Bila Lembu Bersuara

IMG_6130

Setelah didapati bersalah melanggar undang-undang, khususnya Akta Bank dan Institusi-Institusi Kewangan, 1989 (BAFIA), Rafizi terus mencari simpati dan sokongan di media sosial dengan membuat satu bebenang mengenai isu NFC di Twitter.  Beberapa soalan telah diajukan oleh Rafizi untuk menerangkan kenapa beliau melanggar undang-undang tersebut.  Saya akan kongsikan di sini apa yag telah dituliskan serta pendapat saya mengenai setiap persoalan yang diajukan Rafizi.

Rafizi telah memulakan dengan mengfalsafahkan perbuatannya dengan mengajukan dua soalan:

  1. “Apakah tanggungjawab saya apabila mendapat tahu mengenai skandal NFC?”
  2. Apakah wajar melanggar undang-undang demi menyelamatkan wang rakyat?”

Beliau menjawab soalan pertama dengan mengatakan bahawa sekiranya beliau tidak berbuat apa-apa mengenai perkara tersebut, beliau pecah amanah sebagai seorang wakil rakyat dan pemimpin politik, serta amanah yang Allah kurniakan untuk memahami isu-isu tersebut.

Larangan Hasutan dan Pecah Rahsia serta Patuh Kepada Undang-Undang menurut Islam

Beliau mengutarakan bahawa undang-undang seperti BAFIA, Akta Rahsia Rasmi, Akta Hasutan adalah undang-undang yang telah digubal dengan niat buruk untuk melindungi pesalah yang berkuasa.

Undang-undang, di mana sahaja kita berada, sama ada di sebuah negara Islam, mahupun negara yang ditadbir oleh bukan Islam, adalah wajib dipatuhi, selagi ianya tidak menyuruh kepada melanggar hukum Allah SWT.

Surah An-Nisaa’ ayat 59 menyebut:

Wahai orang-orang yang beriman, ta’atilah Allah dan ta’atilah Rasul (Nya), dan ulil amri di antara kamu.

Ulil Amri di sini bermaksud ibubapa jika anda masih anak yang masih bergantung kepada ibubapa; suami kepada isteri seperti mana yang diwahyukan melalui surah An-Nisaa’ ayat 34; Majikan jika anda bekerja untuknya maka wajib mematuhi peraturan dan arahan bekerja; pemimpin yang dipilih, hakim-hakim mahkamah, polis dan lain-lain pihak berkuasa sekiranya anda adalah rakyat.

Sebuah hadith Sahih Muttafaqun Alayhi Bukhari dan Muslim (Bukhari 2796/Muslim 1839 menyebut:

Menjadi kewajipan seorang muslim mendengar dan taat dalam melakukan perintah yang disukai atau pun tidak disukai, kecuali bila diperintahkan melakukan maksiat. Bila dia diperintah melakukan maksiat, maka tidak ada kewajiban untuk mendengar serta taat.

Akta BAFIA diwujudkan untuk memelihara rahsia-rahsia peribadi, bukan untuk melindungi orang yang salah.  Sekiranya tiada akta seperti ini diwujudkan, maka kandungan akaun anda boleh didedahkan kepada sesiapa sahaja.  Bukan Malaysia sahaja yang mempunyai undang-undang seperti ini, bahkan Agensi Kewangan Saudi Arabia dan lain-lain negara di dunia juga ada mempunyai undang-undang yang sedemikian.

Akta Hasutan adalah undang-undang untuk mencegah dari perbuatan atau pertuturan yang menghasut orang ramai untuk memberontak atau bangun melawan pihak berkuasa, kerajaan mahupun Raja.  Perbuatan menghasut ini sekali lagi bertentangan dengan dalil-dalil di atas.  Iblis telah memberontak semasa diperintah oleh Allah SWT untuk sujud terhadap Adam a.s. dan mengeluarkan kata-kata berbaur hasutan yang mempersoalkan keperluannya sebagai malaikat Allah untuk sujud kepada kejadian Allah yang diperbuat dari tanah.  Akibatnya Iblis telah diusir keluar dari syurga.

Akta Rahsia Rasmi pula diadakan untuk menentukan rahsia-rahsia  kerajaan Yang DiPertuan Agong tidak disebarkan sewenang-wenangnya.  Bayangkan walaupun adanya Akta ini, masih ada yang tidak memegang sumpah dan ikrar yang dibuat semasa diambil bekerja.  Memelihara rahsia itu adalah satu perintah Allah SWT.  Surah At-Tahrim Ayat 3 mafhumnya:

Dan ingatlah ketika Nabi membicarakan secara rahasia kepada salah seorang isterinya (Hafsah) suatu peristiwa. Maka tatkala (Hafsah) menceritakan peristiwa itu (kepada Aisyah) dan Allah memberitahukan hal itu (pembicaraan Hafsah dan Aisyah) kepada Muhammad lalu Muhammad memberitahukan sebagian (yang diberitakan Allah kepadanya) dan menyembunyikan sebagian yang lain (kepada Hafsah). Maka tatkala (Muhammad) memberitahukan pembicaraan (antara Hafsah dan Aisyah) lalu (Hafsah) bertanya: “Siapakah yang telah memberitahukan hal ini kepadamu?” Nabi menjawab: “Telah diberitahukan kepadaku oleh Allah yang Maha Mengetahui lagi Maha Mengenal

Akibat tidak memelihara rahsia tersebut, Hafsah binti Umar r.a dan Aishah binti Abu Bakar r.a tidak didatangi Rasulullah SAW selama sebulan lamanya.  Itu adalah hukuman bagi kedua-dua isteri Rasulullah SAW itu (Sahih Bukhari 5191).

