Nation at a crossroad of NSC

Nation at a crossroad of NSC


Can we accept what the PM Najib said recently : “National Security Council Act 2016 for national security, not personal design” (Aug 27, 2016) ?

 Can this defence be true and justified if we go through the NSC and the “junta” of 5 persons especially the PM who is also the Chairman can control everything socalled “National Security” bypassing the YDP Agong, a Ruler or Yang diPertua Negeri according to the NSC section 23 (2)a.

 Before I go further on the check and balance of any public act and the absence thereof, it is important a brief introduction of the NSC act is available. The National Security Council Act 2016 (Malay: Akta Majlis Keselamatan Negara 2016) is "to provide for the establishment of the National Security Council, the declaration of security areas, the special powers of the Security Forces in the security areas and other related matters". This Act is intended to strengthen the government's ability to address increasing threats to the nation's security, including threats of violent extremism.[2][3] The Bill was introduced into parliament by Shahidan Kassim on 1 December 2015.[4] It passed the Dewan Rakyat (House of Representatives) on 3 December 2015,[5] and the Dewan Negara (Senate) on 22 December 2015 without amendment.[3]


The Act received Royal Assent on 18 February 2016 in pursuant to Clause 4A of Article 66 of the Federal Constitution.

 The National Security Council Act 2016, in its current form (7 June 2016), consists of 7 Parts containing 44 sections and no schedule (including no amendment). • Part I: Preliminary • Part II: National Security Council • Part III: Duties of the Director General of National Security and Government Entities • Part IV: Declaration of Security Area • Part V: Special Powers of the Director of Operations and Security Forces Deployed to the Security Area • Part VI: General • Part VII: Savings.

 The common allegations of the NSC are largely in these aspects namely:- • Clause 18 (1): PM has full discretion to decide where 'security area' is • Clause 18 (3) and (4): Initial declaration of ‘security area’ lasts for 6 months but may be renewed by PM indefinitely • Clause 22–30: security forces can arrest without warrant; stop and search; enter and search premise; take possession of any land, building or movable property. • Clause 37: All NSC’s affairs are done is absolute secrecy • Clause 38: No action or lawsuit can be brought against the NSC (source: Wikipedia) To me there are much more than that if the NSC is grievously applied or misapplied in any circumstances beyond what the public desire. First, NSC does not have any definition of National Security and scenarios thereof except it is found in a section such as Functions of the Council 4.

 The Council shall have the following functions: (a) to formulate policies and strategic measures on national security, including sovereignty, territorial integrity, defence, socio-political stability, economic stability, strategic resources, national unity and other interests relating to national security; (b) to monitor the implementation of the policies and strategic measures on national security; (c) to advise on the declaration of security areas; and (d) to perform any other functions relating to national security for the proper implementation of this Act. So based on the functions of the Council, sky is the limit not to mention some of the activities already dealt with by other existing Acts. So NSC would appear to be over riding in all circumstances and cannot be challenged in the Judiciary. I leave this to the public court to decide but aggressive protests on NSC would be disallowed too.

 If we deliberate on the various items in the Function above-mentioned, it would appear the present Government has brought the nation very edgy and at breaking points like it or not and so does the present socalled “failed” leaders need NSC to continue to perform which can lead to more disasters in the making at advanced and critical status.

 Readers and concerned citizens would agree with me that certain scenarios are already so ugly and yet not properly addressed even after some decades, and yet do we need NSC to do that?

 Critical more specific areas are race/religions of the dominant one against the minorities; climate change and environment – manmade or acts of God – being ignored or regularly sidelined, massive official corruption so far without action or denied according to the scale thereof, prevailing illicit drugs menace.

 All these degraded circumstances in the four areas can easily threaten our sovereignty or our existence whether we like it or not. Second, Maybe we leave the religion and climate change to God for His justice or ultimate justice, but environment, corruption, illegal and ‘project IC’ immigrants and illicit drugs must be addressed by everyone of us.

