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...
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 debtreaching RM1.5 trillion. - NST, 13/7/2024
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
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
[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.
No to death
by hanging for 6 former Malaysian Armed Forces University students – Sentence
them instead to 30 – 40 years imprisonment, which is more humane and consistent
with Malaysia’s current stance on death penalty and executions
Court
should never endorse ‘self-help’ actions against suspected criminals by lay
persons, and take action against Clinic for failure to report victim of
suspected crime
As human beings and Malaysians, we do not want to anymore
kill or murder anyone, even those that commit the most grievous of crimes. It
is a folly to believe that we are innocent, because it is our courts that
sentenced someone to death by hanging, and the State carried out the execution.
As Malaysians, more so in a democracy, we are responsible for the laws of the
land, and the acts of intentionally killing of anyone by the State.
MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) verily believes
that justly, the Court of Appeal should not have, in the case of the
killing of navy cadet Zulfarhan Osman Zulkarnain of
Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia (UPNM) seven years ago, sentenced the
6, being Muhammad Akmal Zuhairi Azmal, Muhammad Azamuddin Mad Sofi, Muhammad
Najib Mohd Razi, Muhammad Afif Najmudin Azahat, Mohamad Shobirin Sabri, and
Abdoul Hakeem Mohd Ali to death. The court in this case, was reported saying, “Therefore,
we unanimously decide that a single sentence is appropriate for all six
defendants, and they shall be taken to a place of execution where they will be
sentenced to death by hanging.”(Malay Mail, 23/7/2024).
For the crime of murder, no more does the Malaysian courts
and Judges have no choice but to sentence the convicted to mandatory death
penalty as it was in the past. Now, courts have the option to impose the alternative
sentence of long-time imprisonment and whipping.
MADPET hopes that Malaysian Courts demonstrate justice and
compassion and stop using the death penalty.
After 4/7/2023, There Is an
Alternative Sentence, Other Than Death, For Murder
After the Abolition Of Mandatory
Death Penalty Act 2023 (AMDP Act 2023) came into force on 4/7/2023, the
sentence for murder (Section 302 Penal Code) was no longer the mandatory death
penalty, it became it ‘shall be punished with death or imprisonment for a term of not less than
thirty years but not exceeding forty years and if not sentenced to death, shall
also be punished with whipping of not less than twelve strokes.’
Beside sentencing someone to death
by hanging, there now is an alternative sentence available that does not
involve the deprivation of life.
Alternative Sentence
Available For Even MURDER Committed Before Mandatory Death Penalty Abolished.
Section 39 of the AMDP Act 2023
states that ‘Upon the coming into operation of this Act, if a person is
convicted by any court for the commission of an offence under section 121,
121A, 302 or 364 or paragraph 130C(1)(a),
130I(a), 130N(a), 130O(1)(aa), 130QA(a), 130ZB(a) or 374A(a) of the Code, the
person, whether at a trial or on an appeal, shall be sentenced in accordance
with the provisions of the Code as amended by this Act even though the
offence was committed before the date of coming into operation of this Act.’
This means that the new sentence
applies for all ongoing trials and appeals, and it did not matter when the
crime was committed.
This meant that when the Court of
Appeal, allowed the Appeal on 23/7/2024 in the case of the killing of navy
cadet Zulfarhan Osman, and found the 6 guilty of murder (s. 302), the Court did
not have to sentence them to death, but had the option to impose the
alternative sentence of‘imprisonment
for a term of not less than thirty years but not exceeding forty years’ plus
‘whipping of not less than twelve strokes’
In this case, the court could have
even sentenced the 6 to 40 years imprisonment, and these about 21 year old
young adults when they committed the crime, would come out of prison when they
are over 60 years old. This would be just.
Even for Murder, Courts
Should Justly Avoid Death Sentence
In this case, there were about 18
others, then University Students, who were involved in the torture of the late navy
cadet Zulfarhan Osman for over 2 days, and at the end, 5 took turns ‘pressing a
steam iron on the entire body of the deceased (Zulfarhan), including his
private parts, while one Abdul Hakeem was complicit in inciting and instructing
the 5.
