CONTEMPORARY MALAYSIA

Taken from Uncle Lim’s blog

A hostile posting in yesterday’s thread “Fulfilment of 30-year dream of Sabahans in the hands of Sabah BN MPs” reminded me that the first time I raised the problem of illegal immigrants in Sabah was exactly 30 years ago.

I referred to this in my speech in Kota Kinabalu at the 37th DAP anniversary dinner on 4th July 2003, which is worth revisiting, viz:

This is the 40th anniversary of Sabah when together with Sarawak and Singapore, Malaysia was formed in 1963 from an expanded Malaya. It is also a time for an assessment of the successes and failures of nationhood and political development in the past four decades in Sabah.

There is probably no better start for such an assessment than an encounter with a taxi-driver in Kota Kinabalu. In the past few days, the planes are beginning to be full again, hotel room occupancy rates up and travel business and local economy starting to revive after the crippling effects of the SARS outbreak.

But the comment of a Kota Kinabalu taxi-driver was most perceptive and meaningful, when he posed the question: “What is the SARS outbreak for three months when the people of Sabah had been suffering from SARS for seven long years!”

I was at first mystified by what the taxi-driver meant, whether Sabah had secretly been the victim of the fatal SARS outbreak for seven long years without the knowledge of the people in Malaysia , the world and the WHO!

The taxi-driver enlightened me that the SARS outbreak which had afflicted Sabah for seven years is not the frightening new disease which had killed hundreds of people in China, Hong Kong, Canada, Singapore and Malaysia but stands for “Saham Amanah Rakyat Sabah” syndrome!

In 1996, the then Sabah Chief Minister Yong Teck Lee persuaded 57,000 Sabahans to invest in SAS – Saham Amanah Sabah – convincing them that it was a great buy which would multiply its value twice or thrice its original price of one ringgit! Today, SAS has reached the point of no return, dropped from RM1 to below 20 sen, with some telling me that it is now worth only 19 sen while others putting it as low as 12 sen – incurring over RM400 million losses!

DAP MP for Bukit Mertajam, Chong Eng and the DAP MP for Batu Gajah, Fong Po Kuan had just given a multimedia presentation of the great deterioration of law and order in the country resulting in the high rate of crime and the fear of crime, recently illustrated by the brutal Canny Ong abduction-rape-murder in Kuala Lumpur, marking the end of an era of public security and citizen safety in the streets, public spaces and even homes.

Sabah lost that innocence more than 30 years ago – when Sabah was transformed from a very safe and law-abiding state where people had no qualms or fears to leave their houses unlocked because of a non-existing crime rate to a a very unsafe place because of the influx of illegal immigrants.

The following judgment could serve as a verdict of 40 years of nationhood and development in Sabah:

“The management of Sabah’s resources, civil service and political situation are among the factors contributing to the state’s lackluster economic performance. Sabah was once a wealthy state but it has reached a point of no return and is now in the same economic league as Kelantan.”

This indictment of 40 years of development of Sabah did not come from the DAP or the Opposition but was made by an UMNO national leader who would have been the country’s Finance Minister if he had not lost the 1999 general election – Datuk Mustapha Mohamad, now the National Economic Action Council executive director at a dialogue at Universiti Malaysia Sabah in Kota Kinabalu in February this year!

Sabah has reached such economic doldrums not because of inefficient and bungling Opposition rule – but after nine years of Barisan Nasional government with its special brand of rotation of the post of Sabah Chief Minister.

Sabah is a special state and has a long list of “firsts”, though many with dubious honour, in Malaysia.

One such dubious “first” is in having the most number of Chief Ministers in the past 40 years as compared, for instance, with Sarawak – both of which joined together to form Malaysia 40 years ago. In the past 40 years, Sarawak had four Chief Ministers but Sabah had as many as 13 Chief Ministers!

Having so many Chief Ministers should be a blessing and a boon to the people of Sabah, in particular seven Chief Ministers in the past nine years, if Chief Ministers competed as to who can serve the people and state better – but it would undeniably be a curse for Sabah if so many Chief Ministers in so short a span of time only resulted in the competition as to who could serve themselves and their cronies better at the expense of the people and the state.

Barisan Nasional’s rotation of the Sabah Chief Minister system has proved to be a double disaster for Sabah. It was introduced by the Barisan Nasional as a gambit to wrest state power from the PBS of Datuk Seri Josteph Pairin Kitingan, allegedly to prove a higher commitment to the principles of multi-racialism and political pluralism.

It has not worked out as promised as in the past nine years, there had been four Chief Ministers from UMNO, two Chinese Chief Ministers claiming to represent the Chinese community, while the Kadazandusun community had only one Chief Minister who lasted only 14 months!

The system of rotation of the post of Sabah Chief Minister has left the people and state of Sabah even more worse-off with every rotation.

When I came to Sabah in the seventies, I highlighted three burning issues close to the heart of the people - the issues of illegal immigrants, corruption and democracy!

In all these three issues, the situation today is even worse than they were three decades ago. In fact, democracy in Sabah had gone back by some 20 years, with the Sabah State Assembly reduced to a one-party chamber where the voice, grievances and aspirations of the ordinary people could no more be heard! To restore democracy, the people of Sabah have to go back 20 years to the “Spirit of Tambunan” in the Tambunan by-election in 1984 marking the the beginning of an awakening and commitment to end unpopular rule, corruption and misgovernance in the state.

The issue of illegal immigrants has become so serious over the decades that it has fundamentally altered the demographic, political, economic and even constitutional landscape in the state, to the extent that many Sabahans are very disturbed and alienated that the majority of the state’s population of 2.6 million are not genuine Sabahans or Malaysians!

Kota Kinabalu, for instance, has become the capital of unaccountability, untransparency and bad governance not only in Sabah but also in Malaysia. The scandal of the most exorbitant municipal car-parking rates remained unresolved, as despite the various adjustments to the regime of the highest car-parking rates in the country topping RM38.50 a day, the KK Municipal Council is slated to up its overall car-park collection by 30%.

From Wisma Merdeka to Centrepoint, there are 22 Twentieth Century Lamp-posts which are the symbols of Kota Kinabalu as the capital of unaccountability, untransparency and bad governance in Malaysia – as they cost the people RM2.1 million or RM46,000 each when their cost was only RM5,000 each.

But there can be no more blatant symbol of Kota Kinabalu as the capital of unaccountability, untransparency and bad governance than the outrageous scandal of the closure of a public road for a private purpose, the closure of the Jalan Jati for the Sugar Bun operation.

Although the issue has been taken to court in a legal challenge as to the legality of the closure of Jalan Jati by the KK Municipality for a private purpose, I find it most shocking that this issue has remained unresolved whether by the KK Municipality or the Sabah State Government for the past four years since mid-2000.

I am not talking about the law, but the public morality and good governance of the decision. The refusal of the authorities concerned to revoke the closure of Jalan Jati and return it from private use to common public use is the height of unaccountability, untransparency and bad governance of the Kota Kinabalu Municipality and the Sabah State Government.

A survey and assessment of the political development and nation building of Sabah in the past 40 years reminds one of the imagery of swarm of locusts laying barren a rich and verdant land – that in the past 40 years, Sabah had been had been laid bare by swarms of “political locusts” downgrading it from a “once wealthy state to the same economic league as Kelantan” reaching “a point of no return”!

This is why the forthcoming Sabah state general election and the 11th national general election are so critical and unlike previous general elections – for the voters of Kota Kinabalu and Sabah must unite to open up Jalan Jati, open up Kota Kinabalu, open up Sabah and open up Malaysia to democracy, justice, fair play and good governance!

There is a further reason why the coming elections are two crucial tests for democracy and nation-building in Sabah and Malaysia – as the very basis of the 1963 Malaysia Agreement which constitutes the basis for the formation of Malaysia is facing unprecedented challenge.

The Cobbold Commission Report 1963, the founding document of the 1963 Malaysia Agreement, published the memorandum which was submitted by the Donald Stephens as Chairman of the Malaysia Solidarity Consultative Committee on 23rd February 1962, which said: “It is satisfied that the acceptance of Islam as the religion of the Federation would not endanger religious freedom within Malaysia nor will it make Malaysia a State less secular”.

The “929 Declaration” by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad on Sept. 29, 2001 that Malaysia is an Islamic State goes against the very fundamentals of the 1957 Merdeka Constitution and the 1963 Malaysia Agreement of a democratic, secular and multi-religious nation where Islam is the official religion but Malaysia is not an Islamic State – whether ala-UMNO or ala-PAS.

The fathers of the Merdeka Constitution and the Malaysia Agreement were not anti-Islam or any religion when they declared Islam as the official religion would not in anyway undermine or compromise the secular basis and character of multi-religious Malaysia – that “it will make Malaysia a State less secular”.

This is the fundamental constitutional principle and nation-building cornerstone which has been challenged by the “929 Declaration” and why Sabahans should stand in the very forefront with all other like-minded Malaysians to defend and uphold the 1957 Merdeka Constitution and the 1963 Malaysia Agreement to preserve, defend and uphold the democratic, secular and multi-religious basis and character of Sabah and Malaysia.

Taken from Daily Express

Kota Kinabalu: Sabah MPs should consider supporting the planned DAP motion for the Royal Commission of Inquiry on Illegal Immigrants in the Parliament.

Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) Supreme Council member Dr Chong Eng Leong said that the recently-completed Royal Commission of Inquiry on the Judiciary, among others, had allegedly implicated former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad in the irregular appointment of judges.

"Since Project ICs issued to foreigners in Sabah was also referred to as Project Mahathir (refer to my 1999 Likas Election Petition trial, my papers to Parliamentary Select Committee on Integrity in 2006 and my papers to Suhakam Roundtable Discussion on Illegal Immigrants in 2006) may be a Royal Commission of Inquiry might also implicate Mahathir or vindicate him," he said.

Meanwhile, Dr Chong said a week after the last general election, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi admitted that "he had heard what the people wanted him to hear".

"He must have heard peninsula voices only because the near 100 per cent MP seats from Sabah and Sarawak given to BN did not receive rewards appropriately," he said.

"It seems our PM's only concern is peninsula. Look at our Sabahans repeated appeal and begging him to listen to our cry for help to solve our security cum sovereignty within Malaysia due to the huge number of illegal immigrants and project IC holders.

"The PM had personally heard me saying in 2001 in Dewan Maksak Likas that foreigners could get Malaysian ICs very easily. But nothing concrete has come out of this," he said.

Dr Chong said the promise in 2006 for a large scale operations like the Ops Nyah II to flush out paperless foreigners also did not happen.

He said the announcement for two more detention centres for illegal immigrants to be built in Sabah in 2006 remained mere words and it was again announced when the PM was in Sabah as if it was something new.

Dr Chong who is PBS Luyang chief said Abdullah had in October last year said, "We do not want to pretend and say that everything is okay. We do not want to be in a state of denial. Tell the truth, even if it is painful.

"But the PM did not practice what he preached. He did not want to hear the truth about Project IC or Project Mahathir in Sabah by the fact that the National Registration Department was directed not to answer the Parliamentary Select Committee on Integrity on questions regarding this project," he said.

He added that Sabah BN components had sent memoranda to the Prime Minister on this issue "but did he ever read them?"

"If not, did he assign somebody to read them and then be briefed on the contents of the memoranda? Sabah BN component besides Suhakam, NGOs and individuals had on umpteen times asked for Royal Commission of Inquiry on Illegal Immigrants but our PM brushed it aside," he said.

Instead, Dr Chong said the Prime Minister pushed the matter to the Federal Cabinet Committee on Illegal Immigrants headed by the Deputy Prime Minister of the day, a Committee formed in 2000 but so far only held one meeting.

The outcome of that meeting on May 2006 was to form a special court to handle cases involving illegal immigrants, he said.

"Did this also materialise?" he asked.

Looks like it’s either Do or Die for Tun Mahathir now. News taken from here.

Nearly 40 years ago as a young Umno rebel, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad went on a tirade against the leadership of Tunku Abdul Rahman. Dr Mahathir cleverly used the race angle, accusing the Tunku of failing to protect and promote the interests of the Malays.

He was sacked by Umno, a move which made him a hero with the Malay community. When the Tunku resigned in the aftermath of the May 13, 1969 race riots, his successor Tun Abdul Razak not only brought Dr Mahathir back to the party but also paved the way for him to become Umno president and prime minister in 1981.

Dr Mahathir is now hoping to topple the current Umno president and prime minister by playing the same game — adopting the race angle and hoping to stoke fear and anger among the Malays against Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

Just listen to the speeches he has been giving since the March 8 elections, the latest last week in Johor when he said the Malays were losing their grip on power. At a gathering of some 1,000 people, he said: “If we don’t speak up, if we choose to keep quiet, we will lose our rights and the other races will take over.”

On his blog, he recently wrote: “Today, the Malays have lost their political power and the non-Malays no longer respect the Malays and the Malay institutions. All the special rights of the Malays are being challenged and questioned. And the Malays cannot do anything to strengthen their position.”

The fact is power in this country is still very much in the control of the Malays and will remain so and no non-Malay would dare challenge Malay institutions like the royalty. In fact, the last time we checked, the only person who had done anything against the Malay royalty was Dr Mahathir himself when he was the all powerful prime minister who tolerated no challenge to his authority and views.

