Perak speaker calls emergency state assembly meet

February 27, 2009 | Perak speaker V Sivakumar

today called for an emergency state assembly sitting on March 3. The assembly is expected to vote on two motions related to the constitutional crisis in the state.

The first motion by Titi state representative Khalil Idham Lim Abdullah is for a vote of confidence for Pakatan Rakyats ousted menteri besar Mohamad Nizar Jamaluddin.

The second motion by Chang Lih Kang (PKR-Teja) is for the state assembly to be dissolved in order to hold a fresh elections.

Pakatan not averse to unity govt if Pak Lah stays on as PM

By Wong Choon Mei | suarakeAdilAn | 28 February 2009

A call by the Islamic-based PAS for the formation of a unity government to put aside unnecessary negative politicking and focus national resources and attention on weathering the economic crisis has the full backing of the Pakatan Rakyat.

However, there is one all-important condition.

“Broadly speaking, Pakatan is agreeable with the idea and principle of a unity government given the uncharted economic uncertainty facing the nation,” said KeADILan information chief Tian Chua.

“But we are agreeable only, and only if the unity government is under Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi. You can see for yourself, it is becoming quite clear, the people are uncomfortable with Najib, and we have to abide by their wishes.”

Put aside differences until next general election?

PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang had said that Barisan Nasional could not on its own pull Malaysia out from the economic crisis.

“To do it fairly it must involve all parties, in times of crisis it is important for all of to carry out our duties collectively,” Hadi was quoted as saying by the Malaysian Insider.

“I wish to suggest to the outgoing Prime Minister to make some changes, to at least complete his agenda in reforming the judiciary, eradicating corruption and I believe Barisan Nasional cannot do it alone.”

Abdullah is due to step down in favour of his deputy Najib Abdul Razak, who is also Finance Minister, on March 31.

The 55-year old Najib is the scion of one of the best-known political families in the country. Despite his distinguished lineage, he himself has been plagued by scandal throughout his 33-year political career.

Lacks the confidence of the people

Although the Umno-led Barisan Nasional no longer commands its long-held two-thirds majority in Parliament, it still has sufficient mandate to push through many programmes. However, it does not enjoy the confidence of the people and has been losing every by-election to the Pakatan since the March 2008 national polls.

The problem lies with the growing unpopularity and public distrust for Najib, who angered many Malaysians earlier this month with a questionable power grab in Perak state, leading to an outbreak of open and intensifying hostilities between the Pakatan and Umno-BN.

When news surfaced early last month that not a single initiative from a RM7 billion economic stimulus plan unveiled on Nov 4 had been implemented yet, public disquiet grew. Only then were steps hurriedly taken to push out RM5 billion in projects disbursements.

Disclosures from Najib’s own cabinet colleagues that chunks of the stimulus package were also to fund special projects in states holding by-elections further fuelled public distaste for his methods - reminiscent of those employed by his mentor, ex-premier Mahathir Mohamad and former economic adviser Daim Zainuddin.

Guilty or not, calls have been growing from the public as well as from civil society for Abdullah to stay on and keep an eye on the economy and the national coffers, as the government prepares to spend unprecedented billions to mitigate what will clearly be the worst-ever economic crisis.

Perak Crisis Revisited - 3

February 18, 2009 - Nizar Jamalludin @ Pasir Panjang

BN Perak tuduh sidang DUN tak sah, baca dulu ulasan Dr Aziz Bari

Oleh Tarmizi Mohd Jam | PerakExpres.com

ADUN Chenderiang, Dr Mah Hang Soon menyifatkan tindakan Sivakumar itu telah melanggar titah Sultan Perak dan menuduh Sivakumar tidak tahu undang-undang dan membuat keputusan tanpa rujuk kepada Sultan.

“Mana boleh adakan sidang DUN tanpa dapat perkenan Sultan?” katanya ketika memberi reaksi terkejut terhadap tindakan Speaker untuk memanggil sidang Dun 3 Mac ini.

“Dia (Sivakumar) ini macam tidak tahu undang-undang dan membuat keputusan tanpa rujuk kepada Sultan. Mana boleh adakan sidang DUN tanpa dapat perkenan Sultan? Oleh itu, keputusan yang Speaker buat pada hari ini adalah tidak sah. Kita kena bertindak ikut undang-undang dan kena mengenepikan sentimen politik dalam hal perlembagaan,” ujarnya.

Bagi menjawab tuduhan tidak berasas Dr Mah itu, saya menurunkan kembali ulasan pakar Perlembagaan UIAM, Profesor Dr Abdul Aziz Bari yang menjadi tajuk utama muka depan Harakah Bil 1418 yang lalu sebagai ingatan bagi memahamkan semua Adun BN dan Pakatan tentang kuasa memanggil sidang Dun.

Terdapat isu menarik berkenaan Dun Perak dan kuasa Speaker. Saya berbincang dengan Profesor Dr Abdul Aziz Bari tentang perkara ini. Masih terlalu luas kuasa speaker, apabila ada pihak yang menghina Dewan tidak digunakan. Hatta, kenyataan PM, Abdulah Ahmad Badawi yang memerintahkan Dr. Zamry Abdul Kadir agar tidak menghiraukan keputusan penggantungan oleh Speaker dewan, sebenarnya boleh diambil tindakan dan dijatuhkan hukuman. Namun saya bertanya, apakah yang perlu lakukan sekrang di Perak. Begini jawapan Dr Aziz Bari dan saya melaporkannya:

DUN Perak perlu bersidang dengan segera bagi menyelesaikan kekaburan yang ada sekarang. Demikian pandangan Profesor Dr Abdul Aziz Bari ketika diminta mengulas mengenai permohonan Speaker S. Sivakumar kepada Sultan Perak untuk mengadakan Sidang Khas Dewan 23 Februari lalu.

Aziz berkata di bawah Perkara 16(1) Undang-undang Tubuh Negeri Perak, Sultan diberi tanggung jawab untuk memanggil sidang dewan, termasuk mempastikan bahawa DUN bersidang sekurang-kurangnya sekali setiap enam bulan.

“Peruntukan ini sama dengan Perkara 55(1) Perlembagaan Persekutuan yang meletakkan kewajipan yang sama ke atas Yang di-Pertuan Agong”, jelas beliau ketika dihubungi.
Profesor undang-undang itu berkata, memanggil sidang DUN tidak termasuk di dalam hal-hal yang menjadi budibicara dan beliau berpendapat bahawa Yang di-Pertuan Agong atau Sultan atau Yang di-Pertua Negeri tidak boleh menyekat atau menolak permohonan untuk memanggil sidang.

“Pada hakikatnya kuasa ini adalah kuasa formal dan adalah tidak munasabah untuk Sultan, dalam kes Perak ini, untuk menolak atau menghalang permohonan speaker itu,” tegas beliau lagi. Pakar perlembagaan itu berkata, hujah tersebut diperkuatkan oleh teori yang meletakkan ketua negara atau ketua negeri sebagai sebahagian daripada mekanisme yang melindungi perlembagaan dan semangatnya.

