Archive for October, 2007
His Hollowness The Imam of Islam Hadhari
Posted by Kit in Bakri Musa on Monday, 22 October 2007
by M. Bakri Musa
You can tell much about a creed by its practices, in particular that of its leader. By this measure, Islam Hadhari is a cruel hoax perpetrated by Abdullah Badawi on the citizens. This recently concluded Ramadan was Abdullah’s fifth as Prime Minister. On none of those occasions did he see fit to live or demonstrate the spirit of generosity and forgiveness that is the hallmark of Ramadan.
During the tenure of Mahathir, as well as others before him, it was traditional for the King on the advice of his Prime Minister to pardon prisoners during the last days of Ramadan, in time for them to join their families for Eid celebrations. We had the writer and philosopher Kassim Ahmad as well as the scholar Syed Hussin Ali, prisoners of conscience under the ISA, thus released. My classmate, once a fast rising star in UMNO and a former cabinet minister, was also pardoned of his murder conviction and released.
Abdullah has had five Ramadans to demonstrate the generosity or magnanimity of his Islam Hadhari. He missed them all. Equally significant, during the recent 50th Merdeka Anniversary, Abdullah did not see fit to have any amnesty program for prisoners. Nor did he have one on assuming power.
In his typically sermonizing Hari Raya message he exhorted Muslims to be generous and gracious. That was as far as he went; nothing beyond dispensing homilies.
On closer scrutiny, there was nothing in the ten stated principles of his Islam Hadhari about generosity or charity. How foolish of me to assume that the “Islam” of Islam Hadhari would at least have some redeeming qualities like charity, a pillar of our great faith!
Abdullah’s idea of generosity during this last Hari Raya was to host a multi-million ringgit “Open House” at the Putra World Trade Center. Rest assured that the funding of this mega bash would come out of the public treasury. It is easy to spend or give away money when it is not yours. Read the rest of this entry »
Shame on Zam for hypocrisy and chicanery – hiding behind Lee Kuan Yew to reject RSF press freedom index
Shame on Information Minister, Datuk Seri Zainuddin Maidin in hiding behind Singapore’s former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew to reject the 2007 worldwide press freedom index of the Paris-based Reporters Without Borders (RSF) which saw Malaysia recording two “worsts” – the sharpest plunge of 32 spots from 92 last year to 124 placing, which is also Malaysia’s worst ranking in the RSF annual worldwide press freedom ranking since it was started in 2002.
It is a public slap in the face of the Zainuddin as Information Minister as well as the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi who had promised to allow greater press freedom in the country that Malaysia has now been given a worldwide press freedom ranking which was even worse than under the era of former Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad.
However, instead of courageously addressing the widening deficit between the promise of greater press freedom and the reality of worse media control and censorship, Zainuddin has decided to outdo himself in his inveterate state of denial, even hiding behind Singapore’s former prime minister Lee Kuan Yew to call on Malaysians to ignore the the RSP press freedom index.
Zainuddin’s chicanery and hypocrisy were immediately obvious, for he never had any good word for Kuan Yew before.
Is Zainuddin prepared to be consistent in his current pastime of singing praises for Kuan yew and support the Singapore Minister Mentor’s endorsement of Transparency International’s Corruption Perception Index (CPI) which repeatedly listed Singapore among the world’s top five among the least corrupt nations while Malaysia’s CPI ranking had plunged further in the past four years of Abdullah’s premiership — again to a new low never plumbed during the Mahathir administration! Read the rest of this entry »
Fairuz Tape transcript – abolish Common Law
(Transcript of Chief Justice, Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim media interview on August 21, 2007 after opening the seminar on the thoughts and academic works of the late Tan Sri Ahmad Ibrahim where he advocated the abolition of Common Law and denied that a Federal Court judge had over 30 unwritten grounds of judgement from High Court days)
Q. Judges having outstanding grounds of decision. What steps have you taken so far in this matter…
Ahmad Fairuz (A.F.) – Well I had checked and I find that the news that say that a judge of the Federal Court has got 30 grounds of decision not written, that’s definitely not according to our record. Our record, we do not have such thing. No Federal Court judge has got such big arrears of grounds of decision to write. We don’t have that in our record. It is something wrong there…
… preliminary investigations showed that that particular judge has read his grounds of decision in open court in the year 2002. He had read but I don’t know what happened after that. We got to check. The grounds of decision had been read, yes, the written grounds, he had already written his grounds of decision, he had read it in open court in 2002, so I am still checking on it lah…
We have not completed our investigations. The preliminary investigations showed that the judge had read his grounds of judgment in the year 2002. So the report is not that right. We have got to check first. I think, you know, it is very dangerous when we said something which is not the truth. In Islam it’s called fitnah. It is very bad. You don’t say anything which is not the truth. You check first then you say it.
