All posts by chedet

Legal

THE CONSTITUTION

40 Comments

1. I was forced to read through the Constitution of Malaysia and the National Security Council Act 2016, in order to understand the need or otherwise of the power of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Prime Minister in ensuring the security of the country.

2. I don’t think anyone would want to read through especially the National Security Council Act 2016. Still I feel a need to summarise the powers accorded the Prime Minister by comparison to the powers accorded the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

3. While the powers of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong give due consideration to the rights and freedom of a citizen when he is to be detained, the power of the Prime Minister under the National Security Act is almost unlimited.

Continue reading THE CONSTITUTION →

Popular

CLIMATE CHANGE

98 Comments

1. We now admit that the climate is changing. But we must also be aware that the so-called natural disasters are happening more frequently, and are more violent. And these cataclysms are happening in more places than before.

2. We see floods in New York, tsunamis in Sumatera and Fukushima, non-active volcanoes erupting, repeated volcanic eruptions in the same location, prolonged winters, high temperatures for months in many countries, tornadoes which wreck whole countries, typhoons of unprecedented strength and huge forest fires which consume parts of towns.

3. Is it just climate change which we hope will come to an end. Can we expect to go back to the years when the weather behaves in predictable cycles, i.e in the regularity of the seasons, the levels of the seas, the rise and fall of the tides, and the habitability of this planet we call Earth.

4. We now accept that the Earth is much older than we use to think. We also know that it was not always like what it is now. We know that the human race appeared probably only a few hundred thousand years ago.

5. We know that there was a time when dinosaurs inhabited the earth. They disappeared but they left their skeletons so that we cannot deny that they existed even though they were strange creatures unlike the animals we see today. Perhaps the crocodile is the only surviving species from the age of the dinosaurs.

6. We know that there were at least two ice ages, when the whole world was covered with a thick layer of ice. Life as we know today could not have survived the cold. Nothing could grow on the ground covered with the thick layer of ice. Even dinosaurs could not have survived, as there was no vegetation for them to feed on.

7. The ice melted to form oceans. The oceans and the seas receded and land masses appeared. We know the land masses grow and sundered, drifting apart to form continents. We are told the Himalaya is still growing taller. The process is very slow, but it is growing if we compare heights over the years.

8. The land masses too change in shape so that the shorelines change even during our times. We have found sea-shells on land very far from the sea, on mountains even.

9. We know all these had happened in the past. It cannot be that all these changes and processes stopped because civilised man now occupy this earth.

10. The process of change on this earth must be continuous. It must be continuing.

11. Men have always believed in the end of the world. Almost every religion talks of the Last Day of the earth. But we really do not know when it will happen. Could it be that we are progressing towards it even now.

12. It may take a hundred thousand years. But can we expect the changes to cease. Can we expect the volcanoes and the quakes, the violent storms, tsunamis and tornadoes, the floods and landslides etc to remain mild or benign as they used to be. I should think not.

13. Instead we must expect increasing frequency and violence of the natural cataclysms. The world may become so hot that living things cannot survive. The world may become so cold, the third Ice Age, that living things cannot thrive either.

14. For humanity it can mean the end of their world .

15. So it is true, what the religions warn us about. For Muslims there has never been any doubt. There will be kiamat. Perhaps the scientists too will finally admit that for men the world has come to an end.

16. But whether they do or not the end will come.

Legal

APOLOGY

46 Comments

1. I would like to apologise for the amendment to the constitution which made the approval and signature of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong no longer necessary for the legalising of an act of Parliament. It would seem that because of the amendment, the new National Security Law has become operational even though the Yang di-Pertuan Agong has not signed it.

2. However I would like to point out that the amendment is not for all laws. Some laws passed by Parliament will still need the consent and signature of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. In fact there are more than thirty proceedings listed out in the constitution that still needs the Agong’s approval frequently without the advise of the Prime Minister.

3. Among these rights and power is that of declaring a state of emergency. The state of emergency is reserved for the Yang di-Pertuan Agong because it’s implications are serious. It gives the Government the right to suspend laws. With this right the Government can arrest and detain any person without trial.

4. Clause (I) of Article 150, Proclamation of Emergency states “If the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is satisfied that a grave emergency exists whereby the security, or the economic life, or public order in the Federation or any part thereof is threatened, he may issue a Proclamation of Emergency making therein a declaration to that effect.”

(2) A Proclamation of Emergency under Clause (I) may be issued before the actual occurrence of the event which threatens the security, or the economic life, or public order in the Federation or any part thereof if the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is satisfied that there is imminent danger of the occurrence of such event.

(2A) The power conferred on the Yang di-Pertuan Agong by this Article shall include the power to issue different Proclamations on different grounds or in different circumstances, whether or not there is a Proclamation or Proclamations already issued by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong under clause (I) and such Proclamation or Proclamations are in operation.

(2B) If at any time while a Proclamation of Emergency is in operation, except when both Houses of Parliament are sitting concurrently, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is satisfied that certain circumstances exist which render it necessary for him to take immediate action, he may promulgate such ordinances as circumstances appear to him require.

(2C) An ordinance promulgated under Clause (2B) shall have the same force and effect as an Act of Parliament, and shall continue in full force and effect as if it is an Act of Parliament until it is revoked or annulled under Clause (3) or until it lapses under Clause (7); and the power of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to promulgate ordinances under Clause (2B) may be exercised in relation to any matter with respect to which Parliament has power to make laws, regardless of the legislative or other procedures required to be followed, or the proportion of the total votes required to be had, in either House of Parliament.

(3) A Proclamation of Emergency and any ordinance promulgated under Clause (2B) shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament and, if not sooner revoked, shall cease to have effect if resolutions are passed by both Houses annulling such Proclamation or ordinance, but without prejudice to anything previously done by virtue thereof or to the power of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to issue a new Proclamation under Clause (I) or promulgate any ordinance under Clause (2B).

(4) While a Proclamation of Emergency is in force the executive authority of the Federation shall, notwithstanding anything in this Constitution, extend to any matter within the legislative authority of a State and to the giving of directions to the Government of a State or to any officer or authority thereof.

