New King must put the house in order.

New King must put the house in order.

Legally according to articles 39 and 40 of the “Malaysia’s Constitution”, executive power is vested in the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. Such power may be exercised by him personally only in accordance with Cabinet advice (except where the Constitution allows him to act in his own discretion) (Art. 40), the Cabinet, any minister authorised by the Cabinet, or any person authorised by federal law.

With this legal background, the new King, His Majesty then took his Oath of Installation, pledging among other things to perform his duties in accordance with the laws and constitution, and to protect Islam at all times.

“I will hereby rule Malaysia in a fair manner in accordance with the law and the country’s constitution and uphold at all times the religion of Islam and stand firm for a just government and peaceful country," he read the proclamation.

Yang di-Pertuan Agong Sultan Muhammad V also said quality human capital is the key to the success of Malaysia in the future. He said only with quality human capital could people improve their productivity and competitiveness as well as explore and exploit the country’s advantages and resources.

“I also hope the other Rulers will give their views and advice to ensure that Malaysia continues to uphold the sovereignty of Constitutional Monarchy in this blessed land,” Sultan Muhammad V said.

Pondering deep into such statements by the new King No. 15 on 24 April, 2017 and to help His Majesty to fulfil his duties to the letter of the “Constitution” and the spirit of Malaysia in both the Constitution and the Malaysia Agreement 1963, I would like to direct His Majesty to many anomalies in the “Malaysia or Malaya Constitution” as amended so many times since 1957 / 1963 with respects to Sabah and Sarawak and Malaya.  Most of those major amendments could be bias against Sabah and Sarawak causing lop-sidedness in the nation’s laws like Sabah and Sarawak were reduced to states in 1976’s major amendment in Parliament instead of 3 or 4 nations in 1963 at the formation of Malaysia.  There are so many amendments in the “Constitution” be it Malaysia or Malaya and so much so much confusions had arisen with great disadvantages and disparities to Sabah and Sarawak in one nation Malaysia.  Since His Majesty has pledged to conform to the “Constitution” and not the sacred “original” one, I hope the new King would call a Royal Commission Inquiry on the prevailing “Constitution” to put the house of Malaysia in good and proper order.

Legally this is his Government and he had delegated it to the appointed Prime Minister and if his PM does not advice for an RCI on the Constitution proper, His Majesty should do it now.

Going from there, His Majesty has indeed a much greater burden in  his hand to “drain the swamp” in Putrajaya as we have come to observe that the present Government under the King has failed the nation in many aspects especially massive corruption and mismanagement/ bad governance after 60/54 years.  The obvious one is that vision 2020 is now “distorted” and a new vision 2050 is in the pipeline.  The King must be very much concerned why the perfect vision of 2020 is now abandoned.

The new King has also said that quality human capital is the key to the future in Malaysia and yet we know that foreigners including massive illegal people from various nations were given Project ICs to remain in the nation with impunity.  With this kind of scenario, how can quality human capital be attainable when the locals are side lined or marginalised and even be demoralised in many aspects.  We had a Royal commission of Inquiry on illegal immigrants in Sabah (RCI IIS) since 2012 with the abridged version of the Report on 4^th December, 2014.  Then the process of dealing with the illegal immigrants including those millions given Project ICs (much denied/silent then in the said Report) and at variances at the RCI proper hearing in 2013 were passed on to two “high power” working committees in 2015 at national and state levels.  Today 24 April, 2017 at the time of Installation of His Majesty, we have yet to hear of any positive results on the positive actions of the RCI IIS.  So my dear King, this is for you to perform as part and parcel of “draining the swamp.”

The new King also indicated that he will uphold the “peaceful” (my addition) religion of Islam and stand firm for a just government and peaceful country. Is the Government really just with all those things going on (including the few items amongst many I have listed above) in the nation under the Barisan National ruling coalition of UMNO and the rest?  Do we really have real peace in the country as prevailing in the country when a large junk of the people could be suffering for all sort of reasons?

I hope the King as the Chief executive of the nation would put the house in order considering that Malaysia Agreement 1963 must be adhered to in the letter and the spirit thereof albeit 54 years belatedly. Prompt and positive actions on good governance long overdue are very much desirable.

Joshua Y. C. Kong  27/4/2017

We are heading to oblivion

We are heading to oblivion.

