Friday, October 29, 2021

Forced Labour - Protest US baseless allegation/actions OR Minister Saravanan should resign for failure of law enforcement that results Malaysia being shamed?

The United States has yet again taken action against a Malaysian company by reason of 'FORCED LABOUR' - Is this 'big powerful country' bullying Malaysia. Are these all FALSE allegations? 

Malaysia's Federal Constitution specifically prohibits Forced Labour  - Article 5(2) states, 'All forms of forced labour are prohibited, but Parliament may by law provide for compulsory service for national purposes.'

What Malaysians are getting confused about is that this is not the 1st Malaysian company where the US has alleged 'forced labour' and have taken action. Then, our government seems to take no(or very little action) against these companies alleged of practicing forced labour.

In the past, then the said companies 'remedies' their practices, and US lifts the restriction. This implies that there was really 'Forced Labour'...

Confusing is Malaysia's reaction - Is there 'forced labour' but Malaysia choose not to act against these companies that breach the law? Or is our labour laws dated and not in compliance with the minimum standards of international law - hence, what is a forced labour violation in US is not a violation of Malaysian law.

Our HR Minister(government) has also been not transparent - What exactly are the allegations? What was the result of the investigations? What were the actions taken? WHY? The HR Minister(Saravanan now) should now come out and inform us of what really is happening...

Was there violation of Malaysian laws against 'forced labour' but the HR Ministry's failed to detect it and act? When 'forced labour' found, was there 'cover-ups' by the government? 

OR are we under attack from the US - if so, Malaysia must act against the US, or maybe people should protest against US - BOYCOTT?

Our HR Minister has been Saravanan since BN-PN-GPS Plus government came into power in March 2020 - and these allegations of 'forced labour' have been occurring since 2019 - and the Minister's plan is to launch a Forced Labour National Action Plan? This comes not just too late - but embarrassingly places blame on 'law enforcement' Should Saravan by reason of shame simply RESIGN as HR Minister - and let another do the needed cleanup of enforcement ? 

According to Saravanan, the issue of forced labour in the rubber glove manufacturing sector is said to be linked to local companies in September 2019 and to date, three local companies had been banned but it was withdrawn in March and September last year.
He revealed that the plan contains four strategic objectives from the aspects of awareness, enforcement, labour migration and access to remedy and protection for victims.

In any event, Minister Saravanan (or the HR Ministry) ought to present Malaysians with a detailed report as to what happened, and what has been done in terms of enforcement and prosecution ...

It is important that we know specifically what were the forced labour allegations -...

These allegation is not simply about rubber glove producers - and, as such may affect all Malaysian companies who are exporting products to US, Europe and other countries. It is foolish to think otherwise..

US lift the 'bans' after the affected company did the needful - Well, Malaysia must certainly incorporate these things done as a legal requirement.

Malaysia can also make it an OFFENCE against companies that export products made using forced labour - A large fine and prison term will be good to DETER a repeat of such offences..

Malaysia should also enact a similar law - that allows Malaysia to ban the entry, sale of products made utilizing FORCED LABOUR..

If the US are making false allegations - then maybe we should be thinking of taking action against the US?  



Office of Public Affairs

October 20, 2021

Contact: CBP Media Relations

(202) 344-1780

News Release


CBP Issues Withhold Release Order on Supermax Corporation Bhd and its Subsidiaries


Agency will detain imports of disposable gloves produced using forced labor


WASHINGTON —Effective Oct. 21, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers at all U.S. ports of entry will detain disposable gloves produced by Supermax Corporation Bhd.’s wholly-owned subsidiaries, Maxter Glove Manufacturing Sdn. Bhd., Maxwell Glove Manufacturing Bhd., and Supermax Glove Manufacturing.


CBP issued a Withhold Release Order (WRO) against Supermax Corporation Bhd and its subsidiaries based on information that reasonably indicates their use of forced labor in manufacturing operations. CBP identified 10 of the International Labour Organization’s indicators of forced labor during its investigation.


Federal statute 19 U.S.C. 1307 prohibits the importation of merchandise produced, wholly or in part, by convict labor, forced labor, and/or indentured labor, including forced or indentured child labor. CBP detains shipments of goods suspected of being imported in violation of this statute. Importers of detained shipments have the opportunity to export their shipments or demonstrate that the merchandise was not produced with forced labor.