But obviously Dr Mahathir will not let facts get in the way of his fear mongering and his current goal to knock out Abdullah.

Dr Mahathir was hoping that the Umno leadership would sack him like they did in 1969, but Abdullah has learnt from the Tunku. He didn’t want to make Dr Mahathir a hero or trigger a wave of sympathy for him.

Frustrated that Abdullah did not sack him, Dr Mahathir on Monday decided to quit Umno and swore to return only when Abdullah is no longer the leader. He also urged Umno members to follow him.

Throughout his political career, Dr Mahathir is obsessed with only what suits him and will do anything to try and get what he wants. The consequences didn’t matter. Everything and everybody else is collateral damage.

Be it the tension that led to May 13, 1969; the political infighting in Umno that ended with the 1987 arrest under the ISA of over 100 people and the sacking of six top judges just as the court was set to hear an Umno appeal case; to the vicious 1998 crackdown on his then deputy and supporters, one common theme stood out — Dr Mahathir had to get what he wanted. Everything and everybody else is collateral damage.

It’s the same with his latest move to resign from Umno and his use of the race card to attack Abdullah’s leadership.

Dr Mahathir doesn’t care if Umno, already reeling from the aftershock of the March 8 elections, plunges into turmoil.

Dr Mahathir doesn’t care that his racist attempts to ignite the anger of the Malays will create unnecessary tension.

Dr Mahathir will resort to anything to get what he wants. Everything and everybody else — including Malaysia and the people of Malaysia — is collateral damage.

He has succeeded in the past.

This time, we must not let him get away with it.

Umno and its members must not end up as collateral damage to enable Dr Mahathir to get what he wants.

The rakyat and the country must not end up as collateral damage just so that Dr Mahathir can get what he wants.

Tun Musa Hitam said on Monday that the era of Mahathirism was over. The people of Malaysia must show in an emphatic way that it is by rejecting Dr Mahathir’s latest stunt and use of the race card.

No wonder-lah the BN cancelled the use of inedible ink at the last minute prior to the 12^th General Election. Article below taken from The Edge.

SINGAPORE: De facto opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim claimed that the Election Commission’s (EC) decision to cancel the use of indelible ink five days before the March 8 general election had caused the opposition coalition to lose 15 seats.

He also alleged that the manipulation of postal votes cost the opposition another 10 seats.

Reiterating his stance that the processes of the March 8 general election were unfair, Anwar said that he has learnt that the Barisan Nasional-led (BN) government decided to do away with the indelible ink when they realised that the opposition was edging close to a simple majority.

“The decision came about as the government knew the opposition was edging towards a simple majority and the PM decided to cancel the use of the indelible ink.

“I was in India a few weeks ago and they could not believe that a decision to cancel the use of the ink was made five days before the general election,” Anwar told a packed audience of merchant bankers, fund managers and leaders of corporations during a luncheon talk at a conference organised by CLSA in Singapore yesterday.

Replying to a question on moral and ethical issues that were raised by Umno-led BN should their elected members of parliament (MPs) decide to defect, Anwar said that it was morally indefensible for the elected representatives to support the present regime.

On the question of Dr Mahathir leaving Umno, Anwar said that the former Umno president and prime minister no longer wielded as much influence in the party as before.

“But the question that will be asked is, was he a fair prime minister? His reason for leaving Umno was because he felt the party had failed to champion the Malay rights. This is not tenable,” he said.

Anwar also questioned the logic behind Dr Mahathir’s condition of rejoining Umno after Abdullah has been replaced.

“This means (Abdullah) can be replaced with any other corrupt person for him to rejoin the party,” he said.

Anwar called on the friends of the opposition in Umno not to leave the party but to support the opposition coalition of Pakatan Rakyat in pursuing their Malaysian Economic Agenda (MEA). He said that before the general election, only Umno was seen as being able to bring about reforms in the system. But that has changed with the elections which showed the opposition can form a viable alternative.

He said that the MEA was a well thought out plan and it took the opposition about 18 months to two years to come out with it and it had been generally accepted by the Malays.

“A substantial number of urban and semi-urban (Malays) supported us, knowing fully well the MEA is to dismantle the present NEP,” he said.

On the question of the expectations of PAS on matters relating to gambling and casino operations should the opposition come to power, Anwar said that the Islamic party has accepted the constitutional guarantees of the country and has participated in the democratic process.

“The constitution guarantees freedom of religion and the rule of law. These are in the MEA. We have no problems in the five states ruled by the opposition,” said Anwar.

Taken from here

Hari ini, Mei 19, 2008 saya mengumumkan keputusan saya untuk keluar daripada UMNO. Isteri saya turut bersama.

Keputusan ini dibuat kerana UMNO yang ada sekarang bukan lagi UMNO yang ditubuh 62 tahun dahulu yang berjuang untuk bangsa Melayu, Agama Islam dan Negara Malaysia (Malaya); UMNO yang menggagalkan Malayan Union, memperjuangkan kemerdekaan Malaya dan Malaysia dan membangunkan Malaysia sehingga menjadi Negara yang termaju di antara Negara membangun di dunia.

UMNO yang ada sekarang hanya wujud untuk menyokong Dato Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, keluarganya dan tindakan serta dasar yang tidak secocok dengan kepentingan bangsa, agama dan negara.

Kepimpinan Dato Seri Abdullah jelas membawa kekalahan dan bencana kepada Barisan Nasional, UMNO, MCA, MIC, Gerakan dan PPP. Kemenangan UMNO di Sabah dan BN di Sarawak bukan kerana kepimpinan Dato Seri Abdullah.

Saya akan jelas satu persatu dasar-dasar dan tindakan Dato Seri Abdullah yang menjadikan Kerajaan pimpinannya dan parti BN dibenci oleh ahli-ahli parti komponen sendiri.

Walaupun sebelum perisytiharan ini saya adalah ahli UMNO tetapi sebenarnya selepas saya letak jawatan sebagai Perdana Menteri saya tidak dilayan sebagai ahli UMNO.

Saya tidak dibenarkan berjumpa ahli UMNO dan ahli UMNO tidak dibenarkan hadir apa-apa perhimpunan di mana saya dijemput sebagai jurucakap atau penyampai ucapan.

Menteri-Menteri yang dahulu berada dalam Kabinet saya tidak dibenarkan atau tidak berani atau tidak mahu jumpa saya lagi.

Jemputan oleh UMNO dan bukan UMNO kepada saya diarah ditarik balik oleh Mneteri Besar dan Polis.

Ramai pemimpin UMNO melepaskan kata-kata kesat kepada saya dan ada yang menyuruh saya keluar daripada UMNO walaupun mereka baru sahaja masuk UMNO. Tidak ada pemimpin UMNO yang pertahankan saya secara terbuka.

Wakil ke Perhimpunan Agong tidak dibenarkan menyuara pendapat mereka. Mulut semua orang ditutup.

Yang didengar hanyalah media arus perdana yang memuji Dato Seri Abdullah sehingga dia percaya dia begitu popular dan akan sapu bersih parti lawan dalam pilihanraya umum ke-12.

Hasilnya ialah kekalahan yang teruk bagi Barisan Nasional. Malangnya mesej yang hendak disampaikan oleh pengundi dan penyokong BN tidak dapat difahami oleh Dato Seri Abdullah.

Dia masih berkata dia menang. Ini sukar diterima oleh orang Kedah, orang Pulau Pinang, orang Perak, Selangor dan Wilayah Persekutuan.

Oleh kerana Dato Seri Abdullah buta mata dan pekak telinga dan tidak faham mesej ahli BN, oleh kerana ahli UMNO pun turut bersama, oleh kerana proses demokrasi tidak berjalan, oleh kerana UMNO yang ada sekarang bukan lagi UMNO yang ditubuhkan 62 tahun dahulu, saya berpendapat penyertaan saya sebagai ahli UMNO tidak bermakna dan tidak berguna lagi.

Justeru itu saya ingin umumkan bahawa saya sudah keluar daripada UMNO.

Saya ingin tegaskan bahawa saya bebas dan tidak menyokong mana-mana parti lawan.

Saya akan pohon untuk masuk UMNO apabila Dato Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi sudah berhenti daripada menjadi Presiden UMNO, Pengerusi BN dan Perdana Menteri Malaysia.

Dr Mahathir bin Mohamad (bekas ahli UMNO No 1)
Dr Siti Hasmah binti Mohd Ali (bekas ahli UMNO No 2)

Taken from Reuters

KUALA LUMPUR (May 19, 2008): Former premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad quit Umno today and urged others to follow suit in a move that could weaken its (Umno) hold on power and unsettle financial markets.

The still influential Mahathir, who was prime minister and leader of the United Malays National Organisation for 22 years until 2003, said he would only return to Umno after Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi quit as leader.

Mahathir, 83, had stepped up pressure for Abdullah to resign as premier after the latter led Umno and the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition to a dismal showing in the 12th General Election on March 8.

"I will write a letter to Umno headquarters to inform that I had quit the party," Mahathir told a news conference in his home state of Kedah. He said he had lost confidence in Umno's ability to safeguard the interest of the ethnic Malay majority.

Mahathir urged other Umno members to quit but not to join the opposition which is seeking to seize power from the ruling BN by wooing defectors.

"It's like pulling another brick out of the crumbling wall," said Tricia Yeoh, director of the Centre for Public Policy Studies. "Once Mahathir resigns, some others will too."

If UMNO lawmakers quit the party and declare themselves independents, meaning no party commands a clear majority in parliament, it will send Malaysia into the political wilderness.

Umno, the backbone of the 14-party BN that has ruled since independence from Britain in 1957, holds 79 of BN's 140 seats.

The opposition, led by former deputy premier and Mahathir's foe, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, needs to gain just 30 seats to win a simple majority and form the government.

"Mahathir's resignation highlighted the precarious political situation in Malaysia and could be negative to the ringgit currency," markets consultancy 4CAST said in a commentary.

Research house Informa Global Markets (IGM) said the resignation was more likely to undermine Abdullah's hold on the party rather than remove a thorn from the premier's flesh.

But it added: "It is too early to determine if it will split the party, and thereby weaken Umno further, which already is facing prospect of defections."

Mahathir announced the resignation three days after the government ordered the Attorney-General to investigate him and five others over the appointment of judges while he was in power.

Analysts said Mahathir was apparently upset over the allegations. "His departure can bring harm to Umno and weaken the PM's leadership," said political analyst Yahya Ismail.

Mahathir said at the weekend he was willing to be investigated and taken to court over the allegations.

NERVES must have been jumping on Wednesday, the day when as many as 17 disgruntled Sabah MPs were expected to “jump ship”.

Without the basics: A squatter shack occupied by an urban-poor family in Miri. In Sarawak, only 30% of its people have access to treated water and only 65% of its towns have electricity.

But PR de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was in fact away in Indonesia on that day and, as Prime Minister-in-waiting, “would not be able to receive them”, an aide pointed out on the eve.

But “saudara Anwar” has set a new deadline for the crossover: Sept 16, the 45th anniversary of Malaysia Day, for maximum impact.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi swiftly moved to stem the tide by meeting individuals and groups in the run-up to D-day: Sabah Progressive Party president Datuk Yong Teck Lee met him on Tuesday as did three Bidayuh MPs from Sarawak who, just a fortnight after the March election, had fleetingly threatened to walk out.

Somehow, despite not having anything concrete in hand, Datuk Richard Riot Jaem (Serian), Datuk Dr James Dawos Mamit (Mambong) and Datuk Dr Tiki Lafe (Mas Gading) were talked out of their disenchantment.

Unfortunately, the anticipated defections overshadowed the real grouses aired by the MPs. Much of the unhappiness reverts to the famous 20-point agreement, the almost sacred treaty signed by the fathers of Malaysia.

Several of the points – such as head of state and language – have never been issues; others like immigration have been eroded in the 45 intervening years.

“Why are MPs making a noise? Because we want the Government to return to the spirit of the 20 points,” said Deputy Speaker Datuk Ronald Kiandee.

The heart of the resentment stems from a feeling that the federal government is exercising two policies: one for the peninsula and another for Sabahans and Sarawakians.

Or as Kalabakan MP Datuk Seri Abdul Ghapur Salleh put it bluntly: “We don’t want to be second-class citizens”.

Illegal immigrants were the primary complaint among Sabah MPs. They have raised it for countless years but it has fallen on deaf ears.

The first salvo was lobbed by Kimanis MP Datuk Anifah Aman, younger brother to Sabah Chief Minister who, in using the analogy of moving from a bungalow to a terrace house, said: “What’s the point of living in a bungalow if one has to sleep beside the toilet?”

Offers of RM30,000 or RM50,000 mean nothing to this suave, cigar-puffing businessman.

“Don’t insult us,” he told The Star. “It was never meant to blackmail the Government. I was only summarising the matters that are closest to Sabah hearts.”

“Before the next election, something has to be done. Why was it so easy to set up a Judicial Appointments Commission and a Malaysian Commission on Anti-Corruption? Why not a Commission on Illegal Immigrants?”

