Malaysia Focuses On Strengthening Intra-ASEAN Trade
KUALA LUMPUR, July 24 (Bernama) -- Malaysia is focusing on strengthening the ASEAN economic framework by boosting intra-ASEAN trade to ensure the continuity of the region's agenda, said Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Hasan.
He said that amid growing global uncertainty, emphasis is now being placed on reinforcing regional economic ties to reduce dependence on traditional external trading partners.
'We can't rely too heavily on our traditional trading partners. Within ASEAN itself, trade among member states is very low, not even reaching 25 per cent.
'Therefore, we've introduced a framework to ensure that trade among ASEAN countries is enhanced,' he said during Minister's Question Time in the Dewan Rakyat today.
He was responding to a supplementary question from Manndzri Nasib (BN-Tenggara) on the key initiatives implemented and planned to ensure the continuity of ASEAN's agenda after Malaysia's chairmanship.
Mohamad said key initiatives being pursued include the implementation of ASEAN Vision 2045, a 20-year plan themed "Our Shared Future", aimed at raising ASEAN's economic standing to be on par with its existing political influence.
'We need to enhance economic activities among ourselves …even if we increase (intra-ASEAN trade) to 30 or 40 per cent, that would be a significant achievement to reduce the dependence of ASEAN countries, especially Malaysia,' he said.
To that end, Mohamad said Malaysia is also diversifying its markets through participation in the BRICS bloc, which represents over 40 per cent of the world's population and 25 per cent of global GDP, while also promoting a strategic trilateral partnership between ASEAN, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and China.
'If we can integrate these three major blocs effectively, we have a very promising future. The Gulf countries have strong purchasing power and abundant resources; ASEAN has a large workforce and rich natural resources; and China has a vast market.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Borneo Post
27 minutes ago
- Borneo Post
More than just a forum
Fu Hua, the forum chair and president of Xinhua News Agency, delivers a keynote speech at the BRICS Media and Think-Tank Forum. — Xinhua photo WHEN I received the invitation from Xinhua News Agency to attend the 'BRICS Media and Think-Tank Forum' in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, I accepted with a sense of pride and anticipation. As a representative from Malaysia, a non-BRICS country but a believer in South-South cooperation and balanced global narratives following the impressive business delegation led by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim a week ahead of the media summit to Rio, I looked forward to a meaningful exchange of ideas with fellow media leaders and thinkers from across the Global South. After all, the premise of a platform for voices from emerging economies to come together was promising. A media and think-tank summit for media practitioners to come together to explore how media in the regions could collaborate, share, and resist the homogenisation that had so often accompanied globalisation, was not something to be missed. In a world increasingly defined by polarities and geopolitical friction, the BRICS forum had the potential to provide a third space, rooted in neutrality, development, and shared aspirations. In his opening remarks, Fu Hua, president of Xinhua News Agency and chair of the forum, highlighted the aspiration behind this summit. 'Since 2015, we have been holding the BRICS Media Forum. 'We organise photo exhibitions, joint workshops, and exchange visits, all of which help to strengthen cultural ties between BRICS countries and their peoples.' It is indeed a noble vision. It resonates with many of us from non-BRICS nations who seek solidarity, exchange and mutual understanding within the Global South. Another of the forward-looking aspirations came from Ali Muhamad Ali, managing director of the News Agency of Nigeria who hailed BRICS as 'a force to be reckoned with, with its influence growing by the day'. 'For Nigeria, joining BRICS is a no-brainer. We are strategically positioned, eager to reshape global governance,' he said. That optimism is a desire shared by many countries like Malaysia, which remain non-aligned but committed to balance international cooperation. If there was one shortcomings of the forum, which I might raise, was that it was a tightly-scripted affair. Held over a single day, it was structured around a series of speeches and presentations. There were no roundtables, no interactive panels, and no open-floor discussions for all participants. The participants, many of whom had travelled across continents, myself included, were left with little room to engage with one another beyond polite greetings and photo opportunities. Media, by its very nature, thrives on exchange. Ideas sharpen when tested. Stories grow richer when told across borders. If this forum had allowed session of honest dialogue for all participants – a closed-door roundtable, a thematic breakout groups, or even an informal Q&A – it might have sparked collaborations that would live far beyond the speeches. And yet, I want to be clear: I remain thankful because the experience and the wealth of knowledge from the speeches, as a whole, left an indelible mark. Besides the forum, the summit brought me to colourful and beautiful Rio de Janeiro. I stood beneath the outstretched arms of Christ the Redeemer, one of the 'New Seven Wonders of the World'. I walked the colourful mosaic steps of