Sunday, July 15, 2012

GE-13: UMNO-BN targets Selangor

GE-13: UMNO-BN targets Selangor

by Zulaikha Zulkifli@www.malaysiakini.com
KTM Komuter trains and stations are now the latest canvas to market the Najib administration to Selangor commuters.
ktm sayangi selangor 150712A survey by Malaysiakini found that train coaches and stations have been used for a “Sayangi Selangor (Love Selangor)” advertising campaign, with Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak as the main subject.
The two taglines for the campaign are “We hear your problems on cost of living” and “We hear and understand your needs on education”.
Such message appear all over train coaches, pillars on the platforms and train station escalators.
ktm sayangi selangor 150712Najib is depicted with various groups, including children, with an emphasis on him listening to the grassroots.
It is understood that the campaign is currently aimed at the KL Sentral-Port Klang route – which runs mostly through Pakatan Rakyat held areas.
‘Why isn’t Khalid on it?’
It is believed that Najib is the centrepiece of the campaign because there has yet to be a clear BN nominee for the menteri besar position. Najib is the Selangor UMNO chief while Keretapi Tanah Melayu Bhd (KTMB) chairperson Mohd Zin Mohamed is the state BN coordinator.
ktm sayangi selangor 150712Interviews with several commuters show that they were overwhelmingly unfavourable of the campaign.
A public university student who wished to be known only as Mat said that the campaign was “not balanced” because Menteri Besar Abdul Khalid Ibrahim was excluded.
“This is supposed to be a ‘Love Selangor’ campaign. Khalid should be included for fairness. It looks odd that a ‘Love Selangor’ campaign focuses on the Pprime minister,” he said.
Mat, 22, said it was not proper for the federal government to advertise its achievements.
Heard it all before
Another student, Amirul, who studies in a private institution said the campaign was a sign that the general election is near. “If they have been looking after the people’s welfare, why the adverts now? Maybe it is because of the election,” he said.
ktm sayangi selangor 150712Meanwhile, Liana, 26, who works in a private firm, said the advertisements were unnecessary since the public is well informed about the government’s efforts.
“There are a lot of advertisements, even on television. I think everyone knows the government has BR1M (Bantuan Rakyat 1Malaysia), vouchers for students and other things.
“I feel there is no need for such advertisements. What is important is transparency,” she said.
Previously, Malaysiakini reported that BN flags had been put up all over  several Selangor Komuter stations along the Kuala Lumpur-Port Klang route. Mohd Zin had at the time denied issuing any instructions for the flags to be raised.
July 17, 2012
KUALA LUMPUR, July 17 — Selangor's loss-making investment arm Permodalan Negeri Selangor Bhd (PNSB) turned a profit of RM28.4 million after Pakatan Rakyat(PR) took over its management, the DAP's Tony Pua (picture) said today, pointing to financial statements from 2008 to 2011.
The lawmaker from the state's ruling pact was debunking his MCA political foe's allegations last week that PNSB had gone into debt after buying land originally owned by Talam Corp, continuing to dispute the PR's financial management in Selangor, Malaysia's most developed state, ahead of key national polls due soon.
Showing reporters PNSB's financial statements from 2008 to 2011, Pua pointed out that PNSB had grown from a state entity posting losses of over RM15.6 million in 2008 to a successful group with profits of around RM28.4 million.
The documents publicly available from the Companies Commission of Malaysia (SSM) showed that PNSB had posted after-tax profits of RM8 million, RM23.4 million and RM28.3 million for the year of 2009, 2010 and 2011 respectively.
“In our first full year of administration, it made RM8 million in profit,” the Petaling Jaya Utara MP told a news conference.
Pua said “this is good governance under PR” as the DAP-PKR-PAS pact had turned PNSB around in their “first full year of administration” in 2009 compared to when the state and its agencies were helmed by the previous Barisan Nasional (BN) government.
The DAP, PKR and PAS had come into power after winning in Election 2008 and formed an alliance now known as PR.
The DAP man said that based on financial statements, PNSB had posted losses of RM0.9 million, RM7.5 million, RM1 million, and RM15.6 million in the years from 2005 to 2008.
Pua also used the 2008-2011 financial statements to show that PNSB's net assets had increased, pre-empting any claims that PNSB could be posting profits because it had sold off assets.
Pua also said that PNSB's cash reserves now stand at RM92.9 million, based on the 2011 financial statement.
Last week, Datuk Chua Tee Yong held a news conference where he alleged that the state-owned PNSB was forced to take a supersized RM230 million loan to acquire land in Bukit Beruntung 2 and Bestari Jaya from Selangor's Menteri Besar Incorporated (MBI) as part of the Talam debt settlement deal.
The Labis MP had said that this caused PNSB to be saddled with debt as it had RM76 million in cash balance and fixed deposits before taking the loan.
Chua, the MCA Young Professionals Bureau chairman, had recently alleged that Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim’s administration had bought over Talam Corp’s RM676 million assets to clear the firm’s outstanding debts of RM392 million to three state subsidiaries.
He had further claimed that the RM392 million in the supplementary budget approved by the state assembly in November 2010 to the MBI was used by the state government for the alleged bailout.
MORE TO COME










Tony Pua gets overwhelming public support against Syabas

UPDATED @ 06:59:54 PM 18-07-2012
July 17, 2012

Pua has pledged the excess of funds raised to the DAP General Election Fund. — file pic
PETALING JAYA, July 17 — The “RM1 for Water Rights: 100,000 Malaysians Support Tony Pua vs Syabas” online campaign in support of DAP federal lawmaker Tony Pua has announced that they have managed to collect more than RM150,000 from their online campaign.

A donation box making the rounds at dinner tonight.
“By the end of the online campaign, we have managed to collect RM150,939,” said the campaign’s organiser, Yeo Bee Yin tonight. When he took to the stage, Pua stated the overall total collected by the campaign, inclusive of the dinner and the rounds done by DAP volunteers with donation boxes.
“And so, I would like to announce the total amounts of the campaign. As announced earlier by Bee Yin, we managed to collect RM151,000. The dinner has managed to collect RM173,000. And the donation has managed to collect RM22,400. This is an overall total of RM310,000,” he announced.
The amount collected is RM110,000 more than the sum Pua has been ordered to pay in damages to Syabas.

Lim Kit Siang addresses attendees of the dinner.
The excess has been pledged by Pua to the DAP General Election Fund. Last month, Syabas won a defamation suit against the DAP national publicity secretary, who was ordered by the Kuala Lumpur High Court to pay RM200,000 in damages besides costs and interests.
The opposition party had started an online campaign to raise RM100,000 to help the federal lawmaker pay the amount by July 16, but the financial support from the public was beyond expectation, organisers have said.
The cause to aid the MP had instead managed to collect RM143,256 by July 16 from tens of thousands of Malaysians in a one-week period.






Speech @ "Tony Pua vs SYABAS" Dinner







Tony Pua on Talam, Syabas and other financial improprieties in Selangor and Malaysia












http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FG8aDlr7VE&feature=player_embedded





























Wednesday, 18 July 2012 11:22

COPY-CAT MOVE: Najib may offer a corporate guy as the S'gor MB if BN wins

Written by  Nawawi Mohamad, Stan Lee, Malaysia Chronicle
Who will be the lucky man Prime Minister Najib Razak will offer to the people of Selangor as their next Mentri Besar or chief minister if the Umno-BN wins back the state from Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim's Pakatan Rakyat coalition?
Indeed, the list of prospective candidates is not short but the reality is that there are very few valid choices for Najib, who is also the Selangor UMNO chief. The hottest bet and flavor of the month now is Subahan Kamal, the Umno assemblyman for Taman Templer.
A trained accountant, Subhan began his career in 1990 with Bank Rakyat (M) Berhad and in 1995 was appointed Senior Private Secretary to the Deputy Minister of Finance until 1998. He was subsequently appointed Senior Private Secretary to the Deputy Minister of Human Resources in 1999. Subahan is now an Executive Committee Member (EXCO) of the UMNO Youth wing. He has also held various directorships in public listed companies such as OCB Bhd and KFC Holdings Bhd, and is currently a vice-president in the Football Association of Malaysia.
What is so special in having a guy with a corporate background or was a CEO of a company to head a state government. The obvious inference is that PKR Mentri Besar Khalid Ibrahim has done a stunning job in re-organising and reviving Selangor. And Khalid was a big-time corporate chief.
Copy-cat
But will a copy-cat move guarantee success for UMNO? The answer is NO. For example, the Badminton Association of Malaysia (BAM) has Nadzmi Salleh, the ex-Proton CEO, as its president but the fate of the game is still dependent on a single star player Lee Chong Wei and Nadzmi has little to do with Lee's successes.
The main criteria for an MB or CM must be integrity and honesty. These values exemplify all the good qualities without which there cannot be any true leadership. The MB can appoint all the professional advisers and competent heads of department he needs to swing around a distressed situation.
Even the thinking or strategy, whether for the economy, social development or politics, can be outsourced to a think-tank or special unit of professionals. But to make the best decision, put the ideas into practice and implement the projects diligently - you need to have integrity in the very core of your character to get the job done well.
Does not Najib have other choices? After all, Subahan has been low-profile and few have heard of his name. Who are those who think they have a chance?
Well, names like Agriculture minister Noh Omar, former Works minister Mohd Zin, Senator Ezam Mohd Noor and even former Selangor MB Muhammad Muhammad Taib have frequently been tossed. All have some chance of being chosen with the only one completely out of the picture being Khalid's predecessor, the corruption-tainted Khir Toyo.
Ultimately, the decision is Najib's and UMNO's? Chances are Najib will decide against the lineup above given that each of the men have a murky past. Hence, the spotlight now swiveling onto Subahan.
'Old' guard unhappy
But have not UMNO-BN had enough bad experience from appointing business-based people to lead a state government? For example, Syed Razak Syed Zain owned and managed several companies before becoming the Kedah MB in 1999. Muhammad Hasan, the MB of Negeri Sembilan, also has several businesses.
UMNO too has appointed many lecturers, doctors and other professionals to helm the states it controls. But whether business background, professional or purely political background, all have turned out to be huge disappointments so far - their records and tenures marred by mismanagement, corruption and abuse of power while they enriched themselves.
The Malay Mail recently reported that three corporate personalities and a serving senior civil servant were being considered for the top Selangor job.
“It is in line with the prime minister’s transformation policies and he wants the people – especially Selangorians – to believe in Umno and BN again. There have been many issues concerning corruption, abuse of funds and land grabs which caused BN to lose Selangor," said a party source.
“We need to reassure the people that the person who will lead Selangor is someone with a good track record in financial management and running a huge company,” said another party source.
That there is already resistance by the 'old' guard is clear. According to Mohd Zin, who is also Selangor UMNO liaison secretary, the proposal was still being studied.
“Well, if it is what the prime minister wants, we must consider,” said a clearly less-than enthusiastic Mohd Zin.
“You look at Selangor today; is Khalid a good leader? Just because you are a good manager doesn’t make you a good leader. Running a state and corporate management are two different things."
Subahan has his own fires to put out
Fortunately for his rivals and unfortunately for Subahan, the Taman Templar ADUN has his own faults
In 2009, Subahan made a promise that he may soon regret. He had publicly vowed he would not stand for election if he failed to resolve the Bukit Botak housing issues in Selayang, which had been mismanaged by the UMNO-BN state government during Khir Toyo's time.
Subahan made this pledge in November 2009 during a MESRA Rakyat program organised for the people in Taman Mutiara, Bukit Botak. However, after nearly 3 years, the housing problems have yet to be resolved either by UMNO or Subahan.
It is Khalid's Pakatan state government that is now sorting out the issue for the Bukit Botak residents. And these residents are murmuring to themselves, if left to UMNO-BN, they would have to wait till the cows come home!
Yes, the truth is despite what Mohd Zin said earlier pertaining to Khalid's shortcomings, it is the present PR state government who are solving the residents' problems in Selangor - area by area - after decades of neglect by the BN.
“The state has adopted Bukit Botak as a pilot project to help solve problem of the settlers who had to wait many years to get a permanent roof over their heads”, said Khalid.
Will his constituents re-elect him?
So, Subahan faces his own problems of credibility. Even if he ignores his own promise and defends his seat in the 13th general election, there is the risk his constituents may dump him.
Another of Subahan’s efforts that ended with pie in the face was a move to erect and hang as many BN flags as possible all over Bandar Baru Selayang. A group of UMNO bikers in the style of Mat Rempits were gathered, paid and even escorted by the police to hang the flags.
But the people there were not impressed. After the Mat Rempits were done at around 3.00 am, another group of youths moved in and tore up all the BN flags, replacing these with Pakatan banners and such. To crown it all, the youths even piled all the BN flags together right in front of Subahan’s house to send him an unmistakable message.
Bad example comes from Najib
So for Najib, the most important lesson - if he is bothered to learn - is that a fish rots from the head. His 'machai' or men take the cue from his lead. If he is corrupt and under-handed, then they are corrupt and under-handed.
A good and reputable CEO suddenly catapulted into the MB's chair will not solve Selangor's woes. Najib cannot be so intellectually challenged as not to understand this - he is just playing favorite political game - imagery and perception. If he truly believed that a sold managerial background was key, he would not have forced Hassan Merican the ex-Petronas CEO to resign.And this is why, Hasan took up another job of a similar level in neighboring Singapore - to give Najib a nice slap in the face for the slight!
At the end of the day, strip away all the rhetoric and hot gas, Najib will go against all good advice and rational thinking. Like all past UMNO presidents, he will appoint someone who will support him and obey his orders. That is the main criteria to become an UMNO Mentri Besar! No doubt, the candidate will have to swallow his pride and say 'YES' in double-quick time whenever Najib throws out a question, but it is worth it!
Once, they sit in the MB's chair, they can do whatever they like and Najib won’t care a hoot, even if the state goes bankrupt. Instead, he will support them if they are caught up in any scandal for the UMNO president too benefits from questionable deals struck by the MB. Sometimes, the UMNO money-making system is like a pyramid or multilevel selling scheme, where dubious 'commissioning' is the name of the game.
Doing it all wrong
Lastly, if anyone has done it all wrongly, Najib may be the perfect example. This is why Khir Toyo dares to fire poison darts from his blog now and then.
Najib has shown how NOT to manage a government. For example, he should know better than to meddle with the choice of contractors for the Ampang LRT extension. He should not have directed the tender board to award the deal to a consortium led by George Kent Bhd, which is controlled by his crony from school days.
The Ampang LRT deal is a clear example of not heeding good, sound and professional advice based on proper vetting procedures. Najib has shown himself as the best example of what UMNO prime ministers, mentri besars or chief ministers should NOT be - corrupt, dishonest and incompetent as ever.
Malaysia Chronicle




























    


Wan Azizah, S’gor MB in waiting?

