Penang Turf Club – a central park for the people? 20 Oct 4:25 PM (2 days ago)
The state has a great opportunity to do something for the people. But will it? Or will it pander to developers’ interests?
Remember, many moons ago, the state granted this land for a pittance as it was originally zoned for recreational use for the people (horse racing).
But then, in the 2000s, during Barisan Nasional rule, some ‘wise guy’ surreptitiously rezoned this land as “mixed development”, making a huge unrealised revaluation profit for certain parties. What a loss to the state/public coffers/ordinary people!
This video by Andrew Han
Did you really think it was all ‘free of charge’? 20 Sep 2:50 AM (last month)
Penang quit rent for residential areas will rise by 29–127%, so says a news report.
I am not surprised. Did you really think all those mega-projects, questionable land deals, easy reclamation rights (classified as freehold instead of leasehold) and lopsided deals, would not come at a price in the end? That it would not hurt your pockets in the long run?
What has happened to Penang’s reserves, which have dwindled from RM1.2bn in 2019 to just RM156m in 2024? Tell us, where did all that money go?
For instance, how much has the state spent on CCTV cameras since 2008? How much did the state have to pay for highway construction?
Who pays for the construction of the LRT (when the federal government debt is already RM1.3tn)? Who do you think? What happened to that financing model – that no public funds would be involved in the building of the infrastructure as it would all be financed by sales of reclaimed land? Kaput.
And what happens if the proposed LRT fails to meet ridership projections? Who absorbs the losses in the end? Guess who. It’s not difficult.
It really is not rocket science. This is what happens when you spend beyond your means.
Shocking rush to pass procurement bill unbecoming of ‘reformist’ government 29 Aug 3:11 PM (last month)
We in Aliran are alarmed at today’s (28 August) rushed second reading and vote on the Government Procurement Bill 2025 in Parliament. This comes just three days before we celebrate National Day.
The 125-63 vote, which prompted opposition MPs to stage a walkout, represents a troubling departure from the reformist principles that some of those in government today once claimed to champion.
The speedy handling of this bill is totally unbecoming of a government that came to power on an anti-corruption and good governance platform.
For legislation that will govern billions of ringgit in public spending, many interested parties – including MPs, civil society groups, business groups and the public – were given little meaningful opportunity or time to scrutinise and provide input on this 93-clause bill.
This hasty approach mirrors the authoritarian tendencies that reform movements seek to dismantle.
A truly reformist government would have ensured extensive consultations, public hearings and transparency ahead of the tabling of the bill, especially on such a critical area. It would have sought vetting by a parliamentary select committee. It would also have provided sufficient time for a thorough parliamentary debate.
Fundamental flaws
Despite years of civil society advocacy for strong procurement laws following endless corruption scandals, this bill institutionalises the very weaknesses that have plagued Malaysia’s governance.
It unfortunately grants the finance minister and state chief ministers extraordinary discretion over procurement contracts above RM50m for goods and services and RM100m for works – with no upper limit. This shocking concentration of power is unbelievable, especially coming from a ‘reformist’ government.
Unlike procurement board members who face conflict-of-interest restrictions, these top ministers operate without such safeguards despite holding far greater authority.
READ MORE:Cracking down on misused public funds
The bill also establishes an appeal tribunal that is anything but independent. The very minister whose decisions may be challenged appoints its members, sets its procedures and controls its secretariat. How can this be? It creates a sham accountability mechanism where the executive essentially reviews itself.
The bill is riddled with provisions that allow ministers to exempt entire programmes from its application, bypass registration requirements (for politically connected actors?) and invoke extraordinary powers with no external oversight.
These loopholes render the bill’s supposed safeguards meaningless.
The bill’s concentration of power in the finance minister and state chief ministers carries chilling echoes of the 1MDB scandal. The 1MDB case showed how concentrated executive power over government spending – whether through state-owned entities or direct procurement – creates opportunities for staggering corruption.
By vesting similar unchecked discretion in future finance ministers over high-value procurement contracts, this bill recreates the very conditions that enabled 1MDB-type abuses in the past.
Government procurement extends far beyond buying office computers and stationery. It encompasses mega-projects for infrastructure projects, land reclamation construction contracts, IT systems and professional services that could cost billions of ringgit.
Without proper checks and balances, these contracts could become vehicles for rent-seeking, kickbacks and ‘commissions’, just as 1MDB’s procurement decisions facilitated massive financial misconduct.
While today’s vote in Parliament is a severe setback, opportunities remain to fix this deeply flawed legislation.
But it requires sustained public pressure ahead of the third reading and the Senate hearings. The public must voice their concerns to influence the final debates and demand a reconsideration of the most problematic provisions.
Senators can’t sit back. They should propose meaningful amendments or reject the bill entirely instead of rubber-stamping it or voting along party lines.
The committee stage review also offers an opportunity for detailed scrutiny and amendment of specific clauses that concentrate power, create conflicts of interest and undermine transparency.
Aliran calls on the government to:
- Allow genuine consultation and amendment during the Senate review process.
- Remove provisions that concentrate enormous unchecked power in the finance minister and state chief ministers.
- Establish truly independent oversight and appeals mechanisms.
- Close any loopholes that allow circumvention of procurement safeguards.
- Subject all high-value procurement and mega-projects to meaningful transparency requirements.
- Introduce iron-clad clauses to serve as a deterrent to present and future finance ministers and chief ministers.
The people of Malaysia deserve a procurement law that serves the public interest – not one that institutionalises the status quo or makes it worse.
The government must choose whether it will honour its reform commitments or worsen the conditions that allowed rampant corruption to flourish.
To meaningfully celebrate Merdeka for the peninsula and National Day on 31 August, let us be mindful of the need for genuine transparency and accountability.
Let us refrain from approving laws that will be potential enablers for abuse of power and corruption.
Merdeka must be for all and benefit all.
From the Aliran team
28 August 2025
Rush to build in Penang! High-density projects sprouting without gazetted local plan 26 Jul 3:59 AM (2 months ago)
More and more people in Penang are demanding transparency as mega-projects advance without proper local plan oversight
This piece, published in Aliran, was written by Rebecca Duckett.
Local residents are stakeholders in the development of Penang. Yet Penang Island has no gazetted local plan.
Development projects receive approval without transparency or accountability despite the public’s right to engage in future plans within their own neighbourhoods.
Transparency and public participation, as required in any local plan, is crucial to the democratic process to ensure transparency and accountability by the authorities. Read the full article on the Aliran website.
Do you agree? Is it a serious problem? Share your thoughts below.
Safeguarding judicial independence and democratic integrity 14 Jul 5:40 PM (3 months ago)
A statement from Aliran:
Aliran acknowledges that many judges of wisdom and integrity have served our country. Their contributions have shaped our legal landscape and fortified our constitutional values.
These judges have also expanded on those values to recognise new and essential civil rights to meet changing needs. These include the rights to education, to information and to privacy.
Yet, the institution they served has not escaped controversy. The shameful dismissal of Lord President Salleh Abas, the country’s top judge, in 1988 remains a scar on our judicial history. That event is a constant reminder of the judiciary’s vulnerability to executive overreach.
Since then, the judiciary has limped through episodes of public distrust. This was the case when it was dogged by allegations of internal influence and external pressure.
More recently, the retiring Chief Justice, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, at the Opening of the Legal Year 2025, reflected on the vilification and undue criticism she encountered, not only in her official capacity, but personally (see video at the top).
Her remarks point to the continuing vulnerability of the judiciary and its incumbents to external forces.
The recent wave of public concern, including calls for a royal commission of inquiry, is disquieting. It shows that public trust in our system of administration of justice continues to waver.
And not without reason. We have seen a spate of corruption prosecutions or charges against high-profile politicians being discontinued or dropped. The spate of “DNAAs” (discharges not amounting to acquittals) has raised public cynicism of the legal system to new heights.
Judicial independence and the separation of powers are not just embellishments. They are the pillars that hold up our democratic way of life. Without the separation of powers, no institution can check another when rights are violated or laws bent to serve the interests of the few.
Without an impartial judiciary, the people have no true safeguard against abuse of legislative or executive power. Without an independent judiciary, a society risks the erosion of the rule of law, compromised human rights and increased corruption.
An independent judiciary ensures an impartial application of the law, holding all actors, including the government, accountable. Conversely, a lack of judicial independence could lead to arbitrary governance, abuse of power, and loss of public trust in the justice system.
