Migrant Workers & Discrimination - If their rights also denied by Malaysian laws/policies - would Malaysia not be guilty of 'human trafficking' as well? MINIMUM WAGE - RM2,700 says Bank Negara

Prior to January 2023, we had Section 60L in our Employment Act, which prevented discrimination based on whether one is a LOCAL worker or a FOREIGN worker - but sadly this provision was deleted vide  EMPLOYMENT (AMENDMENT) ACT 2022 that came into force on 1/1/2023.

60L.  Director General may inquire into complaint.(Employment Act 1955)

(1) The Director General may inquire into any complaint from a local employee that he is being discriminated against in relation to a foreign employee, or from a foreign employee that he is being discriminated against in relation to a local employee, by his employer in respect of the terms and conditions of his employment; and the Director General may issue to the employer such directives as may be necessary or expedient to resolve the matter.

This was an VERY IMPORTANT provision against DISCRIMINATION at the workplace - which clearly stated that a FOREIGN employee had the right to lodge a complaint that he is being discriminated against in relation to a local employee, by his employer in respect of the terms and conditions of his employment. Likewise, the LOCAL employee also had the same right. 

EMPLOYMENT (AMENDMENT) ACT 2022, however, introduced a NEW Section 69F to deal with Discrimination in Employment - 

 69F. Discrimination in employment

(1) The Director General may inquire into and decide any dispute between an employee and his employer in respect of any matter relating to discrimination in employment, and the Director General may, pursuant to such decision, make an order.

(2) An employer who fails to comply with any order of the Director General issued under subsection (1) commits an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable to a fine not exceeding fifty thousand ringgit; and shall also, in the case of a continuing offence, be liable to a daily fine not exceeding one thousand ringgit for each day the offence continues after conviction.".

Thus, reasonably the discrimination under the previous Section 60L is now covered by the NEW section 69F.

The weakness is that it now does not make clear that no worker/employee can be discriminated on the basis that he is FOREIGN employee in comparison to treatment of a LOCAL employee, or VICE VERSA. 

BUT, with regard to FOREIGN Employee(or Migrant Worker), the problem of ACCESS to justice remains, as to claim rights violated, the employee is required to lodge their complaint at the Human Resource Department(Labour Department) or with regard wrongful dismissal at the Industrial Relations Department) - both in Malaysia. When these Departments fixes the next appointment for this rights violation proceedings, the employee is required to attend - and a failure to attend can result in an end of the claim. 

For migrant workers, they may already have been 'forced out' of Malaysia - and hence, their access to justice comes to an end.

Now, at the Labour Department - if attempts of conciliation fails - the case proceeds to the Labour Court for trial.

Now, at the Industrial Relations Department - if attempts of conciliation fails - the case proceeds to the Industrial Court for trial.

Malaysia, unfortunately, to date still does not have provisions in law that ALLOWS the migrant worker to remain in Malaysia legally until their claims of rights violations are determined by the relevant Departments, and/or courts - which means it is extremely difficult for MIGRANT WORKERS to get justice.

In Hong Kong, the State used to provide board and lodging for migrant workers until their cases are determined. And naturally, the progress of these cases are EXPEDITED and will end very fast.

In Malaysia, a Migrant Worker can apply for a 1-Month Special Pass(at RM100 for each application) - which will be very expensive as their cases can go on for years at time. 

Staying legally is one issue - but the bigger issue is that they do not have the right to work and earn while they stay in Malaysia fighting for justice. Without the ability to work and earn is a major issue for a low wage worker fighting for justice in Malaysia

Hence, the INJUSTICE - and these migrant workers become and remains victims of HUMAN TRAFFICKING - exploited with no access to justice in Malaysia - facilitated by Malaysian laws, policies and practices.

Malaysia uses a lot of MIGRANT workers - 3.4 million documented migrant workers in a country with a population of 3.4 million, and the number of Malaysians being 30.6 million in the 1st quarter of 2024.

MALAYSIA kini mempunyai jumlah pekerja asing antara yang tertinggi pernah dicatatkan iaitu 3.4 juta atau 10 peratus daripada 34 juta penduduk. Jumlah rakyat Malaysia setakat suku pertama 2024 ialah 30.6 juta.

For Malaysian WORKERS too, there is a problem with access to justice for workers. Attending Labour Department and/or IRD sessions/meetings is difficult - as the worker needs to take their Annual Leave from their new place of work - Should there not be an entitlement to Administration of Justice leave, for workers to attend meetings and court for the purposes of pursuing justice against usually previous employers - sometimes current employers still? 

Many employers pay migrant workers MINIMUM WAGES - whereby such low wages will not attract Local Malaysian Workers. 

Bank Negara proposed a MINIMUM WAGE of RM2,700 - which may attract LOCAL workers, and really there should be a HIGHER Minimum Wage for them 3D Jobs as it is harder, and higher wages will attract local workers.

UNICEF opines it should be bumped up to RM2,102 monthly, which is more in line with RM2,700 living wage proposed by Bank Negara Malaysia.

Is PM Anwar Ibrahim still using 'cheap labour' to attract foreign investments - end INJUSTICE on all workers, including Malaysian workers - increase MINIMUM WAGE to RM2,700 (listen to Bank Negara) - and get LOCAL WORKERS back to work.

When a foreign company is set up in Malaysia - but the workers are all FOREIGN Workers - the money flows OUT, but if the workers are Malaysian, then the money stays in Malaysia ...

As the cost of living rises, and the value of the Ringgit drops - Malaysia may have more and more difficulty attracting foreign workers. HELLO, we are a 'poor' nation with about RM1.5 Trillion plus debt, so we must stop behaving like we are "RICH"...

Can Malaysia survive WITHOUT Migrant Workers? That is a CONCERN

 

Malaysia sudah terlebih pekerja asing

16 Mei 2024 07:00am

Berdasarkan laporan Perangkaan Demografi oleh Jabatan Perangkaan Malaysia, berlaku pertambahan sebanyak 600,000 warga asing hanya dalam tempoh setahun. Foto hiasan

MALAYSIA kini mempunyai jumlah pekerja asing antara yang tertinggi pernah dicatatkan iaitu 3.4 juta atau 10 peratus daripada 34 juta penduduk. Jumlah rakyat Malaysia setakat suku pertama 2024 ialah 30.6 juta.

Berdasarkan laporan Perangkaan Demografi oleh Jabatan Perangkaan Malaysia itu, berlaku pertambahan sebanyak 600,000 warga asing hanya dalam tempoh setahun.

Pada suku pertama 2022 terdapat 2.4 juta warga asing manakala pada 2023 sebanyak 2.8 juta.

Ketika jumlah pekerja asing sekitar 2.8 juta tahun lalu, Timbalan Menteri Sumber Manusia, Mustapha Sakmud memberitahu Dewan Rakyat bahawa sudah berlaku lambakan pekerja asing dalam negara, melebihi unjuran yang ditetapkan.

Menurut beliau, mengikut unjuran Kementerian Ekonomi, angka pekerja asing yang sepatutnya berada di Malaysia adalah 2.4 juta sahaja atau 15 peratus daripada jumlah keseluruhan tenaga kerja seramai 16.51 juta.

Jika unjuran itu boleh dijadikan sandaran, bermakna kita sebenarnya telah terlebih sejuta pekerja asing.

