EP12 #KenaSoal | Tabung Najib, Kenyataan KPM-MITI, Teknokrat Dalam Politik, Rumah Untuk Anak Muda

Keluar Sekejap

This episode of Keluar Sekejap features a debate between representatives from UMNO and PKR regarding the political stability of Malaysia's U

Key takeaways

• The pardon for Dato' Sri Najib Razak is discussed as a conditional process involving a RM50 million requirement.
• Discrepancies between KPM and MITI statements regarding Bumiputera equity are cited as evidence of friction within the current cabinet.

Main topics

• Najib Razak's Pardon
• Inter-ministry communication conflicts

Notable quotes

The right of a prisoner to ask for penitentiary is the right that is stipulated under the institution.

Conclusion

The episode underscores the complexity of managing a multi-party coali

Transcript preview

Speaker 1 (0:10) Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh and salam sejahtera. Selamat datang ke episode kena soal episode ke-12 dengan kerjasama FMT di bawah inisiatif Future Speaks episode ini. Kalau korang nak tahu, sebulan sekali inisiatif bersama FMT ini. to present more young leaders, regardless of political background, to change their views and ideas in podcast format. So, before the episode got asked, Zaidil, he... Speaker 1 (0:56) So, hari ini saya bersama dua wanita. Speaker 1 (1:15) So, I invite the first one from the former Chief of the Amno Women's Movement. Speaker 1 (1:23) Saudari Shamilia. Hi. Speaker 4 (1:25) Hi. Assalamualaikum. Iman, how are you? Speaker 1 (1:27) Good, good, good. Yang kedua dari PKR. Exko EMK PKR. Saudari Amelia. Speaker 3 (1:35) Assalamualaikum. Hi. Mel juga. Nama sama juga. Dudu Mel. Speaker 1 (1:40) Dudu Madani. Yelah masih lah. Masih, masih, masih. Speaker 1 (1:45) In this episode, we gathered questions from the audience in IG Story to make sure we have an interactive time with our audience. This is compared to the regular episode. So I think we can start because there are a lot of topics that we want to discuss and it's quite heavy. The Speaker 4 (2:07) first Speaker 1 (2:08) topic that was hot last week, very hot. Speaker 2 (2:12) The issue Speaker 1 (2:13) of Dato' Sri Najib's pardon, which was held Speaker 2 (2:16) by Speaker 1 (2:16) the Agong's president, has made Dato' Sri Najib a member of the House of Representatives. Speaker 2 (2:21) And Speaker 1 (2:21) with a condition, by paying RM50 million. So we see there's a smoothies freak question. Why did Anwar once say that he brought Najib's agenda of pardon to the pardoning institution, but now he's seen washing his hands saying this is the power of Agong? And MEM, CHK, walaupun pengampunan Najib kuasa agung, adakah ia keputusan yang selari dengan nilai yang dilawangkan dan dijunjung Pakatan Harapan? Kenapa Pakatan Harapan dilihat let go issue ini? Speaker 2 (2:55) Jadi Speaker 1 (2:55) kalau kita tengok soalan ini, lebih adil untuk Amelia dari PKR untuk jawab lah. We Speaker 4 (3:02) got two Mel here right? Amelia from PKR, Mel from UMNO. So we Speaker 1 (3:08) make this episode more interesting. There's a different perspective from PKR and UMNO. Even though it's one government. One Speaker 3 (3:15) government. One government. Still modern. Still modern Speaker 4 (3:17) until the end of the century. Speaker 3 (3:19) I need to mention that. Okay. Speaker 4 (3:22) So Speaker 3 (3:22) I think from this perspective, actually Dato Sri Anwar from the beginning, from 2024 actually. It is consistent that they will bring the petition to the penitentiary. I think it is very clear. Dato' Suyano Abraham has mentioned this many times and it is not a strange thing. Why do I say it is not strange? Because the right of a prisoner to ask for penitentiary is the right that is stipulated under the institution. Any prisoner who wants to ask for Supaya mendapat pengampunan, mereka ini dibenarkan untuk kita kata file petition, memohon. Itu perkara yang biasa. Saya nampak dekat sini, Dato' Sri Anwar sebenarnya he's being fair to every banduan yang nak mohon, termasuklah dalam isu ini bila melibatkan Dato' Sri Najib Razak. Bila mana Dato' Sri Najib Razak nak mohon, masih dibawa petition itu ke lembaga pengampunan. I think he's being fair here. So sebab itu saya rasa