My Miscellaneous Page

Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew: Reflections on Good Governance

MM Lee on Good Governance (Part One) MM Lee on Good Governance (Part Two) MM Lee on Good Governance (Part Three)

September 15, 2006

MM Lee says good governance is having a good system to ensure Singapore survives

Good governance is having a good system that will ensure the country survives, so that citizens have secure lives.

That is according to Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew, who spoke at the Raffles Forum.

Some 250 bankers and CEOs listened in on a dialogue between Singapore’s Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew and former US Treasury Secretary, Lawrence Summers.

Mr Lee recounted when he was studying in Britain, he learned something fundamental - govern the country for the benefit of the people.

"And I also decided, watching them, that there’s nothing they can do which I cannot do for myself when I came back here. How can these British officers, with no knowledge of this place run the place better than us?" said Mr Lee.

Since then, Singapore has put the systems in place to ensure stability, provide good housing and education for its citizens and attract foreign investments.

Mr Lee said Singapore has been able to attract some 9000 multi-national companies because it offers 1st world conditions in a 3rd world region.

These include having a good infrastructure and security.

An example Mr Lee cited was that Singapore, a country with no oil, is home to the largest and most efficient oil-refining and petrochemical complex in the region.

Looking ahead, Mr Summers asked Mr Lee what he would like to see of Singapore in 40 years.

"My hope is that there’ll be a government that’s equal to the job as the PAP was. We’ve structured the system such that the competent group that gets in will find a machine that works, don’t tinker with it, run the system properly on the basis of merit, not nepotism and you’ll always find a way out of a problem. My ambition is not to preserve the PAP. My ambition, having created this Singapore, is to preserve the system that produces the answers that we must have as a society to survive," said Mr Lee.

During the hour-long dialogue, Professor Summers also outlined crucial requisites for successful governance, such as maintaining order and a competent government.

"The leverage that comes from successful governance is that much greater; conversely the ability of unsuccessful governance to destroy societies is that much greater. The enemies of order can do far more damage than they ever could before, the failure to achieve competence can generate far greater mobility than ever before. So the first lesson of globalisation is to make successful governance more important than it’s ever been," said Professor Summers.

The two-day Raffles Forum, held in conjunction with the IMF-World Bank Meeting will be an annual event. - CNA

Nazri says there is no case for review

27 Sep 2006

---

KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz does not believe that Tun Salleh Abas has a case.

The de facto Law Minister said that the new information provided by the former Lord President does not merit a review of the 1988 judicial crisis.

"I have not changed my mind and will not ask the Cabinet for a review. I believe there must be a finality to this episode.

"Even if there is a review, there is nothing to stop anyone from asking for a review on the review 10 years down the road. There must be a finality," he said.

Salleh outlined his five points for a review of the 1988 judicial crisis after Nazri had said the Government will consider the review if "new and important" facts emerged.

The minister had said until such time, there was no need for a new tribunal to review the decision of two judicial tribunals that had been accepted by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the government in 1988.

Nazri told the New Straits Times last week that the information he referred to could be in the form of statements from the three affected persons that they had been pressured into leaving their jobs.

On Aug 8, 1988, Salleh and five Supreme Court judges — Tan Sri Azmi Kamaruddin, Tan Sri Eusoffe Abdoolcader, Tan Sri Wan Hamzah Mohamed Salleh, Tan Sri Wan Sulaiman Pawanteh and Datuk George Seah — were accused by the government of misconduct.

The five were suspended but Salleh, Wan Sulaiman and Seah were later sacked.

Dr M: Yes, I told Salleh to go

27 Sep 2006

---

PUTRAJAYA: Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad last night said he had asked former Lord President Tun Salleh Abas to step down.

The former prime minister said that his action was necessary to "prevent any scandal".

"I called him, it’s true. I told him about the problems and said that it was best that he resigned.

"He agreed… Later on (several days later), he decided that he should not step down.

