Eminent panel finds sacking of Salleh Abas and two others “unjustied” and “unconstitutional”

By Jacqueline Ann Surin
jacquelinesurin@thenutgraph.com

From left: Ambiga, Sulaiman Abdullah, Salleh Abas, Mah Weng Kwai and Tan Sri Ramon Navaratnam at the launch of the report by the Panel of Eminent Persons to Review the Judicial Crisis in Malaysia

KUALA LUMPUR, 29 Aug 2008: A panel comprising six eminent judges and lawyers from Malaysia, Australia, India and Pakistan have found the 1988 sacking of former Lord President Tun Salleh Abas as “incomprehensible” and “unconstitutional”.

In addition, the Panel of Eminent Persons to Review the Judicial Crisis in Malaysia, also found the dismissal of judges, the late Tan Sri Wan Suleiman Pawan Teh, and Datuk George Seah, as “unjustified”, “inappropriate” and “unconstitutional”.

The panel, which was commissioned by a joint committee comprising the Malaysian Bar, Lawasia, the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute and Transparency International-Malaysia, also called for immediate steps to “redeem the people’s faith in the credibility of the judiciary and the rule of law” to be taken.

Relying only on the material that was made available to the two tribunals set up under the former administration of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, the panel said it was “incomprehensible how a judicial tribunal could accept” the charges against Salleh Abas as proved.

The panel said that having examined the proceedings of the First Tribunal, set up to try Salleh Abas, which found him guilty of five charges including “misbehaviour”, it was of the view that the former Lord President was “totally innocent and none of the charges against him had any merit”.

The panel also said Salleh Abas was, in fact, performing his “constitutional duty to uphold and protect the doctrine of separation of powers and the rule of law in the larger interest of the country.”

“The conclusion is inevitable, that the removal of Lord President Tun Salleh was non est. [editor’s note: means that which could not have been],” the panel found. Its findings were launched today by Bar Council president Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan.

The panel comprised former Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India JS Verma, former Pakistan supreme court judge Fakhruddin G Ebrahim, advocate of the Supreme Court of Pakistan Dr Asma Jahangir, advocates and solicitors of the High Court of Malaya Tan Sri Dr Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahman and Datuk WSW Davidson, and Dr Gordon Hughes, former president of Lawasia and partner at Blake Dawson, Lawyers, Melbourne.

The panel, which worked from September last year until delivering its report on 26 July this year to the joint committee, also said the findings of the second tribunal which suspended and then dismissed Wan Suleiman and Seah were “unjustified and inappropriate”.

“Glaring inconsistencies between enunciation of the legal principles and their application to the facts by the Second Tribunal is indeed incomprehensible. The consequent action of (the judges’) removal under Article 125 (of the Constitution) is unconstitutional and therefore non est.”

Salleh Abas was suspended in May 1988 after several run-ins with the Mahathir administration, by a tribunal that was headed by the acting Lord President Tan Sri Abdul Hamid Omar who was also junior in rank.

Wan Suleiman and Seah were removed from office in September 1988 by a second tribunal. They and three other judges were part of a special Supreme Court sitting that unanimously granted Salleh Abas’ application to restrain the First Tribunal until his objection to its composition was resolved by the High Court.

The panel was set up after repeated calls for the government to undertake a thorough and impartial examination of the 1988 judicial crisis fell on deaf ears.

Speed up judicial reform

Ambiga said the Malaysian Bar has always been steadfast in its support of the judges – including the three others who were suspended and then reinstated, namely the late Tan Sri Eusoffe Abdoolcader, Tan Sri Wan Hamzah and Tan Sri Azmi Kamaruddin – who suffered a “gross injustice”.

Calling the report “historic” in front of lawyers, former judges and the family members of the affected judges, Ambiga said: “We seek no punishment. We seek a correction of the record that now stands against these innocent judges.”

She said even though Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had on 17 April 2008 acknowledged the wrongdoing to the judges by paying them or their families ex-gratia payments, the record against them remained unchanged.

“The findings of the panel completely absolve the judges of any wrongdoing.”

At a press conference later, Ambiga said the report would be submitted to the government, Bar associations worldwide and international organisations.
“We hope the government will accept the panel’s findings in full,” she said, and called on the government to speed up the process of setting up the judicial appointment commission as well as stepping up the judicial reform process.

Blocking Blogs

by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad
August 29, 2008 12:44 PM

1. When a Government makes a promise to the country and then reneges on its promise, then not only will the Government lose credibility but also any respect that the public may have for it.

2. I do not often agree with Malaysia-Today.net and Raja Petra Kamaruddin. He had been sometimes quite irresponsible. But court action had already been taken against him. He is not above the law and if he is found guilty there are already adequate punishment that can be passed against.

3. But to break a promise and to openly show that you can meddle with the security of the internet is to expose a degree of oppressive arrogance worthy of a totalitarian state.

4. I had once before written to a Government Minister that Malaysia has become a police state because the Government instructed the police to call up people who invited me to give talks and coerce them into withdrawing their invitation. The police is not supposed to do that. When the Government makes use of the police for extralegal work then the Government is guilty of abuse of power.

5. The Minister simply replied that I had retired and it was better for me to literally shut up.

6. Now this blockage of the blog is another evidence that this has become an authoritarian state, elections notwithstanding.

7. Where are we heading? The censorship of news in the mainstream media is known to the public. Certainly I know of the blackout on me and the spins on any news about me. Now this.

8. I know that things have been engineered to ensure Khairy Jamaluddin will win as UMNO Youth leader and Dato Seri Abdullah Badawi as President. Democracy in UMNO is dead. And when democracy dies in UMNO, the party itself will die.

9. I would like to say this to the Prime Minister and his minions. You may have the power now. But as in five States, you may lose power some day. And this will certainly happen because of your obsession to block all contrary opinion from being heard. It will blind you to the reality of the situation so that you will continue to do wrong things and the people will reject you totally.

Ku Li: Permatang Pauh defeat shows UMNO must change

MALAYSIA TODAY: Wednesday, 27 August 2008 13:53
Posted by kasee

Statement on the Result of the Permatang Pauh By-Election



26 August 26, 2008
YBM Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah
Member of Parliament, Gua Musang
31 Jalan Langgak Golf
55000 Kuala Lumpur

Today, five months after we met with the biggest General Election loss in our history, UMNO has suffered a landslide loss at Permatang Pauh. This despite the mobilization of the entire leadership and resources of a party that has held the machinery of government without pause for fifty years. This despite a campaign that embarrassed and divided the nation with its ugliness. It is time to face the music: it is we who have been buried:

- Our leadership is rejected by the rakyat and, moreover, is rejected by our own members. BN’s vote count was less than the number of UMNO members in the constituency.

- Within and among our component parties we ran a poorly coordinated and listless campaign against a motivated Opposition.

- What scraps of credibility the Prime Minister and his Deputy had left after March 8 are gone.

Today’s report card, delivered to a Prime Minister who is accountable also as Liaison Chief of UMNO Penang and Chairman of BN, is impossible to hide: he does not have the minimal credibility needed to run the country day by day, let alone to take it in the new directions we need to go in a complex world. He may not have the credibility needed to keep the country together. This dangerous situation cannot continue, and it will not.

I appeal to the members of UMNO and of BN’s component parties to stand by UMNO in our hour of crisis, and to take a sober historical perspective. The people of Malaysia and along with them, Umno’s ordinary members, have found their democratic voice. They demand leadership that can be trusted to unite our people, to restore confidence in our institutions, and forge a clear national direction. Today is proof that this wave cannot be held back. UMNO must change. We must begin by renewing our Party leadership. I am confident that by December, we shall.

Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah

Rocky's Bru2

Imam's Bombshell to Help PKR's Last-minute Campaign

By Wan Hamidi Hamid

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 25: It's an eleventh-hour advantage for Parti Keadilan Rakyat.

The imam who witnessed Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan's swearing on the Quran to accuse Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim of sodomising him has cast doubts on the oath.

With less than a day to campaign in the Permatang Pauh by-election, observers noted that the Barisan Nasional"s strongest point of attack against the former deputy prime minister has been blunted.

[Ramlang witnessed Saiful taking his oath. Picture by Choo Choy May]

This means the public confession by Ramlang Porigi, the imam of the Kuala Lumpur mosque, made in Permatang Pauh late last night has freed Anwar from having to take the same Quranic vow to prove his innocence.

Ramlang witnessed Saiful taking his oath on the eve of the Permatang Pauh by-election. Although Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has said it was not politically motivated, he has been demanding that Anwar take the same oath to deny any wrongdoing.

The PKR de facto leader has refused, and for that, he has been vilified by BN leaders as well as the mainstream media.

