Rakaman Video Anwar Ibrahim & Malaysia’s Anwar to see “old friends” Estrada, AquinoAnwar

Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim will be meeting with his “old friends”, former president Joseph Estrada and senator Benigno ‘Noynoy’ Aquino III, both of whom are running for president in the May elections.

“I will listen to them but I’ve not been asked (for his opinion on their candidacies). I think I will leave it at that and (besides) the formal campaign will begin in two weeks,” Anwar told reporters following a lecture on democracy at the University of the Philippines College of Law.

Without mentioning names, Anwar said he would be meeting with one of the two presidential candidates Friday and another Saturday. Estrada had a scheduled breakfast with Anwar this morning.

Among closest friends

Anwar never fails to mention Estrada and the late president Corazon Aquino, senator Aquino’s mother, as among his closest Filipino friends who stood by him when, as Malaysia’s deputy prime minister, he was charged with sodomy and placed in solitary confinement. The case was later dismissed.

Anwar, 62, has been accused anew of the same unlawful sex act. His trial will begin on February 2. He bewailed the court’s supposed partiality for depriving him and his lawyers of pertinent documents needed for his defense for the last two years.

During the forum, he said that perhaps the lawyers in the audience and UP Law Dean Marvic Leonen could give him some advice on how to defend his case, drawing laughter from the crowd.

Asian Renaissance

Anwar, known as Malaysia’s “voice of democracy,” was invited to give a lecture on Asian Renaissance and the Fourth Wave of Democratisation.

He noted how the Philippines and Indonesia, both coming from years of authoritarian rule, had been at the forefront of promoting democracy in Southeast Asia as he urged the governments to preserve their democratic institutions.

Ahead of the curve

“(The Philippines) is ahead of the curve. This great nation has had its fair share of the trials and tribulations associated with the rites of passage from martial law to freedom and democracy,” Anwar said.

However, he added, “it is not enough just to have civil liberties guaranteed in a document, even though it may represent the seal of the people’s will. Institutions of a civil society must be in place”.

Vibrant opposition

For one, “a vibrant democracy needs a vibrant opposition” but not all of the nations in the region are ready to hear voices of dissent, Anwar said.

He also urged governments to ensure credible elections as a hallmark of democracy, noting that the Philippines would have this exercise in democracy very soon.

“The practice of democracy entails far more than independent speech and the occasional election. Elections can be fraudulent in the process, too.

“We need not only the wisdom of having an independent election commission but also independent (watchdogs) of these elections, and the preparedness of our governments to allow observers to ensure elections are transparent and not fraudulent,” Anwar said.

After the forum, Anwar was asked what his advice to the Filipino opposition would be in the coming elections.

“I don’t claim to have expertise on the Philippine situation,” he said.

Too many candidates

“But I think it is always necessary for the opposition to get together and get a common platform and try to get the issues expounded in the structured manner and hopefully there’s this understanding.

“Otherwise, there can be a problem of too many candidates,” Anwar said. There are 10 presidential candidates for the May elections.

Sun, Jan 31, 2010
Philippine Daily Inquirer/Asia News Network

Estrada, Anwar: Old pals compare jailhouse notes

MANILA, Philippines–Their friendship has grown and survived despite the distance between Manila and Kuala Lumpur and the prison cells that kept them from each other and the rest of the world.

Deposed President Joseph Estrada and Malaysian legislator Anwar Ibrahim, who are both again leading opposition movements in their countries after serving jail time for what they claim to be politically motivated charges, recently met for brunch where they laughingly compared the length of their prison terms.

“How long did you stay in jail?” Estrada is supposed to have asked Anwar, as quoted by Estrada’s spokesperson Margaux Salcedo.

“Six years,” replied Anwar.

“I was in jail for six and half years,” claimed Estrada, adding that one other political leader had beaten them both by another six months.

“Ninoy Aquino (Benigno Aquino Jr.) was detained for seven years,” Salcedo quoted Estrada as saying.

Estrada and Anwar had a late breakfast of fried milkfish, fried eggs and fried rice at the Manila Polo Club Saturday.

The banter continued between the two friends when they met the media after the meeting.

“He knows more about Rizal than [I do],” Estrada said, explaining his admiration for the visiting Malaysian and why their friendship has lasted.

“I admire him because he’s so honest,” Anwar said with a laugh.

Anwar was the deputy prime minister when he had a falling-out with the then Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad. He was jailed on corruption and sodomy charges in April 1999.

In 2001, Estrada was ousted in a popular uprising that followed an aborted impeachment trial.

Estrada was arrested in 2001 on plunder charges and was briefly detained in a police camp in Laguna before being granted “rest house arrest” in his lavish vacation estate in Tanay. He was convicted of plunder in 2007 but was pardoned almost immediately by President Macapagal-Arroyo.

A federal court overturned Anwar’s conviction in 2004 but a ban against a return to politics was upheld. After the prohibition lapsed, Anwar won a landslide victory and reclaimed a seat in the Malaysian parliament in 2008.

Estrada recently was given the go-ahead by the Commission on Elections to run for President in May.

Estrada expressed concern that Anwar could again be facing “politically motivated cases” because of his popularity among the masses—something that he said he could easily identify with.

The former movie star has repeatedly blamed the country’s elite for his ouster in 2001. He has styled himself as the champion of the masses and was elected in 1998 on a pro-poor platform.

No fair trial

“[Maybe] this is my final overseas trip to meet my friends,” said Anwar who will face another sodomy charge in court this week.

“I have not had a fair trial,” he said, adding that a judge who acted with fairness in his case was promptly replaced.

According to Anwar, Liberal Party presidential candidate Benigno Aquino III went to see him on Friday night at the New World Hotel where he is staying.

He said both Aquino and Estrada were “family friends.”

“They treat me as a family member,” he said.

Anwar said his last visit to the country in 2008 was quite memorable as Estrada hosted a dinner that Aquino’s mother, former President Corazon Aquino, attended even though she was already suffering from cancer.

Memorable dinner

“President Cory was then very ill but she was there. It was very memorable for me, [my wife] Aziza and the family,” Ibrahim said.

Anwar would not comment on who the likely winner of the 2010 election would be. He said Estrada and Aquino were both his friends.

Estrada then reminded reporters: “He’s a friend of the Aquinos. He’s a friend of Erap. Let’s not put politics in it.”

Estrada said he and Anwar talked about the prospect of the Philippines’ first nationwide automated elections.

“We’re worried that there might be a failure of election,” he said as the Comelec continues to encounter problems with the machines.

According to a press statement from Estrada’s office, Anwar cautioned that “automation can lead to a lot of mistakes. If it is less than 100 percent accurate, it can be very dangerous.”

Anwar suggested that the Association of Southeast Asian Nations be invited to observe the conduct of the elections, the statement said. He said the automated election would be a first in Southeast Asia.

In his meeting with reporters, Anwar said he also wants to learn from the Philippine election experience.

“You have relatively freer elections, a freer media. We don’t have that in Malaysia,” he said.

“No opposition leader would be given five minutes on television in our country,” he said.

By Norman Bordadora
Philippine Daily Inquirer

umno bn, jaga ahli parliment hangpa dulu: Tengku Razaleigh 2010 – Berucap di atas pentas Pas, Forum Minyak Kota Bahru

When a nobody is Umno Youth chief: The “nobody” perception has emboldened several of his exco members to take pot-shots at him and discredit his leadership publicly.

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 31 — Question: What happens to an Umno Youth chief without a position in the administration and without the ability to deliver patronage to the troops on the ground?

The answer: Rumblings among his exco members about the “lack of direction” and his “leadership” skills grows louder by the day.

Question: What happens to an Umno Youth chief who suffers from the perception that he does not have a direct line to the Prime Minister?

Answer: Exco members aligned to his rivals push the view that he is incapable of furthering the interest of the movement.

Question: What happens to an Umno Youth chief who cannot match the right-wing rhetoric and posturing of more hardline Malay leaders in the party or non-governmental organisations?

Answer: He finds his fitness and ability to lead the wing being questioned by his enemies or their agents.

This is where Khairy Jamaluddin finds himself today. Several blogs and websites have reported that he is in danger of becoming a casualty of a mutiny by Umno exco members or is under seige from exco members unhappy with his leadership.

The Malaysian Insider understands that several exco members asked Khairy some tough questions over the past few days, several linked to his lukewarm ties with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and several about his inability to deliver the goods for wing members.

At this stage, there is little possibility of Khairy being forced out as youth chief. The reasons: he also has his supporters in the exco and the party does not have the appetite for another election.

But there is little doubt that this is an uncomfortable time for the son-in-law of former prime minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. His statements condemning attacks on places of worship and his more moderate stance has put him at odds with the hawks in Umno.

Perhaps more disadvantageous for Khairy has been his inability to dish out contracts or largesse to his hungry men. His supporters have always felt that without a position in the administration and the absence of a protector in the shape of Najib, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin or other senior Umno officials, Khairy would be hard pressed to satisfy exco members and youth wing members who need cash payments or contracts to oil their operations.

An Umno Youth official told The Malaysian Insider: “A lot of exco members are hurting. They have spent funds on their political careers and need help financially. In such a situation, they expect their leader to be the benefactor.”

In Umno as in other political parties, only those with power are feared and revered. Unfortunately for Khairy, he is suffering from the perception that since he does have the ear of Najib or Muhyiddin, he is a leader without power. This perception has emboldened several of his exco members to take pot-shots at him and discredit his leadership publicly.

The attacks are likely to cease after Najib meets the Umno Youth exco next month. But this will only come as respite for the youth leader who does not have what his members respect: the power and the ability to dish out largesse.

Fissures fester in PKR

That’s the way the cookie crumbles.

This is what is being touted about PKR in the wake of
the continued insolence of Zulkifli Nordin and the attacks on Lim Guan Eng by the party’s MP for Bayan Baru, Zahrain Mohd. Hashim.

The antics of a pyromaniac were followed by the reaction-baiting broadsides of the party’s former Penang chief.

There is the scent of mutiny in the salvoes let loose by Zahrain  in recent days at the Penang Chief Minister and DAP secretary general.

He is upset with Anwar Ibrahim but apparently can’t bring himself to train his guns on the PKR supremo. It appears Guan Eng would do nicely as vicarious substitute.

A little over two weeks ago, Zahrain was nowhere to be seen when Anwar visited Permatang Pauh, to hand out free spectacles to poor residents, attend a DAP dinner in Bukit Mertajam, and then speak at ceramah in Cherok Tok Tun and Sg. Bakap.

Usually, Zahrain would be around to accompany the PKR supremo, though on this occasion he was less duty bound to. Last October, Anwar picked Mansor Othman, the present Deputy Chief Minister, to replace Zahrain as PKR chief for Penang.

