Anwar paints gloomy outlook for Malaysian economy

By Clara Chooi - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, March 17 — Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim (picture) today expounded on weaknesses in the Malaysian economy, blaming it on the government’s dependency for pump priming measures, over reliance on petro dollars, the widening public-private investments gap, and capital flight in the country.

The Permatang Pauh MP told Parliament that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s optimism to say the “worst is over” was a stark contrast to the bleakness of the country’s present economic status.

The opposition leader pointed out that although the economy seemed on the mend in the fourth quarter of last year, Malaysia still continued to fall behind other nations in terms of competitive edge and attraction of foreign direct investments.

“At the same time, too much pre-occupation has been given to plans to upgrade the economy into a high value economy that we risk putting aside key economic issues concerning social justice; that should always take centre stage in any economic development agenda in Malaysia,” he told the House.

The former deputy prime minister also said that the government’s efforts to eradicate poverty had borne little fruit, and what was worse, figures from the UN Human Development Report in 2009 showed that Malaysia ranked 66 in terms of economic inequality, behind Singapore (ranked 23), Hong Kong (24), South Korea (26), Brunei (30) and Cuba (51), among others.

He said that despite the government’s incessant dependency on pump priming between the years of 2002 and 2004, the poverty rate still rose 12 per cent in the period.

“This should baffle everyone because this is a period of pump priming when a lot of state financial resources were diverted into the economy. Alas, only cronies and connected people benefit while the poor continued to suffer,” he said.

Anwar said that the economic gap between the different groups in the country was so bad that the task of leading the economy towards wholesome development was beyond today’s administration.

“A gigantic reform and monumental shift in the management of the economy is required if Malaysia is to upgrade itself into a high-value economy and ensure that prosperity is distributed equally to all groups and levels,” he said.

The government’s pump priming measures, undertaken since 1998, were also criticised, with Anwar saying that such measures should only adopted for short periods to boost the economy.

He said the government, overly-reliant on income from oil and gas, even resorted to “squeezing” Petronas when its profits could no longer support such reliance.

Citing examples, Anwar said that Petronas had to make escalating payments to the government in recent years, beginning with RM32.1 billion for the financial year of 2005, RM47.7 billion in 2006, RM52.3 billion in 2007, RM61.6 billion in 2008, and RM74 billion in 2009.

“In the year ending Dec 31, 2007, and Dec 31, 2008, Petronas contributed to 36.8 per cent and 44.9 per cent to the total government income for the years respectively,” he said.

According to Anwar, if income from other oil and gas companies were taken into account, it would mean that the country drew more than half its revenues from non-renewable sources.

“And despite the bumper income from Petronas in 2007 and 2008, the government continued to spend lavishly and registered deficit budgets,” he said.

Pump priming, he added, also resulted in the widening gap between public and private investments in Malaysia.

“The massive drop in private investment will continue to threaten any efforts to mould [the] Malaysian economy into a high performing, high-value economy.

“Furthermore, the pattern of public spending is not sustainable at the rate it is growing. Any attempt to re-model the economy must address the skewed nature of public-private investments in Malaysia.

“Pakatan Rakyat has always expounded that the country requires a holistic reform to the economic policy framework, especially so given the nature of lopsidedness of our economy now,” he said.

Anwar also claimed that the loss of confidence in Malaysia’s economic prospects were due to a spate of poorly managed issues like the “Allah” controversy, and the “disappearance or failure” of government assets such as missing jet engines and the “submarine which does not dive”, had eventually been the cause of the “shocking” extent of capital flight in Malaysia last year.

“Jon Anderson, an economist with UBS, shocked the financial market when he disclosed the extent of capital flight in Malaysia, which had reached 44 per cent of the GDP at one stage.

“Despite the alarm raised, the government rubbished concern on the pretext that this was reflective of ... government-linked companies’ more daring ventures overseas. At the height of it, an estimated RM355 billion left our country,” he said.

Anwar admitted that GLCs had embarked on a more aggressive stance lately by plumping up their overseas investments, but pointed out that the very quantum of the capital outflow suggested that the bulk of it was due to “genuine investment portfolios being pulled out of the country”.

He claimed that the GLCs’ act of putting more of their cash reserves into foreign investments instead of reinvesting in Malaysia mirrored the fact that their confidence in the country’s economy was waning considerably.

“The government must realise that it must combine its approach to the economic problem of capital flight with a political situation. Only with honesty, transparency, fair-mindedness and commitment to reforms that Malaysia can begin to restore confidence in its economy,” said Anwar.

The former finance minister also spoke extensively on other economic indicators like the severe drop in new capital investments, which he claims proved the country’s economic climate was not as robust as the prime minister had painted it to be.

“These indicators clearly point to an uphill struggle to achieve whatever crafty slogans on high value economy that [the] government has drummed up so far.

“Pakatan Rakyat is consistent that without a holistic reform involving a total fight against corruption, the tightening of the government procurement process, the dismantling of the state-politician business relationship, injecting integrity back into the judiciary and important institutions, and an overhaul of our education system, [then] the efforts to move to high value economy will remain as rhetoric,” he said.

Anwar says ‘1 Malaysia’ used to be ‘1 Israel’

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim engaged in a heated exchange with Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaludin in Parliament today. - Reuters pic

By Clara Chooi - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, March 17 — Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim today linked Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s “1 Malaysia” to a previous campaign called “1 Israel”, pushing a sensitive point in a country opposed to the Zionist regime.

Debating heatedly with Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin in parliament, the opposition leader claimed Najib’s image consultants, Apco Worldwide, were led by Israelis who worked on former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s campaign called “1 Israel”.

Despite resounding taunts from the floor, Anwar continued to claim that the consultancy was led by two Israeli leaders, one who was formerly the Israeli ambassador to the US.

“Ehud Barak hired the same company, Apco, in 1999 and they advised him to use the same concept of 1 Malaysia. And just last year, Apco advised Najib to use 1 Malaysia. You can interpret the rest on your own,” the PKR leader said

This, he added, proved that it was not true that Pakatan Rakyat (PR) was a tool used by the Jews.

At this juncture, Khairy, who is also the Rembau MP stood up to demand that Anwar showed evidence that the “1 Israel” concept was a brainchild of Apco.

Labelling the former deputy prime minister “complicit”, Khairy then questioned Anwar’s relationship with Paul Wolfowitz, known to be one of the architects to the US war against Iraq. Amid the barrage of angry shouts, Anwar admitted to his acquaintance with Wolfowitz saying he had nothing to hide and that he had met with Wolfowitz when he was a lecturer in the John Hopkins University after he was released from prison.

Earlier, Khairy clashed with Anwar first when he interrupted the parliamentary leader in his speech on how the PR-led governments had been wrongly painted as anti-Malay.

Anwar said that this was not true for the PR in Perak and in Terengganu had awarded land rights not only to the Chinese but also to a large community of the Malays.

“But when there was a shift in power, the BN stopped these policies. They cancelled them. Yet they say we are anti-Malays,” he said.

Anwar added that the BN was the one who had been awarding “mountains” to gambling tycoons, referring to the late Tan Sri Lim Goh Tong and his gambling haven of Genting Highlands.

“You can award mountains, hills to them,” he said.

Khairy then poked fun at Anwar and said, “Did you not award this same mountain to the so-called gambling tycoon when you were finance minister? Is this not true? Why don’t you answer that?” he said.

He went on to claim that Anwar had also been seen on video dancing with “the daughter of the gambling tycoon”. “You deny this? Is this not true?” he said amid raucous laughter.

Anwar then admitted to dancing but accused BN’s Muslim leaders of “guzzling” alcohol.

“They see me dance a little and they talk a lot but when it comes to them, it is ok to guzzle alcohol,” he said.

Chaos as Zahrain blasts Anwar, PKR in Parliament

By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal and Clara Chooi - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, March 17 — Pandemonium broke out in the House today when Datuk Seri Zahrain Hashim (picture) spoke out against his former party, venting out frustrations on how the PKR had strayed from the path of righteousness to become “subservient” to the DAP.

The Bayan Baru MP, in his inaugural speech as an Independent, took the opportunity to slam his former party comrades, pointing out that he had been cheated into believing that the Sept 16 supposed government takeover would actually happen.

Zahrain also claimed that during the time of the supposed takeover, he was led to believe that de facto PKR leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had even obtained consent from the King.

“We were cheated with the story that supposedly, the Agong was already waiting in the palace... waiting to get confirmation that enough Barisan Nasional MPs had crossed over to the Opposition and that we had the numbers to take over the Federal Government. The Agong had also supposedly agreed to grant the post of Prime Minister to Anwar,” he said, to escalating shouts of “ooh” from the floor.

As Zahrain went further into his speech, loud shouts and profanities were heard from MPs from both sides of the House.

Opposition backbenchers took the opportunity to accuse Zahrain of having been bought over by the Barisan and Anwar himself told the House that his former Penang PKR chief had only been interested in power and positions.