To put further pressure on Anwar, Najib, who is leading the BN campaign in the by-election, swore in a Permatang Pauh mosque that he had nothing to do with the murdered Mongolian woman Altantuya Shaariibuu.

On Anwar's part, he and his campaigners have been insinuating that the Umno deputy president had somehow been involved in the murder linked to an alleged multibillion ringgit submarine deal.

But in front of thousands in Penanti last night, the imam, who said he did not arrange the ceremony on Aug 15, claimed he was directed by -a higher authority- to conduct the oath-taking ritual.

He added that the oath was not completely Islamic as both parties the accused and the accuser must attend. It was an ex-parte admission by Saiful.

When met by the press, Ramlang insisted that as a civil servant he is one of the nine official imams paid by the government to run the KL mosque he must obey the directives from his superiors.

Why did he have to be on a PKR ceramah platform to explain himself? Ramlang said he did not want to be blamed for conspiring with Umno, and the fact that no one in authority defended him.

He has been exposed as an Umno member registered as a voter in Penanti under the Permatang Pauh parliamentary constituency, which he later confirmed. He even asked the voters of Permatang Pauh to stop blaming him for having to do what was directed by the top people, and for that he received thunderous applause and chants of 'Allahu Akbar' (God is Great).

PKR vice-president Azmin Ali, who leads the party"s campaign in the by-election, has denied rewarding Ramlang who came forward willingly.

He told the press that it was proven that the second sodomy allegation is yet another Umno political conspiracy against his boss.

With less than 24 hours to go before polling, PKR and its allies especially Pas are expected to bombard the Malay-majority areas with this latest bombshell.

Many Malay voters are in doubt after Saiful's oath despite repeated assurance from Pas religious scholars that it was a wrong way to take an oath.

Ramlang's insinuation that Saiful was not all worried when taking his oath is expected to seen by many Malay voters as a signal that it was a false admission that"s what PKR campaigners are going to exploit today.

Anwar has refused to swear on the Quran despite calls by BN leaders, saying that many religious scholars advised him not to resort to it.

He has also referred the case to the Kuala Lumpur Islamic Religious Department, accusing Saiful of false accusation even as his Sodomy II charge is to be heard on Sept 10.

Anwar's campaigners are striving to ensure their leader surpasses his wife Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Ismail's majority of 13,000-plus votes in the March 8 general election.

Leader of all Malaysians? Yeah. Right!

Malaysian Insider - Commentary

AUG 10 - The leader of all Malaysians. Once it captured the spirit of optimism that accompanied Abdullah Ahmad Badawi into office as the country's fifth prime minister.

Today, it is a reminder of what should have been; what could have been; another unfilled promise by a politician who promised to blur the racial and religious lines but ended up delivering an even more polarized nation five years on. The leader of all Malaysians.

Once it offered the umbrella of comfort for non-Muslims, planting hope among the 45 per cent of the country's population that the difficult issues of conversion, places of worship and freedom of religion would be tackled.Today, these five words have been buried by a community feeling increasingly despondent about their place here and the ability of important institutions to protect the rights of all Malaysians.

The numbers tell the story. A comprehensive survey on political developments since Election 2008 show that only 18 per cent of the 3,000 people polled identified Abdullah as the leader of all Malaysians, with only 7.3 per cent Chinese believing that he had done enough to deserve the moniker. Generally, more Indians and Chinese feel that he protects the interests of Malays more than he looks after the other races.

Even the anecdotal evidence suggests that the despair is coursing through the veins of many non-Muslims. Datuk A. Vaithalingam has always been a straight-talker. He never fudged or hedged when he was a top official in the golden era of the Malaysian sports scene, the days when the country's football team was a source of national pride and Isthiaq Mubarak was clearing hurdles at the Olympics.

But he outdid himself last Wednesday. Speaking as the president of the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism, he gave a candid appraisal of the non-Muslim sentiment in the country to Abdullah.

"I must report to you that many non-Muslims feel marginalised in today's Malaysia. There is growing discomfort with the rapid Islamisation of our society. Universal values of ethical conduct and good governance, values which are shared by all religions, are appropriated by some to be only "Islamic", '' he said at the 25th anniversary of the council.

He cautioned the Prime Minister - the guest-of-honour - that unless concrete steps were taken to assure 45 per cent of Malaysia's population of fair treatment, the outflow of talent from the country would continue unabated.

Abdullah thanked him for his honesty and made the usual sounds on the need to be fair to all races. But even the PM knows that his government has not come close to delivering on any promises to non-Muslims since he came to power in October 2003.

Questions of body snatching or the status of burial rights for non-Muslims whose conversion to Islam was unknown to the dead person's family remain unresolved.

Abdullah promised to put in place a mechanism after the nastiness surrounding the burial of Everest hero Moorthy in 2006.

Little has changed since then. Similarly, there has been some disquiet over the plight of mothers whose husbands convert to Islam and then, avoid their commitments under the civil law to their former family. Non Muslims are unhappy that the courts are allowing one parent to convert children to Islam even if the other parent does not consent.

Vaithilingam also noted: "In schools, our children are not permitted to and do not get education in their own religion. Moral lessons are reportedly vetted by the Islamic authorities.''

His litany of complaints on Wednesday was long.

This is not the first time that the council has voiced their displeasure at the state of neglect over the interests of non-Muslims. Deep down, they know that Abdullah is not prepared to champion these issues, not when his own position in the country is precarious.

But they cannot keep the lid on the percolating discontent among the non-Muslims. That is why many of the religious groups backed the move by the Bar Council to proceed with its controversial public forum on conversion to Islam on Saturday.

The forum was eventually stopped by the organizers on the advice of police and threats by Muslim non-governmental groups.

Truth to be told, little good would have emerged from a forum not represented by major Muslim players such as Parti Islam SeMalaysia, Umno and Jakim. But in the absence of any meaningful moves by the government or political parties to resolve issues related to conversion, non-Muslims are prone to support any group willing to discussing these matters.

Abdullah and other Umno leaders have urged the Bar Council and other bodies to discuss sensitive matters behind closed doors but the Prime Minister will know from recent experience that this approach does not guarantee any progress. For example, he knows that many of his Umno colleagues in Cabinet are either against or ambivalent about promoting dialogue between Muslims and non-Muslims. That is why Datuk Shafie Apdal's proposal to have more dialogue on national unity was shot down vigorously by an Umno minister during a recent Cabinet meeting.

A cabinet minister, who declined to be identified, told the Malaysian Insider: "Shafie did not get much support.

Pak Lah did not say much and neither did Najib. It could because this is the Umno election season and nobody wants to do anything which will upset party members. But it could also be in-built mechanism against dealing with any difficult issue, whether judicial reform or other reforms.''

There is little doubt that the party grassroots is ambivalent about reform - and this is a charitable interpretation.

During recent branch meetings, Umno members were focused on Malay unity - specifically the need to stay as one and fight off demands from the increasingly vocal non-Malay population.

There was little discussion on the need to shed the party's perceived arrogance and refill the depleting bank of non-Malay support.

Against this backdrop and with the upcoming party elections in December, no national leader is going to champion the cause of non-Muslims and risk alienating the Muslim constituency.

Certainly not the man who once said that he was the leader of all Malaysians. That claim rings hollow among many non-Muslims today.

Ezam Mohd Nor as many knew him

The Chameleon
By Khalid Jaafar

The Malaysian Insider, AUG 2 — "If you ask me what kind of image I want", he once told me at my office in Jalan Telawi, Bangsar, Kuala Lumpur, "I want an image of a liberal."

He does not want to be a true liberal as the notions of spontaneous order, the virtue of the market and limited government are too strange for him. He just wanted a public perception that he wasn't an Islamic fundamentalist or a Malay ultra.

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim was still languishing in prison when I had this conversation with Ezam Mohd Nor and our party was dogged with an identity problem. I had yet to know then that he was already a mole, a Reformasi Lai Teck.

But today, as he turns away with vengeance against his former mentor, hurling vituperative against Anwar's cosmopolitanism and inclusive social and political philosophy, Ezam has re-embraced Umno's most decadent form of racial ideology. His return to his old party will only help plunge Umno into a deeper ideological crisis, alienating its power-sharing partners, and his strident Malay rhetoric will drive away idealistic youths in search for an integrated Malaysia in disgust.

He must be suffering from a lapse of memory that we are now living in the 21st century. There are the unstoppable and irreversible forces of globalisation affecting everybody and Umno’s exclusivist philosophy of Ketuanan Melayu is grossly out of key with time.

There is market still for Ezam's venom but a rapidly shrinking market. If Umno is really for the Malays there is still a political base to be consolidated. But the implementation of the NEP has been so corrupt in the last two decades only the naive would swallow government propaganda without being squeamish.

