EDITORIAL : THE BUSINESS DAY, SOUTH AFRICA

World needs treaty on arms trade

Tighter regulation of arms sales will not prevent the rampant corruption characterising ‘legitimate’ transactions such as the notorious South African arms deal, but it might help save lives in places such as Syria

Published: 2012/07/05 06:50:59 AM

THE horrific situation in Syria, with civilians being massacred by shadowy state-linked militias, the army using heavy artillery to bombard rebel-held cities with no regard for the lives of innocent residents, and sophisticated missile systems being used to shoot down a neighbouring country’s fighter jet in international airspace, is as good an illustration as you are going to find that the global arms trade needs far stricter regulation.

Russia, which officially exported more than $6,5bn worth of military equipment in the first six months of the year, has long been Syria’s primary arms supplier. It has arms contracts worth about $4bn in place and, predictably enough, opposes a proposed United Nations (UN) arms embargo on Damascus, accused of repeated human rights abuses in its efforts to cling to power.

But Russia is not alone in cynically exploiting others’ misfortune to support its arms industry. The US, which remains the biggest arms exporter in the world with as much as 50% of the estimated $60bn-$70bn annual legal trade, is also believed to be clandestinely supplying weapons to the rebels. The resulting standoff — not dissimilar to the Cold War conflict-by-proxy that sustained dictatorial regimes the world over for decades after the Second World War — has undoubtedly contributed to the difficulty in finding a diplomatic solution to Syria’s troubles. There is little incentive for the international community to reach consensus on the action to be taken when there is so much at stake for the countries that have veto powers in the UN.

That is why there is scepticism among military analysts as to whether this week’s UN-sponsored conference aimed at establishing an international treaty governing arms sales will succeed. An overwhelming majority of UN member countries support the treaty concept, as do influential civil society groups such as Amnesty International and Oxfam, but that will mean little if the main arms-trading nations — which happen to be the five permanent UN veto holders, plus Germany — merely pay lip service to the ideal of a transparent, human rights-focused international arms trade that promotes accountability in terms of a legally binding treaty.

After all, the Convention on Cluster Munitions, an international treaty that prohibits the use, transfer and stockpiling of cluster bombs, has been signed by all UN members except the ones that matter — those that produce, or suspect they may have reason to use, cluster bombs. Without the endorsement of the US, Russia and China, this treaty is not worth the paper it is written on.

Still, there is some cause for optimism. The US, which voted against the 2006 UN resolution that launched the arms treaty process, has reversed its position under President Barack Obama and now backs a treaty that would plug loopholes in the international laws which allow arms traffickers and middlemen to ship weapons, ammunition and spare parts to murderous regimes that kill their own people.

Again, it is easy to be cynical about this, since the suggestion probably has the merit that the US has changed its tune only after noting the rise of the Chinese and Russian arms industries and realising that it is likely to lose its global dominance of the trade in the near future. But the reason for its about-turn matters less than its effect, and if US support for a treaty puts increased pressure on the other big arms producers to make similar concessions, it is to be welcomed.

Tighter regulation of arms sales will not prevent the rampant corruption characterising "legitimate" transactions such as the notorious South African arms deal, but it might help save lives in places such as Syria and other parts of the world where autocratic regimes remain in power through the barrel of the gun. As Oxfam points out, it is scandalous that there is an international agreement to govern world trade in bananas, but no treaty covering the sale of deadly weapons.

The government that voters deserve


Published: 2012/07/05 06:51:00 AM


THE lack of action against Basic Education Minister Angie Motshekga for being in contempt of court after failing to deliver textbooks to Limpopo schools has made it clear that unless voters step up and hold government to account at the ballot box, there is little incentive for ministers to respect the rule of law.


Next week, the Gauteng North High Court is once again set to rule on an alleged breach of the constitution by a government minister, this time after the state failed to ensure residents of Carolina in Mpumalanga have reasonable access to potable water. Water and Environmental Affairs Minister Edna Molewa and eight other government officials and institutions were taken to court over about 17000 people being without safe drinking water since January due to acid mine water seepage contaminating the town’s water supply.


After several months of inaction, the municipality promised to restore water supplies by June 15, but the date came and went without the promise being kept and the community was left with little alternative but to resort to court action. The municipality has argued that it has been trucking in water amounting to five litres per person per day. However, activists contend that the municipal water tanker service is unreliable and not always accessible to the average person.


Moreover, the Water Services Act stipulates that people are each entitled to 25 litres of potable water per day or 6000 litres per household per month, leaving the municipality’s efforts well short of the statutory minimum standard.


With service delivery failures on the increase, it is likely that the government will face more legal challenges on the grounds that failing to attain minimum standards amounts to a breach of people’s basic rights. However, the government’s record suggests these are unlikely to have much effect on delivery.


The court ruled that Ms Motshekga must ensure textbooks be delivered by a June 15 deadline, but it was only after the Democratic Alliance had made a song and dance that she or the officials under her leadership showed any sign of remedying the problem.