Anggapan Rafizi bahawa orang yang menggunakan logik bahawa jika anda langgar undang-undang maka anda harus dihukum adalah orang-orang yang otaknya terletak dilutut juga menunjukkan betapa beliau sendiri tidak percaya kepada perintah dan ketentuan Allah SWT.  Dalil-dalil di atas telah menunjukkan beberapa contoh yang dipetik dari Al-Quran dan Hadith Rasulullah SAW mengenai hukuman yang dikenakan setelah perintah dilanggar.

Begitu juga tanggapan bahawa Mahatma Gandhi itu penjenayah – manakan sama perjuangan Gandhi dengan perjuangan Rafizi.  Gandhi memperjuangkan kebebasan tanah airnya dari penjajahan British.  Rafizi hanya memperjuangkan popularitinya.

Ingat – sebelum 2013, Rafizi tidak mempunyai apa-apa jawatan dalam exco PKR.  Isu NFC telah memberinya nama dan populariti yang telah membolehkannya bertanding di kerusi Parlimen kawasan Pandan dan menang.

Wang NFC Itu Dana?

Wang yang NFCorp gunakan itu adalah wang yang dipinjam daripada kerajaan melalui Kementerian Pertanian dan Industri Asas Tani, yang ketika itu di bawah Menterinya iaitu Muhyiddin Yassin.

Rafizi bukan orang pertama yang mencanangkan kisah NFC ini.  Maka dia bukanlah pemberi maklumat sepertimana yang digembar-gemburkan.  Kisah NFC ini mula muncul dalam laporan audit Jabatan Audit Negara pada tahun 2010.  Di dalam laporan tersebut, tiada langsung perkataan-perkataan seperti “kucar-kacir” mahupun “penyelewengan” sepertimana yang digunakan oleh pihak pembangkang dan Rafizi sendiri.

Yang dilaporkan oleh Jabatan Audit Negara ialah terdapat kelemahan-kelemahan dalam projek tersebut yang ditemui oleh jabatan tersebut.  NFCorp telah menternak sebanyak 4,000 ekor lembu tetapi ini hanyalah merupakan 40 peratus dari jumlah yang telah disyaratkan.  Maka, sebanyak 8,000 ekor lagi lembu telah dibawa masuk.

Masalah yang timbul adalah apabila Kementerian Pertanian dan Industri Asas Tani tidak memenuhi syarat perjanjian mereka untuk menyediakan tempt-tempat penyembelihan berkualiti untuk eksport, serta jalan-jalan untuk ke tapak projek NFC tersebut.  Ini telah menyebabkan kelewatan pada pihak NFC untuk menjalankan projek tersebut.  Malah, kelewatan yang disebabkan oleh Kementerian Pertanian dan Industri Asas Tani inilah yang menjadi perkara kritikal dalam laporan Jabatan Audit Negara tersebut dan bukan terhadap syarikat NFCorp.

Rafizi hanya menggunakan penyata akaun-akaun yang diperolehi dengan cara yang melanggar Akta BAFIA dan menghebahkan mengenai akaun-akaun tersebut dalam satu sidang akhbar yang diadakannya pada 12 Mac 2012.  Beliau mengaitkan akaun-akaun tersebut dengan “penyelewengan” oleh NFC dan memfitnah beberapa orang dan syarikat.

Akibatnya, Rafizi telah disaman oleh NFCorp dan akibatnya didapati bersalah oleh mahkamah atas tuduhan memfitnah, dan diarahkan membayar RM300,000 kepada mereka-mereka yang telah difitnahnya.  Bagaimana Rafizi membayar saman fitnahnya? Dia telah melakukan kutipan derma (crowdfunding) dengan meminta para penyokongnya membayar samannya.  Beliau tidak perlu keluarkan barang satu sen pun. Kesalahan fitnahnya ditanggung oleh orang lain.

Jikalau apa yang diwar-warkan oleh Rafizi itu benar, sudah tentu dia tidak akan didapati bersalah.

Dana Telah Dilesapkan?

Rafizi juga berkata kerahsiaan bank bukan untuk melesapkan dana awam.  Rafizi suka menggembar-gemburkan cerita.  NFC membayar balik RM5 juta setahun termasuk faedah kepada kerajaan.  Sehingga 2013, NFC telah membayar sebanyak RM34.98 juta.

Pembayaran ini terpaksa dihentikan kerana akaun mereka telah dibekukan kerajaan semasa disiasat.  Siasatan oleh SPRM dan PDRM tidak menemui sebarang kesalahan yang dilakukan oleh NFC/NFCorp.  Walau bagaimanapun, Pengerusi NFCorp telah dituduh melakukan jenayah pecah amanah dengan membuat pembelian hartanah untuk syarikat tersebut tanpa persetujuan lembaga pengarah.  Oleh sebab bukti pihak pendakwaan tidak mencukupi, beliau telah diberi pelepasan dan pembebasan oleh mahkamah.

Jelas bahawa NFC ada membuat pembayaran balik pinjaman kepada kerajaan.  Jika benar Rafizi pentingkan hak rakyat, kenapa beliau berdiam diri dalam isu pembayaran RM305 juta yang telah dibayar untuk laporan kajian kesesuaian projek terowong bawah laut Pulau Pinang tetapi sehingga kini masih belum nampak walau sehelai pun laporan tersebut walaupun telah 22 bulan berlalu?

Kenapa Rafizi Tidak Diberi Perlindungan Sebagai Pemberi Maklumat?

Rafizi menulis: “Kalau bising dalam media sahaja tidak cukup untuk sedarkan rakyat kerana bukan semua membaca laporan media. Kena masuk kampung ceramah. Kena buat video.  sebab itu tidak ada cara lain: inilah caranya.”

