UMNO is a Cruel GOD

UMNO is a Cruel GOD

LETTERS/SURAT

Friday, 30 April 2010

By John Doe

“Vote for UMNO, and we'll give you money”. This slogan was louder than 1Malaysia. This slogan worked better than 1Malaysia. In fact, it was more like “Vote for UMNO, and we'll give you money, or else...”. This slogan must have worked somehow. Look, even the dead voted for UMNO. Some phantoms voted for UMNO, and all the Orang Asli's who had their IC's removed from them, prior to the Elections also 'happened' to vote for UMNO.

The 10 Commandments set by UMNO are as follows:
1. I am the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the Empire of the British Empire. You were all former subjects of the British Government, qualified for equal rights, and fair human treatment. That is gone now. Malaysia is still in a state of Emergency. Thou shall not have other “opposition” Gods before me. I will try to cripple them anyway. And pay your bloody taxes to UMNO, coz this God requires your money.

2. You shall make yourselves idle. For six days, you shall “sembang”, “santai” and rest, but on the seventh, you must rest even more. School is an evil thing of the West. You shall have nothing to do with it. You should not have a steady job, nor any real career. You must become dependent on UMNO. Ketuanan UMNO will take care of you. Especially just before elections. We openly spend $100 million then. If you don't like it, then migrate like the rest of the millions of Malaysians since the 80's.

3. You shall not bow down and worship education, or any form of intelligence for I, UMNO, am a jealous and cruel God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the thirtieth and the fortieth generation of those who reject me, but showing steadfast love to the thousandth generation of UMNO, who love me and keep my ISA commandments. You shall not make mention of the name of Altantuya, for UMNO will not acquit anyone who mentions her name. May C4 be upon you too. Otherwise, pigheads will fly.

4. Remember the Putrajaya and keep it Holy. You can bring your sacrificial animals to us, but we prefer that you relinquish all your worldly and earthly posessions to us. You do not need the Evils of Money. We will remove it from you. Sometimes, we will even take it from you after you die. Post-humous Religious Conversions are sanctified by BN. For all this, you must be grateful.

5. Honour the father and mother of Corruption. Corruption is un-officially banned in Malaysia. However, it is only reserved if you are UMNO. We will punish the rest of you, if you do not share it with us. Semua OK, kalau kongsi sama-sama.

6. You shall not murder. BN can, and will. We have openly shown it to you too. Look, even Beng Hock's dead body flew out of the 14th floor. Not to forget Kugan, and the latest 14 year old boy. We wrote the Law, and are therefore, above the Law. The Law is only reserved for puny mongrels called Malaysian Citizens.

7. You shall not commit adultery. This is reserved for UMNO. However, you are required to give all your virgin daughters to us. We have the omnipotent skills to “de-flower” them. How do you spell Ziana Zain again? Watch the wonderful Chua Soi Lek Video. This is a much sought-after Academy-Award Sex-Education Training Video.

8. You shall not steal. If UMNO get's a commission, then it is no longer called stealing. Look at submarines. There is never a need to steal. We are all about “sharing”. You help masturbate my Ketuanan, and I will not C4 you till Kingdom come.

9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour. Just give us a call, and we will have MACC, PDRM, and lelong-judges make sure that it is no longer “false”. Korek korek korek. (Of course, we will require some commission to do this.)

10.You shall not covet BN MP's houses. We live in rich, enamelled, gold-gilded homes, while you trough around in mud. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, and we will tell you when to surrender your wives to us. Unless, of course, they are carpetmen, who are just there for the “Nocturnal Needs” of certain individuals.

Do all of the above, and your days shall be long and dreadful. Failure to comply means immediate arrest for subservient behaviour, and perhaps “mysterious death” while in custody. If the mysterious 1,800 deaths in prison are not enough to frighten you, then perhaps we will send the IRS to investigate you for the next 15 years every single day. We could charge you for failure to keep accurate and detailed records of your paper-clip usage, punishable under the Law by Life-Imprisonment. What do you mean “not in the Constitution”? We, the UMNO GOD, are allowed to change any damn rule we want, whenever we want.

You pitiful riff-raff Citizens are far too pathetic to even think about a revolt. Just pay your tax, continue to worship us and shut the hell up; or we will do it for you.

Thus saith the UMNO GOD.

French Legal Team in Malaysia to Probe Sub Deal

French Legal Team in Malaysia to Probe Sub Deal

SPECIAL REPORTS

Wednesday, 28 April 2010

(Asia Sentinel) Massive corruption suspected in billion-dollar deal tied to Prime Minister Najib

Joseph Breham, a member of a French legal team that filed complaints in a Paris court in connection with a potentially explosive scandal over the billion-dollar purchase of French submarines by Malaysia is due to land in Kuala Lumpur today, April 28, to seek further information on the case and to speak with local officials and their clients, the Malaysia human rights organization Suaram.

As Asia Sentinel has reported at length, the deal was engineered by then-Defense Minister Najib Tun Razak, now Malaysia's Prime Minister, in 2002 and resulted in a massive $114 million (US$151.1 million at current exchange rates) commission for one of Najib's closest associates, Abdul Razak Baginda. The purchase price included two Scorpene-class diesel submarines built by Armaris, a subsidiary of the French defense giant DCN (formerly Direction des Constructions Navales) and the lease of a third retired submarine manufactured by a joint venture between DCN and Spanish company Agosta.

Breham, one of the three lawyers who filed the case with Parisian prosecutors on behalf of Suaram, told Asia Sentinel the French court has opened a preliminary investigation into the matter and that he would be advising his clients on the next steps. Breham said he will also hold a press conference in Kuala Lumpur today to give some details to local reporters. Breham, Renaud Semerdjian and William Bourdon, the lead lawyer, filed the request to investigate bribery and kickback allegations against DCN first in December and filed additional documents in February.

