ON HUMAN RIGHTS, JUSTICE AND PEACE ISSUES, LABOUR RIGHTS, MIGRANT RIGHTS, FOR THE ABOLITION OF THE DEATH PENALTY, TOWARDS AN END OF TORTURE, POLICE ABUSES, DISCRIMINATION...
Malaysian workers ability to get HIGHER INCOME have been 'sabotaged' by government. As demands for workers increased, workers would have gotten more income. BUT then, the Malaysian government allowed for the bringing in of cheap migrant workers....Initially, the permission to use migrant workers was 'difficult' to ensure local workers are protected. There was a QUOTA on the use of migrant workers in a workplace - hence protecting local workers. Now, do the government still have a QUOTA for the number of migrant workers permissible in a workplace? What is the QUOTA?
Then, some employers got smart - they stopped employing migrant workers, and instead started using migrant workers supplied by Contractors For Labour, who technically was employees of these labour supplying contractors - NOT employees of the owners/operators of workplaces >> hence, the actual number of migrant workers at a workplace increased...and them quotas for migrant workers per workplace was ignored, as the number of EMPLOYEES who were migrant workers was still low - but the percentage of migrant workers was so much higher. The call for the abolition of the Contractors for Labour, and the reinstatement of DIRECT EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP with the owners of workplaces is still being ignored by government.
Some foreign companies, as 'part of incentives', were allegedly allowed to use workers from their own country - TRUE or not true? The lack of transparency is a problem.
When the ringgit fell in value, the cost of labour dropped especially for foreign corporations, and also those companies that export their products which was still in US Dollars. So, the coming in of foreign investors to Malaysia now is not something the government ought to be proud of as the labour cost has dropped...??
Press
statement by the Labour Law Reform Coalition on 17 August 2023 in Shah Alam
The decrease of the
labour income share to 32% is shocking, LLRC calls for a government roadmap to
achieve the 45% labour income share
The Labour Law Reform Coalition
is shocked to learn from the Madani Economy document that Malaysia’s labour
income share has dropped to 32.4 per cent in 2022, a sharp decrease from the
35.2 per cent in 2017 (BNM Annual Report 2018). That means, the workers’ share
of the economy has rolled back to the status in 2011 after the Covid-19
pandemic.
Although the Covid-19 pandemic
has severely and negatively impacted the jobs and incomes of Malaysian workers,
LLRC had highlighted before that low unionisation rate and lack of appropriate
bargaining mechanism at workplaces during the pandemic would lead to wage cuts
unilaterally imposed by employers.
In addition, the decrease of
the labour income share is also attributed to the lack of a concrete roadmap of
the previous governments. The ambitious 48% target of labour income share
stated in the Shared Prosperity Vision 2030 (SPV2030) remained elusive, a
casualty of the absence of a resolute roadmap and audacious strategy to guide
the way. As a result, the SPV2030 was doomed to fail.
The Madani government must
learn from the previous mistakes and create a concrete roadmap for achieving
the 45% labour income share in the next 10 years. Among other measures, they
should have a national action plan on trade union development as a step to
strengthen trade union bargaining power, which will certainly lead to higher
wages and benefits for workers in Malaysia.
Trade unions act as the voice
of the workforce, campaigning for equal treatment, improved working conditions
and greater remuneration. The efficacy of these unions, however, is strongly
based on a supportive legislative framework and dedicated involvement by the
government.
We urge the government to step
up to the challenge and a course consistent with the Madani values of fairness,
inclusion, and social advancement. The Madani government has a chance to guide
the country towards a future in which workers’ wages and benefits reflect the
full value of their contributions. It is a vow to respect economic ideals of
equality and justice.
Media enquiry please contact N. Gopalkishnam at
019-3174717
Note :
Labour Law Reform Coalition is endorsed by 58 Trade Unions from various sectors
and worker organisations. The group started in June 2018 to initiate discussion
on labour law reform based on ILO’s decent work framework. The coalition had
submitted proposals of reforming Employment Act 1955, Trade Union Act 1959 and
Industrial Relations Act 1967 in January and May 2019 respectively.
Gopalkishnam
Nadesan is the General Secretary of National Union of Transport, Equipment and
Allied Industry Workers (NUTEAIW), and former Secretary-General of Malaysian
Trade Union Congress. Irene Xavier is a veteran social activist who founded
Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor, she has been fighting for the rights of
women workers for decades.
If no police reports are made, law enforcement may not investigate - so make police reports NOW...
Anwar's understanding of using, or rather ABUSING, government assets, resources and power is ODD.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has emphatically
stated that he has not utilised government assets throughout the
campaign period of the six state elections...."You can curse me all you want, but I have not taken government money."They (critics) say I don't take money but use a car. It's a government car. "I use a government car... not just a car, but even an airplane owned
by the government. What else am I supposed to do? Do they want the
prime minister to fly in other people's planes? They'll fuss over that
too. What's this?" he questioned.
Anwar Ibrahim or the members of the Cabinet can come down and campaign - BUT do it on your own time and expenses....and using your own private transportation or GRAB. You are there to campaign NOT as Prime Minister or Minister, but simply as a party leader...
Anwar dropped by with a government helicopter, or with a few helicopters >>> how much monies, i.e. OUR government monies was spend for that 'helicopter trips'... fuel, pilot, support staff, OT, etc.. No problem if Anwar hired and paid for his own 'private' helicopter, car, drivers and went around campaigning. Anwar seems to wrongly believes that since he is now Prime Minister, he can use government vehicles/resources/personnel as of right - this is where he is WRONG - he can use all government resources/time ONLY when he is carrying out his official duties as Prime Minister/Minister >> not for personal matters including political party/coalition matters...
[In the past, some Ministers consciously schedule some 'event' that justifies his presence in a town/place - and then spend most of the time 'campaigning' - Malaysians will no longer be fooled]
As a Prime Minister and Minister, you are a government employee, as it is the people of Malaysia that are the BOSSES that pay your salary....so were you campaigning during WORKING HOURS? No problem if you do so after working hours, or if you take annual leave from your work as Minister/PM and then go campaigning...
DID ANWAR, or any of the Unity Government members of the Cabinet, or members of any party including the Opposition commit any ELECTION OFFENCES? Bribery? Undue Influence? Treating? Etc.. YES, election offences can be committed by any person, including members of the government..
LET us not focus just on the candidates of the elections but all others...ANYONE can make a police report that can start an investigation...
PROBLEM in Malaysia is that law enforcement sometimes do not act UNLESS there is a police report - so, do make police reports to initiate investigations...
REMEMBER that even the use of religion can be an offence...
TO ENSURE FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS - WE NEED TO ACT AGAINST ALL WHO COMMIT ELECTION OFFENCES, and these offences can be committed even BEFORE the nomination or campaign periods...
Did Anwar or even MBs or members of the government commit these election offences?
'...Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has emphatically
stated that he has not utilised government assets throughout the
campaign period of the six state elections....' - BUT did you utilize government assets before the campaign period -- which is also an offence.
