When All The Gold is Gone...

Sorcha Faal wrote an interesting article AT THIS LINK about former International Monetary Fund (IMF) Chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Please check it out if you have the time.

Thanks! Have a great day!

And now, it is Bahrain!

Check out this report HERE about how army patrols and tanks locked down the capital of this tiny Gulf kingdom after riot police swinging clubs and firing tear gas smashed into demonstrators, many of them sleeping, in a pre-dawn assault Thursday that uprooted their protest camp demanding political change. Medical officials said four people were killed.

Hours after the attack on Manama's main Pearl Square, the military announced on state TV that it had "key parts" of the capital under its control and that gatherings were banned.

CLICK HERE for the rest of the entry.

BELIEVABLE BALA?

The 1st Statutory Declaration (SD) preamble is that of someone proud of their length of service and promotions, look at the length and detail of the preamble. The 2nd SD preamble is short, it's just a formality, not a personal expression. The style (wording) of the preambles and SDs gives the impression they were written by different persons.

I conclude Bala wrote the first SD but somebody else wrote the second SD.

Various blogs have focussed on the money Bala was paid, saying he is not credible, the SD was done merely for money.

As i recall, several days ago, it was revealed Bala's family was being held hostage.

I think the safety of his family motivated Bala, not money. I think Bala is credible. If Bala's tale was not credible, then why didn't Najib counter the tale with evidence?

WRITTEN BY PAKAC LUTEB

You can read more at THIS LINK.

NOT AN OPTION

A lot has been written lately by many parties regarding judicial reform. The writers focus on independence of the judiciary and the integrity of judges. Those are absolutely essential components of a judiciary in a democratic society.

However, they are far from sufficient.

If all the judiciary has is independence and judges who have high integrity, what will result is decisions that are merely the administration of law: if someone commits offence X they receive punishment Y. Justice will be absent.

Laws are made by the Legislature. Members of Parliament, however noble their intent, may fail to be aware of some consequences of laws they create.

They may lack the imagination to see the consequences or the situation causing a particular consequence may not be foreseeable. For example, the technology involved in the unjust situation may not yet exist when the law was created.

Sometimes unforeseen consequences can result in great injustice if laws are blindly administered.

There is a remedy that injects justice into the administration of laws. It is called a Jury.

Juries inject common sense and flexibility into the administration of law. They do that with their collective wisdom and intelligence.

Abraham Lincoln reportedly said "You can fool all the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time".

That is very true in the case of juries. Jurors are likely to understand the facts of a case, no matter how convoluted the arguments of the lawyers.

In addition to juries injecting justice into a judicial system, they also give credibility to the judicial system and the decisions reached.

In simple terms, which is less likely to be bribed, coerced or intimidated into arriving at a particular decison, 1 or 2 judges, or a jury of 10 (or 12) members of the rakyat?

To have a judiciary in Malaysia that is fit for a democratic society, trial by jury is NOT an option, it is a necessity.

WRITTEN BY PAKAC LUTEB

A SPORTING CHANCE

Is it good sportsmanship to keep moving goalposts to favour one's own team? BN/UMNO seems to believe it is. Witness the many instances of when in the course of a trial the Prosecution has amended the charges.

Often it's done when the charges clearly can't be sustained in the face of the evidence.

An infamous example is Anwar's first sodomy case, where the building the sodomy allegedly happened had not yet been built at the date of the offence as stated in the charge.

Any proper court would have thrown out the charge and acquitted Anwar.

But the courts of Malaysia are anything but proper and permitted the Prosecution to amend the date of the charge.

Sometimes the Prosecution amends the charges to harass a defendant,the changes to the charges being intended to send the accused and their lawyer from pillar to post, even though that is blatant abuse and misuse of the Court.

The Prosecution must, if a trial is to have any legitimacy at all, give the defendant a sporting chance, by not amending charges during a trial.

WRITTEN BY PAKAC LUTEB

Will "UTUSAN" RUN DOWN DR. PORNTIP?

Well-known Thai pathologist Dr Porntip Rojanasunan told the coroner's court today that there was an 80 per cent possibility of homicide and 20 per cent chance of suicide in the death of political aide Teoh Beng Hock.

This flies in the face of local investigators who were so insistent on pushing the suicide theory, they even went to the extent of insisting Teoh's parents undergo psychological evaluation

In the light of this will "UtusanMeloya" tell the whole truth of her testimony, give barebones info or spin ?

