It’s All In The Planning!

I was reading a well-written article by Zainah Anwar in The Sunday Star yesterday on the inequalities of the laws in Malaysia with regard to the rights of the Muslim and non-Muslim women population.

I could sense her outrage in the article as she spelt out the various areas of discrimination and her appeal - well, I will call it an appeal - to the Government to right the discriminations and make the Islamic Family Law regarded once again as the most progressive personal status code in the Muslim world.

I wouldn’t want to delve totally into what she had written because you can always read it online here. But I would want to reproduce some passages where she touched on insurance and EPF monies.

Firstly, the Insurance Act 1996 which was amended such that the Muslim beneficiary named in an insurance policy acts only as the administrator of the estate. Whatever monies in the policy has to be distributed according to the Fara’id.

Thus, if a man buys a policy and names his wife and daughters as his beneficiaries, their well-being will not be wholly protected when he dies. According to the Fara’id, his parents and siblings or even distant male relatives are part of his heirs and will be entitled to claim a share of the insurance money.

Secondly, the same applies to his EPF funds too. Zainah says that in 2000, the National Fatwa Council issued a fatwa to extend the Fara’id rule to EPF funds. So if a husband names his wife as the beneficiary, she actually only acts as an administrator.

She continued: “This means that if a woman has children, she gets only one-eighth of the monies; if she has no children, she gets only a quarter, while the rest goes to the husband’s surviving heirs. If he has no other surviving heirs, the monies go to Baitulmal. If the husband is a convert and there are no children, his non-Muslim children from an earlier marriage or his non-Muslim parents or siblings cannot benefit from his insurance policy or his EPF monies as non-Muslims are not considered heirs.

“A convert friend of mine was so outraged and baffled that we could have decision makers who could think that he should purchase an insurance policy that would benefit Baitulmal, instead of his loved ones. The saving grace is that many Muslims have the conscience to recognise the injustice of these policies and have not chosen to contest EPF and insurance monies that have gone to the bereaved widow and the children.”

Remember, you can read the entire article here.

Who will be champ at this year’s Malaysia Chess Festival?

YOU MAY think that six weeks is a long time but, actually, it is not. That’s about the time left before the start of this year’s Malaysia Chess Festival. As I had mentioned some weeks ago, it may possibly be the last of the Festival in its present form.

Most certainly, it will be the fifth and final edition of the Arthur Tan memorial Malaysia open chess tournament. It’s one of the first-class chess events in this part of the world and has never failed to generate much interest among the top chess grandmasters in the region.

Over the years, we’ve had visiting grandmasters and international masters from Indonesia, the Philippines, Myanmar, Vietnam, China, India, England, Scotland and Australia. We have also had strong players from Brunei, Bangladesh, Armenia, Russia, Kazakhstan and Singapore among the participants. The Arthur Tan event has even attracted players from the United States, Hongkong, Macao, New Zealand and Japan. Basically, every continent except Africa has been represented here.

According to the Malaysian Chess Federation – the organisers of the Malaysian Chess Festival – foreign players have started making inquiries. Some are already making their travel plans.

One thing we can expect is China to be well represented in the Arthur Tan event. They’ve always given this event very good support over the years by sending players who almost never failed to make an impact.

In three out of the last four editions of this event, the trophy had been held by a Chinese player. In the inaugural event in 2004, Ni Hua was the winner. In 2005, Wang Hao was the big winner when he practically annihilated the rest of the field in his relentless march to the champion’s podium. Then, last year, it was Li Chao’s turn to make an impression.

Wouldn’t you already consider this as a Chinese stranglehold on the tournament? Well, maybe not quite because in 2006, the event was won by Vietnam’s Dao Thien Hai. In that year, the Chinese players were rather subdued. Perhaps it was good that they couldn’t excite the field because it gave the other players a chance to shine.

In that year, we saw an interesting tussle for the top prize. There was a lot of excitement because going into the final round, the Filipino player, Oliver Dimakiling, was holding a slim half-point lead over the others. The crunch came in the final round. He failed to deliver a win. Dimakiling only managed a draw while four of his closest rivals won their games!

The result? A five-way tie at the top of the table. But the first prize had to go to someone and according to the tie-break system, Dao’s tie-break points were the best among them. Of course, it was a big heartbreak for the Filipino player but Dao’s success could not be faulted. You may say that it was luck but he did take his calculated risks well.

Whether or not we’ll see a tight finish again this August or whether another Chinese player will rule the roost remains to be seen but the Arthur Tan event promises to be full of excitement.

