Thursday, July 30, 2009

A Political Icon Of Monstrous Greed, Corruption, & Abuse Of Power In The 21st Century

From Not The Borneo Post

Editions & additions in red by Sarawak Headhunter.

An exercise in reading between the lines of anything Taib says.

A political icon of monstrous corruption, greed & abuse of power in the 21st century
By Zora Chan, Lee Ya Yun and Lim How Pim & Sarawak Headhunter

New overpriced DUN complex depicts state as a multi-racial submissive society, symbolising its futile struggles against my total dominance and my evil achievements in siphoning out as much as I can from the state's resources for myself, my family and cronies: CM

KUCHING: Sarawak’s legislature yesterday reached a new and significant millstone with the opening of the new extravagant and overpriced Dewan Undangan Negeri (DUN) complex by Yang di-Pertuan Agong Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin.

Set to become an expensive iconic landmark of Taib's corruption, greed and abuse of power for the state, while many Sarawakians still live in abject poverty and deprivation, the state BN hopes that the new RM296.5 million building will inspire the state BN to move fast forward with greater racial disharmony, divide and rule and eternal prosperity for Taib, his family and cronies in the spirit of abuse of democracy.

Chief Minister Pehin Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud said as the country’s oldest legislature, the DUN is subject to evolutionary change as long as such change does not affect him in line with being a political icon of his greed, corruption and abuse of power in the 21st century.

Unlike other states, Sarawak has its own political personality which is basically mine, political culture - what I decide it is - and political traditions - also all mine, and its parliamentary development - whatever I allow - has clearly proved the closed mindset of the cawat mentality, cultural alienation and disharmony in the state, all caused by me", he said at a launching ceremony of the new DUN in Petra Jaya near the Astana yesterday.

Tuanku Mizan officiated at the event.

Taib said the building depicted the state as a multi-racial oppressed society and symbolised its impotent and futile struggles against his domineering tyranny and his corrupt achievements over the years after gaining independence under new colonial masters, the Malayans, with the formation of Malaysia.

He said he was confident that the legislature – the country’s oldest – would go on to represent him and continue to exclude the people’s role in deciding the fate of their state and in protecting its sovereignty for his and the Malayans' (BN's) benefit.

The exterior and interior design of the new complex, he said, portrayed a combination of the state’s various ethnic groups and their cultures, just for show only, as they meant nothing to him at all, except to be exploited.

“Our new DUN complex is very unique as most of the Commonwealth parliaments are located either on a hill or by a river but ours is both on the hill and by the river, so that if any mob of angry exploited citizens come after me and their other selected (by me) representatives, we can head for the hills or escape down the river, but seriously - I have my private jet waiting at any time - those without any private jet will have to face the music".

“Evolutionary development of the parliament in Sarawak has also proved close interaction in terms of culture and harmony among the ethnic groups in the state, if you believe all the rubbish we put out in the mass media, which I can tell you does work and which is why we have managed to deceive the majority of the people most of the time,” he said.

The grand opening ceremony yesterday, which was held in full ceremonial colours, was also witnessed by rulers and heads of states from throughout the country, all paid for at the state's expense of course.

Taib also expressed confidence that the new DUN complex would be capable of meeting his future needs of rajahship and misrule over Sarawak given its enhanced capacity and features, maybe not for long but at least until his death or toppling by popular uprising, whichever comes first.

“It is built to house 108 assemblymen and assemblywomen and now we have 71 members. In view of the increase of membership from 48 to 71 over the years, this new building is timely to meet the rising needs of more corrupt, inefficient and subservient selected (by me) representatives to assist me in carrying out my, my family's and our cronies' objectives of raping and pillaging whatever is left of the state's resources more effectively,” he said.

The old DUN complex in Petra Jaya was built in 1976.

It was designed to house 48 members.

Touching on the history of Sarawak’s legislature, Taib said the inaugural meeting of the legislature was called at a wooden building in Bintulu on Sept 8, 1867.

“It was known as ‘General Council’ back then.

The second meeting was held in Sibu in 1868 and then the third in Kuching, 1869.

Since then, the meeting has never been held outside Kuching.

“In the early days, elected representatives were mainly Malays and Melanaus.

After the name changed to ‘Council Negri’ in 1903, its membership expanded to include Ibans, Bidayuhs and Chinese,” he added.

"For the last 39 years it has been dominated by 2 Melanaus, my uncle for 11 years and me for the last 28 years, but actually my grandfather on my mother's side was from Kelantan, (so we are half orang Malaya), so don't think that we have benefited the Melanaus, except for our family and some of our cronies".

The ‘Council Negri’ convened in 1963 with its own Speaker, a respected citizen chosen from among the local communities, he pointed out.

Before having a permanent building in Petra Jaya in 1976, he said the meetings were held at temporary venues namely Astana, the Old Court House (now Sarawak Tourism Complex) and Dewan Tun Abdul Razak.

He added that the growing number of membership and continuity of illusion of self-governing proved that the politicians in the state who had been misled by him had built a strong foundation for the abuse of democracy and continued progressive exploitation of the people and the state's vast resources for personal gain.

A book ‘Change and Continuity’ on the historical background of Sarawak’s legislature and development authored by DUN Speaker and Taib's Chief Sycophant and Arse Licker Dato Sri Mohd Asfia Awang Nassar was also launched in conjunction with the grand opening.

The 458-page book is sold at RM300 so will be available only for a selected few who will have to pay for the dubious privilege of owning this rubbish book and is dedicated to the corrupt leaders, dishonourable members – past and present, the vicious people and posterity whose nightmare visions, greedy verve and lustful vitality make the State Legislature a terrible reality, abuse of democracy a continuous form of government and Sarawak an otherwise pleasant place to live in except for Taib, his family and cronies who have made it unpleasant for everyone else.

There are nine floors in the new 114m high building with a total floor space of 47,747 sq m and a 50-m wide umbrella-shaped roof to cap the building.

Its design is based on a nine-pointed star.

It also has a ‘lapau’ (ceremonial hall) capable of accommodating 300 people as well as an auditorium of similar capacity.