Zahrain had wanted to be the PKR candidate for the Penanti by-election in late May 2009, a poll that was called because the incumbent Mohd Fairus Khairuddin resigned at Anwar’s behest following a painfully embarrassing run in the deputy chief minister’s role.

Anwar chose former his political secretary, Mansor, as the candidate for the by-election, to Zahrain’s chagrin.

For Anwar’s Jan 15 visit, Zahrain, no more the state chief, was not required to be in attendance.

But telltale signs of a rift were inferred when Anwar let on to state party insiders that he had not heard from Zahrain in some time and, having misplaced his Blackberry, was at a loss to contact his old Penang buddy.

Friends of some 30 years’ standing don’t usually have any problems getting each other’s contact numbers from mutual acquaintances.

There then followed the spectacle of the public rants of Zulkifli Nordin over supposed threats to Islam.

Zahrain must have been unimpressed with PKR’s vacillations in the face of Zulkifli’s shenanigans, considered hugely damaging to the party’s image as multi-denominational.

The barbs Zahrain aimed at Guan Eng are calculated to coerce his party to take action against him when it is already hard put to do just that to Zulkifli.

Angling for action to be taken

Meanwhile, Zulkifli has defied a PKR gag order by claiming that he knows of ulterior motives behind Christians wanting to use the word ‘Allah’.

Court approved use of the word is the subject of controversy, so it is said by some quarters, while others maintain the hubbub is contrived to serve the aims of elements conniving to forestall Umno’s prospective loss of power.

In sum, the darts now hurled by Zahrain on Guan Eng come at a time when PKR has drawn withering fire for having been woefully supine towards Zulkifli.

Today the decisions of a combined PKR Political Bureau and Leadership Council meeting in the morning followed by a Pakatan Rakyat presidential council meeting in the afternoon are not likely to impress Zulkili, neither Zahrain, if at all their outcomes impinge on PKR’s malcontents.

Ostensibly, the earlier meeting was called to discuss Zahrain’s fulminations against Guan Eng. The latter has wisely elected not to dignify them with comment.

Both Zulkifli and now Zahrain are angling for action to be taken against them, the better they can make alternative arrangements with power brokers who are intent on the next item in Malaysian political gamesmanship: the re-delineation of parliamentary boundaries.

Their redrawing, held every 10 years and which never failed to favor the powers-that-be, has to be endorsed by two-thirds majority in Parliament which the ruling Barisan Nasional were denied at the last general election and could now secure by default, with the help of some new-found friends.

Presumably, Zahrain’s prospective departure would not be unaccompanied. If he is joined by the PKR MP for Nibong Tebal, Tan Tee Beng, the charade will be complete in its turn towards farce.

For only last June, Tee Beng led nine of 13 PKR divisions in Penang in a petition to party headquarters demanding Zahrain’s removal as state chief.

Like they say, that’s the way the cookie crumbles.

Terence Netto/Mkini

Adorna reversal: Selective Justice by the Federal Court?

By NH Chan/loyarburok

An incisive look at the ethical dynamics behind the recent Federal Court decision of Tan Ying Hong v Tan Sian San and Ors.

The duty to do the right thing

What is the duty of a judge? It is to administer justice according to law. It is the simplest duty in the world. Anyone with integrity who is fair-minded can be a judge. This is why I have always tried to impress on my readers that it is so easy to be a judge. The hyperbole of the unjust judges who have been telling us in their unjust decisions that the words in a statute mean whatever they want them to mean, will no longer be tolerated by us common folk. The common people of this country will be able to expose the Humpty Dumpty judges for what they really are. The general public is no longer gullible. Unjust judges can no longer mask their hyperbole judgments with unintelligible garbage. This is possible today because most people now know how to judge the judges.

It is this awareness of the true meaning of justice that the common man can judge the judges. Anyone can be a judge. All that you need to be one is to be fair-minded yourself and to show by your conduct and behaviour in a court of law that you deal out impartial justice – for justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done. The other attribute of a judge is to administer justice according to law.

Shortly stated, justice means that the judge’s duty is to do the right thing. The right thing to do is to deal out impartial justice. The right thing to do is also to apply the law as it stands. As the late Lord Denning once said in The Discipline of Law (page 8):

One thing you will not be able to avoid – the nervousness before the case starts. Every advocate knows it. … No longer now that I am a Judge. The tension is gone. The anxiety – to do right remains. (emphasis mine)

In the case of Tan Ying Hong v Tan Sian San and Ors, the Federal Court on Thursday, Jan 21, 2010, held that its decision in Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd v Boonsom Boonyanit in 2000 was wrongly decided and therefore not to be followed. By so deciding this Federal Court has done the right thing.

Chief Justice Zaki Azmi said that “he was legally obligated to restate the law since the error committed was so obvious and blatant”.

Comprising the panel of this Federal Court were Chief Justice Zaki Azmi, Alauddin Mohd Sheriff (President Court of Appeal), Arifin Zakaria (Chief Judge Malaya), Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin and James Foong Cheng Yuen FCJJ. Doing the right thing is the duty of every judge. Here, these judges did the right thing; they applied the statute as it stands.

But do you recognise or remember these judges?

Three of them were among the infamous five who decided Zambry v Sivakumar in the Federal Court. In case you have forgotten who the infamous five were, they were Alauddin Mohd Sheriff PCA, Arifin Zakaria CJM, Nik Hashim Ab. Rahman, Augustine Paul and Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin FCJJ. See here for my critique.

So you are now aware that the same three judges were members of the infamous five in Zambry v Sivakumar. These three blatantly refused to apply Article 72(1) of the Federal Constitution as it stands. Until they recant from what they had done ignominiously in Zambry v Sivakumar they will not be forgiven. Their names will remain in infamy until they take steps to redress the wrong that they had done. Remember this: “The evil that men do lives after them.” (Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act 3, Scene 2)

And what about Chief Justice Zaki Azmi, is he to remain unscathed?

I shall refer to some excerpts from my book, How to Judge the Judges (2nd ed), so that you can judge the Chief Justice for yourself. See “An Addendum to the Asean Security Paper Mills’ Case” at page xxxix of the book:

If you will recall, see p 181 et seq. when the Federal Court overruled the decision of the Court of Appeal it resulted in the insured plaintiff Asean Security Paper Mills Sdn Bhd obtaining judgment against the insurers on their policy of fire insurance in respect of the goods destroyed in the fire. One of the insurers then applied under rule 137 of the Rules of the Federal Court 1995 for a review. The application for a review was turned down by the Federal Court in Asean Security Paper Mills Sdn Bhd v Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance (Malaysia) Bhd [2008] 5 AMR 377 (Abdul Hamid Mohamad CJ, Zaki Azmi PCA and Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin FCJ).

As you would probably know the judgment of PS Gill J (as he was then) in the High Court was an unjust decision. An appeal by the insurers to the Court of Appeal was allowed. But the Federal Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeal – You can read all about it in the book. But what is very disturbing is the reason given by the Federal Court in rejecting the application for a review by the insurance company. This is what Chief Justice Abdul Hamid Mohamad said, page 382 of the law report:

However, I accept that, in very limited and exceptional cases, this court does have the inherent jurisdiction to review its own decision. I must stress again that this jurisdiction is very limited in its scope and must not be abused. I have no difficulty in accepting that inherent jurisdiction may be exercised in the following instances: …

I have commented in my book that to review an unjust decision is not an abuse of the inherent jurisdiction of the court to review its own decision. The Chief Justice continues:

… where there is a clear infringement of statutory law. In this respect, a clear example would be where the court has mistakenly applied a repealed law. But, where it is a matter of interpretation or application of the law, it is in my view not a suitable case for review. The judgment of this court in Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd v Kobchai Sosothikul [2005] 1 AMR 501 does throw some light in this respect. (I have supplied the emphasis)

At pages xlii, xliii of the book, I said:

This is a shocking thing to say. What if the statute is plain enough ? where the language is so clear that even a child could understand it ? what is there for the judge to interpret (”interpret” means “explain the meaning of”) in such a case?

For instance, there is Article 72(1) of the Federal Constitution where it says:

72(1) The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court.

Those words mean what they say. Yet we have encountered judges of the Federal Court who have refused to apply this constitutional provision as it stands under the guise of interpretation – “the court was the best place to seek interpretation of the Constitution”, said a Minister.

In What Next in the Law, Lord Denning said, p 319:

Parliament is supreme. Every law enacted by Parliament must be obeyed to the letter. No matter how unreasonable or unjust it may be, nevertheless, the judges have no option. They must apply the statute as it stands.

Lord Denning also said at p 380:

May not the judges themselves sometimes abuse or misuse their power? It is their duty to administer and apply the law of the land. If they should divert it or depart from it – and do so knowingly – they themselves would be guilty of a misuse of power.

So then how could the Chief Justice say “where it is a matter of interpretation or application of the law, it is in my view not a suitable case for a review”? What is most shocking is that the Chief Justice approved the unjust decision of PS Gill FCJ in Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd v Kobchai Sosothikul [2005] I AMR 501 when the words in section 340 of the National Land Code are so clear and unambiguous that even a child can understand it. Yet the judge refused to apply the law as it stands by deciding that it was not a suitable case for review. This is what PS Gill FCJ said, at page 507:

If the application of r 137 is made liberally the likely consequence would be chaos to our system of judicial hierarchy. There would then be nothing to prevent any aggrieved litigant from challenging any decision on the ground of “injustice” vide r 137.

So that we have judges in the Federal Court, even the then Chief Justice himself, who hold the view that if justice is not administered according to law, that is, if the judge did not apply the statute law as it stands, it is not a suitable case for review. Injustice is also not a ground. Zaki Tun Azmi PCA (as he then was, he is now the Chief Justice) gave a similar concurring judgment.

So there is no hope for the estate of Mrs Boonyanit, she has died. The highest court has even confirmed the perverse judgment of the unjust judges.

So there you have it, Chief Justice Zaki Azmi has confirmed the unjust decisions of two Federal Courts against poor Mrs Boonyanit. Although today Zaki Azmi, the current Chief Justice, has held that the decision of former Chief Justice Eusoff Chin in Adorna Properties v Boonsom Boonyanit was blatantly wrong, nevertheless, he has confirmed that it is still not a suitable case for review. Injustice is still not a ground for review by the Federal Court of its own judgment even though the injustice was the result of an injustice brought about by a judge in not applying the statute as it stands.

Now that Chief Justice Zaki Azmi has taken the right step to do the right thing, the task is now upon him to put right the injustice done to the late Mrs Boonyanit and to her estate. It is an onerous duty to right a wrong. He will be judged by what he would do next. Almost everyone knows how to judge a judge today. So be warned!

And lastly what about James Foong FCJ, is he entirely blameless?

