Wednesday, February 29, 2012

The Return Of Altantuya's Ghost.

Asia Sentinel

Maybe, if it isn’t delayed again

On March 9, the appeal of the convicted murderers in the politically charged case of Mongolian translator and party girl Altantuya Shaariibuu is once again set for Malaysia’s Court of Appeal after being delayed for a month because of boxes of evidence about the case had been sent to the wrong place.

Altantuya was murdered on Oct. 18, 2006. The interminable delays in getting justice for the murdered woman have led to suspicions that the delays are deliberate in order to erase the crime from the public mind. She had been killed in particularly gruesome fashion. She was shot twice in the head and her body was blown up with military explosives, raising suspicions that was to hide the fact that, as she told one of her murderers, she was pregnant.

Altantuya has been inextricably tied to a massive scandal involving the purchases of submarines by the Malaysian Defense Ministry that netted then-Defense Minister Najib Tun Razak’s best friend, Abdul Razak Baginda, a 114-million euro “commission” that is believed to have been kicked back to politicians in Malaysia and France.

Apparently, according to the Malaysian government-sponsored news agency Bernama, 57 volumes of documents about the case were sent by the court to the prison where the two, who were once elite bodyguards for now-Prime Minister Najib, are incarcerated instead of to the lawyers representing them.

J. Kuldeep Kumar, a lawyer for former Chief Inspector Azila Hadri, told the court on Feb. 10 that the documents were being sent back to him in stages, and that he had only received 40 of the volumes over the past six months, so he was unable to file an appeal on Feb. 10 when the matter was to be taken up in the appellate court.

That statement has been met with disbelief by Manjeet Singh Dhillon, a prominent Kuala Lumpur-based criminal defense attorney, who said sending court records to the accused instead of to his lawyers was unheard of. It is also unheard of for a case to be delayed at the appellate level unless the lawyer is a new replacement for one who has dropped out of the case, Dhillon said.

Dhillon is representing a private detective, P Balasubramaniam, who has issued several statements saying Najib had first been Altantuya’s lover and had passed the Mongolian woman on to Razak Baginda because he didn’t want the embarrassment of a mistress when, as expected, he became prime minister.

“In Malaysia, if you have an appeal pending, the documents are served on the accused’s lawyers, they don’t get served on the accused,” Dhillon said. “In Malaysia, if you are facing the gallows, whether in the high court or on appeal, by law you are entitled to a lawyer if you can’t afford one. In a capital case, there will always be lawyers and the papers are always sent to the lawyers.”

There are no excuses for delays in normal appeals cases, Dhillon said. “The lawyer can always say ‘I am not ready,’ but that only comes about if you are newly assigned to the case. The rest do not get leeway from the court. Say you get the date, you will do the case. If you are telling me they shipped such a large amount of documents to the wrong place, that makes no sense. I don’t even look at as a snafu, it is a ridiculous explanation. It is a lot of codswallop.”

Altantuya, the jilted lover of then Defense Minister Najib’s best friend, Abdul Razak Baginda, was by admission in a letter found after her death attempting to blackmail Razak Baginda for US$500,000 Azilah Hadri and his accomplice, Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar, were to be paid RM50,000 to RM100,000 to kill Altantuya and two of her companions, according to a confession by Sirul which, though was produced after he had been given a warning of his right to a lawyer, was never produced in court.

The trial of the two elite bodyguards and Razak Baginda didn’t get underway until early February 2008, droned on for more than a year. The US Embassy’s political section chief, Mark D. Clark, wrote in a diplomatic cable liberated by the Wikileaks organization that a deputy prosecutor had told him "there was almost no chance of winning guilty verdicts in the on-going trial of defendants Razak Baginda, a close advisor to Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, and two police officers. She described the trial as interminably long."

Ultimately Razak Baginda was freed by the judge without having to put on a defense in October 2009. The two were finally convicted in April 2009 and sentenced to hang. The question of who had offered to pay them to murder the woman was never asked, let alone answered. That was one of many questions not asked or answered in the case. Read more.

Yong Teck Lee Lost Libel Suit Harris Salleh Awarded RM1 million.

Hantu Laut

Yong Teck Lee lost the libel suit brought against him by former Sabah Chief Minister Harris Salleh.Harris was awarded RM1 million.More to come

Read story here.

Tuesday, February 28, 2012

Was Bangkok Just the Start?

By Luke Hunt

The nature of terrorism is shifting. As a strategy favored by Islamic militants and separatists this nasty and virulent type of civilian-focused warfare had dominated the security landscape across Southeast Asia for much of the last decade. But as jihad groups likes Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) and Jamaah Ansharut Tauhid (JAT) are routed, and the likes of the Abu Sayyaf are contained, other outfits with foreign agendas are stepping into the breach.

