THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDGES REVISITED BY NH CHAN

What does the term ‘the independence of the judges’ mean? I pose this question because it appears that there are many of our judges today who do not seem to know the true meaning of separation of powers in constitutional law.

This is most apparent especially among those judges in the higher echelon of the judicial hierarchy. The bad judges seem to think that independence means that they can do what they like – because the dictionary says the word means ‘free from the control or influence of others’.

The recalcitrant judges think that words can mean whatever they want them to mean. They think like Humpty Dumpty who says that it depends on who has the power – “the question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master”. These Humpty Dumpty judges also think that they are independent of the legislature.

They think they could ignore the federal and the Perak constitutions, even the statutes enacted by Parliament so long as they side with the government in power. By so doing, these judges have exposed themselves to the rest of us because they have refused to perform their duty which is to do justice according to law. It is their duty to do the right thing. The right thing to do is to deal out impartial justice and to apply the law of the land as it stands.

The notion of separation of powers or the independence of the judges seems to be beyond the comprehension of these judges. But we are here today to explain to the ordinary people of this country what it means to have an independent judiciary. Once the ordinary people have a grasp of the concept of separation between executive and judicial powers they will be able to judge the judges.

When it comes to explaining the law so that it could be easily understood, I believe the late Lord Denning had no equal. In ‘The Family Story’, at pages 191,192, he explains the concept: The independence of the judges.

“The keystone of the rule of law in England (and elsewhere) has been the independence of the judges. It is the only respect in which we make any real separation of powers. There is here no rigid separation between the legislative and the executive powers, because the ministers, who exercise the executive power, also direct a great deal of the legislative power of Parliament. But the judicial power is truly separate. The judges [in England] for nearly 300 years have been absolutely independent. And when I speak of judges, I include not only the High Court Judges, but also all the magistrates and others who exercise judicial functions.

No member of the government, no member of Parliament, and no official of any government department, has any right whatever to direct or to influence or to interfere with the decisions of any of the judges. It is the sure knowledge of this that gives the people their confidence in the judges, and I would add also the chairmen of tribunals when they are independent of the executive, for they too are judges. It does not depend on the name judge or chairman but on the substance. The critical test which they must pass if they are to receive the confidence of the people is that they must be independent of the executive”.

The judges must be independent of the executive, how did this happen? For the answer to this question I have to return to Lord Denning who had, in his lifetime, explained the law in a way that ordinary people can understand. He said in The ‘Family Story’, page 190:

“… for nigh on 700 years, the judges of England laid down the common law which precisely defined the rights of the individual and made the life and liberty of every law-abiding citizen secure from injury on the part of others or of the State. …The principles laid down by them have sunk deep into the mind of the nation and have been more powerful than anything else in creating the spirit of the British Constitution. (Here, ’spirit’ means ‘typical character, quality or mood.)”

What does the spirit of the constitution mean? Lord Denning explains it at page 191:

“It lies, I believe, first, in the instinct for justice which leads us to believe that right, and not might, is the true basis of society; and secondly, in the instinct for liberty, which leads us to believe that free-will, and not force, is the true basis of government. These instincts for justice and liberty are abstract ideas which are common to all freedom-loving countries: but the peculiar genius of the British Constitution lies in a third instinct, which is a practical instinct leading us to balance rights with duties, and powers with safeguards, so that neither rights nor powers shall be exceeded or abused. But who are the guardians of this spirit? Who are they who interpret it on our behalf?

They are twofold. On the one hand – Parliament. On the other hand – the Judges. Our (the British) Constitution is unwritten. But it is founded on two strong pillars. One is the sovereignty of Parliament. The other is the independence of the Judges.

The only difference between the British constitution and ours is that ours is a written one. With a written constitution everything is contained in the entrenched clauses of the constitution (which is a statute).”

In an unwritten one like the British constitution they have no entrenched clauses. They have no fundamental constitution by which other laws can be tested. They will have to rely on the common law as laid down by the judges of England. In this respect the common law of England is wove into the fabric of the history of England.

Rigid separation of powers

But we are here today to look at the independence of the judges. This will take us back to the opening paragraphs of this address where I read from Lord Denning.

Shortly stated, the independence of the judges means that there is a rigid separation of powers between executive power and judicial power. The critical test which every judge must pass is that he must be independent of the executive. If a judge does not appear to be independent of the executive then he will lose the confidence of the people.

Once the people has no confidence in a judge that is the end of his reputation and integrity as a judge. Haven’t you heard the often repeated remark, ‘I don’t respect our judges any more’ among the people of this country, ever since the Perak debacle exploded onto the local scene?

Why do the people feel so strongly about this? It is because the keystone of the rule of law has been the independence of the judges. For the English people, Lord Denning has expressed it in this way, ibid, on page 192:

“Why do the English people feel so strongly about this? It is because it is born in them. We know in our bones that it will not do for us to allow the executive to have any control over the judges: and we know it because our forefathers learnt it in their struggles with the kings of England – the kings who in the old days exercised the supreme executive power in the land.”

We, Malaysians, also feel very strongly about this. But it is not born in us. It is not in our bones that it will not do for us to allow the executive to have any control over the judges because our forefathers did not experience any bitter struggle with our rulers – our sultans and governors.

Ours is a new nation; it is only 52 years old. But we have inherited the Common Law of England – see the Civil Law Act 1956 – and from the common law we have learnt how the separation between executive power and judicial power came to light.

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

Shortly stated, justice means that the judge’s duty is to do the right thing. The right thing to do is to deal out impartial justice. The right thing to do is also to apply the law as it stands. The so-called Perak crisis has brought out a host of cases that showed that the judges gave the impression that they were one-sided. The perception of the people is that they sided with the BN government.

A classic example is the shocking case of Zambry v Sivakumar in the Federal Court. We all remember the infamous five (judges) who were Alauddin Mohd Sheriff , Arifin Zakaria, Nik Hashim Ab Rahman, Augustine Paul and Ahmad Makinnuddin.

They decided in favour of the BN-appointed Mentri Besar Zambry Abd Kadir. They held that the speaker of the Perak legislative assembly V Sivakumar has no power to suspend Zambry and six executive council members from attending the assembly.

I posted this criticism of the decision on the Internet. I wrote:

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

The words in Article 72(1) are specific. The words mean exactly what they say. Even a child can understand them. Yet the infamous five chose to ignore the plain meaning of the words. They gave their own meaning to them. They said, under the pretext of interpretation, that the constitutional provision did not allow the speaker to suspend the seven applicants. But who are they to say that the speaker was not allowed to suspend the MB and the turncoats when the supreme law of the land says ‘the validity of any proceedings in the legislative assembly of any state shall not be questioned in any court’?

”Law of the land

Even in the unwritten British Constitution there is an almost similar provision as ours, but it is called the privileges of Parliament. This is how Lord Denning put it in ‘The Family Story’, page 192:

“The Houses of Parliament enjoy certain privileges. One of them is freedom of speech. Erskine May says: ‘What is said or done within the walls of Parliament cannot be enquired into in a court of law”.

“The Bill of Rights 1688, art. 9, s 1, says that the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament, ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament.”

Not even the great Lord Denning could assail this. The case is reported in the ‘Law Reports – re the Parliamentary Privilege Act 1770 [1958] AC 331′. He tells it on page 193 of ‘The Family Story’:

“On February 8, 1957 Mr Strauss MP wrote a letter – on House of Commons paper – to Mr Maudling, the Paymaster-General. He complained of the behaviour of the London Electricity Board. He said that they were disposing of scrap cables at too low a price. He said their conduct was a scandal. Mr Maudling … passed the complaints on to the London Electricity Board.

