Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak, taking a leaf from Mahathir Mohamad, has launched the Global Movement of the Moderates (GMM) in Putrajaya on Tuesday this week.

But of what good can it do for Malaysia or the world is a source of national and international puzzlement. What is certain though, the event will cost Malaysian taxpayers a pretty penny indeed – all for the purpose of boosting Najib’s ego and padding his resume or legacy, if you will.

The implication here is that Islamic fundamentalists everywhere are engaged in a Global War of Terrorism against the west and its allies. The so-called moderates, like Najib, want to distance themselves from this militant form of Islam propagated by a tiny minority. In the process, they want to buy “respectability’ and support from the international community for their own self-serving political survival.

Muslim extremism or terrorism

To digress a little, militant Islam worldwide has its roots in the madrasahs in Pakistan, many of which are funded by Saudi Arabian money. These madrasahs don’t impart any form of learning in science and mathematics and secular knowledge. Instead, they preach nothing but unmitigated hatred of non-Muslims among the impoverished and therefore vulnerable bands of Muslim youth everywhere.

The idea is to turn increasingly vulnerable Muslim youth into illiterate suicide bombers who can be relied on as so much cannon fodder and/or to strike terror in public places, and military establishments, and sow a general feeling of government ineptitude and helplessness in the face of insecurity in the non-Muslim world and among the ruling elite in the Muslim world.

The objective: to increase the cost of doing business in the non-Muslim world, the west and India in particular, increase insurance and security costs and depress values in currency, collateral, land, shares, properties and other investments and instruments.

The objective: to drive the non-Muslim world, the west and India in particular towards insolvency and the collapse of secular Muslim regimes.

The objective: to foster the emergence of a worldwide Muslim Empire in the form of the return of the Caliphate, to replace secular Muslim regimes, while destroying the papacy and ensuring the subjugation of the non-Muslim world.

Nearer home, Pakistan sees militant Islam as a unifying force against being re-absorbed by India, its giant secular neighbour which continues to get more powerful by the day and cause jitters among the ruling elite in Islamabad.

Anwar was a moderate long before the word became politically popular

Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim in fact assumed, albeit in public, a moderate stance in Islam even long before the advent of militant Islam worldwide. This is the reason why he has ever since then been lionised by the west and invited to join the lecture circuit in academia and other forums elsewhere, open and closed.

The west meanwhile also stands accused of being engaged in endless wars, arms peddling and the like, unlike the so-called moderates like Najib and Malaysia who ostensibly preach a more “moderate”, presumably pacifist, vision in diplomacy, crisis management, conflict resolution and economics. This is a repeat of Mahathir’s attempts to get the world community to criminalise war.

The west would argue that they would have to demonstrate their ability to ensure global security, at least for themselves, in the face of all forms of militancy. The level and degree of maintainance of global security, in turn, would manifest itself in facilitating cost-efficiency in doing business and the like as already outlined.

By latching on to the “moderate” label, Najib is obviously also trying to erase public perceptions of him as an extremist, racist, ultra and perhaps even a fanatic in a way.

But can a leopard change its spots

The question that arises is whether a leopard can change its spots, and if so, it will surely turn Darwinism upside down and be a first in the history of evolution. Evolution decrees that one makes a difference for the better or worse, evolving towards one or the other. But that doesn’t mean one can begin in evil and evolve towards good or vice versa.

Memories of Najib raising the Malay keris or sword at an Umno Youth meet, some time ago in his past, and swearing to bathe it in Chinese blood are still fresh in the public mind. Anyone with access to the internet can Google the despicable incident complete with pictures.

If we are going to give the benefit of the doubt to Najib, and assuming the leopard can indeed change its spots, the question that arises is whether he can go beyond mere rhetoric and rise to the occasion.

Charity begins at home.

Najib cannot wear the moderate hat outside the country and the hat of opposites – extremist, racist, ultra, fanatic – at home.

He has to choose whether he wants to be known and remembered as a moderate, both at home and abroad, or show himself in his true colours.

