That special relationship between the two men led to China-born Chan and his family moving to Malaysia, where he eventually became a citizen. It was Chan who helped several Malaysian footballers, such as Chow Chee Keong and Lim Fung Kee, when they turned professional in Hong Kong during the 1970s .

A well-connected man, with links to political and business circles in southern China, his passions are football and food. He talked fondly of the Merdeka soccer tournament, which he used to be involved in, but is sad that the tournament has lost its shine.

"You must try the shark's fin soup in this restaurant, they don't use monosodium glutamate," said the health-conscious sifu, who reminded me of the late actor Kuan Tak Heng, who played the legendary kungfu master Wong Fei Hoong in the movie classics.

I am often told that shark's fin soup is tasteless without the MSG. Well, leave it to the best chefs in Hong Kong and they can prove the critics of this culinary delight wrong.

In Hong Kong, as in many Asian countries, food is a serious subject. It can even become emotional if the subject turns to shark's fin soup, particularly among traditionalist Chinese food lovers.

Last week, the subject was a major item in Hong Kong newspapers in yet another spat between conservationists and shark's fin traders and food lovers.

The former said Hong Kong's efforts to control the shipment of shark's fins had fallen short, especially the white shark, great white shark and basking shark, all of which are protected by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna.

The three species face extinction from what conservationists estimate is a 100 million sharks a year cull to meet the demand for shark's fin soup, with local conservationist Brian Darvell pushing for laws to restrict the trade.

The debate has taken an interesting twist because Chiu Ching Cheung, the chairman of the Shark's Fin Trade Merchants Association, has dismissed the allegation. "Basking sharks, whale sharks and great white sharks … their fins are too big and, therefore, not very popular in the market. Their fins are also not very tasty," he said, adding that the conservationists did not seem to know this.

He also dismissed the argument that fishermen only slash the fins of the sharks before they were dumped overboard, saying every part of the shark was used in typical Chinese fashion.

Chiu is upset that environmental groups were allegedly presenting misleading information to make traders look bad, saying extinction was not determined by environmentalists but experts with real figures.

But in a highly competitive city, where consumerism is king, the campaign by the conservationists is an uphill battle. The older Chinese in Hong Kong even see the campaign as interference from white busybodies.

They snubbed the decision of Hong Kong Disneyland not to serve shark's fin soup at its restaurants following pressure from the conservationists even as its competitor Sea World reportedly allowed the dish to be served at its place.

The theme parks have waged a price war for wedding packages, with Sea World offering couples the opportunity to take pictures with dolphins. The more adventurous can even take underwater photos with the sharks but the punch line is they can swim with the sharks and eat the shark's fins too, not necessarily the ones there.

In a symbolic move, Hong Kong University has banned shark's fin dishes on its campus and said it would not reimburse staff for the delicacy consumed at official banquets.

A green group, meanwhile, has asked telecommunications company PCCW to withdraw shark's fin from its promotional gifts following a complaint against the city's largest fixed-line telephone service provider.

PCCW is offering gift packs, including shark's fin and fried mushrooms, to customers who sign up for its fixed-line services for 12 months. A company spokesman has declined to say whether it plans to withdraw the package, nor would it say if it would ban it at company business banquets.

Even the Hong Kong government has been dragged into the debate with the World Wide Fund for Nature, Hong Kong, lambasting the government for its failure to ban shark's fin as the city is the leading consumer in the world of this product.

Aware of the sensitivity, a coral reef specialist Paul Hodgson said he did not want the people of Hong Kong to stop eating shark's fin and that his activism did not come from a distaste for Chinese culinary tradition.

"I will fight for a person's right to eat shark's fin – as long as it's sustainable," he said.

As I prepared to leave Hong Kong for home, a friend telephoned to invite me for a breakfast of dim sum, saying I should try the yee chee siew mai, or shark's fin dumpling. Looks like it's going to be tough for the conservationists.

Religious zealots who claim they are carrying out God's orders are not confined to Muslims, although the Western media has given extensive coverage to this group of people.