Seksyen 6 Akta Perlindungan Pemberi Maklumat, 2010 terang-terang menyebut bahawa sesiapapun boleh membuat pendedahan mengenai kelakuan tidak wajar (salahlaku) KEPADA MANA-MANA AGENSI PENGUATKUASAAN YANG DIFIKIRKANNYA MUNASABAH  DENGAN SYARAT BAHAWA PENDEDAHAN SEDEMIKIAN TIDAK DILARANG SECARA KHUSUS OLEH MANA-MANA UNDANG-UNDANG BERTULIS.

Seksyen 97(1) Akta Perbankan dan Institusi-Institusi Kewangan 1989 pula menyebut:

Screen Shot 2018-02-11 at 22.51.07

Rafizi telah menerima penyata akaun-akaun tersebut daripada seorang pegawai bank yang tidak diberi kebenaran oleh empunya akaun-akaun tersebut.

Rafizi kemudiannya mendedahkan penyata akaun-akaun tersebut kepada pihak media dalam sidang akhbarnya. Media bukanlah agensi penguatkuasaan yang ditakrifkan dalam Akta Perlindungan Pemberi Maklumat, 2010.

Dengan ini terang lagi bersuluh bahawa Rafizi telah melanggar undang-undang dan tidak layak diberi perlindungan sebagaimana diperuntukkan oleh Akta Perlindungan Pemberi Maklumat, 2010.

Akhir Kata

Rafizi tidak pernah hormat kepada agama Islam mahupun undang-undang.  Beliau adalah merupakan seorang penghasut dan pemfitnah bersiri.  Di antara siri hasutan dan fitnah beliau termasuk:

  • 12 Januari 2013, Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi yang ketika itu Menteri Pertahanan telah mengemukakan saman malu ke atas Rafizi kerana menerbit artikel fitnah dalam blog beliau. Rafizi telah menurunkan artikel tersebut dan memohon maaf kepada Zahid.
  • 22 Nov 2014, Perdana Menteri dan isteri fail saman malu dan Rafizi balas dengan mengatakan fitnah beliau itu ‘hanya gurauan’ kerana memfitnah subsidi minyak masuk ke dalam akaun Perdana Menteri dan isteri untuk membeli cincin baru. Fitnah beliau tersebut terus dipercayai sehingga ke hari ini dan telah memberi kerosakan teruk kepada imej Datin Seri Rosmah.
  • Januari 2016, Rafizi didenda RM1,800 oleh mahkamah kerana mencetus ketegangan agama Islam-Kristian dengan memfitnah mengatakan ahli UMNO telah membaling bom petrol ke gereja.
  • Rafizi juga telah menabur fitnah kononnya Tabung Haji sudah kehabisan wang sebab dana Tabung Haji telah dirompak. Akhirnya, kerana percayakan fitnah tersebut, 3,954 pendeposit menutup akaun tabung haji manakala 3,105 telah membatalkan pendaftaran untuk menunaikan ibadah haji.
  • Rafizi juga menabur fitnah dengan mendakwa kos projek MRT sebanyak RM21billion bagi laluan sepanjang 21km sedangkan ianya untuk laluan sepanjang 51km.
  • Pada bulan Oktober 2016, Rafizi diarah membayar RM300,000 oleh mahkamah kerana memfitnah NFC mengenai pembelian hartanah.
  • Pada bulan November 2016, Rafizi didenda RM1,950 oleh mahkamah kerana himpunan haram “Blackout 505”.
  • Pada bulan November 2016 juga Rafizi dihukum penjara 18 bulan oleh mahkamah kerana melakukan kesalahan di bawah Akta Rahsia Rasmi.
  • Pada penghujung bulan November 2016, Rafizi telah diminta bertaubat oleh Abdul Hadi Awang kerana memfitnah PAS menerima dana 1MDB.

Inilah Rafizi yang masih diagung-agungkan oleh mereka yang tenggelam dalam kebencian yang tidak berasas. Kalau ada pun asas yang didakwa mereka, asas tersebut hanyalah berlandaskan pembohongan dan penipuan semata-mata tanpa usul periksa.

Rafizi menulis: “Hakim saya ialah Allah. Hanya hukumanNya yang saya benar-benar peduli, bukan hakim-hakim lain.”

Begitulah Rafizi cuba menunjukkan betapa alimnya beliau.  Perintah Allah dilanggarnya, undang-undang diketepikannya.  Kini, beliau cuba memperdayakan ramai dengan imej alim.  Tak ubah seperti para perogol yang memakai songkok atau kopiah apabila dihadapkan ke mahkamah.

Screen Shot 2018-02-11 at 23.38.15

Biarlah Rafizi mengelembukan diri sendiri.  Jangan terikut dilembukan olehnya.  Ingat firman Allah SWT dalam surah Al-Buruuj ayat 10:

“Sesungguhnya orang-orang yang mendatangkan fitnah kepada orang-orang mukmin lelaki dan perempuan, kemudian mereka tidak bertaubat, maka bagi mereka azab Jahannam dan bagi mereka azab (neraka) yang sangat pedih.”

Fitnah dan Pakatan berpisah tiada.

Where Should The Allegiance of the Armed Forces Lie

Malaysian Armed Forces Veterans

I received this copied in a Veterans’ WhatsApp group. I omitted some parts of the message as it was just gibberish talk:

_Copied from write up by Mej **** ***** TUDM (Rtd)_

Good afternoon to all. The fight for a free Malaysia must go on!
Let us get one thing clear – the country and the government are separate entities. Governments come and go, the country is eternal.

We owe our allegiance to the country, not to the government. Therefore, saying bad things about a bad government is not being anti-national. Most important of all, voting against a bad government is not being anti-national. A bad government does not deserve loyalty. Disloyalty to the government is not disloyalty to the country; in fact, voting out a bad government is being loyal to the country.

