Malaysiakini : Yesterday, Kaarthik told Malaysiakini that he would seek legal advice after receiving the notice to immediately vacate their temple from the land parcel owned by the textile company along Jalan Munshi Abdullah in Kuala Lumpur.

The Jan 13 notice sighted by Malaysiakini urged immediate cooperation and noted that development works would begin within a month’s time.

The textile company also said it has set aside RM1 million, which may be disbursed by Jakel’s lawyers “at any time upon confirmation that the temple has fully vacated the site”.

Failure to comply, they warned, would leave the company with no alternative but to withdraw its offer and take necessary legal action to enforce its rights as the landowner.

Nizam confirmed the matter when contacted by Malaysiakini yesterday.

Concern over threat

Kaarthik emphasised that there have been no delays whatsoever in the temple’s efforts to relocate its premises.

However, he highlighted that despite constant engagement with local authorities and stakeholders since April 2025, they had only received approval for a new building plan in November 2025, and the new land was gazetted for the temple’s use on Dec 10 last year.

“And only yesterday, Jan 15, were we told by email that vacant possession of the plot was ready. In short, we have proceeded with all possible speed since last year,” he said.

Kaarthik also expressed concern over Jakel’s threats of “further escalation” if the temple committee failed to comply with their demands.

He described such language as “inappropriate and unacceptable”, as well as “defiant and disregarding government undertakings”.

He also rebuked the textile company’s claims that they had already received a development order and building plan for their new project on the site, noting that such approvals were also in breach of government directives.

“If such approval has been given by Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL), without our knowledge, the government is obliged to cancel or revoke it, as the government is bound by the March 25, 2025, undertaking.

“DBKL as a government body cannot act in defiance of a public undertaking made by the government itself,” he stressed.

Yesterday, Kaarthik also questioned the government’s commitment and reminded the government to fulfil its promise to the temple’s management committee.

Land dispute

The dispute over the temple land gained national attention last year when Lawyers for Liberty, together with former Malaysian Bar president Ambiga Sreenevasan had publicly criticised Jakel Trading’s plans to develop a mosque on the land.

READ MORE: KINIGUIDE | Exploring temple crisis in the heart of KL

The project would require the relocation of the temple, which remains at its original location along Jalan Bunus Enam, opposite Jakel Mall.

Advocates for the temple’s preservation cited its long history, saying the shrine dates back to the British colonial era and has been a place of worship for generations.

Critics, however, argued that the temple has no legal claim to the land, which was sold by DBKL to Jakel, and should therefore relocate to make way for development.

Following the public outcry, discussions were held involving Jakel, the temple committee, and DBKL, after which City Hall agreed to relocate the temple to a site about 50m from its current location, within the same Jalan Masjid India area. This was also agreed to by the temple’s chairperson.

While a relocation plan was announced, the temple has not been physically moved and continues to operate at its original site pending the finalisation of relocation arrangements.

Malaysiakini : Does it not matter to this party, which led the independence movement, that what Najib did amounted to the biggest kleptocracy the world had ever known, causing money to be stolen from massive bond issues, a first for this country and an assault on the nation?

Is it okay that billions were not only laundered but also stolen from borrowed funds with express authority given by Najib, who signed off on all the money transfers under the memorandum and articles of association of 1MDB, a supposedly strategic development company which chalked up over RM42 billion in liabilities?

How can you justify billions of ringgit in borrowings but very little available for use because most of it had been siphoned away through sham schemes for lavish and wild parties, pricey paintings, overpriced assets, a billion-ringgit yacht, expensive jewellery worth hundreds of millions for Najib’s wife Rosmah Mansor, donations for Umno divisional heads totalling several hundred million ringgit, and a host of other things?

Umno sinking low

Has Umno sunk so low that they are prepared to appeal for a pardon for Najib despite the billions in losses he incurred for the country, causing not only the smearing of the country’s name but huge opportunity costs which may amount to as much as RM100 billion in all?

Or is it because many of its divisional leaders also received money from Najib?

Is Umno not worried about the kind of message sent out if the biggest crook and felon this country has ever known is given a full pardon for his crime? Should they not be clamouring for a heavier sentence, which will send shivers down the spine of those who are thinking of committing similar offences?

Don’t the people in Umno, those people who say they are nationalists and loyal to country, race, and religion, recognise the heinous crime that Najib has committed, or are they mere politicians trying to protect their own kind from crimes against the state?

Loke’s acquiescence

So powerful is the move to get a pardon for Najib that those who want to celebrate a rightful and appropriate sentence for a crime of monstrous proportions have been threatened by Umno goons to the extent that the DAP secretary-general says there is no need for an extra stab against Najib.

Anthony Loke’s comments that his party’s fellow leader Yeo Bee Yin’s celebration of the decision of the court against Najib would damage cooperation within the Madani government is timid at the least and a gross acquiescence against morality and good sense.

If Umno can vociferously condemn a decision of the court, why can’t another person say she will celebrate the decision? Why be afraid of a party which has abandoned all sense of morality in the biggest criminal case of abuse of power and money laundering in the country?

DAP, succumbing to pressure, has lost an opportunity to assert its stand against corruption among politicians and to score some points with its voter base.

Abuse of power

It is immaterial to Najib’s conviction how much money is recovered; the point is that he abused his power to enable the theft, and money actually went into his account from the theft and not from any Arab donation.

Even if all the money is recovered, 1MDB did not have the money for long periods and still had to repay the borrowings with interest, owing as much as RM42 billion.

At a 10 percent per year opportunity cost, the amount lost would be a further RM42 billion after just seven years.

And then there is the cost of overpayments for assets and contracts, bond underpricing, and other costs, which would have added several billions more to take the figure to as much as RM100 billion, easily the biggest loss in any single venture for Malaysia.

1MDB still hangs heavily around Malaysia’s neck, and the release of the man primarily responsible, with the other, Low Taek Jho, who is at large and by most accounts is close to Najib and his wife, will be a gross travesty of justice.

Umno must not be permitted to carry this out. And if Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim ties himself to this, the repercussions at the polls for the Madani government will be heavy.

Because of 1MDB, Umno no longer commands mass support - a corrupt party in steep decline.

Malaysiakini : And how did this “yeye” scandal erupt? Because pictures of such parties were posted on social media. What is it with folks posting illicit activity they engage in, or allowing recording devices at those parties?