As the sitting erupted into further chaos and Zahrain yelled at Anwar, “You don’t lie!” the parliamentary Opposition Leader walked out of the House.

At that juncture, BN MPs taunted at Anwar’s departure, claiming that the usually fiery leader was unable to take the heat.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Abdul Aziz then switched on his microphone and said repeatedly, “Takut, takut, takut, takut, takut.”

Speaking to reporter in the Parliament lobby shortly after the House was adjourned for the day, Zahrain defended his earlier outbursts, maintaining that he had every right to do so.

“I’m just telling the reasons why I left the party, on my frustrations with Keadilan and the promises made by the ketua umum which are all lies,” he said.

When asked about the number of MPs Anwar claimed PR had won over in Sept 16 2008, the Bayan Baru MP declined to provide an answer.

“I’m not bothered about numbers, I’m just telling my story, the truth, what I went through. To me it’s irrelevant.”

He took to great lengths to defend his positions and reaffirmed that his departure from PKR was expedited by Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng’s running of the State.

“Sept 16 happened but when the issue of dictator, chauvinist came out and I was not defended, that was the last straw,” said Zahrain, who has been extremely vocal in voicing out his discontent towards the Penang Chief Minister.

Earlier on Anwar who had abruptly left the Parliament session soon after Zahrain’s speech, slammed the former PKR man for lying about what had supposedly happened on Sept 16.

“Which MPs came during the takeover of power? No one came. But he is telling a tall tale. He claimed that when the takeover was going to happen everyone would convene in Parliament.”

“Nobody was here. It’s not true at all...he is being used by Umno at a cheap price for what? He’s angry because people are accusing him for the two dollar company. That’s the real issue,” said Anwar.

No need for Independent caucus, says Ibrahim Ali

By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, March 17 — Outspoken Independent MP Datuk Ibrahim Ali today claimed that there is no need for an Independent caucus as it would only serve to “tie the Independents down.”

The Pasir Mas MP explained that not all the Independent MPs agreed with every issue, and that having a caucus would defeat the purpose of being independent in the first place.

“There are times when you might have your own stand on a matter. I think the need to have a caucus has its pros and cons. If a caucus were formed officially, it would be an institutionalisation of sorts, akin to a political front.”

“It’s better to be an independent than form a caucus,” he told reporters in the Parliament lobby here.

But Ibrahim also pointed out that Independents had their own role to play in Parliament, and that in cases where BN or PR MPs were absent, their numbers will be important.

“Take for example the ISA bill. I don’t know their stand. I want the ISA retained, but with amendments.”

Former PKR MP Datuk Seri Zahrain Hashim had first floated the idea for an Independent caucus on Monday.

Speculation has been rife whether the Independents would be able to work together if such a caucus were to be in place.

MPM claims Malays are marginalised

By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, March 17 — The Malay Consultative Council (MPM) claims that Malays and Bumiputras, who form the majority group in the country, are being marginalised and amendments need to be made to the New Economic Model (NEM) to remedy that.

Speaking to reporters outside of Parliament today, Datuk Ibrahim Ali (picture), who is the founder and steering committee member of MPM, said these amendments have been sent to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak earlier today.

He stated that MPM wanted to make sure that NEM was balanced and that there were “no more polemics” surrounding its introduction.

“I want to clarify something... people are thinking that MPM is racist, it’s not true. We are focusing on the distribution of the country’s wealth, based on social justice.

“MPM’s proposal is that NEM follows the UN Social Economic Charter for marginalised people,” said Ibrahim.

According to the politician, 67 per cent of the country’s population is made up of Malays and Bumiputras while 33 percent are non-Malays, which made Malays and Bumiputras the majority race in the country.

“Any country where the majority is marginalised, they should be given priority... with continual affirmative action.

“The UN charter states that the majority group is the national agenda... this is indeed the issue of national agenda, because this is the majority population.”

He added that contrary to preconceived notions, Malays have not “received much anyway, these are all misperceptions.”

According to Ibrahim, MPM had a roundtable discussion back on March 7 where 75 NGOs and 500 academics had first debated on the proposed amendments to the NEM.

He said that the proposals were designed on the constitutional laws of the country.

“The NEM should include measures that will put a stop to market dominance by a minority, and in turn make it healthier and stable. The positions and rights of the Malays have to be preserved, and distribution has to be balanced,” said Ibrahim.

He noted that the Prime Minister’s reaction had been positive thus far based on preliminary feedback.

“PM has been very receptive, and says he will look and study the proposal.”

The memorandum, titled “meletakkan agenda Melayu dalam ekonomi Melayu” had four main points to offer:

1. Social justice (no marginalisation of the majority group)
2. Economic justice and access to market (to stop the practice of cartel and market dominance by the Chinese so that other races can compete competitively)
3. NEM be based on the spirit of the Constitution
4. Simultaneous development and distribution

We are also 1 Malaysia, says Orang Asli leader

More than 1000 protesters from the The protest, organised by the Peninsular Malaysia Orang Asli Association (POASM) and the Network of Orang Asli Villages, handed over a memorandum to the PM in Putrajaya today. - Picture by Jack Ooi

By Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani - The Malaysian Insider

PUTRAJAYA, March 17 — More than 1,000 people gathered today near the Prime Minister’s office to protest against the proposed amendment to Act 134 of the National Land Act.

The protestors claim the proposed amendment will only allow six to eight acres of land to be allocated to each Orang Asli (indigenous people) household.

The protest, organised by the Peninsular Malaysia Orang Asli Association (POASM) and the Network of Orang Asli Villages, handed over a memorandum, signed by 12,000 Orang Asli throughout Peninsular Malaysia, to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

The protestors, some wearing indigenous outfits, carried banners saying ‘Our rights must be protected,’ ‘Don’t abolish our Act’, and ‘Don’t take away our rights, we are willing to be bathed in blood.’

Police stopped the protestors as they began marching towards the front entrance of the prime minister’s office. They explained that there were many tourists around.

Police stopped the protestors as they began marching towards the front entrance of the prime minister’s office. They thens there were many tourists around.

“Put down the banners! You are breaking the law!” the police officers ordered.

“You do not have to talk to us like that! We are also humans. We know the law. Can’t you ask nicely?” one of the protestors shot back.

Police forcing the protestors to put down their banners. - Picture by Jack Ooi

They finally agreed to the demands by the police and waited patiently under the hot sun for the prime minister’s officers to receive the memorandum.

Half an hour later, Datuk Seri Shafie Apdal appeared and received the memorandum.

The Rural and Regional Development Minister explained that the amendment to Section 134 was in the deliberation process and the government was still open to discussion.

“Currently we are doing a road-show explaining to the public at large — particularly the indigenous people — about the amendments. And the feedback coming from them is crucial to help us accommodate them. There are no closed doors.

“The amendment is not finalised, it is still with the Attorney-General. That is why we are going to table it... possibly in June,” he told reporters here.

Shafie also denied that the government plans to only allow six acres of land for each household

“We need to explain to them that actually the indigenous people are entitled to not only the land gazetted but also land for which they can apply. There are no restrictions granted to the indigenous people on top of what they are entitled to,” he said.

Shafie tried to play down the demonstration and said most of the protestors came to Putrajaya on “vacation.”

“Actually they came to witness the handover of the memorandum and also to have a vacation. They wanted to take pictures of Putrajaya and they also took pictures with me. They came all over and they haven’t seen Putrajaya and only seen it on television,” he said.

Later at a press conference, Pijah Yok Chopil said the government must protect the rights of the indigenous people if they truly believe in 1 Malaysia.

“When Najib became the prime minister, the first thing he did was come up with his concept of 1 Malaysia. Our understanding of 1 Malaysia is that every Malaysian has their uniqueness, making Malaysia into a colourful society. So let us live our own way of life, culture, beliefs but we can be united so do not take away our human rights. Make 1 Malaysia a reality,” said the founder of Network of Orang Asli Villages.

Pijah explained that the amendments do not represent the demands of the indigenous people.

“ For us, land is everything. Land is not for living and income but our land represents everything. It is for culture, beliefs, knowledge, and our history. Our way of life is our identity. We are not greedy but what we are demanding is our right even though we have been labelled as a society that migrates from one place to another. That is not true.

“Every group of indigenous people lives as a group in one area. So even though we move from one place to another it is within our land.

“We find that the amendment does not consider the desire of the indigenous people and is not accordance with the spirit of 1 Malaysia which emphasised the different races in the country,” she said.

She also criticised the government for neglecting the Orang Asli.

“For almost 53 years of independence but many of our villages do not have necessary necessities such roads, electricity and many more. Many of our lands have been taken so easily causing us to be poor. Actually we are not poor but very rich. We are the richest people in Malaysia. We have land and resources. That is why our people have never begged for money or lived on the streets. Even though we do not drive Mercedes, we are very rich.

But I am afraid that in five years time that this will happen if the amendments are approved,” she said.

Pijah added that the “air-conditioned” ministers must listen to the community.

“The ministers talk like that because they live in air-conditioned buildings but we living in the villages know the problems facing us. I believe that those facing problems know the solution to their problems. So if the government wants to help then they should listen to us,” she said.

