Najib should give Liow Tiong Lai an ultimatum to resolve the Sabah health crisis or be sacked

By Lim Kit Siang,

I am shocked and outraged by a letter I have received from a serving medical officer of Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Kota Kinabalu about the deplorable conditions of the hospital complexes in Sabah particularly Kota Kinabalu which had been likened to Vietnam refugee camp.

Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai had been Health Minister for more than two years and despite repeated complaints, he had turned a complete deaf ear and blind eye to the prolonged healthcare crisis and the deplorable hospital conditions in Sabah particularly in Kota Kinabalu.

The serving doctor in QEH wrote of the horrors suffered by the sick in Kota Kinabalu where they are subjected to “a wicked game of musical chairs” shunted around various hospital centres according to their changing healthcare needs as “there is not a single centre that can address a patient as a whole”.

The medical maze, which has brought total chaos to healthcare services in Sabah, includes the state’s only referral centre, Queen Elizabeth Hosptal and nearby centres like Hospital Bukit Padang the mental institution, Hospital Likas, the makeshift hospital in Lingzhi Museum in Kepayan and Umno’s favourite Sabah Medical Centre (SMC).

This is the tale of horror as narrated by this QE doctor:

“Mr. Wong, an elderly man presented at Hospital Likas because of severe breathlessness and was found to have severe pneumonia on chest x-ray.

“He was then admitted to the High Dependency Unit of Queen Elizabeth Hospital (QEH) 30 minutes away for treatment.

“He improved after six days and was then transferred to the normal ward for further recuperation.

“A bed was urgently needed one day later and the frail Mr. Wong was then shipped off to Hospital Bukit Padang for ‘rehabilitation’.

“Alas, he did not improve but instead deteriorated.

“As Hospital Bukit Padang was devoid of the necessary equipment and setup for managing emergencies and ill patients, Mr. Wong was then resent back to QEH for further management.

“More tests were required and old Wong was then sent to Sabah Medical Center for a CT scan.

“I’m not sure what happened to Mr. Wong thereafter.”

The QEH doctor who made these revelations of the deplorable health crisis in Sabah in the form of an Open Letter to Liow Tiong Lai, wrote:

The formation of the Queen- SMC-Likas-Lingzhi-BukitPadang medical maze has brought total chaos to healthcare services in Sabah.

The docile and unassuming Sabahan patients are constantly playing a wicked game of musical chairs, being transported around from one hospital to another according to their changing healthcare needs.

There is not one single center that can address a patient as a whole.

A lady in labor will be told that she can’t do so in QEH, while a fitting patient are whisked away from Likas to QEH.

A child with a broken limb may go to SMC but the surgery can only be done in Likas.

Elderly Mr. Wong is merely one of many such victims.

Continuity of care is virtually impossible when patients are moved about every few days.

Valuable investigations and data are lost in the process of multiple transfers resulting in costly, repeated tests.

Patients have even died due to the lack of emergency equipment and the deficient setup at the peripheral wards.

You will not hear all these because your little pharaohs in the state health department have done a great job concealing negligence, mismanagement and sheer stupidity.

Medical personnel are suffering in silence too.

Doctors from house officers to specialists are rushing around the five medical centers daily, wasting precious time, fuel and energy in the process of doing so.

Medical officers have been doing eight to fifteen on-calls every month as a result of the increased locations housing the sick.

That is fifteen days away from home and family every month, mind you.

Just in case you forgot we too have young, growing kids to care for.

Absent parents do not make for good family dynamics, won’t you agree?

We are risking our lives each working day wondering if the abandoned tower block will one day collapse upon us and send us to our Maker.

Our comrades serving in Sabah Medical Center are not having it any better.

In spite of the Barisan Nasional’s grandiose publicity buzz over the RM 245 million purchase of Sabah Medical Center, the medical personnel and patients have remained mere squatters in the premises.

The medical staffs are receiving summonses so very too often as a result of limited parking space.

Those of us in surgical disciplines are working till 9 pm on Mondays to Fridays so as to optimize the operating time of our three miserable rented surgical theatres.

In the SMC wards, 4-5 patients are cramped into rooms meant for two as the hospital was built to house a capacity of 150 beds only.

On QEH, the only tertiary referral centre in Sabah, the QEH doctor has this to say:

Increasingly, the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, the only tertiary referral center in Sabah is living up her grand title of being a sick house.

Partially shut down since September 2008, the ailing sick house of Sabah has turned critical recently, with worsening cracks and falling tiles and a real threat of frank collapse.

The older blocks nearby were declared unsafe and subsequently evacuated and shut down.

Ill and frail patients were shipped off in a frenzy like unwanted cargo to nearby centers like Hospital Bukit Padang the mental institution, Hospital Likas, and the makeshift hospital of Lingzhi Museum in Kepayan and of course, UMNO’s favourite Sabah Medical Center (SMC).

The QEH doctor said he and his colleagues invite Liow “to come and see the ground situation for yourself without a grand entourage of administrative boot-lickers”.

He continued:

“Patients who require hospital admission have to be turned away due to the insufficiency of places.

“The inpatients meanwhile are packed like sardines in the current wards, with hardly a metre of space between beds.

“The situation is comparable to a Vietnamese refugee camp.

“Hospital-acquired infections are the norm rather the exception.

“When a patient with tuberculosis coughs his lungs out, everyone in the ward will be inhaling the highly infectious Mycobacterium.

“After 50 years of independence, our ill patients who require close observation are still sharing monitors and other equipment between themselves.

“Is this the standard of care that Barisan Nasional is according to Najib’s self-proclaimed fixed deposit?

“Whatever happened to all the oil money that Sabah has generated for Tanah Melayu over the last 50 years?

“So you see, Mr Health Minister, we don’t need more jobless house officers, more empty promises and more tasty slogans like 1Malaysia.

“We need 1Hospital and 1HealthMinister who is attuned to the sufferings of the rakyat under his care.”

This is an utter shame for the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s 1Malaysia and his pledge of “People First, Performance Now: I will send the QEH doctor’s indictment of the healthcare system and the Health Minister ‘s failure and negligence to the Prime Minister, who should table it on Friday’s cabinet meeting as an example of failed Minister in his Cabinet.

Either Najib give Liow an ultimatum to immediately resolve the deplorable healthcare crisis in Sabah or Najib should make an example of Liow by sacking him and appoint a new Health Minister for the country.

PM To Announce Administrative Reforms To Support New Economic Model

From Mikhail Raj Abdullah ', TEXTFONT, 'Verdana, Arial, Helvetica', TEXTSIZE, '1', WIDTH, 75)" )="" onmouseout="nd()">

From Mikhail Raj Abdullah ', TEXTFONT, 'Verdana, Arial, Helvetica', TEXTSIZE, '1', WIDTH, 75)" onmouseout="nd()"> HONG KONG, March 24 (Bernama) -- Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak will announce administrative reforms when he introduces the New Economic Model (NEM), next week, to ensure its success and effectiveness on the Malaysian economy and the people.

"The emphasis will be on the execution of the NEM in order to achieve the government's objective of transforming Malaysia into a high-income economy and to spur deveopment," he told Malaysian reporters here on Wednesday before returning to Kuala Lumpur after attending the Credit Suisse Asian Investment Conference.

Najib, who is also Finance Minister, said: "Although the new economic model is good but if the implementation is not planned well, with the right people in place, then we will not be able to achieve the desired target."

When asked if the administrative reforms would involve both the International Trade and Industry and Finance ministeries, he said: "Let's wait and see next week".

On his visit to Hong Kong and his meeting with foreign fund managers at the Credit Suisse Asian Investment Conference, Najib said it had attained the intended objective of "explaining the direction of the new government policy in bringing about a huge transformtion of the Malaysian economy".

Attorney General, The Superman of Malaysia?

Loyar Burok
By Lai Chee Hoe

This post is reproduced from here.

Considering the implications of the Attorney General’s wide discretionary powers and why even the humblest citizenry ought to be more vigilant towards any abuse of those powers.

Recently, a few of my clients who needed criminal law advice asked me a similar question.

Question: “If there is no clear evidence, why are the police still pressing charges?”

This question is conceptually incorrect as you may already know that the police has no authority to determine whether to press charges or otherwise. Telling them the police has no power to do so, does not really clear their doubts and I took the opportunity to explain to my clients that only the Attorney General (AG) can decide who, when and where to prosecute.

My client responded, “In that case, isn’t he the superman of Malaysia?”

Answer: “Well, that is quite subjective but if someone were to look into the context of the Federal Constitution, the answer is yes.”

So who is this AG and why is his office so powerful?

The AG is an individual appointed by the government of the day to carry out legal affairs of the government. His main responsibilities are:
(a) Chief legal adviser to the Government;
(b) Guardian of the rule of law; and
(c) Superintendence of the prosecuting departments.