Aliran believes the current laws do not protect judicial appointments enough from executive influence. The structural weakness in the laws guiding judicial appointments could undermine democracy itself. The appointment of judges must be through a process over which the executive has no influence.
We call for legislation that creates a truly independent appointments process: one that reflects transparency, accountability and constitutional integrity. The process must be designed to serve the people – not political interests.
Aliran remains steadfast in our belief that a just society demands an independent judiciary and a true separation of powers. This calls for an unwavering commitment to democratic principles.
These are the rights of the people of Malaysia, and it is our responsibility to defend them.
Aliran executive committee
13 July 2025
What New York’s Mamdani can teach Malaysia’s Madani 4 Jul 1:49 PM (3 months ago)
Imagine this: you are watching a political debate and one of the candidates has to spell out his own name because his rival cannot get it right.
“The name is Mamdani, M-A-M-D-A-N-I.” (This of course has been turned into a meme, complete with dance moves, that has swept across US social media.)
Mamdani. It almost sounds like Madani, that grand vision that Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has touted with its six noble values of sustainability, compassion, respect, innovation, prosperity and trust.
Yet, something is different. While Malaysia’s political leaders give us airy-fairy slogans and pie-in-the-sky visions, Zohran Mamdani has given New Yorkers something else – specific promises on issues that matter most to them. He had no memorable slogans for them like 1New York or Keluarga New York (New York Family).
Full article on Aliran website
Focus on bus network rather than RM17bn LRT 14 Jun 2:06 AM (4 months ago)
Check out this Rapid Penang mini-bus – instead of rushing to start the RM17bn elevated light rail project that risk turning into a loss-making venture.
At a time when the nation is saddled with so much debt, do we really want to spend even more for a rigid, inflexible pricey elevated light rail? Such a system would burden the nation with even more debt.
And what happens when the ridership projections are not met? Who do you think will bear the burden of the debt and annual deficits? The federal government? The state government? Or you, through higher fares, taxes and other charges….
Wouldn’t it be better to focus on upgrading the bus network with more buses, bus lanes, first-and-last-mile connectivity, a reliable frequency….
(Thanks to Luca for the heads-up on the video.)
MBI debacle: Why did it take so long to crack down? 10 Jun 4:10 AM (4 months ago)
Finally, it appears that China-Malaysia authorities are cracking down on the infamous MBI scheme. But what took them so long?
Years ago, everyone and his (her) dog/cat in Penang already knew something was up. It didn’t take a genius to figure out what was going on.
Small get-rich-quick schemes were busted. But MBI continued as the ‘good times’ rolled on. Some of those linked to MBI were operating openly within a stone’s throw and full view of Komtar.
But deep down we knew the good times would not last forever.
Now, some 11 million ‘investors’ have suffered including a couple of million perhaps in China.
The total amount these investors lost could rival or surpass what was lost in the 1MDB case.
How far did the MBI tentacles spread? Where did the billions ‘invested’ end up? What were the funds used for? Was MBI linked to any politician and if so, who?
Some of those linked to MBI were operating openly within a stone’s throw and full view of Komtar.
Did Bank Negara do enough to protect the interests of the public in Malaysia and beyond? What about the MACC?
Check out this CNA article: China-Malaysia crackdown on alleged Ponzi scheme rattles Penang’s corporate, political circles
Mano Maniam – more than just Uncle Chan, he had a dream for Malaysia 1 Jun 12:05 AM (4 months ago)
Fans of Kopitiam, the TV series around the turn of the century, may recall the wise and affable Uncle Chan bantering with his friends at a local coffeeshop.
The popular sitcom introduced Mano to the masses beyond audiences in Malaysian theatre halls, where he was already an established figure.
But there was more to Mano than the well-documented path he took as stage actor and director. Less well known was his activism. Mano was also a member of the social reform group Aliran, whose members today are mourning his loss. Full article on Aliran website
Reform roadmap welcome but key appointments process remains unclear 29 May 2:27 AM (4 months ago)
We welcome the government’s initiative to publish the “PetaRI” institutional reform roadmap.
This represents a positive first step towards transparent governance. It allows civil society to monitor progress and hold the administration accountable for any delays more effectively.
The digital accessibility is commendable, as is the commitment to stakeholder engagement sessions. However, we require greater transparency about how effective these consultations have been. Full article on the Aliran website.