I think the most bizarre story I read was the one where a senior police officer in Kelantan made a police report because he discovered his 14-year-old daughter was engaging in sex acts with a teenage boy, and it was recorded on her handphone.

Apparently, making the report was considered brave.

‘Parti yeye’ not the main issue

Are there serious issues with this “parti yeye”? Of course. There is always a possibility that compromising information could be gathered during these parties.

But seeing how the top military brass are involved in all manner of pecuniary criminal enterprises, it would be far easier for foreign intelligence services, criminal enterprises, and yes, even political operatives, to put the squeeze on them rather than low-ranking officers and service personnel getting their jollies off.

And, of course, pressuring junior officers to procure escorts for senior officers not only damages morale but also reeks of the feudalistic mentality that has seeped into the armed forces after decades of systemic political dysfunction.

Let’s be honest, when it comes to the average grunt in the state security apparatus, they are being screwed all the time.

Soldiers frequently have to pay for stuff out of their own pockets, our army bases are substandard because of all the leakages, and service personnel utilise substandard equipment with the added hazard of poor maintenance.

Training leaves much to be desired, with deaths reported in nearly every branch of the armed forces due to either bullying or training without the requisite safety parameters.

And let us not even talk about how many veterans are living rough after service. There is a case going on right now about the restructuring of pension schemes, but just four years ago, veterans were protesting at the national monument because of the screwed-up pension policies of successive Malaysian governments.

While all this is going on, very senior officers in the armed forces are getting rich. Very rich. At the same time, the average grunt gets screwed by racial and religious indoctrination.

Morale in the doldrums

I have spoken to many young people in the armed services, and the major theme I have noticed is that they do not have pride in what they are doing. Who can blame them?

Folks talk about the corruption that goes on in the armed forces, but what gets lost in all the talk is that money and resources, which were supposed to go to the soldiers, get siphoned away. 

When that happens, their standard of living is affected, which leads to their sense of professionalism being affected, too.

I honestly believe that when a senior officer organises these parties, he is narcotising some poor dupes with liquor and sex to ensure some sort of loyalty because they sure as hell do not feel loyal to the organisation tasked with defending the realm.

And please do not bring even more religion into this. Do you really think that an outfit like the Armed Forces Islamic Services Corps (Kagat) is afraid to impose sanctions on senior officers?

Because there is no transparency or independent oversight, how can any rational person be sure that this religious apparatus or personnel from it are not involved in such activity?

Religious organisations, like every other public body in Malaysia, have been mired in corruption scandals.

Remember the Tabung Haji scandal in 2018? Did you see PAS and Umno rallying against that as they did for the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (Icerd)?

As reported in the press, Amanah leader Raja Kamarul Bahrin Shah Raja Ahmad said, “the losses suffered by Tabung Haji and other public institutions were tragedies for poor Malays and Muslims caused by the abuse of power by other Malays and Muslims.”

It’s all a distraction

So, really, all these “yeye” parties are a distraction from the real issue facing the armed services. I know folks are going to get angry, but if “yeye” parties were the most illicit thing going on in our army, I could live with that.

Remember when Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, when he was defence minister, said that non-Malays lacked the patriotic spirit, which was why there was low enrolment in the armed forces?

He said, “Maybe it is the fear of tough military discipline, low pay compared to private jobs or no encouragement from families.”

Of course, non-Malays took offence when he said this, as they rightly should, but Zahid is the poster child for all that is screwed up in the military apparatus.

He was a defence minister, and you better believe the cartels were operating at that time, who, later in his political career, was charged with corruption and then was given a get-out-of-jail card.

The average schmuck, if he is lucky, gets his “parti yeye”.

Malaysiakini : However, Akmal went further. He saw the split of Malay parties as a tragedy, and revived the grand dream of combining the two largest Malay parties, Umno and PAS, in the Muafakat Nasional tent.

This was opportunistic as PAS leaders now felt betrayed by Bersatu after the Perlis menteri besar crisis, where a coup resulted in the PAS menteri besar being replaced by a Bersatu leader.

Akmal even had the backing of PAS information chief Ahmad Fadhli Shaari, who wanted MN to be “immediately” launched after Umno leaves the coalition government.

Every Malay party leader has tried to unify the Malays (former Umno president Onn Jaafar’s Kongres Melayu, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah’s Angkatan Perpaduan Ummah, Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s “Kongres Maruah Melayu”, and the current prime minister’s Bumiputera Economic Congress).

The moves were made because they stoked a profound longing among Malays and would almost guarantee electoral dominance. Imagine the most prominent Malay-Muslim leaders seated together with a common Malay agenda.

And then imagine Akmal as the first proposer. If it worked this time, Akmal would have achieved a rare feat in Malaysian political history.

However, this was not meant to be.

Zahid did not seem convinced and urged his party not to “indulge in nostalgia”, and promised to stay with the coalition government for now.

He also said Umno does not want to be “bitten by the same snake a second time”.

PAS’ betrayal of Umno

In Malay culture, snakes are commonly used as imagery to describe a hidden betrayal that is close to you or two-faced behaviour.

For Zahid to use such a harsh description shows that Umno has not moved on from its perceived betrayal by PAS after they formed MN in 2019.

Notwithstanding the hype around the pact, it was a project that lasted for barely five months. It was not even a formal coalition; it was only a charter signed by both parties to champion Malay-Muslim issues.

Yet, Umno expected some degree of loyalty from PAS, and felt betrayed when PAS went on to form a formal political coalition with Bersatu. Even after five years, Zahid still doubts PAS’ sincerity and accuses them of abandoning the project.

Most political parties have the right to be cautious of PAS. The Islamic party has partnered with most major political parties, and almost all of them ended acrimoniously.

The only time PAS could work well with its partners was when the others were small, bordering on insignificant: Gerakan, Pan-Malaysian Islamic Front (Berjasa), and Malaysia National Alliance Party (Ikatan).

Based on their coalition track records, there seem to be at least three reasons why it is hard for others to work with PAS.

Why PAS always abandons partners

First, PAS’ long-term thinking sees every partner as merely a tool. What cannot be taken away from PAS is that it has a clear long-term vision that has not changed since its founding in 1951.

PAS believes in a government and society that is led by Islamic leadership, with Islamic precepts and syariah law governing every aspect. While the zeal and gradient of this may vary through the decades, the long-term vision did not change.