Their differences were highlighted in two capitals over the last fortnight; in Jakarta where the last of the Bali Bombers has gone on trial, and in Bangkok where a trail of tragic errors had unwittingly led Thai police to an alleged Iranian plot to assassinate Israeli diplomats on Thai territory.

Speculation has firmed that the motive behind the botched plot – dubbed the Valentine’s Day Bombings – is linked to Israel’s well-publicized alleged assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists.

Two people have been held in Bangkok in connection with the Bangkok blasts, a third is expected to be extradited from Malaysia and a fourth, a woman who rented the house, is believed to be in Tehran and is also wanted. Two more – one spotted leaving the house shortly before the blast – are also wanted.

All are linked to Hezbollah, the Lebanese-based Shiite paramilitary group whose benefactors include Iran and Syria, and are largely regarded as a terrorist outfit by the West.

Israel was quick to blame Iran for targeting its diplomatic staff in Thailand, as well as India and Georgia, after a series of bombs was detonated in the three countries over a 24 hour period.

The Bangkok plot was initially uncovered after a bomb was mistakenly detonated – blowing up part of the roof of a house the bombers had rented. According to some accounts, the pair fled, one attempting to hail a taxi that refused to stop. A grenade was tossed amid terrified onlookers.They fled and were eventually cornered by police. A bag of grenades was thrown, but it missed and bounced off a tree, exploded and blew the leg off one of the bombers. In all, five people, including the Iranian, were injured in three explosions.

Their fate was dictated solely because Thailand remains an open country and prides itself on ease of access for foreigners of all backgrounds – the Iranians simply found this an easy place to operate.

That style of planning contrasts sharply with the ideology and methods deployed by the likes of JI acolyte Omar Patek, who appeared before a Jakarta court amid claims he was a key strategist behind the Bali Bombings of 2002 that left more than 200 dead, and a string of church bombings in Indonesia on Christmas Eve nearly two years earlier.

However, Patek can’t be charged under terrorism laws introduced in 2003 because they aren’t retrospective. Instead, he has been charged with harboring terrorists and possessing ammunition for the purposes of launching a training camp in Aceh in 2010.

He has also been charged in connection with the church bombings in Jakarta, but his lawyers are arguing Patek isn’t the strategic mastermind behind JI that the prosecution alleges.

A verdict isn’t expected until June.Read more.

Also read:Malaysia’s Militant Headache

Monday, February 27, 2012

HANTULAUT: Is The Police Competent In Reading The Law?

HANTULAUT: Is The Police Competent In Reading The Law?: Hantu Laut The NFC debacle, is it morally wrong or criminally wrong? As usual, Malaysian media only give a half full cup for the public to...

Is The Police Competent In Reading The Law?

Hantu Laut

The NFC debacle, is it morally wrong or criminally wrong?

As usual, Malaysian media only give a half full cup for the public to drink.Of course, if you don't ask the right questions you wouldn't get the right answers.

Like the smart reporter asking Wan Azizah whether she has Anwar's Omega watch which Azizah replied in the affirmative and next was her most terrifyingly stupid request "cuba tunjuk".No one in their right sense would think Azizah would be carrying the watch everwhere she goes, only that embarrassingly stupid reporter.

I have in my previous posts explicitly mentioned that Shahrizat should resign her ministerial position out of moral obligations.

Is the police competent in reading the law? Are they under public pressure to indict the directors of NFC or they do have a watertight case aginst them?

What is criminal breach of trust?

Section 405 of the Penal Code (Act 574) stated that:

405.Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property either solely or jointly with any other person dishonestly misappropriates, or converts to his own use, that property, or dishonestly uses or disposes of that property in violation of any direction of law prescribing the mode in which such trust is to be discharged, or of any legal contract, express or implied, which he has made touching the discharge of such trust, or wilfully suffers any other person so to do, commits “criminal breach of trust”.

The punishments under the law came under Section 406 to 409:

406. Whoever commits criminal breach of trust shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than one year and not more than ten years and with whipping, and shall also be liable to fine.

As always Mat Zain is all pumped up to grind his axe against the AG. He may be wrong here when he asserted Section 409 is the charge applicable to the directors of NFC.Unless, they are considered civil servants or agents the charge should be under Section 406.If the case is thrown out there would be many poison arrows flying toward the AG.

Section 409 below:

409. Whoever, being in any manner entrusted with property, or with any dominion over property, in his capacity of a public servant or an agent, commits criminal breach of trust in respect of that property, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than two years and not more than twenty years and with whipping, and shall also be liable to fine.

If they are considered as civil servants, which I doubt, or as agents which is possible than Mat Zain may be right in his assumption.

