Najib to ex-AG: Did Dr M act against his enemies?

 

Former prime minister Najib Razak poses questions to former attorney-general Tommy Thomas about high-profile criminal cases involving politicians.

PETALING JAYA: Najib Razak has questioned if Dr Mahathir Mohamad had intervened in the decision to prosecute his political enemies on criminal charges, and whether he had also had cases against Lim Guan Eng and others to be dropped.

The questions were raised by Najib and directed at former attorney-general Tommy Thomas after the revelation by Thomas that Mahathir, then prime minister, had told him to avoid proceedings in open court over an extradition request against controversial preacher Dr Zakir Naik.

Thomas had written about Mahathir’s intervention in his memoirs, “My Story: Justice in the Wilderness”, which was extensively quoted in news reports today.

Thomas had also written that cases against DAP personalities over allegations of links to the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam had been dropped after Mahathir was satisfied with his explanation about the decision to do so.

Najib responded to Thomas’ revelations by asking about the dropping of charges against DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng, who had been accused of corruption and abuse of power.

In a brief Facebook posting, Najib asked whether Mahathir truly did not intervene in the affairs of the attorney-general and the legislative branch of government.

He said Thomas had stated that he didn’t charge Naik because he was complying with Mahathir’s instructions.

“He dropped the LTTE cases after he got Mahathir and the Cabinet’s permission. What about the decision to retract charges against Lim and Pakatan Harapan leaders allied to Mahathir?

“What about the decision to charge Mahathir’s political enemies? Why didn’t you write about that, Tommy?” said Najib, who has been on trial for alleged corruption and abuse of power relating to 1MDB. Other Umno personalities who have faced criminal charges included Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, who was Najib’s deputy in government and in Umno, and former Federal Territories minister Tengku Adnan Mansor.

In his book, Thomas said he met Mahathir some time in 2018 to brief him on the Zakir Naik issue. Prior to his meeting with Mahathir, the Indian high commissioner had met him to discuss Naik. They (Indian authorities) wanted Malaysia to expel him from our shores, Thomas wrote.

He said the high commissioner, Shri Mridul Kumar, was frank. “India-Malaysia relations would not be on an even keel unless the Zakir Naik issue was resolved to India’s satisfaction,” Thomas said.

“He also agreed that instituting extradition proceedings against Naik in our courts would exacerbate tension. I then briefed Tun (Mahathir) on the matter and he agreed any form of court action must be avoided at all cost because that was what exactly Naik would prefer; a platform for him to spew his poison,” Thomas wrote.

On the LTTE case, he said he was “troubled” by the impending trial as the prosecution’s case against the accused was weak. “Dr Mahathir Mohamad was satisfied with my explanation since there was no realistic possibility of a conviction for any of the 12 accused,” Thomas wrote. - FMT

Some university students allowed back on campus from March

 

Among those allowed to return to campus are students who need to use laboratories or studios. (Reuters pic)

PUTRAJAYA: The National Security Council has agreed to allow six categories of students to return to campus for classes from March 1.

The higher education ministry said in a statement that the students allowed to return are those who need access to practical classes as well as to use laboratories, studios and special devices for their studies.

Students who do not have access to the internet or who lack a conducive environment for learning online can also return to campus.

Others include those enrolled in pre-universities and diploma courses who have been staying in-campus, international students, except UK students, disabled students, and those taking the Malaysian University English Test as well as international and professional examinations.

Students not in these categories will continue their lessons online, the ministry said.

Peninsula students returning to campuses in Sabah and Sarawak must take swab tests at no charge. Those going to Sarawak must undergo two weeks’ quarantine first.

Students from Sarawak and Sabah returning to campuses in the peninsula will also be placed in quarantine centres. - FMT

No Moral Compass

 Here is a report in The Star about an online panel discussion on corruption. Two of the speakers were Tan Sri Johan Jaafar and Dato Wong Chun Wai. Both Johan and Chun Wai are friends of mine, we served together for four years on the MACC's Advisory Panel.

