Rakaman video ucapan dasar Presiden keADILan, DSWA

Rakaman video Anwar Ibrahim: Katak menerima habuan RM 2 juta untuk lompat

Rakaman video spr ditempelak kerana cubaan menghalang pendaftaran pemilih baru

Rakaman video Ucapan DSWA: Kita adalah Masa Depan

Rakaman video Manikumar, ADUN Bkt Selambau: Beliau tetap kekal bersama keADILan & bukti umno flip-flop serta geng senatak ezam/sallehudin tipu, dulu pun kata setiap minggu satu MP keluar parti, tak jadi juga

Rakaman video: KeADIlan akan jadi semakin kuat selepas proses pembersihan najis katak

Petrol prices could go up an initial 15 sen – it’s about time to change the federal govt

The government could hike petrol prices by an initial 15 sen per litre from their current price at some stage this year under plans presented by a body advising the government on how to cut subsidies.

The benchmark RON 95 grade currently costs RM1.80 per litre.

The proposals were made in a public presentation on today to win over voters to accepting higher prices as Malaysia seeks to reduce its budget deficit which stood at a 20-year high of 7 percent of gross domestic product in 2009.

Under the proposals presented by the advisory body, the price of petrol would be hiked some time this year followed by two price hikes totalling 20 sen per litre in 2011 and two more of 20 sen per litre in 2012.

In 2013-2015, the price hikes would slow and by the end of 2015, the price of RON95 would stand at RM2.60 per litre,
according to the plans that have yet to be approved by the government.

The forecasts were based on a crude oil price forecast of US$73.06 per barrel for 2011 and US$79.41-US$94.52 for 2013-2015.

Subsidy cut proposals

The government will hike petrol, gas and toll highway rates under a five-year plan to cut subsidies, if the proposals made by Pemandu, a body advising the government on how to cut subsidies are enacted.

It has yet to make a decision on the planned subsidy cuts and may not do so for some months.

Subsidy cuts proposed involving 12 items:

Petrol

Petrol prices to be increased 15 sen in June-Dec 2010, then 10 sen hikes every six months between Jan 2011-Dec 2012 and by a lesser amount in following years.

Petrol prices seen at (per litre):

2011 – RM2.16
2012 – RM2.20
2013 – RM2.34
2014 – RM2.52
2015 – RM2.60

The forecast for crude oil in 2011 is US$73.06 per barrel and for 2013-2015 in the region of US$79.41-94.52.

Tolls

Renegotiation with PLUS highways in 2010 and with LDP Highways by 2013.

Propose that all concession agreements would proceed without subsidies, resulting in a toll hike of between 10-67 percent for 2010.

Gas

Gas price is increased by a fixed rate of RM3/MMBTU every six months from initial increase for power sector and non-power
sector.

Gas price increase of RM3/MMBTU every six months corresponds to an increase in electricity tariff of 1.6 sen/kWh every six months.

Electricity tariff for lifeline consumers (in 2010, less than 200 kWh) would not be increased. About 56 percent of households will not be affected in 2010.

Consumers with a monthly bill of 20 ringgit and below will continue to get free electricity until Dec 2010.

Strategic industries will be protected initially.

Food items

Sugar to be increased by 20 sen per kg for every six months until 2012

Flour to increased by 20 sen per kg in 2010 and 25 sen per kg in 2011

Cooking oil to be increased by 15 percent per kg in 2010 and 2011 and 5 percent every year until 2014.

Mitigation plans

Cash rebates of 126 ringgit for owners of cars with engine capacity less than 1,000cc and 54 ringgit for owners of small motorbikes.

20 percent discount for frequent toll users

Cash rebate of 20 ringgit for anyone with an identification card

Inflationary impact

Estimated impact on inflation if all subsidy cuts made: Consumer Price Index (CPI) would accelerate to 4 percent in 2011 and 2012

Estimated impact on inflation just from petrol price hikes:

• A 5 percent increase in petrol prices would result in a 0.4 percentage points rise in the consumer price index.

• A 10 percent increase would cause the CPI to go up by 0.82 percentage points. Fuel represents 7.7 percent of the CPI basket.

Total savings

In 2010, government will save about RM3 billion.

2011 – RM14 billion
2012 – RM21 billion
2013 – RM29.5 billion
2014 – RM35 billion

Total savings of 103 billion ringgit in 5 years.

- Reuters/Mkini

Rakaman video Anwar Ibrahim: Jangan biar isu yang direka oleh umno flip-flop menjadi penghalang kepada perjuangan keADILan.

Rakaman video Judi bola: JAIS, mufti S’gor dibidas kerana membisu serta MP Shah Alam cabar Ezam bertanding kerusinya

MP Rakaman video PAS minta Kerajaan tarik balik Judi Bolasepak

Rakaman video Anwar Ibrahim: Katak lompat telah dihentikan sungguhpun Rm50juta diperuntukan untuk tujuan demikian

Rakaan Video PC Pas hantar Memo kepada Majlis Raja-raja.

Rakaman Ceramah Anwar Ibrahim di Melaka: Lagi tekan lagi dapat sokongan

Rakaman Demo membantah lesen judi bola

Rakaman video Ceramah Anwar Ibrahim di Tg Karang

Return of Ghost of Altantuya: Bala still waiting to meet MACC

Private investigator P Balasubramaniam is still waiting to be interviewed by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and reiterated he was “ready, willing and able to do so”.