walaupun Dato' Sri Anwar yang membawa petition itu, the YDPA is still able to give the forgiveness to the Executive Minister. That is also clear in the Constitution according to Article 42. We cannot interfere in this process because we are a country with a constitution and the YDPA is given the authority to determine that a citizen can be given full forgiveness, house maintenance and so on. That is up to... YDPA Agong. From the perspective of justice or the Hope Association, does this support these values or not? Actually, I think it is consistent with our statement. From the Hope Association's Council, we say the same thing. We also issued the same statement to the AMK. And Dato' Sri Anwar also said the same thing, that we need to respect the process of the institution, the process of this forgiveness, where the power is given to YDPA. But at the same time, we still apply values to fight the corruption. The agenda has never been buried, it is still being carried out. And I think we also need to make it very clear, even though forgiveness is given, it does not mean that the bondage is erased. This is not a full forgiveness, this is a conditional forgiveness. still need to pay RM50 million. It's not a small amount actually. Not everyone has RM50 million. So I think that need to be paid attention to or the community need to understand that these values are still embedded. We are still very strong advocate against corruption and many more cases. in the court's consideration and so on. Even 1MDB is not yet done. So I think that's what we've gained or what we've held on the side of Pakatan Harapan and PKR. Speaker 1 (6:21) For Mel herself, from Amnolah, because now we see on social media, the teams of Pakatan Harapan seem to want to reverse this issue. Speaker 1 (6:34) Salah UMNO. Salah UMNO. UMNO yang meminta. UMNO yang meminta. Bagaimana Mel melihat perkara ini dari sudut... Siti Kawan, Kerajaan Perpaduan sekarang inilah. Speaker 4 (6:45) Alright. Mungkin saya boleh sentuh sikit on soalan yang kenapa boleh smoothies freak ni boleh timbulkan at first place kan. And then ada satu lagi soalan mengatakan adakah Pakatan Harapan mungkin lari daripada perjuangan sebenar kerana isu pengampunan Dato' Sri Najib Razak ni merupakan saya rasa dulunya perjuangan yang mereka mau mengambil alih kerajaan dengan beberapa isu yang sangat hangat. Isu 1MDB dan juga related dengan beberapa jenayah yang lain. When we see Datuk Seri Najib Razak being punished and getting the punishment and being reduced. And of course from the people who support Datuk Seri Najib Razak. Because Datuk Seri Najib Razak is not a small leader. He is one of the big leaders, namely the previous President of the Party. And it is necessary that there are supporters who demand justice or demand anything. related to Dato' Sri Najib Razak to be considered and brought to justice as fair as possible. So I think that maybe there is a right or let it be between the experts and supporters to do what is possible and as normal as possible. How did the supporters from Pakatan Harapan themselves want to release Dato' Sri Anwar Ibrahim from prison and so on. But maybe we can look, if we look at the question, why is this thing considered legal? the hope of this movement to run away from the struggle, or as if they want to legalize this issue. Maybe, from my point of view, as a member of UMNO, we see that it was true, Dato' Sri Anwar Ibrahim stated in the parliament, oh, we try to bring this issue because it was left in the agenda of the Pembangunan. So we brought, Dato' Sri Anwar Ibrahim himself brought the Pembangunan to Yanggi Petok Agong. And when we look at it later, there are some phases or things that arise. For example, like the Tita Addendum. Speaker 2 (8:32) Where Speaker 4 (8:33) there is a Tita Addendum, but there are some phases that are delayed. Or there are some conflicts that occur around the journey that cause misunderstanding between the UMNO members and the Tahrirat. And that's where the controversy started, Iman. If we notice, there were people demoing in front of the parliament and the palace to ask if the Adendum was true or not. This Adendum was made at that time. And now, when we have witnessed the