On March 4,1957 the Board’s solicitor wrote to Mr Strauss threatening a writ. That simple solicitor’s letter raised the great constitutional issue. Who was supreme? Parliament or the courts of law? Mr Strauss said the letter (threatening a writ) was a breach of the privileges of Parliament, and that the Board and its solicitor were punishable by the House itself. The London Electricity Board said that they were entitled to have recourse to the courts of law and that the House of Commons could not stop them.

The issue was referred to the Privy Council. Seven Law Lords sat to hear it. I was one of them. I found myself in a minority of one. Six of them…held that the House of Commons could treat the issue of a writ against a Member of Parliament – in respect of a speech or proceeding in Parliament – as a breach of its privileges.”

Lord Denning’s dissent was that every Englishman had a right to seek redress in the courts of law and then Mr Strauss in his defence could plead the defence of Parliamentary privilege as being a ‘proceeding in Parliament’ within the Bill of Rights.

You will not find his dissent in the opinion of the Privy Council – in those days dissenting opinions were not allowed. In a sense Lord Denning was right; no one could be prevented from seeking redress in a court of law. But in the case in question the issue was referred to the Privy Council for its opinion. This had preempted the writ action. Had the issue to be decided by a court of law, parliamentary privilege is still a complete defence.

Now that you have been apprised of the law, you will know that there is a rigid separation of powers between the executive government and the judiciary. You will also know the true meaning of the independence of the judges. You are also sure that the separation between executive power and judicial power is real. It is not a myth. It is the law of this country.

It is only those judges who had made all those decisions on the Perak crisis who have created the confusion by refusing to apply the law of the land as it stands. But to the good judges and the dedicated lawyers and to all right thinking people of this country, I urge all of you not to give up the struggle.

Keep on commenting on their conduct in court. Keep on writing articles about their decisions that do not apply the law of the land as it stands. Educate the people of their rights and the law that is applicable to the decision, and should the judges divert it or depart from it – and do so knowingly – they themselves would be guilty of a misuse of power: see Lord Denning’s ‘What Next in the Law’, page 319.

On my part, I shall try to ensure that the names of the bad guys will remain in infamy for generations to come unless they recant the wrongs that they have done to the country and to the people. I shall write their obituary when they die. If they outlive me I am sure there will be others who will take my place.

The author NH CHAN was admitted to the Bar in 1961 and was a lawyer for almost two decades before becoming a High Court judge. He was then elevated to the Court of Appeal before retiring in 2000. He is the author of two books, ‘Judging the Judges’ (2007) and ‘How to Judge the Judges’.

KU LI - UMNO CAN DO ANYTHING BUT I MAINTAIN MY STAND - ROYALTY PAYMENTS MUST BE MADE DIRECTLY TO THE STATE GOVERNMENTS

Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, who is popularily known as Ku Li, spoke that his party UMNO can do anything on him but he still maintains his stand that royalty payment of 5% and NOT WANG EHSAN must be paid to the State Government and not any other body under UMNO control.

Watch this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNXC979B-GA&feature=player_embedded#

It seems UMNO will face a major problem, since one its veteran leaders are adamant with his stand.

PM NAJIB SAYS :TIME FOR PROTECTION OVER, GET USED TO IT

Malaysians must face new global realities and accept increased competition and removal of subsidies, said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak today.

He said today that subsidies for industries must be restructured and gradually phased out to promote private investments.

“Giving freer rein to private initiative and market forces... has important consequences,” he said in a speech at an economic conference.

“We may not be able to afford over-subsidised and under-priced energy,” Najib added.

Subsidies make up about 2 per cent of Malaysia’s gross domestic product with the country expected to spend RM21 billion this year on fuel, gas and food subsidies.

Najib noted that the China-Asean Free Trade Area (CAFTA) that took effect in January would pose challenges to the country but that the nation would just have to adjust.

“CAFTA will challenge all Asean economies to structurally adjust and adapt and Malaysia is no different,” said Najib at the opening of the 1 Malaysia Economic Conference organised by the Associated Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry of Malaysia (ACCCIM).

“The private sector will need to raise its game in terms of being more efficient abd hone its ability to exploit opportunities presented. CAFTA offers Malaysians unique prospects to export and expand their business.”

ACCCIM president Tan Sri William Cheng had in his speech earlier suggested that the governments of Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia try to convince China to limit their exports to affected Asean countries to no more than a 10 per cent increase over last year to reduce the impact of CAFTA.

“It is important to understand that complaints and demands to be shielded from competition will get industry participants nowhere,” Najib responded.

“If Malaysians do not do what is necessary to survive and thrive, and do it faster and better, we run the risk of being left out and left behind.”

He added that subsidies for industries must be restructured and gradually phased out and greater domestic competition must occur.

“Nurturing of infant industries must be done differently and based on skills, technology, access to capital and marketing support. Not on protection. The sooner we realise these new realities, the better it will be for all of us.”

Najib added that Malaysia needed to create more intangible assets such as proprietary technologies, intellectual property, brand names and institutions.

“Investment in these assets is extremely critical. Look at high income countries. Their high value industries and corporations have a high ratio of intangible investment,” he said.

The Najib administration is trying to make the country’s economy more efficient by removing subsidies such as for oil and sugar as well as embarking on various economic liberalisation measures such as lifting of ethnic quotas in selected sectors of the economy.

news courtesy of Malaysian insider

'Yea' for Nizar means trouble for Perak

So, finally the Perakians have to pay the price for this 'injustice' caused by certain parties. The best alternative would be to DISSOLVE THE STATE ASSEMBLY and hold fresh elections. Will BN/UMNO be prepared to face defeat?.

Regardless of points of law or consideration of justice, a ruling in favour of ousted Perak menteri besar Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin may mean more trouble ahead for the Silver State.

"Should the court rule in favour of Nizar tomorow, it would put the state in a difficult position," said renowned constitutional law expert Abdul Aziz Bari.

He was commenting on the impending judgement of the controversial Nizar (left in photo) versus current Perak MB Zambry Abdul Kadir (right in photo) case.

The UIA law professor explained that in the past year or so, Zambry had made a lot of decisions in his 'rule' over Perak.

"A ruling in favour of Nizar would render those decisions illegal," he stressed.

This situation will surely wreak havoc with the Perak government, especially in its currently fragile state. As it is, the state is already purportedly suffering a loss of investor confidence.

A decision for Nizar may unravel all the administrative decisions of the past year or so, including the recently passed budget.

Abdul Aziz also refuted suggestions from certain quarters that the courts make a prospective ruling to avoid that difficulty.

'Prospective decision improbable'

In most cases, the law would apply retroactively, meaning that the decision decided on today will also be applied to past events in relation to the case.

There are arguments that in the Perak situation the law should only apply prospectively, that is, only to events transpiring after the date of the judgement.

However in this case, the new MB will of course need to put his own policies in place and remove those of his predecessor. Zambry did the same when he came to power.

"I personally just do not see how that (a prospective ruling) can be done," he added.

'Wife with uncertain husbands'

The root of this problem, Abdul Aziz contends, were the gross judicial errors committed by the Court of Appeal in the first place.

"It was wrong for the Court of Appeal to suspend the High Court ruling which held that Nizar was the rightful MB last year.

"The judges in the appellate court should instead have made a ruling; either confirming or reversing the high court's earlier decision," he said.

Abdul Aziz (right) likened what the Court of Appeal did was like allowing a man (Zambry) whose status as a husband was still unclear to live with a woman (Perak) whose marriage to another man (Nizar) was still undecided.

The decision to simply suspend the earlier ruling affirming Nizar as MB, he believes, is like allowing the man (Zambry) to cohabit with the said woman (Perak) until it eventually led to the birth of children.

