“This is what the public wants. We want the same, too…What we want is to be independent in carrying out investigations with no interference.” – Director-General Ahmad Said Hamdan, ACA director-general.
Is this response by the ACA director-general to the proposed revamp of the Anti-Corruption Agency into the Malaysian Commission on Anti-Corruption, announced by the Prime Minister yesterday, an admission that there had been interference all this while into the ACA investigations, resulting in its inability to nab the 18 “big fishes” targeted at the beginning of the Abdullah premiership four years ago and the country’s plunge in the Transparency International Corruption Perception Index rankings from No. 37 in 2003 to No. 43 last year?
If so, the time has come for the ACA to open its books to fully account for all cases of interferences into all past corruption investigations into high-profile personalities, political or otherwise.
#1 by Hishamuddin on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 11:46 am
I wonder who the 18 “Big Fishes” are ?
#2 by Cinapek on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 12:07 pm
I am digressing a little though still on this subject of commission appointments.
I could not help but compare the flurry of activites by Pak Lah now to the same period when he first took office after he became PM. Remember his highly publicised visit to the Immigration office and all those fatherly homilies he dispensed including announcing going after the corrupted?
Well, he fell into a stupor after that and in the few period in between when he woke up, he was travelling overseas every chance he gets (88 trips in four years as reported by some blogs) and he neglected his pronouncements and promises.
I hope he has learned his lesson and not fall into the same mess again and this time diligently follow through with his promises of the Judicial Appointment Commission and this MCAC- not forgetting the IPCMC. And don’t come up with the excuse that promises made in 2004 take longer than 4 years to implement. No one buys this and he would do himself a favour if he would stop using this excuse as he look sillier whenever he says it.
YB, the ACA DG is just stating the obvious. Everyone knows there is interference. The first thing the new MCAC should do is to get rid of this DG who is a legacy of the old tainted days and appoint a truly independent new DG. Start with a clean slate.
#3 by yhsiew on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 12:28 pm
What about those who offered bribes – they were rarely prosecuted!
Eradication of corruption is only complete if both the recipient and giver of bribes are prosecuted.
#4 by lakilompat on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 12:34 pm
I’m sure Khairy & Kamaludin name are not in those list.
#5 by comingto50 on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 12:36 pm
ACA can make investigation but who decides to prosecute???
AG???
Who appoints the AG???
Any loopholes???
I am not sure this so much hooha on the “independent ACA” we will still see no prosecutions???
#6 by Damocles on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 12:48 pm
I regret that there are still those who are hoping against hope that this PM will ever reform anything. Or change for that matter.
He is merely saying what you all want to hear.
Let’s say he’ll even do something to assuage your fears.
Once you reaffirm him in his position, he’ll have the upper hand and you’ll regret that you ever cast a vote for him.
Why throw good money after bad?
The recently concluded GE showed that there are many good, capable people with integrity who are willing to serve the people and the country.
We have choices. So, why hanker for those failures in UMNO and BN?
Are we a nation of masochists?
#7 by merdeka on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 1:07 pm
ACA Independent !!!! Sure, the day when Pakatan Rakyat form new govt. then we see Independent!!!!! ACA dare to nab those “BIG FISHES” ???? DREAM ON !!!!!!!
#8 by k1980 on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 1:08 pm
For all you know that “interference” is from the pm himself
#9 by ShiokGuy on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 1:11 pm
Dear YB Kit
Why the need to wait until the end of the year? Another “I promise” and delivery later mentality of BN again?
To be fair, I would want to give BN the benefit of the doubt and wait until end of the year to see what happen. But I have heard a lot “I promise” before, enough is enough. Thats why we create the tsunami on 8 March.
When parliament sits on Monday, can PR’s MP do something to get the ACA under parliament with immediate effect? Am I just dream? Can I be done?
After that ACA should start the IAF and start going out to nap the corrupt police, government office, politician and more. Lets the IAF junior learn the trade of pretend to be a crook and nap other crook.
While the senior should start reopen book and go after all the big fishes.
What is IAF? Internal Audit Force, check my blog
http://shiokguy.blogspot.com/2008/04/questions-for-mp-who-dont-have-one.html
Not another promise la!
Shiok Guy
http://shiokguy.blogspot.com/
#10 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 1:19 pm
YB LIM.
it is not a surprise that the aca chief have admitted that there were “interference” with the investigations. otherwise, how could so many VIPS have not been taken to court .
on a moral issue, the one who gives a bribe is as guilty as the one who receives a bribe. so i think both parties should be charged. unless however, the law states otherwise.
looking back on the many scandals, it looks more like a pyramid schemes of corrupts , that the head of the corrupted henchmen is none other than the leader himself.
there was this perwaja steel case, ( hope it is not contempt of court ), where, datuk zainal yusof abidin have difficulties to get the japanese to be in Malaysia to be prosecution witnesses. whether an appeal has been filed, i am not sure.
i also suggest that the aca dg, must be appointed by a commission led by maybe tunku aziz and tan sri ramon, tun salleh, and yb lim.
if the head of aca is doubtful, 5000 officers are just mere employees.
#11 by k1980 on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 1:25 pm
Stephen Sackur should interview Najib, Khairy, Hishamudin, the Ong brothers, Samy ect on BBC’s “HardTalk” programme
http://themalaysianinsider.com/mni/vintage-mahathir-retorts-while-given-hard-time-in-hardtalk.html
#12 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 1:27 pm
corruption should not be narrowed to monetary gains only.
corruption of the media reporting and bias reporting should also be a benchmark for a better malaysia.
corruption of the abuse of power invested on those who have powers, like the immigration department, whereby, i have known of cases, where many “arranged false marriages ” are approved, whereby those on social visits may have extended stays and working in bars and lounges.
corruption of the abuse of power invested on those who have powers, like the rela department , who sometimes treated the professional indians nationality like illegal immigants, because they are indians.
corruption of the abuse of power invested on those who have power, like detention without trials. like remand for the sake of remand. and extension of remand without justification. many of those remanded, are merely thrown into cells for the duration of time, without actual investigation.
#13 by Richardqed on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 1:36 pm
Reforming the MCAC is not enough. This intention needs to go hand in hand with widespread reforms in the police force, and the AG’s office too.
Consider this: Even if you have an MCAC that gathers evidence and charges corrupt people, all they need is for some procecutor in the AG’s office to screw up for one reason or other, and people can get away scot free. There have been cases whereby the court had no choice but to let some accused go scot free, because of shoddy work done by prosecutors. And worse still, no one thinks of going after the AG’s office for these blunders. Convenient. Truly convenient.
#14 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 1:38 pm
In all fairness, i know datuk zainal yusoff abidin, and i have met him at his office, at Peguam Negara. i remember that he wanted to resign last year, and he should know why?
for those muslims, DOA SERIBU DINAR, which many muslims would hang in their business premise for good business is wrong. it is actually a prayer, to ask that we be led out of any confused situation. not many muslims understand that too.
btw rasuah is haram.
#15 by Tantech on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 1:50 pm
1. Consult ISAC hongkong. There are very successful.
2. The head of MCAC to be elected by public.
3. Try to use religious leaders like pastors, priests, imams to be the head and members. These people have the credibility of God-fearing.
4. While MCAC filing a report to AG, make sure they file cc to all MPs. If AG does not take action, the MPs will know and pursue further.
#16 by Tantech on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 1:51 pm
By the way it is ICAC Hongkong. Typo error.
#17 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 1:54 pm
This may be the 11th Hour but there are 60 minutes left.
There is still time and hope for malaysia to rebound from the abyss of corruption and decay. But I don’t see very much hope in real meaningful and effective change under BN. It’s still got to be PAkatan Rakyat. So all Malaysians will still have to hold their breath until Pakatan Rakyat takes over the reins of government, hopefully sooner rather than later.
#18 by Bigjoe on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 2:58 pm
Interesting proposition. Will the ACA retroactively review cases now its independent? Will the commission ask it to?
#19 by madmix on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 3:07 pm
Let us see whether Pah Lah lah really means what he says. If he fulfills just up to what he promised in the papers, we should be satisfied. Remember the last post-election proclamations: he fulfilled zero of what was trumpeted in the press.
This may be a good time for him to push changes to the max as he doesn’t have to worry about warlords trying to topple him as he is as good as a lame duck P.M. He will at least be membered as the father of reformation.
#20 by sheriff singh on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 3:33 pm
“interference” in all matters has been the name of the game for many decades especially over the past two administrations. It is common knowledge, nothing new, just unspoken.
These interferences had led to many strange things happenings and decisions being made and forced down the line by the leadership. Laws had been passed to ensure this.
It is perhaps time for a full-scale and comprehensive review and overhaul of our Constitution to bring it in line with modern times, to ensure full transparency, accountability and integrity and to ensure that we have the best practices in place for the smooth running of our country. Bring back referendums and public consultations. And make the Senate meaningful.
