Ihsan Dari Sinar Harian Web TV
Pada 18 Oktober 2011 jam 11 pagi, pengurusan Felda Global Ventures Holdings Sdn Bhd (FGV) telah mengadakan Mesyuarat Jawatankuasa Penyenaraian FGV yang ketiga dipengerusikan oleh Tan Sri Isa Samad. Antara lainnya, mesyuarat tersebut membincangkan kesediaan pengurusan Felda dan pandangan mereka mengenai penyenaraian FGV dan penstrukturan korporat yang akan berlaku berikutan penyenaraian tersebut.
Boston Consulting Group (BCG) adalah salah satu daripada juru runding yang dilantik untuk menerajui proses penyenaraian ini. Selain menyediakan pelan langkah-langkah penyenaraian, BCG juga bertanggungjawab menilai kesediaan dan pandangan pengurusan Felda mengenai tindakan Barisan Nasional menyenaraikan FGV dan aset-aset berkaitan Felda.
KEADILAN telah berjaya mendapatkan salinan laporan yang dibentangkan oleh BCG kepada pengurusan Felda dan FGV di dalam mesyuarat tersebut.
Mukasurat 4 dari laporan tersebut yang menyentuh mengenai kesediaan dan pandangan pengurusan Felda ada disertakan bersama.
Kesimpulan yang dibuat oleh BCG setelah menemuramah dan mengadakan kajiselidik melibatkan 30 orang pengurusan tertinggi Felda dalam bulan Oktober 2011 adalah seperti berikut:
1. Cabaran terbesar untuk menjayakan proses penyenaraian ini adalah pandangan pengurusan tertinggi Felda sendiri yang menentang keputusan tersebut;
2. Lebih separuh dari pengurusan Felda (55%) tidak bersedia untuk melalui proses penyenaraian ini;
3. Hanya 20% dari pengurusan tertinggi Felda yang benar-benar menyokong proses penyenaraian; dan
4. 65% dari pengurusan tertinggi Felda percaya proses penyenaraian ini akan gagal kerana Felda masih belum bersedia.
Pendedahan ini mengesahkan bahawa proses penyenaraian yang cuba dilakukan Barisan Nasional mendapat tentangan hebat dari kalangan pimpinan tertinggi Felda sendiri. Ini memberi gambaran bahawa mereka yang lebih arif dan mengikuti proses dalaman sepanjang keputusan menyenaraikan Felda berpandangan penyenaraian ini lebih membawa keburukan daripada kebaikan kepada Felda dan peneroka.
Tentangan pengurusan tertinggi Felda ini akan menyulitkan proses penyenaraian dan membawa risiko bahawa ia akan gagal kerana tidak mendapat kerjasama kakitangan Felda.
Makanya, adalah menjadi tanggungjawab Dato’ Seri Najib Tun Razak dan Tan Sri Isa Samad untuk memberikan penjelasan kenapa pandangan dan tentangan pengurusan tertinggi Felda ini tidak diambil kira dan penyenaraian Felda diteruskan jua.
Mereka juga perlu memberi jaminan bahawa pengurusan Felda sedia ada tidak diketepikan dan muka-muka baru yang lebih akur dengan kehendak Barisan Nasional akan dilantik mengisi sebahagian besar jawatan baru di dalam Felda.
MOHD RAFIZI RAMLI
PENGARAH STRATEGI KEADILAN
COMMENT It is sad that despite the success of the Bersih 3.0 rally, the government’s media have successfully managed to distract some of us from the larger issue which is the demand for electoral reforms.
Many of Bersih’s own supporters, even those who took part in the rally of April 28, have been busy accusing fellow participants of breaking the law and indulging in violence. Some commentators cite the storming of the barbed wire barricade at Dataran Merdeka as the reason why the police shifted their position from “token resistance” back to their old ways.
Others were more crass, calling those who stormed the barricade as “hooligans” who took the law into their own hands despite the court order banning the crowd being inside the square. These so-called law abiding citizens of course do not ask questions like “which law?” or “whose courts?”
Then there are of course others who treat the rally as simply a parade, and that being peaceful means abiding by even the unfair laws symbolised by the barbed wires. Some are clearly been under the illusion that Bersih 3.0 was our answer to the Rio carnival.
Their political loyalty is only laid bare upon reading their ‘eyewitness’ reports taking pains to point out that majority of rally goers were not opposition supporters. In their inability to overcome their inborn allergy of opposition parties such as PAS and PKR, they even make the claim that shouts of ‘reformasi’ were not entertained by the crowd.
One eyewitness, none other than the daughter of Dr Mahathir Mohamad, even points out that no political leader in the country could have mobilised something as big as Bersih. (Gentle reminder: 14 years ago, 100,000 people gathered at the same spot in support of a certain individual that her father despises.)
The truth is that shouts of ‘reformasi’ and ‘Hancur Najib’ were reverberating in liberal doses on that day. Anyone who was there would tell you that slogans against Barisan Nasional had echoed with the same fury and spirited volume as the “non-partisan” shouts of “Bersih” or “Hidup Rakyat”, and spiralled later into the LRT coaches and nearby restaurants.
Those who claim otherwise could be living in their smart sound-proofed walls of wishful thinking, selectively erasing out words they couldn’t stomach.
Clamour for reform takes on a life of its own
Whatever the instructions given by Bersih leaders, the fact is that the clamour for electoral reforms has taken on a life of its own. It is therefore naive to expect that the tens of thousands of people who went there should not storm the barricade, having been told to be as close as possible to Dataran Merdeka.