(8) Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution —
(a) the satisfaction of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong mentioned in Clause (I) and Clause (2B) shall be final and conclusive and shall not be challenged or called in question in any court on any ground.
From these articles and clauses it is clear that
(I) The power of the Agong to proclaim an emergency solely rests with the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and may not be challenged.

5. There is no mention in this case that the Agong acts on the advise of the Prime Minister. The Yang di-Pertuan Agong can even promulgate an ordinance which shall have the same force as an Act of Parliament.

6. There is therefore no necessity for any other laws to enable the Government to suspend laws in order to deal with a security situation.

7. Besides being superfluous the new National Security Act, by giving the power of the Agong to the Prime Minister is derogatory to the provision in Article 38 (4) which states “No law directly affecting the privileges, position, honours or dignities of the Rulers shall be passed without the consent of the “Conference of Rulers”.

8. Clearly the National Security Act, by encroaching unto the special position of the Conference of Rulers, is contrary to the rights of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to declare a state of emergency. For this Security Act to become law the consent and the signature of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is still needed.

9. Under (3) of Article 40 Federal Law may make provision for requiring the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to act after consultation of any person other than the Cabinet in the exercise of any function other than –
(a) functions exercisable in his discretion.

10. The declaration of an Emergency is one which the Constitution specifies as being at the discretion of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. Since the National Security Act is meant to give the power of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to the Prime Minister as chairman of the Security Council, the need for the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to have the sole right to decide a state of Emergency becomes redundant. Effectively the NSC had taken away the power and the right of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. For this to be done the consent of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Conference of Rulers has to be obtained.

11. Clearly when the Government ignores the request of the Rulers and the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to revise the NSC Act, it is not complying with the Constitution as amended. This being so the National Security Act cannot become law.

12. Article 130
Advisory jurisdiction of Federal Court.
The Yang di-Pertuan Agong may refer to the Federal Court for its opinion any question as to the effect of any provision of this Constitution which has arisen or appear to him likely to arise, and the Federal Court shall pronounce in open court its opinion on any question so referred to it.

13. This provision entitles the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to refer to the Federal Court should there be doubt as to the legality or otherwise of the National Security Act which has not obtained the consent and signature of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

14. Appointment of the Prime Minister.
One of the discretionary powers of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is the appointment of the Prime Minister. The need is for the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to appoint an elected person as P.M. if he has the support of the majority of the members of the Dewan Rakyat. The name submitted by the winning party need not be accepted by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong if he feels there are other candidates.

15. Thus, based on similar provisions in the respective State Constitutions, in three states – Terengganu, Perlis and Selangor – the candidates submitted by the winning parties were rejected and the Rulers decided on other candidates. They were appointed Menteri Besar and were accepted by the state councils.

16. The Yang di-Pertuan Agong clearly has discretionary power to appoint a Prime Minister. If the Dewan Rakyat at its sitting rejects the candidate appointed by the Agong then he ceases to be the Prime Minister. A new candidate will then be named by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

17. (105) Auditor General

(I) There shall be an Auditor General, who shall be appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on the advice of the Prime Minister and after consultation with the Conference of Rulers.

106. Powers and duties of Auditor General
(I) The accounts of the Federation and of the States shall be audited and reported on by the Auditor General.
(2) The Auditor General shall perform such other duties and exercise such powers in relation to the accounts of the Federation and of the States and to the accounts of other public authorities and of those bodies which are specified by order made by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, as may be provided by federal law.

107. Reports of Auditor General
(I) The Auditor General shall submit his reports to the Yang di- Pertuan Agong, who shall cause them to be laid before the House of Representatives.

18. The Prime Minister, Dato Sri Najib had ordered the Auditor General to audit the accounts of the 1MDB. But instead of submitting this report to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, the Auditor General reported instead to the Public Accounts Committee. The report of the PAC together with this report of the Auditor General were then submitted to the Attorney General. The Auditor General’s report was then declared to be an official secret and was placed under the Official Secrets Act.

19. This is contrary to the provision in the Constitution wherein the report of the Auditor General should be submitted to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and then laid before the House of Representatives. Clearly the Government of Dato Sri Najib has not only ignored the provision of the Constitution but also acted against it by giving the report to the Attorney General. It was then classified as official secret.

20. The essence of an audit is to expose any wrong-doings or mismanagement by those responsible for the monies of an organisation. By making the Auditor General’s report a secret the whole purpose of the auditing is negated. The public has a right to charge the Government for attempting to hide the Auditor General’s reports.

21. As I said at the beginning, the amendment to the Constitution which can render the consent and signature of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong unnecessary is not total. The consent and signature is still needed if the act impinges on the authority and position of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. And the National Security Act certainly impinges and makes the power of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to declare a state of Emergency superfluous and unnecessary. For this Act the assent and signature of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong remains necessary.

22. In declaring that the National Security Act is now legal even though it does not get the assent and signature of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Dato Sri Najib is not adhering to the amendment to the Constitution as made when I was Prime Minister.

23. I sincerely apologise for making the amendment as it is open to misinterpretation. The amendment has not ordered the other powers of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, more than thirty of them, invalid.

VERSI BM

MOHON MAAF

1. Saya ingin memohon maaf kerana pindaan perlembagaan yang menyebabkan kelulusan dan tandatangan Yang di-Pertuan Agong tidak lagi menjadi keperluan untuk menjadikan suatu Akta Parlimen sebagai undang-undang. Kononnya disebabkan pindaan ini, maka Akta Majlis Keselamatan Negara yang baru telah dapat dikuatkuasakan walaupun tidak mendapat tandatangan persetujuan Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

2. Tetapi saya ingin jelaskan bahawa pindaan tersebut bukanlah meliputi semua undang-undang. Terdapat beberapa undang-undang yang diluluskan Parlimen yang masih lagi perlu mendapat persetujuan dan tandatangan Yang di-Pertuan Agong.Sebenarnya terdapat lebih 30 prosiding yang tersenarai dalam Perlembagaan yang memerlukan persetujuan Yang di-Pertuan Agong sebahagian darinya tanpa mendapatkan nasihat Perdana Menteri.