Corruption pandemic infected our country 
only vaccine is good moral values
panel discussion on combating corruption
Tan Sri Johan Jaaffar, Datuk Hussamuddin Yaacub, Datuk Wong Chun Wai 

only way to solve it was through rakyat
people also corrupt because they allowed it to happen
in the system, in govt, in corporate sector
high time people own up, do something to break chain
collapse of moral values of M'sians because "we allowed it"
must change our attitudes toward corruption
bring back value system 50 or 60 years ago 
Hussammuddin called all political party members to change leaders

Johan said corruption was like cancer 
eats away at everything we believe in
people become indifferent 
indifference breeding ground for corruption 
heading toward serious problems in the future.
transparency, integrity, value systems taken for granted

Wong said corruption involved taker but givers also responsible
when police ask you how to solve problem and you say I'll pay... problem starts
people fed up with corruption and also with issues being politicised
Wong urged public to come together and combat corruption

My comments :  Corruption, stealing, murder, rape, lying, cheating, dishonesty are all symptoms. They are symptoms of a breakdown in a society's value system.

Good values. What are good values? What are the practical causes and effects of "good values" or the lack thereof?

Lets say a man has four concubines. Or four mistresses. He can "maintain" his four concubines / mistresses. Is that a good thing to do? Does that represent good values? 

What are the practical effects of having four concubines ? Economically and materially the man may be able to maintain his four concubines, give them food, shelter, provide for any children that he may have with his four concubines. He can even leave aside sufficient amounts of wealth and money for his concubines and all his children. All that can be done. This has happened before.  

But does that create an upright society that is good? For certain the concubines will be at loggerheads with each other and their children may end up quarreling and fighting with each other over who is more worthy of being the offspring of the father. This too has happened and happens until today in "plural" households.

Now what if the man can get a piece of paper which says that he has "married" the four women? He actually has four wives now. They are not concubines or mistresses. Does the morality of the situation suddenly shoot up to the sky now?

Does that suddenly create an upright, "good" society? For certain the four wives will be at loggerheads with each other and their children may end up quarreling and fighting with each other over who is more worthy of being the offspring of the father. This too has happened and happens until today.

So what exactly are good moral values? In my view there is a simple method of finding out. The answer to the pudding is always in the eating. So just see what are the effects - positive and negative - of any particular behaviour of a society. 

If a particular behaviour or norm of a society causes harmony, well being, happiness and overall good in the society then that norm has a good moral value. 

If a particular behaviour or belief causes unhappiness, disruption and poverty or backwardness in a society then that norm has a negative moral value. Alway look at the practical effects. 

There is no point saying 'Oh but if we do this we will go to our version of heaven, we will be in nirvana, will be reincarnated as high value race horses, bla bla'.  Do not waste time. 

You cannot create chaos, confusion, stupidity, mayhem, poverty and backwardness in this life as a pre-condition or pre-qualification to somehow get magically rewarded in an afterlife.   You need serious psychiatric counselling.

So what if your belief system is the problem? Your religion is a belief system. Your traditions and culture unique to your race or unique to the place where your race or community came from can be a belief system. How your mother and father brought you up can be a belief system (regardless of what race or religion they belong to). You may be a member of an NGO, a society or a political party that may have also provided you with a belief system. So what if your belief system is the problem?

The following article, which is a tad long and written in Malay, went super viral about two weeks back. If you have not read this, do try. This article is written by Dr Rozhan Othman, an academic at a local university.

For quick reading I have truncated the article and I have some comments at the end. 

https://malaysiadateline.com/paksaan-sengketa-dan-agenda-islam-yang-terpesong

Tidaklah keterlaluan untuk mengatakan agenda “negara Islam” lebih banyak memberi kekecewaan kepada mereka yang menaruh harapan padanya. 

Antara inisiatif paling awal guna idea “negara Islam” pada kurun lalu ialah penubuhan Pakistan.

