Malaysian pride: Tan, who is from Muar, was appointed to the most senior technology position at Nasa recently. – nasa.gov

EVERY time we read about Malaysians making a mark globally in their respective fields, pride and joy course through our veins knowing these people have elevated our country’s standing.

Recently, that proverbial uplifting news featured six young Malaysians acquiring seats in the prestigious Harvard University for the class of 2026.

The students received offers of admission amidst stiff competition from a global applicant pool of 61,220 students, it was reported.

Last week, another piece of good news surfaced. A Malaysian from Muar, Johor, Florence Tan, was appointed Deputy Chief Technologist at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Nasa) – the most senior technology position.

She had left Malaysia at 18 to study in the United States, and then started to work with Nasa, beginning as an intern at one of its research centres.

When I read those two stories, I couldn’t help pondering if the six Harvard students would return to Malaysia someday, perhaps after gaining experience in the US and other countries.

And what can Tan really do in Malaysia, even if she chose to return home? After all, we can’t cater to her expertise, experience and skill in aeronautics.

But more and more, when we read of these high achievers, the media is compelled to refer to them as “Malaysia-born,” which is a euphemism for Malaysians who have emigrated overseas and are not nationals of our country any longer.

At least we’re sure that two legendary Malaysians of global repute, Hollywood actress Tan Sri Michelle Yeoh and shoe designer Datuk Jimmy Choo are hanging on to their Malaysian passports.

Unfortunately, Malaysia is one of the countries most affected by brain drain, as it faces a major problem in not only being incapable of delivering the required talent, but also in failing to retain the current local talent or attracting foreign ones, as a report in cs.stanford.edu put it.

The World Bank defines brain drain as the migration of talent across borders, which has an impact on Malaysia’s aspiration to become a high-income nation.

“Human capital is the bedrock of the high-income economy. Sustained and skill-intensive growth will require talent going forward.

“For Malaysia to be successful in its journey to high income, it will need to develop, attract, and retain talent. Brain drain does not appear to square with this objective: Malaysia needs talent, but talent seems to be leaving.

“Brain drain is a subject of intense debate and controversy, but surprisingly few studies have characterised the phenomenon in the Malaysian context – be it in terms of magnitude, impact, or policy response.

“What complicates matters further are the statistical discrepancies that limit the quality, availability, timeliness, and comparability of international migration data,” wrote its senior economic advisor Philip Schellekens.

He quoted the World Bank’s Malaysia Economic Monitor saying that the Malaysian diaspora – the group of skilled and unskilled Malaysia-born women, men and children living overseas – is estimated conservatively at one million worldwide as of 2010.

“A third among these represent brain drain – those with tertiary education among the diasporas. This is not to suggest that others are not ‘brainy’, but educational attainment is the only available proxy that is consistently available across recipient countries.

“To put the numbers in perspective, two factors are important: the size of the skills base and the profile of immigration.

“Because of the narrow skills base, brain drain is intense in Malaysia and is further aggravated by positive selection effects, as the best and brightest leave first.

“Further, brain drain is not alleviated by compensating inflows, since migration into Malaysia is mainly low-skilled with some 60% with primary education or less and the number of high-skilled expats has fallen by a quarter since 2004.”

As of 2019, there are 952,261 Malaysians or Singaporeans of partial or full Malaysian origin residing in Singapore. And including the permanent population in the country, about 350,000 Malaysians cross the Johor-Singapore Causeway daily to commute to work or school.

Australia is another popular choice for Malaysians, with 177,460 people living there in 2020, according to a report, while the 2016 census from the Australian Bureau of Statistics reveals that 138,364 Malaysians became permanent residents or citizens.

There’s nothing wrong with us continuing to look for low-skilled labour for our oil palm estates, restaurants and homes – many West Asian countries are in the same predicament. However, Malaysia needs to embrace the global mobility of talent, too.

For a start, we must admit that the biggest criteria are the differences in earnings, career prospects, opportunities, professional exposure and quality of life.

The elephant in the room for many Malaysians is the discontent with our country’s affirmative policies, particularly among the non-bumiputras who see their chances of climbing up the ladder hampered by their ethnic origin.

The painful truth is, many talented non-bumiputras, especially the Chinese, make up the bulk of the diaspora.

In all fairness, the government, via Talent Corporation Malaysia, has developed many initiatives to encourage Malaysians to return, but a better carrot needs to be dangled.