3. Diantara hak dan kuasa ini termasuk mengisytihar darurat. Perisytiharan darurat adalah keistimewaan yang diberi kepada Yang di-Pertuan Agong kerana implikasinya amat serius.Ianya memberi hak kepada kerajaan untuk menggantung pelaksanaan undang-undang.Dengan ini Kerajaan boleh menangkap sesiapa sahaja tanpa dibicara.

4. Fasal (1) Perkara 150, Proklamasi Darurat menyatakan “Jika Yang di-Pertuan Agong berpuas hati bahawa suatu darurat besar sedang berlaku yang menyebabkan keselamatan, atau kehidupan ekonomi, atau ketenteraman awam di dalam Persekutuan atau mana-mana bahagiannya terancam, maka Yang di-Pertuan Agong boleh mengeluarkan suatu Proklamasi Darurat dengan membuat dalamnya suatu perisytiharan yang bermaksud sedemikian.

(2) Proklamasi Darurat di bawah Fasal (1) boleh dikeluarkan sebelum sebenarnya berlaku kejadian yang mengancam keselamatan, atau kehidupan ekonomi, atau ketenteraman awam di dalam Persekutuan atau mana-mana bahagiannya jika Yang di-Pertuan Agong berpuas hati bahawa kejadian sedemikian hampir akan berlaku.

(2A) Kuasa yang diberikan kepada Yang di-Pertuan Agong oleh Perkara ini termasuklah untuk mengeluarkan Proklamasi-Proklamasi yang berlainan atas alasan-alasan yang berlainan atau dalam hal-hal keadaan yang berlainan, sama ada suatu Proklamasi atau Proklamasi-Proklamasi sudah dikeluarkan atau tidak oleh Yang di-Pertuan Agong di bawah Fasal (1) dan Proklamasi atau Proklamasi-Proklamasi itu sedang berkuatkuasa.

(2B) Jika pada bila-bila masa semasa suatu Proklamasi Darurat sedang berkuat kuasa, kecuali apabila kedua-dua Majlis Parlimen sedang bersidang serentak, Yang di-Pertuan Agong berpuas hati bahawa ada hal-hal keadaan tertentu yang menyebabkan perlu baginya mengambil tindakan serta-merta, maka Yang di-Pertuan Agong boleh memasyhurkan apa-apa ordinan sebagaimana yang didapatinya perlu mengikut hal keadaan.

(2C) Sesuatu ordinan yang dimasyhurkan di bawah Fasal (2B) hendaklah mempunyai kuat kuasa dan kesan yang sama sebagaimana Akta Parlimen, dan hendaklah terus berkuat kuasa dan berkesan sepenuhnya seolah-olah ordinan itu ialah Akta Parlimen sehingga ordinan itu dibatalkan atau diungkaikan di bawah Fasal (3) atau sehingga ordinan itu luput di bawah Fasal (7) ; dan kuasa Yang di-Pertuan Agong untuk memasyhurkan ordinan di bawah Fasal (2B) boleh dijalankan berhubung dengan apa-apa perkara mengenainya yang Parlimen berkuasa membuat undang-undang, tanpa menghiraukan tatacara perundangan atau tatacara lain yang dikehendaki diikuti, atau perkadaran jumlah undi yang dikehendaki diperoleh di dalam mana-mana satu Majlis Parlimen.

(3) Proklamasi Darurat dan apa-apa ordinan yang dimasyhurkan di bawah Fasal (2B) hendaklah dibentangkan di hadapan kedua- dua Majlis Parlimen dan, jika tidak terlebih dahulu dibatalkan, hendaklah terhenti berkuat kuasa jika ketetapan diluluskan oleh kedua-dua Majlis yang mengungkaikan Proklamasi atau ordinan itu, tetapi tanpa menjejaskan apa-apa jua yang dilakukan sebelumnya menurut kuasa Proklamasi atau ordinan itu atau tanpa menjejaskan kuasa Yang di-Pertuan Agong untuk mengeluarkan suatu Proklamasi baru di bawah Fasal (1) atau memasyhurkan apa-apa ordinan di bawah Fasal (2B).

(4) Semasa Proklamasi Darurat berkuat kuasa, kuasa eksekutif Persekutuan hendaklah, walau apa pun yang terdapat dalam Perlembagaan ini, meliputi apa-apa perkara dalam kuasa perundangan sesuatu Negeri dan pemberian arahan kepada Kerajaan sesuatu Negeri atau kepada mana-mana pegawai atau pihak berkuasa Negeri itu.

(8) Walau apa pun terdapat dalam Perlembagaan ini—
(a)  hal puas hati Yang di-Pertuan Agong yang disebut dalam Fasal (1) dan Fasal (2B) adalah muktamad dan konklusif dan tidaklah boleh dicabar atau dipersoalkan di dalam mana- mana mahkamah atas apa-apa alasan;
Daripada Perkara dan Fasal tersebut, nyatalah bahawa
(I) Kuasa Yang di-Pertuan Agong untuk mengisytihar darurat kekal terletak hanya pada Yang di-Pertuan Agong dan tidak boleh di pertikaikan.

5. Tidak ada disebut yang di dalam kes ini, Yang di-Pertuan Agong bertindak atas nasihat Perdana Menteri. Yang di-Pertuan Agong juga boleh memasyhurkan ordinan yang mempunyai kuasa yang sama dengan Akta Parlimen.

6. Dengan kuasa ini yang kekal ditangan Yang di-Pertuan Agong tidak terdapat apa-apa keperluan bagi mana-mana undang-undang lain untuk membolehkan Kerajaan menggantung undang-undang bagi menangani masalah keselamatan.

7. Selain tidak menjadi keperluan, Akta Majlis Keselamatan Negara yang baru yang memindahkan kuasa Yang di-Pertuan Agong kepada Perdana Menteri menghina peruntukan Perkara 38 (4) yang menyatakan “Tiada undang-undang yang secara langsung menyentuh keistimewaan, kedudukan, kemuliaan atau kebesaran Raja-Raja boleh diluluskan tanpa persetujuan Majlis Raja-Raja.”

