BUDGET 2010

PM slashes spending in Budget 2010
Oct 23, 09 4:05pm

Prime Minister Najib Razak slashed government spending in the 2010 budget, moving to rein in a fiscal deficit swollen by stimulus measures aimed at pushing the economy out of recession.
In his maiden budget, Najib promised an ambitious cut in the budget deficit in 2010 from its highest level in more than 20 years, although he provided few clues as to how the reductions would be realised.
The main spending cuts would come from reduced "operating
expenditure" (-13.7 percent), lower food and fuel subsidies (-14.7), a sensitive political issue for an unpopular government, and less money for development spending (-4.5 percent).
Najib also said an extensive fuel subsidy system, extremely popular with the public but a drain on national coffers, would be revamped next year but did not give details of the cuts.
He said the economy would shrink by 3.0 percent this year, less than a 4.0-5.0 percent contraction tipped earlier, but that it could bounce back and post modest growth of 2.0-3.0 percent in 2010.
"Major indicators suggest the economy is on track to recovery," said Najib, who is also finance minister, adding that "Malaysia's economic fundamentals remain resilient, despite the more challenging environment in 2009."
But he said the downturn, which hit Malaysia's export-dependent economy hard, showed it needed to address its long-term competitiveness and shift to a new model "based on innovation, creativity and value-added activities".
"We are now at a critical juncture, either to remain trapped in a middle-income group or advance to a high-income economy," he said.
Najib said Malaysia needed to strengthen domestic demand, lose its reliance on cheap imported labour, and introduce liberalisation measures to enhance competitiveness.
Ambitious spending cuts
The 2010 budget allocation totalled RM191.5 billion - 11.2 percent lower than the revised allocation of RM215.7 billion for 2009.
"This allocation reflects prudence in government spending and gives priority to value-for-money," said Najib, adding that the cuts would not harm public sector delivery.
Operating expenditure will be slashed by 13.7 percent to RM138.3 billion in an unprecedentedly large cut, helping reduce the fiscal deficit from 7.4 percent this year to 5.6 percent next year - much lower than expected.
Wan Suhaimi Saidie, an economist with Kenanga Investment Bank, was cautious about the ambitious move to rein in spending.
"It's a big surprise for me because, in spite of the economic recovery, the government is already consolidating its fiscal deficit by substantially cutting down the operating expenditure as well as reducing development spending," he told AFP.
"My view is that (the cut) will affect the efficiency of the government machinery. My view is that the maximum you can cut is 5.0 percent."
Others were sceptical the target could be met.
"It is good that we see now the government seems serious to address the budget deficit issue," said Azrul Anwar Ahmad Tajudin, senior economist at Bank Islam.
"But the problem is whether we can achieve it or not. It's too huge a reduction," he told Reuters.
Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim applauded the move to cut costs but said he doubted whether it would be achieved, and that the budget did not address rampant corruption which was one of the causes of overspending.
"I have no qualms about the stated pronouncement on the attempt to ensure Malaysia becomes more competitive and reduces waste, but actions speak louder," he said.
New petrol subsidy system
Najib said the government, which was hit with severe criticism over past cuts to petrol subsidies, would implement a "fuel subsidy management system" in early 2010 but gave no further details.
There were promises of lower taxes with 1 percentage point to be lopped off the top 27 percent income tax rate and a vague commitment to study a goods and services tax (GST), which economists say is need to expand the tax net.
According to Najib, the government is "at the final stage" of a study into implementing a long-considered GST to replace the current tax and services tax.
"The purpose of this study is to ensure that if the GST needs to be implemented to stabilise government finances, it will not burden the people," he said.
Average consumer price inflation is predicted at 1.0 percent this year, slower than the forecast of 1.5-2.0 percent by the central bank in March.
Exports are expected to shrink 19.2 percent in 2009, but could rebound to record 5.1 percent growth in 2010, it said.
In his two-hour speech, Najib said emphasis will also be placed on human capital and improving the public sector's efficiency.
"In approach I would not see any major departure in his (Najib's) approach to previous prime ministers," said political analyst Khoo Kay Peng.
"We see the usual tiny populist giveaways alongside catching-up measures."

SALIENT POINTS
Quick facts
• Malaysia economy to grow 2-3 percent in 2010.
• Per capita income to increase by 2.5 percent to RM24,661.
• Budget 2010 allocations totalled RM191.5 billion, of which RM138.3 billion is for operating expenditure and RM53.2 billion for development expenditure.
• Federal government revenue in 2010 to decline by 8.4 percent to RM148.8 billion.
• Budget deficit at 5.6 percent of GDP compared with 7.4 percent in 2009.

Taxation
• Maximum income tax rate to be further reduced to 26 percent from 27 percent effective from the 2010 year of assessment.
• Personal tax relief will be increased to RM9,000 from RM8,000 effective from the 2010 year of assessment.
• Individual taxpayers to be given tax relief on broadband subscription fee up to RM500 a year from 2010 to 2012.
• Income tax for 2010 based on income derived from 2009 will be allowed to be paid in instalments in five years.
•
• Employees EPF contributions will be raised again to 11 percent on a voluntary basis with immediate effect. However, from Jan 1, 2011 employees' EPF contribution will revert to 11 percent.
• The government proposes existing personal tax relief of RM6,000 for EPF contributions and life insurance premiums be raised to RM7,000.
• Civil servants are eligible to apply for computer loans once in every three years and up to a maximum of RM5,000 from the government once in every five years.
• A five percent tax to be imposed on gains from disposal of real property from Jan 1, 2010.

Credit cards
• There will be no more free credit cards which are currently being used extensively. The number increased from more than two million in 1997 to 11 million as of August 2009, excluding 285,000 charge cards.
•
• To promote prudent spending, a service tax of RM50 a year will be imposed on each principal credit card and charge card, including those issued free of charge.
• There will also be service tax of RM25 a year imposed on each supplementary card.

Fuel subsidies
• To ensure fuel subsidies only benefit targeted groups, the government will implement a fuel subsidy management system in early 2010.

Goods and Services tax
• Government is in the final stage of completing a study on imposing Goods and Services Tax (GST). The rate will be lower than the current sales and service tax.

Approved Permits (AP)
• RM10,000 to be imposed for each AP to open AP holders effective Jan 1, 2010. A portion of the collection will be channelled to the bumiputera development fund in the automotive sector.

Permanent residency
• Simplify permanent residency (PR) applications for those who possess high talents, expatriates will be issued visas within 14 days while male expatriates who marry locals will be automatically conferred PR status.
KEY BUDGET ALLOCATIONS
Infrastructure
• Government to allocate RM9 billion to finance infrastructure projects, with RM4.7 billion for road and bridge projects, RM2.6 billion for water supply and sewerage services, RM899 million for rail facilities, RM820 million for ports and sea services and RM276 milliion for airport projects.
• RM3.7 billion set aside to beef up the security forces, including providing modern and sophisticated equipment for the relevant agencies.
• TNB to spend RM5 billion to implement electricity generation, transmission and distribution projects in 2010.
• Public-private collaborations to include an integrated immigration, customs and quarantine complex in Bukit Kayu Hitam, construction of six UiTM campuses and the development of Matrade centre.
• RM3.5 billion for infrastructure and basic amenities and training programmes and socio-economic projects to support implementation of private sector projects.

Corporate social responsibility
• 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) will establish a corporate social responsibility fund totalling RM100 million as a start to finance community activities.

Tourism
• Government to allocate RM899 million to intensify tourism industry.
• Tax incentives for healthcare service providers who offer services to foreign health tourists with income tax exemptions of 100 percent on the value of increased exports from 50 percent previously.

Health
• RM14.8 billion is allocated to manage, build and upgrade hospitals and clinics.