Zefry Dahalan | July 18, 2012
Naming her as the candidate for the post will solve many problems in Pakatan as well as secure the support of women voters.
PETALING JAYA: In politics nothing is impossible.
In recent weeks it is clear that Selangor Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim is facing stiff internal pressure from PKR deputy president Azmin Ali’s camp when the latter’s supporters waged a war against Khalid’s private secretary Faekah Hussin through the Internet and social media.
Even though both Khalid and Azmin never publicly showed that they are at odds, the strained ties between the duo is an open secret.
About a year ago sources told FMT that there will be a major reshuffle in Selangor after the 13th general election. At that point of time it was said that PKR de facto leader, Anwar Ibrahim, planned to field Khalid only in a parliamentary seat (Bandar Tun Razak) and make him a Cabinet minister if Pakatan Rakyat marched into Putrajaya.
Meanwhile, Azmin will contest in his Bukit Antarabangsa state seat and eventually be made the new Selangor menteri besar.
However, recent developments in Selangor PKR, including the Faekah saga and few other internal crisis, requires Anwar to act on the issue carefully in order not to hurt both Khalid and Azmin respectively.
He needs to find a strong figure to unite Selangor PKR in order to hold the state with the help of PAS and DAP as well.
One such figure is his wife and PKR president Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail.
Personal touch
Wan Azizah has always been addressed as Kak Wan by PKR leaders and members even in the division and branch levels. That is the personal touch and closeness that Wan Azizah has with PKR grassroots members that not even Anwar has.
So speculation is rife that a few PKR division leaders in the state who are unhappy with both Khalid and Azmin are proposing that Wan Azizah contest in a Selangor state seat and eventually be made as the new menteri besar if Pakatan retains the state.
On July 15, Azmin was quoted by Sinar Harian as saying that Selangor PKR is willing to accept Wan Azizah if she decides to contest in a state seat in Selangor.
However, he said that she must first get the support of the PKR grassroots in the state.
Although a very democratic practice, it seems strange that a party president has to go through the state leadership and grassroots in order to secure a seat.
Imagine if Umno president Najib Tun Razak suddenly decides to contest in Negeri Sembilan and Menteri Besar Mohd Hasan says that he needs to seek the permission of his grassroots leaders first?
Yesterday, the speculation of Wan Azizah contesting in Selangor grew stronger when Kapar PKR publicly offered her to contest in the Sementa state seat.
The Sementa seat was won by Umno’s Abdul Rahman Palil uncontested during the 12th national polls when the PKR candidate failed to turn up on nomination day.
The pros and cons
Let’s start with the cons first.
If Wan Azizah contests in a state seat in Selangor, Umno may accuse PKR of practising cronyism and brand the party as a family party.
However, this strategy may not have much of an impact as by now the majority of Malaysians don’t see the Anwar and Wan Azizah combination as an element of cronyism even after their daughter Nurul Izzah was elected as the party’s vice-president.
Malaysians know why Wan Azizah is there and how the party was formed and under what scenario the party was established. Umno and several BN component parties too have the family connection in their leaderships at the national, state and division levels.
Malaysian are largely not bothered about who sits in the party but rather how the leaders run the state and country and how the people can benefit from the policymakers.
On the positive side the move to nominate Wan Azizah as Selangor menteri besar will trigger an excitement among Malaysians, especially the women not only in Selangor but also nationwide.
Wan Azizah and Pakatan will be making history as she will be the first woman menteri besar should Pakatan win back the state.
It will also boost the support of women for Pakatan as internal surveys have shown that the opposition lacks the support of this gender.
Don’t be surprised if even Umno is forced to nominate a woman for the post should Pakatan name Wan Azizah.
Also read:
I’m ready to contest again, says Wan Azizah
Wan Azizah’s polls candidacy an edge for PKR



























July 20, 2012

Nurul Izzah said AAT did not meet the technical requirements needed for it to secure the contract. — File pic
PETALING JAYA, July 20 ― PKR has revealed another Putrajaya contract issued to a company that was not recommended for the job, adding today that purported recipient is also controlled by a son of Umno MP Datuk Seri Jamaluddin Jarjis. Citing documents in her possession, PKR vice president Nurul Izzah Anwar alleged today that Advanced Air Traffic Systems (M) Sdn Bhd (AAT), the firm involved in the faulty air traffic control system in Subang, has now been awarded a similar project for KLIA2.
She said AAT was awarded the contract even though another firm, AMP Corporation (M) Sdn Bhd (AMCOP), had been identified by qualified consultants as more suitable for the job.
“After Malaysians were shocked over the problems of the radar system developed by Selex Sistemi Integrati (SELEX) and AAT at the National Air Traffic Control Centre (NATCC) in Subang, PKR now understands that one of these firms was awarded a project for KLIA2 even though they were the losing bid,” said the Lembah Pantai MP told a press conference here.
AAT is linked to Ikwan Hafiz Jamaluddin through a company called Tirai Variasi, of which he is the largest shareholder. Ikhwan is the son of Jamaluddin, Malaysia’s Ambassador to the US with ministerial status. SELEX is also alleged to own 30 percent of AAT.
According to the Lembah Pantai MP, her allegations were based on a report she sourced from Malaysia Airports Holdings Bhd’s hired consultant, AECOM.
“For the KLIA2 project, a firm called AECOM was hired as consultants to MAHB and began collecting information, data and reports since February 2010 in order to present a comprehensive opinion, especially in three aspects which are the air control system, procedures and equipment,” she said.
She added that AECOM also had reservations with the efficiency of SELEX’s system and recommended that it be upgraded in order to cope with expected flight capacity once KLIA2 begins operations.
“According to the technical valuation report by AECOM dated December 9, 2011, they recognised the ability of AMCOP to carry out the said contract better and had endorsed them, but in the end the contract was handed to AAT ― a firm that, according to the report, did not meet the technical specifications needed for this project,” Nurul Izzah said.
She also pointed out that while the cost of AAT’s bid was lower compared to AMCOP’s, approval could only be given if AAT met all technical aspects listed, which they did not.
According to Nurul, MAHB’s special procurement committee meeting had also clearly given their valuation and recommendation for AMCOP to be chosen on March 15 this year.
“The choice of AAT is surprising because prior to this, AAT was already embroiled in a controversy that questioned the effectiveness and safety of Malaysia’s air traffic system as well as air transport passengers, through internal memos which lists the flaws and stability maintenance of the MIP-2 radar system for the Subang Airport,” she said.
Nurul Izzah also said that MAHB and the Transport Ministry must now justify awarding the air traffic control system for KLIA2 to AAT given the firm’s track record.
Last month, the PKR leader had highlighted that the ministry awarded a RM128.4 million contract via “closed tender” to Selex and AAT to develop the radar system for the NATCC.
Nurul Izzah said that the system installed at the NATCC by AAT and Selex was “so flawed controllers revert to the old system of not using radar,” putting the lives of millions of passengers at risk.
The KLIA2 low cost airport began receiving scrutiny last year when the cost of construction ballooned from RM1.9 billion to RM3.6 billion and its opening was delayed from September 2011 to April 2013.
Earlier this month, AirAsia group chief executive Tan Sri Tony Fernandes posted on his blog that the cost may now reach RM5 billion.
DAP’s Tony Pua blamed the cost increase on the relocation to the airport’s current site, which he said required extensive and costly earthworks that would not have been necessary at the original location.
Transport Minister Datuk Seri Kong Cho Ha responded to the claim by saying the shift was in line with the KLIA Blueprint December 2008.

























Speech @ "Tony Pua vs SYABAS" Dinner







Tony Pua on Talam, Syabas and other financial improprieties in Selangor and Malaysia












http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FG8aDlr7VE&feature=player_embedded
 























Tuesday, 24 July 2012 08:05

RM5.1 mil saved annually if SYABAS boss removed

Written by Harakah

The Selangor state government has proposed to sack the top duo of controversial private water concessionaire Syarikat Bekalan Air Selangor (SYABAS) after the company failed to provide a satisfactory answer to the state’s SYABAS monitoring committee on recent claims of a 'water crisis' in the state.
Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim said the dismissal of SYABAS executive chairman Rozali Ismail alone would save close to RM5.1 million annually.
Besides Rozali, SYABAS’s chief executive officer Ruslan Hassan has also been cited for failing to explain to the newly formed SYABAS monitoring committee.
“The state government is prepared to spend an allocation for new water treatment plant aiming to increase the capacity of treated water and immediately calls for tenders for the Second Mitigation project worth RM225 million,” added Khalid.
Following the proposal for water rationing, Khalid ordered the setting up of monitoring committee to oversee SYABAS. The committee among others demanded SYABAS to provide details of daily water output for each treatment plant as well as water level at dams, water demand based on metered consumption from January 2012 to date and water demand as forecasted by SYABAS.
The committee also wants SYABAS to furnish details on balancing reservoir, terminal reservoir and service reservoir’s water levels, areas affected by water disruptions and information on main pipe networks which include dams and problematic areas and non-revenue water (NRW).
SYABAS was also asked to explain the cause of supply problems, solutions and its emergency response plans.
Following three days of observation, the committee concluded that Rozali and Ruslan should be sacked.
Khalid said the two proposals were made in the people's interest as SYABAS had failed to provide adequate clean water supply as stipulated in the concessionaire agreement.
-Harakahdaily



















Speech @ "Tony Pua vs SYABAS" Dinner







Tony Pua on Talam, Syabas and other financial improprieties in Selangor and Malaysia












http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FG8aDlr7VE&feature=player_embedded






















The Selangor Water Crisis- the weapon of the Oppresor.( Part 1/2)



I am not going to underestimate the intelligence of Selangor people. They know the hidden political agenda in the ongoing water crisis. The DPM has said that water rationing is not necessary yet. It was and is never necessary; the dams are filled with water. Rainfall is plenty.
The water shortage issue is a fabricated one. The people know it’s a political ploy to justify what’s next? The what's next will be the continuous barrage against the state government for ignoring the welfare of the people. What’s next will be the justification to build another multibillion Ringgit water treatment plant perhaps already booked for by Syabas Satellite Company.
You are asking people to rise up against a government with a much better track record than all the states run by UMNO/BN leaders. This is the government that gives free water to a certain level. This is also a government that wants to stop the increase in water tariffs on an essential product. Water should have been a natural monopoly not some business allocated to a political crony. This is also the government that wants to reduce the astronomical salary of the person who heads Syabas but who hasn’t shown competence in managing a water supply and treatment company.
Why should Selangor people support UMNO/BN for the manner they proposed to solve the problem? Why should Selangor people elect a government that wants to increase water tariffs by up to 75% so that the selected few Malays will get richer?
Syabas is 70% owned by Puncak Niaga. The other two components in Syabas were given rights to share in fleecing people over the supply of water. The chairman of Syabas pays himself RM 400k/month and he was the person who buys pipes for Syabas from his own company.
Yes, why should we support a government that wants to increase water tariffs? Why should we want to support a government that seems to waste no time in justifying the construction of the Langat 2 dam which will costs RM 8 over billion?
This Langat 2 project- what is it? Is it a logrolling project where the main proponent behind the project wants to secure political allegiance in Selangor? Let’s say it’s the DPM who is the main proponent to have the Langat 2 Dam up and about. If he does that, then he is likely to secure the allegiance of UMNO warlords in Selangor, with whose support he can mount a challenge to kick out wimpy Najib.
Why should Selangor people rally behind Syabas which hasn’t done anything to correct its 32% non-water revenue losses?  
The syabas chairman pays himself over RM 400k a month, yet he couldn’t rectify the NRW losses. If Langat 2 comes about, will his pay gets doubled?
But why are you envious that a Malay gets that big salary? Chinese and others get that salary, you keep quite. That would be the typical knee-jerk response from UMNO supporters who see this issue from the perspectives of race–balancing wealth game. This is not a racial issue. The issue here is UMNO supports the inefficient, the incompetent and the corrupt and its cronies. We just don’t want such a government bossing us anymore.
The people complaining about this are probably Malays themselves. Why is it difficult for UMNO to accept that what it does, how it manages the country is objected to by Malays? If the entire population of Malaysia were Malay, then this would be a case of the oppressed rising in revolt against the oppressor. The downtrodden proletariat versus the bourgeois capitalists. So, imagine this to be issue confronting one people-Malaysians. Malaysians find the water issue objectionable and unconscionable. Only a lunatic will use water as a political weapon on its own people.
What has Syabas not tell the people of Malaysia? It hasn’t told the people that it hasn’t done anything to rectify the 32% non-revenue water losses. Over the years, it has managed to only treat 70% of the water that goes into the water treatment plant. It is clealy incompetent yet it wants more money from the government of the state.
The other part of NRW is the amount of water losses that are incurred in leaky pipes, and other infrastructure support that would ensure efficient water supply to consumers. Has Syabas done enough to replace pipes and prevent distributive losses?
We have not been told that Syabas has failed miserably to efficiently convert enough of that raw water into potable water. Potable water is water fit to run in our taps at home. The technical term for the amount of raw water that is wasted due to inefficiencies in the water treatment plant is called “non-revenue water” or NRW. 32% of water produced by Syabas is wasted. A staggering one-third of the raw water that enters a Syabas water treatment plant goes entirely to waste.
How does this wonderful record compare with what goes on in other countries? In Bangladesh, the NRW is 29 percent. NRW in one of the poorest country in the world is 29% and in Malaysia which is richer and wants to be 1st world country by 2020, the NRW is 32%. In the Philippines, Eastern Manila managed to bring down its NRW from 63 percent in 1997 to 11 percent in 2010.
Developed nations have even lower levels of NRW – Germany’s NRW is only 7%, while the Netherlands and Denmark have achieved NRW levels of 6%. But then, our leaders have a penchant of comparing our country to nations like Zimbabwe, Kampuchea, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Burma etc. we are much better than these countries say our leaders. SPM holders compare themselves to SRP holders but not STP holders. MCE against LCE but never HSC holders. Singapore, the much maligned little red dot down south has an NRW level of 5%.
Under Syabas’ stellar management whose chairman gets paid over RM 400k a month, it manages to waste six times more water than Singapore. How much does Singapore pay its water supply company CEO? Syabas, Syabas, well done!























