Anwar draws ‘red line' on US tariff talks, says pro-Bumiputera policy not up for negotiation
He said that although investment and trade with the US are significant, Malaysia has a 'red line' in negotiations — namely the Bumiputera policy — which must not be compromised, even if it is perceived as 'discriminatory' by external parties.
In addition, Anwar, who is also the finance minister, stated that procurement and opportunities for local companies must also be protected in negotiations with the US.
He added that Malaysia's approach is more thorough and firm in order to safeguard national interests, while continuing to strengthen trade relations with other countries, including China and ASEAN, as a step to expand market access.
'That is our red line in negotiations (on tariffs), which is why our approach is more careful and firm.
'We must continue to trade and engage well with all countries, but no country should be allowed to impose conditions that pressure us,' he said during a monthly meeting with staff of the Prime Minister's Department (JPM) here today.
Anwar said that his close ties with world leaders, particularly in Brazil and Egypt, have opened up strategic economic opportunities for Malaysia to strengthen its economic resilience.
He stated that as a result of his good relationship with Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Petronas was invited to participate in oil exploration and production in the country, while Yinson Holdings is involved in the construction of oil and gas vessels for the Brazilian and Peruvian markets.
'The involvement of Malaysian companies was made easier due to our strong friendship. In addition to increased trade with BRICS countries (the economic bloc comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa), Malaysia is opening new networks for the country's survival, (as we) cannot rely on just one country,' he said.
In Egypt, Anwar said his relationship with President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi also yielded positive results, with the Egyptian government granting Proton the opportunity to make the country a production hub for the north African market. This has also contributed to a 34 per cent increase in trade with Egypt within a year. — Bernama
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New Straits Times
11 minutes ago
- New Straits Times
US President Trump 'caught off guard' by Israeli strikes in Syria
WASHINGTON: US President Donald Trump was "caught off guard" by Israeli strikes in Syria last week, White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said Monday, adding that he discussed the issue with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Israel had launched strikes on the capital Damascus and the southern Druze-majority city of Sweida, saying it aimed to put pressure on the Syrian government to withdraw its troops from the region amid ongoing clashes there. Trump "was caught off guard by the bombing in Syria and also the bombing of a Catholic church in Gaza," Leavitt told reporters at a press briefing. "In both accounts, the president quickly called the prime minister to rectify those situations," she continued. Netanyahu had visited the White House earlier this month, his third trip since Trump returned to power on January 20. "The president enjoys a good working relationship with Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu, and stays in, you know, frequent communication with him," Leavitt said. "When it came to Syria, we saw a de-escalation there." US President Trump 'caught off guard' by Israeli strikes in SyriaUS President Trump 'caught off guard' by Israeli strikes in Syria Israel and Syria on Friday entered a US-brokered ceasefire. Also on Friday, Prime Minister Netanyahu called Pope Leo to express regret at the strike on the Catholic church in Gaza, blaming a "stray missile." In May, Trump met with Syria's Islamist president Ahmad al-Sharaa in Saudi Arabia shortly after lifting many longstanding US sanctions against Damascus. Trump later praised the leader, who led a major armed group that was once aligned with Al Qaeda and toppled the Syrian government in December. The United States removed a bounty on Sharaa's head after he came to power.