After the end of torture on the 22nd,
Zulfarhan sadly passed away on 1/6/2017.
Whilst the 6, involved in the
torture in the later stage using the steam iron, were sentenced to death, it is
ironical that the other 12 only ended up with a sentence of 4 years
imprisonment. They ought to have received a higher sentence as it is hard to
say that their earlier torture did not contribute to the death.
Why were the other 12 NOT
charged for culpable homicide not amounting to murder? SELF-HELP against
suspected criminals by lay persons cannot be allowed.
Ironically, the 12 others were
convicted Section 330 of the Penal Code -Voluntarily causing hurt to extort confession or to compel restoration of
property, which is an offence prescribed usually for law
enforcement. The 12 were just fellow students – not police or law
enforcement. They have NO RIGHT to to extort confession or to compel
restoration of property.
The law prohibits ‘self help’ when
a crime is suspected? Reports must be made to the relevant law enforcement
authorities when another is suspected of a crime.
Hence, to convict under Section 330
may be seen as an acceptance of ‘self-help’ by lay persons, including the ‘torture’
of persons suspected of a crime by persons, who are not legally empowered to
enforce the law.
More so, since it would have been most
difficult to establish whether it was the earlier torture, that involved
kicking and beatings, or the later ‘steam iron’ torture that caused the death?
Section 330 should never be used for
anyone other than police or law enforcement officers.
Why has no action been taken
yet against the Military Hospital and the Clinic with regard the death?
The judgment also revealed that the
deceased was allegedly then taken to the As-Salam Clinic for treatment on
27/5/2017, and for another follow-up treatment at the same clinic the following
day – but the Clinic failed to inform the authorities of the crime. Surely, the
clinic must have suspected that the patient was a victim of a crime, and should
have immediately informed the police?
Should not action be taken against
the Hospital and the Clinic, for if they had acted, death could have been
avoided?
The deceased passed away on
1/6/2017, several days after the torture.
To sentence 6 to death, but the
other 12 to just 4 years imprisonment may be a miscarriage of justice, or
inadequate administration of justice. The failure of the 12 to immediately
inform the authorities should also be a consideration – was it acquiescence to
the ongoing torture that ended with death?
All responsible for causing the
death should be held accountable.
Malaysia – Moratorium on Executions
Pending Abolition of Death Penalty
Malaysia, since 2018 have
committed to a moratorium on executions pending the abolition of the death
penalty. Malaysia voted in favour in the United Nations General Assembly
Resolution 73/175 of 17 December 2018, 75/183 of 16 December 2020 and 77/222 of
15 December 2022. Therefore, these resolutions were supported by the post GE14
Pakatan Harapan Government in 2018, the Perikatan Nasional government in 2020,
and Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s Pakatan Harapan led-coalition (also known as
‘Unity Government) in 2022.
Opposition and Government Parties
for Abolition Ultimately – So ABOLITION Now
For, as long as Malaysia retains
the death penalty in its laws, there is always a risk that persons will
continue to be sentenced to death, and as such, MADPET calls for the total
abolition of the death penalty.
Thus, in Malaysia, currently both
the ruling parties in government, and the Opposition parties are for the
ultimate abolition of the death penalty, and so, MADPET calls on Malaysia to
take the next step after the abolition of the mandatory death penalty, to now totally
abolish the death penalty.
Therefore,
MADPET calls for the Public
Prosecutor, and/or the convicted 6, to appeal this decision of the Court of
Appeal, with a view of changing the ‘death by hanging’ sentence for murder to
the alternative sentence of long-term imprisonment.
MADPET calls for the Public Prosecutor to appeal this decision of the Court of
Appeal, with a view of also reviewing the conviction of the 12 under
Section 330 Penal Code, and to consider charging them for culpable homicide not
amounting to murder. Self-help in punishing criminal suspects cannot be
endorsed, and certainly not by a court of law.
