Making the murky even murkier – Sahak aka khalid ibrahim simply got to go, he’s an arrogant nincompoop

Sahak aka khalid ibrahim is not fit to be the mb. during the hulu selangor by-election, he spent rm800,000 but we could not figure out where this money goes to. in term of flags, banners or billboards, it’s no where to be seen during the by election. furthermore he was advised not to distribute package of rices to the villagers during the by election yet he still persist & his umno-also-do-it answer is showing he is purely an arrogant  nincompoop.

can u imagine that he bought rice, canned sardin,  onions etc for the outstation election workers for their meals?  in the first place, these election workers do not have a proper kitchen to cook the stuffs, even if they have , they got no time to cook the meals & they don’t have cook to help them do it. in kalumpang, where the perakians stay, they presented to Sahak a bowl of uncooked rice with chopped onion to welcome him.

beside that, he ordered the staffs in mb office to print out 14,000 postcards, sorted & delivered it by hand to the voters affected by the transfer of their polling stations.  before they could finished printing the first batch of the post cards sahak issued another order just 2 days before the election day, asking the same staffs to print another set of 14,000 post cards that would include the original & new polling stations. i personally told the staffs if they decided to print the 2nd batch of the post cards & delivered it to me, i will send  all of them to the  mb office.   on the eve of the election day, who’s going to deliver the cards?

the operation rooms in hulu selangor was in existence on paper only, when the matter was brought up to the mb, he refuse to listen & was seen checking his blackberry instead of seeking ways to activate the operation rooms.

the whole operation during the by election was in shambles, he as the election director failed to control the direction of the campaign & thus the party lost.

during the by election, the voters in hulu selangor thought that all the things initiated by the state government were  done by the federal government. some of the orang asli still think that khir toyol is still the mb!! after 2 years, the selangor state government has failed to disseminated the info to the ground. if this continue, then there is no more hope for PR in selangor.

if sahak can be the mb then a lot more out there could as well. to grade him from 1- 10, he can get only 2, no more no less. he simply failed & has to go. otherwise, selangor will definitely return to umno-bn.

some people are trying to spin the story that those who are against sahak, are those who are seeking positions, contract & so on from the state, but the reality is sahak is losing the touch on the ground. if you don’t believe it, you can go to Ijok & check it out yourself. he may even lose the seat in the next general election.

in Ijok, if sahak could not get at least 50% Malay votes, 70% Chinese votes & 40% Indian votes, he is as good as losing the seat.

ckchew

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

You can read below what Wong Choon Mei wrote today in the Malaysia Chronicle. I would say that Choon Mei’s analysis of the Selangor situation is quite off the mark. For example, the comment that Free Malaysia Today is an Umno-friendly online portal is certainly off the mark.

Just because certain websites or portals take a stand and that stand may not be favourable to the opposition does not make them pro-Umno. Free Malaysia Today is trying to maintain a neutral stand and take the middle road as far as it possibly can. So sometimes it whacks the government when the government is wrong and sometimes it whacks the opposition when it too is wrong. Has that not been the stand that Malaysia Today also takes?

The last two days I have been receiving many phone calls from people asking me why I have not written about the current goings-on in Selangor. My response was that I had already written many pieces about Selangor since Perak first fell more than a year ago. I have already said what I want to say so what more can I say? I told you so?

Yes, if I write about Selangor that is probably what I would say: I told you so. But I have written so many ‘I told you so’ pieces in the past I do not want to sound like what some people accuse me of being: a stuck or broken record.

Anyway, I must response to Wong Choon Mei’s piece — which just made what is murky even murkier. First of all, there is no G15, Gang of 15, or Group of 15. And there is no conspiracy, unless it is a conspiracy of one involving just Azmin Ali.

Just because 15 people talk with one voice does not make them a gang of conspirators. I too agree with some things that Khairy Jamaludddin says and I can support him on those stands or statements. Does this mean I am now in Khairy’s team and that I am one of his ‘conspirators’?

Or should I oppose Khairy even when he is right to demonstrate that I am anti-Umno? So, when Khairy opposes the licencing of sports betting, especially the way it was awarded to Vincent Tan on an award without tender to the highest bidder basis, then I should support the giving of the licence to Vincent Tan just to take the opposite view to Khairy.

Well, if I oppose the giving of the licence to Vincent Tan, just like Khairy, then Wong Choon Mei will say I am pro-Khairy and am an Umno mole whose aim is to create problems in the opposition. Better I oppose Khairy by supporting the betting licence to prove I am not an Umno mole.

That is silly. And it is equally silly to spin the G15, or Gang of 15, conspiracy theory just because all 15 share the same view as to the precarious situation Selangor is in.

I have been getting much feedback from many Chinese business people in Selangor who have indicated they are disappointed with Pakatan Rakyat and come the next election they may vote Barisan Nasional if the situation in Selangor persists. These are people who hate MCA and despise Umno. Yet they want to go back to Barisan Nasional, and not because they love MCA or Umno, mind you.

There certainly must be something wrong with Selangor when those who supported you in 2008 now want to turn their backs on you. And these are people who have invested heavily in Selangor and can determine the future direction of the state’s economy.

We must listen to the ground. We need to get our fingers on the pulse. And these 15 Members of Parliament, the so-called G15, have done just that. And the feedback they get is not reassuring. If the Selangor State Assembly were to be dissolved today and a new state election were to be called in 10 days time, Selangor would most likely fall to Barisan Nasional. That is the reality of the situation.

No, there is no conspiracy, in particular an Umno conspiracy. There are no Barisan Nasional moles amongst those 15 Members of Parliament. There is no Gang of 15 either. But there are 15 Members of Parliament who have received the same feedback that I have received — and that is the people who supported us in March 2008 now no longer do so because they are disappointed with the Selangor state government.

And just because 15 Members of Parliament share the same view does not make them a gang of conspirators.

*************************************************

PKR retreat: Enough, the time has come to take strong action

Wong Choon Mei, Malaysia Chronicle

Most of PKR’s supreme council members are looking forward to their two-day retreat in Shah Alam beginning on Saturday. The exceptions though may be those guilty of having helped stir up the media frenzy against Selangor Mentri Besar Khalid Ibrahim.

Nonetheless, the majority of PKR leaders are eager and looking forward to finding out what is happening to ‘poor Khalid’.

Is there really a revolt? Who is this G15 or Group of 15 federal lawmakers? And has Azmin Ali really reached the point of no return with Khalid?

Firstly, there is no revolt. As Khalid has pointed, what erupted in the past few days was overdone media speculation by the mainstream press including Umno-friendly online portals FreeMalaysiaToday and The Malaysian Insider. Their aim – to destabilize PKR.

That is indeed their ultimate objective. Already, former Umno MB Khir Toyo has rushed to take a bow because he knows that when the retreat ends on Sunday, this entire episode will once again be exposed to be what it really is – a collaborative attempt between Selangor Umno and saboteurs within PKR to weaken the party and Pakatan Rakyat.

As usual, Khir could be counted on to resort to gutter and racial polemics. Quick as a flash, he told The Malaysian Insider that Khalid will not be unseated because he is being propped up by the DAP. He omits to mention that Khalid cannot be toppled because he has the support of the great majority of Pakatan state assemblymen including those from his own PKR party.

Who then is unhappy with Khalid? The G15? But aren’t they federal lawmaker, i.e. members of Parliament? Do they have the locus standi to oust Khalid? But no, Khir and the online portals conveniently overlook this point. What they say boils down to this – wake up! The Chinese are now in charge in Selangor! Look at how the Malays in the state are being bullied – even poor Azmin has to quit his directorship in PKNS … and all because Khalid appointed a new political secretary without informing him and the other Malays!

But isn’t Khalid’s new pol-sec is also a Malay? This is the logic and the spin of the Umno media. To be fair, they are ably abetted by saboteurs still embedded in PKR, intentionally leaking false news and stirring up trouble. If past reports are true that guys like Ezam Mohd Noor, Salehuddin Hashim and their cronies were dangled huge carrots to jump ship, then their jobs are still far from done and you can expect them to keep rocking the PKR boat for a while more.

Fortunately, PKR is getting a bit smarter at dealing with this. The Malaysian public is also getting immune to it. And as vice president Sivarasa Rasiah has pointed out the G15 that is supposedly led by Azmin is “a fiction of someone’s imagination”. Even if true, there is a solution. PKR co-ordinator Zaid Ibrahim has minced no words – the whole bunch should be sacked for their “blatant show of indiscipline”.

Because this group of 15 – if it exists – is following in the tradition of Khir Toyo, Ezam, Salehuddin and so forth. According to the news reports, they are out to squeeze goodies, fat allowances and perks from Khalid and Khalid’s crime was to have been un-diplomatic enough to deny them.

Should Khalid lower his standards and allow what he deems to be unsuitable candidates to help themselves to the Selangor vaults? Is this what Selangorians want? Perhaps not advisable, especially when it has not been confirmed that they are not still paying for Khir’s monster RM24 million Bali palace, Disney trips and so forth.

How about Azmin? Well, this is why PKR’s top decision-makers will be paying close attention this weekend. No dozing off because they will all want to hear with own ears what Azmin has to say. They want to see with their own eyes his body language, especially when he and Khalid bump into each other.

Also, will Zaid, Azmin and Khalid mingle at tea breaks, etc? Is it really true there is such awesome bad blood between the three men and what about the Supreme Commander that they are each supposedly plotting to replace? How does Anwar Ibrahim feel about the whole issue? Who among the three does he really prefer?

PKR leaders may not get the all the answers they seek, but for sure, they will be expecting firmness and direction from Anwar at this retreat. Words of advice that he gave at last month’s annual congress have obviously not worked. So tougher action must be taken or PKR may really be destabilized.

The Opposition Leader must do something like he did in the Zul Noordin episode – make the party’s stand crystal clear and also take steps to ensure that the Malaysian people get to hear and know the true story. He must not allow PKR to be sidestepped by silly media opportunism and internal sabotage. And Zaid’s advice – as always – is worth a deeper look.

A tribute to RPK: RPK the cyber anarchist?

RPK can be seen as just this nemesis of bumiputeraism and what a nemesis! He taunts them in cyberspace all the way to hell. You couldn’t find a more exemplary model of the rational, non-racist Malaysian intellectual who is not afraid to castigate not only the ruling class but also the spineless and the opportunists in ALL the ethnic communities in Malaysia.

===================================

I don’t consider myself a “fanatical fan” of RPK (Raja Petra Kamarudin) nor am I a “bottom feeder” in the fetid Malaysian political aquarium. (‘Cyber anarchist with belligerent agenda‘, Jan 2, New Straits Times)

I have been observing Malaysian society since the 50s and the pretentious apologists in the mainstream media have never failed to amuse me by providing so much comic relief. To call them prostitutes would be a gross insult to sex workers.

Their attempts to discredit RPK will surely fail now that these formerly imperious state propaganda pieces have been reduced to “old newspapers” and have to compete with us, the people in cyberspace. What a leveler the Internet is!

First of all, is it Malaysian to discredit somebody by labeling him an “anarchist”? The obscurantists in the establishment would want Malaysians to believe that anarchists are irresponsible troublemakers who do not care about society.

Little do they know that one of the world’s greatest public intellectuals, Noam Chomsky, is an anarchist by political persuasion.

The positive and constructive contributions by Chomsky to freedom, democracy and human rights in the post-war world have been universally recognised.

His commitment to the Palestinian cause precedes Umno’s and he is consistent in championing many other anti-imperialist causes as well unlike the selective populism of Umno.

Anarchists (or anarcho-syndicalists) were in control of many areas of Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War, a war which inspired freedom-loving people like George Orwell and many other famous writers to fight fascism during the early part of the 20th century.

Michel Foucault, the well-known philosopher and profound critic of capitalist state institutions has sometimes been categorised as a neo-anarchist too.

What do anarchists stand for? Shelley has touched on its ideals in this poem:

“The man
Of virtuous soul commands not, nor obeys:
Power, like a desolating pestilence,
Pollutes whatever it touches, and obedience,
Bane of all genius, virtue, freedom, truth,
Makes slaves of men, and, of the human frame,
A mechanised automaton.”

Anarchists place a high premium on liberty.

They recognise, however, that individuality is a social phenomenon since we need other people in order to develop, expand, and grow.

Anarchists want to create a society based on three principles: liberty, equality and solidarity.

Liberty is essential for the full flowering of human intelligence, creativity, and dignity. One could say that these are also the avowed aims of education in so-called enlightened societies.

Domination stifles innovation and personal responsibility, leading to conformity and mediocrity. While liberty is essential for the fullest development of individuality, equality is essential for genuine liberty to exist. There can be no real freedom in a class-stratified and unequal society.

As Marx has analysed in ‘Capital Volume I’, liberty in capitalist society is at best the “freedom” to choose one’s boss.

Finally, solidarity means working voluntarily and co-operatively with others who share the same goals and interests. But without liberty and equality, society becomes an exploitative system based on the domination of the masses by the ruling class.

Anarchists are not idealists who think that people or ideas develop outside of society. Individuality and ideas grow and develop within society, in response to material and intellectual interactions and experiences, which people actively analyse and interpret. That is why anarchists are also described as libertarian socialists.

So, would you call RPK an anarchist? I always say, “If the cap fits…” I notice he wears a red star on his green beret!

An apt epithet

Looking at the laudable efforts of RPK during the last decade, “cyber anarchist” would be an apt epithet to confer upon him.

He has done more than any politician in this country to expose the illegitimate institutions of the Malaysian state, as John Dewey has described the capitalist state, “domination by business for private profit through private control of banking, land, industry, reinforced by command of the press, press agents and other means of publicity and propaganda.”

RPK has gone beyond the sociological theses about the shared interests of the ruling elite – he has literally stripped bare the integuments of the Malaysian state; exposed the machinations of the police and shameful harassment of whistleblowers.

He has posed questions surrounding the unsolved murder of Altantuya which all patriotic and justice-loving Malaysians want answered.

The “hapless prey” in this case happens to be the most powerful person in this country!

Far from throwing “fantasist allegations”, RPK has produced statutory declarations which should prompt any just and responsible public prosecutor to take action.

Besides these documents, he has produced video interviews on YouTube with the private investigator in the Altantuya murder case who has claimed that he was coaxed and harassed by interested parties to change his statutory declaration and to leave the country. “Get real!” as they say…

The nemesis of bumiputeraism

Bumiputeraism has been used as a populist ideology by the Malay ruling class in their ascent to political power after May 13, 1969. It was intended to rally the Malay community behind this ruling class as it reaped the economic benefits from this policy while discriminating against the “Nons”.

But it was only a matter of time before the contradictions in the “bumiputera” policy imploded because their crony capitalist policies invariably create not only inter-ethnic but also intra-ethnic inequalities.

These fissures within the Malay community have appeared during the 70s (Baling and Hamid Tuah incidents), the 80s (the Umno split), the 90s (Reformasi) right into the 21st century.

Much to the chagrin of the Malay ruling class, more and more Malay intellectuals have risen up to question the legitimacy of this bumiputeraist policy and to expose the iniquities of the state.

RPK can be seen as just this nemesis of bumiputeraism and what a nemesis! He taunts them in cyberspace all the way to hell. You couldn’t find a more exemplary model of the rational, non-racist Malaysian intellectual who is not afraid to castigate not only the ruling class but also the spineless and the opportunists in ALL the ethnic communities in Malaysia.

The wind is blowing

And thank Pete for Malaysia Today! At no time in our country’s history has alternative journalism been more exciting and refreshing and websites such as Malaysia Today under RPK has shown that we can beat these mainstream rags at their game.

For all the pompous braying by the apologists of the state, at least Malaysia Today has the graciousness to publish their pieces. Most progressives have given up writing to the establishment newspapers because of their shameless censorship. So who’s afraid of rational debate?

So here’s wishing RPK  “Good Speed” and assuring him of our support in his campaign for truth, justice and democracy.

He is the best judge of the system of justice in this country, so if he decides to keep on running, we hope he keeps on writing and take comfort in these lines from the Song of the French partisan:

“Oh, the wind, the wind is blowing
Through the land the wind is blowing
Freedom soon will come
Then you’ll come from the shadows…”

KUA KIA SOONG, a former MP, was principal of the New Era College, Kajang. He is also a director of human rights group Suaram./Mkini

What happened to this police report?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

There appears to be a lot of noise in the mainstream media lately about whether I am still in Malaysia, if not then how did I get out and if I got out then where can I be, which passport did I use to get out of Malaysia and which passport did I use to get into the other country if I really did get out of Malaysia, and so on.

I think the above is just too complicating for the Malaysian police to solve. Solving the above would involve using your brain and this is certainly beyond the capabilities of the Malaysian police. As part of my community service to the Malaysian police, I am going to offer them a simpler problem to solve.

The police report below was made by Americk Sidhu, PI Bala’s lawyer, on 8 July 2008. That was about one-and-a-half years ago. I think one-and-a-half years is enough time even for the most stupid police force in the world and the Malaysian police force is certainly far from being the most stupid.

So, instead of trying to solve the problem of RPK, why not the Malaysian police and the IGP please tell us what happened to the investigation on the police report Americk made way back in July 2008.

Or did they just ignore Americk’s police report and threw it into the dustbin? The normal procedure would be they would call you to take your statement after you make a police report but Americk was never summoned in all that time. This gives an impression they are not pursuing the matter.

So what is all this talk about the MACC wanting to interview Bala but that he must first send them an official letter? Americk’s police report is more than just an official letter. It is stronger than an official letter.

Aiyah, MACC and PDRM very hau siau one lah! Full of bullshit! No need to worry about RPK. He is safe and happy. Get cracking on the very old police report below. We will give you 14 days to come out with your statement on what happened.

AMERICK SINGH SIDHU’S POLICE REPORT OF 8 JULY 2008

I, AMERICK SINGH SIDHU NRIC NO  561129-71-5251  hereby lodge the following complaint :

(1) I am practising as an Advocate and Solicitor in Malaysia.

(2) I was instructed by one Mr Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal (NRIC NO 600928-08-6235) in respect of documenting the facts and circumstances involving him in the Altantunya matter.

(3) This led to the affirmation of a Statutory Declaration by Mr. Balasubramaniam on 01.07.2008 . The affirmation of the said Statutory Declaration was done in my presence and I have personal knowledge of the facts and circumstances leading to the production and affirmation of the said Statutory Declaration dated 01.07.2008.

(4) Mr Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal held a Press Conference on the 04.07.2008. I am informed by media reports that another Statutory Declaration affirmed by Mr. Balasubramaniam and dated 04.07.2008 was made public on that day. The contents of the said 04.07.2008 Statutory Declaration suggests that the earlier Statutory Declaration dated 01.07.2008 was made ‘ under duress ‘.

(5) I acted in good faith in documenting the facts that led to the production and affirmation of the Statutory Declaration dated 01.07.2008 and I am satisfied it was made voluntarily and without any duress whatsoever.

(6) By reason of the matters stated above, I have reasonable grounds to believe that the second Statutory Declaration dated 04.07.2008 is suspicious on the face of it. The said document’s contents amount to criminal defamation of my character both personal and professional. I strongly believe person and/or persons have induced, threatened and caused the production of the 04.07.2008 Statutory Declaration by unlawful conduct.

(7) I request that an investigation be carried out to ascertain the person and or persons who unlawfully caused the said Mr Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal to state that the earlier Statutory Declaration dated 01.07.2008, which was made in my presence, was made under duress. I believe the offence of criminal conspiracy to cause criminal defamation would have been committed by this and/or these persons.

Dated this 8th day of July 2008

Americk Sidhu

No matter how they treated you, Don’t give up: RPK’s son changes plea, claims trial

Raja Petra Kamarudin’s son has today changed his plea at the Shah Alam Magistrate’s Court and is now claiming trial to four counts of theft as well as possession of stolen goods.

Raja Azman Raja Petra, 32, was supposed to be sentenced today but he changed his plea at the last minute.

He has two lawyers representing him – J Chandra and Amarjeet Singh Sidhu – the same legal team representing his blogger father.

Following the change of plea, magistrate Norkamilah Aziz fixed Sept 14 to 16 for hearing.

According to his lawyers, Raja Azman will be in remand until his hearing as he is unable to post the RM10,500 bail.

Raja Azman has been in remand since May 6. When he was produced at the Magistrate’s Court on May 19, he pleaded guilty.

Raja Petra on Interpol watchlist

Raja Azman, who was arrested on May 6, has pleaded not guilty to breaking into a house and stealing a number of items, including a mobile phone and wrist watch.

He also claimed trial to stealing a motorcycle.

Raja Azman’s father, Raja Petra, 59, has been a fugitive after failing to appear for two court cases.

The police have alerted Interpol after two arrest warrants were issued against him for failing to turn up for his sedition and criminal defamation trial.

The blogger penned a heart-wrenching apology on May 21, two days after Raja Azman was charged, where he apologised to the nation for his son’s misdeeds.

He also made a startling accusation that a police officer had wanted to negotiate a monetary settlement for the case.

pressing too hard, They break their balls – Geraaaamnya!!!: Govt efforts to put RPK back behind bars hits a brick wall

By Debra Chong

PUTRAJAYA, June 9 – The government’s efforts to put Raja Petra Kamaruddin back behind bars in Kamunting hit an obstacle today at the Federal Court.

The Federal Court here ruled in favour of the fugitive editor of the Malaysia Today news website who wanted a review of its earlier order to recall Justice Datuk Augustine Paul to hear the Home Minister’s appeal against Raja Petra’s November 2008 release from detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA).

The three-man panel of judges headed by Court of Appeal President Datuk Alauddin Mohd Sheriff noted that the earlier decision made by a two-man bench had failed to meet the necessary criteria under Section 74(1) of the Courts of Judicature Act for a panel of three judges minimum to hear the case.

“It is therefore our considered opinion that there was a quorum failure,” the judges said in a written judgment read aloud in court today by the deputy registrar to the apex court.

The Federal Court today also noted that the appeal by the Home Minister against Raja Petra had not properly started.

This means that the entire appeal case against Raja Petra “goes back to square one”, his lawyers told reporters.

Malik Imtiaz Sarwar said today’s decision from the highly-ranked judges, which included the Chief Justice of Malaya Datuk Arifin Zakaria and Chief Justice of Borneo Richard Malanjum, were “much welcome” and signalled the judiciary’s seriousness in tackling thorny issues of fundamental human rights.

A new date to hear the appeal proper will be fixed later by the Federal Court registrar as Raja Petra’s lawyers want a bigger panel of five to seven judges to sit at the next round.

In early February, Federal Court judges Datuk Nik Hashim Nik Ab Rahman and Datuk Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin rejected Raja Petra’s application to recuse Justice Paul.

Raja Petra, 58, was arrested under the ISA on Sept 12 last year and later sent to the Kamunting detention camp in Taiping, Perak.

He was freed two months later when Shah Alam High Court Judge Datuk Syed Ahmad Helmy Syed Ahmad granted him a writ of habeas corpus, ruling that the home minister’s order to detain him was beyond the scope of Section 8 of the ISA.

Shafee Abdullah: caught with his pants down

On 6 August 2008, I wrote an article called ‘Shafee Abdullah: sodomologist extraordinaire’. Shafee has since sued me for this article and in his summons-in-chamber he says that my allegation does not contain any particulars. Well, today, I will certainly give him those particulars that he seeks.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

It was a few days before that article that I received the phone call from Tamrin Ghafar. Tamrin said someone wants to meet me and it was very urgent and extremely important that I meet this person. It was agreed that we meet for tea at the Havana Club in the One World Hotel in Damansara Utama.

My wife and I arrived there early but did not have to wait too long. Within minutes Tamrin walked in with Datuk Kamal Amir and Datuk Kadar Shah. It was actually Datuk Kadar who wanted to see me although Tamrin did not mention that earlier when he phoned me — and I knew better than to ask over the phone considering the police were monitoring my phone calls.

Datuk Kadar related how he had gone to lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s office a few days earlier to discuss Jamaluddin Jarjis’s bottom pinching case in the Havana Club at KL Sentral. I think Datuk Kadar was involved because he had an interest in the establishment. Anyway, I was told Shafee wanted JJ to pay RM1 million as ‘settlement’ or else his scandal was going to explode.

And this was when Datuk Kadar saw that whiteboard with Anwar Ibrahim’s and my name on it and the police officers who were in the office discussing the Anwar Ibrahim Sodomy II case. And a few days later the whole sodomy thing exploded with Saiful’s ‘revelation’ that he had been sodomised, the PUSRAWI doctor’s examination that showed Saiful was still a virgin, and Najib’s denial and later his admission that he had met Saiful prior to the sodomy allegation.

The rest I had already written about in August 2008, which you can read below in case you have not read it yet. I have since been sued and the case is still pending. And Datuk Kadar said he will come forward to testify if need be that he did see what he told me he saw in Shafee’s office that day, and which I wrote about on 6 August 2008. Shafee, of course, denies this and that is why he sued me.

*************************************************

Very troubling reports have been published, which reveal the existence of a medical report of an examination done by a doctor on Mohd Saiful Bukhari bin Azlan a few hours before Saiful lodged a police report that he had been sodomised. The medical report apparently shows that there is no evidence that he had been sodomised by anyone.

Such reports raise some very serious questions that require immediate answers:

(1) Are the police in possession of such a medical report?

(2) Was the doctor concerned interviewed by the police and was he detained for any length of time?

(3) Is the doctor concerned facing any form of intimidation and, if so, by whom?

(4) Is there a medical report by another doctor that either confirms or contradicts the first medical report?

(5) If it is true that the medical report exists showing a lack of prima facie evidence, what then could have been the justification for the vigorous actions taken against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim as well as the public call by the authorities for his DNA sample?

The answers to these questions are of paramount importance, as they bring into focus the integrity of our law enforcement system.

These latest disclosures regarding the investigations into the sodomy allegations are not the only ones to raise questions that need answering. There is, for example, also the issue of P. Balasubramaniam’s abrupt “disappearance” that has yet to be satisfactorily explained. No one can deny that the circumstances of his first and second statutory declarations are highly unusual. All these show a pattern of events that cause much disquiet to right-thinking members of the public.

The Malaysian people are deeply troubled. A country that truly believes in the rule of law should not be faced with so many disturbing developments and unanswered questions.

The credibility of the Malaysian justice system as a whole is therefore at stake. The integrity of professionals, be they doctors or lawyers, must never be interfered with. The public must be left in no doubt that the criminal justice system in this country will not be misused or abused. There must be nothing less than an open and thorough investigation into these cases. This calls for the courage and professionalism of all those involved to do the right thing no matter the consequences. And those who have shown such courage and integrity must know that they live in a country where it is safe to do so.

Dato’ Ambiga Sreenevasan
President
Malaysian Bar

*************************************************

What Ambiga said in her press statement above is certainly true and she has cause for concern. But she would be even more concerned if she knows what we know about this whole matter.

A special police operations centre was set up some time ago to coordinate all activities related to the Anwar Ibrahim sodomy crisis. No, the special police operations centre was not set up AFTER the alleged sodomy act took place on 26 June 2008. It was set up way before 26 June 2008.

Why the need to set up a special police operations centre BEFORE the date of the alleged sodomy act? Are they clairvoyant and did they peep into their crystal ball and ‘see’ the crime happen before it actually happened? Was the special police operations centre set up so that they could solve the crime? Or was the special police operations centre set up BEFORE the date of the ‘crime’ so that they could invent the so-called crime?

Yes, questions and yet more questions. But this is not yet the icing on the cake. The icing on the cake is that this special police operations centre is not located in the police headquarters. It is located in the meeting room of the office of prominent Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah who possesses a notorious reputation for fixing cases such as those involving the people implicated in murdering Altantuya Shaariibuu or those alleged to have pinched the bottoms of cigar girls in the Havana Club in Kuala Lumpur.

Name me any questionable case and you will find the hand of Shafee Abdullah behind that case. And this same person is coordinating the Anwar Ibrahim sodomy allegation from the meeting room of his law office in Kenny Hills.

There are four police officers headed by an officer name Aziz who are based in this special police operations centre in the meeting room of Shafee Abdullah’s law firm. But why are they based in an Umno lawyer’s office instead of in the police headquarters? Is this an official police operation or is this a rogue operation? Yes, we have watched many Hollywood movies about the CIA’s Dirty Tricks Department. Have Shafee Abdullah and the Royal Malaysian Police also seen the same movie? It appears so because the special police operations centre in Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s law firm looks like a plot out of these movies.

In this special police operations centre in Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s law firm is a whiteboard and on this whiteboard are two names: Anwar Ibrahim and Raja Petra Kamarudin. Below these two names are all sorts of notes, scribblings and etchings. There are also charts and strategies on how both Anwar Ibrahim and Raja Petra Kamarudin can be implicated in various crimes and incarcerated until their teeth fall out of their gums.

Yes, the police report to Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah. And Shafee Abdullah coordinates this special police operation with the IGP and AG. And the purpose of this special police operations centre in the meeting room of Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s law firm is to explore how to incarcerate Anwar Ibrahim and Raja Petra Kamarudin. And the special police operations centre has to be in Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s office and not in the police headquarters because, officially, the IGP and AG are not involved in the Anwar sodomy case, as announced by Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

Shafee Abdullah is no ordinary man. In fact, he is not even a man; he is a devil. But he is Malaysia’s first and foremost sodomologist, a specialist in crimes of sodomy. And that is why the Pusrawi doctor’s report was rejected. He is just a normal doctor, a GP, argued the government. The prognosis of a normal doctor can’t be accepted as evidence in a sodomy case, never mind if he has been practicing medicine for two decades or more. They need the prognosis of a sodomy specialist, a sodomologist, and Shafee Abdullah is Malaysia’s first and foremost sodomologist.

That is why Senior Assistant Commissioner (SAC) II Mohd Rodwan Mohd Yusof did not meet Saiful in the police station or at the police headquarters. The special police operations centre is not in the police station or at the police headquarters. It is in the meeting room of Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s law firm. So it would be dangerous to meet Saiful in this law firm lest someone finds out. That is why Rodwan met Saiful in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel.

Okay, so Rodwan met Saiful one day before the alleged crime took place. But then maybe Rodwan is clairvoyant or he has a crystal ball and he ‘saw’ that a crime of sodomy was going to take place the following day. Some people do have this gift of ‘foresight’. Nevertheless, whether the timeline appears a bit out of sync or not, they still have the ‘evidence’ to work on to ‘prove’ that Anwar did sodomise Saiful the day AFTER Saiful met Rodwan in room 619 of the Concorde Hotel.

One such crucial evidence was supposed to be the doctor from Pusrawi’s medical examination of Saiful at 2.00pm on Saturday, 28 June 2008. But then the doctor said that he had examined Saiful and found no evidence of sodomy. This report has since surfaced and the doctor has gone missing so, now, there is no way they can use this evidence.

The next evidence was supposed to be the second medical examination done at the Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) at 4.00pm on Saturday, 28 June 2008. But then the outpatient department of the HKL was closed at 4.00pm on Saturday, 28 June 2008. So how could a second medical examination have been done? Yes, that’s right. No second medical examination was done and the doctors at the HKL refuse to doctor a medical report to say that the second medical examination had been done, when none had been done, or to say that they did find evidence of sodomy, when they did not.

Since none of the doctors at Pusrawi or HKL are cooperating with the police, the last piece of ‘evidence’ will have to be Saiful’s underwear. Okay, Saiful’s underwear does not really have Anwar’s semen stains on it. But this is a small matter. As long as someone from the Chemistry Department is prepared to testify that they did examine Saiful’s underwear and they did find Anwar’s semen stains on it, then that would be good enough. They will be able to build their case against Anwar and charge him for sodomy based on this ‘evidence’ from the Chemistry Department.

No, the Chemistry Department has NOT come out with their report yet. There is no report from the Chemistry Department that says they found Anwar’s semen stains on Saiful’s underwear. This is because they first of all need Anwar’s specimen so that they can plant it on the underwear and so that the Chemistry Department can then ‘discover’ it.

But Anwar is being bloody silly. He is being extremely pigheaded and stubborn. He refuses to hand over his specimen. How can they plant Anwar’s semen on Saiful’s underwear when Anwar refuses to let them take his specimen? The Chemistry Department can’t prepare its report saying that it found Anwar’s semen on Saiful’s underwear until the police are able to plant it there. But Anwar does not want to voluntarily hand over his specimen so this plan is being upset a bit.

But never mind. As soon as Parliament convenes later this month they will rush through a new law that will make it mandatory for you to hand over your specimen if the police demands that you do so. Refusing to hand over your specimen when the police demand that you do so will soon become a crime and you can be sent to jail. They will try to pass this law before Merdeka Day of 31 August 2008 and they will try to backdate the law and make it retrospective so that any ‘crime’ committed before the passing of this law will also be covered.

Soon they will get Anwar once the DNA Act becomes law and Anwar can no longer refuse to hand over his specimen. Then, once they have obtained Anwar’s specimen, the Chemistry Department will be able to ‘discover’ it on Saiful’s underwear. Then they will be able to arrest and charge Anwar. And, who knows, they might even be able to convict him as well.

Yes, this Shafee Abdullah the sodomologist is good. He has names, charts, notes, scribbling and etchings all over his whiteboard in the meeting room of his law firm. This meeting room has been the special police operations centre for quite a while now. It was set up long before the alleged sodomy crime took place on 26 June 2008. It was set up not to solve the sodomy crime. It was set up to create the crime.

But, thus far, they lack one very crucial piece of evidence. They lack Anwar’s specimen that they need to plant on Saiful’s underwear. But they will get it as soon as the new DNA Act becomes law and they can use this law to force Anwar to hand over his specimen. Then Anwar is finished and they can close down the special police operations centre in the meeting room of Umno lawyer Shafee Abdullah’s law firm and once again use this meeting room for fixing legal cases.

*************************************************

Lawyer: Abdul Razak Baginda ‘is completely unimplicated’

Abdul Razak Baginda, a prominent political analyst, knew the murdered Mongolian model. His lawyer, Shafee Abdullah, said he wouldn’t “go so far to say” that Abdul Razak had a relationship with Altantuya Shaariibuu, but would say that “he knows the lady.”

He said he met his client Wednesday morning and heard his side of the story. “I am extremely relieved from my conversation … I am totally convinced of his innocence .. he is completely unimplicated.” [Associated Press via International Herald Tribune]

*************************************************

Anwar verdict puts Malaysia’s justice system on trial
Report by Tim Lester
ABC Online; 14 April 1999

MAXINE MCKEW: Well, to our own region now and the most publicised trial in Malaysia’s history ended today, with Anwar Ibrahim — the man once groomed to lead the nation — jailed for six years, after a judge found him guilty on four counts of corruption.

Asian leaders have joined human rights groups in denouncing the severity of the sentence. In Malaysia, there have been clashes between police and protesters in the wake of the judgment, suggesting widespread scepticism with the verdict. So, did the system succeed in catching a wayward politician, or did it dance to the tune of an opportunistic leader who wants a political enemy behind bars?

TIM LESTER: Conviction day for Anwar Ibrahim.

As his supporters took to the streets around Kuala Lumpur’s High Court, few doubted the outcome of the marathon corruption trial. For seven months now, they’ve watched Anwar battle to keep alive his shot at the country’s top job.

They’ve heard him say repeatedly the system was being used against him. Many Malaysians, perhaps most, believe it. They believe Anwar Ibrahim’s conviction was orchestrated to suit the PM and several of his close colleagues.

BRUCE GALE: There is a feeling among a large number of Malaysians that the trial wasn’t fair.

TIM LESTER: Singapore analyst Bruce Gale sees this perception — whether right or wrong — as a problem for the Mahathir Government.

BRUCE GALE: If you have large sections of the population believing that somehow the judiciary is not fair or impartial, then this is a very serious situation. It’s an undermining of a major national institution.

GURBACHAN SINGH: We could have easily shown by irrefutable evidence the involvement of several top politicians to bring Anwar Ibrahim down politically.

TIM LESTER: Among Anwar’s nine defence lawyers, there is deep frustration that many witnesses, documents, even tapes they had ready didn’t make it to evidence, because the judge wouldn’t allow them.

GURBACHAN SINGH: There was evidence of the involvement of the PM, as well, that he knew this process of political conspiracy was going on — he did nothing to stop it.

MAHATHIR MOHAMAD: I wish he hadn’t done this and he should have succeeded me and everything would be fine.

TIM LESTER: Political conspiracy — it was Anwar’s claim the moment Dr Mahathir dumped him as Deputy PM and his lawyers say it was vital to their defence of the four corruption charges. But Judge Augustine Paul ruled as irrelevant the suggestion that government ministers and officials cooked up the sex claims to ruin Anwar.

GURBACHAN SINGH: Most of the rulings where the judge could exercise discretion, went against us.

MUHAMMAD SHAFEE ABDULLAH: When the trial first started, I think at least for the first two months or three, there were often times, I thought, where the judge was giving a lot of leeway to the defence.