A video clip going around on the Internet purportedly shows PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim giving the green light to his deputy president Azmin Ali (arrow) to open the barricades blocking Dataran Merdeka.
This clip is then used by some to condemn Anwar as the cause of the police brutality that followed.
I for one have never vehemently come to Anwar’s defence other than my profound sympathy for the vile allegations that he and family have been made to endure. But if Anwar had indeed called for the barricades to be torn down, I really don’t mind putting a photograph of him as my desktop wallpaper!
The truth is that we all went there to break the law. A law devoid of fair play and justice, a law which is enforced to the detriment of ordinary citizens. The barricades blocking our march into Dataran Merdeka are the clearest and most tangible symbol of the government’s animosity to the ordinary public. It would be foolish to be there and not dismantle them.
We did not go there to merely shout and punch the air. We probably did so last year, singing in the rain at the gates of Stadium Merdeka.
This time, it is serious business. There is no time to waste. We are talking about tens of thousands of dubious names in the electoral roll, new voters whose citizenship are suspicious, the continued Big Brother mentality of our tax-funded television channels, and many more.
The peoples of Tunisia and Egypt would not have celebrated the downfalls of their tyrants had they followed the law and stayed outside the perimeters of the heavily fortified Tahrir Square. History is full of examples that for change to happen, removing police barricades is a norm, indeed the act has become a main ingredient of peaceful protests to claim back public places and venues denied to them.
It does not justify any high handedness by the security forces. History is replete with such examples. Change could not have happened if Iranians had obeyed the law against demonstrations during the Shah’s tyranny in 1979, or if the Berlin Wall had not been vandalised in 1989, or if Gandhi had not picked up salt during his 240-mile Salt March in 1930, or if Rosa Parks had not stuck her butt in a bus seat in Alabama in 1955.
Pakatan Rakyat leaders should not pay attention to the constant focus by the police and the Umno media on the storming of the barricade, as if the act were a grave threat against public safety.
This is no time to defend from accusations of violence and vandalism. People were angry, they want reforms. More importantly, they want them now. There is no need to waste time claiming ‘agents provocateurs’ amongst the crowd.
Playing into the hands of propaganda
I find nothing wrong in what some protesters did at Dataran, and simply accusing them of being ‘agents provocateurs’ is not only cliched but also plays into the hands of propaganda. There is no use compiling evidence to back claims of police brutality.
Now is not the time to seek an apology for the treatment meted out on protesters, but an apology over the way institutions of democracy have been raped and systematically undermined. After all, it is why we braved the tear gas, defied police warnings, and by the same logic, stormed the barricades at Dataran Merdeka.
The April 28 rally is not a tea party or simply a ‘walk’ as some who participated in it would like to think. Those who feel we should not have stormed the barricades at Dataran might as well stay home clicking at the ‘like’ button of anti-government Facebook pages, or disappear into some obscure stadium as suggested by the Kuala Lumpur mayor, in keeping with the stand that DAP vice-chairperson Tunku Aziz Tunku Ibrahim has taken.
My only regret was that I was not part of the crowd who tore down the barricades. I was suffering from a tear gas attack near Masjid Jamek, with the multiracial ‘hooligans’-cum-‘pharmacists’ coming to my help offering toothpaste, salt and water, before charging towards a police force that is armed to the teeth and trained to injure.
To those who fail to understand why we defied the law that day, I have this to say: “Kalau takut dengan risiko, jangan bicara soal perjuangan”. Pull aside, chew the gum of defeat and watch the show. That will be better than accusing those who risked personal safety to hammer in the urgency of reforms. To paraphrase a verse from the Qur’an, not equal are those who stay home and those who strive hard with their wealth and their lives.
BANKRAP adalah satu modal baru Umno-BN untuk menakutkan rakyat supaya jangan pilih Pakatan Rakyat. Sebelumnya mereka menggunakan isu agama, bangsa dan raja. Oleh kerana ketiga-tiga isu ini sudah menjadi basi dan tidak laku kerana Umno mempunyai rekod yang buruk terhadap tiga perkara yang diperkatakan. Maka Umno mengalih pemikiran rakyat dengan menakutkan isu bankrap jika Pakatan Rakyat memerintah. Semua tawaran Pakatan Rakyat akan dilabelkan bankrap dengan harapan rakyat tidak beralih sokongan dan meninggalkan Umno.
Apabila Pakatan Rakyat menjanjikan untuk menghapuskan PTPTN, hapuskan tol, gaji minimum RM1,100.00, menurun harga minyak, mengekalkan subsidi. Maka terdapat suara-suara sumbang mengatakan negara akan bankrap, termasuklah dari kalangan pensyarah. Apa yang pelik semua yang dilakukan oleh kerajaan BN tidak berani ditegur walaupun memudaratkan ekonomi negara dan membankrapkan negara walaupun mengenepikan prinsip ketelusan.
