Biden Administration’s Capitulation to Israel

Volume 28, Number 61 — Friday, March 3, 2023


Biden Administration’s Capitulation to Israel


By preventing a U.N. Security Council vote on Israel’s illegal settlements, Marjorie Cohn says Biden failed to demonstrate even the modicum of reason exhibited by the Obama-Biden administration.




U.S. President Joe Biden signs guestbook at the Israeli president’s residence in Jerusalem, July 14, 2022. (White House, Adam Schultz)

By Marjorie Cohn

Truthout

As the new right-wing Israeli regime ramps up its oppression of Palestinians, the Biden administration has taken its capitulation to Israel to a new and absurd level.

After nominating an independent expert to serve on a human rights commission, the U.S. State Department withdrew the nomination because the expert accurately called Israel an apartheid state. A week later, the United States prevented the United Nations Security Council from voting to condemn Israel’s illegal settlements in Palestinian territory.

On Feb. 10, the State Department nominated Professor James Cavallaro as an independent expert on the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). Cavallaro is “a leading scholar and practitioner of international law with deep expertise in the region as well as the Inter-American human rights system,” the State Department declared. Cavallaro, executive director of the University Network for Human Rights (UNHR), was a member of the IACHR from 2014-2017 during the Obama administration and even served as its president.

IACHR commissioners are independent human rights experts, not spokespersons for their countries’ foreign policies. They hear cases about massacres, extrajudicial killings, torture and disappearances only in the Americas. They have no jurisdiction over Israel.

But that didn’t stop the State Department from withdrawing Cavallaro’s nomination on Feb. 20 after The Algemeiner, a U.S.-based Jewish newspaper, criticized him for (correctly) describing Israel as an “apartheid state” and accusing Israel of “atrocities.”

Cavallaro also ran afoul of the Biden administration by criticizing House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-New York) for his close relationship with the powerful pro-Israel lobby, American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). Cavallaro tweeted that Jeffries had been “Bought. Purchased. Controlled” by AIPAC. Indeed, in 2020, Jeffries told an AIPAC meeting that “back home in New York City we consider Jerusalem to be the sixth borough.”

In defending the withdrawal of Cavallaro’s nomination, State Department spokesperson Ned Price said, “[Cavallaro’s] statements clearly do not reflect U.S. policy. They are not a reflection of what we believe, and they are inappropriate to say the least.”


Cavallaro: ‘No Remit Over Israel & Palestine’

James Cavallaro while chair of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, 2016. (Juan Manuel Herrera/OAS, CC BY 2.0)


But an independent expert is just that — independent. Cavallaro would not be representing the United States if he served on the IAHRC.

As an independent expert, “I would not have represented the United States government and I would have had absolutely no remit over Israel and Palestine!” Cavallaro told Amy Goodman on Democracy Now! “The Inter-American Commission oversees human rights in the western hemisphere. That’s the other hemisphere, Israel and Palestine.”

Nevertheless, the State Department withdrew Cavallaro’s nomination so as not to anger Israel. Cavallaro would have served as an independent expert on the Americas. But he failed to pass the U.S. litmus test, which requires fealty to the illegal Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory.

Agnès Callamard, secretary general of Amnesty International, called the U.S. action, “A state driven attack on a brilliant human rights lawyer because of his view on Israel apartheid,” noting, “The U.S. government has not engaged with the legal and empirical bases of positions on Israel apartheid. Instead, it is censoring, shutting down debates, and threatening.”

Callamard’s sentiments were echoed by Omar Shakir, Israel and Palestine director at Human Rights Watch, who said the U.S. withdrawal of Cavallaro’s nomination “suggests that for the State Department, believing that Palestinians deserve basic rights disqualifies one from serving on a human rights body. Shameful and yet U.S. foreign policy in a nutshell.”

“While Cavallaro’s potential participation on the commission would have absolutely no impact on U.S. policy on Israel, the withdrawal of his nomination will have real consequences for human rights in the Americas,” the UNHR said. “Cavallaro has been a courageous and committed voice for justice for victims of human rights abuse across the region; as an experienced commissioner in his second term, he would have advanced the cause of human rights in the hemisphere significantly.”

“Human rights practitioners and scholars should not fear professional reprisal for expressing their views about human rights violations, especially those carried out by U.S. allies,” 83 leading human rights organizations, that include Human Rights Watch, B’Tselem, Center for Constitutional Rights and National Lawyers Guild International Committee, and more than 300 academics and advocates, including this writer, stated in an open letter to Blinken protesting the withdrawal of Cavallaro’s nomination to the Commission. “This undermines free expression, academic freedom, and the work of all human rights advocates, particularly those who do not have the same kind of platform as Cavallaro.”

The 450 signatories from 20 countries, including members of the IACHR as well as current and former UN special mandate holders, added, “The State Department’s move is harmful to the global human rights movement and undermines the credibility of the United States in advocating for human rights in other parts of the world.”


Israel Is an Apartheid State

Israeli ground forces in August 2022 during an IDF air strikes campaign against Gaza. (IDF)


Moreover, Cavallaro’s characterization of Israel as an apartheid state is accurate. Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem, and Michael Lynk (UN Special Rapporteur for the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967) have all called Israel an apartheid regime.

In his March 2022 report to the U.N. Human Rights Council, Lynk affirmed that Israel practices apartheid in the occupied Palestinian territory. “There is today in the Palestinian territory occupied by Israel since 1967 a deeply discriminatory dual legal and political system that privileges the 700,000 Israeli Jewish settlers living in the 300 illegal Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.”

Lynk continued, “Living in the same geographic space, but separated by walls, checkpoints, roads and an entrenched military presence, are more than three million Palestinians, who are without rights, living under an oppressive rule of institutional discrimination and without a path to a genuine Palestinian state that the world has long promised is their right.”

Furthermore, Lynk reported, “Another two million Palestinians live in Gaza, described regularly as an ‘open-air prison’, without adequate access to power, water or health, with a collapsing economy and with no ability to freely travel to the rest of Palestine or the outside world.”

Lynk cited inhumane acts, extra-judicial killings, torture and the denial of fundamental rights to Palestinians. He also noted collective punishment, home demolitions, an abusive military court system and a high child mortality rate for Palestinians.

Apartheid is defined in the Apartheid Convention as “inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them.”

Those acts include “legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full development of such a group or groups, in particular by denying to members of a racial group or groups basic human rights and freedoms.”

In addition, the Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court defines apartheid as inhumane acts “committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention to maintaining that regime.”

Both the Apartheid Convention and the Rome Statute consider apartheid to be a crime against humanity. Although Israel has not ratified the Apartheid Convention or the Rome Statute, apartheid is prohibited by jus cogens, which means that all countries are bound by the prohibition against apartheid.


Preventing Vote on Settlements

U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres (right) with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken, center, and Linda Thomas-Greenfield, U.S. representative at the U.N., Aug. 1, 2022. (UN Photo/Mark Garten)


The Biden administration continued its shameful capitulation to Israel by brokering a deal to avoid a U.N. Security Council vote on a resolution condemning illegal Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank. If that resolution (which was scheduled for a vote on Feb. 20) had come to the floor of the Council, the United States would have been in the awkward position of having to veto it in order to avoid angering Israel.