So now I am investigating. I found that the judge had read his grounds of decision already in 2002. There must be something wrong somewhere. So we are investigating into it now.
Q. What about other judges? Are you looking into overall… …
A.F. – Overall. Overall. We have got records. We have got records with us as to the judges who have not written grounds of decision. In fact, in the past, judges who have not written grounds of decision have not been promoted until they finished their grounds of decision only then they are being promoted. Right? Read the rest of this entry »
Ahmad Fairuz is not fit to continue for a single day as Chief Justice
I am calling this media conference to prove that the Chief Justice, Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim had misled Parliament in his denial that he had advocated the abolition of the Common Law at the seminar on the thoughts and academic works of the late Tan Sri Ahmad Ibrahim two months ago on August 21, which made the front-page headline, “Mansuh Common Law — Ketua Hakim Negara mahu perundangan lapuk Inggeris diganti”, in the Utusan Malaysia the next day.
On 5th September 2007, the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz replied in Parliament to my earlier speech criticizing Ahmad Fairuz’ call for the abolition of the common law system as being most unbecoming of the highest judicial officer of the land sworn to defend and uphold the Constitution and the Merdeka social contract.
Nazri gave a flat denial that Ahmad Fairuz had ever made such a call for the abolition of the common law system saying that the Chief Justice’s speech made no such mention whatsoever.
Nazri blamed reporters and their poor quality reporting for the mistake. However, when I asked why no correction had been made by Ahmad Fairuz for close to two weeks of the public controversy over his call, Nazri said Parliament was the best forum for the explanation.
Nazri also made the following claim:
“Hari pertama perkara ini keluar, Ketua Hakim telah menghubungi saya untuk menyatakan bahawa itu merupakan satu perkara tidak benar yang dituliskan dalam akhbar. Saya tidak menyalahi beliau kerana dengan izin I have got bad experience juga dengan surat khabar. Apa juga yang kita nafikan yang dilaporkan mereka, tidak mendapat tempat yang sama seperti mana mereka telah melaporkan sehari sebelum itu sebab credibilitynya. Saya rasa, pada saya, it is a waste of time.”
It is significant that up to now, Ahmad Fairuz had neither refuted nor confirmed Nazri’s denial on his behalf that he had ever called for the abolition of the common law although the Chief Justice should know that his call had set off a public controversy in legal circles and the public domain which is still raging on.
Did Ahmad Fairuz call for the abolition of the common law in Malaysia 50 years after independence?
I have here a tape recording of Ahmad Fairuz media interview after his opening speech at the seminar on the thoughts and academic works of the late Tan Sri Ahmad Ibrahim on August 21, which clearly confirmed his call for the abolition of the Common Law, viz:
“My own opinion I think there is no need for us to go to the Common Law of England now. We have a lot of our pakar undang-undang sekarang ini yang boleh memberi pendapat masing-masing mengenai undang-undang bagaimana cara nak solve undang-undang. Why should we go to Common Law?”
Earlier, Ahmad Fairuz told the press about his proposal at the seminar:
“I am just suggesting to the seminar, perhaps they can look into this matter, whether you want to still maintain and keep this position ataupun you show to the government that we can put another substitute to this method, why go to Common Law? And pulak tu tahun 1957?”