Adendum, we need to implement it as soon as possible. Maybe if it's true, then now it's proven what has been stated in the Adendum, that is, the provision of protection in the house for Dato' Srinaji Razad was implemented. But I think why people can say or why Dato' Sri Anwar wants to discuss this issue, maybe this is my view as a member Speaker 3 (9:25) of the Speaker 4 (9:25) Amno. Maybe because before 2018, Pakatan Harapan used this issue to, the sentence of falling is very painful, but maybe to fall the government at that time, using the issue of Dato' Sri Najib Razak and also the existing cases. So, bila dah ada dalam kepimpinan ataupun menjadi Perdana Menteri, why you seems like? to bring back or to correct the things that you used to fight for. So maybe those things are what made one of the... Why did this question arise? That's my view as well, at the first place. Speaker 1 (9:58) But if we look at it, if Pakatan Harapan itself says this is a great power, Speaker 2 (10:05) but Speaker 1 (10:05) why did Anthony Lok need to place an order from the DAP itself? And it seems that Anthony Lok and the DAP don't agree with this. And Hana Yoh herself is in the Assembly and did not release any statements. And how do you see this matter? Speaker 3 (10:26) Mel too. Mel where? Mel Speaker 4 (10:28) PKR? Okay, Speaker 3 (10:29) I think in a democratic country, actually all people are given the right to speak and give their own opinions. Same goes for the PKR and UMNO. Actually, it's okay to give our opinion. Some agree, some disagree. That is normal. But what we need to know is that we need to respect that process. We acknowledge, yes, the process is there, we respect it. But if we agree or not, we can still give our opinion. So I think that's what happens in the case where Anthony Lok placed the sentence. I think this issue is not a small issue. Because as Mel said earlier, the issue of Dato' Sri Najib has been around for Speaker 1 (11:11) a Speaker 3 (11:11) long Speaker 1 (11:11) time. Speaker 3 (11:11) We are talking about a new issue and we are against corruption and crime issues that have affected 1MDB, SRC, International and so on. So it is the establishment of DAP. It is not necessary for everyone to place an order here because it still wants to maintain this government and ensure that the government is stable until the end. Until the end of Speaker 4 (11:37) the day. Speaker 3 (11:37) Until the end Speaker 4 (11:37) of Speaker 3 (11:37) the day. Maybe the next day. We don't know, God willing. So I think that is a strong signal from the DAP as well. When they say their stance. And that's not wrong. That should be respected for me. And it's not an easy decision that Anthony Loke made to place the position. Because when we talk about ministers, everyone wants to be a minister. A good Speaker 4 (12:01) chair. Speaker 3 (12:01) A good chair. And the fact that you... Remove yourself from that position. It's not something that everyone can do, I think. So, it has to be respected by the DAP. Speaker 1 (12:12) So, last week, the issue of the 50 million condition, we saw UMNO itself opening the bank. Tolidari TE, Dato' Sri Najib Razak. To collect funds. So there's a question from Pravin Markandu. Are you donating to Najib's house arrest fund? Is yes or no? Why? So Mel can go first. I as Speaker 4 (12:40) Aliamno. Because I hold to one quote. When we do something good, if possible, don't spread it. So that the good thing doesn't become something that reacts to people out there. So whether I'm a Derma or not, it's between me and God only. But maybe I can share a few points about it. Because I see this thing is very viral on Thread or any application out there. Which is they say that why you need to donate to people who are in trouble. Or why you need to open that in Speaker 2 (13:09) the Speaker 4 (13:09) sense that you help and so on. This is my view as a person, where I think that is the right. ... Speaker 4 (13:42) It's not just a big deal, but I think it's the right of the politicians or supporters to make this solidarity fund. That's the first thing. Second, if we look at it, there are people who comment, why are we as B40 people, to donate to people who are T20? For me, the