In a letter sent to the media, signed by his lawyers Manjeet Singh Dhillon and Americk Sidhu, the private eye who was a witness in the murder case of Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariiibuu, has offered July and London as the date and place for his meeting with the graft-busters.

According to his lawyers, Balasubramaniam has yet to receive a formal letter from MACC despite deputy commissioner Shukri Abdull have publicly said that they would meet with the private investigator “anywhere he felt appropriate”.

Shukri has also stated that MACC had no objections to Balasubramaniam’s lawyers being present when his statement was being recorded.

No follow-up from MACC

Manjeet and Americk have described this as a “pleasant surprise” as the MACC had earlier insisted that the interview be conducted at the Malaysian High Commission in Singapore and the conversation would be classified under the Official Secrets Act.

However, they said Balasubramaniam is still waiting for MACC to follow-up on its offer.

“We had anticipated that this announcement would have been presented to us in the form of a written response to our letter dated Jan 22 but unfortunately this has not happened.”

On July 3, 2008, Balasubramaniam made a sensational statutory declaration pertaining to the murder of Altantuya but retracted it the next day, and subsequently left the country with his family.

He claimed that he was offered huge sums of money to withdraw the damning statutory declaration which drew a link between Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and Mongolian national Altantuya. Mkini

Displin & Katak lompat agenda Mesyuarat Agung Tahunan Parti keADiLan Rakyat di Kota Baru

Rakaman video PC berkenaan mahasiswa terlibat dalam kempen: ukm digesa tarik pertuduhan

Keputusan PRK Sibu Mengikut Daerah Mengundi, Tempat Mengundi & Saluran

Rakaman video Selepas Tsunami: Apa yg berubah?

Official Result of Sibu By election: Dap: 18,845 , be end Altantuya: 18,447, Majoriti:398

Election Commission makes official announcement:

DAP – 18,845
BN – 18,447
Ind -232

Majority – 398

The two-hour delay in the announcement of the result was due to a dispute in the postal ballots where 208 votes were rejected. This however did not change the final result.

The final result of the postal ballots:

DAP – 70
BN – 2,323
Ind – 36

Rejected postal votes – 208

Rakaman video PRK Sibu 2010 : Anwar Ibrahim di Teku

Rakaman video Gobalakrishnan di Skudai, Johor : Lawan tetap lawan, sungguhpun didenda RM3000, tidak seperti mereka yang hutang keliling pinggang & kaki main perempuan jadi katak terhina

Rakaman video – Tidak konsisten: Anwar dakwa Saiful pembohong

Rakaman video PC Anwar Ibrahim: bik mama, jib Altantuya terlibat dalam komplot sodomee 2

‘BERJAYA Milik cukong VINCENT TAN perolehi lesen judi bolasepak’: Mana dia pemuda umno kluk klek, perkasa, yang riuh sekampung pasal Kuda Zaid Ibrahim?

Meskipun mendapat bantahan daripada pelbagai pihak, kerajaan meneruskan keputusannya untuk mengeluarkan lesen judi semasa kejohanan bola sepak Piala Dunia 2010 berlangsung awal bulan depan. menteri kewangan semalam secara rasminya memberi lesen judi berkenaan kepada Kumpulan BERJAYA.

Sehubungan itu pertaruhan secara sah boleh dilakukan sebelum kejohanan bolasepak itu bermula pada 11 Jun ini.

BERJAYA akan menjadi syarikat tunggal pertaruhan bolasepak di negara ini yang mempunyai lesen.

Ia dijangka akan menggunakan lebih dua ratus kedai pertaruhan Toto yang dimilikinya itu untuk menerima pertaruhan.

Sebelum ini, ada pihak yang bimbang rangkaian kedai serbanika, 7-eleven yang juga dimiliki Kumpulan BERJAYA akan digunakan untuk tujuan yang sama.

Sin Chew memetik sumber yang berkata, masyarakat Islam akan dilarang daripada terbabit dengan pertaruhan bolasepak itu.

BERJAYA pada 11 Mei lalu memohon sahamnya di Bursa Kuala Lumpur digantung hari ini mulai jam 9 pagi hingga 5 petang sementara menunggu pengumuman lanjut berhubung cadangan menaikkan modalnya.

Ketika dihubungi pegawai BERJAYA berkata kenyataan media akan dikeluarkan hari ini.

Pada 6 Mei lalu, Timbalan Menteri Kewangan, Datuk Awang Adek Hussein, berkata tindakan kerajaan itu bagi mengelak berleluasanya aktiviti perjudian dan pertaruhan haram di negara ini.

Katanya, jika kerajaan tidak mengeluarkan lesen kepada pihak yang memohon, aktiviti perjudian dan pertaruhan haram tetap berlaku tanpa kawalan dan pemantauan pihak berkuasa. Mkini

Rakaman video Keluarga Arwah Aminulrasyid Mahu polis minta maaf

Rakaman video Pas: Program 13 May ‘Melayu Bangkit’ bersifat perkauman & Di Sibu, Kalau Bawa Isu Kalimah Allah, akan dikenakan IsA – apco umno/bn klek kluk sangat desperate di Sibu – mereka tahu 66% Cina 30% Melayu & 30% Iban undi PR maka mereka akan kalah!!

