Like many Malaysians, I was particularly enthralled when the Raja Muda, Raja Nazrin Shah in a speech some time ago declared that “Malaysians of all races, religions and geographic locations need to believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that they have a place under the Malaysian sun”.
For such pearls of wisdom to flow from a regal figure is extraordinary especially when we compare to the diversive speech by our erstwhile politicians in a political meeting sometime ago.
However, like many others, I feel disappointed that the simple and dignified wedding celebrations was tainted by the presence of the State Mufti, Datuk Seri Harussani Zakaria who was given a prominent role in conducting the wedding ceremony.
This religious head who is Perak’s State Mufti should have been charged and imprisoned for inciting racial riot at a Catholic church. His malicious intent to cause racial disharmony was deliberate. From his pulpit he announced to his shocked congregation that a mass conversion was about to take place in a Christian church.
His infuriated Muslim congregation marched to the Catholic Church and almost cost a riot. Fortunately, an ulgy incident was averted when it was found that the conversion was for a group of Indian girls.
A few months earlier the same Mufti announced to a shocked Muslim audience that there were 100,000 Muslims apostates. Of course he could not back his assertion with any statistics.
Raja Nazrin Shah’s speech and message to Malaysians would have been an unequivocal inspiration had his father the Sultan dismissed this mufti who have caused so much harm and discord among its various races.
How could the Crown Prince expect his subjects to believe his message when in his regal presence is a man who have sown so much discord?
Malaysians in general truly applaud the Crown Prince for his caring and inspiring message but what good are those messages if words are not matched with deeds?
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Saturday, May 19, 2007
What else does the Govt want from us?
On the same day when it was reported that two major banks “require law firms to have a minimum of three partners of which one must be Bumiputra with a minimum 50 per cent stake in the firm before they can do any business with the banks” another report in Singapore says “Job ads in the city: No age, race.”
Two different emphasis on policy matters, one from our close neighbour Singapore and one from our own virtually sums up the two different directions we are heading.
After 50 years of being in power our leaders are still promulgating laws and policies which are dividing the nation while in Singapore, the rationale is to eliminate race as a criterion to select candidates for jobs believing in the concept that “multi-racialism is a fundamental principle here”.
How divergent and different each nation’s path has become.One will lead the nation to ultimate destruction whilst the other will grow and prosper.
How can our leaders be so myopic and parochial? Why must it always be the Malays vs Chinese thing? Can’t they adopt a more pragmatic view that the Chinese are not their enemies and that we are all sitting in the same boat. If this boat sinks we sink together.
Our immediate competition will be from our neighbouring countries like Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam. Yet this has not been their main focus.
Instead of directing their energy and strength to combat our external foes our leaders are doing their level best to weaken our own citizens.
How can our leaders be so short-sighted as to sacrifice long term gains for short term benefits?
Instead of looking at the bigger cake from outside our shores we are scrambling for the contracting small cake within our country.
With each passing day as citizens of this country, we feel hopeless and helpless as our leaders remain oblivious to the consequencs of their own policy-making decisions.
We can only hope with abated breath that a miracle will prevent the ruination of this country. Otherwise, only divine intervention can rescue us from this path of destruction.
Two different emphasis on policy matters, one from our close neighbour Singapore and one from our own virtually sums up the two different directions we are heading.
After 50 years of being in power our leaders are still promulgating laws and policies which are dividing the nation while in Singapore, the rationale is to eliminate race as a criterion to select candidates for jobs believing in the concept that “multi-racialism is a fundamental principle here”.
How divergent and different each nation’s path has become.One will lead the nation to ultimate destruction whilst the other will grow and prosper.
How can our leaders be so myopic and parochial? Why must it always be the Malays vs Chinese thing? Can’t they adopt a more pragmatic view that the Chinese are not their enemies and that we are all sitting in the same boat. If this boat sinks we sink together.
Our immediate competition will be from our neighbouring countries like Singapore, Thailand, Indonesia and Vietnam. Yet this has not been their main focus.
Instead of directing their energy and strength to combat our external foes our leaders are doing their level best to weaken our own citizens.
How can our leaders be so short-sighted as to sacrifice long term gains for short term benefits?
Instead of looking at the bigger cake from outside our shores we are scrambling for the contracting small cake within our country.
With each passing day as citizens of this country, we feel hopeless and helpless as our leaders remain oblivious to the consequencs of their own policy-making decisions.
We can only hope with abated breath that a miracle will prevent the ruination of this country. Otherwise, only divine intervention can rescue us from this path of destruction.
Wednesday, May 09, 2007
RM534.8 million commission for Scorpene submarines - why Perimekar?
The pathetic explanation given by the Defence Ministry regarding the purchase of the Sukhoi SU30MKM fighter and Scorpene submarines raises more suspicions than answers.