Designed to last for 100 useful years, it also includes a state banquet hall for 1,000 people, a carpark for 315 vehicles as well as a parade ground and a waterfront spread out within a 172-acre site.

The new DUN chamber can hold up to 108 members, each with his or her own office.

It is located on the eighth floor with a height of 27.7m, a diameter of 30.9m and a total area of 760 sq m.

It also has a capacity of 142 seats for civil servants, 86 in the VIP gallery and 106 in the public gallery.

It is also ripe for an opposition takeover, provided the opposition gets its act together and the people come to the realization that they will be far better off without Taib and his evil oppressive regime.

Sarawakians, wake up! You have nothing to lose but your poverty!

Step into the 21st Century and reclaim your birthright which has been stolen from you by Taib, his family and their cronies!


Senyum Kambing - Kata Tak Nak Kepada UMNO & BN!

Visit Kata Tak Nak Blog for fresh and different viewpoints and anecdotes of what UMNO and BN get up to.

As it says: "A man of principles will resist an evil system with his whole soul. Non-collaboration with evil is a sacred duty!" -- Gandhi

Malaysians, especially Sarawakians, do your sacred duty! Say no to UMNO, BN & Taib's evil regime!

Sunday, July 26, 2009

Why Are Some Dayaks Getting Their Cawats In A Twist?

Most, if not all, Dayaks don't wear cawats (loincloths) any more, except perhaps on ceremonial or festive occasions, which is good. So the question is why are some Dayaks getting their cawats in a twist about what Hadi Awang said, especially if what he said was true?

Or is it because what he said was true that they are getting their cawats in a twist? Or perhaps they didn't really understand what he said or meant to say and felt insulted for nothing?

Well, let's see.

Sarawak Headhunter's comments in red as usual.

Raging storm in the Land of the Hornbill over Hadi and PAS Print E-mail
Malaysian Mirror

Saturday, 25 July 2009 11:52

KUCHING – People of the Land of the Hornbill continue to make a storm over recent remarks by PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang that are seen hadi-awang.pngas disparaging to the Dayaks and all Sarawakians.

If his remarks are "seen" as disparaging to the Dayaks, why drag other Sarawakians in as well? After all, not all Sarawakians once wore cawats. By the way, even Sarawak Headhunter's tribe did wear cawats - hey! that was the only fashion they knew in those days and nothing to be ashamed of, even today. And Sarawak Headhunter doesn't feel at all disparaged or insulted by Hadi's remarks and neither should any one else, least of all the Dayaks.

Obviously these are some BN idiots bent on causing mischief and sowing the seeds of discontent amongst the steadily growing opposition in Sarawak. Don't be fooled by such twists of the story. They lie as usual - they are not really insulted, just making political capital of what they want everyone to think is an insult.

A villager of Rumah Lagan Empit, Batang Ai, Zainie Ajie, said Hadi had crossed the line.

What line did Hadi cross? Was he telling a lie? Did he say it to insult anyone? Is the truth insulting? If any Dayaks really felt insulted, perhaps they should mend the error of their ways and stop supporting oppression of their own people by Taib and his regime.

“Hadi should apologise to the people of Lubok Antu and the Dayaks as a whole for making us look uncivilised. Next time when he talks, he should watch what he says. Don’t make any further sensitive comments,” he told the Borneo Post.

Did Hadi really want to make the people of Lubok Antu and the Dayaks as a whole look uncivilised? Was that his point? Again, why should anyone feel sensitive above Hadi's remarks unless they were true?

Zainie felt that the Dayak people should also take Hadi’s comments as a challenge.

Yes, of course, a challenge to overthrow Taib's regime and the unholy BN government as a whole! For the benefit and prosperity of all Dayaks and Sarawakians!

'We are not like before - uneducated and downtrodden'

“Dayaks in the rural areas must work to make sure that strangers like Hadi can see that we are not like before - uneducated and downtrodden,” he said.

This must be a rich educated Iban talking, one of the minority who have benefited from Taib's regime and who has not had his land taken away from him like many of his uneducated and downtrodden brothers. If he is not rich or educated, that is even worse. He must be stupid.

Does he think that Hadi is really that stupid to look down on the Dayaks? Or that Hadi doesn't know the actual condition of the Dayaks?

In another development, the Batang Ai Youth wing of Parti Rakyat Sarawak said they are going to burn PAS flags on Sunday.

Its deputy chief Edwin Raoh said they are very angry that over the ‘cawat’ remarks made by Hadi, which “insult the dignity of the Iban people.”

What dignity? Is there any dignity in continuing to support an oppressive regime which only cares for the rich and to beg for crumbs from their table? Is there any dignity in continuing to remain so stupid?

“We are very upset and we are very offended. We are planning to burn PAS flags,” he was quoted as saying in the Borneo Post Saturday.

You might as well burn your own longhouses down, you idiots! Taib's regime will be tearing your longhouses down one by one anyway and giving NCR lands to his family and cronies if the Dayaks continue to support the BN in the next state elections.

Why is it that you are not upset or offended by this, which has been happening and is still happening?

How opposition leaders see them

He hoped that with the burning of the flags, the people of Lubok Antu and Engkilili would realise how opposition leaders really saw them.

jawah-gerang-2.jpgHadi had said in a report in news portal Malaysiakini on July 11 that the opposition lost in the Batang Ai by-election on April 7 because the voters did not know how to vote and they were still wearing cawat (loincloth).

What Hadi meant, Sarawak Headhunter thinks, is the cawat or backward mentality of the Dayaks, who in spite of being the victims of Taib's regime, still supported their oppressors and victimizers. Then again, perhaps the voters of Lubok Antu were smarter than either side thought they were.

See Sarawak Headhunter's posting here, where he said: "There is a factor that both BN and PKR underestimate, and that is the collective intelligence of the voters.

The voters of Batang Ai are not stupid. They understood full well the dilemma that this by-election put them in - a vote for PKR which had only "Dayakism" on its agenda would have made them a target for discrimination by the BN until at least the next state elections, while a vote for the BN would mean that they had to swallow their Dayak pride yet again and accept the "goodies" offered to them by the BN, tempting enough as these were.

