Thursday, April 30, 2009

Zambry the zombies ...we really don't know what are you doing....

Until the court confirms you are the legitimate Perak Menteri Besar, sad to say you are still illegal at this point of time. Till then, please do not do something that will hurt the feelings of people in Perak......

Zambry, Camry, all in a hurry — The Malaysian Insider

APRIL 30 — Datuk Seri Zambry Abdul Kadir will begin May by trying to sack Perak State Assembly Speaker V. Sivakumar and auction off 15 Toyota Camrys bought by the toppled Pakatan Rakyat state government.

All this while Zambry has yet to get the courts to confirm whether his appointment as Perak mentri besar is legal notwithstanding the royal endorsement in early February when Barisan Nasional grabbed the state from Pakatan Rakyat.

While sacking Sivakumar is politically expedient to seal his status within the state assembly, which by his count must meet by May 13, putting the Camrys under the auctioneer's hammer smacks of haste ahead of any court verdict.

By moving in a hurry, either the Pangkor assemblyman is prescient or is absolutely convinced that despite the weight of legal opinion and precedents in Malaysia and the Commonwealth, any empanelled court will decide in his favour.

Such confidence is good although it is best spent on getting the Perak Ruler to agree to fresh state elections and cut through the Gordian knot that has tied up the state in a constitutional crisis and political impasse.

Also, pushing off the perfectly-serviceable and three-month-old Toyota Camrys, all registered on Jan 9 just weeks before the putsch, makes no sense. Especially if Zambry says he is doing this as a matter of national pride to drive a Proton car.

Aliran president P. Ramakrishnan called the auction “foolish and puerile” but pointedly asked what national pride is Zambry talking about, saying he can only claim that if he had the legitimate mandate from the Perak electorate.

"He cannot talk about pride and dignity after toppling the rightful government through the help of corrupt politicians and unsavoury characters," Ramakrishnan said in a statement this week.

Ramakrishnan castigated Zambry for talking about national pride when he had kept quiet about Terengganu's decision to buy Mercedes Benz to replace their Proton Perdanas that were said to experience problems.

"The hypocrisy displayed in the car episode is nauseating. It will rankle and smoulder for eternity until this injustice is rectified. Rest assured that Perakians will long remember this hypocrisy and they will punish Umno without fail. The rallying cry for the next general election will be, “Remember Perak — Remember the injustice!” Ramakrishnan added.

While Zambry is in a hurry to get rid of the last vestiges of Pakatan Rakyat rule, his attention must surely be on administering the state for the remainder of just four years before the next general elections, unless state elections are called.

In an earlier interview with The Malaysia Insider, he said he cannot afford mistakes as it will be picked upon immediately.

"That is why I am trying to be very objective in carrying out my responsibility and the most important thing is to deliver," he added.

Wise words. Deliver. Not the Toyota Camrys but the promises made once legally ratified as the mentri besar.

N.H. Chan: An inconvenient judge

Chan tells why he feels compelled to speak out. — Picture by Choo Choy May

By Debra Chong

IPOH, April 30 — Chan Nyarn Hoi lives in a modest two-storey semi-detached house in a quiet lane near the state stadium in Perak with his wife, a dog and seven large Japanese carp.

At 74 years old and with ruddy smooth cheeks under a full head of snowy white hair, few would connect him to the acerbic, no-nonsense former judge Datuk N.H. Chan, who has in the last couple of months done the unthinkable: fire away missives at judges who have trampled on the Federal Constitution in deciding issues related to the power grab in Perak. His lengthy articles have reminded Malaysians of a time gone by when towering individuals sat on the Bench and simplified the Perak constitutional crisis for the common man.

Still seething over the events that transpired in Perak and decisions of the apex court, he says that if Malaysians are upset with the state of the judiciary and think that the present crop of judges are not up to the mark, they should exercise the power of their vote to change the state of affairs in the country.