“Kalau Sultan menolak permohonan itu bermakna Sultan sudah menyekat demokrasi dan ini bertentangan dengan Konsep Raja Berperlembagaan yang mesti selari dengan tuntutan demokrasi,” tambahnya lagi.

Aziz berkata sidang DUN itu juga perlu kerana Perkara 16(2)(a) dan (6) Undang-undang Tubuh Negeri Perak menyebut soal sokongan majoriti di dalam DUN dan ini perlu ditunjukkan secara telus dan terbuka. Ditanya mengenai pendapat yang mengatakan bahawa sokongan majoriti itu boleh ditunjukkan di luar dewan, Aziz berkata “pendapat itu sebenarnya pandangan yang agak lemah dan hanya boleh diterima sekiranya ada pihak, contohnya kerajaan yang ada, yang dalam konteks Perak Dato Seri Nizar, enggan atau menghalang sidang DUN”.

Beliau berkata pendapat itu berdasarkan kes Adegbenro yang diputuskan pada 1963. Katanya kes yang lebih baik ialah kes Stephen Kalong Ningkan yang diputuskan pada 1966 yang menghukumkan bahawa ia perlu dibuat di dalam dewan.

Aziz menambah peruntukan yang sama juga ada dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan, yakni Perkara 43(2)(a) dan 43(4). Sebab itu, tegasnya, adalah salah apabila Speaker Dewan Rakyat, Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia menyekat permohonan Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

Aziz menjelaskan, “Memang speaker mempunyai kuasa mutlak tetapi ini berhubung dengan keahlian, perjalanan dewan dan seumpamanya. Apa yang berlaku di Perak ialah Speaker Sivakumar mahu proses menunjukkan sokongan itu berlaku sedangkan Pandikar Amin bertindak sebaliknya. Ini menyebabkan peruntukkan perlembagaan, khususnya Perkara 43(2)(a) dan 43(4) tersekat. Itu sebab saya pernah mengatakan bahawa speaker tidak harus menyelamatkan kerajaan dari diuji sokongannya oleh dewan. Apa yang berlaku di Perak betul kerana speaker mahu kerajaan yang ada membuktikan bahawa dirinya mempunyai sokongan majoriti di dalam dewan.”

Tiga hari lalu Pandikar Amin dipetik di dalam media sebagai berkata speaker dewan harus adil dan tidak memihak.

Aziz menambah di sisi perlembagaan, Anwar sebenarnya tidak perlu menulis surat kepada Perdana Menteri Dato Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi pada 16 September 2008 kerana Abdullah adalah ketua kerajaan dan bukan ketua dewan.

“Mungkin apa yang Anwar lakukan itu sekadar strategi politik, tetapi ia bukan satu syarat. Bagaimanapun kita perlu sedar bahawa Malaysia mempunyai budaya politik yang ganjil dan tidak mesra perlembagaan dan strategi seperti itu perlu,” ujar Aziz. Abdullah bagaimanapun menolak mentah-mentah sidang tersebut. Pandikar Amin juga enggan memberi laluan.

Aziz berpendapat di dalam keadaan sedemikian, Yang di-Pertuan Agong bertanggung jawab menitahkan sidang kerana isu sokongan majoriti amat penting dan ia adalah nyawa bagi sesebuah kerajaan di dalam sistem demokrasi berparlimen seperti Malaysia.

“Pada saya ini selaras dengan kehendak peruntukkan yang berkenaan, khususnya Perkara 43(2)(a), 43(4) dan 55(1) di baca bersama,” tambahnya. Keadaan yang sama wujud di Perak sekarang, kata Aziz.

Beliau berkata “jika sidang DUN tidak dipanggil sukar bagi kerajaan hendak menjalankan pentadbiran; contohnya mendapatkan kelulusan perbelanjaan dan pelbagai urusan rutin yang memerlukan dana yang mesti diluluskan oleh DUN dan sebuah kerajaan yang sah, yakni yang mempunyai dokongan majoriti di dalam dewan.”

Ditanya mengenai perlantikan Dato Dr Zambry Abd. Kadir oleh sultan beliau berkata, “itu tidak mengapa; isunya di sini ialah perlantikan itu perlu dibuktikan benar-benar sah oleh DUN kerana dewan yang mempunyai kata putus sama ada penilaian Sultan itu tentang sokongan majoriti kepada Zambry itu betul atau sebaliknya.”

Aziz berkata sokongan majoriti itu terpakai kepada Zambry dan Mohamad Nizar. Beliau menjelaskan soal sokongan majoriti itu boleh dibangkitkan di dalam dewan bila-bila masa sebagaimana yang biasa dilakukan di United Kingdom umpamanya.

“Katakan Zambry kalah kali ini, beliau boleh lepas ini membawa usul undi tidak percaya terhadap Mohamad Nizar pula kalau beliau berasa sokongan ahli dewan terhadap beliau bertambah. Begitu juga dengan ahli dewan yang lain yang berasa mereka mempunyai sokongan yang cukup. Proses ini dizinkan malah dikehendakki oleh perlembagaan,” tegasnya. Sanggahtoksago

Posts Berkaitan:

1. BN Perak persoal Speaker panggil sidang DUN
2. Sidang tergempar Perak: Tindakan Speaker canggah Perlembagaan
3. Speaker panggil sidang tergempar DUN Perak 3 Mac
4. BN bakal bentuk k’jaan baru Perak
5. DUN Perak bubar: Sultan buat keputusan esok

Perak Crissis -Revisited 2

February 19, 2009 - Speaker DUN Perak Press Conference

When Umno forgot to ‘kidnap’ the speaker

FEB 28 — Malaysianinsider - Mohamed Hanipa Maidin

One tends to make a mistake when doing something in a hurry. That was what happened to Umno. The unholy haste to topple the PR government in Perak has now landed the party in uncharted waters. The side effect is a constitutional impasse.

It all started when Umno forgot about the speaker. Greedy with power, Umno overlooked the importance of the speaker. Their focus was mainly directed to the three former Pakatan state assemblymen. What they failed to realise is that without the speaker on their side they would be facing the greatest obstacle to convene the assembly.

In a non-military coup, the role of speaker is extremely significant. Failure to take into account the role of the speaker is seriously fatal. Now Umno has felt the pinch due to its own ignorance on the role of the speaker.

Umno might have thought that the speaker had nothing to do with the process of ousting Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin, thus toppling the legitimate PR government. Thus they concentrated their effort elsewhere. They mainly focused on how to convince the Sultan of Perak to force Nizar’s resignation.

What Umno failed to realise is that the speaker is not akin to Umno’s permanent chairman (pengerusi tetap). If Umno holds that view the party definitely has committed a very serious and grave error. Any government which follows a Westminster model should know very well how important the role of a speaker is particularly when there is an attempt to overthrow a government via a vote of no confidence. In a political coup like what happened in Perak the speaker is a kingpin.

