2011 Budget not a child of New Economic Model but bears all the marks of old discredited Mahathirish policies (Part 5 of 5)
Ex-top cop Mat Zain’s Open Letter is testimony that criminal justice system had further deteriorated after 2005 Dzaiddin Police Royal Commission report
Recently, both the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein had made great play about the successful NKRA on crime reduction, claiming that there have been a drastic drop in the crime rate particularly in street crime with improvement of the crime index since January this year.
However, up and down the country, ordinary Malaysians do not feel this dividend of fall of crime index in their daily lives as they do not feel comparatively safer in the streets, public places or privacy of their homes as compared to previous years.
In fact, the continued mushrooming of gated and guarded communities in the country is most eloquent proof of the failure of the police force in the country to discharge its most basic duty, to ensure that Malaysians, visitors, tourists and investors enjoy the two fundamental rights to be free from crime and the fear of crime.
In its 2005 Report, the Dzaiddin Royal Police Commission made 125 recommendations to create an efficient, incorruptible, professional world-class police service focused on three core functions – to keep crime low, to eradicate corruption and to uphold human rights.
Five years have passed. Have we progressed or regressed in the overall objective of the Dzaiddin Royal Police Commission Report to create an efficient, incorruptible, professional world-class police service capable of performing the three core functions to keep crime low, eradicate corruption and uphold human rights?
In my view, the police report card based on the Dzaiddin Royal Police Commission Report is in red ink as there is regression instead of progress in all the three police core functions to keep crime low, eradicate corruption and uphold human rights.
But this is not only the view of Malaysians outside the police force but also that of independent, dispassionate and objective former officers of the police force.
In this regard, I refer to the Open Letter by a former top cop, former Kuala Lumpur CID chief Mat Zain Ismail, dated 8th October 2010 which is powerful testimony that the criminal justice system had worsened after the 2005 Dzaiddin Police Royal Commission Report.
Mat Zain was the police officer who headed the initial investigation into the 1998 case of Anwar Ibrahim’s “black eye” assault while in police custody in Bukit Aman and recommended that the then Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Rahim Noor be prosecuted for criminal assault against Anwar, but his recommendation was ignored until a Royal Commission of Inquiry was subsequently set up resulting Rahim being found guilty and sentenced to two months’ jail.
Mat Zain recounted in his Open Letter when referring to the investigation into Anwar “black-eye” assault case in 1998, that he had to decide at the time whether to salvage the honour of PDRM or that of Rahim Noor and he decided with sadness to propose that Rahim Noor, whom he had the highest respect as a leader, a colleague and family friend, be prosecuted under Section 323 of the Penal Code.
Mat Zain wrote the Open Letter to Datin Kalsom Taib, wife and biographer of Datuk Shafee Yahaya, former head of the Anti-Corruption Agency, in response to questions asked in her book about police investigations into allegations against former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad for abuse of power in June 1998 in ordering a halt to corruption investigations against Ali Abul Hassan Sulaiman, head of Economic Planning Unit. Mat Zain was the officer in charge of investigations into the allegations.
Mat Zain was also the officer responsible for the investigations into the four police reports lodged by Anwar from 9th July 1999 to 20th August 1999 when in Sungai Buloh prison on abuses of power and obstruction of the process of justice directed against Mahathir, the then Attorney-General the late Tan Sri Mohtar Abdullah, current Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail as well as reports of corruption and abuses of power against Tun Daim Zainuddin, Tan Sri Rafidah Aziz, Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Thamby Cik and the late Tan Sri Eric Chia.
Mat Zain revealed in his Open Letter that he had written in May this year to Tan Sri Ismail Omar, then Deputy IGP and to the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein, for a review of the investigations into the false evidence produced against Anwar in the “black eye” assault case of 1998 “to protect the credibility, impartiality and image of the of PDRM which had been seriously affected since 2006”.
Mat Zain made the very serious allegation that former IGP Musa Hassan and Attorney-General Gani Patail had allowed fabricated evidence in the Anwar Ibrahim “black eye” assault case and must be held responsible for the current mess of the criminal justice system.
