CHIN PENG'S FAREWELL LETTER - HIS LAST WORDS

The following is a copy of Chin Peng's farewell letter obtained by Malaysiakini's correspondent in Bangkok:

“My dear Comrades, my dear Compatriots,

When you read this letter, I am no more in this world.

It was my original intention to pass away quietly and let my relatives handle the funeral matters in private. However, the repercussions of erroneous media reports of me in critical condition during October 2011, had persuaded me that leaving behind such a letter is desirable.

Ever since I joined the Communist Party of Malaya and eventually became its secretary-general, I have given both my spiritual and physical self in the service of the cause that my party represented, that is, to fight for a fairer and better society based on socialist ideals. Now with my passing away, it is time that my body be returned to my family.

I draw immense comfort in the fact that my two children are willing to take care of me, a father who could not give them family love, warmth and protection ever since their birth. I could only return my love to them after I had relinquished my political and public duties, ironically only at a time when I have no more life left to give to them as a father.

It was regrettable that I had to be introduced to them well advanced in their adulthood as a stranger. I have no right to ask them to understand, nor to forgive. They have no choice but to face this harsh reality. Like families of many martyrs and comrades, they too have to endure hardship and suffering not out of their own doing, but out of a consequence of our decision to challenge the cruel forces in the society which we sought to change.

It is most unfortunate that I couldn't, after all, pay my last respects to my parents buried in hometown of Sitiawan (in Perak), nor could I set foot on the beloved motherland that my comrades and I had fought so hard for against the aggressors and colonialists.

My comrades and I had dedicated our lives to a political cause that we believed in and had to pay whatever price there was as a result. Whatever consequences on ourselves, our family and the society, we would accept with serenity.

In the final analysis, I wish to be remembered simply as a good man who could tell the world that he had dared to spend his entire life in pursuit of his own ideals to create a better world for his people.

It is irrelevant whether I succeeded or failed, at least I did what I did. Hopefully the path I had walked on would be followed and improved upon by the young after me. It is my conviction that the flames of social justice and humanity will never die.

Farewell, my dear Comrades!

Farewell, my dear Compatriots!

Farewell, my dear Motherland!”

FULL STORY AT: http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/241699

Kisah Dongeng Kota Damansara - oleh Khalid Samad

Kisah Dogeng Kota Damansara

 oleh

 

Khalid Samad

Wakil Rakyat PAS, Shah Alam

 

6 June 2013

 

Saya telah menulis beberapa isu berkenaan KD sebelum ini yang merangkumi persoalan Strategi, Akhlak Jamaah Islam, Kawasan Contoh dan Perang Uhud. Artikel ini akan cuba mengupas beberapa kisah dongeng yang berlegar selepas apa yang berlaku di KD. Apabila ingin menegakkan benang yang basah, maka bermacam-macam kisah dogeng terpaksa dikemukakan berhubung KD. Saya senaraikan di sini beberapa kisah dongeng tersebut satu per satu untuk dinilai bersama.

Dongeng 1: Kota Damansara Dipinjamkan Kepada PKR
Pada tahun 2004 KD ditandingi PAS sambil Paya Jaras ditandingi PKR. Pada 2008, atas permintaan PAS Subang, maka Paya Jaras digantikan dengan KD. Maka PAS bertanding Paya Jaras dan KD ditandingi PKR. PAS kalah di Paya Jaras tetapi PKR, dengan Dr Nasir sebagai calonnya menang di Kota Damansara.

Pada tahun 1999, tiada kerusi Kota Damansara. Kota Damansara adalah kerusi baru hasil persempadanan baru yang dilakukan pada 2003 oleh BN. Seperti Parlimen Kota Raja, Dun Sri Andalas dan Dun Sri Muda. Maka bagaimana ianya dijadikan milik PAS?

Sepanjang 5 tahun sejak 2008, tidak pernah walaupun sekali isu KD ‘dipinjamkan’ kepada PKR disebut di BPPNS.Maka kata-kata Kota Damansara dipinjamkan kepada PKR dan KD adalah kerusi PAS adalah dongengan semata-mata.

Dongeng 2: PKR Tiada Calon di Kota Damansara
Hakikatnya PKR telah bersedia menurunkan calon lain sekiranya Dr Nasir tidak setuju untuk turun sebagai calon PKR. Saudara Radzlan Jalaluddin seorang peguam adalah calon yang akan diturunkan oleh PKR sekiranya Dr Nasir bertanding sebagai calon PSM. Calon PKR ‘standby’ pun saya diberitahu sudah ada iaitu Ustaz Shamsul Firdaus.

PKR bersedia menghadapi 3 penjuru dengan PSM sekiranya perlu di Kota Damansara. Tetapi apabila Dr Nasir setuju untuk diturunkan sebagai calon PKR, maka PKR arah calon-calon mereka yang lain untuk menarik diri.

Maka cerita konon bahawa PKR tiada calon juga adalah dongeng semata-mata.

Dongeng 3: Dr Nasir Adalah Calon PSM
Hakikatnya Dr Nasir adalah calon PKR. Watiqah yang diguna adalah watiqah dari PKR. PKR turunkan beliau sebagai calon PKR. Tiada watiqah PSM dan bukan PSM yang ditentangi PAS. Bukan seperti di Semenyih.

Cuba buka mata sikit. Ada beza atau tidak Semenyih dan Kota Damansara? Di Semenyih Aru bertanding atas tiket PSM. PKR turunkan calon bertanding kerana tidak terima Aru sebagai calon PKR. Sedangkan kerusi Semenyih dipersetujui semua adalah milik PKR bukan milik PSM. Di KD kes Dr Nasir adalah sebaliknya. Hanya yang terus ingin menegakkan benang basah sahaja akan mengatakan tiada beza.

Dalam soal memilih calon, setiap parti berhak memilih calonnya sendiri atas alasan tersendiri. Ahli PAS KD perlu ingat, pada 2008, PAS meletakkan Ibrahim Ali di Pasir Mas! Ibrahim Ali bukan ahli PAS pun! Itu adalah atas maslahah PAS Kelantan. PAS Kelantan mencapai kemenangan besar, dari majoriti 1 kerusi pada 2004 kepada majoriti 2/3 pada tahun 2008. PAS mendapat 39 dari 45 kerusi pada tahun 2008! Strategi meletakkan Ibrahim mungkin telah menyumbang sedikit sebanyak kepada kemenangan itu.