#21 by gofortruth on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 3:40 pm
It goes to show all along that ACA has been manned by “BN fearing” personnel & therefore subjects to “interferences” just like the MSM papers. That’s why I had proposed “proven” God fearing personnel who can work without fear and favour.
Simply changing the name ACA to MACA or any other high & mighty sounding name if there are “fixed” BN people in it will not alter the corruption situation but it will sure become nightmares for PR people who will be “disturbed” day & night. We all saw how Tian Chua got dragged out of the car & arrested under brute force by the “BN” police. He ended up even being sued for biting a cop.
Lets wait & see what is the out come of Lingam case.
#22 by HJ Angus on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 3:56 pm
Wow! What a big slip of the tongue by the ACA.
Maybe we should put him on the witness stand to find out more?
#23 by Godfather on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 4:31 pm
Of course there will be political interference. Where in the world has there been no political interference in the work of the enforcement agencies ? It is a matter of degree, and whoever helms the ACA has to walk that fine line.
#24 by k1980 on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 6:01 pm
Aiyah, when my bapak mertua is sacked, I’ll be left with these two useless old hags…
http://bigdogdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/rahmah-hamid.jpg
#25 by novice101 on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 6:23 pm
Tell your deliquent MPs and their counterparts in the PKR to read your blog more regularly. These are areas in which they can form many questions to ask in Parliament.
LKS, can you get Anwar to tell the rakyat how he reads Nik Aziz’s statement on Karpal’s remark on the speech by the prince from Kelantan.
#26 by badak on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 6:39 pm
what lahhh ,change name all so happy..This BN leaders just talk talk and more talk…get rid of the AG ,IF Pak lah is serious…End of the day it is the AG who decide if the case go to court.BN leaders must stop talking and get to work.Corruption is so bad that it has become a big joke.
I dare say that 99 % of all local councils are corrupted.Who is there to look at local council accounts..
#27 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 6:48 pm
“If so, the time has come for the ACA to open its books to fully account for all cases of interferences into all past corruption investigations into high-profile personalities, political or otherwise.” Kit
Not to worry.
They knew this was coming and they have a ready answer to this. It will be something like this, “As the current head of the ACA I have no control over matters which happen before I took over but I will assure you this much. There will be no interference during my administration.”
#28 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 6:59 pm
“Where in the world has there been no political interference in the work of the enforcement agencies ? It is a matter of degree…” GODFATHER
Hence it is important that this new body be headed by a former judge or Attorney-General who must have security of tenure i.e. once appointed he could not be dismissed by the PM. He should be given his own security detail as his personal security is always at risk.
#29 by Bujang Zayn on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 7:27 pm
PM looks to be transperence and on the other hand they will play a lot tricks when the time comes. As usual Pak Lah seems to be serious on the reform just because of UM..NO AGM to be held in December 2008.
Wait and see the moment he wins the presidency seats.He has nothing to loss if he fails but poor Najib will be left forever DPM of Malaysia if he is lucky.
#30 by ktteokt on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 8:07 pm
I am wondering if this is another “changing the soup without changing the medicine” case!
#31 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 8:12 pm
Malaysia has not ratified the U.N. Convention against corruption.
http://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/treaties/CAC/signatories.html
#32 by mata_kucing on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 8:24 pm
I must say that Abdullah in the last one week has done more than the last four years he’s been the PM. It’s amazing what a strong opposition can do to wake up the government. Malaysians now should no longer fear what the BN has been demonising on the role of the opposition.
#33 by dennyboy on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 8:33 pm
Remember Lingam’s ex-secretary’s testimony? We actually have an ACA that offered bribes!!!!!
The BIG Question for AAB: why only implement reform NOW? After a massive trashing at the GE?
Why wait till year end? So that files can have adequate time to go missing?
#34 by aiD_kamikuP on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 8:35 pm
// Hence it is important that this new body be headed by a former judge or Attorney-General who must have security of tenure … //
It had better be so, lest this MCAC soon turn into another macaque.
#35 by limkamput on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 8:37 pm
The government must be clean and incorruptible from day one. That was how Lee Kuan Yew went about setting up the Government in the early years. Civil service and enforcing agencies, to the best of my knowledge, have always worked hand in glove to the government leaders of the day. If the majority of the government leaders have chequered past, it is almost impossible for the civil service and enforcement agencies to do the right thing.
I see no way out. The monumental change that has begun in March 8 must proceed to its rightful conclusion. Piecemeal and incremental changes are what they are – piecemeal and incremental. First, the intention and sincerity of the reform are very much in doubt. Second, the measures and proposals being considered are unlikely to go far enough.
Malaysians have given PK to start anew for this country. Like Lee Kuan Yew started years back, there must be concerted and unequivocal efforts to ensure that all leaders chosen to hold important positions are people of integrity and honesty. The system put in place must be robust enough to filter out lazy, seat warmer, insincere and opportunist leaders from day one. Only leaders of integrity and honesty can direct the civil service and enforcement agencies without fear and favour.
#36 by limkamput on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 8:40 pm
sorry, Civil service and enforcing agencies, to the best of my knowledge, have always worked hand in glove with the government leaders of the day.
#37 by Godfather on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 9:01 pm
I am confused. in previous postings you were hellbent on fighting with PAS to ensure that DAP’s secular interests are protected. Now you say that PR must go towards its logical conclusion – which presumably is to obtain control of the federal administration. how do you do that without a give-and-take attitude?
#38 by Ron260461 on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 9:22 pm
How many times have heard the same old story – that the ACA is not able to catch the Big fishes but instead is netting only the Ikan bilis . It is a real joke on the effectiveness & capability of the ACA!
#39 by joehancl on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 9:36 pm
# Hishamuddin Says:
Today at 11: 46.15 (9 hours ago)
I wonder who the 18 “Big Fishes” are ?
YES what happened? 4-5 years has passed. This time around IF Bodohwi chakap tak serupa bikin, malaysians maybe can forgive him, but I think God will NOT. I say, this is the PM of malaysia. If there is no God then I don’t care. If there is, I am certain he WILL be damned. Not every tom, dick and harry can be PM. Grace must be seen as from God.
#40 by justice_fighter on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 9:37 pm
Take a look at how the corrupted Barisan Nasional has been making ordinary people suffer!! My heart aches when I see how the citizens in this country are being treated by their corrupted government!
Angry residents of Bandar Mahkota Cheras remove barrier at access road:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3yZ6wx6OAc
One more good reason to vote against BN! A big thank to DAP!!
#41 by cemerlang on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 9:50 pm
Let me guess. Veteran politicians may be. Businessmen may be. Enforcers of the law may be. We will not be wrong. Sad isn’t it how ACA do things. It is inhumane to watch all the wrongdoings but do not want to act. In fact, it is a sin !
#42 by billgates on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 10:32 pm
The Rakyat have all along suspected that selective prosecution is being practised.
I agree that all the 18 Big cases be re-opened again. Lets wait and see the RCI report on Linggam Tape.
http://pakatanrakyat-malaysia.blogspot.com
#43 by ReformMalaysia on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 10:51 pm
Hopefully, all this latest moves by Pak Lah is jot just political tactical move to regain his popularity.
Whatever move is made, whatever intention is it…..at the end, the truth prevails.
The rakyat is the jury….keep eyes and heart opened, ….and mind alert.
#44 by pangwl88 on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 11:20 pm
18 BIG FISH only????
Sup Sup Sui lah…
Come to Sabah, we have 1800 here.
Take your pick….we have plenty.
Come join the gang, all is welcome here as long as you know the “jalan”.
You don’t know the “jalan”??? Nevermind, go to any Government Department, they will show you THE “jalan”.
No problem. Maybe they will issue you Private Membership also.
(Bring some Ang Bao or A4 size envelope….. you know what i mean….)
ACA Independence? no lah…don’t waste our tax money lah.
You want to see changes in ACA???
Change the current Government.
And why is there no one doing anything about the ISA?
I agree we need Internal Security…..everyone needs that….., but please, its time to “change” it also lah…. we are not having civil war mah…..
#45 by dawsheng on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 11:26 pm
Training for Angkasawan Mejar Dr Faiz Khaleed will go on despite the country’s space programme coming to a virtual halt.
Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Naj!b Tun Razak said the Government had yet to make any decision on the matter and was still exploring various options.
“We are carrying out a cost benefit analysis of the first space mission and we will see whether there is any justification to continue with it.
“If the financial problem looks to be an obstacle for the programme, we may have to think of other options. The space mission may be postponed but we want to continue with the training for the astronaut,” he told reporters Tuesday after meeting with 11 Indonesian parliamentarians at his office here. – The Star
Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi on Tuesday said infrastructure projects under its multi-billion-dollar five-year development plan may be delayed due to escalating costs.