• Revolusi di Iran juga menggunakan label “negara Islam”. 
• Demikian juga rampasan kuasa di Sudan yang membawa agenda Islam. 
• Pemerintahan Taliban di Afghanistan juga mendakwa “negara Islam”.

bolehkah kita berbangga dengan pencapaian negara-negara ini? 
Pakistan dikenali dengan pergolakan politik, rampasan kuasa tentera berulang kali.
Walaupun beragenda Islam rasuah berleluasa, penindasan wanita terusan 
Adakah ini sifat sebuah negara Islam?

• Iran mengutamakan agenda syia`ahnya. 
• Ia sanggup menindas rakyatnya. 
• Rasuah dan pencabulan hak asasi manusia berleluasa.

Di Sudan, Jeneral Bashir akhirnya dijatuhkan oleh rakyat sendiri
Tindak-tanduk Sudan di Darfur tidak boleh dibanggakan
Taliban pula terkenal dengan sempit dan bengis.

• Bashir dipenjara atas rasuah selepas pemerintahan selama 30 tahun.
• Bagi umat yang waras dan rasional adakah ini manifestasi terbaik Islam?
• Persoalan ini perlu dihalusi untuk mengelak ulangi kesalahan yang sama

Penulisan ini menganalisis apa yang dianggap agenda Islam
ciri utama ialah kesemuanya ambil pendekatan paksaan (coercive approach)
Undang-undang digunakan untuk memaksa Islam ke atas masyarakat
Ini dilakukan dengan guna kuasa tentera, polis.

• Pelaksanaan Islam sebegini sering mempunyai percanggahan
• non Muslim diberitahu Islam hormati kebebasan agama 
• tetapi mereka dipaksa mematuhi arahan mengekang kebebasan agama mereka
• Hudud dikatakan menjamin keadilan tetapi pilih bulu berlaku

kita (perlu) soalkan pendekatan paksa ini
tiada bukti Rasul / sahabat mengintip, memeriksa cara pakaian wanita 
Mereka tidak meneliti status halal makanan, pinggan, periuk, kuali 
wujud golongan bukan Islam di Madinah 
ada sahabat masih tinggal sama ibu-bapa yang belum Islam

• Rasul serta muhajirin bukan kuat dari segi ketenteraan
• Oleh itu, baginda tidak berupaya memaksakan apa-apa
• Rasul tidak mempunyai kuasa undang-undang memaksa orang 

Rasul dan muhajirin tidak memiliki kekayaan
penduduk menerimanya bukanlah kerana manfaat ekonomi 

• kenapa penduduk menerima Rasul 
• kita perlu meneliti apa dilakukan baginda sebagai pemimpin 

baginda mendamaikan sengketa lama
Baginda (tidak) guna pecah-dan-perintah (divide and rule) 
Baginda (tidak) menyemai kebencian untuk mendapat sokongan
baginda tidak mengambil semua pendekatan ini. 
Baginda tidak guna Islam untuk menekan, menyisihkan bukan Islam

• baginda mewujudkan piagam inklusif (constitution) sebagai kuasa penyatu
• Baginda isytiharkan “umat yang satu” (one people) 
• antara golongan berbeza agama dan bangsa 
• Islam rahmat kepada seluruh alam 
• bukan rahmat untuk orang Islam sahaja

baginda jamin kebebasan beragama
baginda beri hak bukan Islam tadbir agama mereka
Baginda melibatkan mereka berunding isu-isu masyarakat

• pendekatan Rasul mendamaikan, bukan melaga-lagakan
• menyatukan Islam dengan bukan Islam 
• bukan wujudkan jurang antara mereka
• menjaga kepentingan semua penduduk bukan Islam sahaja.