Clean elections
Clean government
Right to dissent
Save our economy


Fine words they are, but for someone with some legal training to write as such shows how much understanding the author has of the Federal Constitution.

Let us address this “call”:

Point 1:

“Good afternoon to all. The fight for a free Malaysia must go on!
Let us get one thing clear – the country and the government are separate entities. Governments come and go, the country is eternal.

We owe our allegiance to the country, not to the government. Therefore, saying bad things about a bad government is not being anti-national. Most important of all, voting against a bad government is not being anti-national. A bad government does not deserve loyalty. Disloyalty to the government is not disloyalty to the country; in fact, voting out a bad government is being loyal to the country.”

The country and the government cannot be separated, neither can a state be separated from its state government.  Yes, governments come and go, but a government is still a government.  Officers and men of the civil service, the Armed Forces, the Police owe their allegiance to the King and Country.  The King rules the Country, as do the Sultans their respective state, through a government that was picked by the people. Be they the Federal Government or the State Government, they administer the country and the states on behalf of the King and Sultans, as well as the Governors.  This is prescribed by Article 39 of the Federal Constitution where the Executive Authority of the Federation is vested in the Yang DiPertuan Agong by him, or by the Cabinet, or by any Minister authorised by the Cabinet.

In the case of the Armed Forces, the King exercises his power through the Minister of Defence.  Which is why the officers and men of the Armed Forces are required to salute the Minister of Defence who represents the King’s executive power over the Armed Forces, and the Prime Minister who is the King’s Chief Executive, representing the King.

Article 41 states that the King is the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces and therefore those representing the King as prescribed by Article 39 are performing their duties on behalf of the King.

Therefore, it is imperative that the Armed Forces, as well as the civil service and the Police, remain loyal to the government of the day as the government of the day represents the King – be it bad or otherwise. Whether or nor a member of the Armed Forces, or the civil service, or the Police subscribes to the government of the day politically is a secondary matter.  The oath that was taken was to be loyal to the King and Country; therefore loyalty shall be given to the government of the day.

The Minister who represents the King in matters of defence is also made the Chairman of the Armed Forces Council which is responsible for the command, the discipline and the administration of the Armed Forces, except for matters relating to their operational use.  This is prescribed in Article 137 of the Federal Constitution.

And it is the Parliament that passed an Act to amend and consolidate the law relating to the establishment, government and discipline of the Armed Forces is made which is called the Armed Forces Act, 1972.

It is also the Armed Forces Act, 1972 that gave the powers to the Armed Forces Council to enable Brigadier-General Datuk Fadzlette Othman Merican Idris Merican be promoted to Major-General while she is being seconded to a Federal Government Department.  Section 5C of the Armed Forces Act, 1972 determines that she remains a member of the regular forces but her remuneration shall be paid by that Federal Government Department.

By the same token, even the ordinary people who are citiens of Malaysia must realise that the Federal Government represents the King, the state governments represent the resective state’s Ruler.  These are governments chosen by the people but was appointed by the Rulers to administer the country and states on their behalf.  The only way to change these governments is by a democratic process called ELECTIONS (unless you have not heard of that word before).

Point 2:

“Clean elections”

Since 1955, Pulau Pinang, Perak, Kedah, Kelantan, Terengganu, Selangor and Sabah have all seen a change in government.  If the elections were not clean, would it have been possible for the Opposition to have won cash cows such as Pulau Pinang and Selangor?

Point 3:

“Clean government”

I must admit there are bad hats in the government, be it the Federal government or the states government.  This is why we have seen people like Harun Idris, Mokhtar Hashim, Khir Toyo, Lim Guan Eng charged in court for corruption. All but Lim Guan Eng have served jail time.  Guan Eng, who said that he is not afraid to go to prison, has been delaying his corruption trial using technical issues.

Many more state excos have also been arraigned in a court for corruption.  This is not possible without agencies such as the Auditor-General’s Office and the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission which act as checks and balances to ensure that the Federal as well as states governments are run efficiently and cleanly.

Of course there are those who have yet to face the music. For example those responsible for the Maminco scandal in 1985 that saw a loss of RM1.6 billion (about RM2.56 billion in today’s terms); the Perwaja scandal in 1982 that saw a loss of about RM10 billion (RM18.73 billion in today’s terms); the BMF scandal of 1983 that had caused a loss of RM2.5 billion (RM4.5 billion today); the 1986 Deposit-Taking Cooperative Scandal that caused a loss of RM1.5 billion (about RM2.58 billion today); the RM30 billion loss by Bank Negara Malaysis through foreign exchange gambling in 1994 (RM45.25 billion today); the Malaysia Airlines scandal of 1994 with the loss of RM9.4 billion (RM14.18 billion today); the PKFZ scandal of 1999 with a loss of RM12.5 billion (RM13.5 billion in today’s terms).

The above all happened during the tenure of a certain former Prime Minister.  The grand total of losses is RM67.5 billion (or RM101.3 billion in today’s terms).  The amount shown does not include the bailouts reported in various books, Opposition leaders’ blogs and so on.

I do hope that the cry for a clean government will also call for the arraignment for the Prime Minister during whose tenure the financial scandals happened.  Had the RM101.3 billion been put to good use during those 22 years, Sabah and Sarawak would have had SIX toll-free Pan Borneo Highways, or 1,013 80-bedded Government hospitals all over the country!

Instead, it enriched the few and killed one person.

Point 4:

“Right to Dissent”

I have not seen any Opposition-leaning media being taken off print or air, unlike during a certain 22-year period of my life.  Malaysiakini et al are still spinning their version of what they call “balanced news” (read: news the way we want you to see it).  The way these media operate reminds me of a character in Netflix’s limited series called “Godless” called A.T Grigg, a newspaper owner-editor who writes news the way he sees it, not how it truly happens.