When the speaker started to exert his power and flex his muscles i.e by suspending Barisan Nasional’s Datuk Zambry Abdul Kadir and his six exco members, Umno began to concede its foolhardiness. Zambry had to turn to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi for assistance. The latter however prescribed a wrong medicine by advising Zambry to lodge a police report. One wonders what business the police have when the matter involves the speaker’s prerogative and constitutional interpretation. Never in history has the police been brought in to investigate the speaker’s power. The constitutional turmoil is beyond the purview of the police domain.

Zambry, I believe, knew very well it was a sheer stupidity to bring the police in. However he and other Umno members have grown up with an embedded culture of blind loyalty to their leaders. It was immaterial, as far as Zambry is concerned, whether Pak Lah gave correct or wrong advice with regard to lodging a police report. Umno’s motto: whenever the higher up says we have to follow blindly. Thus the emergence of 19 reports against V. Sivakumar, the speaker.

If Abdullah had taken pains to get proper legal advice, he surely would have known about the existence of the following laws dealing with the immunity of the speaker, namely the Legislative Assembly (Privileges) Enactment 1959 and Article 72 of the Federal Constitution respectively. These two laws protect the speaker from any civil suit and criminal prosecution whenever he discharges his official duty.

It is submitted that the issue whether the decision of the speaker was legally correct or not does not arise in this matter. The laws,enacted by the BN government, conferred him immunity. The speaker’s decision, unless set aside or quashed by a court of law, was legally valid and binding on Zambry and his six exco members. Non-compliance with the decision of the legitimate speaker is at Zambry’s own peril.

It is axiomatic that almost all countries in the world including Third World countries confer immunity to the speakers of Parliament or the state assembly. There are a plethora of decided cases which show that the speaker’s powers cannot be challenged in any court of law. As far as the court is concerned, the power of the speaker is non-justiciable. It is better to share the following authority with Umno.

In James Eki Mopio vs Speaker of Parliament [1977] PNGLR 420, the case concerned the appointment of Michael Somare as the Prime Minister of Papua New Guinea following the general election. James Eki Mopio, the plaintiff, who was a member of the National Parliament, contended that the requirements of s142(4) of the Constitution were not complied with, and on that ground sought a declaration that the appointment of the prime minister was null and void and that a new election of prime minister should have been ordered..

Section 142(4) of the Constitution provides as follows: “(4) If the Parliament is not in session when a Prime Minister is to be appointed, the Speaker shall immediately call a meeting of the Parliament, and the question of the appointment shall be the first matter for consideration, after any formal business and any nomination of a Governor-General or appointment of a Speaker, on the next sitting day.”

Mopio contended that that section went further than to prescribe the order of business for the next sitting day after the meeting of Parliament had been called, and required that the election of the prime minister was to be conducted on the day following the appointment of the speaker. Mopio also submitted that the section was mandatory and not merely directory so that non-compliance would have the effect in law of invalidating the appointment.

After Mopio outlined his case , a preliminary objection was taken by Pokwari Kale on behalf of the speaker that what Mopio was seeking to do was to litigate before the court the question whether a procedure prescribed for the Parliament had been complied with, and that such a question, there being no special provision in a constitutional law to the contrary, was non-justiciable — Constitution, s. 134. So far as Mopio’s reliance on a breach of the Standing Orders was concerned, Kale submitted that as such orders concerned the order and conduct of Parliament’s business and proceedings that matter also was non-justiciable. (Constitution, ss. 133, 134)

The Supreme Court, in dismissing the suit filed by Mopio, held that the matters concerned with the conduct of the business of Parliament and its procedure. Accordingly as the issues before the court involved the question whether that procedure had been complied with, and also the exercise of the freedom of proceedings of Parliament and the functions and duties of the speaker, the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the case .

Zambry now realises that lodging a police report was not a wise move. Such a move made him a laughing stock. He has to switch to another viable option. Thus came the idea of consulting the QC. Money is not a problem to him. For Pakatan leaders engaging a QC is a reflection of a colonial mentality plus a waste of money. However since when Umno really cares about spending a huge sum of money for its political survival?

What is interesting about this Perak fiasco is that despite the collapse of the PR government the office of Pakatan’s speaker remains intact. And the most fascinating fact is that even the Sultan has no power to remove the speaker. He was appointed by the state assembly, thus the removal must also come from the latter unless he resigns or no longer holds office as an assemblyman.

Since the speaker has not lost his office it follows that he still possesses very vast powers in so far as the business of state assembly is concerned. He has inter alia very wide powers to suspend any state assemblymen as he did to Zambry and the six BN exco members. As far as the “three stooges” (don’t tell me you don’t know who they are) are concerned they are no longer assemblymen. The speaker has already made a ruling that their resignations were valid and constitutional under Article 35 of Perak’s Constitution. Even if they consider themselves assemblymen they only represent the Elections Commission and not the rakyat of their respective constituency.

Umno may be proud that the Sultan has backed it in ousting the Pakatan government of Perak. But what transpires now seems to suggest that the life of the BN government is hinging now on the speaker of the PR government which it unjustifiably ousted via undemocratic means.

Mohamed Hanipa Maidin is the Pas legal adviser. He is also a lawyer.

Does Umno represent all Malays?

FEB 28,2009 — Malaysianinsider

Does Umno represent all Malays? Is the Umno viewpoint synonymous with the Malay world view?

Datuk Hishammuddin Hussein and Datuk Reezal Marican of Umno Youth would like Malaysians to believe so. They want Malaysians to equate an insult against Umno Youth as an insult against all Malaysians.

But the answer to both questions is a resounding NO.

The umbilical cord between the ruling party and the community it was set up to serve has long been severed. It is difficult to pinpoint when the break happened.

Some political pundits say that Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s sacking from government in 1998, his humiliation and jailing by the Mahathir administration was the defining episode that ended the special relationship between Umno and the Malays.

Others argue that the cord did not snap as a result of one pivotal event but was cut after decades of excesses and corruption by ruling party politicians.

In the 1999 elections, the new more tenuous relationship between Umno and the Malays became obvious. Malay voters in the 59 large Malay-majority seats in Peninsular Malaysia split their votes between the Umno/Barisan Nasional (49 per cent) and the Pas/Barisan Alternatif (51 per cent).

In 2004, thanks largely to euphoria over Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s promise of reforms and more religious image, the Malay vote swung back to Umno. Umno/BN snared nearly 59.1 per cent of the votes in 60 Malay-majority seats in Peninsular Malaysia, nearly 10 per cent up from 1999.

Political analysts say that on March 8, 2008, the Umno/BN share of the Malay vote was between 52 per cent and 55 per cent.