“This Withhold Release Order will help protect vulnerable workers,” said Troy Miller, CBP Acting Commissioner. “CBP is a global leader in forced labor enforcement, and we will continue to exclude products made by modern slavery from entering into the United States.”


“With 10 of the 11 forced labor indicators identified during the course of our investigation, CBP has sufficient evidence to conclude that Supermax Corporation Bhd. and its subsidiaries produce gloves in violation of U.S. trade law,” said CBP Office of Trade Executive Assistant Commissioner AnnMarie R. Highsmith. “Until the manufacturers can prove their manufacturing processes are free of forced labor, their goods are not welcome here.”


In Fiscal Year 2021, CBP issued seven WROs and two forced labor findings. The International Labour Organization estimates that 25 million workers suffer under conditions of forced labor worldwide. Foreign companies exploit forced labor to sell goods below market value. This exposes vulnerable populations to inhumane working conditions like physical and sexual violence, isolation, restriction of movement, withholding of wages, excessive overtime, and more. It also hurts law-abiding businesses, threatens American jobs, and exposes consumers to unwittingly supporting unethical business practices.


Any person or organization that has reason to believe merchandise produced with the use of forced labor is being, or likely to be, imported into the United States can report detailed allegations by contacting CBP through the e-Allegations Online Trade Violations Reporting System or by calling 1-800-BE-ALERT.


Follow CBP Office of Trade on Twitter @CBPTradeGov.




U.S. Customs and Border Protection is the unified border agency within the Department of Homeland Security charged with the management, control and protection of our nation's borders at and between official ports of entry. CBP is charged with keeping terrorists and terrorist weapons out of the country while enforcing hundreds of U.S. laws.


PETALING JAYA: The issue of forced labour in Malaysia has again been brought into the spotlight with Supermax Corp Bhd being the latest Malaysian company to run afoul of US Customs and Border Protection (US CBP) over allegations of forced labour practices, which have resulted in a withhold release order (WRO) on its products exported to the United States.

US CBP said that with 10 of the 11 forced labour indicators identified during the course of its investigation, it has ample evidence to conclude that Supermax and its subsidiaries produce gloves in violation of US trade laws.

Other Malaysian companies still facing WROs imposed by US CBP include FGV Holdings Bhd and Sime Darby Plantation Bhd.

This has prompted the government to formulate the Forced Labour National Action Plan which will be launched next month as an approach to deal with the issue in the country, as announced by Human Resources Minister Datuk Seri M Saravanan on Friday.

He revealed that the plan contains four strategic objectives from the aspects of awareness, enforcement, labour migration and access to remedy and protection for victims.

Saravanan stated that the issue of forced labour is giving a bad image to the country’s rubber glove manufacturing sector in which Malaysia is the leading exporter with 60% of the global market, and the sector contributes 51.1% of the overall total exports of the country.

Besides Malaysia, other countries on the WRO list include Brazil, China, Japan, India and Mexico.

What is forced labour?

US CBP defines forced labour as all work or service which is exacted from any person under the menace of any penalty for its non-performance and for which the worker does not offer work or service voluntarily. Indentured labour is defined as work or service performed pursuant to a contract, the enforcement of which can be accomplished by process or penalties. This includes forced or indentured child labour.

How does US CBP address forced labour?

The US enforcement agency implements Section 307 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. §1307) through issuance of WROs and findings to prevent merchandise produced in whole or in part in a foreign country using forced labour from being imported into the US.

US CBP is responsible for preventing the entry of products made with forced labour into the US market by investigating and acting upon allegations of forced labour in supply chains.

The Human Trafficking Legal Center’s June 2020 guide, Importing Freedom: Using the US Tariff Act to Combat Forced Labour in Supply Chains, may be used to help the trade community strengthen petitions to US CBP, and is one of several suggested tools to combat forced labour.

What are the indicators of forced labour?

The indicators are intended to help “front-line” criminal law enforcement officials, inspectors, trade union officers, NGO workers, and others to identify persons who are possibly trapped in a forced labour situation, and who may require urgent assistance. These indicators represent the most common signs that point to the possible existence of a forced labour case.

