Tax? What Tax?

Second Finance Minister, Johari Ghani today revealed that both Jho Low and Riza Aziz have never paid taxes in Malaysia.

Replying to DAP’s Lim Lip Eng in Parliament, Johari said the duo has never declared their income in Malaysia and this the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) cannot tax them.

Opposition supporters jumped with joy upon hearing this, with some asking how can they not be taxed when they throw wild parties frequently. As usual, Opposition supporters know very little about anything else than to whine about everything.

If the duo have a business in Malaysia and earn their income in Malaysia, the IRB would definitely have jumped on them.

Unfortunately, this is not the case as the duo earn their income overseas.

If the Opposition supporters use the Internet to Google for the correct information rather than spending their life reading trash in portals like Sarawak Report, they would have come across this in the IRB’s website:

“Mulai tahun taksiran 2004, pendapatan yang diterima di Malaysia dari luar Malaysia adalah dikecualikan daripada cukai. Dengan itu, pembayar cukai sama ada yang bermastautin atau yang tidak bermastautin di Malaysia dikenakan cukai atas pendapatan yang diperoleh dari Malaysia sahaja.”

And Lim Sian See adds:

Why Jho Low and Riza Aziz do not pay tax in Malaysia?


They are not in the country 182 days or more per year and do not earn their income here.

Therefore, they are not considered as TAX RESIDENT in Malaysia and hence do not pay tax here.

Presumably, they will pay tax in the countries where their jobs are or spend most of the time in.

Tax accountants will understand this.

Please ask Lim Guan Eng if he understands the concept of tax residency or not.


Second Finance Minister has also issued a statement as follows:


1. I wish to clarify further to my reply to the Segambut MP, YB Lim Lip Eng and Batu MP, YB Tian Chua who recently asked me about the tax file(s) of a Mr. Reza Aziz and Mr. Jho Low and why these two individuals are not paying tax in Malaysia.

2. The tax collection system in Malaysia is based on the simple premise that if an individual or company derives income from Malaysia, that income received will be subjected to Malaysian income tax. While income derived from outside Malaysia and remitted to Malaysia will be exempted from tax. This applies to all individuals or companies without any exceptions. It is important for LHDNM to determine whether the income is derived from Malaysia before income of an individual or a company is subject to Malaysian tax.

3. The initial finding of LHDNM has shown that the two individuals, who were the subject of enquiries by the Opposition MPs in Parliament, do not have income derived from Malaysia in the past recent years and there are no records that they have brought in taxable income derived from overseas into Malaysia. Even if they had brought their income which is derived from overseas into Malaysia, this will be exempt from income tax. However if it is later discovered that any of their income is indeed subject to Malaysian tax, LHDNM has the power to raise assessment against those individuals within 5 years or at any time if fraud, wilful default or negligence is proven.

4. Malaysia has adopted a self-assessment system, where an individual or a company is required to determine and compute their chargeable income and tax liability. The rate of tax applicable is provided under the Income Tax Act 1967 and changes to the rate may be made and announced during the Annual National Budget. Under the self-assessment system a taxpayer will be audited on any declaration of income made. In the case where a person fails to make any declaration, LHDNM has a dedicated team to continuously analyse and identify this and severe penalties will be imposed once LHDNM has ascertained that tax is payable. It is not the practice of LHDNM to tax any individuals or companies based on perceived wealth or rumours of income.

5. Please be assured that LHDNM is ever vigilant in carrying out its duties under the law without fear or favour.


Minister of Finance II

The BN Government Will Continue To Look After The Welfare And Readiness Of The Malaysian Armed Forces

“The government shall continue to look after the welfare of the Malaysian Armed Forces,” said Minister of Defence, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein.

He said this in a meet with Royal Malaysian Navy personnel, civilian staff of the Ministry of Defence in Sabah, as well as Armed Forces veterans at the Kota Kinabalu Naval Base here.

Announcing the agenda to build more quarters for the naval personnel, Hishammuddin said that they (the naval personnel) cannot be sent for operations if they worry about the safety and security of their families.

Prior to this, the state government of Sabah offered a piece of land to be developed into 1,700 houses by the Ministry of Defence.  However, the location at Kampung Layang-Layang is not suitable as it is 30 kilometres away from the base.