Malay Mail
11 minutes ago
- Malay Mail
Simplified: How judges are selected in Malaysia vs UK, Australia, Singapore, India
KUALA LUMPUR, July 22 — Amid recent controversy over the selection of new top-ranking judges in Malaysia, the government has launched a new study to compare how judges are appointed in the UK, Australia, India, and Singapore. Here's a simplified comparison of how judges are selected and appointed in these five Commonwealth countries, some of which have an independent body called a Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC). Malaysia (Has JAC) Malaysia has a nine-member JAC chaired by the Chief Justice, with the other members being the other top three judges, and five members appointed by the prime minister (a Federal Court judge and four eminent persons). There is a two-step process now, namely selection and then appointment: Step 1: The Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) filters and selects candidates based on merit, then recommends names to the prime minister. (Judicial Appointments Commission Act 2009). Note: Under the JAC Act, the PM can ask the JAC for two alternative names (for vacancies for the top four judges, Federal Court and Court of Appeal). Under the same law, the PM does not need to give any reason for rejecting the names, and there is no limit on how many times the PM can ask for other names. Step 2: After accepting JAC's recommendations, the prime minister submits the names to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. The Agong then appoints judges based on the prime minister's advice and after consulting the Conference of Rulers (Federal Constitution's Article 122B). The JAC, introduced in 2009, is a step forward for Malaysia as there are now written criteria and written procedures for a person to be selected as judge. The JAC also sends candidates' names for background checks by five agencies: the police, the anti-corruption body, the companies commission, the insolvency department, and the tax authority. The JAC, introduced in 2009, is a step forward for Malaysia as there are now written criteria and written procedures for a person to be selected as judge. — Picture by Raymond Manuel UK (Has JACs) After the UK's constitutional reforms in 2005, there are now three bodies involved in selecting and recommending potential judges (the JAC for England and Wales; Northern Ireland's JAC and the Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland). Looking specifically at England and Wales, the 15-member JAC is chaired by a layperson, with six judicial members, two professional members, five laypersons, and one non-legally qualified judicial member. The JAC's role is to select candidates on merit, having good character, and to encourage diversity in the range of available candidates. The JAC has a detailed list of items that a candidate has to declare when applying to be a judge (such as criminal convictions, traffic offences, being bankrupt, tax issues) to assess if they are of 'good character', and will also carry out character checks with professional regulatory bodies and the authorities such as for insolvency and tax. The JAC selects judges up to the High Court level, while the JAC would also be part of independent selection panels to select higher-ranking judges or judges at the higher courts. Generally, the Lord Chancellor (who is a Cabinet minister) may accept the JAC's recommendations, and has limited powers to reject or ask for reconsideration of recommended candidates. Generally, the King will appoint judges on the recommendation of the Lord Chancellor, based on the recommendation by the JAC or an independent selection panel. For certain positions such as Supreme Court judges, the Lord Chancellor's recommendation — based on the panel's recommendation — would go to the prime minister, and the prime minister would advise the King on the appointment. Australia (No JAC) Under Australia's Constitution, the Governor-General 'in Council' appoints judges. (The Governor-General is the head of state, a role that is played by the Agong in Malaysia and the King in the UK.) This means that the Governor-General appoints judges on the advice of the prime minister and Cabinet. The Attorney-General (who is part of Cabinet) makes recommendations to the Australian government on who should be appointed as judges. For the appointment of High Court judges, the federal Attorney-General is required by law to consult with the attorney-general of the states in Australia. The Attorney-General's website states that the Australian government's process for appointing judges 'may include' advertising, consulting with the legal professional community to request nominations, and getting advisory panels to assess candidates and give recommendations to the Attorney-General. The website also lists the personal and professional qualities that a judge should have, including outstanding legal expertise; excellent written communication skills; temperament, integrity, impartiality, tact and courtesy. Singapore (No JAC) Under Singapore's constitution, the President appoints judges on the prime minister's advice, if he agrees with the prime minister's advice. Before giving his advice to the President, Singapore's prime minister 'must consult' the Chief Justice on appointments of judges (except for the appointment of the Chief Justice). India (Had JAC for a few months) After amending its Constitution and creating a new law in 2014, India introduced