As President Barack Obama was leaving office, his administration (in an unprecedented move) abstained from a similar resolution. By preventing a Security Council vote on Israel’s illegal settlements, Biden failed to demonstrate even the modicum of reason exhibited by the Obama-Biden administration.

After Israel announced it was legalizing nine illegal settler outposts in the occupied West Bank and had approved the building of 10,000 new houses in current settlements, the Palestinian Authority (PA) backed a Security Council resolution denouncing the settlements. Resolutions passed by the Security Council are considered binding under the United Nations Charter.



Riyad Mansour, permanent observer of the State of Palestine to the U.N. addressing Security Council meeting on the situation in the Middle East, Feb. 20. (UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe)


But the Biden administration convinced the PA to back down from supporting the resolution in return for a “presidential statement” by the Security Council that criticizes the Israeli settlements. Israel agreed to temporarily halt its unilateral actions in the occupied West Bank for several months, suspend the demolitions of Palestinian homes and evictions for a few months, and decrease Israeli military raids on Palestinian cities. Israel also agreed to increase Palestinian tax revenues by more than $60 million a year. The PA agreed to resume security coordination with Israel that the former had suspended after last month’s Israeli raid on the Jenin refugee camp which killed nine Palestinians.

The PA administers the occupied West Bank. The decision of the PA to withdraw the resolution “goes against the Palestinian national struggle,” Mustafa Barghouti, general secretary of the Palestinian National Initiative, told Al Jazeera.

“We reject equating between two sides — one that is an aggressor and an occupier, and the other that is living under occupation and apartheid,” Barghouti said. “Some are saying we need to focus on diplomatic and political resistance, so why has the decision been withdrawn? Even diplomatic resistance is forbidden? Even resistance based on international law?”

Meanwhile, the Biden administration continues to uncritically support Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestinian lands to the tune of $3.8 billion in annual military assistance.



Marjorie Cohn is professor emerita at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, former president of the National Lawyers Guild, and a member of the national advisory boards of Assange Defense and Veterans For Peace, and the bureau of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers. Her books include Drones and Targeted Killing: Legal, Moral and Geopolitical Issues. She is co-host of “Law and Disorder” radio.

***

kt comments:

No US President has the guli's to criticise Israel, her Master.

Apartheid = White Afrikaans = Nazis = Israelis,

Therefore Israelis are neo-Nazis

Going to Singapore is upsetting

FMT:

Going to Singapore is upsetting

From technological and educational advancements to monetary policies, Singapore is arguably leaps and bounds ahead of Malaysia.





I came back from Singapore, upset as always, yesterday.

I flew from the Subang Skypark Terminal at the Sultan Abdul Aziz Shah Airport. And, I am relieved that the finance minister in his budget announcement last week said that the government intends to expand and upgrade Subang Airport to attract more investors, traders and tourists.

This airport has seen better days, just like the shabby and tatty Penang International Airport.

I arrived at Seletar Airport in Singapore. What a world of difference. Efficient, modern, stylish, and manned by professionals. The immigration officer handling my entry was a Singaporean Malay man. He was chatty, jovial, and welcomed me pleasantly to his country, and in Bahasa Malaysia, of course.

Now, before you throw brickbats at me and tell me to move to Singapore or worse, “balik India”, don’t get riled up. You decide for yourself if expelling Singapore from the federation was in fact good for us.

Of course, Singapore has its fair share of critics too. Their 58-year-old single party rule has seen systematic clamp downs on opposition politicians, their government has been accused of being overly authoritarian, and they have had human rights issues.

You’ll be happy to learn this; they also have traffic jams on their roads. But their jams are nowhere near as bad as in Kuala Lumpur or now, in Penang too. The congestion in Penang, my hometown, where I spend half my working week, is deplorable.

There’s no end in sight for Penang. No public transport or MRT/LRT plan is apparent. At certain times during the day, traveling from the Penang International Airport to our home in Tanjung Tokong, a short 22km journey, can take up to one and half hours. And, this is not even on public holidays or weekends.

In Singapore, they have multiple expressways but mostly people use their sterling public transport system, the MRT and local buses. They’ve built more than 140 stations across six MRT lines that span the island. The 200km network handles a daily ridership of over three million people. And, it runs like clockwork.

Singapore buys their trains from China, specifically from Shanghai, just like Malaysia. But quite strangely, our operators blamed the manufacturers for plant closures during the pandemic, and the difficulties in getting spare parts for our LRT breakdowns. For this excuse, someone would have been fired in Singapore.

The hotel I stayed in was literally fully staffed by Malaysians. Everyone from their front office team to the concierge and service staff spoke decent English, were well trained and acted professionally. I met people from Sungai Petani, Alor Setar, Ipoh, Kota Bharu, Temerloh and Batu Pahat this trip, just in my hotel.

I suppose the exchange rate is very favourable for these hoteliers, even though all of them stay in Johor Bahru, and travel every day for one and half hours each way, at a minimum, to get to work and back. But then again sometimes we do the same here in Kuala Lumpur, but don’t get paid three times more (SDG$1 is equivalent to RM3.32) like them.

I remember going to Singapore when I was young and the value of their dollar and our dollar (this is what we used to call our money, too) were the same. It is not anymore. Our money is pretty dismal now.

On the way back, I had lunch at the Seletar Airport Teh Tarik Express eatery, which is the only food outlet there. I had a fried Koay Teow, a “popiah”, a Yu Char Kway and a “teh ais” (yes, I was starving). It cost me SGD$14 (RM49), and the food was pretty decent. At the table next to me were two airport security personnel. They were having a drink and a plate of noodles each. I reckon their meal was less than SGD$10. Not bad, a nice lunch at a fairly swanky eatery at the airport for less than ten bucks.

I guess there is no need for menu “Rahmah” for them.

My flight got delayed, then cancelled. Astro and Firefly Airlines are the same. Every time it rains, there will be a definite service disruption. But, tiny Seletar Airport in Singapore is so much nicer to be delayed at, as opposed to the airport in Subang or Penang. The seats were conformable, the carpet plush, the piped-in easy jazz was soothing, and the water cooler fountain was lovely and cold. I spent a pleasant four hours in the departure lounge working. I never thought I’d ever say that about being stuck at an airport.

The ground staff for the airline were excellent in managing us. From moving some passengers to Changi to take the larger Malaysia Airlines jet-plane to shifting the rest of us to later flights, they were patient and professional. They were well trained and knew that passengers would be irate, even though the cancellation wasn’t the airline’s fault, but rather the bad weather, they handled themselves admirably.

Incidentally, all the ground staff were Singaporeans of Malay heritage. Not that it should matter, but I felt obliged to spell it out before racial stereotypes are inferred.

When Malaysia launched the New Economic Policy (NEP) in 1970, our GDP per capita was about the same as Singapore. Now, Singapore has a GDP per capita of US$66,176 and Malaysia’s is US$10,575.

As painful as it is for us Malaysians to admit, our neighbour has surpassed us in so many fields. From technological and educational advancements to monetary policies, and socio-cultural experiments in a plural society, Singapore is arguably leaps and bounds ahead of us.

Isn’t this upsetting?

And, without belabouring the point, we have gone down this path because of bad-governance, corruption, unfair practices, the use of special privileges to enrich the elites, the brain drain – most of our best people are in Singapore, the exclusive state-sponsored policies for the majority community in Malaysia, and incessantly making religion a political tool.

