Selangor - PR(then PH) since 2008 after ousting BN, but support for PH declined after GE15 and the PH-BN 'Unity Government?

Is it time for a change of the Selangor Government? If PH does not wake up soon, it may find itself being rejected come GE16...

SELANGOR's BN rule ended in 2008, and thereafter Pakatan Rakyat(PR - PKR,DAP,PAS) and later the Pakatan Harapan have ruled until now. BN returns to ruling Selangor because PH formed an electoral pact to contest the recent State elections. [In my opinio, PH should have contested the State elections as PH alone).

In GE15, when PH contested - in Selangor, they won 16 out of 22 Parliamentary seats - 73% of the seats won by PH.(In GE14, PH won 20 seats) in November 2023

But, when it came to State Elections in Selangor a few months later in August 2024, PH only managed to win 32 seats out of 56 seats - 57% of State seats won by PH. [In comparison, in GE14 PH won 51 seats)

WHY did PH's performance decline during the Selangor State elections compared to the GE15 Parliamentary elections in Selangor?

One reason could be unhappiness of the fact that PH did not contest on its own, but with a PH-BN electoral pact. Unhappiness could also be because of the post GE15 formation of the PH-BN coalition. 

The decline in support in GE15 was maybe (a) because PH during its 22 month rule after GE14 failed to bring needed reforms including repeal of bad laws, and also Local Council Elections; (b) unhappiness with the PM Candidate Anwar Ibrahim, whilst in GE14, the PM Candidate was Mahathir...The dreaded 'political appointments continue - when will the people be able to vote in their Local Government representative, and their own community leadership?

SELANGOR PR/PH rule - what were the changes or significant changes that PH brought? Many did not see any REAL changes - political appointment of ketua kampung and community leaders continued, the promise of abolition of tol highways did not materialize - in fact, more tols came into the picture, ... The governance style did not really differ much when under the BN rule.. Some joked - nothing changed but faces in government, and maybe emergence of 'new cronies'. Worst, after GE14, when PH could have speedily amended them Federal Laws that prevented local council elections, they did not - MIND you, that Local Council elections was key item before the 1MDB issue... Local Council - PR/PH introduced a certain percentage to be filled by civil society(HR Defenders) but as time passed it returned to political appointees from the various political parties of PH - same old same old.

Will PR allow people to elect their own Local Councillors? Civil Society Deadline for Local Council Elections:- '..by or before 2010..'

Selangor not keen on Local Councilors chosen by the people - they prefer to appoint. A new attempt to pacify LC Elections advocates..

When NGO activist join governments, Local Councils... do they get 'confused' about their struggle? CONPAC?

People vote for civil society representatives to Local Councils in Penang - Will Selangor follow?

No Local Council elections and shrinking NGO or non-political party appointees

Local government elections are constitutionally permissible - What will Pakatan do now?

Azmin Ali and PKR-DAP-PAS(Amanah?) in Selangor reduces NGO/Professionals in Local Council to less than 2% from once about 25%?

Vote for them who will restore Local Government Elections immediately . Nga Kor Ming, when will the Federal law be amended to allow States to decide whether to have Local Council elections or not?

 

Post GE14, after PH was ousted at the Federal level, BERSATU-PAS led coalition managed to govern - and there was little difference when PH ruled.

Now, the fact that PAS was part of Pakatan Rakyat with PKR and DAP also diminished the old prejudice that many had about PAS.

BERSATU was part of PH before - so criticism about BERSATU by PH now does not have much effect.

So, after Sheraton Move, the ability of PAS-BERSATU plus the added ex-PKR MPs to govern became a non issue, hence GE15 results shows this growing support.

The 1MDB issue, the disappointment and anger against BN's Najib, Zahid Hamidi and other ex-BN politicians who abused their powers in office and 'stole' from the people and committed crimes is still a major issue - and the people want these people tried, convicted and sentenced.

Hence, the January 2024 Pardon of Najib that halfed his prison sentence, and quartered his fine ... did anger Malaysians, and many see the PH-BN government being responsible, The role/influence of the government of the day in pardons emerged post GE14 when Anwar was pardoned.

Zahid Hamidi's discontinuance of criminal trial is something that happen after the Selangor State Elections in August.

The court also recently acquitted and discharged Kinabatangan Member of Parliament Datuk Seri Bung Moktar Radin and his wife Datin Seri Zizie Izette Abdul Samad. The trial court, being the Sessions Court ordered them to enter their Defence, meaning that the Judge found that prosecution had established a prima facie case against them. Rather than entering defence, they filed a REVISION application to High Court who overturned the Sessions Judge's decision, and acquitted both of them. The Prosecution has appealed

After GE-14, the peoples' support for Pakatan Harapan has been declining as reflected in the results of GE15 Parliamentary election results. WHY is something that the Pakatan Harapan and its member parties DAP, Amanah, PKR and UPKO needs to evaluate.

What changed? In GE14, the PM Candidate was Mahathir, and in GE15, the PM candidate was Anwar Ibrahim. Was the naming of Anwar a reason for the decline in support?

Stop/Postpone PD Elections? Start again - this time make it CLEAN AND FAIR?

Mat Sabu salahgunakan kuasa untuk bantu Anwar? Anwar bikin bukan saperti cakap? EC diam?

Azhar Harun, EC Chairman - Election 'offences' in PD? Acting 'without fear or favour'..or 'sweep under the carpet'?

Of course, the decline in speedy REFORMS, especially the repeal of bad laws, and a reform in governance was a factor - the culture of political appointment continued, even the Ketua Kampung and community leaders did not move a democratic elections where community leaders are chosen by the people, not appointed by the government who usually chooses one of their political parties minor leaders.

REMEMBER Local Council Elections was a MAJOR Issue - both Selangor and Penang were barred by reason of certain Federal Laws - but when PH came into power, they could have but didn't amend those Federal Laws to facilitate local council(government) elections. 

Some Media and even some in the international community believed that Anwar Ibrahim had popular support of the people - but the reality maybe otherwise. Post pardon, Anwar even failed to get the same or more votes in the Constituency, where the MP had to resign to give way to Anwar.

Anwar wins BUT Fails to demonstrate overwhelming support? Less votes than former MP?

Would PH without Anwar as leader or PM do better? PH's support, in my opinion, really comes from DAP and Amanah - something that became evident when PKR decided to contest on its own in the Johor State elections..It contested 20 seats, and won only one. DAP(under PH Banner) won 10 out of the 14 seats contested, and PH-Amanah won 1 out of the 16 seats contested

Apart from that, seven Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) candidates in the Sri Medan, Semarang, Tenggeroh, Pasir Raja, Johor Lama, Tanjung Surat and Benut constituencies also lost their deposits after failing to garner one-eighth or 12.5 per cent of the total votes counted.

One must recall that DAP gained popularity because many of its MPs were seen as human rights defenders - bravely highlighting wrongs and calling for reform. PKR and Amanah had very few comparatively.

However, things have changed after GE15, the former 'reformist' seem to have gone silent, and promised reforms are not happening. 

The Anwar Ibrahim's PH-led coalition government seems to have adopted the BN's style of governance - no or lesser allocation for Opposition MPs, the continuation of political appointments, and worse the U-turns and justification for keeping of draconian laws like Sedition Act, the 'apartheid' policy, etc

KUALA KUBU BARU BY-ELECTIONS  

It was the death of the PH-DAP State Assemblyperson that brought about this elections - the norm has been when it such deaths, the constituents vote back a person from the same party...

As it stands, the loss of the KKB seat will not affect the government, who will still be the same even if PH loses KKB.

The policy of lesser allocation for the Constituency if won by the Opposition compared to if the State Assemblyperson is  from PH will also factor in.

The fact that the PH candidate seems to be a 'parachute candidate' is a factor - as people generally prefer MPs or ADUNs that reside in the Constituency who will more easy to meet that a MP/ADUN who drops by once in a while.

PH-DAP majority dropped in GE15 compared to GE14.

As it is, between PN and PH-BN, there really is not much of a difference. Will PRM be able to get the peoples' vote this time?

The use of RELIGION or ETHNICITY is no longer relevant - what people are looking for today is what is the parties position on issues

- Will we move towards greater democracy, where people finally can VOTE their Local Councillors, Ketua Kampungs, Senators - or will it remain 'political appointment'?

- Position on HEALTHCARE and EDUCATION > will they move towards FREE healthcare and education, or will we still have to pay, or pay more?

-  Workers - will they move for greater protection of employment rights, minimum wage, Occupational Safety and Health

-  Parking rates, public transport, etc..

-  Unified Examination Certificate (UEC)

Pakatan Harapan got peoples' support because of the REFORMS promised, and the peoples' rejection of the BN and desire for a NEW government. But with PH forming an electoral pact with BN, it may impact on support. 