The ISA was repealed six years ago by this present administration. Although replaced with SOSMA and POTA, it doesn’t give powers to the authorities to hold anyone without trial as the ISA did. And the ISA was being used a lot against political dissenters especially in the late 1990s during the tenure of a certain former Prime Minister.

This administration also introduced the Peaceful Assembly Act, 2012 that has allowed more freedom to assemble peacefully, unlike during those days of a certain former Prime Minister where at the slightest hint of a political dissent, you get whisked away to the University of Kamunting.

Has the author of the message been arrested yet?  Of course not.  Even when he actually committed sedition against Malaysia by encouraging Sarawak to secede from Malaysia.

How is it that a legal-trained person does not know that his act is seditious escapes me

Now, how is that seditious?  If you look at Section 2 of the Sedition Act, 1948 it tells you the following:

Section 2 defines how an act is seditious. He has committed a seditious act by definition of Section 3(1)(a)

This former Armed Forces officer also committed a crime of sedition under Section 3 (1) (b) of the same Act for encouraging Sarawak to leave Malaysia:

Section 3 (1) (b) of the Sedition Act, 1948

And you thought that the Federal Constitution protects freedom of speech?  Yes, it does.  But as with all other liberties, they are subjected to restrictions.  Article 10(1) guarantees that every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression, but at the beginning of the Article it also says the following:

You cannot just say anything you like although you have the freedom of speech and expression

To dissent is okay. To dissent seditiously, or criminally, or dangerously, or incitingly, is not okay.

Any legal-trained person ought to know this, right? What more a former officer of the Armed Forces!

Point 5:

“Save Our Economy”

In April 2017, the World Bank forecasted that Malaysia’s GDP would be at 4.3 percent.  This was revised in June 2017 to 4.9 percent due to an acceleration in domestic economic activities (people in Malaysia are actually spending more) by 5.7 percent year-on-year.  The GDP growth was revised again in October 2017 to 5.2 percent.

Let me quote several reports here by the World Bank.

World Bank Group lead economist Richard Record said at a media briefing on the update that Malaysia’s robust GDP growth in the first half of 2017 was largely underpinned by strong private-sector expenditure, with additional impetus from an improvement in external demand.

“Private consumption expanded firmly this year, supported by favourable income growth amid stable labour market conditions, and improved consumer confidence. Private investment also sustained rapid growth rates during the period, reflecting mainly continued capital spending in the manufacturing and services sectors,” said Richard Record.

“On the external front, gross exports rebounded strongly from the subdued growth experienced in 2016, supported by double-digit growth in commodity and manufactured exports,” he added.

Economic watchdogs are generally bullish on the Malaysian economy’s performance, buttressed by strong expansion in private consumption and private investment. In the latest update on its World Economic Outlook, the International Monetary Fund has upped its GDP growth projection for Malaysia in 2017 to 4.8 percent from 4.5 percent previously.

Apart from that, the Asian Development Bank has also upgraded its 2017 growth outlook for Malaysia to 4.7% from 4.4%, and indicated that the two-year slowdown in economic growth is likely to have bottomed out last year.

Richard Record also predicted Malaysia’s economy for 2018 and 2019.

“We are forecasting Malaysia’s GDP to grow by 5 percent next year (2018) and 4.8 percent in 2019. Our prediction reflects how we are seeing the country’s macroeconomic fundamentals’ performance and the baseline scenario,” he said.

Online economics portal ‘Focus Economics’ also said the following:

“Economic momentum remained robust in Q3 as confirmed by more complete data. Export growth expanded by a double-digit pace in September, underscoring thriving external demand for Malaysian goods. Household spending was buoyed by a low unemployment rate in September and by higher wages, which were propped up by a thriving manufacturing sector, the key driver of industrial production growth in the quarter. The 2018 budget passed on 27 October is focused on fiscal consolidation and is expected to narrow the fiscal deficit from 3.0 percent in 2017 to 2.8 percent in 2018. Despite the tightening, the budget has consumer-friendly components that will increase disposable income. These include lower income tax rates, especially for middle-income earners; higher public wages; and increased assistance spending.”

By contrast, Brunei’s fiscal deficit had hit 16 percent in 2016.

Of course, with the oil prices continue to stay below the USD70 per barrel level, Malaysia as well as other countries will continue to experience some sluggishness in the economy. However, good fiscal policies have allowed us to grow unlike a neighbour of ours that is often quoted as being a model economy.  That country’s growth have been at 2 percent in 2016, and 2.5 percent this year.

The outlook for the construction sector has taken a sharp turn for the worse, with poll respondents tipping a contraction of 4.2 per cent. The previous survey, released in June, had respondents forecasting 0.2 per cent growth in the sector.

The outlook for the accommodation and food services sector in this model country has also worsened – it is now expected to shrink 1.5 per cent, from previous estimates of a 1 per cent expansion.

Economists polled expect overall economic growth of 2.5 per cent next year for this model country, the same pace as this year.

Perhaps the author of the message we are discussing here should go down South and help revive the economy of that model country.


So, there have you.  I really do not know what the fuss is about.  All I can deduce is that the author of the message is all hot air – you can feel it blowing on your face, but there is no real substance there.  This is the same as BERSIH, and the recycling of petty but stale issues by the Opposition just so that they can remain relevant, and justify for the allowances they receive from the pockets of the rakyat.

You can express your dissatisfaction, but always do so constructively. Especially if you are a member of the Malaysian Armed Forces and Malaysian Armed Forces Veterans.

The A-G Also Needs A Law Degree

I read with shock that the Attorney-General, Gani Patail, is reviewing the charges made against Associate Professor Azmi Shahrom under the Sedition Act, 1948. This review is being made AFTER Azmi was charged in court, an act that is very much unprecedented.

