Posts Subscribe to Revolution ChurchComments

Jumaat, 31 Ogos 2012

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

9:38 PTG Dicatat oleh blog2
Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info
Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

BN, PR: dua kali lima

Posted: 30 Aug 2012 07:05 PM PDT

 

But the political parties that they belong to will not allow this. Although they are called Wakil Rakyat, in reality they are Wakil Parti. They have to represent their party, not us, the voters. And when they try to do what they are supposed to do, the party will pounce on them. Hence they have to toe the party line or else they will be suspended, or worse, sacked.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

No, this is not an anti-government article. It is not an opposition-whacking article either. This is an article about why we vote for 222 Malaysians to represent us in Parliament -- never mind whether you voted (or will be voting) for Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat. That is not important. What is important is: why do we vote?

We vote for 222 Malaysians to go to Parliament (and another almost 600 State Assemblypersons for the State Assemblies as well -- known as ADUNs) so that they can become our representatives or wakil.

The Malays have the correct term for this. These people we vote for (both MPs and ADUNs) are called Wakil Rakyat in Malay, which means Citizen's Representative (or People's Representative). 

And, as the name implies, that is exactly what they are supposed to do -- represent us, the voters.

But the political parties that they belong to will not allow this. Although they are called Wakil Rakyat, in reality they are Wakil Parti. They have to represent their party, not us, the voters. And when they try to do what they are supposed to do, the party will pounce on them. Hence they have to toe the party line or else they will be suspended, or worse, sacked.

Why call them Wakil Rakyat then? They cannot function as Wakil Rakyat. We might as well call them Wakil Parti. And in the coming general election, 10 million Malaysians can go to the polling stations to vote for the Wakil Parti.

Both Barisan Nasional as well as Pakatan Rakyat are equally guilty of this. And since we do not have a 'third force', so to speak -- unless the rakyat can be regarded as that third force -- that is how things are going to be for a long time to come.

But, no, I am not going to talk about the third force. Malaysians are too dumb to understand the meaning of 'third force'. To most people, 'third force' means three-corner contests. Then they will say I am trying to sabotage Pakatan Rakyat so that Barisan Nasional can retain power.

So what if some Members of Parliament (never mind BN or PR) go against their party stand? If it is for the good of the rakyat why can't they break ranks and not toe the party line? That is why we sent them to Parliament (or the State Assemblies) in the first place.

In America, the Congressmen or Senators from the President's own party can vote against the President while those from the other side will vote in support of the Bill that the President is proposing. On more than one occasion the President's Bill had been defeated by his own party while those from the other side actually voted in support of it. No one was suspended or sacked because of this.

I know, some of you are now going to argue that we follow the British Westminster system and that this is how they do things in the UK. They have the Parliament Whip whose job is to ensure that no one breaks ranks.

Okay, if we are so concerned about what they do in Britain, and hence we need to follow the British model, then what about the written constitution? Britain does not have a written constitution. Why not follow Britain and abolish our Constitution?

I have no problems with that. Then no longer will Islam be the religion of the Federation or Malays have special privileges or the Agong be the Supreme Head of the Federation and all that. Britain's 'laws' do not allow a Prime Minister not from the Church of England. You must belong to the Church of England. You want to follow that as well since it is very important that we follow the UK?

Some things we say we MUST follow. Other things we don't want to follow. Apa ni? Gay marriages also allowed in England, mah! Want to follow or not?

This sorry state of affairs can only be corrected by you, the voters. If you, the voters, insist that the Wakil Rakyat speak for us and not for their party, only then can it happen.

I am going to tell you a story about why Ali is my favourite of the four (Rightly-Guided) Caliphs of Medina. And, no, it is not because I am a follower of the Shia sect of Islam.

Ali was the last of the four Medinan Caliphs. The Shias, however, allege that Ali was robbed of his right to be the First Caliph. I am not going to talk about that. What I want to talk about is he almost became the Third Caliph. And according to the story this is what happened.

As Omar, the Second Caliph, lay dying, he told the people of Medina to form a committee to decide on who should succeed him when he dies. A few candidates were selected and finally it was short-listed to just two, Osman and Ali.

A few interviews were conducted and during the final interview Osman was asked how he would rule if he was chosen as Caliph. Osman replied he would rule according to tradition and by following the example of the Prophet.

Ali was asked the same question and he replied he would rule according to his conscience and with God as his guide.

Osman got the job and some historians say that that was the beginning of the decline of the Islamic Empire. Osman appointed his relatives to important posts in the government and corruption soon emerged. One of Osman's blunders was he appointed his cousin Muawiyah as the Governor of Syria. When Osman died and Ali took over, Muawiyah declared war on Ali, the first ever war where Muslims fought Muslims (and have been fighting ever since)

I know many Islamists will disagree with my analysis of events, although these events did take place. Nevertheless, my interpretation of this event is Osman said he would follow tradition while Ali said he would follow his conscience. And we have seen how tradition may not always be the best thing to follow.

And the same goes to the issue of our Wakil Rakyat. Forget about tradition, especially Westminster tradition. Follow your conscience. Did we, the voters, or your party vote you into office? And if we voted you into office then serve us instead of your party.

***********************************

BN trio face reprimand for Section 114A gripe

(Malaysiakini, 29 Aug 2012) - The cabinet has accepted a suggestion to reprimand three key BN leaders for their open objection to Section 114A of the Evidence Act 1950.

The trio are Deputy Higher Education Minister Saifuddin Abdullah, Deputy Youth and Sports Minister Gan Ping Sieu and Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin.

Government sources told Malaysiakini that the cabinet made the decision at its meeting chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin on Aug 15.

"It was suggested that the prime minister or deputy prime minister should summon the two deputy ministers and give them a warning because their actions went against the government's stance," revealed one source.

"It was also suggested that Minister in Prime Minister's Department Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz should meet with the two deputy ministers and Khairy to hear their views, and provide them with the government's explanation."

A day before the meeting, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, who was abroad then, had instructed the cabinet to discuss the contentious following a major online protest dubbed 'Internet Blackout Day'.

However, the meeting decided not to review the amendment. The decision was later reaffirmed and explained by Nazri.

According to the sources, the cabinet was of the view that if action was not taken, it would jeopardise the government's credibility and weaken the administration.

"The cabinet also noted that the trio have been openly issuing statements contradicting government policies.

"They should have convey their views through internal channels such as their ministers or political parties," a source added.

The sources also disclosed that the cabinet had pointed out that disciplinary action had been taken against defiant members of the administration since the era of second prime minister Abdul Razak Hussein, but this practice is absent in the current administration.

When contacted today, Khairy and Saifuddin said they have yet to be informed about the cabinet decision.

"Didn't receive anything yet, so no comment," replied Saifuddin.

Khairy said he would meet Nazri and Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail today to pursue his views on the amendment.

Nazri and Gani could not be reached for comment despite several attempts to contact them.