SIBU, 11 Mei — Parti-parti politik dilarang daripada menggunakan polemik penggunaan kalimah “Allah” — antara isu hangat — sebagai bahan kempen pilihan raya kecil kerusi Parlimen yang sedang berlangsung.

Arahan itu dikeluarkan oleh Polis Sarawak beberapa jam selepas majlis anjuran DAP bagi penganut Kristian semalam, yang mendapat sambutan, di mana pemimpin parti itu menggesa pengundi menunjukkan protes berhubung isu “Allah” pada 16 Mei ini.

Pengundian pilihan raya kecil ini akan berlangsung Ahad ini. Kempen bermula Sabtu lalu.

Larangan itu diumumkan oleh Ketua Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah Sarawak SAC II Huzir Mohamed yang turut memberi amaran akan mengambil tindakan di bawah Akta Hasutan atau Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri terhadap mereka mengingkari arahan itu.

“Kami sedang memantau ceramah dan mendapati ada parti politik yang menggunakan kalimah Allah sebagai satu isu,” kata Huzir pada sidang media di sini hari ini.

“Ini satu isu yang sensitif. Kami menasihatkan semua pihak daripada berhenti menggunakan isu sama sekali,” kata beliau sambil menambah, jika ada mana-mana pihak yang menggunakan isu ini, “kami akan mengambil tindakan.”

Dalam pada itu, dengan menamakan Menteri Dalam Negeri Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein, DAP bertanya sama ada polis akan menahan mereka yang bertanggungjawab membangkitkan isu berkenaan

“Biar Perdana Menteri menjelaskan sama ada ini adalah arahan beliau,” kata Penasihat DAP, Lim Kit Siang dengan menegaskan pihaknya tidak akan mematuhi arahan tersebut.

Setiausaha Publisiti DAP Tony Pua berkata, Barisan Nasional (BN) menerusi SUPP juga bertanggungjawab membawa isu-isu sensitif dalam kempen di sini.

“Jika isu ‘Allah’ tidak boleh dibangkitkan, mengapa mereka menggunakan isu negara Islam,” katanya.

Pemimpin-pemimpin SUPP mendakwa DAP menyokong penubuhan negara Islam kerana ia bekerjasama dengan PAS dalam Pakatan Rakyat (PR).

DAP menjadikan isu kalimah “Allah” sebagai bahan kempen utama dengan calonnya, Wong Ho Leng berjanji akan menyelesaikan perkara itu jika dipilih hujung minggu ini.

Bagaimanapun calon BN Robert Lau Hui Yew dari SUPP menganggap ia sebagai isu kebangsaan memandangkan larangan “Allah” tidak berbangkit di Sibu sama sekali.

Isu polemik kalimah Allah menjadi isu sejak 2007 selepas Kementerian Dalam Negeri menggunakan keputusan Kabinet 1986 untuk melarang bukan Islam daripada menggunakan sesetengah perkataan dalam bahasa Arab, antaranya “Allah” termasuk oleh akhbar mingguan Katolik Herald.

Bagaimanapun penerbit akhbar itu menang dalam kes mereka yang diputuskan akhir tahun lalu, tetapi ia berakhir dengan kontroversi apabila beberapa rumah ibadat diserang, kebanyakannya gereja.

Januari lalu, Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz memberi jaminan kepada masyarakat Kristian di Sabah dan Sarawak bahawa larangan “Allah” tidak akan memberi kesan kepada mereka.

Kira-kira 53 peratus daripada 55,000 pengundi di kawasan Sibu merupakan masyarakat Kristian. MI

Rakaman Video PC Anwar Ibrahim di Mahkamah Tinggi Jalan Duta

Bekas mufti: Jangan halalkan pertaruhan kejohanan Piala Dunia (Disebabkan oleh hutang judi bola beratus ribu ringgit, MP Nibong Tebal kena lompat parti)

KUALA LUMPUR, 10 Mei — Bekas mufti Perlis Dr. Mohd. Asri Zainul Abidin (gambar) menggesa kerajaan mengkaji balik langkah mempertimbangkan kemungkinan mengeluarkan lesen untuk membenarkan pertaruhan dilakukan semasa kejohanan bola sepak Piala Dunia 2010 berlangsung bulan depan.

Sehubungan itu kata Asri, beliau juga mahu rakyat pelbagai kaum dan agama agar membantah usaha tersebut.

Sambil menekankan peranan pemerintah adalah mencegah keburukan, bukan menaja atau bersaing dengan penjenayah, Asri memberitahu, cadangan tersebut hanya mengubah ‘taukeh’ yang tidak berlesen kepada yang berlesen.

“Apakah nanti mungkin kita akan wujudkan tempat ‘hisap candu berlesen’ untuk mengelakkan penagih candu menghisapnya di tempat yang tidak berlesen?

“Jangan fikir lesen dan cukai keuntungan sahaja, kerajaan hendaklah berfikir kesan yang akan menimpa rakyat nanti.

“Maka, saya sekali lagi membantah cadangan ini dan meminta semua rakyat Malaysia yang waras dan mempunyai nilai-nilai agama dan moral membantah cadangan ini,” kata beliau dalam satu kenyataan dikeluarkan.

