MMC
DRB Hicom
Proton
Malakoff
Johor Port
Senai Airport
Port of Tanjong Pelepas
Bank Muamalat
Padiberas Nasional
CSR Sugar
Gardenia
MPH Bookstores
Penang Port
Now he is after…..
RTM
KTMB
Bank Islam
The world's richest Malay (Syed Mokhtar Albukhary) got really rich because he worked his ass off - AT being a crony of Muhyiddin and former premier Mahathir Mohamad. Virtually all his assets were handed to him on a silver plate. And it all began with Stamford Holdings.
Stamford & 4,622% profit
In 1994, Stamford applied to the Johor government for permission to develop a light industrial estate on part of its huge land holdings near the state capital of Johor Baru. However nothing happened during the subsequent four years.
In 1998, two Malaysians approached Stamford alleging that they were the Johor Menteri Besar’s (Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin), business associates and that they were able to able to get Stamford ’s application approved promptly. The two individuals were Syed Mokhtar Albukhary and Datuk Yahya Taib. The meeting was held in Singapore .
The one pertinent condition was that Stamford form a joint venturetogether with them along with Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin wherebyStamford would retain 70% of the shareholdings in this JV company and that the trio would pump in RM1,800,000 (approx RM3,397.50 per acre) into the JV Company to develop 1,766 acres of its 8,310 acres in total land holdings.
In late 1989, Stamford agreed to the proposal and the four parties formed a JV company, which resubmitted a fresh application to theJohor State government to convert the 1,766 acres of plantation landto industrial use. The new application was promptly approved.
When the property was later sold in 1994, the Muhyiddin group's initial investment of RM1.8 million had soared to RM83.2 million(4622%).
Takeover
The unfortunate truth is that there is reason for this cynicism. A lot of the opinions that abound in media, both mainstream and social, are rooted in pre-fabricated positions that fly under the flag of one label or another. In addition, over the last few years it has become clear that very few of our certitudes about the independence of the allegedly independent institutions stand up to scrutiny. The Radia tapes, in particular confirmed to our ears what were hitherto only speculative conspiracy theories in our mind. More than anything else, the contamination of media changes everything; our shared sense of reality comes from media. We need to take media for granted, and the inability to do so produces an acute sense of disorientation, a loss of co-ordinates caused by an absence of reliable maps. Today we don't really know if an opinion expressed is an opinion at all; it might well be a cunningly crafted bit of spin inserted at someone's behest. We cannot trust a film review, or depend on a food critic to tell us the truth, we read into headlines rather than merely read them, trying to guess what or who is behind these.
The urge to narrativise discrete opinions, to impose on any point of view a larger and coherent set of implied beliefs accelerates the use of labels. If one raises the question of the apathy shown by mainstream media to the plight of Kashmiri Pandits, it cannot be out of anything but an adherence to a particular set of beliefs, if one asks if there is a reason why the workers of Maruti acted the way they did, one clearly has extreme left-wing sympathies. Believers in Hindutva cannot question any action of Modi and feel compelled to justify any action taken by their side; likewise a progressive liberal would find it very difficult to say anything complimentary about Modi, without gulping very hard. Being a liberal no longer means being comfortable with listening to different modes of thought with an open mind without being locked into an automatic view, now it is a name given to an automatic and very elaborate set of beliefs one must adhere to and uphold at all times. As a result, some questions cannot be asked at all, particularly when they involve the touchy issues of the day.
Part of the problem also lies in the nature of labels at our disposal. We are stuck with some tired binaries that we use to sort and categorise our world, binaries that have over the years been systematically robbed of their meaning. The politics of Mayawati, Mamata Banerjee, Jayalalitha do not fit into the Left/right label for instance. The BJP has more in common with the Left than with the Congress, for instance. Anna Hazare, with his peculiar combination of support from middle-class, a sundry assortment of public minded citizens from across the ideological spectrum and a clutch of spiritual gurus, defies easy categorisation. Inarticulate labels blind us to what we see because we do not have the vocabulary to describe it.