TIM LESTER: Former prosecutor Shafee Abdullah praises Judge Paul for refusing to hear Anwar’s conspiracy argument in relation to the four corruption charges.

MUHAMMAD SHAFEE ABDULLAH: Whether or not he committed those sexual offences have got nothing to do with the present charges.

TIM LESTER: So was Anwar’s trial fair?

Yes, says Shafee Abdullah. But even he admits Malaysians don’t see it that way.

MUHAMMAD SHAFEE ABDULLAH: There are a lot of individuals out there who feel that the whole trial has gone completely bonkers. Many individuals think that Anwar did not receive a fair trial.

TIM LESTER: The damage from the trial goes beyond perceptions about Government influence over the judiciary to the police force.

MUHAMED AZMIN ALI: They hit me physically and they stripped me naked and asked me to dance in the room, with my hand handcuffed.

TIM LESTER: Anwar Ibrahim’s private secretary of 11 years was among hundreds arrested at the height of anti-government protests last year. He’s now making a disturbingly common claim in Kuala Lumpur — that police used brutality and humiliation in the hope of recruiting him as a witness against Anwar.

MUHAMED AZMIN ALI: Oh, yeah, they asked me to admit that I was sodomised by Anwar.

TIM LESTER: Three of five people cited in sex charges pending against Anwar have now withdrawn their claims and turned on police.

GURBACHAN SINGH: And they were picked up and forced — tortured by the police — to make allegations against Anwar, to admit to sodomy, which they repeatedly said never happened. And they’ve gone on affidavits, they’ve gone on statutory declarations to that effect.

TIM LESTER: Add in Anwar’s black eye — Malaysia’s highest-ranking officer at the time hit him while he was blindfolded and handcuffed. In the process of convicting Anwar, Malaysia’s police have earned themselves an image crisis.

Among other claims that didn’t make it to court — the Washington limousine driver who says a Malaysian embassy official asked him to accuse Anwar of sexual misconduct while visiting the US.

JAMAL AMRO: Then he asked me — he said “Relax”. Then he told me, “Anwar — did you ever bring girls for him, or boys or anything like that?”

I said, “No”.

He said “C’mon, if you say ‘Yes’, we can make some money”.

TIM LESTER: Jamal says he was told he could make more than $250,000 by going along with the sex claims against the then Deputy PM. Public anger over Anwar’s treatment has helped his wife, Wan Azizah, win backing for a new political party and an opposition alliance to fight Dr Mahathir at the next election.

MUHAMED AZMIN ALI: The hatred against the present leadership is swelling because they can not believe the manner they handled this issue against Anwar.

TIM LESTER: This trial and the events around it have thrown up challenges the Mahathir Government didn’t anticipate. Now, there’s the possibility of a united opposition at the next national election due within 12 months.

A powerful threat for Dr Mahathir, but it’s still not likely. The groups Anwar’s supporters need to bring together would make unusual partners.

BRUCE GALE: It seems extremely difficult for me to believe that post-election, that this alliance could hold. The policies of these parties are so diametrically opposed to one another. Islamic fundamentalists want an Islamic State. To the Chinese, this is an anathema — something they would never accept.

TIM LESTER: Many Malaysians don’t like the way their government and judicial system dealt with Anwar Ibrahim. Today’s verdict will only fuel their suspicions.

But Dr Mahathir is still in the middle ground of Malaysian politics. His enemies have a giant task — trying to bring together opposition parties into an alliance needed to capitalise on anti-government sentiment.

A prelude to Anwar Ibrahim’s ‘Sodomy II’ trial

Now, the day after Saiful met Najib, he met Rodwan in room 619 of the Kuala Lumpur Concorde. Najib did not know this of course. Prior to that meeting, Rodwan and Saiful spoke over the phone at least eight times.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

On 11 August 2008, in an article called ‘The real dalang behind the Anwar sodomy allegation’, Malaysia Today wrote: Shafee was supposed to have led the prosecution against Anwar. A provision in the law called FIAT allows the Attorney-General to appoint an outsider to conduct the prosecution. If Shafee does well then he would most likely be appointed the next Attorney-General.

Since the publishing of article almost a year ago, Shafee has sued me and in his summons in chambers he applied to strike off my defence on grounds that my allegation did not have any particulars. Well, if it’s particulars he wants then it is particulars he shall get.

In the meantime, read what Malaysia Today wrote on 11 August 2008:

*************************************************

Sodomy II: Who stands to gain the most?

In the court of the rakyat, Anwar Ibrahim is not guilty of Sodomy II, and neither was he guilty of Sodomy I. He was initially found guilty of Sodomy I (that ‘judgment’ later reversed) in the most convoluted and illogical judicial process facilitated and engineered by top policemen, prosecutors and judges who were anything but the respected and responsible public servants for law and order and justice in a democratic country.

Today, we are on the verge of witnessing a repeat of that most shameful process in Malaysia’s history. The question is why would anyone want to do this? Surely, Saiful (aged 13 during Sodomy I) knows the gravity, implications and consequences of his allegations against Anwar.

Assuming that Saiful has actually been sodomised, what does he gain by lodging a report? He says that he been sodomised eight times by Anwar, in which case he should have lodged a police report immediately after the first incident if he were the innocent law-abiding citizen that he (or rather various powerful interested parties are trying to portray on his behalf) is trying to portray.

On the basis of his own report and confession, Saiful now faces the possibility of being jailed for willingly engaging in sodomy (as Anwar’s adopted brother was found guilty of and jailed for six months in Sodomy I) if his allegations against Anwar are ‘proven’. Furthermore, Saiful will now be the target of ridicule and harassment about his manhood and sexual preference. No young man will be able to live normally with such shame and accompanying torment and ridicule.

In fact, it is a well-known fact that genuine rape victims in general do not report the crime, and male victims in particular are more inclined not to report sodomy because of the greater shame and implications regarding their manhood. Furthermore, Saiful’s allegations against Anwar are so flimsy that unless the Sodomy I process is repeated, Anwar will not be found guilty.

Given these facts, Saiful could be getting a huge reward for alleging that Anwar had sodomised him, a reward which adequately compensates for the stigma and guilt associated with being a partner willing or unwilling in several acts of sodomy The question is who is offering such a handsome reward? Who is so rich and powerful to be able to make an offer which Saiful cannot refuse? Or, more correctly, who stands to gain most from Sodomy II?

The popular arguments on the Net and in the coffee-shops point to Najib. Najib met Saiful on the day after the alleged sodomy. Saiful has access to Najib’s aide. The allegation against Anwar has diverted the attention of the public from the revelations made by Private Investigator P Balasubramaniam about Najib in his first statutory declaration. Saiful’s allegation has also put Anwar on the defensive and thwarted his plans to challenge the BN government for power by September.

All these suggest that Najib has much to gain from Sodomy II. The reality is that Najib is also a victim of Sodomy II. In the eyes of the public, Najib is not only involved in the Altanuya case but is also masterminding a conspiracy against Anwar. These perceptions will have serious consequences and will most surely weaken Najib’s case to be the next PM. The way that Najib has responded to the sodomy allegation against Anwar suggests an individual who is blundering – not a mastermind who has crafted the whole thing, from positioning Saiful in PKR to getting him to accuse Anwar of sodomy. In conclusion, Najib does not stand to gain from Sodomy II.

As for Abdullah Ahamd Badawi, the people punished him on March 8 for his poor performance as PM. His popularity is at an all time low – the high petrol/diesel prices, high food prices, inflation, crime, etc.  Sodomy II has added a major political crisis which Abdullah is ill-equipped to handle, even if he is inclined to do so at this time. Either way he will be a loser.

If Anwar is found ‘guilty’ of Sodomy II, the people will hold Abdullah responsible for victimising Anwar, and Abdullah may have to exit well before the declared 2010 deadline. If Anwar were found innocent, that would strengthen Anwar, enabling him to challenge BN and hasten Abdullah’s exit. If Sodomy II drags on, there will be serious public unrest and this would also pose a major challenge for Abdullah. Thus, Abdullah is also a victim of Sodomy II.

It looks like that Anwar, Najib and Abdullah are all victims of Sodomy II in one way or another. So who is behind Sodomy II? Who will benefit from Sodomy II? Someone who will lose most if Anwar comes into power. Someone who will go to any extent to prevent Anwar’s rise. Someone who no longer accepts Najib as a potential PM. Someone who wants instability in Malaysia. Someone who wants to topple Abdullah.

Someone who cannot accept the rise of the opposition. Someone who does not agree with the new direction that Malaysia is taking in matters such as the judiciary and law and order. Someone whose buddies (cronies) are badly affected by government actions such as termination of mega-projects. Someone who wants to prevent probe and investigation into government misdeeds and mal-practices of the past. Someone who wants to continue the legacy of the past.

Someone who is fully schooled in sodomy matters from Sodomy I. Someone who has strong allies in the government, especially the home ministry, police and AG chambers. Someone who is unscrupulous. Someone who will go any extent to get what he wants. Someone who is extremely rich and powerful. Someone who has finally readied an heir. So, who is behind Sodomy II? A Machiavellian par excellence.

Who is it?

Ken, Malaysiakini

*************************************************

That was what Ken wrote in Malaysiakini on 22 July 2008. I do not, however, agree with his prognosis. Without a doubt he is exonerating Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi from the crime of trying to frame Anwar Ibrahim and has painted them, plus Anwar, as the three victims in this attempted frame-up. And in that same breath Ken is insinuating that Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is the real dalang behind the whole thing.

I do not quite agree with this assumption. Yes, Mahathir has no love for Anwar, and vice versa, but the Grand Old Man of Malaysian politics is not behind this latest move to frame Anwar on sodomy charges. And I say this because the behind-the-scenes goings-on prior to the sodomy issue exploding onto the Malaysian scene seem to point to Abdullah’s office, or at least to those within his inner circle.

Firstly, Saiful met Najib before the so-called sodomy took place. No doubt, at first, Najib denied meeting him and then later admitted meeting him but explained that it was for purposes of career guidance and to help the young man obtain a scholarship. Later on, Najib confessed he met Saiful to discuss the sodomy allegation against Anwar. This flip-flopping and inconsistency — denial and then confessing only when it appeared like he could no longer deny it — makes Najib appear like he is lying and therefore is trying to cover up an evil deed.

Najib’s responses certainly make him look like a liar and therefore he must have something to hide if he is lying. A lying man is certainly the mark of a guilty man, which makes it look like he is behind the conspiracy, or at least involved in the conspiracy to frame Anwar. But this is what they are trying to make us believe. Why this effort to make it appear like Najib is the culprit if not to deflect all attention from whoever is the real culprit?

Now, the day after Saiful met Najib, he met Rodwan in room 619 of the Kuala Lumpur Concorde. Najib did not know this of course. Prior to that meeting, Rodwan and Saiful spoke over the phone at least eight times. We can only assume that part of this conversation involved asking Saiful to go meet Najib and to make sure that everyone knows about it so that the conspiracy points to Najib. The fact that Saiful brought a friend along only reinforces this assumption, especialy when this friend is aligned to Anwar Ibrahim.

The man who is the real mastermind behind this latest conspiracy to frame Anwar is Shafee Abdullah. Just days before the sodomy allegation exploded, and even before Saiful’s meeting with Rodwan on 25 June 2008, Shafee was in Najib’s house to attend a gathering. And in front of scores of witnesses he asked to be excused early because he ‘had a very big fish to catch’. Shafee conveniently made it known that he is behind the move to catch the ‘big fish’ and he wanted all those in Najib’s house to be aware that Najib was in the know. Actually, Najib did not know what he was talking about and assumed that the ‘big fish’ meant Raja Petra Kamarudin and was with regards to the Statutory Declaration that he had signed just days earlier on 18 June 2008.

Shafee was supposed to have led the prosecution against Anwar. A provision in the law called FIAT allows the Attorney-General to appoint an outsider to conduct the prosecution. If Shafee does well then he would most likely be appointed the next Attorney-General. When word got out that he is heading the special police operations centre, which was located in his office, they had to abandon the whole idea.

Shafee’s hands are behind the whole thing. And this can only happen with Abdullah’s blessing. No, it is not Mahathir who is behind this. And it is not Abdullah, Najib and Anwar who are the three victims. The victims are Mahathir, Najib and Anwar. Abdullah is the hidden hand and Shafee is the henchman who was tasked with the job of implementing the evil deed. Politics is not what it always appears to be in Malaysia. That is how Malay politics is played out.

I just love a good fight

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

RPK is now a fugitive and, thus far, still a liar!

This has to be said!

I for once (it should be ‘I for one’, not ‘I for once’) do not believe Raja Petra Kamarudin (RPK) ran away, rather than face the court, because he is afraid his Royal family will punish him for being a treacherous to his royal brethren! I for once (same here) do not believe he skips his court hearings because he is afraid, as he puts it, the police will arrest him and throw him in the dungeon.

(The IGP and Minister BOTH made public announcements that the police do not intend to re-detain Uthayakumar. Why do they refuse to also announce that they do not intend to re-detain me? Furthermore, they appealed against the Shah Alam High Court’s decision to release me from ISA detention while they refuse to appeal the same court’s decision to acquit Razak Baginda of the charge of abetment to murder.)

He took off because he is in a fix for he cannot come out with any shred of evidence on any of his serious allegation he made against Prime Minister Najib Razak and his wife Rosmah Mansor!

(If Superintendent Gan would just reply to all the questions posed by my lawyer, YB Gobind Singh Deo, in my sedition trial, then the evidence that Rusdi seeks would be available. Of course I can’t come out with a shred of evidence when they cover up that evidence and refuse to allow it to surface in the trial. Why not Rusdi suggest instead that Supt. Gan reply to the questions so that this evidence that he seeks would be available?)

However, I would also like to believe this man RPK could be suffering from a psychiatric disorder called “Munchausen Syndrome”, a malady which is named after a 16th century German Baron Karl Friedrich von Münchausen. According to a definition, Münchausen Syndrome “is a psychiatric disorder wherein those affected feign disease, illness, or psychological trauma in order to draw attention or sympathy to themselves. It is in a class of disorders known as factitious disorders which involve “illnesses” whose symptoms are either self-induced or falsified by the patient. It is also sometimes known as hospital addiction syndrome or hospital hopper syndrome.”

(Would Rusdi like to deny that he came to meet me at the Havana Club at midnight some time in 2007 to offer to pay me off to stop writing about Najib and his link to the Altantuya murder? Would Rusdi like to deny he asked me to name my price? Would Rusdi like to deny he phoned me the next day and scolded me for telling Dr Mahathir about it? Would Rusdi like to deny that he phoned me and scolded me for telling Dr Mahathir because Najib screwed him good and proper after Dr Mahathir gave him a piece of his mind? An Umno man by the name of ‘Man Cowboy’ was there that night. Would Rusdi like to deny that as well?)

For the record, RPK has hurled a lot of serious unfounded accusations against the Prime Minister and his wife for being involved in a death, mind you in a death, of a foreign national. That, to me is a very serious accusation. Thus far he has accused the PM of being involved, and the PM’s wife had supervised in the killing of a foreign national.

(The transcript of the exchanges of text messages between Najib and lawyer Shafee Abdullah is re-produced below. This was first published in Malaysia Today when I was under detention in Kamunting. So it could not have been me who published it since I did not have internet access in my jail cell. Najib never denied this. He just said that it is a private matter so he need not explain anything.)

RPK also said he has a witness, a Lieutenant Colonel in the military intelligence, who said this witness saw the whole thing, which led him to write a piece in his website accusing the PM’s wife supervise the killing. Serious stuff!

(While under ISA detention and during my interrogation I informed Datuk Zambri Ahmad of the Special Branch that my source was Kol. Azmi Zainal Abidin of Military Intelligence. Zamri said he knows Kol Azmi personally. Why do they refuse to ask Kol. Azmi to openly and publicly deny this? Is it because they did speak to Kol. Azmi and he actually confirmed it? And was this also why they quickly packed me off to Kamunting the next day without allowing me to sign my statement cum confession?)

Well so far this has happened! This Lt Col has since said it was a total hogwash and a fabrication on the assertion on RPK’s part that he saw the whole thing where a foreign national was blown up and the wife of the PM was there, and he told RPK! We, Malaysians, were led to believe RPK has a concrete proof to the fact! Well, instead of showing the proof so that the PM and his wife can be charged then if found guilty to be hanged or jailed for being involved in a murder, RPK scoot off and ran away!

(What if I can produce the official and signed records of the security personnel to confirm that TWO senior officers from the military went to Najib’s house the night of Altantuya’s murder and did not leave until the next morning? What happened in those many hours they were in Najib’s house? Does Rusdi really want these records made public? Will Najib be able to explain it if I do make them public?)

Then he has the audacity to tell the whole world, in his website Malaysia Today, that he could not attend his court hearings where he has to answer to some very serious accusation he made to the Prime Minister of this country and his wife, because the police will arrest him and hos (I think he meant ‘his’) Royal brethren will kidnapped (bad grammar) and tortured (also bad grammar) him if he were to appear in court at PJ which is in the state of Selangor?! What an insult to our intelligence eh!

(I never said that. What I did do was I published the two e-mails from my Aunty Fuziah below. Rusdi himself has previously posted an article in his Blog where he said that the Sultan of Selangor called me gila. In fact, Rusdi added, the Selangor Royal Family regards me as a sort of outcast of the family. This is what Rusdi himself posted in his Blog. He said this, not me.)

The sad part is what he wrote for his reason why he ran away to be a fugitive instead of facing the music is that many people still believe in his lies!

(Rusdi had better check whether I am running away from something or running towards something. Read my story about crossing the bridge and tricking the guard into thinking you are coming from one direction whereas you are actually coming from the opposite direction.)

Well, I do not how it works but if he is in London, England, I am sure he can be extradited, and if he is in Segambut hiding at YB BABI’s house I am sure he has to come out sooner or later.

(Well, let’s see you try to get me. I plan to be the longest fugitive on the run in Malaysian history. And I am going to conduct this guerrilla warfare and keep hitting Umno till it destructs in a heap.)

When that happens I think the Malaysian government will be firmed (bad grammar again) enough to take stern action and do the necessary in finding him guilty of lying and then booked him with the maximum years allowed by the law for his crime against the natural order of logic! This man RPK, he is one totally illogical sad dude I have ever come across!

(You have to catch me first.)

Enough already!

Rusdi Mustapha

*************************************************

Dear Peter,

I am sending you this letter as you have not responded to my telephone calls nor to my telephone message inviting you to the house on Saturday afternoon to talk over family matters particularly in connection with the open letter to Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin which you posted in your blog on 2nd March 2009.

As you already know, I admire your ability to write and express your thoughts, ideas and comments about events in your blog especially your mastery of the English language. I have also often reminded you that truth should always prevail in communicating these things to the public. It is also not for you to decide “what is clearly lawful”.

Had Tok Uda been alive, he would have considered the content and manner of what you wrote in the open letter to Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin, as a betrayal of the code of conduct and values which he had subscribed to, cherished and passed on to us. And for this, to have come from his favourite grandson would certainly have made him collapse in a state of shock.

While Tok Uda, as a true royalist had demanded loyalty and the upholding of family honour, tradition and adat, he had, on many occasions also emphasized that we are entitled to our own personal views, accepted our sense and spirit of adventure, freedom of thought and action as you may well have known from the family history. But “RESPECT FOR THE LAWS OF THE COUNTRY” or “UPHOLDING LAW AND ORDER “ was his cardinal principle, to be dearly valued and respected by the family at all times.

I believe that in the case of the open letter, you have crossed the line. Such writings would appear to be seditious. Therefore, for the sake of Tok Uda, and, in upholding the family honour, I feel that the only discourse open is to diffuse/redeem this and for you to apologize through your blog to the rulers and the public.

We all love you Peter in our own small ways but I have this task to keep the family together, so help me Peter. And  so help me  too, Ya-Allah.

With my personal good wishes and love to you and Marina and the family,

I remain,

Yours,

Aunty Fuziah
14 March 2009

*************************************************

Dear Peter,

Assalamualaikum,

It would appear that you have misinterpreted my letter of 14 March 2009 to you.

In all fairness to your readers, I urge you to post the full text of the letter in your blog.

Thank you and Wassalam,

Yours,

Aunty Fuziah
20 March 2009

*************************************************

The text messages were transmitted between Najib’s personal mobile phone (+6012 2143177) and Shafee’s mobile phone (+6012 3257052).

Wednesday 8/11/2006

Najib to Shafee (S2N)

Date: 8/11/2006 02:59:31

Dato Seri, The Razak Baginda thing is troubling me. Can I help? Salam, Shafee

Najib to Shafee (N2S)

Date: 8/11/2006 03:45:05

I will speak with u later tonight.

S2N

Date: 8/11/2006 03:45:31

Thank you

S2N

Date: 8/11/2006 06:28:56

Met the investigating officer today. Position is serious for RB. The 3 are highly implicated. RB’s case can be fought. There are redeeming features for him. But we need to meet Dato Seri as there are other looming issues at large. But not to worry.  Salam > Shafee

N2S

Date: 8/11/2006 21:06:11

I have spoken to IGP. U can represent n meet RB in court.

Thursday 9/11/2006

N2S

Date: 9/11/2006 12:45:30

If RB’s remand is upto Sunday, does it mean that he has to be charged by Fri or be released? i hope it is looking better for him.

S2N

Date: 9/11/2006 13:11:23

3 things can happen. Firstly, they can ask for more time for detention. We will resist. Second, they have to release him by Friday or thirdly charge him by Friday. Police took him to his office for document search. Nothing incriminating found. Now they are recording stmt from him. Later search in house. Under control so far Dato Seri.  Salam, shafee

S2N

Date: 9/11/2006 14:09:03

Dato Seri, Re RB need to meet up with you today. shafee

N2S

Date: 9/11/2006 14:17:47

630 pm at my house in PJaya this evening.

S2N

Date: 9/11/2006 14:18:21

Thank you

Friday 10/11/2006

N2S

Date: 10/11/2006 15:14:3

Any news about RB ?

S2N

Date: 10/11/2006 15:19:40

Dato Seri, Negotiating for conditional release. If not police need 2 or 3 more days extention. I suspect its an exercise in public relation as they do not want public to think a VIP was given an easier time. Being a vip under these conditions is a liability. Otherwise we are on track according to plan.  Salam, Shafee

N2S

Date: 10/11/2006 15:27:01

Thanks, he is very stressful according to his wife n would be a huge help if he could get a conditional release latest by sun.

N2S

Date: 10/11/2006 21:35:52

Saw the news on tv. RB was sent for DNA. Not sure it was neccessary.

S2N

Date: 10/11/2006 21:40:19

Unnessasary. But I think its on his lung infection. He has just been sent again to HUKM. Will know more later from inside contacts.

Saturday 11/11/2006

S2N

Date: 11/11/2006 03:17:56

Dato Seri, I was at ghkl ccu 4th floor.RB was admitted due to lung infection:mild pneumonia and asthmatic. This was the pain he was suffering in the chest and unexplained coughing for months. He is under an able physician Dato Dr Jeyaindran Sinnadurai(head of Dept of Medicine)Its good he is resting there than in the lockup. Dna was done to eliminate that he was at scene of crime (paternity can be ruled out as well).Need to see Dato Seri on some concerns. Salam. Shafee

N2S

Date: 11/11/2006 08:54:17

ANy chance of a release by sun ?

S2N

Date: 11/11/2006 08:58:14

Police should release him by then except that I think the police is disturbeb by Media and public pressure. Other factors need be coomunicated to Dato Seri in person. Investigation wise we are on track for release.

S2N

Date: 11/11/2006 09:26:52

It is clear that the Police will ask for extention t’row. I will resist strongly in view of the fact that the last few days investigation on RB have completed investigations that require RB’s presence in custody. Secondly, from yesterday the Police has done nothing much with him except to do the dna. Thirdly, I am concerned with the Police carelessness yesterday in allowing the 3 other suspects to be freely mixing and therefore tainting their subsequent stmnts as they could be ‘group coached’. But it also show Police no longer need to isolate the suspects. Even RB was handcuffed to the C/I. Salam. Shafee

N2S

Date: 11/11/2006 11:46:48

I Can see u today at my Taman duta hse at 6 pm.

S2N

Date: 11/11/2006 11:59:08

OK Dato Seri. Insyaallah I will be there.

Sunday 12/11/2006

S2N

Date: 12/11/2006 13:53:41

2 days extention to Tuesday. They must release him by then maybe conditionally. Police asked for full 14days.He has message.

S2N

Date: 12/11/2006 14:06:23

Will give Dato Seri in a while

S2N

Date: 12/11/2006 15:10:17

0320949418

Monday 13/11/2006

S2N

Date: 13/11/2006 15:53:36

Am in his office now. Another search. AG will be unwilling to charge and lose a case yet again. It is a good idea to suggest to AG to hood on and let investigtion proceed with Razak Released on Bond.

N2S

Tel: 60122143177

Date: 13/11/2006 16:23:29

How was the search ?

S2N

Date: 13/11/2006 16:25:56

We provided them everything, including old pda and note books and a couple of bills. Nothing incriminating.

Wednesday 15/11/2006

S2N

Date: 15/11/2006 13:21:32

Things going as expected.2 male officer charged for murder in common intention. Razak’s name not in. Lady officer released but rearrested under Emergency Ordinance to be used as Crown witness (exactly as predicted). I am expecting RB to be released on Bond. 4 of my lawyers are watching brief the proceedings in the murder case. Rb matter prob t’row. Pl call.  Shafee Ps coming back now from Taipei.

N2S

Date: 15/11/2006 23:31:09

So hopefully he will be released tmrw?

S2N

Date: 15/11/2006 23:34:38

Dato Seri, I am driving up from S’pore, no more flight to KL tonight. Hope for th best. Any indication? Shafee

N2S

Date: 15/11/2006 23:36:52

Not heard anything untoward yet.

Thursday 16/11/2006

S2N

Date: 16/11/2006 10:52:43

Anything Dato Seri? I am already in Court.

N2S

Date: 16/11/2006 10:53:50

Pls do not say anything to the press today. i will explain later. RB will have to face a tentative charge but all is not lost.

S2N

Date: 16/11/2006 10:54:30

OK, TQ

Friday 17/11/2006

S2N

Date: 17/11/2006 10:50:30

Dato Seri, Its important you speak to Yusoff Zainal Abidin as he knows the law a lot better in the Chambers. I am confident he is concerned with the negligible evidence agst Razak. The Raja Mahani and Tengku Ariston cases ought to be the guiding critera for AG. They cannot afford another scandallous loss by the Prosecution as in Norita, Ariston, Dato Balwant etc.

N2S

Date: 17/11/2006 11:39:46

OK will try. Meanwhile try to console the wife. She is hysterical.

S2N

Date: 17/11/2006 11:41:29

I know Dato Seri.I will do everything I can.Salam, Shafee

S2N

Date: 17/11/2006 12:57:49

Dato Seri, Razak has not been sent to Hospital. He is clearly not well. He is refusing to take Prison’s medicine for fear of sabourtage. The chief Physician of GHKL Dato Dr Jaya Sinnadurai is shocked that they have not brought Razak back to GHKL. I have spoken to Haji Darussalam, Sg Buloh’s Prison Director. Can You sound this to Dato Radzi Shek Ahmad? Need to see you of s’thing that I think had happened that led to her death. Utterly shocking if I am right. Shafee

S2N

Date: 17/11/2006 15:45:34

Dato Seri, I am at Sg Buloh Prison. I have organised Razak to be in HUKL, He is on his way there now. The Pengarah Hj Darussallam and deputy Supt Gunasegaran very helpful. Shafee

N2S

Date: 17/11/2006 21:27:02

My regards to him. He Is always in my thought.

S2N

Date: 17/11/2006 21:34:44

Will tell him

Sunday 19/11/2006

S2N

Date: 19/11/2006 16:25:08

Dato Seri, I need Dsp Musa, your ADc to call me to clarify a point. He is not answering  Shafee

Monday 20/11/2006

S2N

Date: 20/11/2006 13:02:33

Any developement Dato Seri? Shafee

N2S

Date: 20/11/2006 14:30:20

Not yet.

S2N

Date: 20/11/2006 14:30:38

Thank you

S2N

Date: 20/11/2006 21:05:17

Dato Seri.Razak is being transfered to Sg. Buloh t’row. Can Dr. Jaya do anything?

N2S

Date: 20/11/2006 23:04:50

When is he being transffered?

S2N

Date: 20/11/2006 23:05:48

T’row

N2S

Date: 20/11/2006 23:07:01

What time?

S2N

Date: 20/11/2006 23:08:01

Probably late morning

Thursday 23/11/2006

N2S

Tel: 60122143177

Date: 23/11/2006 13:46:51

Your message read” Najib released on personal bond!”.

S2N

Date: 23/11/2006 13:50:00

Razak released on Bail of 1 million. On personal bond undertaking.  Shafee?I  am terribly sorry for that mistake. Whole night tak tidur preparing. My profuse apologies Sir.  salam. shafee

N2S

Date: 23/11/2006 14:00:25

ALhamdullillah , at least he is on bail. Big relief for him n family.

S2N

Date: 23/11/2006 14:02:02

Dato, I need to brief you urgently b4 you speak to him. Shafee

N2S

Date: 23/11/2006 14:12:32

OK but not intending to speak to him as yet.

Saturday 2/12/2006

S2N

Date: 2/12/2006 18:59:15

Dato Seri, Got some info that are troubling. Quite serious. Are you in Taman Duta? Can we meet?   Salam, Shafee

Sigh… hafidz baharom does not respect me: Who the hell is hafidz, anyway? Do we need his respect to survive?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Today, Hafidz Baharom’s piece ‘Why I don’t respect RPK’ was published in The Star. Once upon a time, The Star used to be known as ‘Suara Tunku Abdul Rahman’ — when it was then merely a regional newspaper for Penang folks. Now, of course, it is better known as Suara MCA and has since been transformed into a national newspaper.

Back in the early 1990s, I too used to write for The Star. At that time I was just a freelance columnist writing for the Cycling, and later, Motorcycling columns in The Weekender. The Weekender’s editor then was Sharifah Intan. I think she is the Tunku’s granddaughter but I never did ask her.

Hafidz echoes what many Umno types have repeatedly said: berani kerana benar. What he means is: I have lied. So I should be man enough to face the music and walk into jail with my head held up high. First of all, they assume I have lied. Secondly, since I have lied, then I should suffer a sham trial and accept the verdict of a kangaroo court and go quietly to jail.

Okay, let us focus on that one issue for the meantime. We can always talk about the other issues later.

The issue they raise is: I have lied. Since the court has not ruled either way just yet, let us assume, therefore, that I have. And we will give them the benefit of the doubt and agree that I have lied. I shall not dispute that. And this means I need to go to court so that the court can rule whether I did or did not lie.

I have no problems with that. In fact, in the beginning, that was what my sedition trial was all about. Superintendent Gan made a police report against me alleging that I had lied. And I was arrested and charged for sedition because it is said I had lied. And I faced trial and defended myself against the allegation that I had lied.

Then Gan was called to testify. He was not my witness but the prosecution’s witness. And he went into great detail relating how he arrived at the conclusion that I had lied — and which was why he made that police report against me.

It was an open and shut case. Raja Petra Bin Raja Kamarudin lied in that article he wrote. So Gan was forced to make a police report against me. He was the investigating officer in the Altantuya murder. He knows the full details of the murder investigation. And he therefore knows very well that what I wrote are total lies.

Then it came to our turn to cross-examin him. He had already testified for the prosecution. Now it was our turn to cross-examin him on his testimony he gave the prosecution.

And that was when he changed his story.

No, he did not investigate the Altantuya murder after all. Another person did. So he is not that knowledgeable about the details of the murder investigation. He just knows small patches of the investigation.

Okay, but he said I had lied. Which parts of that article were the lies? My lawyer went through the article and identified four (4) paragraphs where, according to Gan’s police report, I was supposed to have lied. Okay, now let us look at the charge. The charge says seven (7) paragraphs contain lies. But only three (3) of the seven (7) tally with the three (3) of the four (4) that Gan had identified. This means there is one paragraph that does not tally. So, Gan has four, the charge says seven, and there is one where Gan and the prosecutor can’t agree whether is a lie or not.

The next step is to try to establish the truth. Only by establishing the truth can the lies be established. Since I was alleged to have lied, let us then seek the truth and only when we know the truth can it be proven whether I had lied or not.

But when Gan was asked about the truth he refused to reply to YB Gobind’s questions. He would just not reveal what was the truth. Each time he was asked a question he replied he does not know or does not know how to answer or does not know what to say.

How then does he know I had lied when he does not know what is the truth? Well, he came to the conclusion that I had lied because he had never stumbled across what I had written before. This means, if I were to write that female mosquitoes bite humans while male mosquitoes feed on fruits and not on blood, since he had never stumbled across this fact before, this means I must be lying. There are no two ways about it.

YB Gobind then goes through the article, paragraph by paragraph. He reads each paragraph and asks Gan where in that paragraph are the lies. Then it is discovered that Gan was not able to tell the court where the lies were. In short, what he initially thought to be lies were in fact not.

How did Gan then come to the conclusion they were lies when he made that police report, but when testifying on the stand he can’t stand by his allegation that I had lied? And remember, his police report said I had lied and that I had committed sedition because I had lied.

At this point, when it became clear that the prosecution’s case against me on the basis that I had committed a crime of sedition because I had lied appeared to be falling apart, the prosecutor stood up and told the court that the truth of the matter, or otherwise, is not important. Sedition has nothing to do with true or false. It would be seditious and therefore a crime even if I had told the truth.

But Gan’s police report and testimony were very clear. It was based on the fact that I was supposed to have lied. Now that the lie allegation can no longer stand, they want the court to forget about the lying part and focus on whether I did write what I was alleged to have written even if it is true. And even if it is true they still want the court to send me to jail.

To add insult to injury, the prosecution wants the court to ignore the four or seven paragraphs and whether one paragraph does not tally between the police report and the charge. The article, the court was told, has to be looked at in its entirety, not based on four paragraphs or seven paragraphs.

But the police report clearly marked four paragraphs. And it was these four paragraphs that constituted my so-called crime. The charge, on the other hand, marked seven paragraphs. And this was why I was on trial. Now they want the court to agree that all these paragraphs are no longer relevant and instead the article must be seen as a whole, minus the marked paragraphs.

Okay, the court was told, forget about whether I had lied or in fact had told the truth. Forget the police report. Forget even the charge. Let us just look at the article. Did I or did I not write that article? That is all that matters. And if I did then I must be sent to jail.

Fine, let us do just that. Let us forget about whether I had lied or in fact had told the truth. Let us forget the police report. Let us even forget the charge. Let us instead just look at the article. Did I or did I not write that article? That will be the focus.

The prosecution then adduced the article. This, according to the prosecution, was the article I was alleged to have written. And this article was downloaded from the website called Malaysia Today.

Then it was discovered that the article was NOT downloaded from Malaysia Today. It was in fact typed out. This means this was not the original evidence. It was created or fabricated and NOT downloaded from Malaysia Today. For all intents and purposes, I did not write that article. They, the prosecution, wrote that article. It is a copy. It is not an original article download from Malaysia Today.

When they realised that it was game over, they asked for a postponement so that they could amend the charge. The new charge, this time around, will have the real article downloaded from Malaysia Today.

Then they read out the new charge. But the new charge also had a fabricated article. It DID NOT have the original article downloaded from Malaysia Today. So, again, they were stuck. And at this point the court should have just acquitted me without the necessity of my defence having to be called because the charge was clearly defective and the evidence had been fabricated.

But they refused to give up. Instead, again, they applied for a postponement so that they can do a SECOND examination of the computer. They already did one examination but could not find any copy of that article. The article just did not exist. That is why they had to fabricate the evidence — because they could not find the evidence.

And why did they need to do a SECOND examination of my computer? So that they could prove that I had used the computer to update the website. This would be the evidence to prove I had published the article.

At this point they were asked how, in the first place, did they even know that the computer belongs to me? Well, because it was confiscated from my house. Am I living in that house alone? No! When they raided my house there were other people there as well. Then how do they know that I own that computer? They don’t, they just assume.

In fact, they confiscated TWO computers and one of them actually belongs to someone else and the files in it prove this. But when they confiscated the two computers they never asked me whether I owned those computers and I never said that I did. So who owns those two computers? The police do not know.

They then summoned an IT expert to testify. They wanted the IT expert to testify that the computers the police had confiscated were used to update Malaysia Today on the day the article was published. The IT expert, however, testified that the computers never accessed Malaysia Today on the day in question. In fact, many days before the alleged crime was committed, the computers they confiscated never accessed the Internet at all, let alone Malaysia Today.

