Scheme launched for young adults to get 100% financing for new home

By A. Letchumanan, The Star

KUALA LUMPUR: Young working adults can now buy themselves a new home without having to pay a sen in down payment.

Those earning less than RM3,000 a month can obtain up to 100% financing to buy their first home under a new scheme launched yesterday.

The My First Home Scheme, launched by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak yesterday, will enable them to buy houses costing between RM100,000 and RM220,000 with a repayment period of up to 30 years.

The scheme sees the participation of 25 conventional and Islamic financial institutions including major banks like AmBank, CIMB, Hong Leong, Maybank, Public Bank, RHB and Standard Chartered.

To qualify for the scheme, which is for both houses under construction and completed properties, house buyers must be those working in the private sector and are confirmed employees with a minimum of six months in the job.

The self-employed do not qualify for the scheme while joint applications are allowed, provided that both are in the private sector and are family members, such as siblings or spouses.

The monthly financing repayment sum must also be not more than one-third of the applicants’ monthly gross income.

However, this sum can go up to 50% of their income if additional credit is permitted under the banks’ underwriting policy.

The Government through Cagamas Berhad – a national mortgage corporation – will bear the costs of the initial 10% deposit for the house while normal interest or profit rates for Islamic banks apply under the scheme.

The scheme does not cover refinancing of a home.

In his speech during the launch yesterday, Najib said the scheme would enable young adults in the country to own their first home within a short time.

“This scheme is a government initiative to help the young citizens as well as to inculcate confidence and desire in them to own houses.

“It is also part of the Government’s objective to provide affordable housing to all Malaysians in rural and urban areas,” he said.

The Prime Minister had announced the scheme during the tabling of the Budget in October.

Later, Najib witnessed the agreement signing between the Finance Ministry and the participating institutions, which was also attended by Bank Negara governor Tan Sri Dr Zeti Akhtar Aziz and Treasury secretary-general Tan Sri Dr Wan Abdul Aziz Wan Abdullah.

Also present was Second Finance Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Husni Mohamad Hanadzlah, Deputy Finance Minister Datuk Donald Lim Siang Chai and Cagamas Holdings Berhad chairman Datuk Ooi Sang Kuang.

Kenyataan Datuk Seri Dr. Wan Azizah Wan Ismail Tentang PRK Kerdau dan Merlimau

Keputusan pilihanraya kecil di Merlimau dan Kerdau yang baru sahaja berlangsung pada 6 Mac lalu sememangnya telah diduga. Selain menyedari dua DUN tersebut adalah kubu kuat BN kita dapati imbuhan keterlaluan telah dilemparkan kepada pengundi. KEADILAN mendesak supaya SPR dapat bertindak dengan bebas dan berkecuali serta peka terhadap aduan-aduan yang diajukan oleh kedua-dua belah pihak secara adil dan telus.

KEADILAN mengucapkan tahniah dan syabas kepada petugas PR yang terpaksa menongkah arus dengan berhadapan jentera gergasi BN. Apatah lagi seluruh jentera kerajaan diguna sewenangnya. Media arus perdana pula kekal tempang dan begitu mudah diperkudakan.

Pakatan Rakyat akan mengorak langkah bagi menghadapi pilihanraya Sarawak dan PRU13. Gerakerja tersusun di setiap peringkat perlu dimulakan sekarang. Kemenangan dua PRK ini pastinya menjadikan BN selesa dan memanggil PRU13 seawal mungkin. PR harus terus mendekati rakyat kerana kesejahteraan rakyat tidak memadai dengan gula-gula pilihanraya. Apa-apapun, kita harapkan SPR akan lebih telus dan bebas lantas mengizinkan sistem demokrasi di negara ini dilaksanakan sebaik mungkin. Amat penting untuk kita menyelamatkan negara demi kesejahteraan berpanjangan.

Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail

Does Malaysia's Governing Coalition Regain Momentum?

(Asia Sentinel) Sunday's by-elections look good, but...

US pollsters call it the Big Mo – momentum – and, on the surface at least, right now it appears as though Malaysia's governing Barisan Nasional (BN) has it. On Sunday it won two by-elections in Merlimau and Kerdau, not only by comfortable margins but with substantial increases to its majority in both cases.

This means that since last April, the BN has emerged victorious in six of seven such contests, in a mixture of parliamentary and state assembly seats. And in the last five months it has not only won every time, but has also strengthened its hold on each occasion, either with bigger majorities or, in the case of Galas last November, by taking over from the opposition. On both sides of the Peninsula, and in West Malaysia and East, the forward march of Pakatan Rakyat, so confident after their great strides in the 2008 general election, has been stopped, or even reversed.

The latest results should fuel speculation that Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak will take advantage of his string of election successes, his high approval ratings (which have consistently been around 70 per cent over the last year, up from 45 per cent in June 2009) and the disarray in opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim's party, Parti Keadilan Rakyat, to call a snap general election. He has no need to do so before 2013, but the circumstances seem fortuitous.

Quite apart from the above, there is the fact that in contrast to his ineffectual predecessor, Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Najib comes across as a quietly determined dynamo who not only knows where the economic tiller is but has his hand firmly on it. He can boast excellent growth last year and the return of foreign investment after a dreadful 2009, and is restoring Malaysia's standing internationally, as shown by his being granted a coveted bilateral meeting with US President Barak Obama in Washington last April.

Moreover, the opposition too often does his work for him by providing the government with propaganda gifts. Day after day, various hotheads in PAS, the Malay Islamist party, make a nonsense of their alliance with the left-leaning, secular and mainly Chinese DAP. In January, PAS's candidate in the Tenang by-election did herself no favours by refusing to shake hands with men. Tourism Minister Ng Yen Yen swiftly pounced.

"PAS claims it is not moving towards an Islamic state but why is their candidate making an issue about shaking hands with male voters?" she said. "It would be better if PAS openly states it wants to create a Muslim country governed by Muslim regulations."

In February, PAS's Youth leader Nasrudin Hasan Tantawi promised a crackdown on Valentine's Day against "sinful and immoral activities," embarrassing even members of his own party, while in the last few days the PAS-run state government of Kelantan has provoked a furor by suddenly banning sales of a popular lottery ticket, prompting the DAP's chairman, Karpal Singh, to protest that under federal laws the rights of non-Muslims to gamble cannot be restricted arbitrarily. If PAS was actively trying to scare the non-Malay electorate into voting against them, and if it was aiming to sabotage the opposition's message that it is for a Malaysian Malaysia where one community's priorities will not take precedence over others,' it could not be doing a better job.

So is a general election imminent? The opposition parties, and especially the DAP, have been readying themselves for battle stations for months. The Barisan constituent party the Malaysian Chinese Association is discussing postponing internal elections due to the expected national polls. Najib himself refuses to rule out a snap campaign, while giving every indication that he is seriously considering one, such as by meeting last month with 118 Barisan division chiefs to ensure that both sides were up to speed.

However, beneath all the confident talk there remains great unease about the Barisan's prospects. It may be that 2008 will prove to have been the opposition's high-water mark.

But what if they pull off another shock result and do even better? One senior Umno member of parliament told me recently of a doomsday scenario put forward by two teams commissioned to advise the government. According to this, he said, "we would win only four states – Johor, Melaka, Pahang and Sarawak."

Many younger voters, he pointed out, may work in the urban centres where the opposition is strong, but they remain registered in their home states. It would be a mistake for the Barisan to calculate that it can afford to lose the cities and rely on its traditional supporters in the countryside.

"The local people often live in rural areas where there is no internet," he said, "so they do not have access to so much information. But then the children come back to vote, and they have a different view. They have read all the stories on the web, the independent and opposition media, and they will talk to their families."

If the Barisan doing so badly sounds far-fetched, another high-ranking Umno official confirmed that losing a general election – unthinkable prior to the 2008 result - has been discussed within the party's councils. Some fear that in such a situation Umno diehards would try to have a state of emergency declared and the army step in. When that was raised, however, said the Umno official, it was "rejected absolutely."

"Handing over power in five states in 2008 has helped us come to terms with the possibility of losing a general election," he said.

The four-states scenario demonstrates why Barisan joy over Sunday's by-election victories should not be unconfined. Merlimau is in Melaka and Kerdau is in Pahang. Retaining seats the Barisan previously held in the four states it can still bank on, if everywhere else is lost, gives little or no indication of what will happen in the marginals it needs to take to regain the crucial two thirds supermajority in parliament that allows the government to amend the constitution.

It is also why the forthcoming Sarawak state elections are key. They must be held by July, and although the chief minister, Tan Sri Taib Mahmud, has been having fun keeping the date to himself, there have been strong hints it could be next month. That would be shortly after the 30th anniversary of his taking over the job, a day not necessarily to be overemphasised by Barisan campaigners well aware that recent reports have detailed how tidily he has done for himself over that time (not least on Asia Sentinel).

Despite his age, however, the 74-year-old Taib is fighting all out. And with a local opposition riddled with factionalism and which only holds seven of the 71 state assembly seats, most agree the question is not whether Taib will win but over the magnitude of his victory.