DO we need new clearer laws to prevent abuse of government power, resources used to woo voters to vote candidates from one's party/coalition?
Section 10 Bribery (ELECTION OFFENCES ACT 1954)
The following persons shall be deemed guilty of the offence of bribery:
(a)
every person who, before, during or after an election, who directly or
indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, gives,
lends, or agrees to give or lend, or offers, promises, or promises to
procure or to endeavour to procure, any money or valuable consideration
to or for any elector or voter, or to or for any person on behalf of any
elector or voter or to or for any other person, in order to induce any
elector or voter to vote or refrain from voting, or corruptly does any
such act as aforesaid on account of such elector or voter having voted
or refrained from voting at any election;
(b) every person
who, before, during or after an election, directly or indirectly, by
himself or by any other person on his behalf, gives or procures, or
agrees to give or procure, or offers, promises, or promises to procure
or to endeavour to procure, any office, place or employment to or for
any elector or voter, or to or for any person on behalf of any elector
or voter, or to or for any other person, in order to induce such elector
or voter to vote or refrain from voting, or corruptly does any such act
as aforesaid on account of any elector or voter having voted or
refrained from voting at any election;
(c) every person
who, before, during or after an election, directly or indirectly, by
himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes any such gift, loan,
offer, promise, procurement, or agreement as aforesaid to or for any
person in order to induce such person to procure or endeavour to procure
the election of any person, or the vote of any elector or voter at any
election;
(d) every person who, either before, or during an
election, upon or in consequence of any such gift, loan, offer,
promise, procurement or agreement, procures or engages, promises or
endeavours to procure, the election of any person, or the vote of any
elector or voter at an election;
(e) every person who,
either before, or during an election, advances or pays or causes to be
paid any money to, or to the use of, any other person with the intent
that such money or any part thereof shall be expended in bribery at any
election or who knowingly pays or causes to be paid any money to any
person in discharge or repayment of any money wholly or in part expended
in bribery at any such election;
(f) every elector or
voter who, before or during any election directly or indirectly, by
himself or by any other person on his behalf, receives, agrees, or
contracts for any money, gift, loan, or valuable consideration, office,
place or employment, for himself or for any other person, for voting or
agreeing to vote or for refraining or agreeing to refrain from voting at
any such election;
(g) every person who, after any
election, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on
his behalf, receives any money or valuable consideration on account of
any person having voted or refrained from voting or having induced any
other person to vote or to refrain from voting at any such election;
(h)
every person who, after an election directly or indirectly, by himself
or by any other person on his behalf, on account of and as payment for
voting or for having voted or for agreeing or having agreed to vote for
any candidate at an election, or on account of and as payment for his
having assisted or agreed to assist any candidate at an election,
applies to such candidate, or to his agent or agents, for the gift or
loan of any money or valuable consideration, or for the promise of the
gift or loan of any money or valuable consideration or for any office,
place or employment or for the promise of any office, place or
employment; and
(i) every person who, either before, or
during an election, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any person
on his behalf, in order to induce any other person to agree to be
nominated as a candidate or to refrain from becoming a candidate or to
withdraw if he has become a candidate, gives or procures any office,
place or employment, or agrees to give or procure or offers or promises
to procure or to endeavour to procure any office, place or employment,
to or for such other person, or gives or lends, or agrees to give or
lend, or offers, or promises to procure or to endeavour to procure any
money or valuable consideration to or for any person or to or for such
other person, or to or for any person on behalf of such other person.
(1) Every
person who, before, during or after an an election, directly or
indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use
of or threatens to make use of any force, violence, or restraint, or
inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any
temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm, or loss upon or against any
person in order to induce or compel such person to vote or refrain from
voting, or on account of such person having voted or refrained from
voting, at any election, or who by abduction, duress, or any fraudulent
device or contrivance impedes or prevents the free exercise of the
franchise of any elector or voter, or thereby compels, induces, or
prevails upon any elector or voter either to give or refrain from giving
his vote at any election, or who directly or indirectly interferes or
attempts to interfere with the free exercise by any person of any
electoral right shall be guilty of the offence of undue influence.
(2)
A person shall be deemed to interfere with the free exercise of the
electoral right of a person within the meaning of this section who
induces or attempts to induce such person to believe that he, or any
person in whom he is interested, will become or will be rendered an
object of divine displeasure or spiritual censure.
Section 8 Treating (ELECTION OFFENCES ACT 1954)
Every
person who, corruptly, by himself or by any other person, either
before, during or after an election, directly or indirectly gives or
provides or causes to be given or provided, or is accessory to the
giving or providing, or pays or engages to pay wholly or in part, the
expense of giving or providing any food, drink, refreshment or
provision, or any money or ticket or other means or device to enable the
procuring of any food, drink, refreshment or provision, to or for any
person for the purpose of corruptly influencing that person or any other
person to give or refrain from giving his vote at such election or on
account of any such person or any other person having voted or refrained
from voting or being about to vote or refrain from voting at such
election, and every elector or voter who corruptly accepts or takes any
such food, drink, or refreshment or provision or any such money or
ticket or who adopts such other means or device to enable the procuring
of such food, drink, refreshment or provision shall be guilty of the
offence of treating.
Often governments also commit election offences - like the use(or rather abuse) of government resources sometimes before nomination day... Anwar, an offence is not simply about pocketing monies... "You can curse me all you want, but I have not taken government money.
PM: I've not used any govt assets throughout this campaign period
By AMIRUL AIMAN HAMSUDDIN -
August 10, 2023 @ 11:57pm
Prime
Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has emphatically stated that he has
not utilised government assets throughout the campaign period of the six
state elections. -NSTP/ASYRAF HAMZAH
KUALA
SELANGOR: Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has emphatically
stated that he has not utilised government assets throughout the
campaign period of the six state elections.
The prime minister stated that he can withstand any allegation and
accusation thrown by opposition parties, including misappropriation of
government funds.
"You can curse me all you want, but I have not taken government money.
"They (critics) say I don't take money but use a car. It's a government car.
"I use a government car... not just a car, but even an airplane owned
by the government. What else am I supposed to do? Do they want the
prime minister to fly in other people's planes? They'll fuss over that
too. What's this?" he questioned.
He made these remarks while speaking at the Grand Finale Ceramah in
Kuala Selangor at the Bestari Jaya night market site, Ijok, here,
tonight.
At the same time, Anwar criticised the opposition leaders who
questioned the duties of the police personnel responsible for his
security.
"That's their responsibility. They handle official matters, and even
unofficial matters. They even watch over me when I sleep at home, all
for the prime minister's safety.
"You've missed your chance, so just let it be. Stay silent," he said. - NST, 10/8/2023
So much for your 'good governance', Islamic finance expert slams Anwar over helicopter rides
Anwar
Ibrahim has mocked critics who question his use of a government
helicopter for campaign trips, saying it is his right as the prime
minister.
