maybank 'discriminating fiasco'...

receive this couple of times via email...

some may have been following up on this blatant and downright discrimination by maybank... an extra reading material for you during coffee breaks...

i hv close my maybank account last month of so, which i have been having since approx 13 years.... i thought as much this kinda stupid ruling will happen sooner or later, as a matter of timing... wat's next?!?...

are the current umno-led govt gonna support this discriminating move?!?... are they gonna keep quiet again?!?...


p/s ; i have also close my bank bumi current account as a silent protest to this 'bumi rules' matters... already 50 years into independence, will this 'bumi rules' matters ever end?!?...







Maybank rapped for pro-Bumiputra discriminataory policy

Maybank, a government-linked company (GLC), and another unnamed major bank, gave come under severe public criticism for practising pro-Bumiputra policy discriminating against their multi-racial clienteles.

The two banks have recently introduced new regulation requiring law firms to have a minimum of three partners, of which one must be Bumiputera with a minimum 50% stake in the firm, before they can do any business with the banks.

Media reports said the requirements would take effect on July 1 while the deadline for existing firms is a year after the new ruling is implemented.

Dr Goh was quoted as saying in the Chinese Press that the regulation is an insult to the legal profession and contradicted the prime minister's calls to promote meritocracy.

The Bar Council has cried foul over the conditions set by the banks. Quote Council chairman Ambiga Sreenevasan from Bar Council website, May 6: (http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/content/view/8796/2/)


The requirement is "totally discriminatory"

There is no legal basis for such a condition and it's certainly in breach of the spirit of the Federal Constitution.

All our lawyers should be judged on merit. That is the correct basis for selection.

Most of all, we are concerned that such preferences will give rise to tokenism and that it will affect the quality of the legal services provided.

Ambiga said the Bar Council had written to the banks in the last two days expressing concern and asking them to review their policies.

The Bar Council will also be following up on this matter with Bank Negara Malaysia.

Legal circles said, at the moment , there are no specific requirements for legal firms to be appointed by financial institutions. Even the Bank Negara had said there is no specific requirement for legal firms appointed by financial institutions.

Furore in Public and Parliament

Meanwhile, the Associated Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry of Malaysia (ACCCIM) has rapped Maybank (http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/content/view/8790/2/) for the discriminating policy. See Bar Council website archive here (http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/content/view/8790/2/) .

Yesterday, Maybank went to Press (http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/content/view/8806/2/) by stating that it would do the necessary review based on feedback, giving no specifics.

It might be too late. The issue was debated in the Parliament with MCA Youth chief Liow Tiong Lai urging the PM to intervene. See Oriental Daily News (http://www.orientaldaily.com.my/news_item.asp?NewsID=9748) here as MCA's mouthpiece, The Star, has missed the story today.

According to Malaysiakini (http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/66907), DAP Member of Parliament for Bandar Kuching Chong Chien Jen yesterday tried to move a motion to debate the matter in the Dewan Rakyat. However, Speaker Ramli Ngah Talib rejected it it, saying that it was an internal matter of the bank.

However, Chong disagreed with the decision, saying the Speaker had taken the easy way out. Quote:


"All banks in Malaysia are subject to the directive and policies of Bank Negara. The Speaker's decision only shows that the government condones practices that are discriminatory on a racial basis," he alleged.

"Previously, this has been done in relation to government procurement procedures. Now it has sipped into procedures of government-linked companies," he said.


Parliamentary Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang was more specific in his statement to Maybank. He said in keeping with the principles of CSR (corporate social responsibility), Maybank should not speak in ambiguities (http://blog.limkitsiang.com/?p=202) but must make clear its policies and guidelines.

Kit challenged Maybank to be a model of CSR and make public the top 25 legal firms on its panel which have been given the most bank business each year for the past 10 years.


(He) urged Maybank to explain whether the 50 percent bumiputera partnership ruling will come into force on July 1, and how it will impact on both current panel lawyers and new firms.

"I call on Maybank to be a model of corporate social responsibility and make public the top 25 legal firms on its panel which have been given the most business each year for the past 10 years," said Lim.

"This is to allow the public to judge whether the firms given the most business are the politically- connected ones rather than those (who receive work) based on meritocracy or other criteria."


Kit also asked the government, which effectively owns Maybank as a GLC, to freeze Maybank bumi ruling until EPU methodology on ethnic equity ownership (http://www.jeffooi.com/mt32/mt-search.cgi?IncludeBlogs=1&search=lim+teck+ghee) is made public.

Meanwhile, DAP Socialist Youth (Dapsy) members have threatened to close their accounts with Maybank if it failed to retract the ruling in the next two weeks.