The Rule of Law

In Tun Mahathir's blog yesterday, he wrote:

Malaysia is a country which practices the rule of law. Our laws must cover every aspect of our societal life, so we will know exactly what we can do and what we cannot do. Prime Ministers in particular must have everything spelt out for them in this respect. This will enable them to be charged if they had breached the rule of law long after they had retired.

Governments, serving Prime Ministers and Ministers are well placed to initiate action against others. But when the Government, the Prime Minister, the Deputy Prime Minister do something wrong, like cover-ups for example, then police reports may be made against them. But how can the person reporting be sure that the police will investigate without fear or favour. I believe some reports have been made but so far there have been no results. Public confidence would be undermined if investigations by the proper authorities are not made. If the investigation is only to clear the name, then can we say the rule of law is being properly practised?

We therefore need to have more Royal Commissions manned by people of impeccable character like the ones on the Lingam tapes. The Commissions can then make proposals based on speculations and possibilities can then investigate the possibilities and probabilities and help clear those in power. When this is done we can say that this beloved country practises the rule of law.

The rule of law, in its most basic form, is the principle that no one is above the law. Thomas Paine stated in his pamphlet Common Sense (1776): "For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other."

However, procedures of court are still subject to manipulation and seasoned politicians cum lawyer have every opportunity to 'play the gallery' feeding clueless journalists with information leading to 'trial-by-media.'

Although the law is king, unfortunately, perception is truth.

Pulau Batu Putih

Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim must be kidding. 12 to 4 is NOT a win-win judgment. For an island that is only 14.3km from Tanjung Penyusop in Johor and 46.3km from Singapore, the outcome is a national embarassment.

We have a long history and culture of 'tidak-apa' attitude as seen from this case. The loss is our own undoing. UMNO and BN also has a habit of losing Malaysian land without a fight. The biggest example is the loss of Singapore!

'You are a mouse!"

In response to Dr M's intention to quit UMNO, some veteran UMNO members have only this to say (in thestar.com.my, 19 May 2008):

PM Abdullah: Shocked

Meanwhile, Abdullah said he was shocked by the decision and, despite their differences, had not expected him to leave.

Umno Deputy President Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak expressed his shock ...

Umno veteran and stalwart Tan Sri Aziz Tapa, 85, said that he was shocked at the news and was at a loss for words.

Umno supreme council member Tan Sri Rahim Thamby Chik said, "It's shocking news to me."

In Narnia: Prince Caspian, Prince Caspian was taken down by a courageous talking mouse named Reepicheep while running away from some Telmarines. With a sword pointing at the princes' neck, Reepicheep said, "What are your last words?" And the bewildered prince replied, "...you are a mouse!" To which the exasperated Reepicheep said, "You guys have no imagination."

'No dogs and Blacks allowed’ = ‘Only 10% non-bumis are allowed’

I was one of those who took the STPM route and got into a public university. During my orientation, a bumi senior asked me in a casual chat, "You dapat berapa principle ah?" I stammered in disbelief, "Errr... lima lah." We were required to take five subjects and the obvious answer would be to pass all of it.

I was appalled at the question because it implied that he did not pass all his subjects to get a place in the university. A more reasonable question should have been "How many A's did you get?" Or, a less kiasu question could sound like, "How did you score?"

Not much has changed I gathered, from all the top scorers crying foul over their failure to get scholarships (or even placements in courses of choice).

Disappointed Student wrote to Malaysiakini.com on April 25, 2008 venting her frustration of failing to clinch a scholarship despite getting 11A1s for her SPM. She said, in a response to other similar rants:

To ‘Schoolteacher, I would like to share with my case which is very similar to your case. I am a SPM leaver with an SPM result of 11A1s and I have a mother, whose is also a teacher in a government primary school. I am also the eldest daughter and I have two more younger brothers. With my family middle-class income, it's impossible for me to further my studies at a private college/university or overseas unless with a scholarship. I am pretty confident with my achievements as I hold extra-curricular posts eg, ,vice president, secretary, school prefect and I even went for the National Service programme.