Article 145 of the Federal Constitution provides amongst others:

- It shall be the duty of the Attorney General to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Cabinet or any Minister upon such legal matters, and to perform such other duties of a legal character, as may from time to time be referred or assigned to him by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Cabinet, and to discharge the functions conferred on him by or under this Constitution or any other written law.

- The Attorney General shall have power, exercisable at his discretion, to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for an offence, other than proceedings before a Syariah court, a native court or a court-martial.

There is an existing argument that the AG should be made accountable to Parliament and his office be granted access to the members of parliament from the opposition which I do not wish to dwell into at this moment.

What I wish to elaborate is the extensive powers of the AG affecting the lay man on the street.

To have a better understanding of Article 145(3) of the Federal Constitution, I have dissected this section into 3 parts: institute, conduct and discontinue.

Power to institute

The word “institute” in this context has been judicially examined in PP v Lim Shui Wang & Ors [1979] 1 MLJ 65 where Suffian Lord President observed that “the word institute” means “to set on foot, initiate, start,” and in Public Prosecutor v Datuk Harun Bin Haji Idris [1976] MLJ 116, the judge refers it to the “commencement of proceedings and prosecutions.”

For a lay person like you and me, it simply means that the AG has a discretionary power to decide whether to charge a person or otherwise. Conversely, the police do not have the power to determine whether to charge but were only limited to investigating duties.

In practice, it is then translated to this – after a complainant made a police report, his/her matter will be referred to an investigating officer (IO). An investigating paper (IP) will be opened and upon completing investigation, the IP will then be sent to the office of the AG. The Deputy Public Prosecutor who were delegated certain powers of the AG, upon examining the IP will decide whether to charge or otherwise.

To illustrate the discretionary power to institute proceedings, it is interesting to contrast the 2 high profile cases of Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim and Datuk Seri Dr. Chua Soi Lek. Notwithstanding that both of them have police report made against them for committing carnal intercourse against the order of nature, one is facing a charge in the High Court while the other is claiming the throne of MCA.

Both are investigated under a similar section under the Penal Code which states:

Any person who has sexual connection with another person by the introduction of the penis into the anus or mouth of the other person is said to commit carnal intercourse against the order of nature.

But both of them obviously do not share similar fate.

Power to conduct

Power to conduct may not be as controversial as the former but remains important as it gives the AG’s office the exclusive right to prosecute and conduct proceedings. The consequence of this ruling is to deprive the prosecuting officers of other government agencies to conduct prosecutions unless authorised in writing by the AG’s office.

Power to discontinue

The most obvious manifestation of this aspect of the AG’s powers would be the outright withdrawal of charges in cases pending before the courts. If you could recall, the most recent one was after the High Court acquitted a political analyst of abetting the murder of a Mongolian woman, prosecutors from the AG’s office decided not to appeal against the verdict. This has attracted much criticisms from the society but as far as the law is concerned, the AG’s office has not contravene any of the laws in Malaysia on the contrary has complete powers to not appeal against the decision of the High Court Judge.

Unease over the AG Chambers is a widely share sentiment among many Malaysians. The Rakyat yearns to see more reforms are carried out to curtail its wide discretionary powers. The powers although granted by the FC should not be exercised arbitrarily. Many have suggested that the AG should be made accountable to Parliament and to also consider in establishing a position similar to that in other Commonwealth countries where the power to review evidence and conduct the prosecution of offences is held by a director of public prosecution.

No matter what the reforms are, I believe that it is the tax-payers’ funds that ultimately pay for all criminal prosecutions and hence we should take personal interest in getting to know more about the AG’s powers and be vigilant towards the abuse, like how most of us are drawn in to the powers of superman, a man of steel who would only use his super powers to save the world, and nothing else.

'Save Bukit Gasing' residents show the way

Bukit Gasing residents campaigning against a property development project on a steep hill-slope are showing other Malaysians how to push for greater accountability from local government.

Solidarity in the rain – File photo courtesy of Save Bukit Gasing blog

Their struggle shows that local residents need not remain helpless and disempowered when confronted with unsustainable development or environmentally risky projects by private developers. Their campaign to save the area, which began in 2005, is finally seeing some light: obstacles have been cleared for the residents to now mount a full-scale legal challenge in court.

This report from The Star:

PUTRAJAYA: Some 108 residents of Bukit Gasing can now proceed to challenge a development order for a hillslope project in the area at the High Court.

The Federal Court has refused to grant leave to the Kuala Lumpur City Hall and the project’s developer Gasing Meridian Sdn Bhd (GMSB) to appeal against the Court of Appeal’s decision against them.

On Nov 20, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal by the two parties against an earlier High Court decision which granted leave to the residents to seek a judicial review to quash the mayor’s development order.

Yesterday, Chief Justice Tun Zaki Tun Azmi, who sat together with Federal Court judges Justices James Foong and Md Raus Sharif, ruled that the full merits of the case should be heard first at the High Court.

The Bench also ordered KL City Hall and GMSB to pay RM20,000 in costs to each of the residents.

R. Sivarasa, who acted for the residents, said issues to be heard would be whether residents in Kuala Lumpur had the right to be heard when a development project took place near their houses.

“This case is of public importance and raises important questions of planning policies of City Hall,” he said when contacted yesterday.

Sivarasa said the residents contended that they had the right to be heard under the Town and Country Planning Act 1976 which was now in force in Kuala Lumpur.

“The residents claimed that the City Hall’s development is violating the existing Federal guidelines on hillslope development which disallow housing development on slopes of more than 25 degrees,” he added.

Then Kuala Lumpur mayor Ruslin Hassan had issued an order dated Oct 2, 2007 to GMSB allowing the developer to carry out earthworks and subdivisions in the area.

In their application for judicial review filed on January 2008, the residents named City Hall and GMSB as defendants.

The residents claimed that the mayor had failed to take into account that they had a right under common law to be given due notice, and be given a chance to voice their opinions in the decision-making process of planning.

In a statement last year, GMSB reiterated that all approvals, including the development order, hoarding permit and earthworks permit, had been obtained and that the project had been reviewed by the sensitivity committee of the Federal Territories Ministry, which had representatives of 13 agencies.

KJ: GST won't burden consumers

Thiagu entah hilang kemana

Seorang pemuda bernama Thiagu a/l Krishnan hilang sejak 08 Mac 2010 di Kuala Lumpur.

Beliau telah pergi ke Kuala Lumput untuk mengambil sijil kelulusan beliau. Semenjak hari tersebut, tidak ada sebarang khabar mengenainya.

Keluarga Thiagu risau akan keselamatannya. Menurut ibu Thiagu, Puan Sarasa, pihak polis tidak begitu serius untuk menjejak anaknya yang hilang walaupun laporan polis sudah dilakukan.

Video oleh GS Shan, Wartawan Masyarakat

1MALAYSIA AND 1ISRAEL

1Malaysia, One Israel: Anwar to explain next Tuesday

DAP not satisfied with Hisham's answer

Hisham denies rift with top cop

Ku Li: NEM is test for Najib

KJ: No secret agenda with Perkasa

'No tension between IGP and me'

By Rahmah Ghazali (Free Malaysia Today)

FULL REPORT KUALA LUMPUR: Home Minister Hishammuddin Tun Hussein today dismissed claims that there is tension between him and Inspector-General of Police Musa Hassan.

"Even if there is a third force (meddling in police affairs), it would not affect our main agenda to reduce the crime rate,” he said in response to a question by Anthony Loke (DAP-Rasah) in Parliament.

Yesterday, FMT reported that there is speculation that ties have soured between the duo after the minister claimed to be in the dark about Musa's revelation that a third party was interfering in police operations.

Hishammuddin said the IGP, who made the disclosure in an interview with Mingguan Malaysia, did not raise the matter with him.

“If there is a third force who has the power to influence the police, inform me,” he told reporters yesterday.

When quizzed on this oustide the Dewan Rakyat this afternoon, Hishammuddin reiterated that he has no problems with Musa.

"If there is a problem between us, how do you explain the reduction of crime in the country?” he asked.

Earlier, Loke said that Hishammuddin's statement was an "indirect admission" that there is indeed a problem with the IGP and the minister.

"If not, why is there a need to communicate through the media? Clearly, there is problem between them," he said.

Musa too refused to entertain questions on the third party issue during a press conference on Police Day celebrations at the Bukit Aman federal police headquarters this morning.

"This press conference is only about Police Day," he said curtly.

PM should intervene

At a separate press conference, Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timor) urged the prime minister to resolve the matter.

"There is a crack at the highest level of leadership of national security. I call upon the prime minister to end this unseemingly and ugly public spectacle.

"Something is very wrong...the prime minister seems to be losing control of this part of his government," he said.