I still say we cannot compete with our tiny neighbour. So yes, going to Singapore is upsetting for me.

Ex-CJ questioned Apex Court's kerbau-ish "protocol"

FMT:

What protocol, ex-CJ asks apex court after Nazlan probe ruling

Abdul Hamid Mohamad has criticised the Federal Court’s finding that MACC’s probe into Justice Nazlan Ghazali violated protocol.

Abdul Hamid Mohamad served as the country’s fifth chief justice from November 2007 to October 2008. (Bernama pic)


PETALING JAYA: A former chief justice has torn into a recent ruling by the Federal Court which found that the investigation against Justice Nazlan Ghazali by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) had violated protocol.

In a blog post, Abdul Hamid Mohamad pointed out that there was no written law to govern the matter.

Neither has the protocol described by Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat ever been mentioned by the courts prior to its formulation by the Federal Court via its ruling last week, he said.

“Without finding any clear constitutional provisions to depend on, the court used the principle of judicial independence and created a new protocol.

“In effect, the MACC was found to have breached a protocol that had yet to exist.

“Whatever it is, the decision gave the courts an excuse to find fault with the investigation.

“Whether it has cleared Nazlan’s name is another matter altogether,” said Hamid, who served as Malaysia’s fifth chief justice from November 2007 to October 2008.

Hamid said the seven-member panel’s ruling should have stopped after it answered the two questions of the law posed in the case which the court was hearing.

Filed by lawyers Nur Ain Mustapa, Sreekant Pillai and Haris Ibrahim, the suit sought a declaration that the MACC was not permitted to investigate serving judges unless they were suspended or removed from office.

It also asked whether the prosecutor could initiate criminal proceedings against serving judges.

In its answer, the apex court held that investigative bodies like the MACC could probe serving judges and that they can be prosecuted for potential criminal offences.

“However, the chief justice and the judiciary could not allow their ruling to stop there, having twice issued statements defending Nazlan. Otherwise, it would seem as though the claims made by Raja Petra Kamaruddin are true.

“It must be noted that none of the parties in the case had pleaded or was asked to address the court on the matters which became the subject of the decision. Those matters were raised by the court on its own,” said Hamid.

The former chief justice said he had been extremely concerned by several decisions delivered by the Federal Court in recent times, and that the apex court had exceeded its jurisdiction in several decisions.

He said the present judgment made it seem like the legislative and executive branches of government did not have the power to carry out their duties independently.

The judgment also puts judges “on a pedestal higher than government ministers and even the Malay Rulers” by requiring the authorities to consult the chief justice before initiating a probe against serving judges.

According to Hamid, the judgment also insinuated that MACC’s probe had been carried out in bad faith and for “collateral purposes”.

“What other purpose could there have been? Only one comes to mind, which is to secure a court ruling that (former prime minister) Najib Razak had suffered an injustice and deserves a retrial,” he said.

“Have the judges forgotten that MACC has spent tens if not hundreds of hours investigating Najib’s case? If anyone would want Najib convicted, it would be the MACC,” he added.

Instead, MACC was portrayed as defending Najib, said Hamid.

The former top judge said he was not opposed to the establishment of a set of protocols when probing judges. However, that was a policy matter for the executive to deliberate on, he added.

“The judiciary can make its proposals on the matter to the executive. If the executive agrees, then it should be made law by Parliament,” said Hamid.

“In other words, do it the right way.”

Nazlan presided over Najib’s SRC International corruption trial and convicted him on seven counts of corruption and abuse of power.

He went on to sentence Najib to imprisonment for 12 years and imposed a fine of RM210 million.

Najib has maintained that Nazlan ought not to have tried the case due to a conflict of interest. He says Nazlan, in his previous capacity as general counsel of the Maybank Group, was directly involved in banking matters involving SRC and its then parent company, 1MDB.

Those complaints became the subject of an investigation by the MACC.

An incomplete document appearing to be the MACC’s report on the investigation was leaked online by Raja Petra shortly before the decision was handed down in July 2020.

Najib’s application to adduce fresh evidence relating to Nazlan’s alleged conflict of interest was dismissed by the Federal Court in August last year.

On Aug 23 last year, the apex court went on to dismiss Najib’s final appeal and ordered that his jail term commence immediately.

*********

Related:

Judiciary intimidated - the other view

Abdul Hamid Mohamad


COMMENT | Since Raja Petra Kamaruddin published his article ‘Shocking Revelation: Najib’s Trial Judge Nazlan’s Conflict-of-Interest Exposed’ on March 14, 2022, in his blog, Malaysia Today, we have only read one-sided views on the issue, be it from the press release by the Chief Registrar, the Bar Council, the chairperson and deputy chairperson of the DAP, the Chief Justice, The Edge, or constitutional expert Shad Saleem Faruqi.

In this article, I am giving the opposite view with the sole purpose of giving the public arguments on both sides so that they are in a better position to make up their mind on the issue. I am neither saying I am right and they are wrong, nor that Raja Petra is right and judge Nazlan is wrong, or otherwise.

I refer to the statement by the Bar Council and article in The Edge. It is said that Raja Petra and politicians, especially former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak’s supporters, are intimidating the judiciary.

Whether that is true or not, can it not be equally argued that they too are intimidating the MACC from doing its duties? They seem to forget that it was the MACC that investigated Najib leading to his conviction.

Now, just because an allegation is made against the judge who had convicted Najib, which conviction they are afraid of being set aside, they jumped to his defence and cast doubts on the credibility of the MACC.


Are judges above the law?

The Bar Council demands equivalent investigations to be carried out by the authorities on the police report lodged by judge Nazlan; that there should be no double standards in approaching the matter; that the MACC probe violated the doctrine of separation of powers; that it undermined the judiciary’s independence; that it is unconstitutional and that it should be dealt with under Article 125 of the Constitution.

Question: Had judge Nazlan acquitted Najib, would the Bar Council issue a similar statement?

It goes without saying that both Nazlan’s police report and the report made against him must be given equivalent investigations and I am sure they are being given. But, by demanding “equivalent investigations” on Nazlan’s report but trying to prevent investigation to be carried out on the report against the judge, is the Bar Council not practising double standard?

Court of Appeal judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali


I received a number of WhatsApp and email messages, all from non-lawyers asking the same question: Is it against the doctrine of separation of powers for MACC to investigate a judge? It shows that even non-lawyers found the opinion of the Bar Council weird. No judge is above the law. Do I have to say more to the president of the Bar Council?

The Bar Council also said that the investigation undermines the judiciary’s independence. Madam president, the independence of the judiciary does not include the freedom to commit a crime and from being investigated for it.

The Bar Council also said that the investigation is unconstitutional. I would like to know under which provision of the Constitution it is unconstitutional?

She referred to Article 125. I urge her to read the article again. That article refers to situations when a judge “ought to be removed on the ground of any breach of any provision of the code of ethics prescribed under Clause (3B) or on the ground of inability, from infirmity of body or mind or any other cause, properly to discharge the functions of his office…”. It does not cover the commission of criminal offences.

On the other hand, the MACC and the police only have the power to investigate criminal offences under their respective jurisdiction and not matters mentioned in Article 125. Even though Shad Saleem tries to widen the coverage of Article 125, I do not think he can disagree with my last two sentences.


