Phantoms in Mahathir's Citizens' Declaration

Mahathir's Citizens' Declaration or, as named by DAP's Charles Santiago. a "rushed document" without considering how to restore Malaysia's public institutions allegedly destroyed by Mahathir (judiciary, police, civil service, etc, especially their accountability and transparency), was supposedly signed by 50.

what's the f**king rush?
where's the consultation?
what's mahathir's commitment to reform? 

As V Gayathry said (see my immediate previous post 
Signing a Mahathirism document when he's yet to be held accountable for his actions?) those Pakatan leaders who signed despite their unfulfilled demand that Mahathir apologises for his mistakes as PM, and who claimed deceitfully they have signed as individuals and not for their parties: You can’t be leaders of influential movements and claim to be individuals only in this political move.

But at least 50 is more than Anwar Ibrahim's supposed 30 BN MPs hopping across to Pakatan in 2008, wakakaka.

But wait, it's not 50 because two names on that Declaration have their actual persons coming out to say, words to the effect, "Bullshit, I did not sign the document", wakakaka.

woi nyonya Maria Chin, mana you?
wakakaka

One of the two, Ku Li claimed he didn't go to the gathering nor was he even aware of it. The other was Zaman Khan, ex cop and former (retired) prison chief who was shocked to see his name as one of the signatories when he did not support the Declaration.

"I was there!"
wakakaka 

50 minus 2 equals 48, and I have to wonder how many more names were there but not signed by their owners, wakakaka.

Aiyah, so hard up, so desperate lah. But where the f**k are the 40,000 Banglas when they're needed, wakakaka.

To close, here's a poem titled 'Bangla in Pilihanraya' I wrote in my other blog, KTemoc Komposes, for your perusal, wakakaka.

Hello, my name is Mr Farooq Majumdar
I was born in Kampung Paya Terubong
Which by the way, Sahib, is not very far
Just the distance for a Bangladeshi song

Yes Sahib, indeed I am very very Malaysian
Which is why today I have come to vote
‘Coz there is also lucrative compensation
And I really don’t mind coins or bank note

Come to think of it, I've a Malaysian mien

I work goreng-ing at a char koay teow stall

And pahkok with Ah Peh Ah Ee in Hokkien

While my towkay sits behind doing f*-all

* Malaysian and Penang Hokkien words (italicized) explained in Ktemoc Komposes

Best of all I don’t have to go home, I mean

Kampung Paya Terubong is now my address,
And that’s what makes me really super keen
To vote as told, for a citizenship to possess

"Farooq you naughty rascal, come home immediately"

wakakaka (with sincere apologies to Madame Sheik Hasina)

Signing a Mahathirism document when he's yet to be held accountable for his actions?

And now a word or two from V Gayathry, former South-East Asian Press Alliance (Seapa) executive director, as reported by Malaysiakini, on why he (like Charles Santiago of DAP) refused to sign up with Mahathir's Declaration:

PODAH 

***

Why I reject the Citizens’ Declaration

My beef has turned into curry, together with the sedated social media conversation.

I expect political parties to make negotiations and compromises, sometimes wrongly, but they do have a constituency and I do believe in the power of the elections - through which I can tell them what I think.

Now, with the NGOs, it’s another story. Who are they accountable to? How can they be effective checks and balances if they sit at the same table - not to discuss implementation of reforms, but merely to offer legitimacy to what I think is an undemocratic group?

You can’t be leaders of influential movements and claim to be individuals only in this political move.

Of course, I acknowledge that we are not being forced to sign the declaration so we shouldn’t need to make all this noise.

However, NGOs cannot make political decisions and expect not to be criticised - especially if their supporters feel that they have acted with little accountability.

These are my three background settings:

The Bersih committee had met to discuss their strategy. We know the outcome.

What I would like to know is if there were dissenting voices, and how many? And did the wider community of NGOs discuss the declaration and the strategies post-declaration?

I think the answer is no, but I’m happy to hear otherwise.

Anyhow, hundreds of thousands of people have responded over the years to the call of Bersih on the streets, online, in cash or in kind. I figure they/we are far more important than Mahathir.

The BN government, as well as its machinery, is rotten to the core. It has to go.