“I shall announce the housing agenda within the next week or two,” he said.

The event was also attended by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department in charge of the Economic Planning Unit, Datuk Seri Panglima Abdul Rahman Dahlan and Chief of Defence Forces, General Tan Sri Raja Mohamed Affandi Raja Mohamed Noor.

Earlier, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin launched a Petronas kiosk inside the base as part of the welfare initiatives.  Prior to this, personnel working in the base had to travel 20 kilometres to the nearest petrol station.

When asked about a group of Armed Forces veterans who attack the government’s initiatives to help both serving and former members of the Malaysian Armed Forces, Hishammuddin said that this is just a small group of people whose agenda is to serve the seasonal politicking of others.

“This government will not be disheartened by this group.  We have provided a lot more under this government and shall continue to strive for the best for the members of the Armed Forces and its veterans,” he commented.

Datuk Seri Hishammuddin also handed over keys of family quarters to 20 crew member of the patrol vessel KD Selangor.  16-year old Kasih Nuraisyah Ramaddy Ricky, the daughter of Corporal Ramaddy Ricky Ahmad, who scored 7As in her Pentaksiran Tingkatan 3 exam was among thirteen children of Armed Forces personnel who received academic excellence awards from the Minister.

Hishammuddin congratulates Corporal Ramaddy Ricky Ahmad after presenting an award to the latter’s 16-year old daughter, Kasih Nuraisyah, for scoring 7As in her Pentaksiran Tingkatan 3 exam last year

BN Is Serious About The Security Of Sabah

A ‘Force Demonstration’ conducted by the three services of the Malaysian Armed Forces was held at Kem Paradise near Kita Belud today. 400 personnel were involved in the demonstration of firepower that also saw the involvement of two Boeing F/A-18 Hornet fighters, two Sukhoi Su-30MKM multirole combat aircraft, four BAe Hawk light multirole fighters and helicopters from all three services.

In his speech, Defence Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein assures the people of Sabah that the Barisan Nasional government under Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak will continue to preserve the peace and security that is being enjoyed by the people of Sabah.

“The government will not compromise the security of Sabah. Today’s programme that involves all three branches of the Malaysian Armed Forces proves that we are sincere and serious about it,” he said.

Hishammuddin also urged the people of Sabah to not fall for the irresponsible sentiments of hatred that are being played by the Opposition.

“Their appearance is seasonal in nature and is filled with their agenda. They do not offer solutions like we do, especially in the security aspect of the people of Sabah,” he added.

The force demonstration was also attended by Minister of Communications and Multimedia, Datuk Seri Salleh Said Keruak; Secretary-General of the Ministry of Defence, Datuk Seri Mohd Radzi Abd Rahim; Chief of Defence Forces, General Tan Sri Raja Mohamed Affandi Raja Mohamed Noor; Chief of the Royal Malaysian Air Force, General Tan Sri Affendi Buang and Chief of Army, General Tan Sri Zulkiple Kassim.

Meanwhile, Hishammuddin said that the Malaysian Armed Forces shall continue to cooperate and conduct trilateral cooperation with Indonesia and Philippines to face the threat of terrorism.

“For now, we have joint air and sea patrols with our neighbours while joint land patrols will be conducted soon,” he said.

The demonstration today also saw a field hospital being set up where the people of Kota Belud were given free medical and dental treatment.

Malaysia Is Buying Up The World According To Pakatan

Everyone talks about Communist atrocities in Malaysia. Well, it was done by Malayans, not China. But we never talk about Japanese atrocities in Malaya. Why?

I refer to a WhatsApp message that says the following:

Listen to this (video) and think about it.

 It’s hard to believe that Malaysia is the perfect model for China after Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Jamaica & Greece.

We hv the history of atrocities by Communist Party (Terrorists).

Jack Ma is also the influential biz advisor to the PM.

Numerous lands & companies bought over by China, Xiamen university for students from China.

Enclavement (safe haven) in MCKIP, Forest Cities, flourishing China’s retail companies even in Aeon too.etc,

Strategic Tun Razak 106 Exchange overlooking KL area, with potential airport, ports and MISC shipping, railway lines, even purchase of Perwaja land within Kemaman Supply base etc….widespread corruptions, a condusive environment to China Belt Road Initiatives.

