Monday, December 20, 2010


16th December 2010 would surely be a day to be remembered in the Malaysian Parliamentary History and I must thank the members of the Malaysian Opposition Party (DAP, PKR & PAS) for planning and making it as a day to be remembered.

Many may still be asking if it was fair to suspend YB Permatang Pauh (Dato' Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim) who also happens to be the Opposition Leader. As a newly elected member of the Parliament - I don't have any doubts and I am indeed convinced upon reading the minutes which was presented by the Rights & Privilege Committee (RPC) that the Suspension of YB Permatang Pauh was indeed the best decision based on matters presented, as such WITHOUT DOUBT I AGREED TO THE MOTION which was presented.

Having said that, there has been many lies being spread by a few responsible opposition politicians or shall I call them 'ANWARINAS' who not only misleading the general public but also have to a certain extend mislead their own party members.

Let me explain, what made me agree to the motion.

On 22nd April 2010, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department - YB Dato' Seri Mohamed Nazri bin Abdul Aziz proposed a motion to the Parliament that on 17th March 2010, YB Permatang Pauh - In his speech mentioned "1999 SATU ISRAEL. 2009 APCO MENASIHATI PERDANA MENTERI DATO' SRI MOHD NAJIB 1MALAYSIA'

That's the issue - that particular statement, as that statement mislead the Parliament. All YB Permatang Pauh had to do, was to let the committee know his stand and defend himself.

The RPC was formed under the Standing Orders of the Dewan Rakyat (80.1), which are as follows;

"There shall be a Committee to be known as the Committee of Priveleges to consist of Tuan Yang di-Pertua as Chairman and six members to be nominated by the Committee of Selections as soon as may be after the beginning of each Parliament. There shall be referred to this committee any matter which appears to affect the powers and privileges of the House. It shall be the duty of the Committee to consider any such matters to them referred, and to report on them to the House"

Following that, the following members were appointed;

YB Beluran, Datuk Ronald Kiandee
YB Muar, Datuk Razali bin Haji Ibrahim
YB Alor Gajah, Datuk Seri Dr. Fong Chan Onn
YB Batang Sadong, Puan Hajjah Nancy binti Shukri
YB Subang, Tuan Sivarasa a/l K Rasiah, and
YB Bukit Gelugor, Tuan Karpal Singh a/l Ram Singh

and, The Tuan Yang di-Pertua acted as the Chairman of the Committee.


The RPC met for the first time on 17th May 2010 and among other things it was decided that it would call the following witnesses to appear as follows;

On 8th June 2010: YB Dato' Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim, and
On 9th June 2010: YB Dato' Seri Mohamed Nazri bin Abdul Aziz and a representative from APCO Worldwide.


The Chairman started the meeting and informed all members that an invitation letter was send out to APCO Worlwide Europe to request them to attend the meeting and that they have responded informing and appointing Mr. Brad Staples, CEO APCO Worldwide Europe, Middle-East & Africa Region would be representing them in this meeting. The Chairman also informed the committee that YB Permatang Pauh would also appear before this committee.

The Chairman then informed the Committee that he has received an application from YB Permatang Pauh who have requested that the committee consider his request to be represented by a lawyer and that the meeting needs to be conducted in a transparent manner and also to be allowed to list down a list of witnesses that would be called - (THIS IS RPC NOT A COURT ROOM) & (YB TUAN KARPAL SINGH & YB TUAN SIVARASA NOT GOOD ENOUGH LAWYERS ? OR MAYBE YB PERMATANG PAUH DONT TRUST THEM)

The committee was then informed that under Standing order 83(7A), as follows;

"By leave of the Select Committee parties whose conduct forms the subject, or one of the subject, of an investigation by that Select Committee, or whose rights and interests are directly affected by the matter which has been referred to that Select Committee for consideration, may appear in person or may be represented by counsel"

and the committee also took note that under Standing order 85, as follows;

"The evidence taken before any Select Committee and any documents presented to such Committee shall not be published by any member of such Committee, or by any other person, before the Committee has presented it's Report to the House". (YB PERMATANG PAUH KNOW THIS VERY WELL, BUT, STILL INSISTED ON WANTING THIS, WHY ? CAUSE NEED TO FIND A REASON TO EXCAPE THE COMMITTEE'S.)

The above rule is clear and the rule does not allow any observers to be in attendance during the investigations as information cannot be published or mentioned outside before it's being presented to the House.

and finally Standing Order 83(2) says as follows;

"A Select Committee shall have power to send persons, documents or papers, and shall have leave to reports it's opinion and observations, together with the minutes of evidence taken before it to the House".