Roads are also a priority. In Sabah, less than 50% of the roads are tarred. It is worse in Sarawak where in semi-rural Julau, for instance, only about 30% of the population enjoy surfaced roads. Another 50% bump along laterite roads and 20% to 30% still resort to the rivers.

It is the same story with electricity and water. Only 65% of the towns have electricity. In the interior, 30% to 40% have to manage on their own generator sets.

In Sabah, only 60% to 65% have treated water; in Sarawak, the figure drops to 30%.

In towns, people get piped water the colour of “teh susu” (tea with milk), said Ghapur.

For this reason, Sabah and Sarawak MPs would have been satisfied with two crucial portfolios – “minister of JKR and Rural Development”, as Ghapur put it.

Sabahans are insulted at being “put in charge of museums and clouds”, he added, referring to Datuk Shafie Apdal and Datuk Dr Maximus Ongkili respectively. Ideally, he wants four important ministerial portfolios so that the state can shape Cabinet thinking.

Ghapur gave an ultimatum for Abdullah to reshuffle his Cabinet within six months or, at the very latest, by the end of the year. “Without Sabah and Sarawak’s 54 seats, the Barisan would not have been able to form a simple majority.”

He pointed out that “one particular state has seven ministers; another state that had lost has four ministers”, referring elliptically to Johor and Selangor respectively. By comparison, Sabah has three and Sarawak has seven deputy ministers.

SAPP’s Yong took an even tougher stance – an August deadline.

RM3bil had been set aside for education under the 9MP, 18% of which is to go to Sabah, noted Kiandee. “But is that an allocation that can narrow the gap between peninsular and Sabah schools? You must look at the effect of the cumulative years, between well-equipped Selangor schools and schools in Sabah.”

“Quality is just as important as quantity,” said Deputy Minister of Energy, Water and Communications Datuk Joseph Salang Gandum. “To be fair to the Government, there are enough schools,” adding that his Julau constituency has 43 primary schools. “But I have yet to see the target of 20 students achieving 5As in UPSR per year. I know because I hand them RM500 each as an incentive.”

The figures tell stories of poverty. When Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department S.K. Devamany cited a national poverty index of 3.7%, Sabah MPs leapt up. Sabah suffers a poverty rate of 23% – or even worse in the interior.

All this might be resolved if Sabah earned more in oil royalties, suggested Ghapur. He proposed that the oil royalty be raised from 5% to 20%, one of the promises Anwar had made in his 2008 election manifesto.

But away from Parliament, Parti Rakyat Sarawak president Datuk Seri Dr James Masing said: “He (Anwar) can talk. Our oil reserves will finish in four years. Unless we find new oil fields, it’s gone.”

On the sidelines, Sarawak MPs maintained a more dignified reserve.

“It’s good that they voice it,” said Salang. “Sarawakians by nature are not so outspoken.”

On May 13, Sabah Deputy Chief Minister Datuk Seri Joseph Pairin Kitingan sedately came out in support of the anti-hop law.

As president of the once-beleaguered Parti Bersatu Sabah, Pairin had been a prime victim of party hoppers who had defected to a cluster of smaller Sabah parties that exist today.

In 1992, the High Court had ruled that the law was unconstitutional as it contravened Article 10 of the Federal Constitution on freedom of association.

Amendments to that law require a two-thirds majority before it can be adopted by Parliament and, at present, neither side has the numbers.

The floor was awash with talk of money being dangled. But it is not Ringgit that will spur the jump – it will be deep frustrations.

Taken from The Star

A shift in position by Sabah Barisan Nasional leaders is causing ripples in the country’s political arena. Among the more vocal of the leaders is former Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Yong Teck Lee. The 50-year-old Sabah Progressive Party president speaks to Sunday Staron why they are making their stand clear.

Your meeting earlier this week (May 13) with Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is seen as a move by the Prime Minister to head off any possible crossovers by restless Sabah MPs. What did the Prime Minister tell you?

A: My discussion with the PM was cordial and friendly. The PM reaffirmed his commitment to the matters that have been brought to his attention before. I mentioned that the answers given by his Cabinet Ministers in Parliament (in the current session) are not satisfactory because they are noncommittal.

On my part, I made it clear that the Barisan leadership should not rule out the possibility of a crossover of MPs in the future because the issues raised by the MPs are real and affect the daily lives of the people. The window of opportunity is limited.

Q: Do you expect something substantial to come out of it?

A: No, I do not expect anything substantial. But I still hope to see some progress or express commitment to address the many issues.

We keenly await the answers to be given by the ministers in Parliament in the coming week to see if there is positive response from the Government.

Q: What are the key issues that SAPP is

raising for the Federal Government to resolve?

A: The key issues are illegal immigrants, unfair taxes such as the Cooking Oil Subsidy Scheme, imprudent extension of federal laws to Sabah that are costly to the state, political autonomy, closure of JPPS, recognition of the special status of the High Court in Sabah and Sarawak, development and so on. Details are found in the SAPP website www.sapp.org.my.

Q: You spoke about Petronas oil royalty where you have supported the building of the Sabah-Labuan bridge instead of Penang’s second bridge. You have also highlighted issues of double taxation of oil palm. Can you elaborate?

A: We see that the Labuan bridge is a necessary infrastructure project that will benefit Labuan and southern Sabah such as Beaufort, Sipitang and nearby Sarawak districts. Labuan’s international airport can serve this region.

The physical integration of the Labuan economy to the mainland would bring much growth and opportunities to the whole region.

As for the Cooking Oil Subsidy Scheme, it was implemented on Jan 1, 2007 as a response to the shortage of cooking oil last year.

Millers were unwilling to produce more cooking oil because of price control on the item.

Millers prefer to produce CPO and other products because of higher profitability.

Profiteers, hoarders and smugglers took advantage of the shortage and low prices. The Government should have penalised these culprits instead of the planters.

The term “double taxation” came about because of the Sabah state sales tax that oil palm people also pay to the state.

Since the Federal Government pays for the fuel subsidy and padi subsidy, it is only right that the Federal Government also pay for the cooking oil subsidy.

Why penalise the oil palm planters? Since Sabah pays for almost 70% of this subsidy, it means 10% of the population (Malaysians in Sabah) subsidises 70% of the cooking oil in the country.

This is an unfair tax.

Q: Your demands for political autonomy from the Federal Government has raised eyebrows as some even associate it to Sabah’s status in the federation. Tell us what you mean by political autonomy?

A: Political autonomy is not sovereignty. Political autonomy means that the people in Sabah should be able to determine their own political status, participation and elect their own state government.

The Chief Minister should be based on the state elections instead of the current practice of appointment by the federal leadership, that is, the PM.

We can learn from Perlis and Terengganu.

To us, political autonomy also means not having Sabah MPs and potential candidates losing their dignity to kowtow to machais (henchmen) of central leaders in lobbying to be election candidates.

An example is when Sabah Umno leaders had to camp in KL to lobby for candidacy or to oust an incumbent chief minister, because they are all appointed by KL, not selected by the people.

Q: What sort of political scenario is SAPP looking at for Sabah?

A: We want to see the political scenario for Sabah as one that will be determined by state-based parties. National parties may exercise their right to participate in state and parliamentary elections in the state but should not force the state-based parties to share seats with them or the national coalition such as Barisan.

Q: You gave an August deadline for Kuala Lumpur to meet Sabah demands. Is such a stand realistic? Some see it as a political psy-war being played out by Sabah MPs and parties. Do you see it that way?

A: The August deadline is practical and realistic because some of the issues are easily within the capability of the Government to solve.

As for longer term matters like security, the Government must show political will and determination to act. Matters like illegal immigration are the basic duty of the Government. There should be no need for political pressure to get the Government to act.

The Government has failed miserably on this score. People are getting fed up. After August, the nation will be busy with other things such as the fasting month, Hari Raya and Umno elections. By September, the national media and the country as a whole would have gotten tired of the Sabah issues. We (Sabah) will be forgotten again.

For instance, the national media were rarely keen on the issues affecting the people in Sabah. Only when the speculation of “crossovers” surfaced did the national media become interested in Sabah – because the “crossovers” would affect the national government.

If not, the national media is not interested about Sabah issues.

Some may see this as a political psy-war. I don’t know. But the issues are real. People are serious.

Q: If a situation arises where you are unable to obtain the concessions for the state, what will your next move be? Does pulling out of Barisan constitute one of your options?

A: If we are unable to achieve results after this window of opportunity has closed, then either we become subservient to the federal establishment again like in the last few decades or else the situation will explode. Explosion means that the mainstream Barisan people will have no control over the political process. Opposition parties, NGOs and people power of some sort might emerge. This is because people might lose hope in the Barisan political process. By then, whatever SAPP does is not relevant to the political process. Whether SAPP or some other component party pulls out or not is no longer important.

Q: Your party has only two MPs and four assemblymen. Do you think you make a difference? What can be achieved?

A: In terms of numbers, SAPP with two MPs and four assemblymen makes no difference. This two by four box is too small to rock the boat.

Q: Why is Sabah the only state making its voice heard louder than, say Sarawak, which has similar issues and concerns? Are Sarawak MPs doing it more subtly?

A: Sarawak has a closely-knit leadership. The CM there is all-powerful. But their feelings and aspirations are similar to Sabah. They will wait for the easterly wind to blow before they make known their feelings.

Q: Have you met Parti Keadilan Rakyat adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim or his intermediaries? If no, why is this talk of crossover so hot?

A: You do not need a meeting with Opposition leaders for talk of “crossover” to become hot because the underlying causes are the real issues facing Sabah and the people.

Let’s go back in time and recap what happened before Sabah, Sarawak and East Malaysia merged to become Malaysia.

For further reading, please download the PDF version of the book Surrendering to Symbols by Stig Aga Aandstad here.

Zainon Ahmad @ The Sun

INITIALLY the leaders of Sabah (then British North Borneo) and Sarawak were opposed to Malaysia or at best gave it a lukewarm welcome after it was proposed by Tunku Abdul Rahman on May 27, 1961 at the Foreign Correspondents Association in Singapore.

“Let us become independent first and then we will decide whether to join Malaysia or not,” said Tan Sri Ong Kee Hui, the Kuching mayor and leader of the Sarawak United People’s Party (SUPP), formed in 1959.

Other prominent Sarawak leaders like Datu Abang Haji Openg – later the first local governor – and Abang Mustapha Abang Haji Abdul Gapor who are also members of the Council Negeri, considered the oldest legislature in the country, were unanimous in their opposition to the Tunku’s plan.

In Sabah, Tun Fuad Stephens (then Donald Stephens), a newspaper publisher, a member of the State Council and Huguan Siou (paramount leader) of the Kadazan/Dusun people, shared the same view as Ong.

Sabah Chief Minister Tun Fuad Stephens takes his oath of office as part of the first state cabinet on Sept 16, 1963.

“We must not be seen as changing colonial masters,” was the response of the United National Kadazan Organisation (Unko), a party Fuad formed with Keningau community leader GS Sundang. They contacted leaders from the other territories to see whether they should revive the idea of a federation of Borneo states of Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei instead.

Many of the leaders believed that Malaysia’s formation was not really meant to benefit the people of the two territories but more to provide a solution to solve the problems of Britain, Malaya and Singapore.

Britain needed to withdraw from the East but it could not just up and go without ensuring its former colonies’ survival. Malaya wanted to
increase the number of bumiputras to ensure that their numbers were bigger than the others. Singapore, threatened by communists, wanted security.

The leaders opposed the plan because they feared their people would be at the mercy of the commercially superior Chinese whose numbers would increase with Malaysia, and they also feared that they would eventually be sidelined by the more politically sophisticated
Malays.

They also worried that their culture and polity would be gradually eroded. Thus, discussions were held on such issues as religion, education and finance where early assurances on these matters were made. Most of the discussions centred on the Sabah All-party 20-point memorandum and the Sarawak 18-point memorandum containing matters the two territories wanted to safeguard.

Minister of Sarawak Affairs, Temenggong Jugah anak Barieng, takes the oath at the swearing-in ceremony on Nov 2, 1963.

But mostly the focus was on religion, constitutional safeguards, immigration, special position of the indigenous people, language, education and fiscal arrangements.

But even while discussions were still at the early stages, more and more leaders and their people gradually began to voice support for the
plan.

The Malays were easily persuaded by Malayan Foreign Ministry permanent secretary Tan Sri Ghazali Shafie – the driving force behind the plan.

And the resolve of those Malays who still resisted the plan finally caved in shortly before the Cobbold Commission arrived in the two territories to determine the peoples’ response to Tunku’s proposal.

Tun Mustapha Datu Harun, a Sabah State Council member and considered a leader of Sabah Malays, agreed wholeheartedly. Someone even described him as being the most “gung-ho” about Malaysia. A few months after the announcement, he formed Usno (United Sabah National Organisation).

In Sarawak, two lawyers, Tun Abdul Rahman Yakub and his nephew Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud, not only favoured the idea but also promoted it. They quickly formed a party called Barjasa (Barisan Anak Jati Sarawak) which later merged with Panas (Parti Negara Sarawak) to form Parti Bumiputra.