We hv to accept first that the threat is real.”



The atrocity done to Malaysians was by those born in Malaya, not China.  China merely gave its support for the setting up of a Communist satellite nation in Malaysia by Chin Peng, who is largely revered by the DAP.

In 1981, Mahathir’s political secretary was arrested by the police for being a communist agent.  Interestingly, Mahathir allowed Communist Cuba to open an embassy in Kuala Lumpur in 1997.  Mahathir also allowed Communist North Korea to open an embassy in Kuala Lumpur in 2003, several months before he stepped down.

Mahathir loved Communist China so much that he visited the country seven times and invited China to invest in Malaysia.  A year after he became PM the Sino-Malaysia trade stood at US$307 million.  A year before he stepped down, it was at US$14 billion.

Mahathir himself said in Bangkok after retirement that for 2000 years China has been a superpower, and it could have invaded the Malay states had it wanted to but never did.  So, if Mahathir has never been afraid of China, why should be we be afraid of it?


Well, Jack Ma is the advisor to this country on E-Commerce.  If this is the concern, then Jack Ma is also the business advisor to Indonesia on E-Commerce.  By definition, China has also colonised Indonesia through Jack Ma.

Wait! Jack Ma is also the advisor to the UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) on E-Commerce.  So, has China taken over the world?


Wow! Well written by a very ill-informed person.

Xiamen University Campus Malaysia has 700 students from China and 900 from Malaysia.  Last year it gave out scholarships to top performing local (Malaysian students).

Xiamen University Campus Malaysia is just a new face in a crowded space that already has nine branch campus of foreign universities that include Nottingham University, University of Reading, Monash University to name a few.

Why pick on Xiamen University alone? Is it because it is in a state held by the Barisan Nasional?  Before Xiamen University, we already have Hanjiang (Han Chiang) University in Pulau Pinang and New Era University College in Kajang, Selangor.  Why not ask why is the flag of China flying above those campuses as well?

As at the beginning of 2018, China’s investments received in Malaysia is RM63 billion.  Japan’s investments received in Malaysia totals RM70 billion.  Aren’t we selling the country to the Japanese more?

Furthermore, China’s FDI in Malaysia is at the 10th place and accounts for only 2 percent of the total FDI received by Malaysia.  The US debt to China is at US$1.2 TRILLION making its Debt-to-China-versus-GDP at 6.5 percent.  Is the US now owned by China?  You tell me!


AEON is a company that has nine members of the Board.  Three of the nine are Japanese while the rest are Malaysians.  If the Japanese board members don’t give a hoot about China retail companies in AEON complexes, why should you?

The Malaysia-China Kuantan Industrial Park (MCKIP) in Kuantan is a 51:49 percent joint-venture between a Malaysian consortium and a China consortium.  How is it that we have sold our country to China when we have a 51-percent control of the park?

Why did the writer also write that there is a CMQIP in China?  Yes, there is a China-Malaysia Qinzhou Industrial Park which is also a 51:49 percent joint-venture between a China consortium and a Malaysian consortium. Has China also sold its ports, airports and country to Malaysia?

There are also the China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park (CSSIP) and the China-Singapore Tianjin Eco City (CSTEC), both in China. Has China sold its country to Singapore too?

Exchange 106 is only built by China’s CSCEC, but the master developer is Indonesia’s Mulia Group.  Since when is Exchange 106 a China-owned property?

Forest City is an exception.  Although only 40 percent of the development is owned by a Malaysian company, it is an enclave for foreigners, not just China’s citizens. About 15 percent is owned by other foreigners including those from the Indian subcontinent and the Middle East.  But does owning only 40 percent make Forest City essentially China-owned?

Similarly, the Marina One and DUO development in Singapore are 60 percent owned by Khazanah Nasional. 40 percent remains with Temasek Holdings.  Does that mean those developments are essentially Malaysian? Has Singapore sold itself to Malaysia? Has there been any noise by anyone in Singapore over this issue?

Of course not.  Singaporeans are not as stupid and foolish as Malaysians are who would believe anything especially lies and fake news.

(Originally sent as a WhatsApp message)

Pergau Payoff

Kuala Yong near Jeli, Kelantan is a laid back but picturesque place. Located some 100 kilometres west of Kota Bharu, the village was once the seat of a global controversy that is still being spoken about today – the Pergau Dam affair.