Singapore, one of the best-run countries, has the same problem as it faces a challenge to retain quality citizens because the country’s brain drain rate is higher than the global average with six in 10 Singa-poreans willing to leave the country in pursuit of a better job, according to a Randstad Workmonitor research report.

The study revealed that the brain drain rate in the Lion City is higher than the global average of 50%. It’s also higher than Hong Kong’s 56%, but slightly lower than Malaysia’s 66%.

It said 68% of Singaporean workers, aged between 18 and 34 years old, are willing to pack up and leave their country.

In many ways, ethnic Chinese, like their forefathers, are a migratory race, regardless of their nationalities, with many selecting Canada and Australia as their choices during the last 20 years, according to statista.com

In 2013, the United States and Canada became the countries with the highest immigration rate of millionaires from China, according to Hurun Research Institute.

China is reportedly one of the world’s largest emigration countries as well as the country with the biggest outflow of high net worth individuals between 2003 and 2013. Likewise for many Hong Kongers and Taiwanese.

Our politicians love to use the term “world class” when they talk about Malaysia, but we need to really walk the talk or else it remains hollow and unconvincing. If we’re indeed top of the heap, we should be getting top notch workers queueing up to work here.

Duty bound: Once a report is lodged, the MACC, which is headquartered in Putrajaya, has to investigate the allegation, no matter how popular the implicated person is. – IZZRAFIQ ALIAS/The Star

THE investigation by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) on Court of Appeal judge Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali has left a sour taste in the mouths of Malaysians, as he was the judge who convicted and sentenced Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.

Many see this corporate-lawyer-turned-judge as a bold figure with impeccable credentials, someone who isn’t afraid to pass judgement on a former prime minister for misappropriation of funds.

He found Najib guilty on seven charges relating to RM42mil in funds belonging to SRC International on July 28, 2020, and sentenced him to a 12-year jail term and a RM210mil fine.

This is the same judge, an Oxford University graduate, who ruled that vernacular schools have long been recognised in the legislative framework of the education system, even before Merdeka and the existence of a Federal Constitution.

Last December, Mohd Nazlan ruled that the existence and establishment of these schools and the use of Chinese and Tamil languages in schools were Constitutional.

Certainly, in highly politicised Malaysia, his judgements would have also earned him many critics, if not enemies.

Last week, the MACC responded to the criticisms, saying it has the authority to probe any public official, including judges.

It pointed out that it had investigated other judges in the past, too, with its investigation papers sent to the Attorney-General’s Chambers, as was the norm.

The revelation by the MACC is that three reports were filed on Mohd Nazlan on March 15 as well as April 23 and 27. So the probe wasn’t merely initiated by a comment by controversial blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin, who lives in England.

In all fairness, once a report is lodged, no matter how popular the implicated person is, the MACC is duty-bound to investigate, with no exemptions.

If the MACC chooses not to investigate a report, then it sets a dangerous precedent. Once it has completed a case, the findings are submitted to the AG’s Chambers, and that’s the process.

Many see the corporate-lawyer-turned-judge Mohd Nazlan as a bold figure with impeccable credentials. – MOHD SAHAR MISNI/The StarMany see the corporate-lawyer-turned-judge Mohd Nazlan as a bold figure with impeccable credentials. – MOHD SAHAR MISNI/The Star

If there’s no case, then it should quickly make a conclusion and clear Mohd Nazlan, to ensure there is no lingering doubt about his integrity and credibility.

There has been the accusation of an “unexplained RM1mil” in his bank account.

How this information is derived and obtained is itself an infringement of the banking laws on privacy. And how does one conclude that this has been an “unexplained sum” since this would be the Inland Revenue Board’s job, and perhaps the MACC’s now.

There have also been allegations and presumptions on the conflict of interest involving Mohd Nazlan in the SRC case he presided over when he was a Maybank general counsel.

With three reports to his name now, hopefully, the investigators will verify the accuracy and reliability of the information they obtained.

Were the reports made from hearsay or from a blog post, or from solid evidence they obtained from credible whistle blowers? After all, these are terrible accusations that have tarnished the judge’s image.

It would surprise us if Mohd Nazlan – who just received the title of Datuk Paduka Mahkota Selangor from Selangor Ruler Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah in February in recognition of his work – doesn’t have a substantial amount in his bank accounts having worked as a senior lawyer.