Needless to say, the directors of NFC had strayed away from the main objective of the soft loan given to them.The lack of due diligence by all parties concerned may be the cause of this debacle.In the first place the loan should not have been given to a non-GLC entity.Soft loan of this nature should only be approved to GLCs, where the government has complete control over the company.

Having not seen the terms and conditions of the loan agreement and the books of NFC it would be unwise to speculate.

Only the AG can determine whether there is watertight case against the directors of NFC.

Sunday, February 26, 2012

PKR Wants FELDA Settlers To Continue the "katak dibawa tempurong" Syndrome

Hantu Laut

The omnifarousness of Malaysian politics from the disingenuous and empty promise of a Sabah politician who tried to fool the kampong folks promising to get 50% oil royalty for Sabah if his party voted into power, to a politically bankrupt of ideas of a PKR Malay politician who called the proposed listing of FELDA as "an evil scheme"

Obviously, this Malay politician from PKR wanted the future generations of FELDA settlers to continue living "under the tempurong" as Rocky cleverly put it in his article below.

PKR's chief strategist Rafizi Ramli has described the proposed listing of Felda as "an evil scheme". Scary. Since when did an IPO become an evil scheme to cheat the rakyat? Yes, it's scary when young politicians like Rafizi start to label things "evil".

What really is evil in the scheme of things involving Felda and its 113,000 setllers? I'll tell you what, Rafizi: Evil is the scheming going on to stop the IPO and to deny the settlers' children and their children to have a shot at a better life, for them to be able to get out of the little plots that the government opened up years ago so that they could pursue bigger and better opportunities.

Evil is the scheming minds of politicians - young ones like Rafizi and old ones like Tengku Razaleigh - who want settlers to remain as settlers forever, and who expect the settlers' children and grandchildren to continue to become settlers.

Yes, that's evil.

What the IPO offers settlers is not just the windfall in terms of ringgit and sen. It allows these settlers to move up in life and become part of the future growth of Felda in Malaysia and the rest of the world. It allows the settlers to keep what they already have and, in addition, open up vistas for the settlers' future generations to become more than just settlers.

A few years ago, an think-tank conducted a study on more than 20,000 settlers in the state of Sabah. One of the questions they asked the settlers is whether they would like their children to become settlers after them. None of them said they wanted their children to become settlers.Read more.

PKR is the weakest link in the amalgamation of strange bedfellows. They will get the least seats among the three components in the coming general elections.

Saturday, February 25, 2012

Singapore's Lee Family and Nepotism

A blogger feels the wrath of the ruling family

Singapore’s ruling Lee family, apparently angered by a comment made on a Singapore-based blog Temasek Review Emeritus, has come down hard, with Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, his wife, Ho Ching, his brother Lee Hsien Yang, all demanding apologies for intimating that they have filled top government positions with family members.

Lee Kuan Yew became prime minister of Singapore in 1959 and ran the place until 1990, when he stepped down to become a senior minister and then was appointed minister mentor by his son, with many of his critics alleging he has continued to run the island republic from behind the scenes. After an interregnum from 1990 to 2004 when Goh Chok Tong held the premiership, Lee Hsien Loong took over as prime minister and has led the People’s Action Party government since.

Among other Lee family members who have held high positions in government are the elder Lee’s daughter, Lee Wee Ling, who is director of the National Neurological Institute. His other son, Lee Hsien Yang, was chief executive officer of Singapore Telecommunications from May 1995 until April 2007. He was appointed the chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore in 2009.

Ho Ching, Hsien Loong’s wife, has run Temasek Holdings, the sovereign wealth fund controlled by the Singapore Ministry of Finance, since 2002 after serving as president and chief executive officer of the government-owned Singapore Technologies. Although she has been criticized for some disastrous investments, including one in former Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra’s Shin Corp that Fortune Magazine called a "spectacular misjudgment" as well as several others in flagging western investment banks, she has never been asked to step down.

TR Emeritus, as the blog is known, hastily took down the article, which is no longer available. Apparently written by a contributor or in response to another article, it has been described as pointing out that the elder Lee’s appointing Hsien Loong prime minister and Hsien Loong appointing his wife to head Temasek Holdings “was nothing short of ‘cronyism’ and nepotism.”

The blog has posted a full apology, saying, among other things, that “we recognize that the article meant or was understood to mean that Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong had secured, or was instrumental in securing, the appointment of his wife, Mdm Ho Ching, as the Chief Executive Officer of Temasek Holdings (Private) Limited for nepotistic motives. We admit and acknowledge that this allegation is false and completely without foundation. We unreservedly apologize to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong for the distress and embarrassment caused to him by this allegation.”

Richard Wan, representing TR Emeritus, was unreachable. He posted a statement on the website saying he would no longer respond to questions from the press. He also asked TRE readers to “refrain from making such comments about Mdm Ho Ching with regard to her appointment in Temasek Holdings (Private) Limited. Any such allegations put up by anyone on TRE will be deleted.”