In a comprehensive survey conducted by Merdeka Centre just after the general election, 54.7 per cent of Malay respondents felt that Malays should be united under Umno while 35 per cent of Malay respondents felt that more room should be given to other Malay political parties such as Pas.

But this support for Umno among Malays could be slipping judging by results of the last two by-elections.

In the Permatang Pauh by-election, Anwar obtained 62 per cent of the Malay vote and in the Kuala Terengganu by-election, the Pas candidate won the seat on the strength of Malay support, especially those in the younger age group.

So looking at the voting pattern since 1999, one conclusion can be reached: Umno no longer can claim to speak for the Malays. It has to share that privilege with Pas and, to a lesser extent, Parti Keadilan Rakyat.

This fact is important because there is a move by Umno to pit whoever dares criticise the party against the Malay community. Reezal Marican, the prime minister’s political secretary and aspirant for the No. 2 position in Umno Youth, attempted to do so yesterday.

He said that DAP chairman Karpal Singh had hurt the Malays’ feeling by uttering the word "celaka" (damn) in reference to Umno Youth during his debate speech in Parliament.

"If we were to curse Karpal by saying 'celaka Singh', it would surely anger the Sikh community as it had hurt the Malays as Umno Youth is representing the Malays," he said.

Nice try but Umno Youth only represents their political party. Several of the men who gate crashed Parliament and confronted Karpal are contesting the party elections in March. Arguably, they were representing their own political aspirations on Thursday.

It’s the Umno election season and their actions and words are guided by one objective only: garnering enough support for the polls in March. That is why Hishammuddin spoke like a warrior yesterday when he said that he would stand by the Umno Youth members who confronted Karpal.

“If they are brought before the privileges committee, I will attend. Even if it is in court, I will be with them.

“We will defend our honour and our good name,” he said. Several hundred kilometres away in Kedah, his deputy Khairy Jamaluddin was bending the facts and painting the stormtroopers of the Youth wing as the aggrieved party in the Parliament fracas.

Yes, all of them would like Malaysians to believe that when they speak, they speak on behalf of the Malays. They don’t. The numbers do not support this claim. They are politicians auditioning for next month's elections.

Chitrakala says she is scared of Samy Vellu

Chitrakala says the MIC president is now trying to blame her for all sorts of financial improprieties.

By Baradan Kuppusamy | KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 28,2009 | Malaysianinsider

P. Chitrakala Vasu, the woman at the centre of a row with Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu over missing MIED files and funds, has given the public a rare inside look into the dealings of the MIC president.

At a press conference today, she offered up a glimpse into how her former boss thinks, works and manages the millions that the government has allocated over the years to the MIC to alleviate Indian poverty.

But before opening the window into the world of Samy Vellu and his inner circle, Chitrakala said: “I am very scared of this man.

"He has got money, people. I am an ordinary person, I am very scared. He has got everybody with him; I don’t have anybody with me. But I thought going public is my best protection.”

She was once so close to Samy Vellu that she became the subject of gossip, suggesting she was having an affair with him.

“It is all lies but I was that close to him,” Chitrakala told the press conference at the crowded Lotus restaurant in Jalan Gasing, Petaling Jaya.

She said Samy Vellu was now going after her and trying to pin on her all sorts of allegations of financial improprieties connected with MIED, the MIC arm that operates the AIMST University and other colleges.

“MIED is worth RM1 billion compared to Maika Holdings which is worth zero,” Chitrakala said, adding that her relationship with Samy Vellu started to sour after the March 8 general election as he became suspicious of everybody around him.

“He felt very insecure after losing in Sungei Siput and losing as minister. Not being a minister anymore and without it he was a nobody. He knew his days were numbered and he would be challenged for the president’s post. So he got very insecure and saw enemies everywhere,” she said.

One of the issues that arose was the future of MIED which, being worth RM1 billion, was the jewel in the crown of the MIC.

But Samy Vellu saw MIED as a different entity and having nothing to do with MIC or the Indian community.

According to her, he knew he could lose as MIC president but he wanted control of MIED.

“He did not want to let go of MIED. He wanted to remain as MIED chairman and chancellor of AIMST University,” said Chitrakala.

“The way to do it was simple, he wanted MIED removed from MIC,” she said. “MIED is for Indians. He wanted to divorce it from MIC. Legally it can be done but morally it is very wrong.”

“I cannot let what happened to Maika Holdings happen to MIED. I told myself that I have no strength to challenge Samy Vellu on this but my husband supported me,” he said.

One of the first acts Samy Vellu ordered, and over which Chitrakala baulked at, was an instruction to remove former MIC deputy president Datuk S. Subramaniam as a director of MIED.

“After that Samy Vellu wanted to get rid of nearly everybody, all the 35 members of MIED. He even wanted to get rid of Palani (MIC deputy president Datuk G. Palanivel). He marked a whole list of people for removal and asked me to do it.”

Chitrakala told Samy Vellu he could not do it. “I said MIED is not MIC where he can sack and put in anybody he likes at his whims and fancy. MIED is governed by company law and he can’t do as he likes.

“He got very angry with me,” she said.

Then Samy Vellu asked her to move the MIED office out of the MIC building in Jalan Rahmat here to somewhere else.

“I also disagreed but I did not say no directly. I just delayed the matter. People visit the MIC office for MIED help. We are tied together, we cannot be separated physically,” she said.

“So this is the background of why we had a falling out and finally the crunch was he tried to force me to make payments to AMIST University contracts without proper documentations,” she said.

"Samy Vellu also asked me to make advance payment to contractors."

The fight between the two even got down to little things like the wording on the plaque unveiled when AIMST was opened by the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi last year.

The plague had the words: Malaysian Indian Congress, MIED presents AMIST University to all Malaysians.

“A few days later Samy Vellu called and ordered me to remove the words Malaysian Indian Congress. I asked why and he said MIED was not linked to MIC.”

Samy Vellu in the case of the missing files and government funds

Chitrakala makes a point at today’spress conference. She said she and her family now live in fear for their lives. — Picture by Choo Choy May

By Baradan Kuppusamy - KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 28, 2009 —Malaysianinsider

The murky financial dealings of MIC were laid bare today after a one-time loyalist implicated Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu in mismanagement of party funds and misappropriation of government money.

P. Chitrakala Vasu, who is at the centre of a raging row with Samy Vellu over the MIED financial fiasco, alleged today that up to RM2 million raised for tsunami victims in 2004 was transferred from government accounts to a party foundation controlled by the MIC president.

She also alleged that lorry-loads of files were removed from the office of MIED, MIC's education arm of which she was once the chief executive.

MIED had raised millions of ringgit from the Indian community, in addition to receiving about RM300 million from government sources and a loan of RM220 million from Bank Pembangunan Malaysia, which is outstanding, for the construction of the AIMST university in Kedah.

Today, Chitrakala made public two reports she made earlier in the morning in Shah Alam urging police to probe the whereabouts of the MIED files and also RM2 million in donations collected in 2004 for tsunami victims in Sri Lanka.