Lapa, feeling the stories of the late Selarón in every tile. I wandered through the vibrant lanes of Santa Teresa and watched the sea and mountain in conversation behind Sugarloaf Mountain as cable cars floated like dreams in the clear blue sky. These were moments that no conference schedule could offer – encounters with a city that speaks not only through architecture and history, but through rhythm, food, colour, and spirit. Rio awakened something in me: a reminder that meaning sometimes comes not in the form that we expect, but in what we find along the way. As for the forum itself, I hope this was merely a first step. The symbolism of bringing together media and think-tank representatives from BRICS countries and beyond is significant. But if future editions are to make a lasting impact, they must move beyond formalities. We are eager to find allies in storytelling, development, media innovation, and cultural exchange. We believe in amplifying voices that often go unheard on the global stage, and in creating new narratives that reflect the complexity and dignity of our regions. Malaysia has much to contribute – and much to learn – from our BRICS partners. Our media ecosystem, though challenged by digital disruption and economic pressures, remains resilient. We are undergoing transformation, moving towards digital-first newsrooms, encouraging responsible journalism, and exploring new frontiers in content creation. But more than that, we bring with us the lived experiences of Southeast Asia – a region that, like Latin America, Africa, and parts of Asia, understands the struggle for development, identity, and sovereignty in a multipolar world. I return from Rio not with a portfolio of joint statements or memoranda, but with renewed resolve. Until then, I carry with me the colours of Rio, the lessons of missed opportunities, and the hope that the next forum will truly listen – not just speak. • BRICS started as a forum for cooperation among a group of leading emerging economies: originally they were Brazil, Russia, India and China. The representatives of these countries began meeting informally during the 2006 meeting of the United Nations General Assembly. In 2011, South Africa joined the organisation, resulting in the change of the group's name abbreviation to BRICS. Now, BRICS also includes Indonesia, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates.
Borneo Post
27 minutes ago
- Borneo Post
Validity based on law
Hibah can be challenged in court by the heirs if there are weaknesses or non-compliance with legal or religious requirements. — Bernama photo HIBAH, which in Islamic law refers to assets voluntarily given or transferred to a beneficiary by a person during their lifetime, is generally viewed as final and not open to dispute. However, a recent decision by the High Court came as a shock to many when it annulled a 'takaful' (Islamic insurance) hibah worth RM1 million that had been given to the policyholder's widow. [This case involved a takaful policyholder who named his wife as the hibah recipient. But, after his death, his family filed a claim in the Syariah Court to challenge the takaful hibah, but the court upheld the widow's right to the funds. The family then brought the case before the Civil Court, which ruled in favour of the family and ordered that the funds be redistributed according to 'faraid', or Islamic inheritance law]. The case has sparked a heated debate on social media because the general perception is that hibah cannot be challenged by other heirs. Many netizens, who had placed full trust in the 'immunity' of hibah from legal disputes, questioned the validity of takaful hibah. Some even accused their takaful agents of being 'scammers' because there is no guarantee that the hibah cannot be challenged in court. 'It can be challenged' According to lawyer Dr Mahmud Abdul Jumaat, hibah is a voluntary transfer of property from a giver to a recipient during the giver's lifetime, usually done to avoid inheritance disputes later on. Hibah also refers to the immediate transfer of asset ownership, made without expecting anything in return and based on love or affection. 'However, in reality, hibah can be challenged in court by the heirs if there are weaknesses or non-compliance with legal or religious requirements, like, for example, the hibah document is unclear or incomplete. 'Similarly, if the gift (hibah) doesn't fulfil the pillars and conditions of Islamic law or lacks the recipient's consent, or the property is not fully owned by the giver, then heirs have the right to question its validity in court. 'Challenges usually arise when heirs feel dissatisfied, for example, if they believe the hibah undermines their faraid rights, or suspect fraud or coercion in the process,' he tells Bernama. Hibah also refers to the immediate transfer of asset ownership, made without expecting anything in return, and based on love or affection. — Bernama photo Mahmud says if a hibah is made while the giver is suffering from a terminal illness, it (gift) will be treated as part of the giver's estate and, hence, will be subject to the appropriate conditions. In such cases, he points out that the heirs may challenge the hibah on the grounds that it violates Islamic inheritance laws. He also clarified that under Malaysia's legal framework, hibah falls under the jurisdiction of both the syariah and civil courts. 'The Syariah Court holds specific authority to verify the validity of a hibah under Islamic law, while estate administration (distribution of estate after death) falls under civil jurisdiction, such as the Small Estate Office or the Civil High Court. 