"Then, of course, the government was forced to take action. That’s all. It was necessary to take action," he said, commenting on a statement by Salleh why the sacking of the three judges in 1988 should be reviewed by the government.

Salleh’s account of the meeting with Dr Mahathir is different.

He said he was summoned to the then PM’s office and asked to step down after he was accused of being biased.

He said that during the meeting, he told Dr Mahathir he was not prepared to resign.

Following which, the former PM allegedly threatened to dismiss him by setting up a tribunal.

Dr Mahathir said he could not recall what he had offered Salleh but clearly remembered that he had asked him to resign.

He said following Salleh’s refusal to do so, he was forced "to act".

Salleh Abas gives five reasons to reopen case
‘Dr M told me to resign’

27 Sep 2006
V. Vasudevan

---

KUALA LUMPUR: Tun Salleh Abas yesterday revealed five incidents which he said proved that his fate as the Lord President was sealed before a tribunal heard misconduct charges against him in 1988.

He hoped that these incidents would meet the "new and important facts" criteria set by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz for a review of the 1998 judicial crisis.

"These new facts, I hope, could persuade Datuk Seri Nazri to change his mind. The incidents undeniably go to show that come what may, I must be made to give up my judicial office.

"There would, of course, be other incidents and other details which would emerge if the review is held but for the time being, I shall keep the identities of those unnamed persons concealed," said Salleh yesterday.

The five incidents which Salleh said would shed light on his sacking and the dismissal of Datuk George Seah and Datuk Wan Sulaiman Pawanteh are:

Incident No. 1:

The first incident relates to my meeting with the then prime minister in his office on May 27 in the presence of the then deputy prime minister and chief secretary to the government.

"I was asked by the then prime minister to step down because I was accused of being biased in the discharge of my judicial duties.

"My understanding of this accusation was that it must have been connected with the impending Umno 11 (the case involving 11 Umno members who sought to nuliify the 1987 party elections) case when I decided to establish a nine-member panel of the Supreme Court to hear the appeal.

"I strongly denied the accusation and told him that I was not prepared to resign. Then he threatened to dismiss me by instituting a tribunal under the Constitution. I told him I was prepared to be dismissed rather than leave the judicial office under a cloud."

Incident No. 2:

On May 27 1988, a messenger who was "a very important officer of the government" visited Salleh and tried to persuade him to resign or go on long leave. He rounded up by threatening Salleh with dismissal if he refused.

"Were I to resign, I would be appointed to a lucrative job in Jeddah as a director of an Islamic bank with a high salary, coupled with an unlimited amount of entertainment allowance and travelling expense.

"The officer said he had been authorised to pass this message to me by a very important minister. I was threatened with dismissal and the ignominy of facing a tribunal. I gave the same answer I gave the prime minister earlier."

Incident No. 3:

A month after his suspension, Salleh said he was summoned by some Malay rulers to Istana Kelantan in Jalan Kia Peng.

"I was told by the then Raja of Perlis that should I tender my apologies to and ask forgiveness from the Yang di-Pertuan Agong for writing my letter to his Majesty, my suspension would be lifted and the matter would end there. I was to travel to Istana Bukit Serene with my chief counsel."

But Salleh alleged that the mission failed as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong had been "briefed by two senior government officers from Kuala Lumpur" not to forgive him.

Incident No. 4:

Salleh said his colleagues were suspended to thwart them from hearing a judicial review application challenging the legality and constitutionality of his suspension and the composition of the tribunal to deal with his dismissal.

Incident No. 5:

Salleh said that he and the late Tun Suffian Hashim acted as advisers to the Rulers when the government wanted to curb their immunity.

By then, the Sultan of Johor was no longer the Yang Di-pertuan Agong.

"This was my first audience with the Sultan after my dismissal and he said to me in no uncertain terms that he very much regretted what had happened to me… He said he then realised he had been ‘made use of’."

Salleh said he told the Sultan not to feel sorry for him but "he should express his regrets and apology to the people of this country for losing a judiciary that was independent and could look after their rights."