The degree still matters, though. The rumor from Kuching is that Taib's camp is pressing Najib to hold the national elections at the same time as Sarawak's, in either June or July, which would make it difficult for the opposition to focus too much attention on the state. Other figures, such as UMNO Youth leader Khairy Jamaluddin, argue that Najib needs more time for his economic programs and reforms to take effect and for the Barisan component parties to raise their ratings to something like those enjoyed by the prime minister. Waiting until next year or so, however, runs the risk of an opposition recovery.

So what lessons can we draw from Sunday's by-elections? Given that the results were an increase in support in a heartland that the government expects to keep control of even if disaster strikes everywhere else, the answer is: not much really.

If that is frustrating for observers, it is not much help to Najib either, and he is the one taking the decision that will define his premiership.

"People warned Badawi about how bad the situation was in 2008," says one long-standing Umno MP, "but his people didn't take it seriously." That is not a mistake that Malaysia's sixth prime minister will have any intention of repeating.

Sholto Byrnes is a contributing editor of the New Statesman (UK) and divides his time between London and Kuala Lumpur.    

Answering the people’s call is the way to winning the next GE

By N H Chan

The call of the people is accountability which is the ultimate checks and balances of democracy

There is an excellent article by an astute young lady in the Sun, March 3, 2011:

Checks and balances imperative
By Yap Mun Ching

When former transport minister Chan Kong Choy was charged with … cheating amounting to RM1.9 billion … it was as though the winds of accountability sweeping across the Middle East had finally gusted over. …the former minister looks set to join his predecessor Dr Ling Liong Sik on a list of former cabinet ministers accused of less than hounourable activities while in office.

Viewing these developments against the backdrop of the events in the Middle East, several important lessons stand out. Firstly, it is never healthy to have leaders hold on to power for too long a period without proper checks and balances. It is not by coincidence that the heads of government facing the strongest opposition in the Middle East now are those who have hung on for decades by crushing all opposition. Tunisia’s deposed Ben Ali ruled for 23 years while Egypt’s Mubarak sat at the helm … for 29 years. Embattled Libyan leader Gaddafi is one of the world’s longest-serving leaders at 42 years, while … Yemen and Bahrain, the incumbents have been in power for 30 and 40 years respectively.

While Ling and Chan did not manage tenures of comparable length, both were members of a government that has ruled for 54 years … a two-thirds majority enjoyed by the ruling government in Parliament [until the 2008 general election] has resulted in a blurring of the separation of powers so important to maintaining the integrity of a democratic form of government. Without independent institutions, the ability of our system to hold leaders to account has been severely compromised.

What a superb piece of writing. She is so good at making an accurate assessment of the situation in the Middle East and about the aspirations of the people there for wanting accountability in government which is also a universal wish of all freedom loving peoples the world over. To paraphrase, the people’s wish is democracy not a dictatorship in any shape or form. It is only in a democracy could there be accountability of those who hold positions of power. It is only with a government of the people, by the people and for the people – for that is what a true democracy is – that the people’s representatives, who hold positions of power in order to govern, could be made accountable to the people who had elected them to office in government. The integrity of a democratic form of government relies on the system’s ability to hold leaders to account. And this can only be possible if our institutions of government – such as the judiciary, the civil and legal services, the police and the armed forces – are independent bodies, not minions who are always at the beck and call of an autocratic master.

In a democracy there is no such thing as the hijacking of an elected government and supplanting it with an appointed one that was made possible by the intervention of a third party in the form of a ruler or king. In the case of Perak, the sultan resorted to some vague imaginary power which some local legal experts have described as a “residual power” – as if a monarch had it before he became a powerless constitutional monarch, unless these experts are naive enough to think that there is such a thing as the divine right of kings. If you can still remember your English history you would know that King Charles the First lost his head and crown to the executioner’s axe for the belief that kings had divine powers. Indeed any form of external intervention, because such is not the choice of the people, destroys the very concept of democracy; such intervention defeats the effectiveness of accountability to the people.

But supplanting King Charles the First with another dictator – Oliver Cromwell – was just as bad because it became a case of replacing one despot for another despot. That was why Cromwell’s dictatorship died with him and upon his death England reverted back to autocratic rule by despotic kings. It was only after the last Stuart king – James II – had fled his realm that democracy started to take root in England and the monarchy became a toothless tiger as we understand it today; a constitutional monarchy without any power to interfere with the democratic process. The Perak takeover was, therefore, unconstitutional because no residual or any power was given to our rulers in our written Constitution. However, had there been such a power given to the monarchs in our written constitution then, in which case, Malaysia would not be called a democracy. It would have become a dictatorship. The English peoples took some 700 years to get rid of their tyrannical kings. It took them that long a time because they did not have a written constitution.

When a system of government had taken hold for too long a period, to use the words of Yap Mun Ching, ‘it resulted in the blurring of the separation of powers so important to maintaining the integrity of a democratic form of government. Without independent institutions, the ability of our system to hold leaders to account has been severely compromised’.

The antithesis of democracy is dictatorship. Any ruler or leader or a government, as in Malaysia, that had held on to power for too long a period – for power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely – would have inexorably transformed himself or itself into a tyrannical autocracy or regime with an animal farm syndrome; the adage is ‘all animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others’. These individuals think they are more equal than others because they think they are invincible and, therefore, not accountable to the people who had elected them to office. They can feel safe from accountability because the so-called independent institutions, like the judiciary, the civil service, the police and the armed forces have been compromised. These institutions would no longer be perceived by the people to be independent because they have been serving the same master for such a long period – in this country for 53 years. Only the unfortunate ones, like Ling and Chan – we should also not forget the late Eric Chia – were made the fall guys to assuage the disgruntled masses because they were expandable.

The difference between the Middle East and Malaysia is their totally diverse system of government from ours; the difference between them and us is the difference between totalitarianism and democracy

n the Middle East they have kings and presidents who actually rule and who had ruled their country before change was brought about through revolution by people’s power. The people there could not do otherwise because despots who have ruled for many years would not give up their power unless they are forced to do so. Hence, change could only be achieved through revolution. But, in this country we can always vote the ruling party out of office in an election.

But, if there is going to be a regime change, like what is happening in the Middle East, things could well be different as the change that was brought about by the power of the people would enable the people to demand accountability from their leaders. In this country we too can achieve change, though not by revolution as we have seen it happening in the Middle East, but by the power of the vote in a general election. This is how Yap Mun Ching puts it in her own inimitable but subtle style:

Protesters in the Middle East, while focusing their anger on a despised figurehead, also demanded the removal of the majority of members of their besieged governments. The prosecution of former cabinet ministers are welcome, but these actions cannot be considered sufficient to close the file on corrupt leaders. Active investigations must be undertaken against other leaders, former and current, to ensure accountability and to deter others from abusing their positions of power.

Important as it is to remove unwanted leaders, these actions must be taken with a view to restoring justice and reparation. Too often in the past, corrupt dictators have evaded punishment by escaping abroad and living the rest of their lives in luxury with their ill-gotten gains.

In my article The People’s call for Change I wrote:

One should be in politics to serve the people, not to get rich. That is why democracy requires the representatives of the people to be accountable to the people. Look at Mr Lim Kit Siang, he has been in politics for as long as I can remember and his son is currently the Chief Minister of Penang. Another was the late Dr Lim Chong Eu. The Perakians and the Penangites know that they are not rich. It is a good thing if every member of the Cabinet and every member of the Exco are investigated as to their financial status and assets before they can assume office. And when they leave office they are to be investigated again. They are to be accountable if they are found to be richer than what they could have earned while in office when they leave.

Restoring public confidence in our institutions

Miss Yap concluded her gem of an article with this suggestion:

Therefore, when it comes to the prosecution of allegedly corrupt leaders, investigators would do well to remember that other than justice, the public would also look to see stolen money restored. RM1.9 billion may not be a large sum in the [scale] of the swindling that has been exposed in the Middle East, but it is nonetheless a sum that would go a long way to restoring public confidence in our institutions.

And I am sure all of us will agree with her unless you are one of those sycophants currying the favour of dishonest politicians.

How to answer the call for change

Now, I trust you will realize that we Malaysians are in dire straits. Don’t you think it is time for us to move on to a better Malaysia. Like the peoples of the Middle East we can use the power of the people to change from tyranny to a true democracy. Use the power of your vote to unseat the oppressors. We have been under their yoke for 53 long years. Enough is enough. Use facebook and twitter. Use your email and if every reader of this article emails it to his friends we will be able to persuade a whole generation of young people to vote out the BN and replace them with a new government. It doesn’t matter that the new is inexperienced but at least we have a government of the people, by the people and for the people. It took the English peoples 700 years to get rid of their tyrannical kings. The American peoples to what they have become today in 250 years. I don’t think we will take that long because we are resilient and we have the benefit of hindsight. And above all we have our young people whose young minds will be able to meet the challenges ahead.

But before you vote for the opposition, I think, you should demand that they should promise to repeal all oppressive laws if ever they do come to power. We do not need the Sedition Act, or any emergency law like the ISA or any legislation that would suppress freedom of speech and our fundamental liberties. Above all, demand that they will enforce accountability to all our leaders, past and current.