Many Dayaks, led by their paramount chief, Temenggong Jugah anak Barieng, also came out in support of the idea. The chief was among the founders of Pesaka (Parti Pesaka Anak Sarawak) which later merged with Parti Bumiputra to form Parti Pesaka Bumiputra Bersatu or PBB, the current dominant party of the Sarawak Barisan Nasional.

Datuk James Wong Kim Ming, who later led the Dayak-based Sarawak National Party (SNAP) and was deputy chief minister several
times, agreed “subject to favourable terms for Sabah and Sarawak.” In his book The Price of Loyalty, he said he had been told of the proposed federation in 1960 by British officials while he was in London.

Indeed, most leaders of the Borneo territories had heard of similar proposals for an association of Malaya, Singapore, Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei being bandied about by officials in Britain and in Asia long before the Tunku’s announcement.

But Fuad Stephens and members of his delegation abandoned the idea of a federation of Borneo territories after meeting Tunku in Kuala Lumpur where they were royally entertained. Fuad Stephens was also talked out of it by Ghazali and Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew, a strong campaigner for Malaysia.

A member of Fuad’s delegation, Datuk Seri Ghani Gilong, told reporters on arrival at the airport in Kota Kinabalu (then Jesselton) “… bisuk pun boleh masuk Malaysia” (“... we can join Malaysia as early as tomorrow”).

Fuad Stephens, who with his friends had tried to popularise the term Kadazan in the 1950s to refer to his people who were “unglamorously” known as Dusun, now threw himself into campaigning for Malaysia.

He hoped the founding day of the new federation would fall on Sept 14, 1963, his 43rd birthday. It was not to be. It fell instead on the 40th birthday of Lee Kuan Yew, the man who convinced the Unko leader of the benefits of joining Malaysia.

Sundang, who was against Malaysia and who was also not enamoured by the term Kadazan, left Unko and formed United National Pasok Momogun Party or Pasok Momogun for short.

But all these parties later came together as the Sabah Alliance led by Mustapha and Fuad. On Merdeka Day, Mustapha took office as governor and Fuad as chief minister. And, as Fuad wanted, it was an independent Sabah that officially became part of Malaysia on Sept 16, 1963.

In Sarawak, SNAP, led by Tan Sri Stephen Kalong Ningkan, finally agreed to join Malaysia but SUPP refused to be persuaded till the end.

Said Ong: “We felt that any decision on North Borneo and Sarawak becoming part of a larger confederation should not be made until both these states were independent and directly responsible for their own destiny.”

The party held demonstrations when the Cobbold Commission arrived in Sarawak and told the commission why Sarawak should not be part of Malaysia. It said the same thing to the United Nations team that was sent to verify the peoples’ response to the new federation.

Such was its opposition to Malaysia that it even voted against the bill when the Sarawak Alliance government, led by SNAP’s Ningkan as chief minister, presented it in the inaugural meeting of the newly elected Council Negeri. The vote was 31 ayes to five SUPP nays.

Having succeeded in forming Malaysia, Tunku, now prime minister of a larger federation was magnanimous to SUPP. Since then, the Chinese-based party with Dayak and Malay members has played an important role in the country as well as the state.

It is interesting to note that as Malaysia celebrates 50 years of nationhood, fewer and fewer people seem to be asking about the safeguards thatwere put in place and whether they are still in place. Like in any strong federation, the tendency is for them to gradually fade away.

In Sabah’s case, it was successive state governments themselves that whittled away some of the safeguards, arguably, for better state and federal relations and stronger national unity.

Under Mustapha, for instance, the Sabah constitution was amended to make Islam the state religion. But he refused to sign over Sabah’s
petroleum rights to the federal government and Petronas. Fuad, when he became chief minister as the head of the Berjaya government, however, did it just before he was killed in a plane crash.

Under Mustapha, the state government also changed the provisions for education and language through the extension of the Federal Education Act 1961 to the state, hence making the education department and its director directly responsible to the education ministry.

After Datuk Harris Salleh succeeded Fuad as Berjaya chief minister, he made Labuan a federal territory, and in the process, made it easy for other Malaysians to enter Sabah.

There is little to distinguish Sabah from the peninsula states now that Umno is leading the state Barisan Nasional.

Sarawak, on the other hand, seems to be fiercely autonomous even though it has given up some safeguards in the interest of unity and uniformity. But it is still the only state without a state religion.

Unlike Sabah, it was an independent state from 1842 and was recognised so by the US and Britain. It had is own flag and national anthem long before it became a British colony in 1946.

The same flag was unfurled and the same anthem sung when the state became independent again.

That perhaps explains why the proud state – the only one still without the benefit of Umno’s guidance – is trying very hard to remain autonomous.

An article that I would like to share with all readers. Taken from here.

By Anthea Mulakala

Anthea Mulakala is The Asia Foundation’s Country Representative in Malaysia. She can be reached at amulakala@asiafound.org.

The Economist last week featured a telling pie chart on Malaysia’s 12th general election results. It revealed, without analysis, that Malaysia’s Barisan National (BN) coalition has the electorate in Sabah and Sarawak to thank for saving its narrow majority in parliament. While the BN was toppled in key states like Penang and Selangor, there was barely a ripple in voter trends in Malaysia’s eastern most states. Almost all BN candidates in both states won with a solid majority. The BN has been the ruling coalition in Malaysia since 1974, though its dominant party the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) has been in the governing seat since independence in 1957.

These often ignored states are now enjoying the limelight as kingmakers for the BN and are well placed to cash in on the attention.

Geographically separated from Kuala Lumpur by the South China Sea, Sabah and Sarawak comprise 5.4 million people or 20% of Malaysia’s population of 27 million. Together the states gave the BN 54 seats out of 140 in the Malaysian parliament. 41 of these seats are held by local Sabah and Sarawak parties that have joined the BN coalition.

However, the BN’s success in Eastern Malaysia should not lead observers to believe that Sabahans and Sarawakians are satisfied with the BN’s governance, accountability and service delivery in their states.

Despite their wealth in natural resources, Sabah and Sarawak are amongst Malaysia’s poorest states. In Sabah, 24% of households live below the national poverty line and child poverty rates are 42%. More than one fifth of the population aged six and over has never been to school. Malaysia enjoys the unflattering distinction of having the highest Gini coefficient in Southeast Asia attributable to the high incidence of poverty in Eastern Malaysia. Sabah’s GDP per capita is less than 50% of the national average. Furthermore, most of Sabah and Sarawak’s poor come from the non-Malay Bumiputra population (61% of Sabah and more than 50% of Sarawak). Clearly, the affirmative action New Economic Policies of UMNO and the BN have not been successful in alleviating these indigenous people from poverty.

Why then, when their development has lagged under decades of BN and UMNO rule, did the local parties, give the BN so many seats in parliament? First the local parties in Sabah and Sarawak are homegrown; the opposition parties are not and are seen to represent the interests of peninsular Malaysians. Until the opposition parties establish roots in Eastern Malaysia they will continue to have limited traction amongst the electorate. Second, everyday Sabahans and Sarawakians worry that voting for the opposition may result in the loss of vital development grants and projects for their states. Certainly BN politicians have dangled the fruit of these grants temptingly during the campaign. Sabahans also feel that constituencies which fell to the opposition parties in the 2006 state elections were subsequently denied federal development grants. Voter education workshops with citizens in Eastern Malaysia reveal that they feel their needs are more likely to be addressed as part of the governing coalition than the opposition.

Furthermore, though peninsular Malaysians very rarely refer to Sabah and Sarawak in their political debates, national politicians are acutely aware of the importance of the Eastern votes and have rewarded their vote bank by building highways and airports. However if Sabah and Sarawak are to emerge from the development doldrums and their voters kept “on side” the BN must reward the backbone of its support with more than tarred roads. In the future, they may demand more power at the centre and more meaningful growth-led development.

Sabah’s shifting demographics add a further layer of complexity to this analysis. 25% of Sabah’s population is comprised of non-Malaysian citizens, mostly Muslim Indonesians and Filipinos, many who entered Malaysia illegally through the state’s porous borders, many seeking jobs and a better life. Many have become “regularized” by the federal government and thereby earn the right to vote. While the means through which these citizens have acquired their papers may be dubious, they form a significant power base for the Muslim dominated UNMO. Critics cry fowl and claim this is an attempt to buy votes in exchange for citizenship. The issue is one of increasing social tension in Sabah and Sarawak which UNMO will need to adroitly navigate.

There was much more to Malaysia’s 12th General Elections than meets the eye. Not least, it provides a pivotal opportunity for the citizens of Sabah and Sarawak to exercise more influence over national policy and get a better deal for themselves. Recognition of their role as ‘kingmakers’ has already sparked grumbling within Sabah and Sarawak that they only received 5 ministerial seats out of 27 in the new cabinet. With 54 seats in parliament, the time is ripe for Eastern Malaysians to put their key issues – like land rights, illegal immigration, persistent poverty, and sub-par economic growth – on the table. If the BN does not pay attention the outcome of the 13th General Election is likely to be quite different than the 12th.

Readers,

Let us support for the proposal of bringing back trams as another means of public transport for Penang.

Electrical trams were used in Penang, Georgetown by the then GeorgeTown Municipal from 1905 to 1936, and reaped high profits until World War I when the supply of replacement parts was hampered.

In my previous posting here, the Penang Heritage Trust (PHT) proposed for the first two phases of the tracks to cover routes with the heaviest traffic, totalling 7km in length. It will be serviced by 10 electric tram cars, of which seven can accommodate 220 passengers and the remaining three 40 passengers. The estimated cost is RM63.98 million or RM9.14 million per km. The proposal also estimates that the project would take no more than 24 months to implement from the appointment of consultants to the commissioning of the system.

For more infos and advantages on trams, look no further than here and here.

Below are some of the pictures of trams in other countries.

By Tony Thien | May 13, 08 1:29pm

If Umno wants to save Barisan Nasional, it has to stop its tai ko (big brother) stance, especially with component parties in Sabah and Sarawak, said an academic based in Kuching.

The two states, especially Sabah, have been trying to get federal attention to problems associated with illegal immigrants, who are deemed to pose a serious threat to security, welfare and livelihood of the local people.

The academic, who declined to be named, said increasingly critical parliamentarians from Sabah have raised valid demands, but “federal leaders appear not to be interested”. He warned that
political allegiance could shift any time if this continues.

Kalabakan MP Abdul Ghapur Salleh (left), a former Sabah deputy chief minister, said yesterday that state leaders would have no qualms about switching parties - although not immediately to Pakatan Rakyat - or forming a new party in the interim.

Abdul Ghafur had questioned why certain states - including Perak which the BN lost to Pakatan - have more representatives in the federal cabinet.

In a latest development, Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP) leader Yong Teck Lee, a former chief minister, said today that none of its two MPs would defect for now.

However, he did not discount the possibility of crossovers after August.

Sarawak leaders less vocal

Although Sarawak leaders have been less vocal, they appear to be no less unhappy with Kuala Lumpur. Despite contributing 30 parliamentary seats to the federal BN's tally in the general election, they feel that they have not been given a fair share of cabinet representation.

“This is clearly a ‘big brother’ attitude, taking the best for themselves and leaving the crumbs to others,” noted a political observer.

Another analyst pointed to the way the Election Commission has listed the political parties in the table of election results. In spite of severe losses, the MCA and MIC are placed second and third after Umno.

The analyst said that the right order should be: Umno (79 seats), MCA (15), PBB (14), SUPP (6), PRS (6), SPDP (4), UPKO (4), MIC(3), PBS(3), SAPP (2), Gerakan (2), LDP (1) and PBRS (1).

The BN won 140 seats, while opposition parties improved their performance with an unprecedented 82 seats.

Hopes that a viable solution is found to solve the public transportation woes, news taken from The Edge Daily

By Lee Wei Lian ,The Edge

The Penang Heritage Trust (PHT) has proposed that the Penang government reintroduce trams as a mode of public transport in the island. Penang used to operate an electric tram system until 1936 when it was discontinued in favour of trolley buses.

The proposal is based on a study done by the PHT last year. According to a copy of the proposal obtained by The Edge, the first two phases will cover the routes with the heaviest traffic, totalling 7km in length. It will be serviced by 10 electric tram cars, of which seven can accommodate 220 passengers and the remaining three 40 passengers. The estimated cost is RM63.98 million or RM9.14 million per km. The proposal also estimates that the project would take no more than 24 months to implement from the appointment of consultants to the commissioning of the system.

This proposal comes at an interesting time because a monorail system that was supposed to be implemented in the state under the Ninth Malaysia Plan (9MP) is in question. In January, Syarikat Prasarana Negara Bhd awarded a letter of intent for the construction of the monorail system in Penang to a consortium led by Malaysian Resources Corp Bhd. The other members of the consortium are Penang Port Commission and Scomi Engineering Bhd.

Last month, Melewar Industrial Group presented a proposal to the Penang government for a 52km monorail system costing RM2.2 billion. In March, Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng was reported to be considering a subway system for the island.

The federal government is currently reviewing its projects under the 9MP and speculation is rife that the implementation of the monorail project may be delayed.

When contacted, Lim Hock Seng, state executive councillor in charge of air, sea and rail transport, says Penang welcomes any federal government initiative, such as the monorail, but if none is forthcoming, the state government will have to explore alternatives.