The public is not concerned with the laborious explanation regarding the negotiations carried out by the Defence Ministry neither are they interested in the approval levels and the checks by the technical and price committee.
What the tax paying public is interested is why was the contract awarded to Perimekar to prepare support and coordination services for six years. The contract value was 114.96 mil euros(RM534.8 mil) to be paid in stages according to the level of progress of the project.
What kind of support and coordination services that Perimekar can provide that the Defence Ministry is not capable of providing?
The pertinent question that begs to be answered is why was the contract awarded to Perimekar. In view of the substantial amount involved (RM534.8 mil) was there any open tender for the contract?
Perimekar for all intent and purpose is jointly owned by Lembaga Tabung Angkatan Tentera, Boustead Holdings Bhd and KS Ombak Laut Sdn Bhd.
The ownership of Perimekar reveals one interesting fact. None of them appears to have any expertise in the area of Defence equipment. So how could they provide any support and coordination services to the Defence Ministry?
The revelation of the owner of KS Ombak Laut Sdn Bhd is even more fascinating.A political analyst by profession and a close associate of DPM, Najib, Razak Baginda owns Ombak Laut.
The public deserves an answer why a contract of such proportion (RM534.8 mil) was awarded to a political analyst for a job that could easily be monitored by the Defence Ministry.
The nature of the contract albeit under the guise of support and coordination services is nothing but a concealment of commission paid to parties or party closely associated to the Defence Ministry.
The public is not concerned with the laborious explanation regarding the negotiations carried out by the Defence Ministry neither are they interested in the approval levels and the checks by the technical and price committee.
What the tax paying public is interested is why was the contract awarded to Perimekar to prepare support and coordination services for six years. The contract value was 114.96 mil euros(RM534.8 mil) to be paid in stages according to the level of progress of the project.
What kind of support and coordination services that Perimekar can provide that the Defence Ministry is not capable of providing?
The pertinent question that begs to be answered is why was the contract awarded to Perimekar. In view of the substantial amount involved (RM534.8 mil) was there any open tender for the contract?
Perimekar for all intent and purpose is jointly owned by Lembaga Tabung Angkatan Tentera, Boustead Holdings Bhd and KS Ombak Laut Sdn Bhd.
The ownership of Perimekar reveals one interesting fact. None of them appears to have any expertise in the area of Defence equipment. So how could they provide any support and coordination services to the Defence Ministry?
The revelation of the owner of KS Ombak Laut Sdn Bhd is even more fascinating.A political analyst by profession and a close associate of DPM, Najib, Razak Baginda owns Ombak Laut.
The public deserves an answer why a contract of such proportion (RM534.8 mil) was awarded to a political analyst for a job that could easily be monitored by the Defence Ministry.
The nature of the contract albeit under the guise of support and coordination services is nothing but a concealment of commission paid to parties or party closely associated to the Defence Ministry.
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
Singapore Malays better off than Chinese in Malaysia.
It is rather ironic that Baki Aminuddin could venture to write in Malayisakini that “S’pore Malays worse off than Chinese here” when in fact the opposite is the truth.
Before I begin to answer his fallacious argument I would like to pose one very simple question to him. If S’pore Malays are really worse off in Singapore why is there no exodus of Malays from S’pore to Malaysia? Instead the opposite is happening where the Chinese are making a beeline to Singapore for work and education?
Baki is naive to deny that LKY’s statement that the BN govt is systemmatically marginalising the Chinese and non-Malays. Before condemning the S’pore govt of marginalising the Malays and their education Baki should support his assertion with facts ratherthan spurious allegations.
There is no official policy to deny the Malays the chance to further their education till tertiary level provided they have the abilty to compete on a level playing field. Can Baki honestly say that the Chinese and non-Malays in Malaysia are given the same opportunity in education? Is it not a fact that Malays are exclusively given places in Mara schools where with their one year matriculation exams they can hop into any of the local universities whereas non-Malays have to undergo the more rigorous two year STPM exam to gain admission?
Baki must be living in a different planet if he does not know that the NEP is a policy marginalising the non-Malays. Can he pin-point any specific policy in S’pore where there is such a policy of blatant discrimination against the Malays?
Baki fails even to understand that S’pore practices meritocracy and if a Malay is capable he can hold any post and this is vindicated by the post of President being held by an Indian.Similarly, the post of foreign minister and finance are also held by Indians.
It is really sad that people like Baki who are so used to the easy life with all the perks they enjoy in Malaysia that they tend to forget that what they abundantly get is at the expense of the non-Malays.
I would strongly urge Baki and those Malays who accept his illusory perception of the S’pore Malays to read a letter written by an illustrous Singaporean Malay, Dr.Syed Alwi, who wrote an article about the “The Malaysian Malay”.