the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) — which had the duty of recommending individuals 'of ability and integrity' for the President to appoint as judges. The NJAC was meant to be a six-member panel, chaired by the Chief Justice of India, two senior Supreme Court judges, the minister in charge of law and justice, two eminent persons. (A three-member committee comprising the CJ, the prime minister, the Opposition Leader would nominate the NJAC's two eminent persons, with one of the eminent persons required to be a woman or from a minority or marginalised group.) But just months after the constitutional amendment and the NJAC Act came into effect in April 2015, India's highest court, the Supreme Court, in October 2015 struck down both laws as unconstitutional. India then returned to using its existing 'collegium' system, which is where a group of senior judges select and recommend candidates for the President to appoint. For example, to appoint new Supreme Court judges, there would be a collegium of five judges (the Chief Justice and the four most senior Supreme Court judges), who would give their recommended names via the Chief Justice to India's government. The Chief Justice would give the recommendation to the law minister, who would then forward the recommendation to the prime minister to advise the President on the appointment of the new judges. To JAC or not? Like Malaysia, the four other countries we are looking at are members of the 56-member Commonwealth. In the UK-based Bingham Centre for the Rule of Law's 2015 report on the best practices for appointing judges in the Commonwealth, it was found that it is now 'uncommon' for only the executive branch of government to be responsible for appointing judges. At that time, the report found that 18.7 per cent (nine out of 48 independent Commonwealth jurisdictions such as Australia and Singapore) was where the executive was solely responsible for judicial appointments, while 81.3 per cent (39 out of 48 such as India, Malaysia, UK) had a JAC. This figure will now be 38 out of 48 as India has scrapped its JAC, but the 2015 report had noted that a number of countries, which established JACs in relatively quick succession (including the UK, the Maldives, Pakistan and Malaysia) after 2003 showed a 'clear trend' favouring JACs. Recommended reading:
The Sun
21 minutes ago
- The Sun
Anwar dares opposition to table no-confidence vote
PUTRAJAYA: Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has challenged opposition MPs to table a vote of no confidence in Parliament if they believe the government no longer holds the majority. He noted that any attempt to topple the administration outside the democratic process would constitute a breach of the Federal Constitution. Addressing civil servants during the Prime Minister's Department monthly assembly yesterday, Anwar acknowledged calls for his resignation and claims that the public no longer felt secure or able to cope with current economic pressures. 'Yes, there are those saying Anwar must step down. I hear those things. 'They want to hold an assembly – the police submitted a report and I said go ahead. There's no intention to block it.' However, he criticised groups suggesting they would 'force the government to fall' without waiting for the next general election, calling such rhetoric unconstitutional. 'I told the Speaker, if there's a motion today – the first day of Parliament – I'll face a vote of no confidence. If there's a majority, so be it. The Cabinet will dissolve. That's our system. Use it,' he said. Anwar reaffirmed that the unity government remains stable with a two-thirds majority and is on course to serve its full term. 'But instead, they want to pressure me to step down now. That already violates constitutional principles and the rule of law. We are open to criticism and dissent, but if the Constitution is challenged we will respond firmly.' Referring to anti-government remarks made at a recent rally in Kedah, Anwar cautioned that political agitation could undermine the country's hard-won economic and political progress. 'If they provoke unrest, no country can remain safe. All our achievements could be undone if we fail to maintain national and political stability.' He stressed that criticism, including allegations of mismanagement, is valid in a democracy but changes in leadership must occur through legal and constitutional means. 'If there is someone better to take over, I have no issue. But it must be done in accordance with the law.' During the same assembly, Anwar hinted at an upcoming announcement previously described as an 'extraordinary tribute' to the people. The announcement is expected to be made today or tomorrow. 'Before I make the announcement, a few new approaches are being finalised. If there isn't enough time today, we'll do it tomorrow,' he said, without disclosing details. He added that the measures require careful consideration. 'These concerns need to be addressed thoughtfully before I proceed with any major announcements or changes. I've said I'll make the announcement – possibly in the form of additional measures – within a day or two. But I need a bit more time to ensure all aspects are properly handled.' Anwar had earlier indicated that the measures would aim to reduce the burden of rising living costs and provide relief to those affected by inflation and economic pressures. He said more time was needed to review the matter following the unity government retreat in Port Dickson on Sunday.
