Friday, 30 March 2012
Acid victim Fakhra Younus' suicide shames all Pakistan
Before and after ... acid victim Fakhra Younus / Pic: Fakhra Younus family
Source: The Daily Telegraph
FAMILY and friends of a former Pakistani dancer who committed suicide after being heavily disfigured by an acid attack in 2000 said her death brought shame on Pakistan.
Fakhra Younus, 33, leapt to her death from a sixth floor building in Rome on March 17, almost 12 years after the attack which she said left her looking "not human".
At the time of the attack, her ex-husband Bilal Khar was accused of entering her mother's house and pouring acid over her face as she slept.
The attack, in front of her then five-year-old son, left her unable to breathe and fighting for her life. She underwent 39 surgical procedures to repair her face in the past decade.
The acid almost completely corroded her nose, burned off her hair, fused her lips, blinded her in one eye, destroyed her left ear and burned her breasts.
After being rushed to hospital she said "My face is a prison to me", while her distraught son said at the time "This is not my mother".
Ms Younus moved to Italy to continue treatment in Rome. She left a suicide note complaining of legal indifference to such atrocities and insensitivity by Pakistan's rulers. Bilal Khar was arrested in 2002 and charged with attempted murder after the attack, only to be released on bail after five months.
The ex-parliamentarian and son of a wealthy Pakistani governor was eventually cleared of the attack, though many believe he could have used his family connections to escape conviction.
Since news of Ms Younus's suicide emerged, Khar has continued to deny any part in the attack. He has claimed in a television interview that a different man with the same name carried out the crime.
Khar claimed that his ex-wife killed herself because she did not have enough money, not because of her injuries.
More than 8,500 acid attacks, forced marriages and other forms of violence against women were reported in Pakistan in 2011, according to The Aurat Foundation, a women's rights organisation.
The Pakistani government introduced new laws last year criminalising acid attacks and stating that convicted attackers would serve at least 14 years in jail.
Tehmina Durrani, the ex-wife of Bilal Khar's father, had become an advocate for Younus after the attack, and said Younus had pledged to bring her attacker to justice when she had recovered.
Ms Durrani urged the Pakistani government to do much more to prevent violence against women.
"I think this whole country should be extremely embarrassed that a foreign country took responsibility for a Pakistani citizen for 13 years because we could give her nothing, not justice, not security," she said.
In Parliament, MPs trade barbs over apostasy claims
Zulkifli’s apparent jibe at Siti Mariah triggered a shouting match among the MPs. — File pic
KUALA LUMPUR, March 29 — The Dewan Rakyat descended into name-calling and insults today after lawmakers began arguing during a debate on the issue of Muslim apostasy.
Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom, when winding up debates on the royal address, had earlier told the House that the government was closely monitoring claims of apostasy in the country.
He said existing laws were sufficient to deal with the issue, saying additional enactments would be added if required.
Rising to interject, Zulkifli Noordin (IND - Kulim-Bandar Baharu) claimed of videos allegedly in the possession of former Selangor executive councillor Datuk Hasan Ali that purportedly show Christian priests converting Muslims out of Islam.
“So what is Jakim’s (Islamic Religious Department) stand on this, with this proof that Hasan has?
“Will Jakim call Hasan to present this proof and take proactive steps to prevent this from recurring?” the former PKR lawmaker asked.
This prompted Dr Siti Mariah Mahmud (PAS-Kota Raja) to say that issues of proselytisation were not new, and that these were being used by certain leaders to create friction among the different religions.
“Why do we need to frighten others about this threat by other religions? We do not have to politicise this,” she said, adding that there are sufficient laws in the country to deal with apostasy.
Zulkifli then stood to say, “The problem is, perhaps when the incident happened, Kota Raja was still wearing Pampers (diapers).”
His remark sparked anger from the floor and MPs from the opposition bench demanded the lawmaker retract his statement.
“How can you tolerate this kind of nonsense?” one lawmaker shouted to Deputy Speaker Datuk Ronald Kiandee, who was presiding at the time.
Those in support of Zulkifli began yelling in response, accusing the opposition bench of being traitors to their religion.
“You sold your God, even Allah you sold! Traitor!” some shouted.
Zuraida Kamaruddin (PKR-Ampang) then raised a point of order to demand the Deputy Speaker order Zulkifli to retract his remarks, which she labelled as “disrespectful”.
Refusing to sit despite repeated orders from Kiandee, Zulkifli also attempted to raise a point of order, accusing Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad (PAS-Kuala Selangor) of calling him a “devil” and “satan”.
“I would like to raise a point of order as well. I want Kuala Selangor to state in the open what he said... using the words devil and satan. Retract it. Not brave enough?” he charged.
Attempting to defuse the situation, Kiandee then ordered Zulkifli to retract his initial remarks and for Dzulkefly to explain his.
Zulkifli relented and Dzulkefly reasoned that he had merely asked the former not to behave like a “devil” or “satan”.
“There are no devils or satan here,” Kiandee said.
House can’t impeach Anwar, says Deputy Speaker
Wan Junaidi pours cold water on those who want to see Anwar Ibrahim removed from Parliament.
KUALA LUMPUR: Dewan Rakyat’s Deputy Speaker today dampened the hopes of those who want to see Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim go through an impeachment process.
Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar told a press conference at Parliament House that neither Parliament’s standing orders nor the Federal Constitution had any such provision.
“But if there is a motion brought in the House, it’s up to the Speaker’s discretion to allow it to be discussed or not,” he said.
Umno-owned Utusan Malaysia today quoted the ASEAN Human Rights Commissioner to Malaysia, Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, as saying that parliamentarians could introduce a motion to impeach Anwar for alleged immoral behaviour.
Wan Junaidi, however, said the Dewan Rakyat could not remove a sitting MP unless a court of law had found him guilty of a criminal offence.
“We cannot use someone’s private affairs as grounds for removing him,” he said.
PKR vice president Tian Chua, the MP for Batu, said it was “stupid” for Shafee to come up with such a statement.
“Even a prime minister cannot be impeached,” he said. “What is Shafee talking about? It’s nonsensical.”
Yusmadi Yusoff (PKR-Balik Pulau) said Shafee should understand that not everything practised in the United States was applicable in Malaysia. “He probably thought about former US president Richard Nixon being impeached over the Watergate scandal in the 1970s and wanted the same to be done here.”
He described Shafee’s statement as “weird”, saying the Umno-aligned lawyer should have known better than to bring up such a question.
“Shafee’s statement and conduct show that he is not fit to be a human rights commissioner,” he said.
KUALA LUMPUR: Dewan Rakyat’s Deputy Speaker today dampened the hopes of those who want to see Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim go through an impeachment process.Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar told a press conference at Parliament House that neither Parliament’s standing orders nor the Federal Constitution had any such provision.
“But if there is a motion brought in the House, it’s up to the Speaker’s discretion to allow it to be discussed or not,” he said.
Umno-owned Utusan Malaysia today quoted the ASEAN Human Rights Commissioner to Malaysia, Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, as saying that parliamentarians could introduce a motion to impeach Anwar for alleged immoral behaviour.
Wan Junaidi, however, said the Dewan Rakyat could not remove a sitting MP unless a court of law had found him guilty of a criminal offence.
“We cannot use someone’s private affairs as grounds for removing him,” he said.
PKR vice president Tian Chua, the MP for Batu, said it was “stupid” for Shafee to come up with such a statement.“Even a prime minister cannot be impeached,” he said. “What is Shafee talking about? It’s nonsensical.”
Yusmadi Yusoff (PKR-Balik Pulau) said Shafee should understand that not everything practised in the United States was applicable in Malaysia. “He probably thought about former US president Richard Nixon being impeached over the Watergate scandal in the 1970s and wanted the same to be done here.”
He described Shafee’s statement as “weird”, saying the Umno-aligned lawyer should have known better than to bring up such a question.
“Shafee’s statement and conduct show that he is not fit to be a human rights commissioner,” he said.
Open fire on military and lose votes
The more you attack the military, the less support you're going to get from the armed forces, Mindef warns the opposition.
KUALA LUMPUR: The armed forces will not support the opposition if the latter attacks the purchase of military equipment.
Deputy Defence Minister Abdul Latiff Ahmad said that those politicising military matters risked hurting the feelings of Malaysia’s soldiers.
Though he did not specifically label the opposition, he told the Dewan Rakyat: “When it is politicised, our soldiers feel hurt. It doesn’t matter if (they’re) from the navy, ground (forces) or from the air (force).”