MADPET also calls for the
Public Prosecutor to consider taking actions against the Rumah Sakit Angkatan
Tentera(RSAT)/Military Hospital and the As-Salam Clinic, including also
relevant staff in these institutions, for the actions/omissions with regard to this
death. Surely, doctors and medical facilities are duty bound to report to
relevant law enforcement when they come across a possible victim of crime.
MADPET reiterates its call for
the abolition of the death penalty, and for the maintenance of a moratorium on
executions pending abolition.
MADPET also reiterates its
call for the abolition of the inhumane corporal punishment of whipping, that is
now provided for in Malaysia’s criminal laws.
Charles
Hector
For
and on behalf of MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)
#####
Note:
Extract from the relevant High
Court Judgment [2024] 1 CLJ 795
‘Ringkasan Fakta Kes Pendakwaan
[17] Si mati, ZF, adalah pelajar UPNM, menginap di Asrama
Jebat di bilik B-06. ZF telah disyaki mencuri sebuah laptop milik T1 di bilik
asrama yang lain. Pada 20 Mei 2017 jam 9.30 malam, SP25 (rakan sebilik ZF),
telah diminta oleh T1 untuk mencari laptop T1 di loker ZF dan di sekitar bilik
ZF kerana T1 menuduh ZF mencuri laptopnya. SP25 mencari laptop itu tetapi tidak
dijumpai. Menurut SP25, rakan sebilik ZF, iaitu T18, menyatakan bahawa bapanya,
SP13, berkebolehan mencari barang hilang mengikut perubatan Islam. SP13 selepas
dihubungi oleh anaknya T18, telah membuat solat hajat dan mendapat firasat
bahawa ZF yang telah mengambil laptop. Ini membuatkan T1 menjadi sangat marah.
[18] Pada jam lebih kurang 1 pagi, masuk ke tarikh 21 Mei
2017, semasa ZF sedang tidur di biliknya, ZF telah dikejutkan oleh T1 dan SP20
dan ZF diarahkan pergi ke bilik 3-05. Di bilik ini, ZF telah disoal siasat oleh
T1 dan telah dipukul oleh T1, T7, T9, T11 dan T12. ZF pada masa itu hanya
berseluar tanpa baju. Walaupun ZF dipukul beramai-ramai, namun ZF masih tidak
mengaku mencuri laptop T1.
[19] Pada sebelah pagi hari tersebut, ZF tidak hadir roll
call. ZF kemudian dilihat berada di biliknya pada jam 6.30 petang, berpakaian
sukan, berkeadaan lemah dan sakit tangan sehingga memerlukan bantuan SP25 untuk
memakai baju.
[20] Selepas dipukul, di bilik yang sama dari jam 4.45
pagi sehingga azan subuh berkumandang jam 5.45 pagi, ZF telah dicucuh atau
ditekap dengan seterika wap sambil disoal siasat. Pada masa ini, ramai pelajar
telah bersurai dan hanya tinggal T1 hingga T6. Tertuduh-tertuduh, T1 hingga T5,
telah mencucuh seterika panas ke badan ZF bergilir-gilir dan T6 yang
mengarahkan lima tertuduh ini supaya ZF dicucuh. ZF menjerit dan menggelupur
kesakitan setiap kali dicucuh dengan seterika. Pada masa itu, ZF hanya memakai
boxer, tertiarap di lantai dengan kedua-dua tangan diikat.
[21] Selepas dicucuh dengan seterika pada 22hb dan
beberapa hari ZF tetap berada di bilik 4-10. T1 dan T2 ada bersama mengawal ZF
dan tidak meninggalkan ZF tanpa ada salah seorang atau lebih seorang tertuduh
mengawalnya. Keadaan kecederaan ZF akibat ditekap seterika wap pada badannya
menjadi menggelembung dan ada tompok-tompok kehitaman di badan dan sedikit
darah di kulitnya, di seluruh badan. ZF dilihat tidur di atas katil dan
berselimut. T1 hingga T4 bercakap mahu merawat sendiri ZF.