Perhaps it would be appropriate for me to quote some words of wisdom from this great Singaporean Malay,”No one owes Malaysian Malays a living. Let me assure you that should Malaysia fails- the Malaysian Malays will suffer enormously.”
Before I begin to answer his fallacious argument I would like to pose one very simple question to him. If S’pore Malays are really worse off in Singapore why is there no exodus of Malays from S’pore to Malaysia? Instead the opposite is happening where the Chinese are making a beeline to Singapore for work and education?
Baki is naive to deny that LKY’s statement that the BN govt is systemmatically marginalising the Chinese and non-Malays. Before condemning the S’pore govt of marginalising the Malays and their education Baki should support his assertion with facts ratherthan spurious allegations.
There is no official policy to deny the Malays the chance to further their education till tertiary level provided they have the abilty to compete on a level playing field. Can Baki honestly say that the Chinese and non-Malays in Malaysia are given the same opportunity in education? Is it not a fact that Malays are exclusively given places in Mara schools where with their one year matriculation exams they can hop into any of the local universities whereas non-Malays have to undergo the more rigorous two year STPM exam to gain admission?
Baki must be living in a different planet if he does not know that the NEP is a policy marginalising the non-Malays. Can he pin-point any specific policy in S’pore where there is such a policy of blatant discrimination against the Malays?
Baki fails even to understand that S’pore practices meritocracy and if a Malay is capable he can hold any post and this is vindicated by the post of President being held by an Indian.Similarly, the post of foreign minister and finance are also held by Indians.
It is really sad that people like Baki who are so used to the easy life with all the perks they enjoy in Malaysia that they tend to forget that what they abundantly get is at the expense of the non-Malays.
I would strongly urge Baki and those Malays who accept his illusory perception of the S’pore Malays to read a letter written by an illustrous Singaporean Malay, Dr.Syed Alwi, who wrote an article about the “The Malaysian Malay”.
Perhaps it would be appropriate for me to quote some words of wisdom from this great Singaporean Malay,”No one owes Malaysian Malays a living. Let me assure you that should Malaysia fails- the Malaysian Malays will suffer enormously.”
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Ijok:PKR malay candidate a smarter Strategy
I refer to the letter Ijok: Can’t an Indian represent Malay rights? I must say that opposition party PKR is right in fielding a Malay candidate at Ijok for the very simple reason that strategy dictates such a choice. To field an Indian against another Indian from the BN would be suicidal.
If you study past records (the recent one being Machap), you will find that when two non-Malays contest against each other, the Malays will inevitably support the BN guy. DAP adopted the wrong strategy in Machap when it selected a Chinese. The DAP candidate obtained about 1,400 votes without a doubt from the Chinese as the Malays are averse to voting for a Chinese DAP member.
Assuming the BN Chinese candidate obtained 50% of the 1,400 Chinese votes, this means that balance of 3,600 votes came from the Malay voters. If DAP had fielded a Malay candidate and split the Malay votes, the result could have been a cliffhanger. The DAP (or PKR) Malay candidate would have obtained 1,800 + 1,400 = 3,200 votes, around the same as the BN candidate.
There is no doubt in my mind that if an Indian candidate from the opposition was nominated to contest in Ijok against an Indian from BN, the latter would win hands down. Now, with a Malay candidate, the opposition votes from the Chinese and Indians - plus a sizeable ‘split votes’ from the Malays - the battle for Ijok is more even.
For the opposition to win any contest against BN, the opposition cannot adopt the same strategy as the latter. BN has no option but to field an Indian candidate because it was a seat allocated to the MIC.
PKR or DAP have the luxury of not abiding by the same agreement that firmly binds the BN. Instead, they can face political reality and field a candidate that provides the best opportunity to win the seat based on the racial profile of a Malay-majority area.
It is a correct decision of PKR to field a Malay candidate. To do otherwise would severely diminish the chances of an opposition victory.
If you study past records (the recent one being Machap), you will find that when two non-Malays contest against each other, the Malays will inevitably support the BN guy. DAP adopted the wrong strategy in Machap when it selected a Chinese. The DAP candidate obtained about 1,400 votes without a doubt from the Chinese as the Malays are averse to voting for a Chinese DAP member.
Assuming the BN Chinese candidate obtained 50% of the 1,400 Chinese votes, this means that balance of 3,600 votes came from the Malay voters. If DAP had fielded a Malay candidate and split the Malay votes, the result could have been a cliffhanger. The DAP (or PKR) Malay candidate would have obtained 1,800 + 1,400 = 3,200 votes, around the same as the BN candidate.
There is no doubt in my mind that if an Indian candidate from the opposition was nominated to contest in Ijok against an Indian from BN, the latter would win hands down. Now, with a Malay candidate, the opposition votes from the Chinese and Indians - plus a sizeable ‘split votes’ from the Malays - the battle for Ijok is more even.