Sebenarnya taktik pemimpin BN bermodalkan bankrap supaya rakyat lupa bahawa negara akan menjadi bankrap, kerana rekod pemerintahan Umno seperti barah di peringkat empat. Apa tidaknya, hutang negara 53 peratus, paras bahaya ialah 55 peratus. Hutang negara melonjak dari RM146 bilion pada tahun 2002, RM242 bilion (2006) dan RM456.1 bilion pada penghujung 2011. Wang Felda susut daripada RM4.08 bilion (2004) kepada RM1.35 bilion (2009). Saham Bumiputera RM52 bilion lesap, Stadium Terengganu berharga RM292 juta runtuh, walaupun hanya setahun dibina, upah Apco Yahudi Israel RM77 juta setahun, RM589 juta hutang bekas Pengerusi Eksekutif MAS Tan Sri Tajudin Ramli dihapus kira, projek NFC RM250 juta, Laporan Ketua Audit Negara 2008 menyatakan berlaku ketirisan RM28 bilion, laporan Ketua Audit Negara 2006 melaporkan Kementerian Pertahanan membayar kepada kontraktor sebanyak RM943.46 juta (hampir RM1 bilion) tanpa ada baucar.
Ini bukti bahawa negara akan bankrap jika BN terus berkuasa. Sedangkan tawaran PR untuk membantu rakyat dengan kita memerangi rasuah, perbelanjaan berhemah insya-Allah negara selamat, rakyat mendapat rahmat.
Idris Ahmad, Ahli Jawatankuasa Pas Pusat
Speech by Anwar Ibrahim at the Economist’s CEO Lunch meet, APRIL 19, 2012 at the KL Hilton
In a collection of Greek and Latin proverbs compiled by the Renaissance humanist and philosopher Erasmus, known as Adagia, we are told: Multa cadunt inter calicem supremaque labra.
Not to worry, because for the life of me, I too haven’t the foggiest idea what it means.
But after doing some checking, this is just the Latin version of an old English proverb many of us are familiar with. It goes like this: “There’s many a slip between the cup and the lip”. In other words, even when the outcome of an event looks certain, things can and do go wrong.
That proverb could also be a convenient excuse when we don’t fulfill our promises, especially if we have made grand pronouncements about great changes to come. Well, I think you know where I’m heading here but just to add on to the drama, let me throw in another quote. For this, T.S. Eliot is the master:
Between the idea
And the reality
Between the motion
And the act
Falls the Shadow…
Now, this is no ordinary shadow but a long drawn veil of different shades of darkness.
But seriously, I am saying this because today more than ever before we are living in a world dominated by sense perception. A world where sound bites, boiler plate pronouncements and state-of-the-art mass media image-building take the place of sincere and straightforward expressions of truth.
In this regard, we have been treated to a barrage of promising reforms, which look very good on paper and even more impressive through media campaigns which cost millions of ringgit of the tax payers’ money. And this is money spent without any regard to accountability.
Indeed when it comes to promises, we have an embarrassment of riches. Firstly there is the overkill of sound bites such as the NEM, the GTP, the ETP, and the list goes on. They may all sound different but as you know, they are essentially cosmetic variations of the same stale approach to economic management.
But first let us look at the political and legal reforms which have been touted to have ushered in a new era of freedom and democracy for the nation.
To begin with, as you know the ISA is supposed to have been abolished just over the weekend. But even before we could give it a decent burial, the powers that be have already resurrected it from the grave. They’ve given it a different name of course, but we know that a bad law by any other name will still smell as bad.
Much has already been said by all concerned parties about the erosion of our fundamental rights and freedom, and that this new law is akin to taking away the powers of the police from their right pocket only to put it back into their left pocket. Suffice it to add that with the passing of this new repressive law, the stench of oppression still permeates the air and the Sword of Damocles still hangs over our heads.
Let me now share some thoughts with you on our social and economic policy road map which is encapsulated in the Pakatan Rakyat’s Orange Book. Firstly, this policy is founded on a new social contract between the government and the people. In the event of a transition to power, we pledge to introduce sweeping reforms.
We want to establish a real democracy to reflect and empower the supremacy of the people. We want to build a dynamic and sustainable economy to provide prosperity to all. The drivers for growth will be essentially led by the private sector. But this will not be crony capitalism driven by a philosophy of greed. It will be free market capitalism with a humane face. This is not an ideal in the clouds but a reality that can be achieved because we will be guided by the principles of social justice.
We will continue the practice of transparent and responsible government as currently done by Pakatan Rakyat states. We will free the nation’s institutions from the undue influence of politics and restore them to their past glory. The Judiciary has been savaged by the UMNO/BN Executive. We pledge to stop the political meddling in judicial proceedings and restore its independence and competency.
Other national institutions of government must be reformed: the Election Commission, the MACC, the AG’s Chambers and the Police – these are essential institutions to ensure the rule of law. They work for the people, not the political masters. They must be transparent and accountable. (more…)
From Asia 360 News
How does a Muslim village boy who faithfully attends Quran classes and goes home to the works of Lao Tzu and Confucius, grow up to view the world — and his country? The scope of Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s worldview is matched by the breadth of his political ambitions. Having risen from the ashes, the leader of Malaysia’s opposition is raring to prove his mettle at the upcoming elections.
Asia360 News editor-in-chief Goh Chien Yen caught up with Anwar Ibrahim in an exclusive interview at the Houses of Parliament, to discuss how exactly the firebrand politician plans to do that.
Asia360 News: There is a lot of talk about the general elections being round the corner. Some predict that they could be held as early as June this year. When do you think it will be?
Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim: I don’t know. I’m not particularly good at speculating. But the incessant attacks in the UMNO media on the opposition and their rosy coverage of [Malaysian Prime Minister] Najib’s movements, which you see virtually every day, is a sure sign of the imminent elections.
Q: Is the timing good for UMNO to call for an election soon?