Asri berpendapat bahawa judi sama ada ‘dilesenkan’ atau tidak keburukannya sentiasa dominan dan akan menyebabkan pembaziran tanpa sebab, sikap bergantung nasib tanpa kewarasan, merosakkan keluarga, menimbulkan tabiat suka berhutang, membawa kepada kejatuhan ekonomi individu secara mengejut dan ketagihan tabiat buruk tersebut yang luar biasa.

“Akal waras manusia dari semua aliran agama dan masyarakat, bahkan yang tidak beragama pun tetap menyatakan judi selalu merosakkan masyarakat.

“Jika pun judi itu untuk masyarakat bukan Islam, saya tetap katakan masyarakat Malaysia bukan masyarakat judi.

“Tiada ajaran mana-mana agama yang menggalakkan judi. Tiada siapa pun dalam mana-mana bangsa atau agama dalam negara ini sanggup untuk mendakwa ‘judi adalah budaya kami’, atau ‘kebanggaan hidup kami’,” katanya.

Khamis lalu, Timbalan Menteri Kewangan Datuk Dr Awang Adek Hussein berkata kerajaan mempertimbangkan kemungkinan mengeluarkan lesen untuk membenarkan pertaruhan dilakukan semasa kejohanan bola sepak Piala Dunia 2010 berlangsung awal bulan depan bagi mengelak berleluasanya aktiviti perjudian dan pertaruhan haram di negara ini.

Kata beliau, jika kerajaan tidak mengeluarkan lesen kepada pihak yang memohon, aktiviti perjudian dan pertaruhan haram tetap berlaku tanpa kawalan dan pemantauan pihak berkuasa.

“Ada beberapa perkara penting untuk dikaji sama ada perkara ini (mengeluarkan lesen membenarkan pertaruhan) baik bagi kerajaan atau jika kerajaan boleh cuba mengawalnya untuk mengetahui berapa banyak (jumlah wang daripada pertaruhan haram).

“Kerajaan sedang mengkaji perkara ini dan akan memutuskannya jika mahu membenarkan pertaruhan memandangkan kejohanan Piala Dunia ini semakin hampir,” katanya. MI

Ceramah Anwar Ibrahim di Skudai Johor

Sibu: It’s a three-corner fight

11.29am: Returning officer Wong See Meng announces that one objection was made but none of the three candidates are disqualified.

It’s a three-corner fight between Robert Lau (SUPP-BN), Wong Ho Leng (DAP-Pakatan) and Narawi Haron (Independent).

The eight-day campaigning period begins with polling on Sunday, May 16. Lau’s name will be first on the ballot paper with Narawi second and Wong third.

11am: Objection period ends.

10.33am: Cheering war continues between BN and Pakatan supporters. Both sides are waiting for the returning officer to make an official announcement on the candidates. There is no objection raised so far.

10.15am: It is learnt that Robert Lau (SUPP-BN) has submitted his nomination papers at 9.02am, Wong Ho Leng (DAP-Pakatan) at 9.03am, while independent candidate Narawi Haron submitted his at 9.25am. A three-corner fight looms. No objections raised so far.

10am: Returning officer Wong See Meng announces nominations are closed. The one-hour objection time begins. The BN crowd starts shouting “Hidup Pemuda” and “Hidup BN”. This stirs up the emotion of the Pakatan supporters, who also start chanting slogans.

BN Youth retaliates by singing patriotic songs, while the Pakatan side shouts “Undur Barisan, Hidup Pakatan”.

9.30am: Pakatan supporters, beefed up by hardcore supporters from the peninsular, continuously cheer slogans such as “Hidup Rakyat”, while the largely local BN supporters wait quietly for the outcome of the nomination process.

One of the Pakatan banners says, “Vote BN = Vote White Hair”, an obvious reference to long-time Sarawak CM Taib Mahmud, who has been in power for more than a quarter of a century.

9.10am: Narawi Haron (right), the expected independent candidate, arrives at nomination centre.

9am: Returning officer Wong See Meng declares nomination open.

Both DAP’s Wong Ho Leng and SUPP’s Robert Lau Hui Yew enter the nomination centre at the same time at 9 on the dot.

8.50am: Both opposing parties are backed by a crowd of supporters who had gathered outside the nomination centre in Dewan Suarah in Sibu town.

The BN crowd is estimated at 3,000, overwhelming the 300-strong Pakatan crowd.

Pakatan leaders seen in the crowd included DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang, Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng, Selangor Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim, PKR president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, party vice-president Azmin Ali, PAS vice-president Salahuddin Ayub and party deputy election director Wan Abdul Rahim Wan Ahmad.

A few Snap leaders are seen on the Pakatan side. They include party president Edwin Dundang and secretary-general Edmund Stanley Jugol. Snap, which has recently joined the Pakatan coalition, is split into two factions, with the other faction backing BN.

The BN entourage is led by Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin. With him are Sarawak Chief Minister Abdul Taib Mahmud, Sabah CM Musa Aman, Gerakan president Dr Koh Tsu Koon, Umno Wanita chief Shahrizat Abdul Jalil and the wife of senior Robert Lau.

Interestingly, no top MCA leaders are there.