Maka cerita penglipur lara bahawa Dr Nasir adalah calon PSM dan bukan PKR juga merupakan dongeng semata-mata.

Dongeng 4: PAS KD Tolak Dr Nasir Kerana beliau Sosialis
Dr Nasir seorang Sosialis sejak dahulu. Beliau bersama Dr Syed Hussin dalam PSRM dan apabila PSRM bercantum dengan Keadilan sehingga Keadilan pun menambah ‘rakyat’ dalam nama ‘PKR’ dan menambahkan jalur merah pada logonya, Dr Nasir tidak ikut sama. Sebaliknya Dr Nasir berusaha menubuhkan PSM.

Namun pada 2008 beliau diturunkan sebagai calon PKR di Kota Damansara. Begitu juga Arul yang bekas ahli PSRM juga diturunkan di Semenyih. Pada ketika itu PAS terima dan tidak membantah.

Kalau mahu tolak Dr Nasir kerana dia Sosialis, sepatutnya ianya dibuat sejak 2008 kerana semua tahu beliau Sosialis pada ketika itu lagi. Bukan baru beliau isyhtihar bahawa beliau Sosialis.

Lagipun telah diakui bahawa PKR dan DAP berbeza fahaman politik dengan PAS. Kalau PAS tolak Sosialis kerana bercanggah dengan Islam, bagaimana pula dengan fahaman liberal demokrat dan sosial demokrat yang dibawa PKR dan DAP? Dan bukankah ini sebabnya ada ‘tahalluf’ iaitu kerjasama dengan yang tidak sama fahaman politik dengan PAS. Dan bukankah ini sesuai dengan ayat 61 Surah Al-Anfal yang bermaksud;

“Dan kalau mereka telah condong kepada perdamaian, hendaklah kamu condong juga kepadanya (perdamaian), dan bertawakallah kepada Allah. Sesungguhnya Dia Maha Mendengar dan Maha Mengetahui”.

Masalah ini sepatutnya tidak timbul lagi kerana ianya telahpun diputuskan bersama pada 2008 bahawa sekiranya Dr Nasir guna lambang PKR maka tiada masalah.

Soal Syed Hussein Ali bertanding di Kelantan dan ditolak oleh PAS Kelantan adalah atas perkiraan lain. Masyarakat Kelantan tidak bersedia menerima Syed Hussein Ali sebagai calon. Faktor ‘winnability’ dalam suasana saingan sengit perlu diambil kira. Tapi di Kota Damansara, terbukti Dr Nasir boleh menang. Ini telah terbukti pada 2008.

Maka dengan itu alasan PAS KD tolak Dr Nasir kerana beliau Sosialis juga adalah alasan dongeng yang telah direka cipta.

Dongeng 5: Dr Nasir Sebagai ADUN Banyak Menimbulkan Masalah
Ada yang mengatakan bermacam-macam perkara berhubung tindakan Dr Nasir sebagai ADUN. Masalah itu dan ini. Kononnya susah untuk dapat peruntukan untuk program dan sebagainya. Saya jawab dengan mendedahkan satu fakta sahaja untuk menyanggah ini semua.

Sepanjang 5 tahun tiada sebarang aduan terhadap Dr Nasir yang dikemukakan dalam mesyuarat BPPNS. Kalau ada pun, isu biasa yang melibatkan semua ADUN yang bukan PAS yang dihadapi oleh ahli PAS. Biasalah tu, mereka pun sibuk membuat program sendiri dan PAS pun dengan programnya. Sepatutnya kerja rapat. Program PKR/DAP program PAS, program PAS program mereka juga kerana semua untuk bertemu dengan rakyat jelata yang merupakan pengundi PR bersama.

Pada masa yang sama ramai juga ahli PAS jadi Nazir Masjid, AJK Masjid, Ketua Kampung, JKK, Ahli Majlis dan sebagainya. Tiada pula Dr Nasir menhalang fahaman Islam dari disebarkan dan fahaman Sosialisma diajar di Masjid dan Surau!

Amatlah menghairankan kenapa tiba-tiba apabila sudah dekat dengan PRU baru isu ini timbul. Semasa membincangkan soal siapa calon untuk Paya Jaras, di mana pimpinan Selangor bertemu pimpinan PAS Subang berkali-kali, termasuk selepas pembubaran Parlimen, tiada walau satu ayat pun dikeluarkan berhubung KD!

Maka bagi saya, sebagai pimpinan PAS Negeri Selangor, alasan Dr Nasir banyak menimbulkan masalah adalah dongeng ke 5.

Dongeng 6: Bertanding di KD adalah Keputusan Majlis Syura!
Saya malas hendak jawab. Saya nasihat penghujjah jangan menipu. Walaupun kita tahu “peperangan itu adalah tipu-helah” janganlah guna hadis itu sebagai alasan untuk menipu ahli dan rakyat. Saya bukan berperang dengan saudara-saudara. Saya hanya ingin menegur kesilapan yang telah dilakukan. Jangan menipu. Jatuh imej tuan-tuan semua; lebih-lebih lagi yang bergelar Ustaz.

Sebenarnya, jika benar ikhlas, alasan tidak perlu bertukar-tukar dan berbagai jenis. Tidak perlu ditokok tambah dengan macam-macam cerita penglipulara. Cakap je, “Dia Sosialis”. Atau “dia susah nak kerjasama”. Atau “kerusi dipinjam”. Atau “PKR tiada calon”. Pilih sahaja satu dan hujjah berasaskan yang itu. Ini tidak. Alasan berbagai dan beraneka bentuk dan banyak darinya yang dongeng belaka. Itu adalah bukti alasannya adalah alasan semata-mata.

WaLlahu 'Alam
KHALID SAMAD

NEW YORK TIMES REPORT ON THE DEATH OF CHIN PENG

 

Asia Pacific

Chin Peng, Malaysian Rebel, Dies at 88

By DOUGLAS MARTIN

Chin Peng, a Communist guerrilla leader whose tenacious, bloody struggles for an independent Communist Malaysia pitted him against Japanese invaders, British colonialists and finally the government of what had become his own newly sovereign nation, died in exile on Monday in Bangkok. He was 88. 

Agence France-Presse, the French news agency, said the cause was cancer, quoting a retired Thai military commander who had acted as a liaison between Mr. Chin and the authorities. Mr. Chin had lived in Thailand for many years. 