The case has been making headlines in Malaysia - although few in the mainstream media, which are owned by the country's leading political parties -- since the gruesome October 2006 murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu, a Mongolian translator and spurned lover of Razak Baginda who had accompanied him to France on some of the transactions over the submarines. Altantuya was shot in the head and her body was blown up with military explosives in a patch of jungle outside of Kuala Lumpur. Two of Najib's bodyguards, who were directed to intercede with her by Musa Safri, Najib's chief of staff, have been convicted of the killing. Neither Najib nor Musa has ever been questioned by law enforcement officials about the case.

Although records showed Najib was in France at the same time as Altantuya and Razak Baginda, he has repeatedly sworn to Allah that he had never known the beauteous Mongolian. One report filed by a private detective hired by Razak Baginda said she had been Najib's lover first. After she was killed, authorities discovered a letter she had written saying she was blackmailing Razak Altantuya for US$500,000, although she did not say why.

In addition to the cost of the submarines and the whopping "commission" fee, it has now emerged that under the terms of the original contract, the vessels were basically bare of armaments and detection devices. The Malaysian military must pay an additional $130 million to equip them.

"You mean we bought bare metal?" wrote one incredulous and anonymous military official in an email to Asia Sentinel.

The charges go well beyond the Malaysian purchase. Judges in the Paris Prosecution Office have been probing a wide range of corruption charges involving similar submarine sales and the possibility of bribery and kickbacks to top officials in France, Pakistan and other countries. The Malaysian piece of the puzzle was added in two filings, on Dec. 4, 2009 and Feb. 23 this year.

French politicians seem to have a knack for backhanders. On October 26, in a trial that centered on illegal arms sales to Angola, Jean-Christophe Mitterrand, the son of the late president Francois Mitterand, was given a two-year suspended sentence and ordered to pay a $375,000 fine for receiving embezzled funds. The court ruled that he had accepted millions of euros in "consultant fees" on the arms deals between 1993 and 1998. In the dock with him were 42 people accused of selling weapons to Angola in defiance of a UN arms embargo, or of taking payments from the arms dealers and using their influence to facilitate the sales.

The trial, it was said, shined a light into a murky world of secret payments made in cash and discreet deals linking Parisian high society with one of Africa's longest-running wars. But it hasn't shined a light on what happened elsewhere with contracts concluded by the representatives of France, and particularly by DCN.

For instance, 11 French engineers employed by DCN, which peddled subs to Pakistan, were blown up in a bus bombing in 2002 which was first thought to have been perpetrated by Islamic militants. The 11 were in Karachi to work on three Agosta 90 B submarines that the Pakistani military had bought in 1994, with payment to be spread over a decade. According to Reuters, commissions were promised to middlemen including Pakistani and Saudi Arabian nationals. Agosta is a subsidiary of DCN. It is believed that Pakistani military officials blew up the bus in retaliation for the cancellation of the payments.

In the Taiwan case, the French company Thales, formerly Thompson-CSF sold six DCN-built La Fayette-class 'stealth' frigates to Taiwan in 1992 for US$2.8 billion. At least six people connected with the case have died under suspicious circumstances including a Taiwanese naval captain named Yin Ching-feng, who was believed to have been killed because he planned to go to the authorities about fraud connected with the case. His nephew, who was also pursuing the case, a Thomson employee in Taiwan and a French intelligence agent were also among the dead. It gradually emerged that some $600 million in commissions had been paid into various Swiss accounts set up by Andrew Wang Chuan-pu, the Taiwan agent for Thomson-CSF. In October 2008 a French judge finally ruled that no one could be prosecuted because of lack of evidence.

The Malaysian allegations revolve around the $114 million payment to a Malaysia-based company called Perimekar for support services surrounding the sale of the submarines. Perimekar was wholly owned by another company, KS Ombak Laut Sdn Bhd, which in turn was controlled by Najib's best friend, Razak Baginda, whose wife Mazalinda, a lawyer and former magistrate, was the principal shareholder, according to the French lawyers.

In the complaints filed in Paris, the issue revolves around what, if anything, Razak Baginda's Perimekar company did to deserve $114 million. Zainal Abidin, the deputy defense minister at the time of the sale, told parliament that Perimekar had received the amount - 11 percent of the sale price of the submarines - for "coordination and support services." The Paris filing alleges that there were neither support nor services.

Perimekar was registered in 2001, a few months before the signing of the contracts for the sale, the Paris complaint states. The company, it said flatly, "did not have the financial resources to complete the contract." A review of the accounts in 2001 and 2002, the complaint said, "makes it an obvious fact that this corporation had absolutely no capacity, or legal means or financial ability and/or expertise to support such a contract."

"None of the directors and shareholders of Perimekar have the slightest experience in the construction, maintenance or submarine logistics," the complaint adds. "Under the terms of the contract, $114 million were related to the different stages of construction of the submarines." The apparent consideration, supposedly on the part of Perimekar, "would be per diem and Malaysian crews and accommodation costs during their training. There is therefore no link between billing steps and stages of completion of the consideration."

Dear Najib Tun Razak

Dear Najib Tun Razak

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Wednesday, 28 April 2010

Today, I am not going to write an article. Dah letih menulis mah! Today, I am just going to publish the letter that Human Rights Watch wrote to Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak. I really do not need to add anything more as the letter is self-explanatory. So read on. And understand what it is that we are voting for in the general and by-elections.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Letter to Prime Minister Najib on Malaysia's Candidacy for the UN Human Rights Council

Dear Prime Minister Najib,

Human Rights Watch is writing in regard to Malaysia's candidacy for election to the United Nations Human Rights Council. In support of its candidature for the 2010-2013 term, the Malaysian government circulated a memorandum dated March 9, 2010, outlining its human rights record and its pledges and voluntary commitments. UN General Assembly resolution A/RES/60/251 states that members of the Human Rights Council shall "uphold the highest standards in the promotion and protection of human rights" and "fully cooperate with the Council." We believe that it is essential that countries which are members of the Human Rights Council adhere to these criteria. Therefore, Human Rights Watch asks for your commitment to make the following changes in Malaysia's laws, policies, and practices that affect the protection and promotion of human rights in the country.

