Deputy Prime Minister and UMNO Deputy President Datuk Seri Najib Razak dropped a bombshell at the National Land Council meeting yesterday – that it is unconstitutional for state governments to issue freehold titles to new villages, kampong tersusun and other purposes, impacting directly on the plans of Pakatan Rakyat state governments of Perak and Penang.
The Perak Pakatan Rakyat State government had announced within a month of being in power after the March 8 “political tsunami” that freehold titles would be issued to new villages and kampong tersusun, affecting some 149,000 people living in 349 planned and 134 new villages in the state.
The Penang Pakatan Rakyat State Government had also announced that residential leasehold landowners in the state could apply for their property to be converted to freehold status and earlier this month, that some 20,000 owners of low and medium-cost flats developed on state land need not pay a premium to convert their leasehold titles to freehold status.
There is controversy as to whether Najib is right that Article 91(5) of the Constitution and the National Land Code constitute a bar on the state governments from issuing freehold titles without the approval of the National Land Council.
However two questions come to mind from Najib’s “no freehold” bombshell:
Firstly, why has the Federal Government taken eight months to respond to the publicly-announced intentions of the Perak state government to issue freehold titles to new villages and kampong tersusun and the Penang state government with regard to residential leasehold landowners?
Secondly, who are the real parties who played the role of “throwing spanners” in the works by the Perak and Penang state government to issue freehold titles – are they Umno, MCA, Gerakan, MIC and other BN component parties?
What is the stand of the BN component parties on the issue of freehold titles to new villages and kampong tersusun in Perak and residential leasehold owners in Penang? Let Umno, MCA, Gerakan, MIC and all the other BN component parties declare publicly their stand on this issue.
#1 by k1980 on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 12:31 pm
Very simple to get freehold titles– just throw BN into the garbage dump the next elections and hey presto, the rakyat can get freehold titles! But PR must remember to reserve leasehold titles to all those BN supporters, including Dollah and Najib
#2 by wanderer on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 12:54 pm
I had a manufacturing factory on a TOL land for a good 40+years. One day, I was suddenly served with a notice to vacate, not by the State govt but, by a private company, who informed me that they have obtained a free hold title. Strange… after a brief investigation on my part, I found that this private company, belongs to the MB’s family under a company’s name. My lawyer told me, it was a waste of time to take the matter to the court. These UMNO goons are the almighty. If this is not daylight robbery, what is?
I am not bitter, just disgusted with the manner they robbed from the rakyat.
Najib, look into your own sarong and see how your UMNOputeras behave. YB Lim, you are right. Get these coalition to come up openly with a standard ruling.
#3 by k1980 on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 1:06 pm
MCA, Gerakan, MIC ect will merely toe Najid’s no-freehold line unless they wish to end up like Loh Seng Kok, the one-term mca MP who was barred by umno to contest in the 2008 GE because he opened his big mouth too much
#4 by dawsheng on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 1:08 pm
My questions is, why Najib is against issuing freehold titles to the Rakyat? Whatever, it is clearly politically motivated, but in anyway this issue unfolds, the one on the losing side is still BN. My words of advice to Najib, change your political advisors while you still can.
#5 by FY Lim on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 1:10 pm
This is good fodder for the PR coalition i.e DAP,PKR & PAS campaign in KT. Just ask the simple question :
1. Is BN govt taking the interest of the rakyat at heart or are they trying to play politics by throwing in the spanner for the good efforts of the PR govt.’s in Perak and Penang ?
2. The PR govt’s in these two states are trying to assist the poor rakyat to achieve prosperity by having leasehold converted to freehold and yet the BN govt. is against it. BN ( UMNO , MCA, Gerakan , MIC ) is definitely working against the interest and welfare of the residents in Penang and Perak. And more so in a worsening economy.
3. Therefore the residents of KT should know who to vote. Are they voting for a caring party or they would choose a party that is not working for the best interest and welfare of the residents ? The choice should be clear and the decision lies in the rakyat’s hand and not UMNO or BN.
#6 by norizanmohd on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 1:55 pm
This is a sabotage. It’s never being heard of before, not even during PAS rule in Terengganu. We never came across it in Kelantan either, but now it seems that Najib has found a new tool to suppress the PR government. This shows how arrogant BN is, the party thinks that it can always undermine the people’s power. Well let’s wait and see how this regime would end up.
#7 by hawk on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 2:13 pm
Why worry. Land is under the Constitution a state matter. Land in Perak or in any States belong to the Sovereign State of Perak or those States. All the States agreed to form a Federation. The Federation Agreement doesn’t include surrendering their land. The Federal Gov’t owns nothing unless some stupid State’s Gov’t like the stupid Selangor Gov’t under the BN gave them lands like KL, Labuan and Putrajaya.
Just ask the Perak landowners to surrender their leasehold land back to the State Authorities and the State’s Authority could alienate the same land in perpetuity( freehold) back to the same landowner. Let’s see what Najib and the Council or the Federal Gov’t could do.
When BN States Gov’t including Najib when he was Pahang MB plundered State’s forestry for themselves and cronies, this National Land Council did nothing. Under Art 91(5) Fed constitution they should control the utilization of forest lands in the States. Since they are the ones who stole and plundered these forest lands, nothing is mentioned of the Land Council and its role and duties.