 Seriously hardly much had been done for the menace of environment by the appropriate allocation of adequate funding except that in Kota Kinabalu, the Judiciary together with DBKK took a tough stance on the local pollution and thrash in Sembulan – the black dot so near the city within. So for Sabah with so much national security in terms of national resources dwindling fast, we need to expose all our mishandling or cannot-be-bothered attitude in environment, it is important and urgent to have a blueprint on environment at an environment expo which I had proposed as Sabah Environment Expo or SEE Sabah 2016.

 Once our depleted natural resources are gone in Sabah, our total losses would be in areas such as global tourism, food sources, climate change, general health, economy, and general well beings of the people.

 Maybe, we have seen some fresh air with the latest appointed MACC Chairman Datuk Dzulkifli Ahmad as he seems to be tough in his position with zero corruption in the civil service. Maybe, he would go on to the business communities who work hands in gloves with the civil servants and then the politicians later. Also recently, the relevant authorities have also arrested hundreds of thousands in the illicit drugs sector. It is known that illegal and project IC immgrants can be detained in detention centres and the prisons.


 Third, I hope such pro-active action would be pursued and finally there are enough spaces in prisons for millions of inmates after due but long process in the Courts also over stretched. Given the complexity and complicity of illegalities in the environment, corruption official or otherwise, illegal and project IC immigrants, illicit drugs, would NSC be applied to shorten all the usual stretched legal processes to resolve millions of cases? If not done that way, these critical issues would be with us forever in a failed nation.


 A neighbouring country is shooting drugs suspects on sight. In Turkey, the Government even adopted the policy of freeing many thousands of convicted criminals to be back to the streets for the coup suspects to be detained in over stretched prisons. So that is tough decision indeed with or without NSC. Fourth, Now let me come back to a finer point in NSC as it is not obvious to the common mind. Why should there be public indifference or disquiet over NSC fearing themselves that the undesirable actions could happen to the Whistleblowers even with the existing Whistleblowers Act 711 of 2010 which in reality is a red herring when the present Government is challenged. So is NSC really as alleged that NSC can be used against whistleblowers acting in public interest when PM said no personal agenda?


So let look at this again. NSC has a director of operation as in section 20 namely 20. (1) The Council shall appoint a Director of Operations to be the person in charge of the operations in a security area. (2) The Director of Operations shall be responsible to the Council. Does the NSC act disallow the PM cum Chairman to be appointed Director of Operations which is accredited so much power beyond belief in NSC activities. So what is there to stop the NSC to appoint the Chairman as the Director of Operations as five persons or a single person decide on that. We can now imagine how a “junta” in any emergency behave. Who actually appointed Tun Abdul Razak in 1969 as Director of Operations?


Was he appointed by the YDP Agong or the Rulers’ Conference? Was there an internal sort of coup within UMNO? Was he self appointed with new found faction power within UMNO? Wikipedia is also silent on this drastic change of leadership. He was so powerful that he could change the course of the nation in its nation building (NEP/ Barisan National) or nation’s gradual destruction as far as MA63 was concerned and there go our independence and our precious resources. Now the YDP Agong and Rulers, Yang Dipertua Negeri are out of the picture in NSC 2016 Section 23 (2a). Is there any chance of check and balance when NSC 2016 is the legitimate document to implement whatever as sky is the limit in anything or everything, bad, good or evil? This is especially so when 5 persons or a single person in NSC are ‘untouchable’ be it personal or official matters.

So before the Director of Operations get hold of that NSC power as it was in 1969 (no NSC then), we are now in totally different scenario and the YDP Agong and the ruler conference having failed to have the NSC 2016 ‘refined’, install an Interim Good Governance Government (IGGG M) totally independent from the political divide to bring the nation forward without all the entanglements of more than 5 decades. Please appreciate this articles as the 2016 national message of IGGG M.

 Joshua Y. C. Kong 30 August, 2016