F1 wannabe-owner Tony Fernandes sold off his Caterham Formula 1 Team to a consortium of Swiss and Middle Eastern owners, who are led by former Midland and HRT F1 principal Colin Kolles.
F1: Caterham team is sold by Tony Fernandes
By Andrew Benson
Chief F1 writer
The Caterham F1 team has been sold by owner Tony Fernandes to a Swiss and Middle Eastern consortium.
The new owners will be advised by former Midland and HRT team principal Colin Kolles, and they will continue to race under the Caterham name.
Caterham in F1
Best race finish: 11th – Vitaly Petrov at the 2012 Brazilian Grand Prix
Best team finish: 10th (2010, 2011, 2012)
Former Dutch F1 driver, Christijan Albers, will take over the running of the team, assisted by Manfredi Ravetto.
“We are aware of the huge challenge ahead given the fight at the bottom end of the championship,” said Albers.
“Our target now is to aim for 10th place in the 2014 championship.
“We are very committed to the future of the team and will ensure it has the necessary resources to develop, grow and achieve everything it is capable of.”
Both Caterham drivers, Sweden’s Marcus Ericsson, and Kamui Kobayashi of Japan, have failed to collect a point from eight races and the team are last in the Constructors’ Championship.
Malaysian businessman Fernandes, who is also the chairman of Premier League club Queens Park Rangers, entered F1 four years ago with what was then called Lotus Racing.
The Oxfordshire-based team’s name was changed to Caterham in 2012 after Fernandes bought the manufacturer of lightweight sports cars. Caterham F1 will now have no links with the rest of the Caterham Group, which is still owned by Fernandes and comprises two technology companies as well as the car manufacturing arm.
Frenchman Cyril Abiteboul, who Fernandes had employed as team principal, has left the team and is reportedly returning to work for Renault Sport.
Lotus/Caterham finished 10th in the championship for their first three seasons but finished 11th last year.
Tony Fernandes also owns Premier League club Queens Park Rangers
If they fail to finish in the top 10 again this season, it will cost them millions of pounds in prize money.
Fernandes’ decision to sell Caterham F1 was based on their failure to improve their performance.
On Friday, Fernandes wrote on his Twitter account, which has now been closed: “F1 hasn’t worked, but love Caterham Cars.”
This decision self-proven that Fernandes and partners neither had the cut, intention nor strategic to own, manage and develop an F1 team right from the start.
Instead, the former music executive started the team and was gambling on the bit where deep-pocketed sponsors Petronas and Proton were to jump in and support the financial conundrum of a low caste F1 team. By the he packaged his team as ‘1Malaysia Team’.
When that failed too, he had to scrooge what ever pittance he has left over from his low-of-the-rung Queen’s Park Rangers football team, which did very poorly to remain in the premier league and eventually was relegated to barclays premier.
Fernandes singularly in a very short time manage to bastardise the ‘Caterham’ brand in several single strokes. The tried to prostitute the brand for a regional charter jet business, which did not take off despite the idea mooted back in 2010.
In short, pretentious-accented Fernandes proven himself in a very short time he cocked things up. Why? He over-sold, he had no substance, his ideas are deffective, he entered into the ill-intent to milk Petronas and Proton for money and fund his project.
It was about getting someone paying for Fernandes to promote his brand at international level, in big time.
So that he could create some controversial about this team, the competition and the industry. And eventually cash out for a premium.
Quod erat demonstratum.
New Zealand Foreign Minister Murray McCully apologises to Prime Minister John Key over the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s handling of Malaysian diplomat Muhammad Rizalman Ismail for alleged burglary and assault of a 21 years old Kiwi woman.
The New Zealand Herald story:
McCully says sorry to Key over diplomat sex case
2:04 PM Wednesday Jul 2, 2014
Crime International Politics
Murray McCully, left, and John Key.
Foreign Affairs chief executive John Allen has acknowledged his ministry bungled the case of the Malaysian diplomat accused of sexual assault.
Mr Allen said his apology to the Government was for both the shortcomings in the advice given to the Government by the ministry and its management of a serious incident.
“The ministry has fallen well short of its obligations to the Government on this occasion and we take this failure very seriously.
“It is the long-standing policy of the New Zealand government to formally request the waiver of diplomatic immunity in such cases.”
He said the ministry initiate a review of its processes for handling such cases, and said it would likely appoint an independent reviewer.
The review would focus on two areas: the informal communication with the Malaysian High Commission which left open the possibility of a different course of action to that expected by the Government and the fact that the Minister of Foreign Affairs was not sufficiently informed of events.
Earlier today, Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully apologised to Prime Minister John Key for not fully informing him about the Malaysian diplomat before Mr Key spoke publicly on the matter.
Mr McCully revealed late last night that Malaysia may have received mixed messages from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT) about whether New Zealand wanted the country to waive diplomatic immunity for Muhammed Rizalman Bin Ismail, who is facing sexual assault charges.
Watch: Malaysia will extradite suspect
The minister told a press conference this morning that the MFAT had fallen short of expectations. He said a “considered process” was underway over the misunderstanding and he could not rule out job losses.
In official talks between New Zealand and Malaysian officials, MFAT clearly stated that it wanted Malaysia to waive immunity for Ismail so he could face the charges in New Zealand.
Government released the official correspondence yesterday to confirm this.
But MFAT also engaged in a series of unofficial discussions, which led to this stance becoming more “ambiguous” for Malaysian officials.
Read more: Malaysian diplomat could still be extradited
Malaysia appeared to conclude from the informal talks that New Zealand was happy for the diplomat to return home and be court martialled instead of facing the charges in New Zealand – contrary to Mr Key’s public statement.
Mr McCully said: “I told the Prime Minister that he had not been given all of the information he should have been given. And I have taken responsibility for that and apologised to him.
“The third-person note was clear and unambiguous, but some of the discussions that occurred because of the complexity of the case would have given the Malaysian officials room to draw the conclusions they did.”
This development would fuel Opposition speculation that New Zealand had done a deal with Malaysia behind closed doors.
The minister would not reveal any further detail about the informal talks, saying it could prejudice the investigation in Malaysia.
Malaysian Foreign Minister Anifah Aman said in a discussion with New Zealand officials on May 12, “the New Zealand side had offered an alternative for the accused to be brought back to Malaysia”.
Asked about this, Mr McCully said: “I wouldn’t use those words. But I can understand having gone and looked at the material why his officials might have told him that.”
He had asked MFAT chief executive John Allen to look at MFAT’s actions and whether they were appropriate.
Mr Allen had been asked to investigate why Mr McCully and Mr Key were not given “more timely” information about the informal discussions.
He added: “The unseemly situation you saw yesterday when the Malaysian Foreign Minister and I were talking at odds with each other is something that should not have occurred? My own view is that it falls short of it falls short of the standards we should expect.”
Mr McCully said the victim and her family were also entitled to “a better standard of performance”.
The 21-year-old woman was not consulted by officials before the diplomat left New Zealand.