So there goes their case against me. They confiscated two computers that they can’t prove belong to me. Even if the computers do belong to me, they were never used to publish the offending article. In fact, there is no copy of that article in the two computers so there is no evidence I had even written it in the first place. They can’t prove that I lied. They are no longer interested whether I lied or not because they can’t prove that I lied. So where do they go from there? And why are they still pursuing their case against me when they no longer have a case?

Not willing to admit that they no longer have a case, the prosecution told the court they still have many witnesses to call. Okay, they are supposed to tell the court before the trial starts who they are calling as witnesses. How many NEW witnesses are they calling and who are they? They don’t know yet. They are still figuring it out and will inform the court later once they have decided.

Yes, berani kerana benar, all these people say. If I am benar, then I must be berani to face the court. Hey, I did. I did just that; I faced the court. And I allowed them to build their case against me. I allowed them to get to the truth so that they can establish that I had committed the crime of lying and therefore I am seditious. But they failed to do so, each step of the way. And each time they failed they asked for a postponement so that they could go back to the drawing board and come out with new charges, new witnesses, new testimony, new evidence, new rules of the game, and whatnot. And, still, they failed to nail me.

But they refuse to allow it to end there. They refuse to acknowledge that they can’t get me in spite of bending the rules and moving the goalposts so many times halfway through the trial. This is no longer even a kangaroo court. They have set new standards for what a kangaroo court should look like.

Yes, berani kerana benar. I berani walk away from this sham trial and tell them to go to hell kerana benar. And I berani face the warrant of arrest they have issued for not turning up in court kerana benar. And I berani say to their faces: no more bullshit. And I berani tell them I refuse to allow them to detain me, yet again, under the Internal Security Act. And I berani do all this kerana I benar. And I will not lose any sleep over the matter just because Hafidz Baharom does not respect me and challenges me with berani kerana benar.

Serious case of foot in mouth disease

The US made it clear it viewed the latest sodomy charge against Anwar as a sham charge similar to the first one back in 1998. And you respond by grumbling about people linking Najib to the Altantuya murder and about how you turned down a bribe?

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

On Thursday (May 14), at a joint press conference after meeting with United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Washington DC, Anifah was asked about the fresh sodomy charge against Anwar, which State Department had earlier said was politically motivated.

“He said that he will form the government on September 16 and he had changed the dates many times. And he was trying to entice members of parliament (to defect),” said Anifah, who is the brother of Sabah Chief Minister Musa Aman.

“And I was personally offered to jump into the opposition and offered a very lucrative position – it’s like a deputy prime minister (in the Pakatan government). And this is not known to the world at large.”

Anifah defends Najib on Altantuya

At the press conference, Anifah also defended his boss, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, who was accused of being linked to the murder of Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibauu.

“And insofar as Anwar Ibrahim is concerned – we know him very, very well. Most of the things (allegations) are untrue; for example, like the involvement of our honourable prime minister and the murder of a Mongolian citizen. And he has repeatedly said before the elections that he will provide evidence and yet, until today, he has not given anything.”

Expressing shock over Anifah’s allegations, Anwar chided the minister for faring poorly in his international debut as foreign minister, which he said reflected his inexperience and immaturity.

“I have spoken to Anifah only once on the phone and that’s it…,” said Anwar after a meet-the-people session in his Permatang Pauh parliamentary constituency.

“I never offered the DPM post to him for him to defect. The issue indeed was never raised. He was never qualified for such a position anyway. Perhaps it was his dream to become deputy prime minister.”

He suggested that the minister was perhaps overawed and overwhelmed by the occasion. “After all, being a new minister before an international audience for the first time, he was probably prompted to impress his new political master,” chided Anwar, confirming that he would soon be filing a civil suit against Anifah for defamation.

“As the matter would be in court, I prefer not to comment further on the issue,” he said, adding that Anifah was seeking to tarnish his image abroad.

Malaysiakini

*************************************************

To understand the above, one must first understand Sabah and Umno politics, which is not that easy to understand when it involves Umno Sabah. Umno Sabah is not part of Umno Peninsular Malaysia in the true sense of the word. Umno Sabah considers itself a ‘separate entity’ and ‘kingmaker’, the party that more or less keeps Umno in power. And the same goes for Barisan Nasional Sarawak as well although there is no Umno in Sarawak — at least while the Grand Old Man of Sarawak politics is still alive.

Sabah has 25 parliament seats, Sarawak another 31. Out of a total of 222 parliament seats, this gives Sabah and Sarawak about 30% of the total. In the last general election, Sabah and Sarawak lost only one seat each to the opposition. This means Sabah and Sarawak are Barisan Nasional strongholds and without these two states Umno would never be able to form the federal government.

According to the agreement, Sabah and Sarawak must comprise of not less than 25% of the total number of parliament seats. Therefore, every time they increase the number of seats in Peninsular Malaysia, they must also do so correspondingly in Sabah and Sarawak. This puts these two East Malaysian states in a very advantageous position where they can demand a lot and get away with it — and whoever so wishes to form the federal government just can’t ignore Sabah and Sarawak.

However, Musa Aman, the Chief Minister and head of Umno Sabah, does not have the support of all the 25 Umno divisions. At best he has the support of only seven with 18 opposed to him. This is quite normal for Sabah though where infighting is always fierce considering that East Malaysian politics is politics of the warlords. And there are certainly many warlords in Sabah.

It is said the poorest Sabah warlord is worth only RM200 million. If that is all you are worth then nobody talks about you because wealth in Sabah is measures in terms of billions — half a billion, one billion and so on. To be worth only RM200 million means you are in the small boys club and not yet worthy to sit with the real man.

Is it any wonder that when they are not visiting their constituency once or twice a year these warlords would be throwing their money away in Australian casinos plus those in other parts of the world? Of course, they make up for this by going to Mekah at least once a year so that they can cleanse their gambling sins and be ‘reborn’ to repeat the routine all over again.

Musa was at the crossroads of his political career in the run-up to the last general election. There was talk that since he could not get the support of the majority of the 25 Sabah divisions he would most likely be dropped. But the problem with this was, while he may command the support of only seven of the 25 divisions, this was also the same for the others as well. No one commanded majority support. And even though Musa may command the support of only seven divisions, neither can any of the other warlords better this.

In a nutshell, Musa may not be the best, but he is certainly not the worse. No one really commands majority support and replacing Musa would only mean you are replacing one problem for probably an even bigger problem.

But Musa was not going to take any chances. He knew he was living on borrowed time and Sabah’s performance in the 8 March 2008 general election would decide his fate. If he can keep the opposition out, then he would be guaranteed another term. But if the opposition makes inroads, then it would be good-bye Musa. His best bet then would be to keep close links with Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and serve him in whatever way necessary, through the son-in-law and the Fourth Floor team of course.

However, what would happen if Abdullah Badawi gets ousted and Najib takes over? Well, then Plan B comes into play. And plan B would involve his brother Anifah. Anifah, therefore, has to stay close to Najib so that he would be the bridge Musa builds to Putrajaya in the event Abdullah Badawi is sent into retirement.

When Rosmah throws a private birthday party for Najib where only close friends are invited, Anifah is on the guest list, the only Sabah warlord to receive an invitation. Anifah’s links with Najib therefore extends beyond politics. It is on a very personal level.

But how would Musa explain to Abdullah the reason why his brother is a personal friend and buddy of Najib? Is Musa hedging his bets? If Abdullah stays on then he is okay. If Najib takes over he is still okay, through his brother. This appears like Musa is trying to get the best of both worlds.

To cover their tracks, they got to make it appear like Anifah is the prodigal member of the family. He is a loose cannon. He is what every family dreads, the black sheep of the family. In fact, Anifah is beyond control and would probably even go join the opposition if pushed too far.

This ‘may join the opposition’ story also works in Anifah’s favour. Anwar Ibrahim has said that if Pakatan Rakyat forms the federal government then there may be two or even three Deputy Prime Ministers. Maybe DPM1 would be Malay, DPM2 non-Malay rotated between the Chinese and Indians, and DPM3 would be someone from East Malaysia, rotated between Sabah and Sarawak.

Yes, that is a good plan and something the non-Malays and East Malaysians have been asking for a long time now. Ah, but that is not all. Do you know that Anwar has offered the post of DPM3 to Anifah?

Yes, that was the story relayed to Najib. Therefore, when Najib takes over, he had better offer Anifah an important Cabinet position. Not just Deputy Minister of Welfare or something totally useless. Anwar has offered him the post of DPM. Surely Najib can match that with something worthwhile, even if it is not the post of DPM?

That was the Aman family spin. So now Anifah has to announce to the world that he turned down a lucrative offer of the post of DPM for a lesser post of Foreign Minister. That was the story he told Najib to be able to get this senior cabinet position. So he has to maintain this story for the sake of consistency.

Honestly though, would Anifah really make a suitable DPM? Look at how he talks in his meeting with the United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. He really put his foot in his mouth on this one. A Malaysian Foreign Minister meets the US Secretary of State and he talks about Najib and Altantuya? And he reveals to the Americans that Anwar tried to bribe him with the post of DPM? Hello, either he is more stupid than we thought or he is trying to ruin Najib in the international scene.

Those are not the things you talk about when you meet foreign governments. The US made it clear it viewed the latest sodomy charge against Anwar as a sham charge similar to the first one back in 1998. And you respond by grumbling about people linking Najib to the Altantuya murder and about how you turned down a bribe?

Sheesh, talk about a huge political blunder. The US already thinks that Najib is linked somehow to the murder. In fact, not only the US, but also all the foreign missions in Malaysia as well. Just speak to any Ambassador and they will tell you that they believe Najib’s hands are not clean and that Altantuya’s murder leads to Putrajaya.

There is nothing Anifah can say that will convince them otherwise. And the US did not ask Anifah whether it is true that Najib is guilty. They asked about what they thought was a sham sodomy charge that will soon lead to a sham sodomy trial. And Anifah responds by talking about Najib and Altantuya and the bribe he turned down instead.

Mother of All Screwed-up Land: How the screwee became the screwer

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

On late Monday afternoon, the court ruled that Nizar is still the Menteri Besar of Perak. On early Tuesday morning, the Appeal Court allowed a stay of execution. This means Nizar was back as Menteri Besar for a mere couple of hours yesterday and then had to hand the state back to Zambry.

What was astonishing was the speed in which the Appeal Court sat to make its decision when there are still so many older cases pending — sometimes up to ten years while the convicted persons awaiting the outcome of their appeal languish in jail without bail during all that time. And the beauty about this is, even if they lose their appeal, their jail sentence is shorter than the time they have thus far spent in prison under remand. Some have withdrawn their appeal just so that they can go home. It is better to plead guilty or not contest the verdict since the sentence is shorter than the time they would have to spend in prison under remand.

The second thing that has astonished most people; lawyers especially; is the one-man quorum that sat to hear Zambry’s application for a stay of execution. They would have expected a minimum quorum of three judges since this case is of great public interest. But only one man sat to hear Zambry’s application and it certainly does not give an impression that Nizar saw justice done yesterday in the Appeal Court.

That happened to me in the appeal that the government filed against my release from ISA detention in November last year. We asked for a quorum of seven judges. If we can’t get seven we would settle for five. But they refused both seven and five and agreed on only three. Why only three and whose decision was that? It was an administrative decision, meaning a court clerk somewhere decided that it should be three.

We were not told who the judges were until the morning of the hearing. And when we found out who they were we objected to one of them because I had crossed swords with him many times over the last ten years. So this judge was asked to leave the room while the other two sat to hear our objections. When it was pointed out that it is illegal and unconstitutional for only two judges to sit and that we would be appealing against this the judge said, “Do what you like.”

Then the two judges ruled that the third need not recuse and he was invited back to ‘take his rightful place on the bench’.

The court is just fucking around with me and I am expected to ‘respect the court’ and abide to its decisions without a peep or a squeak. Balls! I do not have to, and will not, take this crap. I attended the first day’s hearing, and after seeing how the court pushed us around and treated us like idiots, I refused to walk into that courtroom again for the rest of the hearings. You want to put me on trial, well and fine. I will face the court. But if you want to fuck around with me and treat me like I am one stupid country bumpkin then I do not need to take this crap.

Okay, let us now talk about my second brush with the court, the criminal defamation trial at the end of this month. When I was first charged and asked how I plead, I replied that I refuse to enter any plea. The court said it would take that as a ‘not guilty’ plea. I then raised my voice and told the judge that I did not plead ‘not guilty’. I had refused to enter any plea.

I was advised that, under the law, refusing to enter any plea would be interpreted as a ‘not guilty’ plea.

When they transferred my case to a higher court they again asked me how I plead and I again refused to enter any plea. And, again, they interpreted this as a ‘not guilty’ plea and, again, I raised my voice and said I did not enter a ‘not guilty’ plea.

Look, I did not plead ‘not guilty’. And I don’t care a damn how the court wishes to interpret that. No plea means ‘no plea’ as far as I am concerned and, at that point of time, they had a choice to pronounce me guilty and send me to jail — which is what I wanted and I told my lawyers so. But my lawyers said that this would not happen because, since I did not enter any plea, then I shall be subjected to a trial.

That is stupid and, in spite of that being the law, a stupid law is still a stupid law. When I refused to enter a plea on both occasions I told the court my reason for doing so was because the charges are defective and mala fide. But the court ignored that. The prosecutor asked my lawyers in what way the charges are defective and mala fide but of course my lawyers would not tell him. If we did then they would amend the charges as they did in my sedition trial when they discovered they were losing their case against me.

When the police called me in for interrogation it was on the basis I had signed a false Statutory Declaration. In fact, the day after I signed it, the AG said that I am guilty of signing a false declaration. Two days later, the IGP also announced they would be taking action against me for signing a false declaration.

How did the AG know? How did the IGP know? I had signed a SD, which I then officially, through my lawyers and by way of letter, sent to the prosecutors in the Altantuya murder trial. This was a ‘for your eyes only’ document. This means, since it is a criminal investigation matter, the SD is classified information and automatically comes under the Official Secrets Act.

However, mysteriously, within 24 hours, my SD appeared on http://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/, a Blog run by Zakir, a man aligned to Mukhriz Mahathir. I know Zakir lives next door to a very senior Special Branch officer because he has mentioned this often enough so this is probably how he got a copy of my SD.

Why did the police leak my SD to an Umno Blogger? It was confidential and meant only for the prosecutors in the Altantuya murder trial. But almost immediately the AG plus IGP both told the whole world about it and announced publicly that I had signed a false SD and that they would be taking action against me. They had not even seen the SD yet when they made those announcements. Furthermore, no investigation was launched to determine whether my SD is in fact false or otherwise.

Yes, the decision to ‘take action’ was made way in advance of any investigation. They had put the cart before the horse. Now they had to go look for the horse since the cart had already been announced. After that they called me in for interrogation so that the AG and IGP would not look like the stupid idiots that they are for announcing something before it even happened.

Then they panicked. If they charge me for the crime of signing a false SD then they have to prove it. I need not prove anything. It is not my job to prove anything. Since they are the ones charging me then they have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that I did in fact sign a false SD. What if I manage to put on a good defence and prove that I had not signed a false SD but had in fact signed a truthful one? What if witnesses come forward to testify that what I signed was true?

That’s when they realised they had blundered. If they charge me for signing a false SD and can’t prove it, or I can in fact prove otherwise, then Najib and Rosmah are dead meat. So they changed their strategy and instead charged me for criminal defamation.

But they can’t charge me for criminal defamation. Firstly, Rosmah is not a government officer. Criminal defamation involves you defaming a government officer in the execution of his or her official duties. Rosmah is merely the wife of a politician. She is not a government officer.

The husband and wife army officers may be considered government officers but I ‘defamed’ them in what they did outside their official duties. I did not accuse them of committing a crime when they were discharging their official duties.  I did so in their capacity as off-duty army officers on a frolic of their own, as the law would say. This means they were not doing things as government officers but were moonlighting.

The government is therefore not involved in what they did so I did not commit a crime of criminal defamation. Or are they saying that the husband and wife army officers were merely carrying out their official duties under orders from the top?

The government is playing games with me. From the first announcement by the AG, followed by the announcement by the IGP, followed by my interrogation for the crime of criminal defamation, then the eventual charge for a totally different crime altogether, and finally, the transfer of my case to a higher court for no apparent reason whatsoever, I can see that all the government wants to do is to screw me good and proper.

Well, why should I endorse what the government is trying to do? I already said I refuse to enter a plea. I refuse to entertain the government with a trial. If they want to charge me for the crime of signing a false SD, well and fine. Let us fight it out in court and they can try to prove I did in fact sign a false SD — while I will try to prove otherwise. But in a charge such as criminal defamation, they need not prove the truth of the matter. They only need to prove that I signed the SD. If they can prove I signed it, which they can since I did sign it and never denied doing so, then they can send me to jail.

In short, whether what I signed is true or false does not matter. They need not go into the truth or falsity of my SD. All they need to do is focus on proving that I did sign it and that would be enough to send me to jail, even if what I signed was absolutely true.

And the same goes for my sedition charge. Initially, they made a police report against me because I was alleged to have lied. The police officer who made the police report against me is the same chap who investigated the Altantuya murder. And he knows I lied because, according to him, he investigated the murder and did not stumble across what I was alleged to have written.

In short, he investigated the murder so he knows. And he knows what I was alleged to have written is therefore not true. So, I lied.

Then, he discovered that, since he investigated the murder and therefore knows everything about the murder to the extent that he knows I lied, the court would require him to reveal the truth so that the truth can be compared to what I am alleged to have written to establish whether I had indeed lied or not.

That’s when he changed his story. He said he actually does not know that much because he did not personally investigate the murder. Some other people conducted the investigation and he was merely the coordinator. But earlier he said otherwise.

If he did not personally investigate the murder and does not really know that much about it, how did he then know that I lied? He did make the police report against me on the basis that I lied. He knows that I lied. But he does not know that much about the murder. Yet he knows that I lied because he did not stumble across what I wrote.

What total crap! And when YB Gobind Singh repeatedly asked him about certain facts of the investigation to compare these facts against what I was alleged to have written; to establish in what way I had lied; this police officer with the rank of Superintendent refused to answer the questions.

If he refuses to answer the questions how can we establish the truth and at the same time establish whether I lied? That was when the prosecution told the court that it does not matter whether what I was alleged to have written is true or false. The court only needs to focus on whether I had in fact written that article. And if it can be proven I had indeed written it then I can be sent to jail even if what I wrote was true.

But did not the police report say I had lied and was I not charged for the crime of sedition because I am alleged to have lied? Now it does not matter any longer if I lied or not? Even if I did not lie I am still guilty?

Aiyah, games, games, and even more games. They keep changing the rules and move the goalposts halfway through the game. And they are still doing this. And the Umno guys whack me and insist that I face the court and they call me a coward for refusing to ‘face the music’. I can face the music as what these Umno people insist I do. But what music are they playing? I need to know first before I am asked to face it.

What Umno can’t stand is when you refuse to play by their rules and instead make up your own rules, which they are then forced to follow. Our HINDRAF chap did this when he refused to sign the conditional release papers and insisted that he remain in Kamunting. They had to physically throw him out of Kamunting like they threw Siva out of the Perak State Assembly last week.

Yes, I am having more fun this way. I refuse to tunduk to them and it upsets them like crazy. They tried to screw me and I turn around and screw them instead. They gave me an ultimatum to issue a public apology to the Sultan of Perak or else the family is going to insert a full-page advertisement in the mainstream newspapers announcing that I have been disowned. Then I turn around and disown them instead by going into exile.

No, I am nobody’s patsy. And I will go to great lengths to defy them every step of the way. I know they have issued a fresh detention order and the instant I appear in court they will detain me under the Internal Security Act and send me to Kamunting. And it burns them up so much that I am so near yet so far away.

Was Siva merely collateral damage?

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

After I wrote my last article in No Holds Barred (It’s all about race, stupid!), I went to sleep — after staying awake for almost 24 hours. I admit that my No Holds Barred article was very fiery, practically calling for blood. I make no apologies for that but I suppose sleep depravation does that to you; it makes you lash out. Nevertheless, I maintain my stand that what they did to Siva — dragging him out of the State Assembly like a sack of potatoes and unceremoniously evicting him — was downright uncivilised and utterly inexcusable.

After five hours of a good sleep, and with a clearer mind because of it, I have had time to reflect on what happened in Ipoh yesterday. As I said, I make no apologies for what I wrote earlier and have not changed my views. But what I have since been able to do is to analyse what the thinking of the Pakatan Rakyat leaders could have been and why they ‘abandoned’ Siva to his fate.

Could not Pakatan Rakyat have demonstrated a show of force and defend Siva to the last man standing? Are the Pakatan Rakyat leaders that gutless that they did not stand up for what is right? After all, they are constantly screaming that Siva’s eviction is unlawful and his physical removal unconstitutional. Why then not defend the law and the constitution by force if necessary?

Well, I am looking at things from the perspective of a political activist. Pakatan Rakyat could probably be looking at things from the political angle. Not being a politician I do not see things the political way but the political activist way. And this is maybe why I do not make a good politician. I just can’t see how sometimes in politics you have to allow the other side to show its true colours. In other words, you give your enemy enough rope for it to hang itself.

I have to go read Sun Tzu again and see what he said about strategy. And strategy involves many things. As Mao said, when the enemy chases, you run. When the enemy rests, you counter-attack. Mao must have read Sun Tzu as well and I am sure that was his ‘bible’ in the battle to win the hearts and minds of the Chinese people.

Something else Sun Tzu said was to not engage an enemy more powerful than you. And if it is unavoidable and you do have to engage, then make sure you engage it on your terms, not on your enemy’s terms. Choose your battlefield. Make sure it is a battlefield that you know. Never fight on a battlefield where your enemy will be stronger and better equipped than you.

The Taliban never read Sun Tzu — or maybe they did, I don’t know. But they applied this strategy to the maximum and sent the powerful Russian military machine running back to Moscow with its tail between its legs. How to fight the Russian tanks, rockets and helicopter gun-ships when you are only armed with rifles? In an open battlefield the Russians would make mincemeat out of you.

Well, don’t engage the Russians in an open battlefield. The Russians would excel in an open battlefield. They are well equipped to fight in an open battlefield. So avoid the open battlefield and draw the Russians into the mountains. The Russian army is not trained to fight in the mountains plus their tanks would be useless in the mountains and the helicopter gun-ships would find the mountains most precarious.

So that is what the Taliban did. They knew the mountains like the back of their hands. They could move up and down those mountains blindfolded. And when the Russians came into those mountains the Taliban kicked the shit out of them. Eventually, the Russians called it a day and went home, but not after having to send home so many of their soldiers in body-bags.

So, what happened in Ipoh yesterday? There was hardly any resistance. PAS alone could have easily mobilised 50,000 supporters. Sure, there were roadblocks and thousands of police, hundreds in the State Assembly itself. But Pakatan Rakyat could have outdone this easily. Yet it did not. Why?

Anwar was not in Ipoh. Neither was Hadi Awang. Lim Kit Siang was but was not allowed in. And when they refused to allow him in he went off. There was no attempt to force their way into the State Assembly. No storming of the Bastille as had been hoped and as many had wished for. Why?

Was it complacency? Did they think Pakatan Rakyat would win the day without putting up a fight? Are they that naïve? Did they sell us out?  Yes, those were the first questions running through my mind and lack of sleep allowed me to think only of the questions but the answers were not forthcoming.

I don’t believe it is any of the above. And I don’t think it is because of lack of caring or lack of interest as well. I think Pakatan Rakyat planned every move to the last detail and knew exactly what it was doing. And I think Barisan Nasional played right into Pakatan Rakyat’s hand.

But then I have a suspicious mind, as Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is fond of saying. I am always looking for conspiracy theories. I am always thinking that there is more than meets the eye. I believe that politicians are good magicians. They distract you with their right hand while the trick is being performed with the left hand.

Is that what happened in Ipoh yesterday? Was that why it appeared like Pakatan rakyat offered only token resistance to make it look like they tried? Maybe, maybe not!

Let’s face it. Pakatan Rakyat had already lost the state. It lost the state when the Sultan sacked Nizar and replaced him with Zambry. Pakatan Rakyat now has lesser seats than Barisan Nasional in the State Assembly. What happened in Ipoh yesterday was merely to confirm what was already fact — that Pakatan Rakyat is no longer the government in Perak.

Pakatan Rakyat could have resorted to force, bloodshed even. But would that have helped them get back the state? What it may have done is to give the police an excuse to detain everyone under the Internal Security Act and declare martial law in Perak like what they did in Kelantan more than 30 years ago — and which I have written about before. That means democracy would be suspended and they can run Perak without the ‘burden’ of a State Assembly. Umno would be doing things without any opposition since there is no longer any State Assembly and therefore no longer any opposition in the State Assembly.

I believe Pakatan Rakyat knew it could not have won a military campaign in Ipoh yesterday. It has problems even winning the legal battles in court. The only way, therefore, is to allow Barisan Nasional to do what it did and which in turn would antagonise the people.

If blood had been spilled, the people might blame Pakatan Rakyat rather than Barisan Nasional for it. Sure, Barisan Nasional is violent. But then Pakatan Rakyat knows that Barisan Nasional is violent. Why then allow them to use violence whereby the people are exposed to risk and danger? Pakatan Rakyat should look after the people’s interest and guard their safety. Knowing that Barisan Nasional is violent and yet exposing the people to danger is downright irresponsible of Pakatan Rakyat.

This would be the reaction of the people if anything adverse happens to them. So Pakatan Rakyat very cleverly avoided violence and allowed Barisan Nasional to do what it did in Ipoh yesterday. And, today, more people have become disgusted with Barisan Nasional and will vote for Pakatan Rakyat in the next election, or by-election, just to demonstrate this disgust. They may not vote for Pakatan rakyat because they love Pakatan Rakyat. But they will certainly vote for Pakatan Rakyat because they now hate Barisan Nasional even more than before yesterday’s fiasco in Ipoh.

Was, therefore, Siva merely collateral damage? Were they expecting this and did Barisan Nasional do exactly as expected? After all, the state had been lost months ago. Winning the battle of the State Assembly, yesterday, would not have got the state back. Instead, it would have invited other problems, the people’s safety being one of them.

This is of course only my wishful thinking. I could be wrong, I don’t know. I would like to believe that what happened was part of Pakatan Rakyat’s plan and that it worked as planned. I hope and pray that Pakatan Rakyat laid a trap and that Barisan Nasional walked right into it and got snared.

As I said, I am not a politician. So I think differently from the way politicians do. But I do hope that what I am currently thinking is what they had also been thinking all along and that what happened in Ipoh may appear to have been a defeat but was actually a political victory that, in time, will reveal itself.

They say: he who has the last laugh has the best laugh. Was yesterday, in Ipoh, the last laugh? Or is the last laugh yet to be laughed? And who is going to have that last laugh? Politicians are so devious.

And am I being too idealistic here?

The mystery of the missing confession: najib Al-Altatuya

We met early April at La Bordega in Bangsar. Bull suggested I should instead sign a Statutory Declaration, as that would be stronger. They can ignore my article but they can’t ignore a Statutory Declaration.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

From the 12th to the 22nd September 2008, I was detained at the Police Remand Centre (PRC) where most ISA detainees spend their first 60 days of detention. Suddenly, on the morning of the 22nd, I was told that my interrogation, which was held from the 17th to the 21st, is going to end and that they have to finalise their report that same day.

That was the first surprise.

I was supposed to sign my statement the following day — on the 23rd. Instead, I was packed off to Kamunting the morning of the 23rd without being allowed to sign the statement cum confession.

That was the second surprise.

What was it that the higher-ups were so scared about that they wanted to keep my confession cum statement from those who were supposed to review it and decide whether I can be released or should be sent to Kamunting for further detention? I really don’t know because they never told me.

Anyway, here is part of my interrogation by the Special Branch — what they asked and what I replied.

The last time you were detained for 54 days, is that correct?

Yes, it was from 11 April to 6 June 2001. I think it was about 54 days.

You were not sent to Kamunting right?

That’s correct.

That’s because you cooperated. So if this time you also cooperate then there is a good chance you will also not be sent to Kamunting. You might be allowed to go home like the last time.

(I just nod)

We find your Statutory Declaration very hard to believe.

Why do you say that?

Well, we don’t think what you said about Rosmah being at the murder scene is correct.

How do you know?

It is highly unlikely. Rosmah is very rich. She has plenty of money. Why would she want to take the risk of going there personally? She can pay someone to do the job. No need for her to go there herself.

Well, that’s what I was told, that she went there personally.

We don’t think so. It doesn’t make sense for her to go there herself.

Okay, if you say so, but I know what I was told.

Who told you?

Lt Kol Azmi Zainal Abidin. He is the number two in the Special Branch of the Military Intelligence.

Yes, we know who he is.

So, that means you can ask him yourself then since you know him.

But how do you know he was telling you the truth? He could be setting you up.

I admit I don’t know Lt Kol Azmi that well. But he is always in Ku Li’s office. He is very close to Ku Li. And Anwar Ibrahim also knows him very well.

So you are not really that close to Lt Kol Azmi. That means you don’t know whether you can trust him. We feel he is setting you up as the fall guy.

Maybe if I had to just trust him then I wouldn’t dare take that risk. I mean; I don’t know him well enough to trust him all the way. But the person who introduced us is a very old friend. I’ve known him for about 45 years, longer than I’ve known my wife. And I trust my friend. My friend gave me his personal assurance that the story is legit.

Who is that friend?

Nik Azmi Nik Daud. We call him Bull. He works for Ku Li. I also asked Din Merican to check with Anwar whether I can trust Lt Kol Azmi with my life. Those were the exact words I used.

What did Anwar say?

Anwar replied you should never trust anyone with your life. However, Lt Kol Azmi’s information is very reliable. I also asked John Pang, who also works for Ku Li, to check with Ku Li whether Lt Kol Azmi’s information is reliable. I told John what Lt Kol Azmi told us and asked him to inform Ku Li about it. John confirmed that Lt Kol Azmi told Ku Li the same thing and that the information is reliable.

So that is why you signed the Statutory Declaration?

No. Actually, initially, I wanted to just write an article, like usual. But Bull asked to meet first before I write anything. So we met early April at La Bordega in Bangsar. Bull suggested I should instead sign a Statutory Declaration, as that would be stronger. They can ignore my article but they can’t ignore a Statutory Declaration.

Then you signed it?

No. I still did not sign it yet. I was worried about the repercussions. We would be forcing the government to act and they might come down hard on me. As Bull said, they can ignore my article but they can’t ignore a Statutory Declaration. Bull called for a second meeting on the Sunday before I signed the Statutory Declaration. We met at the Selangor Club Dataran Merdeka for lunch.

And then?

I told Bull I was a bit worried about signing a Statutory Declaration because the government will surely arrest and charge me if I do. I felt an article would be safer. But Bull disagreed. He felt an article was not strong enough. Bull said if anything happens to me they would go to court to testify that what I had signed is the truth. Bull assured me they would not allow me to rot in jail. So, on the 18th June, I signed the Statutory Declaration.

Are you sure they will come forward to testify in your trial?

That’s what Bull told me and I trust him. As I said, I’ve known him for 45 years.

Okay, let’s see whether they do or not. But we think they will not. They will not come forward to testify at our trial.

Maybe. Maybe what you say is true. I don’t know. Let’s see. After all I have already been charged and my trial will soon start. Let’s see whether they keep their word and testify at my trial. But I am confident they will because they have given me their assurance.

We believe you have been set up as the fall guy. Maybe they want to get rid of you.

I don’t think so. Anyway, we will know soon enough once my trial starts. It is going to be a most interesting trial indeed once the truth surfaces. Don’t you think so?

Didn’t Najib’s people approach you to make a deal?

You mean to buy my silence? Yes, they did.

Who?

Datuk Jamaluddin Jarjis.

JJ?

Yes.

When?

It was not long after I was charged for sedition, before I signed the Statutory Declaration. JJ phoned and said he wanted to meet. I knew he was working for Najib so I agreed. We met at the car park outside Kelab Taman Perdana. My wife drove me there and waited at a distance. She was worried that it may be a trap and she wanted to be cautious in case they were setting me up, or something like that.

JJ arrived about 6pm and asked me to get into his car. He was alone. I waved to my wife and signalled her to go home and she wrote down JJ’s car number plate in case I disappeared or whatever.

We drove to a roadside stall in Jalan Ipoh and sat there and talked. JJ told me that Najib had asked him to meet me to make a deal. I asked him whether Najib really knows we are meeting and whether he had endorsed or sanctioned the meeting and JJ replied that our meeting was on Najib’s instructions.

We spent about an hour talking. The bottom line is he wanted me to stop writing about Najib and Altantuya. He also asked me whether I could delay my sedition trial until Najib becomes the Prime Minister. Once Najib is installed as Prime Minister they will drop the charges against me. I will also receive a monthly allowance of RM30,000 for my cooperation. He didn’t say for how long though.

I asked him how to delay the trial and he replied I can always get a medical certificate to confirm I am not fit enough to attend trial. I told him if I delayed the trial then the legal costs would increase and he offered to pay all the legal fees. He asked me to get my lawyers to issue an invoice and he would pay the cost, whatever it may be.

I told my lawyers about this incident so that at least some other people know about it.

So, what happened to the deal?

Soon after that I signed my Statutory Declaration. That was my way of saying no deal. After that they arrested me and charged me for criminal defamation. I suppose that was their way of replying to my reply.

Wouldn’t it have been better for you to accept the deal? After all, Najib is soon going to be the Prime Minister.

Maybe. But it’s too late now isn’t it? I have already burned my bridges behind me.

The above is a small portion of my questions and answers session with the Special Branch over the five days of interrogation. This, plus a lot more, was compiled into a report, which I was supposed to sign on the morning of 23 September 2008 — but which never materialised for some strange reason. I am probably the first ISA detainee in almost 50 years who made a statement (confession) but was never asked to sign it.

To understand the Perak Constitutional Crisis

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Ku Li: Why Nizar is still the MB
THE STAR, 7 February 2009

Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin is still the Perak Mentri Besar until he resigns of his own accord, or is removed by a vote of no-confidence in a formal sitting of the State Assembly, said Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah.

“Only the answer of the assembly counts, regardless how many sworn statements, defections, press conferences and declarations, or what forms of advertisement, display, inducement or force you bring to bear on the question,” he said in a statement yesterday.

“The Constitution makes no provision for his removal by any other means, including by petitions or instructions from any other authority,” he added.

He also said that a legitimate constitutional government draws all its authority from the consent of the people and only from that consent. The people consent because it is their government formed according to their constitution, whose leader is chosen through free and fair elections.

“To formally test the mandate of the current government, the question must either be put to the people through state elections, or to assemblymen through a formal vote in the Dewan,” said Tengku Razaleigh.

He said to remove and install governments in any other way was to violate the Constitution, erode the rule of law and run the risk of forming an illegal government.

*************************************************

That was what YBM Tan Sri Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah said on 7 February 2009. And, on 7 May 2009, we are going to see another chapter in the Perak Constitutional Crisis when the illegitimate Menteri Besar calls for a state assembly meeting and probably, as most already suspect, call for the removal of the Speaker of the Perak State Assembly.

Umno is just driving more nails into its own coffin. The majority of Perakians do not endorse the illegal and unconstitutional takeover of the Perak government. It is nothing short of a coup, by whatever name you wish to call it. The outcome of the recent Bukit Gantang by-election is proof enough that the people do not endorse what Umno did in Perak. If that is not a clear enough message of where the people’s sentiments lie then I don’t know what is.

Many legal minds have spoken on the issue, renowned and respected judges included, and all are of the opinion that Umno’s move is illegal and unconstitutional. Expect the people to converge on the Perak State Assembly on 7 May as a demonstration of their disgust. Even those within Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s circle have expressed dismay at what is going on in Perak. They feel that Najib has been ill advised and has made a huge tactical blunder.

Members of the Royal Family, the Perak Royal Family included, are no less perturbed. Not all Royals support the opposition of course. But not all agree with Umno as well. To put it mildly, the Royal Family is divided as to its support for the ruling party. While many support the ruling party for personal and business reasons, they worry that Umno’s blunders may not only see the demise of that party but also of the institution of the Monarchy as well. The Regent of Perak himself feels that the damage done to the Monarchy may not only be long term but may be irreparable as well.

Of course, we can’t interpret the sentiments of the Royal Family as being pro-rakyat or pro-democracy. After all, the succession to the throne is hereditary and no Ruler is democratically elected into office. So, democracy is probably the last thing in the minds of the Royal Family. But the Royals of today are not like the Royals of yesteryear. Nowadays, the Royals are well educated, many having received their education in overseas universities. So they know history. They studied history. And they know what the storming of the Bastille means and how it came about.

The Royals fear for their future. They fear that if they swim against the tide, they will drown. No matter how strong a swimmer you may be, you just can’t swim against the tide. What more if it is not just a tide but, in fact, a powerful Tsunami? A Tsunami will swallow everything in its path and suck all out to sea on its retreat. Malaysians learned the power of the Tsunami on Boxing Day of 2004 — and, again, on 8 March 2008, when, for the first time in Malaysian election history, the voters demonstrated the potency of people’s power.