Judiciary’s knee-jerk reaction gives opponents ammunition

I now refer to the two press releases by the Chief Registrar of the Federal Court. For whatever reasons, no such allegations had ever been made against any judge in the last fifty years. So the reaction of the judiciary by issuing the press releases is also a first. I believe that the Chief Registrar would not have issued such statements unless instructed by the Chief Justice.

Take note that the allegation is not a general allegation against the judiciary. It is an allegation against a particular judge. Why should the judiciary jump to the defence of the judge?

Even though the allegation was made by a blogger, if Najib’s counsel does not make an application for a retrial or does not use it as a ground of appeal in the Federal Court for the court to set aside the conviction and order a retrial, the matter ends there.

If Najib’s counsel chooses to do one of the two things earlier mentioned if no statement had been issued by the judiciary, even if the court were to dismiss the application or argument, no criticism on grounds of bias could be levelled against the judiciary.

Former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak


On the other hand, where the statement was issued, Najib’s counsel could argue that the court is biased as the judiciary had issued a statement dismissing the allegation. If and when the court dismisses the application or argument, it gives ground for detractors to say that the court is biased. Either way, why give Najib and his supporters a reason to attack the court’s decision?

On the issue of sub judice, is the statement by the judiciary not sub judice? It should be more so, it coming from the judiciary before the issue is decided upon, if raised.

We now come to the Chief Justice’s speech. I do not disagree with any part of it. I only question the timing of it.

Even though the Chief Justice did not mention it, anybody reading the speech knows that she was referring to the articles written by Raja Petra Malaysia Today that judge Nazlan is under investigation by the MACC.


Let MACC do its job

I repeat what I had said regarding the effects of the two press releases issued by the Chief Registrar. Note that an important event had happened after the second press release i.e. the MACC confirmed that it was investigating the judge.

Question: Is it not better to allow the MACC to proceed and complete the investigation?

At the end of the investigation, the MACC may announce either there is no evidence to support the allegation or that there is sufficient evidence to support a charge(s).

If it is the former, the judge is cleared. Isn’t it better for the judge that the clearance comes from MACC after a thorough investigation and no such statement has been issued by the judiciary? If it is the latter, then the file will be referred to the public prosecutor (the attorney-general) to decide whether to charge the judge or not. If, based on the evidence, the public prosecutor decides not to, the matter ends there. If he decides otherwise, the trial process begins.

Whether or not the judge is cleared, no criticism could be levelled against the Chief Justice. She cannot be accused of trying to interfere with the investigation by the MACC.

Lest I am accused of being pro-Najib, let me make it clear that I do not care even if Najib has to spend the rest of his life in prison, provided he gets a fair trial.

I did not say whether Raja Petra’s allegation that Najib did not get a fair trial has merits or not. That is for the court to decide. I did not say whether Raja Petra’s allegation and the reports against Nazlan that he was involved in the 1MDB financial scandal is true or not, or whether the judge’s report against Raja Petra has merits or not.

That will only be known after the MACC has completed its investigations on both the allegation and the reports. Hence, the MACC should be allowed to do its job without any or seemed interference by anyone.



ABDUL HAMID MOHAMAD is a former Chief Justice.

Anticipating economic slowdown in 2023, Rafizi says Putrajaya to focus on tackling costs of living, wages

MM:

Anticipating economic slowdown in 2023, Rafizi says Putrajaya to focus on tackling costs of living, wages

The Ministry of Economy’s main focus is to implement programmes that address the rising costs of living and raise wages. — Picture by Hari Anggara

Friday, 03 Mar 2023 7:23 PM MYT


KUALA LUMPUR, March 3 — The Ministry of Economy said today that its main focus will be to implement programmes that address the rising costs of living and raise wages.

Its minister Rafizi Ramli said in a statement that the ministry will take an integrated approach to tackle these two main issues faced by the public, amid a sluggish economy this year.


“The policies regarding the wages will be brought to the Economic Action Council (EAC) that will be chaired by the prime minister so that national policies are aligned towards a target of comprehensive wage growth among all workers,” he said.

The first EAC meeting is expected to be held this month.


He said the policies would take into account the economic slowdown in 2023, citing a predicted smaller growth of the global economy at 2.9 per cent compared to 3.4 per cent last year.


In addition, he also pointed out that the gross domestic product (GDP) had shown a decline in quarterly growth last year, from 3.8 per cent in the first quarter to -2.6 per cent in the fourth quarter.

Rafizi also announced that the ministry's said that his ministry's People's Income Initiative (IPR), one of the programmes towards these ends, would be launched on March 26.

He said the first targets of the IPR would be the hardcore poor and bottom 40 per cent (B40) households nationwide.

"In formulating our economic plans, the ministry will balance our focus on structuring the national economy with the economic needs of the people relating to the cost of living and higher wages," he said.

The IPR is a RM750 million programme aimed at training some 120,000 hardcore poor households to grow crops, sell cooked food and provide in-demand services to raise their income.

Under the IPR, participants will be given support in the form of training and monthly supplemental income of up to RM2,500 — depending on the programme — for up to two years.

Rafizi said during its launch that IPR’s primary goal is to create an “ecosystem” that would enable a long-term, income-generating programme for its participants that spans from retail to the entire supply chain.

Govt’s UEC stand a let-down, says Sarawak Chinese federation

FMT:

Govt’s UEC stand a let-down, says Sarawak Chinese federation

The Sarawak Federation of Chinese Associations laments how political parties use the certificate issue for political mileage but change their stand when they come to power.

Recognising the UEC was among the key pledges in Pakatan Harapan’s manifesto for the 15th general election. (Bernama pic)


PETALING JAYA: The Sarawak Federation of Chinese Associations has criticised the federal government over the education ministry’s stand on the Unified Examination Certificate (UEC).

The federation’s president, Richard Wee, said the minister’s statement that there were no plans to recognise the school-leaving examination for Chinese-medium high schools was a let-down.

According to The Borneo Post, Wee urged Putrajaya to emulate the Sarawak government, which has recognised the UEC since 2014.

“The issue of UEC has been used by all political parties, especially the Chinese-based parties, to further their political agenda and to woo the support of the Chinese community,” he said.

“Unfortunately, when they come to power, they seem to either change their stand or have no political will to see their promise and pledges in their election manifesto through.

“As always, the Chinese community has been left with disappointment and given the short end of the stick after being promised this and deceived too many times.”

Earlier this week, education minister Fadhlina Sidek said her ministry had no plans to recognise the UEC, adding that this stand was based on the National Education Policy, and the Education Act 1996.

Recognising the UEC was among the key pledges in Pakatan Harapan’s (PH) manifesto for the 15th general election.

The coalition promised to make public higher education institutions recognise the UEC, on the condition that applicants had at least a credit for the Bahasa Melayu paper in their SPM examination.

Wee, who is also the treasurer of the Sarawak United Association of Chinese School Boards, said the Chinese community will continue its endeavour to get the UEC recognised by Putrajaya.

He also voiced hope that this goal would be realised in the near future.

When PH was in government, it formed a task force to gather views on recognising the UEC. Led by sociologist Eddin Khoo, it included then Malaysian Islamic Youth Movement (Abim) president Raimi Abdul Rahim and then Dong Zong deputy president Tan Yew Sing.

However, its work ceased after the change of government in 2020, though the task force had completed a report.

