Important XXXXroads

Four XXXX because for some key people involved, a wrong turn may result in DEATH -- and in Chinoserie tongue, "four" is "Sei" meaning "the end of a mortal life on Mum GoOD earth".

But of greater importance is the potential death of a nation, so citizens of Malaysia have to keep an end when approaching key road junctions lest they make a wrong turn, like turning right when you're leftist like Desi. If you do not what I'm writHing about, that's part of the purpose of my exercise -- to wake up some lazy BUMmer Malaysians to the fact that many events unfolding in NegaraKu have "more than meets the eye". Sometimes"aMore" substitutes for "more" and you're on the right-er path.

From theSun, best coverage of the trial from among MSM, I subscribe for a copy, unlike cheapO Malaysian kind who line up at seven11 at unearthly hour of sevenAM to get a freebie. Do they also gift out tehtarik ah?:(

WEB EDITION :: Local News
Sirul: I was made out to be the "black sheep"
by S. Tamarai Chelvi

SHAH ALAM (Feb 4, 2009) : Cpl Sirul Azhar Umar broke down today when he said he was made out to be a “black sheep” (scapegoat) to be sacrificed to protect the plans and intentions of others who are not present in court to face the consequences of their act.

Sirul, who was wiping his tears while reading his 15-page statement from the dock, said he never knew the victim, Altantuya Shaariibuu, or Abdul Razak Baginda Abdullah and never had any dealings with either of them, personally or otherwise.

Sirul Azhar, 37, of the Bukit Aman Special Action Unit (UTK), tugged at the heartstrings of those in the High Court here by appealing that he not be found guilty and sentenced to death.“I don’t have any reason to cause hurt, what more to take the life of the victim so cruelly. I beg the court, not to punish me and to complete their plans against me,” he said, adding that throughout the proceedings, he had observed that a few key prosecution witnesses, especially from the federal serious crime division (D9), did not tell the truth and constantly changed their stories when cross-examined.

"I have observed this carefully, as to me their actions are to get me convicted," he said. "I appeal to the court, which has the powers to determine if I live or die, not to sentence me so as to fulfill others' plans for me," he said while wiping away tears. His younger sister and an older cousin who were in the public gallery were also seen wiping away tears.

Clad in a black suit and black shirt, Sirul paused several times to compose himself while reading from his statement. After he finished reading, he sat down on the bench in the dock and wiped his tears.

Earlier, Sirul was also emotional when he related how he was ordered by ACP Mastor Mohd Ariff to come back to Malaysia, while he was on duty as the prime minister’s personal bodyguard at a hotel in Islamabad, Pakistan on Nov 5, 2006.“Mastor ordered me to come back to Malaysia on the grounds that my former wife ... lodged a police report against me and I needed to go back to settle the problem, “ said Sirul, his voice breaking.

Earlier, in his defence, Sirul said first accused Chief Inspector Azilah Hadri told him that DSP Musa Safri told him (Azilah) of a friend who was facing “woman problem”, while they were on their way to Musa’s friend’s house in Bukit Damansara.He said Azilah also said “DSP Musa’s friend” is of high position, a businessman and wealthy. However, he said, Azilah did not reveal the identity of “DSP Musa’s friend” (Razak).He said Azilah told him a Chinese woman and a Chinese man, believed to be her brother, had caused a disturbance and chaos in front of the man’s house and that the woman was a former girlfriend of the man, whom he referred to as “DSP Musa’s friend”.Sirul said according to Azilah, he had promised DSP Musa that he would help his “friend” by patrolling around the bungalow area from time to time during after-duty hours to prevent the woman and man from causing chaos in front of the house.He said at that stage, Azilah asked him whether he could help to patrol if Azilah had official duty outside Kuala Lumpur and if Sirul did not have any official duty.Sirul Azhar said the agreement to make rounds of the vicinity of Abdul Razak's house was a favour as he knew Musa was a superior officer and it was also a directive from Azilah who was also his superior officer.He said along the way, Azilah also told him that a woman and a man believed to be the woman's elder brother, both Chinese, had caused a disturbance outside DSP Musa's friend's house.

