PAS Prime Minister? Guan Eng's reasonings increases 'prejudice' or 'racism'? Stop using race,religion, etc to DIVIDE Malaysians?

A PAS Prime Minister - Why Not? Or are we being 'racist' by saying No immediately?

Well, a Prime Minister is at the end of the day an individual MP, who enjoys the confidence of the majority of the MPs. Saying that a 'PAS PM' is dangerous highlights one's own prejudice and racism.

We have only thus far had Prime Ministers from UMNO, or those who were former UMNO >> Some Prime Ministers have been OK - but some Prime Ministers have been bad like criminal convict Najib Razak, who broke the Malaysian law and 'stole from Malaysians'

Many States have also PAS Menteri Besars - some have been good, a few not so good. When Pakatan Rakyat(then PAS, DAP and PKR) won in Perak, did they not support a PAS ADUN to become the Menteri Besar of Perak.

Now, DAP is in Pakatan Harapan together with Amanah - who are former PAS members. Is DAP also against Husam Musa or Mat Sabu becoming PM?

To say that Malaysia will 'break up' if we had a PAS MP is really prejudicial, discriminatory and 'racist'.

After GEs, MPs should choose the BEST MP to be Prime Minister > or is it time we change this, and give the people the power to choose the Prime Minister by vote?

It is a sad reality that in Malaysia, race-based political parties are still powerful - noting that race based parties, unlike other Malaysian parties, will be primarily seen as interested in a certain race group not all Malaysians. Likewise, religious based parties end up being seen as bias in favour of Malaysians of a certain religion.

PAS tried to break this perception by forming a PAS Supporters Group, open to non-Muslim Malaysians, and did also place these non-Muslims as their party candidates in elections in the past.

UMNO, MCA and MIC tried to break this single ethnic group perception through the formation of Barisan National, a multi-religious multi-racial coalition.

DAP, though being a party open to ALL Malaysians, failed to attract Malay membership in numbers, is sadly today perceived as a party for non-Muslim non-Malay Malaysians...even though they do have Malay/Muslim ADUNs and MPs

To break this wrong public perception of being a party for non-Muslims and non-Bumiputra, DAP has elected a similar strategy as BN to allign itself with other Malay/Muslim Parties even PAS, when they were part of Pakatan Rakyat, and today Amanah and PKR as Pakatan Harapan.

I believe that Lim Guan Eng personally do not discriminate based on race or religion, and this recent comment was a political strategy to maybe get the votes of non-Muslim Malaysians and Muslim Malaysians, who are against certain Muslim opponents like PAS >>> BUT such strategy is WRONG as it may really lead to cultivation of prejudices, biasness, ...against Malaysian Muslims generally  

Malaysia would cease to exist with a prime minister from PAS, DAP chairman Lim Guan Eng claimed today.The Bagan MP claimed the Islamist party’s leaders were pushing a racist and extremist narrative that jeopardised Malaysia’s multireligious and multicultural stance by putting Muslims first, based on the latest Facebook post by PAS president Tan Sri Abdul Hadi Awang.

I really hope that Malaysian political parties will STOP using RACE or RELIGION to garner support > rather they should be focusing on Human Rights and Justice Issues, Good governance practices, increasing democracy and practice of real democracy, ...

Why can't a PAS member be Prime Minister?

Guan Eng need to appreciate that a similar argument has been used against DAP, just like the argument they used against PAS.

This is Malaysia, and Malaysian Muslim or Non-Muslim can be Prime Minister, likewise Chinese Malaysian, Indian Malaysian, Kenyah Malaysian, Kadazan Malaysian can be a Prime Minister >>>Our Federal Constitution does not so, they cannot be - there is no provision in our Federal Constitution that says that a Prime Minister must be from a particular ethnic group or religious group. We can also have a WOMEN Prime Minister..We can have a Young Person as Prime Minister - we do not need only OLD people as Prime Ministers.

He argued that no one from PAS is qualified to hold the post of prime minister and cited a laundry list of what he deemed to be the party’s increasingly hardline stance.

So, attack these different points of disagreement - there is no reason to attach even the Party, noting that any political party's position or public stance MAY not be the individual stance/position of each and every PAS MPs.

Amongst the MPs now, there are PAS MPs for the abolition of death Penalty > even though PAS has not taken yet a clear position/stance on death penalty...

Of PAS MPs, we know how different a person was the late Nik Aziz compared to the person of Hadi..

Even if PAS gets the majority in Parliament, the majority of MPs may have no confidence in making Hadi the Prime Minister - but they may have confidence that another PAS MP ought to be the Prime Minister

Likewise, if DAP gets the majority, the MPs may not have the confidence in Guan Eng as Prime Minister but maybe some other DAP MP.