Single mum wants Federal Court to remove MAIPs from custody case

FMT:

Single mum wants Federal Court to remove MAIPs from custody case

Loh Siew Hong asks whether a Perlis enactment empowers the state’s religious authority to intervene in non-Muslim divorce matters.

Loh Siew Hong is challenging the Perlis religious authority’s legal right to intervene in a custody hearing over her three children.


PUTRAJAYA: A single mother is asking the Federal Court to set aside a ruling allowing the Perlis Islamic Religious and Malay Customs Council (MAIPs) to intervene and vary a custody order over her three children who are now alleged to be Muslims.

Loh Siew Hong filed the application for leave to appeal a Feb 7 Court of Appeal ruling by framing four questions of law.

She is asking whether a Perlis Islamic religious administration enactment gives powers to the state authorities to intervene in non-Muslim divorce matters.

Loh is also asking the apex court to determine whether MAIPs has passed the threshold under Rules of Court 2012 to be made a party in the custody matter.


Another question relates to whether Section 3(3) of the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976 operates to prohibit MAIPs from being made a party to vary the custody order.

The fourth question is whether the Court of Appeal’s ruling went against Article 12(4) of the Federal Constitution that allows a parent or guardian to determine the religious status of children aged below 18.

Under Section 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964, Loh must satisfy the Federal Court that there are novel and constitutional questions of public importance and raised for the first time.

The application, sighted by FMT, was filed by Gunamalar Law Chambers yesterday.

Shamsher Singh Thind, a lawyer in Loh’s legal team, said the application had been fixed for case management on April 3.

Last month, the Court of Appeal held that MAIPs had made out a case under Order 15 Rule 6(2) of the Rules of Court 2012, read with Section 96 of the Law Reform Act.

Justice Has Zanah Mehat, who led a three-member bench, said a reading of the two provisions would confer upon the applicant (MAIPs) a legal right to intervene.

MAIPs had appealed against a High Court order last year that refused to allow it to intervene in the action.

Loh’s former husband, M Nagahswaran, is said to have taken the children to Perlis, where he unilaterally converted them to Islam on July 7, 2020.

The 15-year-old twin girls and an 11-year-old son were placed under the care and control of preacher Nazirah Nanthakumari Abdullah.

On March 31, 2020, the High Court granted Loh full custody of the children.

Loh’s divorce from Nagahswaran was finalised on Sept 23, 2021.

Loh also took out a habeas corpus application in the High Court, which was allowed by Justice Collin Lawrence Sequerah in February last year.

That decision paved the way for a reunion between the mother and her children.

In March 2022, Loh filed a judicial review application to challenge the children’s unilateral conversion, which will be heard later this month.

***

kt comments:

Disgusting, MAIPs (Perlis Islamic Religious and Malay Customs Council) going after underaged non-Muslim children reminds me bitterly and horrendously of JAWI harassing Nik Raina Nik Abdul Aziz (former Borders bookstore manager) - republished Malay Mail 15 March 2015 article to remind us of typical brutal Islamic authorities' bullying tactics:


MM:

‘Arrogant’ JAWI again renews pursuit of Borders manager

JAWI's actions showed 'arrogance' in deliberately wanting to intimidate Nik Raina (centre) by serving the notice directly to the bookstore manager, her lawyer said. — Picture by Saw Siow Feng

Sunday, 15 Mar 2015 11:05 AM MYT


KUALA LUMPUR, March 15 — The Federal Territory Islamic Affairs Department (JAWI) has appealed against the Federal Territory Shariah High Court’s February 26 decision to discharge Borders bookstore manager Nik Raina Nik Abdul Aziz for selling a book deemed un-Islamic.

Aside from the continuing its years-long prosecution of her, Chief Sharie Prosecutor (KPS) Mohamad Adib Husain also took the unusual step of serving the notice of the appeal directly to Nik Raina at her place of work in the Mid Valley shopping mall.


"Last Friday, I received notice that the Ketua Pendakwa Syarie (KPS) has appealed to the Shariah Appeal Court against the order of discharge not amounting to acquittal (DNAA) granted by the Shariah High Court.

"The KPS served the notice of appeal at Borders Gardens ignoring the fact that my firm LHAG (Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill) are solicitors on record. The KPS breached the rule that they should not communicate with my clients directly," Nik Raina’s lawyer, Rosli Dahlan, told Malay Mail Online when contacted.


According to the lawyer, JAWI's actions showed "arrogance" in deliberately wanting to intimidate Nik Raina by serving the notice directly to the bookstore manager instead of the lawyers representing her in the case.

Rosli added that the latest appeal puts Mohamad Adib and JAWI’s director-general in contempt of both the civil High Court and Court of Appeal’s orders directing that the prosecution against Nik Raina be discontinued due to illegality.

"This appeal is a positive act and not just a passive omission by the KPS, which is in direct breach of the two orders of the superior courts," Rosli explained.

"This will be a first in Malaysia if we take steps to cite the KPS/JAWI for contempt of a civil court order.”

Rosli also clarified that he was not in any way implicating the Shariah courts for the latest development, pointing out that the Shariah High Court clearly agreed with the civil courts’ orders when it gave Nik Raina a discharge not amounting to an acquittal.

Nik Raina was charged for being a Muslim manager at a bookstore that carried the book, “Allah, Kebebasan dan Cinta”, which was translated from the English Version written by Canadian author Irshad Manji.

JAWI raided the Borders outlet in Mid Valley where she is a manager on May 23, 2012, even before the book was banned by the Home Ministry, and arrested her a week later.

On June 19 2012, she was charged under Section 13 (1) of the Syariah Criminal Offences (Federal Territory) Act for allegedly selling and distributing a book that is contrary to the Islamic laws.

If convicted, she may be fined up to RM3,000 or jailed up to two years, or both.

On March 22, 2013, the Kuala Lumpur High Court ruled that JAWI had acted illegally in raiding Borders, seizing the books and charging Nik Raina. It was then ordered to withdraw its charges against her in the Syariah court.

On December 30, 2014 the Court of Appeal also ruled in favour of Nik Raina, and said the prosecution against her was “unreasonable, irrational” and done in bad faith, and that it was against the “principle of fairness and justice” for JAWI to prosecute Nik Raina for an offence in the Shariah court simply because she was a Muslim and because it could not charge the company and her non-Muslim supervisor.

Govt respects court’s acquittal of Najib, says Fahmi

FMT:

Govt respects court’s acquittal of Najib, says Fahmi

The communications and digital minister says allegations that the government interfered in the case are an insult to the courts.

Communications and digital minister Fahmi Fadzil reiterated that the government would not interfere with the court’s affairs.


PUTRAJAYA: The government respects the High Court’s decision to acquit former prime minister Najib Razak from a charge of alleged abuse of power by causing amendments to the 1MDB audit report.

“As Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has said, the government will not interfere with the court’s affairs,” communications and digital minister Fahmi Fadzil told a press conference here.

Fahmi added that claims the government had interfered in the case were an insult to the courts.

“This is the court’s process and we respect its decision,” he said.


Earlier today, co-accused and former 1MDB CEO Arul Kanda Kandasamy was also acquitted of a charge of abetting Najib in the commission of the offence.

Justice Zaini Mazlan held that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case against Najib under Section 23 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009.