In her report, she claimed the RM2 million was deposited from the Works Ministry into the account of the Yayasan Pemulihan Social (YPS) of which Samy Vellu is chairman and Chitrakala the CEO. Samy Vellu was then the works minister.

“Some time in February 2008 (just before the March 8 election) Samy Vellu telephoned me and informed me that the Works Ministry Treasury would transfer RM2 million into the YPS account and asked me to place the money in fixed deposit,” she said in the report.

“He told me this money was for the people of Sri Lanka but since it was not used he was transferring to YSS for later use,” she said.

"The money was put in a CIMB fixed deposit account and was still there when I left on Jan 2, 2009,” she said in the report, adding that she was making the report to prevent Samy Vellu from using the money for any other “unauthorised purpose”.

She also fears she might be blamed if the money when “missing”.

In the second report, she urged police to investigate “missing” MIED files and gave details of a heated confrontation she had with Samy Vellu in his office on Dec 31, 2008 in the presence of MIC vice-presidents Datuk S. Veerasingham and Datuk S. Sothinathan.

“A heated argument broke out after Samy Vellu made baseless accusations and I told him I will see him in court but he replied court is not the place,” she said in the second report.

In the report, she said Samy Vellu allegedly told her that he would "make sure the police arrest and embarrass you”.

“Soon thereafter I was slammed with five show-cause letters and more followed after this,” she said.

“After I left on Jan 1 without even taking my personal belongings I learned lorries were used to remove files from the MIED office and taken to an undisclosed location on orders of Samy Vellu,” she said in the report.

At the press conference, Chitrakala said the police must investigate how so many files had gone missing and why she is being blamed for it.

“What secrets these files hide?” she asked.

“This is only the first part… there is more coming,” a defiant Chitrakala told a press conference at a restaurant here today.

“I was followed, photographed, harassed and threatened in the days leading to this press conference,” said a visibly angry Chitrakala, 38, who is married with four children.

Even major newspapers considered close to Samy Vellu were not invited to the event for fear the news would be leaked and she could be waylaid or the press conference somehow scuttled.

“He pushed me to the wall, he asked for this (revelations). I worked hard for him and protected him for 14 years but in the end he came after me and pushed me to the wall,” Chitrakala told The Malaysian Insider before the press conference.

“I am not afraid of him… I know the truth behind him,” she said, adding all the accusations Samy Vellu had made against her over the missing MIED files and for involvement in corrupt deals were false and designed to shatter her.

“He has to answer not me,” Chitrakala said, breaking down in tears at how she and her family now feared for their lives.

“He is powerful, he is big… we are nothing. But we have the truth, the people behind us. That’s why I am going public. The people have a right to know,” she said.

Anwar says PKR must fulfil promise of March 8

By Adib Zalkapli - SHAH ALAM, Feb 28,2009 — Malaysianinsider

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim told members of his PKR party today to embark on a soul-searching exercise and ask themselves if they had done enough to fulfil the promise of March 8.

In a special address here to party leaders just a week before the first anniversary of the general election which saw PKR and its partners make significant inroads into the dominance of Barisan Nasional, Anwar attempted to rally the faithful and acknowledge the pressure it has recently been placed under by the ruling coalition.

“If you are among those who are complacent or who feel as though the work is too hard and the sacrifice too great, let me remind you of how I felt from a dark cell, humbled by your courage, overwhelmed by your loyalty, and inspired by your extraordinary feats in the face of adversity.

“It is this spirit that propelled us into a new dawn and it is the same commitment and resolve that we must renew to raise our party to the next level,” said Anwar.

Today's meeting of PKR elected representatives and leaders was planned to relaunch the party's agenda for change.

He warned party leaders not to be preoccupied with government positions and awards but should instead focus on building the party machinery ahead of three crucial by-elections.

His special address comes amid intensified attacks from Umno and BN, which led to the fall of the Perak state government and the investigation by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission on Selangor's PKR Menteri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim for alleged abuse of power.

Anwar urged party leaders to revisit the party's agenda and not to be satisfied with the victory last year.

“On this eve of the anniversary of our March 8 victory I ask you to reflect on whether you have worked hard to fulfil this promise.

"I ask you whether you have — in your capacity as a leader — done everything you could have to raise this party to the status which it deserves,” he said.

He also warned the opportunists in the party not to belittle the party's struggle by asking to be rewarded after PKR's success.

The former deputy prime minister said the party had lately been bogged down over issues of race, religion and the royalty, which he said could reverse PKR's efforts in promoting change.

“The current political scenario has put Pakatan Rakyat at a crossroads.

"We are facing an emotional propaganda — three Rs — race, religion and royalty. These three emotive issues have developed into the Malay psychology. If the people are not shown the real picture on these issues they will be fooled with arguments on the symbols of race, religion and royalty, which will bring their way of thinking back into the feudal era,” said Anwar.

“The issue of the Malay Rulers must be handled with moderation. We must be diplomatic but firm. It has to reflect mainstream thoughts and not just rhetoric,” he added.

Jangan salah tafsir pandangan Abdul Hadi

FEB 28 — Malaysianinsider - Zulkkifli Sulong

Nampaknya kenyataan Presiden Pas, Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang sekali lagi telah dilihat sebagai mahu bekerjasama dengan Umno. Padahal apa yang dicadangkan oleh beliau untuk semua pihak di negara dalam menghadapi kegawatan ekonomi dan politik sekarang.

Cadangan ini jauh sekali berbeza dengan cadangan Mac 2008 lalu iaitu muzakarah Pas-Umno. Ini kerana cadangan ini bakal melibatkan semua parti-parti politik dalam Pakatan Rakyat dan juga dalam Barisan Nasional. Ia bukan kerjasama antara Pas dengan Umno semata.

Inilah mesej yang saya sendiri dapat apabila saya turut terlibat dalam wawancara antara Saudara Adib Zalkapli dari The Malaysian Insider, saya dari Siasah dan juga Nazri Abdullah dari Tvpas.com. Wawancara ini berlaku pada jam 2.30 petang di Tingkat 14, Bangunan Parlimen Selasa lepas. Untuk kepentingan ketiga-tiga pihak yang mewawancara ini, kami berjanji ia akan diterbitkan serentak iaitu hari Jumaat semalam.

Sebagai karyawan dari Siasah, saya yang mula memberikan soalan. Soalan saya pula berdasarkan apa yang kami fikirkan di Siasah dan apa yang telah kami buat di Siasah.

Siasah, sebelum ini telah menyiarkan dua kali berturut-turut cadangan kami agar ahli-ahli politik di negara ini samada dari PR atau BN agar melakukan genjatan senjata.

Untuk edisi pertama, kami cadangkan agar pilihan raya dua bukit nanti dijadikan mahkamah rakyat. Keputusan pilihan raya ini hendaklah dipatuhi oleh BN dan PR.