Anwar
Ibrahim has made no apology over his use of a government helicopter to
get to campaign events, saying it is his right as prime minister. Photo:
Bernama
Anwar
Ibrahim's remarks defending his use of the government's assets,
including travelling for election campaigning using a helicopter, have
been criticised by a senior academic, who said the prime minister's
behaviour was the opposite of whatever he had said about good
governance.
Aznan Hasan, a former head of the Islamic Law Department at the
International Islamic University who is part of the Securities
Commission's shariah advisory board, was responding to Anwar's speech in
Sik, Kedah, recently, where he arrived at several ceramah events using a
government helicopter.
Anwar had hit out at critics, saying it was his right as prime minister to travel using government facilities.
- Advertisement -
"They get angry about Anwar riding in a helicopter. Yes, I boarded a
government helicopter for VIPs, you know? Why are you hurt? This is the
government's, not mine.
Aznan Hasan.
"But you can't use it; the prime minister can," he told a programme at a Felda settlement.
Aznan said the criticism over his use of a government helicopter was not because people were hurt.
"It's not because they were hurt by your use of helicopters. They're
criticising because, in the past, you were famous for the slogan 'good
governance' and often attacked the government at that time, which you
accused of misusing government assets to campaign.
"You also attacked them for allegedly misusing official government
programmes for campaigning," Aznan said in a Facebook post that has
since gone viral.
"Now, whatever you attacked them for, you, too, are doing it. At
least they didn't use helicopters. You're not only using a helicopter;
you also go around campaigning at official government programmes," he
added.
Aznan also hit out at those who had attacked past administrations
over the use of public assets during elections, only to now keep their
silence over the same actions by Anwar.
- Advertisement -
"It seems that all your 'good governance' talk before this only
applied to others but not to you. That's what people are questioning,
not out of envy. People are judging."
Earlier, a lawyer said Anwar's defence of his use of a government helicopter to attend campaign events smacked of "arrogance".
Rafique Rashid reminded Anwar that he was only entitled to use the helicopter in his capacity as prime minister.
But he said Anwar had been using the same type of transport nearly every day to tour the six states facing elections on Aug 12.
"The cost is borne by the people, but the one that benefits is the party led by PM10," Rafique told MalaysiaNow.
"Why has there been no rebuke from the other coalition parties?"
In a similar tone, electoral reform group Bersih also chided the prime minister with a reminder to politicians to be humble.
"Arrogant and haughty attitudes such as those shown by the prime
minister might backfire because the people will not agree with the
misuse of government machinery for campaigning," it said.
Raja Rozela Raja Toran, the lead
deputy public prosecutor (DPP) in Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s corruption
trial - an excellent job thus far.
She has successfully managed to prove to the court ALL 47 charges of money laundering and
criminal breach of trust (CBT) involving millions from Yayasan Akalbudi,
which he founded, and accepting bribes for various projects during his
tenure as the home minister.
This is NOT an easy task when it involves 47 charges, and the prosecution succeeded and thus the High Court Judge ordered Zahid enters his defence. Now, if Zahid fails to raise a reasonable doubt - then he will be convicted for all 47 charges.
Zahid has had all the opportunity to prove that he is not guilty during the prosecution stage but he FAILED - now, he again have the opportunity to call witnesses and adduce evidence to prove innocence... BUT, he has been making representations possibly asking for prosecution to 'decline to prosecute further'. Why don't he let the Judge(the Court) decide whether he has been proven guilty or not...rather than getting prosecution to 'discontinue'?
There are a FEW possible ways that PROSECUTION can 'protect' politicians or certain persons:-
1 NOT even charging them in court. (The AG before did not charge Najib, and it was only AG Tommy Thomas that charged him - and it was correct, for Najib has already been proven guilty, convicted and is serving his prison sentence)
Remember Eric Chia and Kasitah Kadam - both were acquitted because prosecution failed to call material witnesses.
The Eric Chia case...
In
his 30-page oral judgment, he went on to fault the prosecution in every
aspect of the case, from the way the main charge and alternative charge
were proffered right to the tendering of documents, and its failure to
call crucial witnesses.
Akhtar said the most glaring setback was the prosecution’s failure to call two material witnesses,
who would have been able to confirm whether payment was needed ...
He said former
Perwaja company secretary R.R. Durai Rajasingam, who was involved in
all Perwaja’s contracts, would have known the actual contents of the
TAA.
“Yet the prosecution never called him. The question is why? I see nothing to say that he would be a hostile witness or give evidence against them.”
The judge also questioned the prosecution’s reluctance to call the five Japanese witnesses, including NKK Corporation, Japan, director N. Otani, who was present at the signing of the TAA in Japan in 1993.
“I wonder whether it was the Japanese witnesses who were reluctant or
the prosecution was the one reluctant to bring them here,” he said.
Akhtar also said the prosecution’s contention that the TAA was free
fell flat in its face when tendering its documents at the trial as they
clearly stated that the agreements would be effective upon receiving
first payment.
Another document by NKK Corporation not only requested for the payment to be in a lump sum but also stated the amount.
Now, see the similarities in the Kasitah Gaddam's case...
Former
land and cooperative development minister Tan Sri Kasitah Gaddam was
acquitted and discharged by the High Court here of committing corrupt
practice and cheating involving shares belonging to the Sabah Land
Development Board (SLDB) in 1996.
Judge
Justice Suraya Othman ruled that the prosecution had failed to
establish a prima facie case on both charges for the court to call
Kasitah to enter his defence.
“The
essential ingredients of both the offences of corrupt practice and
cheating were not made out on the facts before the court. In the
circumstances, the accused stands acquitted and discharged of both the
charges against him,” Suraya said in her 74-page judgment.
Kasitah, 62, was the first Cabinet member to be charged with such crimes....
.
,,,,Kasitah
had claimed trial to using his position as SLDB chairman for his
financial gain by taking part in the decision to approve a proposal to
sell 16.8 million shares held by the board in Sapi Plantations Sdn Bhd
to Briskmark Enterprise Sdn Bhd, where he was promised 3.36 million
shares in Sapi Plantations on Oct 22, 1996.
On
the second charge, Kasitah was alleged to have cheated the SLDB board
members by omitting to disclose the offer by PPB Oil Palms Sdn Bhd to
allocate five shares of the company for each share of Sapi Plantations
in the proposal by company for listing on the KLSE.
He
thereby dishonestly induced them to approve the sale of 16.8 million
shares held by SLDB in Sapi Plantations to Briskmark Enterprise whereas
they would not have approved the sale if they had known about the offer
by PPB Oil Palms.
Justice Suraya said the
failure of the prosecution in not calling six board members who were
present in the meeting was detrimental to the case as it had created a
big gap over the question of whether the board members were actually
cheated by the accused.
She
also said that evidence by lawyer cum board member Catherine Yong was
very damaging as she did not indicate that Kasitah had misused his
position or influence her or other board members during the meeting.