As Ambiga once responded to a critic, that Mahathir has taken them for a ride, with: “We are not that stupid” - this is my response to those who feel they have to lecture us on the bad situation of the country, and thus justifying the move: “We are not that stupid, either.”

The Pakatan leadership has showed anything but leadership. They have done some good administrative work, but in critical political situations, they crumble. I would not hedge my bets on them all the time.

Four reasons why I won’t be signing the declaration

1) The main beneficiary is Umno. By involving their stalwarts and using the language of reform (which was minimal in the document), they want to present themselves as the “reformers” or the conscience of the party.

Mukhriz’s statement just proves what they really wanted out of this - and that is to remove his nemesis so he can be in power. For that, they could have organised a petition among the Mahathir-loyal diehards in Umno and do what they want.

And what does the BN cohort bring to the table that has tilted the power equation for the civil society? I care not for Umno and BN, and have always wished for them to self-implode.

So, I will not sign the declaration to give Mukhriz, Muhyiddin and Mahathir (from 2M to 3M) any legitimacy.

2) Where was the consultation, really? And no, it’s not so urgent that consultation had to be compromised. Many of us have put voices and fingerprints on calls for reforms, and I firmly believe the process is as important as the outcome.

To me, this People’s Declaration is closer to what I think of a united and representative voice - one drawn up collectively.

The 1986 People’s Declaration for Democracy (during Mahathir’s rule) was a result of a People’s Assembly, an open and consultative process. I support that.

The Bersih demands are also a result of consultation and a determined campaign, which I fully support, but not this Mahathirism document - which appears to have been done quickly and quietly.

So, I will not sign the declaration that was not conceived of openly, and with little citizens’ input.

3) The ‘what is the alternative’ argument is a false choice. It is not this or nothing at all. We have options and we can mobilise through different means.

Yes, some people would rather not have demonstrations, but it is a legitimate form of political expression; as are campaigns and continuous political pressure - they all work in combination.

Hence, I take offence at those in support of the declaration initiative whose retorts are that the rest of us are doing nothing, or that people who stake their claims on the elections are not really empowered.

Belittling your allies - and worse still, citizens - is not the hallmark of a strong civil society.

This declaration may be a path for some, but please do not present it as the only option available at this point. So, I will not sign the declaration as I will be taking other paths available to me.

4) A rather sensitive issue has also come up - the endorsement of those who have suffered in the hands of Mahathir, and who have said they are willing to let go to focus on the big picture.

I have always been inspired by the activists and politicians who fought for and paid with their freedoms. That they have decided to forgive Mahathir and let the past be, must have taken tremendous strength on their part.

We admire them for that; but there are many who have suffered in different ways, and to different extents as a result of an unjust system. The accountability needs to have a face and a mechanism for those who have been wronged, to seek justice.

The short-term letting go needs to be turned into a proper form of holding those in power, responsible. A formal reconciliation process is needed for so many ghosts of the past. That hasn’t happened yet, and doesn’t seem to be on offer.

Mahathir has not been held accountable for his actions. It is not enough for me to hear how a few have said that they forgive him, to justify this declaration of Mahathirism. So, I will not sign it.

Mahathir root cause of rot in Malaysia

Star Online reports:

Sunday, 6 March 2016 | MYT 1:11 PM

Dr M root cause of rot, says DAP MP on "Save Malaysia" declaration


BY RAHMAH GHAZALI





PETALING JAYA: A DAP lawmaker has poured cold water over the unity call for Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak's ouster, calling the declaration a "rushed document".

Klang MP Charles Santiago said the declaration, dubbed "Save Malaysia" signed by a group of politicians and activists did not clearly spell out the aspirations of the people.

Moreover, he said, the declaration was led by former premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the same man whom he said had single-handedly "ruined Malaysia's economy and tarnished the nation through autocratic means.

"I agree that Najib must go for the better of the country and her people. But in this quest for justice one must not also forget that Dr Mahathir is the root cause of the rot that is affecting every Malaysian today.

"One cannot deny that his 22 years in power was made possible by the use of draconian laws to jail dissidents and critics," he said.