Yang ditekankan baginda bukan “ketuanan” dominasi golongan lain
baginda bina kredibiliti menjaga kepentingan semua pihak
non Muslim menerimanya kerana keyakinan bukan kerana dipaksa

• Pendekatan mendamai bukan melagakan perlu agar Islam jadi jurubicara semua 
• melagakan, benci, bermusuh, kekuasaan, dominasi bertentangan dgn Rasul
• bersengketa dan memaksa terpesong dari landasan baginda

gerakan Islam (semasa) bawa mesej negatif dan regresif 
hilang kredibiliti walaupun penyokong tegarnya teruja

• di Malaysia Islam perlu jadi jurubicara semua rakyat
• Islam hanya kredibiliti apabila membela seluruh masyarakat 
• dan bukan untuk golongan Islam sahaja

oleh *DR ROZHAN OTHMAN dr_rozhan@yahoo.com. 
mantan Prof UTM – Malaysia Japan International Institute of Technology (MJIIT)

My comments :

My view is this. All this is wasting time. There is no universal 'agama'. The agama is permanently split into sects. The sects have existed for over 1200 years and will never go away. So choosing the agama really means choosing a sect.

And because the agama is so divided, there is no intellectual or academic scholarship. There cannot be. There is no such thing. Any so called religious scholarship can only study, research and be called scholarship INSIDE its own sect.

I knew a friend who was a religious researcher at a government university. He would help do research, write papers etc. He would be told to strictly remain within the boundaries of sectarian scholarship - dont rock the boat. That is not scholarship. That is propaganda.

So what values or morality can we expect from religious scholarship other than sectarian propaganda? That is why religion has failed and will continue to fail.

There is no universal good or universal morality that can be garnered from religion. Dont believe me? Listen to this guy:

He says a man can have four wives and an unlimited number of concubines. 
You want to talk about religion, I am quite sure he can produce his references and his religious authorities.
I will need to comment on this video in some detail some day soon. 
So religion is not the source of universal morality or universal good.
We really have to keep religion where it belongs - OUTSIDE the public domain.

We have no choice. We must turn to the Islam of science. Science is Islamic. Reason, rational thinking, common sense, evidence, questioning, asking WHY - that is the islamic method.  Yes and no force. 

And does it produce good for the human race? The entire human race. That shall be the criteria for determining morality and values. 

If you have unlimited number of concubines does it produce good for the human race? That sort of questioning and thinking processes. 

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.

Fake News On Muhyiddin Yassin Debunked

 

This allegation is false (fitnah) and there is no truth to the story. Yet another fake news on Muhyiddin Yassin debunked after the revelation by previous Attorney-General Tommy Thomas about the so-called “backdoor” Prime Minister myth.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

For the last two weeks, a story has been floating around about Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin’s alleged involvement in a RM1.2 billion scandal (READ THE VIBES REPORT DATED 12 JANUARY 2021 BELOW). The anti-Muhyiddin cyber-troopers have been going viral with this story.

Che’GuBard has now debunked this fake news in his Facebook posting (PENDEDAHAN SENSASI HANYA FITNAH), which you can read below, and he has challenged Lokman Noor Adam to provide the evidence to support this allegation.

Other sources have confirmed that this allegation is false (fitnah) and that there is no truth to the story. Yet another fake news on Muhyiddin Yassin debunked after the revelation by previous Attorney-General Tommy Thomas about the so-called “backdoor” Prime Minister myth.

******************************************************************************

PENDEDAHAN SENSASI HANYA FITNAH

Che’GuBard Original

Chairman IRIS adalah kroni Mahathir dan Umno yang buat cip kad pengenalan rakyat Malaysia. Nampaknya bekas MKT Umno yang konon buat pendedahan sensasi kutip maklumat dimana?

KALAU LOKMAN BERANI dan ADA MAKLUMAT SAHIH, LAPOR LAH SPRM!

Selain kroni Mahathir dan Umno sebagai Pengerusi IRIS, salah seorang pemegang saham IRIS adalah orang Umno mantan KP Umno Perlis yang Lobak mungkin tak ada pun datanya.

