Swiss VAT plant proposed for Penang

Swiss firm to open new plant in Penang

By SIMREN KAUR simren@thestar.com.my

GEORGE TOWN: A Swiss semiconductor company has chosen Penang to open its first manufacturing plant in Asia.

VAT Manufacturing Malaysia Sdn Bhd will be built on a 3.035ha in Batu Kawan and is expected to commence production by December this year.

VAT executive vice-president Quality and Procurement Andreas Scheibe said it was a big step for VAT to open its first branch in Asia.

“A lot of our customers in the United States have moved to Asia, so we decided to move as well to be able to better serve our customers,” said Andreas.

An artist’s impression of the proposed VAT plant in Penang.

“After surveying several Asian countries, we chose Penang because it is the only one that meets our requirements,” he said.



VAT is the world's leading supplier of vacuum valves for state-of-the-art applications in the semiconductor industry, for manufacturing flat screens and solar panels, as well as for coating optical systems and tools.

Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng said that he was delighted that VAT had chosen Penang over China, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam.

“We are proud that our human resources, suppliers in mechanical and electronic components, infrastructure and logistics support as well cost of living comply with the requirements of VAT,” he said.

Lim was speaking at the sale and purchase signing ceremony between VAT and Penang Development Corp at his office at Komtar yesterday.

He added that the new facility, with investments totalling US$25mil (RM75mil) was expected to generate 100 new jobs.

The law’s great mysteries

Reflecting on the law By SHAD SALEEM FARUQI

A breathtaking variety of approaches to the law light up the legal firmament in so many spectacular ways that one cannot fail but be impressed.

EVERY judge, lawyer and law teacher has to grapple with some central and eternal riddles that surround the law. The most basic, unanswerable (and embarrassing) question is “what is ‘law’?” Is there some universal concept of law or are there many varied conceptions?

In its simplest form, law could be defined as rules of conduct or norms or standards of behaviour. However, the rich reality is that rules exist in many forms and originate from many sources. Many tributaries contribute to the legal main.

> At the dawn of human history, rules of conduct existed primarily by way of custom and traditions of the tribe or community.

> As formal religions took hold, legal norms began to be prescribed by religion, ethics and morality.
> With the rise of the political state, law came to be attributed to the commands of the state or the political sovereign.

> In modern society, the legislative mono­poly of the state is complemented by innumerable civil society groups and other centres of authority like business and professional guilds. Their precepts and practices constitute an important alternative source of informal legal practice.

> A large part of social, professional and economic life is governed by the private law of contract, the law of the association and the contractual rules at the workplace which are predominantly dictated by non-state actors.

> In an increasingly globalised world, the dictates of international organisations and the treaties and agreements between multi-national parties regulate much of our beha­viour. The sovereign state is in decline and more and more international laws are lapping at our shores.

> When disputes arise, we go to courts, tribunals or mediatory or conciliatory bodies. Their decisions are generally holistic and are based on a multiplicity of competing sources. Rarely does a judge decide on the basis of a lone rule. He reads a statutory provision in the context of provisions from other statutes and he supplements formal rules with informal standards that enrich our life and legal system. Like a painter, he enriches the legal canvas with religious, moral, social, economic and historical colours. Law becomes what he, the interpreter, declares it to be and not what the legislator actually prescribed.
.
.

Clearly, there is a multiplicity of competing sources in the majestic network of the law. Which source is legally acceptable and which not? Which rules qualify as law and how do we distinguish legal rules from other types of rules? Within the multiplicity of sources, is there a clear hierarchy of superior and inferior norms?

There are many other eternal questions that surround the law.

What is the basic or essential foundation on which law rests? Is it reason or revelation, coercion or consent, morality or utility, history or psychology?

What is the relationship between law and morality and law and justice? Are flagrantly immoral and unjust laws legally valid? In the definition of law, is moral content relevant? Can a horrendously unjust legal order like the Nazi system satisfy the nomenclature of legality? Is morality a criterion of validity or a factor contributing to compliance and continuity?

Must law be defined by reference to who makes the law, i.e. by the law’s source, or by reference to how it was made, i.e. by reference to procedures accepted in a society?

Must law be defined by reference to its functions in society so that any rule that performs regulatory and normative functions qualifies to be called law?

Why is law obeyed? Is it because we have been psychologically conditioned to believe that we have a duty to obey the law? Or do we obey the law because of the fear of sanction?