He was one of the five judges who gave the unanimous decision of Jamaluddin & Ors v Sivakumar in the Federal Court. To refresh your memory, I refer to the story in the New Straits Times of Friday, April 10, 2009:

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court has declared that three assemblymen who quit their parties are still members of the Perak state legislature. This follows an unanimous ruling by a five-men bench yesterday which ruled that “The Election Commission is the rightful entity to establish if there was a casual vacancy in the Perak state legislature,” said Federal Court judge Tan Sri Alauddin Mohd Sherff. Sitting with him were Datuk Ariffin Zakaria, Datuk Nik Hashim Nik Abdul Rahman, Datuk Seri S Augustine Paul and Datuk James Foong.

I posted an article on the Internet where I wrote:

What do you think of the quality of these judges of the highest court in the country? You must think that after all the rigmarole and after all the effort in writing this 20 page judgment, they could have done better. But no, they still missed the point altogether. All of us ordinary folk knew the answer. But not those five judges.

Of course, the point is Article 33(5) of the Perak Constitution that says that when a question arises whether a person is disqualified from being a member of the Assembly, the decision (meaning “the vote”) of the Assembly is final. It is neither the Speaker nor the Election Commissioner who determines if a person is disqualified from being a member of the assembly.

I then went on to say:

If a person resigns his membership of the Legislative Assembly, he shall be disqualified from being a member of the Assembly for five years from the date of his resignation: see Article 31(5).

Article 35 only says that a member can resign simply by writing to the Speaker.

So that if any question arises as to the resignation of the three turncoat assemblymen – a person who resigns his membership of the assembly is disqualified for five years from being a member of the legislative assembly – the decision of the assembly by a vote being taken on their disqualification shall be final. It is only after a member of the assembly has been disqualified for membership of the legislative assembly that a vacancy of the member?s seat in the assembly arises. It is only then that a casual vacancy arises.

Must James Foong FCJ redeem himself for the wrong he did in Jamaluddin & Ors v Sivakumar? In that case he failed to do his duty as a judge by not applying the law as it stands. He had lent his name to a perverse decision by agreeing to it.

S’gor gov’t a sensation at Thaipusam

Batu Caves was a hotbed of politics as both sides of the spectrum rallied during the Thaipusam celebrations yesterday to win over the much contested Indian votes.

Despite battling on home ground, the Pakatan Rakyat Selangor government took off hamstrung as police refused them their event permit at the last minute.

While Prime Minister Najib Razak, MIC president S Samy Vellu and their cohorts addressed the masses from a vantage point within the temple compounds, their counterparts had to do without a stage, which was forcefully dismantled by the police.

The underdogs, however, worked against odds to inspire hundreds into a full-throated roaring chant of ‘Hidup Rakyat’, as the state leaders spoke from a makeshift stage attached to a Selayang Municipal Council truck.

“Just like the old times,” observed a Pakatan leader.

The event, which started at 11pm, two hours later than scheduled to make way for Najib, was held under the Middle Ring Road flyover some 500 meters away from the temple.

Lukewarm welcome for first couple

This was in stark contrast to the federal government’s happening, where Najib and his waving wife could only garner a sprinkling of applause and that, only after Samy called him the ‘Father of 1Malaysia’.

While Selangor MB Khalid Ibrahim guaranteed the safety of all in Selangor, Najib’s delivery was mainly the rehashed story about the handouts distributed to the Indian community by the BN last year.

Not to be outdone, Khalid  announced donations to build more temples in Selangor.

Police presence was equally strong at both events but their action had more muscle at the Pakatan end with attempts to halt Khalid’s speech after threatening to arrest the whole lot for illegal assembly.

But, according to Selangor state exco Elizabeth Wong, the men in blue were pushed away by the passionate crowd.

The crowd also booed Samy when his car passed by, with one man screaming, “Go home, Selangor is my state not yours.”

Speaking to the press later, Khalid expressed his disappointment at being “pushed aside by (their) guests (the federal government)” in their home state.

“We are now looking to see what authority we have over usage of land and public spaces as the state government, so we can avoid this (conflict) next year,” he said.

Organising exco, Xavier Jayakumar told Malaysiakini that the disruptions cost the state at least RM120,000, excluding payments to be made to pop stars from India whose appearance had to be cancelled.

Aidila Razak/Mkini

Malaysia court rejects Anwar Ibrahim evidence appeal

A Malaysian court has rejected a bid by opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim to be granted access to evidence against him in a pending sodomy trial.

Mr Anwar has accused the government of interfering in the case and trying to rush it through court.

The former deputy prime minister was charged with sodomy, a criminal offence in Malaysia, in 2008.

He denies the charge and says it is politically motivated, but faces up to 20 years in jail if convicted.

Mr Anwar spent six years in prison following a similar accusation in the late 1990s, but was freed after an appeal.

On Friday, the Federal Court upheld a lower court’s ruling that Mr Anwar could not have access to medical evidence held by prosecutors.

“The court ruled that the evidence that we were seeking did not fall within the ‘necessary and desirable’ category and turned down the appeal,” lawyer Sankara Nair told the AFP news agency.

‘Quick conviction’

Mr Anwar told AFP he was “shocked with the [government's] impunity to go on with such a case despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary”.

He said he believed he could win the case if the court looks at the “facts and the law”.

But he said he believed Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak was “quite directly involved” in the legal process, which made him “not too confident of the system”.

Mr Anwar said the court “seems they want to rush” his trial and that their “political masters want a quick conviction”.

The trial is scheduled to begin on Tuesday, but Mr Sankara said he would ask for it to be postponed while an appeal seeking to have the case thrown out completely went through another court .

Mr Anwar was arrested by armed police in a dramatic raid in August 2008, after a 23-year-old man who used to work in his office said he had sex with him.

Mr Anwar says his accuser is lying and the evidence has been fabricated.

He claims that the charge is part of a government conspiracy to undermine his opposition alliance, following its big gains in the March 2008 elections.

Government officials deny any plot against him. BBC

High Court ordered the prosecution to hand over evidence but Kangaroo Court rules no evidence to be given to Anwar

Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim has lost his final chance to get more key evidence such as CCTV footage and medical reports from the prosecution to prepare for his sodomy trial, which is to start next Tuesday.

Federal Court judge Abdull Hamid Embong, who led a three-member panel, dismissed Anwar’s appeal and upheld of the Court of Appeal’s decision.

The Federal Court panel had on Jan 20, heard submissions on the matter from senior counsel Karpal Singh and solicitor-general II Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden.

However, they could not arrive to a decision, resulting in the announcement of the verdict today. The panel has also ordered Anwar’s sodomy trial to begin on Feb 2.

On Nov 6, the appellate court allowed the prosecution’s appeal when it ruled the PKR de facto leader was not allowed to fish for information before his sodomy trial.

Justice Hasan Lah, who was leading the panel, interpreted section 51 of the Criminal Procedure Code strictly and limited the judge’s discretionary power with regard to the application for discovery of documents at the pre-trial stage.

“Except as what is provided for under section 51A of the code, the respondent is not entitled to discover or inspect evidence or material in the possession of the prosecution before the commencement of the trial,” he said.

High Court ‘went overboard’

On July 16, in a rare victory for Anwar, the High Court ordered the prosecution to hand over evidence including video footage and medical reports to the accused.

However, Abdull Hamid, in rejecting the High Court decision, said section 51 does not grant wide ranging application to get the document.

“In our view, the High Court judge went overboard in amending the provision under section 51 by ordering the prosecution to provide the documents.

“A task of a judge is to interpret the law and not provide interpretation so as to amend the law under section 51 and section 51A,” he said.

“The task to amend the law is with the Parliament and not the judges whose task is to interpret.”

Anwar, 62, is charged with sodomising his former aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, 24, at the Desa Damansara Condominium, in Jalan Setiakasih, Bukit Damansara on June 26, 2008.

Medical reports sought

Among the key documents were the recorded witness statement of Mohd Saiful and the condominium owner Hasanuddin Abdul Hamid, the examination notes of Dr Osman Abdul Hamid from Pusrawi Hospital, statements and notes of three doctors from Hospital Kuala Lumpur Hospital (HKL), a chemist’s notes and medical reports.

It has been report that the medical reports indicated that there was no sign of penetration in Saiful’s anus.

Anwar also wanted the CCTV footage of the condominium at the alleged time.

On July 16, the High Court judge Justice Mohd Zabidin Mohd Diah allowed Anwar to obtain Mohd Saiful’s medical report from HKL and CCTV footage but he rejected Anwar’s application to obtain the original DNA specimens as they have been packeted and sealed.
www.malaysiakini.com/news/108605

Following justice Zabidin’s decision, the prosecution filed an appeal, while Anwar filed a cross appeal.

Meanwhile, Anwar has also filed an application to stay his sodomy trial scheduled next week. The High Court will first hear his stay application before the controversial trial can proceed.

Mkini

Kelantan berjaya kurangkan kadar kemiskinan: Itu yang rakyat mahu & siapa sebenarnya tahu memerintah?

Mahfuz Omar: Israel ada jet tak ada pilot, Malaysia ada jet tak ada enjin.

Rakaman video wawancara bersama Nik Aziz: Nama Allah dan hubungan antara agama & Isu Royalti

‘Umno members among Tabernacle arson suspects’

A PKR vice-president has claimed that Umno members were involved in the arson attack against the Metro Tabernacle church in Desa Melawati earlier this month.

Azmin Ali said he is in the process of collecting evidence and will release the information in the near future.

He was speaking at the Masjid Jumburiyah in Taman Dato Harun, one of two mosques desecrated with two wild-boar heads today.

Azmin, who is Gombak MP, said at least four of the eight remanded over the attack are Umno members from the Gombak and Ampang divisions.

“The Umno president should explain why these members were involved. This was a cowardly act by Umno Youth,” he said.

He told reporters that the full name, Mykad number and Umno membership number of those involved will be made public as soon as possible.

“It will not be difficult to obtain these details. I even know which branch they are from,” he claimed.

Azmin, who visited the mosque alongside Selangor Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim and state assemblypersons Dr Xavier Jayakumar and Ronnie Liu, strongly condemned the desecration as “un-Islamic”.

He urged the police to take swift action in the public interest, rather than only to safeguard the interests of Umno and Barisan Nasional.

Similarly, Khalid said that differing viewpoints should be addressed through dialogue, and not through acts such as this.

Those who committed the acts not only disrespect Islam, but all faiths, he said after meeting with residents in the area.

“Selangor residents should remain calm and pray that this issue will not escalate further. Do not fall into the trap of those who intend to sow the seeds of discord,” he said.

Jimadie Shah Othman/mkini

On Video Tian Chua: Change To Save Our Country & Mobilize To Support Dato’ Seri Anwar Ibrahim on Feb 02/ Berubah untuk selamatkan negara & Rakyat mesti datang beramai-ramai pada 2 Feb untuk menghadiri perbicaraan DSAI

Righting a wrong: But do you recognise or remember these judges?