BN only managed to win 30 seats in Parliament - an indication that they are on the way out.

Now, PH's partnership with BN may also lead to the demise of PH. 

 

High Court acquits Bung Moktar and wife Zizie Izette of all three graft charges

Kinabatangan MP Datuk Seri Bung Moktar Radin (pic) and his wife Datin Seri Zizie Izette Abdul Samad have been acquitted and discharged of all three corruption charges. ― Picture by Hari Anggara

Thursday, 07 Sep 2023 3:39 PM MYT

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 7 ― The High Court here today acquitted and discharged Kinabatangan Member of Parliament Datuk Seri Bung Moktar Radin and his wife Datin Seri Zizie Izette Abdul Samad of all three corruption charges.

Judge Datuk Azhar Abdul Hamid made the decision after allowing the couple’s applications for a revision against the Sessions Court's decision ordered them to enter their defence on the corruption charges amounting to RM2.8 million involving a RM150 million investment in Public Mutual Berhad unit trust.

Bung, 63, looked calm while Zizie Izette, 44, cried after hearing the decision.

Judge Azhar ruled that it was a fit and proper case to exercise revisionary power under Section 323 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC).

“After examining the records of proceedings this court finds that there is no evidence that the 24th prosecution witness namely Public Mutual Berhad’s investment agent Madhi Abdul Hamid and the 25th prosecution witness Unit Amanah consultant, Norhaili Ahmad Mokhtar had given money to Bung Mokhtar through his wife.

“So the decision of the Sessions Court to call for defence is a miscarriage of justice. I hereby invoke Section 325 of the CPC to acquit and discharge both of them,” said the judge.

The prosecution was led by deputy public prosecutor Low Chin How while lawyers Datuk K. Kumaraendran and M. Athimulan acted for Bung Mokhtar and Zizie Izette respectively.

The Sessions Court, on September 2 last year, ordered Bung Mokhtar and Zizie Izette to enter their defence on all three corruption charges. This prompted them to file revision applications in the High Court against the Sessions Court’s ruling.

However, the High Court struck out their applications without hearing the merits of the applications after allowing the prosecution preliminary objections against the applications.

The couple subsequently filed the appeal to the Court of Appeal and on July 7, 2023, they won the appeal and the court remitted back the revision applications to the High Court for the merits of the applications to be heard.

On May 3, 2019, Bung Moktar who was then the non-executive chairman of Felcra, was charged with two charges of accepting bribes of RM2.2 million and RM262,500 as an inducement to obtain Felcra approval to invest RM150 million in Public Mutual unit trusts.

He is alleged to have accepted the bribes from Public Mutual Berhad’s investment agent Madhi Abdul Hamid through Zizie Izette at Public Bank Taman Melawati Branch here between 12.30pm and 5pm on June 12, 2015.

Bung Moktar was also charged with receiving RM337,500 in cash from Unit Amanah consultant, Norhaili Ahmad Mokhtar, under the name of Zizie Izette for the same reason and place on June 19, 2015, while Zizie Izette is facing three charges of abetting her husband over the matter at the same place, date and time.

Previously, Sessions Court Judge Rozina Ayob had fixed September 23, 2022, for Bung Moktar and Zizie Izette to enter their defence.

On September 23, 2022, the High Court here allowed their applications to postpone the defence trial pending disposal of their revision applications.

The trial was set on July 20 2023, but it was adjourned again pending the disposal of the revision applications.

The Sessions Court had set September 13 for mention of the case for parties to update the court on the revision applications that had been heard today at the High Court. — Bernama, Malay Mail, 7/9/2023

Zahid confirms Umno rejected local council seats in Selangor

Mohd Farhan Darwis-22 Jan 2024, 02:50 PM

Umno president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi insists that there is nothing to be disappointed.

Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said one of the main reasons the local council seats was rejected was the fact that not all Umno division leaders could be appointed. (Bernama pic)

PUTRAJAYA: Umno president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has confirmed that the party rejected local council seats offered by the Selangor state government.

Zahid said he respected the decision conveyed to him by Selangor Umno during a meeting last night, adding that there was nothing to be disappointed about.

The deputy prime minister said one of the reasons for the rejection was that some Umno division leaders could not be appointed as local council members.

“It is not a question of being greedy. We have 22 division chiefs (in Selangor), so if there are some who do not get (appointed), then it is better that none of them are appointed,” he said.

“Even though we (Umno) are not in local councils (in Selangor), we still support the state government,” he said in Putrajaya today.

Last Saturday, Selangor Umno said that it decided to return its quota of 20 local council members to the state government.

In making the announcement, Selangor Umno chief Megat Zulkarnain Omardin said the quota of 20 positions allocated to Umno was just 7% of the 288 positions in Selangor’s 12 local councils.

Umno and PH joined forces in Selangor following the formation of the federal unity government, a cooperation that saw them win 34 out of 56 seats in the state assembly elections last year.

Umno, which won Dusun Tua and Sungai Tawar, was allocated one executive council seat, returning them to the state administration for the first time since their defeat in the 2008 general election. - FMT, 22/1/2024

 

Academic Freedom and Students' Rights, Prof Gilley's views - criticize if we do not agree, BUT no to Prior Government Approval for Speakers invited to talk in Universities/Schools?

ACADEMIC FREEDOM - Can Universities invite foreign academics to speak? Or no academic freedom anymore - requirement of prior government approval for speakers in universities and/or schools? BEWARE as this government is placing more and more restrictions on what we can talk about - even 

The restriction imposed on visiting professors and speakers who are pro-Zionist must be seen from the aspects of security and the image of the country which may be affected and tarnished because of their statements. Higher Education Minister Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abd Kadir said therefore, the allegation that the restriction would affect academic freedom should not be raised.

Is the Government moving towards censorship of speakers - they cannot say this and that? They cannot criticize the government? or statements made by present or former Prime Ministers?

"I hope that those who commented on this need to distinguish between the context of academic freedom and freedom that touches on the country's image and reputation," he told reporters after attending the Higher Education Ministry's (MOHE) Aifilfitri celebration here today.Zambry said this in response to the statement made by a local professor that Universiti Malaya (UM) should not have apologised for inviting the American professor Bruce Gilley who made controversial and disrespectful statements during his lecture at the university recently.

We do not know the full text of Bruce Gilley's speech, and all we have heard about are 'extracts' and allegedly that he is pro-Zionist. 

Bruce Gilley is just an academic, not representing any country, and as a speaker he has every right to voice out his view on any subject matter. Now, in such forums, usually other panelists will have the ability to respond or challenge the views of a particular speaker. Likewise, the floor or the attendees also will have the opportunity to respond >> sadly, media did not cover these responses - Did everyone there not question or respond when Gilley said something they did not agree with or had a different view?

Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, in my opinion, goes overboard when he calls that Professor a 'mediocre scholar'. He should have just highlighted and criticized the views of Gilley that he did not agree to. When UM invites, they would never invite 'mediocre scholar's... Would an academician that expresses anti-Zionist views be a 'eminent' scholar? Would an academic who praises the PM be a mediocre or good scholar? Whether one is a good or bad scholar really does not depend on his views on certain subject matter, does it now?

A mediocre scholar should not be brought in as a visiting professor, says Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. His criticism against US academician Bruce Gilley came in the wake of the latter's controversial statements against Malaysia for supporting Palestine. "Mediocre scholar should not be invited as a visiting professor in the first place.

LISTEN to every viewpoint and/or opinions. Consider the various arguments and points, and DECIDE what is your position or conclusion. Government has no business deciding what or whose views the people should listen to - this is a VIOLATION of the freedom of expression and opinion, and a LACK OF TRUST in the wisdom of Malaysians and/or individuals. In Malaysia, for a long time schools and/or universities were not allowed to invite Opposition politicians, human rights defenders and activist to speak...Is PM Anwar continuing this 'policy'? Is this government ONLY allowing pro-government people to speak to students?  

We don't need no education
We don't need no thought control
No dark sarcasm in the classroom
Teacher, leave them kids alone

Hey, teacher, leave them kids alone
All in all, it's just another brick in the wall
All in all, you're just another brick in the wall - lyrics from Pink Floyd's Another Brick in the Wall

Malaysians, including Malaysian students, need to know other views and opinions, and learn also how to counter-them effectively. Thus BLOCKING other views is not real Education, and it is bad education.

What will Malaysian students studying overseas do when they hear anti-Palestine or pro-Zionist arguments? Will they be able to logically and reasonably argue against of debate the points made that are pro-Zionist? Or will Malaysian students simply react in 'silence' or anger without the ability to counter these views that they do not agree to?

EDUCATION is not 'brainwashing' - it is not simply pumping into the minds of students the views and positions of the current government. Such kind of education is also bad for REFORMASI or Transformation - as students out of such a system will be lacking in alternative ideas and views...?