***********************************

(The Star, May 2012)) - The DAP disciplinary board wants Senator Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim to confirm if he has repeated his public criticism of Bersih 3.0 although he was rebuked earlier by the party leadership over the matter.

"I am trying to locate Tunku (Aziz) for the statement," the board's chairman Tan Kok Wai told a news portal yesterday.

Kota Alam Shah assemblyman M. Manoharan called for disciplinary action to be taken against Tunku Aziz, who is party vice-chairman, over his remarks on the rally.

Manoharan accused Tunku Aziz for failing to toe the party's line by making the remarks, which he said were tantamount to a "double misconduct".

"It is my personal view that severe action should be taken against him. He seems to be a great embarrassment to the party.

"It is the police and not the public that should be blamed. The public have a right to voice out (their feelings)," he said yesterday.

He called on Tunku Aziz to leave the party on his own accord, claiming that the latter did not understand the party leaders' struggles, especially those who were held under the Internal Security Act.

Tunku Aziz had spoken out against the rally before it was held on April 28, fearing that it might turn violent.

Expressing sadness over the violence that did occur, Tunku Aziz recently remarked that the Bersih 3.0 organisers should have realised that while there were those who were genuinely fighting for electoral reforms, others were out to create havoc or hijack the rally for their political agenda.

He added that it was unfair for Bersih leaders and politicians to solely blame police for the violence between protesters and police.

Tunku Aziz reportedly said Bersih 3.0 organisers were not "angels descended from heaven" who were blameless, adding that they should look at themselves before pointing at police for last Saturday's violence.

When contacted yesterday, Tunku Aziz said he was not upset with Manoharan as he was entitled to his personal view.

***********************************

(The Star, 2007) - Cameron Highlands MP K. Devamany has been let off without a suspension or warning over his remark in Parliament recently.

Devamany had a 20-minute meeting with Barisan Nasional Chief Whip and Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak yesterday morning to explain himself.

The MIC backbencher told a press conference at the Parliament lobby that he had told Najib that he regretted his statement.

He, however, declined to say whether he was sorry over what he said when pushed further by reporters.

Devamany was said to have broken ranks with the ruling coalition over his remark in Parliament last Monday.

He had said the fact that 50,000 people showed up at the Nov 25 Hindraf protest showed the Government's failure in distributing wealth equally.

His remark irked some Barisan backbenchers who felt he should have used proper channels but Devamany, who received support from the MIC top brass, maintained that he was only speaking up for the Indian community.

Devamany thanked Najib for meeting him and said he explained to the Chief Whip the concerns of the Indian community.

"He was very nice to me. I told him I regretted the statement. He advised me on what happened.

"I truly believe that unity, peace and stability is paramount in the country and cannot be compromised," he said.

Devamany said Najib had expressed concern over the plight of the Indian community, which would be addressed by the Government and MIC through the Barisan Nasional spirit.

"He (Najib) has assured him that he would look into legitimate concerns of the Indian community," he added.

Devamany said he would still speak up in the House but would be more responsible and not just throw words around.

"I fully support Barisan Nasional and the party leadership. That cannot be questioned," he added.

 

Also at the press conference was Minister in the Prime Minister's Department and Deputy Chief Whip Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, who confirmed that no suspension or warning had been given to Devamany.

***********************************

(Malaysiakini, 2005) - MIC secretary-general S Sothinathan has been suspended as a deputy minister for three months over his remarks at yesterday's parliamentary debate on the Crimea State Medical University (CSMU) issue.

The unprecedented decision was made at a cabinet meeting today. Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said that the suspension was because Sothinathan had breached BN party discipline.

"We made a decision to suspend him with immediate effect for what he did in parliament," Abdullah told a press conference.

"He's a member of the front bench, he should not have taken a stand like he did, criticising his own government. It is certainly a breach of party discipline," he said.

Sothinathan, who is deputy minister for natural resources and environment, could not be reached for his reaction on the suspension.

Yesterday, Sothinathan irked Barisan Nasional backbenchers when he broke ranks and interrupted Deputy Health Minister Dr Abdul Latiff Ahmad over a point raised in explaining the decision to withdraw recognition for Ukraine-based CSMU.

The withdrawal of recognition by state agency, the Malaysian Medical Council, has affected about 1,400 Malaysian students who are currently studying at the university - the oldest and leading medical university in Ukraine.

The non-recognition resulted in the students, who are mostly Indian Malaysians, not being able to practice as doctors upon graduation, but will have to sit for an additional medical qualifying examination under the MMC.

Latiff told Parliament during a heated debate yesterday that the decision was made to maintain the quality of our doctors, and stressed that it had "nothing to do with race, ethnicity and religion".

He said the number of Malaysian students in CSMU had increased from 53 to 1,366 in May this year.

According to Latiff, unqualified CSMU students, including those who failed their Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia, had obtained no-objection letters from the Higher Education Ministry to enable them to enrol in the university.

Sothinathan, who was agitated by Latiff's remarks that the majority of those who graduated from unrecognised universities were Indians, had pressed the deputy health minister on how the Higher Education Ministry could have issued no-objection letters to unqualified students.

He also asked why one community was being single out when the problem of unrecognised medical graduates involves all communities in Malaysia.

"If MMC is indeed professional, how come it recognised CSMU in 2001? Why did it make a decision in haste?" he asked.

The debate, which was sparked by an emergency motion moved by the opposition DAP, saw the blurring of party affiliations with DAP and MIC MPs exchanging barbs with Umno MPs over the issue.

Works Minister S Samy Vellu, contacted by reporters in Parliament today, refused to comment.

Samy, who is MIC chief, had earlier described the MMC decision as a move to prevent more Indians from becoming doctors.

Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timur) said that the parliamentary culture of allowing MPs to reflect the people's views without having to toe a party line is still "very superficial if not alien in Malaysia".

"This 'Big Brother' rule for BN back-bench criticism of ministers was broken yesterday, and this explained the strong adverse reaction to the MIC position in Parliament and the 'high drama' over my emergency motion on the MMC derecognition of CSMU medical degrees," he added.

 

New York priest says child often seducer in sex abuse cases

Posted: 30 Aug 2012 05:35 PM PDT

(Reuters) - A Roman Catholic priest in New York expressed sympathy this week for some clergy who sexually abuse children, saying that it was often the "youngster" who was the seducer, then later apologised for his remarks.

Comments by the Rev. Benedict Groeschel, 79, co-founder of the Franciscan Friars of the Renewal in Westchester County outside New York City, in which he expressed sympathy for convicted child rapist Jerry Sandusky, drew strong criticism from the Archdiocese of New York and the support group Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests.

"Suppose you have a man having a nervous breakdown, and a youngster comes after him. A lot of the cases, the youngster — 14, 16, 18 — is the seducer," Groeschel said when asked by an interviewer from the National Catholic Register, the nation's oldest Catholic newspaper, about his work with priests who abuse children.