The UMNO Water Torture: weapon of the Oppressor( 2/2)



The UMNO water torture: weapon of the oppressor.
The days of giving a free lunch is over. Syabas wants to raise tariffs; it must earn and qualify itself for the right to. It must show its track record to have improved on NRW losses. Otherwise, if you pay them without having them to show some improvements then you are condoning legalized plundering by Syabas- the use of government to secure benefits while impoverishing others.
Now if the federal government controlled by UMNO agrees and support the legalized plunder by Syabas on the Selangor people, it stands on the side of the oppressor. UMNO sudah menjadi parti penindas.
The Selangor government has done the right thing to refuse approval to Syabas to increase the water tariffs. Why should the people pay more? Why should the government agree to increased tariffs when Syabas has not shown any efforts to improve its services? What are we rewarding Syabas for? It hasn’t shown any intrinsic improvement meriting any raise. Syabas must earn the right to increase tariffs by showing corresponding improvement in quality of services and products. After years of milking money, if it still wants to be treated as an infant, it should be replaced. Let the Selangor government de-privatize Syabas.
It’s not an infirmed Bumiputera company that requires constant watching over. If it requires perpetual help, it’s better to replace it with another Bumiputera company which may be able to do a better job. Syabas under the leadership of Razali Ismaill It has shown nothing to this effect and that is evidenced by the extraordinary large losses in the form of NRW.
The problem with this company as with the UMNO leaders, they think they are the only people with brains and are capable of managing the country. With the quality people leaving UMNO and what’s left are the riff raffs, half past six quality, why should we entrust the management of this nation to UMNO and its satellite business arms?
The issue of improving competence is not addressed. Why isn’t this issue addressed by the DPM who has shown to be a quick draw McGraw in wasting no time to call for tenders to build a new water treatment plant in Langat costing RM8.65 billion. You mau kasi siapa Din? 
He should be directing his mind to measures to ensure a sufficient water supply for the Klang Valley by way of drastically reducing the amount of NRW. For that, we don’t need a RM8.65 billion water treatment plant, or to throw money at the problem – we just need managers with integrity at the helm.
Is the water crisis created to justify the construction of the RM8.65 billion water treatment plant? The water treatment plant project will of course make a few selected people extremely rich, while impoverishing the rest of the nation.  And as the plot meanders as planned, we are treated to a pandikutty standard of a statement from Syabas Technical Services Executive Director V Subramaniam, who issued a statement saying:
“The water crisis at present is the result of a shortfall in treated water for distribution caused by the refusal of the state government to issue the development order for construction of the Langat 2 treatment plant.”
Pandikutty!
You know its all politics. The UMNO/BN government is supporting an idea to hold the people of Selangor at ransom. Because Selangor is under Pakatan, it has shamelessly adopted this heinous strategy of using a biological weapon to subjugate the Selangor people. Why isn’t the Water Services Industry Act (WSIA), which was passed by the BN-dominated Parliament in 2006 applied in Selangor?
This law provided for the de-privatization of the water industry and its return to the respective state governments, where privatization had clearly proven to be a disastrous failure across the board. If it has done so in Malacca and Johor, why can’t it do so in Selangor? What are the outstanding substantive and procedural matters alluded to by the DPM that can be resolved in Johor and Melaka that can’t be sorted out by a much abler leadership in Selangor?
When the facts show that the federal government has allowed de-privatization in BN-held states while preventing it in Selangor, the hidden agenda becomes clear to all.
Will people support the plan by Syabas to increase water tariffs by up to 75 percent or will they support a government that has pledged to cap any tariff increases to 12 percent? Who is looking out for the rakyat, and who is looking out for themselves? Plus, we must support the Selangor government to slash the monthly salary of the Syabas chairman by 90 percent.
Let’s raise the stakes a little more. Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim is the man keenest on the de-privatization of the Selangor water industry and the takeover of Syabas by the state government. How is his track record since Najib has repeatedly asked people to judge him on his track record? Khalid Ibrahim is the man who increased the cash reserves of the Selangor government five-fold from RM400 million in 2008 to RM2.1 billion in 2012.
The achievements by the man are treated with the usual elegant silence from the mainstream media. Yet we are treated with daily doses of wisdom and advises from imbecilic and corrupted UMNO politicians.
What has Najib achieved thus far other than bewildering people with a potpourri of acronyms? Rebranding and renaming give you the illusion of doing something? Under UMNO and Najib, the federal debt – a debt our children and grandchildren will have to pay – has since the year 2007 nearly doubled to RM456 billion this year.
Who do you think is better suited to run our water industry? Are we going to allow people who are bringing the nation to the edge of a real – not manufactured – economic crisis to bully us into footing the bill for a RM8.65 billion megaproject that nobody needs?
This is just another of those crony-enriching projects along with FGV, George Kent and the innumerable new spending initiatives the Prime Minister has recently announced  which will bleed the nation’s coffers completely dry. Its plunder while you still can before the lights go out!


























Water Torture in Selangor leads UMNO to its Unmarked Grave.



“This is just another of those crony-enriching projects …. “
And those in the know at that time, and knowing Rozali’s (limited) abilities and background immediately knew he was merely a front man for an UMNO warlord, and you can guess who.
So no surprise that he didn’t keep the hard part of the bargain, that is, to reduce the NRW (non-revenue water). This is water that leaks out of old pipes, ductile iron and also asbestos pipes, and also stolen water.
The Selangor government is billed for processed/treated water that leaves the treatment plants, that is, billed on gross volume, but it can only sell to consumers 70%, after losing 30% NRW. So herein lies the problem. If the 30% NRW is cut down by Syabas then there may be no need for Langat 2.
But Rozali is not the man for the job. He specializes in milking Syabas. When there was a need to replace or add pipelines, instead of buying cheaper locally made ductile iron pipes (several Malaysian manufacturers), he went to Indonesia to buy a plant and supplied Syabas with expensive pipes from his own plant. Well, he was clever only in this sense.
Selangor should slug it out with the BN government. The people will support the MB.
I could not summarize it better to describe what’s happening to Selangor with the water issue. With the water issue as background, let’s see how BN fares against the incumbent government.
The UMNO information chief says it’s mobilizing the 6667 operation centers in preparation for the GE13. Mobilizing means what? Repainting that old hut and cutting the foliage and growth that has claimed the unused operations center? Putting up maps, flags, installing TV and karaoke machines?  Don’t forget to order a table for the blackjack sessions.
The General Election is expected to be held in September. That’s the best window of opportunity for UMNO to have the GE. Later dates would place UMNO in a very precarious position to do damage control on issues that are coming out of the woodwork. Also UMNO thinks what it has done in terms of handing money and cash to the public is sufficient to bring back the swing voters it lost in the GE12. 
We are not going to dispute that assessment. But we are not going to overrate its chances in getting back what it has lost either. On average the vote swing towards the opposition in 2008 was around 12%. In Selangor the swing was on average 20%.
With all the money it has given out, all the propaganda it dishes out through the media industrial complex (audio, visual and the new media UMNO owns and controls) it has probably succeeded in getting back at the most 5%. That still leaves a 7% vote swing in favor of Pakatan on the whole. In Selangor and Wilayah Persekutuan Kuala Lumpur with 11 parliamentary seats, Pakatan still has a surplus of 15%. That is assuming that while UMNO went on the offensive, Pakatan has been sleeping.
PM Najib has received favorable reports. Never mind if they are inflated by 30%. Najib has already collected postal votes from students at overseas centers which will be added to the overall votes UMNO and BN expect to get.
But UMNO goes into this election mindful of the fact that in 2008, it secured only 2.38 million of the 7.88 million votes. It got 2 million votes of the 5.7 million Malay votes. PAS and PKR got more Malay votes than UMNO. So it’s no wonder UMNO has spent all efforts and time at dehumanizing Anwar Ibrahim to get the public to look at Anwar Ibrahim as a sex fiend and a morally depraved being who is not morally fit to head this country. Only an animal is described as how Anwar Ibrahim is described.
But here is the hard truth- we may not like Anwar Ibrahim for whatever reasons we have, but if the people wills it that he heads the country, what can we with our `pristine’ moral scruples do?
DAP secured more Chinese votes than both MCA and Gerakan combined. Now, we can expect the MCA and Gerakan to be obliterated. BN is all UMNO now. The MCA and MIC boys should take a hard look at themselves and start thinking whether it’s prudent to stay on the side of the oppressors. It’s better for them to cast their lot with Pakatan. If I were a Malaysian Indian, after the `hang Ambiga’ outburst, I would be ashamed to support UMNO/BN. it would be dishonorable for any Malaysian Indian to support UMNO.
Now that UMNO is really really ready to go the polls allow us to reveal to them a few facts. In 2008, there was an average of 12% vote swing to the opposition. Let’s say with the amount of money that UMNO has given out and all those corporate moves that fatten their war chest, that vote swing obtained by the opposition in 2008, is reduced by 5%. That still leaves the opposition party- Pakatan with around 7% vote swing.
If the swing remains at 7%, BN will likely be left with less than 90 seats. They are out!
The PM wants to get Selangor back at all costs. He knows in 2008, voter swing was biggest in Selangor at 20.9% and in FT Kuala Lumpur at 20.5%. He’s pulling all the stops to recapture Selangor. The biggest single blunder UMNO/BN made was to use water as a weapon to pummel the people of Selangor into submission. That is the most despicable and heinous action UMNO/BN took. It’s going to be fatal to UMNO.
The people of Selangor must stand solidly behind Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim in facing this version of biological warfare visited upon them by the evil UMNO/BN power crazy leadership. The Selangor government should start thinking of setting up a new water supply company to replace syabas altogether. Or it should start building a state owned water treatment plant. With the heinous and unconscionable strategies expected from UMNO/BN, Selangor government must develop a siege mentality as defense. The people of Selangor must never cower at the face of this bestial behavior of the UMNO government.
This single treacherous act by UMNO /BN will only cause the vote swing obtained in 2008 to be entrenched and even escalate. For Selangor I predict the vote swing will stay around 15%. With 15% vote swing, how will the Pakatan fare in Selangor?
UMNO can only retain the current 6 parliamentary seats it has if over the 4 years, UMNO has regained 18% of the swing votes it lost in 2008. That is very unlikely given the gangster-style manner UMNO is taking to recapture Selangor. Even if UMNO has recovered 10 percentage points, UMNO will never regain Selangor.  Noh Omar and others hanging on their seats will be enjoying life as private citizens. Khir Toyo will pursue a rewarding career as a Tempe seller and Noh Omar will be a prawn farmer.
This is what will happen in Selangor under different vote swing scenarios. This was taken from a private intelligence study on the impact of vote swings on the future of BN and PR.
IF VOTE SWING IS
3%
5%
10%
1
SABAK BERNAM
PR
PR
PR
2
SUNGAI BESAR
BN
BN
PR
3
HULU SELANGOR
PR
PR
PR
4
TANJONG KARANG
BN
BN
PR
5
KUALA SELANGOR
PR
PR
PR
6
SELAYANG
PR
PR
PR
7
GOMBAK
PR
PR
PR
8
AMPANG
PR
PR
PR
9
PANDAN
PR
PR
PR
10
HULU LANGAT
PR
PR
PR
11
SERDANG
PR
PR
PR
12
PUCHONG
PR
PR
PR
13
KELANA JAYA
PR
PR
PR
14
PJ SELATAN
PR
PR
PR
15
PJ UTARA
PR
PR
PR
16
SUBANG
PR
PR
PR
17
SHAH ALAM
PR
PR
PR
18
KAPAR
PR
PR
PR
19
KLANG
PR
PR
PR
20
KOTA RAJA
PR
PR
PR
21
KUALA LANGAT
PR
PR
PR
22
SEPANG
BN
PR
PR
BN
3
2
0
PR
19
20
22
ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR
LIMA, ENAM, TUJUH, LAPAN
NAJIB RAZAK CAKAP BESOR
NAK TAWAN SELANGOR TIADA HARAPAN. 




