Ahmad Chik, the author of the proposal and a PHT council member, says electric trams, or light rail transit as they are known in many countries, do not require a licence from the federal government to operate but can be undertaken by the local council.

He adds that the proposal was presented to the previous state government, which was in favour of it, and that it was mentioned to the new state government in a brief meeting. But a formal presentation is still pending. He says a more detailed study should be commissioned before any major transport decision is made.

Chow Kon Yeow, Penang exco member in charge of local government, traffic management and environment, confirms that the proposal was mentioned to him but there still has not been a formal presentation.

Dr Choong Sim Poey, the PHT's president, says trams are environmentally friendly and some of the old tram lines still exist on Georgetown roads and can be reused. "Don't go for expensive solutions. Look at multi-modal public transport and show the cost benefit to the people," he says.

Trams were very popular in the early 19th century. However, with the growth in popularity of motor vehicles, many cities decided to remove the tram system, which was perceived to be old fashioned, in favour of cars and buses. Notable exceptions include San Francisco, Zurich and Melbourne.

Melbourne not only preserved its tram system, but also expanded it into the world's most comprehensive one, with over 245km of lines, 500 trams and 1,813 stops.

In the 1970s, the term "light rail transit" or LRT was coined by the industry to update the image of the tram and the two terms are often used interchangeably.

Unlike in Malaysia, LRT in most other countries refers to modern electric trams, which run on unobtrusive rails embedded in the road as well as conventional rail tracks. Today, LRT is enjoying a resurgence and dozens of cities around the world have reintroduced LRT to their streets.

These include Los Angeles, which once had the world's largest tram system, and Sydney, which reintroduced trams to its streets in 1997. Last year saw the opening of new LRT lines and cities that joined the tram fraternity include Buenos Aires, Argentina; Nice, France; and Toyoma, Japan. The latest city to do so was Shanghai, which started construction on a 10km LRT line last December, some 30 years after the last tram was taken off its streets.

While some people perceive trams as old-fashioned vehicles, modern electric trams can look quite sleek and futuristic. Their main advantage is that they operate at surface level and commuters can hop on and off without the hassle of trekking up to an elevated platform. The cost of building a tram stop is also negligible compared to building an elevated platform station. The stops are also less visually disruptive and tend to blend in with the urban landscape.

Tim Hunter, head of sector for rails at Siemens, tells The Edge that there are some challenges to reintroducing the tram system, which include integrating with the road traffic. "Integration is key. If the planners can resolve how the system can work with the traffic, it will be an excellent mode of transport as people can hop on and off and you can also increase capacity easily. It's also flexible enough to serve both the city and suburban areas. While in the city, the trams will be treated as road vehicles and obey speed limits, but once they are out of the city and are on dedicated tracks, they can reach speeds of up to 100kph."

To make trams a more attractive option, he says there are technologies that can help them achieve greater mobility in the city, including giving them priority at traffic lights.
Siemens is working on a project to reintroduce trams to Edinburgh, where the last tram was taken off the streets in the 1960s. The new trams are scheduled to be operational in 2011. However, when asked about the PHT's cost projections, Hunter says they are too low.

Taken from The Edge Daily

KUALA LUMPUR: Another Barisan Nasional member of parliament from Sabah, Datuk Seri Panglima Abdul Ghapur Salleh (Kalabakan-BN), has called for more funds to be channelled to the state by increasing its oil royalty to 20% from the current 5%.

“We are getting only 5% of oil royalty or RM500 million a year. I want to ask the federal government to give Sabah 20% or RM2 billion a year. With this, we can solve a lot of problems in Sabah and it is not as if we want to pocket all of the money ourselves,” he said.

Datuk Anifah Aman (Kimanis-BN) had last week urged the federal government to review Petroliam Nasional Bhd’s (Petronas) oil agreement with the state.

Abdul Ghapur, who resigned as deputy minister of natural resources and environment last month, said the additional money from the oil royalty would help alleviate poverty in the state. “The poverty level in Sabah is 24% while it is only 3% in Peninsula.”

And the school children in the states were not getting proper food, he said. “The food provided to them probably cost around 30 sen per pupil, which is fitting for cats.”

“We also want to know why the government keeps issuing the IMM13. The IMM13 is for those who come from war torn countries. Half of them are Sabah residents now,” said Abdul Ghapur.

He said a “political tsunami” may reach Sabah if the state’s grievances were not addressed. BN MPs from Sabah could form a new party and decide later whether to stay in the Barisan Nasional or join the Opposition camp, he added.

Asked if he had met up with Parti Keadilan Rakyat’s de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Abdul Ghapur said “no” but added he would not know if other MPs from the state had.

Debating the motion of thanks on the royal address, he said it was Sabah and Sarawak that saved the federal government from falling to the Opposition, but Sabah were only given three minor Cabinet portfolios.

Presently, Sabah’s Datuk Shafie Apdal is the Minister of Unity, Culture, Arts and Heritage, Tan Sri Bernard Dompok is Minister in Prime Minister’s Department while Datuk Maximus Ongkili holds the Science, Technology and Innovation portfolio.

“If it is not for the number of MPs from Sabah and Sarawak, the Opposition would have formed the government. A hundred and forty seats minus the 54 seats from Sabah and Sarawak, (meant) there would not even be enough to form a simple majority,” he said.

He pointed out that one particular state had seven ministers while one state that fell to the Opposition was given four important portfolios.

Calling for a change in the Cabinet, Abdul Ghapur revealed that he did not accept the deputy ministerial post offered to him as he considered it “insulting”.

On Anifah’s remark that Sabah BN MPs could move to a terrace house (meaning the Opposition) from a bungalow (BN) if there was no room for them in the bigger house, he said: “Don’t say moving to a terrace house, we are even willing to move to a kampung house.”

Highlighting Sabah’s underdevelopment, Abdul Ghapur said some people in Sabah still lived in houses with attap walls but he could not see such houses in the peninsula. Even the street lamps in town areas such as Kota Kinabalu and Sandakan did not function properly, he said.

“When we asked for an allocation of RM20 million to RM30 million, there was no allocation. Yet, the government could announce billions of ringgit for projects in the peninsula,” he added.

When asked whether the federal government should cancel the allocation for Penang and divert them to Sabah, Abdul Ghapur said the government did not have to resort to this as it could allocate “special projects” for Sabah.

He explained that tourism could become a thriving industry for Sabah but many tourists did not go to the state due to the lack of infrastructure.

Urging the government to give a bigger allocation to Sabah, he said it would take 10 hours to travel from Kota Kinabalu to Tawau by road compared to four hours for a trip from Kuala Lumpur to Penang.

“If we require RM10 billion, give RM10 billion,” Abdul Ghapur added.

Touching story of a Malaysian’s encounter with May 13 1969….Taken from MySinChew

On the tragic night of May 13, thirty nine years ago, scores of us lost a bit of our blood but for a different reason. We are trying to fill up the fast depleting blood bank at the University Hospital in Petaling Jaya.

In the ensuing confusion, it didn’t occur to us to enquire whether our blood would go to a Malay, or to an Indian, or to a Chinese. Neither did it bother us. So long as it would help save a life, it was worth the while to give our blood. Among us were also Ibans, Kenyahs, Dusuns “dan lain lain lagi” or others. The funny thing is that all our blood had the same colour.

We were all freshmen then at the Campus next to the teaching hospital and had just checked into our respective hostels the day before. On the fateful evening, in the midst of the welcoming party at our hostel, students’ union officials suddenly stormed in and stopped the partying. It was only then that we realised what had just happened. Many of us rushed to the hospital to donate blood. Some joked that there’s too much beer from the party in their blood and wondered if it would be of any use.

At the blood bank it was a riot of a scene as overworked nurses and staff were trying desperately to organise the blood donation in some orderly fashion. As most of the staff were caught by the curfew imposed following the riots, the hospital was acutely short of workers, so again we went there the following day to help out in any that we could; at the laundry, the kitchen, or some janitorial work that had to be done.

As I sit and stare at my blood donation card from the hospital dated 13 May 1969, I wonder if we could ever learn anything from May 13.

Thirty nine years on we still hear blood curling screams of racism in the name of one’s race. They sound ever so self-righteous.

Sadder still is when I hear such racist slurs uttered by those who were not yet even born in 1969 and thus did not experience the trauma of the tragedy. There is the suggestion from some quarters that May 13 was engineered by power-crazed people to seize political power regardless of how many innocent lives that had to be sacrificed on the altars of their political agenda.

Thirty nine years on, there still exists in our midst racists screaming blue murder to the adulation of their blood thirsty mobs.

Thirty nine years ago this day, some of us had the opportunity to donate a few drops of our blood only because precious lives depended on them. Each life is precious in the sight of God. Only the ungodly would endanger such lives by their continued racist outbursts.

Kota Kinabalu: Young leaders of Umno, particularly in Peninsula Malaysia, should stop provoking the feelings of non-Malays by insisting on the issue of "Ketuanan Melayu" (Malay supremacy) as it may lead to the downfall of the Barisan Nasional (BN) Government.

United Pasok Momogun Kadazandusun Murut Organisation (Upko) Vice President Datuk Dr Marcus Mojigoh said the persistence of these "young cowboys" in Umno is not the Malaysian way.

"This is not the way to lift the Malay race to a higher pedestal but a plain and blatant sign of arrogance that may lead to detestation by others.

"To me this is not the Malay culture that I know of. I never heard of this before," said the Putatan MP.

Speaking at the Kaamatan Festival in Kampung Duvanson in Putatan, near here, Saturday, Mojigoh said the Malays are known to be friendly and courteous but the action of certain leaders had spoilt this image.

Towards this end, he hoped Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi who is also Umno President would advise these leaders not to be carried away and to stop acting arrogantly.

In the context of Sabah, he said there were claims of "over a million newly created Malays" - a new product imported from the Philippines and Indonesia.

"Imagine (if) you have to address these illegals as tuan," he said, adding that the authorities need to address the problem of illegal immigrants gaining citizenship and acquiring this Malay status through the back door.

Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng, who is DAP secretary-general, revealed that he stepped in to overrule his father, party supremo Kit Siang, on the issue of boycotting the swearing-in of the Perak mentri besar whose post went to a PAS leader.

On March 12, four days after the general election which saw the Pakatan Rakyat opposition taking power in five states including Perak, Kit Siang had rebuffed the appointment of a PAS man as mentri besar.

“The decision to appoint PAS assemblyperson Mohamad Nizar Jamaludin as Perak mentri besar has caused shock and consternation to DAP leaders, members and supporters,” he said in a controversial press statement.

He also vowed that all DAP Perak assemblypersons would stay away from the swearing-in ceremony for the Perak mentri besar scheduled the next day.

Kit Siang’s statement came hours after it was announced in Ipoh that the Regent of Perak has agreed on Nizar’s appointment.

“I overruled that,” Guan Eng told Malaysiakini in a 70-minute interview at the Parliament lobby a week ago.

However, when asked whether the boycott move was a mistake by Kit Siang, Lim skirted the issue.

“I directed the members to attend the swearing in. I think we leave it as that,” he said.

The next day, Kit Siang - who is member of parliament for Ipoh Timur - apologised for any offence caused to the Perak royalty over his statement.

He later personally conveyed the apology to the Perak crown prince at the mentri besar swearing-in ceremony which was attended by all DAP elected representatives.

Another DAP stalwart Karpal Singh, MP for Bukit Gelugor, is currently at the centre of another controversy involving the royalty.

Over the past week, the renowned lawyer had 20 police reports lodged against him after he said the Perak sultan had acted unconstitutionally in the transfer of a religious department official and criticised the Regent of Kelantan’s message at a forum last month.

PAS’ ambiguous role in Penang

In the exclusive interview with Malaysiakini, Guan Eng also took pains to explain PAS’ ambiguous role the DAP-led state government in Penang, where the Islamic party - which has one elected representative in the island state - was not officially part of the ruling coalition.

“They were not exactly part of the coalition in the beginning but they are brought in later and we would want them to play a role as a result of discussion between PKR and PAS. I would not want to go beyond that,” he said.

He argued that non-Muslim voters still fear PAS despite some had voted for the Islamic party in the March 8 national polls.

“They voted for PAS because they wanted to teach Barisan Nasional a lesson and PAS downplayed the question of Islamic state. If that is brought to the fore, it would have been a very different situation. Our role is to ensure that wouldn’t occur again.

“I think for instance the Perak menteri besar has done very well, in terms of taking a moderate approach but we want to see that reflected at the national level. Unfortunately, there are one or two statements from top PAS leaders which are not in accordance with the spirit that is agreed upon - that Pakatan Rakyat is not about Islamic state, now or in the future.”

Guan Eng also said that the party may re-examine its strategy of political hedging, where top leaders contest for both state and parliamentary seats, resulting in close to one-third of its elected representatives holding dual seats.

“Of course in the past, it was important we wanted to win the seats and we felt that only a well-known candidate will win the seat, that was the primary consideration.

“To be frank, many candidates were reluctant to stand in both seats because they were afraid of losing both and they only wanted to stand in only one which they are sure of winning. We have to compel and force them to take the seats…”

Looks like something is going to happen this 14^th of May 2008... Just wait and see...