Under PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang, this takes a more exclusivist tone of marginalising non-believers.

Another proof of PAS’ long-term vision is its launch of the “Wawasan Induk Negara Sejahtera 2051” that lays its grand vision of how Malaysia should be transformed at the party’s 100th year.

That is why it does not see coalition partnership the same way other parties do. It does not matter who they work with, as long as it serves them to get closer to the party’s long-term vision.

PAS used to hold on to the principle of “tahaluf siyasi” (or political pact) to justify working with BN (1974), Angkatan Perpaduan Ummah (1990), Barisan Alternatif (1999), Pakatan Rakyat (2008).

It then changed to a new strategy called “ta’awun siyasi” (or political cooperation), which is a looser concept that allows it to work with as many parties as possible - even at the same time.

It was what helped justify a flexible partnership with arch-rival Umno, but still formed a political coalition with Bersatu. It was why this was perceived as a betrayal to Umno but was logical to PAS and its long-term vision.

‘Big brother’ tendency

Second, PAS has a “big brother” tendency that is growing by the election. When times are good, it would not take long before PAS shows how uncomfortable they are playing second fiddle.

In 1999, when it won 27 seats (from the previous seven seats) as part of Barisan Alternatif with DAP, Keadilan, and Parti Rakyat Malaysia (PRM), it became overzealous and started pursuing kharaj land tax on non-Muslims, mandating Muslim dress codes, banning gambling and restricting alcohol, and pushed for syariah enactments in Kelantan and Terengganu.

DAP left the pact. The current rift with Bersatu is similar, as PAS is not only the largest party in Parliament now, but has also made breakthroughs in Sabah and Negeri Sembilan to feel confident.

Even when times are bad, PAS has a track record of making unilateral decisions and violating coalition principles. Despite rejections by DAP and PKR, PAS insisted on implementing hudud when it was part of Pakatan Rakyat.

Similarly, Umno’s main grievance against PAS was that the Islamic party did not consult Umno before forming Perikatan Nasional, resulting in the severance of trust and the MN structure.

And this can be attributed to how PAS works. Its ulama leadership is the central authority. The veto authority of its ulama outweighs any coalition discussion.

It is hard for PAS to view its ulama as being subservient or even equal to other coalition partners. After all, any partnership is meant to serve PAS’ highest truth of governing the country with Islam. There could not be anything higher.

Third, PAS’ ideological stance will not shift. In its party constitution, 2003 Islamic State document, official speeches, and multiple peer-reviewed journals, it is unambiguous that PAS is intent on an Islamic state that runs on Islamic precepts and syariah laws.

The short diversion to use “negara berkebajikan” (welfare state) in 2011 was simply a matter of relabelling and sequencing (welfare first, to lead to an Islamic state).

Other parties are aware of this, but were still open to working with PAS because of what they bring. PAS has one of the most disciplined party machinery that could be mobilised in an instant.

Its 70-year grassroots infrastructure is mature, covering pre-schools to secondary schools, youth volunteering corps, and civil society. In a world where voters are split, a party that could deliver between 30 to 40 MP seats with certainty is a kingmaker.

By this time, every party knows what it is like to work with PAS. Yet, most parties are still tempted to consider, given PAS’ seemingly unstoppable electoral ascendency.

These parties will convince themselves that they could manage PAS’ behaviour and eventually come out on top. However, they should ask Bersatu how this turned out.

Malaysiakini : Today, many of us will feel that the Madani administration has crossed that line when prosecutorial discretion replaced judicial truth, and Malaysians are asked to accept Zahid's NFA as reform.

This is the moment when patience stops being a virtue and becomes complicity. This is no longer about guilt or innocence, because that question was never allowed to reach a proper conclusion.

For many Malaysians, Zahid’s NFA feels less like legal closure and more like a betrayal of the Pakatan Harapan coalition’s GE15 promises on governance and the rule of law.

What matters is how the system behaved, when it acted, and who benefited. Forty-seven charges, involving criminal breach of trust, corruption, and money laundering, were never tested before a judge. There was no verdict, no public scrutiny, just administrative finality.

Malaysians are told the evidence is “insufficient” after “further investigations” and “internal prosecutorial assessments”. Really?

If the evidence was weak, why were charges filed? Why did the case progress to defence? Why did insufficiency become definitive only when political circumstances made it convenient? These are not conspiracies, but legitimate questions any member of the rakyat, who values the rule of law, would ask.

How many million ringgits did the Malaysian government waste in pursuing this case, which we are not shocked that it ended nowhere?

How much of the nation's resources were wasted in manhours, such as the court's time, lawyers’ fees, judges, researchers, security detail, witnesses, gathering evidence, police time, and other necessary preparations needed to go to trial? Have we so much money to fritter away?

Obvious pattern

The DNAA, to NFA, to a full acquittal pipeline, exposes the gap between process and principle. The case hasn’t been fully tested in court, but it is moving step by step toward being cleared entirely without a trial.

At least on paper, it looked like the law was being followed. However, the ethical or moral purpose of justice has not been fulfilled.

As the attorney-general has decided to drop the case, it is effectively closed for now. It is sickening when the powerful protect the powerful. As their cases simply drag on, for them, delay is a defence. Put simply, the long waiting time protects powerful people.

Discretion is absolution because, as we have seen, the prosecutors’ choices let powerful figures avoid legal consequences. Time provides a protective shield for the political elite.

The government claims institutions are independent, but only when it furthers their agenda. When it doesn’t, independence vanishes into thin air. It is disgusting how the government treats the AG’s decision not to continue the Zahid case as untouchable; more importantly, it refuses to challenge it.

Ordinary Malaysians who question these decisions are ignored or told their concerns don’t matter. This is a recipe for disaster for Malaysia, because we see clearly what is happening when institutions move decisively against the weak and tiptoe cautiously around the powerful.

The pattern is obvious. The public anger that persists is justified.

Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s silence compounds the failure. This was the moment for transparency, for moral leadership, for insisting on open judicial scrutiny.

Instead, quiet acceptance signals that reform has limits, and those limits appear to be determined by political necessity, selfish personal agendas and not principle.

Stark contrast

Meanwhile, Malaysians are shown selective economic indicators, investor confidence, and market optimism, while families write about shrinking pay cheques, rising prices, and the daily arithmetic of survival. The contrast is stark: if you have capital, you can thrive; if you do not, you are told to endure.