The 'children' in this case being the decisions Zambry has made since.

"But then one should not be too surprised with the clumsy manner the judges handled the Perak case. This was not the first time the judiciary has erred," he added.

Doubtful decisions

Abdul Aziz gave the example of how a magistrate granted an injunction (to the police) to prohibit citizens from exercising their constitutional right to assemble peacefully as granted under article 10(1) of the federal constitution.

"Under this (constitutional) provision only parliament has the power to deny that right," he exclaimed.

He also pointed to another case in which the Federal Court in 2005 ruled that the prohibition on gender discrimination under the constitution did not apply to MAS as it was a private company.

This, Abdul Aziz said, obviously ran counter to the principle of constitutional supremacy contained by the constitution.

He also gave an example when a court decision could throw a state into turmoil. In 1966, the first Sarawak Chief Minister, Stephen Kalong Ningkan, was ousted when the state governor showed him a letter of no confidence issued by 21 out of 42 legislators and asked Ningkan to resign as chief minister.

Ningkan refused, saying the letters were not the equivalent to a vote of no confidence in the state legislative assembly. He was sacked by the governor but eventually reinstated by the Borneo High Court, which saw the necessity of a formal vote of no confidence.

Abdul Aziz said the court was right in its decision, but it catapulted the state into chaos, when the federal government, upset and embarrassed, declared a state of emergency and suspended the state constitution.

The Perak hullabaloo

The hullabaloo surrounding the Perak case, both in the past and impending future, he said, underlined the point that taking political problems to court, was not the answer. "Especially when judges fail to act swiftly and correctly," he concluded.

Abdul Aziz's view is echoed by others. Indeed there are many who feel that the right to determine the government of Perak should have been returned to the people.

news courtesy of Malaysiakini

MACC chief: Kick my ass if I'm wrong - Can you believe him?

Newly-minted Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) chief Abu Kassim Mohamed wants Malaysians to give him the benefit of doubt as published by Malaysiakini today.

Recognising that the MACC will have to redeem its image following a number of controversies, Abu Kassim said the commission must demonstrate that it is independent.

“I need you to be our champion. By doing that, if anyone wants to kill MACC, you'll be our protector. But believe me, if I'm wrong, you kick my ass,” he said without mincing his words.

“Just say, 'Abu, you're wrong. If you want us to protect you, behave yourself.' I will make sure that I go straight. My words, (and) my actions must show that I'm independent.”

Abu Kassim made these remarks at a recent hour-long informal discussion with MACC advisory panel member Anis Yusoff, and Malaysiakini columnist KJ John and editor-in-chief Steven Gan at the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Academy in Jalan Duta, Kuala Lumpur.

Topics covered included the actions MACC must take to regain public trust, its never-ending probe on Selangor Opposition Leader Dr Mohd Khir Toyo and why the commission is reaching out to the alternative media.

Abu Kassim, who took over the embattled MACC less than two months ago, revealed that the advisory panel had requested attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail to explain why no action had been taken on the Lingam tape scandal.

He also described the MACC's police report against Thai pathologist Dr Pornthip Rojanasunand - a witness in the Teoh Beng Hock inquest - as a “shot in the foot” [sic].

Excerpts of the discussion follow.

Gan: One of the major problems with MACC is the accusation that it ignores politically sensitive cases.

Abu Kassim: In the case of Rafidah Aziz (former international trade and industry minister), it was very clear that we recommended that she be charged.

All big cases, we investigate. In many countries, to investigate big cases, you have to get permission. In one country, (the anti-corruption agency is) very independent, but the government did not give it enough resources - no people, no investigation. In another country, the anti-corruption agency has no powers. It is merely a coordinating agency.

In Malaysia, the MACC is accountable directly to Parliament. At the end of the year, we have to present our report (to Parliament). We are now preparing our annual report. After that, we have to present it to our advisory board.

And we have to bring that report to the special committee under the Parliament which consists of (MPs) from the opposition and the government. And they can call us up at any time to answer all the issues raised in the report.

The prime minister has no role. The Prime Minister's Department controls only the (MACC) budget. And it answers questions in Parliament on issues not directly involving us. We are more afraid of the (advisory) committee and the Parliament. We are answerable to the committee and the Parliament.

Those who are sitting in the committee, do you think they will keep quiet? Even at today's (advisory panel) meeting, sampai habis (until the very end), I have to answer, answer, answer - non-stop answering.

But I'm happy. They make sure that you don't go astray. You must be straight. If something is wrong, they will say, 'Go back, go back. Straight line, please'. I like that. I like that because they are representing the society.

The problem is people don't understand. One of the committee member just now thought that we have the powers to prosecute.

Anis: They have been in the committee for nearly a year, they still did not know...

Abu Kassim: I had to explain to him, 'No, I don't have the powers to prosecute'. Although the law says that I can act as the DPP (deputy public prosecutor), but it's the AG (attorney-general) who gives me the power. We control the investigation, not the prosecution.

So if you want to assess me, assess me on the investigations. We investigate all cases which have been reported to us. Furthermore, lagi susah (even more troublesome is that) the operation review committee wants everything to be presented to them - any case which we decide not to investigate, we must justify (our decision).

Anis: (The advisory panel chief) Hadenan (Abdul Jalil) is on the committee...

Abu Kassim: Tan Sri Hadenan, Cecil Abraham - all these people are well-trained. Cases which we keep after one year and do not submit to the DPP, we have to tell them. And they start asking why tak habis lagi? (why haven't these been completed yet?).

If there is a conflict between MACC and DPP - we suggest charge, they suggest don't charge - we have to explain why. And before we want to close any case, we have to explain to them (the advisory committee). 'This case is going to be close and these are the reasons'. And they can call up all the cases which the public have complained (about) to them at any time.

That's why, although their terms of reference involved cases only for 2009, when they saw the Lingam tape case, they made a public announcement that they want the AG to present to the (advisory) committee.

So they wrote a letter, and AG will have to make a presentation.

Gan: When is the presentation?

Abu Kassim: The meeting will be next month. This is now a totally different world, believe me. Working in MACC is like (being in) hell. Previously we were not transparent. I have to be frank - then, it was only between us and that AG. Now we have to be accountable.

John: What is the relationship between the minister and MACC?

Abu Kassim: He answers questions in Parliament only. We prepare answers for him to answer, that's all. He has no administrative powers over us. If he calls me to see him, and I don't want to see him, it's okay. I never go and see him, unless he says, 'Abu, this is the answer in Parliament, I want to know more in case the wakil rakyat (members of parliament) ask'. Normally I send my officer.

Even if he has a post-cabinet meeting to coordinate something, I don't go. My junior officer goes. All other heads of department, they go. I don't go. Why should I? I don't want to be seen as...

I need to be frank with you. I need you to be our champion. By doing that, if anyone wants to kill MACC, you'll be our protector. But believe me, if I'm wrong, you kick my ass. If I'm wrong, don't agak-agak (don't hesitate). Just say, 'Abu, you're wrong. If you want us to protect you, behave yourself.' I will make sure that I go straight.

My words, my actions must show that I'm independent.

Anis: Today at the (advisory panel) meeting, one of the suggestions was that you cannot sign off as menurut perintah (following orders) any more. You will sign off as pemegang amanah (as holder of the public trust).

Abu Kassim: From now on, with all my letters, I'll signed off as Saya pemegang amanah.

John: All the MACC officers (should do so). Menurut perintah is old culture.

Abu Kassim: I'm happy (with the suggestion). Sometimes you don't see the problem as you're used to it.

John: I'm a retired civil servant. Out there, all ex-civil servants want to see country do well. But you must be able to listen to them. And they will tell you as it is.