Zahrain, please tell the whole story

But they never allowed me to sign my statement. On the day I was supposed to sign my statement they sent me off to Kamunting. I am probably the only ISA detainee who was not made to sign his statement. Clearly they are afraid of allowing me to sign my statement lest the government falls one day and this statement falls into the hands of a new government.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Zahrain sparks off verbal hullabaloo

Making his debut in Parliament as an independent member, Bayan Baru parliamentarian Zahrain Hashim made a loud entrance of sorts rousing the house into a shouting match between both sides of the divide.

The episode began serenely enough when the independent parliamentarian began his maiden parliament speech. But the ruckus he kicked up as he went along in an already all too volatile parliament was anything but serene.

Zahrain's speech on the reasons why he left PKR raised the ire of Pakatan Rakyat members of Parliament when he related his version of events leading up to September 16, 2008, the date when Pakatan Rakyat de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim said the opposition would take over the federal government.

The spark that ignited the powder keg of parliamentary fireworks was his allegation that Pakatan representatives were 'told to be on stand-by in Parliament' on September 16 to take over the legislature. He claimed that the Pakatan parliamentarians were told that 'they had the support of the army and the consent of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

Zahrain's claim prompted Anwar, who is opposition parliamentary leader, to stand up and say that Zahrain was 'only after power and riches'. Anwar then walked out of the chambers.

What followed next was a barrage of hoots from BN representatives accusing Anwar of not being able to take the heat and counter-retorts by Pakatan parliamentarians deriding Zahrain for what they said were false claims.

Dewan Rakyat Deputy Speaker Ronald Kiandee joined in the fray reminding everyone that according to the standing orders, institutions of the state, which included the Agong and judges, could not be brought into the discussion unless there was a motion on them. He was alluding to Zahrain's claims about the Agong and the military.

The verbal hullabaloo expanded with both sides making much noise and wild claims as many parliamentarians interjected - whether given way by Zahrain or not - to say their piece. Amongst the most vocal were Batu MP Tian Chua, Padang Serai MP N Gobalakrishnan and Sri Gading MP Mohamad Aziz.

However, the wet-market atmosphere ended when Kiandee adjourned the Dewan Rakyat until 10am tomorrow. -- Malaysiakini, 17 March 2010

*************************************************

That was what Malaysiakini reported today. Actually, there is some truth in what Zahrain Hashim said so I feel Anwar Ibrahim should not have walked out of Parliament. By doing so it would appear like Zahrain had struck a raw nerve, which actually he had I suppose. But then Anwar should not reveal this. Play poker lah, like me. Smile and wait for your time to strike back. Aiyah, Anwar, bad poker player lah.

As I said, Zahrain did not totally lie. And the fact that Zahrain raised this matter in Parliament makes the allegation very serious. You do not lie in Parliament. So Zahrain did not lie. He just left out many other facts in his statement in Parliament today.

It is true the opposition had been told -- or at least some of us had been told -- that the military and the Agong were on ‘stand by’ to swear in the new government. Abdullah Ahmad Badawi was supposed to have been ousted back in 2008 and a new man was supposed to take over as Prime Minister of Malaysia.

But this new Prime Minister was not supposed to be Anwar. It was going to be another person, an Umno man. And this Umno man is not Najib. It was going to be some other person. And Zahrain, of course, knows this, although he did not say so in Parliament today.

The plot goes as follows. I was asked to meet a certain person named Bul, short for Bulat. All the ‘old boys’ of the Malay College Kuala Kangsar (MCKK) know whom I am talking about. Tan Sri Megat Najmuddin Megat Khas -- that Umno man from the Umno Disciplinary Board who called me his brother and advised me to return to Malaysia and clear by name in court -- also knows who Bul is and what I am talking about.

Anyway, Bul and I had our first meeting at La Bordega in Jalan Telawi in Bangsar. My wife was also present, as was a fourth person who sat there without opening his mouth and without saying a single word, as if he was a member of the KGB (yeap, figure that one out).

Bul then told me the story about Rosmah Mansor, her ADC Lt Kolonel Norhayati Hassan, and Norhayai’s husband, also holding the rank of Lt Kolonel, and trained in the use of C4, were at the scene of the crime the night Altantuya was murdered. (I got this ‘trained in the use of C4’ bit confirmed by another person, the army Kolonel who conducted the training, so I was quite satisfied that this information is correct).

I asked Bul what he wanted me to do about this information. “Expose it,” replied Bul.

I told Bul if I do that they would certainly arrest me and send me to jail. Bul promised me if that happens then they would come forward to testify. They would not allow me to be sent to jail, Bul assured me. They will come to my aid and make sure that the truth is revealed.

After the meeting my wife told me to forget it. It is too risky, my wife said. So I did nothing.

Bul then requested another meeting and this time we met in the Selangor Club for lunch on a Sunday. That same mysterious ‘KGB’ man was there, as was my wife. Bul asked me whether I was going to act on the information he gave me and I replied, no. I was not sure whether this information is true.

Bul assured me it is true. He has read the Military Intelligence report that they sent to Prime Minister Pak Lah, Bul assured me.

I looked at my wife who shook her head. Bul told my wife not to worry. Bul said he offers his guarantee that I would come to no harm. This is dynamite and Pak Lah will fall because he knows about it yet he keeps quiet. And Najib will also fall so Malaysia will get a new Prime Minister. Then we can talk about forming a unity government with Pakatan Rakyat and maybe offer Anwar the post of Deputy Prime Minister.

Against my wife’s advice I told Bul I would do it. But he must back me up when the shit hits the fan. No problem, Bul said. Kol Azmi, the number two in the Special Branch of the MIO has a copy of the report that was sent to Pak Lah and he is waiting to come forward to expose the whole thing.

Bul wanted to know when I would do it and I replied maybe I would write my article the following day. No, no article, Bul said. An article is not good enough. It must be a Statutory Declaration. The government can just ignore an article. But the government can’t ignore a Statutory Declaration. So it must be a Statutory Declaration.

In the meantime, my wife and I met Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad a couple of times to check whether he is agreeable to the new candidate for Prime Minister or whether he would prefer for Najib to take over. (Tan Sri Sanusi Junid can confirm this). Dr Mahathir gave us the impression that he is not in favour of Najib and that he is agreeable to the man named by Bul.

So we arranged for this man to meet Dr Mahathir and they met a few times. Dr Mahathir also sent Datuk Andrew Leong to meet this man to seal the deal. I, in fact, arranged for the meeting between Andrew Leong and this man. I also sat in on the meeting.

The deal was struck. I would sign my Statutory Declaration. Pak Lah would be ousted. Najib would be blocked from taking over. And the new Prime Minister would take over with Dr Mahathir’s blessing.

Along the way, however, something went wrong. The candidate for new Prime Minister was asked to confirm that he agrees to the setting up a Presidential Council once he becomes Prime Minister. And the Presidential Council, headed by Dr Mahathir, will ‘guide’ the new Prime Minister.

This candidate for new Prime Minister said no. If he becomes Prime Minister then he will decide how this country is going to be run. He is not going to become a puppet Prime Minister with the Presidential Council as the real power behind the throne. Dr Mahathir, in fact, announced during a meeting with about 1,000 Umno members in the Singgahsana Hotel in Petaling Jaya that this Presidential Council will be set up and the next Prime Minister will answer to it.

When this man said no, Dr Mahathir dumped him and turned to Najib. Najib was back in and this other man was out of the picture. But shit, in the meantime I had already signed the Statutory Declaration that was supposed to not only get Pak Lah ousted but disqualify Najib as well.

I was now an embarrassment to them. They needed Najib after all since this other man did not agree to the Presidential Council while Najib did. So they needed to clear Najib’s name. And, to do that, they have to bring me down.

And that, dear readers, is why I am in this predicament. I was supposed to be the catalyst to get rid of Pak Lah and to block Najib from taking over. But the deal went sour. And this other man who was supposed to take over was sidelined. And I was given the ‘red card’ and sent off the field.

And that made my wife fucking mad. When I was detained under the Internal Security Act, Bul phoned my wife and said that this man wanted to meet her. My wife told Bul to tell this man to go fuck himself and hung up the phone.

My wife then went to meet Anwar to tell him the whole story, most of which Anwar already knew. Anwar then went to meet this man, who was supposed to be the new Prime Minister but did quite not make it. Anwar told him that I signed that Statutory Declaration because they asked me to do so. And that was supposed to clear the way for this man, instead of Najib, to take over as Prime Minister.

But he did not dare come forward to reveal what really happened and why I signed that Statutory Declaration. My wife then insisted that Anwar go to court to meet me and tell me in person, which Anwar did. I knew then that they had abandoned me as ‘collateral damage’ and that I was now on my own.

Anyway, I related this story to the Special Branch, which was recorded. I was supposed to then sign my statement, the normal procedure when they take your statement during ISA detention.