We are inundated with messages that the economy is doing well, political stability matters, but deep down in society, the cost of crisis living bites. Many are suffering. The rewards from a thriving economy have not yet filtered down to the masses.

Growth that reassures investors while normalising hardship is not progress. If you're a successful exporter of electronic items, life is great. A reform agenda that asks the struggling majority to wait patiently while the powerful are quietly unburdened has lost its moral compass.

When Zahid said that “truth has prevailed”, the question is: whose truth, determined by whom? In a democracy, truth is tested in court, not in private evaluations. What has prevailed is not truth because we saw that it is finality without judgment.

The law may have been followed, but reform was never about doing the bare minimum legally. It was about restoring trust in how power is exercised. On that measure, the Madani government has failed.

If the price of reform is silence, then it was never reform at all. The Madani administration needs to be reminded that reform belongs to the people who refuse to stop demanding it.

Malaysiakini : Remember when former inspector-general of police Abdul Hamid Bador wanted everyone to know that there were cartels operating within the Royal Malaysia Police who were linked to political operatives and were up to no good?

More importantly, remember when he said that he had everything under control? How did that work out for him? And keep in mind that the Home Ministry had said then that there were no cartels within the Royal Malaysia Police.

Truth be told, the fact that Madani is even investigating these allegations would be hell freezes over moment except for the reality that Madani cannot have it both ways. It cannot coddle high-ranking political figures on the one hand and go after others and claim that Madani has a zero tolerance for corruption.

This, of course, is not counting the numerous get-out-of-jail cards that have been given to still-serving political operatives aligned to Anwar and Madani.

‘Leakages’ in armed forces

There have always been “leakages” in the armed forces. You do not have to take my word for it. In 2013, former army deputy chief Abdul Ghafir Abdul Hamid claimed, "I have studied this matter and noted the ills in the military.

“The Defence Ministry conducts direct negotiations to purchase capital equipment (military hardware), and this is open to hidden costs, corruption and abuse of funds in military hardware purchase.

"We are not wise in our purchases. The ministry does not consult much with us on our technical evaluation. The decision lies with the person holding the tender bid, and this has resulted in some unwise purchases."

He also said, and I know many other former officers would agree with him, “…that the military camps were like ‘Third World facilities’ that have not been maintained” and "when the men are asked to serve overseas, they are mocked by the international forces".

Ghafir, who led Malaysian peacekeepers in Namibia, said that they took an ambulance van along and it "always broke down".

Political mileage

So, this is not some earth-shattering revelation that the PM and the defence minister knew of such cartels. In fact, the better question would be who in Madani or any of the former administrations did not know of the existence of various cartels within the government machinery?

And if they did not know, then either these people are the most clueless people that ever walked on Malaysian soil, or they did not care or that all those campaign speeches about reforming corrupt systems were merely horse manure.

Of course, claiming that the PM knew of the existence of cartels gets good political mileage, especially now that Madani is despised by its own base.

But the reality is that every former prime minister and defence minister knew about these cartels. Honestly, do you really think that these cartels stopped operating when someone like Mohamad Sabu was the defence minister?

Think about it. Here we have the government in a protracted legal battle with armed forces retirees about their pension schemes, and here we have high-ranking officers with their hands in the cookie jar, living large.

This is why average service men or women think that it is better to feather their own nest because the higher-ups are looking after themselves. This is part of the cycle of life of corruption within the government.

The entire political system of this country is part of a complex ecosystem of private and public interests that seek not only political hegemony but also religious hegemony. We are not dealing with corrupt individuals within a system, but rather a system of corruption with a few honest men and women.

Corruption - part of DNA

Corruption is not a recent phenomenon; it is part of the DNA of the organism, fuelled by racial and religious imperatives and a compromised electoral system.

Let us not forget that when we talk of corruption, we are not only talking about the corruption of the political elites but also of institutions which are considered sacred cows to the bangsa (race) and agama (religion) crowd.

So you see, even though I believe that there are many honest political operatives in Madani, they are outnumbered by people who are willing to make compromises and sustain the system either for political gain or because they are so narcotised by their political party that to make waves would be detrimental to their political survival.

The tragedy here is that Madani is doing something about corruption, albeit nothing that would reform the system.

Malaysiakini :  Years later, that bicycle would be polished as a trophy of humble origins he had vaulted far beyond. He sailed through school, became a medical professional, and built a life of quiet dignity - a life in which he had never once set foot on an aeroplane.

On the East Coast, a third boy entered the world draped in lineage. A silver spoon was his birthright, and a boarding school in the United Kingdom his destiny. Academia’s “slow horses” bored him; the ledgers of economics were a foreign language.

His curriculum was privileged, his exams in entitlement. When his father died, he was anointed - not by choice, but by political patronage - as successor and head of the clan.

The coup de grâce

Fast forward. The caddy’s path was one of earth and roots. He dropped out of school, his shoulders familiar with the weight of oil palm fruit bunches before he rose to mandore (supervisor).

His authority grew not from title, but from trust: head of the Parent-Teacher Association, chief of the local party branch, chairperson of the temple. His rise was measured in community respect, not altitude.

The ice cream boy’s path shot upward. He entered politics, starting with being a diligent background figure for years, until a scandal thrust him into the forefront. Declared “clean”, he was handpicked to lead a state.

He learned the ropes with startling speed. But his administration developed leaks, noticed by an intrepid journalist. The facts mounted against him. His fall was swift. The man who had championed Pembangkang Sifar (Zero Opposition) watched his own government being zeroed out at the polls.

Then, the outrageous details emerged: a global gallivant, a parade of six-star hotels, luxury unabashed while his state festered in pockets of squalor. Official trips to Disneyland - in Orlando and Paris - were family holidays, complete with wife, children, and maid in tow.

The parable had found its perfect symbol: the ice cream boy had finally flown, only to land in a fantasy kingdom of corrupt illusion.

The coup de grâce was judicial. Conviction. Jail. Upon release, he found a new chapter, and a new love - a civil servant.

Wealth and power

The silver spoon heir, now lord of the clan, found his learning curve vertical and slick with agendas. Advisers swarmed, a chorus of contrasting ambitions.

Yet his ascent was meteoric: from state to national stage, a new wife and an extended family in tow. It was not merely that greed has no bounds, but that its display becomes a fatal pride.

