IGP Musa Hassan selamat dibedah di IJN

Ketua Polis Negara Tan Sri Musa Hassan selamat menjalani pembedahan pintasan koronari di Institut Jantung Negara hari ini. Pakar kardiologi mendapati beliau mengidap sumbatan koronari minggu apabila pemeriksaan angiogram dijalankan. Maka diputuskan bahawa pembedahan perlu dijalankan segera.

Ketua Polis Negara Jalani Pembedahan Pintasan Koronari

By: Ramjit

KUALA LUMPUR, 19 Ogos (Bernama) — Ketua Polis Negara Tan Sri Musa Hassan hari Selasa menjalani pembedahan pintasan koronari di Institut Jantung Negara (IJN) di sini.

Timbalan Ketua Polis Negara Tan Sri Ismail Omar berkata Musa selamat menjalani pembedahan tengah hari. “Beliau kini ditempatkan di Unit Rawatan Rapi untuk pemeriksaan lanjut sebelum ditempatkan ke wad biasa,” katanya ketika dihubungi Bernama.

Musa kini dilaporkan berada dalam keadaan stabil.


Sekarang beliau sedang dipulihkan dalam Unit Rawatan Koronari pasca pembedahan yang berjaya. Ini merupakan prosedur biasa dan sumber memberitakan bahawa keadaan beliau adalah stabil dan memuaskan. Semoga Allah s.w.t. meletakan Tan Sri Musa berada dalam keadaan selesa dan cepat sembuh.

*Perkembangan dikemas kini Rabu 20 Ogos 2008 1130am

Difahamkan Tan Sri Musa menjalani pintasan pada empat batang arteri dalam pembedahan semalam. Beliau kini boleh bernafas tanpa memerlukan bantuan alat pernafasan dan perkembangan yang dikatakan amat memberangsangkan.

*Perkembangan dikemas kini Khamis 21 Ogos 2008 600pm

Perkembangan pasca pembedahan pintasa koronari oleh pakar bedah IJN amat memuaskan. Tan Sri Musa kini dibenarkan keluar dari unit rawatan rapi koronari dan sedang dipulihkan dalam wad VIP.

Published in: on August 19, 2008 at 19:05  Comments (12)  

Mukhriz: Anti Islamisation Congress in organised xenophobia at its worst


Anti-Islamisation Congress is Organised Xenophobia at its Worst

Wisma Putra’s statement condemning the intended Anti-Islamisation Congress by Pro-Koeln next month in Cologne is timely and appropriate as this conference is nothing short of a disgusting act of xenophobia by an extremist group that is both malicious and ignorant.

At a time where religious tolerance around the world is of paramount importance, it is deplorable to see this movement organise a conference which serves only to antagonise, defame and insult not only Muslims but people of all faiths who believe in constructive dialogue and proper engagement.

By disguising its racism with its right to free speech, this right wing movement intends to create a subjective platform that spitefully criticises Islam with no dissenting views. This conference which purportedly aims to discuss radical Islam is in itself a radical exercise and certainly nothing productive will emerge from it; except of course more reasons for these extremists to hate Muslims and Islam in general.

The speakers scheduled to appear at the conference include the Flemish politician Filip Dewinter, who once said that ‘she who wears a hijab signs her return to sender contract’ when dealing with Muslim immigration in Europe and Mario Borghezio, an Italian politician who was convicted of assaulting a Moroccan child in 1993. Surely, these men cannot be expected to have sensible views when it comes to inter-faith relations.

It is hoped that the German government will refrain from supporting this blatant attempt at inciting abhorrence and in turn condemn it as this will ensure proper diplomacy and continuous trade relations with Muslim-majority nations.

We also trust the reasonable people of Germany and Europe in general will reject this repulsive conference. Let it be realised that offending a religion and its followers is an affront to the practice of democracy and human rights, ideologies that have long been lauded by the West to ensure peace and harmony.


Published in: on August 18, 2008 at 18:55  Comments (11)  

Shafee Abdullah’s media statement on suing and challenging Raja Petra and Malaysia Today

Eminent litigation lawyer Dato’ Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, who was specifically mentioned by Raja Petra’s Malaysia Today articles under No Holds Barred section recently, decided to take him and the political news portal to court. However, the distant relative to the Selangor Royal family refused and totally ignored the attempt to serve him the summon earlier in week.


This is not the first time Raja Petra Kamaruddin was sued in court for his writings. Earlier this year, UUM Vice Chancellor Tan Sri Dr. Nordin Kardi obtained a default judgment  suit for a RM 7 million sum as the former Free Anwar Campaign lead media person refused any attempt to defend himself nor appear in court. Recently when he appeared in court for the sedition and criminal defamation charges, Raja Petra refused to enter plea.

Today, Dato’ Shafee issued a media statement with regards to his action and challenged Raja Petra, whom the former called the latter “A common pariah”, in court or any tribunal of both mutual choice :

Press Release (17 August 2008 )


1. On the 6th, 7th, and 12th August 2008, Raja Petra published the 3 defamatory articles on me with other commenters publishing their comments following the 3 defamatory articles. All of the commenters are equally guilty of defamation and various offences of vulgarities under the Penal Code.


2. The Raja Petra website is a controlled website, meaning it is a moderated website. He chooses through that system to publish or not any article or comment posted on the blog site. He is therefore a publisher of all the articles and comments posted on his blog site and is therefore guilty of publishing, accommodating and adopting the contents as his. He has committed the offences of defamation, sedition and other offences in the Penal Code and the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998.


3. Raja Petra does not practice an open blog site. He only publishes materials that support him. All other materials that are critical of him or condemn him are not published. He is not interested in an open debate for alternative views. His claim that his website is a source of independent news is total nonsense. Clearly this blogger is a coward and one that hides behind his blog ( and as you can see in court last Friday, one that hides behind his wife as well) Any so called “Royalty” (as Raja Petra claims himself to be) who indulges in publishing vulgar statements over and above being defamatory ought to be ashamed of himself as his behaviour evidenced in the blog site is that of a common “pariah”.

4. I am lodging a police report today for offences committed by Raja Petra which are as follows:


(a) Criminal Defamation;

(b) Sedition under the Sedition Act 1948;

(c) Offences under the Penal Code for vulgarities;

(d) Offences under the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998; and

(e) Printing Presses and Publication Act 1984


5. The Order of the High Court has been officially served on him on the 15th of August 2008. But before this Raja Petra was aware of the contents of the Order dated 13th August 2008 as admitted by him in his article on the 14th itself. Under the law he should have obeyed the Order of Court counting from the 14th itself. I am monitoring closely if Raja Petra is complying with each and every order that the court has imposed against him. If he does not observe any of these orders, I will compel him to be produced in court for contempt of court. I will continue to do this for every contemptious act he commits and if the contempt continues I will make repeated applications for contempt against him. If the court of Appeal could find it sufficient to send Murray Hiebert, a bona fide journalist to jail in Malaysia, the crimes committed by Raja Petra would be far worse. Raja Petra is not a bona fide journalist or an independent news provider. He is truly a puppet of some political animal. Raja Petra’s website is a political propaganda website and Raja Petra is the chief puppet.

6. This year alone 2 successful defamation suits have been taken against Raja Petra. The cases are :


(a) Universiti Utara Malaysia & Vice Chancellor Tan Sri Dr Nordin Kardin v Raja Petra , where a defamation suit was taken against Raja Petra. Raja Petra never entered appearance nor defended the case. On 26th March 2008, Raja Petra was ordered to pay RM 4 Million as damages to the Plaintiffs. He has failed to pay the RM 4 million. Raja Petra is a bankrupt and has been declared a bankrupt for quite sometime. As you know, an honourable bankrupt must defend his reputation about his credibility. Raja Petra never defended his credibility. He is not just a common bankrupt. He is also bankrupt of credibility and ideas.