Bagaimanapun tentulah ada pertimbangan lain dalam peningkatan mendadak tersebut seperti keperluan tenaga kerja dalam sektor yang kurang diminati rakyat tempatan seperti perladangan dan pembinaan.

Namun harus diingat, 3.4 juta tersebut adalah pekerja yang sah. Kalau dikira sekali dengan pendatang asing tanpa izin (PATI) jumlahnya mungkin naik sekali ganda.

Pertubuhan Antarabangsa untuk Migrasi (IOM) misalnya menganggarkan terdapat antara 1.2 juta hingga 3.5 juta pekerja PATI di Malaysia pada 2022.

Kalau jumlah PATI digabungkan dengan pekerja asing yang sah sekarang, ia boleh mencecah angka sebesar 6.9 juta orang!

Tidak dinafikan ada banyak negara lain yang lebih bergantung kepada pekerja asing.

Arab Saudi contohnya mempunyai 13.4 juta warga asing iaitu 42 peratus daripada 32.2 juta populasi negara itu.

Namun dengan jumlah pengangguran sebanyak 566,600 orang pada Mac 2024 dan pelbagai masalah sosial yang dicetuskan mereka, kerajaan tidak boleh membiarkan lambakan warga asing di negara ini.

Apatah lagi dengan pelbagai pelaburan baharu syarikat antarabangsa seperti Microsoft dan Google di Malaysia, pekerja asing dikhuatiri akan menguasai ratusan ribu lagi peluang pekerjaan dalam bidang teknologi maklumat sekali gus menyempitkan peluang rakyat tempatan. - Sinar Harian, 16/5/2024

‘Recruit more foreign workers to fill shortage’

Need for migrants remains significant as locals do not have necessary experience in various sectors especially in plantations, says employers association

Farahatun Nisa Omar

• 29-07- 2024 07:20 AM

Pix for visual purposes - BERNAMApix

PETALING JAYA: The country should recruit more foreign workers to fill the labour shortage in construction, manufacturing, and especially the plantations sector where locals are reluctant to work, said Malaysian Employers Federation (MEF) President Datuk Dr Syed Hussain Syed Husman.

“Malaysians do not have the necessary experience in the plantation sector compared with Indonesians. While efforts have been made to reduce our dependency on foreign workers through automation processes, the need for them in the plantation sector remains significant.”

Syed Hussain said employers need to offer higher salaries to attract equally capable Malaysian workers for the various sectors, but this would undermine the cost competitiveness that is crucial to remain competitive against emerging economies in the region.

He added that long-term solutions to overcome hiring foreign workers include investing in research and development in agriculture technology to enhance efficiency.

He said the MEF has been collaborating with the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) and the International Labour Organisation Global Business Network on Forced Labour (ILO GBNFL) to educate its members on the procedures for hiring foreign workers.

“In 2023, we collaborated with SMEs and the IOM to conduct a capacity-building workshop on fair and ethical recruitment and employment of foreign workers, which provided participants with the tools to strengthen their policies and practices.

“We also collaborated with ILO GBNFL in launching a due diligence toolkit for fair recruitment of foreign workers to help companies, particularly SMEs, to set out a due diligence process when hiring workers from abroad.”

The Home Ministry reported that as of February, Malaysia has 2.12 million registered foreign workers who originate from Bangladesh, Indonesia, Nepal, Myanmar and India, among others.

Syed Hussain said if foreign workers are found medically unfit under the Foreign Workers’ Medical Examination Monitoring Agency, they will have to be returned to the source country, which will delay the recruitment process.

“A 2019 report by the Khazanah Research Institute said foreign workers do not directly impact employment opportunities and wages of Malaysians because they generally fill different roles within the economy.

“Foreign workers typically occupy unskilled positions, while Malaysians predominantly hold semi-skilled and skilled jobs.”

He said for legal purposes, smaller companies usually hire recruitment agents to assist in handling issues related to employing foreign workers, and that the MEF strongly advocates that companies carry out their due diligence to ensure there is no forced labour during the hiring process.

To ensure security, an initial step companies must take when hiring foreign workers is to conduct thorough screenings of prospective employees in their source country, he added.

“Candidates should be evaluated for suitable skills based on the positions being offered, their health status, and any indication of criminal or harmful behaviour.”

He said to protect Malaysians and foreign workers from misunderstandings and negative interactions, companies must provide comprehensive cultural training to help them understand Malaysia’s social norms, legal expectations, and workplace etiquette.

“This also includes local customs and traditions, offering practical guidance on daily interactions, and ongoing support through mentorship programmes. Such an approach will enhance the well-being and productivity of foreign workers, and foster a more harmonious working environment.”

Negative interactions between foreign workers and local communities can be reduced by ensuring that their accommodation and transport do not excessively impact any specific local areas, he added. - SUN, 29/7/.2024

 

Malaysia’s minimum wage should be RM2.1k, says UNICEF

• 09-05- 2024 03:20 PM

Pix for representational purpose only - THESUNPIX

PETALING JAYA: The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)’s recent report, ‘The Living on the Edge Key Findings’ has revealed that the current minimum wage of RM1,500 is “too low and insufficient for the workers”.

UNICEF opines it should be bumped up to RM2,102 monthly, which is more in line with RM2,700 living wage proposed by Bank Negara Malaysia.

According to the report, the calculation takes into consideration key factors such as cost of living, poverty line income, median wage, and productivity.

READ MORE: Malaysia ranks 59th out of 67 countries for minimum wage

Along with a higher minimum wage, UNICEF advocates for universal childcare allowance and universal allowance for PWDs (person with disabilities).

They are suggesting a universal childcare allowance of RM200 per month for moms-to-be until their kids turn two and a universal for all PWDs and their caregivers.

UNICEF also advocates that all workers in Malaysia should have coverage from the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) and the Social Security Organisation (PERKESO), no matter what job they have.

This would ensure their protection against injury, unemployment and inadequate or no income during old age. - Sun, 9/5/2024

M’sian minimum wage 59th in 67-country – Study

Adjustments must be balanced between workers being able to afford necessities and business survival: Expert

Qalif Zuhair

• 05-02- 2024 11:13 AM

Pix for representational purpose only - THESUNPIX

PETALING JAYA: The current minimum wage in Malaysia does not align with the rising cost of food and is not a living wage that prevents the lower income groups from falling below the poverty line as it does not keep pace with inflation and increases in the cost of living, said Academy of Sciences Malaysia fellow Datuk Dr Madeline Berma.

She was commenting on a minimum wage study involving 67 countries by e-commerce company Picodi Malaysia, which revealed that Malaysia ranked 59th.

The study showed the net minimum wage in Malaysia remained constant at RM1,323, with basic groceries alone costing about RM437.58 (33.1%) of the amount, reflecting an increase from 30.6% in 2023.

Berma said many employees working full-time and earning minimum wage faced difficulty paying for food, housing, transportation, childcare and healthcare.

Meanwhile, Bank Muamalat Malaysia Berhad chief economist Dr Mohd Afzanizam Abdul Rashid said adjusting the minimum wage requires a multifaceted approach.

“There needs to be a balance between ensuring employees can afford to pay for their living costs amid rising expenses, and simultaneously making sure businesses can manage their overhead costs and payroll.

“The adjustments should be made at predefined intervals to allow businesses to plan. This approach was formalised with the establishment of the National Wages Consultative Council Act 2011.”