Now, in this Zahid Hamidi's case, Raja Rozela Raja Toran, the lead
deputy public prosecutor (DPP) and her team managed to do a GOOD JOB as prosecutors are meant to do - they proved prima facie case... IT is very ODD for a lead Prosecutor to quit before the end of the case - SO WHY IS RAJA ROZELA BEING REMOVED?
There is suspicion that some maybe pushing for the prosecution to stop the case, so that Zahid may be acquitted....too soon to speculate.
4. Prosecution Discontinues Case - then Acquittal or DNAA
254 Public Prosecutor may decline to prosecute further at any stage Criminal Procedure Code)
(1) At any
stage of any trial, before the delivery of judgment, the Public
Prosecutor may, if he thinks fit, inform the Court that he will not
further prosecute the accused upon the charge and thereupon all
proceedings on the charge against the accused shall be stayed and the
accused shall be discharged of and from the same.
So, maybe there is pressure to use section 254 - and prosecution declines to prosecute furtherMaybe, Raja Rozela Raja Toran, the lead
deputy public prosecutor does not AGREE with this...
5. Other DEALS
Anyway, it is a FACT that Raja Rozela Raja Toran who started and led prosecution to this late stage of Zahid's case is most familiar with the case - a change of lead prosecutor at this stage is SUSPICIOUS...
IT IS BEST THAT RAJA ROZELA COMES BACK AND LEAD PROSECUTION UNTIL THE END OF ZAHID'S TRIAL - THERE SHOULD BE NO PRESSURE FROM ANYONE FOR THE PROSECUTION TO DISCONTINUE PROSECUTION - more so since Zahid Hamidi is the Deputy Prime Minister, and a 'close friend' of PM Anwar Ibrahim...
'Unity Government' of Anwar may see more acquittals of BN politicians, and maybe even an early pardon of Najib....? Are there no more BN politicians being charged in Anwar's rule?
AG must explain removal of lead prosecutor in Zahid’s trial, says Pejuang man
Pejuang information chief Rafique Rashid Ali says Attorney-General Idrus Harun cannot remain silent on the matter.
FMT Reporters -
Deputy
prime minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi is standing trial on 47 charges of
corruption, money laundering and criminal breach of trust. (Bernama pic)
PETALING JAYA: A Pejuang leader has urged Attorney-General Idrus
Harun to explain why Raja Rozela Raja Toran has been dropped as the lead
deputy public prosecutor (DPP) in Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s corruption
trial.
This comes after New Straits Times, quoting sources, reported that
Raja Rozela had been taken off the case. She had been absent during
proceedings last week.
When contacted, Raja Rozela simply told the news outlet: “I am a public servant, I am not allowed to comment. My apologies.”
FMT’s attempts to obtain Idrus’ comment on the matter were unsuccessful.
Pejuang information chief Rafique Rashid Ali said the
attorney-general cannot remain silent on the matter and must offer an
explanation.
With
Zahid’s Yayasan Akalbudi case now at the defence stage, Rafique pointed
out that Raja Rozela had been handling the case from the start and was
successful in establishing a prima facie case against the Umno
president.
“So, why the need to replace the lead deputy public prosecutor now?
The attorney-general cannot stay silent. The people are watching and
evaluating,” he said in a Facebook post.
Zahid is standing trial on 47 charges of money laundering and
criminal breach of trust (CBT) involving millions from Yayasan Akalbudi,
which he founded, and accepting bribes for various projects during his
tenure as the home minister.
Twelve of the charges are for CBT, eight for corruption, and the remaining 27 for money laundering.
Last week, the prosecution told the High Court that it is still
considering Zahid’s representations concerning his ongoing corruption
case. - FMT, 8/8/2023
Raja Rozela applied for early retirement, says AG
Attorney-General
Idrus Harun says Raja Rozela Raja Toran will be on leave from Aug 30,
while Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s trial will go on till December.
Deputy
public prosecutor Raja Rozela Raja Toran previously declined to comment
on a report that she was dropped as the lead prosecutor in Ahmad Zahid
Hamidi’s corruption trial. (Bernama pic)
PETALING JAYA: Raja Rozela Raja Toran was replaced as the lead deputy
public prosecutor (DPP) in Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s corruption trial as she
applied for an early retirement and will be on leave from Aug 30,
according to Attorney-General Idrus Harun.
Idrus said a new lead prosecutor was needed to take over
Zahid’s Yayasan Akalbudi case as the next trial dates will be until
December.
“This is to ensure continuity in the prosecution of Ahmad Zahid Hamidi,” he said in a statement.
“Raja Rozela applied for early retirement on April 3. The application
was approved and will be enforced on Nov 1. Meanwhile, she has applied
to go on leave before her retirement, starting Aug 30.”
Idrus added that deputy public prosecutor Dusuki Mokhtar will take over as the lead prosecutor in Zahid’s case.
The attorney-general said Dusuki had extensive experience as a deputy
public prosecutor for nearly 30 years now and had handled high-profile
cases even at the Court of Appeal and Federal Court.
One such high-profile case was the Lahad Datu incursion in 2013,
which led to 13 people being convicted of various offences linked to the
intrusion.
“The decision (to replace Raja Rozela) was made carefully to ensure
the prosecution’s case against Zahid is not affected and so that the
attorney-general’s chambers can ensure justice is served,” said Idrus.
Earlier today, New Straits Times reported that Raja Rozela
had been taken off Zahid’s case. She had been absent during proceedings
last week.
When contacted, Raja Rozela simply told the news outlet: “I am a public servant, I am not allowed to comment. My apologies.”
Pejuang information chief Rafique Rashid Ali had urged Idrus
to explain the matter, questioning the necessity to replace Raja Rozela
when she had been successful in establishing a prima facie case against
the Umno president.
Zahid is standing trial on 47 charges of money laundering
and criminal breach of trust (CBT) involving millions from Yayasan
Akalbudi, which he founded, and accepting bribes for various projects
during his tenure as home minister.
Twelve of the charges are for CBT, eight for corruption and the remaining 27 for money laundering.
Last week, the prosecution told the High Court that it is
still considering Zahid’s representations concerning his ongoing
corruption case. - FMT, 8/8/2023
Is Raja Rozela the new Gani Patail?
Comparisons
are drawn between the removal of Raja Rozela Raja Toran as lead
prosecutor in Ahmad Zahid Hamidi's corruption trial and the termination
of Abdul Gani Patail as attorney-general amid a probe into 1MDB in 2015.
In
July 2015, then attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail was abruptly
replaced by Mohamed Apandi Ali. Prior to that, Gani was heading a
special task force probing the wrongdoings in 1MDB.
As events eventually unfolded, the money trail in 1MDB led to then
prime minister Najib Razak, who is now serving a 12-year jail sentence
and an RM210 million fine for abuse of power and corruption.
One cannot be faulted for thinking that Gani's removal, some three
months prior to his retirement in October, came as a relief for Najib,
if not bought him precious time.
