problem has always been the issue of the sitting Prime Minister choosing the JUDGES. .. NOBODY wants a situation where a sitting Prime Minister can choose and appoint judges ... more so, when it has been acknowledged a FACT that sitting Prime Ministers, Ministers,etc...can commit crimes, and it is ABSURD for them to be tried before Judges chosen by them... Does this mean that everyone who has a case against Anwar Ibrahim, because the presiding Judge was chosen by PM ANWAR? That is why the Prime Minister should have NO ROLE in choosing Judges...the choosing should be by a INDEPENDENT body... On or about 2007, latest crisis in the judiciary as shown by the expose through a video clip of a lawyers lengthy discussion with a senior judge and the alleged brokering of the appointment and promotion of judges,... This led to about 2,000 lawyer members and the Malaysian Bar acting - they exercised their right of Peaceful Assembly to highlight this issue, including the demand that there be an INDEPENDENT Judicial Appointment Commission(JAC) On September 26, 2007, about 2,000 lawyers gathered at the entrance of the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya, before marching to the Prime Ministers Office to deliver the Bar Councils memorandum.Malaysian Bar urged 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. 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. Well, the government responded by tabling the Judicial Appointments Commission Bill - which created the Judicial Appointments Commission(JAC) but still gave the power to the PRIME MINISTER to 'influence' the selection process - because 5 members of the JAC were persons determined by the PM. 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...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.... Malaysia Now, 30/11/2022 2 YEARS LATER, and PM Anwar Ibrahim has still failed to act on the recommendation of the Conference of Rulers. WHY? And, recently 4 of his political appointees were again appointed to the JAC - (Nov 18): Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has appointed former attorney general Tan Sri Idrus Harun, former Federal Court judge Tan Sri Zainun Ali, former Sarawak AG Datuk Seri Talat Mahmood Abdul Rashid and Universiti Teknologi Mara law lecturer Dr Hartini Saripan as members of the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC). - Edge, 18/11/2024 After the enactment of the Judicial Commission Act, it is legally mandatory that the JAC makes their RECOMMENDATIONS to the Prime Minister of all NEW Judges to be appointed, and also Judges to be elevated - BUT the problem was the VACANCY in the JACs - a vacancy that made a problem for the JAC to meet the requisite QUORUM. So, the question is WHETHER the recent appointment of the Chief Justice of the High Court in Malaya Datuk Seri Hasnah Mohamed Hashim, some eight Court of Appeal judges, Fifteen High Court judges,...is LEGAL or ILLEGAL? ...the JACs role in selecting candidates for judicial appointments with integrity and independence. Their appointments also restore the JACs ability to convene after a quorum issue rendered it inoperative since September 2024. - Malaysian Bar President's Statement, 12/11/2024 Noting that the JAC was 'crippled' by reason of a quorum issue BECAUSE Anwar Ibrahim again was INCOMPETENT when he failed to immediately fill the vacancy, when the previous 4 appointees terms expired on 4/9/2024. A competent Prime Minister will ensure that there is NO GAPS - so that the JAC would have been always been operational. The new members of the JAC should have appointed the day the term of the previous batch of appointees expired. Chief Justice of the High Court in Malaya is also a member of the Judicial Appointment Commission (JAC). There are 4 members of the JAC -Chief Justice, President of the Court of Appeal, the Chief Justice of the High Court in Malaya, and the Chief Justice of the High Court of Sabah and Sarawak. Court of Appeal president Tan Sri Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim performed the duties and functions of Chief Justice of the High Court in Malaya until the position was permanently filled recently. What this meant for the JAC was significant as the heads of the Judiciary's votes was reduced to 3 persons(with 3 votes) not 4 person - noting that the other 5 were politically choosen by the PM? Chief Justice of the High Court in Malaya also has a ROLE to play with the appointment of High Court Judges and Judicial Commissioners - as per the Federal Constitution . Was the delay of appointment of the CJ of HC of Malaya intentional - to prevent participation in choice of Judges/Judicial Commissioners? Think about it. ANOTHER ISSUE - did PM Anwar Ibrahim appoint Judges as recommended by the Judicial Appointments Commission(JAC) OR did Anwar ignore the JAC and appoints persons he wanted to be Judges. All ANWAR needs to do now is to come out and STATE that he appointed Judges as per the JAC's recommendations - will he speak out. BUT THEN, there is a problem with Federal Court Judge, Tan Sri Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh . Personally, i do not think that the JAC would have ever considered or recommended a sitting Attorney General/Public Prosecutor to be appointed a Federal Court Judge... different, if he had already retired some months back. But Terriruddin was said to be 56 - many years before he retires... PUTRAJAYA will name solicitor-general (SG) Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh the new attorney-general (AG) to replace Idrus Harun, said sources...Terrirudin is 55, and was appointed SG in March 2022. - Malaysian Insight, 1/9/2023 Ahmad Terrirudin is DIFFERENT. Terrirudin was not a Attorney General/Public Prosecutor appointed for a fixed contractual term - which happens for some AG/PP before him - Appandi, Tommy Thomas, Idrus...i.e. those who were over tetirement age, or those brought in not from the public service. As a public officer, Terrirudin ought to have remained Attorney General/Public Prosecutor until his retirement at 60. So, in my opinion, the PREMATURE REMOVAL of a sitting Attorney General/Public Prosecutor is WRONG - but the method used, however creative, as in this case by the appointment as a Federal Court Judge is still unacceptable? Did Terrirudin even have the RIGHT to oppose his 'wrongful dismissal'? Can he say NO when told that the KING approved your appointment as Federal Court Judge? By the way, for a AG to be appointed a Federal Court Judge, I see it as a DEMOTION... SO, DID the JAC participate in the premature removal of Terrirudin? Did they even recommend a sitting Attorney General to be appointed a Federal Court Judge? IF YES, I will be dissapointed and would be curious as to how the JAC members voted??? Did the heads of Malaysian Judiciary agree to this? The issue is also about the INDEPENDENCE of the Public Prosecutor(and here in Malaysia also the Attorney General for now) - I believe that the PUBLIC PROSECUTOR(at least) must be INDEPENDENT and certainly not be a "Yes-Men" or persons whose actions can be dictated by the Prime Minister or government of the day. One safeguard - SECURITY FOR TENURE - and that means Terrirudin should have remained Attorney General/Public Prosecutor until he RETIRED as a Public Officer at the Age of 60. Malaysia is in the PROCESS of separating the AG and Public Prosecutor...and this is BEST, for at the end of the day, the Attorney General is the government's lawyer - who also acts in defence of public officers, Ministers and Government against other Malaysians. The AG is really more a 'political appointee', very different from the Public Prosecutor who is more about law enforcement and prosecution of criminals...who can also be sitting Ministers,... Malaysian Bar calls on Mohamed Apandi Ali to immediately resign as Attorney General, for the good of Malaysia.. Malaysian Bar Resolution on the Attorney General, Public Prosecutor and Improvement of Public Perspective of Administration of Justice in Malaysia ONE QUESTION needs further discussion - Was AG/PP Terrirudin REMOVED by Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim or NOT? Being a Public Officer, I do not believe that Terrirudin's appointment was for a fixed contractual term - which means he cannot be easily REMOVED until he retires at the retirement age? A siting AG/PP should never have been recommended to be appointed Judge, by the JAC or any of the Heads of Judiciary? If they did, it was WRONG as it is tantamount to REMOVAL or DISMISSAL, and when it comes to REMOVAL of AG/PP - the same policy and practice that is used for the Removal of Judges should apply. The Federal Constitution must be amended - thus amendment of the JAC Act only will not do. The King should appoint judges based on the ADVICE of the JAC, and importantly the JAC too must be independent - and the Prime Minister shall have no way of getting his 'people' into the JAC...this was the advice of the Conference of Rulers too... See some earlier posts: Questionable appointment of Dusuki b4 previous AG reaches retirement age? Dusuki and link to Zahid's case? We need an Independent Public Prosecutor.. JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS COMMISSION BILL 2008 - not at all what the people asked for... Amend Federal Constitution and Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009 to remove Prime Ministers 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) Appointment of former AG Idrus Harun, three others to Judicial Appointments Commission confirmed By Hafiz Yatim / theedgemalaysia.com 18 Nov 2024, 01:22 pmUpdated - 05:27 pm main news image KUALA LUMPUR (Nov 18): Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has appointed former attorney general Tan Sri Idrus Harun, former Federal Court judge Tan Sri Zainun Ali, former Sarawak AG Datuk Seri Talat Mahmood Abdul Rashid and Universiti Teknologi Mara law lecturer Dr Hartini Saripan as members of the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC). Their appointment for a two-year period under Section 5(1) of the Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009 is effective from Nov 1 this year to Oct 31, 2026, the JAC secretary said in a statement on Monday. Their appointments are to replace former chief justice Tun Md Raus Sharif, former Federal Court judge Tan Sri Suriyadi Halim Omar, former Sarawak AG Datuk Abdul Razak Tready and law lecturer Datuk Dr Shamrahayu Ab Aziz, where their term expired on Sept 3 this year. JAC would like to thank the contribution made by Md Raus, Suriyadi, Abdul Razak and Shamrahayu for the duration of them being a member, JAC added in the statement. The statement confirmed The Edges earlier report on Nov 11 that announced Idrus, Zainun, Talat and Hartinis appointment to the JAC. Newly appointed Chief Judge of Malaya (CJM) Datuk Seri Hasnah Mohamed Hashim, by virtue of being the CJM, will replace her predecessor Tan Sri Mohamad Zabidin Mohd Diah as the fifth member.- Edge, 18/11/2024 King confers appointment letters to 25 judges, including new Chief Judge of Malaya His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim hands appointment documents to Chief Justice of the High Court in Malaya Datuk Seri Hasnah Mohamed Hashim at the presentation ceremony and awarding of appointment documents for judges of the Federal Court, Court of Appeal and High Court at Dewan Singgahsana Kecil, Istana Negara November 12, 2024. Bernama pic Tuesday, 12 Nov 2024 4:59 PM MYT KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 12 His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim, King of Malaysia, today granted an audience and handed over instruments of appointment to 25 judges at Istana Negara here. The ceremony, held at Dewan Singgahsana Kecil, began with the conferment of the appointment letter to the Chief Judge of Malaya, Datuk Seri Hasnah Mohamed Hashim, followed by Federal Court Judge, Tan Sri Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh. His Majesty then conferred appointment letters to eight Court of Appeal judges, namely Datuk Noorin Badaruddin; Datuk Seri Mohd Firuz Jaffril; Datuk Dr Alwi Abdul Wahab; Datuk Faizah Jamaludin; Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid; Datuk Ismail Brahim; Datuk Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh and Datuk Ahmad Fairuz Zainol Abidin. His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim hands appointment documents to Federal Court Judge Tan Sri Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh at the presentation ceremony and awarding of appointment documents for judges of the Federal Court, Court of Appeal and High Court at Dewan Singgahsana Kecil, Istana Negara November 12, 2024. Bernama pic Fifteen High Court judges among them Azizan Md Arshad; Narkunavathy Sundareson; Noor Ruwena Md Nurdin; Jamhirah Ali; Noor Hayati Mat; Azlan Sulaiman and Kenneth Yong Ken Chinson St. James also received their instruments of appointment at the ceremony. The other High Court judges were Leong Wai Hong; Noor Hisham Ismail; Roz Mawar Rozain; Wan Fadhilah Nor Wan Idris; Rofiah Mohamad; Wong Mee Ling; Datuk Raja Ahmad Mokhzanuddin Shah Raja Mohzan; and Suria Kumar D.J. Paul. Also present to witness the ceremony were Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat; Minister in the Prime Ministers Department (Law and Institutional Reform), Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said; Court of Appeal, president Tan Sri Abang Iskandar Abang Hashim; and Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak, Tan Sri Abdul Rahman Sebli. Also in attendance were the Chief Secretary to the Government, Tan Sri Shamsul Azri Abu Bakar; Chief Registrar of the Federal Court of Malaysia, Prime Ministers Department, Datuk Zamri Bakar; and Judicial Appointments Commission secretary, Salinah Ismail. After the conferment of the appointment letters, His Majesty graciously posed for a photograph with the newly appointed judges. Bernama, Malay Mail, 12/11/2024

18/11/2024, The Court of Appeal today ordered Kinabatangan Member of Parliament Datuk Seri Bung Moktar Radin and his wife Datin Seri Zizie Izette Abdul Samad to enter their defence on three corruption charges involving RM2.8 million. It's GOOD that there has NOT been a U-TURN on all the efforts of law enforcement and prosecution that started after GE14(2018)... Still waiting on the Public Prosecutor/AS Court of Appeal orders Bung Moktar, wife Zizie Izette to enter defence over three corruption charges involving RM2.8m File photo of Kinabatangan MP, Datuk Seri Bung Moktar Radin (centre), attending a hearing at the Kuala Lumpur High Court Complex in September 2023. Picture by Hari Anggara. Monday, 18 Nov 2024 10:21 AM MYT PUTRAJAYA, Nov 18 The Court of Appeal today ordered Kinabatangan Member of Parliament Datuk Seri Bung Moktar Radin and his wife Datin Seri Zizie Izette Abdul Samad to enter their defence on three corruption charges involving RM2.8 million. A three-man bench comprising Justices Datuk Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim, Datuk Mohamed Zaini Mazlan, and Datuk Noorin Badaruddin made the decision after allowing the prosecution's appeal against the couples acquittal by the Kuala Lumpur High Court on Sept 7, 2023. -Advertisement- On Sept 18, 2023, the prosecution filed an appeal against the decision of High Court Judge Datuk Azhar Abdul Hamid on Sept 7, 2023, which had acquitted the couple of the charges. The High Court arrived at the decision after allowing Bung Moktar and Zizie Izettes application to review the Sessions Courts ruling on Sept 2, 2022, which had ordered them to enter their defence on the charges. Justice Mohamed Zaini, when reading out the unanimous decision, said that the critical issue in this appeal is whether the High Court has a right to subject the findings of a prima facie case for revision. He explained that a criminal trial generally begins when an accused person faces charges, after which the prosecution starts its case by calling witnesses and presenting evidence to support its claims. At the end of the prosecutions case, the trial court must analyse the witness testimonies and the evidence produced on a maximum evaluation basis and determine if the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused. A prima facie case is established when the prosecution has presented credible evidence proving each element of the offence, which would justify a conviction if left unchallenged or unexplained, he said. Justice Mohamed Zaini further said if the court finds that the prosecution has not established a prima facie case against the accused, the court shall acquit the accused. If the court finds that the prosecution has established a prima facie case against the accused on the offence charged, the court shall call upon the accused to enter his defence. The decision to acquit or to call for defence would have been arrived after a maximum evaluation exercise by the trial judge. These procedures and criteria are set up under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code and the provisions under this section are mandatory. Once the court finds that the prosecution has made up a prima facie case against the accused, it shall call upon the accused to enter his defence because of the word shall the court has no other option, he added. Justice Mohamed Zaini said it is established law that the accused cannot appeal a decision to call for defence. The courts findings at this stage are not subject to appeal, as