Do you think that the Ibans of Batang Ai still don't know what Taib and his bunch of rampaging rapists, pillagers and looters have done throughout Sarawak under the guise of the "politics of development" and how they and other Sarawakians have been abused, made use of and discriminated against by Taib's evil regime? All this is no longer news in Sarawak and has gone beyond the blogs".

PRS information chief Richard Wil Uban challenged Dayak leaders in the PKR and Pakatan Rakyat to make their stand on the issue, singling out Ngemah state assemblyman Gabriel Adit Demong and former Lubok Antu MP Jawah Gerang.

Hopefully these two will not fall into this trap.

Jawah had lost to political novice Malcolm Mussen Lamoh, representing Barisan Nasional, in the by-election. PAS, PKR, the DAP and the Sarawak National Party are members of Pakatan in Sarawak.

Wil Uban said Hadi must have surely known that Adit and Jawah are Ibans and yet he still made such derogatory comments about members of the community.

“I feel demoralised and looked down upon. We have been in Malaysia for 45 years and they are still talking about us as if we are cavemen.

And Taib's dispossessing your people of their land and bulldozing their longhouses is what if not forcing you to look for caves to live in? If there were valuable minerals or metals in those caves, Taib would probably force you out of the caves too.

batang ai election 2.jpg

“But what are Adit and Jawah going to do now that their friend in Pakatan has insulted their dignity and the dignity of the Ibans as a whole?

“What do they have to say?” he was quoted as asking by the Post.

Why should they say anything? Why should they feel that their dignity and that of the Ibans as a whole has been insulted? Taib insults the dignity of the Ibans and all other Sarawakians daily, and no one feels offended?

Wil Uban added that voters had the right to vote for whoever they chose and no one should think that those who supported the government or Barisan did so blindly.

Who are the fools?

“Voting is every eligible Malaysian’s right. I can vote for the opposition if I want to. But I vote for the government and it is not because I am a fool.

“It is those people who vote for the opposition, even when they have been receiving assistance from the government of the day, who are fools,” he said.

ALL governments exist for the purpose of assisting ALL their citizens, you fool! But if such assistance (little as it is in the case of Taib's regime) is used to justify oppression, then you would be a fool to continue voting for and supporting such a government.

He said he spent five days in Engkari to help campaign for the Barisan during the Batang Ai by-election and every longhouse along the Engkari river had tiled corridors, flush toilets and other amenities.

This is what this fool calls "development"?

“Where are the people wearing ‘cawat’ there? If Hadi doesn’t believe me, ask our Deputy Prime Minister (Muhyiddin Yassin) who visited the place during the by-election.

Obviously Hadi knows that the people don't literally wear cawats any more. Anyway, don't Dayaks wearing cawats still appear in official BN government tourist brouchures and cultural performances?

“But I wish to say this to all Dayaks of Sarawak, if we are marginalised it is because of people’s ignorance of our existence,” said Wil Uban.

Dayaks are marginalised because of their ignorance of Taib's regime's manipulation and oppression of their own people and other Sarawakians, or if they are not ignorant of this, then because of their own stupidity.

PRS secretary-general Wilfred Nissom said as far as he could see, no one cast their votes in their loincloths during the by-election.

Perhaps he couldn't see the invisible mental loincloths blocking their brains.

At the same time, he said there were not many spoilt votes so it must mean that the people there knew how to vote.

“Actually, I think that the people in Batang Ai are very smart because they know what a constituency under PAS or Pakatan is like. They have seen the level of development in Permatang Pauh (in Penang), so they decided to vote for the best, and that’s the Barisan,” said Nissom.

He can justify iot anyway he wants but the fact is that most rural areas of Sarawak inhabited by the Dayaks and non-Dayaks alike are still at least 30 years behind the rural areas of Malaya.

PAS world knows no Dayaks

In LUBOK ANTU, the Dayak population expressed their anger over Hadi’s remarks.

They felt that what Hadi had said was not a mere political issue, but had racial undertones bound to create much dissatisfaction particularly among the Ibans.

Now it has become a race issue! When will these BN politicians stop making everything into a racial issue? Again, don't let them fool you. If Hadi is a racist, then of course he doesn't deserve any support from the Dayaks or anyone else, but if he is not (which Sarawak Headhunter believes he is not), then the real racists are those making a big issue out of this in an attempt to discredit the opposition, thereby allowing Taib to continue to divide ands rule the Dayaks.

Do you really think this is about race, or about lust for power, position and wealth, irrespective of race?

Village leader Sirai Medol from Rumah Jubang, Sebangki Panjai, said political leaders like Hadi should know the background of each race in Malaysia, particularly the different ethnic groups.

He said Hadi made the remarks because of his ignorance of Malaysia outside his small world of PAS.

He said Hadi was also insensitive to Ibans because he knew very little of the contributions of this ethnic group, who fought against Communist terrorists and helped in the creation of Malaysia.

“Therefore, Dayaks must reject Hadi and PAS because if he and his party should ever come into power, we will be seen as mere rubbish,” he said.

Dayaks are already seen as mere rubbish by Taib.

No space in Dayaks' hearts

Sirai stressed that whoever supported Hadi in this matter must be rejected by Dayaks, saying that Hadi and those who shared his views must not be given any space in the hearts of Dayaks.

Councillor Temeling Juna from Rumah Jemat, Nanga 3, was shocked that a party leader like Hadi could make such remarks.

He said the opposition was deliberately trying to hurt the feelings of the people in Lubok Antu and in the Batang Ai constituency in general.

“They have run out of issues and they are now thinking of other ways to turn the people away from the Barisan. Since the Batang Ai by-election, the opposition has been unhappy with the Barisan’s victory and that’s why they make such statements,” he said.

“If they really want to know what our life is like, they should come here and see for themselves. See whether we are still running around in cawat as he claimed,” he added in a statement to the paper.

All sadly but typically missing the point, perhaps purposely. Why should the opposition deliberately want to hurt the feelings of the very people whose support they need? Everyone, including Hadi, knows very well that the Dayaks no longer "run around" in cawats. But that doesn't mean that the Dayaks have yet managed to outgrow their cawat mentality, just like many Malays (read "UMNO Malays") have still not managed to outgrow their feudal mentality.