(b) The case of Dato Seri Azim Zabidi v Raja Petra, a Kuala Lumpur High Court suit. Again judgment in default of appearance has been taken against him. The Plaintiff in that case has applied for damages to be assessed by the court. And the damages sum would soon be announced by the Court. Tell me why isn’t Raja Petra defending these suits ? I suggest there is only one reason : he has no defence and he knows his stories are all propaganda and has no nexus to truth.


The above precedent cases show that:


(a) Raja Petra is a coward in not defending the defamation suits against him.


(b) If he claims he can justify the contents of all his writings, the public deserves to know the truth and he should not behave like a coward and not come to court and prove his case.


(c) I challenge him to consent to our case being expedited for trial so that the public will know the truth whether Raja Petra is a liar or not. The court is the best forum to adjudicate on the conflict. In fact, alternatively, if Raja Petra wants an independent arbitration on this matter, with independent arbitrators chosen by a joint consent between him and me, I will gladly accept it and challenge him to produce the proofs of his allegations.


7 We are concerned that Raja Petra thinks that being a bankrupt he does not have any obligations to law and society. This is perhaps the reason why he is so dishonest and reckless as to what he publishes. If he thinks he can hide behind his bankruptcy, he is dead wrong. So far the conduct of Raja Petra clearly shows that his sole motive is to do propaganda and truth was never his consideration at all.


8. For your information, I can conclusively show Raja Petra is a total liar I have independent evidence, both oral and documentary, that will show neither the office of Shafee & Co nor this conference room you are sitting in or the whiteboard you are looking at or I personally are involved in anything close to the allegation by Raja Petra that we are involved in a conspiracy relating to the case of the sodomy allegation by Saiful against Anwar Ibrahim. Raja Petra will have to show his so called evidence. He bluffs by saying he has got 6 witnesses 3 of them are datuks apparently.And I urge him that if he has that evidence, he must quickly agree for an expedited trial of this matter as the public deserves nothing less than the truth. If Raja Petra is found to be lying to the public he must be stopped fast so that the public is not misled.


9. For your information, I have been away in Kuching and Terengganu for more than 6 weeks prior to Anwar Ibrahim being charged, I was away from the 28 June 2008 until 7th August 2008 continuously with one week in Kuala Terengganu (all of them related to my work in relation to 3 Election Petitions).How could I be in this room to mastermind the operation with the police.


10. Why should the police want to do a black operation in this room? Don’t you think a black operation by its nature is secretive ? Should such an operation be done in this open conference room ? That is the reason I say even a person with a pea-sized brain would not believe his story. Raja Petra is not a clever bluffer. I would love to cross-examine him in court and I would offer myself to be cross-examined by his team of lawyers if this is the only way truth can be revealed.


11. I will tell him to stop being the coward he is. Come out into the open, in the open court and fight me like a man and not to hide behind his web site or behind the skirt of his wife.



Dato’ Muhammad Shafee Abdullah


*Updated 930pm

Also read The Malaysian Insider for their report

Published in: on August 17, 2008 at 12:33  Comments (25)  

Saiful sumpah muhabalah untuk selamatkan dunia Islam dari Anwar

Pembantu Mantan Timbalan Perdana Menteri dan banduan salah guna kuasa Anwar Ibrahim yang membuat laporan Polis pada 28 Jun 2008 mendakwa diliwat Bossnya itu, Mohd. Saiful Bukhari Azlan 23, petang ini bersumpah muhabalah dengan Al Quran dalam Masjid Wilayah Persekutuan dihadapan Imam Besar mengenai dakwaan Anwar meliwat beliau.

MStar online melaporkan:

Saiful bersumpah ‘mubahalah’ di Masjid Wilayah

15-08-2008 10:47:56 PM


(Dikemas kini) KUALA LUMPUR: Selepas lebih seminggu kes diliwat disebut di mahkamah, Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, bekas pembantu peribadi Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim melakukan sumpah mubahalah di Masjid Wilayah Persekutuan di sini petang ini.

Saiful, 23, memilih hari Jumaat untuk menyempurnakan upacara sumpahnya.

Pada pukul 6.23 petang, Saiful yang berpakaian baju Melayu warna coklat dengan songkok sambil diperhatikan oleh ayahnya, Azlan Mohd Lazim yang berbaju Melayu biru telah melafazkan sumpah.

Turut menyaksikan upacara itu ialah Imam Masjid Wilayah Persekutuan, bapa saudara Saiful, ‘Uncle Pet’, beberapa pegawai masjid berkenaan, ahli keluarga Mohd Saiful, Pengarah Jabatan Agama Islam Wilayah Persekutuan (Jawi) iaitu Datuk Che Mat Che Ali dan pegawai dari Jawi.

Sambil memegang al-Quran, Saiful yang duduk bersila di atas sejadah sambil mengadap kiblat dan diperhatikan bapanya, telah memulakan upacara ‘bermubahalah’ dimulai dengan mengucap dua kalimah Syahadah sebanyak tiga kali dan bacaan Al-Fatihah.

“Bismillahirrahman nirrahim. Pada hari ini, 15 Ogos 2008, saya Mohd Saiful Bukhari Bin Azlan, No Kad Pengenalan 850706-01-5687 dengan ini sesungguhnya dengan nama Allah Yang Maha Pemurah Lagi Maha Penyayang berikrar dan bersumpah seperti berikut….A’uzubilahiminasyaitanirrajim. Bismillahirrahman nirrahim. Wallahi…Wabillahi….Wata’alahi. Saya bersumpah bahawa saya telah diliwat oleh Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim pada 26 hb Jun 2008 iaitu pada tarikh tersebut Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim telah memasukkan zakarnya ke dalam lubang dubur saya. Jika saya berdusta, atas pengakuan ini, maka saya berdusta terhadap Allah dan saya sanggup menerima azab, laknat dan kutukan daripada Allah hingga ke kiamat. Wallahualam.”

Sejurus selepas upacara bersumpah itu, Saiful memeluk bapanya, Azlan dan menerima ciuman bapanya di dahi kemudian terus bergegas meninggalkan masjid tanpa memberi peluang kepada pihak wartawan untuk menemuramahnya.

Anwar mengaku tidak bersalah di Mahkamah Sesyen di sini pada 7 Ogos lalu terhadap tuduhan melakukan seks luar tabii terhadap Saiful pada Jun lepas.


Kejujuran Saiful untuk berbuat sumpah sedemekian adalah demonstrasi jelas bahawa beliau ingin membuktikan bahawa beliau di’aniaya’ Anwar untuk melakukan hubungan seksual luar tabii.

Saiful telah menunjukan keberanian yang luar biasa, menyerahkan kepada Allah s.w.t. agar menjatuhkan bala dan laknat sekiranya dakwaan dan pengakuan sumpah muhaballah ini palsu dan sengaja dilakukan dengan tujuan menganiaya Anwar.

Ini bukan pertama kali Anwar terlibat dalam perbuatan jijik ini. Beliau pernah disabitkan dengan jenayah melakukan hubungan seksual luar tabii bawah Kanun Keseksaan Seksyen 377B oleh Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur pada 30 April 2001. Walaubagaimanapun, pada 2 September 2004 Mahkamah Persekutuan membatalkan hukuman tersebut, kerana isu teknikal. Namun begitu, Mahkamah bersetuju bahawa Anwar terlibat meliwat Azizan Abu Bakar.

Sebahagian dari sedutan penghakiman Hakim Mahkamah Persekutuan:

The Federal Court on September 2, 2004, by a majority decision of 2:1 acquitted Anwar on the charge of committing carnal intercourse against the order of nature – sodomy.

He was acquitted essentially on the grounds that it was unsafe to convict him mainly on the evidence of the complainant, one Azizan who the court held was an accomplice and therefore his evidence must be corroborated by other witnesses that he was sodomised on the dates that he complained of.

However, it is interesting to note that the majority decision of the Federal made a finding that:

“The testimonies of one Dr. Mohd Fadzil and one Tun Haniff and the conduct of the first Appellant (ie Anwar) confirmed the appellants’ involvement in homosexual activities. However such evidence did not corroborate Azizan’s story that the appellants sodomised him on the date, time and place specified in the charge.”