Jika Pas menang di Bukit Gantang, BN kena terima hakikat rakyat Perak mahukan Pas memimpin negeri itu. Datuk Dr Zambry Kadir kena serahkan balik kerajaan Perak kepada PR. Jika BN menang, Datuk Seri Mohamad Nizar Jamaluddin secara baik serahkan kerajaan Perak kepada BN. Tarikh balik saman ke mahkamah dan patuhi kehendak rakyat Perak itu.

Dalam keluaran berikutnya, di muka depannya kami laporkan semua sokong politik damai. Kami tinjau pendapat pelbagai pihak dan kebanyakan mereka bersetuju dengannya.

Kenapa kami lakukan ini? Kerana, kami sendiri sebagai karyawan di akhbar politik sudah letih dengan apa yang ada. Kami setuju nasihat Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin agar media fokuskan kepada ekonomi yang bakal gawat dan kurangkan cerita politik.

Bagi kami, cerita politik akan kurang kalau ahli politik memberikan fokus kepada ekonomi yang bakal gawat. Kurangkan aktiviti politik yang bagi kami sudah terlebih dan melampau sekarang.

Dalam masa yang sama, kami mendapat maklumat, isu ini turut dibincangkan di kalangan pemimpin politik termasuk dalam Pas dan PKR. Yang kami tak tahu pandangan pemimpin DAP dan Umno sahaja.

Pemimpin Pas dan PKR kami difahamkan bersetuju agar satu genjatan senjata dibuat untuk membolehkan semua pihak dapat memberikan fokus kepada ekonomi yang bakal meleset. Mereka akan memberikan tumpuan kepada lima negeri yang mereka perintah. BN pula tumpukan negeri yang mereka perintah dan kerajaan pusat. Namun ini tidak boleh dibuat kerana ketegangan politik ini.

Di kalangan Pas, kami difahamkan tidak berbangkit lagi yang tidak sokong idea ini kumpulan Erdogan kerana mereka juga setuju dengan politik damai ini. Kita akan bertembung lagi dalam pilihan raya ke 13 nanti. Buat masa sekarang mari kita berikan masa dan minda kita untuk hadapi masalah yang bakal dihadapi rakyat.

Atas dasar inilah, saya secara peribadi bertanyakan soalan kepada Presiden Pas itu. Maka, jawapan yang kami terima adalah beliau cadangkan politik damai atau bentuk kerajaan perpaduan ala Habibie di Indonesia lalu.

Dalam kerajaan itu, semua berada di dalamnya. BN, PR dan parti-parti dalam kedua-dua komponen ini. Masing-masing mendapat peranan berdasarkan kekuatan masing-masing samada dalam DUN atau Parlimen.

Ketika itu, semua akan memberikan fokus kepada usaha untuk kepentingan yang dipersetujui bersama iaitu menghadapi masalah ekonomi, rasuah serta perpaduan, kata Abdul Hadi.

Oleh itu tidak berbangkit soal Abdul Hadi mahu bersama dengan Umno kerana ketuanan Melayu dan seumpamanya. Ia adalah untuk kepentngan negara dan rakyat.

Mungkin kerajaan perpaduan ini tidak dapat bertahan lama. Mungkin dua tahun sahaja sebagaiman di Indonesia zaman Habibie dahulu. Tetapi kena ingat, kesannya besar kepada negara Indonesia itu. Hingga kini, masalah demokrasi, melawan rasuah dan ekonomi sangat jelas arahnya.

Selepas itu, apabila datang pilihan raya ke 13, semua parti-parti politik ini akan bertembung kembali. Kita bentuk kerjasama sebagaimana pra 2008 lalu dan kembali membentuk kerajaan baru selepas itu.

Inilah ideanya, apa yang saya faham dari wawancara dengan Abdul Hadi Awang itu. Jadi jangan berfikir yang bukan-bukan kerana saya adalah antara penentang muzakarah Pas-Umno 2008 lalu.

Does Zambry or Nizar get the MB's pay?

IPOH, Feb 28, 2009 — Malaysianinsider

The Perak Public Accounts Committee (PAC) will open investigations to determine whether the salaries and perks should be paid to the Barisan Nasional menteri besar and executive councilors or those from the Pakatan Rakyat.

The inquiry will begin next Thursday and also look into the purpose and benefit of the recent appointments of three advisors to Menteri Besar Datuk Dr Zambry Kadir and one information chief, all with executive councillor status.

Perak PAC chairman Wong Kah Woh said that in view of the tug-of-war game between the two coalitions over who should helm the state, the committee needed to ensure that funds disbursed to whichever parties were “justifiable”.

On the appointments of the four with exco status, namely Datuk Chang Ko Youn (Chinese affairs), Datuk S. Veerasingam (Indian affairs), Kpt (Rtd) Datuk Mohd Najmuddin Elias Al-Hafiz (Religious affairs) and state information chief Datuk Hamdi Abu Bakar, Wong said:

“We want to know what laws were used in making the appointments, the rationale and purpose of the appointments, what wages, allowances and others would these appointees receive, and what are the benefits of their appointments.”

Wong added that while the committee was not out to point fingers at who was right or wrong in this constitutional crisis, it needed to ensure that public funds were not put into the wrong hands.

We will not question who is right and wrong in this matter.

“As a committee formed under Standing Order 70, the PAC has the responsibility of ensuring that all funds paid during this crisis is fair and in accordance to laws and procedures,” he told reporters in a press conference at the State Secretariat here yesterday.

“We will seek an explanation from all parties before we decide on our next course of action,” he said.

Wong said that the PAC may also summon State Legal Advisor Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid, State Secretary Datuk Dr Abdul Rahman Hashim and State Financial Officer Datuk Jamalludin Al Amini Ahmad to attend the inquiry.

Wong said the PAC would make recommendations to the state financial department and the state assembly.

“They have an obligation to consider our recommendations,” he said.

The PAC has seven members, with five from PR and two from BN.

Najib: Emergency sitting of Perak assembly can’t be held

KUANTAN, Feb 28,2009 — Malaysianinsider — Bernama

Datuk Seri Najib Razak said today the Perak state assembly speaker cannot call an emergency sitting of the assembly because the court has yet to make a decision on the status of the government in the state.

The Deputy Prime Minister said any decision to hold a state assembly sitting in Perak depended on the decision made by the court in relation to the case.

"It (sitting) cannot be held because there has been a court action," he told reporters after opening an assembly of undergraduates of Universiti Malaysia Pahang and the Eastern Zone National Education Carnival here today.

Najib said this when asked to comment on Perak State Assembly Speaker V. Sivakumar yesterday announcing that an emergency sitting of the assembly would be held on Tuesday.

Asked if the sitting was aimed at toppling the Barisan Nasional government in Perak, Najib said: "Whatever it is, we have to wait for the decision of the court first. We have to first establish the status of the Perak government in terms of the constitution."