I touched briefly on the Pergau Dam affair in a recent posting. It talked about how Malaysia took advantage of the weak British economy to conduct the infamous ‘Dawn Raid’, almost bringing Margaret Thatcher to kowtow before Mahathir.

The Pergau Dam affair was about treachery – Mahathir’s style.

It involved an arms scandal as well as aid for the poor that turned into what is now the Pergau Dam.

Allegations of bribes being passed to the then-Prime Minister of Malaysia was abound. But as with the allegations of tens of billions of Ringgits squandered by Mahathir, he never challenged these allegations either.

The Pergau Dam story started with then Secretary of State for Defense George Younger’s agreement with the government of Malaysia in 1988 that the Britain would provide aid in the amount of 20 percent the value of arms sales from Britain to Malaysia. This aid would come in the form of a dam project, despite a subsequent assessment from economists and engineers of the Overseas Development Administration (ODA – the UK’s development arm at the time, which reported to the Foreign Secretary) who found that the dam would not be a cost-efficient way to increase the production of electricity.

In 1991, then Foreign Secretary, Douglas Hurd, authorised the expenditure of £234 million from the aid budget anyway, to maintain a deal made by the defence secretary and approved by Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, and later John Major.  The World Development Movement called for a judicial review of the funding of Pergau Dam on the grounds of a law which states that aid can only be used for “promoting the development or maintaining the economy of a country….or the welfare of its people”.

The British High Court ruled in 1994 that the project was not of economic benefit to the Malaysian people; the deal linked aid directly to commercial contracts and was unlawful.

The Sunday Times ran a story that the dam contractor, George Wimpey International, had paid an initial bribe meant for Mahathir to the tune of USD500,000 (approximately RM1.25 million then). Instead of challenging the newspaper in a court of law, Mahathir got Anwar, who was his Deputy then, to announce ‘Buy British Last II‘.

Lim Kit Siang, Mahathir’s present best friend, jumped at the opportunity to slam the latter. He openly challenged Mahathir to sue the Sunday Times in a court of law – something Mahathir never did.

Although the amount of bribe stated by Lim Kit Siang varied from what was reported by the Sunday Times the last two lines of the above screen capture of Kit Siang’s article shows that monies were transferred to ‘account numbers in Switzerland to which fees related to contract award are to be paid.

When the Pergau deal and alleged bribes transfers took place in 1984-85, Mahathir’s right-hand man Daim Zainuddin was the Finance Minister. Coincidentally, it was said that Daim owned, or was in control of, at least a bank in Switzerland, if not more. This was also how, according to Edmund Terence Gomez and Jomo Kwame Sundaram, Daim’s company called Baktimu Sdn Bhd was able to obtain a RM40 million loan from the Union Bank of Switzerland to buy a 33 percent stake in Sime UEP for RM75 million in CASH!

Daim only recently divested from the banking business in Switzerland through his company, ICB Financial Group AG.

Could Daim have been involved in providing the accounts into which these payments were credited?

Neither Mahathir nor Daim has come forth to explain, let alone sue especially the Sunday Times for running that story.

In the words of Lim Kit Siang when his struggle then was for the people:

Forest City Presses The Red Dot Hard

Screen Shot 2018-02-26 at 13.25.19

I refer to a recent post on the left-leaning portal The Malaysian Insight where Ng Kheng Khoon, a researcher from the National University of Singapore, wrote that Forest City has disrupted the local housing market and appeared to be exempt from compliance with Johor’s housing policies.

Keng Khoon who along with Nanyang Technical University’s Guanie Lim said that there is no data to show that the Forest City development has directly contributed to the provision of affordable and low-cost homes in Johor Baru, and nor is there a provision of the Bumiputra quota in this project as it falls under the category of ‘newly established international zone’.

Keng Khoon added that was not in line with the Johor Housing Policy for Johoreans in Iskandar Malaysia (DPRJ) introduced in 2014.

The policy was actually introduced in 2012, not 2014.

The Malaysian Insight wrote that according to data compiled at the National Property Information Centre, homes in the RM250,000-RM500,000 range were most launched in Johor Baru, making up about 40% of total launches.

The price range is the yardstick for affordability for the majority of Johoreans.