8. Jelas sekali Akta Majlis Keselamatan Negara ini, menceroboh kedudukan istimewa Majlis Raja-Raja dan bertentangan dengan hak Yang di-Pertuan Agong untuk mengisytihar darurat.Untuk Akta ini diluluskan sebagai undang-undang persetujuan dan tandatangan Yang di-Pertuan Agong masih diperlukan.

9. Dibawah Fasal (3) Perkara 40 Undang-undang Persekutuan peruntukanboleh diadakan bagi menghendaki Yang di-Pertuan Agong bertindak selepas berunding dengan atau atas syor mana-mana orang atau kumpulan orang yang bukan dari Jemaah Menteri pada menjalankan mana-mana fungsinya selain—

(a) fungsi yang boleh dijalankan menurut budi bicaranya;
.

10. Mengisytihar darurat adalah satu perkara yang ditentukan Perlembagaan sebagai atas budi bicara Yang di-Pertuan Agong.Tetapi apabila Akta Majlis Keselamatan Negara memindahkan kuasa Yang di-Pertuan Agong kepada Perdana Menteri sebagai pengerusi Majlis Keselamatan, keperluan bagi Yang di-Pertuan Agong untuk secara bersendirian melaksanakan hak untuk memutuskan darurat tidak lagi bermakna. Secara dasarnya Majlis Keselamatan Negara telah merampas kuasa dan hak Yang di-Pertuan Agong untuk melaksanakan perkara ini. Persetujuan Yang di-Pertuan Agong dan Majlis Raja-Raja haruslah diperolehi lebih dahulu.

11. Apabila Kerajaan mengenepikan permintaan Raja-Raja dan Yang di-Pertuan Agong supaya Akta Majlis Keselamatan Negara diperhalusi dan disemak semula, maka jelas sekali pindaaan tersebut tidak mematuhi Perlembagaan. Oleh itu Akta Majlis Keselamatan Negara tidak boleh dimeterai sebagai undang-undang.

12. Perkara 130
Bidang kuasa nasihat Mahkamah Persekutuan
Yang di-Pertuan Agong boleh merujukkan kepada Mahkamah Persekutuan untuk pendapatnya apa-apa soal tentang kesan mana- mana peruntukan Perlembagaan ini yang telah berbangkit atau yang tampak padanya mungkin berbangkit, dan Mahkamah Persekutuan hendaklah mengumumkan pendapatnya tentang apa- apa soal yang dirujukkan sedemikian kepadanya itu di dalam mahkamah terbuka.

13. Peruntukan ini memberi hak kepada Yang di-Pertuan Agong untuk merujuk ke Mahkamah Persekutuan jika terdapat kesangsian terhadap kesahihan ataupun ketidaksahihan Akta Majlis Keselamatan Negara yang tidak pun mendapat persetujuan serta tandatangan Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

14. Perlantikan Perdana Menteri.
Lantikan Perdana Menteri juga merupakan kuasa budi bicara Yang di-Pertuan Agong.Yang diperlukan ialah supaya Yang di-Pertuan Agong melantik seorang individu sebagai Perdana Menteri jika individu tersebut mempunyai sokongan majoriti ahli Dewan Rakyat.Nama yang dicadangkan oleh parti yang menang tidak semestinya diterima Yang di-Pertuan Agong, jika Yang di-Pertuan Agong merasakan bahawa terdapat calon lain yang lebih sesuai.

15. Oleh sebab itu, berdasarkan kepada peruntukan yang sama di dalam Perlembagaan Negeri masing-masing, di tiga negeri – Terengganu, Perlis dan Selangor – calon yang dikemukakan parti yang menang ditolak dan Raja-Raja membuat keputusan menerima calon yang lain. Mereka ini dilantik sebagai Menteri Besar dan diterima Majlis Mesyuarat Negeri.

16. Yang di-Pertuan Agong jelas sekali mempunyai hak untuk melantik Perdana Menteri atas budi bicara. Jika semasa persidangan, Dewan Rakyat menolak lantikan Yang di-Pertuan Agong, maka calon tersebut terpaksa berhenti daripada menjadi Perdana Menteri. Yang di-Pertuan Agong akan menamakan calon yang baru.

17. (105) Ketua Audit Negara

(1) Maka hendaklah ada seorang Ketua Audit Negara, yang hendaklah dilantik oleh Yang di-Pertuan Agong atas nasihat Perdana Menteri dan selepas berunding dengan Majlis Raja-Raja.

106. Kuasa dan tugas Ketua Audit Negara
(1) Akaun bagi Persekutuan dan bagi Negeri-Negeri hendaklah diaudit dan dibuat laporan mengenainya oleh Ketua Audit Negara.

(2) Ketua Audit Negara hendaklah melaksanakan apa-apa tugas lain dan menjalankan apa-apa kuasa sebagaimana yang diperuntukkan oleh undang-undang persekutuan berhubung dengan akaun bagi Persekutuan dan akaun bagi Negeri-Negeri dan berhubung dengan akaun bagi pihak-pihak berkuasa awam lain dan akaun bagi badan yang dinyatakan melalui perintah yang dibuat oleh Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

107. Laporan Ketua Audit Negara

(1) Ketua Audit Negara hendaklah mengemukakan laporan- laporannya kepada Yang di-Pertuan Agong yang hendaklah menyebabkan laporan itu dibentangkan di hadapan Dewan Rakyat.

18. Perdana Menteri, Dato Sri Najib telah memerintahkan Ketua Audit Negara untuk mengaudit akaun 1MDB. Laporan yang sepatutnya dibentangkan kepada Yang di-Pertuan Agong sebaliknya di hantar kepada Jawatankuasa Kira-Kira Wang Negara (PAC). Laporan PAC bersama dengan laporan Ketua Audit Negara kemudian dihantar kepada Peguam Negara. Laporan Ketua Audit Negara kemudiannya diisytihar sebagai rahsia dan diletakkan di bawah Akta Rahsia Rasmi.