JAN 26 — What is the duty of a judge? It is to administer justice according to law. It is the simplest duty in the world. Anyone with integrity who is fair-minded can be a judge. This is why I have always tried to impress on my readers that it is so easy to be a judge. The hyperbole of the unjust judges who have been telling us in their unjust decisions that the words in a statute mean whatever they want them to mean, will no longer be tolerated by us common folk. The common people of this country will be able to expose the Humpty Dumpty judges for what they really are. The general public is no longer gullible. Unjust judges can no longer mask their hyperbole judgments with unintelligible garbage. This is possible today because most people now know how to judge the judges.

It is this awareness of the true meaning of justice that the common man can judge the judges. Anyone can be a judge. All that you need to be one is to be fair-minded yourself and to show by your conduct and behaviour in a court of law that you deal out impartial justice – for justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done. The other attribute of a judge is to administer justice according to law.

Shortly stated, justice means that the judge’s duty is to do the right thing. The right thing to do is to deal out impartial justice. The right thing to do is also to apply the law as it stands. As the late Lord Denning once said, The Discipline of Law, page 8:

One thing you will not be able to avoid – the nervousness before the case starts. Every advocate knows it. … No longer now that I am a Judge. The tension is gone. The anxiety – to do right – remains. (the emphasis is mine)

In the case of Tan Ying Hong v Tan Sian San and Ors, the Federal Court on Thursday, 21 January 2010, held that its decision in Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd v Boonsom Boonyanit in 2000 was wrongly decided and therefore not to be followed. By so deciding this Federal Court has done the right thing.

Chief Justice Zaki Azmi said that “he was legally obligated to restate the law since the error committed was so obvious and blatant”.

Comprising the panel of this Federal Court were Chief Justice Zaki Azmi, Alauddin Mohd Sheriff, President Court of Appeal, Arifin Zakaria, CJ (Malaya), Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin and James Foong Cheng Yuen FC JJ. Doing the right thing is the duty of every judge. Here, these judges did the right thing; they applied the statute as it stands.

But do you recognise or remember these judges?

Three of them were among the infamous five who decided Zambry v Sivakumar in the Federal Court. In case you have forgotten who the infamous five were, they were Alauddin Mohd Sheriff PCA, Arifin Zakaria CJ(M), Nik Hashim Ab. Rahman, Augustine Paul and  Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin FCJJ. The story exploded on the front page of the Star newspaper of Friday, 17 April 2009 with the startling headline, “Court: Siva does not have right to suspend seven”. The report reads:

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal court has unanimously ruled that Perak Assembly Speaker V Sivakumar does not have the power to suspend the Mentri Besar Datuk Zambry Abd Kadir and six executive council members from attending the assembly. … Court of Appeal president Justice Alauddin Mohd Sheriff, who chaired a five-men panel yesterday, said the Speaker’s decision to suspend the seven applicants was ultra vires (outside the law) and invalid.

In an article that was posted on the Internet I wrote:

This is a perverse judgment of the Federal Court. It is perverse because it is a decision that was made in blatant defiance of Article 72(1) of the Federal Constitution that says, “The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court”. The judges of the Federal Court have failed the people and the government of this country when they chose to ignore the law of the Constitution of Malaysia. In other words the judges have refused to do justice according to law.

Incidentally, ultra vires does not mean “outside the law”. It means “outside one’s jurisdiction, beyond the scope of one’s power or authority”. And we may ask, who is the Federal Court to say what is beyond the jurisdiction of the Speaker when the supreme law of the country says, “the validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court”.

So you are now aware that the same three judges were members of the infamous five in Zambry v Sivakumar. These three blatantly refused to apply Article 72(1) of the Federal Constitution as it stands. Until they recant from what they had done ignominiously in Zambry v Sivakumar they will not be forgiven. Their name will remain in infamy until they take steps to redress the wrong that they had done. Remember this: “The evil that men do lives after them.” – Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Act 3, scene 2.

And what about Chief Justice Zaki Azmi, is he to remain unscathed?

I shall refer to some excerpts from my book How to Judge the Judges, 2nd edition, so that you can judge the Chief Justice for yourself. See An Addendum to the Asean Security Paper Mills’ Case, on page xxxix of the book:

If you will recall, see p 181 et seq. when the Federal Court overruled the decision of the Court of Appeal it resulted in the insured plaintiff Asean Security Paper Mills Sdn Bhd obtaining judgment against the insurers on their policy of fire insurance in respect of the goods destroyed in the fire. One of the insurers then applied under r 137 of the Rules of the Federal Court 1995 for a review. The application for a review was turned down by the Federal Court in Asean Security Paper Mills Sdn Bhd v Mitsui Sumitomo Insurance (Malaysia) Bhd [2008] 5 AMR 377 (Abdul Hamid Mohamad CJ, Zaki Azmi PCA and Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin FCJ).

As you would probably know the judgment of PS Gill J (as he was then) in the High Court was an unjust decision. An appeal by the insurers to the Court of Appeal was allowed. But the Federal Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeal – You can read all about it in the book. But what is very disturbing is the reason given by the Federal Court in rejecting the application for a review by the insurance company. This is what Chief Justice Abdul Hamid Mohamad said, p 382 of the law report:

However, I accept that, in very limited and exceptional cases, this court does have the inherent jurisdiction to review its own decision. I must stress again that this jurisdiction is very limited in its scope and must not be abused. I have no difficulty in accepting that inherent jurisdiction may be exercised in the following instances: …

I have commented in my book that to review an unjust decision is not an abuse of the inherent jurisdiction of the court to review its own decision. The Chief Justice continues:

… where there is a clear infringement of statutory law. In this respect, a clear example would be where the court has mistakenly applied a repealed law. But, where it is a matter of interpretation or application of the law, it is in my view not a suitable case for review. The judgment of this court in Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd v Kobchai Sosothikul [2005] 1 AMR 501 does throw some light in this respect. (I have supplied the emphasis)

At pages xlii, xliii of the book, I said:

This is a shocking thing to say. What if the statute is plain enough – where the language is so clear that even a child could understand it – what is there for the judge to interpret (“interpret” means “explain the meaning of”) in such a case?

For instance, there is Article 72(1) of the Federal Constitution where it says:

72(1) The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court.

Those words mean what they say. Yet we have encountered judges of the Federal Court who have refused to apply this constitutional provision as it stands under the guise of interpretation – “the court was the best place to seek interpretation of the Constitution”, said a Minister.

In What Next in the Law, Lord Denning said, p 319:

Parliament is supreme. Every law enacted by Parliament must be obeyed to the letter. No matter how unreasonable or unjust it may be, nevertheless, the judges have no option. They must apply the statute as it stands.

Lord Denning also said at p 380:

May not the judges themselves sometimes abuse or misuse their power? It is their duty to administer and apply the law of the land. If they should divert it or depart from it – and do so knowingly – they themselves would be guilty of a misuse of power.

So then how could the Chief Justice say “where it is a matter of interpretation or application of the law, it is in my view not a suitable case for a review”? What is most shocking is that the Chief Justice approved the unjust decision of PS Gill FCJ in Adorna Properties Sdn Bhd v Kobchai Sosothikul [2005] I AMR 501 when the words in s 340 of the National Land Code are so clear and unambiguous that even a child can understand it. Yet the judge refused to apply the law as it stands by deciding that it was not a suitable case for review. This is what PS Gill FCJ said, at p 507:

If the application of r 137 is made liberally the likely consequence would be chaos to our system of judicial hierarchy. There would then be nothing to prevent any aggrieved litigant from challenging any decision on the ground of “injustice” vide r 137.

So that we have judges in the Federal Court, even the then Chief Justice himself, who hold the view that if justice is not administered according to law, that is, if the judge did not apply the statute law as it stands, it is not a suitable case for review. Injustice is also not a ground. Zaki Tun Azmi PCA (as he then was, he is now the Chief Justice) gave a similar concurring judgment.

So there is no hope for the estate of Mrs Boonyanit, she has died. The highest court has even confirmed the perverse judgment of the unjust judges.

So there you have it, Chief Justice Zaki Azmi has confirmed the unjust decisions of two Federal Courts against poor Mrs Boonyanit. Although today Zaki Azmi, the current Chief Justice, has held that the decision of former Chief Justice Eusoff Chin in Adorna Properties v Boonsom  Boonyanit was blatantly wrong, nevertheless, he has confirmed that it is still not a suitable case for review. Injustice is still not a ground for review by the Federal Court of its own judgment even though the injustice was the result of an injustice brought about by a judge in not applying the statute as it stands.

Now that Chief Justice Zaki Azmi has taken the right step to do the right thing, the task is now upon him to put right the injustice done to the late Mrs Boonyanit and to her estate. It is an onerous duty to right a wrong. He will be judged by what he would do next. Almost everyone knows how to judge a judge today. So be warned!

And lastly what about James Foong FCJ, is he entirely blameless?

He was one of the five judges who gave the unanimous decision of Jamaluddin & Ors v Sivakumar in the Federal Court. To refresh your memory, I refer to the story in the New Straits Times of Friday, April 10, 2009:

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court has declared that three assemblymen who quit their parties are still members of the Perak state legislature. This follows an unanimous ruling by a five-men bench yesterday which ruled that “The Election Commission is the rightful entity to establish if there was a casual vacancy in the Perak state legislature,” said Federal Court judge Tan Sri Alauddin Mohd Sherff. Sitting with him were Datuk Ariffin Zakaria, Datuk Nik Hashim Nik Abdul Rahman, Datuk Seri S Augustine Paul and Datuk James Foong.

I posted an article on the Internet where I wrote:

What do you think of the quality of these judges of the highest court in the country? You must think that after all the rigmarole and after all the effort in writing this 20 page judgment, they could have done better. But no, they still missed the point altogether. All of us ordinary folk knew the answer. But not those five judges.

Of course, the point is Article 33(1) of the Perak Constitution that says that when a question arises whether a person is disqualified from being a member of the Assembly, the decision (meaning “the vote”) of the Assembly is final. It is neither the Speaker nor the Election Commissioner who determines if a person is disqualified from being a member of the assembly.

I then went on to say:

If a person resigns his membership of the Legislative Assembly, he shall be disqualified from being a member of the Assembly for five years from the date of his resignation: see Article 31(5).

Article 35 only says that a member can resign simply by writing to the Speaker.

So that if any question arises as to the resignation of the three turncoat assemblymen – a person who resigns his membership of the assembly is disqualified for five years from being a member of the legislative assembly – the decision of the assembly by a vote being taken on their disqualification shall be final. It is only after a member of the assembly has been disqualified for membership of the legislative assembly that a vacancy of the member’s seat in the assembly arises. It is only then that a casual vacancy arises.