Sadly, it was public embarrassment rather than the rule of law that spurred the minister into action. Although it is encouraging that the opposition and media can still play a role in holding the government to account, voters are responsible for ensuring that the representatives they elect deliver on their promises. The old adage may seem trite, but in a democracy people really do get the government they deserve.

THE DAILY NATION: UK walks talk on corruption

Published: 2012/07/05 06:51:00 AM

NEWS coming out of the U K illustrates the strong sanctions available for companies that flout the rules.

The chairman of Barclays Bank, the CE and one other top official have this week been forced to resign after the bank was caught in a scandal over the manipulation of interest rates.

In an unrelated development in the US, pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline will pay $2,5bn in civil and criminal liabilities in the biggest healthcare fraud settlement in history. The global conglomerate pleaded guilty to promoting drugs for unapproved use, concealing important safety information, and bribing doctors to dispense its products.

In the recent past, we have seen corporate executives sentenced to lengthy jail terms for defrauding the public or robbing shareholders, particularly in the US.

The point is that while we so often think of corruption as a government preserve, it is also deeply rooted in the private sector.

The difference is that in Kenya, we wink at corporate corruption, while elsewhere strong action is taken. Nairobi, July 4

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY NEWS EGYPT, EGYPT

Morsy, Suez murder and state security

Egyptian columnists in several newspapers have explored different subjects relating to the new President Mohamed Morsy.

Some writers denounced Morsy’s passivity in relation to the latest Suez incident, where a young engineer was killed. Others questioned the President’s relation to the State security, being one of the former senior figureheads of the once-banned Muslim Brotherhood.

No need for a coalition
Diaa Rashwan
Al-Masry Al-Youm

Expert on political Islam Diaa Rashwan examines President Mohamed Morsy’s pre-election promises, in the form of the establishment of the “National Front”; an accord between Dr. Morsy and prominent political, revolutionary and national figures.

The promises he made as part of this front were to appoint an independent patriotic prime minister, not to allow his Freedom and Justice Party to occupy the majority of cabinet seats, and to form a presidential team, consisting of vice-presidents, consultants, and deputies, who represent the wide spectrum of Egypt’s political, religious, and generational differences.

Rashwan states that the Egyptian revolution has taken a different path from the principles originally set out by the ‘National Front’, given the fact that parliamentary and presidential elections pre-assign weights to different political groups based upon votes.

He concludes that the current situation is more the formation of a “National Coalition” than a “National Front”.

Rashwan explains the difference between both concepts. While forming a coalition relates to times when there is no decisive parliamentary majority, forming a “National Front” has been historically linked to the confrontation of a foreign occupation, or counteracting internal instability, such as riots and revolts.

Rashwan concludes that the best solution for the country and the Islamist majority is to allow the latter to implement their agendas uninterrupted. Only then, will Egyptians have the right to either approve or reject such policies, through the ballot boxes.

Did every party give away its square?
Amr Al-Shobaki
Al-Masry Al-Youm

Amr Al-Shobaki ponders why the demonstrators in both Tahrir Square and Nasr City decided to suspend their strikes simultaneously.

While the Nasr City camp at first speculated about a confrontation between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Supreme Council of Armed Forces (SCAF), they soon realised that the transitional period would actually constitute a willful handover of power by the SCAF to the Brotherhood.

It is hardly shocking to recognise the conflict of interests between the Brotherhood and the revolutionaries in Tahrir Square.

This was demonstrated by the acceptance by President Morsy of the Supplementary Constitutional Declaration, and his swearing-in before the Supreme Constitutional Court, despite the denouncement of the declaration by revolutionary groups.

He says that the challenges facing Egypt in the coming period will require the pure soul of Tahrir square.

This does not mean a square mutilated and dominated by one particular political faction which works hard to exploit the revolution in order to serve its narrow interests.

The end of demonstrations in both Tahrir Square and Nasr City, show how both camps need to work through the democratic system and help to re-build the country, rather than try to intimidate their opponents by demonstrating with loud slogans.

Suez is calling you, Dr Morsy
Wael Kandil
Al-Shorouk News

Following the tragic killing of the young student Ahmed Hussein Eid in the city of Suez by the self-named ‘Society for Commanding Just and Forbidding Evil’, Wael Kandil calls upon President Morsy to react before it is too late.

While Morsy did not attend the victim’s funeral procession, the least he could do, in Kandil’s estimate, is visit Eid’s family to offer his condolences.

The incident happened soon after the election of the Islamist President Morsy, and has propagated a widespread fear of Islamist rule among ordinary people.

Kandil considers that Morsy’s main emphasis should be to put down these fears, and take immediate action.

Kandil recalls the brutal killing of Khalid Said by police agents, after which ousted President Mubarak did not move a muscle to react.

He sees that regardless of who committed this act, had it been extremist Islamists or agents of the ousted regime’s state security apparatus, President Morsy needs to firmly stand up before the residents of Suez and reaffirm that Egypt will remain a civil, democratic, and just state, governed by law, which respects the sanctity of Egyptian blood.