One also cannot be faulted for drawing a comparison between the
episode, which took place eight years ago, and the recent removal of
Raja Rozela Raja Toran as the lead prosecutor in the corruption trial of
Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.
The similarities did not end there. When approached by Malaysiakini
for comment at that time, Gani replied: "Never mind. I do not want to
say a word. Nanti saya cakap ni banyaklah."
Meanwhile, Raja Rozela's response to the New Straits Times over her
departure was: "I am a public servant... I am not allowed to comment. My
apologies."
Officially, Gani "left" due to "health reasons" while Raja Rozela had
opted for "early retirement". In both instances, the reasons were
stated through media statements by their immediate superiors, that is,
the then chief secretary Ali Hamsa for the former and Attorney-General
Idrus Harun for the latter. Neither Gani nor Raja Rozela addressed the
media, despite the huge public interest in their decisions.
Are the similarities not eerie?
Why did Raja Rozela leave when she had led the team that had proven a
prima facie case against Zahid, who is facing 47 charges of criminal
breach of trust, graft, and money laundering involving Yayasan Akalbudi
funds?
The decision to drop Raja Rozela is part of a series of questionable
decisions made by the prosecutors with regards to Zahid's trial. For
one, he is able to get his passport back, purportedly for work, but from
the looks of it, he took the opportunity to undergo a cosmetic
procedure abroad, too.
Worse still, he was able to get his trial postponed in April over
"new facts and evidence", and prosecutors were then instructed not to
oppose the postponement. It is unclear what the "new evidence" was, but
considering that his defence has been called, it is all very fishy.
By any accounts, these are suspicious moves that suggest political
interference. It does not help that the law minister is an Umno leader.
If it is true that Raja Rozela was adamant about retiring, did the
government try to persuade her to stay at least until the disposal of
Zahid's case? What were the reasons behind her decision to call it
quits, given her upstanding reputation as a prosecutor? Why was she
dropped now when her retirement only takes effect in November?
There are far too many unanswered questions about Raja Rozela's
departure. Unless the government clears the air over these, it would
have to brace for a backlash from voters, particularly urbanites, in the
state elections this Saturday.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the position of MalaysiaNow. - Malaysia Now, 9/8/2023
The problem with IJN is that it does not operate like other government hospitals and clinics that provide healthcare for ALL at an affordable rate, with minimum charges. Anyone(including foreign nationals) can get IJN's services, which is heart healthcare, but you must pay thousands and tens of thousands of ringgit.
IJN provide services for ALL provided that you pay its HIGH FEES - The only obvious exception are government employees or civil servants, government pensioners and their dependents.
It was also supposed to provide affordable service to a small number of the POOR - but this is minimal, and difficult. Others can get IJN's services, which is heart healthcare, but you must pay thousands and tens of thousands of ringgit.
Meanwhile, IJN revealed approximately 84.7% of its workload comprised
patients from the government sectors (employees, pensioners and their
dependents) while 14.9% were self-paying patients (insurance coverage
and cash). “Only 0.4% are foreign patients (this information is available in our performance reports on our website),” it added.
84.7% - patients from the government sectors (employees, pensioners and their
dependents
14.5% - self paying patients
So, does it mean only 0.8% for the other poor in Malaysia - private sector workers, self-employed, farmers, FELDA Settlers, fisher folk, small vendors, Grab drivers, etc...? Or maybe not - maybe that w
IJN was wholly owned by the government of Malaysia - is this still the same?
IJN must be 'NATIONALIZED' and to provide heart healthcare for all in Malaysia including the poor. The majority cannot afford the DRACONIAN FEES charged now to 'self paying patients' . SO, let it operate like any other government facilities where the services required a small fee or is free. HUMAN LIVES are more important that PROFITS.
Talking about private hospitals and clinics > some States own them and they provide services for those who can pay the FEES only, which is HIGH. Do these States not care for the people to provide free healthcare for the people - rather than making PROFITS by operating private medical facilities.
UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE FOR ALL FOR FREE OR AFFORDABLE RATES
IJN dismisses privatisation claim, says still treating govt servants, retirees
Alfian Z.M. Tahir
Updated 5 days ago ·
Published on 5 Aug 2023 2:32PM
IJN dispels claims that it has stopped providing treatment to retired civil servants. – IJN pic, August 5, 2023.
INSTITUT
Jantung Negara (IJN) said it has not been made a private entity and is
still fully owned by the government under the Minister of Finance
Incorporated.
Responding to a recent anonymous letter claiming that IJN has been
privatised and is refusing treatment to retired civil servants, the
specialist heart institute, in a statement, said its commitment to
providing excellent healthcare to government employees has not wavered.
It also emphasised it values the contribution of government employees, including retirees.
“IJN takes seriously the accusations in the recent letter by
“Concerned Pensioners” that has been circulating on social media and
WhatsApp. They are inaccurate and unjustified to the organisation.
“We strive to offer the highest level of medical care to all our
patients, regardless of their backgrounds. Contrary to the claim in the
letter, IJN has never been privatised – it has been corporatised
institution since its inception.
“As a corporatised entity, IJN continues to be fully owned by the
government under the Minister of Finance Incorporated and the centre
operates privately under the Malaysian Private Healthcare Facilities and
Services Act 1998 under the purview of the Health Ministry,” it said in
the statement.
IJN also said its primary mission remains to provide exceptional
medical services to all Malaysians, including government employees,
retirees and citizens, as well as patients from neighbouring countries.
The letter, which has since gone viral, claimed IJN is redirecting
its patients to other hospitals, on the grounds that it is transitioning
to private care.
The letter also said former government employees were being asked to leave and seek treatment at other hospitals.
Meanwhile, IJN revealed approximately 84.7% of its workload comprised
patients from the government sectors (employees, pensioners and their
dependents) while 14.9% were self-paying patients (insurance coverage
and cash).
“Only 0.4% are foreign patients (this information is available in our performance reports on our website),” it added.
Since its establishment, nearly five million patients have received treatment at IJN.
Its chief executive officer Dr Aizai Azan Abdul Rahim told reporters
previously that despite working at that capacity, the centre does not
face any problems accommodating the volume of patients as it has
sufficient staff and adequate equipment and facilities. – August 5,
2023.
PM Anwar Ibrahim and the Pakatan Harapan parties must speedily clarify if he/they agrees with what DPM Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said....
Amongst others, he said that GOD has destined the combination of certain parties > not included was DAP or Amanah or even PKR or PH? Why?
"Allah has destined the combination between Prime Minister Datuk Seri
Anwar Ibrahim and me representing UMNO and BN, assisted by Gabungan
Parti Sarawak (GPS) chairman Tan Sri Abang Johari Abang Openg, Gabungan
Rakyat Sabah (GRS) chairman Datuk Seri Hajiji Noor and Parti Warisan
Sabah (Warisan) president Datuk Seri Mohd Shafie Apdal.
Then, he goes on to say in this BERNAMA(The Malaysian National News Agency) report..