Additionally, the majority also held:

“even though reading the appeal record, we find evidence to confirm that the appellants were involved in homosexual activities and we are more inclined to believe that the alleged incident at Tivoli Villa did happen, sometime, this court, as a court of law, may only convict the appellants if the prosecution has successfully proved that the alleged offences as stated in the charges, beyond reasonable doubt.”

However, we should note the minority opinion:

“It will be too high a standard to require that in sexual offences no case can be made out if it is solely on the evidence of a complainant or a participant to the act. At the end of the day it is the credibility of the witness that matters and in these appeals, the learned judge correctly appreciated that position.”

Perbuatan Saiful ini wajar disanjung kerana tabiat Anwar cenderung melakukan hubungan seksual diluar tabii wajar diketahui dunia. Ini kerana Anwar bukanlah seorang insan yang layak menjadi pemimpin kerana tergamak melakukan sifat jijik.

Disamping itu, Anwar yang begitu bercita cita besar mengambil alih sebagai Perdana Menteri Malaysia semenjak Barisan Alternatif (kini dikenali sebagai Pakatan Rakyat) menang luar biasa besar pada Pilihanraya Umum ke XII 8 Mac 2008 dan menyaksikan BN buat pertama kalinya gagal mempertahankan kedudukan tradisi menguasai 2/3 Dewan Rakyat.

Saiful sebenarnya berjaya menghalang dari Anwar diangkat sebagai Perdana Menteri Malaysia dan lantas pemimpin sebuah negara Islam yang paling lantang memperjuangkan isu isu umat Islam sejagat dipersada global, termasuk membidas Amerika Syarikat atas isu isu seperti penjajahan dan jenayah kemanusiaan di Bosnia Herzegovina, Palestin, Iraq, Lubnan dan bakal akan menjelang, Iran. Anwar yang telah terbukti mempunyai hubungan luar biasa akrab dengan Yahudi Neo Conservative Barat, terutama Amerka Syarikat termasuk Kerajaan, telah dibuktikan Anwar mendapat sokongan kuat yang mendalangi segala usaha menindas dan mengenai umat Islam diperingkat antarabangsa. Perhatian khas media Barat, termasuk Israel atas perkembangan Anwar juga perlu diwaspada secara serious.

Landskap dunia Islam akan berubah sekiranya pemimpin seperti Anwar berjaya diangkat sebagai Ketua Eksekutif negara Islam paling berpengaruh dalam dunia moden ini. Kedudukan sebagai pemimpin Malaysia akan digunakan sebagai alat untuk Barat menguasai seluruh negara negara Islam yang menyanjung Malaysia sebagai negara Islam yang dianggap sebagai ‘ketua’ kepada masyarakat Islam dunia, terutama dari sudut hubungan antarabangsa dan diplomasi, pembangunan ekonomi dan teknologi serta peranan sebagai pencetus isu isu sejagat.

Maka akan bermula babak baru, sandiwara lama, terutama selepas pencalonan Pilihanraya Kecil kerusi Parlimen Permatang Pauh besok, 16 Ogos 2008, setelah Presiden PKR mengosongkan kerusi yang membawa kedudukan sebagai Ketua Pembangkang dalam Dewan Rakyat, baru baru ini.

Published in: on August 16, 2008 at 02:34  Comments (54)  

Khalid enggan minta maaf, orang Melayu demo di Istana Negara

Menteri Besar Selangor Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim baru baru ini menaikan emosi orang orang Melayu apabila mencadangkan bahawa UiTM, sebuah IPTA yang diujudkan khas untuk membangunkan orang Melayu dengan memberikan pengkhususan dalam latihan dan pendidikan professional dibawah Akta MARA pada 1966 dibuka kepada Bukan Melayu, terutama orang keturunan Cina.

Orang Melayu mula menunjukan reaksi dan dua hari lepas, sebuah demontrasi membantah cadangan MB Selangor Kahlid ini dianjurkan di Shah Alam. Namun begitu, Khalid masih berdegil mempertahankan cadangan dan enggan memohon maaf ketelanjuran kata yang sudah pun menyinggung orang Melayu.

Utusan.com.my mempunyai laporan mengenai ini:

UiTM: Khalid enggan mohon maaf

SHAH ALAM 13 Ogos – Menteri Besar Selangor, Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim tidak akan memohon maaf kepada Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM) berikutan cadangannya supaya universiti itu membuka 10 peratus kemasukan pelajar kepada penuntut bukan bumiputera dan asing.

Katanya, beliau tidak akan memohon maaf kerana berpendirian cadangan yang dikemukakannya itu bukan untuk mempersoalkan hak istimewa bumiputera dan penubuhan UiTM.

Sebaliknya, ia merupakan pandangan daripada kerajaan negeri bagi mempertingkatkan mutu dan kualiti pendidikan tinggi termasuklah di UiTM selain mahu membuka peluang pekerjaan yang lebih luas kepada pelajar Melayu serta bumiputera Sabah dan Sarawak.

Bercakap kepada pemberita selepas mempengerusikan mesyuarat Exco kerajaan negeri di sini hari ini, Abdul Khalid menyalahkan pihak tertentu termasuk media yang dituduhnya sengaja “mencetuskan perkara itu yang menjurus kepada isu perkauman”.

“Kita bukan hendak minta maaf tetapi hanya untuk menerangkan perkara ini. Saya tidak bermaksud untuk mempertikaikan hak orang Melayu dan bumiputera lain serta tujuan UiTM ditubuhkan di bawah Perkara 153 Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

“Apa yang saya cadangkan sebelum ini hanya pandangan yang dikemukakan oleh pihak media kepada saya.

“Oleh itu, saya harap isu ini tidak lagi dipanjangkan dan UiTM tidak perlu lagi menumpukan kepada isu kuota ini tetapi memberi fokus kepada usaha meningkatkan taraf dan kemudahannya untuk menjadi sebuah universiti yang disegani,” ujar beliau.

Ahad lalu, Abdul Khalid yang juga Pengerusi Perhubungan Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) Selangor mengemukakan cadangan supaya UiTM membuka kuota kemasukan sebanyak 10 peratus kepada bukan bumiputera dan asing bagi membolehkan universiti itu bersaing dalam era globalisasi.

Bagaimanapun, cadangan tersebut mendapat bantahan daripada banyak pihak termasuk para pelajar universiti itu yang menyifatkan Abdul Khalid ‘pengkhianat’ yang cuba menghapuskan hak istimewa orang Melayu dan bumiputera selain menggugat keseimbangan antara kaum di negara ini.

Semalam, lebih 5,000 pelajar universiti tersebut mengadakan perhimpunan dan perarakan di Shah Alam sebelum menyerahkan memorandum bantahan kepada Abdul Khalid di Pejabat Setiausaha Kerajaan Negeri Selangor.

Menteri Besar Selangor itu turut memberitahu, beliau akan mengadakan perbincangan dengan pengurusan beberapa universiti yang terletak di Selangor untuk memberi kefahaman berhubung isu-isu penting.


Sebagai menunjukan ketidak puasan hati orang Melayu keatas cadangan kuota 10% ini, petang ini akan dianjurkan satu lagi demonstrasi membantah cadangan MB Khalid ini. Kali ini, orang Melayu akan berdemonstrasi di hadapan Istana Negara.

Orang ramai diminta berkumpul di Surau Jalan Bellamy (belakang Istana Negara – berdekatan medan ikan bakar Bellamy) pada jam 300pm untuk demonstrasi aman ini membantah cadangan kuota 10% kemasukan UiTM diperuntukan untuk Bukan Melayu.

Penasihat PKR Anwar Ibrahim, yang telah mengumumkan untuk bertanding di Parlimen Permatang Pauh pada pencalonan Sabtu 16 Ogos ini, akibat kekosongan yang berlaku kerana Presiden PKR meletakan jawatan digesa untuk membuat kenyataan dan ketetapan atas isu yang dicadangkan MB Khalid ini.