Speech @ "Tony Pua vs SYABAS" Dinner







Tony Pua on Talam, Syabas and other financial improprieties in Selangor and Malaysia












http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FG8aDlr7VE&feature=player_embedded


























GE-13: UMNO-BN targets Selangor



Tony Pua gets overwhelming public support against Syabas

UPDATED @ 06:59:54 PM 18-07-2012
July 17, 2012

Pua has pledged the excess of funds raised to the DAP General Election Fund. — file pic
PETALING JAYA, July 17 — The “RM1 for Water Rights: 100,000 Malaysians Support Tony Pua vs Syabas” online campaign in support of DAP federal lawmaker Tony Pua has announced that they have managed to collect more than RM150,000 from their online campaign.

A donation box making the rounds at dinner tonight.
“By the end of the online campaign, we have managed to collect RM150,939,” said the campaign’s organiser, Yeo Bee Yin tonight. When he took to the stage, Pua stated the overall total collected by the campaign, inclusive of the dinner and the rounds done by DAP volunteers with donation boxes.
“And so, I would like to announce the total amounts of the campaign. As announced earlier by Bee Yin, we managed to collect RM151,000. The dinner has managed to collect RM173,000. And the donation has managed to collect RM22,400. This is an overall total of RM310,000,” he announced.
The amount collected is RM110,000 more than the sum Pua has been ordered to pay in damages to Syabas.

Lim Kit Siang addresses attendees of the dinner.
The excess has been pledged by Pua to the DAP General Election Fund. Last month, Syabas won a defamation suit against the DAP national publicity secretary, who was ordered by the Kuala Lumpur High Court to pay RM200,000 in damages besides costs and interests.
The opposition party had started an online campaign to raise RM100,000 to help the federal lawmaker pay the amount by July 16, but the financial support from the public was beyond expectation, organisers have said.
The cause to aid the MP had instead managed to collect RM143,256 by July 16 from tens of thousands of Malaysians in a one-week period.



GE-13: UMNO-BN targets Selangor












‘Syabas a national security threat’

FMT Staff | July 18, 2012
Tony Pua says there is enough water for Selangor consumers and accuses the concessionaire of holding the public to ransom with its call for rationing.
PETALING JAYA: Syabas is holding the public to ransom with its threat to ration water, DAP publicity chief Tony Pua said today.
Reiterating the Selangor government’s declaration that there was no water shortage in the state, he said the water concessionaire had, by its “fear mongering”, exposed itself as a national security threat.
“Visits by Selangor executive committee members Ronnie Liu and Dr Xavier Jeyakumar to the various dams across the state yesterday proved that the dams are full and there is no shortage of raw water,” he said in a press statement.
Syabas officially admitted yesterday that there was no shortage of raw water, but in a statement that Pua characterised as “goal shifting”, claimed that the state was short of treated water.
“This is essentially an admission that the Syabas treatment plants are either operating inefficiently or there is not enough treatment plant capacity at existing water reservoirs,” Pua said.
He noted that Syabas had been lobbying for the new Langat 2 treatment plant to be built.
According to the concessionaire’s plan, the new plant, if approved, would be ready only by 2014 at the earliest.
Even then, Pua said, the plant would treat water sourced expensively from Pahang instead of from existing supplies. Hence, Langat 2 was not necessary, he added.
“Instead, what is needed is a thorough review of the existing water treatment plants operated by… Puncak Niaga Sdn Bhd, Syarikat Pengeluaran Air Sungai Selangor Holdings (SPLASH) and Konsortium ABASS.
“Selangor Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim has already promised to build additional capacities at the existing treatment plants, and these measures will take less than a year to complete.”
Pua, the MP for Petaling Jaya Utara, said Syabas’ threat was a ruse to frighten the seven million water consumers in Selangor into forcing the state to give its approval for the Langat 2 project.
“It is a fear-mongering tactic used by Syabas, which is 70% owned by Puncak Niaga, firstly to help Barisan Nasional win Selangor in the next general election in order to perpetuate their control over water rights in the state.
“Secondly, it is an excuse to try and force the state government to agree to the RM3.94 billion Langat 2 project to source raw water from Pahang, which is much more expensive than the existing raw water as well as other available means.”
The Selangor government has refused to permit Langat 2, claiming that it is unnecessary in view of “overflowing dams” in the state. Furthermore, state officials have said, it would raise the cost of water to consumers.
Pua said the privatisation of Syabas had resulted in the interest of the people of Selangor, Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya being severely compromised.
“Syabas can now act with impunity to threaten the security of the nation by holding the people and the state government to ransom,” he said, adding that the federal water authority must deal with it with the “utmost urgency and without compromise”.
“We call upon the federal government and Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Air Negara (SPAN) to immediately censure Syabas for unilaterally threatening water rationing without prior consultation… with the Selangor state government and other relevant authorities.”

Also read:
Mampukah S’gor atasi krisis air?













GE-13: UMNO-BN targets Selangor



GE-13: UMNO-BN targets Selangor




















Speech @ "Tony Pua vs SYABAS" Dinner







Tony Pua on Talam, Syabas and other financial improprieties in Selangor and Malaysia












http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FG8aDlr7VE&feature=player_embedded

























GE-13: UMNO-BN targets Selangor

 Please scroll all the way down page to READ article!

 

 

 

 

 

GE-13: UMNO-BN targets Selangor

 Please scroll all the way down page to READ article!

Wednesday, July 25, 2012

 

 

Never allow UMNO Government to blackmail us


Selangor may hold a referendum for the public in the state and the Federal Territory to vote on its planned takeover of Syabas.
State Executive Councillor for Health, Plantation Workers, Poverty and Compassionate Government, Dr Xavier Jeyakumar, said the referendum idea would be pursued while awaiting the Attorney General's decision and preparing necessary legal action on the matter.
"We know we are in the right, and we are confident that the people of Selangor have faith in the government they elected," he said today.
He described the decision of the Special Cabinet Committee on the water issue as a "forgone conclusion" as some of its members had openly expressed support for the Langat 2 Plant proposed by Syabas.
He claimed that the committee's decision was to protect Syabas. "The cabinet committee seems to be more interested in Syabas than the fate of 5 million people in Selangor," he said.
Sudden withdrawal of water rationing shows crisis was 'manufactured'
Xavier also highlighted the Special Cabinet Committee's assertion that there is no need for water rationing in the state.
"It showed that Syabas is manufacturing the water crisis. Who is going to take responsibility over this?" he asked.
Meanwhile, the Coalition Against Water Privatisation (CAWP) is calling for a Royal Commission of Inquiry to probe into the tussle over the water concession.
When contacted, its coordinator Charles Santiago said there are more questions than answers coming out of the whole saga.
"Why is there so much of reluctance to open Syabas' books? Why are there contradictory statements being made?" he asked.
"One minute Syabas says that water rationing is necessary and then the Deputy Prime Minister (Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin) says it is not," he said, alleging that the people were being held "at ransom".
"Syabas has also failed to comply with what is in the water agreement between it and the state and federal governments," he claimed, adding that an inquiry would be the best way to determine all discrepancies and allegations at hand.
"This inquiry should also look into the necessity for the Langat 2 plant," he added.
An Umno tool
Exco for Tourism, Consumer Affairs and the Environment, Elizabeth Wong, called Syabas an Umno tool to pressure Selangor into approving Langat 2.
"The federal government has no plans as to how Langat 2 will solve the water shortage considering the state government has prepared a water mitigation plan worth RM 225 million," said Wong.
She added that there has to be an independent committee to determine which project would solve the treated water problem at the lowest cost.
"The Barisan Nasional federal government should admit its mistake in signing the Water Privatisation Agreement in 2004, a mistake which cannot be corrected until now," she added.
Wong said the Selangor government has the power to take over Syabas under the Water Supply Industry Act 2006, adding the federal government decision to block this showed the BN government favoured corporations over the rakyat.
Exco for Women's Affairs, Science, Innovation and Culture, Rodziah Ismail, insisted that Syabas cannot implement water rationing.
She said the government-linked company had not consulted the state before announcing its rationing plan.
"Syabas should withdraw its wishes and actions of rationing water and raising water prices by almost 40% in Selangor as it does not benefit the people at all," added Rodziah.











GE-13: UMNO-BN targets Selangor

 Please scroll all the way down page to READ article!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 





Speech @ "Tony Pua vs SYABAS" Dinner







Tony Pua on Talam, Syabas and other financial improprieties in Selangor and Malaysia












http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FG8aDlr7VE&feature=player_embedded

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

"Tony Pua vs SYABAS" Fund-Raiser: Mission Accomplished!


The DAP would like to make an official announcement to declare that we have collected sufficient funds from our "RM1 for Water Rights: 100,000 Malaysians Support Tony Pua vs Syabas" Campaign! The campaign is an overwhelming success, and we will end the online fund-raiser today.
As at 4pm 13/7/12 (Fri), the online donation campaign has raised RM143,256, a remarkable achievement of small contributions from tens of thousands of Malaysians in less than a week.
The KL High Court has ordered Tony Pua to pay RM200,000 in damages plus interest plus costs. SYABAS is claiming RM80,000 for costs, but this is amount being negotiated.
The Party will be able to raise the balance of the required funds from our sell-out fund-raising dinner on 17/7/12 (Tue) Dewan Sivik MBPJ. The dinner has sold more than 100 tables.
Any excess funds from the collection will go into the DAP General Election Fund.
We would like to thank all Malaysians for the generous support and this only proves that is we act together, we can change the nation!

Background of this issue:

Selangor state government launched a campaign in 2009 to buy-back the privatized water concessionaires in order to provide quality water at affordable prices.

Tony Pua campaigned hard for the above and was sued for defamation by SYABAS. The High Court awarded RM200k in damages to SYABAS.

Hence we are calling for 100,000 Malaysians to contribute as little as RM1 each to support Tony Pua in his effort to battle with SYABAS and to continue to speak up for the Rakyat in this issue.

Tony has appealed the judgment to the Court of Appeal but he has been asked to pay the damages to SYABAS first. If the appeal is successful, the money collected in this campaign will be channeled to DAP General Election preparation fund.



 

 

 

 

 

 





Speech @ "Tony Pua vs SYABAS" Dinner







Tony Pua on Talam, Syabas and other financial improprieties in Selangor and Malaysia












http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7FG8aDlr7VE&feature=player_embedded

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Thursday, 26 July 2012 14:21

IT'S WAR! Muhyiddin & Rozali are creating a WATER tsunami for BN to DROWN IN

Written by  Mathias Gomes, Stan Lee, Malaysia Chronicle

There is a popular saying, 'when Elephants fight the grass gets trampled'. The Malay version is no less powerful, 'Gajah sama gajah berlawan pelandok mati tersempit di tengah'.
In the case of the boiling hot 'water crisis' in Selangor, the residents of the state are the grass. They will get trampled and they will suffer. The Federal Government led by Prime Minister Najib Razak appears determined to play politics to the hilt. Since the state has already fallen into the hands of the Opposition, what better way to teach the people of Selangor a lesson for voting the Pakatan Rakyat in the 2008 general elections than to hold them to ransom over a 'manufactured' water shortage.
Deserved or not, this is the talk prevalent throughout the state. And it won't do Najib's Umno party any good or help it to win back the hearts and minds of Selangorians, among the most intelligent in the country. And this is why despite all the spin from the Umno-controlled newspapers, the fight over who controls the water industry in the state is going Pakatan's way.
How can the people not believe that Umno 'created' the water crisis, threatening water rationing so as to hammer through the RM8.65bil Langat 2 water treatment plant when there is heavy rainfall with some areas even suffering from floods.
Caught in a lie after an independent check ordered by the Selangor government, Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin did not even have the grace to offer an explanation - he could only bluster his way through with a final 'proclamation' that Langat 2 would proceed to be built. Few have doubts that Langat 2 will eventually benefit Umno leaders and their cronies. And guess what - the bill will be passed onto irate taxpayers!
Umno no longer cares, all it wants is MONEY
Perhaps the Umno-led BN federal government thought it could paint the Selangor state government in a negative light by blowing up the crisis but all it has done is highlight the BN's unusual urgency for Langat 2 and pushed the people over to the side of the Pakatan Rakyat Selangor.
To block such a reckless spending spree and to tackle the problem at source by forcing water distributor Syabas to pull up its socks and raise its output of treated water, Selangor Mentri Besar Khalid Ibrahim and team have decided to takeover Syabas and sack its chairman Rozali Ismail, who incidentally is an Umno division leader.
What is Syabas ? Some say it is a leech created by the federal government to suck the people's blood, while filling the bank accounts of the Umno elite. The fight that the Selangor Pakatan government is giving Syabas and the Federal Government is therefore appropriate because the state government has every right to protect its citizens, who voted them in.
After being exposed, Syabas now mysteriously admits there is no water shortage. The dams are full but the water is dirty and not treated. Again, Langat is brought out. Syabas now says it wants Langat 2 to be up 'soon' so that the Selangor water woes will flow away. But how soon is soon.
Rozali himself admits Langat 2 won't be ready until 2015. Did we hear it right - 2015? This means people have to wait for 3 years before they can be assured that there will be no water rationing and their taps will not run dry.
And the Langat 2 cost cost at RM 8.65 billion? Don't we smell a lot of rotten rats here? Finally, guess what! The person to oversee all that money will be none other than the DPM of Malaysia himself - Muyhiddin Yassin.
Which also raises the question of why Muhyiddin? He's in charge of Education, what does he know of water treatment and distribution? It really does not take rocket scientist to put two and two together. It sure looks some high-up people have been planning Langat 2 as their last 'cut' before the Umno-BN sings sing Auld Lang Syne and fades into obscurity after the 13th general election.
Why give in to daylight robbery that will endanger our kids' financial future
The fact is, there is really not a big water problem in Selangor. There are 20 Water Treatment plants available in the state and only Syabas is saying that all are overloaded.
Really? Malaysia is a water basin, we will never run dry - nature will see to it. It is only the less than angelic Syabas and Rozali who think that 20 treatment plants are not enough.
And if there was really a bad water problem in Selangor, as long as it isn't the fault of the state government's, don't worry. The people won't blame anyone because they sure as hell don't want any Langat 2 mucking up the state's finances and stealing from their children's financial heritage.
So go ahead, Myhyiddin and Rozali. Try your best to sabotage Selangor's water. The people will fight back, they will use the old-fashioned ways rather than give in to daylight robbery.
Dig a hole in the backyard, collect and pump the water. Then filter it the old fashioned way with layered sand. That's what my grandfather did and he did not die by using that method. In fact, he raised our generation with it.
Malaysia Chronicle




