Ahmad Fairuz is not fit to continue for a single day as Chief Justice. If he could use Nazri to mislead Parliament to deny on his behalf that he had advocated the abolition of Common Law in August, when he had actually done so as proven by this Fairuz Tape, he could easily mislead Nazri a second time to issue the denial that he was the other party in the Lingam Tape. Read the rest of this entry »
Education – How to be top
What works in education: the lessons according to McKinsey
From The Economist
Oct 18th 2007
THE British government, says Sir Michael Barber, once an adviser to the former prime minister, Tony Blair, has changed pretty much every aspect of education policy in England and Wales, often more than once. “The funding of schools, the governance of schools, curriculum standards, assessment and testing, the role of local government, the role of national government, the range and nature of national agencies, schools admissions”–you name it, it’s been changed and sometimes changed back. The only thing that hasn’t changed has been the outcome. According to the National Foundation for Education Research, there had been (until recently) no measurable improvement in the standards of literacy and numeracy in primary schools for 50 years.
England and Wales are not alone. Australia has almost tripled education spending per student since 1970. No improvement. American spending has almost doubled since 1980 and class sizes are the lowest ever. Again, nothing. No matter what you do, it seems, standards refuse to budge (see chart). To misquote Woody Allen, those who can’t do, teach; those who can’t teach, run the schools.
Why bother, you might wonder. Nothing seems to matter. Yet something must. There are big variations in educational standards between countries. These have been measured and re-measured by the OECD’s Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) which has established, first, that the best performing countries do much better than the worst and, second, that the same countries head such league tables again and again: Canada, Finland, Japan, Singapore, South Korea.
Those findings raise what ought to be a fruitful question: what do the successful lot have in common? Yet the answer to that has proved surprisingly elusive. Not more money. Singapore spends less per student than most. Nor more study time. Finnish students begin school later, and study fewer hours, than in other rich countries. Read the rest of this entry »
Lingam Tape – Another “Three No’s” to Haider Panel’s “Five No’s”
How pathetic! After three weeks, no one has come forward to give information to the Haidar Panel on the Lingam Tape!
This itself speaks louder than anything about the confidence the Haidar Panel commands among the Malaysian public concerning its credibility, independence, authority and legitimacy — which is zero!
The Haidar Panel has proved to be very “creative” in interpreting its month-long duration to complete its narrow term of reference to establish the authenticity of the Lingam Tape from Sept. 27 to 30 working days rather than 30 calender days — stretching its tenure to November 8, after the retirement of Tun Ahmad Fairuz as Chief Justice unless he gets an extension.
The Haidar Panel had started with the infamous “Five No’s” — no power to administer oaths, no power to compel witnesses to come forward, no power to commit anybody for contempt, no power to provide immunity and no power to protect witnesses.
It appears to have acquired another Three No’s after three weeks – not knowing whether Chief Justice Tun Ahmad Fairuz was at end of the phone, not knowing whether senior lawyer V.T. Lingam who appeared in the tape was the real one and not knowing whether the video clip is genuine!
We are now told that the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) is sending the Lingam Tape to experts in Hong Kong to determine its authenticity.
Why did the ACA waste one whole month since the public expose of the Lingam Tape by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim on Sept. 19 before seeking expert help to determine its authenticity? Read the rest of this entry »
Landmark RM2.5 million damages ISA decision – AG should make policy decision not to appeal
Posted by Kit in Human Rights on Friday, 19 October 2007
The Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail should take the policy decision not to appeal against the landmark decision yesterday by High Court judge Datuk Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus in awarding Abdul Malek Hussin RM2.5 million in damages for having been unlawfully arrested, detained and beaten up while in police custody in 1998.
In ruling that Abdul Malek had succeeded in suing former Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Noor, a police officer and the Government, Hishamudin said “The behaviour of the defendants is inhumane, cruel and despicable, as the plaintiff was not just arrested and detained unlawfully for 57 days but was also subjected to a vile assault, unspeakable humiliation, prolonged physical and mental ill-treatment”.
A policy decision by the Attorney-General not to appeal against the Hishamuddin judgment will set a shining example and send a clear message that the era of human rights has arrived in Malaysia and the police and all public servants must respect human rights.