If you are 21 and above, register yourself as a voter now and when election time comes do your duty and exercise your right to vote out the BN for a better Malaysia without oppressive laws and accountability from all those who hold or have held positions of power or trust on behalf of the people. I think the phrase is wide enough to encompass all politicians, judges, the civil service, police and the armed forces for any misuse of power.

Malay Bibles Not Confiscated But Refused Entry Says Home Ministry

KUALA LUMPUR, March 9 (Bernama) -- The Home Ministry denied claims made by a Christian organisation that it had confiscated and detained 5,000 Bibles in the Malay language that were imported from Indonesia.

The Ministry clarified in a statement that the Bibles actually had been refused entry into Malaysia for not fulfilling the ministry's requirements.

The statement said that a letter of refusal dated June 26, 2010 was sent to the importer, however, the importer had yet to claim the cargo.

Hence, allegations by the National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (NECF) that the ministry had confiscated and detained the Bibles were inaccurate and misleading, the statement added.

Tuesday, NECEF secretary-general Sam Ang claimed that the Ministry had confiscated and detained the Bibles in Port Klang since last year and refused to release them although the Cabinet had approved the release of the consignment.

World's 4th Richest Man Mukesh Rates Malaysia Highly, Keen To Expand Business

By P. Vijian

MUMBAI, March 9 (Bernama) -- Mukesh Ambani, the world's fourth richest man has expressed interest to expand his existing business operations in Malaysia while exploring other potential areas.

Chairman and managing director of India's conglomerate Reliance Industries Ltd, Mukesh, impressed by Malaysia pro-investors policies proposed to expand its textile operations in Nilai.

"I am happy that Mr Ambani will continue to give priority to Malaysia. He will like to see new areas that can be tapped.

"He said Malaysia was the best destination for investors in Asean," Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin told Malaysian reporters in Mumbai Wednesday.

Muhyiddin, currently on a five-day visit to three Indian cities held talks with Mukesh and another Indian industrialist Ratan Tata.

The heavily diversified Reliance is also keen to explore petro-chemicals, education and the development of the Greater Kuala Lumpur (KL) project and inter city connectivity to make KL a global city.

The talks are still in "exploratory stage" and Mukesh is likely to visit Malaysia soon.

Wife of Taib's son wants RM400m

Well, well, well, what can I say? Shahnaz A Majid, the estranged wife of Mahmud Abu Bekir Taib, the son of Sarawak Chief Minister Taib Mahmud, is seeking RM300 million as her share of assets in a divorce settlement and RM100 million in compensation.

Teacher says 'keling', but students punished

'Minors were brought to the 'balai police' and questioned without the presence of their legal guardians. Is that allowed in Malaysia?'

Cops question students for 10 hours over 'Interlok'

Gandhi: Matters are getting worse. Where is Hulu Selangor parliamentarian P Kamalanathan, Niat (National 'Interlok' Action Team) and all other Indian NGOs supposedly concern but are unable to help in this situation?

What audacity for the police officer to take the students to the police station. All MPs from across the political divide must raise this in Parliament. This atrocity is happening just because of a lousy novel?

The discipline teacher must apologise and the police officer must resign from his PTA (Parent-Teacher Association) chairmanship. Indians must remember this and vote Kamalanathan out.

Norman Fernandez: In a recent poll, it was the Indians who gave the highest approval for PM Najib Razak. See how in the recent by-elections Indians bent backwards to support BN?

Then they complain and blame Pakatan Rakyat for not realising that Indians have been discriminated for 53 years by BN. You cannot expect miracles from Pakatan in two years.

Indians have no choice but to learn the hard way. Maybe these students may become Pakatan supporters in future. Who knows, this incident may have a silver lining to it.

Anonymous: I see some the politicians here are taking advantage in this case by asking the Indians not to vote for this party or that party. Hello, we are talking about our children's education and well-being here, not your stupid politics. Please, for God's sake, for once think like a human being rather for your own benefit.

I find it very wrong for the Education Ministry to do this to our Indian children. I'm in the services line and I have never discriminated against any Malay or Chinese.

What's wrong with these teachers? They seriously need to go for psychiatric evaluation before they are allowed to teach in school. Please withdraw 'Interlok' before it causes further damage to this country.

Thisia: I'm an Indian Malaysian and I can understand why there are Indians who still vote for Umno-BN even after so much atrocities have been committed against this community.

Just look at the previous two by-elections: one Indian family has been eating biawak (iguana) as they can't afford to pay for a decent meal. So when Umno-BN enters such estates and gives away Milo and milk, it's something they can't afford to buy, so they blindly vote for Umno-BN.

By keeping Indians below the poverty line this way, Umno-BN will always get the Indian vote.

Anonymous4076: Cikgu kata 'keling pariah' tapi murid di hukum. Manalah keadilan? Is this the hidden agenda of the Umno-led government behind introducing the 'Interlok' novel in the SPM syllabus? As a citizen of this country, we don't deserve this.

AkuMelayu: The fact is that the majority of Indians didn't find 'Interlok' offensive. Only a minority of Indians were offended by it and it is only after they were instigated by the opposition politicians and NGOs. We must not allow others to dictate our thinking, because God give us brains to decide on what is best for our future.

Temenggong: So many foolish-minded persons are equating voting patterns to the 'Interlok' book. Does it not occur to them that the discipline teacher and school head may be PKR and PAS members?

That Malays and Chinese had also voted for BN in the last three by-elections? That when issues arise, the people naturally turn to no one but Hindraf? That when there are issues confronting the Indian community, DAP, PKR and PAS are nowhere to be seen?

Not a word from the relevant elected MPs and state representatives, and yet they expect the people to vote them? No wonder BN keeps winning.

Sabawak: The head of the Parent-Teacher Association (PTA) Bakhtiar Rashid took the children to the police station? For what? Does that explain the stupidity?

A cop is the head of the PTA and he decides to act on a matter that is purely for the school to attend to? The headmaster has abandoned his duties and should be severely punished, sacked if necessary.

Anonymous: How come the school children are using this book. I thought it would be distributed only after amendments are made? The PTA head was showing his authority to the school children. You can't take them to police station for returning the books and the worst part without the parents' consent.

DPM Muhyiddin Yassin has to answer for this. Stop your arrogance.

Phoenix Star 88: During the era 'Interlok' was set, the term 'pariah' was still in official use in British India. Hence, it would be historically accurate for people during this era to describe a low-caste Tamil Indian as being from the 'kasta pariah'. India only prohibited the use 'pariah' decades later.

The novel has some factual errors but it still does reflect the realities of life during this era. The early Indian and Chinese settlers had a lot of social problems which is expected of any immigrant community trying to settle in. Alcoholism and wife-beating was historically a problem for Indians during this era. The Chinese faced fierce clan wars and opium addiction.

However, the choice of 'Interlok' as a textbook is unwise especially at a time where race relations are fragile and people tend to be so sensitive about race. I doubt that 17-year-olds and their teachers can analyse the book within the right historical context.

Kgen: I had a ex-colleague who was accused by the boss for stealing software and the boss called the police to the office to question him. He was so shaken that he burst into tears.

Now we have school children taken to the police station and questioned for 10 hours without their parents and this idiot Norel said it is "standard procedure". This is truly a country where the minorities are threatened and harassed if they so much as dare to whisper against 'Ketuanan Melayu'.

'Interlok' has become a symbol of their 'ketuanan' and their right to use this racist book. Nobody, not even school children can be allowed to question this. This is the Malaysia which MCA, MIC and Gerakan help Umno to build.

Anonymous_5fb: To me, this is a case of a police, who is a law enforcer, took laws into his own hand for 'arresting' the Indian students to a police station, kept them there by questioning them for 10 hours. The parents concerned could actually sue the police for kidnapping their children.

Rajakera: There should be disciplinary action taken against the police for removing minors from the school without the presence of their guardians/parents. They have no business interfering in affairs of the school. The students broke no law.

Why are the school teachers using the police to instill fear in students? The students should be spoken to and convinced to do the right thing if they are not doing so. This is a disgusting state of affairs that are taking place in our country.

If books are provided for education they should not contain racist material inspite of the BN politicians who are happy to encourage racism so as to win votes so that they can rape the wealth of our country.

The role of teachers is to teach the right thing to all students and to teach them to love and respect all races and religions, otherwise the teachers should be sacked as they do not qualify to teach.

Alice's cat: Minors were brought to the 'balai police' and questioned without the presence of their legal guardians. Is that allowed in Malaysia? Is that legal?

Shanu: Muhyiddin, you gave us the impression that the books were not distributed yet, but here it shows that the schools are actually teaching the book and the effect is - teachers are abusing students using the 'k' word as well as the 'p' word.

This must be what our dear 'sasterawan negara' (national laureate) Abdullah Hussain meant when he said that he stands by his book - he claims to know the history of the Indians better than Indians themselves.

Is it a programme meant to belittle all Indians?