Typical pirates of the South China Seas.
#8 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 2:26 pm
The controversy should be evaluated from 3 perspectives, (1) legal, (2) political and (3) apolitical and practical perspectives.
I Legal Perspectives:
There’s nothing to say National Land Council/Federal authority overrides State Authority.
You’re relying on section 76(aa) National Land Code (NLC). State govt can alienate freehold land (technical term is Grant in Perpetuity) where State Govt is satisfied with existence of “special cicumstances” .
The NLC does not define what these are: it is up to you (State Govt) to define.
Also under Federal Constitution (Article 74) matters relating to land (like rivers, forests, local government, and town and country planning) are within the jurisdiction of the State Authorities.
Compare with the National Land Council controlled at Federal level
Article 91(5) of the Federal Constitution states that the National Land Council is reponsible to set up a national policy “for the promotion and control of the utilisation of land throughout the Federation for mining, agriculture, forestry and for any other purpose..”
You are alienating at State Level “residential” land – not “mining, agriculture, forestry” where “any other purpose” would in ordinary meaning refers to these general class of land designated for commercial exploitation that excludes residential!
The moral and legal right of Federal Govt to intervene in a matter like land under jurisdiction of states rests in the imperative to co-ordinate from one centre common issues affecting environment, forestry, resources from land whether mining, oil etc, arguably separate from land tenure for residence of the dispossessed, poor and homeless.
These are socio-economic concerns addressed by the State Govt(s) which are entirely consistent with the Federal Govt’s two pronged objectives of the NEP (before they were twisted out of their intentions by racist politicians)!
I will break up and deal with Political Perpectives & Practical apolitical perspectives in 2 separate postings
#9 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 2:27 pm
II Political Perspectives:
Either case PKR scores political brownie points. If you succeed to alienate freehold land, people give you votes because you’re people orientated thinking of socio-economic justice etc but if you fail, because of legal obstacles, you can always blame it on Barisan Nasional or the courts/judge sinfluenced by it, either way smelling good for trying!
#10 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 2:30 pm
III Practical apolitical perspectives :
Granted PKR’s socio-economic and political agenda to attend needs of the middle and below middle class vote banks, from practical national and long term development objectives, PKR should address the issue, in land management, whether if the State now alienates freehold land freely, these lands may be taken back so easily in the future when you require it for public purposes/development.
Our Constitution protects land rights, which means once alienated freehold, it cannot be converted back to 99 yr or lesser leasehold, unless with huge compensation, and it becomes an issue of how much more the State or Federal Govt has to compensate when back door compulsory land acquisition is resorted to.
Once the dollars and Sen issue settled and parameters defined, take away the restrictive conditions in leasehold land. This condition in Leasehold land – that you cannot have dealings (transfer, charge, lease) without state authority consent – is nuisance delaying land transactions and breeding corruption when downline little Napoleons in land offices ask for bribes for exercise of discretion to grant what in reality, in most cases, is and ought to be automatic consent.
This dichotomy of Freehold and Leasehold is unfortunate. The former has better value relative to latter because the latter is subject to this condition – which should be removed. The other thing is the fear that upon expiry of Leasehold, the property reverts to the State which will not re-alienate it back to same owner or if it does so it is conditional upon exacting a huge premium.
You should remove this uncertainty : give an assurance that all Leasehold will be re-alienated (without loss of any area) as of right unless required for public purpose in which case the State would pay compensation. Make certain and clear that the premium if any or the quit rent/assessment is subject to defined parameters.
Once you remove the restrictive condition of requiring State Authoritry’s consent for dealings and make certain re-alienation of Leas as of right within defined parameters of premium, people know what they get, that they are free from the mercies of bureaucratic whimsical decisions, and the difference bwteen Freehold & Leashold becomes narrowed, and PR states could alienate Leasehold land to meet their socio-economic agneda without so much conflict with Federal Government/Najib, worried that alienation of Freehold would impose a huge compensation problem when public or development purposes require taking back the land, and Petronas oil has run out by then!
#11 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 2:33 pm
Typo omission in 1st para of preceding posting rectified in bold capital : “these lands may NOT be taken back so easily in the future when you require it for public purposes/development.
#12 by lew1328 on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 2:46 pm
Greetings!
Before I go for a long holiday break, this is my little opinion.
I strongly believed that the villages entitled and allowable for the “Freehold” land as they are flooding the land with their “blood and sweat”.
Please ask your relatives or friends who’s always grumbling on government stuffs, please rethink and think before they consider casting vote for BN if they would like to witness the future improvement in our motherland in the near future.
The unknown angels have yet come and we shall not make a judgment that dreams will not come through if we ourselves continues blind fold or trap by them BN.
My last wish in 2008, hope PR will strengthen their internal relationship rather than openly criticizing each other of small matters.
Happy Holidays!
#13 by OrangRojak on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 3:09 pm
Can someone explain to me what the “need not pay a premium to convert their leasehold titles to freehold” means?
If I own a house and lease it to someone, I suppose I could allow them to convert their title to a freehold one, but I’d expect them to buy the house from me. Is the ‘premium’ an additional payment on top of the cost of buying the land from the current owner?
#14 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 3:23 pm
It appears that the issue is not whether you could alienate lands per se to new villages and kampong tersusun, affecting some 149,000 people living in 349 planned and 134 new villages in the state – but why should you alienate Freehold, when the rest of us are only getting Leasehold….???