It is no secret that Singaporeans have been buying properties in Johor, and all thanks to the comparitively low prices making everything affordable to the people of Singapore.  In 2016, five thousand Singaporean families have bought homes in Johor.

At a PropertyGuru Malaysia Property Show (MPS) in Singapore, over 2,155 Singaporean buyers flocked to hunt for properties. At the end of the event, over 30 units worth RM30.1 million were sold.  Two weeks later, 20 units worth RM18.3 million were also sold at the MPS in Johor Bahru.
Wealthier foreigners, majority of whom are Singaporeans have also snapped high-value properties in Johor, causing land price to shoot up.  Some Johor-based property valuers said the land price in Ledang Heights, located in the Iskandar region had increased fivefold since 2007 to between RM150 and RM250 per square foot (psf) in 2017.

Both Ng Kheng Khoon and Guanie Lim have answered most of the issues they have raised themselves.  Firstly,  Forest City is a development that has been designated as an ‘International Zone’.

In an interview by this blog writer in September 2017, Country Garden Pacificview  (CGPV) executive director Datuk Md Othman Yusof said that Forest City is aimed at foreign buyers, not Malaysians. This is to ensure that foreigners take up only what is being sold at Forest City, leaving the development on mainland Johor up for grabs by the locals.

This is how Johor ensures that the local market is not spoilt,” he added.

Therefore, it is evident that by designating Forest City as an International Zone, the Johor state government as well as CGPV are doing the locals a favour.  If Forest City has to build  affordable or low-cost housing in that development area, it would contradict the international zone status.

For the same purpose, Dubai designates similar zones for foreigners to own properties in.  Article 4 of the Property Ownership Law. Article 4 of the Property Ownership Law allows non-UAE or GCC nationals and companies to own freehold title in the areas in Dubai that have been designated for foreign ownership under regulations issued by the Ruler of Dubai (‘Designated Areas’).

Imagine if Forest City has to build low-cost homes, local contractors would have to fold up.  How are local contractors to compete with Forest City’s Industrialised Building System (IBS) which can pre-frabicate house components in far shorter time than local contractors could?

“One of the project’s major selling points is its connectivity to neighbouring Singapore. This means that a new Customs, Immigration, and Quarantine Complex (CIQ) dedicated to Forest City will have to be established.  But who will pay for the upkeep of this third CIQ that only serves private interests?” said Keng Khoon to The Malaysian Insight.

If this is the best that a researcher from the University that is 15th in the world according to the 2018 Quacquarelli Symonds World University Rankings could put forth as an argument, that raises a question on how the NUS could get that ranking.

If Forest City could afford an IBS plant, surely it can build and maintain a CIQ for its purpose, operated by the various related government agencies.  Having a CIQ there is a matter of government policy.  Imagine the number of Singaporeans being able to go to Tuas on a busy weekend, and travel by boat to Forest City to shop at its Duty Free Zone, and stay at their apartment there.

Or even live there and work in Singapore.

Or even live and conduct their business from Forest City.

Is that why until now Mediacorp has not allowed any form of advertisement involving properties in Johor to be aired on any of their channels?

Secondly, the Johor Housing Policy for Johoreans affect only the properties built on mainland Johor.  Forest City is NOT built on a part of mainland Johor.  Nor is Forest City built for locals (unless they have money to spare to purchase properties there).

However, the locals can go there to shop, enjoy the facilities, and even work there!  As of January 2018, 1100 out of 1500 workers in Forest City are locals.  That accounts for 73 percent of the workforce there, debunking the myth created by the Opposition that Forest City does not provide employment opportunities for locals.

To summarise, Forest City is an initiative to provide properties to wealthier foreigners to own so that the local market is not spoilt and remain affordable for locals to own.  Therefore, its creation does not go against the Johor Housing Policy for Johoreans.  Far from not being beneficial for the locals, it gives employment to the locals and is expected to create more jobs for locals as its development progresses.

You can read more about Forest City:

The Living Forest

Sustaining The Future

Forest City Continues to Benefit its Surrounding Communities

Drama Kera La

Lawan Pencinta Israel


Baru-baru ini kita dikejutkan dengan kehadiran seorang diplomat dari Israel ke sebuah persidangan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu di Kuala Lumpur.  Pihak pembangkang dengan segera telah menghentam kerajaan kerana telah membenarkan perkara tersebut berlaku seraya mengatakan bahawa kerajaan bersikap hipokrit dalam memperjuangkan hak-hak Palestin tetapi pada masa yang sama telah menjemput seorang warga Israel untuk datang ke Malaysia.