AI: I don’t think the timing is actually good for UMNO. You see, they have downplayed UMNO as a party. They are projecting Najib, to show that he’s trying to do his level best. Relying solely on him, however, is to acknowledge the fact that there are strong sentiments against UMNO and the Barisan Nasional coalition. The other component parties that used to play a major role — MCA (Malaysian Chinese Association) and the MIC (Malaysian Indian Congress) particularly — are completely sidelined. I don’t believe they’re that confident.
Q: And the timing is good for the opposition, for Pakatan Rakyat? What’s your plan for the upcoming election in order to boost your chances of getting into the government?
AI: Well, we’re working very hard under the circumstances. We have at least been able to present ourselves as a formidable force, a team, and I think that has helped. Unlike Najib, they’re projecting him, but we always appear — the three party leaders [of the opposition coalition] — together. Then, there’s a clear common platform from Buku Jingga, the Orange Book, and on some issues we presented at the recent Pakatan Rakyat Convention. The good thing is that we’ve been working very hard on those issues. We presented the case not only as an alternative government, but with clear policies laid out.
Q: So what are some of these clear policies from an economic standpoint? The Malaysian economy seems to be doing quite well, registering about 5% growth for 2011 despite the global slowdown. What can you do differently or do better on the economic front?
AI: We are of course for market economics and market reforms, but to us, governance is central. Price hikes here are mainly due to monopoly. Rice and sugar are the monopoly of a few select companies controlled by family members of cronies. We believe that if things are done in a transparent manner and proper procurement policies, tender process, then we can minimally reduce some of these problems.
And this figure, the 5% growth, does not really resonate with the masses. Unlike our neighbouring countries, we’re a net exporter of petroleum; the revenue rests comfortably with this huge income resource.
I don’t think we have much of an issue with infrastructure, or economic growth. People tend to compare us with mostly developing economies. But I would always say that we should be compared with Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea, and not Myanmar and Bangladesh. But what is more important in terms of economic policies is that we have the capacity to move forward at a faster pace and to improve, radically shift and substantially improve the quality of education.
Q: So these are what you see as the immediate challenges if you were to get into power. What would your priorities be in your first 100 days in office?
AI: We need to make sure and be clear that it is not a race-based politics, number one. Number two, the issue of governance. If an observer looks at the growth figures, they know what is lost to corruption.
Q: If the opposition comes into power, Malaysia will be faced with an unprecedented situation of UMNO not being in government. How would others such as the judiciary, military and the monarchy react to this new political state of affairs?
AI: This issue is probably relevant much earlier. In 1969, it was a race question. The opposition was seen to be an attack on the Malays. It is not necessarily right; I’m talking about perceptions here. By 2008, we [the opposition] controlled five states — this is not a concern anymore. We are talking about an UMNO-dominated government versus the opposition, which is also Malay-led, so you can’t use this race card. Also now that we have been in government at the state level for some years, our interactions with the military, the police, has been deeper, and also with the sultans.
Q: So you think Malaysia is ready to move further away from race-based politics that have dominated the political scene for so long?
AI: If you look at the 2000 elections, it’s clearly a departure. It’s been quite clear since 2007. Some critics painted the picture that that if we do take over, it will be like a stooge to the Chinese. It has been used by Mahathir [the former prime minister] against me and it was used by Najib against me. He had publicly said that I will be a stooge of the Chinese, particularly the DAP (Democratic Action Party). My style has never been to be apologetic. Why can’t I be used by the Chinese and the Malays and the Indians, for the good of this country? Instead of just denying, “No, I will not.” Although this has been a major campaign in rural areas about the insecurity of the Malays, I think it’s over. People finally want to know about the future, their welfare. You go to the Penang Malays, it’s not whether a Chinese is chief minister, it is about their housing, about access to credit, which are their concerns. So we’ll have to address these issues.
Q: What are the challenges for Malaysia as it modernises while remaining faithful to its religious and cultural heritage? Do you see a balance that could be struck or will it always be a source of tension?
AI: We have been able to navigate this successfully, maintaining our posture as a tolerant, moderate, Muslim society. The so-called contentious religious issues were not raised by religious scholars but were purely a political ploy. After all, this race card, religion card are all inculcating a climate of fear. What they want to hear is what you have to offer in terms of concrete policies. If and when we do take over, then the constitutional guarantees and framework will be made on the issues of language and religion, which I think is clearly acceptable to Muslims and non-Muslims in this country. But, having said that, I wouldn’t want to discredit the fact that it would still continue. Look at the UMNO media; it’s a daily dosage of Christians versus Malays, so they may attempt to send this message through their incessant propaganda efforts to the rural heartlands.
Q: You’ve been scandalised, beaten, stripped of your title and thrown into jail. What keeps you going?
AI: I’m just plain crazy!
Q: Where do you draw your inspiration?
AI: I’m not crazy; I was just quoting Mandela. After I was released, he invited me, Azizan and the children to visit him. So we went to Johannesburg, because he wasn’t doing too well. He was very apologetic, he said, “Anwar, I’m sorry we’re not able to do much.” I said, “Look, you did your best.” He had immense influence and he was successful in even getting me out of the country for treatment in Johannesburg. He said: “People like us, people say we’re mad, we’re crazy.” Then I intercepted and said to him, “Mad, for sure we are not, but crazy, yes.” But I don’t know. I’m grateful for my parents, they were quite idealistic, my late mum and my father.