"For these reasons, I hope Datuk Seri Nazri will present the proposal to the Cabinet for a review of the 1988 judicial crisis so that the truth of this important episode in our nation’s history is uncovered."

Thursday December 29, 2005

Group: Amend Constitution to cure grave legal defect

KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Sikhism feels that a subsection of the Federal Constitution should be repealed to make it clear that the Syariah Court has no jurisdiction to hear matters involving non-Muslims.  

Its president Rev Sri K. Dhammananda said the Moorthy case had raised some constitutional issue as the Civil High Court should be the court to decide on such cases.  

“The council is very disturbed by what has happened today (Wednesday). It is considered a crisis for non-Muslims because they can seek no legal remedy.  

“The facts were not presented to the Civil High Court, therefore it is very hard to accept its decision,” he told a press conference yesterday. 

He called on the Prime Minister and other relevant parties to look into this matter.  

“We call on the Government to urgently cure this grave defect in our legal system by making the necessary amendments to the Federal Constitution and all other legislation so that jurisdiction to determine the validity of conversions into and out of Islam are vested in the High Court where all Malaysians can be parties and have equal rights as witnesses,” he said.  

Related Stories:
High Court declines to intervene
Brother: Accept Moorthy’s conversion to Islam

Saturday January 7, 2006

Resolve issue in civil court

By SA’ODAH ELIAS

PETALING JAYA: The Cabinet is of the view that the civil court should not just brush aside cases pertaining to the status of converts by stating that it has no jurisdiction.  

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz said the matter was discussed at length during the Cabinet meeting on Wednesday. 

On Dec 28, the High Court ruled that it would not disturb the declaration that the late Mount Everest climber Sjn M. Moorthy was a Muslim because the matter was under the syariah court’s jurisdiction.  

The High Court’s ruling came five days after the Syariah High Court declared Moorthy a Muslim.  

Moorthy’s Muslim name was Mohammad Abdullah. 

Moorthy’s widow S. Kaliammal, 30, who was involved in a tussle with the Federal Territory Religious Department (Jawi) for the right to bury Moorthy, had sought a declaration in the civil court that her late husband was a Hindu who had practised the Hindu way of life.  

Following the High Court ruling, Moorthy was buried according to Islamic rites.  

Nazri, however, said the Cabinet’s view was not specific to Moorthy’s case and should not be taken as the Government subscribing to the view that the civil court should have the power to review cases decided by the syariah court. 

The syariah court, he said, has full jurisdiction over cases involving Muslims.  

However, when the status of a convert was in question, the right avenue for the issue to be resolved was through the civil court. 

Nazri said, personally, he felt that the High Court – in ruling that it would not disturb the declaration by the Syariah Court that Moorthy was a Muslim - had taken the “easy way” out. 

The syariah court, he said, would only have full jurisdiction once a convert was declared a Muslim by the civil court and not when his conversion status was in dispute.  

“This fact is very clear. Other than his status as a convert, the question was also raised as to whether Moorthy was in full control of his mental faculties when he converted. This clearly falls under the jurisdiction of the civil court. 

“If the deceased had converted willingly and without compulsion, then Jawi would have all the documents to prove its case in the High Court without using the syariah court to make such a declaration,” he added.  

On Thursday, a Parliamentary Roundtable discussion was held on judicial powers over religious matters.  

Discussion had centred on Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution, which since 1988 had prohibited the civil court from having jurisdiction over syariah court matters.  

Asked to comment on the five resolutions adopted at the roundtable, Nazri said he only agreed to parts if it, as he felt that the syariah court’s jurisdiction over Muslims in this country was not an issue. 

The roundtable was attended by several Members of Parliament, lawyers, representatives from the Interfaith Council, and Malaysian Human Rights Commission chairman Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman, a former Attorney-General .  

