ღ♥ Wedding Anniversary ღ♥

Daisypath Anniversary tickers

ღ♥ My precious baby girl ღ♥

Lilypie Kids Birthday tickers

Saturday 5 December 2015

Malaysian Democracy Goes Up In Flames

Malaysian Democracy Goes Up In Flames

Malaysian Democracy Goes Up In Flames

2 DEC 2015

THIS POST IS ALSO AVAILABLE IN: MALAYIBAN
Scorched earth - how Malaysia's democracy is going up in flames like the Borneo Jungle
Scorched earth – how Malaysia’s democracy is going up in flameslike the Borneo Jungle  
Najib Razak claims that the draconian ‘security’ bill, which he is rushing through Parliament over the next three days, is based on provisions brought in by the UK to counter bombing attacks against civilians.
This is untrue.
Liberal forces may be up in arms in the Britain about what they describe as the dangerously wide powers granted by the UK anti-terror acts, but these are nothing compared to the sweeping provisions currently being rushed through in Malaysia, which allow the PM to introduce martial law at the drop of a hat.
In particular, the UK terror laws are directed specifically against mainly foreign nationals suspected of planning random and murderous attacks against innocent civilians – attacks of a kind that are yet to take place in Malaysia.
From reformer to dictator via the bank
From reformer to dictator via the bank
By contrast, the main provisions of Najib’s act are clearly directed against internal critics.
Indeed, whilst the British law allows for indefinite detention of foreign nationals believed to be fomenting acts of terror, the Malaysian law allows similar sweeping powers against anyone the Prime Minister regards as threatening his own political position in any way.  He is allowed to imprison under this act someone he regards as threatening the economy for example…. this includes criticising his own management of it in any way.
The licence for dictatorship that Najib is currently rushing through Malaysia’s pretend Parliament in just three days goes much much further even than all this however. It is a sign of just how little regard the elected representatives have for their responsibilities that they are allowing this final public removal of their authority in such a way.
Najib's council of war - the so-called National Security Council
Najib’s council of war – the so-called National Security Council [from Malaysiakini]
Far in excess of anything that has been brought through in the UK, Najib is effectively allowing himself a War Cabinet, his so-called National Security Council, to run the country as a straight dictatorship, by-passing all the previous checks and balances that define a democratic system.
And his Parliamentary bosses (which is what the MPs elected by the people are supposed to be) are letting him do it overnight and without the slightest justification whatsoever.
Power behind the throne - wife Rosmah is given to ring up officials on her all-powerful husband's behalf
Power behind the throne – wife Rosmah is given to ring up officials on her all-powerful husband’s behalf
Of course, he is pretending that all these powers are just ‘provisional’ to counter a ‘possible emergency’ – but there is nothing to stop him assuming them when he likes for whatever reason he chooses in this legislation and given how desperately he is currently hanging on to power there is little doubt he will do so sooner rather than later.
The Prime Minister is grabbing all these powers on the pretext of an emergency that simply does not exist in Malaysia. There have been zero terror attacks and there is no war – and yet he has taken on more powers and authority through this bill than Winston Churchill adopted when the Nazis were heading for Britain’s beaches.
When Churchill launched his own War Cabinet against the Nazi invaders, for example, he specifically included opposition politicians in key positions in order to preserve the democratic principle and bring the people with him.
Yet, Najib’s War Cabinet, consists of a handful of his closest political cronies, along with an un-elected police officer, that very IGP who has been running amok in recent weeks attacking anyone who raises concern about corruption in high places.
Running the country as they like from now on new DPM, PM and Police Chief
Running the country as they like from now on new DPM, PM and Police Chief