But they never allowed me to sign my statement. On the day I was supposed to sign my statement they sent me off to Kamunting. I am probably the only ISA detainee who was not made to sign his statement. Clearly they are afraid of allowing me to sign my statement lest the government falls one day and this statement falls into the hands of a new government.

Datuk Zambri Ahmad, that senior man in the Special Branch who was in charge of my interrogation, knows exactly what I am talking about. He also confirmed he personally knows Kolonel Azmi, the number two in the Special Branch of the MIO whom I am talking about.

So Zahrain did not lie in Parliament today. What he told Parliament about the military and the Agong being on stand by to swear in the new government is true. Zahrain just did not tell Parliament the whole story. And I have just filled in the missing pieces of the jigsaw puzzle.

Thanks Zahrain. By raising the matter in Parliament this has allowed me to add to your story. Muchos gracias.

UK Parliament passes Early Day Motion on Anwar Ibrahim

Jeremy Corbyn to meet Anwar Ibrahim on Friday and more Members of Parliament to sign the EDM tomorrow

MALAYSIA AND ANWAR IBRAHIM

15.03.2010

Corbyn, Jeremy

That this House recognises Malaysian Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim's contribution to promoting democracy in Malaysia and peace and understanding between the Muslim world and the West; is deeply concerned at the charges laid against Anwar Ibrahim and that his current trial flouts international standards of fairness and adherence to the rule of law; notes that this trial resembles the one he faced in 1998 in which the conduct of the judiciary was condemned by Malaysians and by the international community; further notes the renewed exhortations by international human rights organisations including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and prominent leaders from Commonwealth nations including the Right honourable Paul Martin of Canada and the Right honourable Michael Danby and 59 other elected representatives of Australia for the Malaysian government to drop the charges against Anwar Ibrahim; and calls on the Malaysian authorities to bring an end to the harassment and persecution of members of the political opposition.

Early Day Motion

EDM 1092

MALAYSIA AND ANWAR IBRAHIM

15.03.2010

Corbyn, Jeremy

That this House recognises Malaysian Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim's contribution to promoting democracy in Malaysia and peace and understanding between the Muslim world and the West; is deeply concerned at the charges laid against Anwar Ibrahim and that his current trial flouts international standards of fairness and adherence to the rule of law; notes that this trial resembles the one he faced in 1998 in which the conduct of the judiciary was condemned by Malaysians and by the international community; further notes the renewed exhortations by international human rights organisations including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and prominent leaders from Commonwealth nations including the Right honourable Paul Martin of Canada and the Right honourable Michael Danby and 59 other elected representatives of Australia for the Malaysian government to drop the charges against Anwar Ibrahim; and calls on the Malaysian authorities to bring an end to the harassment and persecution of members of the political opposition.

Otak lembu

George Kent got its two contracts of RM16 million each. It also got its Variation Orders of another few million. Pahang transferred the money to Johor so that Johor could pay George Kent. And Umno Johor got its RM1 million, payable in cash in small bills so that it was untraceable.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Anuar Shaari also commented on the RM1 million lawsuit against him by former Berita Harian editor Datuk Ahmad Nazri Abdullah.

He said the lawsuit stemmed from his claim in a local Malay daily last December that "an Opposition leader had liquefied his assets overseas".

Anuar urged Ahmad Nazri to clarify his relationship with Anwar Ibrahim as well his assets as claims have surfaced they are estimated to be worth more than RM1 billion.

"Ahmad Nazri needs to come forward to explain whether or not he's Anwar’s proxy. Besides that, he is also a former newspaper editor," Anuar said.

Anuar said these were not accusations but merely a plea for Nazri to come forward to clarify the issue.

Anuar was accompanied by Abdul Ghani Haroon of Perkasa. – The Malay Mail

*************************************************

When that group of Malays dragged the cow head to the Selangor State Secretariat building some months ago after Friday prayers, and stomped on it, they explained that it was not meant to insult the Hindus. When you are stupid the Malays would say: bodoh macam lembu (stupid like a cow), explained the protestors. So the cow head is symbolic of stupidity. And the Selangor government, in particular the Menteri Besar, Khalid Ibrahim, is stupid. Hence the reason for the cow head, they told the media, with the Minister himself present during that particular press conference.

And, also, hence the reason for the title of my piece today: otak lembu (cow brains).

Anuar Shaari wants Ahmad Nazri Abdullah to explain his relationship with Anwar Ibrahim, reported The Malay Mail. And my response to Anuar Shaari is otak lembu; bodoh macam lembu.

The way The Malay Mail spun the story is as if Nazri has committed a crime by having a relationship or association with Anwar. Anuar Shaari did not come right out and allege that Nazi does in fact have an association with Anwar. He wants Nazri to explain whether he does or does not have an association with Anwar.

Okay, say he does. Say Nazri does have a relationship or association with Anwar. Is this a crime, as what The Malay Mail is trying to make it out to be? So what? What is wrong with that? Is having a relationship or association with Anwar a crime? Is it not the right of anyone to have a relationship or association with anyone he or she so chooses?

This is a merely a spin. The Malay Mail is doing some spinning. They raise innuendos and insinuations and leave the rest to the imagination of the reader. When the reader reads this news report it gives an impression that Nazri and Anwar have some sort of ‘unholy alliance’ and that this is very wrong.

Of course, Anuar Shaari and The Malay Mail did not allege that it is so. They are ‘just asking’. But the way they have spun it makes it appear like there is something going on and that whatever is going on is wrong.

Anuar Shaari and The Malay Mail should read the Federal Constitution of Malaysia, the part that guarantees all Malaysians freedom of association. That means all Malaysians have a right to choose whom they wish to associate with. There is nothing wrong with this and no crime has been committed by associating with anyone.

In Malaysia, however, they impose this ‘extra-Constitutional law’ that makes you guilty by association.

Are they trying to suggest that if Nazri associates with Anwar then he is guilty? In the first place, what is Anwar’s crime? And therefore, by extension, because of his association with Anwar, what would Nazri’s crime be?

Anwar was alleged to have committed sodomy. So, since I am associated with Anwar, does that also make me guilty of sodomy? I, in turn, am alleged to have defamed the ‘First Lady’ of Malaysia when she was not yet the ‘First Lady but merely the wife of the Deputy Prime Minister. So, since Anwar is associated with me, does that also make him guilty of defaming the ‘First Lady’?

Otak lembu sungguh Anuar Shaari!

Actually, the bone of contention is that Anwar Ibrahim is the opposition leader. It is because Anwar is in the opposition that they consider it wrong for Nazri to associate with him. If Anwar was in Umno then it is not wrong to associate with him. And if Anwar leaves PKR to rejoin Umno then it is also not wrong to associate with him. It is only wrong if Anwar remains in the opposition.

Many businessmen, tycoons, millionaires, billionaires, etc., associate with Umno, MCA, MIC, Gerakan and so on. This is okay. This is not wrong. But if they associate with PKR, PAS or DAP, then this is wrong. That is the real issue. You do not really have freedom of association, as guaranteed by our Constitution. This freedom of association is only allowed when you associate with Barisan Nasional, not if you associate with Pakatan Rakyat.

Otak lembu!

Anuar Shaari, you want something to get your teeth into? Okay, I will give you something to get your teeth into. Make a public statement, again, and ask Tan Sri Tan Kay Hock to explain his association with Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak.

Do you remember the story about Tan Kay Hock? He was reported to be Najib’s golf buddy. And in case the name is blur to you, as I am sure it must be considering your limited educational background, then read this (http://todayfinancialworld.blogspot.com/2009/01/najib-series-tan-sri-dato-tan-kay-hock.html). You will find all the information about Tan Kay Hock, Najib’s golf buddy, in that link.

The Malaysian Insider also wrote about it here: (http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/malaysia/32354-najibs-inner-circle).

In that report The Malaysian Insider said:

Tan Sri Tan Kay Hock is said to be a golf buddy of the PM. He is the low-profile controlling shareholder of Johan Holdings, a public-listed investment holding company, and said to be a golf buddy of Najib’s.

The Financial Times had reported that Tan, 61, was the owner of the 607ha Guiana Island, which is now at the centre of a fraud case brought by the United States authorities against Texan billionaire businessman Allen Stanford.

Is there anything wrong for Tan Kay Hock to be associated with Najib? Not really. But if it is wrong for Nazri to be associated with Anwar then, by this same yardstick, we have to also question Tan Kay Hock’s association with Najib.

Anuar Shaari, allow me to reveal a story that the two reports above did not mention.

Tan Kay Hock is the Chairman of Johan Holdings Berhad and George Kent (M) Bhd. Well, so was I back in the 1980s. I was a director of Johan Holdings and the Deputy Chairman of George Kent plus director of ‘Special Operations’ -- meaning covert operations. So what I am going to reveal is ‘insider’ information, not something that I heard, but something that I was involved in back in my ‘jahiliyah’ days.