In the 1980s, there was a group of Christian fanatics who stockpiled firearms and cyanide with the aim of poisoning major city water supplies in the United States. Their targets were homosexuals, blacks and Jews. Ten years later, there was another group which plotted to bomb the Oklahoma City Federal Building.

In both instances, these fanatics also talked about bringing down the "Zionist-occupied" government and multilateral institutions and replacing them with Christian ones.

Strangely, the al-Qaeda also used the Zionist conspiracy theory to win support while their sympathisers see a Jewish hand behind every decision made by the Western powers.

In her book, Terror in The Name of God, Harvard University terrorism expert Jessica Stern spoke to Christian, Islamic and Jewish extremists to find out why religious militants killed.

The author wanted to know why people, who spend all their time reading religious books which emphasise love, peace and forgiveness, could end up becoming evil people who kill in the name of their faith.

These are supposed to be do-gooders who know their religious books better than many of us and live a morally upright way of life but yet they end up as devils.

There seems to be some common pattern, even if their faiths differ. All want to get rid of the world's secularism, humanism, materialism, the Jews, the blacks, gays and liberals. Their logic is simple – get rid of them and there will be peace. If necessary, use force.

People who do not subscribe to their interpretations of their religions are either infidels or sinners. In their eyes, their faiths are being threatened and their actions are justified to purify the world of these corrupting influences.

In the case of the Christian terrorists, Stern spoke to a former terrorist who has been released from prison and who now lives in a trailer park. He spends a lot of time in meditation and prayer.

He is an accomplished student of the Scriptures and is obsessed with good and evil. But he once was involved in a shoot-out with federal agents in a rural compound in Arkansas.

In the case of the Muslim terrorists, she found that these terrorists argued that they found the US-led new world order "humiliating" to Muslims and that their faith was under attack.

One Hezbollah militant told Stern that America's way of life was motivated by evil and overly materialistic.

The use of religion, however, is not confined to terrorists but also politicians to win votes and, in many ways, to prevent themselves from being criticised by voters and supporters.

I remember attending a ceramah of an opposition party in a small village in Terengganu some years back and the fiery speaker told his listeners that they would go to hell if they gave their vote to the other side.

Intimidation and pressure in the name of religion and even race are used by these zealots to exert their influence. Not many of us are prepared to face these threats, let alone speak up against them.

For minorities, it is even more difficult when their voices are not heard or, worse, denied.

Religion is such a potent force that many prefer to conform and, in a democracy, few politicians dare to take up those in religious clothing for fear that they would lose votes. While some prefer to keep silent, some try to outdo their opponents religiously, which is even worse.

When US president George Bush attacked Iraq and Afghanistan, he, too, reportedly claimed he was asked by God to do so. In a new BBC documentary, Bush reportedly told Palestinian leaders in 2003 that God told him to end the tyranny in Iraq.

Although the White House subsequently denied that Bush ever made such a claim, there is no denying that the president's support base includes the Christian Right, especially those in the Midwest and southern states.

Playing the religious card has helped his political career.

I remember, at the height of the attack against Iraq, a preacher appeared on CNN and quoted verses from the Bible to justify the US invasion. A black Methodist pastor who took a different line ended up in trouble, it was reported.

Quoting verses from holy books in a distorted way to suit one's political or religious agenda is not confined to any faith. The overall context is often ignored and not many dare to rise to the occasion to challenge because of our inadequacies.

But as Stern found out in her extensive research, while religion is used as a front, what is often not talked about is human greed and political power.

Take away the cloak of morality, the terrorists, too, want to keep their power of leadership.

The point is that all of us have to watch out for the religious zealots who attempt to impose their version of the faith on us. They need not be in religious clothes, as in the case of Azahari who never wore a skull cap or jubah, but who made bombs to kill people.

In a democracy, everyone is free to choose, and their rights, as stated in the Constitution, must be respected. The religious and cultural rights of everyone should be protected.