“Each time the government makes a decision to procure new assets, they (the military) are very happy, because they are trained to be a professional army.
“So if that party… the more they condemn these assets, the more support the Barisan Nasional federal government gets,” he said.
Abdul Latiff said this in response to a supplementary question by Sri Gading MP (Umno) Mohamed Aziz, who asked about certain parties playing up issues related to defence.
He had originally asked the deputy minister if the Ministry of Defence (Mindef) intended to “empower” the Royal Malaysian Navy’s (RMN) fleet where maritime operations were concerned.
In recent years, Pakatan Rakyat had questioned the government’s procurement of defence equipment.
These included salvos against the Scorpene submarine, RM9 billion for six Littoral Combat Ships (LCS), an estimated RM2 billion for a Mindef IT project, RM7.55 billion for armoured carriers and other matters.
Abdul Latiff also said that politicising defence matters ran the risk of revealing the country’s secrets and military readiness to “uncertain enemies”.
Criticising the government’s critics as “less intelligent”, he argued that Malaysia was a maritime country, and estimated that there was more than 600,000sq kilometres of sea area to cover (twice as much as Malaysia’s land mass).
This area, he said, was filled with gas and petroleum deposits, that Malaysia had to guard.
“When we bought the LCS, we didn’t do it for fun. We bought them because they have sonar (capabilities),” he said, adding that the price tag was more “competitive” than other countries.
In another query, Bachok MP (PAS) Nasharudin Mat Isa said that neither side of the political divide was willing to compromise on national security.
He then asked what Mindef’s procurement process was in upgrading military equipment, and pointed to Singapore’s AWACS (airborne warning and control system) upgrade.
Abdul Latiff then reassured the House that when it came to military procurement, Mindef did not operate out of the Finance Ministry’s bounds.
KUALA LUMPUR: The armed forces will not support the opposition if the latter attacks the purchase of military equipment.
Deputy Defence Minister Abdul Latiff Ahmad said that those politicising military matters risked hurting the feelings of Malaysia’s soldiers.Though he did not specifically label the opposition, he told the Dewan Rakyat: “When it is politicised, our soldiers feel hurt. It doesn’t matter if (they’re) from the navy, ground (forces) or from the air (force).”
“Each time the government makes a decision to procure new assets, they (the military) are very happy, because they are trained to be a professional army.
“So if that party… the more they condemn these assets, the more support the Barisan Nasional federal government gets,” he said.
Abdul Latiff said this in response to a supplementary question by Sri Gading MP (Umno) Mohamed Aziz, who asked about certain parties playing up issues related to defence.
He had originally asked the deputy minister if the Ministry of Defence (Mindef) intended to “empower” the Royal Malaysian Navy’s (RMN) fleet where maritime operations were concerned.
In recent years, Pakatan Rakyat had questioned the government’s procurement of defence equipment.
These included salvos against the Scorpene submarine, RM9 billion for six Littoral Combat Ships (LCS), an estimated RM2 billion for a Mindef IT project, RM7.55 billion for armoured carriers and other matters.
Abdul Latiff also said that politicising defence matters ran the risk of revealing the country’s secrets and military readiness to “uncertain enemies”.
Criticising the government’s critics as “less intelligent”, he argued that Malaysia was a maritime country, and estimated that there was more than 600,000sq kilometres of sea area to cover (twice as much as Malaysia’s land mass).
This area, he said, was filled with gas and petroleum deposits, that Malaysia had to guard.
“When we bought the LCS, we didn’t do it for fun. We bought them because they have sonar (capabilities),” he said, adding that the price tag was more “competitive” than other countries.
In another query, Bachok MP (PAS) Nasharudin Mat Isa said that neither side of the political divide was willing to compromise on national security.
He then asked what Mindef’s procurement process was in upgrading military equipment, and pointed to Singapore’s AWACS (airborne warning and control system) upgrade.
Abdul Latiff then reassured the House that when it came to military procurement, Mindef did not operate out of the Finance Ministry’s bounds.
Double standard for medical courses overseas?
A former medical student has charged that students pursuing their medical degree in Egypt and Jordan are exempted from several conditions set by MMC.
KUALA LUMPUR: Students pursuing their medical degree in Egypt and Jordan are allowed to circumvent certain regulations set by the Malaysian Medical Council (MMC), prompting questions if double standard was practised in sending students overseas to complete their medical course.
A group of Malaysian medical students overseas are saying that this double standard practised by the MMC and the Higher Education Ministry is discriminatory against non-Malays.
A former medical student from Ukraine, who declined to be named for fear of reprisal, revealed that medical students in Egypt and Jordan were exempted from several conditions, usually imposed on students wanting to pursue their medical degree abroad.
He said the MMC, which sets regulations and guidelines for medical students wanting to study abroad, is to be blamed for the double standard.
“Why does MMC have two sets of rules for Malaysians aspiring to do medical studies abroad?” he asked.
He pointed out that while students wanting to pursue their medical degree overseas were required to undergo a foundation course, those going to Egypt and Jordan were exempted from such study.
“If a student plans to do a medical programme, then he has to score at least five Bs in SPM each in Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics or Additional Mathematics and another optional subject.”
“The student would then be required to sit either the foundation course or other pre-university examinations like STPM, Matriculation and A Levels. This requirement is set by MMC,” he added.
However, he said, MMC seems to give “special privilege” to students going to universities in Egypt and Jordan as they are not required to undergo the foundation course.
“Those going to these two countries just need their credits in SPM and they are off to do a medical degree… this contradicts MMC’s requirements,” he said.
He added that the Higher Education Ministry acts as an recruitment agent in sending students to universities in Egypt and Jordan, where seats are allocated only to Malays.
There are now more than 3,000 Malaysian medical students in Egypt and Jordan.
“This is really unfair as non-Malays have to sit a foundation programme to gain entry into a medical programme, while Malays can start the course after completing their SPM. MMC is giving a free ride for Malays to do medical programmes overseas,” he added.
MMC giving free rides
He said while he had no qualms about Malay students doing their medical degree after SPM, the MMC should be consistent with its regulations.
“We want MMC’s answer on this matter… why the double standard?” he said.
He said although students sent to Egypt and Jordan were required to undergo a six-year medical course, they do not complete their foundation course at the universities there.
“When asked, MMC told us that students going to Egypt and Jordan do their foundation course in the first year and complete their medical degree in the next five years. But this is not true. We checked with universities there and found that they are absorbed into the degree course from day one.
“Furthermore, the first year in Egypt and Jordan does not have any foundation programme subjects as required by the MMC.
“Students going to the Baltic countries, like Russia, Poland and Republic Czech are forced to spend seven years to complete their medical course, including their foundation course. But students going to Egypt and Jordan can complete their medical degree in six years minus the foundation programme,” he added.
“It is crystal-clear that MMC has applied double standard in its system based on race,” he claimed.
The source also reveals that a group of overseas medical students met MMC president Dr Hasan Abdul Rahman recently on the matter, but there was no positive outcome from the meeting.
Despite, numerous attempts, FMT could not reach Hassan for comment.
KUALA LUMPUR: Students pursuing their medical degree in Egypt and Jordan are allowed to circumvent certain regulations set by the Malaysian Medical Council (MMC), prompting questions if double standard was practised in sending students overseas to complete their medical course.A group of Malaysian medical students overseas are saying that this double standard practised by the MMC and the Higher Education Ministry is discriminatory against non-Malays.
A former medical student from Ukraine, who declined to be named for fear of reprisal, revealed that medical students in Egypt and Jordan were exempted from several conditions, usually imposed on students wanting to pursue their medical degree abroad.
He said the MMC, which sets regulations and guidelines for medical students wanting to study abroad, is to be blamed for the double standard.
“Why does MMC have two sets of rules for Malaysians aspiring to do medical studies abroad?” he asked.
He pointed out that while students wanting to pursue their medical degree overseas were required to undergo a foundation course, those going to Egypt and Jordan were exempted from such study.
“If a student plans to do a medical programme, then he has to score at least five Bs in SPM each in Biology, Chemistry, Physics, Mathematics or Additional Mathematics and another optional subject.”
“The student would then be required to sit either the foundation course or other pre-university examinations like STPM, Matriculation and A Levels. This requirement is set by MMC,” he added.
However, he said, MMC seems to give “special privilege” to students going to universities in Egypt and Jordan as they are not required to undergo the foundation course.
