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 recent disclosure that Nurul
Izzah Anwar, a former Pakatan Harapan Member of Parliament who failed to defend
her seat in GE15, and the daughter of current Prime Minister and Finance
Minister was appointed as senior economics and
finance adviser on January 4, allegedly by her father, the Prime Minister
and/or Minister of Finance raises serious issues about the practice of political
appointments by the new Pakatan Harapan led coalition government.
Will the abuse, process and bad practices
of political appointments under Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim remain unchanged and
remain the same as was previously done by BN and PN governments, despite talks
of good governance and promised real changes and reform including transparency
and accountability.
Political
appointments have been known to be abused by governments as a means to
secure and maintain support of Members of Parliaments, be it from within one’s
own party(or political coalition) or otherwise, to maintain support to be able for
one continue to be Prime Minister, or to hold on to executive power in government.
This use of ‘political appointments’ ought to be considered a form of corrupt
practice.
Political appointments have also been
abused by the appointment of one’s own family members, party members and
friends to positions that inevitably can enable financial gain for the
appointees, and powers.
Political appointments have also
been abused to undermine democracy, by the denial of the peoples’ rights to
democratically elect their community leaders, local government and even
Senators in Malaysia. A political appointee is more likely to act as per the
will of the political appointer, rather than for the interest and good of the people
and communities. Peoples’ participation and decision-making powers can be
stolen by such political appointees who make decisions on their own with any real
consultation and participation of the people.
Appointment of
daughter Nurul Izzah
In the appointment of Nurul Izzah,
there is still a lack of transparency on the selection and appointment process.
Did it follow even the principles behind the demands for open tenders, as
apposed to direct appointments?
The fact that this appointment,
that allegedly happened on 4th January, was kept ‘secret’, only to
come to light when Nurul herself disclosed it in a recent media interview several
weeks later, does not augur well for the Prime Minister and the cabinet, as it
lacks transparency for any such information should have been disclosed to the
public immediately.
The Prime Minister has absolute
discretion in the appointment of Cabinet members, as stated in the Federal Constitution,
but it does not extend to the appointment of others to government positions.
The executive power is with the Cabinet not the Prime Minister, save when the
laws provide specifically that a particular discretion can be exercised solely by
the Prime Minister, Minister or some other.
There is a need to disclose whether
the appointment of Nurul Izzah was done by the Prime Minister, Finance Minister
or some other. It is best practice that Malaysians are informed which law was
relied on for the appointment of Nurul Izzah, or any other political appointee.
Names of the political appointee, the law relied on, and the amount of
salary/allowance that the appointee will receive must be disclosed.
Referring to the United Nations
documents like the UN Guide for Anti-Corruption Policies, it is stated therein
that, ‘…generally, favouritism, nepotism and clientelism involve abuses of
discretion. Such abuses, however, are governed not by the self-interest of
an official but the interests of someone linked to him or her through
membership of a family, political party, tribe, religious or other group. The
hiring of ‘…a relative, he or she acts in exchange for the less tangible
benefit of advancing the interests of family or the specific relative involved
(nepotism)…’.
As such, MADPET(Malaysians
Against Death Penalty and Torture) takes the position that the appointment of
Nurul Izzah by her father is clearly nepotism, and can be perceived as an abuse
of power, and even if it was done pursuant to a power explicitly provided by
law, it may still be an abuse of discretion contrary to the principles of good
governance.
Nurul’s qualification to be Anwar’s
senior economics and finance adviser may not be the issue, but were other
qualified persons like academics, proven business personalities and others even
considered.
Other Issues behind
political appointment to government or government agencies
In political appointments to
positions in government or government agencies, certain matters need to be
considered, some of which are as follows: -
a)Legal Basis
for The Appointments – What law allows for the appointment of say Nurul Izzah
or other political appointees to government positions? It is absurd to say that
a Prime Minister or a Minister can simply appoint anyone for any position as
he/she pleases is simply not right.
b)Liability for
actions/omissions of political appointees – With ‘power’ that comes
with the appointment, the question that follows is whether the said appointee will
also be personally liable for actions/omission especially those that causes
damages and/or loss to Malaysia or others? Can they be sued? Will the
appointing Minister and the government of Malaysia be vicariously liable?
c)Public
Officers or not – It must be made clear whether Nurul Izzah and
others appointed by Ministers or government to be government positions are
public officers or not? Will they also be subject to the Public Officers
(Conduct and Discipline) 1993 Regulations? Who does Nurul Izzah and such
political appointees report to – the Prime Minister, the Minister of Finance,
the Cabinet or to Parliament?
d)Financial
Implications. Even though Nurul Izzah may not be paid an allowance or
salary, in the carrying out of her duties, the government will inevitably expend
monies and resources. Will these monies come from a Ministry’s budget, or the
government’s budget?
e)Employment/Appointment
Contracts – Will the services of political appointees immediately end
when the said particular Minister or government that appointed them cease to
hold power? Or, will Malaysia be liable to pay termination benefits or compensation/damages
for early termination of contracts? This is a concern for Malaysians, more so
when sometimes some of these political appointees may be employed with rather
high salaries, and with fixed term contracts.
On 14/12/2023, the Malaysian
cabinet decided that chairmen and directors on the boards of federal statutory
bodies, Ministry of Finance (Inc) companies, government-linked companies and
government-linked investment companies who were political appointment will be
terminated effective immediately (NST, 16/12/2022).All political appointees and
directors in federal statutory bodies, Ministry of Finance (Inc) firms,
government-linked corporations (GLCs), and government-linked investment
companies (GLICs) had their services terminated. How much did Malaysia have to
pay these when the services of these ‘political appointees’ were terminated?
There was hopes that reforms, including
possibly the end of appointment of politicians, would be put placed, before any
new appointments is done. Unfortunately, there has been almost silence after
the termination exercise of political appointees. Have new persons be appointed
‘secretly’?
Political Appointees
and GLCs
One concern about political
appointees, is the question of qualification and competency of these
appointees. Appointment of the ‘wrong’ persons can lead to abuse of power and
losses of the peoples’ monies. Sadly, some appointees may get focused in
enriching themselves or their ‘friends’, and it can result in poor performances
of the said government agencies or government linked companies. FELDA, Lembaga
Urusan Tabung Haji(LUTH), Malaysian Airlines, 1MDB and SRC International are
examples where political appointees may have brought about losses and/or
failures.