Ramai yang tertipu dengan fitnah bahawa menantu PM mendapat contract RM1 Billion dibawah Kementerian Dalam Negeri.

Kampeni yang dapat adalah Iris Corp Bhd. TIDAK ADA kena mengena dengan menantu PM. Menantu PM BUKAN pemegang saham pun, dilantik sebagai pengarah pun TIDAK.

Sebelum anda percaya dengan fitnah mereka, elok semak dengan SSM. Data ada dalam SSM, mana boleh tipu.

Menantu PM ada 2 orang, sorang nama Idris, sorang nama Adlan. Tengok lah sendiri dalam SSM tu. Ada ke tidak?

kalau tak percaya jugak, boleh semak sendiri di https://www.mydata-ssm.com.my/

Geng makan duit suka tuduh sebab ingat orang lain pun macam dia kan?

*****************************************************************************

Iris Corp in talks with govt over RM1.2 bil immigration project

Sources say IT service provider has received a letter of intent to begin negotiations

(The Vibes, 12 January 2021) – Iris Corp Bhd has received a letter of intent to begin negotiations with the government over the RM1.2 billion National Integrated Immigration System (NIIS), people familiar with the matter said.

A source said there had been three days of negotiations last week between Iris, Home Ministry officials as well as S5 Holdings Inc director Syed Mohamad Hafiz Syed Razlan.

Iris was not available for immediate comment.

The IT service provider has been a front runner for the NIIS ever since a request for proposal (RFP) was called in 2019, when Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin was home minister, after he terminated the project’s predecessor, Sistem Kawalan Imigresen Nasional (SKIN), due to inflated costs.

Estimates put the cost of the NIIS at about RM1.2 billion, a 66% discount from SKIN’s RM3.5 billion. Prestariang Bhd, which was directly awarded the SKIN contract from the then-Barisan Nasional government in 2017, is suing Putrajaya for RM732.86 million in damages.

Muhyiddin would go on to become prime minister while his Bersatu colleague, Datuk Seri Hamzah Zainuddin, took over the Home Ministry portfolio following the change of government in late February last year.

But the RFP also allows for a consortium of companies to bid for the project. Business publication The Edge, citing sources, had reported on August 24 that Iris had put in a bid through a consortium, with S5 being party to the deal.

Also, an S5 shareholder has links to Muhyiddin’s son-in-law, Datuk Adlan Berhan. The Vibes had reported that Avocat Sdn Bhd, which is controlled by businessman Lim Beng Guan, has a 3.62% stake in S5. Lim is a director while Adlan, who is married to Muhyiddin’s daughter, Nabilah, is a shareholder of Agathistwo Jia Sdn Bhd.

The “Backdoor” Prime Minister Myth Shattered

 

So, it was Mahathir and not Muhyiddin who is at fault. And yet the Pakatan Harapan people are accusing Muhyiddin of “stealing” the government. With this latest revelation by Tommy Thomas, the truth is finally known. And that truth is: Muhyiddin is not a backdoor Prime Minister after all.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

The truth has finally been revealed. Muhyiddin Yassin is not a backdoor Prime Minister and neither is Perikatan Nasional an illegal government, as Pakatan Harapan has been claiming for the last 11 months. The revelation by the previous Attorney-General Tommy Thomas confirms this.

It seems His Majesty Seri Paduka Baginda Yang di-Pertuan Agong first tried to persuade Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad to not resign. When Mahathir still insisted that he wanted to resign, the Agong wanted to appoint Deputy Prime Minister Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail as the interim Prime Minister.

Mahathir, however, disagreed — so in the end the Agong was forced to appoint Muhyiddin Yassin since he was “next-in-line” in terms of majority. If not, Wan Azizah would have been PM8 instead.

So, it was Mahathir and not Muhyiddin who is at fault. And yet the Pakatan Harapan people are accusing Muhyiddin of “stealing” the government. With this latest revelation by Tommy Thomas, the truth is finally known. And that truth is: Muhyiddin is not a backdoor Prime Minister after all.