Many of us who know the internal problem he created within the party heaved a sigh of relief when he submitted his Umno form and it was a joke among us that his application was accepted but as a second-class member.

Still, I am often asked: "Why? What really happened?" Many find it difficult to comprehend why those who have found themselves estranged with the party for various reasons returned to the fold after Anwar was released but Ezam was at odds with everyone and finally left us.

The popular explanation was that it was the bitter personal rivalry between the two former secretaries for their boss's attention. As a person who has worked as Anwar’s press secretary for 10 years I found the explanation rather silly.

"The party has no discipline," he blurted out on the only occasion we had a heated argument. He wanted the party to take stern measures against his rivals who deliberately skipped party meetings. But in the years when I was a member of the supreme council he was known for his sparse attendance, and while present he was in the habit of being the last to come and the first to leave.

In the media he made innuendos on a particular person who was rich and comfortable while other Reformasi activists were slogging to make ends meet. But very few know that he received salaries from at least three companies, pocketing a salary equivalent to a CEO of a listed company. He was always being chauffeur-driven in fancy cars, and moved around with unproductive auxiliaries, reminiscent of the habits of Umno politicians.

His attacks have always been personal, spewing venom at Azmin Ali, and me on much lesser scale. Now he has upped the ante by mounting personal attacks against Anwar himself. A corporate person whose company provided Ezam with a fancy car told me recently: "All the time he tried to poison my mind on Anwar's character. He claimed to know Anwar inside out."

He created the impression that as political secretary he has opened Anwar's closet and found piles of stinking skeletons in there. The next prime minister has met his nemesis. I was more amused than alarmed at his threat.

Of the three of us — Azmin, Ezam and I — Ezam knows Anwar the least simply because he joined the office of the deputy prime minister — regrettably on my strongest recommendation — barely two years of the DPM's tragic sacking. I served as Anwar's press secretary for 10 years, and Azmin preceded me by a few months.

During the two years Ezam could not have seen much of Anwar Ibrahim. He only met him during weekly staff meetings of which he was mainly silent perhaps for being too young and too much in awe of the future prime minister or when he accompanied him in public political functions.

Azmin, being the private secretary, saw the boss the most in private. He was the gate keeper, arranging meetings and communicating messages to the corporate and political movers and shakers of Malaysia.

I had the singular honour of dealing with the most uncelebrated visitors, people whom other secretaries prefer to make themselves scarce when they knocked at the door of the DPM's office. They were intellectuals, genuine and occasionally pseudo, great scholars as well as deep thinkers. It was a real pleasure to open the door for Seyyed Hossein Nasr and Ali Mazrui, and it was a real treat to sit in and to listen to Anwar’s conversations with Nobel laureate V.S. Naipaul and futurist Alvin Toffler.

Ezam, I suppose, must be the Special Branch's biggest success story in turning over. If he wasn't turned over how he could have written a letter to Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi while serving his prison term in Kajang. He was the most celebrated of the ISA detainees but upon his release he refused to be present with them at a press conference. He also avoided being on the same platform at any rally.

When Anwar was released and regained his health, leaders fought tooth and nail to have him speak at their constituency. But Ezam evaded offers by Anwar to speak in Shah Alam, his division, and asked Shamsul Iskandar to sit in for him as Anwar toured of the country.

Why Ezam failed the test while the rest continue to walk tall as Reformasi heroes? I think he suffered from a disease I call Alcibiades syndrome. Alcibiades was the most controversial Athenian politician during the Peloponnesian War and one of the disciples of Socrates. He was immortalised in Plato's dialogue called "The Symposium". Instead of trying to understand Socrates' philosophy he was enthralled with the personality of the philosopher.

His speech in the symposium was all encomia to his teacher. In his politics he betrayed Athens by joining the city's mortal enemy, Sparta, then rejoined Athens to fight against Sparta and later betrayed Athens to join the Persians.

I saw Ezam giving a similar speech in Jakarta, when we were in a short exile, at the launching of the Indonesian version of Anwar’s Asian Renaissance. He didn't say a sentence on the book, or about Tagore, or Iqbal, or Rizal and Okakura. He was saying "Anwar this, Anwar that" and I at the time was praying that lightning and thunder would strike so that he could end his dumb speech.

I saw him in Ipoh where I heard him say: "I joined Umno because of Anwar Ibrahim, and left Umno because of Anwar Ibrahim." Of which he received a standing ovation among the youth delegates.

I saw his character in the Romance of Three Kingdoms, in the personality of Lu Bu whose politics is marked with a series of betrayals. But both Lu Bu and Alcibiades ended in ignominious deaths.

About the Author: Khalid Jaafar is a Parti Keadilan Rakyat supreme council member and a close confidante of Anwar.

Doctor on the run: Police want him to Fabricate Evidence against Anwar

Malaysia Today

Posted by Super Admin
Monday, 28 July 2008 00:18

The doctor’s report says it very clearly. Saiful was never sodomised, either by Anwar or anyone else. Why is the government still pursuing the case against Anwar? And why are they looking for the doctor who has now gone underground with his whole family?

NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin

On 21 July 2008, I published an article in this same column called HOW, YET AGAIN, THEY ARE TRYING TO FABRICATE EVIDENCE AGAINST ANWAR. (Read the article here ).

In that article I mentioned as follows:

You see, they asked a certain doctor from a certain hospital to conduct an examination on Saiful. The doctor did so and he came out with a report that said there is no evidence Anwar had ever penetrated or sodomised the young man. The police then picked up the doctor and detained him for three days. As much as they tried to force him to change his report to implicate Anwar he refused to do so.

Until today, the doctor stands by his report that there is no evidence Anwar had sodomised Saiful. He knows he is going to be made to pay for this but he doesn’t care. He is not going to change his report and say that Anwar sodomised Saiful whatever they do to him. Exasperated, the police had to release Anwar on personal bond or police bail. The doctor refuses to doctor his report and neither does Anwar want to volunteer his new specimen.

Well, that doctor’s name is Dr Mohamed Osman Abdul Hamid from the Hospital Pusrawi and he has now taken his entire family and has gone into hiding because the police are looking for him and they want him to change his medical report.

Saiful (centre) at the press conference with his father Azlan Mohd Lazim (left) and lawyer Zamri Idrus.

At 2.00pm on 28 June 2008, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Bin Azlan went to see Dr Mohamed Osman to complain about a pain he is suffering in his anus. Saiful told the doctor that he had been assaulted by ‘a very important person’ -- meaning, of course, sodomised by Anwar Ibrahim.

Dr Mohamed Osman examined Saiful but found no evidence that he had been sodomised, either by Anwar Ibrahim or anyone else for that matter. The doctor’s report (which can be viewed below) says that there is zero (0) skin tearing, zero (0) active bleeding, zero (0) traces of pus, etc., which basically means he can’t be suffering from a pain in the anus as what he alleges.

The doctor’s diagnosis is that he rules out or TRO (to rule out) assault (sodomised). In short: Mohd Saiful Bukhari Bin Azlan is not suffering any pain in the anus and neither was he assaulted or sodomised in the anus.

Saiful then said he would like to make a police report so Dr Mohamed Osman suggested he go for a second medical examination at a government hospital. Saiful did so and the doctor at the government hospital also came out with the same diagnosis. Nevertheless, Saiful still made his police report at the pondok police in the hospital.

In spite of the doctors all confirming that Saiful was never sodomised, the police still pursued the case. Anwar Ibrahim was subsequently arrested by about 20 SWAT members in Balaclavas and armed to the teeth in a dramatic movie-style action-packed drama in front of his house after he had confirmed he would be reporting to the police station at 2.00pm as required.

The police detained Anwar in the lockup until the next morning and even brought him to the hospital for examination and to try to obtain his specimen for what the police say are for purposes of doing a DNA profile. The fact that the police already have Anwar’s DNA profile from 1998, plus the doctors from both hospitals confirm that Saiful was never sodomised, did not seem to matter.

Clearly the government is attempting to fabricate evidence against Anwar and is trying to indict him on trumped-up charges of sodomy. And who but the slime-ball AG and scumbag IGP, the same two players in the 1998 episode, can be behind this latest travesty of justice.

The doctor’s report says it very clearly. Saiful was never sodomised, either by Anwar or anyone else. Why is the government still pursuing the case against Anwar? And why are they looking for the doctor who has now gone underground with his whole family?

Civil society movements, NGOs and the Malaysian Bar Council must not remain silent. The police have already detained the doctor for three days but he still refuses to doctor his medical report. Anwar did not sodomise Saiful and the doctor’s report says it very clearly. And the police also have a copy of this same report that I have published below so they know what I know. And now Malaysians also already know what I and the police know -- that Saiful was never sodomised by anyone.