Morsy’s file in the State Security
Emad Al-Din Hussein
Al-Shorouk News

In an attempt to speculate about the nature of the relationship between the Muslim Brotherhood’s President Mohamed Morsy and high-rank police generals, Emad Al-Din Hussein suggests that Morsy, being a major Brotherhood figurehead since 1977, should have a file in the drawers of the disbanded state security apparatus, now called National Security.

Hussein cites a conversation he had with an ex-state security officer, who was transferred to a rural public relations post after the dissolution of the apparatus.

The officer was convinced that the Brotherhood were the reason behind all of the world’s miseries, from terrorism to global warming!

He and many of his police comrades regard the revolution as a coup d’état led by the Muslim Brotherhood, with the assistance of Hamas, the funding of Qatar, and the support of the United States.

From this standpoint, Hussein sees the greatest challenge to be the need to reform the police apparatus rather than just dismiss its personnel.

President Morsy carries the responsibility of re-structuring Egypt’s security by winning confidence among younger ranks.

Hussein warns Morsy against acting like an “Ikhwani” cadre who is out to settle accounts with old rivals, rather he urges him to act as president of all Egyptians.

Jogging
Magdi Al-Gallad
Al-Watan News

Editor-in-Chief of Al-Watan Magdi Al-Gallad recounts his relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood.

He knows well that they have been the only political faction with enough organisation and discipline to survive the decay which occurred in all institutions during Mubarak’s era.

While Al-Gallad praises their devotion to their programme, he does not deny his skepticism of the concept of blind obedience which has effectively been the ingredient guaranteeing the Brotherhood’s survival.

Al-Gallad sees no difference in the way in which the Muslim Brotherhood and the ousted National Democratic Party regard media and journalists; they both see them as good, as long as they are ‘in their pockets’.

Al-Gallad declares that his issue with the Brotherhood arises from his ‘journalism disease’, meaning he is unable to remain silent before anything that goes wrong, regardless of the outcomes he might face, and the price he may pay.

Denouncing the way most of media circles are ‘jogging’ towards the Muslim Brotherhood, their Freedom and Justice Party, and their President Mohamed Morsy; Al-Gallad asserted to Morsy that the presidential institution should be the one fearing the media, and not the other way around.

Gallad expresses his surprise that, when this was put to him, Morsy acknowledged this point.

The Halal Violence
Khalid Montassir
Al-Watan News

Khalid Montassir denounces the hideous murder of the engineering student Ahmed Hussein in the city of Suez, who was killed in cold blood, by what he terms “Salafist thugs”, in front of his fiancée.

He unequivocally condemns this new form of ‘halal violence’, committed by bearded thugs wearing short jilbabs, and describes those who kill innocent people, in the name of wanting to ‘Command the Just and Forbid the Evil’, as lacking any sense of Islam and humanity.

Montassir questions whether President Mohamed Morsy will visit Hussein’s mother as he did with Khalid Said’s mother, and deal with the lurking threat of religious violence with an iron fist.

He queries whether Morsy will shy away from upsetting the Salafists who helped him to ascend to his presidency, in exchange for a vow to implement Shari’a, in their own hard-line interpretation.

This, he speculates, enables them to interfere in everyone’s personal freedoms under the old canard of protecting the society from vice.

Montassir states that while Salafists killed a young man walking in the street with his legal fiancée, they staunchly defended their MP Ali Wanis after he was caught in a Matrix car with women on three different occasions.

These women included; a girl whom he called “his niece”, another who he named his “fiancée”, and someone he does not know.

EDITORIAL : THE BANGKOK POST, THAILAND

Justice elusive in deep South

The army's ability to remain beyond the arm of the law is sadly illustrated by the case of Pvt Wichien Phuaksom, a native of Songkhla province, who was allegedly tortured to death by drill sergeants at an army camp.

One year later, little progress has been made in the case, and the lieutenant who allegedly oversaw the fatal beating still walks free.

Pvt Wichien served at the 151st infantry battalion, based at Peeleng camp in Cho Airong district of Narathiwat province, the same camp which was attacked by suspected Islamic insurgents on Jan 4, 2004 who fled with more than 400 firearms.

A master's degree graduate from Thammasat University, Pvt Wichien volunteered to serve in the army in one of the three southernmost restive provinces early last year after leaving the monkhood.

On June 4 last year, his family received a phone call informing them that Pvt Wichien was lying unconscious at the intensive care unit of Naradhiwasrajanagarindra Hospital.

Family members rushed to the hospital from Songkhla only to find him dead the following day from serious injuries allegedly inflicted upon him by his drill sergeants under the supervision of an army lieutenant.

The victim's family claimed Pvt Wichien was dragged across the room and badly beaten up by about 10 drill sergeants using bamboo rods. But the more disturbing part of this tragedy is not only about Pvt Wichien's death from apparent torture but about the inaction of higher-ranking army officers to investigate the case and, worse still, the attempts to spare an army officer from prosecution.