In Malaysia, the leadership's emphasis on moderation has been a key success in governing our plural society. The police, in particular, must be praised for their constant vigilance for political and religious extremists.

The fear of God, rather than the fear of men, should be our constant reminder.

The Datuk Bandar of Kuala Lumpur is a much sought after job. It has prestige, glamour and more important, power. It is a hot seat and recent developments prove there is no shortage of ambitious people who cannot wait to see him fall.

Just a year ago, Datuk Mohamed Shaid Mohd Taufik ended his term in a most unceremonious way, after just three years.  He found out about it from the press, several hours after the Federal Territories Ministry issued a statement announcing his director-general Ruslin as successor.

At a press conference to announce City Hall's 2004 Budget, Mohd Shaid told newsmen that he did not know about his termination and that no one had called to inform him.

But he must have known it was coming. He had rubbed certain powerful politicians up the wrong way and his relationship with then FT Minister Tan Sri Mohamed Isa Abdul Samad was said to be bad.

According to supporters of Mohd Shaid, he, too, was a victim of a plot to oust him using political pressure. What has happened to Ruslin is certainly the result of a power struggle in City Hall.

Interestingly, Isa has also quit from the Cabinet following his suspension from Umno after he was found guilty of money politics in the party elections.

In 1992, the media-savvy mayor Tan Sri Elyas Omar stepped down after a controversy whereby it was revealed that City Hall planned to buy a fleet of 22 Volvos for its department heads at a cost of RM2.3mil.

The problem was that only the director-general was entitled to a Volvo, so the knives were drawn when the other department heads got to enjoy the same model. The situation was made worse because the cars were turbo-charged automatic models costing RM8,000 more than the normal ones.

Just months earlier, Elyas found himself in the soup when he was questioned for leading a 100-member delegation to Casablanca on a trip which cost ratepayers RM800,000. But Elyas maintained it was only RM240,000.

Elyas was also accused by the media of using a doctorate from a non-existent university, to which he retorted that it was the media which had used the Dr title. But the powers-that-be already had had enough of Elyas. In the end, he was dumped too.

Ruslin has admitted that "there must have been those who were unhappy with changes and decisions implemented over the past seven months since I assumed office".

The fact is that the rumblings of dissatisfaction have been heard along the corridors of DBKL and soon various rumours began circulating.

The hottest was the allegation that a police report had been filed about a nurse being fondled by a senior DBKL official. But police said there was no such report.

Ruslin, it is said, was once put in "cold storage" for eight years by his rivals who gave him the unglamorous position of coordinating waste collection in Cheras. But he managed to work his way back to the top.

Now, Malaysians have learned through news reports that a group of senior officials, known as the Group of Seven, could be linked to the conspiracy to topple Ruslin. The plot certainly gets thicker.

But Malaysians also want to know whether the Anti-Corruption Agency will dig deeper into the allegations of corruption in the DBKL, irrespective of the level of officials involved.

The ACA has taken the first step of investigating the allotment of temporary licences for the fasting month in Jalan Mesjid India.

One newspaper reported rumours of DBKL officials demanding rental from Sri Hartamas traders.

The authorities should not just dismiss this as hearsay but to check with the traders there.

From the way events have unfolded in City Hall, things are not going well. A big clean-up must be undertaken and Malaysians hope the ACA will be allowed to do its job, without fear or favour.

They inched their way into the house patiently, despite the discomfort of the huge crowd, just to have a final look at Kak Endon.

I spoke to a few of these people to find out what were the qualities they admired so much about Kak Endon although they professed that they had never met her, let alone talk to her.

All said, they were deeply touched by the love showed by Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Endon. Their open display of affection touched the hearts of many Malaysians, who saw them as model husband and wife.

On Friday, I received a telephone call from Zainah Anwar, an advocate of Muslim women rights for Sisters in Islam. Zainah, a former New Straits Times journalist, had covered many assignments with me. She had the privilege of getting to know Endon and family members well, and was still in grief.

Kak Endon had always been supportive of the non-governmental organisation's cause while her daughter Nori, too, plays an active role.