Of course, the notion of independence comes under more covert attack too. The dominant structures of the day, and in particular, the market produce common currencies that appear objective and impersonal, but which serve to guide actions invisibly towards a particular end. Television ratings are a great example; the idea that all programming should aim to maximise viewership creates a push towards a particular brand of programming; one that values arrested stimulation over any form of thoughtfulness. Channels lose their sense of agency when confronted by this impassive and seemingly neutral measure and converge to the undifferentiated middle path. The focus on marketability produces a new form of emptiness for consumers are fed what they are deemed to like. Like two mirrors facing each other, the recursive logic of being made to like what one allegedly likes, by giving one no other choices at all, has infinite space but no real depth. The market's key trick is to make every individual believe in their own independent individuality while making that individuality homogenous.
The trouble with the quest for being independent is that there seems to be no such thing. We are embedded in some structure or other and knowingly or otherwise, are presumed to speak on its behalf. Foreknowledge makes us extrapolate a worldview from a single opinion; we can today categorise something before seeing it. Deeper structures that guide behaviour invisibly make any sense of independence that we might have potentially illusory. The need to escape labels and become more aware of the implicit influences that might lie behind what passes for commonly accepted wisdom, the need to ask uncomfortable and very fundamental questions without rushing to find answers, the need to be lost in some self-doubt and to regain a sense of innocent confusion might well be the starting point for feeling independent again.
The urge to narrativise discrete opinions, to impose on any point of view a larger and coherent set of implied beliefs accelerates the use of labels. If one raises the question of the apathy shown by mainstream media to the plight of Kashmiri Pandits, it cannot be out of anything but an adherence to a particular set of beliefs, if one asks if there is a reason why the workers of Maruti acted the way they did, one clearly has extreme left-wing sympathies. Believers in Hindutva cannot question any action of Modi and feel compelled to justify any action taken by their side; likewise a progressive liberal would find it very difficult to say anything complimentary about Modi, without gulping very hard. Being a liberal no longer means being comfortable with listening to different modes of thought with an open mind without being locked into an automatic view, now it is a name given to an automatic and very elaborate set of beliefs one must adhere to and uphold at all times. As a result, some questions cannot be asked at all, particularly when they involve the touchy issues of the day.
Part of the problem also lies in the nature of labels at our disposal. We are stuck with some tired binaries that we use to sort and categorise our world, binaries that have over the years been systematically robbed of their meaning. The politics of Mayawati, Mamata Banerjee, Jayalalitha do not fit into the Left/right label for instance. The BJP has more in common with the Left than with the Congress, for instance. Anna Hazare, with his peculiar combination of support from middle-class, a sundry assortment of public minded citizens from across the ideological spectrum and a clutch of spiritual gurus, defies easy categorisation. Inarticulate labels blind us to what we see because we do not have the vocabulary to describe it.
Of course, the notion of independence comes under more covert attack too. The dominant structures of the day, and in particular, the market produce common currencies that appear objective and impersonal, but which serve to guide actions invisibly towards a particular end. Television ratings are a great example; the idea that all programming should aim to maximise viewership creates a push towards a particular brand of programming; one that values arrested stimulation over any form of thoughtfulness. Channels lose their sense of agency when confronted by this impassive and seemingly neutral measure and converge to the undifferentiated middle path. The focus on marketability produces a new form of emptiness for consumers are fed what they are deemed to like. Like two mirrors facing each other, the recursive logic of being made to like what one allegedly likes, by giving one no other choices at all, has infinite space but no real depth. The market's key trick is to make every individual believe in their own independent individuality while making that individuality homogenous.
The trouble with the quest for being independent is that there seems to be no such thing. We are embedded in some structure or other and knowingly or otherwise, are presumed to speak on its behalf. Foreknowledge makes us extrapolate a worldview from a single opinion; we can today categorise something before seeing it. Deeper structures that guide behaviour invisibly make any sense of independence that we might have potentially illusory. The need to escape labels and become more aware of the implicit influences that might lie behind what passes for commonly accepted wisdom, the need to ask uncomfortable and very fundamental questions without rushing to find answers, the need to be lost in some self-doubt and to regain a sense of innocent confusion might well be the starting point for feeling independent again.
