Toxic Waste In Kuantan

RARE EARTH 17 Dec 2012
The Toxic Waste That's Not In Our Back Yard
By Wendy Bacon

Australian-owned company Lynas is quietly shipping rare earth to a processing plant in Malaysia - without a firm plan in place to dispose of dangerous radioactive waste.

If a manufacturing plant involving radioactive materials moved into your community, one of the first things you would ask is, "what’s going to happen to the waste?"

This is exactly how residents of Kuantan on Malaysia’s east coast reacted when the Australian company Lynas announced plans to build LAMP, the world’s biggest rare earth processing plant in their area.

Several years later, they have no clear answer. Indeed last week, while the plant that will use concentrate imported from Lynas’s rare earth mine at Mount Weld in Western Australia was finally ramping up for production, the Malaysian Government and the company were in direct conflict about what would happen to the waste.

On 8 November, after two years of delays caused by court challenges and inquiries, a halt on a temporary licence granted to protesting citizens in September was lifted. Five days later, Lynas secretly moved 100 containers of rare earth concentrate from a depot at Bilbra Lake and quietly shipped them through Fremantle Port. The containers were unloaded and delivered under police escort to the $800 million plant on 22 November.

Read the rest here: The Toxic Waste That's Not In Our Back Yard

Oh, and by the way, the three Kuantan residents have failed their bid to obtain a stay of the government’s decision to issue the temporary operating licence (TOL) to Lynas Malaysia.

The judges at the Court of Appeal upheld the Kuantan High Court decision as “correct in fact and in law" and have now ordered costs of RM20,000 to be paid by the residents.

Half was awarded to jointly to Lynas Malaysia and Lynas Corporation (the Australian side), and the rest to science, technology and innovation minister and the Atomic Energy Licensing Board.

That is Malaysian justice for you.

BERSIH Not Unlawful After All

The Kuala Lumpur High Court has quashed the home minister's declaration on July 1 last year that the Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (Bersih) is an "unlawful" organisation.

However, the court did not grant the two prayers sought by Bersih for the coalition to be registered.

Justice Rohana Yusof in her decision this morning said Bersih has successfully proven its case in challenging the declaration.

She also ruled that Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein’s declaration was "tainted with irrationality".

"Hence, we are allowing the applicant's application (for judicial review of the government's declaration), with no order as to costs," she said.

In her 30-page judgment, the judge narrated the history of the application that challenged Hishammuddin's decision to declare the coalition of NGOs to be an unlawful organisation.

Despite the declaration, she noted, the authorities had continued to meet with Bersih officials.

“There was negotiation between the applicant and the respondent (government) as to the location of the July 9 rally,” she said.

“There was an audience with (the Agong for) the first applicant (Bersih co-chairperson Ambiga Sreenevasan) and there was no censure of Bersih (in conducting) its activities (the July 9, 2011 rally) as scheduled.”

The court had further taken judicial notice that Hishammuddin had made a public statement to allow the Bersih 3.0 rally to proceed on April 28 this year.

“Even if it can be said that Bersih was endangering security before the order was made, it cannot be the case that - after one week - such reason was no longer valid or applicable.

“In short, Bersih cannot be a society used for purposes detrimental to security on July 1, 2011 - and then, no longer so a week later. Even if that is so, then the declaration should have been lifted accordingly.”

Legality Status Decision For BERSIH 2.0

A reminder for the judicial review tomorrow.

Date: 24 July 2012
Time: 9AM
Venue: Court RKKK2, 3rd Floor, Mahkamah Jalan Duta

Do come and lend your support.

Translating The Gobbledegook

Razak Baginda may have motive to kill Altantuya but...

... the answer hangs in the air. Or in a 70-page judgment.

Most people don't believe he did it anyway.

They tend to believe someone else was responsible.

After all, you don't summon military commandos to resolve a civil matter of blackmail and stalking. You call in the police.

Of course, you certainly don't erase or confiscate all immigration records of her entering or leaving the country. Not when there are photographic evidences documented all over.

You don't get rid of the nuisance by blowing her up with government-owned C4 explosives. You file a police report or maybe even press charges in court.

Which is why most people tend to look in the direction of the defence minister at that time.

But hey, I'm not saying anything. No more than the 70-page judgment.

Washington Post On Anwar And Democracy In Malaysia

An editorial opinion by the Washington Post on Anwar Ibrahim's ludicrous case.

ON MONDAY a struggle over human rights and democracy will come to a head in an important Muslim country.

The site is not Egypt or Turkey but Malaysia, a country of 28 million that, as it has prospered economically, has grown an opposition movement that is pressing an authoritarian regime to share power.

The opposition’s leader is Anwar Ibrahim, whose multiethnic alliance shocked the ruling party in several state elections in 2008 and who has a chance to oust Prime Minister Najib Razak in national elections expected in the next few months, if the vote is free and fair.

All that explains why on Monday Mr. Anwar will find himself not on the campaign trail but in a courtroom, where he is likely to be given a lengthy prison sentence. The charge is homosexual sodomy, which Malaysia shamefully still treats as a crime.

Read the rest online: A ‘test’ of democracy Malaysia might fail

Bravo UKM4!

The BN government, stupid as it is, has made some good survival decisions in the past. One of them is to silence university students.

Nothing spells firebrand like a young student discarding his teens and embracing his 20s. It's an exciting age, it's a world of revelations.

The Mahathir administration made it illegal for even political science students to be involved in politics. That is tantamount to forbidding an engineering student from undertaking industrial training.

The protest was meek, if anything. So the Act went ahead and the students were silenced.

But no more.

In a landmark decision, Section 15 of the AUKU -- Act disallowing student participation in politics -- was considered unconstitutional. One judge had the moral fortitude and sense of justice.

A lot of people chastised the UKM4 for being on the ground at Hulu Selangor. But they have paved the way for a wrong to finally be corrected.

Does Malaysia Have a Newly Independent Judiciary?

The decision Friday by High Court Justice Syed Ahmad Helmy Syed Ahmad to free the Raja Petra Kamaruddin, the editor of the internet publication Malaysia Today, has kicked off an intense round of speculation in Malaysia that the courts might be breaking loose from the thrall of the United Malays National Organisation, the country’s biggest ethnic political party.

Are the courts free of UMNO's grasp? What do you think? Read more to decide if you agree or disagree.

Razak Baginda Acquitted

We just got our Halloween present from our esteemed government.

Not that it was unexpected - not by a long shot. Masterwordsmith says, "[it] comes as no surprise to me."

Did anyone actually NOT expect Abdul Razak Baginda to be acquitted?

Sometime back, I posted something on Razak Baginda's outburst in court which was never reported in our newspapers for political reasons.

I think Razak Baginda was the fall guy for someone higher up.

But considering this "higher-up" is in such a prominent position of power, all it takes is some pressure on prosecution to drop the case and not investigate too thoroughly.

This situation is repulsive.

There have been some dodgy SMSes flying around. A lot of questions unanswered. Private investigators going missing 'til today.

You know what's going to happen?

This case is going to get dragged on until everyone loses interest.

Malaysia boleh.

Malaysia Is In Distress

Honestly, I don't know who it is out there, who can make a difference.

We need a judiciary with integrity.

We need law enforcement with the courage to do the right thing.

And most of all, we need a government with the people's best interests at heart.

If you are reading this, I beseech you to do something. For the sake of this nation. For the sake of all of us here.

Charge Me, Baby!

Big talk from a big boy!

But we all know good ole Dr M is guilty of a lot of things, judicial manipulation being the least of them.

He's got presence. He's got moxy. Even one hell of a sense of humour. And when the need arises, selective memory.

If it comes to a match between Abdullah and Mahathir, you can expect a whole lot of mud-slinging.

The Real Slim Lingam, Please Stand Up!

Looks like I wrote this - did I?

By JAIME EE

MY fellow lawyers, citizens and other distinguished friends who may have been caught in an incriminating video or two - greetings. Welcome to our workshop titled: 'Never Say Die Even When Your Face Is Staring At You From The Video - henceforth known as the Lingam Defence.'

Now, this is a very interesting strategy, inspired not by a famous brand of chilli sauce, but by a well-known lawyer of the same name across the Causeway currently caught in a judge-fixing scandal. Upon watching a video allegedly of him talking on the phone and being asked to confirm his identity, he told the court, 'It looks like me, and the voice sounds like me,' but would not say if it was him, or not him, or even possibly him in the video.

Now, any armchair litigator or court kaypoh would pooh-pooh him for trying to pull a fast one. But, my friends, we who live by the mantra 'open to interpretation' have found this to be a ground-breaking defence that, with some modifications, can be used not just in court but in all manner of situations that require deflection of blame.

The focus of this workshop then, is to show you how to use the Lingam Defence in almost any scenario. For example, in the original case, it could subsequently be argued that if one does not look at oneself in the mirror all the time, it is entirely possible to look at a video and think 'that can't be me', especially if one's mental picture of oneself is 20kg lighter and with a more trendy hairstyle. Alternatively, one could also be struggling with philosophical issues, hence he could be referring to himself in the metaphysical sense as in 'Is that really me in the mirror? Or is that just someone else with the same face?'

Similarly, depending on what situation you find yourself in, the same principles can apply. Say, for example, you are presented with a video of yourself having sex with a florist-cum-personal friend. You could delay a public resignation by arguing, 'It looks like me and uh, sounds like me, wait a minute, oh wow, is that really me? Am I that athletic? I didn't know I could do that . . . no no that definitely can't be me. But you know, if it was me, I think I'm pretty hot. But I'm not saying it's me.'

Or, in another scenario where you are caught feeding monkeys in the nature reserve and are being fined $4,000. 'Sir, it may look like me and sound like I was feeding the monkeys, but have you considered the possibility that I was minding my own business when a monkey which did not like the bread someone else gave him, came and shoved it in my hand just before I was filmed? It sounds like I was saying 'here, monkey, have some bread', I was actually saying, 'Eee, monkey, loathsome breed'. Hence, I feel that you should send this tape to an overseas expert for verification and to prove that it was a human who taped it and not another monkey.'

Or, in the case of a chikungunya-carrying mosquito mistaken for a dengue-causing one: 'It looks like me and sounds like me, the resemblance is so uncanny that when I look in the mirror I try to swat myself.'

And there you have it. The Lingam Defence workshop - it looks and sounds like a workshop, but it may or may not have been one. We might offer more, but I can't confirm or deny it.

"It Looks And Sounds Like Me!!"

I come from a family that's crawling with lawyers.

I've heard every single method of hedging around the question in desperate attempts not to perjure oneself.

Or so I thought.

This is the first time I've ever heard anyone utter, "By golly, it looks and sounds like me, mate!!" upon seeing himself on tape.

Check out the highly amusing report in the Sun:

The commission also wanted to know the position taken by Lingam after the submission of evidence by two main witnesses - Loh and CyberSecurity Sdn Bhd forensics digital analyst Mohd Zabri Adil Talib - if the person in the video clip was the lawyer himself.

Commission member Datuk Mahadev Shankar asked Lingam’s lawyer, R. Thayalan, if Lingam admitted it was him who appeared in the clip.

"Is it your position that your client is not him in the clip?" asked Mahadev.

"He said it looks and sounds like him in the clip," replied Thayalan.

Mahadev pressed Thayalan further and asked if Lingam admitted the details which appeared in the transcript was uttered by Lingam.

"I have to take instructions from him, but his stand now is that it looks and sounds like him," replied Thayalan.

Commissioner Tan Sri Steve Shim Lip Kion also pursued the issue and asked Thayalan to explain his reply.

"What do you mean, look like him… can you explain," said Shim.

"The image is not clear ... let me get back to him … that was his stand," said Thayalan.

I'm sure there must be a very good explanation.

Severe amnesia, maybe? Along the lines of selective memory loss?

Poor bloke couldn't remember if it was him, in his own house, saying those words in his voice and accent and bombastic vocabulary ("correct, correct, correct").

Oh yeah, Malaysia boleh indeed.

Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus

Now this is a man with honour and integrity.

The man who awarded an unprecedented RM2.5mil in damages to an ex-ISA detainee for having been unlawfully arrested and beaten up during detention.

I decided I wasn't completely qualified and knowledgeable to comment on Justice Hishamudin but Human Rights lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar (whom I recently featured in conjunction with Article 11) has this to say about him:

I have the highest regard and the deepest admiration for this man of principle. I moved the Court for the order suspending the re-arrest Ghani Haroon and Gobalakrishnan.

Justice Hishamudin’s sense of fair play and justice came to the fore that day as he recognized that a re-arrest would be inhumane. It was a defining moment, and it shaped my understanding of how far the interests of justice could be advanced with a just man on the bench.

He embodies all the qualities that a Judge should have. His humility, patience and judicious temperament are well known at the Bar as is his willingness to learn from the lawyers appearing before him.

Which takes me to my point. With all these qualities and more, why is Justice Hishamudin still a High Court judge? He was elevated to the High Court bench in 1995. He has an excellent track record. Judges elevated after him have made it to the Federal Court, a court in which Justice Hishmudin should be sitting.

Perhaps it is these very qualities, cherished by the Bar, that has kept Justice Hishamudin in the High Court.

Read the whole post here, it is too good to miss. It especially points out why this ruling does NOT represent an independent judiciary.