Published in: on August 14, 2008 at 08:04  Comments (27)  

Money Diverted Will Come Back To Gold With A Fury

Dow’s Suckers’ Rally Is Over – Money Diverted Will Come Back To Gold With A Fury

– By Matthias Chang

Future FastForward, Wednesday, 13 August 2008 08:06

Many have asked me why I have not written anything on Gold. I have written enough on the subject matter of gold and in my book, “The Shadow Money Lenders and the Global Financial Tsunami” I have given ample reasons and justification to hold on to gold.

Daily price gyrations of the metal, as a result of manipulations by central banks and speculators have not affected my strategy. This is because I look at the fundamental trends affecting the global economy – and the trend is down and out. Worst is yet to come for the global economy.

During the Dow’s Suckers’ Rally, there were even times when banks were in deep shit announcing massive write-offs, yet the Dow went up. Yet, from July 2007 till the first half of 2008, the Dow plunged each time the financial shits hit the ceiling fan.

How can anyone with any brains believe in the garbage that “when financial data are not as bad as expected (even though the data reflects massive write-offs) the Dow has reached the bottom and will recover”?

Those who believed in this stupid nonsense and went back to the stock market will soon be bleeding profusely. This is because the Bush & the Neo-cons war party got it so wrong with the Georgian armed aggression in South Ossetia. This event, coupled with more mess coming from UBS and JP Morgan, will push down the Dow from its recent rally.

This will result in mass hysteria and panic, and assholes will jump back to Gold, some barely able to survive the sharp downturn after the close of the Beijing Olympics.

Gold is now at bargain prices. This is a golden opportunity to come in again and wait for the inevitable upturn by the end of August.

Published in: on August 13, 2008 at 16:49  Comments (7)  

KPMM 2008 ditunda

Kongres Professional Melayu Muda Ke III 2008


“DEB: Dari Perspektif Pembinaan Negara Bangsa”


7 hb Ogos 2008



Sesiapa yang berkenaan,





Tuan / Puan



“ DEB : Dari Perspektif Pembinaan Negara Bangsa”


Terlebih dahulu dukacita dimaklumkan Kongres Profesional Muda Melayu III 2008 yang dijadualkan pada 16hb Ogos 2008 di Dewan Kuliah Fakulti Sastera , Universiti Malaya terpaksa ditunda ke suatu tarikh lain yang akan ditetapkan kemudian.


Penundaan ini dibuat kerana ramai ahli panel yang terlibat dalam KPMM mempunyai komitmen pada parti masing-masing pada tarikh tersebut.


Pihak kami memohon maaf diatas segala kesulitan yang berlaku berhubung penundaan majlis ini.


Segala maklumat terkini berhubung Kongres tersebut, pihak tuan/puan boleh perolehi dengan melayari laman web www.ansara.org.my.


Sekian, harap maklum.




Mohd Roslan Bani Amin

Timbalan Presiden Ansara

Pengerusi KPMM Ke II 2008

Published in: on August 13, 2008 at 08:54  Leave a Comment  

Usul mengesa ‘Peralihan Kuasa’ yang lebih awal

Umum mengetahui tentang gelombang politik yang amat besar sedang melanda orang melayu khususnya UMNO. Ini dapat ditafsirkan dengan jelas terhadap fakta keputusan pilihanraya umum baru-baru ini yang sokongan pengundi terhadap BN dan UMNO khususnya telah merudum. Tidak pernah dalam sejarah pilihanraya Malaysia ini UMNO dan Barisan Nasional menerima tamparan yang hebat dari pengaruh parti pembangkang.

Kita harus sama-sama bersetuju dan menerima hakikat yang parti UMNO yang kita cintai ini berada di dalam keadaan yang lemah. Selama ini kita sebagai ahli UMNO tidak pernah termimpi yang perkara ini boleh berlaku terhadap UMNO. Mungkin juga selama ini kita di buai oleh mimpi-mimpi indah yang kekuatan UMNO tidak akan terhakis selama-lamanya. Kita juga harus menerima hakikat yang ini adalah ujian politik yang amat besar yang harus di tempuh oleh ahli-ahli dan semua pemimpin UMNO disebabkan oleh kelekaan kita semua. Amat menyedihkan yang kestabilan kontrak sosial yang telah direncanakan oleh Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tan Cheng Lock dan Tun Sambathan sejak akhir-akhir ini di mainkan oleh pihak-pihak tertentu untuk kepentingan politik disebabkan oleh kelemahan UMNO sendiri.

Lebih malang lagi, tiada tindakan yang jitu dan berkesan yang direncanakan untuk menangani isu-isu semasa. Ahli-ahli UMNO mahu pun pemimpin tertinggi UMNO seperti hanya berharap yang masaalah yang dihadapi akan usang secara semulajadi tanpa menerima hakikat yang scenario politik semasa sedang mengalami perubahan yang amat drastik. Perubahan arus politik sekarang ini menuntut kita untuk berhenti sejenak dan berfikir secara jujur tentang tindakan yang lebih “out of the box” untuk memenangi kembali hati orang-orang melayu khususnya peringkat akar umbi ahli-ahli UMNO. Pemimpin UMNO harus akur dan belajar untuk memikul dan menerima tanggungjawab atas apa yang berlaku sekarang ini.

Demi kepentingan parti dan menolak kepentingan individu, saya dengan ini ingin membawa usul untuk diperbincangkan dalam persidangan ini.

Berasaskan kuasa yang termaktub dalam Fasal 17.5.1 Perlembagaan UMNO; demi untuk menyelamatkan UMNO, agama, bangsa dan tanahair; maka UMNO Cawangan Sungai Buloh Country Resort, Bahagian Kuala Selangor, dalam Persidangan Tahunan pada 9 Ogos 2008, mendesak UMNO Bahagian Kuala Selangor menggunakan Fasal 14.5.3 untuk mengemukakan satu usul ke peringkat PAU 2008 meminta tempoh peralihan kuasa daripada Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi kepada Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, dilakukan mulai 1 Januari 2009.

Sebab-sebab mengapa peralihan kuasa harus dilakukan segera :-

a) Sebab utama ialah ketidakyakinan rakyat atas pucuk pimpinan kini dalam menangani masalah negara

b) Memastikan setiap ahli umno memainkan peranan lebih terus dan telus dalam memilih pemimpin. Ini dapat dilakukan dengan memastikan hasrat dan luahan kami ini di sampaikan kepada kepimpinan tertinggi UMNO.

c) Kekuatan Umno memerlukan masa ynag panjang untuk dipulihkan
sebelum PRU 13. Barisan pucuk pimpinan perlu di perkuat dari sekarang.

d) Ahli umno yg menjadi pembangkang di 5 negeri dan 1 wp perlu umno yg lebih kuat  dan bukan yg rapuh bagi menyelamatkan negeri2 tersebut dari terus menjadi negeri dibawah pemerintahan PR.

diluluskan sebulat suara:

UMNO Cawangan Sg. Buloh Country Resort

Bahagian Kuala Selangor

9 Ogos 2008

Published in: on August 11, 2008 at 11:42  Comments (16)  

UMNO Youth International Bureau Statement United States’ Support For Anwar Ibrahim






One wonders whether former Vice President of the United States, Al Gore’s unfounded allegations and reprehensible statements against Malaysia in support of Anwar Ibrahim is proof of the pudding that Anwar Ibrahim is a political puppet of the United States government. Isn’t this proof that there has been and is in vigorous motion a concerted conspiracy to install their lackey in Malaysia as further evidenced by the summoning of the Malaysian envoy by the US State Department?

The United States lost all moral authority when it lied to the world in order to invade Iraq for its oil for starters.  Democracy, human rights, and justice are merely slogans used by the United States administration when it is convenient. This is a government that sanctioned the ‘extraordinary rendition’ or kidnapping of suspected ‘’terrorist’’ around the world to be transferred to secret torture camps in parts of Europe and in third world countries.