Meanwhile in 1992, Syed Mokhtar Albukhary and Datuk Yahya Taib again approached Stamford ’s directors, proposing to develop the remaining 6,544 acres of Stamford 's Johor prime land holdings. However the conditions were different this time around. They were willing to pay RM30,000 per acre to Stamford but demanded 70% equity stake.When Stamford insisted on retaining the original JV conditions whereby they hold 70% equity and that the Albukhary - Taib- Yassin group pay RM70,000 per acre for the 30% equity stake, one of Muhyiddin's associates allegedly warned Stamford’s directors that the land acquisition papers were on the MB’s desk and could be “signed at any time”. Stamford refused
A few days later, Muhyiddin called up Stamford again, and told them,“Look, I have this piece of paper in front of me on my desk. All I have to do is sign it and Stamford Holdings will no longer own the4,000 acres of land. Now, do you agree or not to develop the land and I take 70%?” Stamford again refused.
The following week, they received a letter from the Johor State Government signed by Muhyiddin stating that the government has taken over the land.
Conspiracy
Stamford Holdings, through its director, Gan Tee Kian, filed the suit in the Kuala Lumpur High Court on February 4, 1995 claiming that Muhyiddin, Syed Mokhtar and Yahya contravened the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act in acquiring the piece of land through the Johor Islamic Economic Development Corporation and sued the trio for damages for alleged conspiracy in acquiring land in Johor through the Land Acquisition Act.
In the suit, Stamford Holdings claimed the three had abused certainprovisions of the Act to acquire its 6,600 acres of land through theJohor State Islamic Economic Development Corporation using one of its subsidiaries, Kelana Ventures Sdn. Bhd.
Stamford Holdings also named the Johor State Government as a defendant in the suit, alleging that Muhyiddin and the two businessmen conspired to use the state government's authority to acquire the land. Stamford Holdings wants the court to declare that the Johor State Islamic Economic Development Corporation was not entitled to invoke provisions of the Land Acquisition Act to acquire a private landed property.
It had also claimed that Syed Mokhtar and Yahya had conspired with Muhyiddin to press for the land acquisition. In the suit, Stamford Holdings sought a declaration that the land acquisition exercise wasnot done in good faith and was therefore null and void.
Two weeks later, the case was transferred to the Johor Baru High Court.
Not a single shred of truth
On February the 24th, 1995, the Johor Baru Land Administrator made an award sum of RM239,099,583.00 over the said property to Stamford Holdings. This comes to about RM36,670 per acre.
On April the 15th, 1995, the Johor Baru High Court struck out with costs Stamford Holding's suit, saying that the company had no reasonable cause of action against the five defendants. Stamford ’ssolicitors then brought the case to the Court of Appeal.
On December the 28th, 1995, Kelana Ventures Sdn. Bhd. deposited the award amount with the Johor Baru High Court.
On March the 14th, 1996, another RM10,585,894.90 was deposited by Kelana Ventures with the Johor Baru High Court as accrued interest. Subsequently when Stamford Holdings challenged the Land Administrator’s award, the said award sum was revised by the Johor High Court by RM63,565,982.20 making it a total of RM313,251,460.10 (about RM48,000 per acre).
On November the 12th, 1996, the said differential sum of RM63,565,982.20 was likewise deposited with the Johor Baru High Court by Kelana Ventures Sdn. Bhd.
It was during the time when this case appeared in the Court of Appeal that Asiaweek did a comprehensive investigative report on it, quoting ad verbatim Muhyiddin’s phone call to one of Stamford’s directors. The Johor MB then publicly denied all allegations made in an article on Asiaweek stating,
“There is not a single shred of truth in any of the allegations against me” but failed to instigate legal redress against the magazine. This inaction speaks louder than words as Asiaweek has deterred any legal action from Muhyiddin by also stating on the article that they have in their possession the taped conversation between Muhyiddin and Stamford Holdings.
Out-of-court settlement
On December the 11th, 1997, the Court of Appeal overruled the Johor Baru High Court’s decision and ordered all proceedings in the civil suit to proceed pending an appeal by the defendants.