Rescind reservations to human rights treaties

The Malaysian government has voluntarily committed to "strengthening capacities for implementation and enforcement for human rights conventions which Malaysia is party to, alongside reconsidering of instruments which it has yet to accede to."

Human Rights Watch is concerned by the extensive reservations Malaysia adopted when ratifying the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). The reservations to CEDAW, articles 5(a), 7(b), 9(2), 16(1)(a), (c), (f), (g), and 16(2), undermine the government's commitment to women's rights and contribute to the failure to protect the rights of women to equal participation in affairs of state, and in marital and family relations. The CRC reservations, articles 1, 2, 7, 13, 14, 15, 28(1)(a) and 37, minimize protections offered to children in respect to discrimination, torture, arbitrary detention, and enjoyment of the core rights of free expression, thought, conscience, and religion, association and peaceful assembly, and due process. We urge Malaysia to promptly review and rescind all of these reservations. In addition, we urge that Malaysia ratify the two Optional Protocols to the CRC, which prohibit the sale of children and child prostitution and pornography, and the use of children in armed conflict.

Ratify additional human rights treaties

Human Rights Watch has long expressed concern that Malaysia, unlike most of the world's states, is not party to all of the core international human rights treaties. We urge Malaysia to ratify without delay the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and to bring domestic law into conformity with these conventions.

While Human Rights Watch commends Malaysia for ratifying a number of the core Conventions of the International Labor Organization (ILO), we urge quick ratification of ILO Convention No. 87 (Freedom of Association) and Convention No. 100 (Discrimination in Employment and Occupation). We also urge that Malaysia take immediate steps to reverse its denunciation of Convention No. 105 (Abolition of Forced Labor), one of only two current denunciations of a core convention by an ILO member state. We further recommend Malaysia support a binding convention on domestic work at the upcoming International Labor Conference in June 2010 in Geneva.

Expand cooperation with UN Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council

Malaysia's voluntary commitments and pledges include "deepening and widening our cooperation with and support for the work of various UN actors and mechanisms involved in the promotion and protection of human rights such as the ... Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council," which includes special rapporteurs, working groups, and independent experts. Human Rights Watch welcomes the recent decision of the Malaysian government to allow the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention to visit in June 2010, and urges that planning for the visit be done in a participatory and transparent manner, involving all key stakeholders including representatives of Malaysian civil society long active on issues related to arbitrary detention.

However, we believe that the Malaysian government can and should do more. At present, there are eight outstanding requests from special rapporteurs whose mandates cover critical areas for human rights protection in Malaysia. Human Rights Watch urges that your government immediately extend invitations for visits to those on the "waiting list" and arrange to complete all eight visits by 2013. These would include visits by the special rapporteurs on (1) human rights defenders (requested 2002); (2) indigenous people (2005); (3) freedom of religion (2006); (4) migrants (2006); (5) human rights and counterterrorism (2005); (6) racism (2008) and (7) independence of judges and lawyers (2009) and (8) the independent expert on minority issues (2007, 2009).

In addition, as a matter of principle Malaysia should issue a standing invitation to visit to all UN special procedures mandate holders, including special rapporteurs, independent experts, and working groups.

Implement recommendations from the Malaysia Universal Periodic Review

The Malaysian government includes among its voluntary commitments and pledges that it will engage "continuously with all our partners and stakeholders to assess and monitor the implementation of recommendations" from the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) process. However, Human Rights Watch is concerned that contrary to its pledge, Malaysia has failed to adequately consider numerous recommendations made by Malaysian nongovernmental organizations and by other UN member states. We note that many of your government's objections were directed against civil and political rights protections. We urge you to reconsider Malaysia's stance, especially since the voluntary commitments and pledges acknowledge that "the Government is increasingly sensitive of the need to balance the traditional emphasis on ESC [economic, social and cultural] rights with civil and political rights."

Human Rights Watch supports this commitment, and in addition to the above recommendations, calls on the Malaysian government to take the following actions as soon as possible, and in all cases before its next UPR review in 2013.

Repeal laws providing for preventive detention

Human Rights Watch notes that when you became Malaysia's prime minister in April 2009, you pledged your "intention to uphold civil liberties" and expressed your "regard for the fundamental rights of the people of Malaysia." We call on you to turn these pledges into concrete action by ordering law enforcement officials to immediately cease use of all preventive detention laws, and by starting a time-bound process to repeal those laws. The Malaysian penal code and criminal justice system are fully capable of addressing situations of internal security, and should be allowed to do so without resorting to preventive detention, which results in long-term arbitrary detention without the right to a fair trial.

Human Rights Watch notes your government stepped back from tabling the Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA) for amendment by parliament in March 2010. We are concerned that amending the law is not an adequate remedy because the law's core premise runs contrary to international human rights standards. Rather, we urge your government to publicly push for immediate repeal of the ISA as recommended in 2003 by Suhakam, the national Human Rights Commission of Malaysia. The government should also repeal provisions allowing for preventive detention under the Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969, the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985, and the Restricted Residency Act 1933. Those who are being held under these laws should immediately be charged with a cognizable offense in a court of law or released.