Perhaps Al Gore needs to be updated that true democracy is alive and well in Malaysia. We have had 12 general elections with the ruling coalition losing five states, the Federal Territory as well as its two-thirds majority in parliament in the most recently concluded general elections. This couldn’t have been possible if elections in Malaysia weren’t free and fair. Al Gore of all people should know this difference after failing in his popular bid for President in 2000 against a ‘’well-connected’’ George W. Bush.

How does one determine if a case is politically motivated if the due process of law isn’t allowed to take place? It’s a double insult that Al Gore had first supported the reformasi-riots in 1998 and now chooses to support Anwar Ibrahim whom faces the very same charges of sodomy. Perhaps Al Gore doesn’t understand the gravity of the charges of sodomy as it may not be a crime in the west, but in Malaysia it’s a serious unlawful act. Also, the present political situation is getting even more severe as Anwar Ibrahim is like a chameleon, changing colours whenever it suits him.

The world as well as Malaysia lauds Al Gore’s efforts to combat global warming but playing the worn geo-political game of propping up stooges in foreign countries will just serve to damage his credibility.

If Anwar Ibrahim has nothing to hide and hasn’t committed any offence against the laws of Malaysia, then he has nothing to worry about. Although it is known that he has made public certain allegations against the impartiality of the judiciary, it is the same judiciary that acquitted him of sodomy on a technicality. Therefore, one wonders whether the recent disparaging comments made by foreign individuals about Malaysia is the direct result of Anwar Ibrahim complaining to them and inviting them to exert pressure on the Malaysian government to subvert the process and rule of law in order to allow him to continue with his ambitions to become the next Prime Minister – however surreal that may be. This then begs the question whether Anwar Ibrahim will surrender our sovereignty as a nation and sell out the Rakyat’s interest if, however unlikely it may be, he were to become Prime Minister.


Published in: on August 11, 2008 at 02:17  Comments (8)  


As a precursor to the upcoming KPMM 2008 – DEB: Dari Perspektif Pembinaan Negara Bangsa, this article by eminent developmental economist Dr. Rais Saniman, who was instrumental in the formulation of the New Economic Policy in 1970, is produced here with permission:




By : Mohamed Rais bin Saniman


Introduction :


As Malaysia celebrates its 50th Merdeka anniversary this year with joy and thanks giving, across the land from Perlis to Sabah, including sending its first Cosmonaut into space, it is also a time for all of us responsible Malaysians, who wish the country and its people well into the future, to take stock of our history, namely to assess what went right and what went wrong in the past decades. We must learn from our history, so that we could map out our future development, utilizing the strengths of our successes and also avoiding the weakness of our past mistakes. This article attempts to asses the socioeconomic contribution of the New Economic Policy (NEP or DEB in Bahasa) towards building a united Malaysian nation in diversity since its introduction in 1970 and its evolution over the decades. It also attempts to assess its relevance in the future socioeconomic development of this country. This is the Unfinished Business of Malaysia which it sets out to accomplish since Merdeka. Indeed it forms the basis of its national drive particularly the spirit of the Angkatan Bangsa Melayu.


The article is divided into the following sections, which we will elaborate in turn :


  1. The Origin of Malaysia’s New Economic Policy (NEP)
  2. The NEP in Summary
  3. Some Instruments of the NEP
  4. NEP Debate and Decision
  5. The Outcome : Economic Growth and Ethnic Disparity
  6. The NEP Today
  7. The Relevance of the NEP type of policy in the future
  8. Conclusion


* The writer wishes to thank his mentor, teacher and friend Tan Sri Just Faaland, of the Chr. Michelsen Institute, Bergen, Norway, for allowing him to use part of his paper on the NEP, which he presented to the international symposium on the NEP organized by the Central Bank of Namibia in September 2007. The African countries, most of which are facing problems similar to those faced by Malaysia, are keen to learn from the Malaysian experience of implementing the NEP, to achieve maximum economic growth with ethnic economic balance simultaneously. Tan Sri Faaland, who was the Economic Adviser to Tun Abdul Razak, at the time of the 1969 racial riot, devised the NEP which became the basic underpinning of the Malaysian economic system since 1970. He is currently one of the Economic Adviser to YAB Dato Abdullah.


A. The Origin of Malaysia’s New Economic Policy (NEP)


What came to be called the New Economic Policy (NEP) in Malaysia was initiated and developed in response to massive economic disparities along ethnic lines. Fifty years ago, in 1957 when Malaya achieved its independence from British colonial rule, it had a population of 7 million; nearly every other resident was a resent Chinese or Indian immigrant stock. Today, in the large Malaysia-which since 1963 includes also the two North Borneo States of Sabah and Sarawak-there are some 25 million citizens; one in three being Chinese and Indian Malaysians and two of three are Malays or members of other indigenous groups of peoples, collectively referred to as Bumiputera (sons of the soil).

The economy of Malaya at Independence was deeply segregated as between ethnic groups: in geographic location, in types of economic activity and in levels of livelihood. As compared with the non-Bumiputera :


  • Malays form a much higher proportion of population in rural areas than in towns;
  • Malays populate the relatively poorer States and occupations to a higher degree;
  • Malays form a higher proportion of the workforce in low productivity traditional agriculture and a lower proportion of the workforce in high productivity modern industry and commerce;
  • Within given industries and enterprises Malays typically hold lower-echelon position;
  • Malays have property rights over only about one-third of land under agricultural cultivation;
  • Malays have a significantly lower share of ownership, control and management of industrial and commercial enterprise and, as a result, less control of their own economic destiny;
  • The average Malay has a much lower standard of living.


These disparities persist today and remain major issues for policy debate and formulation.

 In May 1969, following general elections that year, the tenuous social balance between ethnic groups broke down into vicious rioting. This was quickly and effectively met by the declaration of a state of emergency, vesting all power in a National Operations Council (NOC), headed by the then Deputy Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak. Civil order was quickly restored and the NOC spent the next year and a half laying the political and institutional basis for what they saw as a viable and prosperous multi ethnic Malaysia of the future. The NEP was borne and presented in the Second Malaysia Plan (SMP), issued in early 1971, when the country returned to Parliamentary rule. The NEP was further elaborated in the Mid Term Review of SMP in 1973.

 The socio-political conviction on which the NEP was based was clear :

 “National Unity is unattainable without greater equity and balance among Malaysia’s social and ethnic groups in their participation in the development of the country and in the sharing of the benefits from modernization and economic growth. National Unity cannot be fostered if vast sections of the population remain poor and if sufficient productive employment opportunities are not created for the expanding labour force” (SMP, pp.3-4).

 The basic formula for an effective NEP was set out in no uncertain terms and the political commitment to its implementation were emphatic :

 “(The NEP) incorporates the two pronged objective of eradicating poverty, irrespective of race and restructuring Malaysia society to reduce and eventually eliminate the identification of race with economic functions…(The Government) will spare no efforts to promote national unity and develop a just and progressive Malaysian society in a rapidly expanding economy so that no one will experience any loose or fell any sense of deprivation of his rights, privileges, income, job and opportunity… To achieve our overall objective of national unity, Malaysia needs more than merely a high rate of economic growth. While devoting our efforts to the task of achieving rapid economic development, we need to ensure at the same time that there is social justice, equitable sharing of income growth and increasing opportunities for employment… The Plan must succeed as it is vital to our survival as a happy and united nation” (SMP, p.v).


B. The NEP in Summary

The NEP was designed to enable the Bumiputra community to enjoy the fruits of development on par with the other ethnic groups, who were then and still remain economically far more advanced. This was to be achieved through a process of growth and modernization so directed as to bring about gradual restructuring of employment and production patterns in all sectors and at all levels, so as to be in rough accord with ethnic population ratios.