Mr. Chin was the last surviving revolutionary leader to have successfully fought for independence from colonial rulers in Asia after World War II — a cohort that included Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam, Sukarno in Indonesia, Aung San in Burma (now Myanmar) and Norodom Sihanouk in Cambodia. 

When he finally laid down his arms in 1989, Mr. Chin was called “the world’s senior surviving guerrilla.” 

Chin Peng was the nom de guerre of Ong Boon Hua, who had joined with the British to battle Japanese troops after they invaded what was then British Malaya in 1941. His honors for heroism included the Order of the British Empire. 

But after the war, as the newly named head of Malaya’s Communist Party, he ordered an armed insurrection against the British colonial rulers, and when Malaya became independent of Britain in 1957, the insurgency morphed into a fight against the new government. 

(Malaysia, consisting of Malaya, Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore, came into being in 1963. Singapore became independent of Malaysia in 1965.) 

“I suppose I am the last of the region’s old revolutionary leaders,” Mr. Chin wrote in his 2003 memoir, “My Side of History. “It was my choice to lead from the shadows, away from the limelight.” 

He may not have actually had a choice. By the mid-1950s, the British had effectively put down the Communist offensive, although a final peace agreement would not be signed until 1989. Mr. Chin disappeared, although his voice was heard on broadcasts of the clandestine Malaysian Revolution Radio.

 Then he fell silent, and it was assumed that years of living in the jungle had taken their final toll on him.

It turned out that in 1960 he fled to China, the principal backer of the Malaysian Communists, who themselves were mainly ethnic Chinese. He later moved to Thailand. 

After the 1989 peace pact, he tried to return to Malaysia but was refused entry. 

Ong Boon Hua was reported to have been born on Oct. 21, 1924, in the Malaysian state of Perak. His father, an immigrant from Fujian Province in southeast China, made a good living selling and repairing bicycles, and sent him to English-language schools, where he excelled. Attracted to Communism as a means of fighting prejudice against Chinese-Malayans, he joined party youth organizations at 15. 

Soon he left school and went to work for the party, which assigned him to lead three anti-Japanese organizations for students, teachers and shop assistants. After the Japanese invaded in December 1941, he became a liaison to British commandos.

 The Associated Press reported in 1989 that John Davis, a British officer, said of him, “Unusual ability, and commanded the natural respect of men without fuss or formality.” 

After the war, Lai Teck, secretary general of the Malayan Communist Party, fled with most of its money after collaborating with both the Japanese and the British. Mr. Chin was placed in charge of investigating him, and was appointed to replace him in 1948 at age 24. 

He ordered an armed struggle, perhaps on instructions from Moscow, and began by attacking two rubber plantations and methodically executing three planters. Twelve years of violence, which came to be known as the Malayan Emergency, ensued. A $250,000 reward was offered for information leading to Mr. Chin’s capture. 

At the height of the conflict, some 70,000 British, Australian, New Zealand, Fijian, Gurkha and other British Commonwealth troops fought about 10,000 guerrillas. More than 10,000 fighters and civilians died between 1948 and 1960. Britain rescinded the Order of the British Empire it had granted him. 

“I make no apologies for seeking to replace such an odious system with a form of Marxist socialism,” Mr. Chin wrote. “Colonial exploitation, irrespective of who were the masters, Japanese or British, was morally wrong.” 

In 1955, Mr. Chin emerged from the jungle to negotiate with Malayan officials at a schoolhouse near the Thai-Malay border. Talks broke down after Malayan negotiators refused Mr. Chin’s demand to be part of a coalition government. Though the point was largely moot after Malaya’s independence in 1957, fighting sputtered on, with periodic escalations. 

When it finally ended in 1989, some 1,200 guerrillas were allowed under the peace pact to returned to civilian life. 

Mr. Chin thought the 1989 agreement provided for his own return to Malaysia, but he was denied in court on the grounds that he could not prove he was Malaysian, having lost his birth and citizenship certificates. Many said the real reason was a lingering resentment over the insurrection. 

Information about his survivors was not available. Mr. Chin’s wife, Khoon Wah, is deceased. They had two sons. 

The Malaysian police have refused to allow his remains to be returned to his home country.

 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/17/world/asia/chin-peng-malaysian-rebel-dies-at-88.html?_r=0

 

"STAND BY YOUR PROMISES", Najib's UMNO-BN Government Being Told 

 

http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/241284

Constitutional expert Abdul Aziz Bari today told Najib's Umno-BN government to " HONOUR YOUR PROMISES and DON'T TRY TO MILK THE DEATH OF COMMUNIST PARTY LEADER FOR POLITICAL MILEAGE."

He reminded them that the 1989 ceasefire agreement between the government and the Communist Party of Malaysia (CPM) was signed by former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad, with their respective predecessors in tow.

Abdul Aziz said that with the signing of the 1989 document, MALAYSIA HAD TACITLY RECOGNISED THE COMMUNISTS.

Abdul Aziz Bari said,

"Stop manipulating the emotions of the army and police veterans. Just put up or shut up! (IGP) Khalid Abu Bakar should just shut up or ask his own predecessor as to why the police agreed to sign the truce with the communists.

"The court was wrong to reject Chin Peng's application to come back. The judges asked for documents to prove his citizenship, like a birth certificate. But they knew that it was during the height of emergency and Chin Peng - rightly or wrongly - was a fugitive."

He added that the court had asked the impossible from Chin Peng, who had fought British rule.

Abdul Aziz Bari said the GOVERNMENT WOULD LOSE ITS AUTHORITY if Home Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi and Inspector-general of Police (IGP) Khalid Abu Bakar continued to vehemently oppose Chin Peng's final wishes for his ashes to be interned in Malaysia.

Noting that even some ex-Umno and BN leaders were also detained in the past for communist activities, Abdul Aziz said that the party should stop "demonising" communists and communism.

DID CHIN PENG REALLY DIDN'T APPLY TO RETURN HOME, AS CLAIMED BY EX-IGP HANIFF OMAR??

Did Chin Peng REALLY REFUSE ticket home? 
http://tinyurl.com/lv86kw2

Tun Haniff Omar claimed yesterday that Chin Peng had refused an offer to return home in 1989 and only applied in 2005.

TunHaniff said,

“When Chin Peng finally applied in 2005 to return to Malaysia, the boat had sailed and there was absolutely no reason to admit him back into the country, unless he could prove that he had applied to return within that one-year window, which he couldn’t."