Amend or repeal laws restricting rights to freedom of expression, assembly, and association

In line with your statement as prime minster that "We [Malaysia] need a media ... that is empowered to responsibly report what they see, without fear of consequence," we urge immediate repeal of the draconian Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, which requires annual licensing of publications and which has been used by the authorities to effectively penalize responsible media outlets raising sensitive issues and covering controversial stories not supported by the government.

We further urge your government to amend the Communication and Multimedia Act 1998, which places restrictions on the media by prohibiting "content which is indecent, obscene, false, menacing or offensive in character with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person." Violations carry fines up to RM50,000 (US$15,620) and up to a year in prison. The law's vague and overbroad wording allows government officials wide ranging authority amounting to effective censorship of material running counter to government political views and objectives.

The government should also amend the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971 to provide for freedom of expression for academics and students on campus, recognizing that free exchange of opinions is a core element of academic discourse and learning. In line with the recommendations of the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Education, the government should amend the Act "to guarantee recognition of the right of teachers and pupils to freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and their right to participate in political activity."

The government should also amend the Sedition Act 1948, and narrow the overbroad definitions of "sedition" and "seditious tendency," which authorities too frequently use to censor expression or to jail peaceful political opponents and critics.

In line with Suhakam's recommendation, the Police Act 1960 should be amended to allow for peaceful assembly. License requirements for any gathering of three or more persons have long been used by law enforcement authorities to bar rallies professing messages the government would rather not be heard. Violent repression of peaceful rallies conducted without a permit has too often been the norm. Amendments should include revoking the unlimited power of a police district officer to refuse a license or to arbitrarily determine the conditions under which assemblies, meetings, or processions are licensed. Instead, amendments should provide for reasonable and negotiated conditions for assembly, and an appeal process that eliminates political grounds for withholding permission.

Human Rights Watch is seriously concerned with the Malaysian government's continued failure to amend labor law and regulation in order to ensure full freedom of association for workers. We note the decision of the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA) in case No. 2301, calling on the government to amend the Trade Unions Act 1959 and the Industrial Relations Act 1967 so as to bring those acts into full compliance with the right to freedom of association. We urge the government to act on the ILO CFA's recommendations in the case cited and to make the necessary legislative amendments to the relevant acts.

Provide for refugee rights and establish status determination procedures

The government should immediately ratify the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol. Human Rights Watch recognizes the government's enhanced cooperation with agencies such as the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, but notes that such cooperation and contemplated plans to ease conditions for refugees and asylum seekers is not backed by enabling legislation.

Respect rights of migrant workers and improve conditions in immigration detention centers

Human Rights Watch urges Malaysia, as a major labor receiving country for migrant workers from Southeast and South Asia, to promptly ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families. Such workers, who comprise close to 30 percent of the Malaysian work force and contribute significantly to the economic development of Malaysia, are entitled to the effective legal protection that ratification and concomitant change in domestic legislation will provide.

The government should significantly reform its foreign worker recruitment practices. Specifically, the government should move the entire responsibility for registration and regulation of migrant workers to the Ministry of Human Resources. We call on your government to immediately end "out-sourcing" arrangements operating under the authority of the Ministry of Home Affairs that unscrupulous agents and middlemen consistently use to cheat workers and violate their human and labor rights.

Human Rights Watch urges your government to amend all relevant labor laws and regulations to ensure that domestic work is fully covered by those laws, and to conclude bilateral memorandums of understanding with countries sending migrant domestic workers so as to ensure effective labor rights protection, fair wages, safe working conditions, and guaranteed protection of basic human rights-such as freedom of association, movement, and expression.

While we recognize Malaysia's responsibility to secure its borders through immigration laws, we urge your government to de-criminalize illegal entry. The practice, rather than discouraging irregular migration, only succeeds in prolonging detention and increasing crowding in immigration detention centers (IDCs). The government's systematic use of corporal punishment against undocumented male migrants to penalize illegal entry should also be discontinued. Use of such punishment contravenes international human rights prohibitions against torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment.

Human Rights Watch also calls on your government to immediately take action to improve the living conditions for those held in IDCs. Reports from former detainees, supplemented by accounts from others acquainted with the centers, consistently cite pressing problems such as serious overcrowding, filthy conditions, bug and rodent infestation, inadequate sleeping arrangements, chronic food shortages, insufficient and unhygienic water for bathing and drinking, and woefully inadequate medical attention. Deaths from leptospirosis, a bacterial infection associated with water contaminated by animal urine, have surfaced in at least two IDCs.

Human Rights Watch believes that Malaysia's operation of its IDCs contravenes the UN Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners and the UN Body of Principles for the Protection of all Persons under any Form of Detention, and accordingly, are inconsistent with Malaysia's voluntary commitments and pledges to Human Rights Council. We urge your government to commit the necessary resources to improve conditions in the IDCs to meet international standards.

Suhakam: The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia

Finally, Human Rights Watch notes your government's commitments regarding Suhakam. Human Rights Watch supports your pledge of "increasing support for the roles and functioning of Suhakam" including its ability to undertake "public inquiries into allegations of human rights infringements free from government interference." As part of that pledge, Human Rights Watch urges that your government ensure that selection of Suhakam commissioners is conducted in a participatory and transparent manner that involves civil society organizations and makes use of an open nomination process. We also call on parliament to set aside specific times on its schedule for open debate on each Suhakam report it receives.

Human Rights Watch commends Malaysia for its decision to stand for election to the UN Human Rights Council. We wish to request a meeting with you or your representatives to discuss how Malaysia may best implement its voluntary commitments and pledges to the Council and to fellow UN member states.