Agriculture
• Allocate RM137 million to upgrade and improve drainage and irrigation infrastructures in paddy fields involving 180,000 farmers.
• RM70 million to build the Paya Peda Dam Project in Terengganu to increase water supply capacity to paddy irrigation scheme in Besut.
• RM82 million to modernise aquaculture industry and conduct entrepreneurship training scheme for aquaculture breeders with focus on production of fish fry and ornamental fish.
• RM149 million to develop food farming industry such as fruits, vegetables, organic farming, herbs, seaweeds and swiftlet nests.
• RM58 million to develop basic infrastructures for livestock farms and establish supply chains for beef and mutton production.
• A consortium comprising Felda, Felcra and Risda will be established by the end of 2009, with a paid-up capital of RM300 million and with each agency contributing RM100 million.
• Government to provide subsidies, incentives and assistance amounting to some RM2 billion to farmers and fishermen to safeguard their interests.

Small and medium enterprises
• To consolidate 79 SME funds to 33 to simplify access to SME financing to be coordinated by SME Corp.
• An allocation of RM350 million to SME Corp, with RM200 million set aside for SME soft loans, RM100 million for capacity enhancement and the balance for branding and promotion.
• Financial institutions to approve micro-financing in six days and disbursement in four days.
• To allocate RM538 million for implementation of various SME programmes, with RM281 million to state economic development corporations, RM200 million to Tekun and RM57 million for purchase of business premises and infrastructures.

Green technology
• Government to sanction RM20 million to intensify green awareness activities and practise environment-friendly lifestyle.
• Develop Putrajaya and Cyberjaya as pioneer townships in GreenTechnology as a showcase for the development of other townships.
• Establish a RM1.5 billion fund to promote green technology, with a maximum RM50 million financing for suppliers and RM10 million for consumer companies.
• Applications for financing through the National Green Technology Centre to commence on Jan 1, 2010 and 140 companies are to benefit.

Construction
• Building owners obtaining GBI Certificates from tomorrow until Dec 31, 2014 are to be given income tax exemption equivalent to additional capital expenditure. Stamp duty exemption to buyers of buildings with GBI Certificates from tomorrow till Dec 31, 2014.

Regional corridors
• Government will ensure that the five regional corridors - launched during former premier Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's tenure - will be developed according to schedule.

Crime
• Target set to reduce crime index by five percent, including street crimes such as snatch theft and robberies by 20 percent by the end of 2010. Among the measures that will be taken is to increase police presence by providing stations in 50 crime hotspots.

Hardcore poverty
• Government committee to achieve target of zero hardcore poverty in 2010. Five thousand poor households registered with eKasih and 4,000 Orang Asli households to receive aid. Skills training programmes and income generating programmes will be provided. Federal welfare assistance to be distributed on the 1st of each month.
• RM141 million to be allocated for 'Program Lonjakan Mega' scheme to alleviate 5,600 families from hardcore poverty.

Finance
• Double deduction on expenditure incurred in promoting Malaysia as an international financial centre.
• Deduction on expenditure incurred to set up Islamic stockbroking companies.
• To introduce a basic insurance and takaful scheme for motor insurance protection by mid-2010.
• To expand micro insurance and takaful coverage for small-scale businessmen to benefit from coverage ranging from RM10,000 to RM20,000 with a premium as low as RM20 per month.
• Stock market to be further liberalised to enhance efficiency. Liberalise commission-sharing arrangements between stockbrokers and remisiers by allowing flexible brokerage sharing at a minimum rate of 40 percent for remisiers and to have commission-sharing fully liberalised effective January 1, 2011.
• Allowing 100 percent foreign equity participation in corporate finance and financial planning companies.
• Current tax incentives to develop financial services, particularly Islamic finance, extended to 2015. Twenty percent stamp duty exemption on Islamic financing instruments.
• Tax exemption on banking profits derived from overseas operations.
• Effective Jan 1, 2010, government agrees to allow agencies to retain 50 percent of rentals received while the remaining 50 percent will be remitted to the government as revenue.
• Maximum tax rate for cooperatives will be reduced to 26 percent while the fixed tax rate for non-resident individuals will be cut to 26 percent.

Human resources
• Income tax on employment income of Malaysians and foreign knowledge workers residing and working in Iskandar Malaysia will be set at 15 percent compared with the maximum 26 percent for the rest of the country.
• Government to launch a scheme in January 2010 that enables EPF contributors to utilise current and future savings in Account 2 to promote house ownership.
• The government to establish the 1Malaysia Retirement Scheme to be administrated by EPF.

From: Malaysiakini

Malaysian: A true meaning!

By: Tunku Abdul Rahman's great granddaughter
Sharyn Lisa Shufiyan, 24
Conservationist


“Both my parents are Malay. My mum's heritage includes Chinese, Thai and Arab, while my dad is Minangkabau. Due to my skin colour, I am often mistaken for a chinese.
I'm happy that I don’t have the typical Malay look but I do get annoyed when people call me Ah Moi or ask me straight up "Are you Chinese or Malay"

Like, why does it matter? Before I used to answer "Malay" but now I'm trying to consciously answer Malaysian instead..

There's this incident from primary school that I remember till today. Someone told me that I will be called last during Judgement Day because I don’t have a Muslim name. Of course, I was scared then but now that I'm older, I realise that a name is just a name. It doesn’t define you as a good or bad person and there is definitely no such thing as a Muslim name. You can be named Rashid or ALI and still be a Christian.

I’ve heard of the 1Malaysia concept, but I think we don’t need to be told to be united. We've come such a long way that it should already be embedded in our hearts and minds that we are united. Unfortunately, you can still see racial discrimination and polarisation. There is still this ethno-centric view that the Malays are the dominant group and their rights must be protected, and non Malays are forever the outsiders.

For the concept to succeed, I think the government should stop with the race politics. It's tiring, really. We grew up with application forms asking us to tick our race. We should stop painting a negative image of the other races, stop thinking about 'us' and 'them' and focus on 'we', 'our' and 'Malaysians'.

No one should be made uncomfortable in their own home. A dear Chinese friend of mine said to me once, "I don’t feel patriotic because I am not made to feel like Malaysia is my home, and I don’t feel an affinity to China because I have never lived there..

I know some baby Nyonya friends who can trace their lineage back hundreds of years. I'm a fourth generation Malaysian.. If I am Bumiputra, why can’t they be, too? Clearly I have issues with the term.

I think the main reason why we still can’t achieve total unity is because of this 'Malay rights' concept. I'd rather 'Malay rights' be replaced by human rights. So unless we get rid of this Bumiputra status, or reform our views and policies on rights, we will never achieve unity.

For my merdeka wish, I'd like for Malaysians to have more voice, to be respected and heard. I wish that the government would uphold the true essence of parliamentary democracy. I wish for the people to no longer fear and discriminate against each other, to see that we are one and the same.

I wish that Malaysia would truly live up to the tourism spin of Malaysia truly Asia. Malaysians to lead - whatever their ethnic background. Only ONE NATIONALITY -MALAYSIAN. No Malays, No Chinese, No Indians - ONLY MALAYSIANS. Choose whatever religion one is comfortable with.

MERDEKA

MERDEKA

MERDEKA

The End of Civility?

A MASTERPIECE BY MARINA MAHATHIR

I had to remind myself many times that this was happening during Ramadan, when we are enjoined to exercise restrain. Did these people then go home and eat since surely their puasa was batal'd?

I grew up in Kedah and Kedahans, while not an overly formal people, put great store on courtesy and manners. Known for being gentle people, we were governed by many rules on how we behaved and spoke, particularly to our elders.

For instance, it was considered extremely impolite to refer to ourselves as 'saya' (I) when speaking to family members (including extended family members). 'Saya' was considered so formal as to be snobby, even arrogant. (The extremely informal 'aku' however was beyond the pale; you only use it among very close friends who are allowed to call you the very rough 'hang'). Correctly speaking, you have to refer to yourself always by name, or at least the diminutive version of it, or, as some very traditional Kedah women would, as 'Che' (pronounced 'Chek', not 'Chay') though this is considered very 'manja'. Thus you would say, "Che tak tau la sapa mai tadi pasai Che tak dak kat rumah." (I don't know who came just now because I was not home.)

Similarly, having to name one's parents posed great difficulties to the well-brought up Kedahan. Our parents' names were sacred, not to be bandied about. Perhaps it was a way of teaching us not to be arrogant about our family and origins. But if asked what our parents' names were, the reaction was often a certain amount of blushing and hand-wringing before a tiny voice finally whispered their names.