Zainah suggested that I read a speech made by Endon at a function organised by the group in 2003. Endon had told her listeners that a "happy family is one that is not taken for granted, and a happy marriage is one that cannot be taken for granted".

She spoke of her 40 years marriage with Pak Lah, saying their bond grew stronger each day because they placed great priority on their relationship and their family members.

She said everyone in the family understood their responsibilities and support for each other at all times. It was well known that she did not tolerate polygamy and at one time, her views upset some people, but her focus on the family as an important institution earned the respect of many of us.

There will be Malaysians who asked whether Pak Lah would be able to cope with the loss of someone he loves greatly. The loss, as in the passing away of someone so close, would surely be felt. The loneliness would certainly be there. Pak Lah would need plenty of support from his family members, especially Nori, and close friends.

He can also count on all ordinary Malaysians who pray for him and his family. His work, health and concerns will always be in our prayers which, in the words of Endon, is the greatest gift of all.

Pak Lah's strong faith in God would certainly help him go through this difficult period. Despite his Mr Nice Guy image, he has strong character and will be able to move on, make no mistake about it.

Pak Lah, we can assure you that Malaysians will work with you in leading the country, especially in the fight against corruption. You will never walk alone.

Bureaucracy and undue obstructions from over-zealous middle-ranking civil servants have long been blamed for why Christians have difficulties in building churches although the Federal Constitution is clear on everyone's right to freedom of worship. The size of the Christian population is taken into account before approval can be given in line with religious sensitivity. Thus, if the numbers are wrong, it would have repercussions on followers of the faith.

The liberal policy of the Government and the open-mindedness of our leaders are clear in protecting the rights of all religions, especially the minorities. The Selangor Government, for example, recently allocated and approved land for the construction of churches.

It has not been an easy journey for Christians in Selangor, particularly the Roman Catholics. Unlike Muslims, Buddhists and Hindus, the Christians have a lesser voice, in terms of representation in government. Still, it is encouraging to know that complaints from many Christians that their religion has been wrongly recorded have received the attention of the Government.

I understand that the Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Dr Maximus Ongkili and Deputy Home Affairs Minister Datuk Tan Chai Ho are helping to rectify the problem, together with the ministry's secretary-general Tan Sri Aseh Che Mat.

Aseh, a dedicated and fair-minded civil servant, I honestly believe, would be able to resolve this concern.

NRD director-general Datuk Wan Ibrahim Wan Ahmad was recently quoted as saying that "changes on religion could not be made without proof as the department has to be accountable" while public relations officer Jainisah Mohd Noor reportedly said the procedure of signing a declaration form was necessary for the department's documentation.

I share the concern of these two officials in wanting to ensure accuracy for statistical reasons but their good intentions may not be well received by many. Some may find such requests unacceptable because it is unlikely that those from other religions would be asked to show such proof.

The National Evangelical Christian Fellowship Malaysia said it had received complaints that some NRD clerks insisted that those who wished to make amendments to their religion should produce baptism certificates or letters from their churches as proof of change in religion.

This problem has surfaced because of the NRD's assumption on religion that it is based on the birth certificate, past IC information or simply race. Pastors, for example, have found their religion listed as Buddhists or Hindus. When they sought amendments, they were asked to show proof that they are Christians.

In all fairness, new Christians should also not be too quick to accuse the NRD of wrongdoings if they themselves have not informed the clerks of their change in religion. But what the NRD can do is to ensure some uniformity at the front desk level. For example, a simple form should be sufficient. Unlike Muslims, those from other faiths do not have legal implications if they wish to change their faiths.

In short, non-Muslims have the right to change their religion as it is essentially a personal matter. There is thus no need for non-Muslims to prove their religion and the job of the NRD clerk is to record the information, that's all.The NRD has no legal basis or authority to ask MyKad applicants for baptism certificate or church letters.

Religion has always been treated as a sensitive matter in Malaysia and rightly so too. The NRD must understand and appreciate this concern.