In 2019, it was highlighted how
Malaysian GLCs have on average underperformed their private sector counterparts
over the last ten years. “The data is very clear; total returns — share price
and dividends — of non-GLCs are about five times greater than GLCs over a
10-year period,” said a panelist at a forum. (Edge Markets, 31/10/2019).
On 24/1/2023, the Perak state
government announced the shutdown of 27 of its subsidiaries identified as
non-performing and burdensome to save costs. Menteri Besar Saarani Mohamad was
reported saying that the Perbadanan Kemajuan Negeri Perak (PKNP) subsidiaries
affected by the closure were not carrying out business activities and had
failed to contribute to the state government. (FMT, 24/1/2023).
Will Prime Minister Anwar and the
Federal government also take the drastic needed actions as was done in Perak?
Will the political appointees (or the Minister responsible for the appointment)
who caused or contributed to these failures and losses be held personally
accountable and liable?
Anwar Ibrahim had previously lamented
about the very high wages and allowances paid out to political appointees,
sometimes even higher that allowances for Members of Parliament – will the new
government legislate on maximum remuneration and matters related. Even after
1MDB and SRC, it seems that many politically appointed Directors have yet be
made liable. Sometimes, these political appointments are simply about benefits
and power, with no responsibility for failures and losses caused.
Reforms are most needed, and it
best be made clear by means of laws – and not left uncertain discretionary
powers of Ministers. Parliament also should play their role in monitoring
political appointments by the executive branch of government. Will Parliament,
or the relevant Parliamentary Select Committee investigate the appointment of Nurul
Izzah and other political appointee of this Pakatan Harapan led coalition
government?
MADPET also calls for the end of political
appointments of kampung, kampung baru, kampung orang asli and community’s
leaderships. These leaders and peoples’ representative must be democratically
elected by the people. Malaysian people’s right to democratically elect their
own Local Government, and even Senators must happen.
MADPET calls for real reform in the
political appointment process, whereby the selection and appointment must be
done without any discrimination by preferably an independent body, and not left
to sole discretion of the Prime Minister or Minister. Nepotism must be avoided.
MADPET urges the Malaysian Human
Rights Commission(SUHAKAM) to investigate the nepotistic appointment of Nurul
Izzah by her father, as such abuse of power or discretion directly impairs on
the rights of all Malaysians. SUHAKAM could also provide recommendation for
best practices in good governance on when and how such appointments can, or
ought to be done in a transparent, accountable and non-corrupt manner.
Charles
Hector
For
and on behalf of MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)
I believe that for the first time UMNO has barred contest for its top 2 post using a Resolution passed at the General Meeting.
First time that potential contenders for top positions have been sacked or 'suspended' before elections. But Khairy, Hishamuddin, etc still can appeal to the Disciplinary Board, and if still disatisfied can appeal to 'Majlis Kerja Tertinggi'(which seems to be different from the General Meeting). If they do appeal, would they still be able to exercise all memberships, including the right to contest in the upcoming UMNO elections, until they exhausted all avenues of appeal. Najib was able to function as MP until the Federal Court dismissed his final appeal. Logically, Khairy and Hishamuddin despite the first disciplinary decision, should be able to still contest pending the dispossal of their appeals..
20.6 Seseorang ahli atau pihak yang tidak berpuas hati dengan
tindakan disiplin yang dikenakan oleh Jawatankuasa Disiplin, hendaklah
merayu kepada Lembaga Disiplin terlebih dahulu sebelum rayuan terakhir
itu dibawa ke peringkat Majlis Kerja Tertinggi untuk keputusan muktamad
It was common in the past for General Meetings and members to generally express similar sentiments in the past- but never before, I believe, a TOTAL denial of the right of a member to contest the top 2 positions through a Resolution.
If such a thing is possible, then there can be similar resolution that maintain the position of ALL incumbent leaders, not just at national level but also division and branch levels can eliminate most elections. There will only be elections if the incumbent decides to step aside and no longer contest OR dies. That sounds very much like FEUDALISM and not democracy.
Any society, even UMNO, can decide - i.e. its members can decide whether it wants to be democratic or something else.
In 2023, UMNO members still do not have the right to individually vote who will be their President and national leadership. PKR stands out here in that every member has the right to vote the President and national leadership.
UMNO has a 'delegate system' where the right to participate in national General Meetings and make decisions therein is with the delegates - same too the right to vote and choose the President and the national leadership.
8.4 Perhimpunan Agung Tahunan hendaklah terdiri daripada:- 8.4.1 Pengerusi Tetap dan Timbalan Pengerusi Tetap. 8.4.2 Ahli-ahli Majlis Kerja Tertinggi.
8.4.3 Wakil yang dipilih oleh Perwakilan Tahunan Bahagian sebanyak seorang wakil bagi tiap-tiap lima ratus (500) orang ahli dengan syarat bilangan wakil-wakil itu tidak lebih daripada tujuh (7) orang dari satu Bahagian termasuk Bahagian yang Jawatankuasanya sedang digantung jika Bahagian itu boleh mengadakan Perwakilan Bahagian dengan sempurna. 8.4.4 Ketua, Timbalan Ketua, Naib Ketua, Ketua Wanita UMNO, Ketua Pergerakan Pemuda, Ketua Pergerakan Puteri dan Setiausaha Bahagian yang telah mengadakan Perwakilan Bahagiannya. Mereka di atas yang menjadi Ahli Majlis Kerja Tertinggi berhak melantik gantinya yang terdiri daripada Pengerusi Tetap, Timbalan Pengerusi Tetap atau Ahli Jawatankuasa Bahagian.
8.4.5 Tidak lebih daripada sepuluh (10) orang wakil Wanita UMNO, sepuluh(10) orang wakil Pergerakan Pemuda dan sepuluh (10) orang wakil Pergerakan Puteri yang dipilih oleh Perhimpunan Agung Pergerakan masing-masing.