Sabah Environment Protection Association (SEPA) forged a smart partnership with the government through the State Tourism, Culture and Environment Ministry to form EAC in 1997 with the aim of initiating a joint responsibility between the government and the people to carry out environmental activities that can contribute towards enhancing environmental quality.

Unfortunately this smart partnership had run aground when a Police Report was made by SEPA in April, 2105 after the due process of settlement of an accounting function of EAC failed and the Police Report appears to have not been pursued after 2 years.

I had been the founder member of SEPA since 1984 together with Mayor Datuk Yeo and an EAC member since 1997 with much concern in environment and this ongoing “crisis” on Bring Your Own Bags (BYOB) is indeed a black mark for environment activities for a few years since BYOB was implemented. The joint project of SEPA with the Ministry in BYOB was reported to have collected very much money of up to RM1m or lesser sums as reported in the press.

The crux of the “crisis” was that the accounts of BYOB project had not been audited for years.  There is an allegation that the said money had not been properly accounted for while there was a shakeup in the management team of BYOB. 

As it is with the alleged missing Tun Fuad Foundation since 1980s without any answer or off the radar, BYOB under EAC is in similar straits like “missing in action” even only very recent event.  

Just in passing, I wonder why a press article in page 2 of Daily Express on 17 April, 2017 headed “ Hidden Accounts: NGO under probe” after a Police Report was lodged with the name of NGO missing?

So I hope appropriate action by taken to bring the “crisis” in BYOB to a resolution to enhance environment activities especially now we the State Policies on the Environment just launched on 13 April, 2017 at the Sabah Legislative Assembly. We need to bring back the confidence of the public in all environment matters.

Joshua Y C Kong. 18/4/2017

Make iconic Tanjung Aru Beach a rejuvenated proud green lung for Kota Kinabalu City

Make iconic Tanjung Aru Beach a rejuvenated proud green lung for Kota Kinabalu City

Sabah lost it very huge tract of pristine forests especially to the Japanese in the commercial wood trade and only to be replaced by a lower specie of trees in oil palms in a few millions of acres of once abandoned forest land.

With the forests gone, we did not realise that we lost the eco therapy of forests until the Japanese started forest bathing in 1982 and appeared too late to stop the ravage of our pristine forest to make money to oil some industries elsewhere.

The tonic of the wilderness was Henry David Thoreau’s classic prescription for civilization and its discontents, offered in the 1854 essay Walden: Or, Life in the Woods. Now there’s scientific evidence supporting eco-therapy. The Japanese practice of forest bathing is proven to lower heart rate and blood pressure, reduce stress hormone production, boost the immune system, and improve overall feelings of wellbeing.

Forest bathing—basically just being in the presence of trees—became part of a national public health program in Japan in 1982 when the forestry ministry coined the phrase shinrin-yoku and promoted topiary as therapy.

Personally, in early 1980s I had a two hours brisk walk in the jungle of Moyog and I could stay much awake until 3am which was unusual as the impact of the forests.

Soon Sabah especially Kota Kinabalu would likely lose the top rated Tanjung Aru Beach (TAB) if TAED as it is, is implemented again to make money for some people.

With the loss of the TAB we also lose everything eco.

Apart from the nutritional properties, the ocean provides a variety of other health-giving elements you can benefit from.

The range of benefits to be exposed to the sea and the fresh air or just be by the beach as sea water and the beach have benefits for well-being of the people.

Research shows that the sound of waves alters wave patterns in the brain lulling you into a deeply relaxed state. Relaxing in this way can help rejuvenate the mind and body.

If you've ever wondered why we always sleep more soundly after spending the day on the beach, it's because of the sea air. Sea air is charged with healthy negative ions that accelerate our ability to absorb oxygen. Negative ions also balance levels of seratonin, a body chemical linked with mood and stress. Which is why after a holiday you feel more alert, relaxed and energised.

So are we really going to lose TAB as it is just because some people are adamant to make tons of money.

So to enable the virtual benefits from a natural beach is to leave untouched except do the minimal recovery against little erosion, much pollution, and re-forestation and nothing to do with massive reclamation.

So I suggest that TAED changes it direction to make TAB another massive green lung within the KK city with the existing Prince Philip Park as rehabilated together with a large area for botanical garden minus the golf course and less concrete jungle with enough fruit trees and endemic flora to be attractive for the local and tourists.