***Comment: CORRECTION : ERROR – In Paragraph 8, the NAME of the NRD director general is INCORRECT. The director-general is Datuk Mohd Abdul Halim Muhammad and NOT Datuk Wan Ibrahim Wan Ahmad. Error pointed out by Royce Cheah Shiou Han and confirmed by Parkaran – 27/12/2005

All the earlier talk of punishing Hattan under the National Anthem Act 1968 must have made Malaysia sound like an intolerant police state.

Malaysians who watched the football final, either at the stadium or at home, hardly noticed Hattan's purported jazzed-up version of the Negaraku.

Many of the VIPs who attended the game went on record to say the same. For them, it was a non-issue until it was brought up in Parliament.

What we noticed were football players and the fans in celebratory mood when the national anthem was played. Instead of standing still to attention, many were seen running and jumping in joy.

And certainly we saw plenty of Indonesian flags for a game between two Malaysian states vying for the Malaysia Cup. Hello, this is Malaysia.

No one, including the Yang Berhormat, seemed to have brought this up. Instead, he was more preoccupied with Hattan, whom many of us thought sang with great gusto and pride.

But Arts, Culture and Heritage Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim instilled some common sense when he said there was nothing offensive about Hattan's rendition of the Negaraku.

After watching the footage, he said, he found nothing degrading in the manner Hattan had sung the national anthem although the last modulation went a bit high. There was no jazzing up whatsoever and neither did he ridicule the national anthem.

Dr Rais correctly pointed out that some of the spectators were seen to be disrespectful.

Following the controversy created by one MP, Dr Rais has now suggested that the Negaraku should revert to the original tempo first introduced in 1956.

He said this was to ensure that the tempo of the national anthem would remain the same.

Dr Rais must have good reasons in wanting to protect the dignity of the national anthem, which is a national treasure.

But I do miss the faster, marching version of the Negaraku introduced a few years back. Younger Malaysians felt it was more inspiring and forthright, in comparison to the slower version.

It reminded us of the faster pace of development set by the country and our commitment to marching forward to a developed nation.

The point here is that even the official 1956 version has been changed before. It was set during the 50s.

Music is alive. There is no such thing as the national anthem must remain static, but as of now it appears that only the politicians can have a say in telling us what is right or wrong.

Surely Malaysians, too, would want to have their say. The Negaraku does not belong to just the MPs and Cabinet members.

Let's allow Malaysians, especially the younger generation, to have their say about the tempo of the Negaraku.

It should become a practice for all Malaysians to sing the national anthem and not just stand attentively whenever it is played.

We do this when we are overseas but we are seemingly shy to do so when the Negaraku is played at home.

We have seen how the Americans sing their national anthem, with one hand on the heart, when their national anthem is played before a boxing or football match.

Sometimes a black singer would sing the soul version, and even we non-Americans would find it a delight to the ears.

The point is that the Negaraku must be sung beautifully in a passionate way. The key word is "sing", not just listen – that will be music to the ear then to Malaysia.

Various reasons have been cited why Chinese tourists have been shunning Malaysia but one clear factor must be the order from the China National Tourism Administration (CNTA) to its travel agents to cancel group tours to Singapore, Malaysia and Thailand.

That directive hurt Singapore as well. The island republic's number of Chinese tourists fell to 352,000 in the first six months of this year but that was only a 10% drop, which isn't as bad as that for Malaysia.

One area of unhappiness, which is being talked about among Chinese visitors, are reports of Chinese tourists being robbed of their passports and female tourists being hassled at Immigration because of suspicions that they might be involved in prostitution.

MCA public services and complaints department chief Datuk Michael Chong said he had received many complaints from bona fide Chinese visitors, including investors, that they had encountered such difficulties at KL International Airport.

He said one businessman, regarded as one of the richest men in China, had to wait until 5am before he was allowed to enter Malaysia although he had the proper travelling documents including a visa.

Chong said the businessman, who has an office in Kuala Lumpur, had his Malaysian visa on an old passport, which he carried along, but that did not satisfy the Immigration officer. The man was allowed in after some intervention from senior Immigration officers.