That may not have been enough. On Feb. 17, the government-controlled New Paper reported the parliament had pushed through an amendment to the Evidence Act that gives the courts the discretion to admit deleted online posts as evidence. The amendment, according to the paper, gives the courts “the discretion to consider relevant evidence by widening the admissibility of several categories. Among them are changes to the computer output evidence - which means computer printouts and sound and video recordings can be treated just like other evidence in Singapore courts.
Read more.

Friday, February 17, 2012

Malaysia's Latest Proton Saga

Thursday, 16 February 2012

Questions of insider trading in national car shares remain unanswered a month after sale to a Mahathir crony

For nearly three decades, Malaysia’s national car project, Proton, has suffered through endless troubles, nearing its demise several times only to be propped up again and again by the government.

The government has regularly sought foreign buyers to come in and save the project, Perusahaan Otomobil Nasional Bhd. The carmaker has cost the country’s consumers billions in lost opportunity costs from the steep tariffs levied against other carmakers in addition to the losses the company made on its own, estimated at US$2-3 billion, plus the cost of building its factories. The preferential tariffs haven’t stopped consumers from turning to other makes anyway.

In January, DRB-Hicom Bhd, controlled by billionaire Syed Mokhtar al-Bukhary, a longtime Mahathir friend and United Malays National Organization crony, agreed to take the ailing carmaker off the hands of Khazanah Nasional Bhd., the state-owned investment fund which owned 42.7 percent of the shares after taking the company over during an earlier period of distress. The subsequent events have raised many questions of insider trading, none of which have ever been addressed either by Proton, Hicom or Bursa Malaysia, the country’s stock exchange.

In the two months prior to the announcement of the sale, Proton’s shares went on a wild ride, beginning on Nov. 14, when the shares traded thinly, at only about 300,000 per day at a price of around RM2.70 (US88 cents)

According to official announcements by Bursa Malaysia, the Kuala Lumpur main board, the shares took off on Nov. 15, rising to RM3.21 on volume of 4.3 million traded. Over the next 12 days, daily volumes averaged 4.4 million shares. By Dec. 5, volumes increased to 20 million shares per day – 60 times the November average - with the price rocketing up by nearly 25 percent over the period to RM4.50 per share.

Proton’s Wild Ride
It wasn’t until Dec. 5, three weeks after the shares began to gyrate that Bursa Malaysia issued an Unusual Market Activity enquiry. On the next day, Proton announced: “"The Board of Directors of Proton wish to clarify that after making due enquiry with the Board of Directors and major shareholders, the company is not aware of any reason for the unusual market activity in the shares of the company recently, and further, that there is no material corporate development not previously disclosed."

Certainly not! On Jan. 17, DRB-Hicom announced it would buy Khazanah’s stake in the carmaker for RM1.291 billion, the equivalent of RM5.50 per share. That meant that those smart enough – or informed enough -- to buy the Proton shares in November at RM2.70 had effectively doubled their money in two months.

Insider trading?
“The above chain of events makes a bad overall impression. It looks very much that certain parties were privy to inside information,” wrote M A Wind, who blogs for Asia Sentinel. “Why was Bursa Malaysia so late with its Unusual Market Activity query? The share price of Proton had increased already over three consecutive weeks by a whopping 70 percent while daily turnover had risen 20-fold when it finally took action.”

The announcement on December 6, 2011 by Proton that neither it nor Khazanah Nasional were aware of any unusual activity looks puzzling to say the least. The market was rife with rumor, but neither Proton nor Khazanah Nasional said they were aware of any activity.

More suspiciously, the share price more or less stratified at RM 5.50 several days before the final announcement on January 16, 2011 – the DRB-Hicom offer price, which seems to suggest that unknown parties might have known what it would be.

Also, both Proton and DRB-Hicom appeared remarkably passive in issuing announcements, both only responding to queries from Bursa Malaysia (most notably on Dec. 6, 8 and 13, 2011 and Jan. 9, 2012), not initiating the announcements themselves although the stock exchange’s website says: "We place significant emphasis on timeliness, adequacy and accuracy of disclosure to enable investors to make informed investment decisions."

”Let’s be clear,” said a Kuala Lumpur-based investment banker. “All of Malaysia is one big insider-trading casino. There aren’t any other kind of trades.”

The banker declined to speculate on who made the killing. However, he said the clues point to top political figures. The car company was government-owned, the new ownership is close to top United Malays National Organization figures. Read more.

Thursday, February 16, 2012

Penang:A Gem Or A White Man's Bluff?

Hantu Laut

Yes! I was there few months ago.

Penang is different from the rest of the Peninsula, it has its own characters and charms, a laid back and quaint place, more a resort type destination rather than an industrial city with a burgeoning economy.Very Chinese, a piece of chinoiserie of some kind, keeping much of its old traditions.