On June the 10th, 1998 the Federal Court granted leave to the defendants to appeal to the Federal Court against the decision of the Court of Appeal and further ordered that there be a stay of proceedings in the Johor Baru High Court civil suit.
Instead of pursuing the case in the Federal Court, all parties agreed to an out of court settlement and a Consent Order was recorded at the Johor Baru High Court. Judge Zainun Ali recorded the order after lawyers for the company and the defendants agreed to settle the matter in the judge's Chamber and all parties concerned agreed upon a final figure of RM405 million as due compensation for the compulsory acquisition of the said property by the State Government in accordance to the Land Acquisition Act (about RM62,000 per acre).
The judge then ordered Kelana Ventures to pay the differential amount of RM92,115,606.80 directly to Stamford Holdings but allowed them a period of 18 months to complete the payment. The sum was not ordered to be paid as damages but compensation in lieu. He also ordered that the State Government and/or the Land Administrator alienate the land to Kelana Ventures within three months from the day the Consent Order was recorded. The freehold land is in the mukim of Tebrau in Johor Baru.
No action against Syed Mokhtar, Yahya Taib or Muhyiddin Yassin
Meanwhile, the judge also ordered Stamford Holdings to hand over the land title to Kelana Ventures within two months from the day theConsent Order was recorded, and pay retrenchment benefits to workers affected by the transfer of the land to Kelana Ventures.
The judge further ordered that all the civil suits, civil appeals andmiscellaneous civil applications by the plaintiff be settled and bedisposed of.
No further action was taken against Syed Mokhtar Albukhary, DatukYahya Taib or Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin who later became the Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia.
Every state in Malaysia has its head of state either in the form of a Sultan or governor, except for the Federal Territories (FT) of KuaLa Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya. Since ambitious FT Minister Raja Nong Chik already has “Raja” in his name, one wonders if he could be desirous of becoming the first-ever head of state for the Federal Territories, given his recent all-out take-no-prisoners conduct in trying to pry the Lembah Pantai seat to contest from Prime Minister Najib Razak. And knowing RNC, as Nong Chik likes to be called, it will not be a mere ceremonial role he is going after but with the executive powers much like the Chief Executive of Hong Kong, SARS. Unfair accusation? Then, lets ook at what RNC has been up to since becoming the FT minister. Making sure the Mayor doesn't upstage him  Isn’t it telling that, despite aiming to be a world class city, RNC ensures that Kuala Lumpur will never have a world class mayor, like the Mayors of New York and London as to have such a capable person would be detrimental to his ambition. Thus KL folk after suffering one of the most incompetent mayors in the form of Mohd Fuad, they now have an even more spineless mayor in the form of Ahmad Phesal.Now Ahmad Phesal may be a good fella but a good, firm and just may he is not. But the most important deciding factor is he is 'everything' to RNC - someone who would never be able to steal the limelight from the dimunitive and undistinguished FT Minister. So Ahmad is lucky indeed for all he is required to do is to hold the glamorous title of “Datuk Bandar Kuala Lumpur”. Ahmad Phesal will be the errand boy, minion, spokesman, agent and butler to serve RNC but not to take care of the welfare and needs of the KL people. At most, Ahmad will just be RNC’s sidekick and lap dog, accompanying him on official vists and grinning and nodding his head when the 'boss' speaks. Even when Mohd Fuad was still the mayor, Ahmad Phesal was reporting directly to RNC instead of to Fuad, who was his immediate superior. And the worst cheek of it all, this trumped-up glamorized personal and private assistant of RNC's is being paid for by the public. RNC is very cunning indeed. He is very scheming and rather scamming too. KL deteriorates as RNC focuses on personal political ambitions  One of Ahmadl’s recent assignments was to ensure that the re-development of old flats in KL similar to the ones in Jalan Pekeliling and in Kerinchi goes smoothly - in the best interest of the developers and of course RNC. Flat dwellers never even made it to the list of priorities!The PR1MA housing scheme, which is envisioned by RNC's own boss Najib Razak, will be the main platform RNC plans to use to serve his personal interests and motives. And Ahmad Phesal is the chief agent to accomplish all the deals that have to be made at the expense of the present owners of the old flats. The scam is being shuffled along at the Seri Pinang flats, Seri Melaka flats and Taman Ikan Emas in Cheras but already has been met with objections from the residents during a May 9 presentation held at the DBKL Hall in Bandar Sri Permaisuri, Cheras. It is no wonder