But MP Teresa Kok reminded the former Inspector-General of Police (IGP) that he had said OTHERWISE in previous media reports and clearly contradicted what he said in a New Straits Times article in 1991.

Teresa Kok demanded clarification today from Tun Haniff Omar over his claim.

In an NST report cited in a December 2009 article by online news portal The Malaysian Insider (TMI). Tun Haniff was quoted as saying

"“Chin Peng submitted his application quite late ... towards the end of the period."

The report was referring to the one-year window given to former Communist leader Chin Peng and his followers to return home after signing the 1989 Hat Yai peace treaty.

In another NST report on September 9, 1991, then Special Branch director Datuk Zulkifli Abdul Rahman had said that Chin Peng’s application “was being processed” and would be given the same treatment as the rest.

The remarks were made after the first batch of 13 ex-CPM (Communist Party of Malaya) members were allowed to return home. Then the following day, IGP Haniff had also said that Chin Peng’s application was being “studied”.

MP Teresa Kok said,

"..Has Tun Haniff ever denied or can he deny that he never said what he said to NST in 1991, that is , Chin Peng had submitted his application quite late but obviously WITHIN the stipulated one year period?.

"If Chin Peng had indeed submitted his application to return home within the stipulated one year period, then Tun Haniff should explain why was his application rejected."

Teresa Kok pointed out that apart from contradicting himself, Haniff’s words were also spoken in CONTRARY to Chin Peng’s own recollection of the past as written in his memoirs My Side of History.

Teresa Kok said,( quoting from the book):

“In his final chapter, entitled ‘A continuing exile’, Chin Peng had said: ‘After meeting my end of the 1989 peace accords, I had looked forward to a homecoming. In late 1990 I made applications to settle down in Malaysia, but was rejected at the end of December 1991,”

Teresa Kok also noted that Chin Peng’s words appeared to be consistent with the NST report in 1991, particularly in as far as the date of his application is concerned.

“If Chin Peng had indeed submitted his application to return home within the stipulated one year period, then Tun Haniff should explain why was his application rejected,” Kok said.

Chin Peng lost his lawsuit, which was filed in 2009, to be allowed back into Malaysia when the Federal Court ruled a year later that he needed birth and citizen certificates to re-enter.

CHIN PENG - OBITUARY by LAWYER TOMMY THOMAS

OBITUARY 

CHIN PENG, A MALAYAN NATIONALIST.

BY

Tommy Thomas
(Tommy Thomas is a senior lawyer
based in Kuala Lumpur Malaysia

 

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/obituary-chin-peng-a-malayan-nationalist

AS A LAWYER FOR CHIN PENG, and the Malayan Communist Party (MCP) in their recent unsuccessful litigation before the Courts of Malaysia, I am deeply saddened by his death in Bangkok on September 16, 2013 at the ripe old age of 88, and call on the Malaysian Government to honour the 1989 Peace Treaty with the MCP by permitting his burial in his birthplace, Sitiawan, next to his parents.

Posterity will remember Chin Peng as ONE OF THE GREAT LIBERATION FIGHTERS of the second half of the 20th century.

Indeed, he led an armed struggle AGAINST TWO IMPERIALIST POWERS:

- the Japanese from December 1941 to August 1945, and
- the British thereafter until 1957.

HISTORY WILL CONSIDER CHIN PENG IN THE SAME WAY AS HO CHI MINH and SUKARNO, who led nationalistic campaigns against French and Dutch imperialism.

Treating Chin Peng as a major contributor to Merdeka does not in any way detract the equally worthy contributions of Founding Fathers like Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Abdul Razak, Tun Dr Ismail, Tan Cheng Lock and V. T. Sambanthan.

Appropriate analogies would be the different roles played by:
- General George Washington and politicians John Adams and Thomas Jefferson to the American War of Independence in 1776, and
- peaceful non-violent campaign of Gandhi and Nehru,
in contrast to the armed struggle of Subhas Chandra Bose which led to India’s Independence in 1947.

All of them were TRUE PATRIOTS.

Leading scholars of modern Malayan history and politics, including Professors Jamie Mackie, Anthony Reid, Anthony Short and Wang Gung Wu, attended a Symposium with Chin Peng at the Australian National University in Canberra in February 1999 which resulted in the publication of a book entitled Dialogues with Chin Peng: New Light on the Malayan Communist Party, edited by C. C. Chin and Karl Hack.

In a dialogue session on MCP’s role in Merdeka, Chin Peng was quoted as stating:

“But we didn’t experience defeat in forcing the British to grant independence to Malaya. Without our struggle, I don’t think the British would grant independence to Malaya. Or it will be many years later. According to Sir Robert Thompson (the British counter-insurgency expert whose services were later sought by the Americans in the Vietnam War), before he passed away, he admitted we at least accelerate the Merdeka for 10 to 15 years. The BBC people told me. Unfortunately, I don’t have the chance to meet him." (Pages 234-235].

One of the most contentious issues during the 5 rounds of negotiations between the Malaysian Government and MCP, under the auspices of the Thai Government, held in 1989 in Phuket, was MCP’s role in achieving Merdeka.

In his My Side of History, published in 2003, Chin Peng stated:

"Would Britain have granted independence to Malaya as early as 1957 had the military activities of our guerillas not been a factor in the equation? This was explored at length during the private negotiating sessions. Finally, Rahim Noor, speaking in the Malay language from notes in a fully recorded meeting, made the announcement that Malaysia did not deny or dispute MCP’s contribution to the struggle for independence. As to the extent of this contribution, he went on, there was no need to argue the matter in this forum. It should rightly be an issue left for historians.” [Page 490].


Hitherto the ORTHODOX HISTORY OF MERDEKA has by and large been written by the victors: hence, IT IS UMNO and ALLIANCE-CENTRIC.

Hardly any mention is made of, let alone proper acknowledgement given, to others deserving of praise like Onn Jaafar, Burhanuddin Helmi, the Malayan Democratic Union (MDU) and other non-mainstream figures.

We hope that THE TRUE HISTORY OF MERDEKA WOULD BE RESEARCHED AND PUBLISHED IN THE COMING DECADES. . We are confident that in such an endeavour, CHIN PENG WILL TAKE HIS RIGHTFUL PLACE AS A MAJOR NATIONAL ICON.

At a personal level, representing Chin Peng is one of the highlights of my career.