Mohd Afzanizam said necessities accounted for 29.5% of the total Consumer Price Index (CPI) and is the largest share within the CPI basket.

“Thus far, prices within this category increased at a rate of 4.8% in 2023, slightly lower than the 5.7% recorded in 2022, which means the CPI basket is an important driver of general inflation.

“The anticipated increase in the prices of necessities implies that the purchasing power among Malaysians will be eroded, and individuals within the minimum wage bracket will experience the impact as their net income is reduced.”

Universiti Putra Malaysia Putra Business School economist Assoc Prof Dr Ida Md Yasin said the minimum wage is influenced by the principles of supply and demand within the labour force.

“When labour supply decreases, wages will rise. The minimum wage is already high in sectors such as oil and gas, while it remains low in less-skilled occupations like the food and beverage sector.

“But the manufacturing industry seems complacent and shows a preference for employing foreign workers over investing in machinery and automation due to cost savings.”

Ida said increasing the minimum wage might also cause industries to struggle with payroll issues, which could potentially result in higher unemployment rates.

However, she said salary levels do not always align with the educational qualifications of certain individuals since many industries prioritise experience in deciding higher compensation.

“While providing numerous employment opportunities, the government must concurrently prioritise the development of a skilled workforce.

“Its intervention is vital to prevent unfair industry practices, but the sectors have different pay structures. Individuals seeking a job must navigate the market carefully.”

Ida encouraged individuals to diversify their job prospects and evaluate if their skills could be transferred to other sectors.

“This includes considering options to earn more, such as through a side business or engaging in the gig sector. These are choices that are increasingly favoured today.

“Individuals should also actively pursue alternative opportunities and steer clear of relying excessively on the government,” she said. - Sun, 5/2/2024

 

 

A SEXIST provision in Malaysia's Federal Constitution remains - Article 15 Citizenship by registration (wives and children of citizens) - include HUSBANDS of citizens?

Why should this provision just deal just with 'WIVES' - and not neutrally with SPOUSES (both husbands and wives)?

A remnant from a patriarchal era - where women were seen as not being equal to men

Patriarchal (adj.) describes a general structure in which men have power over women. Society (n.) is the entirety of relations of a community. A patriarchal society consists of a male-dominated power structure throughout organized society and in individual relationships.Power is related to privilege. In a system in which men have more power than women, men have some level of privilege to which women are not entitled.

So, Article 5 provides rights to WIVES because the husband is a CITIZEN, but not to husbands of Malaysian WIVES - Should it not be REPEALED, or better still amended to include HUSBANDs of Malaysian Citizens? After all, does not Malaysia believe in equality of persons, and is against DISCRIMINATION based on GENDER?

This Article is now being amended by  the Constitution (Amendment) Act 2024, where the First Reading was on 25/3/2024.

It proposes adding a NEW condition(c) that she has an adequate knowledge of the Malay language.”

What is 'adequate knowledge of the Malay language'? WHY is that language requirement even needed before one is accorded the right of citizenship by registration? A person in Malaysia can survive with or without the Malay language - or just simple communicable Malay language. So, is there any real justification for the requirement of 'adequate knowledge of Malay' - which is rather VAGUE - and may be abused by some officers against some applicants. [Or is the government contemplating certain language courses that need to be passed by the applicant]. In Malaysia, without Malay - people can survive as Malaysians have a grasp of many different languages...

Luckily, a similar language requirement was not placed on the CHILD.

Whether the child of a Malaysian citizen(wife or husband) applies to be registered as a Malaysian citizen, AGE really should not matter, should it? So even a 25 year old should be able to be registered as a Malaysian citizen... why accord the right now only to children below 21(and after the amendment below 18 years of age)

The Malaysian government MUST amend Art.15 to include Husbands.

The Malaysian government MUST amend Art.15 - and provide the right to citizenship by registration to any child of a Malaysian Citizen(be it wife or husband) irrespective of AGE.

The only condition should be that wife or husband is a Malaysian Citizen - hence maybe that 'a citizen at the beginning of October 1962' should be deleted.

Even the provision that ' has resided in the Federation throughout the two years preceding the date of the application' should be probably deleted as today - many people work overseas(and their spouses are with them), and even families where spouses may be working in different countries - so, the only condition is PROOF that the marriage is subsisting. A foreign spouse may have other 'family obligations' like looking after elderly or sick family members - so the fact that one was NOT continuously in Malaysia should not prejudice applications.

Likewise, many Malaysians also elect to send their kids overseas for studies, and it is not uncommon that one parent also go be with the kids overseas to take care of them.

In terms of FOREIGN SPOUSES of Malaysian citizens, they should immediately after the marriage has been registered in Malaysia be accorded 'Permanent Resident'[PR] status as of right. The right to citizenship can come after - but the PR status accorded to spouses of Malaysians must be different - it must automatically allow for employment, without any further need for application for permits/passes to enable them to be employed in Malaysia.

PR Status can be terminated with the DISSOLUTION of the Marriage generally - but there may be other factors that come into consideration before termination of PR Status including Malaysian children, or children studying in Malaysian education system, whether the said foreign spouse is still a citizen of another country or not, or whether there are some other reasons why the PR Status be retained - business, property, home acquired post marriage in Malaysia, etc..

15  Citizenship by registration (wives and children of citizens)

(1) Subject to Article 18, any married woman whose husband is a citizen is entitled, upon making application to the Federal Government, to be registered as a citizen if the marriage was subsisting and the husband a citizen at the beginning of October 1962, or if she satisfies the Federal Government—

(a) that she has resided in the Federation throughout the two years preceding the date of the application and intends to do so permanently; and

(b) that she is of good character.

(2) Subject to Article 18, the Federal Government may cause any person under the age of twenty-one years of whose parents one at least is (or was at death) a citizen to be registered as a citizen upon application made to the Federal Government by his parent or guardian.

(3) Subject to Article 18, a person under the age of twenty-one years who was born before the beginning of October 1962, and whose father is (or was at his death) a citizen and was also a citizen at the beginning of that month (if then alive), is entitled upon application made to the Federal Government by his parent or guardian, to be registered as a citizen if the Federal Government is satisfied that he is ordinarily resident in the Federation and is of good character.

(4) For the purposes of Clause (1) residence before Malaysia Day in the territories comprised in the States of Sabah and Sarawak shall be treated as residence in the Federation.

(5) The reference in Clause (1) to a married woman is a reference to a woman whose marriage has been registered in accordance with any written law in force in the Federation, including any such law in force before Merdeka Day, or with any written law in force before Malaysia Day in the territories comprised in the States of Sabah and Sarawak:

Provided that this Clause shall not apply where the woman applies to be registered as a citizen before the beginning of September 1965, or such later date as may be fixed by order of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, and is at the date of the application ordinarily resident in the States of Sabah and Sarawak.

(6) (Repealed).

---

---

Constitution (Amendment) Act 2024

Amendment of Article 15
2. The Federal Constitution is amended in Article 15—

(a) in Clause (1)—

(i) in paragraph (a), by deleting the word “and” at the end of the paragraph;

(ii) in paragraph (b), by substituting for the full stop at the end of the paragraph the words “; and”;

and

(iii) by inserting after paragraph (b) the following paragraph:

“(c) that she has an adequate knowledge of the Malay language.”;


(b) i n C l a u s e ( 2 ) , b y s u b s t i t u t i n g f o r t h e w o r d s “twenty-one years” the words “eighteen years”; and (c) by deleting Clause (3).

