiciary has a huge impact on where investors will go. In the past, quite a significant number of commercial contracts inked in Malaysia had specified a third country for the settlement of disputes because of the delays in our legal system,” points out Pemudah’s Yong.

A big worry though remains whether Zaki’s efforts will continue. He will retire in October 2011, when his term ends.

“I promised my wife I will retire then. But don’t worry, the momentum will be carried out by the others on the bench,” Zaki says.

Bukit Antarabangsa: Jangan biarkan Pusat bersembunyi di belakang OSA

Dari Harakah Daily

Kerajaan Negeri Selangor tidak bersedia untuk membenarkan Kerajaan Pusat bersembunyi di sebalik Akta Rahsia Rasmi (OSA) dan terus menafikan hak penghuni Bukit Antarabangsa dan orang ramai bagi mendapatkan maklumat sebenar berikutan kejadian tanah runtuh di kawasan itu.

Menteri Besar, Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim dalam kenyataannya hari ini berkata, kerajaan negeri akan mencari jalan bagi memboleh maklumat itu didedahkan sepenuh.

“Pada masa sama, pihak perundangan Kerajaan Negeri sedang mengkaji beberapa peruntukan lain untuk mengubah status dokumen
tersebut sekiranya Kerajaan Pusat terus menafikan permohonan Kerajaan Negeri ini,” katanya dalam satu kenyataan hari ini.

Sebelum ini, Khalid memaklumkan, kerajaan negeri telah mengeluarkan laporan mengenai kejadian tanah runtuh itu dari dilindungi di bawah Akta Rahsia Rasmi.

Namun, pihak kerajaan pusat membantahnya kerana ia terletak di bawah bidang kuasa mereka bukannya kerajaan negeri.

Sehingga kini, laporan akhir kajian tentang punca kejadian tanah runtuh di Bukit Antarabangsa belum pun didedahkan kepada umum.

Ekoran itu Kerajaan Selangor berasa sangat kecewa kerana hasratnya untuk mengubah status laporan tersebut (to declassify) tidak mendapat sokongan Kerajaan Pusat.

Kerajaan Negeri dan agensinya Majlis Perbandaran Ampang Jaya (MPAJ) sudahpun menghantar surat kepada Kementerian Kerja Raya dan Kabinet Kerajaan Pusat memohon kebenaran untuk mengeluarkan laporan kepada umum tetapi sehingga hari ini, belum menerima jawapan.

Sehubungan itu, Kerajaan Negeri menegaskan pendiriannya sekali lagi bahawa Kerajaan Pusat mesti mendedahkan laporan tersebut demi kepentingan umum, terutamanya kepada penghuni Bukit Antarabangsa.

Laporan tersebut yang disediakan oleh Jabatan Cerun Bukit Kementerian Kerja Raya, dilaporkan sudahpun diserahkan kepada Majlis Perbandara n Ampang Jaya pada September lalu tanpa pengetahuan Kerajaan Negeri.

Hanya pada November ini Kerajaan Negeri dimaklumkan mengenai laporan tersebut.

Oleh sebab laporan itu menyentuh isu tanah, iaitu dalam kuasa undang-undang Kerajaan Negeri, maka Mesyuarat Ahli Majlis Kerja Kerajaan Negeri (MMKN) pada 18 November 2009, bersetuju menggunakan kuasa Menteri Besar menurut Seksyen 2C Akta Rasmi 1972 untuk mengubah status dokumen tersebut (to declassify the document).

“Dengan ini diberi penegasan di sini bahawa Ahli-Ali MMKN (EXCO) bersetuju mengambil tanggungjawab penuh terhadap keputusan pengubahan status laporan tersebut.