It is clear that Standing Order 83(7A) states that, only with the approval from the Committee, a lawyer can accompany the applicant, while Standing Order 85 says that the investigation cannot be held in the open as it contradicts that rule and standing order 83(2) says that the committee can call have the right to call anyone it wishes to call.

YB Subang, then requested, that other MPs have shown interest to attend and witness the meeting, upon discussions, the RPC felt that it was not needed for them to attend (OBVIOUSLY LAH, BECAUSE THATS WHY WE HAVE YB SUBANG & YB BUKIT GELUGOR THERE TO WAKIL ALL THE MP's)

YB Subang then requested that YB Permatang Pauh to be allowed to bring in his own lawyers, to this the Chairman, explained, that the committee would first call YB Permatang Pauh to enter the meeting room and let him explain why he needs a lawyer and after that the committee can make a decision.

NOW THIS IS INTERESTING: YB Permatang Pauh was called into the meeting (BUT DID HE WALK INTO THE ROOM ALONE?) and along with him a few other uninvited MPs barged into the meeting room. (EVEN AT THIS POINT WE CAN SEE THAT YB PERMATANG PAUH DID NOT HAVE AN INTENTION TO DEFEND HIMSELF, BUT, MORE DRAMA)

YB Bukit Gelugor then asked the chairman, if a decision has been made, on whether to allow other MPs in the meeting room, to which the Chairman said, YES, we have, but if we need to see a division, then that can be done as well.

The Chairman then requested YB Permatang Pauh and other MPs to leave the hall, so that a division can be carried out and a final decision can be made.

In the meantime, the committee expressed regrets that a few MPs barged into the meeting room without prior approval and while the meeting was on going.

YB Subang then proposed a resolution that to allow MPs to attend the proceeding; The resolution was not accepted as 4 members voted against the resolution and 2 members voted for the resolution.

Once this was done, YB Permatang Pauh was requested to enter the meeting room alone to inform him of the decision and to start with the investigation.

YB Permatang Pauh came inside the room and upon hearing the decision, he then requested the right to be represented by a lawyer according to Standing Order 83(7A), YB Permatang Pauh further requested that the lawyer be allowed to present the case on s behalf (JUST LIKE COURT CASE LAH - I GUESS FOR YB PERMATANG PAUH EVERY WHERE IS A COURT ROOM).

The Chairman did mention to YB Bukit Gelugor as well as YB Permatang Pauh that a lawyer can be accompanied with YB Permatang Pauh, but the lawyer would not be able to cross examine and etc. (SURELY CANNOT LAH, THIS IS PARLIAMENT, NOT COURT ROOM).

However, YB Bukit Gelugor insisted that YB Permatang Pauh should not only be accompanied by a lawyer, but that lawyer must also be given the rights to defendAnd ask questions to whoever they want to on behalf of YB Permatang Pauh.

Based on all these arguments presented, the committee yet again discussed if this can be allowed. The committee decided that another division should be held to finalize this decision.

4 members voted against the idea of a lawyer representing YB Permatang Pauh and 2 members agreed with the idea. Since majority did not agree, YB Permatang Pauh's request to have a lawyer represent him was denied. (SHOULD HAVE JUST AGREED WITH THE CHAIRMAN TO LET THE LAWYER ACCOMPANY) (BUT, WHAT TO DO, NEED TO FIND REASONS TO AVOID THE COMMITTEE INVESTIGATION).

The Committee also discussed on the issue whereby, matters which was discussed in the meeting is being explained to the media by some of the Committee Members, the Chairman felt under Standing Order 85, this cannot be done as all findings of this committee must first be presented to the House and only after that the media and the public could be informed. (NOW YOU KNOW WHY YB SUBANG, YB BUKIT GELUGOR WAS SUSPENDED).


It's 9th June 2010 and the RPC meeting is to start at 11:30 am, the Committee was supposed to hear evidence from YB Dato' Seri Mohamed Nazri Abdul Aziz and Mr. Brad Staples (both were available to give evidence).


The meeting did not even start, YB Permatang Pauh barged in even without knocking the door (at this point a few members of the committee have not even arrived for the meeting).