that KL has visibly deteriorated since RNC was appointed Senator and made FT minister in 2008 as the mayors he has in turn recruited have all been too busy serving his personal interests rather than the city's. Remember the KL Velodrome that was neglected beyond repair to the extent that taxpayers may now have to foot the bill for another RM88 million velodrome? Have you not heard of the poorly planned 7.7ha tropical fruit orchard undertaken by KL City Hall with a price tag of RM17.2million that has 'everything' but not enough fruit trees? What about the ever increasing crime rate in KL? As mayor, both Mohd Fuad and Ahmad Phesal had important roles to play because they should be the ones to keep harping on the police to tighten surveillance and work harder to prevent crime. We can also see evidence of more neglect by just traveling along Jalan Ampang from KLCC until the junction at Seri Wangsa. Just take a look at both sides of the road and you will be shocked at the unsightly damaged railings, broken-up and un-repaired sidewalks, with manholes and sumps covers not on the same level as the sidewalks, unplanned digging and excavations, unmaintained trees. There is also an old and dilapidated restaurant with adds to the unsightliness, while the lamp post stumps on the sidewalk in front of Affin Bank opposite the KLCC have still not been removed or replaced. And mind you, this stretch of road is lined with foreign embassies and high-end condominiums. Yet RNC is too busy to bother and so is Ahmad Phesal it appears. Clawing & killing off Shahrizat: Next, Nurul Izzah!  RNC has better and more urgent fish to fry in Lembah Pantai, where he has already begun an all-out assault to make sure his UMNO colleague Shahrizat Jalil is pushed out of the picture once and for all.This he has succeeded in doing and Shahrizat, who has been the UMNO candidate in Lembah Pantai for more than a decade, no longer has any chance to contest in the coming election thanks to the news leaks that were allegedly planted by the RNC camp over the RM250million NFC debacle. RNC's next move is to make sure that current Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah will not win in GE-13 and it does not matter to him what ways and means are used to keep the first-term Opposition lawmaker out of Parliament. The most important thing for RNC is that he gets to contest and gets to win Lembah Pantai. Then he can become a 'bona-fide' leader and not dependent on Najib's goodwill to make it to the Senator's list and from there, take the 'backdoor' entry into the Malaysian Cabinet. So it is that RNC has taken care to ensure the people in Lembah Pantai are well greased by various cash aids, goodies and handouts to remember him by when the ballot is finally called. Making sure the BOSS is happy It is important for RNC to make a good impression on the people of KL so that they can accept him as their 'Chief Executive'. To be the CE, RNC must win all the 11 parliamentary seats in KL. To this end, RNC and Ahmad Phesal recently met with the leaders of the residents associations in the FT and gave RM5000 to each association, emulating Najib's famed 'Gua tolong lu, lu tolong gua' or transactional politics. 'You help me, I help you' - that's the name of the game and corrupt or not, both Najib and RNC will keep at it. Amusingly though, RNC was even clumsier than Najib who is already notorious for being heavy-handed. His attempts to buy his way into the good graces of the people received flak from the public when the news was revealed and from the associations leaders as well! KL at his feet  And should RNC falter in his overarching ambition to be the CE of the FT, it does not matter as there is plenty of consoling factors that will soon bring the smile back to his small, sharp-featured face.KL has a huge budget for its administration, maintenance and development. Although, the federal government - read Najib - is pumping massive money directly and indirectly into the KL MRT project, there are so many other mega projects to keep RNC busy. All he needs to do is to maintain his position as FT minister. For example, there is the Ampang LRT extension, the new TRX financial hub, the beautification of the Klang River, re-developing the Pudu Jail area and the re-development of Kampung Baru. All these are in KL. Now, does it becomes s a bit clearer why RNC would claw like a raging tiger, fight tooth and nail not only against Nurul Izzah but even his own Umno colleague Shahrizat Jalil just to ensure he remains FT minister? Better yet if he makes it to FT CE! The world would indeed be his oyster then. There is definitely a lot of money to be made if RNC plays it right. His daughter - already embroiled in a corruption scandal - too could have another huge piece of the cake. Delish!  The average income of the world's richest five per cent is 165 times higher than the poorest five per cent [EPA] |