Charitable Koon Yew Yin founder IGB
The official and Government friendly printed media has been carrying column after column on the “water crisis” in Selangor during the past few weeks. Readers will have noticed that the finger of blame for this so-called “crisis” has been pointed towards the Selangor state government and the larger Pakatan Rakyat coalition.
The prime minister and his Barisan colleagues have made repeated charges that Mentri Besar Khalid Ibrahim has failed to take care of the interests of the people of Selangor and accused him of allowing a water shortage situation to develop.
In his latest salvo, PM Najib Razak has said that Selangor’s water crisis can be resolved. According to him,
“It cannot be that the Federal Government is unable to resolve the water problem in Selangor. We can do it”
He also added that “we have to wait until the time comes when the people of Selangor make a choice and choose a government that can do it.”
This statement by the Prime Minister shows how dirty and unscrupulous the BN government is prepared to be in its attempt to stay in power.
Even by the low standards of the BN’s electioneering during the past 50 years, this latest election ploy is quite remarkable. No other prime minister or cabinet in our political history has attempted to make so much political capital out of a basic need of the rakyat such as water.
With the elections due soon, it is evident now that no sector or area of life in the country is exempt from being made a political football by Barisan.
The public though is not fooled one bit by this cheap election tactic engineered by the political and economic interests associated with previous state government to win back the state of Selangor by playing on the fears of the public and by spinning a fairy tale on the lack of water in the dams.
This latest piece of political spin also suffers from the disadvantage that most people in the country are fully aware of the back ground and root causes of Selangor’s water predicament.
Selangor Water Problem Created by BN
When Najib argued that it cannot be that the Federal Government cannot resolve the water problem in Selangor, he conveniently forgot to add that in fact the water problem was created entirely and solely by the Federal Government.
It is a fact that the concession agreement for Syabas was approved by the Federal Government in 2005. Earlier, the Barisan Nasional government privatised the water industry to four different companies from 1996 onwards resulting in wastage and mismanagement, with the Selangor case the worst of the cases.
It is important to note too that in December 2009, the federal government provided a RM320.8 million back-loaded, interest-free unsecured soft loan to Puncak Niaga, the holding company of Syabas to settle their debts. In other words, an expensive bail out at public expense.
What Others Have Written
Members of the public have also written to express their concern though none of this ever appears in the print media. In December 2010, at the height of the Selangor state government’s attempt to submit a memorandum to the Agong over Selangor's water issue approaches, the salary of Syarikat Bekalan Air Selangor's chief executive officer was hotly debated over micro-blogging site Twitter.
In particular the readers were posting comments about the salary of SYABAS's Rozali Ismail, who earns some RM425,000 a month, 19 times more than the salary of the prime minister, at RM22,826.65 a month.
“If UMNO's brand of Ketuanan means paying its GLC CEOs RM425,000 per month, then I also want!" shouts one named 'anthraxxx'.
A twitterati calling himself 'fickryyaacob', suggested that Rozali may have helped fund UMNO's election campaigns in the past.
“Is every payment for a litre of water flow(ing) to UMNO? Are you funding UMNO’s election funds?” he asked (http://en.harakahdaily.net/index.php/berita-utama/1877-twitter-fun-as-syabas-ceos-fat-salary-becomes-focus.html)
More recently, Nat Tan has written an excellent post in Malaysiakini analyzing the crisis. I cannot agree more with his conclusion that the water issue is in reality a crisis of corruption (see http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/204258)
Water Gods Angry With Barisan
A few weeks ago when water rationing appeared a distinct possibility in Selangor due to the long drought, the Barisan leadership must have been congratulating itself that they had victory in Selangor state in the bag.
This is because Barisan would have been able to use their formidable spin machinery with assistance from Syabas to turn the people’s water shortage frustrations on Pakatan. We can be sure that the hundreds of pictures and hours of television programming would have appeared focusing on the lines of people queuing for water in Selangor. The negative impact of the issue on the Pakatan and its propaganda value to Barisan would have been priceless.
Unfortunately for the Barisan and Syabas, the water gods have not cooperated with them. Although there was a possibility of water shortage about a month ago in view of the prolonged drought, the heavens have opened up in Selangor during the past few weeks and the rivers and dams are full.
Repent Now
Now that the water gods have turned against them, my advice to the Barisan is simple: repent your crooked and corrupt ways. Again, I like to repeat what I wrote last year on the issue:
If this is an example of the New Economic Model (NEM), then God help our country. All Malaysians, whether from Selangor or from other states, must demand full transparency and accountability on this issue.
It is the height of economic foolishness to award concessions or contracts without open competitive tenders. This warning is for all the 131 projects that are being envisaged under the Economic Transformation Programme (ETP) including the MRT project which is supposed to transform Malaysia into a high-income nation.( http://english.cpiasia.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2088:empty-promise-of-reform-in-sgor-water-service&catid=211:koon-yew-yin&Itemid=169)
Post script
Now that the rivers and dams are full again, I predict that our Barisan chameleons will sing a different tune. We can expect them to declare victory over Khalid and claim credit for the ending of the water crisis in the state.
Malaysia Chronicle

 

My Grandchildren

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Reprimand Najib, Bersih tells EC

G Vinod | July 26, 2012
PM telling Selangorians to vote “the right government” to resolve water issue is tantamount to political campaigning, says Samad Said.
PETALING JAYA: Bersih co-chairman A Samad Said wants the Election Commission (EC) to reprimand Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak for campaigning before Parliament is dissolved.
Samad said that Najib’s statement urging Selangor voters to “choose the right government” to resolve the state’s water issue was clear-cut political campaigning for the general election.
“The EC should reprimand the prime minister. How can you allow Najib to say such things when election is not even called for yet?” asked Samad.
English daily The Star today reported Najib as saying that the Selangor water crisis could be resolved but it needed a state administration which can handle the issue well.
“It cannot be that the federal government is unable to resolve the water problem in Selangor. We can do it.
“If we can make Malaysia the global centre for initial public offerings (IPO), how can it be that we can’t solve water issues?” Najib asked.
Najib also said: “The problem could be resolved by the BN government but we have to wait until the time comes when the people of Selangor make their choice and choose a government that can do it”.
Samad, a national laureate, said that the prime minister’s announcement of paying half month bonuses to civil servants yesterday could also be considered as political campaigning.
“This is not right. Najib should not abuse his powers to campaign right now.
“Unfortunately, the mainstream media is being used to swing the voters’ mood and the opposition has little avenue to counter the campaign,” said Samad, who added the move was undermining democracy.

EC: Najib gave his views only

Meanwhile, EC deputy chairman Wan Ahmad Wan Omar dismissed Samad’s accusation, saying Najib was merely voicing out about the stalemate in resolving Selangor’s water issue.
“We all know about the differing views both the federal government and the state government has on the issue. Najib was merely giving his views on the matter,” said Wan Ahmad.
He also said that it was a day-to-day government administrative issue and as the prime minister, Najib has the right to speak out on the impasse between both governments.
“If Najib had said this after the Parliament is dissolved, then it can be considered wrong,” said the EC official.
Wan Ahmad also dismissed claims that the bonus announcements for civil servants as political campaigning saying it’s an on-going programme and policy by the government.
Yesterday, Najib announced a half month’s bonus with a minimum RM500 payout to all civil servants for the Hari Raya Aidilfitri celebrations.































Public officer or public servant: a question of law, not what you think

An old question about how to lay corruption charges against people who hold public office has arisen like a ghoul from the grave in which it had apparently been buried several decades ago.
The lawyer for Khir Toyo says his client, then Selangor menteri besar and chairman of the state development corporation PKNS, does not meet the definition of public servant (as set out in the Penal Code) when he was charged with corruption in buying a plot of land on which he built a mansion said to be worth RM24mil.

On the face of it, Khir Toyo’s argument goes against accepted notions of the meaning of public servant. After all, if a menteri besar is not a public servant, who is?
Pakatan Rakyat supporters, who well remember Khir Toyo’s attempts to undermine the Pakatan Rakyat election victory in Selangor in 2008, reacted in anger to the Khir Toyo argument. He was menteri besar, he serves the public, he accepts public funds for serving the public, therefore he is a public servant, says the angry horde.
Well, the Malaysian courts agree.
In 1977, the Federal Court comprising Lord President Tun Mohd Suffian, Chief Justice Raja Azlan Shah, Federal Court judges Wan Suleiman, Chang Min Tat and Syed Othman heard an appeal in a Malacca corruption case. They quoted two precedents in English law, and held as follows:
We accept that a public officer in the context of the relevant ordinance is an officer who discharges any duty in the discharge of which the public are interested, more so if he is paid from public funds.
Federal Court judgement, PP v C.S. Tan
That’s clear enough. That’s what the layman would say about Khir Toyo, too.
But the 1977 judgment had been about whether Tan Cheng Swee, the Malacca Municipal Commissioner, met the definition of “public officer” under anti-corruption laws. (He was said to have approved plans for a housing development by a company of which he was the executive chairman.)
Khir Toyo, however, was charged under a different law, the Penal Code, and charged as a “public servant”, not as a “public officer”.
What’s the difference, the layman may ask. Aren’t they the same? Not quite. The two terms are defined differently, in two different laws.
Which definition would apply? The Federal Court discussed the two definitions in detail and that Tan Cheng Swee as Commissioner of the Malacca Municipality, qualified as a “public servant” under the Penal Code, as well as “public officer” under anti-corruption laws.
This is the meaning of ‘public officer’ under the Anti-Corruption Act

“officer of a public body” means any person who is a member, an officer, an employee or a servant of a public body, and includes a member of the administration, a member of Parliament, a member of a State Legislative Assembly, a judge of the High Court, Court of Appeal or Federal Court, and any person receiving any remuneration from public funds, and, where the public body is a corporation sole, includes the person who is incorporated as such;

» Anti-Corruption Act
This is the meaning of ‘public servant’ under the Penal Code
There are 10 specific examples (one later repealed): a military officer; a judge; court officer; jury member or assessor; prison warders, police and health officers (generally); and this —
(i) every officer whose duty it is, as such officer, to take, receive, keep or expend any property, on behalf of Government, or to make any survey, assessment, or contract on behalf of Government, or to execute any revenue process, or to investigate, or to report on any matter affecting the pecuniary interests of Government, or to make, authenticate, or keep any document relating to the pecuniary interests of Government, or to prevent the infraction of any law for the protection of the pecuniary interests of Government, and every officer in the service or pay of Government, or remunerated by fees or commission for the performance of any public duty;
(j) every officer whose duty it is, as such officer, to take, receive, keep or expend any property, to make any survey or assessment, or to levy any rate or tax for any secular common purpose of any village, town or district, or to make, authenticate or keep any document for the ascertaining of the rights of the people of any village, town or district.
» Penal Code
Khir Toyo’s lawyer wants the Appeal Court to hold that Khir Toyo as menteri besar cannot be regarded as a “public servant”.
And until the Appeal Court decides, the more interesting question is: why was Khir Toyo not charged as a “public officer” under anti-corruption laws, in which there is little ambiguity about the position of menteri besar? Instead, he was charged under the Penal Code as a “public servant”, which his lawyer now contends does not apply.

In either case, it looks like the ghost of the Tan Cheng Swee judgment is well alive and come a-haunting
Disclaimer: no legal opinion was sought for this posting. Consult your friendly neighbourhood Pakatan-aligned lawyer for further elucidation (at your own expense, of course).





























 Your Royal Highness, It is So Trivial. Does It Really Matter ?


 Sunday, September 02, 2012

 

Read here and here for more


Photobucket 
 The Sultan of Selangor has questioned the state’s decision to invite Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to grace an official National Day celebration last week, a Malay daily reported today as controversy grows over the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) government’s treatment of the palace. 
“His Royal Highness the Sultan finds it strange that in such a programme, Anwar, who is not part of the state government’s top leadership, was the guest-of-honour.
“The PKR Opposition Leader also does not hold any official portfolio, except as the appointed State Economic Adviser,” Datuk Mohamad Munir Bani, who is private secretary to Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah, was reported by Sinar Harian as saying.

“The convention is that if His Royal Highness is unable to attend the state government’s official programmes, the Mentri Besar replaces the Sultan to give speeches and so on. But, why was Anwar invited and gave a speech, when this was an official programme, not a political programme?” the palace official told the Malay daily.

Mohamad was previously reported as saying that the Selangor Sultan was not invited or informed of the state-level celebrations.

“Maybe the people will wonder why in an official programme, the Sultan did not appear, but Anwar became the guest of honor and came forward to speak,” he was quoted as saying.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had yesterday castigated the PR-led Selangor government for shutting out the state Ruler from its official National Day celebrations at Dataran Shah Alam last Thursday, suggesting that it placed greater importance on Anwar  who was only an economic adviser than the monarch.

