“We cannot afford another Anwar prosecution”

The following is an excerpt of a public lecture by Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan titled Democracy, Law and Human Rights in an Era of Globalisation that was delivered on 23 June 2009 to commemorate the 25th anniversary of the Chevening Scholarship Programme

THE Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim prosecution is seen by many as the political persecution of the leader of the opposition. The question is, can we, as a nation, go through a second Anwar prosecution?

Lawyer Tommy Thomas had this to say in an article titled A Second Prosecution of Anwar Ibrahim — Is it in the national interest?: "The starting point is the previous prosecution of Anwar for sodomy in 1998[,] which imposed incredible strains on our legal system, and made Malaysia the laughing stock in the legal world.

"It would be sufficient to remind ourselves of the conduct of the prosecution in the 1998 case, the unfair publicity given by the mass media, the denial of bail, the 'irrelevant' rulings by the trial judge, the conduct of the trial itself, the amendment of the charges, the shameful parading of the mattress, the expungement of 'inconvenient' evidence, the finding of guilty, the lengthy sentence, the appeal to the Court of Appeal, and finally the appeal to the Federal Court."

I personally recall being utterly horrified and disgusted by the charges against Anwar the first time round. The initial charges carried wording I cannot repeat in good company. I also remember the terrible injustice done to Sukma Darmawan. And then to Dr Munawar Ahmad Anees, who to this day has not been vindicated by our courts although they have had the opportunity to do so. We must not forget these and other unfortunate people who all became innocent victims in this political war against Anwar.

The whole prosecution was a disgrace. I remember someone saying then that the trial robbed this country's citizens, in particular our children, of their innocence, as we had a daily fare of sodomy, semen-stained mattresses and the like.

Thomas argues, and I agree, that since those disgraceful events, the judiciary has taken steps to repair itself. He argues that a second prosecution would (I'd say could because, of course, the court could throw out the case) undo all the repair the judiciary has carried out to improve its image.

And it is no coincidence that Anwar is the opposition leader who has brought sweeping changes to the political landscape.

Tommy ThomasThomas argues: "If Anwar were not a potential prime minister, and only an ordinary citizen, he would not face this prosecution. It is as simple, plain and obvious as that."

The prosecution, Thomas argues, is economic and political suicide. He adds that the people of Malaysia are deeply divided on this issue, and that Malaysia's international image will, no doubt, suffer.

He then concludes with these words: "History is replete with examples of leaders who refused to learn from past mistakes, and were doomed to repeat them. It would be a tragedy of ancient Greek proportions if our leaders do not learn the lessons from 1998.

"It is abundantly clear that all the factors point in one direction: it is not in the public interest to subject the nation and its citizens to the trauma of a second trial..."

Ultimately, the powers-that-be must appreciate the consequences of this prosecution. If they win, they lose; if they lose, they lose. Actually, the nation loses. If you were a betting person, what would you do with those odds?

One thing must be made clear, it is my opinion that what we are doing to Anwar Ibrahim is starkly similar to what is happening to Aung San Suu Kyi. I ask, show me the difference between the two. I ask, how can we condemn the latter and do the former?

I call on the government to immediately review the Anwar prosecution in the public interest and because it is the right thing to do. If the government takes this step, it will certainly regain some credibility.

The AG's role

It is important in our justice system to appreciate the duties and responsibilities of the Attorney General, particularly in criminal prosecutions.

The Attorney General cannot act arbitrarily. In a judgment relating to the Attorney General's discretion over prosecutions, the Federal Court held that:

"The public of whose interest he [or she] is the guardian has a right to expect him [or her] to act honestly, without fear of powerful national and local figures or of the consequences to him [or her] personally or politically, and without favouring his [or her] relatives and friends and supporters, his [or her] principal concern being to maintain the rule of law so that there will be no anarchy and to maintain standards in public life and the private sector."

Aung San Suu Kyi (Public domain; source:
Wiki commons) Our institutions must work to regain their credibility. I started my speech with a quote from Aung San Suu Kyi that fear of losing power corrupts those who wield it. I hope this is not what we are seeing today in Malaysia.

Rule of law

You would have appreciated by now that democracy, rule of law and human rights are all interlinked. The essential distinction between rule of law and rule by law must be noted.

Many dictatorships or military regimes can quite honestly say that everything that they do is in accordance with laws they have passed. Does our Internal Security Act, for example, accord with the rule of law? No — that is rule by law.

Laws passed by Parliament must accord with the rule of law. They must encompass basic fundamental liberties and values. These laws must be acceptable to a large number of people. They must be fair.

In Malaysia, even after 50 years of Merdeka, there are still in existence four declarations of emergency! We still have the archaic Sedition Act, Official Secrets Act, and Printing Presses and Publications Act. It is time for us to review all these pieces of legislation.

Within our borders

So, if there are human rights abuses outside our borders, can we in today's world fail to act? The answer is no. We must reach across our borders on issues of human rights.

But more important is what we do within our borders. Do we have the right to condemn apartheid, as we did, when we allow racist rhetoric to abound in our country? What about the right to condemn Aung San Suu Kyi's suffering while we treat Anwar Ibrahim the way we do? Can we criticise the kidnapping and disappearance of people overseas when it happens in our country?

We must have the moral authority to criticise others by ensuring we do not behave in the same way.

Click this link to read more!

Britain has 85 sharia courts: The astonishing spread of the Islamic justice behind closed doors

At least 85 Islamic sharia courts are operating in Britain, a study claimed yesterday. The astonishing figure is 17 times higher than previously accepted.

The tribunals, working mainly from mosques, settle financial and family disputes according to religious principles. They lay down judgments which can be given full legal status if approved in national law courts.

Disputes: Islamic leaders rule on disagreements

However, they operate behind doors that are closed to independent observers and their decisions are likely to be unfair to women and backed by intimidation, a report by independent think-tank Civitas said.

Commentators on the influence of sharia law often count only the five courts in London, Manchester, Bradford, Birmingham and Nuneaton that are run by the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal, a body whose rulings are enforced through the state courts under the 1996 Arbitration Act.

But the study by academic and Islamic specialist Denis MacEoin estimates there are at least 85 working tribunals.

The spread of sharia law has become increasingly controversial since its role was backed last year by Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams and Lord Phillips, the Lord Chief Justice who stepped down last October.

Dr Williams said a recognised role for sharia law seemed 'unavoidable' and Lord Phillips said there was no reason why decisions made on sharia principles should not be recognised by the national courts.

But the Civitas report said the principles on which sharia courts work are indicated by the fatwas - religious decrees - set out on websites run by British mosques.

Controversial comments: Dr Rowan Williams said a recognised role for sharia law seemed 'unavoidable'

Mr MacEoin said: 'Among the rulings we find some that advise illegal actions and others that transgress human rights standards as applied by British courts.'

Examples set out in his study include a ruling that no Muslim woman may marry a non-Muslim man unless he converts to Islam and that any children of a woman who does should be taken from her until she marries a Muslim.

Further rulings, according to the report, approve polygamous marriage and enforce a woman's duty to have sex with her husband on his demand.

The report added: 'The fact that so many sharia rulings in Britain relate to cases concerning divorce and custody of children is of particular concern, as women are not equal in sharia law, and sharia contains no specific commitment to the best interests of the child that is fundamental to family law in the UK.

'Under sharia, a male child belongs to the father after the age of seven, regardless of circumstances.'

It said: 'Sharia courts operating in Britain may be handing down rulings that are inappropriate to this country because they are linked to elements in Islamic law that are seriously out of step with trends in Western legislation.'

The study pointed out that the House of Lords ruled in a child custody case last year that the sharia rules on the matter were 'arbitrary and discriminatory'.

And a 2003 judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg said it was 'difficult to declare one's respect for democracy and human rights while at the same time supporting a regime based on sharia, which clearly diverges from Convention values.'

However last year Justice Minister Bridget Prentice told MPs that 'if, in a family dispute ...the parties to a judgment in a sharia council wish to have this recognised by English authorities, they are at liberty to draft a consent order embodying the terms of the agreement and submit it to an English court.

'This allows judges to scrutinise it to ensure it complies with English legal tenets.'

Decisions from sharia tribunals can be presented to a family court judge for approval with no more detail than is necessary to complete a two page

form. The sharia courts in the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal are recognised as courts under the Arbitration Act. This law, which covers Jewish Beth Din courts, gives legal powers to a tribunal if all parties involved accept its authority.

Enlarge

The Civitas study said the Islamic courts should no longer be recognised under British law.

Its director Dr David Green said: 'The reality is that for many Muslims, sharia courts are in practice part of an institutionalised atmosphere of intimidation, backed by the ultimate sanction of a death threat.'

The Muslim Council in Britain condemned the study for ' stirring up hatred'.

A spokesman said: 'Sharia councils are perfectly legitimate. There is no evidence they are intimidating or discriminatory against women. The system is purely voluntary so if people don't like it they can go elsewhere.'

Patrick Mercer, Tory MP for Newark and chairman of the Commons counter-terrorism sub committee, said: 'We have an established law of the land and a judiciary. Anything that operates otside that system must be viewed with great caution.

'If crimes are going unreported to police, this will erode the authority of those who have to enforce our law. In a sovereign state there must be one law, and one law only.'

Philip Davies, Tory MP for Shipley, said: 'Everyone should be deeply concerned about the extent of these courts.

'They do entrench division in society, and do nothing to entrench integration or community cohesion. It leads to a segregated society.

'There should be one law, and that should be British law. We can't have a situation where people can choose which system of law they follow and which they do not.