Not qualified

Patently, Najib the ‘keris’ is not qualified to claim the moderate label unless he can redeem himself from his past.

For the record, Najib presides over a government and system which has institutionalised racism – prejudice and opportunism included — and encourages virtually slavery through statelessness, human trafficking and illegal immigration.

This issue among others, including the observance of key tenets of the Federal Constitution more often than not in the breach, has been flogged to death in the past.

Briefly, Article 153, Article 3, Article 8, Article 10 and the like and the New Economic Policy (NEP), the use of the term Bumiputera for groups not sanctioned by the Federal Constitution, a misreading of the term “Malay” and politicising Malaysian history when not basing it for chunks on the fairy tales in the Sejarah Melayu.

Lying to the country is bad enough, stop lying to the world

Najib has tried to pull the wool over the public eyes by emphasising on government transformation and economic transformation and so far all on paper.

But man does not live by bread alone. Najib cannot impress Malaysians by trotting out figures on Key Performances Indexes, the amount of foreign investment gathered and the like.

He needs to grab the bull by the horns and ensure fundamental political reforms are put in place. No one in the richer states and the urban areas is any longer interested in bread-and-butter issues.

Promising even more development – including in the form of piped water and electricity more than 50 years after the British left – and doling out our money to ourselves in the form of vote-buying bribes under various guises is not the way to go.

One can bluff some of the people some of the time but not all the people all the time.

It’s high time that Najib and his ruling Umno stop the politics of distraction and disruption and decide where politics ends and good government begins. Either shape up or ship out. Don’t waste our time!

Chronicle: 1. Firstly, the hottest Question in town still remains, why did Najib pull back from a conviction? Most Malaysians believe in a conspiracy but not an independent judiciary as BN has claimed. The story around town is that the judge had already written a conviction judgment and had to make do with a verbal acquittal that lasted all of 60 seconds. Do you see internal UMNO power play in this, was Najib fearful for his own legacy and how he will be remembered if he were to adopt a ‘hardline’ approach on this issue?

Malott: I don’t have a clue why the judge ruled the way he did. It really was surprising. There are so many well-documented reports of political interference and misuse of the judicial system. For example, not just Anwar but also the case of Ramli Yusoff and the failure to seriously investigate and prosecute the deaths that occurred at MACC. Earlier in the trial, this judge reversed his own decision on whether the DNA taken from the comb and towel that Anwar used in jail was admissible, and it seems clear there was pressure on him to do so. Otherwise, why would he reverse himself? But now he ruled in Anwar’s favor. It was a shock. As I said in my op-ed, the government might have decided that Anwar was a bigger threat to them in jail because he would be a rallying point for the opposition. We can all speculate, but only the judge knows why he did what he did.

Chronicle: 2. Perhaps the answer to (1) will have a bearing on this second Question. Do you think that the Najib administration will push for an appeal? If it does, what will it do to Najib’s and the Malaysian government’s reputation, the country’s image to investors? Will the repercussions be deep and long-lasting given global corporate captains such as Richard Branson have already expressed exasperation and obvious disgust over the Anwar prosecution?

Malott: I think there will be a lot of pressure on Najib to appeal, coming from the hardliners in UMNO, who are afraid of what will happen if the opposition comes to power. Gani Patail and the prosecutors also have lost face, so they might be inclined to want to appeal. Some people might think that they can find a more compliant judge the next time. But the reaction not just from inside Malaysia but also from overseas will be strong if the government appeals and puts Anwar and his family through this again.

Chronicle: 3. Given your familiarity with the Malaysian political scene and its players, after decades of monitoring the situation, what do you personally think Najib will do? Will he push for an appeal and why?

Malott: Personally, I think that Najib does not want to appeal. But Najib has always been a very weak leader. He talks a good game, but as the saying goes, he doesn’t walk the talk. He is under a lot of pressure. So he might just remain silent and let it happen, saying that the decision is up to the prosecution. There have been other times like this, like when he said “it is up to the police” whether a demonstration can go forward. Are you in charge of your own government or not?