ADDENDUMS

Najib will never become PM, says Dr M

KUALA LUMPUR, July 10 — Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who turned 83 today, dropped a bombshell — he predicted that Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi will never allow his deputy Datuk Seri Najib Razak to take over as Prime Minister.

Picture courtesy of The Malaysian Insider

Writing in his blog chedet.com, the former premier did not mince his words when putting forth his theory.

Dr Mahathir said that although Abdullah promises that Najib would succeed him by 2010, allegations would be hurled against the deputy prime minister before then to show up his inability to take over.

The Malaysian Insider had reported earlier that Abdullah would announce his decision to relinquish his post in June 2010

"Somebody who is deemed more loyal to Datuk Seri Abdullah will replace him (Najib). The replacement candidate will not take over the prime minister's post in 2010 because he lacks experience. Datuk Seri Abdullah will then hang on to his post until the 13th General Election.

"If the people's current trend of thinking continues (until the next general election), Barisan Nasional will lose the elections and Datuk Seri Abdullah will no longer be the prime minister. Therefore, there will be nothing for Datuk Seri Najib to take over from," said Dr Mahathir in his blog.

The former prime minister also accused Abdullah of not practising what he preaches; in particular, not adhering to his own directive to Umno.

"Campaigning for party elections is not allowed but the party president can bring all division leaders together and tell them not to challenge him for the president's post," he added.

He also said that Abdullah would assure Najib that there would be no challenges for his job. "If Muhyiddin insists on contesting, he will be seen as disloyal to the party and deemed a traitor because he does not respect the president's ‘democratic’ directive," he said.

But this is what Dato Seri Najib said as he paid tribute to the PM for setting a specific timetable for the handover of power. He noted that various people had urged him to go for broke in December.

"I must admit it was nice to hear this. But after calm had returned, I asked myself about my own core values. The fact is that I have never won a position by contest. It seems odd that at the tail end, I want to contest for a position. The concept of transfer of power suits my personality and my values. I don't want to do anything which I don't want done to me. I would not want to be force to step down, so I will not do it to someone else."

This tradition of not challenging the top leaders began after the debacle in 1987 that ended with Umno being deregistered following a challenge by Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah against Dr Mahathir. The next year, Umno in the form of Umno Baru was registered.

PI BALA retracts parts of declaration

The Star Online
KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA

Political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda's private investigator P. Balasubramaniam on Friday retracted the statutory declaration which he made less than 24 hours ago.

In a startling turn of events Balasubramaniam revealed in a second statutory declaration that he wished "to retract the entire contents of my statutory declaration dated July 1 2008. I was compelled to affirm the said statutory declaration under duress".

The document also read that all statements made were inaccurate and not the truth.

A visibly perturbed Balasubramaniam remained mum on Friday when met by pressmen who had rushed to a hotel here where his new lawyer Arulampalam Mariam Pillai accompanied him for the brief press conference.

Private investigator P.Balasubramaniam (left) talking with his new lawyer Arulampalam Arulampalam Mariam Pillai after the press conference Friday where he retracted the earlier statutory declaration, denying that Abdul Razak Baginda said anything to him that linked the Deputy Prime Minister to Mongolian murder victim Altantuya Shaariibuu. - Bernama

Dressed in a cap and T-shirt Balasubramaniam refused to answer questions posed to him and left quickly after his lawyer distributed the second statutory declaration to reporters.

Arulampalam also refused to entertain pressmen, giving only a brief statement that his client was under duress and that he was upset.

The new statutory declaration withdrew all statements that Balasubramaniam had revealed to a packed press conference organised by PKR de facto leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim at party headquarters on Thursday.

This included the fact that he had informed police what political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda had purportedly told him prior to Altantuya's murder.

The 10 statements highlighted in the second statutory declaration dated July 4 were:

* At no material time did Razak inform him (Balasubramaniam) that the former was introduced to Altantuya Shaariibuu by a VIP;

* At no material time did Razak inform him that Najib had a sexual relationship with Altantuya and that she was "susceptible to anal intercourse";

* At no material time did Razak inform him that Najib instructed Razak to look after Altantuya as he did not want her to harass him since he (Najib) was the Deputy Prime Minister;

* At no material time did Razak and/or Altantuya inform him that Najib, together with Razak and Altantuya had met and all been together at a dinner in Paris;

* At no material time did Altantuya inform him that she wanted money in the sum of US$500,000 as a commission for a submarine deal she "assisted" with in Paris;

* At no time whatsoever did Razak and/or Altantuya inform him that Najib met with Altantuya in Singapore;

* At no time whatsoever did Altantuya inform him that she wanted Balasubramaniam to arrange to see Najib;

* At no time did he tell the police during the course of their investigations about any relationship between Najib and Altantuya as no such relationship existed to his knowledge;

* At no time did Razak inform him that he had sent Najib an SMS the evening before he (Razak) was arrested; and

* At no time did Razak inform him that Najib has sent him an SMS on the day of his (Razak) arrest to the effect that he was going to see the IGP that day and that the matter should be resolved and for Razak to remain calm.

Statutory Declaration by Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal on Altantuya Murder case

From the Office of Anwar Ibrahim: Press Statement - for immediate release
3 July 2008, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia

Today we witness another episode of a consistent pattern of abuse of power and manipulation of the criminal justice system.

Recently one of the witnesses in the Altantuya trial approached us with detailed information of events connected to her disappearance and murder. The information was shocking.

Mr. P. Balasubramaniam, who was engaged by Abdul Razak Baginda as a private investigator was advised to seek legal counsel and document his story independently.

Today he is releasing a statutory declaration dated 1st July 2008 to the public detailing the story that he has to tell about what actually happened and what was told to him by key personalities in this saga including Abdul Razak Baginda and Altantuya herself.

These revelations speak for themselves. They reveal, amongst others, the following allegations:

1.Mr. Balasubramaniam was engaged by Abdul Razak Baginda to deal with alleged harassment by Altantuya in relation to debts owed to her (Paragraph 5 and 6).

2.Altantuya was promised a commission of USD 500,000 for assisting in a submarine deal in Paris (Paragraph 22, Paragraph 25.5 and Paragraph 28.2 and 28.3 ).

3.Altantuya was introduced to Razak Baginda by Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak at a diamond exhibition in Singapore ( Paragraph 25.5 and Paragraph 28.1).

4.Altantuya, Datuk Seri Najib and Razak Baginda had all been seen together at a dinner in Paris (Paragraph 28.2).

5.After the disappearance of Altantuya, a commotion took place in front of Razak Baginda’s house several days after 20 December 2006 where girl friends of Altantuya and one Mr.Ang (Altantuya’s own private investigator) arrived searching for Altantuya. Balasubramaniam had to call the police. A patrol car arrived shortly. Shortly thereafter an investigating officer from Dang Wangi Police Station who was handling the missing persons report lodged by one of Altantuya’s girl friends arrived. Balasubramaniam then informed Razak Baginda who was at home to inform him of the events taking place at his front gate. Razak then called one DSP Musa Safri who called him back informing him that Musa would be calling him on his handphone and that he was to pass the phone to the inspector from Dang Wangi Police station. Balasubramaniam then received the call from Musa Safri and duly passed the phone to the inspector. After the conversation of 3 - 4 minutes, the inspector told the girls to disperse and to see him the next day (Paragraphs 34 - 38). We believe DSP Musa Safri was aide-de-camp to Datuk Seri Najib at the material time.

6.Balasubramaniam was interrogated at Bukit Aman for seven consecutive days and his statement recorded at the end of November 2006. He says that he told the police all that he knew including everything Razak Baginda and Altantuya had told him about their relationships with Najib. These details were omitted from the statement he was asked to sign (Paragraph 49).

7.During the trial of Sirul, Azilah and Razak Baginda at at the Shah Alam High Court, the prosecutor did not ask him any questions in respect of the relationship Altantuya had with Datuk Seri Najib or of the phone call that he had received form DSP Musa Safri (Paragraph 50).

8.When Razak Baginda was arrested, Balasubramaniam was told by him that he had sent an SMS messsage to Najib the evening before (Paragraph 51). Razak also informed Balasubramaniam that he had received an SMS from Najib and showed it to him; the message read “I am seeing IGP at 11 A.M. today …. matter will be solved … be cool”.

Mr. Balasubramaniam’s evidence also mentions the extent of the relationship between Altantuya and Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak. We are not interested in the personal nature of the relationship. That is entirely his own business and hers.