Najib was then the Menteri Besar of Pahang while the then Menteri Besar of Johor was Ajib. Remember Ajib, Musa Hitam’s man? He was the man who called Tun Dr Mahathir a mamak during a Malay Chamber of Commerce meeting and was soon after removed as Menteri Besar and replaced by Muhyiddin Yassin, the present Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia. At that time Muhyiddin was the Deputy Minister of Trade.

Anyway, Muhyiddin met Datuk Andrew Leong, one of the Johan Holdings directors and the man associated with Deepak Jaikishan (ah, yes, another ‘association’ -- remember Deepak, Rosmah's carpetman cum bagman cum toyboy?), in Singapore to plan how to give George Kent a RM32 million ductile iron pipe contract. Muhyiddin was representing MB Ajib, who Andrew had met a day earlier in his office in Johor Baru.

The deal was: Johor would give George Kent the RM32 million contract on condition that George Kent paid Umno Johor RM1 million. Now, this was more than 25 years ago so imagine what RM32 million and RM1 million were worth then? Today, you could probably multiply that by five times or more.

But Johor could not sign a contract for RM32 million because any contract above RM20 million must first obtain the approval of the Minister of Finance. So they broke the contract into two, which was illegal. Each contract would be worth RM16 million. Then, with 'Variation Orders' included, each contract can be inflated to RM19 million, just below RM20 million where the Ministry of Finance would become involved. So it would finally come to RM38 million, but in two contracts. That would bypass the Minister of Finance.

They had one problem, though. Johor had used up its budget for the year and if they requested more money from the federal government then the Ministry of Finance would get to know about the contract.

So they contacted the Menteri Besar of Pahang, Najib, and they were told that Pahang had some unused budget. Pahang did not manage to spend all the money allocated to them for that year (what can they spend it on in Pahang anyway?)

Najib agreed to transfer Pahang’s money to Johor, but on the sly of course because this was not legal. Then, the following year, when Johor receives its next budget, it would return the money to Pahang. It was a sort of loan from Pahang to Johor. And the Ministry of Finance would not know about it. It was an MB to MB arrangement.

George Kent got its two contracts of RM16 million each. It also got its Variation Orders of another few million. Pahang transferred the money to Johor so that Johor could pay George Kent. And Umno Johor got its RM1 million, payable in cash in small bills so that it was untraceable.

So, Anuar Shaari, if you want an explanation about the association between businessmen and politicians, get your teeth into that story which I just revealed. This is not an innocent association. This is an association that smacks of corruption, abuse of power, and whatnot. And it involves both the current Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister.

Is there a statute of limitation on corruption and abuse of power? Damn, that means Najib and Muhyiddin will be able to get away scot-free.

So please don’t talk about the association between businessmen and the opposition politicians. There is no crime in that. But there are many elements of crime in the association between businessmen and those who walk in the corridors of power.

Come on Najib and Muhyiddin. Please deny the story I just told. Call me a liar. Make a police report against me. Say this is not true.

Oh, and before you do, let’s play some poker. Do you want to bet that maybe, just maybe, I still do or do not have the contract documents to support my story?

Call my bluff, if you think I am just playing poker.

Okaylah, let me give you a small hint. Ask Tan Kay Hock about the civil suit, George Kent (M) Bhd versus Bumi Kejuruteraan Sdn Bhd.

Aiyah, Anuar Shaari. You are still a novice in this game lah. Budak kecik pergi main jauh-jauh lah. You are not seasoned enough to play this type of game. We can makan you hidup-hidup.

Otak lembu!

MCA's three-ring circus rolls around

By Kee Thuan Chye

COMMENT Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat just doesn't know when to quit, does he? Despite his bravado in promising to step down before the mess hit the fan at the MCA's extraordinary general meeting last Oct 10, he is still adamant that he will be an asset to a beleaguered party split apart by his high-handedness as president. He has declared — the first candidate to do so — that he will defend his position at the coming party elections on March 28.

This is the very man who promised to quit as president if the no-confidence vote against him at the EGM was passed by just one vote. It was actually passed by a margin of 14, with 1,155 delegates voting for it and 1,141 against. He should have kept his word, and done the honourable thing; instead, he chose to stay on.

That more than 600 members attended the party's annual meeting on March 7 indicates that he enjoys their support, but that is only a quarter of the 2,379 delegates who will vote in two weeks. Besides, some of those 600 could have attended the AGM just to hedge their bets; there may be opportunists among them who will switch loyalties if another faction looks the surer winner. Furthermore, the political complexion has just changed, now that former president Tan Sri Ong Ka Ting has also announced his candidacy.

This is another pathetic twist to the MCA soap opera. In 2008, Ka Ting was the one who led the party to its worst general election defeat ever, losing more than half the seats it had held. In his tenure as president, he was not noted for having any gumption in standing up to Umno's trampling over Chinese concerns. He also didn't stand up for Tee Keat when the latter was reprimanded in 2006 by Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, then deputy prime minister, for urging the Education Ministry to act on corruption in Chinese schools.

What will Datuk Dr Chua Soi Lek and Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai, who have been touted as likely candidates, do now? Chua had been considered the front-runner because, pundits say, he could rely on the support of at least 900 delegates. How will his chances be affected with Ka Ting’s entry? As for Liow, since a large chunk of his supporters are also those of Ka Ting’s, will he settle for the number two position?

“
...delegates may be faced with only these options — of a man who broke his promise, a man who betrayed his friend, a man who cheated on his wife, and a man who lacked courage when he was president.

What about Ka Ting's brother, Ka Chuan? Surely, there would be something in all this for him? But Ka Chuan's track record is not impressive: he was trounced in the 2004 general election in Batu Gajah and managed to win in 2008 probably because Tanjung Malim was a safe seat. And in the MCA elections of 2008, he lost to Chua for the deputy presidency. Why would the delegates want him this time?

Intriguing times

The MCA is in for intriguing times. There will be a lot of horse trading right up to the elections as the factions scramble to make up the required figures. Liow was an ally of Tee Keat’s till he apparently betrayed the latter after the Oct 10 EGM. Are we likely to see further betrayals by any of the others? Will Chua the "magician" be wily enough to pull off the art of making the impossible possible, and the possible impossible?

It looks like the same circus is back. You can almost hear the orchestra striking up the opening strains of Send in the Clowns. The sad part is, the delegates may be faced with only these options – of a man who broke his promise, a man who betrayed his friend, a man who cheated on his wife, and a man who lacked courage when he was president.

In the past, there was only a Team A vs Team B; now there are Teams X, Y and Z. With the party already so split, will the March 28 elections lead to unity? There would be animosity even if Ka Ting becomes president again. If Tee Keat wins, the party would be back at square one. All the grief and disgrace the party has experienced would have been much ado about nothing. And Tee Keat was the one whose open contempt for Chua, his deputy then, from the moment he stepped into the presidency led to the unravelling of the whole mess today.

Where does the solution lie? One doubts whether the team leaders know the answer. As it is, the whole MCA "dramedy" has shown up the reality that the MCA is no longer a force in Malaysian politics. The world of the Malaysian Chinese didn't end while the in-fighting went on. Life in the Chinese community continued, debunking any claim that the MCA still matters to the Chinese.

Its days are nearly over. Why fight over a dying cause? Time to move on. Time to heed the words of Tun Dr Lim Keng Yaik who has suddenly wised up now he's been out of the Gerakan leadership for a couple of years: “After March 8, politics is going towards an ideological base that is multi-racial in approach.”

Perhaps it's time for the MCA to implode and start all over again.

---

Kee Thuan Chye, dramatist, author and journalist, is a contributor to Free Malaysia Today

Lawyer's suit against Raja Petra set for case management on June 1

(Bernama) -- A lawyer's suit against Malaysia Today editor Raja Petra Raja Kamarudin over alleged defamatory articles published against him in 2008, was set for further case management on June 1.

The High Court deputy registrar K.Pavani fixed the date in chambers today.

Counsel S.Ravindran appeared for Datuk Seri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, while counsel for Raja Petra was absent.

Muhammad Shafee is suing Raja Petra for posting three articles on Aug 6, 7 and 11, 2008 entitled "Shafee Abdullah: Sodomologist Extraordinaire", "Money, Power and Sex: What Motivates Man" and "The Real Dalang Behind The Anwar Sodomy Allegation" on the Malaysia Today website, which he said were defamatory of him.

On Aug 13, 2008, he obtained ex-parte injunctions ordering Raja Petra to remove the articles as well as all comments on the articles from the website, and reveal the identities of visitors to the website who had left comments and messages following the publication of the articles, among others.

Raja Petra, in his statement of defence filed on Nov 25, 2008, denied that the three articles which were published on Malaysia Today were false, malicious or defamatory to Muhammad Shafee.

Raja Petra, 60, left the country last year, and is believed to be hiding in London.

Anwar sindir Najib puji diri sendiri

(Harakah Daily) - Ketua Pembangkang Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim menyindir Datuk Seri Najib Razak kerana memuatkan pujian kepada diri sendiri dalam teks titah ucapan Duli Yang Maha Mulia Yang Di Pertuan Agong sewaktu merasmikan sidang parlimen dua hari lalu.