But the "loss of face" for the Chinese investor infuriated him so much that he threatened to close down his KL office, which would have meant retrenchment for the Malaysian staff. But Chong managed to calm him down.

That is not all. I have personally heard of a Chinese shipper, with a branch office here, whose 60-year-old wife was denied entry because of some technical problems relating to her visa. The matter was eventually brought up to a Cabinet minister.

To be fair to Immigration, rules are rules. If the officers have reasons to be suspicious, then they must be allowed to exercise their discretion to turn away foreign visitors, irrespective of their nationality.

But Immigration must be sensitive to such complaints, especially from genuine tourists. We should not give the perception, no matter how small, that Chinese tourists are discriminated against.

A few years back, I accompanied then Deputy Tourism Minister Datuk Dr Ng Yen Yen on her tourism promotion trips. She decided to take along a senior Immigration officer to allow him to hear directly the problems faced by Chinese tour agents.

It was an eye-opener for the officer. More interestingly, he was surprised at the development in Chinese cities. Talking to him, the impression I had was that he thought Kuala Lumpur was ahead of these cities.

The situation has improved much but more needs to be done. In fact, there should be more consistency and better coordination between the Tourism Ministry and the Home Ministry, especially the Immigration department.

Bad press such as the recent case in Genting Highlands where Chinese tourists staged a sit-in after they discovered hotel workers had drawn pigs on their pass cards used for restaurants, and the murder of Chinese students in Malaysia certainly did not help.

These are isolated cases, no doubt, but we need to tackle them as every country is fighting hard for the tourist dollar. The competition is no longer from Asian countries but also from Europe and the United States.

In the past, this region attracted many Chinese tourists but as they become richer, they have turned to Europe and the US. In Australia, entertainers from Hong Kong and Taiwan have become major acts in theatres to cater to these Chinese arrivals.

Malaysia needs to review its strategy to win these Chinese tourists and with their interest in eco-tourism, Malaysia will continue to enjoy certain advantages.

Tourists from the southern Chinese cities should be encouraged to visit Penang, Kuala Lumpur, Johor and Malacca, because many Malaysians speak in Hokkien and Cantonese, which should make them feel at home.

Tourism Minister Datuk Dr Michael Toyad and his deputy Zahid have worked hard but it will help tremendously if a Chinese-speaking deputy minister is appointed in the next Cabinet reshuffle. The personal touch, coupled with the required social skills, is crucial in doing business in China.

We can dismiss or challenge the index, including the criteria used, but it would not help Malaysia. It will be better if we do something about it to improve our standing in the international community.

Malaysia still has a chance to get things right. On the forefront of the campaign against corruption is the Prime Minister but he alone cannot eliminate or reduce graft overnight. Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has kept the momentum going and has attempted to introduce a new culture of national integrity but all this takes time.

All the efforts including the setting up of a National Integrity Institute and the launching of a National Integrity Plan have the support of all Malaysians but the time has come for a strong push.

Pak Lah's efforts must not be allowed to go to waste. Corruption must be regarded as a criminal act and nothing less. If not, corruption will be regarded as a way of life and a norm.

But Malaysia may come to that point if we are not careful. According to a survey carried out among hawkers and stall operators by the Kuala Lumpur Society for Transparency and Integrity, the respondents viewed corruption among local councils as a "very serious" problem.

Unfortunately, the victims of bribery also said that corruption was a norm, with 17% of the respondents saying that giving bribes was acceptable to ensure their business could operate smoothly.

Pak Lah has taken the right move by insisting that the delivery system must be simple and effective. That means doing away with regulations or, at least, simplifying them, to prevent corruption. More transactions with the Government should be done online to cut red tape and corruption.

The media must continue to expose corruption, with prominence given to civil servants and politicians charged with corruption. That's not all – their titles should be automatically revoked when they have been sentenced.

I can detect the frustration of many Malaysians, especially businessmen, who believe that individual Malaysians cannot do anything to effect change. There is growing pessimism and the perception that corruption has become so entrenched in some areas that it can no longer be fought.