Below are some hypothetical headlines for the sake of satire (or are they) ?

"Maksud nama Dr.Porntip adalah "Hujung Lucah" dan rambutnya ala punk, dia adalah musuh orang Melayu"

" Hujah Dr.Porntip hanya merujuk pada kes Thai, keaadaan di Malaysia lain, di mana tulang tenkorak kita lebih kebal"

"Daripada 10,000 kes yang dikaji Dr.Porntip hanya 100 shj yang membabitkan terjun mati, jadi dia bukan pakar"

"Si-rambut pelangi Porntip mungkin bersubahat dengan ejen yahudi cawangan DAP, pastinya angkara DSAI lagi"

"Dr.Porntip lebih prihatin terhadap simati, tetapi kita prihatin terhadap yg hidup dan di salah tuduh"

"Dr.Porntip menghina kewibawaan pakar tempatan, jom boikot produk Thai"

'Dr.Porntip kelihatan muda walaupun menjangkau usia lebih 50 tahun - mungkin kerana memakai susuk dan ilmu-hitam"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer -above is for the purpose of satire and is not intended to bear any semblance or insinuate our Local Daily- Utusan Malaysia which has been hailed by no less than our Prime Minister for their level of professionalism. Read more HERE and also OVER HERE.

Written by Vijay Kumar Muragavell

A COMMON TOOL

Police often lie to suspects when questioning them, to mislead the suspect to reveal information they would otherwise not give the police. Lying is a common tool of police.

Despite the PI Bala being ex-police and knowing that police lie, Bala still believed his ex-colleague and friend in the Brickfields police who invited Bala for a teh tarik after Bala's first SD.

What Bala found instead of teh tarik was that the machinery of government had moved hyperfast and prepared a second SD negating the first SD, also Bala found the government had engaged a different lawyer for the second SD.

After presenting the second SD, Bala, his wife and children disappeared. Some time later, there was also no news of Bala's nephew, who had been close to Bala and very worried when Bala disappeared.

What happened to Bala and his relatives?

Because the police lie as a normal thing in police work, they could very well lie when presenting DNA evidence in court.

For example, the police could lie that a suspect's DNA matches the DNA from a crime scene when in fact there is NOT a match. The police could also simply decide to avoid the trouble and expense of DNA testing and claim there is a match with a suspect's DNA when actually a DNA test was never performed.

A general question: What court or judge or lawyer would allow a Bill that removes the right to challenge something in court? If no challenge is possible, the courts, judges and lawyers will be

unemployed, as they would have nothing to do.

Clause 24 of the DNA Bill prevents challenging DNA evidence in court, however, other challenges might be possible.

A court, or Parliament, may be able to challenge the validity of the Bill itself.

The validity of the Bill is suspect because of the removal of judicial review.

Removing judicial review and putting handling of DNA evidence under the police violates the separation of powers of the Executive and the Judiciary.

The lack of judicial review is a characteristic of police states, NOT democracies.

With passage of the DNA Bill, Malaysia is officially a police state, although it has been an unofficial police state for some decades, thanks in large part to Mahathir's molest and rape of the judiciary, including ending trial by jury.

Malaysia URGENTLY needs a return of trial by jury.

Have you noticed, in all the talk by the government about judicial reforms, trial by jury has NEVER been mentioned?

That's because trial by jury is what the government fears MOST.

The absence of trial by jury is the MOST powerful tool the government has against the rakyat, even more powerful than the ISA.

That is why the government has talked of reviewing the ISA but NEVER, not even ONCE, spoken of considering a return of trial by jury.

When there is trial by jury, the rakyat, not a judge, decides guilt or innocence of an accused.

The government can control a judge but it can't control the rakyat, that's why the government is truly terrified of trial by jury.

Please excuse any typos i may have missed, my cat Claws 24 was helping me write by stepping on the keyboard.

Written by Pakac Luteb

A BASIC PRINCIPLE

Although this article is on a serious matter, Clause 24 of the DNA Bill, I will begin on a light note that is a pun and conclude with yet another pun.

My cat has six toes on each foot. It's a rare mutation that led me to name my cat Claws 24.

Now for the serious stuff. A court is the appropriate forum, in fact the only forum, to challenge evidence in a trial. That's a basic principle.