Groeschel, who has published numerous books and hosted shows on the Eternal Word Television Network, suggested that children might seduce priests because they lacked a father figure, adding, "They won't be planning to get into heavy-duty sex, but almost romantic, embracing, kissing, perhaps sleeping, but not having intercourse or anything like that."

Yesterday evening, Groeschel apologised, claiming his mind and ways of expressing himself "are not as clear as they used to be".

"I apologise for my comments. I did not intend to blame the victim. A priest (or anyone else) who abuses a minor is always wrong and is always responsible," he said in a statement. " I deeply regret any harm I have caused to anyone."

The Catholic Church has been rocked in recent decades by accusations that it tried to cover up the sexual abuse of children by priests and has paid out billions in settlements to abuse victims, bankrupting several US dioceses.

Similar scandals have shaken the lucrative world of college sports, most notably the conviction of Sandusky, a former Penn State assistant football coach, for sexually abusing 10 boys over 15 years, most of them in the campus football showers.

Groeschel referred to Sandusky as "this poor guy". Pondering how Sandusky's attacks could have gone on for so long, Groeschel added, "Well, you know, until recent years, people did not register in their minds that it was a crime".

The interview was published on Monday but was removed from the National Catholic Register's website by yesterday. It was replaced with a note from Jeanette De Melo, the Register's editor in chief, apologising for what she called an "editorial mistake", saying the publication should have attempted to clarify or challenge his comments.

"Child sexual abuse is never excusable," she wrote.

The Archdiocese of New York said Groeschel's comments were "simply wrong" and could not go unchallenged, although it does not have direct authority over Groeschel, who retired from teaching in the archdiocese's seminary last year.

'Said something like grandpa would say'

Colleagues of Groeschel suggested yesterday that he was recovering from a fall and was mentally frail.

The Rev. Glenn Sudano, a spokesman for the Franciscan Friars, likened him to an elderly relative.

"He said something like grandpa would say and it's like 'Grandpa, why would you say that?'" Sudano told Reuters in a telephone interview.

"Obviously we don't agree with what he said. Obviously it's terribly disappointing that people are hurt or upset," Sudano said. "We feel very bad about it."

Sudano said he did not know if Groeschel would face any consequences for his remarks.

Barbara Blaine, president of Survivors Network for those Abused by Priests, called the remarks "callous".

"A teenager does not have the power to seduce anyone. The adult is in the position of power and authority," Blaine said. "He should be removed from speaking as a Catholic leader."

Archdiocese spokesman Joseph Zwilling said, "The harm that was done by these remarks was compounded by the assertion that the victim of abuse is responsible for the abuse, or somehow caused the abuse to occur.

"This is not only terribly wrong," he said in a statement, "it is also extremely painful for victims."

 

End hudud tiff, PAS told

Posted: 30 Aug 2012 03:06 PM PDT

Dzulkefly

DZULKEFLY: Hudud issue will only hamper party's performance in election

Spat with DAP will hamper election results, say party leaders 

Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani, The Malay Mail

PAS leaders have called for the party to stop the hudud tiff with DAP and avoid creating unnecessary distractions, stressing the need to solely focus on the general election.


Political analysts, however, have disregarded the political quarrel between the two Pakatan Rakyat (PR) parties as a "gimmick" to strengthen their political base.

PAS central working committee member and Kuala Selangor MP Dzulkefly Ahmad said the hudud issue would not help but only hamper the party's performance in the elections.

"I want the hudud polemic to stop as we would like the electorate to clearly focus on the 'defining issues' of the general election and how both divides advocate solutions and what both have done in the course of the 12th parliamentary session," he said.

"Besides, it will allow PAS-PR to mount a campaign against the Umno-BN government.

Dzulkefly, the PAS Research Centre director, told The Malay Mail the party needs to be realistic in its struggle for hudud and stressed that any amendments should be done democratically.

He said the party has established its commitment in implementing the Islamic Penal Code.

He said the biggest obstacle for the penal code to get a federal mandate is the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 which reduces all punitive laws of Islam to RM3,000 fine, fives years detention and strokes of the rotan.

"PAS and other political parties and NGOs and academics must work together to get hudud explained and supported. They should also ensure it is implemented democratically," he said.

PAS Shah Alam MP Khalid Samad agreed that the party needs to get its act together, saying its leaders needed to be more understanding.

Khalid

KHALID: PAS needs to get act together, leaders should be more understanding

"Unfortunately some of the party youth leaders are not sensitive to understanding the current situation. The hudud issue is like a double-edged sword. Maybe in Terengganu, PAS can get more support from the Malays by championing hudud but the party might lose votes from non-Malays in other states like Selangor.

"The party must be wise in handling the issue. The public knows the party's Islamic agenda. Even though we don't talk about it, it doesn't mean that they don't know it," he said.

Universiti Utara Malaysia School of International Studies Dean Dr Mohd Azizuddin Mohd Sani, however, said the war of words between DAP and PAS was only a "political gimmick."

"I think this is a political gimmick before the election. They want to maintain their core support but they also do not want to scare away the Chinese voters because PAS was able to win several seats due to Chinese support.

"That is why they have their top leaders reassuring that hudud will not be implemented but their grassroots are saying the opposite," he said.

Independent political analyst Khoo Kay Peng also said the hudud debate was a "political necessity" for both parties.

"I don't think there will be an all out war but it is a political necessity. Their sole purpose is to defeat Barisan Nasional (BN) at the polls. Hudud will not become an issue for both parties and will be set aside when election takes place," he said.

 

Nasharuddin not among PAS candidates

Posted: 30 Aug 2012 02:52 PM PDT

(The Star) - Nasharuddin Mat Isa's chances of defending the Bachok parliamentary seat are as good as gone.

The controversial former PAS deputy president's name is not in the list of contenders for the seat, said Kelantan PAS deputy commissioner II Datuk Mohd Amar Nik Abdullah.

"I have received information that Nasharuddin's name is not in the list of those nominated for the seat," he said at a Hari Raya gathering here.

He added that it had also come to his attention that Nasharuddin's name had not been mentioned at the grassroots level in Bachok.

He added, however, that the PAS central committee would decide on Nasharuddin's fate.

The MP's fallout with PAS and spiritual adviser Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat started after the 2004 general election when then prime minister Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi led the Barisan Nasional to a landslide win.

Nasharuddin, at that time, was accused of trying to engineer a "unity government" with Umno. In the 2008 general election, he defeated Barisan's Datuk Awang Adek Husin to take the seat.

Matters got to head a year later when Nik Aziz, who is Kelantan mentri besar, demanded that Nasharuddin quit as Bachok MP and join Umno if he persisted on the unity government agenda.

Nasharuddin's political mettle was again tested when he was accused of being in the "good books" of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak when they met in Medina.

A meeting by the Syura council on Sept 9 will either make or break the deadlock that is crucial to Nasharuddin's future in the party.

However, PAS Ulama chief Datuk Harun Taib said the syura council would unlikely give in to pressure from certain quarters to kick Nasharuddin out of the party.