Abu Kassim: Based on the law, I don't have to attend the meeting today. Only my deputy needs to attend.

Gan: What meeting?

Abu Kassim: The advisory panel.

John: The full panel?

Abu Kassim: No, no, one of the five panels. The one chaired by Tan Sri (Ramon) Navarathnam.

Anis: The one dealing with media, democracy...

Abu Kassim: Getting public support and all that. But I wanted to come. I wanted to hear. I wanted to interact with them. I wanted to hear what they say. They are not MACC. They are representing the public. I wanted to be close to the public.

They don't even get any salary from us, or the government. They are people like you, who have been appointed to the advisory panel.

Anis: People read Malaysiakini. All the criticism (in Malaysiakini) is coming from one side. But they are not at fault. The criticisms are based on perception.

Abu Kassim: Here's a classic example, the sand case...

Gan: The 'sand and sex' case?

Abu Kassim: Yes... about how it is being politicised. When our officers wanted to make arrests,(Selangor exco Yaakob Sapari) called all the media. And he spun things which were totally irrelevant and not right. He said that we were investigating him for going to China.

How did he know that we were investigating him for going to China? No, we didn't investigate him for going to China.

We were forced to come up with a statement, or else the damage would have been worse. So I asked my officers to tell how many (were arrested). But the mistake that we made was we didn't put the dates on (all) the arrests.

Gan: It looked like the arrests were made on the same day.

Anis: Or that Selangor was the only state where the arrests were made.

Abu Kassim: We had been arresting people the week before - Johor, Pahang...

Gan: But the timing was also bad as Dr Mahathir (Mohamad) said something on the matter in his blog a day or two before...

Abu Kassim: That I totally did not know.

Gan: So you're saying that it was a coincidence.

Abu Kassim: 100 percent. If I knew, I'd have made sure...

Gan: Some people put two and two together and come to the opinion that...

John: That was the unfunny part - the timing (of the arrests).

Gan: What about the MACC's police report against Dr Pornthip? That was...

Abu Kassim: A shot in the foot.

Gan: That's right. How did you come to that decision? What made you do it?

Abu Kassim: For me, it's very important to focus on the Teoh Beng Hock case. Make the (inquest) complete as fast as possible. All the plot within the plot is not important. We have to move forward. How can we move forward if this keeps dragging, dragging and dragging (on)?

Gan: I can understand if the police report is made against Suara Keadilan. But not Pornthip. It looked like MACC has an axe to grind.

Abu Kassim: I agree with you. I went to Mecca to perform my umrah (minor pilgrimage). I came back and the next morning I and my wife went to have nasi lemak. When we were almost finished, a TV station (reporter) came and asked, 'Datuk, what's your opinion (about the report against) Dr Pornthip?'

I said, 'What report?' What to answer? So I said if there was a report, then let them (police) investigate.

But I was very sincere when I said, 'I did not know'. I asked AG (about it), the AG said every (MACC) officer has the right make a police report.

But I would say that if he had made a police report against Suara Keadilan, then there may be some basis to it. I don't really understand why a report was made against Pornthip.

Gan: So the officer did not consult you?

Abu Kassim: I was away. I just came back.

John: Can an officer make a report without consulting any of his bosses?

Abu Kassim: I referred to the AG, and the AG said that if an officer wants to make a report, he can.

John: But he is doing it as a public official, he is not doing it as an individual.

Gan: Yes, he is seen to be representing MACC when making the police report.

Abu Kassim: He made the report as an MACC official, to preserve the (image of) MACC. I believe he might have asked somebody... I was not there at that particular time. At the particular time, I did not know. So I can seriously answer, I did not know.

news courtesy of Malaysiakini

So, finally we have a MACC head ABU KASSIM admitting that the rakyat can kick his ass if he fails to perform according to the wishes of the rakyat and NOT according to his maters - UMNOputra leaders in the government.

The rakyat is still await for his results on the pending matters.....give him 3 months and NO RESULT - he will have to voluntarily LEAVE.

Ku Li: We're still stuck in 1997

Recent events have shown that the state of Malaysian democracy has not progressed since 1997, said veteran Umno lawmaker Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah in scathing remarks today.

“If any one of us was tempted to imagine that Malaysia had outgrown the sordid events of 1997, the government's newspapers bring to our breakfast tables each day - Sodomy II,” he said.

Tengku Razaleigh cited several more issues in the news that, he said, prove Malaysia is only a “democracy in name”.

These include Anwar Ibrahim's ongoing sodomy trial, the row over the use of the term 'Allah', the Perak constitutional crisis and the government's failure to act on two royal commissions of inquiry findings.

“We are still in a whitewash of bad taste, authoritarianism and arbitrary power that destroyed our practice of parliamentary democracy, compromised our judiciary and police, and disenfranchised our people,” said the Gua Musang MP.

Razaleigh made his remarks in a speech when launching the Institute of Democracy and Economic Affairs (Ideas) at the Tunku Abdul Rahman Memorial, Kuala Lumpur today.

The former finance minister warned his audience not to expect reform from the political old guard who are entrenched in the prevailing order.

“We have left it to the deranged for too long…To expect change from the incumbents is to expect, in the Malay saying, 'the mice to repair the gourd',” he said.

news courtesy of Malaysiakini

ANWAR'S SODOMY II TRIAL - POSTPONED TO TOMORROW

The Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim sodomy II trial which was suppose to proceed today with cross-examining complainant Saiful Bukhari Azlan was POSTPONED to tomorrow morning so that the Judge could decide on the application made by the defence for High Court judge Justice Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah to recuse himself.

Datuk Seri Anwar’s lead counsel Karpal Singh brought up the issue as soon as the case was called at 9.58am, on the grounds that the judge’s previous ruling in relation to the closed proceedings of the trial’s second day “brings to surface an element of real danger of bias.”

Trial resumes tomorrow.

MB PERAK - ZAMBRY OR NAZIR - KNOWN TOMORROW

A year long battle for the 'legitimate' Mentri Besar Perak will be known after a 5 man Federal Court gives its verdict tomorrow (Tuesday 9 February 2010).

Is it Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir of UMNO (BN) or Datuk Seri Ir Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin of PAS (Pakatan).

The Perakians are anxiously awaiting for the results.

But Perakians are waiting for the State Assembly to be DISSOLVED so that fresh elections could be conducted to vote a new government of the peoples' choice is formed.

Will this dream materialise?

'Sedaq' to protest until Malay stakeholders are no longer 'ignored'

Penang Malay Chamber of Commerce president Rizal Faris Mohideen said the 50-member coalition of Malay groups 'Sedaq' (Aware) will hold more protests until the Penang government takes steps to consult Malay groups on issues that affect the community.

This is because figures within the government were inclined to ignore them until the issues were taken to the streets, said Rizal.

“In the meetings that we had over the issue of local government, we had advised the state government to always consult with the stakeholders before deciding on a course of action or policy.

“Yet, they have not heeded our advice. That's why we went to the streets. To get the power of the people to correct the wrongs of the state government,” he said when contacted.

Rizal (right), who was among those who led a 300-strong gathering on Friday to demonstrate against the DAP-led government of Lim Guan Eng, said the move by a DAP state assembly member to lodge apolice report against his organisation reflected its arrogance.

“Looking at the response of the state government after our demonstration, they do not appear to regret their way of governing. There seems to be no positive indication on their part that they want to right the wrongs. Instead, they lodged a police report against us.

“Therefore, I am of the opinion that this coalition Sedaq should hold more gatherings that will pressure the state government until the Malay community sees there are positive changes within the state government,” said Rizal.