The 11 International Labour Organization indicators of forced labour are:

1. Abusive working and living conditions.

2. Abuse of vulnerability.

3. Debt bondage.

4. Deception.

5. Excessive overtime.

6. Intimidation and threats.

7. Isolation.

8. Physical and sexual violence.

9. Restriction of movement.

10. Retention of identity documents.

11. Withholding of wages.

- The Sun Daily, 24/10/2021

HR minister: Forced Labour National Action Plan to be launched next month

Human Resources Minister Datuk Seri M. Saravanan says the Forced Labour National Action Plan will be launched next month as an approach to deal with forced labour issue in the country including the rubber glove manufacturing sector. — Bernama pic
Human Resources Minister Datuk Seri M. Saravanan says the Forced Labour National Action Plan will be launched next month as an approach to deal with forced labour issue in the country including the rubber glove manufacturing sector. — Bernama pic

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our Telegram channel for the latest updates.

PUTRAJAYA, Oct 22 ― The Forced Labour National Action Plan will be launched next month as an approach to deal with forced labour issue in the country including the rubber glove manufacturing sector, said Human Resources Minister Datuk Seri M. Saravanan.

In a statement today, he said the plan contained four strategic objectives from the aspect of awareness, enforcement, labour migration and access to remedy and protection for victims.

He said the issue of forced labour is giving a bad image to the country’s rubber glove manufacturing sector in which Malaysia is the leading exporter with 60 per cent of the global market and the sector contributes 51.1 per cent of the overall total export of the country.

According to Saravanan, the issue of forced labour in the rubber glove manufacturing sector is said to be linked to local companies in September 2019 and to date, three local companies had been banned but it was withdrawn in March and September last year.

In this regard, Saravanan also viewed seriously the import ban imposed by the United States Customs and Border Protection Department (US CBP) on rubber-based products manufactured by a subsidiary of Supermax Corporation Bhd.

According to him, the ban was imposed based on investigations of US CBP which found the company had 10 forced labour indicators in the operation of manufacturing company.

On Wednesday, (October 20) , US CBP issued a Withhold Release Order (WRO) on Supermax Corp and all its subsidiaries after receiving information which claimed the use of forced labour in the manufacturing operation of the company.

Following that, the disposable rubber gloves produced by Supermax Corp wholly-owned subsidiaries, Maxter Glove Manufacturing Sdn Bhd, Maxwell Glove Manufacturing Bhd and Supermax Glove Manufacturing, were banned from entering US effective yesterday (October 21). ― Bernama - Malay Mail, 22/10/2021



Thursday, October 28, 2021

27th October Malaysian Day For the Abolition of Detention Without Trial laws


Media Statement – 27/10/2021

27th  October Malaysian Day For the Abolition of Detention Without Trial laws

27th October should be recognized as the Malaysian Day For the Abolition of Detention Without Trial laws. In 1987 on this day, Operation Lallang happened, where about 106 persons, including human rights defenders, women activist, politicians, worker rights activist, religious groups and others were arrested and detained without trial under the Detention Without Trial law, Internal Security Act 1960.

Internal Security Act Repealed but Detention Without Trial lives on

In July 2012, the ISA was repealed.  The Emergency (Public Order and Crimes Prevention) Ordinance 1969, another draconian detention without trial(DWT) law also is gone. However, the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 remained as the only remaining DWT law.

There was hope that soon all other remaining detention without trial laws would also be repealed, but this did not happen. A new DWT law was enacted, being Prevention of Terrorism Act 2015 (POTA). Then the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 (POCA) was amended to include detention without trial for a wide scope of alleged crimes.

DWT Scope no longer about ‘national security’ but expanded to cover so many crimes

The scope of preventive detention laws was expanded, and today it can be used even against persons alleged of committing any of the Penal Code offences including murder, robbery, theft and rape.   It can be used against traffickers in dangerous drugs, including persons who live wholly or in part on the proceeds of drug trafficking; traffickers in persons, including persons who live wholly or in part on the proceeds of trafficking in persons; persons concerned in the organization and promotion of unlawful gaming; smugglers of migrants, including persons who live wholly or in part on the proceeds of smuggling of migrants; Persons who recruit, or agree to recruit, another person to be a member of an unlawful society or a gang or to participate in the commission of an offence; and Persons who engage in the commission or support of terrorist acts under the Penal Code.