He is moreover granting this crony cabal arbitrary powers to run the country as they like and to arrest and detain who they like, without reference to any existing laws all in the name of fighting terror.  Most significantly, Najib is also granting his boys and himself total immunity from prosecution over any of their actions in advance, in case any ‘mistakes’ they might make in the heat of their battle against the “terror threat” facing Malaysia.
These ‘mistakes’ could under this definition most certainly include plundering the public purse further into their own bank accounts, perhaps under the ‘mistaken belief’ that this would increase their personal protection agains these bombers, criticisers, law enforcers and other such threatening figures allegedly ‘seeking to topple the Prime Minister’ of Malaysia.
This is Najib Razak’s bid for supreme and untrammelled powers of dictatorship over his country, all under the guise of protecting it from a terror threat that has so far not manifested itself within its borders.  And he is doing it because he can no longer rule by consent, since he has lost the confidence of his people and he is in trouble with the law.
This thinly disguised bid for dictatorship has nothing to do with anti-terror measures
To be clear, the British anti-terror legislation may have been locally criticised, but it does not allow the British Prime Minister to run the country along with his cousin, police chief and mad-dog new deputy, without reference to Parliament or the law and it does not allow the British Prime Minister personal immunity for all his actions.  Neither does it allow the British Prime Minister to define anything he likes as an ‘act of terror’ on grounds as woolly as ‘undermining the economy’ or ‘bringing the government into disrepute’.
This rushed through legislation has nothing to do with protecting Malaysian citizens from foreign bombing attacks and terrorists, it has everything to do with protecting Najib Razak from the consequences of corruption.
Yet that corruption has entrenched so deep within his own UMNO party that it does not occur to his MPs that they are solemnly tasked with the duty of protecting the rights and freedoms of the people, who elected them and who pay for their very comfortable positions.  Not a single one of them has thought to stand up in their pretend Parliament and express the slightest concern that their role has finally been made redundant.
These bow-wows are instead interested only in how much Razak will be prepared to pay them this time to do what they are told.  And, as long as it is enough so that they can pack their bags and leave Malaysia to live somewhere a little more free and congenial (e.g. London) when things get too rowdy back home, this is all these ‘legislators’ clearly care about.
By bringing through this so-called anti-terror legislation Najib is formally abolishing democracy in Malaysia, just a few years after assuming office under the pledge of reforming its earlier erosions.
He does so in the face of opinion polls that quite rightly show him to be the most unpopular Prime Minister ever in the history of the country – 16%.  At least when Hitler abolished democracy in Germany he was popular when he did it!  Even so, the consequences are there for all to remember.
Heil Najib - he is now 'protected' against all legal action against him - self-granted immunity.
Heil Najib – he is now ‘protected’ against all legal action against him – self-granted immunity.
No one should believe a word of it when Najib and his cronies declare that these provisions will never be abused or used except to tackle terror offences. It was not believable when he brought in SOSMA and other oppressive Acts in 2012 and sure enough SOSMA and all those acts have been first and foremost used not to tackle terrorists but to suppress democratic critics of corruption.
Never mind, say the UMNO frogs, we can parachute out to London or New York.  Never mind say the opposition, we will win the next election hands down and then we can repair the country.
Both are wrong.
Najib knows how desperate his measures are and he has no intention of holding a next election.  His solution will be to claim a terrorist emergency to abolish all elections till future notice.
Parliament will in the course of this week grant him that power to do so and also to claim immunity for this act against his people.  There is one major terrorist at large in Malaysia who is single-handedly threatening the peaceful and democratic way of life of the people and that is the Prime Minister himself.
As for those UMNO pleasure seekers, Sarawak Report and many others will be waiting to name and shame them from London to New York.  Exile might not be so easy after all.

Thursday 17 September 2015

Today, I feel like I do not belong

Today, I feel like I do not belong

 | September 17, 2015
Why was the hatred that was spewed at the rally met with silence? Why did the Malay leaders not speak out against it?
COMMENT
malaysians
A few weeks ago, while my friends and I were having a late supper at a mamak place in Jalan Ipoh, an elderly Malay gentleman in his 70s invited himself to our table. He then congratulated us on being ‘friends’.
“It is such a rarity to see people of different races having gatherings such as this,” he said as he shook our hands and took some time to get to know each of us.
My friends and I found it pretty amusing. We didn’t see anything unusual about us hanging out together. I mean, we do lots of things together all the time – we put on theatre shows, we handle acting workshops, play board games, celebrate birthdays, go on holidays, have potlucks and cookouts, watch movies, enjoy karaoke sessions… we even find comfort in each other when a shoulder to cry on is greatly needed.
While it was nice being applauded by the Malay gentleman for holding on to the Malaysian spirit, I thought it was kind of sad to have someone congratulate you for having friends of other races. I mean shouldn’t this be the norm in a country which takes pride in its multiracial status?
Today I finally understand the Malay gentleman’s surprise at the closeness he observed between the multiracial group he came across sharing a meal at the mamak shop. Maybe, we were never meant to be together after all.
As I browsed through reports on the Red Shirts gathering, and watched the video clips of what transpired and what the protestors and spokesperson of the rally had to say, my heart sank.
“Enough is enough. This is our land. Menjadi warganegara bukan bermakna kita ada hak bersama. Pendatang is pendatang. Babi is babi.”
The people I saw preaching those words weren’t people who had been dragged over and paid to say such things. They seemed like intelligent people. They seemed like my peers. They could have been my neighbours and my colleagues.
If educated young Malay folks had such strong hatred for the non-Malays, I fear for my future in this country I call my home.
But why? What have I done wrong to be treated in such a despicable way? Is it my fault that my ancestors weren’t Malay? Is it my fault that I have Indian blood running through my veins?
I have been a good child to my motherland all these years. And I can’t put into words how much I love and treasure my Malaysia. But today I feel like I do not belong here.
I used to believe that my Malay friends were the real Malays while those inciting hatred were puppets under the influence of others. But today as our atmosphere filled with so much hatred, my world came tumbling down. I did not see anyone standing up for me.
While some of my Malay friends ridiculed the Red Shirts Rally and some posted pictures with hashtags #IamMalaysian, the rest remained silent. As for me, I tried very hard to crack some jokes on social media to take my attention away from what the rally had turned into. But after a few attempts, I couldn’t keep it up. It had gotten to me.
The thing is, if only the Malay leaders who had been so opposed to the Red Shirts Rally, would have uttered a few words to console our bleeding hearts, it would have made a difference. It would have been much appreciated. If only my Malay friends had offered words of comfort to ease our troubled minds, instead of joking about images of Air Asia stewardesses dressed in red…that would have meant a lot.
I find myself wishing they had been a little bit more sensitive. Is that too much to ask?
All my life I have been proud to be Malaysian. All my life I have been confident that if I was hanging on a cliff, my Malaysian brothers and sisters could be counted on to give me a hand. Today, I am not sure.
In my 40 years of life, I have contributed to this country and its people in so many ways. I have raised my two children to love this nation and to contribute to society when they are capable of standing on their own two feet. I have even written articles calling those who abandoned this country for another as unpatriotic. But today, I ask myself if I was wrong all along.
Maybe this isn’t my country. Maybe I do not belong here. Do I sound bitter? Trust me, it’s nothing compared to how I feel inside.
For what it is worth, thank you Malaysia for putting me in my place.

Original Artilce : Today I Feel Like I Do Not Belong (Clickable Link)

Thursday 16 April 2015

Malaysia amends law to hold publishers responsible for user comments

So folks.... be careful with what you write nowadays

Original Article : Malaysia amends law to hold publishers responsible for user comments (Clickable link)

Malaysia amends law to hold publishers responsible for user comments

Sedition Act now affects publishers like Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter and Google, but many don't believe the Malaysian government is intent on targeting international or corporate players.

UN says laws greatly restrict human right to free speech
UN says laws greatly restrict human right to free speech
In a move The Economist has described as ‘thuggish’ the Malaysian government strong-armed a series of bills through in the past month that greatly impede the right to free speech for the country's citizens. The worst of the lot are arguably the Prevention of Terrorism Act, which allows subjects to be detained indefinitely, and amendments made to the Sedition Act.
For the marketing and communications industry, the changes that bring the biggest chill of apprehension are the those made to the Evidence Act and the Sedition Act.
"The amendments to the Sedition Act are tremendously repressive and draconian," commented Ong Kian Ming, member of parliament for Serdang (a Malaysian town) and a member of the Democratic Action Party.
The United Nations has urged the Malaysian government to withdraw the amendments made to the Sedition Act as the laws "curtail human rights". 
Digital News Asia explains these changes as follows:
As noted by [Malaysian] lawyer and Digital News Asia (DNA) columnist Foong Cheng Leong last week, when read with the Evidence Act amendments – the infamous Section 114A – the Sedition Act amendments become more chilling.
 The Sedition (Amendment) Bill 2015 creates liability to ‘any person’ and "thus may include owner, host, editor and subeditor" of "online forums, online news portals, and even Facebook Page/ Group owners," he wrote.
Sections 3 and 4 of the Bill introduce the words ‘caused to be published.’ Under the newly amended Section 4(1)(c) of the Sedition Act 1948, a person who, among others, publishes or caused to be published any seditious publication is guilty of an offence.  
So what does ‘caused to be published’ here mean? It seems to cover a website operator who allows a comment to be published on his website (especially in the case where comments are moderated). This also covers a comment or a posting published on a Facebook page," he added.
Facebook, LinkedIn, Google and Twitter have been quiet on the subject. Requests for comment made to these organisations in the past few days have either gone unanswered, in the case of Google, or have found communication heads unable to comment.

PRWeek Asia emailed Foong Cheng Leong to pose a few more questions:

What power do these amendments give the Malaysian government against the tech giants?
Foong: Our laws may not reach foreign tech giants. However, with the new amendments to the Sedition Act and even under the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, it is possible to block the websites of these foreign tech giants. 
What could it cost them potentially to keep operating in Malaysia?
Foong: Possible problems: being criminally liable, servers and other electronic devices being seized as evidence, and so on, during investigation. 
 What are their options? Self-monitor like Tencent?
A self monitoring practice is possible but it will be costly and time consuming. Unfortunately, we do not have takedown notice provision (other than under our Copyright Act) or laws to protect intermediaries, hence monitoring is required in Malaysia. 
One possible option is to have their operations moved out from Malaysia which is detrimental to our economy. 
Do you think lobbying will change these amendments?
Foong: Lobbying for laws to protect intermediaries would be recommended. Other than affecting the freedom of expression, it also affects our digital economy. Foreign investors will have to think twice before setting up their operation and putting their servers here in Malaysia. 

The impact to marketing and communications in Malaysia

Most agencies with a presence in Malaysia were unwilling to comment on the record. As one source puts it, "That’s just the problem, the government could choose to take issue with anything we say."
David Lian, general manager of Zeno Group Malaysia, however, was willing to speak on the subject. "Right now, we have clients asking about the implications of these acts, but without details on the government’s plans to implement, you just can’t plan. It is at present a statement of intent. We are advising clients to wait and see."
Lian pointed out that the bill had been tabled in the past, usually just prior to Malaysia’s elections when the government wanted greater control over dissenting voices. In 2008, the government arrested prominent political blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin for posting anti-government comments and in February 2015, the government arrested a cartoonist for a Tweet he made about the controversial Anwar trial.
"Wait and see", is the consensus of industry sources. Most are confident that even if the amendments raise a potential risk for clients, the Malaysian government will not use the law to act against corporate entities. Instead, it will be a weapon against political discourse.
"We’re advising our clients to tighten their policies around community moderation and to be upfront about it," said an agency lead.
"I actually don’t believe this legislation will have much of an impact on corporate communications behaviour in Malaysia," said Bob Pickard, chairman Asia-Pacific of Huntsworth. "The market already has a reputation necessitating calculated restraint in public relations and media relations."
The new laws, Pickard added, may however adversely impact the nation’s marketing industry. "Our craft is at its best when freedom of expression trumps even well-meaning efforts which may have the consequence of stifling creativity or squelching insights and, in so doing, holding back the development of a country’s marketing services industry. My best communications counsel for both clients and  governments is to proactively engage the online public as a source of new ideas to be openly shared."

Friday 27 March 2015

Give God your Dreams

Friday March 27, 2015

All of us have dreams for our lives - aspirations to do something great or become someone worthwhile. When shaped by the purposes of God, dreams guide us to meaningful living.

Abraham had a dream - two dreams, in fact - and both were God-given. Old and childless in a culture of large families, he dreamed of having a son (Genesis 11:30, 15:3). God promised that his dream would come true and added one more. Not only would Abraham have a son, he would have a nation (12:2, 15:5, 17:5). Two big dreams indeed!

And that´s one reason we find Genesis 22 so baffling. Isaac is born - the fulfilment of the first dream and a glimpse of the second (21:1-3) - and Abraham is called to sacrifice him! (22:2). God was asking to have back what He had given. Abraham was to give up both his fulfilled and unfulfilled dreams.

The preparation would have been agonising. Abraham gathered his son, servants and supplies, and walked for days to the sacrifice site where he laid what was most precious to him on the altar (vv. 3-9). And just as the knife was poised to plunge, God intervened and gave Abraham back his dreams (vv. 11-14). Abraham learned two important lessons that day : the true God is not like the gods around him who revelled in child sacrifice, and nothing - not even a God-given dream - comes before Him.

Have you given your dreams to God - both the fulfilled ones and the unfulfilled? It´s the only way to ensure that our dreams are under His hand, and that they don´t become gods themselves. As He did with Abraham, God may well give your dreams back to you or give them back in a new form.

But whatever He does with your dreams, you can be sure it will come accompanied by a blessing (vv. 15-18). - Sheridan Voysey

Read
Genesis 22:1-18
Some time later God tested Abraham. He said to him, "Abraham!"
"Here I am," he replied.
Then God said, "Take your son, your only son, Isaac, whom you love, and go to the region of Moriah. Sacrifice him there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains I will tell you about."
Early the next morning Abraham got up and saddled his donkey. He took with him two of his servants and his son Isaac. When he had cut enough wood for the burnt offering, he set out for the place God had told him about. On the third day Abraham looked up and saw the place in the distance. He said to his servants, "Stay here with the donkey while I and the boy go over there. We will worship and then we will come back to you."
Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and placed it on his son Isaac, and he himself carried the fire and the knife. As the two of them went on together, Isaac spoke up and said to his father Abraham, "Father?"
"Yes, my son?" Abraham replied.
"The fire and wood are here," Isaac said, "but where is the lamb for the burnt offering?"
Abraham answered, "God himself will provide the lamb for the burnt offering, my son." And the two of them went on together.
When they reached the place God had told him about, Abraham built an altar there and arranged the wood on it. He bound his son Isaac and laid him on the altar, on top of the wood. Then he reached out his hand and took the knife to slay his son. But the angel of the Lord called out to him from heaven, "Abraham! Abraham!"
"Here I am," he replied.
"Do not lay a hand on the boy," he said. "Do not do anything to him. Now I know that you fear God, because you have not withheld from me your son, your only son."
Abraham looked up and there in a thicket he saw a ram caught by its horns. He went over and took the ram and sacrificed it as a burnt offering instead of his son. So Abraham called that place The Lord Will Provide. And to this day it is said, "On the mountain of the Lord it will be provided."
The angel of the Lord called to Abraham from heaven a second time and said, "I swear by myself, declares the Lord, that because you have done this and have not withheld your son, your only son, I will surely bless you and make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and as the sand on the seashore. Your descendants will take possession of the cities of their enemies, and through your offspring all nations on earth will be blessed, because you have obeyed me."

Proverbs 16:9
In his heart a man plans his course, 
but the Lord determines his steps.

Psalm 105:19
till what he foretold came to pass, 
till the word of the Lord proved him true

Question to Ponder
What dream do you have for your life?
Have you offered it back to God?


**Article taken from ODJ (Our Daily Journey with God) March 2015 - May 2015 issue

Saturday 14 March 2015

Mongolian's murder haunts Malaysian elite

Mongolian's murder haunts Malaysian elite

Abdul Razak Baginda

Mongolian's murder haunts Malaysian elite

In mid-December 2012, a handful of Malaysia’s top lawyers adjourned for late drinks at a bar in a posh Kuala Lumpur hotel after attending a wedding dinner.

What exactly transpired among the group of friends that evening is now the focus of a nearly two-year probe into charges of misconduct against one of the attendees, who has been implicated in the widely publicised murder of a Mongolian woman nine years ago.

After six months of quizzing a dozen witnesses, including those present at the drinks party, a three-member disciplinary panel of Malaysia’s Bar Council is expected to decide in coming weeks whether Cecil Wilbert Mohanraj Abraham, one of Malaysia’s most senior lawyers, did engage in professional misconduct.

He is alleged to have acted improperly by drafting a private investigator’s sworn statement that government critics claim was part of a conspiracy to limit the fallout from the killing of Altantuya Shaariibuu by two police commandos.

The officers were at the time of her murder members of Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s security detail.

Abraham, who declined to respond to questions for this article, has never made any public comment on allegations that first surfaced in late 2012 that he was involved in preparing the statement by the investigator.
Lawyers familiar with the tribunal proceedings say that Abraham has testified in recent months that he was not involved in any way in the making of the statement.

But the tribunal has also heard statements from other lawyers who have insisted that Abraham had privately admitted his role in drafting the sworn statement, which was also the subject of discussion at the mid-December drinks session.

Disciplinary cases are common in the Malaysian Bar Council, which counts close to 15,000 lawyers as members. The Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board – an independent body under the Bar Council empowered to investigate professional misconduct – receives as many as 600 complaints against lawyers annually. These complaints largely involve dishonesty among solicitors who misuse funds belonging to their clients.
Few have attracted the kind of intense public scrutiny as the complaint against Abraham. Here’s why.

For starters, it was the Bar Council itself that lodged the grievance with the disciplinary tribunal demanding an investigation into Abraham.
Then the disciplinary case goes directly to the heart of one of the biggest scandals that continues to bedevil the Najib administration – the murder in October 2006 of Altantuya, a part-time Mongolian translator, whose body was obliterated with hard-to-come-by C4 explosives in a jungle clearing outside Kuala Lumpur.

A one-time political advisor to Najib, Abdul Razak Baginda, admitted to having an affair with Altantuya and was charged with abetting the murder. But he was acquitted without having to present a defence.

Thirdly, there has been renewed public interest in the Altantuya murder in recent weeks. The two police commandos were found guilty of the murder in 2009 and sentenced to death, but their convictions were overturned and they were freed in 2013 over gaps in the evidence. This January, however, Malaysia’s highest court reinstated the convictions.

One of the two convicted killers, Sirul Azhar Umar, was arrested later in January in Brisbane, Australia, after fleeing Malaysia in October, and there is widespread speculation that the rogue officer could shed fresh light into the murder in order to secure asylum and avoid extradition and execution in Malaysia.

In particular, analysts say that Sirul could reveal the identity of the person, or persons, who ordered the two policemen to carry out the murder, an issue that both the defence and the prosecution failed to address in the lengthy murder trial.

Meanwhile, the disciplinary charge against Abraham is another possible window into why Altantuya was murdered.

The following account of events leading to the disciplinary charge and the many twists in the tribunal’s proceedings that have involved Kuala Lumpur’s leading legal lights are based on interviews with lawyers closely tracking the case.

Most of those involved directly in the matter have declined comment on grounds that disciplinary proceeds are held in secret.

The charge against Abraham principally revolves around the affairs of the private investigator P. Balasubramaniam, who died in 2013.

Balasumbramaniam, who had  formerly been attached to the Special Branch division of the Malaysian police, was hired by Najib’s one-time advisor Abdul Razak Baginda to protect his family against harassment and threats from Altantuya.

Balasubramaniam testified in the trial against Abdul Razak and the two police officers in mid-2007. Displeased with the court proceedings, the private investigator signed a statutory declaration, as it is known in Malaysian law, on July 1, 2008, claiming that the police investigations were compromised to protect powerful political personalities.

It included allegations that Najib, who was deputy prime minister at the time, and Altantuya knew each other and had even had an affair. (Najib has always denied ever having met Altantuya).

That statement was made public at a press conference on July 3, 2008, but just a day later, in an astonishing about-turn, the private investigator made a second sworn statement retracting all of his previous claims. He and his family shortly afterwards fled the country and went into hiding.
Balasubramaniam reappeared in November 2009, and in a widely circulated video he recounted how he was forced to sign the second statutory declaration under duress.

He also claimed that he was never introduced to the individual who prepared the second sworn statement and only dealt with businessman Deepak Jaikishan, who coordinated the entire exercise to expunge the damning first sworn statement.

Balasubramiam’s new version of events didn’t amount to much at the time. But it did turn the spotlight on Jaikishan, a businessman with interests in carpet manufacturing who was widely regarded in Kuala Lumpur’s business circles as someone who enjoyed close ties with premier Najib’s family.

Sometime in December 2012, news surfaced that Jaikishan had fallen out with the premier’s family and was facing serious financial problems because of large loans on several property deals that had gone sour.
In what appeared to be an attempt to buy time and also some powerful intervention in his problems, Jaikishan began making public statements backing Balasubramaniam’s claims on events leading to the second statutory declaration.

In several press conferences, Jaikishan acknowledged that he helped facilitate the production of the second sworn statement that Balasubramaniam had said he was forced to sign.

He never publicly identified the author of the second statutory declaration, but there was widespread speculation at the time that Jaikishan was directing the blame at Abraham in private conversations.

Abraham, who started his law career in 1970, is widely regarded as one of the country’s top litigation lawyers. He holds the rare distinction of having acted as counsel for two sitting premiers.

Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew appointed him as lead counsel in the late 1980s when the then premier sued Malaysian Star Publications newspaper group for defamation.

Abraham also acted for Dr Mahathir Mohamad in a 2000 case in which the then Malaysian premier resisted moves by political rival Anwar Ibrahim to have him testify as a witness in the latter’s corruption trial.

A former senior partner of Shearn Delamore, one of Malaysia’s most prestigious firms, Abraham is currently a senior partner at Zul Rafique & Partners, a mid-sized legal firm considered one of Malaysia’s most politically well-connected law outfits.

According to lawyers close to the situation, the Bar Council wrote to Abraham on a number of occasions in January and February 2013 enquiring whether he had any knowledge of the allegations made against him with regard to the preparation of Balasubramaniam’s sworn statement.

They say the response the Bar Council received from Abraham’s solicitors was that their client could not provide any assistance on the matter because of solicitor-client privilege and confidentiality.

Things changed dramatically in mid-March 2013. Balasubramaniam died of a heart attack, and days later lawyer Americk Singh Sidhu told a packed annual general meeting of the Bar Council that he had met Abraham a couple of weeks earlier.

Americk, who had helped Balasubramaniam prepare his first sworn statement on the Mongolian woman’s murder, publicly declared that Abraham had admitted to him that he had drafted the second statutory declaration on Najib’s instructions.

Americk also confessed that he and Abraham had agreed that the matter would remain confidential. But he was forced to break that promise after Balasubraminam’s death.