The Royals are getting very nervous. They realise they can’t oppose Umno. This would be even more so since the architect and engineer of the mid-1980s Constitutional Crisis, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, is now back at the helm of Umno, pulling all the strings from behind the scenes. The Royals do not fear Najib as much as they fear Mahathir. After all, Najib is more or less a Royal just like them, as was his late father, Tun Razak.

Malays, by nature, are feudalistic. And Umno, therefore, is also a most feudalistic party. It is just impossible to separate the Malays, Umno and feudalism. All three come as a package. And this was Mahathir’s greatest beef. He wanted to break the Malay feudalistic culture, which is also the Umno culture. And to do this he had to break the feudalism mentality of the Malays. So he went to war with the Rulers and taught the Malays how to kurang ajar.

At the time of the 1980s Constitutional Crisis, Tun Ghafar Baba was the Deputy Prime Minister. But unnoticed by most Malays, the move to eradicate the Malay feudalistic culture started earlier than that. It started when Musa Hitam was the Deputy Prime Minister. And Musa made the new plan very clear when he openly declared that it is time the Malays learned how to kurang ajar.

Most did not understand what Musa meant at that time. The Malays must learn how to kurang ajar. But kurang ajar against whom? The Chinese? The government? Umno? No! Musa Hitam is not a racist. All his women, and he had loads of them, were not Malays. Musa meant the Malays must break away from tradition. And one of these ‘counter-productive’ and ‘outdated’ traditions was the feudalistic culture that prevented the Malays from progressing and from moving forward. Is it not a Malay proverb: biar mati anak, jangan mati adat? Yes, better the child dies than tradition dies. Malays would die defending their traditions and this is what was holding them back.

Many could not understand why Mahathir chose Musa over Tengku Razaleigh as his Deputy. Was it not the deal that Tengku Razaleigh makes way for Mahathir as Hussein Onn’s number two and then, when Mahathir succeeds Hussein Onn, he would take Tengku Razaleigh as his number two? Yes, that was the deal. But Tengku Razaleigh is a Royalist while Musa is a Republican. And Mahathir, being a Republican himself, wanted another Republican and not a Royalist as his Deputy.

Umno’s history has always been about feudalism and ‘royalism’. Onn Jaafar was an orang istana. So was Tunku Abdul Rahman, followed by Tun Razak and Hussein Onn. The entire lot since 1946 were people brought up in the palace and who were very close and intimate with the palace. Onn Jaafar was in fact honoured by the Japanese during the occupation years and was given a Japanese officer’s uniform complete with Samurai sword to wear. This was the great respect the Japanese had for Royalty (the Emperor of Japan was considered a God) and the acknowledgement that not only was Onn Jaafar a Malay leader, but one who was close to the Johor palace as well.

Finally, in 1981, Umno managed to rid itself of feudalism and, for the first time, they got a Republican (some say Communist) as its leader. It took two generations for that to happen. But now that Umno no longer has an orang istana as its leader, why would Mahathir want to turn the clock back and appoint Tengku Razaleigh as his Deputy? So, instead, he chose Musa. And, when Musa resigned, he chose Ghafar, again, instead of Tengku Razaleigh.

But Ghafar was old Malay. He was one who held dear the old traditions. And when the Constitutional Crisis erupted in the mid-1980s, Mahathir forced Ghafar to lead the charge against the Monarchy. And Ghafar had to make many trips to Istana Negara with Anwar Ibrahim in tow to negotiate with the Rulers. The message was simple. The Rulers resisted at their own peril. If Malaysians rise up to demand that the Monarchy be abolished then Umno would not be able to save the Rulers.

The Rulers remained stubborn. So Mahathir launched a nationwide demonising campaign. The Rulers were dragged through the mud. Now even the Umno Malays were demanding that Mahathir cut the Rulers down to size. Now, it was no longer Mahathir but the Umno Malays who wanted the Rulers taught a lesson. Mahathir gallantly stepped in as ‘mediator’ and settled the problem between the Umno Malays and the Rulers. The Rulers had been taught who is the real boss in Malaysia. Umno, and not the Rulers, is the boss. The Rulers, with their tails between their legs, gave in and admitted defeat. Umno, or rather Mahathir, had won.

But the Constitutional Crisis proved that Ghafar was too weak. He was too soft. He was old Malay who held to tradition and culture. And one of those traditions and cultures is one does not derhaka with the Rulers. If not for Anwar, Ghafar would not have dared face the Rulers and engage them in a confrontation. That was why Mahathir made Anwar follow Ghafar to the Istana Negara. If Ghafar falters, then Anwar can step in to save the day.

And that is exactly what happened. At one point during the heated debate with the Rulers, Ghafar took off his songkok and placed it on the table. It was a most kurang ajar thing to do but something he did unconsciously. Ghafar was not trying to demonstrate kurang ajar. He was feeling desperate and in his desperation he took off his songkok without realising he was doing so. The head negotiator for the Rulers, the Yamtuan Besar of Negeri Sembilan, also took off his songkok and placed it on the table. That was His Highness’s way of saying that Ghafar is kurang ajar so he too is going to be kurang ajar.

Mahathir realised that Ghafar was still very feudalistic at heart. You can’t avoid it though. Ghafar is an old man, seven months older than Mahathir, so he is ‘old Malay’ in thinking. And old Malays do not kurang ajar with the Rulers. Mahathir decided that Ghafar has to go. He can never be a Republican. Anwar can. So Mahathir told Anwar to challenge Ghafar, which he did. And when Ghafar realised that Mahathir wants him out he gave Anwar a walkover. Anwar became the new Umno number two without a fight.

At the height of the Reformasi Movement, and soon after I was released from ISA detention in 2001, I was summoned to the Palace and asked why I am so stupid as to support Anwar and get incarcerated. I replied that I am not supporting Anwar as much as I am opposing Mahathir. I am doing this for the Monarchy, I replied, because Mahathir is anti-Monarchy and would turn Malaysia into a Republic if he could.

The Sultan replied that Anwar is no different. Anwar was one of the key players during the Constitutional Crisis, the Sultan said. It was actually Anwar and not Ghafar who gave the Rulers a hard time. No doubt Mahathir was the architect and engineer. But Anwar was Mahathir’s ‘hit man’ who did much damage to the Rulers. Ghafar did not talk too much. Anwar did most of the talking and was the one the Rulers faced most problems with. The Rulers can never trust Anwar and will not accept him as a Prime Minister.

That meeting with the Sultan revealed what was in the minds of the Rulers. Anwar was perceived as a Republican, just like Mahathir, and it did not matter who won the fight in the Anwar-Mahathir war that erupted in 1998. They realised that Anwar was Mahathir’s victim and they did not believe all the allegations against Anwar, in particular the sodomy allegation. But it is good that Mahathir and Anwar are now at war. A united Mahathir and Anwar would not be good for the Monarchy. It puts the Monarchy at risk. Now that Mahathir and Anwar are at war, they are too occupied to worry about the Rulers and will leave the Rulers alone, at least for the next couple of years.

And that is why the Rulers did not come to Anwar’s aid in 1998 when Mahathir threw him into jail. They welcomed the Reformasi Movement in that it kept Mahathir busy and helped weaken Umno. A strong Umno would mean a weak Monarchy. On the other hand, a weak Umno would mean the Rulers would be needed as Umno can then hide behind the Monarchy to perpetuate its evil deeds, like what is happening in Perak now. Furthermore, would the Rulers dare take Anwar’s side and risk antagonising Mahathir? At least, with the Rulers remaining ‘neutral’, Anwar and Mahathir can go for each other’s throats rather than for the throats of the Rulers like in the mid-1980s.

But Najib is different. Sure, he is carrying much baggage. But then so are many of the Rulers. No one is perfect, in particular the Rulers. After all, the Rulers are also human, just like Najib and all the Umno leaders who have numerous skeletons in their closet. But Najib is an orang istana and he would never dream of abolishing the Monarchy and of turning Malaysia into a Republic. With Anwar they could not be so sure, as the mid-1980s Constitutional Crisis proved. Better a devil like Najib that one knows than an angel like Anwar who might turn out to be the death of the Monarchy.

We must remember that Anwar played a crucial role in the mid-1980s Constitutional Crisis. Najib did not. Najib, in fact, kept the lines of communication with the palace open the entire duration of the Constitutional Crisis. Najib demonstrated that he is a friend of the Monarchy, just like his late father was. Anwar demonstrated the reverse.

It is not puzzling as to why the Sultan or Perak appears pro-Umno, or rather pro-Najib — because it is Najib who is behind the current Perak Constitutional Crisis. The key word here is survival. Najib can ensure the survival of the Monarchy. Anwar cannot. In fact, in the mid-1980s, he already demonstrated he is anti-Monarchy. You can always argue that Anwar had no other choice as he was under the orders of Mahathir. But then so were Ghafar and Najib but they did not whack the Rulers as hard as Anwar did.

If one wants to argue that Anwar is not anti-Monarchy and was only doing Mahathir’s bidding, the clash Anwar had with the Kelantan Palace put this theory to sleep. Anwar was the Finance Minister at that time and he ordered the Customs Department to impound the Sultan’s Lamborghini on grounds that the import duty was unpaid. Actually, Sultans are exempted from import duty on the first seven cars they import while the Regent, Raja Muda or Tengku Mahkota gets exemption on three. So that makes ten cars altogether and the Sultan of Kelantan had not used up his full quota.

The Sultan was furious and he asked his palace official to go to the Customs office and take the car by force. The palace official just drove off with the car under the very noses of the Customs officers, much to the chagrin of the Customs Department and Anwar who accused the Sultan of stealing the car. Later, it was proven that the Sultan was right and that Anwar was wrong and the issue was quietly laid to rest without any further hullabaloo. But the damage had been done. Anwar’s actions were entirely on his own initiative and not on the instructions of Mahathir. No one can now say that Anwar’s role in the mid-1980s Constitutional Crisis was just to carry out the instructions of Mahathir.

To understand what is happening in Perak today, one must go back 25 years or so to the time when Anwar and Ghafar made those many trips to Istana Negara to engage the Rulers in the Constitutional Crisis. The Rulers got burned badly. And it was Anwar that they had to face, not Mahathir. Yes, the Rulers know it was Mahathir pulling the strings from behind the scenes. But it was Anwar and not Mahathir who tegang leher and bertekak with the Rulers while Ghafar sat there sighing, wishing he had never been dragged into this fight.

Sure, the Rulers are selfish. What they are doing is only to ensure their own survival. But is this not the natural instinct of humankind? Is it not natural for anyone to make a decision that ensures your own survival? And this is exactly what the Sultan of Perak is doing. He backs Najib over Anwar. And he gives the Perak government to Najib’s party instead of Anwar’s. That is what anyone would do when his or her survival is at stake.

But is the reverse going to happen instead? Is what the Sultan of Perak doing going to actually accelerate the demise of the Monarchy rather than the other way around? Time will tell. Maybe what is happening in Perak will just put to question the relevancy of the Monarchy. Maybe the Tsunami of people’s power will challenge the wisdom of the Monarchy and demands for its abolishment may reach a crescendo. Or maybe Najib will owe the Monarchy a huge favour and he will ensure that the Monarchy is retained, at least during his tenure as Prime Minister.

7 May 2009 may, or may not, be the turning point for the Monarchy. 7 May 2009 may see the Monarchy strengthened or may see it weakened. We will know which it is going to be when 7 May 2009 is upon us. Will the people turn out in droves? Will they hit the streets in tens of thousands like what they did on Nomination Day in Bukit Gantang? Are we going to see the storming of the Bastille on 7 May 2009?

Sure, Umno too will make sure they are represented in great numbers. Umno will probably bus in its supporters from all over Malaysia to make up those numbers. No doubt Umno has the money to finance this ‘great assembly’. With money you can do many things. But the ‘other side’, made up of opposition supporters, will also be in Ipoh on 7 May — not because they have been paid to be there, but because they want to be there. You do not need to pay opposition supporters to come out. They will be there on their own accord and at their own expense.

Expect the police to soon issue a statement. The people will be warned that they must not go to Ipoh on 7 May 2009. The police will declare that the gathering in Ipoh is going to be classified an illegal assembly and that action will be taken against anyone who assembles in Ipoh on 7 May 2009.

I doubt, however, that the people can be intimidated. Gone are the days you can threaten the people and frighten them into staying indoors. The crowd will be there. Both sides will be there. And how the government handles the situation will depend on what happens thereafter.

And don’t say Malaysia Today has not warned you. We are warning you that for every action there will be an opposite and equal reaction. Force begets force and violence begets violence. And there is only so much you can do to oppose the will of the people. Many countries all over the world, our neighbours included, have demonstrated this. The people always win in the end. And there are no two ways about it.

See you in Ipoh on 7 May 2009.

Sun Tzu and the art of war

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

The Internet has been abuzz the last couple of days about the ‘accidental’ police report an NGO made against Malaysiakini. Those who had made the police report did not know the difference between Malaysiakini, The Malaysian Insider and Malaysia Today.

The following day, they ‘corrected’ the mistake and two more ‘Malay’ NGOs made a police report against Malaysia Today. While I am honoured that the news reports talk about Malaysiakini, The Malaysian Insider and Malaysia Today in the same breath, I have to correct this misperception and declare that Malaysia Today should not be compared to Malaysiakini or The Malaysian Insider.

Malaysiakini and The Malaysian Insider are proper or legitimate online newspapers or portals run by professional media personnel, most who have many years experience in the media industry. Malaysia Today, however, is not in that same league. We are not a proper or legitimate online newspaper. Neither are we run by professional media personnel. Malaysia Today is a ‘weapon’ that is meant to bring about political change in Malaysia.

We learned how useful the Internet can be back in 1998 when the Reformasi Movement first exploded onto the Malaysian political scene. More than 100 Reformasi websites mushroomed overnight to give Barisan Nasional a run for its money. Of course, then, most of these websites were aligned to Anwar Ibrahim and/or PAS. There were some that were aligned to DAP as well.

In 1998, however, there were only 280,000 Internet subscribers. But that was enough to sufficiently damage Barisan Nasional in the 1999 general election that was held about a year after the debut of Reformasi. No doubt the Internet was not the major contributor to the opposition victory in November 1999. But it did contribute enough, though in a small way, as to how Barisan Alternatif performed.

Then the opposition became complacent. Their 1999 ‘victory’ lulled them and put them to sleep. Not long after that DAP pulled out from Barisan Alternatif and that aggravated the problem. In the March 2004 general election, the voters demonstrated their disgust for the opposition coalition.

I have already talked about this matter so many times in the past so there is no need to go over all the issues and statistics again. The bottom line is: the opposition practically got wiped out.

Soon after that, Anwar Ibrahim was released from incarceration. There was jubilation all around. My wife, Marina, and I stood on the steps of the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya, quite amused at the chanting and cheering going on. My phone rang but I could not hear properly because of the noise. I handed the phone to Marina, who has better hearing than me. “It’s the BBC from London,” she told me as she handed me back the phone.

“Hold on,” I shouted into the phone. “It’s so noisy here. Let me move to a quieter place.”

Marina and I quickly walked to the side of the Palace of Justice where it was quieter and I spoke to the chap from the BBC.

“We heard Anwar has just been released. Can we get your statement?”

“Sure, but why me?” I asked.

“Well, you are the Director of the Free Anwar Campaign and you run the freeanwar dot com website. I suppose you are now out of a job since Anwar has just been released. What do you plan to do now?”

“I suppose you could put it that way,” I laughed. “I must be the only Director who got retrenched from his job because he is successful.”

The BBC chap laughed and asked, “So what do you intend to do now, now that you have been retrenched?”

“I am going to now focus fulltime on the new website I just started three weeks ago.”

“Oh, what is it called?”

“Malaysia Today. It’s at malaysia dash today dot net.”

“You said you started this website three weeks ago? Does this mean you anticipated that Anwar would be released?”

“Yes, I did. In fact, that was one of the first articles I wrote on Malaysia Today. I said that Anwar would be released with a two-one verdict and that the lady judge would be the sole dissenting voice.”

“How did you know? Do you own a crystal ball?”

“It’s my business to know. That is what I do. I find out what people don’t know or try to hide and publish the story, while crossing my fingers in the hope that I am right.”

“So what do you hope to achieve with your new website?”

“Let me put it this way. It took us six years to free Anwar from jail. But only Anwar is free. Malaysians are not yet free. And Malaysians will never be free until they can be allowed freedom of expression and freedom of choice. It may take us 60 more years to free Malaysians, I don’t know. I may even never see that happen in my lifetime. But that is the mission and vision of Malaysia Today, to free Malaysians by allowing them freedom of expression. Freeing Anwar was phase one. Phase two is to free Malaysians.”

“Thank you Raja Petra. And I wish you luck in your new endeavour. Can we call you again if we need anything further?”

“Sure, no problem. Bye.”

That was my ‘interview’ with the BBC on the steps of the Palace of Justice on the morning of 2 September 2004. Malaysia Today was then only 20 days old. But Malaysia Today was created with a vision and a mission. It is not, as the government said, a hobby of bored and unemployed housewives. Malaysia Today was created to gain back the territory that we lost in the March 2004 general election when Barisan Nasional performed its best ever in the history of Malaysian elections.

“What do you think we are going to see?” Marina asked me. “This is going to involved a hell of a lot of work. And you are going to suffer all sorts of hassle from the police. Is it going to be worth it?”

“Hun (we call each other Hun, which is short for honey, not hantu),” I told Marina. “Come the next election, in 2008 or 2009, Malaysia Today is going to be the weapon we use to hit Barisan Nasional where it hurts most. We are going to engage Barisan Nasional in the cyber-world and use hit and run guerrilla tactics. They will be running around in circles trying to duck our hit and run attacks but they will not be able to do anything about it. By then the Internet will be the most powerful ‘terrorist’ weapon in the elections. And we will be there, ready to take on Barisan Nasional in 2008 or 2009.”

Yes, in 1998, when we first started using the Internet to fight Barisan Nasional, there were only 280,000 Internet subscribers against 8 million registered voters. Today, ten years on, there are almost 16 million Internet subscribers against 12 million registered voters.

Over the last ten years, the number of registered voters increased only 50%. However, in that same period, the number of Internet subscribers increased 328.9% (according to the official statistics). Today, the Internet reaches 62.8% of the Malaysian population. Malaysia has more Internet subscribers than it has voters. (See the statistics below).

Yes, that was our plan back in 2004 when we launched Malaysia Today. No, Malaysia Today is not a newspaper. And it is not in the same league as Malaysiakini and The Malaysian Insider. Malaysia Today is a guerrilla outfit. We are cyber terrorists. Our job is to hit the government whenever and wherever we can. And if hit and run is what it takes, then hit and run is what it will have to be.

We almost succeeded in meeting our aspirations in March 2008. But, in our books, that is a job only half done. We have to finish the job. We have to complete what we started back in 1998. And the completion would be when Barisan Nasional has been brought down from its high horse and made to eat humble pie. We will consider to have met our objective when the government admits that it serves the people, and not the people who serve the government.

On a slight digression, when I was in Kamunting from September to November last year, Marina sent me loads of books to read and one of those books was The Art of War by Sun Tzu. It was a most interesting book and took me only a day to finish. I must say that book gave me new insight into guerrilla warfare.

The government calls the Barisan Rakyat Bloggers cyber terrorists. Actually, I had never thought of it that way. I suppose, under the circumstances, since we have been classified as cyber terrorists, then we have no choice but to act as one. And terrorists must master the art of hit and run.

***********************************************************

Internet World Statistics

Total world: 1,581,571,589
Asia Only: 650,361,843
Malaysia: 15,868,000 (62.8 % of the population) (user growth 2000-2008: 328.9 %)

Source: Internet World Stats
(http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm )

**************************************************************

The Art of War: Sūn Zǐ Bīng Fǎ

Chapter summary

1. Laying Plans explores the five key elements that define a successful outcome (the way, seasons, terrain, leadership, and management). By thinking, assessing and comparing these points you can calculate a victory, deviation from them will ensure failure. Remember that war is a very grave matter of state.

2. Waging War explains how to understand the economy of war and how success requires making the winning play, which in turn, requires limiting the cost of competition and conflict.

3. Attack by Stratagem defines the source of strength as unity, not size, and the five ingredients that you need to succeed in any war.

4. Tactical Dispositions explains the importance of defending existing positions until you can advance them and how you must recognise opportunities, not try to create them.

5. Energy explains the use of creativity and timing in building your momentum.

6. Weak Points & Strong explains how your opportunities come from the openings in the environment caused by the relative weakness of your enemy in a given area.

7. Manoeuvring explains the dangers of direct conflict and how to win those confrontations when they are forced upon you.

8. Variation in Tactics focuses on the need for flexibility in your responses. It explains how to respond to shifting circumstances successfully.

9. The Army on the March describes the different situations in which you find yourselves as you move into new enemy territories and how to respond to them. Much of it focuses on evaluating the intentions of others.

10. Terrain looks at the three general areas of resistance (distance, dangers, and barriers) and the six types of ground positions that arise from them. Each of these six field positions offers certain advantages and disadvantages.

11. The Nine Situations describe nine common situations (or stages) in a campaign, from scattering to deadly, and the specific focus you need to successfully navigate each of them.

12. The Attack by Fire explains the use of weapons generally and the use of the environment as a weapon specifically. It examines the five targets for attack, the five types of environmental attack, and the appropriate responses to such attack.

13. The Use of Spies focuses on the importance of developing good information sources, specifically the five types of sources and how to manage them.

Sun Tzu

What will irritate them the most?

Everyone breathed a sigh of relief. I was mere seconds away from being sent back to Kamunting. Malik was just about to inform the court that we were giving it a walkover. And, suddenly, the court changed its mind and said, yes, it will give us the time we requested after all.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Recently, the new Information, Communication and Culture Minister Rais Yatim hosted a dinner for 50 ‘prominent’ socio-political bloggers at a local restaurant in a move to engage the New Media.

Raja Petra Kamarudin and his gang of Barisan Rakyat bloggers were not invited; to ask the reason why would be stupid of me.

This is the same 3-in-1 Minister who not long ago warned bloggers “not to twist the truth or face the music”. It was a naked threat for bloggers to toe the line or face the full force of the law, no matter how unjust the laws are in the repression of our right to free speech.

Such laws are often described as ‘draconian’.

Draco was the law scribe called by the tyrannical nobilities in ancient Athens around the turn of the 7th century BC to codify all the unjust laws used to persecute the ordinary poor citizens. Draco’s laws were infamous for their severity of punishment, even for a minor crime like stealing an apple from an orchard. Death was the commonest punishment for both serious and minor crimes.

Of this grim code of laws, men said they were “written in blood”. That is how the term “draconian laws” came to be synonymous with pieces of harsh inhuman legislation.

Fortunately for ancient Athens, the tyrannical nobilities – especially the “accursed Alcmaeonidae” – were overthrown and banished. The great poet, statesman, and lawmaker, Solon, was authorised to prepare a new set of laws relieving the miseries of the poorer people of Athens. There is a historical lesson to be learned by Malaysians.

One of the people currently persecuted by our Malaysian version of draconian laws is RPK. He has even chosen to be a fugitive of these laws, choosing to exile himself from his home state. “They” are after his blood with “laws written in blood”. Only a change of government at the federal level can save him now, and we may not have to wait long for that to happen.

To 3-in-1 Minister, ‘go eat cake!’ by Sim Kwang Yang, Malaysiakini (Go here to read the rest of the article http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/103085)

*************************************************

I was just seconds away from being sent back to Kamunting. That was the day the Federal Court sat to hear the appeal against the Shah Alam High Court’s decision to release me from Internal Security Act detention on 7 November 2008.

It was a decision I took against the advice of my panel of lawyers. It was not until the morning of the hearing that we knew who the quorum of judges were going to be. We had asked for a quorum of seven — if not seven, then at least five. But the Federal Court would allow us only three. Why three? And whose decision was it that it should be three?

The decision was an ‘administrative decision’. In other words, all it needs is for a clerk in the court to decide that it should be three then it would be three. Can we appeal this? Is there a body or panel that can sit to hear our arguments as to why we want it to be more than three? No! It is a unilateral decision by someone unknown — a faceless and nameless person — in the court bureaucracy that makes that decision and the decision is final and undisputable.

That morning, to our horror, we found out that one of the three was Justice Augustine Paul. You might as well have asked Rosmah Mansor to hear my case. The affect would have been no different. Augustine Paul was my sworn enemy and, based on what I have said about him over the last ten years, I would be extremely surprised if he does not hate me like hell.

We informed the court that we would like to file an application for Augustine Paul to recuse but the court would not allow us time to do so. They did not want to waste any time, they said. They wanted to get my case over and done with that very day.

“Why did you not file your application earlier?” the court wanted to know. Why the rush? Why the need to make a decision on my case that very day? How could we file our application earlier when we did not know until that very morning that one of the three judges was going to be Augustine Paul?

We did try to find out earlier but the court refused to divulge who the judges were going to be. They would only tell us that it was going to be three judges. But they refused to tell us who these three are. So, not knowing who the judges were until that very morning itself, how could we have filed our application to recuse earlier?

Anyway, we raised all the issues as to why we objected to Augustine Paul and why he should recuse. If he did not, then we would need to file a formal application to get the court to order him to recuse.

And the strangest thing happened after that.

The court said no! They refuse to allow us time to file the application. The case has to proceed with no further delay. My lawyers were perplexed. Why the hurry? Can’t they allow us just another day or two to make a formal application?

Azhar stood up and walked over to the public gallery where I was seated.

“So, how Pete?” Azhar asked me.

“Walk off. If they refuse to allow us time to file our application then walk off. Boycott the hearing.”

Azhar hung his head low and shook it from side to side. “That would mean they would get judgement in default and they will send you back to Kamunting.”

“So be it.” I was determined not to give in even if it cost me my freedom.

I could see that Sam was utterly perturbed with my decision. “Then you had better get ready to run, and run far, if that is your decision.”

“No. No running. I will not allow them to say I am scared.”

“Fuck you! We went through all that trouble to get you out and you just volunteer to walk back into Kamunting.”

Sam walked out of court — I am not sure whether out of disgust with my decision or to get a nicotine fix. My wife was beginning to suspect that something was wrong. I would not look her in the face lest she read what was on my mind. She can always tell what I am thinking just by looking at me. I suppose after being together for more than 40 years that is inevitable.

Azhar walked back and whispered into Malik’s ear. Malik turned to look at me as if to get my confirmation that this is what I wanted. He need not have said anything. His look was enough to indicate that he had a question on his mind. I nodded, indicating that what Azhar had whispered was correct.

Malik stood up to inform the court that the lawyers were going to stage a walkout. In short, we are boycotting the hearing and the court can go fuck itself for all we care. But before Malik could open his mouth and say what he was about to say, the court suddenly did a U-turn and agreed to give us time.

Everyone breathed a sigh of relief. I was mere seconds away from being sent back to Kamunting. Malik was just about to inform the court that we were giving it a walkover. And, suddenly, the court changed its mind and said, yes, it will give us the time we requested after all.

I had just bought myself six extra days of freedom.

The second time the court sat I did not attend. This was not my decision but that of the lawyers. They expected the court to turn down all our applications and rush through with a decision. This means, if I were in court, they would detain me on the spot and whisk me back to Kamunting. And the same as for the third hearing six days later — I also did not attend the hearing.

True enough, our application for another court to hear our application to recuse Augustine Paul was rejected. The same Federal Court that was hearing the appeal against my release wanted to hear the application to recuse Augustine Paul.

How can that be? We are asking that this judge be disqualified and the same judge is being asked to hear the application to disqualify him? Which judge would agree that he is not suited to be a judge? This was ludicrous.

No, Augustine Paul would not be asked to hear the application to disqualify him. He will be asked to leave the room, leaving the other two judges to hear the application. Two judges? We wanted seven. If we cannot have seven, at least five. But you insist on only three. Now you are giving us only two judges? This was getting even more ludicrous.

We objected to this decision but our objection was shot down. Two, and only two, judges will be hearing our application. Malik pointed out that this was illegal and unconstitutional. He argued his case well. He even showed the court where it says that two judges just cannot sit to hear our application.

The court just brushed aside Malik’s arguments. Two judges would sit to hear our application. And the two judges that sat ruled: Augustine Paul need not recuse. He need not be disqualified from hearing the appeal against my release.

Malik then informed the court that, under the circumstances, a sitting of two judges would be unconstitutional and unlawful and he further informed the court that we reserve the right to challenge the decision of the court. Justice Nik Hashim shot back arrogantly: “You can do what you want”. Then Nik Hashim declared that Augustine Paul “could now take his rightful place on the bench”.

That was the last straw. The remark that Augustine Paul “could now take his rightful place on the bench” showed that, in the mind of the court, they had prejudged the case. It was futile to even continue with the hearing. They had written their judgement even before the hearing started.

After that, every application and objection that we raised was shot down, one by one. In some instances, the court would not even demonstrate patience and they just brushed aside whatever we raised without giving us time to present our arguments.

When Azhar informed the court that we would like to present our evidence, Augustine Paul asked Azhar what the relevance of the further evidence was. Azhar replied that it was to establish a jurisdictional error on the part of the Minister as detention under the Internal Security Act was intended to be preventive to avoid further threat. Augustine Paul exclaimed in a dismissive manner “What jurisdictional error?” and subsequently dismissed the application.

Yes, that was how the appeal hearing at the Federal Court was conducted. It just brushed aside everything that was raised and refused to consider whatever was argued, even when it was pointed out that the law and the Constitution allows our applications or arguments.

Classifying the appeal against my release from ISA detention as a kangaroo court would be putting it mildly. However, after all that hullabaloo in the Federal Court and the hurry-burry attitude it had demonstrated, the Federal Court suddenly went very quiet. For two months now nothing has been heard from them. Why?

I did not realise that something was amiss until much later. Around the time of the three by-elections, there were massive traffic jams all over the Kelang Valley because of police roadblocks that had been set up. I was not in town then.

A friend sent me a SMS about the matter and I replied I had already been informed about it. “Do you know?” my friend replied, “that some of the police are your fans?”

“Why do you say that?” I asked.

“Because I saw one holding your photograph.”

I don’t know whether he was just plain naïve or this was his attempt at tongue-in-cheek. Nevertheless, this triggered off the alarm bells in my head and I called up an Umno friend who owed me a favour, big-time.

“Your file is on Najib’s table,” my Umno contact told me. “I attended a meeting where you and Anwar were discussed. Najib told us that you and Anwar have to be dealt with as soon as possible. He wants you both out of action.”

I called up Anwar and he confirmed that he too had received the same information. So it must be true then. My Umno contact then told me a very interesting story.

It seems the AG had summoned the DPP handling my two court cases, Roslan Md Noh, and asked him whether they can secure a conviction in my sedition and criminal defamation trials. Roslan replied that they really don’t have a case against me and should actually consider dropping the charges.

The AG went berserk. He shouted at Roslan and said that Roslan is negative and has an attitude problem. He then removed Roslan from my case and appointed Shahidani Abd Aziz as his replacement. Roslan was then sent into cold storage at the industrial court. That is probably the end of Roslan’s career so he might as well resign from the government and go into private practice.

“They are going to detain you on the 23rd when you attend your sedition trial,” my Umno contact told me.

“How do you know,” I asked him.

“Okay, if on the 23rd Roslan does not turn up and if, instead, Shahidani turns up in his place, then you will know my information is correct.”

I informed one of my lawyers about this matter so that no one can say this is after-the-fact information.

“They know they can’t win their case against you. Roslan has already told the AG this. The only way they can silence you is to send you back to Kamunting under a fresh detention order. That is why they have gone cold on the appeal. They are no longer interested in the appeal because they have issued a new detention order. You turn up in court on the 23rd and you will be back in Kamunting the same day.”

I did not respond to this. I did not how to.

“Do you know what they fear most?” my Umno contact asked me.

“That I will launch a hunger strike and die in prison?”

“No. They don’t care about that. They are going to set up CCTVs in your cell so that they can prove to the world you caused your own death and that the authorities tried their best to convince you to eat to save your life.”

“Come on Pete. They are ready for you. They know your only weapon is a hunger strike and that you plan to use it. You have been detained twice before and each time you launched a hunger strike while under detention. They are well prepared for that. It will not work the third time.”

“Okay,” I replied. “Then what are they most worried about?”

“They are most worried that you will disappear or go underground or overseas where they can’t touch you and where you will become even more dangerous. That is the greatest fear.”

Hmmm…..interesting. Now that is a thought. They are expecting me to surrender and then launch a hunger strike while under detention. What if I do what they did not expect and what they fear most? That would really knock them off-guard.

Ooooo…..I just love it when I have a devious mind. It is so…..so……so me.

Now that he is PM, najib Altantuya must not victimise Raja Petra

By Wong Choon Mei, Suara Keadilan

Pakatan Rakyat leaders have asked Prime Minister Najib Razak not to victimize the country’s most popular blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin, who ran a scorching series of revelations about his purported misdeeds including a report from French newspaper Liberation linking him to the murder of Mongolian beauty Altantuya Shaariibuu.

They also demanded that Najib immediately clarify if a new Internal Security Act detention order has indeed been issued against RPK, as he is also known, and if a decision was made to charge him for treason or some “equally serious capital offence”.

“It is a mark of the inability of Najib as the new Prime Minister to command public confidence that more and more Malaysians share Raja Petra’s grave doubts about the independence, impartiality and integrity of the judiciary,” said DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang.

“If not, is Najib prepared to make two public commitments that under his premiership, Raja Petra will not be victimized and will not be detained under a fresh ISA detention order and will not be charged for treason or equally serious capital offence for what he had done so far?”

A man for all seasons, a Malaysian for all Malaysians

The 59-year old RPK is more than just a well-followed writer and news editor. He is a key figure, with iconic status, in the crusade for a fairer and just Malaysia.

With his often tongue-in-cheek writings and controversial political discourse, he played an instrumental role in the re-awakening of the pro-democracy movement in the country. His years of activism finally helped sow the seeds of a two-coalition political system, which after five decades of monopoly by the ruling Umno-Barisan Nasional is a major step forward.

For these reasons, he has long been the target of a government blacklist that includes opposition leaders like reform icon Anwar Ibrahim and Kit Siang himself. Both Anwar and Kit Siang have been warning of a hard crackdown once Najib finds himself unable to shake the growing popularity of the Pakatan movement despite all ways and means – both fair and foul.

They expect him to revert to form and bring out Malaysia’s most famous weapon – the infamous ISA. An oppressive law originally intended to be used against terrorists, the ISA allows for indefinite imprisonment without trial. Of late, it has been used increasingly against political foes including writers and editors like RPK, already a two-time detainee.

On Thursday, an arrest warrant was issued for him after he jumped bail, saying that if he came to court he would have been seized immediately and made to serve what could be an endless jail term. This time on other trumped-up charges of treason against the Perak Sultan. RPK was facing sedition charges over an article entitled Let’s send the Altantuya murderers to hell.

“Is Najib prepared to make the further commitment for the withdrawal of the government’s appeal to the Federal Court against Raja Petra’s release under the ISA in November when the Shah Alam High Court ruled that his ISA detention was illegal,” said Kit Siang. SK

Sedition trial: Arrest warrant for RPK

An arrest warrant has been issued against Malaysia Today editor Raja Petra Kamarudin this morning for failing to appear in the Petaling Jaya Sessions Court for the continuation of his sedition trial.

MCPX

Raja Petra, 59, is facing trial for posting an allegedly seditious article entitled ‘Let’s send the Altantuya murderers to hell’ on his website.

The charge under Section 4(1)(c) of the Sedition Act carries a maximum fine of RM5,000 or three years’ jail, or both, upon conviction.

The popular blogger and his wife, Marina Lee Abdullah – who stood as his bailor – was no where to be seen when the court resumed today at 9.25am.

When Sessions judge Rozina Ayob asked for the accused, defence lawyer J Chandra informed the court that about a posting in Raja Petra’s Malaysia Today website in which the controversial blogger wrote that he would not be in court.

According to the posting, Raja Petra was on a “self-imposed exile” from Selangor and hence he could not be in Petaling Jaya where the court is located.

Raja Petra explained his ‘exile’ was the result of the hurt he had caused to the Selangor palace which he is a member, and going by royal convention, he had decided on being exiled from the state.

On hearing this, Rozina asked whether there was a written order from the royalty for Raja Petra’s exile and Chandra replied he did not know.

“This is a punishment he meted out for himself,” said Chandra.

Being a bankrupt, he cannot leave Malaysia

DPP Shahidani Abd Aziz subsequently applied for a warrant of arrest against Raja Petra as well as a show-cause notice for bailor Marina, who was also not present in court today.