'We can't have a situation where people choose the system of law which they feel gives them the best outcome. Everyone should equal under one law.'

Veteran Tory Lord Tebbit provoked anger among Muslims earlier this month by comparing Islamic sharia courts to gangsters.

He likened the tribunals to the 'system of arbitration of disputes that was run by the Kray brothers'.

Lord Tebbit told the Lords: 'Are you not aware that there is extreme pressure put upon vulnerable women to go through a form of arbitration that results in them being virtually precluded from access to British law?'

Warning that women could be shut out from the protection of the law, he asked Justice Minister Lord Bach: 'That is a difficult matter, I know, but how do you think we can help those who are put in that position?' (TheDailyMail)
Click this link to read more!

World Bank says Malaysia’s governance worsened in last five years

KUALA LUMPUR — A study by the World Bank suggests that Malaysia’s governance has deteriorated since 2003. The country fared worse in four out of six good governance categories in the World Bank study and improved in only two as of 2008.

The nation also lags well behind the scores of high income countries such as Australia, Japan and Switzerland. It scored better than Indonesia but remained far behind Singapore. Indonesia, however, saw its governance scores improve across the board since 2003.

Malaysia saw its performance drop in four categories — voice and accountability (level of democracy), political stability, regulatory quality and control of corruption.

In terms of its relative position to other countries, Malaysia also fell further behind countries in the same categories. It recorded an improvement in performance and relative position in only two categories — government effectiveness and rule of law.

The World Bank study uses a percentile method to show the relative ranking of a country. For example, a country with a ranking of 60 means that its score is higher than 60 per cent of countries in the study.

Malaysia has a rank of 32 (2003 ranking — 38) for voice and accountability, 50 (57) for political stability, 84 (80) for government effectiveness, 60 (70) regulatory quality, 65 (63) for rule of law and 63 (65) for control of corruption.

It is an indication of the divergent paths that Malaysia and Singapore took upon their split in 1965 that Singapore is the highest ranking country in three categories and near the top in all except for voice and accountability, where it ranked in the bottom third with Malaysia.

While Indonesia ranked in the bottom half for all categories, it nevertheless saw both its relative position and raw scores rise in the past five years. Significantly, Indonesia appears to be doing better than both Malaysia and Singapore when it comes to the practice of democracy.

While the study does not make a link between a country’s income and good governance, broadly speaking, countries that enjoy high incomes such as Australia, Canada, Sweden and Switzerland tend to score and rank near the top in all categories, while the poorest countries are likelier to cluster near the bottom.

Malaysia’s numbers suggest that the government’s emphasis on service delivery over the past five years is gaining traction but it is losing the fight against corruption despite numerous promises to eradicate the scourge.

Voice and accountability, defined as the extent to which a country’s citizens are able to participate in selecting their government, as well as freedom of expression, freedom of association, and a free media also deteriorated during this period.

In the category of political stability and absence of violence/terrorism, which measures the perceptions of the likelihood that the government will be destabilised or overthrown by unconstitutional or violent means, including domestic violence and terrorism, Malaysia peaked in 2005, the year after the ruling Barisan Nasional government won its biggest ever mandate.

It went downhill from there and reached its lowest point in the last five years in 2008, which saw protestors and police clash on the streets and was also the year that the opposition made record gains at the ballot box.

The World Bank study, called the Worldwide Governance Indicators project, reports aggregate and individual governance indicators for 212 countries and territories over the period from 1996 to 2008. (tmi)

Click this link to read more!

Kelantan To Use Political, Diplomatic Channels To Get Oil Royalty

KOTA BAHARU-- The Kelantan state government will use political and diplomatic channels to get oil royalty totalling RM1 billion from the federal government, the State Legislative Assembly sitting was told Monday.

Chairman of the State Committee on Economic Planning, Finance and Welfare Datuk Husam Musa said the state government had sought the views of several legal firms in terms of the technical aspects but the move was still at the preliminary stage and he was confident that the oil royalty claim could be resolved through political and diplomatic channels.

"I'm confident that the Prime Minister (Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Tun Razak) will consider the letter submitted by Kelantan Menteri Besar Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat," he said when replying to Datuk Noor Zahidi Omar (Pengkalan Kubor-PAS) during question time.

Husam said he was confident that the federal government would consider granting the royalty because the oil rig in Terengganu was located 220 kilometres off the waters of the state and it was receiving the royalty.

Whereas the oil well in Kelantan was located 170 kilometres off the state waters, and as it was closer compared to the Terengganu oil rig, it was appropriate that Kelantan received the oil royalty, he said.

He said the state government was merely asking for between RM850 million and RM1 billion from the federal government under the Petroleum Act 1974, which entitled the state to receive an oil royalty of five per cent from the proceeds derived from petroleum.

Husam also hoped that there was no discrimination against Kelantan in the royalty payment as was the case in Terengganu when PAS administered the state from 1999 until 2004 when the allocation was changed to special payments.

Replying to another question from Noor Zahidi, he said the state government would set up the Kelantan Gold Trade to undertake trading in the gold dinar in the face of the world economic recession.

He said the state government planned to trade in gold to avoid using paper currency.

"One cannot speculate in gold as it has a stable market value compared to paper currency.

"One can easily speculate in paper currency which can lead to fluctuations and instability," he said.

Husam said the state government had also held discussions with several banks to enable the government to make deposits in dinar.

-- BERNAMA
Click this link to read more!

Brazil beat gutsy US to clinch Confederations Cup for the third time

JOHANNESBURG (AP) -- Clint Dempsey sobbed as the Americans walked up to get their second-place medals, unable to hide the pain and the disappointment any longer.The euphoria of knocking off Spain last week dissolved Sunday in the Confederations Cup final when Brazil unleashed its "Beautiful Game."After dominating the five-time World Cup champions in the first half, the Americans were powerless as Brazil scored three goals in the final 45 minutes to rally for a 3-2 win."We're at the point where we don't want respect, we want to win," said Landon Donovan, whose goal in the 27th minute gave the United States a 2-0 lead. "There's no guarantee we ever get back to a final game like this, so it's disappointing."Luis Fabiano scored twice for Brazil, and Lucio added the third in the 84th minute to give Brazil its second straight Confederations Cup title and third overall. The American men fell short in their first final of a FIFA tournament, but the experience was invaluable.Almost sure to qualify for next year's World Cup, also in South Africa, the Americans certainly saw the benefits of playing this game. What hurt was the way they lost it."We continue to try and move ourselves forward, and playing these kind of games only helps," U.S. coach Bob Bradley said.

"But it still feels pretty lousy to let this one get away."In the third-place match, Spain fought back to beat host South Africa 3-2 after extra time in Rustenburg.The United States has beaten Brazil once in 15 games, and it was just 10 days ago that the Brazilians hung a 3-0 rout on the Americans in group play of the tournament that had the critics piling on and some calling for Bradley's job.In the first 45 minutes Sunday, though, it was Brazil that looked like the beaten team. Its usually fluid offense created few opportunities and was constantly stymied by the U.S. defense and goalkeeper Tim Howard. Meanwhile, the Americans were relentless in their attack on a nervous-looking Brazil defense, with Donovan working hard to give his team several scoring chances.Just 10 minutes into the game, Jonathan Spector sprinted down the right side and sent a low cross into the area.

Dempsey, who had plenty of room to maneuver, raised his right leg and put just enough of a touch on the ball to alter the direction and send it past a diving Julio Cesar.Dempsey, who also scored in the 2-0 shocker over top-ranked Spain in the semifinals, finished the tournament with three goals and was awarded the Bronze Ball.Donovan then got possession at his own end shortly after Maicon had sent in a corner for Brazil from the right. The United States midfielder ran up the middle, passed to Charlie Davies and then reclaimed the ball from his teammate before beating Julio Cesar.There is a reason Brazil has won so many titles over the years, though, and it wasn't about to let another slip away.Luis Fabiano started the comeback in the 46th minute.

The striker collected a pass from Ramires before turning and shooting past defender Jay DeMerit for his fourth goal of the tournament."We gave up the first goal so early in second half," Bradley said. "We really put ourselves in a tough spot."Luis Fabiano added a tournament-leading fifth goal to equalize in the 74th, heading in a rebound after Kaka's cross was kicked against the crossbar by Robinho.The Americans caught a break in the 60th when Kaka headed a cross from Andre Santos to the near post.

Howard stepped back into his goal and knocked the shot off the underside of the crossbar and then grabbed it safely in his arms. Kaka appealed, arguing that the ball crossed the line before Howard was able to get to it, and television replays indicated he was correct.It wouldn't matter, with Lucio delivering the decisive goal in the 84th when he headed a corner kick from Elano past Howard. Brazil has now won eight matches in a row, and is unbeaten in 16."You look around at their players, and you realize why they're worth so much and why they play at the teams that they play," Donovan said.

"It's disappointing when we gave such a good effort today."As the Brazilians gathered in a circle and jumped up and down in celebration, the Americans remained on the field, watching in stony silence. Many climbed up to get their medals with their heads bowed, and there were few smiles in sight."We were able to make it a real game with a top team," Bradley said. "Over time, to be able to sustain that longer, not have ups and downs throughout the game, that's a sign of progress." (ESPN)


Click this link to read more!

Judgement: Sultan was right not to consent to Nizar’s dissolution request

PUTRAJAYA — Sultan Azlan Shah was right in not dissolving the Perak State Legislative Assembly in February because it was barely one year old, Court of Appeal Judge Datuk Md Raus Sharif said.