Chronicle: 4. If so, will it mean it’s back to square One for Malaysia and Pakatan Rakyat? Also, what about Malaysian voters? Will it make them more inclined to boot out the BN? Or will it make them doubt Anwar again?

Malott: Somebody joked, never make predictions about the future. I don’t know what will happen. But I do think that 2012 will be the most important and also the most interesting time in Malaysia’s political history. That’s good for Malaysia Chronicle. You will have lots to write about !!

Chronicle: 5. From an outsider’s view, what do you see happening inside Umno? It is famous for intrigue and infighting. Have trends or scenarios evolved that even outsiders can see clearly the divisions forming, with distinct groups or factions emerging? If yes, who do you reckon are the main players in Umno and what is their respective purpose?

Malott: I think it is clear that BN as a whole is no longer a strong political force. It is all about UMNO now. MCA and MIC have been emasculated and lost credibility with the Chinese and Indian communities. So the focus will turn to UMNO. In some ways, the struggle inside UMNO will be more important than the struggle between UMNO and PR. The hardliners, the right wing inside UMNO will become more vocal and anti-Najib. Mahathir, Muhyiddin, Hisham, Ibrahim Ali will all cause Najib even more trouble. Depending on how the political winds blow, some of the more moderates inside UMNO might decide to cross over, or be lukewarm in their support of UMNO, sit the election out and see what happens. Look at Sakmongol. He kept trying to get UMNO back on track, and now he has joined DAP. It will be interesting to watch what Ku Li says and does and whether he finally concludes that there is no hope for reform inside UMNO.

Chronicle: 6. GE-13 date is also another factor that may be affected by the acquittal. Some say the aquittal pushes GE-13 forward but others including DAP’s Lim Kit Siang thinks it is no longer March but June 2012. There are others who even think it may be after the UMNO internal polls later this year – perhaps in early 2013? What do you think and why?

Malott: I think that elections are more likely sooner rather than later. The longer UMNO waits, the more problems will come out, the longer the opposition will have to organize and campaign.

Chronicle: 7. In your article ‘Testing Malaysia’s Promises’, you mentioned electoral reforms and the dirtiest GE-13 ever with the possibility of a return to the strong-arm tactics of Dr Mahathir. Since the July 9 Bersih rally and the formation of a Parliamentary Select Committee on reforms, as someone who has been watching the Malaysian situation, do you think enough is being done to ensure clean elections and swiftly enough too?

Malott: I don’t think anything has been done yet. All talk, no action. The point is, these reforms need to be put in place before the general elections are held, or the results will not be credible.

Chronicle: 8. So far, the proposed use of indelible ink has been approved, but are there many other hurdles? Would you be satisfied with current achievements of the PSC and the electoral reforms it has agreed to implement? And why?

Malott: I think the most important reform of all is to make sure that RTM and Bernama, which are owned by all the people of Malaysia, are fair and balanced in their reporting. Right now they act like they belong to UMNO and not the Government. The restrictions on distribution of the opposition’s newspapers also should be removed. The ruling parties and the opposition should be treated the same. That is the only fair way.

Chronicle: 9. Anwar has long been a friend of yours. This acquittal has been a tremendous boost for him – personally, for his family and for his legitimacy as a leader of the country. If the Najib administration pursues an appeal, do you think public sentiment will desert Anwar?
Or do you think Anwar has already navigated a tricky corner and is now able to fully push the Pakatan Rakyat towards victory in GE-13. What are some of the benefits Anwar and Pakatan will reap from the acquittal and what will an appeal do to these?

Malott: It is true that my wife and I have become good friends with Anwar and Azizah, and I came to know all of his children so well during the time that they lived here in Washington DC. They are a wonderful family. But when I analyze Malaysian politics, I still wear my old diplomat’s hat and try to be observant and not let my personal feelings get in the way.