In his judgment, Zaini held that although four items were removed from the 1MDB audit report, those items did not give rise to the possibility of any civil or criminal proceedings being brought against Najib.

The judge also issued a certificate of indemnity in Arul Kanda’s favour after being satisfied that the former 1MDB CEO had been truthful and given full discovery when testifying in the case.

Najib’s wife, Rosmah Mansor, described the former Pekan MP’s acquittal as a positive development for their family and would also boost the ex-Umno president’s morale.

Meanwhile, Najib’s lawyer Shafee Abdullah said he believed that the court’s decision will be the beginning of “many good things to come”.

Najib is currently serving a 12-year jail term after his conviction and sentencing in the SRC International case were upheld by the Federal Court last year.

An application for leave to review the SRC case is presently pending in the Federal Court.

Why Wan Saiful is spooked about class warfare

Why Wan Saiful is spooked about class warfare

S Thayaparan


“But as time goes by, despite the original good intention, the affirmative action policy turned into an ugly beast. What was supposed to be a temporary assistance programme evolved into a sense of entitlement, and then morphed into a monster called Malay rights that cannot be debated, let alone be removed.”

- Wan Saiful Wan Jan (“Affirmative action is morally wrong”)

“The reality of Malaysian political system is affirmative action is needed today. However, It must be framed and evaluated in the right way and it must be seen as a program that will help to improve the livelihood of people. Affirmative action also should not last forever. It must be to the extent where we have a proud Malay population that can stand on its own and state they want affirmative action to be removed.’’

– Wan Saiful said after joining Bersatu

COMMENT | The reason why Tasek Gelugor MP Wan Saiful Wan Jan is spooked about class warfare is because he is on the wrong side of it.
Back when he was one of the big brains of the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (Ideas), he wrote two big think pieces – “Affirmative action is morally wrong” and “Bring back morality into economics”.

He even took it to the road, where he was a panellist at the Penang Institute which hosted a discussion titled “Affirmative Action in Malaysia: Who Gains? Who Loses?” where it was reported he was “…strongly opposed to the stance of affirmative action.

Calling affirmative action policies to be “morally wrong” and unjustifiable, even from the perspective of data and the Constitution, Wan Saiful (above) was of opinion that affirmative action policies, at the root of it, are discriminatory.

Discrimination, as it is, is wrong, he claimed, and even if affirmative action is positive, it cannot be used as a means or a reason to justify discrimination. He saw Malaysia, as it is now, as a divided nation, and the line between needs and race for affirmative action becoming increasingly unclear.

They were good old-fashioned talking points and Wan Saiful even back then was dismissive of “leftist” politics. Back in the day, he would have been considered a race traitor and leftist himself, by the Malay uber alles establishment, which just goes to show you how ill-informed these people are.

I admit I was briefly impressed that a young Malay would align with the baseline conservative – as opposed to right-wing bunkum - ideas and looked forward to what this young man was capable of. This of course didn’t last long. Hooking up with Bersatu, which was then part of the Pakatan Harapan government, demonstrated what kind of opportunist this Ideas man was.

PSM deputy chairperson S Arutchelvan


After joining a right-wing racial party, Bersatu, Wan Saiful was dutifully parroting right-wing American talking points, even though as the ever-reliable S Arutchelvan of PSM points out, not only are lefty socialist policies of the Malay establishment first principles but also the racial entitlement programmes that Malay uber alles parties like Bersatu boastfully defend.

The racial component of Wan Saiful’s line of attacks – communism, socialism etc – is because of the presence of the DAP in the unity government. This, of course, is laughable because the last thing the DAP is is a “socialist”.

Indeed the moniker “Development Action Party” was coined for a reason but all this means bupkis to the base, ironically that class of Malays, that Bersatu wants to keep chained with the ideas of race and religion, which Wan Saiful was very dismissive of before.

Malay political elite

I have always argued – and back in the day, Wan Saiful agreed with me – that the affirmative action policy morphed into a class problem creating a middle and kleptocrat class while the rest of the Malay polity ended up servicing the kleptocrat class.

Wan Saiful was affronted by the idea of the former prime minister, now a felon appealing his conviction, of creating a new economic policy, where sharing the stage with, of all people Tommy Thomas, he said: "Now the Constitution may become an issue of dividing the people where certain groups are forced to accept a group of people that is superior to others. It is unfortunate we have these clauses... but the problem is that we are not debating the clauses on whether it should be there or not. It is a public document which is owned by us. However, there is not much debate on it despite everyone having a vested interest in it.”

However, now that Wan Saiful is safely in the bosom of a political party which benefits from the privilege of class, even more so than the average Malay Joe Rakyat, you can see he is so easily spooked by Saudara Anwar’s allusions – if he did make any – to class warfare.

Wan Saiful as part of the Malay political elite really does not want any class-conscious raising amongst the disenfranchised Malay classes but has no problem providing them with crumbs from the table through racial and religious entitlement programmes to keep them dependent and with a sense of racial and religious superiority.

Wan Saiful's legal problems are weighing heavily on him and no doubt all these race-baiting comments about DAP are meant to distract from them. However, he is a prime example of one of the Malay elites who knowingly use the compromised political system to further entrench ideas that he has admitted had failed Malaysia.

The average Malay uber alles political operative, flunkie or dependent, probably does not know any better after years of indoctrination and belief in a system which they think rewards their loyalty. But for someone like Wan Saiful, his stance is even more repugnant because he has demonstrated he knows better but willingly embraces policies, strategies and dialectics that he at one time fervently believed were destroying this country and the Malay community.

And this is really what the Malay uber alles parties are all about. What they are doing, what someone like Wan Saiful is doing, is defending his class.

Of course, Bersatu did not start this. Umnoputra status always conferred some sort of benefit. An example of this would be when former Kota Raja Umno chief Amzah Umar revealed - “We give a seven percent discount for bumiputera buyers and 12 percent for Umno members, if I am not mistaken.”

This is what it has always been about. When Wan Saiful talks about class warfare, he really does not mean the average Malay who is struggling. He means the warfare against the political class of which he is a proud member.

This has always been the reason why the Malay political class have been afraid of unifying ideas in the Malay community beyond race and religion that is.

I will leave you with what Wan Saiful once publicly said - "As with the Chinese and Indians, the bumiputera and the Malays should be able to stand on their own and have confidence in themselves without the support or interference from the government. This realisation must come from the Malays themselves.”

Wan Saiful's role now is to actively hamper that realisation.


S THAYAPARAN is Commander (Rtd) of the Royal Malaysian Navy. Fīat jūstitia ruat cælum - “Let justice be done though the heavens fall.”

Amir’s Half-Easy: The Truth of the Lazy Native

Amir’s Half-Easy: The Truth of the Lazy Native

Written by Amir Hafizi


A friend of mine recently lamented that Malaysia has produced no good movies and lays the blame solely on the National Film Development Corporation Malaysia (FINAS).

Now, despite its name, I can’t really blame the state of the movie industry on FINAS alone.

Granted, the agency was tasked to promote the development of Malaysian films but so far, in my opinion, nobody from FINAS has had any great idea on how to do that.

Even when someone did have an idea, it’s the ludicrous ‘let’s win an Academy Award in three years’ which is dumb and even if we achieve it, won’t change the industry much.