Abdullah, who is also finance minister, said high on the casualty list was the construction of a vital second bridge linking the northern island of Penang to peninsular Malaysia.
“Several matters have delayed its construction. Firstly in getting the land for building the bridge,” he was quoted as saying by Bernama news agency. ” Secondly, there is a need to ensure that the given design is the most suitable and also the issue of (rising) cost.” Abdullah also said that several other projects under the MYR200 billion development plan from 2006 to 2010 would be reviewed. – AFP
Malaysia’s fledgling space programme will be temporarily shelved due to a lack of funds, six months after sending its first astronaut to space, a news report said Tuesday.
Science minister Maximus Ongkili said the initial plan to send a second astronaut to space could not be carried out due to a problem of budgeting.
‘There’s zero money. The ministry will have to look for money if it wants to continue with the programme,’ Ongkili was quoted as saying by the New Straits Times daily. -IANS
Prime Minister and Barisan Nasional (BN) Chairman Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said former Gerakan deputy secretary-general Lee Kah Choon’ decision to accept the appointments as director of InvestPenang and Penang Development Corporation, had gone against the spirit of BN.
Prime Minister said he would let Gerakan to decide whether to take action against Lee who remained as Gerakan member currently.
“Any subsequent action on Kah Choon will be left to the Gerakan to decide on,” he added.
He added Lee should not accept the appointments before discussing with Gerakan leadership and he had violated the spirit of BN. – Sin Chew Daily
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi ought to be responsible if Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim becomes the country’s leader one day, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said.
In an interview on BBC’s Hard Talk programme yesterday, Dr Mahathir told presenter Stephen Sackur it would be Abdullah’s fault if the alleged defections by Barisan Nasional members of parliament to the opposition were true, and Anwar succeeded in becoming a prime minister.
“He (Anwar) is welcomed to question me if he becomes prime minister one day, but it should be the prime minister, the present leader that should be blamed, because he couldn’t even get the loyalty of his own members,” he said.
Dr Mahathir also said Abdullah’s judicial reform was a political move to rid of his unpopularity at the moment. – The Edge
Datuk Seri Naj!b Razak should get used to it. Name calling, that is. A few days ago while addressing some 200 students in Manchester, former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad labelled him a coward.
He chastised the deputy prime minister for not joining the chorus of attacks against Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, saying that Najib had been silent on the real reasons why Umno performed badly in Election 2008.
“We see that he is a penakut (coward)… He is always saying yes sir, yes sir, saya sokong, saya sokong (I support),” said Dr Mahathir. – The Malaysian Insider
he Malaysian government has pulled the brakes on YTL’s RM10 billion bullet train project to Singapore. The Economic Planning Unit has decided that the project is not viable nor is it critical for the country, The Malaysian Insider has learnt.
This decision ends the uncertainty surrounding Tan Sri Francis Yeoh’s ambitious plan of reducing travel time between Kuala Lumpur and Singapore to 90 minutes. Since the tycoon floated the idea of a bullet train in 2006, there has been a sharp division of views over the project.
Its supporters argue that besides reducing the time of travel, a bullet train will also create a convergence of properties and level out the price of properties between the two countries.
Critics say that Malaysia does not need another expensive infrastructure project and note that it will impact on the KLIA’s position as a hub, with many Malaysians travelling to Changi to take advantage of better connectivity. – The Malaysian Insider
“Thanks but no thanks,” said Umno Supreme Council member Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim when asked about remarks by former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad Sunday.
Mahathir was reported to have said Sunday that he had no confidence in Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Naj!b Tun Razak in taking over as prime minister, and named Rais, besides Umno vice-president Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, to vie for the post.
Rais, who is Foreign Minister, said while he thanked the former prime minister for the suggestion, he was not interested in the post.
“On the one hand, I thank him (Dr Mahathir). On the other, no thank you… I cannot… I mean I cannot take part in that kind of suggestion. I am comfortable as I am,” he said to the press here Monday. – Bernama
Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Naj!b Razak said members of Barisan Nasional component parties should not work for the opposition.
“I want to see Gerakan’s position on this matter,” Naj!b said after witnessing the signing of 19 deals worth RM1.129 billion between the Defence Ministry and suppliers at the 11th edition of the Defence Services Asia here yesterday.
Naj!b said on point of principle, members of BN component parties should not be encouraged to serve opposition-led state governments. – New Straits Time
The Challenge – by Matthias Mahathir
I therefore challenge the Joker and the Lady-in-Waiting to an Open Public Debate on the following issues:
Whether Tun Salleh was rightly dismissed for his misconduct.
Whether the just announced reforms of the Judiciary is sincere and effective.
Whether the Lady-in-Waiting has lobbied directly or indirectly for judicial appointment.
Once again I invite Raja Petra of Malaysia Today to be the moderator. The rules are simple:
Each party to be allowed to speak for half an hour: no-holds-barred.
Each party to cross examine the other party for half an hour: no-holds-barred.
Let the Court of Public Opinion decide. The Joker and the Lady-in-Waiting have 48 hours to response to this challenge.
Now, is that enough BS for a day?
(cut copy & paste from malaysia-today.net)
#46 by undergrad2 on Tuesday, 22 April 2008 - 11:34 pm
We need to get passed the rhetoric as always. Nobody can disagree that corruption is a serious issue affecting all governments in all countries – developed and developing. The nature of corruption is such that you can never get rid of corruption totally. The corollary of power is its abuse.
It is extremely naive to suggest that with a PR government we would have zero corruption. I am sick and tired of listening to Hillary Clinton talking about being ready on Day One and of the 3.00 a.m. phone call, and here I am being made to listen to the same bull about being ready!
There is no such thing as when you are best ready to tackle corruption. You are ready when you are willing and able. This government has been unwilling and unable. The reasons for that is obvious. Had we followed the doctrine of civil service neutrality the situation may well have been different.
#47 by damianyeow on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 12:09 am
The ACA to be made truly independent? Can it really happen in the Badawi (AB)era. Wait long-long lah…
For a start, it is supposed to report to parliament representative
(with opposition participant), not to AB. No use if report to him, we hear his pledges 4 years ago, how? Report card FAIL with-FFF. How can? his relatives, son, son-in-law all involved in muti-million corrupt practises, disguised as the holy-grail of UMNO’s NEP to create the ‘Super-Rich’ Umnoputras. To make the ACA truly independent is equivalent to shooting himself in both his 2 legs & hands. As stupid as he is, he cannot be ‘that stupid’…
Even the apology is not sincere, only the insincere express of regret to the judges, what is so hard to say sorry, all we 22 million(+6million illegals made citizen) M’sian already know that dictator Dr.M is 101% guilty, why is he not charged for misuse of power? Why is he still allowed to open his ‘big-mouth’ all his statements are full of contradictions & crap.
The only way, I say for a meaningful Change, the real Change, not cosmetic change can be no other, for Anwar (PKR) to come-in as PM, & wipe out the BN from this planet.
#48 by limkamput on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 12:34 am
It is naïve to think of civil service neutrality. If there is, it is because the political leadership allows it. We all know corruption can never be completely eliminated but we also know where corruption has become endemic and where corruption is contained. The best bet to contain corruption is to prevent it from becoming prevalent in the first place. Honest political leadership from day one together with a robust filtering system put in place to carefully select people for leadership positions have proven to be very effective. Of course other basic tenets of democracy also count, like transparency, press freedom, and a more vigorous opposition which require genuine nurturing and inculcation rather than rhetoric.
#49 by limkamput on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 12:39 am
If my earlier posts are understood correctly, there is no conflict or confusion in whatever I said here. In any case, does it matter? I am also rattled and confused by many posts here.
#50 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 12:53 am
“It is naïve to think of civil service neutrality. If there is, it is because the political leadership allows it.” limkamput
This is what I wrote earlier.
Quote
“Had we followed the doctrine of civil service neutrality the situation may well have been different”.
Unquote
The second sentence just doesn’t make any sense!
#51 by limkamput on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 1:15 am
“had “we” followed…. been different”
Who is “we” here? The civil service, the political masters, the rakyat, the cuontry? Who decide on civil service neutrality? You think it is something given – i.e. happening naturally?
It does not matter my second sentence does not make any sense to you. It makes a lot of sense to me and hopefully to others who read this blog. The doctrine of civil service neutrality, to me, will only happen so long as the political masters allow it.
#52 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 1:19 am
You may know it but here you’re writing about precisely what I mentioned i.e. civil service neutrality. Are you naïve in mentioning it in the context of corruption? No.
“Civil service and enforcing agencies, to the best of my knowledge, have always worked hand in glove to the government leaders of the day. If the majority of the government leaders have chequered past, it is almost impossible for the civil service and enforcement agencies to do the right thing.”
#53 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 1:21 am
“The doctrine of civil service neutrality, to me, will only happen so long as the political masters allow it.” limkamput
From this sentence it is clear that you do not understand what you are talking about.