PETALING JAYA (May 12, 2008): Pakatan Rakyat leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim today confirmed that several Members of Parliament from Barisan Nasional (BN) and its component parties will be crossing over soon, fuelling speculations that the ruling coalition may lose its grip on power.

In a packed press conference in his Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) Section 16 office today, Anwar disclosed that the respective MPs will make announcements by themselves soon.

"I don't necessarily need to make it. They might do it themselves," said Anwar.

"We have the numbers and we will determine the timing (to announce the crossovers) after observing necessary rules and procedures under the constitution," said Anwar.

"BN and and Umno are not at ease now as they are panicking," claimed the former deputy prime minister.

"They are bringing up issues of racial sentiments and survivals of Malays, and we sense that this might not go down well if we make the announcements now," he added.

"We have to take into account many issues before making any announcement but let them (BN) speculate," he said.

Anwar added that the defections will be carried out according to the law and no "money" will be involved.

He said if the constituents disagreed with the move taken by their respective MPs, then they can protest or even report it.

When asked if he had support from MPs in Sabah and Sarawak, Anwar said the support is now sufficient for the Opposition to form the federal government.

He also reiterated claims he made earlier that a new federal government led by the Opposition can be formed before Malaysia Day (Sept 16).

On another matter, Anwar said he has been advised by friendly parties to enhance his personal safety. "I will not disclose this further but I had been advised to take precautionary safety measures."

Asked to comment on former premier Tun Dr Mahatir Mohamad’s claims that he had purposely exposed the Datuk V.K Lingam tape, Anwar said: "Those are his personal views ... the facts speak for themselves. Furthermore, the incident occurred in 2001 and at that time, I was in prison."

Mahathir had earlier lambasted Anwar, saying the issue was aimed at incriminating him.

Anwar said he welcomed the submission of the report by the Royal Commission to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and called for it to be made public.

Fellow Sabah BN MPs, do what you think is right…

News article taken from here

KOTA KINABALU, May 12— Datuk Yong Teck Lee is not a happy man. He has been upset since his request for the Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP) to contest the Sandakan and Kota Kinabalu seats were rebuffed by the state Barisan Nasional leadership.

He has been disgruntled that his party has only two parliament and four state seats, remarking that the SAPP cannot forever be content with its limited political representation. He and his party are prime candidates to cross over to the Pakatan Rakyat, a move that will give the Opposition two more parliament seats and adding four state seats to the one they currently have.

Worse yet, the changing of political colours could set off a domino effect and embolden other MPs to join the Opposition.

That is why Yong Teck Lee’s name is on the lips of many BN politicians and why some of them are making a beeline for Sabah to appease him and persuade the former Chief Minister of Sabah that he will have a role to play in Kuala Lumpur, possibly as a senator.

But this olive branch may not be sufficient to entice Yong. He is prepared to wait a while and find out if Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi can hush his critics in Umno and stay on in power.

In this regard, he is like many other Sabah politicians who are upset with Abdullah for not recognising the role that the state played in keeping BN in power. They feel that Sabah and Sarawak should have obtained a large share of ministerial positions than states like Selangor.

Abdullah knows that they are restless and has made several promises to them including appointing more Sabahans to senior positions in the Federal civil service and government-linked companies. But they sense that the PM is vulnerable and are going for the jugular.

Today it was Datuk Seri Ghapur Salleh’s (BN-Kalabakan) turn to up the ante. Referring to rumours that many BN MPs in Sabah may join the Opposition, he said: “We have never jumped. We can move by simply forming a new party. Then we can decide as to where we want to sit, here or there."

Debating the Royal Address, he noted that Sabah had been sidelined by the federal government and had the Opposition breaking out in applause when he said: "Kita di Sabah mahu keadilan." Realising that there were Parti Keadilan Nasional politicians in the House, he declared that he wanted justice for Sabahans and was not referring to Anwar Ibrahim’s party.

He argued that Sabah and Sarawak formed the backbone of the Barisan Nasional but yet were not being treated fairly.

"Without Sabah and Sarawak there would be no BN government. Sabah and Sarawak has saved the Barisan Nasional. But what we got in return was three ministerial positions. There are double standards in the BN," he said. Sabah and Sarawak contributed 56 of the 140 parliamentary seats won by BN.

"We were given a portfolio to take care of the museums...is this fair?" he asked, referring to the Unity, Culture, Art and Heritage portfolio held by Datuk Shafie Apdal.

The other ministers are Bernard Dompok (Minister in the Prime Minister's Department) and Datuk Maximus Ongkili (Science, Technology and Innovations).

Ghapur said: "There is a state which has seven ministers while another lost to the Opposition has four Ministers," he said, referring to Johor and Selangor.

Ghapur wanted this imbalance to be addressed by a Cabinet reshuffle.

"I call on the Prime Minister to reshuffle his Cabinet to reflect the current power equation...If nothing is done to address the grouses raised by Sabah folk the state will fall into the hands of the Opposition. The political tsunami will hit us and the BN will lose, I will lose," he said.

He also asked for an increase in oil royalty from 5 percent to 20 percent, increasing the yearly allocation from RM500 million to RM2 billion.

"We can solve problems ourselves with that chunk of money," said the veteran politician, who told reporters later that he had not met Anwar Ibrahim to discuss crossing over to Pakatan Rakyat.

Ghapur is an influential politician in Sabah and his stark comments will unnerve Abdullah. The PM cannot afford any crossovers from Sabah and will have to move quickly to win over Yong, Ghapur and others. He has ruled out a Cabinet reshuffle until after Umno elections in December but may have to consider more meaningful gestures to politicians in the state in the mean time.

Otherwise, Abdullah could face more than just sabre-rattling words. He could face a revolt.

Taken from here

Almost four decades have passed and, as someone who went through the horror, I say it is now time for us to exorcise the ghosts of that one day in May, 1969.

By HO KAY TAT, THE STAR

IT was around 4pm, May 13, 1969. I was taking my usual leisurely walk home from St John’s Primary School on Bukit Nanas in Kuala Lumpur to nearby Kampung Baru. It seemed like any other day except that we were let off early. I didn’t know why, but as a 10-year-old I didn’t care.

On the bridge that divided the then Jalan Ampang commercial heart of KL (where British trading houses like Inchape and Wearne Brothers were located) from Kampung Baru, I saw my mother.

Surprised, I asked: “What are you doing here?”

She grabbed my hand and said: “I was going to take you back from school. Hurry, hurry, go home. There is going to be trouble.”

After seeing me home, my mother, who by then was in a state of panic, rushed to the other end of Kampung Baru to get my sister from the Jalan Temerloh school near where Istana Budaya is today.

I had no clue what was happening. Some of our neighbours had already packed and left. I remember my father telling someone off: “Spread rumours and I will report you to the police. There won’t be trouble. Just stay home.”

When my mother returned, she told everyone there were hundreds of people out on the streets at the Jalan Raja Muda/TPCA stadium junction but there was no trouble yet.

We were seven Chinese families living in four wooden houses just off the bank of the Gombak river, surrounded by Malay homes. Across the river, where the Renaissance Hotel now stands, was a small Chinese enclave where most of the Chinese in the area lived.

Born and bred in Kampung Baru, my five older siblings and I are first generation Malaysians. Our parents and our paternal grandmother who lived with us came from China after the War.

Kampung Baru was where I learnt to catch spiders, play guli-guli, watch joget at Malay weddings, enjoy sambal belacan and eat with my hands. My best friend was Atan, a chubby boy who lived just opposite us. I spent hours playing with him, ate and slept over at his house.

For a 10-year-old, it was bliss, although we were dead poor and all six of us slept in one room with our parents.

But our world would be shattered that one day in 1969.

By dusk, all but two families had left, including the family living in the same house with us. We decided to go indoors. Just as we were locking up, one of my sisters said, “Let’s go over and join Kimi Chi.”

Those words saved our lives.

Kimi Chi, our nickname for her, was a kind woman in her early 30s and we treated her like an older sister.

When we went over, she and her family – husband, amah, three kids, including a baby – were about to hide themselves in a Malay house separated by a narrow lane from hers. Fearing trouble, the makcik and her family had decided to leave but not before suggesting that we take shelter in her house.

The Malay houses were all on stilts. The Chinese homes were not and would be easily identified as all of them had altars in front.

Virtually minutes after we entered the house, they came, scores of them. They had come from the direction of Gurney Road using the riverbank. Soon, we could hear them smashing things up in Kimi Chi’s house.

This went on for a while and throughout that first night people were running up and down that lane shouting. We heard many gunshots from a distance.

I was not scared initially because I didn’t know what was happening. I thought it was just some bad hats running wild. But the adults and older kids knew it was more serious than that. It was a racial clash – sparked by politics and bankrupt politicians – and we were caught in the heart of it.

Throughout the time we spent in hiding, we had only water and biscuits. Amah would quietly boil water to make milk for the baby. I was mostly hiding under the bed together with the other males. The women had decided that the attackers, if they were to break in, would go after the males first so we should be hidden away. We spoke rarely and only in whispers for fear of being heard.

There were two close calls. One evening we heard two men talking outside the house. The baby cried. One man said: “What’s that”? The other replied: “Just a cat!”

Another time, someone said they should check the house. From their footsteps we knew they came right to the door, but stopped when one of them said: “Rumah Melayu-lah.”

After three or four nights in hiding we started to wonder how we were going to get out safely.

Then one afternoon, we heard light knocks on the side of the wooden house from outside and a male voice said softly in Malay:

“Hello, is there anyone inside?”

We maintained silence.

He knocked a few times again and said: “Hello, don't be afraid, I am a soldier. If you are in there, please knock back.”

Silence.

“Don't be scared, I am here to help you.”

Was he genuine? We were truly frightened.

Finally, out of desperation, someone answered him.

“Yes, we are inside.”

Within hours, the good soldier, who later told us he had heard the baby cry, brought in a rescue team.

We were taken to an army camp where we stayed for a few weeks. On the way there, I could see burnt cars and there were still scores of people with weapons roaming the streets. At one point, they tried to stop the army truck to check who was inside.

The army camp was luxury compared to our next place – the refugee centre at the Shaw Road flats school opposite Victoria Institution. There we slept on floors or desks combined into makeshift beds. There were at least 40 to 50 people crammed into each classroom. From the school we could see soldiers patrolling the streets, and an armoured car was positioned all the time at the roundabout (now an underpass) opposite.

It was a couple of months before we were relocated to a low cost flat to enable us to return to normal life and for me, school. I remember my school friends – Malays, Chinese, Indians, Eurasians – asking me what happened on my first day back at school. They knew I was a victim by the tattered donated school shirt I wore.

Almost four decades have passed and, as someone who went through the horror, I say it is now time for us to exorcise the ghosts of that one day in May, 1969.

The people, regardless of race and faith, are ready. In fact, the people were never the problem. There were many instances of one race helping others during the riots. Mine was only one of them.

May 13, 1969, was about politicians, politics and power.

So, are our politicians ready for a fresh start?

Ho Kay Tat is editor-in-chief of The Edge.

Taken from here

Dear Fellow Malaysians and RPK,

I have been following the recent trends in Malaysia from abroad with great interest. With so much dissatisfaction with our elected leaders and government officials as well as with the Police force, what can we ordinary folks do after the election?

Malaysians has voiced their displeasure by denying BN a 2/3 majority, and this alone has probably raised the awareness amongst even more Malaysians that there are so many others like them, hardworking people, leading an honest life to ensure the wellbeing of their family and loved ones. I would not be surprised that given the overwhelming positive vibes from the Pakatan Rakyat, that if we were to hold a snap election right now, we will definitely have a change of government. But well, we will probably have to wait another 5 years or so to know if that happens.

Meanwhile, while the opposition parties get about executing their promises after their election, Malaysians in general cannot afford to sit back and let the Pakatan Rakyat do the job for them on their own. It is commendable to see that there is so much spirited effort in exposing the corruption and what is seriously wrong with the country by the army of bloggers. But seriously, let’s face it, the more the information reaches out to the people, the more dissatisfied people become. But it probably just ends there! We must continue to effect change for the betterment of the country in every little way that is possible.

So what more can be done. As a Malaysian I want to do my part to continue to ensure the process to improve the country does not stop. I have got a wish list and would like very much to know if there is anyway we as ordinary citizens can effect the following;

1) Crime continues to be a widespread problem, yet the police seem more engaged in pacifying peaceful protests and receiving superficial police reports from people who are simply trying to score brownie points for their own political ambitions. I want to know if we can hold those in the police force accountable for their inactions. I want those who abuse their responsibilities with no impunity to know without a doubt that someday, they will be hauled up to court and be faced with a prison sentence. I want them to realise that they have been entrusted to do a job, and they have to do it well. Maybe they lack the passion for it, maybe they are paid too little for it, but a job is a job. Be professional about it. If we the people think that the IGP is not doing his job, we want him to resign and be replaced by someone more capable. What can we as normal folks do to effect this?