In his 49-page judgement dated June 2, but only released today, justice Raus said that in order for a dissolution of the assembly to take effect under Article 36(2) of the Perak State Constitution as requested by the then mentri besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin, the assembly must be in the conclusion of the five-year term when a general election is contemplated.

“It was well-known fact that the general election had been held barely one year ago,” he said, adding that Nizar had applied the wrong provision when requesting for the dissolution of the assembly.

He said Article 36 of the Perak Constitution was only a general provision empowering the sultan to prorogue or dissolve the assembly after the conclusion of the five-year term.

Nizar should have instead requested for dissolution of the assembly under Article 16(6) which states that if the mentri besar loses the confidence of the majority of the members of the assembly, then, unless at his request of the sultan, dissolves the assembly, he shall tender the resignation of the Executive Council.

Raus also said that the question of Perak having two mentris besar did not arise because Article 16(6) demands that once the mentri besar was made to know that he had lost the confidence of the majority of the members of the assembly, he should take the honourable way out by tendering his resignation.

“If the mentri besar refuses or does not tender his resignation and the resignation of the Executive Council, as had happened in this case, the fact remains that the Executive Council is dissolved (which include the mentri besar) on account of the mentri besar losing the confidence of the majority of the members of the legislative assembly,” he said.

Therefore, it was unnecessary for the sultan to remove Nizar and the other members of the Executive Council, he said.

He said Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir’s appointment as the mentri besar to succeed Nizar was made according to the Perak Constitution and established democratic practice and convention.

“The Sultan of Perak in exercise of his royal prerogative under Article 16(2) of the Perak State Constitution is at liberty to appoint another mentri besar to replace Nizar,” he said.

Raus said the Sultan, however, must appoint someone who has the command and the confidence of the majority of the members of the assembly and in this case, there was no doubt that Zambry had the majority support of 31 members out of 59 members of the assembly.

“The circumstances in the present case clearly shows that on February 5, Nizar no longer had the confidence of the majority of members of the assembly. There were signed letters from 31 members pledging support to Barisan Nasional which were presented to the Sultan,” he said.

He also said Article 16(6) does not express mandatory requirement that there must be a motion of no confidence passed by the assembly against a mentri besar before he ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members.

“The fact that a mentri besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the assembly can be established by other means. It cannot solely be confined to the vote taken in the assembly,” he said.

Meanwhile, justice Ahmad Maarop who presided over the case with with Raus and Datuk Zainun Ali said Nizar must tender his resignation once he lost the confidence of the majority of the members of the assembly and when sultan refused his request to dissolve the assembly.

“His refusal to tender his resignation and the resignation of the Executive Council was not merely a breach of convention and undemocratic but more importantly, it contravened the clear mandatory constitutional command under Article 16(6) of the Perak Constitution and therefore unconstitutional.

“Thus, since he had ceased to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the assembly, it is implicit that on his refusal to tender the resignation, the Executive Council is thereby dissolved and the office of the mentri besar vacated.”

Ahmad said he was also of the view that the sultan’s power to dismiss the mentri besar was implicit in the event the mentri besar refuses to resign although he has ceased to command the confidence of the majority and the sultan withholds his request to dissolve the assembly.

“In my judgment, the situation confronting His Royal Highness in the state of Perak was one such situation, and His Royal Highness had, in that critical situation rightly exercised his constitutional powers provided under the State Constitution, which exercise was without any doubt, solely for the best interest of the people of Perak,” he said.

Datuk Zainun Ali’s judgement is expected to be released on Monday.

The three Court of Appeal judges had on May 22 ruled that Zambry was the legitimate mentri besar of Perak, reversing an earlier High Court decision in Nizar’s favour.

The Federal Court is to hear Nizar’s application for leave to appeal on July 9 and 10.

Nizar, 52, was appointed Perak mentri besar on March 17 last year after the DAP-Parti Keadilan Rakyat-Pas alliance won 31 seats in the state assembly in 12th general election.

Less than a year later, they lost three members who declared themselves independent and lent support for Barisan Nasional (BN) that then had 28 seats in the assembly after a representative who had jumped ship earlier made an about turn.

Sultan Azlan Shah then asked Nizar to step down and swore in Zambry after finding that BN had the majority in the state assembly.

Following this, Nizar initiated the legal action to seek a declaration he is the rightful mentri besar and an injunction to bar Zambry from discharging his duties. – Bernama

Click this link to read more!

Najib's bid to put aide on board rejected by Petronas

Najib (R facing) talking with key Umno leaders who may have tips on how he change the mind of the Petronas board. - Picture by Choo Choy May

KUALA LUMPUR– Board members of Petroliam Nasional (Petronas) stood their ground this week and have politely turned down a bid by Prime Minister Najib Razak to admit a key political aide as a director of the national oil corporation.

Government officials close to the situation told The Straits Times that the board in a meeting on Wednesday had reaffirmed its decision a month previous not to admit Omar Mustapha as a director because he had defaulted on his scholarship loan agreement with Petronas two decades earlier.

The board, which was directed by Datuk Seri Najib to reconsider its decision last month over Omar’s proposed appointment, also decided it would send a delegation to brief the Prime Minister on the matter in the coming days.

Government officials familiar with the situation said the delegation would be headed by senior lawyers and a Petronas director, Abdul Kadir Kassim.

“I don’t think it is about his close ties to the PM. It has more to do with the scholarship issue,” said a senior government official, adding that Petronas took a firm view against scholarship defaulters.

Omar, 38, did not complete the required number of years of service with the oil corporation or a related government agency as stipulated in his scholarship agreement.

Petronas initiated legal proceedings against him in 2001.

Tan Sri Hassan Marican, Petronas chief executive and president, declined to comment on the issue when asked by reporters yesterday about possible changes to the board.

Government officials say that the Petronas board has briefed the company’s influential adviser, former premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, of its decision to reject the proposed appointment of Omar.

Tun Dr Mahathir had on Monday voiced reservations about Najib’s plan to appoint his aide to the board of Petronas, Malaysia’s sole entry in the Fortune 500 list of the world’s most profitable companies.

While acknowledging that it was Najib’s prerogative as premier to “appoint a man who failed to honour his obligation to Petronas when he was given a scholarship by it”, Dr Mahathir said in a written response to this newspaper that “generally I would say that it is not a good thing to appoint such a person”.

Petronas has established itself as an international energy player over the last two decades, and many industry experts and economists credit that transformation to the government’s hands-off approach in the running of the oil corporation.

That is why Najib’s bid to appoint Omar to the board raised eyebrows.

Omar has emerged as one of the closest political confidants to Najib and is often tapped for advice on economic and financial matters.

He graduated from Oxford on a scholarship from Petronas and worked briefly with the national oil corporation and another government-linked corporation. He then joined McKinsey & Co, working for the international consulting company in London and Malaysia.

He left McKinsey in early 2002 to set up his own consultancy firm, called Ethos, with several close friends and two years later was tapped by Najib, who was then deputy prime minister, to become his special officer. – The Straits Times

Click this link to read more!

BN component parties split over meaning of ‘unity government’

KUALA LUMPUR – Their boss may be selling the 1 Malaysia concept but other Barisan leaders have many different ideas about his take on unity.

In response to the prime minister’s call to PAS to reconsider unity talks for the sake of Malay-Muslim unity, MCA leaders said any talk about unity should be based on national and not racial interests.

But some MIC leaders believe that there is nothing wrong with Najib’s and Umno’s intentions, arguing that unity among the majority race is integral in ensuring the country’s growth.

Datuk Seri Najib Razak yesterday seemed to resuscitate the whole unity government idea when he called on the Islamist party to forget their political differences and co-operate with Umno in the name of Malay-Muslim unity.

Umno has, however, rejected any notion of a multi-racial Pakatan Rakyat(PR)-Barisan Nasional (BN) unity government, saying that it was interested in engaging only with PAS, sparking concerns among its non-Malay allies.

MCA leaders like Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai, the party’s vice president, did not want to comment on Najib’s statement but said that any form of unity talks should be based on pluralism.

Liow, who is also the Health Minister, said the unity government concept itself, first proposed by a faction in PAS, is vague, and unclear as to whether the unity government idea involved only PAS and Umno, or the entire PR-BN lot.

Backing him is Deputy Education Minister Wee Ka Siong, the MCA Youth chief, who said that his party had never thought of engaging rivals, the DAP, about Chinese unity.

“What for? I believe MCA’s stand about this is clear from the beginning. Any engagement with any quarters should be of national and not racial interest,” he told The Malaysian Insider in Parliament today.

But as far as MIC is concerned, the racial undertone in the unity government idea is not something to be worried about.

Its information chief, Datuk M. Saravanan, said the country is not prepared for national unity given its young age, arguing that unity among the majority race superceded other issues.

“I totally agree with Najib. It is important for the majority to be united and the minority divided as the majority is at the forefront of the country’s development,” he said.

For Saravanan, a deputy Federal Territories minister, the country is not ready for a Bangsa Malaysia (Malaysian race).

Meanwhile, Datuk Joseph Salang Gandum, the Parti Rakyat Sarawak (PRS) MP for Julau, is fully supportive of Najib’s calls for Malay and Muslim unity to pave the way for 1 Malaysia.

“My view is that there is nothing wrong with any group wanting to be united,” Salang told The Malaysian Insider today.

“What we are against is if they unite to suppress others,” he added.

He disagrees with Lim Kit Siang’s view that Malay-Muslim unity talks between Umno and PAS, if it takes place, will stunt Najib’s goal of closing the growing gap among the different races and religious groups.