The frequency of global financial and economic crises has increased over the past decade and a half, and they appear to have become a systemic feature of the international economy. The risk of economic growth and human development achievements being undermined by such volatile international developments is fostering an overall re-think about the inner nature of crises, the growing vulnerability of developing countries and their capacity to be resilient in the face of these shocks. As the 2015 Millennium Development Goals deadline approaches, the debate around a new framework for understanding macroeconomic vulnerability and resilience is gaining momentum among a wide array of stakeholders, ranging from academia, civil society and grassroots movements, to international organisations, development policy-makers and the media. New research by the United Nations Development Programme contributes to the public debate by arguing there is no uniform approach to understanding macroeconomic vulnerability or resilience in the context of financial and economic crises in developing countries. Broadly, two distinct approaches can be identified: the first approach addresses macroeconomic vulnerability principally in relation to financial crises: currency, debt or banking crises. Currency crises, for instance, are seen as driven mainly by macroeconomic imbalances in the financial sector of developing economies and by fragile domestic financial systems. Hence, policy recommendations to build resilience to such shocks are focused on containing credit growth and the money supply, ensuring flexible exchange rates and guarding against expansionary fiscal policies. However, the empirical and theoretical assumptions underlying many of the studies and articles that support this approach have been long questioned - in particular, the assumption that markets are self-regulating and inherently efficient. A second approach frames macroeconomic vulnerability in the context of both economic and financial crises. The focus here is on identifying the structural determinants and transmission channels through which an economy is exposed to crises, reflecting the rapid integration of developing countries in international trade and finance. This broader perspective argues that the growing dependence of many developing countries on exports - specifically primary commodity exports, their increased dependence on foreign investment for economic growth, coupled with limited fiscal and institutional capacity - renders them vulnerable to economic and financial shocks. Yet, there is no clear agreement on which structural determinants and transmission channels are the primary drivers of macroeconomic vulnerability. Some argue that the size and location of an economy are critical determining factors, whereas others focus on trade dependency or dependency on international private capital flows as the primary conditions that expose an economy to shocks. The importance of rising inequality A major determinant of macroeconomic vulnerability that is either totally neglected or barely mentioned by these studies is that of rising income inequality. The staggering escalation in inequality contributes to global and domestic economic and financial instability by fostering a political environment that lends itself to risky investment behaviour and the emergence of asset bubbles. The critical importance of inequality as a driver of crisis is clear when one is confronted with the fact that the average income of the world's richest five per cent is 165 times higher than the poorest five per cent. In a world where the richest five per cent earn in 48 hours as much as the poorest in one year, understanding the linkages between rising income inequality and the greater frequency and severity of the financial and economic crises is central to proposing policies that build systemic resilience and enable a less volatile growth process. In traditional thinking, there is no disagreement on the need for policies that help economies cope with or counteract the impacts of shocks. Indeed, this is how resilience is defined in economics literature. Nevertheless, coping with a shock only when it happens presents decision makers with a limited set of policy options to build resilience. This narrows the choices for concerted action to tackle rising inequality and to address the longer-term policies needed to build systemic resilience. The recent - and lasting, economic and financial crisis, along with renewed calls for a re-think on traditional approaches to economic growth and development, offers us the opportunity to embark on a more comprehensive framework for the assessments of macroeconomic vulnerability in developing countries. Such a framework should allow for a comprehensive mapping of all the structural conditions and transmission channels that drive the vulnerability of developing economies, and that expose them to the virulent impacts of crises. Calls for a re-think of existing approaches should ultimately help us deliver policies for resilience that build coping capacities to withstand and counteract a shock and reduce exposure to shocks, while advocating for global coordination mechanisms to minimise the frequency of global crises themselves. |
No comments:
Post a Comment