"Dr Mahathir introduced money politics in Umno, robbed the judiciary of its independence, clamped down on street protests and kept a heavy lid on freedom of the media," added Santiago.

On Friday, Mahathir together with the opposition leaders including DAP national advisor Lim Kit Siang signed a declaration, calling for Najib’s ouster.

"The Save Malaysia coalition has ironically only made a passing reference to reforming national institutions, which are crucial to ensure the next government would be accountable and transparent.

"This declaration, therefore, is a rushed document that did not think through these pertinent issues," he said.

Santiago seemingly likened the current situation with a popular American TV series, House of Cards, which centres around a politician's elaborate plan to make himself the president of the US.

"Kevin Spacey plays the ruthless politician who makes pacts with his nemesis and teams up with strange bedfellows to become the most powerful man on earth.

"The point here is that everyone who comes on board his bandwagon have a personal agenda, simmering vengeance, need for revenge: in short, an axe to grind," he said.

And the question would still remain if the move was merely an act of revenge by Dr Mahathir.

"As for Mahathir critics, the question would still remain if this is an act of revenge because Najib had flatly refused to continue Dr Mahathir's policies, setting in motion the crumbling of his legacy.

"The onus is now on civil society representatives and political parties to ensure Dr Mahathir does not hijack the movement,” he said.

Bersih blesses Mahathir?

Last year in October I wrote about Maria Chin Abdullah, the person who took over the NGO BERSIH. I stated that it appeared as if she wanted to be a political king-maker.

Maria Chin has forgiven me so you can all join me in my movement go remove Najib even if I don't promise any reforms on the wrongs I did during my PM days

BERSIH used to be an NGO which had objectives as follows:

• Clean up of the electoral roll
• Reform of postal ballot
• Use of indelible ink
• Minimum 21 days of campaign period
• Free and fair access to mass media for all parties
• Strengthening of public institutions
• No corruption
• No dirty politics

That had been why BERSIH could and was supported by politicians of all hue, as it sought only to ensure elections are held clean and fair. If you recall, under Ambiga Sreenevasan, she was scrupulously non-aligned, once telling Anwar Ibrahim off for his attempt to hijack BERSIH for his own political gains

But WTF is Bersih doing today under Maria Chin Abdullah?

For a start she expanded the ambit of the NGO into being anti Najib. There's actually nothing wrong being anti Najib but, indeed BUT was that the objective of BERSIH?

Now Maria Chin doesn't want us to keep harping on Mahathir's mistakes during his days as PM (365.25 x 22, wakakaka) and the associated calls by activists for him to apologise or at least to acknowledge his role in ruining Malaysia’s institutions, and in concentrating power in the prime minister’s hands during his years of rule. 

Those calls against Mahathir were demanded by activists as a pre-condition for joining Mahathir’s new movement to remove PM Najib.

I had previously written of her: She seems to be either a confused activist which has been why I see Bersih 4.0 as a confused NGO, or as I suspect, she wants to be a political KINGMAKER, one who wants to change PM, one who pontificates pompously on the timing of Pakatan Harapan's political formation as if that's her business, one who ... god only knows what she wants next?

Well, as BERSIH chairperson she's still confused, and now she wants us to additionally forgive Mahathir and forget his role in ruining Malaysia's institutions such as the judiciary and for putting far too much power in a PM's hands (originally his own hands, wakakaka).

Nonetheless, it seems many have heeded her call ..... under the deceitful guise that those Pakatan people who have joined Mahathir despite his refusal to apologise for his deformasi or even to agree to freeing Anwar Ibrahim as one of the objectives of his (Mahathir's) new anti Najib movement, have pretended they have joined not as representatives of Pakatan but as individuals. Bullshit!

And by logical deduction, it would seem Maria Chin Abdullah doesn't give two figs about the possibility of Mahathir's men taking over from Najib BUT continuing to run UMNO as the party was, had been, is and will be, regardless of whether it had been under Mahathir or currently under Najib or in the future, once again under Mahathir or his proxy.

And finally, with thanks (and just in case, apologies) to the scriptwriters of The Sound of Music:

Baroness: My dear, is there anything you can't do 

Maria: Well, I'm not sure I'll make a very good nun.