“Those going to these two countries just need their credits in SPM and they are off to do a medical degree… this contradicts MMC’s requirements,” he said.
He added that the Higher Education Ministry acts as an recruitment agent in sending students to universities in Egypt and Jordan, where seats are allocated only to Malays.
There are now more than 3,000 Malaysian medical students in Egypt and Jordan.
“This is really unfair as non-Malays have to sit a foundation programme to gain entry into a medical programme, while Malays can start the course after completing their SPM. MMC is giving a free ride for Malays to do medical programmes overseas,” he added.
MMC giving free rides
He said while he had no qualms about Malay students doing their medical degree after SPM, the MMC should be consistent with its regulations.
“We want MMC’s answer on this matter… why the double standard?” he said.
He said although students sent to Egypt and Jordan were required to undergo a six-year medical course, they do not complete their foundation course at the universities there.
“When asked, MMC told us that students going to Egypt and Jordan do their foundation course in the first year and complete their medical degree in the next five years. But this is not true. We checked with universities there and found that they are absorbed into the degree course from day one.
“Furthermore, the first year in Egypt and Jordan does not have any foundation programme subjects as required by the MMC.
“Students going to the Baltic countries, like Russia, Poland and Republic Czech are forced to spend seven years to complete their medical course, including their foundation course. But students going to Egypt and Jordan can complete their medical degree in six years minus the foundation programme,” he added.
“It is crystal-clear that MMC has applied double standard in its system based on race,” he claimed.
The source also reveals that a group of overseas medical students met MMC president Dr Hasan Abdul Rahman recently on the matter, but there was no positive outcome from the meeting.
Despite, numerous attempts, FMT could not reach Hassan for comment.
Anwar’s ‘cronies’ named in court
Businessman Low Thiam Hoe told the court that he was a ‘victim’ of a ‘larger scheme’ involving Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim and Hong Leong chairman Quek Leng Chan.
KUALA LUMPUR: Businessman Low Thiam Hoe, who is being sued by Hong Leong Finance Bhd (HLFB) in a breach of repayment suit involving RM445 million syndicated loans given in 1997, today named several individuals whom he identified as “cronies” of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim.
Taking the stand at the Commercial High Court here today, Low said that he was “the victim” in a deal in which he was assisting Anwar as well as HLFB executive chairman Quek Leng Chan.
However, when cross-examined by the bank’s lawyer, Andrew Chiew, Low admitted that he had nothing in black and white to prove that he was simply used as a “nominee” of Anwar – the then finance minister and deputy prime minister – and Quek.
“Sometime in March 1997, two individuals by the name of Hamzah Harun and Mohd Faiz Abdullah (Anwar’s speech writer), both from a company known as Arus Murni Sdn Bhd (AMSB), told me that they were acting on behalf of Anwar and Quek,” Low said during examination-in-chief by lead counsel, D Paramalingam.
Low said that HLFB, through Quek, was then pushing to acquire Kewangan Bersatu Bhd (KBB), which was at the time acquired by Arus Murni Corporation Bhd (AMCB) from one Ishak Ismail for RM390 million.
He said he agreed to be a nominee, or “conduit”, for the syndicated loan transaction.
The other individuals and companies used as nominees were Hood Osman, Nik Hussain Nik Mohamed, AMSB and Mekuritek Sdn Bhd, whom he described as “cronies” of Anwar.
Paramalingam: How are these companies and individuals related?
Low: From what I know, they are all cronies of Anwar Ibrahim.
Low said he did not apply for the loan as “the whole thing was arranged by Hong Leong’s representative, namely Seow Lun Hoo”.
Quek’s right-hand man
He also said that he was informed that Seow, who was president and CEO of Hong Leong Credit & Leasing Bhd at the time, was “essentially Quek’s right-hand man”.
Low said the loan given to him was RM30.161 million but a credit assessment was never done on him at all.
“It was all pre-approved. I just had to turn up to sign the necessary documents, that’s all. I was unemployed at that point in time.”
Low also said that he signed the relevant loan documents at a hotel in Singapore in March 1997 as HLFB “wanted to avoid paying stamp duty”.
“Syndicated loans were also given out to the other nomiees as well to reach the plantiff’s target of RM445 million for the acquisition of AMCB. A sum of RM80.1 million was given to Hood, RM80.1 million to Nik Hussain, RM30.161 million given to Mekuritek and RM224.478 million to AMSB,” he said.
However, he said that the plan to purchase KBB did not take place by the end of 1997.
“It was only at that point in time that we discovered that Seow, on behalf of Quek, was the mastermind of the whole transaction. The plantiff through Seow deliberately sabotaged the scheme…”
Low said that the plaintiff, HLFB, had “acted in bad faith” when it breached its fiduciary duty, and he and other nominees were “clearly cheated by them”.
“We were left high and dry,” he added.
Bigger picture
During cross-examination by Chiew later, Low was aggressively grilled on his credibilty.
Chiew: The two individuals told you they were acting for Anwar and Quek. Did you take any steps to check?
Low: Yes.
Chiew: Did you talk to Anwar?
Low: No.
Chiew: Did you talk to Quek?
Low: I was in no position to contact Quek.
Chiew: If they were to hoodwink you, they could have, couldn’t they?
Low: No. I had no reason not to believe (them)… Faiz was Anwar’s speech writer…
Chiew: But what about Quek? The point is this. You were told about this deal. Any documents to work out how this deal is to be srtructured? Was it presented to you by Faiz?
Low: I had no reason to believe…
Chiew: My question is… Was there any paper in writing?
Low: No, but it was all arranged at top level
Chiew: You are a director of a public-listed company, with experience in financing. Is that your position: you believed these two persons about this deal, which seems ‘phantom in nature’ by your own answers? When you entered the deal, you knew what you were going into…
Low: I knew what I was getting into. I was just a nominee. But can I add… it was on a bigger picture. It was linked to Anwar and Quek.
Chiew also repeatedly asked why Low did not raise this “bigger picture” 14 years ago when the case was first filed.
“Fourteen years later you suddenly have an inspriration. I’m putting to you this was done in bad faith,” Chiew said, to which Low denied.
Chiew also asked Low to explain and clarify several statements he made – including allegation about Anwar’s cronies, the meetings that took place and the credit assessment done on him as well as the allegation that HLFB wanted to purchase KBB at RM350million.
Low admitted that it was Hamzah who supplied him with those information.
Chiew: This contention that you have this representation/collateral contract… it doesn’t exist. It never existed. It is really an afterthought.
Low: Of course based on all the documents here… there is nothing to support my contention.
Chiew: I am putting it to you that you are putting up this fantastic story about Anwar and Quek. Correct? You got this from strange publications found on the Internet? Hence you are stringing this defence together? There is no basis to your contention about this so-called larger scheme?
Low: No.
Full confidence
During re-examination by Devanandan S Subramaniam, Low said his reason for raising this issue 14 years later was that initially, he had full confidence that Hamzah would “take care” of the case.
On March 19, High Court judge Hadhariah Syed Ismail dismissed Low’s application to amend his defence statement to include Anwar as “the person behind the deal”.
In rejecting his application, Hadhariah said it was made at the “eleventh hour” and had come too late in the course of the trial.
However, the court had last week allowed the defence to subpoena four individuals namely Anwar, Quek, Hamzah and Faiz.
Six witnesses of the plaintiff had already taken the stand.
In 1998, Hong Leong Finance filed a suit against Low, Merkuritek and Arus Murni over non-payment of the syndicated loans amounting to RM445 million.
The loans were given to the parties in a bid to acquire financial institution AMCB which owns KBB.
Each defendant was sued for over RM28 million plus interest for the non-repayment of the loans.
In 1999, Low filed a counter-claim against HLFB, HLG Capital Markets Sdn Bhd and Hong Leong Credit Bhd’s former CEO Seow Lun Hoo asking for damages for alleged wrongful or negligent advice.
Hong Leong also filed another suit against Mekuritek and three guarantors – Hussin Abdul Karim, Agus Salim Mohd Dom and Abdullah Abd Karim Bajerai – as defendants for a similar claim of RM28 million.
KUALA LUMPUR: Businessman Low Thiam Hoe, who is being sued by Hong Leong Finance Bhd (HLFB) in a breach of repayment suit involving RM445 million syndicated loans given in 1997, today named several individuals whom he identified as “cronies” of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim.Taking the stand at the Commercial High Court here today, Low said that he was “the victim” in a deal in which he was assisting Anwar as well as HLFB executive chairman Quek Leng Chan.
