1. It is interesting to note the admission by UMNO Minister Abdul Rahman Dahlan that “MALAYSIAN OFFICIAL 1” in the report by the Department of Justice, the United States of America is obviously Dato Sri Najib the Prime Minister of Malaysia.

2. Now what does the DoJ say about MALAYSIAN OFFICIAL 1 i.e. about Najib the Malaysian Prime Minister.

I. On page 13 para 39 the report says, “Upon its formation, MALAYSIAN OFFICIAL 1 i.e. Dato Sri Najib assumed a position of authority with 1MDB. MALAYSIAN OFFICIAL 1 (Najib) had the authority to approve all appointments to, and removals from, 1MDB’s Board of Directors and 1MDB’s Senior Management Team. In addition, any financial commitments by 1MDB, including investments, that were 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 OFFICIAL 1 i.e. Najib.”

Continue reading WHO IS MALAYSIAN OFFICIAL 1 →

1. Laws are made essentially for the safety, good life and well- being of the people. For the laws to do all these Government must govern according to the laws of the nation. An elected Government must do nothing less.

2. But what we are seeing in Malaysia today is a Government which ignores and abuses the laws so that they no longer protect the people or even provide good government.

3. I list below the abuses of the laws by Najib as Prime Minister and his Government.

Continue reading THE RULE OF LAW →

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 →

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.

1. In any other country the report by the Auditor General would be a public document. But in Malaysia the A.G’s Report is made a Government secret, denied access by the public. And this despite the provision in the Constitution that the report is to be made to the King and by his order to be tabled in Parliament.

2. It was Dr. Kissinger the Secretary of State of the United States of America who said that once the Xerox machine was invented secrecy became impossible. Since then we have come a long way with the advent of the Internet and mobile phones and instant transmission electronically. All documents can be copied and broadcast worldwide. And secrecy has become a thing of the past. The best of security systems have all been hacked by computer savvy amateurs.

3. And so it is with the A.G’s Report. Everyone should have read it if not actually possessing or copy of the document.

Continue reading THE A.G’s REPORT →

1. The A.G. would like the punishment for people who leak Government secrets to be caned and jailed for life.

2. It tells of a very primitive mind and is unIslamic. The Quran repeatedly enjoins upon Muslims to judge with justice. The punishment should fit the crime. It should not be excessive. Even for your foes you have to judge with justice, if you are guided by the teachings of the Quran.

3. But I am not going to complain about his primitive mind. I am questioning whether Najib with 2.6 Billion Ringgit in his personal and private accounts is doing his work as Prime Minister. Is it in his terms of reference to acquire secret funds and keep it in his personal accounts. No Prime Minister of Malaysia has ever done this.

Continue reading GOVERNMENT SECRETS →

1. Following upon the Malaysian A.G.’s (Tan Sri Mohamad Apandi Ali) decision that the report of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission showed there were no wrong doings by the Prime Minister in relation to the 2.6 billion Ringgit and 42 million Ringgit in his personal accounts, perhaps coincidentally, the French legal authorities have initiated legal action on the payment of so-called consultation fees to companies under the control of Razak Baginda, a close associate of Dato’ Sri Najib. Then the Swiss A.G. released a media statement against former officials of the state-owned fund 1MDB and persons unknown, on suspicion of bribery of foreign public officials (Article 322septies of the Swiss Criminal Code – SCC), misconduct in public office (Article 314295 SCC), money laundering, (Article 305bis279 SCC) and criminal mismanagement (Article 158 SCC). The office of the Attorney General of Switzerland (OAG) has requested the Malaysian Authorities for mutual assistance. This request for mutual assistance now puts the agreement in principle between Malaysia and Switzerland into concrete forms.

2. Investigation by the Swiss A.G. has revealed serious indications that the funds have been misappropriated from Malaysian State companies.

Continue reading AG TO AG →

1.​In Malaysia the Attorney General decides if a law has been broken or not. That decision is in fact a judgement. The A.G. is both a judge and a prosecutor. This in itself is an injustice.

2.​I admit I was not shocked when the A.G. decided that the report by the MACC does not show that the Prime Minister has committed any criminal act when 2.6 billion Ringgit is found in his private account or a further amount of 42 million Ringgit was also in his account. I had already said it would be his decision.

3.​Merely having that amount of money in a Prime Minister’s account is already wrong even though it may not be criminal. But now the A.G. declares that the money was a gift from the Saudis.

4.​It seems there was a letter by a Saudi stating that a sum of US$ 681 million or RM2.08 billion was a donation for the PM’s contribution to the fight against Islamic terrorists. Who is this Arab, how does he have the huge sum of money to give away, what is his business, what is his bank, how was the money transferred, what documents prove these. Just a letter from a deceased person or some nonentity is enough for the A.G.

5.​Then he goes on to say that the balance of US$620 million or RM2.03 billion has been returned to the Saudis. How and when was this done? We are told the balance is frozen by Singapore. Can Singapore explain the unfreezing and the delivery back to the Saudis? Or does Singapore also believe in the free gift story, the letter and the Saudi admission.

