by Zaid Ibrahim
1. The call by Tengku Ahmad Rithauddeen, Chairman of The Disciplinary Tribunal, for UMNO to disband its youth, wanita and puteri wings, as part of the measures to curb corruption, has attracted much flack from the party’s senior leaders including Dato Najib Razak. Instead of brushing aside the suggestion, as is the standard response of the party when confronted with something new, they should reflect and try to understand what Tengku Din was trying to tell them. Tengku Din was exasperated with the extent of the corruption permeating the party at all levels. He was saying that the Disciplinary Tribunal alone could no longer cope with the practice and culture of corruption within the party. As a loyal party man he was trying to politely tell the party leaders that UMNO could no longer be salvaged under the present structure, and under the present crop of leaders I might add.
2. What makes it so difficult for the Tribunal to effectively carry out its functions is the selective prosecution it must practice in the discharge of its duties. Actions can only be taken if required or useful to certain top leaders. The Tribunal lacks clear mandate from the party management in dealing with money politics, UMNO’s euphemism for corrupt practice. When I was suspended for allegedly being involved in money politics, I knew that Tengku Din, although Chairman, was not involved in making the decision. Someone else in the management wanted me out. So an UMNO member will be subject to investigation and harassment if he does not belong to the right camp. Many others will escape with impunity and they can bribe the delegates as much as they want and not get the attention of the Tribunal. So even Tengku Din now realises the futility of having the Disciplinary Tribunal to deal with corrupt practice. I therefore urge Tengku Din to retire and resign from the Tribunal.
3. UMNO leaders who are critical of Tengku Din should also be mindful that they are not supposed to criticise him or the Tribunal. Look what happened to me for criticising the Tribunal and for not wanting to apologise when asked. I got suspended because they said I violated party ethics. UMNO got ethics? Well that’s the true story. So they same fate will fall on Dato Najib and his friends in the Supreme Council. They too may get suspended if they continue to criticise the Disciplinary tribunal or its Chairman.This is of course wishful thinking, as there are rules in UMNO that apply to some but not to others.
#1 by Jeffrey on Sunday, 1 February 2009 - 1:18 pm
//Would MCA or MIC break rank with UMNO in a parliamentary vote ?// – why are you comparing whether PAS/DAP will break rank with PKR over anti-hopping bill? Are you suggesting PAS/DAP are in principles of same moral fibre as MCA or MIC that you condemn incessantly?
And what has “relationship between Kit, Tok Guru and Anwar, and then you will understand the motto of the three musketeers” got to do with the point under discussion which is how to reconcile the differences when:
· Anwar’s position on canvassing BN defections appears inconsistent with purpose of anti-hopping law;
· Anwar’s position cannot then be reconciled with Lim Guan Eng’s position supporting the anti hopping law, which I must assume is also DAP/Kit’s position;
‘ to abide by Anwar’s position when it comes to vote in parliament against anti hopping legislation is to contradict and back pedal on Lim Guan Eng/DAP’s position in its support?
Are you trying to whitewash these differences or say Guan Eng does not need to be consistent with what he said or trying to dismiss the significance of these differences if the issue of anti hopping is required to be voted upon in Parliament?
Are you always trying cover up real differences afflicting the PR camp and avoid calling a spade a spade or are you making a special effort today on this?
#2 by katdog on Sunday, 1 February 2009 - 6:07 pm
Talking about the anti hopping law. I think BN is in a bind on this just the same as PR. On one hand it needs people to hop in order to have any chance of regaining states like Perak.
With the current sentiments generally against the BN, i doubt BN would like to risk any further by-elections that might further test their actual support from the voters. Therefore, i doubt they would support any anti hopping law except only if they are convinced that Anwar may actually take over the government.
the UMNO goons still control many things in these country and have more resources to ‘persuade’ people to jump. An anti hop law at this moment would appear to be more disadvantageous to BN than PR.
#3 by Loh on Sunday, 1 February 2009 - 7:11 pm
///KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said today several Pakatan Rakyat elected representatives in Perak would cross over to Barisan Nasional soon.///— http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/NewsBreak/20090201122005/Article/index_html
This is most interesting. It says that AAB does not believe in anti-hopping law since he is actively encouraging hopping, and was very proud to announce his achievements.
The two missing PKR EXCOs of Perak were charged in court for corruption. They are also the two persons said to be missing and waiting for as what AAB said to be signed over. The reason why UMNO chooses candidates who have been charged for corruption in court was because they have proven to be susceptible to corruption, and are therefore qualified as UMNO members.
It was said that BN offers RM 10 million as the going rate of hopping. Would this be classified as corruption since MACC chief declared that money politics in UMNO was corruption?
The two PKR EXCOs could not be so stupid as to accept cash in the manner they were conveniently arrested by ACA. If that was a frame up, what was needed was for publicity, and trading could begin. The two EXCOs were selected for the crisis.
Since the two EXCOs had not been able to fight, like Anwar did, we understand why they have agreed to ‘cross-over’. But they can at least resign the position in the state assembly, after crossing over. Keep the money, and let there be a BUY-election again in Perak. It is at least a revenge for being framed up.
#4 by Loh on Sunday, 1 February 2009 - 8:24 pm
///Feb 1, 09 7:38pm
BREAKING NEWS! Perak state assembly speaker V Sivakumar said he had received the letters of resignation from the two PKR state representatives at about 5.45pm today.///– Malaysiakini
So two Buy-elections are coming.
#5 by ttc on Sunday, 1 February 2009 - 10:28 pm
Hmm, just sitting here wondering very curiously why the UMNO/BN turkey would want to table or support this proposed vote for Christmas to come early?
WE SAY YEAH! & NO TO ISA! :) AND HARIS FOR AG & RPK FOR IGP! GO FOR DSAI FOR PM & LKS FOR DPM & KIND WAN AZIZAH FOR HOME MINISTER.
2009 Resolution: Seek out all garbage and recycle or dispose post haste for a healthier life and planet!
#6 by cemerlang on Monday, 2 February 2009 - 12:40 am
Heaven is a place on Earth and that heaven is Malaysia considering all the Islamic ways of life that have been imposed into the lives of each and every Malaysian. Pray 5 times a day and before after any occasion. Fast once a year. Pay your tithes. Slaughter the cow. Make the religious pilgrimage. Cover your skin. Eat halal food. Do not point with your index finger because it has something to do with Allah and not so much about accusing others. Don’t use your left hand to give something away because it has something to do with Satan and not so much about being rude. And the list goes on. But…
#7 by Loh on Tuesday, 3 February 2009 - 11:19 am
///Malaysiakini Team | Feb 2, 09 4:28pm
updated 5.49pm Both have issued statements at two separate press conferences but with the same message – that they have not stepped down as state representatives.///
///He (Perak DAP Chief) says the PKR duo cannot retract their resignation letters and must now step down, as events have been set in motion for by-elections in their state seats.MORE
Absence of date on letter ‘irrelevant’
‘Valid’ unless they say it is a forgery’ ///
///Hafiz Yatim | Feb 2, 09 1:53pm
As BN and PKR brace themselves for possible by-elections in Perak, Malaysiakini learns there is a likelihood that the matter could be first referred to the courts instead of the ballot boxes.MORE
Lawyer cites Eusoff Chin’s decision in 1991
No anti-hopping law poses a problem ///
I hope lawyers will have their say on this.
To me, the letter says what it suppose to mean, and so a letter of resignation would mean that the person who signs the letter indicates his intention to resign. Would the court consider whether the letter was signed at gun-point? Would a letter signed like a promisary note be taken as signature under duress, or just part of a promise, in writing to undertake actions agreed verbally.