Ismail followed her home on May 9, where the assault took place. Police arrested him that night and he was charged the next day with burglary and assault with intent to rape.
Mr Key said the flow of information to ministers was “disappointing”.
But he said he would be “very surprised” if any officials found New Zealand’s stance to be “ambiguous”.
“In so much that there’s a degree of ambiguity in the correspondence, it’s correspondence attached to the issuing of a third party notice.
“And the third party notice is formal declaration that we’re asking the country to waive diplomatic immunity. So it’s a very clear statement of intent.”
Read the NZ Government’s letter to Malaysia here:
On 10 May 2014, MFAT had written to the High Commissioner of Malaysia not to invoke the personal immunity status on Rizalman so that the New Zealand authorities could continue investigations.
On 21 May 2014 the Malaysian High Commissioner to New Zealand replied that the Malaysian Government would not waive the personal immunity of Rizalman.
It is obvious that New Zealand authorities did not have enough evidence on Rizalman. And as a diplomat with immunity, Rizalman should not have been remanded as the investigation had been carried on for the past 7 weeks.
It was the right thing to do, to bring Rizalman back and place him under jurisdiction of the Armed Forces where they have the full legal authority to conduct a court martial under the Malaysian Armed Forces Act against one of their own officers, if the allegations are proven. Malaysian Foreign Minister Dato’ Seri Anifah Aman assured that the matter would not be ‘Swept under the carpet’ and gave full commitment that the case would be dealt accordingly.
As for now, the trust and tight working relationship between Wisma Putra and New Zealand MFAT is the key to resolve this matter without compromising the diplomatic immunity privileges.
The Cabinet decided this morning that WOII Rizalman Ismail would be sent back to Wellington, to face the authorities and the process to sought justice.
Press statement of Malaysian Foreign Minister Dato’ Seri Anifah Aman:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
FORMER MALAYSIAN DEFENCE STAFF ASSISTANT TO BE SENT BACK TO NEW ZEALAND TO ASSIST INVESTIGATION
The Government of Malaysia has decided to send back to New Zealand, Second Warrant Officer Muhammad Rizalman Ismail, former Defence Staff Assistant at the High Commission of Malaysia in Wellington, to assist in the investigation for the charges of burglary and assault with intent to commit rape. Mr. Muhammad Rizalman will be accompanied by a Senior Military Officer from the Ministry of Defence.
This decision was conveyed by YB Dato’ Sri Anifah Aman, Minister of Foreign Affairs to his counterpart, the Hon. Murray McCully, Minister for Foreign Affairs of New Zealand this afternoon.
The Malaysian Government is of the view that this decision will provide an opportunity for Mr. Muhammad Rizalman to cooperate fully and assist the New Zealand authorities in the on-going investigations on the allegations made against him. In this regard, the legal principle that one is considered innocent until proven guilty should apply to Mr. Muhammad Rizalman. The Government of Malaysia will provide legal assistance to Mr. Muhammad Rizalman if necessary.
Malaysia has complete faith in the New Zealand legal system and has full confidence that Mr. Muhammad Rizalman will be given fair treatment with dignity as provided under the law.
The Government of Malaysia’s decision is a clear testament of the excellent bilateral relations between Malaysia and New Zealand.
2 July 2014
The case involving a diplomat with the Malaysian High Commission to New Zealand Muhammad Rizalman Ismail for burglary and assault with the intent to commit rape which caused a public outcry in Kiwiland, would be treated accordingly and the Malaysian Government has no intention ‘to sweep the matter under the carpet’.
The Star story:
Published: Tuesday July 1, 2014 MYT 6:19:00 PM
Updated: Tuesday July 1, 2014 MYT 11:30:49 PM
Malaysia not sweeping NZ sexual assault case ‘under the carpet’
BY T. AVINESHWARAN
PETALING JAYA: The Malaysian Government has ensured a transparent investigation into the incident involving a defence staff assistant who was allegedly accused of sexual assault in New Zealand.
According to the Foreign Affairs Ministry in a statement on Tuesday, the Government said that it is “not sweeping the matter under the carpet”.
It said the Government acknowledged that the incident does not reflect the exemplary conduct and integrity of Malaysians serving abroad.
“The Malaysian Government is committed in ensuring the transparency of the investigation of the case. The Ministry of Defence will not hesitate to take stern action against the accused person under the Armed Forces Act 1972, if it is proven beyond reasonable doubt that the accused is responsible for his alleged misconduct,” the statement said.
In earlier reports, New Zealand was asked to drop all charges against the alleged accused, according to correspondence released by the New Zealand Government on Tuesday.
This came after its Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (Mofat) had requested that diplomatic immunity be waived for Muhammed Rizalman Ismail, 38, a defence staff assistant with the Malaysian High Commission in New Zealand.
However, according to the Foreign Affairs Ministry, they were prepared to waive diplomatic immunity of the alleged accused to enable prosecution under New Zealand law.
It said that the Malaysian High Commission in Wellington had a meeting with Mofat’s Deputy Chief of Protocol and New Zealand police officers to discuss the matter.
“During the discussion on May 12, the New Zealand side offered an alternative for the accused to be brought back to Malaysia. It was never our intention to treat the matter lightly.
“With the agreement of the New Zealand side, the accused person and his family returned to Malaysia on May 22,” said the statement.
Muhammed Rizalman was allegedly accused of sexually assaulting a 21-year-old woman at her home in Wellington.
He reportedly followed the young woman back to her home in Brooklyn on the night of May 9 and is alleged to have assaulted her with the intent to rape.
He was brought to court on May 10 for the charges of burglary and assault with intent to commit rape but has since returned to Malaysia.
The incident has created a public outcry in New Zealand, with Prime Minister John Key saying his “preference” was for the alleged accused to be tried under NZ law.
Rizalman, who is a career soldier would be dealt under the provisions of the Armed Forces Act (1972). The ATM Inspector General is expected to conduct their own investigation and sort the matter, under laws governing members of His Majesty’s Armed Forces personnel.
In his media conference Malaysian Foreign Malaysia Dato’ Seri Anifah Aman stated that New Zealand offered the diplomat to be brought back to Malaysia, and be dealt with by Malaysian authorities.
This matter was brought into discussion between the Malaysian Foreign Minister Dato’ Seri Anifah Aman and New Zealand Foreign Minister Murray McCully. The two members of the Commonwealth share common laws for criminal and conduct under military establishments.
New Zealand Foreign Minister Murray McCully’s statement after consulting his Malaysian counterpart Dato’ Seri Anifah Aman:
Murray McCully1 JULY, 2014
McCully receives Malaysian assurances
Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully has tonight spoken to Malaysian Foreign Minister Anifah to clarify any misunderstanding relating to the diplomat who was accused of an attack on a woman and the circumstance involving his return home.
“The Malaysian Foreign Minister is absolutely committed to the alleged offender facing a proper judicial process,” Mr McCully says.
“The individual concerned is a military person and the Malaysian Chief of Defence Force has established a Board of Inquiry process. Minister Anifah assured me that any material provided by New Zealand Police will be placed before the Board of Inquiry.