Because of that, any ban on challenging evidence in court makes the court useless and irrelevant. The effect of such a ban is to make the court non-existent, because such ban makes possible conviction of an accused on evidence that contains an error, is fabricated or in fact even non-existent although claimed to exist.

Some problems with convicting an accused solely on the basis of DNA: DNA evidence can be easily contaminated with other DNA or damaged (the strands of DNA broken into smaller pieces) and it can even be fabricated, please refer to THIS LINK.


Clause 24 makes the DNA Bill a tool to convict anyone of anything, by claiming that there is DNA evidence of guilt of the accused.

Malaysia Today has a nice article AT THIS LINK about how a mistake can come back later with a painful bite:

Clause 24 may be such a mistake, a mistake that may come back to bite Najib and Rosmah.

Here is a way they may become bitten:

First, 2 facts:

Fact 1: Everywhere we go we are leaving samples of our DNA. The samples are small, but they can be amplified by a method called PCR, until there is sufficient DNA for testing.

Fact 2: When a woman is pregnant, some cells from the baby inside her circulate in her blood. Thus, cells from her baby can be found throughout her body, in any tissue where there is blood supply, including in her bones. Remember, it is in the bones, in the bone marrow, where blood is made. Those cells from the baby of course
contain DNA from both it's parents, including the father. Bones of Altantuya are in Mongolia and her father is a medical doctor, he would know who can extract DNA from her bones.

Taken together, those 2 facts potentially could lead to DNA of Najib being compared with DNA from the bones of Altantuya.

If there is a match, because of Clause 24, it would be conclusive evidence, not allowed to be challenged in any court, that Najib made Altantuya pregnant.

Even if the DNA match were to be totally fabricated or non-existent, it would still be impossible for Najib to challenge in any court, because of Clause 24.

Thus Najib, because of Clause 24, could be found, without any means to challenge the evidence, to have impregnated Altantuya, giving motive for Rosmah to want to kill Altantuya.

With motive to kill Altantuya and Rosmah being present at the place Altantuya was killed, her presence at the murder scene being claimed by both Bala's first SD and by RPK, presumably Rosmah wanted to be there to be confident that Altantuya was truly dead, Rosmah could be convicted of murder and sent to the gallows.

The long saga of the murder of Altantuya would thus finally conclude.

Malaysians might gain a new peribahasa (saying) from the sordid tale,
"It's not over until the fat lady hangs".

Written by Pakac Luteb

FIGHT CORRUPTION

Corruption is a phenomenon that can be encountered in any country of the world. No matter what the country is – poor or rich, democratic or authoritarian, big or small – it is difficult to avoid corruption. While corruption in the world can be estimated at approximately 1 trillion dollars; meanwhile, about a billion people are living in the conditions of extreme poverty. There are different types of corruption including political corruption, data corruption, linguistic corruption.

Political corruption means that the government officials are using their powers and positions for personal gain. In most countries of the world it is regarded to be illegal. For some countries this phenomenon is so ordinary that people consider it to be normal interacting with the government officials.

Corruption takes different forms including:

bribery

grafts

extortion

kickbacks

cronyism,

embezzlement etc.

When corruption is tolerated within an economy it can also have negative effects on the political and economic development. For example, government corruption can shift government spending from positive growth and social affairs toward spending on unnecessary programs or low quality investments related to the infrastructure of the government . Government officials often take bribes that persuade them to spend money on low quality investments that are beneficial for personal gain rather than the gain of the country or economy as a whole.

Corruption seriously undermines democracy and good name of political institutions. Economic, political and social effects of corruption are really hard to estimate.

Corruption can be solved in many ways. One way corruption can be solved is with extensive background checks to see if a government official misused any governmental powers for illegitimate private gain. Considering the fact that some corrupt people still may get in a governmental position because of false information, there are others ways to avoid and limit corruption.

Another way to limit corruption would be to organize a specialized group of people to investigate suspicious activities. Another method is to develop awareness so that others could learn to stop corruption as well.

It is important that citizens report incidences of corruption and for the government to take firm action against corrupt officials and leave no stone unturned in the investigations. Let the guilty ones be brought to court and be sentenced and they must also repay all that they have taken from the people. The authorities concerned must put citizens above all else and endeavour to have a clean government that the country may progress and develop.