The expensive timepieces, the procession of handbags - first whispered in the corridors of power, then photographed, then circulated on social media for all to judge.

Even loyal civil servants grew uneasy at the wealth and power wielded by his wife. Then came the recordings of telephone conversations between husband and wife.

Warnings that she had become a liability were ignored. They were raising vulgar questions about who truly wore the pants in the house. The dynasty, it seemed, was now a combination of arrogance, pride, conceit, and overconfidence.

More than 50 years after his anointing, he joined the ice cream boy in the dock. Many rejoiced; others were dejected. But the final, unforgiving law of politics held true - when it involves the people’s money, the sympathisers will always be outnumbered.

Malaysiakini : The former attorney-general (AG) should not be viewed as a cartoon villain or a political caricature, but he should be examined as a case study in institutional collapse.

How was it possible that a man with enormous legal power, albeit exercised without transparency, was able to neutralise justice without ever stepping into a courtroom?

The most dangerous failures in governance don’t make headlines. They happen quietly inside offices, look lawful on paper, and hide behind the shield of discretion.

From 2015 to 2018

The timeline of decisions, from 2015 to 2018, is revealing.

Year 2015 was about "removal and reset": In July 2015, the then AG Abdul Gani Patail was abruptly removed and replaced by Apandi.

Shortly after that change, the multi-agency special task force investigating 1MDB, which involved the AG's Chambers, Bank Negara Malaysia, the police, and MACC, was disbanded or rendered inactive, with key officials reassigned.

Investigative momentum slowed before fracturing. This was not a courtroom event. It was an institutional decision.

Year 2016 was about "No Further Action": In January 2016, Apandi announced that Najib had committed no offence in relation to funds that later proved, in court, to originate from SRC International and 1MDB-linked sources.

Apandi classified the investigation papers as “No Further Action” (NFA).

Years later, under oath, Apandi testified that he had classified the 1MDB investigation as NFA even though investigations were not completed when he left office.

He claimed witnesses had absconded, and evidence was missing; however, he did not dispute that investigations remained unfinished.

As a result, no charges were brought, and no prosecution was tested in court. That distinction matters.

From 2016 to 2018, prosecutorial discretion was exercised in a way that consistently terminated lines of inquiry rather than advancing them.

Resistance, not cooperation

During later High Court proceedings, Apandi acknowledged that mutual legal assistance (MLA) from foreign jurisdictions could assist investigations, yet he also argued that cooperating with foreign authorities might prejudice local probes.

This was a position the court found difficult to reconcile.

Court documents recorded questions as to why Malaysian authorities did not accept or offer MLA to the Swiss AG or the US Justice Department, despite those agencies actively investigating 1MDB-linked transactions. International investigators encountered resistance, not cooperation.

These are documented decisions and judicially recorded observations, not speculation. Decisions matter, especially when made by an AG.

This was more dangerous than acquittal, because justice was not defeated in court. Justice was neutralised before it reached the court.

An acquittal can be scrutinised, appealed, criticised, but a prosecution never brought leaves no judgment, no reasoning, no institutional memory.

This is why the Court of Appeal later observed that Apandi’s conduct created the impression that the 1MDB scandal had been covered up.

Impression matters, because justice depends on public trust, and once public trust in justice is damaged, the entire system weakens. Najib’s conviction closes one chapter, but it exposes another.

Silence is not neutrality

In 2022, a police report was lodged concerning Apandi’s role during his tenure as AG, and investigations were publicly acknowledged.

Since then, there has been no public accounting, no conclusion and no explanation.

Silence is not neutrality. Silence is a decision. Decisions made without explanation are exactly how institutions decay.

In the post-Najib era of the country, Malaysians were promised reform after 2018. This meant independence of institutions, the separation of powers and no more political shielding.

The political shielding operated as a buffer between power and accountability and effectively insulated decision-makers from ordinary processes of accountability.

Today, the most important test of reform is not whether we punish villains, but whether we confront the enablers.

So, if no explanation is required for shutting down investigations, no accountability follows institutional inaction and no lessons are publicly articulated, then the system has not learnt any lesson.

In other words, without accountability and transparency, institutions have failed to learn anything from past inaction.

Loyalty safer than law

The message to the rakyat is simple: Loyalty is safer than law. Delay outlasts outrage. Time protects those who do nothing.

This is precisely what citizens observe in Malaysia today, across successive administrations, whenever a major scandal erupts: 1MDB, the Scorpene procurement saga, Altantuya Shaariibuu’s murder, the littoral combat ships navy scandal, the disappearance of Pastor Raymond Koh, and the unresolved case of M Indira Gandhi’s daughter.

In each, loyalty appears safer than law, delay outlasts outrage, and time protects those who do nothing.

Apandi matters now, but he is not unique. He is repeatable.

If Malaysia does not explain what went wrong, and not just who was wrong, then the next AG inherits the same dangerous ambiguity. Unchecked discretion. Opaque decisions. No consequences.

More importantly, that is not reform, but it is a relapse.

So, while Najib’s conviction tells us who benefited, it is Apandi’s silence which forces us to ask who enabled.

Until Malaysia answers with honesty, accountability remains incomplete.

If Najib is guilty, what about those who stopped the system from working?

Malaysiakini : PAS’ conduct is particularly revealing. Despite positioning itself as the principal opposition force following the 15th general election, PAS has noticeably softened its rhetoric against the Madani government and Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim.

The party’s attacks are selective, restrained, and often focused more on symbolic issues than on direct challenges to federal authority. This restraint should not be mistaken for moderation. It reflects strategic calculation.

PAS-governed states continue to receive substantial federal allocations, development funding, and administrative cooperation. In practical terms, PAS is benefiting materially from the Madani government while maintaining just enough opposition posture to preserve its identity.

This arrangement points to an emerging understanding: opposition does not necessarily mean exclusion from resources. In Malaysia’s political culture, access to federal largesse often matters more than ideological consistency.

PAS appears to have concluded that outright confrontation with Anwar carries fewer benefits than calibrated engagement. This pragmatic posture also positions PAS as a viable future partner rather than a permanent adversary.

Anwar’s political history

To understand why such accommodation is possible, one must consider Anwar’s political history. As a former president of the Malaysian Islamic Youth Movement (Abim), Anwar built networks that cut across ideological and party boundaries long before today’s alignments solidified.