Or maybe my friend was confusing FINAS’ role with the Film Censorship Board of Malaysia (LPF) which has promoted piracy when they censor movies shown at cinemas and on TV, driving the IT-savvy Malaysians to seek out uncensored, sometimes illegal entertainment elsewhere.

Even if we combine the two agencies, it’s not enough to explain the doldrums of the local film industry.

I believe the responsibility is shared equally among the governing agencies, the filmmakers themselves and the Malaysian audience.

The filmmakers are mostly not churning out great work every time they do something.

Not all acting performances are great, not all scripts are the best it could be, and the money being paid to everyone, mere pittance.

So with minimal investments in money and effort, how can we get great things more consistently?

Then, we have the audience who would spend perhaps 10-20 times on foreign movies than they do local productions.

According to FINAS, in pre-pandemic 2019, total gross movie ticket sales (local and foreign) amounted to RM1.08 billion with local movies taking in RM144.71 million. Last year, gross sales was RM22 million with local films netting only RM140,000.

I’m not saying it’s wrong to spend our money in any way, shape or fashion – that is up to you whether you want to buy a Grab rider breakfast or tip him with cash, for example.

However, if we as the audience fail to strategically invest in local productions, no matter how crappy they are in its infancy, there will be no improvements for the next 400 years.

This unwillingness to even consider our role in the state of things is everywhere in the world, but very strong among Malaysians.

However, to be fair, I know of no other communities extensively to make any sort of comparison.

I can just say that from my experience, we love blaming other people or assigning responsibility on one or just a few people.

Statesman and two-time Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad was admitted into IJN recently and some of the more revealing comments made on social media was along the lines of, “I still believe Dr M can save us and the country!” or “Dr M remains our last great hope!”

I am a big Dr M fan, but I believe this sort of thinking is unfair to Dr M and is ultimately damaging to the country because it shows how unwilling Malaysians are in taking responsibility for themselves and the future of this nation.

For one, Dr M is almost a century old. Let the man rest. Some of those who begged for his help just a few years before even turned their backs on him when it suited them better.

I believe he should just retire and enjoy time with his loved ones and let these ingrates fend for themselves.

Have we no shame that no one else save for a man who should have retired 50 years ago can make the changes we want in this country?

It is the same disease we see in rabid pro-Anwar/pro-Najib/pro-KJ/pro-Azmin/pro-Zahid/pro-Lim Guan Eng supporters who believe everything will be solved once their political god is in the driving seat.

Nobody ever talks about how exactly these deities can make the country better, because one of the things Malaysians hate doing is considering the type and amount of work necessary to achieve certain things.

Are these people even capable of doing anything at all, much less fulfilling the many empty promises they have made to everyone?

I see we are too lazy to even consider these questions and just designate some poor chump like these politicians we ‘worship’ to do the thinking for us.

It’s like how in Malaysian schools, the class monitor is usually the most disliked or passive student because none of the kids want the responsibility of collecting and sending exercise books to the teacher or doing any unpaid labour.

Malaysians are not lazy when it comes to doing work. Some of us are very good labourers and I have worked with many Malaysians who pay a lot of attention to the details.

What we really hate doing, is taking the responsibility of making the world a better place. We hate thinking of solutions to problems, but we love screaming about the problems themselves, sometimes because it is fashionable to pretend to be victims of our own lack of action.

We loathe to go beyond choosing someone to lead. Beyond voting for a class monitor.

This is what happened after GE14, among those who won. We thought that once we replaced the old people with other old people, then mission accomplished.

Nobody talked about the immense amount of work that lay ahead, perhaps for fear of being asked to do it.

Nobody wanted to revamp the education system, even the ones given the power to do so.

Attempts to reduce inequality in terms of wealth, access, socio-cultural stuff were abandoned in favour of politicking and backstabbing and ruthless ambition that eventually resulted in a tragic comedy or a comic tragedy that has become our lives.

It’s so sad to think of what could be accomplished if only Malaysians presented a unified front while taking responsibility for this country and what goes on in it.

But what happened was the greed and especially the laziness took root and we went again to cults of personality and here we are today, back to where we were years ago on a direct trajectory to hell and damnation.

Once everyone is burned by the eternal flames, the only thing left to do would be to point fingers on who was supposed to gather the exercise books in the first place.

Recent events have demonstrated the willingness of Malaysians to take matters into their own hands. The way Malaysians joined forces to help our most vulnerable during the pandemic and the victims of the flood are good demonstrations of the potential of not avoiding responsibility when it presents itself.

The biggest challenge, is to address the country’s biggest problem – our core values. So far, our core values reveal a lot of cruelty and stupidity and it is up to us to correct this, if we want to.

In the process, we must also shirk any worship of any icon or public figure, especially politicians. They are all useless until we find a use for them.

However, if I’m a betting man, I think when the time comes, we will again shirk all responsibility and designate untrustworthy and reptilian politicians to make the decisions for us.

They, in turn, will appoint even worse idiots to head government agencies and we will never have good Malaysian movies, which is the real tragedy here.

Money First, Cronies Second, Malay & Islam Last – PN Willingly Offers Prime Minister Post To Sarawak For Power

Money First, Cronies Second, Malay & Islam Last – PN Willingly Offers Prime Minister Post To Sarawak For Power



He could say and do anything he likes, including insulting and belittling all the nine Malay Rulers. And he certainly could instigate social unrest with seditious statements to the point of starting bloody racial riots. Abdul Hadi Awang realizes he is untouchable because all the sultans – even the ruling government – are too pussy to take action against him as he’s the president of PAS Islamist party.



When two students went ballistic over history paper questions in the Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (equivalent to O-Levels) examination, using vulgar words to criticize those who had set the questions and also insulted Singapore, they were quickly arrested by the Royal Malaysia Police. But where was the police when Mr Hadi boldly insulted the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (King)?



After testing the water, the religious extremist Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS) believes they are unstoppable. The monarchs are too afraid that PAS would overthrow them like the Iranian Revolution whilst Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim is too terrified of the backlash from Malay-Muslim voters if the leaders of the Islamist party are investigated, charged or imprisoned.



As the biggest stakeholder in the Opposition with 49 parliamentary seats, PAS now calls the shot in the 74-seat Perikatan Nasional coalition, even though the role as opposition leader has been given to partner Bersatu (Malaysian United Indigenous Party) general-secretary Hamzah Zainuddin. Even the chairman of Perikatan Nasional is Bersatu president Muhyiddin Yassin.



But having tasted blood, PAS top leadership cannot and will not wait till the next general election, which is another 4 to 5 years away, to try their luck again to form the government. The corrupted and power-hungry leaders of the Islamist party still could not forget the taste of lobsters, money, power and projects when they were part of the Muhyiddin and Ismail Sabri backdoor government.



After the Nov 2022 national polls, which produced a hung Parliament, Perikatan Nasional had a chance to return to power. However, Muhyiddin’s arrogance – flatly rejecting a “Unity Government” proposed by King Sultan Abdullah – saw the opportunity dashed as he had insisted to become the prime minister, and not the deputy to rival Pakatan Harapan leader Anwar Ibrahim.



Hadi Awang was equally arrogant and over-confident that Perikatan Nasional could become the government – hoodwinked by Muhyiddin’s claim that they had 115 SDs (statutory declarations) of support. It was both puzzling and hilarious that they had no idea that with the implementation of anti-hopping law, those SDs was not worth the paper it’s written on.