'Conflicts can arise if there's overlap or confusion between these two jurisdictions. 'For instance, heirs may challenge a hibah in Civil Court by claiming that the property concerned is still part of the estate and must be distributed via faraid, even if the Syariah Court has already confirmed the hibah as valid. 'This was exactly what happened in the recent takaful hibah court case, where a legal technicality (involving Schedule 10 of the Islamic Financial Services Act (IFSA) 2013 regarding hibah nominations) led to a contradiction between the syariah and civil court rulings. 'Overall, a hibah can be challenged if it doesn't meet religious or legal conditions. 'But if it is properly executed in line with syariah principles and legal requirements, it is usually upheld as valid, even if contested,' he explains. Understanding the procedures On experts and estate planning practitioners' assertion that hibah remains a relevant instrument for asset distribution as long as the procedures are carried out properly, Mahmud says the fact that hibah can be challenged does not mean it is automatically invalid or illegal. Rather, it simply means hibah is not an 'untouchable' instrument immune from scrutiny. 'If something is challengeable, it doesn't mean it's inherently bad. 'Just like a 'wasiat' (will) or any other legal document, hibah offers a good solution for estate planning, but it must be executed carefully in accordance with Islamic principles. 'In fact, under Islamic law, hibah is permissible and considered a suitable practice as long as it doesn't contradict faraid and fulfils syariah requirements. 'The recent court case highlights the importance of understanding the legal processes involved in hibah, rather than rejecting its benefits outright,' he says. Dr Mahmud Abdul Jumaat Mahmud adds that it is important to realise that the court challenges usually stem from technical or procedural weaknesses, and not because the concept of hibah is invalid. Pointing to the recent court case, he says it involves specific legal provisions (takaful hibah nominations under IFSA 2013), adding that the court decision is not final yet as it is expected to be appealed. Mahmud also observes that most other forms of hibah, such as property, cash or other assets, are recognised as valid as long as they fulfil the necessary conditions. 'Therefore, the people need not panic, but should instead focus on strengthening their hibah procedures. 'Hibah continues to be an important tool for Islamic estate planning in Malaysia. 'It allows the wishes of the deceased to be honoured – for example, protecting the welfare of specific family members or chosen recipients – without breaching faraid, if handled correctly. 'What's crucial is to understand that hibah is not an absolute guarantee on paper alone. 'It requires proper understanding and correct execution to ensure the giver's intentions are fulfilled smoothly and without future disputes,' he says. Alternatives According to Mahmud, aside from hibah, there are several alternative methods to transfer wealth or assets to the loved ones that carry a lower risk of being challenged. These include direct transfers during one's lifetime through standard ownership transfers or gifts, without relying on formal hibah documents. 'For example, a husband may give cash or transfer property ownership to his wife legally while still alive. 'Once the property is registered in the wife's name, it becomes her absolute right and is no longer considered part of the husband's estate after his death. 'In other words, assets given during the giver's lifetime are not subject to faraid distribution because the ownership has already changed hands before death. 'These direct transfers – whether via a deed of gift, transfer of ownership at the land office for real estate, or bank account balance transfer – can help avoid disputes as other heirs no longer have a claim on the assets given as gifts. 'In addition, married couples may consider joint ownership arrangements – for example, registering assets like a house or bank account under both husband and wife's names. 'Depending on legal practices, this method sometimes allows the asset to automatically pass to the surviving joint owner without going through the inheritance process.' Mahmud also points out that for Muslim couples in Malaysia, a wife can also make a claim for joint matrimonial property in the Syariah Court after the husband's death, and vice versa. Through this claim, the court will determine a portion of the jointly acquired assets as the wife's rightful share. This portion is removed from the deceased's estate and cannot be disputed by other heirs as it already belongs to the wife. Another alternative is to use a trust as an asset distribution tool. The asset owner can appoint a trustee institution or trust company, such as Amanah Raya Bhd or a private trust firm, and transfer specific assets to the trustee through a formal trust agreement, with instructions that the assets be held for the benefit of a chosen recipient. 'For instance, a father might place a sum of money or property into a trust for his child under certain conditions. 'Upon his death, those assets would not be included in his estate because they were already placed in trust during his lifetime. 'The trustee would then distribute the assets to the child according to the terms of the trust, and other heirs could not challenge it because legally, the assets no longer belonged to the deceased at the time of death,' he says, adding that trusts usually involve costs and require professional management. 