[22] Kawan ZF, SP23 bersama T8 merasa kasihan kepada ZF
telah menulis surat layang meminta ZF diselamatkan dan pada 23 Mei 2017, SP23 telah menyelitkan surat itu di hadapan
Rumah Sakit Angkatan Tentera (RSAT). Malangnya, tiada tindakan
diambil untuk memberi bantuan ke atas ZF walaupun surat layang telah
dibuat, malah surat layang ini telah tular dan diketahui oleh T1. T1
setelah mengetahui surat layang itu lantas telah membawa ZF ke bilik asrama
yang lain. Selepas itu, ZF dibawa keluar dari UPNM dan menginap di hotel di
Bangi dan membawa ZF ke Klinik As- Salam pada 27 Mei
2017 dan selepas itu satu lagi rawatan susulan (follow up) pada 31 hb di klinik
yang sama. Selepas itu, ZF dibawa tinggal di Apartment De Centerum
di Bangi. Di sinilah pada 1 Jun 2017, ZF tidak sedarkan diri dan nazak dibawa
dengan ambulans ke Hospital Serdang dan disahkan meninggal dunia….’
Court of Appeal reinstates murder charge, death penalty for six former UPNM students over death of Navy cadet (VIDEO)
The
father of the murder victim who was a former student of the National
Defense University of Malaysia (UPNM) Zulfarhan Osman Zulkarnain,
Zulkarnain Idros (second from right) and his wife Hawa Osman, appeared
at the Appeal Court at the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya, July 23,
2024. — Bernama pic
Tuesday, 23 Jul 2024 12:38 PM MYT
PUTRAJAYA,
July 23 — The Court of Appeal today imposed the death sentence on six
former students of Universiti Pertahanan Nasional Malaysia (UPNM) for
the murder of Navy Cadet Officer Zulfarhan Osman Zulkarnain seven years
ago.
The sentence was meted out after a three-judge panel led by
Judge Datuk Hadhariah Syed Ismail, allowed the prosecution’s
cross-appeal to reinstate Section 302 of the Penal Code initially faced
by all the accused.
-Advertisement-
The
accused are Muhammad Akmal Zuhairi Azmal, Muhammad Azamuddin Mad Sofi,
Muhammad Najib Mohd Razi, Muhammad Afif Najmudin Azahat, Mohamad
Shobirin Sabri, and Abdoul Hakeem Mohd Ali.
Delivering the
unanimous decision, Judge Hadhariah stated that the High Court judge had
erred in amending the original murder charge under Section 302 of the
Penal Code to Section 304 (a) of the Penal Code.
“Therefore,
the court allows the prosecution’s appeal to set aside the amended
charge and reinstate Section 302 of the Penal Code,” she said, sitting
alongside Judges Mohamed Zaini Mazlan and Datuk Azmi Ariffin.
In
her ruling, Judge Hadhariah stated that the court found the five
defendants had taken turns pressing a steam iron on the entire body of
the deceased (Zulfarhan), including his private parts, while Abdul
Hakeem was complicit in inciting and instructing the five defendants to
do so.
“Therefore,
we unanimously decide that a single sentence is appropriate for all six
defendants, and they shall be taken to a place of execution where they
will be sentenced to death by hanging.
“Thus, the court overturns
the 18-year prison sentence imposed by the High Court on the six
defendants and replaces it with the death sentence,” said the judge.
Initially,
Muhammad Akmal, Muhammad Azamuddin, Muhammad Najib, Muhammad Afif, and
Mohamad Shobirin faced murder charges under Section 302 of the Penal
Code, which provides for a mandatory death penalty upon conviction.
Whereas,
Abdoul Hakeem was charged as an accomplice under Section 109 of the
same Code, which also carries a mandatory death penalty.