For example, despite the prominence given by the media to the blatant practice of restaurants placing tables and chairs along roadsides, many municipal councils have ignored the media outcry. In short, the media can shout but the status quo remains.

Some Malaysians believe that it does not pay to stand on principle and feel that it is acceptable for a low-ranking government officer to take a small bribe since the bigger fish are doing it and getting away with it.

Despite such a dampening mood, there is certainly greater public awareness but unless the proper mechanism is put in place, all the good intentions of the leadership will go to waste. Worse, its sincerity will be questioned because of the rising expectations.

Unless the Anti-Corruption Agency is made independent, and not just another government department, its effectiveness will be limited and even compromised. Our ACA deserves to be given the kind of autonomy like that of the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) of Hong Kong, which drew much objection from police officers when it was set up.

There is also a need to introduce laws to protect whistle-blowers if we want the public to come forward to testify against the corrupt. There should be no fear of reprisals once such laws are in place.

Steps should also be made by the ACA, with the support of the National Integrity Institute, to make it more accessible to the public to lodge reports against those who take bribes.

In Hong Kong, the ICAC have offices near market places and even shopping areas to enable the public to interact with them. The public can just walk into these offices to voice their grievances.

Fighting corruption should be regarded as community work. Let's join hands with Pak Lah to fight graft.

"It's the question time I am worried. The public can vote you out every five
years but the backbenchers can get you out by the end of the week," said the
panicky politician to his wife Annie in one episode.

"It's the question time I am worried. The public can vote
you out every five years but the backbenchers can get you out by the end of the
week," said the panicky politician to his wife Annie in one episode.

by Najib, although the Deputy Prime Minister has downplayed this
sportingly.

In August, she did not turn up for a Cabinet meeting where she was supposed to
explain the AP issue, saying she was sick and needed treatment for a knee
problem.

On Wednesday, Rafidah was again absent from the Cabinet meeting chaired by
Najib, This time, she is away in the United
States on a trade mission.

She should have turned up at the Dewan Rakyat to face the MPs, who are the
people's representatives, and to clear whatever doubts they might have.

While the minister could have been on an important mission for Malaysia
but the Dewan Rakyat is the most important forum.
Like Pak Lah, former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and other Malaysian
leaders also watched the long-running political satire.

International Trade and Industry Minister Datuk Seri Rafidah Aziz had obviously
not taken seriously the one-hour allocation for questions and answers when the
Dewan Rakyat sat from Monday to Thursday.

On Thursday, there were resentment and anger from fellow Cabinet members and
Barisan Nasional backbenchers when she did not attend the sitting to reply to
the MPs on the controversial Approved Permit (AP) issue to import cars.

It did not help that she decided to reveal the names of MPs who had received
APs, with the elected representatives saying it was a move to arm-twist them
into not speaking up on the issue.

As far as the MPs were concerned, she should have been there to face them but
rightly or wrongly, she chose to snub them.

They told the press in no uncertain terms how they felt, and certainly did not
care if she was away on a trade mission.

Her absence could well be a turning point in her political career, with many
now saying that her Cabinet position was untenable and that her holding to her
position stubbornly would only hurt the Government.

Just a few months ago, she was heckled and booed by Umno members at the party
general assembly over the AP controversy.

If that was not enough, she also ended up having an exchange of words, to put
it mildly, with some of her fellow Cabinet members.

One news report had it that she sniped at a minister who was smiling when the
hot topic was brought up while another colleague was reportedly told to take
care of his ministry first.

Her colleagues described her as "combative", "confrontational" and "abrasive"
and one minister reportedly said the longest serving Miti minister was
dismissive of anyone who disagreed with her.

At the core of the controversy are the unanswered questions on the huge
allocation of APs to a few individuals.

Of the 67,000 APs issued this year, more than 28,000 went to Tan Sri Nasimuddin
SM Amin, Datuk Syed Azman Syed Ibrahim, Datuk Mohd Haniff Abdul Aziz and Datuk
Azzuddin Ahmad.