If we prevent Malaysians or students from listening to people with different views, or views that is not in line with the current government's views, does it help people become educated and/or mature. Just feeding students and others with government views or government approved views ONLY is wrong. It maybe called BRAINWASHING.

But sadly, this is what happens in Malaysian Parliament - Government MPs generally do not even listen and consider the views and points made by the Opposition - they 'blindly' support the government position and proposed laws. Likewise, many Opposition MPs also adopt a similar attitude - end result not a Parliamentary 'debate' where one should at the very least be open to differing views, all of which must be taken into consideration when one makes a final decision - to support, oppose or abstain.

In Malaysia, the government also tries to control the freedom of opinion, expression - they simply do not allow people to consider different views, think about it and make an informed decision on their own > Just LISTEN and follow the views of the government. 

The situation is DIRE in Parliament, so much so that decisions are made based on ambiguous 'VOICE VOTES' which presumes that Government Party MPs approve and Opposition MPs oppose. 

So, the people do not even know how many MPs voted in Support, how many opposed and how many abstained. We will never even know how our MP or some other MP voted > If we knew, then we could lobby individual MPs to take particular position or change their position. REFORM Needed - all votes must be counted. Better still, people must know how their MP voted - TRANSPARENCY. If not, MPs can LIE and say things that they voted differently from what was perceived or about how they really voted.

At a session at the Bar Council some years back, when Anwar Ibrahim was speaking - when asked why Anwar did not oppose the use of the ISA during Operation Lallang and other mass arrests. Anwar responded that he oppossed the use of ISA, and this he clearly communicated to the Prime Minister. Who would believe him? After all, there was no Parliamentary Record or media report stating that this was the case. One BN MP that stands out is Nazri Aziz, who despite the government position on death penalty came out in the media and stated that he personally opposed the death penalty.

For every issue, one must make a decision after considering pro and anti views > the right to decide is with the individual, not the government. The government does not decide on our own view of things/issues. IT is foolish to say that we must agree with everything PM Anwar says..or even the Ruler says.

In UNIVERSITY, after the Universities and University Colleges Act 1971[UUCA] has been used to take away the freedom/rights of students and even academics. The UUCA was one of the draconian legislation that PH said it will repeal - but what happened is just some minor amendments - which is not enough.

Can a Malaysian University student association or even school student groups  invite members of the Opposition to speak to them? [Well, for a long time, University students had to first get approval of the University authorities with regard to programs, speakers and even publications - there was NO FREEDOM.

Can Universities and/or schools in Malaysia invite Human Rights Defenders and activist - who many a time may highlight the failings and lackings of government as they call for REFORMS?

YES, some minor amendments to the UUCA - but nothing much have changed. Supporting government activities OK - but others maybe not OK. 

University Students FREEDOM is still an issue even after about 17 months of PM Anwar Ibrahim's Pakatan Harapan led coalition government - What happened to the PH's promise to abolish the Universities and University Colleges Act? 

Pakatan Harapan's GE15 pledge to abolish the University and Universities Colleges Act 1971 (UUCA) will not be fulfilled.According to Higher Education Minister Mohamed Khaled Nordin (BN-Kota Tinggi), the law was still relevant,...Harapan had promised to abolish the UUCA as part of its GE15 election pledges. Its goal was to grant more autonomy to universities and institutions of higher learning."The UUCA will be abolished and students, lecturers, and alumni will be recognised as the true stakeholders," read the Kita Boleh! Harapan GE15 Action Plan document...' - Malaysiakini, 24/2/2024

When a person hears a view or opinion, it is dangerous to simply accept it even if it is the view of the Prime Minister or the government. People MUST CONSIDER any views, and then decide whether I agree or I do not. In fact a good educator stimulates the consideration of different views on any subject matter - we need THINKING students - not students that simply follow the views of the government of the day.

In my view, UM did no wrong in inviting Professor Bruce Gilley? Of course, those who invited cannot be blamed for anything the said speaker says during his speech or other interventions. Hence, it was wrong for the University to even apologize.

If someone says something that we do not agree with - then, criticize him with words and other protest actions. We may be not opposed to everything he said, so critic what we do not agree with.

I personally am against Zionist Israel, not all Jews or Israelis as many Jews and Israeli are also against what the Israeli government are doing, and are pro-Palestine.

On the Palestine Issue, it is shocking the US now(24/4/2024), despite what Israel is doing to the Palestinians just approved US26.4 Billion Aid for Israel

The Senate passed a foreign aid package Tuesday that includes money for Ukraine, Israel and the Indo-Pacific region. ...The package would provide $26.4 billion to aid Israel, specifying that the funds are to support “its effort to defend itself against Iran and its proxies, and to reimburse US military operations in response to recent attacks,” - CNN, 24/4/2024

What would Malaysia's response be? It is easy to attack one Professor and a Malaysian University - but what will PM Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysian Government and Malaysians do with US that is funding Israel, who is an ongoing violator of human rights? Would Anwar speak out or even send a PROTEST NOTE to the US Embassy?

Criticisms against Gilley's views is OK. 

See also:-

Students - human rights defenders for the poor and marginalised in Malaysia?

Palestine - Anwar reveals US 'demarche' - so any other pressure from other States? Did Malaysia send protest notes to US, and other countries?

 

UM apologises for hosting pro-Israel professor, lambasts him for claiming Malaysia unsafe for travellers

The University of Malaya lambasted Bruce Gilley for claiming that Malaysia is not safe for travellers after Putrajaya ordered that his events be cancelled due to his remarks. — Picture by Ahmad Zamzahuri

By Anis Zalani

Thursday, 25 Apr 2024 12:44 PM MYT

KUALA LUMPUR, April 25 — The University of Malaya (UM) has today expressed regret for hosting a controversial American academic who accused Malaysian leaders of advocating a “second Holocaust” for Jews in a lecture.

In a statement, the university then lambasted Bruce Gilley for claiming that Malaysia is not safe for travellers after Putrajaya ordered that his events be cancelled due to his remarks.

“This is an irresponsible and extreme statement that angers every Malaysian," it said.

UM also said it has acknowledged the directive from the Ministry of Higher Education and promptly responded by cancelling all planned programs and activities featuring Gilley.

“UM expresses regret over the controversial statements that disregard societal sentiments as circulated on social media platforms,” it said.

Gilley, a professor of political science at Portland State University, was invited by the Department of International and Strategic Studies for three events, starting with a seminar on international relations on Monday.

On Tuesday, Gilley delivered a keynote address titled “Will Malaysia Become an Active Middle Power”. Yesterday, in an X post about the speech, he said “a country whose political leaders advocate a second Holocaust against the Jewish people will never be a serious player in world affairs, and will certainly never be a friend or partner of the US”.

Gilley pointed to the remarks of former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Agriculture Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Sabu.

He has since deleted the post, claiming it was for the safety and well-being of UM staff who invited him.

Gilley is known to be a supporter of Israel, displaying the state's flag on his X account.

He is also a controversial figure among the Western academia for praising Western colonialism and saying it should be “reclaimed”, considered “legitimate”, and even “resurrected”.

In 2017, his article The Case for Colonialism was published in the Third World Quarterly journal and provoked massive controversy resulting in two petitions signed by thousands of academics calling for the editor responsible to be sacked, while 15 of the journal's 34-member editorial board resigned in protest. - Malay Mail, 25/4/2024

'Mediocre' scholars shouldn't be visiting professors here, PM Anwar says after UM invited pro-Israel, pro-colonialism academic

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim speaks to the press after launching the new MAB Academy campus and the groundbreaking of its Flight Simulator Building at the South Support Zone at the MAB Academy.

Join us on our WhatsApp Channel, follow us on Instagram, and receive browser alerts for the latest news you need to know.

By R. Loheswar

Friday, 26 Apr 2024 1:09 PM MYT

SEPANG April 26 — Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has today urged local education institutions to be more discerning in the kind of academics they invite.

He called American academic Bruce Gilley a “mediocre” professor, after the advocate for Western colonialism called Malaysian leaders of calling for “second Holocaust” for Jews.

“Mediocre scholars shouldn't be brought to Malaysia as visiting a professor.

“The rest the [higher education] minister has already clarified," Anwar told reporters when met at the Malaysia Aviation Group (MAG) official launch of its new MAB Academy campus and the groundbreaking of its Flight Simulator Building at the South Support Zone here.

Gilley, a professor of political science at Portland State University, was invited by the Department of International and Strategic Studies for three events, starting with a seminar on international relations on Monday.

On Tuesday, Gilley delivered a keynote address titled “Will Malaysia Become an Active Middle Power”. Yesterday, in an X post about the speech, he said “A country whose political leaders advocate a second Holocaust against the Jewish people will never be a serious player in world affairs, and will certainly never be a friend or partner of the US”.

Gilley pointed to the remarks of former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Agriculture Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Sabu.