“The Minister made it clear that he would not allow the actions of one individual to tarnish the reputations of all Malaysian diplomats.
“It is clear to me from my conversation with Minister Anifah that his Government’s decision to decline New Zealand’s request for immunity to be lifted was driven by his Chief of Defence’s desire to put in place a robust judicial process to deal with this matter and his officials’ belief that this would be an outcome acceptable to New Zealand.
“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade has this evening provided me with the correspondence between New Zealand and Malaysian officials on this matter. While the formal request is absolutely unambiguous in seeking the lifting of immunity, it is now clear to me that officials engaged in informal communications over what is a complex case, in a manner that would have been ambiguous to the Malaysian Government.
“Due to the nature of the proceedings that lie ahead, I am unable to be more forthcoming on the matter at this stage. However, I can say that the Malaysian side have acted entirely in good faith.
“I have emphasised to my Malaysian counterpart the New Zealand Government’s commitment to justice for the victim in this case, and my colleague assures me that the Malaysian Government shares this view,” Mr McCully says.
This is a demonstration of very good understanding, trust and diplomatic relationship between the two Commonwealth cousins.
The Opposition is making a very big toss about Prof Dr Redhuan Othman’s removal as Director as University Malaya Centre for Democracy Elections (UMCEDEL) is nothing but a cheap ploy for political mileage, by distorting facts, manipulating online media postings and perpetuating the lie further via Opposition Leaders’ social media accounts.
Pro Anwarista-funded online skewed portal story:
Another blow to academic freedom, say Pakatan MPs on UM professor’s removal
BY ANISAH SHUKRY
Published: 30 June 2014
The removal of renowned political scientist Professor Datuk Dr Mohamad Redzuan Othman from Universiti Malaya’s Centre for Democracy and Elections (UMcedel) is another blow to academic freedom and impartiality in public universities, opposition lawmakers said today.
They said the former UMcedel director was impartial in his research and had criticised both Barisan Nasional (BN) and Pakatan Rakyat, but added that his impartiality was apparently not enough for BN, which was said to be unhappy with Redzuan for purportedly being opposition-friendly.
“The action by the Minister of Education is a disgrace and proves that he is unfit to be leading the main policy body to train and equip our young leaders with critical thinking and analytical minds,” DAP publicity chief Tony Pua told The Malaysian Insider.
“What is the point of conducting empirical studies to obtain reliable statistics for in-depth analysis, if one gets the sack when the conclusions are not favourable to BN?” he asked.
Pua said it was no surprise that local academics find it difficult to get their research published in international journals for peer recognition, noting that this culminated in poor international rankings.
“If the Ministry of Education cannot grant academic freedom and political impartiality to our local professors, in this case the study of political science, UM might as well shut down the entire department,” said Pua.
Pua said the ministry’s directive to Redzuan was “hardly surprising”, as it was not the first time it interfered in a university’s academic freedom.
The Petaling Jaya Utara MP noted that Professor P. Ramasamy and Dr Aziz Bari were both forcibly removed from University Kebangsaan Malaysia and International Islamic University Malaysia, respectively.
DAP’s Seremban MP Anthony Loke told The Malaysian Insider that the move showed there was no room for academic freedom in Malaysia.
“An independent academic cannot survive in our public universities. It has been proven again that any independent minded academic will face this kind of pressure, especially when their research is not in favour of the ruling party.”
He said Redzuan’s research on elections was always accurate, and anyone unhappy with the results could simply disagree with his findings, rather than prevent him from conducting future studies with UMcedel.
“Redzuan has done tremendous work in the past few years in this field of election research… even though anyone can argue or disagree with his findings, I think he should be given the freedom to conduct his research.”
Loke, who is also DAP national organising secretary, urged the government to confirm whether it had interfered in the public university.
“If it is, I call upon Education Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin to immediately retract that order and reinstate Redzuan as dean of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, and chief of UMcedel.”
DAP’s Serdang MP Dr Ong Kian Ming, a former lecturer himself, urged education ministers Muhyiddin and Datuk Seri Idris Jusoh to give their full commitment towards upholding academic freedom in higher learning institutions.
“[They must] make it clear to all civil servants and vice-chancellors that this academic freedom is a crucial part of improving our academic standards and rankings.
“Academics should not be punished for pursuing legitimate academic research including in the field of politics and political science even if the results do not seem favourable to the ruling party.”
Ong added that rather than be punished, Redzuan should be applauded for his efforts to carry out surveys on elections, a field in its infancy in Malaysia.
He pointed out that academic freedom, especially in the social sciences, was an integral part of pushing the research agenda in any university.
“It should be noted that UMcedel was accurate in predicting a win in the popular vote for Pakatan Rakyat in GE13 but that the BN would win the majority of seats,” he noted.
Ong said Redzuan had also chaired a UMcedel forum post-GE13, and invited himself, Umno’s Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah and PKR’s Bukit Katil MP Shamsul Iskandar.
“This kind of engagement with BN as well as PR politicians should be part and parcel of the research agenda of any institute or centre that examines and does research on elections in Malaysia,” said Ong.
Following The Malaysian Insider breaking the news of Redzuan’s removal this morning, Saifuddin, the former deputy higher education minister, announced that he was quitting as senior research fellow at UM’s Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, in solidarity with Redzuan.
In a Facebook post today, he confirmed that “certain quarters” from the Education Ministry had pressured Redzuan to quit as UMcedel director.
“But he did not make a big fuss of it. Today, his tenure as dean was also discontinued, even though he was nominated by the lecturers of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences,” wrote Saifuddin.
The Malaysian Insider understands that Redzuan’s work in UMcedel has sealed his fate at the university.
It was learnt that over the last few years, UMcedel had irked Putrajaya with its various survey findings showing the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) in a bad light.
One survey which was said to have rattled the BN was conducted during the run-up to the 2013 general election, where its findings showed that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak trailed behind opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.
The UMcedel poll showed that more than 60% of voters surveyed favoured Pakatan Rakyat’s (PR) manifesto, compared to just 50% for BN’s election pledges.
It also showed that 43% of respondents believed that Anwar was qualified to be prime minister, pipping Najib by four percentage points.
Najib had rubbished the findings and many BN supporters questioned the methodology used.
UMcedel in its reply noted that Najib had been pleased with earlier surveys after he had assumed office which painted a positive picture of him and the BN.
However, despite the projections, BN won the 13th general election but with a reduced majority, capturing 133 parliamentary seats. Pakatan, meanwhile, clinched 89 out of the 222 parliamentary seats.
Within the academic circles, it is common knowledge that Redzuan, a history professor, had often faced pressure from the Education Ministry over the centre’s findings.
The Malaysian Insider learnt that Putrajaya was also unhappy with Redzuan for purportedly being opposition-friendly, although he had on many occasions explained it by saying, “where would I be without politicians”.
Apart from surveys on the BN and Najib’s popularity, UMcedel had also conducted a study on Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and the Umno elections.