DELEGATES represent the specific groups of UMNO members - so, in the voting of motions and passing Resolutions, are these 'delegates' voting as per what the members for whom they are delegates for wants and decided, OR did they simply decide as they please without any reference and mandate for the members they represent.
I did not read media reports about UMNO branch or division meetings being called to discuss on whether to support or not the Motion(now resolution) deciding no contest for the top 2 national leadership positions? Some say the motion came about at the last minute - so there was no time to revert back to the members, and so these 'delegates' had to decide then and then on their own. So, it may not be what the UMNO members really wanted.
If UMNO had had its General Elections before end June 2021, the likelihood of Zahid Hamidi and many of the current leaders in UMNO was slim. When Zahid won in 2018 UMNO elections, it was before he was charged in court.
In the 2018 Umno elections, Zahid obtained 99 votes while Khairy
Jamaluddin received 61 votes and Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah 30 votes.
However, Zahid's biggest challenger is no more, as Khairy has just been sacked....?
Note that Zahid and the UMNO No. 2 could have spoken up for elections opposing the motion that the top 2 post not be contested. If they did, then the General Meeting may not have voted and passed that Resolution.
Zahid's victory in 2018 happens before the High Court made a decision that the prosecution had established prima facie case, and Zahid had been ordered to enter his defence.
The High Court has ordered former deputy prime minister Ahmad Zahid
Hamidi to enter his defence on all 47 of his corruption, criminal breach
of trust (CBT) and money laundering charges. Judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah ruled that the prosecution had established a prima facie case against Zahid. - FMT, 24/1/2022
Now, that the High Court hearing Zahid's case has been appointed as Court of Appeal judge, we are uncertain that Judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah will continue hearing the case until the end, or will a NEW judge take over the case.
There has been growing sentiments amongst some in UMNO, to clean up UMNO and remove the so-called 'Court Cluster'
October 2018 - Former Malaysian deputy prime minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi claimed trial
on Friday to 45 charges of criminal breach of trust, abuse of power and
money laundering involving some RM114 million (S$37.8 million).
On 18/12/2018, Zahid went on 'garden leave' as President of UMNO, 'Zahid announced that his deputy Mohamad Hasan will now assume the duties of Umno president."In
light of the crisis faced by the party today, I have decided to entrust
the deputy president with the duties of the Umno president....' -Malaysiakini, 18/12/2018
30/6/2019 - Zahid assumed all duties of UMNO President
27/6/2019 - Former deputy prime minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi was slapped
with another 33 charges at the Sessions Court here today for receiving
bribes totalling RM42.7 million, as an inducement to extend the contract
of Ultra Kirana Sdn Bhd in managing the One Stop Centre (OSC) in China
and the Visa Luar Negara (VLN) system. - On Sept 23, then High Court judge Yazid Mustafa ruled that the
prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case against Zahid.
The prosecution has filed its petition of appeal to challenge Ahmad
Zahid Hamidi’s acquittal from 40 charges of corruption purportedly given
by a company to secure the extension of a contract to operate a foreign
visa (VLN) system and a one-stop centre in China. - FMT, 29/12/2022
UMNO President Zahid Hamidi and Supreme Council 3 year term ended on 30
June 2021, and there should have been a party election to determine who
will the new President, Supreme Council members and leaders of the
party. If there was party election, UMNO members may have chosen other
leaders. UMNO without elections may have been declared illegal and
de-registered. But, then 'mysteriously' the Registar of Society, not
UMNO members, decided to delay elections until end 2022.NO
Democracy in UMNO? State elections, but still UMNO delays elections -
kept Zahid Hamidi in power beyond 3-year term? UMNO members Ok with
this?
Then in March 2022, The Umno General Assembly has approved a motion to postpone the party
election to six months after the 15th General Election (GE15) is held,
says Umno Deputy President Datuk Seri Mohamad Hasan.
This meant Zahid Hamidi and the National leadership were able to decide on UMNO candidates in GE15 - this power of national party leadership power in determining the party's candidate for State and Federal elections is common amongst parties in Malaysia - something that I believe should change.
Now, with UMNO's no challenge to top 2 positions may mean that Zahid Hamidi and Mohamad Hasan will remain President and Deputy for another 3 year term.
The sacking or 6-year suspension of potential challenger/s before the party elections means Zahid Hamidi and Mohamad Hasan's position may be safe. Even if the Registrar of Society decides not to approve the no-challenge resolution, the potential threats in Khairy and Hishamuddin may have been removed. They may no longer be qualified to contest for the Presidency or Deputy Presidency of UMNO.
Come end June 2023, Zahid would have been President of UMNO for 5 years. Note the term of office as per the UMNO constitution is just 3 years.
Now, the delegates at the UMNO General Assembly that adopted the no challenge Resolution, how many of them were holding their position beyond the 3 year term? How many would have retained their position if elections were held before June 2021?
UMNO Constitution talks about 'Perwakilan Tahunan Bahagian' - was there a recent annual elections that picked the Delegates that were at the said General Meeting?
UMNO's membership - after GE in 2018, we saw a lot of MPs/ADUNs leaving UMNO to join other parties. Reasonably, when these 'party leaders' left - members will also follow. So how many members do UMNO still have? Remember the number of delegates per division depends on membership numbers... As such, membership decline determines the number of delegates.
As it is, any society's affairs ought to determined by ALL its members, but can any member be denied the ability to participate in the decision making process of a society - especially in the amendment of constitution, passing of Resolution and voting of leadership.
Some clauses from the UMNO constitution of interest:-
20.6 Seseorang ahli atau pihak yang tidak berpuas hati dengan tindakan disiplin yang dikenakan oleh Jawatankuasa Disiplin, hendaklah merayu kepada Lembaga Disiplin terlebih dahulu sebelum rayuan terakhir itu dibawa ke peringkat Majlis Kerja Tertinggi untuk keputusan muktamad
20.7 Seseorang ahli yang membawa apa-apa jua perkara parti atau hak keahliannya ke mahkamah sebelum mematuhi sepenuhnya peraturan-peraturan parti maka keahliannya di dalam parti gugur dengan sendirinya.