However the allegations revealed by him raise key questions of public interest:

a)Suppression of evidence by the police investigating officers and those responsible for prosecuting this case. Such suppression could only have happened with the full knowledge of top public officials such as the IGP and the AG.

b)The question is also raised as to whether such suppression of evidence was the reason behind the last minute switch in DPP’s handling the case - where the head of the Criminal Division of the AG’s Chambers, Datuk Yusuf Zainal Abiden was completely sidelined from the case leading him and the senior DPP originally slotted for the case Sallehudin Saidin to put in papers for early retirement some months later.

c)Questions can be raised now with regard to the sudden switching of the judge fixed to hear the case which took place in March 2007 - why was this really done?

d) Did Datuk Seri Najib lie when he said that he had never met Altantuya before?

e) Did Datuk Seri Najib lie when he said that he was not involved in any commission deals for the purchases of the Scorpene submarines”

Mr.Balasubramaniam’s evidence vindicate what we have been saying all along; there has been no proper investigation of the murder of Altantuya and the investigation and proceedings in court seem to following a pre-arranged script for a pre-arranged outcome.

This has serious implications for the administration of justice in the country where the integrity and credibility of our key institutions such as the police, the AG’s chambers and the judiciary are already severely tarnished.

Today’s revelations further confirm a clear and consistent pattern of manipulation of the criminal justice system that we have witnessed in this country since 1998.

The allegations revealed here warrant a full Royal Commission of Inquiry.

Statutory Declaration by Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal —
[PDF Version]

STATUTORY DECLARATION

I, Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal (NRIC NO: xxxxxx-xx-6235) a Malaysian Citizen of full age and residing at xxxxx, Selangor do solemly and sincerely declare as follows :-

1. I have been a police officer with the Royal Malaysian Police Force having jointed as a constable in 1981 attached to the Police Field Force. I was then promoted to the rank of lance Corporal and finally resigned from the Police Force in 1998 when I was with the Special Branch.

2. I have been working as a free lance Private Investigator since I left the Police Force.

3. Sometime in June or July 2006, I was employed by Abdul Razak Baginda for a period of 10 days to look after him at his office at the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang between the hours of 8.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m each working day as apparently he was experiencing disturbances from a third party.

4. I resigned from this job after 2 ½ days as I was not receiving any proper instructions.

5. I was however re-employed by Abdul Razak Baginda on the 05-10-2006 as he had apparently received a harassing phone call from a Chinese man calling himself ASP Tan who had threatened him to pay his debts. I later found out this gentleman was in fact a private investigator called Ang who was employed by a Mongolian woman called Altantuya Shaaribuu.

6. Abdul Razak Baginda was concerned that a person by the name of Altantuya Shaaribuu, a Mongolian woman, was behind this threat and that she would be arriving in Malaysia very soon to try and contact him.

7. Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that he was concerned by this as he had been advised that Altantuya Shaaribuu had been given some powers by a Mongolian ‘bomoh’ and that he could never look her in the face because of this.

8. When I enquired as to who this Mongolian woman was, Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that she was a friend of his who had been introduced to him by a VIP and who asked him to look after her financially.

9. I advised him to lodge a police report concerning the threatening phone call he had received from the Chinese man known as ASP Tan but he refused to do so as he informed me there were some high profile people involved.

10. Abdul Razak Baginda further told me that Altantuya Shaaribuu was a great liar and good in convincing people. She was supposed to have been very demanding financially and that he had even financed a property for her in Mongolia.

11. Abdul Razak Baginda then let me listen to some voice messages on his handphone asking him to pay what was due otherwise he would be harmed and his daughter harassed.

12. I was therefore supposed to protect his daughter Rowena as well.

13. On the 09.10.2006 I received a phone call from Abdul Razak Baginda at about 9.30 a.m. informing me that Altantuya was in his office and he wanted me there immediately. As I was in the midst of a surveillance, I sent my assistant Suras to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office and I followed a little later. Suras managed to control the situation and had persuaded Altantuya and her two friends to leave the premises. However Altantuya left a note written on some Hotel Malaya note paper, in English, asking Abdul Razak Baginda to call her on her handphone (number given) and wrote down her room number as well.

14. Altantuya had introduced herself to Suras as ‘Aminah’ and had informed Suras she was there to see her boyfriend Abdul Razak Baginda.

15. These 3 Mongolian girls however returned to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office at the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang again, the next day at about 12.00 noon. They did not enter the building but again informed Suras that they wanted to meet Aminah’s boyfriend, Abdul Razak Baginda.

16. On the 11.10.2006, Aminah returned to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office on her own and gave me a note to pass to him, which I did. Abdul Razak Baginda showed me the note which basically asked him to call her urgently.

17. I suggested to Abdul Razak Baginda that perhaps it may be wise to arrange for Aminah to be arrested if she harassed him further, but he declined as he felt she would have to return to Mongolia as soon as her cash ran out.

18. In the meantime I had arranged for Suras to perform surveillance on Hotel Malaya to monitor the movements of these 3 Mongolian girls, but they recognized him. Apparently they become friends with Suras after that and he ended up spending a few nights in their hotel room.

19. When Abdul Razak Baginda discovered Suras was becoming close to Aminah he asked me to pull him out from Hotel Malaya.

20. On the 14.10.2006, Aminah turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house in Damansara Heights when I was not there. Abdul Razak Baginda called me on my handphone to inform me of this so I rushed back to his house. As I arrived, I noticed Aminah outside the front gates shouting “Razak, bastard, come out from the house”. I tried to calm her down but couldn’t so I called the police who arrived in 2 patrol cars. I explained the situation to the police, who took her away to the Brickfields police station.

21. I followed the patrol cars to Brickfields police station in a taxi. I called Abdul Razak Baginda and his lawyer Dirren to lodge a police report but they refused.

22. When I was at the Brickfields police station, Aminah’s own Private Investigator, one Mr. Ang arrived and we had a discussion. I was told to deliver a demand to Abdul Razak Baginda for USD$500,000.00 and 3 tickets to Mongolia, apparently as commission owed to Aminah from a deal in Paris.

23. As Aminah had calmed down at this stage, a policewoman at the Brickfields police station advised me to leave and settle the matter amicably.

24. I duly informed Abdul Razak Baginda of the demands Aminah had made and told him I was disappointed that no one wanted to back me up in lodging a police report. We had a long discussion about the situation when I expressed a desire to pull out of this assignment.

25. During this discussion and in an attempt to persuade me to continue my employment with him, Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that :-
25.1 He had been introduced to Aminah by Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak at a diamond exhibition in Singapore.
25.2 Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak informed Abdul Razak Baginda that he had a sexual relationship with Aminah and that she was susceptible to anal intercourse.
25.3 Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak wanted Abdul Razak Baginda to look after Aminah as he did not want her to harass him since he was now the Deputy Prime Minister.
25.4 Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had all been together at a dinner in Paris.
25.5 Aminah wanted money from him as she felt she was entitled to a USD$500,000.00 commission on a submarine deal she assisted with in Paris.

26. On the 19.10.2006, I arrived at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house in Damansara Heights to begin my night duty. I had parked my car outside as usual. I saw a yellow proton perdana taxi pass by with 3 ladies inside, one of whom was Aminah. The taxi did a U-turn and stopped in front of the house where these ladies rolled down the window and wished me ‘Happy Deepavali’. The taxi then left.

27. About 20 minutes later the taxi returned with only Aminah in it. She got out of the taxi and walked towards me and started talking to me. I sent an SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda informing him “Aminah was here”. I received an SMS from Razak instructing me “To delay her until my man comes”.

28. Whist I was talking to Aminah, she informed me of the following :-
28.1 That she met Abdul Razak Baginda in Singapore with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.
28.2 That she had also met Abdul Razak Baginda and Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak at a dinner in Paris.
28.3 That she was promised a sum of USD$500,000.00 as commission for assisting in a Submarine deal in Paris.
28.4 That Abdul Razak Baginda had bought her a house in Mongolia but her brother had refinanced it and she needed money to redeem it.
28.5 That her mother was ill and she needed money to pay for her treatment.
28.6That Abdul Razak Baginda had married her in Korea as her mother is Korean whilst her father was a Mongolian/Chinese mix.
28.7 That if I wouldn’t allow her to see Abdul Razak Baginda, would I be able to arrange for her to see Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.

29. After talking to Aminah for about 15 minutes, a red proton aeroback arrived with a woman and two men. I now know the woman to be Lance Corporal Rohaniza and the men, Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azahar. They were all in plain clothes. Azilah walked towards me while the other two stayed in the car.

30. Azilah asked me whether the woman was Aminah and I said ‘Yes’. He then walked off and made a few calls on his handphone. After 10 minutes another vehicle, a blue proton saga, driven by a Malay man, passed by slowly. The drivers window had been wound down and the driver was looking at us.