Baroness: Oh, if you have any problems, I'd be happy to help you.

HRH read wrong newspaper?

Three days ago Malaysiakini published Utusan Malaysia not racist, says Perak sultan in which we read (extracts only):

Sultan of Perak Sultan Nazrin Muizzuddin Shah has defended Malay language daily Utusan Malaysia, saying that the paper is not racist but instead embodies the spirit of 1Malaysia.

Sultan Nazrin said those who branded the paper as being racist have an agenda to derail Malaysia's social contract.

"The Utusan Group and its main publication, Utusan Malaysia, is now branded as racist; (it is) intentionally played up by those who are put off by it and those who have an agenda to eliminate the social contract agreed upon by our forebearers in formulating the main policies that form an independent nation.

"They are increasingly vocal in questioning the status of the bumiputera in the country and do all kinds of subversive activities to dethrone the special position of the bumiputera that is enshrined in the Federal Constitution.

"They are in fact stirring a hornet's nest; they are instigating the people to play with fire," Sultan Nazrin said in his keynote speech at the inaugural Utusan Business Awards 2015 awards ceremony in Kuala Lumpur today.

I opine that for two reasons we shouldn't and needn't argue with HRH about his views on Utusan Malaysia:

Firstly, it's considered 'insolent' and 'treasonous' in Malaysia to argue with or defy a sultan, as had been witnessed in September 2014 when Anwar Ibrahim (PKR) and the DAP in Selangor did not, like PAS, kuai kuai submit 3 names required by HRH for the post of MB to replace Khalid Ibrahim.

Then, the Sultan's private secretary, Datuk Munir Bani stated: "The Selangor Sultan is extremely disappointed by the actions of DAP and Keadilan in disobeying the decree he made on August 27 2014‎."

"DAP and Keadilan's actions reflect their insolence towards the royal institution and is treason towards the Selangor Sultan."

Mind, most of us didn't realise that on the matter of a ruling party (or coalition)'s choice of candidate for the state MB, the Sultan of Selangor has a constitutional right beyond approving or not approving that candidate.

Let kaytee play Edward de Bono here - say, if HRH had disapproved the 1st and then the 2nd name (say, PKR's Wan Azizah and PKR's Eli Wong respectively), I believe HRH would have obtained the same outcome. Ampun Tuanku.

While PKR and DAP's decision to submit only one name, that of Wan Azizah, might have been considered 'insolent' if we give Datuk Munir Bani some lexical latitude, I think the accusation of 'treason' might have been very much way over the top.

'Treason' is defined in the English language dictionary as "the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign" which hadn't been the case as (a) the Pakatan was/still is the legally elected government and (b) everyone loves HRH (unless someone knows something sinister that I don't?).

OK, I hope the 'insolent' minefield has been well-charted so let's leave Selangor and return to HRH Sultan of Perak and Utusan Malaysia.

Secondly, on why we shouldn't and needn't argue with HRH about Utusan being not racist, most of us including even UMNO people already know Utusan only too well. Don't we?

Thus most of us should not and would not have been fazed by HRH giving Utusan a clean bill of social health. Malaysia is a democratic country and everyone of us including HRH has the right of opinion, though some caution is advisable in the matter of 'expression' of such opinions in public.

However, ampun Tuanku, I have to admit I have been rather stunned to hear HRH, a very learned scholar, mentioned "... those who have an agenda to eliminate the social contract agreed upon by our forebearers in formulating the main policies that form an independent nation".

'Social contract'?

Here's one of the several voices in Malaysiakini that have spoken out against that term 'social contract'. Noted political writer Kim Quek has this to say:

What social contract? Everything our founding fathers had agreed by consensus was written into the federal constitution, and the so-called “social contract” was a mere concoction by an Umno politician to justify the ruling party’s racist policies.

Further, the special position of the Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak is spelled out under Article 153 of the federation constitution, where its very limited scope is defined as reservation of quotas in public service, educational facilities and business licences.

The modest provisions of such “special position” certainly cannot be interpreted to mean the endowment of racial privileges to create a privileged class of citizenship.