READ MORE HERE: Agong Wanted Dr Wan Azizah As Interim PM But Dr M Nominated Himself, Says Ex-AG

READ MORE HERE: Agong Mahu Wan Azizah Jadi PM Interim, Tapi Dr M Calon Diri Sendiri Walaupun Sudah Letak Jawatan, Kata Tommy Thomas

***************************************************************************************

PENGKHIANATAN TERUK TUN DR MAHATHIR KINI TERDEDAH

Kamarul Yusoff

Menarik sekali pendedahan mantan Peguam Negara, Tan Sri Tommy Thomas, di dalam buku “My Story: Justice in the Wilderness” terbitan SIRD yang mula berada di pasaran semalam.

Paling menarik bagi saya tentulah pendedahan Tan Sri Tommy mengenai peranan Yang di-Pertuan Agong di dalam tempoh peralihan kuasa, iaitu bahawa:

(1) Yang di-Pertuan Agong merayu kepada Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad supaya kekal menjadi Perdana Menteri tetapi Tun Dr Mahathir bertegas mahu meletakkan jawatan yang menyebabkan Yang di-Pertuan Agong tiada pilihan lain selain menerima perletakan jawatan tersebut.

(2) Tun Dr Mahathir tegas bahawa Kabinet mesti dibubar (insisted that the Cabinet must be dismissed) ekoran perletakan jawatan beliau sebagai Perdana Menteri dan ini terpaksa diterima oleh Yang di-Pertuan Agong menyebabkan sejumlah 50 Menteri dan Timbalan Menteri hilang jawatan.

(3) Yang di-Pertuan Agong sebenarnya mahu melantik Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail sebagai Perdana Menteri Interim tetapi Yang di-Pertuan Agong tidak dapat berbuat demikian kerana Tun Dr Mahathir mahukan beliau sendiri dilantik sebagai Perdana Menteri Interim tersebut.

Sangat menarik juga pastilah pendedahan Tan Sri Tommy bahawa Tun Dr Mahathir menyebut kepada beliau di dalam pertemuan mereka pada 25 Februari 2020 bahawa:

(1) Tun Dr Mahathir mempunyai sokongan sebulat suara daripada 222 Ahli Parlimen untuk menjadi Perdana Menteri.

(2) Tun Dr Mahathir akan mempunyai kuasa penuh (“a complete free hand”) di dalam Kerajaan Perpaduan beliau.

(3) Jawatan parti tidak akan diberi pertimbangan oleh Tun Dr Mahathir untuk lantikan Kabinet Kerajaan Perpaduan.

(4) Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim dan Lim Guan Eng tidak akan menjadi sebahagian daripada Kabinet Kerajaan Perpaduan.

(5) Tun Dr Mahathir terpaksa memecat Tan Sri Tommy sebagai Peguam Negara kerana ini adalah syarat UMNO dan PAS.

Buku Tan Sri Tommy ini adalah bukti nyata bagaimana Yang di-Pertuan Agong telah melaksanakan tanggungjawab Baginda dalam tempoh peralihan kuasa ini dengan seadil-adilnya tanpa cuba memihak kepada mana-mana pihak seperti didakwa.

Lebih penting lagi, buku Tan Sri Tommy ini juga adalah bukti jelas bagaimana Tun Dr Mahathir telah mengkhianati dengan seteruk-teruknya rakan-rakannya di dalam PH, khususnya Datuk Seri Anwar, Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah dan Lim Guan Eng.

Tidak dapat dibayangkan jika pemimpin-pemimpin seperti Datuk Seri Anwar, Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah dan Lim Guan Eng masih sanggup bekerjasama dengan Tun Dr Mahathir setelah beliau dibuktikan telah mengkhianati dengan seteruk-teruknya mereka.

Don't just raise fines, get public involved in enforcement during MCO

 

Raising fines for those flouting the standard operating procedures (SOP) during the movement control order (MCO) may not be effective as long as goalposts in the way laws are interpreted by stakeholders keep shifting.