This was the way I grew up. And to this day I treat my elders with respect, even when I don't like them too much. I may now find it easier to refer to myself as 'saya' when I speak to someone in KL though I tend to retreat to the English 'I' when I can. Also, even 12 years after receiving my award from the Sultan of Selangor, I cannot bring myself to introduce myself by my title nor sign off anything but the most formal of letters with it.It's the Kedah way and what my parents taught me.

Not to say that Malays from other states are any less polite. We stick to many rules of courtesy. One of those I like is calling someone older than you 'Kak' or 'Abang' or 'Makcik/Aunty' or 'Pakcik/Uncle'.I still inwardly cringe when a young person calls me by my name although I have made it a rule that if they're over 25, they don't have to call me Aunty. And those who do call me Aunty aren't allowed to shout it out too loudly in public. But it's nice when, unbidden, young people easily address you as Kak or Aunty as a show of respect. It also tells you a lot about their upbringing.

Why am I talking about upbringing? It's really been prompted by that video I posted yesterday on the Shah Alam dialogue-turned-fracas. Over the years I have become aware that civility is really becoming uncool. People are rude everywhere, whether on the roads, in shops (you know, the ubiquitous and automatic 'no stock' without even bothering to look) or on the phone. Most of it is shrugged off as the daily irritations of city life and frankly sometimes on a bad day I can be curt too.

But one of the occasions in which I am never impolite is in a meeting. Over the years I have been in numerous meetings/dialogues/conferences/consultations, whatever you want to call them. They can be tedious, boring, frustrating and annoying. But it's never served anyone well to be rude in them. I have faced very vocal opponents in several meetings and have never yielded to the temptation of shouting back at them. In fact the louder they get, the calmer I become. My philosophy is, just because a point is shouted doesn't make it a better argument.

Which is why when I watched that video it was clear to me that those people had no intention of having any dialogue at all. What dialogue is there when all one person can say (or rather shout repeatedly) is 'Bangang!'. One bespectacled man takes the mike and starts off speaking normally enough and then suddenly spins into some sort of hysterical dance, much like a child stamping its foot when it doesn't get something it wants. Another man, in a songkok to denote piety perhaps, grabs the mike behind the panel and starts shouting incomprehensibly. Someone else apparently took off his shoes and showed it to the MB. Did his mother teach him that?

But the 'star' is the young man with the ponytail who is a tubby hurricane unto himself, shouting, waving, jumping up and down, rushing the panel, all the while not uttering a single comprehensible word that might advance his argument. I can almost picture how he drives his car.

I had to remind myself many times that this was happening during Ramadan, when we are enjoined to exercise restrain. Did these people then go home and eat since surely their puasa was batal'd?

It still puzzles me what the reason for not having the temple in their neighbourhood is. I was following the whole session on Twitter and apparently one woman claimed that having the temple there would cause house prices to fall and crime rates to rise. The logic of that escapes me. In my neighbourhood, there is a mosque, a temple and a church within shouting distance of one another and there is no problem, apart from the traffic jams and indiscriminate parking on Fridays. Although crime is a problem in my area, it can't be attributed to the presence of places of worship, and house prices have risen to ridiculous levels.

I did start to wonder though, is there no mosque in Section 23? Would they rather there be a mosque where the temple is to be? If so, why put it in a factory area?

Even so, what trouble would a temple bring except from these people themselves? In what way does it intrude into their lives? And as a friend pointed out, if being in the majority is the excuse not to have a place of worship of a minority faith, then there would be no mosques in America or Europe.

But back to the behaviour of these people, this is the most troubling part of it. These are the people on whom the government and the police base their arguments for not allowing demos or for using the ISA, notwithstanding the allegations that these are pro-BN people and that most probably they will never be hauled up. These are the examples pointed to when people say that demos can't be allowed because people can't control their emotions and behave rationally. These are the people held up as 'typical' Malaysians, a notion I find extremely insulting.

Even more ironically, these are the very same people who insist that we must keep the ISA, because they assume that everyone must behave like them in situations like this. That, just because they can't be trusted to discuss anything in a civilised manner, nobody else can either. They see the world entirely as mirrors of themselves, no matter how ugly that reflection. Or perhaps it's a distorted mirror they are looking at, where all their reflections come out beautiful.

We know that there are many people out there perfectly capable of intelligent, calm and rational discussion. In fact our culture dictates that that's how we conduct ourselves. Only a few people are predisposed to acting like neanderthals, whose idea of a good 'dialogue' is when the outcome has been predetermined to their advantage. Make no mistake, these types transcend race. But in this case, it is clear that the ugly ones are those who claim to represent my race and religion. I'm sorry but I refuse to be represented by them.

But the trouble is, the excuse for maintaining harsh laws will be these people. Just because a small number of people don't know how to behave, the rest of us are the ones who will have to suffer.

Already the Malaysian Comunications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) has asked for these videos to be taken down. I suspect it's because it makes Malays look bad. Could there be a sense of shame after all? But the official excuse is that Indians will get offended. Well I'm sorry la, but every decent right-thinking Malaysian is offended, not just Indians. And for that decency, we are going to be punished.


God help us, Malaysia.

By:Marina Mahathir - Sunday, 06 September 2009 16:48
(Marina Mahathir is the daughter of Dr. Mahathir, our ex-PM)

LAGU HUJAN: SUDIRMAN ARSHAD

Hujan Hujan yang turun bagaikan mutiara
Berkilau bersinar berkerdipan
Subur menghijau bumi terbentang
Dan bayu berpuput lembut
Cinta yang bersemi Diwaktu hujan turun
Menyirami ketandusan hati
Dan hujan turut mengiringi
Engkau pergi...
Selembut hujan bercurahan
Begitulah cinta ini
Semesra bumi yang disirami
Begitulah hati ini
Hujan yang turun bersama air mata
Bersama pedih, bersama rindu
Kau datang dan kau pergi jua
Rindu lagi

Lagu : Kau akan kembali: SUDIRMAN

Aku terima berita dari mu
Kau akan kembali seperti yang diduga
Bertahun berlalu kau berada dirantauan
Kau akan kembali ke pangkuan ibunda

Sawah terbentang dan padi menguning
Daun nyiur melambai angin timur membelai
Riak air di kali bagaikan bersedia
Membasuhi tubuh mu dari debuan kota

Sayup-sayup terdengar merdu suara seruling
Mendendangkan lagu anak desa
Kau pergi dahulu keranan dah jemu
Kau telah impikan satu hidup baru
Pahit manis seorang kembara
Segalanya telah kau rasa

Desa nan permai setia menunggu
Tiada bezanya seperti masa dulu
Namun kami semua tiada pernah jemu
Segalanya indah selalu

A GRAVE DISTORTION OF THE MALAYSIAN CONSTITUTION

In a written judgment by Justice Nik Hashim Nik Rahman, the Federal Court empowers the Election Commission (EC) to over-rule the Speaker over the resignations of the three ‘independents’ in Perak and declares these assemblymen continue to stay as assemblymen.

This judgment, released on June 15 - 67 days after the oral judgment was given by the panel of five judges on April 9 - is flawed on two scores.

First, the court has misinterpreted the Constitution to wrongly declare the EC – instead of the Speaker – as the authority to decide whether a resignation in the legislature should be accepted.

Second, even if the court is correct in giving the EC the role of the final arbiter in respect of resignations in a legislature (which is decidedly wrong in law), the court has no business to declare the three 'independents' remain as assemblymen.

The kingpin of the court’s argument is Article 36(5) of the Perak Constitution, which reads: "A casual vacancy shall be filled within 60 days from the date on which it is established by the Election Commission that there is a vacancy.

"Pouncing on the word "established" as conferring an executive power to deliberate on the legality of the resignation of a legislator, Nik Hashim asserts that "the Election Commission has the right to enquire into any matter relating to the purported resignation."

