Beware of Traffic Lights with Daylight Robbers in Klang Valley

Beware of Traffic Lights with Daylight Robbers in Klang Valley

In recent months, a new robbery trend has emerged in Klang Valley (Kuala Lumpur and adjoining cities & town in Selangor) with motorists being targeted by robbers on motorbike at traffic lights or even in a road traffic jams. Based on our analysis, most of them were at daytime. Possibly, this is what the real meaning of ‘daylight robbery’.

Typically, the robbers will come in a pair with dark colour apparel and riding on a motorbike. According to many victims as well as my observation, the robbers will attack the victim by smashing the car side windows in favour of stealing valuable mobile phone, notebook computer, and even handbag while the car is stationary. Those criminals are well trained to carry out the crime even with many other motorists on the road in the same time.



What actually urged me on writing this urgently today as I think the real statistics of such crime are really depressing and at alarming stage. Just imagine among my surrounding friends, there are two cases happened in a single day – one in the afternoon at Kepong and another in the evening at Mont Kiara. And two weeks ago, the same scene happened in front of me at the opposite road direction in USJ Subang Jaya.

Furthermore, my friend who is a lady that victimised at Mont Kiara went to file a report at the police station today. The police officer mentioned to her that she is the second victim for the day in that particular area.

In conclusion, this kind of crime usually happens in split second. Thus, when you’re behind the wheel, try focus best on the road by not texting or talking on the phone (even on hands-free) as the robbers usually hit when the spotted victim is not aware off.

http://www.fastmotoring.com/index.php/tag/malaysia-crime-rate-2012/

Najib Tun Razak : A Trust Betrayed!

Najib Tun Razak : A Trust Betrayed!

Posted: 21 Jun 2012 10:27 PM PDT

 

In Malaysians what ever laws, rules, regulations, checks and balances put in place in any corporation, in any statutory body, in any government entity, there will be a provision that allows  the relevant Minister to overrule these enactments so that the Minister can come in as a referee in the last resort and resolve the situation.


The inherent flaw of this provision is the presumption that a Minister will make a decision in the best interest of the organization! UMNO and Barisan Nasional Ministers are most likely to err on the side of their vested self interest rather then ours when it comes to decision making! 

 

This is about a trust betrayed. The trust we place in Najib as Minister of Finance and the betrayal of that trust for political and financial expedience and gain. What I will now do is to tell you how Najib Tun Razak, our Minister of Finance betrayed our trust by the decisions he made pertaining to Non Performing Loans’s of our Banks.

Let us start from the beginning:

Banking and Financial Institutions in Malaysia are governed by BAFIA : The Banking and Financial Institution Act which regulates what they can and cannot do.
Under the Banking and Financial Institution Act of 1989, Malaysian Financial institutions are not permitted to dispose of any of their assets, including NPLs, without an application to and approval from the Minster of Finance.

In 1997 lending by Banks in Malaysia in three sectors accounted for 45% of the Banks total lending.

 

·     Property : 20% of lending.

·     Consumption credit: 33% of lending.

·     Purchase of securities: 10% of lending.

 

At the onset of the Global Financial Crisis, the value of Non Performing Loans (NPL) was 15 billion ringgits. By December 1998, NPL had quadrupled to 60.5 billion ringgits. 

 

NPL : “A loan is nonperforming when payments of interest and principal are past due by 90 days or more, or at least 90 days of interest payments have been capitalized, refinanced or delayed by agreement, or payments are less than 90 days overdue, but there are other good reasons to doubt that payments will be made in full”

 

These loans were for mostly for the purchase of homes, cars and for credit cards for consumers consumption. These NPL meant that people in Malaysia were unable to pay for their homes, their cars and household debts increased because of the loss of income and credit during the GFC.   

 

What happens when you default on your loan?

§ The bank issue letters of demand.  

§ If you do not pay the bank will summon you to court for 1st mention to ask you whether you admit to the debt claimed by the bank. 

§ If you admit, a consent judgement is entered whereby you then renegotiate with your bank to settle the debt.

§ If you still do not pay the bank shall apply to seize your assets and properties.

§ Bank's debt collectors and agencies have no right to threaten and beat you up.  

§ Your EPF, Pension, SOCSO and Insurance money cannot be seized.

How do Banks deal with NPL’s when they cannot collect the outstanding debt from the borrowers?

Banks can sell these NPL’s to companies willing to purchase these non performing loans (NPL) and earn profits using specific strategy to do so. Usually property is the real value for purchasing non performing debt. In non-assets NPL’s the debt often relates to credit cards or personal loans used for immediate consumption items. Attempting to purchase this debt for $.10 or $.20 on the  ringgit can be profitable if the company settles for $.30 or $.40 on the ringgit with borrowers.

However under the Banking and Financial Institution Act of 1989, Malaysian Financial institutions are not permitted to dispose of any of their assets, including NPLs, without an application to and approval from the Minster of Finance. 


This did not stop Local and Foreign banks from selling their NPLs to debt collection agencies.