Despite numerous amendments, our constitution remains egalitarian in letters and spirit and there is only one class of citizenship where all citizens are equal as expressly guaranteed under various articles in the constitution, including Article 8 (equality) and Article 136 (impartial treatment of all federal employees).

Perak Sultan Nazrin Muizzuddin Shah’s speech is highly regrettable not only for imputing unnecessary meaning to Malay special position but also for partaking in partisan politics when he defended and praised Umno’s mouthpiece Utusan Malaysia, despite the latter’s notoriety as ultra-racist and the newspaper most frequently punished by the courts for committing defamation.

Thus the sultan has, through his support for Utusan, breached a fundamental principle of our constitutional monarchy – that the monarch should stay meticulously above partisan politics at all times.

The other Malaysiakini voices mentioned the Reid Commission and the original agreement by our founding fathers including the consensus to limit the special preference for Malays to only 15 years - OTOH, kaytee believes there could/might have been a misprint where the actual period limited for 'special preferences for Malays' was actually 150 years?

Curse the printer's hantu for the missing '0'. For those of you who don't know what the printer's hantu is, it's known today rather unromantically as 'typo', wakakaka.

But the best Malaysiakini reader-comment was by Rick Teo who stated: Sultan Nazrin, I beg to differ. You could be reading the wrong newspaper.

Polite and diplomatic, our Rick Teo, syabas sdr!

Indeed, and as mentioned above,.most of us including even UMNO people already know Utusan only too well.

However, I have been more than just stunned when I read HRH, a most learned scholar with all sorts of degrees from Oxford and Harvard etc, saying: "They are in fact stirring a hornet's nest; they are instigating the people to play with fire."

'Hornets (tebuans); playing with fire ...'!

Those words sound very very very familiar and probably what had been missing to complete that recalled scenario (from somewhere sometime ago) was a lil' red book being waved in the air from the podium as the speaker (of yore) talked about tebuans, playing with fire and testing his patience.

Oh yes, it's all coming back now. 'Twas in December 2005 when Badruddin Amiruldin stated as I had then written:

At the UMNO assembly, ethnic hero Badruddin Amiruldin gave his infamous hornet's nest threat, "No other race has the right to question our privileges, our religion and our leader".

He warned that taking away Malays' privileges would be akin to stirring up a hornet's nest with terrible consequence. Just in case the wannabe nest stirrer didn't understand the dangers of depriving him and mates from the institutionalised ethnic-based special privileges, he waved a book about the May 13 racial riots (in 1969), where the Chinese in Kuala Lumpur were taught a severe lesson of how terrifying racial rioting could be.

Ampun Tuanku.

Apa lagi 'reformasi-istas' mahu?

TMI's editorial in Can Dr Mahathir, political foes unite against Najib?

apa lagi Cina mahu?
kepimpinan saya?

wakakaka 

TMI extracts: Let's face it, the likes of Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang, Mohamed Sabu, Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail or Lim Guan Eng cannot bring the pact back to what it was in the 2008 and 2013 election campaigns.

KT comment: Missing the manmanlai virtuoso of Anwar in providing the glue for Pakatan? Hmmm ... I'm happy to concede to Anwar's political virtuoso but would also say he subsequently furnished the 'ungluing' as well, starting with PKR's selfish Kajang Move.

So, some of the opposition leaders are hoping that Dr Mahathir will be able to bring some measure of unity and create a national wave across the country – defeating Najib and his BN colleagues as they have done in 2008 and 2013.

KT comment: Actually Mahathir had been the one enabling the Pakatan victory in 2008 following his then-continuous undermining of AAB. Thanks to him, BN lost its 2/3 majority. Thanks to his self-centred self-interest selfish petulance against AAB, he demolished BN (fresh from a landslide victory in 2004) sufficiently, one example being to awaken the traditionally pro-BN Chinese and indirectly convince them to go for broke and switched over to Pakatan.

The Pakatan victory in 2013 enjoyed then-existing momentum from 2008 with more fence-sitters committing themselves to Pakatan.

That is a tall order but they had done in the past as it was almost all straight fights. But the next elections could be different if they remain fractious and continue sniping at each other. Hence the need for Dr Mahathir as much as the country's longest-serving prime minister needs them to oust another of his successors.