right to donate or to donate is each person's right. If we feel that we want to donate sincerely, there is no problem. So maybe a little bit of my view to Pakatan Harapan or any other organisation, meaning any other organisation that does not support this solidarity team, I think you also need to see what has happened before this. Even though there are two different cases, for example, the donation about Harapan Bank, or the donation about Tony Pua case, or any other case from the leaders themselves, I'm sure at that time, there might have been from our community, sorry, I don't know, I think it's not fair. But it's not questioning until we can say it's embarrassing or questioning until it's not fair. So I think if this thing about the fund is happening and someone is defending it, let it be. I mean, it's their right as supporters and also the right to make solidarity to the party leaders. Speaker 1 (15:02) That's it. Speaker 1 (15:04) The view of the bank is like this. Because before, Dato Sri Anwar had a bank. I noticed that. Speaker 3 (15:11) Okay, for me, in this case, if Melia doesn't want to tell what her stance is, whether she's a donor or not, but I'm very clear with my stance, which is I'm not a donor to Dato Sri Najib's solidarity bank, on a few factors. The first is, Because I principally disagree with giving our hard-earned money to those who have betrayed the people of Malaysia. That's the first thing. Because I say betrayed here, where when we see the case, it's not a new case that has been discussed. The case has entered the court and was suspended and sentenced. And Dato' Najib Razak has also... go through for several years in prison. So for me, that is a clear crime that has been committed and as a Malaysian citizen, I also have the right to not, to take the approach to not donate to the fund. That's my stance. And secondly, I myself was affected by the 1MDB and SRC International cases when I shared on my social media, personal social media, I have shared my experience where in 2015-2016, I was informed that I could not continue my studies in the United Kingdom due to the lack of money from the government at that time. After a few years, when I found out about this case, namely 1MDB, SRC and so on, I felt so frustrated and disappointed. Because I think I am the most vulnerable party, we can say, where we cannot continue our studies abroad on that fact. But at the same time, we know there are issues of corruption that happen behind the scenes. And it's not merely corruption, it's crime. It's crime that is faced in court. So that's my approach. I don't donate to the bank. Speaker 1 (17:14) Okay. So we saw earlier, there was a Speaker 3 (17:18) lot Speaker 1 (17:18) of dynamics in the issue of Dato' Srinajib and it's still in the process of dissolving. And until now, we still haven't seen the house's Speaker 4 (17:27) maintenance. Speaker 1 (17:27) Because now Speaker 4 (17:29) the debt has only reached RM1 million. Speaker 3 (17:33) So Speaker 4 (17:33) we're Speaker 1 (17:36) still seeing this issue from time to time and hopefully KF will... Speaker 1 (18:06) So, I think in this issue, we... We should have rejected the facts first. Because we ourselves, until now, still don't Speaker 2 (18:16) know. Speaker 1 (18:16) We Speaker 2 (18:16) still Speaker 1 (18:16) don't know. Speaker 3 (18:17) But Speaker 1 (18:17) I feel very disappointed. And frankly, a bit awkward. When we look at the ministry and the ministry, they all release different statements. If we look at the previous KKDW and MOF, Speaker 3 (18:31) now Speaker 1 (18:32) MITI and KPM. Speaker 3 (18:33) And I Speaker 1 (18:35) feel a bit embarrassed for a government administration, one government. This is what we're talking about one government, talking about one cabinet, about one administration itself. And from there, I think a lot of questions arise. How does a government want to function efficiently? Speaker 4 (18:55) And Speaker 1 (18:56) how do civil servants want to... Because Speaker 4 (19:00) both are coming from the same government. But the statements are different. Because I Speaker 1 (19:05) think at the end of the day, the formula of the United Kingdom is already difficult to