The PRS information chief said that for national unity to happen, the people within the same religious and ethnic groups must first be united. (TMI)

Click this link to read more!

Yen Yen admits RM1m allocation for Todt

Michelle Yeoh (L) and her fiance, former Ferrari team boss Jean Todt, are seen at the Marrakesh 8th International Film Festival November 21, 2008. — Reuters file pic

By Shannon Teoh

KUALA LUMPUR— The government has allocated RM1 million for former Ferrari Formula One team boss Jean Todt to spend over two years as Malaysia’s Tourism ambassador.

But Tourism Minister Datuk Seri Ng Yen Yen said no disbursements have been made since his appointment in May.

The MCA vice president also denied that Todt has been given any land in Terengganu as part of the deal.

“As far as I know, Todt does not own any land in Terengganu,” she said.

PKR vice president Azmin Ali caused a stir this morning when he demanded a full disclosure of the deal with Todt and his fiancée, Malaysian actress Datuk Michelle Yeoh, claiming that almost RM1 million had already been spent on the Frenchman.

Ng, however, said that the figures the Gombak MP had quoted were untrue as Todt was serving on a voluntary basis and the government was only covering his travel expenses in the course of promoting Malaysia as a tourist destination.

“One million in Europe gets you nothing nowadays,” she said, defending the appointment.

She added that Todt was chosen for his international presence and connectivity, which would give Malaysia greater visibility.

Ng claimed that Todt had personally helped the ministry make influential contacts in Paris, including a top film producer, magazine publisher and aides of French president Nicolas Sarkozy.

Her claim that the allocation is for two years nevertheless contradicts the announcement she made in May regarding Todt’s appointment, when she said it was for just one year. (TMI)

Click this link to read more!

Berlusconi denies ever paying for sex

June 2004 file photo of Berlusconi and his wife Veronica in happier times. — Reuters pic

ROME,— Silvio Berlusconi can breathe again. After weeks of revelations about his private life — culminating in a prosecutor's decision to question dozens of young women on suspicion that they were paid to attend his parties — Italy's Prime Minister shrugged off the pressure yesterday, recording a convincing victory for his centre-right coalition in provincial and municipal elections across the country.

Beyond Italy's borders it may seem inconceivable that an elected national leader could comport himself like an ancient Roman emperor without facing grave political consequences. But within Italy, Berlusconi's fallible humanity and the fact that he is not so obsessed with power play that he has no time for the sweeter things in life, are seen by many as points in his favour.

So while the centre-left celebrated their success in hanging on to much of its traditional "red zone" in central Italy, Berlusconi's Freedom People Party managed to seize control of Milan and Venice. "If this is a victory for the opposition, we always want to lose like this," Berlusconi crowed after results were in. "Before this provincial election, the Freedom People governed five million people [in the constituencies which voted]. Now it governs as many as 21 million."

In reality the result was more complex and nuanced, and according to Italy's top pollster, Renato Mannheimer, a steep rise in abstentions was the most important new development. Berlusconi is also responsible for the fact that the popular opinion of politicians has sunk to a new low, 25 per cent of people associating politics with "disgust", and another 22 per cent with "anger".

And Berlusconi is by no means out of the woods. Since his wife of 20 years, Veronica Lario, announced in early May that she was suing for divorce because of his endless womanising, the Italian Prime Minister has been engulfed by wave after wave of damaging revelations regarding his apparent obsession with surrounding himself with pouting lovelies.

One of the women invited to a party last November at Berlusconi's home in a palazzo in central Rome, 42-year-old Patrizia D'Addario, said she was promised €2,000 (RM9,800) to attend and when she saw the gaggle of women already present, said to herself: "But this is a harem." Photographs were released of two other women, Lucia Rossini and Barbara Montereale, supposedly taken by themselves in the bathroom in Berlusconi's apartment. And now as many as 30 women invited to such events, many of them from eastern Europe, are being questioned by prosecutors as part of an investigation into the alleged procuring of prostitutes for these parties, while a business acquaintance of Berlusconi, Giampaolo Tarantini, who D'Addario said had paid her for attending the party, is also to be questioned in the same investigation. Tarantini has denied the accusations, but publicly apologised to Berlusconi for the embarrassment the affair had caused.

Yesterday, in an interview published in La Famiglia Cristiana, Italy's best-selling weekly, whose editor says he has received "many angry letters" about the Prime Minister's peccadilloes, Berlusconi attempted to draw a line under his troubles. He claimed that D'Addario had been given "a very precise and well-compensated mandate" to discredit him, but denied flatly that he had paid any of the women. "I have never paid a woman," he declared. "I have never understood what satisfaction there would be if not in the satisfaction of conquest... There is nothing in my private life for which I must apologise."

But the editor of the magazine thought otherwise. "It's gone beyond the limits of decency," Antonio Sciortino wrote of the affair in the magazine. "One cannot ignore the moral emergency, one cannot pretend that nothing has happened. Christians — as the letters from readers demonstrate — are appalled by this climate of moral decadence."

Taken together with recent criticism in the columns of L'Avvenire and by the Archbishop of Lanciano-Ortona, these words must send alarm bells ringing in the Berlusconi camp. No Italian politician with their wits about them likes to alienate the Catholic vote. So the scandal continues to fester, though Berlusconi will not face another electoral test until next year. And already the accusations against him have obliged him to abandon or at least downplay his ambitions for the highest office in the land, that of president. "I have no interest in being president," he replied flatly when questioned about it in recent days.

This week three academics at Italian universities have gathered "hundreds" of signatures for a letter to the wives of G8 leaders due to arrive in Italy next month for the G8 summit, urging them to boycott the event because of "the way in which Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi treats women both in public and in private".

The proximity of the scandal to the summit revives unpleasant memories for Berlusconi: at a summit in 1994, during his first term as PM, he was served with legal papers alleging corruption. Soon afterwards he resigned. — Independent

Click this link to read more!

Muhyiddin admits that PPSMI is a failure

KUALA LUMPUR— The teaching of maths and science in English the last six years has not improved the performance of students in those subjects, the education minister admitted today.

“There have been changes but the difference is nominal,” said Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin.

He said there had only been a two to three per cent change since the policy was implemented in 2003.

The deputy prime minister was responding to a supplementary question by DAP’s Tan Seng Giaw in Parliament.

The Kepong MP said the policy had been in existence for six years and asked for the reports on its effectiveness to be made public.

The education minister also said that the government, after much delay, will make a decision on the issue by next month. It is expected to continue with the programme, while finding ways to accommodate differing views.

Muhyiddin's reply drew flak from opposition MPs, who accused the government of negligence for its refusal to shut the policy down despite admitting to having problems in implementing it.

Shah Alam MP Khalid Samad from PAS said it was obvious in the minister's response that the government is not fully prepared for the implementation of the policy and students are being victimised as a result.

"It is apparent that they are not fully prepared for this and have not taken into account the implication and the repercussion," he told a press conference in Parliament.

He added that it was absurd that the government realised the programme's failure only after six years it has been implemented.

"Don't make our children guinea pigs," said Khalid, adding that teaching maths and science in English won't upgrade students' English quality, suggesting that it would be better for the government to focus on getting the best teachers to teach the international language instead. (TMI)

Click this link to read more!

Four dead, 70 hurt in Washington metro crash

Washington DC : One subway train slammed into another during the evening rush hour killing four people and injuring 70 in the worst accident in the history of Washington's subway system, officials said.

Hundreds of emergency responders from around the region rushed to the chaotic scene in the northeast section of the US capital where one train rammed into a stationary train from behind, leaving part of one train crumpled atop the other.

"There are already four confirmed fatalities," Washington Mayor Adrian Fenty told a hastily arranged press conference. "This would be the deadliest accident in the history of our metro train transit system."

Fire Chief Dennis Rubin said at least 70 people were hurt, including two with life-threatening injuries.

Television images showed at least two carriages of one train had lifted off the ground and mounted the other train, partially crushing at least one carriage below on an above-ground section of the popular Red Line train route.

Rescue teams were seen stretchering injured passengers down the tracks and using equipment to cut through the carriages' outer shell in an effort to get to those inside the train, as emergency crews searched for more dead and wounded.

The collision occurred at 5:02 pm (2102 GMT) near the Fort Totten Metro station close to the District of Columbia's border with the state of Maryland, said Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) general manager John Catoe, who offered his condolences to the families of those who died.

One of those who died, a woman, was the operator of the second train that rammed into the first as it awaited orders to proceed along the tracks, Catoe said.

"The next train came up behind it and for reasons we do not know plowed into the back of the train, he added.

"To the families of those who are injured, our deep heartfelt pain is with you, and we will do whatever we can to help through this process."

National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) officials were on the scene and had launched an investigation into the crash.

Dozens of stunned passengers, safely evacuated from the train, were standing by the train tracks close to the collision site, or were being helped down off the other carriages by rescue workers.

For passenger Abra Jeffers, the crash was a harrowing welcome to the nation's capital, where he was heading home from his first day of work Monday.

"I was on the train that got hit. I thought it was an explosion," Jeffers, 25, told AFP. "I thought it was like the train bombings in London. There was smoke and dust everywhere."

Train passenger Jody Wickett told CNN she was texting a friend when she was sent hurtling through the air of the subway car.

"We felt like we hit a bump and about five or 10 seconds later, the train just came to a complete halt and we went flying," Wickett said.

"I went in there to try and help and (there was) debris and people pinned under and in between the two cars. We were just trying to get them out and help them as much as possible, pulling back the metal and whatnot," she said.

"Some we couldn't, some we could, until an emergency crew got there."