8.45am: DAP supremo Lim Kit Siang exchanges some light banter with SUPP leader and Energy, Green Technology and Water Minister Peter Chin.

“It is good that the PM comes everyday, ‘angpow’ will arrive everyday,” Lim told Chin.

8.40am: The BN crowd arrives to join the Pakatan supporters at the nomination centre.

Both BN and Pakatan supporters are separated by 100-strong FRU at two different parts of nomination centre and they are not able to see each other.

Top leaders move inside the compound of nomination centre, sitting inside the camp provided by the Election Commission.

8.30am: Muhyiddin Yassin leads BN supporters in quietly marching to the nomination centre, about 1km away. With him are Sarawak Chief Minister Abdul Taib Mahmud and other to BN leaders. No slogans are heard.

8.20am: Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin arrives at the BN gathering point. He along with other BN leaders shout “Hidup BN” and “Satu Malaysia”. He calls out the slogan in Chinese too. The pronunciation is not bad, observes a journalist.

8.10am: Pakatan supporters first to arrive at the nomination centre. They chant, “hancur, hancur, hancur BN” as they march.

7.45am: Pakatan Rakyat supporters who gathered at Rejang Park begin marching to the nomination centre at Dewan Suarah. The crowd is estimated at around 300 strong.

7.40am: Hundreds of SUPP and BN supporters gather at the residential area of Taman Delta, which is around 1km from nomination centre. They are in high spirits, holding both BN and SUPP flags. BN candidate Robert Lau, who is among his supporters, said he “feels good” ahead of the eight-day campaign. Mkini

Rakaman Video Saksi Bawah umur dalam kes polis tembak mati Arwah Aminulrasyid disoal siasat untuk kali ke 3

The Ghost of Altantuya: Enough evidence to launch Scorpene probe

Was the 114 million euro (RM534.8 million) paid to Perimekar a “commission”?

The Malaysia government has argued that the huge sum was not a commission but for the provisions of “support services” to the RM3.7 billion Scorpene submarines bought from France.

That’s the crux of an on-going Parisian investigation as under French and international laws, giving commissions on such deals are illegal.

According to French lawyer Joseph Breham, who is part of a team investigating the scandal, there was enough “prima facie evidence” to justify a probe.

“How did this company suddenly obtain 114 million euro (RM482 million) in their bank account?” he asked in an interview with Malaysiakini last week.

“Also, the main shareholder of this company, is the wife (Maslinda) of a close associate (Abdul Razak Baginda) to the (then) minister of defence (Najib Razak).”

Breham’s team hopes to unearth enough evidence to convince the French court to institute corruption charges.

Excerpts from the interview follow:

Malaysiakini: You said in media reports that you have sufficient evidence to proceed in the case. Can you reveal what kind of evidence you have?

Breham: We have Perimekar’s account statement in 2001 and 2002. And between these years, they have lost about RM75,000. How can a company lose RM75,000 when the only thing the company did was related to some administrative cost? There was no income, and it was just renting an office.

How did this company suddenly obtain 114 million euro in their bank account? This is the basis for suspicion. Also, the main shareholder of this company is the wife (Maslinda) of a close associate (Abdul Razak Baginda) to the (then) minister of defence (Najib Razak).

These are strong elements (for suspicion) and if you add to this the fact that Altantuya Shaariibuu was killed by the bodyguards of the prime minister, and if you add to this the fact that the immigration records of Altantuya’s entry into the country have disappeared, there is proof that a high official did not want any evidence of her entering the country.

And the fact that the two policemen blew her up with C4 (explosives), it appears as if they completely do not want anything of her to appear.

So, we have the proof that someone who is a high official is involved in this case. We have the proof that the wife of one of the close friends of the PM is involved – (he or she may have) nothing to do with the Altantuya case, but in the issuing of commissions.

I am saying that there is enough evidence, enough prima facie evidence, based on all these elements to make an enquiry.

You are saying that the French prosecutors have accepted your arguments to proceed with the case?

Yes, and there is an key argument that each time (French state-owned shipbuilder) DCN makes a deal in a foreign country, there is corruption. Of course, this does not prove anything but they are not ‘white knights’ either.

How similar is the Malaysian case to the Taiwanese and Pakistani cases that you mentioned in recent media reports?

I am not the lawyer for the Taiwanese or the Pakistani side. However, the Taiwan and Pakistan cases began the other way around. They both started because there were dissension in the French political parties. For example, the Pakistani case started because there were factions in the conservative party.

One of the factions was running for president in the presidential elections. So, the one in power stopped the other from getting kickbacks. In the end, the Pakistanis were not getting their money from the French.

The Taiwanese case came exactly the same way. It was related to a former French minister involved in another case with the company, and they proved that one of his mistresses bought him very expensive shoes.

They inquired where the money came from, and by tracing the money, they found that it came from a bank account in Switzerland. They also managed to prove that the money came from someone involved in the Taiwanese contract.

The reason why it went to such a high level was because of a provision in the contract that stated that there should be no commission paid and that the French government could ask DCN to pay back the commission.

Taiwan lost a lot of money because of this. They filed a civil case against DCN to make them pay back the commission and they won. So the French judicial system could not just ignore the evidence.