20.12 Ahli-ahli yang dikenakan hukuman, boleh membuat rayuan supaya: 20.12.1 Menarik balik penggantungan keahliannya selepas dua (2) tahun daripada tarikh ia dihukum. 20.12.2 Menarik balik pemecatan keahliannya selepas tiga (3) tahun daripada tarikh ia dihukum. 20.12.3 Menarik balik pengguguran keahliannya dari tarikh keahliannya gugur.
# The above are just my opinion and views...it is an interesting matters of interest to all Malaysians. If Zahid was challenged, and lost his Presidency - there would be consequences - as we may have a new Deputy Prime Minister...mmmm
I'm back! Zahid announces return to active duty as Umno chief
Published: Jun 30, 2019 3:40 PM
⋅
Updated: Jul 1, 2022 2:01 PM
Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has announced his return from garden leave to resume the mantle of Umno president.
Zahid made the announcement in conjunction with the first anniversary of him being elected as party president and not "appointed by Umno" leadership.
"So
the one year is significant and important to me, hence on June 30,
2019, I wish to announce that I am ending my (garden) leave today.
“This means, beginning today, I will resume my role as Umno president,” he said during a Hari Raya event in Perak.
Zahid went on leave in December last year amid pressure for him to step aside.
His opponents from within Umno had criticised him for what they claimed was a lack of direction.
Zahid also presided over an exodus of lawmakers from the party, with threats of further defection if he did not step down.
He finally relented, and on Dec 18 announced that his deputy Mohamad Hasan (left in photo) would take over as the new acting president.
Zahid's return just six months later threatens to reopen faultlines in the party.
Just
hours ago, former Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin – a close ally of
Mohamad – had said Zahid should first seek the opinion of the Umno
supreme council before announcing his return.
"Morally, it should
be discussed by the Umno supreme council. Zahid was on leave and the
supreme council carried out his duties so it would be unfair if the
supreme council is not consulted.
"To say that it is solely Zahid's decision, I would disagree.
"In
the last few months, including the three by-election wins we achieved,
they were all done under Tok Mat (Mohamad)," he said after officiating
the Sungai Buloh Umno divisional meeting in Shah Alam today. Yesterday, former Umno president Najib Abdul Razak had said it was up to Zahid to decide whether he should make a comeback.
Both Najib and Zahid are facing graft charges.
Under Mohamad, a proposal was made to expel Umno members convicted of graft and who have exhausted all appeals.
However,
the proposal was shot down with strong objection from the likes of Umno
supreme council member Lokman Noor Adam, a Najib loyalist.
In an immediate response, Sabah Umno chief Bung Moktar Radin hailed Zahid's return.
"Zahid's
announcement to end his leave is a good move, in line with the mandate
given to him as president. As a leader and party member, we should
respect it.
"Sabah Umno is confident that the party's mission and
mobilisation will be intensified with this decision. Let us strengthen
the party together," he said in a statement. - Malaysiakini, 1/7/2022
News KJ sacked, Hishammuddin suspended B Nantha Kumar Published: Jan 27, 2023 10:55 PM ⋅ Updated: 11:41 PM
Umno presidential hopeful Khairy Jamaluddin has been sacked by the party.
Earlier, the party had also sacked supreme council member Noh Omar, who asked to be let go after he was suspended for six years.
Umno secretary-general Ahmad Maslan announced in a statement that they were axed for breaching party discipline during the 15th general election.
However, the specifics of their offences were not mentioned.
Khairy had wanted to challenge Umno president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi for control of the party.
He had also alleged there were "phantom delegates" planted at the Umno annual general assembly (AGM) in order to pass a motion that would bar contest for the party’s presidency and deputy presidency. Umno secretary-general Ahmad Maslan
Khairy had said yesterday that he would remain loyal to Umno and rejected overtures for him to join Perikatan Nasional.
Meanwhile, Ahmad said the party has also sacked 26 Pahang Umno members, as well as five from the Pasir Gudang division, Putrajaya division (9) and Tanjung Karang (2).
Several others have been suspended for six years including Sembrong MP Hishammuddin Hussein and incumbent deputy Umno Youth chief Shahril Hamdan Suffian. Sembrong MP Hishammuddin Hussein
Also suspended were former Jempol MP Salim Sharif and former Tiram assemblyperson Maulizan Bujang.
The reason for their suspension was not stated.
Earlier, Umno supreme council member Puad Zarkashi said in a Facebook post that fellow council member Fathul Bari Mat Jahya had also been suspended.
However, Fathul was not among those that Ahmad declared had been suspended in the official party statement.
The sackings and suspensions were meted out following a supreme council meeting on Friday night, with Ahmad saying that the party had acted on the recommendations from its disciplinary board.
On a related matter, the party also announced that Umno vice-president Khaled Nordin will be the new Johor Umno chief, replacing former menteri besar Hasni Mohammad. - Malaysiakini, 27/1/2023
Umno leaves it to RoS to decide validity of the no-contest decision
By Muhamad Lokman Khairi -
January 23, 2023 @ 6:55pm
Datuk
Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi visiting the construction site of the Bagan
Datuk - Kampung Sejagop bridge here today. - NSTP/MUHAMAD LOKMAN
KHAIRI.
BAGAN DATUK: Umno will leave it to the Registry of Societies (RoS) to
decide the validity of the party's general assembly decision not to
hold contests for the top two party positions.
Its president Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi insisted that
everything done during the 2022 Umno General Assembly, which concluded
on Jan 14, was in accordance with the constitution of the party.
He, however, admitted that there is a clause in the Societies Act
1966, which stated that RoS must be made aware of the decision passed
during the party's general assembly.
"In my opinion, the matter is not about obtaining approval but rather informing the RoS.
"The meeting (the party's general assembly) proceeded according to
the Umno Constitution and the party's permanent chairman followed all
the necessary procedures," he told reporters after visiting the
construction site of the Bagan Datuk - Kampung Sejagop bridge here
today.
Zahid, who is the deputy prime minister and minister in-charge of
rural and regional development, was asked to comment on the complaints
lodged with the RoS over the "no contest" resolution moved for the top
two party posts at the 2022 Umno General Assembly.
The complaints were filed by Muhammad Aizat Fikri Mohd Nasir and
Muhammad Fiqri Firdaus Muhammad Rom, who are Umno members from
Terengganu and Negri Sembilan respectively. They submitted the
complaints to Ros in Putrajaya on Friday.