For the opposition to win any contest against BN, the opposition cannot adopt the same strategy as the latter. BN has no option but to field an Indian candidate because it was a seat allocated to the MIC.
PKR or DAP have the luxury of not abiding by the same agreement that firmly binds the BN. Instead, they can face political reality and field a candidate that provides the best opportunity to win the seat based on the racial profile of a Malay-majority area.
It is a correct decision of PKR to field a Malay candidate. To do otherwise would severely diminish the chances of an opposition victory.
Saturday, April 21, 2007
The NEP has been abused to help the rich
How long can the govt continue with its NEP policy? If the govt’s denial that ASLI’s report “of 30% bumiputra equity ownership had already been exceeded ” then it’s incumbent upon the govt to provide a clear official methodology as to how corporate equity is measured.
Earlier, the centre for public studies headed by Dr, Lim Teck Ghee had made a statement that its findings had established bumiputra equity ownership had exceeded 45%. In order to rebutt this findings by ASLI and to deny further credence to the findings that “corporate equity distribution was narrowly based, unrealistic and has resulted in an underestimation of the true volume and value of bumiputra equity”, the govt must reveal the official methodology to measure corporate equity. Based on itscalculation it must provide clear irrevocable proof that bumiputra’s equity has regressed to a lowly 18% in 2006.
At that time when the ASLI’s findings was published many UMNO leaders including the P.M called the report “baseless, inaccurate and irresponsible”. UMNO vice-President Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin went even further and called it “rubbish”.
There was a beacon of hope to establish the truth when DPM Najib gave an assurance that the methodology used to calculate the Bumi’s corporate equity would be publicly revealed.That assurance was given almost six months ago and it appears quite likely that the DPM has reneged on his word.
NEP in its present form has been abused and lost its initial noble objectives of helping the poor and the needy instead of the rich of one single race. Instead of affirmative action based on poverty it was exclusively based on a policy of helping just one race irrespective of the wealth of that person.
Hence we have a situation where a rich bumiputra is entitled to purchase a high-end property at a discount. What kind of logic is it? If he can afford to buy a high-end property surely he don’t need a discount.
The NEP must embrace the concept that there are poor Malays Indians, Chinese, Ibans and Kadazans etc. If the NEP is to have any meaning it must help those in need irrespective of their race and not because they belong to a select community.
If there is any defect in ASLI’s report, it is its failure to pinpoint the recipients of the 45% of bumiputra equity.The revelation maybe academic but the truth is maybe only 10% of the bumis benefitted from the 45% corporate equity distributed by virtue of the NEP.
As long as the govt refuse to accept this reality the longer it will be for national reconciliation.The inequitable distribution of wealth can only mean that the poor and the needy will continue to be deprived of govt assistance while the rich will continue to benefit from this skewed affirmative policy.
Earlier, the centre for public studies headed by Dr, Lim Teck Ghee had made a statement that its findings had established bumiputra equity ownership had exceeded 45%. In order to rebutt this findings by ASLI and to deny further credence to the findings that “corporate equity distribution was narrowly based, unrealistic and has resulted in an underestimation of the true volume and value of bumiputra equity”, the govt must reveal the official methodology to measure corporate equity. Based on itscalculation it must provide clear irrevocable proof that bumiputra’s equity has regressed to a lowly 18% in 2006.
At that time when the ASLI’s findings was published many UMNO leaders including the P.M called the report “baseless, inaccurate and irresponsible”. UMNO vice-President Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin went even further and called it “rubbish”.
There was a beacon of hope to establish the truth when DPM Najib gave an assurance that the methodology used to calculate the Bumi’s corporate equity would be publicly revealed.That assurance was given almost six months ago and it appears quite likely that the DPM has reneged on his word.
NEP in its present form has been abused and lost its initial noble objectives of helping the poor and the needy instead of the rich of one single race. Instead of affirmative action based on poverty it was exclusively based on a policy of helping just one race irrespective of the wealth of that person.
Hence we have a situation where a rich bumiputra is entitled to purchase a high-end property at a discount. What kind of logic is it? If he can afford to buy a high-end property surely he don’t need a discount.
The NEP must embrace the concept that there are poor Malays Indians, Chinese, Ibans and Kadazans etc. If the NEP is to have any meaning it must help those in need irrespective of their race and not because they belong to a select community.
If there is any defect in ASLI’s report, it is its failure to pinpoint the recipients of the 45% of bumiputra equity.The revelation maybe academic but the truth is maybe only 10% of the bumis benefitted from the 45% corporate equity distributed by virtue of the NEP.