Others have asked me how I see Mahathir now, and I spent the first 20 minutes talking about the nice time I had with him. They said, “No, please be serious.” I said, “I am!” That’s a wonderful thing to have. Of course I get angry, I counter his arguments, rebut very strongly, in some ways despise his hypocrisy, the gross injustice, but I wouldn’t deny the positive contributions he made. But the destruction of the institutions of government, that’s unforgivable. Personally, I’m okay, I moved on, but the judiciary, media, the police force, parliament, were all relegated to becoming inconsequential.
Q: Speaking of your relationship with Mahathir, do you have any regrets in the sense that perhaps things could have been done differently? After all, you were the heir-apparent. You were the deputy prime minister, slated to become the next leader.
AI: Oh, I thought about that a lot. You have to remember, I was in prison, so what do you do? Meditate, read and think. And sing, I sing quite a bit too. You do, you reflect, but then it was mutual, he was kind to me and I was exceedingly kind and loyal to him. It was a very difficult period but I don’t think I had much option towards the end. In fact, I’ve always said to my more critical friends that I have absolved myself. After all, we were part of the government. Some of the decisions were bitter, but we needed to draw the line. Things like bailouts, things like the corruption reports against ministers, already on your table, and for you to say “not to do anything”… you have to bring it up! But people say you could have compromised, some friends did say that. But then you would have transgressed the boundary. If or when you do take over, how do you then rationalise with the public what you’ve done? If it’s done by the prime minister, well there’s not much I can do. But if it is condoned by you, you have a problem. So, do I regret it? No. Was it difficult? Yes. Do I think I had other options? No, except to resign early, to die a fighter.
Q: You’re also a man of ideas. It was about 17 years ago when you wrote the book “Asian Renaissance”. A lot has happened since. Asia is on the rise. Do you think what you described as renaissance is happening now? And where do you see Malaysia in this emerging Asia?
AI: That book became quite contentious because people close to Mahathir thought we were clearly parting ways. Secondly, the central idea of economics empowerment is critical, but not everything, that’s why I talked about renaissance, cultural empowerment, I talked about freedom, and justice. And I think there was a flaw in the thinking at that time of these economic gurus: prescriptions by the World Bank, the IMF about the East Asian economic miracle, and so forth. They didn’t talk about disparity, the marginalised, the poor, whether the judiciary is independent or not, or if the media’s free. To them ‘the miracle’ was in terms of a limited notion of economics and power. I hold very dearly the thesis I presented in that book. That’s why I used the term ‘renaissance’.
Q: Do you think this is happening now? There have been some changes. Indonesia has changed and is now a proud democracy. Malaysia has made progress too, slightly more liberal and democratic these days.
AI: I don’t think they’re that liberal — they are forced to be. Look at the parliament proceedings today — a mockery, a joke. But it’s a challenge. Once you are transformed into a relatively vibrant democracy, then you actually allow for space. And that latitude is essential for the mushrooming of ideas. That, to me, is very critical when you talk in terms of economics or cultural empowerment.
That is happening more successfully in Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand because they are more democratic. Although I wouldn’t want to deny the fact that Indonesia, too, is facing a major problem due to endemic corruption and marginalisation. If the issue of governance is not resolved, people have this suspicion, then whatever policies, however rational or good, will always be suspect. Is it to enrich your cronies or is it really something really essential to the masses? Trust is important.
Q: What would you consider your greatest political achievement to date?
AI: I’ve not achieved much. For now, I’m cementing the three parties together. Fortunately, the leaders of the three parties are like-minded and willing to collaborate for a common agenda. But there is still a long way to go. So we shall see. People say that success means you assume office. It’s not true. Success is when you’re able to deliver. It’s not when you attain the position. That’s I think the wisdom of having been there and being downtrodden. And I think that keeps your sanity and humility. I think that’s important. People think being prime minister is the end, but I don’t think so. I think you should be evaluated and judged. And when you’re able to honour your commitments after you assume office, and remain true to your ideas, that, to me, is a far greater challenge than articulating this ideal in the absence of authority or power. When you’re there, you deal with the realpolitik, with the power play, with the big forces, with the tycoons. If they give you a 10 million dollar ring, what do you do?
Q: There’s a strong moral conviction behind your political action. What keeps you true? What keeps you walking the straight and narrow and not, like you said, being wavered by the 10 million dollar ring or turning your eye away from what you think is not right?
AI: I’m a man of faith; I’m a practicing Muslim. At the same time, I grew up well thanks to my parents. My mother is not English-educated but she’s an avid reader. She virtually read all novels in Malay or in Bahasa Indonesia in those days, the entire collection of Balai Pustaka books. And my dad, we always had these small compendiums of books, from Gandhi to Lao Tzu to Confucius, and it’s interesting. For a Muslim family in a village, with a small library at home, we have that. So you familiarise yourself. I go to Quran class, and following the Nabi (prophet), as an intellectual, you don’t view religion purely from a dogmatic sense but you engage.