The ministers felt Rafidah had not replied to several crucial issues on which
they wanted answers.

To put it bluntly, her integrity as a minister has been questioned at all
levels and now, MPs from both sides of the benches, have spoken up openly
against her with Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri
Abdul Aziz slamming her for not turning up to field questions on the AP
issue.

On Thursday, the Opposition attempted to refer her to the parliamentary
privileges committee but what was astounding was the silence of government
backbenchers when the DAP motion was rejected by Speaker Tan Sri Ramli Ngah
Talib.

The usual table thumping to signify approval was missing, a point certainly
noted by Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, who attended the
morning session on Thursday.

They were obviously incensed that the names of MPs who received APs were
revealed without an explanation.

MPs and senators are entitled to an AP once in their lifetime as part of their
perks.

An irate Nazri told reporters that the AP issued to each MP and senator was not
meant for them to resell for financial gain but for their own individual
use.

He said what probably raised the hackles of the MPs most was that Rafidah's
name was not on the list.

In fairness to Rafidah, it was a question from Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang
and she was merely providing a written reply.

The public are actually interested in knowing which MPs have enjoyed such a
perk but it would mean a lot to these elected representatives if her ministry
took the trouble to explain it was only a one-off thing.

But there is now a new dimension to the issue – Rafidah has stayed away from
two Cabinet meetings chaired
The perception now is that she had run away from the MPs or she had decided to
ignore them. Either way, it's bad for her image and reputation. The Government
needs to move away from the AP issue.

Despite the setting up of a committee, headed by the Prime Minister, to review
and decide on all issues related to APs, the issue has not gone away.

It has taken up too much of government time and attention.

Rafidah has got herself into a corner because of her own doing. Worse, while
she has put the Government in a tight spot she may have put her Cabinet job on
the line now.

Fact number three is that Judge Datuk Abdul Kadir Musa,
in his 49-page judgment, found there was not too much evidence adduced against
all three or for their defence to be called.

He has correctly pointed out that there were unresolved doubts and unanswered
questions in the prosecution's case.

The judgment has not gone down well with most Malaysians and many are outraged,
but a judge has made his decision on evidence available.

That is how the law operates and a judge must not be swayed by public
sentiments or prejudices.

If there is anyone to blame, then it must be the police and the
prosecution.

As the judge noted, the prosecution hurt its own case by failing to call a
certain Insp Moin.

That was not all, Koh's driver Mohd Razbean Md Tab, a key witness, has gone
missing. That does not speak well of the police at all.

Another key witness, Fang Sui Jing, said to be a girlfriend of Koh, has been
deported to China and even the date of her deportation is unknown.

The Chinese national, who was serving a 10-month sentence in Kajang prison for
overstaying, was a key witness and yet no attempt was made to keep her until
the case was over.

Investigating officer Asst Supt Nor Omar Sapi admitted that he did not make any
formal request to the Kajang prison for Fang to be handed over to the
police.

Malaysians are left grappling with questions like how a murdered boy could end
up in the swimming pool of a heavily guarded bungalow with 23 injury
marks.

These are questions the prosecution failed to answer and we are not sure if
they will ever be.

But Malaysians, concerned with the increasing crime rate, are upset that the
prosecution and police have failed to resolve a series of high profile murder
cases.

The public would like to think that our police are efficient and they have
proven able to live up to our expectations when it comes to serious
crime.

But when our defenders of public order keep losing their cases, especially
murders, then Malaysian taxpayers have a right to ask what they are
doing.

What are our investigators and prosecutors doing when they keep losing in the
courts?

When judges throw out their cases, it just means that the prosecution has
failed to produce sufficient evidence. That's how the legal system works.

Our hearts go to the family of Xu in China who had hoped that their child would
get a decent education in Malaysia and grow up to be somebody they can be proud
of.

Instead he was murdered and, worse, we cannot even find his murderer or
murderers. It's a murder most foul.