His charm, easy-going manner, sense of humour and humility left an indelible mark on the legal team, led by Malaysia’s leading barrister then, the late Raja Aziz Addruse (who we also deeply miss and fondly remember) and also included Chan Kok Keong and Leong Cheok Keng. Chin Peng graciously hosted us in Bangkok.

ONE OF CHIN PENG'S REQUEST IN THE BALING TALKS OF 1955 with Tunku Abdul Rahman was for the Malayan Government TO REVOKE THE BANNING OF THE MCP AND TO ALLOW IT PARTICIPATE IN THE DEMOCRATIC ELECTORAL PROCESS, thereby giving the voters of Malaya an opportunity of accepting or rejecting MCP as a legitimate political party.

That request was wholly unacceptable to Tunku, and DISMISSED OUTOF HAND.

He returned to the jungle to resume the armed struggle against the colonial power.

Chin Peng truly believed and practised the principle that those who make peaceful change impossible, make violent change inevitable.

In 1959, the State of KERALA IN KERALA elected the first Communist Party in the world in free, fair and democratic elections. In the next 50 years, Kerala’s communist party has been defeated and re-elected on numerous occasions. Never has it not left office peacefully when the electorate rejected it.

HAVING MET CHIN PENG, no doubt in his twilight years when he appeared as everyone’s favourite grandfather, I am convinced that had Tunku agreed to permit the MCP and Chin Peng to participate in Malaya’s general elections, the first one held in 1959, and had MCP been elected, and had Chin Peng come to power, he would have voluntarily relinquished power if MCP had subsequently been defeated in the polls.

It is MALAYA'S TRAGEDY that such a possibility NEVER occurred.

I hope the Malaysian Government will be compassionate in permitting Chin Peng’s burial in his motherland, a country which he loved so much, and for which he fought two imperial armies far more powerful than his own guerilla force.

May his soul rest in peace.

TOMMY THOMAS
September 17, 2013.

-------
Tommy Thomas - Profile

Tommy Thomas was called to the Malaysian Bar in 1976, Mr. Thomas started his career at one of the largest law firms in Malaysia before being invited to join its partnership in 1982.

In a career as a Barrister spanning over 35 years, Mr. Thomas has had the privilege of appearing as counsel in landmark cases in various branches of the law; in all the courts of Malaysia, from the magistrate’s court to the Privy Council in London, which was Malaysia’s highest court until 1985.

Mr. Thomas has had more than 120 reported cases and countless unreported cases.

He has been singled out as one of Malaysia’s leading litigation lawyers by numerous independent international publications including The Asia Pacific Legal 500, Which Lawyer, Who’s Who Legal (The International Who’s Who of Business Lawyers), Commercial Litigation Lawyers of Asia and Chambers Asia.

http://tommythomas.net/profile-tommy-thomas/

PAS, Make Up Your Mind. In or Out of Pakatan ? Don't Drag This Issue for PAKATAN At Every Election

 The prolonged internal squabbling in PAS between the Ulama faction and the Moderates is becoming untenable to Pakatan Rakyat Coalition (PR) especially when the PR had won more than half of the popular votes and if not for the UMNO-BN gerrymandering, would have been the government of the day.

The blame game is on within PAS on the inability of PAS to deliver the Malay/Muslim rural votes to the Opposition at the GE 13.

Some PAS insiders have accused of PAS Deputy President Haron Din of harbouring a unity government strictly between PAS and UMNO, at the exclusion of other political parties. Read here: http://www.anwaraidc.com/?p=27519.

Haron Din had also been accused by some PAS insiders as being responsible of creating problems for PAS's campaign with just before each election (notably 2004, 2008 and 2013) with remarks that cause confusion to muslim voters about PAS.

The ulama faction are upping the ante against the influence of the more modern and more relevant MODERATE faction to 21st century Malaysia.

The line drawn between the Ulama versus the Moderates is as follows:

THE MODERATE FACTION: Dzulkefly Ahmad, Hatta Ramli, Kamaruddin Jaffar, Salahuddin Ayub, Husam Musa, Khalid Samad, Nizar Jamaluddin, Mohamad Sabu, Hanipa Maidin and Raja Kamarul Bahrin Shah.

THE DESTABILISING ULAMA FACTION: Fundamentalists: Abdul Hadi Awang (PAS President, Marang MP and Rhu Rendang State Assemblyman), Haron Din (lost the contest for the Arau Parliamentary seat in Perlis in the 13th general election), Harun Taib (chief of the religious faction and Manir State Assemblyman in Terengganu), Nasruddin Hassan Tantawi (PAS Youth Chief and Temerloh MP), Nik Zawawi Salleh (Syura Council Secretary-General), and the whole Syura Council.

The MODERATES are more well-known to the voters compared to the ULAMAS who are quiet and are more of a keeping to themselv

The problem for the Malaysian public who voted for PAS is that in PAS it is always a SUBTLE CLOAK-AND-DAGGER GAME.

The ULAMA faction members are all in the Syura Council which is equal in power to the Central Working Committee only that the said Council decides on religious matters and the religious stand of the party.

Tok Guru Nik Aziz Nik Mat, the Kelantan Menteri Besar for the past 23 years is the current state assemblyman for Chempaka and the party’s spiritual advisor is NEUTRAL, supporting neither the moderates nor the fundamentalists although he was very slightly on the side of the MODERATES in the previous muktamar.

It appears the Ulama faction is more concern about the split of voter support of MUSLIMS with PKR (an essentially a Malay-led party) and has covertly blamed PKR ( including the Moderates in PAS itself) for the PAS's poor performance among the Malay voters.

Evidently, the Ulamas have indicated they have NO problem working with DAP. This view has been taken with a pinch of salt by some PKR and DAP leaders because it was meant to appeal to the NON-Muslim voters who voted PAS and who are more sympathetic to DAP.

The end game in the internal instability of PAS will have repercussions on the viability of Pakatan Rakyat having PAS as one of the triumvirate.

WHATEVER IT IS, for NON-MUSLIM VOTERS OF PAS, the MODERATES MUST emerge triumphant in the coming muktamar. Otherwise PKR and DAP will NOT HAVE a comfortable working relationship with PAS.

Read here for more:http://tinyurl.com/k85rou6

MALAYSIA: IS HE THE PRIME MINISTER OR ADVERTISING MANAGER/SALESMAN FOR UTUSAN MALAYSIA ?