Pressure against Redzuan included interference in his university programmes that involved PR leaders, which the academic had repeatedly resisted.
According to UM’s website, Redzuan was to serve as director from February 26, 2012 to December 31, 2014. It is understood that a ceremony will be held today to hand over his post to his deputy, Profesor Dr Md Sidin Ishak. – June 30, 2014.
The truth is far from these wild and baseless accusations.
Prof. Dr. Redzuan wasn’t removed from the UMCEDEL directorship recently. He left sometime earlier in the year.
What happened recently was his tenure as the Dean for the Faculty of Arts had expired and University Malaya (UM) did not renew it. The basis for the committee, which was chaired by the Vice Chancellor and comprises several Deputy Vice Chancellors and fellow professors to advise the university not to renew Prof. Dr. Redzuan is very simple and straight forward.
Prof. Dr. Redzuan’s mandatory retirement is less than six months.
It made better sense for UM to appoint someone who could serve the post as the Dean of Faculty Arts for more than six months. Otherwise, UM had to look for another chap to fill that post when Prof. Dr. Redzuan had to go by the end of the year.
One of the UM Research Fellows as usual. over reacted.
The Star story:
Published: Monday June 30, 2014 MYT 11:33:00 AM
Updated: Monday June 30, 2014 MYT 5:31:34 PM
Saifuddin quits as UM fellow in solidarity with dismissed Prof Redzuan
BY L. SUGANYA
PETALING JAYA: Former deputy education minister Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah (pic) has announced that he is quitting his position as University Malaya (UM) senior research fellow following the controversial dismissal of a professor at the university.
“On the principal of academic freedom and solidarity, I quit as Senior Research Fellow UM today. This is in relation to Prof Redzuan’s case,” he tweeted on Monday morning.
According to reports, UM’s political science lecturer Professor Datuk Dr Mohammad Redzuan Othman was asked to quit his position as director of Universiti Malaya’s Centre for Democracy and Elections (UMcedel) by the Education Ministry as the ministry was unhappy with independent surveys and polls on Malaysian politics conducted by the professor.
It was also reported that Professor Dr Redzuan’s position as dean of the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences department was not renewed.
The reports claimed that the professor’s termination was due to the dissatisfaction over the results of Professor Dr Redzuan’s surveys and polls, which allegedly showed Barisan Nasional in a bad light.
Whether or not UM is happy with Prof. Dr. Redzuan’s performance as Dean of Faculty of the Arts and/or Director of UMCedel, the fact is that he days are numbered due to the mandatory retirement.
The usual practice is civil servants due for retirement serve their leave which they have yet to utilise up to three months ahead of their last official day in service. Hence, if Prof. Dr. Redzuan has the same amount of unutilised leave, the change-over for a new Dean which is only 55 years old at this point of time is the right and logical choice.
It is sinister to suggest Ministry of Education usurp public institute of higher learning, especially UM which is the pioneer of all universities and alma mater of the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education, to propagate political lineage especially towards BN.
The Minister had always been professional in allowing the university office bearers to run their institution professionally.
Time has proven many academicians who were very critical of leadership like Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and the decisions he had eventually came to there senses saw through at it were about. later, the manifested their support forTun Dr Mahathir’s wisdom and visions. Personalities like Dr Chndra Muzaffar, Dr. Mohd Fairus Kharuddin, Ramlah Adam and even Jomo K Sundram.
Media statement by UM Vice Chancellor
Professor Mohammad Redzuan’s tenure not extended due to election process
Referring to the current news reports, highlighting the issue of Professor Mohammad Redzuan’s tenure as the Dean of Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences not being extended, the management would like to state that this was a decision based on democratic and transparent election process.
The management would like to clarify that this election exercise is a normal process to decide the faculty deans for the upcoming term after their tenure expires on the 30th of June 2014.
The position of faculty dean is an administrative position, whereby the appointment is by the Vice-Chancellor for one term (2 or 3 years) and subject to the normal process of selection: application by academic staff, election by faculty members; followed by interview and a panel selection headed by the Vice-Chancellor.
In accordance with the University of Malaya constitution 2010, sub section 24(4) which provides the Vice-Chancellor the authority to appoint a Dean/Director for each faculty, school, centre, academy and institute, the Vice-Chancellor shall appoint the said Dean/Director from among three candidates who have received the highest scores.
From the list of the three candidates who received the highest scores from the elections held from the 10th to 12th June, an interview was conducted with each of the candidates from the 17th until 20th of June to decide on the appointment of the new Dean/Director for 2014.
Professor Mohammad Redzuan was shortlisted among two other candidates, Professor Dr Md Sidin Ahmad and Professor Dato’ Dr. Azizan Hj Abu Samah.
After lengthy deliberations, the management decided to appoint Professor Dr Md Sidin, 55, as the new Dean of Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, taking into account Professor Mohammad Redzuan’s, 59, expected retirement next year and the opportunity for Professor Dr Md Sidin to familiarize himself with his new role as Professor Mohammad Redzuan’s successor.
The management also took into consideration the the two terms served by Professor Mohammad Redzuan (3+2 years) with Professor Md Sidin’s appointment providing stability in line with the faculty’s succession plan.
The appointment of Professor Md Sidin, is timely as he was formerly the Deputy Dean (Postgraduate) Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences for 5 years and is seen as the perfect candidate to continue in the faculty’s outstanding culture of excellence in research.
Regarding the allegations of outside interference in the removal of Professor Mohammad Redzuan as the Director of University of Malaya’s Centre for Democracy and Elections (Umcedel), the management would like to take this opportunity to clarify certain issues regarding this matter.
Firstly, the management would like to categorically state that this decision was taken in the interests of the university and not in any way linked to any form of pressure from outside parties.
This decision was solely taken by University of Malaya in light of Professor Mohammad Redzuan’s impending retirement next year and to provide his deputy, Dr. Amir Saifude Ghazali an opportunity to familiarize himself with the responsibilities as a the survey body’s director.
Nevertheless, Professor Mohammad Redzuan will still be contributing his expertise as a member of UMCEDEL’s research group and as a professor in the History Department in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences.
His invaluable knowledge and wisdom will certainly be asset in grooming the upcoming political researchers in maintaning UMCEDEL’s position as the premier political research body in the country.
Professor Dato’ Dr. Mohd Amin Jalaludin
Several elected Johor Opposition leaders were behaving like traitors and rubbishing a national EPP project, at the expense of the strategic interests of Malaysians and future economic benefits and development opportunity of Malaysia in a foreign country.
Chinese Chauvinist DAP ADUN Tangkak Ee Chin Li, ADUN Mengkibol Tan Hong Ping and ADUN Bentayan Chua Wee Beng were demonstrating infront of President of Taiwan, along with PAS Central Committee member Mazlan Aliman on 18 July 2013.
They also submitted a memorandum to the Taiwanese President and demanded that Taiwan’s Kaokuang Petrochemical Co. stop investing in the RAPID project. Petronas is developing the RM60 billion EPP project in South East Johor.