19. Ini bertentangan dengan peruntukan Perlembagaan dimana laporan Ketua Audit Negara hendaklah di hantar kepada Yang di-Pertuan Agong dan kemudiannya dibentang kepada Dewan Rakyat. Amat jelas bahawa Kerajaan pimpinan Dato Sri Najib bukan sahaja mengabai peruntukan Perlembagaan, tetapi bertindak bertentangan dengannya, dengan memberi laporan tersebut kepada Peguam Negara. Ianya kemudian diklasifikasi sebagai rahsia rasmi.

20. Intipati laporan audit ialah untuk membongkar salah-laku atau kepincangan dalam pengurusan oleh pihak yang bertanggungjawab menguruskan kewangan sesuatu organisasi. Dengan mengisytihar laporan Ketua Audit Negara sebagai rahsia, maka sia-sia lah tindakan dan tujuan audit diadakan. Rakyat mempunyai hak untuk mengambil tindakan ke atas Kerajaan kerana menyembunyi hasil laporan Ketua Audit Negara.

21. Seperti yang saya katakan dari awal lagi, pindaan kepada Perlembagaan yang menyebabkan persetujuan serta tandatangan Yang di-Pertuan Agong tidak lagi diperlukan bukanlah secara menyeluruh. Persetujuan dan tandatangan Yang di-Pertuan Agong masih lagi diperlukan jika Akta yang dicadangkan menyentuh kuasa serta kedudukan Yang di-Pertuan Agong. Dan Akta Majlis Keselamatan Negara jelas memberi kesan ke atas kuasa Yang di-Pertuan Agong untuk mengisytihar darurat, yang mana kuasa tersebut tidak lagi bermakna. Untuk Akta ini, persetujuan serta tandatangan Yang di-Pertuan Agong masih diperlukan.

22. Di dalam mengisytiharkan yang Akta Keselamatan Negara ini sudah menjadi undang-undang, walaupun ianya tidak mendapat persetujuan serta tandatangan Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Dato Sri Najib tidak mematuhi pindaan kepada Perlembagaan yang dibuat semasa saya menjadi Perdana Menteri.

23. Saya dengan penuh ikhlas memohon maaf kerana membuat pindaan tersebut yang terbuka kepada tafsiran yang berbeza. Pindaan tersebut tidak melucutkan lebih 30 perkara lain dibawah kuasa Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

UMNO

SPEAKING FRANKLY

57 Comments

1. Musa’s book “Frankly Speaking” makes interesting reading. Speaking frankly does not mean speaking truthfully. And when talking of things which happened 30-40 years ago, the accuracy of incidents and conversations are affected by current situations.

2. Frankly Speaking seeks to blame me for everything that happened in UMNO and the Government over all these years. Musa naturally does not blame himself for anything. He is as innocent as a newborn child. Which explains why he is so popular.

3. On loyalty. He said I demanded absolute loyalty. On that basis many including Musa, would have felt the full weight of my displeasure.

Continue reading SPEAKING FRANKLY →

UMNO

WHY A NEW PARTY?

20 Comments

1. I am surprised that there are people asking why a new party should be formed.

2. It should not if the dominant party in the Government coalition is playing the role and upholding the objectives for which it was formed or even some semblance of them.

3. Earlier when suggestions were made for a new party to contest against UMNO, they were rejected as it was hoped that if Najib ceased to be its president, UMNO could be resuscitated and regain the support of the people. The BN could still continue to be the Government of Malaysia.

4. But rapidly this idea became untenable. For one thing the wrong doings of Najib had become more open and serious. Not only was 1MDB losing billions but it was unable to pay debts. Then it was discovered that Najib had more that 2.6 billion Ringgit in his private account. A Prime Minister of Malaysia should not have this kind of money in his account no matter how he may have acquired it.

5. Then it was found that Najib had a total grip on UMNO. Any criticism of his leadership was not tolerated. Critics were expelled and tame leaders were put in place. They all seem to be obligated to Najib despite his wrongdoings. A vote of no confidence in him became impossible.

6. A personality cult was built up so that Najib could not be challenged or deposed. Nothing else mattered to UMNO, especially to UMNO members of Parliament.

7. It became clear there was no way for a leadership change and UMNO to be resuscitated.

8. With these developments the idea of a new party to contest against UMNO became not only attractive but also absolutely necessary.

9. UMNO is a race-based party. Until 2004 this race-based party had won the support of all races through a coalition with other race-based parties. Even the multi-racial parties in the BN were race-based.

10. The sophisticated and highly educated urban people may believe that racial politics is not in keeping with the times. But on the ground it is different. For the rural people who largely are poor, race is not only important but they believe is essential for their well-being. UMNO’s popularity is because it is a racial party.

11. If the new party is to compete with UMNO, it must give the people in the rural constituencies and the unsophisticated urban constituencies the kind of comfort associated with UMNO’s kind of racism.

12. Still the new party is not to be confined to Malays only but to all indigenous people – the Bumiputeras. Besides it is ready to accept Bumis and non-Bumis as associate members.

13. I have studied the fate of the parties which won independence in other countries. Most of them have disappeared. They had lost to new parties formed after independence because invariably they forgot the purpose for which the parties are formed and abused the power accorded them for personal gains.

14. UMNO had lasted much longer. But under Najib it forgot completely the purpose for which it was formed. Najib has brought shame to this once admired country. The whole world looks down upon Najib for being the worst Finance Minister of Malaysia and for all kinds of wrong doings perpetrated by him.

15. Only a new party can revive the country’s glory of the past. The new party will take cognisance of the changes in the thinking of all Malaysians. We had made progress. Our people are better educated, and are better off in many ways. Their perceptions of things and their aspirations have changed.

16. The new party will restore democracy and the rule of la which have been denied and abused by Najib.

17. The separation of powers between the legislative, the executive and the judiciary will be upheld. Additionally the legal service represented by the Attorney-General will be separated from the judiciary. The AG may not pass judgement over reports made to the police except when the reports are vexations and irrelevant. Even then the AG must give his reasons to the public and not just say there is no case to answer. Certainly he must not put the reports under the Official Secrets Act.