Metro carries an average of some 800,000 people a day in and out of the nation's capital, and is divided into five lines criss-crossing the city and traveling deep into the neighboring states of Maryland and Virginia.

On the January 20 inauguration of President Barack Obama, more than 1.5 million people used Washington's public transportation system to see the swearing-in.

But many Metro officials have been urgently calling for more funds to repair the aging system, warning it was coming under increasing strain.

Mayor Fenty warned of huge delays to commuter traffic, including non-Metro train services along the heavily traveled East Coast corridor near Washington.

The last major train crash in the United States was in September, when 25 people were killed when the conductor of a train in Los Angeles was sending text messages on his mobile phone while in charge of a commuter train.

The deadly collision in Chatsworth, north of Los Angeles, also injured 134 people and was the worst train accident in the United States in some 15 years. (MSN)

Click this link to read more!

Nik Aziz and Nasha agree with no unity talks

The much-watched meeting of top PAS leaders ended with spiritual adviser Nik Aziz Nik Mat reconciling with deputy president Nasharudin Mat Isa, whom he had publicly berated for not turning down an invitation from Prime Minister Najib Razak to hold unity talks.

“In family spirit, we have decided to settle our differences over the issue which has been exploited by the mainstream media,” Nik Aziz said in a statement issued on Monday night.

“We have unanimously agreed to forget all the misconceptions among the top leadership as a result of Umno’s political games. So this issue between me and him should no longer be raised.”

No two ways about it - absolutely no unity talks with Umno

Nik Aziz, the party’s senior-most leader, had alarmed members last week with an unusually harsh attack against Nasharudin, who was re-elected as deputy president earlier this month.

Nik Aziz demanded that Nasharudin quit the post and resign as Bachok MP, spurring more than half the party’s 21 lawmakers to stand behind their revered spiritual adviser, who is also the Kelantan Menteri Besar.

Both men also agreed not to raise the issue of unity talks again. Their decision is in line with the common stand taken by the Pakatan Rakyat, which earlier in the day rejected Najib’s offer to form a unity government.

The coalition however welcomed discussion with the government on several key issues including how to revive the economy, improve the quality of education and restoring the independence of the judiciary.

The three partners PKR, DAP and PAS also reiterated their loyalty to each other and renewed their pledge to form the next federal government together.

“We have also unanimously agreed that unity government talks be stopped with immediate effect as decided by PAS president Hadi Awang and Pakatan Rakyat,” Nik Aziz said. (SK)

Click this link to read more!

Pakatan say no to unity gov’t, pledges loyalty to each other

Today is certainly an important day for Malaysia.

Key decisions affecting the country’s immediate future were made and it is now a step clearer how the country will be governed over the next few years.

As with the stock market, there will be gyrations now and then as the two main protagonists slug it out in the political arena.

But what is sure and necessary for all Malaysians and foreign investors in the country to know is that it will be firmly a two-party coalition system.

The Pakatan Rakyat offering its own brand of new politics and the Umno-BN peddling its decades-old concotion of paternalistic policies.

On Monday, the Pakatan announced its decision to reject a proposal from Umno to form a unity government, dealing a death-blow to speculation that partners PKR, DAP and PAS would split, with PAS opting to cross over and build a new Malay power-pact with Umno.

Instead, the trio reiterated their loyalty to each other and renewed a pledge to strengthen their coalition with the express aim of forming the next the federal government.

Indeed words of comfort to many Malaysians, although they may at the same time elicit fear from Prime Minister Najib Razak’s Umno-BN.

“The Pakatan council of leaders has reaffirmed our rejection of the idea of forming a unity government with Umno/BN which is clearly a malicious and desperate attempt to compromise the integrity of the increasingly popular Pakatan Rakyat,” the leaders said in a joint statement released on Monday.

“Pakatan agrees to adopt an open approach and is willing to hold discussions with the leaders of BN on issues of national interests.” (SK)

Click this link to read more!

Anwar’s sodomy trial delayed

KUALA LUMPUR — Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was given a brief reprieve by the High Court today.

His sodomy trial, the second in a decade, was originally fixed to start on July 1.

Judge Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah today postponed the hearing to July 8, pending his decision to strike out the case.

Anwar had last week filed to the High Court for the sodomy charges against him to be dropped.

He claimed that two hospital reports on his accuser had put him in the clear.

Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, Anwar's former aide, accused the 61-year-old father of six of sexually attacking him in June last year. He had gone to a private hospital and Hospital Kuala Lumpur (HKL) for medical exams to support his claims.

Both reports, the HKL report released recently, showed there was no penetration or wound on Mohd Saiful's anus.

The hearing for the case to be struck out, originally fixed for Friday, has also been pushed to July 8 because of a delay in getting some documents from the public prosecutor (PP) related to his trial.

Anwar accused the PP of purposely withholding information and denying him a fair trial.

But a lawyer on the prosecution team told The Malaysian Insider that they had given all the relevant documents that they would be using in the trial proper to Anwar's lawyers, as required by the law under Section 51A of the Criminal Penal Code (CPC).

The High Court is set to deal with that application on July 1.

Anwar is charged with sodomising the then 23-year-old Mohd Saiful at Desa Damansara Condominium in the leafy enclave of Damansara Heights in June last year.

If found guilty, he can be jailed up to 20 years and whipped under Section 377B of the Penal Code.

The former deputy prime minister, who made his comeback after winning the Permatang Pauh parliamentary by-election last year, has lately been using the Sodomy II charge against him in a campaign to discredit the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition. (TMI)

Click this link to read more!

Chedet reject Unity Govt and 3rd bridge proposal

Former premier Mahathir Mohamad has warned his protege Prime Minister Najib Razak against persisting with unity talks with arch rival PAS and building a high-cost third bridge to Singapore.

“I don’t think the country wants a government which is 100 per cent Malay. I don’t think it is a good idea,” Mahathir told reporters on Friday.

The 84-year old who ruled Malaysia with a fist of iron from 1981 to 2003 said a unity government with PAS could jeopardise Umno’s relationship with non-Malay components in Barisan National.

He also called on Najib to explain what his administration’s objective was and if he was willing to dump the MCA, MIC and Gerakan just to form a government that consisted of only Malays.

Another leader to say NO to the bridge

Like the Sultan of Johor, Mahathir also shot down Najib’s prized third bridge proposal - which would be his first mega-project if it successfully took off.

“I think it is better for the government to build the crooked bridge instead of the third bridge,” he said.

According to him, a third bridge could affect operations at the Pasir Gudang Port and it was a better idea to replace the existing Causeway between Johor and Singapore.

Apart from reducing traffic, this would also perk up the new Customs, Immigrations and Quarantine complex at the Causeway, he added.

The CIQ was built to accommodate a new bridge to replace the Causeway but the project was cancelled by Najib’s predecessor Abdullah Badawi, who dropped it after Singapore voiced its disagreement.

Although retired, Mahathir still wields considerable influence in Umno. (SK)

Click this link to read more!

‘Unity’ may result in more Malay votes, but not more seats

KUALA LUMPUR — There is an issue raging in the Malay press right now, and it is about Chin Peng, the former leader of the Communist Party of Malaya (CPM) who is now living in Thailand. Should he be allowed to return to Malaysia? The Malaysian courts have disallowed it, but public opinion is divided – roughly along racial lines.

The Chinese tend to be more open about his return, but there is strong Malay sentiment against it.

New Straits Times columnist Zainul Arifin explained the issue yesterday: “The CPM may have terrorised everyone equally, but psychologically affected Malays more because they saw it to be promoting Red China’s agenda to make Malaya a Chinese-dominated satellite, or the 19th province, of Beijing.”

Yet, at the same time, there are also some Malays, such as opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim, who support Chin Peng’s return.

This controversy goes some way towards explaining the current Malay political sentiment in Malaysia after last year’s general election upended the status quo.

It brought out a deep sense of Malay anxiety over the perception of a loss of Malay political clout.

“They see the minorities as exerting more than the ‘ordinary’ sense of influence in national issues,” said Merdeka Centre director Ibrahim Suffian.

It is this sentiment that underlies the current fervour for ‘unity’ talks between Umno and Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS).

Umno still holds around 54 per cent of Malay support nationwide.

There is a clear leaning, though a slight one, in Malay support for Umno, largely based on the sense that there is a need for the Malays to stand united.

But it would be a mistake to boil Malay sentiment down to this one category of anxiety to maintain political dominance. This may be the impression given by the Malay-language media, but the sentiment is a lot more diverse.

Pick any other racially sensitive issue – pro-Malay economic policies, scholarships and, yes, even bilateral issues with Singapore – and it will become apparent that the range of opinion is wide.

Indeed, the Malay political sentiment is riddled with subtleties. A political analyst said it would not do to underestimate the Malay sense of fair play and justice, and concern for issues of governance and democracy.

Many young and urban Malays focus strongly on these issues because of their access to information. They dislike the excesses of Umno, and see pro-Malay economic policies as benefiting a crony class.

They tend to give greater prominence to issues of justice and governance than to ethnic interests, but at the same time, they are generally also socially more conservative than the minorities.

As it stands now, the Malay vote favours the Barisan Nasional (BN) slightly, particularly because a vast majority of Malays live in rural areas. This would likely remain the case in the next general election, due in 2013, but after that, as the number of young voters increases, the scenario may change.

Given the current situation, a ‘unity’ of both parties – whether through a merger or cooperation – will probably win them more Malay votes, but ironically, this may not win either party more seats.

PAS and Umno generally contest against each other in the Malay-majority seats, while the mixed seats go to the other component parties.