This is should be seen as nothing but an economic sabotage by persons who are legislators and elected representative of the rakyat.
A London High Court Judge lashed against British Prime Minister David Cameron for his sub judicial statement against former co-editor controversial News of the World tabloid who later served Press Secretary to Prime Minister till January 2011, when the Conservative Party formed a coalition government with the Liberal Democrats in May 2010..
The Telegraph story:
Andy Coulson judge criticises David Cameron: full statement
Here is the full statement made by Mr Justice Saunders as he criticised the Prime Minister for commenting on the Andy Coulson case while the jury was still considering outstanding verdicts
6:55PM BST 25 Jun 2014
Application has been made to me to discharge this jury on the basis that it is no longer possible for Andrew Coulson and Clive Goodman to have a fair trial on the remaining two counts that the jury are considering. The application is based on the publicity last night and this morning following the verdicts delivered yesterday on count 1. Immediately after the verdict the PM issued a statement apologising for employing Mr. Coulson. That statement has been followed by pronouncements by a large number of politicians from all parties. I have not considered and will not consider anything that has been said in Parliament as that is covered by parliamentary privilege and is the sole prerogative of Parliament.
I asked for an explanation from the Prime Minister as to why he had issued his statement while the jury were still considering verdicts. I received a response from his principal private secretary which said ‘the Prime Minister was responding to the guilty verdict on hacking charges that had been delivered in open court. He did this in the light of the intense media coverage and understandable public interest. The Prime Minister was careful to make no further comment about any matters that might still be before the court.’
I accept that that was the Prime Minister’s intention but I am afraid that to an extent his explanation misses the point. He has now told the public and therefore the jury that he was given assurances by Mr. Coulson before he employed him which turned out to be untrue. The jury were not aware of that before and it is a matter which is capable of affecting Mr. Coulson’s credibility in their eyes. Mr. Coulson’s credibility is a matter which is in issue on the final two charges that the jury have to consider.
Other politicians have chosen to comment about Mr. Coulson and as a result the jury have heard of matters which were not admitted at the trial for legal reasons. I am certainly not seeking or intending to single out the Prime Minister. Politicians from across the political spectrum have seen fit to make strong comments about Mr. Coulson despite the fact that the jury are still deliberating. The Chairman of the parliamentary committee which investigated phone hacking has told the public that Mr. Coulson lied to them in the evidence that he gave.
Evidence of what Mr. Coulson said before the committee could not be given in court as it would amount to a breach of parliamentary privilege. That was the view of parliamentary counsel which was conveyed to the court and which I accepted. Again that information is capable of affecting the jury’s view of Mr. Coulson’s credibility.Mr. Langdale who made powerful and well argued submissions to me relies on the public importance of those who made the comments and the increased likelihood therefore of the jury being influenced by them. This was a significant factor in the court of appeal’s decision in the case of McCann and as he says, while the decision is an old one, the principle has not changed.
My sole concern is to ensure that justice is done. Politicians have other imperatives and I understand that. Whether the political imperative was such that statements could not await all the verdicts, I leave to others to judge. The issue for me now is to decide whether I am satisfied that Mr. Coulson will receive a fair trial on the other two counts or whether the prejudice is such that that is impossible.
I have been referred to the decision of the administrative court in contempt proceedings brought against parts of the media following the partial verdicts in the case of Levi Belfield. I am satisfied that the revelations in those reports were considerably more prejudicial to the fair trial of Belfield on the remaining counts than is the case here.
The decision in this application is entirely fact specific. Not merely is it fact specific but it is also specific to this jury who we all have been watching at work for eight months. First this jury have shown that they are entirely capable of putting out of their minds prejudicial material in reaching their decisions. At the start of this trial I heard two days of submissions on behalf of Rebekah Brooks to the effect that there was so much prejudicial material about her in the public domain that the jury would inevitably convict her and it was impossible for her to have a fair trial. She has been acquitted of all the charges against her. I trust that no one will maintain that complaint now. Everyone who has watched the jury have been impressed with their dedication and their ability to concentrate on the evidence and follow directions of law. Our legal system is based on the premise that juries comply with directions of law given by the Judge.
We should not forget the stage of the case that we have reached. The jury at the moment are deep into an analytical discussion of the evidence on counts 2 and 3 and have been for sometime. I am fortified in that belief by consideration of the notes that I have received from them. There is no reason to suppose that they will be diverted from that course. We underrate juries, and particularly this one, at our peril. It should also be born in mind that by virtue of the verdict that the jury have already returned, they are sure that Andrew Coulson has lied to them about his involvement in phone hacking. Therefore, while important public figures in defence of their own position or to attack another’s have revealed other lies told by Andrew Coulson, those revelations will have less effect on the jury.
I watched a fair amount of the news coverage last night in anticipation of this application. I have considered other material which has been referred to me. As I have made clear, I have also considered the cases of AG – v- Associated Newspapers and R – v- McCann.
I have decided that the jury should not be discharged as I am satisfied that the jury will continue to try Mr. Coulson and Mr. Goodman on the evidence that they have heard in court and solely on that evidence. That does not mean that I am not concerned about what has happened in this case. I consider that what has happened is unsatisfactory so far as justice and the rule of law are concerned. The press in court have been extremely responsible in their reporting of this case but when politicians regard it as open season, one cannot expect the press to remain silent. I accept that this case is very unusual if not unique, but the situation could occur again and I would urge that discussions take place to try and set up a better system of dealing with it.
I have considered whether, in the light of what has happened, I was correct to take partial verdicts. I am fortified in what I did by the fact that no counsel has suggested I was wrong even with the benefit of hindsight and by the fact that what I did accords entirely with the Practice Direction which lays down the procedure for taking verdicts and emphasises the necessity for the same procedure to be followed by all Judges.
Opposition Leader Ed Milliband had a field day in the House of Commons taking pot shots against Prime Minister Cameron for “Bringing a criminal into No. 1o Downing street”.
The Guardian story:
Andy Coulson, the criminal who had David Cameron’s confidence
Former No 10 spin doctor is found guilty of hacking charge while Rebekah Brooks is cleared of all counts
Lisa O’Carroll and Patrick Wintour
The Guardian, Tuesday 24 June 2014 21.32 BST
Andy Coulson, the former No 10 spin doctor, leaves the Old Bailey on Tuesday after being found guilty of conspiring to hack phones. Photograph: Will Oliver/EPA
Seven years of deceit by David Cameron’s former director of communications were undone in the Old Bailey on Tuesday, when a jury found Andy Coulson guilty of conspiring to hack into phone messages.
The verdict came at the end of an extraordinary eight-month trial that also saw Coulson’s predecessor as editor of the News of the World, Rebekah Brooks, found not guilty of phone hacking and three other charges. Her husband, Charlie, her former PA and a security guard were also found not guilty of the single charges they faced, as was the paper’s former managing editor.
But the jury’s decision in Coulson’s case prompted Cameron to make a rapid and unreserved apology – while Ed Miliband countered that the verdict demonstrated that “a criminal” had been brought into “the heart of Downing Street”.