When asked on the actions of the two members, Zahid said Umno is a party that is very open about the matter.
"If there are any reports or complaints lodged with the RoS, Umno is open for the members to submit the report," he said.
Zahid nevertheless hopes that RoS will accept the motion passed during the recent Umno General Assembly as a valid decision.
The decision by RoS, he said, could also put to rest any speculation
over the party's decision not to contest the posts of party president
and deputy president in the upcoming Umno election.
"I leave the matter to the party delegates (who attended the Umno
General Assembly) to decide and they have made their decision (over the
motion for no contest for the top two positions in the party).
"What is important is to defend and protect unity in the Umno leadership," he said.
The Umno General Assembly at the Kuala Lumpur World Trade Centre last
week approved an additional motion for the posts of president and
deputy president to remain unchallenged in the party election.
The additional motion was proposed by Rembau Umno delegate Mohd
Shukri Shamsudin during the debate on the president's policy speech and
was seconded by Marang Umno chief Datuk Nik Dir Nik Wan Ku.
Amend Federal Constitution and Judicial
Appointments Commission Act 2009 to remove Prime Minister’s role in appointment
and elevation of judges in Malaysia.
PM must disclose whether recent
appointments is as per recommendation of the Judicial Appointments Commission or
not.
MADPET(Malaysians Against Death
Penalty and Torture) demands confirmation that the recent appointment of High
Court Judges, Court of Appeal Judges, Federal Court judge, the new President of
the Court of Appeal Tan Sri Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim, the new Chief Judge of
Malaya Datuk Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah, the new Chief Judge of Sabah and
Sarawak Datuk Abdul Rahman Sebli was as recommended by the Judicial
AppointmentsCommission(JAC), and not
the decision of the Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim who ignored all or some of the
recommendation of the JAC.
As it is now, the Federal
Constitution in Article 122B(1) still states that ‘The Chief Justice of the
Federal Court, the President of the Court of Appeal and the Chief Judges of the
High Courts and (subject to Article 122C) the other judges of the Federal
Court, of the Court of Appeal and of the High Courts shall be appointed by the
Yang di-Pertuan Agong, acting on the advice of the Prime Minister, after
consulting the Conference of Rulers.’ There is a need for a speedy amendment of
the Constitution to remove the Prime Minister, to be replaced by an independent
Judicial Appointment Commission(JAC).
On September 26, 2007, about
2,000 lawyers of the Malaysian Bar gathered at the entrance of the Palace of
Justice in Putrajaya, before marching to the Prime Minister’s Office to deliver
the Bar Council’s memorandum, which amongst others called for an independent Judicial
Appointment Commission (JAC) to select appoint judges. Concern about the
independence in the selection of judges arose when a video emerged showing a
lawyer discussing with a senior judge about appointments of judges.
The government responded
positively in the enactment of Judicial Appointments
Commission Act 2009 (Act 695), whereby the Commission was to submit recommendations
to the Prime Minister. It was expected that the Prime Minister would follow the
recommendation of the JAC and advice the King as such.
However, a task force in October
2022, alleged that 4 individuals appointed to the top judicial posts in July
2018 differed from those selected by the Judicial Appointment Commission (JAC)
and conveyed to then prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad in June 2018.
Given this, and the possible
disregard of the Prime Minister to the recommendation of the JAC, there is a
need to amend the Federal Constitution, to remove the role played by the Prime
Minister in the selection and appointment of judges. It should be replaced with
the JAC directly advising the King.
When it comes to the JAC, at
present the Prime Minister plays a role in the appointment, and this need to be
removed. Section 5(1) of the Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009 now
states that ‘The Commission shall consist of the following members: (a) the
Chief Justice of the Federal Court who shall be the Chairman;(b) the President of the Court of Appeal; (c)
the Chief Judge of the High Court in Malaya; (d) the Chief Judge of the High
Court in Sabah and Sarawak;(e) a Federal Court judge to be appointed by the
Prime Minister; and (f) four eminent persons, who are not members of the
executive or other public service, appointed by the Prime Minister
after consulting the Bar Council of Malaysia, the Sabah Law Association, the
Advocates Association of Sarawak, the Attorney General of the Federation, the
Attorney General of a State legal service or any other relevant bodies’
Thus, there is a need to amend
the Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009, to
ensure that the 4 eminent persons are selected and appointed not by the Prime
Minister.
The Conference of Rulers on
30/11/2022 also proposed the removal of the prime minister's power to appoint four
representatives to the nine-member Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC), the
body which proposes candidates to be made judges in the superior courts.
Negeri Sembilan's Tuanku Muhriz
Tuanku Munawir, on behalf of the Conference of Rulers, also was reported saying
that "To ensure the independence of JAC in carrying out its
responsibilities, I propose that the appointment of its five members should not
be made by the prime minister. "Instead it should be given to
other institutions such as the Malaysian Bar Council, the Sabah Law Society,
the Sarawak Bar Association and the Parliamentary Select Committee’[Malaysia
Now, 30/11/2022]
Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan
Mat, on 9/1/2023 called for the amendment of the Federal Constitution, and the Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009.She said that “We will not reach the
objective of appointing judges without executive involvement, if the current
provision (which requires executive consultation) remains,” She said the
prevailing public perception of executive involvement in the appointment of
judges must also be removed.[FMT, 9/1/2023]
The conviction of the previous
Prime Minister Najib Razak, and the fact that many members or former members of
the Cabinet have pending cases in court, makes it all the more urgent to remove
the prevailing public perception of executive involvement in the appointment of
judges. Will judges chosen or elevated by the Prime Minister be seen to be
independent in cases involving the Prime Minister, his Cabinet members or even
the government?
In court today, Prime Minister
Anwar Ibrahim himself too has commenced several defamation suits in court,
amongst others, against Muhyiddin Yassin,
Kuala Terengganu MP Ahmad Amzad Hashim, Kedah Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Muhammad
Sanusi Md Nor and Perak Pas chief Razman Zakaria. There is also the case of Yusoff
Rawther, a former research assistant to Anwar, claiming sexual assault against
Anwar that is still pending in court.