Born in Ipoh on March 27, 1935, Chan was admitted to the Bar in 1961. He was a lawyer for almost two decades before becoming a High Court judge and moving to Kuala Lumpur.

He was among the first batch of High Court judges to be elevated to the Court of Appeal, set up in 1994 to act as an intermediate court between the High Court and the apex court.

Chan's first book, “Judging the Judges”, was published in 2007 and is a collection of his articles for the Perak Bar. Only 1,000 copies were published.

His second book, “How to Judge the Judges”, is expected to come out some time in the middle of the year. The final draft has just been sent to the publishers. They wanted him to include the Perak saga as well, but because it is ongoing, he had to draw a line somewhere. He has included some information in the epilogue.

In an exclusive interview, the former judge, who was recommended to the Bench by none other than Sultan Azlan Shah, the Sultan of Perak and a central figure in the present crisis, tells The Malaysian Insider why he feels compelled to speak out.

Q: Unlike many former judges, you have been very vocal in your criticisms against the judiciary. What drives you?

A: In the first place, I am not against the judiciary. I am sure there are some good judges around, only they have not manifested themselves in the present constitutional, should I say, crisis in Perak.

I expected James Foong JCA (as he then was, he is now a Federal Court judge) to do the right thing but he failed to do that. I suppose it takes great courage for a Court of Appeal judge who sat as a winger in the Federal Court to give a dissenting judgment.

Now, back to your question. When I became a judge I had to be true to my calling which is to know that the essence of justice is fair trial and the duty of the judge is to administer it according to law.

Lord Devlin in his book “The Judge”, wrote on page 4: “...impartiality and the appearance of it are the supreme judicial virtues. It is the verdict that matters, and if it is incorrupt, it is acceptable. To be incorrupt it must bear the stamp of a fair trial.”

And at page 85 he said: “The first — ought one to say the whole — duty of the judge is to administer justice according to law.”

Back to page 3, the book said: “What is the function of the judge? Professor Jaffe has a phrase for it — 'the disinterested application of known law' (Jaffe in his book “English and American Judges as Lawmakers”, page 13)”

This means that the judge's only duty is to do justice in the disinterested application of known law. Known law means basic law and the term includes both common law and statute law.

The judge who gives the right judgment but does not appear to be impartial is useless to the judicial process. After that, the judge's whole duty or function is to decide the case according to law on the admissible evidence before him.

And what do you call a judge who does not administer justice according to law? A renegade judge? So now you know why I am so vocal when I admonish the errant judges who did not apply unambiguous law as it stands.

Q: You have been especially blunt in your views over the issues in Perak. Why so?

A: You mean for calling a spade a spade? What do you call a judge who doesn't follow or apply easy to understand and unambiguous statute law as it stands?

Like Article 72(1) of the Federal Constitution which says: “The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court”.

This law applies to all members of the legislative assembly — it does not matter if you are DAP or PKR or MCA or Barisan Nasional or any political party. Even a child could understand the plain meaning of the words. We do not need the Federal Court to interpret (meaning “explain the meaning of”) the words for us. Nor do we need any law professor from Singapore to tell us Malaysians that the courts should have the power of judicial review over what has transpired in Parliament or a Legislative Assembly.

There is separation of powers between the Legislature and the Judiciary of this country. We all know that one can apply to the courts for a judicial review over executive actions. But there is no such thing as judicial review over what transpired in the legislature — if there is such a thing then we can have judicial review over the passing into law of certain Acts of Parliament that we don't like — like the ISA.

A long time ago when I was a High Court judge, I have sentenced many criminals to death without qualms. But personally I am against the death sentence because it is barbaric. But as a judge I must apply the law as it is.

To quote Lord Denning: “It is their [the judges] duty to administer and apply the law of the land. If they should divert it or depart from it — and do so knowingly — they themselves would be guilty of a misuse of power.”

I would never dream of doing such a thing.