YB Permatang Pauh requested that he be given the priority to appear first before other witnesses are called in (HE FORGOT HIS TURN WAS YESTERDAY, BUT WHEN GIVEN A CHANCE, HE PUT MANY CONDITIONS) and still insisted that he not only be accompanied by his lawyer but also the lawyer will have to be given a right to cross examine (ALAMAK, INI PARLIMEN COMMITTEE, BUKAN MAHKAMAH, YB SUBANG & YB BUKIT GELUGOR DID NOT INFORM HIM OF THE DECISION YESTERDAY).

The Chairman then informed YB Permatang Pauh that his request to be represented by a lawyer has been rejected. Upon hearing the decision, YB Permatang Pauh and his lawyer both walked out of the meeting room (ALAMAK, DONT WANT TO GIVE EVIDENCE AH,

When the meeting began, the Chairman informed the committee that he has received a letter from YB Permatang Pauh requesting the committee to reconsider the decision made earlier to allow his lawyer and also to allow MPs to witness the meeting (WHY LA? JUST GIVE EVIDENCE ALSO WANT SO MUCH DRAMA, KAN YOU ADA 2 FIRST CLASS LAWYERS IN THE COMMITTEE).

The Chairman informed the committee that based on the decision made on 8th June 2010, the committee will not be able to consider this appeal.

YB Subang then requested the Chairman in YB Permatang Pauh could sit in the room while other witneses are providing their evidence, to which the chairman said that tithes would not be possible as a final decision has been made. ( DEPA LUPA INI PARLIMEN, BUKAN MAHKAMAH)

The committee also discussed on the application from YB Puchong seeking permission to allow 10 MP's including him to witness the proceeding of the meeting, the chairman clearly have said that this is not possible based on Standing Order 85 and furthermore a decision has already need made. But, YB Bukit Gelugor kept on asking permission to allow others to attend the meeting, despite knowing that this was not possible.

YB Bukit Gelugor, the seasoned and experienced MP in the house, then went ballistic against the speaker by throwing plenty of unpaliamentary words i.e.'You are suffering from a phobia that I called you a dictator, you got it last time. It goes on and on', 'you don't have to throw tantrums like that' this was a few of those words uttered by YB Bukit Gelugor. (ITS VERY IMPORTANT, THAT AS A PARLIAMENTARIAN WE NEED TO RESPECT THE CHAIR - TAKKAN YB BUKIT GELUGOR TAK TAHU).

The heated arrgument between the Speaker and YB Bukit Gelugor went on and on and to manage the situation and with YB Bukit Gelugor's non stop insults against the Chairman, the Chairman had no other options, other than to call off the meeting on that day


The meeting started at 9:30 am on 3rd December 2010.

The Chairman informed the committte that, on 9th June 2010, both Dato' Seri Mohamed Nazri and Mr. Brad Staples were ready to give their statements to the committee, but, due to reasons which all members are aware, they could not give their evidence.

The Chairman then informed the committee that he has received a letter from APCO dated 19th August 2010 explaining their point with regards to the issue to the Government of Malaysia.

Based on Standing Order 83(2) "A select committee shall have the power to send persons, documents or papers, and shall have leave to report it's opinion and observations, together with the minutes of evidence taken before it to the House". Further to the Standing Order 83(11) 'The Committee may at it's discretion refuse to hear any irrelevant evidence or any recalcitrant witness".

YB Muar then said, since we have all relevant information and documents from all parties involved in this matter, we have the speech made by YB Permatang Pauh on 17th March 2010 and his explanation on 30th March 2010, the debate on the resolution proposed by the Minister on 22nd April as well as the Governments stand on APCO's issue via written replies to YB Serdang on 22nd October 2009, YB Tanah Merah on 18th March 2010 and YB Seputeh on 29th March 2010 and with the written reply from APCO I think the Committee can make a decision.

YB Muar further quoted the speech made by YB Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Koon "tidak ada syarikat perhubungan tempatan atau luar negara yang diupah untuk mempromosi gagasan 1Malaysia secara khusus".

YB Muar also referred to the letter sent by APCO to the Committee (1st Page, Para 7) which read as follows, "We were engaged in June 2009 to provide communications support to the Government of Malaysia. We have been honored to do so. We had nothing whatsoever to do with One Israel. We were not involved in the creation on 1Malaysia" and 3rd Page, Para 5) which read as follows "The current engagement is to share best practices through the provision of Government-wide advice, training and capacity building. The work was designed to address the Government's goals to improve the delivery of information to the public, to communicate quickly and transparently, and to utilize new online technologies. APCO was not and is not involved in assisting the Government of Malaysia with formulating policies"

Based on all the above facts and after giving all the opportunity to YB Permatang Pauh, which he did not make use of the opportunities given to him, instead requesting special privileges, YB Muar felt that the committee should be able to make a decision and that the committee need not spend more time to make the final decision. The resolution has been put forward, all relevant documents have been presented, so the committee should be able to make a decision.