"Whether Nasharuddin would still be fielded as a candidate in the next election is immaterial.

"The party needs his energy and ideas," he said.

Harun said the list of candidates had not been officially confirmed.

"Even if Nasharuddin is not fielded in the next general election, he is still a potential candidate for following elections," he said.

 

Hadi: DAP cannot stop us

Posted: 30 Aug 2012 02:46 PM PDT

(The Star) - PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang has strongly upheld his party's hudud agenda in the face of opposition from a Pakatan Rakyat partner.

He said DAP had no authority to compel PAS to forgo its hudud agenda.

"DAP has no power to stop PAS from expressing its right just as PAS cannot stop DAP from objecting to hudud," he added in a statement yesterday.

Hadi said PAS had stood by its principles when DAP aired its views during open dialogues.

"PAS can collaborate on matters of common interest without imposing its views on others.

"We can give and take on some matters, but will not budge on others," Hadi said.

He said PAS would not give up its struggle to uphold Islamic laws, adding that the Malacca sultanate centuries ago had imposed syariah laws on Muslims and customary laws on non-Muslims.

Stressing that hudud would not be forced on non-Muslims, Hadi said it was clearly a "seasonal issue" that popped up in the run-up to elections.

DAP newcomer Datuk Aspan Alias, a former Umno leader, said DAP had not officially objected to hudud.

"DAP respects the aim of PAS to implement hudud," he added in his blog.

Aspan said hudud should not be a barrier to collaboration among Pakatan parties.

He added that DAP chairman Karpal Singh could object to hudud because he was not a Muslim.

Meanwhile, MCA Publicity Bureau deputy chairman Loh Seng Kok called on Pakatan leaders to issue a joint statement declaring their decision on hudud law once and for all and "stop confusing the Chinese community".

He noted that Hadi had stated that implementing hudud was the responsibility of all Muslims while DAP had told the Chinese community that the Islamic law issue was merely being stirred up by MCA.

Loh said DAP members should stop deceiving themselves and hiding behind the Pakatan common policy framework Buku Jingga on the issue of hudud.

 

Pahang PKR warns DAP about seat allocation

Posted: 30 Aug 2012 02:41 PM PDT

(The Star) - Pahang PKR fired the first salvo against its coalition partner, reminding the DAP to exercise discipline in the allocation of seats.

State PKR chairman Datuk Fauzi Abdul Rahman said although it was not wrong for the DAP to request for additional seats, it must be done through the proper channels and with "mutual consent".

Recently, the DAP hinted that the party hoped to contest in Damak, a seat alloted to the PKR, in the coming general election.

In retaliation, Fauzi said: "We would also want to contest in seats allocated to the DAP but out of respect for one another, we must adhere to the decision of the central leadership.

"The DAP can request for a swap in seats such as giving up its Tanah Rata seat in exchange for Damak.

"We are willing to swap but not give up any of our allocated seats."

Fauzi, a former deputy minister and ex-Kuantan MP, said Pakatan Rakyat was not an individual party or belonged to certain leaders such as (Datuk Seri) Anwar Ibrahim or (Penang Chief Minister) Lim Guan Eng.

He said as such, any important decisions, including the allocation of seats, must be agreed upon by all leaders of the coalition during its central meeting.

In the 2008 elections, PKR contested six parliamentary seats and 13 state seats while the DAP stood in two parliament and seven state seats.

Fauzi said PKR had already finalised potential candidates in all the seats allocated to the party.

On the lack of professionals joining the party as compared to their DAP counterparts, Fauzi brushed it aside, claiming the party had at least five lawyers and three engineers but not enough seats to contest.

On the senior Opposition man who was arrested for suspicion of committing incest, Fauzi said the suspect was not from the party.

"He is not a PKR leader and neither do we have any dealings with him.

"Although he had met me before to discuss seat allocations, nothing was concluded as his party was not part of Pakatan," he said.

 

Pakatan now aiming for more support from women

Posted: 30 Aug 2012 02:34 PM PDT

Hafidz Baharom and Joan Lau, The Malaysian Insider

Pakatan Rakyat (PR) is ramping up its efforts to win over women voters with the formation of an initiative called Agenda Wanita Malaysia (Malaysian Women's Agenda) this September 13.

This comes on the back of political observers and analysts saying that both the youth and women are the swing voters who will determine who takes Putrajaya, as the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) and PR are locked in an almost even tussle for support.

As women make up half of the country's electorate, the fight for women voters is something the federal opposition is taking very seriously.

While reluctant to go into the details of the initiative ahead of the launch, Wanita PKR information chief Ramlah Bee Asiahoo said: "The agenda will focus on the enforcement of law, increasing quality of life, providing opportunity for women to involve themselves in the economy, revamping the educational policy, social harmony and the empowerment of young women."

Although this sounds very much like political rhetoric, the initiative seems to be more than just talk. 

Srikandi PKR chief Siti Aishah Shaik Ismail said they would also head to the ground and host forums as well as ceramahs. "Once Agenda Wanita Malaysia is launched, we will head to the ground starting with rural areas, and then suburban areas and finally target the young working professionals in the cities.

Wong said apart from welfare, Pakatan will concentrate more on policies.
"This is because those in the rural areas require more exposure than those in the suburban areas and cities," she said.

PR leaders are going to focus on bread-and-butter issues like safety and economy as it is believed that women vote principally on issues and established experience.

PKR president Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail recently began an initiative for mothers against crime, a growing issue especially among women in urban areas.

Another issue taking centre-stage the past week is the apparently lenient sentence for two men convicted of statutory rape, which both BN and PR have protested.

PAS Muslimat information chief Aiman Athirah Al-Jundi said the party's women's division would go door-to-door, a method that worked very well previously for Wanita Umno as well.

In recent years though, this personal touch has been replaced by mass gatherings where cash handouts are given to underprivileged families but now Agenda Wanita Malaysia is picking up where they dropped off.

"Giving aid is good, but it is very piecemeal and not enough. So apart from welfare, we must concentrate more on policies," said PKR central committee member Elizabeth Wong.

These policies have to be explained and this is where door-to-door visits can help to drill down the nuts and bolts of these proposed policies.

"We need to step into their houses, sit down and spend some time explaining what we have to offer," said Aiman.

In the race to win the next general election, it looks like the opposition is willing to do something a little retro — go down to the ground and meet potential voters face to face.

 

Pakatan Rakyat: A new kind of opposition in Malaysia

Posted: 30 Aug 2012 02:26 PM PDT

Keith Leong, The Malaysian Insider

Malaysia's next general election — when it occurs — will be the most intensely-fought in the federation's history. There has been much speculation if and how the opposition Pakatan Rakyat coalition — comprising Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's PKR, the long-standing DAP and the Islamist PAS — also arguably the most successful and long-lasting in Malaysia's history will be able to hold on to and indeed improve on the historic gains it won in the 2008 elections.

