What a hypocrite! The most corrupt and immoral teaching us about fighting corruption? Damn … well, at least he is honest about it ~ “If we view corruption as truly unethical and immoral behaviour, …” so, obviously he doesn’t view corruption as truly unethical and immoral, and it’s just UMNO culture, that’s all. SO it’s perfectly the right thing to do! Now we know why, he believes that corruption is ok. Weirdo! Start by looking at the values in UMNO. Corruption, abuse of power, hypocrisy, slander, spin, incitement of racism and religious extremism – you name it UMNO practices it. Mr Najib, you don’t walk the talk. As the saying goes , all words and no deeds is like a garden full of weeds.
French human rights lawyers William Bourdon and Joseph Breham have accepted the invitation of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim to come to Kuala Lumpur to brief the Malaysian Parliament on the latest status of the Scorpenes corruption trial, provided that they get an assurance from Prime Minister Najib Razak’s government they will not be deported or be subjected to physical harassment and intimidation.
“Both William and Joseph told Anwar they will come but they would like an assurance from the BN government that they won’t be turned away at the airport and their time wasted. They also want to be assured that their physical safety will not be threatened,” PKR vice president Tian Chua toldMalaysia Chronicle.
“These are reasonable requests since they will be coming at the invitation of a Malaysian parliamentary leader and for the purpose of updating the country’s lawmakers and the people on the latest findings on a matter of great national importance. Even though it might be ‘sensitive’ to Najib and Umno, the Malaysian people have a right to know how their money has been spent. If Najib and Umno are innocent, they should not fear.”
In Paris to attend a seminar, Anwar also met and invited lawyers acting for Malaysian NGO SUARAM and French naval firm DCNS to Kuala Lumpur. Bourdon and Breham act for SUARAM, while Olivier Metzner who acts for DCNS has yet to reply.
“As Leader of Opposition in Parliament, I write to request your presence as lawyers acting for SUARAM, a party to the ongoing inquiry, to deliver a briefing on the status and development of the inquiry to interested Malaysian Members of Parliament during this current session of the Malaysian Parliament which will run until 22″ November 2012. I propose to invite all members of the Malaysian Parliament to this briefing,” Anwar wrote in a letter dated October 2, 2012.
The French trial is a hot potato for Prime Minister Najib Razak’s government and his Umno party.
Najib and Umno have been accused of obtaining illegal kickbacks in the federal government’s RM7.3billion acquisition of 2 Scorpene submarines from DCNS. The deal was sealed in 2002, when Najib was the Defense minister, and the ships sent to Malaysian waters in 2010.
Although Najib and his party have denied wrongdoing, they have resisted calls from civil rights groups to investigate and audit the deal, forcing SUARAM to go to Paris to file a corruption complaint against DCNS in 2010.
If found guilty, DCNS may have to compensate the Malaysian people for the over-pricing caused by the alleged illegal commission paid to Najib and his Umno party. As for Najib and his party, they would have little choice but to finally face up to the music.
The Najib administration has also acted harshly against SUARAM and its French legal team. Bourdon, who was in Kuala Lumpur with his wife last year to update Malaysian groups on the case, was suddenly deported. Breham was forced to hold a media briefing in Bangkok earlier this year, with the Malaysian immigration authorities refusing to give valid reasons for barring him from entering the country.
‘Traitor’ SUARAM backfires: International NGOs zoom in on M’sia
SUARAM too is facing tremendous pressure from the Najib administration.
It has been accused of obtaining foreign funding including from Jewish billionaire George Soros to topple the Umno-BN government. The Companies Commission of Malaysia has also threatened to charge SUARAM for “misleading accounts”, which the NGO has denied.
SUARAM has vowed to fight back, denouncing Najib for “persecution” due to the Scorpenes trial.
Indeed, Najib’s heavy-handedness against SUARAM may backfire although he is not expected to ease up, given that his political survival is at stake. The uneven David vs Goliath battle has attracted the attention of top global civil rights groups such as Amnesty International.
“Amnesty is concerned that the recent government actions against SUARAM appear to be linked to the organisation’s legitimate work, in particular a corruption case which it has brought before the French courts,” Amnesty had said in a recent statement.
“The government began these actions against SUARAM four weeks after the organisation disclosed new information from documents made available by the French public prosecutor’s office, which implicate Malaysian officials in the corruption allegations.”
French trial picks up speed
With the summer holidays over, the French trial is expected to pick up speed. Just days ago, SUARAM revealed that its lawyers had succeeded in serving their first summons on a witness in a list that includes Najib, his close aide and alleged proxy for receiving the commission Razak Baginda, as well as current Defense minister Zahid Hamidi.
Although SUARAM did not name the witness who had been subpoenaed, speculation is rife it was Jasbir Singh Chahl, who is allegedly Baginda’s right-hand man. Baginda, who was also a negotiator in the Scorpenes acquisition, has been accused of taking an illegal kickback from DCNS amounting to at least 114 million euros.