“The question of disrespecting the Selangor Sultan does not surprise us... they show more respect to their economic adviser who has no locus standi,” he told reporters at the Selangor Umno Adilfitri celebration in Sungai Buloh yesterday as he scoffed at his political nemesis’ specially-created position within the state government.

“His Royal Highness is the symbol to the state that we must respect,” he said, adding that the Selangor Sultan was a symbol of the state’s sovereignty and unity and should be accorded the highest level of respect.
Najib, who is also Umno president, had warned that there the PKR-DAP-PAS opposition bloc would change many things, including the royal institution should it succeed in taking power at the next general elections due soon.

Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim has deflected criticism saying the state countdown to the country’s 55th Independence Day last Thursday at Dataran Shah Alam was not politically-motivated.
“This celebration has never been a politically-motivated celebration and has been carried out by government officials from the state secretariat office for several years,” Khalid, who is also the PKR treasurer, was quoted as saying in today’s New Sunday Times.

Khalid reportedly said that the state had complied with the usual practices in organising such an event.
The weekend edition of the Umno-linked English daily also reported Khalid saying that State Secretary Datuk Mohamad Khusrin Munawi would explain the circumstances in a report.

 The Selangor government today denied it had intentionally shut out Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah from its official National Day celebrations last week, and pointed out that the state ruler did not traditionally attend the event and this has been the practice since the previous Barisan Nasional (BN) administration.

The state leadership — now under Pakatan Rakyat (PR) control — was put on the backfoot today after the Selangor Ruler reportedly questioned its decision to invite Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to grace the event despite the fact that he holds no official position in the government, pointing to a widening rift with the palace.

Faekah Husin, who is political secretary to Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim , defended the state's decision as the norm for the past four years.

“It has been the tradition for the last four years that His Royal Highness the Sultan is not invited and (does not) attend the Merdeka day celebrations programme.

“His Royal Highness is only invited to the yasin and tahlil ceremony at state mosque, Sultan Salahuddin Abdul Aziz Shah Mosque,” she told The Malaysian Insider when contacted.

She said it had always been the case even when the state was under BN administration. '

She was responding to Malay daily, Sinar Harian’s front page news report today, that the Selangor Sultan had questioned the state’s decision to invite Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to grace the state’s official National Day celebrations last Thursday night.

“The convention is that if His Royal Highness is unable to attend the state government’s official programmes, the Mentri Besar replaces the Sultan to give speeches and so on. But, why was Anwar invited to give a speech, when this was an official programme, not a political programme?” Datuk Mohamad Munir Bani, who is private secretary to the Selangor Sultan told Sinar.

The Sultan’s private secretary was also previously reported as saying that the Selangor Sultan was not invited or informed of the state-level celebrations.

Faekah said she was confident that the committee organising the event, led by State Secretary Datuk Khusrin Munawi, had conducted checks on protocol when deciding the invitation list.

“We believe Datuk Khusrin has seen the protocol list for invitations of previous years including celebrations during the time of BN’s rule (in Selangor).

“But if this year, His Royal Highness had the intention to attend the Merdeka eve celebrations, His Royal Highness’ private secretary Datuk Mohamad Munir Bani has to advise us, but there was no advice regarding that matter from him,” she said.

She also expressed regret at Munir’s statement to the media that appeared to have been played up by certain parties to suggest the Selangor PR government was attempting to diminish the Sultan’s role.
“Datuk Khusrin himself has guaranteed that Datuk Munir will explain, but I don’t understand why his (Munir’s) statement in the media is very different.”

“When it’s related to the Sultan and the palace, the state government is very careful,” she said.
A text message the state secretary had sent Faekah — made available to The Malaysian Insider — appeared to corroborate her remarks.

In the message, Khusrin had purportedly referred to the issue as an attempt by Umno-owned Malay paper Utusan Malaysia to stir up public sentiment against the state government. He had also purportedly said he would clarify the matter with the Sultan’s private secretary.

The text message stated: “Saya maklum. Utusan sengaja nak buat isu. Selama ini memang Tuanku tak pernah dijemput dalam program malam kemerdekaan kecuali majlis baca yasin. Saya minta Dato Munir untuk beri penjelasan semula (I note that. Utusan wants to create an issue intentionally. All this while, His Royal Highness has never been invited to Merdeka eve programmes except the yasin reading ceremony. I will ask Datuk Munir to explain again)”.

Faekah also said the state government is confident that the Sultan of Selangor will view the matter from a broader perspective despite allegations by certain parties criticising the state for its alleged disrespect to the royal institution.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had yesterday castigated the PR-led Selangor government for shutting out the State Ruler from its official National Day celebrations at Dataran Shah Alam last Thursday, suggesting that it placed greater importance on Anwar, who was only an economic adviser, than the monarch.

“The question of disrespecting the Selangor Sultan does not surprise us... they show more respect to their economic adviser who has no locus standi,” he told reporters at the Selangor Umno Adilfitri celebration in Sungai Buloh yesterday as he scoffed at his political nemesis’ specially-created position within the state government.

“I believe His Royal Highness is wise enough to view this matter in a broader way.”

“No one wants to ignore the Sultan; what more if His Royal Highness himself has intentions to attend the Merdeka eve night (celebrations),” she said, adding that “but if that is true, the intention did not reach us.”
“If it was informed (to us), I am confident that the Merdeka celebrations will be more joyous with the presence of His Royal Highness, the Sultan,” Faekah said.



























My reminder to the Sultan of Selangor: How Umno stripped the Rulers naked (UPDATED with Chinese Translation)