2) Corruption in the government continues to undermine the ability of the country to compete with other developing countries. Do those in office holding key positions realise that if they are corrupted, it means that every level of the government will have the same problem. It is no surprise that you might hear one quoting "if the boss does it, why can't I". I want our leaders from PM to MP to realise that if they had done wrong, the arm of the law will eventually catch up with them, be it many years after they have left the office or even fled the country. Religious faith and one's morality alone cannot guarantee one will not succumb to the dark side. The fear of being caught and severely punished must exist as a deterrent. The ACA is less than effective to do this for obvious reasons. What can we as normal folks do to effect this?

3) Lastly, I want the key personnel of the government to be people with impeccable background and qualifications. If they are appointed to any posts from Ministers to local councilman, I want to know everything about them- education history, career history, family members, personal wealth, all their assets declared upfront before taking office. I rather not hear about it only when a scandal breaks out. I want them to be paid a salary on par with highest paid personnel in their respective profession/industry. In return, I want to have the comfort of knowing that they will not be tempted. They must be held to a higher standard of excellence than any other ordinary person. I want to have the comfort of knowing that the people running the country, is not the type who is doing it for the monthly salary and for the kickbacks but for the greater good of the country.

As a democratic country with an election held every 5 years, we cannot vote to change the government for the next 5 years. Unlike a listed corporation, we cannot sack the CEO or Chairman (PM) by calling an EGM. We do not get quarterly reports on the country's performance. Our only measure of how well the government is doing is by looking at the anecdotal evidence of the people's happiness. We cannot look at the economic GDP reports or the KLCI alone to know how well they are doing their jobs as these are affected by external variables not just domestic. So, please tell me what I can do as an ordinary citizen.

By Ian Phung

Seems like this is the beginning of more to come…

GEORGE TOWN (May 8, 2008): In a landmark ruling, the Penang Syariah High Court today allowed a Muslim convert to renounce Islam.

This is the first such decision by a Syariah High Court in the country since the Syariah Court Civil Procedure (State of Penang) Enactment 2004 came into force and is viewed as significant because apostasy, or renouncing the faith, is one of the gravest sins in Islam. Apostates can be jailed.

Siti Fatimah Tan Abdullah, 39, whose Chinese name was Tan Ean Huang, expressed relief that the two-year court wrangle is finally over.

"I will celebrate this decision with a big family dinner this Sunday (May 11) and at the same time celebrate Mother's Day with my mother."

After speaking briefly to the media, Siti Fatimah, accompanied by relatives, went to the Goddess of Mercy Temple on Jalan Mesjid Kapitan Keling to give thanks.

In delivering his decision, Perlis Syariah Court Chief Judge Othman Ibrahim, who had initially presided over the case before he was transferred, said the grounds for allowing Siti Fatimah's application were the testimonies heard in court and her affidavit which proved she never practised Islam.

"The court heard that she had continued with her Buddhist faith even after converting to Islam by praying at temples and was even accompanied by her husband who had brought her into Islam," he said.

He said her husband, as the person who brought her into the religion, had also failed to guide and assist her in her new faith as a Muslim.

The judge also took into account Siti Fatimah's affidavit which stated that she had continued consuming pork, praying to deities like Guan Yin, Thni Kong and Tua Peh Kong and that she did not understand Islam or its practices.

"The defendant, the state Islamic Affairs Council, did not take appropriate action as it was their responsibility to care for and look after the welfare of Muslim converts," Othman said.

He said the Syariah Court viewed this case seriously but it had no choice but to allow Siti Fatimah to renounce Islam based on those grounds.

He also ordered the council to cancel her Islam conversion certificate.

However, he disallowed her application for a court order to the National Registration Department to change the religious status on her identity card from Muslim to Buddhist as it was beyond his jurisdiction. He advised her to apply directly to the NRD.

Othman criticised the state Islamic Affairs Council for failing to carry out its duties in guiding Siti Fatimah in her new faith which resulted in this situation.

He said the council had also not bothered to appoint representation until the case neared the end.

Later, outside the courtroom, Siti Fatimah’s lawyer Ahmad Jailani Abdul Ghani described the decision as a new beginning for syariah law as a non-Muslim is now allowed to continue practising her own religion.

Siti Fatimah filed the application to renounce Islam in May 2006. She had converted in July 1998 to marry Iranian, Ferdoun Ashanian, in 1999.

She claimed Ferdoun left her a few months after their marriage and she stopped practising Islam. She has no knowledge of Ferdoun's whereabouts.

Ahmad Munawir Abdul Aziz, who represented the council, said the council may appeal the decision.

In August 2007, the Syariah court had ordered Siti Fatimah to undergo counselling at the Department's Unit Ukhwah (a unit on brotherhood and sisterhood in Islam) before it could deliver a decision on her case.

The case was then postponed to December 2007 and was deferred yet again when she did not attend most of the counselling sessions.

Hmm, seems that the Penang education department is adopting a double standard by refusing to allow Deputy Chief Minister II Prof Dr P.Ramasamy to distribute free spectacles to needy school children. Come on lah, school children have to bear the political burdens also? What the heck is going on?

Toh raps Penang education dept's attitude

GEORGE TOWN (May 7, 2008): Former Barisan Nasional (BN) state executive councillor Datuk Dr Toh Kin Woon expressed disappointment at the attitude of the the Penang education department for refusing to allow the current state government from distributing prescription spectacles to children of Tamil schools during school hours.

"Why is it that it was okay for me to go to the schools when I was executive councillor but not for the executive councillor of a different party?" asked the former state education committee chairman.

"It is also not fair that the education minister at the federal level can go to schools, but not the state executive councillor for education."

Deputy Chief Minister II Prof Dr P.Ramasamy, who also succeeded Toh’s portfolio after the May 8 elections, had told the press on Monday (May 5) of the current education committee’s plan to distribute spectacles to 223 pupils from 11 Tamil schools in Seberang Perai Utara on May 12.

However, the education department told him they were not allowed to do so during school hours.

"I urge the department to allow Ramasamy to deliver the spectacles so the students' visions can be corrected," Toh said in a telephone interview.

"I am disappointed with the attitude of the department. Although the programme was initiated by me, it was very kind of Ramasamy to continue it. He saw the social value in it."

Toh said he had initiated the programme due to concerns that the students' poor health would affect their academic performance.

"Many students did not even know they had vision problems," he said.

"We managed to get the state to intervene and pay for the spectacles."

"We conducted medical assessments camps in several areas, particularly where there are Tamil schools, and found as many as 100 to 200 children needing spectacles to correct their vision."

Taken from Malaysia-Today

Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak Convinces No One By Saying That The Government Is Liberal And That Sedition Charges Against Blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin Is Not Politically Motivated When RPK Was Charged After Najib And His Wife Objected Against His Allegations Linking Them To The Altatunya Murder Trial.

Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak convinces no one by saying that the government is liberal and that sedition charges against blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin is not politically motivated when RPK was charged after Najib and his wife objected against his allegations linking them to the Altatunya Shaariibuu murder trial. With RPK being charged so soon after both of them objected to so called slanderous remarks online, the public can not be faulted for thinking that these charges were a directed act of vengeance.

On 2 May 2008 the Deputy Prime Minister’s press secretary Datuk Tengku Sariffuddin Tengku Ahmad wrote in a letter to Malaysia Today that Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak will not hesitate to seek legal redress over unfounded and unfair allegations made against him in the case involving murdered Mongolian woman Altantuya. This follows Najib’s wife statement on 1 May against slanderous remarks against her. Despite such warnings of civil action of defamation, Najib has still not sued RPK who instead faced criminal charges of sedition.

This latest infringement of rights may be the beginning of Barisan Nasional’s crackdown on media freedom. This will also set a frightening precedent against online expression that will further erode media freedom in this country despite promises by the BN government.

DAP condemns the arrest of blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin, the editor of the internet news portal Malaysia Today, under the Sedition Act, and demands for his immediate release as well as withdrawal of charges. DAP hopes that all journalists and media associations can come out in solidarity and support for RPK by condemning RPK’s sedition charges.

We know that Raja Petra - who is charged with implying in a post on April 25 that Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and his wife were involved in the murder of a Mongolian model Altantuya Shaariibuu - has been one of the vocal critics of the BN government and its cronies.

On the same day the posting was made (April 25) Information Minister Datuk Ahmad Shabery Cheek told the press that media freedom should not be feared by anyone, including the ruling party, as it could also be the source of strength for the government and the country. Ahmad Shabery even said that the reform announced by Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi recently such as the setting up of a judicial commission and introducing an Anti-Corruption Commission could be implemented more effectively in a free media environment.

Even Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar promised that he would review the country's repressive media laws to boost press freedom. “I have told my officers that I want to have a re-look at the Printing Presses and Publications Act so that we can move with the times,” he said, according to the Star on April 20.

Syed Hamid went further when he said, “We need press freedom in order for us to have a check and balance in government. We are not trying to control you but we want everyone to contribute to the nation-building process. Why should we let ourselves (government) become unpopular by having such regulations?”

The sad truth about this deteriorating situation pertaining to our press and other media is due to Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s too many promises which he failed to deliver since he became Prime Minister in late 2003. After the recent political tsunami on 8 March 2008, it is now proven that talk is cheap.

Such empty promises also demonstrate that BN is not capable of reform, that BN can never accept criticisms and will always resort to repressive laws against the interest of the people.

Another anti-freedom attitude displayed by BN leaders is when Najib yesterday (May 7) inferred that the Attorney-General can decide whether action can taken against DAP chairman Karpal Singh for questioning the transfer and reappointment of the Perak Islamic Religious Affairs Department (JAIP) director. Malaysia is facing international condemnation and widespread public anger for charging RPK. Najib is strongly advised not to apply the same tactics of sedition used towards RPK on Karpal who is the National Chair of DAP.

When criticisms are perceived as threatening stability and public order, this means the BN government will never ever learn from the lesson of the March 8 political tsunami. While the voters are giving BN a second chance, its leaders are more interested in bullying the voice of conscience and the voice of the oppressed.

DAP demands that BN government immediately stop harassing bloggers, journalists and federal opposition leaders and supporters who are merely acting as good citizens in exposing wrongdoings of government leaders.

Taken from The Sun

PETALING JAYA (May 7, 2008): Blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin, the webmaster of malaysia-today.net who was charged with sedition yesterday for news content in his website has refused bail.

In an act of defiance against the charges, Raja Petra has gone on a hunger strike in the Sungai Buloh prison where he is being held and has refused to meet anyone, including his wife Marina Lee Abdullah.

"He won't listen to anyone of us and I am so worried for his health. Except for a drink of water just before being charged in court on Tuesday, he has not eaten or drank anything since. He has kidney problems and I don't think he can take this hunger strike if he goes on for days like this," said Marina when contacted by theSun today.

She said Raja Petra developed kidney ailments when he went on a five-day hunger strike during his detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA) in 2000.

"My husband's lawyers and I had tried to post bail early today (yesterday) to free Raja Petra but he had not just refused bail but also declined to see any of them.

"I believe my husband is doing this as he feels he has been unfairly judged and persecuted. He is angry, just as how everyone else is with what has happened and I know he will only stop this strike when they release him. I can only pray for his health for now, I hope everyone will do so too," said Marina.

Raja Petra is charged under the Sedition Act for an article in his website titled "Lets send the Altantuya murderers to hell" just days after he was called up by police for questioning.

During the questioning session by police officers in the federal police commercial crimes department on Saturday, the blogger who is known for his fiery and no-holds barred comments and write-ups refused to answer any of the questions put to him.

According to Puchong MP and lawyer Gobind Singh Deo, Raja Petra himself has to agree to posting bail to walk out of Sungai Buloh prison.

"Someone can post the money, but only Raja Petra can post bail," said Gobind, who declined to comment on Raja Petra's current situation.

Civil society groups yesterday urged the government to reconsider its use of the Sedition Act to pursue charges aginst blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin.

In a press statement, the Center for Policy Initiatives (CPI), National Alliance of Bloggers, Writer Alliance for Media Independence (WAMI), Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) and the KL and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall said: "In our view the sedition charge is malicious and without merit."

They added that it is also politically motivated and aimed at silencing a principled and uncompromising voice speaking against the abuse of power, including those stemming from the highest level of government and authority.

The group said the Sedition Act, enacted by the British colonial government, should have no place in a democratic society as unlike the law on defamation, one cannot defend oneself form a charge.

"In other words messengers may be shot for simply uttering the truth," said the group.

That the state is using its legal apparatus to charge Raja Petra with sedition instead of the aggrieved party resorting to civil defamation points to a need for thorough reform of our media laws, a demand consistently raised by civil society and progressive political parties.

The group said this action of the government coming just a few days after World Press Freedom Day on Saturday makes a mockery of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s expression of commitment to democratic and social reforms to promote a more open and transparent government.

The groups said the charge against Raja Petra is in connection with a post in his blog titled "Let’s send the Altantuya murderers to hell" in which he raised pertinent questions on various facts of the case that are already within the domain of public knowledge.

Editor of Malaysia Today news portal and blog Raja Petra Kamarudin was charged in a Petaling Jaya sessions court with sedition in connection with the article which he wrote and posted at www.malaysia-today.net on April 25, 2008.

"This action not only runs counter to the government's expressed promotion of a democratic, informed and participatory society, it also smacks of a renewal of the tactics of fear and intimidation which were recently resoundingly rejected by the Malaysian electorate," the statement said.