Must James Foong FCJ redeem himself for the wrong he did in Jamaluddin v Sivakumar. In that case he failed to do his duty as a judge by not applying the law as it stands. He had lent his name to a perverse decision by agreeing to it.

— By NH Chan /MI

On Video Anwar Ibrahim: The Speech That Prompted The Police To Act/ Ucapan yang menyebabkan ceramah Anwar Ibrahim dihentikan oleh polis di KL

GST: Siapakah yang akan untung?

On Video bn under siege: Malaysia Police Halt Anwar Speech in Kuala Lumpur 24/01/2010/Rakaman bn dalam ketakutan, guna polis hentikan ceramah Anwar Ibrahim di KL

For Anwar, the crowds and slurs swell

Even as Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim took his case to the courtroom of public opinion – increasingly riveted judging from the size and composition of crowds during his two-stop tour of southern Perak on Friday – the bile of his detractors was equally a match.

‘Anwar khianat Melayu Islam’ spewed one banner at the junction where the road from the town of Tapah meets the narrower turn-off that heads for Sg Manik, the second and more well attended location of the PKR leader’s two-stop swing through southern Perak.

Clearly, Anwar’s unequivocal condemnation of the outrages against mainly non-Muslim places of worship in recent weeks had drawn the ire of quarters wanting to exploit last month’s High Court decision in favour of non-Muslim use of the term ‘Allah’ as a rallying point to regain Malay support and put Pakatan Rakyat on the defensive.

These quarters see the ‘Allah’ decision as a lighted match thrown into a powder keg.

But the even temper of the mixed race crowd at Slim River, the first stop, and later of the predominantly Malay crowd in Sg Manik, indicated that at the most the ‘Allah’ issue is a tempest in a teapot.

Perhaps that explained the desperation of the bannered slurs against the Pakatan Rakyat chief.

Anwar’s combative speech to a mixed race crowd of about 1,500 people at a shop lot in Slim River showed that he fights best when he is up against the ropes.

He was preceded at the podium by PKR’s lesser lights, Chan Tian Chua  and Elizabeth Wong, whose spiel was useful as appetisers to the main course.

By the time it was the PKR’s adviser turn to speak, the crowd had waxed to its highest number at around 1,500 and when he finished 45 minutes later, people were still trickling in from the surrounding vicinity, obviously having heard titillating bits from motorcyclists who had periodically peeled from the belt of listeners to scamper into the nearby housing estate.

Indisputable magnetism

The mainly Malay crowd at Sg Manik, at about 10,000, far by much in excess of any gathering Anwar has drawn on his peninsula-wide road show since it started, had not come just to hear the pros and cons of the ‘Allah’ issue.

In the rural Malay heartland, the grapevine at warongs and suraus reverberates with the latest juicy tidbits. In the last several weeks, the word in Sg Manik has been about a police report lodged by the former driver of the area’s Member of Parliament, Tajuddin Rahman, of Umno.

The driver, until recently, of the famously cantankerous Pasir Salak MP, had alleged in his report that Tajuddin had punched him after he had lost his way while looking for the Deputy Prime Minister’s house one night in early December.

Tajuddin was invited to a meeting of selected Umno MPs from Perak at Muhyiddin Yassin’s  Bukit Damansara home. An allegedly irate Tajuddin then took over the wheel of the car but he was equally at a loss to find the DPM’s residence.

Since the time the driver, who is from Sg Manik, lodged a report over the alleged incident at the police station in his kampong, Pasir Salak’s most famous denizen has not been seen in the constituency. The police there it is said want to talk to him.

No doubt this story factored in accounting for the outsize crowd at Anwar’s Sg Manik ceramah, though it detracts from his indisputable magnetism as a draw on the hustings.

But after PKR’s head of Bureau of National Unity and Religious Understanding, Mohd Nor Manuty, had given a painstaking explanation of the ‘Allah’ issue from the theological standpoint, Anwar took over and riveted the crowd who must have felt some gratitude to Tajuddin Rahman for having giving them added impetus to be present.

‘Allah’ can be used by Christians

Essentially, Anwar rehearsed what he had said earlier at Slim River, the narrative this time having more Islamic inflections.

His skilful staccato attack on the administration of Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak  drew laughter and applause.

He revealed that during his mid-January visit to Lebanon for an Islamic conference, he spoke to renowned preacher Sheikh Yusuf Qardawi and other comparably weighty scholars who held that the term ‘Allah’ can be used by Christians.

He also said these scholars condemned as vicious the attack on his character implied by the sodomy charges preferred against him.

By the time Malaysia’s most famous stump orator wound up close to midnight, the memory of the bannered slurs against his Malay-Muslim identity had faded into the inky night.

And the alleged incident concerning Pasir Salak’s parliamentary rep was reduced to a mere footnote in the larger saga of Sodomy II.

Terence Netto/mkini

Rakaman Video Anwar Ibrahim: Isu terkini – Kadar jenayah tertinggi & engin jet hilang di 1hutan Malaysia

Rakaman Video Anwar Ibrahim: Penerangan Isu Allah

Rakaman Video Ceramah Saifuddin Nasution di Malam Mesra Rakyat, Bkt Sentosa

APCO: jibby Altantuya’s RM20 Million Image Builders Are Israelis & Modi & jibby Altantuya’s Image Builders Have Dictators On Client List

From Times Of India

Worldwide, the company hired by the prime minister to redeem his flagging image, has allegedly offered similar services to dictators and corrupt leaders around the globe, according to The Times of India.

India’s most influential newspaper reported recently that apart from Najib, the Washington-based PR company had also serviced former Nigerian dictator Sani Abacha and Kazakhstan’s life-long

president Nurs

orldwide, the company hired by the prime minister to redeem his flagging image, has allegedly offered similar services to dictators and corrupt leaders around the globe, according to The Times of India.

India’s most influential newspaper reported recently that apart from Najib, the Washington-based PR company had also serviced former Nigerian dictator Sani Abacha and Kazakhstan’s life-long

president Nursultan Abishuly Nazarbayev.

APCO’s clients have also included millionaire Mikhail Khodorkovsky, who was once the youth leader for the Russian Communist Party and who had links with the mafia.

The Times said APCO Worldwide had the capability of re-engineering the image of public figures and leaders who were not popular with the people.

The paper launched an investigation into APCO Worldwide after it was discovered that Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi was a client of the company.

Narendra had been accused of being the cause of religious riots in February 2002, in which 1,000 people were killed, the majority being Muslims.

The Gujarat state government hired APCO Worldwide to re-build Narendra’s image, paying it a fee of US$25,000 a month.

“Although APCO’s services are three time more costly than what other PR firms offer, it was chosen because it had many former Republicans and Democrats acting as consultants,”The Times said.

The Malaysian Government is believed to have anchored APCO with a RM20 million contract immediately after Najib became Prime Minister.

Established in 1984, APCO Worldwide is a global communication company with a network extending across 25 major cities in the world.

Its clients include national governments, corporate holdings, industrial organisations and not-for-profit agencies.

APCO Worldwide set up office in Kuala Lumpur on 1 September 2009 after it was signed on by the Najib Government.

Among the company’s key advisors are experts who once worked with Israel’s Zionist regime. They include Shimon Shein, former Israeli ambassador to Germany, Itamar Rabinovich, former Israeli ambassador to the US and Doron Bergerbest-Eilon, former chief of Israel’s national security agency.

Modi’s Image Builders Have Dictators On Client List

From Times Of India

Adolf Hitler was a brilliant propagandist. Narendra Modi too believes in the power

Which is probably why the chief minister hired a US lobbying firm which has serviced clients like former Nigerian dictator Sani Abacha and President-for-life of Kazakhstan Nursultan Abishuly Nazarbayev.

This Washington-based firm, Apco Worldwide, was hired by Modi sometime in August this year, in the run-up to an important Assembly election, to improve his image before the world community. Among its recent clients are Mikhail Khodorkovsky, a former Communist youth leader-turned-Russian billionaire with mafia links.

The firm has a distinction of taking contracts of boosting images of leaders who fell out of favour of their followers.

On the face of it Apco Worldwide’s brief is to build and sell Brand Gujarat to the international community. But according to sources Modi, who was denied visa by the US earlier because of the taint he earned in the 2002 riots, wants his image to be improved so that he gets to visit the US in future.

The Modi regime feels lobbying is required to attract much-sought after foreign direct investment (FDI) which has been a cause for concern even though Gujarat is topping the charts among Indian states in terms of overall investments, according to latest statistics brought out by the Reserve Bank of India.

Modi, of course, still nurtures the wish to get an US visa and some of his NRI friends have advised him to use the services of lobbyists for the same. Sources in the government told TOI that if it works and Modi comes back to power, Apco’s contract will be renewed in January for Vibrant Gujarat 2009, the event that Modi prides himself in, for bringing investments to the state.

The Gujarat government will pay Apco 25,000 USD per month for the Modi image building exercise.

Sources in the government said Modi thought of this image-building exercise during his visit to Switzerland earlier this year. His government shortlisted some seven national and international firms, without floating tenders of which two were shortlisted. Even though it quoted a sum that was three times more than others, Apco was picked for the job.

The reason given was that Apco has a better team. Apco has former senators from Republican and Democratic parties working with it.

Two in one – the murderer of Altantuya is about to explode: “Those who want the orang utan in KL don’t know the difference between it and a cat.” & “Indians should leave Malaysia to teach the government a lesson”

Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s maiden visit to India has set the South Asian nation’s cyberspace ablaze with comments, with most airing displeasure over his ‘missing’ Indians remark.

Najib will also be the first Malaysian prime minister since Dr Mahathir Mohamad in 1983 to set foot in Tamil Nadu during his three-day trip which ends Saturday.

On the internet, Indian websites were abuzz with comments, the majority of which touched on the case of 39,000 Indian nationals ‘missing’ in Malaysia.

At a press meet with Indian journalists in Putrajaya before his official trip, Najib expressed concern that 39,046 Indians who came to Malaysia with a tourist visa had subsequently disappeared from the immigration radar.

“These people who came to Malaysia through the ‘visa-on-arrival’ facility could be back in India or be among the people here… (maybe) working in Indian restaurants,” he said.

According to him, this is the main reason why the immigration department is not keen on extending the ‘visa on arrival’ facility for those coming from Tamil Nadu.

‘What about the Indonesians?’

In the news site NewKerala.com, numerous commentators vented their frustration over this issue with one of them, Anthony from Sanaa, Yemen, asking, “What about the Indonesians?”

Another comment by a Singaporean pinned the blame on the paltry wages of immigration personnel in Malaysia.

“They are not deporting illegal immigrants because it will dent their income,” he said.

Similar comments also appeared in prominent Tamil news portals such as Dhinamalar.com and Dhinamani.com.

A commentator by the name M Amanullah from Dubai wrote that Indians should leave Malaysia to teach the government a lesson.