A decision by Gani Patail to appeal against the Hishamudin decision can only mean that the Attorney-General himself and the government he represents is yet to “walk the talk” of respect for human rights and is still condoning human right violations by the police and public servants — making nonsense not only of the establishment of Suhakam but also of Malaysia’s calls for respect for human rights in international forums, including the recent statements of outrage by Malaysian leaders at the human rights violations and atrocities by the Myanmar military junta in the brutal suppression of the “saffron revolution” in Burma.
The Hishammuddin judgment had been long in coming, as human rights abuses in the form of physical violence and other forms of torture had been common treatment meted out to ISA as well as non-ISA detainees — which must be condemned in no uncertain terms and stopped forthwith. Read the rest of this entry »
Challenge to Ahmad Fairuz – resign as Chief Justice if there is proof he lied and misled Nazri in misleading Parliament with his denial as having advocated abolition of Common Law in August
Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim’s application for six-month extension as Chief Justice should be rejected as he has brought the judiciary into greater disrepute and a new crisis of confidence in the 55 months he was the highest judicial officer of the land.
In fact, in the past month Ahmad Fairuz had gone into hiding since the Lingam Tape expose by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim exactly a month ago, after the Chief Justice was implicated in the latest judicial scandal involving the perversion of the course of justice concerning the fixing of judicial appointments and court decisions — making total nonsense of the important principle of judicial accountability.
It is most scandalous that Ahmad Fairuz had not come out publicly to personally and categorically issue a denial of his involvement in the Lingam Tape scandal and had chosen instead to rely on the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz to bat for him and claim that Ahmad Fairuz had phoned him to deny that he was the one talking to Lingam.
Firstly, in depending on a Cabinet Minister to “clear” his name, Ahmad Fairuz had undermined the doctrine of the separation of powers and the important principle of the independence of the judiciary, making the Chief Justice and the head of the Judiciary subservient and beholden to the “favours” of a Cabinet Minister who is from the Executive.
Secondly, the “proxy” denial of Ahmad Fairuz through Nazri lacks credibility, as he had used this stratagem once to deny what he had actually advocated – the abolition of the English common law. Read the rest of this entry »
ASEAN Charter – why sign it in Singapore Summit if it will be instantly discredited by Myanmar?
United Nations special envoy, Ibrahim Gambari has asked ASEAN nations “to turn rhetoric into real action”.
Speaking at a press conference yesterday after a two-day visit to Malaysia, which had included “substantive discussions” with the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Gambari said:
“We appreciate the strong statement coming out of ASEAN but now is the time to work together for concrete results.”
The next one month must see concrete results from both Gambari and the ASEAN Summit in Singapore to get the political dialogue for national reconciliation and democratization in Burma off the ground or ASEAN and UN would again be led up by the garden path by Myanmese military junta to aid and abet the repressive and corrupt military rule in the narco-state.
Although Gambari said that the United Nations will not compel ASEAN to suspend Myanmar as a member but instead encourage it to remain engaged with the junta government to restore the democratic process and respect for human rights in the country, the suspension and expulsion of Myanmar from the regional organization must remain an option of the ASEAN governments and peoples if the Myanmese military junta remain totally impervious after two decades to calls for a tripartite dialogue among the generals, pro-democracy activists led by Aung San Suu Kyi and ethnic nationalities to start the process of national reconciliation and democratization. Read the rest of this entry »
Malaysia’s worst-ever ranking in RSF worldwide press freedom index – could be even worse!
In the latest worldwide press freedom index released by Paris-based watchdog Reporters Without Borders (RSF), Malaysia scored two “worsts” — the sharpest plunge of 32 spots from 92 to 124 placing, which is also Malaysia’s worst ranking in the RSF annual worldwide press freedom ranking since it was started in 2002.
In the past six years, Malaysia had been ranked poorly in RSF’s annual worldwide press freedom index —
RSF Worldwide Press Freedom Index (Malaysia)
2002 – 110 (out of 139 countries)
2003 – 104 (166)
2004 – 122 (167)
2005 – 113 (167)
2006 – 92 (168)
2007 – 124 (169)
Last year, when Malaysia jumped 21 spots to 92nd ranking from the previous year’s 113rd position, the New Straits Times crowed:
“This is the best ranking that the country has achieved since the global media watchdog first introduced the Index in 2002, when we came in 110th. In fact, this is the first time the country has scored higher than all the other Asean countries. Last year, we were fourth, and the year before were fifth.”