Lantas Kementerian Luar Negeri telah mengeluarkan sebuah kenyataan untuk menerangkan perkara tersebut.  Di dalam kenyataan tersebut, Wisma Putra menerangkan bahawa segala jemputan ke persidangan tersebut telah dilakukan oleh pihak Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu melalui Artikel III kepada Perjanjian Negara Tuanrumah yang telah dibuat di antara kerajaan Malaysia dengan pertubuhan tersebut.


Kenyataan ini juga menerangkan bahawa sebagai negara tuan rumah, Malaysia terpaksa menerima kehadiran delegasi dari Israel walaupun berkeras tidak mahu.  Malangnya, sebagai memenuhi kehendak diplomasi pelbagai hala,   Ianya tidak bermakna Malaysia telah mengubah pendiriannya terhadap Israel dan Palestin.


Saudara Fahmi Fadzil, Pengarah Komunikasi PKR telah membidas kenyataan Wisma Putra.  Di dalam laman Facebooknya, Fahmi telah mempersoalkan kuasa Jabatan Imigresen Malaysia untuk menafikan mana-mana individu yang tidak dikehendaki untuk masuk ke negara ini.

Screen Shot 2018-02-19 at 00.20.23

Screen Shot 2018-02-19 at 00.20.37.png

Saya berasa amat kecewa kerana sebagai seorang yang memegang jawatan penting, Fahmi tidak memahami undang-undang.  David Yitzhak Roet, diplomat Israel yang telah ke mari, adalah merupakan seorang diplomat dari negara Israel yang memegang passport diplomat yang bermakna beliau adalah merupakan seorang diplomat bagi negaranya.


Ini bermakna, David Roet tidak boleh dikategorikan sebagai “pendatang yang tidak diingini” (undesirable immigrant) mengikut Seksyen 8(k) Akta Imigresen, 1959/1963.  Mari kita undur beberapa tapak untuk memahami keadaan sebenar sebelum mempercayai segala kebebalan yang ditulis oleh Fahmi tadi, atau kenapa Malaysia tidak membantah, dan juga kepada persoalan mengapa Malaysia tidak batalkan sahaja persidangan tersebut.

Pertama sekali, persidangan ini dalah sebuah persidangan yang dianjurkan oleh pertubuhan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu.  Perjanjian Negara Tuanrumah di antara pertubuhan tersebut dengan Malaysia telah ditandatangani pada bulan Mac 2017.


Setelah perjanjian tersebut dibuat, penganjur (UN Habitat) membuat lain-lain persiapan berhubung keperluan persidangan tersebut.  Hanya pada bulan Jun 2017, UN Habitat telah menghantar surat-surat jemputan kepada Menteri Luar Negeri setiap negara ahli pertubuhan tersebut termasuk Malaysia dan Israel.


PBB ada mempunyai satu format Perjanjian Negara Tuanrumah yang seragam untuk digunakan oleh agensi-agensi di bawahnya, termasuk UN Habitat.  Cuma susunan Artikel adalah terpulang kepada agensi-agensi tersebut, di antaranya menyebut:


Konvensyen Mengenai Keistimewaan dan Kekebalan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu yang diterima pakai oleh Perhimpunan Agung pada 13 Februari 1946, yang mana negara tuan rumah adalah satu pihak, hendaklah terpakai bagi Persidangan tersebut.  Terutamanya, wakil negara-negara akan menikmati keistimewaan dan kekebalan yang diberikan di bawah Artikel IV Koenvensyen tersebut.”

Dokumen di atas menerangkan dengan jelas bahawa wakil-wakil setiap negara yang menghadiri persidangan yang telah dijalankan di Kuala Lumpur, hendaklah diberikan keistimewaan dan kekebalan yang telah kita persetujui sebagai salah sebuah negara ahli PBB yang telah mengiktiraf Konvensyen tersebut.