Q: Why did you choose to air your views so publicly? I'm trying to understand why you got involved.

A: I'm only an outsider and I don't care. But when everybody is missing the point and all that — and some of them have not even read the Perak Constitution, I thought I better explain why the people are angry.

Q: Why do you think the people are angry?

A: Do you know why the Perakians were up in uproar against the Sultan of Perak?

It's because, as any lawyer will tell you, especially as he was Lord President before, that before you make a decision, you cannot see the parties. If you want to meet any of the parties, both of them must be present. You never do so by seeing one and then making a decision. The moment you do that, to the losing side or to any observer will think you have been influenced. So it's the impression that counts.

They were angry with the Sultan because they can sense it in their bones that it is wrong to make a decision to see the other side first.

Q: Is the Sultan morally wrong or legally wrong?

A: If the Sultan had executive powers to rule, it is legally wrong, so they could apply for judicial review of the Sultan's decision. But I pointed out in my first article he has no executive power to rule because he is not an executive monarch, he is a constitutional monarch. What he did was morally wrong.

Q: You must have seen many things during your time as a judge. What is wrong with Malaysia’s justice system? What can be done to correct it? And what’s stopping the necessary changes from taking place?

A: I don't think there is anything wrong with our judicial system. It is the players that we should be concerned with — if we get the right people on the Bench, that is, those people who are not interested in power — because power corrupts, those fair-minded individuals who would administer justice according to law, then we will have a judiciary to be proud of.

We used to have that at one time. And if the general public think that the present crop of errant judges are not up to the mark, then the remedy is to use the power of the vote to change the present state of things.

At the general election of 1906 the common people of England toppled the Conservative Government of the day because they were unhappy with the decision of the House of Lords in the Taff Vale case which had virtually put an end to trade unions six years earlier.

That case had immense political consequences. At the general election of 1906 the opposition pledged complete immunity for trade unions.

Lord Denning said in his book “Landmarks in the Law”, page 121: “The result of the general election was like an earthquake. ... It was a sweeping victory for the trade unions. Parliament immediately passed the Trade Disputes Act 1906. It is probably the most important Act ever put into the Statute Book. It reversed all the judicial decisions against trade unions. The Taff Vale case was overruled. No trade union could thereafter be sued for damages for any wrongs done by its members. Its funds were unassailable.”

There is a well known Spanish proverb which says, “He who goes with wolves learns to howl.” So that if the electorate don't trust the judges they tend to put the blame on the government who put the judges there.

Q: Many ordinary Malaysians today feel powerless to affect positive changes to the institution of the judiciary because they lack legal knowledge. Do you agree with this view? How do you think they can work to bring about the change they want?

A: I think the real problem is this. In most cases when you read about a court decision in the newspapers, the judgment of the court is expressed in such a way that the average reader will not know if the judge is right. So invariably, we assume that the judge must be right.

I do realise the problem, so I thought I should try to explain the issue in simple language so that everyone will be able to judge for himself whether the judge is doing the right thing or not.

Lord Denning was famous for explaining difficult law in such a way that any lay reader can understand it. Now that they know how to judge the judges by reading my articles, they could, if they thought they have been short-changed by the judges, do the same thing as was done by the electorate in 1906 England. They have the power to change the government of the day by their vote in the next general election.

The opposition, in order to get the people's vote, could pledge to undo all the wrongs done to the community by the judges. They could pledge that if they were given the mandate of the people to form the next government, they would pass an Act of Parliament to overrule such unjust decisions of the Federal Court such as Adorna Properties vs Boonsorm Boonyanit, the Asean Security Mills, PP vs Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim as well as all the decisions of the Federal Court pertaining to the Perak constitutional crisis which were not decided according to law — where the court had blatantly refused to apply Article 72 of the Federal Constitution.

They could also pledge to remove the errant judges from office. This is how it could be done.