31. Azilah then informed me they would be taking Aminah away. I informed Aminah they were arresting her. The other two persons then got out of the red proton and exchanged seats so that Lance Corporal Rohaniza and Aminah were in the back while the two men were in the front. They drove off and that is the last I ever saw of Aminah.

32. Abdul Razak Baginda was not at home when all this occurred.

33. After the 19.10.2006, I continued to work for Abdul Razak Baginda at his house in Damansara Heights from 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 a.m. the next morning, as he had been receiving threatening text messages from a woman called ‘Amy’ who was apparently ‘Aminah’s’ cousin in Mongolia.

34. On the night of the 20.10.2006, both of Aminah’s girl friends turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house enquiring where Aminah was. I informed them she had been arrested the night before.

35. A couple of nights later, these two Mongolian girls, Mr. Ang and another Mongolian girl called ‘Amy’ turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house looking for Aminah as they appeared to be convinced she was being held in the house.

36. A commotion began so I called the police who arrived shortly thereafter in a patrol car. Another patrol car arrived a short while later in which was the investigating officer from the Dang Wangi Police Station who was in charge of the missing persons report lodged by one of the Mongolians girls, I believe was Amy.

37. I called Abdul Razak Baginda who was at home to inform him of the events taking place at his front gate. He then called DSP Musa Safri and called me back informing me that Musa Safri would be calling handphone and I was to pass the phone to the Inspector from Dang Wangi Police Station.

38. I then received a call on my handphone from Musa Safri and duly handed the phone to the Dang Wangi Inspector. The conversation lasted 3 - 4 minutes after which he told the girls to disperse and to go to see him the next day.

39. On or about the 24.10.2006, Abdul Razak Baginda instructed me to accompany him to the Brickfields police station as he had been advised to lodge a police report about the harassment he was receiving from these Mongolian girls.

40. Before this, Amy had sent me an SMS informing me she was going to Thailand to lodge a report with the Mongolian consulate there regarding Aminah’s disappearance. Apparently she had sent the same SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda. This is why he told me he had been advised to lodge a police report.

41. Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that DPS Musa Safri had introduced him to one DSP Idris, the head of the Criminal division, Brickfields police station, and that Idris had referred him to ASP Tonny.

42. When Abdul Razak Baginda had lodged his police report at Brickfields police station, in front of ASP Tonny, he was asked to make a statement but he refused as he said he was leaving for overseas. He did however promise to prepare a statement and hand ASP Tonny a thumb drive. I know that this was not done as ASP Tonny told me.

43. However ASP Tonny asked me the next day to provide my statement instead and so I did.

44. I stopped working for Abdul Razak Baginda on the 26.10.2006 as this was the day he left for Hong Kong on his own.

45. In mid November 2006, I received a phone call from ASP Tonny from the IPK Jalan Hang Tuah asking me to see him regarding Aminah’s case. When I arrived there I was immediately arrested under S.506 of the Penal Code for Criminal intimidation.

46. I was then placed in the lock up and remanded for 5 days. On the third day I was released on police bail.

47. At the end of November 2006, the D9 department of the IPK sent a detective to my house to escort me to the IPK Jalan Hang Tuah. When I arrived, I was told I was being arrested under S.302 of the Penal Code for murder. I was put in the lock up and remanded for 7 days.

48. I was transported to Bukit Aman where I was interrogated and questioned about an SMS I had received from Abdul Razak Baginda on the 19.10.2006 which read “delay her until my man arrives”. They had apparently retrieved this message from Abdul Razak Baginda’s handphone.

49. They then proceeded to record my statement from 8.30 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. everyday for 7 consecutive days. I told them all I knew including everything Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had told me about their relationships with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak but when I came to sign my statement, these details had been left out.

50. I have given evidence in the trial of Azilah, Sirul and Abdul Razak Baginda at the Shah Alam High Court. The prosecutor did not ask me any questions in respect of Aminah’s relationship with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak or of the phone call I received from DSP Musa Safri, whom I believe was the ADC for Datuk Seri Najib Razak and/or his wife.

51. On the day Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested, I was with him at his lawyers office at 6.30 a.m. Abdul Razak Baginda informed us that he had sent Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak an SMS the evening before as he refused to believe he was to be arrested, but had not received a response.

52. Shortly thereafter, at about 7.30 a.m., Abdul Razak Baginda received an SMS from Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and showed, this message to both myself and his lawyer. This message read as follows :- ” I am seeing IGP at 11.00 a.m. today …… matter will be solved … be cool”.

53. I have been made to understand that Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested the same morning at his office in the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang.

54. The purpose of this Statutory declaration is to :-
54.1 State my disappointment at the standard of investigations conducted by the authorities into the circumstances surrounding the murder of Altantuya Shaaribuu.
54.2 Bring to the notice of the relevant authorities the strong possibility that there are individuals other than the 3 accused who must have played a role in the murder of Altantuya Shaaribuu.
54.3 Persuade the relevant authorities to reopen their investigations into this case immediately so that any fresh evidence may be presented to the Court prior to submissions at the end of the prosecutions case.
54.4 Emphasize the fact that having been a member of the Royal Malaysian Police Force for 17 years I am absolutely certain no police officer would shoot someone in the head and blow up their body without receiving specific instructions from their superiors first.
54.5. Express my concern that should the defence not be called in the said murder trial, the accused, Azilah and Sirul will not have to swear on oath and testify as to the instructions they received and from whom they were given.

55. And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same be true and by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declaration Act 1960.

SUBCRIBED and solemnly )

declared by the abovenamed )

Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal ]

this day of 2008 )
Before me,

………………………………….
Commissioner for Oath
Kuala Lumpur

Rosmah at murder scene

My informer states that Acting Colonel Aziz Buyong was the person who placed the C4 on various parts of Altantuya’s body while being witnessed by Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor and Norhayati.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

"It's mind-boggling!" - That's how Raja Petra Kamarudin's statutory declaration alleging that Deputy Prime Minister Najib's wife was at the murder scene of Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu was described today.

An aide to Najib Abdul Razak also said they were aware of this latest claim made by Raja Petra, who also runs the 'Malaysia Today' website.

"At the moment, we are looking into it. This is a very mind-boggling statutory declaration," said the aide when contacted.

The latest allegation hurled at Rosmah Mansor was made by well-known blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin via a statutory declaration (below) signed at the Kuala Lumpur High Court on Wednesday.

The aide however refused to comment if any action could be taken against Raja Petra.

Najib and Rosmah (left) have repeatedly denied they are linked to the killing of Altantuya, describing the widely-known allegations was nothing more than ‘slander and concocted stories’.

In his latest bombshell, Raja Petra accused Rosmah as among three individuals who were present when Altantuya was murdered on October 19, 2006.

"I have been reliably informed that between about 10pm on October 19, 2006 and early hours of the following day, the night Altantuya Shaariibuu was murdered, three other people were also present at the scene of crime," he said, according to his two-page statutory declaration.

He named the two other individuals as one acting colonel Aziz Buyong, who is described as ‘a C4 expert’ and the latter’s wife, known only as Norhayati, who is also said to be Rosmah’s aide de camp.

‘A crime not to reveal’

Altantuya’s body is alleged to have been blown up with C4 explosives at a secondary forest in Puncak Alam, Shah Alam. The murder trial is currently ongoing at the Shah Alam High Court.

"My informer states that Aziz was the person who placed the C4 on various parts of Altantuya’s body witnessed by Rosmah and Norhayati," Raja Petra claimed in the document.

"I make this statutory declaration because I have been reliably informed about the involvement of these three people who have thus far not been implicated in the murder nor called as witnesses by the prosecution in the ongoing trial at the Shah Alam High Court.

"I also make this statutory declaration because I am aware that it is a crime not to reveal evidence that may help the police in its investigation of the crime," read the document, which was first posted on the bigdogdotcom blog run by another blogger.

Raja Petra, contacted by Malaysiakini, has confirmed the content of the document.

He further alleged that he has also been ‘reliably informed’ that Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi knows of Najib's (right) wife alleged involvement.

"[...] Abdullah has received a written report from military intelligence confirming what I have revealed and this report was subsequently handed over to his son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin for safekeeping," he said.

Apart from Abdullah and Khairy, Raja Petra claimed "one of the (Malay) Rulers" has also been briefed about the matter and is fully aware of the allegation.

He said he has agreed not to reveal their names other than mention that the prime minister and his son-in-law have been given a copy of the military intelligence’s report.

Police inaction over report

"The purpose of this statutory declaration is to urge all these parties who have been duly informed and have knowledge of this matter to come forward to reveal the truth so that the police are able to conduct a proper and thorough investigation into the murder of Altantuya.