The measure, which included a rule to allow commoners to criticize the Sultans, even the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, or king without fear of the Sedition Act other than questioning the legitimacy of the monarchy itself, was passed overwhelmingly by the parliament, apparently without outcry over Dr Mahathir's rather tough treatment of the country's nine monarchs.
THE CORRIDORS OF POWER
Raja Petra Kamarudin
In a speech before Malaysia's Dewan Rakyat or Parliament on 14 February 1993, the then Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad asked that the body strip the country's sultans of their immunity to the law. In the speech, he accused them, among other things, of giving away parts of the country to the British, oppressing the people, breaking civil and criminal laws, misusing the money and property of the government and pressuring government officials. The measure, which included a rule to allow commoners to criticize the Sultans, even the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or king without fear of the Sedition Act other than questioning the legitimacy of the monarchy itself, was passed overwhelmingly by the parliament, apparently without outcry over Dr Mahathir's rather tough treatment of the country's nine monarchs.
Asia Sentinel brings this up in light of the growing controversy in Malaysia over opposition protests against the Sultan of Perak's decision to oust the Pakatan Rakyat chief minister of his state and sanction the appointment of a member of the United Malays National Organisation as the new chief minister despite the fact that a 28-28 tie remained, and that the Pakatan Rakyat had asked for a snap election to determine which coalition should rule the state.
When Karpal Singh, national chairman of the Democratic Action Party, offered to sue Sultan Raja Azlan Shah in the courts to get his decision reversed, scores of UMNO members filed complaints and led rallies against Karpal Singh for insulting the sultan. Members of the press, including Jed Yoong of the Asia Sentinel, have also been cited.
It would appear from Dr Mahathir's 1993 speech that it is perfectly legal to sue members of the royalty. It would also appear that UMNO members, particularly prime ministers, can make allegations against the country's royalty that opposition leaders and members of the press can't. We invite readers to decide for themselves. We reprint Dr Mahathir's historic 1993 speech below in its entirety.
    Mr. Speaker Sir,
    I request to propose that is a Bill named “An Act to amend the Constitution” to be read for the second time. Speaker Sir, allow me to introduce and comment on the Act that I mentioned above
    2. When the country demanded independence, the country's leaders, who received a huge victory and united support in the 1955 General Election, decided that our country would be administered via Parliamentary Democracy and Constitutional Monarchy.
    3. This system was chosen because when the Malay states were administered via the feudal system with power vested in the hands of the Rajas, the Malay states were weak and its administration was in chaos. The states could not establish peace and enforce laws. As a negative result, the states were forced to put themselves under the influence of foreign powers like China, Siam and the West. Finally, all the Malay states were conquered by the British and ruled as a British colony via agreements between the Rajas that administered with the British Government.
    4. After the Second World War, the Malay Rajas hoped that when the British administered again, their positions as Rajas, under the advice of the British officials, would be reinstated. The Malay states would be ruled by the British although not like Singapore, Penang and Malacca, where the British had full power.
    5. For the majority of the Malay people in the Peninsular states, they were ready to accept a rule in which the Malayness of the Malay states was recognized by the British, although the administration was almost completely controlled by the British. Yet, there were opinions among some Malays that the Malay states should be completely freed from British colonial rule.
    6. Malays only realized that they might be marginalized and be made beggars in their own states when the Malay Rajas bowed to MacMichael's threats and signed a new agreement with the British to return the Malay states directly to the British to be ruled as British colonies like Singapore, Penang and Malacca.
    7. Because the Rajas so easily handed over Singapore, Penang and Pangkor to the colonialists and then the Malay states, the People (“rakyat”) could no longer accept a system that only gives power to the Rajas and the People are not given any role in the country's politics. Also, after World War 2, absolute monarchies decayed throughout the world. Everywhere, absolute monarchies were abolished. Where it was maintained, the powers of the Rajas were limited by the Constitution, or the country's basic law. Hence, when the Federated Malay States demanded for independence, the leaders of the People studied administrative systems while taking into account of the history of the Malay States and other administrative systems.
    Mr. Speaker Sir,
    8. The old administrative system in the Malay states was a feudal system in which the Rajas had absolute power without a written Constitution. This feudal system was determined by customs that were often manipulated by the people in power. If the people in power breached the customs, it was difficult for palace officials and the People to criticize and make charges. But when the situation became too bad, it was likely that customs were put aside and revolt occurred. But this method brought definite negative consequences without guaranteeing that the revolt would improve the situation.
    9. Therefore, the opinion that Rajas should be placed under a Constitution that determined the status and role of the Rajas was born. With this method, the Rajas could no longer act as they liked. The powers of the Rajas would be determined by the Constitution, that is the country's basic law. Yet, there were Rajas who were willing to hand over their own states to foreign powers while ignoring the Constitution.
    10. Yet when the Constitutional Monarchy was drafted for the Federation of Malaya, which at that time was moving towards independence, those drafters of the constitution still believed that the Rajas would abide by not only by what was written but also what was written between the lines, that is the spirit of the Constitution.
    11. During the British colonial period, because they could appoint or remove Rajas, therefore Rajas accept the advice of the colonial rulers. This matter is included in the agreement between the British and the Malay Rajas in which the advice of the 'British Resident' or 'British Adviser' must be sought and abide by the Rajas save those that relate to Islam and Malay customs. For the British, that the advice must be abided by the Rajas is not strange because in the Government system in Britain, their 'King' or 'Queen' must accept the Government's advice. If not, the King will be removed from the throne. Hence, when King Edward VIII married a divorcee, he had to abdicate the throne on the Government's advice, although there was no specific allocation for this action. What was enforced was not the law but the country's political interests, and the British Kings abide by the country's politics. That's the reason that even before that, the British Parliament decided that Queen Elizabeth pays income tax. She herself just decided to pay income tax. The British Constitution, although not written, is abided from the perspective of spirit and custom.
    12. Because the Malay Rajas in colonial times followed the advice, therefore it was believed that the problem of Rajas breaking the law would not happen.
    13. The drafters and founders of the administration of the independent Federation of Malaya also believed that the provision that the Rajas that could not be charged in court is only a sign of the majesty of the King and not as a right to commit crimes. Certainly, the drafters of the Constitution and the founders of our country's independence did not mean this provision gave the Rajas the right to be above civil and criminal laws. Constitutional Monarchy has never given privilege to the Rajas to commit crimes. But if the Rajas break the law while carrying out official duties, the Rajas are free from charges. This is because the Government is responsible and the party that should be charged.
    14. In the effort to oppose the Malayan Union and return the Malay states and Straits states to the 'status quo ante', that was the situation before World War II, the People played an important role although there is no legal provision. It was clear at that that time to the people that the Rajas without the People's support are easily controlled by the colonialists and other parties. Hence, the People had to be given rights in the country's politics and administration. The role of the People must be determined by the law.
    15. Looking at this reality and once again taking the example of Britain, the independent Federation of Malaya chose the Parliamentary Democracy system. The People will elect their representatives to the Dewan Rakyat (People's House or Parliament) and the Dewan Undangan Negeri (State Legislative Assemblies) who will be the main law and policy makers. This allowed the People to play their roles in an orderly and organized manner.
    16. Once again following the system in Britain, the laws can only be valid after they are signed by the Rajas. In Britain, this is not a problem because it is not possible that the King will reject the advice of the Cabinet. But in Malaysia, the word 'advice', that the drafters of the constitution believed would have the same meaning like in Britain and during the colonial period, is not clearly interpreted. Therefore, the Rajas can reject the Government's advice.
    17. If the Government admits to be made up of representatives chosen by the People to determine the People's power, but the advice of the Government may not be accepted, this meant that the Parliamentary Democracy does not exist and the People are not in power. In some matters, not only the agreement of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is required, but also the Council of Rajas.
    18. Although the representatives were free to speak in the Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Undangan Negeri about any topic, but they could not touch on the Rajas because any criticism of the Rajas could be interpreted as sedition and they could be charged under the Sedition Act. This provision was a result of an amendment made in 1971. Before this, criticism of the Rajas could be made in the house. In Britain and other countries, the Parliament was free to criticize the Rajas. It is clear that that criticizing the Rajas does not destroy the Rajas' majesty.
    19. While this prohibition on criticism is said to protect the Rajas' majesty, but when the Rajas are not criticized, they will not be aware of the wrongs that they have committed. Hence, maybe more wrongs will be committed and these wrongs may become more serious. This not only contaminates the Rajas' majesty but can also cause the People to hate the Rajas. It is not true to say the prohibition on criticizing the Rajas will protect the Rajas' majesty. Actually, the majesty of the Rajas will be contaminated because of this prohibition.
    20. With the possibility that the Rajas reject advice while being free from criticism and any fair action, hence, the Rajas are actually not Constitutional Monarchs anymore but have become absolute Monarchs. Once again Parliamentary Democracy no longer exists because no action can be taken towards the Rajas that do not receive the advice of the People's Government and commit wrongs.
    21. In 1983, action was taken to amend the Constitution so that at the very least the power of the Agong to reject Bills written by Parliament was abolished. This effort was successful but not fully. What was approved in the end was the power of the Agong to reject Parliament Bills was reduced a little by having a new provision such that he can refer back to Parliament if he is unwilling to sign the Bill that has been approved by Parliament. If Parliament approves it again, whether with or without amendments, the Bill will be valid law in 30 days (Article 66(4) Constitution) although unsigned by the Agong.
    22. But approvals this way are limited to matters that do not touch on the rights and privileges of the Rajas. To amend the Constitutional provisions that touch on the Rajas, the Council of Rajas must give their agreement.
    23. At the state level, no amendments was made to state Constitutions. Hence, there are no laws that could be approved without being signed by the Rajas. This means the powers of the Rajas in the state is beyond the powers of the Dewans Undangan Negeri that represent the People.
    24. These provisions do not become problems if there are no opposing opinions between the Rajas and the Dewans Undangan, or there is no wrongdoing by the Rajas, or there is no Malay custom that does not like to jeopardize the relationships with the Rajas. Unfortunately, because the Chief Ministers and Prime Minister are Malays that are unwilling to be on bad terms with the Rajas, when the Rajas do something that is not supposed to be done, no effective criticism is made. Even if there is, the unwillingness of the Rajas to care about the criticisms of these official advisers does not bring about any action towards the Rajas.
    25. Hence, in the history of independent Malaysia, the actions of the Rajas and parties who hide behind the Rajas that exceed the rights and privileges of the Rajas become more serious over time. The possibility is that it will become more serious in the future. If there are no amendments to the law, like those suggested here, without doubt worse matters will happen that will cause the Raja Institution to be hated by the people. It is not impossible that if one day in the future, demands are made to completely abolish the Raja System although there are provisions in the Constitution.
    26. Hence this amendment that is suggested aims to avoid or prevent the escalation of hatred towards the Rajas that could bring about demands to abolish the Raja System. This amendment is to save the Rajas themselves and the Constitutional Monarchy system. To strengthen the Constitutional provisions to maintain the Raja System, provisions are made such that any suggestion to abolish the Raja System will be interpreted as sedition and falls under Sedition Laws.
    27. This amendment does not touch on the privileges given to the Rajas. Rajas will continue to be of Raja status, and facilities provided to the Rajas and the Royal Families according to the Constitution will be continued.
    28. To guarantee that Constitutional Monarchy is really effective, three amendments need to be made to the Federal Constitution. First, the Constitutional provision related with the immunity of the Rajas from any legal action as in Clause (1) Article 32 where after the word “court” is added the words “but only those related with whatever that is done or left to be done by him in the carrying out or that which resembles the carrying out of his functions under any written law”. This means no court action can be taken towards the Rajas who are carrying out their official duties.
    29. Sovereign Immunity is a feudal concept – a concept in which allegedly 'The King can do no wrong'. According Dr. Hogg in his book 'Liability of the Crown', this concept is based on the excuse that a King cannot be charged in his own court. This excuse has long been questioned and rejected by European law experts like Adams who feel that there is no doubt that feudal lords are under their own courts – 'No doubt at all of the subjection of feudal lords to their own courts'.
    30. Under the Government of India Act 1935, the Governor General or Governor is only immune when carrying out official duties.
    31. In the United States, President Nixon's demand such that he is exempted from a legal provision is rejected by the Supreme Court.
    32. In England, the Queen cannot be arrested and the arrest of anyone cannot be made on palace grounds. Even charges towards the Queen cannot be made in court.
    33. But in a paper that discussed the Constitutional Law of India, under the Crown Proceedings Act for England the original provision has been amended such that 'Civil proceedings by and against the Crown' can be made. Hence, the difference of 'proceedings' towards the 'Crown' is equivalent to the People.
    34. In the same paper it was mentioned that it has become a 'fundamental general rule' that 'His Majesty cannot sanction any act forbidden by the law'. When he cannot sanction, he also cannot do something wrong. Hence, 'His Majesty is under and not above the laws (and) he is bound by them equally with his subjects'.
    35. Provisions in the Constitutions of Spain, Belgium, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and Luxemborg all give immunity to the King only when carrying official duties as King. Any wrongs in carrying out official duties fall upon the Government or Ministers.
    36. There are no special provisions in any Constitution in European countries that give immunity to the King when carrying out unofficial activities. Yet, the Kings in the respective countries are still recognized and sovereign. They continue to be sovereign and did not lose their sovereignty. The opinion that Kings are only sovereign if the Kings can commit crimes as they like is not supported by the practices of other countries in this era. Even in the older eras, the King is often punished when he commits any wrongdoing, like in the case of Charles I in England and Louis XVI in France.
    37. Only in the Constitution of Malaysia is a specific provision under Article 181(2) that 'no proceedings whatsoever shall be brought in any court against the Rules of a State in his personal capacity'.
    38. Almarhum Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra al-Haj, this country's first Prime Minister, had written that immunity is not 'satisfactory' because 'Rajas can kill anyone without any action taken against him'. The result of provision 181(2) is very wide. Because the Constitutions of the Federation and States are also law, Article 181(2) actually allows Rajas to breach the Constitution. Because of that, when Rajas conduct business, although prohibited by the Constitution, nothing can be done by the Government. The Agong cannot be charged in any court. But the Council of Rajas can sack him from his position. On the contrary as a Raja, Article 181(2) will protect him.
    39. If Malaysia intends to become a country that practices Parliamentary Democracy and Constitutional Monarchy, the immunity that is given to the Rajas must be abolished. Because the Constitution in countries that practice the Constitutional Monarchy System doesn't give immunity to their Kings, the abolishment of the immunity of the Malay Rajas cannot jeopardize their sovereignty. In the modern era, only because the King can't commit crimes as they like, the King's status will not be jeopardized, especially in a country that practices Parliamentary Democracy and Constitutional Monarchy.
    40. To guarantee the effectiveness of the abolishment of immunity, two more provisions in the Constitution needs to be amended. The first is related to the provision in Article 63(2) that protects a person from taking part in a debate in Parliament or Parliamentary Committee from being questioned in court, which has been amended by Article 63(4) if it touches the provision of the Sedition Act. This provision is made in 1971. This means criticism towards the King can be made before 1971 without jeopardizing the Raja's sovereignty. Hence, it allows again the People's Representatives to criticize the Rajas who were wrong without denying the original rights and privileges of the Rajas. The amendment of Article 63 after Clause (4) reads:- “(5) Notwithstanding Clause (4) no one can be charged with any proceedings in any court related with anything that is said by him about the Agong or a Raja while taking part in whatever proceedings in any of the Parliamentary Committee or any of its task force except if it organizes the abolishment of the Constitutional position of the Agong as the Head of the Government of the Federation or the status of the Constitutional Monarch of a state, according to whichever applies”. Article 72 of the Federal Constitution is amended by inserting after Clause (4) the following Clause:- “(5) Notwithstanding Clause (4) no one can be charged with any proceedings in any court related to anything that has been said by him about the Rajas in any state while taking part in any proceedings in the Dewan Undangan in any state or in any committee unless if he organizes the abolishment of the status of the Raja as the Constitutional Monarch of the state”.
    41. The interpretation of the sedition towards the King in the Constitution is so wide until no criticism is can be made in Parliament by members of the Dewan Rakyat or Dewan Undangan. Hence, the media also has no opportunity to report. Criticism can only be made by the Rajas' advisors behind closed doors. If this criticism is ineffective, there is nothing that can be done.
    42. Actually all three former Prime Ministers, as advisors to the Rajas, have already criticized the Rajas many times while they were in service. I know criticisms have been made because this matter has been repeatedly reported in Cabinet meetings and also the UMNO Supreme Council.
    43. Allahyarham Tun Hussein Onn, as Prime Minister, had in his written speech in a Raja Council Meeting, only attended by His Highnesses or their representatives, harshly criticized the doings of the Rajas that should not be done.
    44. But all these criticisms are not effective. The matters touched upon continued to be done, even intensified. What was never done during the British era and in the early years of independent Malaysia are now done obviously and widespread.
    45. Although almost all Prime Ministers and Chief Ministers report to the UMNO Supreme Council, there are problems that they face but the public are not told. Hence, the public do not know the problems faced by the Government. Most of them continue to believe that the system of Constitutional Monarchy is operating smoothly with the Rajas honoring all the provisions in the Constitution. Only a small portion of the People know and they are not comfortable with the Rajas' doings. But they can't express their views and feelings because there is a Sedition Act.
    46. The Sedition Act and the relevant provisions for sedition towards the Rajas in Article 63(4) of the Constitution prohibits the People from getting information and voicing their opinions. They can only talk among themselves. Political leaders, including Government leaders, definitely hears and realizes that the views and anger of a number of People that knows about the Rajas' doings. Such is their anger till there are, mostly among the young generation, that consider the Raja System to be behind times.
    47. But because of the Sedition Act and prohibitions on criticizing the Rajas, Rajas do not listen and do not believe their advisors when such information is conveyed about the People's anxiety. The Rajas and the Royal Families seems to opine that all of these are inventions of the advisors to the Rajas to scare them or snatch the Rajas' rights.
    48. In this situation, the Rajas not only continue their habits that the People dislike and are uneasy with but also matters that are hated by the People. If this trend is not stopped, the feelings of the People towards the Raja will boil over and become so bad that at a point of time in the future, the People may no longer be able to control their feelings. Letters to newspapers that expressed such feelings have existed for a long time.
    48. With your permission Speaker Sir, I wish to read an excerpt of an article sent to The Straits Times in 1946 by a prominent Malay leader, when the British suggested the formation of the Malayan Union. This leader went on to hold a high position in Government. This article was not published in the Straits Time but was passed to me recently by the writer.
    50. This writer says, with your permission, 'All intelligent Malay leaders ought now seriously to give most profound and careful thought to the question whether the time has not ar- rived when the Malay Royalty (I mean the Sultan and Raja) should gracefully withdraw themselves altogether'.
    51. If opinions were already like this in 1946, is it not possible that it will arise again in 1993 if the Rajas are not stopped from doing things that are undesirable?
    52. The protection and privilege given to the Rajas aim to put the Rajas in a high and majestic place. The protection and privilege is not to allow the Rajas to do whatever they like including committing crime. Rajas who are aware and understand the true meaning of these provisions will always take care to prevent contaminating itself in acts or behaviours that are not good and disliked by society. Rajas who are aware will know acts that ignore the feelings and opinions of society will cause the People to finally remove the Rajas, and even abolish the Raja System. This is what happened in countries that are now republics.
    53. In Malaysia, the protection given is very thick. Sovereign Immunity from laws and prohibitions from criticism, although only by members of the Dewans Undangan that has been entrusted to administer the country, separates the Rajas from the real world. In this situation, the acts and behavior of the Rajas will become worse in the long run. This is happening in Malaysia.
    54. Hence, it is important Members of the Dewan are given back the right to criticize the Rajas in their debates. Without this right, the Members of the Dewan will fail to practice the Parliamentary Democracy system and will fail to prove that the People are the ones in power in this system. Without this right, the ones in power are the Rajas and not the People.
    55. With the existence of a prohibition on criticizing the Rajas, Members of the House actually cannot protect the Raja Institution and Raja System. Hance, the freedom of Members of the House to speak in the House should not be blocked by the Sedition Act like provided for under Article 63(4) and 72(4). With the addition of Article 63(5) and 72(5), the Members of the House not only can protect the Raja's position but also the Constitutional Monarchy that is clearly protected by the Constitution, because it is mentioned in Article 63(5) and 72(5) that the exception from the Sedition Act does not include organizing the 'abolishment of the Constitutional status of the Agong as the Head of the Federation or the status of a Raja in a state'.
    Mr. Speaker Sir,
    56. The second matter that can void the abolishment of the Rajas' immunity is when doing something that breaks the law in a non-official matter is the Rajas' right to pardon as provided for in Article 42. With this provision, a Raja can pardon himself if he is convicted by a court after immunity from legal action is withdrawn. This means the withdrawal of immunity is meaningless and ineffective.
    57. Hence, the Government proposes that Article 38 and 42 of the Federal Constitution be amended as in Clause (2) Article 28 and Clause (12) Article 42. Clause (2) Article 38 of the Federal Constitution is amended – (a) by substituting the comma at the end of the paragraph (c) with a semicolon; and (b) by inserting after paragraph (c), the following paragraph: “(d) giving pardon, reprieve and respite, or to remit, suspend and reduce sentences, under Clause (12) Article 42,”. Article 42 of the Federal Constitution is amended by inserting, after Clause (11), the following Clauses: “(12) Notwithstanding the contents of this Constitution, if the powers mentioned in this Article – (a) have to be carried out by the Yang di-Pertuan of a State and are required to be carried out on himself or his wife, his sons or daughters, these powers have to be carried out by the Chief Minister of the State that will act on the advice of the Board of Pardons formed for the state under this Article and needs to be chaired by; (b) are required to be carried out on the Agong, a Raja of a State, or his Consort, according to whichever is applicable, these powers needs to be carried out by the Council of Rajas and the following provisions are required to be used: (i) when attending any proceeding under this Clause, the Agong cannot be accompanied by the Prime Minister and other Rajas cannot be accompanied by their Chief Ministers; (ii) before making any decision about any matter under this Clause, the Council of Rajas must consider whatever written opinion that may be given by the Attorney-General about this matter. (c) are required to be carried out by the Agong or the Raja of the related State with his sons or daughters, according whichever is applicable, the powers have to be carried out by a Raja of a State named by the Council of Rajas and that Raja has to act according to the advice of the relevant Board of Pardons formed under this Article. (13) For the meaning of paragraph (b) and (c) Clause (12), the Agong or respective State Raja, according to whichever is applicable, and the State Yang di-Pertuas cannot be made members of the Council of Rajas”.
    58. With this amendment, the Raja cannot hear the plea and pardon himself. If the Raja or his Consort who pleas for pardon, the Council of Rajas will hear and decide on the respective case.
    59. The Raja also cannot listen to the plea of and pardon his offspring. The Council of Rajas will appoint another Raja to hear and decide on the pardon pleas of a Raja's offspring.
    60. With the abolishment of the immunity of the Rajas from legal action, except when carrying out official duties, it is believed that a Raja will not commit acts that can be charged in courts. With this, the Raja will be honored by the People.
    61. The abolishment of the ban applied on Members of Parliament and the Dewans Undangan Negeri by the Sedition Act will prevent the Rajas from committing any act that may attract the criticism of the respective members of the house.
    62. The abolishment of the powers to pardon himself will make legal action more effective.
    63. The real reason for these amendments is not because the Government or the People want to drag the Rajas to court as they like. The reason is so that the Rajas will constraint themselves from committing acts that can negatively cause legal action. Hence, the Rajas will be respected more.
    64. It should be reminded that the respect of the People towards the Raja cannot be determined by laws. With your permission, 'Respect must be earned'. Having laws that scare the People will not bring 'respect'. With the realization that the Rajas can be brought to court, Rajas will certainly avoid committing acts that will cause the people not to respect the Rajas. Hence, the Raja Institution will be better respected and better preserved.
    65. To strengthen the efforts to preserve the Rajas and Raja System, any suggestion or exertion to abolish the Raja System is interpreted as sedition and will be charged under the Sedition Act.
    Mr. Speaker Sir,
    66. I feel very sad that today I am forced to present to the august House a Bill to amend the Constitution that has in some way contaminated the good name of the Rajas and the Raja Institution. With a heavy heart I presented and explained the suggested amendments.
    67. That the Government made the decision to amend the Constitution is not without reason. Actually, as I have said, the Government has refrained from making these amendments since the start when we achieved independence. But this approach does not alleviate the situation. On the contrary, the situation became worse.
    68. In the end, an incident in which a Raja assaulted a citizen and before this another incident in which the son of a Raja assaulted a citizen. The Government cannot look lightly at such events without jeorpardizing the Government's credibility as responsible leaders.
    69. The Government is forced to make a firm stand to protect the People from being oppressed by the Rajas. Certainly, this stand was not made because of these two incidents only. Before this there were many incidents where the Rajas oppressed the People, Rajas broke civil and criminal laws, Rajas misused the money and property of the Government and country, Raja pressuring and oppressing officials.
    70. The incident in Johor is only, with your permission, 'the straw that broke the camel's back'. The People's reaction towards these incidents clearly shows that the People no longer accept and 'tolerate' these kind of acts.
    Mr. Speaker Sir,
    71. There are people that ostensibly wish to give powers to and defend the Rajas when the Raja commit crimes. They try twist the People's thoughts by accusing the Government is trying to abolish the Raja System.
    72. I wish to assert that the Barisan Nasional government does not at all suggest to abolish the Raja System. This is clear from the suggested amendments. Any suggestion to abolish the Raja System will be interpreted as sedition and the Government will take action under the Sedition Act upon anyone who suggest or act to abolish the Raja System.
 Mr. Speaker Sir,
    73. The government is aware that the People, specifically the Malays accept and support the Malay Raja Institution. The accusations that the Government is trying to abolish the Raja System is merely because of political interests. The Government represents the majority of the Malays and other races will abide by the wishes of the People and will not do something that is unpopular.
    74. Because it is clear that the majority of the people of all races still wants the Raja System, specifically the Constitutional Monarchy System, the Government will guarantee that this system is protected by the Constitution.
    Mr. Speaker Sir,
    75. There are parties that opine that the Malay Rajas are needed to protect the Malays. The MacMichael Agreement and the Malayan Union incidents clearly prove that those who are willing and able to protect the Malays are the Malays themselves. If not because they rose up and opposed the Malayan Union, today, the Malays would have been beggars in their own country.
    76. The attempts by some parties to scare the Malays towards the amendment are caused by those who wish to use racial sentiments for the interests of their own parties. Their history does not assure us that they are sincere. They are the ones who try to weaken the Malays by breaking up UMNO and working with certain parties that are viewed with suspicion by the Malays.
    77. Can merely barring the Rajas from committing crimes cause the Rajas to lose their sovereignty and no longer be Rajas? The opinion that the Rajas can only be Rajas if they are given rights and given privileges to commit crime contravenes the concept of Rajas as the source of law. In the old era in the West, Kings possessed the right to commit crime. For instance, according to the concept, with your permission, 'Droit du seigneur' (right of the Lord) or the Right of the Lord, the King has the right to spend a night with all newlyweds.
    78. But in the West, all these rights have been abolished. That is why Western countries that preserve the Monarchy System does not have specific immunity for the Rajas. Even if there is a mention that the King cannot be brought court, it is only a formality. King, Government and the People know if the King commits a crime, he will be brought to court, and he will be removed from his throne. Hence, the Kings in the Western countries will not intentionally commit crime.
    79. Although it is clear that the Kings in the West are not immune from legal and non-legal action, the Kings are still Kings. They are respected and admired.
    Mr. Speaker Sir,
    80. In the British era, the Malay Rajas were not only immune but were also under the orders of the British officials. They can be appointed and removed from the throne. One of MacMichael's threats so that the Rajas would sign the Malayan Union Agreement is they will be removed from the throne if they do not sign the Agreement.
    81. In this situation, the Rajas will continue to be Rajas. The People are not demanding the Rajas be dislodged or the Raja System to be abolished although the Rajas handed over the Malay states to the colonialists. Happily I am reminded that at that time the Rajas in Indonesia, India and Pakistan have been rejected by the People who demanded for independence. On the contrary, Malaysians, mainly the Malays and UMNO, have fought to save the Rajas and Raja System.
    82. The opposition of the Malays against the Malayan Union is clear because the fortunes of the Malays are in the hands of the Malays. The safety of Malays is not jeopardized with the Malay Rajas who do not have the right to commit crime. There are parties that say the abolishment of the Raja's right to commit crime, the Malays are no longer Malays and that will be the end of the special position of the Malays. This is not true. This is slander. Those who guarantee that the Malays will continue to be Malays and Malay rights are protected are the Malays themselves. They, through their representatives and the Government that they choose, create and implement various activities to protect and fight for the honour of the Malays.
    Mr. Speaker Sir,
    83. A Raja asked why the Constitutional amendments are related to Islam when the Government does not agree with the implementation of Sharia and Hudud law. According to him, he is ready to accept Islamic law without immunity but is unwilling to accept the country's laws which are not Islamic law.
    84. With or without his blessing, the position of the Malay Rajas since Merdeka has been determined by the law, that is the Constitution. These laws also give certain special privileges to the Rajas. Among these privileges is immunity from legal action. If the Rajas were willing to accept the immunity under laws which are not Islamic laws, why is the abolishment of immunity in the same laws are not accepted by the Rajas?
    85. In Islam there are two principals that are strongly held by the law. The first is there is no difference among Muslims in enforcement of Islamic laws. Raja and People are the same. The immunity for Rajas contravenes this principle. Rejecting the abolishment of the immunity so that the difference between Raja and People is preserved in the laws does not reflect a strong adherence to Islamic principles.
    86. Receiving immunity from laws said to be not Islamic law, but rejecting the abolishment of this immunity in the same laws clash with the allegation that only Islamic law is acceptable.
    87. Islam gives much leeway. Islam takes into account all factors and circumstances faced by its believers. Such that even in carrying out religious duties, environment, an individual's health and the current circumstances are considered. Therefore, praying can be made without certain movements, without facing the kiblat, before, after or together, in a congregation or alone. Palestinians, who were driven out by the Zionist Rule, could pray without taking off their shoes. In other religious duties, there is also leeway. Such is with the enforcement of hudud law. The state of the environment and society must be considered. That is the reason why not many countries in which the majority of the residents are Muslims do not establish hudud law. Those who do, also do not fully implement them.
    88. The Government does not reject hudud law. The implementation must take into account the situation of the country in which Muslims only make up 56 percent and they are still weak in many fields. The administration who rejects the leeway given by Islam actually does not follow Islamic teaching. Islam does not order Muslims or a Muslim Government to blindly implement Islamic law until one is destroyed. That is why the Prophet asks his followers to go to Habsyah to save himself. That is why the Prophet migrated to Medina to save Islam and the Islamic struggle.
    89. If the conditions allow, we will implement hudud law. But while waiting for hudud law to be implemented, we do something against Islamic teaching. Actually, crimes are prohibited by the country's laws and also Islamic laws. Does the said Raja want the freedom to commit crime only because we have not implemented hudud laws that prohibit the same crime?
    90. The second principle is there is no immunity in Islam. All laws are the same for all believers. A Raja that wants to be immune from the law certainly opposes this Islamic principle.
    Mr. Speaker Sir,
    91. Finally, I wish to touch on the problems related to advising the Rajas. Like I have mentioned, Rajas must accept the Government's advice. In other countries where the Monarchy System still exists although without specific provision that the Kings must act according to the Government's advice, the Kings never act contrary to the Government's advice. Hence, the relationship between the King and Government who represents the People remains good. More than that, in these countries, these Kings are respected and revered by society.
    92. Unfortunately, in Malaysia, although there are provisions that the Rajas should act according to the Government's advice, the Rajas hold on to the interpretation of 'advice' as widely accepted – that is advice can be accepted or rejected. This interpretation is wrong. In this area, there are also some matters that the Rajas consider no advice is required to be given. Hence, many things are done in opposition of the Government that represents the People.
    93. The problem faced today is caused by the opinion that Rajas could overstep the People's Government. This deceitful act occurs because advice is ignored. An impasse on this amendment is also caused by the unwillingness of the Rajas to accept advice.
    94. If this continues, the Parliamentary Democracy Government can no longer fully and truly exist. This is the reason the Government is bringing these amendments to the House. If this process is challenged, the decision can be brought to court. As a Government that holds firm to, with your permission 'rule of law', we will abide by the decision of the courts. At the same time, this matter should not be seen from the legal angle only. It also has to be seen from a political angle.
    95. When the Rajas handed the Malay states to the British, the People took the political action to get back the Malay states and preserved the Raja Institution. Although, from a legal point of view, the People do no have the right to as all agreements are made between the British and the Rajas only, the British honored the People's political action.
    96. I hope the Malay Rajas also take the lesson from our country's history, specifically the history of the Malayan Union and accept the political will of the country. Although the signs show that the Malay Rajas accept this amendment, I hope after the amendment is approved by the Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Negara, the Malay Rajas will accept and approve these laws.