The NEP is not a policy purposely to discriminate against non-Bumiputra ethnic communities or withdraw from them the levels of income and wealth they have already gained; on the contrary, it seeks to ensure that increments in the nation’s wealth and income redound more fully to the Bumiputra and not disproportionately to the minority. To achieve this, the Bumiputra must eventually participate on an equal footing in the modern high productivity sectors. The NEP therefore places emphasis on advancing economic productivity of the Bumiputra, on education and training, on the adoption and spread of modern technology, on market efficiency and competition in a largely private sector regime, and on a business friendly government. The NEP, therefore, is firmly a policy for sustained growth with emphasis on a gradual change in distribution as between ethnic groups, and at the same time a transformation of social institutions and attitudinal change. In other words, economic development is indeed important. Yet, growth alone, no matter how rapid it may be, is not enough. Distribution must be a parallel or twin objective of equal importance.

The twin objectives of NEP are the eradication of poverty for all Malaysians irrespective of race and the correction of the racial economic imbalances in terms of income, employment and wealth. This required action on many fronts:

First, it was accepted that the federal and State governments and their various agencies and institutions would have to play more active and interventionist role, so as to ensure that the Malays obtained a fair opportunity to gain more ready entrance into, and equality within, the modern sectors. New institutions would therefore be set up and old ones sharpened to assist the Malays.

Second, the policy framework had to be consistent with and conducive to a high rate of economic growth. This would alleviate general poverty in the country by raising the general income level, provided growth was fairly evenly spread. It would enable the non-Malays to grow without hindrance while allowing for accelerating Malay entry into the modern sectors. Growth was also necessary to create those additional resources, required to undertake the economic and social reforms envisaged, without serious pain and dislocation to the system. To achieve such a high performance, the private sector was to be given incentives to spearhead the growth of the economy, especially in its rapid industrialization efforts and export drive. The challenge was to ensure both rapid growth and an improving racial economic balance. It was recognized, however, that beyond a point, the pursuit of these objectives could become competitive rather than complementary. The Government would therefore have to exercise flexibility in case of severe conflict.

Third, an active full employment policy would be pursued so as to absorb the already underemployed and unemployed labour force, while at the same time catering for new entrants to the market, stemming from population growth and making room for those wishing to move to new jobs in the modern sector of the economy. Economic growth had to be encouraged and guided along an employment intensive path. The full employment policy, like the rapid economic growth policy, was therefore an indispensable and a strategic element of the NEP.

Fourth, to develop the capability of the Malays: Vigorous programmes of education and training the Malays would be undertaken so as to enable them to participate actively in the development process. For all Malaysians, education was assigned the important role of laying the foundation for the creation of a new common value system among the younger generations for the attainment of national unity and racial integration.

At its core, therefore, the NEP was designed to achieve no less than a complete social and economic transformation. It sought to achieve the emergence of a new Malaysian society which would transcend existing ethic, cultural, religious and economic differences and provide for opportunities for advancement for all Malaysians. After 1969, it seemed there was no other option, otherwise the country would return to anarchy and chaos.


C. Some Instruments of the NEP


Consistent with-and indeed as part and parcel of-the pursuit of this strategy, Malaysia introduced a set of policies which are characteristic of the NEP:

 1. Foreign Investment Committee (FIC) and the industrial Coordination Act (ICA)

For the effective pursuit of the NEP objective to correct ethic economic imbalances, specifically in the patterns of employment and in ownership and control of enterprises, the Government established what was called the foreign Investment Committee (FIC) and introduced the Industrial Coordination Act (ICA). This became the powerful agent of change in the private corporate sector, focusing on the balance of equity ownership as between foreign and domestic investors. However, only sporadically and only in the early years was the FIC active in the pursuit of employment restructuring, even though this had been the intention when NEP was first formulated. Also, the name notwithstanding, the FIC has concerned itself not only with the role of foreign investment; all acquisitions of assets above stipulated magnitudes, mergers and take-over of companies-whether they involved foreign or just domestic investors-have to be approved by FIC.

The NEP at its inception in 1970 envisaged that by 1990 the ownership of capital would be such that 30 per cent was owned by Bumiputera as against no more than 2 per cent in 1970, 40 per cent by non-Bumiputera nationals as against some 35 per cent in 1970 and 30 per cent by foreign investors as against well over 60 per cent in 1970. The FIC was mandated to formulate policy guidelines on foreign private investment, to monitor progress and make recommendation for investment policy changes, to supervise ministries and agencies concerned, to regulate the acquisition of assets, mergers and take-over of companies.

Over time and as Malaysia has developed and its economy has been even more integrated in the global economy, the FIC has changed rules and practices so as to allow the more unencumbered flow of market forces in respect of corporate equity structures. However, the FIC is still in place and retains its functions as an important regulatory and monitoring agency.


2. Privatisation

In the early 1980 the Government initiated what became an active and deep-going privatisation process. A proactive Malaysian Privatisation Plan was prepared by a consortium of local and foreign consultants, approved and published. Privatisation included turning Government departments and agencies into corporations as well as management buy out of Government companies. The record for the past 25 years shows that in all 500 projects were privatised and well over 100 000 public sector employees were transferred to the private sector. Privatisation remains today a major aspect of national development policy. Where possible, it is so directed as to enhanced the participation of Bumiputera ownership, employment and business opportunities in line with NEP objectives.


3. Public Procurement

Government departments and agencies, as part of both operation and development activities, provide a major market not only for employment (up to 10 % of the total workforce), but also for services and products supplied by the private sector. In various ways Malaysia seeks to use this market power to contribute to the NEP objectives. Preferential treatment of Bumiputera suppliers is the order of the day for some categories of products and services, contracts for standard building and construction are awarded to Bumiputera entrepreneurs and corporations, business opportunities are created as part of special Bumiputera vendor programmes etc. Over time this has had positive effects and the empowerment of Bumiputera through public procurement continues as a major thrust today. Yet, the system-as practiced-has also led to a state of over dependence by many Bumiputera entrepreneurs on preferential public procurement. Moreover, the system has proved difficult to operate with both effectiveness and perceived fairness.



D. NEP Debate and Decision


It is in the nature of economic policies in this area that they raise controversy. And so they should. While it may not be seriously contested that-in the interest of a cohesive and viable Malaysian nation-the successful attainment of the NEP objectives would be of lasting benefit to each and all ethnic groups, the implementation of NEP policy measures, each seen by itself, will be felt-and rightly so-to have costs borne disproportionately by the non-Bumiputera and giving benefits to the Bumiputera which are discriminatory for the non-Bumiputera. Also, some benefits have to be accorded now in order for benefits to flow much later. An illustration of this may be the terms of “the Social Bargain” which created the basis for the immediate right of citizenship for a million or more immigrant non-Malay residents against the long term commitment to ensure that the Malays be brought up roughly at par with the non-Malays in the future economic life of the nation. And moreover, the very purpose and justification for specific NEP policy measures may be defeated in actual implementation, resulting in misdirected preferences, serious leakages and costly inefficiencies. Much of the opposition to the NEP is based on the more blatant such misuse of NEP instruments, giving the whole NEP effort a bad name in some circles. Illustrations may be the reservation of a minimum of 30% of new equity holding for Bumiputera; and the preference accorded in public procurement.

Policy decisions in Malaysia have often emerged in part through a special process of consultation between leading personalities in political parties and interest groups. While for the original NEP the imprint of Tun Razak himself is very much in evidence, he successfully sought to build a broad consensus in support of the new strategy and its specific policies. One such step was to create what was called the National Consultative Council which allowed influential representatives of a wide range of political groupings and economic interests to deliberate freely but in closed sessions the needs and options for handling the challenges to national cohesion and development. Similarly, in 1989 when the planning period of 20 years of NEP restructuring was coming to conclusion, a National Consultative Council (with the Malay acronym MAPEN) was convened, again with a membership representing a cross section of Malaysian society. Then, in 2000 when the National Development Plan (NDP) for the 1990s was coming to a close, a second National Economic Consultative Council (referred to as MAPEN 2) was convened. And earlier this year, as a follow-on to the National Missions as formulated in the Ninth Malaysian Plan, a similarly constituted 50 member National Unity Board was established.