In “What Next in the Law”, Lord Denning said, page 319: “Parliament is supreme. Every law enacted by Parliament must be obeyed to the letter. No matter how unreasonable or unjust it may be, nevertheless, the judges have no option. They must apply the statute as it stands.”

Yet the errant judges, especially the five in the Federal Court, have refused to apply Article 72 of the Federal Constitution as it stands.

In his book, “The Judiciary in Malaysia” (Asia Pacific Publications Sdn Bhd, 1994) the then Chief Justice of Malaysia Tun Abdul Hamid Omar said, page 88: “... the provisions dealing with the removal of judges in pursuance of an address in Parliament … was modified to provide for a special tribunal to be established for the removal of judges.”

That is incorrect. Actually Article 125(3) of the Federal Constitution only applies to judges of the Federal Court.

At the time of the fracas between the then Lord President Tun Salleh Abbas and Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad in 1988, Article 125(3) of the Federal Constitution provides for the removal of judges of the Federal Court on the ground of “misbehaviour or of inability”.

Article 125(3) and (4) reads:

“125(3) If the Prime Minister, or the Lord President after consulting the Prime Minister, represents to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong that a judge of the Federal Court ought to be removed on the ground of misbehaviour or on the ground of inability, from infirmity of body or mind or any other cause, properly to discharge the functions of his office, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall appoint a tribunal in accordance with Clause (4) and refer the representation to it; and may on the recommendation of the tribunal remove the judge from office.

“125(4) The said tribunal shall consist of not less than 5 persons who hold or have held office as a judge of the Federal Court, the Court of Appeal or a High Court or, if it appears to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong expedient to make such appointment, persons who hold or have held equivalent office in any other part of the Commonwealth, and shall be presided over by the member first in the following order, namely, the Chief Justice of the Federal Court, the President and the Chief Judges according to their precedence among themselves, and other members according to the order of their appointment to an office qualifying them for membership (the older coming before the younger of two members with appointments of the same date).”

The book “The Judiciary in Malaysia” said — this part is significant so do pay special attention to it — page 89: “Until the recent amendment in 1994, the grounds for the removal of a judge was 'misbehaviour or of inability', The Constitution (Amendment) Act 1994, however, substituted for the word 'misbehaviour', the words 'any breach of any provision of the code of ethics prescribed under Clause 3A...'. The effect of this amendment is that, besides the inability, either from infirmity of body or mind, or any other cause, properly to discharge the functions of his office, a judge may be removed if he has breached the code of ethics prescribed for judges.

“Article 125(3A) provides that the code of ethics shall be observed by every judge, be it, the judge of the Federal Court, the Court of Appeal or the High Court.”

This is what Section 2 of the Judges' Code of Ethics 1994 says:

“2(1) This Code of Ethics shall apply to a judge throughout the period of his service.

“2(2) The breach of any provision of this Code of Ethics may constitute a ground for the removal of a judge from office.”

So now we all know that any serving judge could be removed from office for a breach of any provision of the Judges' Code of Ethics 1994.

Section 3(1)(d) is the provision in the Code of Ethics to apply against the errant judges. It reads: A judge shall not conduct himself dishonestly or in such a manner as to bring the Judiciary into disrepute or to bring discredit thereto”.

I think the words in Section 3(1)(d) are clear enough — we all know what they mean. So that if a judge brings the judiciary into disrepute or discredit, as the errant judges have done by not administering justice according to law, they could be removed from office under this provision. It's a bit harsh, but it can be done.

Monday, April 20, 2009

Oh No, Tun Mamak wants to call a shot again.....

Oh No, the old man wants to call a shot again.....

Najib oh Najib, if you are not going to anything now, you will end up like Pak Lah soon....

Najib oh Najib, it is time to show that you are not Pak Lembek.....Because of Tun Mamak, you have to appoint Mukhriz as deputy minister who even lost in the party election(why appoint Mukhriz when this guy has never prove his credibility in any level of politics)

Najib, it is time to tell Tun Mamak that you are the one who call the shot....