For a person with no formal legal training, I recall that only details of the charges can be amended, but charges cannot be dropped once arraignment  has been made.

Gani’s act incurred the wrath of former Attorney-General Abu Talib Othman. Gani’s act, according to Abu Talib, tantamount to an admission of injustice and the lack of transparency on his (Gani) part when making the charges under the Sedition Act. This, said Abu Talib, is what the A-G needs to explain.

Abu Talib also reminded that prosecuting an accused is not to persecute, but to provide. Justice to both the accused and the victims affected by the acts of the accused.

I do not know for what reason or reasons is Gani Patail reviewing the charges, but if what Abu Talib Othman had said above is right, then it only underscores my previous opinion that the Attorney-General is a useless person. Now he can join the rank of Aziz Bari, the self-proclaimed constitutional “expert” in getting his fees back from wherever he read law aeons ago. With that money, he could enrol in a law degree course at the Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan Tamil Simpang Lima in Klang and be at par with another idiot called Charles Santiago.

If Abu Talib’s view of Gani Patail is inaccurate, then I believe that the latter is being pressured by someone in the government. If this is the case, then the government owes an explanation to the people.

Either way, Gani Patail is still useless for being spineless and for not knowing the mechanisms of the legal system.

Stop Breathe Think Act

Stop, think, breathe, act. It is a life-saving rule in times of trouble.  Monkeys are not known to be capable of acting this way.

Here, have a read at this first:

Press Statement by YB Zuraida on IGP Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar

2 September 2014

The IGP has gone overboard with his latest arrest of the Penang Voluntary Patrol Unit (PPS). As IGP, he cannot simply declare any society as illegal and should go through proper procedures. Any society unregistered with the ROS must first be declared illegal by the ROS like Hindraf. There must also be proof that the society had tried to register with the ROS and was declined its registration.

The scenario for PPS is different. PPS is part of the Penang State Government body and comprises of the state exco members and state assemblymen.

The IGP should be aware that he is a public servant and that the public’s interest comes first. The police force should not be used as a means to oppress the public.

PPS had always been a voluntary unit to help the community in emergencies and disasters. If the PDRM had been efficient, there would be no need for volunteers to step up and help the police in their work. These volunteers sacrifice their family time just to make their neighbourhood a safer place to live in. Due to the community spirit and selflessness of these PPS members, crime rates in Penang have gone down.

PPS was set up many years ago. There is no reason why the IGP should suddenly and unjustly call it illegal and start to crackdown on these innocent volunteers when all along, these PPS members report to their respective neighbourhood police stations before patrolling the area. Threatening to raid the homes of these volunteers unless they surrender themselves to the police is also absurd and an abuse of power.

The IGP has shown very weak leadership.

In the case of Victor Wong and Nasrul, both who offended the IGP by describing him as Henrich Himmler and Anjing BN respectively, and subsequently being directed by the IGP that both be investigated by the Police Cyber Investigation Response Centre (PCIRC) shows a lack of tolerance for personal opinion. Even after Victor Wong tweeted an apology to the IGP and PDRM, Khalid is bent on taking action against the two under Section 233 of the Communication and Multimedia Act 1998 and Sedition Act 1948.

These heavy-handed clampdown on those in opposition towards the Federal Government is a repeat of Operasi Lalang.

The IGP should be reminded that the PDRM is not his personal army.

YB Zuraida Kamaruddin
Ahli Parlimen Ampang
Ketua Wanita Keadilan

I instantaneously burst into laughter after reading the statement above. Of course, Zuraida aka Mak Lampir is just one of those Lab Monkeys the PKR fielded in 2008 and never expected to have won the seat.  Perhaps she, like Wan Azizah, need to have a good grasp of their surroundings and of current affairs before coming up with such bravado (Wan Azizah still thinks that the Lembaga Letrik Negara or LLN still exists!).

The Royal Malaysian Police only affected the arrest of more than a hundred members of the illegal Persatuan or Pertubuhan Peronda Sukarela (PPS) or whatever you call it by on the 31st August 2014, that Lim Guan Eng claims to have been set up four years ago under the powers vested to the Penang State Government to assist the police in crime-fighting.  However, members of the PPS have been seen putting up DAP party flags and banners instead and have been involved in acts that are extrajudicialis.  Nothing much is known about the PPS despite having been set up for four years. No paper work, no guidelines, nothing.  It is just a band of vigilantes set up in the name of the state government.

 

The action by the police was taken after a warning was issued for the PPS NOT to gather on the 31st August 2014.  This was after the letter below dated 26th August 2014 from the Registrar of Societies was received:

Letter from RoS on the status of the PPS
Letter from RoS on the status of the PPS

With such information in hand, only idiots like Zuraida and those who support her still think that it is absurd and an abuse of police power for going after the members of the PPS.  Lim Guan Eng’s feeble attempt at equating the PPS to the JKKK is also a funny act.  The JKKK (Jawatankuasa Keselamatan dan Kemajuan Kampung) is formed under the local government to become a committee to channel issues affecting the socio-welfare, development and security of a kampung.  They do not have extra-judicial but absent powers and do not wear any uniform like that of the PPS.

Sméagol and Gollum. Innocent and dangerous at the same time.
Sméagol and Gollum. Innocent and dangerous at the same time.

If Lim Guan Eng is so adamant that the police in Penang are short-handed, why not utilise the funds paid tot he PPS members to provide allowances to support the RELA and Rukun Tetangga initiatives, both which are legal organisations empowered to assist the police when needed? Why the need to set up a shady uniformed organisation that has no guideline whatsoever and does all DAP’s biddings?