The prime minister said he regretted his decision to employ Coulson first as communications director at the Conservative party in 2007, shortly after he left the News of the World after one “rogue reporter” from the tabloid had been jailed over hacking, and take him with him to Downing Street from 2010.
In a statement, Cameron said: “I take full responsibility for employing Andy Coulson. I did so on the basis of undertakings I was given by him about phone hacking and those turned out not to be the case. I always said that if they turned out to be wrong, I would make a full and frank apology and I do that today. I am extremely sorry that I employed him. It was the wrong decision and I am very clear about that.”
Nevertheless, questions remain about the personal judgment of Cameron and whether he put his desire to be close to Rupert Murdoch’s newspapers before a dispassionate judgment of whether it was likely that Coulson as News of the World editor had no knowledge of phone hacking to gather sensational stories.
Miliband was fierce in his criticism of Cameron’s attitude and his refusal to heed multiple “monthly warnings” from 2009, when the Guardian first reported that phone hacking at the News of the World may have been widespread.
Miliband said: “David Cameron has very, very serious questions to answer … we now know he put his relationship with Rupert Murdoch ahead of doing the right thing when it came to Andy Coulson.
“This was not small or accidental mistake. He stuck with Andy Coulson for a long period of time – it was not as if there was not information out there to arouse his suspicions. He was warned by the deputy prime minister, he saw front page stories in newspapers, he was warned by newspaper editors and still he refused to act”
No 10 recognises Cameron faces a few difficult days but believes his error will cause little long-term political damage. The man who recommended hiring Coulson in the spring of 2007, the chancellor, George Osborne, added: “We gave him a second chance but, knowing what we now know, it’s clear that we made the wrong decision.”
There were dramatic scenes outside the court as Brooks and her racehorse trainer husband, Charlie, who was also cleared, left the dock. Coulson stood emotionless as he absorbed the news. Looking faint and close to tears, Brooks walked with the support of the court’s matron and her solicitor Angus McBride.
The Brookses made no comment on the verdicts and left the Old Bailey to be confronted by a phalanx of photographers, TV crews and members of the public as she was shepherded to a waiting taxi. Asked if she had a comment to make, Brooks’s solicitor Angus McBride said she couldn’t say anything because the trial was ongoing, with verdicts still to be reached in charges faced by Coulson and the News of the World’s former royal editor Clive Goodman relating to corrupting public officials.
Coulson’s conviction brings the number of people associated with the News of the World convicted of a hacking conspiracy to five.
Before the trial three former newsdesk executives, including Greg Miskiw and James Weatherup, pleaded guilty, as did the phone hacker Glenn Mulcaire and a former reporter, Dan Evans, who confessed to hacking Sienna Miller’s messages on Daniel Craig’s phone.
Neville Thurlbeck, the News of the World’s former chief reporter and news editor, pleaded guilty after the police found the tapes he had of Blunkett’s messages in a News International safe. Sentencing is expected early next week.
The eight-month trial involving seven defendants came about following revelations first reported in the Guardian in 2009 that News of the World had routinely used hacking to get exclusives on celebrities, sports stars, politicians and royals.
Coulson resigned as editor of the paper in January 2007 after the imprisonment of the private investigator Glenn Mulcaire and the paper’s former royal editor Clive Goodman for hacking a limited number of celebrities and royal aides claiming he had to take “ultimate responsibility”. Months later, Cameron in search of a media professional with knowledge of the tabloid newspaper mind hired Coulson after he received assurances from Coulson that Goodman was a rogue.
It was not until Coulson entered the witness box that he dropped the bombshell that not only had he known about the hacking of Blunkett, but he had also listened to tape recordings of the intimate messages the cabinet minister had left on the phone of Kimberly Fortier, the then Spectator publisher. He also admitted lying to Blunkett when he failed to tell him how he knew about the affair when he confronted him at his Sheffield constituency office in August 2004.
Blunkett told the Guardian: “This is clearly not about me. This is about those who never asked to be in the public eye in the first place and who have been subject to the most grievous misreporting, personal misrepresentation and abuse, and now to further public scrutiny, simply because of the actions of people who acted illegally, brought the journalistic profession into disrepute, and put personal success before high standards.”
Born into a council estate in Essex, he became a star showbiz columnist on the Sun and went on to become editor of Britain’s largest selling Sunday newspaper from where he leapfrogged into Downing Street, becoming one of the prime minister’s closest aides.
Brooks’s acquittal will provide some relief for Rupert Murdoch, who once described the woman who rose to be chief executive of his London based News International operation as his “top priority” when the phone-hacking crisis hit the company in the summer of 2011.
Brooks was found not guilty of four charges including conspiring to hack phones when she was editor of the News of the World and making corrupt payments to public officials when she was editor of the Sun. She was also cleared of two charges that she conspired with her former secretary and her husband to conceal evidence from police investigating phone hacking in 2011.
A spokesman for News UK – the British newspaper publishing arm of Murdoch’s media empire – said that they had put in place measures to ensure that the wrongdoing at the News of the World could not happen again.
Prime Minister Dato’ Sri Mohd. Najib Tun Razak announces a Cabinet reshuffle, about 13 months after forming his first Cabinet from the mandate of a general election which he led BN as the Chairman on 5 May 2013.
New faces are brought into the Cabinet, although most of them at one time served as Minister and mostly as Deputy Ministers and been hiatus after MCA under then President Dato’ Sri Chua Soi Lek decided stay out of Government due poor performance in 13GE:
Dato’ Sri Liow Tiong Lai, Minister of Transport. Liow is MCA President.
Dato’ Seri Mah Siew Keong, Minister in PM’s Department. Mah is Gerakan President
Dato’ Wee Kah Siong, Minister in PM’s Department. Wee is MCA Deputy President
Dato’ Lee Chee Liong, Deputy Minister MITI. Lee is MCA Vice President
Dato’ Chua Tee Yong, Deputy Minister of Finance. Chua is MCA Vice President
Datin Paduka Chew Mei Fun, Deputy Minister of Women and Family Development. Chew is MCA Vice President.
Mah recently won the Teluk Intan Parliamentary by-election, defeating the DAP experimental candidate, which puts Gerakan back on BN’s map of elected representatives.
This Cabinet reshuffle means that Chinese in Semenanjung are back being represented in the Cabinet. In May 2013, only Paul Low was the sole Chinese member in Prime Minister Najib’s first Cabinet.
After the 2008 12GE, MCA was accorded with the traditional four Cabinet posts where as Gerakan is allocated one. At the time, MCA had still manage to have 15 MPs eventhough is dropped from 31 from the previous GE.
In the current 13th Parliament, MCA has only seven elected representatives. On 5 May last year, Gerakan managed only to secure one. Mah as Teluk Intan MP, is Gerakan’s second seat in the Parliament.