Oh Malaysian, where is our future ?

Dr M wants to lead BN against Anwar in Penanti


KUALA LUMPUR, April 20 – Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad is prepared to lead Barisan Nasional’s (BN) machinery for the Penanti by-election as his supporters continue to pile pressure on Umno president Datuk Seri Najib Razak to abandon his idea of skipping the expected vote in Penang.

The former prime minister believes he can defeat PKR in the stronghold of his arch-enemy Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. Penanti lies within Anwar’s Permatang Pauh parliamentary constituency.

And this message has been communicated by Dr Mahathir’s supporters to various BN leaders.

Yesterday, Dr Mahathir urged Najib to call off the idea of skipping the Penanti vote just a day after the new prime minister floated the idea.

Dr Mahathir argued that to concede defeat to the opposition would be a sign of weakness.

But The Malaysian Insider understands that so far, Najib and most BN leaders still think that it is counter-productive to contest the by-election in Penang.

Last week, PKR’s Fairus Khairuddin, who also resigned as Penang’s deputy chief minister amid graft allegations, resigned as Penanti assemblyman and paved the way for a by-election.

With even some in the PR camp concerned with election fatigue – Penanti will be the fifth poll since last year’s general elections – Najib began attacking the opposition for what he claimed was a waste of money in abusing the polls process for political mileage.

But PR leaders have hit back by accusing BN of cowardice.

Dr Mahathir’s remarks suggest that he fears BN and Umno may be stuck with that tag if they skipped the by-elections.

The Malaysian Insider understands that Dr Mahathir believes Anwar should not be given a free victory anywhere in the country.

The act of giving a walkover to Anwar, he feels, will have a demoralising effect on the Umno troops.

Dr Mahathir’s public remarks have, however, placed Najib in a predicament.

Accede to Dr Mahathir and he runs the risk of being labelled as being under the thumb of the former PM.

If he stands his ground, he risks getting the same kind of treatment Tun Abdullah Badawi received from Dr Mahathir, who contributed to his downfall through his unrelenting attacks on the administration.

It is understood, however, that the BN leaders are behind the Prime Minister on this issue.

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Property market to perk up

It seems that now is a good time to buy property.....

Written by Sharon Kam
Sunday, 05 April 2009 15:28

KUALA LUMPUR: The Malaysian property market is not heading towards slump even though there may be a slowdown now as attractive financing packages and more realistic prices from sellers should perk up sentiment, according to real estate industry experts.

They said the current "wait and see attitude" by potential property investors and homebuyers may end soon, as sentiment is given a boost by the attractive purchasing environment.

Besides low lending rates, the financial crisis has prompted sellers to become more realistic in their prices and developers are coming up with attractive investment deals.

This was the view of real estate industry experts who spoke at "The Edge Investment Forum on Real Estate 2009: Residential property values: How low can we go?" on April 4.

Most of speakers were optimistic and enthusiastic about the outlook of the property sector in the country despite the current slowdown.

"Despite the current recession, the Malaysia real estate market is not headed towards a slump and there is still buying power in the marketplace," said Zerin Properties CEO Previndran Singhe.

This was a marked improvement from the last quarter of 2008 when there was almost no transactions at all. "Thanks to the low interest rates, people now want to invest in real estate and are keen on landed properties," Previndran said citing a sale of a parcel of land in Damansara Heights for RM610 per square foot (psf) in February this year.

"Transactions may be slow but they are happening. There is new capital inflow coming in. Even though it is very little, it's already flowing in," he added.

Another speaker Ho Chin Soon, director of Ho Chin Soon Research Sdn Bhd found that the property market had not experienced a bubble and hence there would not be a bust.

With commodity prices inching upwards again, there are visible signs that people are buying properties again, he said citing how a major developer managed to close RM25 million sales from one of its projects in just one day recently.