they do not constitute a final resolution of the respondents rights requesting a revision of these findings is essentially the same as filing an appeal against them. The due process of the trial must continue, allowing the respondents to present their defence, he said. Justice Mohamed Zaini said the High Courts findings on the Sessions Court judges decision to call for defence was premature. The learned Sessions Court judges oral ruling was brief and does not contain comprehensive reasoning for her decision. The oral ruling was not a judgment that contains the grounds for her decision. The learned Sessions Court judge, in fact, has no obligation to give any reasons at this stage in calling for defence. That obligation only arises at the end of the trial, whether she chose to acquit or convict the respondents (Bung Moktar and Zizie Izette). These are insufficient material in a brief or a ruling for the learned High Court judge to revise, assuming that his lordship has the powers to do so, he said. Justice Mohamed Zaini also pointed out that the right to a fair trial applies equally to the prosecution. He said, allowing an application for revision of a prima facie ruling disrupts a trial, creating an insufferable situation in which the trial court must accede to numerous requests for postponements to enable each party to appeal against an order made during the trial. This will frustrate the progress of trials, wasting precious judicial time and public expense, and must be stopped. Based on the aforesaid, we allow the appeal by the appellant. The High Courts ruling is therefore set aside. The Sessions Court ruling is restored, and we order this case to be remitted back to the Sessions Court for the trial to continue without further delay, said justice Mohamed Zaini. The court then fixed Dec 5 for mention at Sessions Court. Bung Moktar, 65, who was then the non-executive chairman of Felcra Berhad, was charged on May 3, 2019, with two charges of accepting bribes of RM2.2 million and RM262,500 as an inducement to obtain Felcra approval to invest RM150 million in Public Mutual unit trusts. He was alleged to have accepted the bribes from Public Mutual Berhads investment agent Madhi Abdul Hamid through Zizie Izette, 46, at Public Bank Taman Melawati Branch here between 12.30 pm and 5 pm on June 12, 2 . Bung Moktar was also charged with receiving RM337,500 in cash from Unit Amanah consultant, Norhaili Ahmad Mokhtar, under the name of Zizie Izette for the same reason and place on June 19, 2 , while Zizie Izette was charged with three counts of abetting her husband over the matter at the same place, date and time. Speaking to the press after the proceedings, Bung Moktar, who is also Sabah Barisan Nasional Sabah chairman, said he accepted the courts decision today. Insya-Allah, if that is the courts ruling, it must be accepted... thank you, he said with a smile, accompanied by Zizie Izette. Bernama, Malay Mail, 18/11/2024 Bung, wife acquitted as order to enter defence unjust, says High Court judge V Anbalagan - 29 Apr 2024, 06:10 PM Justice Azhar Abdul Hamid says the sessions court judges finding of a prima facie case was incorrect and perverse. The prosecution is appealing the High Courts exercise of its revisionary powers to acquit Kinabatangan MP Bung Moktar Radin and his wife, Zizie Izette Abdul Samad, of corruption charges. (Bernama pic) PETALING JAYA : A High Court judge said he exercised his revisionary power to acquit Kinabatangan MP Bung Moktar Radin and wife, Zizie Izette Abdul Samad, of corruption charges over a RM150 million Felcra investment as there was no basis for the trial judge to order the couple to enter their defence. Justice Azhar Abdul Hamid said he was of the opinion that the sessions court judges finding of a prima facie case was incorrect and perverse, and had caused great injustice to both the accused. It is my view that this is a fit and proper case for this court to exercise its revisionary power. Both the applications are, therefore, allowed and the session courts decision is set aside and substituted with an order of acquittal and discharge without calling for them to enter their defence, he said in a written judgment released last week. On Sept 7 last year, the session court ruled that the prosecution had proved all the ingredients of the charges against the duo and that the presumption of corruption under Section 50 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009 had been triggered. In his 10-page judgment, Azhar said the trial judges decision ran contrary to the evidence tendered in court by the prosecution. Both material witnesses for the prosecution, namely SP24 (Norhaili Mokhtar) SP25 (Madhi Abdul Hamid) clearly stated in their oral evidence in court that no element of gratification exists in this case, he said. He said Norhaili had denied under cross-examination that what was stated in her written statements given during investigations had actually transpired. She also denied that the RM2.8 million paid to Zizie at Public Bank Taman Melawati was meant for Bung, he said. Azhar said Madhi had, in his evidence in court, also confirmed that there was neither any element of gratification nor request from either accused. He (Madhi) went on to confirm that the money (RM2.8 million) paid to Zizie was an introduction fee, he said. In the face of this evidence, Azhar said, the trial judge was wrong to accept the previous statements which the two witnesses gave to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission in the course of its investigation. The trial judge determined that the oral evidence of these two witnesses do not give effect to the charges against both the accused, he said, adding that such contradictory evidence made such testimonies completely untrustworthy. Azhar said the High Court decision in the case of Lim Hung Wang v. PP (2011) empowered him to use his revisionary powers under Section 323 of the Criminal Procedure Code to review the decision of the sessions court. The prosecution is expected to file its petition of appeal this week after having received the appeal records, which included the judgment, on April 23. The petition is intended to state where the High Court had erred in law and facts. The Court of Appeal has set July 29 to hear the prosecutions appeal against the acquittal. - FMT, 29/4/2024

officers treat 'Datuks', Datu Seris, etc is different from the way they treat ordinary Malaysians... This differential treatment is called 'DISCRIMINATION' - AND is contrary to our Constitutional guarantee of EQUALITY... PM Anwar portrays himself as a 'feudalist' who seems to project that he listens and obeys the King and the Conference of Rulers. TRUE or not is up to debate. In Malaysian Constitution, most of the decision making power vests in the Prime Minister - and even the KING has no choice but to ACT on the advice of the Prime Minister. He cannot 'disobey' the Prime Minister in most cases. The King only has ABSOLUTE power in very few cases. So, the 'RESPECT' accorded to the King and Royalty is more cultural...not based on law. That RESPECT exists... SOLUTION - Should we consider that the KING and sitting rulers of State not be involved in Businesses, more so businesses which deal with the State to get permits/licences or even 'biddings to become the second operator of 5G Networks'.... So when they become King or State Ruler - maybe all their shares in companies should be disposed off and they be paid the value of their shares? They will be prohibited to have dealings on business - and should confine their duties to just being KING, Sultan and or State Ruler? Same maybe should apply to PM, Ministers and members of the Cabinet? The King, for example is briefed on a very regular basis by the Prime Minister and/or government - and there is a RISK that he may have access to information not yet available to the public? Would KING/Rulers involved in businesses use such information for the benefit of the businesses they own or are related with? This is something Malaysians and the government need to think about.... "No One Really Like TO Criticize a Business that the King or Royalty are involved in - for it is so easy nowadays to 'turn it around' and paint it as an act of SEDITION - and PM Anwar Ibrahim's government has already threatened everyone that Sedition Act will be used for the 3R cases - where one of the 'R" is the royalty??? It does not exclude businesses where royalty is involved in..... A SUGGESTED REFORM - affecting ROYALTY and also leaders of current government...Think about it. Business Decision to award 5G network deal to U Mobile comes under scrutiny In a statement yesterday, Maxis said it will engage with the MCMC to understand the rationale for the decision and consider its options after discussions with all stakeholders. Updated 1 week ago Published on 04 Nov 2024 Current shareholders in U Mobile include Singapore-based Straits Mobile Investments Pte Ltd with a 48.3% stake.- November 4, 2024 THE governments decision to appoint U Mobile as the second operator of Malaysias 5G network last week has come under scrutiny. According to reports in the New Straits Times, CIMB Securities in its note today said the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission's (MCMC) decision came as a surprise to the firm and the market. "Maxis or CDB (to a lesser degree) were widely expected to win, being the two largest MNOs in Malaysia (in terms of subscribers and earnings, with relatively stronger balance sheets)," it said. In a statement yesterday, Maxis said it will engage with the MCMC to understand the rationale for the decision and consider its options after discussions with all stakeholders. Maxis emphasised they are a homegrown Malaysian company led by Malaysians and principally owned by Malaysians with 77% of its shares owned by Malaysians. Maybank Investment Bank Bhd (Maybank IB) believes that U Mobile is unlikely to independently deploy a 5G network and will likely seek a partnership with either CelcomDigi Bhd or Maxis Bhd. Current shareholders in U Mobile include Singapore-based Straits Mobile Investments Pte Ltd with a 48.3% stake. The Malaysian investors are, His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim, the King of Malaysia, with 22.3%; Magnum Bhd with 7.8%; Singer (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd with 6.1% and U Telemedia Sdn Bhd, owned by Malaysian tycoon Tan Sri Vincent Tan, at 5.6%. Industry experts were also reported as asking the government to spell out why it had chosen U Mobile. - Nov 3, 2024, Vibes

yet tells us his decision > and now, he has been REMOVED by way of an appointment as a Federal Court Judge. He did not RESIGN as AG/PP or say he was going to do so...and he certainly could not have RETIRED as it was reported that he was only about 56 years old,,, Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar - on a Google search appears as being the Industrial Court Chairman who heard the DRB-HICOM cases Pekerja DRB-HICOM tak dapat kerja kembali walaupun dibuang kerja secara salah? RM1.1juta hanya lebih kurang RM940 sebulan? In this case, Dusuki did not order REINSTATEMENT - but only compensation in lieu of reinstatement. Thus the company got rid of active union members... The case also HIGHLIGHTS the INJUSTICE - because 'The workers will be receiving between RM24,000 and RM94,000 each in backdated wages and compensation in lieu of reinstatement.' The amount workers got for wrongful dismissal was as low as RM24,000 because the law as it it is UNJUST to workers - and the maximum workers get is just 24 months wages(usually lesser), so a small income worker will only get very little monies --- it all depends wages. The media reports of HIGH awards is for workers that get higher wages...usually RM10,000 or more??? REMEMBER the ATTORNEY GENERAL/PUBLIC PROSECUTOR plays a very important role in Prosecution of Criminal Cases, and also in PARDON. Some PM will PREFER an AG who will do as the PM Wants... Will the change of AG/PP affect the Najib's 'house arrest" case now? Remember, in Zahid's case, the lead prosecutor was removed at the 11th hour just before the case was DNAAed? Would this impact Najib's 1MDB case? SHOULD a new AG be the next in terms of seniority at the AGC? There is a Judicial Appointment Commission for Judges, should there not be an independent commission for the appointment of Attorney General/Public Prosecutor to prevent perception of abuse of power by the Prime Minister? AG played a important role in Najib's pardon - half the prison sentence, and fine more than quartered. AG/PP power to discontinue criminal cases - as was done in Zahid Hamidi's case. PP only has the power of appeal with regard to sentence, etc... Like recent deaf E-Hailing Driver assault by police officer in security detail of VVIP - only sentenced to Fine of RM1,000.... Rightfully, the PP should appeal the sentence... Will they do it? ... See other relevant posts - If DPP Raja Rozela Raja Toran continues to prosecute, Zahid Hamidi will likely be convicted and sentenced? Come back and prosecute to the end.. Zahid Hamidi's DNAA - One reason was MACC needed more time to investigate? Why, after 9 months, MACC not completed additional investigation? How long for AG/PP Terrirudin to investigate Zahid Hamidi's matters? Waiting for Judge Collin Sequerah to retire? Charge him using s.254A CPC, or keep us updated as to how long more we have to wait? Ahmad Terrirudin,56 years old, could not be retiring yet? So, why the AG/PP removed so soon after 13 months? Did the JAC recommend Terrirudin to be appointed Federal Court Judge? Zahid Hamidi's can always be charged again, the trial reinstated and continued - section 254A CPC? Explaining and concerns? Dusuki to be new AG, replacing Ahmad Terrirudin By Hafiz Yatim / theedgemalaysia.com 11 Nov 2024, 03:07 pm KUALA LUMPUR (Nov 11): Datuk Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar will be appointed as the new attorney general, effective from Tuesday, succeeding Tan Sri Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh, who will be appointed as a Federal Court judge after one year and two months as the AG. The announcement was made by Chief Secretary to the GovernmentTan Sri Shamsul Azri Abu Bakarin a statement. Dusuki, who is presently the head of the Appellate and Trial Division of the Attorney General's Chambers, is the first AG who graduated the International Islamic University (IIU). Shamsul said Dusuki, 57, who hails from Machang, Kelantan, holds a law degree from the IIU and a masters from the Wollongong University, Australia. He has 31 years of experience in the Attorney General's Chambers. The government thanks Ahmad Terrirudin for his services to the country as the AG, said Shamsul. - EDGE, 11/11/2024

on Sept 6 last year, succeeding Tan Sri Idrus Harun, whose contractual appointment ended on Sept 5. The question is WHY was AG/PP Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh removed by the Prime Minister? The Attorney General is appointed on the advice of the Prime Minister - Art.145 (1) The Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall, on the advice of the Prime Minister , appoint a person who is qualified to be a judge of the Federal Court to be the Attorney General for the Federation. A Federal Court Judge too according to Art 122B (1) 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. The King just appoints on the advice of the Prime Minister....hence, all the power of the Prime Minister. SO, the question is why was AG/PP Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh removed by the PM? A previous AG/PP that was prematurely removed allegedly because he was going to charge Najib on the 1MDB cases. Was AG/PP Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh removed because he was going to re-charge Zahid Hamidi for the 47 Charges? Was he going to charge PM or some Ministers? Ouestions that are relevant - why was he removed so soon? ODD - nothing in media about AG Terrirudin to be made Chief Judge of Malaya? Protect Independence of Judges/AG? Free yourself from 'feudalism' or neo-feudalism? Transparency - no more 'secret' appointment process? No to the appointment of current Public Prosecutor as Federal Court Judge or Chief Judge of Malaysia Protect the Independence of Public Prosecutor and the Judiciary