Abraham denied Americk’s allegations in response to queries from the Bar Council in early April. But that did not stop Bar Council President Christopher Leong from lodging the official complaint against Abraham for professional misconduct a day later on April 4.

The disciplinary proceedings moved at a glacial pace for much of 2013, with Abraham flatly denying Americk’s claims about what was discussed at their meeting.

Sometime in mid-March 2014, the case took a surprising twist when the lawyers acting for the Bar Council in the disciplinary hearing were informed of the drinks session at the Renaissance Hotel in Kuala Lumpur in mid-December 2012 and that Abraham’s alleged involvement in drafting the second sworn statement had emerged as a topic of conversation there.

According to sources familiar with the disciplinary probe, six lawyers were present at the drinks session. Apart from Abraham, the other senior lawyers included Tommy Thomas, a senior constitutional and corporate lawyer; Johari Razak, a partner with law firm Shearn Delamore who is also a brother of premier Najib; Lim Chee Wee, a former Bar Council president and a senior partner of Skrine & Co; and Darryl Goon of Raja, Darryl & Loh, and his wife Foo Yet Ngo, who is a prominent family lawyer.
The sources say that all of the lawyers present have been asked to provide testimony to the three-member tribunal during several closed-door hearings over the past six months.

Sources say that one of the lawyers did acknowledge that conversations with regards to the second sworn statement did take place, the rest informed the tribunal that they could not recall or that they were not aware of any such discussion taking place.

The tribunal is expected to make a decision in coming weeks, which could see either Abraham liberated from the allegations against him or face disciplinary action, which would result in his suspension, or in the most extreme circumstance, an expulsion from the Bar Council.

In the latter case, too, the questions surrounding Malaysia’s most notorious murder scandal of recent years – in particular why the second sworn statement was prepared – will not go away easily.
- See more at: http://www.theedgereview.com/node/1008#sthash.QsEwN2eO.dpuf

Tuesday 10 March 2015

Divine Diversity

Tuesday March 10, 2015

If you´ve ever strolled through a botanical garden or an art museum, you know that diversity makes for beauty. For some reason, however, this doesn´t seem to work within the church.

As we grapple with how our local expressions of the body of Christ are separated by issues of culture, race, socio-economics and theological distinction, it´s easy to believe that our diversity is the culprit for our disunity. Uniqueness and fine-tuned distinctions, however, are part of God´s original creation, intrinsic to the created world that He called "good" (Genesis 1:3-4).

In Genesis there was orderliness and harmony, a beautiful fusion of distinct realities. There was creature and creation, male and female, light and darkness, night and day, work and rest. The Creator separated "the waters of the heavens from the waters of the earth" and ordered time around the rhythmic distinction between evening and morning (vv. 6, 8). God´s design was not for a world where everything was the same, but rather a world where all things (with all their multifaceted uniqueness) were gathered together in Him. Creation´s harmony existed because of its shared life in God, not because of any flat unanimity.

As God´s revelation unfolds, we discover that God exists as a trinity, the mystery of God being three-in-one. In God, there is unity and diversity. Humans, those who bear the Trinity´s image, also reflect God´s own reality. We, because of God, share a unity that can never be extinguished. But we are also diverse, each of us offering our unique selves within God´s world.

In Jesus, may we find ourselves living in harmony with one another, even as our unique selves shine brighter. - Winn Collier

Read
Genesis 1:1-31
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. God called the light "day" and the darkness he called "night". And there was evening, and there was morning - the first day.
And God said, "Let there be an expanse between the waters to separate water from water." So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. God called the expanse "sky". And there was evening, and there was morning - the second day.
And God said, "Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear." And it was so. God called the dry ground "land", and the gathered waters he called "seas". And God saw that it was good.
Then God said, "Let the land produce vegetation : seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds." And it was so. The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning - the third day.
And God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark seasons and days and years, and let them be lights in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth." And it was so. God made two great lights - the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. God set them in the expanse of the sky to give light on the earth, to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. And there was evening, and there was morning - the fourth day.
And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the sky." So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living and moving thing with which the water teems, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. God blessed them and said, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth." And there was evening, and there was morning - the fifth day.
And God said, "Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds : live-stock, creatures that move along the ground, and wild animals, each according to its kind." And it was so. God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."
So God created man in his own image, 
In the image of God he created him; 
male and female he created them.
God blessed them and said to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air and over every living creature that moves on the ground."
Then God said, "I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air and all the creatures that move on the ground - everything that has breath of life in it - I give every green plant for food." And it was so.
God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning - the sixth day.

Revelation 7:9-11
After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb. They were wearing white robes and were holding palm branches in their hands.
And they cried out in a loud voice : 

"Salvation belongs to our God,
who sits on the throne,
and to the Lamb."
All the angels were standing around the throne and around the elders and the four living creatures. They fell down on their faces before the throne and worshipped God.

Question to Ponder
What unique gifts has God given you? 
How has He infused your uniqueness with purpose and love?

**Article taken from ODJ (Our Daily Journey with God) March 2015 - May 2015 issue

Monday 9 March 2015

Always

Monday March 9, 2015

I was talking with a friend whose marriage had ended in a divorce. For years he tried to apologise and to rebuild a relationship that was broken. His wife, however, was bitter over an event that she couldn´t forgive - or forget. The event involved a loving act he had done to help her, but she didn´t see it that way. And her heart became stone.

The prophet Malachi brought a message of love and forgiveness to God´s people. Though they had sinned against God and had for decades been brutally carried off into exile as a means of His discipline, they had been permitted to return to their homeland. Knowing they were beaten down from their experiences in Babylon, God said to them, "I have always loved you" (Malachi 1:2). The people, cynical and sceptical, retorted, "Really? How have you loved us?" God then declared His control over human events and His promise to deal with Judah´s adversaries (vv.2-5) - something very loving!

Later, He said, "I am the Lord, and I do not change" (3:6). Had He allowed His people to be brought into captivity due to their sin? Yes. Did He love them enough to do so? Yes. Had He patiently waited for the returned exiles to repent of their lack of true worship and to stop doubting Him? (vv. 7-8, 13-14). Yes.

God stood before His people offering unchanging love and forgiveness. But He also sought the right heart response : "Those who feared the Lord spoke with each other, and the Lord listened to what they said" (v.16). Of those faithful believers God said, "They will be my own special treasure" (v.17).

Due to difficult events, perhaps your heart for God has grown cool and has started to harden. Remember that He waits for you with open arms (Luke 15:20). You´re the special treasure He loves - always! - Tom Felten

Read
Malachi 1:1-5
An oracle : The word of the Lord to Israel through Malachi
"I have loved you," says the Lord.
"But you ask, 'How have you loved us?'"
"Was not Esau Jacob´s brother?" the Lord says. 
"Yet I have loved Jacob, but Esau I have hated, and I have turned his mountains into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the desert jackals."
Edom may say, "Though we have been crushed, we will rebuild the ruins."
But this is what the Lord Almighty says : "They may build, but I will demolish. They will be called the Wicked Land, a people always under the wrath of the Lord. You will see it with your own eyes and say, 'Great is the Lord - even beyond the borders of Israel!' "

Malachi 3:6-18
"I the Lord do not change. So you, O descendants of Jacob, are not destroyed. Ever since the time of your forefathers you have turned away from my decrees and have not kept them. Return to me, and I will return to you," says the Lord Almighty.
"But you ask, 'How are we to return?'"
"Will a man rob God? Yet you rob me. But you ask, 'How do we rob you?' "
"In tithes and offerings. You are under a curse - the whole nation of you - because you are robbing me. Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house. Test me in this," says the Lord Almighty, "and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will not have room enough for it. I will prevent pests from devouring your crops, and the vines in your fields will not cast their fruit," says the Lord Almighty. "Then all the nations will call you blessed, for yours will be a delightful land," says the Lord Almighty.
"You have said harsh things against me," says the Lord.
"Yet you ask, 'What have we said against you?' "
"You have said, 'It is futile to serve God. What did we gain by carrying out his requirements and going about like mourners before the Lord Almighty? But now we call the arrogant blessed. Certainly the evildoers prosper, and even those who challenge God escape.' "
Then those who feared the Lord talked with each other, and the Lord listened and heard. A scroll of remembrance was written in his presence concerning those who feared the Lord and honored his name.
"They will be mine," says the Lord Almighty, "in the day when I make up my treasured possession. I will spare them, just as in compassion a man spares his son who serves him. And you will again see the distinction between the righteous and the wicked, between those who serve God and those who do not.

Psalm 103:1-5
Praise the Lord, O my soul;
all my inmost being, praise his holy name.
Praise the Lord, O my soul,
and forget not all his benefits - who forgives all your sins
and heals all your diseases,
who redeems your life from the pit
and crowns you with love and compassion,
who satisfies your desires with good things so that your youth is renewed like the eagle´s.

Question to Ponder
What difficulties have caused you to doubt God or to turn from Him?
How does the fact that He always loves you encourage your heart today?

**Article taken from ODJ (Our Daily Journey with God) March 2015 - May 2015 issue