Some developers offering attractive financing packages to customers such as Sime Darby Property Bhd and SP Setia Group Bhd for instance had garnered encouraging sales during two recent sales campaigns while developers are eyeing opportunities to acquire land, he added.

The forum also included a panel discussion on "Property investment strategy in a recession with hyper-inflation - where should you put your money?"

Members of the panel were Knight Frank Malaysia managing director Eric Ooi, property investor Kam Wei Tsung and Hectares & Stratas managing partner Stephen Tew.

Ooi provided an outlook on high-end high-rise residential property in the Klang Valley where prices had generally declined between 10% and 20% from peak prices.

The market, he said, while it would soften a bit more in the short term, should provide prospects to seek good deals.

"We are seeing buyers starting to commit to purchases. This could signal the end of the wait and see period. Sales are starting to happen already because buyers see that the prices of the properties they have been eyeing have dropped to a level they like," said Ooi.

Those still hoping for fire sales might want to rethink again as residential property investor Kam, who is also Platinum Property Ventures Sdn Bhd director, did not foresee fire sales.

The supply and demand for housing were at an equilibrium while property prices in the country have been conservative compared with Singapore and Hong Kong.

Speaking on the pros and cons of investing in property, Kam provided some tips to consider when investing during a recession, including a focused investment strategy.

Tew, who is also founder shareholder/director of Axis REIT Manager Bhd, gave some pointers on the investment potential of industrial and commercial properties.

Favouring semi-detached and detached factories for the space they come with and shophouses for the control owners can have over them; he said the yields were between 8% and 10% per annum for industrial property while commercial properties could offer fair yields of about 6.5% to 7.5% per annum.

Managing partner of Chur Associates Chris Tan, who spoke on the topic "Nightmares of a Landlord", related some nightmarish situations landlords face.

Resolving problems with tenants through the current set of legal remedies took a long time and in most cases, seem to favour the tenants.

An association for landlords should be established to help level the playing field for landlords, Tan said.

"An association will give landlords the opportunity to share information and set up a tenants database which will help in the tenant screening process," he said.

He added that a landlords association could help lobby for better regulations on landlord and tenancy thus making Malaysia an attractive place for international companies to invest in Malaysian properties.

Tan drew his experience in real estate from his involvement in the International Real Estate Federation, both regionally and locally.

He was part of the technical committee of the Prime Minister's Department to devise strategies to stimulate the property sector in Malaysia. He helped formulate the blueprint of the Malaysia Property Inc (MPI) to position Malaysia as an international property investment destination.

The Forum held at the Sime Darby Convention Centre on April 4 saw more than 600 participants. This is the third real estate forum organised by The Edge and presented by UOB Malaysia exclusively for The Edge readers. Several developers also showcased some of their latest developments and attractive deals for purchasers at the Forum including, SP Setia Group, Sunway City Bhd, Mah Sing Group, IOI Properties Bhd and Island & Peninsular Sdn Bhd.

Several participants also took home 12 Ho Chin Soon Research wall maps worth RM36,000 in a lucky draw.

Friday, April 3, 2009

One Malaysia......... Sorry,not this One.........

Enter Najib, with baggage — The Economist

APRIL 3 — One could certainly say that Datuk Seri Najib Razak was born to be prime minister. He is the son of Tun Abdul Razak, the second man to hold that job following independence from Britain, and the nephew of his successor, Tun Hussein Onn. Elected to Parliament aged 23, on his father’s death, he rose to become deputy to the outgoing prime minister, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

However, Najib, who became the country’s sixth post-independence leader today, enters under a cloud of allegations, including ones linking him to a murder case, all of which he categorically denies. But some Malaysians will be wondering if he is a fit person to lead them.