Chandra also informed the court he did not know the reason for Marina’s absence.

Rozina eventually agreed to issue the arrest warrant. The judge then fixed May 22 for the hearing of the arrest warrant and the show cause notice.

While Raja Petra and his disappearance had been a mystery, there are speculations that he could have gone overseas. Some of his supporters who were in court today said they had no idea where the blogger is.

DPP Ishak Mohd Yusof, who is assisting Shahidani, said with the arrest warrant against the blogger, the police would be required to locate Raja Petra.

Asked about the possibility that Raja Petra could be overseas, he said it would be imppossible as the blogger is already declared a bankrupt and was not supposed to leave the country.

According to co-counsel Gobind Singh Deo, the last time he had contact with the popular blogger was two months ago, during the prosecution’s appeal against his release from Internal Security Act in the Federal Court.

The court was also told that there would be 10 more prosecution witness in the sedition trial.

Mounting legal problems for RPK

Before the trial was adjourned in February, Gobind had raised the issue of an apparent photograph of Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak seated at the same table with murdered Mongolian woman Altantuya Shaariibuu during her birthday party in Mandarin Hotel, Singapore.

Raja Petra is facing another charge for criminal defamation in Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court for allegingly implicating Najib’s wife, Rosmah Mansor, and two army officers in the murder of Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu.

The popular blogger’s problem does not end there.

He has been ordered to pay RM1 million by the Kuala Lumpur High Court to Umno treasurer Abdul Azim Mohd Zabidi following a judgment in default entered against him on April 3.

Last year, the Alor Star High Court had also ordered Raja Petra to pay damages over libel claims by a university head.

University Utara Malaysia and its vice-chancellor Nordin Kardi filed a lawsuit against Raja Petra over an item that alleged Nordin had plagiarised an article.

The High Court made the decision after Raja Petra, who published the story in his website, failed to file a defence.

It ordered Raja Petra to pay RM4 million to Nordin and the university.

Raja Petra has argued that the offending item was a letter written to him by a former student representative and that he would not pay the compensation. Mkini

Raja Petra: Why I am absent in court today

After two ISA detentions, I do not plan to allow them to get me so easily the third time around. I also refuse to face treason charges that will result in me being sent to the gallows. I love my life and wish to remain alive a few years longer if possible. NO HOLDS BARRED Raja Petra Kamarudin I wish to explain why I am not going to be present in court today, 23rd April 2009. Firstly, it involves my recent dispute with the Selangor Palace. This dispute was due to my open letter to the Perak Menteri Besar, Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin, which I wrote on 2nd March 2009 in response to the ongoing Perak Constitutional Crisis. My family said I had acted in a treasonous manner and they wanted me to issue a public apology to the Sultan of Perak. I refused to comply with my family’s demand and instead wrote two articles condemning the Perak Palace for violating the Federal Constitution of Malaysia and for ignoring the wishes of the rakyat. My opinion is no different from that of NH Chan, the former Court of Appeal judge, which you can read in the addendum below. The Sultan of Selangor was very angry and that triggered a conflict between our two families. My family told me I had brought shame to the family name and they demanded that I attend a family meeting to discuss the matter. However, I did not attend that family meeting and this aggravated the situation. My family then gave me an ultimatum. I was to either make that public apology or else my family would insert an advertisement in the mainstream newspapers practically distancing itself from me, which could be interpreted as disowning me. My response to that was, and in accordance with the normal action to be taken against a member of the kerabat who durhaka, I went into exile outside Selangor. As a matter of fact, I even missed two recent family funerals, as I could not and would not step foot in Selangor ever again. It has to be noted that this has always been the punishment for any member of the Selangor Royal Family who is considered durhaka since the beginning of the Selangor Sultanate more than 250 years ago. My grandfather, Sultan Musa, was in fact subjected to that same punishment and it is the only punishment befitting a member of the Selangor Royal Family who has courted the displeasure of the Palace. This means, in short, I can no longer attend the court hearing as the same is heard in Petaling Jaya, which is invariably within the state of Selangor. The second reason is as follows: In September 2008, I was detained under the Internal Security Act for what I was alleged to have written regarding the Altantuya murder and the alleged links to those who walk in the corridors of power. However, I am already facing trial on sedition and criminal defamation charges in this court as well as in the Kuala Lumpur court. Now, my ISA detention in September 2008 was for the same crime as what I have been charged in this court (sedition) and in the Kuala Lumpur court (criminal defamation). This means I am being punished twice for the same crime and the law does not provide for one to be punished twice for the same crime. No doubt, in November 2008, the Shah Alam court ruled my detention illegal and subsequently ordered my release. Nevertheless, the government is appealing this decision, giving a clear indication that it wants me back in Kamunting whereby I will face punishment without trial on top of the two trials I am being made to face — which, as I said, are for those same crimes. The events of late do not give me any confidence that I will get a fair trial. Even if the Petaling Jaya court acquits me, they can still appeal the decision of the court like what they are doing with the Shah Alam court’s decision to free me from ISA detention. And the manner the Federal Court conducted itself during the recent ISA appeal hearing is very troubling indeed and borders on unprofessional conduct. Finally, my open letter to Nizar Jamaluddin has been classified as treason and the government wants to charge me for treason. The fact that no such law exists will not stop them as they can use the ‘waging war against the King’ law that they used against some of the Al Maunah members, which resulted in them being hanged in the Sungai Buloh Prison in October 2006. Many of my friends have spotted police vehicles parked outside their house. Others have noticed police officers loitering in front of their residence while some have been summoned to Bukit Aman for interrogation. The police want them to reveal where I am currently residing. Why are the police looking for me? Two months ago, the Federal Court was in a hurry to hear the appeal against my release from ISA detention. After impatiently rejecting all our applications and refusing to allow us time to file the necessary papers, the court suddenly went cold and nothing was heard from it since. This got me very suspicious. I did some checking and have reason to believe that a new detention order has been issued and that is why the police are looking for me. If I were to turn up in court today I would never be allowed to leave. The police would immediately detain me and send me to Kamunting and this time I shall not be so fortunate as to see freedom in two months like in the last two occasions. After two ISA detentions, I do not plan to allow them to get me so easily the third time around. I also refuse to face treason charges that will result in me being sent to the gallows. I love my life and wish to remain alive a few years longer if possible. Those are the reasons I am not in court today. I shall, however, attend the court hearing when the situation permits, i.e., I am no longer to be charged for treason and I get an assurance from the powers-that-be that the Government’s appeal against my ISA release is withdrawn forthwith and that no new detention order has been issued. After all, if the Razak Baginda acquittal was not appealed upon, why am I being treated differently? Raja Petra Bin Raja Kamarudin 23rd April 2003 ****************************************** ADDENDUM: Opinion of NH CHAN is former Court of Appeal judge Malaysiakini, 20th February 2009 Now we know why the people of Perak and elsewhere in Malaysia, are making harsh statements about the sultan. A quick search on the Internet will prove this. It is the perception of the people that matters; and the confidence of the people is destroyed when they go away thinking that he was biased – that he had been influenced by Najib. It is very sad that Sultan Azlan Shah, who had been held in high esteem internationally and by the populace, has, in a careless moment, lost all that. His reputation for fairness and justice has been shattered when they go away thinking that he had been influenced by Najib or that he has favoured BN. It does not matter whether he did, in fact, favour one side unfairly. Suffice it that reasonable people might think that he did. The die is cast and we cannot put the clock back. Hereafter, there may be many who will no longer believe in his speeches on good governance and the integrity of the judiciary. The impression is that he does not practise what he preaches. When the menteri besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the legislative assembly, he has two choices. First, he may request the ruler to dissolve the assembly for the purpose of a state election. Second, if his request is turned down by the ruler, “he shall tender the resignation of the executive council”. This is provided in Article XVI, Clause (6) which reads: “(6) if the Menteri Besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly, then unless at his request His Royal Highness dissolves the Legislative Assembly, he shall tender the resignation of the Executive Council.” What Article XVI, Clause (6) says is this: If the menteri besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the legislative assembly, he shall tender the resignation of the executive council, unless the ruler has, at the request of the menteri besar, dissolved the legislative assembly. However, in the present case, Mohd Nizar on Feb 4, had requested the ruler to dissolve the legislative assembly, and the ruler informed him on Feb 5 that he acted in his discretion to withhold his consent for the dissolution of the assembly. That being the case, the menteri besar has no other choice but to tender the resignation of the executive council. Under Article XWI, Clause (2), paragraph (b), the ruler has a personal discretion to withhold his consent to the menteri besar’s request for the dissolution of the legislative assembly. Unfortunately, the ruler, in the present case, has acted unconstitutionally when he side stepped the constitutional provisions of Article XVI, Clause (6) of the laws of the Perak constitution. This was what he did. The Sultan of Perak’s media statement said: “Mohd Nizar was summoned to an audience with the sultan to be informed of the ruler’s decision not to dissolve the State Assembly, and in accordance with the provisions of Article XVI (6) of the Perak Darul Ridzuan State Constitution, the Sultan of Perak ordered Mohd Nizar to resign from his post as Perak menteri besar together with the members of the state executive council with immediate effect. “If Mohd Nizar does not resign from his post as Perak menteri besar together with the state executive council members, then the posts of menteri besar and state executive councillors are regarded as vacant.” As we know the sultan is a constitutional monarch who has no power to rule except a couple of discretionary powers mentioned in Article XVIII, Clause (2). So, apart from the couple of matters mentioned in Article XVIII, Clause (2), the Sultan of Perak has no power to order Mohd Nizar to resign from his post as Perak menteri besar together with the members of the state executive council with immediate effect. Nor has he the power to declare that the posts of menteri besar and state executive councillors are regarded as vacant. In the present case, the menteri besar had acted under Article XVI, Clause (6) which permitted him to request the ruler to dissolve the legislative assembly if he ceased to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the legislative assembly. In this case, the ruler turned down his request. Then the menteri besar has no choice but “to tender the resignation of the executive council”. So, why did the ruler, in the present case, depart from the provisions of Article XVI, Clause (6)? Under the provisions of Clause (6), the sultan knew that the ball was in the menteri besar’s court and it was to be the menteri besar who “should tender the resignation of the executive council”. Yet he chose to ignore these provisions of the Perak constitution.

Sedition trial: Arrest warrant for RPK

The Sessions Court has this morning issued an arrest warrant for Malaysia Today editor Raja Petra Kamarudin for failing to appear for his sedition trial.

MCPX

Raja Petra is facing trial for the alleged seditious article entitled ‘Let’s send the Altantuya murderers to hell’ which was posted on the Malaysia Today website on April 25 at his home at No 5, Jalan BRP 5/5 Bukit Rahman Putra, Sungai Buloh on April 25 this year.

The charge under Section 4(1)(c) of the Sedition Act 1948 carries a maximum fine of RM5,000 or three years’ jail or both upon conviction.

Mkini

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AWARD 2009 RECIPIENTS ANNOUNCED: The Bindmans Law and Campaigning Award goes to Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, Lawyer of Popular Blogger Raja Petra

The winners of the 2009 Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards were announced last night at a ceremony at Kings Place, London

The ceremony, hosted by Index on Censorship Chair Jonathan Dimbleby, with a keynote speech by Sir David Hare, honoured those who had made a contribution to free expression in five categories: books, films, journalism, new media and law and campaigning.

Speaking at the event, Jonathan Dimbleby said: ‘Freedom of expression helps to define our essence as human beings and citizens. Everywhere this right is under growing threat. The Index on Censorship Freedom of Expression Awards are a chance to celebrate those who against all odds have made distinguished contributions to this vital cause – to protect and enhance liberty in Britain and around the world.’

The recipients of the awards for 2009 are:

The Guardian Journalism Award: The Sunday Leader – Sri Lanka
The Sunday Leader and its journalists have been subject to continual threats and brutal harassment since it was launched 15 years ago. The assassination of the Sunday Leader’s editor and co-founder Lasantha Wickrematunge in January provoked protests and vigils around the world. His brother Lal has since bravely taken on the position of editor, continuing the important work of the newspaper.

The Economist New Media Award: Psiphon
Psiphon is a revolutionary software programme that allows Internet access in countries where censorship is imposed. The programme turns a regular home computer into a personal, encrypted server, capable of retrieving and displaying web pages anywhere. Psiphon was developed as a human rights software project by the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. One of its aims is to design software that is easy to use, so that those with limited technical abilities can take advantage of the technology.

The TR Fyvel Book Award: Beijing Coma – Ma Jian
Spiked with dark wit, poetic beauty and deep rage, Beijing Coma takes the life (and near death) of one young student to create a dazzling novel about contemporary China. In May 1989, tens of thousands of students are camped out in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square. But what started as a united protest at the slow pace of their government’s political reform has begun to lose direction. People from all over China are coming to join the demonstration, but the students at its heart are confused by the influence they suddenly wield, and riven by petty in-fighting. One of them, Dai Wei, argues about everything from democracy to the distribution of food to protesters, little knowing that, on 4 June, a soldier will shoot a bullet into his head, sending him into a deep coma.

The Bindmans Law and Campaigning Award: Malik Imtiaz Sarwar – Malaysia
Malik Imtiaz Sarwar is a leading human rights lawyer and activist and the current president of the National Human Rights Society (HAKAM). Imtiaz has been a central figure in fighting lawsuits brought against journalists and bloggers, and was the lead counsel for Raja Petra Kamaruddin, popular blogger and editor of Malaysia Today, whose release he secured last year. In August 2006, a poster declaring him to be a traitor to Islam and calling for his death was circulated in Malaysia. He has proposed setting up an inter-faith council, and spoken in a series of public forums on the need for religious freedom.

The Index on Censorship Film Award: The Devil Came on Horseback
Using the exclusive photographs and first-hand testimony of former US Marine Captain Brian Steidle, Directed by Annie Sundberg and Ricki Stern The Devil Came on Horseback takes the viewer on an emotionally-charged journey into the heart of Darfur. Steidle had access to parts of the country that no journalist could penetrate; he was unprepared for what he would witness and experience, including being fired at, taken hostage, and being unable to intervene to save the lives of young children. Ultimately frustrated by the inaction of the international community, Steidle resigned and returned to the US to expose the images and stories of lives he believed were being systematically destroyed.

There to collect awards were Lal Wickrematunge the editor the Sunday Leader, Nart Villeneuve the CTO of Psiphon, Ma Jian the author of Beijing Coma, Peter Noorlander on behalf of Malik Imtiaz Sarwar and Annie Sundberg the director of The Devil Came on Horseback.

Also in attendance were nominees for the Bindmans Law and Campaigning award Harry Roque and Harrison Nkomo as well as Guardian Journalism award nominee Sanjuana Martinez.

Radio interviews by the BBC recorded in the run up to the awards with Lal Wickrematunge, Nart Villeneuve, Harrison Nkomo and Sanjuana Martinez can be found on our website http://www.indexoncensorship.org in the coming days.

Index on Censorship

It’s time to storm the Ipoh-Bastille on 7 May 09

I call upon all Malaysians who wish to uphold the kedaulatan of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia to converge onto Ipoh on 7 May 2009 as a show of support to Nizar Jamaluddin and the Pakatan Rakyat government of Perak.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Kenyataan Media YB V.Sivakumar, Yang Dipertua Dewan Negeri Perak

7 Mei 2009 telah ditetapkan sebagai tarikh Persidangan Dewan Negeri Perak. Perkara ini tidak dirunding dengan saya terlebih dahulu. Saya tidak mengetahui tentang tarikh itu sehingga saya diberitahu oleh ADUN-ADUN yang lain. Notis dikeluarkan oleh Setiausaha Dewan En. Abddullah Antong. Saya telah mengantung tugasnya sebagai setiausaha Dewan Negeri sebelum persidangan ‘bawah pokok’ yang dibuat pada 3 Mac 2009.

Notis yang sama juga telah diberikan kepada saya oleh Setiausaha Dewan. Siapakah yang memberi arahan kepada Setiausaha Dewan untuk mengeluarakan Notis. Arahan itu sepatutnya datang daripada pejabat Speaker. Tetapi, Speaker sendiri tidak tahu tentang tarikh persidangan tersebut. Mungkin sayalah yang terakhir dimaklumkan tentang tarikh persidangan. Bukankah ini satu tindakan yang aneh. Speaker dihina sekali lagi.

Pada protokolnya, Spaeker yang harus memberi arahan kepada Setiausaha Dewan untuk mengeluarkan notis. Tetapi, di sini, speaker pula menerima notis yang sama seperti ADUN-ADUN yang lain.

Adakah ini merupakan usaha-usaha untuk memperkecilkan atau memperbodohkan institusi Speaker? Pada pandangan saya, ini merupakan satu lagi tindakan untuk menghina Speaker Dewan Negeri.

Sanggupkah Pandekar Amin, Speaker Dewan Rakyat berdiam diri jika Setiausaha Dewannya mengeluarkan notis memanggil Dewan Rakyat bersidang tanpa berunding dengannya? Bukankah hak Speaker untuk mengetahui terlebih dahulu segala apa yang berkaitan dengan Dewan. Apa gunanya institusi Speaker apabila semua keputusan dibuat oleh Pihak yang lain. Ini merupakan campurtangan eksekutif yang nyata. Sekali lagi doktrin pengasingan kuasa dicabuli.

Saya akan menulis surat kepada Istana untuk mendapatkan kepastian tentang tarikh persidangan yang ditetapkan. Saya tidak ditunjukkan apa-apa bukti tentang penetapan tarikh persidangan oleh Istana. Oleh yang demikian, tarikh persidangan itu mungkin perlu ditangguhkan sehingga saya mendapat kepastian tentang tarikh tersebut.

Saya juga mengantung tugas En Abdullah Antong sebagai Setiausaha Dewan. Beliau akan digantikan dengan Tuan Haji Misbah sehingga suatu tarikh yang akan diberitahu kelak.

*************************************************

Saya sedar ramai yang ingin tahu kesan keputusan Mahkamah Persekutuan pada 16 April lalu yang memutuskan bahawa keputusan V.Sivakumar, Speaker Perak menggantung dan melarang Zambry dan enam Exconya hadir di Dun Perak selama 18 bulan dan 12 bulan adalah terbatal dan tak sah.

Ramai yang bertanya saya adakah keputusan tersebut bermakna Zambry dan enam exconya kini boleh menghadiri sidang Dun Perak?

Jika kita melihat kenyataan peguam Umno dan laporan akhbar pro-Umno seperti Utusan Malaysia (17.4.2009) mereka dengan tidak bertanggungjawab menyatakan bahawa Zambry dan enam exconya kini dibenarkan menghadiri sidang Dun Perak yang mungkin akan diadakan dalam masa terdekat.

Sebagai salah seorang peguam yang terlibat dalam kes tersebut, saya menasihati rakyat agar tidak terkeliru dengan kenyataan peguam Umno dan laporan akhbar Umno tersebut. Banyak yang mereka sembunyikan dan tidak jelaskan tentang apa yang sebenarnya berlaku di Mahkamah Persekutuan pada tarikh tersebut.

Marilah kita mulakan dengan melihat apakah perintah-perintah yang dipohon oleh Zambry dan enam exconya di dalam saman yang mereka kemukakan ke atas Sivakumar di Mahkamah Tinggi dan kemudiannya didengar di Mahkamah Persekutuan.

Sebenarnya Zambry telah memohon sepuluh (10) perintah Mahkamah dan dari sepuluh perintah tersebut Mahkamah hanya membenarkan dua (2) perintah sahaja. Dua perintah yang dibenarkan oleh Mahkamah adalah seperti berikut:

Pertama, perintah membatalkan keputusan V. Sivakumar yang menggantung dan melarang Zambry hadir di Dun Perak selama 18 bulan.

Kedua, perintah membatalkan keputusan V. Sivakumar yang menggantung dan melarang enam exco Zambry untuk hadir di Dun Perak selama 12 bulan adalah terbatal dan tak sah.

Itu sahaja dua perintah yang Mahkamah Persekutuan benarkan pada 16 April lalu. Memandangkan Mahkamah Persekutuan hanya membenarkan dua perintah di atas, adalah jelas Mahkamah tidak membenarkan lapan (8) perintah lain yang juga dipohon oleh Umno dan dihujahkan oleh para peguam Zambry dan pasukan peguam Sivakumar.

Mohamed Hanipa Maidin

*************************************************

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.

This is a perverse judgement 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, which 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.

Don’t these judges realise that they have actually done a disservice to the Government of the day? Perhaps they have never heard of the Taff Vale case. I think the message of the Taff Vale case to our judges of the Federal Court should be clear enough. The electorate may decide, just as the voters did in 1906 England to the Conservative Government, to use the power of their vote to unseat the BN government in the next by-election or general election because they do not trust the judges.

Suppose the Speaker Sivakumar were to ignore the declarative decree of the Federal Court, what then? Clause (2) of Article 72 of the Federal Constitution says that: “No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly of any State or of any committee thereof”.

The Federal Court can say anything they like but the Speaker is not liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly. The order of the Federal Court seems to me to be a brutum fulmen which in Latin means “ineffectual thunderbolt: (action which is) loud but ineffective”.

By NH Chan

*************************************************

Article 72 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia

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

72 (2) No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly of any State or of any committee thereof.

72 (3) No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly of any State or of any committee thereof.

72 (4) Clause (2) shall not apply to any person charged with an offence under the law passed by Parliament under Clause (4) of Article 10 or with an offence under the Sedition Act 1948 as amended by the Emergency (Essential Powers) Ordinance No. 45, 1970.

*************************************************

So there you have it — the press statement by the Speaker of the Perak State Assembly and the legal opinions of NH Chan and Mohamed Hanipa Maidin. You really do not need to go to law school to comprehend the issues. The power to decide rests with the Speaker and under Article 72 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia the courts may not interfere in the decision of the Speaker. The court just does not have the power to do so.

So where do we go from here? Umno has overridden the Speaker by calling for a State Assembly meeting on 7 May 2009. They are doing this because, if the State Assembly does not meet by 13 May 2009, then the State Assembly is automatically dissolved and a new state election has got to be called. That is why Umno is pushing for a State Assembly meeting, legally or otherwise, to avoid the dissolution of the State Assembly whereby a new state election must be held within 60 days from 13 May 2009.

On 11 March 2009, the Perak Menteri Besar, Nizar Jamaluddin, requested an audience with His Highness the Sultan of Perak. The Palace, however, ignored that request and did not respond. At 3.40pm yesterday, Nizar sent a second letter requesting an audience. It is not known yet whether His Highness will, again, ignore this letter or probably reply in the negative. Most likely this second request will be ignored as well.

Umno and the Palace are playing with fire. There is only so much the people will tolerate. Winning the 8 March 2008 general election through fraud is one thing. In spite of the rampant cheating, Barisan Nasional is still seen as winning through a democratic process although everyone knows they won with a mere 51% of the popular votes — which would have been less than 50% if they had not padded the ballot boxes and manipulated the elections through gerrymandering and postal votes. On a level playing field, today, Pakatan Rakyat would be the federal government instead of Barisan Nasional.

Nevertheless, there was still an election and the people can accept the decision, fraud or no fraud. But to topple the Perak state government in violation of the Federal and State Constitutions would be extremely unpalatable and something the people will not allow to happen without a fight.

The mood on the ground is not good. The people are restless. They want Perak back in the hands of the lawful government, not transferred illegally to Barisan Nasional in violation of the Constitution.

Today, the people have the law on their side. They are standing on the side of right, not might. And if enough people stand united in opposition of might, then right wins in the end. Beware the 7th of May. The storming of the Bastille occurred on 14 July 1789. Will we be seeing the second storming of the Bastille on 7 May 2009? I would not be the least bit surprised if there is.

Maybe this is what Umno wants. They want chaos to erupt on 7 May 2009 so that they can declare an emergency on that day and suspend the Perak State Assembly for six months or more, like they did in Kelantan 30 years ago. Then, too, in Kelantan 30 years ago, they brought the PAS government down by engineering riots on the streets of Kota Bharu and then declared an emergency and suspended the state assembly.

It took PAS 12 years to get back Kelantan and since 1990 Kelantan has remained an opposition stronghold. It would now take forever for Umno to win back the state but the people of Kelantan had to endure 12 years of Umno rule and rampant corruption and mismanagement before PAS managed to kick Umno out again.

There appears to be a hidden agenda here. Umno knows that the courts cannot overturn the Speaker of the Perak State Assembly’s decision. So why are they doing this? And the mainstream media is spinning propaganda that the court has ruled in favour of Umno whereas the court only ruled in two out of ten points — and even then, in the first place, the court should have rejected Umno’s application on grounds that it has no jurisdiction over the matter.

The police are looking for me. My friends have been summoned to the police headquarters for interrogation, police cars are parked outside their house, and police personnel are loitering outside their residence to monitor whoever comes and goes. My ISA case, which the government is appealing, has suddenly been dropped and for almost two months the case has gone cold after the Federal Court appeared to be in a hurry and would not even allow us 24 hours to file the necessary papers.

This seems very strange. Initially, the court wanted everything done yesterday and even the following morning was considered too late. Why the sudden change in urgency? Does the government now feel that I should not be sent back to Kamunting since Najib Tun Razak is now the Prime Minister?

Not likely. The reason they are no longer in a hurry on the ISA appeal is because they have issued a new detention order. So they no longer need to hurry with the appeal hearing. They can just detain me under a fresh detention order and send me back to Kamunting. And that is why they are loitering outside my friends’ houses and have called them in for interrogation. They are looking for me.

The police know of my clash with the palace and about my self-imposed exile from Selangor. So, I am not in Selangor. So where am I? That is what the police want to know. And why are the police so concerned about where I am? Because they want to detain me under the Internal Security Act using the new detention order that has been issued.

Well, never mind, they want me back in Kamunting under ISA for what the government alleges is my treasonous act which makes me a threat to national security. Then let us give them a good reason to send me back to Kamunting. Let me really be a threat to national security.

I call upon all Malaysians who wish to uphold the kedaulatan of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia to converge onto Ipoh on 7 May 2009 as a show of support to Nizar Jamaluddin and the Pakatan Rakyat government of Perak. Let us not allow Umno and Barisan Nasional to take the Perak government by force and through foul means. Let us, Rakyat Malaysia, storm the Bastille.

There, now you have a valid reason to detain me under ISA.

RPK ordered to pay RM1 mil to Umno treasurer

Popular blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin has been ordered by the Kuala Lumpur High Court to pay RM1 million in damages to Umno treasurer Abdul Azim Mohd Zabidi.

Senior assistant registrar Nor Hatini Abdul Hamid made the ruling yesterday after allowing Abdul Azim’s application for a judgment in default against Raja Petra.

The order followed the Malaysia Today editor’s failure to enter an appearance during the civil proceedings.

Nor Hatini ordered Raja Petra to pay RM500,000 in general damages, another RM300,000 in aggravated damages and RM200,000 in exemplary damages.

The suit was brought by Abdul Azim in his personal capacity against Raja Petra for publishing two libellous articles on the website.

Lawyer Sunil Abraham told reporters the court made the decision after Raja Petra failed to enter an appearance and also failed to file the statement of defence.

Abdul Azim obtained a judgment in default against the blogger on Aug 8 last year but the damages were assessed yesterday

In his statement of claim, Abdul Azim who is the Bukit Bintang Umno division chief, claimed the two libellous articles were titled ‘A Scam By Any Other Name, Smells Just as Foul’, and the ‘New Member of Parliament for Putrajaya – Azim Zabidi’.

Portrayed as a crook, unclean politician and dishonest

Abdul Azim claimed the first article and comments made by the readers portrayed or represented him as a crook, guilty of abusing and utilising his position in public office as the Umno treasurer to enrich himself.

He said it further alleged that he had used his position to swindle money and of having the resources to manipulate the judiciary in fixing cases.

He also alleged the article portrayed him as a scumbag and unfit to hold public office or the position of Umno treasurer.

For the second article, Abdul Azim said he was portrayed as an ‘Ali Baba’ front and a crook; a rent seeker and commercial agent; unfit to be an MP in the last election; he is not a clean politician; and he acted for BK Tan who is an underworld figure, and that he is dishonest, corrupt and unfit for public office.

Raja Petra could not be reached for comments.

Hafiz Yatim, Mkini

And you said you fear PAS & believe in kalai?

You might not agree with Islam or PAS’ policies on Islam. But at least with PAS you know what’s coming and you can voice out if you don’t like it. With Umno, you are not allowed such luxuries.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

First read this:

News Item 1: Jerai PKR division dissolved

A PKR division chief has pulled out from PKR, taking over 400 party members with him. Jerai PKR division chief B. Kalaivanar said his decision to leave PKR was due to his disappointment and frustration, as well as many other members’, with the party’s leadership that has ignored the voices of those who had struggled for the party. (You can read the rest of the news item below).

Now read this:

News item 2: PKR man faces cheating rap

Parti Keadilan Rakyat candidate for the Gurun state seat in the last general election B. Kalaivanar was charged at the magistrate’s court yesterday with two counts of cheating involving RM3,600. Kalaivanar, who is also Jerai PKR division chairman, claimed trial to inducing R. Patchama, 59, to hand over RM2,000 in April 2004 as payment to process an application for aid with the Social Security Organisation (Sosco). (You can read the rest of the news item below).

Do I need to explain what is going on in Kedah or are you intelligent enough to grasp the situation? It is quite simple really. Contest the by-election and then win. And after you win you negotiate a deal to cross over to Barisan Nasional — such as a cash payment of RM5 million plus for the court case to be dropped.

Sounds reasonable? Okay, enough about Kedah. Now read the following news item:

News Item 3: Delegates want Islamic law to be ennobled

The Islamic legal and economic systems must be ennobled immediately to ensure that the ummah remained strong and supreme in future, a Puteri Umno delegate, Seriwani Sabtu said today. The Setiawangsa Puteri Umno head said that the role and power of the syariah courts should be widened to enable them to hear various cases pertaining to Islam instead of confining to marriage and divorce cases only. (You can read the rest of the news item below).

What is that I hear? PAS is dangerous because it is propagating the setting up of an Islamic State based on Syariah laws? For those who speak without understanding what Islamic laws are all about, Syariah laws comprise of many laws. The Hudud law, which is a bone of contention to many, is just one of these Syariah laws. Hudud, however, deals with seven specific crimes. But there are other Islamic laws that deal with inheritance, marriage, and so on.

At least PAS openly propagates Islamic laws. In that same breath, however, PAS says it shall not unilaterally implement Islamic laws if it ever comes to power in the federal government. And that, of course, is another issue to argue. How can PAS implement Islamic laws if it comes to power in the federal government when it will need a two-thirds majority in Parliament to do so but it contests only one-third of the 222 seats and wins less than half that?

Nevertheless, PAS has agreed that any policy matter requires unanimous agreement by all the partners in Pakatan Rakyat (and the implementation of Islamic laws is a policy matter). A simple majority is not enough. So, if PAS wants Islamic laws, and even if PKR agrees to this (which it will not of, course), as long as DAP opposes the idea then it just can’t be done. Simple! So the issue is a non-issue from the word go.

But what should not be ignored here is Umno’s plan for Islamic laws. Forget about PAS. They can’t do it. First, they do not control two-thirds of the seats in Parliament. Second, DAP will not support Islamic laws so it can’t be done since it will not be unanimous. But Umno can do things unilaterally. Umno does not need to ask the other 13 members of Barisan Nasional permission to do anything. Umno does what it wants to do. Umno is Barisan Nasional and Barisan Nasional is Umno.

Furthermore, PAS announces what it wants to do. It makes no secret of its plan to eventually see Islamic laws implemented in Malaysia. But it can also accept the fact that it may never see that happening. And PAS is quite prepared to leave well enough alone.

Umno, however, Islamises Malaysia in secret. They don’t make any noise about it, like PAS, which talks but never really gets to do it. With Umno, you wake up one morning and suddenly find out that this or that is a new ruling.

Take the ‘Allah’ ban for Bibles as one example. Take the arresting of non-Muslims who hold hands in public places. Take the ban on the building of Buddhist temples. Take the demolition of Hindu temples. Take the body snatching cases. All these, and more, are either federal government policies or events that happened in Umno run states.

In PAS run states, the Hindus, Buddhists and Christians face no problems. In Kelantan, the Hindus were offered permission to build a temple even though they had not asked for permission. The biggest Thai temple in Malaysia is in Kelantan. While Umno says that non-Muslims can’t use the word ‘Allah’, Nik Aziz says they can. During the Umno days, the Chinese could not slaughter pigs in Kelantan. Now, they can.

Do I really need to run through the entire list, which I have already talked about so many times in the past?

With PAS, you know what you are getting. They will announce what they want to do and you are free to oppose it if you disagree. With Umno, they just go ahead and do it without telling you first. And if you oppose it because you disagree, they will accuse you of insulting Islam and take action against you.

You might not agree with Islam or PAS’ policies on Islam. But at least with PAS you know what’s coming and you can voice out if you don’t like it. With Umno, you are not allowed such luxuries.

If you think you are more protected from Islam by voting Barisan Nasional, think again. Let the track record speak for itself. I too don’t agree with some of the policies of PAS. But I will take PAS over Umno anytime. With PAS, WYSIWYG.

***************************************

NEWS ITEM 1

Jerai PKR division dissolved
By LOOI SUE-CHERN, The Star, 30 March 2009

SUNGAI PETANI: A PKR division chief has pulled out from PKR, taking over 400 party members with him.

Jerai PKR division chief B. Kalaivanar said his decision to leave PKR was due to his disappointment and frustration, as well as many other members’, with the party’s leadership that has ignored the voices of those who had struggled for the party.

“I am dissolving the Jerai PKR division, which has about 100 members; and the Kedah Indian Community Development Committee, of which I am also chairman.

“The commitee has 357 members, who are also leaving the party,” he said during a press conference at the Cinta Sayang Golf and Country Resort here Monday.

Kalaivanar, who is a long-serving member since 1998 and had been detained by police 29 times for taking part in demonstrations, claimed the PKR de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim did what he liked and ignored those who had long fought for him and PKR.

“I am fed up. I don’t want to waste my time anymore and deceive the people. PKR had been deceiving the Indian people just to get their support.

“They played with our sentiments when they went on stage, talked about the five detained Hindraf leaders and shouted ‘Makkal Sakti’ (people’s power).

“When I suggested all Opposition MPs stage a walk out of Parliament for the five leaders’ release (from the Internal Security Act), none of them listened,” he said.

Among those leaving PKR with Kalaivanar are his wife Sungai Petani municipal councillor K. Deivanai, who is also state PKR Wanita deputy chief and Jerai PKR Wanita division chief; and Yan District councillor S. Poobalan, who is also Kalaivanar’s deputy.

When asked if he would ask other PKR divisions to pull out as well, Kalaivanar said he could not speak for them.

On whether he was leaving the party because he was not selected as PKR’s candidate for the Bukit Selambau by-election, he said it was a secondary issue.

“It is alright with me if they do not want me as candidate. The issue is they should have discussed with all PKR members on the selection.

“It also does not matter to me if the PKR candidate (S. Manikumar) wins the by-election or not. I will still be the person the Indian community approaches to solve problems as always,” he said, adding that he would not comment on Manikumar as he did not know him well.

Kalaivanar also expressed his grouses that the state PKR’s top leadership had never seen the appointment of a non-Malay member even though the party claimed to be multiracial.

He also said he was disappointed that the Pakatan Rakyat government in Kedah had done nothing for the people after running the state for over a year.

“They have done nothing but criticise Barisan Nasional and Umno since they won the state.

Kalaivanar said he would campaign for democracy this by-election and hold ceramahs these seven days to reveal the ‘actors’ in Pakatan Rakyat and PKR so Bukit Selambau voters would not be misled.

“I will not join any party. I have not approached Barisan.

“I will campaign under my two non-governmental organisations (NGOs) – the Alternative Action Team (AAT) and the Malaysia Indian Efficiency Movement,” he said, but clarified that his campaign would also not be in support of any of the 13 independent candidates.

Kalaivanar later met Umno deputy president Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin at the resort’s restaurant by coincidence and congratulated the latter on his recent win in the Umno general assembly.

Asked if he was now siding with Barisan, he maintained that he and the NGOs he led would back ‘those who can serve’ and act as pressure groups for the people.

***************************************

NEWS ITEM 2

PKR man faces cheating rap
KPMU.net, 11 June 2008

SUNGAI PETANI: Parti Keadilan Rakyat candidate for the Gurun state seat in the last general election B. Kalaivanar was charged at the magistrate’s court yesterday with two counts of cheating involving RM3,600.

Kalaivanar, who is also Jerai PKR division chairman, claimed trial to inducing R. Patchama, 59, to hand over RM2,000 in April 2004 as payment to process an application for aid with the Social Security Organisation (Sosco).

Known as Kalai among PKR members, the 44-year-old also claimed trial to issuing a cheque for RM1,600 to Patchama on Sept 15, 2005, when he knew that there was no application for the amount with Socso. The cheque bounced.