"And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declaration Act, 1960," he said in his declaration.

In the phone interview, Raja Petra explained why he did not lodge a police report on the latest allegation which could lead to a fresh police probe on the Altantuya (left) murder.

The blogger said since there was no action over a police report he had lodged in a separate case in 2001 when he was allegedly beaten up by a high-ranking policeman, "I am not bothered in making a police report".

When asked why the document was posted elsewhere instead of his own 'Malaysia Today' site, he retorted: "Why must it be published on my site?"

Raja Petra was called in for police questioning early last month over an article titled ‘Let’s send the Altantuya murderers to hell’ in which he implicated Najib and Rosmah in the high-profile murder case.

A close aide to Najib, political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda and two police special operations force personnel have been charged with the murder of the Mongolian national.

All three have pleaded not guilty for the ongoing trial. They face the death sentence should they be found guilty. (MALAYSIAKINI.COM)

STATUTORY DECLARATION
I, RAJA PETRA BIN RAJA KAMARUDIN (IC No: 500927-71-5257), a Malaysian citizen of legal age residing at No. 5, Jalan BRP 5/5, BuKit Rahman Putra, 47000 Sungai Buloh, Selangor Darul Ehsan, do solemnly and sincerely affirm and say as follows:-

1. I have been reliably informed that between about 10 p.m. on 19th October 2006 and early hours of the following day, the night Altantuya Shaariibuu was murdered, three (3) other people were also present at the scene of the crime;

(a) Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, wife of the Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, Dato’ Seri Najib Tun Razak

(b) Acting Colonel Aziz Buyong (then Lt. Col.) a C4 expert

(c) Acting Colonel Aziz’s wife, Norhayati (one of Rosmah’s ADC)

2. My informer states that Acting Colonel Aziz Buyong was the person who placed the C4 on various parts of Altantuya’s body while being witnessed by Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor and Norhayati.

3. I make this Statutory Declaration because I have been reliably informed about the involvement of these three people who have thus far not been implicated in the murder nor called as witnesses by the prosecution in the on going trial at the Shah Alam High Court. I also make this Statutory Declaration because I am aware that it is a crime not to reveal evidence that may help the police in its investigation of the crime.

4. I have further been reliably informed that Prime Minister, Dato Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has received a written report from the Military Intelligence confirming what I have revealed above and that the report was subsequently handed over to his son-in-law, Khairy Jamaluddin, for safe-keeping.

5. I have also been reliably informed that one of the Rulers has been briefed about this matter and His Highness is fully aware of what I have revealed above.

6. I have knowledge of who has informed me of this matter plus I have knowledge of the Ruler who has been briefed and is aware of the matter but I have agreed that I shall not reveal this information other than mention that the Prime Minister and his son-in-law have been handed a written report confirming what I have revealed.

7. The purpose of this Statutory Declaration is to urge all these parties who have been duly informed and have knowledge of this matter to come forward to reveal the truth so that the police are able to conduct a proper and thorough investigation into the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu.

And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declaration Act, 1960.

SUBSCRIBED and SOLEMNLY DECLARED )
by the abovenamed RAJA PETRA BIN RAJA KAMARUDIN )
at Makhamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur )
this 18th day of June 2008 )


Before me,


ADDENDUM

Freedom Of Religion In Sabah

The term “Allah” in reference to God has been used for generations; it has become part of the cultural heritage. Despite this fact, churches, from time to time, face harassment from the local authorities for using Christian literature containing the word “Allah”.

Article 153 of the Federal Constitution provides for the natives of Sabah the special position and privileges as that of the Malays. Sabah joined Sarawak, independent Malaya and Singapore to form Malaysia in 1963. A 20-point agreement was made as part of the condition to join the Federation, and among the points are:

1. There should be no state religion and the provisions relating to Islam in Federal Constitution should not apply.

2. English should be an official language for all purposes without limitation of time.

3. The natives should enjoy special rights analogous to those enjoyed by Malays.

4. The power to amend the Constitution of Sabah belongs exclusively to the people of Sabah.

In the 1985 elections, the then opposition Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS), led by Datuk Seri Joseph Pairin Kitingan, form the state government. PBS ruled Sabah until 1994 when an internal agitation made way for UMNO to enter Sabah politics. Datuk Seri Musa Aman from UMNO was the Chief Minister from 2003 when the two-year rotation system was abolished.

In 2002, PBS’ joining the Barisan Nasional coalition rendered Sabah a state with no competitive opposition. Regardless, there have been palpable tensions and occasional calls for withdrawal from the Federation.

An added impetus is the token 5% royalties fo­r oil and gas. The Federal Government takes 95% of the profits, contributing very little to the state in return. Sabahans feel that the federal policies have generally been unfair and unfavourable to the state development. There have been calls for the review of these federal policies. Many believe that the NEP has not benefitted the Sabahan bumiputeras.

Despite the rich natural resources and the Prime Minister’s assurance that “no community is left behind in the mainstream of development” (The Star, 7/11/07), Sabah falls greatly behind the mainstream in economic development.

Sabah, together with Sarawak, contributed to BN’s simple majority in Parliament at the 2008 general elections in March. The recent political realities have prompted the various opposition parties to form a coalition called Pakatan Rakyat Sabah (The Star, 7/7/08).

Islamisation

Before 1963, Sabah and Sarawak were guided by their native customs and British laws. The influence of Islam was minimal. In 1967, the new state government under Chief Minister Mustapha Datu Harun embarked on vigorous religious activities. Mustapha strongly believed that the Malay language and Islam should be used to unite the people.

There have been reported mass conversions, particularly in the rural areas.

The most devastating blow came when Mustapha used his emergency powers to expel expatriate Christian missionaries with the reason that imperialist mentality and outlook should not be allowed to continue after independence, whether in relation to politics or religion (Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra, 1977, p. 266).

The Project IC or Project M, a political scandal relating to systematic granting of citizenship to immigrants, was reported to have begun when UMNO entered Sabah politics in the 1990s. The immigration policy favouring Muslims had resulted in an influx of immigrants from the Philippines and Indonesia, both legal and illegal. It is widely believed that this exercise was implemented to weaken the indigenous Kadazan-Dusun Christians and to enhance UMNO powerbase.

At a seminar in June 2007, the Chief Minister claimed that Malays formed more than 50% of the population, although the state’s statistics showed only 11.5%.

Supporting the claim, his counterpart, the Chief Minister of Melaka, said, “Even if that person is Chinese or Indian or Kadazan, if they are Muslim or have converted, converse in Malay and follow the Malay tradition, then they are Malays” (Daily Express, 10/6/07).

Religious Freedom

In April 2007, a businesswoman complained to the then Minister of International Trade and Industry, Dato’ Seri Rafidah Aziz, that her loan application was rejected because her unisex styling business was in conflict with Islam (Daily Express).

The Sabah Fatwa Council issued a decree banning all activities related to Rufaqa Corporation (The Star, 15/12/06). The Mufti said the movement had gone against Islamic teaching and caused confusion among the Muslim community. In May 2007, 11 people were arrested under the ISA for alleged involvement in an Islamist group known as Darul Islam Sabah.

There is no provision on conversion out of Islam. Muslims who wish to renounce Islam may face either punishment or mandatory detention at rehabilitation centres.

According to the 1995 Sabah Syariah Criminal Offences Enactment, “A Muslim who intends to or attempts to convert out of Islam is subject to be detained in the Islamic rehabilitation centre for a term not more than 36 months for ‘rehabilitation’ purpose.” Further, a Muslim declaring himself to be a non-Muslim is guilty of ridiculing the religion and thus subjects himself to punishment.

Bahasa Malaysia is the medium of communication among the natives in the state and the Alkitab is the principal Scripture used by Christians.

The term “Allah” in reference to God has been used for generations; it has become part of the cultural heritage. Despite this fact, churches, from time to time, face harassment from the local authorities for using Christian literature containing the word “Allah”.

Last 15 Aug, three boxes of Christian educational publications containing the word “Allah” and belonging to SIB Sabah were detained at the Low Cost Carrier Terminal (LCCT) in Sepang by the Customs. The Internal Security Ministry subsequently took over the matter. After several unsuccessful appeals, the SIB church turned to legal redress at the civil court. The lawsuit against the Federal Government is ongoing.

Last year, a lawsuit was filed against the Sabah Chief Minister concerning a stop-work order on the Mazu (Goddess of the Sea) statue in Kudat. The project was said to have been approved in Dec 2005 but a stop-work order came after the state mufti in July 2006 issued a fatwa saying that the construction was contrary to Islamic teaching.