He further states that "Under Article 35 of the Perak Constitution, the Speaker’s role is limited to receiving the written resignation letter of the assemblyman and forwarding the same to the Election Commission, which will then by its own procedure determine whether a casual vacancy has arisen or not". (Article 35 reads: "A member of the Legislative Assembly may resign his membership by writing under his hand, addressed to the Speaker.").

If Nik Hashim's interpretation of the Constitution is correct, hasn't our poor Speaker been reduced to a mere messenger boy for the EC whenever a resignation in the Assembly or dispute arising wherefrom crops up?

Founding fathers not dim-witted

Surely our founding fathers and the crafters of our Constitution, which is built on the principle of separation of power, could not be so dim-witted as to allow such piece of nonsensical legislation to slip through their fingers?

Actually there is nothing wrong with the legislation. The problem is with the interpreter of the constitution. Nik Hashim has obviously misconceived the real function of the word "established".

Interpreting it out of context, he conjures up powers to the EC that are not intended and non-existent in the Constitution.

Any experienced reader of the constitution should be able to discern that Clause 5 of Article 36 of the Perak Constitution was intended to stipulate that a casual vacancy must be filled when it arises, and that it must be filled within a certain period.

The word “established” is used in the context of defining the 60-day period within each the vacancy must be filled, and not to be used as implying the granting of executive power to the EC to micromanage the mechanism of an act of resignation in a legislature.

If it is intended that the EC be given such an important function as manager and final arbiter of resignations in a legislature, is it conceivable that the crafters of the our constitution had camouflaged it in such cavaliar fashion, and not expressly spelling out the details under a separate clause?

In fact, it is equally inconceivable that our founding fathers could have agreed to such provision due to its fundamental contradiction with the doctrine of separation of power.

In Malaysia, and in fact in legislatures all over the democratic world, it is always the Speaker who scrutinises and acts upon the resignation of a legislator, and should there be any dispute which the Speaker could not resolve, the Assembly will act as the final authority to settle the outstanding issues.

In the worst scenario where criminality is alleged, such as forged signature or undue coercion, the aggrieved party can always seek redress through the courts. But under no circumstances should the EC involve itself in any such matter which is deemed the exclusive domain of the assembly, outside the jurisdiction of not only the EC but also the courts. The latter could only come in, if there is incidence of criminal elements.

EC’s hollow authority

Nik Hashim may be technically correct when he rules that “the Election Commission is the rightful entity which establishes if there is casual vacancy of the State Legislative Assembly seat”, but such function to “establish” vacancy is a hollow authority – a mere formality to announce a vacancy upon notification from the Speaker of a resignation, as the bulk of action in a resignation takes place at the Speaker’s end, not at the EC.

When the Speaker receives a letter of resignation, he scrutinises its authenticity, and satisfies himself that the resignation is genuine before accepting it. And upon his notification to the EC to this effect, the legal act of resignation is deemed complete. And since the EC has no legal power under the Constitution or any law to undo this resignation, it should treat the Speaker’s notification as legal command to fulfill his constitutional obligation to declare a vacancy and a by-election date.

In the Perak case, the EC had clearly acted ultra vires the constitution when it rejected the Speaker’s decision and refused to conduct by-elections.

The current Federal Court judgment endorsing such unconstitutional act has caused a grave distortion to our Constitution and opened the floodgate for potential interference by EC into issues of resignations in our legislatures including parliament.

This judgment must therefore be promptly reversed through a judicial review to avert permanent damage to our system of government under the principle of separation of power.

I have said at the beginning of this article that the Federal Court has no business to declare that the status of the three ‘independents’ be maintained as assemblymen. This is due to the fact that this court hearing is just to interpret the meaning of the Constitution pertaining to the EC’s power in respect of the resignation of a legislator, and not to look into the legality of the specific act that the EC had taken in respect of the resignations of the three ‘independents’ in the Perak Assembly. As such, the Federal Court has no legal basis to make declarations that the assemblymen status of the three ‘independents’ be maintained. That decision is up to the High Court in Ipoh, where such litigation is still on going.

BY: KIM QUEK FOR MALAYSIAKINI, 17TH JUNE 2009

'World's oldest blogger' dies in Spain at 97.

MADRID: A Spanish great-grandmother who billed herself as the "world's oldest blogger" and who gained a global following on the Internet, died on Thursday, 22nd May, 2009 at the age 97, local officials and reports said.

Maria Amelia Lopez, who was introduced to the world of blogging by one of her grandchildren, used a mix of humor and nostalgia to recall life during the long dictatorship of Francisco Franco and give her take on modern life.

"Today it's my birthday and my grandson, who is very stingy, gave me a blog," she wrote on her first post on amis95.blogspot.com on Dec 23, 2006.

Her blog quickly soared in popularity after the media reported on it, having seen more than 1.5 million hits.- AFP

Story of May 13, 1969

Story by Thomas Lee ( Taken from Malaysiakini )

I was one month short of my 21st birthday on May 13, 1969, and I will never forget how I was escorted safely home by some Malay men when I had to pass through the Malay section of Lorong Selamat (the Macalister Road end) in Penang on my way home on my Vasper scooter. One of them even rode pillion on my scooter to ensure I was not attacked. The riot was not racial. It was the poor Malays being told by Malay politicians that the rich Chinese caused them the economic suffering, and the poor Chinese being told by Chinese politicians that the powerful Malays in government caused them to suffer. The riot was triggered off by the then massive suffering of both the poor Malays and poor Chinese. Who to blame? Not the Malays. Not the Chinese. But the happy-go-lucky ‘tidak apa’ government of the day, which didn't have any concrete plans and policies to uplift the quality of life of the poor Malays and poor Chinese. That's what I believe May 13 was all about. By the way, May 13 is also my wedding anniversary.

ZEN AND THE ART OF BLOGGING

When I was growing up, I wanted to be Grasshopper, the character in David Carradine’s TV series ‘Kung Fu’.

Grasshopper was child imbued with immense interest in learning about what life means and how to create himself. The conversations between the master and the student intrigued me.

My interest in the philosophy of martial arts, drawn from the teachings of the masters of the Shaolin Temple, led me later in life to also study Oriental Literature and Philosophy, reading great works such as ‘The Dream of the Red Chamber’, ‘The Tale of Genji’, and ‘The Pillow Book of Sei Shonagon’.

I watched numerous kung fu movies and wanted to also be like Bruce Lee, the man who synthesised Western and Eastern philosophy into an advent garde form of martial arts.

Reading Buddhism in one of those periods of my spiritual enrichment and encountering works such as ‘The Zen of Motorcycle Maintenance’ and ‘The Dancing WuLi Masters’, I found the idea of deconstructionism and psychology of awareness even before I plunged into the study of social semiotics in my years in New York City.

Zen Buddhism’s most famous advocate in the West is Richard Gere, the American actor who is deeply involved in the campaign for a free Tibet. Gere often speak with the Dalai Lama in making the world aware of the persecution of the Tibetans by the Chinese government.

Awareness is a key principle of the teaching of the Buddha. Siddhartha Gautama is a quintessential example of a human being who discarded the garment of nobility and elitism and came down to earth and explored the bare-nakedness of alienation and dehumanisation.

From a prince to a pauper he evolved in the final days transformed into a philosopher. His struggles against the demons called Mara and his exploration of the self as powerful cause and effect of existence itself - and how wisdoms like pearls will emerge out of deep meditations on the fate of humanity - all these have become a life history example of how one can be at peace and harmony with the universe.

Cyberspace is a world of Maya with Mara shooting arrows at the enlightened ones. One has to be a Shaolin master in order to fight these demons and to continue to evolve into one piece into wise individuals.

Paid cyber-troopers in the Malaysian ‘Mahabharata’ of this millennium is a feature of this perpetually fragmented world. The industrial model has collapsed. The Malaysian monarchical state is in trouble. The Perak plague is a beginning of the Balkanisation of this Asian despotic state we are attempting to reconstruct.

Fight the demons
In cyberspace, bloggers are playing the art of making others aware of issues and in the process hopefully impart wisdom. Bloggers are artists practising the art of harmonising truth, realism, and activism.