The Kuala
Lumpur High Court had then found all six defendants guilty of causing
injury to Zulfarhan with intent but without the intention to kill, under
Section 304 (a) of the Penal Code, which provides for imprisonment of
up to 30 years and a fine if the act was committed with the intent to
cause death.
All of them were accused of committing the acts in a
room at the Jebat Hostel block, UPNM, between 4.45 am and 5.45 am on May
22, 2017.
Zulfarhan passed away at the Serdang Hospital on June 1, 2017.
Meanwhile,
the three-judge panel overturned the three-year prison sentences
imposed on 12 other former students of the same university for injuring
Zulfarhan to four years of imprisonment.
The 12 are Mohd Hafiz
Fauzan Ismail, Mohamad Lukhmanul Hakim Mohd Zain, Ahmad Shafwan Berdal,
Muhammad Amirul Asraff Mala, Luqman Hakim Shamsuri Agus, Muhammad Sufi
Mohd Mustapha, Noriznan Izzairi Noor Azhar, Muhamad Ashraf Abdullah,
Muhammad Danial Firdaus Azmir, Muhammad Hasif Ismail, Muhammad Adib Iman
Fuad Ady Sani, and Mohamad Syazwan Musa.
They were found guilty
of deliberately causing injury to Zulfarhan to obtain a confession that
he had stolen a laptop and were charged under Section 330 of the Penal
Code, which provides for a maximum penalty of seven years in prison and a
fine, upon conviction.
All of them, now aged 28, were accused of
committing the acts in two rooms at the Jebat Hostel block, UPNM,
between May 21 and 22, 2017. — Bernama, Malay Mail, 23/7/2024
AG to file appeal against court’s ruling in navy cadet’s case
The
six accused escaped the gallows but were sentenced to 18 years’ jail
yesterday after they were found guilty of culpable homicide not
amounting to murder.
The
judge said he was satisfied that the 90 burn wounds inflicted on navy
cadet Zulfarhan Osman Zulkarnain by five of the accused using a hot
steam iron had caused his death, but ruled that it was not premeditated
murder. (Facebook pic)KUALA LUMPUR:
The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) will appeal
against the High Court’s ruling to convict six students of the National
Defence University (UPNM) for culpable homicide not amounting to murder
of a navy cadet.
They were initially charged with murdering UPNM cadet officer Zulfarhan Osman Zulkarnain.
Attorney-General Idrus Harun, when asked
whether the AGC would file an appeal to restore Section 302 of the Penal
Code against the accused, said:Yes, we will file an appeal.
The six accused escaped the gallows but were
sentenced to 18 years’ jail yesterday by High Court judge Azman Abdullah
after they were found guilty of culpable homicide not amounting to the
murder of Zulfarhan four years ago.
They are Muhammad Akmal Zuhairi Azmal,
Muhammad Azamuddin Mad Sofi, Muhammad Najib Mohd Razi, Muhammad Afif
Najmudin Azahat, Mohamad Shobirin Sabri and Abdoul Hakeem Mohd Ali.
Of the six accused, five were charged with the
murder of Zulfarhan under Section 302 of the Penal Code, which carries
the mandatory death penalty upon conviction, while Hakeem was charged
with abetting the murder under Section 109 of the same Act, which
carries a similar sentence.
The judge, in his decision, however, said that
the court found all the accused guilty under Section 304 (a) of the
Penal Code for causing injuries to the deceased (Zulfarhan) with no
intent to murder, which carries a jail term of up to 30 years and shall
also be liable to a fine, upon conviction.
The court also sentenced five of the
accused, except Shobirin, and their 12 friends to three years’ jail
after finding them guilty of injuring Zulfarhan.
Shobirin was previously charged with the same offence but was acquitted of the charge at the end of the prosecution’s case.