The offences were allegedly committed at No 24, Kampung Sungai Ibur in Gurun, 20km from here.

Assistant public prosecutor Nuraswan Amuniddin proposed bail of RM4,000 in one surety for each charge.

Kalaivanar, a father of six, who was not represented, pleaded for a lower bail of between RM1,000 and RM1,500, saying that his wife was a housewife and that he worked as an activist with several non-governmental organisations.

Court Registrar V. Kanesan, sitting as magistrate, set bail at RM3,000 for each charge in one surety pending mention on July 6.

Kalaivanar posted bail, but was arrested again outside the bailiff’s office about 1pm.

It is learnt that he was detained in connection with investigations into his alleged involvement in another cheating case in Bahau, Negri Sembilan, several years ago.

Kuala Muda district police chief Assistant Commissioner Hashim Ali was not available for comment.

In the March 8 election, Kalaivanar lost to Dr Leong Yong Kong of Barisan Nasional in the Gurun state seat. He polled 7,035 votes against Dr Leong’s 8,589 votes, losing by 1,554 votes.

He also contested as a PKR candidate for the same state seat in the 2004 general election. He lost to the incumbent state MCA chairman Datuk Beh Heng Seong of BN.

***************************************

NEWS ITEM 3

Delegates want Islamic law to be ennobled
Bernama, 28 March 2009

The Islamic legal and economic systems must be ennobled immediately to ensure that the ummah remained strong and supreme in future, a Puteri Umno delegate, Seriwani Sabtu said today.

The Setiawangsa Puteri Umno head said that the role and power of the syariah courts should be widened to enable them to hear various cases pertaining to Islam instead of confining to marriage and divorce cases only.

“Those making statements that disputed the religion should also be heard by the syariah courts and upon conviction, stiff penalties should be imposed so that the religion will not be ridiculed easily,” she said when debating the motion on the presidential policy speech, the motion on education and religion at the Umno general assembly, here today.

Seriwani also rejected the organising of any inter-faith discussions to avoid intervention by non-Muslims in Islamic affairs.

“If such discussions were allowed, it would enable certain groups to tarnish Islam. As such, measures to monitor and control such activities should be enhanced,” she said.

Selangor Umno representative Datuk Zainal Abidin Sakom said Umno leaders lately appeared to be scared to enforce the existing political power to defend Islam.

Meanwhile, Johor Umno delegate Ayub Rahmat asked the supreme council to revoke the implementation of the teaching and learning of Mathematics and Science in the English language.

Since the policy was implemented in 2003, he said the numerous studies carried out by Umno itself had shown that it was detrimental to the Malay Malaysian students.

“Why is Umno reluctant to accept the outcome of the studies conducted by the party itself?” he asked.

He said studies carried out internationally also showed that out of 45 nations that used the English language as the medium of instruction, only five had emerged as a developed nation.

My name is RPK, I am Malaysian, and I am no prostitute

Yes, I am no prostitute. And all those Malays who justify joining Umno for business reasons, and those Chinese and Indians who say they support Barisan Nasional to cari makan, are worse than prostitutes.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

I remember something my late mother once told me back in 1960 or thereabouts: a house is not a home. A home is a house, but a house is not a home.

I was only ten years old then so it took me many years to grasp the wisdom of her words. Today, 48 years on, I now understand what she meant. I have a house. But that house is not my home. And that is because I no longer live in that house since it is in Selangor and I no longer live in Selangor. I am now forced to tumpang in somebody else’s house outside Selangor. But that is not my home. It is someone else’s home. I am just a penumpang, sort of like a pendatang.

I also no longer own a car. I have to take public transport to move around. So I don’t move around anymore since public transport is a hassle, especially in Malaysia that has a primitive public transport system.

Many of my friends tell me they joined Umno for business reasons. My one-time neighbour, a young Malay lawyer, confessed he joined Umno so that he can be assured of getting government contracts. He is a lawyer in Zul Rafique and Co. and an Umno Bukit Bintang youth leader. His purpose for joining Umno is purely economic reasons.

And this goes for many other Malays as well, some of my relatives included. My relatives resent me opposing the government because they are worried that Umno may punish the family for what I am doing. They depend on the government for their livelihood so they do not want me to jeopardise their periuk nasi (rice bowl).

Chinese, too, tell me the same thing. Cari maka mah! They support Barisan Nasional because they need to survive. It’s all about the money. If we oppose the government then we may suffer, economically, they tell me.

Yes, it’s all about the money. Of course, they try to justify their actions by saying they have no choice. They don’t want to support Barisan Nasional. They don’t like supporting Barisan Nasional. But they have no choice but to support Barisan Nasional for the sake of their rice bowl.

To these people they have done no wrong. Okay, it may be immoral for them to support a party they do not believe in. It may be immoral for them to support a party that they actually hate. But they are supporting this party not out of choice. They have no choice in the matter. They are doing it to protect their livelihood.

Prostitutes say the same thing. They open their legs and do blowjobs on their clients not because they are sex-starved or actually enjoy what they are doing. In fact, most prostitutes hate life as a prostitute and hate themselves for doing what they do. But they have no choice. It is not about the pleasure of sex. It is about the necessity of money.

Prostitutes would willingly choose another profession if one was available to them. But they can’t get an honest job for whatever reason, mostly because they lack the education, qualification and skills. So the only option available to them is life as a prostitute.

A house is not a home. That was the title of a movie back in 1960. And the movie was about life as a prostitute. I too live in a house. But that house is not a home. It is someone else’s home. I am just a penumpang. But I am not a prostitute. And it is because I am NOT a prostitute that I now live in a house that is not a home.

But I was offered the opportunity to prostitute myself. One day, some time back, a person by the name of Rusdi Mustaffa who works for Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, called me and said he wanted to meet me. I was then at the Havana Club in the Concord Hotel in Kuala Lumpur enjoying cigars with my friends.

Rusdi arrived way past midnight and we talked. He wanted to know how much I wanted. I did not understand what he meant and told him so. He repeated the question and asked me how much I wanted to stop writing about Najib and Altantuya. Name my price.

The conversation went on for about half an hour, and to cut a long story short, I turned down the offer. The following morning I phoned a certain Chinese Datuk and requested him to make an appointment with Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

At 3.00pm, the Chinese Datuk and me, together with my wife, went to Tun Dr Mahathir’s office in Petronas at the Twin Towers where I related what happened the night before. Tun Dr Mahathir joked that I should have asked for RM20 million. “Then you can give me half.”

I never knew Tun Dr Mahathir as being a joker. I told Tun Dr Mahathir I have never received any money either to write or not write an article or expose in Malaysia Today, “Not even from you,” I added as I pointed to the Tun. He just smiled. I wanted the point to be driven home that I am not a prostitute. I think from that day the Tun and I strengthened our respect for each other. I then kissed Tun’s hand and left his office.

Tun Dr Mahathir phoned Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor and asked him to go and see Najib. Najib was then in Pekan so Tengku Adnan had to fly to Kuantan and drive down to Pekan. The message from Tun was short and sharp. “Don’t try to buy my boy. I know you tried to buy off Raja Petra.”

Within minutes I received a call from Rusdi. He was angry as hell. “I thought I could trust you. Why did you tell Tun about our meeting last night?” I told him that I told Tun so that Najib can be sent the message that I am not for sale, not for any amount of money. And I wanted no less than Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad to deliver this message to Najib, his ‘boy’, which he did through Tengku Adnan.

Yes, I am no prostitute. And all those Malays who justify joining Umno for business reasons, and those Chinese and Indians who say they support Barisan Nasional to cari makan, are worse than prostitutes. I despise them. They are shit. And I have no mercy for these people. They are scum of the earth.

Nothing and I mean nothing can justify you prostituting yourself.

Our God-given right of freedom of speech

But those who walked in the corridors of power resented Jesus and would allow him freedom of speech. So they plotted to kill Jesus so that they could silence him. Freedom of speech was regarded as dangerous because the rakyat might start believing all those ‘lies’ from Jesus.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

According to Selangor State EXCO member, Dr Xavier Jayakumar, 40 people were arrested in a ceramah in Taman Ria in Sungai Petani, Kedah. Dr Xavier said that the police, who fired water cannons and teargas into the crowd that included women and children, did not issue the mandatory warning beforehand.

Children coming out of a nearby tuition centre were also doused by the spray from the water cannon, as were the patrons in a nearby Chinese restaurant. Even the traders selling memorabilia and souvenirs were not spared the heavy-handedness of police who screamed like wailing banshees to expect ‘more aggressive action’ as they chased the people away.

Meanwhile, two opposition newspapers, Suara Keadilan and Harakah, have been suspended for three months – meaning, basically, that they can’t report about any problems in the ongoing Umno general assembly or play a role in the three by-elections early next month.

Former de facto Law Minister, Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, has hit out at the suspension of these two opposition party publications and said that Malaysians should denounce attempts to silence opposing voices, reported The Malaysian Insider.

Zaid said that he was not surprised by the suspension of the opposition party owned newspapers and added that the only way to prevent more such attempts was if more people would stand up and criticise the move.

“We’re all vulnerable,” he said. “Those who think they are safe are mistaken. No matter how much you try to play safe, you are never safe. If more and more people stand up, then the people in power will probably think twice.”

The government did not give an explanation for suspending the two opposition newspapers yesterday. However, it is widely perceived as a move to stifle the reach of opposition parties and bolster the chances of the ruling party in three critical by-elections next month.

In another move that is seen as an attempt to tighten its grip on the media landscape, Umno, the party that forms the backbone of the Barisan Nasional government, also barred six Internet-based media from covering its annual general assembly this week.

Further to that, Gobind Singh Deo has been suspended from Parliament for one year, with his salary and all privileges suspended as well during that same period. His father, Karpal Singh, faces sedition charges, to add to the many cases of sedition, criminal defamation, illegal assembly, and whatnot, that hundreds of others who are perceived as threats to Umno also face.

All this reminds me of Nazi Germany during the time of Adolf Hitler when the ‘black shirts’ were practically running the country at the point of the gun. That was more than 70 years ago. But nothing has changed much over 70 years as far as Malaysia is concerned. Time has almost stood still in Malaysia.

Malaysia too has its ‘black shirts’ a la Nazi Germany and these people are from Pekida. Pekida, a sort of militia, was formed soon after ‘May 13’ and is supposed to be the spearhead of the next race riots, if Malaysia ever does see another one. From the looks of things, though, Umno is bent on ensuring that there is.

In case you do not know, Pekida is promoting a ‘Say YES to ISA’ campaign. They want the Internal Security Act to be retained so that ‘Malay rights and privileges’ can be protected. And how would the ISA help protect ‘Malay rights and privileges’? Easy. All those who question ‘Malay rights and privileges’ can be detained without trial and sent to Kamunting where they can be silenced and will not be able to speak any longer.

In short, the ISA can stifle free speech and silence dissent. That, basically, is what the Umno-Pekida militia are saying. And that is Umno’s game plan. Now can you see why all these happenings have been going on the last few weeks? They want Malaysians to shut up and not complain so much.

Hey, I did not say Malaysia does not allow freedom of speech. Of course we have freedom of speech in Malaysia. It is freedom after speech that we don’t have. And this is what my grouse is all about.

God has allowed freedom of speech. In fact, God not only allowed freedom of speech. God has made it mandatory. And all those who oppose freedom of speech are going against God’s wishes. So they are God’s enemies. And enemies of God are my enemies as well. And their blood, therefore, becomes Halal, to quote what many Muslim scholars say.

Hey, I am not saying this. Muslim scholars are saying this. And I was told by the ustaz in Kamunting during my ISA detention that I must listen to the religious scholars. This is what the ustaz in Kamunting told me and they sent me to Kamunting so that I can listen to the ustaz and become rehabilitated.

So this is the newly rehabilitated Raja Petra Kamarudin speaking. I speak the words of the religious scholars who rehabilitated me in Kamunting. Those who oppose God are enemies of God and their blood is Halal, said the ustaz who were responsible for my rehabilitation. And those who stifle freedom of speech are enemies of God. So their blood is Halal.

The People of the Book believe in the story of Moses (Musa) and how God commanded him to go meet the Pharaoh and deliver God’s message to him. The message was simple. Moses was asked to abandon his evil and misguided ways and to allow his citizens the freedom to practice their religion as outlined by God.

But the Pharaoh would not listen. He was stubborn, just like Umno, because he thought that he was God and that Moses’ God was bullshit, just how the Umno people today think. God then commanded Moses and his people to leave the country so that they could be free to speak and free to practice their beliefs.

But the Pharaoh would not allow them to leave and he tried to stop them. So God drowned him in the Red sea just like how Umno was drowned in the Indian Ocean during the Permatang Pauh by-election and in the South China Sea during the Kuala Terengganu by-election.

Hey, I am just relating history and about what the People of the Book believe. I did not create all these stories. These things happened long before I started writing and I am just relating what happened 3,500 years ago in Egypt when I was still a very small boy.

Then, 1,500 years later, another man came along, according to the belief of the People of the Book. And this man was named Jesus (Isa). And God commanded Jesus to sort out those who walked in the corridors of power at that time. These people were all corrupt, cruel, oppressed the rakyat, discriminated against those less fortunate than them who happened to have come into this world through the ‘right’ pussy and were therefore the Bumiputeras of that era, and whatnot.

But those who walked in the corridors of power resented Jesus and would allow him freedom of speech. So they plotted to kill Jesus so that they could silence him. Freedom of speech was regarded as dangerous because the rakyat might start believing all those ‘lies’ from Jesus. This would mean the government would be in trouble if the rakyat started believing Jesus instead of believing those who walk in the corridors of power.

But what these people did not know is that Jesus spoke the word of God and they also did not know that God wanted Jesus to speak so that the truth can emerge and the corrupted government of the day could be exposed for what it is, a bullshit government, just like the Umno government of today. And God proved that those who stood on the side of truth would prevail while the bullshit government will eventually crumble to dust and will be blown by the wind to disappear into the desert, like what will happen to Umno in the not too distant future.

Then, about 600 years later, another man came along who faced the same problems as faced by Moses and Jesus. And this man, whom Time magazine labelled as the most influential man in history, was named Muhammad. And that is why many Malays like to name their sons Muhammad, because he was the most influential man in history.

Some even have two Muhammads in their name because their parents thought the more Muhammads they have in their name the more influential they will grow up to become. Sometimes, however, the more Muhammads they have in their name, the more corrupt they become. In fact, many Malays with two Muhammads in their name have become more like the Pharaoh than like the Prophet. Furthermore, people with names like Isa (Jesus) or Musa (Moses) are the biggest crooks in Malaysia.

Eventually, they plotted to kill Muhammad, like how they did to Jesus and Moses before that. This was because Muhammad, like Jesus and Moses before that, believed in freedom of speech and that an oppressive and corrupt government should be toppled. So the oppressive and corrupt government tried to silence them just to protect their interest.

This happened 3,500, 2,000 and 1,400 years ago. Thousands of years ago, the corrupt governments of that time also tried to stifle freedom of speech in an effort to ensure that the truth does not surface. And the People of the Book believe that all these people are enemies of God and that their blood is Halal. These are enemies of the truth, who are therefore also enemies of God, and they should not be allowed to live. They must die. And it is the rakyat’s duty to kill them, like how God did thousands of years ago to those who stifled freedom of speech and would not allow the truth to surface.

I am now persona non grata and living in exile: Whatever Raja Petra choose to be, the RAKYAT will always stand-by him!!

As a loyal subject of the Sultan of Selangor, I bow my head and sembah in an act of loyalty. And as I have refused to abide to the wishes of the Selangor Palace for me to apologise and retract what I wrote, I am prepared to exile myself from Selangor and never set foot in Selangor again.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Dear Peter,

Assalamualaikum,

It would appear that you have misinterpreted my letter of 14th March 2009 to you.

In all fairness to your readers, I urge you to post the full text of the letter in your Blog.

Thank you and Wassalam,

Yours,
Aunty Fuziah

***************************************

Dear Peter,

I am sending you this letter as you have not responded to my telephone calls nor to my telephone message inviting you to the house on Saturday afternoon to talk over family matters, particularly in connection with the open letter to Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin, which you posted in your Blog on 2nd March 2009.

As you already know, I admire your ability to write and express your thoughts, ideas and comments about events in your Blog, especially your mastery of the English language. I have also often reminded you that truth should always prevail in communicating these things to the public. It is also not for you to decide ‘what is clearly lawful’.

Had Tok Uda been alive, he would have considered the content and manner of what you wrote in the open letter to Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin, as a betrayal of the code of conduct and values which he had subscribed to, cherished and passed on to us. And for this to have come from his favourite grandson would certainly have made him collapse in a state of shock.

While Tok Uda, as a true Royalist had demanded loyalty and the upholding of family honour, tradition and adat, he had, on many occasions, also emphasised that we are entitled to our own personal views, accepted our sense and spirit of adventure, freedom of thought and action as you may well have known from the family history. But “RESPECT FOR THE LAWS OF THE COUNTRY” or “UPHOLDING LAW AND ORDER“ was his cardinal principle, to be dearly valued and respected by the family at all times.

I believe that in the case of the open letter, you have crossed the line. Such writings would appear to be seditious. Therefore, for the sake of Tok Uda, and, in upholding the family honour, I feel that the only discourse open is to diffuse/redeem this and for you to apologise through your Blog to the rulers and the public.

We all love you Peter in our own small ways, but I have this task to keep the family together, so help me Peter. And so help me too, Ya-Allah.

With my personal good wishes and love to you and Marina and the family,
I remain,

Yours,

Aunty Fuziah

***************************************

My Aunty, Raja Fuziah Tun Uda, was referring to my Open letter to Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin (http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/18734/84/). In that piece of 2nd March 2009, I wrote as follows:

Dear Datuk Seri,

I am going to make this short and sweet. No more cheong hei article from me.

They can lock the Perak State Assembly building if they want. The building is not important. If the building is inaccessible — say like there is a flood or an earthquake brings it down — does this mean the State Assembly can’t meet?

Of course it can. It can meet anywhere, not necessarily in that particular meeting.

Go find another meeting place, tonight, now itself, and hold the meeting there tomorrow. Pass a vote of confidence to support you as the Menteri Besar. Then pass all the other motions, including the motion to dissolve the Perak State Assembly. Then drive up to Bukit Chandan as soon as possible and inform Tuanku of the State Assembly’s decision.

If Tuanku refuses to comply with what is clearly lawful, then challenge him and, if necessary, trigger a Constitutional Crisis like never before seen in the 52-year history of this nation.

The people are ready. The next ‘revolution’ is not going to be a race riot a la May 13. It is going to be a class struggle. And I am with the Rakyat on this, never mind my so-called Royal background.

I speak as a Royal but speak for the Rakyat. And rest assured there are many other Royals who share my view. Don’t allow a handful of those who sit on the throne intimidate you into thinking that you are alone, representing the Rakyat, against the Monarchy. No, we are with you, as are many other Royals.

Grab the bull by the horns and bring it to its knees. And if this bull wears a crown so be it. The Rakyat have spoken. Don’t back down now. Go all the way or forever lose that advantage. And if you fail to go all the way, the Rakyat will never forgive you and you will lose our support till the end of time.

Daulat Tuanku. Daulat Tuanku. Daulat Tuanku.

Patek yang hina sembah Tuanku dan memohon perkenan agar Tuanku jangan kecewakan Rakyat. Hasrat Rakyat ialah untuk mencari kebenaran dan keadilan. Biarlah ini juga menjadi hasrat Tuanku.

Daulat Tuanku. Daulat Tuanku. Daulat Tuanku.

On 14th March, my Aunty sent me the e-mail above and my response to that can be read in the following piece called Raja adil raja disembah, raja zalim raja disanggah (http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/19258/84/), which I wrote on 16th March.

At my Aunty’s request, I have published both e-mails. My stand, however, remains the same. I see no need to apologise to His Highness the Sultan of Perak, as I do not feel I have acted in a treasonous or seditious manner. I have already explained why I feel that way in my article of 16th March, so there is no necessity for me to repeat what I have already said.

I have been told by palace sources that the government wants to arrest me and charge me for treason. My lawyers have advised me that no such law exists. Nevertheless, they can charge me for ‘waging war against the King’, like how they charged the Al Maunah group — who were subsequently found guilty and soon after that hanged in the Sungai Buloh Prison in October 2006.

My reluctance to apologise for what I wrote would certainly be interpreted as an act of defiance on my part. The government will also take the view that my two Internal Security Act detentions in 2001 and 2008 have not ‘done the trick’ and have instead made me more ‘difficult’. This would mean Internal Security Act detention is ‘wasted’ on me. The only way to silence me would be to charge me for ‘treason’ and then send me to the gallows to end my life.

I have no reason to believe they would not secure a conviction. My three ongoing trials and the way they keep ‘moving the goalposts’ every time they appear to be losing their case against me only strengthens this belief. I have written about this many times so I do not need, again, to go through the points of not only my concerns but that of my lawyers as well.

I do not believe that apologising, as my Aunty has asked me to, will change anything. The government will not spare me just because I have apologised. The only way I can be spared would be for me to renounce the opposition and announce that I am joining Umno. I would be expected to explain that I had erred in supporting the opposition and did not see, at the time, that the opposition is wrong and has been misleading Malaysians. Maybe, and I repeat, maybe only then will the government spare me.

But I will not do that. I can’t do that. I have come so far, 30 years to be exact — the last ten years through the Reformasi Movement — to now change my stand. Why would I take the trouble of spending more than half my life opposing the government and then, towards the end of my life, do a U-turn, especially if the purpose in doing so is to settle the many legal problems I am now facing?

I never intended to bring shame to my family, in particular to smear the name of my late Grandfather, Raja Sir Tun Uda. If my family feels embarrassed about my actions I apologise for that. But I offer no excuses for what I did. While I apologise for bringing shame to my family, I do not apologise for what I have done and will stand firm in defence of my actions.

I understand my family would now have to disown me. I can never be regarded as the grandson of Raja Sir Tun Uda — or a grandson of Tengku Badariah binti al-Marhum Sultan Ala’uddin Suleiman Shah of the great-grandson of His Royal Highness Sultan Ala’uddin Suleiman Shah ibni Raja Muda Musa. As much as I am proud of my heritage, my love for my family is more important. And if I have to save my family by becoming an outcast then this is what I must do for the sake of my family.

Yes, I am the grandson of Raja Sir Tun Uda as well as the great-grandson of Sultan Ala’uddin Suleiman Shah. But I am a rakyat’s man. Just because of my royal lineage I can’t take the side of the palace when the rakyat has been wronged. Justice demands I stand on the side of truth. My personal affiliations and family loyalty can’t stand in the way of truth and justice.

I understand I am a Raja first and all others second. And, as a Raja, I am expected to take the stand as a Royalist and defend the palace whenever it is under attack. But that is just it. I did do that in the 1980s when Umno attacked the Rulers. Anwar Ibrahim, then, was in Umno and I turned my back on Anwar when he sided with Umno against the Rulers. I ‘disowned’ Anwar in spite of my earlier support for him when he did not defend the Rulers from Umno.

But I defended the Rulers and turned my back on Anwar not because I am a Raja and therefore must take the stand as a Royalist. I did so because the Rulers were being unfairly attacked and Umno, through the mainstream media, was spinning lies about the so-called misconduct of the Rulers. No doubt, some of the Rulers had misbehaved. But this does not warrant attacking all the Rulers, in particular those who were innocent and had done no wrong.

I paid a heavy price for that. I was then living and doing business in Terengganu. Umno Terengganu, at the behest of the Menteri Besar, went out of its way to bring me down. Eventually, my business was brought to ruin. Umno approached my foreign partners and told them that as long as they had Raja Petra as their partner their business prospects in Malaysia would be very bleak. After awhile, when they realised they were being blacklisted just because they had me as their partner, they ended our partnership and took new partners ‘recommended’ by Umno.

By 1994, I could hardly do any business anywhere in Malaysia. My name was untouchable. The very mention of my name meant you were doomed. The only option I had left was to close down all my businesses and retire, at the age of 44, into my new life as a writer. Umno ‘advised’ me to leave Terengganu, which I did, for my safety and that of my family.

I started writing for the cycling and motorcycling columns of The Star in the early 1990s. In 1994, when I had left Terengganu, I started my own website and wrote about political, social and economic issues. My time was spent staying at home churning out an article a day on various issues. My wife baked cookies, curry-puff and whatnot, which I went around on my motorcycle to sell.

At one stage we were so tight for cash we could no longer even buy new clothes. My wife had to be contented with hand-me-downs from my daughter and, for me, hand-me-downs from my son-in-law. To put food on the table (we ate once a day; dinner only) my wife sold rice in front of the mosque in Sungai Buloh.

One Friday, my wife could not sell even one plate of rice. She sat there for hours waiting for customers but no one bought any. I told me wife I needed to go home for a short while to write an article and left her in front of the mosque all alone. I lied. I just could not stand seeing her sit there with an anxious look on her face, wondering if she was going to sell anything that day. I went home and had a good cry. I cried like a baby, wondering if I had done the right thing in opposing the government and subject my family to this very uncertain future.

Yes, I paid the price for my ‘folly’ in opposing the government. I took a stand and suffered for it. But I never once went to my family to tell them of my problems. My family knew me as a successful businessman with plenty of money. The truth is, I was broke and could not afford to even feed or clothe my family. I suffered in silence. My family never knew what we were going through.

When the situation demanded it, I took the side of the Rulers against Umno. I even turned my back on my friends in Umno, people like Anwar Ibrahim who later became the Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia. Those around Anwar became rich. I too could have become rich. But I chose to be poor on grounds of principle. I never sold my principles just to end my financial predicament.

When they sacked and eventually jailed Anwar, I rallied to his side. Yes, Anwar who had wronged the Rulers, as far as I was concerned. And for that I suffered arrest and detention, to add to my financial predicament, which was still unresolved at that time.

When I said in my 16th March 2009 article that I have earned the right to take the Rulers to task if they err or misbehave, I meant it. And I knew what I was saying when I wrote that. I had never shied away from pain. Even when the pain became unbearable I stood my ground. I just sneaked away and cried. But I never sold out my principles.

Today, my family is unhappy with me because I have acted treasonously towards the Sultan of Perak. Maybe, maybe I am treasonous. But I do not see it as treason. I am of the opinion that the Sultan has erred. And that is why I wanted Nizar to hold his ground and not back down — which he did. And, most importantly, I have earned that right, the hard way, to take the Rulers to task if they err. And, this, I did.

As a loyal subject of the Sultan of Selangor (my late father has a certificate Kerabat Selangor), I bow my head and sembah in an act of loyalty. And as I have refused to abide to the wishes of the Selangor Palace for me to apologise and retract what I wrote, I am prepared to exile myself from Selangor and never set foot in Selangor again. That is what is expected from a loyal Kerabat Selangor who has acted treasonously (durhaka) and has incurred the wrath of the Sultan and the Selangor Royal Family.

As of today, I am persona non grata in Selangor and will live in exile outside Selangor. My decision is final and my stand is firm. There is not a soul on earth who can persuade me to change my stand.

Daulat Tuanku.

Krisis Perlembagaan 1993: umno berDERHAKA, Berpesta MAKI HAMUN Raja-Raja – Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah on the Constitutional Crisis of 1993

This is not the first constitutional crisis in which the rights of the Rulers have been touched upon. Today’s crisis in Perak is about the legitimacy of the process by which a new state government has been formed in Perak. It’s not about the status of the Rulers.

In comparison, the Constitutional Crisis of 1993 arose from an ugly confrontation between Umno and the Rulers over a question that had direct and profound implications on their sovereignty and that of the Yang diPertuan Agong. For good reason, the Head of State in most countries may not be prosecuted in an ordinary court of law. In 1993, the government campaigned to remove this immunity through amendments to the Constitution.

I opposed these amendments.

In the event, the Rulers and Parliament were railroaded by the government of the day and the amendments duly passed. These are the very same amendments, which, today, make it legal for a Ruler to be prosecuted. Mr Karpal Singh, though I disagree with him, was acting well within his rights that an Umno-led government enacted in 1993 when he earlier proposed to sue DYMM the Sultan of Perak.

Let’s reflect on this irony. Does Umno serve the Rulers more genuinely by upholding and protecting the Constitution, which guarantees their status, or by histrionic displays tuned for the coming Umno elections?

This bears upon the question of the kind of leaders, and the kind of party, we want. Do we want to be led by those who can understand and address the foundational issues facing our society today, and shall we have leaders capable of forging “mutual consent by debate and discussion, inquiries and elections”, or shall we again be landed with those whose main talent is to strike poses that people outside a small, insecure circle in Umno, and particularly Malaysia’s internet generation, find ridiculous?

Was greater harm done to the sovereignty of the Rulers in 1993 through Parliament or a week ago on the streets of Perak?

And is today’s Umno, with its inconsistent adherence to the rule of law, its inconstant respect for the key institutions of our country, a credible or effective defender of the Rulers and of the laws upholding this institution?

Or do we actually harm what we claim to protect?

Above is a video recording in two parts of the speech I made in Parliament in 1993 opposing the amendments to the Constitution.

I stand by my argument.

***************************************

Article 10 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia

(1)Subject to Clauses (2), (3) and (4) –
(a) every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression;
(b) all citizens have the right to assemble peaceably and without arms;
(c) all citizens have the right to form associations.

(2) Parliament may by law impose –
(a) on the rights conferred by paragraph (a) of Clause (1), such restrictions as it deems necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of the Federation or any part thereof, friendly relations with other countries, public order or morality and restrictions designed to protect the privileges of Parliament or of any Legislative Assembly or to provide against contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to any offence;
(b) on the right conferred by paragraph (b) of Clause (1), such restrictions as it deems necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of the Federation or any part thereof, or public order;
(c) on the right conferred by paragraph (c) of Clause (1), such restrictions as it deems necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of the Federation or any part thereof, public order or morality.

(3) Restrictions on the right to form associations conferred by paragraph (c) of Clause (1) may also be imposed by any law relating to labour or education.

(4) In imposing restrictions in the interest of the security of the Federation or any part thereof or public order under Clause (2) (a), Parliament may pass law prohibiting the questioning of any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative established or protected by the provisions of Part III, article 152, 153 or 181 otherwise than in relation to the implementation thereof as may be specified in such law.

***************************************

Article 10[1][a] of the Federal Constitution provides that every Malaysian citizen shall have the right of free speech and expression. Taken in isolation, it appears to be a guarantee of that right. Sadly, as we all know, the guarantee is not absolute. Starting with Article 10[2][a] and [4] of the Federal Constitution, we are immediately reminded that any such guarantee is, in fact, illusory. Furthermore, restrictions to free speech are enshrined in legislation, such as the Sedition Act 1948, Printing Presses and Publication Act 1984 and the Internal Security Act 1960.

The 1983 Constitutional Crisis involving the Rulers and the 1993 constitutional amendments to, inter alia, remove the personal immunity of the Rulers clearly demonstrates that a new ethos has evolved during the Mahathir Administration that permits the discussion of matters that involve the Rulers.

Chin Thye Choo

***************************************

The issue is simple. Article 10 of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia guarantees all citizens the right to freedom of speech, assembly and association. However, this same Article 10 allows the government to take away that right when deemed necessary. In short, you do not have automatic freedom of speech, assembly and association. The government decides when you can and cannot have it.

If you were to note what Tengku Razaleigh said in his 1993 speech in Parliament (in the videos above), there are certain things that can’t be questioned. These are issues related to the Rulers, Malay rights and privileges, the National Language, and Islam. Even two-thirds of Parliament can’t change this. The only people who can change this would be the Rulers’ Conference. Even then it must be a unanimous decision by the Rulers’ Conference. A simple majority will not be sufficient. Just one dissenting voice from one of the Rulers is good enough to block any move to make these changes.

It therefore becomes unlawful for anyone to challenge the position of the Rulers or the position of Islam and the National Language or to challenge Malay rights and privileges.

Nevertheless, in 1993, ten years after the First Constitutional Crisis, Parliament removed the immunity of the Rulers. This matter was heavily debated at that time and was opposed by Tengku Razaleigh. However, Umno, at the behest of the Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, wanted the Rulers’ wings clipped. So Parliament passed the law that now subject the Rulers to prosecution and court action, which prior to 1993 was not possible.

Yes, Umno removed the Rulers’ immunity. And, as Tengku Razaleigh said, it was done after an orgy of Ruler-bashing (pesta mencaci raja-raja, as he put it). The mainstream media went to town in revealing the excesses, transgressions and misconduct of the Rulers to the extent that even the international media picked up the issue, which made a mockery of Malaysia’s Rulers.

The Rulers were run into the ground and driven through the mud. They were defiled and insulted. If an opinion poll had been conducted at that time, probably 90% of Malaysians, across the board, would have opted for the abolishment of the Monarchy and for Malaysia to be transformed into a republic.

As Tengku Razaleigh said, it was Umno who had harmed the Monarchy beyond repair. The Monarchy was no longer perceived as the noble institution as it once was. It was now viewed as a joke and something that Malaysia could do without.

Ghafar Baba, the then Deputy Prime Minister, said there is nothing wrong in criticising the Rulers. In fact, the Rulers should be criticised considering that many of them had misbehaved. What can’t be argued is whether the Monarchy should be abolished and the country turned into a republic. That would be seditious, said Ghafar. Everything else is fair game.

A nationwide campaign was launched to bring the Rulers to their knees. The mainstream media ran expose after expose about the excesses, transgressions and misconduct of the Rulers. By the end of it all, very few Malaysians had respect for the Monarchy and many openly said that it is time for the Monarchy to go.

State Assemblies debated the issue of the ‘corrupt’ Rulers and how the Rulers were beneficiaries to state land, timber concessions, and government contracts. ‘Tengku’ Wong was exposed as the ‘Ali Baba’ front man for the Sultan of Pahang. ‘Tengku’ Yong was exposed as the same for the late Sultan of Terengganu. The mainstream media ran photographs of the lavish palaces in Penang owned by the Sultans of Selangor and Kedah (which was all bullshit, of course, because the Sultans did not own these properties). Exposes of pig farms, gambling debts, lavish lifestyles, and whatnot, were done, all linked to the Rulers of the various states.

The government impounded the Sultan of Kelantan’s Lamborghini on allegations he had refused to pay the import duty on the car — when in actual fact he was exempted from paying tax. But even when it was later proven he never avoided paying the import duty, the damage was still done. Malaysians were aghast that the Sultans were each buying dozens of multi-million Ringgit sports cars and did not have to pay any tax like the rest of the rakyat.

Heck, after seeing what the mainstream media revealed, even I became ashamed to admit I am from the Royal Family. Umno had totally and absolutely demolished the Rulers. Even Malays were openly condemning the Rulers.

Yes, when it suits Umno, there is absolute and total freedom to attack the Rulers, run them into the ground, and drive them through the mud. They even change the law in Parliament to remove the immunity of the Rulers so that they not only can be attacked but can also be dragged to court as well. But when they want to silence the opposition, they declare that criticising the Rulers is a crime.

I was informed they are considering charges of treason against me for that open letter to Nizar, which was posted in Malaysia Today. The Al Maunah group was also charged for treason. If I am found guilty, the sentence for treason is death by hanging — like what happened to the Al Maunah people who were hanged in the Sungai Buloh Prison in August 2006.

Yes, that’s right. They can’t get me under the Internal Security Act or the Sedition Act or for criminal defamation. So now they want to hang me for treason for writing an open letter to Nizar asking him to defy the Sultan even if it triggers a Constitutional Crisis in Perak. However, history has shown that Umno did more than what I could ever do to the institution of the Monarchy — and we have this on record.

Raja adil raja disembah, raja zalim raja disanggah

Yes, we speak out against the Sultans — we, who defend the Monarchy from its enemies. But we speak not because we are treacherous. We speak because we love the Monarchy and wish to save it from itself.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Malay customs and culture can be very complicating indeed, even for Malays themselves. From an early and impressionable age, Malays are taught that Allah is above all else and anything else comes second to Allah. Islam, therefore, must be the guiding light for all those who profess Islam as their religion.

However, in that same breath, Malays will say they are Malays first and all else second. This is certainly contradictory. Islam propagates non-race. Malays propagate Malay Nationalism. Each is incompatible with the other. How do you reconcile Islam with nationalism when Islam is opposed to nationalism and declares such concepts as haram (forbidden)?

Probably not a single Malay would be unaware of the Hang Tuah, Hang Jebat, Tun Perak and Melaka Sultan story. While almost all would agree on the storyline, the jury is out as to who is the hero and who is the villain in that story. Some view Hang Tuah as the hero and Hang Jebat as the villain. Others would view the Sultan as the villain, Hang Jebat as the hero, and Hang Tuah as being just plain stupid. However, while the argument is focused on just three personalities, very few even talk about Tun Perak, the most crucial player in this entire scenario, and whose role made whatever happened possible.

In other words, because Tun Perak defied the Sultan’s orders, Hang Jebat died and Hang Tuah lived. If, on the other hand, Tun Perak had followed the Sultan’s orders, then Hang Tuah would have died and Hang Jebat would have assassinated the Sultan. Tun Perak was the man who changed the course of history. But his role is very seldom discussed. Those most talked about are Hang Tuah, Hang Jebat and the Sultan of Melaka.

And this is what makes the Malays most complicating animals. Why are the Malays arguing about Hang Tuah and Hang Jebat and about who should be declared the hero and who the villain? Should not the focus of the Malays be on Tun Perak? Tun Perak defied the Sultan. Is he therefore a hero for daring to do so or is he a villain for not carrying out the Sultan’s orders?

The Malays would rather not tread into this most dicey territory. If Tun Perak were to be declared a hero then Hang Jebat would also become a hero since both were of the same mind that Hang Tuah should not be killed. If, on the other hand, Tun Perak were to be declared a villain for disobeying the Sultan’s orders, then Hang Jebat would also become a villain because he too opposed the Sultan on the issue of whether Hang Jebat should be killed.

This means Tun Perak’s status in the Malay mind — whether he was a hero or a villain — would also affect Hang Jebat’s status. Furthermore, how can Tun Perak be a villain even though he defied the Sultan’s orders when by doing so he actually saved the Sultan’s life? So this is something the Malays would rather not discuss.

Some members of my family are most upset that I wrote that open letter to Nizar, the ousted Pakatan Rakyat Menteri Besar of Perak. (http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/18734/84/). They are of the opinion I have committed treason against the Sultan of Perak. No doubt the Sultan can’t order my execution like in the days of old. But I can certainly be hauled up on sedition charges, which is what I am already facing anyway.

My reply would be the same as Hang Jebat’s famous quotation: Raja adil Raja disembah, Raja zalim Raja disanggah. If Hang Jebat is a villain in the eyes of my family, then I suppose that too makes me a villain; so be it. But maybe even my own family does not know of my loyalty to the institution of the Monarchy, mainly because they remained silent and refused to surface more than 20 years ago during the 1980s Constitutional Crisis.

I said I am loyal to the institution of the Monarchy. This does mean I will also offer blind loyalty to the Monarchs. To the institution, yes! To the Monarchs, no! I will only be loyal to the Monarchs when they uphold the sanctity of the institution of the Monarchy and not otherwise. There is a difference.

I have been told I must offer a public apology to the Sultan of Perak as well as to the public at large for that open letter to Nizar. I’m afraid I can’t do that. And I can’t do that because I have earned, the hard way, my right to take the Monarchs to task on their errors and wrongdoings.

More than 20 years ago, the Monarchy came under attack from Umno. Most Malays; my family included; kept very silent. No one came forward to speak in defence of the Monarchy. I, however, wrote to the Selangor Palace and requested an audience.

The long and short of it all: I met the Royal Households of Selangor, Terengganu, Kedah and Perlis. I was not able to meet the Royal Household of Perak but word was sent back that although we were not able to personally meet I can take it that Perak was with us on the issue and will undoubtedly endorse the decision of the brother-Rulers.

The issue was simple. Umno was attacking the Monarchy and there was a danger Malaysia would be transformed into a Republic. Our aim was to find a solution on how to defend the Monarchy and ensure that it is not abolished, whereby all the Rulers would be forced off the throne.

I am not able to reveal details of the meetings and about what transpired. Suffice to say the Rulers agreed to the plan but they would have to leave it to us to implement. The Rulers can’t be seen as being involved in politics. It would be extremely dangerous to implicate the Rulers in any move to fight back as this may incur the wrath of Umno and doom the Monarchy for good.

Needless to say, if the plan backfires or we get caught, the Rulers will not be able to come to our aid. They would not even be able to admit that any meeting ever took place. We were entirely on our own. If it succeeds, the Rulers’ position would be secure. If it fails, we would have to take the fall, and a most heavy fall at that.

We then launched our counter-attacks. We did certain things to garner the support of the rakyat. Umno soon realised they could not get rid of the Rulers that easily and thereafter backed off and left the Rulers alone. But they had to create the impression they had won. So they introduced certain new ‘rules’ that gave an impression the Rulers have lost their immunity while leaving the Constitution intact. The recent developments in Perlis, Terengganu, Selangor and Perak prove the Rulers have lost nothing.

I made it very clear I was not doing this for the sake of the Rulers. I was doing it for the sake of the institution of the Monarchy. I did not wish to save the Rulers. I wished to save the Monarchy. And from thereon the Rulers had better learn how to behave, I added. The Rulers are their own worst enemies. It is their misconduct that allows Umno to attack them. If they behave then Umno would have nothing to use against them.

I also made it clear that any misconduct by one Ruler put all the Rulers at risk. Even if just one Ruler commits a crime, Umno would call for the blood of all the Rulers. We must, therefore, make sure that all Rulers behave themselves. And we shall attack any Ruler who misbehaves so that the entire institution of the Monarchy can be protected.

That was more than 20 years ago. The Rulers, then, were under attack. So they agreed that the Rulers should not be above criticism. And if any Ruler misbehaves then he should be taken to task. And he should be taken to task because what he does endangers not only himself but all Rulers as well.

Today, I hold the Rulers to what they agreed more than 20 years ago. 20 years ago the Rulers panicked when they thought their days were numbered. But we came forward to offer to save them. And we presented the plan and they agreed to it. And we, in turn, agreed that if anything adverse happens we would not implicate the Rulers but would instead take the fall even if it meant our deaths.

Today, I have been asked to make a public apology to the Sultan of Perak. But my family that wants me to apologise did not surface more than 20 years ago when we put our safety on the line in defence of the Monarchy.

I have earned my right to criticise the Rulers. I came to the defence of the Monarchy in its hour of need. The Rulers agreed that their position was under threat. And they agreed that we would implement certain plans to garner the support of the rakyat in our effort to ensure that the Monarchy remains intact and Malaysia will not get transformed into a Republic.

Yes, who is the villain? Was it Hang Jebat or Hang Tuah? Or maybe it was Tun Perak. Whatever it may be, the three were just acting in the service of the Sultan. But the Sultan forgets very easily. Those who serve him are condemned to death. But he who the Sultan condemns to death always resurfaces to defend him in his hour of need. And what would the villain be then? Would he still be a villain or would he be the Sultan’s saviour?

History has taught us nothing. Yes, we speak out against the Sultans — we, who defend the Monarchy from its enemies. But we speak not because we are treacherous. We speak because we love the Monarchy and wish to save it from itself.

There are not many Monarchies left in this world. Even Australia wants to dispose of its Queen. About half the Monarchs live in Malaysia, which has ten. Should we stand by and do nothing and see the demise of the institution of the Monarchy? Or should we speak out and run the risk of treason in the interest of saving the Monarchy?

I chose to speak. I have earned that right to speak. But I do not speak the words of treason. I do not want to see the Republic of Malaysia replace the Constitutional Monarchy that we have now. But as Malaysia grows and our population exceeds 30 million in time to come, how can we stop the tide? And what if the tide turns into a Tsunami? Can a mere ten Monarchs resist the will of 30 million?

The Monarchs need to demonstrate it is the Monarchy of the rakyat — Raja bersama rakyat. Raja adil Raja disembah, Raja zalim Raja disanggah. That was so 500 years ago. That is still so today. So let me play that most unwanted role of taking the Monarchs to task. But I do so only as a wakeup call. Yes, he who bells the cat becomes dinner for the day. But he suffers so that others can be protected. That is the fate of he who bells the cat.

***************************************

Bendahara Paduka Raja Tun Perak (died 1498) was the fifth and most famous bendahara, a Malay rank similar to a prime minister, of the Sultanate of Malacca. He served under four sultans (Sultan Muzzafar Shah, Sultan Mansur Shah, Sultan Alauddin Riayat Shah and Sultan Mahmud Shah) from 1456 to 1498. Early in his life, Tun Perak was a soldier-statesman for Malaccan rulers. In 1445, he led the Malaccan army to victory by defeating Siamese invaders. As a result, he was made bendahara in 1456.

Tun Perak was the son of Malacca’s first bendahara, Sri Wak Raja Tun Perpatih Besar. In 1445, he was appointed as Malacca’s representative in Klang. Tun Perak was then appointed bendahara in 1456 after he upset the Siamese attack against Malacca. He stopped another Siamese invasion in 1456 as well.

Tun Perak was also instrumental in colonising Pahang, Terengganu, Johor, Riau, Lingga, Bengkalis, Karimon, Rokan, Siak, Kampar, Jambi, Inderagiri and Aru. The rulers of these governments converted to Islam due to Malaccan influence.

Tun Perak was very loyal towards the Malaccan Sultanate. When his son, Tun Besar, was killed by Sultan Mahmud Shah’s son, Raja Muhammad, due to a misunderstanding, he did not seek revenge against the Sultan. Instead, he requested Raja Muhammad to be crowned elsewhere. The sultan honoured Tun Perak’s request. Raja Muhammad was subsequently made a sultan in Pahang.

He died in 1498 and was replaced by his younger brother Tun Perpatih Putih. – by Wikipedia

References

1. Ahmad Fauzi bin Mohd Basri, Mohd Fo’ad bin Sakdan and Azami bin Man, 2004. Sejarah Tingkatan 1, Kuala Lumpur, DBP.

2. http://sejarahmalaysia.pnm.my/

***************************************

Hang Tuah’s illustrious career as an admiral or laksamana includes tales of his absolute and unfaltering loyalty to his Sultan, some of which are chronicled in Sejarah Melayu (the semi-historical Malay Annals) and Hikayat Hang Tuah (a romantic collection of tales involving Hang Tuah).

Hang Tuah became the Sultan’s constant aide, accompanying him on official visits to foreign countries. On one such visit to Majapahit, Taming Sari, a famous Majapahit warrior, challenged Hang Tuah to a duel. After a brutal fight, Hang Tuah emerged the winner and the ruler of Majapahit bestowed upon him Taming Sari’s kris or weapon. The Taming Sari kris was named after its original owner, and was purported to be magical, empowering its owner with invincibility. It is said to be the source of Hang Tuah’s alleged supernatural abilities.

Hang Tuah also acted as the Sultan’s ambassador, travelling on his Sultan’s behalf to allied countries. Another story concerning Hang Tuah’s legendary loyalty to the Sultan is found in the Hikayat Hang Tuah, and involves his visit to Inderaputa, in Pahang during one such voyage. The Sultan sent Hang Tuah to Pahang with the task of persuading the princess Tun Teja, who was already engaged, to become the Sultan’s companion. Tun Teja fell under the impression that Hang Tuah had come to persuade her to marry him, not the Sultan, and agreed to elope with him to Melaka. It was only during the voyage home that Hang Tuah revealed his deception to Tun Teja.

The Hikayat Hang Tuah and Sejarah Melayu each carry different accounts of this incident. The Hikayat records that it was Hang Tuah who persuaded Tun Teja to elope with him, thus deceiving her. Sejarah Melayu, however, claims that it was another warrior, Hang Nadim, who deceived Tun Teja.

Perhaps the most famous story in which Hang Tuah is involved is his fight with his closest childhood companion, Hang Jebat. Hang Tuah’s deep loyalty to and popularity with the Sultan led to rumours being circulated that Hang Tuah was having an illicit affair with one of the Sultan’s concubines. The Sultan sentenced Hang Tuah to death without trial for the alleged offence. The death sentence was never carried out, however, because Hang Tuah’s executioner, the Bendahara, went against the Sultan’s orders and hid Hang Tuah in a remote region of Melaka.

Believing that Hang Tuah was dead, murdered unjustly by the Sultan he served, Hang Jebat avenged his friend’s death. Hang Jebat’s revenge allegedly became a palace killing spree or furious rebellion against the Sultan (sources differ as to what actually occurred). It remains consistent, however, that Hang Jebat wreaked havoc onto the royal court, and the Sultan was unable to stop him, as none of the Sultan’s warriors dared challenge the more ferocious and skilled Hang Jebat. The Bendahara then informed the Sultan that the only man able to stop Hang Jebat, Hang Tuah, was still alive. The Bendahara recalled Hang Tuah from his hiding place and the warrior was given full amnesty by the Sultan and instructed to kill Hang Jebat. After seven gruelling days of fighting, Hang Tuah was able to kill Hang Jebat.

It is notable that the two main sources of Hang Tuah’s life differ, yet again, on the details of his life. According the Hikayat Hang Tuah, it was Hang Jebat who avenged his friend’s death, only to be killed by the same friend. According to Sejarah Melayu, however, it was Hang Kasturi. The Sejarah Melayu is the more historical account, but the Hang Jebat story, as the more romantic tale, remains more popular. – by Wikipedia

***************************************

Hang Jebat was the closest companion of the legendary Malay hero Hang Tuah. He is well known for his vengeful rebellion against the Malacca Sultan whom he served. After Hang Tuah was sentenced to death, Hang Jebat was conferred by the Sultan of Malacca with the Taming Sari, a sacred kris formerly used by Hang Tuah. Believing that Hang Tuah was unjustly murdered by the Sultan he served, Hang Jebat turned against the Sultan to avenge his friend’s death. No one knew, however, except the Bendahara who went against the Sultans orders and hid Hang Tuah in a remote region of Malacca that he was still alive.

With the kris in his possession, Hang Jebat became invincible and there was not one person in the entire Malacca Empire who was capable of killing him. Hang Jebat’s revenge had forced the Sultan of Malacca to abandon his palace. Jebat seduced the women of the palace and spent his days eating, drinking and sporting with them. All the warriors sent by the Sultan to challenge him were killed. Even his friend Hang Kasturi was driven out when Hang Jebat realised that the other man hadn’t come to join him in merrymaking.

After learning from the Bendahara that Hang Tuah was still alive, The Sultan had him recall Hang Tuah and gave Hang Tuah full amnesty. The Sultan then ordered Hang Tuah to kill Hang Jebat. Being unquestioningly loyal to the Sultan, Hang Tuah obeyed the Sultans biddings and went on to challenge Hang Jebat. After fighting in a battle that lasted seven days, Hang Tuah eventually managed to reclaim the Taming Sari by tricking Hang Jebat. Although stabbed by Tuah, Hang Jebat bandaged his wounds and ran amok in the city square for three days, killing thousands of people before retreating to Tuah’s house and dying in his friend’s arms.

Hang Jebat’s famous quote was “Raja adil raja disembah, raja zalim raja disanggah” which literally means: “A fair king is a king to obey, a cruel king is a king to fight against”.

After the fight, The Sultan ordered his men to tear down, burn and throw the ashes of the house into the sea. Two months later, when a lady of the Bendahara’s retinue gave birth to Jebat’s son, the sultan ordered Hang Tuah to throw the baby into the sea as well. Instead, the laksamana entrusted the child, Hang Kadim, to the Bendahara. – by Wikipedia

In case you have forgotten: a rebuttal to Nazri Aziz

With press censorship and plummeting newspaper sales, the Internet has become the main source of information. Students are accessing the net, then distributing their printouts, demonstrations are organised via the net, then within hours of the demonstration the action is posted on the net. The censored press is starting to react, being more adventurous in what they dare to publish. The corrupt authorities are finding that they are powerless to act. Such is the power of the net that it has become a case study in itself as to how to counter corrupt governments. – Amnesty International, September 1999

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

First, read this report from the Star today:

A-G, IGP cleared in Anwar ‘black eye’ case

Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan and Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail were cleared of fabricating evidence in the Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim “black eye” incident of a decade ago.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz told the Dewan Rakyat Wednesday that the two were cleared of any wrong-doing after a two-month investigation conducted by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

Anwar had accused both Abdul Gani and Musa of tampering with evidence in an investigation into an alleged beating he received from then IGP Abdul Rahim Noor while in police custody in 1998.

“Since this case is sensitive and of high profile, the MACC had suggested a three-person independent panel be appointed as deputy public prosecutors to look into the case,” Nazri in response to a question by Gobind Singh Deo (DAP-Puchong).

The independent panel was made up of former Federal Court judges Datuk Abdul Kadir Sulaiman and Datuk Wira Mohd Noor Ahmad, and retired Court of Appeal judge Datuk Mohd Noor Abdullah.

In reply to Gobind’s supplementary question on when the decision was made, Nazri said that the case was investigated on July 2 last year and was completed two months after that.

“Since we need to consider several things, we took a bit more time to announce the decision so that it does not create doubt among people,” he said, adding that that was why he decided to reply on Wednesday.

In reply to DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang’s question on who was the dissenting voice, Nazri said he could not give the information and majority decision obviously means a 2-1 decision.

He added that the decision for the IGP was 3-0.

Gobind had been asking why the result of the investigation was not officially announced.

MACC Chief Commissioner Datuk Seri Ahmad Said Hamdan had announced the results in an interview with Sunday Star on March 1.

Later Wednesday, Anwar expressed his “disgust” at the outcome of the probe, claiming that the evidence against the IGP and A-G was “strong and solid.”

*****************************

Okay, after having read that, now read this piece from Amnesty International circa September 1999:

The Detention and Brutal Treatment of Anwar Ibrahim

20 September 1998, in the closing days of one of the worst Commonwealth Games, on the eve of the Queen’s visit to Malaysia, 30,000 people took to the streets of Kuala Lumpur calling for democratic reform and the removal of the corrupt prime minister Mahathir bin Mohamad. The police and security forces reacted with violence, weighing in with tear gas and clubs to clear the streets.

One of the star speakers was Anwar Ibrahim, less than a month before, Finance Minister, Deputy Prime Minister and heir apparent to the corrupt Mahathir bin Mohamad. After decades of subservience, Anwar Ibrahim did the unthinkable and spoke out against the corrupt Mahathir bin Mohamad, the mismanagement of the economy, the cronyism, the corruption. Anwar Ibrahim was sacked (2 September 1998) and the corrupt Mahathir bin Mohamad ran a smear campaign to discredit him. After speaking at the rally, Anwar Ibrahim walked home to the resounding cheers of his supporters. At his home he gave a press conference. Paramilitary police kicked in the door and took him away. He wasn’t to be seen again in public for ten days when he made a brief court appearance.

Anwar Ibrahim was beaten into unconsciousness on the evening of his arrest (20 September 1998). Only a few miles away, the Queen and Robin Cook (UK Foreign Secretary) supped and dined with a dictator, toasted the end of the Commonwealth Games. Neither spoke out. The UK has an ‘ethical foreign policy’.

Since the sacking of Anwar Ibrahim there has been daily street protests.

The fabricated charges laid against Anwar Ibrahim were corruption and perverse sexual practices. Two star witnesses against Anwar Ibrahim were his friends who had admitted to participating with him in perverse sexual acts, and had been found guilty for these same offences. Ten days later they were to withdraw their ‘confessions’, claiming they had been extracted under duress.

On the day following Anwar Ibrahim’s arrest, with people on the street, the police detained his friends and colleagues. Transmissions (video footage) from broadcasters of the demonstrations and police brutality were blacked out.

The arrest of Anwar Ibrahim spurred the fragmented opposition groups into co-operation. Political parties and NGOs called a joint press conference (27 September 1998) to protest the police brutality, the arrest of Anwar Ibrahim, and called for freedom of speech, right of free assembly, right to fair trial and fair hearing and repeal of all anti-human rights legislation, especially the Draconian Internal Security Act (that enables detention without charge or trial).

22 September 1998, Azizah Ismail, wife of Anwar Ibrahim, was questioned for several hours. Her request to see her husband was denied. She was warned not to ferment trouble. She feared for the safety of herself, her husband and her family. Police Chief, Abdul Rahim Noor, warned that now the Commonwealth Games were over, to expect a purge.

24 September 1998, the fascist police chief, Abdul Rahim Noor, called a news conference. Not used to Western style news conferences or Western media, he shouted at the journalists to ‘shut up’ and tried to tell them how to behave. The fascist buffoon, festooned with medals, looked like an over-decorated Christmas tree.

29 September 1998, Anwar Ibrahim appeared in court to face nine charges of corruption and perverse sexual activity. This was his first public appearance since his arrest ten days earlier (20 September 1998). He appeared looking pale, drawn and thin, his left temple bruised, his left eye black. He pleaded not guilty to the nine fabricated charges. He described how: “I was boxed very hard on the left temple and the right part of my head. I was hit very hard on the left part of my neck. I was then slapped very hard left and right, until blood seeped from my nose and lips.”

He then collapsed and passed out. He was denied medical attention for five days. He was held in solitary confinement in a darkened room.

On seeing the condition of their father, two of Anwar Ibrahim’s daughters wept openly in court. His wife said that she was ‘shocked and stunned that my husband has been a victim of police brutality’. She has been warned not to meet with journalists and not to ferment trouble. Anwar Ibrahim faces up to 20 years imprisonment on the false charges laid against him. Under the Internal Security Act he can be held indefinitely without charge or trial.

The authorities have threatened to inject Anwar Ibrahim with the AIDS virus unless his wife calls off the street demonstrations.

According to reports in the Malaysian press, the corrupt Mahathir bin Mohamad has claimed that the injuries sustained by Anwar Ibrahim were self-inflicted. An examination by a doctor of Anwar Ibrahim following his court appearance, supported the allegation that he had been beaten and sustained injuries whilst in police custody.

World leaders have rallied to the support of Anwar Ibrahim leaving the corrupt Mahathir bin Mohamad looking increasingly isolated. At the IMF/World Bank meeting in New York finance ministers spoke out against the treatment of Anwar Ibrahim, the exception was Gordon Brown (UK Chancellor of the Exchequer) who remained silent. Neighbouring countries have spoken out against the treatment of Anwar Ibrahim. At the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation summit held in Kuala Lumpur, US vice-president Al Gore launched a strong attack on the corrupt Mahathir bin Mohamad. World leaders now need to back their fine words with sanctions against the corrupt Malaysian regime.

Opponents of the corrupt Prime Minister are making full use of the Internet to co-ordinate their opposition and to inform the world of the brutal regime. Malaysia is following the path of Indonesia, institutionalised brutality, lack of democracy, with the majority of the population wishing to see the downfall of a corrupt leader. The people are expected to take to the streets until the corrupt Prime Minister is removed from office.

Anwar Ibrahim’s teenage daughter, Nural Izzah, has taken up the campaign against the corrupt regime on her father’s behalf.

Monday 2 November 1998, the trial of Anwar Ibrahim began. He appeared looking pale, thin and downcast. Most of the defence pre-trial appeals had been rejected by the judge. Several new charges were added to the original list. International observers were denied access to the trial, though several managed to slip into the public gallery. The US State Department attacked the decision to deny access to international observers. Armed security police ringed the court and prevented Anwar supporters from approaching the court.

The key prosecution witness was to have been Mohamed Said Awang (Special Branch director), but the choice of this witness backfired on the prosecution and only served to highlight the level of political corruption under Mahathir. Under oath, Mohamed Said Awang admitted he would lie if instructed to do so by his superiors, he spoke of ‘turning over’ witnesses and ‘neutralising’ anyone considered to be a threat. Mohamed Said Awang’s testimony revealed a sordid tale of cronyism, political and financial corruption with the corrupt Mahathir at its heart.

Mid-January 1999 as the trial continued the prosecution admitted that Anwar Ibrahim had been badly beaten whilst in police custody. A couple of days later the chief of police resigned.

Freedom of expression and respect for democratic institutions and human rights do not exist in Malaysia. The Prime Minister justifies his iron rule as necessary to keep Malaysia on the path of economic success. The so-called Malaysian economic miracle now lies in ruins. In a histrionic outburst, Mahathir bin Mohamad, desperate to blame others for his own shortcomings and failings, has blamed foreign speculators and agents of foreign powers. In addition to the Draconian and repressive Internal Security Act (which grants the power for indefinite detention without charge or trial) Malaysia also uses the Sedition Act and Printing Presses and Publications Act to silence critics.

Those concerned with the treatment of Anwar Ibrahim and the lack of fundamental human rights within Malaysia should raise their concern with Malaysian diplomats in their own country, and also pressurise their own politicians to impose sanctions on Malaysia.

Malaysia is currently seeking funds from the West to bail out its failed economy. In addition to the usual economic strings, conditions on the reform of the democratic and judicial systems should be attached.

The detention and trial of Anwar Ibrahim is an abuse of the political system and the judicial process. In detaining Anwar Ibrahim Malaysia is contravening acceptable international standards on freedom of expression, the right to a fair trial and the treatment of detainees.

Amnesty International has adopted Anwar Ibrahim as a Prisoner of Conscience. In addition AI has called for the immediate release of all prisoners detained under the ISA and for an independent investigation of the injuries sustained by Anwar Ibrahim whilst held in custody.

Sources of information

John Aglionby, Anwar’s teenage daughter picks up baton of reform, The Guardian, 19 October 1998

A.I., Malaysia: A crossroads for human rights and the rule of law?, Amnesty International, 18 September 1998

A.I., Malaysia: Amnesty International calls for Anwar to be charged promptly or released, Amnesty International, 21 September 1998

A.I., Malaysia: Amnesty International declares Anwar a prisoner of conscience, Amnesty International, 25 September 1998

A.I., Malaysia: The arrest of Anwar Ibrahim and his political associates, Amnesty International, 3 October 1998

BBC, The World at One, Radio 4, BBC, 29 September 1998

BBC, News Day, BBC World Service, BBC, 30 September 1998

BBC, The World Tonight, Radio 4, BBC, 30 September 1998

BBC, News Desk, BBC World Service, BBC, 1 October 1998

BBC, News Desk, BBC World Service, BBC, 2 October 1998

BBC, News Desk, BBC World Service, BBC, 5 October 1998

BBC, News Desk, BBC World Service, BBC, 10 October 1998

BBC, News Desk, BBC World Service, BBC, 18 October 1998

BBC, News Desk, BBC World Service, BBC, 25 October 1998

BBC, News Desk, BBC World Service, BBC, 1 November 1998

BBC, News Desk, BBC World Service, BBC, 3 November 1998

BBC, News Desk, BBC World Service, BBC, 15 November 1998

BBC, The World Today, BBC World Service, BBC, 17 November 1998

BBC, News Desk, BBC World Service, BBC, 8 December 1998

Nick Cumming-Bruce, Mahathir sacks deputy in row over economy, News in Brief, The Guardian, 3 September 1998

Nick Cumming-Bruce, Malaysia leader goes for gold in power game, The Observer, 13 September 1998

Matt Frei, Black eye may floor Mahathir, The Daily Telegraph, 4 October 1998

John Gittings, Angry Anwar spurned chance to flee, The Observer, 1 November 1998

John Gittings, Anwar faces fresh charges, The Guardian, 2 November 1998

John Gittings, Anwar downcast as marathon trial begins, The Guardian, 3 November 1998

John Gittings, US ‘lecture’ ruins dinner, The Guardian, 17 November 1998

John Gittings, Interrogators ‘abused Anwar speechwriter’, The Observer, 22 November 1998

John Gittings, Anwar ‘victim’ gives evidence, The Guardian, 3 December 1998

Guardian leader, Malaysian subtext, editorial, The Guardian, 19 November 1998

Frances Harrison, Anwar tells court of political plot, The Guardian, 9 February 1999

Nick Hopkins, Troops guard Queen amid rioting, The Guardian, 21 September 1998

Nick Hopkins, Mahathir cracks down on protests, The Guardian, 22 September 1998

Nick Hopkins, Wife cannot see Malay detainee, The Guardian, 24 September 1998

K Baranee Krishnaan, Anwar was assaulted, confirms doctor, Cyprus Mail, 1 October 1998

Kathy Marks, Anwar’s trial is halted by arsenic claims, The Independent, 11 September 1999

Sheila McNulty & Peter Montagnon, Gore backs Malaysian protesters, Financial Times, 17 November 1998

Peter Montagnon & Sheila McNulty, Apec assails credit rating agencies, Financial Times, 19 November 1998

Seth Mydans, Arrested heir voices the unthinkable, The Guardian, 22 September 1998

Richard Lloyd Parry, Battered Anwar in court at last, The Independent, 30 September 1998

Richard Lloyd Parry, Malaysian furry at Al Gore’s ‘interference, The Independent, 18 November 1998

M G G Pilai & David Watts, US ‘encouraging’ Malaysian unrest, The Times, 18 November 1998

Michael Sheridan, Police witness turns the tables on Mahathir, The Sunday Times, 8 November 1998

Alex Spillius, Malaysian police storm mosque to break up demo, The Daily Telegraph, 26 September 1998

Alex Spillius, Police beat me as Queen was visiting, Anwar tells court, The Daily Telegraph, 30 September 1998

Alex Spillius, Australian leader hits at Mahathir over Anwar, The Daily Telegraph, 1 October 1998

Alex Spillius, Critics scorn Mahathir’s claim that Anwar hurt himself, The Daily Telegraph, 1 October 1998

Alex Spillius, Doctor confirms Anwar’s beating, The Daily Telegraph, 2 October 1998

John Sweeney, Don’t act like that here in Malaysia, The Guardian, 25 September 1998

John Sweeney, Arrest of Anwar spurs solidarity, The Guardian, 28 September 1998

John Sweeney, Battered Anwar in court, The Guardian, 30 September 1998

Times editorial, The Regime in Malaysia – Corruption, cronyism and clamp-down are also Asian values, The Times, 22 September 1998

Stephen Vines, Malaysia losing fight against cyber protest, The Independent on Sunday, 13 December 1998

David Watts, Malaysia in turmoil as government cracks down on dissenters, The Times, 22 September 1998

David Watts, Anwar’s wife accuses police of beating him, The Times, 30 September 1998

More information on Anwar Ibrahim may be obtained from:
Amnesty International, 1 Easton Street, LONDON WC1X 8DJ, England
tel +44-171-413-5500 / fax +44-171-956-1157
e-mail: info@amnesty.org
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
<!–
document.write( ‘</’ );
document.write( ‘span>’ );
//–>
Web: http://www.amnesty.org

Go straight to jail, do not pass ‘go’, and do not collect RM200

This is the first time in history that a legitimate government was forced to conduct its business under a tree. I am going to propose a ceremony to place a bronze plaque under that tree so that generations to come can get to see the spot where the people took back power from the government, minus the bloodshed as well.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Section 124 of the Penal Code reads as follows:

“Whoever, with the intention of inducing or compelling or attempting to induce or compel a member of Parliament or of any legislative assembly or of any state executive council to exercise or refrain from exercising in any manner the lawful powers of such member, assaults or wrongfully restrains, or attempts wrongfully to restrain, or overawes by means of criminal force, or the show of criminal force, or attempts so to overawe, such member shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to a fine.”

The Perak CPO, Datuk Zulkifli Abdullah, has breached Section 124 of the Penal Code. Technically, therefore, he can be charged for a criminal offence — and, if found guilty, can be jailed or fined, or both. That is the law and one just can’t avoid punishment if one has broken the law.

But will he be made to face punishment? If the Speaker of the Perak State Assembly — or any member of the public for that matter — makes a police report against him, then the police are obligated, by law, to open a case file and investigate the report.

Over the last 11 years, thousands upon thousands of police reports have been made against those who walk in the corridors of power. But almost every single report has ended up in the NFA (No Further Action) tray. Try, however, to make a police report against someone perceived as ‘anti-establishment’. Within 24 hours an investigation will be launched and the police, with guns and Balaclavas, will swoop on the ‘dangerous criminal’.

Remember what happened to Anwar Ibrahim back in September 1998 and then, ten years later, in 2008? Both times the police came as if they were about to arrest Botak Chin, Bentong Kali, the Mamak Gang, or what have you. And, mind you, in both these incidences, Anwar’s lawyers had contacted the police to inform them that their client would voluntarily surrender himself at any police station that they want him to if asked.

Why the need to do a military-style operation as if Anwar was going to fight with guns and bombs till the last man standing? He had already said he would go in to the police station if asked. In fact, in the 2008 Hollywood-style arrest, Anwar was already on the way to the police station to make good his 2.00pm appointment when they arrested him so dramatically just outside his house as he was leaving for the police station.

Thousands upon thousands of police reports have been made over the 11 years which have all come to nought in the end. I have personally made two, one against the Director of the Criminal Investigation Department, Bakri Zinin, and another against JAKIM. The police not only classified them as NFA, they did not even call me in for my statement to be recorded, which is the usual procedure. In short, the police just totally ignored my two police reports.

I remember, back in 2001, when ten of us, all Reformasi activists, were detained under the Internal Security Act. The Special Branch goaded us and asked whether we really think we can take over the government. You can take to the streets, said the police. You can even win the general elections. But we own the guns and we decide who gets to form the government. Saari Sungib, in fact, wrote about this in his series of eight or ten books about his two-year experience in Kamunting and the two-month detention prior to that.

The police support the government-of-the-day, one very senior police officer told me. But we decide who gets to form the government and who becomes the Prime Minister, another officer told Saari. And if the Prime Minister tak betul jalan, they might even find his car dalam gaung the next day.

Strong and confrontational words indeed from the defenders of justice and upholders of public safety and security. Are they employed as guardians of the peace or to decide who gets to form the government and becomes the Prime Minister?

I remember what one Deputy Director of the Special Branch once told me. When the May 13 race riots broke out, Bukit Aman held a briefing for all its officers and the instructions to the officers was: you are Malays first and police officers second. You job is to defend Malay political power and dominance. Understandably, only the Malay officers were invited for that briefing.

Another non-Malay Special Branch officer who was on duty outside Datuk Harun Idris’s house moments before the May 13 riots started had this to relate. He saw the crowd surge forward after a series of rabble-rousing speeches by various UMNO leaders and they started hacking to death all the non-Malays they came across.

I was alone and had just one revolver with six bullets, he told me. What could I do against thousands of parang-wielding rioters bent on drawing blood? I tucked my revolver in my waist and just stood by helplessly and watched as they hacked to death innocent non-Malays who did not know what the hell was going on.

This officer managed to save a couple of people but was himself confronted by some soldiers who raised their rifles and took aim at his head. In desperation he took out his authority card and explained that he was a police officer. The soldiers gave him ten seconds to get out of there before they shoot him dead. Invariably, he resigned from the force in disgust soon after that. Being a Special Branch officer who was on duty at ‘Ground Zero’ when May 13 exploded means he knew more than he could endure.

Another friend whose father was an army camp commander at the time of May 13 told me how his father opted for early retirement not long after that. On retirement he became a recluse and refused to meet any of this old army mates. He totally turned his back on the army and on his old friends from his army days. He knew something that we all don’t but he refused to talk about the army or May 13 till the day he died.

The police revealed their ‘true colours’ again in Perak today. No, Barisan Nasional is not a coalition of 14 political parties. It is a coalition of 16. The other two are the police and the Elections Commission (SPR). The police and SPR are also part of Barisan Nasional and are out to serve the interests of that ruling coalition. Can we trust the police and SPR when their job is to ensure that UMNO stays in power?

This was, in fact, confirmed by SPR in a meeting we had with them back in 2000. When asked why they would not abolish the postal vote system now that the Communist insurgency has ended and the soldiers are no longer in the jungles fighting the CTs (Communist Terrorists), they replied: if we abolish the postal vote system then not a single Minister would be able to retain his or her seat.

We were shocked by that reply and, after a few minutes of deafening silence, we asked them, “Isn’t it the job of the SPR to guarantee fair and free elections?”

They replied, “No, the job of the SPR is to ensure that the Malays do not lose political power.”

The SPR may be crooks but at least they are honest about it. I suppose that makes them honest crooks just like we have virgin prostitutes. And the police are no less slimy. And if what happened today in Perak can’t convince you of this then nothing in the world will ever convince you.

Perak is supposed to be Najib’s ‘Waterloo’. And I mean, of course, Najib as Napoleon Bonaparte, the man who lost the war, not Najib as the Duke of Wellington, the man who won. Najib’s political fortunes will be determined by whether he gets to retain Perak or he loses it back to Pakatan Rakyat. Currently, it appears like Najib’s coup d’etat has failed and Pakatan Rakyat has managed to launch a successful counter-coup, albeit constitutionally. This makes Najib’s position very dicey indeed.

Najib needs to make sure he does not lose Perak. The forces opposed to him do not really mind if Perak falls back into Pakatan Rakyat’s hands. Okay, so they lose Perak. But then they will also lose Najib as well. It is a sort of ‘package deal’. If Perak goes, then Najib goes as well. Losing Perak is a small price to pay for blocking Najib from becoming Prime Minister.

I realised, when they postponed my sedition and criminal defamation trials to end-April and end-May respectively, that bringing Najib down through the evidence I was supposed to reveal during these trials would not happen as planned after all. Thus far, only the sedition trial has commenced. The criminal defamation trial has not even started yet. Even then, the sedition trial is not even halfway through.