From one month warnings to 24 hours notice

He said one particular issue of contention that drove the protests is the announcement some weeks earlier that the state local government and traffic management committee would reduce the number of notices to illegal traders from three in one month to only one warning.

Under the present enforcement system, illegal traders are issued first a 14-day notice, then a 30-day notice, before finally being given a 24-hour demolition notice.

The government plans to replace the present system with one whereby the demolition exercise would be carried out within 24 hours of the issuance of the first notice.

Rizal said such an announcement reflected the “arrogance” of the state government, given DPMMPP and many others had called for more discussions between the government authorities, small traders and other stakeholders on the issue of illegal structures.

“If your intent is to tweak policies to fit current times, then you should have consulted with all the relevant stakeholders, such as DPMM, the various traders associations, the small traders, hawkers, and so on.

“Get feedback on your ideas and discuss them with the stakeholders before you announce how the by-laws and policies are going to be change.

How did you come about making this decision? How is it that you can come up with such a policy without having consulted with our (DPMMPP) members?” asked Rizal.

“This is the kind of dictatorial manner of governance by Lim Guan Eng that we are complaining about,” he added.

Race card

On claims that DPMMPP and Sedaq were playing the race card and inciting racial tensions, Rizal said the coalition's aims are to the contrary.

“We are not affiliated to any political organisation, neither is there some hidden hand behind us. We want to see an equal share of wealth and power among all races. We want to see a situation where the minorities in Penang are given the opportunity (to prosper).

“Currently, we see a great (income) gap between the races, and if this goes on, it will be an unhealthy state of relations between the communities. We want to close that gap, because unless it is closed, the frustrations will lead to the build up of a time bomb.

“By addressing this, it's not just for the Malays. We're doing it for Penangites in general,” he said.

When contacted, Datuk Keramat state assembly person Jagdeep Singh Deo who lodged the police report yesterday, said the issue remains that DMPPMM and other groups in Sedaq had erroneously alleged the government was discriminating against the Malays.

Citing earlier reports, Jagdeep said only 38 percent of the hawkers against whom action were taken in 2008 were Malay- as opposed to Chinese and Indian hawkers who made up the remaining 52 and 10 percent, respectively.

Even fewer Malay hawkers in terms of percentage had action taken against them in 2009, compared to hawkers of the other races, Jagdeep added.

“The issue is one of enforcement against all illegal traders based on the law, regardless of whether those who violated the laws are Malays, Chinese, Indians, Punjabis or others,” said Jagdeep

“In the days leading to the demonstration, many of the local tabloids contained reports that misrepresent the state government and alleged that it enforced the laws along racial lines.

“You cannot make such rash and harsh statements like this and accuse the state government of racial discrimination. This is criminal defamation. We want the police to investigate DPMMPP.”

Jagdeep declined to speak on the policy issue regarding notices raised by Rizal, saying it is under the purview of the state's local government and traffic management committee chairman and DAP Penang chairperson Chow Kon Yeow.

When contacted, however, Chow declined to comment.

news courtesy of Malaysiakini

6 DECEMBER - TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN DAY

The Government plans to make this Tunku Abdul Rahman Day; in memory of the deeds and struggle of the country's first prime minister.

Information Communication and Culture Minister Rais Yatim said the observation of this important day will start this year, with activities that include a quizzes, essay-writing competitions and exhibitions related to the life and achievements of the statesman.

Date of the Tunku's death

Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra passed away on Dec 6, 1990 at the age of 87. He was laid to rest at the Langgar Royal Mausoleum in his home town here.

It is important to have such a day because many people do not understand and appreciate the Tunku's ideologies and his significance in the history of the country, Rais told reporters after launching a mobile exhibition on the Tunku's special collections and catalogues here on Sunday.

The five agencies associated with artefacts and history under his ministry would be tapped to come up with ideas on how to organise Tunku Abdul Rahman Day, he said.

news courtesy of Malaysian Mirror

PM NAJIB : BIG PLANS AHEAD FOR KG BARU

The Prime Minister's walkabout in Kampung Baru here yesterday was more than just a PR exercise. It came with goodies as Najib Abdul Razak said Kampung Baru would be redeveloped to benefit its residents.

Najib announced that the residents and land owners would have the right to dictate the type of development and would not have to relocate to make way for the project.

Special body

The Government also proposed to set up a special body run by a government trustee without private sector participation to safeguard the interests of Kampung Baru residents, he said.

"I hope that after we have put forward a good proposal, the residents here will have the opportunity to study it and concept to be applied. I hope after that, the residents, particularly the land owners, can accept the proposal," he was quoted in a Bernama report.

The Prime Minister had attended a briefing at Kuala Lumpur City Hall before going on a walkabout in Kampung Baru.

Najib said Federal Territories and Urban Well-being Minister Datuk Raja Nong Chik Raja Zainal Abidin had been asked to prepare a Cabinet paper on the redevelopment and that he would hold a dialogue with the residents after the Cabinet approves the paper.

Removing restrictions

Najib gave the assurance that the Government would launch the redevelopment immediately after getting the agreement of the residents, and that this concept of development would overcome all restrictions which had kept the land value low in the area.

He said the value of land in the area could exceed RM20bil if the residents accepted the redevelopment concept which would realise the full potential of Kampung Baru.

The value of land in Kampung Baru is only around RM350 per square foot when that in nearby areas such as the Kuala Lumpur City Centre (KLCC) exceeded RM2,000.

"With the conversion of the land status, the land owners in Kampung Baru will enjoy a huge shift in terms the value of the land they owned.

"A new era for Kampung Baru will begin as soon as the residents accept the government proposal," he said.

Explaining the role of the special body, Najib said it would be a dedicated one with the participation of some organisations determined by the Government to undertake redevelopment.

Keeping pace

"We do not want Kampung Baru to represent a squatter or slum area when the surrounding areas have developed with modern buildings and such.

"I wish to see Kampung Baru residents evolve into a modern society which garners high value for the land owned," Najib said to applause from the residents.

He also said the redevelopment would retain the Malay cultural elements and legacy of the area to reflect a unique image.

Business gains for bumis

Replying to a question, Najib said the redevelopment plans had provisions for skyscrapers, condominiums, shopping malls and housing, as well as business opportunities for bumiputra traders.

The 110-year-old Kampung Baru enclave, spreading over 90ha, has 35,000 residents in seven villages. The number of land owners is about 1,000.

Najib also announced an allocation of RM2mil to renovate two blocks of 17-storey PKNS flats in Kampung Baru after he saw their poor condition during his walkabout.

news courtesy of Malaysian Mirror

OUSTED PERAK MB NIZAR FEARS THE END IS NIGH

Today is the first anniversary of the Perak power grab and another worrisome cloud is hanging over ousted menteri besar Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin -a sudden no confidence vote against him to finally end the saga.

Nizar fears the possibility of the Barisan Nasional government going for it as early as next week depending on which way the decision on Pakatan de factor leader Anwar Ibrahim's sodomy trial falls.

He brought this out during his speech at a Pakatan gathering in Ayer Tawar last night prior to his departure this morning to the northern parts of the state on what the opposition coalition has dubbed the Democracy Expedition.

The mission is to explain to the people the story of the power grab constituency by constituency.

Nizar told Malaysiakini that the state BN appears ready for any eventuality in regard to the Federal Court's verdict expected on Tuesday on the rightful menteri besar, himself or his replacement, Zambry Abdul Kadir.

Twists and turns in power game

Once that is over, he expects the emergency assembly sitting to be on Wednesday or Thursday.

"We heard from sources that BN will use former deputy assembly speaker Hee Yit Foong to chair the sitting to table a motion of no confidence against me and remove me as the legitimate menteri besar," said a worried looking Nizar (left).