The 12 are Mohd Hafiz Fauzan Ismail, Mohamad
Lukhmanul Hakim Mohd Zain, Ahmad Shafwan Berdal, Muhammad Amirul Asraff
Mala, Luqman Hakim Shamsuri Agus, Muhammad Sufi Mohd Mustapha, Noriznan
Izzairi Noor Azhar, Muhamad Ashraf Abdullah, Muhammad Danial Firdaus
Azmir, Muhammad Hasif Ismail, Muhammad Adib Iman Fuad Ady Sani and
Mohamad Syazwan Musa.
All of them, now aged 25, committed the offence in two rooms at the Jebat dormitory block, UPNM, on May 21 and 22, 2017.
Zulfarhan succumbed to his injuries at Serdang Hospital on June 1, 2017.
Azman, in his judgment, said he was satisfied
that the 90 burn wounds inflicted on Zulfarhan by five of the accused
using a hot steam iron had caused his death, but ruled that it was not a
premeditated murder.
He said after considering the testimonies of
two medical experts who were a prosecution and a defence witness
respectively, the court found that Zulfarhan’s death was not a sudden
death after being injured. - FMT, 3/11/2021
THE HIGH COURT JUDGMENT
PP lwn. MUHAMMAD AKMAL ZUHAIRI AKMAL & YANG LAIN - see full judgment at
What exactly is Malaysia's Federal Government DEBT?
Based on Media Reports - it seems that Malaysian Federal Government
Debt has been increasing since Anwar became Finance Minister and Prime
Minister.
The recent statement in JULY 2024 - indicates that Anwar has FAILED to reduce Federal Debt,
and maybe it has increased from the RM1.2 Trillion in January 2023 to
now RM1.5 Trillion. (in the July media report, there is NO INDICATION
that the RM1.5 Trillion, includes other liabilities.)
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.
Anwar,
as FINANCE MINISTER, the people expect you to be VERY HONEST and speak
clearly so that the people can KNOW and understand the financial state
of the nation > as this has SERIOUS impact to all Malaysians, now and
in the future...
In October 2022, the previous Prime Minister said
Total government debt and liabilities as of June 2022 is estimated to be
at RM1.42 trillion and will rise further next year as Prime Minister
Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob’s administration tabled a deficit Budget
2023, the biggest federal spending plan to date. - Malay Mail, 7/10/2022
Then, in January 2023, Anwar said that the DEBT was RM1.5 Trillion, i.e. RM1.2 Trillion debt, and if plus liabilities, it is RM1.5 trillion.
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.' - hence, debt was RM1.2 Trillion. If we plus other liabilities(?) it is RM1.5 trillion."We have to accept this reality. We cannot feel complacent, living with
the culture of contentment as if there is no problem," Anwar said during
the 2023 Budget dialogue here today. - NST, 17/1/2023
Then, recently in July 2024, Anwar implies government debt reaching 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."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. - NST, 13/7/2024
WHAT IS THE TRUTH? WHAT IS THE MALAYSIAN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DEBT? The additional 'liabilities' must also be explained? Some say, these are Federal Government GUARANTEES when others borrowed monies - details, please Mr Finance Minister Anwar Ibrahim.
a) So, Anwar, since January 2023, have you FAILED to reduce the Federal Government Debt? Has the DEBT increased? If so, should you not RESIGN - and get in a more competent Finance Minister?
b) What is the amount of the Federal Government DEBT, and what is amount of the Federal Government Debt(Plus Liabilities)?
c) Does the 'Liabilities' include government guarantees for the loan taken by other entities like 1MDB, etc? If NOT, what is amount of government guarantees for loans taken by others - and please inform the people who did the government stand as 'guarantors' and for what amounts?
Government guarantees are conventionally excluded from the federal
debt and liability balance sheet but there is increasing call by
opposition lawmakers to include it into the national fiscal management
debate after the 1Malaysia Development Berhad corruption exposed
taxpayers to the fund’s massive debt.