As such, the two persons convicted of the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu could have also been subjected to DWT laws but fortunately they were accorded their right to a fair trial.

Who gets subjected to DWT laws, and who gets charged and tried result in discrimination and a violation of Article 8(1) of the Federal Constitution that states ‘All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law.’

The reasons why one becomes a victim of DWT laws cannot be reviewed or challenged in court. This means that an innocent person can wrongly suspected by the administration of a crime, and can be detained without trial for up to 2 years, and extended thereafter indefinitely for 2 years at a time.

Besides detention, the said DWT law victim can also be subjected to Restriction Orders and/or Supervisory Orders that removes one’s freedom of movement, association and other activities. All these can be done to victims of DWT laws without being accorded the right to defend one’s self, in denial of the right to a fair trial, and worse the inability to challenge the reasons and orders in court.

Even the convicted criminal can walk free until their appeals, but not DWT law victims

Even a convicted criminal like former Prime Minister Najib Razak, have the right to 2 appeals in court, and in the meantime is free to walk around freely and remain a Member of Parliament.

On the other hand, victims of DWT laws are denied their freedoms and rights, without even being tried and convicted by court. This unjustice must end.

DWT laws even remove judicial discretion during remand proceedings, as Magistrates have no choice but to allow remand as provided by these DWT laws.

DWT law victims are denied the right to fair trial, he does not have the right to defend himself at all.

DWT laws - Protection and/or Preferential treatment of ‘criminals’

Persons who committed murder, robbery, drug trafficking and a range of offences could escape trial and convictions resulting in long prison sentences and even death, if the DWT laws are used, and these who did commit crimes can end up being released in a couple of years. A murderer could be free in 2 years, when if tried and convicted, he would have been sentenced to death.

A trial is open to the public, and reasons not to charge may be because there maybe something that the government may want to hide from the general public. As such DWT laws can be abused to protect other criminals, and even their bosses or persons who instructed them to commit crime.

DWT laws – promotes incompetence of police and law enforcement

If DWT laws are used then the police and/or prosecution simply do not have to work hard to find evidence to prove someone is really guilty. Would simply subjecting one to DWT laws mean criminal investigation files are closed? This may mean that the innocent may languish in DWT detention, whilst the truly guilty may still be free out there.

It is certainly not for the police or the government to decide who is guilty and who is not – that is role and duty of judges and courts after a fair trial. One must never forget the presumption of innocence until proven guilty after a fair trial before independent judges.

How many victims of DWT laws? What is the alleged crimes?

Malaysia is not transparent in disclosing the number of current victims of the DWT laws, and for what allegation are they being made victims of DWT laws.

The victims may not be prominent politicians or personalities, but all Malaysians ought to be concerned about this large group of victims of DWT laws, who are denied even their fundamental right to a fair trial.


MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) reiterates the call for the immediate abolition of all Detention Without Trial Laws. Everyone should be accorded the right to a fair trial.

MADPET also calls for the immediate and unconditional release of all those currently detained or restricted under DWT laws.

MADPET urges political parties and/or coalition to all political parties to take a clear stand for the abolition of all Detention without Trial Laws. A clear party position prevents U-turns when they come into power.

MADPET proposes longer periods of remand for certain serious ‘national security’ crimes, to enable police and law enforcement to complete their investigation, and for an immediate moratorium on the use of DWT laws pending abolition.

MADPET urges the government to forthwith provide quarterly report on the number of victims of the different DWT laws, whether they be detained, restricted and/or under other orders.

Charles Hector

For and on behalf of MADPET(Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture)


See earlier posts:

33rd Anniversary of Ops Lallang – Abolish all Detention Without Trial laws


No to using detention without trial laws - 6 arrested under DWT laws

Detention Without Trial Laws in Malaysia


Mahiaddin, the real name of PM - Court quashes detention order under Detention Without Trial law for use of 'glamour name' by PM?

Denied the right to protest by peaceful assembly before Parliament(Dewan Rakyat) passed the law allowing Detention Without Trial

Malaysian lawyers Dissatisfaction on the Delay in Abolition of Draconian Laws, and Call for Moratorium on Use of Such Laws Pending Abolition

Detention Without Trial flourishing in Malaysia? 142 juveniles and posibly thousands of adult Malaysians?