Nine non-commissioned officers were charged with involvement in Pvt Wichien's death but their superior, an army lieutenant, was detained for 15 days and spared criminal prosecution. One year later, the lieutenant, whose father is said to be an army general, still walks free.

Pvt Wichien's case was highlighted at a panel discussion held on June 26 in Bangkok to mark the International Day Against Torture. A relative of the victim, Marisrawan Kaewnopparat, said the army had offered the family 10 million baht to settle the case, which they rejected. All they have asked for is transparency in the case and justice for the victim, she said.

The plight of lowly-paid military defence volunteers in the deep South should also raise concerns in government quarters, especially as volunteers are poised to take on a bigger role in providing security in the region.

In the first six months of this year, 15 volunteers have been killed, eight wounded and 11 of their sidearms stolen. Insurgents appear to be targeting them as a source of weapons.

One volunteer told the Isra news agency that he and his colleagues based at an outpost were given only one pack of instant noodles, three eggs and one pack of instant coffee for four days of sentry duty.

Military rangers and defence volunteers such as these will take over most security work in the restive region from regular troops who are being gradually withdrawn.

Whether this volunteer's plea will ever be heard by his superiors at the Interior Ministry remains to be seen. Yet how can residents rest easy at night knowing that the ministry, which should be doing a better job overseeing security in the deep South, appears to regard the foot soldiers of that unenviable security duty as second-class citizens?

EDITORIAL : THE AUSTRALIAN, AUSTRALIA

Helping the homeless is a major national challenge

AS overnight temperatures plunge to below freezing in many parts of the continent, a new report by the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare has highlighted the fact that about 99,000 Australians are homeless in one of the most prosperous societies in the world.

As well as pricking the consciences of authorities and individuals, the report underlines the complexity of the problem and the shortcomings of gesture politics.

After the November 2007 election, the first piece of "homework" Kevin Rudd set Labor caucus members was to visit a homeless shelter and report on local housing issues. With absolute sincerity and commitment, Mr Rudd, who was no stranger to rolling up his sleeves and helping out at such centres, which he continued to visit unaccompanied after his election as prime minister, vowed to make homelessness a national priority. He pledged to cut the numbers of homeless Australians by 20 per cent by 2013 and 50 per cent by 2020. Regrettably, the nation and federal Labor have fallen well short of that goal, despite investing $5 billion in services.

The institute's report explains the reasons why, citing financial difficulties, housing affordability, domestic violence, family breakdown, mental health issues, substance abuse, other medical conditions and unemployment among the main reasons homeless people seek help.

No government or charitable organisation, however well resourced, can eliminate such pressures entirely. That said, more effective and pragmatic initiatives are needed to help society's most disadvantaged people become self-supporting and access the services they need. It is appalling, for example, that 48 per cent of people seeking long-term accommodation from dedicated homelessness services in the final quarter of last year were neither accommodated nor referred to another service. The over-representation of Aborigines, especially women, among the homeless -- indigenous people accounted for 21 per cent of those who sought help -- is a sign of how much remains to be done by way of long-term, practical reconciliation solutions to redress disadvantage in health, welfare and housing.

Of the 99,000 people who sought help from specialist homeless agencies in the December quarter last year, more than 24,000 mentioned mental health, substance abuse and other medical problems as a reason for their plight.

Despite funding increases for mental health, the sector urgently needs better resources to deal with the pressures created over recent decades in the rush to close mental institutions and relocate patients back into the community. The misguided policy's impact on many sufferers and their families was intense because of inadequate support services and specialist accommodation.

Just as Bob Hawke's rash promise in 1987 that "by 1990 no Australian child will be living in poverty" proved unrealistic, Mr Rudd's ambitious pledge to cut homelessness substantially was never going to be easy, or cheap. But while the number of homeless people remains high, finding solutions must be a priority. As Wesley Mission chief Keith Garner said yesterday, there is no quick fix. Homelessness demands a comprehensive, long-term approach from governments and the community.

Carbon tax policy confusion

LIKE homelessness, climate change was another challenge Kevin Rudd thought he could solve. Five years ago, as opposition leader, he convened a high-level summit and declared "climate change is the great moral challenge of our generation".

It was, he said, also an environmental challenge, an economic challenge and a challenge of national security. Today, it seems climate change is no longer about the economy, the environment or national security, let alone the moral imperative of our national politics. As ministers fanned out across the nation this week to argue the case for the carbon tax, voters could be forgiven for thinking it was simply an elaborate way to fund cash handouts, tax cuts and pension increases. Few are talking about the purpose of the carbon tax: to force a structural change in the economy and pivot towards a low carbon future. If the purpose appears lost amid song-and-dance routines, ministers eager to show no price impact at supermarkets and claims that Whyalla will or won't be "wiped off the map," the government is being advised to remove or lower the $15 floor price when transitioning to an emissions trading scheme in 2015.