While the Government paid considerable attention to the findings and recommendations of these Councils, they were not always accepted in policy formulation and implementation. Yet the deliberation in the Councils provided both general orientation and specific input for Government decision making. These Councils have allowed its broad and influential membership to gain a more balanced insight into the nature of the challenges to nation building and to find common ground. Moreover, to an extent, the Council deliberations have helped create for its membership a sense of ownership of the NEP.

 Ever since it origin, the NEP itself and-even more-its implementation have been hotly contested. The central objectives of the NEP have had the full acceptance of successive Governments to this day, but they have been pursued with varying determination and consistency. Sometimes pressures for changes have been accepted in the rules of application of particular instruments of NEP policies, sometimes in complete retreat. The initial formulation of the NEP and its subsequent elaboration in the early years could draw on strong and focused political will. However, the success of the strategy depended crucially on close monitoring of implementation for impact, effectiveness and shortcomings. The monitoring of the course of restructuring of the ethnic employment pattern in the private sector, which is such a critical element in the NEP, has been particularly weak. So has the build-up of statistics on the ethnic distribution of different forms of capital. This has left the Government without the information base needed for confident decision making on how best to interact and dialogue with the private sector so as to gradually come to grips with the ethnic disparity issues.


E. The Outcome : Economic Growth and Ethnic Economic Disparity


The NEP has shown itself, in spite of some shortcomings, to be an effective policy for dealing with the economic and ethnic problems of Malaysia. During the NEP era Malaysia achieved one of the highest rates of economic growth in the world, reduced poverty and restructured the production and income pattern to gradually contain rising ethnic economic disparity when it was implemented firmly particularly from 1970 – 1987. The NEP had shown that the two twin objectives of maximum economic growth and the reduction of ethnic economic imbalances were mutually reinforcing. The experience of implementing the NEP gives a valuable lesson to policy makers, namely in this country at least, it is possible to achieve optimal growth and reduction of inequality at the same time. Our experience shows that the upper ceiling is at about 7% of growth. Beyond that rate there would be a trade off between growth and equity as the implementation of the National Development Policy shows. There should not be extremes of implementation either for growth or distribution-a balance should be struck and managed, by careful monitoring to adjust policies accordingly as required, to be on the simultaneous optimal paths of growth and distributions.

The NEP has been criticised as an anti-Chinese discriminatory policy and to take away what they already owned. The evidence suggests that this criticism is not valid. Under the NEP and the National Development Policy regimes, Chinese capital have replaced foreign capital as the most dominant force in the Malaysia economy replacing the latter.

 What the NEP did was to redistribute the INCREMENTS of the Gross National Product newly created by joint cooperative efforts in proportions to their contributions, and not the distribution of the whole economy. Nor was there a threat of nationalization or coercion of foreign or Chinese assets. The Federal Constitution protects the economic and social rights of the Chinese and others. What they already owned in theirs, and the NEP was designed not to touch those right and ownerships. The fact was, ‘The efforts to attain these objectives (of the NEP) will, in turn, be undertaken in the context of rapid structural change and expansion of the economy so as to ensure that no particular group experiences any loss or feels any sense of deprivation in the process’. (Mid-Term Review of the Second Malaysia Plan 1971-1975)

 All Malaysians gained from the NEP irrespective of the social and ethnic groups. GDP per capita in real terms increased by about 4% a year on average over the 50 years since Independence. Ethnic income disparity, already very high in 1957, deteriorated further in the years up to the early 1970s when NEP was introduced. In 1990, after two decades of NEP, the income disparity in favour of the Chinese as against the Bumiputera had been reduced to nearly 7 to 4 as against 9 to 4 in 1970. Since 1990, in fact since the mid 1980s, there has been no further sustained improvement in the ethnic income ratios. Now, however, the recently announced National Mission as contained in the RMK-9 document is set to not only maintain the rate of growth in per capita GDP at well over 4%, but also to bring in an epoch of sustained gradual correction in the ethnic income ratios, specifically to bring the ratio of Chinese to Bumiputera income down to 6 to 4 in 2010 and to 5 to 4 in the course of the 2020s.


F. The NEP Today

 The original NEP was developed in a long term perspective with targets to be achieved within the first 20 years. In 1990 the framework was reoriented into the National Development Policy (NDP) for the 1990s and presented in the perspective of Vision 2020, outlining the aim of Malaysia attaining developed nation status by the year 2020. While specifies of policy have changed over the decades, the core NEP objectives of national unity, growth and social equity have remained-although with shifting emphasis. In 2005, a new policy and implementation framework-The National Mission-was drawn up, outlining the approach to be taken to achieve Vision 2020.

 The National Mission is a framework aimed at obtaining greater impact and performance. It identifies five key thrusts:

 First: To move the economy up the value chain so as to sustain a growth rate of at least 6%. For Malaysia to be successful within today’s increasingly competitive market place, moving out from its “middle development” stage towards a human capital driven economy, this will require

 Increasing the productivity, competitiveness and value added of establish activities in agriculture, manufacturing and services sector; 

Generating new sources of wealth and upgrading employment opportunities in technology and knowledge intensive sectors such as biotechnology and skills based services; 

Giving a lead role to the private sector, enhancing small and medium enterprise development, increasing public-private partnership and attracting targeted high-quality foreign direct investment. 


Second: To raise the capacity for knowledge an innovation so as to reach specific targets set for educational improvements for research and development, for the penetration rate of personal computers etc.


Third: To address persistent socio-economic inequality through focused efforts on reaching the right target groups and by providing opportunities for employment and advancement. Here time limited specific targets are set for poverty eradication and for reduction of disparities within and between ethnic groups, between rural and urban areas as well as between regions of the country. The employment structure and hierarchy in the economy is targeted to better reflect the full and fair participation of all groups in the population. In addition, targets are set for ethnic distribution of assets, both equity holdings and ownership in residential and commercial property.


Fourth : To improve the standard and sustainability of quality of life by action on many fronts from better management of natural resources to ensuring public safely and security and to promotion of the rich Malaysia cultural heritage.


Fifth: To strengthen the implementation capacity by improving public service delivery, addressing actual and perceived corruption in both public and private sectors, enhancing corporate governance by strengthening the legal and regulatory frameworks and also strengthening the roles of Parliament, media and civil society.


G. The Relevance of the NEP type of policy for future economic policies of this country.


The Malaysian NEP story as depicted above of advance towards the distribution objectives and then retreat or consolidation at half way and now renewed efforts to advance again holds lessons for the future. They are:


The importance of growth

Broad based growth to ensure that disadvantaged groups can be more fully and effectively included as participants in the production process through employment, eventually at par with those already in places, and in ownership, management and control of enterprises is less firmly resisted-in conditions of growth and expansion.

Growth is a matter of increasing productivity in given economic activities; it is also a matter of shifting employment from lower to higher productivity sectors and activities. In the evolution of the Malaysian economy in recent decades, both these growth factors have been operating. With education, training and opportunity large components of the labour force have move to higher levels of productivity by both avenues. The NEP strategy focusing on a more rapid and continuing shift of Bumiputera into activities of high productivity has led to high growth rates overall, even if the affirmative action to do so may have meant foreclosing-at least in the short run-some opportunities for more rapid advancement of the non-Bumiputera.


Employment creation and poverty alleviation

The speed and pattern of growth in a largely traditional economy, as was Malaysia in 1970, need to be such as to increasingly include the underemployed and unemployed in the growth process, specifically creating opening for those wishing to move into the modern sector. Thus, economic growth has to be encouraged and guided along an employment intensive path. Largely through these approaches, Malaysia reduced its poverty rate from a high of one household in two in 1970 to less than one in five in 1990 with further significant improvement in subsequent years.