e-hailing driver Ong Ing Keong on 28/5/2024, more than 5 months ago, at the front of St Regis Hotel in Kuala Lumpur where Ong was waiting for passengers. The perpetrator, who was said to be a police officer, was a part of a security detail of a member of the Malaysian Royalty, a VVIP. It is unacceptable that the victim was not informed in advance of the fact that the perpetrator was going to be charged in court . Malaysian law acknowledges the right for a crime victim to be heard before sentence is decided upon and imposed on the perpetrator. In Malaysia today, one who makes a police report already has the right to be informed on the status of the investigation and reasonably that right should also include prior information as to when perpetrators of the crime are going to be brought to the court to be charged. It is an important right especially for victims of said crime. The Failure to Listen to The Suffering of Victim Before Sentencing The fact that the VICTIM was not even informed of the said court prosecution of the alleged assailant is shocking, as the presence of the VICTIM in criminal cases is important. The victim has the right to tell the Court about the impact suffered by him by reason of the offence , whereby the Court will take into account when it comes to sentencing. Malaysias Criminal Procedure Code in Section 183A clearly states, (1) Before the Court passes sentence according to law under section 183, the Court shall, upon the request of the victim of the offence or the victim's family, call upon the victim or a member of the victim's family to make a statement on the impact of the offence on the victim or his family The failure to ORDER perpetrator to pay Compensation to Victim Criminal Procedure Code in Section 426 (1A) states that, Without prejudice to subsection (1), the Court before which an accused is convicted of an offence shall, upon the application of the Public Prosecutor, make an order against the convicted accused for the payment by him , or where the convicted accused is a child, by his parent or guardian, of a sum to be fixed by the Court as compensation to a person who is the victim of the offence committed by the convicted accused in respect of the injury to his person or character, or loss of his income or property, as a result of the offence committed . In this case, the victim Ong Ing Keong, besides suffering soft tissue injury following the sudden attack on him with a hard punch on the face, where he later had to get treatment at the Kuala Lumpur Hospital, also would have reasonably suffered loss of income as an e-hailing driver following the incident and in his quest for justice, mental trauma or anguish, and other cost including legal fees. Malaysian law provides that the Court that heard and convicted this assailant could and should have order payment of compensation to the victim. A compensation to be paid to the victim would have been just, for a FINE now is just payment to the State not the victim. If the Public Prosecutor, failed to apply to court for the payment of compensation to the victim, it may be an indication of lack of concern or even a dereliction of duty to victims of a crime. Justice demands not just being sentenced for ones crimes, but also payment of compensation to victim and even maybe also a public apology by the perpetrator to the victim. When a criminal does not apologize, that will lead to higher sentence. A plea of guilt is not an apology to the victim. When POLICE Breaks the Law, There Should Be A CUSTODIAL SENTENCE Police officers are expected to be law abiding citizens, more so since it is their public duty to enforce the law. Hence, when law enforcement personnel break the law, it is a very SERIOUS matter, and warrants a heavy deterrent sentence. The Court of Appeal, in its decision We would, however, like to take this opportunity to remind the lower courts that they should take cases of police officers assaulting anyone very seriously. When a police officer, be he of whatever rank, is found guilty of assaulting a member of the public so of an arrested person as in this case, the courts should send a message of the public abhorrence of such acts - by coming down hard on him and nothing short of a custodial sentence, even for a first offender , would suffice. [ Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Mohd Noor v. PP[2001] 4 CLJ 9] What about the Other Offences? In this case, there were allegedly other offences and offenders. There was allegedly a THREAT addressed to the victim to withdraw the first police report. Ong claimed that the palace representative gave him two choices, which was to retract the case and they will return his phone, or go to court( Malaysian Insight, 31/5/2024 ) When the crime happened, did the other persons, including police officers present, make police report of the crime. Since March 2017, Section 13 of the Criminal Procedure Code imposes an obligation on Every person aware- (a) of the commission of or the intention of any other person to commit any offence punishable under the Penal Code or any other written law; commission of or the intention of any other person to commit any offence punishable under the Penal Code or any other written law. There are also crimes of obstruction of justice. In short, everyone who committed crimes in connection with the assault or abuse of power in Ong Ing Keongs case must be forthwith charged and tried in court. In Malaysia, a withdrawal of the police report does not mean the end of the criminal investigation. Once, law enforcement is made aware of the alleged crime, they will proceed with the investigation and/or prosecution of the perpetrator of the crime. It matters not whether the victim subsequently withdraws his/her police report, or comes to some financial settlement with the perpetrator. A crime will still be investigated and prosecuted irrespective of any settlement. In this case, which has been much highlighted and is known by the public, it should not be swept under the carpet with regards to the other crimes committed, by the same and/or other perpetrators. MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) and others have called for special offences for law enforcement officers as they are expected to be law abiding citizens, tasked with the enforcing the law . In this case, the criminal L/Kpl Muhammad Taufik Ismail, was charged, convicted and sentenced under Section 323 of the Penal Code, which is a general offence of voluntarily causing hurt that applies for all persons. Taufik was fined RM1,000 in default of 20 days imprisonment. MADPET is of the opinion that when police or law enforcement officers commit this crime, more so when on duty, they should be subjected to a much higher DETTERENT sentences. Laws like Section 323 of Penal Code should also be amended, to enable Courts to have discretion to impose higher sentences depending on the facts and circumstances. MADPET calls on the Prosecution to forthwith appeal the sentence to the High Court , as only the Prosecution, other than the convicted, have the right and ability to appeal the conviction or sentence. Alternatively, MADPET calls on any High Court Judge to exercise their general supervisory and revisionary jurisdiction in the interests of justice . Section 35 Courts of Judicature Act states that the High Court shall have general supervisory and revisionary jurisdiction over all subor dinate courts, and may in particular, but without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing provision, if it appears desirable in the interests of justice, either of its own motion or at the instance of any party or person interested , at any stage in any matter or proceeding, whether civil or criminal, in any subordinate court, call for the record thereof, and may remove the same into the High Court or may give to the subordinate court such directions as to the further conduct of the same as justice may require MADPET also call for the immediate termination of L/Kpl Muhammad Taufik Ismail for, amongst other, the restoration of the image and trust in Malaysian police. Any law enforcement officer that breaks the law, more so whilst on duty, is best removed immediately. Police officers on security details of VIPs are also highly trained, and we do not want to retain officers that resort to violence rather than words. MADPET reiterates the call to enact laws that recognizes the right for persons in Malaysia to be free from torture, cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment save in accordance to law. Charles Hector For and on behalf of MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) Closure for disabled e-hailing driver with bodyguard's sentence, says lawyer By NURBAITI HAMDAN Nation Monday, 04 Nov 2024 KUALA LUMPUR: After five months, there is finally closure for disabled e-hailing driver Ong Ing Keong who was assaulted by a VVIP's bodyguard, says lawyer Zaid Malek. This comes after L/Kpl Muhammad Taufik Ismail was fined RM1,000 in default of 20 days imprisonment on Monday (Nov 4) after he pleaded guilty to voluntarily causing hurt to Ong in front of the lobby at the St. Regis Hotel at about 11.40am on May 28. Zaid said the proceedings had taken them by surprise as they were unaware that L/Kpl Muhammad Taufik Ismail would be charged today. "This is why Ong is not here. But this (outcome) is exactly what he wanted. He wanted the aggressor to be brought to court and this had happened today. It was a simple, straightforward case with ample dash-cam recording and medical evidence," Zaid told the press. Zaid, who held a watching brief for Ong, appeared before the Magistrate during the proceedings. On Monday, Magistrate Farah Nabihah Muhamad Dan passed the sentence on L/Kpl Muhammad Taufik, 32, who pleaded guilty to voluntarily causing hurt on Ong at the lobby of St Regis Hotel, at about 11.40am on May 28. The charge under Section 323 of the Penal Code carries a maximum one year jail term or a fine up to RM2,000 or both upon conviction. - Star, 4/11/2024 Disability group questions anonymity of policeman charged with assaulting deaf driver, wants case revisited DAWN says yesterday's court proceeding raises serious questions of integrity while sending a message that violence from the authorities is tolerated. MalaysiaNow November 5, 2024 8:33 AM A screenshot from Ong Ing Keong's dashcam video on May 28 which recorded the moment a policeman punched him on the face. A prominent support group for the deaf community has expressed disappointment over the outcome of the case involving a police officer who assaulted deaf e-hailing driver Ong Ing Keong, and called on authorities to revisit the case as the transparency required by a court is in question. The Deaf Advocacy and Well-being National Organisation, or DAWN, one of many groups that had been part of a campaign to pressure authorities to charge the attacker, said Ong was never directly notified on the identity of Taufik Ismail, a 32-year-old police officer named as the accused in the charge sheet. It said the anonymity afforded to the man, who was shielded from the press by several officers throughout his presence at the Kuala Lumpur court complex yesterday, raised serious questions about the integrity of the trial. "Why was the assailants identity protected? Why was the case resolved with such haste? This absence of transparency fuels concerns that some individuals or groups may be shielded from accountability due to their positions," the group said. "Is Taufik Ismail indeed the individual shown in the CCTV footage from the incident at Hotel St Regis?" DAWN said without confirmation from Ong or his lawyers, it could not be verified that the right individual had been charged. "If the authorities are confident in this identification, why was Ong not notified directly?" Grab driver Ong Ing Keong tears up during a press conference by Lawyers for Liberty on Aug 14 as he recalls how he was assaulted by an officer accompanying a royal entourage. "Justice must be seen to be done, and we call for more robust accountability, genuine protection, and fair treatment of all citizens, especially those within vulnerable communities," it added. Yesterday, Taufik, a police officer who is part of Johor regent Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim's (TMJ) royal entourage, escaped jail after pleading guilty to assaulting Ong on May 28, in a case that has sparked public debate over the rule of law in the country. Instead, the Kuala Lumpur Magistrate's Court sentenced him to a fine of RM1,000, a decision criticised by Ong's lawyer Zaid Malek, who compared it to the imprisonment of Abdul Rahim Noor in 2000, after the former inspector-general of police pleaded guilty to assaulting Anwar Ibrahim in 1998. Zaid had quoted the Court of Appeal's reasoning for imprisoning Rahim despite his guilty plea, in which it stated that it wanted to send a message to the public that the law does not condone police officers assaulting members of the public and that "there should be nothing short of a custodial sentence, even for a first offender, would suffice". DAWN said the "extraordinarily light punishment" sends the message that violence is tolerated even by those charged with protecting the public. "For five months, Ong and the deaf community waited, hoping the system would deliver a fair and balanced judgment. However, the outcome has left many feeling overlooked, disrespected, and unsupported by those meant to uphold justice. It said Ong had suffered psychological distress during the five months that the authorities did not charge the attacker despite video evidence. "The courts decision fails to consider the long-term impact on him and the resilience shown by the deaf, the disabled, and broader communities that have stood by Ong. "This leniency implies that harm done to the public by those in authority may be easily dismissed, setting a dangerous precedent enabling further abuses without meaningful consequence." Taufik was accused of assaulting Ong at the lobby of the St Regis Hotel in Kuala Lumpur on May 28, an incident that was recorded by Ong's dashcam. The video showed Ong waiting for passengers when a man shouted at him to move his car to make way for TMJ's entourage. Ong then rolled down his car window to speak to the man before he suddenly attacked him with a hard punch on the face. He was later treated at Kuala Lumpur Hospital for a soft tissue injury. Public outrage increased when it was revealed that a "palace representative" had asked Ong to withdraw his complaint lodged with the Brickfields police station. Ong rejected a claim by city police chief, Rusdi Mohd Isa, that he had withdrawn his police report as it was a "misunderstanding". Instead, Ong disclosed that an officer had given him the choice of either accepting a sum of money from the palace representative or having his phone confiscated if the case went to court. The delay in taking action was also criticised by the government's Human Rights Commission (Suhakam), which questioned Attorney-General Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh over his silence. - Malaysia Now, 5/11/2024 Assaulted deaf e-hailing driver wants justice, says his lawyer Noel Achariam Updated 5 months ago Published on 31 May 2024 From left layer N Surendran, Lawyers for Liberty director Zaid Malek, Latheefa Koya and the victim Ong Ing Keong. May 31, 2024. A deaf e-hailing driver who was assaulted by a security detail personnel last Monday wants justice and rejects any compensation, said his lawyers. One of his lawyers, Latheefa Koya, told a press conference today that no one has been arrested over the incident. This comes just as Inspector-General of Police Razarudin Husain said Bukit Aman will summon all officers involved in investigating the case to ensure a thorough investigation. He said all those involved in the earlier investigation will have their statements recorded. Earlier today, Kuala Lumpur police chief Rusdi Mohd Isa said investigation into the alleged assault was still going despite earlier reports that the case was settled after the victim allegedly accepted RM800 from a representative of the assailant. Latheefa meanwhile said the victim did not agree to settle the case. The police have called him tomorrow to give his statement to assist with the investigation. We will be accompanying him tomorrow. We want the police to carry on with the investigation (wait to conclude) before looking any at legal options, she said at a press conference in Petaling Jaya today. Latheefa said that lawyer N Surendran and Lawyers for Liberty director Zaid Malek will be representing the victim Ong Ing Keong. Earlier today, Johor Regent Tunku Ismail Sultan Ibrahim has hit out at attempts to link the royal institution to the alleged assault of an e-hailing driver. I do not condone any illegal action or intimidation. I urge the authorities to investigate thoroughly the incident where a police officer escort is alleged to have committed a harmful act. I hope the authorities will take action in accordance with the law and give the victim justice, he said on X. On Wednesday, police confirmed that the case involving Tunku Ismails bodyguard, who allegedly assaulted a disabled man at a hotel, has been amicably resolved. Kuala Lumpur police said that was done after they received another report from the complainant late yesterday stating that the matter had resolved the matter amicably, and the victim did not want to prolong the case. The Malaysian Deaf Advocacy and Wellbeing Organisation (DAWN) in a statement yesterday said it was alarming that the victim was allegedly pressured to settle the case for RM800. The victim said he felt pressured to drop the case and be compensated for his injuries instead of pursuing the matter which would see his mobile phone confiscated, Dawn had said. He was told that if he were to proceed with the case, his mobile phone would be confiscated, but if he were to drop it, he would be compensated for his injuries. The question remains: how is the phone related to the assault incident? The victim had lodged a police report after he alleged he was assaulted at the hotel entrance as the VIPs convoy was leaving. Victims version The victim, Ong. gave his version of events today. He claimed to have accepted RM800 from a wakil istana (palace representative) as settlement when he went to lodge a police report. After lodging the report, the police said that a palace representative was coming. I then asked (the place representative) where the person who hit me was and he said the person was working. Ong claimed that the palace representative gave him two choices, which was to retract the case and they will return his phone, or go to court. The representative said they will pay for hospital treatment or go to court over the matter. I wanted the handphone, so I decided to drop the case. The officer then asked how much I wanted in compensation. They asked me to settle, and I asked for RM1,000. The place representative then gave RM800. Ong said that he wants fairness and justice in his case. May 31, 2024, Malaysian Insight