CONTRASTING THE GOOD AND THE BAD IN MALAYSIA

The Lies and Untruths in the film "TANDA PUTERA" by Retired SPECIAL BRANCH OFFICER

 

http://tinyurl.com/nxafl7c

Tan Sri Yuen Yuet Leng, who was an officer with the police Special Branch at the time of the May,13 riots said today:

a) the urination scene in controversial film “Tanda Putera” AS COMPLETE FABRICATION, and

b) the Communists DID NOT engineer the deadly May 13 riots in 1969.


Tan Sri Yuen Yuet Leng, clarified that the communists had little interest in sowing division along racial lines as the Malayan Communist Party (MCP) was “essentially a non-racial party”.


ON THE URINATION SCENE IN "TANDA PUTERA"

He said,

“I can also confirm with you, as I was on duty at the time, that the urination incident never happened."

Tan Sri Yuen was referring to a scene of an ethnic Chinese man urinating on a flagpole at the then-Selangor Mentri Besar’s residence as depicted in the local film directed by horror maestro Datin Paduka Shuhaimi Baba.

Tan Sri Yuen criticised Shuhaimi for including the scene in the film, saying that it was something that should have been researched properly to avoid sparking unnecessary tension.

Tan Sri Yuen said

“The director (Shuhaimi Baba) should have called me. IT WAS DURING MY TIME.

This is a very specific incident and it should have been researched properly... now it is only causing so much confusion AND THIS NOT GOOD FOR THE COUNTRY."


ON THE ALLEGED ROLE OF COMMUNISTS IN "TANDA PUTERA"

Tan Sri Yuen said no single political party at the time, save for the Socialist Front and Labour Party, should be identified as being in any way communist.

He added that it would be MISLEADING to blame the communists for orchestrating the 1969 riots.

Tan Sri Yuen said,

“They might prompt riots but not racial riots because they are essentially a non-racial party. If they could have it their way they would have preferred continuing success of their open and legal struggle."

Recounting his version of events, Tan Sri Yuen pinned the blame for the May 13 riots on “stupid Chinese and some Indian hooligans” who taunted the Malay community while celebrating the opposition’s unprecedented sweep of 54 parliamentary seats.

“Communal ultras could only made things even more worse by capitalising on already explosive emotions,” he said.


Shuhaimi, who had initially defended the film as “historically accurate”, LATER DENIED SHE MADE A DOCUMENTARY AND ADMITTED TO USING "ARTISTIC LICENSE" to produce HER INTERPRETATION of incidents leading to the deadly racial riot.

 

THE HIJACKING OF THE MALAY NATIONALIST AGENDA BY UMNO

MUST READ:
 HOW UMNO HIJACKED THE MALAY NATIONALIST AGENDA   AND THE FIGHT FOR INDEPENDENCE FROM OTHERS AND THEN SUPPRESSED WITH ITS DISTORTED VERSION OF  MALAYSIAN HISTORY IN SCHOOL TEXTBOOKS AND THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA

TOKOH-TOKOH PEJUANG KEMERDEKAAN TANAH MELAYU (1906-1956)

September 4, 2011

oleh

Adnan Abdullah

 https://www.facebook.com/notes/adnan-abdullah/tokoh-tokoh-pejuang-kemerdekaan-tanah-melayu-1906-1956/260795930607488

Sejarah sebenar perjuangan kemerdekaan tidak diketahui oleh rakyat umum kerana samada ianya telah dilenyapkan atau dipadam dari buku-buku sejarah. Sebahagian daripada pejuang-pejuang yang terlibat dengan perjuangan menentang penjajah itu telah gugur dan ada juga sebahagiannya yang masih hidup.

Ibrahim Haji Yaacob

Ishak Haji Mohamad (Pak Sako)

Ahmad Boestamam

Dr Burhanuddin al Helmy

Abdullah CD

Shamsiah Fakeh

Us Abu Bakar al-Baqir

Rashid Maidin

Aziz Ishak

A Samad Ismail

S.A. Ganapathy

Perjuangan awal menentang penjajahan British dan menuntut kemerdekaan bermula pada tahun 1906 oleh golongan pembaharuan atau reformasi Islam yang mendapat pendidikan di Timur Tengah antaranya termasuklah Syed Sheikh al-Hadi, Sheikh Tahir Jalaluddin dan Haji Abbas Mohd. Taha. Selepas itu, perjuangan menentang penjajahan British dan Jepun turut digerakkan dan dirancakkan dengan penubuhan Kesatuan Melayu Muda (KMM).

KMM telah ditubuhkan pada 1938 di Kuala Lumpur iaitu ibu negara Negeri-Negeri Melayu Bersekutu (Federated Malay States) untuk melindungi hak-hak orang Melayu dan menentang penjajahan British. Antara pemimpinnya adalah Ibrahim Haji Yaakob, Mustapha Hussein, Ishak Haji Mohamad (Pak Sako), Ahmad Boestamam dan Burhanuddin Al Helmy.

KMM merupakan pertubuhan politik bersifat kebangsaan yang pertama di British Malaya. Pertubuhan ini berhasrat untuk menggulingkan pemerintahan Inggeris di Tanah Melayu dengan tindakan keras dan menyatukan Tanah Melayu dengan Indonesia di bawah panji-panji Melayu Raya. Perjuangan yang amat radikal ini menyebabkan pihak Inggeris menggangap mereka pejuang berhaluan kiri. Pada tahun 1942, penjajah British telah mengharamkan KMM dan pucuk kepimpinan KMM termasuk Ibrahim Yaacob telah dipenjarakan. Perjuangan KMM menjadi lemah apabila ramai pemimpin mereka ditangkap.

Jepun telah mengalahkan tentera Britsh dan menakluk Tanah Melayu pada Disember 1941. Semasa pemerintahan Jepun, KMM telah bekerjasama dengan Tentera Anti-Jepun Rakyat Malaya (TAJRM) atau Malayan People Anti Japanese Army (MPAJA) untuk menentang penjajah Jepun pula. Pada 1942 Jepun telah mengharamkan KMM dan MPAJA kerana terlibat dengan perjuangan kemerdekaan Tanah Melayu. MPAJA adalah penjelmaan Parti Kominis Malaya yang ditubuhkan pada tahun 1930 untuk menentang penjajahan British. Selepas Jepun dikalahkan, pihak British telah memberi penghargaan kepada KMM dan PKM diatas kerjasama mereka menentang Jepun.