As long as the govt refuse to accept this reality the longer it will be for national reconciliation.The inequitable distribution of wealth can only mean that the poor and the needy will continue to be deprived of govt assistance while the rich will continue to benefit from this skewed affirmative policy.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Saturday, April 14, 2007
Contract Award Of West Coast Highway is a Sham
It is disconcerting to learn that the West Coast Highway mooted in 1996 but put on hold because of the Asian financial crisis will be given to the original contractors awarded 11 years ago.
A project awarded 11 years ago certainly has no justification to be given to the same contractor unless the project was awarded in an open tender in 2007.
Cost of labour and price of material fluctuate over time and can bear no relationship after a period of 11 years. So on what basis was the Highway contract awarded to the same contractor?
How did the estimated cost of $3.12 billion been awarded to the contractor if there was no competitive bid for the project?
Surely a project of such magnitude would demand greater transparency and accountability.
The concessionaires for the project include Kumpulan Europlus Bhd and the contractor is Konsortium LPB Sdn Bhd.
As taxpayers whose money are being used for this project I think we are entitled to know how and on what basis this contract was awarded and who are the principal beneficiaries of this Highway Project.
Saturday, April 07, 2007
The People of Machap must vote for a Change.
The Machap by-election will be an important milestone for the chinese community.It will determine, after 50 years of BN rule whether the chinese community will opt for a change or remain and continue to be marginalised by the present govt.
The choice for the people of Machap is a simple one.After 50 years where do we go from here? The present govt seem to have lost its direction and no longer have the capabilty to lead this multi-culture, multi-race and multi-religious nation where its people of different origin can live in peace and harmony.
Instead of fostering goodwill among its people the govt has implemented divisive racial policies that have polarised the different races. Its affirmative race based policy has benefited only one community and discriminated the rest.
Even its race based affirmative policy has been hijacked to benefit only a few elite UMNO members. After 50 years the Malay rural heartland of kelantan, Trengganu, Pahang, Perlis,Kedah and Johore still remain impoverished.
Corruption has creeped into every level of our daily lives. Corrupt politicians and civil servants are so prevalent that the system is powerless to act on them. Our political masters are reluctant to bring the culprits to justice because they are just as tainted with corruption.
Our Judicairy are presided by spineless judges guided by religious emotion and personal conviction rather than the rule of law as defined in our sacred Constituition.
So where do we go from here? The question should not only be directed at the Chinese but to all the races in Machap. If after 50 years our path taken is still littered with potholes, then its high time we make a change. A journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step.To begin our journey, the people of Machap must take that first step to vote for the opposition. Failure is not an option because our very future may well depend on it.
This entry was posted on Friday
The choice for the people of Machap is a simple one.After 50 years where do we go from here? The present govt seem to have lost its direction and no longer have the capabilty to lead this multi-culture, multi-race and multi-religious nation where its people of different origin can live in peace and harmony.
Instead of fostering goodwill among its people the govt has implemented divisive racial policies that have polarised the different races. Its affirmative race based policy has benefited only one community and discriminated the rest.
Even its race based affirmative policy has been hijacked to benefit only a few elite UMNO members. After 50 years the Malay rural heartland of kelantan, Trengganu, Pahang, Perlis,Kedah and Johore still remain impoverished.
Corruption has creeped into every level of our daily lives. Corrupt politicians and civil servants are so prevalent that the system is powerless to act on them. Our political masters are reluctant to bring the culprits to justice because they are just as tainted with corruption.
Our Judicairy are presided by spineless judges guided by religious emotion and personal conviction rather than the rule of law as defined in our sacred Constituition.
So where do we go from here? The question should not only be directed at the Chinese but to all the races in Machap. If after 50 years our path taken is still littered with potholes, then its high time we make a change. A journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step.To begin our journey, the people of Machap must take that first step to vote for the opposition. Failure is not an option because our very future may well depend on it.
This entry was posted on Friday
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Which Part Of The constituition They dont understand?
There is a general feeling of despondency over the gradual erosion of non-Muslims rights as provided for in the Federal Constitution. The State Legislative List in the 9th schedule of the Federal Constitution provides specific provisions that the “syariah courts ... shall have jurisdiction only over persons professing the religion of Islam” and yet despite this legal provision cast solidly in stone, two High Court judges deemed it fit by a majority decision to dismiss Subashini's appeal.
The majority decision went on further to declare quite wrongly and in direct contravention of the Federal Constitution that Subashini's recourse albeit a non-Muslim was at the Syariah Court and not at the High Court.
How two learned judges could circumvent the Fedaral Constitution and arrived at such an erroneous decision is certainly mind boggling. There are two possibilities why a straight forward case ended in such an acrimonious fashion.