The DAP veteran also questioned Musa's move to resort to Mingguan Malaysia to reveal that there is the presence of a third party, which has everyone speculating on the matter.

"Could the (third force) mean Pakatan Rakyat policitians - (opposition leader) Anwar Ibrahim, (PAS president) Abdul Hadi Awang or myself. I don't think we have such powers.

"He is talking about directives to officers under him without the knowledge of the top management of the police force.

"If he is talking about politicians, he could only mean the Home Ministry. This is very serious. If he doesn't mean Hishammuddin then he must clarify," he said.

Lim stressed that this controversy must not be allowed to continue.

"It should be ended immediately with the resignation of the IGP and the stepping down of Hishammuddin," he said.

ASP Vasantha Kumar DPP & AG working hand in glove on Ops Padam Hindraf damage control at P.Uthayakumar’s Sedition trial.

This morning was fixed for P.Uthayakumar’s “ethnic cleansing” Sedition trial on his letter to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

ASP Vasantha Kumar and the Attorney General’s alter ego the DPP in furtherance of doing damage control in Ops Padam Hindraf as was revealed by no other than the Deputy Criminal Investigations Department (CID) Director at the Bukit Aman Federal Police Headquarters DCP Dato Acryl Sani bin Abdullah Sani in open court on 14/1/2010 was in action at the KL Court today.

The Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Noorin Badaruddin at the onset the Court proceedings this morning introduced ASP Vasantha Kumar’s lawyers as holding watching brief for this ASP.

T o do damage control on Ops Padam Hindraf?

Mahendran.

Note: P.Uthayakumar’s Sedition trial otherwise was postponed to 21/4/10 for mention on his lawyer N.Surendran’s submissions that this matter had to be stayed pending P.Uthayakumar’s appeal to the Federal Court to recuse this “biased Judge” from further hearing this matter.

Inefficient AG and IGP from which law school; applies Emergency Ordinance for murder suspects

The IGP and AG were so in efficient that they could not even gather and secure enough evidence to prosecute M.Nandakumar (43), and M.Thirugnanam (33). But they have been detained irrespective of, or insufficient evidence against these suspects.

Having miserably failed in their duties they withdraw their murder case at the High Court and now detain these as mere suspects indefinitely without charge.

Even a first year law student will tell the AG and IGP that a man is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

We expect higher standards of efficiency by the police vis-a vis the AG as the police force alone has been allocated RM ONE BILLION and we expect the real murderers in jail and not the mere suspects.

But in One Malay-sia this is the fate the Indians who have to suffer under this UMNOs’ AG and IGP.

P. Uthayakumar

Indian complaints falling on deaf UMNO ears

UMNO cares a damn especially when it is the poor and underprivileged Indians who complain to the Malay-sian authorities. This happens on the most elementary problems, and on a day to day basis, to these poor and helpless Indians. These two examples are just the tip of the iceberg.

Starmetro 4/3/2010 at page M9 and Sinar 4/3/2010 at page S18)

P. Uthayakumar

High technology tilapia farming at Tasik Temenggor; Indians excluded

UMNO would never grant a licence to an Indian to embark on this high technology tilapia and other fresh and sea water fish aquaculture (UM Mega 5/3/2010 at page 1,2&3).

On a rare occasion Oone of our supporters from Taiping whose hobby was fishing, was denied state land to do fish farming in some abandoned mining pools, childhood despite years and years of waiting.

Let alone he being given business loans from Agro Bank and the technology know to farm high technology aqua culture by the Agriculture and Agro based Industries Ministry. All because he is an ethnic minority Malaysian Indian. And this example is just the tip of the iceberg of how the Indians are excluded from the national mainstream development of Malaysia. Is this UMNO Prime Minister Najib Razak’s One Malaysia?

P.Uthayakumar

Kugan police murder; as usual police shift blame to other detainees.

This is what the police had been doing for 53 years since independence. And the police do this with impurity because they get away scot free as UMNO’s Attorney General would never prosecute them for murder or manslaughter. (refer NST 24/2/2010 at page 14 and The Star 24/2/2010 at page N18)

Cop: No injuries on Kugan. “But see the gruesome injuries on Kugan below. It is the police culture to blatantly lie even in the court on a day to day basis from the lowest rung policeman to even the Deputy Federal Police CID Chief Datuk Acyrl Sani Abdullah, who had lied at P.Uthayakumar’s “ethnic cleansing” trial, that only the respective police stations would have statistics of death in police custody and police shooting. But on cross examining bombardment by P.Uthayakumar and his lawyer N.Surendran, he then changed course and now agrees to bring in the statistics at the next hearing date on 22/3/2010.

Admin

3 PKR mandores doing MIC style damage control ala MIC on Hindu temple demolishment (cut down by the PKR led Majlis Perbandaran Selayang, Sinar 13/3/20

Supervisor and policemen responsible if Kugan injured

The Sessions Court in Petaling Jaya was told that if any serious injury had been inflicted on a suspect during interrogation, a police supervisor assigned to oversee the interrogation would also be held responsible.

Operations Officer of D9 (Serious Crime), Insp Faezal Monir, 29, who was investigating luxury car theft cases which was believed to involve A. Kugan, explained that each time a suspect was questioned by a junior policeman, a supervisor with the rank of detective corporal would also be present.

"If during the investigation, the junior officer assaults the suspect, the supervisor present would also be held responsible," he said.

Faezal, the 11th prosecution witness, was testifying during cross-examination at the hearing on the custodial death of Kugan several days after he was detained on Jan 15 last year on suspicion on being involved in car theft.

Not guilty

The accused in the trial, Constable V. Navindran, 28, pleaded not guilty on Oct 1 last year to the charge of causing grievous hurt on Kugan, 23.

Navindran, who was represented by counsel Datuk P.M. Nagarajan, is accused of committing the offence at the interrogation room of the D9 office at the Taipan Police Station, USJ, Subang Jaya, at 7am on Jan 16 last year.

He is being charged under Section 331 of the Penal Code which carries a jail term of 10 years and a fine upon conviction.

When cross-examined by Nagarajan, Faezal said: "Usually, we assign two personnel to interrogate the detainee throughout the stipulated period and if a personnel who was not scheduled on that particular day was present, he would be allowed to help."

When shown the photograph of Kugan who had bruise marks, Faezal said he had never seen such bruises since Kugan was detained between Jan 15 and 19 last year.

The trial before Judge Aslam Zainudin continues tomorrow.

- Bernama

Perlis Speaker will not submit quit letter to EC

By Clara Chooi - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, March 23 — Perlis Speaker Yazid Mat will not submit the resignation letter of Titi Tinggi assemblyman Yip Sun Onn to the Election Commission.

Confirming this with The Malaysian Insider when contacted this evening, Yazid said that he was still “considering” what to do with the letter.

“We are trying to speak to him, trying to persuade him to come back to the Dewan. We have to cool him down,” he said.

He claimed that this message had already been conveyed to Yip through the latter’s close friend in the state executive council.

“He has calmed down now... he has positively calmed down,” he said.

Yazid also scoffed at DAP leader Lim Kit Siang’s claim that the speaker had no right to try and convince an assemblyman to retract a resignation letter and should instead exercise standard protocol by submitting it to the EC.

Once the letter reaches the EC, a by-election would have to be called for the state seat within 60 days.

“That is his (Lim’s) own narrow interpretation of my role. As the speaker, it is still within my jurisdiction to accept the letter. Anyway, it is none of his business.... this is not even his state,” he said.

Yazid also admitted that he had already known about the letter since yesterday, saying that a meeting was immediately called to discuss the matter with Yip.

“Yes, we held a meeting in the mentri besar’s guest room yesterday with Yip, myself, two exco members and my deputy speaker.

“At the time, Yip was angry, he was very angry,” he said.

Yazid said that at the meeting, Yip had lashed out at the MCA top leadership, blaming them for his removal from the state executive council line-up.

During the swearing-in on Friday, Yip (picture), who was formerly the New Town Development, Local Council and Housing Committee chairman, was replaced by Indera Kayangan assemblyman Dr Por Choo Chor.

“He (Yip) was not angry with the mentri besar or his other colleagues in the Perlis government. He was angry with the MCA leaders,” said Yazid.

He admitted that Yip had yet to inform him he wanted to retract the letter but still said he would not be submitting it to the EC.

“Let some time pass, we will settle this amicably. There is no need to rush. I think we have managed to diffuse the situation,” he said.

He added that there was no time frame for him to submit the letter to the EC.

EC rules no go for third vote

By Neville Spykerman - The Malaysian Insider

SHAH ALAM, March 23 — The Election Commission (EC) has formally informed Selangor that it cannot restore the third vote.