Facing a revitalised opposition, in an election last year the governing coalition, led by Umno, lost the two-thirds majority it needs to change the constitution. Since then, the knives have been out for Abdullah. Despite his efforts to cling on he was forced to quit. The contest to succeed him as party president, and thus prime minister, at first promised to be lively. But party officials, fearful of the challenge from the opposition leader, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim (a former Umno deputy leader), chose to hang together rather than hang separately. By Nov 2 Najib had won enough nominations to block his only rival, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, a former finance minister, from getting on the ballot-paper.

Like Abdullah before him, Najib comes to the job promising reforms, including of the system of preference for members of the ethnic-Malay majority for state contracts and jobs. Abdullah achieved little, though he allowed a bit more freedom of expression than had his predecessor, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad. Expectations for Najib are lower still. It is possible, notes Edmund Gomez, a political scientist, that he will use the worsening economic outlook as a pretext for reverting to Mahathir-style repression.

Anwar has failed to carry out his threat to topple the government through a mass defection of parliamentarians. Even so, there is a palpable fin de rĂ©gime air around Umno. Abdullah,Dr Mahathir and other leaders are publicly lamenting how corruption and cronyism are rife in the party. But his opponents say Najib is hardly the man to restore confidence. In the latest scandal to which they are linking him, the Defence Ministry (which he oversaw until recently) has deferred a big order for helicopters following questions about their high price. A parliamentary committee recently cleared the government of wrongdoing, but admitted not investigating whether “commissions” were paid.

In an earlier case, a company the opposition claimed was linked to Abdul Razak Baginda, an adviser to Najib, was paid juicy fees for services provided over a contract for the purchase of French submarines. A Mongolian woman, said to have worked as a translator in the negotiations, was shot dead and her corpse destroyed with explosives in 2006. Razak was put on trial over her killing, along with two policemen. The case has dragged on for months and seen various odd goings-on, including changes of judge, prosecutors and defence lawyers at the start of the trial. A private detective signed a statutory declaration implicating Najib, retracted it the next day, saying it had been made under duress. Calls by the victim’s family for Najib to testify were rejected. On Oct 31 the judge ruled that the prosecution had failed to make a prima facie case against Razak.

The policemen’s trial will continue. A blogger who linked Najib’s wife to the case is on trial for criminal libel. None of this, however, seems likely to interfere with Najib’s accession to the prime minister’s job. A bigger threat may yet emerge from the resurgent opposition and Anwar, who nurtures a long-thwarted ambition to take the job himself. — Economist

Wednesday, April 1, 2009

Please continue to vote for BN if.................

Three by-elections are just around the corner and by now I believe the voters have the answers in their hearts who to vote ...............

For those fence sitters, you might want to continue to vote for BN if you are willing to see this happening again:-

(1) Khir Toyo the ex- selangor menteri besar, using tax payers money to travel around the world, funded his wife to visit his son who is studying in Australia...... an infamous Muhammad Taib another ex-menteri besar of Selangor , caught red handed in Australia because of carrying few million in his luggage but still occupying cabinet post until now.......... a chief minister name Ali Rustam who was caught involved in money politics and was ban to contest in the party post but still survive as Melaka Chief minister .....

Read reports from Malaysiakini and the Malaysian Insider and the NST

(2) Allegations of corruptions in three French submarines and Russian Suhkoi Su-30 fighter aircraft purchase that remain unanswered and few hundred million USD commissions paid to companies such as IMT Defence and Perimekar Sdn Bhd

(3) Lopsided deals that favour companies such as Plus, water concessionaires companies and hefty payment of salaries to a fail CEO

(4) Land given to kuncu-kuncu instead of ordinary folks that more deserve to get the land

See how Pakatan rakyat manage to prove to BN that nothing is impossible.............

(5) Rampants of money politics that have no end.........

Certainly there are many more issues that I can write...............

But one thing for sure , this nation will go no where if your votes go to BN..............

One Malaysia, my foot !!!!!!!!!! there is no way we can see the light at the end of the tunnel if this country is still governed by a same party ...................