"The possibilities are there as BN is desperate to cling on to power and they see me as the obstacle to their objective. They will not use BN assembly speaker Ganesan as he was not lawfully elected," he added.

He also said the Pakatan is arranging around 10 buses to ferry Perakians to Putrajaya as a show of support for Nizar and to hear the court verdict and hopes the police will not hinder them.

As for the expedition, the north-bound bus convoy is headed by Nizar while another going south is led by DAP state chief Ngeh Koo Ham.

Nizar will meet the people in the streets and wet markets in several northern towns including Jelapang ( Yit Foong's constituency), Chemor ,Sungai Siput, Kuala Kangsar, Lenggong, Padang Rengas, Changat Jering, Taiping , Bagan Serai and finally to Parit Buntar where a Pakatan ceramah is expected for the night.

Ngeh's journey will take him to Batu Gajah, Gopeng, Kampar, Tapah, Bidor, Trolak and Tanjung Malim.

news courtesy of Malaysiakini

SAIFUL WAS AT CONDO AS PER CCTV FOOTAGE

Members of the court in Anwar Ibrahim's sodomy trial today visited the alleged crime scene at a posh condominium in Bukit Damansara, Kuala Lumpur.

The visit took place after 'in camera' proceedings ended at about 11am.

About a dozen cars ferried the members of the court to the scene together with complainant Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan and the accused Anwar Ibrahim.

When Saiful disembarked at the heavily guarded comdonimium entrance, several women who were there jeered and hurled insults at him.

It is believed that the women had trailed the entourage from the Kuala Lumpur court complex.

Yesterday, Saiful told the court of how Anwar had allegedly made sexual advances to him at Unit 11-5-1 at the Desa Damansara Condominium on June 26, 2008.

Saiful was prevented from revealing further details yesterday as defence counsel Karpal Singh applied for the rest of the testimony to be heard 'in camera'.

The closed-door proceedings began this morning at 9.30am.

Members of the court spent about an hour at the condominium compound before heading back to the court.

LIVE UPDATES follow from the Kuala Lumpur High Court:

4.20pm: Court adjourns till 9.30am tomorrow.

4.10pm: Doctor at Pusrawi suggested that Saiful have himself checked at a government hospital.
Saiful said he then went to the Kuala Lumpur general hospital where he told one Dr Daniel that he was sodomised by the accused.

Saiful said the doctor passed him a note and he proceeded to the emergency ward to lodge a police report was lodged. One superintendent Jude Pereira was among the police that attended to him.

4.00pm: Saiful said on June 28, 2008, accompanied by uncle Tuah Mohd Halim, he went to Tawakal Hospital at about 1.00pm but was turned away because it was only operating for half-day.

Following this, he went to another private hospital - Pusrawi Hospital - and was tended to by Dr Mohd Osman Abdul Hamid.

3.45pm: Footage shows Saiful entering entering a lift at the carpark and leaving more than an hour later.

3.40pm: Computer used to play the CCTV footage freezes while screening footage of the condominium carpark.

Justice Mohd Zabidin orders Anwar to step out of the dock and stand closer to the screen, since the latter can't see clearly.

3.35pm: Court now viewing CCTV footage of Saiful in the condominium.

3.30pm: Justice Mohd Zabidin rules that there was no contempt of court, as contempt must be proven through in depth investigations.

He said the defence can make a police report on Utusan Malaysia report should they feel there is element of contempt in the news report.

3.10pm: After submissions by the defence, Justice Mohd Zabidin said the Utusan Malaysia use of the word 'lagi (again)' was "mischievous".

Court in recess for five-minutes in order for the judge to decide on the matter.

3.00pm: Defence counsel Karpal Singh kicks off the afternoon proceedings by urging Justice Mohd Zabidin Mohd Diah to cite Utusan Malaysia for contempt over its front page report titled 'Tak rela diliwat lagi'.

news courtesy of Malaysiakini

ZAHID HAMIDI - MILITARY SECRETS LEAKED TO A FOREIGN EMBASSY

Defence Minister Zahid Hamidi disclosed Thursday that internal sources in the Armed Forces have been leaking military secrets to a foreign embassy.

Zahid said the leakage was discovered following investigations by the ministry's intelligence corps. He, however, declined to elaborate how long this has been going on but would make give more details later on.

Zahid said he would meet Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak to discuss the matter soon.

He believed the alleged individuals "have been paid" to sell the information.

He said those responsible for the leakage have been given a stern warning. Further investigations are being carried out by the intelligence corps and the police.

news courtesy of Malaysian Mirror

ELECTION FEVER IN THE AIR AT SARAWAK

Even though Sarawak’s next election is only due in 16 months, polls fever is already being felt in the state. Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat leaders have criss-crossed the length and breadth of the state and are busily organising various functions.

“Many of the star hotels in Kuching have been fully booked between June and July for federal ministers,” say hotel sources.

The unusually heavy hotel bookings have prompted political observers and politicians to believe that the state election is imminent. Some even suggest that the election may be held in July this year.

Sources close to the four component parties of the state Barisan have been told to get their machinery ready.

Confirming this, Tedewin Ngumbang, a Parti Rakyat Sarawak supreme council member, says: “Yes, it is true. We have been told to update our election machinery and get ready for election.

”Tedewin, who is also a close aide to PRS president and Minister of Land Development James Masing, says that he understands that as from March, which is the beginning of the five-year 10 MP (10 Malaysia Plan), BN will roll out massive development funds throughout the nation with special attention to Sarawak’s Corridor Renewal Energy (SCORE).

Tenders for the Bakun Road to the proposed Murum Dam, the Bintulu/Tunoh/Baleh/Kotai road and Kapit/Song/Sibu road will be out soon. The three trunk roads are expected to cost close to RM2 billion.

There are also several major projects which are to be implemented under 10MP in other parts of Sarawak, details of which are yet to be announced.

Constant visits

Other indications of early election include the constant visits by Federal ministers to various parts of Sarawak, right from Lawas to Sibu, Kapit and Lundu.Rural and Regional Development Minister Shafie Apdal has announced that his ministry has approved RM3.4 billion to build more roads, houses and public amenities under the National Key Rural Area (NKRA). These projects are expected to be carried out between now and 2012.

Another factor that can help determine an early election is the decision of the Apex Court in Perak on Feb 9 in which the ousted menteri besar Mohd. Nizar Jamaluddin has challenged the legality of Zambry Abdul Kadir’s state government.

Political observers see that whatever the court's decision, an early election is inevitable to determine which one is really the “government of the people”. Although Zambry says that BN can win up to 34 seats in the state assembly, BN and Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak are said to be dead scared of losing the Perak government to Pakatan Rakyat when such an election is to be held.

Thus, the observers reason, Najib wants Sarawak to hold a simultaneous election with that of Perak’s, so that if the BN is to lose Perak, it will be counter-balanced by the victory in Sarawak.

BN political strategists think along the same line, saying a BN victory in Sarawak will have a cushioning effect and will save Najib from embarrassment assuming PR takes Perak.

For Sarawak, the Federal Government is confident of its victory. This victory is being assessed by Federal ministers who have been visiting Sarawak lately.

Apdal says: “BN is going to win the next election in the state judging by the feedback I received from the rural areas. “But, of course, we must not be complacent. We need to work harder to ensure we will win the election in a big way,” he told BN supporters.

But Najib must ask Taib to hold an election simultaneously with the election in Perak. And observers believe that there is no reason why Taib should not agree, after all Najib has promised to inject massive development funds to Sarawak under the 10MP. And waiting for June next year to have an election is of little difference; it is a matter of nine or ten months away, so the strategists argue.