However, when cross-examined by the bank’s lawyer, Andrew Chiew, Low admitted that he had nothing in black and white to prove that he was simply used as a “nominee” of Anwar – the then finance minister and deputy prime minister – and Quek.
“Sometime in March 1997, two individuals by the name of Hamzah Harun and Mohd Faiz Abdullah (Anwar’s speech writer), both from a company known as Arus Murni Sdn Bhd (AMSB), told me that they were acting on behalf of Anwar and Quek,” Low said during examination-in-chief by lead counsel, D Paramalingam.
Low said that HLFB, through Quek, was then pushing to acquire Kewangan Bersatu Bhd (KBB), which was at the time acquired by Arus Murni Corporation Bhd (AMCB) from one Ishak Ismail for RM390 million.
He said he agreed to be a nominee, or “conduit”, for the syndicated loan transaction.
The other individuals and companies used as nominees were Hood Osman, Nik Hussain Nik Mohamed, AMSB and Mekuritek Sdn Bhd, whom he described as “cronies” of Anwar.
Paramalingam: How are these companies and individuals related?
Low: From what I know, they are all cronies of Anwar Ibrahim.
Low said he did not apply for the loan as “the whole thing was arranged by Hong Leong’s representative, namely Seow Lun Hoo”.
Quek’s right-hand man
He also said that he was informed that Seow, who was president and CEO of Hong Leong Credit & Leasing Bhd at the time, was “essentially Quek’s right-hand man”.
Low said the loan given to him was RM30.161 million but a credit assessment was never done on him at all.
“It was all pre-approved. I just had to turn up to sign the necessary documents, that’s all. I was unemployed at that point in time.”
Low also said that he signed the relevant loan documents at a hotel in Singapore in March 1997 as HLFB “wanted to avoid paying stamp duty”.
“Syndicated loans were also given out to the other nomiees as well to reach the plantiff’s target of RM445 million for the acquisition of AMCB. A sum of RM80.1 million was given to Hood, RM80.1 million to Nik Hussain, RM30.161 million given to Mekuritek and RM224.478 million to AMSB,” he said.
However, he said that the plan to purchase KBB did not take place by the end of 1997.
“It was only at that point in time that we discovered that Seow, on behalf of Quek, was the mastermind of the whole transaction. The plantiff through Seow deliberately sabotaged the scheme…”
Low said that the plaintiff, HLFB, had “acted in bad faith” when it breached its fiduciary duty, and he and other nominees were “clearly cheated by them”.
“We were left high and dry,” he added.
Bigger picture
During cross-examination by Chiew later, Low was aggressively grilled on his credibilty.
Chiew: The two individuals told you they were acting for Anwar and Quek. Did you take any steps to check?
Low: Yes.
Chiew: Did you talk to Anwar?
Low: No.
Chiew: Did you talk to Quek?
Low: I was in no position to contact Quek.
Chiew: If they were to hoodwink you, they could have, couldn’t they?
Low: No. I had no reason not to believe (them)… Faiz was Anwar’s speech writer…
Chiew: But what about Quek? The point is this. You were told about this deal. Any documents to work out how this deal is to be srtructured? Was it presented to you by Faiz?
Low: I had no reason to believe…
Chiew: My question is… Was there any paper in writing?
Low: No, but it was all arranged at top level
Chiew: You are a director of a public-listed company, with experience in financing. Is that your position: you believed these two persons about this deal, which seems ‘phantom in nature’ by your own answers? When you entered the deal, you knew what you were going into…
Low: I knew what I was getting into. I was just a nominee. But can I add… it was on a bigger picture. It was linked to Anwar and Quek.
Chiew also repeatedly asked why Low did not raise this “bigger picture” 14 years ago when the case was first filed.
“Fourteen years later you suddenly have an inspriration. I’m putting to you this was done in bad faith,” Chiew said, to which Low denied.
Chiew also asked Low to explain and clarify several statements he made – including allegation about Anwar’s cronies, the meetings that took place and the credit assessment done on him as well as the allegation that HLFB wanted to purchase KBB at RM350million.
Low admitted that it was Hamzah who supplied him with those information.
Chiew: This contention that you have this representation/collateral contract… it doesn’t exist. It never existed. It is really an afterthought.
Low: Of course based on all the documents here… there is nothing to support my contention.
Chiew: I am putting it to you that you are putting up this fantastic story about Anwar and Quek. Correct? You got this from strange publications found on the Internet? Hence you are stringing this defence together? There is no basis to your contention about this so-called larger scheme?
Low: No.
Full confidence
During re-examination by Devanandan S Subramaniam, Low said his reason for raising this issue 14 years later was that initially, he had full confidence that Hamzah would “take care” of the case.
On March 19, High Court judge Hadhariah Syed Ismail dismissed Low’s application to amend his defence statement to include Anwar as “the person behind the deal”.
In rejecting his application, Hadhariah said it was made at the “eleventh hour” and had come too late in the course of the trial.
However, the court had last week allowed the defence to subpoena four individuals namely Anwar, Quek, Hamzah and Faiz.
Six witnesses of the plaintiff had already taken the stand.
In 1998, Hong Leong Finance filed a suit against Low, Merkuritek and Arus Murni over non-payment of the syndicated loans amounting to RM445 million.
The loans were given to the parties in a bid to acquire financial institution AMCB which owns KBB.
Each defendant was sued for over RM28 million plus interest for the non-repayment of the loans.
In 1999, Low filed a counter-claim against HLFB, HLG Capital Markets Sdn Bhd and Hong Leong Credit Bhd’s former CEO Seow Lun Hoo asking for damages for alleged wrongful or negligent advice.
Hong Leong also filed another suit against Mekuritek and three guarantors – Hussin Abdul Karim, Agus Salim Mohd Dom and Abdullah Abd Karim Bajerai – as defendants for a similar claim of RM28 million.
Tribunal AG: Bola berada di kaki Najib
Rakyat terkejut dengan jawapan Perdana Menteri bahawa tidak ada bukti yang kukuh untuk menyiasat salah laku Gani Patail dan Musa Hassan.
Apa kata masyarakat dunia tentang undang-undang di negara ini apabila Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak enggan mengambil sebarang tindakan terhadap banyak dakwaan salah guna kuasa melibatkan tiga badan penguatkuasa?
Tiga badan yang dimaksudkan ialah Peguam Negara (AG), Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail; bekas Ketua Polis Negara, Tan Sri Musa Hassan dan Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) atau sebelum ini BPR (Badan Pencegah Rasuah).
Sejak bekas Pengarah Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah Komersial (CCID) Ramli Yusuff mendedahkan salah laku mereka dalam ucapannya ketika jamuan malam bagi meraikan ulangtahun kelahirannya pada 29 Februari lalu, tekanan semakin memuncak agar Gani dihadapkan ke tribunal penyiasatan. (Di bawah perlembaan Malaysia Peguam Negara hanya boleh dipecat melalui tribunal, sama seperti hakim).
Apabila Perdana Menteri akhirnya berdepan dengan isu tribunal bagi menyiasat Gani pada 24 Mac lalu, beliau hanya berkata “tidak” dan menambah, ini hanya merupakan satu dakwaan yang tidak berasas, satu tuduhan yang belum dapat dibuktikan. Sebuah tribunal hanya boleh dibentuk sekiranya terdapat bukti yang cukup, katanya.
Rakyat terkejut dengan jawapan Najib ini sedang banyak fakta dan bukti yang menunjukkan salah laku Gani, termasuk beliau bersubahat dengan Musa dan SPRM untuk memerangkap Ramli dan pegawai-pegawainya.
Terlibat dengan kumpulan haram
Mengenai Ramli pula, beliau terpaksa berdepan dengan tindakan undang-undang bermula sejak 2007 apabila beliau menimbulkan kemarahan Musa.
Atas arahan Timbalan Menteri Dalam Negeri Johari Baharum, Ramli ketika itu CCID dan para pegawainya sedang menyiasat kegiatan sindiket haram di Johor yang berakhir penangkapan dan pembuangan negeri ketua penjenayah Goh Cheng Poh yang juga dikenali sebagai Tengku Goh.
Penangkapan tersebut menimbulkan kemarahan Musa kerana Tengku Goh adalah kawan baiknya. Musa pernah membantu Tengku Goh membina empayar judinya ketika Musa berkhidmat di Johor sebagai ketua polis negeri, sepertimana yang terdapat dalam bukti hasil siasatan para pegawai Ramli.