SORRY - Malaysia's DEBT increasing as 'bad' Finance Minister continues borrowing? - hence increasing the amount of DEBT, increasing annual debt servicing cost?

In a recent report, which was CONFUSING - it looked like good news on 1st reading - news that Malaysia's debt was reducing....but it was the OPPOSITE - our Malaysian Debts under Anwar Ibrahim is INCREASING...and in 2023, it increased by RM90 plus Billion.

BUT, on 2nd reading - we see that all that Anwar seems to be PROUD about is the fact that in 2023, Malaysia BORROWED less than compared to previous years before...only RM93 Billion...compared to previous years when MALAYSIA annually borrowed RM100 billion....

Malaysian Federal Government Debt? How did Anwar managed to reduce the DEBT? Was it paid off or simply transferred to another? TELL us 

What our 'disappointing' Finance Minister(also Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim) is doing is SIMPLY reducing the amount of NEW DEBTs or rather NEW LOANS - so from borrowing RM100 Billion annually in 2021 and 2022, Anwar reduced NEW LOANs to RM93 Billion in 2023, and plans to reduce NEW LOANS in 2024 to maybe RM86 Billion - FOOLISHNESS, in my opinion - when what he should really be doing is to reduce spending and STOP borrowing- spending not more that what Malaysia earns annually - and if he was smart, he could have used monies saved by reduced spending to DECREASE Malaysia's LOAN - hence the amount for 'DEBT SERVICING'. 

“Our goal is to reduce borrowing despite existing debt. For example, the debt was RM100 billion in 2021 and 2022.

“In 2023, we reduced it to RM93 billion, and for 2024, we aim to lower it further to RM86 billion. This gradual reduction is crucial for continuing our development efforts,” he said in his speech at the National Tax Conference 2024 here today.

Everyone knows that when one has to take LOANS - we still have to pay of the monthly/annual loan interest, and also more depending on the type of LOANS - some of which, one has to pay all outstanding when it is just a LOAN(that demands full repayment) after the lapse of certain defined period. 

"These loan receipts were used to repay matured debts amounting to RM20.6 billion, with the remaining RM49.9 billion used to cover the deficit and future maturing debts," he said in a parliamentary written reply.

SORRY - I was misled by the media report titles like 'PM Anwar says Malaysia’s debt going down, aims to lower it to RM86b for 2024 by cutting sovereign loans' - Malay Mail, 22/7/2024- it should really have been ''PM Anwar says Malaysia’s NEW ANNUAL debt going down, aims to lower the new loans taken to RM86b for 2024 by cutting sovereign loans'

So, the problem arises from reporters and media getting confused with the words or representations made by PM/Finance Minister. Anwar need to be VERY CLEAR - What is the Federal Government Debt? What is the Federal Government Liabilities? Additionally, how much of the Loans of 'others' have the Federal Government stood as 'Guarantors'? 

Remember, in January 2023, Anwar said'"The problem with our debt is it has already touched RM1.2 trillion and if includes liabilities, it is RM1.5 trillion.'  - NST, 17/1/2023

Does the figures INCLUDE the amount the Government has stood GUARANTOR for other loans?

Herein, lies the problem - should not Anwar(being a Finance Minister) STOP new borrowings > and 'tighten our belts' and stay within the amount of monies we earn annually - NO more FISCAL DEFICITS - let's have a BUDGET SURPLUS.

Fiscal deficit is the difference between the total revenue and total expenditure of a government in a financial year. Fiscal deficit arises when the expenditure of a government is more than the revenue generated by the government in a given fiscal year.

The opposite of a budget deficit is a budget surplus. When a surplus occurs, revenue exceeds current expenses, resulting in excess funds that can be further allocated.

Like past Prime Ministers - Anwar has been SPENDING and spending - maybe to appease the people by being seen as giving them MONIES - Subsidies being cut, civil service wage increase by 13 per cent(the highest in Malaysia's history), 'bai-outs' to certain ...

The government will allocate supplementary subsidies totalling about RM100 million to Felda to cover increases in plantation operating costs due to the removal of blanket subsidies for diesel, says Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim. - WHY? Would they not have been covered by the 'Targetted subsidies'? 

Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has announced an allocation of over RM130 million for Felda settlers, with RM100 million to ease their burden following the implementation of the targeted diesel subsidy programme. He also said RM31.7 million will be allocated for 317 Felda plantations for the “Program Sejahtera Komuniti Madani (Sejati Madani)” scheme.

Question - All other plantation companies are doing OK - why is FELDA 'failing' - is it because of 'political appointees'. RM100 Million to FELDA or FELDA Settlers. FELDA Settlers have their own plantations, and FELDA has nothing to do with settlers Plantations ... when nationally, already the poor are receiving subsidies, which will include the 'poor' FELDA Settlers - so are they getting 2 different subsidies for the  same thing?

WHAT do Malaysians WANT? REDUCE DEBTS - so reduce the amount that we waste in debt financing? Or continue to BORROW ....??

ME - I would be inclined to REDUCE National DEBT - so we will have more money to spend for development rather that debt financing/etc - Looks likes in 2023, to repay matured debts amounting to RM20.6 billion, with the remaining RM49.9 billion used to cover the deficit and future maturing debts..Would it not have been better if we had that 70 Billion used for DEVELOPMENT that will benefit all Malaysians????

As it goes, national DEBT will not be reduced - but simply GROWING at a slower rate if Anwar continues as the Finance Minister...

Is it time for a NEW Finance Minister?

NSTLeader: Reform dividends

July 25, 2024 @ 11:47pm

Finance Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has maintained a firm grip on the country’s purse strings. BERNAMA PIC

Not many Malaysians spared a thought for the implications of our substantial national debt. Why should they, when there's little visible impact on their lives? That notion was shattered after the 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) scandal erupted into the public consciousness.

Suddenly, people were educated on the workings of national debt, especially after hearing about the culprits' cavalier spending on luxury items hoarded in swanky apartments. It would have been fortunate had the stolen 1MDB funds been limited to a shopping splurge. But the bulk of the funds were siphoned out of the country, totaling a mind-blowing RM48 billion, based on the government's report on its 2023 debt servicing.

Despite this, Malaysia has remained resilient, even with politicians and moguls seeking lucrative government contracts. The country hasn't collapsed despite the RM1.4 trillion debt reported by the Auditor General. However, another RM94.1 billion in debts was accrued in 2023. After all, money had to be spent on development, social welfare, healthcare, and education. This spending highlights the ongoing need for careful financial management.

Finance Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has maintained a firm grip on the country's purse strings. He has determinedly reduced new debt, first to RM100 billion in 2021 before paring it down to RM93 billion in 2023, and aims to cap it at RM86 billion this year. Anwar's efforts to control the national debt are part of a broader strategy to ensure financial stability and prevent future fiscal crises.

To achieve his mission of zero leakages or misappropriation, Anwar has implemented a broader crackdown on high-level corruption in the government. This approach involves stringent measures and comprehensive oversight to ensure public funds are used appropriately. Anwar has achieved these savings by deploying a bold debt restructuring plan and rolling out multi-pronged, albeit unpopular, reforms to reduce spending and reboot the economy. The much-maligned diesel subsidy rationalization will liberate RM4 billion in annual government spending.