The New Straits Times today did not report the 2007 RSF worldwide press freedom index released yesterday and Malaysia’s worst ever ranking and plunge. Read the rest of this entry »
“Never” suspend Myanmar from ASEAN – Hamid’s statement most deplorable and reprehensible
I am totally flabbergasted by the statement of the Foreign Minister, Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar that ASEAN will never suspend Myanmar despite its bloody crackdown on mass protests after his meeting with the United Nations special envoy Ibrahim Gambari yesterday.
Hamid’s declaration is most deplorable and reprehensible as it has undone the “revulsion” statement of the ASEAN Foreign Ministers in the United Nations last month over the violent suppression of peaceful demonstrations in Myanmar, given encouragement to the Myanmar military junta’s hardline position and undermined Ibrahim Gambari’s diplomatic efforts to kickstart a political dialogue in Burma for national reconciliation and democratization.
Malaysia’s public position that Myanmar will never be suspended from ASEAN under any circumstances will only strengthen and harden the Myanmar military junta in its defiant and unrepentant responses to the international outrage at its bloody repression of peaceful dissent, shrugging off international action to punish it for its crackdown of the saffron revolution last month, even as Japan cut aid and European nations widened sanctions.
Even if the Malaysian government is currently of the view that Myanmar should never be suspended, let alone expelled, from ASEAN whatever egregious violations of human rights and democratic freedoms of the people of Burma are committed by the Myanmar military junta, why was it tactically necessary for Hamid to make such a public statement at a time when every lever should be applied to single-mindedly impress on the Myanmar military junta the unity and weight of regional and international opinion that it should respond positively to United Nations initiatives for a political dialogue for national reconciliation and democratization in Burma and to end all human right violations. Read the rest of this entry »
Haider Panel on Lingam Tape – greatest service to cause of justice is to resign en masse
Sin Chew Daily and China Press reported today that the Haidar Panel into the authenticity of the Lingam Tape, which was supposed to meet for the second time today, has postponed its second meeting indefinitely.
China Press reported that the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA)’s inability to complete its investigations into the Lingam Tape as the reason for the postponement of its second meeting today, which was fixed when the Haidar Panel met for the first time on October 3.
It is three weeks since the Haidar Panel’s appointment by the Deputy Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak on Sept. 27 to complete its terms of reference within a month. The Haidar Panel took one week to prepare for its first meeting on Oct. 3, after which it went into hibernation for two weeks leaving all the legwork to the ACA.
China Press reported that the next meeting of the Haidar Panel may be on Oct. 27, the last day of its one-month life tenure.
In the past fortnight, the three-man Haidar Panel disappeared from public view completely upstaged by the two-act histrionics of the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, viz:
- Firstly claiming that witnesses and whistleblowers are protected by the law, even offering plastic surgery to give “a new identity or even new look” for the person or persons who took the Lingam Tape, only to find subsequently that there is no such Witness Protection Act or Bill; and
- Secondly claiming that he will ask the Cabinet to provide protection for the people behind the recording of the Lingam Tape, only to announce after the Cabinet meeting that there would be no such protection.
Who lied? Zam or Pak Lah?
Posted by Kit in Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Media on Tuesday, 16 October 2007
Who lied? Was it the Information Minister, Datuk Seri Zainuddin Maidin or the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi himself?
On Friday, 6th October 2007, speaking at the Gerakan National Delegates Conference, Abdullah called on “leaders, especially those in Barisan Nasional” to tell him the truth and to stop “be in a state of denial”.
He exhorted:
“Tell the truth, even if it is painful.
“The prime minister must have the courage and readiness to listen even to the worst stories, whether it is related to the country or himself. Never allow yourself to sink in a hole of denial and feel that everything is alright.”
Four days later, on Wednesday 10th October 2007, Information Minister Datuk Seri Zainuddin Maidin summoned top media editors to a special briefing and in the name of the Prime Minister, laid down the law that
- Abdullah’s pledge to “hear the truth” does not apply to the media as it was restricted to Barisan Nasional leaders and government officials; and
- the Prime Minister’s repeated pledges to “listen to the truth” did not mean that the media have the green light to “practice unrestrained reporting”.