Sirul (front), and Azilah being brought to the Shah Alam High Court for thetrial yesterday. (Visualise the pic OK! I can't spend precious time at the crossroad painting it for Thee, can I? -- Desi:(

He said according to Azilah, the woman was a former lover of DSP Musa's friend.He also admitted having gone to Hotel Malaya (where Altantuya stayed) together with Azilah that day to meet the Mongiolian woman but they were unsuccessful as Azilah did not know her room number. Sirul Azhar said on Oct 19, 2006, Azilah called him at 8.45pm and told him to come to Abdul Razak's house to provide assistance in case the Chinese man and woman who caused disturbance became violent. He said when he reached the house (on foot as he had parked on the curb), he saw Azilah talking to a Chinese woman and an Indian man, and when Azilah saw him, he motioned to him to get into a red Wira Aeroback.

"Not long after, I saw the Chinese woman walk towards the car followed by Azilah and the Indian man. The Chinese woman opened the back passenger door and got in," Sirul Azhar. He said the car driven by Azilah headed towards a junction and he asked Azilah to drop him off so he could get his car. He said Azilah then followed his car and stopped at a bus stop and he met Azilah and was told that the woman had shown good behaviour and repsonse after being advised not create a disturbance at Abdul Razak's house."I told Azilah that in view of the situation being under control and I had no further role I wanted to go home. Azilah said OK. After that I continued driving from Jalan Damansara and turned towards the Jalan Duta government offices complex.

"Before turning into the New Klang Valley Expressway, I called Azilah to ask if I had to patrol around DSP Musa's friend's house the following day as Azilah would be on duty in Putrajaya."Azilah said he had advised the Chinese woman and she had agreed not to create any disturbance in front of DSP Musa's friend's house anymore. Azilah told me I need not make a patrol the next day," he said. Sirul Azhar said he arrived at the house at 10pm and left at midnight and headed towards the Jalan Damansara toll plaza, on to the Jalan Duta toll plaza and on to Kampung Baru, Kuala Lumpur to 'bersahur' (post-midnight meal).

Earlier in the trial, the prosecution had put forward the route as an alternative route for Azilah and Sirul Azhar to take Altantuya to Puncak Alam from Abdul Razak's house.Azilah in his defence also did not state that Sirul Azhar had gone home but rather Sirul Azhar had followed him to Bukit Aman and had agreed to send Altantuya to the hotel that night. Azilah and Sirul are charged with murdering the 28-year-old Mongolian woman in Mukim Bukit Raja between 10pm on Oct 19, 2006 and 1am the following day. Justice Datuk Zaki Md Yasin on Oct 31 last year ordered them to enter their defence.

Sirul Azhar said before leaving for Pakistan on Oct 31, 2006 for protection duty for the Prime Minister, he had left his vechicle, a jeep, at the car park in the Bukit Aman compound and left the keys with a Sergeant Rosli. "Before leaving for Pakistan, I had cleaned my car and arranged things in it including a pair of red slippers which I placed beside a large plactic box in the rear of the vehicle," he said.However, he said, the slippers presented as evidence (which had stains of Altantuya's blood) were not his as the colour was different and were not the same size as his feet.Relating how he was taken to the scene of the crime, Sirul Azhar said ASP Tonny Lunggan (the investigating officer in the case) had instructed several police officers, who had a video camera, to go to an area on Nov 6, 2006, but were there for only a short while as it getting dark.

Sirul Azhar said the next day ASP Zulkarnain Samsudin (a prosecution witness) had asked him to make a confession by saying "...it's like this, Sirul, if you agree you follow me, you identify the items, you hold and point towards them while the photographers takes photos, I can help you and we will not take this matter to court."He said without asking any questions he followed several police personnel to his house and there he saw Zulkarnain open the door using a key which he had handed over to ACP Mastor Mohd Ariff (a senior UTK officer) while in Pakistan. However, Sirul Azhar said the key produced in court was not his house key as the key (produced) was shiny while his key was faded.