If the Government pursues an appeal against Anwar, it will strengthen the opposition in terms of public sentiment. It will tie up Anwar’s time in court, however, and make it harder for him to deal with issues inside the opposition and campaign, simply because he would have to deal with legal issues and sit in court all day.

I said that I do not like to make predictions, but I do believe that if electoral reforms are put in place, and the elections are fair, then the opposition most likely will come to power. They almost did it in 2008, with one hand tied behind their back. I say this as an analyst of Malaysian politics, and not because of any personal feelings.

Former Cabinet Minister Abdul Kadir Sheikh Fadzir says that cash was given to voters in previous elections and added the strategy was known as “bomb”.

Kadir, who is from Umno also added that he had himself seen how cash handouts that ranged from RM200 to RM1,000 was used in Barisan Nasional’s election campaigns to bribe voters in return for their support at the polls.

The former Minister of Culture, Arts and Tourism, said that the word used for the strategy was known as “bomb”.

Speaking at a forum, he said “I have been the head of delegation of many campaigns and I have been given lump sums of money to distribute,” said the former Information Minister at the Malaysia Strategic Outlook Conference 2012 here. “It was a blatant use of money to buy votes.”

But he was quick to add that he personally didn’t use the money.

James Chin, who heads the School of Social Sciences at Monash University at Sunway, and who spoke at the forum after Abdul Kadir said that “bombing” was a very effective tool in Sabah and Sarawak.

Kadir said that while he still in Umno, he wanted to remind them of the “Merdeka trust” — which meant giving the people the right to truly free and fair elections.

Umno should not fear losing

Kadir also told Umno members not to fear losing if it was sincere in its intentions.

“If you lose accept it; people change governments all the time in US and Australia,” he said. “I am an Umno man, I don’t mind if I lose. If you are there just to make millions for yourself and your cronies or if I have made my billions and am afraid I will be arrested after I lose power, then I will do all these tricks.”

Kadir stressed that to have free and fair elections, there must be equal access to the media and GLCs and government departments must be neutral.

“You must give the opposition the freedom to have TV, radio and newspapers,” he said. “For 50 years, PAS has been asking for a newspaper licence but none given — the government is a big bully.”

Barisan Nasional, he said, should not be making use of the Ministry of Information, Felda, Felcra, the Special Branch and other federal agencies to support their campaign.

Foreign correspondents and the publications they work for often face a dilemma: How to suggest omniscience in their reports about a country of which they know not much on the basis of a few conversations with the locals and a jigsaw of media headlines?

The omniscient pose is difficult to bring off, especially by weekly news magazines that revel in a format that condenses the news and melds it with comment.

While these first drafts of history – as one founder of the genre (Henry Luce) grandly suggested this journalism was – may have width in terms of its coverage of the world, that strength may be vitiated by a lack of depth.

The international news weeklyThe Economist takes its style from Walter Bagehot, its mid-19th century editor-in-chief, but there are times when the strains of its imitation of Bagehot’s arresting blend of aphoristic statement with enlivening fact do starkly show.

Its coverage of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim’s acquittal earlier this week from what would have been a career-stifling charge of sodomy is an example of too many conclusions floating around unsupported by a substratum of fact.

Most glaringly, The Economistsaid that Anwar, despite the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s acquittal of him after a trial of two years that was lurid in its details, has hadhis reputation tarnished.

PKR still a fledgling party

The ad hominem conclusions in The Economist’s Anwar coverage were rendered the more trivial by a remark that at the age of 64, Anwar “seems a distant and untrustworthy figure to many younger Malaysians.”

The irony here is mordant because Anwar’s supporters contend the reason his eventual accuser so easily inveigled himself into the cohort around Anwar was that young Malaysians, particular Malays, are attracted to the man’s struggles for political change and are drawn by his charisma.

Anwar is a magnet, especially to the more idealistic among the younger Malaysian set, which is why his party is poised – Anwar had recently confirmed this – to field a high proportion of youthful candidates in the impending general election.