Kemudian, satu operasi menyelamat dijalankan di mana Goh dikeluarkan dari tempat pembuangan, dengan Gani dan BPR memainkan peranan utama.
Gani dan Musa adalah kawan rapat, kesetiakawanan di antara mereka terjalin sejak lewat tahun 90an apabila kedua-duanya memainkan peranan penting dalam kes sodomi I Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Gani sebagai pendakwa utama dan Musa sebagai pegawai penyiasat.
Bukti daripada Ramli dan kenyataan bersumpah yang diakses dari portal berita Malaysiakini menunjukkan Gani dan BPR bersubahat untuk mendapatkan fail-fail rahsia hasil siasatan daripada Ramli, ekoran dari maklumat-maklumat yang diterima, hasil buruan BPR hingga membawa kepada penangkapan Tengku Goh.
Pemberi-pemberi maklumat ini kemudian diindoktrinasi oleh pegawai-pegawai BPR supaya menukar kenyataan-kenyataan mereka sebelum ini.
Kenyataan-kenyataan baru ini kemudian digunakan untuk membebaskan Tengku Goh dari kawasan pembuangan yang terhad.
Kenyataan-kenyataan ini digunakan untuk mendakwa enam pegawai Ramli di mahkamah atas dakwaan “memalsukan bukti” bagi membabitkan Tengku Goh.
(Pegawai-pegawai yang diindoktrinasi ini kemudiannya membuat kenyataan bersumpah bagi menjelaskan bagaimana mereka telah dipaksa untuk berubah fikiran oleh BPR. Dokumen-dokumen ini diperolehi Malaysiakini, yang kemudiannya menyiarkannya dalam beberapa siri laporan dalam laman webnya tiga minggu yang lalu.)
Ramli sendiri didakwa atas beberapa kesalahan oleh BPR dan Gani. Malah peguam Ramli, Rosli Dahlan juga mendapat layanan yang serupa.
Tuduhan yang direkayasa
Ternyata tuduhan terhadap Ramli adalah palsu belaka apabila mahkamah menolak kesemua bukti tanpa mahkamah perlu memanggil mana-mana pegawai yang dituduh untuk membela diri.
Ramli akhirnya dibebaskan dari segala tuduhan oleh sembilan hakim yang berlainan setelah menjalani perbicaraan di mahkamah sesyen, mahkamah tinggi dan mahkamah rayuan.
Agak signifikan dalam kes perbicaraan Ramli, Musa diisytihar oleh Hakim Mahkamah Sesyen di Sabah sebagai saksi yang tidak boleh dipercayai untuk mendengar kes dakwaan Ramli menyalah guna kuasa.
Manakala BPR juga diberi amaran oleh Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur yang membebaskan Ramli, kerana bergantong kepada keterangan daripada salah seorang ahli kumpulan haram untuk mendakwa Ramli kerana kegagalan mengiystiharkan hartanya.
Mengenai enam pegawai Ramli yang didakwa dan kemudiannya dibebaskan, kesemua mereka diserah kembali tugas masing-masing dan dinaikkan pangkat.
Ramli secara terbuka mengucapkan terima kasih kepada Ketua Polis Negara Tan Sri Ismail Omar kerana akur bahawa mereka sebenarnya telah menjadi mangsa.
Perbicaraan atas tuduhan-tuduhan yang dangkal ini, termasuk percubaan mengaitkan bukti dengan afidavit-afidavit adalah bukti yang direkayasa.
Ini menunjukkan bahawa dakwaan Ramli terhadap Gani, Musa dan BPR ada asasnya di mana mereka bersubahat untuk membawa saksi, memalsukan bukti, menjalankan siasatan polis dan menghalang keadilan dari terlaksana.
Peristiwa “mata lebam” Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim yang berlaku pada tahun tahun 1998 merupakan satu lagi kes yang memerlukan kepada penubuhan Tribunal bagi menyiasat Gani dan Musa.
Bekas Pengarah Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah Kuala Lumpur, Mat Zain Ibrahim mendakwa kedua-dua Gani dan Musa terlibat memalsukan bahan bukti.
Beliau turut memberi amaran kepada Najib bahawa adalah menjadi satu kesalahan jenayah jika Najib tidak mengendahkan perbuatan keji pemalsuan bukti-bukti berhubung insiden “mata lebam” Anwar.
Kini bola berada di kaki Najib.
Apa kata masyarakat dunia tentang undang-undang di negara ini apabila Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak enggan mengambil sebarang tindakan terhadap banyak dakwaan salah guna kuasa melibatkan tiga badan penguatkuasa?Tiga badan yang dimaksudkan ialah Peguam Negara (AG), Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail; bekas Ketua Polis Negara, Tan Sri Musa Hassan dan Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) atau sebelum ini BPR (Badan Pencegah Rasuah).
Sejak bekas Pengarah Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah Komersial (CCID) Ramli Yusuff mendedahkan salah laku mereka dalam ucapannya ketika jamuan malam bagi meraikan ulangtahun kelahirannya pada 29 Februari lalu, tekanan semakin memuncak agar Gani dihadapkan ke tribunal penyiasatan. (Di bawah perlembaan Malaysia Peguam Negara hanya boleh dipecat melalui tribunal, sama seperti hakim).
Apabila Perdana Menteri akhirnya berdepan dengan isu tribunal bagi menyiasat Gani pada 24 Mac lalu, beliau hanya berkata “tidak” dan menambah, ini hanya merupakan satu dakwaan yang tidak berasas, satu tuduhan yang belum dapat dibuktikan. Sebuah tribunal hanya boleh dibentuk sekiranya terdapat bukti yang cukup, katanya.
Rakyat terkejut dengan jawapan Najib ini sedang banyak fakta dan bukti yang menunjukkan salah laku Gani, termasuk beliau bersubahat dengan Musa dan SPRM untuk memerangkap Ramli dan pegawai-pegawainya.
Terlibat dengan kumpulan haram
Mengenai Ramli pula, beliau terpaksa berdepan dengan tindakan undang-undang bermula sejak 2007 apabila beliau menimbulkan kemarahan Musa.
Atas arahan Timbalan Menteri Dalam Negeri Johari Baharum, Ramli ketika itu CCID dan para pegawainya sedang menyiasat kegiatan sindiket haram di Johor yang berakhir penangkapan dan pembuangan negeri ketua penjenayah Goh Cheng Poh yang juga dikenali sebagai Tengku Goh.
Penangkapan tersebut menimbulkan kemarahan Musa kerana Tengku Goh adalah kawan baiknya. Musa pernah membantu Tengku Goh membina empayar judinya ketika Musa berkhidmat di Johor sebagai ketua polis negeri, sepertimana yang terdapat dalam bukti hasil siasatan para pegawai Ramli.
Kemudian, satu operasi menyelamat dijalankan di mana Goh dikeluarkan dari tempat pembuangan, dengan Gani dan BPR memainkan peranan utama.
Gani dan Musa adalah kawan rapat, kesetiakawanan di antara mereka terjalin sejak lewat tahun 90an apabila kedua-duanya memainkan peranan penting dalam kes sodomi I Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Gani sebagai pendakwa utama dan Musa sebagai pegawai penyiasat.
Bukti daripada Ramli dan kenyataan bersumpah yang diakses dari portal berita Malaysiakini menunjukkan Gani dan BPR bersubahat untuk mendapatkan fail-fail rahsia hasil siasatan daripada Ramli, ekoran dari maklumat-maklumat yang diterima, hasil buruan BPR hingga membawa kepada penangkapan Tengku Goh.
Pemberi-pemberi maklumat ini kemudian diindoktrinasi oleh pegawai-pegawai BPR supaya menukar kenyataan-kenyataan mereka sebelum ini.
Kenyataan-kenyataan baru ini kemudian digunakan untuk membebaskan Tengku Goh dari kawasan pembuangan yang terhad.
Kenyataan-kenyataan ini digunakan untuk mendakwa enam pegawai Ramli di mahkamah atas dakwaan “memalsukan bukti” bagi membabitkan Tengku Goh.
(Pegawai-pegawai yang diindoktrinasi ini kemudiannya membuat kenyataan bersumpah bagi menjelaskan bagaimana mereka telah dipaksa untuk berubah fikiran oleh BPR. Dokumen-dokumen ini diperolehi Malaysiakini, yang kemudiannya menyiarkannya dalam beberapa siri laporan dalam laman webnya tiga minggu yang lalu.)