18. Any suspicion of corruption must be investigated and the report made public. All Malaysian officials must be seen to live within their means. This include all members of the Cabinet.

19. Foreign observers will oversee elections and will have full access to the operations of the election, both Government and Opposition.

20. The anti-corruption commission will have non-Government members. All transactions by Government must be transparent.

21. Borrowings by the Government must not exceed amounts fixed by Parliament. Guarantees by Government should regarded as borrowings by Government.

22. These are some of the things the new party will struggle for. It will strive to improve the performance of the Government and give a better life for the people. It will try to regain the respect and honour of this nation in the eyes of the people and the world.

23. UMNO cannot do all these anymore. That is why a new party has to be formed.

24. We aspire to serve the people. We pray the people will help us achieve our aspirations for them.

 

UMNO

CAMPUR TANGAN ASING

46 Comments

1. Seperti biasa Najib gelabah apabila kenyataan benar berkenaan salahlaku olehnya didedah.

2. Demikian pendedahan yang dibuat oleh Department of Justice (DOJ) Amerika Syarikat berkenaan salahguna wang oleh keluarga dan kawannya dan oleh “Malaysian Official 1” yang semua tahu ialah Perdana Menteri Najib sendiri.

3. Najib dan konco-konconya memikir akan cara memutarbelit fakta yang didedah supaya rakyat Malaysia tertipu.

Continue reading CAMPUR TANGAN ASING →

UMNO

NAJIB’S FREEDOM

67 Comments

1. Najib tells his tame audience that I want him to do things my way only. Maybe so though I don’t think it is true.

2. But if he wants to do things his way, it should at least to be something good for the country. Promoting corruption is certainly not good for the country or for anyone.

3. Having 2.6 billion Ringgit in his private account is also not good. No Prime Minister of Malaysia should have that amount of Ringgit in his private account. And the explanation he gives as to the source of the billions is quite ridiculous.

Continue reading NAJIB’S FREEDOM →

UMNO

PEMIMPIN UMNO

178 Comments

1. Bilakah pemimpin UMNO akan mengakui kebenaran tuduhan yang dibuat terhadap Najib?

2. Sejak mula skandal 1MDB didedah, pemimpin-pemimpin UMNO cuba menidakkan tuduhan terhadap Najib.

3. Kononnya semua tuduhan ini berniat jahat – bertujuan untuk menjatuhkan seorang pemimpin yang dipilih secara demokratik. Mereka sengaja lupakan bahawa Dato Abdullah, PM Malaysia Kelima juga dipilih secara demokratik tetapi dijatuhkan oleh Najib sendiri.

4. Dalam negara demokratik banyak sudah pemimpin yang dipilih dalam pilihanraya yang dijatuhkan sebelum edahnya. Demikian PM Abbott Austraila. President Brazil digantung jawatan atas keputusan mahkamah tinggi supaya siasatan dapat dibuat keatasnya tanpa halangan.

Continue reading PEMIMPIN UMNO →

1MDB

THE CAT IS NOW OUT OF THE BAG

193 Comments

THE CAT IS NOW OUT OF THE BAG

1.The Department of Justice of the United States of America has taken action to seize the assets of named individuals suspected of stealing money belonging to 1MDB, and the Government of Malaysia.

2.Altogether 17 assets are listed. They include properties, investments, aircrafts, yachts, companies, paintings and movie films. They are worth USD 1 billion. The 136 page document gives in detail the way the money was siphoned through fraudulent investments in bogus companies, passing through various banks and individuals and ending in the account of MALAYSIAN OFFICIAL 1.

3.Who is Malaysian Official 1 mentioned 36 times in the report. He is described as “a high-ranking official in the Malaysian Government who also held a position of authority with 1MDB. During all times relevant to the complaint, Malaysian Official 1 was a “public official” as that term is used in 18 USC – 1956(c)(7)(B)(iv) and a “public servant” as the term as used in Section 21 of the Malaysian Penal Code.”

4.In para 39 of the report “Malaysian Official 1 assumed a position of authority with 1MDB. Malaysian Official 1 had the authority to approve all appointment to, and removals from, 1MDB’s Board of Directors and 1MDB’s Senior Management Team. In addition, any financial commitment by 1MDB, including investments, that are likely to affect a guarantee given by the Government of Malaysia for the benefit of 1MDB or any policy of the Malaysian Government, required the approval of Malaysian Official1.”

Para 102 of the report states “that Malaysian Official 1 is the ultimate beneficiary of AMPRIVATE BANKING – MR Account is the same account that later received certain payments totalling approximately $681 million USD in March 2013. As set forth in Paragraph 263 below, the Attorney General of Malaysia has publicly stated that the account into which these $681 million payments were made belonged to Dato Sri Najib, the Prime Minister of Malaysia. It cannot be that the accounts and the sum of USD 681 belong to two different people.

Para 28 states “Malaysian Official 1 is a high-ranking official in the Malaysian Government who also held a position of authority with 1MDB.”

Para 29 “Riza Shahriz bin Abdul Aziz (“Aziz”), a Malaysian national, is a relative of Malaysian Official 1 and a friend of LOW. He co-founded Red Granite Pictures, a Hollywood movie production and distribution studio, in 2010.”

In Para 39 Malaysian Official 1 assumed a position of authority with 1MDB etc etc.

5.I don’t know why the US officials writing the report are being coy about giving the real name of Malaysian Official 1 when they are happy to write down the names of the other culprits; namely Riza Aziz, Jho Low and Khadim Abdullah. If it is because this is not at the stage of making criminal charges, then no names should be named.

6.Now Najib and his goons are saying that Najib is not involved as his name is not mentioned. Najib himself is saying, “Allow legal process to take its course for those named by US DOJ.” Clearly he did not consider the legal process would include investigation regarding his role in stealing the money belonging to 1MDB.