This young slate would be the reproof of The Economist’s opinion that Anwar has “failed to nurture a new generation of opposition leaders” in PKR.

At just under 13 years, PKR is a still fledgling party that required the rallying focus of Anwar’s wife, Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, to hold it together as he fought off corruption and sodomy charges.

Anwar’s now 14-year struggle – seen against the longer background of his stature built up from his youth as a paladin for political change – has had the effect of not only uniting hitherto electorally weak, and ideologically disparate, political parties in Malaysia’s first-past-the-post system, but it has also drawn a wide array of NGOs and other activists to the banner of reform.

He can be seen as old and superannuated only in the sense that Aung San Suu Kyi, who is of the same age, may be seen in the same way in Burma’s politics.

A deeply entrenched, sclerotic system takes a long time to buckle to popular pressure – Anwar’s 64 years is old only in the sense that the African National Congress’ Nelson Mandela was the same when he became his country’s president in his late 70s in the mid-1990s, by which time South Africa’s apartheid system was as old as the century.

The Umno-dominated and warped system of governance in Malaysia is a little more than a half-century old, enough time for it to be barnacle-like in its hold on power. Advancing age is not a disqualifier for someone striving to have the system jettisoned.

Is Anwar like a banyan tree?

Unlike other points of its coverage, The Economist is on less precarious ground in its observation that Anwar has not modernised PKR and “has allowed it to become something of a family-run affair, driven by infighting.”

But even there the weekly’s comment has to be seen against the backdrop of the young sapling that Malaysian democracy is and PKR’s relative newness as a political force.

PKR is an assembly of disparate political, social and religious factions that needs time to jell into a coherent whole. True, Anwar bestrides it like a colossus but the jury is still out on whether he is like a banyan tree, no other sapling can grow under its shade.

Enduring political parties in parts of Asia that have quasi to fully democratic forms of government are family-fostered, from the Nehruvian Congress to the Lee Kuan Yew-nurtured PAP.

A nascent people on a continent whose ancient cultures and religions are not exactly hospital to the concept of individual responsibility for one’s destiny require the mystique of larger-than-life figures for long periods before they can come into their own.

Anwar is acquainted with the best that has been said and thought in the realms where democracy has taken hold over the last few centuries which brings us to the gaping omission in The Economist’sevaluation of him.

This is the fact that his entire career is tied to a world-historical concern: whether Islam is compatible with democracy, the zeitgeist issue of our times.
It’s an issue of epochal significance and the fact that after the verdict, he travelled to countries as religiously disparate as India and Turkey to speak at conferences where he is viewed as a Vaclav Havel-like figure is testimony of his category confining-transcendence.

Walter Bagehot, who expanded the sweep of The Economist’s news coverage from national to transcontinental extents, would have understood Anwar’s quest and breadth.

The Arab Spring could find an echo in Malaysia which has 55 per cent ethnic Malay Muslims and a large Buddhist, Hindu and Christian population. He was first accused in 1998 of corruption and sodomy and again in 2008 of sodomy which is punishable with 20 years in Malaysia. Despite his serious injury and harsh treatment, he is forgiving. He doesn’t expect an apology from the powers that be and has no plans to sue the government. “Can you sue Hitler?” he asks, adding that he will form the next government. A close aide of former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohammed, he took on corruption within the first family leading to his arrest and conviction the first time. He has been described as a prisoner of conscience by Amnesty International and received widespread support from the world over after he was jailed.

In India at the invitation of Rajmohan Gandhi as part of a pro democratic think thank initiative, Mr Ibrahim is grateful for support from this country and others and this is perhaps what led to his acquittal. He orders “garam paani” (hot water) in Hindi and confesses to being an avid fan of older Bollywood films like Sangam, but is not in touch with current releases. Most Malaysian papers said the acquittal was on technical grounds which is far from the truth, he says.

Excerpts from an interview with Meena Menon.

The verdict of acquittal surprised you..?

Because I gave evidence based on the facts and law to suggest that the decisions in the trial were blatantly biased against me. Key witnesses we wanted to call were disallowed, which is unacceptable. This is a criminal charge based on a complainant, who went to the doctors. So we wanted those notes of examination but this was not given to us. We adduced enough evidence to suggest there was fabrication. It was only after we brought in international experts that we could prove this. No local expert would dare come out and testify under such a regime.

I don’t know if the verdict was due to public pressure or fears that the international community would focus on Malaysia –I don’t know whether the judge decided this based on his conscience. It was not a convenient, normal sort of a verdict. Certainly it came as a surprise, I don’t know why the judge did this.

What would be the political impact of this decision. Polls are expected soon in Malaysia and can this verdict work to your advantage?

Elections will be called very soon, anytime from March to June, I don’t think they will delay for far too long, since the new Prime Minister has not got the mandate. Secondly, the economic projections for this year are not great, but notwithstanding all this I am optimistic that we can wrest control from the government, predicated upon free elections, which we don’t have.

What about your years in prison? How did you survive?

There is no issue of money, land or remunerations. I was also finance minister then and there was no basis for charging me over any irregularity. So they charged me with speaking to the police over some scurrilous attacks on my character. The police came over and I said investigate it. What’s wrong with that? The ministry for home affairs at that time was under Mahathir, he should be questioned not me. I have no authority to go and direct the police, it was under my boss. That’s Malaysia. But still we are better than Zimbabwe(smiles).

I opposed Mahathir who wanted 2 billion ringgit to bail out his son then. Later his family could pay 2.9 b ringgit to buy San Miguel company. How did you raise the money in cash?

But the important thing is to move on – move forward.

How did you keep your morale up in jail?

I spent six years in solitary confinement before I was released in 2004. Earlier for two years I was a political detainee. Eight years — that’s a short walk to freedom compared to Nelson Mandela’s 26 years! The harassment was small compared to Gandhiji’s , I was badly assaulted, and that is a reprieve compared to those who were shot dead okay? So you always look at things positively.

The first six months Mahathir denied me any reading material. But after that they slowly allowed under pressure from international media and I spent a long time reading the Islamic epics, Hindu epics, Chinese epics, western books. Other than Ramayana, Mahabharata, Gita and Gandhi, I read Shri Aurobindo whom I think should be popularized more. I read Shakespeare of course, the entire works four and half times, with copious notes.

Why did government choose sodomy to harass you?

You should ask Mahathir why he chose that. They chose it because they can’t pick one case of corruption- I was minister of finance for eight years, and they said I am traitor to the country and am a Jewish/ Chinese/ Hindu agent but finally sodomy was chosen – because this would enrage the rural conservative Muslim constituency. Secondly it is easier, there is no proof required to convict me, it is a matter of accepting the complainant’s view.

That’s what happened in the first case in (1998), but in the second case, they made a stupid blunder they brought in forensics, DNA and then we brought international experts to demolish those.

At one point you wanted a trial under Islamic Law?

I did that because they use Islam and they say you should swear by the Koran which to me is an insult. I am a practising Muslim and it is an insult to Koran to consider crimes to be resolved only by swearing on the holy book. You rape a girl and you swear by the Koran and you are free? What does this mean? Is this what Islam teaches us? I consulted all religious authorities and they said no, they said the only option is to refer the matter to the religious court. That’s why I decided to go there but they wouldn’t dare bring it up.

The government says the acquittal shows judicial independence?

The huge crowds outside the court is unprecedented, we had Malays, Chinese, Indians. When the verdict was announced people were embracing each other and crying, it was a beautiful scene of multi racial unity. I watched on TV and even police officers were laughing and shaking hands. The government says this is evidence of judicial independence. They exploited the verdict. But that is not at all the reality. One swallow does not a summer make. There was a public outrage, international pressure. Even the Washington Post wrote against my case.

What about the ruling United Malays National Organisation(UMNO) in Malaysia and your challenge to them? Your party already posed a challenge in 2008 winning some major districts. How do you see your future?

Yeah I must be crazy to challenge them (laughs)! In 2008 we won a lot of seats. In the last three years we worked very hard in the districts we have control and secondly made forays into other parts of the rural heartland and people do accept us. UMNO is seen to be by the more educated crowd as a party continuing with its obsolete ways and partly as authoritarian, The zeitgeist has changed, especially among the young. India is a democracy, Indonesia has transformed itself. The Arab Spring has its ramifications elsewhere. My old colleagues they failed to understand me, are they completely oblivious to the changes taking place? You see the same pattern- When Ali (Ben Ali in Tunisia) fell Mubarak said this is Egypt, we are not Tunisia. When Mubarak fell, Gaddafi said its Egypt it’s unique, different, then Syria which has a great culture and civilization was in turmoil and the Prime Minister in Malaysia said “this is Malaysia we are not Arabs.”

How has your earlier conviction and present acquittal changed things? Especially in the eyes of the people in the rural areas, will it have an impact?

Now the acquittal has reinforced our position, Even my last conviction did not affect me much. The acquittal has made it easier for us. While the government has been using my acquittal as an example of an independent judiciary. I say look you have been abusing me everyday for the last 14 years, and now I say you should be in the Opposition.

Is the sodomy charge used to harass people commonly in Malaysia? As a political weapon?

No, I am an exception. It’s a phobia created against me, a sort of xenophobia. You look at the media on prime time TV– I am a threat to security, I am anti Malay, they say I went to India and attacked Malaysia. Once I asked the minister of information “can you give me one week’s leave?” He didn’t understand , he asked me where do you want to go? He kept on asking – I finally said Shut up on Anwar in your TV network. The media is UMNO controlled, there is no freedom. The Hindu has been kind to me. Amnesty and Human Rights Watch played a major role in raising the issue.

UMNO has been speaking of reforms?

Even Mubarak used to talk of reforms to his son Jamal, Qaddafi used to talk of reform to his son Saif ul Islam. The most corrupt will be supporting legislation against corruption. We must measure change from actual reform and actual implementation of the reform, not pronouncements. If I am a rich man, I can pay 22 million US dollars to appoint an international PR consultant appointed by Sani Abacha and others- so naturally they must give him(the Malaysian Prime Minister) good advice- but should you be presumptuous and accept their version? No. You should assess by the performance what have they done- is corruption rooted out, is there a free media, is there an independent judiciary?

What is your focus in your election campaign?

We’ve spelt out efforts to promote growth- strengthen the market economy, a strong dose of affirmative action based on need, not based on race, judicial independence, free media, and no discriminatory practices against ethnic minorities. Islam is the religion of the Federation of Malaysia , yes, but you should not use that either that to compel non Muslims or to denigrate the position of non Muslims.

How does the regime treat any opposition?

Some time ago 300 students opposing the oppressive University College Act which bars students from taking part or giving any comments in political issues were beaten up by the police and we had the rally for fair and free elections which was roughly treated by the police. There are many cases of torture, apart from mine. People are killed or die in police custody or in the custody of the anti corruption commission- of course it is said that they are not killed, did not commit suicide but these are mysterious deaths. In my speeches sometimes I joke these people are not killed –they are looking at the door or the window- and they just walked out, and they fell, only the room happened to be 14 stories above ground. So stupid to expect people to believe these stories.

There is a public outcry on all this. A young Chinese party supporter fell from the 14th floor while in custody and another Hindu boy died in police custody. A Malay Muslim died after falling from the fourth floor while under anti corruption commission custody. When I was called by the police for questioning in this case, I said can we do it on the ground floor. Do you have windows or doors?(laughs)

You say the impact of Arab Spring will be reflected in Malaysia?

The night before this verdict 50,000 people came to hear what I thought was my last speech. On the court verdict day, it was a working day – people took leave and came to cheer me. I was arrested two and a half years ago, and put in a lock up on a cement floor for one night and then released, for no reason- other than abuse –they could have asked me to go to the police station for questioning. But the good thing is I have the humility now – that means your passion for justice becomes strong- if I can be treated that way- I am a known person , the world talks about me. What about the poor guys?

Are you going to sue or take action?

Do dictators ever apologise? The fight against corruption and scurrilous charges is like the battle by Krishna against an evil snake(as in Hindu mythology).

I want to move on and forgive them but this government shouldn’t be allowed to go on with impunity. How can I sue this government, I am planning to take over this government.(laughs) This is Malaysia. You don’t sue Hitler do you?

When I tweeted, I forgive, people said please don’t repeat that statement- people are angry.

Your wife has been supportive all along…

She became politically active only after I was detained but my daughter is in politics. The government prompted people to ask my wife –”why are you still with your husband? why don’t you demand a divorce?” Can it happen anywhere else in the world? That is the state of gutter politics in Malaysia – insulting human dignity and they call it moderate Islam.

I was badly assaulted and in pain but otherwise its okay. I survived reading , meditating, being patient, and the conviction that ultimately you will be victorious. The role my family, my wife Azizah and the children too played was remarkable. People prayed for me- it was amazing the support I had.

Is the current regime jittery after your acquittal? What are your next plans? And any learnings from India?

I will meet people and our party convention of the Opposition will soon announce its manifesto. India is a rare case with its penchant for democracy and unswerving commitment under all times – even in Emergency the judiciary had the courage to decide in favour of the Constitution.

I would like to replicate many things from India –protection of minorities, respect for human rights—am talking of replicating ideals, am not talking of the corruption(laughs). But India has a huge intellectual legacy, whatever you say the judiciary is still strong, the media is free, you have the right to protest, and growth is impressive but an issue I see is that the needs of poor and marginalised must be addressed..

Pertama ialah set dokumen daripada MAIWP sendiri termasuk baucer bayaran bernombor 2010B04112 bertarikh 29 April 2010 sebanyak RM32,150.00. Baucer tersebut secara terang merakamkan kumpulan wang yang digunakan merupakan kumpulan wang zakat.

Kedua merupakan surat daripada Ketua Audit Negara Tan Sri Dato’ Setia Ambrin Buang kepada Pengerusi Jawatankuasa Kira-Kira Negara Datuk Seri Azmi Khalid yang mengesahkan bahawa RM63,650 wang zakat (iaitu bayaran pertama sebanyak RM31,500 pada 9 Februari 2010 dan RM32,150 yang tercatat di dalam baucer tersebut) digunakan bagi membayar kos guaman MAIWP.

Jamil Khir berkali-kali menegaskan bahawa MAIWP mempunyai peruntukan daripada kerajaan sebanyak RM700,000 bagi menampung pelbagai pembayaran termasuk kos guaman.

Namun Laporan Ketua Audit menyebut bahawa MAIWP hanya memulangkan wang tersebut pada Disember 2010, kira-kira enam bulan selepas peruntukan tersebut disalurkan ke dalam MAIWP. Jamil langsung tidak menyebut tentang hal ini.

Saya juga ingin membetulkan laporan Utusan pada 4 Januari lalu yang memetik Bahagian Hal Ehwal Korporat Jabatan Audit Negara bahawa isu salahguna zakat ini tidak dilaporkan di dalam Laporan Ketua Audit Negara 2010. KEADILAN tidak pernah mendakwa demikian, sebaliknya kami merujuk kepada surat Ketua Audit Negara kepada Jawatankuasa Kira-Kira Negara seperti tertera.

KEADILAN memandang serius penyalahgunaan institusi penting umat Islam ini. Saya akan membuat laporan polis esok 11 pagi di Balai Polis Dang Wangi berkaitan dengan kes salahguna wang zakat ini.

NIK NAZMI NIK AHMAD
PENGARAH KOMUNIKASI
PARTI KEADILAN RAKYAT