Friday, July 9, 2010

Did you know this, Paul

You don't have to be Paul The Octopus to predict this but Olympic Council of Malaysia (OCM) rejected a proposal to amend Article 14.4 of the Constitution.

The proposal, in line with desires of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and submitted by the National Archery Association, was to introduce a clause to prevent office-bearers aged 70 or above, or who had already served for 20 years, from being nominated as a candidate to stand for office.

But, the General Assembly rejected it. So now, office bearers can stay on, but staffs must leave by age 70, at least that was the reason given to discontinue the services of two veteran officials, Mr. M.P. Haridas and Mr. N.A. Baskaran. Two sets of rules, no problem.

There are greater octopuses than Paul in Malaysian sports. The World Cup is almost over and now is time to start writting again. Fo those of you who were busy with Paul, Vuvuzelas and other stuffs, welcome back to reality.


  1. Unle Joe, Like the proverbal bad penny OCM issue surfaces again. First I think you are referring to both 14.4 and 14.5 of the OCM constitution. I feel 14.5 is the more relevant of the two because it allows the office bearers to stand for re election.
    The bouble standard and the injustices, the retardation of Sports in Malaysia can be singly attributed to the Olympic Council of Malaysia.
    Yes the allegations are strong and let me tell you that the Secretary General of OCM and the whole Board are guilty of this crime, and there is nothing you can do about it.
    OCM may be just a sports body under the Sports Development Act, but in fact there are a super Sports Body that is above the Sports Development Act and really those in the know will tell you the Sports Commissioner or the Minister of Youth and Sports have no power to restrain OCM.
    Okay you dobting Thomese out there may say no one is above the law. I say OCM is very much above the Sports Development Act. You know where their weapons lies? It is the Olympic Charter.
    The Olympic Charter is an moral creature, but place in the hands of a tyrant, it is open to multifarious interpretation that have no body to interprete it except the National Olympic Association. Why you may ask?
    In the preamble of Olympic Charter Fundamental to Olympisim 4 and 5 it talks of all that is wholesome fair and good, it is a human right , no discrimination, fair play etc etc. Now who determine what is fair? The answer in Malaysia , it is the OCM.
    In Malaysia, the OCM has interferred in almost so many sports that they have manouvered themselves into a position of power. You tow the line or we will chop you off. Look at Fencing, Taekwando and many more that I do not care to mention.
    Those who have dealt with the Secretary General, before, have you seen the manner he replies to you so efficiently? It is as though he is the policy maker that does not require deliberation from the Board.
    The main funding of the OCM are ultimately the Govermnment of Malaysia, I feel that if they refuses to tow the line, I do not see why there is a need to finance them. Let their sponsors finance them.
    On this issue of age of retirement and the double standard that you highlighted, let me tell you the Secretary General will fight tooth and nail to retain his position in the election in 2011. He will turn to all sporting Malaysian and say, so what are you going to do? I have my Olympic Charter and if you try and touch me I will get my big brother in OCA and IOC to stand by me.
    Randir Singh the decrepit Secretary General of the Indian Olympic Association is still there despite attemps by the Indian Minister of Sports to unseat him.
    In Malaysia Uncle Joe, Dato Sieh has told Rizal Hasim of Loose Canon fame that he will step down ages ago, but he still remains , not willing to give up his kingdom. NOw you know why he is often referred to as the Grand Emperor and OCM is his Kingdom.

  2. Everybody Goes Kungfu FightingJuly 9, 2010 at 3:58 PM

    Dato'Donny Sieh Kok Chi, the Secretary General of the Olympic Council of Malaysia. Is that the spirit of Olympism and fair play that you so often esposes "Two Set of Rules, no problems".
    Please next time don't tokkok okay.
    Rejection is of course by Donny Sieh, the rest of the Board members are either asleep, have duct trape plastered across their mouth or simply no telur to speak out.