Maybe Najib himself, Zahid or Baginda!
Whether or not it is really Jasbir, the subpoena is a major breakthrough. There are many high-profile witnesses due to take the stand in Paris, including Najib himself, Razak Baginda and current Defense minister Zahid Hamidi.
Najib, who was the Defense minister in 2002, had hammered through the purchase despite huge public outcry that the submarines were too expensive and not suitable for Malaysia’s shallow coastline. Despite years of lobbying for a full audit, SUARAM failed to get any response from the Umno-controlled federal government.
In 2010, as similar accusations of corruption against DCNS erupted in Taiwan and Pakistan, SUARAM decided to file a complaint in France, where it is illegal for anyone to offer illicit commissions or kickbacks to induce a deal.
If found guilty, DCNS may have to compensate the Malaysian people for the over-pricing caused by the alleged illegal commission paid to Najib and his Umno party.
Najib has denied all wrongdoing but in 2011, he deported William Bourdon, the renowned French human rights lawyer acting for SUARAM when the latter flew into Malaysia to brief his client. Earlier this year, SUARAM’s legal team were forced to meet their client in Bangkok amid concerns of similar harassment by the Malaysian authorities.
If the UMNO wants to return to power Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak today said that if the country wanted to eradicate corruption, it should not only look at abuse of power in public offices.What utter rubbish. Abuses in public office is blatant corruption and must be eradicated. There is a difference between corruption and capitalism. While both can cause billions of losses and suffering, there is definitely a difference. We must pass a law that prime ministers must be of a minimum IQ!!
reward merit. Sycophants and courtiers belong to Mughal and colonial eras.UMNO leaders with talent and commitment know they might never get a shot at the top job. They console themselves by promoting their professional careers even when there is a clear conflict of interest. If they were a part of a dynamic, meritocratic party that fast-tracked talent, they would become assets, not rent-seekers. Bipolar syndrome, hallmark of most leaders Malaysia has produced.corruption is Unethical and Not moral …when a person uses his own assets,no one is bothered..when he uses not his own assets,especially Public assets(including public $) the people will be bothered… Acquiring wealth/ assets with unethical means IS also immoral & a form of corruption
Obsessive xenophobia, that seems to provide much adrenalin to Najib whenever he holds forth, cannot substitute for an effective cure for the many ailments that afflict Malaysia just as his orchestrated campaign in cyberspace to pour vitriol on his critics is no substitute for reasoned debate. Let him concentrate on his record in office. It is neither as bright as he would have the world believe nor as pitch dark as his detractors paint it. This, when all is said and done, is what is at stake in the elections.
To reverse its electoral fortunes, theUMNO must re-invent itself as a modern, democratic party that places merit above loyalty. The government has the solemn duty to reduce corruption and it has FAILED big time! Are you trying to give excuses for the pathetic performance of government leaders? Time for a NEW government in Putrajaya – maybe BN can become a political power again if it REFORMS as the opposition.
the power the Constitution: as head of the government and the Council of Ministers he must Najib have accountability – not just the latter. This will boost good governance.
The MACC has said that its investigations against a state leader for corruption has met with difficulties due to ‘archaic laws’.
The MP for Kubang Kerian Salahuddin Ayub is quoted yesterday as saying
“We were told at the meeting that investigations against a state leader (ketua negeri), a person well known for having a lot of wealth, could not proceed due to shoddy laws and despite six investigations papers having been opened.”
The MACC has not until now denied this.
The MACC should not look for excuses to justify its failure to bring these leaders to book. The question of admissibility of evidence is a matter that should be left to the court to decide.
The MACC should charge where there is evidence and let the court decide. If the courts throw out the case because of a problem with the law, then it would be for Parliament to move to correct the position. But without trying, it is simply ridiculous to justify not prosecuting on these grounds alone.
What you are in effect saying is that you know there is corruption, you know who is corrupt but you can’t do anything about it and you have been sitting on it and not doing anything about it until now.
Such excuses are laughable to say the least. It is shameful. This will again cast a great shadow of doubt over the impartiality and effectiveness of the MACC.
Further, the MACC should have brought this problem to the attention of the Attorney General much earlier.
I call upon the Attorney General to state, as Public Prosecutor whether this problem has been brought to his attention. If it has, he must tell us what he has done about it, and if he has done nothing, he must also state why?.
The problem is one which relates to investigation and prosecution. The Attorney Generals’ chambers must take full responsibility for it as these are matters within its purview and give us a complete account of how it is they propose to deal with it as soon as possible.