In my recently-published book "The Future of Pakatan Rakyat: Lessons from Selangor", I argue that changes in Malaysia's political landscape and the opposition parties themselves mean that a united and coherent opposition is possible in Malaysia and that — whatever happens in the next general election — Pakatan Rakyat has provided a template for a style of politics outside of the parameters set by the long-ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition.

Opposition pacts in Malaysia — including the Gagasan Rakyat and Barisan Alternatif opposition alliances cobbled together to fight the 1992 and 1999 general elections — often collapsed soon after despite making some gains. As James V. Jesudason argued very persuasively in his chapter "The Syncretic State and the Structuring of Oppositional Politics in Malaysia" in Garry Rodan's seminal "Political Oppositions in Industrialising Asia" (1996), this was due to the "syncretic" nature of the Malaysian state.

He defined Malaysia's "syncretic state" as "a product of a particular historical-structural configuration that has allowed the power holders to combine a broad array of economic, ideological, and coercive elements in managing the society, including limiting the effectiveness of the opposition as a democratising force." To my mind, this means that successive BN administrations continued the colonial British practice of "divide and rule", whereby the various ethnic groups in Malaysia were kept apart politically, economically and socially. Whereas this was used by the imperial power to justify its presence, as a "honest broker" between the various races, it has been adapted by the BN to argue that its continuance in office as essential to maintain harmony between Malaysia's ethnic groups, whose interests at times seem irreconcilable.

BN's success can be attributed to their forging a syncretism in their style of government that was able to straddle these competing interests. They were able to squelch dissent by simultaneously using coercion such as the application of the now-dead and unlamented Internal Security Act (ISA) but also selectively co-opting oppositional groups like absorbing the opposition Gerakan in 1969.

BN's hold on power was also helped by the inability of Malaysia's opposition parties to come up with coherent alternatives to BN's syncretic state. First, because parties like the DAP, PAS and S46 were themselves largely composed along Malaysia's ethno-religious lines, they could be portrayed as "extreme" in these matters compared to BN. PAS's heartland was and is Malaysia's rural Malay-Muslim communities, while S46 appealed to their urban counterparts. The DAP, whilst theoretically multiracial, was and is largely Chinese or Indian in composition. This meant that they could never command as large a vote bank as BN, whose emphasis on economic development and political stability had cross-ethnic appeal. With the power of state patronage behind it, BN could effectively outbid all three parties in addressing ethnic aspirations, depicting itself as looking after the interests of all races.

Furthermore, the opposition's very different ideologies meant that it was very difficult to form permanent alliances between them. As we know, two previous attempts to form an alliance, the Gagasan Rakyat and Barisan Alternatif, eventually collapsed after PAS and the DAP were unable to agree with the former's quest to create an "Islamic state" in Malaysia. Jesudason argued that Malaysia's opposition parties tend to withdraw to their own ethnic constituencies to shore up support after brief attempts at co-operation.

The very fact that Malaysia's oppositional parties are primarily ethnic parties reinforces the notion of the syncretic state. Jesudason accused Malaysia's opposition parties of doing nothing to close the ethnic cleavages that perpetuate BN's rule by championing ethnic-based platforms. This in turn renders them vulnerable to BN's practice of coercion and co-option. For instance, opposition leaders who question Malaysia's constitutional settlements can be silenced via the various security laws. Conversely, the ruling regime can then win over Malaysians who may feel threatened by the perceived "extremism" of the opposition, for instance, non-Malays wary of PAS's political Islam or Malays worried about the DAP's vision of a "Malaysian Malaysia".

These factors, along with what Jesudason called the "enfeeblement" of class politics in Malaysia (i.e., the perceived pliancy of its middle class), have conspired to prevent broad-based and permanent oppositional alliances against Barisan and perpetuated its power.

Subsequent events however have suggested however that Barisan's "syncretic state" is breaking down. As Jesudason himself hypothesised but thought unlikely, Barisan's hold on power would continue as long as its Umno lynchpin was able to remain united, it's governments able to manage Malaysia's complex ethno-religious identities, as well as provide continued economic growth.

The record will show, however, that all of these contingencies have come to pass: Umno's unity was shattered (the sacking of Anwar and the spat between Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi), it lost its ability to deal effectively with Malaysia's communal relations (the Hindu temple demolitions in Selangor, as well as the race-baiting against the Chinese Malaysian community by certain Umno leaders) as well as the loss of performance legitimacy regarding the economy (the Asian financial crisis of 1998 and the subsequent, numerous corruption scandals). The rise of the social media also meant that BN could not present selective messages, at least to Malaysia's urban middle class, as effectively as it had in the past.

Reformist elements in the opposition, on the other hand, spent the years after their drubbing in the 2004 general election regrouping and rebuilding. The release of Anwar in 2004 and his recommitting of the PKR to a multiracial, "Ketuanan Rakyat" brand of politics gave the opposition a bridge that could unite both its secular and Islamist elements. Anwar's adoption of ketuanan rakyat was also a turning point as it presented Malaysians with a Malay leader who had a vision for the country's future that all communities could equally accept.

The DAP too has and continues to make an effort to recruit not only technocrats (such as businessmen like Tony Pua and, more recently, academics like Ong Kian Ming), but also to try and shed perceptions that it is a "Chinese chauvinist" party and reach out to the Malay community. It has launched Roketkini, a Malay-language online news portal, as a companion to its already multilingual Rocket organ and has promised to field more Malay candidates in the next election. It is too early to tell if the Malay community will embrace these initiatives, but the unease by which they have been greeted by Umno suggests that it may not be completely futile.

PAS, too, has undergone remarkable changes. Whilst it's harping on the Islamic state and imposition of the hudud laws did much to turn off non-Muslim voters in the past, its setting forth of its "Caring Nation" agenda which emphasises its interpretations of Islamic notions of democracy, good governance and development suggests that it is attempting to present an more universalistic, or at least nuanced version of its struggle. Furthermore, the fact that it's technocratic (i.e. lay, non-ulama) "Erdogan" fact triumphed in its 2011 party polls and are now clearly driving the party also indicates that it is more responsive to the social changes in Malay society, which is rapidly urbanising and becoming more complex.

READ MORE HERE

 

Merdeka: The end of the fairy-tale

Posted: 30 Aug 2012 02:16 PM PDT

Najib has made a lot of mistakes and has reneged on many promises. His Merdeka slogan, 'Janji DiTepati' is an affront to the rakyat.

Mariam Mokhtar, FMT

The nation is 55 years old today. To read some newspapers you'd think that it was Barisan Nasional, and not the people, which achieved independence from Britain.

To learn that the Merdeka Day celebrations at the Bukit Jalil Stadium is "by invitation only", is appalling. Who decreed that the rakyat had to be members of the "select" BN club to celebrate Merdeka? If Merdeka is exclusively BN, then the slogan "1Malaysia" is rendered meaningless.

As with many things in Umno, the taxpayers are made to pay for the prizes and the ceremony, but they are denied the opportunity to win any of the prizes or even attend the event.