He had specialised in corporate, conveyancing and banking laws, worked as Maybank’s group general counsel and was then promoted to the board as independent and non-executive director.

His move to the Bench was in 2015 when he was made Judicial Commissioner and eventually became a Court of Appeal judge in 2022.

Given the gravity of the accusations, it’s better for the MACC to reveal their findings, no matter how unpopular they may be. However, let’s not forget that it’s also an offence to make false reports.

It has become fashionable for individuals or groups with political links to make police reports, sometimes with malicious intent.

Complainants of false reports are liable to be prosecuted under Sections 177, 182 or 203 of the Penal Code. A person who lodges a false police report, if charged, may face imprisonment or a fine of RM2,000, or both.

The MACC provision also allows for action against any complainant making a report “which is false or intended to mislead, etc., to an officer of the Commission or the Public Prosecutor”. It can result in a fine not exceeding RM100,000 or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years, or both.

These are tough laws. We expect our judges to be “whiter than white” to ensure the integrity of the judiciary. However, when their reputation is deliberately tarnished for political reasons, then those who are responsible must face the consequences of their mercenary actions.

The perception now is that Mohd Nazlan is being intimidated for his decisions, and for sure the majority of Malaysians, won’t accept it if the judiciary is being threatened, rightly or wrongly.

Innocent until proven guilty: The principle of the law is simple, all accused are guaranteed legal representation by the Federal Constitution. – 123rf.com

THE comment by Perlis Mufti Datuk Dr Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin about it being sinful for a lawyer to defend people who are known to have committed offences, has raised many eyebrows. In fact, that action is hair-raising.

It’s disturbing for many Malaysians, especially for those who perceive an increasing tide of such radical religious interpretations in our country.

Asri went further by saying that the sin of taking money from offenders is worse than income from prostitution.

According to a news report last week, he explained himself to several lawyers on their career path if they chose to be defence counsels to alleged offenders.

Asri’s comments rightly earned a rebuke from Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Parliament and Law) Datuk Seri Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar, who issued a reminder on the principle that a person is “innocent until proven guilty,” adding that lawyers had no power to declare whether a person was guilty or innocent.

The principle of the law is simple: an accused – including a cleric – is guaranteed legal representation by the Constitution.

In February, celebrity preacher Ebit Lew was slapped with 11 charges of sexual harassment at an interior court in Sabah.

The 37-year-old, who was charged under Section 509 of the Penal Code, pleaded not guilty to all charges. If convicted, he could face up to five years in jail or a fine, or both.

Ilmami Ahmad, who appeared for the prosecution, was assisted by deputy public prosecutor Azreen Yas Mohamad Ramli, while Ebit was represented by Zairi Zainal Abidin.

Ebit may have been charged, but he is innocent until proven guilty, and even then, he is eligible to many stages of appeal in the higher court.

Going by Asri’s logic, Ebit would have been denied his right to legal representation, unless Asri meant a consistent criminal. But even then, it doesn’t mean the serial offender is responsible for every crime, unless proven otherwise, of course.

Asri himself has reportedly faced defamation suits, and he surely must have sought the advice of his lawyers. That would surely be the sensible thing to do.

The burden of proof is on the prosecution. That aside, imagine the consequences if no lawyers are provided for defences, according to Asri’s warped logic. There would be no trials and with no trials, conviction would be impossible unless the accused pleads guilty from the outset.

Then, there are the questions of insanity, diminished capacity, duress, mistake, infancy and entrapment, which may be the defence’s arguments, or in the worst case, mitigating factors. However, only trained defence lawyers can handle such cases competently.

Wan Junaidi dismissed Asri’s remarks, saying, if receiving payment and legal fees was sinful, then no Muslims would want to become lawyers. I’m sure there are many Muslim lawyers who would dismiss Asri’s “revelation”.

If I may humbly add, thank God Malaysia has a proper legal system that’s mainly based on the common law legal system. The supreme law of the country and the Federal Constitution set out the legal framework and rights of every citizen.

The country provides for a unique dual justice system – the secular laws for criminal and civil cases and syariah laws for Muslims, particularly on family and religious matters.

Asri’s position on legal fees is hard to fathom. Surely, as professionals, lawyers are expected to be paid for their services unless they do it on a pro bono basis.

To equate legal fees with prostitution is simply uncalled for, no matter how one puts it, especially in a religious argument.