He has since deleted the post, claiming it was for the safety and well-being of UM staff who invited him.

Gilley is known to be a supporter of Israel, displaying the state's flag on his X account.

He is also a controversial figure among the Western academia for praising Western colonialism and saying it should be “reclaimed”, considered “legitimate”, and even “resurrected”.

In 2017, his article The Case for Colonialism was published in the Third World Quarterly journal and provoked massive controversy resulting in two petitions signed by thousands of academics calling for the editor responsible to be sacked, while 15 of the journal's 34-member editorial board resigned in protest.

UM has since apologised for hosting Gilley and criticised him for his remarks on the country.

Earlier, Minister of Higher Education Datuk Seri Zambry Abd Kadir today lambasted Gilley after the latter claimed that Malaysia is not safe for travellers after Putrajaya ordered that his events be cancelled due to his sensitive remarks.

Zambry deemed the remarks of the academic — who is an advocate for Western colonialism — as dangerous and could tarnish Malaysia’s image, considering the country did not even act against him for his remarks.- Malay Mail, 26/4/2024

 

With RM1.5 Trillion Debt, should Malaysia increase wages of 1.7 million Public Officers? Maybe only those who earn below RM4k? But increase MINIMUM Wages now for all?

What? On the occasion of the coming May Day, Prime Minister Anwar is announcing the increasing wages of civil servants - employees of the Federal Government but what about the rest of Malaysian workers, remembering that all workers including the self employed all contribute to the development and well-being of Malaysia.

Just recently, RAYA AID was given to again Federal Government employees and pensioners - forgetting again the poor, the private sector workers, self employed...

CAN MALAYSIA AFFORD INCREASING WAGES OF ITS EMPLOYEES - THE CIVIL SERVANTS? Should the increase of wages be limited to just the Federal Government workers that earn less than RM4,000? 

Bureaucracy. Malaysia's bureaucracy is one of the biggest in the world, with 1.7 million civil servants to a population of 32 million, a ratio of 4.5% compared with Singapore's ratio of 1.5% civil servants to total population, Hong Kong's 2.3% and Taiwan's ratio of 2.3%.

Why so HIGH? Some say it was because Malaysia's graduates did not have the needed quality to be attractive to the Private Sector, and hence the government absorbed many who were sent on scholarship and government loans into the civil service. Some were even absorbed as teachers, without the required skills and interest - and it has affected the education system..

REMEMBER the Malaysian Federal Debt(Liabilities) is about RM1.5 Trillion. 

Remember that the Malaysian Household debts, i.e. the current personal debt of individual Malaysians also is more than RM1.5 Trillion.

No 'Raya Aid' for the private sector workers, self employed or the POOR - just for civil servants and government pensioners? RM1.5 trillion debt? borrow and spend as normal? Debt service charges HIGHER than operating expenditure?

In 2023, the Federal Government allocated RM46. 1 billion or 15.2% of revenue (2022: RM41. 3 billion; 14%) for debt service charges (DSC).

Despite the high number of government employees, the government still have contracted out services like cleaning, security guards, school wardens, etc..

MINIMUM Wages was last increased from RM1,200 to RM1,500 was in May 2022, and possibly relying on facts and situation in Malaysia in January 2022 or even earlier. 

The last time the government reviewed the minimum wage was in May 2022, increasing it from RM1,200 to RM1,500.

BUYING POWER or monies value had significantly declined because of the declining value of the Malaysian Ringgit...

January 2022 - 1 USD = 4.1725 MYR

May 2022 -  1 USD = 4.3535 MYR

Apr 2024 - 1 USD = about 4.8

Therefore the Buying power of  the Ringgit - you need more Ringgit to buy things 

Say, you needed RM1000 in January 2022, in May 2022 you needed RM1043, and today in 2024 we would need RM1151 to buy the same thing that cost RM1,000 in January 2022.

When the Ringgit dropped - prices for everything increased. Why? Because even those whose product or services cost did not increase - they now needed more money to compensate for the increase in cost of living.

YES, the government can come in with SUBSIDIES to ensure people can still afford to buy the same things at the 'same price' in 2022 - but that cannot solve the problem as subsidies can cover only some items - In the market, the price of kambing, beef, fish, pork, ayam kampung, Ipoh Chicken, etc had all sky rocketed...so more and more people simply could not buy it as the price increased but not INCOME. Subsidies means the GOVERNMENT must spend more - compensate the manufacturer, middle man and seller of products and services. How much did the Government spend for the TOL Free days during festivals?

At a minimum, what the government could have done was to INCREASE THE MINIMUM WAGE accordingly - no need to wait for several years and adjust Minimum Wages.

When cost of living rises for whatever reason, immediately(or within weeks), increase the MINIMUM WAGE. Sadly, many employers simply pay the Minimum Wages when they ought to pay their workers more...

Now, this PM Anwar Ibrahim led Pakatan Harapan led coalition government again is giving the impression that Minimum Wage can only be reviewed once every TWO(2) years - BUT THIS IS NOT TRUE. Minimum Wages can be increased at any time...

Section 25(1) NATIONAL WAGES CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL ACT 2011 says ' (1) The Council shall, at least once in every two years, review the minimum wages order.' 

It says 'at least once in every 2 years' - that means that there can be more reviews, any number of reviews. What the ACT is saying is that at a minimum, it must be once every 2 years. 

Given the current situation in Malaysia, there must be REVIEWS and new Minimum Wages every time the cost of living rises for whatever reason so that Malaysians and workers can at least earn a MINIMUM Wage sufficient to meet the living expenses of themselves and their family/dependents. 

If these poorest of workers cannot earn sufficient, they may be forced to borrow from ALONGS(illegal Money Lenders), for sadly in Malaysia the poor simply cannot borrow money from Banks or even the Government for not financial institutions will give loans to anyone with no security(property or a REGULAR EMPLOYMENT). 

Look at Section 25(2) of the Act that says, '(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), the Council may, on its own accord or upon the direction of the Government, review the minimum wages order.

Yes, if the Wage Council is not acting - then all it needs is for Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim to tell them to do the needed to immediately increase the Minimum Wage. But, Anwar and his government did not do this..

So, the Prime Minister who could at any time act causing the MINIMUM WAGE to be increased failed to do so...

Remember, on 1/5/2023(last year), our Prime Minister said, 'The issue of minimum wage will be settled by next month, says Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.' Workers expected an increase of Minimum Wage in a month - but almost 12 months down the road, the Minimum Wage is still not increased. Claps and applause to "FAKE PROMISES" or fake insinuations, but despite increasing cost of living, Anwar failed to INCREASE Minimum Wage sooner...and now his Minister is still talking about reviewing - not INCREASING Minimum Wage. 

Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) had stated that for Kuala Lumpur, the living wage for a single adult was RM2,700 (in 2018), and for a childless couple, it would be RM4,500. The living wage for a couple with two children would be RM6,500.

One dirty 'strategy' that seems to have been employed by governments of the past is to increase Federal MINIMUM wage across the board, affecting also the small businessman like sellers at fresh markets, small shops that barely survive, fishermen, farmers, etc... By lumping all employers together - there will be massive protest especially from these small employers who can currently hardly survive..

So, I suggest:-

INCREASE MINIMUM WAGE - but not applicable across the Board. For the very small business people, fisherman, farmers, etc that have annual profits LESS Than RM100,000 should be excluded.

For these small employers, maybe a profit sharing scheme with workers should be proposed > sharing say 50% of their profits with their current employees. In this way, these smaller employers may be able to SURVIVE - they simply may not be able to pay any higher wages otherwise. Profit sharing with labour is the way forward.

Another FLAW with Malaysia's Minimum Wage orders of past, although the ACT provides already flexibility..

"b) the coverage of the recommended minimum wages rates according to sectors, types of employment and regional areas;

(c) the non-application of the recommended minimum wages rates and coverage to any sectors, types of employment and regional areas or to any person or class of persons;...(Sec. 22)"

ONE Minimum Wage rate for all. Different Minimum Wage depending on region and having sight of the needed cost of living there...

Well, the cost of living in different places/towns/areas differ - living in a smaller town for example one can rent houses at a much lower rate - this should have been taken into account. So, different MINIMUM WAGE for different areas based on the differing cost of living...

Now, certain work is not attracting Malaysian workers as it is TOUGH, work under the Sun, manual work... THEREFORE a Higher MINIMUM WAGE for these kind of hard work - 3D work (Dirty, Dangerous and Demeaning) - Higher MINIMUM WAGES will attract Malaysian workers - say a Minimum Wage of RM2000 or RM2500? After all there are currently MORE THAN HALF A MILLION Malaysians that are unemployed. 