“They are ploughing the same field,” said Merdeka Centre’s Mr Ibrahim.

Furthermore, the many by-elections over the last one year, in particular, the one in the mixed seat of Bukit Gantang in Perak in April, have shown that parties that take the middle ground have the best chance with voters. – The Straits Times

Click this link to read more!

Hishammuddin: No govt plan to abolish Sedition Act

KUALA LUMPUR: The government has no plan to abolish the Sedition Act 1948 as its provisions are still relevant at the present time, Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein said today. He said the provisions enabled the government to act if individuals or organisations attempted to undermine security and public order.

"Individuals who use words of a seditious nature in their speech or writing can be prosecuted under Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act," he said in a written reply to Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor) in the Dewan Rakyat.

Karpal Singh had asked whether the government was prepared to abolish the Sedition Act 1948 which was formulated to stop protests against the formation of the Malayan Union proposed by the British administration then.

Meanwhile, Information Communication and Culture Minister Datuk Seri Rais Yatim said the government does not intend to list or register bloggers and they are free to convey information in the Internet.

He said the freedom accorded, however, was subject to the laws of the country in the interest of racial harmony.

"In the process of conveying the information, they are free to note, convey or inform whatever information no matter what is being imposed by the authorities. So far, we have not listed or registered any blogger operating on the Internet.

"The honourable member must accept this fact, and there is no plan to do so," he said when replying to a supplementary question from Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timur) at the Dewan Rakyat sitting, today.

Lim had questioned why the government was not intensifying efforts to widen the broadband services to the people in the country, claiming that the government was instead giving more emphasis on restricting the freedom of bloggers operating on the Internet.

When replying to the original question from Datuk Ismail Abd Muttalib (BN-Maran), Rais said the print and electronic media were subject to various laws to ensure that the contents were not slanderous or seditious that could cause chaos among the multiracial society.

He said as licence holders under the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia 1998 Act, the contents carried by private broadcasters were closely regulated by the ministry through the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC), and must abide by the special conditions of the licence on the contents carried.

Rais also said the government was intensifying efforts to increase broadband penetration in the interior areas and schools. (TheEdge)

Click this link to read more!

PAS, PKR, DAP leaders urge Nasha-Nik Aziz reconciliation

Senior PAS leaders have urged deputy president Nasharudin Mat Isa to meet and clear the air with the party spiritual adviser Nik Aziz Nik Mat after a public spat over unity talks with arch rival Umno.

“I believe that Tok Guru has no hatred towards Nasharudin as a person. His statement is made out of love, just like how when a father occasionally beats his son, it is out of love for the son’s future,” vice president Mahfuz Omar told reporters on the sidelines of Parliament on Thursday.

On Wednesday, Nik Aziz - the senior-most leader in PAS - had given Nasharudin a public scolding after the latter welcomed a suggestion from Prime Minister Najib Razak to hold unity talks.

“If it is true that Nasharudin supports the formation of a unity government, it is best that he joins Umno by quitting his PAS post and as an MP for Bachok. Don’t cause problems in the party,” Nik Aziz had said.

Nasharudin had said PAS would not join Umno or Barisan Nasional but would offer recommendations on political and economic issues to the government.

“I think the issue of PAS joining Umno or Barisan does not arise, but we see there are recommendations that we can give to the government to improve the economic and political situation,” said the newly-elected deputy president.

Neither PKR nor DAP wishes any acrimony between the two PAS leaders

Innocuous as Nasharudin’s comments may have been, there is nevertheless concern that he and PAS president Hadi Awang could steer the Islamist party towards Umno and its BN coalition.

According to Mahfuz, the Nik Aziz-Nasharudin spat will be discussed at a meeting slated for Monday. Hadi is due to return from London on Sunday.

Another PAS vice president Salahuddin Ayub urged Nasharudin to “show his respect” to Nik Aziz and meet him to sort out the issue, which was starting to trouble the party grassroots.

Meanwhile, the Muslimat or women’s wing expressed their support for Nik Aziz and reiterated they would stand by a decision taken at the party’s recently-held annual congress to stay within the Pakatan Rakyat.

Kota Raja MP and Muslimat information chief Siti Mariah Mahmud also called on members to “remain calm and not to be worried by attempts by some parties to break up the Pakatan and create disunity within PAS”.

Meanwhile, top leaders from PKR and DAP have stood up to the test, with both Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim and Lim Kit Siang seeking to soothe the ruffled feathers between Nik Aziz and Nasharudin.

Of greater concern to them was that acrimony was not allowed to set in between the two, rather than avoiding an imminent break-up of the Pakatan as portended by the Umno-controlled press.

This, they said, was the least likely to happen.

“As far as DAP is concerned, we are always prepared to talk to anyone on matters of national interest. We are Malaysians and we are prepared to talk to anyone on what is of concern to all Malaysians,” said Kit Siang.

“I think Nik Aziz should talk to his leaders on this matter and I believe it can be resolved,” said Anwar. (SK)

Click this link to read more!

Najib has work cut out if third bridge is not to be stillborn

NUSAJAYA— Datuk Seri Najib Razak will have to do some major damage control with the Sultan of Johor if he wants his proposal to build a third bridge linking Johor and Singapore to become a reality.

Today’s public statement by the sultan that he would not support the project and the circumstances in which the rejection of the bridge project was delivered was aimed at showing the extent of his displeasure to the Najib administration.

The sultan arrived at the spanking new state assembly in Kota Iskandar to open the legislative assembly sitting. He inspected the guard-of-honour mounted by the Johor Military Force and then proceeded to the VIP holding area.

Then he told the Tengku Mahkota to read the prepared text and announced that he was leaving. As directed, the Tengku Mahkota read the text, which was prepared by the state government. But at the end, he informed the assembly that he had a royal order to announce, and noted that the sultan was against the proposal to build a third bridge linking Desaru and Changi and that the project would not take off.

The Tengku Mahkota then left the assembly.

So what triggered this adverse reaction from the Johor Sultan? Firstly, state officials say that he was not consulted on the project by the Federal Government.

A day before the Prime Minister visited Singapore, he was granted an audience by the sultan. The bridge proposal was not raised at this meeting and the first time the Ruler heard about it was after it was raised in bilateral discussions between Najib and Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

Even more grating to the royal household was the widespread coverage in the papers about the project, especially during Lee Kuan Yew’s recent eight-day trip to Malaysia.

Johor civil servants also say that instead of building a third bridge, efforts should be made to drive traffic into JB city. This is where the royal palace is and the seat of the throne. Yet, little resources are being spent to modernise the city centre, with more focus on Medini and now Desaru.

To be sure, even if the Najib administration had informed the sultan of the project, there is no guarantee that he would have supported the proposal to build a third bridge.

The reason: the sultan has been displeased with the loss of Pulau Batu Putih to the republic. The International Court of Justice ruled in favour of Singapore.

Given this antipathy, the fact that Johoreans will not agree to lift the ban on sand and the sultan’s displeasure at being kept in the dark about the project, Najib will have to launch a massive charm offensive to put the third bridge back on the Malaysia-Singapore agenda. (TMI)

Click this link to read more!

HKL reports says that Saiful is never being sodomised

Saiful Bukhari, the alleged victim in the sodomy charges filed against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

By Adib Zalkapli

KUALA LUMPUR, Jun— Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim claims that the Kuala Lumpur Hospital (HKL) found that his former aide Saiful Bukhari Azlan was never sodomised.

In an affidavit filed at the Kuala Lumpur High Court yesterday to strike out the case against him, the Opposition leader said the report dated July 13 last year backed another medical report by private hospital, Pusrawi.

“No conclusive clinical findings suggestive of penetration to the anus and no significant defensive wound on the body of the patient,” read part of the report which was cited in the affidavit.

The HKL report was endorsed by three specialists from the hospital.

Last year, Saiful lodged a police report against Anwar claiming that he was sodomised, resulting in the Permatang Pauh MP being detained by the police for one night.

But a medical report from Pusrawi, which found no evidence of sodomy later surfaced on the internet and the doctor who performed the examination, Dr. Mohamed Osman Abdul Hamid later went into hiding claiming that his life was in danger.

Anwar said that the case is politically-motivated and is an abuse of the court procedure.

In his affidavit, Anwar added that the prosecution has yet to furnish his defence team with several items related to the case including the CCTV recordings at Desa Damansara condominium, where the alleged sodomy took place.

“We have only received blur pictures from the recordings,” said his lawyer Amer Hamzah at a press conference here.

They also have not received chemistry reports of various DNA samples taken from Saiful and other information that will support Anwar in the case.

“I would like to stress that the prosecution’s refusal to furnish me with testimony supporting my case is an act of suppression of evidence,” said Anwar.

He also claimed that the alleged fabrication of evidence that happened in his first sodomy trial 10 years ago would probably recur again.

Anwar’s Sodomy II trial starts on July 1. (TMI)

Click this link to read more!

Malaysia ‘immune’ to US criticism of trafficking

By JULIA ZAPPEI
From Associated Press

Malaysia’s government pledged Wednesday to address U.S. claims that it has not done enough to combat forced labor exploitation, but urged Washington not to make “unfair” accusations.

The U.S. State Department’s annual “Trafficking in Persons Report” _ which is meant to expose trafficking problems around the world and propose solutions _ put Malaysia on its list of top trafficking offenders Tuesday.

Malaysian Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein said the government was not surprised by the criticism, adding that “after awhile, you get immune to these things.”

Malaysia has been singled out before for its record on human trafficking, although this was its first appearance in the State Department’s report.