He added that the 30,000 ‘missing’ Indians “are not hiding in the jungle” but working in various industries and they should not be hard to locate.

pm’s ‘send orang utan over’ idea irks Sabah

Sabah is resisting a ‘directive’ from Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak that orang utan from Sabah be sent to Kuala Lumpur for eco-tourism purposes.

Apparently Najib has in mind to recreate in KL the famous Sepilok Sanctuary in Sandakan or the Semenggoh Wildlife Sanctuary near Kuching.

Najib’s idea was disclosed to the media in Kuching last Sunday by newly-appointed Federal Deputy Tourism Minister James Dawos Mamit.

“After my swearing in ceremony on Jan 13 in KL, the prime minister asked me, ‘Could we fly one or two orang utan to KL?’” said Mamit.

“I said yes, we could. But we would need a suitable location, preferably a mature tropical jungle or forest.”

Mamit said Najib’s idea needed to be carried out as “it was a directive to him from the prime minister”.

An environmental expert and scientist by training, Mamit has already held talks with the director-general of the forestry department Razani Ujang to find a suitable forest near KL for the primates.

Next, he plans to meet the directors of both Sarawak and Sabah Forest Departments.

“Input from experts is needed so that the orang utan sanctuary in KL will be a big success,” he said, adding that the sanctuary was in line with the government’s intention to make eco-tourism a more prominent sector.

However, Mamit did not know when the sanctuary would be a reality.

Can’t tell difference between orang utan and cat

State Minister for Tourism, Culture and Environment Masidi Manjun is strongly opposed to the idea.

“The reason why God has given the orang utan to Sabah is probably because he knew that they would survive better here,” he said.

“Those who want the orang utan in KL don’t know the difference between it and a cat.”

He added that those who wanted to see them could come to the state.

“How can we just simply allow our iconic primates to be bundled off to KL in this manner?”

Manjun pointed out that moving an orang utan out from its natural habitat involved many technical difficulties, especially from the virgin jungles of Borneo to an urban jungle like KL.

“It’s not as easy as moving a cat from one house to another,” he quipped.

The fact that Sabah had not been consulted on the idea is also a sore point with him.

Mamit has come under fire in Facebook following Masidi’s comments which he also posted on the social networking site.

Nevertheless, time is running out for the orang utan, even in their traditional habitats in Borneo and Sumatra.

Conservationists estimate that the world has less than 20 years to save the charismatic red apes by protecting its jungle habitat in Malaysia and Indonesia.

Joe Fernandez/Mkini

Rakaman Video Anwar Ibrahim di Mesra Rakyat Bkt Sentosa

PKR briefs diplomatic circle on sodomy case/Sidang media PKR selepas pertemuan bersama diplomat asing

PKR held a briefing for the diplomatic community in Kuala Lumpur today concerning Anwar Ibrahim’s second sodomy trial.

The two-hour closed door session took place at the De Palma hotel in Ampang. Among those who attended were representatives from the embassies of Austria, Spain, Britain, Singapore and the European Union.

Speaking at a press conference later, PKR vice president Mustaffa Kamil Ayub said the briefing was held to “update members of the diplomatic community on PKR’s perspective of the events and issues surrounding the sodomy allegation.”

“We have a right to meet up with the diplomats and present to them our side of the story,” he stressed.

PKR deputy president Syed Hussin Ali, who was one of those who conducted the briefing, was pleased with what he called “good response from the diplomatic community in Kuala Lumpur.”

Asked what transpired during the briefing, the veteran politician was tightlipped on the details.

However, he mentioned that some of the diplomats had expressed “concern over the judiciary, such as who will be appointing the judges (in the upcoming trial).”

Syed Husin claimed that the sodomy trial is an attempt by Umno to weaken Pakatan Rakyat.

Allah issue also raised

Other than the sodomy issue, the briefing also touched on PKR’s stand on the ‘Allah’ controversy, which made international news following a spate of attacks on churches.

Others present at the briefing were vice-presidents Lee Boon Chye and R Sivarasa as well as PKR religious understanding bureau chief Muhammad Nur Manuty.

Sivarasa, a lawyer, is also part of the opposition leader’s defence team for the sodomy trial, which is to start next Monday.

Commenting on the case, Sivarasa said: “We are prepared for the trial but remain cautious over what may be in store for them.”

The briefing is the latest in a series of programmes held by PKR in past weeks to garner support for their beleaguered de facto leader.

Last week, Sivarasa along with PAS parliamentarian Khalid Samad and other PKR leaders kicked off a series of grassroots talks in what is to be a road show to explain and gain public support for Anwar.

Hazlan Zakaria/Mkini

God as politics in Malaysia: “The umno-led government’s appeal is waning, not only with the non-Malays but also with the vast majority of Malays who realize that the ruling party has lost its way,”

DENPASAR, Bali – The escalating Allah controversy that has resulted in the bombing of Christian churches across Malaysia has called into question the country’s moderate Muslim credentials and could have major repercussions for political alliances that underpin the United Malays Nasional Organization (UMNO)-led coalition government.

Both main political blocs – UMNO and the Anwar Ibrahim-led Pakatan Rakyat (PR) opposition coalition – have bid to capitalize on the violence, which has devolved from an obscure freedom of expression issue into a volatile matter of internal security that could potentially determine the government’s political survival.

UMNO has so far come out the worse for wear with its credibility shaken and reputation bruised by perceptions it has tacitly condoned the violence targeting Christians. Political analysts believe those perceptions, fanned by online media and blogs, could alienate UMNO’s moderate Muslim base and perhaps more importantly constituencies in the swing states of Sabah and Sarawak, whose parliamentarians help to maintain UMNO’s parliamentary majority.

Some analysts predict that the violence could coax certain constituencies, particularly Christians in Sabah and Sarawak, away from UMNO and towards the PR opposition, potentially paving the way for the parliamentary defections Anwar has long sought to topple the government. Others believe UMNO’s poor handling of the violence could sway more voters against the party at the next election, which already promised to be hotly contested.

UMNO’s politicization of ethnicity and religion has a long history. Many feel those tactics have paved the way for the recent senseless attacks against at least nine churches in the wake last month’s High Court ruling in favor of Catholic weekly newspaper, the Herald, that allowed the publication to use the word “Allah” in reference to the Christian God.

Lim Teck Ghee, director for the Kuala Lumpur-based Center for Policy Initiatives, said that hot-headed Muslims would not have felt emboldened enough to throw firebombs at churches had former prime minister Mahathir Mohammad not “shifted the political goal posts in 2001 by pronouncing Malaysia as an Islamic state”.

Another wedge driven between local religions, Gee says, was former premier Abdullah Badawi’s neglect of inter-faith dialogue in favor of what he characterizes as the former premier’s “empty Islamic Hadhari rhetoric”. He also pinned the blame on academics, a partisan media and the attorney general “for having failed to draw attention to the rise of political party-related religious and right-wing extremism”.

The approach of current UMNO leader and Prime Minister Najib Razak to the controversy has apparently been influenced by the March 2008 election results, which saw the heretofore invincible Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition lose power in five of the federation’s 13 states and yield its long-held two-thirds majority in parliament.

A series of by-elections since have underlined the shift in voter-sentiment away from UMNO and indicated that its past politicking in favor of Malay Muslims over minority groups is no longer the rock-solid strategy it previously was. Minorities, including ethnic Chinese and Indians, constitute 40% of the Malaysian electorate.

The Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC) and the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA), the respective ethnic Indian and Chinese parties of the BN coalition, were virtually wiped off the political map at the last election. Meanwhile, UMNO simultaneously lost substantial support among its traditional Malay Muslim constituency.

The BN currently controls 137 of 220 parliamentary seats; PR, on the other hand, holds sway over 82 seats, while three members of parliament are independent of either coalition. Anwar recently told this correspondent that several BN parliamentarians had long been ready to cross over, but were held back “by fear of repression”.

Those claims are difficult to substantiate, but the Allah controversy has confirmed to many political observers that UMNO has given up trying to revive the political fortunes of the MCA or MIC and is now deliberately moving to withdraw into its conservative, nationalist past.

The earlier decision to ban The Herald from using the word “Allah”, as well as the vociferous reaction to the court verdict last month that reinstated the paper’s right to use the word in its publications was to many observers a thinly veiled attempt to reunite a splintered ethnic Malay vote – which combined represents some 60% of the country’s 26 million people.

That strategy was apparently based on the assumption that the controversy would not alienate the large Christian constituencies in Sabah and Sarawak. Non-Muslims form the majority in the two states and Christians form the single biggest constituency by faith, accounting for 47% of the two Borneo-based states’ combined population.

The Allah controversy’s ripple effect, many agree, has been to discredit UMNO’s claim to ethnic Malay supremacy and emboldened the PR’s clarion call for multiracial harmony. Instead of driving more Muslims intro the UMNO fold, the church attacks seem to have renewed momentum towards an ethnic-blind country and political system.

UMNO’s religious bluff – that the Allah issue represented a threat to Islam and was part of a larger pro-Christian plot to convert Muslims – has been refuted by the opposition-led Parti Islam-se Malaysia (PAS), viewed widely as Malaysia’s most traditional Islamic party. PAS has so far largely stood by The Herald, underscoring the notion that the controversy is not a religious issue, but rather a political one.

As a consequence, PAS could lose appeal with its past core traditional Islamic constituency, but could in the process pick up more moderate Muslims that desert UMNO over the controversy. The opposition party could also benefit from emerging grass roots campaigns that have pinned the blame for the violence squarely on UMNO.

A group consisting of 121 non-governmental organizations and other religious and professional organizations has since the bombings promoted solidarity between religions while at the same time condemned UMNO. Farouk Musa, a leader of the umbrella group, said that such violence against places of worship “is as much an affront to Islam and to all religions as it is to Christians”.

The opposition is bidding to piggyback on those campaigns. “The UMNO-led government’s appeal is waning, not only with the non-Malays but also with the vast majority of Malays who realize that the ruling party has lost its way,” said Anwar in an interview with this correspondent. “UMNO’s ability to hold onto enough seats in parliament will be questioned by many if it continues down this reckless path.”

That promises in the weeks ahead to turn the political focus on Sabah and Sarawak. In those two states, people’s identity is tied mostly to tribe rather than religion or political affiliation, marking a different political culture than other areas of the country. Elections, especially in Sarawak, have historically been dominated by money politics, which UMNO has been able to influence with its access to state coffers.

Sarawak’s 31 seats account for 13% of parliament’s seats, while Sabah’s is slightly less with a tally of 25. All parliamentarians except for two from Sarawak and Sabah are currently aligned with the BN. But a sudden swing in favor of the opposition would mathematically be enough to topple the BN and bring Anwar and the PR to power.