“Jarang berlaku dalam ucapan titah Yang Di Pertuan Agong, perdana menteri secara peribadi memuji dirinya sendiri,” sindir Anwar tengah hari tadi sambil disambut gelak ketawa oleh Ahli Parlimen Pakatan Rakyat di dewan Rakyat.

Dalam nada yang jenaka, Anwar yang juga Ahli Parlimen Permatang Pauh menasihatkan Najib supaya memuatkan ucapan penghargaan kepada Umno BN kerana berjaya mengekalkan kuasa dalam kerajaan.

“Tanpa rasa malu Perdana Menteri memuji dirinya sendiri, selalunya diletakkan tahniah kepada kerajaan kerana menang pilihan raya, itu kebiasaannya,”

Disebabkan Speaker Dewan Datuk Donald Kiandee tidak menghalang seloroh itu, Anwar terus membaca teks titah ucapan yang dimaksudkan beliau.

“Para pemimpin hendaklah mencontohi Memanda Perdana Menteri (Najib),” kata Anwar.

Tambah Anwar lagi, sidang kali ini turut mencipta sejarah apabila Datin Seri Rosmah Mansur, iaitu isteri kepada Perdana Menteri turut dipuji secara peribadi dalam titah ucapan tersebut.

“Bukan setakat itu tuan speaker, inilah kali yang pertama dalam sejarah di mana dalam Titah Diraja, suatu pujian khusus pada insiatif yang dibuat oleh isteri perdana menteri,” sindir Anwar lagi.

“Berikutan kejayaan program Permata Negara, Permata Pintar, Permata Seni, Permata Insan Permata Remaja, Ini Permata yang memang menjadi projek istimewa si isteri jelita,” kata Anwar lagi.

Anwar yang juga Ketua Umum PKR berkata, teguruan khusus kepada perdana menteri itu bukanlah bermakna memperkecil titah ucapan DYMM Tuanku Sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin.

Menurut beliau, konsep raja berperlembagaan yang diamalkan di Malaysia bermakna kerajaan yang memerintah menyediakan titah ucapan yang kemudiannya disemak dan diperkenan oleh seorang Yang Dipertuan Agong.

Maka, kata Anwar, Najib selaku ketua kerajaan bertanggungjawab menyediakan draf ucapan titah ucapan tersebut.

Tindakan Najib itu tegasnya sekaligus boleh merosakkan imej dan tradisi raja berpelembagaan yang selama ini dilaksanakan di Parlimen.

Beliau juga menasihatkan kerajaan supaya tidak mengulangi perbuatan serupa di Dewan Rakyat yang mulia itu.

“Ini yang nak saya perbetulkan supaya pujian-pujian pada diri sendiri seperti ini tidak lagi berulang,” tegas Anwar.

Article 153 on the ‘special position’ of the Malays and other natives: The way forward*

By Art Harun,

* This article is originally written in Bahasa Malaysia. Helen Ang of the Centre for Policy Initiatives has kindly translated it into English.

In my article, Visiting the Malay ‘Rights’ (the Bahasa Malaysia version can be read here), I had commented on article 153 of the Federal Constitution. I stated that under its provisions, the Malays in fact do not possess any special ‘rights’.

There is only the special ‘position’ of the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak. In general, this special position does not confer any right which is recognised by law to the Malays.

Specifically, what is contained in article 153 is the power vested in His Majesty the Yang di Pertuan Agong to ensure that places in the civil service and institutions of higher learning are reserved for the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak as His Majesty deems reasonable.

Additionally, His Majesty is also given the power to reserve a quota for the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak in the allocation of scholarships, and permits or licences required for business and trade. This power is similarly to be exercised by His Majesty as His Majesty deems reasonable.

A few fundamental premises should be examined and borne in mind regarding the provisions contained in article 153. They are:

• They do not confer any rights to the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak. For example, article 153 does not state that the Malays are entitled (as a matter of rights) to 30% or 50% of scholarships disbursed by the government every year;
• The special position is not only conferred to the Malays but also the natives of Sabah and Sarawak;
• The power (enabling the quotas) belongs to His Majesty the Yang di Pertuan Agong;
• His Majesty is to exercise the powers under article 153 as His majesty deems reasonable. This means the power cannot be exercised arbitrarily.

The injection of the element of ‘reasonableness’ in article 153 brings an element of dynamism in the implementation of the powers under article 153. This is because what was reasonable back in 1969, for instance, may no longer be fitting in 2010 and so forth.

A starting point towards dissipating the dissatisfaction currently felt by all parties (whether the Malays or non-Malays) over article 153 is, I believe, to commence a rational discussion to determine what is held to be ‘reasonable’ at this point.

Thereafter, I feel, the implementation of those facets of article 153 can then be carefully planned by incorporating whatever equitable formula guaranteeing the element of ‘reasonableness’ in time to come.

In this way, there will be no need for all of us to have shouting matches, wield the keris and to ready the arena for a silat fight here and there every time there is doubt that the economic balance between the races falls short of the ideal in our country.

Malaysia has our fair share of the intelligentsia and learned economists. Dr Jomo Sundram, for example, is a senior official at the United Nations secretariat. We even have our very own astronaut. We have submarines in our naval fleet. Why don’t we just employ the wisdom and expertise which we possess to resolve this matter of article 153?

Lately, the issue has raised a lot of hackles and even been distorted by those who appear to be ignorant of its provisions. The trite rhetoric daily purveyed by the mass media is bereft of academic credentials and far from factual. The cheap politicking and parochialism emanating from this rhetoric is so pungent as to be nauseating.

One of the popular assertions is that article 153 cannot be amended. This claim is, in my humble opinion, very confusing and merely reflects ignorance of the Federal Constitution.

According to article 159 of the Federal Constitution, article 153 can in fact be amended on the condition that the amendment is supported by two-thirds of the members of the Lower and Upper Houses in its second and third reading. If this support is obtained, the amendment may only take effect after it is approved by the Council of Rulers.

Therefore, if there is anyone who insists article 153 cannot be amended, I would be glad to be proven otherwise.

We as Malaysians should be more sensitive to any efforts made to gain a deeper understanding of various matters because it is only through knowledge can we arrive at the truth. Don’t simply swallow wholesale what people say. On the subject of article 153, there is a lot we can learn from history.

So let’s revisit history on it.

It is common knowledge that a commission was established to draft our constitution. This commission is known as the Reid Commission (named after its head, a renowned English judge, Lord Reid).

In drawing up the Federal Constitution, the Reid Commission was assigned the task to ensure that the position of the Malays was safeguarded. Its report says:

“Our terms of reference require that provision should be made in the Constitution for the ‘safeguarding of the special position of the Malays and the legitimate interests of other Communities’.”

Nonetheless, the commission found it difficult to give a special preference to any single race permanently because such a special preference is contrary to the principle of equality in the eyes of the law. The Reid Commission reported:

“We found it difficult, therefore, to reconcile the terms of reference if the protection of the special position of the Malays signified the granting of special privileges, permanently, to one community only and not to the others."

The Alliance front led by Tunku Abdul Rahman had also wanted independent Malaya to confer equal rights, privileges, and equal opportunities to all its citizens regardless of race or religion. Additionally, the Council of Rulers had hoped too that the concept of communalism would be eventually eradicated from the country’s political and economic spheres. In relation to this, the Reid Commission reported:

“The difficulty of giving one community a permanent advantage over the others was realised by the Alliance Party, representatives of which, led by the Chief Minister, submitted that in an independent Malaya all nationals should be accorded equal rights, privileges and opportunities and there must not be discrimination on grounds of race and creed ...’ The same view was expressed by their Highnesses in their memorandum, in which they said that they ‘look forward to a time not too remote when it will become possible to eliminate Communalism as a force in the political and economic life of the country’.”

Such was the hope and good intentions of our forefathers in their common struggle to obtain independence from British colonialism. The Federal Constitution was formulated in cognizance of these intentions and aspirations.

This notwithstanding, the Reid Commission was presented with yet another difficulty. What was in actuality the special position of the Malays that was to be preserved? Where was the special position to be found? What guidelines should they have used to determine and establish this special position?

Their search ended when it was discovered that the Malays had always enjoyed a special position even from the start of British colonisation. This special position was already affirmed by the British in their earlier treaties with the Malay rulers. This culminated in the recognition of the said special position in clause 19(1) (d) of the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1948. It was explained as below:

“When we came to determine what is ‘the special position of the Malays’ we found that as a result of the original treaties with the Malay States, reaffirmed from time to time, the special position of the Malays has always been recognised. This recognition was continued by the provisions of cl 19(1)(d) of the Federation Agreement, 1948, which made the High Commissioner responsible for safeguarding the special position of the Malays and the legitimate interests of other communities.”

They found that the Malays had always enjoyed a special position in four areas:

• Reserve land,
• Quota in the civil service,
• Quota in permits and trading licences, and
• Quota in scholarships and education.