Then you say these are economically disadvantaged groups and getting a Freehold they need not have to a premium to convert their leasehold titles to freehold status (in the future when their leashold expires).
However here we’re talking about 99 years time, the normal time for Leasehold of residential category. What happens in 99 years time – no one knows : these economically disadvantaged groups may a generation or two then be wealthy, who knows and can pay the premium!
However if you think premium is an issue, then ask the PR controlled State Govt to pass by fiat/decree/stae law exempting certain economic disadvantaged groups from having to pay premium when (a) renewing their Leasehold newly alienated or (b) converting their existing Leasehold to Freehold now.
What the Federal Govt takes the PR controlled states to task is not that you alienate land (which normally nowadays is Leasehold) but why you have to alienate Freehold (instead of Leasehold) to new property owners or allow freely existing property owners with Leasehold to convert to Freehold.
Because if you do, it implies that you got the arithmetic all worked out of where to get money to compensate if and should require some part of these lands to revert to the State Govt or the Federal govt for development or public purposes even if they are not for privatisation to cronies but geneuninely for public good.
Also you will be setting a precedent from Penang down to Selangor where Leasehold land can be easily converted back to Freehold without heed on larger national issues of compensation for development and public purposes.
Naturally Najib thinks it is a irresponsible political ploy/gambit because you PR set a precedent like that for every leasehold owner in every other state to vote for Pakatan Rakyat next election so that they could enhance their property value from Leasehold to Freehold!
PR has to ask itself why it cannot issue / alienate Leasehold; why it must insist on Freehold!
If you say Leasehold creates problems, then I can equally argue being state authority you could eliminate these problems like for example remove all restrictive condition requiring state consent from the new lands alienated; and in respect to all existing Leasehold land held, either give a blanket waiver needing state Consent or instruct all land offices to issue automatic consent within a week, or better still register all dealings whether or not State Authority consent has been applied for or obtained! :)
#15 by localgrad on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 3:37 pm
hm… a good point to campaign about in KT by-elec
Just ask the Chinese there,
1. You wan a racist BN government that sabotaj PR state government’s humanity move by giving out freegold titles.
2. Or a caring PR government who treats rakyat fair but with some internal rebuttal sparked by its Islamic party, which always shout about their Islamic state and hudud but could not be transpired into a reality (need at least 2/3 majority to amend the constitution).
I will choose the second option wisely.
#16 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 3:40 pm
OrangRojak, lands here either Freehold good for perpetuity or Leasehold ie of a definite time frame 99 yrs for residential, 60 for industrial, 30 for mining etc upon expiry of which by effluxion of time, it reverts back to the state and the state not needing it for devlopment or public purpose re-alienates ie re-give back the property to the original owner for another 99 year term after exacting its pound of flesh, a premium (say) 100,000-00 having regard to value of land around. Leasehold is a category of land which has nothing to do with you as land owner “leasing” your property to a tenant or lessee if it is a term more than 3 years, or if less it is a letting to a tenant a tenancy rather than a lease…
Under proposed policy of Penang State Govt if you are poor belonging to the viollages, you can, if you are existing property owner, change with the State your Leasehold land for a Freehold one without paying amny premium becausrs you are ostensibly poor. And if you were so poor as to be without any property, the State Govt would alienate land to you so that you own property for a nominal premium. And it is going to alienate Freehold land when the national policy as applied to every other state before 8th March election results controlled by BN was to alienate only Leasehold land, not Freehold land..
It is this alienation of Freehold Land and freely allowing conversion of existing Laesehold to Freehold policy of Pakatan Rakyat that BN Federal govt and Najib opposes because the authorities ostensibly has no more control over issues of getting back the land for development/public purposes and issues of compensation, which is definitely exponentially more if it were Frehold as compared to Leasehold.
#17 by rossi on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 4:43 pm
How could this be deemed unconstitutional when it gives the true meaning of the word– citizen of a land! This is another word Najib uses to marginalize and gain the tones necessary from the ultras to stay in power as exposed clearly here http://sjsandteam.wordpress.com/ Why is a lame duck govt wasting so much time when every action is accordingly done to the Laws written in place?
#18 by Onlooker Politics on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 4:47 pm
If there is really a social covenant in the formation of the Federation of Malaysia, then all Malaysians should understand that all absolute political power in relation to the Land matters shall be vested in the hand of the respective State Government in the state where the land is located, whereas all power in relation to Islamic Religion, the Malay Customs and Traditions shall be vested in the hand of the State Sultan.
Any intervention from the Federal Government in relation to the state authority in relation to the land matters and Islamic religious affairs, the Malay Customs and Traditions shall be ruled by the Federal Court as unconstitutional. Therefore, why should the PR state governments bother so much about Najib’s decree on the Land issue? Is Najib going to declare that he be enthroned as the Emperor of Malaysia Empire?
Right now, the best action the PR Menteri Besars and PR Chief Minister shall take is to transfer all the Pro-Barisan Nasional heads of the Land Offices to other less important departments and appoint all Pro-Pakatan Rakyat men to head all the Land Offices before more and more political damages can be rendered by those Land Officers who constantly show insubordinate behaviour to the PR leadership.