Do the Dayaks still want to get their cawats in a twist over this purported insult?

Dayaks, throw away your cawats for good - get rid of your slavish mentality!


Saturday, July 25, 2009

To Those Degenerate Malays Who Have Made UMNO Their God

You claim to be Muslims, yet persist in upholding and perpetuating the disgusting racist agenda of UMNO. How does this conform to Islam and what does that make you? The position of Islam is very clear on this subject.

As the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said in his last sermon: “All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor has a non-Arab any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black nor has a black any superiority over a white except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not, therefore, do injustice to yourselves.

Remember, one day you will appear before ALLAH and answer for your deeds. So beware, do not stray from the path of righteousness after I am gone”.

Yet you as Muslims have broken the Muslim brotherhood and strayed from the path of righteousness by supporting, encouraging and helping UMNO to implement its insidious subversive racist agenda of purportedly upholding “Malay rights” not only against other Malays but all other Malaysians as well.

You know very well what UMNO in pursuit of this subversive agenda has done to the country, yet you persist in forcing such an agenda down the throats of other right-thinking Malaysians, Malays and non-Malays alike, in the perversely mistaken belief that whatever UMNO does is right.

In doing so, you have made UMNO your God and the Devil your Guide. This is syirik. And it is wrong. And you are doing injustice to yourselves.

The sad fact is that since independence, UMNO’s agenda has resulted in many lost opportunities for the vast majority of the people and vicious exploitation by a few opportunistic and greedy UMNO Malays and their BN cronies.

Untold hundreds of billions of ringgit have been siphoned out of the economic system in the implementation of UMNO’s subversive agenda.

UMNO has not even paid for its own building, the PWTC Complex, and the amounts owing by it have had to be surreptitiously absorbed and written off by Bank Bumiputra and Malayan Banking. Whose money was it? Are you not ashamed of this, or perhaps it is something that you degenerate UMNO Malays are proud of?

Has UMNO really given back anything much to the people in return, other than some crumbs and even that grudgingly? The poor Malays in the mean time do not know any better and continue to support a corrupt, inept, exploitative and divisive UMNO government whose programmes do nothing more than regard the country’s resources as their own to do with as they please.

The whole political, legislative, judicial, administrative and economic process of the nation has been hijacked by all means, mostly foul, to maintain this corrupt UMNO regime in power at the total expense of the people, who are fed lies and all kinds of misinformation in the name of governance and government.

You disingenuously maintain that all institutions of government, which should be run for the benefit of all Malaysians, are “Malay” institutions, even if most other right-thinking Malays themselves would not agree with you. Why not just be truthful and call them “UMNO” institutions since their only function is to ensure the continued survival, empowerment and enrichment of UMNO and degenerate Malays like you?

Just because you degenerate Malays, and those non-Malays whom you have been able to convince, hoodwink or otherwise compel, uphold corruption, misgovernance, theft, injustice and all kinds of other wrongs, including murder, does not make any of it right.

But that is the UMNO whom you have made your God.

You will only regret it when you have to answer before the One True God on Judgment Day.

Don’t think that you can hide behind your race, as you know very well that this has absolutely nothing to do with race. It has everything to do with right and wrong, truth and justice.

Then it will be too late to realize that UMNO was the Devil, not God. And it was degenerate Malays like you who made it your God.

You are a disgrace to the Malays and worst of all to all other Muslims.

Repent before it is too late, change your evil ways, be pious and do good deeds so that the One True God may forgive you.

UMNO will never change.


Thursday, July 23, 2009

The Perversity Of Gani Patail & Malaysian Rogue Judges

From The Malaysian Insider, Wed. 22nd July, 2009

JULY 22 — I must apologise for the delay in giving this critique. The Court of Appeal gave its decision on July 2. I received the “Outline of Reasons” from Ngan Siong Hing only last Friday, July 17. Without him supplying me with a copy of the judgment of the Court of Appeal I would not be able to write this critique. Also as I do not have access to a law library I depend a lot on his generosity to get the legal material that I need to write my essays for ordinary people to understand what the judges are talking about. This is to enable the common people of this country to judge the judges for themselves.

The whole case can be understood just by reading sections 418A(1) and (2), and 376(1) and (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Power corrupts

David Pannick in his book Judges, OUP (1987), wrote at p. 76:

In all societies throughout history, judges have occasionally been adversely affected by their power. An early example occurs in the biblical story of Daniel and Susanna. Two elders of the community were appointed to serve as judges. They saw Susanna walking in her husband’s garden “and they were obsessed with lust for her”. When she resisted their advances they falsely accused her of infidelity to her husband. “As they were elders of the people and judges, the assembly believed them and condemned her to death”. A young man named Daniel protested that an enquiry should be made into the judges’ allegations. He accused them of giving “unjust decisions, condemning the innocent and acquitting the guilty”. Under his careful cross-examination, the judges were proved to be liars: Daniel and Susanna in The Apocrypha.

The English Bench has had its fair share of bad judges. … In the seventeenth century, the Bench “was cursed by a succession of ruffians in ermine [most notably Jeffreys and Scroggs (Sir William)], who, for the sake of court [royal] favour, violated the principles of law, the precepts of religion, and the dictates of humanity”: John Lord Campbell, Lives of the Lord Chancellors (5th edn, 1868), vol. 4, p. 416.

The misuse of power from whatever quarter it may come

In The Family Story, Butterworths (1981), Lord Denning said at p. 179:

The law itself should provide adequate and efficient remedies for the abuse or misuse of power from whatever quarter it may come. No matter who it is — who is guilty of the abuse or misuse. Be it government, national or local. Be it trade unions. Be it the press. Be it management. Be it labour. Whoever it be, no matter how powerful, the law should provide a remedy for the abuse or misuse of power. Else the oppressed will get to the point when they will stand it no longer. They will find their own remedy. There will be anarchy. To my mind it is fundamental in our society that a judge should do his utmost to see that powers are not abused or misused. If they come into conflict with the freedom of the individual — or with any other of our fundamental freedoms — then it is the province of the judge to hold the balance between the competing interests. In holding that balance the judges must put freedom first.