When they visited Tanah Melayu to solicit the views of the various parties before proceeding to draft our constitution, the Reid Commission did not meet with any objections from any parties for this special position to remain although there were some quarters that objected to it being extended for a long period of time.

After studying the special position of the Malays and the circumstances of the Malays who at that time were lagging behind the other races in the economic and education sectors, the Reid Commission decided to retain the Malay special position in the constitution that they drafted.

This is the background and rationale behind article 153 that we have with us today. The question now is whether it is true that the provisions of article 153 were meant to be maintained for perpetuity.

But what was said in the British Parliament about this? What was the wish of our Father of Independence, Tunku Abdul Rahman?

We will look into the details in Part 2.

Anwar Sindir Najib Puji Diri Sendiri

Dari Harakah Daily
Oleh Dzulfikar Mashoor

Ketua Pembangkang Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim menyindir Datuk Seri Najib Razak kerana memuatkan pujian kepada diri sendiri dalam teks titah ucapan Duli Yang Maha Mulia Yang Di Pertuan Agong sewaktu merasmikan sidang parlimen dua hari lalu.

“Jarang berlaku dalam ucapan titah Yang Di Pertuan Agong, perdana menteri secara peribadi memuji dirinya sendiri,” sindir Anwar tengah hari tadi sambil disambut gelak ketawa oleh Ahli Parlimen Pakatan Rakyat di dewan Rakyat.

Dalam nada yang jenaka, Anwar yang juga Ahli Parlimen Permatang Pauh menasihatkan Najib supaya memuatkan ucapan penghargaan kepada Umno BN kerana berjaya mengekalkan kuasa dalam kerajaan.

“Tanpa rasa malu Perdana Menteri memuji dirinya sendiri, selalunya diletakkan tahniah kepada kerajaan kerana menang pilihan raya, itu kebiasaannya,”

Disebabkan Speaker Dewan Datuk Donald Kiandee tidak menghalang seloroh itu, Anwar terus membaca teks titah ucapan yang dimaksudkan beliau.

“Para pemimpin hendaklah mencontohi Memanda Perdana Menteri (Najib),” kata Anwar.

Tambah Anwar lagi, sidang kali ini turut mencipta sejarah apabila Datin Seri Rosmah Mansur, iaitu isteri kepada Perdana Menteri turut dipuji secara peribadi dalam titah ucapan tersebut.

“Bukan setakat itu tuan speaker, inilah kali yang pertama dalam sejarah di mana dalam Titah Diraja, suatu pujian khusus pada insiatif yang dibuat oleh isteri perdana menteri,” sindir Anwar lagi.

“Berikutan kejayaan program Permata Negara, Permata Pintar, Permata Seni, Permata Insan Permata Remaja, Ini Permata yang memang menjadi projek istimewa si isteri jelita,” kata Anwar lagi.

Anwar yang juga Ketua Umum PKR berkata, teguruan khusus kepada perdana menteri itu bukanlah bermakna memperkecil titah ucapan DYMM Tuanku Sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin.

Menurut beliau, konsep raja berperlembagaan yang diamalkan di Malaysia bermakna kerajaan yang memerintah menyediakan titah ucapan yang kemudiannya disemak dan diperkenan oleh seorang Yang Dipertuan Agong.

Maka, kata Anwar, Najib selaku ketua kerajaan bertanggungjawab menyediakan draf ucapan titah ucapan tersebut.

Tindakan Najib itu tegasnya sekaligus boleh merosakkan imej dan tradisi raja berpelembagaan yang selama ini dilaksanakan di Parlimen.

Beliau juga menasihatkan kerajaan supaya tidak mengulangi perbuatan serupa di Dewan Rakyat yang mulia itu.

“Ini yang nak saya perbetulkan supaya pujian-pujian pada diri sendiri seperti ini tidak lagi berulang,” tegas Anwar.

MCA ’s three-ring circus rolls around

By Kee Thuan Chye

Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat just doesn’t know when to quit, does he? Despite his bravado in promising to step down before the mess hit the fan at the MCA’s extraordinary general meeting last Oct 10, he is still adamant that he will be an asset to a beleaguered party split apart by his high-handedness as president. He has declared — the first candidate to do so — that he will defend his position at the coming party elections on March 28.

This is the very man who promised to quit as president if the no-confidence vote against him at the EGM was passed by just one vote. It was actually passed by a margin of 14, with 1,155 delegates voting for it and 1,141 against. He should have kept his word, and done the honourable thing; instead, he chose to stay on.

That more than 600 members attended the party’s annual meeting on March 7 indicates that he enjoys their support, but that is only a quarter of the 2,379 delegates who will vote in two weeks. Besides, some of those 600 could have attended the AGM just to hedge their bets; there may be opportunists among them who will switch loyalties if another faction looks the surer winner. Furthermore, the political complexion has just changed, now that former president Tan Sri Ong Ka Ting has also announced his candidacy.

This is another pathetic twist to the MCA soap opera. In 2008, Ka Ting was the one who led the party to its worst general election defeat ever, losing more than half the seats it had held. In his tenure as president, he was not noted for having any gumption in standing up to Umno’s trampling over Chinese concerns. He also didn’t stand up for Tee Keat when the latter was reprimanded in 2006 by Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, then deputy prime minister, for urging the Education Ministry to act on corruption in Chinese schools.

What will Datuk Dr Chua Soi Lek and Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai, who have been touted as likely candidates, do now? Chua had been considered the front-runner because, pundits say, he could rely on the support of at least 900 delegates. How will his chances be affected with Ka Ting’s entry? As for Liow, since a large chunk of his supporters are also those of Ka Ting’s, will he settle for the number two position?

What about Ka Ting’s brother, Ka Chuan? Surely, there would be something in all this for him? But Ka Chuan’s track record is not impressive: he was trounced in the 2004 general election in Batu Gajah and managed to win in 2008 probably because Tanjung Malim was a safe seat. And in the MCA elections of 2008, he lost to Chua for the deputy presidency. Why would the delegates want him this time?

The MCA is in for intriguing times. There will be a lot of horse trading right up to the elections as the factions scramble to make up the required figures. Liow was an ally of Tee Keat’s till he apparently betrayed the latter after the Oct 10 EGM. Are we likely to see further betrayals by any of the others? Will Chua the “magician” be wily enough to pull off the art of making the impossible possible, and the possible impossible?

It looks like the same circus is back. You can almost hear the orchestra striking up the opening strains of Send in the Clowns. The sad part is, the delegates may be faced with only these options – of a man who broke his promise, a man who betrayed his friend, a man who cheated on his wife, and a man who lacked courage when he was president.

In the past, there was only a Team A vs Team B; now there are Teams X, Y and Z. With the party already so split, will the March 28 elections lead to unity? There would be animosity even if Ka Ting becomes president again. If Tee Keat wins, the party would be back at square one. All the grief and disgrace the party has experienced would have been much ado about nothing. And Tee Keat was the one whose open contempt for Chua, his deputy then, from the moment he stepped into the presidency led to the unravelling of the whole mess today.

Where does the solution lie? One doubts whether the team leaders know the answer. As it is, the whole MCA “dramedy” has shown up the reality that the MCA is no longer a force in Malaysian politics. The world of the Malaysian Chinese didn’t end while the in-fighting went on. Life in the Chinese community continued, debunking any claim that the MCA still matters to the Chinese.

Its days are nearly over. Why fight over a dying cause? Time to move on. Time to heed the words of Tun Dr Lim Keng Yaik who has suddenly wised up now he’s been out of the Gerakan leadership for a couple of years: “After March 8, politics is going towards an ideological base that is multi-racial in approach.”

Perhaps it’s time for the MCA to implode and start all over again.

Proposed Orang Asli land policy: Planned poverty?

(Aliran ) Ketuanan Rakyat observes that the government's proposed Orang Asli land policy is a recipe for planned poverty.

Re this piece below (by Yogeswaran), besides the issue of customary rights, the amount of land allocated amounts to a policy of planned poverty.

There are around 40,000 Orang Asli households in the country. Thus, 50,000 hectares amount to just over 1 hectare a household. No forests, no other resources.

Even assuming that Orang Asli want to operate oil palm smallholdings, 1 ha a household would produce around 15 tonnes a year, and even assuming RM500 a tonne, this would result in net earnings of around RM5,000 a year, or just over RM400 a month, well below the official poverty line income for an average household of five.

---

The obvious starting point for Orang Asli empowerment would be their exercise of control over their customary lands, says Yogeswaran Subramaniam.

The recent policy granting land titles to the Orang Asli has far-reaching consequences for the 150,000-strong Orang Asli community. It appears to be limited in economic utility and, more importantly, in flat contradiction of the 1Malaysia concept.

In short, the proposed policy involves the granting of two to six acres of plantation lands and up to a quarter of an acre for housing to each Orang Asli head of household. The policy is subject to two main qualifications that impact upon its economic utility.

First, land forming part of this policy is subject to availability. This means that the land is not available as of right and depends on state discretion. If past records are anything to go by, the states’ performance for gazetting Orang Asli reserves has been nothing short of dismal.