Zz2XX: I think this a brilliant move. We should organise a date and time for all pupils in the whole of Malaysia to return the book to their headmasters.

Fighting rages for control of Libyan cities

Tripoli, Libya (CNN) -- Fierce battles raged Tuesday for control of key Libyan cities in the east and west as Libya entered its fourth week of fighting and continued its descent into civil war.

In the eastern oil city of Ras Lanuf, rebels fired antiaircraft guns after Libya's air force carried out fresh raids.

Video shot by Sky News showed that fighting was continuing in Zawiya, despite government assertions that forces loyal to Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi controlled the oil-refining city. Hundreds of anti-government demonstrators could be seen marching in the street, many of them pumping their fists in the air. As the crackle of gunfire could be heard, the demonstrators ran toward the camera. Four men could be seen carrying a fifth, then putting him into an ambulance.

A doctor who left the city in the morning told CNN that Gadhafi forces had fatally shot two fellow doctors in the main square and were shooting wounded civilians rather than allowing them to be treated. The city's two medical clinics were closed, he said.

Military casualties were being taken from the city by ambulance, he said.

CNN was not able to witness the fighting and could not independently confirm reports of what was happening there on Tuesday.

Opposition officials accused Gadhafi of bombing water reserves in Ras Lanuf, the site of intense fighting in recent days.

Rebels have seized several cities and the army has fought fiercely to reclaim some of them.

In Gadhafi's stronghold, the capital city of Tripoli, about 100 journalists assembled during the evening in the lobby of a hotel after being told that Gadhafi would arrive. Nine hours later, just before midnight, his convoy of SUVs pulled up to the hotel.

Shortly afterward, surrounded by his security detail, he strode into the lobby, waved at the throng of reporters, pumped his right fist several times into the air, retreated to a private room for an interview with a Turkish journalist, then left via a back door without addressing the reporters. Libyan television then announced it would broadcast a taped speech by Gadhafi, but did not say when.

The incident occurred hours after opposition members denied Tuesday that they have been negotiating an exit deal with Gadhafi, rejecting an assertion made earlier in the day by an opposition official.

Gadhafi's regime, too, denied having entered into negotiations with the rebels. Musa Ibrahim, a government spokesman, called reports of such negotiations "lies."

The Libyan opposition is composed not of a single monolithic group, but of various groups and individuals around the country whose shared goal is to see the 68-year-old ruler ousted.

But their military skills tend to be rudimentary, at best, when compared with the relatively disciplined, well-armed pro-Gadhafi forces. "There is no one here with military experience, but have a strong heart," said medical student Yahya Ali, who was manning an antiaircraft battery in the eastern Libyan town of Al-Brega after four hours of training.

In Washington, U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said any departure from Libya of Gadhafi would not exempt him, his family or others from responsibility for their actions. "We are going to hold him accountable," Crowley said.

U.S. President Barack Obama discussed Libya on Tuesday with British Prime Minister David Cameron, the White House said in a statement.

"They agreed that the common objective in Libya must be an immediate end to brutality and violence; the departure of Gadhafi from power as quickly as possible; and a transition that meets the Libyan peoples' aspirations for freedom, dignity, and a representative government," it said.

Both leaders agreed to go ahead with planning responses, "including surveillance, humanitarian assistance, enforcement of the arms embargo, and a no-fly zone."

Death toll estimates have ranged from more than 1,000 to as many as 2,000.

"Both the Libyan government and opposition forces need to allow unhindered access for aid organizations to assist civilians," Bill Frelick, refugee program director at Human Rights Watch, said Tuesday. "People living in areas of heavy fighting in western Libya are now in dire need of medical aid and other assistance."

The U.N. World Food Programme said Tuesday a convoy of trucks entered Libya headed for Benghazi, the rebel stronghold in eastern Libya. "A convoy of trucks carrying 70 metric tons of high-energy, fortified date bars crossed the Egyptian border last night on its way to Benghazi. This would be the first delivery of food assistance from a U.N. agency to enter the country," the organization said in a statement.

Plans for more food deliveries are being made, and tons of food have been delivered to the Egyptian border to help feed refugees, the organization said.

This is part of a $39.2 million emergency operation designed to help feed more than 1 million people in Libya, Egypt and Tunisia over three months, the group said.

Late Monday, the Gulf Cooperation Council said Libya had rejected its offer of humanitarian aid. The council is composed of Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.

As reports continue to emerge of the government's use of force against civilians, the international community has been left pondering strategies on how to end the violence.

Three members of the U.N. Security Council -- France, Britain and the United States -- were working Monday on a possible resolution that would include language on a no-fly zone over Libya, diplomatic sources at the United Nations said. And the Gulf Cooperation Council said Monday night they supported such an action.

The Organization of the Islamic Conference, which represents 56 member states, said Tuesday that it wants the United Nations to enforce a no-fly zone over Libya.

But any kind of military intervention could face sharp criticism from Russia and China, two permanent members of the council that wield veto power.

Libyan Deputy Foreign Minister Khalid Karim told CNN on Tuesday that Libya is not misusing its air force and that any no-fly zone would be tantamount to an act of war. He said the Libyan government has asked for international monitors to verify that assertion. He said the military "are taking purely defensive positions; they are not taking offensive ones" except in self-defense.

The U.S. administration remains reluctant to move forward on a no-fly zone alone. "Well, we want to see the international community support it," Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Sky News on Tuesday.

And the United States has also been reluctant to consider using force alone. "We'd like to see this resolved peacefully," Clinton said. "We'd like to see him go peacefully. We would like to see a new government come peacefully. But if that's not possible, then we're going to work with the international community."

Asked if the United States was considering lifting the arms embargo, she said, "Well, I think everything is being looked at, but it is difficult in the midst of this civil conflict that is going on now to even know how you would do that, because right now, it's not clear what part of the country is actually under rebel control."

The U.S. ambassador to Libya, Gene Cretz, has met in Rome and Cairo with Libyan opposition figures to get a sense of what is happening in the country, Crowley of the State Department said. He did not give names. Crowley said there have been meetings and phone conversations with members of the National Transitional Council and others.

The State Department also spoke Friday with Libyan Foreign Minister Musa Kusa in a brief conversation in which each side gave its view, Crowley said.

NATO said it has begun round-the-clock surveillance flights near Libya.

With no clear end to the clashes in sight, U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon appointed a new special envoy to Libya to discuss the crisis with officials in Tripoli.

The fighting has sparked the flight of Libyans and foreigners out of Libya, with nations across the globe scrambling to help people leave.

About 200,000 people have fled Libya with nearly equal numbers going to Tunisia and Egypt, the U.N. refugee agency has said.

But 15,000 to 17,000 people are still at a refugee camp near the Libya-Tunisia border. Most of them are from Bangladesh, the U.N. refugee agency said.

A man who said he was trapped in Misrata, a city east of Tripoli that has seen heavy clashes, said the rebels were running out of weapons -- but will continue to fight.

"Maybe tomorrow I'll still be alive, I don't know. I have nothing to lose," the man said. "Nobody believes he will be alive tomorrow. Nobody knows. We need support."

Salleh Abas says no memory of sacking

In his memoirs, Dr Mahathir claimed Salleh had cost himself the Lord President’s post. — Picture by Choo Choy May

KUALA LUMPUR, March 9 — The man who was at the centre of Malaysia’s biggest law crisis 23 years ago and lost his chief judge post as a result says he no longer remembers how it happened.
 
Tun Salleh Abas was back in the news after retired prime minister, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, revealed in an autobiography launched here yesterday that the former Lord President had brought on his own sacking after embarrassing and angering the Yang di-Pertuan Agong then.

In “A Doctor In The House: The Memoirs of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad” published by MPH Group Publishing, the author said the monarch called for Salleh to be removed for complaining about the noise coming from renovation works at the Agong’s private home.

The Agong at that time was Sultan Mahmud Iskandar Al-Haj ibni Ismail Al-Khalidi of Johor who ruled from 1984 to 1989. The sultan passed away last year.

“I can’t remember. I don’t think so,” Salleh told The Malaysian Insider when contacted for comment on Dr Mahathir’s version of events which led to his sacking.
“It happened so long ago, okay?” the reclusive ex-judge replied when asked to elaborate.

The two Tuns were contemporaries. The Terengganu-born Salleh was Lord President from 1984 to 1988 while Dr Mahathir was in office from 1981 to 2003.

According to Dr Mahathir, the Agong had shown him Salleh’s complaint letter, which had also been sent to the other Malay Rulers.

Dr Mahathir added he does not have a copy of the letter.

He also acknowledged the fact that the Attorney-General did not use it during Salleh’s tribunal hearing, which Dr Mahathir said was only called after the chief judge changed his mind about stepping down.
Salleh, 82 this year, has kept a low profile after dropping out of running for office six years ago due to poor health.

He was Jertih state assemblyman for one term, from 1999 to 2004.
Dr Mahathir, who turns 86 in July, has long been blamed by his detractors for clipping the judiciary’s powers.

His successor, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, all but apologised for the ruling Barisan Nasional government’s part in the event, dubbed the “judiciary’s darkest hour”.