Ianya tidak berakhir di situ:


Semua orang yang disebut di dalam artikel II (artikel III dalam perjanjian dengan Malaysia) hendaklah mempunyai hak untuk masuk dan keluar dari negara tuan rumah, dan tiada halangan dikenakan terhadap perjalanan mereka ke dan dari kawasan persidangan.”

Semua di atas adalah berkenaan dengan Konvensyen Vienna Mengenai Hubungan Diplomatik, 1961, yang dipersetujui oleh Malaysia, dan juga Akta Hubungan Konsular (Konvensyen Vienna), 1999.  David Roet adalah diplomat yang dihantar oleh negaranya.  Maka, Malaysia tidak banyak pilihan kerana telah menandatangani perjanjian tuan rumah, serta perlu menghormati konvensyen Vienna.

Kalau itu sahaja yang boleh diketengahkan sebagai hujah-hujah, maka saya rasa amat elok sekali sekiranya parti tersebut menukar Pengarah Komunikasi mereka memandang Fahmi Fadzil begitu dangkal daya pemikirannya.


Ramai penyokong pembangkang serta mereka yang termakan hasutan pembangkang dalam isu ini bertanyakan tidakkah kerajaan membuat bantahan terhadap jemputan kepada Israel oleh PBB?

Saya petik laporan sebuah akhbar Israel, The Jerusalem Post, yang menyebut:


Malaysia yang ternyata anti-Israel membenarkan penyertaan Israel dengan penuh marah hanya setelah Israel mengenakan tekanan diplomatik yang hebat sehingga ke pejabat Setiausaha Agung PBB, Antonio Gutteres.

Ini adalah kerana dengan menaja sebuah acara yang berkaitan dengan PBB, Malaysia menjadi suatu kewajiban bagi Malaysia terhadap PBB untuk membenarkan penyertaan dari semua negara.”

Jelas Malaysia telah berkeras untuk tidak membenarkan penyertaan Israel tetapi terpaksa akur dengan perjanjian yang telah dipersetujui.

Walau bagaimanapun, ianya berbeza bagi rakyat biasa Israel. Pada tahun 2015, Malaysia telah tidak membenarkan dua orang peluncur layar dari Israel untuk menyertai Kejohanan Pelayaran Belia Sedunia.  Keputusan kerajaan ini telah dibantah bukan sahaja oleh Persatuan Layar Israel, malah oleh badan pelayaran dunia.

Pada tahun 2016, Malaysia telah enggan mengeluarkan visa bagi pasukan ping pong Israel untuk menyertai Kejohanan Ping Pong Sedunia yang telah diadakan di sini.


Pada 25 Mac 1997, seramai 2,000 orang penunjuk perasaan telah berarak ke Jabatan Perdana Menteri untuk menyerahkan satu memorandum kepada Perdana Menteri ketika itu membantah keputusan kerajaan Malaysia untuk membenarkan pasukan kriket Israel untuk menyertai Kejohanan Kriket Sedunia yang dilangsungkan di Kuala Lumpur.  Pada 30 Mac tahun yang sama, seramai 2,500 orang penunjuk perasaan telah menyerbu padang kriket di mana pasukan Israel dijadualkan bermain serta membakar papan-papan tanda iklan berkenaan kejohanan tersebut.

Screen Shot 2018-02-19 at 00.22.30

Anwar Ibrahim yang kononnya memperjuangkan Islam ketika itu, dalam sokongan terhadap bosnya berkata, sukan dan politik tidak sepatutnya dicampur-adukkan.

Pada tahun 1993, Mahathir yang ketika itu merupakan Perdana Menteri telah menulis sepucuk surat kepada Perdana Menteri Israel, Yitzhak Rabin mengenai Perjanjian Oslo I.

Mahathir’s letter to Yitzhak Rabin in December 1993

Ianya mungkin sukar dibaca.  Jadi saya sediakan terjemahan kepada transkrip surat tersebut seperti berikut:

Yang Berhormat

Encik Yitzhak Rabin

Perdana Menteri Israel


Saya ingin mengucapkan terima kasih di atas surat anda pada 17 Oktober yang memaklumkan kepada saya tentang Perjanjian Prinsip dan Pengiktirafan Bersama di antara Israel dan PLO.