  3. Mr. ConstitutionJuly 10, 2010 at 1:57 AM

    The motion by the National Archery Association of Malaysia (NAAM) is a valid and a consistent motion and should be carried but it is doom to fail if the voting is, I believe by show of hands. Is it true that the Board of OCM are at the Mercy of their members? Look at the structure of OCM, and the manner in which the constitution is drafted. The members that are mere sporting bodies are dependent on OCM for their existence rather than the other way around.
    Please understand that OCM have the absolute powers to send athletes to the Games and it is not the members’ right. Look at the powers in the Constitution in the event of a dispute by members, the powers lies in the Board and the appointment of the Alternative Dispute Resolution are by the Board of OCM. However the impression given are as though they are subservient to their members.
    Look at the arguments raised by NAAM. What they are merely saying is why not OCM be consistent with the Olympic Charter 16.3.3 and 16.2.71 and place the age of retirement to 70. Hello! it is in the Olympic Charter and this is the sacred document or the fountain where OCM claims to derive its powers from.
    Instead the so call 8 speakers that spoke against the motion referred to IOC and OCM are totally different bodies. Any fool knows that it is different but the argument is the substance of putting in an age of retirement that is consistent with the charter. So OCM is a member’s club, does that means that you can ignore this salient issue of age of retirement?
    This Blog made a valid point, as an employee you have to leave on attaining 70 but if you are an office bearer you can remain until you die in the office.
    Let’s be objective about this, why is there a need for an age of retirement in the first place? The simple answer as put by NAAM is to allow young blood in and remove the “dead wood”. When will the young have the chance to play a role in OCM in the present structure?
    The second reason is that they do not draw a salary or allowance. This gives a very misleading impression that being in the Board of OCM is such a noble gesture. What rubbish, why don’t the Board bring out the perks that they get, the free travels, full board and perhaps allowance when they attend meeting through out the world? I am not making the traveling part an issue but the picture painted is as though everything comes out from their pockets, which is a load on bullshit!
    In my second part I would like to reply to the fallacy of their reason using the Olympic charter as their shield.

  4. The 3rd reason that all the speakers who spoke against the motion says that Malaysia is a democratic country. What really pisses me off is at the same breath these sycophants have the temerity to use the part in the Olympic Charter that preaches you have to practice fair play, no race, religion, politics etc etc and no discrimination. Here is the killer that I find it hard to stomach. They say that to put a bar on the age is a form of discrimination.
    These goons at the General Assembly do not see that they are blowing hot and cold. The Olympic Charter has placed a limit to age of retirement at 70. Now when there is this motion to place an age limit, they now conveniently twist the argument around to say that putting a tenure bar on office bearers is a form of discrimination. What sick and perverted logic is that? If that is OCM line of arguments, are they not saying that the Charter is a flawed document? I now begin to think that the whole nest in OCM is nothing but a bunch of hypocrites protecting their own selfish interest.
    I ask you to examine age limit objectively, all the organs of a Government from the Civil Service to the Judiciary and even the stuff you buy from the supermarket has a shelf life. To resist the motion on grounds of discrimination that is something I feel Malaysian sporting public finds it hard to swallow.Give us a better reason.
    The 4th reason forwarded to defeat the motion is laughable OCM belongs to the Members and in the hands of the members. Ideally OCM is right, however before you place your sympathy on the Office bearers of OCM, I ask you to first and foremost examine the Constitution of OCM and some I have dealt with already.
    Look at the clause 7 on Membership. Look at 7.2 where it states that OCM shall be solely responsible for the acceptance of membership. This seemingly innocent clause alone gives OCM the absolute discretion to accept or reject a sports body. I can quote you instances of sports body that are recognized by their International Federation are put out in the cold and not accepted as a member of OCM. What is damning about the Constitution is clause 7.7, where OCM have amended their constitution to even allow the acceptance as Associate members of a particular sports that may or may not be affiliated to their International Federation. OCM uses this to block other legitimate body.
    I have quoted the structure of the Alternate Dispute Resolution and the Arbitration in OCM Constitution. Suffice for me to say, the manner it is structured, you cannot have an independent panel to hear your dispute let alone to have a ruling against OCM.
    Now if you were to recall in 2009 election, just before the election all members of OCM including the Associate members gets an Ang Pow. Now you tell me is the Ang Pow decided by the members or the current office bearers or board members? Now they seem to tell the public that they are at the mercy of their members. Come on OCM give us a better story and you know that the NSA are at your mercy and not the other way round.

    I cannot help but touch on OCM claim that they are mature and intelligent sports people in my next comment.

  5. As in everything else in the world...change comes slowly, very slowly.

  6. Could Mr Constitution please suggest the next better course of action for those legitimate bodies that are blocked by OCM clause 7.7?