Shortly after the 2008 general election, the Abdullah administration agreed to pay cash compensation to Salleh and five Supreme Court judges who were also fired for defending their boss.

While Dr Mahathir wrote his version of events that led to Salleh’s sacking 23 years ago, a detailed account of the sacking was given in “May Day For Justice” written by Salleh and writer K. Das that was published by Magnus Book in 1989.

In an attempt to justify the sacking, a New Zealand Queen’s Counsel, Peter Alderidge Williams, wrote a government-approved account, “Judicial Misconduct”, also in 1990.
K. Das then wrote a rebuttal to this account in “Questionable Conduct”.

Dr M compares Malays to Palestinian Arabs, liable to sell out

Dr Mahathir waves during the launch of his memoirs in Kuala Lumpur, March 8, 2011. — Picture by Choo Choy May

KUALA LUMPUR, March 9 — Malaysia’s biggest race is like the displaced Palestinian Arabs who seem nationalistic but cannot resist selling away their rights to high bidders, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad wrote in memoirs released yesterday.

 
Dr Mahathir has been an ardent defender and critic of the Malay race, and has both written and commented extensively on the community and its future direction.

“Outwardly, the Malays seem to be nationalistic, at times to the point of being racist. They can become very anti-Chinese and do not hesitate to be rude and unreasonable when criticising them. Their attitude recalls the behaviour of the Arabs in Palestine,” the former prime minister wrote in his autobiography, “A Doctor In The House: The Memoirs of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad”.

“Nationalist or not, they could not resist the prices offered,” Dr Mahathir said in his comparison of the two races half a world apart.

He observed that while the Arabs were strident in condemning the Zionists for carving out an Israel state out of their land, they had also “willingly sold their land to the Jews”.

“I am not suggesting that our Chinese Malaysians are like the Jews, only that the Malays have acted like the Palestinian Arabs,” said Dr Mahathir, a known world leader in championing Palestine’s cause against the Zionist regime in the strife-ridden Middle East conflict.

Closer to home, he is known as the patron of pro-Malay rights group, Perkasa, which has been lobbying the Najib administration to keep the New Economic Policy (NEP).

The NEP was a 20-year national policy introduced by in 1971 to boost Malay and Bumiputera ownership in the corporate sector to at least 30 per cent, but failed; an outcome which Dr Mahathir himself acknowledged in the book published this month by MPH Group Publishing.

The Malaysian prime minister from 1981 to 2003 said this was due to the Malays’ own weaknesses.

“Malays like to believe or claim that the Chinese have succeeded in business through cheating. Yet when a Malay wants to sign a contract (to build a house, for example), he will not give it to a Malay contractor. He would prefer a Chinese contractor. He obviously trusts the Chinese more than the Malays,” he pointed out.

“Many Malays have become so used to a life of continual economic support, that when the flow stops they simply cannot continue on their own. Rather than learn about business and managing money, they spend their energies on cultivating contracts and gaining access to easy, short-term opportunities,” Dr Mahathir further observed in the book published nearly eight years after he left public office.

The retired medical doctor who turns 86 in July said that as a Malay, he does not want to “denounce the bad work ethic of so many Malays” but hopes that his honesty will help prod them into action for their own sake.
“I fear that those brave words of Malay defiance — Takkan Melayu hilang di dunia (Malays shall never disappear from this world) — will one day come back to haunt us.

“Preventing this from happening has been the biggest challenge of my life and of my generation,” Dr Mahathir wrote in the 809-page tome.

The country’s longest-serving prime minister announced his political retirement in tears in 2002, saying he had failed to change the Malay mindset but was persuaded by Umno to remain as party president and premier until 2003, when he handed power to then deputy Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

While Abdullah went on to win the ruling Barisan Nasional’s (BN) biggest majority of 91 per cent of parliament seats, Dr Mahathir went on to campaign against his successor for allegedly promoting his (Abdullah’s) family and friends at the expense of others.

In a stunning reversal of fortune, Abdullah then led BN to its worst electoral losses in Election 2008, when it lost 82 parliamentary seats and four states to an opposition pact led by Dr Mahathir’s sacked deputy prime minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

Dr Mahathir has come back to public prominence under new prime minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, and even rejoined Umno, which he left in a huff in protest against Abdullah, who resigned from his post in April 2009.

Umno ‘overdoing’ persecution of Anwar

Najib may well be reminded of a Turkish saying - Zulum ilea bad olan berbat olur - the one who persecutes will disappear.

The issue of (PKR de facto leader) Anwar Ibrahim has overtaken a much needed sober appreciation of what’s going in in this country.

This country isn’t about Anwar anymore. The Anwar issue is before the courts.

I think Umno should contain itself and not be seen as crusading the persecution and prosecution of Anwar Ibrahim. The matter will be decided by the courts.

What can be got out of parading the ‘virtuous virgin’ Ummi Hafilda around and the jambu-looking Rahimi to discredit Anwar?

People are saying that Ummi Hafilda has run out of money – that’s why she is making herself available.

As for Rahimi- what can this ‘young ciku’ offer to further enlighten us on covert links with America, CIA or World Jewry?

All this is for show (by Umno) - but Anwar’s fate will be decided in the courts.

A few weeks ago, sitting with the Oracle of Syed Putera I asked him what Tun Daim’s (Zainuddin) take was on Anwar.

He said Tun Daim sees the persecution of Anwar as a cause of concern.

“This is strictly a matter before the courts. If Umno is seen as crusading the prosecution of Anwar, then there will be inference that the judiciary is under Umno’s thumb. That’s the danger.

“This time around, the legal loop is tightening around Anwar’s neck. The law will take its natural cause. Otherwise the stories spun around what has been revealed in the court are sufficient to discredit Anwar forever.

“The man is fast becoming a spent force. Just look at him physically,” he said.

Win not a true test

At the same session I asked the Oracle about Tun Daim’s views on the Kerdau and Merlimau by-elections.

Said the Oracle: “We will no doubt win in Kerdau and Merlimau, but the wins will not be the true test of a resurgent Umno.

“Those two seats are Umno seats anyway. The danger will be if the opposition got more votes than their previous outings.”

I then asked what about Barisan Nasional’s wins with an enlarged majority?

The Oracle said: “That’s not to be unexpected, with all the resources and power brought to bear on by elections by the government.

“So the winis not the true test.”

Are the people ready, I asked?

“For all you know, they are readying to unseat this government,” said the Oracle.

Deserving accolades

I moved on and touched on Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s visit to Turkey where he met his counterpart.

In light of what Umno is doing on the political scene, I am of the opinion that Najib may well be reminded of a Turkish saying – Zulum ilea bad olan berbat olur - the one who persecutes will disappear.

I asked the Oracle what was the purpose of the Turkey visit?

“It’s as what Wisma Putra said – to strengthen bilateral relations. Also the PM is accompanying the missus (Rosmah Mansor) who was honoured with some award.

“The PM’s wife is a sharp and intelligent lady. She deserves the accolade. I hear his entourage was a big one including the Defence Minister.

“Some issues about the purchase of military hardware were discussed and ironed out.

“We have Turkish technology in the making of our tanks here in Malaysia.

“If I am not mistaken, the Adnan Tank built by DEFtec in Pekan uses predominantly Turkish technology and expertise.

“The minister in charge of our defence was on hand to probably take on the issue of technical glitches in the tank construction.”

RM8 bil gone awry

In the initial years, it was a common sight to see the Adnan tanks breaking down while on test runs.

Perhaps it was also to discuss the purchase of armoured-wheeled vehicles (AWV).

Syed Mokhtar (Al Bukhary)’s group hasn’t been able to deliver the RM8 billion award to supply the government some 265 armored vehicles.

We didn’t hear of open biddings did we?

But rumours are circulating that sometime ago the Mindef awarded Syed Mokthar’s DEFTEC to supply 265 AWVs worth RM8 bilion.

Deftech had participated in one LIMA show and showcased the PARS AWV from Turkey. But the model failed a series of test.

It is conceivable that the visit to Turkey also included the agenda to get some affirmation from Turkey that it can supply combat worthy AWVs.

More controversy

But back home, this issue if it becomes public will certainly raise some controversy.

Five years ago in 2006, a few defence contractors took part in the LIMA exhibition. Five companies took part to market to the Government of Malaysia (GOM) 8 x 8 armored wheeled vehicles.

Deftec-DRB a company linked to Syed Mokhtar offered the PARS from Turley while Alam Jujur Sdn Bhd offered PIRANHA III of Switzerland, ROOIKAT of South Africa and CENTAURO of Spain.

Another company linked to Naza Group offered the ROSOMAK (PATRIA) of Poland. The model that passed the test by MINDEF was the ROSOMAK from Poland.

PARS which was marketed by Deftec DRB failed miserably. Inexplicably, Deftech DRB which offered the PARS was later offered the contract to supply 265 AWVs worth RM 8 billion.

There weren’t any open bidding for the supply of the AWVs.

So questions remained unanswered as to why DEftec-DRB which offered the least acceptable model was given the award.