this Household Income would be RM6,000 - meaning that aid may not be forthcoming to them unemployed with no earnings 6 individuals. For helping the POOR - what we need is a determination of the earnings of the INDIVIDUAL - and not the 'Household Income' How do we do this? One method is the requirement for every adult to submit annually the INCOME TAX form, where they would be required to list in detail their income from wages and other sources of income. Maybe, they should also declare property,shares, unit trust they own - for after all a person can own RM millions in property, and have no regular monthly income - and thus should be disqualified from receipt of any aid from the government. THIS WAY THE GOVERNMENT WILL HAVE A MEANS OF KNOWING WHAT IS THE INDIVIDUAL INCOME - THE INDIVIDUAL FINANCIAL POSITION - hence, the ability to HELP who? WE MUST HELP THE INDIVIDUAL POOR - and not miss out anyone, simply because he stays with other high earning individuals in the same house. AID should flow to individuals who are poor, and family units that are really poor. POOR or RICH should not just be looking at monthly incomes - but the totality of wealth that a person has...land, houses, unit trust, fixed deposits, shares, etc.. THAT is the first hurdle that the government needs to overcome >> DETERMINE who are the really POOR and deserves government aid. SECOND ISSUE - Assistance to the POOR should be a RIGHT according to the LAW. It should not be according to the 'whims and fancies' of the government of the day or the PRIME MINISTER. There should be a law = that provides a senior citizen(more than 55 years of age) the right to receive at least RM1,500 per month for living expenses. So, the government will determine how much monthly earnings he/she has in reality, and ORDER monthly payments of RM1,500 or less(minus other earnings) for as long as he/she lives. The sum disbursed could be reviewed annually, so that he/she does not get more than he/she needs. A law that provides the UNEMPLOYED a sum of not more than RM1,500 until he gets new employment. A mechanism to ensure that he/she is actively seeking employment to prevent abuse. A law for single mothers - A law for the provision of nursing care homes for the elderly or others. Nursing care for the elderly run by the private sector comes to about RM3,500 per month. Best if government provides these homes, or pay for the care of these elderly/disabled. A law for the provision of CARE INCOME for adults who have to stay home to take care of the elderly or young children, hence not being able to enter the job market and even earn the Minimum Wage, - they must be paid at least the Minimum Wage by the government directly. A law for the provision of RM___ per child to childcare homes, foster parents that take care of orphan and/or abandoned children. DAY CARE CENTERS for the Elderly/Disabled and/or Children in every town will allow people to leave their old folks or children at such homes, go to work and pick them old folks/children from such government homes - This must be a PRIORITY, and it allows the person stuck in home caring for the elderly/children to go to work and earn an income - that will increase family income. If not, they have to stay at home doing caring work.. When the LAW provides for the right of specified groups of persons to receive a certain defined sum - it is certainly more efficient. COMPARED with aid allocations that can be used by PM or government as and when it pleases. It must become a RIGHT - and not an uncertain 'hope' that they will get government aid. SUBSIDIES - we need to ensure FREE EDUCATION and FREE HEALTHCARE for all. For Education, at least until Secondary Education or Vocational/Technical Education end. For University Education too for all Malaysians at any Public Universities in Malaysia. That must be GUARANTEED. So no subsidies or no 'targetted' subsidies here. After all, the RICH and the VERY RICH usually send their kids to PRIVATE Schools and utilize PRIVATE Healthcare facilities. So, no 'targetted subsidies' for government schools or healthcare facilities - make them all FREE. Where can you get money? SIMPLE - HIGHER TAXATION for the RICH 2023income tax rates for residents Taxable income band MYR Tax rate 0 to 5,000 0% 5,001 to 20,000 1% 20,001 to 35,000 3% 35,001 to 50,000 6% 50,001 to 70,000 11% 70,001 to 100,000 19% 100,001 to 400,000 25% 400,001 to 600,000 26% 600,001 to 2,000,000 28% 2,000,001+ 30% Non-residents are subject to withholding taxes on certain types of income. Other income is taxed at a rate of 30%. SOLUTION - Increase TAX RATES for those having Taxable Income of more than $400,000 (Taxable Income is Total Gross Income after deduction of certain items) 100,001 to 400,000 25% 400,001 to 600,000 30% 600,001 to 1,000,000 40% 2,000,001+ 50% In short, increase TAX rate - for those earning more than RM400,000 to 30%, For those earning more than RM600,000 to 40%, For those earning more than RM1 million to 45%, For those earning more than RM2 million to 50%, For those earning more than RM5 million to 60%. This is the right way, and the HIGHER TAX rates would not trouble the VERY RICH - and, it would earn the government more money to assist the POOR. So, why is PRIME MINISTER and Finance Minister not doing this? It is FAIR, and many countries have this. TARGETTED Subsidies for Diesel/Petrol - it should also not just be how poor they are - but also HOW expensive their cars is . For those owning cars above RM60,000, they should not be subsidized...because they could very well buy a Proton or Malaysian car.. When removing subsidies for FUEL, what the government should have been doing was making available AFFORDABLE Public Transport - Busses, Trains, Taxis, Motor-bike Taxis, etc >>> and Public Transport like Busses will only work if the DISTANCE that a person has to walk from home/workplace/etc is NO further than 500 meters. If it is more than this, you can forget it - to ask Malaysians to walk kilometers to get to a bus stop in rain and shine is impossible, In Thailand, they have Local Council monitored motor-bike taxis, that transport passengers when they get off from LRT/MRT stations to their homes around 1-2 Km away at a reasonable rate. Malaysia should consider this. We had the B40, M40 and T20 - so, what nonsense this new T15, so what do we have now > B40,M40,MT5, T15? Not all T15 are ultra-rich By ARFA YUNUS Nation Tuesday, 29 Oct 2024 KUALA LUMPUR: Redefine the high-income group now known as the T15 to include only those earning above RM30,000 a month, the Dewan Rakyat has been told. Sibu MP Oscar Ling made the proposal in response to the governments plan to withdraw subsidies for petrol, education and public healthcare for those in that category. He argued that the threshold for defining high-income earners needs to be revised, taking into account the rising cost of living due to inflation. I believe the definition of high-income earners should be realigned, and it would be more appropriate if those earning over RM30,000 are classified as such, he said when debating the Supply Bill 2025 in the Dewan Rakyat here yesterday. Revise threshold: Ling call for review of T15 definition. He said that current economic conditions, particularly inflation, must be considered when categorising household income groups. With the high cost of education in private institutions and rising healthcare costs, categorising those earning below RM30,000 as high-income would place an undue burden on them, he added. Ling urged the government to rethink the classification, considering how the high cost of living affects different income brackets, particularly those whose earnings fall just below the RM30,000 mark. These individuals, he argued, might struggle to cope with educational and healthcare expenses without subsidies. Ling also said implementation of the minimum wage should be more nuanced across different regions of the country. The minimum wage is set at RM1,700 but he noted that socioeconomic conditions vary widely between regions, particularly in Sarawak. I hope the government will consider the socioeconomic differences between regions when implementing the minimum wage of RM1,700. In many parts of Sarawak, there are few economic activities, and enforcing the minimum wage in these areas may lead to higher unemployment as businesses might reduce their workforce to cut costs, Ling said. He suggested the government adopt a tiered approach to the minimum wage, with different rates for urban, suburban and rural areas to reflect the unique economic realities of each region. Revise threshold: Dr Wee call for review of T15 definition. Malaysia not only has diversity in terms of race and religion but also in socioeconomic conditions that differ significantly across regions, he said, emphasising the importance of tailored economic policies to ensure they benefit all Malaysians equitably. On Saturday, MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Wee Ka Siong said it is unfair to categorise individuals in the top 15% income group (T15) as ultra rich based solely on their household earnings. Dr Wee, who is also Ayer Hitam MP, said the T15 group includes people who are not millionaires, and some not even particularly wealthy. Take, for example, a married couple who are both teachers at the DG48 level, having taught for 15 years, with a combined income of around RM14,000 a month. They own a house, two cars and have three children. Similarly, a couple who are both civil servants or PTD officers are also classified as T15 ultra-wealthy. Is this logical? he asked. Dr Wee also said those working in statutory bodies or government-linked companies (GLCs), where salaries are typically higher than in the government sector, can also be considered as part of the T15 group. He said according to the Household Income Survey and Household Income and Expenditure Survey in the open data system by the Statistics Department, as of 2022, T15 starts with a household income of RM13,925 and above. - Star, 29/10/2024

his duties/responsibilities INDEPENDENTLY and/or professionally without fear or favour - and certainly not to be influenced by the government or any Prime Minister. The decisions or actions of the Public Prosecutor, like Ministers and Prime Ministers, MUST be subject to Judicial Review to ascertain that it was done correctly in accordance to law, and this right to apply for Judicial Review must be accorded to the people of Malaysia, as any Public Prosecutor inadvertently acts on behalf of ALL Malaysians, not just the government. The prosecution has great responsibility - but sometimes, it may seem that the Public Prosecutor may be following the 'will' of the government of the day, and hence this may tantamount as an abuse of power. AG/PP Gani Patail was prematurely removed. Appandi Ali, was a AG/PP that was appointed by Najib who came out declaring Najib's innocence in the 1MDB case, and of late, there were allegation that current AG/PP may be removed by way of appointment as a Federal Court Judge. Hence, we need to also remove the Prime Minister in choosing the Attorney General/Public Prosecutor of Malaysia. The Prime Minister inadvertently decides who gets appointed as Attorney General/Public Prosecutor, and the question has always been whether the said Prime Minister is able to influence the Public Prosecutor. Art 145(1) Federal Constitution says. The Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall, o n the advice of the Prime Minister , appoint a person who is qualified to be a judge of the Federal Court to be the Attorney General for the Federation.... (3) The Attorney General shall have power, exercisable at his discretion, to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for an offence, other than proceedings before a Syariah court, a native court or a court-martial. Art 40 Federal Constitution - (1) In the exercise of his functions under this Constitution or federal law the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall act in accordance with the advice of the Cabinet or of a Minister acting under the general authority of the Cabinet, except as otherwise provided by this Constitution; but shall be entitled, at his request, to any information concerning the government of the Federation which is available to the Cabinet. (1A) In the exercise of his functions under this Constitution or federal law, where the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is to act in accordance with advice, on advice, or after considering advice, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall accept and act in accordance with such advice. One needed REFORM is that the Prime Minister's role in appointment of Attorney General/Public Prosecutor must be abolished - the AG/PP should be appointed on the advice of Parliament(or some Parliamentary Committee) or some other Independent Body. This becomes all the more important since finally in Malaysia former Prime Ministers, maybe even sitting Prime Ministers, Ministers and politicians can now be investigated, charged and prosecuted. This change finally arrived on or about 2018, after General Elections 14. Thereafter, finally law enforcement and prosecution could move and ACT - no one is above the law. However, after GE15, when Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim was appointed - there has been some worry about the post-GE14 reform may suffer, and things may go back to the 'bad' old days. First, there was the pardon of Najib, Then, there was a discontinuation of Zahid Hamidi's case, ...Was there Ministers or 'friends' of the government who were not charged,... it may all be decision of the AG/PP alone, but many will still wonder whether PM had anything to to with it? The Public Prosecutor holds the power on who is charged and for what charge. The Public Prosecutor also have the power to at any time DISCONTINUE a criminal case - as happened in the Zahid Hamidi case, after the prosecution had already successfully proved PRIMA FACIE case for all 47 charges that Zahid Hamidi(Anwar Ibrahim's DEPUTY Prime Minister) - which means that if Zahid Hamidi is not able to raise reasonable doubt with regard all of the 47 charges, he would be convicted and sentenced according the law. The discontinuance of the Zahid's case was because the prosecution needed more time the matters raised in Zahid's Letters of Representation - and the Public Prosecutor, after this investigation is complete, can very easily RE-CHARGE Zahid Hamidi and the case can be completed??? The Public Prosecutor can also 'sabotage' the conduct of prosecution, intentionally or negligently. In the cases of Eric Chia and Kasitah Kadam - there was a failure to call material witnesses Remember Eric Chia and Kasitah Kadam - both were acquitted because prosecution failed to call material witnesses. The Eric Chia case... In his 30-page oral judgment, he went on to fault the prosecution in every aspect of the case, from the way the main charge and alternative charge were proffered right to the tendering of documents, and its failure to call crucial witnesses. Akhtar said the most glaring setback was the prosecutions failure to call two material witnesses , who would have been able to confirm whether payment was needed for the technical assistance agreements (TAA) signed between Perwaja Rolling Mill Development and NKK Corporation. He said former Perwaja company secretary R.R. Durai Rajasingam, who was involved in all Perwajas contracts, would have known the actual contents of the TAA. Yet the prosecution never called him. The question is why? I see nothing to say that he would be a hostile witness or give evidence against them. The judge also questioned the prosecutions reluctance to call the five Japanese witnesses , including NKK Corporation, Japan, director N. Otani, who was present at the signing of the TAA in Japan in 1993. I wonder whether it was the Japanese witnesses who were reluctant or the prosecution was the one reluctant to bring them here, he said. Akhtar also said the prosecutions contention that the TAA was free fell flat in its face when tendering its documents at the trial as they clearly stated that the agreements would be effective upon receiving first payment. Another document by NKK Corporation not only requested for the payment to be in a lump sum but also stated the amount. He said the prosecution failed to lead any evidence to show fabrication of that document, which it contended .- Star, 27/6/2007, Eric Chia acquitted of CBT Now, see the similarities in the Kasitah Gaddam's case... Former land and cooperative development minister Tan Sri Kasitah Gaddam was acquitted and discharged by the High Court here of committing corrupt practice and cheating involving shares belonging to the Sabah Land Development Board (SLDB) in 1996. Judge Justice Suraya Othman ruled that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case on both charges for the court to call Kasitah to enter his defence. The essential ingredients of both the offences of corrupt practice and cheating were not made out on the facts before the court. In the circumstances, the accused stands acquitted and discharged of both the charges against him, Suraya said in her 74-page judgment. Kasitah, 62, was the first Cabinet member to be charged with such crimes.... . ,,,,Kasitah had claimed trial to using his position as SLDB chairman for his financial gain by taking part in the decision to approve a proposal to sell 16.8 million shares held by the board in Sapi Plantations Sdn Bhd to Briskmark Enterprise Sdn Bhd, where he was promised 3.36 million shares in Sapi Plantations on Oct 22, 1996. On the second charge, Kasitah was alleged to have cheated the SLDB board members by omitting to disclose the offer by PPB Oil Palms Sdn Bhd to allocate five shares of the company for each share of Sapi Plantations in the proposal by company for listing on the KLSE. He thereby dishonestly induced them to approve the sale of 16.8 million shares held by SLDB in Sapi Plantations to Briskmark Enterprise whereas they would not have approved the sale if they had known about the offer by PPB Oil Palms. Justice Suraya said the failure of the prosecution in not calling six board members who were present in the meeting was detrimental to the case as it had created a big gap over the question of whether the board members were actually cheated by the accused . She also said that evidence by lawyer cum board member Catherine Yong was very damaging as she did not indicate that Kasitah had misused his position or influence her or other board members during the meeting. Besides that, the judge said there was no element of inducement on the part of Kasitah to the board members.- Star, 13/8/2009, Kasitah freed of corruption charges The Attorney General is the government's lawyer - he also acts for the PM/Ministers and the Government of Malaysia in cases against the government. He also ADVISES the government. He is part of the Pardon Board - and has a significant say. Hence, the move to SEPARATE the AG and the Public Prosecutor - we wait and hope it happens soon. D-Day approaches in Najib's 1MDB trial - and we are waiting to see what the court will decide. Did the prosecution manage to prove PRIMA FACIE case for all the charges, or some of the charges? If they did, the Court will order Najib to enter his defence. If not, he will be acquitted...and Prosecution may APPEAL or NOT. All submissions have been done, and the COURT is making its decision now....and will pronounce his decision on 30/10/2024. On October 30 (next Wednesday), the High Court will decide if the prosecution has made out its case and which would require Najib to enter defence in the 1MDB trial. At this stage, Najib goes public with an 'APOLOGY" - which was also a claim that he is NOT GUILTY of the charges. This happens on 24/10/2024 - and Najib should have done so, more so when the Court was to decide on this very case on 30/10/2024. Najibs son, Datuk Mohamad Nizar Najib, today read out a press statement in which the former finance minister claimed to be innocent and to not have worked together with Malaysian fugitive Low Taek Jho to defraud 1MDB of its money. I have already been punished politically but as I am clearly not the mastermind and neither did I collaborate with Jho Low as recent events have shown, I should not be victimised legally too. I am still in deep shock knowing now the extent of the wretched and unconscionable shenanigans, and illegal things that happened in 1MDB, Nizar said at a press conference at the Kuala Lumpur court complex that was streamed live online when reading out the statement on behalf of Najib. Will the Court cite him for CONTEMPT OF COURT? Worse still was PRIME MINISTER Anwar Ibrahim's responding to this? He 'welcomed' that apology - and, I am of the opinion that he should have never done this, more so not before the Court renders its judgment before 30/10/2024. Anwar should have respected the COURT process - and should have not said anything at this point of time. Does Anwar Ibrahim accept Najib's position that he is NOT GUILTY? Because he was misled, deceived,...by others. Anwar claims to be 'Father of the Nation' - but is not the King the father of the nation? Malaysian did no choose Anwar Ibrahim to be the Prime Minister - by any direct vote. He is Prime Minister, simply because the majority of the MPs, i.e. more that 50% of sitting MPs then said that they had confidence then that Anwar Ibrahim be Prime Minister. At any time, Anwar can lose the confidence of the majority - and some one else may become Prime Minister, maybe from PH itself, maybe from some other party. Anwar, if he wanted to express his PERSONAL opinion, he should have said that it was his 'personal view'? Does his Cabinet support what he did? Does Parliament support his position? Where is respect for the RULE OF LAW or the administration of criminal justice? Najib could have included his 'apology' without admission of guilt in the submissions made in court - that is the proper way. He should have stayed silent after submissions were already submitted, and waited for the Court's decision on 30/10/2024? We WAIT for the Court's Decision on 30/10/2024... As case ruling looms, sorry Najib says already punished politically and unfair to hold him legally responsible for 1MDB scandal Former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak is guarded by police as he arrives at the Kuala Lumpur Court Complex on Oct 24, 2024. Bernama pic By Ida Lim Thursday, 24 Oct 2024 5:13 PM MYT KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 24 Former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak today apologised to Malaysians over the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) financial scandal, saying he is deeply shocked and regretful over what had happened at the Finance Ministry-owned company. Ahead of the High Courts decision next Wednesday on whether Najib would be acquitted or have to defend himself against 25 charges over 1MDBs stolen RM2.27 billion funds, Najib said he should not be made a victim or be held legally responsible over 1MDB. Najibs son, Datuk Mohamad Nizar Najib, today read out a press statement in which the former finance minister claimed to be innocent and to not have worked together with Malaysian fugitive Low Taek Jho to defraud 1MDB of its money. I have already been punished politically but as I am clearly not the mastermind and neither did I collaborate with Jho Low as recent events have shown, I should not be victimised legally too. I am still in deep shock knowing now the extent of the wretched and unconscionable shenanigans, and illegal things that happened in 1MDB, Nizar said at a press conference at the Kuala Lumpur court complex that was streamed live online when reading out the statement on behalf of Najib. I deeply regret what has taken place at SRC and 1MDB. However, being held legally responsible for things that I did not initiate or knowingly enable is unfair to me and I hope and pray that the judicial process will, in the end, prove my innocence, Nizar said on behalf of Najib. Najib is currently serving his jail term as he was convicted over the misappropriation of former 1MDB subsidiary SRC International Sdn Bhds RM42 million, and cannot speak to the public directly as a prisoner. Earlier in the same statement read out by Nizar, Najib said he had decided to make this statement after much reflection over the course of 26 months in prison and after what he described as significant recent developments regarding 1MDB. First and foremost, it pains me every day to know that the 1MDB debacle happened under my watch as minister of finance and prime minister. For that, I would like to apologise unreservedly to the Malaysian people, Najib said. Najib then went on to claim that the recent developments regarding 1MDB allegedly proves that I am not the mastermind and did not collaborate with Jho Low in deceiving 1MDB of its funds. He cited the recent developments as being the recent conviction of PetroSaudi executives in court in Switzerland, as well as a recent article by local financial publication The Edge on 1MDB. While Najib did not specify the date or name of The Edge s article, he claimed that the publication had concluded that PetroSaudi and Jho Low had worked together to deceive him, and that he was allegedly unaware that PetroSaudi was siphoning 1MDB funds and that he did not knowingly receive any money from funds sent by 1MDB to PetroSaudi. As hard as it is for some people to fathom or understand, I was advised and honestly believed at that time that the funds I received were political donations from Saudi Arabia, Najib said via Nizar. Throughout the 1MDB trial, Najibs lawyers had tried to claim that he believed the money which entered his private bank accounts were donations from Saudi Arabia, but the prosecution has said those funds originate from 1MDB and its subsidiaries. Najib today cited unspecified court proceedings as allegedly showing that the Saudi government did make two large donations in 2010, and claimed those were not subject to any criminal proceedings or civil proceedings in court. Looking back to the past, Najib today said in hindsight that he should have acted differently when various parties began to question what was happening at 1MDB. Najib said he did initiate various investigations on 1MDB, but he was inclined then to believe the explanations by 1MDBs board of directors and 1MDBs management. And then when I became suspicious about what was actually transpiring at 1MDB, my immediate concerns were its financial predicaments and the risk it posed to diplomatic and bilateral relations at the highest level, he said, before going on to express his deep shock and deep regret over 1MDB and his hope to be found innocent. After reading out his fathers statement, Nizar also thanked Najibs supporters who were present at the press conference. I humbly ask that you pray for my fathers court matter on October 30 to be eased, and for my father to be at the side of victory, God willing, said Nizar, who is also an exco member in the Pahang state government, the Peramu Jaya state assemblyman in Pahang, and Pekan Umno vice-chief. On October 30 (next Wednesday), the High Court will decide if the prosecution has made out its case and which would require Najib to enter defence in the 1MDB trial. If required to enter defence, Najib would have the option of testifying in court in his own defence and calling in defence witnesses. If the High Court decides that Najib does not have to enter defence, he would be acquitted and walk free from the criminal charges in the 1MDB trial. - Malay Mail, 24/10/2024 - 'I'm father of the nation': Anwar defends remarks on Najib apology It comes as social media users attack the prime minister for 'welcoming' the jailed leader's apology over the 1MDB scandal. MalaysiaNow October 28, 2024 8:19 AM Anwar Ibrahim says he is the 'father of the nation'. Anwar Ibrahim has angrily defended his statement welcoming an apology from Najib Razak, saying it is not fair to attack the jailed leader alone over the 1MDB scandal that was at the centre of a Pakatan Harapan (PH) campaign to topple the Barisan Nasional government six years ago. Anwar said his response to Najib's apology last week - in which the former prime minister stopped short of admitting guilt over the billions of dollars in illegal transfers that triggered one of the biggest corruption scandals in recent years - was done in a responsible manner as the leader of the country. "I am the prime minister, I am the father of the nation, " he said during a speech in Perak yesterday. "This man said something, what do you want me to do? I said we welcome it. "Oh, (they become) angry! What's this! What kind of behaviour is this? What kind of people?" said Anwar. On Oct 24, Najib in a rare apology read out by his eldest son Nizar said he took responsibility for the scandal taking place under his watch as prime minister and finance minister. Najib, however, maintained his innocence regarding the large-scale money transfers from 1MDB. "To be held legally responsible for something that I did not initiate or have knowledge of, is unfair to me, and I hope and pray that the judicial process will be in my favour and prove my innocence," his statement said. It came ahead of a court ruling this week on whether he should defend himself in another case related to 1MDB for money laundering and corruption. Anwar is under pressure from Najib loyalists, family members and Umno - the party whose support was crucial in helping him realise his ambitions to become prime minister in 2022 - to release the former leader by recommending a full royal pardon, similar to the one granted to Anwar himself in 2018 on the recommendation of then prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad. However, Najib, who is serving a 12-year jail term for embezzling RM42 million of SRC International funds, was only granted a partial pardon in the form of a reduction of his sentence from 12 years to six years and his fine from RM210 million to RM50 million. Many Umno leaders were also angered by the revelation that there was an addendum to the partial pardon in which former Agong, Sultan Abdullah Sultan Ahmad Shah, had ordered Najib to serve the reduced sentence under house arrest. Najib is currently appealing against the High Court's decision in July, which dismissed the claim on the existence of a royal addendum as "hearsay". Anwar yesterday launched his familiar attack on those who criticised him for welcoming Najib's apology, accusing them of ignoring others who had "stolen billions of ringgit" "When (they) attack, they are only attacking one person. "It's not fair to attack (only) one person. The ones who attack have robbed more than that," Anwar said. Anwar was criticised by, among others, the former chief of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), the body at the centre of investigations that led to Najib's conviction and imprisonment in 2022. Latheefa Koya took the prime minister to task, saying he "has no business and no authority" to make such a comment. "Since Najib maintains innocence, Anwars acceptance condones the crime. It emboldens the corrupt, makes a mockery of the courts, undermines the MACC. "Is this the prelude to releasing Najib on house arrest?" she asked. Lawyer Rafique Rashid echoed her sentiments, saying Anwar, as prime minister, should side with the millions of Malaysians who are angry over the 1MDB scandal which has eaten up the state coffers and led to a series of new taxes being imposed on the people. "Everyone has the right to berate Najib Razak and everyone also has the right to tell the government not to accept the apology. "How can the prime minister say within 24 hours, 'Yes, we welcome it'? This is very unwise coming from the prime minister," Rafique told MalaysiaNow. Najib's apology and Anwar's remarks have sparked a flood of comments on social media, especially from PH supporters. "If his apology is accepted and can be forgiven, we can accept and forgive every convict in the country and release all prisoners," wrote Alfred Adaikalaraj. "It is nothing more than another brazen attempt to hoodwink Malaysians once again. Shorn of all his self-righteous excuses, he remains unrepentant!" said Ch'ng Kim Hock. "Your statement shows that you don't have the competence to lead the country to the extent of falling for the scam of an ordinary citizen and foreign firms. I hope you will not make a comeback as prime minister again," said Muhammad Hazim. DAP leader's sarcasm Former DAP MP Tony Pua, who together with PKR deputy president Rafizi Ramli were among the most vocal PH leaders to speak out against Najib during the height of the 1MDB scandal, wrote a post full of sarcasm over the former premier's insistence that he was innocent despite his apology. Rafizi Ramli and Tony Pua, among PH leaders who crisscrossed the country to explain the 1MDB scandal. "I'm not responsible for sacking my deputy PM to cover up 1MDB," said Pua, referring to the dismissal of Muhyiddin Yassin, who had demanded an explanation from Najib shortly after the scandal came to light. "I'm not responsible for sacking the attorney-general to cover up 1MDB. I'm not responsible for sacking the MACC chief and Special Branch chief to cover up 1MDB. I'm not responsible for installing a stooge as the PAC chairman to cover up 1MDB. "I'm not responsible for US$27 million 22-carat pink diamond my beautiful wife purchased (and many more millions in jewelry and luxury goods). (Where is it hidden by the way?)" Pua wrote on Facebook, referring to the jewellery that Najib had claimed was a gift from a UAE prince to his wife Rosmah Mansor. Pua continued: "I'm not responsible for issuing secret RM3 billion government guarantee letter to raise bonds for 1MDB. I'm not responsible for paying extortionary fees to Goldman Sachs to raise bonds for 1MDB. "I'm not responsible for negotiating a lopsided super over-priced deals with Chinese companies to cover up 1MDB debts. "I'm not responsible for going after and persecuting 1MDB whistle-blowers to cover up 1MDB," he said, referring to efforts to thwart the 1MDB investigation. "I have already paid my political price. Its not fair for me to legally responsible for any of the above. I just have to say I'm sorry for being the stupidest and slowest PM of Malaysia, for trusting the wrong parties who cheated Malaysians of tens of billions of ringgit. "I should not be sitting in prison, even though I benefited immensely from the 1MDB largesse, in cash and in kind. It's not my fault. Really." Meanwhile, a portal run by British journalist Claire Rewcastle Brown, who was also actively reporting the 1MDB revelations, criticised Anwar's remarks. "That is not an apology, it is merely another denial. Anwar ought not to have accepted it for that reason and nor should the courts who are supposed to be independent," it said. - Malaysia Now, 28/10/2024

and detained without trial under the Detention Without Trial (DWT) law, the then Internal Security Act 1966(ISA) during the premiership of then Mahathir Mohamad. Then next, major crackdown using the ISA was against persons in the Arqam movement in 1994. Ashaari Muhammad, the founder-leader of the Malaysian Islamic group Al-Arqam, along with several other members of the group, was arrested in Thailand and subsequently returned to Malaysia, where he was detained and/or restricted under the Internal Security Act (ISA). Ashaari remained a victim of ISA from 1994 until 2004, whilst in the later part, he was said to have been restricted to Labuan. Detention and Restrictions/Conditions Under DWT Laws Besides being detained in Detention Centers, these Detention Without Trial laws also provide for the imposition of restrictions and conditions , where the victim shall (a) he shall be required to reside within the limits of any State, district, mukim, town or village specified in the order;(b) he shall not be permitted to transfer his residence to any other State, district, mukim, town or village, as the case may be, without the written authority of the Board; (c) except so far as may be otherwise provided by the order, he shall not leave the State, district, mukim, town or village within which he resides without the written authority of the Chief Police Officer of the State concerned;(d) he shall at all times keep the Officer in Charge of the Police District in which he resides notified of the house or place in which he resides; (e) he shall be liable, at such time or times as may be specified in the order, to present himself at the nearest police station; (f) he shall remain within doors , or within such area as may be defined in the order, between such hours as may be specified in the order, unless he obtains special permission to the contrary from the Officer in Charge of the Police District; (g) except so far as may be otherwise provided by the order, he shall not be permitted to enter any State, district, mukim, town or village specified in the order; (h) he shall use only equipment and facilities of communication which are declared to and approved by the Chief Police Officer of any State concerned; (i) except so far as may be otherwise provided by the order, he shall not access the internet ; (j) he shall keep the peace and be of good behavior; (k) he shall enter into a bond, with or without sureties as the Board may direct and in such amount as may be specified in the order, for his due compliance with the restrictions and conditions imposed on him by the order; (l) he shall be attached with an electronic monitoring device.. Violations of Restrictions/Conditions an Offence Now, if the persons so restricted violates any of the condition or restriction, it is a criminal offence. Section 13(5) POTA states that, Any restricted person who fails to comply with any restriction or condition imposed on him under this section commits an offence and shall be punished with imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years and not less than two years Like Detention Orders, these Restriction Orders can be perpetually renewed, every 2 years. ISA and the EO repealed, but new Detention Without Trial laws enacted On 31 July 2 , the ISA was repealed, when Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2 (SOSMA) came into force. SOSMA is not a detention without trial act, as all those arrested for committing any SOSMA listed offence have a right to Trial. A law can be repealed by a specific repealing law, or through a provision in any other law. The later happened with the ISA, as section 32 of SOSMA repealed Internal Security Act 1960. Victims of the then ISA also included present Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and Human Rights Defender victims like Theresa Lim Chin Chin, Cecilia Ng, Chee Heng Leng, Irene Xavier, Kua Kia Soong, Harrison Ngau, Chandra Muzaffar, Bro Anthony Rogers, Mohd Nasir Hashim, Mohamad Yunus and Meenakshi Raman. Politician victims included Mohamad Sabu(now President of Amanah, a member of Pakatan Harapan[PH]), Lim Kit Siang, Lim Guan Eng(now Chairman of DAP, a member of PH), Mat Sabu, Tan Seng Giaw, P. Patto, and Karpal Singh. Joshua Hilmy, which SUHAKAM found to be a victim of enforced disappearance was also a victim of ISA during Ops Lallang. Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969)[EO], another Detention Without Trial Law came to an end when Malaysia finally put an end to the then existing 3 Declarations of Emergency. With that the Emergency ended and set in motion the constitutional provision to also end, within a period of six months, all laws passed under the powers given to the Government to enact emergencyrelated legislation. The six months period expired on June 19, 2 , ending the operation of the EO once and for all. We recall the infamous EO Six six activists from Parti Sosialis Malaysia, including Dr Jeyakumar Devaraj, now former Member of Parliament for Sungai Siput. They were released after a month and not charged with any crime. Return of Detention Without Trial Laws POTA and POCA A new Detention Without Trial Act that was then enacted, being the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2 (POTA). The Prevention of Crimes Act 1949 (POCA), was amended several time from 2014 to make it a Detention Without Trial, now even worse compared to the previous ISA. Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 is the other DWT law. Rule of Law and Criminal Administration of Justice If a person is suspected of a crime, he is charged and accorded a Fair Trial, and one is presumed innocent until found guilty in a court of law. Article 10 of Universal Declaration of Human Rights states, 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) states, Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence. Article 9 states No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile. All the normal standards to prevent miscarriage of justice does not apply when it comes to these draconian Detention Without Trial laws. Cannot Challenge In Court The Reasons Used In DWT laws The victim cannot even go to court to challenge the very reason he is arrested, detained and/or restricted. The courts jurisdiction to hear such cases is also ousted by law, and thus even the court cannot ensure that justice be done. Note that Article 5(2) of the Federal Constitution states (2) Where complaint is made to a High Court or any judge thereof that a person is being unlawfully detained the court shall inquire into the complaint and, unless satisfied that the detention is lawful, shall order him to be produced before the court and release him. Section 19 of POTA says, (1) There shall be no judicial review in any court of, and no court shall have or exercise any jurisdiction in respect of, any act done or decision made by the Board in the exercise of its discretionary power in accordance with this Act, except in regard to any question on compliance with any procedural requirement in this Act governing such act or decision. By question of compliance with any procedural requirement, that means whether the procedures have been followed or not No court can look to see whether the reasons for the detention or restriction is justified or not. It means even a false reason can be used to detain/restrict victims of Detention Without Trial. POTA says that , " judicial review " includes proceedings instituted by way of(a) an application for any of the prerogative orders of mandamus, prohibition and certiorari; (b) an application for a declaration or an injunction; (c) a writ of habeas corpus ; and (d) any other suit, action or legal proceedings relating to or arising out of any act done or decision made by the Board in accordance with this Act Uncertainty of duration of detention and/or condition/restrictions In most crimes, the law provides for the sentence, and the courts, on conviction decide on the sentence, like how many years in prison. There is certainty as to sentence, and the convicted criminal knows when he/she will be free. However, in Detention Without Trial laws, how long you languish in detention, or is subjected to restrictions is determined by the Minister (or the relevant Board). in Malaysia, Loh Ming Liang of Johor experienced detention without trial for 16 years. It is widely recognised that the longest-serving detainee under detention without trial was Chia Thye Poh of Singapore. He had been deprived of his personal liberty by the Singapore government for a total period of 32 years. The victims of Detention Without Trial are not criminals who have been proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt in court , and neither on a lower standard of balance of probabilities. There is no trial, and they suffer punishment for so long at the government desires. They also presumably do not even have the right to apply for PARDON from the King/Rulers more so, since they are NOT convicted prisoners serving out a sentence. Time for Abolition of all Detention Without Trial Laws in Malaysia Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, at a session in the Bar Council after his acquittal and release by the Federal of the 1 st Sodomy case, did say that he opposed Detention Without Trial laws. He said that, whilst in then Mahathirs Cabinet, he opposed the use of ISA during the 1987 Ops Lallang and the 1994 Arqam ISA operation. He said he informed the then Prime Minister of his opposition. Many in the Pakatan Harapan-led government of the day have experienced the unjust Detention Without Trial laws, and it is only reasonable that they now ACT speedily and abolish all existing Detention Without Trial laws. We, the undersigned 10 groups, call for the immediate abolition of Detention Without Trial laws - Prevention of Terrorism Act 2 (POTA), Prevention of Crimes Act 1949 (POCA) and Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985. Anyone who commits a crime, should be accorded a FAIR Trial, and if convicted, sentenced according to law. We call for the immediate and unconditional release of all persons in detention by reason of these Detention Without Trial Laws. We also call for the removal of conditions/restrictions imposed on possibly thousands of persons by these DWT laws. Charles Hector For and on behalf of the 6(now 10) listed Groups below ALIRAN Centre for Orang Asli Concerns (COAC) MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) North South Initiative (NSI) Pergerakan Tenaga Akademik Malaysia (GERAK) WH4C (Workers Hub for Change) Sarawak Dayak Iban Association(SADIA) Haiti Action Committee Legal Action for Women UK Global Womens Strike

believe that it is best and reasonable that organized criminal groups be limited to Triads and criminal gangs that engage in serious crimes of violence, extortion, murder, etc. It is not right and dangerous to define it broadly as crimes committed by more than one of any Penal Code offences. Is GISBH now an organized criminal group in Malaysia? On 23/10/2024, GISBH chief executive officer Datuk Nasiruddin Mohd Ali, his wife together others, total being thirteen men and nine women, were charged Selayang Sessions Court on Wednesday (23/10/12024) under Section 130V (1) of the Penal Code, for being members of organized crime gang . The said Section 130V(1) reads, (1) Whoever is a member of an organized criminal group shall be punished with imprisonment for a term of not less than five years and not more than twenty years. The Penal Code, in Sec 130U now says that "organized criminal group" means a group of two or more persons, acting in concert with the aim of committing one or more serious offences , in order to obtain, directly or indirectly, a material benefit, power or influence; Serious offences was previously defined in that law as any offence punishable with imprisonment for a term of ten years or more but that definition was deleted by Penal Code (Amendment) Act 2014, where the amending provision read, The Code is amended in section 130U by deleting the definition of serious offence. This means that today that if anyone commits any crime, however small, with another or more risks the possibility of being charged as a member of an organized crime gang under Section 130V of the Penal Code, and since that Chapter VIB Organized Crime of the Penal Code is listed as Security offence in the First Schedule in Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2 (SOSMA), then SOSMA applies. Thus, 2 persons or more engaged in a consensual act of Sodomy, theft, murder, illegal assembly or any crimes whatsoever are at risk of being charged for organized criminal group crimes, and SOSMA will apply. The other crimes listed under this Chapter VIB include assisting, harboring, consorting, etc. MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) is unhappy with this situation, as the 2014 re-definition of term organized criminal groups is just too broad, and can easily be abused by the government of the day. This term should be restricted to triad groups, mafia like groups and criminal gangs that commit serious criminal offences involving violence or extortion. As of last year, 72 active criminal organisations that posed a significant threat to national security were operating in the country, said former director of the Federal Police Crime Investigation Department (CID) Datuk Seri Abd Jalil Hassan Sun, 9/12/2023 Malaysia Crime Prevention Foundation (MCPF) senior vice-chairman Datuk Seri Ayub Yaakob said criminal activities by gangs present a significant concern to communities. Their activities encompass extortion, money laundering, drug trafficking, robberies and prostitution. Such criminal activities undermine community well-being and jeopardize public safety Should the company GISBH justly be considered a criminal organization? Not Police Only, But An Independent Body To Decide Whether A Group Is A Organized Crime Gang GISBH, in our opinion does not fall into this category. We also need to look at the process how a group is defined as a organized crime gang in Malaysia. It certainly should not be done by the police alone, but possibly some independent body that would possibly include parliamentarians. When any group is listed as organized crime gang, their crimes will not only be SOSMA offences, but they also risk becoming victims of the Detention Without Trial laws like Prevention of Crime Act 1959(POCA) Prevention Of Crime (Amendment of First and Second Schedule) Order 2014 changed 2. Persons who belong to any group, body, gang or association of five or more persons who associate for purposes which include the commission of offences involving violence or extortion., by substituting for the words "involving violence or extortion" the words "under the Penal Code"; Now, it reads 2. Persons who belong to or consort with any group, body, gang or association of two or more persons who associate for purposes which include the commission of offences under the Penal Code . To prevent abuse and miscarriage of justice, more so after the 2014 amendments to the Penal Code and POCA diluted the definition organized crime, so much so that it can now apply to anyone who committed any crime with another or more persons, MADPET calls for an independent body to decide whether a particular group or groups of persons ought to be considered a organized crime gang or NOT. GISBH From Child Abuse, Deviant Islam, AMLA Offences, Now Organized Crime Gang? Malaysians are waiting for those in GISBH to be charged, tried and convicted with the offences that led to the crackdown on GIBSH being child abuse, child offences, offences against under the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Act 2001 (AMLA Act) that justified freezing of accounts; and other crimes. Given the impression that GISBH investigation have been long carried out, one wonders why there is a delay in prosecution and trial? Pre-Conviction Punishment Must Be Abolished SOSMA is draconian legislations, where amongst others Parliament ousted judicial functions to decide on Bail, which means those charged with SOSMA listed offences will languish in detention until the end of trial, and grave injustice to those who ultimately is found not guilty. This pre-conviction mandatory detention is a form of pre-conviction punishment of the still presumed innocent person must be abolished. If Charged, Prosecution Is Ready To Start Trial And Prove Prima Facie Case The 22 were charged at the Sessions Court, but only the High Court has the jurisdiction to try any SOSMA cases, and as such, they must be immediately brought before the High Court and charged, and their trial should be expedited and completed soonest, as they are denied Bail by law. It is disturbing that they have yet to be charged at the High Court, and oddly the Session Court fixed a mention date on December 23, and the question is WHY? ( Bernama, 23/10/2024 ) Justice Harun reminded us that the legal principle in