If fear is the sole motivation behind obedience, then how is the law of the state distinguishable from the law of the evil gunman? If there is a moral or utilitarian duty to obey the commands of the state, is this duty absolute or conditional to the state’s performance of its social contract?

What are the aims and functions of law in society? Is law about order or about freedom? Is it about stability or about change? Is it a heathen word for power or is its job to balance the might of the state with the rights of the citizens?

Does law mould society or does society mould the law?

What is the role of the judiciary in the legal system? Are judges law finders or law makers? If judges contribute building blocks to the law, is such law-making undemocratic and undesirable?

To none of the above issues are there any simple, single answers. Much depends on the philosophical approach one adopts. There is a breathtaking variety of such approaches and they light up the legal firmament in ways so spectacular that no one can fail to be impressed.

Among the prominent approaches are naturalism, legal positivism, historicism, realism, Marxism, post-modernism, feminism and the perspectives of anthropology, critical legal studies and sociology.

Naturalism stands for idealism in the law. It links law with substantive and procedural justice. It supports inalienable rights.

Positivism focuses on law’s link with the state. It rejects higher sources.

Historicism and anthropology de-emphasise formal sources. They see law as an evolutionary product of custom and the spirit of the people.

Realism defines law by reference to judicial decisions. It sees judges as the central agent of law’s interpretation and evolution.

Marxism, feminism, critical legal studies view law as class ideology and as the preserver of the unjust status quo. They seek reform and change.

At this moment in Malaysian history when transformation is being sought through the law, one must be hopeful, yet cautious.

Laws are as good as the people who administer them. Justice is not in legislation but in administration.
> Shad Faruqi is emeritus professor at UiTM and visiting professor at USM.

Related articles

• Law by moral consent (howtoadvisethepresident.wordpress.com)
• The Origins of Property: A Parable with Morals (wanderlustmind.com)
• Law Schools Under Critical Scrutiny (nasblog.org)
• Samuel Read on Legal Positivism and Capitalism in 1829 (stephankinsella.com)

BJCC Golf Club management Fiasco: challenges members to leave! Would Guan Eng Intervene?

Golfers pleads Guan Eng to intervene Bukit Jambul Country Club fiasco

Following the dispute over the Bukit Jambul Country Club management decision to require golfers to use payable electric buggies on its 18-hole golf course, the members staged a demonstration and pleaded Penang CM, Lim Guan Eng to intervene and resolve the issue.



According to one of the golfers, Adrian Ho, he hoped that something can be done to resolve this as they are ready to compromise with the management, if they are going to charge for a walking fees.

Ho also said that the management set off the water sprinklers at the green today to prevent them from walking.

He also stressed that they are mulling take legal action against the management if the issue remained unsolved.

Many aggrieved members feel that such requirement to pay for electric buggies are unfair as they are already paying a regular fees to the club.

Bayan Baru parliament coordinator, Por Joo Tee said that the issue started from a notice saying that the golfers privileges of walking has been cancelled.

Por also added that during professional golf tournaments the golfers would walk to the selective holes instead of using buggy.

Komunitikini earlier tried to reach Bukit Jambul Country Club management for a response but the Chief Operating Officer, Johnny Khoo said that response can only be given once the management company CEO, Dato’ Eiro Sakamoto arrives from Kuala Lumpur later today.

Bukit Jambul Country Club is a subsidiary of Penang Development Corporation (PDC) and is currently managed by Taiyo Resort (KL) Berhad.

Source: Komunitikini

Police Report_BJCC
  Thugs or Guards from Metro Security?


Management and members take swings at each other over buggy rule
  By TAN SIN CHOW sctan@thestar.com.my,  Friday 10 Feb 2012

GEORGE TOWN: The “clash” between disgruntled members and the management of Bukit Jambul Country Club has escalated with both parties lodging police reports against each other.

It all started when some 100 members voiced their displeasure over the compulsory buggy-use rule at the golf club, effective Feb 1.

A 59-year-old member lodged a police report on Feb 3, alleging that the club's security guards had verbally abused him and several others at the golf course on that day.

He also claimed that the guards had prevented them from walking on the course and verbally abused them.

On Feb 2, more than 100 disgruntled golfers protested at the club over the new ruling that made it compulsory to use a buggy.

The golfers said the ruling was not suitable due to the way the course was built. It was designed for golfers to walk around the course and was not intended to be a buggy course.

They also complained about the increase in the buggy rental rates from RM22 to RM37 for the first nine holes.