6.​Singapore is a financial centre. Can it be so gullible?

7.​Then the A.G. concludes that there is no case for Najib to answer. He also directed MACC to close the case and cease investigation.

8.​I thought the MACC is an independent body. Now it seems it is subordinate to the A.G. and it takes orders from him. No wonder Malaysia is included among the ten most corrupt countries in the world. The Anti-Corruption Agency is not free.

9.​I was right when I predicted that the A.G. will reject the report by the MACC as he did with the report by Bank Negara.

10.​A lot of people must know the contents of both reports. But they have all seen what can happen even when someone lodges a report to the police. And they are scared.

11.​I am scared too. In Malaysia today laws and rules no longer protect the people. The OSA for example is used to prevent reports from reaching the people. On the other hand people are now exposed to abuse of the OSA and they may end up in jail. Even the ISA did not frighten people as much.

12.​Quo vadis Malaysia.

 

VERSI BM

QUO VADIS (KE MANA ARAHNYA?)

1. Di Malaysia, Peguam Negara yang memutuskan jika sesuatu undang-undang dilanggar atau tidak. Keputusan tersebut merupakan satu penghakiman. Peguam Negara bertindak sebagai Hakim dan Pendakwa Raya. Ini dengan sendirinya satu ketidakadilan.

2. Saya mengaku saya tidak terperanjat apabila Peguam Negara memutuskan laporan oleh SPRM tidak menunjuk YB Perdana Menteri telah melakukan perbuatan jenayah apabila RM 2.6 bilion dijumpai di dalam akaun peribadi beliau atau selanjutnya jumlah RM 42 juta juga didapati di dalam akaun beliau. Saya telah menyatakan Peguam Negara akan membuat keputusan yang sedemikian.

3. Hanya dengan mempunyai sejumlah wang berkenaan sahaja di dalam akaun Perdana Menteri adalah menjadi satu kesalahan walau pun ianya mungkin bukan perbuatan jenayah. Tetapi kini Peguam Negara telah mengistiharkan wang tersebut merupakan hadiah Dari pihak Arab Saudi.

4. Kononnya terdapat sepucuk surat dari Saudi yang menyatakan bahawa wang berjumlah USD 681 juta atau RM 2.08 bilion adalah hadiah kepada Perdana Menteri atas sumbangan beliau melawani pengganas Islam. Siapakah gerangan Arab ini, bagaimana beliau mempunyai wang yang begitu banyak untuk diderma, apakah jenis perniagaan beliau, apakah maklumat perbankannya, bagaimana wang berkenaan disalurkan, apakah dokumen-dokumen bagi membuktikannya? Hanya sepucuk surat dari individu yang telah meninggal atau badan-badan yang agak samar latar belakangnya adalah memadai untuk Peguam Negara.

5. Kemudian beliau menyatakan bahawa baki USD 620 juta atau RM 2.03 bilion telah dipulangkan kepada pihak Saudi. Bagaimana dan bila ini dilakukan? Kita dimaklumkan baki berkenaan telah dibekukan oleh pihak Singapura. Bolehkah pihak Singapura menjelaskan pembatalan pembekuan dan penghantaran semula kepada pihak Saudi? Atau adakah pihak Singapura juga mempercayai cerita sumbangan percuma, surat berkenaan dan pengakuan pihak Saudi?

6. Singapura adalah sebuah pusat kewangan. Adakah negara tersebut begitu mudah mempercayainya?

7. Kemudian Peguam Negara memutuskan bahawa tidak ada kes terhadap Najib. Beliau juga mengarahkan supaya pihak SPRM menutup kes berkenaan dan memberhentikan penyiasatan.

8. Saya fikirkan pihak SPRM merupakan badan yang bebas. Namun kini kelihatan SPRM berada di bawah bidang kuasa Peguam Negara dan menerima arahan dari pihaknya. Tidak hairanlah Malaysia termasuk dalam senarai antara sepuluh negara yang paling korup di dunia. Badan pencegah rasuah tidak bebas.

9. Adalah bertepatan apabila saya meramalkan bahawa Peguam Negara akan menolak laporan dari SPRM seperti mana yang berlaku dengan laporan dari Bank Negara.

10. Ramai orang semestinya telah mengetahui isi kandungan kedua-dua laporan berkenaan. Walau bagaimana pun mereka telah melihat apa yang boleh terjadi apabila seseorang membuat laporan kepada polis. Dan mereka berasa takut.

11. Saya juga takut. Hari ini undang-undang tidak lagi melindungi orang ramai. Sebagai contoh, Akta Rahsia Resmi kini digunakan untuk menghalang laporan-laporan dari diketahui umum. Sebaliknya orang ramai kini terdedah dengan penyalahgunaan Akta Rahsia Resmi dan risiko dimasukkan ke penjara. Sehinggakan Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri tidak memberi ketakutan yang sedemikian kepada orang ramai.

12. Quo Vadis Malaysia (Ke mana arahnya Malaysia?)