Focus Malaysia:
By Prof Ramasamy Palanisamy
THERE is new and dangerous trend in Malaysia under the Madani government of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. There are slow but sure attempts to curb the freedom of the media.
Once the government might have acted in its broader interests but now the trend is to defend or protect ministers and officials from public scrutiny with regard to allegations of corruption, nepotism, nepotism, favouritism and the sorts.
Regime stability or instability seems to the main pre-occupation of the unity government through its nefarious mechanisms of media regulation and control.
Internet regulator, the Malaysian Commission Multimedia Communications (MCMC), has become the weapon to curb unpleasant news regarding the government, ministers or public officials from public scrutiny.
Like many others including me, lawyer Shamsher Singh Thind merely posted a FB message on why Asia Mobility Technologies Sdn Bhd helmed by Ramachandran Muniandy who is the husband of Youth and Sports Minister Hannah Yeoh was awarded the direct responsive transit (DRT) project through direct negotiations rather than the open tender system which is the Pakatan Harapan (PH)-led government’s mantra.
Focus Malaysia
22 hours agoPenang-based lawyer Shamsher Singh Thind could possibly be the first social media influencer to legally challenge the Malaysian Communications & Multimedia Commission (MCMC) if the latter had indeed acted on the instruction of the Communications Ministry to request Facebook to block his post uploaded on May 26.
Shamsher’s remark of “how open the award was” seems to have irritated the multimedia watchdog. The MCMC swung into action in an unprecedented manner to ask Meta, the FB operator, to remove Shamsher’s statement. The posting was uploaded on May 26.
‘Inciting cyber bully’
Shamsher has since written to the MCMC asking the internet regulator to ascertain how and in what way his post was offensive and whether Deputy Communications Minister Teo Nie Ching had a hand in the ban.
Earlier, Teo emerged as the leading defender of Yeoh saying that calling for her resignation was unfair. She claimed that I had double-standards in asking for the resignation of Yeoh.
The MCMC has come out to say that Shamsher’s post was intended to cyber bully Yeoh with remarks not constructive to public discourse. The commission further blamed Shamsher’s FB post for inciting others to cyber bully Yeoh.
Prof Ramasamy Palanisamy
Since the controversy over the DRT project which was awarded to Asia Mobility helmed by Yeoh’s husband Ramachandran started, the media is abuzz with reports and analysis as to why there was no open tender as well as to why the husband of Yeoh was involved in the project.
Lately, we hear that MCA Youth has brought to fore that there were more than 30 companies involved in public transportation that could have participated if there had been open tender.
Asia Mobility or the other company BadanBas Coach Sdn Bhd have not demonstrated why are they superior to other companies or why they deserve preferential treatment in terms of the negotiated award given to them.
The discussions of this controversial matter were not all critical of Yeoh or her husband. Some defended the award to Asia Mobility on the grounds of merit, experience and performance.
Nothing defamatory
It was argued that the personal relationship between Ramachandran and Yeoh should not be the primary concern. What is important is whether the company can deliver what it was supposed to do.
Of course, there were many who felt that it was wrong to go for direct negotiations with the two companies. The much-talked about open tender system should have been adopted.
Furthermore, projects involving public funds should not be managed by relatives of public officials including ministers. Even if there are no wrongdoings, perceptions are bound to arise.
This is the reason why in the interest of morality and good governance, either Yeoh of her husband should resign from their respective posts. Only through this action can public confidence in the government be restored to some extent.
It is wrong for MCMC to say that there were attempts to cyber bully and belittle Yeoh. When did the MCMC assume the role of protector and defender of Yeoh or her husband?
Does this mean that Yeoh cannot defend and protect herself? If she or husband has been defamed, she knows what kind of legal action she can pursue. At least she and her hubby could start off by making some police reports.
This is the first time in the political history of the country that the government is seen to come to the rescue of an embattled minister and her husband in light of allegations of nepotism, favouritism and cronyism.
By the way, the so-called “mischievous” or “defamatory” FB post by Shamsher cannot erase the fact of the absence of an open tender and the involvement of the spouse of a federal minister in a project financed by taxpayers’ money.
The Madani government has clearly lost its moral compass in deciding what should come first: the interest of the larger public or the particular narrow interest of one or two individuals. – June 8, 2024
Former DAP stalwart and Penang chief minister II Prof Ramasamy Palanisamy is chairman of the United Rights of Malaysian Party (Urimai) interim council.
Lately, we hear that MCA Youth has brought to fore that there were more than 30 companies involved in public transportation that could have participated if there had been open tender.
Asia Mobility or the other company BadanBas Coach Sdn Bhd have not demonstrated why are they superior to other companies or why they deserve preferential treatment in terms of the negotiated award given to them.
The discussions of this controversial matter were not all critical of Yeoh or her husband. Some defended the award to Asia Mobility on the grounds of merit, experience and performance.
Nothing defamatory
It was argued that the personal relationship between Ramachandran and Yeoh should not be the primary concern. What is important is whether the company can deliver what it was supposed to do.
Of course, there were many who felt that it was wrong to go for direct negotiations with the two companies. The much-talked about open tender system should have been adopted.
Furthermore, projects involving public funds should not be managed by relatives of public officials including ministers. Even if there are no wrongdoings, perceptions are bound to arise.
This is the reason why in the interest of morality and good governance, either Yeoh of her husband should resign from their respective posts. Only through this action can public confidence in the government be restored to some extent.
It is wrong for MCMC to say that there were attempts to cyber bully and belittle Yeoh. When did the MCMC assume the role of protector and defender of Yeoh or her husband?
Does this mean that Yeoh cannot defend and protect herself? If she or husband has been defamed, she knows what kind of legal action she can pursue. At least she and her hubby could start off by making some police reports.
This is the first time in the political history of the country that the government is seen to come to the rescue of an embattled minister and her husband in light of allegations of nepotism, favouritism and cronyism.
By the way, the so-called “mischievous” or “defamatory” FB post by Shamsher cannot erase the fact of the absence of an open tender and the involvement of the spouse of a federal minister in a project financed by taxpayers’ money.
The Madani government has clearly lost its moral compass in deciding what should come first: the interest of the larger public or the particular narrow interest of one or two individuals. – June 8, 2024
Former DAP stalwart and Penang chief minister II Prof Ramasamy Palanisamy is chairman of the United Rights of Malaysian Party (Urimai) interim council.
Ya, Ya Shamser Thind Singh has a long history as an on line shit stirrer.
ReplyDeleteWhat is evident and clear is that the evangelical Christian party has lost its moral compass.
ReplyDelete