7.Yet the references to Malaysian Official 1 coincide with what is known and admitted by Najib were associated with him. This includes the reference to the $681 million in the Account of Malaysian Official 1, the reference to Malaysian Official 1 authority over the Government and 1MDB which coincides with Najib’s position as Minister of Finance and Adviser to the Board of 1MDB. And so it goes on with the other 30 or so descriptions of the authority and role of Malaysian Official 1 coinciding with those of Najib as Prime Minister, Minister of Finance of Malaysia and Adviser to the Board of 1MDB.

8.Despite detailed descriptions in the DOJ report on how 1MDB money had been shunted through various companies, including Good Star, a company belonging to Jho Low and banks in a number of countries and finally appearing in the account of Malaysian Official 1 in Ambank, the Attorney General insists that there is no proof that money from 1MDB was misused.

9.Under 11 on Para 14 of the DOJ report “The Good Star Phase: More than $1 billion is misappropriated from 1MDB.”

10.In Para 40, the manner through which $1 billion of 1MDB money was invested in Petro Saudi is detailed.

11.Para 41 explained that Jho Low and his associates caused $700 million of the 1 billion meant to be invested in Petro Saudi, to be sent to an account at RBS Coutts Bank in Zurich held in the name of Good Star Ltd, a company owned by Jho Low.

12.Para 42 states that “between May and Oct 2011, approximately $330 million in additional funds were wired at the direction of 1MDB official to the Good Star account purportedly in connection with a financing agreements between 1MDB and 1MDB – Petro Saudi JV.

13.Perhaps the Malaysian A.G. can explain why 1MDB investments of $1 billion should go into the account of Good Star in RBS Coutts Bank in Zurich. Or is he going to deny that this happened? In that case he should show proofs that it did not happen. Merely saying it is not true is not enough. The A.G.’s words have no credibility at all. His claims that there is no evidence of Najib’s wrongdoing in all the reports submitted to him is about as credible as a crocodile shedding tears. AG’s claim that Najib gave back RM 2.3 billion of the RM 2.6 billion given by the dead King of Saudi Arabia is just as incredible. No transfer documents and no receipts have been exhibited.

14.Stealing money is a crime. Merely seizing the stolen money does not nullify the crime. The only logical sequence to the seizures of stolen money is the criminal charge against the thieves. How is the DOJ of the USA going to charge the Malaysian Official 1 without naming him?

15.Malaysians’ want to regain their good name. They don’t want to be led by a leader suspected of kleptocracy of stealing billions of Government money. They cannot do anything themselves because Malaysia Official 1 controls the Attorney General and the police – the enforcement agencies. They cannot remove him through a vote of non-confidence as he controls a majority of the Members of Parliament through illegal measures.

16.Like it or not they have to rely on actions by foreign countries. If the US really believes in eradicating corruption and money laundering which involves their country, they should not be shy about naming names and letting due process to take place.

17.When the thief is in charge of the police and the prosecuting agency, only foreign intervention can bring about justice.

18.Cry my beloved country.
VERSI BM
SEKARANG RAHSIA TELAH TERBONGKAR

1. Jabatan Kehakiman Amerika Syarikat telah mengambil tindakan untuk merampas aset individu-individu yang dinamakan yang disyaki mencuri wang hak milik 1MDB dan Kerajaan Malaysia.

2. Secara keseluruhannya 17 aset telah disenaraikan. Ini termasuk harta, pelaburan, pesawat udara, kapal layar, syarikat-syarikat, lukisan dan filem-filem. Jumlahnya bernilai USD1 bilion. Dokumen sepanjang 136 halaman itu menunjukkan secara terperinci cara wang itu disalurkan melalui pelaburan penipuan dalam syarikat-syarikat palsu, melalui pelbagai bank dan individu-individu serta berakhir dalam akaun MALAYSIAN OFFICIAL 1.

3. Siapakah Malaysian Official 1 yang disebut 36 kali dalam laporan ini. Beliau digambarkan sebagai “seorang pegawai berpangkat tinggi dalam Kerajaan Malaysia yang juga memegang kedudukan yang berkuasa dengan 1MDB. Sepanjang keseluruhan masa berkaitan dengan aduan itu, Malaysian Official 1 adalah “pegawai awam” sebagai istilah yang digunakan dalam 18 USC – 1956 (c) (7) (B) (iv) dan “penjawat awam” sebagai istilah yang digunakan dalam Seksyen 21 Kanun Keseksaan Malaysia.”

4. Dalam para 39 laporan tersebut “Malaysian Official 1 memegang jawatan yang berkuasa dengan 1MDB. Malaysian Official 1 mempunyai kuasa untuk meluluskan semua pelantikan kepada, dan penarikan balik daripada, Lembaga Pengarah 1MDB dan Kumpulan Pengurusan Kanan 1MDB. Di samping itu, sebarang komitmen kewangan 1MDB, termasuk pelaburan yang mungkin memberi kesan kepada jaminan yang diberikan oleh Kerajaan Malaysia untuk manfaat 1MDB atau mana-mana dasar kerajaan Malaysia, memerlukan kelulusan Malaysian Official 1. ”

Para 102 laporan menyatakan bahawa Malaysian Official 1 adalah benefisiari muktamad AmPrivate Banking – Akaun MR adalah akaun sama yang kemudiannya menerima bayaran tertentu berjumlah kira-kira USD681 juta pada Mac 2013. Seperti yang dinyatakan dalam Perenggan 263 di bawah, Peguam Negara Malaysia telah secara terbuka menyatakan bahawa akaun yang menerima bayaran $681 milion itu dipunyai oleh Dato Sri Najib, Perdana Menteri Malaysia. Tidak mungkin akaun dan jumlah USD681 juta dimiliki oleh dua orang yang berbeza.

Para 28 menyatakan “Malaysian Official 1″ adalah seorang pegawai berpangkat tinggi dalam Kerajaan Malaysia yang juga memegang kedudukan yang berkuasa dengan 1MDB.”