Hunger Strike 215 SOSMA victims - PH-led Government stop using SOSMA and DWT laws NOW...pending repeal?









**Last year's statement carried

Ops Lalang: Abolish all detention without trial laws

Charles Hector
Published:  Oct 27, 2020 3:20 PM
Updated: 4:51 PM 
COMMENT | On Oct 27, 1987, a black day in Malaysian history dubbed ‘Operation Lalang’ happened. This massive crackdown using the draconian detention without trial law, the Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA) resulted in about 106 human rights defenders, politicians and others being arrested, and detained, some for almost two years. 

The Home Ministry also withdrew the printing and publishing licenses of the Star, Sin Chew Jit Poh and Watan, which was restored almost five months later on around March 1988.

Whilst the ISA was repealed in end July 2012, other draconian detention without trial (DWT) laws like the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 (Poca), Prevention of Terrorism Act 2015 (Pota) and the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 (DDSPMA) still remain, and many persons continue to be arrested, detained and/or restricted without trial in Malaysia.

DWT laws allow the Executive to administratively detain/restrict persons for reasons that cannot be challenged in courts, and as such lies and falsehood can be used. The reasons or justification for the use of such DWT laws cannot be challenged in courts. Hence, the judiciary’s role in a democracy, to serve as a check and balance to the actions/omissions of the Executive is removed.

Since the abolition of the ISA, the scope the current DWT laws are so much wider, to now even include even ordinary Penal Code crimes. A suspected thief may also be simply be detained without trial, and not be accorded the right to a fair trial.

DWT laws undermine the rule of law, justice and human rights – denying the right to a fair trial, and even violating the fundamental principle of presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

Article 10 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) provides, “Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.”

Article 11(1) of the UDHR states that “Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to the law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.”

Victims of Ops Lalang

Amongst the arrested were human rights defenders (HRDs), including women human rights defenders such as Theresa Lim Chin Chin, Chee Heng Leng and Cecilia Ng, Irene Xavier and Meenakshi Raman.

Other activists arrested included Dr Chandra Muzaffar, Tan Ka Kheng, Harrison Ngau, Anthony Rogers, Arokia Dass, Kua Kia Soong, Mohd Nasir Hashim and Lim Fong Seng.

Community HRDs included Hiew Yun Tat and Lee Koon Bun (chairperson and vice-chairperson of Perak Anti-Radioactive Committee).

Pakatan Harapan fails to repeal DWT laws

Current leaders of the DAP and Amanah such as Lim Kit Siang, Lim Guan Eng and Muhamad Sabu were also victims, along with many other politicians from the DAP and PAS. Anwar Ibrahim, the leader of PKR was also twice a victim of the ISA, in 1974 and thereafter in 1998, but he has been criticised for his silence during Ops Lalang when he was then part of the cabinet.

Other Ops Lalang politician victims included Ibrahim Ali, Tajuddin Rahman, Abdul Latif Mohamad, Muhammad Ariff Yaacob, Bunyamin Yaakob, Khaled Abu Samad, Suhaimi Saad, P Patto, Karpal Singh, V David, Hu Sepang, Wee Choo Keong, Fahmi Ibrahim, Mohamed Yunus Lebai Ali and Halim Arshat.

Madpet (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is disappointed when the then Pakatan Harapan government that included PKR, DAP and Amanah, failed to do the needful and abolish speedily all remaining DWT laws, including Poca, Pota and the DDSPMA. Judicial review of the reasons for the arrest, detention and/or restriction is still not allowed, and that could have been remedied easily by an amendment.

The Harapan government also failed to even table bills that would lead to the repeal, not even bills that will finally enable courts to review reasons why DWT laws are used against victims – judicial review. If there was no time, bills could always be debated and passed at subsequent parliamentary sessions.

Even if politicians are not victims of DWT laws, people still are

Even though prominent politicians may have not fallen victim to these remaining DWT laws, other persons continue to be victims, and any justice-loving person or party must be committed to repealing all DWT laws. A caring government committed to justice will repeal such DWT laws and ensure everyone is accorded the right to a fair trial.