Some politicians are not leading by example and not being held accountable for flouting the MCO SOP, and this is fueling anger in society.

The powers of enforcing a law in all aspects lie with the relevant agency. The interpretation in the manner it is carried out is left to the discretion of those who have powers to carry it out.

The executive and the legislative branches of the democratic system and government set the policy but do not interfere with the manner and mode on how enforcement is carried out. Over time, the balance of the way of enforcement, its shortcomings with all the pros and cons will be ventilated guided by persuasive guides on precedents, trite law and natural justice.

We must trust the enforcement system to find its balance on its own evolution. Officers entrusted with these powers exercise it with experience, knowledge of the law and a sense of fair play. The law never intended policymakers from any other branch of the democratic system to be involved, although there is a very thin line of accountability and responsibility between these branches.

The executive and the legislative, which are usually fused, need to constantly exercise this separation of powers to allow independent decisions to be made by the relevant enforcement agency. They only step in when there are serious controversies. The courts will have the final say on any issue if and when it is brought before it.

The police being the most significant enforcement agency during this crisis, almost always is caught between a rock and a hard place whenever it deals with the executive and the political landscape in general. This is because the overall political landscape wields great influence over them.

This is a cold fact and must be addressed through parliament if we are to have a better separation of powers when it comes to enforcement decisions that need to be applied without fear or favour.

The recent inconsistent decisions on religious gatherings, processions, SOPs that are inconsistently applied to different segments of society, etc are part of the ongoing problem.

We need the police to be neutral, fair, patient and firm in enforcing the law. It will win the hearts and minds of the people, and that will be crucial in the days ahead in the war against this unseen enemy.

Religious and cultural events are sensitive issues that can rile up communities when intervening factors prevent them and those concerned from fulfilling their obligations. It is understandably difficult for those who practice their faith dutifully, piously and emotionally. However, neither can it be an excuse nor an exception to the rule.

The rule of law must prevail, especially when the covid cases are presently on the rise and difficult to control. The inconsistency in enforcement can demoralise society, notwithstanding the fact that it fuels others not to comply with the SOP on masks and social distancing.

The problem can be further compounded when the enforcers themselves empathise with these segments of society as they are intertwined within the same community and beliefs. It is understandable but should be weeded out.

Both the executive and the enforcers of the law must understand what needs to be done without fear or favour irrespective of political bases. This requires strong and practical leadership. It must set aside partisan politics for the good of the nation.

It is also clear that the present approach of complete lockdowns is crippling the economy and may cause irreversible damage. This can be equally as lethal as the pandemic.

The way forward requires a change in paradigm in the lockdown measures but allowing society's socio-economic needs to stay above water.

The community and the relevant agencies need more data and profiling of those being infected. This profiling information must be by location, time, date and general activities of those infected in an area. Enforcement can then move in tandem in the strictest interpretation available.

The public must also be encouraged to assist enforcement agencies by providing audio and visual evidence, this will be more effective than raising fines. With their smartphone devices, the public will be the eyes and ears of the police, becoming an effective tool of enforcement that will ensure strict compliance. - Mkini

---

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor, G Selvakumar and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

Thomas revelations bode ill for Dr M's legacy

 

The latest revelations by former attorney-general Tommy Thomas on the conduct of Dr Mahathir Mohamed in the finals days of the Pakatan Harapan government augur badly for the legacy of the former two-time premier.

But, as we already know and as the man himself has often maintained, Mahathir cares little for his legacy.

Maybe so, but what Thomas has disclosed in his book, My Story: Justice in the Wilderness, which is scheduled to be released today, ought to have put paid to Mahathir's new political outfit's (Pejuang) hopes of contesting GE15 under the logo of Amanah, a Pakatan Harapan component.

The Registrar of Societies on Jan 6 rejected the application for recognition by Pejuang, a new party initiated by Mahathir after he was expelled by Bersatu, the latter which he also founded in 2016 to fight Umno.