#54 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 1:23 am
Previous posting. It should read
“You may NOT know it…”
#55 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 1:25 am
Since you are only interested in being your usual self i.e. personal, confrontational and abrasive, I have no further interest in pursuing the ‘debate’ – if you could call it that!
#56 by limkamput on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 1:36 am
Just let others judge who is being cocky, abrasive and confrontational here. Our feeling is mutual. You write what you deem right, and i shall write mine.
#57 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 2:19 am
If Abdullah Badawi is serious about stemming corruption, the head of the body to replace the ACA should be given prosecutorial powers of its own.
#58 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 2:51 am
If the doctrine of civil service neutrality is adhered to, the decision to prosecute or not to prosecute would not have to depend on the prior approval of the Prime Minister. Similarly, the decision to investigate any individual should not require his prior approval.
The decision to prosecute must depend solely on the evidence available to it. If the prima facie evidence made available to it consequent upon its investigation is insufficient or weak to win the case, then perhaps it could wait. To prosecute based on weak prima facie evidence is to waste taxpayers’ money. The file, however, should remain open.
What is of paramount importance is that the head of this new body must have his own prosecutorial powers, coordinating only with the Attorney General on matters of law and not policy.
#59 by pwcheng on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 3:02 am
I am excited and at the same time not very convinced of what our PM said with regard to the overhauling of the Judiciary and ACA. He is loosing power very fast and he is trying to play the same game as he had played in the 2004 Gen. election which gave him an overwhelming majority by singing the same songs and hope to get the people support again. To me is once bitten twice shy.
The train which we all know is having some mechanical problem and moving so fast will certainly end up being derailed. We all know that more than 90% of the politicians in BN, especially those from UMNO and the civil servants are corrupt and they will do everything to derail him. If he cannot or do not make an effort change all these at the peak of his power, how is he going to do these now that he is almost like a lame duck. Yes the rakyat are hungry for all these changes, but can he withstand the torrent of all those who had been enjoying these tasty fruits for so long.
To me I think it is the just like a sick man who try to pop in some pills and hope to have an immediate cure. On the other hand if this guy is hale and hearty ( say if he has repeated the 2004 victory), we will have to swallow those pills instead of him.
My verdict is (never mind if you brand me as a pessimist), do not expect too much. It is easier to change the government than to change the mindset of UMNO and its civil servants. If you are lucky you will only get a watered down version of what we are expecting.
The happenings in the last four years do not have any indication or any positive impact that he is a statesman but a staleman. Hear me, this is a playback of his stale stories.
#60 by ChinNA on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 5:22 am
Hmmmm…. thinking about this.
Will we need to change the government before we can see independent bodies? Take the case of US, be it Democrat, Republican or others, things don’t change much.
Can it be the same for Malaysia?
#61 by boobear on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 5:44 am
ENDANGERED hornbill has put forward a pertinent point… it may be the 11th hour, but there’s still the remaining hour (60 minutes) or even the remaining 12 hours of the day, weeks, months, years and decades to come…
Better late than never… and if it makes Malaysia a better world for ALL RACES… then so be it.
YB LKS went past the half century mark to see a tsunami… one day there will be an earthquake to rattle the timbers of the “palatial bungalows” build on the foundations of CORRUPTION & OPPRESSION.
#62 by boobear on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 5:48 am
To ChinNA, do we need to change the govt in order to have an independent commision ? NOT NECESSARY.
In fact, a COMMISION “sanctioned” by the BN will be better received eventually if we do have a change in govt. Then the PRakyat won’t be blamed of setting up something that will go on a witch-hunt.
In fact, if there’s any witch-hunt, it will start with the associates “exposed” in the Lingam case.
#63 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 7:03 am
A snapshot of the ACA before the April 21 announcement:
The Anti-Corruption Agency began as a small unit under the Prime Minister’s Department. Investigation was carried out under a unit of the Police Department, while prosecution of corruption cases fell under the Ministry of Law.
Now how independent can an ‘independent’ ACA be given that it functioned as a unit of the PM’s Department in its early years and has had to depend on the special crime unit of the Police in its investigation?
The ACA is claimed to be independent from any political interference, but it falls under the Prime Ministers Department though for financial and human resource matters only. So how independent could a body like the ACA be?
What has changed since?
——————————————
The answer has already been given by our PM himself –
“There’s always a minister, anywhere in the world, responsible
for any institution set up. And I will be responsible for the
institution,” said the PM.
So folks! It looks like it is business as usual.
#64 by kickbutt on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 7:34 am
I thought as much. It is too good to last!
#65 by winsoontan on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 7:34 am
Delaying of Penang Second Bridge is really a shame for BN. Abdullah kept on announcing the NERC, IDR…. So many plans? But what he has really done? A person who really put an effort won’t simply stop or delay a plan. BN should stop spending so much money for what it has claim the “aerospace project”. By spending 100 million just for sending a tourist into space! Infrastructures are very important to lure foreign investment, Federal government stop or delaying Penang Second Bridge will bring a bad impact to the Penang economy. At the end, collection of taxes reducing. What benefit that federal government can gain? Bear in mind, building materials price are going up significantly. By delaying of important project will increase the cost in the future. Abdullah never learnt from what he did for Ipoh-Padang Besar Double Tracking Project. He postponed the project from the initial cost of less than 10 billion and resumed it at cost of 12 billion. If Abdullah did it wisely, he can save of 2 billion for Penang Second Bridge!
#66 by Jimm on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 8:25 am
We all are to be blamed …. all these while we took such a long time to realise our future have been ‘sold’ by UMNO.
TDM took advantage of every single opportunity to rule this country without fear the moment Sultan Johor did mistakes back then. The rest are history … Malaysian ngihtmares ..one after another.
When we look at all these ‘unchecked’ events, NEP have been taken advantages by making Malays believe that their future as land owner are protected. Another ‘unchecked’ event that sold the Malays moral and putting them backwards with religion beliefs.
All those holding portfolio with government agencies are merely cronies from UMNO.
Even Stevie Wonders can clearly see that these people are ‘puppet’, taking advantage of the situation where opportunities abundance.
ACA, all those that were there before and retired and all those that still with this agency …you have sold your soul right and deceived all Malaysian of our future because … you are just carrying your bosses balls to keep you job.
To me, a wrong is always a wrong …
To ACA , a wrong can always make more monies and power.
Incentive trips, family holidays paid for, education advantage, massive bank accounts .. all these are what you have traded for to keep Malaysian future look good …
Worst, you still pretend to pray 5 times each day and seen in public to pray in grand occassions with VVIP.
We, Malaysian are truly sad because you all are only having short memory and cannot see future despite of having advantages over Stevie Wonders.
Shame on you all and all your family members and all generations to come …
Traitors to all Malaysian.
#67 by alancheah on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 9:04 am
If they can really do something like HK’s ICAC,
I will cut all my hair to BOTAK….!!
#68 by lakilompat on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 9:31 am
Hello opposition state? do u guys have enough celebration? don’t just ask question, we need more action, what’s opposition state been doing while Pak Lah continue to prevent Malaysian to become 1st world country.
Malaysia development has been further hindered by the BN govt.
1) Second bridge delay due to costs and design issues
Who will be interested to come Penang to invest if the Federal Govt. failed to delivery 1st class infrastructure looking at current situation? Penang belong to opposition state.
2) KL-Singapore bullet train derailed by high cost
The future investment has been stop, now, any foreigner will be interested to come Malaysia? KL belong to opposition state.
Are opposition just going to sit there and ask question, without any action?
#69 by Godfather on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 9:49 am
It’s not as simple as trying to resurrect projects that the Federal government has either cancelled or delayed. The basic tenet for the federal government’s decisions is always “we have no money”, but you can bet your bottom dollar that the real reasons will be:
1. the cost has gone up so high with the inept dilly-dallying by the bureaucrats; or
2. why benefit states that are under Opposition rule;
3. there’s not a lot of money to be made by fellow UMNOputras because of the increased scrutiny nowadays.
The states don’t have the money to proceed with grandiose projects that cost billions. In the case of Penang, what Guan Eng can do is to commission a study for the second bridge that emphasises on the lowest cost option, and make that option public. If the cost is, say, between RM 2 – 3 billion, when the Federal government’s option costs RM 4.3 billion, then there will be the usual public outcry with the demand to build the bridge at the lowest cost option.
#70 by Godfather on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 11:18 am
I think it is quite easy for the DAP to ask for advice from engineering advisors on the best alignment for the bridge, plus the estimated costings. The only issues are whether or not the new bridge can be implemented without federal government consent, or tolls to be collected without federal government consent.
#71 by HJ Angus on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 11:30 am
If you just look at the proposed bridge on the map, you can see that a much shorter bridge can be constructed , about 10km north of Georgetown.