Things changed after Ismail Sabri became Prime Minister - Malaysia has broken lose from the convention that only the Party President can be Prime Minister >>>that is no more the case

So, at the end of the day, I would say that a suitable PAS MP can always be the Prime Minister...and maybe even the best Prime Minister ever of Malaysia

Prejudice and bias against any person simply based on ethnicity, religion, political party he belongs to...MUST END. 

I call on Guan Eng to change his stance and be no longer biased against PAS members as a whole - If unhappy with a position PAS leadership expressed (possibly achieved by unanimous vote but by simple majority) - and make your arguments as to why DAP or you oppose it.

From the Malaysian perspective, looking at the various State governments under the leadership of people from different parties - the main problems at the end of the day is similar - i.e. abuse of power, corruption, money laundering, CBT, failure to deal with the sufferings of the poor/marginalized, etc..

Blinded by race-based or religious-based politics, we, Malaysians, have not been focusing with the REAL problems of the people - and how the various government/s continue to fail to fully deal with it...

Accusing party of extremism, Guan Eng claims a PAS prime minister could break up Malaysia

Lim argued that no one from PAS is qualified to hold the post of prime minister, amid the party’s increasingly hardline stance. — Picture by Sayuti Zainudin

By Soo Wern Jun

Tuesday, 27 Sep 2022 11:12 AM MYT

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 27 — Malaysia would cease to exist with a prime minister from PAS, DAP chairman Lim Guan Eng claimed today.

The Bagan MP claimed the Islamist party’s leaders were pushing a racist and extremist narrative that jeopardised Malaysia’s multireligious and multicultural stance by putting Muslims first, based on the latest Facebook post by PAS president Tan Sri Abdul Hadi Awang.

“National unity should be the priority amongst all Malaysians regardless of race and religion, and not just putting Muslims first.

“Worse, PAS has openly stated its ambition of having its own prime minister,” Lim said in a statement.

“A PAS prime minister would break up Malaysia and pose a nightmare scenario for non-Muslims and non-Bumis, since he would not be a prime minister for all Malaysians but only for Muslims,” he added.

He argued that no one from PAS is qualified to hold the post of prime minister and cited a laundry list of what he deemed to be the party’s increasingly hardline stance.

He said that Hadi has issued many negative remarks about non-Muslims and non-Malays by asserting that they should not hold senior Cabinet posts, and unfairly blaming them for threatening Malay political power though the top government positions are held by Malays or Muslims.

Lim accused Hadi of repeatedly spreading “lies” about Pakatan Harapan, using English in Malaysia and even cultural practices like Oktoberfest and Bon Odori.

The DAP politician claimed that PAS is pushing its extremist narrative as a cover for its alleged failures to tackle the current economic problems and corruption challenges.

“This is the reason why Kelantan has become the poorest state in peninsular Malaysia after more than 30 years of PAS’ rule.

“Deprived of economic opportunities, Kelantanese are forced to migrate to other states and Singapore to seek job opportunities, whilst Kelantan suffers from poor crisis management in floods, bad governance and cannot even provide clean piped water to its citizens,” Lim claimed.

He also demanded the other ruling parties and coalitions to explain their silence in the face of Hadi’s remarks, and named MCA, MIC, Gabungan Parti Sarawak and Gabungan Rakyat Sabah.

“Why has MCA, MIC, GPS and GRS kept an unholy silence and continue to support a racist and extremist PAS in government?

“To date neither MCA, MIC, GPS nor GRS have publicly stated that they oppose PAS in government and their ambition to put one of their own as prime minister?” he asked.

In a speech on August 20, Hadi had said corruption stemmed from those who reaped profit through illegal means. He said the majority of those involved in ruining the country’s politics and economy were non-Muslims and non-Bumiputera.

He said it had reached a point that “these people” ended up controlling the country’s economy and using their money to taint politics, the administration and judiciary.

Bukit Aman had since summoned Hadi for claiming that non-Muslims and non-Bumiputera were at the root of corruption in the country after 28 reports were submitted against the Marang MP - Malay Mail, 27/9/2022

DAP/Amanah Expelling MPs that do not toe party line - Foolish undemocratic move that will NOT result in disqualification as MP or a by-elections?

DAP, I believe,  is making a serious mistake - it wants to automatically expel its party members, including MPs, if they do not toe the party line.

DAP has successfully passed a motion to amend its constitution so that elected representatives who do not toe the party line on fundamental issues would automatically lose their membership.

On Sept 18, Amanah amended its constitution so that any MP, senator, or state assemblyman who goes against the party’s decisions would automatically lose their membership.