Solid and united

In the meantime, all BN parties have been told to put their houses in order and stop infighting.

Of the four BN parties in the state, Masing’s PRS is perhaps more solid and united now after a three-year crisis. For SPDP and SUPP, they have some internal problems that may undermine their unity.

The problem in SPDP is more about personality, and with the right approach, it should be solved soon. Only SUPP has a major problem especially the “Dudong branch” issue that has been a thorn in its flesh for the past three years without any sign of it being solved. In fact it has gotten from bad to worse.

Some 28 branches of the party have asked for an extraordinary meeting to solve it, but their request has been turned down, setting a major clash between supporters of Wong Soon Koh, state assemblyman for Bawang Assan, and Dr Soon Choon Teck, state assemblyman for Dudong. Both of them have been in the centre of the crisis with neither one prepared to give way, resulting in the problem being dragged on and on affecting not only SUPP branches and members in Sibu, but also statewide. Both of their supporters are at each others’ throats.

The effect of this divide may put the state seats in the midst and lower Rajang basin in jeopardy. Seats like Repok, Dudong, Pelawan and Bawang Assan are sure to face an uphill battle if the previous election results are any indication. SUPP has already lost Meradong and Bukit Assek to DAP in the last election.

The other BN component party, PBB, which is the backbone of the state government, will be holding its triennial general meeting early next month. Apart from strengthening its unity, election preparations are expected to be one of the meeting agendas. As PBB president and Chief Minister Abdul Taib Mahmud is known to have employed an iron-fist rule in the party, he will not tolerate any conflict or diverse views in the party. For him, the next election can be his last leading the state BN. In all the past elections, except for the 1987 state election when the opposition won 20 out of 48 seats, Taib has delivered absolute victories in the 29 years of his leadership.

Opposition front

On the opposition front, Pakatan Rakyat has also made some early preparations, such as the drafting of its manifesto and talks on seat allocation among PKR, DAP, PAS and SNAP. Initial discussions were held late last year.

“The seat allocation should be finalised after the Chinese New Year in order to ensure a one-to-one fight against the Barisan Nasional. By then we should know which seats each party will contest,” says Baru Bian, State PKR chairman.

DAP is expected to fight SUPP in Chinese-majority seats, while PAS and SNAP will contest in some Malay and Iban seats respectively.

For PKR, it is eyeing some 29 Dayak, four or five Malay, and one or two Chinese constituencies.

PKR’s other preparations include profiling of each and everyone of the constituencies, training of its grassroots and branch leaders, carrying out voter registration and membership exercises through the length and breadth of the state.

“The profiling of the constituencies is very important so that we will know the number of male, female and young voters, the pattern of voting, campaigning issues, development projects that have been carried out in those areas, the problems of the people and, at the same time, identifying potential candidates,” said Granda Aing, vice president of PKR Sarawak.

On its training programme, he said: “Our Akademi Keadilan Rakyat (Ark) has just completed a number of workshops to train trainers who will return to their respective areas and conduct their own leadership skills training, campaigning techniques, and polling agents and counting agents (PACA) training,” Granda said.

A PKR adviser, Wan Zainal Wan Sanusi, who was with Granda said: “PKR is really serious this time to unseat the present BN government. We want to change the government, and we hope the people will support us. This time it is the best opportunity,” he said.

news courtesy of Malaysian Mirror

POLICE MUST PROSECUTE CULPRIT FOR STIRRING RACIAL TENSION WITH INDIANS

The Royal Malaysian Police must immediately investigate and arrest the culprit named wireless2107 and rateddxnaruto and charge him/them with under Malaysian Laws for stirring racial tension with the Indian community in Malaysia.

The Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak has been trying his level best to foster good relationship with the Indian community who were once loyal BN supporters to continue to vote the BN into power again in the coming general elections by looking and resolving their plights.

The two video clips that were posted in the youtube are: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iYfiWUahDY and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9FN3M1srK3Y&feature=related which was discovered by Putera MIC Cyber War Team last Monday.

Malaysian must learnt to respect one another and foster PM's 1MALAYSIA concept.

COURT ADJOURNED FOR SITE VISIT

The Anwar Ibrahim sodomy trial at the Kuala Lumpur High Court resumed this morning with proceedings being heard in camera before the court adjourned to visit the scene of the alleged crime.

Justice Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah, Solicitor-General II Mohamed Yusof Zainal Abiden representing the prosecution, counsel Karpal Singh representing the defence team and court official are now at the Desa Damansara Condominium at No 99, Jalan Setiakasih, Bukit Damansara, Kuala Lumpur.

Anwar's former aide, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, has alleged that the 63-year-old Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) advisor and Member of Parliament for Permatang Pauh had come on to him at Unit 11-5-1 of the condominium block between 3.01pm and 4.30pm on June 26, 2008 when he had asked him for sex.

He is charged under Section 377B of the Penal Code and can be sentenced to amaximum of 20 years in jail and whipping upon conviction. The trial takes place18 months after Anwar was charged in court in August 2008.

Anwar's lead counsel Karpal Singh had yesterday asked for Mohd Saiful's testimony tobe heard in-camera when the latter, under the prosecution's examination-in-chief, was describing what happened in the condominium that day.

news courtesy of Malaysiakini

THE FEDERAL MALAYSIAN CONSTITUTION PROTECTS EVERY MALAYSIAN CITIZEN IRRESPECTIVE OF HIS/HER ETHNIC GROUP

Everyone born in Malaysia after 31st August 1957 and those granted citizenship certificates who were born prior to 31st August 1957 are CITIZENS of Malaysia and no one can take it away from them unless they on their own surrender or have taken citizenship of another country.

Every Malaysian especially UMNOputras must clearly understand this fact and must not raise this issue.

I need for once to agree with former premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad as reported in the Star newspaper as follows:

Dr M: Never question the citizenship of the non-Malays

PETALING JAYA: The citizenship of non-Malays in the country should never be questioned, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said.

A provision in the Federal Constitution clearly stated that the Malays were the indigenous people of the country while the non-Malays had rights to citizenship, he said.

“That should not be questioned. The Constitution provides that you cannot take away citizenships,” he told reporters after opening the Malaysian Liver Foundation building at Ara Damansara here yesterday.

The former prime minister was asked to comment on alleged racist remarks made by Datuk Nasir Safar, a special officer to the Prime Minister, during a 1Malaysia seminar in Malacca.

“It is a very bad statement to make. Even if it is true, we don’t say things like that. They are in fact, the children of the people who came here. They have not just arrived,” said Dr Mahathir.

Johor Umno information chief Datuk Samsol Bahari Jamali said Nasir’s remarks did not reflect the views of Umno in any way.

He said Johor Umno always looked at ways to get everyone to work together and not hurt anyone’s feelings.

“I am shocked to hear it. He never struck me as a racist,” he said when contacted.

MIC vice-president Datuk Dr S. Subra­maniam said the immediate action taken by Najib indicated his seriousness and commitment in ensuring the success of the 1Malaysia policy.

“This should act as a deterent to ensure that similar statements are not repeated by any quarters,” he said in a statement.

Penang Gerakan chairman Datuk Dr Teng Hock Nan said the alleged racist remarks had aggravated the already high political tension in the country

Meanwhile, non-governmental organisation Perkasa came to Nasir’s defence.

Its president Datuk Ibrahim Ali said the remarks would have been harsher had it come from him (Ibrahim).

He said he understood why Nasir had made that statement.

Kelab Belia Graduan 1Malaysia also came to Nasir’s defence, saying his remarks were misunderstood and taken out of context.

Its deputy president Najieb Mokhtar said Nasir never intended to offend anyone.