Malaysia's unemployment rate remained at 3.3% in January 2024, with the number of unemployed persons declining further to 567,300 from 567,800 in December 2023, says the Statistics Department of Malaysia - Star, 8/3/2024

Malaysia must prioritize the employment of Malaysians - before allowing the entry of migrant workers, who may be attractive because migrant workers are easily exploited, cheated, oppressed with little or no means to claim justice in Malaysia as migrant workers are speedily 'forced out' from Malaysia so their claims and cases for justice and human rights cannot start or be continued in Malaysia...' 

 

Usually, the market determines the WAGES of workers - which means worker wages will increase. This was SABOTAGED when Malaysia made it easy for employers to bring in MIGRANT WORKERS. The effect the wages were kept low - even for Malaysian workers.

 

As an example, in the construction industry previously, wages were determined according to experience and skill of the worker, and higher skilled worker could get higher wages. With the bringing in of migrant workers, Malaysian workers left as they were unwilling to work for such low wages, as most employers simply paid 'minimum wages'. Some of the Malaysian workers became independent contractors and started taking on small construction work to survive - but then government and some politicians started using only their 'friend' contractors or contractors that were 'politically connected' - and may even Bumiputra contractors had no choice but to shut down operations.

 

It is sad that for the government, the primary issue for workers had been 'Minimum Wage' - and this is such a narrow thinking. Workers in Malaysia also still do not enjoy 'REGULAR EMPLOYMENT' but only 'contract employment' or 'short-term contract employment'. This state of affairs is very BAD for workers - and they cannot even fight for better wages and better working conditions, or even form Trade Unions. Most who start fighting for worker rights find themselves out of a job. The Human Resource Minister has the power to ensure that 

Section 2A of the Employment Act says '

(1) The Minister may by order prohibit the employment, engagement or contracting of any person or class of persons to carry out work in any occupation in any agricultural or industrial undertaking, constructional work, statutory body, local government authority, trade, business or place of work other than under a contract of service entered into with-

(a) the principal or owner of that agricultural or industrial undertaking, constructional work, trade, business or place of work; or

(b) that statutory body or that authority.

So, simply the Minister can ensure that all workers are working with their REAL employer who has full control of the workplace. End usage of workers of other contractors at the workplace. No more outsourced workers PLEASE.

Likewise the government can put an end of SHORT-TERM Employment Contracts. Now, many employer simply do not renew the short-term employment contract despite there still being work that requires workers. Then, the employer simply hires a NEW worker. Employers must be prevented from doing this, and the law should require employers to use the same worker until the work requiring the worker cease to exist.

If Malaysia insists on REGULAR EMPLOYMENT for all workers - even when the work requiring the worker ends. The law requires the employer to find other work which the worker can do. If there is none, then the employer has the right to RETRENCH, and the worker has the right to receive RETRENCHMENT BENEFITS. Hence, there is really no prejudice to the Employer, but it improves EMPLOYMENT SECURITY for the worker. 

There is so much that the Malaysian government can do for workers if PM Anwar Ibrahim and his government has the intention to help workers.

PM Anwar: Proposal to improve salary of civil servants to be announced at Labour Day gathering

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim chairs the Meeting No 3/2024 of the Public Service Remuneration System (SSPA) Review Main Committee meeting, April 19, 2024. — Picture from X/Anwar Ibrahim

Friday, 19 Apr 2024 7:13 PM MYT

KUALA LUMPUR, April 19 — Proposals for improvement, including efforts to increase the net income rate of civil servants, will be announced by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim at the Labour Day rally to be held later.

Anwar, in his Facebook post, said the Meeting No 3/2024 of the Public Service Remuneration System (SSPA) Review Main Committee, which he chaired today to discuss the salary structure of civil servants further, has almost finalised improvements related to the matter.

Anwar, who is also finance minister, said the matter would then be decided at the Cabinet meeting.

“I wish to emphasise the government’s commitment to resolving efforts to improve the salary structure of civil servants which have been implemented through the SSPA Review, despite the country’s challenging economic situation due to global geopolitical uncertainty.

“The government takes this position and responsibility by considering the pressures of cost of living for civil servants, especially those with low income. Hopefully, this effort will motivate civil servants to increase productivity and provide the best service to the people,” he said.

The prime minister had, when tabling Budget 2024 on October 13 last year, announced that the SSPA would be fully implemented from 2025. — Bernama, Malay Mail, 19/4/2024

Unemployment rate stays at 3.3% for January 2024, says Stats Dept 

Friday, 08 Mar 2024 2:55 PM MYT

PUTRAJAYA: Malaysia’s unemployment rate remained at 3.3% in January 2024, with the number of unemployed persons declining further to 567,300 from 567,800 in December 2023, says the Statistics Department of Malaysia.

Chief statistician Datuk Seri Dr Mohd Uzir Mahidin said that based on the Labour Force Statistics for January 2024, the country’s labour market sustained its upward trend, in line with the ongoing improvement of the national economic situation and consistent with global economic expansion. 

"Therefore, the labour force in January 2024 saw further enhancement, increasing by 0.1% to 17.05 million persons compared to 17.03 million persons the previous month.

"The labour force participation rate during the month was unchanged at 70.2%, as in the preceding month.

"This positive trend was driven by a continuous increase in the number of employed persons, while the number of unemployed persons declined,” he said in a statement Friday (March 8).

Mohd Uzir said the number of employed persons increased by 0.2% to record 16.48 million persons compared to 16.46 million in December 2023.

Elaborating on the employment situation, he said 75.2% of employed persons in January 2024 were in the employees’ category, while the own-account workers category continued its increasing trend, rising by 0.3% to 3.01 million persons from three million persons in December.

At the same time, Mohd Uzir said the number of employed persons in the service sector remained upward, particularly in the wholesale and retail sector, food and beverage services, and transportation and storage activities.

He added that a similar trend was seen in the manufacturing, construction, mining and quarrying sectors in January 2024, while the number of employed persons in the agriculture sector rebounded compared to the previous month.

Regarding the unemployment situation, he said 79.8% of the total unemployed persons were those who were available for work and were actively seeking jobs, or the actively unemployed, which posted a decrease of 0.2% to 452,500 persons from 453,600 in December.

According to Mohd Uzir, the unemployment rate for youth aged 15 to 24 stood at 10.6% or 306,800 persons, while among youth aged 15 to 30, the rate was 6.7%, with 439,700 unemployed youths.

Meanwhile, Mohd Uzir said the economic situation in Malaysia was steady, with higher domestic demand anticipated due to January’s decline in inflation, a robust job market, and supportive financial positions.

Additionally, the increase in tourism may contribute to economic activities, potentially leading to various businesses and job opportunities.

"Therefore, the labour market in Malaysia is anticipated to improve and remain stable over the next few months, driven by a resilient domestic economy.

"This situation is expected to continue to generate increased demand for employment, thus serving as an important key to sustaining economic stability,” he said. - Bernama, Star, 8/3/2024

 

Minimum wage to be reviewed this year

By Hana Naz Harun, Qistina Sallehuddin - March 14, 2024 @ 5:47pm

Human Resources Minister Steven Sim Chee Keong says the review will be based on the National Wages Consultative Council Act 2011. - Bernama pic

KUALA LUMPUR: The government will review the minimum wage this year, taking into account the views of both employers and employees.

Human Resources Minister Steven Sim Chee Keong said the review would be based on the National Wages Consultative Council Act 2011.

"For your information, this year, based on the National Wage Consultative Council Act 2011, the minimum wage rate will be reviewed.

"We will take into account the views of all parties, including employers and employees, and refer to socio-economic reports such as those from Bank Negara."

Sim said this in his winding-up speech on the royal address debate, in a response to Rodiyah Sapiee (Gabungan Parti Sarawak-Batang Sadong).

Rodiyah had raised the issue of reviewing the minimum wage, as suggested by the Bank Negara and the Employees' Provident Fund's literacy initiative, Belanjawanku.

Yesterday, the Malaysian Trades Union Congress (MTUC) demanded the government to review the minimum wage rate, following the Sales and Services Tax (SST) hike.

Its secretary-general Kamarul Baharin Mansor reminded the government that the National Wages Consultative Council Act required a reassessment of the minimum wage every two years.

The last time the government reviewed the minimum wage was in May 2022, increasing it from RM1,200 to RM1,500.

Last year, the then Human Resources Minister V. Sivakumar said the review of minimum wage by the National Wage Consultation Technical Committee was 80 per cent complete.

In January, Economy Minister Rafizi Ramli said he would initiate the process of formulating policies for the 13th Malaysia Plan (13MP) this year, with the Progressive Wage Policy being one of the components in the five-year plan.

He had said the formulation and focus of the policies would be closely related to labour market reforms, and would be developed in collaboration with other ministries involving various components to shape the idea of labour market reforms in the country. - NST, 14/3/2024

 

PM: Minimum wage issue to be settled by next month

---

By MARTIN CARVALHO and FAZLEENA AZIZ

• Nation

• Monday, 01 May 2023

PUTRAJAYA: The issue of minimum wage will be settled by next month, says Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

The Prime Minister said the implementation of minimum wage is a big challenge.