'Wills can be challenged' Explaining that Muslims can also consider making a will, Mahmud says this is permissible within certain limits, one of which is that only up to one-third of the estate (after deducting debts) can be given to non-heirs. Additionally, a will cannot include faraid heirs – unless with the consent of all other heirs. A will is a written or verbal declaration by someone about how their assets should be distributed after death and it only takes effect upon their passing. 'If the will exceeds the legal limit, or is made in favour of a faraid heir without the consent of others, it can be challenged. 'Any portion exceeding one-third will revert to faraid distribution, and any bequest to an heir without consent will be invalid, unless all other heirs agree to it. 'For Muslims, a will must be validated by the Syariah Court via a will confirmation order, whereas for non-Muslims, the probate process must be conducted in the Civil Court before assets can be distributed. 'Wills take time and may be contested if there are questions about their validity,' he adds. 'Documents must be complete' To ensure a hibah is strong and less likely to be challenged, Mahmud says both the giver and the recipient must make sure that its documentation is clear and complete. It should include details such as the identities of the giver and the recipient; a description of the asset to be given as gift; declarations of the offer and acceptance; signatures; and witnesses. He also says the hibah documents must be free of ambiguity and meet all requirements of Islamic law and existing regulations. 'It's always better for a hibah to be done in writing – rather than verbally – as written documents serve as strong proof of intention and mutual consent. 'Moreover, anyone planning to gift assets through hibah is encouraged to seek Syariah Court confirmation and prepare formal documentation. 'Confirmation from the Syariah Court (via a hibah confirmation order) certifies the validity of the hibah under Islamic law and makes it binding on other heirs. 'It's also advisable for the hibah giver to seek professional advice from a syariah lawyer, religious institution officer or estate planning consultant before and during the process,' he says, adding that the experts can ensure no technical aspects are overlooked, such as in the case of property, whether or not it is still under mortgage; or if there is a need to obtain bank consent; or for takaful hibah, whether or not the correct nomination procedures have been followed. Conditional hibah Al-Isra' Group associate manager Reefa Shahidah Mohd Razali, meanwhile, believes that the issue of takaful hibah being disputed in court would not arise if its implementation followed the existing legal framework under IFSA 2013. She explains that the hibah used in the current takaful industry is 'conditional hibah' – a direct gift made by the policyholder to the nominated recipient in the takaful certificate. Reefa Shahidah Mohd Razali 'There's no basis for accusing takaful agents of misleading clients because the implementation of this hibah is based on valid legal provisions under IFSA 2013, specifically Schedule 10, which outlines the hibah instrument. 'Hibah management in today's takaful differs from older plans that existed before IFSA 2013. 'Before the Act was enforced, most plans used the concept of 'wasi' (trustee), not absolute ownership-based hibah. 'That's why there was confusion in the past – it was not clearly stated whether the gift to heirs was through hibah or wasi. 'Today, it's clear. In current takaful plans, conditional hibah is valid and legally grounded,' she points out, adding that hibah nominations are valid and cannot be contested unless there is an element of fraud or breach of contract. 'Everything is based on the law. 'In fact, we encourage clients to fully understand the concept of conditional hibah before signing any policy.' — Bernama
The Star
6 hours ago
- The Star
Asean's parallel diplomacy on Myanmar: Creativity sans coordination
AT the 58th Asean Foreign Ministers' Meeting on July 9, the regional bloc reiterated its commitment to the Five-Point Consensus (5PC) as the central political reference for addressing the deepening crisis in Myanmar, which was also stated in the 2025 Asean Leaders' Statement on a Ceasefire in Myanmar Extended and Expanded. Yet more than four years since the military coup, with escalating violence, deepening displacement and widespread human rights violations, one must ask: How effective has this approach truly been? What has become increasingly clear is the growing disconnect between Asean's rhetoric and its actions. Far from being a roadmap to peace, the 5PC has become a diplomatic placeholder, invoked ritually in communiqués yet divorced from realities on the ground. What has emerged in its place is a fragmented and contradictory set of responses has emerged, exposing Asean to what is described as the trap of "parallel diplomacy". This trap reveals both institutional stagnation and growing division among Asean member states. Rather than forging a cohesive and principled regional strategy, Asean has allowed individual member states to pursue uncoordinated and improvised national initiatives. These fragmented actions, often detached from Asean's formal mechanisms, have bred confusion, diluted collective pressure on the junta and eroded public confidence in the bloc's credibility. Parallel diplomacy, by nature, is not inherently flawed. Informal channels, Track 1.5 dialogues and backchannel negotiations can play crucial roles in complex conflict contexts. However, when these efforts unfold