But I suppose, included in the schedule of the Turkey visit was a meeting to raise the issue of the supply of PARS AWV.

We have to ask why is Deftech DRB allowed to supply a AWV that failed the mobility tests by Mindef?

Can we trivialize this technical requirement which is critical to our defense capability in exchange for some political assurances and expedience from Turkey?

How free will we be under PR?

While Pakatan Rakyat says it will abolish the Internal Security Act (ISA) and the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA) if it takes over the federal government, one still wonders whether journalists will be free to write whatever they want.

A point often forgotten in the discourse on press freedom is the control that media owners have on what journalists can write or say.

For example, are journalists writing for papers owned by Rupert Murdoch or Vincent Tan free to write anything critical of them or their companies?

Likewise, are journalists writing for party organs such as Harakah, The Rocket or Suara Keadilan free to write anything positive about the Barisan Nasional (BN) or critical of PAS, DAP or PKR or their leaders? Or are journalists writing for online publications free to write anything critical of their sponsors? An example of the latter is the Media Development Loan Fund, which has the objective of nurturing “independent” media.

The general answer to these questions appears to be “No.”

Take the case of controversial Greek journalist Taki Theodoracopulos. Wikipedia writes: “Due to Taki’s characterisation of himself as a ‘soi-disant antisemite’, coupled with strong criticism of the Israeli government and its supporters in the United States, The Spectator no longer permits him to write about Israel or Jewish affairs.”

So, not even in the liberal democracies can journalists stray too far from their employers’ editorial policies.

If Pakatan were to come to power and remove all government restraints on the media, would journalists working with the MCA and Umno media be free to write what they want?

With the repeal of the PPPA, anyone will be free to start a publication; so a journalist can join whichever media organisation suits his inclinations. Still, he will most likely not be able to go against the political alignment or interest of his employer.

And let us not forget the role of advertisers in constraining the media.

As any journalist who writes for one of those speciality magazines will tell you, you usually cannot write negatively about products or services sold by companies advertising in those magazines.

Also, advertisers rarely want to be associated with politically controversial publications; so the more ads a publication carries, the more it tends to tone down its political stridency.

For example, blogger Kenny Sia, who earns five figures a month from ads, once said that he avoided writing on partisan politics because it would deter advertisers from wanting to be associated with him. So his postings are mostly lighthearted articles.

New challenges

On another note, while Pakatan says it will abolish the ISA, what would it do if the BN parties march and demonstrate in the streets, instigate strikes by civil service workers and those in key utilities, occupy and shut down airports and create all kinds of civil and economic disruption?

Would it let them continue to do so in the name of freedom or would it forcefully act to stop them in the name of national security or national interest?

The abolition of the ISA and the PPPA should be welcomed, but new challenges will arise.

An approach often ignored by “independent” media in Malaysia is the membership-supported media cooperative.

A fine example is Vancouver Co-op Radio, a listener-supported, community radio station that serves as a voice for under-represented and marginalised segments of society and is operated mostly by volunteers.

It broadcasts programmes that encourage listeners to examine the social and political concerns of geographic and cultural communities in the province of British Columbia. It also has programmes on public affairs, music and the arts.

Individual subscribers to Co-op Radio pay C$60 a year each and institutional members pay more. Altogether the station earns C$1.8 million or more a year, and this allows it to eschew advertising and be a truly independent medium.

Are there enough Malaysians willing to support such cooperative initiatives here?

Home Ministry to probe Radio Free Sarawak

KUCHING: The controversial Radio Free Sarawak is being investigated for its content, Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein said today.

“This is not about politics. This is about spreading malicious lies, the issue of unity and harmony among the races,” he told reporters after visiting the Home Ministry operations room here.

Hishammuddin said that no legal action could be taken at the moment because the investigation was on-going.

Responding to a question, he said the Internal Security Act could only be used if the individuals involved posed a serious security threat.

Last week, the Parti Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu (PBB) Youth wing lodged a police report claiming that the radio had been operating illegally and spreading lies, especially about Sarawak Chief Minister Taib Mahmud.

Clare Rewcastle Brown, the sister-in-law of former British prime minister Gordon Brown, and Peter John Jaban, an Iban activist, told an English tabloid last month that they were responsible for the blog Sarawak Report and the radio station.

-Bernama

Dr M shall have the last word

Someone will challenge his account and recount of many episodes but at a glance, it is a rambling digest of little nuggets of a moment in time, a sharp narrative on certain phases, a swooping look at several acts and a perspective on some of the most arresting intervals of his decades-long narrative.

New Straits Times

IF there is a quintessential quirk of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the definitive politician of our times, it is the former prime minister's hardened exterior, that inherent defensive posture that gleefully soaks in blow after verbal blow.

He scraps like a prize fighter -- only absorbing jabs, hooks and undercuts as soon as he lets go a powerful combination of verbal punches himself that sets the tone and direction of any policy/political decision and counterattack.

The more he gets thumped, the stronger he becomes, perhaps not physically, but mentally and intellectually, as he soaks in the more radioactive of criticisms and distills them to become a counterweight of arguments.

Now juxtapose that stance to the gift he bestowed unto Malaysians: national pride, a can-do spirit, ultra-confidence and big cojones to take on the world.

The one misstep that his political foes over-confidently took while haranguing him during the 22 years of his premiership (or even today) was to underestimate the man, thinking Dr Mahathir was easy meat.

Ask worthy adversaries Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, Tun Musa Hitam and Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Ask Lee Kuan Yew.

Dr Mahathir's ability to make a robust comeback every time you'd think he was beaten and sunk is legendary.

As soon as he responds, it is similar to the recoil of a cannon that blasts shells of cutting wit, worldly wisdom, stark revelation and concise illumination.

Now garnish all these inherent Dr Mahathir characteristics and the outcome is his terrific memoirs, an 809-page colossus covering just about everything Malaysiana in a read easy to comprehend, given Dr Mahathir's natural gift for unencumbered and well-defined English.

It's natural to dive into the juiciest parts first (Anwar and his preferential foibles, given the relevancy of his current battles), but take a quick glimpse at the glossary and the index first, filled with the social, political, religious, economic and cultural buzzwords of the Mahathir era.

Dr Mahathir makes mention of sandiwara (old word for comedy, play or concert but now expanded to mean political theatrics of complex plots and hidden hands), towkay (once the phrase used to address an employer or a Chinese above the working class but now applied generally to any Chinese trader or captain of the great Malaysian football team of the 1970s), and "approved permits" (defined in the book as a system by which imports into Malaysia are controlled but in actuality, a connotation of explosive meaning).

He even allows a passage to orang puteh, the Caucasians he refers to as Europeans frequently dubbed as Mat Salleh of which he is fond of unravelling as either an imperial flake or a global irritant despite making friends with them and convincing them to pump good money into Malaysia.

The index is also a revelation: the direct reference to "Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim" alone took a big chunk of 56 pages and that doesn't include the indirect references to Tan Sri Rahim Noor (then inspector-general of police who recklessly punched Anwar's black eye and provided what Dr Mahathir mused as a "long-term political capital").

If the index is an indicator of the leanings of his memoirs, he allowed copious references to former colleagues-turned-foes-turned allies Tengku Razaleigh (the fractious fight for the Umno presidency in 1987) and as opposition rival (1990 general election), Tun Musa Hitam as heir apparent but eventual sulk, and former right-hand man Tun Daim Zainuddin, whom Dr Mahathir placed as a pivotal character in many business and economic dealings but had a falling out with in later years.

There are astute references to Pas (he blasted away against its spiritual leader for his senseless hypocrisy) and paid reverent homage to former prime ministers for constructing foundations of which he built the new Malaysia.

Slicing and dicing Europe (and America) his forte: he once characterised them as the biggest cause of the planet's sordid financial state, unending wars and stage-managed flashpoints.

At 62 extremely wide-ranging chapters of what it means to be a Malaysian, cherry pick the intriguing "Anwar Challenge", or how he was finally convinced of the police intelligence on Anwar's predilections -- a watershed still at play in real time in the High Court where Anwar is facing Sodomy II while at the same time, Dr Mahathir was pitching his memoirs at the launch yesterday.

Could this memoir be sub-judice to Anwar's trial? Or submitted as evidence by prosecution and defence? That would be tantalisingly, with Dr Mahathir a willing witness -- for both sides.

Dr Mahathir is aware of the risks of publishing his memoirs when the political environment is dicey and inflammatory, particularly when the characters and situations in his book are still functioning, probably with their lawyers on speed dial in case their treatment is legally challenging.

But not getting any younger at 85, Dr Mahathir is determined to have, perhaps, the last word on the turbulent era he accelerated with bullishness.

Someone will challenge his account and recount of many episodes but at a glance, it is a rambling digest of little nuggets of a moment in time, a sharp narrative on certain phases, a swooping look at several acts and a perspective on some of the most arresting intervals of his decades-long narrative.

His parting words in the Anwar chapter is classic Dr Mahathir: "Anwar should have been prime minister of Malaysia today. But if he is not, it is because of his own actions.

"He left me no choice but to remove him and I did what I thought was best for the country.