Japanese firm Taiyo Resort (KL) Bhd took over the club's management in 2010 and signed a leasing agreement with PDC and Island Golf Properties Bhd.

Yesterday, Club managing director Datuk Eiro Sakamoto said they lodged a report with the Sungai Nibong police station yesterday to deny the allegations.

“The club had carried out its own investigations and found the allegations to be untrue,” he said at a press conference.

“The 50-odd disgruntled club members had violated club rules by teeing-off without registering. They also did not use the buggies as required.”

Eiro said there was no such right as walking on the course, adding that the security guards had approached them in a polite manner but were instead insulted.

“We are legally allowed to implement the buggy-use rule in accordance with club rules. An overwhelming majority of the 2,800 club members are happy with the rule.”

He added that a complaint had since been lodged with the club's disciplinary committee.

“I wish to stress that this is a proprietary club, not a member's club,” he said, adding that displeased members “have the freedom to leave”.



Related post:

BJCC management fiasco: 'Outsourcing not the fair way', Golf truly a walking game!

BJCC Golf and Country Club News

Aspiring nations gain more from Internet

By JO TIMBUONG
bytz@thestar.com.my

 

Manuel: "Malaysia derives a lot of income from exporting equipment that 

allows people to connect to and use the Internet." 

 

KUALA LUMPUR: Aspiring countries like Malaysia are gaining more from the Internet than developed nations.

The Web helps these countries improve gross domestic product (GDP), better their small and medium enterprises, and boost the creation of new jobs.

Going online helped Malaysian industries contribute 4.1% of the country's gross domestic product (GDP) in 2010, making Malaysia one of the 30 fastest growing countries in the world.

Some of the other aspiring countries are Argentina, Hungary, Mexico, Morocco, Nigeria, Taiwan, Turkey and Vietnam.

They were part of an online study - titled Online and Upcoming: The Internet's Impact on Aspiring Countries - by researchers McKinsey & Co.

McKinsey defines aspiring countries as those that are developing but are at the cusp of becoming a developed nation.



The study found that the Internet contributed US$9.75bil (RM29.7bil) out of a total GDP of US$238bil (RM723bil) for the aspiring countries in 2010. This is far more than what was contributed in the United States and China.

Nimal Manuel, principal at McKinsey, said a big chunk of the GDP contribution in Malaysia came from the IT industry.

"Malaysia derives a lot of income from exporting equipment that allows people to connect to and use the Internet," he said.

"The country will also see significant growth in the value that domestic activity on the Internet delivers to the nation."

Manuel was giving a briefing on the economic impact of the Internet on Malaysia.

Booster

Besides contributing positively to the country's economy, the Internet also helped its small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to make gains.

Manuel said the SMEs in Malaysia and the other aspiring countries that took their businesses online gained over 6% more in revenue than those with only brick-and-mortar stores.

"Thanks to the Internet, these businesses were able to reach new customers in different geographic locations. They also enjoyed a 10% increase in productivity (after embracing technology)," he said.

According to him, this increase in productivity (due to better efficiencies) does not mean decreased job opportunities in the aspiring countries.

"Our study found that for every job lost, 3.2 new jobs were created because of the Internet. And in comparison, for every job lost in developed countries, only 1.6 new ones were created," he said.

These aspiring countries must not rest on their laurels; they should be making an effort to improve their Internet ecosystems.

Manuel said they need to ensure a high quality and secure infrastructure to better capture the value of the Internet.

The governments need secure servers, in addition to basic infrastructure, such as electricity supply, as well as quality fixed and mobile Internet services, he said.

In response to the recommendations, Datuk Mohamed Sharil Tarmizi, chairman of the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC), said the Government is championing the quality of Internet services in Malaysia.

"This is an entry-point project under the Economic Transformation Plan, and that shows how serious the Government is on broadband services and issues," he added.

MCMC is the communications and multimedia industry regulator.

Think before you "Like" on Facebook

Corporations are engaging in a social media arms race

 
By Chris Taylor Annie Scranton has a little problem.

The founder and president of New York City's Pace Public Relations is a successful and sober-minded individual, but when it comes to this one thing, she has a definite compulsion. It's the "Like" button on Facebook -- she just can't stop clicking it.

"I'm totally obsessed with it," says the 31 year old. "Just like a lot of people I know. My friends and I call it 'Like-Bombing', where you go online and like everything."