Malaysia is that a person should not be charged in Court until the investigation into the case against him has been completed and there is prima facie evidence to prosecute him of the charge . In other words, a person should not be put in peril of a criminal trial unless the prosecution is able to prove the case against him. To do otherwise is an injustice... [ Public Prosecutor V. Tan Kim San [1980] CLJU 66[1980 ]. This means that the prosecution is already ready to start the trial, and prove a prima facie case against all 22, and as such there is no reason to delay the trial. Delay will imply that prosecution is not yet ready, which means the 22 have wrongly been charged, and this is unacceptable. Expedite Trials Of All In Detention Pending Conviction About 30,000? M A DPET calls for all criminal trials of those who are in detention pending conviction , who have been denied BAIL, must be expedited and finished fast, preferably not later than 6 months from the date they have been charged. If the prosecution charges anyone, they, the prosecution, must already ready to proceed with trial. In mid-2021, about 41.7% of those in Malaysian prisons had not yet been tried, convicted and sentenced , according to World Prison Brief, which obtains information from Malaysian government sources. If there are about 75,000 people in Malaysian prison, that will mean about 40% (or 30,000) are inmates who have not yet been tried, convicted or sentenced. Unlike the 1MDB case, which led to legal actions being taken in many different countries, we do not see similar reaction in the many other countries where GIBSH, its subsidiaries and related companies are currently operating. As the GISBH is also allegedly a case of Islamic deviants, one wonders whether Muslim police or law enforcement officers are able to act independently when it comes to investigation of the other crimes not religious crimes, or is it better that the investigations are led by officers who are not Muslims to ensure a more professional investigation. Religion and other prejudices are known to impact investigation and prosecution. MADPET calls for the amendment of law to re-define strictly the meaning organized criminal groups to restrict it to Triad or criminal gangs that commit serious criminal offences involving violence or extortion . Organized criminal groups, just like Terrorist groups, must be determined and listed in law by preferably an independent body, not just law enforcement agencies. MADPET reiterate the call for the repeal of SOSMA, and, in the interim period SOSMA be amended to allow the Court to determine the question of Bail . Now, Parliament has ousted the courts powers to determine the question of Bail; MADPET calls that all criminal trial, where the accused are in pre-conviction detention by reason of unavailability of bail, not being able to pay in advance the Bail amount by reason of poverty, etc. or to provide the needed surety, etc. be expedited and completed soonest not later than 6 months. This is needed to prevent gross miscarriage of justice, more so when the courts, after trial, finds them not guilty. In Malaysia, no law that provides compensation for these persons who had to unnecessarily languish in prison until the end of their trial. In the case of the GISBH 22, MADPET calls for them to be immediately charged in the High Court, and the trial speedily commenced by the Prosecution, to end no later than within 6 months . We do not want the innocent to suffer pre-conviction punishment. The police investigate, the judges deliver the sentence. Before a sentence is passed, suspects should not be punished beforehand, PM Anwar Ibrahim was quoted as saying at the 25th Suhakam anniversary. ( Malay Mail, 9/9/2024 ). Now, pre-conviction detention is also pre-conviction punishment before the judges deliver their sentences. Charles Hector For and on behalf of MADPET (Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture) Note: A friend drew my attention that in 2014 amendment of the Penal Code, that when the definition of serious offences was deleted in section 130U, a new section 52B was inserted 52B. Serious offence The words "serious offence" denote an offence punishable with imprisonment for a term of ten years or more.'. However, noting that section 130U was a specific interpretation provision for CHAPTER VIBORGANIZED CRIME, one wonders whether the new section 52B definition will also apply to this Chapter - we need to wait for the Courts to make a finding one way or the other to be sure. See also Yusoff Rawther - Languishing in Detention Since 12/9/2024? No High Court Judge used Revisionary Power? DPP/AG not DNAAed? Lawyer files new application, not for Revision? BERNAMA, 23/10/2024 Wrong to consider GISBH an organised criminal group in the likes of triads, crime gangs GISBH CEO, wife, Abuyas son, others charged with organised crime activity GISB Holdings Sdn Bhd CEO Datuk Nasiruddin Mohd Ali was among the 22 who were brought to face charges at the Sessions Court in Selayang, on Oct 23, 2024. Bernama pic By Malay Mail Wednesday, 23 Oct 2024 11:50 AM MYT KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 23 GISB Holdings Sdn Bhd (GISBH) chief executive officer Datuk Nasiruddin Mohd Ali, and his wife, Azura Md Yusof, were charged today at the Selayang Sessions Court with being part of an organised crime group. National news agency Bernama reported that the son of of Al-Arqam founder Ashaari Muhammad, Mohammad Adib At-Tarmimi, was also charged. Others also charged with the offence include: Mohd Shukri Mohd Noor, Muhammad Afdaluddin Latif, Mohamad Sayuti Omar, Mohd Fazil Md Jasin, Mohd Dhirar Fakhrur Razi, Mokhtar Tajuddin, Muhammad Fajrul Islam Khalid, Abu Ubaidah Ahmad Shukri, Shuhaimi Mohamed, Hasnan Abd Hamid, Muhammad Zahid Azhar @ Nadzri, Khalilatul-Zalifah Mohammad Jamil, Nur Jannah Omar, Hamimah Yakub, Asmat @ Asmanira Muhammad Ramly, Nurul Jannah Idris, Siti Salmiah Ismail, Siti Hajar Ismail, and Mahani Kasim. The thirteen men and nine women indicated they understood the charges after they were read separately before Judge Lailatul Zuraida Harron @ Harun. No plea was recorded as the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2 (Sosma) was invoked, meaning the case falls under the jurisdiction of the High Court. All 22 are accused of committing the offence at a GISBH premises in Bandar Country Homes, Rawang, between October 2020 and Sept 11, 2024. The accused, aged between 27 and 72, were charged under Section 130V(1) of the Penal Code, which is punishable by imprisonment of between five and 20 years, upon conviction. Lawyer Datuk Rosli Kamaruddin later asked the judge if bail applications would be made in her court or the High Court, to which she said the latter. However, she said the accused were entitled to medical attention if needed. Linked to the banned Al-Arqam sect, GISBH is at the heart of a national child sexual abuse and human trafficking scandal that has horrified the country. - Malay Mail, 23/10/2024 Recalling black eye in 1998, PM Anwar backs protection for detainees to prevent lock-up abuses, says willing to join Suhakam checks (From left) Prime Ministers Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said, Suhakam chairman Datuk Seri Mohd Hishamudin Md Yunus, and Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim at Suhakams 25th anniversary celebration at KL Sentral on September 9, 2024. Bernama pic By Debra Chong Monday, 09 Sep 2024 8:42 PM MYT KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 9 Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim today said his government is fully committed to resolving custodial abuses and deaths in Malaysia. He said his personal experience 26 years ago has shown him the necessity to ensure there is adequate protection for all detainees from potential abuses. When people talk about concerns regarding abuse and deaths in lockups, theres no need to convince me because I know how it feels, and we feel it seems helpless when youre assaulted to near death in the lockup, he was quoted by Bernama as saying at the 25th anniversary celebration of the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) here this evening. The 77-year-old recalled his experience at being beaten while in police custody in 1998 when he was deputy prime minister and detained for suspected corruption and sodomy, which resulted in the widely reported black eye incident. Anwar said Datuk Seri Mohd Hishamudin Md Yunus the current Suhakam chairman was among several people who stepped forward to defend him back then. We need to support all efforts necessary to protect the suspect or convict in the lockup, and Im pleased to say that both the home minister and Inspector-General of Police support the idea. (But) their concern and also my concern is that not everyone who comes out with cuts, injuries or even dies in the lockup is necessarily due to police abuse. That is why we need proper procedures and protection, he was quoted as saying. He said various measures have been put in place to ensure detainees rights, including abolishing the Internal Security Act 1960 and mandatory death sentences, although these steps have caused some concern in society. Anwar also said he is willing to join Suhakams visits to police lockups to check on the conditions of the detainees. The police investigate, the judges deliver the sentence. Before a sentence is passed, suspects should not be punished beforehand, he was quoted as saying. Other dignitaries present at Suhakams anniversary celebration included Minister in the Prime Ministers Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said. - Malay Mail, 9/9/2024 30,000 innocent people languish in Malaysias overcrowded prisons Madpet By Charles Hector - 9 Feb 2023 In mid-2021, about 41.7% of those in Malaysian prisons had not yet been tried, convicted and sentenced, according to World Prison Brief, which obtains information from Malaysian government sources. They are called pre-trial detainees or remand prisoners, and this means they are innocent, as stated in Article 11(1) of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which reads: Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence. The Malaysian Prison Department disclosed on 3 February that Malaysian prisons are packed to overflowing. It said the number of inmates in prisons nationwide exceeds its current maximum capacity of 4,200 by 36% . This rate is based on international regulations. Measures to reduce congestion will continue with the cooperation of various agencies that will also focus on reducing the number of remand prisoners, the department said in a statement. In October 2022 Prison Department director general Nordin Muhamad revealed there were 82,539 prison inmates. Of that number, 76,336 were in prison while 6,203 had been placed in community rehabilitation programmes. Prison overcrowding would be resolved if the majority of these pre-trial or remand detainees are released on bail pending the end of trial. Most of these are the poor, who simply cannot afford bail. Denial of bail for serious crimes like murder may be justifiable. Statutory denial of bail by laws like for all Security Offences (Special Measures) Act (Sosma)-listed offences must also end. Let judges decide on bail. [Those charged with] lesser offences not resulting in death or grievous bodily harm should be entitled to bail. 30,000 innocent in prisons If there are about 75,000 people in prison, that will mean about 40% (or 30,000) are inmates who have not yet been tried, convicted or sentenced. Poverty is one of the key reasons why those not yet tried and found guilty are in prison. They simply cannot afford to post bail, as they have no acquaintance or family member who are rich enough and willing to place the bail sum, which could be thousands of ringgit, in court. The surety who places the bail money simply would not be able to use this money until the trial is over. Many poor people simply cannot afford to post bail if it means they will not be able to have access to it even in times of need. Consider the rich like Deputy Prime Minister Zahid Hamidi, who is out on RM2m bail while his criminal trial proceeds. But many among the poor simply cannot even raise the bail amount, let alone find sureties willing to post bail sums amounting to thousands of ringgit. In Thailand, with the passing of the Justice Fund Act, BE 2558 (2 ), legal assistance is now provided by the government and made available to low-income people so that they can have a proper legal defence in court and can be released immediately on bail while awaiting their trials to end. Between 1 October 2021 and 31 March 2022, the fund has approved THB190m to help low-income people related to lawsuits against them helped 1,425 people fight legal cases in court also provided money to help 473 people offer financial guarantee for release on bail . Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet) calls on Malaysia to consider and set up a similar fund that will give the poor access to money that can be used for bail so that they no longer need to languish in prison until the court decides, after trial, whether they are guilty. Expedite trials of 30,000 detainees Remember that these are people who did not plead guilty and who demanded trial. If they are to be remanded until the end of their trial, these trials must be expedited and targeted to end within three months or sooner noting that after trial, they may be found to be not guilty. As it is, Malaysia still does not have a criminal compensation act that will compensate the innocent victims for the detention and suffering theyendured until the court finds them not guilty. When the innocent plead guilty It must be acknowledged that many innocent people, especially the poor, plead guilty so they can serve their sentence and move on with their life . The reason could be poverty and the fact that if they do not plead guilty, they would still end up as pre-trial or remand detainees in prison for an undefined period for no one knows when their trial will proceed and end. It is sad that many may be in prison for a term longer that the sentence that might be imposed if they had pleaded guilty fast. There is a loss of faith in the criminal administration of justice. As trials are delayed, many innocent pre-trial or remand detainees in prison may still end up pleading guilty, because of delays in trial. They choose to abandon their quest for justice, which they had hoped to get from a fair trial . The problem thus may be with the courts the inadequacy of judges and courts to ensure speedy trial. Madpet calls for an increase in the number of judges and courts so that we can speedily reduce the pre-trial or remand detainees in prison to at least fewer than 5% of total prison inmates. Programmes to reduce the prison population in Malaysia to date seem to affect only the convicted serving their sentence, not the pre-trial or remand detainees in prison. The initiatives implemented since 2008 such as the parole system, compulsory attendance orders, resident reintegration programmes, licenced prisoner releases and community rehabilitation programmes could reduce overcrowding in prisons across the country are really for the prisoners who are already convicted and serving their sentence. Provide lawyers to all detainees The Malaysian government did not provide legal aid for suspects and accused in criminal cases until about 2 , and thus the Malaysian Bar, with its own funds and lawyers, filled this gap. Only since 2 , through the National Legal Aid Foundation scheme, did the government step in to provide financial payments for lawyers providing legal aid for criminal matters. However, foreigners are generally still excluded, and they can only rely on the Malaysian Bars legal aid lawyers or lawyers who come in on their own to act pro-bono or with minimal fees. Noting that many of the pre-trial or remand detainees in prison today are foreigners, Madpet calls on the Malaysian government to provide legal aid lawyers for all, as this will also help expedite and ensure a fair trial. The major problem with the overcrowding in prisons is the large percentage of pre-trial or remand detainees, and Malaysia must urgently expedite trials and take steps to reduce the number of pre-trial or remand detainees. Maybe the courts should review the bail amounts and conditions of all pre-trial or remand detainees, and the government should assist, even financially, to ensure that no innocent person languishes in prison before they are tried, convicted and sentenced. After all, even Najib Razak, after conviction, was allowed out on bail, until the end of his final Federal Court appeal. Charles Hector issued this statement on behalf of Malaysians Against Death Penalty and Torture (Madpet) - ALIRAN Website