He said while in the house he was forced to hold a jacket and point to Altantuya's belongings to be photographed and at that time he was not read any 'caution' by any police officer. After Sirul finished reading his statement, his lawyer, Hasnal Redzua Merican, said the defence would not call any other witness and closed its case.Judge Mohd Zaki fixed Feb 16 and 17 for submissions before he makes a decision.

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

From The Star Online:
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/2/5/nation/3200276&sec=nation


Thursday February 5, 2009
Nizar leaves fate of govt in Sultan’s hands

IPOH: Perak Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin failed yesterday to get the royal consent to dissolve the state assembly and call for fresh elections.

After a one-hour-and-40-minute meeting with Sultan Azlan Shah in Istana Kinta, a serious-faced Nizar emerged at 5.35pm and told reporters waiting outside the palace gates: “I have sought an audience with the Sultan and requested for the dissolution of the state assembly. I will leave it to him to decide whether to allow the dissolution.”

Stating his stand: Nizar (centre) speaking to reporters at a press conference at his office yesterday. — Bernama (Visualise2, yeah, use thy God gifted imagine-NATION ala Beatles-- Desi:)

At a press conference earlier, Nizar announced that the remaining 28 Pakatan Rakyat assemblymen had agreed to fresh elections, in view of the current situation.
“As you all know, two of our exco members have been pinched from us by Barisan Nasional,” said Nizar who also blamed Barisan for orchestrating the entire “fiasco”.

In the middle of the press conference, which was delayed by two hours to 3pm, Nizar received a phone call from the wife of Bota assemblyman Datuk Nasarudin Hashim.

After the call, Nizar said that Nasarudin’s wife Datin Umi said her husband had been kidnapped and brought to see Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.

At a second press conference later in the evening, Nizar appealed to the Ruler to give the people the right to choose their government. “I told Tuanku that if we follow the majority, there would be crossovers from time to time and it would not solve the problem.”

Nizar also said the Sultan would need some time to study laws such as the state constitution before announcing his decision. “I am sure whatever decision he makes will be fair to the people of Perak and all political parties,” said Nizar.

Nizar added that the present government was still in power and would perform its duties as usual. He later insisted that the two former PKR members had resigned as assemblymen and that their seats – Behrang and Changkat Jering – were now vacant.

The same applied to Hee Yit Foong as she too had resigned as Jelapang assemblyman.
“She had tendered her resignation to the state,” he said.

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

And from mGf KIM QUEK, highlighted at cpiasia.net:)


Pakatan Riding Over Storms in Perak


Columnists
Written by Kim Quek
Thursday, 05 February 2009 08:51

February 4, 2009: Just as Malaysians were held spellbound by another round of the country's unique brand of "missing persons" politics, we are hit by another bombshell – the record-smashing move by the Election Commission (EC) to overrule a decision by the Speaker of a legislature to accept the resignations of members of the legislature.

When newly installed election EC chairman Abdul Aziz Yusof announced on Feb 3 that two assemblymen of the Perak state assembly should continue to hold their positions as assemblymen, despite having received a notification from the Speaker that these two have resigned, the EC was in fact telling the Speaker: your acceptance of those two resignations is no damn good, we don't recognize it, so the two will remain assemblymen, and there wouldn't be any by-election.

Sure, the EC did not use these exact words to reject the speaker's decision; in fact, it said that the "EC decided that it cannot establish that vacancies have occurred", and went on to say "we have decided that both the seats will remain with the incumbents" and that there would be no necessity to call for by-election. But doesn't this amount to a flat rejection of the Speaker's acceptance of those resignations, as without repudiating the Speaker's decision, EC had no reason to declare that there was no vacancy?

But since when have we amended the law to allow the EC to take over the function of the Speaker to accept or not to accept the resignation of members of the legislature? What legal standing does EC have to claim a say over the membership of a legislature? What legal power does EC have to interfere in the exercise of the speaker's authority to run the affairs of the legislature? And isn't the decision over the suspension or resignation of a legislator the exclusive domain of the Speaker?