Over
RM50 billion had been leaked or embezzled through the sovereign fund
founded by disgraced former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, now
facing trial for multiple corruption and power abuse charges for his
alleged role in the fiasco...Up
to June this year[2022], the Ministry of Finance said RM19 billion of the
stolen monies have been recouped and deposited into a special account
set up to clear 1MDB’s debt. The
Malaysian government is still exposed to RM25.9 billion of the fund’s
debt up to June this year, or 1.5 per cent of total debt-to-GDP. Meanwhile
liabilities from private-public partnership projects, private-financing
initiatives and programmes spearheaded by public infrastructure company
PBLT Sdn Bhd dropped to RM149 billion from RM151 billion last year.
d) Now, Malaysia is in a VERY PRECARIOUS financial position, for besides the Federal Government Debt(Plus Liabilities) plus government guarantees, ordinary Malaysians have also personal debts, whereby the HOUSEHOLD Debts was reported to be about RM1.53 Trillion in 2023, and this is VERY HIGH for a country with a population of about 30 million only...
The aggregate debt for households in 2023 has amounted to RM1.53 trillion, the Dewan Rakyat was told.Finance Ministry in a parliamentary written reply on Monday (March
18) said of the total, the largest portion of the debt was housing loans
which comprised 60.5 per cent of the debt, followed by vehicle loans
(13.2 per cent) and personal financing (12.6 per cent).
It added that other loans for other purposes include non-residential
property purchases, credit card debt, securities and others.
In aggregate, the total household debt for 2022 was RM1.45
trillion, followed by 2021 (RM1.38 trillion), 2020 (RM1.32 trillion),
2019 (RM1.25 trillion), and 2018 (RM1.19 trillion), said the ministry.
e) Besides Federal Government DEBTS and Liabilities, Household DEBTS, there is state State Government Debts(and liabilities), and also Local Government DEBTS(and liabilities) - Malaysians deserve to know details of these debts(and liabilities) too. Are the PN governed States in a better position than the PH-BN governed States?
In the past, whenever the salaries of civil servants go hope - the price of goods and the cost of living also rises, does Anwar not realize this? So, expect a large jump in the cost of living at the end of the year...
When Malaysia's financial situation worsens, our Ringgit value also drops - and the cost of goods and cost of living rises too.. When this happens, it derails our preparedness for old age survival - what we kept aside is no longer enough to sustain the cost of living until death... KWSP told us before that RM250,000 in our account was sufficient to cover our livelihood until death- I believe that may not be enough anymore...
Fuel Subsidies are disappearing - but still no plans to put in place affordable public transport - In the past, there were regular busses in every towns, but today only bus-stops remain, but no busses. In most towns, new housing estates have emerged - and so, distances between town centre, hospitals, etc increased to 10-15 Km, and there is no bus services - and GRAB is simply too expensive(and seriously lacking in smaller towns). Public Transport within towns and local government areas are generally not-profitable if one wants to keep cost affordable for the masses - so, it is best managed by the government, be it the Federal Government, State government or local government. But, Anwar's government still not dealing with this yet...focus still remains in Klang Valley, Penang and the west Coast of Peninsular Malaysia -
Government needs to 'tighten its belt' and overcome the debt-problem - so, please end policy of using monies to generate/maintain political support - which, by the way really does not work in 2024, as it may have in the 80s and 90s. People are smarter with their choices at the ballot box.
So, ANWAR forget about the next GE, and focus on improving the economic or financial state of the nation >>> REDUCE our DEBT(and other liabilities) now, so it does not burden future generations of Malaysians.
"We don't even have (huge) reserves any more. Oil-producing countries have huge reserves, we don't."
He said if Malaysia's RM1.5 trillion debt and continually widening
federal budget deficit were not remedied, the economy would inevitably
collapse and cause immense suffering to future generations.
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
Malaysia's national debt now at RM1.5 trillion, or over 80pct of GDP
By Teoh Pei Ying, Farah Adilla -
January 17, 2023 @ 9:01am
Malaysia's national debt including liabilities has reached RM1.5 trillion. NSTP/AIZUDDIN SAAD
PUTRAJAYA:
Malaysia's national debt including liabilities has reached RM1.5
trillion and should be addressed urgently, Prime Minister Datuk Seri
Anwar Ibrahim said.