"Anthony Loke, although he is from DAP, has made a pledge in front of
us that DAP will never interfere in Islamic matters in Malaysia because
DAP fully respects the position of Islam as enshrined in the Malaysian
constitution," he[Zahid Hamidi] said.
Did Antony Loke make this pledge in front of '...Prime Minister Datuk Seri
Anwar Ibrahim and me representing UMNO and BN, assisted by Gabungan
Parti Sarawak (GPS) chairman Tan Sri Abang Johari Abang Openg, Gabungan
Rakyat Sabah (GRS) chairman Datuk Seri Hajiji Noor and Parti Warisan
Sabah (Warisan) president Datuk Seri Mohd Shafie Apdal...'
DAP is a multiracial multi religious party - so why should it make a PLEDGE before the US... ?
Did BN, UMNO, Amanah, PKR, Warisan and GRS make a similar pledge.... for it is important that they do respect the Federal Constitution...
DAP, I am certain never made any pledge not to interfere in Islamic matters - because it is duty bound to represent all Malaysians(including the about 60% Muslims) - meaning if there are matters against the rights of citizens, even Muslims - DAP must act.
DAP is not MCA, which is an ethnic based party representing Chinese Malaysians. DAP also represents Muslims.
Hence, if there is something wrong with the Lembaga Tabung Haji, DAP, I believe, will speak out. If there is problem with Zakat related matters, DAP will speak out. If there is something about Islamic banking, halal certification, etc - all which some can claim are 'Islamic Matters', DAP must speak out. If not, then it is no more a national party, but a party just representing the 40 per cent...'non-Muslims'.
Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim need clarify whether GOD has destined that Malaysia be ruled by PH, PKR, Amanah and DAP ...Is PH still strong and united?
Of recent times, from media reports, it seems that Zahid Hamidi and the BN seems to have more influence than Anwar Ibrahim and PH? Am I wrong?
A perusal of Anwar Ibrahim's actions, in my opinion, indicates continuing the BN agenda? REFORMASI agenda seems to be forgotten at the moment - the bad laws expected to be abolished still remains(worse still even being used) - and there is more? Sedition Act, SOSMA, Detention Without Trial Laws - POCA, POTA,etc..., Societies Act, Universities and University Colleges Act (AUKU),
He seems to have abandoned DEMOCRACY -Local Council Elections/Kampung Elections - and maintaining the 'political appointment' system.
10th MONTH of PM Anwar Ibrahim's rule - and remember, he can at any time lose the confidence of the majority of MPs and then we may have a new PM. Anti-Hopping law does not stop a change of PM - MPs need not leave their current parties to decide whether they still have or have lost confidence in ANWAR...
SO, BUCK UP AND START PROMISED REFORMS FAST...
The 6-State Elections, especially in Selangor and Penang may see voters taking the elections as a means of expressing 'disappointment' of the current Federal government ... hoping that this will get Anwar and PH moving on reforms...
DPM: DAP promises never to interfere in Islamic matters
Deputy
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said DAP has given its
promise that the party will always respect the religion of Islam as
enshrined in the constitution.-NSTP/NIK ABDULLAH NIK OMAR
PASIR
PUTEH: Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said DAP
has given its promise that the party will always respect the religion of
Islam as enshrined in the constitution.
He said the matter was stated by DAP secretary-general Anthony Loke
during the formation of the unity government, which comprises Pakatan
Harapan (PH), Barisan Nasional (BN) and coalition partners from Sabah
and Sarawak.
"Allah has destined the combination between Prime Minister Datuk Seri
Anwar Ibrahim and me representing UMNO and BN, assisted by Gabungan
Parti Sarawak (GPS) chairman Tan Sri Abang Johari Abang Openg, Gabungan
Rakyat Sabah (GRS) chairman Datuk Seri Hajiji Noor and Parti Warisan
Sabah (Warisan) president Datuk Seri Mohd Shafie Apdal.
"Anthony Loke, although he is from DAP, has made a pledge in front of
us that DAP will never interfere in Islamic matters in Malaysia because
DAP fully respects the position of Islam as enshrined in the Malaysian
constitution," he said.
He said this at a media conference after attending the 'Pemimpin
Bersama Masyarakat' (Leaders Meet the People) programme at the Perumahan
Nelayan Tok Bali here today.
Also present were UMNO secretary-general Datuk Dr Asyraf Wajdi Dusuki
and Pasir Puteh UMNO Division chief Datuk Zawawi Othman. -- BERNAMA - NST, 9/8/2023
While PM Anwar and the Kedah State government are trying to claim 'GLORY' in bringing in more investment from Infineon, what we must remember is INFINEON will respect worker and trade union rights... In the near past, there was an issue of rights violations...(The issue was never resolved as the victimized worker elected to stop pursuing for justice)
Who brings in investment to the country and State? The Federal government may assist - but ultimately it is STATE government that gives permission to operate factory or business facility in a State. It is the relevant LOCAL GOVERNMENT(Local Council) who has the final say as to whether a factory is permitted to operate within its local government area or not.
KELANTAN, who have for a long time been ruled by the Opposition, different from the powers that ruled the Federal government - did actively draw in foreign investors to open factories/businesses in Kelantan - and, this they did presumably without any Federal government's assistance.
Whilst the battle continues as to who is responsible for the additional investment by Infineon - the company has stayed silent.
Malaysia should only allow foreign entities to come to Malaysia to set up factories and/or business premises ONLY if they will respect worker and union rights - if the government truly cares for workers in Malaysia. There must be no union busting - or attempts to prevent trade unions.
PM Anwar: German chipmaker Infineon’s additional RM24.9b investment shows faith in Malaysia
Prime
Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is also the finance minister,
said the announcement is in line with the idea of a civil economy that
aims to make Malaysia an economic leader in Asia and ranked among the 30
largest economies in the world. — Bernama pic
By Ben Tan
Thursday, 03 Aug 2023 10:27 PM MYT
KUALA
LUMPUR, Aug 3 — Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim welcomed the
continued support shown by German chip maker Infineon Technologies AG
that he said reflects Malaysia’s important position in the global
semiconductor supply chain.
“It complements the National
Investment Aspiration (NIA) and the New Industrial Master Plan which is
to attract high-tech and high-value investment to support the global and
domestic economy,” he said in a statement tonight.
Anwar
was commenting on Infineon’s latest plan to build a factory in Kulim,
Kedah to produce the world’s largest 200mm Power Fab SiC (silicon
carbide).
He also hailed the company’s additional investment of €5
billion (RM24.9 billion) over the next five years in the second phase
of its module three construction.
Anwar,
who is also the finance minister, said the announcement is in line with
the idea of a civil economy that aims to make Malaysia an economic
leader in Asia and ranked among the 30 largest economies in the world.
“I welcome the investment announcement from Infineon which has proven their faith in Malaysia.
“This
announcement is an extension of my discussion with Infineon
Technologies AG chief operating officer Dr Rutger Wijburg on July 24,”
he said.