When I received a copy of the entry form earlier this week, I was surprised to find that the prize fund had been topped up to US$24,000 (RM78,577). Yes, the organisers have increased the number of prizes in the hope of attracting a bigger and better field.

There are now prizes for the best 20 results in the tournament, compared to last year’s 15. The value of the first prize is unchanged, though, which is US$4,000 (RM13,100). Neither has the quantum of the second to fifth prizes changed.

But there will be a slight redistribution of the remaining prizes to accommodate the increased number of winners. There are also separate prizes for the top five Malaysians in this event.

Game of the week

This was probably the most spectacular game from the second Arthur Tan event three years ago. Wang Hao had arrived in Malaysia with a reputation of having won the Dubai open tournament several months earlier but how was he going to perform here? Would he be able to repeat his feat?

The participants did not have long to wait. Round after round, the Boy Wonder from China simply chalked up point after point to leave his opponents panting behind. Throughout the 11-round tournament, he dropped only two draws. Already a clear-cut winner, he didn’t have to win his game in the last round but obviously, nobody told him that he could have drawn the game and still take away the champion’s cheque.

So what did Wang do? He approached the final round like the way he played the 10th round and the ninth round and the eighth round and all the rounds before that. He wanted only to play for a win, and his hapless opponent was the Australian grandmaster, Ian Rogers.

White: Ian Rogers (Australia)
Black: Wang Hao (China)

1.c4 e5 2.Nc3 Nf6 3.Nf3 Nc6 4.e3 Bb4 5.Qc2 d6 6.a3 Bxc3 7.Qxc3 e4 8.Ng1 Ne5 9.b4 b6 10.f4 (I felt this move weakened White’s position too much. After the exchange of pawns, Black found himself an excellent square for his knight to jump.)

10….exf3 11.Nxf3 Ne4 (Here it comes. This knight occupies such a dominant square in the centre of the board and White must already be feeling a chill around his king.)

12.Qd4 Nxf3+ 13.gxf3 Qh4+ (This must be near the end of the game. White is positively lost by now.)

14.Ke2 Qf2+ 15.Kd3 Qxf3 16.Qxg7 (Why not 16.Qxe4+ Qxe4+ 17.Kxe4? Because White’s rook gets skewered after 17?.Bb7+. So White tries another measure.)

White: Ian Rogers (Australia); Black: Wang Hao (China)

16….Bf5 (Wow, a double rook sacrifice. You don’t see this every day. See diagram. Will White dare to take them? Actually, he doesn’t have many alternatives.) 17.Qxh8+ Ke7 18.Qg7 (White needs his queen to guard the long black diagonal. He cannot play 18.Qxa8 because Black will finish him off with 18….Nc5+ 19.Kc3 Na4+ 20.Kb3 Qd1+ 21.Ka2 Qc2+ 22.Bb2 Qxb2 mate.)

18….Rg8 19.Qxg8 Nf6+ (It’s inexplicable why Black did not go for 19….Nc5+ etc.) 20.Kc3 Nxg8 21.Rg1 Qf2 22.Rxg8 Qxf1 23.e4 Be6 24.Rg3 Qxc4+ 25.Kb2 Qxe4 26.Rc3 Kd7 27.d3 Qe2+ 0-1 (Finally, White gives up.)

It’s been reported today that the Employees Provident Fund (EPF) is introducing two new features for account holders: Topping Up and Matrimonial Claims.

The Topping Up plan allows children to top up the savings of their parents and spouses to top up for one another. This can be done at any time until the member whose account is being topped up reaches the age of 55. To top up a member’s account, the children or spouses need not be EPF members.

Cash or cheques are accepted for topping up an EPF member’s Account One at the service counters of all major EPF offices. There is no limit to the maximum amount but a minimum of RM50 is required.

The Matrimonial Claims will enable the EPF to comply with court orders regarding claims of matrimonial assets on EPF savings in the event of a divorce. However, this change is applicable to non-Muslims only as the National Islamic Fatwa Council does not deem EPF savings as a joint matrimonial asset but an individual’s estate.

When a claimant submits the application together with the court order, a special account will be opened under the claimant’s name. Any amount transferred to the claimant’s account from the members account will be paid together with the dividends when the claimant reaches 55.

Come 16 Feb 2009, a spectacular and scandal-packed court battle is scheduled to start in Hongkong over the USD4.2 billion fortune of Asia’s richest woman, Nina Wang, who died aged 69 last year, leaving her money to an unknown feng shui master.

It is expected to last eight weeks. Wang, the former chairwoman of the Chinachem property empire, died of cancer in April last year, leaving a will which bequeathed her entire fortune to a part-time feng shui master Chan Chun Cheun.