RESIGNATION A FAIT ACCOMPLI

When Speaker V. Sivakumar received the letters of resignation from PKR assemblymen Jamaluddin Radzi and Osman Jailu, he had every right to accept these resignations and thereafter to inform EC of these two vacancies. The act of resignation was considered complete when Sivakumar announced on Feb 1 that following his acceptance of those two letters, "they have stepped down as state assemblypersons with immediate effect".

Next day Feb 2 at 8:00 am, Sivakumar personally handed his letter of notification of such vacancies to the Perak state election director Adli Abdullah. So on what ground EC rejected Sivakumar's decision over the resignation of Jamaluddin and Osman? EC chairman Abdul Aziz said in a press conference on Feb 3 that soon after EC received Sivakumar's notification on Feb 2 at 8:00 am, it also received one letter each from Jamaluddin and Osman claiming that their letters of resignation were invalid. EC claimed that these two letters had given rise to doubts over the validity of the resignation, hence its decision to maintain the status quo, meaning no vacancies and no by-election.

Asked whether the two denied in their latest letters that they had signed on the resignation letters, Abdul Aziz said: "they do not deny, but they do not agree as to the date of enforcement of the letter". When a reporter asked: "so they claim the letters were invalid?" Abdul Aziz answered: "not valid, they deny the date of the letter as Feb 2, 2009 ". (Malaysiakini, Feb 3).

DISPUTE ONLY ON DATE

So, the crux of the issue is now boiled down to the date of the letter. Jamaluddin and Osman had said earlier that they had signed undated letters of resignation soon after the Mar 8, 2008 election, presumably as a pledge of loyalty to their party PKR, in default of which their resignations would be tendered.And since both had disappeared for almost a week and steadfastly failed to respond to frantic calls by PKR leaders amid swirling talks of their defections to UMNO, it should come as no surprise that the two resignation letters were delivered to the Speaker for these to take effect as agreed solution for such eventuality as pledged earlier by the PKR legislators.

The point to note is that these two did not challenge the legality of such an arrangement of resignation that apparently serves to seal the relationship between the party and its elected representatives; they only dispute the timing of using such resignation letters, possibly on the premise that they had not yet declared their defection from PKR. In fact, through separate press conferences on Feb 2 when both again failed to appear themselves as promised, their supposed representatives read out press statements that claimed that they remained PKR members and denied they had resigned. They justified their continued non-appearance by claiming they were sick.

Now that Jamaluddin and Osman have objected to the timing of these resignation letters, what should EC do – to act upon the Speaker's notification and call for by-election or accept the two letters as valid complaints and brush the Speaker's notification aside? The EC has obviously chosen the latter. This is of course a horrible plunder on the part of EC, as it has no business to butt its nose into the correctness of the Speaker's decision, whatever complaints it may receive from the parties involved. The correct procedure in case of a dispute of such nature is for the assemblymen concerned to complain to the Speaker, failing which they should seek redress through the courts, and EC should be the last body considered for settling such disputes. It is therefore unthinkable that EC should have taken upon itself in this case the role of a judge and ruled in favour of the complainants, virtually passing a verdict against the action of the Speaker.

EC BLUNDER INEXCUSABLE

The big puzzle is: how could an election body that has functioned for half a century have committed such fundamental error? What conclusion can we draw other than that the EC under the new leadership of Abdul Aziz, instead of breathing a new life to the much discredited body with a higher level of independence and integrity, has in fact fallen into a greater depth of subservience to the ruling power, taking into consideration that even the much criticized former EC chairman Rashid Rahman had the decency to publicly declare that the EC had only one option – to act on the Speaker's notification to call for by-elections?

Facing such unprecedented and unruly challenges engineered by the incumbent federal power, it gives comfort to note that the Pakatan Rakyat government of Perak is riding over these storms with a steady hand. It has wisely resorted to two trump cards of incumbency – barring the two assemblymen from the assembly to maintain the present workable majority and contemplating a snap election for the state to seek a renewed mandate from the people.