The swearing in to His Majesty Seri Paduka Baginda Yang DiPertuan Agong XIV would be held in Istana Negara on Friday. It is also speculated that Prime Minister Najib would be announcing the second bit of his Cabinet reshuffle soon and this time it is about Ministers and Deputy Ministers from UMNO.
MCA expressed its gratification because its party leaders representing the Chinese community and UMNO’s oldest strategic political partner are back in the Cabinet and now part of the most strategic forum formulating macro and strategic policies.
Liow thanks Najib for including MCA in Cabinet
25 JUNE 2014 @ 3:27 PM
KUALA LUMPUR: MCA President Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai thanked Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak for the appointment of MCA’s representatives in his cabinet line-up in helping in nation-building.
Liow said the appointment proved that the Barisan Nasional (BN) government led by Najib always strive to practise power-sharing in ensuring a harmonious development of this multi-racial country.
“I thanked and appreciated the prime minister for this newly appointment of MCA ministers and deputy ministers. We will do our level best to perform and serve the nation and move the country forward,” he told Bernama here today.
Liow, who is Bentong Member of Parliament, said, after leaving the cabinet for over a year, there were a lot of things that must be done by MCA’s ministers and deputy ministers to help the prime minister.
“MCA needs to double up the effort to catch up with where we have left, there are many duties and, therefore, I urge all MCA new ministers and deputy ministers to give our level best to play out the role,” he added.
The principle of ‘power-share’ which is the fundamental working relationship between the Malays and Non Malays, particularly the Chinese, has been normalised with this appointment of two MCA and one Gerakan leaders back into the Cabinet as Ministers.
Federal Court decided against The Herald Weekly highly controversial and politicised appeal to allow them to use ‘kalimah Allah’ in the publication and upheld the Court of Appeal judgment against the Christian Federation of Malaysia’s weekly.
Herald Weekly fails to get leave to appeal “Allah” ban
BY HIDIR REDUAN SHARANPAL SINGH RANDHAWARAHMAT KHAIRULRIJAL – 23 JUNE 2014 @ 10:14 AM
PUTRAJAYA: The Herald Weekly today failed to get leave from the Federal Court to challenge the Home Ministry’s ban on its use of the word “Allah” in its Bahasa Malaysia edition.
A seven-man panel led by Chief Justice Ariffin Zakaria delivered a majority 4-3 judgment on the matter, here, today.
Also on the panel are Court of Appeal president Tan Sri Md Raus Sharif, Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin, Federal Court judge Tan Sri Suriyadi Halim Omar, Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Tan Sri Richard Malanjum and Federal Court judges Datuk Jefrrey Tan Kok Wha and Datuk Zainun Ali.
Earlier, Perkasa vice-president Syed Osman Mansor said the non-governmental organisation will not go against any decision made by the apex court.
“Whatever the decision is, we will abide to it. We will not take it to the streets if the ruling is to allow an appeal.
“Of course, we would be disappointed if the appeal is allowed but as I said we will abide to the decision,” he said.
Perkasa president Datuk Ibrahim Ali said that disappointed or not the people will have to accept the decision.
“We had on various occasions discussed this matter in our Supreme Council meetings and there will not be any sort of demonstration.
Some 500 Perkasa members, men, women and children, clad in black T-Shirt written “Allah just for Muslim” had gathered at the Palace of Justice as early as 5.30am to show support.
The four versus three majority at the Federal Court decision upheld that the definitive provision in the Federal Constitution 3(1) where it states ‘Islam is the religion of the Federation of Malaysia’ and 11(4) prohibiton to profess the faith of Non Islamic religion to Muslims, still stand.
Despite this judgment is on the case brought forth by CFM to take to court Home Ministry for banning the ‘kalimah Allah’ in the Malay edition of the Herald, this should be the precedent and an end on the controversy, once and for all.
Any interpretations about using “Allah” to replace “God” in Christian publications should fall back to this ruling.
This include in the case of Malay bibles, confiscated from the Bible Society of Malaysia on 2 January 2014 in Damansara Kim, Petaling Jaya. Majlis Islam Selangor (MAIS), which is the state religious council and answerable directly to HRH Sultan Selangor already proclaimed that the seized bibles would not be returned.
This is consistent to the titah of HRH Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah Ibni Almarhum Sultan Salahuddin Abdul Aziz Shah that “Allah is exclusive to Muslims and other faiths are prohibited to use it”.
However, it is clear many pockets of minority who claims to be Malaysians and swore by the Federal Constitution including legal practitioners, are not able to respect the decision of the Apex Court. The 4-3 majority rule that translate to the interpretation of the existing laws in the context of upholding the Court of Appeal ruling to disallow the use of ‘kalimah Allah’ by CFM The Herald is sublime.
The Malay Mail online:
Bar VP: Federal Court should have allowed ‘Allah’ appeal
BY BOO SU-LYN
JUNE 23, 2014
1 1 Google +0 1
INCREASE TEXT DECREASE TEXT RESET TEXT PRINT ARTICLE
Muslim supporters gather in front of the Federal Court as they wait for the seven-member bench to decide on the appeal by the Catholic church against a lower court’s decision forbidding it to use the word ‘Allah’ in its publication, on June 23, 2014. — Picture by Saw Siow Feng
KUALA LUMPUR, June 23 — The Federal Court should have permitted the Catholic Church to challenge a court decision upholding a ban on its use of “Allah” in its newsletter as the application met the criteria for appeal, said vice president of the Malaysian Bar Steven Thiru.
Steven said the questions posed in the case had fulfilled the requirements of Section 96(a) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964, which involved the questions of public importance, as well as Section 96(b) on constitutional issues.
“It is regrettable that the Federal Court refused leave,” Steven told The Malay Mail Online today.
“The Federal Court has missed the opportunity to decide on important points of constitutional and administrative law that affect minorities’ rights and the protection of minority rights under our constitutional scheme,” he added.
Earlier today, the Federal Court rejected the Catholic Church’s application to appeal against the Home Ministry’s ban on the Arabic word “Allah” in its weekly paper, the Herald, in a 4-3 decision by the seven-member bench.
Steven said the case of the Herald had raised important constitutional questions involving Article 3 (Islam is the religion of the federation), Article 8 (equality before the law), Article 11 (the right to profess and practise one’s religion) and Article 12 (the prohibition of religious discrimination) of the Federal Constitution.
The lawyer added that the Federal Court’s refusal to grant leave to the Catholic Church meant that the Court of Appeal’s ruling last year stood.
As part of its judgment, the appellate court said that “Allah” was not integral to the Christian faith and that the home minister was justified in banning the Herald from describing God with the Arabic word on grounds of national security and public order.
“It could be used as binding precedent on the lower courts unless it can be distinguished on the facts (if the other cases are on very different facts) or is shown to be ‘per incuriam’ (if it is shown that the Court of Appeal’s decision is contrary to established principles of law),” said Steven.
Already, its effects have been felt beyond the Herald, despite Putrajaya’s continued insistence that the ruling was limited to the Catholic paper.