The will is being challenged by Wang’s relatives acting through a Chinachem charitable foundation who say that the will is not valid and that the family should inherit the money.

Wang was named as the richest woman in Asia in 2006 with a fortune estimated at USD4.2 billion although some estimates suggested her real worth may have been closer to USD13 billion.

With no children of her own, Wang wrote a new will in 2006, two years after her ovarian cancer was diagnosed, making 48-year-old Chan her sole beneficiary. However, her sisters and other relatives filed suit to fight for her estate, which was originally shared between charities and family members in an earlier 2002 will.

Chan is an expert in feng shui, the ancient Chinese practice of placement and arrangement of space to achieve harmony with the environment, and is consulted by property developers for readings.

We’re still in the throes of the subprime crisis, no thanks to the ineptitude and greed of the U.S. financial industry. We’ve heard so much about the crisis but have we really understood it? This is not an attempt to make light of the situation but I’ve just uncovered this slideshow which explains it in dummies-style.

Note: This is not your everyday YouTube cloned site. You’ll have to keep clicking on the “forward” button to move from slide to slide.

I RECEIVED a strong e-mail last week from the World Chess Federation (Fide) general secretary Ignatius Leong. The content that I’m reproducing below is self-explanatory. For clarity, the only bits I have left out include the excerpts he quoted from my article, his attachment of internal Fide communications and some remarks.

“I refer to your article in The Star on May 16 referring to events conducted in Malaysia and which you had stated that the MCF had submitted the tournament reports and that the rating records did not appear in Fide’s records.

“You drew the conclusion that the delays could not have been the fault of the MCF, which draws implication that Fide was at fault.

“After reading the article, I communicated with the Fide Rating Administrator Mr Casto Abundo. His final e-mail to me read: ‘Yes, but Elista Fide Office advised all who submitted by e-mail to instead use the Fide Ratings Server. I personally informed Hamid that he should upload himself to the Fide Ratings Server.’

“I have always thought one would check all facts from various sources before pointing a finger. I am all the more alarmed because the responsibility (sic) seemed to be a long-time chess administrator and experienced arbiter. As a matter of fact, I noted that only after the MCF changed its Rating Officer that the results were finally submitted in the correct way.

“I have copied this e-mail to all my colleagues to clear them from the embarrassment deriving from your article. I hope you will set the record straight in your next article.”

Ignatius, thanks for your e-mail. I really welcome your feedback because it gives me an insight into the way that Fide operates.

But in returning to the matter at hand, yes, I’ve been told that at the end of last year, Abundo did indeed remind the previous MCF secretary to use the Fide Rating Server to submit tournament results.

But I also understand that the MCF faced problems while attempting to log into the Fide Ratings Server and later, with the submission of data. If there were reasons why the MCF could not react fast enough to Fide’s procedural changes, I wouldn’t know what had happened. Nonetheless, I heard that the MCF did e-mail people in Fide for help from late last year and their difficulties were finally resolved some time in February.

The MCF is but a small member of the worldwide chess fraternity. It’s small but all the same, it is a respectable Fide member with positive chess ideals. It’s wonderful when I see the MCF and the affiliates carry on with their tasks to promote chess in whatever way they can. To us here in Malaysia, we’re only able to organise a handful of Fide-rated events in a year. It is a big blessing to us that we can organise them at all.

With so few opportunities for our players to earn their Fide ratings, there can’t be a reason at all why the MCF would want to delay submitting the tournament results. Indeed, the reverse must be true. It’s only for the good of our own players that they become Fide-rated.

But what happens when a member country hits a brick wall with, for example, the Fide Rating Server when results cannot be submitted according to requirements? Please allow a temporary alternative measure while the member attempts to find a solution in the meantime, that’s what I say!

Next, of course it stands to reason that the results were finally submitted in the correct way after the MCF changed its Rating Officer. That was why a new Rating Officer was appointed in the first place: to look into resolving the issues with a fresher mind. (I would have loved to become the Rating Officer myself but a computer illiterate like me would probably hit the brick wall even sooner, make a mess of it all and possibly start an international incident somewhere.)

Ignatius, I’m sorry if you had assumed that I was implying it was Fide’s fault but seriously, it was never the intention. All I was interested in was the end result: the Shakespearean “all’s well that ends well” which was exactly the phrase I used in my column. At the end of the day, when I addressed my Malaysian readers, I merely wanted them to know that the delay in rating the tournaments had been resolved.