Notably political leaders in the two states have remained muted as the Allah controversy has spiraled. But there are unmistakable signs of grassroots discontent. Some Borneo-based religious leaders, activists and academics have expressed anger over what they perceive as UMNO’s contempt for the collective political weight of Christian voters. Those rising sentiments accentuate what was already a growing sense of alienation in the two states vis-a-vis the wealthier peninsula.

The two states joined Malaya in 1963 on the basis of the so-called 20-point agreement for Sabah and the 18-point agreement for Sarawak. The agreements were written for the purpose of safeguarding the interests, rights and the autonomy of the people of the two states on the formation of the federation. It was originally envisaged that the two states would be two of four entities in the federation, the others being Malaya and Singapore.

Over time, Sabah and Sarawak’s political weight has diminished as two of 13 states in a wider federation, which also comprises three federal territories: Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya. Aside from nominally separate immigration controls, there is little evidence that the two states have maintained any degree of autonomy, including over natural resource exploitation.

In recent years, Sabah in particular has accused Kuala Lumpur of exploiting its resources; some estimate as much as 95% of the profits from Sabah’s natural resources is taken by the federal government. UMNO has arguably been remiss in addressing Sabah’s and Sarawak’s demands for more equitable revenue sharing, opening the way for Anwar’s opposition to make inroads through promises of a better economic deal.

Anwar’s coalition has actively bid to win over local politicians, saying that the coalition “is ready to show strong commitments to at least some of the East Malaysia’s (Sabah and Sarawak ) demands.” At last December’s opposition coalition convention, PR leaders made strong references to Sabah and Sarawak and promised to resolve contested issues on oil royalties and problems facing different local ethnic groups who are among the poorest and least educated in the country.

Whether those promises and growing disenchantment over the church bombings will be enough to win wholesale defections in Sabah and Sarawak is yet to be seen. PR has not yet fully mobilized its election machinery in the two insular states and some doubt that Anwar has done enough yet to win over local hearts and minds. But even if the church bombings motivate a split of the two state’s votes, it could be enough to swing the electoral balance in Anwar’s and the PR’s favor.

Fabio Scarpello is the Southeast Asia correspondent for Adnkronos International. He may be contacted at fscarpello@gmail.com/Asia Times Online

Wawancara bersama Datuk Zaid Ibrahim: pembunuh Altantuya berasa dosa sebab itu dia bagi wang ehsan & umno akan gagal jatuhkan Nik Aziz

Sialnya orang yang duduk bersama pembunuh Altantuya: Makkal Sakti party president sacked

The Malaysian Makkal Sakti Party (MMSP) inquiry committee today revoked the membership of its president RS Thanenthiran after he failed to answer several charges against him.

Thanenthiran did not turn up at the meeting, chaired by central committee member R Thakurdas, which was held at the party headquarters in Shah Alam.

The decision was made by 14 of the 27 central committee members after an hour-long meeting. The remaining 13 members were not present.

Speaking to reporters later, MMSP deputy president A Vathemurthy claimed that out of the 13, six were fence sitters while the rest were aligned to the president.

At the meeting it was also decided that Vathemurthy holds the position of acting president while secretary-general R Kannan said Thanenthiran’s attempt to amend the constitution was discovered.

Vathermurthy, who is not interested in taking over the reins, said the next president would be announced on Feb 7.

He however did not discount the possibility of party advisor and businessman ‘Ohms’ Thiagarajan assuming the post.

EGM, only way out for Thanenthiran

As for Thanenthiran’s fate, Thakurdas said the only way of overturning this decision is via an emergency general meeting.

“He has to gain majority support from the members to challenge this decision,” he said, prompting Vathemurthy to add that they have no personal grouses against Thanenthiran.

Kannan meanwhile confirmed that he would be updating the Registrar of Societies on the latest developments.

“A chronology of events would also be sent to the Prime Minister’s Office and the police,” he added.

This morning, the central committee members discovered that the party premises was locked, forcing them to call in a locksmith.

They also discovered that the office was broken into, with some party documents and a CPU missing.

Kannan said they have filed a police report on the incident.

Tanenthiran’s brother and party vice-president, who arrived later, said they would not recognise the decision of the inquiry committee.

He also revealed that Thanenthiran would call for a meeting on Jan 21 with regards to the show cause letters sent to members aligned to Vathemurthy

The Barisan Nasional-friendly MMSP was launched in October by Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak. K Pragalath/Mkini

Isu Peruntukan, umno bn Langgar Federalisme: Peruntukan dari wang Rakyat disalurkan kepada umno & disalahgunakan

greenboc

Who financed PWTC? YOU DID, says book

The book chronicling the life and politics of Dr Mahathir Mohamad has made a startling allegation that the Umno headquarters – Putra World Trade Centre – was financed, in part, by taxpayers.

In the Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times, author Barry Wain writes that the government “persuaded” state-owned banks to forgive a large chunk of the loans to finance the project.

The author, who referenced this information to a 2007 interview with former Finance Minister Daim Zainuddin, said the banks had written off at least RM140 million in accumulated interest.

According to a confidential accountants’ report commissioned by Umno in 1985, which Wain had obtained, the PWTC’s eventual price tag was at RM360 million.

The report said the sum was financed by loans of RM199.5 million from state-owned Bank Bumiputera Malaysia Berhad and RM64.9 million from Malayan Banking Bhd, as they were then known.

Additionally, the accountants’ report states that as of March 1986, the Umno appointed company to construct the building, Khidmat Bersatu Sdn Bhd, had only paid RM51,570 in interest.

Umno’s free flowing cash cow

“And the report… made it clear the company would pay no more,” wrote Wain, in the fifth chapter of his book, titled A Volatile Mix of Business and Politics.

“Malaysian taxpayers had subsidised the construction of Umno’s landmark headquarters, which became a cash cow for the party,” he concluded.

Wain’s allegations adds to the string of controversies over how Umno’s financed the iconic 42-story office building, which is still serves as one of the country’s most important convention centres.

The book details, what is already public knowledge, of how the Federal Government threw a debt-ridden Umno a lifeline in 1986, by awarding the party-owned United Engineers (Malaysia) Bhd a RM3.42 billion contract for the North-South Highway, better known by its Malay acronym of PLUS.

“In the case of the PLUS project, it is a means of Umno solving its problems by repaying loans taken for the new Umno headquarters building,” Najib Abdul Razak, then culture, youth and sports minister, was quoted in the book as saying.

‘As long as Umno is in government…’

But as the party went into turmoil in 1988 – which saw the party being de-registered and being reorganised into a new party – its assets were caught in tangle of complications.

After years of failing to service the loan, Bank Bumiputra obtained a court approval to auction off PWTC, which was stalled by Umno which tried to renegotiate a refinancing plan.

“It was a magnanimous gesture, considering that Umno had failed to make any payments for years, though not surprising, since Umno effectively controlled Bank Bumiputra,” wrote Wain.

Referring to the author’s 2007 interview with Daim, the latter was quoted saying, “As long as Umno is the government, the bank will not disturb you”.

PWTC was conceptualised during the 1975 Umno general assembly while construction proper began in November 1982.

Wain’s book is currently under scrutiny by the Home Ministry which have withheld sale of the book. The book is enjoying brisk sales in neighbouring Singapore.

The author was the former editor of the Asian Wall Street Journal and is currently attached to the Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore. Mkini

Anwar tells Muslim thinkers to ask right questions

Anwar Ibrahim told a gathering at the International Institute of Islamic Thought in Beirut earlier this week that Muslims should frame the right questions for a better grasp of the riddles of modern existence.

Speaking at a panel discussion attended by renowned Muslim scholars and intellectuals from over 100 countries, Anwar said that rather than ask, “What is the Islamic concept of knowledge?” Muslims ought to ask, “How have Muslims understood knowledge?”

He explained that using better-framed questions would lead to an enquiry of the earliest history of Islam without the burdens of prejudice and misperceptions accumulated over time.

“Invariably, in this quest, we will encounter societies where diversity of views was not only tolerated but seen as a blessing of providence.”

Anwar said that history has shown Muslims have worked with people of other cultures and faiths in dialogue, while still retaining their ideals.

“More significantly though less apparently, it will also show that non-Muslims had in the past reached out to us to engage with problems of our times.”

Anwar draws the line

In citing the example of the Egyptian scribe, Rifa’ah Rafi Tahtawi, who spent five years in France in the early 19th century trying to understand the ideals of the French Revolution, Anwar drew the line against the nihilistic trends that some of the European Enlightenment’s liberal ideas have tended to.

Anwar said that Rifa’ah, who was one of the earliest of the progressive reformists in Islam, could not have appreciated some of the European Enlightenment’s leading ideas without being steeped in the tradition of Islamic political thought.

He said that Rifa’ah’s musings on humankind’s role in society, the principle of justice being essential for a good society, and welfare as the guiding purpose of government, were the fruit of his attempt to synthesise Islamic ideals with Enlightenment currents.

The Malaysian opposition leader also held forth on the need of Muslims to treat minorities living in their midst with consideration as to their needs in education and other fields.

“Democracy of education through empowerment of minorities in Muslim countries is therefore a relevant issue that warrants renewed focus by Muslim majorities as that would be reflective of the attitude Muslim minorities bear when living in similar situations,” he said.

Terence Netto/Mkini

umno bn Terdesak Guna Isu Kalimah Allah

greenboc

Tian visits Gurdwara Sahib Sentul

Stop picking on Anwar, hishammuddin @ kris minister told: “The people are observing the way this issue is being handled by the government, and are pointing their finger directly at Umno,”

Pakatan Rakyat leaders have told Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein to stop fingering Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim in order to divert attention from the recent vandalism and violence against churches.

They were referring to the minister’s warning to all politicians – but singling out Anwar  – who are ngaging various religious groups over attacks on churches or who are taking advantage of the situation to cause tension.

Nine churches and one school have been targeted following the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s ruling on Dec 31 last year to allow Catholic weekly magazine Herald to use the word ‘Allah’ in its Bahasa Malaysia version.

Yesterday evening, the front door of a Sikh temple in Sentul was damaged after stones were thrown at it.

Newly-appointed PKR secretary-general Saifuddin Nasution said that targeting Anwar is essentially an attempt to cover up Hishammuddin’s failure in handling the issue thus far.

“His statement saying that the home ministry will investigate Anwar if he harps on religious sentiments over the ‘Allah’ controversy is irresponsible,” Saifuddin said when contacted.

“By right, Hishammudin should investigate the prime minister (Najib Abdul Razak) and himself, because both of them supported the demonstrations by extremist groups last Friday. As a result, this has become a heated matter.”

Saifuddin, who is also the Machang MP, reiterated that PKR stands by Anwar’s call for people to remain calm and not get involved in any action that may jeopardise peace.

Unlike BN politicians, he said Pakatan leaders have visited churches and the Sikh temple to express sympathy and respect for freedom of religion.