Second, Orang Asli households would have to reimburse the appointed developer for all costs in relation to the development of the land from proceeds gained from the plantation. Other than the obvious room for abuse in the development process itself, Orang Asli would additionally have to start their ‘new’ life in the market economy under the burden of debt.

Sources also indicate that the estimated 50,000 hectares allocated under the proposed policy is well short of the 140,000 hectares of customary land currently occupied by the Orang Asli. Have we not taken enough of their land?

The policy does not recognise Orang Asli customary lands. To compound matters, Orang Asli who accept the deal will not be able to bring any claims to the courts for customary lands or loss of such lands.

Subject to further elaboration of the amending law, Orang Asli are left to either accept the policy where they lose their customary lands or chance their arm in court for recognition of their customary lands. If the latter course of action is taken, Orang Asli can expect the governments (except maybe for Selangor state) to contest such claims to the hilt.

The Orang Asli community is unique compared to other ethnic groups in Malaysia. Unlike other communities, Orang Asli culture, identity and nationhood is inextricably linked to their customary lands. Land is central to the identity of an Orang Asli person, providing, physical, cultural, economic and spiritual nourishment.

Top-down policies that change the face of Orang Asli land into plantations are devastating and traumatic to Orang Asli culture and identity. Ironically, the 1Malaysia concept regards ethnic diversity as an asset and explicitly rejects the concept of assimilation where ethnic identity vanishes.

If we can accept perceived outlandishness of cultures and practices of the three main ethnic groups in Peninsular Malaysia, it should not to be too difficult to ‘tolerate’ the unique relationship between Orang Asli and their lands. 1Malaysia demands that we do so.

It is thus puzzling that the proposed land policy disregards Orang Asli customary lands. Whilst it is true that economic independence is vital to Orang Asli well-being, it should not be toyed with at the expense of their identity.

The answer lies in empowerment, where Orang Asli, with technical assistance from all parties concerned, are empowered to determine their own priorities in their cultural, social, political and development. Experiences in Australia, Canada and United States have shown that there is a direct link between enabling an Aboriginal community to exercise control over its own affairs and improved social and economic outcomes.

The obvious starting point for such empowerment would be the exercise of control over Orang Asli customary lands. Unfortunately, this is not at all apparent from the proposed land policy. If diversity of culture is to be celebrated as an asset, it is time for the government to rethink the land policy.

Yogeswaran Subramaniam, an Aliran member, is pursing a doctoral thesis in the Reform of Orang Asli Land rights at the Faculty of Law, University of New South Wales, Sydney.

Jom Bangkit

Just publicising a good effort :)

Dear fellow Malaysians,

Are you happy with the state of our country today? Is our country and her people truly living up to their potential? What do you think of Malaysian society today? Should “race” be a major factor in how Malaysian citizens relate to each other? Whatunites Malaysians? What divides Malaysians? Do you think Malaysia needs to change? Why or why not? What are yourdreams/aspirations for yourself? Your country?

Do you love Malaysia?

These are questions that are rarely asked of our country’s youths. But we believe that all of them have a burning answer deep within their hearts. They may not feel at liberty to share it. Or they may feel like even if they did, who would listen? So many of these hushed voices go unheard. It’s the greatest loss to our nation…

Well, not anymore.

We believe that the youth of our nation have outstanding opinions about the issues facing Malaysia today. And we want our nation’s youths to know that they are NOT forgotten, forsaken or frivolous. Because it is their passion that will revive the hope in our nation – to once again rise up and be a shining example to the world for our peace and prosperity. And this willhappen when the youth of our country choose to stand up and speak out.

That’s where BANGKIT comes in.

BANGKIT is a nationwide search for songs written by youths, for youths and representing the aspirations of the youths in our country. We believe that they deserve…no, they NEED to be heard. And we’re going to provide the platform for them in the language that speaks to youths – music!

And to prove the point that Malaysians DO care about their country, we will be taking a huge step of faith – because we want to put this entire project together with NO MONEY AT ALL!

No money for salaries or allowances
No money spent on promotions/marketing.
No money spent on design.
No money spent on recording.
No money to hire talents.
No money spent on websites.
No money prizes
No money for prizes.
Tak ada, mei you, eelek, zip nada!

Impossible? Maybe…unless you and I decide to believe that it is NOT IMPOSSIBLE. We can both step out in faith that this project WILL succeed because there will be more than enough people stepping up to contribute their time, talents, facilities and resources FOR FREE, with no other motivation than their passion, creativity and love for country!

Have we got your attention yet?

If you feel inspired to join us, here are the details of BANGKIT:

MECHANISM
- A BANGKIT blog will be set up for this event
- Teasers will be spread throughout the internet (March 15 – 31)
- Selections begin, demo cuts of compositions to be submitted in mp3 format (April 1 – May 15)
- Songs will be featured on the BANGKIT blog for youths to vote on their favourites (April 1 – May 31)
- Professional judges will select 10 songs from the 20 most popular voted songs and results announced (June 7)
- A professionally recorded BANGKIT CD of the 10 selected songs will be released within 3 months of final selection (Target to be launched in September)
- A BANGKIT concert featuring local artistes will be held to showcase the selected songs (to be held either in November or December, in conjunction with SABM’s voter registration carnival)
- No prizes will be offered. Just recognition of participants’ talents and the chance for their song to be recorded.

PUBLICITY
- Primarily through the internet (facebook, youtube, twitter, blogs, websites, etc)
- Flyers and posters to be distributed to universities / colleges nationwide
- Exposure through the Mass Media
- Email, SMS & MMS

WHAT YOU CAN DO
- Attach the ‘BANGKIT’ posters/banners/videos to your blog or website and make sure to link it to our blog. We will be releasing a series so that it keeps fresh and exciting
- Tell everyone you know about BANGKIT through word-of-mouth, blogs, facebook, twitter, email, SMS, MMS, etc. We need everyone in Malaysia to know.
- Keep updated at our BANGKIT blog or the SABM website.
- Put us in touch with people who are willing to contribute to BANGKIT’s cause for free.

Please support BANGKIT in our effort to bring the voices of our youth to the nation and the world!

P.S. As BANGKIT is still the pre-launch stage, please don’t reveal too much about us yet. If you feel a need to explain a bit more about BANGKIT, just say something like ”something big is brewing in Malaysian cyberspace and everyone under-30 should watch out for the announcement on April 1st”. We will be releasing more promos and information that you can post as the official launch date (April 1) approaches.

If you need more information, please email: jombangkit@gmail.com.

For more info please check out our blog at http://jombangkit.org/

And please do feel free to pass this message to as many people as you know.

Let’s rock Malaysian together!

Regards,
Lai Chee Seng
Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia – Youth Outreach Project Team Coordinator

Government, Church at impasse in ‘Allah’ talks

By Debra Chong - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, March 17 — Talks between the federal government and the Catholic Church over the “Allah” issue have reached a stalemate, with both parties not backing down on their respective stands.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers have now gone ahead to file a formal appeal against the Kuala Lumpur High Court ruling which allows the Catholic Church to use the word “Allah” in the Bahasa Malaysia edition of its Herald newspaper.

Representatives from the AG’s office, Cabinet Ministers Idris Jala and Koh Tsu Koon, have been engaging in regular talks with Father Lawrence Andrew, the priest-editor of Herald and lawyers from the Catholic Church.

The Malaysian Insider understands that the AG has been trying to convince the Catholic Church to drop its claims to be allowed to use the word “Allah.”

Church officials have refused to do so, citing the fact that it had won the original High Court ruling, which has since been suspended pending appeal.

It is understood that the Church is willing to abide all future court rulings even if they were to lose.

The government is keen on finding a compromise solution to the dispute because of the racial and religious tensions the dispute has sparked.

Earlier this year, several churches, mosques and a Sikh gurdwara were hit by a series of attacks that followed close on the heels of a High Court ruling upholding the Herald’s constitutional right to use the word “Allah” to refer to God in a non-Muslim context.

According to sources, certain Muslim groups are lobbying the government to pressure the Archbishop of Kuala Lumpur to withdraw the church’s case despite the fact that the ball is now in the government’s court.

The next step is for the Court of Appeal to set a suitable date to hear the case, said counsel for the Church, S. Selvarajah, but the AG, who has the power to push the legal suit along, has delayed doing so.

The court registry may also step in to set a date.

But Lawrence, who is also in charge of the St. Anne’s Church in Port Klang, is worried that the longer the case drags out, the greater the risk the dispute will spiral out of control and truly become the threat to national security as the government claims.

“The recent controversy of Biro Tata Negara (BTN) is indeed a case in point. Are we training our young to respect people of other faiths?” the Catholic cleric questioned in the Herald’s latest issue out last Sunday.

He noted reports from students who were obliged to attend the controversial courses over the high-handed way some lecturers taught certain subjects, including on Islamic civilisation, where they mocked other religions.

“Such pedagogical methods of ridicule have hurt the feelings of Christians and created unnecessary polarization and tension.”