In the 2024 Budget, a higher service tax, high-value goods tax, and new capital gains tax were proposed to diversify revenue sources and increase returns. These measures are crucial for building a more robust and sustainable fiscal framework. Additionally, a progressive wage policy promises to improve workers' wages, accompanied by productivity gains. This policy aims to balance economic growth with social equity, ensuring that the benefits of development are widely shared.

Anwar's introduction of the National Energy Transition Roadmap aims to shift from a traditional fossil fuel-based economy to a high-value green economy. This transition is part of a broader effort to align Malaysia's economic development with global environmental standards and trends. Anwar also conceived the New Industrial Masterplan 2030, which focuses on driving manufacturing while aiming to lift the gross domestic product by 6.5% annually. This plan is designed to boost Malaysia's competitiveness and innovation in the global market.

These bold initiatives spurred influential American investment bank JP Morgan to upgrade Malaysia's debt rating from underweight to neutral. Forbes agreed that the economy is moving towards a "high-growth and high-value" trajectory. These positive evaluations reflect growing confidence in Malaysia's economic management and future prospects. While these economic reforms are a bitter but necessary pill to swallow, they have understandably drawn public resistance from a populace unused to financial discipline.

Nonetheless, Anwar is resolute in remediating and realigning the economy after a maddening decade of notorious corruption. His commitment to transparency and accountability is a crucial element of his economic strategy. Citizens will need to temper their fury and pessimism, as these reforms will take time to materialize into direct benefits that will swell their pockets. The road to economic recovery is long, but with the right policies and perseverance, the benefits will eventually become evident to all. - NST, 24/7/2024

PM: Federal govt debt hits RM1.22 trillion as of end April this year

By Qistina Sallehuddin, Nor Ain Mohamed Radhi - July 16, 2024 @ 10:39am

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is also Finance Minister, said the government had taken gross loans amounting to RM70.5 billion in the first four months of this year. - Pic courtesy from Information Dept

KUALA LUMPUR: The federal government's debt has increased by RM50 billion to RM1.22 trillion as of the end of April this year, compared to RM1.17 trillion at the end of last year.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is also Finance Minister, said the government had taken gross loans amounting to RM70.5 billion in the first four months of this year.

This, he said, included the issuance of Malaysian Government Securities totalling RM30 billion, Government Investment Issues (RM34.5 billion) and Malaysian Treasury Bills (RM6 billion).

"These loan receipts were used to repay matured debts amounting to RM20.6 billion, with the remaining RM49.9 billion used to cover the deficit and future maturing debts," he said in a parliamentary written reply.

Anwar said this in response to Ahmad Amzad Mohamed (PN-Kuala Terengganu), who asked for the justification for the increase in the government's debt in the first four months of 2024.

He added that the increase in the federal government's debt each year was also due to the need to borrow to finance the fiscal deficit, which is to fund development expenditure (DE).

"DE is crucial as it constitutes public investment with a multiplier effect in driving the country's economic growth.

"The borrowings will continue to increase the government's debt level as long as the government's financial position remains in deficit."

Meanwhile, he added that the government is committed to maintaining a fiscal consolidation trajectory with a deficit reduction in 2023 to 5.0 per cent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) or RM91.4 billion compared to 5.6 per cent in 2022 (RM99.5 billion).

"The fiscal deficit in 2024 is projected to further decrease to 4.3 per cent of GDP or RM85.4 billion.

"The effort is able to improve the public financial position and further reduce the debt burden in the medium and long term."- NST. 16/7/2024

 

This Chart Shows How Najib Drove The Country To RM1 Trillion In Debt

May 22nd, 2018 by financetwitter

May 22 2018

We wish to say “I told you so” again. But to hear it from the horse mouth – Mahathir – is equally satisfying. Yes, Malaysia has already breached the RM1 trillion marks, for the wrong reason. Speaking for the first time to staff of the prime minister’s office, Mahathir revealed the troubling debts accumulated, thanks to 9 years of corrupt Najib administration.

When Mahathir resigned in 2003 after ruling for 22 years (1981 to 2003), the debt was only about RM190 billion. After he passed the baton to Abdullah Badawi, the sleeping head doubled the nation’s debt to about RM380 billion. But after Najib Razak took over the country, he tripled it to RM1 trillion in debts. In short, Najib doubled the debt in 4 years what Badawi would have done in 8 years.

During the 14th election campaign, Najib Razak conveniently used the national debt as a weapon to attack his opposition. He warned the people that a victory for the opponent coalition Pakatan Harapan’s would cause debt to skyrocket. He claimed that the opposition’s promise to abolish GST (goods and services tax) and road toll collection would increase national debt to RM1.1 trillion.

Najib, of course, didn’t want the people to know that his regime had already clocked the RM1 trillion figures. By first quarter of 2017, the country was already burdened with RM916.12 billion. Since Najib came to office in 2009, Malaysia’s debt has grown at an average of 10% a year. Hence, if you look at the government gross debt chart, the first number of debt figure will jump – every year (get the picture?).

The worst part is this – despite abolishing subsidies for petrol, diesel, sugar, cooking oil, electricity tariffs, water and whatnot, Najib regime somehow still couldn’t find the money to run the government efficiently. The son of Razak was practically stealing rice from a beggar’s bowl when he introduced 6% GST (goods and services tax) on 1 April 2015.

Do you need more proof that the despicable and corrupt Najib had been stealing from the people to live lavishly? The clearest proof of excessive spending, and even corruption for that matter, can be found in this chart – the yearly allocation for the Prime Minister Office (PMO). In his first year as prime minister, the budget for the PMO breached RM10 billion for the first time in the history.

The yearly budget for the PMO continued to climb and reached the climax when it hit the RM20 billion in 2016. Now we know why a small nation with 32-million populations need to pay RM20 billion for the operation of Najib’s office. After the stunning defeat of Barisan Nasional coalition government, it is discovered that a whopping 17,000 “political appointees” were hired by the previous government.

Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, shocked, said the contracts for the highly paid 17,000 “political appointees” will be axed. This will reduce the expenditure. Assuming each of them was paid a conservative RM5,000 every month, the annual expenses would hit RM1 billion already. When Mahathir resigned in 2003, the PMO was allocated merely RM3.5 billion.

However, paying top dollar for 17,000 “political appointees” to boost Najib’s image wasn’t the only wastage policy adopted by the former prime minister. His wife, Rosmah Mansor, was the biggest beneficiary from the massive yearly budget to the PMO. Auntie Rosie’s pet project – Permata Programme – was allocated RM100 million and RM111 million in 2010 and 2011 Budget respectively.

When Najib presented the 2013 Budget, the so-called pre-school education programme was allocated a whopping RM1.2 billion. The amazing part about the “Permata” programme is that nobody knows how the money was being used. In fact, the programme has been such a cash-cow to Rosmah that even after his husband has lost, she insisted the new government to retain the project.

Najib’s previous government operated without transparency. As the finance minister himself, he spent excessively and lavishly without thinking about the source of income. His answer to lack of funding was to borrow money. One of Najib’s tricks in hiding the RM1 trillion debts accumulated over the years – exclude the government-guaranteed debt.