“The action of PKR leaders is not to gain political mileage. The opportunists are those in Umno. The police should take immediate action to prove that they are serious (about bringing the perpetrators to book),” he added.

Anwar has further blamed the federal government for having added to the situation.

Inquiry crucial

Similarly, PAS secretary-general Mahfuz Omar said the minister is evading the real issue.

“The people are observing the way this issue is being handled by the government, and are pointing their finger directly at Umno,” he said.

“So (the government is) diverting attention towards the opposition by insinuating that we are trying to manipulate the issue.”

Mahfuz said that creating a royal commission of inquiry would reveal the root causes of the problem, and enable solutions to be agreed upon.

“At very least, a White Paper should be tabled in Parliament,” he said.

DAP stalwart Lim Kit Siang pointed out that Hishammuddin’s statement has only revealed that public confidence in him is eroding.

“Hishammuddin is too truculent and controversial an Umno leader to be a good and professional home minister to inspire confidence that he will not use his ministerial powers for party political ends,” said Lim.

“Why is he talking about action against Anwar when he has not been able to take any action over the past five days against anyone for the spate of attacks on places of worship?”

Lim asserted that it is unbecoming and irresponsible of the minister to have said that the government cannot prohibit the people from expressing their views over the use of ‘Allah’.

He added that it is time for Hishammdudin “to become a good, effective, non-controversial and professional home minister and to stop playing Umno politics”. S Pathmawathy & Nigel Aw/Mkini

Money leaving Malaysia in massive amounts and bizarre fashion – Plus Loses in Forex trading by bank negara

SHAH ALAM: Malaysia’s once strong foreign exchange reserves is bordering on collapse, according to a UBS Securities Asia Limited report.  It says that in 2009,  Malaysia experienced the biggest foreign exchange reserve losses among Asian countries.

It says official reserves fell by  more than one-quarter on a valuation-adjusted basis.

Describing the situation as bizarre, it notes that Malaysia used to have the largest current account surplus in Asia–at around 17% of  GDP.

“Over the past 12 months, Malaysian reserves nearly collapsed” while neighbours like Thailand, Singapore, Taiwan, Hong Kong and China “have seen  sizeable increases,” it says.

It says foreign capital outflows from Malaysia in the last year was nearly 50 percent of its GDP.

“When we measure implied net flows using the same rough methodology as in used on Russia,  the numbers are simply stunning.  [Malaysia showed] peak outflows of nearly 50% of GDP,” it says, noting that the outflow was larger than anything witnessed in the world of emerging markets (EM).

The report also says Malaysia over the past 12 months recorded one of the biggest base money contractions in the entire EM world.

It asserts that recent outflows were “far, far bigger than those Malaysia experienced in the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis.”

The full report follows:

Malaysia–Another Bizarre Story

Confusion is a word we have invented for an order which is not understood. — Henry Miller

What it means
After last year’s series of notes on EM countries with “bizarre” money and credit behavior (Chile, Kazakhstan and Vietnam, see Tales of the Bizarre, EM Daily, 4-6 November 2009), we need to add one more to the list: the very strange case of Malaysia.
Question: which Asian country had the biggest FX reserve losses in 2009? The answer is Malaysia, and by a very wide margin; we estimate that official reserves fell by well more than one-quarter on a valuation-adjusted basis.  Why is this bizarre? Well, in the first place because Malaysia runs a current account surplus – and not just a mild surplus but rather the largest in Asia, around 17% of GDP. Other structural surplus neighbors like China, Hong Kong, Singapore, Taiwan and Thailand have all seen sizeable increases in FX reserves over the past 12 months … and yet Malaysian reserves nearly collapsed.

How did this happen? In short, Malaysia must have seen massive foreign capital outflows – and sure enough, when we measure implied net flows using the same rough methodology as in our note on Russia earlier in the week (Watching Money in Russia, EM Daily, 5 January 2010), the numbers are simply stunning: peak outflows of nearly 50% of GDP, i.e., more than twice as large as in the “capital flight” case of Russia and many orders of magnitude larger than anything witnessed in the average EM country (Chart 2).1 In fact, the
recent outflows are far, far bigger than those Malaysia experienced in the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis (Chart 3).

It gets stranger. Unlike Russia, Ukraine, the Gulf states or other recent EM capital flight economies, Malaysia didn’t see any net external inflows in the run-up to the current crisis. Indeed, Malaysia has not recorded a year of positive net capital inflows since 1997, i.e., there wasn’t exactly a large pool of “hot” money parked onshore waiting to leave. Nonetheless, as shown in the above charts, capital is apparently still leaving Malaysia in large quantities as of the latest data points – long after most other emerging countries began to see net inflows again.

1 Implied capital flows in Chart 2 are defined as the difference between valuation-adjusted FX reserve accumulation and the current account balance. Flows in Chart 3 are defined as the difference between the overall balance of payments and the current account balance.

Nor, in contrast to all the above-named economies (and in contrast to Eastern Europe in general), did Malaysia have any noticeable increase in domestic leverage – both broad money M2 and bank credit actually declined as a share of GDP since the beginning of the decade.

So where on earth did the outflows come from?

Certainly not local deposits. Unlike Russia, Ukraine or other CIS economies, there was no outflow from the domestic deposit base; M2 growth in Malaysia is still very comfortably positive, in sharp contrast to the Russian figures we published a few days ago (Chart 4).

And this despite a massive, unprecedented decline in high-powered “base” money, as shown in Chart 4. Indeed, over the past 12 months Malaysia recorded one of the biggest base money contractions in the entire EM world, matched only by the Baltic states (Chart 5). This is in part because the Malaysian central bank responded with a sharp drop in reserve requirements to keep banks liquid … but still, we can’t help but note that the domestic financial system seems uniquely unaffected by apparent capital outflows.

In fact, perhaps the most surprising feature of the economy is that interest rates have fallen steadily. In 1997-98, with much lower ex-post outflow pressures, Malaysian short-term interest rates skyrocketed into the high teens; last year the same thing happened in some other countries with strong outflows pressures. Meanwhile, during 2009 Malaysian rates settled in comfortably at around 2% per annum and show no signs of rising substantially any time soon. What is going on? How do we square this circle? To be honest, we’re not really sure – but we strongly suggest the interested reader turn to ASEAN economist Ed Teather for further answers. For additional information on Malaysia, Ed Teather can be reached at edward.teather@ubs.com.

• Analyst Certification

Each research analyst primarily responsible for the content of this research report, in whole or in part, certifies that with respect to each security or issuer that the analyst covered in this report: (1) all of the views expressed accurately reflect his or her personal views about those securities or issuers; and (2) no part of his or her compensation was, is, or will be, directly or indirectly, related to the specific recommendations or views expressed by that research analyst in the research report.

Required Disclosures

This report has been prepared by UBS Securities Asia Limited, an affiliate of UBS AG. UBS AG, its subsidiaries,branches and affiliates are referred to herein as UBS. For information on the ways in which UBS manages conflicts and maintains independence of its research product; historical performance information; and certain additional disclosures concerning UBS research recommendations, please visit www.ubs.com/disclosures. The figures contained in performance charts refer to the past; past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results. Additional information will be made available upon request.

Company Disclosures

Issuer Name
Chile
China (Peoples Republic of)
Kazakhstan
Malaysia
Russia
Singapore
Taiwan
Thailand (Kingdom of)
Ukraine
Vietnam4
Source: UBS; as of 08 Jan 2010.

4. Within the past 12 months, UBS AG, its affiliates or subsidiaries has received compensation for investment banking services from this company/entity. Free Malaysia Today

macc willing to meet Bala anywhere. Is it so? Why don’t macc get in touch with Americk, the lawyer?

The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) is willing to meet private investigator P Balasubramaniam “anywhere and anytime” to record his statement.

New MACC head Abu Kassim Mohamed said it is most important for the commission to meet Balasubramaniam, who has made damaging allegations against the premier’s younger brother Nazim Abdul Razak.

“He is the main witness. Without him, the investigations would not be complete. (To) those people involved, please come forward or (tell us if) you want us to meet you anywhere,” Abu Kassim told a press conference today.

“There will be no conditions imposed. We are looking forward to recording his statement.”

Balasubramaniam had claimed in an interview posted on Youtube last year that Nazim had offered him RM5 million to retract a statutory declaration linking the premier to slain Mongolian woman Altantuya Shaariibuu.

The private eye had fled Malaysia with his family on July 5, 2008, after making a second declaration overnight that contradicted the contents of the first.

MACC deputy chief commissioner Mohd Shukri Abdull, who was at the press conference, said efforts are being made to contact Balasubramaniam, but would not reveal details.

“I too urge him to come forward. He is a MACC witness. We do not want to charge him. If he wants to meet with us anywhere, that should not be a problem,” he said.

Balasubramaniam’s lawyer Americk Singh had previously said his client is willing to assist the MACC in its investigations, based on prior conditions.

Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak has refused to respond to the allegation which he described as “frivolous“, while Nazim had nothing to say.

Hafiz Yatim/Mkini

Rakaman Video Tok Guru: Dasar sempit umno tolak sifat hormat Agama punca serangan gereja

greenboc

PAS disagree with use of ISA against arsonists: PAS hopes that the minister will not opt for the easy way out and make this issue into the second ‘Ops Lalang’

Islamist party PAS has condemned the attacks on churches since Jan 8 over the usage of the term ‘Allah’ in the Malay-language edition of Catholic weekly Herald.

The party also expressed regret over Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein’s threat to invoke the draconian Internal Security Act (ISA) to solve the matter.

Hishammuddin’s threat, says the party’s information chief Idris Ahmad belies Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s assurances that the country is safe.

In a statement today, PAS said that Hishammuddin has failed to solve the problem. The authorities have however claimed to have identified one suspect in the arson attack on the Metro Tabernacle Church in Desa Melawati.

“Until now the people are still posing questions on the further action of the police on the suspects.

“When will the suspects be arrested and prosecuted in court? The people are increasingly worried as everyday there is a church that is targeted,” said Idris.

Nine churches and counting

As of now nine churches and one school has been targeted following the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s ruling on Dec 31 to allow Herald to use the word ‘Allah’.

Although the court had granted the Home Ministry a stay of execution pending appeal a week later, after the attorney-general intervened, the attacks continued.

Yesterday, the government, in a rare move, announced that it will call for an inter-faith dialogue between various religious leaders to reach common grounds on the matter.

Politicians from both the ruling coalition and the opposition have condemned the attacks and appealed for calm among the public.

“PAS hopes that the minister will not opt for the easy way out and make this issue into the second ‘Ops Lalang’

“The suspects who had committed the crime are not arrested while others are hauled under ISA,” said Idris in the statement.

“The issue of the usage of the word ‘Allah’ can be solved in a reasonable manner and not through violent means.” / Mkini