Ramli sendiri didakwa atas beberapa kesalahan oleh BPR dan Gani. Malah peguam Ramli, Rosli Dahlan juga mendapat layanan yang serupa.
Tuduhan yang direkayasa
Ternyata tuduhan terhadap Ramli adalah palsu belaka apabila mahkamah menolak kesemua bukti tanpa mahkamah perlu memanggil mana-mana pegawai yang dituduh untuk membela diri.
Ramli akhirnya dibebaskan dari segala tuduhan oleh sembilan hakim yang berlainan setelah menjalani perbicaraan di mahkamah sesyen, mahkamah tinggi dan mahkamah rayuan.
Agak signifikan dalam kes perbicaraan Ramli, Musa diisytihar oleh Hakim Mahkamah Sesyen di Sabah sebagai saksi yang tidak boleh dipercayai untuk mendengar kes dakwaan Ramli menyalah guna kuasa.
Manakala BPR juga diberi amaran oleh Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur yang membebaskan Ramli, kerana bergantong kepada keterangan daripada salah seorang ahli kumpulan haram untuk mendakwa Ramli kerana kegagalan mengiystiharkan hartanya.
Mengenai enam pegawai Ramli yang didakwa dan kemudiannya dibebaskan, kesemua mereka diserah kembali tugas masing-masing dan dinaikkan pangkat.
Ramli secara terbuka mengucapkan terima kasih kepada Ketua Polis Negara Tan Sri Ismail Omar kerana akur bahawa mereka sebenarnya telah menjadi mangsa.
Perbicaraan atas tuduhan-tuduhan yang dangkal ini, termasuk percubaan mengaitkan bukti dengan afidavit-afidavit adalah bukti yang direkayasa.
Ini menunjukkan bahawa dakwaan Ramli terhadap Gani, Musa dan BPR ada asasnya di mana mereka bersubahat untuk membawa saksi, memalsukan bukti, menjalankan siasatan polis dan menghalang keadilan dari terlaksana.
Peristiwa “mata lebam” Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim yang berlaku pada tahun tahun 1998 merupakan satu lagi kes yang memerlukan kepada penubuhan Tribunal bagi menyiasat Gani dan Musa.
Bekas Pengarah Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah Kuala Lumpur, Mat Zain Ibrahim mendakwa kedua-dua Gani dan Musa terlibat memalsukan bahan bukti.
Beliau turut memberi amaran kepada Najib bahawa adalah menjadi satu kesalahan jenayah jika Najib tidak mengendahkan perbuatan keji pemalsuan bukti-bukti berhubung insiden “mata lebam” Anwar.
Kini bola berada di kaki Najib.
Aiyah! Why so bodoh one ah?
Let’s
be clear about one thing. No politician fights for the rakyat, not when
they receive big fat salaries, allowances, fees, pensions, etc. and
have huge expense accounts and budgets to spend. Show me one politician
who has worked free of charge the last 40, 30, 20, etc., years and I
will show you a politician who fights for the rakyat. Currently, in
Malaysia, there are none. There are no Malaysian Gandhis.NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
‘Opposition out to smear Government’
(The Star) - The Opposition has created endless issues to confuse the people, said MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek.
Citing the Lynas rare earth processing plant as an example, he said the Opposition had succeeded in poisoning the minds of the people.
“The people should realise that the Opposition creates problems to tarnish the image of the Government.
“As such, it is our duty to solve these problems and prove that such allegations are not true,” he said after attending a gathering with state party leaders here yesterday.
Dr Chua said MCA's stand was very clear on the issue of Lynas, stressing that if the plant affected the environment and health of the Kuantan citizens, the party was against it.
He said it was the responsibility of the company to ship the waste out of the country.
“If they cannot fulfil the two stipulated conditions, MCA is against its operations here.
“We will continue to monitor the situation closely,” he said, adding that the issue had been discussed at length by professional experts.
In a separate function, Dr Chua said the Barisan Nasional election machinery had to focus on using cyberspace as a publicity tool.
He said the coalition had to accept that it could not rely solely on traditional media as the cyber arena had been dominated by the Opposition.
“We may be too late, but we can still optimise social media to increase our publicity for Barisan Nasional,” he said at the launch of the Paya Besar Barisan election machinery in Gambang here yesterday.
*******************************
Aiyah!
Why is the MCA President, Chua Soi Lek, so bodoh one ah? The Opposition
has created endless issues to confuse the people, said Chua Soi Lek.
But of course! That is the job of the Opposition. Why would the
Opposition want to raise issues in support of the government? Their job
is to raise issues against the government. What a stupid statement. No
wonder he got caught with his pants down, literally. And to make him even more bodoh, he held a press conference to confess that it was he in that sex video. No one asked him whether it was or was not he. Before anyone could ask, he quickly called a press conference to confess. Bodoh or not? At least VK Lingam was cleverer. He said that the man in the video looks like him, sounds like him, but is not he. And Anwar Ibrahim replied that the man in the sex video is too fat while he is thinner so it must be a double. But Chua Soi Lek goes and confesses it is he before anyone even asks him. No wonder he is making bodoh statements like the one reported by The Star.
And the Umno leaders are saying that the Opposition is trying to grab power, the Opposition is trying to kick out Barisan Nasional, the Opposition is trying to take over Putrajaya, and whatnot. Is this not what the Opposition is supposed to do, to take over the government? Why are these Umno people so bodoh one? Why state the obvious? Of course that is what the Opposition is trying to do. That is the job of Opposition parties all over the world.
Aiyah! Why so bodoh one ah? Can we hear more intelligent statements from these Barisan Nasional people? If they want to impress us then they had better stop making stupid statements.
And the Opposition is no better. They are now saying that the next general election is going to be a class war.
Aiyah! Why so bodoh one ah? That is what I have been saying for some time. When I say that they whack me and call me all sorts of names. I already said for some time that the next battle is going to be a class war. I said it is going to be a battle between the haves and the haves-not. When I said that you say all sorts of things about me. Now the Opposition is saying the same thing.
The Opposition is saying that they are fighting for the downtrodden, the poor people, the oppressed, the masses, the rakyat, the fishermen and farmers, and whatnot. Betul ke? Is this true?
How come over the last four years since 2008 none of the Opposition wakil rakyat refused to take their salary? How come they all took their salary? Would any of the Opposition wakil rakyat, Chief Ministers/Menteris Besar, EXCO members, Council Members, Committee Members, Board Members, Chairmen, etc., be prepared to work for no salary? Would they be prepared to surrender all their future salary and hand back all the salary they have taken over the last four years since March 2008? What about those salaries, allowances, etc., that they had earned over the last 30 or 40 years since the 1960s or 1970s? Would they be prepared to hand back all those millions they have earned?
If the Opposition wakil rakyat are working for the rakyat, the downtrodden, the poor, the oppressed, the fisherman and farmers, etc., and not for the own benefit, then they should work free of charge. They should take nothing. They should pool all their salaries and allowances into a special poverty fund and distribute these millions to the needy.
Yes, no one is prepared to work for no money. Many even receive huge pensions on top of their huge salaries, allowances and expense accounts.
Let’s put it another way. How much have Nik Aziz Nik Mat, Anwar Ibrahim, Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, Lim Kit Siang, Karpal Singh, Hadi Awang, Mustapha Ali, and the hundreds of other Opposition leaders earned in total from the day they became wakil rakyat (from the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, 1990s, etc.) until today? How many millions are we talking about here? Are all these hundreds of wakil rakyat prepared to be transparent and declare their total earnings since the day they became politicians and wakil rakyat?
Let’s be honest. Let’s be open. Let’s be transparent. Declare your total earnings since Day One. For example, Nik Aziz Nik Mat became a wakil rakyat in 1967, Lim Kit Siang in 1969, Karpal Singh in 1974, Hadi Awang in 1978, Anwar Ibrahim in 1982, and so on. Anwar was also a Minister and Deputy Prime Minister so he gets a pension for those as well. As I said, in total, all these come to millions of Ringgit for the hundreds of wakil rakyat if we include their salaries, allowances, fees, expense accounts, budgets, pensions and much more.
Anyone who claims he or she is working only for the rakyat would refuse to take the rakyat’s money. They would either forgo their salaries, allowances, fees, expense accounts, budgets, pensions, etc., or surrender all this money to a special fund set up to help the poor, downtrodden and oppressed rakyat.