The duality of power and accountability between party and government is inherently toxic. Every act of alleged corruption in governments –opaque defence deals and arbitrary tender allocations – can be traced back to this duality.When there are two centres of power with contrasting objectives, the corrupt prosper have given it an outside chance of doing so – internal political reforms are a condition precedent. Three are vital:
Those who watched the first televised debate between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, the two contenders in the US presidential elections, would have learnt a thing or two about how leaders in a democracy can exchange sharp arguments on issues of concern and interest to the electorate within the bounds of civility. And they would have contrasted this with the speeches
To Believe or Not to Believe: Najib condemns Corruption
by Nigel Aw@http://www.malaysiakini.com
Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak today said that if the country wanted to eradicate corruption, it should not only look at abuse of power in public offices. Instead, he said values of society must also be taken into account in combating graft.
“If we view corruption as truly unethical and immoral behaviour, we cannot stop at just looking at public officials and politicians who abuse their powers – we must go much further than that,” he said during the launch of the 6th International Association of Anti-Corruption Authorities Conference in Kuala Lumpur this evening.
Najib said often times, people were only concerned about abuse of power in government and public service whenever corruption is raised.
“What is often neglected, however, is the fact that corruption and corrupt behaviour is entangled deep with the moral fabric of all societies.We must be able to take an unrelenting honest look at the values prevalent in our societies,” he said.
Najib pointed out that in some countries where severe punishment was meted out for corruption, it has not proven entirely effective. As such, he said it was necessary to cultivate social norms and values that are critical of corruption and a sense of duty.
“It is critical, therefore, people in positions of power and authority to exemplify the values they wish their constituents would follow,” he said.
‘Is the pursuit of profits corruption?’
Explaining further, Najib said while society demands public accountability, they endorse the pursuit of greed and unmitigated material successes. “In other words, we forgive greed, until that greed spirals out of control and the effects reach beyond the handful of individuals perpetuating it,” he said.
“Is the unbridled and ruthless pursuit of extraordinary profits a form of corruption?I believe that if we see corruption as fundamentally a moral problem, therefore anything that promotes selfish interest at the expense of the well-being of others is morally wrong,” he said.
He added that it was vapid self interest and greed that was truly at the heart of corruption.
In another segment of the same debate, the voice seems to cue Romney to use the word support. After reviewing the tapes, MSNBC surmised that a microphone had picked up the whispers of a member of the audience. In an e-mail to Florida’s Sun-Sentinel, then Romney spokesperson Kristy Campbell deferred to the network by way of comment. Speculation persisted that the audience member was a helper or handler using a covert ultrasound-based communicator. Which, technically, could work.
Holosonics of Watertown, Massachusetts, manufactures a system called the Audio Spotlight that converts ultrasound to audible sound via a narrow targeted beam heard only by its recipient, who doesn’t need to wear a receiver. The transmitter can be as small as a cell phone. The catch is the helper needs the recipient in his line of sight. If the narrow beam of ultrasound grazes a microphone en route to a debater, the helper’s whispers would be amplified for the world to hear.
To guard against such helpers, the Commission on Presidential Debates employs an individual known as Frequency Coordinator armed with a spectrum analyzer to detect radio communication. The spectrum analyzer wouldn’t detect an Audio Spotlight. According to Joseph Pompei, founder and president of Holosonics, “The Audio Spotlight system uses only ultrasound, which is just a special kind of sound wave, so there is no specific radio frequency signature for a spectrum analyzer to see.” Another means of debate subterfuge is covert wireless radio. In the 1970s, the CIA created such a communications device, the SRR-100, for its operations officers in Moscow. The receiver was strapped under the officer’s arm or onto his back, sprouting a wire that looped around his neck and was hidden by his collar. A second wire was encased in a Q-Tip-head-size earpiece placed in his actual ear, which in turn was entirely concealed by a silicone cast of the ear. Today spread-spectrum encrypted technology has been added to the audio–against it, the spectrum analyzer is essentially defenseless. And the receiver and earpiece have been miniaturized into a single earpiece so small that an inspector would need an otoscope to detect its presence in a debater’s ear. Otoscopes are not used at the debates. Nor are the debaters inspected.
As Commission on Presidential Debates executive director Janet Brown told me, “You have to assume that a code of honor is being followed.”
That’s the extent of the Commission on Presidential Debate’s rules with regard to cheating.
Infrared light beam communicators would also do the trick in the presidential debates, as I reported four years ago. At the time I investigated applicable systems costing hundreds of thousands of dollars, including the “Voice of God,” which transmitted messages to terrorists so it seemed they were hearing from Allah himself. Today there’s an infrared communicator that debaters can get on Amazon for $34.95, not including shipping.
Finally, no list of debate-cheating techniques would be complete without the old Get-a-Look-at-the-Test-Ahead-of-Time method. The moderators’ questions aren’t exactly kept under armed guard. According to a staffer at the PBS office of Jim Lehrer, moderator of tonight’s presidential debate in Denver, no countermeasures were put in place beyond the premises’ standard security.
Fortunately, deviation from the code of honor on the part of candidates for political office remains only a hypothetical.