“Only a small number of those present at the function took offence and left the hall,” he said, adding that he was also at the same seminar.

Every Malaysian must respect one another and not question their roots. History clearly shows that except for the Orang Asli and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak, the rest are all 'emigrants' who have been given citizenship rights by birth or by applying to the government.

This fundamental right should never be raised or questioned by another.

ANWAR'S SODOMY TRIAL - SAIFUL START TO TESIFY

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s accuser in his Sodomy II trial shocked the High Court today when he said the Opposition Leader had used profane language when asking to have sexual intercourse with him.

Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, who took the stand at the High Court as the prosecution’s first witness, testified that when he first met Anwar at a condominium in Damansara Heights in 2008, the PKR de facto leader had asked him: “Can I **** you?”

He also told the court that he had refused to comply with Anwar’s request, but later went into the guest room where he then stripped and donned a towel before the Opposition Leader hugged him.

Saiful had earlier pointed to Anwar when asked by Deputy Public Prosecutor Datuk Mohd Yusof Zainal Abiden to identify the accused.

Anwar did not look at him.

The Opposition Leader, who smirked at many points during Saiful’s testimony, had earlier described the charge as “evil, frivolous lies by those in power” when the charge was read out to him.

Saiful, who appeared calm and composed, told the court that his job as Anwar’s personal assistant included helping the Opposition Leader to organise secret meetings with potential MPs who wanted to defect to Pakatan Rakyat (PR) parties.

He also testified that he took care of Anwar’s mobile phone and alerted his boss to important messages.

news courtesy of Malaysian Insider

SUGAR - CAN'T FIND AT KOTA KINABALU

If we were to go to any provision shop, supermarket and hypermarket in Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, we will find that there is NO SUGAR available at all.

The price of sugar has been raised but still there is no supply.

Some shops have even placed 'TIADA GULA' (no sugar) signs outside their shops to avoid harrassment from customer asking for it.

Its time for the government to look into this matter.

The Chinese New Year celebrations are going to be celebrated in a week or more and if there is no sugar, how to bake cakes to celebrate this grand ocassion.

Where is the sugar? Will someone investigate?

MCA CRISIS WILL NEVER END WITHOUT FRESH POLLS

It is widely reported that Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai's fraction are going to boycott events held by the MCA President Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat's fraction.

With so much of discussion and with the involvement of UMNO as the mediator has still fail to produce a fair and just solution.

It looks very clear that FRESH POLLS would only be the best platform to amicably settle this crisis.

The members of MCA are eagerly awaiting for the party MCA to reorganise itself so that they could benefit from the current situation.

Will MCA hold FRESH POLLS immediately?

PM NAJIB'S AIDE TO RESIGN OVER ALLEGED RACIST REMARKS MADE IN MALACCA TODAY

Datuk Nasir Safar, special officer to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, will resign over allegedly racist statements he made, the Prime Minister’s Office said in a statement today.

“The remarks allegedly made by Nasir in Malacca today do not in any way reflect the views of the Prime Minister,” the statement said.

“Nasir never intended to make any derogatory remarks. He spoke at length on the contributions made by all races in developing the country.

“Nevertheless, Nasir apologises for any offence caused ... and in light of this, will tender his resignation.”

Online portals earlier reported that Nasir’s remarks at a 1Malaysia seminar at the Malacca International Trade Centre were so offensive that MIC and MCA members in attendance walked out in protest.

He was reported to have said that Chinese and Indian Malaysians were mere “pendatangs” (immigrants) and that Chinese women came to Malaysia to indulge in the “flesh trade.”

Nasir first denied the reports, saying he was just talking about the country’s history.

“I did not say the word ‘pendatang.’ I only said the country has been successful as the Chinese and the Indians from those days until today have been coming here to work,” he told The Malaysian Insider.

He also dismissed claims that he had threatened to revoke the citizenships of non-Malays who demanded that their rights be respected, the portal reported.

MIC and MCA leaders had threatened to lodge police reports over the incident. There are also demands from members of the Malaysian public that Nasir should be arrested and charged under the Sedition Act immediately for creating disharmony among the Malaysian society and it goes against the 1 MALAYSIA concept initiated by our Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.

some news courtesy of the STAR

DATUK SERI ANWAR'S SODOMY TRIAL

NOTICE : My earlier report that the Court of Appeal will meet 9am tomorrow is INCORRECT. Apologise for the misquote.

The long-awaited trial of Anwar Ibrahim on charges of sodomising a former aide was postponed for about five hours Tuesday before the High Court finally ruled that it will start on Wednesday.

The trial was due to start in the morning but was postponed pending a decision by another court whether the defence has the right to study in advance the evidence that the prosecution plans to unveil.

Judge Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah had allowed a request by Anwar’s lead counsel Karpal Singh to adjourn the proceeding until the afternoon.

Anwar had wanted the documents to assist him in his defence against the charge of sodomising former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, 25, at a condominium in Bukit Damansara here more than a year ago.

Rushed to Putrajaya to meeet CJKarpal and Solicitor General II Mohamed Yusof Zainal headed to Putrajaya after the court adjourned to meet Chief Justice Zaki Azmi to request for an early date to hear the review.

However, Zaki Azmi was not at his office and, instead, asked Court of Appeal president Alauddin Mohd Sheriff to meet both parties Wednesday to set a date to hear Anwar’s review application against the Federal Court ruling last Friday which denied him access to certain documents to prepare his defence.

In the review application, Anwar claims that the Federal Court had erred in law in holding that the ruling of the High Court in granting him access to documents and materials was a final order.

“The Federal Court in review must put right what is obviously wrong, to ensure a fair trial,” Anwar said in his affidavit to support his application.

He added that injustice had been done to him, and that he would be “severely prejudiced” should he be denied the material and documents he claims are vital for the preparation of his defence.

Three-man bench

Judge Mohd Zabidin...decided on trial date“I respectfully state that I have made out an exceptional case for the court to act as the decision of the Federal Court has occasioned an injustice which needs to be rectified and prevented,” he said.

Last Friday, the Federal Court unanimously upheld the Court of Appeal’s ruling and denied Anwar access to the documents he sought.

The three-man Bench of the apex court -- Chief Judge of Malaya Arifin Zakaria and Justices Md Raus Sharif and Abdull Hamid Embong -- ruled that prior to the start of the trial, Anwar was only entitled to documents and materials pertaining to the charge, which had already been provided to him.

The Bench ruled that at this pre-trial stage, a roving fishing enquiry for evidence was not permissible.

At about 2.30pm Tueday Mohamad Zabidin announced that there was no special circumstances to warrant a stay. He quashed the application by the defence team.

Anwar has long maintained that the allegation against him is a conspiracy by his enemies to end his political career.

news courtesy of Malaysian Mirror

COURT OF APPEAL TO HEAR DATUK SERI ANWAR'S APPEAL TOMORROW AT 9AM

It is reported in anilnetto.com that the Court of Appeal will hear tomorrow at 9.00am on applying to the Federal Court for review of its 29 January 2010 decision in not to allow Datuk Seri Anwar access to possible evidence.

news courtesy of anilnetto.com

ANWAR'S SODOMY TRIAL KICKS OFF AT 2.30PM & PM NAJIB AND WIFE ROSMAH SUBPOENA TO TESTIFY

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's sodomy II trial which was suppose to commence this morning was postponed to 2.30pm to allow the legal team to meet the Chief Justice to settle some matters.

The charge is as follows:

It was also mentioned that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Tun Razak and his wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor will be subpoena to testify since the complainant Saiful Bukhari Azlan had seen and met them prior to making the police report or going to the Kuala Lumpur General Hospital for a medical check-up.

More updates later.