In an way, this project reminds me of the other “Crooked Bridge” in JB. Both launched with much gusto but without final designs and open tenders.
http://malaysiawatch3.blogspot.com/2008/04/penang-2nd-bridge-decide-in-haste.html
#72 by HJ Angus on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 11:36 am
Here is a quick way for Penang to do the project:
If 1000000 citizens buy RM1000 shares in the project, they can raise RM1b. Penang government can issue state bonds to raise the balance, say another Rm1b at 5% interest.
This way, the state owns the bridge and can charge toll say 80% of the competition?
#73 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 11:51 am
Can the opposition controlled state government of Penang tap into the international capital markets? International borrowing requires the guarantee of a sovereign state. Penang is not.
#74 by procol on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 12:00 pm
“The decision to prosecute must depend solely on the evidence available to it. If the prima facie evidence made available to it consequent upon its investigation is insufficient or weak to win the case, then perhaps it could wait.”- undergrad2
Of coz,that is the ideal situation. How long should they wait? In some cases,it’s not possible to keep it open for a long time. For eg in offences criminal in nature,ur not entitled to keep in custody d accussed until u hv sufficient evidence.Do understand as well that from the investigation stage right up to prosecuting stage,the police,ACA n AGdpt are severely short of staffs.To wait may not always be ideal as well.For eg, Y committed Criminal breach of trust,Y could already be in Timbaktu after the ‘wait’. I’m not saying that AG should prosecute without strong pf case, perhaps extending ACA’s prosecuting powers only solves part of the problem because u can have all the powers u want but if u don’t have the manpower to carry out investigation n prosecution,in the end,u end up with more shoddy charges.
The other point is, it also may not be ideal to allow unchecked prosecuting powers.Prior consent/sanction does to a certain extent operate as a filter to eliminate frivolous charges.Already the police,AG,ACA are burdened by the backlog of cases.
#75 by Godfather on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 12:08 pm
HJ Angus:
You can’t build a bridge that span for RM 2 billion. You may be able to do a pontoon bridge, but certainly not a steel and concrete structure. I estimate that the least cost option is probably going to be around RM 3 – 3.5 billion.
Also, you can raise long term debt at 5 pct, not when the banks’ base lending rate is still above 6 pct, and private debt securities of 15 – 20 years are yielding around 9 – 10 pct.
You can finance the bridge on a PFI basis, which is to ask the private sector to build it, take the ridership risks, and have the state agree to a fixed subsidy over a period of 20 – 30 years. That way, the state has no liability over the debt incurred by the private sector, and its only liability is a fixed amount which ought to be manageable.
#76 by Godfather on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 12:08 pm
sorry, second para should be “…you cannot raise…”
#77 by pwcheng on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 12:20 pm
alancheah Says:
Today at 09: 04.29 (3 hours ago)
If they can really do something like HK’s ICAC,
I will cut all my hair to BOTAK….
Cutting your hair is no big deal. I can assure you that you will still maintain your manhood (if you are a man) even if you dare them that you will cut that something else.
If you really have a peep inside the whole government, you will know what I mean, they really have phobias for transparency, the civil servants blaming the government for certain absurd policies and the government blaming that little Napoleon for some distasteful policies. They have been bluffing us for far too long and in reality this is all the making of UMNO.
#78 by Godfather on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 12:22 pm
The most recent RM 4.3 billion estimate from the government on the cost was because they had to tally up what the bumiputra subcontractors want in terms of “toll” on the subcontracts from UEM. If you were to offer the deal directly to China Harbour Engineering, without the immediate subcontract to UEM, and without pre-conditions on subcontractors, then I think the Chinese company can do it for less.
It is this “tolling” mentality within UMNO that is constantly keeping project costs high. The higher the cost, the higher the tolls, hence UMNO has never really looked at the lowest cost options.
#79 by HJ Angus on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 12:43 pm
Godfather
thanks for the critique.
Was just thinking aloud.
Maybe property owners in that part of the island may take on this project? I am thinking of a much shorter bridge as no point building one that will qualify as “the longest one in SEA” just for that title.
Suggest Penang look at an alternative so that there is some competition for tolls.
Imagine if the toll is 80% of the first bridge, more traffic may flow this way and maybe the federal government may have to compensate. That would be sweet!
#80 by grace on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 1:03 pm
pwcheng wrote this:alancheah Says:
Today at 09: 04.29 (3 hours ago)
If they can really do something like HK’s ICAC,
I will cut all my hair to BOTAK….
Cutting your hair is no big deal. I can assure you that you will still maintain your manhood (if you are a man) even if you dare them that you will cut that something else.
You are 100% correct. Whatever commision the government, BN can form, the same old people would be manning them. They are somewhate connected to one another. Thus they would just got off by claiming ‘member sama member’.
I DO NOT HAVE CONFIDENCE IN ANY COMMISSION FOR ANTI_CORRUPTION HERE!!!
#81 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 1:20 pm
“Of coz,that is the ideal situation. How long should they wait? In some cases,it’s not possible to keep it open for a long time.” procol
Certainly not forever!
In certain jurisdictions like the United States, there is a statute of limitations on each type of crime.. It becomes statute barred after a fixed number of years. That number is determined by statute depending on the crime. I believe in Malaysia there is no statute of limitation pertaining to crimes committed. It refers only to civil proceedings – six years if my memory serves me, after which it is statute barred.
The rationale behind it is evidence deteriorates over time, witnesses die or would no longer be able to recall the events twenty years after the fact. But more important is the issue of fairness to someone alleged to have committed a crime. It would not be fair to him or her to have to live under such suspicion, feeling that he or she could be called again and again to answer questions.
Since Malaysia has no statute of limitation (the last time I checked) for crimes, your question is how long should such files be kept open? My answer is it should depend on the circumstances of each case. Corruption cases leave behind a long paper trail which does not deteriorate over time though memories of witnesses do – but then I am not head of the ACA.
#82 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 1:36 pm
“The other point is, it also may not be ideal to allow unchecked prosecuting powers.Prior consent/sanction does to a certain extent operate as a filter to eliminate frivolous charges.Already the police,AG,ACA are burdened by the backlog of cases.” Procol
If there is a very strong prima facie case against the person investigated, I see no reason why it should require the prior approval of a politician like the Prime Minister for the case to proceed to trial. If the head of the ACA is a former judge, he or she would know if the evidence on file is strong enough to proceed to trial.
Abuse of prosecutorial powers is always a serious matter and the head of the ACA should be made personally responsible. Prosecution is sometimes punishment in itself. It need not result in a conviction.
#83 by lakilompat on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 1:43 pm
With all the savings by delaying the 2nd Penang bridge and shelving the KL-Singapore bullet train, and with smaller cabinet where is our country money goes?
#84 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 2:05 pm
can we please remember that YAB Lim Guan Eng, was jailed for an offence in defence of an underaged malay girl. remember the photo of the grandma of the underaged age begging @ that time guan eng to help and seek justice. the vvip is untouchable even till today.
can we please remember that mohamad taib got a very good alibi, and the australian court found him ” not guilty” . and the malaysian attorney general office cleared him of any criminal offence. and now this super rich man is a senator minister.
can we also remember that the ap queen and the list of beneficiaries of the permits distribution.
and remember that when zulkipli was the head of bpr, the second man, exposed all the corrupted issues, properties and also police reports of intimidation against zul, but the attorney general office cleared him too.
remember only last year that the head of commercial crime at bukit aman was charged for being on the wrong side of the warlords. among the charges was a helicopter ride to view his estates. When parliament was dissolved, remember that the deputy pm, najib, was also using government jet for campaign purposes.
KERAJAAN YANG TERPILIH TERHUTANG BUDI KEPADA PEUNGUNDI DAN RAAYAT DAN BUKAN SEBALIKNYA. HANYA BILA KERAJAAN MEMAHAMI KONTRAK PILIHAN RAYA UMUN DENGAN RAAYAT, ( IA ITU, TIADA RAAYAT TIADA KERAJAAN, HARUS LAH RAAYAT SAHUT CABARAN PEMIMPIN.
JUSTERUS, GAJI DAN LUMAYAN YANG DI BAYAR PADA PERDANA MENTERI DAN MENTERI MENTERI NYA ADA LAH DARI HASIL SUMBANGAN RAAYAT. DAN SEKALI GUS , HAK MINYAK, TANAH, DAN SEGALA NYA ADALAH JUGA HAK SETIAP WARGANEGARA MALAYSIA. TANPA KIRA BANGSA DAN AGAMA. KEWAJIPAN KERAJAAN TERKINI ADA LAH MENJAGA KEPENTINGAN RAAYAT , DAN BUKANNYA, KEPENTINGAN DIRI SENDIRI DAN KELUARGA.
#85 by shortie kiasu on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 2:13 pm
Wah! This is a real revelation into the working of ACA all these while that it is interfered, and supposedly by the politicians and influential personalities in this countries!