Firstly, the two judges were so illiterate in their knowledge of the provision of the Federal Constitution that they overlooked the relevant provisions embodied in the constitution. This is quite unlikely as the provision in the constitution is so elegantly crafted without any ambiguity that a chambering law student would not even overlook it.
The second more plausible possibility is that unseen hands already decided on the fate of Subashini's case even before her appeal was to be heard by the High Court. Earlier, all three attempts to divert the case of S Sharmala, M Moorty and A Rayappan to the Syariah Court ended in failure.
For some in the syariah and civil courts, there is a fervent desire to prove to the world that justice for the non-Muslims can also be obtained at the Syariah Court. In order to prove this, a non-Muslim must first be made to submit to the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court. Failure to bring a non-Muslim to the Syariah Court would tantamount to failure to reveal to the world how Islamic jurisprudence would deal with a non-Muslim and receive justice.
In short, there is an attempt by some authorities to compel a non-Muslim to submit to the Syariah Court so that it will have an opportunity to vindicate its propaganda that Islamic law is impartial to all and sundry.
There is no doubt in my mind that Subashini will win her case in the Syariah Court and that this case will be made a shining example for future cases to be brought to the Syariah Court for adjudication.
However, before we rush into this unprecedented decision to seek justice in the Syariah Court, bear in mind the consequences. At what cost, because this will inevitably open the floodgates for all future such cases to be brought to the Syariah Court and the consequences can be disastrous.
The majority decision went on further to declare quite wrongly and in direct contravention of the Federal Constitution that Subashini's recourse albeit a non-Muslim was at the Syariah Court and not at the High Court.
How two learned judges could circumvent the Fedaral Constitution and arrived at such an erroneous decision is certainly mind boggling. There are two possibilities why a straight forward case ended in such an acrimonious fashion.
Firstly, the two judges were so illiterate in their knowledge of the provision of the Federal Constitution that they overlooked the relevant provisions embodied in the constitution. This is quite unlikely as the provision in the constitution is so elegantly crafted without any ambiguity that a chambering law student would not even overlook it.
The second more plausible possibility is that unseen hands already decided on the fate of Subashini's case even before her appeal was to be heard by the High Court. Earlier, all three attempts to divert the case of S Sharmala, M Moorty and A Rayappan to the Syariah Court ended in failure.
For some in the syariah and civil courts, there is a fervent desire to prove to the world that justice for the non-Muslims can also be obtained at the Syariah Court. In order to prove this, a non-Muslim must first be made to submit to the jurisdiction of the Syariah Court. Failure to bring a non-Muslim to the Syariah Court would tantamount to failure to reveal to the world how Islamic jurisprudence would deal with a non-Muslim and receive justice.
In short, there is an attempt by some authorities to compel a non-Muslim to submit to the Syariah Court so that it will have an opportunity to vindicate its propaganda that Islamic law is impartial to all and sundry.
There is no doubt in my mind that Subashini will win her case in the Syariah Court and that this case will be made a shining example for future cases to be brought to the Syariah Court for adjudication.
However, before we rush into this unprecedented decision to seek justice in the Syariah Court, bear in mind the consequences. At what cost, because this will inevitably open the floodgates for all future such cases to be brought to the Syariah Court and the consequences can be disastrous.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Why Iskander Development Region Will Fail
The response from the foreign investors to the Iskander development Region is quite evident.After few months from its launching, the Iskander Development Region has received lukewarm response from the foreign investors.This prompted Tun Musa Hitam,amember of the Iskander Development region Authority(IRDA)advisory Council to say unequivocally that'it was time to give up the New Economic Policy(NEP) for the success of the Iskander development Region(IDR).'On 22nd March 2007, our P.M declared that six sectors would not have to have Bumiputra equity participation.
For 50 years our malay political masters have deemed fit to cling to the NEP policy and now without much persuasion they have willingly relinquish that condition for the Iskander development Region.Why?
The simple reason is that Malaysia has missed the boat.Most of the FDI's that we are targeting have taken flight to China's economic region of Shenzan,Hangchou and to India's Mumbai and Bangalore region.Of late whatever FDI left have gone to Vietnam.So who are we trying to attract to the IDR? In order to answer this question let us examine the profile of the investors in Malaysia.
For the last ten years, the main investors in Malaysia have been the U.S and Singapore.Both their investments in Malaysia constitute almost 50% of all investments in the country.Therefore based on historical statistic it would be safe to assume that this would be the same category of investors targeted.
But would Singaporeans keen to invest in the Iskander develoment Region?Obviously not.Why would they want to invest in a country that seem to treat their presence with utter disdain and contempt.The scenic bridge, the sand issue, the use of Malaysian air space and a host of other minor irritants have seen relationship between the two countries at their lowest level.No matter what the incentives offered bythe Malaysian counterparts, the Singapore govt is defintely not going to take the bait.Further, a successful Iskander Development project would be at the expense of Singapore's own development.So logically it would be in Singapore's interest for theIDR to fail.
As for the Americans, would they want to pour their Investment dollars in the Iskander development region.?Definetely not, especially when their President was recently charged under the war crimes tribunal held in kuala Lumpur and presumably under the patronage of the govt.
By our own volition, our govt have foolishly offended the two most likely investors in the country and any amount of incentives or cajoling would unlikely to have any positive impact.Without the participation of these two major investors the Iskander development Region is destined to fail.
For 50 years our malay political masters have deemed fit to cling to the NEP policy and now without much persuasion they have willingly relinquish that condition for the Iskander development Region.Why?
The simple reason is that Malaysia has missed the boat.Most of the FDI's that we are targeting have taken flight to China's economic region of Shenzan,Hangchou and to India's Mumbai and Bangalore region.Of late whatever FDI left have gone to Vietnam.So who are we trying to attract to the IDR? In order to answer this question let us examine the profile of the investors in Malaysia.
For the last ten years, the main investors in Malaysia have been the U.S and Singapore.Both their investments in Malaysia constitute almost 50% of all investments in the country.Therefore based on historical statistic it would be safe to assume that this would be the same category of investors targeted.
But would Singaporeans keen to invest in the Iskander develoment Region?Obviously not.Why would they want to invest in a country that seem to treat their presence with utter disdain and contempt.The scenic bridge, the sand issue, the use of Malaysian air space and a host of other minor irritants have seen relationship between the two countries at their lowest level.No matter what the incentives offered bythe Malaysian counterparts, the Singapore govt is defintely not going to take the bait.Further, a successful Iskander Development project would be at the expense of Singapore's own development.So logically it would be in Singapore's interest for theIDR to fail.
As for the Americans, would they want to pour their Investment dollars in the Iskander development region.?Definetely not, especially when their President was recently charged under the war crimes tribunal held in kuala Lumpur and presumably under the patronage of the govt.
By our own volition, our govt have foolishly offended the two most likely investors in the country and any amount of incentives or cajoling would unlikely to have any positive impact.Without the participation of these two major investors the Iskander development Region is destined to fail.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
A.G's Chambers must wake up from slumber.
Lately, Our Attorney-General, Abdul Ghani Patail seems to be in a state of hibernation.So many legal infractions have passed through his hallowed corridor and yet not one of any consequence have been brought to face justice.Let us refresh his memory.
The mufti of Perak nearly caused a religious riot when he spread a false rumour from his pulpit that there was a mass conversion of muslims to christianity.There was strong irrefutable evidence that he had deliberately disseminated this false rumour to his congregation which nearly resulted in a riot at the church.If it had been any body else there would surely be a tangible case to be brought to court.Why then was the Perak Mufti exempted from any charge?
Then there was this Senator whose son had found it more lucrative to clone APs rather then apply it through the normal channel.The Custom dept. had found very credible evidence that a systemmatic cloning of APs was carried out by the Senator's son and the money involved was not a paltry sum but a conservative figure of $40 million.The custom dept were adamant that their evidence was strong and irrefutable and yet the Attorney-General have not filed any action against the culprits.Can the A.G explain why no charge was filed?
Then we have the famous wakil Rakyat fromMalacca who asked the Custom dept to close one eye on his indiscretion.If Anwar can be charged for corruption for giving orders beneficial to his interest then what is the difference with this case?Why the double standard?
Of late we see and hear alot of criminals being acquitted for their crimes for the simple reason caused by shoddy and inept preparation of cases.The thought that murderers and violent criminals are released because of technical reasons is a daunting prospect face by ordinary citizens of this country.
Theprospect for the future becomes even more grim when the very institution,the office of the Attorney-General, which we so highly put our faith in beomes mired in incompetence.
The mufti of Perak nearly caused a religious riot when he spread a false rumour from his pulpit that there was a mass conversion of muslims to christianity.There was strong irrefutable evidence that he had deliberately disseminated this false rumour to his congregation which nearly resulted in a riot at the church.If it had been any body else there would surely be a tangible case to be brought to court.Why then was the Perak Mufti exempted from any charge?
Then there was this Senator whose son had found it more lucrative to clone APs rather then apply it through the normal channel.The Custom dept. had found very credible evidence that a systemmatic cloning of APs was carried out by the Senator's son and the money involved was not a paltry sum but a conservative figure of $40 million.The custom dept were adamant that their evidence was strong and irrefutable and yet the Attorney-General have not filed any action against the culprits.Can the A.G explain why no charge was filed?
Then we have the famous wakil Rakyat fromMalacca who asked the Custom dept to close one eye on his indiscretion.If Anwar can be charged for corruption for giving orders beneficial to his interest then what is the difference with this case?Why the double standard?