Sincerely,

Brad Adams

Director, Asia Division

http://www.hrw.org/node/90069

Malaysian Submarine Scandal Continues

Malaysian Submarine Scandal Continues

NEWS/COMMENTARIES

Wednesday, 28 April 2010
French Lawyer Looks for Answers for Scandal in Kuala Lumpur

Breham said the French prosecution is particularly concerned about the fact that Razak Baginda's wife, Mazalinda, was the principal shareholder of KS Ombak Laut Sdn Bhd, which owned Perimekar.

Written by Hamish McKenzie, Asia Sentinel

Joseph Breham, one of a team of lawyers looking into allegations of corruption in a Malaysian submarine purchase from a French defense conglomerate, told reporters in Kuala Lumpur Wednesday that he had filed a 10-page inquiry with the French courts that calls into question the actions of a company with close ties to the Malaysian Prime Minister's best friend and aide, Abdul Razak Baginda.

Breham is also expected to question several witnesses in Kuala Lumpur about the case, which has broken into the open after years of silence in Malaysia. The inquiry, which now rests with independent French prosecutors, is directed at a €114 million (US$151.1 million) commission paid to a company called Perimekar, which Breham's legal team suggests was established in 2001 purely for the purpose of receiving the kickback. Najib Tun Razak, then Malaysia's defense minister, led the negotiations with the French government to buy the two Scorpene-class submarines, build by Armaris, a subsidary of the French defense giant DCN, and to lease a third a few months later, in 2002.

Political reformers in Malaysia say they are placing their hopes on the French investigation to get to the bottom of the payment to Perimekar and its implications because, they say, there is little hope that the Malaysian justice system will bring the truth to light. Despite repeated requests for information by opposition leaders in Malaysia's parliament, Najib and other top members of the government have refused to answer.

Cynthia Gabrial, who sits on the board of directors of the human rights NGO Suaram, for whom Breham and his colleagues are acting, told Asia Sentinel that "whoever's guilty must be punished, and if it has the be the French court system that actually brings this issue to surface, then so be it."

It isn't likely that anybody will get any answers soon, however. The Perimekar episode goes well beyond Malaysia and is believed to be just a part of years of peddling defense equipment including submarines to countries across the globe by DCN.

Investigating judges looking into some parts of the French establishment have been stalled for years by their inability to obtain defense secrets, partly because of a suspicion that they are related to top figures in French politics. In the past allegations have arisen that sought to ensnare such figures as Edouard Balladur, who ran against President Jacques Chirac, and Nicholas Sarkozy, now the French president, who was Balladur's campaign manager.

Perimekar, according to the Malaysian government, was paid by DCN for "coordination and support services" during the submarine negotiations. But Breham and Suaram say it's highly unlikely the company had the ability to carry out such a role.

"Perimekar was created only in 2001, a few months before the submarine contract was definitely signed," Breham told the press conference. "This means that Perimekar has no experience at all in submarine deals, has no experience in logistics, has no experience in nothing regarding submarines."

"Perimekar until this contract had never had any contract with any company. The only thing Perimekar had done until this signature of the €114 million contract was lose RM75,000 (US$23,310) in 2002. That was the only thing Perimekar had ever done," Breham said.

Breham said the French prosecution is particularly concerned about the fact that Razak Baginda's wife, Mazalinda, was the principal shareholder of KS Ombak Laut Sdn Bhd, which owned Perimekar. He said he hopes the inquiry will answer where the money for the commission came from, where exactly the money went, and if the money stayed in Malaysia.

Perimekar appears to have been subsumed into another company, Boustead DCNS, a joinrbenture between Boustead's parent company and DCNS, SA, the Frnch defense company. In its annual report, Boustead Heavy Industries described Perimekar as an "associate of the Group" that is "involved in the marketing, upgrading, maintenance and related services for the Malaysian maritime defence industry."

The inquiry is now at a preliminary stage, Breham said. If the French prosecution finds that the questionable elements surrounding the commission payment to Perimekar warrant further investigation, it will pass the case on to an 'instruction judge' who will conduct a deeper inquiry that could last for years. For instance, a similar corruption case involving DCN and the sale of frigate to Taiwan has dragged on for more than 10 years, Breham said. Then, if the judicial power believes there is sufficient evidence of corruption, the case will move to trial phase.

The scandal began to come to the surface in 2006 with the gruesome murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu, a Mongolian translator and spurned lover of Razak Baginda who had accompanied him to France for some of the transactions over the submarines. Altantuya was shot in the head and her body was blown up with military explosives in a patch of jungle outside of Kuala Lumpur. Two of Najib's bodyguards, who were directed to intercede with her by Musa Safri, Najib's chief of staff, have been convicted of the killing. Neither Najib nor Musa has ever been questioned by law enforcement officials about the case. Razak Baginda was tried along with Najib's two bodyguards but was acquitted without having to put on a defense in a trial that left more questions than answers. Immediately after his acquittal, Razak Baginda left the country for England, where he remains.

Breham said the French jurisdiction cannot consider the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu in its investigation. "The only thing that France's jurisdiction will delve into is corruption."

What they want: past, present and future (UPDATED with analysis of Indian votes)

What they want: past, present and future (UPDATED with analysis of Indian votes)

NO HOLDS BARRED

Tuesday, 27 April 2010

Even 100% of the Indian votes cannot give us the government. However, 60% of the Malay votes can. So we need to know why we did not still get 50% of the Malay votes last Sunday. That was what killed Zaid Ibrahim.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

There has been a bit too much Indian bashing in Malaysia Today since last Sunday. Readers comment about how great the Chinese are and that the Chinese voters have principles, not like their Malay or Indian comrades.

Oh yes? Then why would the Chinese still vote for a president who was caught with his pants down? It is not only on video but he also called a press conference to admit that it was he in the video. He never said: “It looks like me, it sounds like me, but he’s too fat and ugly so it can’t be me,” like how a smart Indian would say. Instead, he said: “Before you ask me, let me admit it. Yes it’s me, and I am proud that it is me.”