Lastly, I don’t think your colleagues in Fide should have anything to be embarrassed about with a localised matter that, in the grand scheme of worldwide chess development and promotion, is comparable to a tiny molehill of an incident that’s normally consigned to a little footnote in chess history.

In summary, I’d like to urge you to accept my explanation in good faith so that we can all move on. But of course, your clarification have been very helpful to enable common Malaysians to understand how rating reports should be handled and submitted to Fide henceforth.

Oh yes, by the way, please do include the fifth Arthur Tan Malaysia open tournament in the Fide tournament calendar as soon as possible, won’t you? Many thanks for that, and Gens Una Sumus!

Recently, I read through some comments from youths in Singapore regarding financial education. Here is a summary of these comments:

“YOUTH here are clueless about investment. The most they know is that putting money in a bank earns more interest than in a piggy bank. Savings deposits alone are inadequate as their value is eroded by inflation. As youth are not yet burdened financially, they are in a better position to invest in long-term assets. With the advantage of a longer time horizon, youth should start investing as early as possible.” - Chew Zhi Wen, 21

“WHEN I started studying in Australia, I was shocked to find that most of my peers had part-time jobs. It is the norm in Australia for parents to stop giving their children allowances once they turn 18. Having a part-time job and studying means having to balance commitments at school and at work. The youths also have to manage their finances - balance their budgets for rent, food, travel and entertainment. Financial responsibility cannot be taught in an institution - it is one of the many lessons in life we pick up along the way.” - Tabitha Mok, 21

“REPORTS of people chocking up credit card debt abound and poor financial literacy has been blamed. Maybe the problem stems from greed and the tendency of those in debt to live beyond their means. We need to examine the root of materialism in society.” - Ng Yixun, 19

“FINANCIAL literacy as a life skill ranks up there with tying your shoelaces and learning to get along with others - it should be taught from the time we learn to walk. Bank credit is often designed to encourage debt and it pays for students to adopt the role of enlightened consumers from early on.” - Abdullah Luqman Hussin, 25

“IF SUCCESSFUL financial management could be learnt from a textbook, I dare say Singaporeans would be millionaires by now. Being financially aware is a process that starts from a young age in which parents play a fundamental role to teach and reinforce concepts like a budget and the value of money.” - Melissa Khong, 21

WASHINGTON, US - A YEAR after a summer subprime crisis roiled markets and squeezed credit worldwide, analysts are looking for signs the worst is over for the troubled US housing market and banks that made risky bets on the sector.

Economists are divided on the crisis at the approach of summer, with memories still fresh of a turbulent period in 2007 that resulted in an upheaval in global markets in July and August.

Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke said this month that the risk of a severe downturn stemming from the housing meltdown ‘appears to have diminished.’

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson also argues the crisis is winding down: ‘In my judgment we are closer to the end of the market turmoil than the beginning,’ he said last month.The roots of the problem stem from years of easy credit, but troubles began building in January 2007 when rising levels of defaults on subprime or risky mortgages started to rise as adjustable-rate loans were ‘reset.’

A wave of bankruptcies among subprime lenders occurred in the subsequent months and various investment banks and hedge funds began to start acknowledging hefty losses from investments tied to US real estate loans.

British bank HSBC was among the first, shaking up its ranks after announcing losses of more than US$10 billion (S$13.6 billion). Citigroup, UBS and Merrill Lynch and others followed, while Bear Stearns announced in June that its hedge funds involved in subprime loans were in trouble.

The crisis heated up on July 10 as Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s downgraded over 12 billion dollars in bonds backed by subprime loans, and days later when Bear Stearns said its hedge fund losses would top 90 per cent.

Turmoil hit a frenzy in July and August with more troubles for Bear Stearns and a near-meltdown at top mortgage lender Countrywide Financial.

As credit dried up and stock markets plunged, the Fed swung into action, slashing its discount rate for direct loans to banks August 17, the first in a series of moves to help get credit flowing in a global financial system in disarray.

Since the first subprime problems emerged in early 2007, losses recognised by large financial institutions are nearing US$400 billion and capital injections close to US$300 billion, notes economist Stephen Gallagher at Societe Generale, who argues that the outlook is still murky.

‘More write-offs may be in store,’ he said. ‘Values of credit assets held by financial institutions are once again coming under pressure.’

Some say the crisis turned a corner with the March rescue of Bear Stearns after its near-implosion by JPMorgan Chase in a deal backed by US$29 billion in Federal Reserve guarantees.

‘A generalised credit collapse seems now most unlikely due to the Fed’s actions in connection with Bear Stearns,’ said Mr Jeremy Siegel, a finance professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton business school.

‘That increasingly looks like the turning point in this financial crisis.’