Botanical garden can earn good money for the entrance fees and rejuvenated the TAB with very good world class image as many expect this after decades of neglect by the authorities.
Joshua Y C Kong 11/4/2017

Accounting for income tax in religious bodies can be regressive.

Accounting for income tax in religious bodies can be regressive.

The Order of exemption by the Finance Minister in February, 2017 to allow religious bodies from Income tax stated that “a religious institution or organisation” means a religious institution or organisation which is established in Malaysia exclusively for the purpose of religious worship or the advancement of religion and is not operated or conducted primarily for profit.

That order was in place after the non Muslim religious bodies complained about the amendment in the Income Act 1967 in late 2016 to tax all religious bodies in 2017 hence  departure from the privilege of no tax scenario for all religious bodies since 1963 and earlier.

With the Order of Exemption, the religious bodies have felt contented with the new status.

But we need to be beware of anything that can come from the Inland Revenue Board (IRB) as how the Order of Exemption is to be viewed especially the Income Tax Act 1967 was amended and empower IRB to act on all or any religious bodies to verify if any such bodies are qualified for exemption if there are profits in such mutual organisations.  The Order of Exemption is not automatic for any  religious organisations and it is conditional as to how such organisation operate themselves as far as revenue from various sources are obtained although all such organisations are largely financed by donations.  Any donations or the resultant amount of donations after expenses should not be taxable.  Even any investment income such as rental and operational profit from such fund as donated should not be taxable.  Such investment incomes would be utilised for the daily operation of such organisations.  So the long time exemption of religious bodies is therefore in order.

The temporary new Order of Exemption in February, 2017 may bring temporary relief for religious bodies properly registered. The real scenario is not over yet. There may be some problem to be addressed for certain bodies since the British colonial time.  What would be the attitude of the IRB on such very religious bodies?

With the new Exemption Order and the amended Income Tax Act 1967, would the IRB still proceed in its power to call for certain returns of certain religious bodies to establish if such bodies qualify for exemption order as the order is still conditional on “profits”as in (and is not operated or conducted primarily for profit) ?

Who knows one fine day IRB in its desk or field audit decide to call up some well-to-do religious bodies to show the records?  What would happen if such religious bodies do not maintain anything like what the IRB would require to be examined?  Would such religious bodies be penalised if such bodies make much profits/surplus in their “draft final accounts” likely not suitable for the tax purpose?  Business corporations would know what to do but religious bodies would have shortcoming in this aspect.

Is IRB really happy with the recent Exemption Order as it has “defeated” IRB’s intention to resolve any anomaly faced by IRB in its effort to boost tax collection?  The amendment was a normal strategy of IRB to put all grey areas in order for tax jurisdiction.

Was it that there was a report that some people in the religious bodies earning very good income of up to RM200,000 annually did not report such income to the IRB?  Please do not let such violation by bad apples to destroy a well intended tradition for decades religious bodies had enjoyed to cement the harmony in multi racial and multi religious society.

Some view the change as affecting non Islamic religious bodies only although exemption order mentioned “religious bodies” meaning all such bodies.  These people do miss the point. It all depend on how IRB view such changes and we do not have any say in how IRB deal with the religious bodies. But one thing is for sure that Islamic bodies are largely financed by the Government and if such bodies do have to pay any income tax, such taxes would very likely come from the Government too.  For the non Islamic bodies, it is a burden solely to be borne by such bodies possibly with devastating impacts financially indisposed.   Many such religious bodies do operate with shoe string budget and yet have to find additional donation to take care of the accounting, auditing and taxation services in line with complications of tax matters.

Unless the amended section in the Income Tax Act 1967 is repealed as the Order of Exemption can be withdrawn too (nothing to stop the Finance Minister), I would advise all religious bodies leaders to take cognisant of the fact that IRB still have the power to do its operations on religious bodies.  Since it is effective from 2017, I would advise the religious bodies to make sure they have all the records and the financial statements (in tax compliance format) be prepared ready in the file for any eventuality of IRB acting according to its power.  As submission of annual returns is now dispensed with, and IRB may not act so soon but maybe with 6 years or nothing at all, it is still wiser to be prepared for such eventuality to avoid any tax on “estimated” income when such incomes do not exist.

Perfectly right for IRB to act but how IRB would act is beyond all the taxpayers including religious bodies. Some may appeal but the process of appeal can be very expensive not affordable for most religious bodies.  In good faith, would IRB come out with their good intention?

Joshua Y C Kong  10 April, 2017