without coordination or a shared strategic vision, they risk undermining peace building efforts. Fragmented diplomacy, in such a case, becomes a symptom of disunity, not a strategy for flexibility. Thailand's approach to the Myanmar crisis exemplifies the consequences of this incoherence. Often operating outside Asean frameworks, Thailand has spearheaded what has come to be known as the 'Bangkok Process', a series of direct engagements with Myanmar's military regime. This began with then-foreign minister Don Pramudwinai's visit to Naypyidaw in 2021 and continued with the appointment of a Thai special envoy to Myanmar. Several informal consultations followed, including meetings involving the junta and its closest allies. In December 2022, Thailand hosted a closed-door meeting that included junta representatives and the foreign ministers of Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam. Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Singapore boycotted the meeting, citing their commitment to the 5PC and objected to the junta's inclusion. Similar meetings followed in June 2023 and December 2024, often framed around humanitarian engagement. The latter was attended by ministers from Laos, Malaysia, the Philippines, Thailand and Singapore, with the rest sending lower-level delegates. These moves signalled improvisation over unity, diplomacy over strategy. Indonesia as Asean chair in 2023, meanwhile, held consultations with over 145 stakeholders, including resistance groups, by September that year. These engagements evolved into an informal Joint Coordination Body known as the "Jakarta Club", which remains active today. The January 2025 Asean Foreign Ministers' Retreat further highlighted the region's growing fragmentation over Myanmar. The Philippines proposed a new political framework, while Vietnam called for the inclusion of ethnic armed organisations in future dialogue. These diverging positions do not signal healthy pluralism, they reflect deepening strategic incoherence within Asean. In April, Malaysia initiated direct engagement with the National Unity Government Myanmar's civilian-led opposition. However, diplomatic courtesies and technical cooperation with the junta continue in parallel, lending de facto legitimacy to the military regime while reducing pro-democracy actors to symbolic participants. The emergence of multiple informal mechanisms, such as Indonesia's Jakarta Club, Thailand's Bangkok Process and Malaysia's dual-track diplomacy, reflects both innovation and disarray in Asean's approach. These ad-hoc efforts, in the absence of a unified strategy, illustrate Asean's drift: engaging both the junta and the opposition without a coherent political roadmap risks perpetuating stalemate rather than resolving the crisis. Part of this incoherence stems from Asean's institutional structure. The rotating nature of the Special Envoy, changing with each Asean Chair, undermines continuity and long-term strategy. Compounding this, minister-level envoy is no longer on the table. While some of these adjustments are framed as strategic, they also reflect the bloc's limited political will and uneven commitment to addressing the crisis. Another structural flaw lies in Asean's lack of a clear, enforceable mechanism to address unconstitutional changes of government. This institutional gap not only enables impunity but makes the bloc complicit in democratic backsliding. Without the courage to confront member states that violate core democratic norms, the bloc merely adds strain to its already fragile regionalism project. Another disunity has been revealed in member states' responses to Myanmar's planned 2025 elections, to be held later this year. Malaysia and Singapore have rightly questioned the vote's legitimacy, while Thailand remains neutral and Cambodia has even offered to send observers. These divergent positions highlight Asean's chronic inability to speak with one voice on fundamental democratic principles, undermining its credibility and emboldening authoritarian actors within and beyond Myanmar. Asean stands at a critical juncture shaped by crisis, centrality and conscience. This photo taken on December 10, 2023 shows members of the Mandalay People's Defense Forces (MDY-PDF) heading to the frontline amid clashes with the Myanmar military in northern Shan State. Myanmar's junta ended the country's state of emergency on July 31, 2025, ramping up preparations for a December election being boycotted by opposition groups and criticised by international monitors. — AFP The humanitarian catastrophe in Myanmar, marked by mass killings, displacement and aid blockades, has spilled across borders, fuelling instability and transnational crime. Some advocate for using all diplomatic tools, including parallel tracks, but innovation without principled leadership and a unified strategy risks becoming a smokescreen for inaction rather than a path to peace. The true test of Asean's centrality is no longer its ability to speak in uniformity, but to harmonise many voices without losing the plot. Centrality must mean more than procedural prominence, it must signal strategic coherence and moral leadership. The Myanmar crisis has revealed troubling signs of institutional drift, and unless corrected, Asean's foundational claims to unity and purpose will ring increasingly empty. Above all, Asean must summon moral clarity. Leading with conscience means naming the perpetrators, supporting the victims and rejecting impunity masquerading as diplomacy. — The Jakarta Post/ANN Yuyun Wahyuningrum is executive director of Asean Parliamentarians for Human Rights (APHR).