I understand your daughter's feeling pretty well because I also was rejected for matriculation also for most of the scholarships that I've applied for (Petronas,Yayasan TNB,Yayasan Telekom,Yayasan Khazanah). Until now, I've only been called for an JPA interview.

Honestly, I don't really feel surprised I got rejected for those GLC scholarships and matriculation. As we know, matriculation is only open 10% for us, the non-bumis. Just imagine, out of 100 students, there are only 10 seats for us, the non-bumis. Frankly, I would feel surprise if I got an offer for matriculation.

In my school, there are about 20+ straight As scorers and they also did not get any offer for matriculation or other scholarships. We have only gone for the JPA interview so far. Even for the Petronas interview (they called it Petronas Educamp), out of the 20+ top scorers, only two managed to get selected. (One of them scored 11 A1s and one A2, another scored 11As and one B3, both non-bumis)

However, some of my Malay got an offer to do matriculation even with an SPM result of only 5As. I felt so hurt. I am so sad because I seem to be discriminated against. Nobody appreciates my talent, nobody appreciates my ability. As if our country has more than enough talented scholars.

So, to our country’s leaders, don't blame those talented scholars who do not want to come back to serve Malaysia. Don't forget who ‘threw’ them away before treating them as if they were rubbish. Frankly, sometimes I do question myself, why bother to torture myself? Why bother to wake up at 4am, sometimes even 3am to study? Why bother to score a straight A1s?

My mother once told me she is so disappointed with the Malaysian education system. Although I strived hard to score well in the SPM, but in the end, I ended up with no scholarship offer. Well, I am left the one and only hope- JPA. But my mother advised me not to put to much hope on this government scholarship.

Come on, after 51 years of independence, racism still exists in our country. We, the non-bumis, are like the blacks in US. In the past, US white people detested and discriminated against the blacks. They even put notices like,’No dogs and Blacks allowed’ in public places. Now, our government is putting up notices like ‘Only 10% non-bumis are allowed’ for matriculation. (And who knows if the figure of ‘10%’ is true? They might take 7% of non-bumis only, who knows?)

Our government also puts up notices like ‘These courses are only reserved for the bumiputera’ for IPTA course with SPM qualifications. For your information, courses like,’Asasi Sains’, ‘Prepatory courses for medicine’ at local unisare only for bumiputeras. Non-bumis, wait until your next life!

Most of my friends and me will choose to challenge of the tough STPM if we really don't get any scholarship offer.And I believe, STPM is the last choice but is it is also the choice of most non- bumis after a series of disappointments. I observed a few batches of my own Form 6 seniors and there were almost zero bumis in the Form 6 Science Stream. Of course, since they got into matriculation with 5As,or even with 2As from SPM, why bother to take the STPM?

The Karpal Investigation

A reader of The Sun has written in to the local newspaper to voice out his opinion in relation to Karpal Singh’s “offensive commentary” which gave him the lime light quite recently.

The following is the letter written by Param Cumaraswamy to the Sun, published on 14 May, 2008, under the Speak Up! Section, pg17.

“Why undue haste in Karpal investigation?”

Datuk Seri Mohamad Nazri’s Abdul Aziz’s statement reported in the media yesterday that the government does not practice double standards against anyone who makes seditious remarks against the Malay rulers is very commendable.

He was further quoted as having said “I do not care whether the person is an elected representative from the Barisan National or Pakatan Rakyat.” These are stirring remarks of principle.

However, Nazri should be called upon to answer where he was in 1992/93 when then prime minister and UMNO president (Tun) Dr Mahathir Mohamad made virulent and highly seditious public statements against the Malay Rulers including the then Yang di Pertuan Agong, questioning their immunities, privileges and withdrawing some. Police reports were lodged all over the country against Mahathir, yet there was no action taken against him. Was not double standards applied then? Was not Mahathir then seen to be above the law?