Many figures who once shared that formative Islamist-reformist space now occupy senior positions across PKR, Umno, and PAS. These informal relationships, rooted in shared experiences rather than party platforms, facilitate back-channel communication, trust, and compromise.

In Malaysian politics, these personal networks often lubricate realignments long before they become visible at the institutional level.

Against this backdrop, Umno’s aggressive posture toward DAP, particularly through its youth leadership, takes on deeper strategic meaning. The sustained “DAP-bashing” of recent months appears far too systematic to be dismissed as spontaneous populism.

Youth leaders such as Dr Akmal Saleh have repeatedly invoked racially and religiously charged narratives that frame DAP as hostile to Malay-Muslim interests. The absence of firm rebuke from Umno’s top leadership suggests that these attacks serve a broader purpose.

The objective is not merely to weaken DAP electorally, but to delegitimise it as a coalition partner. By repeatedly associating DAP with cultural threat, religious insensitivity, or political disruption, Umno helps create an environment where DAP’s continued presence in government becomes a liability rather than an asset.

This is a familiar method in Malaysian coalition politics: parties are rarely expelled outright. Instead, pressure is applied until withdrawal appears “voluntary,” justified, and even necessary for stability.

Studied silence

This approach also explains PKR’s studied silence. As the anchor party of the Madani government, PKR has both the authority and the incentive to intervene. Yet its reluctance to defend DAP robustly suggests a strategic choice.

By allowing Umno to take the lead on identity politics while keeping PAS engaged through material cooperation, PKR preserves flexibility. It avoids alienating Malay voters while keeping open a possible future realignment that does not depend on DAP.

Amanah’s position in this evolving equation is even more precarious. As a splinter group from PAS, it lacks PAS’ grassroots discipline and Umno’s institutional depth. It commands neither dominant rural Malay support nor decisive urban backing.

In a coalition increasingly shaped by ethnic arithmetic rather than ideological pluralism, Amanah becomes surplus to requirements; too weak to anchor Malay support, yet insufficiently distinct to mobilise non-Malay voters.

The emerging alternative is a Malay-dominated coalition anchored by PKR, Umno, and PAS. Each party brings complementary strengths. Umno retains extensive institutional memory, administrative experience, and entrenched local networks.

PAS commands a disciplined base in rural areas and has steadily expanded its appeal among conservative urban Malays. PKR provides national leadership legitimacy, international acceptability, and a reformist veneer that softens the coalition’s image.

Such a configuration could plausibly dominate Peninsular Malaysia’s Malay-majority constituencies. From a purely electoral standpoint, it offers a powerful arithmetic advantage. In this structure, DAP is not merely inconvenient, but it is structurally incompatible.

Its multiracial ideology, strong non-Malay base, and insistence on institutional accountability complicate efforts to consolidate Malay support under a single narrative. Removing DAP simplifies messaging, voter targeting, and coalition management ahead of GE16.

East Malaysian parties further ease this realignment. Gabungan Parti Sarawak (GPS) and Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS) have consistently demonstrated ideological flexibility.

Their operating principle is pragmatic: support whichever coalition can form the federal government while safeguarding state autonomy and access to resources. Their participation is not anchored to Pakatan Harapan, BN, or Perikatan Nasional, but to power itself.

This makes them natural stabilisers in any future coalition configuration.

Volatile times

All of this makes the current political moment particularly volatile. With GE16 projected for 2027, there is ample time for recalibration, defections, and gradual repositioning. Malaysian politics rarely waits for election cycles to enact change. Realignments are often completed long before voters are called to the polls.

For DAP, the challenge is existential. Can it remain relevant within a coalition increasingly shaped by ethnic pragmatism rather than multiracial principle? Or is it being manoeuvred toward an exit that allows others to consolidate Malay power while discarding the complexity of pluralism?

For Malaysia, the implications are even more profound. The erosion of Harapan’s multiracial character risks normalising a return to race-based governance: rebranded, but fundamentally unchanged.

If Madani was meant to represent a departure from old political habits, the current trajectory suggests continuity rather than transformation.

The coalition map is being redrawn not through press conferences, but through calculated silences, selective confrontations, and strategic restraint.

In Malaysian politics, these signals often matter more than formal statements. Taken together, they suggest that the real contest for GE16 may not be waiting in the future, as it may already be unfolding.

They proudly talk about settlements and asset recovery. Reality check: • The recovered funds (including money from Goldman Sachs) are almost exhausted • To avoid default, the government has already injected over RM15 BILLION of PUBLIC MONEY • That money came straight from Ministry of Finance Malaysia Translation: 👉 Your taxes are now servicing elite corruption ⸻

 🚨 HOW 1MDB IS STILL HURTING YOU — RIGHT NOW 🏥 No Hospitals. No Schools. RM15+ billion could have built: • Dozens of modern hospitals • Thousands of schools Instead, it’s paying interest on theft. 📉 Weak Ringgit, Higher Prices Huge sovereign debt: • Pressures the ringgit • Makes food, fuel, medicine more expensive • Shrinks household purchasing power 

⛽ Subsidy Cuts Disguised as “Reform” Fuel, electricity, and aid cuts are not accidents. They are fiscal triage — because the state is bleeding from 1MDB. 👶 A Stolen Future Children born today will still be paying for 1MDB as working adults. They didn’t vote. They didn’t steal. But they will pay. ⸻ ⚖️ THIS IS WHY “MOVE ON” IS A SCAM They say: “The courts have decided. Let’s move on.” Move on to what? • Paying until 2039? • Accepting corruption as a generational tax? • Watching the same political elites recycle power? Justice is not jail alone. Justice means no rakyat money used to clean up elite crimes. That did not happen. ⸻ 🧨 GE16 IS NOT ABOUT THE PAST — IT’S ABOUT THE BILL 1MDB is not history. 

It is still in your electricity bill. Still in your grocery prices. Still in your shrinking subsidies. Still in your children’s future taxes. Any party asking for your vote in GE16 must answer ONE QUESTION: Why are Malaysians still paying for 1MDB until 2039? If they can’t answer — they are part of the same rotten system. ⸻ 

 ❗ THE GE16 LINE THAT MUST STICK “Najib goes to jail. Malaysians go into debt — until 2039.” Repeat it. Share it. Make it unavoidable. Because if this system is not dismantled, 1MDB will not be the last national robbery — only the first one we paid for in silence. 