Truth and falsehood multiply endlessly in cyberspace. At the centre of the personhood of the blogger lie awareness and the Zen-ness of the master’s craft. It is the awareness of what to do with truth and falsehood and the subjectivities and reflectivities in between that determine whether the blogger is fighting the Maras the Buddha fought, or has become one of the Maras.

In cyberspace, bloggers are educating, whether it is education for peace or for war. The more popular the blogger, the greater the impact of the message. The blogger is a weapon itself - in the whole enterprise of waging war or waging peace.

In the political scene, Malaysia is being deconstructed by bloggers. It is a natural progression of the anarchic nature of the Internet. No politician is safe. You can neither run nor hide in cyberspace. It is a Matrix of the Maya world we inhabit; a world of the Maras that attacked Buddha and of the masses that stormed the Bastille.

Malaysia will continue to be destabilised by bloggers - for the better - in her evolution towards the establishment of a just republic or a republic of virtue as the French ideologues of the 18th century would say.

Politicians and pirates of the Malaysian Caribbean, ones who stole from the poor to give to the rich, are in constant fear of bloggers - especially of the Zen bloggers. The Zen blogger, like the messiah on twitter is one who does not speak ill of others in cyberspace but makes people ill by invading the inner spaces of those who abuse power and by oppressing others.

Like a Rumi poem, the Zen blogger takes the middle path in spreading a message of peace through deconstructionism. But deconstruct, the blogger must. Through right thought, right action, right conduct, and right blogging, the blogger must make others aware of what life ought to be. In Malaysia, what ought to be has become what we are wrought to be. This means we have evolved from a nation of tolerance in the 1970s to a nation of totalitarianism in the 21st century.

Like the WuLi masters and Little Grasshopper, the blogger must know how to dance when given a sword. Like Bruce Lee, he must know how to harmonise the philosophies and create a lethal art of war in his or her work in waging peace.

Only when blogging is an art and science of educating for peace and not a dance of death in Dante’s Inferno, not when bloggers can be bought and sold for millions of ringgit by owners of the production of falsehood, that we can see the Zen and the art of blogging at play.

Bloggers must journey into the self and fight the demons within. You must, as the Sufi teachers would say, be skilled in journeying from the levels of Shariat, Tarikat, Hakikat, and Makrifat - the levels of outer and inner consciousness that define the harmonious self.

For, essentially, as bloggers we answer to our inner conscience. And ultimately, we are a republic unto ourselves, in a world in which the state is still a necessary evil.

Bloggers - beware and be aware.

By: Azly Rahman.

Press Statement by Member of Parliament Klang Charles Santiago in Klang on 18th April 2009.

It is appalling to read Utusan Malaysia run a frontpage article titled “Bangkitlah Melayu”, urging the Malays to rise against the other races who are allegedly demanding way too much. But maybe the answer lies in the fact that the paper is linked to the ruling UMNO.

Although at first glance the verbal diarrhea by Datuk Ibrahim Ali, the Member of Parliament of Pasir Mas seems to pour cold water on Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s 1Malaysia concept, the lines blur upon careful scrutiny.

If Najib is serious about getting rid of racist language that strife to divide the Malaysian society even further, then he should formally put an end to the affirmative action policies which have only lined the wallets of the ruling elite.

But, on a different note, mere rhetoric by Ibrahim, Utusan Malaysia and other UMNO members would not help achieve Najib’s call to Malaysians to break away from their “ethnic prison”.

Picking up on Najib’s statement after chairing his first cabinet meeting, I urge the premier to act sternly on Utusan Malaysia, which practices obsequious journalism to pander to the whims and fancies of its UMNO bosses.

The country is facing enough economic problems without a whole new franchise cashing in with their bully–boy tactics. Najib’s top job and concern should be about the economy, which is handicapped by rising unemployment and declining demand.

The effect of massive job loss may increase the national unemployment rate, which currently sits at 3.5 percent, to 4.5 percent. The country’s manufacturing sector recorded a 26.1 per cent decline in sales in February. The Malaysian Institute of Economic Research, a government-linked think tank, has said that the country’s export-driven economy would shrink 2.2 percent this year, more than the government and central bank are forecasting.

Bursa Malaysia Bhd early this week reported a net profit decline of 63 per cent from RM 42.1 million a year ago to net profit of RM 15.5 million in March of this year largely due to the decline in equities trading revenue

Malaysia’s GDP grew just 0.1 percent in the fourth quarter from a year ago, as exports continue to drop due to sagging global demand.

Utusan, Ibrahim Ali and Najib should be aware that pushing the racial line when the country’s economy is sliding fast would not help the people. These groups should strive instead to promote an enabling environment for every Malaysian, especially the poor.

Specifically, Najib’s slogan should not be persuasive language used to hoodwink the people even further. He is after all not competing to win the best slogan title against former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad who chanted Bersih, Cekap, Amanah and his one-time blue-eyed boy Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s “Work With Me, Not For Me.

In short, we do not need mere political slogans, racist rhetoric and bigotry. The country needs to focus on the economy.

Charles Santiago

Member of Parliament, Klang

016-6267797

மதமாற்ற விவகாரம்: இந்து சங்கம் அமைச்சரவை உதவியை நாடுகிறது

தாயாரின் அனுமதியின்றி வலுக்கட்டாயமாக மூன்று இளங்குழந்தைகள் ஈப்போவில் மதமாற்றம் செய்யப்பட்ட விவகாரத்தில் இந்து சங்கத் தலைவர் எ. வைத்திலிங்கம் புதிய அமைச்சரவையின் உதவியை நாடியுள்ளார்.

“இப்பிரச்னை துணைப் பிரதமர் முகைதின், பிரதமர்துறை அமைச்சர் கோ சூ கூன் மற்றும் மனிதவள அமைச்சர் எஸ். சுப்ரமணியம் ஆகியோரின் கவனத்திற்கு கொண்டுவரப்பட்டபின், இது ஒரு கடுமையான பிரச்னையாகக் கருதப்படுகிறது”, என்று அவர் ஓர் அறிக்கையில் கூறியுள்ளார்.

இப்பிரச்னையைக் கையாள்வதற்கு கோ, சுப்ரமணியம் மற்றும் இஸ்லாமிய விவகாரங்களுக்கு பொறுப்பேற்றுள்ள பிரதமர்துறை அமைச்சர் ஜமில் கீர் பகாரும் ஆகியோர் அடங்கிய குழு ஒன்றை துணைப் பிரதமர் முகைதின் அமைத்துள்ளார் என்றாவர்.

“இதற்கிடையில், சம்பந்தப்பட்ட அனைவரும் அமைதி காத்து இப்பிரச்னைக்கு நியாயமான தீர்வு காண உதவுமாறு இந்து சங்கம் வேண்டுகோள் விடுக்கிறது. நீதிக்காகப் பிராத்னை செய்வோம்”, என்று வைத்திலிங்கம் கூறினார்.

வயது ஒன்றிலிருந்து பன்னிரண்டு வயதுடைய மூன்று குழந்தைகளை அவர்களுடைய தகப்பனார் முகமட் ரிட்ஜுவான் அப்துல்லா ஏப்ரல் 12 ஆம் தேதி அக்குழந்தைகளின் பிறப்புப் பத்திரங்களை மட்டுமே முன்வைத்து மதமாற்றம் செய்தார். குழந்தைகளைத் தன்னுடைய பாதுகாப்பில் வைத்துக்கொள்வதற்கான உத்தரவைப் பெறுவதற்கு ஷரியா நீதிமன்றத்தில் மனு தாக்கல் செய்துள்ளார்.

அக்குழந்தைகளின் தாயார், எம். இந்திரா காந்தி, 35, அவருடைய குழந்தைகள் இந்து மதத்தைப் பின்பற்ற அனுமதிக்குமாறு கோரியுள்ளார்.

தற்போது, அத்தம்பதிகளின் இளையமகள் பிரசன்னா திக்சா, முகமட் ரிட்ஜ்வானுடன் இருக்கிறார். இதர இரண்டு குழந்தைகளும் - தேவி தர்க்ஷிணி, 12, மற்றும் காரன் தினேஷ் - தாயார் இந்திராவுடன் இருக்கின்றனர்.