This was already more than 80 per cent of the country's gross domestic product (GDP).
The figure also suggests that Malaysia's budget deficit will widen
further than the earlier estimate of 5.8 per cent of the GDP for 2022.
"The economic uncertainties are still not easing. The
economy is still considered dim and this was also contributed externally
including the Ukraine-Russia conflict as well as global recovery
post-Covid.
"The problem with our debt is it has already touched RM1.2 trillion and if includes liabilities, it is RM1.5 trillion.
"We have to accept this reality. We cannot feel complacent,
living with the culture of contentment as if there is no problem," Anwar
said during the 2023 Budget dialogue here today.
Also present were deputy Finance Ministers Datuk Seri Ahmad
Maslan and Steven Sim Chee Keong, as well as deputy secretary general of
treasury Datuk Johan Mahmood Merican.
The new 2023 Budget is expected to be tabled in the Parliament on Feb 24.
The original 2023 was presented on Oct 7 by the then finance
minister Tengku Zafrul Abdul Aziz with a total allocation of RM372.3
billion but was not approved due to the dissolution of Parliament three
days later to make way for the 15th general election (GE15).
Anwar was reported to have said that the government will
look at the proposals in the budget tabled by the previous government
and make the necessary changes before tabling his government's budget.
Meanwhile, Anwar said it had taken him only two months in
the office to recognise that the government would be able to save around
RM10 billion from leakages from its procurement system.
Hence, he said the mandate of the unity government remained -
to change the orientation of the system in order to ensure that the
vast majority of citizens benefit from economic initiatives and reforms. - NST, 17/1/2023
Budget 2023: Malaysia’s debt, liabilities estimated at RM1.42t up to June
Prime
Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob and Finance Minister Tengku
Datuk Seri Zafrul Abdul Aziz at Parliament building in Kuala Lumpur,
October 7, 2022. ― Picture by Firdaus Latif
By Syed Jaymal Zahiid
Friday, 07 Oct 2022 4:20 PM MYT
KUALA
LUMPUR, Oct 7 ― Total government debt and liabilities as of June 2022
is estimated to be at RM1.42 trillion and will rise further next year as
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob’s administration tabled a
deficit Budget 2023, the biggest federal spending plan to date.
Federal
government debt accounts for 61 per cent of debt-to-GDP, at RM1.04
trillion up from RM979.8 billion in 2021. Total debt and liabilities are
about 82 per cent of GDP.
Guarantee
commitments up to the same period rose to RM199 billion from RM197.3
billion in 2021. Total loans guaranteed by the government up to June
2022 stood at RM307 billion or 17.9 per cent of GDP, down from RM310.4
billion last year.
Government guarantees are conventionally
excluded from the federal debt and liability balance sheet but there is
increasing call by opposition lawmakers to include it into the national
fiscal management debate after the 1Malaysia Development Berhad
corruption exposed taxpayers to the fund’s massive debt.
Over
RM50 billion had been leaked or embezzled through the sovereign fund
founded by disgraced former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, now
facing trial for multiple corruption and power abuse charges for his
alleged role in the fiasco.
He
has already been convicted of criminal breach of trust and embezzling
RM42 million from SRC International, a former 1MDB subsidiary.
Up
to June this year, the Ministry of Finance said RM19 billion of the
stolen monies have been recouped and deposited into a special account
set up to clear 1MDB’s debt.
The
Malaysian government is still exposed to RM25.9 billion of the fund’s
debt up to June this year, or 1.5 per cent of total debt-to-GDP.
Meanwhile
liabilities from private-public partnership projects, private-financing
initiatives and programmes spearheaded by public infrastructure company
PBLT Sdn Bhd dropped to RM149 billion from RM151 billion last year. - Malay Mail, 7/10/2022
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...
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..
Posts