If the Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and his Information, Communications and Culture Minister, Rais Yatim, cannot even organise a Merdeka event that is inclusive of all Malaysians, then they are not fit to run the country after the 13th general election.

You'd be forgiven for thinking that it was not Merdeka we were celebrating but Hari BN. Rais' foray into composing the Merdeka song makes you wonder: which is he worse at – songwriting or being a Cabinet minister?

The biggest disappointment is Najib. He is weighted by personal and political baggage. Even if he listened and learnt (from his and others' mistakes), he cannot be rescued politically. He was not elected into office and is now vilified by the man who put him there, former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Najib has made a lot of mistakes and has reneged on many promises. His Merdeka slogan, "Janji Di Tepati" is an affront to the rakyat. He is insecure and is desperate to win the affection of the rakyat. His reputation locally and abroad is tarnished.

Wasting taxpayers' money

At the beginning of the week, it was reported that The Guardian had sacked its journalist, Joshua Trevino, for conflict of interest and for bringing the media industry into disrepute.

Trevino had belonged to FBC Media, a public relations company, which had been paid by Najib to bathe Malaysia in a good light, to whitewash the misdeeds of its government, and to criticise Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim. Using taxpayers' money, Najib paid overseas PR companies such as Apco, FBC and CNBC millions of ringgit to promote him and his administration.

Why does Najib need to spruce up his image? Why waste taxpayers' money when he only needs to act responsibly at home? If he is not sure of his duties, they are to lead, to listen and to learn.

Najib holds on to the illusion of power, but the real power is in the hands of a man, who is sitting in The Mines Resort, just outside Kuala Lumpur.

Najib thought he could win the hearts of the overseas Malaysians with the promise of enfranchisement, but his promises have remained an illusion.

The Home Ministry, the police and Pemandu CEO Idris Jala, all gave us the illusion that crime was falling, but the truth is people are being raped, mugged, killed, abducted and robbed, on a daily basis.

The illusion that Najib presents to overseas leaders is that he is a champion of the "moderates", but Malaysians beg to differ. At home, race and religion are used to divide the nation. Thus, the illusion of racial and religious harmony is just that. An illusion.

Periodically, Malays are scared into thinking that Muslims are covertly being converted to Christianity, en masse. The controversial raid on the Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC) sparked off the formation of Himpunan Sejuta Melayu to defend Islam.

Himpunan reported that it had the support of four million Muslims and 200 NGOs. Last October, a mere 5,000 people turned up for the rally, at the 100,000-capacity Shah Alam stadium. Another illusion was broken.

Last May, the government held a "Million Youths Rally 2012" in Putrajaya, an event which some alleged was the government's attempt to try and rival the success of the Bersih 3.0 rally.

The illusion of mass support by the youth was crushed with allegations of money and free food for those who attended. To make matters worse, several people were injured when a drag race car tore into the crowds.

The illusion that the government looks after its youth was shattered when the Youth and Sports Minister Ahmad Shabery Cheek asked that the event not be politicised. Both he and the organisers refused to be held responsible for the lack of safety at the event.

The 11th National Cooperative Day Expo 2012 held in mid-July at the National Stadium was another flop. Many seats were unoccupied. Old-age pensioners who had been bused in to fill the seats started to disperse as Najib started to speak. Bored schoolchildren blew their vuvuzelas and were reprimanded by Najib for drowning him out.

The illusion that the prime minister draws crowds wherever he goes is false. It is also alleged that several government servants were transferred because of the dismal attendance.

READ MORE HERE

 

Secular or Islamic State? Dr Farouk and the Peacocks

Posted: 30 Aug 2012 11:37 AM PDT

What I find egregious about the attack on Dr Farouk by Imran Mustafa and Wan Mohd Aimran Wan Mohd Kamil in The Bankruptcy of the Islamic vs Secular State Debate is their insinuation that they are "learned scholars and men and women of spiritual discernment and of pure and upright character; scholars and saints," while Dr Farouk is ignorant, superficial, devilish, pretentious, brazen, blind, debilitated, obeisant, simplistic, unreasonable, unfair, futile, inflexible, hypocritical, schizophrenic (I may have missed a few).

Rama Ramanathan

I do not know Dr Ahmad Farouk Musa, whom I believe is a medical doctor who lives in Kuala Lumpur. I do know that he is a Muslim who is being belittled and mocked by some others who also speak for Islam in Malaysia. I say this because soon after his 2,000 word piece Arguing for a Secular State appeared, a 5,000 word piece was loosed upon him by 2 writers from Himpunan Keilmuan Muslim.

What I find egregious about the attack on Dr Farouk by Imran Mustafa and Wan Mohd Aimran Wan Mohd Kamil in The Bankruptcy of the Islamic vs Secular State Debate is their insinuation that they are "learned scholars and men and women of spiritual discernment and of pure and upright character; scholars and saints," while Dr Farouk is ignorant, superficial, devilish, pretentious, brazen, blind, debilitated, obeisant, simplistic, unreasonable, unfair, futile, inflexible, hypocritical, schizophrenic (I may have missed a few).

When respondents resort to name calling, we know the author of the original paper has either exposed a glaring weakness, or has proposed something which could displace the entrenched. Thus my interest in what Dr Farouk has to say. His is a wide ranging article. In the interest of brevity, I'll restrict myself to 6 themes.

Hudud. Dr Farouk feels compelled to write about the Islamic/Secular state at this time because the Islamic state, especially in it's manifestation as Hudud, is often raised in the build-up to General Elections. I note that Hudud is the rod MCA repeatedly uses to beat the DAP for the latter's willingness to work together with PAS, the Islamic party in Malaysia.

Dr Farouk indicates that PAS is divided over whether the Hudud penal code (which to me means cane those who consume alcohol, cut off the hands of those who steal and stone women who commit adultery) should be implemented. He labels those who support such penalties "medievalists," and labels those who do not support such penalties "Erdoganists." He highlights an alternative view of Hudud which space does not permit me to discuss here.

 

Dhimmi. Dr Farouk says many Islamists think an Islamic State is comprised of three groups of people: Muslims, Dhimmis and Harbis. Dhimmis are those who agree to submit to Muslims by paying a special tax called jizyah which buys them the protection of the state; Harbis are people who are hostile to Islam. He even points out that well known, centuries-old Islamic laws prohibit Dhimmis from riding animals within city limits and require Dhimmis to wear distinctive clothing and even bells so that it will be clear to all that they are Dhimmis.

Tolerance. Dr Farouk's purpose in pointing out those features is to state the obvious: those "medieval" laws are now common knowledge for most Malaysians. I have known about those laws for many years – thanks to the extensive coverage of Islam after 9/11. Dr Farouk is challenging Malaysian Muslim scholars and leaders to recognize that there is a diversity of opinion amongst Muslims about these matters. He's pointing out that large numbers of Malaysian Muslims are also eager to recognize the rights and aspirations of non-Muslims, who are equally citizens of Malaysia. He's pleading for tolerance.

Diversity. Dr Farouk brings up the very practical question of "who interprets"? I think immediately of the practice of various difference forms of government in "Islamic" countries – for instance in Indonesia, Jordan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the various expressions of Islam, e.g. Ahmadiyyas, Ismailis, Shiites, Sunnis, Wahhabis, etc. He points out that there is no one person whom Muslims can claim is the final authority, not even the Grand Syeikh of al Azhar and the Saudi Mufti. Further, he points out the difficulty of arguing against those who say "it's mandated by the divine will of God." I recall that this is why churches often caution Christians not to say "God says."

Citizenship. Dr Farouk explicitly mentions citizenship. His critique of "medievalism" is not that it's old (which his attackers obtusely say is what he is claiming). His critique of medievalism is that it doesn't have room for present day realities – which include the constitution of Malaysia, the understanding of citizenship and universal human rights. It's easier to attack Dr Farouk for his purported ignorance and deprecation of history, than to face his challenge and answer how the proposed "Islamic state" will work with modern realities.

Piety. One of the most compelling of Dr Farouk's passages concerns true piety. He says:

"Any regime that imposes piety because of the belief that it is part of the doctrine "commanding the good and preventing the wrong" like Saudi Arabia for instance, is basically creating a community of hypocrites [rather] than genuine piety.

Genuine piety only arises through personal choice. And that choice only becomes possible when there is freedom. In other words freedom to sin is a necessary medium to be sincerely pious."

That made me think immediately of the hypocrisy in the current regime in Malaysia after 55 years, so eloquently expressed by Tengku Razaleigh:

"[Tengku Abdul Rahman] called a press conference and had a beer with his stewards when his horse won at the Melbourne Cup. He had nothing to hide because his great integrity in service was clear to all. Now we have religious and moral hypocrites who cheat, lie and steal in office but never have a drink, who propagate an ideologically shackled education system for all Malaysians while they send their own kids to elite academies in the West."

Imran and Aimran's bitter attack caused me to study Dr Farouk's paper carefully. They flaunt their ability to quote stellar Muslims from the history of Islam; they think they show they're "cool" by making reference to the RSA; they choose to ignore the history of Malaya and Malaysia and current realities.

I am repelled by their response. I am attracted to Dr Farouk's thought. I respect Dr Farouk for thinking deeply about 20th century realities in our ethnically fractured Malaysia, for taking seriously his neighbours and digging deep into his heritage to unearth and courageously promote such views.

You've probably heard the saying "as proud as a peacock," and you may have seen peacocks displaying their feathers, preening, showing off. Do you know that peacocks are worthless and that they can barely fly? They can fly about six metres, but they can't land. They can only crash.

 

China editor's suicide sparks web debate

Posted: 30 Aug 2012 11:32 AM PDT

File photo: Newspaper stand in Beijing
 
People's Daily newspaper is the mouthpiece of the ruling Communist Party

(BBC) - "My pain is I dare to think, but I don't dare to speak out; if I dare to speak out, I don't dare to write it down, and if I dare to write it down, there is no place to publish. 

The suicide of a senior editor working for China's Communist Party newspaper has sparked strong reaction from Chinese cultural and media circles and on the internet.

Xu Huaiqian, 44, was editor-in-chief for the Dadi (Earth) supplement of the People's Daily.

According to its official microblog, he jumped to his death on 22 August.

The official People's Daily microblog said he had taken time off because of depression and had sought medical help.

Xu Huaiqian was born in 1968 and graduated from the prestigious Peking University in 1989.

After a year of work experience in a steel plant, he started working for People's Daily, where he stayed until his death.

'Can't leave system'

Zhu Tieszhi, deputy chief editor of Seeking Truth journal, said he could not believe that Mr Xu had chosen this route.

Many people praised his excellent writing, and quotes from his interviews and publications have become instant hits.

In an interview he gave before his death, Xu Huaiqian was quoted as saying: "My pain is I dare to think, but I don't dare to speak out; if I dare to speak out, I don't dare to write it down, and if I dare to write it down, there is no place to publish.

"I admire those freelance writers, but I can't leave the system because if I do that my family will suffer."

In an article entitled "Let Death Be the Witness", he also wrote: "Death is a heavy word, but in China, in many cases, without deaths society will not sit up and pay attention, and problems won't be resolved."

These quotes were widely circulated on the internet and resonated with netizens who expressed shock and anger as they asked why a talented journalist ended up taking his own life.

'Unpublished script'

A reader posted in Tencent Weibo (one of China's Twitter equivalents): "I am only starting my career as a journalist and I have encountered such difficulties in my work already, and I feel that I can't fight them."

A reader asked on Sina Weibo: "Did Xu Huaiqian die to serve as a witness? Was it personal depression or the depression of an era? What kind of country is this?"

Another netizen commented that Mr Xu experienced the 1989 student movement as a young man but he had to live in lies, which caused his illness.

Some netizens mentioned the fact Mr Xu's suicide happened just days after the Burmese government said it was lifting its censorship, and lamented the sad state of affairs for Chinese intellectuals and journalists.

An eulogy posted on QQ Weibo by Gao Shixian summed up like this:

"People are the editors of a country; People only have their lives to publish; Their life is their article, and their death is the payment; Your sad end to life is like an unpublished script."

 

Stop fanning rumours, DAP man tells PR

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 10:38 PM PDT

(The Sun) - Penang DAP chairman Chow Kon Yeow has urged Pakatan Rakyat leaders to nip rumours in the bud to prevent uneasiness fermenting among the grassroots.

Chow said instead of adding to such controversies, leaders instead should disseminate the right information to party members.

"If something does not happen (not true), kill it and not fuel it," the Tanjung MP told theSun.

Chow was commenting on the recent controversy involving Penang PKR chairman Datuk Mansor Othman after it was reported that he had described Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng as "arrogant and cocky" as well as seen a "tokong" (temple or deity).

The deputy chief minister I was alleged to make the remarks in a PKR meeting over seat negotiations with DAP. The remarks were contained in the minutes of the meeting which was leaked to a blog.

Mansor has denied describing Lim as arrogant but defended using the word "tokong" as it was made in reference to the esteem and respect of the people had towards the DAP secretary-general.

Chow said the issues raised during the PKR meeting would not have repercussions with the DAP as he was of the opinion that the matter were were just the concerns of a particular group in the party (PKR).

"The views of these groups in the party does not necessarily reflect the reality on the ground," he added.

 

'Exodus if PBRS has to give up MP seat'

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 07:39 PM PDT

(Daily Express) - Keningau: The public spat between Barisan Nasional components Parti Bersatu Rakyat Sabah (PBRS) and Umno in the Interior seats in the coming general election continued with PBRS Sook Youth Chief Kahirin Bador predicting that BN will lose thousands of members if PBRS loses one of its two seats here to Umno.