Its hawker's foods are lusciously tasty and cheap.It retained more of its colonial past while the rest of the Peninsula tried very hard to erase it and had succeeded in doing so.

More like my home state Sabah, unpretentious, rustic, friendly, hospitable and no hang-ups.

It was once called the "Pearl of the Orient" before other more enchanting destinations like Bali, Phuket and many others in the region, discovered and developed more rapidly that had put it back in the backwater.

The streets are much cleaner than before but the waterfront facing the Esplanade is still littered with rubbish of all kinds.....discarded plastic bottles,plastic bags and animal carcasses are eyesores disfiguring the waterfront.

Former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammad while still the PM then, disgusted with its dirtiness, called it the "Rubbish of the Orient". The man who once ran this tiny island with negligence is still in the Federal cabinet. I need not mention his name.

The current state government is doing an excellent job trying to revive Penang's past glory to lure back the tourists and had embarked on excellent tourism promotion (paid for or otherwise).Read this New York Times article on Penang.

White men loves this kind of place.

My stay at the Hard Rock Hotel was pleasant and there were more domestic tourists than foreign tourists when I was there.

My wife says, probably, off-peak season.

Maybe, I'll make another visit a year from now to see whether Penang has weathered well under Pakatan's care.

Wednesday, February 15, 2012

A grandmother, a baby and Sabah’s poverty:A Sabah Story

FEB 15 — Waiting at the check-in lounge for my flight home to Kota Kinabalu, I saw a woman in her senior years looking rather forlorn. She looked to be at least in her 60s; far too old to be the mother of the newborn in her arms. Besides the baby, she was also clutching what looked like one of those carriers that would hold baby bottles and nappies.

When it was time for the plane to depart, she rose, awkwardly trying to juggle the baby and the bag.

I looked around for someone accompanying her, some relative or friend, but she seemed to be alone.

“Makcik seorang ka? (Are you alone, auntie?)” I asked.

She nodded. I asked to carry her bag and she thanked me, her eyes full of relief and the tenseness about her easing a little.

We chatted for awhile and she told me the baby was her daughter’s. The baby’s parents were both working in the Peninsula because it was the only place to find work. But neither earned enough for them to be able to afford childcare so it was left to her to look after the infant.

A steward, noticing that I’d helped the old woman with her bag, smiled and thanked me. At least I wasn’t the only one who noticed. Sadly the rest of my fellow passengers were a little too preoccupied to lend a hand to the old woman. I am sure the steward would likely have taken her bag for her on the plane; he took it from me when she reached her seat, placing it in the overhead compartment for her.

She had another relative waiting for her when she arrived at the airport, fortunately. Otherwise, she, the baby and the bag would be on a rickety bus home and I’m not sure if someone would have been kind enough to take her bag.

I look at the old woman and think of my middle- and upper-middle class friends in the Klang Valley with helpers. They fuss about their “stupid”, “untrustworthy” help and few things are as discussed by these “tai-tais” than how hard it is to find good help.

But maids are a luxury; they don’t see that. The working class can’t afford maids and rely on relatives to look after the children while they work. But what if there is no doting grandparent or widowed aunt? Affordable childcare facilities aren’t easy to find and are out of reach for families that take home less than RM2,500 a month.Read more.

Monday, February 13, 2012

NCR Land:The AG Is Right, Stupid!

Hantu Laut

A Sabahan, a federal minister, either he does not know the law, pretended not to know the law, or intentionally telling a lie to his people.Politicians playing to the gallery are nothing new, tools of the trade.


"The natives have been here well before laws were made… It’s only when the British came here were laws made, but tribal communities have thrived pre-independence, pre-colonial days, they have thrived and developed the system of culture themselves, the Penampang member of parliament said.

“So this includes ownership of properties, of land, they developed it and for you to say there has to be a cut-off point for this is not correct because all the native laws and customs pre-date laws made by legislature,” Dompok told reporters after witnessing the presentation of printed KadazanDusun language calendars to SK Putaton here yesterday and when asked to comment on Roderic’s statement which many Sabahan leaders disagreed with the state AG." ...Unquote

Read more here.

Obviously, this leader of the Kadazan people want this state to live by the law of the jungle and trying to usurp the law of the land.Natives customary rights (NCR) are well covered in the Sabah Land Ordinance which the Honourable Minister did not bother to familiarise himself with before he concludes that the State AG was wrong.

The AG was right that after 1930 no state land can be considered as NCR land unless the complainant comply with the requirements under the Sabah Land Ordinance of which the relevant sections are shown below

13. Enquiry as to native rights.

Upon the receipt of any application for unalienated country land it shall be the duty of
the Collector to publish a notice calling upon any claimant to native customary rights in
such land who is not yet in possession of a registered documentary title to make or send
in a statement of his claim within a date to be specified in the notice. If no claim is
made the land shall be dealt with as if no such rights existed.