Para 29 “Riza Shahriz bin Abdul Aziz (“Aziz”), seorang warganegara Malaysia, adalah saudara kepada Malaysian Official 1 dan seorang kawan LOW. Beliau adalah pengasas bersama Red Granite Pictures, iaitu studio pengeluaran dan pengedaran filem Hollywood, pada tahun 2010.”

Dalam Para 39 Malaysian Official 1 mengambil alih kedudukan berkuasa dengan 1MDB dan lain-lain.

5. Saya tidak tahu mengapa pegawai-pegawai Amerika yang menulis laporan segan memberi nama sebenar Malaysian Official 1 pada hal dengan rela hati menyebut nama-nama pesalah lain, iaitu Riza Aziz, Jho Low dan Khadim Abdullah. Jika ini adalah kerana bukan peringkatnya untuk membuat tuduhan jenayah, maka mana-mana nama pun tidak patut disebut.

6. Sekarang Najib dan penyokong-penyokong bodoh beliau mengatakan bahawa Najib tidak terlibat oleh sebab namanya tidak disebut. Najib sendiri berkata, “Biarkan proses undang-undang berjalan bagi mereka yang nama mereka disebut oleh US DOJ.” Jelas sekali bahawa beliau menganggap proses undang-undang itu tidak mengandungi siasatan berhubung peranannya sendiri di dalam mencuri wang milik 1MDB.

7. Namun rujukan kepada Malaysian Official 1 bertepatan dengan apa yang diketahui dan yang diakui oleh Najib sebagai mempunyai kaitan dengan beliau. Ini termasuk rujukan kepada USD681 juta dalam akaun Malaysian Official 1, rujukan kepada kuasa Malaysian Official 1 atas Kerajaan dan 1MDB yang bertepatan dengan kedudukan Najib sebagai Menteri Kewangan dan Penasihat kepada Lembaga Pengarah 1MDB. Dan begitulah seterusnya dengan 30 penerangan lain mengenai hal kuasa dan peranan Malaysian Official 1 serentak dengan peranan Najib sebagai Perdana Menteri, Menteri Kewangan Malaysia dan Penasihat kepada Lembaga Pengarah 1MDB.

8. Walaupun terdapat penerangan terperinci dalam laporan DOJ bagaimana wang 1MDB telah dipindahkan melalui pelbagai syarikat, termasuk Good Star, sebuah syarikat yang dimiliki oleh Jho Low dan bank-bank di beberapa negara dan akhirnya menjelma dalam akaun Malaysian Official 1 di Ambank, Peguam Negara menegaskan bahawa tidak ada bukti bahawa wang daripada 1MDB telah disalah gunakan.

9. Di bawah 11 pada Para 14 laporan DOJ “Fasa The Good Star: Lebih daripada $1 bilion disalah gunakan daripada 1MDB.”

10. Para 40, cara bagaimana $1 bilion wang 1MDB telah dilaburkan dalam Petro Saudi diperincikan.

11. Para 41 menjelaskan bahawa Jho Low dan rakan-rakannya menyebabkan $700 juta daripada $1 bilion bertujuan untuk dilaburkan dalam Petro Saudi, dihantar ke satu akaun di RBS Coutts Bank di Zurich yang dipegang atas nama Good Star Ltd, sebuah syarikat yang dimiliki oleh Jho Low.

12. Para 42 menyatakan bahawa “di antara bulan Mei dan Oktober 2011”, kira-kira $330 juta dana tambahan telah dihantar atas arahan pegawai 1MDB ke akaun Good Star yang kononnya mempunyai kaitan dengan suatu perjanjian pembiayaan antara 1MDB dan 1MDB-Petro Saudi JV.

13. Mungkin Peguam Negara Malaysia dapat menjelaskan mengapa pelaburan 1MDB sebanyak $1 bilion harus pergi ke dalam akaun Good Star dalam RBS Coutts Bank di Zurich. Atau adakah beliau akan menafikan bahawa ini berlaku? Dalam kes ini beliau patut menunjukkan bukti bahawa ianya tidak berlaku. Semata-mata dengan berkata ianya tidak benar tidak mencukupi. Kata-kata Peguam Negara tidak mempunyai sebarang kredibiliti sama sekali. Dakwaan bahawa tidak ada bukti salah laku Najib dalam semua laporan-laporan yang dikemukakan kepadanya adalah seandai mempercayai air mata tangisan buaya. Dakwaan Peguam Negara bahawa Najib telah mengembalikan RM2.3 bilion daripada RM2.6 bilion yang diberikan oleh seorang Raja Arab Saudi yang telah meninggal dunia mempunyai kredibiliti yang sama. Tiada dokumen pemindahan dan tiada resit telah dipamerkan.

14. Mencuri wang adalah satu jenayah. Semata-mata merampas wang yang dicuri tidak membatalkan jenayah itu. Satu-satunya urutan logik untuk menyita wang yang dicuri adalah membuat pertuduhan jenayah terhadap pencuri. Bagaimanakah DOJ dari Amerika Syarikat akan mengenakan tuduhan terhadap Malaysia Official 1 tanpa menyebut namanya?

15. Rakyat Malaysia mahu menebus semula nama baik mereka. Mereka tidak mahu dipimpin oleh seorang pemimpin yang disyaki kleptokrasi mencuri berbilion-bilion wang Kerajaan. Mereka sendiri tidak boleh berbuat apa-apa kerana Malaysian Official 1 mengawal Peguam Negara dan polis – agensi-agensi penguatkuasaan. Mereka tidak boleh menyingkirkannya melalui undi tidak percaya kerana beliau mengawal majoriti Ahli-ahli Parlimen melalui langkah-langkah yang haram.

16. Suka atau tidak, mereka terpaksa bergantung kepada tindakan oleh negara-negara asing. Jika Amerika Syarikat benar-benar percaya dengan membasmi rasuah dan pengubahan wang haram yang melibatkan negara mereka, mereka sepatutnya tidak segan untuk menyebut nama dan membiarkan proses undang- undang berlaku.

17. Apabila pencuri adalah pengawas polis dan agensi pendakwa, hanya campur tangan asing sahaja yang boleh membawa keadilan.

18. Tangislah negara ku yang tersayang .