YB Muar also touched on Standing Orders 83(4) "The deliberations of a Select Committee shall be confined to the matter referred to it by the house and any extension or limitation thereof made by the House, and, in the case of a Select Committee on a bill, to the bill committed to it and relevant amendments". This Standing Order refers to the fact that the committee has only been entrusted to make a decision based on the remarks made by YB Permatang Pauh on 17th March 2010 and nothing else.

Based on YB Muar's proposal and justifications, a resolution was proposed to continue the proceedings without the need to call for any more witnesses (WHAT CHOICE DO THEY HAVE, EVERY-TIME YB PERMATANG PAUH WALKS INTO THE ROOM, HE ASK'S FOR SPECIAL PRIVILEGE AND THE IMPOSSIBLES).

A vote was called, with 4 members agreed to the decision and 2 members did not agree to the proposal.

Based on the decision, both YB Subang and YB Bukit Gelugor informed the Chairman that they would not want to be part of the Committee any longer (WONDER WHY DID THIS AFTER THE VOTING).

Other members of the Committee decided to stay on and continue with the meeting.

The committee then looked through the following documents;

a) YB Permatang Pauh's speech on 17th March 2010.
b) YB Permatang Pauh's explanation on 30th March 2010.
c) All the opportunities which was given to YB Permatang Pauh to explain his stand.
d) APCO's official letter

Further to that, YB Muar also proposed a resolution to follow the Standing Order 83(2) " A Select Committee shall have the power to send persons,, documents or papers, and shall have leave to report it's opinion and observations, together with the minutes of evidence taken before it to the House".

Standing Order 83(4) "The deliberations of a Select Committee shall be confined to the matter referred to it by the House and any extension or limitation thereof made by the House, and, in the case of a Select Committee on a Bill, to the Bill commiited to it and relevant amendments.

And 83(11) "The Committee may at it's discretion refuse to hear any irrelevant evidence or any recalcitrant witness. (WONDER WHO IS THE RECALCITRANT WITNESS).

The committee also referred to the following documents;

a) Hansard on 17th March 2010.
b) Hansard on 30th March 2010.
c) Government's reply to YB Serdang on 22nd October 2009 - question number 20, YB Tanah Merah on 18th March 2010 - question number 54 and YB Seputeh on 29th March 2010 - question number 62.
d) Hansard 1st April 2010, and, last but not least;
e) APCO Worldwide's official reply to the Committee dated 19th August 2010.

Based on all the above evidence presented, the Committee felt that it is very clear that YB Permatang Pauh has mislead the House and that his allegations were not true.

The chairman then put it to the Committee that YB Permatang Pauh's allegation is not true and he has misused the rights and privilege's as a Member of Parliament and the Committee has made recommendations to the House - THE RESOLUTION WAS THEN PASSED.

The committee also felt that the allegation made by YB Permatang Pauh has created a bad impression amongst Malaysians and they now look at 1Malaysia with a wrong perception. The Committee recommended that an appropriate punishment should be given to YB Permatang Pauh. The Chairman then proposed that YB Permatang Pauh to be suspended as a Member of Parliament for 6 months - THE PROPOSAL WAS ACCEPTED.

The committee also took seriously the words uttered by YB Bukit Gelugor who insulted the Chairman during the 3rd Meeting which was held on 9th June 2010 and his action caused the disruption of the meeting on 9th June 2010. YB Bukit Gelugor also looked down on the qualification of the member of the committee, which he mentioned to YB Muar "where were you trained?" dan "you were not trained properly".

To avoid similar incidents in the future, the Committee recommended that an admonishment to be done by the Speaker against YB Bukit Gelugor. The recommendation of the committee was accepted.


Upon reading the facts presented to the Committee, the Committee felt that the allegations made by YB Permatang Pauh was not true and has abused the rights and privileges of a Member of Parliament.

As such, the Committee decided and agreed that YB Permatang Pauh to be suspended as a Member of Parliament for 6 months.

P.S. I know that there could be some spelling mistakes in the article, please forgive me. There could be spelling mistakes, but I did not make mistakes in agreeing to the decision made on 16th December 2010.

No comments: