Malaysiakini : So far, no minister or religious bureaucrat has come out and openly said that they questioned their faith after watching this movie. Indeed, I wonder if anyone who made these police reports against the filmmakers did.

One of the accusations made of this film is that it encourages apostasy, but seeing how nobody in the film rejects their religion, how can any rational person claim so?

Perhaps people who make this claim are projecting.

Religious diversity

Admittedly, I am confused. Malaysia is a religious plural society, so how exactly is it wrong to promote religious plurality?

The filmmakers of “Mentega Terbang”, as reported in the press, claimed “the Federal Territories Islamic Religious Department’s full evaluation actually admitted the film is a good effort to raise public awareness of the plurality of society (masyarakat majmuk) and religious diversity (kepelbagaian agama).”

So what does this mean? Does the state not want to promote religious diversity and social harmony?

Religious pluralism and liberalism are supposed to be aspirational. If religious pluralism and liberalism are a big no-no, this is the opposite of what Rukun Negara teaches us.

We are supposed to ensure a liberal approach toward its rich and diverse cultural traditions.

So if the home minister did not question his faith, why persecute the filmmakers? Notice that people will say that their feelings are hurt, but never that they question their faith.

They will say that they are concerned that others will question their faith, but they have not done so themselves. So do they believe that everyone else's faith is weak?

Religious sensitivity has been weaponised in this country, and while the discourse revolves around how it has been weaponised against the non-Malay community, its real purpose is to turn the Malay/Muslim community into a monolithic polity, which would be easier to control.

Silencing moderate religious voices

This film is feared capable of making people question their faith, yet it is allowed to be shown at trial. Isn’t the state worried that people will question their faith even in the controlled environment of the courtroom?

Keep in mind that filmmakers, cast and crew were threatened, and in one case, their property was damaged.

When civil society groups decried the harassment of the cast, they were missing the point. The harassment is part of a targeted campaign to silence moderate religious voices in this country.

The harassment serves as a warning to moderate believers not to speak up. It is a reminder that the sole guardians of any kind of religious inquiry are the state and state-aligned preachers.

You only have to look at Muslim culture in Malaysia before the religious bureaucracy, enabled by political cretins, took over to see how diverse it was.

You only have to look at the scholars, artists, and thinkers that the religious state goes after to understand why they want to stamp out plurality in the polity.

Alienating instead of treasuring

Do people who watch P Ramlee movies suddenly start consuming alcohol and dancing in clubs? Do they change the way they dress?

Why stop there? Apparently, Bollywood movies are popular, and so is K-pop. Do Muslims who follow these art forms suddenly change the way they dress and decide to embrace other faiths?

And what of other traditional art forms now deemed offensive to religious sensibilities?

In an interview I did with Ramli Ibrahim, he said that with the Arabisation of the Malays came the rejection of some of their own indigenous cultural practices.

“The traditional performing arts in the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia have been banned, resulting in subsequent generations not being able to continue these precious art forms,” he added.

Instead of treasuring these intangible heritages of ours, they are now alienated from the very communities which once sustained these art forms.

Abandoned and looked down upon, these traditional art forms are now regarded as "against the teaching of Islam".

Imagine the diverse voices being snuffed out all over the world by theocracies or would-be theocracies.

Ultimately, these laws are designed to discourage questioning, which says a lot about Madani and the gatekeepers of the religion of the state.

Malaysiakini : History taught in our schools should reflect what actually happened, not what we wish had happened. More fundamentally, history has the power to unite a nation, but only when it is narrated truthfully and inclusively.

We would do well to heed the most pertinent reminder by the late academic Zainal Abidin Abdul Wahid, who warned that “Unpleasant facts or events must not be brushed aside” and that “Students in schools must be nurtured and educated with history grounded in truth.” These words ring with particular urgency today.

Unfortunately, since 1996, young Malaysians have been primarily learning a form of “government-sanctioned history” – one largely viewed through the lens of a single ethnic group and skewed towards promoting an ethnocentric ideology premised on Malay-Islamic dominance, or the divisive concept of “ketuanan Melayu” (Malay supremacy).

This selective narrative has not only distorted the past but has also undermined the very purpose of history as a disciplined study grounded in evidence.

The problem of historical distortion extends beyond school textbooks.

It began with the Form One volume introduced in 2016 and the Form Five volume in 2020, and has since been compounded by the conduct of several historians who are arguably guilty of committing what can only be described as “intellectual crimes” – distorting history and making baseless claims that contradict clear-cut evidence, including official statistics.

One striking example concerns Parameswara, the founder of Malacca. The Form Two school history textbook (2017, page 82) perpetuates the myth that Parameswara converted to Islam in 1414. Several ethno-nationalist historians go further by asserting that he adopted the name Megat Iskandar Shah upon conversion.

This claim collapses under the weight of historical evidence. As stated by the late Khoo Kay Kim in his book “Malay Society: Transformation and Democratisation” (page 8), “It is almost certain that his [Parameswara’s] son succeeded him in 1414, assuming the title of Megat Iskandar Shah”.

This conclusion is corroborated by the Ming Shih-lu, reliable Ming records, which state explicitly that Megat Iskandar Shah went to Emperor Yung-lo’s court on Oct 5, 1414, and declared that his father, Parameswara, had died.

Leading scholars - including OW Wolters, CH Wake, Mary Turnbull, and BW and LY Andaya, as well as Sejarah Melayu - concur that the first Malacca ruler to embrace Islam in the 1430s was Seri Maharaja, who assumed the name Muhammad Shah. Yet these well-established findings are conspicuously absent from our textbooks.

Development of KL

Equally troubling is the silencing of the phenomenal role played by Yap Ah Loy in the development of Kuala Lumpur. Worse still, two historians have claimed, despite clear-cut and contradictory evidence, that Raja Abdullah was the founder of Kuala Lumpur and that the town originated and developed as a Malay settlement.

Contemporary “people on the spot” – including Frank Swettenham, who later became the resident of Selangor in 1882, and William Hornaday, an American zoologist who visited Kuala Lumpur in 1878 – tell a very different story.

So do earlier history textbooks, such as the Form Four history textbook published by Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka in 1979 and the Standard Four History textbook published in 1981.

Official records, including the 1879 Police Census of Kuala Lumpur and the 1959 Kuala Lumpur Municipal Council publication, together with the works of leading authorities on Kuala Lumpur’s early history such as JM Gullick and SM Middlebrook, all converge on two critical and indisputable facts: Kuala Lumpur originated and developed primarily as a Chinese township, and Yap Ah Loy, the third Kapitan Cina (1868–1885), was primarily responsible for its development.

According to Swettenham, Kuala Lumpur in 1872 was “a purely Chinese village, consisting of two rows of adobe-built dwellings thatched with palm leaves”.

In a similar vein, the 1879 Police Census of Selangor reveals that Kuala Lumpur’s population stood at 2,330, of whom 82 percent were Chinese.

Raja Abdullah’s only claim to being the founder of Kuala Lumpur rests on the minor and incidental fact that he sent 87 Chinese miners in 1857 to mine tin ore in Ampang – an area that was a different district altogether from Kuala Lumpur.

As noted by JM Gullick, Kuala Lumpur grew from the settlement established in 1859 by the first Kapitan Cina of Kuala Lumpur, Hiu Siew, and his business partner Ah Sze, near the confluence of the Klang and Gombak rivers, formerly Old Market Square and now Medan Pasar.

Significantly, the Kuala Lumpur Municipal Council celebrated Kuala Lumpur’s 100th anniversary in 1959, not in 1957 – an official acknowledgement of the city’s true origins.

Orang Asli and produce

Perhaps, one of the most serious shortcomings of our school history textbooks, however, is their denial of the historical role and significance of the Orang Asli. There is no acknowledgement of them as the original inhabitants or “sons of the soil” of Peninsular Malaysia.

Nor is there mention of their crucial role in early international trade as collectors of forest produce, their service as porters and guides, their appointment as “penghulus” (leaders), their role as the fighting force during the Malacca sultanate, or the historical fact that Minangkabau immigrants in Negeri Sembilan married Orang Asli women to establish land rights.

Our history textbooks must tell the truth, as powerfully expressed by Abdul Rahman Andak, secretary to Sultan Abu Bakar of Johor in 1894: “The aborigines were the proprietors of the soil, and we, the Malays, came there (Malay Peninsula) from a place in the Island of Sumatra.”

This truth is further reinforced by demographic evidence. Malaya’s Indonesian population – mainly Javanese, Banjarese, Sumatrans, Bugis, and Boyanese or Baweanese – increased from approximately 30,000 in 1901 to about 240,000 in 1931.

As stated by renowned academic Tunku Shamsul Bahrin, numerically, “the migration of the Indonesians into Malaya is a recent phenomenon.”

Yet “government-sanctioned history” also downplays the profound and enduring impact of Hindu-Buddhist influence on Malay statecraft, coronation ceremonies of Malay rulers, language, literature, and customs.

As stated by Ismail Hamid in “Masyarakat dan Budaya Melayu” (1988, page 55), “… kebudayaan Hindu telah meninggalkan beberapa kesan dalam setiap bidang kehidupan orang Melayu hingga dewasa ini (The Hindu culture has left several impacts on every aspect of Malay life to this day).”

The distortions continue in the economic narrative. Our textbooks have omitted the pioneering role of the Chinese in the 19th century commercial agriculture and have minimised their central contribution to the development of Malaya’s tin mining industry.

More marginalisation

A glaring and misleading error appears in the Form Three history textbook (2018, page 140), which states that the British cultivated various commercial crops, including pepper and gambier. In reality, pepper and gambier were cultivated largely by the Chinese in Johor in the mid-19th century.

Equally alarming is the assertion in the Form Three history textbook (2018, page 212) that Long Jaafar, the territorial chief of Larut, was primarily responsible for the Federated Malay States (FMS) becoming the largest tin producer in the world.

The undeniable truth is that Long Jaafar died in 1857, whereas the FMS became the world’s largest tin producer only towards the end of the 19th century, decades after his death.

The marginalisation does not end there. Our history textbooks have largely sidelined the pivotal role of South Indian labour in the development of the rubber industry, which became Malaya’s principal revenue earner from 1916 and remained so for several decades.

Even more glaring is the total absence of any acknowledgement of the indispensable contribution of South Indian workers to the construction of Malaya’s physical infrastructure – its roads, railways, bridges, ports, airports, and government buildings.

As noted by the late Kernial Singh Sandhu, a leading authority on Indians in Malaya, it is estimated that more than 750,000 Indians may have perished in the process of developing modern Malaya and opening up treacherous jungle tracts for rubber cultivation.

In the poignant words of a former Indian labour leader, “Every railway sleeper and rubber tree in Malaya marks the remains of an Indian.”

Historical omissions, distortions, and half-truths are not harmless mistakes; to my mind, they are ‘intellectual crimes’. Enough is enough. It is time for all right-thinking Malaysians, regardless of ethnicity or background, to stand united and demand better.

Our children deserve an education grounded in truth, evidence, and inclusivity. Only by teaching an honest and inclusive history can we build a shared national identity, restore trust in our institutions, and secure a just and united future for our beloved nation.

Malaysiakini : Several years ago, in a Facebook posting, he attempted to use the Quran to deflect all the corruption done by Malay uber alles political operatives and lay the blame squarely on the non-Muslim and non-bumiputera communities.

For PAS, non-Muslims are to blame for everything wrong with this country. It has this in common with Umno.

For decades, Umno, whenever it is in a tight political spot, blamed the non-Muslim/Malay communities, specifically the Chinese.

“As a result, it is among them that control the country’s economy and then use it to damage politics, administrative affairs, and the judiciary. In fact, they are also the group that most severely undermines the nation’s politics and economy, the majority of whom are non-Muslims and non-bumiputera,” Hadi wrote in the post.

Nobody enjoys giving bribes

This is why we get all this “Race M” and “Race C” nonsense from PAS and the Malay political establishment. Of course, PAS does not pose the question of which race asks for the bribe because in PAS’ Weltanschauung (worldview), Race C goes around willy-nilly offering bribes to anyone interested.

---

READ MORE: 'Race C bribes, Race M receives', says Terengganu exco on corruption

---

Look at the text exchanges between Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s former aide, Shamsul Iskandar Akin, and businessperson Albert Tei. I do not know about anyone else, but I never had the luxury of going on a trip to London and asking someone for some pound sterling.

Anecdotally speaking, nobody I have spoken to of Race C, Race I, and even Race M, enjoys giving bribes or any other inducements for contracts or favours.

Not because of morals or ethics, but because it cuts into the bottom line. The costs are borne not by the givers or takers of the bribes but by the average rakyat. This is what systemic corruption does.

Let us not forget street-level corruption, which happens when you have many mouths to feed, your pay is low, your superiors are corrupt, and you believe or are indoctrinated to believe that other citizens are well off, while your community is constantly under siege, and one day soon, you may be beggars in your own land.

Unfortunately, the narratives of mainstream Islam in this country are all about how the non-Muslims, specifically the Chinese community, control the economy and thus corrupt good Muslim leaders.

Keep in mind that while Hadi has his unique views on corruption, Islam, and working with Umno, former PAS spiritual leader Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat also had his take.

While I may have disagreed often publicly with the late Tok Guru’s religious stance, his views on corruption are well known.

“In 20 years under my administration, the anti-corruption agencies have never been able to convict any of my officers. We denounced Umno because of their corruption, and it would not be right if we came into power and ended up being corrupt too.

“I tell my officers, you are answerable to God - not to me or to anyone else - you answer in the hereafter for your doings. The character is of priority, and the mindset must be changed to include the world and the hereafter,” he was quoted as saying by The Edge in 2013.

Faith over all else?

This, of course, is in stark contrast with religious preachers like Zakir Naik, who claimed that it was better for Muslims to vote for corrupt Muslim leaders rather than honest non-Muslim leaders.

Keep in mind that the political and religious elites fawn over Zakir, who not only says things like that but also demonises other religions in this country.

And if you think that what Zakir said was an aberration and does not align with mainstream Islamic discourse in this country, you would be very wrong.

Hadi said that “integrity without Islam is not accepted by Allah, and a person with faith who has no integrity is still better than someone with integrity but no faith”.

The Straits Times reported this in 2019 when Hadi’s son was babbling about “dedak cartels” within PAS who were allegedly accepting money from Umno.

This is the hilarious part. If you go by Hadi’s logic, it would be better to vote for those leaders with no integrity but have faith.

Hence, it is better to vote for Umno, Bersatu, Pejuang, and of course, PAS leaders, even if they’re corrupt and have no integrity, as long as they have faith, rather than leaders from DAP, for instance, who are without faith.

Is it any wonder that people are championing the release of convicted felon Najib Abdul Razak? But you see, this is the brilliance of this whole con game when it comes to corruption.

PAS is a big party with growing influence, hence it understands that it really does not matter which Malay power bloc is in power because PAS decides on the religious, racial, and policy narratives of this country.

Nobody in PAS asks why the litmus test can’t be voting for leaders with faith and integrity, but I suppose it is far easier to lay the blame on Race C.

Malaysiakini : Every ringgit lost to corruption is money not spent on training, maintenance, or operational combat readiness.

Billions of ringgits have flowed into projects that were overpriced, delayed, or poorly executed. Ships arrive late or not at all. Systems underperform. Readiness suffers. Money disappears.

However, the deepest damage is not material. It is trust.

When defence contracts are hidden from scrutiny, when investigations drag on for decades, and accountability remains elusive, the message to the public is unmistakable - political elites appear insulated, while the public pays the price.

When leaders speak of zero tolerance without enforcing consequences, citizens stop believing the system is fair.

Top brass implicated

In late 2025, MACC launched a sweeping investigation into alleged bribery linked to army procurement contracts, prompting raids on several companies and the freezing of six bank accounts belonging to suspects and family members.

The army chief at the time was placed on leave, officially to avoid a conflict of interest, pending investigations.

However, we are aware of other major defence projects which continue to falter, like the littoral combat ships (LCS) project has suffered repeated cost overruns and delays.

---

READ MORE: KINIGUIDE | A littoral dive into the navy's RM9b LCS scandal

---

No ship has been delivered despite billions of ringgits in payment, and delivery schedules got repeatedly revised.

Recently, the seriousness of these concerns surfaced. A former army chief and one of his wives were charged in court with money‑laundering offences involving more than RM2 million in alleged illicit funds.

Both pleaded not guilty, and the cases remain before the courts.

The charges themselves, which were brought under anti‑money‑laundering laws, underscore the scale of the probe and the level of concern within enforcement agencies.

They also confirm what many Malaysians have long suspected: procurement corruption is not a minor issue confined to low‑level actors.

Freezing bank accounts, staging raids, and placing officials on leave may generate headlines but Malaysians want more than process. They want outcomes. They want accountability.

Sytemic failure

The rakyat is aware that this is not a bureaucratic hiccup. It is a systemic failure. The root of the problem is that defence‑related corruption in Malaysia did not begin in the last few years.

Parliamentary special select committee investigations and public statements by former defence minister Mohamad Sabu in 2019 highlighted questionable land swap deals involving ministry’s land, stretching back decades, with estimated losses in excess of RM500 million.

These deals involved 16 projects covering thousands of hectares of land and billions of ringgits in value, yet many details of the investigations remain classified.

When investigations span decades, administrations, and political parties, but few concrete prosecutions emerge, then it is no longer credible to dismiss them as isolated incidents.

The pattern points instead to weak enforcement, institutional reluctance, and political insulation from consequences.

Scorpene scandal

A case in point is the Scorpene submarine procurement which was once promoted as a landmark strategic acquisition. Instead, it has become a lasting symbol of unresolved controversy.

French prosecutors alleged misappropriation of hundreds of millions of euros linked to support contracts, and MACC investigations into related transactions have continued.

---

READ MORE: KINIGUIDE: Dredging up the DCNS Scorpene scandal

---

Former leaders have denied wrongdoing. No local convictions followed. If a defence procurement scandal from more than 20 years ago remains unresolved, Malaysians are entitled to ask how today’s system can be trusted to function any better.

These cases are not random. They reveal a recurring pattern involving the following: procurement decisions made with limited transparency and frequent reliance on direct negotiation, political oversight that tolerated, or perhaps enabled questionable approvals across successive governments, and investigations that begin years later, when evidence has faded and public attention has waned.

This is not bad luck. It is not inefficiency. It reflects a culture of permissiveness, weak oversight, and excessive secrecy, particularly in financial matters where secrecy is least justified.

National security requires operational secrecy. It does not require financial opacity.

The rakyat is not satisfied with the actions taken thus far. Freezing accounts is not enough. Raiding companies is not enough. Placing suspects on leave is not enough. Reopening old investigations is not enough.

These actions create activity, not justice.

What Malaysians deserve are the following:

• Full disclosure of defence procurement contracts, with secrecy limited strictly to genuine operational needs.

• Independent parliamentary oversight that is not beholden to the executive.

• Clear, timely outcomes from anti‑corruption investigations.

• An end to routine procurement exemptions that bypass open competition.

• Strong, enforceable whistleblower protections.

Without these reforms, transparency remains cosmetic.

Decades of inaction

Malaysia’s defence integrity crisis did not begin today. It began decades ago, and it persisted because complacency was allowed to replace accountability.

What has changed is public awareness and our patience.

Malaysians are no longer willing to accept reassurances while scandals resurface again and again. For too long, corruption in defence has been treated as a management issue rather than what it truly is: a national emergency.

The armed forces are entrusted with defending the nation. Corruption within weakens them from the inside.

And Malaysians should not merely hope for accountability. They should demand it.

Malaysiakini : “While we do eat pork, many of us don’t take bribes, abuse drugs… But we have been condemned as uncivilised for eating pork.”

His point was that “hati busuk” or hateful minds, plus corruption, are worse than any farm odours.

Willie urged all Malaysians to refrain from mocking the food choices of other races.

I personally love budu, which is fermented anchovy sauce, it adds a real zing to Kelantanese food. And we all love belacan, even though this fermented shrimp paste has a jarring odour.

For me, all “smelly” stuff adds a unique, delicious twist to food, be it petai, durian, salted fish, tempoyak, cincalok, blue cheese, stinky tofu, etc.

Imposing on others

However, imagine a Malay who lives in Europe and fries vegetables with belacan. The neighbouring Caucasian family then lodges complaints against “odour pollution” and demands that he stop. Is it fair for one community to impose their culture on others?

Pigs can actually be very clean and even kept as pets. Actor George Clooney was “inseparable” from his pet pig called Max for 18 years.

It was a beloved companion which Clooney had described as "his longest relationship".

So, just because pork is forbidden to Muslims, is it fair to demand that non-Muslims cannot rear pigs in Selangor? Because they are smelly?

In India, Hindu radicals have beaten up Muslims on suspicion of eating, storing, or transporting beef or cattle.

In the latest of several incidents, on Jan 14, a Muslim youth named Sheikh Makandar Mohammad was driving a van loaded with cattle in Odisha, west India.

He was badly whacked by “cow vigilantes” and later died in the hospital.

The cow is a sacred animal for Hindus, but is it right to demand that Muslims in India cannot be allowed to eat or transport beef? Because it's “sensitive” or “offensive” to the majority?

In a multicultural society, let's learn to live and let live.

The respected former Sarawak chief minister Adenan Satem was reported as saying: “Sarawakians, whether they are Malays, Chinese, Dayak, Bidayuh, they live together, drink together, eat together, find partners together.”

What I admire about Sarawak is that Muslims, Chinese and Dayaks can sit together in a coffee shop. The Muslims eat their halal nasi lemak while the others eat non-halal kolo mee. Everyone is cool.

That's why Sarawak is the model for Malaysian racial harmony.

Cows, goats and pigs

Yes, admittedly, traditional pig farms in coastal Selangor, in Kuala Langat and Sepang, have issues with smell and pollution.

On Jan 10, Selangor ruler Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah said he firmly opposed the renewal of licences for existing pig farms there.

However, are chicken, cattle and goat farms more “fragrant”? Or less dirty? Well, it all depends on how they are managed, right?

Even the cleanest animals will stink if they are not taken care of, and that includes pets. Think about cats in apartments that poop everywhere.

I had a friend who caught leptospirosis after accidentally swallowing river water while doing white-water rafting at Gopeng, Perak.

It's a serious disease from rat urine. Rafting guides told him the source was an unhygienic riverside goat farm.

As for cattle farms, they can spread various diseases to humans, such as Q fever, cryptosporidiosis, salmonellosis, E coli, and brucellosis.

So even farms that supply halal meat can be smelly, cause diseases and taint water. It's all about how they are operated.

Clean modern farming

To solve the problem of polluting pig farms, Selangor wants to relocate them to a modern eco-friendly system at Bukit Tagar to minimise odour, noise and pollution, said Menteri Besar Amirudin Shari.

This means zero waste emission, as everything will be in a closed system. Pig waste will be converted into biogas for electricity generation, explained Izham Hashim, the state executive councillor overseeing agriculture.

He added that the farms will be located away from residential areas and flanked by buffer zones.

For the record, Lam Sai Kit was the scientist who discovered that the Nipah virus from bats in nearby fruit orchards had transferred to pigs to cause a deadly outbreak in 1998.

He supports the Bukit Tagar plan as “modern and centralised pig farming enhances public health”, CodeBlue reported on Jan 23.

Centralised systems allow for engineered wastewater treatment, reducing pollution, he explained. It also allows veterinary disease monitoring and vaccination.

In short, the most reasonable opinion is that we need to clean up pig farming through modern methods, as done in Europe.

Emotional politics

But sadly, pigs and pork have become emotional religious issues, and rational debate starts to break down. Then, political calculations enter.

Perhaps that's why, on Jan 23, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim called for the proposed Bukit Tagar modern farm to either be put on hold or relocated due to “residents’ concerns”.

Yet, “residents’ concerns” have often been ignored when it comes to super high-density condos, local council elections or lately, the imminent destruction of parts of the Ayer Hitam Forest Reserve in Puchong, Selangor.

So, why is Anwar suddenly so sensitive to residents' unease over an eco-friendly pig farm?

“Even if the technology is the best available, if it causes concern in the area, it should not be allowed to proceed,” Anwar added.

So, it's a big no to modern science and yes to emotional fears and possible loss of votes - when the issue is blown up by the usual suspects.

The reason earlier pig farms could survive was that they were scattered, small-scale operations under the radar. However, that meant a lack of central pollution control.

Whereas Bukit Tagar is a big, integrated operation that invites political attention, like a big red bullseye target.

So, will pig farming in Selangor have to shut down even though a modern, hygienic alternative is available?

Why not just be honest and declare: “Sorry, actually we want to close down all pig farms as the animals and meat are offensive to Muslims, no matter what scientific farming methods are used.”

What’s next?

In 10 or 20 years, what will come next? Will shops be banned from publicly displaying “offensive” roasted pork products such as char siew and siew yuk?

Perhaps, Selangor's pig farms can be relocated to an island far, far away - namely Sarawak - but that will mean higher costs. Maybe we have to import pork from Thailand or faraway Europe and Brazil, even if it goes against local “food security” policy.

Izham underlined that the issue was long-standing and should not be politicised, stressing that the state government’s focus is on resolving pollution and safeguarding community well-being.

That is the right approach. One can only hope that such rational ideas will speak louder than emotional or political panic.

Meanwhile, please stop evoking the ridiculous argument of “busuk”.

Duit yang mereka curi lebih dari cukup untuk membayar penyelarasan pencen termasuk backdated untuk semua pegawai dan anggota yang telah berkorban mengadai nyawa untuk merdekakan Negara ini dan menjadi kan Tanah Melayu kepada Malaya dan kemudian menjadi Malaysia.

Tanpa kami, orang-orang politik yang menerajui kerajaan sekarang tidak akan wujud. Perompak & penyamun termasuk isteri-isteri kedua,ketiga mereka didalam ATM yang tertuduh di mahkamah sekarang sungguh memalukan kami veteran. Mereka yang tertuduh itu merupakan anak didik kami. Kami yang melatih mereka.

Tapi kerana kesombongan, ketamakan dan keriakan mereka, Allah tidak pernah lupa. Ini baru balasan di dunia belum di hadapan Mungkar dan Nangkir lagi. Belum di padang Mahsyar lagi. Belum dihadapan Allah SWT lagi. Saya banyak mendiamkan diri kerana saya kecewa kita mudah di pecah belahkan oleh orang politik dan orang yang ada kepentingan peribadi dan ketamakan harta yang haram. Saya dari dulu rela melepaskan jawatan memimpin PSPRM dari melihat veteran berpuak-puak dan berpecah belah! Tetapi ramai veteran diakar umbu masih mahu saya memimpin.

Saya tidak ada niat untuk melawan Kerajaan tapi untuk menasihat dan membetulkan sesiapa yang duduk di atas jika mereka salah dari sudut undang-undang termasuk menasihati Duli2 Yang Maha Mulia Raja-Raja Melayu. Kami tetap taat setia kepada Raja-Raja Melayu dan masih mahu mengekalkan "kedaulatan" dan "kuasa budicara Tuanku". Kami hamba patek kalian tidak mahu nasib Duli2 Tuanku jadi seperti nasib Raja2 dan Sultan2 di Indonesia! Kali ini saya ingin berkongsi sedikit secara ringkas tentang pandangan Mahkamah Persekutuan di India tentang Sistem dan Prinsip Satu Pangkat Satu Pencen yang dilakukan di India supaya lebih ramai Veteran kita memahaminya.

Saya harap setiap Veteran simpan tulisan saya ini dan viralkan kepada seberapa ramai rakan-rakan supaya mereka juga simpan tulisan permulaan saya ini. Bila ramai dah baca, baru boleh kita bangkit sekali lagi untuk membetulkan keadaan yang tidak betul. Orang Politik jangan ingat kita tidak mampu untuk menjatuhkan kredibiliti dan kuasa yang mereka ada sekarang! Jika Angkatan Tentera India dan Veteran Tentera India boleh lakukan nya kenapa kita tak boleh?

Syarat pertama yang saya minta adalah kita mesti bersatu. Tidak kisah siapa yang nak memimpin. Pemimpin-pemimpin yang kita perlu adalah yang berilmu, berani, sihat dan mempunyai hati yang ikhlas 🙏fan takut dengan balasan Allah SWT. Kita tidak mahu mereka yang CARMA (Cari Makan), yang sifat ALOK (Aksyen Lebih Otak Kurang) dan yang duduk di atas tahta seperti Kura-Kura diatas tiang tinggi. Bacalah perlahan-lahan apa yang saya tulis tentang OROP di bawah. Jangan tak baca. Jika Anda tidak baca, anda adalah sememangnya tergulung diantara ALOK CARMA yang terdekat!

LATARBELAKANG MENGENAI SKIM SATU PANGKAT SATU PENCEN [One Rank One Pension (OROP)] DI DALAM ANGKATAN TENTERA INDIA

1. Apakah maksud "One Rank One Pension (OROP)"? "One Rank One Pension (OROP)" adalah satu prinsip yang menentukan: Pencen bagi mereka yang bersara dari Angkatan Tentera yang menyandang pangkat yang sama dengan jangkamasa perkhidmatan yang sama, tidak kira bila bila atau tarikh mereka bersara, di beri penyelarasan pencen yang "periodic" secara otomatik setiap kali mereka yang masih di dalam perkhidmatan naik gaji. Dalam ayat yang mudah, seorang anggota tentera yang bersara hari ini harus terima pencen yang sama dengan anggota tentera yang bersara dengan jangkamasa perkhidmatan sama.

2. Latarbelakang Sejarah - "SYSTEM PRA-1973" Sebelum 1973, Angkatan Tentera India mengikuti satu sistem pencen berdasarkan kepada pangkat yang di sandang semasa berkhidmat dalam Angkatan Tentera: Pencen dikaitkan kepada pangkat dan tahun perkhidmatan, bukan di bayar mengikut pusingan komisyen. Anggota Tentera yang bersara dengan pangkat yang sama akan menerima pencen yang sama, tidak kira bila tarikh mereka bersara. Dengan cara ini menentukan OROP menjadi berkesan dalam amalan, walaupun ianya bukan nama yang rasmi. Sistem ini mengakui:

# Umur Persaraan Awal(35–54 tahun untuk kebanyakan anggota Tentera LLP dan Pegawai ).

# Keadaan Perkhidmatan Angkatan Tentera yang Berisiko Tinggi High-risk.

# Peluang Pekerjaan yang Terhad selepas Bersara.

3. Detik Pusingan 1973 – Komisyen Gaji Pusat yang Ketiga [Third Central Pay Commission (3rd CPC)]

# "The Third Central Pay Commission (1973)" telah membuat satu anjakan yang besar:

§ Pencen Tentera dikaitkan kepada Gaji Angkatan Tentera terakhir yang Veteran itu terima semasa berkhidmat dalam Angkatan Tentera.

§ Semakan Pencen terikat kepada untuk membayar apa-apa perubahan komisyen Pencen di masa akan datang, bukan secara otomatik disamakan. Ini mengwujutkan perbezaan pencen diantara: 🕊️ Pesara Sebelum.

Pesara yang akan datang yang akan menyandang pangkat yang sama dan jangka masa perkhidmatan yang sama lama. KESANNYA:

i. Satu jurang perbezaan pencen yang besar dan ketara akan wujud dalam sistem.

ii. Veteran yang bersara lebih awal akan mula menerima pencen yang tersangat rendah dari mereka yang pencen kemudian.

iii. Ini merosakkan prinsip kesamarataan dan moral.

iv. Keputusan yang tidak betul seperti ini telah membuat akar umbi yang terlibat dalam pergerakan kes OROP tersebut.

4. Ketidaksamaan yang semakin meningkat dan berlaku pergolakan veteran di India (1980an – 2000an) Dari tahun-tahun1980an keatas, jurang perbezaan menjadi sangat ketara secara mendadak:

i. Setiap kali berlakunya semakan gaji, ianya menjarakkan jurang pencen veteran.

ii. Beberapa anomali wujud menyebabkan yang junior akan mendapat pencen yang lebih tinggi daripada senior.

iii. Di sebabkan oleh isu ini beberapa Organisasi Veteran Digerakkan di India seperti berikut:-

# Indian Ex-Servicemen Movement (IESM)

# All India Ex-Servicemen Welfare Associa0tion (AIESWA)

iv. Pelbagai badan rejimen dan organisasi veteran yang ditubuhkan telah bertindak balas di India. Organisasi ini telah:

a. Memecah belahkan Parliamen dan penyokong parti politik yang memerintah.

b. Menghantar memorandum kepada Kerajaan India.

c. Veteran menyaman Kerajaan India di mahkamah.

c. Melakukan protest di seluruh negara dan melakukan mogok lapar di India.

d. OROP menjadi tuntutan pusat dari persatuan veteran di India.

5. Dengan sokongan parlimen dan politik (2000–2013) OROP perlahan-lahan mencapai sokongan parti pembangkang di India: a. Tertubuhnya Jawatankuasa Tetap Parlimen di India(Select Committee).

b. Pelaksanaan OROP yang disyorkan berulang kali di India, dengan memetik:

i. Kewajipan moral atas jasa-jasa anggota tentera di India. 

ii. Mereka (parti politik) memerlukan Angkatan Tentera dan Veteran untuk operasi di India. 

iii. Ianya satu Kebajikan untuk veteran Angkatan Tentera India. 

iv. Ia perlu di lakukan untuk Motivasi pengambilan masuk ke dalam Angkatan Tentera India. 

v. India terpaksa tukar Kerajaan dengan parti UPA (2004–2014) dan Parti tersebut terpaksa: 

# Menerima OROP pada dasarnya. 

# Penambahbaikan pencen separa diberikan. 

# OROP penuh tidak dilaksanakan kerana kebimbangan fiskal.

6. Didalam Mahkamah Persekutuan India Supreme Court satu penghakiman yang telah menjadi rujukan Landmark Judgement telah dibuat: Kes itu adalah: D.S. Nakara vs. Union of India (1983) → dimana mahkamah telah menyatakan bahawa Pencen adalah hak yang diiktiraf oleh perlembagaan dan gaji tertangguh yang diperolehi, bukan ganjaran atau amal yang diberikan oleh majikan. 

Ia merupakan hak milik yang diperolehi melalui perkhidmatan yang panjang, berterusan dan setia, bertujuan untuk menyediakan keselamatan kewangan dan maruah semasa persaraan. Mahkamah telah menegaskan bahawa pencen adalah bayaran yang tidak boleh dirunding untuk perkhidmatan yang telah diberikan pada masa lalu. 

Wujudnya Tribunal Angkatan Tentera Bersama di India [Multiple Armed Forces Tribunal (AFT)] dan Mahkamah Tinggi di India mengekalkan: → Bersetuju dengan skim "Pencen yang sama untuk pangkat dan perkhidmatan yang sama"(OROP). Walau bagaimanapun, OROP penuh !3memerlukan keputusan eksekutif, bukan mandat kehakiman semata-mata.

7. Pada tahun 2014–2015: Berlakunya Komitmen Politik dan kelulusan terakhir. Semasa Pilihanraya Umum 2014 di India, OROP menjadi salah satu isu politik yang erbesar di India. Parti BJP telah membuat komitmen melalui Manifestonya: Berjanji untuk melaksanakan sepenuhnya skim OROP. Perlaksanaan Janji:

Dalam bulan September 2015, Kerajaan India dengan rasminya melaksanakan OROP berkuatkuasa mulai 1hb Julai 2014. Rupa Bentuk Skima yang di luluskan adalah:

a. Pencen Anggota Tentera yang sama pangkat dan sama jangka masa berkhidmat.

b. Pencen disemak berdasarkan purata pencen minimum dan maksimum pesara semasa.

c. Kerajaan India setuju mengkaji pencen Tentera setiap 5 tahun dengan anggaran belanjawan: →.₹8,000–10,000 crore setahun.

→Lebih dari 25 juta veterans and janda/duda mendapat untung.

8. Kesedaran ini membuat veteran berterusan membuat tuntutan – Perbahasan mengenai "OROP telah dicairkan" Veteran berpendapat bahawa OROP sebenar telah dicairkan, disebabkan oleh: kitaran semakan 5 tahun dan bukannya penyamaan masa nyata Automatik penggunaan formula purata pencen Pengecualian pesara pra-matang dan beberapa kategori. Ini mengakibatkan bantahan berterusan (terutamanya di Jantar Mantar, Delhi).

Dalam Pengecualian pesara pra-matang dan beberapa kategoriIni mengakibatkan protes berterusan (terutamanya di Jantar Mantar, Delhi)

9. Wujudnya Rasional Strategik & Institusi untuk OROP:

Di luar kebajikan, OROP adalah penting untuk:

a) Moral Kententeraan - Memastikan maruah dan menghormati khidmat jangkamasa panjang.

b) Mengalakkan Pengrekrutan & mampu mengekalkan orang muda yang berbakat tinggi untuk menyertai Angkatan Tentera India.

c) Keseimbangan Ekuiti Awam–Tentera. Mengimbangi keburukan persaraan awal berbanding kerjaya awam.

d) Keselamatan Nasional.

Akan meyakinkan untuk menaikkan moral anggota yang tinggi merujuk secara langsung kepada operasi.

10. Kesimpulan OROP bukanlah konsesi, tetapi pemulihan prinsip pencen tentera asal yang dibongkar pada tahun 1973.

Ia mewakili:

→Keadilan sosial

→Kesaksamaan institusi

→Tanggungjawab moral negara terhadap Anggota Tenteranya

→Walaupun pelaksanaan masih tidak sempurna, OROP berdiri sebagai salah satu pembaharuan kebajikan veteran India yang paling penting.

Berbalik ke negara kita Malaysia, kalau tanya pada saya samaada kita masih ada harapan.... Jawapan saya, Ya! Kita masih ada. Kalau Mahkamah Persekutuan buat keputusan yang salah, mesti ada satu badan yang boleh betulkan mahkamah! Walaupun Mahkamah Persekutuan!

Yang Ikhlas,

Mej Hj Mior Rosli TUDM (Bersara)Dip Pub Adm.,LL.b, LL.m, MScHRD

Malaysiakini : Distortion of events 

Some Malay nationalists are now screaming: “How dare Tan equate the suffering of Chinese Malaysians to the Palestinians?”

But that is a distortion and exaggeration. If you listen carefully to what Tan actually said, he did acknowledge (in his convoluted English) that racial discrimination was “way more of a serious magnitude in Palestine”.

I am guessing that many racial warriors are less conversant in English or have not even heard his actual words. They are probably just blindly amplifying what others are shouting about. 

Even I find Tan’s English a chore to follow. It didn’t help that his question was meandering, thus enabling people to put words into his mouth.

But the core of what he asked was valid, ie, is there a parallel between right-wing nationalism and racial prejudice in Israel and Malaysia? Yes, of course, it’s far worse in the Gaza genocide, but his question was about the underlying mindset.

But Palestine is a highly emotional question in Malaysia. Many, including myself, are distraught, indeed enraged, by the genocide there, and rightly so.

A more appropriate comparison would have been with the hate speech against Muslims in Europe and America. If Malays don’t like such prejudice, then they should not support it when it happens in Malaysia against non-Muslims.

Even then, Muslims are mayors of both London and New York. But in Malaysia, even the idea of local council elections is opposed on racial grounds by Umno, PAS, and Bersatu.

Not rabble-rousing 

Despite his linguistic shortcomings, Tan was not behaving like a racial rabble-rouser, such as a certain good doctor from Malacca, and others who have mushroomed in Malaysia.

He didn’t spew out downright racist and hateful comments like “Balik Tong San” (go back to Tong San) or “halau Cina” (chase the Chinese out) or “DAPig”, as we often see on social media - usually without any action from authorities.

Tan asked a peaceful and respectful, albeit provocative, question at an intellectual forum, which was rebutted by the speaker George Galloway. However, the British MP may not have been fully aware of the harsh history of the Malayan Emergency.

In a mature country that can discuss important issues frankly, that should be the end of it. A calm but confusing question was answered in a serene setting. There was no fiery rhetoric, so why inflame things further?

Selective sedition?

Instead, Tan was arrested under the Sedition Act, an action that was “disproportionate to the wrong that he was alleged to have committed”, especially as he had apologised and resigned from FMT, said DAP’s Bukit Gelugor MP Ramkarpal Singh.

Former Umno law minister Zaid Ibrahim (who now supports PAS) commented: “The police have gone overboard in charging journalist Rex Tan. He has been charged with sedition for posing a silly, insensitive question about race relations in the country.”

“But he is not a known racial agitator or one who made lengthy speeches to incite. He has profusely apologised, and so has FMT. That’s enough.

I remember a ceramah by former PAS president Fadzil Noor during the foment of Reformasi in the late 1990s.

He raised some controversial questions about the rule of former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad and then added, “Nak tanya jer, kalau tanya pun tak boleh, ini dah berat.” (Just asking, if even that is not allowed, then it’s terrible)

PAS was then more inclusive and moderate when the late Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat was their spiritual leader. Their election slogan was “PAS for all”.

But the party changed direction to harp on racial fear, losing its reformist mission, lamented political analyst Prof Tajuddin Rasdi.

And so we get inflammatory statements from PAS nowadays. For example, in October 2025, the party’s Pengkalan Chepa MP Ahmad Marzuk Shaary alluded to Malays as being under “siege” and “exiled from their own homeland” by non-Malay “pendatang” (immigrant) - just like Palestinians under Israeli occupation. 

Wow, wasn’t that a far more provocative comparison with Palestine than Tan’s civil question?

In fact, it should fall under Section 4(1) of the Sedition Act - saying something to promote discontent or hostility between races or classes.

While Tan was arrested under this law, why did Marzuk escape punishment? Is the definition of sedition selective?

The Sedition Act itself was drawn up by the British in 1948, the same year that the Emergency started, to suppress any challenge in their most lucrative colony (after India became independent in 1947).

Technically, any racial criticism can be deemed seditious.

It’s a draconian law that can cover any dissent, even if there is no intent to provoke, and that’s why Pakatan Harapan had campaigned to abolish it.

The threat of the Sedition Act hanging over people’s and journalists’ heads will mean they will only ask “safe questions”, which will produce the usual politicians’ cakap pusing-pusing (hemming and hawing).

This is yet another blow to the Madani ethos, which was supposed to usher in a “civilised society” that can discuss difficult things openly and maturely.

Malaysiakini : The reality is that the DAP has bent over for Umno at the cost of angering its base.

Teresa Kok, a target of Akmal, was even chastised by the prime minister over her comments on halal certification, even though her comments were in fact taking into account the hardship faced by small Malay businesses and the economic effects mandatory halal certification would have on them.

So, you see, even when DAP voices out concern, which would help the Malay community, it is demonised, and more often than not, the head of Madani would side with the far-right ethnocentric agitators who really do nothing for the Malay community.

This is why the Malay uber alles crowd does not want a local election. If non-Malays are seen taking into account the welfare of Malays in their areas, this would shake the ideological bedrock of the establishment.

Mind you, the capitalist, of course, does not want a local election because it would place power in the hands of the rakyat, and this would screw up the whole social contract, which has sustained the political class for decades.

Taking the hits

DAP representatives have been vilified. DAP representatives have had police reports made against them. DAP representatives have had their cars fire bombed. DAP representatives have been reprimanded by the prime minister of their coalition.

DAP representatives have had to make retractions and apologies. DAP representatives have been attacked by online mobs, who happen to also be the people who voted for them, and did you see DAP having a hissy fit and threatening to resign from all posts and abandoning Madani?

Why? Because the other thing the DAP is good at besides attacking the MCA is taking hits from their Malay uber alles partners. The party has always had a soft spot for folks they have deemed as tyrannical and detrimental to a vision of a united Malaysia.

DAP has worked with PAS. DAP has worked with Bersatu. Indeed, all these Malay uber alles parties owe a debt of gratitude to DAP, but they know DAP will never collect.

Even when it comes to Najib Abdul Razak, DAP was willing to work with him. Sure, now that he is in jail, DAP gets all uppity, but remember, in 2016, DAP said it was willing to work with Najib.

“I am prepared to work with any Malaysian to save Malaysia, not only Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Muhyiddin Yassin, but even with Najib if the prime minister is prepared to admit that he had led the country on a wrong tangent and that Malaysia must be saved with far-reaching democratic and institutional reforms,” said Lim Kit Siang.

What DAP brings to any kind of coalition is the majority backing of a voting demographic, and hence, they can claim to be the “voice” of the community on secular and egalitarian issues.

The fact that they have to downplay such aspirations proves how well they can play with weak factions of the Malay political establishment.

Not a threat

Akmal should learn from Nazri Abdul Aziz, whose chequered past with Umno did not mean he did not understand the benefits of being sympathetic to DAP. Indeed, poor Gerakan had conniptions because Nazri understood how beneficial a relationship with DAP was.

In 2018, Nazri said, “I said the voice of the Chinese after the 2013 general election is DAP. Is that wrong? I am friends with DAP because I respect democracy.

“I want to carry out tourism work in Seremban and in Penang. These are DAP areas. I cannot leave them aside.”

Akmal goes on about defending race and religion when even the top guys in Umno know that DAP is not a threat to Islam in this country. Here is Umno secretary-general Asyraf Wajdi Dusuki, just last year, who wanted to debunk the slander of Islam threatened:

"This is a fundamental matter that we must understand, so that all slander and accusations - as though Umno is selling out the country, Islam, and the Malay struggle to others - can be put to rest."

Indeed, so inept has DAP been when it comes to maintaining the secular line, and so eager has the party been to please their Malay/Muslim partners that it has bent over backwards for an overtly religious state. More importantly, while non-Malays condemn such appeasement strategies online, they remain a fixed deposit for DAP.

Honestly, you know why the Umno big cheese is so hesitant to work with snakes who have betrayed Umno? Because the Malay establishment, well, intelligent or cunning ones, understand that Malay uber alles types always fight with each other.

Take what happened in Perlis, for instance, which managed to fragment Perikatan Nasional.

This is what bugs Akmal so much. The fact that DAP is the best partner the far right can have as long as demographics allow.

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.