And at p. 180, this was what Lord Denning said in 1949 at the Hamlyn lectures:

Reviewing the position generally, the chief point which emerges is that we have not yet settled the principles upon which to control the new powers of the executive. No one will suppose that the executive will never be guilty of the sins that are common to all of us. You may be sure that they will sometimes do things which they ought not to do: and will not do things that they ought to do. But if and when wrongs are thereby suffered by any of us, what is the remedy? Our procedure for securing our personal freedom is efficient, but our procedure for preventing the abuse is not. Just as the pick and shovel is no longer suitable for the winning of coal, so also the procedure of mandamus, certiorari, and actions on the case are not suitable for the winning of freedom in the new age. They must be replaced by new and up-to-date machinery, by declarations, injunctions, and actions for negligence: and, in judicial matters, by compulsory powers to order a case stated. This is not a task for Parliament. Our representatives there cannot control the day-to-day activities of the many who administer the manifold activities of the State: nor can they award damages to those who are injured by any abuses. The courts must do this. Of all the great tasks that lie ahead, this is the greatest. Properly exercised the new powers of the executive lead to the welfare State: but abused they lead to the totalitarian State. None such must ever be allowed in this country. We have in our time to deal with changes which are of constitutional significance to those which took place 300 years ago. Let us prove ourselves equal to the challenge.

“That lecture was given in 1949. Now, 30 years or so later [The Family Story was published in 1981], I think we can say that we have achieved what I then hoped for,” wrote Lord Denning.

“We have now new and up-to-date machinery for the winning of freedom.” he wrote. “We have declarations, injunctions, actions for negligence, and judicial review. All that is needed now is for the judges — and the Bar — to get to know how to use it.”

I write about this in order to show how the common law was developed by great judges and Malaysia is a common law country. So that most of us will know how and why we have inherited a great deal from the English common law which is the cradle of it all. The common law is mostly the experience and the combined wisdom of great judges throughout history. It took the British judges 700 or so years to have their common law it is today. The US has a common law history of about 250 years. In Malaysia we have about 50 years since independence. Let us be humble and learn from the mistakes of others.

But for the moment it seems that our present crop of judges have stopped in their tracks as far as the development of the common law is concerned. Some of whom, especially those in the higher echelons, are sorely lacking in competency.

All that is needed now is for the judges to know how to use it

The Bar certainly knew how to use the new machinery to fight the abuse or misuse of power by the powers that be. But not so the judges of the Court of Appeal in Anwar Ibrahim v PP. But first, let me show you the relevant provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code that apply to this case. I start with section 418A(1) and (2), thus:

418A. (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 417 and subject to section 418B, the Public Prosecutor may in any particular case triable by a criminal court subordinate to the High Court issue a certificate specifying the High Court in which the proceedings are to be instituted or transferred and requiring that the accused person be caused to appear or be produced before such High Court.

(2) The power of the Public Prosecutor under subsection (1) shall be exercised by him personally.

This draconian piece of legislation gives the Public Prosecutor the power to transfer any criminal case triable by a subordinate court to a High Court of the Public Prosecutor’s choice. But who is the Public Prosecutor? For this we have to refer to section 376 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It reads:

376. (1) The Attorney-General shall be the Public Prosecutor and shall have the control and direction of all criminal proceedings under this Code.

(2) The Solicitor-General shall have all powers of a Deputy Public Prosecutor and shall act as Public Prosecutor in case of the absence or inability to act of the Attorney-General.

Subsection (2) allows the Solicitor-General to act as Public Prosecutor in case of the inability of the Attorney-General to act as such. This means that if the Attorney-General is disqualified to act on account of bias, as in this case, then in such a situation he is prevented from acting as the Public Prosecutor in a 418A application. In which case the Solicitor-General shall act as Public Prosecutor unless the Solicitor-General is himself tainted with bias — in this case for supporting the Attorney-General for what he had done that amounts to bias. But justice is still served as the defendant can still be tried before a subordinate criminal court. We are entitled to question the motive of the Attorney-General. Why should he, in the mantle of Public Prosecutor, be so insistent and selective in the choice of a court to hear the Anwar Ibrahim sodomy case? To everyone in this country the charge of sodomy against Anwar Ibrahim is no different from any sodomy charge against any other wrongdoer, unless, the Attorney-General as Public Prosecutor wants to have a particular High Court to hear the case against Anwar Ibrahim. But why so? What is so special about Anwar Ibrahim? Is he the Attorney-General’s or someone’s nemesis? Such an act creates an impression to the general public that the prosecution wants to ensure a conviction by choosing the correct court to hear the case. To all of us right-thinking Malaysians this is unfair and unjust treatment of anyone who is accused of a crime. If my reader has the patience to read this article to the end you will be shocked to learn of the real motive of the Attorney-General’s insistence on a High Court of his choice.

The judgment of the Court of Appeal in Anwar Ibrahim v PP

The judges of this Court of Appeal are Abdull Hamid Embong, Abu Samah Nordin and Jeffrey Tan Kok Wha JJCA. Remember their names for posterity so that the bad judges of this country will be etched indelibly in our memory. The judgment of the court was delivered by Hamid Embong JCA. It was a unanimous decision so that the travesty of justice caused by the decision implicates all of them. He said in his judgment which is in numbered paragraphs:

52. In signing this certificate, the PP cannot be said to be exercising a quasi-judicial function, but merely an administrative one, and one that only he can exercise. (see PP v Oh Keng Seng (1976) 2 MLJ)

53. In this case, we are of the considered opinion that the rule that a person under a suspicion of bias should not act as an adjudicator is not applicable to the act of the PP in signing this certificate. We would apply the exception that natural justice may be overridden by a statutory provision as enunciated in Franklin & Ors v Minister of Town and Country Planning (1948) AC 87, an exception which is applicable in both administrative and legislative processes.