Why all this undue haste in having the investigation on Karpal Singh expedited? In this regard we should be mindful of the remarks of the Regent of Perak, Raja Nazrin Shah, reported in the media on Dec 12, 1992. He was reported to have said that “it was a misconception to think that anyone or any institution in the country was exempt from the law because there was not a single system in this modern age which denies the people’s basic rights and freedom”. The Regent made those remarks in the context of the institution of the Sultanate some 15 years ago.

Today Malaysia should be and seen to be in an enlightened era with a robust market place for reason dialogue, the exchange of ideas and opinions. Karpal’s remarks must therefore be seen as an expression of his right to an opinion on a constitutional matter and should not be viewed as an offence.

Draft Local Plan - Speak Now or Forever Hold Your Piss

Pissed-off residents now have 6 weeks to raise their objections (if any) on the Draft Kuala Lumpur Local Plan 2020 (DKLPT2020). The Draft will go on display at the lobby area of the Kuala Lumpur City Hall starting 15 May 2008.

This is a significant event because it concerns the future of the city as every KL resident, home owner and rate payer will be inadvertently effected by it as it has the ability to either improve their quality of life or destroy it.

The residents who are likely to be affected by the proposals from the DKLPT2020 are those living in Sri Hartamas, Mont Kiara, Bangsar Hill, Bukit Tunku, Bukit Damansara, Damansara Heights, Federal Hill and Segambut/Jalan Duta.

KL-Singapore High-Speed Train

One Horsepower - AP Photo

Build the KL-Singapore high-speed train
-------------------------------------------------------------
Malaysia's fuel subsidies have reportedly ballooned to some RM43 billion a year. That's more than three times the Treasury's forecast revenue from personal income tax this year of RM13.4 billion, and over 20% more than the forecast corporate tax of RM34.8 billion. And, it is almost half the total estimated federal government revenue of RM102 billion.

Why avoid a one-time capital investment of less than RM8 billion that improves the country's land transport infrastructure, when the country is already spending five times as much on fuel subsidies in a single year that yield no long-term economic benefits?
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Edge Malaysia, May 10, 2008

By Ben Paul

News last month that Malaysia had dropped plans to build a high-speed rail link between Kuala Lumpur and Singapore was a major disappointment for me. As a Malaysian who works in Singapore, being able to get to the centre of KL within 90 minutes would have improved my life enormously - mostly by putting the food I desperately miss within easy reach. In my view, Malaysia should not only build a high-speed rail link to Singapore, but also invest heavily in expanding rail infrastructure between its major 'cities as well as between its industrial areas and its sea and air transport hubs. But it should drive these projects itself, with private sector companies limited to playing the role of contractors and suppliers.

The rail link proposed by YTL Corp was touted in news stories over the past year as a significant improvement over the existing trains that take as long as seven hours to make the journey between Singapore and KL, and road travel that can take as long as four hours. In fact, it would have been an improvement over flying too. While the flight time is about 40 minutes, travelling to and from the airports as well as the lead time required to check in for the flight typically extends the travelling time between the centre of the two cities to as much as three hours. That might have made the rail link the preferred mode of transport for regular business travellers, who currently have no other practical means of making the trip except by air.

A highly developed rail system that spans the country would also reduce the risk that the economy faces from rising oil prices. Malaysia's fuel subsidies have reportedly ballooned to some RM43 billion a year. That's more than three times the Treasury's forecast revenue from personal income tax this year of RM13.4 billion, and over 20 % more than the forecast corporate tax of RM34.8 billion. And, it is almost half the total estimated federal government revenue of RM102 billion.

If oil prices continue rising, which some market watchers say is likely, Malaysia will really have little choice but to shunt the burden onto its citizens. And, unless there are more efficient alternative modes of land transport available when that happens, the impact on the economy could be dramatic. High fuel prices besides surging trade volumes and choked highways are now also spurring investment in railways in many other countries around the world.

So, why is Malaysia's government backing out of the high-speed rail link project? Its stated reason is that it would have had to bear a significant portion of the project's cost. But compared to what it is already spending to shield its citizens from the full weight of fuel costs, that sounds like a lame excuse. Why avoid a one-time capital investment of less than RM8 billion that improves the country's land transport infrastructure, when the country is already spending five times as much on fuel subsidies in a single year that yield no long-term economic benefits?

In my view, a bigger obstacle to the government backing the high-speed rail link than cost is the scrutiny the deal will face from the country's resurgent opposition. Malaysians are understandably leery of the government providing funds for projects conceived and promoted by the private sector. Too often, the infrastructure assets are over-designed and expensive. And, the potential returns and risks of the project tend to be unfairly distributed between the government and its private sector partner.

The reality, however, is that financial support from governments is often necessary to make affordable rail transport viable. That's because the upfront costs are high, the lifespan of the assets are very long, and the economic benefits they generate are hard for private sector investors to capture. On the other hand, these positive "economic externalities" are difficult to measure, making it tough to determine the extent to which these projects deserve government funding.

Malaysia isn't the only country that's grappling with the problem of finding the right balance between private enterprise and government funding that gets railroads built, allows private companies to earn a fair return and protects the public from getting ripped off. Even in the US, some railroads are asking for government support for their investment in new tracks, arguing that the new lines create wider economic and social benefits, like taking the pressure off roads and highways and making land transport more efficient. But their detractors point out that the railroad sector is already so profitable that it is attracting the attention of savvy billionaire investors like Warren Buffett and Carl kahn.

Rather than struggle with these issues and delay much-needed investment in new railways, Malaysia would probably be better off if the government took over as the owner and financier of these projects. Indeed, when infrastructure projects are heavily reliant on public sector funding, the involvement of a private sector player seems to make little sense. Sure, engineering, procurement and construction contracts can be parcelled out to the private sector through competitive tenders. The government could even appoint a private sector operator to run the rail service for a fee, if it felt its civil servants were not up to the task. But there seems little point in allowing a private company to own railways that are built largely with government funding.

Working with experienced consultants, there is no reason the government couldn't come up with designs and plans for new railways that are as good as any private sector player's. It would certainly be able to obtain long-term financing on more attractive terms than the private sector. And, being in no hurry to recoup its capital investment, it would be in a position to price its rail services at levels that attract large numbers of passengers, quickly achieving the economic aims of the project.

This is something that other countries are beginning to discover for themselves. New Zealand's government agreed last week to buy the country's rail and ferry services from Australia's Toll Holdings for NZ$66s million (about RM1.6 billion), paving the way for more investment in the industry. New Zealand wants to encourage rail transport to take the pressure off its roads, but it found that enormous government support of the private sector owner was necessary to achieve this. In the end, it made more sense for the New Zealand government to repurchase its railroads, ending what some of its officials called the "painful lesson" of I5 years of private ownership of these assets.

Malaysians too have endured painful lessons in the development of the country's physical infrastructure. But that shouldn't be a reason to stop building now. Instead, they should just push for change in the way the ownership and funding of infrastructure projects is organised. Ultimately, their lives will be improved by high-speed rail links that quickly get them where they want to go. I know mine will.

Ben Paul is the executive editor of The Edge Singapore

YB Unruly?

YB unruly, our new MPs? There are many ways to get 'excited', as Teresa Kok puts it, than to act like a bunch of hooligans. Playing down bad behavior is just bad excuse. It is far better to get down to business than to talk Kok. There is really no such thing as 'first day' blues. Once elected, MPs are expected to hit the ground running.

I for one am pleased that Information Minister Datuk Ahmad Shabery Cheek declared that live telecast of proceedings in the Dewan Rakyat will continue. In the live circus performance, we can clearly see for ourselves the cast of Big Foots, Big Monkeys and of course, stars of the show, the Big Mouths.

Please lah. Address real issues.