Bodoh punya Cina. Belum tanya dah mengaku. Nafilah dulu. Mana ada bukti it is you? Macam kes Vijandran, PDRM boleh bakar video dan umum: evidence has been destroyed on orders of higher authority.

90% of the Indians used to vote government for almost 50 years. Only 10% voted opposition. In 2008, it was the other way around, 10:90. In Hulu Selangor last Sunday, how many Indians voted government as opposed to those who voted Pakatan Rakyat? Was it 90:10 like during the 50 years before the 2008 Tsunami? Was it 10:90 like on 8 March 2008? Or was it neither of the above?

I do not have the detailed figures yet. But let us say it was 50:50. Is 50:50 so bad? It may not have been 90:10 (opposition to ruling party) like on 8 March 2008. But it is still far better than 10:90 like in the 50 years before March 2008. Why are we not grateful for that? Why all this Indian bashing?

Is 50:50 so bad? The Malays were 50:50 in 1999. They were also 50:50 in 2008. And we shouted how great the Malays are even when it was only 50:50. But in the Hulu Selangor by-election on Sunday it dropped to one-third for the opposition and two-thirds for the ruling party. As I said, I have not seen the detailed breakdown yet but it could even be that a higher percentage of Indians voted opposition compared to Malays, although in absolute numbers there were more Malays mainly because the Malays were more than 50% of the voters while the Indians were less than 20%.

If the Indians voted 50:50 then they have not let us down. It was the Malays who let us down. The Malays abandoned the opposition cause in spite of Pakatan Rakyat being the state government. Why? And PAS went all out and did its best and yet we failed to win the support of the Malays. What happened?

Can we analyse this instead of whacking the Indians? There are no Indian-majority seats anywhere in Malaysia. But there are many Malay-majority seats where in some places the Malays make up more than 90% of the voters. So the Malay vote is critical. The Indian votes are critical only as far as the kingmaker role is concerned.

Even 100% of the Indian votes cannot give us the government. However, 60% of the Malay votes can. So we need to know why we did not still get 50% of the Malay votes last Sunday. That was what killed Zaid Ibrahim.

The Indians want Hindraf. The Malays want overdraft. And the Chinese want bank draft.

The Indians live for the present. The Malays live in the past. The Chinese worry about the future.

Each race has its needs.

The Indians want a better deal, NOW, not promises about the future. They waited more than 50 years. They are not prepared to wait any longer.

The Malays want to restore their glory of days gone by when they were once the supreme lords of this land. The Malays want to bring Malaysia back to the days when they were lords of this land and when they controlled both the politics and the economy before the non-Malays came to this country.

The Chinese are very concerned about their children’s future and the state of the economy and whether in future they will still have a thriving business and large stashes of cash in the bank.

The Malays voted ruling party because they believe the rhetoric and propaganda that the non-Malays are a threat to the special position of the Malays and that Pakatan Rakyat has sold out to the Chinese.

The Indians voted ruling party because they believe that a change of government on 8 March 2008 has not changed the lot of the Indians and whether Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat rules the Indians would still get a raw deal -- so better vote ruling party which at least controls the federal government and can do more for the Indians, today.

The Chinese voted opposition because they worry that Barisan Nasional is promoting a Malay-first-Chinese-last discrimination policy and that the Chinese may soon see an Indonesian situation emerge in Malaysia.

So, to the Malays it is about the past. To the Indians it is about the present. And to the Chinese it is about the future.

And it was the Malays who gave Pakatan Rakyat that defeat in Hulu Selangor last Sunday, not the Indians, although the Indians did help in this defeat to a certain degree, but not to a large degree.

ADDENDUM

Indian vote still for Pakatan

The media reported that 60% to 70% of the Indians in Hulu Selangor voted for BN and some alternative media hinted that the Indian voters are back to BN. The mainstream media jumped in jubilation claiming that the Indians are backing BN. The only exception was Ibrahim Ali who denied that the Indians supported BN. Further, the Hindraf's relevance for Pakatan was advocated by some.

I have attempted to analyse the votes from Indians in five areas where they are concentrated according to the voting list. They are Ladang Lima Belas, Ladang Chankat Asa, Ladang Kerling, Ladang Nigel Gardner and Taman Bukit Teratai.

This is a micro-analysis of the voting pattern in the rural Indian setting. The total number of votes cast in 2008 was 3,193 and in 2010 it was 3,236.

In 2008, a total of 1,495 voted for PKR and 1,698 voted for BN whereas in 2010 a total 1,406 voted for PKR and 1.830 voted for BN. In terms percentages, PKR gained 46.8 percent of the Indian votes in 2008 and 43.5 per cent in 2010. A decrease of 3.4 per cent.

The total number of votes increased from 3,193 to 3,236 in 2010, an increase of 43 votes. The decrease in the number of votes for PKR is 89. If the additional 43 votes are discounted, the relative decrease for PKR is 46 votes.

Based on the above, the following inference can be made.

There was no significant swing of Indians votes in the five rural areas where the Indians are concentrated. Indians in these areas are still voting in favour of BN as 53.2 percent voted for BN in 2008 and 56.5% in 2010.

The net vote loss for PKR was only 89. If new voters are discounted, it is only 46 votes.

There were complaints that substantial pro-PKR voters were removed form Taman Teratai to Selayang and substituted with pro-BN voters from Sungei Buaya. In Taman Teratai the shift in BN votes increased by 131 votes, a significant 22 percent increase in favour of BN.

Given the traditional voting pattern of the Indians, the transfer of voters and other by-election abuses, the Indian vote is still for Pakatan if not improved.