Officials from the state told The Malaysian Insider they had received an 11-page reply from the EC to their earlier inquiry on whether local council elections can be held.

According to the EC, provisions or aspects of law governing local elections under the Local Government Election Act 1960 had been abolished and neither the commission nor the state had the authority to restore the third vote.

The EC will hold a press conference on the matter tomorrow.

Local government elections were suspended in 1965 but earlier this month Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim (picture) said he would write to the EC on the possibility of holding them again in the state.

Selangor was following in the footsteps of fellow Pakatan Rakyat-ruled state Penang, which made a formal request to the EC on March 4 for local elections to be held for both the Penang and Seberang Prai municipal councils.

The Penang government maintains under Article 113(4) of the Federal Constitution, federal or state law may authorise the EC to conduct elections other than parliamentary or state elections.

Restoration of the third vote was a campaign promise of PR component parties, which comprises PKR, DAP and PAS, during Election 2008.

The Barisan Nasional (BN) federal government had already indicated it was not interested in restoring local council elections as it argues that they will not necessarily improve public services.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had said that since local government elections were abolished so long ago, there was no need to restore them as it would create more politicking at the local level.

Local government elections were first held in 1951 before Merdeka but abolished in 1965 during the Confrontation with Indonesia.

Then-Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman promised they would be restored after the situation improved.

The federal government under Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had in 2007 turned down a demand by the DAP to restore local elections.

Since the suspension of local elections, council seats have become a political reward to loyalists of the ruling party.

Zahrain slams Ghapur for personal attack

By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, March 23 — Bayan Baru MP Datuk Seri Zahrain Hashim today lashed out at Kalabakan MP Datuk Abdul Ghapur Salleh for challenging him to name all 30 Barisan MPs who were supposed to cross over to Pakatan Rakyat (PR) during the failed Sept 16 attempt to take over the government.

Abdul Ghapur had demanded earlier at a separate press conference that Zahrain retract his statement as well as apologise to him.

“I am surprised that he reacted in this way and turned it into a personal attack towards me. He accused me of quitting because I could not procure a project, because I had a protruding stomach.

“I don’t understand this, when I tried to explain in Parliament, he did not let me explain,” said Zahrain (picture).

According to the one-time PKR man, PR de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had allegedly told him that there were 34 to 40 MPs who were going to jump to PR on Sept 16, 2008.

Zahrain claimed that at the time of his speech, he could only remembered the eight names, and he only revealed those names to support his argument as to why he left the opposition party.

“I was just giving reasons why I left the party. Sept 16 was an example. If I were to remember what Anwar had told me, it was 34 to 40 MPs.

“The eight names were what I remembered when I was making my speech. There are more names. I have no bad intentions against Kalabakan; I know he is close to Anwar,” said Zahrain.

When asked by reporters why he had waited two years to make a move, he replied that he had been patient because he was toeing the party line but the issue surrounding Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng was the last straw.

“I was upset about Sept 16, but the last straw for me was when I was referred to the disciplinary committee. My intention was to reveal why I left the party, so I made Sept 16 as the example.

“For me the challenge to reveal the names is irrelevant. Why should I say sorry? I just told them what Anwar told me. If you want to be angry, be angry at Anwar,” he said.

Zahrain had named Abdul Ghapur, Dr Puad Zarkashi (Batu Pahat MP), Datuk Anifah Aman (Kimanis), Datuk Eric Majimbun (Sepanggar), Tengku Datuk Seri Azlan Sultan Abu Bakar (Jerantut), Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah (Gua Musang), Datuk Chua Soon Bui (Tawau) and Datuk Bung Mokhtar Radin (Kinabatangan) as those who were ready to defect.

Zahrain, who left the party last month to turn independent, also alleged that Anwar had said that he had the support of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the armed forces chief to form the new government.

Saifuddin: ‘Pejuang Melayu Tulen Ada Saham Judi’

Dari MalaysiaKini
Oleh Salhan K Ahmad

Ahli parlimen Machang Saifuddin Nasution memohon kerajaan menjelaskan kelulusan lesen judi yang diberikan kepada sebuah syarikat yang dikuasai Tan Sri Vincent Tan.

Berucap ketika membahaskan titah ucapan Yang di-Pertuan Agong di Dewan Rakyat hari ini, Saifuddin (kiri) turut mengaitkan MP Pasir Mas Datuk Ibrahim Ali yang didakwa turut mempunyai saham dalam syarikat berkenaan.

“Pasir Mas, pejuang tulen pun ada saham juga, itulah wajah sebenar pejuang Melayu. Untuk itu kita minta kementerian kewangan jelaskan perkara berkenaan,” dakwanya lagi.

Tambahnya, syarikat yang dinamakan Ascot Sports itu diberikan ruang sehingga 20 tahun untuk menjalankan perniagaan pertaruhan.

Jelasnya, perniagaan itu membabitkan pertaruhan untuk lumba kuda, bola sepak dan sukan-sukan lain.

“Syarikat ini membayar yuran operasi sebanyak 20 juta kepada kerajaan dalam urusniaga sebesar RM1bilion.

“Sudah tentulah lesen ini diberikan oleh menteri kewangan, saya difahamkan menteri kewangan dan perdana menteri sebelum Abdullah Badawi mengambil alih kuasa.

“Menteri kewangan ini adalah presiden Umno, Umno ialah parti agama bangsa dan negara,” katanya lagi.

Tambahnya, maklumat tersebut diperolehinya melalui buku tulisan Barry Wain berjudul Malaysian Maverick yang setakat ini masih dalam penilaian oleh kerajaan.

Umno MP lashes out at Zahrain over Sept 16 claim

By Rahmah Ghazali

FULL REPORT KUALA LUMPUR: Outspoken Umno Kalabakan parliamentarian Abdul Ghapur Salleh ripped into Independent Bayan Baru MP Zahrain Mohamed Hashim over the latter's startling allegations on the Sept 16, 2008 government takeover.

"He could be fatter and happier now, but I don't know why he would involve my name in the first place," he said during his debate on the royal address in Dewan Rakyat.

"I want the Bayan Baru MP to retract what he had said and apologise to me. Is he here or not?” asked Ghapur.

Zahrain, the former PKR MP recently linked Ghapur's name to seven other BN MPs who he claimed were supposed to defect to Pakatan Rakyat to form a new government.

"Zahrain's claims are a 'lie' and Umno should never open its doors to such leaders like him. I'm not somebody who jumps party," Ghapur said.

"I was not asked to defect. Maybe those who did not defect weren't offered enough. But for the Bayan Baru (MP), the bait must have been huge," he added.

He also accused Zahrain of “being paid” before he made his claims about the Sept 16 takeover of the federal government.

"If he (Zahrain) knew about this (takeover), why didn't he leave PKR two years ago (during the Sept 16 episode)? He is now independent and has his pockets full (of money).

"Please Umno, don't accept this kind of people. If he could gigit (backstab) his own leaders, he could gigit our leaders as well," Ghapur said.

The seven other MPs Zahrain claimed who were willing to cross over to PKR were Puad Zarkashi (BN-Batu Pahat), Foreign Minister Anifah Aman (BN-Kimanis), Bung Mukhtar Radin (BN-Kinabatangan), Chua Soon Bui (Independent-Tawau), Enchin Majimbun (Independent-Sepanggar), Tengku Azlan Sultan Abu Bakar (BN-Jerantut) and Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah (BN-Gua Musang).

Zahrain left PKR earlier this month following a fallout with PKR's de facto Anwar Ibrahim.

Added Ghapur: "I have been keeping mum on this matter although reporters approached me and asked if I was involved. I wanted to wait until I could make an official statement (in the Dewan Rakyat)."

'Why only eight, name all 30'

Refusing to back down even when asked to calm down by Umno colleague, Mohamad Aziz (BN-Sri Gading), Ghapur said Zahrain should have revealed all the 30 MPs who were supposed to defect instead of just eight.

Anwar had previously claimed that he had 30 BN MPs who were ready to defect to help him form a new government.

"They said 30 MPs would defect, but why didn't he name all of them? If he said that everything was a lie about the takeover, why didn't he leave then?" Ghapur asked again.

Zahrain, who was in the Dewan Rakyat at the moment, stood up twice to rebutt Ghapur's remarks, but he did not get a chance.

"No, I will not give way to you... Bayan Baru (MP) claimed that BN MPs who went to Taiwan before (the supposed takeover) were involved, but didn't he know that I was not part of the trip?

"Don't throw baseless allegations (without evidence). Now I want all the media to give full coverage to my statements today just like Bayan Baru was given his before this," he said.

Zahrain: Why get personal?

Later at a press conference, Zahrain maintained that he will not apologise for the linking Abdul Ghapur to the Sept 16 takeover.