On Feb 13 former Perak Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin initiated court action in the Kuala Lumpur High Court to get a declaration that he is the rightful menteri besar of Perak. He also sought an injunction to prevent the new menteri besar, Datuk Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir from carrying out the menteri besar's duties and for a fresh election to be held in Perak.

Najib said the important thing now was for the new government in Perak to focus on serving the people of the state well.

"The state leaders in Perak must go down to the ground and show the people the new government's priority is their welfare," he said.

In TAIPING, Zambry said Sivakumar's action was ultra vires the Perak constitution and the Standing Orders of the state's legislature.

"He (Sivakumar) is making his own rules, it's up to him what he wants to do. He thinks by doing this he can circumvent the Sultan (of Perak) and others... some people say 'Singh is King' but I do not know if anyone is saying 'Siva is King'," he told reporters after launching the BN's election machinery for the Bukit Gantang by-election today.

Asked if he would be initiating legal action to prevent the sitting, Zambry said: "That is what he (Sivakumar) wants, bring everything to the courts. We must understand the state constitution and the assembly's Standing Orders are very clear on these matters. You can interpret them any way you want but they must be followed."

It is understood the emergency meeting is being called to move a vote of confidence in Mohammad Nizar as the menteri besar of Perak.

With Sivakumar having issued suspension orders on Zambry and his six executive councillors for 18 months and 12 months respectively from attending state assembly sittings and not recognising three lawmakers who defected from their parties as assemblymen, the ousted opposition government thinks it can return to power in Perak as the majority in the assembly now has shifted in its favour (28 versus 21).

Government spending good money on silly projects

John Lee | Malaysianinsider

FEB 27 — Economic stimulus is all the rage it seems, both in the United States and back home in Malaysia. While I am sceptical of stimulus in general, our government’s spending plans are increasingly ridiculous and insensible day by day. Instead of leaving the era of white elephant megaprojects behind, we seem to be pursuing less obscenely grandiose but equally impractical infrastructure projects.

The basic idea in the minds of stimulus and economic pump-priming proponents is that it is cheaper to borrow money in a recession. People and firms are not confident in the economy, and so they are reluctant to lend money out to any random person. Fortunately, the government can soak up these surplus funds and invest them in something useful for a low cost.

That is the theory anyway; the reality is that the government rarely seems to do much useful investing with our money. Yes, granted, they have brought a lot of “development” to our shores. The North-South Expressway, our various ports, our schools, our universities, so on and so forth — all good stuff. But for almost every good project, you can name an equal number which are just downright bad ideas.

To take one egregious example, the federal government is presently proposing to spend RM9 billion on the “Pahang-Selangor Raw Water Transfer Project”. The crux of the project is that it wants to build a gigantic pipeline to funnel water from Pahang to Selangor. Why? Because the federal government believes that by next year we will be facing severe water shortages in Selangor unless this pipeline is built.

The problem is that it has made similar projections before and been severely wide of the mark. Its original projections indicated a shortage would arise by 2005; no such shortage came about. The government is assuming we’ll be consuming 600 litres of water per person per day in Selangor, when the typical Singaporean consumes a bit over 300 litres per day, and the typical urban denizen in a developed country even less! At the moment the consumption in Selangor is 300 litres per person per day, but for no good reason whatsoever, the federal government insists we will somehow run short of water unless we build this RM9 billion white elephant.

And we can go on to name all sorts of similar projects. What about that harebrained idea of transporting electricity across the South China Sea from the Bakun Dam in Sarawak? Or the white elephant of a Customs outpost for the unused crooked bridge development? These are all projects that have been in the works for years and years — yes, even that ridiculous scheme to build a useless giant water pipe from Pahang to Selangor.

Now, if the government takes its own bloody sweet time and still comes up with these inane wastes of money, can we really expect anything better from the stimulus package? The government is going to be rushing itself like crazy to get the package out the door as soon as possible, and that means there will be hardly any checks on the projects that go into this package. Honestly, I would be shocked and happy if the ridiculous projects in the stimulus package we finally see are only equally pointless as the others I just listed.

Really, the biggest problem with our economy as far as government spending goes isn’t that the government does not spend enough. The problem is the government spends money on very silly and very pointless projects which don’t yield any real benefits for us. There are a lot of good things the government could be spending its money on.

Here’s an idea for a stimulus: raise the salaries of teachers and provide more and better training for them. Honestly, even if the government can’t really train teachers properly, RM9 billion would be much better off being spent on paying teachers better wages or training them better, as opposed to being spent on a stupid pipeline or building even more schools. Or another actual good idea: upgrading and expanding public transport in all major urban areas. We can argue about whether these are the best ways to spend our taxes, but there is no question that education and public transport deserve priority over harebrained schemes like building a dam to produce electricity which will just be lost in transit across the South China Sea.

As sympathetic as I am to some of the ideas behind economic stimulus, I honestly believe the government’s stimulus package is going to be a bad thing for our economy. Most of the spending will be just as redundant and as pointless as the government’s past track record on infrastructure-building and other such spending projects, if not much worse. The government has been unable to get its priorities right for years and years, and there is no sign at all that this will change.

If Pakatan Rakyat is smart, it will capitalise on its plans and manifestos to point the right way. Both the DAP and PKR especially have well-developed plans which will provide for the poorest income groups while removing severe restrictions on private enterprise. Pakatan’s plans, though far from perfect, are very much in line with basic economic principles, and could prove a deadly weapon against Barisan Nasional’s ridiculously poor track record of throwing money at whatever constituencies have by-elections, and building white elephant after white elephant. The upcoming stimulus package could very well be Barisan’s undoing, if Pakatan plays its cards right.

Perak state legal advisor blocks notification of emergency sitting

By Lee Wei Lian | KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 27 —Malaysianinsider

The Perak state legal advisor is trying to block state representatives from being notified of an emergency sitting of the state assembly on March 3rd.

According to DAP Perak chairman Ngeh Koo Ham, the legal advisor, Datuk Ahmad Kamal Mohd Shahid, has directed the house secretary not to send out notices of the emergency sitting.

Ngeh says that this obstruction is in “contempt of the house” and is liable for punishment under house rules.

“The legal advisor has no business to intervene in the process of the house,” Ngeh told The Malaysian Insider.

“He is not an advisor to the speaker or the house. He cannot stop the process and the final decision on whether to send the notices out lies with the speaker.”

To work around the obstruction, a press conference was held in Ipoh today and the speaker will explore other means of sending out the notifications.

Only 49 notices will be sent out.

Menteri Besar Datuk Zambry Abdul Kadir and his six exco members will not received a notification as they were recently suspended by the speaker.

Neither will the three state assemblymen who switched support to the Barisan Nasional (BN) earlier this month as they are regarded as having resigned.

Two motions will be tabled at the emergency sitting. The first motion is proposed by Titi Serong representative Khalil Idham Lim to reaffirm confidence in Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaludin to continue to lead as Menteri Besar.