The cat is slowly being let out of the bags now, and we are seeing the blatant cheats to the public as far as the fighting of corruption is concerned, all these while.
Instead if fighting corruption, especially in the high place, ACA becomes a tool for the corrupted to protected themselves, to scratch one another’s back, to allow them to further fatten their pockets.
Look like there is not end to the corruption in the high place of the country!!
#86 by Bigjoe on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 2:37 pm
Lets not forget about IPCMC with all these ‘promises’ of reform. [deleted]
#87 by Godfather on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 3:18 pm
lakilompat:
The bullet train wasn’t part of the 9MP. The Penang bridge is. These BN goons are cutting their noses to spite their own faces because the projects are in all cases benefitting the cronies of the BN government. The government is also caught between a rock and a hard place – the system of subsidies for petrol, flour, sugar, rice, etc has meant that the government has to pump more money into subsidizing these commodities, and they don’t have the cash to spend on “luxuries”. They reckon that increasing the price of petrol, diesel, etc will have a really negative impact on their political support – and rightly so, because we are now being made to pay for the billions that have been siphoned off for the past 25 years or more.
#88 by k1980 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 3:33 pm
Malaysia Export-Import Bank— the next scandal?
http://asiasentinel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1162&Itemid=32
#89 by Godfather on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 3:45 pm
The ACA had been sitting on the auditors’ report for more than 4 years. And we still expect the ACA to reform and be transparent ? It isn’t just the Export-Import Bank, it is the total lack of transparency of Bank Islam, Bank Pertanian, Bank Rakyat, SME Bank that allows millions to be siphoned off. And every few years, the government has to recapitalise these financial institutions with the rakyat’s money.
There will be no closure of this sort of scandals until and unless there is a total change of government.
#90 by lakilompat on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 3:45 pm
Guys don’t expect a clean management in everywhere. Even Samsung Korea recently, the CEO step down to protect the image.
#91 by Godfather on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 3:50 pm
lakilompat:
No, foreign investors will not look at Malaysia for precisely the reasons you outlined – no transparency, plenty of corruption, no coordination between the state and federal governments now that they are on opposite sides, no cost advantages.
Penang can do well in one particular area – and that’s tourism, but we need to clean up the place (something for the state government to ponder) and we need better public transportation. The state should quickly install a tram system which should not be too expensive, and which can be cost-efficient. The main problem facing the new government is probably that the administrative machinery has been so pro-BN for so long that there is no wilingness to work to help the new government. Short of firing everyone in the state administration, what else is Guan Eng going to do ?
#92 by Godfather on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 3:52 pm
The CEO of Samsung Group, probably the most powerful businessman in Korea, was brought down by a team of dedicated anti-corruption professionals. Here in Bolehland, we have the resources to catch ikan bilis only.
#93 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 4:54 pm
in as much , as the aca may try to be independent,but i hope the punishment meted out must be a deterrent for others ( corrupted ) guys too.
if the punishment is merely a fine or a short term jail, like the mat rempit, no one really fear. follow icac hongkong, but follow china in death execution.
#94 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 4:58 pm
YB LIM.
now that the 12th general election is over, DAP must also be relevant to malays and those who are fluent in bahasa malaysia.
maybe, you can have a dual language blog. because many malay friends of mine may like to comment.
just a suggestion.
#95 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 4:59 pm
godfather.
i think hyundai boss was also charged before.not too sure.
#96 by Godfather on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 5:11 pm
Yes, Mr Chung of Hyundai Group was also charged and jailed.
#97 by JDoe on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 5:15 pm
agreed with Adam Yong. DAP must be relevant to all race. you should have bahasa blog as well. It is time DAP should put more effort to woo the malays and sabah/sarawakians.
#98 by lakilompat on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 5:36 pm
JDoe, how abt tamil?
#99 by lakilompat on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 5:36 pm
English is relevant the whole world, why not use it?
#100 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 5:48 pm
Dear lakilompat. Namastes.
Bahasa malaysia is quite relevant in our country Malaysia. if you remember, one whole generation miss out on quality english education. any many could only write and read BM well.
Being realistic, if dap is to win the hearts and minds of malays electorates, what better way than to use their language. Certainly, dap cannot depend solely on pkr and pas to spread the alternative news that blogslimkitsiang provides, and also the many constructive comments.
Its like malaysiakini, it started with english medium,than onto chinese and malay to cater for the masses. and this is merely a suggestion. because the PERCEPTION is still dap is chinese party.
If it is good , no harm trying,especially the young malays generation. and i dont dispute that english is international language, but somehow, it works with the raayat.
sorry i digress again.
terima kasih.
#101 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 5:54 pm
godfather.
Thanks for the information. well, if thats true, what Malaysia lack is the courage and will power to act on those well connected corrupted. Interesting to know how their corruption agencies work, if even tycoons are jailed. any answers godfather ?
#102 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 5:57 pm
dear lakilompat.
btw, the one generation include malays and non malays too. when maths and science, ie physic, biology and chemistry in bm. not sure about the arts stream.
#103 by Godfather on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 6:00 pm
Simple: A total change in government.
If there was no change in government in Korea, with the same administration in place for 20 – 30 years, then the enforcement agencies stand to be corrupted by those in power. In Bolehland, the same system being in place for the past 50 years meant that everyone doing business is connected somewhere, somehow, to those in government, which meant that they have become “untouchable”. The only effective system against the rise of the untouchables would be a change in government every 5 – 10 years.
#104 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 6:31 pm
“Here in Bolehland, we have the resources to catch ikan bilis only” Godfather
Not so much an issue of resources or lack of it, but more a question of will (the lack of faith in the rule of law) and political interference (the consequence of non-compliance with the doctrine of civil service neutrality). Resources, of course, is important.
Let’s not confuse action with reaction. But whatever it is, it is certainly not a question of being ready on day one!
#105 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 6:57 pm
“The main problem facing the new government is probably that the administrative machinery has been so pro-BN for so long that there is no wilingness to work to help the new government.” Godfather
Not an issue of being pro-BN but an issue of being pro-anything political.
There is little understanding, if any, of the importance of civil service neutrality. Our civil service has functioned nothing less than as an appendage of the machinery of the political party that runs it –and it is wrong. It is wrong because it is not supposed to be that way in a country that has free elections once every five years which may result in a different political party running it.
The reality is it has been that way for decades since Mahathir blurred the lines the way he blurred the lines separating the executive from the judiciary.
It is not surprising that the DAP is facing this problem in Penang. How it manages the problem is important and it is not going to be easy to change attitudes which took decades to take roots.
#106 by HJ Angus on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 7:45 pm
I daresay it had its beginning with the BMF Scandal which I think was the birth of the businessmen making shady deals with politicians to deceive the public.
The success of that cover-up(including the murder of a bank auditor) spawned all the crooks who quickly learned the ropes with the absence of a strong ACA.
#107 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 8:11 pm
Let’s not forget Dato Harun Idris who went to jail for corruption. I believe that was when Hussein Onn was PM and years before BMF.
#108 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 8:15 pm
But you’re right. Harun went to jail. No one went to jail in Malaysia as a result of the BMF scandal since the crime was committed in another jurisdiction. Had the crime been committed in Malaysia, do you think Lorraine and Shamshuddin would have gone to jail?
#109 by kickbutt on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 8:36 pm
Yes, even then had Harun Idris accepted the post of Malaysian Permanent Representative to the United Nations offered to him, he would not have gone to jail!
#110 by mendela on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 8:45 pm
Can someone post the names of the 18 big fishes and what had them done to enlighten our younger bloggers here?
#111 by limkamput on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 9:03 pm
Although Dato’ Harun went to jail after being convicted of corruption (taking money on behalf of UMNO if I am not mistaken), I think one has to look at the circumstances in which he was charged in the first place. He and the then CM of Sabah Tun Datu Mustapha were at loggerhead with the Federal Government at that time. So the motive to charge him may not be entirely due of corruption, I would think so.
I maintain that civil service neutrality can not be sustained on its own. It needs nurturing and tacit approval of political leadership. So the best bet is to have a system that is able to identify, nurture and appoint people of integrity for political leadership. If we look at Singapore, for example, do they really have civil service neutrality there? I don’t think the various institutions of government are very strong and independent in Singapore. But they do have an elaborate system to scout and groom people with potential (both in terms of knowledge, skill and values) for positions of importance in Government. One of the Singapore’s minister (Teh something) committed suicide in the 80s just before he was about to be charged for corruption. I think Lee Kuan Yew said no deal when he went to see him.
#112 by limkamput on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 9:21 pm
The battle is about to begin. BN is waiting for the right time to disclose more surprises besides the Penang Bridge. BN knows that the people’s support for PK is still very strong, being just two months after the election. Soon, when the euphoria subsides, I think BN will sabotage and give PK even more trouble. We shall see. Remember how the Federal Government dealt with the first PBS government of Sabah?