Independent MP Rob Oakeshott has called on the government to remove the floor price, which is yet to be legislated. Greens leader Christine Milne acknowledges some green energy companies would also like to see it abolished. This newspaper has argued that an emissions trading scheme is an efficient and effective way to reduce carbon emissions. The problem is that Australia is edging ahead of the rest of the world which is undermining public support for the scheme. The failure of the Copenhagen talks in 2009, where no global agreement was reached, left Australia at risk of losing its competitive economic advantages. Australia is saddled with an inflated fixed carbon price of $23 a tonne. This week, New Zealand announced changes to its carbon pricing scheme to soften the impact on households and businesses. With the government rarely talking about the need for a clean energy future, the carbon tax has become merely an instrument to redistribute money to ease cost of living pressures in the electorate. Rethinking the fundamental design of the carbon tax is sound but it should have been contemplated months ago, not just days after it was introduced. Such talk only entrenches opposition to the tax.

The real public interest test

IF a competent and popular government that had sought and received a mandate for media regulation proposed a government-funded News Media Council, we would oppose it.

But when it is pushed by a government that has never put its plans to the electorate, is so lacking in self-confidence that it has produced two leadership contests, and blames some media for its record lows in the polls, we are entitled to be especially alarmed. The Gillard government's media regulation proposals deserve to be opposed by voters, of all political leanings, who want to see our imperfect but robust democracy protected.

No matter how benign the intention, government regulation of news media content is an incursion on free speech because it opens up the potential for political pressure at the expense of the public's right to know. The news media must be fearless in its scrutiny of our political system, and other facets of society. The threat of sanction from a government-funded authority, on top of the constraints that already exist through defamation and vilification laws, can only stifle news reporting and impede the scrutiny of government.

At The Australian we have been transparent about our pursuit of issues that have been embarrassing for governments, and have led to a degree of accountability that otherwise would not have transpired. Whether it has been the exposure of the children overboard deceptions, the Australian Wheat Board scandal, the BER waste or the leadership tensions within the former Rudd government, we stand by our diligence, objectivity and primary focus on exposing the truth. Whether this embarrasses government or opposition, Liberal or Labor, should not be our concern. Our compact is with readers. The public is free to choose what media to use or buy, based on the organisation's reputation. That is a far better discipline than a government-funded authority ruling on what is or isn't acceptable on any given issue.

Governments are not renowned for telling us all we need to know. We learn today that Communications Minister Stephen Conroy's justification for a public interest test on media ownership is disingenuous. He cites Productivity Commission support for adding such a test. In fact, the commission only backed the test as an alternative restriction to current ownership rules. Only a free media can be relied upon to correct such unfortunate oversights in our political debate.

EDITORIAL : THE JAKARTA POST, INDONESIA

Graft in Allah’s name

Indonesia has a serious rival to the Wall of China – the thicker, longer and more formidable wall of resistance against combating graft. Part of that wall is the Religious Affairs Ministry, the state institution deemed the most corrupt in a 2011 survey by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK). Officials and the public expressed shock last week when the KPK announced it was beginning investigations into irregularities surrounding the ministry’s procurement of millions of copies of the Koran.

The shock expressed has been greater than that conveyed regarding other graft issues, including haj management. For the latest allegations concern the holy book itself. Indonesia, the country with the largest Muslim population, has now gained global fame for embezzling everything, even the provision of the Koran, which is believed to contain God’s words.

But then the revelations are not all that surprising. For the provision of the Koran copies ended up being only one item on a long list of procurements by the aforementioned ministry, and only one among a vast number of procurements across 34 ministries and other state institutions. The procurements at these bodies are among the main sources of corruption identified by law enforcers.

To meet the demand of at least 2 million copies a year for local religious affairs offices and Islamic schools, the ministry had to outsource the printing of Korans.

Citing KPK sources, Tempo magazine revealed on Monday the role of a Golkar politician on the House of Representatives’ (DPR) budget committee, who was said to be the regular mediator between the House and the ministry.

Graft reports surrounding the Koran procurement, and also the haj management, will only mean louder calls to clean up graft at the ministry – by privatizing its lucrative, graft-prone businesses – or dissolving the ministry itself.

Instead of making haj management independent of the ministry, the government appointed the economist Anggito Abimanyu as the ministry’s new directorate general for haj and minor pilgrimage affairs.

We hope that the former head of fiscal policy at the Finance Ministry becomes a sort of modern-day Pied Piper to lure out the graft rats, given his flute-playing skills. But it will be amazing if he can even so much as scratch the surface of that wall, which protects the interests sitting on the ministry’s lucrative businesses.

Before the Koran procurement reports, the KPK also revealed irregularities in the use of interest proceeds, worth Rp 1.7 trillion (US$188 million) from the management of haj funds of Rp 32 trillion. The commission called for a moratorium on haj pilgrimage registrations, with too many candidates on the waiting list.