Based on statistic from Bank Negara Malaysia (Central Bank), the debt guaranteed by the Federal Government is at eye-popping RM238 billion. And thanks to the declassification of 1MDB audit report after Najib was defeated in the 14th general election, it has been revealed that the state investment fund was drowning in debt. Now, where is that Arul “Anaconda” Kanda guy when you need him the most?

According to the audit report – assuming there are no new loans after October 2015 – it was estimated that RM42.26 billion was needed to pay the principal and interest that will be due between November 2015 and May 2039. 1MDB also needs a minimum of RM1.52 billion every year for 10 years from November 2015 to May 2024 just to pay back its loans.

In short, the declassified report said the scandal-tainted firm had debt commitments totalling RM74.6 billion, inclusive of interest and borrowing costs, from November 2015 to 2039. That’s about RM3 billion of debt commitment every year – for the next 25 years. This is what going to make the country in serious trouble, if billions of dollars plundered by Najib is not recovered.

Now, do you understand why newly sworn-in finance minister Lim Guan Eng is roped in to clean the shit left by the former Thief-in-Chief Najib Razak? Based on his track record in managing Penang finances, only Mr. Lim has the ability to fix the problem. Crooked Najib was essentially driving the country to the brink of bankruptcy, had he not stopped in time. -http://www.financetwitter.com/2018/05/this-chart-shows-how-najib-drove-the-country-to-rm1-trillion-in-debt.html

 

Malaysian Federal Government Debt? How did Anwar managed to reduce the DEBT? Was it paid off or simply transferred to another? TELL us

The question that many may have is HOW did Malaysia lower its Federal Government DEBT of  RM100 Billion in 2022 to RM93 Billion in 2023? 

Malaysia’s sovereign debt has been trending downwards in the past three years, fro, RM100 billion in 2021 and 2022 to RM93 billion in 2023. But Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim is confident his government can reduce it further to RM86 billion this year to ensure financial stability. -Malay Mail, 22/7/2024

Then, there was the report a few days before, where Anwar implied the government debt was still RM1.5 Trillion

The prime minister said, he and the Public Service Department (PSD) would continue to find ways to ensure that this is realised, despite the government's debt reaching RM1.5 trillion. - NST, 13/7/2024

see also:- Anwar, has our Federal Government debt increased from RM1.2 Trillion to RM1.5trillion? Change Finance Minister? What is OUR DEBT now - be honest...

So, what exactly is the Federal Government Debt - RM93 Billion or RM1.5 Trillion? The confusion is caused by the words allegedly uttered by Finance Minister, Anwar Ibrahim. He must really clarify once and for all  HONESTLY - Malaysians deserve to know.

How much is the Federal Government DEBT - or Malaysia's SOVEREIGN Debt? 

Does this include all other LIABILITIES?

Does this include Government GUARANTEES to others taking the loans?

If TRUE, Malaysia's DEBT is going down? How exactly did that happen?

Did Malaysia pay off the DEBT - and, if so, where did the money come to settle the Debt? OR, has the debt simply been transferred or taken over by another entity, so it gives the 'impression' that Anwar is a GOOD Finance Minister who has managed to reduce the Malaysian DEBT? If transfered or taken over by others, is it a government entity or GLC?

Remember, in January 2023, Anwar said'"The problem with our debt is it has already touched RM1.2 trillion and if includes liabilities, it is RM1.5 trillion.'  - NST, 17/1/2023

What does Anwar mean by RM1 Trillion - well, in the British system one trillion = 1,000,000 billions, whilst in the US system, 1 Trillion = 1,000 Billion. I presume Anwar maybe using the US system...

Now, in July 2024, is he finally being honest and saying that the DEBT was never RM1.2 Trillion, but really just RM100 Billion, and now it is down to RM93 Billion or maybe less today.

What is the TRUTH?

There was a JOKE about how a government can reduce POVERTY - Simple, just bring down the POVERTY line, and poverty is reduced. So, if previously the poverty line indicated that those who earned less than 1,000 are poor - then by changing it to those who earn less that RM500 are poor, the effect is the REDUCTION of poverty in the country.

So, is our national debt really reduced - or simply 'transferred' elsewhere where it no longer will be taken into account in the computation of Federal Government Debt and/or SOVEREIGN Debt? Wonder whether 'government debt' and 'sovereign debt' have different meanings.

In the 13th July report he talks about 'government's debt', whilst in the 22nd July report, he uses the term 'Malaysia's sovereign debt'...Mmmm

 

PM Anwar says Malaysia’s debt going down, aims to lower it to RM86b for 2024 by cutting sovereign loans

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said the gradual reduction of Malaysia’s debt is crucial to sustain its development agenda. — Picture by Sayuti Zainudin.

By Anis Zalani

Monday, 22 Jul 2024 2:23 PM MYT

KUALA LUMPUR, July 22 — Malaysia’s sovereign debt has been trending downwards in the past three years, fro, RM100 billion in 2021 and 2022 to RM93 billion in 2023.

But Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim is confident his government can reduce it further to RM86 billion this year to ensure financial stability.

“As prime minister, I must honour prior decisions. Therefore when making choices with my colleagues, I must consider not only current circumstances but also future impacts on the administration.

“Our goal is to reduce borrowing despite existing debt. For example, the debt was RM100 billion in 2021 and 2022.

“In 2023, we reduced it to RM93 billion, and for 2024, we aim to lower it further to RM86 billion. This gradual reduction is crucial for continuing our development efforts,” he said in his speech at the National Tax Conference 2024 here today.

He said the government is taking prudent steps to ensure its spending is only used when necessary as funds for development or to settle existing debts.

He stressed the importance of plugging potential financial leakages and for taxpayers in fulfilling their obligations.

“What I want is that those who should pay, must pay. I don't care when this happens, but there must be stricter efforts. Ensure that those who are obligated to pay must pay, and there should be no leakage,” he said.

Anwar, who is also finance minister, said that subsidies are an important part of government spending that needs to be rationalised.

He added that efficient law enforcement and taxation as well as strict measures to curb corruption will help Malaysia stabilise its financial standing. - Malay Mail, 22/7/2024

Govt to fulfil salary hike pledge despite RM1.5 trillion debt

By Hana Naz Harun - July 13, 2024 @ 12:37pm

The government’s commitment to raise civil servants’ salaries starting this December will still be fulfilled, said Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. - NSTP/AIZUDDIN SAAD

BANGI: The government's commitment to raise civil servants' salaries starting this December will still be fulfilled, said Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

The prime minister said, he and the Public Service Department (PSD) would continue to find ways to ensure that this is realised, despite the government's debt reaching RM1.5 trillion.

"Some said Anwar is not being practical and only wants to be popular, saying that we have no money, but want to increase pay. Others say it is not likely to happen.

"But the PSD is working hard to find ways to make it a reality.

"I don't want anyone to be left behind," he said at the National Union of Teaching Profession's (NUTP) golden jubilee celebration here, today.

Anwar said teachers have waited too long for a raise, but said it was not their fault that the country had debts.

"It is not the teachers who built houses in London, or Australia. It is not teachers who have caused the country to have huge debts.

"So why should they sacrifice?" he said.

Also present were Selangor Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Amirudin Shari, Education Minister Fadhlina Sidek, PSD director-general Datuk Seri Wan Ahmad Dahlan Abdul Aziz and NUTP president Aminuddin Awang.