இஸ்லாமிய இலாகா அதிகாரிகள் அவ்விரு குழந்தைகளையும் எடுத்துக்கொண்டுபோய் விடுவார்கள் என்ற அச்சத்தில் அந்த பாலர்பள்ளி ஆசிரியர் தன்னுடைய உறவினரிடம் தஞ்சம் அடைந்துள்ளார்.

அமைச்சரவைக்குழு என்ன செய்ய முடியும்?

அடுத்த வாரம் குழந்தைகளை தாயாரின் பொறுப்பில் விடுவதற்கான மனு தாக்கல் செய்யப்படும். பின்னர் மதமாற்றம் சம்பந்தமான விசயங்கள் கவனிக்கப்படும் என்று இந்திராவின் வழக்குரைஞர் எ. சிவநேசன் கூறினார்.

“இம்மாதிரியான விவகாரங்களில் நீதி கிடைப்பதில்லை.”

“நான் பலரைப் பார்த்திருக்கிறேன். அவர்களுடைய வேதனைகளைப் பார்த்திருக்கிறேன், குறிப்பாக முஸ்லிம் அல்லாதவர்களின் வேதனையை”, என்று அவர் மலேசியாகினியிடம் கூறினார்.

அமைச்சரவைக்குழுமீது தமக்கு நம்பிக்கை இல்லை என்று சிவநேசன் கூறினார்.

” புதிய குழு என்ன செய்யப்போகிறது? மூவர் அடங்கிய குழு அமைக்கப்பட்டதன் மூலம் அக்குழு பிரச்னையை எப்படி தீர்க்கப்போகிறது”, என்று அவர் வினவினார்.

மதமாற்றம் செய்ய விரும்புகிறவர் இஸ்லாமிய இலாகாவில் தனது மதமாற்றத்தைப் பதிவு செய்துகொள்வதற்குமுன் அவர் சிவில் சட்டப்படி செய்து கொண்ட திருமணம் சம்பந்தப்பட்ட அனைத்து விவகாரங்களையும் முறையாக செய்து முடித்துவிட்டது கட்டாயமாக்கப்படுவதின் வழி மாற்றங்கள் கொண்டுவரப்பட வேண்டும் என்று சிவநேசன் கூறினார்.

“இரு தரப்பினரும் மதம் மாறினால், பிரச்னை இல்லை. ஆனால், ஒருவர் மதம் மாறி இன்னொருவர் மாற விரும்பவில்லை என்றால், அவர்களுடைய குழந்தைகள் 18 வயதை அடைந்து அவர்கள் தாங்களாகவே ஒரு முடிவு எடுப்பதற்கு அனுமதிக்க வேண்டும்”, என்று அவர் மேலும் கூறினார்.

சர்ச்சைக்குரிய பிரச்னை

சிவில் சட்டப்படி திருமணம் செய்துகொண்ட முஸ்லிம் அல்லாதவர்களின் மதமாற்றம் - ஒருவர் மதம் மாற விரும்புவதும் இன்னொருவர் மறுப்பதும் - எப்போதும் பெரும் சர்ச்சையை கிளரிவிடுகிறது. ஏனென்றால் இது சம்பந்தப்பட்ட சட்ட நிவாரணங்கள் தெளிவற்றவைகளாக இருப்பதுடன் முஸ்லிம் தரப்பிற்கு மட்டுமே சாதகமாக இருக்கிறது.

2006 ஆம் ஆண்டில் தங்களுடைய குழந்தைகள் யாருடைய பொறுப்பில் இருக்க வேண்டும் என்பது குறித்து இந்து மனைவி ஆர். சுபாஷினிக்கும் முஸ்லிமாக மாறி முகம்மட் சாபி என்ற பெயர் கொண்ட டி. சரவணனுக்கும் இடையிலான சட்டப் போராட்டம் பிரசித்தி பெற்றதாக இருந்தது.

முகம்மட் சாபி தன்னுடைய மனைவியை விவாகரத்து செய்வதற்கும், குழந்தைகளை தன் பொறுப்பில் வைத்துக்கொள்வதற்கும் ஷரியா நீதிமன்றத்தின் தீர்ப்பை நாடினார்.

இதன் பின்னர், தன்னுடைய பிரிந்துவிட்ட கணவர் ஷரியா நீதிமன்றத்தில் தொடர்ந்துள்ள நடவடிக்கைகளுக்குத் தடை விதிக்கக்கோரி சுபாஷினி செய்து கொண்ட மனு உச்ச நீதிமன்றம் வரையில் ஒவ்வொரு கட்டத்திலும் நிராகரிக்கப்பட்டது.

2007 ஆம் ஆண்டில், நாட்டின் உச்ச நீதிமன்றம் அரசமைப்புச் சட்ட விதி 12(4) இன் கீழ் ஒரு குழந்தையின் மதமாற்றத்திற்கு பெற்றோர்களில் ஒருவரின் ஒப்புதல் போதுமானது என்று தீர்ப்பளித்தது.

ஆனால், இந்த வழக்கில் சம்பந்தப்பட்ட இரு குழந்தைகள் யாருடைய பொறுப்பில் இருப்பது என்பது பற்றி தெளிவான தீர்ப்பு அளிக்கவில்லை. அது குறித்து கணவனும் மனைவியும் அவரவர் சம்பந்தப்பட்ட சட்ட அடிப்படையில் நடவடிக்கை எடுக்கலாம் என்று தீர்ப்பளித்தது.

இப்பிரச்னை பலதடவைகளில் எழுப்பப்பட்டபோதிலும் அரசாங்கம் இது குறித்து மௌனமாக இருந்து வந்திருக்கிறத

மை அல்மா மேட்டர்

High School Klang
SMK Tinggi Klang

Motto : Probitas Et Fides (Loyalty and Integrity)
Established : 1928
School Type : Government Secondary school

Session : Double
Enrollment : 1843
Grades : Form 1 - Form 6
Location : Jalan Meru, Selangor, Malaysia

District : Klang

Colours : Green, Yellow, White


High School Klang, also known as Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Tinggi Klang or SMK Tinggi Klang for short, is a government secondary school located in Jalan Meru about one km away from the Klang town centre in Selangor, Malaysia. It is a male-only school from Form 1 to Form 5. At the Sixth Form level, where students take their STPM, the classes are mixed.

History

High School Klang was originally named Temporary English School and was open to students in the town of Klang on January 14, 1928 with the beginning of the academic school year.

The main school block was opened by the Sultan of Selangor on March 20, 1930. Since then the school has expanded to accommodate its ever increasing student population.
In 1941, the Klang High School was used as the headquarters of the Medical Auxiliary Service for Klang. There were two doctors assisted by 52 nurses. The school reopened after the WWII having been used as a military hospital by the British Military Authority.

After Malaysia's independence, it was known as Sekolah Tinggi Klang or by its acronym S.T.K. By the end of 1990s, the name was changed in accordance with Ministry of Education regulations to its current name.

School buildings

The school has nine blocks. The blocks are named below, with the date each came into use:

• 1928 – Hostel block. Later used as the laboratories (Block B)
• 1930 – Main block (Block A)
• 1948 – Block H and I
• 1961 – Afternoon session laboratories (Block F)
• 1969 – School Library
• 1972 – Biology, physics and chemistry laboratories (Block D)
• 1980 – Physics and chemistry laboratories with the staff room (Block C)
• 1982 – Block E
• 1991 – New block for sixth form classes

School Song

Probitas Et Fides

O God almighty, we give thee thanks
For our school, the High School Klang
And for the teachers who daily guide us
With answers to questions asked
Onward the spirit of close fellowship
And towards others in friendship and love
May we never be found wanting
The great courage of living and striving
Dear High School Klang
Our High School Klang
Thee our dear Alma Mater
Forward to serve we go now
May we love thee forever more

Long live the king(makers)!

I have always thought of Muhyiddin Yassin as a reasonable, restrained and urbane Umno leader; in fact, he used to be one of my favourite cabinet ministers.

When he ascended to the exalted position of deputy prime minister, I was a touch worried that he might just be the new face and the new voice that Umno and BN need to regain the support of the voters who had swung en masse to the opposition coalition in the last general election.