Yes, no one was prepared to work for no money. No one was prepared to forgo what he or she was ‘entitled’ to receive. No one wanted to surrender what he or she had earned. No one wanted to hand back every cent he or she had earned since the day he or she became a wakil rakyat 40, 30, 20 or whatever number of years ago. And we are talking about a huge amount of money here. Hell, just to renovate their offices alone over the last couple of years since 2008 came to millions of Ringgit.
Work for the rakyat means work for the rakyat. Work for money means work for money. How can work for money translate to work for the rakyat? Aiyah! Why so bodoh one ah? At least I worked as the Director of the Free Anwar Campaign from 2000 to 2004 and was only paid RM3,000. Ask Dr Wan Azizah and Rosli Ibrahim who paid me RM1,000 and RM2,000 respectively. I did not work for money. In fact, I had to support myself by selling cookies and curry puffs, which my wife baked.
Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi can be said to have worked for the rakyat. He did not receive any salary. And when they managed to kick out the British and got independence for India, he did not fight for power. He did not demand that he be made the Prime Minister or President of India. He was not power crazy. He was not in this for power like the politicians are. Gandhi really fought for the rakyat and not for money or power like the politicians. So please don’t pretend that you are also just like Gandhi. Gandhi was the true fighter for the rakyat. He did not benefit financially for his sacrifices.
Let’s be clear about one thing. No politician fights for the rakyat, not when they receive big fat salaries, allowances, fees, pensions, etc. and have huge expense accounts and budgets to spend. Show me one politician who has worked free of charge the last 40, 30, 20, etc., years and I will show you a politician who fights for the rakyat. Currently, in Malaysia, there are none. There are no Malaysian Gandhis.
I know what most of you are now going to comment. You are going to scream ABU and are going to say but we must still vote Pakatan Rakyat because even though Pakatan Rakyat is not the best they are still better than Barisan Nasional. Barisan Nasional is worse. So we are better off with Pakatan Rakyat. Yes, that is what most of you are going to comment. You assume that when I write articles such as the above, this means I am asking you to vote for Barisan Nasional.
That is how simple-minded Malaysians normally think. And they think like this because they do not have analytical powers and the skills of reasoning. That is why they come to these kinds of conclusions.
Yes, when I say we want a better Opposition, we want a clean Opposition, we want an honest and sincere Opposition, we are not prepared to accept an Opposition that is a clone of Umno or Barisan Nasional, then that means I am asking you to vote for Umno or Barisan Nasional.
Using that same logic, if you were to say that the Chinese do not want to receive an ang pau in a white envelope for Chinese New Year, then that means you want it to be in a black envelope. I mean; you do see the world is just black and white, right? So, if not white envelopes, then you must mean black envelopes. Is this not so?
Also, going by this same logic, if you were to fight for mother-tongue education -- say Chinese or Tamil languages -- then this must mean you are anti-Malay language. That, therefore, also means you are anti-Malay, correct? And that also means you are a racist, right?
If you fight for more places in public colleges and universities for Chinese, Indians, ‘others’, etc., then this means you resent the Malays getting an education. You are trying to deny the Malays a proper education, right? You want only Chinese, Indians, ‘others’, etc., to receive an education. You want the Malays to remain backward and uneducated, correct?
DAP, MCA, Gerakan, Suqui, Dong Zong, Dong Jiao Zong, the Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall, and all those other Chinese-based groups that are fighting for the Chinese are Chinese racists, Chinese chauvinists, Chinese supremacists, anti-Malay, etc., correct? I mean; this is the logic we are applying. If you fight for one thing then you are anti-the other. If you are not happy with the state of Chinese education then you are anti-Malay just like if you are not happy with the state of the Opposition then you are anti-Pakatan Rakyat, and hence pro-Barisan Nasional.
Aiyah! Why so bodoh one ah?
“Abdul Kadir Played Money Politics Too”
(Malaysian Digest) - Blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin has accused Tan Sri Abdul Kadir Sheikh Fadzir of being a hypocrite, claiming that the former Umno leader had also “played ‘money politics’ when he was in Umno”.
“The truth is, Kadir himself is guilty
of the same thing that he accuses Umno of. He too played ‘money
politics’ when he was in Umno ‘Lama’,” Raja Petra said in his latest
blogpost published on Malaysia Today yesterday.
“I even know who gave him (Abdul Kadir) the money. It was a Chinese business tycoon. I was there in the next room when he came to the office of that Chinese business tycoon back in the 1980s to collect the money. I even shook his hands and said hello,” said Raja Petra.
The blogger also dared Abdul Kadir to challenge him to reveal who the business tycoon who allegedly gave him (Abdul Kadir) the money.
“Does he (Abdul Kadir) want me to name the place and the Chinese business tycoon who gave him the money? I can if he wants me to. I can even name the Chinese lady who had to ‘look after him’ in his visit to the office of the Chinese business tycoon.”
Abdul Kadir resigned from Umno on March 19 after 56 years in the ruling party.
He created stir in January when he claimed that Umno had handed out RM200 to RM1,000 to voters in previous elections in exchange for votes.
The former minister had said that he has not ruled out joining Pakatan Rakyat.
It is reported that Abdul Kadir, who was Umno supreme council member, said many top leaders in PKR, PAS and the DAP, who were his “close friends”, had asked him to join the opposition pact but said he had yet to make a decision on the matter.
Raja Petra, however, said, “It is said he wanted to join the opposition, in particular PKR, but since no one invited him he had no choice but to announce that he did not want to join PKR but will continue his ‘struggle’ through an NGO.”
“Today, Kadir is telling us that Umno is corrupt. Umno is evil. Umno bribes the voters. Umno is involved in ‘money politics’. But Umno has always been doing this even when it was known as Umno ‘Lama’.
“It (Umno) also did this when it was called Umno ‘Baru’. And Kadir was a member and leader/Minister of both these Umnos. So why talk about it now? When Kadir left Semangat 46 to join (or rejoin) Unmo, he already knew very well that Umno plays ‘money politics’. He did not discover this just today,” said Raja Petra.
“I even know who gave him (Abdul Kadir) the money. It was a Chinese business tycoon. I was there in the next room when he came to the office of that Chinese business tycoon back in the 1980s to collect the money. I even shook his hands and said hello,” said Raja Petra.
The blogger also dared Abdul Kadir to challenge him to reveal who the business tycoon who allegedly gave him (Abdul Kadir) the money.
“Does he (Abdul Kadir) want me to name the place and the Chinese business tycoon who gave him the money? I can if he wants me to. I can even name the Chinese lady who had to ‘look after him’ in his visit to the office of the Chinese business tycoon.”
Abdul Kadir resigned from Umno on March 19 after 56 years in the ruling party.
He created stir in January when he claimed that Umno had handed out RM200 to RM1,000 to voters in previous elections in exchange for votes.
The former minister had said that he has not ruled out joining Pakatan Rakyat.
It is reported that Abdul Kadir, who was Umno supreme council member, said many top leaders in PKR, PAS and the DAP, who were his “close friends”, had asked him to join the opposition pact but said he had yet to make a decision on the matter.
Raja Petra, however, said, “It is said he wanted to join the opposition, in particular PKR, but since no one invited him he had no choice but to announce that he did not want to join PKR but will continue his ‘struggle’ through an NGO.”
“Today, Kadir is telling us that Umno is corrupt. Umno is evil. Umno bribes the voters. Umno is involved in ‘money politics’. But Umno has always been doing this even when it was known as Umno ‘Lama’.
“It (Umno) also did this when it was called Umno ‘Baru’. And Kadir was a member and leader/Minister of both these Umnos. So why talk about it now? When Kadir left Semangat 46 to join (or rejoin) Unmo, he already knew very well that Umno plays ‘money politics’. He did not discover this just today,” said Raja Petra.
CURRENCY WARS
2. He writes that he participated in War Games at the Applied Physics Laboratory (APL) located near Washington, D.C.
3. Set up in 1942, after the Pearl Harbour attack, APL brought applied science to improving weaponry.
4. In 2009 the war game was about a global financial war using currencies and capital markets instead of ships and planes. This financial war games was the Pentagon’s first effort to see how an actual financial war might evolve and to see what lessons might be learnt.
5. James Rickards presented a paper on “the new science of market intelligence, which involves analysing capital markets to find actionable intelligence on the intentions of market participants”.
6. The stated purpose was “to examine the impact of global financial activities on national security issues”.
7. Rickards also gave a presentation on futures and derivatives to explain how these leveraged instruments could be used to manipulate underlying physical markets, including those in strategic commodities such as oil, uranium, copper and gold.