KT comment: Certainly Mahathir can still wreck havoc on BN (essentially UMNO) but that's assuming Najib will be lying down quietly with his leg kang-kang just waiting to be politically shagged. Najib is most dangerous when cornered. And what part will PAS play to throw a spanner into a Mahathir-led federal opposition?

However, the big hump to overcome is whether the architect of the destruction of Malaysia's once proud and independent institutions should acknowledge his past sins. Because it will be a bumpy ride If he still believes in the principles of the Frank Sinatra hit song "My Way" and not bother about his record in office.

KT comment: The Pakatan argument is that PM Najib is really really really bad and thus is its No 1 priority to remove from Putrajaya.

Najib is so bad that Pakatan is willing to deal with a far more bad bloke, the baddest hombre in town, if that's what it takes to topple depose and unseat Najib.

Yes, even if the baddest guy in our Malaysian political history was (is?) a, nay, The Devil of Malaysian politics, an enemy, it doesn't matter 'cause of the current Priority No 1, namely Najib.

So deal with the Devil if necessary.

Ignore his 929 and 617 Declarations which by his singular fiat turned secular Malaysia into a fundamentalist Islamic nation (if not constitutionally at least politically and in parts, administratively).

Ignore his emasculation of the judiciary, ignore his politicisation of the civil service, ignore everything he had f**kup in two decades,

Ignore his culture of divisive politics, institutional intimidation and profligate administration of our nation, yes, minta mudah lupa sedikitlah because we're so lucky, so very lucky to get his help, even if his help is principally for the personal benefits of his own sons.

So let's do a Faustian Pact, but what is that, you may ask?

Wikipedia informs us Christian legend has it that some centuries ago Dr Faust traded his soul to the devil in exchange for knowledge. The term “strike a Faustian bargain” means the person trading with the devil is willing to sacrifice anything to satisfy a limitless desire for knowledge or power. Wikipedia goes on to explain:

According to traditional Christian belief in witchcraft, the pact is between a person and Satan or a lesser demon. The person offers his or her soul in exchange for diabolical favours. Those favours vary by the tale, but tend to include youth, knowledge, wealth, fame, or power. [...]

Nevertheless, the bargain is considered a dangerous one, as the price of the Fiend's service is the wagerer's soul. The tale may have a moralizing end, with eternal damnation for the foolhardy venturer.

So DAP, what happened to Anthony Loke's rebuke of Muhyiddin's and Mahathir's so-called 'reforms' (bearing in mind Anwar had also talked about 'reforms', wakakaka), saying those in UMNO opposed to Najib have only been pandai NATO saje (No Action Talk Only)?

Loke was asking what the TMI editorial asked about the Mahathir-Muhyiddin's professed 'reforms' starting with the point as to ... whether the architect of the destruction of Malaysia's once proud and independent institutions should acknowledge his past sins. Because it will be a bumpy ride If he still believes in the principles of the Frank Sinatra hit song "My Way" and not bother about his record in office.

Will there be a Faustian Pact by Pakatan, nay, make that the DAP?

Amen in advance, wakakaka.

want 1MDB file, SB's Altantuyaa file, anti-Najib potion? 

Good things come in threes

Omne trium perfectum in Latin means 'everything that comes in threes is perfect'. Sometimes it's just termed 'good things come in threes'.

Though I might have been taught this popular saying in school, I recall it more vividly after reading Arthur Clarke's sci-fi classic 'Rendezvous with Rama' where the final sentence of the book stys:

And on far-off Earth, Dr. Carlisle Perera had as yet told no one how he had wakened from a restless sleep with the message from his subconscious still echoing in his brain: The Ramans do everything in threes.

A sweetie I once adored argued with me that it was not 'threes' but 'trees', to wit, 'good things come in trees' like, as she painstakingly explained, mangoes, durians, rambutans, etc.

But smart as she was, yes very very smart, I (dungu as I might have been, wakakaka) finally managed to convince her the tree has nothing to do with the saying - for example, what if it was the notorious highly toxic Malaysian Rengas tree, wakakaka - ahem, which may explain why our politics is so toxic, wakakaka again.

One example of 'good things come in threes' would be the 'check & balance' tripodal branches in a democratic government, namely, the executive (cabinet), legislative (parliament) and judiciary.