54. We rule that, in this instance, despite the allegations of bias and conflict of interest against him, the PP being the specific and only officer authorised by law to sign the s. 418A certificate, may do so. His act cannot be impugned by reason of the imputed bias or conflict of interest. (see Mohd Zainal Abidin bin Abdul Mutalib v Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Minister of Home Affairs & Anor (1989) 3 MLJ 170).

Let me now expose the fallacy of the reasoning of the judgment of this Court of Appeal

In paragraph 52 (see above) the judge, Hamid Embong JCA, said that the Public Prosecutor was not exercising a quasi-judicial but an administrative function which only he as Public Prosecutor can exercise. This is not the law. The misuse of power may come from any quarter; it need not be from a person sitting in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity. As Lord Denning has put it: “No one will suppose that the executive will never be guilty of the sins that are common to all of us. You may be sure that they will sometimes do things which they ought not to do: and will not do things that they ought to do. But if and when wrongs are thereby suffered by any of us, what is the remedy?” Nowadays there is always a remedy against the wrongdoings of public officials. The Attorney-General in this case is no more than a salaried civil servant — he is subject to the remedy against the wrongdoings of a public official. His employer is the Government of Malaysia and the CEO is the Prime Minister. On the other hand an English Attorney-General is a minister in his own right and an elected representative of the House of Commons.

In The Queen v Gaming Board for Great Britain, exparte Benaim and Khaida [1970] 2 QB 417, 430 Lord Denning MR said:

It is not possible to lay down rigid rules as to when the principles of natural justice are to apply: nor as to their scope and extent. Everything depends on the subject-matter: see what Tucker LJ said in Russell v Norfolk (Duke of) [1949] 1 All ER 109, 118 and Lord Upjohn in Durayappah v Fernando [1967] 2 AC 337, 349. At one time it was said that the principles only apply to judicial proceedings and not to administrative proceedings. That heresy was scotched in Ridge v Baldwin [1964] AC 40, 77-79 per Lord Reid, 133 per Lord Hodson.

Ridge v Baldwin was a decision of the House of Lords. It was followed and applied by the Federal Court in Ketua Pengarah Kastam v Ho Kwan Seng [1977] 2 MLJ 152. This makes the common law decision of Ridge v Baldwin a part of the common law of this country.

So now we know it is utter rubbish to say that the principles of natural justice apply only to a judicial or quasi-judicial function. Ridge v Baldwin and Ketua Pengarah Kastam v Ho Kwan Seng have changed all that. And it is also rubbish to assume that only the Attorney-General can be the Public Prosecutor. See my explanation of section 376(1) and (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code which I have discussed earlier in this article.

Next is paragraph 53. In substance what this Court of Appeal is saying is that the Public Prosecutor is not an adjudicator so that the question of bias does not apply to him. As pointed out above that heresy has been scotched in the House of Lords’ decision of Ridge v Baldwin. He was merely doing his duty as Public Prosecutor, says the Court of Appeal, to put his signature which according to him is a mechanical act required of him by section 41 8A of the Criminal Procedure Code. But the question is, what if the Public Prosecutor acts in bad faith to transfer the case to the High Court of his choice? Surely, in such a situation the decision to transfer the case to a High Court of the Public Prosecutor’s choice cannot be allowed to stand on account of bias.

The Court of Appeal relied on Franklin & Ors v Minister of Town & Country Planning [1948] AC 87 where the headnote reads that the House of Lords has held that the Minister of Town and Country Planning has no judicial or quasi-judicial duty imposed on him, so that considerations of bias in the execution of such a duty are irrelevant, the sole question being whether or not he genuinely considered the report and the objections under the New Towns Act 1946. We know now that after Ridge v Baldwin in 1964, Franklin is no longer authority for any such proposition.

It is quite unbelievable that these judges of the Court of Appeal could ever dream of misleading the general public of this country by citing as authority a 1948 decision when they knew, as I am sure Haji Sulaiman or any competent counsel would have informed them, that Franklin is no longer good law. Not only that, Ridge v Baldwin in 1964 has been approved and applied by our Federal Court in Ketua Pengarah Kastam v Ho Kwan Seng, thus importing into the common law of Malaysia the English common law decision of Ridge v Baldwin.

Furthermore, they, the judges of this Court of Appeal, even try to mislead us by saying in paragraph 53: “We would apply the exception that natural justice may be overridden by a statutory provision as enunciated in Franklin & Ors v Minister of Town and Country Planning (1948) AC 87, an exception which is applicable in both administrative and legislative processes”. I have read through the judgment of Lord Thankerton, all 12 pages of it, many times over but I am unable to find the proposition of law that Hamid Embong JCA states in paragraph 53 of his “Outline of Reasons” was the ratio decidendi of Franklin. The Court of Appeal has put in words to the House of Lords’ decision in Franklin which were not found in the judgment of Lord Thankerton.

And now to paragraph 54. For the reasons given above, what the Court of Appeal says in paragraph 54 is not the law. Ridge v Baldwin in the House of Lords and our Federal Court in Ketua Pengarah Kastam v Ho Kwan Seng have scotched the heresy. If it can be shown that the Attorney-General had misused his power in the victimisation of Anwar Ibrahim that is enough to disqualify him from acting as the Public Prosecutor to sign the certificate under section 418A of the Criminal Procedure Code.

The most shocking condemnation of all

Finally, I will leave this to your own judgment. The following is taken from the judgment of Steve Shim, who was then the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak in the case of Zainur bin Zakaria v Public Prosecutor [2001] 3 MLJ 604, 613-614:

To my absolute horror and disappointment Datuk Abdul Gani Patail used the meeting and the death sentence under s 57 of the ISA as a bargaining tool to gather evidence against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. He had with him the letter I had written to you and copied to him. He was waving the letter about and kept on saying, repeatedly, “I am not impressed” and suggesting that he would not be impressed with my plea to a charge under the Arms Act but instead he wanted more. This “more”, and it came across very loud and clear because Datuk Abdul Gani Patail laid it out in very clear and definite terms, was:

1. That Nallakaruppan was now facing the death sentence.

2. That there were other charges also under the ISA that he could prefer against Nallakaruppan but that if they (A-G’s chambers?) hanged him once under the present charge what need would there be to charge him for anything else.