Debt Collection became a lucrative business and like all things Malaysian, ‘good business opportunities’ has its own attractions to the rich, the powerful and the politically connected. Collusion between those in the Banks, Debt Collection Agencies and Politicians fed of each other. Thugs and gangsters become the enforcement arm necessary to ensure the collection of these debts and as they say, in every cloud there is a silver lining. In the misery of those who were in debts these agencies thrived. 
CT ALi

 

In 2009 the Minister of Finance, Najib Tun Razak, issued the following letter:

 

 

 

The letter gives 'blanket approval' to the Banks to sell their NPL's subject to the banks following "Guidelines on the Disposal/Purchase of Non-Performing Loans by Banking Institutions (NPL Guidelines)"  


Now here is the thing:  The Malaysian Courts have accepted the blanket approval and upheld the vesting orders i.e. according to the court its legal. Section 50 of Bafia also bulletproofs the vesting order! 

I'm not a constitutional lawyer but section 49(9)(a) limits what BNM and the MOF can do. They cannot recommend or approve of transfers to non-licensed instituitions. The exemption doesn't exempt the minister or BNM from their limitations, it merely exempts licensed institutions. If the primary legislation says BNM and MOF cannot do this, can subsidiary legislation overrule this, especially when it does not explicitly say that the MOF and BNM are no longer bound by 49(9)(a) i.e. BNM still cannot recommend and MOF cannot approve?  Can any constitutional/public lawyer out there give a proper answer to this please? 

 

The letter is dated 7th September 2009 however the Minister had given approval on 6th July 2007  - 

 

ONE YEAR AND TEN MONTHS

 AFTER THE FACT

 

Why did the Minister took so long to confirm the decision that he made on the 6th July 2007 to allow the Banks to sell their NPL's?

 

Was it because by July 2009 the practice of Banks selling their NPL's to vested interest that included the Banks, MOF  Politicians and their cronies was so prevalent that the Minister of Finance had to find a political solution to make legal what was being done by the Banks illegally and backdated the letter to cover all the illegals NPLs already sold to the Debt Collection Agencies?

 

The Minister of Finance then becomes party to Banks,  Debt Collection Agencies and other vested interest colluding to make money at the expense of the Rakyat! 


As I have said at the start of this posting : "Lending were for the purchase of Homes, Cars and Credit Cards for consumers consumption. These NPL meant that people in Malaysia were unable to pay for their homes, their cars and household debts increased because of the loss of income and credit during the GFC."   

 

So in effect these Banks, Debt Collection Agencies, Politicians and their cronies are making money out of the miseries of our people who are in debt because of the Global Financial Crisis and with that Letter Najib made if legal.  

 

And the effect on our people?

 

You see it all around you! All those pieces of paper fluttering in the breeze fixed to bus stops,street signs, trees and any empty space announcing the auctions of houses at bargain prices! The miseries of our people losing their homes through no fault of their own.  

 

In 2007 Malayan Banking Bhd (Maybank) sold two tranches of bad loans worth 424.8 million ringgit, netting about 256 million ringgit from the sale. Standard Chartered purchased those loans. The loans were mainly secured by residential properties located across Malaysia.

 

In November 2009 CIMB Group Holdings Bhd had RM 8.4 billion non-performing loans (NPL) on their books. This represented 45,000 accounts which had been written down to RM 928 million net book value.

 

A special asset management vehicle, the

Southeast Asia Special Asset Management Bhd, wholly owned by CIMB was set up to acquire the NPLs.

 

The decision of CIMB to park the NPLs in a special vehicle wholly owned by the group has not resolved the problem, as what this means is that the toxic waste has been transferred from the right pocket to the left pocket and by this sleight of hand, the bank is now deemed healthy!

But what is more frightening is that these NPLs’ net book value is a mere RM 928 million.

We can only draw one conclusion – these 45,000 accounts are not your ordinary loans to consumers (consumer banking) or small business loans (SME loans) because if it was so, there would be adequate securities in the form of landed properties (i.e. charges/mortgages) and or debentures.

I stand to be corrected, but these must be loans for “trading” either for the stock market or investments in debt instruments. Even if it is not and whatever may be the case, this huge black-hole is a scandal and the management must be brought to account for this sordid state of affairs. Heads must roll. CIMB is a GLC (government linked company) and therefore taxpayers’ monies are at stake.

Maththias Chang

 

And the list goes on! 

 

As Minister of Finance Najib Razak must tell us why he gave 'blanket approval' for the Banks to sell their NPL's in 2007 but only confirmed that approval with a letter in 2009! Was MOF and Bank Negara complicit in Najib's decision? 

This matter has started to unravel. 

 

We have copies of agreements between Banks and Debt Collection Agencies owned by the Banks themselves if not by those involved with the Banks and by people known to the Minister of Finance and to Barisan Nasional.    

 

We have evidence that information about their clients and customers were divulged by these Banks and Financial Institutions to third and even fourth parties and the collusion of EPF and Telekoms in this criminal acts.

 

What this NPL situation confirms once again is that this UMNO led Barisan Nasional government puts the acquisition of material wealth ahead of their obligation and duty of care to the people of our Nation! 

 

Even if one of our Rakyat loses their home because of that "blanket approval" that Najib gave in 7th September 2009 letter - that is one Rakyat too much!   

 

It would have been more prudent if Bank Negara, MOF and the government made the Bank reduce personal debts level as recommended by IMF. 

And more worrying it is not only the foreign debt collectors that are being invited into our country - some of these so-called debt collectors are global investment funds specializing in NPL's - one of which is Cargill CVI Global Value Fund - the beneficiary of which is the CVI Global Value Fund. 


No wonder we have billions of our ringgits flowing out of our country......RM60b as the Malay Mail said yesterday and counting. 

 

We must question Najib’s ‘niat’ or intention in writing that letter giving blanket approval for the sale of these NPLs? 