My worry turned out to be both unfounded and unwarranted. Within a week of assuming the second highest office in the land, the public statement of the new DPM has shown that he is just like the past Umno and BN leading lights - arrogant, insensitive and quite removed from reality.

When MIC boss S Samy Vellu made disgruntled noises about not getting enough ministerial appointment, Muhyiddin practically told him to shut up, and Samy Vellu dutifully complied.

This little bit of melodrama played out in front of a national audience must have entrenched the belief among many Indian voters that MIC is indeed a subservient serf to their Umno masters in the BN coalition, and therefore no longer worthy of support.

Soon after, while reflecting upon the results of the by-elections in the two Bukit, Muhyiddin opined aloud that the Chinese voters were ungrateful or “unappreciative”.

This is evidence that the new DPM is very much the prisoner of the kind of Umno racial narrative that used to be both popular and effective in those Mahathir years. Unfortunately for BN, this kind of vocabulary has outlived its shelf life.

The Chinese electorate throughout Malaysia have changed. The unexpected election results of March 8, 2008 have opened their eyes to new political possibilities in Malaysia. They have tasted the nectar of change, and their ravenous hunger for greater and more fundamental change has grown. Just note their increased support for PAS and PKR in the two Bukit.

This talk of Chinese being ungrateful must have touched a raw Chinese nerve throughout our fair land. Instead of apologising for his insensitive remark, Muhyiddin blamed it on the media, as BN ministers are wont to do. This must have riled up the media fraternity, even if they keep quiet, as mainstream journalists are wont to do.

The new MCA boss Ong Tee Kiat was silent on the DPM’s insensitive remarks against Chinese voters, displaying to a national audience once again that indeed MCA is subservient to Umno in all things Chinese, and they do not deserve support from the Chinese community in the next election.

Finally, Muhyiddin more or less warned the Chinese people on the peril of seeing themselves as king-makers.

The ramification of such a seemingly innocent statement had to be played out in the ultra-right Malay press: if the non-Malay people become king-makers, the Malays are in danger of losing their Ketuanan Melayu and their grip on political power will be loosened. The existence of the Malay race would be threatened on their own homeland.

The clarion call for the Malays to rise and unite is only to be expected.

Political narrative aimed to spook non-Malays

That is the sort of political narrative that could frighten the non-Malays into voting for the BN in the past. I doubt it will do the trick now in our new Malaysia. It will probably whip up the appetite of the Chinese and the Indians for change even more.

Given the Malay voting trends in the two Bukit, it is also unlikely that this scare tactic aimed at the Malay masses can generate the usual communal panic as it used to do.

Even when Anwar Ibrahim was still spending his enforced vacation in Sungai Buloh, I had predicted that the Chinese and the Indian voters could play the role of king-makers in national politics.

As soon as PKR and PAS could split the Malay votes in the urban and the rural constituencies, the minority Chinese and Indian voters in the mixed and even the Malay-majority seats could determine the outcome of a contest between Umno and PKR or PAS.

There is nothing wrong with the Chinese and the Indians playing the king-maker role. The only casualty will be the idea of Ketuanan Melayu and Umno. This new found significance of the two minority ethnic groups will not be a threat to the Malays, because they will need to vote alongside those Malays who believe in the new collective ideology of Ketuanan Rakyat.

Thanks to people like Ong Kian Ming and Wong Chin Huat, we now have very professional empirical analysis of past election results, constituency by constituency, and even polling stream by polling stream.

The latest addition to such collection of meticulous election researcher is Kenny Gan. His recent letter to Malaysiakini entitled 'Can East Malaysia again save BN in 2013' is particularly sobering for watchers of Malaysian politics.

The following is his speculation of what the next general election would look like:

“There are 51 non-Malay majority seats, 44 mixed seats and 70 Malay-majority seats in the Peninsula. A non-Malay majority seat is defined as having less than 50% Malay voters, a mixed seat from 50% to less than 66% and a Malay-majority seat equal to or greater than 66% Malay voters.

“Based on the current voter sentiment, BN will be expected to lose all 51 non-Malay majority seats. Based on 30% non-Malay support and not more than 60% Malay support, BN should theoretically lose all 44 mixed seats too.”

At the end of his analysis, Kenny Gan has this to conclude:

“So BN's tally in the Peninsula is nine mixed seats and 45 Malay-majority seats making a dismal total of 54. Can the East Malaysian states save BN this time?”

Again, the spotlight is turned onto the two powerful blocs of parliamentary seats in Sarawak and Sabah. With BN federal power in doubt, the Chinese and the non-Malay indigenous voters would now have a different set of political parameters to consider when casting their votes.

The Chinese-majority seats in those two eastern states are especially gullible to the Pakatan Rakyat assault. The tone of the campaign and the issues raised would be considerably different from past elections.

The Sarawakian and Sabahan Chinese voters may just decide to emulate the fine example set by their ethnic counterparts in the Peninsula, and vote en masse for the Pakatan Rakyat candidates. Those few Chinese seats may just be king-makers again in a hung Parliament in 2013.

Horse trading involving Sabah, Sarawak

Another possibility is that once the dust has settled in the 2013 general election, and the BN and Pakatan have more or less similar number of seats in Parliament, there would be intense horse trading involving Sarawak and Sabah MPs. The torrid history of politics in those two states has shown that political loyalty can be bought and sold to the highest bidder.

Bought or sold, such MPs would be toxic assets to the political coalition which they would choose to belong at the end of the bargaining session, so I am not so excited about this prospect. But it does illustrate that Malaysian politics cannot be business as usual as it was done before 2008. Many new variables have crept into the confused equation.

The same unknown variable has also crept into the 70 Malay seats in the Peninsula.

According to Kenny Gan, there are 70 Malay-majority seats in West Malaysia, of which 25 were won by PKR and PAS in 2008.

Gan has defined a Malay seat as one where there are 66% or more Malay voters. If the results in Bukit Gantang and Bukit Selambau are an indication, the Umno base support cannot exceed 57%.

Again, in a keen contest, the 34% or less king-maker in those Malay majority seats may just want to try switching their political allegiance from BN to Pakatan. The end game in national politics would then be anybody’s guess.

How the Chinese, Indian, and “other” ethnic voters will vote in the next general election depends on how our political drama plays out before the entire national audience.

They are watching with great interest, slowly realising perhaps that for the first time, the so-called minority ethnic groups suddenly have power to change the destiny of politicians and that of the country far out of proportion with their numerical strength.

The new ruling class within Umno and BN are obviously oblivious to this new development. They are stuck in the time-capsule of their old paradigm and talking in the antiquated language of race and violent threat.

That is why Muhyiddin talked and behaved as he did. He is just adding another nail to the closing coffin. We should encourage him to do more of the same.


Written in Malaysiakini by:SIM KWANG YANG was MP of Bandar Kuching in Sarawak between 1982 and 1995. He can be reached at kenyalang578@hotmail.com.

Perak crisis: Judges have let Najib down

The Federal Court decision that Perak speaker V Sivakumar did not have the right to suspend BN Menteri Besar Zambry Abd Kadir and his six cabinet members is a perverse judgment.

It is perverse because it is a decision that was made in blatant defiance of Article 72 (1) of the Federal Constitution which says, "The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court".

The judges of the Federal Court have failed the people and the government of this country when they chose to ignore the law of the Constitution of Malaysia. In other words, the judges have refused to do justice according to law.

Incidentally, ultra vires does not mean "outside the law". It means "outside one's jurisdiction, beyond the scope of one's power or authority".

And we may ask, who is the Federal Court to say what is beyond the jurisdiction of the speaker when the supreme law of the country says that "the validity of any proceedngs in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court".

Don't these judges realise that they have actually done a disservice to the government of the day? Perhaps they have never heard of the Taff Vale case.

In 1900, the English House of Lords, which is the highest court in the land just as our Federal Court is the highest court in this country, handed down an outrageous decision which was unpopular to the common people of England.