This means that a MP, who wants to remain in DAP, must abandon his duty as the people's representative - for he cannot take  the position of the people of their constituency or what he thinks is best, but only the position of DAP > Is this not a betrayal of the people?

FEUDALISM - blind obedience to the party leadership, is this what DAP is advocating? What 'party leadership' - the Chairman, Secretary General, National Central Committee? Not even the majority of members of the party?

An MP or ADUN are peoples' representative >> hence they represent the people of the constituency in Parliament and/or State Legislative Assemblies - this must not be forgotten or ignored. What DAP is proposing now is akin to saying do not listen to your constituents, do not act according to your own conscience....but simply follow the party line.

Some DAP MPs have taken the position for the abolition of the death penalty, but DAP, as a party, has not taken that position with regard the death penalty >>> So, will all these MPs who are for the abolition of the death penalty automatically be expelled from the DAP?

Some DAP MPs have taken the position for the abolition of detention without trial, but I have not seen DAP taking the position. So will all DAP MPs who have taken the position to abolish detention without trial laws like POCA, POTA and Dangerous Drugs(Special Preventive Measures) Act be automatically expelled.

In any society, like a country, it has human members, and being human not everyone will have the same position and stance on the various different issues. The majority prevails for the day, and the minority accepts this 'current' position of the party - and they will still lobby campaign with the hope that their now minority view may one day be the majority view. Is DAP planning to automatically expel all those with a differing stance from the party position.

Did any party election result in one leader managing to get unanimous support from members? This never happens generally, they win party elections because they managed to get more votes than their opponent >> so, will those who oppose the elected leadership at risk of expulsion?

A good political party will NEVER expel members, save for something very serious like being convicted of serious crimes including abusing of power like in the Najib's case - there too UMNO is yet to take disciplinary action against Najib, let alone expel.

Remember MPs and ADUNs are NOT ELECTED by DAP - A political party merely permits candidates to stand as the party candidate > the people elect. Of course, when the people vote, the fact that he/she is from DAP plays a significant role in their vote >>> That is why anti-hopping laws are needed to ensure immediate disqualification as MP - giving the people another chance to decide who they want as MP.

The anti-hopping law(when it comes into force) also is clear that MPs expelled by their parties will not be disqualified. This is right, and prevents political parties or their leaders from 'CONTROLING' MPs - a threat of expulsion will make many a MP to toe the party line, even though they personally believe something else is right.

DAP's proposal to expel MPs who do not toe the CURRENT party line or listen to the CURRENT leaders is simply wrong. If DAP were to govern Malaysia, would they also be expelling or withdrawing citizenship of the people that oppose them?

DAPs move will make MPs 'slaves' or 'party yes-man' > Is that what DAP wants? What about freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of opinion, etc ..

If a DAP MP says or takes a position against party line >> WELL, DAP can always publicly clarify the party's position, and say that what that particular MP said on this issue is not the party's position. SIMPLE - why expel? Why even commence disciplinary proceedings?

We want our MPs and ADUNs to be free to express themselves and even vote - and that is why the Party WHIP, which tells MPs and ADUNs how they should vote really should be abolished. The use of the WHIP, like in some jurisdictions, should be limited to important issues like the BUDGET - but not for each and every Act or Motion before the Parliament.

The current state of affairs is bad for DEMOCRACY - as most MPs do not even bother to consider the Bills or the issues raised in Parliament - WHY? Because at the end of the day, it simply does not matter, when the MP will have to simply vote as how their political party tells them...they have to right to vote according to their own conscience, or even how the people they represent wants them too.

We, in Malaysia, generally do not even know how our MPs voted on the Bills and issues in Parliament > because there is NO RECORD of how an individual MP voted on a particular issue. Our parliamentarians love 'voice vote' - which does not leave any evidence of how you voted. In Malaysian Parliament, some say there is really no need to vote >> all the Speaker needs to do is look at the attendance as the time, and he knows the end result...JOKE, is it not?

That is WHY the people treats MPs like 'Santa Claus' or welfare centre - they do not go to MPs to try to take this or that position on Bills and issues before Parliament. Some MPs even during ceramah do not express their OWN views but repeat the party position - boring, is it not?

Which MP or member should be expelled? Failed to 'toe the party line' is certainly not a ground for expulsion, or even any disciplinary action. Sexual Harassment, Rape, Murder, Theft of Party Funds >>> well these are serious crimes that may justify disciplinary action ...

'...Loke said the amendment was to safeguard the party from a “loophole” in the anti-hopping law in which MPs sacked by their party do not have to vacate their seats...'  