Pejuang's application for registration as an official party was filed in August last year.

If not approved by the time of GE15, Pejuang's incumbent MPs would have to contest as independents.

The party would prefer to contest under a known symbol and has suggested that perhaps Amanah would be amenable.

There are leaders in Amanah who view Mahathir as a credible leader but it would be difficult to countenance that position after what Thomas has revealed in his book.

Distress and dismay have risen among the leaders of Harapan and the legions which elected them, in proportion to what is seen as the growing incompetence and illegitimacy of the ruling Perikatan Nasional (PN) in the face of a raging Covid-19 pandemic.

In tandem with this negativity, there has arisen recrimination and regret over the way the Harapan government was ousted by PN.

Inevitably, the inclination to fix the blame for the ouster has devolved around a target.

Thomas' book and what it discloses about Mahathir's actions in the last week of February 2020 will place the former PM squarely in the crosshairs of those who see the 22-month tenure of Harapan as a time of diabolical frustration of a long-awaited opportunity for major reform to an ossified system.

Increasingly, critics see Mahathir's ambivalence about their reform agenda as the main cause of the Harapan government's unravelling.

Certainly, the PKR and DAP components of the current Harapan Plus opposition coalition would now be averse to extending Mahathir's lease on political life after reading Thomas' book.

Since Harapan's downfall, Mahathir has comported himself like he harbours hopes of a third stint as PM even as incumbent premier Muhyiddin Yassin hangs on to power by dint of a nebulous parliamentary majority.

That deportment will look tawdry in the wake of Thomas' book because his memoir portrays Mahathir as an amoral manipulator of fluid situations and shady operatives, the better to achieve his less-than-honourable aims.

Thomas' description of Mahathir's sequence of actions in the final days of the Harapan government fingers him as primarily responsible for the implosion of the Harapan administration.

Thomas is conflicted in assigning blame because of the gratitude he felt towards Mahathir for appointing him as AG in June 2018, and sticking to the choice despite an initial bout of jitters.

Thomas' appointment was historic in that it was the first time a private legal practitioner was named for the office.

Hitherto, the details of the drama that played out in the last few days of that fateful February month when Harapan fell are shrouded in mystery chiefly because its central players, like Azmin Ali and Muhyiddin, contrived to say little or nothing about it in public.

Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin and Senior Minister Azmin Ali

In contrast, Mahathir, another principal in the drama, has from time to time held forth on what had happened but his spiel was suspect because of its self-serving quality.

The public was left to puzzle over what had actually transpired at the Sheraton Hotel, the epicentre of the momentous events that led to the formation of a new government, which was installed between March 1 and 8.

So opaque were the events leading to the takeover by the PN government that pundits could not say for sure who did what when.

Now Thomas' book lifts the shroud, enough to apportion blame for it.

Not least of the criticisms of Mahathir's conduct is the opinion of Thomas that Mahathir's decision to force the resignation of the Harapan cabinet resulted in the cashiering of then health minister Dzulkefly Ahmad of Amanah.

From left: Ex-deputy health minister Dr Lee Boon Chye, ex-health minister Dzulkefly Ahmad and Health DG Dr Noor Hisham Abdullah

Dzulkefly, with his assistant Dr Lee Boon Chye of PKR, and the health director-general Dr Noor Hisham Abdullah, had been doing a good job throughout the month of February in managing the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic when the chop came for Dzulkefly and Lee at the end of the same month.

In retrospect, the performance of Dzulkefly and Lee in their portfolio was the brightest spot of an overall Harapan governance that was warped by Mahathir's ambivalence and eventually betrayed by his duplicity.

Their performance mirrored Harapan's capacity for good governance.

Not all Haparan's appointees were comparably equipped but the duo's performance showed what Harapan is capable of.

In contrast, the PN government is a sink of mediocrity.

---

TERENCE NETTO has been a journalist for more than four decades. - Mkini

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.