On Labour Day, Anwar announced a more than 13 per cent increase in civil servants' remuneration, among the highest in Malaysia's history.

The salary increase, effective Dec 1, marked one of the highest in Malaysia's history, with the last revision occurring 12 years ago. - NST, 13/7/2024

 

Court of Appeal ERRED in maintaining conviction under s.330 Penal Code(which is for police/law enforcement not Lay Persons) - Navy cadet Zulfarhan’s murder?

Did the Court of Appeal ERR when it maintained the conviction of the 12 under Section 330 of the Penal Code, i.e. Voluntarily causing hurt to extort confession or to compel restoration of property? This Section 330 and 332(grievous hurt) is the ODD section, that really ought to be used against the police(and other law enforcement officers) for the use of 'torture' against suspects of crimes - and NEVER for lay persons, who have no rights whatsoever to resort to 'SELF-HELP' against alleged crime suspects.

330  Voluntarily causing hurt to extort confession or to compel restoration of property

Whoever voluntarily causes hurt for the purpose of extorting from the sufferer, or from any person interested in the sufferer, any confession or any information which may lead to the detection of an offence or misconduct, or for the purpose of constraining the sufferer, or any person interested in the sufferer, to restore or to cause the restoration of any property or valuable security or to satisfy any claim or demand, or to give information which may lead to the restoration of any property or valuable security, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

ILLUSTRATIONS

(a) A, a police officer, tortures Z in order to induce Z to confess that he committed a crime. A is guilty of an offence under this section.

(b) A, a police officer, tortures B to induce him to point out where certain stolen property is deposited. A is guilty of an offence under this section.

(c) A, a revenue officer, tortures Z in order to compel him to confess to a pretended offence against the excise laws. A is guilty of an offence under this section.

in the High Court case, then Judge Amelia Tee Abdullah, said

[28] On this issue as raised by the appellants, the court has carefully scrutinised the provision of s. 330 of the Penal Code. The offence under this section is one of causing hurt in order to obtain information or confession having reference to an offence or misconduct. As is stated in Ratanlal & Dhirajlal's Law of Crimes, 25th edn. at p. 1693:

The principal object of this section is to prevent torture by the police. But this section covers every kind of torture for whatever purpose it may be intended.

[29] The key ingredient of an offence under s. 330 is the causing of hurt. The hurt may be caused for various purposes, for extorting a confession or to obtain information, to restore or cause restoration of any property or valuable security or to satisfy any claim or demand. The court is of the considered view that there is no necessity that a confession should indeed have been successfully extorted nor is it material that the person who had caused the hurt was not a person who was legally capable of extorting a confession in the sense that such a confession, even if extorted, would not have been admissible in court. To decide otherwise would be to go against the very spirit and intention of that section, namely to prevent the torture of detained persons by persons in a position of authority. If it can be argued that persons below the rank of inspector could not commit an offence under s. 330 that might well take away the weight of that section against those below that rank who cause hurt whilst attempting to extort a confession or to gain information which may lead to the detection of an offence. - PP v. ZULKIPPLY TAIB & ORS AND OTHER CASES[2014] 5 CLJ 365

In another case, K C VOHRAH J said,

'Lord Lawton in the Court of Appeal case of R v. Sarjeant [1974] 60 Cr App R 74, in giving the judgment of the court referred to the classical principle of retribution in sentencing (he did also refer to the other principles of deterrence, prevention and rehabilitation). His Lordship said that the old testament concept of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth no longer plays any part in criminal law and continued:

There is, however, another aspect of retribution which is overlooked: it is that society, through the courts, must show its abhorrence of particular types of crime, and the only way in which they the courts can do this is by the sentence they pass. The courts do not have to reflect public opinion. On the other hand, courts must not disregard it. Perhaps the main duty of the court is lead public opinion. (emphasis added).

On deterrence Lord Lawton remarked that there are "two aspects of deterrence - deterrence of the offender and deterrence of likely offenders". Deterrence to likely offenders is another aspect of public interest.

What cannot be gainsaid is that an offence under s. 330 is a very serious offence; it is one of the most serious offences known in law and the court must show its abhorrence of it; and the public interest requires the court to pass a deterrent sentence on the offender to deter likely offenders. As was pointed out by Young CJ in a revision case in Lal Muhammad & Anor v. Emperor [1936] 37 Cr LJ 811 the causing of hurt by responsible Police Officers engaged in the investigation of a crime is "one of the most serious offences known to the law" and "deterrent punishment should be inflicted on the offender..." The learned Chief Justice underlined his reason why deterrent punishment should be inflicted:

... The result of third degree methods or of actual torture or beating such as in this case must be that innocent persons might well be convicted, confessions being forced from them which are false. In almost every case in which a confession is recorded, in Criminal Courts, it is alleged by the defence that the Police have resorted to methods such as these. It is seldom, however, that an offence of this nature is or can be proved. It clearly is the duty of the Courts when a case of this kind is proved to pass sentences which may have a deterrent effect.

In Lai Kim Hon Suffian LP after affirming the sentences passed by the trial judge but stating this should not be regarded as a precedent in future cases continued:

Members of the Force who do their duty in accordance with the law will receive our and public support and encouragement; but those who treat suspects in a cruel manner can expect to receive only very severe punishments from the courts. Parliament and the public will not allow a Savak to be established here, bringing disrepute to those responsible for the government and for the administration of justice". (emphasis added)

It is unfortunate that this serious aspect of the public interest was not drawn to the attention of the learned judge before she imposed the sentences that she did and it is quite clear she also missed the strong call for stiffer sentences in the future and the reasons why they were needed.

There is another compelling consideration to take into account. Police officers are custodians of the law and they have to uphold, not breach, the law. By subjecting members of the public to acts of violence they in fact infract the very law that prohibits the inflicting of violence by any person on another person and they incalculably undermine and subvert the confidence and trust placed by the public in our police force. The judge should have considered the grave injury done to the police force and to the public's trust in it.

The judge of the Sessions Court also erred in principle when she said that the offences were committed by the two respondents while they were performing their official duties and treated that as a mitigating factor. Overzealousness which involves such blatant breaching of the law with the use of violence can never be a mitigating factor.

Clearly the courts are under a duty, and in the larger interest of substantial justice, to show their abhorrence of this type of crime. While the judge of the Sessions Court did state that she took into account public interest, that, unfortunately, was not sufficiently reflected in the sentences which she passed on the two respondents. - PP v. MUHARI MOHD JANI & ANOR  [1999] 8 CLJ 430

Sadly, there are not many reported criminal cases on Section 330 and/or 331 - when there are so many allegations about 'torture' in police custody, and/or the custody of law enforcement. It is sad that many a victim are simply 'TOO FEARFUL' about making police reports against police or law enforcement officers ...

THUS, it is SUBMITTED that the High Court, and now the Court of Appeal ERRED in the conviction of the 12 Others, involved in the 'torture' that resulted in the death of of navy cadet Zulfarhan Osman Zulkarnain of Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia (UPNM) seven years ago.

For, the very first time, section 330 was used against persons, not being POLICE or law enforcement' in this case of the death of Zulfarhan - and it was WRONG. 

Whatever reason, it was wrong - they were not POLICE or person in authority who has the right to investigate any alleged crime suspect. 