Sunday January 8, 2006

Groups favour review of Constitution on conversions

BY ELIZABETH LOOI

PETALING JAYA: Various quarters have expressed support for the Cabinet’s view that the civil court should not brush aside cases pertaining to the status of converts by saying it has no jurisdiction.  

“Everyone deserves a forum to be heard and nobody should be told that he or she has no remedy,” said Syariah lawyer Bazeer Alam Mydin Meera. 

Bazeer said the Government should review Article 121 (1A) of the Federal Constitution, which had since 1988 prohibited the civil court from having jurisdiction over Syariah court matters.  

He said the review was necessary to find out if it had brought any benefit or negative effect to the public, especially in cases involving religion dispute.  

“We need a system in place which allows both Muslims and non–Muslims to be heard.” 

On Friday, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz said the Cabinet felt that while the Syariah court had jurisdiction over cases where the status of a Muslim convert was in question, the right avenue for the issue to be resolved was through the civil court. 

On Dec 28, the High Court ruled that it would not disturb the declaration that the late Mount Everest climber Sjn M. Moorthy was a Muslim because the matter was under the Syariah court’s jurisdiction. The ruling had drawn much attention as to the role of the civil court in such matters.  

Said Bazeer: “We will have to look back at the constitution to address the problem.”  

Civil lawyer Mohd Yusmadi Mohd Yusoff concurred, saying the matter should be dealt with constructively.  

“A constitutional court should be set up to decide where the cases, especially those involving conversion, will be heard.” 

Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism and Sikhism deputy president K. Pardip also said the Federal Constitution should be reviewed. 

“There should be a clear definition of the Constitution because part of it seems to be vague, allowing some judges to take the easy way out,” he said. 

Sisters In Islam legal officer Razlina Razali said such cases were not something new. 

She felt the civil court should have intervened in Moorthy’s case, as it had done before in the previous cases. 

“They cannot tell someone that there is no remedy. This issue must be resolved and not left in a limbo,” she said.  

 

 

Thursday January 12, 2006

Groups laud Pak Lah’s stand on conversion

PETALING JAYA: Various quarters have welcomed Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s assurance that matters related to religious conversion would be spelt out clearly to avoid confusion and dissatisfaction.  

MCA Youth leader Datuk Liow Tiong Lai said the Prime Minister’s stand on the matter reflected his sincerity in looking after the well-being of Muslims and non-Muslims alike. 

“We feel that the Prime Minister’s intervention is crucial in this matter, particularly in grey areas touching on the rights of non-Muslims,” said Liow, who is also the MP for Bentong. 

Liow noted that the recent decision by the High Court on the case of the late Mount Everest climber Sjn M. Moorthy had resulted in a lot of dissatisfaction, particularly among non-Muslims.  

The High Court had ruled on Dec 28 that it would not disturb the declaration that Moorthy was a Muslim as the matter was under the purview of the syariah court.  

Moorthy’s widow S. Kaliammal, 30, had sought a declaration in the civil court to bury her late husband whom she said was a Hindu who had practised the Hindu way of life. 

The Council of Churches of Malaysia (CCM), the National Evangelical Christian Fellowship (NECF) and the Malaysia Hindu Sangam (MHS) also welcomed Abdullah’s statement.  

CCM secretary-general Dr Herman Shastri said serious consideration should be given to Article 121 (1) A of the Constitution, which had blurred the lines of jurisdiction between the Civil and Syariah courts in its present interpretation.  

“Civil courts should be seen to protect and uphold justice of citizens with regard to fundamental liberties guaranteed by the Federal Constitution. In no way should a judge abdicate responsibility in hearing the case of one who seeks to exercise the right to be heard in court,” said Dr Shastri.  

Related Stories:
Pak Lah: There must be no confusion in religious matters
 

 

 

Wednesday January 11, 2006

Pak Lah: There must be no confusion in religious matters

By DERRICK VINESH and SIOW YUEN CHING
north@thestar.com.my

KEPALA BATAS: Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has made it clear that matters concerning religious conversion needed to be spelt out plainly in the Federal Constitution and other laws to prevent confusion among Malaysians. 