Roger Garaudy was a great philosopher, who started off being a Christian in France, then later on became a Muslim. It’s very interesting what he said, unlike a new convert. He said, “I’m blessed, I grew up a Christian, and that’s where I learnt compassion and tolerance. Then I became a Communist, and I had strong empathy and love for the poor and downtrodden. Then I became a Muslim and then I became more universal.” So just because he is a Muslim, the past is no longer relevant? No, the past is what is him. Exactly what Amartya Sen had said. In his book “Identity and Violence”, he said, “I’m an Indian, I memorised Sanskrit at the age of nine and I think it was a great thing, I’m a Hindu and I think we have a great civilisation, but because I’m in India, I think that Muslim moguls have done wonderfully well. But later I became a professor in Cambridge, in Harvard. I think it’s a great institution and I love being here in America and despite the fact that I grew up in Santiniketan, I am a great admirer of Shakespeare. So who am I?” And that is beautiful. I use that a lot. And when you read it and understand it and you see these people talking about Malay supremacy, oh my god, they know nothing. CY & FE
KEADILAN memandang serius kenyataan PM Najib bahawasanya kesemua 112,634 peneroka di 317 tanah rancangan FELDA dan 22,468 pekerja FELDA akan mendapat durian runtuh terbesar yang mereka tidak pernah impikan sehingga mereka akan “tersandar, rebah dalam kejutan” hasil tawaran awam permulaan atau “initial public offering” (IPO) FELDA Global Venture Holdings (FGVH) yang dijangka selesai penyenaraiannya di Bursa Malaysia pada lewat Mei atau awal Jun 2012.
2. Dengan “gula-gula” pilihanraya semanis ini, kami menjangkakan para peneroka dan pekerja FELDA akan menerima saham FGVH secara percuma di samping sejumlah wang tunai sagu hati insentif penyenaraian tersebut.
3. Malangnya, jangkaan tersebut ternyata meleset kerana menurut sumber yang boleh dipercayai, para peneroka dan pekerja FELDA tidak akan menerima saham percuma atau wang tunai insentif penyenaraian.
4. Sebaliknya, KEADILAN difahamkan bahawa:
4.1 Para peneroka dan pekerja FELDA diwajibkan membuat pinjaman dengan beberapa bank terpilih untuk membeli saham FGVH meskipun segelintir daripada mereka mungkin mempunyai simpanan untuk membiayai permohonan membeli saham IPO tersebut
4.2 Walaupun margin pinjaman adalah 100%, tempoh pinjaman adalah untuk 6 bulan sahaja yakni para peneroka dan pekerja terpaksa membayar balik keseluruhan pinjaman dengan simpanan sendiri semasa menerima borang merah jambu/biru ATAUPUN menggunakan hasil jualan saham FGVH di pasaran terbuka nanti untuk membiayai pembayaran balik pinjaman sebelum atau pada tamat tempoh 6 bulan
4.3 Walaupun “stamping fee” diketepikan, para peneroka dan pekerja FELDA masih perlu membayar kepada bank fi dan caj sebanyak RM200 apabila pinjaman dengan rasminya dikeluarkan atau RM100 sebagai rebat jika pinjaman dilunaskan awal semasa borang merah jambu (bagi pekerja) atau biru (bagi peneroka) diterima
4.4 Kadar faedah “daily rest” pada paras 5% setahun yakni lebih 2.5 kali ganda kadar faedah pinjaman mudah bagi National Feedlot Centre (NFC) pada paras 2%
5. Jelas sekali apa yang disifatkan oleh PM Najib sebagai “lonjakan berganda” ini sebenarnya lebih cenderung ke arah membuka peluang niaga baharu dan memberi kesempatan kepada institusi kewangan terbabit mendapat hasil atas titik-peluh dan keringat peneroka dan pekerja FELDA, terutamanya 5 bank pelaburan yang dilantik menyelenggara kesemua perkara berkaitan penyenaraian, 7 bank yang dipilih untuk memberi pinjaman membiayai pembelian saham, dan beberapa syarikat pembrokeran saham yang dilantik untuk menjalankan urusniaga jual-beli saham di pasaran terbuka. Yang paling ketara adalah bil yuran dan caj tinggi yang perlu ditanggung oleh FGVH atas khidmat nasihat dan pengurusan gerak-kerja penyenaraian oleh 2 bank pelaburan domestik dan 3 asing iaitu Maybank Investment, CIMB Investment, Morgan Stanley, JP Morgan dan Deutsche Bank ke atas FGVH.
6. Malah, pendekatan sebegini juga akan menyebabkan kecairan pada pegangan ekuiti Bumiputera dalam FGVH seusai peneroka dan pekerja FELDA menjual saham mereka di pasaran terbuka untuk melunaskan hutang kepada bank. Walaupun KPF dijangka akan kekal sebagai pemegang saham terbesar di samping Permodalan Nasional Berhad (PNB), Tabung Haji dan Kumpulan Wang Simpanan Pekerja (KWSP) manakala syarikat asing hanya ditawarkan sebahagian kecil saham dalam IPO FGVH, tiada apa yang menghalang mana-mana pelabur (Bumiputera dan bukan Bumiputera) dari membeli saham FGVH di pasaran terbuka.
7. Lebih malang adalah nasib anak peneroka daripada generasi kedua dan ketiga setelah harapan mereka untuk menjadi peneroka baharu dengan mengusahakan tanah ladang kelapa sawit seluas 360,067 hektar tanpa peneroka milik FELDA Plantations Sdn Bhd berkecai kerana telah dicagar kepada FGVH selama 99 tahun bagi tujuan penyenaraian.
8. KEADILAN menggesa agar PM Najib menghentikan “umpan undi” atau “rasuah politik” seumpama ini dengan serta-merta, dan menerangkan kepada umum perangkap yang tersirat di sebalik ‘durian runtuh’ ini. PM wajib menjawab kepada setiap satu mekanisme di atas bagi meleraikan kebimbangan ramai, lantas benar-benar memberi fokus yang sewajarnya atas hak dan kepentingan mereka yang kurang bernasib baik!