“Pegawai-pegawai lain Kerajaan Negeri pula tidak dilibatkan dalam usaha
membuat keputusan tersebut, dan dengan yang demikian, mereka tidak boleh
dikenakan tindakan undang-undang. Maka dalam hal ini, Kerajaan Negeri memberi jaminan untuk melindungi kesemua pegawainya daripada apa-apa tindakan undang- undang, jika ada, yang berkaitan dengan isu ini,” kata Khalid dalam kenyataannya.

Kerajaan Negeri, katanya, sedang melakukan segenap usaha bagi memastikan badan-badan dalam Kerajaan Pusat memberikan kebenaran untuk mendedahkan apa-apa laporan kepada orang ramai.

Caucus: Tengku Razaleigh's Decision Depends On Fair Representation

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 30 (Bernama) -- Former finance minister Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah said his decision on whether to chair the caucus on oil royalty for Kelantan would depend on balanced representation by all parties.

Tengku Razaleigh who was involved in Petronas' inception, said he was not compelled to make the decision but hoped the caucus would be represented by all members of parliament from the petroleum-producing states.

"I want to see that the representation is more encompassing, if possible, before I make the decision. I want to see that it does not involve politics.

"Then we have a caucus. But there is no urgency," he said at the parliament lobby Monday when asked by reporters on his decision on the offer to head the caucus.

Tengku Razaleigh had been reported to be considering the invitation from opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to chair the caucus.

However, a few days later, Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin asked him to think carefully although the issue involves Kelantan before deciding on the move mooted by the opposition pact, especially Anwar himself.

Muhyiddin said that based on party principles, the Barisan Nasional should not be involved in it.

On this, Tengku Razaleigh who is also Gua Musang MP said the question should not arise because there were instances before where the ruling government and opposition together formed committees to deal with matters in the interest of the people.

"So, the issue of whether the government can or cannot sit on a committee set up by the opposition should not arise. What is important is that the people's interest should come first."

However, he said the decision should not be made in haste because if the government accepted the demand made by the caucus, it would have to pay the arrears in oil royalty.

Asked about his stand on the payment to Kelantan which was announced as "wang ihsan" (compassionate fund) instead of oil royalty, Tengku Razaleigh said when the agreement was made, there was no mention of "wang ihsan", instead it was called cash payment.

"The agreement and the ruling was made by me. "Wang ihsan" never crossed my mind. "Wang ihsan" is for beggars.

"This is the people's right. We did not call it royalty. We called it cash payment. That is why we need not raise the oil royalty issue as it had nothing to do with oil production and the related payment to the state government or any other party. It was an agreement to strengthen the position of states in the federation," he explained.

He said that according to the agreement under the Petroleum Development Act, the term oil royalty did not arise but was only being used now, and the accurate term was cash payment, not "wang ihsan".

"There is only one agreement under the Petroleum Development Act that I have seen," he added.

To clear the confusion, Tengku Razaleigh said he was considering participating in a public forum on the issue soon which was being arranged by certain quarters.

"The forum is to explain the issue in the interest of the public and has nothing to do with politics," he said.

Himpunan Anak Muda di Bukit Aman, 3 Disember ini

Atas semangat dan kesedaran anak muda Malaysia maka Solidariti Anak Muda Malaysia (SAMM) dan Solidariti Mahasiswa Malaysia (SMM) akan menghantar laporan 'rasmi' ke Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah Kormersial PDRM berkenaan dengan isu

• Sogokan oleh proksi Najib Razak kepada Balasubramanian untuk melindungi kebenaran dalam kes ALTANTUYA
• Rasuah dan salahguna kuasa Setiausaha Perdana Menteri
• kegiatan mensabotaj ekonomi negara dengan menyeludup wang (jumlah amat besar) oleh Menteri Besar Negeri Sembilan

Untuk itu satu taklimat penerangan media akan diadakan pada 3 Disember 2009, 9.00 pagi, di hadapan pintu utama, I/pejabat PDRM, Bukit Aman, Kuala Lumpur.

Untuk menyatakan sokongan semua anak muda dijemput hadir.