“We will settle all the uproar pertaining to this issue at the Cabinet meeting next month once and for all,” he said in his speech at the Labour Day celebration here, on Monday (May 1).

On Labour Day last year, the Malaysian Minimum Wages Order 2022 came into effect with the monthly salary of employees fixed at RM1,500.

However, its implementation for companies with fewer than five employees has been postponed from Jan 1 to July 1, this year.

Anwar acknowledged that there is a need to increase the salaries among workers in Malaysia.

The matter should be accepted, and cannot be disputed by any employers, economists or even ministers, he added.

“We do not want anyone to dispute this matter. The government has a responsibility to accept this fact that we have to increase the wages for civil and private sectors.

“There are responsible employers but not all are the same. When an employer records a high revenue of up to RM1bil, they did not raise the employees' wages.

“But there are those who think about the welfare of the workers, their children’s education and providing housing benefits. This is how it should be done,” he said.

Anwar said when he was the finance minister, Tenanga Nasional Bhd was privatised and went on to make huge profits.

He said the company increased its workers' salaries, provided housing benefits to them and set up a university. - Star, 1/5/2023

Palestine - The UN created the problem without prior consultation of the inhabitants, causing the refugee problem since 1947, and now still denies Palestine UN membership?

Malaysia need be careful - and demand that Israel return to the !947 borders - not the post 1967 borders..

Israel did not exist, and all we had was the Palestinian region with the Palestinian people who were primarily Muslim, Christians and Jews who lived peacefully.

Then, there was a movement of basically overseas Jews that was pushing for a nation state of the own for the Jewish people, which they called 'Israel'. At that time, the Palestinian region was under the British Colony. 

After WW2, where the Nazi Germany targeted the Jews, Roma people and others, the UK pushed harder for the establishment of the Jewish State of Israel.

Interestingly, the UN got into the picture and a UN Resolution(Resolution 181) was passed for the establishment of the Jewish State of Israel, an Arab Muslim State of Palestine and an independently governed Jerusalem.

The United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine was a proposal by the United Nations, which recommended a partition of Mandatory Palestine at the end of the British Mandate. On 29 November 1947, the UN General Assembly adopted the Plan as Resolution 181 (II).^[1]

The resolution recommended the creation of independent Arab and Jewish States linked economically^[2] and a Special International Regime for the city of Jerusalem and its surroundings. The Arab state was to have a territory of 11,100 square kilometres or 42%, the Jewish state a territory of 14,100 square kilometres or 56%, while the remaining 2%—comprising the cities of Jerusalem, Bethlehem and the adjoning area—would become an international zone.^[3][4]

On May 14, 1948, David Ben-Gurion, the head of the Jewish Agency, proclaimed the establishment of the State of Israel. U.S. President Harry S. Truman recognized the new nation on the same day.

Israel was admitted as a full U.N. member in 1949. However, the Palestinian application that has been made over the decades have continuously been denied. The latest was on 18/4/2024.

'The Security Council today blocked Palestine’s bid to become a full member of the United Nations due to a United States veto on a draft resolution that would have recommended the granting of such status.

The proposal, submitted by Algeria, received 12 votes in favour, with the United States casting a negative vote and Switzerland and the United Kingdom abstaining.  A Council resolution requires at least nine votes in favour and no vetoes from its five permanent members — China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States — to pass.- UN Website

12 of the 15 members of the UN Security Council voted in favour - but with the draconian VETO, one of the 5 Countries that hold the VETO can deny the majority decision. Time for the VETO to be abolished. 

 

If one looks at the UN agreed division of the region, we find that many of the current maps is misleading - the size of Palestine has been shrinked, which is not right. See how Gaza has shrank - Palestine was supposed to be much larger - and if you look at the UN approved map - Gaza and West Bank are connected by land of its own.

Malaysia must be clear and  push for the withdrawal of Israel back to its borders as per the plan approved by the UN in the Plan as per  Resolution 181. Do not be fooled by the plans being 'propagated' by some that has increased substantially the area of Israel and diminished the size of Palestine. 

INJUSTICE that followed UN Resolution 181 - was the creation of the Palestinian Refugee problem.

When they created ISRAEL - there was massive 'cleaning up' of the native Arab or Muslim inhabitants from Israel. 

[REMEMBER The people indigenous inhabitants of the region were never consulted before the UN decided to draw borders and create Israel and Palestine. It was thus sad that people staying in the area for generations found themselves being pressured to leave what became Israel simply because they were NOT JEWS.]

In 1948 more than 700000 Palestinian Arabs – about half of Mandatory Palestine's Arab population – fled from their homes or were expelled, at first by Zionist paramilitaries,^[a] and after the establishment of the Israel, by its military.^{[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9]} The expulsion and flight was a central component of the fracturing, dispossession, and displacement of Palestinian society, known as the Nakba.^[10][11][12] Dozens of massacres targeting Arabs were conducted by Israeli military forces and between 400 and 600 Palestinian villages were destroyed. Village wells were poisoned in a biological warfare programme and properties were looted to prevent Palestinian refugees from returning.^[13][14] Other sites were subject to Hebraization of Palestinian place names.^[15] The precise number of Palestinian refugees, many of whom settled in Palestinian refugee camps in neighboring states, is a matter of dispute.^[16] Around 80 percent of the Arab inhabitants of what became Israel (half of the Arab total population of Mandatory Palestine) left or were expelled from their homes

ETHNIC CLEANSING or 'GENOCIDE' would be what we call this today, and it was great injustice, and blame will lie not just on Israel, but certainly the UN. Did they not consider this problem - could they have insisted on no 'expulsion' of people from their homes.  

The Palestinian REFUGEE came into being, and only then since 1947 have the UN realized the problem created by the UN's own fault, when they created Israel and Palestine in a place where the community was multi-ethnic and multi-religious. {Something similar happened when India was divided into Muslim Pakistan and India). 

• 1947:
  • November 29: Resolution 181: Recommending partition of the Mandatory Palestine into Arab and Jewish states, and international status for the City of Jerusalem.
• 1948:
  • November 19: Resolution 212: Assistance to Palestinian refugees
  • December 11: Resolution 194: establishes Conciliation Commission; protection of and free access to Jerusalem and other Holy Places; Resolves that the refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbours should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the Governments or authorities responsible
• 1949:
  • December 8: Resolution 302(IV): Assistance to Palestine refugees
  • December 9: Resolution 303(IV): International Regime for Jerusalem
  • December 10: Resolution 356: Jerusalem
• 1950:
  • December 2: Resolution 393: Assistance to Palestinian refugees
  • December 14: Resolution 394 (V): Calls for Arab-Israeli peace negotiations, and a solution for Palestinian refugees.
  • December 14: Resolution 468: Reduces financing for an international regime in Jerusalem.
• 1952:
  • January 26: Resolution 512: Report of the United Nations Conciliation Commission for Palestine.
  • January 26: Resolution 513: Assistance to Palestinian refugees.
  • November 6: Resolution 614: Assistance to Palestinian refugees.
  • November 25: Resolution 660: Report of the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine refugees (UNRWA).
• 1953:
  • November 27: Resolution 720: Assistance to Palestinian refugees.
  • November 27: Resolution 766: Accounts of UNRWA.
• 1954:
  • December 4: Resolution 818: Assistance to Palestinian refugees.
  • December 4: Resolution 879: Accounts of UNRWA.
• 1955:
  • December 3: Resolution 916: Assistance to Palestinian refugees.
  • December 3: Resolution 964: Accounts of UNRWA.
• 1956:
  • December 21: Resolution 1081: Accounts of UNRWA.
• 1957:
  • February 27: Resolution 1091: Palestinian refugees.
  • February 28: Resolution 1018: Palestinian refugees.
  • December 12: Resolution 1191.html: Palestinian refugees.
• 1958:
  • December 12: Resolution 1315: Palestinian refugees.
• 1959:
  • December 9: Resolution 1456: UNRWA.
• 1960:
  • December 18: Resolution 1545: Accounts of UNRWA.
• 1961:
  • April 21: Resolution 1604: Palestinian refugees
  • October 30: Resolution 1636: Accounts of UNRWA.
  • December 20: Resolution 1725: Palestinian refugees
• 1962:
  • December 11: Resolution 1789: Accounts of UNRWA.
  • December 20: Resolution 1856: Palestinian refugees
• 1963
  • June 27: UN Special Assembly Resolution 1874.
  • June 27: UN Special Assembly Resolution 1875.
  • November 6: Resolution 1890-C: Accounts of UNRWA.
  • December 3: Resolution 1912: Palestinian refugees
• 1965:
  • February 10: Resolution 2002: Palestinian refugees
  • December 13: Resolution 2047-C: Accounts of UNRWA.
  • December 13: Resolution 2048-C: Accounts of UNRWA.
  • December 15: Resolution 2052: UNRWA Report.
• 1966:
  • October 26: Resolution 2139-C: Accounts of UNRWA.
  • November 17: Resolution 2154: Palestinian refugees.
• 1967:...and the list goes on and on >>UN Resolutions on Palestine>

Israel got its own country - but they have been expanding and expanding their borders to the detriment of the Palestine people.