Mat Zain asked in the Open Letter:
“Apa sudah jadi dengan Sistem Keadilan Jenayah kita?….Siapa yang sepatutnya dipersalahkan? Siapa yang menyebabkan Sistem Keadilan Jenayah kita menjadi kucar kacir sehinggakan sesiapa juga boleh mempermain-mainkannya tanpa takut kepada sebarang tindakan dan hukuman undang-undang? Saya tidak teragak-agak untuk menyatakan bahawa keadaan ini berpunca daripada ‘precedent’ yang dibuat oleh Tan Sri Gani Patail dan Tan Sri Musa Hassan sendiri.”
Gani Patail, Musa Hassan or the Home Minister Hishammuddin and IGP Ismail cannot keep mum on this most incriminating and devastating Open Letter by a former top cop and I call on the Home Minister to give a full and satisfactory accounting on this matter to Parliament.
[Speech (part 5) in Parliament on the 2011 Budget on Wednesday, 27th October 2010]
I find it interesting the way LKS has construct his line of argument – he began with the latest data, then when back to Razaleigh’s viewpoint, talk of Najib’s redirection at UMNO GA, BN component failures and lastly broken law and institutions – when its suppose to be about the budget..
You did not emphasize that Najibs plans to spend will quickly run out of steam and result will be highly mediocre at best. The possibilities of ‘multiplier’ and ‘spin-off’ of mega projects is more limited and nowhere what they are wishing and dreaming off, saddling it to future generations that will be ill-prepared to carry the burden.
Yes, why a budget debate should mingle with so much of other side points?
1. The Budget presentation has blurry presented the financial situation of the Government without providing the Balance Sheet of the Government to include the Domestic and Foreign Dedts and the Rerserve and Assets. Especially missing the in-place of the EPF and its picture.
2. From BNM Statement, the Government is only having cash for 2-3months operation (not to mention the Development expenses!).
3. With the figures collected by IMD for 2009 and the budgets for 2010 & 2010, Malaysia is not be better off than Spain, at least.
4. There is no optimistic factors for Economic Growth and Government Revenue without burdening the tight-pocketed average.
5. The Budget is by no way sound and reasonable.
6. The Government has not proven that they can and had monitoring the budgets well. And, many failures of monitoring or abuses pointed out by the Auditor General years ago, at least since 2005 had not been rectified or even answered.
7. At least the almost doubled Palace expense should cause a cast of no-confidence vote when the doubled had never sought any formal approval from the Parliament like other projects which had gone wild!!
Any budget debating on such a base is meaningless. And, the Opposition should do something more meaningful, at least to show that they have a bundle of MP who can disagree sensibly on the budget!! Should LKS be the only one to voice out? Or, only a few voice from the Opposition on such?
All the discussions in this blog would then be meaningless as well!!
How can we include a ” gated community ” index, into the NKRA? They just dont want to know the truth.
The current mess of the criminal justice system is good enough to dash Najib’s hope of transforming Malaysia into a high-income country.
For too long we have ” celebrity ” leaders doing very little to benefit our country and her ordinary people.
Their only concern is their political careers.
Who own d licences of security companies looking after d gated and guarded communities in d country? Big bucks!
Majlis Ekonomi Negara comprises all UmnoBputras – can we expect progress ah
It’s like how 2 believe Saiful’s infamous rectum was empty even though he ate n did not pan sai 4 2 days, how aah?
Waoh, empty rectum just 2 store cutie sperm 4 2 days, banyak pandai oh
HM is acting like Moomoodin who cant exercise his authority to protect a commoner but chooses to avoid responsibilities and reality……..
Alas! MCA, MIC and Gerakan are not represented in Majlis Ekonomi Negara, which is a 100% “UMNO only” body.
So, folks, don’t waste your votes on MCA, MIC and Gerakan since they have no say in the economic development of the country.
In reference to the question raised by House Victim in #2 above on “why a budget debate should mingle with so much of other side points?”, Kit’s bringing into the parliamentary debate on Budget 2011 so many side issues/points – eg Mat Zain’s open letter, cowardice of component parties’ ministers to declare Malaysian first and race second according to Govt Transformation Plan, implications of “crushed bodies, lives lost”, Ku Li’s comments on corruption etc – is entirely consistent with traditional way of Malaysian Opposition to use Budget debate to question the government and make it accountable in Parliament.
The Government Budget debate offers a forum and high profile platform and opportunity for Opposition to raise important public and national issues.