There is a word  for it - mala fide - bad intentions. It is a question of ethics and morality.It is also vulture economics at its purest but as all things in Malaysia "THE MINISTER DECISION IS FINAL" ...or is it?


Here is BNM press release on this - you decide!

Ref No : 06/12/03

Embargo : For immediate release  

Sale of Non-Performing Loans by Malaysian banks

We refer to a recent news report on the sale of non-performing loans (NPLs) to foreign parties by banking institutions that is inaccurate and misleading.
Banking institutions can dispose off their NPLs as part of the bank's risk management practice. Disposal of NPLs provides the flexibility for banks to manage their loan portfolio effectively and efficiently to maximize recovery to protect depositors' interest. 
Any recovery action must be in accordance with the law.
Banking institutions are permitted to sell their NPLs to non-banking institutions provided that the sale of NPLs is made in accordance with the requirements of the Guidelines on the Disposal/ Purchase of Non-Performing Loans by Banking Institutions which are issued under the Banking and Financial Institutions Act 1989.
The Guidelines sets out certain requirements that must be met by any banking institution proposing to sell NPLs :

§ Banks can only sell to locally incorporated companies which the purchaser is majority owned by domestic shareholders as the purchaser is subject to a foreign equity cap of 49%.

§ Banks are also required to undertake necessary measures to inform the borrower of the sale of the NPLs;

§ Sale of NPLs that is made in accordance with requirements of the Guidelines do not contravene the BAFIA.

§ Sale of NPL does not affect any debt restructuring agreements.

The amount of NPLs sold in the news report is grossly overstated. Since 2005, NPLs sold by banks is less than RM 3.0 billion.

Bank Negara Malaysia
20 June 2012

© Bank Negara Malaysia, 2012. All rights reserved.

Najib must appear in French court or else…

Najib must appear in French court or else…

Ignoring the French court's subpoena over the Scorpene deal investigations will be to Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak's peril, says Suaram.

KUCHING: Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak will be subpoenaed to appear before the French court to give evidence in a corruption case involved in the purchase of the Scorpene submarines.

According to Suaram lawyer, Fadiah Nadwa Fikri, who recently returned from France where they met the judge who is going to preside the hearing of the corruption case in which RM500 million was allegedly paid as commission to Perimekar, the French court has the power to subpoena Najib to testify.

A subpoena will be also issued to Defence Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi and Abdul Razak Baginda to appear before the French court, she said.

Perimekar was at the time wholly owned by Razak and his wife Mazalinda.

“When we met the judge on March 16, 2012 we supplied the list of witnesses who are to be subpoenaed to give evidence before the court.

“We gave him the names of Najib Tun Razak, Zahid Hamidi and Razak Baginda,” Fadiah said to the applause of more than 2,000 at a “ceramah” at the Third Mile Bazaar, Kuching, on Sunday night.

When the case was filed in court in France two years ago, Zahid said that he could go to France to give statement and would give his cooperation.

But lately he said that he did not want to go due to lack of funds and asked who would pay for his flight and his stay in France.
According to Fadiah, Malaysians are prepared to pay for his flight and stay in France as long as he is prepared to give evidence.

“Why should you be afraid if you have nothing to hide?” she asked.

‘Najib can be arrested’

Fadiah said that in this corruption case the French court has the power to hand over subpoena to the witnesses and to ask them to be present at the court to give evidence.

“If they fail to attend the subpoena that has been issued by the French court, they will be given notice again to be present to give statement.

“Again if they fail to be present, the French court will issue a warrant of arrest to force them to be present and give statements and to prove the truth that we are seeking for.

“And if they fail again, Interpol (International Police) can issue an alert and they can be arrested and dragged to the French court,” she said.

The delegation also met their French lawyers who showed them 153 documents which the French police had complied after two years of investigations.

“Those documents shown to us are enough evidence to show the government of Malaysia was involved in the payment of illegal commission that was received by Perimekar,” she alleged.

“When we looked into the evidence we found out so many payments have been made and this corruption case is much bigger than what we have thought,” she said, including the US$1 billion (RM3 billion) to be paid as conditions before the discussions on the purchase of the submarines could take place.

Fadiah said that they had to go to France to open the case to seek the truth as the courts in Malaysia are not independent as they (the courts) are used by the government as tools and the people have no voice to demand for truth.

“We cannot get justice and fairness because the government is so much involved in corruption and also because of the Official Secrets Act.

“But this is our money, the people’s money. We want to know how is our money spent.

“How much is being used? How much is the corrupted money going into the pockets of ministers and their cronies?” she asked, calling on the people to stand up and be with them.

“Let us find the truth and the truth will be out soon.

“Let us pray that the subpoena will be issued soon so that they can be dragged to court to give their statements,” she said.


\

Land Banking Scam in Malaysia- Edgeworth Properties

Land Banking Scam in Malaysia- Edgeworth Properties

It’s sad that investors who invested over RM100,000 on Canadian land banking through its local chapter Edgeworth Properties (Malaysia) after it went into liquidation.
I have caution all investors in 2008 by giving tips before investing in Land Banking.
Read it at Land Banking: Secret Recipes to Wealth?
Have you ever ask this “wise” question?
“Why are they trying to sell overseas(Canadian) land to Malaysian?”
If the Land Banking is so “good”, why it was not snapped up by all the Canadians at the first place?

Do exercise super caution if you wish to invest real estates overseas.

Edgeworth Properties Inc
,
This overview of edgeworth is a good way to be reminded why we invested in Edgeworth in 2006-2007-2008. Also to measure the level of success experienced by investors.

All investors of land banking must conduct their due diligence and bears any risks arising from or connected with such investment.
“Why buy land you cannot see or touch? The best place to buy your land is in your own country where you know the rules and you know you can hold the company accountable when they default.” – Joseph Tan
.
Edgeworth Canada Land Title Scammed, Investors Press Conference photo session
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zbOyuQg9v0I

Edgeworth Canada Land Title Scammed, Investors Press Conference
.
Edgeworth’s Land Title in Canada is worthless. Canadian Mr.Donald Hurst has scammed Asian Investors CAD $76 millions.
CANADA is one of the G8 countries. We believed and respect the transparency in laws. Where is the court justice? We have the land title but now become a toilet paper.
The judge who’s responsible for the Edgeworth’s case, owe us (4000+ investors in Asian) a Justice. ARE you hearing our voice here? Why do you protect a man who’s suspected involved in one of the biggest land scandals in CANADA? This is not the normal insolvency case. It’s a strategic well planned con job.
Could you please explain to us? We want our rights!
We filed numerous police report and given a media press conference. The news will be headlines and published in Malaysia and Singapore major newspaper. TV channel will broadcast this CANADA’s land scandal and how Canadian SCAMMED Asia’s investors in total CAD $76 millions. Moreover, the Edgeworth’s chairman Mr.Donald Hurst has received a protection from CANADA laws. What is this???
We are representing 4000+ investors in Asia and will bring all up to the country authority "National Central Bank" about this scammed.
We are serious about it. We would like to let every new or potential investor know about it, so that they can make a viable decision before consider making any investment in CANADA.
The Canadian law is there to protect the victim or the scammer. Whole world is watching it, how you restore the justice to 4000+ Investors, who has already utilized their retirement fund, education fund and healthcare fund for the investment in CANADA.


Could you please explain to us? We want our rights!

Some of the news extract:
In a fix over land deal
Malaysians and other Asians who invested in a Canadian land scheme through a property company are in limbo after it went into liquidation.
According to Chin Yoke Ling, who invested RM75,000, people from all over Asia had invested to buy 12 plots of land in Alberta from Edge-worth Properties Inc from 2007 to 2011.
“According to the sale and purchase agreement, the company would buy back the land from us with a return of 60%, 80% or 100% within two to five years,” Chin told a press conference at the Selangor MCA Public Service and Complaints Department yesterday.
Chin, who had lodged a police report at the Jalan Travers police station on Monday, alleged that the company had failed to transfer the titles to the purchasers’ names as agreed upon in the sale and purchase agreement.
She claimed in the police report that Edgeworth had taken out mortgages on the land without informing the investors who had already paid for the land.
“The land is now encumbered by mortgages which has resulted in Edgeworth not being able to repay our investment capital,” said Chin who was among about 60 people who brought their grouses to the department.
Malaysian investors are said to have paid the Canadian company, through its local chapter Edgeworth Properties (M) Sdn Bhd, investments totalling RM76.5mil.
Edgeworth Properties Inc’s headquarters was in Ontario, Canada, while its Malaysian branch’s office was in Menara UOA Bangsar up to its closure last December.
The Malaysian branch’s former country manager Lee Kim Haw said the Canadian High Court had ordered all the company’s branches in Canada and Asia to be closed.
He said the court had also appointed a restructuring lawyer, an auditing firm and a developer to look into the matter to maximise recovery and save cost.
Lee, who resigned from the company in June last year, said the court had also ordered the interests of all the Asian investors to be protected.
Selangor MCA Public Service and Complaints Department chief Datuk Theng Book said that such an investment scheme was illegal in Malay-sia.
However, he noted that Edgeworth Properties had engaged a reputable legal firm here to process the investment documents.
He urged the investors to complain to Bank Negara about the investment scheme and to the Bar Council about the Malaysian legal firm that had represented the company.
“The Malaysian directors of the company must also be answerable to the investors here,” said Theng.
He added that the department would bring the matter up with Selangor MCA chairman Datuk Donald Lim who is Deputy Finance Minister.
“We will ask Lim to take up the matter with Bank Negara,” he said.
fr:thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/2/23/nation/10788631&sec=nation
60 in quandary after Canada land deal goes wrong
The dreams that soared with a promise of land in Canada have come crashing down for at least 60 Malaysians and an undisclosed number of other Asians.
Among the biggest losers is 60-year-old breast cancer survivor Cherry Lim, who invested RM85,000 of her savings in the scheme through a company that has since gone into liquidation.
Another victim is software engineer Ng Juinn Jye, who put up RM100,000 which the 33-year-old father had hoped to multiply for his children’s education.
The Canadian High Court offers a ray of hope for the investors. While ordering the company to close its branches, it directed the administrators to protect the interest of investors and “maximise recovery”.
Some of the Malaysians have lodged police reports and are heeding the advice of the MCA Public Services and Complaints Department to bring the matter up with Bank Negara.
fr:thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/2/23/nation/10789835&sec=nation
RM85,000 heartbreak for breast cancer survivor
Breast cancer survivor Cherry Lim was shattered when she learned last year that she may have lost the RM85,000 she invested in a Canadian land investment scheme.
“It was a big chunk of my RM200,000 EPF savings which I can never replace,” said the 60-year-old Lim, who broke down in tears as she spoke of how she had slogged for 35 years as a human resources executive before retiring in 2008.
“It was hard-earned money and I have no other source of income. I had believed the returns promised would see me through to my last days,” said Lim, who has to spend about RM2,000 every three months for medication.
Lim said she had invested in the scheme offered by a Canadian-based property company through its local chapter Edgeworth Properties (Malaysia) after being told about it by her unit trust agent who was also an investment agent for the company.
Software engineer Ng Jiunn Jye, 35, also believed he could multiply the money he had saved for his children’s education by investing in the scheme.
“I invested about RM100,000 in 2008 after being convinced by an agent who told me the land we would be investing in came with titles and insurance coverage,” he said.
Besides assuring Ng that the venture was safe, the agent also convinced him that the value of the property would appreciate within the next 2 years and that he would receive a 60% return on his investment.
Both Lim and Ng said they were confident of good returns especially after company chairman Donald Hurst wrote to them in January last year saying that their investments were doing well.
However, their hopes were dashed when Hurst wrote again in April saying the company had run into problems due to various reasons.
“I just want the RM85,000 that I have invested and nothing else. My future will be very bleak if I cannot get the money back,” Lim said.
She and Ng were among 60-odd people who came to the Selangor MCA Public Service and Complaints Department to talk of their plight.

fr:thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/2/23/nation/10787151&sec=nation

Edgeworth Canada, Donald Hurst in Singapore (July25,2011)
.
Is there any justice at all, for the poor victims of edgeworth??? Is anyone out there who believes in true justice going to do something??
this company started business in 2006. set up offices in singapore, malaysia, philippines, taiwan. collected funds from asians, selling undivided interest shares of raw land.
all this while, edgeworth had portrayed rosy and strong growth.
sent out notices during the last part of 2010 about maturity in June + Sept 2011, and early 2012.
even sent canadian tax forms for 3 project owners, indicating taxes must be paid off before receiving maturity (capital + profits).
the company sent beautiful newsletters in early 2011, indicating strong growth of company and project progress, with upcoming maturity and new partners in their business.
even in march 2011, they announced maturity on time for june 2011.
BUT…. in June 2011, the country managers, the chairman don hurst/hurts could not hide no more that the money disappeared in GOD-only-knows-where!! how in the world can so much money be spent simply? Talk about 40 years of business experience!!
came asia, hoping to clarify why the company could not pay maturity. hoping for more cash from asians. so this video shows you the kind of businessman DONALD HURST is.
STOP BLAMING OTHERS !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Fk0XiXRoiWg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7TjrYa2KWeE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tTlzyzx4qQc&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=ku7-N6bSbYo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BnRNm_3Tfa4&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhVRaFDxV20&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Vamv12MW89s

PRESS RELEASE
SSM ISSUES COMPOUND TO EDGEWORTH PROPERTIES (MALAYSIA)
SDN. BHD.
15 July 2009. Suruhanjaya Syarikat Malaysia (SSM) refers to the articles
that appeared in Bernama.com on 10 July 2009, in the Berita Harian on 11
July 2009 and in Malaysian Reserve on 13 July 2009 respectively on
Edgeworth Properties (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd (EPM).
SSM wishes to confirm that its investigation into the business activities of
EPM revealed that EPM had issued genuine title deeds to its investors in
respect of land it had sold to them, located in England and Canada.
The investigation however revealed that the investment scheme operated by EPM is an interest scheme within the definition of Section 84 of the
Companies Act 1965 and therefore requires compliance with Section 91 of
the Companies Act 1965. Essentially, the section prohibits any person from
offering to the public for sale or subscription an interest in any interest
scheme unless at the time of the offer there is in force an approved deed.
Since EPM had failed to comply with Section 91 of the Companies Act 1965,
SSM had issued compounds to EPM and to all members of its Board of
Directors. The compounds have been duly paid by the company and its
directors.
SSM has also directed EPM to comply with the requirements under Section
91 of the Companies Act 1965 within 3 months, latest by October 2009.
Issued by: Suruhanjaya Syarikat Malaysia (SSM)
Dated: 15 July 2009

http://www.alantanblog.com/land-banking/land-banking-scam-in-malaysia-edgeworth-properties/

Malaysian Internet users Be Warned.

Grave repercussions for internet users

Posted by Foong Cheng Leong

Dissecting the presumption of fact relating to publication in the controversial new Bill.
The Evidence (Amendment) (No. 2) Bill 2012 was one of the bills rushed and passed by the Parliament recently. Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Mohamed Nazri Aziz, when winding up the Evidence (Amendment) Bill 2012, said the use of pseudonyms or anonymity by any party to do cyber crimes had made it difficult for the action to be taken against them. Hence, the Evidence Act 1950 must be amended to address the issue of Internet anonymity.
The amendments introduced s. 114A into the Evidence Act 1950 to provide for the presumption of fact in publication in order to facilitate the identification and proving of the identity of an anonymous person involved in publication through the internet. In simple words, s. 114A introduces 3 circumstances where an Internet user is deemed to be a publisher of a content unless proven otherwise by him or her.

Men in masks, beware of s.114A.

Although it is stated that the amendment is to cover anonymous persons on the internet, the effect of the amendment is quite wide. You see, we, especially social media network users, generally do not use our real names on the Internet. We use nicknames and pseudonyms. Our home addresses do not appear on our account. We sometimes use fictional characters or even digitalized images of ourselves as our profile picture. All these are done to protect our own privacy. So, if none of my personal details appear on my account, does this mean I am anonymous? If someone’s identity cannot be directly ascertained from his account, I would think that he would be anonymous.

The new s. 114A(1) states that “A person whose name, photograph or pseudonym appears on any publication depicting himself as the owner, host , administrator, editor or sub-editor, or who in any manner facilitates to publish or re-publish the publication is presumed to have published or re-published the contents of the publication unless the contrary is proved”. In simple words, if your name, photograph or pseudonym appears on any publication depicting yourself as the aforesaid persons, you are deemed to have published the content. So, for example, if someone creates a blog with your name, you are deemed to have published the articles there unless you prove otherwise. If you have a blog and someone posts a comment, you are deemed to have published it. If you have a Facebook page and an user posts something on your wall, you are deemed to have published it!
Subsection (2) provides a graver consequence. If a posting originates from your account with a network service provider, you are deemed to be the publisher unless the contrary is proved. In simple terms, if a posting originates from your TM Unifi account, you are deemed to be the publisher. In the following scenarios, you are deemed to be the publisher unless you prove the contrary:-
(1) You have a home network with a few house mates sharing one internet account. You are deemed to be the publisher even though one of your house mates posts something offensive online.
(2) You have wireless network at home but you did not secure your network. You are deemed to be the publisher even though someone “piggybacks” your network to post something offensive.
(3) You have a party at home and allows your friends to access your PC or wireless network.You are deemed to be the publisher even though it was a friend who posted something offensive.
(4) Someone use your phone or tablet to post something offensive. You are deemed to be the publisher.
As for subsection (3), you are presumed to have published a content if you have custory or control of any computer which the publication originates from. Here, you are deemed to be the publisher so long your computer was the device that had posted the content. So if someone “tweetjacks” you or naughtily updates your Facebook with something offensive, you are deemed to be the publisher unless you prove otherwise.
Admittedly, the amendments certainly saves a lot of the investigator’s time. It is very difficult to trace someone on the Internet. It will make prosecution for, among others, defamation, offences under the Communication and Multimedia Act 1998 and Computer Crimes Act 1997 and, election offences much easier. But it is not impossible to trace someone. There are many cases where perpetrators are caught and charged.

The new Bill: to like or not to like? | Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/birgerking/

I do not see the logic to deem someone to be a publisher. If an investigator is unable to trace the anonymous internet user, then why should the innocent Internet user take the rap? The onus of proof should always be on the prosecuting side. In the English case of Applause Store Productions Limited & Anor v Grant Raphael [2008] EWHC 1781 (QB), the claimants were awarded £22,000 in damages against Raphael, an old school friend, who had created a false personal profile of the claimants on Facebook. The claimants convinced the Court that Raphael was the person who created the fake profile even though he claimed that he had a party at his house and someone in that party created the account.
In summary, the new amendments force an innocent party to show that he is not the publisher. Victims of stolen identity or hacking would have a lot more problems to fix. Since computers can be easily manipulated and identity theft is quite rampant, it is dangerous to put the onus on internet users. An internet user will need to give an alibi that it wasn’t him. He needs to prove that he has no access to the computer at that time of publication and he needs to produce call witnesses to support his alibi.
Clearly, it is against our very fundamental principal of “innocent until proven guilty”. With general election looming, I fear this amendment will be used oppressively. Fortunately, the amendment is not in force yet. I strongly hope that the government will relook into this amendment.

http://www.loyarburok.com/2012/04/24/grave-repercussions-internet-users/

 

The Bangladesh PM website says Bangladeshi are given citizenship of malaysia with condition they vote for the party in power!!!

 

 

Debate Speech on 18.5.2012 on Motion of Appreciation to TYT’s Speech on 14.5.2012 (Edited from Hansard)

DUN May 2012 – Debate on Corruption, Electoral Threats

Debate Speech on 18.5.2012 on Motion of Appreciation to TYT’s Speech on 14.5.2012 (Edited from Hansard)

(3) Corruption, Electoral Threats
There is nothing wrong to demand for corrupt free election. The people in Sibu needs no reminder the notorious statement by the Prime Minister uttered in Rejang Park on 15^th May, 2010, “You help me, I help you”. If this is not electoral corruption, nothing else is.
There is nothing wrong to demand an end to dirty politics, and Sibu had seen a lot of those. Firstly the SUPP chose tycoons as their candidates. Only tycoons can afford to buy votes. Even as I am speaking now, SUPP cadres are walking around shops and residential areas in Sibu collecting names and photocopies of ICs with a view to buy votes. I am sure the culprits in the BN are not the SUPP alone.
The BN resorted to threats. Withdrawing agriculture subsidies were quite common occurrence. The rhetoric “rakyat didahulukan” sounds dreadfully hollow, because the BN Ministers are even cutting assistance to the disabled.
A few days before the Sarawak state election of 2011, The Minister of Finance II told Sibu folks that after the Sibu by-election defeat of the BN, the PM had considered stopping the Sibu airport extension project.
The Minister had also told Sibu folks that the flood mitigation project was almost stopped because of the by-election loss. He also threatened that should he lose the 2011 state election, all development projects would stop. Does this remind us the political culture of samseng?
The 13^th General Election is coming soon. Are we in for a clean, free and fair election? Far from it.
A few days ago, the Prime Minister wanted us to abide by the law. Of course we have to. But we are now witnessing people setting up burger stalls in front of the home of Bersih co-chairperson Datuk Ambiga. We also witnessed a group of army veterans who went there to perform ‘butt exercises’. Yet, nothing was done to stop these actions which were clearly an invasion of an individual’s privacy. There is total absence of decency. But how could they have escaped action being taken against these crude and insensitive acts? Surely, the powerful BN is behind them.
If the Government permits them to be rude, then they should bring their butts to Sarawak to be shown to corrupt BN politicians. They should show their butts to those Ministers who had the habit of making electoral threats in order to win votes.
Their actions have made Malaysia the laughing stock of the world. Many Malaysians are still immature in politics. Yet, there are members in this august House who do not want to see improvement. They are prepared to wear blinkers and condemn the demonstrators despite not having gone to Ground Zero to understand the situation.