Of late we see and hear alot of criminals being acquitted for their crimes for the simple reason caused by shoddy and inept preparation of cases.The thought that murderers and violent criminals are released because of technical reasons is a daunting prospect face by ordinary citizens of this country.
Theprospect for the future becomes even more grim when the very institution,the office of the Attorney-General, which we so highly put our faith in beomes mired in incompetence.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Friday, March 16, 2007
Those Linked to DPM the beneficiaries of N.S
I wish to refer to Victor See's letter on Who really benefit from NS? Our kids? To a certain extent, I would venture to say that the kids do benefit from a three-month stint, which in many ways is similar to a summer camp. As with all summer camps, the activities and programme sprinkle with military lifestyle can be an exciting experience for the youngsters who are leaving home for the first time.
As for achieving its stated objective of racial integration, it is a complete failure. After spending the most part of their adolescent life in complete isolation, how could anyone expect these kids from different races and diverse background to suddenly accept each other as buddies?
The expectation of the National Service in achieving racial integration is not only unrealistic but is a wanton waste of public funds. Spending a few billion ringgit annually on a programme that do not achieve its stated goal cannot be considered prudent expenditure.
Who then are the real beneficiaries of the NS? From the onset when the NS scheme was formulated and the budget allocated, it became crystal clear that the beneficiaries were the contractors given lucrative contracts to set up the camps throughout the length and breadth of the country.
We have lucrative contracts given to transport the trainees to the camps, the contract for supplies of uniforms and accessories, caterers for food and a host of other contracts too numerous to mention but all at a cost that is way above market price because they were given ad hoc and without proper tender.
And if we were to study the recipients of these contracts, the trail would lead to one source - the Defence Ministry where the deputy prime minister is the head. Part of the reason for the failure of the NS scheme could be attributed to discriminatory way in which the contracts were given out. Many of them just simply didn’t have the experience and expertise to do the job.
An example was the transport of trainees contract given to ex-army and retired officers. On the day of departure, many trainees were left stranded without any transport to ferry them to their intended destination. The vehicles scheduled to transport them did not even bother to turn up at the appointed time and place. Other failed contracts included catering where some camps’ food supplied for trainees were even not fit for human consumption.
The whole concept of fostering racial integration via the NS route is an illusory one. The path is not only fraught with uncertainties and failures, but at what cost? To date, we have already recorded 19 fatalities and the authorities are nowhere near a solution to arrest this problem. This incident of high fatalities should demand a comprehensive investigation into the preliminary screening of the trainees to ascertain if they are medically fit to be enlisted for the NS programme.
Unless and until such time when a suitable mechanism is in place to ascertain the suitability and eligibility of each trainee on medical grounds, the NS scheme based on its current form should be temporarily suspended.
As for achieving its stated objective of racial integration, it is a complete failure. After spending the most part of their adolescent life in complete isolation, how could anyone expect these kids from different races and diverse background to suddenly accept each other as buddies?
The expectation of the National Service in achieving racial integration is not only unrealistic but is a wanton waste of public funds. Spending a few billion ringgit annually on a programme that do not achieve its stated goal cannot be considered prudent expenditure.
Who then are the real beneficiaries of the NS? From the onset when the NS scheme was formulated and the budget allocated, it became crystal clear that the beneficiaries were the contractors given lucrative contracts to set up the camps throughout the length and breadth of the country.
We have lucrative contracts given to transport the trainees to the camps, the contract for supplies of uniforms and accessories, caterers for food and a host of other contracts too numerous to mention but all at a cost that is way above market price because they were given ad hoc and without proper tender.
And if we were to study the recipients of these contracts, the trail would lead to one source - the Defence Ministry where the deputy prime minister is the head. Part of the reason for the failure of the NS scheme could be attributed to discriminatory way in which the contracts were given out. Many of them just simply didn’t have the experience and expertise to do the job.
An example was the transport of trainees contract given to ex-army and retired officers. On the day of departure, many trainees were left stranded without any transport to ferry them to their intended destination. The vehicles scheduled to transport them did not even bother to turn up at the appointed time and place. Other failed contracts included catering where some camps’ food supplied for trainees were even not fit for human consumption.
The whole concept of fostering racial integration via the NS route is an illusory one. The path is not only fraught with uncertainties and failures, but at what cost? To date, we have already recorded 19 fatalities and the authorities are nowhere near a solution to arrest this problem. This incident of high fatalities should demand a comprehensive investigation into the preliminary screening of the trainees to ascertain if they are medically fit to be enlisted for the NS programme.
Unless and until such time when a suitable mechanism is in place to ascertain the suitability and eligibility of each trainee on medical grounds, the NS scheme based on its current form should be temporarily suspended.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)