Nurul Izzah Anwar
Ahli Parlimen Lembah Pantai, merangkap
Naib Presiden KEADILAN
I welcome the new law, The Security Offences (Special Measures) Bill, tabled for first reading today to replace the long-standing and repressive ISA (Internal Security Act).
The Bill intends to remove the government’s right to detain persons without trial, and at the same time limiting any detention for investigations to 28 days.
We celebrate this move, to end a history of detaining people for their political beliefs. I have been, as many of my colleagues in PKR and Pakatan Rakyat, detained under the ISA. It must not be forgotten that Malaysia’s civil society, led by movements like GMI (Gerakan Mansuhkan ISA – Abolish ISA Movement) and SUARAM, have long opposed the ISA.
There is nothing just in the home minister ordering individuals being incarcerated for two years without trial, especially when those jailed are his political opponents.
The end of ISA has been long overdue. The damage it has done over the decades to thousands of Malaysians and their families will remain a scar. The world should not forget the lives ISA has ruined.
While we commend Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, we have reservations about the new Bill. We share the position of the Bar Council as stated in their Memorandum dated 19 July 2010 (Its view that there is adequate legislation to combat terrorism and, where necessary, the existing legislation could be strengthened alongside improved safeguards and oversight mechanisms. The Bar has restated their position today in lieu of the Bill tabling, and I too share their apprehension.
Further, before this Bill introduction,the opposition coalition has already pledged to abolish the ISA when its win in the impending general election.
And second, Najib and his administration have only now moved to abolish the ISA due to the insistent and persistent objections to it by the Pakatan Rakyat. Our ability to force the government’s hands was reinforced by Pakatan Rakyat gains in the general election in 2008.
This is not the end, this is only the beginning.
Najib has to repeal the remaining repressive laws, and there are various. I and the opposition Pakatan Rakyat ask Najib to continue from here and repeal or amend all oppressive laws, among others governing print & publications, students participation in politics, unions, assembly and overseas voting.
I repeat, Najib must seek to end all repressive laws, and with no reservations immediately.
ANWAR IBRAHIM
Datuk Bandar Wilayah Riyadh Putera Dr Abdul Aziz Bin Mohammed Bin Ayyaf Al Horny telah menerima Anugerah Timur Tengah bagi Ketua Eksekutif dalam sektor kerajaan, yang diberikan oleh Institute of Middle East Award for Excellence. Anugerah tersebut disampaikan oleh Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim Mantan Timbalan Perdana Menteri Malaysia yang telah diberikan penghormatan dan menjadi sumber inspirasi pada anugerah tersebut berdasarkan kecemerlangan rekod beliau sewaktu berada didalam pentadbiran Kerajaan.
Anugerah ini diberikan setiap tahun kepada pemimpin dan eksekutif dalam bidang kerajaan dan sektor swasta untuk menghargai prestasi kecemerlangan bagi menjadi motivasi dan insentif kepada peribadi ataupun institusi yang membangunkan dirinya dalam prestasi kerja serta meningkatkan tahap sektor . Berikut adalah petikkan berita tersebut:
http://www.alriyadh.com/2012/04/06/article724928.html
Bekas Perdana Menteri Mahathir Mohamad telah mengakui bahawa ia adalah sukar untuk meramalkan keputusan pilihanraya umum ke-13 disebabkan oleh isyarat “mengelirukan” dari pelbagai pihak.
“Apa yang pasti, ia tidak mudah bagi BN untuk mendapatkan majoriti dua pertiga kali ini. Pembangkang sekarang tidak seperti dulu, dan situasi semasa agak mengelirukan,” Bernama melaporkan Mahathir berkata sebegitu.
Pasti sukar bagi Mahathir untuk membuat pengakuan tersebut, kerana gabungan pembangkang Pakatan Rakyat yang dipimpin oleh Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, merupakan orang yang dia cuba untuk jatuhkan dan gulingkan dari arena politik sepenuhnya.
Pada tahun 1998, kerana takutkan populariti dan peningkatan pengaruh Anwar dengan orang Melayu, Mahathir sengaja mereka cerita liwat dan tuduhan rasuah kepada bekas Timbalannya dan berjaya dalam memenjarakan Anwar selama 6 tahun. Hanya selepas Mahathir bersara barulah Mahkamah Persekutuan cukup berani untuk menjatuhkan tuduhan dan bebaskan Awar.
Kini berumur 64 tahun, Anwar bersedia untuk memimpin Pakatan Rakyat dalam pilihanraya umum kedua sebagai satu parti gabungan. Walaupun tidak dibenarkan pendaftaran rasmi oleh Pendaftar Pertubuhan, parti-parti Pakatan PKR, PAS dan DAP telah menandatangani Rangka Kerja Polisi Awam dan bersetuju untuk manifesto bersama – Buku Jingga – bagi PU-13. Sementara itu, PU-13 dijangka diadakan sebelum akhir tahun ini.
Mengumpul kekuatan
Sejak pilihanraya umum ke-12 pada tahun 2008, Pakatan Rakyat telah mengumpul kekuatan, dengan dua daripada empat negeri yang ditadbir mereka – Selangor dan Pulau Pinang – dipuji oleh Ketua Audit Negara kerana tadbir urus terbaik. Kedua-dua Pulau Pinang dan Selangor juga telah menarik FDI terbanyak, mengalahkan negeri-negeri yang diperintah BN.