Kerajaan saya menyokong perkembangan positif ini dan memandangnya sebagai langkah pertama ke arah merealisasikan penyelesaian menyeluruh kepada masalah Timur Tengah. Sebagai demonstrasi sokongan Malaysia terhadap pembangunan ini negara saya telah diwakili pada Persidangan Penderma untuk menyokong Perdamaian Timur Tengah yang diadakan di Washington dan seterusnya memberikan sumbangan kewangan yang sederhana kepada rakyat Palestin untuk membantu tugas baru mereka. Kerajaan saya juga telah menawarkan bantuan teknikal untuk Palestin di bawah Program Kerjasama Teknikal Malaysia.

Sebagai perkara prinsip umum Malaysia bersedia untuk membangunkan hubungan dengan Israel pada masa yang sesuai. Dalam pada itu, kami ingin melihat kemajuan yang ketara dalam pelaksanaan perjanjian damai.

Masalah di Timur Tengah terutamanya isu Palestin telah menjadi punca ketidakstabilan di rantau tersebut dan saya berharap perjanjian yang dibuat baru-baru ini di antara Israel dan PLO akan menyumbang kepada keamanan yang kekal di kawasan itu.

Saya menanti hubungan normal dengan Israel


Sepertimana yang terkandung di dalam dua bahagian surat tersebut, Mahathir menyatakan hasrat untuk mengadakan hubungan yang normal dengan Israel.  Pada tahun 2014, Presiden Obama telah mengadakan hubungan normal dengan Cuba.  Ini berakhir dengan penyambungan perhubungan diplomatik di antara kedua-dua buah negara tersebut.  Mahathir telah menyatakan hasrat untuk memulakan hubungan diplomatik dengan Israel.  Bahagian akhir yang digaris di bawah itu telah ditulis sendiri oleh Mahathir dengan menggunakan sebatang pen.


Berlanjutan dengan perkara tersebut, Chua Jui Meng dari PKR yang pada ketika itu merupakan Timbalan Menteri Perdagangan Antarabangsa dan Industri berkata Israel boleh menjadi destinasi pelaburan Malaysia (Shanti Nair, Routledge, 1997 p.252).

Hasilnya, pada tahun 1999, eksport Israel ke Malaysia berjumlah USD107 juta. Pada tahun 2000, ia adalah USD732 juta, dan USD615.5 juta pada tahun berikutnya. Pada tahun 2002, laporan Kementerian Perdagangan Israel mengenai hubungan perdagangan dengan Indonesia dan Malaysia menasihatkan warga Israel yang berminat untuk menjalankan perniagaan dengan syarikat Malaysia bahawa “tiada sebarang bangkangan untuk mengadakan perhubungan perdagangan selagi ianya dibuat secara senyap-senyap“.

Mukhriz Mahathir yang merupakan Timbalan Menteri Perdagangan Antarabangsa dan Industri pada tahun 2011 akui perhubungan perdagangan di antara Malaysia dan Israel wujud dan telah bermula pada tahun 1996 ketika bapanya menjadi Perdana Menteri.

Di akaun Twitternya pula, Mukhriz juga menyatakan bahawa “Di atas permintaan daripada pelabur asing yang besar di sini pada tahun 1996, Kabinet mengarahkan MITI untuk meluluskan import dan eksport ke Israel.

Screen Shot 2018-02-15 at 23.43.02

Kabinet tahun 1996 yang dimaksudkan adalah kabinet yang dipimpin bapanya, Mahathir Mohamad.  Tulis Mukhriz lagi pada tahun 2011:

Apabila kita meluluskan pelaburan langsung asing, bukanlah untuk kita mengenakan syarat bahawa mereka tidak boleh berdagang dengan Israel. Sesetengah pelaburan ini berjumlah berbilion Dollar di negeri-negeri di bawah Pembangkang.”

Screen Shot 2018-02-15 at 23.42.24

Ini bermakna negeri-negeri di bawah pentadbiran pihak pembangkang pada tahun 2011 telah menerima pelaburan langsung asing dari Israel.  Pada tahun tersebut hanya tiga buah negeri yang berada di bawah pembangkang, iaitu Kelantan, Pulau Pinang dan Selangor.  Dan saya tak fikir Kelantan terlibat dengan dana dari Israel.

Jadi, siapakah sebenarnya pencinta Israel yang wajib kita sanggah?