"I may have made many mistakes, but removing Anwar was not one of them."

Ibrahim Ali wants commission on revocation of citizenship

(Bernama) - An MP today suggested the setting up of a commission on the revocation of the citizenship of those Malaysians who tarnish the good name of the country.

Datuk Ibrahim Ali (IND-Pasir Mas) said such a commission was necessary in view of the tendency of certain people to raise sensitive issues and ridicule the government to garner political support and spark tension in the country.

“I propose the setting up of the commission to penalise those who smear the country’s name locally and abroad through the mass media, regardless of whether they are Malays, Chinese or Indians or whoever it is.

“What is the use of being a (Malaysian) citizen without showing loyalty and doing things contrary to the (country’s) laws,” he said when speaking during the debate on the motion of thanks for the royal address in the Dewan Rakyat.

Ibrahim also suggested that the Sedition Act be amended or a new law be enacted to prevent non-Muslims from questioning Islam and engaging in acts sensitive to the religion.

He said that of late some non-Muslims had questioned the “azan” (call for prayer), quoted verses from the Quran during political campaigns and given speeches in mosques.

Ibrahim also suggested that the basics of nationhood be included in the History subject in schools to familiarise students with the basis of the formation of the country.

He said there were citizens who did not know how to speak Bahasa Malaysia, the national language.

The house will sit again tomorrow.

World justice on trial

The Star
REFLECTING ON THE LAW By Prof SHAD SALEEM FARUQI

Malaysia must take note of the strengths and failings of the International Criminal Court and inquire if it is a candle in the dark or a tool of colonialism and imperialism.

OFFICIALS of the International Criminal Court (ICC) are in Kuala Lumpur to convince Malaysia to ratify the Rome Statute to make Malaysia the 115th country to join this historic institution that heralds a new era of international justice.

The ICC was set up in 1998 and began operating in 2002. It provides a permanent international forum to prosecute those responsible for crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes and crimes of aggression.

It seeks to end impunity and to send a strong message to perpetrators of mass atrocities.

Since its inception, it has succeeded in extending the international ban on certain weapons like poisonous gases and internal armed conflicts. Its crowning achievement is the creation of domestic laws in many countries to prosecute grave breaches of humanitarian laws.

It has opened five investigations, issued charges against 12 people and secured custody of four accused. It has indicted the serving President of Sudan.

In considering whether to join the ICC, Malaysia must take note of the strengths as well as the failings of this international tribunal.

First, all prosecutions by the ICC up to now are against African leaders in Uganda, Congo, Kenya and Sudan. There may be one soon against Muammar Gaddafi of Libya. This “African centredness” is surprising because we know that similarly grave or even worse offences have been committed elsewhere.

Second, despite the ICC’s existence, superpowers like the United States, Britain, France and their allies are not at all deterred. They are still attacking the weak.

Pre-emptive and unilateral wars of aggression are being waged. Genocides are raging. New holocausts are being perpetrated. Nuclear threats are being issued against nations like Iran that refuse to bow to the hegemony of the West.

The ICC is selective in its prosecutions. For instance, war criminals in Britain and Australia belong to a ratifying state and as such are subject to the ICC’s jurisdiction.

The ICC has been approached by 240 complainants from Iraq. Its chief prosecutor Luis Moreno-Ocampo has amazingly ruled that the complaints do not have “sufficient gravity” to merit the initiation of a prosecution.

No indictments have been served on former US president George Bush and Secretaries of Defence Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld, former British prime minister Tony Blair, Israeli prime minister Benja­min Netanyahu and his predecessor Ehud Olhmert, former Australian prime minister John Howard, leaders of Sri Lanka, Ugandan president Yoweri Kaguta Museveni, Congo rebel leader Laurent Nkunda, and Rwandan president Paul Kagame despite their complicity in the murder of millions.

Cluster bombs, phosphorus, depleted uranium and chemical agents have been used by these leaders in some of these conflicts.

American professor Francis Boyle points out that despite the fact that Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas accepted the jurisdiction of the ICC two years ago, the ICC prosecutor has refused to investigate the crimes against humanity inflicted upon Palestinians by Israel.

Third, countries like the United States, Israel, Russia, China and India remain outside the ICC. Under Bush, the United States derecognised the Rome Statute. As such, Washington is not obliged to surrender any US perpetrators for trial before the ICC.

In fact, it has gone so far as to adopt measures that would allow it to use force to retrieve its nationals detained by the ICC. This reality renders the ICC as a body that can only pursue cases against weak states.

Fourth, for a crime to be prosecuted before the ICC, it must be committed on the territories of a member state of the ICC.

Iraq and Afghanistan are not parties to the ICC Statute and the bestialities committed there by the American allies are therefore exempt from the ICC’s jurisdiction.

Fifth, Article 98 of the Rome Statute provides that a country need not hand over a foreign national to the ICC if it is prohibited from doing so by an agreement with the national’s country.

The American government has forced nearly 100 countries to sign such “Article 98” agreements, thereby making its war criminals immune from international prosecution.

Sixth, the UN Security Council (UNSC) has the power to refer crimes committed by a non-signatory to the ICC (as it did for Darfur). But due to its geopolitical, racial and religious bias, the UNSC is unlikely to refer wrongdoers in the United States, Israel, Russia and China to the ICC.

Seventh, the ICC can investigate a case only if national courts fail or are unable to investigate a case. Major offending states like the United States, Israel and Britain put up the charade of prosecuting low-ranking soldiers but ignore compelling evidence that the massacre of civilians, tortures and other crimes against humanitarian law were authorised by top politicians.

Eighth, before mounting the Iraq invasion the US president had threatened the use of nuclear weapons. During the war, the United States and Britain used many weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that are banned in international law.

Use of these WMDs is not a crime under the ICC Statute. India had asked for inclusion of nuclear weapons and WMDs as a crime against humanity but the United States disagreed.

Ninth, the ICC is to some extent a tool of national leaders who report rebels and oppositionists to the ICC. It is noteworthy that three of the four active cases in Africa involve opposition figures referred to the court by their own governments.

One should therefore ask whether the ICC is a candle in the dark or a tool of colonialism and imperialism. It is undeniable that because of its link with the UNSC, the ICC is indeed a Western tool that reflects the racist and colonial nature of the UNSC.

Its silence in the face of heinous crimes in occupied Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine (especially Gaza) is deafening.

Malaysia should stare the ICC officials in their faces and ask them why is there such unequal harassment under the law, and why is there such callous indifference to the barbarism, slaughtering and stealing in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Gaza.

Nevertheless, our fidelity to human rights demands that we subscribe to a system of international justice against mass murderers.

It must also be remembered that many of the failings of the ICC are the failings of the UNSC.

Despite many reservations, it would be a folly not to join hands with this historic institution of international criminal justice. As Eleanor Roosevelt said: “It is better to light a candle than curse the darkness.”

> Shad Saleem Faruqi is Emeritus Professor of Law at UiTM and Visiting Professor at USM. 

* * Malaysian Bar Web Ads * Malaysian Bar Web Ads * Malaysian Bar Web Ads RCI-TBH (Day 15): MACC Witnesses Called to the Inquiry

The Bar Council’s team of solicitors at the Royal Commission of Inquiry investigating Teoh Beng Hock’s death (“RCI-TBH”) will provide regular updates on the proceedings.

The first report follows below.  For ease of reference, all reports will bear the heading “RCI-TBH”.

Contributed by Richard Wee & Yip Xiaoheng

RCI-TBH (day 15): MACC Witnesses Called to the Inquiry

8 Mar 2011 – Mohd Ashraf Bin Yunus was today called as a witness at the RCI-TBH.

He was tasked to assist one Arman to question Teoh Beng Hock.  Arman is apparently from MACC Putrajaya, while Ashraf, on the other hand, is an officer from MACC Selangor.  Ashraf used to work in a factory as a production operator with a SPM qualification.  He joined MACC about 5 years ago.

Doing examination by counsel, Ashraf admitted that statements are usually recorded by the officer interviewing the relevant person.  However in this case, while Arman did in fact take notes of the interview with Teoh Beng Hock, another MACC officer by the name of Nadzri was the officer who recorded Teoh Beng Hock’s statement.

Ashraf was briefed by Hairul Ilham, the “Pemangku Penolong Pesuruhjaya” of MACC.  Ashraf testified that he had requested Teoh Beng Hock to confirm certain documents and on many occasions had left Teoh Beng Hock on his own to tag the documents by himself.

Examination of Ashraf will continue on 9 Mar 2011.

Counsel representing Bar Council at today’s proceedings were Christopher Leong, Nahendran Navaratnam, S Sivaneindiren and Edmund Bon.

Still a long way to go for women’s rights

The Star

WOMEN everywhere marked the centenary of International Women’s Day on March 8. We hesitate to say “celebrate” the day because, while there have been many gains, there are still many barriers to overcome, and gender equality still seems infuriatingly far off.

After all, the battle for gender equality should be a fact of life, not just a day on the calendar.

Women’s groups here, like their “sistas” elsewhere, have fought on many fronts, such as equal pay, separate taxation laws, domestic violence and rape.