Alas, in Malaysia we have seen the unfortunate destruction of the independence of our judiciary in 1988 in a constitutional crisis which was said to have its genesis in an UMNO power tussle in 1987 between Team A (Mahathir, Anwar Ibrahim) and Team B (Ku Li, Musa Hitam).

A deadlocked UMNO went to the courts. But a certain 'someone', wakakaka, was pissed off with the courts' decision.

What ensued the following year (1988) saw the ugly unbecoming unworthy dismissal of the Lord President of the Federal Court, Salleh Abas, in a most shameful sickening situation reeking malodorously of scatological 'conflict of interests'.

Twenty years later PM AAB on the encouragement of Zaid Ibrahim, then acting Law Minister, did the correct praiseworthy prime-ministerial act by apologizing on behalf of the government (and presumably UMNO) to Salleh Abas for the wrong done to him. Bravo Tun AAB, bravo Zaid! But did that honorable act infuriate a certain 'someone' even more? Wakakaka.

But there was more - The Malaysian tripodal 'check & balance', besides being weakened by the emasculation of the judiciary, was also pummeled horrendously when the membership of the Dewan Senate (Upper House) was changed by a certain 'someone', wakakaka, who altered the Senate's composition to ensure the states could not deny the will of the executive.

North Korea had then came to town, when 'good things come in threes' metamorphosed into a 'power of One'.

'Kim Jong-il'
in the Andes in Argentina?

wakakaka

Wikipedia states:

Each of the 13 state legislative assemblies chooses two senators. The King appoints two senators for the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, and one respectively for the Federal Territories of Labuan and Putrajaya on the advice of the Prime Minister.

Another 40 senators, regardless of their states, are appointed by the King, also on the Prime Minister's advice. Federally appointed senators must have "rendered distinguished public service or have achieved distinction in the professions, commerce, industry, agriculture, cultural activities or social service or are representative of racial minorities or are capable of representing the interests of aborigines (Orang Asli)".

The intent of the original Constitution of Malaysia, which provided for only 16 Senators to be appointed by the King (thus placing them in the minority) was to give the states some say over federal policy. However, subsequent amendments have, according to former Lord President of the Federal Court Tun Mohamed Suffian Mohamed Hashim, acted "contrary to the spirit of the original constitution which established the Dewan Negara specially as a body to protect in the federal Parliament, state interests against federal encroachments".

And a certain 'someone' has now been lecturing us on ... what? Podah!

OK, back to 3's, wakakaka. Then there is the safety slogan of 'stop, look & listen' for public road and level crossing. In Australia where very long distance travelling is the norm there is the catchy slogan of 'stop, revive and survive', meaning it's good to stop and rest every now and then, say in every couple of hours or so, before pushing on ...

... and so on and so forth such as in religion: in Christianity we have 'Father, Son & Holy Ghost', in Hinduism 'Trimurti', in Buddhism 'Tripitaka', in Chinese folk religion 'Heaven, Earth & Man', in Taoism 'Ci' (compassion), 'Jian' (moderation) & 'Bugan wei tianxia xian' which literally means 'not daring to act as first under the heavens' (in short 'humility').

Melchior, Caspar & Balthazar
3 Wise Men bearing  gifts of gold, frankincense & myrrh

Mind, on the flip side sometimes (or most times in Malaysia, wakakaka) you can get stuff like 'bangsa ... etc & etc'. Wakakaka, that's the yang and yin of life. 

Let's now come to Mahathir, wakakaka:

• in 1969 he was expelled from UMNO by Tunku
• in 2008 he resigned because he couldn't get his way with AAB, following which he undermined AAB's government, to wit, BN itself until the ruling party lost its 2/3 majority in 2008, just a mere 4 years after a landslide victory in 2004
• in 2016 he again resigned from UMNO after being ignored by Najib, who Mahathir had the thick-skin to describe as his 'successor', thus implying rather preposterously pompously pretentiously he had handed powers of the government to Najib

As they say '3 strikes and you're out'. Omne trium perfectum.

Omne trium perfectum'
'everything that comes in threes is perfect'

wakakaka