8. He writes, “There is a far more insidious scenario in which currencies are used as weapons, not in a metaphorical sense but in a real sense, to cause economic harm to rivals. The mere threat of harm can be enough to force concessions by rivals in the geopolitical battle space”. (Globalisation and State Capital – page 145)
9. When the Ringgit depreciated in value, the financial and economic experts including those in Malaysia, blames it on bad financial management and contagion. When I suggested that it was due to deliberate action on the part of currency traders to devalue the Ringgit to undermine the Malaysian economy, this was dismissed.
10. Had we failed to handle the crisis, had the economy collapsed, the Government would have to resign. The action taken by the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance at that time to apply the IMF solution without the IMF would have hastened the collapse. But our unorthodox solution prevented the collapse from taking place and we recovered. Otherwise there could have been a regime change.
11. Whatever, the fact is that the U.S. is aware that a currency war can achieve political objectives just as well as a military war. The idea that the attack against our Ringgit was deliberate is not too farfetched. The Western Press and Government leaders in certain countries had made it clear that they desired to bring down the Government of that time for very many reasons.
12. Towards this end they have used NGOs and funds as they are doing in Egypt now.
“Impeach” Atau Pecat? Najib Cuma Takutkan Perdebatan Rasional Dengan Anwar
Saya merujuk kepada kenyataan oleh peguam Umno Shafee Abdullah dan Senator BN S Nallakaruppan pada 28 Mac bahawa ketua pembangkang Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim perlu dicabar oleh Parlimen kerana ‘salah laku’.
Mereka bergantung dan merungut tentang tuduhan lama yang sama salah laku seksual yang direka oleh kerajaan BN terhadap Anwar Ibrahim, dengan kerjasama polis dan Peguam Negara.
Rakyat tidak pernah percaya pembohongan yang memalukan ini, dan telah memberikan sokongan, kepercayaan dan simpati mereka terhadap Anwar Ibrahim dan gabungan parti pembangkang Pakatan Rakyat yang diketuai beliau.
Kejahilan terlampau biasa bagi Umno dan BN
Kenyataan Shafee dan Nalla juga menunjukkan kejahilan terlampau mengenai prosedur pemecatan dan parlimen di Malaysia dan Komanwel. Tiada peruntukan atau pendahuluan bagi pemecatan di Dewan Rakyat.
Di England, prosedur pemecatan kali terakhir digunakan lebih 200 tahun lalu dalam kes Lord Melville
dan kini ia lapuk. Rasional penyelesaian pemecatan tersebut adalah untuk memegang Menteri dan Eksekutif yang bertanggungjawab dalam pentadbiran negara.
Untuk mencadangkan bahawa ia akan digunakan terhadap Ketua Pembangkang menunjukkan salah faham yang besar tentang proses pemecatan. Dengan evolusi usul tidak percaya, jawatankuasa pilihan dan diteliti dengan mendalam oleh parlimen dan disoal siasat,mekanisme pemecatan lama telah ketinggalan zaman.
Jatuh kembali ke dalam politik kotor
Contoh Shafee ialah pemecatan Bill Clinton yang menunjukkan dia tidak memahami mekanisme pemecatan di Amerika, di mana pemecatan digunakan sebagai satu kaedah untuk mengeluarkan ahli-ahli kerajaan Persekutuan seperti Presiden.
Ia adalah tidak munasabah dan pelik bagi Shafee dan Nalla untuk mengancam Ketua Pembangkang dengan proses pemecatan yang purba dan telah digantikan .
Sekali lagi, kita dapat melihat ketidakupayaan lengkap Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak dan BN untuk melibatkan diri dalam perbahasan dan perbincangan rasional bersama pembangkang.
Sebaliknya, Najib dan Umno terus bergantung kepada serangan peribadi yang cetek dan tidak berasas oleh orang-orang seperti Nallakaruppan dan sekutu beliau, yang jelas dilaporkan dalam media elektronik dan cetak yang dimiliki Umno.
N SURENDRAN
NAIB PRESIDEN
PARTI KEADILAN RAKYAT
Mereka bergantung dan merungut tentang tuduhan lama yang sama salah laku seksual yang direka oleh kerajaan BN terhadap Anwar Ibrahim, dengan kerjasama polis dan Peguam Negara.
Rakyat tidak pernah percaya pembohongan yang memalukan ini, dan telah memberikan sokongan, kepercayaan dan simpati mereka terhadap Anwar Ibrahim dan gabungan parti pembangkang Pakatan Rakyat yang diketuai beliau.
Kejahilan terlampau biasa bagi Umno dan BN
Kenyataan Shafee dan Nalla juga menunjukkan kejahilan terlampau mengenai prosedur pemecatan dan parlimen di Malaysia dan Komanwel. Tiada peruntukan atau pendahuluan bagi pemecatan di Dewan Rakyat.
Di England, prosedur pemecatan kali terakhir digunakan lebih 200 tahun lalu dalam kes Lord Melville
dan kini ia lapuk. Rasional penyelesaian pemecatan tersebut adalah untuk memegang Menteri dan Eksekutif yang bertanggungjawab dalam pentadbiran negara.
Untuk mencadangkan bahawa ia akan digunakan terhadap Ketua Pembangkang menunjukkan salah faham yang besar tentang proses pemecatan. Dengan evolusi usul tidak percaya, jawatankuasa pilihan dan diteliti dengan mendalam oleh parlimen dan disoal siasat,mekanisme pemecatan lama telah ketinggalan zaman.
Jatuh kembali ke dalam politik kotor
Contoh Shafee ialah pemecatan Bill Clinton yang menunjukkan dia tidak memahami mekanisme pemecatan di Amerika, di mana pemecatan digunakan sebagai satu kaedah untuk mengeluarkan ahli-ahli kerajaan Persekutuan seperti Presiden.
Ia adalah tidak munasabah dan pelik bagi Shafee dan Nalla untuk mengancam Ketua Pembangkang dengan proses pemecatan yang purba dan telah digantikan .
Sekali lagi, kita dapat melihat ketidakupayaan lengkap Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak dan BN untuk melibatkan diri dalam perbahasan dan perbincangan rasional bersama pembangkang.
Sebaliknya, Najib dan Umno terus bergantung kepada serangan peribadi yang cetek dan tidak berasas oleh orang-orang seperti Nallakaruppan dan sekutu beliau, yang jelas dilaporkan dalam media elektronik dan cetak yang dimiliki Umno.
N SURENDRAN
NAIB PRESIDEN
PARTI KEADILAN RAKYAT
1,000 human trafficking victims rescued since 2008
The Star
PUTRAJAYA: Enforcement agencies have rescued nearly 1,000 victims of human trafficking in raids since 2008.
The
Council against Human Trafficking and Smuggling of Migrants said 977
victims – 260 men, 595 women and 122 children – were granted protection
and given shelter at safe houses over the period.
They were rounded up in 439 cases, of which 412 led to charges in court and 78 convictions.
Authorities also managed to rope in 655 migrants being smuggled into the country in 31 cases since Nov 15, 2010.
The
council also announced its decision to place police and Immigration
Department officers temporarily at the Workforce Department for
guidance, training and to share knowledge to push for more effective
enforcement of the Anti-Human Trafficking and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants
Act.
Difficult To Predict Election Results, Says Mahathir
PUTRAJAYA, March 29 (Bernama) -- Former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir
Mohamad said it is difficult to predict the results of the coming
general election due to the rather confusing prevailing situation.
He said various assumptions had been made about support for Barisan Nasional (BN), with some people saying it was increasing and others saying otherwise.
"What is certain, it won't be easy for BN to get two-thirds majority this time. The opposition now is not like that of the past, and the current situation is rather confusing."
He said this when asked to comment on former finance minister Tun Daim Zainuddin's statement that BN would easily win in only three states - Johor, Melaka and Pahang.
He said various assumptions had been made about support for Barisan Nasional (BN), with some people saying it was increasing and others saying otherwise.
"What is certain, it won't be easy for BN to get two-thirds majority this time. The opposition now is not like that of the past, and the current situation is rather confusing."
He said this when asked to comment on former finance minister Tun Daim Zainuddin's statement that BN would easily win in only three states - Johor, Melaka and Pahang.
31 March voter registration deadline
If the general election falls in June, you must register as a voter by 31 March to be eligible to vote.
Do check your voter registration status on the Election Commission’s website.
Remember, every single vote counts.
Do check your voter registration status on the Election Commission’s website.
Remember, every single vote counts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)