Hishammuddin said authorities would seek specific details from the U.S. on why Malaysia was included in the list and take action to reduce the possibility of future criticism.

“We will do whatever it takes, whatever possible, but of course, there are limitations,” Hishammuddin told reporters.

“You know our border, our shore line is very porous,” he said. “If they are realistic about it, then they will take that into consideration. But otherwise I feel that making judgments on something that is beyond our control will be unfair.”

The U.S. report said Malaysia is a destination and source “for women and children trafficked for the purpose of commercial sexual exploitation and for men, women and children trafficked for the purpose of forced labor.”

Countries cited for failing to take adequate steps to address trafficking can be subject to limited sanctions.

The report recommended that Malaysia fully implement and enforce its anti-trafficking laws _ which have been in place for several years _ and increase prosecutions, convictions and sentences for both sex and labor trafficking.

The U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations said in an April report that illegal Myanmar migrants deported from Malaysia have been forced to work in brothels, fishing boats and restaurants across the border in Thailand if they had no money to buy their freedom.

Malaysia has said it found no evidence to support the claim that thousands of deported Myanmar migrants were handed over to human traffickers in Thailand. (AP)

Click this link to read more!

Umno would rather ‘burn bridges’ than sell sand

KUALA LUMPUR – There seems to be no way around it: Umno leaders say if Singapore wants sand as part of the deal for the third bridge, it’s a “no go”.

For them, whatever the benefits the construction of the third bridge may bring must not come at the expense of the country’s sovereignty.

This issue came up when Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew said that it would not make sense for Singapore to agree on a third bridge if Johor does not lift its ban on the export of sand to the republic, which has been in place since 1997. He was speaking at a press conference during his recent trip to Malaysia.

Government officials say Najib’s administration is willing to resolve outstanding bilateral issues with Singapore and consider lifting the ban on sale of sand to the republic.

But Najib’s efforts, ironically, may be undermined by his own party members, especially those from the southern states who appear reluctant to see Singapore expand through land reclamation with Malaysian sand.

Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin and Rembau MP said he doesn’t believe Malaysians, and especially BN-Umno, will find this “deal” acceptable.

“Although certainly Singapore will ask for some kind of trade-off, sand is very sensitive so if it were up to me, the answer would be no,” he told The Malaysian Insider.

Tangga Batu Umno MP and former Deputy Higher Education Minister Idris Haron said Malaysians’ “long tolerance” of Singapore has nurtured greater hatred towards the republic.

“These grouses come from the fact that Singapore has always expected reciprocal agreements. Any prospect of getting their co-operation on something must be reciprocated,” he said.

If there is a necessity like better integration between the two nations that can be realised through building the third bridge, Idris said imposing any condition is likely to hamper the idea.

And Umno is not the only one with this view. It’s got a friend from the most unlikely of places – its arch-rival PKR is also against the sale of sand to Singapore.

PKR leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim rejected the idea outright.

But for some, the third bridge proposal is an idea too far-fetched and the government should not even waste time discussing the sand issue.

Datuk Shahrir Samad who is the Umno parliamentarian for Johor Baru, said the government should think of ways to improve the existing bridge that links his constituency and the country to the republic instead of hollering about the third bridge.

“It’s bullshit. The government should address the many problems facing the existing bridge, like traffic congestions and so on, and not waste time on something totally unnecessary,” he said.

Shahrir said the joke is on the government when it started talking about the third bridge when the current Causeway Bridge and the Second Link have yet to be fully optimised.

Considering the strong feelings against supplying sand to Singapore, Najib now faces the risk of alienating the Umno hardcore and their anti-Singaporean supporters.

He might not have to deal with their discontent now considering Umno’s “culture of silence” but its outcome may prove to be deadlier when the party faces the impending 13th general elections. (TMI)

Click this link to read more!

Robbing spree in Puchong

SUBANG JAYA: Seven parang-wielding robbers terrorised several businesses in Puchong in an hour-long robbing spree beginning at 5.30am.

They made off with approximately RM9,000, seven cellular phones, some jewellery and a school bag after hitting five restaurants and a hotel that were just opening for business yesterday.Caught in the act: CCTV footage showing a parang-wielding robber threatening someone in a restaurant in Puchong yesterday.

Subang Jaya OCPD Asst Comm Zainal Rashid Abu Bakar said nine reports had been lodged by 11 victims from Bandar Puchong, Puchong Jaya and Kinrara.

One of the victims, a noodle seller in her 60s who only wanted to be known as Kuan, said: “They demanded my wallet and I gave it to them. But when I pleaded with them to return my IC, they kicked me in my chest.”

ACP Zainal said police were checking CCTV footage from the hotel to identify the robbers, who had moved about using a car and a motorcycle.

He urged anyone with information on the robbers to contact the police immediately.

Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo, who met the victims, said: “It is high time police took a more aggressive stance on crimes like this in Puchong and increase patrols in the area.” (TheStar)
Click this link to read more!

Lucky Brazil sink Egypt with last-gasp penalty

Brazil's Felipe Melo challenges Egypt's Ahmed Eid during their Confederations Cup soccer match. - Reuters pic

BLOEMFONTEIN— Underdogs Egypt shook five-times world champions Brazil at the Confederations Cup yesterday but finally succumbed 4-3 when Kaka converted a controversial late penalty.

The Egyptians claimed English referee Howard Webb had awarded a corner when defender Ahmed Al Muhamadi diverted the ball round the post with his arm and only changed his mind when told by another match official who had seen the incident on a television monitor.

Video evidence is banned by world governing body FIFA for use by officials to make decisions during matches.

The controversy marred a great effort by African champions Egypt who fought back from two goals down to level at 3-3 and looked likely to snatch a winner in the opening match of Group B of the eight-nation tournament for continental champions.

Kaka, Luis Fabiano and Juan had given Brazil a 3-1 halftime lead with one reply from Egyptian striker Mohamed Zidan but Mohamed Shawky and Zidan put Egypt level at 3-3 with two goals in a minute early in the second half.

Kaka opened the scoring in the fifth minute as he steered a difficult bouncing ball through the defence with three deft touches before stroking home past keeper Essam El Hadary.

But the African champions drew level just four minutes later when Mohamed Aboutrika broke free on the right and crossed for Zidan to head home.

SET PIECES

Brazil struck twice from set pieces before halftime, Luis Fabiano glancing home a great header from Elano’s cross in the 12th and defender Juan heading in Elano’s corner in the 37th.

Despite the scoreline, Egypt’s quick-passing game had troubled the languid Brazilians and they reaped the benefits soon after the break.

Shawky hit back in the 54th minute when he struck a powerful shot into the bottom corner from just outside the box and within a minute the scores were level as Brazil’s defence cracked. The excellent Aboutrika threaded the ball through for Zidan to notch his second.

In the end, Brazil were lucky to win. Al Muhamadi’s goal line save with his arm from Alexandre Pato’s fierce shot just before the final whistle cost the penalty, defeat and a red card for the substitute defender.

Samir Zaher, the president of the Egyptian FA, confirmed that he would lodge an appeal with organisers.

“We will not protest against the penalty being awarded because that was the right decision, but the referee did not give the decision immediately — he gave a corner. Then he waited two or three minutes and showed the red card and awarded the penalty.” — Reuters

Click this link to read more!

Nizar, Pakatan MPs thrown out after his swearing in

KUALA LUMPUR— Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin was thrown out of Parliament moments after he was sworn in this morning as the new Bukit Gantang MP.

He had led Pakatan Rakyat (PR) MPs in chants of “Hidup rakyat (long live the people)” and “Bubar DUN (dissolve the assembly)” as soon as the swearing-in ceremony ended, with some of them seen wearing headbands with the words "Bubar Dun".

Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia, who was annoyed by the Perak lawmakers, asked Nizar, M. Kulasegaran, Ngeh Koo Ham and Nga Kor Ming to leave the House, after they refused to remove the headbands.

“Please remove the cloths. That is not part of our uniform,” he had said.

As more MPs joined in to protest the action of the Speaker, Datuk Mahfuz Omar (Pokok Sena), N. Gobalakrishnan (Padang Serai), Teo Nie Ching (Serdang), were also asked to leave.

Pandikar later refused to deliver the customary welcoming speech, saying that Nizar had misbehaved.

“Traditionally after an MP is sworn in, the Speaker's job is to welcome the new member, and in the welcoming speech, the Speaker will speak of his hope that the new member will be able to contribute to the House,” Pandikar told the House.

“But this morning I find it difficult to say that, look at the behaviour of the member who was a mentri besar. I don't care how you behave outside the House, but inside the Parliament please watch your behaviour. And because of this I will not deliver my welcoming address,” he added.

Speaking to reporters at the Parliament lobby, Nizar said that Barisan Nasional (BN) was hypocritical as Parliament was sitting while the Perak assembly is in crisis.

“In my oath I said that I will defend the constitution therefore I asked for permission from the Speaker to inform the members on the constitution which has been sidelined in Perak,” said Nizar.

However, the Speaker did not have time to consider his request before Nizar began the chants.

Mahfuz also pointed out that former Speaker, the late Tun Zahir Ismail, had allowed anti-ISA armband during the 10th Parliament session.

Several Perak PR assemblymen were also present to show support to the ousted Perak mentri besar who was asked to step down by the Perak Sultan last February despite asking for fresh polls.

Nizar won the Bukit Gantang seat in April in a by-election seen as a referendum on the takeover of the state government by BN through defections.

A relatively unknown politician until his appointment as mentri besar last year, Nizar early this month was voted into the PAS central working committee and obtained the highest number of votes. (TMI)

Click this link to read more!