Last month, the Kuala Lumpur High Court struck out Sabah Sidang Injil Borneo’s (SIB) 2007 lawsuit against the Home Ministry for confiscating three boxes of Malay-language Christian publications that contained the word “Allah”, citing the Court of Appeal’s decision.
It may also have repercussions on the lawsuit brought by Sarawakian Christian Jill Ireland Lawrence Bill against the Home Ministry for seizing in 2008 her personal compact discs (CD) containing the word “Allah” that is pending.
When asked if the Federal Court’s decision nullified the Cabinet’s 10-point solution that allowed the distribution of Christian holy scriptures in the Malay, Indonesian and indigenous languages, Steven said: “This could well be the upshot of the decision if the Court of Appeal’s judgment is construed as being applicable beyond the Herald case”.
The Christian Federation of Malaysia, an umbrella body representing churches nationwide, said today that it would hold Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail and Putrajaya to a statement by the top lawyer on October 20, 2013, that the Court of Appeal’s decision was confined to the Herald.
Steven also said that nothing in the Federal Court’s judgment, as read out in court today, would allow Selangor’s Islamic authorities to dispose of the Malay and Iban-language bibles that they had seized from the Bible Society of Malaysia in January.
Last year, the Court of Appeal ruled that “Allah” was not integral to the Christian faith and that the home minister was justified in banning the Herald from using the Arabic word on grounds of national security and public order.
Bar Council office bearers are demonstrating their attitude and arrogance no different to Chinese Chauvinists DAP. They neither respect the stance of Rulers as Constitutional Head for all religious matters nor the Federal Constitution and/nor State Constitution.
The fact is that protecting the interests of minority by challenging against what clearly provided in the Federal Constitution, which is the document enacted by Parliament by representatives of the rakyat of upholding the sovereignty of this nation as an independent state.
Opposition Leader Anwar “Mat King Leather” Ibrahim wants nationalist political party UMNO to pay up for Wan Muhamad Azri Wan Deris aka Papagomo, for Kuala Lumpur Session Court’s decision of awarding the suit case to the former and plaintiff to the amount of RM850,000.00.
Former Riong Kali dot com’s story:
Anwar wants Umno to settle Papa Gomo’s case
BY JAMILAH KAMARUDIN
Published: 21 June 2014 | Updated: 21 June 2014 9:10 PM
Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim (pic) today dismissed controversial blogger Papa Gomo’s request that he pay Anwar RM850,000 in cost and damages through RM100 monthly instalments.
Refusing to comment further, the PKR de facto chief told reporters to refer the matter to Umno.
“Don’t ask me, ask the Umno leaders who are sponsoring him,” he said after delivering a speech on the Asian Renaissance in Puchong today.
The Kuala Lumpur High Court yesterday dismissed with cost an application by Wan Muhammad Azri Wan Deris to defer the payment, awarded to Anwar in a defamation suit against the blogger over statements and images posted on his blog implicating Anwar with another man.
Wan Muhammad Azri, when met by reporters outside the court yesterday said he was trying to get the court’s permission to pay RM100 a month to Anwar because he is now a fisherman. – June 21, 2014.
Earlier this year Kuala Lumpur High Court awarded Anwar, who sued Papagomo, the case.
The Star story:
Published: Friday February 28, 2014 MYT 10:14:00 AM
Updated: Friday February 28, 2014 MYT 12:16:54 PM
Anwar wins defamation suit against Papagomo, awarded RM850,000
KUALA LUMPUR: Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim won his suit against Papagomo Wan Muhammad Azri Wan Deris over postings of defamatory words and images of Anwar with another man.
High Court Judicial Commissioner Rosilah Yop awarded RM800,000 in damages to Anwar and RM50,000 in costs.
In his suit filed on March 21 last year, Anwar said the defendant had wrongly posted four defamatory statements on the blog between March 16 and 20.
In his defence,Wan Muhammad Azri said he had never published words, images videos or created any web link which was slanderous of Anwar.
JC Rosilah found that the defendant was actually Papagomo.
The fact is that, this call by former abuse-of-power-convict Anwar Ibrahim for UMNO to pay on behalf of Papagomo is not only inappropriate but ridiculously lame cheap stunt.
Despite being an UMNO member, Wan Muhammad Azri or his nom d’plume Papagomo did not act on behalf of UMNO nor had undertaken the party instruction to slander and defame Anwar. This is something Anwar yet to prove.
As far as it shows, Papagomo acted on his own initiative. Anwar also did not provide any evidence that Papagomo was promised or rewarded any remuneration for his slander against the ‘Dear Leader’ of PKR.
If UMNO is made to pay up for or on behalf of Papagomo, then should Wan Azizah as PKR President and Nurul Izzah as PKR Vice President serve Anwar’s five years jail sentence for guilty of sodomising political aide Mohd. Saiful Bukari Azlan six years ago?
Anwar gets five years’ jail for sodomising Mohd Saiful
07 MAR 2014 08:20PM
PUTRAJAYA, March 7– Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim today was sentenced to five years’ jail by the Court of Appeal here after the court found him guilty of sodomising his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, five years ago.
Justice Datuk Balia Yusof Wahi, who led a three-man panel in hearing the prosecution’s appeal in the case, however, granted Anwar’s application for a stay of the sentence pending appeal with bail of RM10,000.
Justice Balia ordered Anwar to pay the bail this Monday before 11 am.
During the proceedings, the court was disturbed by Anwar’s supporters who made noise and shouted in court resulting Justice Balia warning them to stop it.
In overturning the High Court’s decision in acquitting Anwar, Justice Balia said the panel unanimously held that the trial judge had erred in his findings that the integrity of DNA samples used in the case had been compromised.
Anwar was charged with sodomising Mohd Saiful, 23 (then), at a Desa Damansara condominium unit in Bukit Damansara between 3.10 pm and 4.30 pm on June 26, 2008.
Anwar’s counsel Karpal Singh, speaking to reporters later, said that with this ruling, Anwar could not file his nomination papers for the Kajang state seat by-election this Tuesday.
The same principles should apply for Anwar Ibrahim’s jail sentence, which was determined by three different Court of Appeal judges.
Wan Azizah and Nurul Izzah as PKR top officials stood their neck for Anwar too many times in their capacity as office bearers of the political party, trying to convince the Malaysian public and international community that the charge brought against the one time sacked Deputy Prime Minister was a sinister political ploy.
After all, Anwar is a 67 years old man and younger persons should be allowed to serve his sentence for him.
The truth is that Saiful made the complaint about Anwar buggering him at least eight times as a private citizen to the Police on his own accord. The Police investigated and after forensics, it was found the case had its merits and the charge was brought against the latter by His Majesty’s Public Prosecutor, acting on behalf of the Crown in the name of justice.
Then again, its pointless to point out these principles to a man proven to be without any shred of principles, dignity, credibility, integrity and humanly worthy.
Needless to say, that is time and again proven traits about a psychologically sick man whom Wan Azizah as PKR President proclaimed as “God’s gift” (Anugerah Tuhan) at PKR’s 7th national congress in November 2010.