Over the past five decades, Anwar pointed out that
Infineon has made Malaysia an important hub in wafer fabrication in
Kulim in Kedah and carried out chip semiconductor packaging activities
in Batu Berendam in Melaka.
He said Infineon’s continued
confidence in Malaysia’s investment ecosystem reflects the country’s
important position in the global semiconductor supply chain.
Infineon is Germany’s largest semiconductor manufacturer and is one of the ten largest semiconductor manufacturers in the world.
The company has been operating in Malaysia for 50 years, since 1973. Malay Mail, 3/8/2023
Infineon only decided on RM25bil investment days ago, says Anwar
Caretaker Kedah menteri besar Sanusi Nor recently said Infineon’s decision to invest in the state was made some time ago.
Prime
Minister Anwar Ibrahim said Infineon Technologies AG only finalised its
decision on the investment ‘four days ago’. (Infineon web pic)
GEORGE TOWN: Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has poured cold water on
caretaker Kedah menteri besar Sanusi Nor’s claim that Infineon
Technologies AG’s decision to invest in the state was made some time
ago.
At a ceramah here, Anwar said the German company only
finalised its decision on its RM25 billion investment to expand its
Kulim facility “four days ago”.
“The
government is stable now, and investors are coming. More recently it
was the German company (Infineon). They came to meet me and Tengku
Zafrul Aziz (investment, trade and industry minister).
“The company had sought guarantees (related to the expansion) from
the Kedah government in 2021, but in reality, the decision was made four
days ago.”
Anwar said Infineon decided to invest in its facility at the Kulim Hi-Tech Park which was set up by the federal government.
Earlier today, Malaysia Gazette reported Sanusi as saying Infineon already decided to expand its facility in Kulim last year.
He said that he visited the Infineon factory in Kulim last year and
was briefed on their expansion plans. Sanusi also hit out at the federal
government for claiming credit for the investment. - FMT, 5/8/2023
German subsidiary’s action in Malaysia amounts to ‘union busting’, claim 55 groups
Fifty-five NGOs and unions
have called for the reinstatement of Infineon Technologies’ union
president Muhammad Zulfadlee Thye bin Abdullah, who they claim was
wrongfully dismissed.
We,
the 55 undersigned organisations and trade unions, are shocked to hear
about the wrongful termination of Muhammad Zulfadlee Thye bin Abdullah,
the president of the Infineon Technologies Malaysia Workers Union
(Kesatuan Pekerja Pekerja Infineon Technologies (M) Sdn Bhd) at Infineon
in Malacca, which is said to be the largest assembly of Infineon with a
workforce of about 8,000 people.
Zulfadlee, an employee since 1998, has been the president of the union since 2005.
Infineon,
a German company that produces, amongst others, electronic and auto
components, which are said to be used by major brands including Apple,
Bosch, Philips, Microsoft, Hewlette Packard, Dell and Continental.
On
13 December 2016, Zulfadlee was terminated on the grounds that he
“committed the act of malingering”, with reference to sick leave
obtained on 18 October from a doctor, Dr Aw Cheng Yew, of Klinlk Melaka,
which is a panel clinic of the employer.
The
basis of the allegation seems to be because he was present at an
activity of the Selangor division of the Malaysian Trade Union Congress
(MTUC) in Putrajaya on the same date when he was on sick leave. As such,
one may assume that maybe the charge was simply pretending to be sick
(or faking illness) for the purpose of avoiding work or duty.
It
must be stated that the reason for termination used was not an
employment misconduct stated in Infineon Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn
Bhd’s document entitled Policy for Misconduct and Disciplinary.
Further,
the word malingering is not a commonly used word, and as such many are
unaware of the meaning of that word. To compound matters, in this case,
the word malingering allegedly was never even clearly explained to
Zulfadlee, whose mother tongue is the Malay language. When such English
words are used in a charges levied against a worker, and then not
explained clearly, it will have a tendency to be confusing and may
result in injustice.
In law, Zulfadlee was entitled to 22 days of
paid sick leave every year, and it must be pointed out that he was
examined by a qualified doctor who concluded that he was entitled to
sick leave, and a medical certificate was signed and issued by the
doctor. Sick leave is given only when the doctor, after examining,
decides a worker is not medically fit to perform his/her duties at work.
There
was no question of Zulfadlee lying or pretending to be sick, for on the
subsequent day he went to see a specialist doctor, who allegedly
discovered that he had a stone in his bladder, and he was then given
further sick leave for three days on 19-21 October.
Despite being
on sick leave, Zulfadlee did come to the office for a few hours to do
some urgent work on two of these days but he was not charged for
committing the “act of malingering” for these days.
Being on a
sick leave does not mean that one is to be confined at home and rest in
bed and cannot do any other things including attending some union
meeting or activity. Sick leave only means that he is not medically fit
for work on the day, and in law he becomes entitled to paid sick leave.
On
18 October 2016, Zulfadlee said that he had no plans whatsoever to go
to the Putrajaya union activity with his union members who planned to
go. It was only after he had obtained medical leave whilst he was
sending off the union members heading to Putrajaya, that he was
convinced by his fellow union members and suddenly decided to follow
them in the bus.
Now, even if an employer disputes the medical
certificate issued by the doctor, then the employer should reasonably
have taken action against the doctor and/or the clinic – not with the
employee. It must be pointed out that generally a clinic on the panel of
the employer is less likely to simply issue medical certificates to
employees unless the doctor is convinced that the worker is entitled to
sick leave.
In
this case, the employer really had no reasonable basis to even suggest
that Zulfadlee was ‘malingering’ or lied to obtain the sick leave. In
such health matters, the employer is certainly not competent – only the
qualified doctor is.
We do not believe that any failings of a
doctor, if there even is, should ever be blamed on a worker, and
certainly should not be used as justification for termination.
Further,
attending or participating in a union activity cannot and should never
be an employment misconduct and/or a breach of the employment contract.
Anti-union action and discriminatory action against union president
As
such, we are of the opinion that the termination of the union president
may really not be because of an ‘act of malingering’ by an employee,
but simply a unionbusting action targeting the union president and the
union.
In Infineon’s letter dated 6 January 2017 rejecting
Zulfadlee’s appeal against the termination, it was stated amongst
others, “The basis of our decision was premised on the fact that the
Management could not condone nor mitigate punishments for a serious act
of misconduct committed by a Union President leading the employees of
Kesatuan Pekerja – Pekerja lnfineon Technologies Malaysia itwu.”’
This letter was signed by Lee Cheong Chee, the president and managing director of lnfineon Technologies Melaka.
The
letter also stated “your illustrious career and contributions to the
Company has been well acknowledged through your progress during your
tenure. While that may ordinarily be a mitigating factor in considering
any appeal, the Management has decided that the your act of malingering
is deemed to be unacceptable and is aggravated in view of you being the
Union President at the point the act of misconduct was committed…”
Besides
Zulfadlee, six other members of the executive committee of the union,
including the vice president and the secretary, were also targeted and
subjected to disciplinary action – and some of this had ended with a
stern warning, whilst only the union president was terminated.