It is a reflection of the deplorable state of press freedom in Malaysia that no mainstream media had protested or written about Zainuddin’s violation of a free press, especially under a Prime Minister who had pledged greater openness, accountability, transparency, integrity and good governance!
In fact, Zainuddin’s summoning of the top media editors to direct them what to print and what not to print would be completely unthinkable in the past 50 years of the nation’s development, as no Information Minister would have such temerity to regard himself as the Comptroller-General of the Press. Read the rest of this entry »
Zam the “Minister for Truth” ala-Orwell’s 1984 in Abdullah administration?
Posted by Kit in Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Parliament on Monday, 15 October 2007
It is five days since last Wednesday’s extraordinary briefing to the country’s top editors by the Information Minister, Datuk Seri Zainuddin Maidin that the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s pledge to “hear the truth” does not apply to the media as it was restricted to Barisan Nasional leaders and government officials — and three days since the public revelation of such a “directive” by Malaysiakini in an exclusive report on Friday.
As there had been no clarification or correction by the Prime Minister to such a briefing by Zainuddin, who specifically told the editors that he was acting under Abdullah’s instructions to convey to the media that the Prime Minister’s repeated pledges to “listen to the truth” did not mean that the media have the green light to “practice unrestrained reporting”, I feel compelled to pose in Parliament when it reconvenes next week the following question:
Does Abdullah want Zainuddin to be his “Minister for Truth” ala-Orwell’s 1984, exemplar of “doublespeak and doublethink” in his administration?
George Orwell’s novel 1984 painted a totalitarian country paralleling Stalinist Russia and Hitlerian Nazi Germany, where there is incessant brainwashing and re-education in a society saturated by doublethink and doublespeak.
There is a Ministry of Peace which concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and Ministry of Plenty with starvation.
Is Malaysia on the occasion of Abdullah’s fourth anniversary as Prime Minister heading in the direction of the “doublethink and doublespeak” of Orwell’s 1984, starting with the directive to the editors that the Prime Minister’s pledge to “hear the truth” does not apply to the press or the public at large? Read the rest of this entry »
Practical Policies, Not Party Politics
Posted by Kit in Bakri Musa on Monday, 15 October 2007
by M. Bakri Musa
[In a recent private e-mail to me, a reader chastised me for being “NATO” (No Action, Talk Only). He intimated that if I really loved Malaysia, I should come home and contest the elections. As many readers share his sentiment of me, I post my reply to him. His original letter, in the usual rojak style of Malay liberally interspersed with English, follows.]
Dear Johan:
Thank you for taking your valuable time in sharing your thoughts with me.
My retort to your “NATO” (No Action, Talk Only) accusation is simply this: Been there, done that! However, such a tart response would not do justice to a diligent reader like you who has, by your own admission, bought all my books!
As for my returning home, I served Malaysia on my own accord (no scholarship or other contractual bonds) for nearly three years way back when. It was at a time when my presence (at least initially) doubled the number of Malay surgeons in the country! Although I was proud of my achievements during my brief tenure there, I soon discovered that I would have fewer headaches if I were to stop banging my head against the bureaucratic wall. So I left.
I have returned many times since. On each trip, instead of bringing trinkets for my nieces and nephews, I brought boxes of books to donate to my village school library. On one occasion, the principal proudly displayed to me the mound of books that I had donated over the years. She proudly drew my attention to the fact it was significantly bigger than a similar gift from the World Bank! Read the rest of this entry »
Proton-Volkswagen deal – “a buyer’s market”
GERMAN MEDIA FRENZY OVER POSSIBLE VW-PROTON ALLIANCE
Wednesday, October 10, 2007; Posted: 02:06 AM
FRANKFURT (Germany), Oct 10, 2007 (AsiaPulse via COMTEX) — Germany’s print and broadcast media, not to mention the specialised trade media, have been churning out reports over the past few days about an impending deal between Wolfsburg-based giant carmaker Volkswagen (VW) and Malaysia’s national car company Proton (KLSE:5304).