  7. Mr. ConstitutionJuly 10, 2010 at 4:16 PM

    Dear Anon 1.00pm, the SEA Games comes once every 2 years, the Asian Games once every 4 years.Some of the sports the athletes have a short life span, to even delay our athletes an opportunity for 1 game is to me a mortal sin committed by OCM.
    If there is a wrong it should be put right and I hope this Blog opens the eyes of the sports authorities, that the athletes are suffering and the cause is OCM. I am merely asking them to JUST Do what is right!

  8. Mr. ConstitutionJuly 11, 2010 at 2:04 AM

    The 5th argument to defeat NAAM motion is that the members of OCM are matured and intelligent sports people. They are sports people I agree because they are the NSA representing the International Federation in Sports. However I have serious doubts of their claim that they can evaluate the office bearer performance, integrity, transparency or honesty. Can any of these NSA in OCM tell the public why at the door of the 2009 election they get this “Ang Pow”. Can they in all honesty say that over the years the have performed so well that they deserve the Ang Pow. Now I do not want to be regarded as a sour grape, it is the timing when the money were disbursed to them, that one cannot help but come to the conclusion that the so call monetary rewards is an inducement to vote in the same Santa Clauses. That is far from transparent and reeks of corruption. Although done subtly, it is nevertheless still corruption.
    In the 6th argument they question NAAM why do they not have it in their constitution the age bar. I suppose NAAM may just challenge them that if I amend my constitution to put a bar on age, will you do likewise?
    Sure OCM did splendidly in their finances and we congratulate them that they should be applying for a Banking License from Bank Negara. You see the sad part is they have gone to such an extent of protecting their self-interest that they have actually lost their objective and direction of being a Sports Body. I am quite sure that if the voting has been by way of Secret Ballot, the result would have been different. Take note that the Soft Ball Association of Malaysia under Low Beng Choo has abstained. She could jolly well gave someone the proxy, but the record shows there is abstention. To me that is telling a lot.
    The Sports Commissioner officers were there to watch the Wayang Kulit being played out. They are fully aware of the problems and they also know that the General Assembly are all well orchestrated. Their powers are limited but they honestly know that those chaps above 70 should have retired a long time ago, for Malaysian sports to improve.
    Finally, OCM claims to guard the spirit in the Olympic Charter. I have illustrated that what is fair play and what is non discrimination are interpreted by them to their convenience. I have also demonstrated to you that as far as OCM are concerned, they are not bothered of the Sports Development Act and they do not really care much what the Sports Commissioner say. Now with absolute powers under the Olympic Charter, you know why OCM is often referred a Kingdom by itself.
    Is it not correct for right thinking members of the public to ask “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? “Who shall guard the guards” to the Olympic Charter?

  9. Mr. ConstitutionJuly 11, 2010 at 8:28 AM

    Dear Anon 3.00 p.m. you have asked what can we do to overcome 7.7 of the OCM constitution. Before I answer that you have to be persuaded that 7.7 is ultra vires the Olympic Council of Asia constitution.
    This is an extract of Article 13 of the Olympic Council of Asia constitution.

    A Member recognised as such by the Council must fulfil the following
    1. It shall include within its organisation representatives of the National
    Governing Bodies of sports in which that country is participating in the
    AG. These Governing Bodies should be affiliated to their respective IFs
    or to the respective Asian Sports Federations in lieu thereof in the case
    of a regional sport;
    2. It must include in its own membership its representatives on the GA of
    the Council. It must recognise not more than one body or Association in
    its own country as the National Governing Body of a sport which is the
    body recognised by the IF of that sport or by a body recognised by the
    Asian Sports Federation where no IF exists;

    I particularly liker to draw your attention to 13.2 especially the part “ It must recognize not more than one body or Association in its own country as the National Governing Body of a sport which is a body recognized by the IF…..

    Now look at 7.7, how in heavens can OCM recognize an Associate member not recognized by anyone uses this to exclude legitimate NSA recognized by the IF? The OCA constitution very clearly says you cannot recognize more than one body.
    On this alone if OCM constitution is ultra vires the OCA constitution. What hope can you have of this cowboy body to promote sport in Malaysia?
    Okay what can be done. First, I feel it is important for the Sports Commissioner ‘s office to have an open dialogue with OCM and make their feelings know on the nonsense that is going on in OCM. The SDA says that they are a Sports Body, if they are truly a sports body, the SC must regain some semblance of authority over OCM in the legal sense.
    Second to a large extend OCM also have sponsors but the biggest sponsors to OCM coffers are the Government of Malaysia, tell me why should the Government give them money if they are not prepared to behave.
    Thirdly, the SC must engage with the Olympic Council of Asia in a very friendly way to tell them to restrain their member and have some respect of the Laws of Malaysia.