amongst workers , as Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim said recently that minimum wage for public sector workers will be set to RM2,000? The planned salary increment will come under what Anwar called a new "human resource framework" that would raise the minimum pay for all public sector workers to RM2,000, among others. If PM Anwar is setting minimum wage of Public Sector workers at RM2,000, he should also set the Minimum Wage of all other workers at the same RM2,000 or really higher - as public sector workers receive all kinds of other benefit s too..pensions, healthcare benefits, housing, etc. All WORKERS contribute to the well-being of Malaysia - so why is he discriminating against all other workers??? Should NON-PUBLIC SECTOR workers consider kicking out a government that DISCRIMINATES? Now, we have previously suggested that MINIMUM WAGE should vary according to regions, as the cost of living is different . For Klang Valley, it is higher than some rural areas... In Sabah/Sarawak it also is high. So, reasonably a different MINIMUM WAGE based on region of work/living? Next problem - Many smaller businesses, like market vendors, small shops in rural towns barely survive - they simply cannot afford to pay their workers MINIMUM WAGE - now, for the owner/operator, they should each at least be entitled to take home annually RM50,000 each, so, really businesses that have less than RM100,000 PROFIT annually should not be required to pay Minimum Wage at the same rate - a lower rate is preferred. (Or maybe a requirement of some sort of 'profit sharing' scheme in lieu with Minimum Wage). We looking at smaller shops in small towns, rural areas, fishermen, farmers, etc >> consider their income/profits - if NOT, the government's Minimum Wage will kill off these small business. Minimum Wage should thus be imposed on the all the BIG company employers, GLCs, TNC, Franchise Business, etc - and realistically, it can be HIGHER MINIMUM WAGE of RM2,500 at least. During the presentation of Budget 2025 on Friday, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is also the minister of finance, announced that the minimum wage would rise to RM1,700 per month, effective Feb 1, 2025, and Aug 1, 2025, for employers or small entrepreneurs with fewer than five employees. So, the current plan to impose on ALL employers is FOOLISH - unless Anwar Ibrahim's government wants to kill of these small businesses owned by Malaysians. Fruit sellers, vegetable sellers, sundry shops, etc... they all need workers. MINIMUM WAGE must be increased as and when required - if cost of living goes up, immediately increase Minimum Wage. Employers have been cautioned against using the new minimum wage rate as the starting salary for all employees, including graduates, said Human Resources Minister Steven Sim Chee Keong. Well, that is what happened - many BIG employers too decided to simply use the Minimum Wage ... Before the Minimum Wage, wage was determined by market forces - and, in fact it was higher for some kind of work/jobs - not all. Employers need workers - and workers could demand higher wages - but the Malaysia sabotaged Malaysian workers by allowing in cheap labour in the form of migrant workers. When you can get cheap migrant workers, why pay local employees a higher wage? What is shocking was that even government owned companies, GLCs and companies that get government contracts also just paid the 'MINIMUM WAGE" - the government could have ensured that these companies paid HIGHER wages - or better wages. How many government owned companies, GLCs and companies that get government contracts use the 'minimum wage rate as the starting salary for all employees' Minister Steven Sim? ONE strategy is to impose a HIGHER MINIMUM WAGE for manual work, difficult work - we need to attract Malaysian workers to take on these jobs. A HIGHER MINIMUM wage for them 3D Jobs will attract Malaysian workers? To protect Malaysian Workers, there was a QUOTA for use of migrant workers at the workplace - well, after the QUOTA is filled, employers to get their LOCAL Workers may have to pay higher wages to local workers ....BUT, what did the Malaysian government do? Allowed schemes to allow EMPLOYER to use more than the quota of migrant workers... They stayed within their QUOTA with regard their OWN registered Employees, and started using outsourced workers from other 'Employer'/Contractors - Hence, when we look at the workforce at a workplace - how many migrant workers...how many local workers? Minister seems to be concerned about University Graduates - when he must treat all WORKERS the same. Skill, experience and even age may be a factor to consider different wages - but not educational qualification. EMPLOYMENT SECURITY - abolish short-term contract employment. Require all workers to be employed as REGULAR EMPLOYEES - that will provide employment security for Malaysian workers... but the Minister is still not doing that. So, when worker's contract ends after one year or less, employers still can NOT renew the contract, and simply hire a new worker paid at the Minimum Wage. Even MPs have employment security of 4-5 years, but not most workers. ALL workers at a workplace must be employees of the owner/operator of the workplace. Section 2A Employment Act says that all it requires is a Minister's ORDER - no need to go to Parliament.. (1) The Minister may by order prohibit the employment, engagement or contracting of any person or class of persons to carry out work in any occupation in any agricultural or industrial undertaking, constructional work, statutory body, local government authority, trade, business or place of work other than under a contract of service entered into with- (a) the principal or owner of that agricultural or industrial undertaking, constructional work, trade, business or place of work; or (b) that statutory body or that authority. (2) Upon the coming into force of any such order, the person or class of persons employed, engaged or contracted with to carry out the work shall be deemed to be an employee or employees and- (a) the principal or owner of the agricultural or industrial undertaking, constructional work, trade, business or place of work; or (b) the statutory body or local government authority, shall be deemed to be the employer for the purposes of such provisions of this Act and any other written law as may be specified in the order. This would prevent the employer from using non-employee workers ... and avoiding local-migrant employee quota requirement, will allow employees to come together and fight for worker rights....So, why is Minister Steven Sim making this ORDER that will benefit all workers, especially Malaysian workers and their unions. Today, the reality will show that number of actual EMPLOYEES is very small - as the employer use many workers of 'other employers'(Contractors for Labour) - which allows for DISCRIMINATION of workers at the same workplace doing the same work. It also WEAKENS the workers' capacity to demand better worker rights...????? Many other things to consider ... Minister: RM1,700 minimum wage is the lowest, not target salary for all new hires Human Resources Minister Steven Sim attends a groundbreaking event at Kampung Merang in Bandar Permaisuiri, on Oct 21, 2024. Bernama pic Monday, 21 Oct 2024 4:24 PM MYT BANDAR PERMAISURI, Oct 21 Employers have been cautioned against using the new minimum wage rate as the starting salary for all employees, including graduates, said Human Resources Minister Steven Sim Chee Keong. He explained that the increase in the minimum wage from RM1,500 to RM1,700, as announced in Budget 2025 on Friday, is intended as a basic wage for workers with lower academic qualifications and skills, including those in the 3D (dirty, dangerous, and difficult) sector. It is advisable to offer salaries that reflect employees skills and academic qualifications. The minimum wage should not serve as the benchmark for starting salaries for all workers. This adjustment in minimum wage is a strategy designed for the most basic workers, especially the 4.35 million individuals currently earning below RM1,700. By aligning salaries with academic qualifications, job roles, and skills, companies can benefit as well. If employees are not compensated fairly, we risk losing talent and face challenges in attracting skilled manpower, he said to reporters, following the groundbreaking ceremony of the Social Security Organisation (Socso) Eastern Region Rehabilitation Centre, in Merang, today. During the presentation of Budget 2025 on Friday, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is also the minister of finance, announced that the minimum wage would rise to RM1,700 per month, effective Feb 1, 2025, and Aug 1, 2025, for employers or small entrepreneurs with fewer than five employees. Sim emphasised that the wage adjustment period provided was both reasonable and sufficient, urging employers to comply with the established guidelines. He encouraged anyone, particularly workers aware of labour law violations, including those related to the minimum wage, to report such instances to the ministry, specifically to the Department of Labour, so that appropriate actions can be taken. He clarified that the increase in the minimum wage rate is not intended to burden employers. Instead, it aims to enhance employees purchasing power, which will indirectly generate economic benefits for local entrepreneurs and small businesses. Regarding the Socso Eastern Region Rehabilitation Centre, expected to be completed in 2027, Sim said that it aligns with the ministrys 3K aspirations, which focus on enhancing worker welfare, improving skills, and achieving greater productivity. Meanwhile, the rehabilitation centre, with a construction cost of RM571.8 million, will boast 315 beds and accommodate 400 to 500 patients daily. It will offer a range of treatment services, including medical rehabilitation utilising Neuro-Robotic and Cybernics rehabilitation, as well as innovative therapies like Thalassotherapy, which uses seawater for therapeutic purposes. Additionally, treatment based on the hippotherapy method, which involves using horses as therapeutic instruments to aid in the physical, mental, and cognitive recovery of patients, will also be available. Sim noted that the establishment of this third rehabilitation centre, following those in Melaka and Perak, is particularly relevant, given that records show that 15 to 20 per cent of the total cases received at the existing rehabilitation centre are from the east coast states. Bernama, Malay Mail, 21/10/2024 On Labour Day, PM Anwar announces plan to give civil servants record increment Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim delivers a speech at the 2024 Labour Day celebration in Putrajaya May 1, 2024. Picture by Shafwan Zaidon By Syed Jaymal Zahiid Wednesday, 01 May 2024 11:43 AM MYT PUTRAJAYA, May 1 Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim announced today the governments plan to raise the salaries of civil servants to record level next year, a move that is expected to cost taxpayers RM10 billion more on top of existing spending for emolument. The salary review will be the first in 12 years, which Anwar announced at the 2024 Labour Day celebration with mostly civil servants and representatives from government-linked firms here. The prime minister described the increments as long overdue to pre-empt criticism. The Malaysian government has long been criticised for its bloated civil service, whose emolument often rack up more than a third of federal budgets. "There will be those who criticise, but I say when was the last time we had a (salary) review? If they question, ask them how much they are earning," Anwar said in a speech delivered to staff from various ministries and members of the Congress of Unions of Employees in the Public and Civil Services (Cuepacs). The planned salary increment will come under what Anwar called a new "human resource framework" that would raise the minimum pay for all public sector workers to RM2,000, among others. The highest increment rate was 13 per cent, but the prime minister said the new increment will be "much higher". The current minimum income, which includes salary and fixed allowances, is RM1,795 per month. Anwar vowed to raise pay as part of his pledge to alleviate cost of living pressure when he took office in 2022, and his government has managed to stabilise inflation from its peak record that same year. But low pay, compounded by a weaker ringgit, continues to weigh on buying power as the majority of industries appear reluctant to move away from the decades-long labour-intensive low-pay operating model that has allowed companies to widen profit margins by suppressing overhead costs. Earlier this year Minister of Economy Rafizi Ramli, Anwar's deputy in PKR, the anchor party of the ruling Pakatan Harapan coalition, announced a plan to introduce a "progressive wage policy" as a key measure to incentivise firms to raise salaries through tax breaks and subsidies.

Hopefully, this will make some employers to now employ MORE Local Workers. From a principle of EQUALITY - it ends DISCRIMINATION amongst workers. For the mandatory employer contribution to workers is now the same. SECOND - at least migrant workers will have SOME money to take back home when they leave Malaysia > that monies in the EPF accounts. This would overcome the problem of employer cheating workers of wages, and delaying in settling payments due to workers. BUT Now, with this lump sum money in the EPF account - they can go back. Previously, many remain 'illegally' as they do not have enough money to return because employer cheated them, etc.. Money owing to migrant workers, who are asked to leave the country at the end of the employment, is LOST because to claim for that monies PHYSICAL PRESENCE at the Labour Department was needed. Failure to attend results in your claim against employers being dismissed...a grave injustice to workers > yet to be resolved by the Malaysian Government. This is 'HUMAN TRAFFICKING" - and Malaysia, sadly by law and practice, facilitates Human Trafficking, being exploitation of workers. Employers('human traffickers') who do not pay workers for the work already done tend to get away with it.... Malaysia must resolve this issue. People have asked that migrant workers be not sent back to their country of origin, until it is CONFIRMED that employers have already settled all payments due, and there is NO outstanding claim of monies from employers. A suggestion that a Ministry of Human Resource Certificate be a requirement - where the Ministry will investigate and ensure that there are NO MORE outstanding payment to these workers before they are asked to leave Malaysia.. It is disappointing the EMPLOYERS are protesting ...WHY? Equality demands that all workers are treated equally irrespective of their nationality. MORE contribution to EPF also may benefit all EPF account holders - as more monies available means more investments..and thus the chance for HIGHER EPF Dividends annually... FMM shocked by govts move to deduct EPF for migrant workers FMT Reporters - 21 Oct 2024, 05:48 PM The Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers says industry players feel sidelined as they were not consulted on mandatory EPF contributions for foreign workers. The Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers said foreign workers may not be keen about contributing to EPF since it would reduce their take-home pay. (Bernama pic) PETALING JAYA : The Federation of Malaysian Manufacturers (FMM) has expressed disappointment over the governments unexpected announcement that all foreign workers would be required to contribute to EPF from 2025. FMM president Soh Thian Lai said it was caught off guard by the announcement when the 2025 budget was tabled last Friday, saying the government did not engage stakeholders prior to this. Soh also lamented the lack of clarity on the plan, saying this has caused great concern within the business community. Industry players feel disappointed and sidelined, as they were not given the opportunity to provide input or voice their concerns on the potential impact of such a policy on business operations, costs and workforce management. Its implementation should be delayed, preferably for another two years, to allow sufficient time for comprehensive stakeholder consultations and for businesses to adjust to the impending financial commitments. There has been no information on key aspects like the specific timeframe for implementation, who exactly would be covered under this rule, the contribution rates for both employers and foreign employees or how the phased rollout will be managed, he said in a statement. Soh said the mandatory contributions for foreign workers would affect the operating costs and cash flow of employers, adding that this was an additional burden on top of the upcoming new RM1,700 minimum wage and multi-tier levy system. He believed the existing social safety net system for migrant workers offered sufficient protection, while EPFs purpose of retirement savings did not align with the short-term nature of the employment of migrant workers. He also said employers could not afford to make EPF contributions for migrant workers at the same 12%-13% rate that they do for Malaysian employees. With 2.5 million foreign workers in the country, the EPF contribution on non-citizens would translate to an additional minimum annual payroll cost of RM6.6 billion, he said, also citing the minimum wage and a 13% contribution rate as an example. The former president of the National Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Malaysia added that migrant workers may not be keen about contributing to EPF since it would reduce their take-home pay, the bulk of which is sent to their families back home. In announcing the budget last week, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim said the government had agreed to make it mandatory for foreign workers to contribute to EPF, adding this would be done in phases. - FMT, 21/10/2024