Now, when the new anti-hopping law comes into force, MPs expelled by their parties will not be disqualified as MPs, so no by-elections to choose a new MP. So, DAP or Amanah's expulsion of MPs will be useless > it is better for them to retain these MPs, until they quit on their own - resulting in a disqualification, and a new elections for constituents to choose again a new MP..

Therefore, is this new amendment just 'PROPAGANDA' meant to deceive the people into believing DAP is anti-party hopping? But expulsion does not mean disqualification of MP... so it may be meant to undermine the soon to be anti-hopping laws, once it comes into force. 

"Bonded MPs', like 'bonded labour' - that is what we will have if MPs MUST be totally obedient to current party leadership...

DAP, Amanah and other political parties really should not be expelling MPs that did not 'toe the party line', and if it is an offence, other internally disciplinary measures are better..

At the end of the day, what the party's constitution is up to its members only - the rest of us have no say in it. So, of course, this is my opinion only - not being a DAP member...But, party constitution and policies will also tell Malaysians about the kind of party it is, its values and principles... 

See earlier related post:

PM and Cabinet need to put the Anti-Party Hopping Law in force now - before dissolving Parliament and calling for GE15?

 

 

DAP amends constitution to ensure reps toe the line or lose membership

Danial Azhar and Shahrul Shahabudin

-

September 25, 2022 2:02 PM

7

The amendment will ensure elected representatives who do not toe the party line on fundamental issues are removed automatically.

SHAH ALAM: DAP has successfully passed a motion to amend its constitution so that elected representatives who do not toe the party line on fundamental issues would automatically lose their membership.

DAP secretary-general Loke Siew Fook said the party will file an application with the Registrar of Societies (RoS) to update the party’s constitution.

“We hope the RoS can approve the application soon and allow us to implement the amendment before the next general election,” he said at a press conference.

Loke said the amendment was to safeguard the party from a “loophole” in the anti-hopping law in which MPs sacked by their party do not have to vacate their seats.

When asked if DAP had any concerns over the delay in gazetting the anti-hopping bill, which was passed in the Dewan Rakyat on July 28, Loke said the party had faith that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong would give it his royal assent soon.

“We also have confidence in law minister Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar who has given his word that the anti-hopping law would be gazetted before the next general election.”

DAP is the second Pakatan Harapan component to have amended its party constitution to deal with the “loophole” in the anti-hopping law.

On Sept 18, Amanah amended its constitution so that any MP, senator, or state assemblyman who goes against the party’s decisions would automatically lose their membership.

Shah Alam MP Khalid Samad was reported to have said that the amendment was necessary so that elected representatives from the party who disobeyed the party’s instructions could be considered as giving up their membership.

Muda’s application to join PH

On a separate matter, Loke said Pakatan Harapan (PH) would meet Muda leaders next week to discuss the party’s application to join the coalition.

The party, led by Muar MP Syed Saddiq Syed Abdul Rahman, had applied to join PH earlier this month.

When asked to comment on Umno’s Nur Jazlan Mohamed’s remarks that DAP was sidelining its PH ally Amanah to woo Muda, Loke said the Johor Umno deputy chief was a “busybody”.

“Nur Jazlan shouldn’t be commenting on the affairs of others,” he said.

“He must have too much free time as he has decided against contesting in the next general election for fear of losing.”

In a Facebook post on Wednesday, Nur Jazlan said Muda was DAP’s new “sugar baby” as Amanah could no longer be relied upon to win Malay votes for DAP now. - FMT, 25/9/2022

 

DAP passes motion to amend constitution on anti-party hopping

Bernama

/

Bernama

September 25, 2022 17:52 pm +08

SHAH ALAM (Sept 25): The DAP 2022 Special Congress on Sunday (Sept 25) passed a motion to amend its constitution so as to prohibit its elected representatives from party hopping, in line with the Anti-Party Hopping Bill passed in Parliament.

Secretary General Anthoy Loke Siew Fook said 632 delegates supported, while two opposed the amendments, which would soon be submitted to the Registrar of Societies so that it could be enforced before the 15th General Elections (GE15).

Loke said the amendments to the party's constitution also covers Members of Parliament (MPs) who were sacked for violating the party's directives and policies.

"If the party's constitution says that any Member of Parliament who breaks party laws will lose their membership, Parliament will follow suit," he told a press conference after the congress here on Sunday.