"Sorry for what? I did not make any accusations and I did not belittle them. I just told them what Anwar had told me. If you want to be angry, be angry at Anwar. Not me," he said.

Zahrain said there was no need for Abdul Ghapur to get 'personal' and not allow him room to explain himself.

"Why would he want to challenge me to reveal all the names? When I revealed about the Sept 16 plan, it was just out of frustration towards the party (PKR) leadership.

"Besides, when I made the revelation, I only remembered eight names instead of the 30 MPs and Kalabakan was among them. There was no need for him to make a personal attack.

"He did not allow me explain. I was just telling them what Anwar had told me. I don't hold any grudges against Kalabakan as I know that he is close to Anwar," he said.

Asked to explain Abdul Ghapur's question as to why it took him two years to leave PKR after the failed Sept 16 plan, Zahrain said he never thought of leaving the party then.

"I was hurt (when the Sept 16 plan did not materialise). But then, I never throught of leaving the party then, and that is why I had to toe to the party line.

"I left when the de facto leader (Anwar) betrayed me. When I criticised (Penang chief minister) Lim Guan Eng, I was referred to the disciplinary committee," said Zahrain.

When pressed by reporters to take up Abdul Ghapur's challenge and name the rest of the MPs who intended to cross over, Zahrain said: "I never had the intention to reveal the names.

"My intention was to reveal why I left the party. So I used Sept 16 as the example. I was frustrated about the failed Sept 16 plan."

Anwar to tell all next Tuesday

Written by Yong Min Wei, The Edge

Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim is expected to tell all on allegations linking the 1Malaysia concept to "One Israel" next Tuesday, March 30, at the Dewan Rakyat.

PKR Subang MP R Sivarasa said Anwar would be allowed to give an explanation after the end of the question-and-answer session in the House on March 30, adding that the date was the last day given by Deputy Speaker Datuk Ronald Kiandee for the opposition leader to reply.

"Anwar and I went to meet the deputy speaker earlier so that he can get an explanation from the deputy speaker on his decision," he told reporters at the parliament lobby after a 30-minute meeting at Kiandee's office on Tuesday, March 23, afternoon.

Sivarasa pointed out that March 30 was set by Kiandee as Anwar might not be able to make it to parliament on Thursday, which has been fixed for the re-mention of his sodomy trial in court.

"The trial dates are fixed depending on requests of the prosecution and defence counsels," he said, adding that the Permatang Pauh MP could confirm his attendance at the House next Tuesday.

Sivarasa, a PKR vice-president, added that the opposition leader was not present in the Dewan Rakyat on Monday but had written to the deputy speaker seeking a clarification on the need to explain his allegations to the House within seven days.

Following a heated exchange in the House on Monday, Kiandee concurred with Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz's suggestion that Anwar be given a week to provide "satisfactory explanation" to the House, failing which the government would move a motion referring the opposition leader to the Rights and Privileges Committee.

Anwar had during a parliamentary debate last week alleged that Prime Minister Najib Razak's 1Malaysia concept was akin to the "One Israel" campaign slogan adopted by former Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak.

He also said claimed the 1Malaysia concept was conceived by Najib after consultation with Apco Worldwide, the international strategic communication company engaged by the government. However, Apco has released a statement denying Anwar's claims and stressed it was incorrect to state it represented the Israeli government or Barak.

Asked to comment on his meeting with Kiandee, Anwar said he had to rush for a function and had left it to Sivarasa, who had accompanied him at the meeting, to comment.

Prosecution versus persecution

What if the Agong says he was advised by the legal advisers that if Pakatan Rakyat does get enough seats from the expected crossovers then it is his duty as the Agong to swear in the new government and that doing otherwise would be illegal and a violation of the constitution?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

I made an allegation. That allegation was made formally. It was made by way of a Statutory Declaration -- a copy that was sent via an official letter through my lawyer to the prosecutors in the Altantuya murder trial.

Member of Parliament Zahrain Hashim made an allegation. That allegation was made formally. It was made by way of a statement in Parliament.

Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim made an allegation. That allegation was made formally. It was made by way of a statement in Parliament.

My Statutory Declaration was actually not even an allegation. It was my testimony that I had been told something by a third party, which for all intents and purposes was hearsay at best. I did not allege anything. I related what someone else had alleged and the purpose of my Statutory Declaration was to urge the authorities to investigate this allegation by that third party, which was told to me.

Zahrain’s allegation was also hearsay of sorts. He related what he alleges was told to him by Anwar. The Agong or the military did not personally tell Zahrain anything, so Zahrain cannot testify whether what Anwar said is true or false. Zahrain alleges that this is what the Agong and the military were supposed to have told Anwar and which Anwar in turn told him.

Anwar’s allegation, however, is not too clear. Was his allegation regarding APCO based on what he had been told, documents he had seen, conversation he had with the people from APCO, or whatever? Nevertheless, can Anwar prove what he alleged? And what proof can he offer to support his allegation?

In my case, action was taken against me for what I signed in that Statutory Declaration. Action was not taken against the third person who made that allegation. The fact remains that this is not my allegation but an allegation by a third party, which I in turn related. Am I making an allegation or am I relating something said by a third party, which would be classified as hearsay and therefore not admissible in a court of law?

In Zahrain’s case, he too related something told to him by a third party, like what I did. However, in Zahrain’s case, action was not taken against him, like what they did to me. Instead, action is going to be taken against that third party who told him that bit of information, opposite to what they did to me.

In Anwar’s case, action is also going to be taken against him without allowing him the opportunity to support what he alleged and prove what he said. He is assumed to have lied without establishing whether this is so. The innocent until proven guilty clause is not being applied in this particular incident. He is guilty of lying, period.

There is a difference between prosecution and persecution. As far as the opposition or anti-government elements are concerned, they are subjected to persecution under the guise of prosecution. With regards to the pro-government elements, they are exempted from prosecution. This is called selective prosecution.

When the court acquitted Razak Baginda of the charge of murder, the Attorney-General quickly made a statement saying that they will not be appealing the court’s verdict. When the court declared my Internal Security Act detention illegal and freed me at almost the same time, the Attorney-General quickly appealed the court’s verdict.

The fact that most people the world over are of the opinion that the Altantuya murder trial was badly handled and that there was a gross miscarriage of justice and that the grounds for Razak’s acquittal is flawed because the judge relied on Razak’s Affidavit which was never admitted into evidence in the trial appears to have escaped the Attorney-General. They still refuse to appeal the verdict.

The fact that the judge clearly outlined in what way my detention was illegal and that there is really no way they can dispute those grounds also appears to have escaped the Attorney-General. They still insist on appealing the verdict.

Hey, I am no lawyer. But even if I can see through all this and argue the case, what more those schooled in matters of law? I am a layman in matters of law. But you really do not need to go to law school to see that this is no prosecution but persecution and also see that there are two systems being applied, one for the opposition supporters and another for the pro-government supporters.

Okay, so they want to charge Anwar. Then what? Once they indict Anwar for sedition, as they say that might happen, then Anwar will be put on trial. Then Zahrain will be put on the stand to testify as to what Anwar told him. Then two things can happen here.

First scenario: Anwar can tell the court he did not tell Zahrain what he (Zahrain) said he (Anwar) told him (Zahrain). So it is now Zahrain’s word against Anwar’s. So whose word will the court take? Anwar’s or Zahrain’s? How will the court know who is telling the truth? Does Zahrain have documents or recordings to prove his case? If not then how will the court know that Zahrain is telling the truth and that Anwar is the one who is lying?

Second scenario: Anwar can tell the court he did tell Zahrain what he (Zahrain) said he (Anwar) told him (Zahrain). What next? Anwar tells the court about his meeting with the Agong and certain key members of the military. Is the court now going to subpoena the Agong to testify as to whether Anwar lied and in fact no such conversation existed between His Majesty and Anwar?

Third scenario: Anwar tells the court he did tell Zahrain what he (Zahrain) said he (Anwar) told him (Zahrain). Anwar then reveals to the court that he did in fact talk to the Agong and that the Agong replied if 30 Barisan Nasional Members of Parliament do cross over and if Pakatan Rakyat does control the majority in Parliament then, according to the Constitution, the Agong is compelled to swear in the new government like what the Sultan of Perak did in Perak (which is a precedence already set by the Rulers).

Anwar then tells the court that the Agong admitted that he (the Agong) cannot legally refuse to hand over power to Pakatan Rakyat if Pakatan Rakyat has more seat in Parliament compared to Barisan Nasional. To deny Pakatan Rakyat its right to form the new government would violate the Constitution and the Agong said he would never support anything unconstitutional.

Say this is what Anwar tells the court. Then what? Will the court then say Anwar is telling the truth and in fact Zahrain is also telling the truth. So, since both Anwar and Zahrain are telling the truth where do they go from there? Or will they try to prove that Anwar lied by summoning the Agong to court in the hope that the Agong will deny he spoke to Anwar and that Anwar lied about everything he told the court?