    OCM thinks that they are well respected internationally, but let me tell you that Malaysia is not really China a hot shot sporting Nation. The people in OCA are polite sporting people and sure unimportant posts are given to some OCM chaps. In short they are tikus in OCA but in Malaysia they appear as big bullies to the Sports body.

  10. not only two joe.. but too many sets of rules..

  11. Dear Mr. Constitution, Thank you for your candid and eye opening take on OCM. Are you saying that the Olympic Charter is a "flawed document?"

  12. Mr. ConstitutionJuly 12, 2010 at 8:06 PM

    Dear Anon 3.01pm. I do not think the Olympic Charter is a flawed document. The Charter in my opinion is a moral document that expounds the wholesome of what Olympism is all about. It is a guide and it is open to interpretation.
    In the hands of the fair-minded people certainly it brings out the best in sportsmanship
    In the hands of a tyrant they will misuse the Charter and interpret it to their convenience.
    The subject at hand is the bar on age. The Charter clearly set the age of retirement at 70.
    Look at the Olympic Council of Malaysia’s member arguments that to put a bar is discrimination. Can you accept that?
    When OCM can blatantly disregard the Charter and put in clauses against the Charter in the OCM constitution, that is where the problem lies. If you were to study the amendments, in the Constitution, the amendments are to protect OCM self interest. The NAAM boys should be praised but you watch, life will not be easy for them in the future. I feel by their presentation they were not properly prepared to argue the merits of their motion.

  13. no more Angpau for Archery.. in the future.. just wait n see..

  14. NAAM kenapa diam jer, kan orang dah sokong u. Bagi la pandangan mu?

  15. Mr. ConstitutionJuly 15, 2010 at 9:49 AM

    I feel it would be good perhaps if NAAM could respond and give their views on their motion on this Blog.
    Thank you for giving me time to present my views on your Blog. I just cannot sit still after reading the arguments of the members of OCM that to introduce an age bar is tantamount to discrimination.
    All said, have you read the latest antics of the IOA Sec Gen Randhir Singh to pitch for the next Asian Games with no knowledge of the Sports Minister MS Gill.
    The OCM powers must be clipped there is no way about it and they must be accountable to the sporting public.

  16. I am a member of OCM, and I would like to comment of what Mr. Constitution have to say. The reason why I cannot reveal my identity is obvious, I do not want to be singled out and be a hero.
    What Mr. Constitution say has some truth and it is no longer an option to just keep quiet. His attack on OCM is caustic, but I feel the Sports Commissioners office also is partially to be blamed.
    When OCM amended their constitution, it has to get the approval of the Sports Commissioners office right? Since it is already approved, does Mr. Constitution think that the Sports Commissioner does not know that some of the articles are ultra vires the Constitution of the Olympic Council of Asia?
    Why then blame OCM only? Now on the Ang Pau, that was given to us, what do you expect us to do, return it? To us as members if the Board of OCM give us, of course we will take it with no questions asked. What has our performance got to do on the Ang Pau issue.
    Mr. Constitution is hitting below the belt in this case.

  17. Mr. Constitution, don't you think that the Sports Commissioner is also responsible to ensure that all sports bodies under its care should abide by the rules and regulations of the various international bodies? If the OCM constitution and age bar issue are in conflict with Olympic Charter don't you think the Sports Commissioner is duty bound to advise OCM so? Moreover correct me if I am wrong here that any amendment to constitution can only take effect after approval by the regulatory body, that is, Sports Commissioner. Your comment is solicited.