If those involved in the DCN case were found to be giving out commissions, can action be taken against them? Is there a law in France against giving out commissions?

There are three laws against giving out commissions. They are the 2002 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) Anti-Bribery Convention, 2003 United Nations Convention against Corruption, and the French national law.

[Malaysia is not party to the OECD Convention but it ratified the United Nations Convention against Corruption on Sept 24, 2008.]

These conventions are interesting: they have a mechanism to monitor whether a country respects the conventions. In the French system, when there is risk of corruption among prosecutors, OECD can ask the French government to act against these prosecutors.

In France, there is a written instruction that a decision not to prosecute a case of corruption is not only based on technical criteria, but (also on) either quality of fact or consistency of proof.

A decision not to prosecute could not be motivated based on quality of person, or by consideration of national economic interest. A courageous prosecutor can ask in writing if he was instructed not to prosecute a person for corruption. He can say, “Excuse me, you give me instructions against the convention, please tell me which to follow.” This, too, he should ask in writing.

What happens if you cannot obtain any information from the Malaysian side to help you with your investigation?

Once a judge decides, he can issue an instruction called ‘the international warrant of search’ and this warrant of search will be sent to the Malaysian side, saying, “We, the French judiciary, want this company to disclose to us this, and this, and this (information). According to the UNCAC, you are obliged to cooperate with me”.

If Malaysia does not deal with the situation, it will at least prove that the government has something to hide. Moreover, if we can find elements showing that Perimekar has parked its accounts somewhere else, the solution in corruption cases is always to follow the money. If we can find the money somewhere else other than Malaysia, then we have some chances.

I, as a lawyer, can ask (apply to) the (French) judge to make such an instruction. It is up to him to decide. If he decides against my application, I can appeal.

If DCN were indicted, you of course expect the Malaysian public or NGOs like Suaram to take up the case against the government.

I am a lawyer and I look for proof. So, if corruption happens involving any of its official in Malaysia, we hope the Malaysian justice system will take care of it. It is not up to the French justice system to do this. It would not be logical. So, for now France must do something against DCN corrupting people outside of France.

But I hope that as soon as – and if we have proof – that Malaysian officials have received the commissions, the Malaysia justice system must then do its work.

If nothing happens, the only thing that could be done – but this is very theoretical, as far as I know it had never been done before – is that there is an application that is called ‘either you extradite or you prosecute’ in the UNCAC.

If a country considers that there is a huge problem, that there is such a (corrupted) person in another country, it can ask for extradition and that it is a duty of the other country either to extradite or prosecute.

Can a country refuse to do either?

No, it cannot say ‘no’ since it is international law. Of course, Malaysia will not be invaded if they decide to do neither. However, there is a way for them (Malaysia) to circumvent this, and that is to prosecute.

But in this case, there is a theoretical possibility – although it has never been used – that France may consider that the inquiry (on the Malaysian side) was such a false one. If they can show enough proof that the Malaysian inquiry was not valid, then it (France) can apply for an ‘international binding judgment’.

For example, this applies to an official who must be sentenced to jail. If the official goes out of the country, he can be taken into custody (based on international laws).

Susan Loone/Mkini

Rakaman video Tembak remaja Pemuda Pakatan lapor Suhakam & Dakwa Pembunuh Arwah Aminulrasyid dengan tuduhan bunuh

Gambar ehsan MI

The Ghost of Altantuya: French lawyer fears no threats in Scorpene probe

French lawyer Joseph Breham believes that there will be “pressure and threats” during the course of his investigations into Malaysia’s purchase of two French-made submarines, but believes that the international spotlight on the case will provide him some protection.

“For example, if something were to happen to me here in Malaysia, it will attract such an international media attention, political pressure and so on, that it would be very counter-productive.

“I am not a Mongolian translator. If there were a problem, all the French newspapers will carry headlines such as ‘French lawyer inquiring into allegation of corruption disappeared in Malaysia’. No one can afford to have this,” said Breham, in a recent interview.

Breham and two others, in representing Malaysian human rights organisation Suaram, have filed complaints in a Paris court over Malaysia’s purchase of two Scorpene-class submarines from French defence giant DCN.

Though the Parisian authorities are looking at several allegedly dodgy sales by DCN, the submarine deal with Malaysia has reignited discussions concerning the murder of Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu.

Excerpts from the interview follow:

Malaysiakini: Please tell us about your background and how you became involved in human rights work?

Joseph Breham: I am a French lawyer specialising in international criminal law and human rights. I am also a university lecturer in international criminal law in Toulouse. I teach three weeks per year. I am also quite specialised in terrorism, and did quite a lot of terrorism cases. In fact I was working with the government in the terrorism-prevention branch, training judges and prosecutors in terrorism while respecting human rights. That is how I became involved in human rights work.

I have always been interested in human rights since I was born in 1978, and since I was at the age of understanding. For example, (after) the fall of the Berlin Wall, the world became complicated and there was a new kind of disorder, which was terrorism and profit globalisation.

This new trend is that multinational companies do not respect any kind of rules. They have such power that they can compel governments to oblige them. They have become more corrupt and governments cannot make them (abide by) any obligations. That is how I came to work in human rights.

Tell us about your experience in handling corruption cases.