But what will happen in the event they do summon the Agong to court and the Agong confirms what Anwar said word for word? What if the Agong adds that he asked his legal advisers to study the Constitution and the law carefully? And what if the Agong then says he was advised by the legal advisers that if Pakatan Rakyat does get enough seats from the expected crossovers then it is his duty as the Agong to swear in the new government and that doing otherwise would be illegal and a violation of the constitution? And what if the Agong also says that his legal advisers reminded him about what happened in Perak as a case in point?

So, what then? What are they going to do next? Yes, the government may be playing with fire. The Agong has done nothing wrong if he did in fact speak to Anwar. There is no law that forbids the opposition leader from talking to the Agong. And there is no law that forbids the Agong from advising Anwar on when it is legal and when it is illegal for the Agong to swear in a new government. There is also no law that forbids the Agong from cautioning Anwar that a new government can be sworn in only under certain circumstances and if these conditions are met then there is nothing within the powers of the Agong to block the new government from being formed.

Yes, please charge Anwar. I just can’t wait to see the fun.

I just love to see the government walk into its own traps that it set up to trap the opposition. And the so-called trap that Zahrain set up to trap Anwar is going to trap the government instead.

The one-eyed shall be king in MCA

Its leaders are perceived as corrupted and self-serving, whose only ambition is to be and remain ministers. There are no clear visions or road-maps to speak of. It has been trounced in almost every seat with a substantial Chinese majority.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

By Two Cents, Free Malaysia Today

Crisis and opportunity, MCA in the worst of times, and paradoxically in the best of times. There is no need to write and re-write the comical, twisted events for a much jaded public and an even more exhausted community. We shall attempt to zero in on what may help put the issues in clearer perspectives.

That the once venerable party has sunk to its lowest depths is clear, one wonders what former deputy premier Tun Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman would say today. His famous 'MCA tidak hidup tak mati' remark post-1969 would probably resonate well with the Chinese community today.

Its leaders are perceived as corrupted and self-serving, whose only ambition is to be and remain ministers. There are no clear visions or road-maps to speak of. It has been trounced in almost every seat with a substantial Chinese majority.

It is stuck, even trapped in its own dogma, unable to attract new passionate members, unable to re-brand or re-position its relevance to an increasingly demanding and aware electorate.

Yet, in this crisis, there is the greatest opportunity since 1974 to reinvent the party.

The March 2008 general election debacle, the increasingly desperate hopes of the party faithful, a community no longer expecting much of the party, Barisan Nasional partners using the party as a claim to its veneer or multi-racialism; this is paradoxically the best of times to bring forth radical out-of-the-box reforms that will and must re-create a new branding and identity for the party.

The party is arguably the richest political organisation in Malaysia, with sustainable recurrent income of RM60 million or more annually and assets of more than a billion ringgit. What is needed now is a great sincere transformational leadership .

As such, the first issue that should be dissected is to determine which of the three presidental candidates is most likely to bring forth that possibility .

From the best to the worst

When Ong Tee Keat took over the presidency, the conditions were already in place for transformational leadership. As a much touted maverick he brought much hope to those hoping for a revival. He was challenged by a former close friend and adviser on whether he wanted to be just another president or aspired to be the greatest MCA leader. In short, he had the free rein to reform the party then.

One and a half years on, he has been called the worst MCA president ever. His omnipresent reminders about his sacrifices, his tragic hero role is sounding tiresome. His declared brave war against the warlords of PKFZ contradicts his enjoyment of the warlord's private jet.

He even outdid Neo Yee Pan in sackings after sackings of perceived rivals as if the party was his private company. His fatal error in not keeping to his vow to step down should he lose the EGM last October cost him his last bragging rights - his avowed integrity or as they like to say in Chinese movies, his perceived righteousness.

As for vision and strategies to re-invent the party, all he did was nothing beyond re-shuffling the party's newspaper The Star to install his spin doctors.

The clearest indictment of his short reign is perhaps the turning away of his once close adviser and probably MCA's best strategist for the last 20 years Wong Mook Leong, who resigned in disgust from the central committee.

Tee Keat is now campaigning on allowing him to finish his agenda. Was there ever an outlined clear agenda or was it all war drums?

It would take many, many naive delegates to see his re-election indeed.

Return of old president

The surprise was, of course, Ong Ka Ting's return to the ring. Whatever the motivation or reason given, there is truly a need for a third and more palatable choice. Surely in the hearts and minds of many a delegate there must be a wish for a giant of a man; a proven leader of men with vision, integrity and courage who can appear and lead MCA out of the wilderness.

Contrary to popular belief, Ka Ting's presidency was not a result of the peace accord between Team A and Team B in 2003. He as former president Dr Ling Liong Sik's preferred successor was already planned by Ling and his advisers back in 1995. Despite his obvious lack of charisma, Ling stuck to his plan and Ka Ting took over upon his mentor's resignation.

Ka Ting's leadership will forever be known for two major milestones: the introduction of the three-term limit for key leadership positions, and the 2008 general election debacle.

The three-term limit rule was the result of aggressive and continuous pressure from key reformists led by Mook Leong, and to Ka Ting's credit he supported it. However, the events and leadership or the lack of it leading to the general election debacle must be on his shoulders. Ka Ting's leadership is generally agreed as insipid and colourless.

He is certainly not the man that can revive the party. He might have a chance if he campaigns on a more believable theme, that his mission is to prepare the party for transformational leadership change come the next party elections.

The better choice?

Dr Chua Soi Lek meanwhile has certainly stunned the pundits with his comeback win as deputy president and the fact that he is a serious contender today speaks volumes of his tenacity. Compared to the other two, his not having been president is a major plus as the other two had a go and blew their chances.

Chua's strength and weakness is his daring-do, his devil-may-care, hell-for-leather attitude. When he was in the Johor Exco, and while he was the health minister, stories were abound of him stepping on numerous toes.

On top of all these, there is also the sex scandal as whatever credit one can give him for his brutal admission, his rapid decisive action to confront the issue and subsequent resignation, the questions of that scandal remain.

Surely at the back of every delegates' mind the thought will linger - can the man perform (no pun intended) at the no holds barred level of national politics?

His supporters brandish his courage and decisiveness as the very values needed to transform the party.

Chua needs to find clever ways to address the sex scandal issue. He has obviously done that to his core 40 plus percent delegates. If he can sell the same to another five percent directly or via a strategic alliance, he will win decisively.

Without the albatross of a failed presidency around his neck, and with the worst of battle scars behind him, Chua may well be paradoxically the better choice.

Two Cents is a pseudonym of an MCA observer with inside track in the party. This is a three-part series in which he attempts to provoke the party to wake up from its deep slumber and regain its lost status. In this first part, he writes about the three candidates vying for the presidential post, tomorrow he will outline the battlelines and horse tradings that will take place before the polling on Sunday and in his final part, he will give his views and strategies on how to make MCA relevant again.

APCO: Anwar Perjelas Selasa Depan

Dari Harakah Daily

Ketua Pembangkang, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim akan diberi ruang membuat penjelasan berhubung dakwaan penglibatan APCO Worldwide dalam mempromosikan 1Malaysia di dewan rakyat pada hari Selasa, 30 Mac depan.

Perkara itu diumumkan ahli parlimen Subang Sivarasa Rasiah selepas Anwar bersama beliau mengadakan perbincangan dengan Timbalan Speaker, Datuk Ronald Kiandee sebentar tadi.

Pertemuan itu jelas Siva, bagi membolehkan Anwar mendapat penjelasan terus dari timbalan speaker itu berhubung apa yang berlaku pada persidangan dewan rakyat semalam.

“Datuk Seri Anwar akan memberi penjelasan pada hari Selasa, jam 11.30 pagi.

“Beliau akan mengulas sekaligus menjawab apa yang dibangkitkan (Ahli Parlimen) Kota Belud dan Padang Rengas,” katanya.

Anwar yang juga Ahli Parlimen Permatang Pauh semalam diberi tempoh seminggu untuk menjelaskan kenyataannya di dalam dewan minggu lalu yang mengaitkan kerajaan dengan sebuah firma penasihat Israel, Apco yang didakwa terlibat dalam mempromosikan kempen 1Malaysia.

Tindakan tersebut ekoran Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan (BN – Kota Belud) yang membangkitkan perkara tersebut di bawah perkara 37 (1) yang dibacakan sekali dengan perkara 36(12) peraturan mesyuarat yang mencetuskan suasana gamat di parlimen semalam.

Menurutnya, ahli parlimen Permatang Pauh itu dengan jelas menggunakan kenyataan yang mengelirukan dewan semasa membuat kenyataan tersebut.

Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz (BN- Padang Rengas) kemudiannya memberitahu timbalan speaker, Datuk Ronald Kiandee bahawa kerajaan memberi Anwar tempoh seminggu untuk membuktikan dakwaannya itu.

Anwar sebelum ini juga mendakwa perdana menteri Israel, Ehud Barak telah mengunakan khidmat nasihat syarikat Apco pada 1999.

Sementara itu, beliau pada sidang dewan rakyat pagi tadi berkata beliau akan membuat penjelasan berhubung dakwaannya itu dan akan mendedahkan beberapa lagi fakta berkaitan.

“Macam Apco, saya akan buat penjelasan nanti dan jangan terkejut dengan maklumat yang saya akan sampaikan,” kata Anwar sewaktu mencelah menjawab tuduhan Ahli Parlimen Pasir Salak, Tajuddin Abdul Rahman

US Health Care Reform and Asian Expatriates

Full-time expatriates living overseas are opted out

Breathe easy. American citizens living full time in Asia will not be required to purchase health insurance.

While the health care reform bill approved Sunday by the House of Representatives will affect many expatriates, the most-discussed provisions – the mandate to obtain insurance coverage, and the penalties imposed upon people who do not – will apply primarily to US citizens who live within the 50 states.

The bill, which President Barack Obama announced he would sign into law immediately, creates a coverage mandate. Specifically, the bill adds a new provision to the tax code which mandates that every US citizen obtain "minimum essential coverage" or be fined. But, as is often the case with complex legislation, the definitions exclude as much as they include.

In what will be the new Section 5000A (f)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code, Congress declares that expatriates "shall be treated" as having minimum essential coverage. Thus if you are an expat, it doesn't matter whether you actually have health insurance or not. Congress says you do.

But only full-time expatriates are off the hook. To avoid the insurance coverage mandate, an expat must qualify for the IRS' foreign earned income exclusion, the beloved loophole which says that expats do not have to pay federal income taxes on their first $91,500 of overseas income this year. The IRS has tight rules for who qualifies: an expatriate must establish a tax home in the new country and must either be a bona fide resident of the adopted country for an entire tax year or spend a minimum of 330 days per 12-month period outside of the United States. But if that's you, the new law will not obligate you to purchase health insurance.

Residents of the United States' Asian territories have it easier. In order to avoid the health insurance requirements, residents of Guam, American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands (as well as Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands) need reside in those territories for only 183 days per tax year while having no other tax home.

Now comes the sore point. If you are compensated highly enough, you will have to pay for the new health care laws even though they don't apply to you.

The new law will raise the Medicare payroll tax – which, if your employer is a US firm, is usually payable on all worldwide wages -- by 0.9 percent (to a total of 2.35 percent) on wage earnings of more than US$200,000 a year for individuals and more than US$250,000 for joint filers. Those are healthy incomes, but expatriates are not covered by Medicare, which will only pay for medical treatment within the United States. The US government is asking affluent expats – or their companies -- to pay into a program which the government prevents them from using.

The so-called "Cadillac tax" is a surcharge imposed on employers on the value of higher-cost employer-provided health insurance policies, those which, generally speaking, cost the employer more than $708 a month for individuals or $1,916 a month for families.

There's nothing in the text of the bill which limits the geographic reach of the Cadillac tax or which exempts Americans who receive such coverage from overseas employers. While the tax would be difficult to collect from employers operating wholly outside the United States (and may be unconstitutional as applied to them), the bill is vague on this point, which is an invitation to litigation.

None of this starts tomorrow. The health insurance mandate is not imposed until 2013 or 2014, depending on the tax year used by the taxpayer. The Medicare tax hikes commence in 2013, as does the Cadillac tax. Expats have time to consult with their accountants, tax preparers or attorneys in organizing their affairs in the most tax-efficient manner.

Moreover, Congress isn't done. Although the bill passed on Sunday will soon be law, Congressional Democrats are pushing a reconciliation bill to alter the freshly signed law, including attempts to change the scope of the Medicare tax and the effective date of the Cadillac tax. Republicans vow to oppose or amend, and the Republicans also vow to repeal the legislation if they take back control of the government.

The principal takeaway for full-time American expats in Asia is that, as the law is currently written, they are not required to purchase health insurance so long as they qualify for the foreign earned income exclusion or are residents of a U.S. territory. But this health care reform will be expensive, and expats will ultimately receive part of the bill.

Paul Karl Lukacs is an attorney who blogs about travel and expat issues at www.knifetricks.blogspot.com.

The difficult trials of Anwar Ibrahim

By Gideon Rachman | Financial Times

Gideon Rachman: I met Anwar Ibrahim, the leader of the Malaysian opposition, in the ornate surroundings of the Landmark Hotel in London last week. He was remarkably relaxed for a man who is due to be put on trial, on charges of sodomy next week, which is a crime in Malaysia punishable with a long jail term. If convicted, this would be a return to a prison cell for Anwar. He was arrested in the late 1990s and served six years in solitary confinement on previous charges of sodomy (later over-turned) and corruption.

Yet for a man about to undergo a humiliating and dangerous ordeal, Anwar seemed in remarkably good form: relaxed, cracking jokes and outwardly convinced that he would beat the rap. I asked him how he could be so laid-back, given the trial that he was about to face. He replied coolly: “It’s not that I’m oblivious to it, or unaffected by it, but you have to just get on with life.” He knows that he can survive prison and he has the support of a staunch and politically-engaged wife and six daughters.

I first met Anwar in 1992, when he was Malaysian finance minister. At the time, the going was good, both for Anwar and for Malaysia. The country was booming and the young finance minister was widely regarded as the favoured protégé and heir apparent of Mahathir Mohamad, Malaysia’s long-serving and autocratic prime minister.

Since then, Anwar’s life and career have taken many unexpected turns. In 1998 he fell out with Mahathir, after launching an attack on corruption in Malaysia. He was hit with the criminal charges that landed him in prison.

But Anwar has proved remarkably resilient. He has served time in prison, he has been beaten up in custody, he has faced humiliating personal allegations and he has health problems – in particular, a bad back, that he blames on mistreatment in prison. But nonetheless, he has made a political comeback.

In 2008, Anwar’s opposition coalition won 82 seats in Malaysia’s 222-member parliament. For the first time for many decades it is possible to imagine the ruling party, the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), losing power. But, as a result, Anwar is a marked man. In the coming days, as well as going on trial, he is likely to be suspended from the Malaysian parliament, following allegations he made about Najib Razak, the prime minister.

Personally, I think if I were in Anwar’s situation, I would have thought seriously about not taking that plane back to Malaysia. But he flew back the next day.

What is it that keeps someone like him going: courage, a strong family, a sense of duty, ambition, stubbornness? Probably, a little bit of all of the above. A sense of destiny also helps. When I asked Anwar if he thought he would one day be prime minister, he smiled and replied yes.

Once Perlis Speaker has confirmed receipt of Titi Tinggi Assemblyman Yip Sun Onn’s resignation, it cannot be retracted or it could be challenged in a

It’s a political bombshell – the resignation of Titi Tinggi Assemblyman from Perlis, Yip Sun Onn after he was removed from the state executive council and replaced with Indera Kayangan assemblyman Dr. Por Choo Chor last Friday because of MCA’s “Three Kingdom” factional infighting.

But it is also a legal bombshell – for once Perlis Speaker, Yazid Mat has confirmed receipt of Yip’s letter of resignation (which he has done to more than one media), Yip’s letter of resignation cannot be retracted or it could be challenged in a court of law.

Various parties, including the Speaker, the Perlis Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Mohd Isa Sabu and the Perlis MCA Chief Datin Paduka Chew Mei Fun, are trying to persuade Yip to reconsider his resignation – as reported by various printed and online media.

But this is too late. Once Yip’s resignation letter had been received by the Speaker, it cannot be retracted and if Yip tries to do so, his status as State Assemblyman could be challenged in a court of law, as Yip would be an unlawful State Assemblyman from the date of his resignation and the Speaker would be acting unlawfully in allowing the resignation letter to be retracted.

Of course, the Speaker could take pains to ascertain whether Yip’s letter of resignation was a genuine one or whether the signature was counterfeit or result of blackmail – but the Speaker’s powers are limited and he could not ask Yip to reconsider and withdraw his resignation if Yip had indeed sent in such a letter.

It is understandable that there is a sense of panic in MCA and Barisan Nasional camp because this cannot be a worse possible time for them to face a by-election with the Pakatan Rakyat. But that is another matter.

The Perlis Speaker and Mentri Besar should not be acting in any manner making them into national jokes if they try to get Yip to reconsider what is already a fait accompli and beyond the powers of Yip to undo – his resignation as Titi Tinggi Assemblyman in Perlis.