http://holeng.dapsarawak.com/?p=1731#more-1731

More Very Dirty Datuks – Naroden Majais & Hamden Bin Ahmad MAJOR EXPOSE!

Posted Friday, March 2nd, 2012

This post is also available in: Iban, Malay

Dirty Datuk Naroden Majais and his wife Massenah Binti Ahmad are the sole shareholders of Nirwana Muhibbah Sdn Bhd

Our latest revelations come at the moment of another  landmark court victory by a group of Iban villagers against the destruction of their lands by ruthless loggers, licensed by Taib.
Earlier this week 183 residents of Kampong Lebor, Serian, represented once again by the PKR leader and native rights lawyer, Baru Bian, won their epic case against the company Nirwana Muhibbah Sdn Bhd, which has been violating their Native Customary Rights lands, first through logging and then oil palm plantation for over a decade.
Since 1998 Nirwana Muhibbah has bulldozed their territory, polluted their water supply and planted oil palm without any recognition of the people’s rights, even though their communities have lived in the area since before the time of Rajah Brooke!
The judge is now assessing damages for these people against the Company, the Land & Survey Department (which ‘wrongfully’ provided the lease to the company) and the State of Sarawak, which permitted the outrage. Those damages include, according to the judge:

(a)Destruction of the plaintiffs‟ source of livelihood includes food valuable medicines, wildlife and other forest produce which the plaintiffs need and are dependant upon.(b) Extensive erosion and damage to the said native customary land. (c) Extensive pollution and silting of the rivers and streams, which the plaintiffs and the members of their community are dependant on for water supply and for their source of fish. (d)Damage to cultivated padi land. (e) Damage to fruit trees, rubber gardens and other essential trees and crops [Judgement Justice Clement Skinner, 23/02/12]

PKR Leader, Baru Bian brings the sweet news of victory to the people of Kampung Lebor who were waiting at the court

One particularly shocking incident that came to light in the case was that Nirwana Muhibbah had paid out a mere RM700 ringgit to the entire village as compensation for polluting their water supplies!

Licence for oil palm registered with the Land & Survey Department

So, who were the individuals hiding behind this company name and profiting to the tune of millions of ringgit at the expense of the local people?  According to our information, leaked from the secretive Land & Survey Department and to company records, they are none other than yet another of Taib’s Dirty Datuks, the Assistant Minister for Entrepreneur Development, Naroden Majais and his wife!

The Directors and Shareholders of this logging and plantation company are Datuk Naroden Majais, Assistant Minister in Taib's State Government, and his wife!

And, why do we think Taib’s Land & Survey Department (of which the Chief Minister is Chairman) decided to hand 4,500 hectares of valuable timber and plantation land to Nirwana Muhibbah for such a very reasonable sum?

Elected politicians should not receive secret concessions from the state!

Do we think it is because after a process of open tender it was decided that this company was best suited to manage the land and offered a very good price or because Taib wanted to buy the political loyalty of Naroden Majais?
Giant timber concessions – Exclusive!
However, it turns out that Kampung Lebor was merely small beer for Datuk Naroden Majais.  We have obtained new evidence that for the first time exposes the full shocking scale of this Dirty Datuk’s extraordinary land grabs.
Our new information, obtained from Forest Department records, reveals that the politician, who has a reputation for being an ultra-close confidant of Taib Mahmud, is one of the biggest timber concession holders in the state!
He and a fellow political insider Hamden Bin Ahmad are key shareholders in the company Peninsular Rise Sdn Bhd, which has been granted 7 vast tracts of logging territory amounting to an astonishing 840 square kilometres in North East Sarawak!

Peninsular Rise - 840 square kilometres of timber concessions

The revelation raises immediate and serious questions as to how two former civil servants working in two of Taib’s key Departments rose to acquire such enormous wealth in their roles as Ministers?

Datuk Hamden Bin Ahmad - state accountant turned multi-millionaire timber tycoon

Naroden Majais started out as a teacher and then an official at the Sarawak Economic Development Corporation.
Hamden Bin Hamza was an accountant in the Sarawak Land Development Board, before being parachuted into a state seat by Taib.
Since giving up that seat to the Head of Forestry, Len Talif Saleh, at the last state election, he has presided as a Director of the Taib family construction firm Naim Cendera and as the Treasurer of the massive state supported oil palm enterprise Sarawak Plantation Bhd.
The glaring question remains as to how did their civil servant and ministerial salaries enable these two men to acquire a 30% stake in this enormous timber concern, Peninsular Rise?
Because Taib is so secretive about how he hands out his licences the very existence of these concessions and the position of these two Datuks have remained unknown until now!

Datuks Majais and Bin Ahmad own Windynasty Sdn Bhd!