3. That in exchange for a reduction of the present charge to one under the Arms Act, he wanted Nallakaruppan to cooperate with them and to give information against Anwar Ibrahim, specifically on matters concerning several married women. Datuk Abdul Gani kept changing the number of women and finally settled on five, three married and two unmarried.

4. That he would expect Nallakaruppan to testify against Anwar in respect of these women.

I was shocked that Datuk Abdul Gani even had the gall to make such a suggestion to me. He obviously does not know me. I do not approve of such extraction of evidence against ANYONE, not even or should I say least of all, a beggar picked up off the streets. A man’s life, or for the matter, even his freedom, is not a tool for prosecution agencies to use as a bargaining chip. No jurisprudential system will condone such an act. It is blackmail and extortion of the highest culpability and my greatest disappointment is that a once independent agency that I worked with some 25 years ago and of which I have such satisfying memories has descended to such levels in the creation and collection of evidence. To use the death threat as a means to the extortion of evidence that is otherwise not there (why else make such a demand?) is unforgivable and surely must in itself be a crime, leave alone a sin, of the greatest magnitude. Whether his means justify, the end that he seeks are matters that Datuk Abdul Gani will have to wrestle with within his own conscience.

You can read the rest of it from the law reports. I cannot stomach this anymore. Possibly you can approach a website to show the entire judgment of Shim CJ on their portal with the permission of MLJ or any other law report.

All I can say is that, if Gani Patail is a member of an Inns of Court he would be disbarred as a barrister.

I am sickened by the perversity of the office of the Public Prosecutor.

N.H. Chan

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

NCR Landowners Have Good Reason Not To Trust LCDA

S'wak land owners resist joint-venture 'land grab'

Joseph Tawie
Jul 16, 09

Native Customary Rights (NCR) landowners from some 60 longhouses in the Lower Julau and Upper Bintangor areas in the Sarikei Division have registered their strongest yet objection against the inclusion of their plots as part of an oil palm plantation joint project by the Land Custody and Development Authority (LCDA) and Sime Darby Plantations.

In a statement emailed to Malaysiakini, TAHABAS (Jaringan Tanah Hak Bangsa Asal Sarawak) or Sarawak NCR landowners network secretary Nyumbang Anak Barau said that the landowners who attended a dialogue session on July 9 had told LCDA and Sime Darby Plantations to exclude their land.

However, despite their protest, a memorandum of understanding (MOU) was signed between Sime Darby plantations and the LCDA to develop 20,000 hectares of NCR land.

The landowners from 109 longhouses were represented by the LCDA.

Sarawak's land development minister James Masing witnessed the signing of the agreement.

Nyumbang said: "I wish to reiterate our stand as the affected landowners that we are against the implementation of this NCR land development policy in our areas, where LCDA and Sime Darby respectively own 10 percent and 60 percent shares in a joint-venture company (JVC).

He said that the remaining 30 percent is supposed to be "owned by us, the landowners who have not agreed to this policy".

Major points of discontent

"We are not against NCR land developments through oil palm schemes per se, but we cannot accept this particular land development policy," he said and outlined the main points of disagreement.

He said: "We are not confident that LCDA can competently and impartially protect our rights in the JVC. We see LCDA has vested interests, and the mechanisms to be employed are not convincing enough to protect our rights;

Secondly, he said, the LCDA is being given an equivalent of "dictatorial power which is too strong for our liking, while our rights are unfairly and vastly diminished."

Thirdly, they do not trust LCDA, and "we are against LCDA becoming our Trustee. LCDA's records as known by us have failed to dispel our fear of not receiving fair bonuses and dividends later."

He said that so-called 30 percent share that is offered to may not eradicate poverty but "we may even become poorer by losing our lands forever after signing the trust deed".

Nyumbang said the current policy does not satisfactorily provide a guarantee to return those lands to their heirs upon the expiry of the joint venture after 60 years.

"This fear is genuine and not unfounded. And this is reflected by over 200 cases in our courts involving NCR lands. With such numbers, why are we not to worry?" he asked.

"Incidentally, the people from over 60 longhouses living in Lower Julau and Upper Bintangor and those along Kanowit-Julau-Durin road formed an action committee in 2007 to counteract an earlier attempt to extract timber on these same lands by a company issued with a provisional lease by the government," he said.

Loss of land

Nyumbang said that in the event that the joint-venture company fails to settle its debts by a certain period, the land owners will then be forced to use their land as collaterals.

"We could lose our land," he said and that working as a labourer earning a rate of RM15 per day or RM330 per month is hardly sufficient. It is well below the poverty line."

He said due to the absence of land titles, some of the idle NCR lands may not seem to offer them much profit. But they are a source of unpolluted vegetables, meat and fish in addition to giving them priceless building materials and other jungle produce.

"Moreover by safe-keeping these lands temporarily, we can therefore hope that one day our next generation with better education and means will be able to develop them better," he said.

Senyum Kambing - Mempertuhankan UMNO

Sunday, July 19, 2009

UMNO & BN's Disgusting Racist Agenda

Did I not tell you? PDF Print E-mail
Posted by admin
Sunday, 19 July 2009 18:05


The Chinese call these people running dogs. I would not call them that though. I think it is not right to call them running dogs. I love dogs. I think dogs are lovely creatures. Why should we honour these 13 non-Malay members of Barisan Nasional by calling them running dogs?


Raja Petra Kamarudin

Umno papers slam MACC critics in Teoh’s death
The Malaysian Insider, 19 July 2009

Umno-controlled newspapers, Berita Harian and Mingguan Malaysia, today slammed critics for demonising the country’s graft-busters over Teoh Beng Hock’s death, with one suggesting there is an agenda to weaken Malay-controlled institutions.

Both newspapers accused the opposition of politicising the political secretary’s death on July 16, with Mingguan saying the federal opposition Pakatan Rakyat (PR) was using the incident to divert attention away from internal problems and weaknesses.

But Berita Harian suggested the agenda was to weaken Malay-controlled institutions in the article, “Kematian Teoh timbulkan pelbagai spekulasi politik”, written by the New Straits Times group managing editor Zainul Ariffin Isa.