In a closely fought battle, every vote is vital. Even a single one is too many to lose. However, the media's claim on the drifting of the Indian vote away from Pakatan is flawed, inaccurate and is intended to create a mass appeal for Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and BN.

In fact, given the circumstances, the Indians vote at worst has remained at the status-quo if not improved in favour of Pakatan. -- (Malaysiakini)

Translated into Chinese at: http://ccliew.blogspot.com/2010/04/blog-post_9308.html

Press Statement of Datuk Zaid Ibrahim

Press Statement of Datuk Zaid Ibrahim

LETTERS/SURAT

Wednesday, 28 April 2010

1. Every citizen has a fundamental right to vote. But this right is meaningless if he is not able to exercise it because his name is removed from the electoral roll without his knowledge; or if he is intimidated, or bribed or given all kinds of inducements to influence his choice.

By Zaid Ibrahim

In the recent Hulu Selangor by-election, we witnessed all of the above. We have witnesses who will come forward with the necessary evidence of blatant bribery starting from the Barisan Nasional (BN) party worker right up to the Prime Minister (PM) himself. The conduct of the Prime Minister is shameless and without precedent. More importantly it is illegal. In these circumstances, we will file an election petition as soon as my legal team is ready to do so. Any voter from Hulu Selangor who wants to volunteer relevant information to any of the PKR, DAP or PAS offices.

2. The conduct of free and fair elections is the constitutional duty of the Election Commission. I maintain that they have violated that duty in the recent by-election. They have allowed intimidation, false information, and unfair and illegal electoral practices by the BN machinery without any attempt to stop them. In fact, it was obvious to me that the Election Commission was on the side of BN and wanting BN to win. I will therefore institute appropriate legal action against the Election Commission, in hope that future elections will be conducted fairly to reflect the will of the people.

I will also sue Utusan Malaysia for calling me kaki botol. I was never an alcoholic. Whatever I consumed was no more than whatever Mahathir and other UMNO leaders had consumed. The Election Commission should not have allowed for such a malicious and false campaign.

3. Pakatan Rakyat will mobilize a fresh campaign to make free and fair elections a reality in this country. We will never be able to reflect the will of the people and form the next Federal government if BN can conduct the elections as they see fit, as they are doing now. Our Election Commission must conduct elections that conform to international standards. Our country must allow for international observers to attend the Sibu by-election and all other elections in the future. I ask the PM if he is as popular as he claims, then why is he so afraid of a free and fair fight with the Opposition?

4. A Pakatan International Support group will be launched in London in July. This is to garner international support for free and fair elections in Malaysia. Malaysians residing overseas are eligible to be members of this group. They will make representations and provide information to other countries and international organizations on how elections are conducted here and what the ruling party in Malaysia has done to stay in power. By exerting international pressure so we hope this BN government will one day allow for free and fair elections.

Zaid Ibrahim
Hulu Selangor By-Election Candidate
Central Leadership Council Member
Parti Keadilan Rakyat

What I learned from the HS buy-election

Monday, April 26, 2010

What I learned from the HS buy-election

Okay guys. The by-erection is over.

As many of you might notice, I am a history freak. I just love history. I don't know why. But one thing for sure, I like to look at how people behaved or acted before so that I could learn a lesson or two from them in order to enable me to predict how people will behave in the future. I think that's part of the reason why I love history.

What can I learn from the Hulu Selangor buy-election?

First and foremost, this buy-erection teaches me the sure fire way on how to get something done in my constituency. Let's say there are pot holes everywhere on the roads leading to my house. Or there is an old abandoned school project (there are everywhere, aren't they?) which stands like a sore thumb in my housing area which has also doubled up as a drug haunt.

Let's say my kids need a laptop each. And the old folks near my house need some help with their monthly expenditures to make ends meet. Or I need some road humps near my house because there are bloody idiots who drive 80kph on roads in housing estates in their Cayenne or whatever behemoth they drive. And I have been writing countless time to my MP to help. But there isn't anything done.

The trick is to ask my MP to resign. Or to pray that he or she would kick the proverbial bucket.

Then a buy-erection would be declared. And oh my God wouldn't all my prayers be answered instantly! The abandoned school project will immediately be revived. All the pot holes will instantly disappear. My kids will get new laptop. The road humps will suddenly grow on the road in front of my house. Like wow wow.

And I tell you what. If Baraisan Nasional wins, I could even get to go to Putrajaya to see the Prime Minister who will see to it that a sum of RM3 million or whatever will be allocated for my mosque, Chinese school or whatever. Fooh...like tawdally simply happenin'.

I also learned from this buy-election that many Malays do not know the difference between a "gift" (for which they should be thankful or grateful) and something which they are already entitled to.

Yes. I am talking about the RM50000.00 each paid to 100 FELDA settlers. That money was not a gift from the government. Nor was it a contribution of any sort from the government. That money belonged to the settlers in the first place because their lands have been taken away more than 10 years ago. That money was long due to them. So there was nothing to be thankful to the government for paying it.

I mean, should I thank you if you had taken my Porsche GT3 (note: this is just an example. I do not have a Porsche GT3 or any Porsche for that matter) about 4 years ago and now you pay me 500 bucks for it?

Yes. But the FELDA settlers could not differentiate between the two. They are owed about a million each for their lands. They are now paid 50000 bucks and they thought it was a gift.

What to do?

I also learned that the Chinese people don't give two hoots to the Barisan Nasional or MCA. To them, the BN or MCA can do or say what they like and they just could not care bloody less. If Pakatan Rakyat had put a chimpanzee as a candidate, the majority of the Chinese people would vote for that chimpanzee. Even if Chua Soi Lek was the challenger.