Madpet reiterates the call for the immediate repeal of all DWT laws, including Poca, Pota and the DDSPMA.

Madpet also calls for the immediate and unconditional release of all persons currently detained and/or restricted under DWT laws in Malaysia.

Malaysia must respect the principle of presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a court of law. If anyone has allegedly broken any Malaysian law, then he/she must be investigated, charged in court and accorded the right to a fair trial.

CHARLES HECTOR represents Malaysians Against Death Penalty & Torture (Madpet). - Malaysiakini, 27/10/2020


Malaysia Resurrects Detention Without Trial, Alarming Government Critics

BANGKOK — Three years after abolishing detention without trial, the Malaysian government revived the practice on Tuesday with the passage into law of a highly contentious antiterrorism bill that opposition leaders fear could be used against government critics.

The bill, the Prevention of Terrorism Act, was passed early Tuesday by a vote of 79 to 60 after more than 10 hours of debate.

The government, which arrested 17 people this week for what the chief of police said was a plot to attack army camps and police stations, has sought to justify the law as necessary to combat the threat of terrorism in Malaysia.

Critics say the law is a further slide toward authoritarianism in Malaysia and a definitive reversal of personal freedoms that Prime Minister Najib Razak vowed to introduce soon after assuming power in 2009.

The Prevention of Terrorism Act bypasses the judiciary and allows for detention for as many as 59 days at the discretion of the police. Suspects can be held for two years, renewable for an unlimited period of time, on the decision of a Prevention of Terrorism Board, whose members are appointed by the country’s sultan.

In Mr. Najib’s early years in power, his program of liberalization featured the abolishment in 2012 of the Internal Security Act, a law that allowed for detention without trial and was used against government opponents and anyone who presented a vaguely defined threat.

But in recent months, Mr. Najib has hewed to a hard line. He faces both an ascendant opposition and an open revolt within his own party. In November, he announced that he would toughen another law that he once vowed to abolish: the Sedition Act, a British colonial relic that calls for jail terms for anyone who “excites disaffection” against religion, the country’s sultans and the government.

On Tuesday, Mr. Najib’s coalition introduced changes to the Sedition Act in Parliament, including an increase in the maximum jail term to 20 years, up from five. The revised law would also rule out bail in certain cases.

Prime Minister Najib Razak of Malaysia addressing the annual congress of his party, the United Malays National Organization, in Kuala Lumpur last year.
Credit...Manan Vatsyayana/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

Malaysian lawyers are among the most vocal critics of both the antiterrorism law and planned changes to the Sedition Act, which are likely to pass, given Mr. Najib’s comfortable majority in Parliament.

Now free speech is being exterminated,” Michelle Yesudas, a Malaysian lawyer, said in a Twitter post. She circulated a modified picture on social media of the board game Monopoly in which nearly every square said, “Go to jail.”

Eric Paulsen, another Malaysian lawyer, said on Twitter, “Soon we will have farcical scenes like in Egypt where half of the opposition/dissidents will be behind bars on political trials.”

About 20 people, including journalists, opposition politicians and a university professor, have been charged with sedition over the past year.

On Friday, Zulkiflee Anwar Ulhaque, a cartoonist who goes by the name Zunar, was charged with nine counts of sedition for criticizing a decision in February by the country’s highest court to uphold a five-year prison term for Anwar Ibrahim, the leader of the opposition. Mr. Zunar called the judges who upheld the sentence for sodomy “lackeys in black robes.”

Human rights groups have criticized the jailing of Mr. Anwar, who was one of Mr. Najib’s biggest rivals. The opposition has staged demonstrations urging his release.

But Mr. Najib also faces fierce opposition from one of the leading personalities inside his own party, Mahathir Mohamad, a former prime minister who still wields influence and whose views are widely circulated.

Mr. Mahathir wrote on his blog last week that the Malaysian people “don’t trust Najib.”

He listed a number of scandals, including the murder of a Mongolian model by Mr. Najib’s bodyguards and a government investment fund set up by Mr. Najib that has teetered on the edge of insolvency.

Mr. Mahathir predicted that the governing coalition, which has won every election since independence from Britain in 1957, would be voted out of power if Mr. Najib remained as prime minister. - New York Times, 7/4/2015