Noting the urgency and the
current state of affairs, the Federal Constitution and the Judicial
Appointments Commission Act 2009 must be speedily amended to remove the perception
of executive involvement in the appointment and elevation of judges.
The required Bills should be
tabled now at the upcoming Parliamentary session, and it should be passed
easily considering that Anwar Ibrahim do have the support of more than
two-thirds of the Members of Parliament, which is required for amendments of
the Federal Constitution.
MADPET also calls for the immediate
disclosure as to whether Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim appointed and elevated
judges as per the recommendation of the Judicial Appointments Commission, or
that he opted to ignore the JAC recommendations, and appointed or elevated
judges on his own. The names of judges appointed or elevated, different from
those recommended by the JAC must be made known, and it will be best that these
judges do consider recusing themselves from cases involving the government, or the
Prime Minister, Cabinet members or politicians.
The perception that Malaysia has
an independent judiciary is a matter of great urgency, and the needed amendment
to the Constitution must not be delayed.
Charles Hector
For and on behalf of
MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)
Agong presents letters of appointment to 21 judges at Istana Negara
Yang
di-Pertuan Agong Al-Sultan Abdullah Ri'ayatuddin Al-Mustafa Billah Shah
presented the letters of appointment to 21 judges in a ceremony at
Istana Negara in Kuala Lumpur. ― Picture by Firdaus Latif
Tuesday, 17 Jan 2023 1:58 PM MYT
KUALA
LUMPUR, Jan 17 ― The Yang di-Pertuan Agong Al-Sultan Abdullah
Ri'ayatuddin Al-Mustafa Billah Shah today granted an audience and
presented the letters of appointment to 21 judges in a ceremony at
Istana Negara here.
Raja Permaisuri Agong Tunku Hajah Azizah Aminah Maimunah Iskandariah was in attendance.
Leading
the list was the new President of the Court of Appeal Tan Sri Abang
Iskandar Abang Hashim followed by Chief Judge of Malaya Datuk Mohamad
Zabidin Mohd Diah, Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Datuk Abdul Rahman
Sebli and Federal Court Judge Datuk Nordin Hassan.
Also
receiving their letters of appointment as Court of Appeal judges were
Datuk Azman Abdullah, Datuk Azimah Omar, Datuk Lim Chong Fong, Datuk
Collin Lawrence Sequerah, Mohamed Zaini Mazlan and Datuk Wong Kian
Kheong.
Eleven
judges appointed to the High Court were Datuk Norsharidah Awang, Tee
Geok Hock, Datuk Zaleha Rose Pandin, Alice Loke Yee Ching, Datuk Azhar
Abdul Hamid, Dr Arik Sanusi Yeop Johari, G. Bhupindar Singh, Mahazan Mat
Taib, Ahmad Murad Abdul Aziz, Liza Chan Sow Keng and Wan Muhammad Amin
Wan Yahya.
The ceremony was also attended by Minister in the Prime
Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina
Othman Said and Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat. ― Bernama, Malay Mail, 17/1/2023
Sarawak’s Abang Iskandar is new Court of Appeal president
V Anbalagan - January 16, 2023 2:22 PM
14 Justices Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim (left) and Zabidin Diah have been performing the functions of their new positions since November.
PUTRAJAYA: Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim will be promoted to Court of Appeal president, making him the first judge from Sarawak to assume the post, sources said.
The sources also said Federal Court judge Zabidin Diah will be made Chief Judge of Malaya.
Abang Iskandar, 63, and Zabidin, 65, have been performing the functions and duties of these positions since last November.
The posts of Court of Appeal president and Chief Judge of Malaya are the second and third highest on the judicial ladder, respectively.
Federal Court judge Abdul Rahman Sebli, 63, will assume the role of the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak, taking over from Abang Iskandar, the sources said.
They are expected to receive their appointment letters from the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Sultan Abdullah Sultan Ahmad Shah, tomorrow morning before taking their oaths of office at the Palace of Justice in the afternoon.
At the same time, Court of Appeal judge Nordin Hassan will be elevated to become a Federal Court judge.
High Court judges Azman Abdullah, Azimah Omar, Collin Lawrence Sequerah, Zaini Mazlan, Wong Kian Keong and Lim Chong Fong will be elevated to the Court of Appeal.
Sequerah is the trial judge in former prime minister Najib Razak’s ongoing RM2.3 billion 1MDB corruption trial. He is also the trial judge in deputy prime minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s corruption, criminal breach of trust and money laundering trial.
Zaini is presiding over Najib’s ongoing audit report tampering case. He also presided over Rosmah Mansor’s RM1.25 billion Sarawak rural schools’ solar energy project corruption case. He found Rosmah guilty of the charges in September last year.
Eleven judicial commissioners will be confirmed as High Court judges while five from the Bar and Judicial and Legal Services will be appointed judicial commissioners. - FMT, 16/1/2023
Remove executive’s role in judges’ appointment, says Chief Justice
283 Shares 166 81 32 Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat says the prevailing public perception of executive involvement in the appointment of judges must be removed.
PUTRAJAYA: The judiciary has proposed that provisions in the Federal Constitution be amended to remove executive involvement in the appointment of judges.
This was revealed by Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, who said the suggestion was given by the judiciary to the task force probing former attorney-general Tommy Thomas’ book, “My Story: Justice In The Wilderness”.
One of the suggestions was that improvements should be made to the process of appointing judges.
“We suggested that there should be an amendment to the constitution to give effect to our proposal,” she told reporters after officiating a ceremony to open the legal year.
Tengku Maimun said the judiciary was collectively supportive of the task force’s proposal to the government.
“That is our general stand to improve the judiciary or the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC). However, there must be meaningful engagement with all stakeholders to move forward,” she said.
Article 122B (1) states that judges and all administrative position holders shall be appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, acting on the advice of the prime minister, after consultation with the Conference of Rulers.
However, Section 27 of the Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009 states that the prime minister may request for two additional names for consideration with respect to any vacancy to the offices of the Chief Justice, Court of Appeal President, Chief Judges of Malaya, and Sabah and Sarawak, and on the panels of the Federal Court and the Court of Appeal.
Tengku Maimun said any amendment to the 2009 Act would likely first require the Federal Constitution itself to be amended.