Then I learned that the Indians however are a predictable lot. They would follow whatever the Barisan Nasional say. Even if UMNO rejected their own party's preferred candidate, the Indians would still support BN. MIC had wanted Palanivel. Local UMNO boys preferred Mugilan. UMNO head honchos put in he-whose-name-is-truly-1Malaysia. And the Indians still supported him.

The next thing I learned is the fact that HINDRAF is now more complicated and dynamic than middle-east politics. They have right winged HINDRAF. Then the left. Then the right-leftist and also the left-rightist. Then they have the true HINDRAF. Also the true right, left, right-leftist as well as the leftist-right. Which makes all the other HINDRAF, whether right, left, rightist-right and leftist-right untrue. Then they have the extreme right, which in other word is known as right-right HINDRAF. As well as left-left HINDRAF.

I don't even know who they support. Or whom they are against. I think they should change their party's name to HUH?DRAF instead.

This buy-election has also taught me that Ibrahim Ali is, at the very least, mildly schizophrenic. One minute he wears an Independent MP hat. In this mode, he is an independent MP who is not aligned to anybody or any party. The next minute, he is the PERKASA leader. In this mode, he fights for the Malay rights, kiss his short Keris in public and wave it about town.

Sometime he fights for Islam, or so he says. Of course he forgets that under Islam, human beings are all equal and the only thing which differentiates people in the eyes of God is piety and how he or she adheres to His wishes.

Then he went to Hulu Selangor and campaigned for Kamalanathan, whom, the last time I checked was not a Malay. On this, Ibrahim Ali said he was in Hulu Selangor not as PERKASA leader but as an independent. Now, if he was an independent who is not aligned to anybody or any party, why was he campaigning for the Barisan Nasional's candidate? Didn't that make him aligned to the BN?

Apart from Ibrahim Ali, I also learned that Kamalanathan is also probably a schizo or a very forgetful boy. When Nasir Safar made some statements which he (Kamal boy) deemed racist, he shouted and screamed on his blog that "the authorities should take the strongest possible steps by charging him with sedition."

However, during the bye-erection, he refused comment when asked about Nasir Safar. Not only that, he mentioned that PERKASA's fights for Malay rights is a-okay by him. And this coming from an Indian, who, in the eye of PERKASA, is "second class citizen." Classicus confuse-ious.

In the same blog entry, he also proclaimed that "I think I am more Malaysian than he is." But when he was asked whether he is an Indian first or Malaysian first, if I remember correctly, he refused to answer. (I stand corrected on this as I am writing this purely from memory).

Be that as it may, I am really proud that YB Kamalanathan has mastered and in fact practised one of the scared act in the Malay culture. That is the act of respecting our leaders and elderly persons by kissing his or her hand. YB, I am proud to call you a brahder Bro. And you speak Bahasa Melayu well too. Even better than Zaid Ibrahim. If we ever meet YB, I expect you to kiss my hand okay. After all I am older than you.

Hulu Selangor bai-elecsyen had also given me a peek into the Malay Muslim psyche. Alhamdulillah. And that is, alcohol is a big no no. Yea. Nope. Alcohol consumption is a sin. A very big sin. And repentance is not enough to wash you off that sin. Because alcohol consumption my friend, is drunkenly sinful.

You can plunder the country. Commit adultery with children. Commit murder. Commit breach of trust. Have sex with some sex worker from China or where ever. Marry a nice trophy wife without telling your first wife. Lie to your wife. Be a hypocrite all the way.

Yes. But drink alcohol? Wooooo, that's sinful Bro. It is sinful unless you did it when you are in Barisan Nasional. HUaHAHaHAHAHaHa... kayu!

The next thing I learned is that Mirzan Mahathir is very clever. All the board members of San whatever parent company had wanted to diversify into some other business rather than concentrate in the business of manufacturing and selling beer (although why they would want to do so is beyond my comprehension when they earn a hell lot of pesos doing so) but they did not know how to do so or what to do.

They then brought in Mirzan to help them to diversify. Perhaps they had wanted to diversify into car manufacturing la kot. That's why. But then again, Mirzan must have been one of the smartest diversification strategist around. Caya lu la Bro. You make me stand proud as a Malaysian.

The most important thing that I learn from the Hulu Selangor be-elektion is that the Chinese would get to see the Prime Minister and demand 3 million clams only if the Barisan wins.

Hmmm...Saiful whatever is better than the whole Chinese community in Hulu Selangor then. Why?

Because he got to see the Prime Minister in his house and there wasn't even a buy-erection. Oh sorry, I mean, by-election, not erection.

Apr 19, 2010

Razak 'rediscovers' Islam

By Reme Ahmad ASSISTANT FOREIGN EDITOR

Abdul Razak Baginda (above) spoke about jihad, the current clamour for an Islamic state by some Muslims around the world, and the various responses from state authorities. -- ST PHOTO: DESMOND LIM

ABDUL Razak Baginda, the defence analyst who was acquitted in the murder case of a Mongolian beauty more than a year ago, said he has rediscovered Islam after his harrowing experience.

Now based at Oxford University, he has been doing research on the religion and has given lectures in halls and mosques in Britain about political Islam and the radicalisation of young Muslims.

'Praise God, I went through it (the murder case) because I think my two-year experience in custody helped me to look at things differently,' said Mr Abdul Razak, 50, who now has a paunch and is sporting a beardh.

'I think that is instrumental. Otherwise I would not go to this path. I am trying to be a better Muslim,' he told reporters after delivering a talk in Singapore on Monday.

The talk by Mr Abdul Razak, a senior associate member at St Anthony's College in Oxford, was hosted by the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies.

The one-hour talk, attended by about 40 people, was entitled 'Radical Islam and the New Caliphate.' He spoke about jihad, the current clamour for an Islamic state by some Muslims around the world, and the various responses from state authorities.