Selepas tamat peperangan dunia ke-2 (1939 - 1945) dan berundurnya Jepun dari Tanah Melayu, pihak British telah menguasai semula Tanah Melayu sebagai penjajah. Satu gabungan Melayu Islam telah membentuk Parti Kebangsaan Melayu Malaya (PKMM) bertujuan menentang penjajahan British. PKMM ditubuhkan pada 17 Oktober 1945 di Ipoh Perak dan meluluskan penggunaan slogan MERDEKA serta benderanya ialah MERAH-PUTIH. Semboyan MERDEKA dilantangkan dan berjaya mengembleng seluruh tenaga dari pelbagai aliran agama, nasionalis dan sosialis namun ditentang oleh elit Melayu dan kakitangan atau penjawat jawatan yang pro pemerintah (British).

Antara yang memimpin PKMM adalah; Dr Burhanuddin Al-Helmy, Ishak Haji Mohamad (Pak Sako), Abdullah CD (Cik Dat Abdullah), Ahmad Boestamam, Musa Ahmad, Khatijah Ali, dan Ustaz Abu Bakar Al Baqir.

PKMM telah berkembang pesat dan digabungkan dengan pelbagai pertubuhan yang menjadi tulang belakang dan penggerak di seluruh Malaya, antaranya:

1) API (Angkatan Pemuda Insaf) dibawah pimpinan Ahmad Boestamam. Diharamkan pada 18 Jun 1948 oleh pihak penjajah British dengan persetujuan YDP Umno Dato Onn Jaafar.

2) AWAS (Angkata Wanita Sedar) yang diketuai oleh Shamsiah Fakeh. Diharamkan pada 18 Jun 1948 oleh pihak penjajah British dengan persetujuan YDP Umno, Onn Jaafar.

3) BTM - Barisan Tani Malaya (BATAS) yang ditubuhkan pada 7 Julai 1947 di Kajang. Ketuanya ialah Musa Ahmad. Setiausaha disandang oleh Abas manakala Mokhtar sebagai bendahari dan Kadir menjadi ketua bahagian propaganda. Pimpinan Negeri ialah Mokhtar - Kedah, Selangor - Musa Ahmad, Pahang - Abas, Johor - Kadir dan Negeri Sembilan - Ibrahim Baba.

4) Jabatan Kerja Melayu (JKM) yang telah didirikan pada awal tahun 1946. Diketuai oleh Alimin dan Setiausaha Abdullah CD, merangkap ketua bahagian Selatan. Bahagian Utara diketuai oleh Rashid Maidin dan bahagian Timur diketuai oleh Kamaruzaman Teh.

5) Hizbul Muslimin. Ditubuhkan pada 17 Mac 1948. Tokoh yang terlibat ialah Ustaz Abu Bakar Al Baqir, Ustaz Abdul Rab, Dr Burhanuddin Al Helmy dan Kiyai Mashur Azahari. Pada 18 Jun 1948 pihak penjajah British dengan persetujuan YDP Umno, Onn Jaafar mengharamkan Hizbul Muslimin yang dianggap 'Parti Islam Merah' dan merupakan 'bahaya dari gunung' kepada mereka.

6) GERAM -Gerakan Angkatan Muda. Pimpinan Abd Aziz Ishak dan A Samad Ismail.

7) Kesatuan Buruh Melayu SeMalaya (KBMM). Ditubuh pada tahun 1946 di bawah pimpinan Abdullah CD. Dipanjangkan penubuhan ke negeri-negeri pada 1947.

8) Pan Malayan Federation of Trade Union (PMFTU) yang merupakan gerakan buruh berbagai kaum. Pada 1947, kongres telah memilih S. A. Ganapathy sebagai Pesiden,  Abdullah CD sebagai Naib Presiden dan Chen Lu sebagai Setiausaha.

8) Kesatuan Opera Melayu (KOM).

9) Persatuan Pemandu Teksi (PPT).

10) PETA - Pembela Tanah Air. Ditubuhkan apabila KMM diharamkan pada 18 Jun 1948 oleh pihak penjajah British dengan persetujuan YDP Umno, Onn Jaafar.

11) Majlis Agama Tertinggi Se-Malaysia (MATA) pimpinan Ustaz Abu Bakar Al-Baqir.

Pada tahun 1947, sepuluh tahun sebelum merdeka, PKMM memperkuatkan perjuangan menuntut kemerdekaan dengan bergabung dengan beberapa pertubuhan bukan Islam dan bukan Melayu dan membentuk Barisan Bersatu PUTERA-AMCJA. Dua badan politik utama yang membentuk PUTERA-AMCJA ialah Pusat Tenaga Ra'ayat (PUTERA) dan All-Malaya Council of Joint Action (AMCJA).

PUTERA dianggotai oleh:
1. Malay Nationalist Party (MNP) atau Parti Kebangsaan Melayu Malaya (PKMM)
2. Peasants Union atau Barisan Tani Se-Malaya (BATAS)
3. Angkatan Wanita Sedar (AWAS)
4. Angkatan Pemuda Insaf (API)
dan 70 pertubuhan2 kecil.

AMCJA pula dianggotai oleh:
1. Pan-Malayan Federation of Trade Unions (PMFTU)
2. Malayan Indian Congress (MIC)
3. Malayan Democratic Union
(MDU)
4. Malayan New Democratic Youth League (MNDYL)
5. Malayan People's Anti-Japanese Army Ex-Service Comrades Association (MPAJA)
6. Women's Federation (W's Fed)
bersama Tan Cheng Lock (TCL) sebagai Pengerusi.

Antara gerakan yang dilakukan oleh Barisan Bersatu Putera-AMCJA yang sangat berjaya dan menggugat kedudukan British adalah mogok seluruh Malaya yang dikenali sebagai HARTAL., 1947 yang telah mencatatkan sejarah satu mogok umum, di mana pada hari tersebut, satu aktiviti pun tidak dilakukan oleh seluruh rakyat Malaya.

Putra-AMCJA telah menggubal 10 fasal PERLEMBAGAAN RAKYAT (The People’s Constitution) untuk kemerdekaan. Pada masa yang sama, British telah berpakat dengan elit Melayu yang menubuhkan Pertubuhan Kebangsaan Melayu Bersatu (Perkembar – yang kini dikenali sebagai UMNO), menggubal satu lagi perlembagaan yang dipanggil Perlembagaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu.