Why should we tolerate BN men any longer when PR is indeed the boss in the state government?
#19 by luking on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 5:11 pm
1st. he called for the privatisation of ijn and now no free hold land titles for the people.Anther one called for the abolishing of vernacular school.What type of govnment have we voted in?definately,not a people’s friendly one.
#20 by luking on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 5:49 pm
1st. he gives the green light for the privatization of ijn.Now he says no to free hold land titles to the people.Another one called for the abolishing of vernacular school.Is this the people friendly government we voted in or wanted?
#21 by sheriff singh on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 6:02 pm
The state government should just go ahead and issue the freehold titles. What Najib says is not always right or the gospel or Koranic truth. He can be wrong too so lets not fret about it.
Let Najib and his 3rd floor girls challenge it in court to prove that the acts are illegal / unconstitutional / ultra vires the Consititution or whatever. Take another half a century to resolve the cases by which time he’s gone, gone, gone.
The PM in waiting is getting impatient but let us not give him an easy passage. Make him sweat.
#22 by monsterball on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 6:55 pm
If those land and properties belong to their relations and to all UMNO munafiks..let see Najib object to freehold status.
I am so glad…these fortunate ones.. with their leaseholds turned to freehold…to stop UMNO government keep harassing them…..and also the lucky owners will have their properties value…at much higher values…..and can borrow money from banks ……much easier.
Why don’t UMNO rejoice over DAP smart move….to help small industry?
One guess!!….almost all.. belong to Chinese Malaysians???
Or feeling embarrassed DAP management.. much smarter and more sensible than theirs?
Talk of any UMNO objections…or proposals….not one really have all Malaysians in their hearts. It’s their sickening race and religion mentalities…so deeply rooted….that one needs to be alert and sharp….to know…their hypocritical acting skills….always at play…in every move they make.
One can even cry in live TV…to act and get few..to stop that person from stepping down.
That’s how great …thick skinned ..actor..one can be….and still going strong with his acting.
SICK SICK SICK……and my God!!..tomorrow is Christmas Day!
Merry X’mas to LKS and family and all visitors.
May the coming 2009 bring us closer to be united as Malaysian Malaysia.
#23 by monsterball on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 7:02 pm
Food for thoughts!!
Leasehold means land belong to the country.
And if the Agong or State sultan do not object…why should UMNO??
Does UMNO think…the country belong to them??
I recalled the King of Thailand gave all his land and properties to the Thai citizens. That’s why he is so loved by all Thai people.
#24 by Onlooker Politics on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 9:14 pm
Najib is naive and ignorant about the Constitution of Malaysia, which clearly states that the legislative rights in relation to Land shall be vested in the State Government.
For those who want a detailed clause about Land Rights in Malaysia, please get a copy of Constitution of Malaysia on the website and refer to the Ninth Schedule – Legislative List – List II. State List.
Najib cites that Article 91(5) of the Constitution and the National Land Code constitute a bar on the state governments from issuing freehold titles without the approval of the National Land Council. In reality, National Land Council only has the contitutional rights to manage any issue in relation to uniformity of Land usage and its rights may be limited only to providing advice and performing some technical tasks like doing the land survey and preparing a survey drawing and limited to the rights of claiming a fair share of mining and timbering revenues on behalf of the Federal Government from the state government and of the environmental issues such as animal protection in the designated national park or Tanah Perhilitan. However, National Land Council will never have any effective rights to stop the Land Office under the state government to issue any land title to the lawful landowner. For instance, the state government of Johor has granted many land titles to the land owners as a token of appreciation under the grace politics long before the Pejabat Ukur under the Federal Government has completed the jobs of land site survey and land survey drawing preparation. This clearly indicates that Article 91(5) of the Constitution of Malaysia will not be effectual if the State Government does not wish to comply.
Therefore Perak State Government and Penang State Government may deliberately choose to ignore Najib on the Freehold Land Title issue because the PR governments will not require a signature from Najib in order to confer a land title to the landowners in Perak or Penang.
#25 by vsp on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 10:00 pm
Land matters have always benefited the UMNOputras, their cronies and their lapdogs like MCA, MIC, Gerakan, etc.
Land is the protected preserves of the BN privileged class and it is guarded fiercely for their own benefit.
Obnoxious laws were passed so that land can be acquired cheaply by the BN goons by force under the pretext of public interest, but later mysteriously landed into the laps of some private interests.
Also land titles are not safe because some BN crooks will collude with the Land Offices to illegally transfer the land to themselves or proxies. Even the Supreme Court judgement regarding such illegal transfer upheld such thievery.
Laws enacted to protect forests for water catchment and the environment can also be stolen because the BN state governments have consistently degazetted such laws to enable private development in these sensitive areas. Hilly areas that were not supposed to be developed can also be approved, resulting in disasters such as the Bukit Antarabangsa landslides. Playgrounds that were once abundant years ago were not spared either. Now many children don’t have football fields to enjoy but have to lepak in shopping complexes instead.
[Have you wonder why there are so many property counters on the Bursa stock exchange? Businesses that failed usually get a second life through the property route.]
In their greed to grab whatever land they become callous by destroying temples and convert estates for development thus marginalising the Indians further. The Hindraf phenomenon that took place pierced through the chink of the BN impenetrable armour and taught them an expensive lesson. Yet they seem impervious to learning.