14. Collector to decide claims.

Claims to native customary rights shall be taken down in writing by the headman or by
the Collector, and shall be decided by the Collector.

15. Definition of customary rights.

Native customary rights shall be held to be -
(a) land possessed by customary tenure;
(b) land planted with fruit trees, when the number of fruit trees amounts to fifty and
upwards to each hectare;
(c) isolated fruit trees, and sago, rotan, or other plants of economic value, that the
claimant can prove to the satisfaction of the Collector were planted or upkept and regularly
enjoyed by him as his personal property;
(d) grazing land that the claimant agrees to keep stocked with a sufficient number of
cattle or horses to keep down the undergrowth;
(e) land that has been cultivated or built on within three years;
(f) burial grounds or shrines;
(g) usual rights of way for men or animals from rivers, roads, or houses to any or all of
the above.

16. Procedure when rights established.

(1) Native customary rights established under section 15 shall be dealt with either by
money compensation or by a grant of the land to the claimant and in the latter case a title
shall be issued under Part IV
(2) Where the Collector decides that native customary rights established under section 15
shall be dealt with by money compensation, the affected land together with all buildings,
erection and crops thereon shall vest in the Government free from all encumbrances and shall be deemed to have been surrendered by the lawful claimant thereof upon such decision
being made.

Every country must have established laws that organise, regulate and bring order to society. No modern nation can live on archaic laws.If one is to go by Bernard Dompok's argument that these archaic and unwritten native law must be preserved than he should also consider bringing back head-hunting to Sabah and Sarawak, a tradition that these groups of natives used to practised in the past.

, another ignorant journalist, if you can call this type of writing journalism, or just another highly embellished political tub-thumping to hoodwink the people, typical of many Malaysian so-called journalists, never do research or check the facts before embarking on their journey of political brickbats, serving their paymasters blindly.They should just called themselves reporters who report verbatim.

It reminds me of the reporter who think
ultra vires as something insulting the dignity of the sultan that got Karpal Singh into trouble.The writer also tried to impress his readers that he is a man of letters as to quote something completely irrelevant to the subject matter as William the Conqueror proclaiming all of England as crown land, lest he forgets that Sabah and Sarawak were also known as crown land under British colonial rules.

His glossing over Article 153 of the Federal Constitution is completely irrelevant and has nothing to do with the land laws of Sabah and Sarawak which is different from the Land Laws of Peninsula Malaysia.

Sabah and Sarawak have their own Land Ordinance which supersede any Federal Land Ordinance.Lands are state controlled and Article 153 has no jurisdiction over land matters in both states.Article 153 is more on education,civil service, businesses, etc, encompassing the NEP (affirmative action for the Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak)

NCR laws are not carved in stone as asserted by the minister to be in perpetuity from time immemorial.

Compliance of the law is the rule of the game and paramount to establishing whether the claimants have customary right over the land.There is no such nonsense as blanket cover of customary rights over lands in both Sabah and Sarawak as what the minister is trying to impress his supporters.

Saturday, February 11, 2012

Four Reasons Why Israel Will Attack Iran

Foreign Policy

Washington Post columnist David Ignatius created a tempest last week when he reported U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's prediction that Israel will attack Iran and its nuclear complex "in April, May or June." Ignatius's column was as startling as it was exasperating. When the sitting U.S. defense secretary -- presumably privy to facts not generally available to the public -- makes such a prediction, observers have good reasons to pay attention. On the other hand, the international community has been openly dealing with the Iranian nuclear issue for nearly a decade, with similar crescendos of anticipation having occurred before, all to no effect. Why would this time be different?

Further, an Israeli air campaign against Iran would seem like an amazingly reckless act. And an unnecessary one, too, since international sanctions against Iran's banks and oil market are just now tightening dramatically.

Yet from Israel's point of view, time really has run out. The sanctions have come too late. And when Israeli policymakers consider their advantages and all of the alternatives available, an air campaign, while both regrettable and risky, is not reckless.

Here's why:

Read more.

Friday, February 10, 2012

This Man A Shame And An Abomination

Hantu Laut

This man is a shame and an abomination.

Why did he stays in UMNO for decades knowing how evil the political ideology is?Did he not enjoy the spoils as much as his compatriots that he now accused of the despicable act of bribery and corruption? Where was his conscience then?

He must have locked it up in the safe and forgot the combination?

Why did he not tell the prime minister then, right in his face, that he wants no part of this despicable act and resign his ministerial post and leave the party?

Read his regurgitations here and here.

Obviously, he wants to curry favour with the opposition.