As the haj is obligatory for all able Muslims, millions set aside savings and wait at least three years before leaving for Mecca – setting the stage for graft among greedy parties within and outside the ministry.

Protests come and go; including from Batavia Air, which voiced in April suspicions over its repeated losses in transportation tenders for the annual average departure of 200,000 pilgrims. Its suspicions of a business monopoly are as yet unproven.

But, nevertheless, we question the use of this ministry, if it can’t even protect the Koran from corruption, much less millions of would-be haj pilgrims, many of whom save all their lives to meet the costs involved. As for the protection of religious minorities, we have seen how the Religious Affairs Ministry is itself part of the problem.

EDITORIAL : THE DAILY TRIBUNE, THE PHILIPPINES

Hoist by Noy’s own petard

It may have been easy for Noynoy to kick out former Chief Justice (CJ) Renato Corona from his top post through an impeachment and a conviction, despite there having been no impeachable crime proved in the Senate trial against him.

But it won’t be that easy for Noynoy to fight public perception that, with his appointee for the Chief Justice post to replace Corona, that appointee not only would be under his direction and control, but also that the entire Supreme Court (SC) will be seen as an adjunct of Malacañang and subservient to the the president.

The reason stems from the fact that Noynoy is  now hoisted by his own petard. The means with which he used to harm his foes, has returned to harm him greatly.

He and his allies — many of whom are nominees and applicants for the top judicial post — have always claimed that Corona, being an appointee of Gloria Arroyo, was under her direction and control, to the point of even claiming that he, as CJ, exerted great influence and control over the other justices to do his, and Gloria’s bidding and that the SC was an Arroyo court.

What does that make of his appointment of his preferred candidate for the SC post, since he would obviously have to appoint someone he knows would be Noynoy friendly?

As can be gleaned, his three appointees in the high court have too many times decided in Noynoy and his Palace’s favor. Acting CJ Antonio Carpio has also been known to rule for Noynoy and the executive branch, through his dissent. Today, Carpio tries to paint an image of himself as an independent jurist, now saying that a presidential appointee does not necessarily mean that the appointee loses his independence.

Leila de Lima, the self-proclaimed best bet for the top judicial post, also claims she can be independent, if she becomes the Chief Justice, adding that she has proven her independence when she was the chairman of the Commission on Human Rights (CHR).

Truth is, as CHR chairman, De Lima mostly ruled through press releases to portray herself as an independent officer. Yet the record shows that she failed to file complaints against the military and police who stood accused of violating human rights as well as those alleged as having summarily executed too many victims.

And as Noynoy’s Justice chief, certainly, she has proved her utter subservience to him — to the point of not bothering to probe the DFA-claimed forged travel documents that Sen. Panfilo Lacson, then a fugitive from justice, carried with him to enter the country. And she does what Noynoy wants. She rushes  compliants against his foes, even in the absence of evidence.

She, along with Carpio and Justice Sereno, who also hopes to be appointed by Noynoy, claims that she can be the unifying factor in the SC, even as she had openly defied the SC’s order too many times.

How can anyone of them even be seen as a healer in the SC, when they were actively participating in destroying and demonizing not only the CJ but the very institution they are mandated to defend and position they all seek today?

These applicants and nominees hoping to get the top judicial post fail to see the pitfalls and the loss of independence after the ouster of a Chief Justice that may occur under a new president — as Noynoy will hardly be in Malacañang after 2016. 

As it has been already been shown that a president, using the bribe of pork barrel to get a CJ or even any SC justice impeached and convicted, can easily bring an ouster abou0t, there can no longer be any guarantees of a fixed tenure in a constitutional body.

This is the reason that whoever is appointed by the president, will always be under pressure to please the Malacañang occupant and decide in his favor, to keep his job.

After all, the way the Judicial and Bar Council is constituted, most of whom are his alllies and appointees, he can always get its members to come up with the list he wants and appoint whom he wants.

The reality is that whoever Noynoy appoints, that appointee will always be seen as being his lackey, as he has used that argument to get Corona out.

He used this weapon to destroy his foe. Now that same weapon destroys him and his appointed Chief Justice.

EDITORIAL : THE NEW STRAITS TIMES, MALAYSIA

The last telegram

The electric telegraph came to a quiet end, marking the end of an era

IN a muted and inconspicuous announcement, which was in sharp contrast to the memorable and vivid effects that the messages it has delivered for 138 years in different institutional guises has had on many Malaysians, Telekom Malaysia Berhad (TM) informed its "valued customers" that its telegram service would be "discontinued effective  July 1, this year".  This put a last stop to a once-popular means of communication that began with the British intervention in Perak in 1874. Though TM has been using the computer rather than the teleprinter to receive and transmit the telegraphic messages, it is no small irony that the closure notice was published not only in print but also on its website, as it was more than anything else the spread of email on the Internet that was the nail in the coffin for telegrams.