Germany’s leading dailies such as the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Die Welt and the Handelsblatt have been speculating that VW may finally be on its way to forming an alliance with Proton, by either acquiring a 20 per cent stake in Proton or forming a joint venture company which would include Proton assets.
Later, VW might increase its stake in Proton to 50 per cent. An indication to this effect was given by VW head Martin Winterkorn himself in a recent interview with the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, when he said that VW would “move in that direction”.
VW’s acquisition of Proton will strengthen the German carmaker’s position in Southeast Asia.
But VW, according to Winterkorn, would like to see the risks minimised and is also interested in Proton’s extensive network of dealers and agents.
But he also emphasised in the interview that VW was “nowhere even near a due diligence”. He would first see what concessions Malaysia had to offer.
However, German industry pundits said that VW could afford the luxury of waiting longer while the Malaysian side could not.
Indeed, VW will insist that the Malaysian government provides a “soft landing” cushion to compensate it against any losses at Proton for, at least, three years. Read the rest of this entry »
Abdullah the new patron saint for “the truth that is not the truth”?
Posted by Kit in Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Media on Sunday, 14 October 2007
The Information Minister, Datuk Seri Zainuddin Maidin was among the Umno Ministers joining Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi at the Prime Minister’s Hari Raya Open House at the Putra World Trade Centre yesterday.
When I shook hands with him, wishing him “Selamat Hari Raya”, I remarked that he has become the spokesman for “the truth that is not the truth”.
Zam knew I was referring to Friday’s Malaysiakini report “Zam to media: No need to tell PM the truth”:
Information Minister Zainuddin Maidin has told editors not to play up negative news because Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s pledge to “hear the truth” does not apply to the media.
Zainuddin said this during a one-hour meeting on Wednesday at the RTM headquarters in Kuala Lumpur with the country’s top editors.
The country’s information czar is one of two top government officials to hold meetings with the media top brass this week.
Yesterday, chief secretary to the government Mohd Sidek Hassan in another meeting urged media organisations to avoid emphasising on news deemed negative against the government, such as the 2006 Auditor-General’s report.
According to sources, Zainuddin began the meeting by declaring that he would frequently meet editors to advise them about national issues.
However, he stressed that he would only “advise and not give warnings”.
The information minister claimed that he assumed the new role under the instructions of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.
Zainuddin then explained that Abdullah’s often repeated pledges of “listening to the truth” were only restricted to government officials and Barisan Nasional leaders so as to assist the cabinet in making decisions. Read the rest of this entry »
Organ transplantation…brain death and financial implications (3)
Letters
by FK-506
In reply to Carpe Diem’s cherry picked quotes to the letter, ‘Organ transplant: Are we on the right track?’, the writer’s attempts to endorse this country’s nascent transplant program by trying to downplay key issues in any transplant program — financial implications and controversies surrounding brain death is reprehensible.
Quote : “… … … ..it isn’t quite right to place patients on VADs which have a limited life of their own into patients, not knowing if they are ever going to get a heart. This cannot be ethically correct.”
“Is it more ethical to deny me this option, based on not knowing whether I will get a heart in time, if the expertise is available and I am more than willing?”
For how long and at whose cost? Is Carpe going to pay this out from his or her own pocket? Clearly this person doesn’t realize the economic costs of such programs on government expenditure, unless of course, Carpe thinks that it is the state’s moral duty to transplant everyone with end-stage heart failure, liver failure, renal failure, etc. Chua Soi Lek moaned only last year that the MOH couldn’t afford to pay the RM900 million pharmaceutical bill for patients being treated by the Ministry. But miraculously he today is quoted to have said that the Cabinet, which has never shown respect for tax-payers money, is willing to provide even up to a billion ringgit for a transplant program. Incredible. Where is the set of priorities? Why don’t the cabinet approve the billion ringgit so that patients get better care, better follow-ups, better education programs, home nursing and of course better medicines, so that less patients end up in heart failure, renal or liver failures.