Dec 28, 2025

Malaysiakini : ‘You give them evidence, and they refuse to act’

In 2009, Anwar, the victim of police abuse, was disgusted - “I believe there is a cover-up because it involves the VVIPs. I am disgusted, I think it is very unfortunate with all the evidence provided, they can brush it aside,” he told reporters at Parliament.

“It is typical of the government - you give them strong evidence, medical reports, they refuse to act and allow them to go free,” he added.

Keep in mind that, as far as the police and the political class are concerned, former inspector-general of police (IGP) Abdul Hamid Bador said it like it is when he revealed the “our boy” state of play in the police - “The minister was said to have arranged for ‘his boy’ (the retired senior Special Branch officer) to lead the Special Branch.”

The police force has become a culture of its own, succoured by religion, racism, and handouts, riddled with corruption and sharing a symbiotic relationship with the criminal underclass of Malaysian society, and beholden to political masters who have always been engaged in protracted internal power struggles.

Anwar’s daughter, Nurul Izzah, decried the whitewashing of former IGP Rahim Noor and described him as a “brutal assaulter”.

“I unequivocally oppose this appointment of a brutal assaulter of an innocent man, as he lay there blindfolded and handcuffed - left without medical attention for days.

“This being then lied to the whole world as to the victim’s whereabouts and well-being. Shame on those who executed this travesty,” she had said.

One scandal after another

The past year has been a defining one for the police, in all the wrong ways.

The police and Madani are scuttling away from numerous deaths in custody, and botched investigations by the police have placed a spotlight on accountability and transparency.

The alleged execution of three men in Malacca and the subsequent investigation for murder does nothing to dispel the lack of trust in the state security apparatus and Madani.

The fact that the police officers involved in this alleged murder have not been remanded echoes what Anwar said in 2009.

When the mother of Wan Muhammad Daniel wanted to lodge a report about the torture of her son by the police, an officer allegedly told her that the police officers involved would only get two years and a fine of RM2,000, but the state would reopen the case against her son.

A rape victim’s case was not only grossly mishandled by the police but also badly managed by the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

When she went public with her story, apparently, this was what a police officer said to her - “(The police officer) told me what I did (uploading the Facebook post) is wrong, and that the assailant will pursue legal action if I don’t take down the post. I was also told to present myself at the station for my statement to be recorded.

“I asked him what wrong I had committed. He didn’t answer, and he never followed up with me on the matter,” she said.

Pay attention because this is an important point this rape survivor makes when Seputeh MP Teresa Kok rightly raised her case in Parliament.

As reported in the press, “I am speechless with the answer from the Home Ministry. The answers on paper differ from what is happening in reality, as none of the PEM stages (standard of notification) were applied in my case.”

The abyss between what’s spoken and what’s known

This is what the state relies on. On paper, there are procedures in place which would make the state security apparatus look like a transparent and accountable organisation.

But the reality? If you want to understand the kind of attitudes in the state security apparatus when it comes to women, you only have to look at the incident in Malacca where two women were turned away from lodging a report because they did not observe the dress code.

Digital Minister Gobind Singh Deo was correct when he said, “The immediate focus of the police officer on duty should have been to assist the victims in recording the details of the incident, and not turning them away as in this case.”

But then again, the police seem to be focused on other issues. When they are not busy with moral policing, they have a history of self-investigating and covering up alleged crimes.

In the horror that was the Wang Kelian human trafficking camps, where hundreds of migrants were suspected to have died, Bukit Aman released a statement saying that no police personnel were involved.

Never mind that the evidence was tampered with. Never mind that there was circumstantial evidence of wrongdoing. Never mind that political operatives from the highest levels of the government were repeating the same denials as the state security apparatus, despite there having been no independent investigation.

Again, doesn’t all of this remind everyone of the cover-up Anwar was raging against in 2009 and in events which are taking place now?

And who could trust the police anyway? They have asked the public to help locate M Indira Gandhi’s criminal ex-husband, but the reality is (there is that word, again) that the state security apparatus had always known where he is.

A former IGP has admitted this - “The public does not know where he (Riduan Abdullah) is, but I know. I urge him to come forward so that this matter can be solved amicably.”

‘It’s not shocking anymore’

Throughout the year, when the nefarious actions of the police have been dragged out into the light, all Home Minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail does is deflect from the issues, carry water for the police, offer conflicting and unsubstantiated views, or do nothing unless ordered by the cabinet.

Meanwhile, Saifuddin is up to his neck in the Fifa/FAM scandal, and guess who investigates his actions if there is ever an investigation? That is right, the police.

Muda central committee member Rashifa Aljunied begins her excellent piece with, “Unfortunately, we live in a reality in which police violence isn’t shocking anymore.”

Which says a lot about the iconic image of the black-eyed Anwar.

Malaysiakini : How can public trust be rebuilt when those who allowed billions to be siphoned into private accounts remain in positions of authority? Neither can we trust a government that tolerates pardons, house arrests and discounts for jail sentences and fines, for the most serious crime involving a PM in Malaysia?

Didn't Anwar campaign on a promise for reform and on an anti-corruption drive? His coalition must not only prosecute wrongdoing but also preemptively clean the house.

Cabinet members who were part of Najib’s administration and complicit in abuse of power should step down or be removed.

This is not about vengeance. It is about restoring institutional integrity, reinforcing civic trust, and demonstrating that ethical governance cannot coexist with figures who have historically tolerated corruption.

A Netflix drama

For years, Malaysians watched a story so improbable it belonged on a Netflix set: billions of ringgit allegedly “donated” by a distant Arab monarch, landing directly in a former prime minister’s personal accounts.

We, the rakyat, knew it was a lie. International observers knew it too. Yet, for years, the narrative persisted, repeated by those who should have safeguarded transparency and accountability.

The High Court's declaration that the Arab donation letters were forgeries is not really a revelation, but is more of a validation of what the public had long known.

Malaysians are not stupid. We know that fantasy cannot be a substitute for governance.

The verdict should be a clarion call, not just about the past, but about the present structure of power. Malaysians will remember that when Najib’s deputy and a former attorney-general were swiftly removed for “misconduct”, the message then was clear: accountability matters.

However, today, the coalition includes former cabinet members who were complicit in Najib’s abuses.

The absurdity of the Arab donation narrative was not limited to Najib himself. It was amplified by a network of allies, bureaucrats, and political operatives who allowed the story to persist unchecked.