Translated into Chinese at: http://ccliew.blogspot.com/2010/08/blog-post_07.html



 






























Muhyiddin hints at problems in regaining S’gor

September 15, 2012
The Umno No 2 says infighting could sabotage BN's bid to recapture the Pakatan Rakyat-controlled state
SELAYANG: Umno deputy president Muhyiddin Yassin today hinted that widespread infighting in Selangor could sabotage the party’s aim to recapture the Pakatan Rakyat-controlled state in the upcoming polls.
The deputy prime minister claimed scandals in the country’s most industrialised state meant it is ripe for the taking, but the ruling coalition appears to be slow to exploit as factionalism continues to plague its Selangor chapter.
“I believe the situation is in our favour that we can convince voters that the Pakatan leadership is not serving its people well,” he said before some 800 Umno members here, pointing to some of the state’s problems like the water fiasco and sand mining scandals
“But are we ready (to recapture Selangor)?” he asked in an apparent reference to the continued split within its Selangor ranks.
Umno and its allies in Barisan Nasional will soon face one of its toughest elections yet but as polls near, both Muhyiddin and his president Najib Tun Razak have repeatedly hinted at widespread internal divisions.
It is often mentioned in speeches calling for members not to sabotage candidates and reminded them that the 13th general election will be Umno’s survival battle as opposition influence continues to rise.
Sabotage
Cracks in the ruling party was said to be one of the key reasons behind its record losses in the 2008 elections where BN lost its parliamentary supermajority and five states.
Muhyiddin said today the same problem may hurt Umno’s chances in the polls and despite pledges to stop and unite as polls near, signs of divisions remain a problem.
“When I meet division chiefs and deputies, they say all is well and even shook hands with each other during Hari Raya. But I give them just one hour, and after five minutes they explode,” he said.
The Umno No2 then cited the lost of the Selayang seat as an example. BN won two out of three state seats here but lost the federal seat. The party’s Selayang chapter later admitted that this was caused by sabotage.
Muhyiddin, however, said he and Najib have worked hard to meet and rectify problematic divisions and urged members to trust their leadership on the candidacy.
Umno has yet to finalise its candidates list for the polls which could be linked to factionalism. Party sources told FMT that this was the only reason behind Najib’s move to delay polls. He was rumoured to have eyed for an earlier date.

No comments:

Post a Comment