He wrote that political opportunism can turn grief into political capital, and death can be made a catalyst to stoke anger and racial sentiments.

Inilah muka Melayu haprak bernama Zainul Ariffin Isa yang cuba memutarbelitkan kebenaran demi agenda perkauman Tuhan UMNOnya. This is the face of the degenerate Malay by the name of Zainul Ariffin Isa who is trying to twist the truth to serve the racist interests of his God, UMNO.

“It is not just the Chinese or supporters of the Pakatan Rakyat who know anger and seek justice.

“Suspicions have been raised especially among the non-Malays that MACC, which like other departments have many Malay officers, selectively chose non-Malays to be investigated,” he wrote.

The new boss of the Umno-owned New Straits Times group did not, however, address complaints raised by two DAP men who were also, like Teoh, brought in for questioning.

The two DAP men, one a Chinese and the other a mixed Malay-Chinese, claimed racial insults were hurled at them by the MACC officers.

Like Teoh, both men were not suspects, but “witnesses,” according to MACC officers.

So far, leaders of the PR alliance, led by Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, have not referred to race in their statements demanding the MACC be held responsible for Teoh’s death.

Zainul appeared to suggest that Teoh’s death was an accident and that the MACC officer involved was Malay when he wrote in Berita Harian that “when a victim of an accident was non-Malay, who was previously investigated by a Malay, the speculation is great.”

By suggesting anti-Malay sentiment in Teoh’s death, he also appeared to suggest that government departments were Malay-based institutions rather than a non-partisan civil service.

“Why did the Selangor MB, a Malay, question those of his own race to act fairly?” Zainul wrote.

Mingguan Malaysia, which is also owned by Umno, also attacked the PR alliance for politicising the death.

The newspaper said the controversy could not be resolved through demonstrations or wild accusations.

Mingguan suggested instead that the opposition was using Teoh’s death to distract attention from its own problems.


I have tried to explain this in the past but it has fallen on deaf ears. Some even think I may be seeing ghosts in the shadows. But I have attended enough Umno gatherings in my lifetime and have enough Umno friends in high places to know what I am talking about. Nevertheless, most of those who disagree with my views are those who comment from the comfort and safety of their homes and offices and would most likely not be at the Kelana Jaya stadium today. This means, basically, they do not really have their ears to the ground and comment without the benefit of having their fingers on the pulse.

Let me put this to you in plain words and as clearly as I can. Umno considers the government machinery as a Malay vehicle. The government machinery -- whether it be the Election Commission (SPR), police, the anti-corruption agency (MACC), the Information Ministry (that controls the mainstream media and radio and television stations), institutions of learning (from kindergartens right up to universities), etc. -- are there to serve Malay interests. And make no mistake about this.

There is a government propaganda outfit called Biro Tata Negara (BTN) whose job is to conduct courses and deliver lectures around the clock to government officers and students before and after they enter university. BTN’s main focus is to indoctrinate Malays with the idea that Malaysia is a Malay country. The Chinese, Indians and ‘others’ are immigrants. After allowing them citizenship status these Chinese, Indians and ‘others’ now demonstrate ingratitude and start demanding all sorts of unreasonable things such as equal rights -- forgetting that they are mere guests in this country and are therefore second-class and not first-class citizens.

The army is Malay. The police is Malay. The universities and all institutions of higher learning are Malay. In fact, you name it and it is Malay. There are no two ways about it. And if the Chinese, Indians and ‘others’ refuse to accept this then they should leave this country and go back to the country where they originally came from -- be it China, India, or wherever.

Okay, you may argue that today’s Chinese, Indians and ‘others’ were all born in Malaysia. None were born in China, India, or wherever. Their grandparents or great grandparents may have been born in China, India, or wherever. But almost all the Chinese, Indians and ‘others’ were born here in Malaysia. So that automatically makes them citizens and not immigrants although they may be descendants of immigrants.

I mean, every single US citizen (other than the native Indian) is a descendant of immigrants even if they themselves may have been born in the US and did not migrate to America. So, grandchildren or great grandchildren of immigrants are not called immigrants but are called US citizens. And all US citizens are regarded equal. No US citizen has more rights than another US citizens based on which country his or her forefathers came from.

But that is in the US. That does not apply to Malaysia. In Malaysia, the descendants of the immigrants who came from one of the Indonesian islands have more rights than the descendants of the immigrants who came from China, India or any territory that is not part of the Indonesian islands. That is how it works in Malaysia.

And the Malays are constantly reminded about this. And all those descendants of immigrants not from one of the Indonesian islands will also be constantly reminded that they are guests in this country, do not have equal rights, and are classified as second-class citizens akin to an immigrant.

And that is why Chinese, Indians and ‘others’ are treated more brutally when arrested or detained. They not only suffer verbal abuse and racial slurs but will be physically abused as well. And that is why the death under detention rate for those who are not descendants of immigrants from one of the Indonesian islands is very high. Most, however, die ‘sudden deaths’ or collapse and die for no apparent reason other than medically related ‘natural causes’.

Let me make it clear, again. The Malaysian government is a Malay government. The government’s job is to serve the Malays and protect Malay interests. Yesterday, the Deputy Prime Minister said so in case anyone may have forgotten this. And this will remain so as long as Barisan Nasional stays in office. Umno has promised the people this.

And any Malay who wants to change this arrangement is a traitor to his race. His or her citizenship should be withdrawn and he or she should be expelled from the country. This, Umno has made very clear more than once.

The descendants of immigrants from China, India or any territory not within the Indonesian islands have no problem with this though. They accept the fact that they are second-class citizens under the classification of pendatang. And that is why they are members of Barisan Nasional. And the job of these 13 non-Malay members of Barisan Nasional is to ensure that Umno stays in power although Umno has less than half the seats in Parliament. On its own Umno is out of office. With the 13 other non-Malay members giving Umno the mandate it can stay in office.

The Chinese call these people running dogs. I would not call them that though. I think it is not right to call them running dogs. I love dogs. I think dogs are lovely creatures. Why should we honour these 13 non-Malay members of Barisan Nasional by calling them running dogs?

Saturday, July 18, 2009