In telegram's heyday, organisations and businesses of every kind as well as the man on the street used it to deliver good and bad tidings, from job interviews to family bereavement. But the 1,000 telegrams on the final day at TM Point Kota Baru, Kelantan were mostly from financial institutions using the service to serve formal notices of claims on their debtors rather than ordinary people trying to be the last to send a telegram offering congratulations or condolences. For TM, though telegram use has been declining and no longer its core business and a major contributor to its bottom line, closure was no big loss as it has long refocused its main business on voice, data and Internet services.

For older Malaysians, however, the quiet death of the telegram may stir bittersweet feelings and a nostalgic sense of loss. It is certainly interesting that telegrams are nowadays delivered as nostalgic novelty items in Sweden. But the truth is that there are not too many who remember the days when telegrams were the fastest and cheapest way to receive and transmit urgent messages of sorrow or success. Those days are certainly hazy for younger Malaysians who text messages on their mobile phones and send e-mails on the Internet. For sure, the brevity of the language of telegrams, which relied on abbreviated phrases and punctuation and omitted verbs and pronoun, is akin to the prose used on short-message services. Still, it would be hard for many to imagine that telegrams are anything but a thing for the past. It is certainly the end of an era. The surprising thing is that the telegram lasted longer in Malaysia than in many other countries which recognised the reality of its obsolescence years ago.

EDITORIAL : THE GUARDIAN, UK

BBC director general: Auntie's new man

The world's greatest programme-making enterprise has rightly been entrusted to an experienced programme-maker

The appointment of George Entwistle as director general is an expression of confidence in the BBC's public service mission. The hacking fiasco and its Levesonian aftermath have tainted many media rivals who do things very differently – reminding a nation why it holds an infuriating but brilliant institution so dear, and cautioning enemies in business and politics against all-out assaults for the moment. The bean-counting school of creativity – which subjects every production to cost-benefit analysis – is less appealing in these circumstances. The outgoing director general, Mark Thompson, has also done a good deal for the mood; the BBC Trust has rightly decided to entrust the world's greatest programme-making enterprise to an experienced programme-maker.

For that is what Mr Entwistle always was, before the last half-decade or so spent in management took him to the heights as head of vision, or – in less pretentious parlance – the boss of BBC TV. After starting out as a journalist in Michael Heseltine's magazine empire, he launched into a BBC career, with an initial focus on current affairs that culminated in editing Newsnight. There have also been spells on The Culture Show and Tomorrow's World, and more recently – from the commissioning seat – there was support for a year of science programming in 2010, and indeed for an opera season in the same year, which took arias to the airwaves right across BBC stations and channels. The CV, then, speaks to arts and science as well as politics. Think of Greg Dyke's charismatic populism, or the management-speak that preceded him, and Mr Entwistle's arrival could prove to be the boldest reassertion of Reithian values in a generation.

We must wait and see whether Mr Entwistle will use the top job to set the corporation off in the sort of educative direction which his résumé might suggest. If that is his plan, it is a noble one, but no editorial strategy will succeed without a dash of business and political acumen. The pressure on this BBC career man to demonstrate both will be all the greater because every senior post he has ever held has been within Auntie's shadow. The most immediate if most prosaic managerial challenge is restoring staff morale, which – as across the public sector – is being tested by cuts, as well as by the unavoidable strains of the great northward migration to Salford. More fundamentally, Mr Entwistle will need to swim with a tide of technology that will surely advance just as fast under his watch as under his recent predecessors. John Birt may not have been able to communicate the benefits of his digital investments, but the corporation is surely feeling their benefit now. The iPlayer is surely one of Mr Thompson's greatest legacies to the BBC. His successor must also respond to a world in which more and more screens are stowed in the pocket and viewed on the move.

Keeping ahead of the technology is principally a question of remaining useful to a paying public who foot the bills through the licence fee. But it is also a question of sustaining this spring that sustains all BBC life. A modest poll tax, it is a hard sell in hard times, and unless great care is taken it could become uncollectable as viewing shifts from traditional televisions to other devices. If you doubt the difficulties, just glance at the baffling guidance on when iPlayer users are required to pay up. A flat and compulsory licence fee could hardly be more out of kilter with the culture of a free-for-all and individualistic web.

Tricky as it may be, the case for a licence fee – or something very like it – is the case that the unknown Mr Entwistle will have to make if Britain's proud and distinctive tradition of public service broadcasting is to survive through the next twists of the communications revolution. The argument should be winnable: just as financial scandals create space for the Co-operative Bank, so those Leveson revelations demonstrate afresh the urgent need for something like the BBC. Mr Entwistle's record suggests that he understands as much. He must step forward from the back office and make the case.

Barclays: advantage Diamond

The Treasury select committee unwittingly made a compelling case for a judge-led investigation into banking

On show on Wednesday in parliament was a textbook display of the limits of parliamentary inquiries. The newly ejected boss of one of the world's biggest, and now most disgraced, banks spent an afternoon supposedly being grilled by the Treasury select committee; and the 13 MPs found out almost nothing new. Not because Bob Diamond was taciturn; but because the committee members were not up to the job of winkling out telling points. Over three hours, they unwittingly made a compelling case for a judge-led public investigation into the dangerous excesses and wilful outrages of the banking industry.