Did all the Palestinian Jews move to the new Israel - well, many continued to live where they were with their Muslim and Christian brethren.

Now, the people of Israel are not all indigenous Jews, as many of the Jews in Israel are migrants from many other countries - including those in the Zionist Movement, and they have dominated the political power in Israel.

Israel at present is OCCUPYING (or colonizing) a lot of Palestine - and their object seems 'expansion' of Israel - as such, pressure have been put on indigenous Palestinians to move out, as they build even new settlements for Israeli Jews in what we call Occupied Territory..

There has been those who are promoting the 1967 Borders of Israel, including the US > BUT really should we not be talking about the 1947 UN Resolution borders that decided on the Borders of Israel, Borders of Palestine, and the Borders of the Independent Jerusalem.

Malaysia must be strong about the 1947 Borders as per the partition plan of the UN. I do not believe that any UN Resolution has acknowledged that Israel's Borders have expanded.

Whilst Israel had been made a UN member State since 1949 - but the Palestine has to date been denied UN Membership..

On 11 May 1949, the General Assembly by the requisite two-thirds majority approved the application to admit Israel to the UN by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 273. The vote in the General Assembly was 37 to 12, with 9 abstentions.

UN Membership acknowledged the State of Palestine and this is important.

But again, the passing of the UN Security Council on 18/4/2024 was blocked by the United States of America(a permanent member with VETO power). It must be noted that 12 of the 15 members of the UN Security Council voted in favour.

If the UN Security Council had passed the Resolution, the the question of Palestine recognition as a UN Member State will be taken to the General Assembly, where a two third majority vote is required.

1947 Borders is valid as all neighboring countries like Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon had already achieved their independence before the UN Partition Plan and Resolution 29/11/1947. Hence the then borders of Israel, Palestine and Jerusalem is valid - and rightly, we have to revert to the borders as in 1947. All areas of Palestine that are occupied by Israel and any other country are nothing but 'occupied territories' and must be returned to Palestine.  

Lebanon formally achieved its independence from League of Nations (LON) mandate under French administration on November 22, 1943.  Egypt formally achieved its independence from Great Britain on March 15, 1922. Transjordan formally achieved its independence from Britain on March 22, 1946, and the Kingdom of Transjordan was proclaimed on May 25, 1946.Syria became independent on 17 April 1946.

Israel's expansion of its geographic territory beyond what was provided for in the November 1947 partition plan are all ILLEGAL and ought to belong to Palestine. ISRAEL must return to the 1947 Borders.

US vetoes bid to make Palestine a full UN member

---

By AUGUSTA SARAIVA

• World

• Friday, 19 Apr 2024

  12:21 PM MYT

NEW YORK (Bloomberg): The United States has vetoed a bid to make Palestine a full-fledged member of the United Nations, rebuffing a Palestinian push to gain broader international recognition.

Twelve of 15 Security Council members voted in favour of the proposal on Thursday (April 18), while the United Kingdom and Switzerland abstained. Although the Palestinian authority received enough support to have its bid referred to the General Assembly for confirmation, the negative vote from the United States, which wields veto power, was enough to block it.

Arab nations revived the proposal for full membership, which was originally turned down in 2011, in an effort to maintain momentum for the Palestinian cause as the civilian death toll in the war between Israel and Iran-backed Hamas in the Gaza Strip continues to climb. Foreign ministers from countries including Iran, Jordan and Algeria travelled to New York to attend a debate on the Middle East that preceded the vote.

The best path toward Palestinian statehood "is through direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority," Deputy US Ambassador Robert Wood said after the vote.

United States allies including France, Japan and South Korea were among those voting for full Palestinian membership.

The US veto, which was telegraphed in advance, comes as an olive branch to Israel at the United Nations after Washington refused to veto a Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza, sparking friction between the allies. Since then, the United States has grown more critical of Israel's approach to the war while continuing to support it on the battlefield.

Even as the US veto reaffirms the close relationship between the two allies, it's also likely to further isolate them at the United Nations. For the fourth time since the war started, the United States will have to justify its veto before the 193-member General Assembly – which is much more vocal on the rights of Palestinians, and critical of Israel's policies, than it was in 2011. The General Assembly, which is more representative but less powerful than the Security Council, voted overwhelmingly in favour of a cease-fire in Gaza months ago.

Since 2012, Palestine has had observer-state status at the United Nations.

'Every Vote'

Israel's Ambassador Gilad Erdan said that recognising a Palestinian state would make future negotiations all but impossible. "As long as the Palestinians feel that they can exploit this politicised body to their benefit, why would they bother at the negotiating table or support any compromise?" he said.

But Ziad Abu Amr, special representative of the Palestinian Authority's president, said, "To those who say that recognising the Palestinian state must happen through negotiations, and not through a UN resolution, we wonder once again: How was the state of Israel established?"

While the US veto was widely expected, Palestinians also looked at the vote as a barometer to assess international support for their cause. "The states supporting our membership are taking an important stance that must be acknowledged and appreciated," Deputy Palestinian Ambassador Majed Bamya said ahead of the Security Council action.

Looking ahead, France is working on a Security Council resolution on the Israel-Palestinian conflict that could pave the way for the recognition of a Palestinian state at the United Nations, noting that a majority of member states already recognise it as a country. Nations including Spain and Slovenia have also indicated they're preparing to recognise a Palestinian state.

"We cannot wait any longer," Spanish Foreign Minister Jose Manuel Albares told the Security Council Thursday.

"This is a question of justice for Palestine, it constitutes the best guarantee of security for Israel and it is the first and most fundamental condition for the future of peace in the region." – Bloomberg - Star, 19/4/2024

Security Council Fails to Recommend Full United Nations Membership for State of Palestine, Owing to Veto Cast by United States

The Security Council today blocked Palestine’s bid to become a full member of the United Nations due to a United States veto on a draft resolution that would have recommended the granting of such status.

The proposal, submitted by Algeria, received 12 votes in favour, with the United States casting a negative vote and Switzerland and the United Kingdom abstaining.  A Council resolution requires at least nine votes in favour and no vetoes from its five permanent members — China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom and the United States — to pass.  The Algerian draft failed, owing to a negative vote cast by a permanent member.

If adopted, the draft would have had the 15-member Council recommend to the 193-member General Assembly that “the State of Palestine be admitted to membership in the United Nations”. 

In 2011, Palestine submitted an application to become a full UN Member State.  Although that aspiration did not materialize, it obtained the status of a non-member observer State in November 2012 through an Assembly vote of 138 in favour to nine against (Canada, Czech Republic, Federated States of Micronesia, Israel, Marshall Islands, Nauru, Panama, Palau, United States), with 41 abstentions.

An application for admission to UN membership must be approved by the Council before being forwarded to the Assembly, where the matter requires at least two-thirds support to pass.

Introduction of Draft Resolution

Introducing the draft resolution, the representative of Algeria said that he is doing so on behalf of his Government, the Arab Group, the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation, the Non-Aligned Movement, and countless peace-loving countries, urging Council members to vote for the text and the sake of Palestinians.  “It is the least we could do to honour the debts we owe to its people,” he said. Palestine fulfils membership criteria as defined in the UN Charter.  “It is time for Palestine to take its rightful place among the community of nations,” he declared, adding:  “Peace will come from Palestine’s inclusion, not from its exclusion.”  Failing to do so is a denial of the Council’s responsibilities, an unforgivable mistake, and a license to continue injustice and impunity. 

Explanation of Votes

Speaking after the vote, the representative of the Russian Federation, spotlighted the simple question before the Council today: “Are the Palestinians worth being part of the global family?”  While most of the international community has consistently answered in the affirmative, the United States believes differently, he noted — namely, that the Palestinians “do not deserve to have their own State”.  For that reason, Washington, D.C., is ready to turn a blind eye to Israel’s crimes against civilians in Gaza, force them to submit to the occupying Power, transform them into servants and second-class persons and, perhaps, oust them from their territory once and for all.  The United States’ veto today “is a hopeless attempt to stop the inevitable course of history”, he stressed, adding that the results of the vote “speak for themselves”.  He therefore called on the United States to “listen to the voice of reason”, consider the consequences of its decision and join other Council members’ efforts to establish an immediate ceasefire in Gaza.