Does using section 330 or 331 - 'legitimize' the investigation or 'torture' of Lay-Persons? Hope would have been that the Court of Appeal would have corrected the ERROR - but sadly, it validated it by increasing the sentence under s.330 from 3 years to 4 years. Maybe, no one, not the accused lawyers or the Public Prosecutor raised this CRUCIAL point...but it cannot remain as it undermine the very purpose for Section 330 and 331 of the Penal Code - and more lay persons(without the authority to investigate suspected criminals) may be charged - as the Court of Appeal decision becomes a 'legal precedent' ????

WHY? The said 12 should never have been charged and/or convicted under section 330 of the Penal Code - as this was meant for police and law enforcement using 'torture' during investigations.

Why were they NOT charged for causing'hurt' and not 'grievous hurt'? 

Here was a case, where he was tortured by kickings, beatings, etc by a lot of persons on 21st, and 22nd of May, and died on the 10th day(1/6/2024) 

Grievious Hurt include '(h) any hurt which endangers life, or which causes the sufferer to be, during the space of ten days, in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits.' 

Yes, it talks about 'severe bodily pain', and also 'unable to follow his ordinary pursuits' - but here he died.

It is almost impossible to determine the EXACT cause of death in such situation - was it the beatings - or was it only the torture using the steam iron? Or was it both?

In terms of crimes - the sentence need not be all the SAME - it may be lesser depending on the 'involvement' of the different criminals, and so, the courts will consider each every persons individual action/omissions and determine an appropriate sentence for each accordingly... 

Let's look at the definition of Grievous Hurt in the Penal Code? And the fact that he died reasonably can justify charging them for grievous hurt, does it not 

320  Grievous hurt (Penal Code)

The following kinds of hurt only are designated as "grievous":

(a) emasculation;

(b) permanent privation of the sight of either eye;

(c) permanent privation of the hearing of either ear;

(d) privation of any member or joint;

(e) destruction or permanent impairing of the powers of any member or joint;

(f) permanent disfiguration of the head or face;

(g) fracture or dislocation of a bone;

(h) any hurt which endangers life, or which causes the sufferer to be, during the space of ten days, in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits.

Note also, that vide PENAL CODE (AMENDMENT) ACT 2014, section 320(h) was amended - The Code is amended in paragraph 320(h), by substituting for the words “twenty days” the words “ten days”.

In this case, the victim DIED.

Hence, the other 12 could also have been charged for CULPABLE HOMICIDE not amounting to murder.

ONE problem that emerges in the Penal Code for this kind of offences, is the fact that Parliament has bound the hands of the Court - by fixing a rather low maximum sentence for such crimes. And, maybe Prosecution and Court really felt that these criminals deserved to be punished with a HIGHER SENTENCE for the part they played that resulted in the DEATH of a fellow University Students - and that is why they resorted to charging and/or convicting them under s.330 - which provides for a sentence of 'imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.'vand if charged under section 331, the sentence would have been  'imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.'

Other than that, for causing just hurt - it is now under s. 323  Punishment for voluntarily causing hurts, it is just  'imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine which may extend to two thousand ringgit or with both.'

And for causing grievous hurt -325  Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt, it was   '...imprisonment for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.' 

Section 325 may have been used for those involved in torture that happened on 22nd, but maybe not for those who were involved in torture on 21st - as the suffering/death was limited to just 10 days after the action causing hurt happened. But then, the law requires that 'causes the sufferer to be, during the space of ten days, in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits' - and our deceased victim would reasonably be said to be ' in severe bodily pain, or unable to follow his ordinary pursuits' ever since the torture was inflicted. 

So rather that convicting under Section 330, the 12 should have been convicted under section 325. But, they could also be charged for CULPABLE Homicide.  

Maybe, these laws need to be amended - to increasing the maximum sentence, and not placing any minimum sentence - Thus, allowing the COURT to decided the appropriate sentence - limiting sentence of voluntarily causing HURT to just 1 year may no longer be good enough.. 

 See the following post that also has the HIGH Court Judgment

No to death by hanging for 6 former Malaysian Armed Forces University students - Should the other 12 be charged for culpable homicide?

Extract From Court of Appeal Judgment

Rayuan OKT – OKT 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 dan Rayuan Pendakwaan Terhadap Hukuman.

[214] Hukuman yang boleh dikenakan bagi kesalahan di bawah seksyenb330 Kanun Keseksaan ialah penjara sehingga 7 tahun dan juga denda.

[215] Hakim Bicara telah menjatuhkan hukuman 3 tahun penjara terhadap OKT - OKT 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 dan 19 setelah mengambilkira mitigasi OKT - OKT dan faktor-faktor yang memberatkan hukuman. Hakim Bicara telah merujuk kepada kes Pendakwa Raya v Bukhari Mohd Jani [1999] 8 CL J 430. Dalam kes Bukhari, tertuduh mengaku salah kepada pertuduhan seksyen 330 KK dan Mahkamah Tinggi mengenakan hukuman 3 tahun penjara.

[216] Di hadapan kami, OKT - OKT ini merayu supaya hukuman 3 tahun penjara itu dikurangkan kepada suatu hukuman yang lebih ringan di bawah seksyen 293 atau 294 Kanun Prosedur Jenayah iaitu diberi ikat jamin berkelakuan baik.

[217] Pendakwaan merayu supaya hukuman yang lebih berat dikenakan.

[218] Pada hemat kami, hukuman di bawah seksyen 293 atau 294 Kanun Prosedur Jenayah sama sekali tidak boleh dibenarkan kerana kesalahan jenayah yang dilakukan sangat berat dan serius. Di hadapan mahkamah, selain daripada keterangan SP13, OKT 1 setuju beliau tiada bukti simati mencuri laptop. OKT 1 juga setuju simati tidak melakukan apa-apa kesalahan terhadap OKT 1. Maka, OKT 1 dan OKT 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 dan 19 tidak ada sebab untuk memeras pengakuan bersalah daripada simati dan juga tidak ada sebab untuk memukul simati.
88
Tetapi, seramai 17 orang pelajar telah memukul simati dua hari berturut- turut.

[219] Apa-apa kesusahan yang dialami oleh OKT - OKT seperti dibuang dari universiti dan sebagainya bukanlah faktor untuk meringankan hukuman. OKT - OKT harus menanggung akibat daripada perbuatan mereka.

[220] Dari segi undang-undang, hukuman yang dikenakan bukan sahaja bertujuan untuk menghukum pelaku, tetapi juga untuk mencegah pelajar sekolah atau universiti yang mengamalkan budaya buli supaya tidak mengulangi perbuatan yang serupa.

[221] Dalam kes ini, kami sebulat suara mendapati faktor-faktor yang memberatkan hukuman mengatasi faktor-faktor peribadi OKT - OKT.

Pada hemat kami, hukuman yang wajar ialah 4 tahun penjara. Oleh itu, hukuman penjara 3 tahun diketepikan dan diganti dengan hukuman 4 tahun penjara dari tarikh sabitan. {222] Oleh itu, rayuan OKT – OKT 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18 dan 19 atas hukuman ditolak danrayuan Pendakwa Raya atas hukuman dibenarkan.

My perusal of the Judgment indicates that the Court of Appeal - FAILED to consider the appropriateness of maintaining the conviction under s. 330 Penal Code. It only focused on the sentence - and this was WRONG. 

The effect is a BAD PRECEDENCE