Taken from here

"… when freedom of speech is being brutally subverted by the present regime and false charges can be instituted against anyone who dares to demand for justice and truth."

As a wife and mother, I want to know from my fellow citizens whether a government that has incarcerated my husband in the Sungai Buloh prison on trumped up charges and brought untold suffering on my family, especially when one of my daughters is sitting for her final examinations, is a legitimate government.

No wife, mother or children should to go through this horrible experience when all her beloved husband did was to uphold justice and truth.

On 2nd May 2008, the Armed Might of the regime was unleashed on my family when they came to my house in search of evidence for some alleged crime that my husband was supposedly to have committed.

I thought that this can only happen in a Gestapo state but not in my beloved Malaysia. You be the judge of this.

The police came in the morning and desecrated the sanity of my home for the fourth time. The fact that this has occurred previously does not make it any easier for my daughter and me. I wish that such nightmares can be forgotten, but let me tell you, especially mothers and wives, that the pain will never go away and that it is only our family self esteem and strength and our faith in god that has enable us to withstand and overcome the trauma and pain that we have suffered together.

I pray that no mother and wife will have to suffer and experience what I had with my beloved husband and my family.

Before we had time to recover our composure, the police handed us a summon to appear before the CCID, the following day. However, at 3.15pm, we received a call to appear at 4.00pm on the same day.

My suspicions for this sudden change in the time for my husband to be interrogated was to prevent publicity and the exposure of their dastardly deeds.

Can anyone of you imagine what I, as a wife and mother had to go through emotionally and psychologically when accompanying my husband to be interrogated by the police when on a previous occasion in 2000, he was brutally assaulted in my presence.

I could not express my anxiety to my husband on the way to the CCID, as I know that my strength and resoluteness would be critical to enable my husband to face his interrogators. He must have also felt the same for me and so both of us, thinking alike kept our silence. But we were determined to see this through together hell or high water.

The Petras’ are not some tofus!! We have enough strength and dignity to overcome such adversity.
My daughter suffered in silence and despite her age, she held up magnificently and no mother can be more proud than I to have such daughter.

As we approached the CCID tears welled in my eyes, but they were not tears of fear, sadness or trepidation, but the expression of my determination and faith that my husband’s struggle will ensure a better future for my daughter and the children of a better Malaysia.

I am proud to say that my husband overcame the intrigues and schemes and came out unscathed. But we knew that this was a mere prelude to more brutality that will be inflicted on my family.

The events of yesterday’s circus are known to all.

But what was most telling was the deafening silence of the judiciary and the bar council which supposedly are the guardians of justice and equity.

The dinner that was orchestrated by Pak Lah, his law minister and other cronies that allegedly ushered “a new era” for a independent and fearless judiciary in upholding justice and human rights, makes me wonder when such a institution that was promised was a fantasy in the light of my experience.
Today, my daughter and I went to the Sungai Buloh prison to visit my husband but we were told that he had no wish to see anyone even any member of the family or lawyers. I was shocked and disturbed by this turn of events as it can only mean that my husband is determined to endure the pain of incarceration and humiliation of being subjected and treated like a common criminal for upholding the freedom of speech and justice.

Being married to him for 35 years I knew only to well that he is capable of making any sacrifices for truth, justice and freedom. I suspect that when I was told that he did not want to see me, that he would be taking the ultimate step – to go on a hunger strike to demonstrate his determination to uphold the cause of truth and justice.

I have nothing more to say, as I am thoroughly exhausted by the turn of events and can only hope and pray that my fellow citizens, especially wives and mothers out there, that you would all come together to protest and to demand for my beloved husband freedom and that you will call upon your member of parliament to boycott parliament as a gesture of support for my husband’s struggle.
His struggle must not be in vain. We as a family will see this through but we will only be able to cope if we know that good and god fearing people like you will be there and standing together with me shoulder to shoulder to strike a fatal blow against tyranny and for justice and truth and for my husband’s freedom.

Marina Lee

Chief Minister of Penang Mr Lim Guan Eng was spotted flying economy class from KL to Penang, as blogged by the manager of songstress Ning Baizura, Mr.Vernon Kedit Jolly at his blog. Below are the pictures taken from Mr.Vernon Kedit Jolly's blog.

Just stumble upon anilnetto's writings where he mentioned the launching of the longest bridge in the world in China, where at 36km, 6 lane, and 27km over water, but costs only 11.8 billion yuan (RM5.3 billion) compared to our proposed 24 km Penang Second Bridge that costs at least RM4.3 billion, which works out to be much more expansive if you do the calculations. Some of the news regarding the bridge can be found here, here, and here. The first picture below shows the newly opened longest bridge in the world.

Dear Readers,

Well the truth has been told, please refer to my previous posting where I mentioned that the scrap metal thieves are illegal immigrants, it was acknowleged by Sabah Industrial Development Assistant Minister Jainab Ahmad as per the news article below.

Kota Kinabalu: Industrial Development Assistant Minister Jainab Ahmad believes the scrap metal thieves who had caused the electricity pylon to collapse on April 22, were from the squatter colony near the tower at Kampung Numbak.

She said their act had embarrassed the Barisan Nasional (BN) government, who many quarters blamed for the massive power blackout.

According to her, the squatter colony there is a haven for illegal immigrants, who driven by hardship, saw the opportunity to make fast money by stealing the metal struts.

"I believe these illegal immigrants were the ones who stole the steel bars," she told reporters after the swearing-in of 60 assemblymen/women at the State Legislative Assembly building.

She said it was very unfortunate that the BN Government was blamed for the power disruption that day that plunged almost 90 per cent of Sabah into darkness.

She called on the Sabah Electricity Sdn Bhd (SESB), Immigration Department, police and Special Task Force (STF), among others, to conduct an integrated operation so as to eradicate rampant metal thefts in the State.

Jainab, who is also Karambunai Assemblywoman, urged the public especially villagers to report to the authorities if they see anyone stealing metal items.

The opposition, on the other hand, she said should not just heap the blame on the government but inform the police of the heinous crime.

"This problem can be rectified although some things are beyond our control," she said.

Nevertheless, she said that the squatter colony must go and in this respect called on City Hall to act quickly.

She said the colony must be removed fast because once the squatters have been evicted, the safety of the electricity infrastructure there would be better ensured.

But Jainab said it is hard to evict the squatters, some of whom had been staying there for many decades.

And when the time came to evict them, the Government had to fork out money as compensation to ask them to move elsewhere although in the first place, squatting on Government land is wrong and illegal.

She said if the authorities had been firm from the beginning, the squatter problem would not be difficult to address.

On other developments, she urged City Hall to firmly monitor development projects in her constituency.

"The recent flash floods in Tebobon is the doing of nature but were caused by humans," she said.

Jainab said the developers had indiscriminately cut the hills and in the process exposed the soil.

The soil, she said, would be washed down to the rivers during the rainy season, which is the reason why the rivers become shallower.

She said that developers should be compelled to pay compensation to the people whose properties were damaged or destroyed by the floods.

In many cases, she said the developers did nothing with regards to their social responsibility.

Readers,

An article taken from the blog of MP Wong Ho Leng, State Assembleman for Bukit Assek, Sarawak, touching story about the current Chief Minister of Penang, of his rise from the prison cell to the post of Chief Minister of Penang today.

I had written 2 paragraphs about my visit to Guan Eng when he was serving his sentence in Kajang Prison. I made that visit in October 1998 together with Chong Siew Chiang.I had merely written that during that visit in Kajang Prison, Chong Siew Chiang and I had a heart to heart talk with Guan Eng for 1 hr. 45 minutes in respect of his legal case which had cost him his freedom, political office, professional career, pension and much else besides.

I had said that it was a sad but eventful meeting. I was economical in my words.

There is one aspect of my visit to Guan Eng that day that I did not write about. Actually, I could not write about it, because it was so, so humiliating and sad. I did not write about it because Kit Siang did not want me to see it. But I did see what Kit Siang desperately tried to let me not see it.

Kit Siang was supposed to drive us to Kajang Prison. He was busy that morning and our departure from our HQ was delayed a little. Kit Siang was speeding like nobody’s business. When we arrived at the Prison, we “checked” in at the office. It was at this time that I saw the prisoners walking out in their prison uniform for row calls at the wardens’ office. They had to squat in rows, every time and every day that they did so, and the prison wardens would call their numbers.

As I walked in, I saw the familiar face of a prisoner with an unfamiliar crew hair cut. He was squatting at the front row. Both his hands were placed over the back of his head …

We had a split second eye contact but I pretended not to see … It was very dissimilar to those other cases when I was required to visit the prison as a lawyer.

Half an hour later, we met. Kit Siang did not join us. I would not know where he had gone to. Guan Eng started by saying that he wanted me to send a message to Party members and supporters in Sarawak not to despair over his fate. “Tell them that they can break my back, but they cannot break my soul.”

As we discussed his case, I knew that he was not well at all. He was pale and complained of body pain. He also complained that he had not consumed sufficient salt, the food being tasteless. We were worried that his fragile body won’t take him through. We were concerned about his safety in there. He assured us that the inmates there had treated him alright, that they all knew that he was wronged.

It was unbelievable that even when he was at the pit of his life, he had his heart for the Party members, in our case, the comrades in Sarawak.

We told him our view about the legal case. It was clear to us that he was fated to sit behind bars for another 10 months. He knew as much. Royal pardon was out of question.

As Kit Siang drove us away from the Kajang Prison, he made sure that we had a taste of the signature food of Kajang town – satay. At the coffee shop, Kit Siang greeted the town folks who wished him well and to remain strong, but in his leaner body frame, I saw the pains that he had endured. Political adversaries had long accused him of cronyism and nepotism, and the building of a Lim dynasty. The fate of his son losing everything after standing up for a Malay girl who was raped by a Chief Minister, and having to languish in jail for 18 months, showed the cruelty and venom of those accusations.

Siew Chiang was habouring many questions inside his chest and it took a long time for him to break his silence. He asked Kit Siang why he was speeding desperately this morning. Kit Siang then told us. He wanted to make it to the Prison before the row call. If we had made it in time, our meeting could begin, and Guan Eng would not have to take part in the row call. During the row calls, the prisoner had to squat in a row, hands behind the head … As the father, Kit Siang did not want us to see his son in that moment of ultimate humiliation.

Siew Chiang told Kit Siang that he did not see Guan Eng in the row. I said I did not also. Then Kit Siang told us where Guan Eng was squatted. He sped, because he had not wanted us to see the ultimate humiliation to his son.

But I had sinned with my eyes.

The signature satay was tasteless to me amidst cries of injustice that innocent people had to suffer.

On our way home, there was hardly any communication between us. Our hearts were heavier than lead. In my mind, I saw the flashes of a prisoner, hands behind his head, his face so familiar, squatting in the row like other inmates. I repeatedly asked myself whether Guan Eng deserved this. Why should I see that moment in his life when his father had wanted me not to? But that was what it was, for Guan Eng had to endure that humiliation for 365 days.

It was after midnight in Kuching not long after Guan Eng’s release. We had finished our party function and all were hungry for supper. We found a little place in order to replenish our tummies. There was no food left except plain porridge. I ordered some, teasing Guan Eng that the porridge must be better than what he was used to in Kajang. Guan Eng cursed me for reminding him of what he had gone through.

That day about 2 weeks ago, when I stood for photograph with YAB Lim Guan Eng behind his Chief Minister’s desk in Penang, I recalled what I had seen of this man. From a humiliated prisoner, he had been vindicated by the powers in the people’s hands.

Much that YAB Lim had never responded to anything I said about his less than glamorous times behind bars, he will always remember the ultimate humiliation that a person had gone through. He will know the true meaning of justice.

In less than 10 years, God has shown YAB Lim Guan Eng the way. May YAB Lim now shower mercy and love to the great people of Penang.

28.3.2008

Readers,

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, The former Prime Minister of Malaysia has started his own blog here.

Below is the first article that Tun wrote. Happy Reading and Happy Labour Day!

The Prime Minister has announced that judges would be chosen by a Commission specially set up for this purpose.

2. No details have been made public as to the way the Commission would work.

3. Would the Commission actually appoint the judges or would it only recommend the names for the PM to approve or would the Commission recommend directly to the Agong for him to exercise his prerogative? Or would the Agong require the approval of the Rulers Conference? Or would the Conference of Rulers be merely consulted as is done now? Or would they be able to reject the candidate, and ask for new candidates or name new candidates of their choice?

4. It would be interesting to know the full details of the procedures, above all with regard to the role of the PM.

5. The appointment of judges is provided for in the Constitution. If changes are to be made in any way, they must be considered as in breach of the Constitution.

6. To make the changes legal, the Constitution has to be changed.

7. As everyone knows changes in the Constitution can only be made if two-thirds of the members of Parliament in session agreed with the proposed changes.

8. The Government does not have the necessary two-thirds majority. By itself it will not be able to change the manner with which the judges are chosen. It can only do so if the opposition supports it by at least nine votes.

9. Is the Government proposing to work with the opposition on this issue, and so display its weakness? Will there be a quid pro quo, a bargain with the opposition? It would be interesting to see how the PM proposes to deal with this.