The second motion is proposed by Teja representative Chang Lih Kang and requests the Menteri Besar to tackle the current political crisis by doing all that is necessary to dissolve the state assembly, including sending a request to His Royal Highness Sultan Azlan Shah to dissolve the state assembly.

If all goes according to plan, PR will have 28 assemblymen to BN’s 21 in the emergency session.

Zambry had earlier told The Malaysian Insider in an interview that he will defy his suspension, maintaining that the speaker had no jurisdiction for suspending him unilaterally for something that happened outside the assembly.

Reiterating PR’s stand that power was grabbed unconstitutionally in Perak, Ngeh says that the protracted battle is damaging to the state and its citizens and called upon the prime minister to advise Zambry to agree to dissolve the state assembly.

“Or hopefully, Sultan Azlan Shah can get parties to sit together and find an amicable solution. Let the people choose their government and their leaders.”

Perak Speaker calls emergency session next Tuesday

IPOH, Feb 27 — Malaysianinsider

Perak legislative Speaker V. Sivakumar has called for an emergency sitting of the state assembly next Tuesday in a move that could see the Barisan Nasional (BN) government voted out of power and further complicate the constitutional impasse.

Sivakumar is invoking the assembly’s standing orders 8 and 11 to call for the emergency sitting to vote on two motions in relation to the state’s constitutional impasse.

The two standing orders give him the powers to call for an emergency sitting of the assembly.

The first motion to be voted on will be for the assembly to reaffirm its support for Pakatan Rakyat’s (PR) Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin as the rightful mentri besar. The motion will be tabled by Titi Serong Pas assemblyman Khalil Idham Lim Abdullah.

If passed, the motion will contradict Sultan Azlan Shah’s decision to appoint BN’s Datuk Zambry Kadir as MB after rejecting Nizar’s request for the state assembly to be dissolved.

The second motion up for a vote will be to seek for dissolution of the state assembly and pave the way for fresh polls. The motion will be tabled by PKR assemblyman Chang Lih Kang.

If passed, this motion will throw up the question once again of whether the state ruler will even grant Nizar an audience as he now recognises Zambry as the MB.

Under the state constitution, the Sultan can use his discretion to decide whether to consent to dissolution of the state assembly.

Notices have been sent out to all assemblymen except for the mentri besar Datuk Zambry Kadir and the six BN state executive councillors. The seven BN members were recently suspended from the assembly for between 12 and 18 months.

Notices were also not sent to the three former Pakatan Rakyat (PR) assemblymen who are “friendly” to BN.

This means that if all PR assemblymen vote in favour, the two motions will be passed.

But Zambry has already stated he intends to attend any sitting of the assembly. This could turn the sitting into chaos as Sivakumar could order the BN man out of the assembly.

Unexpected Abdullah respite for toll hikes, cabinet to reconsider today

By Wong Choon Mei | suaraKeAdilan | 27 Feb 2009

Ideas and views on how to regain control of national assets should be invited from all.

Even if not adopted in full, the contribution in part or in spirit would still be positive for Malaysia …

In a move aimed at pacifying commuters and consumer groups, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has stepped in, promising a cabinet review of the proposed toll rate hike on five of Malaysia’s biggest highways.

”People are having difficulties. The situation is not right for a toll hike,” Abdullah said. The cabinet will be meeting today.

Citing contractual obligations to the concessionaires, Works Minister Mohd Zin Mohamed had announced hikes of between five and 33 percent on the much-travelled North-South Expressway, Sprint Highway, Ampang Elevated Highway, Sungai Besi Highway and New Pantai Expressway.

The move was immediately panned by analysts, who worried the increased cost burden to consumers would create a wider negative knock-effect on the fragile economy, just starting to taste its first bite of what is clearly going to be its worst crisis ever.

It also shunted attention onto the concession agreements, which were signed during former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad’s time in power. Recently declassified, these agreement had thrown up huge question-marks as to whether Mahathir’s administration had intended to benefit the Malaysian public or the firms that owned the concession operators.

Past legacy must not be allowed to be perpetuated

As his protege, finance minister and deputy premier Najib Abdul Razak prepares to succeed Abdullah, there is growing fear that Najib too will perpetuate the legacy of mega projects and privatisation deals favoured by Mahathir and his adviser Daim Zainuddin.

“Tolls have been going up and up. The burden on the people is always looming. Given this scenario, it is best that the federal government seriously review all concession toll road agreements and re-nationalise where possible,” said Azrul Azwa, economist at Bank Islam.

Pakatan Rakyat leaders and consumer groups have been urging Najib to re-negotiate toll deals to prevent Malaysians from being held ransom to exorbitant charges, but their appeals have fallen on deaf ears.

For example, the DAP has already unveiled a proposal that if properly implemented could make the North-South Expressway toll-free by 2016.

Selangor Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim too has challenged federal authorities over the price to be paid to buy over the state’s water assets from four major consortia, who have thumbed their noses at his RM5.7 billion offer.

That has not stopped Pengurusan Aset Air Bhd - a unit of the Finance Ministry - from offering these firms a higher price and a widely speculated yet-to-be-disclosed sweetener to one of them - which purportedly has links to Umno. If accepted, Selangor people can expect higher water costs in the future, although it may be smoothened out in the immediate term.

Good intervention but deeper revamp is needed

Whatever his reasons behind this U-turn, Abdullah can expect some praise for intervening. However, the applause will be short-lived unless he insists that Najib undertakes serious and transparent revamping of all the toll road concessions.

“The situation has now changed, and the economy has not become better as yet, which was why we recently decided to introduce the second stimulus package or the mini-budget. I feel that this matter needs to be discussed again in the cabinet,” said Abdullah.

“The decision may come in the form of measures that will included in the second stimulus package or through some other measures. I think that’s the best we can do - do a review and decide on whatever that is appropriate.”

The BN media has already tried to deflect public opinion by attributing the criticism to Pakatan groups, yet BN lawmakers have just as vocally condemned the increases.

Some financial papers too have argued that ownership of these concession-holding firms have long changed hands and may not be linked to Daim or Mahathir or Najib anymore.

It is hard to say given that many of the restructuring deals undertaken in recent years, even by the largest government-linked companies, were transacted more with the intention to benefit their own top management and corporate bankers with fat fees and kickbacks, rather than to really make the firms leaner and meaner for the ultimate benefit of Malaysian consumers.

Perhaps the best way forward for the country is in proposals and initiatives such as those put forth by the DAP and Khalid, where the emphasis is on transparency and simplicity and the purpose is to benefit all Malaysians - not just a select few.

With so much talent among the professionals, ideas should be wooed and views welcomed from all. Even if not adopted in full, the contribution in part or in spirit would still be positive for Malaysia.

In fact, as the nation prepares to spend unprecedented billions in the name of economic recovery, it particularly behoves the Malaysians who are educated and skilled to keep a look out on what is happening and insist that the future of all in this country is protected and not siphoned out.