“We will not reach the objective of appointing judges without executive involvement, if the current provision (which requires executive consultation) remains,” she added.
She said the prevailing public perception of executive involvement in the appointment of judges must also be removed.
Tengku Maimun said she had also called for the new government to set up an independent judicial academy to cater to the training needs of superior court judges.
Last year the top judge announced that the government approved 25 acres of land in Nilai, Negeri Sembilan, alongside an existing magistrates’ court for the academy.
“In principle, the previous government had approved (the proposal), but when the final decision was communicated to us, they said judges should go to the judicial and legal service officers’ training institute due to a costing issue.
“As a matter of principle, judges should not be going there. Judges are not government officers,” Tengku Maimun said.
She said judges in the past never attended any course at the institute located in Bandar Baru Bangi.
“The person who issued the statement lacked understanding of the law and procedure,” she added.
Death threats
Meanwhile, sharing a personal experience in her role as Chief Justice, Tengku Maimun said she had been on the receiving end of death threats when presiding over cases involving certain personalities.
“In cases involving certain personalities, the support or criticism is extreme. People generally know that I myself have received death threats before.
“Whether those were serious threats or not is another question, but it has reached that level,” she said, according to Bernama.
When it comes to high-profile individuals, she said the comments directed at the judiciary were not constructive but excessive, one-sided and politically-motivated.
“I hope the people out there understand the structure of the country’s legal process before issuing any statements which show their lack of understanding.”
In August last year, the media quoted police as saying they had received reports of threats made against Tengku Maimun on social media and would be taking action against anyone found abusing such platforms to undermine security. - FMT, 9/1/2023
Malay rulers propose PM stay out of judges appointment body
They say a more balanced membership is needed so that appointments are not biased.
People take pictures outside the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya which houses the Court of Appeal and Federal Court. Photo: AFP
The
Conference of Rulers today proposed the removal of the prime minister's
power to appoint five representatives to the nine-member Judicial
Appointments Commission (JAC), the body which proposes candidates to be
made judges in the superior courts.
This followed a meeting by the rulers chaired by Negeri Sembilan's
Tuanku Muhriz Tuanku Munawir, held for two days at Istana Negara
beginning yesterday.
In its statement, the conference said the JAC in its present
composition had weaknesses, adding that its membership was critical to
ensure that only those with intergrity are appointed to judicial posts.
Presently, four of the nine JAC members are made up of senior judges,
while the remaining five are appointees of the prime minister.
Tuanku Muhriz said a more balanced membership was needed so that appointments would not be biased towards any parties.
"To ensure the independence of JAC in carrying out its
responsibilities, I propose that the appointment of its five members
should not be made by the prime minister.
"Instead it should be given to other institutions such as the
Malaysian Bar Council, the Sabah Law Society, the Sarawak Bar
Association and the Parliamentary Select Committee," he said.
Tuanku Muhriz also called for JAC's structure to be reevaluated
through discussions with the relevant institutions and stakeholders.
"When all this is implemented, I am confident JAC will be able to
carry out its responsibilities more effectively, and choose and appoint
only those individuals who have a noble character, and are transparent
and fair, to become judges in Malaysia."
JAC was set up in 2009 to ensure an unbiased selection of judges for the consideration of the prime minister.
Critics have however questioned the provision allowing the prime
minister to appoint the majority of the commission's members, as well as
his power to remove them, saying it smacks of political patronage in
the judiciary. - Malaysia Now, 30/11/2022
Why Malaysia’s lawyers march: Did the 2007 Walk for Justice change anything? Why are they marching again?
On
October 16, 2014, the Malaysian Bar held the ‘Walk for Peace and
Freedom’ to condemn the use of the Sedition Act 1948 and to protest the
multiple arrests, investigations and charges made under that law. —
Picture by Yusof Mat Isa
By Ida Lim
Friday, 17 Jun 2022 7:00 AM MYT
KUALA
LUMPUR, June 17 — The Malaysian Bar plans to march to Parliament today
to uphold the independence of the courts and speak out against any
attempts to intimidate judges, and present a memorandum addressed to the
prime minister on the matter.
This march will be one of the rare
moments in the 75-year history of the Malaysian Bar, which currently
represents 20,556 lawyers in Peninsular Malaysia.
But
will a march by lawyers change anything? Have previous events ever
nudged the Malaysian government to do what is right for the judiciary
and the country?
Here, Malay Mail takes a quick look at
the Malaysian Bar’s 2007 “Walk for Justice”, which is closest in aim to
the upcoming “Walk for Judicial Independence”, and see what came of it.
The information is based largely on resources publicly available on the
Malaysian Bar’s website:
A history of marching when it counts
The
Malaysian Bar actually has a long history of marching since it was
founded in 1947, such as its April 7, 1981 walk from the Royal Lake Club
to Parliament to protest against the government’s proposed amendments
to both the Societies Act and the Federal Constitution, as well as the
December 2005 and December 2006 peaceful marches from Dataran Merdeka to
the Lake Gardens to mark the annual International Human Rights Day on
December 10.
In the same year when the Malaysian Bar celebrated
its 60th anniversary and had more than 12,000 members, it organised the
Walk for Justice.
This was prompted by the September 19, 2007,
release of a video clip showing senior lawyer VK Lingam speaking on the
phone about or brokering the appointment of judges in Malaysia.
The
Malaysian Bar’s governing body on September 22 held an emergency
meeting and decided to present a memorandum to the government to call
for a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) on the video clip incident, and
on September 24 announced that it would present the memorandum after a
peaceful walk on September 26.
On September 25, the government
announced a three-member independent panel to investigate the video
clip’s authenticity, but did not at that time announce an RCI.
What happened at the 2007 march?
On
September 26, 2007, lawyers — numbering more than 1,000 or over 2,000
according to different reported estimates — gathered at the entrance of
the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya, before marching to the Prime
Minister’s Office to deliver the Bar Council’s memorandum.
Then-Malaysian Bar president Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan was quoted by The Straits Times saying
at the march: “We are walking for justice, we want judicial reform” and
“Lawyers don't walk every day. When lawyers walk, something is wrong.”