British tidak menerima desakan Barisan Bersatu Putera-AMCJA dengan menolak Perlembagaan Rakyat dan sebaliknya menggantikan Malayan Union dengan membentuk Persekutuan Tanah Melayu serta melantik Yang Dipertua Umno, Dato’ Onn Jaafar untuk menerajuinya.

Barisan Bersatu Putera-AMCJA dan seluruh anggota gabungannya, telah diharamkan pada 18 Jun 1948 oleh penjajah British dengan persetujuan Yang Dipertua (YDP) Umno, Dato' Onn Jaafar. Sebelum itu pada tahun 1947, Ahmad Boestamam, salah seorang pemimpin Putera-AMCJA telah dipenjarakan oleh British selama 8 tahun. Tekanan pihak British terhadap kumpulan-kumpulan yang memperjuangkan kemerdekaan itu telah memaksa mereka meneruskan perjuangan bersenjata dari dalam hutan.

British telah mengisytiharkan Darurat pada tahun 1948, dengan alasan menentang gerakan komunis di Malaya dengan menggunakan 'preventive detention' iaitu tahanan tanpa perbicaraan yang kemudian dikuatkuasakan sebagai Akta Keselamatan Dalam Negeri (ISA), dengan mengambil tindakan menangkap sesiapa sahaja yang menentang.

Antara bukti bahawa Darurat 1948 diisytiharkan adalah semata-mata satu tindakan ’pecah perintah’ British adalah lebih 2,800 orang ahli-ahli gabungan Barisan Bersatu Putera-ACMJA ditangkap dibawah ISA, termasuk Ustaz Abu Bakar Al-Baqir pemimpin MATA dan Hizbul Muslimin yang kemudiannya didaftarkan secara rasminya sebagai Parti Islam SeMalaysia (PAS). Mereka bukan komunis, namun tindakan British itu bertujuan melumpuhkan perjuangan rakyat disamping menghidupkan satu parti yang berkuasa sehingga kini iaitu UMNO.

Bendera BATAS

Bendera Sang Saka Merah Putih Malaya Merdeka


 
 Did they purposely miss this out in our school's Sejarah book?

MALAYSIA'S COMING FINANCIAL TSUNAMI

 

Fitch pushes Malaysia’s credit rating outlook to negative

July 31, 2013
Global ratings agency Fitch Ratings has revised Malaysia's sovereign credit rating outlook from stable to negative as the possibility of addressing public finance weaknesses has deteriorated after Election 2013.

The news comes as the Malaysian ringgit slid to three-year lows against the US dollar and 15-year lows against the Singapore dollar, making imports more expensive while exports would be cheaper although exports have slipped.

But it affirmed the country's long-term foreign and local currency issuer default ratings at A- and A, respectively.

“Malaysia’s public finances are its key rating weakness. Federal government debt rose to 53.3% of gross domestic product (GDP) at end-2012, up from 51.6 percent at end-2011 and 39.8 percent at end-2008.
"The general government budget deficit (Fitch basis) widened to 4.7 percent of GDP in 2012 from 3.8 percent in 2011, led by a 19 percent rise in spending on public wages in a pre-election year,” it said.
But Fitch believed that it would be difficult for Putrajaya to achieve its interim 3 percent federal government deficit target for 2015 without additional consolidation measures.

“Fitch sees risks even to the achievement of the agency’s 3.5 percent deficit projection, as this already factors in one percentage point of GDP of spending cuts.

"This leaves Malaysia’s public finances more exposed to any future negative shock,” it said.
It pointed out that Putrajaya's contingent liabilities were on the rise and its debt guaranteed rose to 15.2 percent of GDP by end-2012 from 9.0 percent at end-2008, as state-owned enterprises (SoEs) participated in a government-led investment programme.

"Also, Malaysia's fiscal revenue base is low at 24.7 percent of GDP, against an 'A' range median of 32.8 percent. Fitch has long emphasised two key budgetary vulnerabilities: reliance on petroleum-derived revenues and the high and rising weight of subsidies in expenditure. Fitch estimated that petroleum-derived revenues contributed 33.7 percent of federal revenues in 2012," the ratings agency said.

"We believe the lack of progress on structural budgetary reform could be due to the general elections, resulting in the government delaying its reform. The situation was compounded by the Umno general election that has been set on October 5.

"Indeed, the government has since put on hold its subsidies rationalisation, after it last cut its fuel subsidies in December 2010. This was made worse by fiscal transfer in 2012 and 2013 to help ease people’s financial burden," Fitch said.

It pointed although the subsidies were projected to fall, it remained sizeable and accounts for 18 percent of the revenue in 2013 (+21.3 percent in 2012), which was still uncomfortably high.

"Way back in the early 2000s, the subsidies only accounted for 2.9-7.8 percent of revenue in 2000-2004, compared with an average of 18.0 percent a year in 2008-12.

"We expect the government to resume its fiscal reform once the Umno election is over. This may help to convince Fitch that the government is committed to bring down its budget deficit through fiscal reform including rationalisation of subsidies and implementation of the goods & services tax (GST) to broaden the government’s tax base," it said.

But it also affirmed the Short-Term Foreign Currency IDR at F2 and the Country Ceiling at A. Despite the weaknesses, the rating house also acknowledged the strengths in the composition of Malaysia’s debt and its funding base.

“Federal Government debt is overwhelmingly denominated in local currency (97 percent at end-2012) and has a smooth maturity profile.

"Sovereign funding conditions benefit from deep domestic capital markets and from the role of the broader public sector in funnelling savings to the Government,” it stated.

Fitch also said Malaysia’s credit fundamentals were weak by a range standards, as the average income level of US$10,400 (RM33,597) in 2012 was closer to the BBB range median of US$11,300 than the A median of US$18,600.

“Its overall level of development and standards of governance are also considered weak for its A- rating. Fitch’s Banking System Indicator of bbb suggests the standalone strength of Malaysian banks does not weigh on the credit profile.

However, Malaysia’s high level of private sector leverage is a risk from a credit perspective,” it said, pointing out it reached 118 percent of GDP at end-2012, above the 'A' median 94 percent.

Malaysia’s household debt also rose from a low of 60.4 percent in 2008 to 81.1 percent of GDP in 2012 and further to 82.9 percent in March 2013 but RHB Research said it was set to rise further given that household loans in the banking system continued to outpace the growth of GDP currently.
- July 31, 2013.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/fitch-pushes-malaysias-credit-rating-outlook-to-negative