Voters threw out gov’t after judges erred

The judges of the House of Lords by their judgment had unwittingly done a great disservice to the Conservative government of the day because in the general election of 1906, it was toppled by a landslide.

The case which was the cause of the fall of the Conservative government was Taff Vale Rly Co v Amalgamated Society of Railway Servants.

It is best that I let Lord Denning take up the story from his book ‘Landmarks in the Law’:

“There was the great Taff Vale case. To understand it, you must know that the trade unions were virtually friendly societies. The members paid their subscriptions into a fund, out of which benefits could be paid to members if they were ill or out of employment.

“Now in the Taff Vale case, the railwaymen's union called a strike at the railway station at Cardiff. The men left work and set up peaceful pickets so as to persuade others not to go to work. The trains could not run, and the company lost money. The railway were advised to bring an action against the union itself, seeking an injunction and damages. The Court of Appeal threw out the action.

“But the House of Lords, in a startling judgment, overruled the Court of Appeal. They issued an interlocutory injunction against the trade union itself, restraining it from setting up the pickets, and said that the railway company could recover damages which could be enforced against trade union funds.

“Later, at the trial itself, the damages were assessed at £23,000 and that sum was paid out of the funds of the trade union. £23,000 in 1900. What would that be now?

“In the eyes of trade unions, that was an outrageous decision. It meant that the railway company could take all the funds subscribed by the members so as to meet the damages. It meant that, in future, a trade union could never call a strike, else it would be in peril of losing all its funds. It meant virtually the end of trade unions. As GM Trevelyan says in his History: 'It struck at the very heart of trade union action'.

“That case had immense political consequences. At the general election of 1906, there came into being a new political party. It was the Labour party. They ran a host of candidates themselves. They pledged complete immunity for trade unions. Many of the Liberal candidates gave the same pledge.

“The result of the general election was like an earthquake. Liberals had 397 seats. The new Labour party had 50 seats. The Conservatives only 157. It was a sweeping victory for the trade unions.

“Parliament immediately passed the Trade Disputes Act 1906. It is probably the most important Act ever put into the Statute Book. It reversed all the judicial decisions against trade unions. The Taff Vale case was overruled. No trade union could thereafter be sued for damages for any wrongs done by its members. Its funds were unassailable."

I think the message of the Taff Vale case to our judges of the Federal Court should be clear enough. The electorate may decide, just as the voters did in 1906 England to throw out the Conservative government, to use the power of their vote to unseat the BN government in the next general election because they do not trust the judges.

What if speaker ignore court decision?

Poor Najib Abdul Razak, our new prime minister, it is the judges who have let him down. Unfortunately it would be the prime minister who has to carry the baby, but not the irresponsible judges who did all the damage by not administering justice according to law.

The law, in the present context, is the Federal Constitution, in particular, Article 72 which states:

7 (1) The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court.

(2) No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly of any State or of any committee thereof.

(3) No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything published by or under the authority of the Legislative Assembly of any State.

Suppose Sivakumar were to ignore the declarative decree of the Federal Court, what then?

Clause (2) of Article 72 of the Federal Constitution says that "No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the Legislative Assembly of any State or of any committee thereof'.

The Federal Court can say anything they like but the speaker is not liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in proceedings of the legislative assembly.

The order of the Federal Court seems to me to be a ‘brutum fulmen’, which in Latin means "ineffectual thunderbolt” - an action which is loud but ineffective.

Written by: NH Chan

NH CHAN is a former Court of Appeal judge famous for his ‘All is not well in the House of Denmark’ comment regarding judicial corruption. He was then referring to High Court’s commercial division which was located in Wisma Denmark, Kuala Lumpur. The quote is based on Shakespeare’s ‘Something is rotten in the state of Denmark’. He now lives in Ipoh.

Voting by proxy

A look at the role and limitations of a proxy.

A PROXY allows a person who is entitled to attend and vote at a meeting, to appoint another person to attend the meeting and vote on his behalf.

According to the Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary, the word “proxy” means the authority given by one person to another to do something for him when he cannot do it himself. The word “proxy” also refers to a person who has been given authority to represent someone else. The subject of proxy votes most frequently arises in the context of meetings of companies and societies. However, there is no common law right to a proxy. Such a right only exists where it is provided by law or contractually agreed to.

Whilst the subject of proxies is relevant in the context of meetings, it is more likely to impact upon meetings of companies and societies. Companies are entities where traditionally individuals associate for the objective of making profits for themselves. Their activities are regulated by the Companies Act 1965. Societies are usually associations of seven or more like-minded persons who come together in pursuit of some common interest.

Companies

In the case of the Companies Act 1965, there is a statutorily provided right for a member of a company to appoint another person to attend company meetings as a proxy. Such a person can have the same rights as a member at the meeting. This right is restricted to the proxy voting in a poll (he must be a member), an approved company auditor or a person approved by the Registrar in any particular case. It is permissible for the company to frame its Articles of Association to have provisions which either restrict the rights of the proxy holder when attending the meeting or put him almost in the same position as a shareholder.

A proxy is appointed by an instrument in writing, in accordance with the articles. There are two forms of proxy: a general proxy which appoints a person to vote as he thinks fit, having regard to what is said at the meeting, and a special proxy appointing a person only to vote for or against a particular resolution.

The Companies Act 1965 requires that when notices are sent out calling for a meeting, the notice must state the right of the member to appoint a proxy. To what extent the proxy can then act has been discussed earlier.

Societies

When it comes to societies, there are no provisions in the Societies Act 1966 for the appointment of a proxy to attend and vote at meetings.

As stated earlier there is no common law right to vote by proxy. In the case of societies, such a right to appoint a proxy and the extent to which the proxy holder can act would need to be provided for in the constitution, which is the contract between the society and the members, and the members inter se.

The constitution of the society is a document created and adopted by its members. It is also a document endorsed and registered with the Registrar of Societies. If the members have not chosen to give themselves such a right, then it does not exist.

In some cases the constitution of a society may say that a member can only vote at a meeting if he is present. Some organisations may impose additional conditions to allow members who are personally present to vote. But whatever the situation, such a clause would make it clear beyond doubt that there can be no proxy voting.

Committee meetings

Another aspect to consider is whether proxies can be given by an absent committee member to another to make decisions at committee meetings.

“Committee” here refers to a group of persons elected by the members of an organisation at a general meeting, to manage the organisation. Such a committee may in different situations and organisations be referred to as a board of directors or a council. Its role is to administer the organisation and execute its policies.

Whether decisions can be made at such committees through voting done in part by proxies, depends on the constitution. If this is not provided for, then no proxy can be given and it would be wrong to rely on it.

If the provisions of the Companies Act 1965 are carefully looked at, it will be noted that the power of giving proxies is for voting at the meeting of members only and not at the board level. There is no such thing as proxies at board meetings.

I am inclined to take the view that there cannot be proxy voting at committee meetings. This is because of the different nature and purpose of a general meeting compared to a committee meeting. Different considerations are involved here.

At a meeting of members which is a general meeting, the member is voting for himself. He can decide which way he is going to vote even before attending the meeting or listening to what is being said. This is reflected in the format of the proxy form where he can direct the proxy to vote for or against a resolution. A committee member’s role is different. Committee members are chosen by the general body to act in the best interest of the organisation. Such a member has to cast his vote in the interest of the society, instead of personal interest.

This he does by taking part in the deliberations of the committee at its meeting, considering contrary views expressed during the meeting and then casting his vote. A person who gives a proxy would not in such a situation be meeting the requirement of making an objective judgment with regard to the matter being considered.

Thus if a proxy were allowed, it would mean that the person giving the proxy pre-directs the voting by doing so without proper consideration. If he leaves it to the person to whom the proxy is given, then he is delegating his responsibility to someone else. This is not what he was elected to do.

Using a proxy in such circumstances in the absence of a specific would be tantamount to abdication of responsibility. How then, it may be asked, can the absent member’s vote be brought into consideration? The way out is to provide for the appointment of an alternate.

If a particular member cannot attend, the alternate member can attend and participate in making the decision. This is common in board of directors’ meetings where alternate directors are often appointed. And this is also an option for societies.

Written by : Bhag Singh