What the Speaker should do honourably and properly is to submit Yip’s resignation to the Election Commission for a by-election to be held within 60 days.

Former British PM Commends Najib's Astute Steering Of Malaysia's Economy

From Mikhail Raj Abdullah

HONG KONG, March 23 (Bernama) -- Former British Prime Minister Sir John Major commended Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak for his candour and being straightforward with foreign fund managers here in outlining the state of the Malaysian economy and listening to their concerns.

"Malaysia is in very good hands indeed, based on what the Malaysian Prime Minister has been telling foreign fund managers at the Credit Suisse Asian Investment conference here Tuesday and his commitment to change Malaysia into a truly developed economy," he said to the applause from the audience at the International Financial Centre here.

Major, a special adviser to Credit Suisse, was addressing a dinner function hosted by CIMB and the financial services group where Najib was guest of honour after the high-level conference which brought together some 100 top-notch regional fund managers.

Najib had back-to-back meetings with fund managers as well as captains of industry and delivered a keynote address at a luncheon which was moderated by Major.

Major said Najib made a clear case in selling Malaysia as an investment destination which the foreign fund managers truly appreciated, who in turn were open about what was lacking in Malaysia's equity and capital markets.

Earlier, Najib, in addressing the gathering, said he took cognizance of what changes fund managers wanted to see in the Malaysian capital market.

The Prime Minister said that after intense deliberations with the fund managers, he had a good sense now of how they perceived Malaysia.

"You like Malaysian markets, which are stable but not exciting enough, so we really have to do something about it given the buzz and the wow factor.

"When the world markets are running high, the Malaysian market doesn't move that much, but the good thing is that when the world markets come crashing down, we don't crash that much either," said Najib.

However, he said, movements in the market excited fund managers, which was why Malaysia had to create more opportunities for investment by creating companies with good track record for listing.

Turning to economic reforms, he said that while fund managers liked the them, they nevertheless wanted them to be accelerated and implemented faster.

Bearing in mind the political dimension in the country, Najib said there was still a lot that could be done, which was basically to engage the Malaysian public.

He said it was crucial to make them understand why Malaysia needed to be more competitive, stronger economically and thereafter emerge as an attractive investment destination.

"This is what the New Economic Model (NEM) is all about, which will set the future direction in terms of the economic transformation of Malaysia," he said.

Najib said that the NEM, to be unveiled on March 30, should be nothing short of a transformation and should not be merely an incremental change.

"I believe we should move right across the board so that there is a massive transformation of Malaysia in due course," he said.

To this end, he called on foreign fund managers to invest in Malaysia for the long haul and expressed confidence that the country would emerge as an exciting prospect for them and the investors.

Perlis by-election could be GST-FPP referendum

If a by-election is held in Titi Tinggi, it could turn out to be a referendum on unpopular neo-liberal policies such as the regressive Goods and Services Tax (GST) and the Full-Paying Patients (FPP) scheme.

The MCA’s Yip Sun Onn has resigned from his seat in the Perlis State Assembly just days after Indera Kayangan assembly member and Kangar MCA chairman Dr Por Cho Chor replaced him in the Perlis state government exco line-up on 19 March. Utusan reported yesterday that the “replacement was made by the state government as a normal practice upon the request of the MCA leadership itself”.

The GST has been shelved for the time being – but it could be resurrected later. At the same time, plans are afoot to extend the Full-Paying Patients (FPP) pilot scheme to other general hospitals.

This FPP scheme reflects the neo-liberal mindset of top officials in the Health Ministry, which is helmed by Health Minister Liow Tiong Lai, who is MCA vice-president. (Tiong Lai has announced that he will contest the party’s deputy presidency.)

Sun Onn’s resignation is another blow for the tottering MCA, already dazed by the scandals, factionalism and intrigue in its ranks – and it comes at the worst possible time for the faction-ridden party as it prepares for divisive leadership polls this Sunday.

With a dearth of issues of substance in the MCA polls, a by-election at Titi Tinggi could provide a platform for real issues to be forefronted for public debate.

The BN had been anxious to avoid a by-election in this season of ‘katak-hopping” – but now this happens. Yip had won the seat with a 1,814-majority in the 2008 general election.

In the meantime, if you want to tell the government what you think of the GST, just go here.

1M'sia clinics - a deathtrap like the 1M'sia camps? >:(

By Nathaniel Tan

This is truly shocking.

A medical practitioner has criticised newly formed 1Malaysia clinics set up by the Ministry of Health for providing poor quality of medical services to patients, which include wrong prescription of medicines and wrong diagnoses.

Dr T Jayabalan, who represents workers and the Malaysian Trade Union Council, claimed that a recent study he conducted in Kampar, Perak revealed that medical assistants in government clinics have been issuing wrong prescriptions to patients.

He cautioned that the clinics, brainchild of Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak (right) which aimed to provide access to healthcare for all Malaysians nationwide, may also be affected by these malpractices as all of them are manned by medical assistants and nurses.

“This seems to be common practice among medical assistants. They are giving out prescriptions for the wrong medicines, or prescribing medicines which they are not allowed to prescribe. They have also been found to have wrongfully diagnosed patients,” said Jayabalan, who is also health adviser to the Consumers Association of Penang.

Jayabalan also said he was appalled that the 44 clinics, launched in January, targeting the urban poor, and charging merely RM1 for its facilities, were not set up in a transparent manner as doctors were caught unawares by the project.

His statement is supported by Malaysian Medical Association president (2009-2011) Dr David KL Quek in January who said that “while the MMA supports better, affordable and more accessible healthcare facilities to the public, the manner in which this has been announced, where they are to be sited, as well as the fact that these clinics were to be manned by medical assistants and nurses, took many doctors by surprise”.

*

This is too much. Now Najib is gambling on his political future with our lives.

Could he be so incredibly desperate to hold on to his increasingly tenuous grasp on power, that he is willing to do a half past six rush job with fancily named medical facilities – facilities in whose hands people put their lives and well being – in some blind attempt to score political points?

Why aren’t there proper doctors at these clinics?

Aren’t there reasons why certain diagnoses and prescriptions can only be made by fully trained doctors, and not medical assistants?

We have already had children die at 1Malaysia camps. Will more Malaysians perish at 1Malaysia clinics?

PM Najib – if you want to do something, do it from your heart (jika ada, lah) and do it right.

If you’re trying to get stuff done cheap just so you can look sparkly – know who you answer to in the end.

Hisham denies rift with top cop - Malaysiakini

Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein has denied allegations that there was a rift between his ministry and the police, amidst allegations that a 'third party' was meddling with police affairs.

In reply to a supplementary question by Anthony Loke (Rasah - DAP) during the question and answer session at the Dewan Rakyat, Hishammuddin described his relationship as "fine".

On the apparent media war between Hishammuddin and the Inspector-General of Police Musa Hassan, the minister said Musa about the 'third party' because he was asked about it during an interview.

Hishammuddin was referring to Musa's claim during an interview with Mingguan Malaysia published on Sunday, that a 'third party' was interfering with police operations.

He said that the clandestine 'third party' would issue orders to his subordinates, circumventing the top management of the police.

Nazri says Anwar’s September16 plans seditious

By Syed Jaymal Zahiid - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, March 23 — Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz today called Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s September 16 takeover plans seditious because he allegedly used the name of the King in a bid to trigger defections from the ruling coalition.

Nazri told The Malaysian Insider in Parliament today that Anwar, the Opposition Leader, could be charged under the Sedition Act.

The minister said “there was nothing wrong” if Pakatan Rakyat (PR), led by Anwar, had the majority to form a new government. However, the minister reasoned that the latter had committed sedition by allegedly using the King and the army’s name to trigger defections by MPs from the Barisan Nasional (BN).

“Say if Anwar said he wants to form the new government on September 16, there’s nothing wrong with it. But when you use the King’s name, when you use the army’s name, you have committed an offence,” said Nazri in a brief interview with The Malaysian Insider in Parliament here.

Nazri, the de facto Law Minister, added that “these words are seditious in nature.”

“I suspect, probably there is something under the Sedition Act that we can use to take action against him,” said Nazri.

Former PKR leader and Independent Bayan Baru MP Datuk Seri Mohd Zahrain Hashim last week claimed Anwar had told his party leaders that the King had consented to his takeover bid and that the armed forces was backing him.

Zahrain had made the explosive allegations in Parliament last week during the debate on the Royal Address. It was made following a fallout between Zahrain and Anwar leading to the former’s resignation from the party.

Nazri said that if Zahrain’s claims could be verified, what Anwar did would be akin to inciting rebellion against the present government.

“If you look at the Sedition Act, it covers this as well,” he said. Anwar has yet to explain or verify the validity of Zahrain’s claim.