Systems failed because structural oversight failed. Courts ultimately vindicated common sense, but at what cost? Millions were spent on trials that should have been straightforward; years of public attention were consumed by a narrative that never deserved it.

That the coalition government continues to house individuals who either facilitated or ignored these abuses only prolongs the shadow of complicity.

The harm done was not only financial. It was political and institutional. It weakened public trust, muddied civic expectations, and emboldened a culture whereby power protected power.

Now that the courts have spoken, public focus rightly shifts from the conviction of one individual to the structures that let such abuses take root.

Restoring credibility

To restore credibility, Anwar must act decisively. Former Umno-Baru figures who served under Najib, and who tolerated or benefited from misappropriation of public funds, cannot remain in office without calling into question the government’s ethical foundation.

Political expedience and coalition-building are insufficient excuses when the nation’s civic conscience and institutional legitimacy are at stake. The public must see that governance is not negotiable, that integrity is non-transferable, and that complicity carries consequences.

If the coalition government wishes to reclaim legitimacy, it must remove those who contributed to or ignored systemic abuse.

Swift removal of a deputy and AG demonstrated the precedent; the same standard must now apply across the cabinet. Only then can Malaysians have confidence that the government acts in the service of the public, rather than perpetuating old compromises.

The Arab donation farce extends beyond Najib himself. Family members and associates who benefited from ill-got gains, such as Rosmah Mansor and Riza Aziz, represent a broader question of accountability.

The lesson is ongoing: governance cannot rely on fantasy. Malaysians knew the lie, so now the system should act truthfully.

The coalition government must signal that benefiting from corruption carries consequences, reinforcing a culture where no one, neither political allies, family, nor enablers, is above systemic accountability.

We know that coalition governments require negotiation and compromise, but if Malaysia’s political leadership wants to convey credible reform and institutional renewal, then maintaining a cabinet heavily populated by figures tied to the pre‑2018 political establishment sends the wrong signal.

The call to action is unmistakable: Anwar must clean house, not out of spite, but to restore faith in governance, to strengthen institutions, and to signal to all Malaysians that no one is beyond accountability.

Already this year a stolen gun and ammo were found stashed in a flower pot at the children’s section of the Strasbourg Christmas market. The weapon may have been cached to avoid the ‘bag checks’ that have become commonplace there and at European festivals and events.

New Year’s Eve at the Champs-Élysées, which was already utilizing bag checks and pat-downs to screen for not only weapons but any alcohol, glass bottles and anything that could be used as a weapon, was canceled because the authorities and the police could not assure the safety of the celebrants in the most iconic spot in all of France. The place where General DeGaulle had once walked down to celebrate France’s liberation has fallen under Islamic occupation.

France recently marked the 10th anniversary of the 2015 Paris attacks during which Islamic terrorists tried to blow up a soccer stadium, massacred people in the Bataclan theater and attacked local cafes in an orgy of bloodshed killing 130 people and wounding over 400 more.

“Unfortunately, no one can guarantee the end of attacks,” President Macron warned at the commemoration of one of the deadliest days for Islamic Jihad in Europe since the original Ottoman invasions, but claimed that 85 attacks had been prevented including 6 in 2025.

(That count is probably up to 7 since yet another terror plot was broken up in December.)

Muslims marked the anniversary in their own fashion when the girlfriend of one of the imprisoned Islamic terrorists, a French woman who had converted to Islam, was arrested for her own terrorist plot along with her current husband and an unknown teenager.

Another three women had been arrested a few months earlier for planning their tribute to the Bataclan theater attack by bombing a concert hall or a bar. One of the women had been preaching Jihad to her 20,000 followers on TikTok. These should not be confused with the previous plot by three Muslim women to set off a bomb outside the Notre Dame cathedral.

The Bataclan attacks were not the only 10 year anniversary being marked in France.

In response to the latest Muslim terrorist threat to Christmas, France is once again calling in the troops and Interior Minister Nunez urged “the military personnel of Operation Sentinelle, to ensure a ‘visible and deterrent presence.’” Operation Sentinelle was launched in 2015 after the Muslim terrorist attacks on the Charlie Hebdo satirical magazine and a Kosher supermarket in which 17 people were killed by a conspiracy of 14 Muslims operating inside and outside France.

The 7,000 soldiers of Operation Sentinelle (which can be increased by another 3,000 soldiers around Christmas or during other times of significant Islamic terrorist threats) have been permanently deployed across France to protect “places of worship and sensitive sites.”

The deployment, originally meant to be short term, has become open ended. The French Ministry of Defense quotes that “our commitment is long-term, for as long as this situation requires.” Minister of the Armed Forces Catherine Vautrin echoed the message, “the terrorist threat is permanent.” Macron had already admitted this is a war with no end in sight.

Shortly after the Bataclan anniversary, Macron announced that France was bringing back voluntary conscription starting with 3,000 in 2026 and going up to 50,000 by 2035. “We need to mobilise, mobilising the nation to defend itself,” he argued. Officially this is about countering Russia, but if so the mobilization would be far more rapid and much more immediate.

France is preparing for a war at home.

National anti-terror prosecutor Olivier Christen warned that Islamic terrorism remains “the most significant, both in scale and in the level of operational readiness”.

Meanwhile the French government is grappling with Islamization.

After announcing 820 Islamization ‘separatist’ offenses against France’s official  ‘secularism’ policy, Interior Minister Nunez warned that the next step was battling Islamic infiltration.

“We’ve dealt with terrorism, we’ve dealt with separatism, now we’re tackling infiltration,” Nunez warned, and looking into “the links between representatives of political movements and organizations and networks supporting terrorist activity or propagating Islamist ideology.”

“It is important to provide a clear, concise, and precise response to those who might suggest that Sharia law could be applied in France.”

These are praiseworthy policies at a time when the politicians of the United Kingdom and the United States have mostly surrendered to Islamization and hail it as a wonderful thing, but the soldiers in the streets, the cancellation of New Year’s Eve at the Champs-Élysées and the drumbeat of terrorist plots also show that fighting Islam as an ideology is not enough without dealing with the demographic problems of mass migration and domestic colonization.

81 years after De Gaulle walked along the Champs-Élysées to Notre Dame to mark the liberation of Paris, the city, including the Champs-Élysées, is under enemy occupation again.

It will take another liberation to end the ‘no-go-zones’ and set Paris free or the city will fall.