The representative of the United States expressed support for Palestinian Statehood within a comprehensive peace agreement.  A sustainable peace can only be achieved via a two-State solution with Israel’s security guaranteed.  His country has long been clear that “premature actions” at the UN, even with the best intentions, will not achieve Statehood for the Palestinian people.  The United States voted against the draft because there was no unanimity among the Admissions Committee members on whether the applicant met the membership criteria outlined in Article IV of the UN Charter.  He said the United States has long called on the applicant to undertake reforms to help establish the attributes for readiness for Statehood.  He underscored that this vote does not reflect opposition to Palestinian Statehood but is an acknowledgment that it will only come from direct negotiations between the parties.

The representative of France said the time has come to achieve a comprehensive political settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict based on a two-State solution.  France supported the draft as Palestine’s admission as a full UN member could facilitate the implementation of such as solution and strengthen the Palestinian Authority.

The representative of Guyana said that 13 years after the last request, another call for justice by the Palestinian people was made today.  However, “the Council’s response was not enough to deliver that justice”, she said, noting that, since 1947, there have been at least 792 formal Council meetings on the Palestinian question.  While the Council has largely been sympathetic to the Palestinian cause, this sympathy has not generated enough political will to achieve a comprehensive, just and lasting solution.  “If the occupying Power were held to account for its continued violation of international law, the path to a free and independent Palestine would have been cleared a long time ago”, she said.  

The representative of Slovenia said that his delegation supported the draft and Palestine’s membership in the United Nations.  The two-State solution, under which two democratic States — Israel and Palestine — live side by side in peace is the only long-term sustainable option.  Membership in the UN is not an alternative to negotiations, but complementary to them. The UN should play a crucial role in the peace process, and therefore both States should have an equal status at the UN, he said.

The representative of the Republic of Korea recalled that, although his country first applied for UN membership in 1949, it was not granted that status until 1991.  As such, he emphasized that his country “can clearly attest to the meaning of aspirations to be admitted to this paramount international organization”. His delegation voted in favour of the draft resolution because renewed efforts are needed to revitalize a path to the two-State solution, he said, adding that its vote today “does not constitute bilateral recognition of Palestine as a State”.  This matter will be considered in the future at a time conducive to the resolution of the conflict. 

The representative of the United Kingdom said her country is committed to a two-State solution.  Recognition of a Palestinian State should not be at the start of the process, but it does not need to be at the very end of it, she said.  She called for the crisis in Gaza to be fixed first, noting that Gaza must be part of a future Palestinian State.  But Hamas is still in control of parts of it and Israeli hostages remain in captivity, she underlined, stating that this shows the process is still at the start.  Ensuring Hamas is no longer in charge of Gaza and removing its capacity to attack Israel are unavoidable steps on the road to peace, as is supporting Palestinian Government reforms.  Her country abstained because a focus must be kept on getting aid in and getting hostages out, then making progress to a sustainable ceasefire without a return to fighting. 

The representative of Japan expressed regret that, despite the adoption of a resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, this objective has not been attained, and the humanitarian situation continues to deteriorate.  “Japan has strongly upheld the Palestinian right to self-determination, and consistently supported a two-State solution,” he said, recalling that his country voted in favor of the 2012 General Assembly resolution granting Palestine observer State status at the United Nations.  Similarly, Japan voted in favor of today’s draft resolution as “a comprehensive decision, recognizing that Palestine meets the criteria for admission to the UN membership”. 

The representative of Switzerland, whose delegation abstained, noted that it would be preferable to determine Palestinians’ membership at the UN at a future stage — “once there has been peace”.  Voicing concern over the catastrophic situation in the Middle East, she underscored the need to ensure the implementation of the Council’s resolution and a ceasefire without further ado to restore political solutions to the conflict.

The representative of China said that today is a sad day. Because of the veto by the United States, the application of Palestine for its full membership at the UN has been rejected.  It is unacceptable that some countries are challenging Palestine’s eligibility for membership.  Some countries make direct negotiations between Palestine and Israel “a prerequisite”, claiming that Palestine’s membership in the UN can only be the result of negotiations.  “This is putting the cart before the horse,” he asserted.

The representative of Ecuador recalled that his country recognized Palestine as a free, independent State on 24 December 2010.  In 2012, it co-sponsored the General Assembly resolution considering observer status for the State of Palestine and, since 2014, it has maintained an embassy in Ramallah while Palestine has one in Quito.  “Today, once again, Ecuador’s vote has shown our commitment to the Palestinian people, reaffirming our recognition that we made 14 years ago,” he emphasized.  He also expressed hope that, in the “very near” future, conditions will exist such that the Council will unanimously allow Palestine to become a full member of the United Nations.

The representative of Mozambique underscored that people are born with the inherent right to self-determination, independence and sovereignty, as anchored in the Charter.  He reminded the Council that, as of today, 140 UN Member States have recognized Palestine.  “This quasi-universal recognition is a testament that Palestine fulfils the requirement of Statehood”, including population, territory, government and the capacity to engage in relations with other States, he said.  Conditions are ripe for Palestine to be a full member of the UN.  Palestine is clearly a peace-loving nation and has shown the willingness to carry out the obligations of the Charter, he added.

The representative of Sierra Leone noted that 13 years after Palestine’s application was first considered by the Security Council Admissions Committee, there is a recognition of the basis for such a request.  Highlighting General Assembly resolution 181 (1947), which recommends the establishment of an independent Arab and an independent Jewish State, he said his country voted in favour of the draft resolution that would have strengthened the two-State solution.  While the membership of the State of Palestine may have been delayed, “it cannot be denied”, he concluded.

The representative of Algeria expressed gratitude to all those who voted in favour.  “The overwhelming support sends a crystal clear message — the State of Palestine deserves its rightful place among the UN Members,” he said, adding:  “We will return stronger and more vocal and backed by the overwhelming majority of the General Assembly”.  He pledged that Algeria’s effort will not cease until the State of Palestine becomes a full member of the UN.

The representative of Malta, Council President for April, said that her country made a clear choice by supporting a two-State solution and in favour of an idea that has enjoyed the support of the vast majority of the international community for decades.  “UN membership is a necessary step for the Palestinians to achieve equal footing with the rest of the international community,” she asserted.

The Permanent Observer for the State of Palestine underscored:  “Our right to self-determination has never once been subject to bargaining or negotiation.”  It is inalienable and eternal, and not subject to manipulation, domination or conditions.  “Especially not by Israel — the occupying Power, the ethnic-cleansing Power, the colonial Power,” he stressed, despite its determination to evict Palestinians from their homeland, eliminate their identity, uproot their civilization and besiege their future.  Underscoring that “we will not disappear”, he said that Palestinians remain on their land out of patience, steadfastness, hope and sacrifice despite oppression, exile, enslavement, persecution, displacement and eviction.  Stating that his delegation came to the Council today to “salvage what can be saved”, he noted that most Council members stood on the side of justice, freedom and hope “in line with the legal and ethical principles that must govern our world”.  He also thanked all those who supported Palestine’s request for UN membership for understanding Palestinians’ pain at this moment. 

Emphasizing that Palestine accepted the two-State solution as an international vision of peace and engaged in the peace process, he said that Palestinian leadership continues to be committed to this peaceful track.  He questioned, however, if Israel is a true partner for peace, stressing that it insists on occupation, murder and siege “to snuff out any hope of a sovereign Palestinian State”.  Asking those present if they will give Israel the time it needs to annex Palestinian land, the immunity it needs to evict and kill and the right to veto Palestine’s full UN membership, he underscored that such inclusion is not “symbolic”.  Rather, it is a manifestation of Palestinians’ right to self-determination and “an investment in peace”, he urged, adding:  “We don’t want to replace anyone, we want to enter your club as an equal.”  Also stating that Palestinians know best what a just solution is — a free Palestine — he reiterated:  “We will not disappear.” 

The representative of Israel thanked the United States, in particular President Joseph Biden, for standing up for “truth and morality in the face of hypocrisy and politics”.  Calling the draft resolution destructive, he said the Palestinian Authority does not meet the basic criteria, has no authority over its territory and supports terror.  He questioned how Palestinians can be called peace-loving when they are paying terrorists to slaughter Israelis.  None of their leaders condemns terrorism or the 7 October massacre.  They call Hamas their brothers, he added, and they do not recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish State.  He noted that the Palestinian representative at the meeting does not represent Hamas, and in turn does not represent at least half of the Palestinian people.

 “Most of you decided to reward Palestinian terror with [a] Palestinian State,” he said, saying these votes will embolden Palestinian rejectionism and make peace almost impossible.  Despite the evidence he has brought to the Council, speaking to it “is like speaking to a brick wall”, he said, adding:  “I pray that the day will come when you will understand the magnitude of the mistake you are making here.  I pray that you will understand before it is too late.” - UN Website, 18/4/2024