Zambry vs Speaker: Grounds of Judgment from Paul Augustine

Selected extracts of the grounds setting aside the suspension of Zambry & 6 others follows.

On the objection that proceedings should have been commenced by way of judicial review, the Court held:

The rule in O’Reilly v Mackman [1982] 3 All ER 1124 has been adopted by the Court of Appeal in cases such as Sivarasa Rasiah v Badan Peguam Malaysia & Anor [2002] 2 MLJ 413, Dato Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim v Perdana Menteri Malaysia & Anor [2007] 4 MLJ 422 and Ahmad Jefri bin Mohd Jahri @ Md Johari v Pengarah Kebudayaan & Kesenian Johor & Ors [2008] 5 MLJ 773. However, due to the uncertainties in the rule in O’Reilly v Mackman [1982] 3 All ER 1124 in England itself the adoption of the rule in that case locally must be done so with care and caution as in Sivarasa Rasiah v Badan Peguam Malaysia & Anor [2002] 2 MLJ 413. The result is that the remedies of declaratory relief under Order 15 rule 16 and certiorari must still be regarded generally as being alternatives and mutually not exclusive.

However, whatever restriction there may be on the use of Order 15 rule 16 it will not apply where a person seeks to assert, inter alia, his right to a legal status. This is statutorily recognised in the form of section 41 which reads as follows:

“Any person entitled to any legal character, or to any right as to any property, may institute a suit against any person denying, or interested to deny, his title to the character or right, and the court may in its discretion make therein a declaration that he is so entitled, and the plaintif need not in that suit ask for any further relief:

Provided that no court shall make any such declaration where the plaintiff, being able to seek further relief than a mere declaration or title, omits to do so.”

…

Clearly the challenge of the Applicants to their suspension from the Legislative Assembly is a matter that affects their legal status within the meaning of section 41. They are therefore entitled to seek a declaration of their legal right pursuant to Order 15 rule 16. It cannot be argued that they ought to have proceeded under Order 53 itself for declaratory relief for two reasons. Firstly, Order 53 does not say it is the exclusive provision for the grant of declaratory relief as stated by Lord Diplock in O’Reilly v Mackman [1982] 3 All ER 1124 at p 1134 in the following words,

…

Secondly, when the Specific Relief Act 1950 was enacted Order 53 was not in existence and, thus, adherence to it could not have been contemplated.

Be that as it may, and in any event, in cases of this nature the most appropriate form of relief is by way of declaration. In support reference is made to The Declaratory Judgment 2nd Ed by Lord Woolf where it says at p 90,

…

Accordingly, we dismissed the objection raised and proceeded to hear the motion.

On the issue whether the Speaker’s decision was justiciable or otherwise, the Court held:

It is perhaps necessary to resolve the question of justiciability of the orders sought by the Applicants before proceeding any further. This is governed by Article 72(1), It reads as follows:

“The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any state shall not be questioned in any court.”

The operative words in the provision are “….proceedings in the Legislative Assembly…”. In considering the meaning of the expression “proceedings in Parliament” Parliamentary Practice 20th Ed by Erskine May says at p 92,

The primary meaning, as a technical parliamentary term, of “proceedings” (which it had at least as early as the seventeenth century) is some formal action, usually a decision, taken by the House in its collective capacity. This is naturally extended to the forms of business in which the House takes action, and the whole process, the principal part of which is debate, by which it reaches a decision.

An individual Member takes part in a proceeding usually by speech, but also by various recognized kinds of formal action, such as voting, giving notice of a motion, etc., or presenting a petition or a report from a Committee, most of such actions being time-saving substitutes for speaking. Officers of the House take part in its proceedings principally by carrying out its orders, general or particular. Strangers also can take part in the proceedings of a House, e.g. by giving evidence before it or before one of its committees, or by securing the presentation of their petitions. While taking part in the proceedings of a House, members, officers and strangers are protected by the same sanction as that by which freedom of speech is protected, namely, that they cannot be called to account for their actions by any authority other than the House itself.

In determining the scope of Article 72(1) it must be remembered that in Malaysia the constitution is supreme. As Suffian LP said in Ah Thian v Government of Malaysia [1976] 2 MLJ 112 at p 113,

“The doctrine of the supremacy of Parliament does not apply in Malaysia. Here we have a written constitution. The power of Parliament and of state legislatures in Malaysia is limited by the Constitution, and they cannot make any law they please.”

…

It follows that Article 72 (1) must be read as being subject to the existence of a power or jurisdiction, be it inherent or expressly provided for, to do whatever that has been done. The Court is empowered to ascertain whether a particular power that has been claimed has in fact been provided for. The issues raised by the Applicants are therefore justiciable.

On the issue whether the Speaker’s decision was legal or otherwise, the Court held:

It is thus manifestly patent that there must be specific legal authority to take cognizance of and punish for contempt. This is particularly significant where the alleged contempt was committed beyond the walls of the Legislative Assembly. The need for such authority is recognised in Article XLIV of the Perak Constitution which reads as follows:

“(1) Subject to the provisions of the Federal Constitution and this Constitution, the Legislative Assembly shall regulate its own procedure and may, from time to time, make, amend and revoke standing Rules and Orders for the regulation and orderly conduct of its own proceedings and the conduct of business.”

The Standing Orders of the State Legislative Assembly of Perak was passed in 1988. The relevant Orders are Standing Orders 44, 89 and 90.

…

Standing Order 44 deals with disorderly conduct arising in the Assembly only. Standing Order 89 deals with the powers of interpretation by the Speaker of any of the Standing Orders. Standing Order 90 gives the Speaker power to regulate matters not specifically provided for in the Standing Orders and in doing so he shall have regard to the usages of Commonwealth Parliamentary practice so far as such usages can be applied to the proceedings of the Assembly subject to the requirement that they must not be inconsistent with the Standing Orders. As far as the application of Commonwealth Parliamentary practices in such matters are concerned what can be adopted are only their “usages” which is defined in Black’s Law Dictionary 6th Ed as:

“A reasonable and lawful public custom in a locality concerning particular transactions which is either known to the parties, or so well established, general, and uniform that they must be presumed to have acted with reference thereto. Practice in fact. Electrical Research Products v Gross, CCA Alaska, 120F 2d 301, 305. Uniform practice or course of conduct followed in certain lines of business or professions or some procedure or phase thereof. Turner v Donovan, 3 Cal App 2d 485, 39 P 2d 858, 859. Usage cannot be proved by isolated instances, but must be certain, uniform and notorious.”

As Parliamentary Practice 20th Ed by Erskine May says at p 72,

“Some privileges rest solely upon the law and custom of Parliament, while others have been defined by statute.”

However, as far as the law of contempt is concerned Kielley v Carson 4 Moores PC Cases 63 and Doyle v Falconer LR 1 PC 328 make it clear that in the Commonwealth countries there must be specific statutory provision to have jurisdiction to deal with it. With regard to the adoption of the power to deal with contempt of the House of Commons Members of Parliament: law and ethics by Gerard Carney says at p 168,

“The only certain basis for the incorporation of all the privileges of the House of Common in colonial legislatures was by their wholesale adoption by statute.”

…

Thus the power to deal with contempts, not specifically provided for in the Standing Orders, is not something that the Speaker can take cognizance of under Standing Order 90 as it requires a law to that effect.

Be that as it may, the summonses which were issued to the Applicants were done so pursuant to Standing Order 72. It reads as follows:

(1) There shall be a Committee to be known as the Committee of Privileges to consist of Mr. Speaker as Chairman and six members to be appointed by the Assembly as soon as may be after the beginning of each session. There shall be referred to this Committee any matter which appears to affect the powers and privileges of the Assembly. It shall be the duty of the Committee to consider any such matters to them referred, and to report on them to Assembly.
(2) When the Assembly is not sitting a member may bring an alleged breach of privilege to the notice of Mr. Speaker who may, if he is satisfied that a prima facie breach of privilege has been committed, refer such matter to the Committee, which shall report thereon to the Assembly.
(3)The Committee shall have power to send for persons, papers and documents, and to report from time to time.

Standing Order 72 (1) authorises the Committee of Privileges to take cognizance of “… any matter which appears to affect the powers and privileges of the Assembly …”. In order for a “… matter …” to have such an effect it must be unlawful or be an infringement of the powers and privileges of the Assembly. It is only then that it can be said that it appears to affect the powers and privileges of the Assembly. The summonses against the Applicants state that their acts constitute contempt. As contempt has not been specifically prescribed for, the acts cannot come within the ambit of Standing Order 72 (1). Even the Legislative Assembly (Privileges) Enactment 1959 enacted by the Perak legislative Assembly does not contain any provision for the offence of contempt and its punishment. By way of contrast reference must be made to the House of Parliament (Privileges and Powers) Act 1952 which makes specific provision for contempt.

The corollary is that Article XLIV of the Perak State Constitution read together with the Standing Orders of the Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Assembly (Privileges) Enactment 1959 do not provide for the offence of contempt and the resultant punishment of suspension from attending sessions of the State Legislative Assembly.

In the upshot the suspension of the Applicants on account of the alleged contempt committed by them is null and void. Accordingly we answered Questions (i) and (ii) in the affirmative. We did not find it necessary to answer the other questions. It was also our view that the answer to the two questions is sufficient to make a final determination in the case. We therefore granted order in terms of prayers (a) (1) and (4) in the originating summons. We made no order as to costs.

Click here to download full judgment

Courtesy Of Suara Keadilan

Click this link to read more!