Surely, Asri can’t expect Muslim lawyers to now seek his advice if they wish to take on cases involving clients who may be found guilty later or have a record of offences.

Have we come to a point where clerics like Asri have also become a reference point for legal matters or for lawyers who are unsure or uncomfortable about such cases?

Even in corporate and civil cases, there would be clients deemed powerful with all the resources at their disposal acting against the common man, for example, a bank repossessing a low-cost home of people who can’t service their loans.

Does Asri also equate the lawyer representing the bank to a prostitute, when essentially, his client is doing what is procedurally correct, as mutually agreed, by the bank and borrower in the agreement even if it looks heartless?

Clerics, regardless of their faith, are powerful and influential, but they need to be checked and reminded if they’re wrong, like everyone else, regardless of their position because they are mere mortals, not God.

Found guilty: Sam was sent off to jail while her lawyers filed an appeal with the Court of Appeal. – China Press

We need to learn from this sad episode and put a stop to dangerous activities like ‘basikal lajak’ racing on our roads.

THE harsh jail sentence imposed on Sam Ke Ting over a devastating fatal accident nearly five years ago, has generated national debate. In the 3.20am incident on Feb 18, 2017, eight teenagers on modified bicycles (basikal lajak) were killed.

The High Court sentenced the clerk to six years’ jail and a fine of RM6,000 for reckless driving, which resulted in the deaths of these cyclists in Johor Baru.

Adding to her woes, a request for a stay of execution was denied, so Sam was sent off to jail while her lawyers filed an appeal with the Court of Appeal.

Let’s hope this appeal secures Sam her stay of execution because she’s neither a hardcore criminal nor flight risk.

Even those convicted of gross corruption are still walking freely while they await their appeals to be heard.

Sam would need a quick hearing, or else she would be locked up. But it may take up to six months before the Bench deliberates on her case. With the certificate of urgency, hopefully the Court of Appeal could meet on this sooner.

High Court Judge Justice Abu Bakar Katar had ruled that the magistrate’s court had erred in accepting the defence of Sam, who had proven she didn’t drive recklessly and had adhered to traffic laws. She had even been acquitted twice.

While Abu Bakar would have made his decision based on the facts of the case and laws, one can also understand why his decision has enraged many Malaysians, with their sentiments well displayed on social media.

Many of these reactions seem valid, really. To put it bluntly, this is common sense, particularly for those who have experienced near-mishaps with these reckless cyclists who think they own our highways.

Anyone driving along the highways at 3am expecting a smooth ride would get a scare if a gang of these cyclists suddenly appeared out of nowhere.

We can talk about the merits of the law, but most of us would surely be caught off guard, and no one in their right mind would want to collide with these youngsters.

You can be driving on a straight road and minding your own business, but if a gang of such cyclists suddenly swerves from the left side dangerously and recklessly, hitting your vehicle even, who’s at fault then?

But in the Johor case, all these are moot points because sadly, a catastrophic tragedy took place. One can imagine the remorse and guilt that Sam must endure for her part in the deaths of these youngsters.

She will have to live with this for the rest of her life.

It doesn’t help to debate now whether the blame should be on these minors who should know better than to roam around on the roads at 3am.

Their parents have been devastated and surely they have been tormented by a lot of abuse, too.

Five years later, with the case given a fresh twist, social media chatter has again haunted the parents, who have been accused of neglect. Irresponsibly but in typical Malaysian style, even racist rhetoric has surfaced.

All this will not bring the kids back, and neither will jailing Sam for six years. The point here is, what have we learned from this sad episode?

Have such dangerous activities stopped?

Have laws been drawn up and enforced to ban such modified bicycles, or do the authorities and parents still think there are more important matters to worry about – until the next major accident?

Highways are not meant for racing – not for cars, motorcycles, and certainly not modified bicycles.

We don’t need another bright politician to propose building racing parks for these youngsters.

We take road safety lightly. By now, we’re all familiar with the common scene at every traffic light – almost every delivery person will try to beat the lights.

Yet, many of us even tolerate and accept such disregard for safety because we think these are people merely trying to earn a decent living and that their wages depend on the speed of delivery and the number of trips they make. They should be excused. Kesian (pity).

One wonders whether these delivery companies even drum in them the importance of safety.

Hasnan Badi, a Malaysian downhill mountain bike racer with 15 years of racing experience, said the modified bicycles with cut-down handlebars and perhaps even no brakes, don’t provide proper control with the position the riders are riding in.