Administrative error on Sabahans’ MyKad in relation to religious status has caused hardship to the people in recent years. The state registration department has presumptuously entered Islam to the MyKad of non-Muslim applicants simply because their names had the word “bin” or “binti”. It has refused to make correction when mistakes were highlighted. Applicants have been asked to fly to Putrajaya in Kuala Lumpur for any amendment to their MyKad.

The entry of “Islam” on the MyKad has grave effects on, among others, the non-Muslims’ marriage, children’s registration, burial and inheritance.

Others

Sabah’s migrant population has been estimated to be anywhere from 600,000 to 1.7 million (Nov 2007). Political expediency and the state’s historical ties have created longstanding illegal immigrant problem.

Without proper documentation and no access to educational opportunity, the stateless children of the migrants are facing bleak futures. Many of them were born locally and become street children once their parents are deported.

Statistics show that Sabah has the highest number of poor households in the country, especially in the interiors. Groups say that Sabahan non-Malay bumiputeras are marginalised and have not benefitted from the NEP. The Federal Government has recently introduced measures to improve their lives.

Some NGOs have chided the Sabah authorities for their apathy when issuing identity cards (IC) to indigenous people. It is an irony that many bumiputeras do not have ICs while foreign workers receive PR status soon after they enter the state.

Today, some of the indigenous children in the most remote areas do not go school. Many rural schools are small and do not even have basic facilities. The Federation of Chinese Sabah has claimed that some 250,000 Chinese are living along poverty margin (Daily Express, 9/2/08). (By courtesy of Berita NECF/ MySinchew)

The 10 Commandments of Facebook

These 10 commandments were given directly by Mark Zuckerberg to the people of the Internet, after he had set them free from MySpace slavery. And Zuckerberg spake these words, from his celestial kingdom, saying: "I truly believe I am the Lord thy God. Behold, Facebook is upon thee"

1. Thou shalt have no other websites before Facebook.
2. Thou shalt make for thyself an anti-MySpace profile picture.
3. Thou shalt learn about thy friends relationships from Facebook, and Facebook alone.
4. Remember the News Feed, and keep it creepy.
5. Thou shalt limited profile thy father and thy mother.
6. Thou shalt write inside jokes on thy friend's Wall, so all can bear witness to thy popularity.
7. Thou shalt poke members of the opposite sex until they finally have sex with thee, or block thee altogether, whichever comes first.
8. Thou shalt untag all photos that make thee look fugly.
9. Thou shalt update thy status regularly, so that thy friends can know thy business at all times.
10. Thou shalt put thy address, screen-name, and phone number on thy profile, so that thou mayst be stalked.

Continue Teaching Science and Mathematics in English

by M. Bakri Musa

The government’s decision to revisit (and most likely do away with) the current teaching of science and mathematics in English is an instructive example of how an otherwise sensible policy could easily be discredited and then abandoned because of poor execution. Had there been better planning, many of the problems encountered could have been readily anticipated and thus avoided, or at least reduced. The policy would then more likely to succeed, and thus be accepted.

Ironically, only a year ago a Ministry of Education “study” pronounced the program to be moving along “smoothly,” with officials “satisfied” with its implementation. Now another “study” showed that there was no difference in the “performance” (whatever that term means or how they measure it) between those taught in Malay or English.

The policy was in response to the obvious deficiencies noted in students coming out of our national schools: their abysmal command of English, and their limited mathematical skills and science literacy. They carry these deficits when they enter university, and then onto the workplace.

The results are predictable. These graduates are practically unemployable. As the vast majority of them are Malays, this creates tremendous political pressure on the government to act as employer of last resort. Accommodating these graduates made our civil service bloated and inefficient, burdened by their deficient language and mathematical abilities.

This longstanding problem began in the late 1970s when Malay became the exclusive language of instruction in our public schools and universities. Overcoming this problem would be a monumental undertaking.

The greatest mistake was to underestimate the magnitude of the task, especially in overcoming the system’s inertia. Today’s teachers and policy makers are products of this all-Malay education system. Change would mean repudiating the very system that had produced them, a tough sell at the best of times.

In their naivety, ministry officials convinced themselves that such enormous obstacles as the teachers’ lack of English fluency could easily be overcome by enrolling them in short culup (superficial) courses that were in turn conducted by those equally inept in English. Or by simply providing these teachers with laptops programmed with instructional modules!

Even if we had had the best talents devoting themselves exclusively to implementing the policy, the task would still be huge. Unfortunately we have Hishammuddin Hussein as Minister of Education shepherding the change. An insightful innovator or an effective executive he is not. Being simultaneously an UMNO Youth Chief, he was also distracted in trying to pass himself off as the champion of Ketuanan Melayu.

These factors practically ensure the initiative’s failure. The tragic part is that the burden of the failure falls disproportionately on the rural poor, meaning Malays, a point missed by these self-professed nationalists. I would have thought that that alone would have motivated them to succeed.

A Better Way

Teaching science and mathematics in English would solve two problems simultaneously. One, considering the critical shortage of textbooks, journals, and other literature in Malay, teaching the two subjects in English would facilitate the acquisition of new knowledge by our students. With the exponential growth of new knowledge, it would be impossible to keep up solely through translations, even if we were to devote our entire intellectual resources towards that endeavor.

The other objective was to enhance the English fluency of our students. Of course if that were the only consideration, there are other more effective ways of achieving it, like devoting more instructional hours to the subject.

If, as the recent Ministry’s “study” indicates, there is no difference in performance between those taught in Malay or English, that in itself would favor continuing the program because of the twin benefits discussed earlier. Besides, changing course midstream would not only be disruptive but also counterproductive. Our educational system needs predictable stability and incremental improvements, not disruptive U-turns and faddish changes, especially in response to political pressures.

A more important point is this. Altering a politically pivotal and highly emotional public policy requires careful preparation and deliberate execution. If I were to implement the policy, this is what I would do. Lest readers think that this is hindsight wisdom on my part, rest assured that I had documented these ideas in my earlier book, long before the government even contemplated the policy.

Being prudent, as we are dealing with our children’s and nation’s future, I would begin with a small pilot project, analyze the problems, correct the deficiencies, and only then expand the program.

First, I would implement the policy initially only at primary and selected secondary schools, like our residential schools. The language requirements as well as the science and mathematical concepts at the primary level are quite elementary, and thus more readily acquired by the teachers. And at that level the pupils would not have to unlearn much as everything would still be new.

In schools where the background English literacy level of the pupils is low as in the villages, I would have the pupils take English immersion classes for a full term or even a year. We had earlier successful experiences with this with our Special Malay Classes and Remove classes. This strategy has also been tried successfully in America for children of non-English-speaking immigrants. Another idea I put forth in my earlier book is to bring back the old English schools in such areas. As the Malay literacy level in the community and at home is high, these pupils are unlikely to “forget” their own language.

At the secondary level, our residential schools get the best students and teachers. Consequently the program could be more easily implemented there as the learning curve would be steep, and mistakes more readily recognized and corrected. Once the kinks have been worked out, expand the program.

Second is the issue of teachers. Fortunately Malaysia has two large untapped reservoirs of talent: recently retired teachers trained under the old English-based system, and native English speakers who are either spouses of Malaysians or residents of this country. Given adequate compensation and minimal of hassles, they could be readily recruited.

I would add other incentives especially if they were to serve in rural areas where the need is most acute. Thus in addition to greater pay, I would give them first preference to teachers’ quarters.

A permanent solution would be to convert a number of existing teachers’ colleges into exclusively English-medium institutions to train future teachers of English, science, and mathematics. As the present teacher-trainees have limited English fluency, I would begin admitting them right away in January following their leaving school in December of the preceding year.

From that January till the regular opening of the academic year (sometime in July), these trainees would undergo intensive English immersion classes where their entire 24-hour day would be consumed with learning, speaking, thinking, and even dreaming in English. With the subsequent three years of additional instructions exclusively in English, these graduates would then be fully fluent in English.

With such quality programs, these graduates would be in great demand within and outside their profession. With their heightened English facility and mathematical competency, their educational opportunities would also expand as they could further their studies anywhere in the English-speaking world. With such bright prospects, these colleges would have no difficulty recruiting talented school leavers. Our teaching profession would also be enriched with the addition of such talents.

As for textbooks, there is no need to write new ones. The contents of these two subjects are universally applicable. Meaning, textbooks written for British students would be just as suitable for Malaysians, so we could select already available books. With its purchasing clout, the government could drive a hard bargain with existing publishers.

I hope Ministry of Education officials, including and especially Hishammuddin, would heed these factors when they review the current policy. They should continue the current policy, correct the evident errors, and strengthen the obvious weaknesses. The success of this policy would also mean success for our students, and our nation. That is a worthy pursuit for anyone with ambitions to one day lead the nation