In the meantime, Loke said negotiations on the distribution of seats between Pakatan Harapan (PH) component parties in several states have been completed, while the rest are expected to be finalised by the end of this month. - Edge Markets, 25/9/2022

Zahid Hamidi’s Acquittal by High Court Must be Appealed to the Court of Appeal, and Prosecution Failures Must be Investigated - Reforms Needed to Ensure Independence of Deputy Public Prosecutors

 

Media Statement – 25/9/2022

Zahid Hamidi’s Acquittal by High Court Must be Appealed to the Court of Appeal, and Prosecution Failures Must be Investigated

Reforms Needed to Ensure Independence of Deputy Public Prosecutors

MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) notes that prosecution failure in the recent Zahid Hamidi’s case raises questions on the independence, competence and professionalism of prosecutors in Malaysia, and the need for reform and laws to safeguard independence of deputy public prosecutors, and to criminalize wrongful actions/omissions of prosecutors done intentionally or negligently for the benefit of the accused.  

Former Deputy Prime Minister, UMNO President and Barisan Nasional Chairperson Ahmad Zahid  Hamidi in this case was facing  33 charges of receiving bribes amounting to S$13.56 million (RM42 million) from UKSB as inducement for himself in his capacity as a civil servant and the then home minister to extend the contract of the company as the operator of the One Stop Centres in China and the VLN system as well as to maintain the agreement to supply VLN integrated system paraphernalia to the same company by the Home Ministry. He was also charged with another 7 counts as home minister who obtained S$1.15 million, RM3 million, CHF15,000 and US$15,000 in cash from the same company for himself in connection with his official work. (Malay Mail, 23/9/2022)

It was reported that the High Court Judge on 23/9/2022 found that prosecution failed at the close of prosecution case to successfully prove a prima facie case against Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, who is also Bagan Datuk MP, on not just some charges but all 40 bribery charges. The judge found that the prosecution failed to call ‘material witnesses’ and adduce certain evidence. (Malay Mail, 23/9/2022). Zahid Hamidi was acquitted without even having to enter his defence.

Before anyone is charged of an offence, prosecutors must verily belief that they have sufficient evidence to present in court to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.  To not do so may be considered an abuse of power on the part of the prosecution. In any event, at the end of the day, prosecution still needs to convince the Judge or court, that an accused person is guilty beyond reasonable doubt, or at the close of prosecution case that a prima facie case has been established against the accused.

Failed To Call Material Witness

In the Zahid Hamidi case, the judge was reported that the prosecution failed to important witnesses to ascertain the source of the funds allegedly paid to Ahmad Zahid, amongst others, one  “…'Nicole Tan' was not called to testify to provide clarifications on the missing link by explaining the nature of the arrangement between UKSB and the Hong Kong subcontractors of which the monies allegedly paid to Ahmad Zahid was derived from…. "The witness from Hong Kong including Nicole would be able to provide an explanation on the actual source of funds especially given that all three key prosecution witnesses confirmed the source of the monies paid to the accused did not originate from UKSB," he {Judge Datuk Mohd Yazid Mustafa] said….”

Of concern also, is the fact of not calling material witnesses has happened before in cases involving politicians and those allegedly connected to politicians. Similar findings arose in the cases of Kasitah Kaddam’s (then Minister of Energy and Natural Resources of Malaysia 1999–2004) and business tycoon Eric Chia.

In the Kasitah Kaddam’s case, it was reported ‘…Justice Suraya said the failure of the prosecution in not calling six board members who were present in the meeting was detrimental to the case as it had created a big gap over the question of whether the board members were actually cheated by the accused….’(Star, 13/8/2009, Kasitah freed of corruption charges)

In Eric Chia’s case, ‘…Akhtar[then Sessions Court judge Akhtar Tahir now High Court Judge]  said the most glaring setback was the prosecution’s failure to call two material witnesses, who would have been able to confirm whether payment was needed for the technical assistance agreements (TAA) signed between Perwaja Rolling Mill Development and NKK Corporation. (Star, 27/6/2007, Eric Chia acquitted of CBT)

Failed to adduce CCTV footage, toll receipts and envelope

It was reported that ‘the prosecution did not produce any sample envelope used for the alleged cash payments, remarking that he found it hard to imagine what kind of envelope could fit the bill stacks amounting to hundreds of thousands at the material time….Neither close-circuit television footage nor toll receipts on delivery visits to Ahmad Zahid's house or the deputy prime minister's official residence — where the offences allegedly took place — were produced in court to support the prosecution's case.’

There is a need to now question whether the Deputy Public Prosecutors acted independently and professionally, or whether they were compromised by ‘corruption’ or orders/instruction from their superiors or others. MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) believes that Deputy Public Prosecutors handling any criminal case should be independent even from the orders/instruction of the Public Prosecutor, Minister, government/s of the day.

MADPET is of the opinion that mis-handling of prosecution duties intentionally and/or negligently for the benefit of the accused or any person who could be charged ought to be criminalized. One wonders whether if another independent Deputy Public Prosecutor was handling this case, would it have led to same outcome for Zahid Hamidi.

Appeal to the Court of Appeal

Now, in Zahid Hamidi’s, the High Court judge could have erred in his judgment to acquit, and as such it is important that the prosecution immediately files an appeal to the Court of Appeal. We know that many cases, the Appellate Court reversed decisions of the lower court.

In this case, MADPET urges the Public Prosecutor to immediately appeal to the Court of Appeal, as it is best that the Appellate Court confirms to us in Malaysia whether there was an error of judgment on the part of the High Court judge, or not.

Irrelevant to this particular case, it is fresh in the minds of Malaysians what was reported in another case, where the transactions are vide cheques not cash, where  Zahid is accused of receiving bribes amounting to RM6 million from Chew as a reward for appointing DTSB to implement a passport chip project for a period of five years or for a total of 12.5 million chips to be included in the polycarbonate biodata page of Malaysia's international passport by the immigration department through direct negotiations under the home ministry.

In that case, Zahid Hamidi repeatedly stressed that he chose not to deposit the money into his accounts or use it for his personal benefit. "Even though at that time I was holding the post of deputy president (of Umno) and that money could be used for political purposes, I chose to use it neither for politics nor for personal purposes, but instead to channel it for charity, waqf and religious activities," he said…"If money is given to a politician, he has the discretion to deposit it into his own account or any other account he deems fit," he said.(Malaysia Now, 22/8/2022)

Given this, MADPET reiterates its call that the prosecution files an immediate appeal to the Court of Appeal so that Malaysian doubts on the correctness of the High Court’s decision to acquit without defence being called was correct or not.

Acquittal is not proof of innocence

In the administration of criminal justice, an acquittal is not proof of innocence. It is simply a failure of the prosecution to prove guilt by establishing a prima facie case at the close of prosecution, or at the end of trial failing to prove beyond reasonable doubt that crime accused had been committed.

Acquittal means Zahid Hamidi can never again be charged for the same offence nor on the same facts for any other offence for which a different charge from the one made against him might have been made. MADPET reiterates its call that the court should not acquit anyone when prosecution elects to discontinue the proceedings mid-trial, they should just be granted a Discharge Not Amounting an Acquittal (DNAA).

In the current case, if the prosecution at any time during trial found the evidence insufficient, it could have elected to sought a long postponement or to discontinue proceedings, and the court could have ordered a DNAA. Then, they could secure more evidence required to continue with prosecution.

It is not uncommon for prosecution witnesses to disappear or suddenly change their statement, or for evidence to be lost. Recall, the Malaysian former spy case, where the money seized and kept by MACC, was taken by a MACC officer (now already convicted), who then replaced it with counterfeit money.

MADPET, noting that the power lies with the Public Prosecutor, to immediately file an appeal to the Court of Appeal with regard the decision of the High Court judge to acquit Ahmad Zahid Hamidi at the close of prosecution stage of trial.

MADPET also calls for an investigation of the Deputy Public Prosecutors involved in this case, to determine whether there was any failure of duty, intentionally or otherwise.

MADPET also calls for reform and/or laws to ensure the independence of Deputy Public Prosecutors handling a particular criminal case, including the freedom from instruction/orders from others including government of the day.

Noting one public perception that Malaysian laws and administration of criminal justice accords preferential treatment to politicians and/or those with ‘connections’ to the government of the day or maybe tomorrow. which contrary to Constitutional guarantee in Article 8(1) that states, ‘All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law’.

Malaysia need to also review and strengthen the mechanisms including safeguards to ensure the independence of the judiciary, prosecutors and law enforcers.

 

Charles Hector

For and on behalf of MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture

 

See earlier posts

Kasitah Gaddam & Eric Chia - Prosecution's failure to call witnesses - Was it just incompetence OR....?

 

Zahid walks free in foreign visa bribery case after High Court rules prosecution failed prima facie

Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi arrives at the Shah Alam High Court September 23, 2022. — Picture by Firdaus Latif

By Kenneth Tee

Friday, 23 Sep 2022 11:46 AM MYT

SHAH ALAM, Sept 23 — The High Court today acquitted Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi of taking bribes from Ultra Kirana Sdn Bhd (UKSB), the company awarded a government contract for a foreign visa system (VLN).

However, the Umno president is still on trial for another corruption case where he is accused of 47 criminal breach of trust, corruption and money laundering charges involving tens of millions of ringgit belonging to Yayasan Akalbudi, the charity organisation he founded.

Judge Datuk Mohd Yazid Mustafa said the prosecution failed to successfully prove a prima facie case against Ahmad Zahid, who is also Bagan Datuk MP, on all 40 bribery charges.

In his ruling, Mohd Yazid said the testimonies by three key prosecution witnesses — former UKSB executives Wan Quoris Shah Wan Abdul Ghani and Harry Lee Vui Khiun, and former administrative manager David Tan Siong Sun — were unreliable and untrustworthy.

Mohd Yazid also said the prosecution has failed to prove the main ingredients of the charges framed under Section 165 of the Penal Code and Section 16(a)(B) of the MACC Act leveled against Ahmad Zahid.

"In view of the failure by the prosecution to prove the foremost important element in all the charges leveled against the accused, i.e the receipt of the corrupt monies, upon exercise of the maximum evaluation of the evidence in totality I find the prosecution has failed to make out a prima facie case on all charges," Mohd Yazid said.

The judge also said he took account of the prosecution's failure to call other important witnesses to ascertain the source of the funds allegedly paid to Ahmad Zahid, noting there was existing 'unanswered doubt' as to whether the money even existed and who delivered the monies.

Based on the oral testimonies of key prosecution witnesses, Mohd Yazid said one individual who goes by the name 'Nicole Tan' was not called to testify to provide clarifications on the missing link by explaining the nature of the arrangement between UKSB and the Hong Kong subcontractors of which the monies allegedly paid to Ahmad Zahid was derived from.

"The witness from Hong Kong including Nicole would be able to provide an explanation on the actual source of funds especially given that all three key prosecution witnesses confirmed the source of the monies paid to the accused did not originate from UKSB," he said.

Mohd Yazid also said the prosecution did not produce any sample envelope used for the alleged cash payments, remarking that he found it hard to imagine what kind of envelope could fit the bill stacks amounting to hundreds of thousands at the material time.

Thus, the judge said he was unable to consciously make a finding that the monies were received by Ahmad Zahid as suggested by the prosecution based on transactions recorded in a ledger — which had listed cash payments to various ministers, politicians and civil servants — owned by UKSB.

Furthermore, Mohd Yazid said neither close-circuit television footage nor toll receipts on delivery visits to Ahmad Zahid's house or the deputy prime minister's official residence — where the offences allegedly took place — were produced in court to support the prosecution's case.

As for the key prosecution witnesses being unreliable, Mohd Yazid said Tan had not mentioned he paid a sum of RM3 million to Ahmad Zahid in his witness statement and admitted to saying it was an afterthought under cross-examination.

"This admission of an afterthought by the key prosecution witness is more than sufficient for me to find that he was with zero credibility," he said.

Ahmad Zahid faced 33 charges of receiving bribes amounting to S$13.56 million (RM42 million) from UKSB as inducement for himself in his capacity as a civil servant and the then home minister to extend the contract of the company as the operator of the One Stop Centres in China and the VLN system as well as to maintain the agreement to supply VLN integrated system paraphernalia to the same company by the Home Ministry.

He was also charged with another seven counts as home minister who obtained S$1.15 million, RM3 million, CHF15,000 and US$15,000 in cash from the same company for himself in connection with his official work.

Ahmad Zahid, who was in the dock dressed in a white baju Melayu top and black trousers, appeared calm as the judge read out his two-hour long decision.

The public gallery immediately erupted with cries of Alhamdullilah (Arabic for praise be to God) when the judge made the no prima facie ruling.

Lawyers Hamidi Mohd Noh, Datuk Ahmad Zaidi Zainal and Datuk Hisyam Teh Poh Teik appeared for Ahmad Zahid.

Deputy public prosecutors Datuk Raja Rozela Raja Toran, Abdul Malik Ayob, Zander Lim and Thavani Balakrishnan appeared for the prosecution. - Malay Mail, 23/9/2022

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RM6 million was a political contribution, not kickbacks for passport chip contract, Zahid says

He says he had no authority to appoint Datasonic Technologies Sdn Bhd as the supplier as such decisions lay with the finance ministry.

Bernama

May 26, 2022 6:00 PM

Former deputy prime minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi arrives at the Kuala Lumpur court complex today. Photo: Bernama

Ahmad Zahid Hamidi told the Kuala Lumpur High Court today that the two cheques amounting to RM6 million received from Syarikat Sarana Kencana Sdn Bhd were political contributions during his time as the deputy prime minister, not bribes.

Zahid, 69, said allegations that the cheques received through former Datasonic Group Bhd deputy managing director Chew Ben Ben were inducements to appoint Datasonic Technologies Sdn Bhd (DTSB) as a supplier of passport chips for five years were untrue and slanderous.

“I wish to stress that the decision to appoint DTSB was not mine. I had no authority to make the final decision as it was under the jurisdiction of the finance ministry.

“The process carried out by the finance ministry, home ministry and immigration department on awarding the polycarbonate contract to DTSB was in order and according to the stipulated procedure.

“All procedures were conducted appropriately by my officers at the home ministry and this was verified by the finance ministry before the contract was awarded to DTSB,” he said when questioned by his lawyer, Ahmad Zaidi Zainal, during his defence against 47 charges involving tens of millions of ringgit in funds belonging to Yayasan Akalbudi.

Twelve of the charges are of criminal breach of trust, eight are of corruption, and 27 are of money laundering.

Zahid said during his time as home minister, former DTSB director Mohamed Hashim Mohd Ali had submitted a letter applying to supply passport chips for five years or 12.5 million chips which would be embedded in the Malaysian passport polycarbonate biodata page via direct negotiation.

“When it involves direct negotiation, it involves directives from the treasury as well as the internal procurement of the home ministry. Furthermore, I stated that the finance ministry determines the award of direct negotiations to any company that has made an application not at the procurement level of the home ministry,” he said.

To Zaidi’s question on how he knew Hashim, Zahid said he met Hashim, who was then the army chief, when he held the position of political secretary to the defence minister.

“He (Hashim) later became the director of several listed companies, including DTSB. I have known him for more than 20 years since I was in the defence ministry, not because of his involvement in business but as an officer of the armed forces,” he said.

He said Sarana Kencana was owned by Hashim and Abu Hanifah Noordin, the former managing director of Datasonic Group Bhd.

The Bagan Datuk MP also said that Abu Hanifah, who is the 32nd prosecution witness, had stated in court that the cheques were given to him as a political fund which was part of a charity.

“Chew Ben Ben (the 34th prosecution witness) also testified during re-examination by the prosecution that based on his understanding, political money is also included as charity.

“Abu Hanifah and Chew also stated that the issuance of these two cheques had nothing to do with the appointment of DTSB to execute the polycarbonate contract. In fact, the cheques that were credited into the customer account of Messrs Lewis & Co were a political contribution to me,” he said.

According to the 14th and 15th charges, Zahid is alleged to have received bribes amounting to RM6 million from Chew as a reward for appointing DTSB to implement a passport chip project for a period of five years or for a total of 12.5 million chips to be included in the polycarbonate biodata page of Malaysia’s international passport by the immigration department through direct negotiations under the home ministry.

The trial is being conducted before judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah. - Malaysia Now, 26/5/2022

Zahid says never used RM6 million political donation for personal benefit

He says he never deposited the money into his accounts but instead handed it over to legal firm Messrs Lewis & Co, the trustee of his charity outfit Yayasan Akalbudi.

Bernama

August 22, 2022 2:48 PM

Former deputy prime minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi at the Kuala Lumpur court complex today. Photo: Bernama

Ahmad Zahid Hamidi told the High Court today that he had never used the RM6 million allegedly received as a political donation from the deputy managing director of Datasonic Group Berhad (DGB), Chew Ben Ben, for personal benefit.

Zahid, 69, also said he had never deposited the money received through two cheques into his personal accounts but that he instead handed over the money to legal firm Messrs Lewis & Co, the trustee of his charity outfit Yayasan Akalbudi.

The Bagan Datuk MP repeatedly stressed that he chose not to deposit the money into his accounts or use it for his personal benefit.

"Even though at that time I was holding the post of deputy president (of Umno) and that money could be used for political purposes, I chose to use it neither for politics nor for personal purposes, but instead to channel it for charity, waqf and religious activities," he said during cross-examination by deputy public prosecutor Abdul Malik Ayob. 

Zahid is on trial for 47 charges: 12 of criminal breach of trust, eight of corruption, and 27 of money laundering involving tens of millions of ringgit belonging to Yayasan Akalbudi.

When asked by Malik why the RM6 million he claimed was a political donation was not deposited into the accounts of Umno or Barisan Nasional, Zahid said it was "not necessarily (so)".

"If a politician receives a political donation, the money doesn’t necessarily need to be deposited into his party’s account as nowhere on the cheque were the words ‘donation for political party’ written.

"If money is given to a politician, he has the discretion to deposit it into his own account or any other account he deems fit," he said.

Zahid also disagreed with Malik’s suggestion that the RM6 million he received from Chew was a bribe.

In the 14th and 15th charges, Zahid is accused of receiving bribes amounting to RM6 million from Chew as a reward for appointing DTSB to implement a passport chip project for a period of five years or for a total of 12.5 million chips to be included in the polycarbonate biodata page of Malaysia's international passport by the immigration department through direct negotiations under the home ministry.

The trial before judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah continues. - Malaysia Now, 22/8/2022