Currently, the prosecution is still presenting its case. At the end of the prosecution’s case the court will decide whether I have a case to answer to and whether my defence needs to be called. If, just like in the Altantuya murder trial, the court feels there is no case, then I will be acquitted without my defence being called, just like what happened to Razak Baginda. This would mean nothing would be revealed, as there will be no trial.

The problem with this would be, all this may happen a year or more down the road, long after Najib takes over as Prime Minister. So there is really no reason to hold my breath until I turn blue. I will be long dead from asphyxiation by the time anything is going to happen, and even then only if it will happen. It will not be in the interest of Najib to allow the trial to go its entire length and breadth, as he knows I am waiting to reveal the evidence once my defence is called. The best would be for the court to acquit me without my defence being called. Even now, when it is still only the prosecution’s case, much of what is surfacing in court is proving very embarrassing for Najib.

Anyway, not knowing whether what I want to say will ever see the light of day, I have decided to change my strategy. Instead of depending on the trial, I have sent all the notes of the court proceedings to Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. Sure, they have blocked most from surfacing in the trial. Superintendent Gan Tack Guan refuses to reply to all the questions posed by my lawyer, YB Gobind Singh Deo. But what he has told us thus far is damaging enough.

For example, Supt Gan confirmed that no investigation was ever launched to confirm whether Najib was, or was not, involved in Altantuya’s murder. Okay, this is not evidence that he was. But there is also no evidence to prove he was not. And no less than Supt Gan, the Investigating Officer of the Altantuya murder, who said this. And he said this while testifying during my sedition trial.

Most lawyers would argue that just because one was not proven innocent does not mean this is evidence that one is guilty (although this was how they found Anwar guilty and sent him to jail for more than six years). Sure, if seen in isolation this may be so. But it should not be seen in isolation. It must be read together with the Affidavit that Razak Baginda signed when he applied for bail in the early days of his trial.

Now, this Affidavit can’t be ignored because this Affidavit was the basis for the court to rule that Razak is not guilty and subsequently acquitted him of the murder charge. This Affidavit is crucial. This Affidavit bought Razak his freedom. And the court believed what Razak had said in his Affidavit. So, what did this Affidavit say?

Razak said, simply, that he never knew the two police officers on trial for Altantuya’s murder until they were introduced to him by Musa Safri, Najib’s ADC. That was when he first met them. Then Razak goes into detail about what happened thereafter, which I had already written about before and, therefore, do not need to repeat here.

The question that begs answer is: who instructed Musa to assist Razak and who subsequently sent the police officer — Chief Inspector Azilah — to go and see him to help him out of his predicament? And did not Razak also say, in the same Affidavit, that he went to Najib’s office to meet Musa and accidentally bumped into (teserempak) Azilah there?

Razak’s conversation with Azilah, about who sent him, etc., also needs to be noted. In short, Najib’s office or someone in Najib’s office set up the whole arrangement. This is what Razak said. And the court believed Razak and freed him from jail.

Was this investigated? According to Supt Gan, no! So they have no way of knowing whether this is true or not. But the court thinks it is true and that is why it freed Razak. So the matter is not about whether Najib was proven guilty. It is about him not being proven innocent. And Najib is not a simple man-in-the-street. He is the man who is going to be the next Prime Minister. And a Prime Minister must be above suspicion, especially when it involves murder.

That was my argument. And I explained this when I sent the official court papers to Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi with a plea to not appoint Najib as the next Prime Minister. I tried to make it simple. I am not saying that Najib has been proven guilty of murder. I am saying that Supt Gan confirmed that Najib has not been proven innocent. The police did nothing. They never launched any investigation. And Supt Gan confirmed this during my trial.

Okay, maybe I did not win first prize. They made sure I would not with the ‘I can’t reply’, ‘I don’t know how to reply’, ‘How do I reply to that’ answers that Supt Gan gave us. But at least I won second prize, for now. We have thus far failed to prove that Najib is guilty, and that may take us another year of hearings before we can do that — which might be too late by then. But we have succeeded in proving that the police never cleared him either.

The ball is now at Abdullah Badawi’s feet. Whether he wants to hand over to Najib at the end of this month or not is his call. But the Altantuya murder is not the only issue. Perak is one more nail in Najib’s coffin. Today, it looks like Barisan Nasional has lost Perak, which means Najib lost. Then there is the emergency meeting this afternoon where some UMNO veterans are going to apply for a court injunction to delay the UMNO Assembly scheduled for the end of this month.

More than 1,000 reports have been made alleging corruption by the many contestants in the UMNO party elections. That is more reports than number of candidates. The UMNO veterans want the party to delay the Assembly until after all the cases have been investigated. What happens if someone (or many) wins the party elections and later is found guilty of corruption (money politics)? They would have to resign and this would be embarrassing for UMNO.

Imagine the entire UMNO Supreme Council and its three Vice-Presidents who win at the end of this month are found guilty of corruption. The entire leadership would need to resign or get sacked. UMNO would be put to shame, not to mention the bother of holding the party elections all over again.

I said this before and I will say it again. 24 hours is a long time in politics. Governments can fall in a mere 24 hours. What more 24 days? Najib may yet not become Prime Minister come end of this month. Sure, he may make Deputy President of UMNO. But that does not mean he will also become Prime Minister. How he handles Perak the next 24 hours and what results from the emergency meeting by the UMNO veterans this afternoon and the injunction that may follow it would have a bearing on Najib’s chances of becoming Prime Minister.

And if Abdullah Badawi does what I hope he will do with the court papers I sent him, then Najib’s goose is cooked. And it will no longer matter what they do to me. Najib will be out and Perak will be back under Pakatan Rakyat. My job is done. What happens thereafter is not a big deal.

This is something Najib does not understand. He thought he knew the game. In reality, he does not. The game is actually very simple indeed. It is called ‘Russian Roulette’. We load the chamber with one bullet, spin the chamber, and pull the trigger. I have pulled it and it did not fire. It just ‘clicked’. It is now Najib’s turn to pull the trigger. Will it fire or will it also go ‘click’? I really don’t know. Najib will have to pull the trigger for us to see. If it ‘clicks’, then the gun comes back to me and it is my turn to, again, pull the trigger. And this game of Russian Roulette will continue until one of us gets a bullet in the head.

Yes, I live dangerously. But I do not do so for the sake of living dangerously. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. No pain, no gain. This is all necessary. Perak was Najib’s doing. He created that mess. So we have to mess him up if need be to get back Perak. And it looks like that may have happened today in spite of what Najib and the police tried to do.

To the Perak CPO, Datuk Zulkifli Abdullah, I have only one thing to say: you have breached Section 124 of the Penal Code. Go straight to jail, do not pass ‘go’, and do not collect RM200 on the way to jail. And to Nizar, well done. We were in Perak today and we are very honoured to have witnessed history in the making. This is the first time in history that a legitimate government was forced to conduct its business under a tree. I am going to propose a ceremony to place a bronze plaque under that tree so that generations to come can get to see the spot where the people took back power from the government, minus the bloodshed as well.

This is Peoples’ Power in the true sense of the word. Syabas. I am proud of you, Nizar. By the powers invested in me, I now proclaim you an Honorary Bugis Warrior.

Drop ISA charges against RPK

Ramakrishnan , ALIRAN

Aliran would like to echo the plea of secretary-general Jean-Francois Julliard of Reporters Without Borders requesting His Majesty the Yang diPertuan Agong to intercede in the case of Raja Petra Kamarudin who is better known as RPK.

RPK was detained under the ISA for posting certain articles in his web-page that were deemed to be a “threat to internal security.” He has been posting many, many provocative articles for years. His articles have been eye-opening, thought-provoking, sensational, and simply incredible. His web-page has an amazing number of daily hits, proving that he has a large following.

His readers are from all backgrounds. They are amused, angry or incredulous but no one has rioted or threatened the security of the nation because of RPK’s articles. This is why it is difficult to believe that RPK is a “threat to internal security.” There is no evidence even to hint of this possibility.

He is already facing a series of court charges for some of the articles. Aliran has no quarrel with this. If anybody felt defamed or hurt by his articles, the aggrieved party should sue him and take him to court. The government should not be suing RPK on behalf of the aggrieved party.

While some of the cases are on-going, why is it necessary to detain him under the ISA? Instead of resorting to the ISA, can’t RPK be pinned down by existing laws and taken to court to be judged for his alleged offence?
The obnoxious thing about the ISA is that there are no charges against a person and no right of defence is available to the unfortunate detainee. He is simply detained for no definite reason.

He was detained on 12 September 2008. RPK challenged his detention. The High Court released him on 7 November 2008. Can’t we let matters rest at that instead of pursuing it further to put him away?

As far as the people are concerned, the widespread perception is that the government is intent on putting him away because he has damaging information that could discredit the BN government. The BN is worried that his articles will expose the BN and ridicule it in the eyes of the public. This is a very persuasive belief.

Aliran hopes that His Majesty will intercede to ensure that every subject of his will be treated with courtesy and accorded justice, which is a fundamental right of a person.

RPK: It was Najib who ordered my detention, I was also offered money to shut up

By SK English Team

The Federal Court has postponed to next Monday a decision on whether to overturn last year’s High Court ruling that freed Raja Petra Kamaruddin from detention under the Internal Security Act.

The government had appealed against the ruling and the Federal Court was expected to deliver its verdict this morning.

In a posting on his blog last night, Raja Petra Kamaruddin or RPK said it was Deputy Premier Najib Abdul Razak who ordered his detention under ISA last year and that he was also offered money to shut up but he refused.

“Chances are, I have but 24 hours left as a free man and, if I do not write this article today, I never will,” Raja Petra or RPK wrote in his latest blog posting.

“I know for a fact that it was not Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi who ordered my detention. He was not even aware I had been detained. The order came from Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and since I am bent on making sure he never becomes Prime Minister on 1 April 2009, I really do not blame him for wanting to get me out of the way.”

Malaysia’s Umno-Barisan Nasional-led federal government wields enormous influence over the judiciary and former premier Mahathir Mohamad has been publicly accused of judge-rigging.

The rot in the country’s judiciary system was among the chief factors that led to voters denying the Umno-BN its long-held two-thirds majority in Parliament during the watershed March 2008 general election.

Said RPK: “I was given an option. Take the money and become rich or go to jail. I refused the money and instead chose jail. This is my choice and no one can convince me to do otherwise.”

Punished for linking Najib and his wife with Altantuya

The controversial blogger and editor of the Malaysia Today news portal is also facing criminal defamation charges for linking Najib and his wife Rosmah Mansor to the murder of Mongolian model Altantuya Shaariibuu, who allegedly was Najib’s mistress.

RPK said he was prepared to go to the Kamunting Detention Centre but vowed not to cooperate with authorities. He also said he would refuse medical treatment, visits, food and water in the detention centre.

“This action will mean I shall survive at the most seven to eight days. By the end of that period I shall be dead. I am prepared for that. They plan to imprison my body for the rest of my life.

“But I shall release my spirit from my body and will again be free. They can keep my body and they can do whatever they want with it. But they will never be able to keep my spirit. I shall separate my spirit from my body and deny them the pleasure of incarcerating me.”

Probably my last message to Malaysians

This country needs major political, economic and social reforms. The next two years are going to be most trying years indeed. And expect a snap general election within 18 months of Najib taking over if he does take over on 1 April 2009.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Tomorrow, I will probably be detained under the Internal Security Act. Anyhow, before we talk about that, let me start by giving you my prediction for the two by-elections scheduled for early April.

In 2004, BN won the Bukit Selambau state seat with a majority of 7,695 votes and in 2008 they lost it with a majority of 2,362 votes. (See the chart below). In the coming by-election, I forecast a voter turnout of around 26,000 and a majority of 3,500-4,500 for the opposition.

For the Bukit Gantang parliament seat, in 2004 Barisan Nasional won with a majority of 8,888 and in 2008 it lost with a majority of 1,566. (See chart below). This time around, the voter turnout will be roughly 42,000 and the opposition will win that seat with a majority of 5,000-8,000 votes.

Okay, I am forecasting this even before I know who the candidates are. Well, I have no choice. On Tuesday, 17 February 2009, the Federal Court is due to hear the appeal against my release from Internal Security Act detention and I really do not know what the outcome is going to be. Chances are, I have but 24 hours left as a free man and if I do not write this article today I never will.

On 7 November 2008, the Shah Alam High Court ordered my release from detention. The government has appealed this decision although it did not see the need to appeal the decision of the Shah Alam High Court acquitting Abdul Razak Baginda of the charge of murder without his defence being called.

I was in court last week to witness the performance of the three judges and what I saw did not give me much confidence. First of all, we asked for a quorum of seven judges, or at least five. But the court turned us down and fixed a quorum of only three judges. And two of the three judges appear to be hostile towards us from the word ‘go’. It looks like my fate has been sealed even before the case goes to court.

Anyway, I know for a fact that it was not Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi who ordered my detention. He was not even aware I had been detained. The order came from Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and since I am bent on making sure he never becomes Prime Minister on 1 April 2009 I really do not blame him for wanting to get me out of the way.

My friends and family want me to leave the country and to seek political asylum in another country. They feel I can still continue with the struggle in a foreign land. But I am against that as much as my wife pleads that I consider this. I am no quitter and I do not run. I shall stay and fight till the very end even if that is the last thing I do.

If I have to lose my freedom so be it. That is the price we pay for opposing the powers-that-be. But I shall not go quietly or make any deals to secure my release with those who walk in the corridors of power.

I was given an option. Take the money and become rich or go to jail. I refused the money and instead chose jail. This is my choice and no one can convince me to do otherwise. No doubt I will have to pay for this and it will be a heavy price that I shall have to pay. But this is the price of the struggle and the price does not come cheap.

I shall not submit. I shall resist till the end. I stand on right and I oppose what is wrong. Amar makruf, nahi munkar, as Islam would say. We must uphold right and oppose wrong. That is not only the Islamic way but also the way of all religions. And even atheists believe in this, so you need not believe in God to subscribe to the concept of amar makruf, nahi munkar.

Over thousands of years countless people have met their deaths just because they stood on the side of right. What I have chosen to do has been done by so many who are now nameless and faceless. So it is nothing so special that I do which has not been done before.

My resistance will continue. But I will have to continue my resistance behind the barbwire fences of the Kamunting Detention Centre. It will now be up to you, those who are free, to continue where I left off.

My resistance, however, will have to take on a new form. I will no longer be able to write or speak at ceramahs. My voice has now been silenced. But I can still speak the words of silence, which will be my new form of resistance.

I shall no longer open my mouth or utter one word during my detention. I shall maintain the silence of a mute person. I shall not sign any documents of the so many documents that they make you sign when under detention. My signature is not going to be placed on a single shred of paper.

By doing so would mean none of my family members or lawyers would have access to me. Yes, that is the price I shall pay for ‘not cooperating’. I know this and I am prepared for it.

I shall refuse all medical treatment and visits to the hospital. I shall refuse to accept any food and water supplied by the Kamunting authorities. I shall refuse to leave my cell or to meet any of the prison authorities. In short, I shall shut myself out from the world and keep to my own world of my eight feet square cell.

This action will mean I shall survive at the most seven to eight days. By the end of that period I shall be dead. I am prepared for that. They plan to imprison my body for the rest of my life. But I shall release my spirit from my body and will again be free. They can keep my body and they can do whatever they want with it. But they will never be able to keep my spirit. I shall separate my spirit from my body and deny them the pleasure of incarcerating me.

This is a decision I have taken and no one can make me change my mind. And this is probably the last article of mine that you shall read if they send me to Kamunting tomorrow. Keep the struggle going. I shall no longer be able to join you in that struggle. The work is far from finished. This country needs major political, economic and social reforms. The next two years are going to be most trying years indeed. And expect a snap general election within 18 months of Najib taking over if he does take over on 1 April 2009.

I lay down my life for this nation of ours called Malaysia. I will sacrifice myself for the sake of the struggle. There is very little left I can give at this point of time other than my life. For those who stood by me all these years, I thank you from the bottom of my heart. I go with a heavy heart. But my heart is heavy only because I have but one life to give.

Death is not the end. Death is but the beginning. It is the beginning of a new journey that none of us can escape and will one day embark upon. It is not something to be sad about. It is something to rejoice.

Please continue your struggle to make Malaysia a better place for our future generation. This country belongs to them and it is for them that we struggle. For some of us, our time is already almost up. We do not have many years left. Many have gone before us. Many friends who started out with us in 1998 are no longer around. But they left this world in the hope that one day Malaysia will be the country that we dream it would be. And that, too, must be our dream.

I pray and hope that the Putrajaya Federal Court will uphold the decision of the Shah Alam High Court to free me from ISA detention. But if it reverses that decision then we must be prepared for that as well. And if the Federal Court does what I fear it will do, goodbye Malaysians, my comrade-in-arms. We shall meet again, one day, although not in this world but the next.

RPK’s sedition trial: Najib in the limelight

An investigating officer of the murdered Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu case today admitted that deputy prime Minster Najib Abdul Razak was not investigated even though he was an important witness.

However the revelations of assistant director of the Interpol National Centre Bureau Gan Tack Guan did not come at the Altantuya murder trial.

Instead he was a witness at the sedition trial of popular blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin at the Petaling Jaya Session Court.

Raja Petra is facing trial for the alleged seditious article entitled ‘Let’s send the Altantuya murderers to hell’ which was posted on the Malaysia Today website on April 25.

Gan was testifying today after failing to show up on two previous occasions.

The police officer was the one who lodged a police report on Raja Petra after reading the article on April 30. He is also the chief investigating officer in the murder trial of Altantuya.

In his testimony today he agreed that Najib’s name was mentioned in the said article and admitted that the deputy prime minister was an “important witness”.

However to questions from defence counsel Gobind Singh Deo, Gan said that he had not investigated Najib despite him being an important witness.

“Najib was not interrogated because the police had dismissed his involvement in the case,” said Gan.

Gobind was grilling Gan in relation to the explosive affidavit filed by political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda on Jan 4, 2007, in which Abdul Razak stated that he engaged the help of DSP Musa Haji Safri, who was Najib’s aide de camp at that time, in solving the Altantuya problem.

The affidavit was filed by Abdul Razak to deny any wrongdoings in the murder of Altantuya when he was charged with aiding her murder with two special unit police officers. He was acquitted at the end of prosecution case.

When Gobind asked if Gan had taken statements from both Musa and Abdul Razak, the policeman said he had done so.

However he could not remember it the statements were in regards the help that was given by Musa to Abdul Razak in solving the ‘problem’.

Minimum direct involvement

Moreover, Gan said that although he was the chief investigating officer in the case, his “direct involvement in it was at the minimum”.

“I supervised a team of investigators to assist ASP Tonny Lunggan,” said Gan, adding that the questioning sessions were handled by Lunggan.

Gobind further asked if Najib was questioned at any time during the investigations into Raja Petra’s article.

Gan said he had not.

In the article, it was said that Abdul Razak went to Najib and Rosmah first, and the couple had then instructed Musa to aide Abdul Razak.

Gobind: Earlier you said that you did not investigate the facts in the affidavit that Abdul Razak Baginda had visited the deputy prime minister’s office and bumped into Musa.

You also said, you did not question the statement, and you said that you did not question Najib… so if you did not interrogate Najib, how do you know that the contents of the paragraph in the article did not take place?

Gan: I got the facts from the investigator of the case ASP Tonny.

Gobind: What were the facts? Tell us the facts!

Gan: You don’t need to raise your voice. First you call me a useless policeman… now you don’t have to raise your voice… the facts relating to the existence of Najib and Rosmah were false.

Police decided not to summon Najib

After the minor argument, Gobind stated that Gan had no personal knowledge of the alleged involvement of Najib, Musa and Abdul Razak.

Gan however reiterated that it was not true and that he had the facts from Lunggan

Gobind then asked Gan if he had any knowledge of Lunggan taking Abdul Razak’s statement regarding his affidavit.

Gan: I do not remember.

Gobind: You don’t remember? Isn’t it important to know whether Abdul Razak’s statement was taken?

Gan: Yes, it is important.

Gobind: It is important because it involves Abdul Razak and important to know whether it is true or false, correct?

Gan: Yes.

Gobind: Is it important to interrogate Najib to uncover the truth in the statement (article)?

Gan: Yes, but Najib was not interrogated because the police had dismissed his involvement in the case (Altantuya’s murder).

Gobind: If he was an important witness why the police did not investigate Najib?

Gan: Because in the Altantuya murder trial, investigation revealed that there was no need to summon him.

Politically motivated prosecution

However, Gobind kept badgering Gan on the fact that despite the importance of Najib’s statement, he was not interrogated for a statement.

“Having failed to take statement from him (Najib), you are in no position to substantiate your police report against Raja Petra.

“This decision to prosecute Raja Petra is politically motivated as no action was taken relating to Najib but to pin down Raja Petra,” blasted Gobind.

Deputy public prosecutor Roslan Mat Nor objected to Gobind’s statement, saying that it was not in Gan’s power to answer questions on the decision to prosecute Raja Petra.

Hearing before before Judge Rozina Ayob continues on Thursday.

60:40 or 50:50?

It is ironical that Barisan Nasional is in fact giving Pakatan Rakyat money through the Chinese. The Barisan Nasional money given to the Chinese ends up in the hands of Pakatan Rakyat, plus more.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

The soothsayers are divided. Some say that the Kuala Terengganu by-election is a 50:50 situation. Others say it is 60:40, in favour of PAS.

On a level playing field I would tend to agree with the 60:40 prediction. However, seeing that the playing is anything but level, I would tend to go for the 50:50 forecast — unless PAS is able to plug all the holes.

First of all, Umno is paying up to RM1,000 per vote. And this is how the system works.

A voter goes into the polling station to collect his/her ballot paper. He/she then puts it in his/her pocket. He/she drops a dummy ballot paper into the ballot box. He/she comes out and ‘sells’ the ballot paper to an Umno goon waiting outside. He/she goes home RM1,000 the richer.

The blank ballot paper is marked Barisan Nasional. It is then given to the next voter. He/she collects his/her ballot paper and puts it in his/her pocket. He/she drops the already marked ballot paper into the ballot box. He/she comes out and hands over the blank ballot paper to the Umno goon waiting outside in exchange for RM1,000.

The process is repeated thousands of times all over Kuala Terengganu at the 38 polling stations.

Another method would be: the voter goes into the polling station with his/her hand phone. He/she marks the ballot paper in the Barisan Nasional box and photographs it with his/her hand phone. He/she then drops the ballot paper into the ballot box. He/she comes out and shows the photo in the hand phone to an Umno goon and receives RM1,000.

All this is of course further to the ‘phantom voters’ who will be voting tomorrow. One man closely related to the Agong showed me the electoral roll where four unknown Chinese voters were registered at his house address. He does not know who these four Chinese are and how they got registered at his house address. How many thousands more are ‘registered voters’ in this manner is yet to be known because not all house owners check the electoral role to look for strangers registered at their address. But expect the figure to run into the thousands. And also expect all these strangers to come out to vote tomorrow.

8,000 registered voters live and work outside Kuala Terengganu. This means 10% of the Kuala Terengganu voters are out of town. Will they all come home to vote? If not, then how many will? The lower the voter turnout, the more chance Barisan Nasional will have of padding the ballot box.

The average voter turnout in any general election is roughly 75%. It is sometimes even lower in a by-election. Tomorrow, Kuala Terengganu may see a voter turnout as high as 80% to 85%. In the 2004 general election, the voter turnout in Kuala Terengganu was 130%, as it was in Kuala Selangor and some other places all over Malaysia. After the ‘error’ was pointed out by Malaysiakini, the figure was ‘adjusted’ to 85% or so.

When asked to explain the voter turnout of 130%, the Elections Commission said that the 130% figure was not yet gazetted so it is unofficial. It is not official until it is gazetted. The gazetted figure was then adjusted to make it look more believable.

Invariably, Umno knows it can’t win the Kuala Terengganu by-election tomorrow unless its cheats like hell. In a fair and free election, Pakatan Rakyat is going to win the by-election with a majority of 5,000 votes. They need to ensure that Barisan Nasional wins by at least 1,000 votes. So the vote buying and rigging needs to be maximised like there is no tomorrow.

I have placed a bet on Pakatan Rakyat winning the Kuala Terengganu by-election tomorrow with a 5,000-vote majority. Will Pakatan Rakyat be able to plug all the holes and ensure that this happens? Or am I going to be a slightly poorer person by tomorrow night? Let’s wait and see.

The Chinese voters in Kuala Terengganu are very upset. Barisan Nasional has been handing out millions of ringgit to their schools and associations — plus RM300 Chinese New Year ‘Ang Pows’ to each voter.

“Why are you insulting us by giving us RM300 Ang Pows?” one reasonably rich Chinese asked me. “Do you think we are so bangsat we need this RM300?”

“If the government treats the Chinese better you do not need to bribe us with RM300. If you treat us better we can give the government RM300. RM300 is nothing. It is a small amount.”

“The fact that the government needs to give us RM300 means the government has not treated the Chinese well. That is why they give us RM300 to buy our votes. If not, no need to give us any money. We can give the government money instead.”

I never thought of it that way. And probably neither did Barisan Nasional. I suppose the many dinners thrown over the last two weeks lies testimony to this. The Chinese pay to attend the Pakatan Rakyat dinners. And the hall is not only packed but overflowing as well. The crowd is not just inside the hall. Hundreds more stand outside to listen to the many speeches. And they stay till the very end.

And in spite of everyone having to pay for the dinner, when the collection box is passed around everyone puts in RM50 notes into the box. Tens of thousands are collected every night. And this is further to the dinner that they pay for.

Barisan Nasional invites the Chinese to free diners. However, not only is the hall half empty, the Chinese whack the food and then leave before the speeches start. By the time the speeches start most people have gone home.

Throwing money to the Chinese does not work. For every ringgit Barisan Nasional throws to the Chinese, they throw back double that amount to Pakatan Rakyat. It is ironical that Barisan Nasional is in fact giving Pakatan Rakyat money through the Chinese. The Barisan Nasional money given to the Chinese ends up in the hands of Pakatan Rakyat, plus more.

That is all for now, my brief report this morning. I now have to take Zaid Ibrahim to Chinatown for breakfast and for one last walkabout before Polling Day. Till we speak again, take care and phone all those Kuala Terengganu voters outside the state and convince them to come home to vote tomorrow.

The KT buy-election!

Sim Kwang Yang|January 15, 2009 Malaysiakini

Thanks to the pack of Barisan Rakyat bloggers led by RPK, I have been able to follow quite closely the on-going electoral battle at Kuala Terengganu. RPK had predicted a victory of five thousand votes for PAS even before the KT by-election began. He has a better than even chance of being proven right on Saturday inght, when all the otes will be counted in the evening.

Once again, when the opposition parties can form a workable coalition, the Chinese voters can become king makers at both national and local levels. Though they make up only 11% or over 8000 votes in KT, they will decide the outcome of this by-election with the Malay votes more or less evenly split between UMNO and PAS.

I had been to KT only once, and found the Chinese there just like the Chinese in small towns elsewhere. Their tranquil sedate daily life revolves round their work and business, their Chinese schools, their guilds and associations, and their temple. Unlike their counterparts in the big cities, the Terengganu Chinese people tend to be much friendlier to strangers and better integrated into the local Malay communities.

Sixty-five percent of the KT Chinese voters had supported the BN candidate during the last general election, and one should not be surprised. Chinese in small towns throughout Malaysia tend not to be too much bothered by issues of national concern or reformasi. Generally, they are far more interested in local issues and the personality of the candidates.

Pragmatic and realistic

The leaders of local Chinese guilds and associations in any small Chinese towns exert considerable influence as community leaders. Those in KT should not be any different. After all, they probably sit on the board of management of local Chinese schools and their places of worship, as well as acting as spokesmen representing the community when meeting government officials at all levels.

Traditionally, these local community leaders support the Barisan Nasional, especially the MCA. Some also serve as local MCA officials. Being pragmatic and realistic, they know where the goodies come from. If the Pakatan Rakyat takes power in the country tomorrow, expect these same Chinese community leaders throughout Malaysia to lean towards the new rulers!

Therefore, it should not surprise long-time observer of Chinese politics that BN won the Chinese votes in KT hands down in the 2008 general election. Everybody in the opposition coalition was busy fighting his own battle all over the country then.

Before 2008, the results of by-elections were predictable. The BN tended to win all of them, the odd exception being the Lunas by-election, which was won by PKR.

Since 2008 though, the Pakatan coalition has changed all that. They have five states in their political pocket, and are now raring for power at the centre. The Permatang Pauh by-election was a relatively easy victory. And now, they are poised to win in KT as well.

What makes the difference now is that when DAP, PKR, and PAS pooled their political capital together, the whole is larger than the sum of its part. Strange bed-fellows they may be. But only a coalition of these vastly different political forces can resist and negate the BN’s traditional assault of dividing and ruling the people through the politics of race.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the KT by-election.

All of a sudden, the active participation of the DAP in the PAS campaign since nomination day has energised the PAS offensive. The arrival of DAP superstars must have had a huge impact on the Chinese voters in KT beyond measure.

Good Chinese leaders

I am sure the DAP presence in KT before the 2008 general election could have been nothing except minimal. For the local Chinese voters in KT in the past, the DAP leading lights were just names in the newspapers. Suddenly, in recent weeks, they were treated to the glamour and charisma of these Chinese heroes in person and in huge doses.

This DAP army are very seasoned campaigners who know the general aspirations of the Malaysian Chinese well. Above all, they can communicate very well with any Chinese community. Their power of persuasion is best illustrated in their ceramah speeches. They can hold a packed hall of many thousands spell-bound for hours on end, earning enthusiastic applauses and cheering with wild elation.

Of course there are very good Chinese leaders in PKR, who can hold their ground among Chinese electorates. But they cannot say the sort of things as the DAP leaders can, because the Chinese who join PKR are likely to be more multiracial in outlook.

The MCA knows that DAP is a brand name in Chinese politics. That is probably why from the start of the KT by-election the MCA has tried to frighten Chinese voters in KT with the threat of hudud laws, over which DAP and PAS have just had a spat of public disagreement before the by-election. In many past general and by-elections, the hudud spectre had frightened many Chinese voters into supporting the BN, no matter how dissatisfied they were with the MCA.

This time though, the Pakatan Rakyat coalition has shown considerable political maturity in handling their differences within a political alliance.

On the night of the 11th, DAP secretary-general and Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng arrived at the over-flowing restaurant in the heart of KT, to announce that it is an agreement among the member parties of Pakatan Rakyat anywhere that a policy must receive the anonymous agreement of all three partners for it to be implemented. That should put an end to the use of hudud as a non-issue.

The closure of the DAP campaign centre through very suspicious means may yet backfire. The KT Chinese may be simple folks, but they are not stupid. They will just keep quiet and vote in their verdict on Jan 17.

So far, the BN machinery has sprung no surprises. They have done their expected chores of showering the Chinese voters with all kinds of election lagarsse, and tens of millions of government allocation. As the campaign grind to the crunch in these last few days, arrangements are probably in place for vote buying.

A vote for RM400

I read an account on the Internet by a Chinese youth in KT who is too young to vote. He has an uncle who is a longstanding member of the local MCA. Having been saturated with political education by DAP ceramah speakers, the uncle went to BN meetings and asked questions raised in the campaign. He was hushed down immediately.

So now the uncle has decided to vote for PAS, though he was offered RM400 by the BN for his vote. The wise nephew advised him to take the money and vote for PAS. The older man told him that he must photograph his vote inside the polling booth on his mobile phone, and send the picture of his actual vote to the paymaster, or else he would not be paid. If he does not have an expensive mobile phone, one would be provided for him. If he is found to have voted for PAS, all kinds of punishment will descend upon him after the by-election.

Having been at the receiving end of many campaigns of money politics, I find this story believable. This device of using the mobile phone to monitor voter’s actual vote violates the secrecy of the vote, and is obviously against the election laws. But in a small town where everybody knows everybody, the uncle is unlikely to lodge a police report over it.

The obvious thing for the Election Commission to do is to ban all voters from bringing their mobile phones into the polling centre. The opposition election agents must also object vehemently to the use of the mobile phone inside the voting booth.

This and other tricks of bribery and intimidation from the BN tend to surface in the last days of any by-election anywhere in Malaysia. Sometimes, they work, and sometimes they fail.

One thing I am sure of is that PAS will get more votes from the Chinese community in KT than in 2008. If the Malay votes are still split, then there is a strong possibility of a PAS win on Saturday.

As for me, win or lose for the Pakatan coalition, the KT buy-election is just another battle in a long war for justice and democracy in Malaysia. The next critical battle field will be my home state of Sarawak. I wonder when RPK and his pack of bloggers will go there in the near future, and whether they will be declared persona non grata.

Sim Kwang Yang was the MP for Bandar Kuching 1982 – 1995. He can be reached at Kenyalang578@hotmail.com

Day 1, Round 1: Pakatan Rakyat

The Chinese have no qualms that the outcome of the Kuala Terengganu by-election rest in their hands. But would they take that bold step of giving the seat to the opposition? Day 1 of the campaign is too early to determine this.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Pakatan Rakyat was clearly the winner on Day 1 of the Kuala Terengganu by-election. Nomination Day saw an estimated crowd of 30,000 to 40,000 Pakatan Rakyat supporters against only 5,000 to 7,000 for Barisan Nasional. In spite of the mainstream media spin that reversed the figures, pictures speak a thousand words and the five pictures below tell all.

At 9.30pm, Anwar Ibrahim addressed an estimated crowd of 20,000 to 30,000 people, mostly all local Kuala Terengganu folks, at Ladang, not far from the Bloggers Operations Centre in Kuala Terengganu. Amongst those who also spoke at this Ceramah Perdana were Lim Kit Siang, Haji Hadi Awang, the Menteri Besar of Kelantan, Nik Aziz Nik Mat, and Mustaffa Ali.

Simultaneously, the Bloggers and a few DAP national leaders graced a dinner that was attended by more than 500 local Chinese residents. We went from table to table to shake the hands of the guests and saw many familiar faces amongst the crowd. The support of the Chinese was most overwhelming, and if the dinner crowd last night is a reflection of the Chinese support for Pakatan Rakyat, then the results of the 17 January 2009 by-election may yet pull a surprise for Barisan Nasional.

But this was only Day 1 and Round 1 of the campaign. We still have 11 more days and 11 more rounds to worry about. An early victory may just be a sign of Pakatan Rakyat winning the battle, but not necessarily that it is winning the war. Ultimately, it is winning the war that counts. You can win ten battles but the victor will be determined by whomsoever wins the war and not whomsoever wins the many battles along the way.

Today’s campaign will be door-to-door. Anwar Ibrahim will be officiating the Parti Keadilan Rakyat operations center at Gong Kapas and will visit 18 kampongs around Kuala Terengganu after which he will be doing a walk-about at the main bus stop and the wet market at 11.00am. The Bloggers will be covering the walk-about and we hope to upload the pictures later today.

Intelligence agencies and the BTN have informed Umno that it has lost Day 1 of the campaign and that efforts must be stepped up to ensure a Barisan Nasional victory. They realise they would not be able to win on a level playing field, so expect the Dirty Tricks Department to launch a series of dirty campaigns later today. What they have planned is not known yet other than they are not confident of victory and therefore need to resort to dirty tactics to turn defeat into victory.

The Chinese voters are fully aware that the Malays are delicately split 50:50 and that it will be the Chinese who will determine the victor. They have been told that the are the Kingmaker but the million dollar question is whom does the Chinese want as their ‘king’ representing them in Parliament as their Member of Parliament.

One issue raised by the Chinese is that they are not too confident that PAS is capable of running the state. Unlike PAS Kelantan, PAS Terengganu is not that sharp, laments the Chinese. And five years of PAS rule from 1999 to 2004 has proven this.

This has to be countered with the argument that the Kuala Terengganu by-election is not about choosing a new state government. The voters will just be sending ‘their man’ to Parliament and not voting to form a new state government. The Chinese must be reminded that the present state government will remain intact even if the opposition wins the Kuala Terengganu parliament seat.

The Chinese have no qualms that the outcome of the Kuala Terengganu by-election rest in their hands. But would they take that bold step of giving the seat to the opposition? Day 1 of the campaign is too early to determine this.

Nevertheless, as in any election, local issues are usually the determining factor. Are the Kuala Terengganu Chinese happy with their government? Do they feel that Umno and Barisan Nasional are just too arrogant and need to be cut down to size? Is it time to send a message to the ruling party that it can no longer take the Chinese for granted and continue insulting them, call them pandatang, threaten them with ‘another May 13’, and ask them to ‘go back to China’ every time they open their mouths and express unhappiness? These would be the factors that will decide which way the Chinese will vote on 17 January 2009.

I now need to go hit the streets and do a walk-about in Chinatown. We will update you with the latest events as they develop. Till later and stayed tuned as we report from Ground Zero in Kuala Terengganu.

THE PAKATAN RAKYAT CROWD

THE BARISAN NASIONAL CROWD