Education, training and opportunity

In Malaysia a pre condition for success in the labour market has been the raising of the levels of general literacy and basic skills and of general and specialized education at secondary and tertiary levels. In these respects the Bumiputera were at a great disadvantage at Independence and when NEP was initiated in 1970. The lifting of the educational standards of the Bumiputera to that of their compatriots of other backgrounds has therefore been a constant Endeavour of the Government, including scholarship and stipends, multiplication of educational facilities, imposition of quotas for University entrance so as to allow for an ethnic distribution of student body in closer accord with the population structure. Some of these efforts by Government to improve quality and quantity of supply of manpower from the disempowered majority groups have been controversial and at times arguably misapplied. Yet, they have been essential to the gradual improvement of the position of the Bumiputera in the pattern of employment in the private sector.


Role of the State and the private sector


In Malaysia throughout the 50 years since its independence, the private sector and market forces generally have been relied upon to be the major agents of growth and modernizations. At the same time the Government at national, state and local level has set and re-set the framework within which the market operates. Malaysia has a strong tradition of planning, setting time bound targets for overall and sectoral development and carefully ensure that the need for more balances is respected.

Malaysia has also sought to deal with real or perceived shortcomings and failures of the market, be it in the area of labour supply, in the availability of investment funds, in attention to under researched potentials for growth and efficiency, in opportunities for social policy actions etc. etc.

This country has succeeded in maintaining generally constructive interaction between the State and the private sector by adopting a proactive business policy and an open market regime. When it comes to the still unmet need for empowerment of the Bumiputera in the economy, the problem expresses itself most generally in the private sector. The Government has at times made overtures to the private sector to overcome any built in practice of discrimination against the Bumiputera; thus aiming to ensure that the private sector can become part of the solution, not only of the problem of ethnic imbalances in the market economy.

H. Conclusion

The NEP was launched as part of an overall strategy of Tun Razak, to reunite and rebuild the country after the traumatic experience of 1969. Besides its objective of creating prosperity for all Malaysians, so that no community would experience a sense of loss and deprivation, it equally stressed the important objective of uplifting the economic status of the Malays, in line with the spirit and intent of the ‘Social Bargain’, the Federal Constitution and the RUKUNEGARA. In formulating the policy, the lessons of past policies were valuable, namely that the efforts of the previous years, in bits and pieces and not in a comprehensive manner, were not sufficient to redress the economic imbalances against the Malays vis-à-vis the non-Malays, even if implementation and the delivery system could be improved. Indeed past policies had increased the gap between the Malays and other groups. It was the basic underlying assumption of the NEP strategists, as proved by the riot of 1969, that too much poverty and the much inequality, stacked against the Malays, who form the majority of the population, could only bring further discontent and trouble. The need and indeed the policy was designed to shift and integrated the Malays into the main stream of development of commerce and industry, and prevent them from being permanently marginalized in the backwards sectors. The strategists firmly believed that unless the Malays participate on a genuine basic in the production process of the country, they would be permanently left behind. Indeed as the evidence of implementing the NEP shows, it is the only viable option to solve the ‘Malay problem’. It is the Unfinished National Business today, as inequality has risen again to the levels of the pre-1969 era, moderated somewhat in some years.

Malaysia has on often positive, albeit chequered, experience with the NEP to deal with gross ethnic disparities and to move towards a sustainable and balanced nation in diversity. The lessons of this experience, as applied to the now more developed Malaysia economy, are under scrutiny today. Instruments of policy as designed and implemented in past years are being left aside or redesigned and the search for other instruments is ongoing.

The NEP is a national objective, not a Malay objective per se, as being interpreted and promoted by some quarters based more on prejudices rather than on empirical evidence. The policy therefore can only be successful with broad and informed public support. While group interest will be affected differently, they must be brought to accept accommodation and compromise in the wider interest of national cohesion and political stability, which itself is a precondition for sustained development. Perhaps the major lesson that can be learned from the NEP experience is that deep seated structural disparities in employment, income and assets along ethnic lines can only be corrected gradually and over decades, even generations. And while realities on the ground and ill winds from abroad call for flexibility and compromise, eventual success depends on firmness of resolve and persistence of pressures for change. Ethnic economic balance policy can be made to work, but it requires clarity of objectives and wide acceptance of the need for a national effort in which both the State and the private sector play their part.

 Malaysia enjoyed political and socioeconomic stability since 1969, and to a degree the NEP contributed to this success. There has not been any racial riot since then. But we cannot rest on our laurels while the pressure builds up beneath the ostensible happy, calm and smiling faces of the Malaysian society. Wide and rising economic imbalances persist today as they did before the NEP era, and the division coincides with racial, cultural, linguistic, and religious divisions. Sooner or later there will be eruptions. We pray to ALLAH that this country will be spared the agony of recurrence of such a misfortune, but that is the pattern in countries with extreme inequality where the majority or even the minority are excluded from the full development process and deprived of their full socioeconomic human rights. The fact is that this country remains as one of the most unequal countries in the world. It must therefore continue to be addressed firmly as the NEP did, for the common good of all Malaysians. Even in a homogenous society the issue has to be confronted directly with decisiveness, as the situation is unacceptable by any standard of a civilized society especially one that aspires to be a developed country by 2020. It would be a historic policy mistake not to take the dangerous problems of ethnic imbalances seriously. Malaysia experienced it in 1969, so also most other countries which failed to address the issue as a national priority policy. But the history of implementing the NEP from 1970-1987 shows, the phase when the policy was firmly implemented, that it is possible for this country to reduce extreme inequality while simultaneously pursuing a policy of maximum economic growth. Tun Razak took the risk without having a precedent case policy to emulate. But we can now learn from the lesson of our own history if we so desire.



Kuala Lumpur 

12th October 2007/30 Ramadan 1428









Selected References


Anand, Sudhir, Inequality and Poverty in Malaysia-Measurement and Decomposition.

Oxford : Oxford University Press, 1983.


Chua Amy, World on Fire. Heinemann, 2003.


Economic Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s Department, Second Malaysia Plan 1971-1975.

Kuala Lumpur : Government Printer, 1970.


Economic Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s Department, Mid-Term Review of the Second Malaysia Plan 1970-1975. Kuala Lumpur : Government Printer, 1973.


Economic Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s Department, Privatization Masterplan. Kuala Lumpur : Government Printer, 1991.


Economic Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s Department, FIC Guidelines on Acquisition of Interest, Mergers and Take-overs by Local and Foreign Interest. Kuala Lumpur : Government Printer, 2003.


Economic Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s Department, FIC Guidelines on Acquisition of Properties by Local and Foreign Interest. Kuala Lumpur : Government Printer, 2003.


Economic Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s Department, Ninth Malaysia Plan 2006-2010. Kuala Lumpur : Government Printer, 2006.


Economic Planning Unit, Prime Minister’s Department, Fifty Years of Charting Malaysia’s Development. Kuala Lumpur : Government Printer, 2007.


Faaland, Just. Ninth Bank of Namibia Annual Symposium 2007, Broad based Economic Empowerment : The Experience of Malaysia : Chr. Michelsen Institute, Bergen, September 2007.


Faaland, Just, Jack Parkinson and Rais Saniman, Growth and Ethinic Inequality-Malaysia’s New Economic Policy. Bergen : Chr. Michelsen Institute/Kuala Lumpur : Utusan Publications and Distributors Sdn Bhd, 2003. (First published in 1990 by C.Hurst and Co. UK).0+


Gomez, Edmond Terence and K.S. Jomo, Malaysia’s Political Economy-Politics, Patronage and Profits. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press, 1999.


Jomo, K.S., Beyond 1990 : Considerations for a New National Development Strategy. Kuala Lumpur : University of Malaysia, Institute of Advanced Studies, 1989.


Mahathir, Mohamed, Malaysia : The Malay Dilemma. Singapore : Federal Publications, 1977, 3rd edition.


Mahathir, Mohamed, Malaysia : The Way Forward (Vision 2020). Kuala Lumpur, 1991.


Ministry of International Trade and Industry, Third Industrial Master Plan 2006-2020. Kuala Lumpur, 2006.

Published in: on August 10, 2008 at 18:33  Comments (10)