Kebangkitan Anwar dan Pakatan kini dinilai sebagai mempunyai peluang yang sama untuk meningkatkan prestasi mereka dari pilihan raya 2008, dengan ramai pemerhati meramalkan mereka mungkin merampas kerajaan persekutuan daripada Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Razak.
Mahathir nampaknya bersetuju dengan pandangan ini, berkata bahawa pelbagai andaian yang dibuat mengenai sokongan kepada BN tidak kukuh, dengan sesetengah orang mengatakan bahawa ia sedang meningkat dan lain-lain berkata sebaliknya. Mahathir tidak menuding jari kepada sesiapa pun, tetapi sehari yang lalu, beliau menyeru kepada Najib untuk membenarkan ‘orang luar’ untuk bertanding bagi kerusi di bawah tiket UMNO.
Mahathir mengeluh kekurangan orang Melayu’pintar’ dalam Umno, keadaan yang mungkin disebabkan kesalahannya iaitu keengganan untuk melembutkan pendirian tegasnya semasa pemerintahan beliau selama 22 tahun dari tahun 1981 hingga 2003. Malah, sepanjang tempoh perkhidmatan beliau, Malaysia mengalami ‘otak longkang’ yang besar termasuk dari masyarakat Melayu, tetapi Mahathir sentiasa menganggap isu ini sebagai isu kecil dan ‘biarkan mereka pergi jika mereka mahu’.
“Tiada satupun dasar Mahathir menyumbang kepada kelahiran barisan pelapis dalam Umno, tiada apa yang dia boleh kata sekarang. Dan kerosakan itu bukan sahaja kepada Umno tetapi dilanjutkan kepada ekonomi secara keseluruhan, di mana Malaysia kehilangan banyak bakat. Kesan ke atas ekonomi sedang berlaku sekarang dan jika tidak dipulihkan oleh dasar pembaharuan dan dasar baru, kita boleh menjangkakan kemerosotan yang berlanjutan secara menyeluruh,” Ramon Navaratnam, pengerusi Pusat bagi Kajian Dasar Awam, kepada Malaysia Chronicle.
Najib gagal dalam kepimpinannya
Dalam beberapa minggu lepas, bekas Menteri Kewangan Daim Zainuddin telah meramalkan BN akan menang dengan mudah dalam hanya tiga buah negeri – Johor, Melaka dan Pahang. Sebahagian besar kesalahan itu telah ditujukan kepada Najib kerana gagal untuk memimpin Umno-BN keluar daripada permasalahan.
Umno melantik Najib sebagai presiden mereka pada tahun 2009 selepas memaksa pendahulunya Abdullah Badawi bersara awal kerana kehilangan 5 negeri daripada 13 kepada Pakatan Rakyat serta majoriti dua pertiga BN yang sudah lama dipegang di Parlimen.
Mahathir dan pemimpin Umno yang lain berharap bahawa Najib akan membalikkan keadaan dan mengembalikan majoriti dua pertiga
yang penting, yang akan membolehkan mereka untuk meminda undang-undang penting untuk kekal berkuasa mungkin lebih satu dekad lagi. Tetapi pembawaan
politik kekok Najib akan ditolak oleh rakyat, yang kini melihat beliau sebagai seorang penipu.
Dalam komennya, dia telah memberitahu Daim untuk menunjukkan bahawa jika Najib gagal untuk memperbaiki keputusan Badawi, beliau perlu meletak jawatan yang akan memihak kepada sama ada timbalannya Muhyiddin Yassin atau ‘pencabar barunya’. Setakat ini, tiada orang baru yang muncul tetapi pertaruhannya adalah bahawa ia boleh mungkin MP Gua Musang Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, yang telah menyerang Najib kerana polisinya yang tidak teratur dan kepimpinan lemah.
Sepanjang tempoh Najib yang bermula pada April 2009, Malaysia mengalami serangan terburuk intoleransi kaum dan agama. Kumpulan pelampau seperti Perkasa dan Jati telah dipupuk dan dibenarkan untuk berkembang. Pada masa yang sama, Najib menyuarakan dasar kesederhanaan Barat. Tetapi ia kelihatan seperti mereka telah kehilangan keyakinan dengannya, malah Washington Post yang berpengaruh menghentam beliau sebagai “seorang hipokrit”.
Namun begitu, walaupun dengan mandatnya untuk memerintah akan tamat pada bulan Mac 2013, Najib telah meneruskan strategi politik busuk yang sama terhadap Anwar, menggunakan perkauman dan ketaksuban agama untuk menakut-nakutkan orang Melayu bagi mengundi untuk Umno supaya ia boleh ‘melindungi’ mereka dari orang bukan Melayu.
Sementara itu, ekonomi negara kekal diabaikan dan lembut kerana percutian kerap Najib di luar negara yang telah dikritik kerana membakar lubang dalam poket pembayar cukai.
Rasuah kekal pada paras tertinggi dalam rekod, dengan Malaysia tergelincir 4 tempat kepada 60 dalam Indeks Persepsi Rasuah Transparency International 2011. Malaysia menjaringkan 4.3 berbanding New Zealand, yang paling kurang rasuah pada 9.5, dan Somalia dan Korea Utara yang masing-masing menjaringkan 1.0, menjadikan mereka kedua-dua negara yang paling korup dalam penyiasatan. Di ASEAN, Singapura menjaringkan 9.3 dan Brunei 6.3