My work in corruption was mostly linked to African countries. Every human rights case related to multi-national companies was also linked to allegations of corruption. We, at Sherpa (the organization he represents) did not begin work in corruption. But if we wanted to be efficient, we have to address this issue. ‘Sherpa’ means ‘helping people in the South to achieve justice’.

I worked for Sherpa in 2006 and currently, I am a member of the board. It was started by William Bourdon, the former secretary-general of the International Federation of Human Rights (FIDH) in 2001. Since FIDH does not sue companies, we started Sherpa.

Why were you interested particularly in African corruption cases?

It is not that we were more interested about corruption in African countries more than others but most of the French’s ex-colonies are in Africa and that is where the French are linked. More than half of Africa (consists of) former French colonies.

What is your success rate in your fight against corruption, for example in Africa? Have you indicted anyone?

We met with a lot of success, but it depends on what you call ‘success’. If you are talking about legal cases we won, then no (there was no success). But if you consider the fact that there is a trial, and that the inhabitants of countries are aware there is strong corruption and fight against it themselves, then we are successful.

The best (most successful) case is the “misappropriation of public assets” case, where we pursued three African heads of state – dictators – for misappropriation of public assets. All these assets, or some of them at least, were in France, where they bought properties, have nice beautiful cars, and very full bank accounts.

The opposition in these countries became more powerful, empowered, stronger and become more aware of these corruption cases (after we raised the issue). Everyone knew of the corruption, but now we have proof enough for inquiry. For example we have a copy of the cheque taken from the national taxes bank account which directly paid for the car of the daughter of the Gabonese president.

This is something new and this case was very exemplary. We won the first stage (of the trial) because the instruction judge considered that there was sufficient evidence. The prosecution made an appeal and lost it, and the case is currently pending at the Supreme Court. This is the first time that I see (that after) an appeal was made, the case (still) went ahead. Usually, an appeal is made when they want to drop the case.

What kind of pressure or threats have you experienced so far?

We do receive (all) kinds of pressure. For example, once upon a time, I had a case against a big uranium mining company. But at that stage, I had just finished my Bar exams, and I was a jurist, not yet a lawyer.

When I finished my Bar exams, I received a proposal to work for one of the best commercial law firms in Paris with a salary I would never meet anywhere else. Of course, I felt a bit of pleasure. I went to see the guy who made the offer and said “okay, I will receive this amount of money, I am very happy, but why me?”

The guy said “Well…we want to reinforce our corporate social responsibility (CSR) department and you are very well known in CSR…”

Ok, of course, I (later) gathered some information and found out that this law firm was one of the firms that was working for the uranium mining company. Oh yes, I was pretty sure they were interested in my vast amount of knowledge and my ability, but in fact it was also a way to bribe me. This, I was very sure of.

Did you accept the offer?

No.

Coming back to allegations of corruption in the DCN case, this is a highly risky thing you are doing. Are you expecting the same kind of pressure, threat?

Yes, sure. For sure there will be pressure, there will be threats but as French lawyers, we are protected. Or at least, I hope so. For example, if something were to happen to me here in Malaysia, it will attract such an international media attention, political pressure and so on, that it would be very counter-productive.

I am not a Mongolian translator. If there were a problem, all the French newspapers will carry headlines such as “French lawyer inquiring into allegation of corruption disappeared in Malaysia.” No one can afford this.

Please clarify your function in this case. You are here to help Suaram collect evidence and reports in order to make a strong basis on why DCN should be investigated, and this will be submitted to the prosecutors…?

My function here is more to collect and translate into media language all the information we have collected.

You said that on the French side, this case has ‘nothing to do with Altantuya,’ but isn’t her murder very much linked to the alleged DCN deal?

Yes, it is very much tightly linked to it. But to the French jurisdiction, we need either a French victim – (and) this is not the case – or that the crime happened in France. This is not the case either. Or we need a French author. The authors here are two policemen. And the accomplice is Abdul Razak Baginda, a Malaysian. DCN can only be considered an accomplice of an accomplice.

This is not sufficient, and moreover, we do not have yet the means or the intention (that DCN wanted Altantuya dead). Even though DCN may have approved it, or DCN paid the commission, I am pretty sure that DCN did not want that (the murder). I am sure they did not care whether she was killed or not, but (the point is that) they did not want it, they did not intend and I am pretty sure they did not know she was going to be killed.

But you are eventually going to investigate whether there was indeed a meeting in Paris, a photograph of Altantuya taken with Najib and Baginda at the same table, and whether this meeting involved DCN?

If they (Altantuya, Najib and Baginda) were meeting DCN, if there were DCN members at this meeting and if we can incidentally prove there was a meeting between the trio at the same table, we will not be inquiring into this aspect and we cannot force the judge to inquire into this aspect. But once we obtain the information, it can be made public.

But do you know if there was indeed a meeting, a photograph of a dinner between Baginda, Najib and Altantuya in Paris?

If during the investigation, for one reason or another, we need to know if there is a meeting between DCN, Najib, Baginda and Altantuya, and if this meeting is linked to any corruption and commission, fine, it will be enquired by the judge, not me.

If this information can be used, then we will use it freely, but the purpose of the enquiry cannot be to inquire about the absence or presence of Altantuya in the meetings.

