Source: http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/189097 (By Koh Jun Lin, 14/2/2015)
A lone protester on hunger strike was taken to the
Gan Ee Seng, an investor in the logging company Seruan Gemilang Makmur Sdn Bhd, had gone without food for more than 24 hours. However, he has vowed to return to his protest site in Padang Kota Damansara, Selangor, when he is discharged.
Several Pakatan Rakyat MPs had earlier visited Gan, who was lying on a piece of cardboard, barely able to speak. He had to be helped up for a drink of water.
“I support the peaceful protest but I totally disagree with any form of protest that would harm anyone, including the protesters themselves. So I’ll try my very best to ask Gan to stop the suicidal attempt,” said Segambut MP Lim Lip
According to the company’s managing director Lee Sin, Gan has a history of hypertension, diabetes, and has undergone angioplasty (a surgical procedure to widen blood vessels).
Gan is protesting the failure of the Pahang government to comply with a court ruling to pay his company RM63 million. Yesterday, he had threatened self-immolation if there is no response. Asked why Gan is the only protester when there were 10 during the last hunger strike, Lee replied: “We don’t want to protest. We have done it before and it was useless.”
Cheras MP Tan Kok Wai and Subang MP Sivarasa Rasiah, who were also at the protest site, slammed the Pahang government for failing to meet its legal obligations. “Malaysian investors seem to have lost confidence in the Pahang government. This is why they cannot attract any more industries except (the Lynas Advanced Materials Plant and Bukit Koman gold mine),” said Tan.
Seruan Gemilang Makmur was involved in a logging scandal after being awarded a permit to clear 8,000 acres of land, said to be owned by Umno Pahang, but was later exposed by Malaysiakini to be state land. The company then filed a suit against Pahang Menteri Besar Adnan Yaakob and the state government and was awarded RM37,127,471.61 by the High Court in Kuantan, plus eight percent interests a year from Dec 31, 2000.
The Court of Appeal later ruled that Adnan Yaakob had wrongly been named as respondent, but upheld that the sum owed to the company must still be paid.