Much of the area of these concessions falls within the deeply controversial region of the Baram Dam. Villages bordering the concessions are Long Liam, Long San, Long Luding, Long Julan, Long Anap, Long Palai, Long Apu, which stand to be flooded if the dam is built.

Official company records for Windynasty show that it is owned by Datuk Naroden Majais and Datuk Hamden Bin Ahmad!

“Land grabbing a myth”! – Naroden Majais
In the light of these revelations it is worth recalling some of the remarks about land grabbing made by Naroden Majais over recent months, especially given the trampling of the rights of the people of Kampung Lebor by a company owned by himself and his wife.
He announced earlier this year for example that the complaints against the government for robbing landowners were “a myth”.

TEBEDU: Every single inch of the people’s land which are acquired by the government for development purposes will be compensated accordingly, assured assistant minister in the chief minister’s department Mohd Naroden Majais.
He said stories about the government robbing the people’s land, as claimed by the opposition during the recent state election, was only a myth.
“The government’s policy is clear. All land acquired for any projects will be compensated. Every single inch will be paid for, even when the projects were implemented for the benefit of the landowners themselves,” he said. [Naroden Majais, May 2011]

In which case, can Datuk Naroden Majais explain the outcome of the court case against him?  Can he also explain how he has been able to complete the recent construction of his new and truly enormous house on the salary of a State Minister of some RM8,000 a month?

New mansion for Datuk Naroden Majais and his wife (and Co-Director of Nirwand Muhibbah Sdn Bhd)

Indeed, can he convincingly refute the widespread rumours that he and his fellow former local civil servant, Hamden Bin Ahmad, are in fact mere proxies, holding lands and concessions for the Chief Minister himself?
After all, a massive house like this is a very nice perk, but it hardly reflects the true value of the enormous concessions that Naroden apparently owns.
Why would Taib have handed such huge concessions to these two former civil servants, when they would surely have been very happy with such a house, a state assembly job and the concession of NCR land belonging to the poor people of Kampung Lebor?
Vast oil palm plantations as well!
The matter does not end here, because readers of Sarawak Report may well recall that Datuk Naroden Majais is also registered as one of the largest beneficiaries of oil palm concessions handed out by Taib, as recorded by the leaked Land & Survey documents that we have already released for all to see!
Datuk Naroden Majais was the registered contact for the concession of an enormous swathe of property that has been handed out to two companies, Hydroflow and Indranika, originally based at Lorong 9, Jalan Rubber, Kuching.

Huge swathes of property handed to these two companies, supposedly a peoples' cooperative

Standard practice? Like Datuk Jacob Sagan, Naroden Majais has made a practice of taking land from his own birthplace of Gedong, Simunjan, within his own constituency

Much play has been made about these two companies providing some form of profit sharing for the local people whose land was taken to supply these vast plantations.

Sounds better than it is! - the local people got just RM200 per annum from Hydroflow and Indranika's plantations. In return they lost their lands.

In fact only 30% of the shares of Hydroflow and Indranika Jaya have been signed over to the thousands of people who have lost lands.
Those shares are held through the companies Sadong Wibawa Bhd and Punggur Wibawa Bhd.
However, both of the companies are run from the offices of the main shareholder, which is a private company, WFM Enterprise Sdn Bhd.
It means none of the local people have any  control over how the enterprise is run.
Thus, last year a grand ceremony was reported by the Sarawak Tribune (edited by Taib’s own daughter, Hanifah) at which supposed ‘interim dividends’  totaling RM575,400 for the year was paid to some 2,877 oil palm ‘shareholders’ from Simunjan and Gedong in the two concerns.
That represents a payment of RM200 per annum per person for the loss of their timber, lands and heritage!
WFM Enterprise
So where is the real profit being made?  It will come as no surprise that the main shareholder of these vast concerns is now a private company which owns 70% of the enterprise and has a few key major shareholders.
Both Hydroflow and Indranika are 70% owned by WFM Enterprise Sdn Bhd.  WFM is largely owned by one Kiong Goon Siong and a relative, Kiong Goon King.  Kiong registered with the Land & Survey Department the same office address in Jalang Rubber as Naroden Majais, whom he replaced as the main contact for these companies, as well as assuming ownership.

The Siongs are associates of Naroden Majais and were registered at the same office by the Land & Survey Department

Under Sarawak’s secretive system run by Taib Mahmud, where timber and oil palm concessions are quietly given out to political and business cronies, it is hard to know who really owns what.

Main shareholders at Hydroflow and Indranika took over the same contact address as Naroden Majais

But, again the questions arise. How is it that Naroden Majais and Hamden Bin Ahmad have acquired so many timber concessions and oil palm concessions after their quiet careers working as civil servants in two of Taib’s key land departments?
How is that concession after concession has been handed out by the Forest Department and Land & Survey Department to wealthy YB Datuks Naroden and Ahmad?

Kuraya - another concession for Hamden Bin Ahmad

Why is it that even a forest reserve in Balingian is not protected from this pair?

Another vast concession in Baram region for Naroden!

More plantation land in Naroden's own birth region and constituency! Have his people put their trust in a wolf from their own community who is working for Taib?

Will Taib and BN start to answer these questions about how such vast lands have found their way into the hands of his own party men, BN’s Dirty Datuks?

http://www.sarawakreport.org/2012/03/more-very-dirty-datuks-naroden-majais-hamden-bin-ahmad-major-expose/