Susan Loone/Mkini

Rakaman Video Saksi Dalam Kereta Bersama Arwah Aminulrasyid, Arwah tidak gostan, terang-terang polis Selangor bohong

Witness: Aminulrasyid didn’t ram car into police

The passenger who was with 14-year-old Aminulrasyid Amzah when he was shot dead by police last week, has cast doubts over police allegations that the latter had had tried to ram the car into police personnel.

“When he was shot, his body fell on my lap, but his foot was still on the accelerator. So the car continued moving and the police kept on firing shots,” he told a press conference at Aminulrasyid’s family home in Shah Alam this afternoon.

Recounting the incident, Azamuddin Omar, 15, said the Proton Iswara eventually crashed into a wall, after which the police continued shooting.

Azamuddin, who sustained injuries on his arm and back, said more than five police officers assaulted him after he got out of the car to surrender.

The Form Three student, who appeared still shaken, is currently undergoing treatment for trauma.

Kamaruddin Hassan, an uncle of Aminulrasyid, reiterated that the family does not want an inquest into the death, as proposed by the Inspector-General of Police Musa Hassan.

“What we want is a royal commission of inquiry because that is the only way we can get a transparent and fair investigation,” he said.

When asked why Aminul did not want to stop, Azamuddin said that the deceased said that he was scared and that he wanted to go home.

“He said that we were in his sister’s car and that he wanted to return it to his house,” he said.

The car crashed about 200m away from Aminul’s home.

According to the family’s lawyer N Surendren, there is no need for an inquest because there is no dispute about how the boy died.

Kamaruddin also hit out at police chief Musa Hassan for saying that he will pull his men off the streets if the public does not want them to enforce the law.

“We respect the police, but there might be some rotten fruits in the bunch,” he said.

The family also requested all to stop speculating and making statements which could hurt the deceased’s mother.

Among hurtful statements, he said, was the accusation that the two boys were criminals, and that the family should be blamed for letting Aminulrasyid to drive illegally at a late hour.

“There is talk that the sister may be charged because her car was used.

“This is the case of shooting the brother and summoning the sister,” he said. Mkini

Anwar on ‘long, dark night of the soul’

Anwar Ibrahim told a human rights forum in Oslo last Friday that detention without trial was an experience so desolating that only reading great literature and contemplation of the higher ideals of the human spirit could sustain him through the “long, dark night of the soul where it’s always three o’ clock in the morning.”

Speaking at the Oslo Freedom Forum, an NGO devoted to freeing humankind from arbitrary fetters imposed on life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, the Malaysian opposition leader said of his two experiences of detention under the ISA:

“Deprivation of freedom is not something one can readily get used to. Yet, when contemplating the larger issues that went beyond my own world, loneliness and despondency gave way to a renewed zeal and hope for better days to come.”

Anwar said that when his second experience of ISA detention segued into a six-year span of confinement for sodomy and corruption, the texts that helped sustain him were Ibn Tufail’s ‘Hayy ibn Yaqdhan’, Shakespeare’s tragedies, and Solzhenitsyn’s parables of Stalinist grotesqueries.

As is his wont, Anwar suggested that Ibn Tufail’s 12th century work in which a person’s enforced solitude enables rejection of distractions and the search for the true and the beautiful, was the precursor of Defoe’s ‘Robinson Crusoe’.

Islamic precursors

Anwar is fond of suggesting Islamic antecedents for intellectual currents made famous in works by European writers and thinkers during the Enlightenment.

The last two years of his public pronouncements at conferences and seminars in the West have seen Anwar attempt an interpretative synthesis of Enlightenment currents with what, Anwar has claimed, were their Islamic precursors.

This attempt has been marked by a feeling for the dialectic of ideas and events.

This was evident in the themes Anwar briefly explored in remarks to the Oslo Freedom Forum which this year invited some 30 world famous victims of unjust detention to air their experiences.

Anwar of course talked about his experience under ISA detention in 1974 and much later in 1998, the second spell followed seamlessly by a six-year span for sodomy and corruption.

Anwar told the conference that the primeval view of freedom as something conferred on subjects by as sovereign was no longer valid despite its resuscitation in recent times by authoritarian leaders who, in pushing for economic prosperity, imposed as a condition for freedom’s conferment the good behaviour of citizens.

As response to this thesis, Anwar argued: “I am neither an anarchist nor a libertarian if by these labels we mean a belief in absolute freedom and minimalist government whatever that really means.

“But I do believe that certain liberties are so fundamental that no sovereign or state or power should be allowed to take them away.”

Judicial mangling

Anwar said attempts to divest a body politic that has constitutional structures of the yeast of freedom would necessarily entail the deviation of the judiciary from its purpose of impartial referee in disputes between rulers and subjects.

“When the law is subjected to the tyranny of politics, the administration of justice becomes both farcical and perverse.

“The judiciary is then transformed into principals in the destruction of the very process they were entrusted to protect.”

Citing the Malaysian experience of judicial mangling, Anwar said: “Decisions favourable to the people are overturned on appeal to the higher courts as integrity and moral conviction are thrown out the judicial window.”

Anwar said the crux of the problem was that the law will not make people free in Malaysia.

Quoting Henry Thoreau, the opposition leader held that it is the Malaysian people who have got to make the law free. Terence Netto/Mkini