  18. I will take the comments made by Anon:9.28pm and A member together.
    On the point of the Sports Commissioner being partially blamed, both of you are partially right and at the same time partially wrong.Now you will accuse me of blowing hot and cold.
    You are right in the sense that in the Sports Development Act OCM is also another Sports Body.All sports Body under the SDA have to have their constitution vetted and approved by the SC office. This is nothing new for it is standard practice when sports body are registered under the Societies Act then.
    On the other hand you have to understand that OCM is not simply a sports body, they are creatures that breath and live under the Olympic Charter, making them a super sports body. Any interference by SC to comment on their constitution is tantamount to political interference. Having met people in the SC, I fully understand their predicament.I believe that they are aware of the problems but rather close both their eyes where OCM are concerned.
    This is not acceptable that is why to be effective I have suggested it high time SC need to have this pow wow with OCM and tell them , I know the nonsense you have been doing and this have to stop. SC cannot avoid their responsibilities they have to tell OCM to stick to their constitution and remove parts that are against the SDA or the OCA Constitution.
    On the age Bar , surely SC can tell OCM that you have to put an age limit that all those above seventy have to get out. The 1st to go is that 71 years old Secretary General or is he now 72?
    Look at India Olympic Association, can you imagine that their Sec Gen Randhir Singh can pitch for the next Asian Games without the knowledge permission or consent of the Indian Sports Ministry? Looking at OCM, I think that is the direction they are taking, they want to be autonomous. Yes they can be autonomous but not to the extend of making a mockery of the Sports Development Act and making monkeys of the SC and Minister of Youth and Sports.
    On the Ang Pow issue, sure take it if it given to you, but understand one thing, it is the board that gives you. It is not your decision or collectively as a body to give yourselves the Ang Pow. The Board claims that they are under you chaps. This you know is rubbish. Do you not agree that the timing it was given before the election smells of corruption?

  19. Why set a limit on age? The standard should always be who is the most qualified for the post, not what year you were born in. If that were the case, I'd be too young for the board.

    Too many cooks are spoiling the broth that is sports in Malaysia.

  20. Mr. Constitution, I hope you keep commenting. I enjoy your comments. They are very informative and educational. Thank you.

    I have some comments to make and would be very happy to hear your views on the matter:

    1. You commented on the great business acumen of the OCM. Yes, they have millions in the bank
    and the Wisma OCM with offices and a hotel.But what are they doing for their members other than angpows before elections? Till about last year,sport associations that wanted to hold meetings could rent meeting rooms for Rm 50. Today, the same rooms cost Rm450!!More money for OCM, but which poor sports association can
    afford this? The rich associations already have their own buildings and function rooms (e.g. soccer, basketball, badminton,etc)Are they trying to discourage poor associations from using the "sports house" facilities so that they
    can rent these to rich outside bodies? Rejecting the poor to enrich themselves?

    2. Regarding the 70-year age or 20 years of service limit that was proposed by NAAM at the AGM of the Olympic Council, I think it has merit. Even in the USA, the world's formost democracy, the President is given just two terms. This limitation forces you to do all that you can quickly, leave a legacy and give a new person a chance. This kind of change is important for progress. And also reduces corruption by people in power. Remember power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely!

    3. I hear that OCM wants to set up a Trust Fund...or have they already done it? The grapevine has it that in the original draft, the wily OCM Sec Gen wanted to set himself up as the Fund's Trustee FOR LIFE!! Can you imagine, even if the Sec Gen was voted out he would control all the money! Tunku Imran would have to go to DSKC with a begging bowl in hand for permission to use OCM money. If the Fund is already introduced, I hope the Board/Council members woke up from their long slumber to spot this and have it changed.(by: Old School)

  21. Dear Old school, Thank you for your views.I am not aware of the Trust funds that you mention in paragrapg 3 and I would not comment on the veracity of it. However I want you to know that setting up a Trust with so much money is a good idea mainly to prevent abuse.
    You have given a new perspective to this OCM issue. Why is it so difficult for a non olympic sport to join OCM and register as an NSA?
    The answer is this, in a Trust the Trustee holds the assests in the name of the beneficiaries. Who are the beneficiaries? I would imagine the beneficieries are all the members of OCM , that is the NSA.
    Now OCM has given a view that they are at the Mercy of the members the NSA, if that is the case, should the NSA gang up one day put an end to the trust , you can imagine they technically can inherit lots of money under the Trust.
    To prevent that I can see your angle of Dato Sieh Kok Chi putting himself as Trustee for Life!!
    You have to understand that he feels he is instrumental in building up OCM, and that he does not want anyone to take over his legacy. It is pure and simple attachment; the tragic part of it is OCM does not belong to Dato Sieh but to the members and in the course of it anyone against him or go against him will not be admitted to OCM.
    Dato Sieh's interference: just look at the problem Fencing is facing now. I hope someone from Fencing would come out and Blog their problem.