Where they needed forensic detail, the MPs preferred bluster. Instead of acquiring expertise, they gladly professed ignorance. Two of the 13 committee members had been directly employed by Barclays; another, we were reminded, is still a director at a City money broker. Yet this experience did not strengthen the MPs' questioning, but seemed to make them even tamer, as Mr Diamond addressed them by their forenames and dead-batted the most polished questions.

The session should have been so different. This week began with the revelation that Barclays staff thought the Bank of England had given them licence to fiddle the system of setting Libor interest rates. But the MPs did not press very hard on that area. As the hearing began, George Osborne was flinging around accusations that Gordon Brown's lieutenants were "clearly involved" in the scandal. Again, Mr Diamond was not asked to address those charges. Instead, he talked a lot about how much he "loved" Barclays, the Quaker-founded conservative institution he turned into a giant casino bank, before stewarding it to the largest fine in the history of British financial regulation. The years Barclays staff spent rigging the money market made him "physically ill". Apart from these made-for-TV soundbites, the biggest revelations were that Mr Diamond thinks other institutions were involved (as regulators warned last week) and that he intends to take his payoff of £22m. However sad this last revelation, it is entirely true to Mr Diamond's form. As Lib Dem MP John Thurso observed wistfully towards the end, "If you were an English cricketer, you would be Geoffrey Boycott. You have been occupying the crease for two and a half hours and I am not sure we are any further forward."

This will surely not be the last public interrogation of Mr Diamond. But it does show just why we need a forensic and concentrated examination of what's been going on at Barclays and throughout the banking industry – and among the regulators and ministers who have allowed one of Britain's leading industries to become serially scandal-ridden and disastrously costly to the rest of us.

In praise of … The Italian Job

It is unblinkingly sexist, chauvinist, and touchingly loyal to the crocks of the car industry, but the British caper film The Italian Job still endures

It is unblinkingly sexist, chauvinist, and touchingly loyal to the crocks of the car industry, but the British caper film The Italian Job still endures. Its latest incarnation is the installation on the De La Warr Pavilion – a replica of a twin-axle Harrington Legionnaire-bodied Bedford VAL coach perched over the side of the building. This is the literal cliffhanger (gold from robbery on one end of the fulcrum, gang wot nicked it on the other) which produced Michael Caine's best line: "Hang on a minute, lads, I've got a great idea! Err …" But the fact that thousands will see a coach teetering over the side of a building and get the joke is testament enough to the 1969 film. What makes its ending British enough to be used as a flag-waving exercise in the Olympics? Is it the sight of the red, white and blue coach teetering over the edge, or more simply the thought that, after all that effort, the gold is out of reach and the result a botch?

EDITORIAL : THE GLOBAL TIMES, CHINA

Shifang protest needs law-based conclusion

Global Times | 2012-7-5 0:25:03

Photo: Tecent Weibo 

Days after a molybdenum copper plant project that triggered large scale protests was halted by the Shifang city government, tensions continue to linger. People have called on local authorities to release detained protesters. 

According to official accounts, 21 of the 27 people taken away during the protests have been released. Currently, three protesters remain in administrative detention and another three in criminal detention.

Tensions came about from the Shifang government's decision-making procedure in approving the heavy-metal refinery, which the public was strongly against. 

When the confrontation escalated, police vehicles were turned over during the protests and police were pelted with rocks. Tear gas was then applied to disperse the demonstrators.

Quite a few people think the public was forced to turn to violence when the initial protests against the government's misguided decision proved fruitless. As a result, protesters currently under detention should be freed unconditionally. The request has received support from some public opinion leaders.

We hold that the Shifang government should initiate an investigation promptly and make the findings public. The legal responsibility of the six protesters, especially the three in criminal detention, has to be based on facts and be decided by law. 

Moreover, local authorities need to communicate thoroughly with the public and reflect on their previous mistakes to avoid a new round of confrontation.

Protesters involved in the incident have received sympathy from the public. However, some negative moods long simmering in cyber space have also joined to reinforce this protest. This sentiment will continue during the investigation period.

The protest was triggered by an environmental dispute, not a political one. Local authorities' response was also aimed at restoring order. 

But the incident has attracted the attention of the whole of society, including negative sentiments in public opinion. It will make it more difficult for the government to smooth over conflicts. 

This is why a local dispute in China can easily turn into a national issue. The Shifang government now has to face inquiries by local residents, and the dissatisfaction of netizens. 

The conclusion of this incident has to be authoritative and the issue must be dealt with in an open and transparent manner. Otherwise, it would be a blow to the dignity of the law. 

If the local government is unable to proceed with the investigation due to its damaged credibility, higher administrative and judiciary departments should become involved. 

Public figures can also be invited to find a better mechanism to respond to mass protests.