So it's a good thing for serial "Likers" like Scranton that there are more and more rewards for consumers who click that button.

Hotel chain Marriott, for instance, is currently offering prizes totaling 10 million reward points for those who Like its Facebook pages, including two grand prizes of a million points each.

Think of it as a social-media arms race among corporations, to see which can amass the greatest number of online followers.

"It's become a real competition between companies to grow the size of that number, and to have more fans than your rivals," says Matt Simpson, marketing director for Phoenix-based Bulbstorm, which develops social-media apps for companies such as NBC and World Wrestling Entertainment.

"Over the last year, we've been seeing more and more of it, and it's been driven largely by promotional applications like sweepstakes."



PROMOTIONS AND LIST BUILDING

If you "Liked" Toys 'R Us before Thanksgiving, for instance, you got a shot at a limo ride, a $1,000 shopping spree, and exclusive store access before its doors opened for Black Friday sales.

Travel site Expedia, meanwhile, hosted a 'FriendTrips' sweepstakes for those who Liked its Facebook page, offering voyages to one of 13 different destinations.

As a result, in the third quarter of this year, an average of 100 million "Like" buttons were being clicked on Facebook every day. That's double the amount of liking going on, compared with the same period last year.

Corporations are doing this for a reason, of course. They're building marketing lists, they're aiming to boost sales, and they're planting themselves in users' news feeds.

When Coca-Cola has more than 36 million Likes, and Disney has more than 29 million, they've assembled a ready-made audience that can be tapped at any time.

And here's a little secret: While companies are certainly happy to have you as a fan, what they're really interested in isn't you; it's your friends.

Because if you officially Like Starbucks, your friends see that you've liked Starbucks, and they become more likely to spend there as well.

"Friends of fans represent a much larger set of consumers than the brand's own fans," says Elisabeth Diana, Facebook's manager of corporate communications. "In fact they're 81 times the size of the actual fan base, so Likes are a way to reach those people as well."

The promotional pushes seem to be paying off.

Expedia's FriendTrips campaign, for instance, garnered 900,000 new Likes for the company. And while Marriott's contest is ongoing until the end of the year, its new Marriott Rewards Facebook page has already gone from zero to more than 170,000 Likes.

"We've surpassed all other hotel rewards programs in under three weeks," says Michelle Lapierre, Marriott's senior director of customer relationship marketing, taking a slap at rivals Hilton, Starwood and Hyatt.

LIKING, PHASE TWO

Of course, once you have an army of online followers, that's not the end of the marketing road. Then there's the question of what to do with them all.

That's why companies are now proceeding to Phase Two of the Like operation: Figuring out how to engage and entertain consumers on an ongoing basis, with a flurry of polls and quizzes and games.

"Collecting Likes by giving away prizes is a great way to build a fan base, but it's not the be-all and end-all of Facebook marketing," says Bulbstorm's Simpson, who himself won a 10-day trip to Hawaii from just such an online promotion.

"Savvy brands are starting to focus on things with more entertainment value, to keep you around longer than the seven seconds it takes to fill out a form."

Beware, though, that Liking something publicly makes companies keenly interested in who you are and where you're surfing.

Not only that, but Facebook is rolling out so-called 'Sponsored Stories' of such activity. In other words, if you officially like Target's Facebook page, your friend Jim might get a Sponsored Story in his news feed announcing that thrilling development.

So if you're uncomfortable with your personal business being public, then maybe Like-Bombing isn't your best online strategy.

"Facebook 'Like' buttons are increasing in prevalence across the Web, raising serious privacy concerns for those who value the privacy of their online reading habits," says Rainey Reitman, activism director for the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation.

"This collection of information about one's Web browsing habits may violate many users' expectations of privacy. Our reading habits can be incredibly sensitive, and Facebook has a long history of playing fast and loose with user privacy."

Facebook reached a settlement with the Federal Trade Commission in November, agreeing to get users' permission before altering privacy settings and submitting to independent privacy audits for the next 20 years.

As for Pace's Annie Scranton, though, she has no plans to rein in her Like campaign - especially since it's brought her a number of new business prospects. So if you get Liked by her, don't be all that surprised.

"My business is inextricably linked to social media, so if I wasn't constantly Liking things, my clients wouldn't be happy," she says. "Even when I'm working, I'm on Facebook all day long. You can never do enough Liking."

(Editing by Jilian Mincer and Linda Stern)
(The author is a Reuters columnist. The opinions expressed are his own.)