I think the states under PK must quickly form a united front to deal with the Federal Government. They must support each other and speak in one voice. For example, Selangor, Perak, Kedah and Kelantan must support Penang’s tussle with Federal Government over the bridge. Penang, in turn, must support important projects of other states under PK.
#113 by undergrad2 on Wednesday, 23 April 2008 - 10:05 pm
An example of a civil service being subservient (a consequent of non-adherence to the doctrine of civil service neutrality) to the political leadership within the context of corruption is when the head of the investigating body in charge of corruption has to get the prior approval of the Prime Minister.
Why is the head of the ACA, a civil servant, being required to obtain the prior approval of the Prime Minister before he could prosecute a civil servant for corruption?
The head of the ACA needs only to satisfy himself as to the veracity of the evidence available to the ACA at the time i.e. whether there is a prima facie case against the alleged perpetrator of the crime of corruption and whether the case is strong enough to meet the standard required at the preliminary hearing. If at all the head of the ACA should be working together with the country’s Attorney General – another civil servant. The Attorney General in turn should only concern himself with the evidence that police investigation has revealed, and the case should be allowed to go to trial based solely on the strength and weight of the evidence and not some extraneous reasons.
#114 by limkamput on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:17 am
That will be ideal, civil service should be allowed to work independently without political interference. The problem is even in countries where the laws may say that civil service is free and independent and yet when come to actual practice the service is less than independent and free. Even in Malaysia today, I don’t know of any legal requirement where AG or Director of ACA must seek the approval of political leadership before proceeding to prosecute high profile cases. Yet, many of us rightly or wrongly think they can not act without prior consultation. So how we do explain this? That is why I said that clean and honest political leadership is of utmost importance to ensure that civil service is allowed to play its proper role without fear and favour.
#115 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:20 am
Another example would be the problem now faced by the political leadership of the state of Penang. Government servants who have always seen themselves as BN supporters, with strong political affiliations to BN now find themselves torn between their loyalty to Party (read: BN) and their loyalty to their employer.
Had the doctrine of civil service neutrality been observed and not violated, there would not be this problem today.
#116 by limkamput on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:35 am
In Penang, the political leadership can actually gradually change the senior government servant there. The problem with Penang is it was a straits settlement where senior civil servants have come from the Federal establishment (Public Service Department, PSD). With PSD under the Federal Government, this is an area where Penang, Perak and Selangor may find problem. Just for information, all former Federated Malay States like Pahang, Selangor, Perak, NS and former Straits Settlement like Melaka and Penang, the senior civil servants come from the Federal Government. The Unfederated Malay states like Kedah, Johor, Trengganu and Kelantan have their own civil service, so they may have to follow the state governments.
#117 by ktteokt on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 7:12 am
BN does not understand what “separation of powers” mean and the Executive puts its hands in every affair of the other branches of power. It has puts its hands in the judiciary as evidenced by TDM’s sacking of the Lord President and five High Court Judges years back and now there is self-admission by the DG of ACA that the government puts its hands into his affairs.
So it looks like BN executive has the absolute power to control all machineries of government in the legislature, executive and the judiciary!!!
#118 by Joetan on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 7:57 am
Can anyone guess who was the ex minister probe for sexual harassment ? This ex senior minister was dropped in the recently cabinet line up eventhough he was elected as an MP. He was embroiled in another controversy last year for allegedly making a racial remark. This ex-minister also has a DATO SERI title. He is now in overseas. So, can anyone guess who is this ex-minister?
#119 by NewDAP on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 9:19 am
from the star dd 24 april……
Saravanan announced last week on the sidelines of the ministry’s roundtable forum with KL MPs that City Hall had to take immediate action on foreign workers there following Wangsa Maju MP Wee Choo Keong’s allegations.
However, when he visited the tourist destination at about 6pm, foreign workers were nowhere in sight, including the supposedly legitimate ones.
With him were Bukit Bintang MP Fong Kui Lun, Kuala Lumpur Hawkers and Petty Traders Association vice-president Datuk Ang Say Tee and Bukit Bintang MCA division chairman Datuk Dr Lee Chong Meng.
“I came here because an MP who is not from Bukit Bintang said Chinatown had turned into a Bangladeshi town.
“We’re very concerned but, so far, it looks all right,” he said after visiting all the stalls and the City Hall CCTV control room in the area.
“I didn’t see any illegal traders, I don’t even know what’s illegal here,” he added.
He also asked Fong if he had seen any illegal workers, to which Fong answered, “No, not today.”
—————————————————
This is Conspiracy at the top, these VIPs together with the star trying to cover up or bluff most malaysians and to make wee’s allegation is not true.
Those who have been to PS will know that most of the time PS is full of bangladeshi operating stalls over there…. PS is like little Dhaka… bcoz city hall is closing one eye on this issue….
only the traders wlecome those illegal bangladeshi, most malaysians and KL or PS’s residents can not and do not want those bangladeshi at PS or maning stalls at KL or PS. But city hall chooses to help those traders by closing one eye….
Chow Kit is still full of Indo and is still a little Jakarta, city hall closed one eye as well???
#120 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 9:46 am
joetan
jj.
#121 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 11:23 am
Allegations of molestation withdrawn by famale complainant based on “misunderstanding” stated in her statutory declaration. Investigations will be closed. If someone hugged you, it must have, in afterthought, been a avuncular paternal and “unclely” one mistaken or misunderstood as a lusty one! :)
#122 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 11:32 am
Huh??
#123 by procol on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 11:41 am
“Had the doctrine of civil service neutrality been observed and not violated, there would not be this problem today.” undergrad2
I applaud ur intention to set high standards as yardstick.What u advocate seems to be ideal situations similar to the
“perfect market” as mentioned by lots of economist. While it’s ok to aim for the highest standard attainable,it’s an overstatement to say that by using that high std as a model,in reality and practically, there wouldn’t be any problems. U may be right in ur statement quoted above but in reality does it work?
I beg to differ because to rely on that doctrine solely n expect it to work is to place too much trust n faith in humans to be able to be thoroughly neutral at all times in all situations n calling perfect shots. How would ur doctrine operate in real life? It’s incredibly hard if not near impossible to serve two masters. Here,we’re talking bout one man,Datuk Lee,let alone the whole institution,department or nation. This is because a political party,assuming it operates without mala fide to enrich their own members,etc,would or may hv different objectives,goals and priorities compared to other parties.
Therefore if a man who is not patently disinterested while serving under two political parties may well find that the priorities of both parties may clash.Even if both priorities are valid and for the furtherance of nation development,it’s still a clash nevertheless.In situation like this,it’s hard for him/her to make a balanced n appropriate decision without the risk of appearing disloyal to one party.
The other option for the man with his feet in two boats is to really retire fr active politics while serving the state govt.Even this may sound pointless or hypocritic.Coz once u join a political party,ur supposedly pledged to commit urself in supporting the party’s ideals,objectives,etc.But in order to appear neutral u then hv to be really non-active or dormant, if that’s the case one may as well quit n concentrate on his job as a civil servant,serving only one master.
#124 by Joetan on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 11:49 am
Allegations of molestation withdrawn ? Probably ACA should step in to probe. The said minister was believed to be drunk when he commited the act. If he is JJ then he should also be charged in syariah court for drinking alcohol.
#125 by ADAM YONG IBNI ABDULLAH on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:02 pm
someone, somehow, somewhat manage to get this lady to withdraw police report. malaysia bolih.
#126 by lakilompat on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:14 pm
To Adam,
“Its like malaysiakini, it started with english medium,than onto chinese and malay to cater for the masses. and this is merely a suggestion. because the PERCEPTION is still dap is chinese party.”
The DAP founder is a chinese, but to date, many DAP leaders are Indian lawyer. The chinese leader can’t converse mandarin and Indian lawyer can’t converse tamil to each other, hence, they must used a standardised mean to converse, that’s English.
#127 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 12:39 pm
“I beg to differ because to rely on that doctrine solely n expect it to work is to place too much trust n faith in humans to be able to be thoroughly neutral at all times in all situations n calling perfect shots. ” procol
I think it will help us to understand the problem better if we talk less in abstract terms, less in terms of concepts and doctrines etc and deal with the socio-economic impact that violation or the non-adherence to this policy has on economic development.
Under the previous BN administration, we see for example, Chinese dominated areas or constituencies being ignored, starved of funds leading to economic neglect of the area. Roads are not being repaired, public amenities are poor etc. presumably to punish residents for voting for the opposition during elections or simply because of the population demographics of the area. For example, it is a ‘Chinese area’ and not a ‘Malay and Muslim area’ – civil service being predominantly Malay and supporters of the UMNO dominated BN.
Had the doctrine of civil service neutrality been observed, don’t you think this type of situation is less likely to happen? To be sure it will happen in any case because we can all agree there is no such thing as a completely independent civil service free from political interference. Economic development could be happening on an accelerated scale because a Minister has his house in the area or a director-general or his deputy make their homes there. So let’s be clear about that.
But at least you will not see this systematic denial, deprivation and economic neglect of the area whose residents had voted for the opposition at the last election. There is just the desire to develop the area irrespective of who they support, their political affiliations and race etc.
It is not about reliance on some artificial doctrine and expecting it ‘to work’ or about trust and faith in good human nature. It is about not following a doctrine, not having the kind of work culture which would have helped to avoid or minimize political interference in the functioning of the civil service – and the waste and imbalances, irregularities and anomalies and inequities that this brings. Not to mention whole populations are being alienated as a result of political decisions or politically motivated decisions.
#128 by procol on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 2:12 pm
Um,to be honest,I can’t pinpoint where ur heading in ur post.I think I have put forward my point quite clearly that in certain situation,case in point: d position of Datuk Lee, it may not be feasible to just lay a finger on the doctrine n say had it been adhered to,then problem solved. The doctrine per se is absolutely good and I don’t think a lot of ppl wld disagree on it. However, I say, it takes more than that in reality because of human nature. Put simply,maybe the insistence of the doctrine is another expression of saying humans inherently has the potential to do harm thus justifying d doctrine. The good n nature are inherent in us,it’s how a person controls n chooses his/her principles. The doctrine per se is as sound as thou shall not murder. However,as far as I’m concerned in reality it’s not working at d ideal std. In another perspective,perhaps we should say it’s a good law,doctrine,etc but lacks enforcement or doesn’t carry the sting of repercussions or plain unfeasible in some situations.
I am actually highlighting the ideal situation and reality.In Datuk Lee’s case even if it works it may not be ideal coz he may be accused of being partial not by one but by both sides.It’s one tough call there.Similarly,that’s y a Judge should discharge himself fr sitting in if he/she is related to either parties by blood,biz or otherwise.I don’t question Datuk Lee’s or Judge’s integrity or ability to perform the task but it’s a matter of public perception and precaution.He may be adept and impartial but yet can’t rely on the doctrine to have feet in two boats.
Anyway,I wouldn’t say ur ideals are off-tangent,who knows one day ur the PM n u can pull it off.It will apply in certain situations. I don’t know bout the Chinese area being ignored,I’d let them spearhead their fight for improvement. Ur advocated ideals n opinions are respectfully yours and if u cld pull it off next time, hats off n u hv my salute. I won’t want to burden readers of this blog anymore bout some doctrine.I’d rather agree to disagree on any differences n urge leaders,civil servants,PM,heck every1 to just work more, think fast, talk slow n do good.
#129 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 6:30 pm
“In Datuk Lee’s case even if it works it may not be ideal coz he may be accused of being partial not by one but by both sides.It’s one tough call there.Similarly,that’s y a Judge should discharge himself fr sitting in if he/she is related to either parties by blood,biz or otherwise.I don’t question Datuk Lee’s or Judge’s integrity or ability to perform the task but it’s a matter of public perception and precaution.He may be adept and impartial but yet can’t rely on the doctrine to have feet in two boats.” Procol
I’m not sure I understand the context of the ‘incident’ but you must have heard of what has become a cliché i.e. justice must not only be done but be seen to be done.
If you have a judge presiding over a case and he is related to one of the litigants or he is personally acquainted to one of the litigants however casual or remote that relationship may be, he is under duty to recuse himself from the case. The practice is not intended to cast aspersions on the character and integrity of the judge or judges. It has everything to do with the need for justice to be seen to be done and not just done. Perception is reality in this case.
I’m curious as to how that ties in with the doctrine of civil service neutrality.
#130 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 6:37 pm
“The doctrine per se is as sound as thou shall not murder. However, as far as I’m concerned in reality it’s not working at d ideal std.” procol
The doctrine of civil service neutrality is what it says it is i.e. a doctrine – a stated principle of government policy.
You cannot blame Moses who appeared at the foot of the mountain some 2,000 years ago with a stone tablet in hand with the Ten Commandments inscribed by the hand of God. It is said that ‘conscience’ is God’s presence in Man but wasn’t it the serpent who worked through Eve to get to Adam who disobeyed God’s command and committed the first Sin?
#131 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 7:29 pm
“Allegations of molestation withdrawn by female complainant based on “misunderstanding” stated in her statutory declaration.” Jeffrey QC
In the United States, charges are “pressed by the victim” and could be withdrawn. If they are withdrawn, the complainant theoretically speaking could, under some circumstances, be prosecuted for filing a false police report if that is shown to be the case.
(But I guess this is the wrong thread to discuss abuse of the legal system and Jeffrey QC posted it here to get the attention of a particular reader. Wonder who that may be?)
#132 by procol on Thursday, 24 April 2008 - 10:37 pm
Undergrad2, A Judge is a civil servant and that doctrine just doesn’t work if he’s somehow interested in the case he’s presiding over. It matters not if he’s really neutral n able to carry out his duty, he can’t use that as an excuse and insists that he should sit through the proceedings though it has happened before. How it ties in? Please refer n read carefully of ur own previous post. U said that the political situation in Penang bout being torn between party n employer at the same time could be resolved through strict adherence to the doctrine. I didn’t say it’s crap,there may be situations where it wouldn’t be practical. I don’t know what ur going about talking bout Moses, I’m not blaming Moses or anyone here to set the record straight. As said u can have the best law, doctrine,rule, etc in the world but relying on it alone may not give u the desirable result and in some situations it just may not be suitable. Further I subscribe to the believe that conscience is god’s presence in man. Point is u may hail that doctrine is a save all provision n universal cure or whatever u believe. However some don’t n u should just accept that. U want to write a thesis on it, go ahead but maybe it helps if u were a tad bit less argumentative instead cld do good by just agree to disagree as stated previously because it really aint the right place here to debate at such lenghts. If u hv an insatiable appetite to carry on harping on it n like to have the last say,go ahead n be my guest, it’s ok u can have the honour. I’m out of here,there’s much more important things to do.
#133 by undergrad2 on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 12:10 am
“It matters not if he’s really neutral n able to carry out his duty, he can’t use that as an excuse and insists that he should sit through the proceedings though it has happened before.” procol
We are not having an argument here! I am with you all the way! Just fine tuning on some of the things you said.
I’m certainly not trying to win converts!
#134 by undergrad2 on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 12:16 am
“U said that the political situation in Penang bout being torn between party n employer at the same time could be resolved through strict adherence to the doctrine.” procol
I did not say it could be resolved in any way! I was suggesting a reason for the rot, if you will, that had set in when BN was in control.
Many of the government servants now working under a political party once in the opposition, must be finding it difficult to adjust.
#135 by undergrad2 on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 12:18 am
” I don’t know what ur going about talking bout Moses, I’m not blaming Moses or anyone here to set the record straight.” procol
LOL.
OK. Let’s leave Moses alone.
#136 by undergrad2 on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 12:35 am
The discussion has strayed far from the topic of the thread. Let’s go back to the issue of an independent ACA.
“The MCAC must possess high-quality officers and equipments. The Prime Minister has made an announcement to add 5000 officers to its existing 2000 officers over the next five years. These officers must be experts in various fields and they must possess certain powers to effectively carry out their tasks. For example, there are accountants, engineers, IT professionals and technicians in ICAC of Hong Kong. These people are in fact the biggest capital of the ICAC.” Sin Chew
The 18 big fish said to have escaped the net did not escape due to lack of human resource or its quality. They ‘escaped’ due to the lack of political will. Period. The best brains in the business would not make a difference.
#137 by limkamput on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 12:20 pm
The best brains in the business would not make a difference……So also is civil service neutrality. It is the lack of “political will” which means political leadership must be willing to bring meaningful change to the country and direct the civil service to carry out the task without fear and favour. The best bet is to institute a filtering system of selecting and grooming people for leadership positions in government. There will be no civil service neutrality if political leadership has chequered past.
#138 by undergrad2 on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 12:42 pm
I believe it was Confucious who said:
“Stupid is forever, ignorance can be fixed.”
#139 by limkamput on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 1:13 pm
i believe stupidity can still be fixed if only one can gradually see it overt time. The tragedy is most can’t see their own stupidity.
#140 by procol on Friday, 25 April 2008 - 11:58 pm
undergrad2, noted. apologies for d momentary lapse of judgment ther.
#141 by mmc2008 on Sunday, 27 April 2008 - 3:20 pm
Well, this is not a new issue. Why need to wait until 4 years only reform?? Need so long of a time?? The sincerity is in doubt!! The success rate is low as well. I think it is another talking issue, hot for a while and then it will die off. This is BN style. So, a revamp of the Federal Gevernment is required as sson as posssible to make those issues a possible one! I am looking forward to…