DAP, is looking for Malay candidates for the general elections, a fertile ground for UMNO has-beens. He might follow the path of Sakmongkol AK47, ex-UMNO assemblyman,whom, I believe will be fielded as one of DAP Malay candidates.

Thursday, February 9, 2012

RPK Reveals 'Dirt' On Two PKR Reps

PETALING JAYA: Controversial blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin, who vowed to reveal the dirt on the sand-mining scandal in Selangor, has implicated two Pakatan Rakyat state assemblymen.

In an article published on his Malaysia Today news portal today, the blogger claimed that Mat Suhaimi Shafiei (Sri Muda) and Amirudin Shari (Batu Caves) had colluded with a well-heeled contractor, who forked out cash whenever requested.

Raja Petra also published the transcripts of alleged taped telephone conversations between Mat Suhaimi and the contractor, whom he referred to as “A”.

During their first conversation, the name “Azmin” had also cropped up but it could not be ascertained if this was in reference to PKR deputy president Azmin Ali.

Raja Petra claimed that on May 23, 2009, Mat Suhaimi had allegedly met the contractor at the Sunway Hotel in Seberang Prai, Penang, to discuss the sand-mining issue.

“Mat Suhaimi asked A to submit an application to mine sand to Kumpulan Semesta Sdn Bhd with a copy to him (Mat Suhaimi). Kumpulan Semesta is a Selangor state-owned company involved in the mining and selling of sand in Selangor,” he added.

In a subsequent meeting on July 2 at Mat Suhaimi’s office, the blogger claimed that the state assemblyman had asked A to incorporate a company called Double Dignity (M) Sdn Bhd.

He added that both Mat Suhaimi and Amirudin were among the five directors of the company and their agreed fee was RM5,000 per month.

“On Jan 18, 2010, Double Dignity submitted an application to mine sand in Dengkil, an area of 45 acres. The letter was signed by A and copied to Mat Suhaimi and Amirudin.

“Amirudin supported the application and signed the ‘letter of support’,” he said.

Raja Petra also claimed that Mat Suhaimi and Amirudin were both registered as directors of Double Dignity on that same day, Jan 18.

Requests made for funds

Prior to this, the blogger claimed that Mat Suhaimi had requested for funds from A on numerous occasions and the latter obliged.

On Aug 15, 2009, Raja Petra said, the state assemblyman contacted A and asked him for RM3,000 in cash as election campaign funds and the money was handed over the next day.

“The contractor handed over another RM2,000 in cash to Mat Suhaimi on Aug 25, 2009. The meeting was held at room 1514 of the Pearl View Hotel in Seberang Prai, Penang,” he added.

Following this, the blogger claimed that on Sept 9, 2009, Mat Suhaimi had requested RM35,000 from A for “Ramadhan expenses” and the sum was given in cash when the duo met at a Nasi Kandar restaurant in USJ12.

“It was clearly stated that all this money was payment to assist Double Dignity in getting approval from Kumpulan Semesta on its application to mine sand. Mat Suhaimi told A that they would need to pay off certain people in Kumpulan Semesta,” he said.

Raja Petra claimed that on Sept 16, 2009, Mat Suhaimi informed A that he wanted to organise a “buka puasa” (breaking of fast) function. The assemblyman had asked the contractor to organise the event and foot the bill.

“The function was held on Sept 17 at the coffeehouse of the Legend Hotel in Kuala Lumpur. That same night, A paid Mat Suhaimi and Amirudin their director’s fee of RM5,000 each,” he said.

A few days later, the blogger said, Mat Suhaimi asked A for RM10,000 to hold a Hari Raya bash and the latter handed over the money to the assemblyman at the Jaya Jusco mall in Klang.

On Jan 5, 2010, Raja Petra claimed that the assemblyman had once again requested for RM50,000 from the contractor.Read more.

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

So! Who Is Going To Bankrupt Malaysia?

Hantu Laut

There are dime a dozen of them out there, churning out the crudest and most ill-conceived writing against the government and its leaders.

Malaysia Chronicle, Malaysian Insider and the mother of all gutters Malaysiakini have plenty of these fierce moles crawling out of the molehills and for the first time see the light of day.

Some sould have been taken to the cleaners for libel but Malaysian politicians either have too many skeletons in the closet or think it's just not worth the effort.For some it's money matters.

If pro-government bloggers are paid than the same must be said of bloggers and writers supporting the opposition.

As Ahiruddin says which I agree "It's a total crap"

We don't need to be paid for our political beliefs.We don't need to be paid for our conscience.

How to support a group of political misfits that are full of contradictions?

Their latest contradiction is the unsound opposition to the government proposal to use RM1.5 billion of EPF funds to provide housing loans to the low income earners that do not qualify for bank financing.