The International Monetary Fund estimated in April worldwide losses stemming from the US subprime mortgage crisis could hit US$945 billion as the impact spreads in the global economy.

Home values are still sliding and construction has fallen to the slowest pace in 17 years.

Mr Ed McKelvey, economist at Goldman Sachs, sees an ‘L-shaped’ recovery in the sector - meaning no real recovery for some time.

‘We do not expect housing activity to stage the kind of vigorous rebound that has been traditional following large corrections in this sector,’ he said.

‘This is because this cycle - unlike the earlier ones - has been induced by a long and massive buildup of excess supply of housing … it is unlikely that builders will see a sustained improvement in the balance of demand and supply for the homes they are building until the excess supply has been whittled down substantially.’

Mr Joel Naroff at Naroff Economic Advisors said he agrees with Mr Paulson and Mr Bernanke that the crisis is easing, ‘but that doesn’t mean we’re out of the woods yet.’

He said the risk is that broader economic problems will lead to job losses that affect not only subprime borrowers but those with solid credit who may have trouble paying mortgages and may be unable to sell their homes because of price declines and tight credit conditions.

‘To say we’ve seen it all is a bit premature,’ Mr Naroff said. ‘We just don’t know who’s going to default and not default.’

The US economy, teetering on the brink of recession, may not recover until the flow of credit returns and banks become more confident, he said.

‘The credit markets are moving toward a more normal situation, not normal but more normal,’ Mr Naroff said.

‘I agree we’re closer to the end than the beginning, but that doesn’t mean there won’t be some big bumps in the road.’ — AFP

Women chess players are a force to reckon with.

I RECEIVED an e-mail during the weekend from a reader who signed himself off simply as Jefri. He was commenting on my coverage of the national chess closed championships which ended recently.

I will just relate this pertinent part where he said: “Why was there almost no coverage of the women’s championship? You wrote so much on the men’s event but you only gave a brief mention of the women’s tournament.”

Obviously, he was referring to this paragraph where I said: “The winner of the women’s event was never in doubt. Alia Anin Bakri was simply too good. She powered her way to win the national closed women’s championship rather easily.”

Jefri, you are correct, of course. The women’s championship only got a one-paragraph mention last week but it was not because I had anything against women’s chess. If you have been reading this column closely in the past weeks, you would have seen that there was no slight to the women chess players in this country. In fact, I have written a lot about them.

But it so happened that the race for the national closed championship was too exciting. It was a wide, open field. At the end of the day, anyone could have won the title but it ended with 15-year-old Edward Lee carrying the day.

Oops, there I go again, spouting about the national closed. I stand guilty. Anyway, getting back to the women’s championship, Alia, one year younger than Edward, won it almost at will. That was how good she was. The women’s field included two former women’s champions but in this event, they were against an irresistible force.

Just consider this. As early as the end of the fourth round, Alia was already the sole leader of the tournament, a full point ahead of her closest rivals. In this round, she had beaten former champion Nurul Huda Wahiduddin.

While her rivals struggled throughout the tournament, Alia simply breezed her way through her first five games. It was only in the sixth and seventh rounds that she eased off on the pedal and conceded two draws in succession.

Still, there was a 1½-point gap between Alia and her closest rivals. For a seven-round event, 1½ points is a wide margin. It’s like the difference between the first and last runners in the 100m dash in athletics.

Even then, the results could have been closer and less flattering to the winner. After her draw in the seventh round, Latifah Shamini Latib missed a good chance to be the undisputed runners-up. All that she had to do was to avoid a loss to the former national women’s champion, Khairunissa Wahiduddin.

A draw would have been enough to guarantee Latifah sole second place in the standings but the wily Khairunissa showed why, despite her lack of consistency and form, she was a former national women’s champion and still a force to be reckoned with.

At the end, there were six players who all ended up in shared second place. Initially, I couldn’t believe it that in a 20-player field, it was still possible to get almost a third of the players finishing joint second (4½ points each) but there you are, it happened right here, in Malaysia, in our own national women’s closed championship.

Eye on the game

HOW do you concentrate in chess? Obviously, different people concentrate in different ways. At the national closed championships, two 10-year-old kids demonstrated their own special styles of concentrating at the chess board.

 

Ten-year-olds Puteri Rafiqah Fahada Azhar (left) and Yeoh Li Tian (right)

Puteri Rafiqah Fahada Azhar prefers to sit upright at the board, sometimes kneeling on the chair to get a better look at the game and her chess clock, while Yeoh Li Tian seems to stare into space, sometimes resting his head on the table while he ponders over his next moves.