Anyway, as I mentioned, Zuraida is a lab monkey from the 2008 era. Had she read the letter from the RoS above and understood its content and where it falls on the timeline, she might not have issued such  press statement that excites the public’s disaffection against the administration of justice.

Zuraida Kamaruddin's press release smacks of seditious tendencies
Zuraida Kamaruddin’s press release smacks of seditious tendencies

As other lab monkeys gone rogue, she needs to be hauled up too!

 

Clear And Present Danger – Part 2

While Najib Razak seems clueless about the bills drafted by the National Unity Consultative Council (NUCC) to replace the supposedly draconian and archaic Sedition Act, the warning Tun Dr Mahathir had given on this issue (The Star – Removal of the Sedition Act Will Lead To Chaos, 30/6/14) ought to be taken seriously. Najib has been proven wrong on several occasions before where the removal of the ISA and the introduction of the SOSMA has led to more terrorists to use Malaysia as a gateway; removal of the Emergency Ordinances have led to more crime; and the Peaceful Assembly Act seem toothless to regulate exactly what it is meant for even to the extent of being called “anti-human rights”.

Now, David Orok, the STAR division head for Tuaran, Sabah, applies the incitement as well as clear and present danger tests on Muslims by ridiculing Islam in the most vulgar manner:

So, what is Najib going to say now? That we the Malays should give more and take less in this “give-and-take” situation where it is always the Malays who have to understand the feelings of the minorities for fear of backlash by human rights activists?

I’m sorry, Najib, I will never support the removal of the Sedition Act because your version of human rights seem more like a free-for-all animal rights.

20140705-235421-86061466.jpg

20140705-235444-86084951.jpg

20140705-235500-86100810.jpg

20140705-235513-86113527.jpg

———————————————————————————
Updated 10am, Sunday 6/7/14

20140706-095705-35825263.jpg

20140706-095705-35825077.jpg

20140706-095704-35824866.jpg

Clear And Present Danger

The Predecessors of the current Rulers at a Rulers' Conference
The Predecessors of the current Rulers at a Rulers’ Conference

The roles of the Rulers (or sometimes referred to as the Malay Rulers) in this blessed nation are somewhat misunderstood.  While many often think that the Institution of the Rulers mirror that of the British’s Westminster-style monarchy, it is not.  Britain had undergone a period of regicide and for a moment was a republic under Oliver Cromwell, but monarchy was reinstalled with the ascension of Charles II guided by the British Parliament with laws made and passed solely by the Parliament. Here, we have Rulers who, until 1957, ruled the land (although much of the administration was passed to British advisers through various treaties who were on the Rulers’ payroll).  It was only on 31st August 1957 that the executive powers of the Rulers were handed over to a civilian government chosen by the majority of the people of the Federation of Malaya. The Rulers, as owners of this land, continue to enjoy their position with their income regulated by the respective laws, and receive advice from the Menteris Besar (or in the case of the Yang DiPertuan Agong, the Prime Minister). This is evident in Article 181(1) of the Federal Constitution which states:

“Subject to the provisions of this Constitution,” the “sovereignty, prerogatives, powers and jurisdiction of the Rulers…as hitherto had and enjoyed shall remain unaffected.”

The same was noted by Mark R Gillen of the Faculty of Law, University of Victoria (Gillen 1994:7). In the words of the late Sultan of Perak, Sultan Azlan Shah, former Lord President, it is:

“a mistake to think that the role of a King, like that of a President, is confined to what is laid down by the Constitution, His role far exceeds those constitutional provisions” (Azlan Shah 1986:89)

As history have shown, time and time again, the strength and weakness of the Rulers lie in the strength or weakness of those responsible to advise the Rulers.  Those appointed as the Prime Minister and Menteris Besar are expected to be sincere, wise and knowledgeable, truthful and forthcoming no matter how bitter the advice may be, so that the Rulers can act with just with their feet firmly on the ground, or in the Malay saying:

Supaya Raja tidak dibuai dalam khayalan; tidak diulit gurindam pujian

Why I have not referred to the Rulers in this particular post as the Malay Rulers is deliberate, with references made to various research papers on this subject.  Before the entrance of the British advisers, each of the Ruler was the Ruler of all he surveyed and was the enjoyer of all he surveyed. This means that there were no state boundaries as we now have to show the dominion of each Ruler, and the people whom we collectively refer to as the Malays (as the Chinese and Indians are back in China and India are) used to refer to themselves as people of where they originated: orang Muar, orang Jasin, orang Pekan so on and so forth.  Their loyalty is to the Ruler who has dominance over their area. With the introduction of the Chinese and Indian immigrants by the British, the role of the Ruler transcended protector of the Malays, as protector of the immigrant subjects as well. The Hikayat Johor of the early 20th century lauds Sultan Abu Bakar of Johor for “looking after the Chinese subjects living in the state.” There is also mention of Chinese and Indians welcoming the Sultan home from an overseas journey (Anthony Milner, Australian National University, Milner 2002:214).

Even a left-wing Malay who wanted to unite a Raja-less Malaya with Batavia (Jakarta), Ibrahim Yaacob, referred to a Kelantan Ruler bestowing a prestigious title on a Chinese merchant and observed that the Johor state council building looked like a Chinese audience hall because it was decorated Chinese writing. When Ibrahim Yaacob asked what was the writing about, he was told that it recorded the personal service of wealthy Chinese people to the Ruler (Milner 2002:261).  Ibrahim Yaacob later served as a Lieutenant-Colonel in the Japanese Giyuugun (Volunteer Army) and fled Malaya for Batavia and served under Sukarno taking up the name Iskandar Kamel Agastya (SeaDemon: Road to Merdeka – Persekutuan Tanah China (6th September 2011).