All over the world in developed and developing countries the government are obligated to help the low income and the needy by providing such facilities as cheap loans or cheap home rentals.

In Britain, if you are less fortunate you are entitled to stay in a council house.In 1979 Britain introduced a right to buy legislation which allow the tenant to purchase the property.In Singapore, the HDB has been the most successful in housing its low income citizens.The government later introduced the HUDC for the middle income.Today, these properties have appreciated 5 to 10 folds its original prices.

The EPF has over RM400 billion investment portfolio and any of these investments can go wrong.

Making a mountain out of a molehill. RM1.5 billion is much less than 1% of the total portfolio.A drop in the ocean to help the poor to put roofs over their heads, a place they proudly can call home.

To this, the Oxford moron in the opposition, a lad called Tony Pua, one that is too smart for his own good, indignantly objected and sent wrong messages to the people to oppose the scheme.He said the scheme is against the EPF Act but failed to mention the particular act. Having read the Act myself it is clear what he claimed is untrue, there was no such contravention.The BOD of EPF has wide ranging powers to decide on any type of investments.This scheme is probably a much safer investment for EPF than shares and stocks as the amount is guaranteed by DBKL. Stocks can appreciate and depreciate in value.

There is no substance in his claim, it's pure political propaganda and a crock of shit.

EPF would not be giving direct loan to individuals.I presumed it would be through a new entity set up for this purpose, either own by EPF or DBKL.

On one hand he pretends to fight for the poor and on the other hand whack the poor and deny them of their rightful place in society.

Those of you, who want to vote for these kind of political misfits, better think twice.

They (Pakatan) have promised:

1.To lower the price of fuel by giving greater subsidies.

2.Bring down the price of foods and other essentials by giving greater subsidies.

3.To increase oil loyalty to 20% to Sabah and Sarawak.

4.To abolish highway tolls.........not sure how they are going to do it.They, either have to pay billion of ringgits to the toll concessionaires or just nationalise the whole damn thing without any payment of compensation.

There are many more on record that I need not mention here.

So! Now you tell me who is going to bankrupt Malaysia?

Malaysia's Anti-Opposition Bloggers

Does Kuala Lumpur have a home-grown version of China’s ’50-centers?’

Is Malaysia getting its own version of China’s so-called 50-centers, the legions of Chinese bloggers who monitor websites and reply to criticism of the government for money?

Ahiruddin Attan, the Kuala Lumpur-based pro-government blogger who writes under the name “Rocky’s Bru” says last September he pulled together friends to set up what he calls a small news portal called The Mole with the idea “to give certain balance to the reports of Malaysiakini, Malaysian Insider, Malaysia Today.”

In Ahiruddin’s view, “there are too many anti-establishment, anti-government sites in Malaysia.”

The Malaysian Insider reported last year that the government had provided US$10 million for the project. Other reports circulating in Malaysian political circles say the bloggers have been provided with US$10 million by the United Malaysia National Organization, the country’s biggest political party, and another US$10 million from the Malaysian billionaire Syed Mokhtar al Bukhary to follow the proliferating anti-establishment news organizations that are thronging Malaysia and state the government’s viewpoint.

But, Ahiruddin said in a telephone interview: “That US$10 million is totally crap. There is no truth at all in it. We are really small.” A former editor of a variety of UMNO publications including the Business Times, The Malay Mail and The Sunday Mail, he says he derives his current income from his continuing directorship at the Mail, a Kuala Lumpur-based daily tabloid. To reports that he had bought a Harley-Davidson motorcycle with his new-found wealth, he snorted. The Harley, he said, is 12 years old.

Despite Ahiruddin’s denials, other sources insist that at least 10 to 15 people are involved in the effort, with government support.

Because all of Malaysia’s mainstream media, including newspapers and television, are owned by its ruling political parties the country has generated perhaps the most vociferous opposition Internet news portals in the region, with some, including Malaysiakini and the Malaysian Insider, providing professional coverage of the government.

Although government officials grit their teeth over what the news portals publish, they have adhered to a pledge made by former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad to leave the Internet censorship-free. Mahathir made the pledge in 1995 to promote the international development of his multi-media Super Corridor, which was designed to attract high-tech industry across the globe. In 1998, the government allowed Malaysiakini to begin operations.

The result, along with the proliferation of news sites, most of them anti-government, has been an explosion of readers who gather their news from the Internet. According to Freedom House, a whopping 55 percent of Malaysians had access to the Internet in 2011. And, the NGO said: “In the watershed elections of March 2008, the ruling National Front coalition lost its two-thirds majority for the first time since 1969. In addition, opposition parties won control of five of the country’s 13 states, including those with relatively high Internet penetration rates…Together with the growing popularity of independent online news outlets, the use of the Internet for political mobilization was widely perceived as contributing to the opposition’s electoral gains.” Read more.