For that we applaud them.

It’s also thanks to them that there is increasing realisation that feminism is not a dirty word and that it’s not about angry women burning their bras.

Unfortunately, legal reforms alone do not transform the social clime. Attitudes, prejudices and the cultural atmosphere continue to exist long after legislature is enforced, and often spottily.

So although on paper, a woman’s status is enhanced, in actuality the state of her affairs remains unchanged.

In the World Economic Forum’s Gender Gap report on Malaysia, which ranks 98 out of 134 countries, the only areas in which women exceed men is in tertiary education enrolment and in life expectancy. In all other areas, women still lag behind men.

Women make up roughly half the potential work force of the country, yet represent only 36% of the actual labour force.

There is, moreover, a disproportionately large number of women in the informal sector, namely, women who run small food stalls or who are casual and subcontract workers, and who do not receive any worker benefits or health insurance.

Those who work as casual labourers among men encounter various forms of gender harassment – from receiving lower salaries than their male counterparts to being physically abused.

Professional women have it better, but are still discriminated against when it comes to promotions, especially to positions of responsibility, and in terms of equal pay. They are faced with the dilemma of having to choose between pursuing their careers or devoting more time to their families.

In politics, of a total of 71 in the present Malaysian Cabinet, there are only 10 women ministers and deputy ministers.

This represents a mere 14% of top political decision makers in the country, far short of the 30% target set by the United Nations (UN).

Violence against women continues unabated with almost daily reports of rapes, beatings and murders.

Muslim women, in particular, have not enjoyed the same rights accorded to their non-Muslim sisters. In the 1990s, several amendments were made to various Islamic laws that eroded the rights and protection granted to Muslim women.

For example, they still have to put up with polygamy, and as far as divorce is concerned, it is so hard for women to obtain it that some opt to lose their financial assets just to get their husbands to agree to a divorce.

Women work, take up roles in politics and the economy, and in some households are even the sole breadwinners, but the man-made laws have not moved in tandem to recognise these new realities.

As Kofi Annan, former secretary-general of the UN, said, “When women thrive, all of society benefits, and succeeding generations are given a better start in life’’.

Women, Family and Community Development Minister Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil takes it even further: “It’s been proven that when you empower women, you empower her entire community. “Although women in Malaysia have achieved a great deal over the years, we cannot deny that there remains much to be done.

“Women still put their families first and neglect their own health; they often give up their careers because the environment in the work place does not cater for their complex needs. Companies can do a lot to improve women’s standing.”

And, indeed, companies with a conscience do pay attention to creating greater equality at work.

The Star, for example, is gender neutral. Women hold management positions.

In fact, Datuk Ng Poh Tip, The Star’s former group chief editor, was the first woman in Malaysia to hold the position in the industry.

Women reporters are also assigned hard political and economic stories and cover war zones and natural disaster areas. Right now, two of our women reporters are reporting on the turmoil in Libya and Tunisia.

So it is not all doom and gloom. Our daughters, brought up with the gains of the women’s movement, are growing up in a world where the equality of women in everything from education to the work force is accepted. They will continue to expect and demand a fairer, and an equitable, society – and they will get it.

The further good news is that there are at least one or two generations of men who have been raised by enlightened mothers (and possibly fathers) who have no hang-ups about treating women fairly, and seeing that as the norm.

But there are still people who scratch their heads and ask: What do women really want?

The answer: Women want what men have. The freedom to choose whatever life they want – not to be confined by ideas of what they should or should not be, what they can or cannot achieve. The right to be anything, to set their sights as high, as wide and as far as ideas and action can take them.

It’s as simple as that.

UMNO bounces back in Malaysia

By Anil Netto

PENANG - The political tide that earlier rolled against Malaysia's ruling United Malays Nasional Organization (UMNO)-led coalition appears to have turned again in its favor, raising the prospects for possible early polls.

The latest indication of the shift: two by-election wins by comfortable majorities over the weekend in two state assembly constituencies. The wins leveled the by-election tally at eight each for the Barisan Nasional (National Front) coalition and opposition Pakatan Rakyat (People's Alliance) since the Anwar Ibrahim-led opposition made significant gains in the March 2008 general elections.

However, the Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition has recently been on a roll, winning seven of the last eight by-elections held since

October 2009. The next big test will come at the Sarawak state elections, which must be called by July but are widely tipped to be held in April. Together with neighboring Sabah, the two states account for a quarter of the seats in the federal parliament.

If the BN wins comfortably in Sarawak, some political analysts reckon a snap general election could be on the cards in the months ahead. General elections are not due until 2013 but UMNO has historically called for snap polls when its popularity or the economy have run on high.

Most of the BN's recent poll victories, including weekend wins in Pahang state's Kerdau and Malacca's Merlimau, have come in rural or semi-rural seats. The one opposition victory in the last six by-elections was picked up by the opposition Democratic Action Party in the town of Sibu in Sarawak.

Apart from the usual opposition complaints of abuse of state agencies during by-election campaigns and relentless pro-government propaganda over state-influenced electronic and print media, there are several political and economic factors working in the BN's favor.

For one, global crude palm oil prices are soaring, representing a boon to the country's many small-scale palm growers under the government's Federal Land Development (Felda) schemes. The benchmark May contract price was above 3,500 ringgit (US$1,155), a huge increase over last year's 2,701 ringgit and 2008's average of 2,236 ringgit. With those high prices, analysts believe Felda settlers will vote solidly for the BN.

"Some of these settlers now live comfortable lives with the prevailing high commodity prices,'' said a Pahang-based local activist who observed the Kerdau by-election won by the BN. ''Concepts like human rights mean little to them.''

Natural rubber prices have also shot up, benefiting some 300,000 smallholders in rural areas. According to a recent Edge weekly report, rubber growers' incomes have recently surged, in some instances tripling since the 2008-9 economic downturn. SMR 20 natural rubber is now trading at over US$5 per kilogram, compared to around $1.50 at the height of the crisis.

With commodity prices booming, analysts say it's no wonder that the BN's popularity has bounced back in many rural and semi-rural areas after suffering electoral setbacks in 2008. But there's another factor analysts say might explain the BN's about-turn since October 2009: prime minister Najib Razak's use of the ''1Malaysia'' slogan.

A poll conducted recently by the research group Ilham Center ahead of the by-election in Merlimau showed that 56.5% of respondents said that apart from issues related to local infrastructure and facilities the 1Malaysia campaign would influence how they vote at the next polls.

The political slogan was first rolled out in September 2010 and called on leaders, government agencies, and civil servants to more strongly emphasize national unity, ethnic harmony, and effective and efficient governance. "1Malaysia's goal is to preserve and enhance ... unity in diversity which has always been our strength and remains our best hope for the future," says Najib at his 1Malaysia website.

Opposition politicians have been highly critical of the campaign, often pointing to the hypocrisy between the message of unity and UMNO's traditional championing of race-based policies that favor ethnic Malays over ethnic minority groups. The introduction of 1Malaysia came at a time when ethnic minority parties in the coalition - namely, the Malaysian Chinese Association and the Malaysian Indian Congress - were at a low ebb after being hammered at the 2008 general election.

Despite the ethnic harmony and national unity sloganeering, many right-wing ethno-nationalist Malay groups have simultaneously emerged in promotion of a more exclusivist vision of the country's future. They have often railed against more liberal-democratic individuals and civil society groups who are seeking to build a more inclusive society.

Clive Kessler, emeritus professor of sociology and anthropology at Australia's University of South Wales, contends that while the 1Malaysia slogan conveys and resonates with both notions of national belonging - 'civic nationalism' and 'ethno-nationalism' - most Malaysians hear only one of the messages.

''On the one hand there are many who yearn for this nation to be, to become in gradual and progressive stages, a truly inclusive, modern national community, a multiethnic and culturally inclusive nation of a generally liberal-democratic kind,'' Kessler wrote in a recent commentary.

"There is another notion. It holds that there is One Malaysia, only one Malaysia, not many. There is only one Malaysia, and it is ours. Since it is ours, we set the terms here. If you wish to be part of it you may. There is a place for you here, and we will tell you what it is."

An opposition PAS Penang state committee member who participated in recent by-election campaigning in Merlimau views similarly the ruling coalition's use of the controversial slogan.

"The BN in its campaigning uses the 1Malaysia slogan to mean different things to different groups of people,'' he said. ''When campaigning in the Malay areas, BN speakers say this 1Malaysia is for development and to promote ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy or dominance), apart from talking about and attending to local problems. When talking to minority communities, they talk about importance of unity, and how we have to be together, as we are all Malaysians."

It's therefore no wonder that the recent Ilham poll found that the 1Malaysia slogan appealed to a majority of respondents in Merlimau. But while the BN appears to have turned the tide in many rural areas, it will find a similar shift more difficult in urban areas, where voters have more access to alternative news and information and are feeling the pinch of rising fuel, food, and housing prices.

That's a still significant divide in perceptions, one that may yet stall the temptation for UMNO to call early elections and run on a ticket of harmony and unity.

Anil Netto is a Penang-based writer.