When racial strife hit Malaysia on 13th May 1969, the Sultan of Terengganu as well as other Rulers took steps to protect their non-Malay rakyats (Kobkua Suwannathat-Pian, Faculty of Humanities, Universiti Pendidikan Sultan Idris, Kobkua 2011:364). This goes to affirm the special press statement made by the Conference of Rulers in October 2008 explaining that the Institution of Rulers is a “protective umbrella ensuring impartiality among the citizens.” The statement itself explains the Rulers’ constitutional role respecting the so-called “Social Contract” between Malays and non-Malays, and assures the non-Malays that there is no need to “harbour any apprehension or worry over their genuine rights.” (Kobkua 2011:425-426).

When the British wanted the Sultan of Selangor to banish a Chinese man, Ho Chick Kwan, (Ho Chick Kwan v Honourable British Resident Selangor, Criminal Appeal No. 11 of 1931), Ho was described as a “natural born subject of the Ruler of the State of Negeri Sembilan, and his adopted mother Lui Ho described herself as owing “true allegiance to His Highness the Sultan of Selangor.”

Such is the role of the Rulers in unifying the rakyat, and such was how the non-Malays back then were loyal subjects of the Rulers as the Malays were – a far cry compared to what we have today.

As mentioned in the fifth paragraph above, the strength and weakness of the Ruler depends on the strengths, weaknesses, sincerity, truthfulness, and knowledge of their adviser, namely the Prime Minister and the Menteris Besar.  The recent fiasco in Johor shows how a weak adviser can put the Ruler in harm’s way.  When the British acted as advisers and administered the states of behalf of their respective Rules, many of the Malays, including Ibrahim bin Yaacob, Burhanuddin Helmy et al saw no need for the monarchy to remain as an institution, hence the desire to make Malaya a republic united with Batavia. UMNO then took over as the linchpin of the Malays from the Rulers with the formation of the Malayan Union.

It is easy to understand why the Rulers agreed to the formation of the Malayan Union: weakened by the pompous nature of their British advisers who departed when the Japanese arrived, the Japanese relegated the Rulers into nothing more than deputy advisers in the administration of the Malay customs and religion.  Imagine what it was like for a Johor commoner to see his Sultan being scolded by the Japanese for leaning on his stick.  Seen working with the Japanese in World War Two, and weak in the eyes of the Malays, the Rulers did not have much choice but to succumb to the demands of the British.  But the Tunku was quick in restoring the faith of the Malays in the Rulers. He recalled that:

“At all costs I wanted to avoid having a split with the Rulers.” (Simon C Smith, Professor of International History, University of Hull, Smith 1995:183)

The seemingly weak administrations of both Abdullah Badawi and Najib Razak, and the digression of UMNO from its original intended path of protecting Islam, the Malays and Bumiputras and its inherent weakness in dealing with various right-wing Chinese and Indian organisations that have thrived under weak administrations have led to the formation of right-wing Malay groups such as the PERKASA and ISMA.  Najib seems to have given in to a lot of demands from people who will never ever support him nor his party, promising uncontrolled legal reforms thence setting up the left-leaning National Unity Consultative Council.  The National Harmony and Reconciliation Bill proposed by the NUCC is seen as a clear and present danger to a society that is already on the edge of destruction.

In Section 6 (1) (iii) of this Bill, will render the Rulers powerless in selecting the Menteri Besar for their respective state; the Agong will not have the power to select his Prime Minister, the Attorney-General, his Inspector-General of Police, or his Chief of Armed Forces even.  You Malays and Bumiputras may think that Article 153 can protect you, but you should also read Article 153(5) of the Federal Constitution and see what it says, and tell me if what I have written in this paragraph is not true.

Section 7 (1) (ii) even allows people of the LGBT group to hold important positions.  Gender equal opportunity is already in effect, but regardless of sexual orientation? I have gay friends and some are good friends of mine. Even they cringe whenever their lifestyle is brought under the spotlight by glamour-seeking peers.  It is not that they are not talented but will this not tear the fabric of our society?  May I ask the so-called religious Muslims and Christians if they agree with this?  In the name of Human Rights, we are beginning to fight to become animals, where unnatural ways are to become the norm of our society. I wonder how long would the Christian church in Malaysia be able to resist same-sex marriages with this Bill coming into effect. Removal of the Sedition Act would certainly act as a catalyst to destruction, much as the removal of the Internal Security Act has contributed to the worsening condition of the country.  There is nothing wrong with either Act.  Mere tweaking to prevent the laws from being abused by politicians would have been sufficient.

I fear for the future of this nation.  We must not let extremism prevail.

This is where the Rulers can play a role in holding the fragile fabric of this divisive society, to once again play a pivotal role in bringing this nation back to its senses.  We can no longer rely on weak Prime Ministers and Menteris Besar to protect this society from falling apart, all in the name of Human Rights (and the desire to please non-believers thinking you can get votes by kow-towing to their demands).  The Rulers also need to keep their conduct, and that of their families, in check.  There is no use correcting the society when they and those related to them do not behave with the utmost decorum.  And as history has proven again and again, the Rulers can act independently from their weak and self-interested advisers.

In the words of Sultan Nazrin Muizuddin Shah of Perak in July 2011:

Rulers must use wisdom to calm situations, but they do not have a ‘magic lamp’ to keep unity, especially when the situation has become chaotic.

I was an Officer of the Armed Forces of Malaysia, my loyalty has always been for my King and Country.  I humbly beg His Royal Highnesses to intervene and override weak and destructive suggestions of the government of the day.  Again in the words of Sultan Nazrin:

Unity requires a willingness to sacrifice, accept defeat willingly and celebrate victory with humility.”

I, your humble servant, humbly beg.

Kobkua Suwannathat-Pian. This goes to affirm