“Many feel it is necessary to clarify the question in the laws and Constitution to avoid further confusion,” the Prime Minister told reporters after performing Zohor prayers in conjunction with Hari Raya Aidiladha at Masjid Kubang Menerung here yesterday.  

However, Abdullah cautioned that the matter should be dealt with great care so that it would not go against the beliefs of the various races. 

RAYA KISS: Abdullah giving month-old Nur Dania Hanis Mohd Nasrul a peck as her proud mother Nafishah Mahadzir looks on during his visit to Kampung Kubang Menerong in Kepala Batas.

“We must handle whatever problems that arise with care. We must not allow our emotions to be whipped up over religion and race,” he said. 

The relevant authorities, he said, should be extra careful when initiating any action on such matters. 

“We must all be united, tolerant and respectful of each other’s religion without causing disharmony among ourselves.” 

“In whatever legal action that we initiate, we must also ensure that justice is served to all,” he said. 

He stressed on the right of Malaysians to follow the religion of their choice and said that this must be respected. 

“The country has both Muslims and non-Muslims. We must respect each other’s religion and practices. And we must acknowledge that each religion has its own rights,” he said when asked to comment on the controversy that arose following the Dec 20 death of Mount Everest climber Sjn M. Moorthy. 

His widow and the Federal Territory Islamic Religious Council got into a legal tussle when it was discovered that he had converted to Islam the previous year. Moorthy was eventually buried according to Muslim rites. 

On Dec 28, the High Court ruled that it would not disturb the declaration that Moorthy was a Muslim because the matter was under the purview of the Syariah Court system. 

A coalition of 35 Hindu non-governmental organisations sent a petition last week to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong seeking to restore public confidence in the judicial system following the controversial case. 

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz and several other ministers had said that the Cabinet was of the view that the civil court should not brush aside cases pertaining to the status of converts by stating that it had no jurisdiction over them. 

Abdullah said he was personally observing the case, giving it due attention to have the matter resolved.  

“If possible, we do not wish for such problems to reoccur,” he said. 

Sunday January 15, 2006

Clearing the air on conversions

KUALA LUMPUR: Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Mohd Radzi Sheikh Ahmad will look into matters involving the legal aspects of religious conversions, said Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak. 

The Government was compiling views on religious matters, including conversions, from all parties including non-governmental organisations, said the Deputy Prime Minister. 

“The Government wants to reach a conclusion that is fair and satisfactory to everyone. 

ONE FOR THE ALBUM: Najib chatting with Malacca Chief Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Ali Rustam (second from left) during a photo session before opening the leadership course in Ulu Klang yesterday.

“Such decisions should also not affect the powers of the Syariah court as the authority on Islamic matters,” Najib said after opening a leadership course for Umno division secretaries in Ulu Klang yesterday. 

He was commenting on a memorandum by several NGOs, including the Malaysian Ulama Association, calling on the Government not to repeal Article 121 (1A) of the Constitution, while giving non-Muslims representation in the Syariah courts. 

Last week, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said that matters concerning religious conversion needed to be made clear in the Federal Constitution and other laws to prevent confusion among Malaysians. 

On Dec 28, the High Court ruled that it would not disturb the declaration that the late Mount Everest climber Sjn M. Moorthy was a Muslim because the matter was under the Syariah court.  

The ruling had drawn much attention as to the role of the civil court in such matters. 

In Kuala Terengganu, Deputy Information Minister Datuk Zainuddin Maidin urged the press not to misconstrue the “euphoria of freedom” given by the Prime Minister. 

He said certain newspapers had gone beyond the limit in reporting a recent issue involving Islam. 

“They had touched on a sensitive area, which was previously left untouched. 

“The press should not get carried away with this so-called new freedom to the extent of forgetting the underlying principles which strengthen our economy,” he said.  

Related Stories:
Sense and sensibility on hot issues