So it was a blow to the BN when they unexpectedly lost 5 golden states to the Pakatan which were rich grounds for their plunder and pillage. While they are so stingy with the ordinary rakayat regarding land, they have no compulsion to even give away land that were protected by statutes. Many land that they have planned to rob were lost with these 5 states.
The area that the Pakatan government planned to convert into freehold lands were probably earmarked by the BN crooks for themselves and that is why they were very upset. At first they went around to instigate the Malay population that the Perak government was only giving the land to non-Malays but when they found out that many Malays also benefit from this kind gesture of the Perak government they have no bullets left to shoot. It was a surprise that they have to take 8 long months to come out with this desperate ruling to once again deny the rakayat with a piece of land which they can call their own.
As more and more private and state land become scarce they will be turning to the Malay-protected land. How? – just create corridors all over the country and forcibly acquire these land or enter into one-sided agreements with the landowners. So people out there watch out. The pirates are coming!
#26 by imranj78 on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 10:22 pm
Here again we have DAP politicizing everything… even land matters!
While I have nothing against converting leasehold land to freehold land, there must be a long term thought to it. Normally lands that are identified as leasehold are earmarked for potential future development plans to develop that area or to the benefit of the state and its rakyat and not only to benefit the few. If indeed the Perak government has had a long term look to the pros and cons of such conversion and THEN only found it to be beneficial, then by all means go ahead with it. But have such studies been done and has it been made transparent? Or is such a move made to gain brownie points among voters as what PR is always trying to do without maybe looking at long term implications?
#27 by winsoontan on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 10:44 pm
Please see the true colour of our in waiting Prime Minister.
If free hold land good for Rakyat, why did he oppose?
Please drop the bad policy maker through the coming KT election!
#28 by Loh on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 10:56 pm
///Gov’t offers to help minority Malays in other countries
Dec 24, 08 1:01pm
Deputy Prime Minister Najib said that the government was ready to help in the advancement of Malays in other countries where they are a minority. ///–Malaysiakini
The above statement shows the working of Najib’s mind. If the land titles in question are for the benefit of Malays, then Najib would not have raised the issue of approval by whatever authority said to have a higher authority than the elected representatives of the people who were appointed by the rulers. By raising that issue, it shows that the land title issue did not please Najib as a racist when he was even willing to help people in other countries rather than the people who share the same nationality with him.
Malays according to the definition of the constitution are those who habitually use Malay language and follow Malay customs. Would minority in other countries satisfy the definition of Malays as envisaged by the Malaysian constitution? How should Najib consider them Malays they in their country may not practise what are considered the customs for Malays? Even though they can be so classified for argument sake, how should the resources of one country contributed by the nationals of different races, in terms of taxes or their share of national resources, be diverted to help people of other countries not out of compassion in terms of needs, but based on race dubiously known as Malays? If Najib as DPM entertain that thought, what else would he so as PM to become champion of Malays in the world using resources of the country contributed partly by non-Malays? If that is not a racist thought of championing Malays’s interests across national boundary, what else is?
If Najib is allowed to help only a certain section of the people in other country based not on needs, would it not be a case of interfering into the internal matters of other nations? What would Thailand feel if the people in South Thailand are encouraged to shift their loyalty from Thailand to outside financier if Malaysian government chose to help Malays in Thailand, rather than all the poor Thais? How would Indonesia feel if some Indonesians choose to identify themselves as Malays rather than as Indonesians so as to be entitled to Najib’s assistance?
The Chinese and Indians in Malaysia are being ill treated by the government. What would Najib respond if the Chinese and the Indian governments choose to help, in whatever form, Chinese and Indians as minorities in other countries, and so declare as Najib did?
How should non-Malays in Malaysia feel when Najib uses national resources for non-Malaysians Malays rather than for Malaysian non-Malays?
#29 by Onlooker Politics on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 11:04 pm
Converting the Leasehold Land in the New Village to the Freehold Land is generally good to the existing landowners. To save the premium which has to be recurringly paid to the Land Office once in either every 25 years, or every 60 years or every 99 years is just the economic benefit the existing landowners can expect. There are other non-monetary benefits which the existing landowners can also grab, such as to avoid political persecution by the ruling party when there is no expiry on the land usage period.
For instance, in early 1980s when there was a political rivalry between Tan Koon Swan and Neo Yee Pan in Party MCA for the presidency of MCA, many Tan Koon Swan’s supporters in Johor were being denied the rights to get the tenure of their residential land titles in the New Village renewed because they had been blacklisted by the then Menteri Besar of Johor as DAP supporters based on a shortlist provided by some Johor State Assemblymen who happened to be Neo Yee Pan’s factional members. Although these inhumane political strategy finally brought about the political disaster to Neo Yee Pan and costed him his MCA Presidency, many Tan Koon Swan’s supporters in Johor were compelled to live in agony as a result of the rejection by the Land Office (which is indirectly controlled by the Meteri Besar) on their application for land leasehold renewal in early 1980s. As a matter of fact, the limited length leasehold tenure on residential land can sometimes be misused by the ruling party as a means for political persecution.
Therefore, I strongly support PR State Governments’ decision in granting the Freehold Land Title to the new village dwellers in Perak and Penang.
#30 by Vidang on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 11:05 pm
In UK they have leasehold title of 998 or 999 years. If the Perak and Penang State Government apply this rule then there is no question of BN Najib kicking up a fuss. 999 years leasehold is consider freehold in for accounting purpose,
#31 by winsoontan on Wednesday, 24 December 2008 - 11:16 pm
MCA Dr Wee and OTK, please give your comment on what Najid said.
#32 by sheriff singh on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 4:49 am
Najib should seriously go after the illegal immigrants with “freehold” citizenships.
#33 by monsterball on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 7:23 am
imranj78….talked about long term development by keeping the land as leasehold by UMNO.
If UMNO is that soooooo far sighted and have great future plans..all mapped out….why…we will not have hill slopes 118 bangalows come tumbling down. 15 years ago…Highland tower.
Floods in Johore and East Coast..a never ending story.
What long term plans is imranj78 talking about?
From what I see….Perak government is fast and practical.
Imranj78 should wake up and KNOW…Penang ..Perak ..Selangor will be totally different and let the residents them judge them….next election. Pakatan Rakyat is no dreamers and crooked fools lot.
So glad…..Lim Eng Guan said …Penang will not buy Proton anymore for State government.
Go and check the list on repairs.
It takes two to start a corruption!!
LEG made a great decision…..and here come some UMNO idiots…twisting good management to something else.
Are we not sick of all those UMNO supporters comments…like from imranj78??
However…on this day…I wish him a merry x’mas….to rejoice with christains…can he do that?
#34 by monsterball on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 7:28 am
Sheriff Singh…he dare not. Those are UMNO phantom voters.
They will do what UMNO tells them to do….or else.
It’s on going for decades.
#35 by monsterball on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 7:37 am
imranj78 is using the art ….how to agree to disagree for readers to feel he is such a level headed reasonable man.
This is the way….UMNO guys come here to fish for votes.
I cannot keep laughing how he project..how professional UMNO is…survey this…plan this…that…never seem to do anything …out of haste….all professionally planned.
hahahahahhahahaha….imrnj78 my dear friend..Christmas Day. Please do not speak with a fork tongue. Holy day la.
#36 by monsterball on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 8:03 am
UMNO guys can build huge palaces on State lands….no problem.
So many State land bought by UMNOputras…all converted to freehold…no problem.
So many many things done illegally by UMNO members on State land…such a long list.for 50 years..no problem.
You see…UMNO thinks they own Malaysia ….even though proven not so…..they are all still dreaming……like Rustam of Melaka..saying UMNO will rule forever….and he is considered favourite future UMNO leader.
So in UMNO….all you need is dare to talk nonsense….dare to fool their own race with skills and art…like a great actor….with an never ending art..to show ..they are defending their race and religion…as if all others are attacking them.
They purposely put out tough Islamic laws..to actually show others are attacking Islam….which is not true.
Using religion to play politIcs…sure winner….so said RPK.
Having the art to twist and turn….dare to sack 4 DPM..l..dare to steal with the art of calling that….commission.. as much as you can…..yet can smile…with a thick skinned face.
Those are the qualifications…to be future UMNO president.
It’s deep rooted.
These …..including imranj78…will never change.
We need to watch out…their
how to agree to disagree’ tactics.
It’s FOR or AGAINST….change of government.
Imranj78….will you vote for change of government?
#37 by Bigjoe on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 9:39 am
Its true, over the years there have been instances where BN state govts in Selangor and Penang have magically issued free hold titles where supposedly they could not – ALWAYS to UMNOputras… I was told by MCA people that even MCA ministers cannot pull it off…
#38 by monsterball on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 10:15 am
Bigjoe…It is not that MCA cannot do anything about UMNO’s unfair and unjust actions….favouring UMNO malays only..
It is MCA behaving little good faith second class citizens….to be contented and survive like so…where most of them are also well off..being rewarded by UMNO with commission.
MCA is actually selling his own race to save their own small group..
The MCA …starting from Ling Liong Sik’s time..is the most low down Malaysian Chinese hypocrites in Malaysia.
Under Ling Liong Sik….famous …”‘sup sup sui. Moe mun tai”..meaning “small matter…no problem”….whenever some Chinese Malaysians or Buddhist temples asked for help.
He never kept his words or promises!!
That MCA man is copycat of Mahathir.
So many times….UMNO treated unfairly..unjustly and even insulted other races…especially the Chinese. Have you ever seen MCA threatened to resign with dignity to defend and uphold ….their party name…”Malaysian CHINESE Association”.
Anyway…those Malays…Chinese and Indian politics ..out-dated long long ago.
MCA can continue to carry UMNO legs……bags…be their pimps…say or do as UMNO tells them to do so….for stolen money..who cares!
These are not politicians. These are people who can sell their children..wives…girlfriends….daughters…to UMNO..when UMNO demands.
I really cannot find a word to describe these MCA people..except many name their pet dogs…Liong Sik.
Gerakan is dead and gone.
Lets focus…..change of government….next election.
#39 by ch on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 10:20 am
Dear All,
The move by Pakatan Rakyat-led governments in Penang and Perak awarding freehold titles to dwellers of kampung baru and tersusun is something which the Barisan-led government has been unable to do or fulfill for the last 50 years. Something which the Barisan-led government unable to do in 50 years is now near reality after just a mere 9 months administrating the two states by the newly installed Pakatan regime. For all said and done, it was indeed a major populist breakthrough for them and left a permanent distasteful image and record for Barisan Nasional. Anyone in the right frame of mind in BN will never let this to happen, allowing Pakatan to steal a major thunder from them.
It is now time for Pakatan-led goverment in the two states to negotiate with the Federal government on their plan(s) to appease the dwellers. Having said that, I certainly believe that the pressure is on BN as failure to meet the promised obligation by Pakatan would be seen as a deliberate attempt to deny the dwellers their rights.
#40 by ch on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 10:41 am
Dear All,
I came to understand that TNB is in progress of considering to re-purchase an Independent Power Plant (IPP) station located in Kapar, Selangor from Malakoff for RM2.95 billion, a price offered by the latter. While I have no credible information to intelligently comment on the on-going negotiation between TNB (probably represented by Ministry of Finance) and Malakoff, I have read in the past that the said IPP was sold to Malakoff by TNB at RM1.73 billion. Malakoff has been taken private and I certainly believe that, if the the deal goes through, they will stand to reap a whooping profit of RM1.22 billion.
“We should be proud that Malaysia continues to easily produces billionaires even at the most uncertain economic condition”.
Perhaps YB Lim should attempt to bring us all up to speed on this matter.
#41 by chengho on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 10:43 am
UMNO nervous with the land lord action by DAP controlled Pakatan Rakyat state government . let see finally who is ketuanan tanah sekarang.
#42 by k1980 on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 1:05 pm
Another BN scandal looming up….
http://sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=28716
#43 by HJ Angus on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 1:11 pm
Any move to help the really poor is a good move by the PR governments.
As usual the government issues senseless statements without much thought like the IJN takeover and this land issue.
If the land conversion (to freehold) fails the PR states can still blame the federal authorities although I think the states have more authority over land matters.
Is there anything to prevent granting leases for 99years? That way those in poverty will get the chance to improves their lives.
#44 by monsterball on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 6:09 pm
k1980…Royal Professor Ungku Aziz…is a non political….no nonsense righteous man.
Yes..you guys..go click to what k1980 have found out.
You can never get such serious news in newspapers.
Millions of suspected fraud and cheating exposed by the good professor….yet UMNO ignore to response..or so call ACA taking the cue and investigate.
Tunku Ahmad Rithauddeen…an UMNO respected real respected man…. said…”UMNO is corrupted to the core…for more than 20 years”…hinting Mahathir is the master of all…..is doing a fine job…getting more than 25 exposed on corruptions.
Dollah and Najib said….they are determined to see UMNO will expose the culprits…short of saying..if they do..all ministers may have to resign…but few retired…..very famous crooks.
Playing with words…talking ambiguously…..mean nothing..is what Dollah and Najib are doing…concerning corruption.
Best of all…the old sly fox promise to put out the list of UMNO corrupted people in his blog….one month ago…all forgotten!!!
What more Malaysians…especially UMNO supporters need to prove to them..that UMNO do not care for his race at all. It’s selected from their race…on and on..to fool the majority..of his own kind.
It’s championing their religion…ISLAM…to make sure all Muslims vote for them.
That’s always UMNO low down sickening politics…being played to the limits by Mahathir for 22 years..and on going.
Even now..he is shouting to disunite all Malaysians…..the winning formula of UMNO to win elections.
How much more proof does anyone want to know…Mahathir is the real devil reincarnated and a racialists PM….not forgetting…self appointed dictator…using money power to buy people.
Before Mahathir….the feeling of being Malaysians and being united soon was there and real.
The time was perfect..vast majority are educated.
Under Mahathir…he made sure UMNO Malays stayed as Malays and not as Malaysians….and fought against PAS…thus dividing his own race.
You see..when you are insincere and a crook…no matter how good you can play acting or talk sweet words for his race to listen……somehow…the real character cannot be shut off.
In Kedah…his home city..Alor Star…majority Muslims hates him.
He lost a tiny by-election…and accused UMNO bought votes..to vote against him.
He is famous to accuse others for what he did…to avoid suspicions.
He may have bought voters…with money…got backfired. Voters took the money and voted against him??
Yet he felt no shame.
So you see….that’s UMNO heritage and great teacher.
Actually not UMNO at all…but UMNO BARU.
Malaysians can never expect ministers.. ex or present ones.. being hurled up to court for corruptions.
All one need to do..is get Koran….swear by it…and that’s all …no need court..not need lawyers anymore.
That priviledge ..exclusive to UMNO future PM only.
Those lawyers and courts are for Malaysians like us.
UMNO ministers are above all…above Allah and King.
#45 by OrangRojak on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 10:23 pm
Thanks for explaining Leasehold / Freehold Jeffrey, apologies for the garbled question.
I think what prompted my question was the prospect that transfer of national assets was being proposed as a way of helping Malaysia’s poor. I think what makes people poor is not so much a shortage of assets as a lack of skill in manipulating value. Transferring a public asset to a poor person seems like a transient benefit, before the asset is owned by someone wealthier and better able to benefit from its long-term value. The public asset’s potential to help the country’s poor is then permanently lost.
Given Malaysia’s leadership of the South East Asian Income Inequality league table, perhaps the poor would be better served by a little more income, rather than yet another scheme that can only benefit Malaysia’s wealthiest in the long term?
#46 by undergrad2 on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 10:59 pm
“Najib, look into your own sarong and see…”
Why bother to look. We already know what he’s going to see. He’s going to see what we see i.e. Rosmah’s hands.
#47 by imranj78 on Thursday, 25 December 2008 - 11:41 pm
monsterball,
Why are you bringing in UMNO into this matter? Do not unnecessarily politicize matters as this will cloud your judgement. It is time we look at it from a clear practical and impartial perspective. It should be clear to all that leasehold land is there for a reason, there is nothing political about this. Leasehold land allows the government (whoever is in power!) to take back the land for development should the need arise.
And don’t try to accuse me of being a UMNO supporter because I am not! I am simply a neutral Malaysian who will support the side which I feel has the best to offer to Malaysia. The world is not black and white .. do not think simply because I don’t unconditionally throw support behind DAP that I am then an UMNO supporter. Time to grow up my friend and put aside all these conspiracy theories that you have been writing about.
You asked whether I will vote for a change in government? I absolutely will if that is for the best interest of the country.
Merry Xmas to you too!
#48 by monsterball on Friday, 26 December 2008 - 7:50 am
Great to hear that imranj78..and I sincerely apologize to you…if I have judged you wrongly.
I have a difficult mission impose on myself…to accuse everyone I suspect…and let them prove me wrong.
Most choose to insult me…which means I am right.
But on UMNO…I and millions are never wrong.
Why do I bring UMNO into this matter…you say?
Why…..the root cause of everything..anything wrong with ourselves…our country…our difficult lives…are all caused by UMNO.
As long as UMNO want to separate races…they are evil doers at this Space age era. TAR ..up to Hussien time….OK.
And the most evil of them all…is Mahathir..doing his devilish politics for 22 years…separating the races…for his racialist agendas.
Young readers ……first time voters..must be reminded over and over again…to give them time…to do research and know the truths.
TRUTHS IS MOST POWERFUL…or else there is no God!!
So……I bring out UMNO over and over again..to let them check it out…..how important for them to get registered and vote…next election.
Do you understand?
Whatever it is…imranj78….bless you and I apologize again.
FOR or AGAINST ……..so simple to vote.
#49 by monsterball on Friday, 26 December 2008 - 8:10 am
imaranj78…On leasehold land…you miss the point.
Najib is not happy…is a bunch of crap talks.
UMNO have been converting leaseholds to freehold thousands of hectares..for so long..ONLY…to UMNO members.
Yes..after that.they buy them back from these UMNO members for developments….is one way…UMNO make their own kind..instant multi millionaires.
If that is applied to all Malaysians..it’s great management…..but pick and choose,…it is unfair and unjust.
And check it out..easy come…easy go money….live like kings..spent to show off…YET..UMNO went further to decorate them with false titles….sort of telling ordinary folks…UMNO are chosen Lords over us.!
Finish the millions..start all over again and again.
Few sen paid by all Malaysians on oil…will cover all the millions stolen.
But they need more money….much much more..so 79 sen is the history in the making by Dollah.
You see….Dollah have no choice…his crooks need much more money…so he applied the fastest and best way….78n sen oil increase…..hoping to be known by UMNO …as best PM.
It got backfired!! The rest is history.
Right now…we had seven reductions..surpassing the 78 sen.
Do you see essentials back to old prices?
Trades suffered so much loses all of a sudden….and it takes years for them to recover.
Big increased followed by small drips reductions….can never cure the illness. These bloody fools!!
#50 by wahai kawan on Friday, 26 December 2008 - 2:33 pm
Dear Kit,
Explain the rational from this angle…..
The free allocation makes perfect economic sense…..
Banking transaction will increase……
Many disputes for tittles will resolved….. The continuous unresolved will not remain unresolved….
The Government has already condoned…. When some form of payment from these people to the government must be taken into consideration….. and so forth
So in I essence when you look at the whole picture, there are activities from the people that can be construed as their entitlement for the free allocation and the government has already condoned to such practices ie: if you pay for something already, this means that there is some binding contract in any contract law – case & point #1
The other side is that this allocation will also increase the level of economic activities within the market… bank loans, S&P agreements and so forth…. So if you should emphasize the “dark side” what this allocation can do to the economy…. Malaysia has a lot of land for a minimal population of not more than 30 million. It’s not like giving everything away!!! Case & point #2
Not only DPM promote lackluster in the economy with this action, this is also a from of victimization…..
Go back to your drawing board ! Act with facts & not with emotional cut and paste from speeches and articles from what has been said and written in the constitution and policy, be it Federal or State
Good luck. May God bless you & PR to bring all Malaysian to the next level !
#51 by kerishamuddinitis on Friday, 26 December 2008 - 7:11 pm
What has ONLY TALK KOK to say about this?
When MONEY COME ALWAYS remains silent, then maybe the allegations about converting leasehold to freehold en masse, then buying back has MCA smack in the centre such that it is better for them to remain silent in case the grandfather of the mother of second cousin twice-removed of the classmate of the son of Ding-a-Ling speaks up to say he got a 1% COMMISSION from a RM5MIL DEAL FOR LENDING HIS NAME. And that his brother, sisters and close cousins were part of the scam to convert the land.