******************************************
Another pluck from cpiasia.net:):)

CPI Press statement On “The Perak Mess”


Press Statements
Written by Centre for Policy Initiatives
Wednesday, 04 February 2009 12:27

The Centre for Policy Initiatives lauds the statement by Raja Muda of Perak, Raja Dr Nazrin Shah, that the Sultan will be “neutral, nonpartisan and free of having personal interest to ensure justice for the people”.

Amidst uncertainty surrounding the resignations of Perak state assemblymen for Behrang and Changkat Jering – Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi and Mohd Osman Mohd Jailu respectively – Raja Nazrin’s assurance that his father the Sultan of Perak has always upheld the principles of justice based on the sovereignty of the law and emphasising solidarity, cooperation, consensus and consultation, is indeed timely. It is hoped that the national leadership will pay heed and take a leaf from the ruler’s book by similarly putting the interests of the rakyat first and foremost over political self-interest.

The interests of the rakyat are best served when the pivotal and watchdog institutions of state work with scrupulous integrity and are autonomous. To borrow from Raja Nazrin’s wise words, this independence “helps in enhancing the effectiveness of the check and balance mechanism”.

Public confidence in the federal government would be greater if statutory bodies such as the Malaysian Anti Corruption Agency are set free from their political masters and provided with the independence and autonomy sorely missing. No one who has examined the dismal record of the ACA and the structure of the reconstituted body will believe that much has changed by way of the political bias and partiality of the organization. Investigation of the two Perak state assemblymen, and their subsequently charge in Aug 25 last year for receiving bribes, has most unfortunately been turned to political opportunism by the Barisan Nasional – a fact clear to most Malaysians but apparently escaping the editors of the mainstream media, especially the NST and The Star.

Against the backdrop of the duo’s case coming up for hearing on Feb 10 at the Ipoh Sessions Court, Jamaluddin and Mohd Osman have been under severe duress in the present climate of intense politicking. The two representatives could face a maximum of 20 years in prison if found guilty of corruption over the RM180 million housing project in Sri Iskandar. Coffee talk throughout the country is probably now focusing on the link between the charges and the defection.

The impartiality of the Election Commission should also come under scrutiny. Only a short while ago EC chairman Abdul Aziz Yusof said that such “unique” circumstances prevailing in Perak would have to be studied by legal advisers and various experts in law, the Constitution and election regulations. Yet the EC’s quick determination now that by-elections are not necessary for Behrang and Changkat Jering leaves the public to wonder if the commission has truly upheld the principles of justice. Its ruling on the invalidity of the resignation letters has been made with undue and unseemly haste. Given the gravity of the situation, the EC’s swift but “politically correct” announcement hardly inspires any confidence. Most analysts will see it more as an expedient political manoeuvre rather than a considered and neutral finding. It is telling of how out of touch the Barisan Nasional is with palace and public opinion when Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi sees it fit to go on record to say “God willing, that may happen” on the prospect of possibly besmirched Pakatan assemblymen party-hopping. He was quoted as saying, “They want to join because they are confident of Umno’s struggle, so we will accept them.”

Presumably though after the corruption charges have been dropped! The outgoing Prime Minister appears set on leaving office on a low note in terms of his record of political integrity and the legacy he is leaving to the nation. Sadly Abdullah’s last days in office are seeing his endorsement of events which are subverting the proper spirit and procedures of law, and fraying the fabric of moral and upright governance. He had one more chance to show his commitment to clean politics and righteous government. He could have set for his own party, the larger Barisan Nasional, the opposition Pakatan Rakyat and other parties a higher standard on the contentious crossover issue. Unfortunately, he has remained steadfast to his “UMNO first and always” agenda rather than the national Malaysian one which he was entrusted with.

“He blew it” will be the verdict of history on Abdullah’s role in transforming Malaysia for the better. It is imperative that the instruments and levers of state – judicial process, electoral process, civil service, official media, etc. - must not be permitted to pander to the interests of Umno and the Barisan Nasional. The more this happens, the more damning will be the downgrade in the people’s perception of the integrity of our political leaders.

Dr. Lim Teck Ghee
Director, Centre for Policy Initiatives
4 Feb 2009