The Budget is the Government’s and by extension the Ruling Coalition’s statement of priorities of the nation, policy intentions set by it and the resources available to implement them. Invariably the budget concern resources to be devoted to education, crime to just about everything else that require government expediture and Parliamentary scrutiny and debate, and therefore all collateral issues involving these topics may be brought up and extyended latitude for debate without being alleged irrelevant or out of place.
Had these issues being independently brought up for debate via motion would they be entertained???? Almost invariably it will be ruled by the Speaker that they don’t satisfy one or more of the requirements of “definite” and of “public importance”, “urgent” as required under Standing orders 18(1) and (2) for Opposition’s motion to be debated – eg Kit’s motion earlier this month to debate the racial epithets by two principals against students in school in context of 1 Malaysia was not allowed by speaker.
There are just too many issues of national importance relative to the opportunities available to Opposition to highlight them: editors of mainstream papers owned by corporations linked to political parties will not give space as a result of which Opposition has to rely on the World Wide Net and Blogosphere to highlight these issues.
To be sure, the time allotted to Opposition for debate of the Budget is restricted but it is still better than nothing for Opposition to use this opportunity to high light the issues, criticize and lampoon and often embarrass the government for inconsistencies between policies and implementation – all part and parcel of the critical role of a loyal Opposition in a democracy, through the institution of Parliament, to check, hold accountable and “hentam” the Executive (government) in line with the best democratic tradition of Westminster Parliamentary Practice – even though not all here in this Blog agree with the uses and beneficent check and balance effects of Westminster parliamentary practice as evinced by comments of grkumar in posting #20 in preceding thread ‘The “Social Contract – Concerned Scholars’ (Oct 27) (and I quote) “This is Tanah Melayu and the rules of Westminster do not apply to the rules of Ketuanan Melayu.” (Unquote)
1. If others issues than the Budget can be allowed for the Opposition to voice in the Parliament, should a well presented debate on the Budget be rejected?
2. Should the platform for the Budget debate be sorted out with necessary clarifications and answering to the Auditor General before new one can proceed?
No one will be suprised that the BN government will take every excuses not to sort out or answer (as seen from the previous).
3. However, don’t forget the jobs of the Oppositions to represent the People are to inquire and ask for clarification when things had gone wrong or illogical or even with violations. At least the Opposition has to show to the People that the Opposition is monitoring and is alert and in the position to ask and INSIST for clarification. So as TO DO THE JOBS!!
4. If the Budget is so much important, should the Opposition take the time to raise other matter, just to embarrass the Government?
With the blur presentation, hit and hide of facts and figures and the proven mis-management or care less of the Government should already embarass the Government if they care of being embarassed!!
5. I believe most Malaysians, with a sensible mind understand the bulliness of this Administration. But, the Opposition must take the chance, as I had said, to show the People what had gone wrong with the Budget and know how to challenge and where rectifications have to be done.
At least to show the People that the Opposition group can be synchronized in oppinion and give pressure to the Administration.
6. If the Opposition being voted in for more 1/3 cannot even give the right shots on the Budget or whatever agenda raised in the Parliament, most probably the People has to accept the Opposition can only work as a “guerilla”.
I hope you are not speaking on behalf of the opposition or their MP or Assemblyman!!
Present to the Parliament a Joint Declaration or Memo on what are to be queried and answered from the Administration. Otherwise, no point of debating the Budget where they have been hardly followed or monitored for the previous years. Raise a non-confident vote or walk out of the Debate, if it does not go through. Let the People see 1/3 insist of a proper Debate instead of firing “rubber” bullets or “smoke”.
Personally, I do not buy your explanation!!
I know its easier to sell the Warisan Merdeka tower as a waste of money to the heartland but if truth be told, even if we assume that the project is not a disaster and it does not directly cost taxpaper money, the question is, the average Malaysian still pays for it in other ways, govt will have to built infrastructure supporting it from traffic, police, power – money that can best used in so many other ways. In addition, the prices there will get ridiculous. The question to heartlanders should be asked – they think they don’t have to pay for it? – nasi ayam cost RM10 in KLCC – they think they can go there and bungkus?
Is this Tanah Melayu or Tanah me-layu? Me-layu as in “WITHERING”??????
This is Tanah Menwallop!
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/opinion/article/arrested-and-beaten-for-testifying-against-cops