Considering
the fact that out of the over 40 employees that participated in the
union programme on 18 October 2016, and only the president and six of
the union leaders have been subjected to disciplinary action, it
certainly looks that Infineon may be discriminating against employees
who are leaders of the union, and it may be reasonably said to be an act
of ‘union busting’.
The timing of these disciplinary actions and
the termination of the union president, when the union and Infineon is
starting negotiations concerning the next collective bargaining
agreement, whereby the first meeting was scheduled for 23 January 2017,
is most disturbing. Members of the union will most likely be prejudiced
by this.
It looks like the employer’s actions in this case was
maybe to instil fear in the union, its members and other employees,
which may affect the effectiveness of the trade union. These actions of
the employer would impact on the duty and obligation of unions to fight
for better rights and working conditions, highlight future wrongdoings,
and fight against violation of the workers’ rights. It is a failure to
recognise and respect the freedom of association.
The failure of
this union and/or its members to openly protest the wrongful dismissal
of the union president indicates that the employer’s strategy to create a
docile and compliant union may be working. It may also seriously affect
the upcoming collective bargaining agreement to the detriment of
employees and union members.
Obligation to uphold worker and union rights and freedom of association
Infineon
Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd, a subsidiary of Infineon, a German
company, in this case seems to have acted contrary to Infineon’s own
policy and Code of Conduct, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and
Development (OECD) Guidelines, the Electronic Industry Citizenship
Coalition’s Code of Conduct, UN standards and principles; and other
relevant standards and good practices.
Brands and corporations
that have Infineon in their supply chain have the obligation to ensure
that justice be done, and that codes of conduct or policies not be
violated by reason of these action/s of Infineon, via its Malaysian
subsidiary, Infineon Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd, including the
discrimination and the wrongful termination of the union leader.
Justice
demands that Infineon Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd should
immediately reinstate Zulfadlee without electing to simply just wait for
a long drawn out court process in Malaysia that could take even five to
nine years before the court may award victory to a wrongfully
terminated worker.
As such, unless Infineon immediately reinstates
Zulfadlee, an employee of Infineon for 18 years, great injustice would
be done to this worker who has wrongfully been deprived of his
employment and income that is so needed for him and his family to
survive.
Unjust Malaysian laws at present state that if a worker
cannot be reinstated, he or she would be awarded compensation in lieu of
reinstatement for just a maximum of 24 months – whereas previously this
compensation would have been payment of all income the worker would
have earned from the date of wrongful dismissal until the date of
judgment (or reinstatement).
The new amended limit is not anymore a
deterrent for employers seeking to wrongfully get rid of employees,
especially worker leaders.
Further, in the case of a union leader,
the chances of getting employment with any other employer, especially
in the same sector, is also most difficult compared to other workers.
Termination of strong union leaders is grossly unjust to the union and
its members. Without immediate reinstatement, great injustice will be
done.
Therefore, we
call for the immediate reinstatement of Zulfadlee Thye Bin Abdullah, the president of the InfineonTechnologies Workers Union;
call
for the immediate withdrawal of disciplinary action/s against other
union leaders and/or members, and/or for the revocation of any
punishment that has already been handed out;
call on
Infineon and its subsidiary, Infineon Technologies (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd,
to respect and promote worker and trade union rights and cease
discrimination against union leaders, and also cease union-busting
activities;
call on Apple, Bosch, Philips and other
companies that has Inineon in its supply chain to immediately ensure
that Infineon respect the freedom of association of workers and workers’
and trade union rights;
call on Germany to ensure
that Infineon complies with OECD guidelines; United Nations and
International Labour Organisation (ILO) standards, principles and best
practices; and other similar obligations to ensure that human rights and
workers’ rights are respected, protected and promoted;
call on Infineon and Infineon Technologies Melaka to respect and promote human rights, including workers’ and trade union rights
Charles Hector Syed Shahir bin Syed Mohamud Mohd Roszeli bin Majid Pranom Somwong
For and on behalf of the 55 organisations, trade unions and groups listed below:
Malaysia -
Union busting tactics in the electronics sector
(2013)
On 1-2 October 2014, workers in Malaysia voted for union
representation by the Electronic Industry Employees Union (EIEU) at
electronics manufacturer Infineon Technologies, despite strong pressure
and union busting tactics by management. Workers at the Kulim-based
plant in northwest Malaysia initially asked the company management for
recognition of their union in April 2014. However, Infineon rejected the
union’s demands and refused to enter a constructive dialogue with
workers. EIEU was subsequently forced to pursue a long bureaucratic
recognition procedure, while the company tried to destroy the workers’
efforts at organising. In a bid to prevent union presence, the company
tried to claim the factory was not producing electronic components.
Eventually, Infineon agreed to a secret ballot of the entire workforce.
In the run-up to the vote, the company regularly provided negative
briefings against EIEU and threatened workers. Nonetheless, more than
half of the workers voted in favour of having the union at the plant. - ITUC Website
Najib’s ‘house arrest’
-
Aliran has released a statement on the latest developments: The news has
made headlines both at home and abroad, and for good reason. For many, this
decisi...
Beyond the Bandung nostalgia
-
Sixty years on, the spirit of 1955 needs updating for today's world.
The post Beyond the Bandung nostalgia appeared first on Aliran.
APA PADA NAMA
-
1. Sejarah Malaysia dikait rapat dengan UMNO, Parti Kebangsaan Melayu
Bersatu. Parti UMNO pula dikenali dengan pemimpinnya. 2. Demikian di
peringkat permul...
China and HK may be barred from Asia Team meet
-
PETALING JAYA: The status of next week’s Asia Team Champion-ships in
Manila, the Philippines, is in quandary as two badminton nations – China
and Hong Kong...
PRU14 - Keputusan TEMERLOH - Parlimen dan DUN
-
Keputusan di Temerloh, harus kita analisa
1- Parlimen dimenangi Pakatan Harapan, yang juga menang DUN Mentakab,
tetapi BN menang DUN Lancang dan DUN Kuala ...
Thank you, Malaysians
-
Before the lights go out on The Malaysian Insider at midnight, we say
"Thank You" to our readers. TMI started on February 25, 2008. Today, after
eight year...
I believe in the freedom of expression - and everyone is free to use, reproduce, quote, copy and circulate, etc... materials published here. Please credit the source: http://charleshector.blogspot.com/.
For those of you who do have Blogs/Websites, it would be good if you could add a link to CHARLES HECTOR Blog. Please do promote the BLOG.
Anonymous comments or those containing profanities and obscenities (or irrelevant matters) will be rejected. Note that all comments made in post are personal opinions.
Number of Visits
Over 4 million visits. On an average, we have about 700-750 visits per day.Thank you all for your support and encouragement..
Source:-
Posts