In an interview with paultan.org, he said roads were not the place for bicycle racing, except in controlled conditions, saying “it comes down to safety and education.

“If the kids are not educated on safety by the parents and the parents are not aware of what their children are doing, then this situation will happen again.”

He, however, said that drivers are also required to always be responsible and in control of their vehicle, adding that “drivers must be aware and be prepared to take necessary action to avoid accidents where possible.”

Finally, let’s not forget what the late William Orville Douglas, an American Supreme Court judge said, that common sense often makes good law.

Opened borders: A health worker administering a test at a Covid-19 screening centre at KLIA2. Malaysia began to allow quarantine-free entry for fully vaccinated travellers from April 1. – Bloomberg

LET’S hope that the mandatory on-arrival antigen rapid test (RTK) at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA) will be short-lived.

The issue is not the option of having to take the compulsory RTK tests at the airports or in health facilities within 48 hours, but its need in the first place.

It makes little sense to have this test because just prior to departure, a traveller entering Malaysia would be required to have a polymerase chain reaction test (PCR).

For example, a traveller flying in from London would need to do a PCR test at least 48 hours before departure, and the cheapest is about £65 (RM358) for the results to be delivered within 24 hours.

If you need your test results within three hours, it will be £85 (RM468), so, there’s no logic in conducting a test 14 hours later upon arrival at KLIA.

Then, you must pay for a professional RTK-Antigen (nasal) test costing RM100 for Malaysians and RM160 for foreigners.

Imagine short haul flights involving just a few hours, or like an hour, from Singapore.

It makes little sense to take two tests in such a short period for such a simple trip.

We’re all quite aware of the price of an RTK self-test kit at pharmacies, be it the nasal or saliva versions. There is an option, of course – you can take an RTK test at approved health facilities for about RM60, which provides results within 48 hours.

The PCR tests for incoming travellers are imposed by Malaysia. Britain no longer requires pre-departure PCR tests or on-arrival RTK tests. Singapore still insists on pre-departure PCR tests but has done away with on-arrival tests. Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia and the Philippines have either stopped it or announced that they will do likewise soon.

There should be greater flexibility for travellers because Malaysia has already declared it is transitioning into the endemic phase of Covid-19. Honestly, Malaysia should take the lead in Asean by making travel easier.

Many Malaysian business travellers heading to Singapore prefer making day trips because accommodation in the republic isn’t exactly peanuts. Throw in the cost of the numerous tests for each flight, and it all makes little economic sense to stay there. And remember, there are thousands of people commuting between the two countries on day trips.

It’s also questionable for a single company to handle screening services for all incoming travellers at KLIA and KLIA2. Proper tender exercises may have been conducted, but it’s still a monopoly.

Malaysia Airport Holdings Berhad announced that there are four different health screening providers at the four international airports – KLIA, Penang International Airport, Kota Kinabalu International Airport and Kuching Airport.

But there is only a single service provider at each one.

The tests have become pricey because the providers must pay for the set-up, rental and operations costs. Obviously, that will be passed on to the travellers. So, why the restriction for only a sole provider instead of encouraging competition?

The screening process can also be expedited when there’s more than one provider at the airports.

Another health provider has been able to offer the RTK test at RM60 for AirAsia passengers through an exclusive arrangement at KLIA2, which simply means that it can be cheaper.

AirAsia Malaysia chief executive officer Raid Asmat is right in saying that while it welcomed the reopening of international borders, many Asean countries have made the journey easier by simplifying testing regimes for travellers.

He said as Covid-19 tests become increasingly essential for travellers, the affordability of the mandatory testing would also harness the attractiveness of Malaysia as a preferred tourism destination.

So, how long must travellers put up with these on-arrival RTK tests when other countries have decided to be less cumbersome and, well, more competitive, by abandoning them?

Cynical Malaysians ailed by trust issues with the authorities could be forgiven for thinking that the compulsory RTK tests is just another cash cow, even though it’s not. However, it’s difficult to ignore this as a precautionary measure since Malaysia isn’t out of the woods, even if we’re almost in the endemic phase.

We haven’t even resolved the ownership controversy of the MySejathera app, even though Health Minister Khairy Jamaluddin has assured us that our data privacy is secure.

We need to keep Malaysia safe, but we also need to make our country competitive and stay ahead of the curve as borders are re-opened and the fight for tourism revenue accelerates.