Former PM Muhyiddin was furiously mad after the King rejected his 115 SDs, but it was too late to cry over spilt milk. Barisan Nasional, despite suffering its worst defeat, has suddenly become the kingmaker. Without its 30 MPs, neither Pakatan Harapan (82 MPs) nor Perikatan Nasional could form a government. It was game over after Barisan chose Pakatan over Perikatan.



Realizing its mistake, PAS had initially expressed its interest to – shamelessly – join the Anwar-led unity government, only to flip-flop days later after Bersatu disagreed. Muhyiddin knew it would be meaningless, at least to Bersatu, to join because the deputy prime minister does not come with real power to stop the anti-corruption agency from investigating his corruption scandals.



In the same breath, it also explains why Tengku Zafrul, former finance minister appointed by Muhyiddin, had lobbied using his royalty connection to force PM Anwar to appoint him again to the same powerful portfolio through backdoor – Senatorship. Muhyiddin wanted Zafrul in the new government to prevent Anwar from accessing confidential files and contracts that could implicate him.



But the new premier was smarter and Zafrul has to be contended as Minister of International Trade and Industry. As expected, despite Muhyiddin’s illegitimate and short 17-month rule, a whopping RM600 billion – as initially admitted by the backdoor PM himself – had been spent without check and balance, thanks to abusing a State of Emergency to cling to power.



Ultimately, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) was satisfied to focus its scope of investigations on the RM92.5 billion directly funded by the government. The strategy of casting the net wide has been fruitful. Some unexpected crooks like Wan Saiful Wan Jan was caught having received RM6.96 million kickbacks in exchange for pre-approval projects.



Wan Saiful, the information chief of Bersatu, has been slapped with two corruption charges of soliciting bribes from Nepturis Sdn Bhd in exchange for a lucrative road project – Central Spine Road worth a staggering RM232 million. If even a small fry like he is caught, chances are big sharks like Muhyiddin and Hadi too are in the beautiful fishing net.



A bigger fish is 42-year-old Adam Radlan Adam Muhammad, who was detained over his role as “middleman” in brokering government projects related to Covid-19 stimulus packages worth RM92.5 billion (US$21 billion) in exchange for bribes on January 5. He has since been charged multiple times (with more to come) for soliciting bribes to the tune of millions of Ringgit.



A former chief executive of Maju Assets Sdn Bhd, Adam is also Segambut divisional leader of Muhyiddin’s political party – Bersatu. The best part is Adam is the cousin of Muhyiddin’s son-in-law, Muhamad Adlan Berhan, who in turn was involved in several scandals. As Muhyiddin’s money collector, it will not be hard to link the disgraced former prime minister to the massive RM92.5 billion scandal.




However, the corruption charges on Wan Saiful and Adam Radlan have not only burst the bubble that portrayed Perikatan Nasional as a clean and incorruptible government, which millions of gullible Malay voters were led to believe. The most damaging part is the exposure of who really got the RM5.7 billion Jana Wibawa projects – supposedly to help struggling Bumiputera contractors during the Covid-19 pandemic.



Jana Wibawa or Economic Recovery of Authorized Bumiputera Contractors, set up in Nov 2020 by PM Muhyiddin, did not really benefit the so-called “son of the soil”. In fact, according to the Malaysian Malay Contractors Association (PKMM), none of its members were involved or has benefited from the scheme because the projects were given directly to Bersatu cronies.



Wan Saiful and Adam Radlan apparently solicited RM6.96 million and RM2 million bribes respectively from Lian Tan Chuan to help Nepturis to secure the RM232 million Central Spine Road project and to obtain the Klang Utara District Police Headquarters project worth RM141 million from the government. This means “Malay First” Muhyiddin has scammed millions of ignorant Malays.



Worse, with Bersatu accounts being frozen by the anti-graft agency MACC, the gravy train has essentially stopped. Having indulged luxuriously and plundered hungrily during the 33-month backdoor governments of Muhyiddin and Ismail, leaving the government with RM1.5 trillion national debt, Perikatan Nasional finds it very hard to survive as the opposition.



When PM Anwar unveiled the Budget 2023, Bersatu and PAS became hysterical and began screaming like hell. They whined, moaned and bitched that the unity government was unfair for not giving equal allocations to opposition Members of Parliament. Heck, they even argued that the allocations were people’s money and should be distributed fair and square.



The opposition conveniently forgot that after they had stolen the government from the Pakatan Harapan government in March 2020 and formed a backdoor regime, they too did not give equal allocations. Even the equal allocations given by Sabri administration were due to an MOU (memorandum of understanding) signed with Pakatan to guarantee support for his fragile government.



Even if Anwar administration wanted to give equal allocations, it can’t because the country runs out of money thanks to corruption and plundering by Bersatu and PAS. The last time ex-finance minister Lim Guan Eng allocated RM400 million to PAS-ruled Kelantan, not only the money disappeared, PAS extremists returned the kindness by sowing hatred against the Chinese instead.



Therefore, it’s only wise not to give huge allocations directly to PAS state governments, who desperately needed money to “buy votes” in the upcoming state elections in Kedah, Kelantan, Terengganu, Selangor, Penang and Negeri Sembilan. In reality, Kelantan and Terengganu did not qualify for a 5% oil royalty because the crude oil extractions are beyond the 3-nautical mile limit.



Under the previous leadership of spiritual leader Nik Aziz, opposition Parti Islam Se-Malaysia did not need to beg the federal government for money. It could raise funds using “Milo tin” and had survived even without equal allocations. But under the corrupted Hadi leadership, the Islamist party has become so commercialized that it can barely breathe without truckloads of money.



The funny thing is that at the same time PAS and Bersatu cry like a baby asking for equal allocations, PAS Ulama Chief Nik Muhammad Zawawi announced that the Islamist party has “lots of money”, so much so it has offered to provide funds for Bersatu in the coming polls. Perhaps it should explain why the people of Kelantan and Terengganu were left to fend for themselves during the recent floods.



The frustration saw Hadi stirring up racial and religion sentiments among the Malays again, falsely claiming that non-Muslims will rule if Malays lack of political awareness – despite the fact that the country’s prime minister has always been a Malay-Muslim since independence in 1957. The racist bigot also lied that only 68% Malay had voted in the 15th General Election, when in fact 79% had done so.



The PAS president has also warned – and threatened – the Anwar administration of an inevitable collapse of the current unity government. Exactly how does the opposition plan to form another backdoor government? In order to return to power, Perikatan Nasional is willing to offer the top prize – 11th Prime Minister – to GPS (Gabungan Parti Sarawak) chairman Abang Johari Openg.



Hishammuddin Hussein, the UMNO traitor who previously influenced and bribed 9 Barisan Nasional MPs to defect to Muhyiddin’s camp after the 15th General Election, was offered the same incentive. But he was quickly “checkmate” by UMNO president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi. Now that Hishammuddin has been suspended for 6 years, the offer goes to Abang Johari.



Whether GPS will switch sides and betray Anwar-led unity government depends on the results of upcoming United Malays National Organization (UMNO) election. If Zahid’s boys were to lose, there will be pressure for his leadership to withdraw support for Anwar Ibrahim. Hadi also plans to work with Mahathir Mohamad to instigate the Malays that they have lost political and economic control.