The first memorandum was a letter addressed to the prime minister
about the “latest crisis in the judiciary” as shown by the expose
through a video clip of a lawyer’s lengthy discussion with a senior
judge and the alleged brokering of the appointment and promotion of
judges, with the Malaysian Bar urging the prime minister to strengthen
the independence of the judiciary through judicial reform and to
introduce a Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) to restore public
confidence in the judiciary.
The memorandum also urged for an RCI
into the video clip. This was well before a government panel later also
recommended for the inquiry to be held.
On
September 25, 2007, the Malaysian government formed an independent
three-man panel to verify whether the video clip was authentic. This
panel on November 9, 2007 then gave its report to the government and
recommended for a commission of enquiry to be set up.
On December
12, 2007, an RCI was officially set up with five members, with five
terms of reference, namely to determine the video clip’s authenticity,
to identify the speaker, the person he was speaking to and persons
mentioned in the conversation, to determine the truth of the phone
conversation and whether there has been any misbehaviour of persons
identified or mentioned in the video clip, and to recommend the
appropriate course of action to be taken if any of them are found to
have committed any misbehaviour.
Following RCI proceedings from
January 14 to February 15, 2008, the RCI panel on May 9, 2008 gave its
report to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. The RCI panel’s report was made
publicly available on May 20, 2008.
In the RCI report, the panel
agreed with and supported the Malaysian Bar’s September 2007 memorandum
to the government on the need to set up a JAC, having concluded that
there were weaknesses in the process of appointment and promotion of
judges and that having a judicial commission would provide more
“transparency, accountability and good governance” which would then
boost public confidence in the judiciary.
On April 17, 2008, then prime minister Tun Abdullah Badawi announced that the government proposed to set up a JAC, with the aim of making the nomination, appointment and promotion of judges a more transparent process.
It
was also at this 2008 event that the prime minister recognised the
contributions of the “six outstanding judges” — including two
posthumously — who were affected by the 1988 judicial crisis, and
announced goodwill ex gratia payments to them or their families. (The
Bar Council together with the International Bar Association’s Human
Rights Institute, LAWASIA and Transparency International–Malaysia had in
August 2007 formed a panel of eminent persons to look into the 1988
judicial crisis and had in August 2008 released its report.)
The
independence of the judiciary was strengthened when the Judicial
Appointments Commission Act 2009 was gazetted on February 8, 2009.
In short, the government actually carried out the RCI and the JAC which the Malaysian Bar had pushed for in its 2007 walk.
File
picture of Malaysian Bar president Chris Leong addressing the crowd at
the ‘Walk for Peace and Freedom’ event, October 16, 2014. — Picture by
Yiswaree Palansamy
Wait, there were other marches, too
After
the 2007 Walk for Justice, the Malaysian Bar held two more marches, to
uphold freedom of assembly and freedom of speech in Malaysia.
On
November 29, 2011, the Malaysian Bar organised the “Walk for Freedom
2011: Peaceful Assembly Bill Cannot and Must Not Become Law!”, which
reportedly was attended by about 1,000 persons in protest against the
government’s Peaceful Assembly Bill which was said to have clauses that
were too restrictive on the constitutional right to assemble, such as
prohibiting street protests.
In the 2011 walk from the Royal Lake
Club to Parliament, Malaysian Bar’s proposed alternative Peaceful
Assembly Bill was delivered to then deputy minister in the Prime
Minister’s Department Datuk Liew Vui Keong.
The Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 was gazetted on February 9, 2012.
In October 2012, the Malaysia Bar received the United Nations Malaysia Organisation of the Year Award,
where the professional body was recognised as having admirably
fulfilled its role as the guardian of the rule of law and defender of
human rights and the public interest in Malaysia.
On October 16, 2014, the Malaysian Bar held the “Walk for Peace and Freedom”
to condemn the use of the Sedition Act 1948 and to protest the multiple
arrests, investigations and charges made under that law.
In the march from Padang Merbok to Parliament, which was estimated to be attended by between 1,000 and 2,000 lawyers, the Malaysian Bar’s memorandum
was presented to minister in the Prime Minister’s Department at the
time, Datuk Mah Siew Keong, who accepted it on behalf of the PM.
Zooming back to 2022
The
judiciary has come under threat again, with online attacks ramping up
in recent months against the judge who had heard and decided on former
prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s trial over the misappropriation
of RM42 million of SRC International Sdn Bhd, in what appears to be a
bid to discredit the outcome of the trial.
The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) on April 23 was reported confirming to local newspaper The Star
that it had started its investigation on the SRC trial judge Datuk Mohd
Nazlan Mohd Ghazali, later responding on April 28 to criticisms by
insisting that it has the power to investigate public officers including
judges and clarifying that investigations do not necessarily mean an
individual has committed an offence.
Judges and the judiciary in
general however are unable to defend themselves publicly against wild
allegations, which was why the Malaysian Bar stepped in to help protect
the dignity and integrity of the courts.
The Malaysian Bar on April 24 spoke out against the MACC investigation,
and the Bar Council on May 4 said it had on April 29 held an emergency
meeting before deciding to hold an extraordinary general meeting (EGM).
On May 5, the Bar Council announced the date of the EGM as May 27. Also
on May 4, six former Malaysian Bar presidents had also launched a
petition urging the Bar Council to organise a walk.
On May 21, the
MACC announced that it had completed its investigations in a case
involving the judge, and said it had presented on May 18 the
investigation papers to the Attorney General’s Chambers for further
study and direction.
On May 27, the Malaysian Bar decided at an extraordinary general meeting
(EGM) to support the Bar Council’s motion to organise a peaceful
protest to uphold the judiciary’s independence, while also criticising
the way that the MACC had publicly announced investigations on the judge
for an indefinite period and without proper closure and said that such
action amounts to an act of intimidation against the judiciary.
Lawyers
are expected to gather today at the Padang Merbok car park with plans
to continue with the march to Parliament, with Deputy Minister in the
Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Mas Ermieyati Samsudin expected to
accept the Malaysian Bar’s memorandum on the prime minister’s behalf. - Malay Mail, 17/6/2022
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..
Umno secretary-general Ahmad Maslan
Sembrong MP Hishammuddin Hussein
14 
Justices Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim (left) and Zabidin Diah have been performing the functions of their new positions since November. 
166 
81 
32 
Posts