The age old idiom “prevention is better then cure” must hold true for this country based on the economy that we have unless Carpe is advocating American style healthcare, in which case, I would like to suggest that the technology be kept going but all transplants be borne by private funds. And I do hope Carpe fathoms the economic consequences of transplant programs. I hope he/she realized what happened to Barnard’s pioneering transplant work at Groote-Schur in South Africa. Transplant programs were immediately shut down by incoming President Nelson Mandela in 1994 when he realized that precious and limited health resources that could be used for Soweto’s populace suffering from cholera, typhoid, malaria and an AIDs incidence of almost 14% in some provinces, were being channeled to a glamorous transplant program. Are we in Malaysia any different if the startling statistics provided by our own MOH are anything to go by? In Sabah alone, even decades after independence, we have still not eradicated malaria and TB.
Quote: “Merican howled that what SJMC and Tan did were improper as ignorant patients may “not have been briefed about complications”. Tan, who pioneered liver transplant techniques at King’s College, London, of course left, preferring to base himself in “less ethical” Singapore, leaving Merican to focus on traditional medicine back here in Malaysia.”
That Merican howled is a fact. It is also a fact that K.C. Tan announced in the media that he was not willing to work in the ethical environment imposed on him. But the end result of this entire episode was clear. Malaysia’s liver transplant program in the private sector, supported quite earnestly by the media even then, was dead in the water. No RM30 million, 100 million or 1 billion ringgit boost to this program, although it was led by a Malaysian surgeon and the incidence of patients requiring liver transplants were equally a concern. Even private donations collected to help patients in this program were ultimately taken over by the Ministry. Why the double standards? Was it because K.C.Tan was a private surgeon working at a private hospital? Or was it due to something else? Yes the insinuation is direct. I am sure readers can make their own conclusions. Read the rest of this entry »
Hari Raya message – four things to make Hari Raya on 50th Merdeka anniversary most meaningful
Posted by Kit in Merdeka 50th anniversary on Friday, 12 October 2007
Hari Raya this year coincides with the nation’s 50th Merdeka anniversary.
Celebrating this year’s Hari Raya on the occasion of the nation’s 50th Merdeka anniversary will be most meaningful if there is a national resolution and government political will to achieve four things:
- A low-crime Malaysia where everyone, whether citizen, tourist or investor can feel safe again in the streets, public places and the privacy of the homes and where the fundamental rights to be free from crime and fear of crime are not just empty and meaningful words.
- Zero tolerance for corruption, abuses of power and financial scandals.
- Restore national and international confidence in a truly independent judiciary and a just rule of law, which will go a long way to enhance Malaysia’s international competitiveness which has suffered considerable erosion in recent years; and
- A Malaysian national consciousness and identity transcending racial, religious or political differences.
Selamat Hari Raya to all Muslims in Malaysia.
Reply to ‘Organ transplant: Are we on the right track?’ by FK-506
Letters
by Carpe Diem
I would like to comment on the letter by FK-506. However I will try to focus on rebutting factual inaccuracies in his letter, rather than comment on his insinuations and innuendos as my interpretations of his statements may be flawed.
Quote : “………..it isn’t quite right to place patients on VADs which have a limited life of their own into patients, not knowing if they are ever going to get a heart. This cannot be ethically correct.”
Whether this is ethically correct or not depends on the patient’s wishes, the facilities available and expert opinion. Unfortunately this is one area where opinions matter. An individual may consider it mental and physical torture to be hooked to a machine with no definite end in sight, but another may consider it a lifeline to a possibly better future. Is it more ethical to deny me this option, based on not knowing whether I will get a heart in time, if the expertise is available and I am more than willing?
Quote : “Merican howled that what SJMC and Tan did were improper as ignorant patients may “not have been briefed about complications”. Tan, who pioneered liver transplant techniques at King’s College, London, of course left, preferring to base himself in “less ethical” Singapore, leaving Merican to focus on traditional medicine back here in Malaysia.”
Well I have no love for traditional medicine, but I don’t see how this case affects the current scenario. Anyway, if I am not mistaken the issue against KC Tan then was on unrelated living donors. Please correct me if I am wrong. Read the rest of this entry »
-
You are currently browsing the archives for October, 2007