Nevertheless, he said PBRS Sook Youth remained loyal to the BN and fully supported the leadership of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and Chief Minister Datuk Seri Musa Aman.

The incumbent for the Pensiangan parliamentary seat is Tan Sri Joseph Kurup, President of PBRS. The court ruled in favour of the Deputy Natural Resources and Environment Minister when his rival claimed that he was prevented from filing his nomination papers on time. Kurup also faced an angry mob at the nomination centre that day in 2008.

According to Kahirin, PBRS has 26,630 members in Pensiangan with 13,850 in Sook and 9,780 in Nabawan.

"This is the up-to-date figure as of June 2012 and not as stated by Umno Pensiangan Youth assistant secretary Khairil Abdullah who was referring to an outdated report that was based on the 2008 figure," he said.

Kahirin advised Khairil to respect the power sharing concept of BN and respect whatever decision made by the leadership.

He said Khairil should have not tabled the motion to ask for one of the three seats in Pensiangan during the Umno Pensiangan Youth annual general meeting.

Kahirin praised Nabawan Upko Assemblyman Datuk Bobbey Suan and Upko members as always cooperating with PBRS leaders to resolve problems of the people in the constituency.

"This is a true example of the BN concept, which is in line with the unity and peaceful spirit, not bully small parties like what Umno Pensiangan Youth is doing," he said.

"I suggest Umno Pensiangan Youth stop discussing the seat distribution because it will only cause disunity among the BN parties," he said.

"Respect whatever decision by the BN leadership as well as the statement by Umno Pensiangan Chief, Datuk Abdul Ghani Yassin, who promised to cooperate with whoever is the BN candidate in Pensiangan," he said.

Meanwhile, Pensiangan Umno urged its members to unite and ensure BN wins and remains the government. Its chief, Ghani, said they should support all BN candidates irrespective of which party they represent.

Pensiangan Umno deputy chief Ahuar Rasam said the Division had yet to receive any information on whether Umno will be contesting the parliamentary seat.

Ahuar said anyone has the right to apply to contest in Pensiangan including Umno. Nevertheless, the decision rests with the BN leadership, he said.

On his son joining the PKR, he said anyone has the right to choose whatever political avenue. However, he did not discount the possibility of his son supporting the BN in the future.

Such scenario, he said, is not strange and cited PBS President Tan Sri Joseph Pairin Kitingan and his brother, Star Sabah Chairman, Datuk Dr Jeffrey Kitingan.

"My son's decision to join another party is his choice and has nothing to do with me," he said. Ahuar is an influential figure in Pensiangan.

He was instrumental in relocating villagers from five settlements on the

Kalimantan-Sabah border to Kg Salarom Taka near Sepulut Kalabakan.

The villagers were given a longhouse as dwelling and also 74 houses to continue their livelihood. According to him, there are 15,464 Umno members in Pensiangan that include Sook and Nabawan.

A former secretary of a BN component, James Jamil, 58, said PBRS President Tan Sri Joseph Kurup, as BN chairman for Pensiangan, should call for a meeting of all the component parties and discuss the issue.

"This is the best way to resolve the crisis," he said, adding that any BN component has the right to request to stand in Pensiangan or Sook and Nabawan.

However, he said it was better the matter not be debated in the media.

"The opposition will gleefully take the opportunity if the crisis between the two component parties cannot be resolved," he said.

According to him, during the formation of PBRS on March 15, 1994, he organised the party in Pensiangan, which at the time covered Tambunan, Bingkor and Pensiangan itself.

"At that time the BN component parties were facing a very tough situation and the PBRS branches at that time had to be re-organised until 2004 the time when I retired.

"However, I know more about Pensiangan especially its people," he said.

In 2004, the electoral boundary re-delineation exercise saw Pensiangan separated from Keningau to cover the state seats of Sook and Nabawan with the incumbent being Datuk Ellron Alfred Angin (PBRS) and Datuk Bobbey Ahfang Suan (Upko), respectively.

"I was made to understand that the BN government had in 1994 until today given the Pensiangan and Sook quota to PBRS until last year when Umno Pensiangan demanded Pensiangan to be represented by Umno," he said.

 

PKR disagrees with Lajim

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 07:35 PM PDT

(Daily Express) - Kota Kinabalu: Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) Sabah Chief Ahmad Thamrin Jaini said it is not true that all Muslim majority seats in Sabah are to be contested by Sabah Reform Alliance (PPS) as mentioned by its chief Datuk Lajim Ukin.

Thamrin who attended Lajim's Hari Raya open house on Aug. 28 in Beaufort said, in fact, Lajim admitted that all Muslim majority seats were still currently being discussed among the PKR, PAS and PPS.

Ahmad Thamrin said Lajim whose power base is mainly in Beaufort needs to continue to champion the cause of Pakatan Rakyat so that more Umno-BN members would join Pakatan Rakyat for the sake of justice for the people and the nation.

He believed everyone has a right to voice his or her own opinion including Lajim, but that all final decisions are to be collective in nature among the parties in Pakatan Rakyat.

"The strength of Pakatan Rakyat is that all decisions are decided by consensus and not by dominance like Umno-Barisan Nasional," he said.

Ahmad Thamrin was confident that the on-going closed door seat negotiations and allocation among Pakatan Rakyat parties namely PKR, DAP and PAS and also with the newly formed PPS as well as Sabah Reform Movement (APS) headed by Datuk Seri Wilfred Bumburing would be concluded soon in preparation for the 13th General Election.

On another note, he said the Pakatan Rakyat Malaysia Day National Celebration will be held from Sept 15-16 in both Sabah and Sarawak, respectively.

The theme for 2012 is "Sebangsa, Senegara, Sejiwa" (One Race, Once Country, One Soul), which would be jointly-organised by all three parties from Pakatan Rakyat together with PPS and APS.

Ahmad Thamrin welcomed PPS and APS into the Pakatan family.

"Much space will be given to them to grow and to mature in the Pakatan family for the sole objective of bringing about a new and just government both in the federal level and also in Sabah," he said.

 

The Special Position of the Malays (Part One)

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 07:19 PM PDT

The special position of the Malays is not a concept that was invented by the ethnic Alliance parties in 1957. The concept had existed at least as early as the 1948 Federation of Malaya Agreement, clause 19(i) of which provided that:

In the exercise of his executive authority, the High Commissioner shall have the following special responsibilities that is to say: …

(d) the safeguarding of the special position of the Malays and the legitimate interests of other communities.

When, therefore, the Alliance parties agreed to preserve the special position of the Malays in 1957, they were simply continuing what had existed in Malaya the decade before Merdeka.

Between 1948 and 1957, the special privileges consisted mainly in reservations for the Malays in four areas:

  • estates in land;
  • positions in the public service;
  • scholarships, exhibitions and other similar educational or training privileges or special facilities;
  • permits or licenses for the operation of trade or business, where required by federal law.

A memorandum prepared for the Reid Commission set out the extent of these privileges. In the area of landholdings, the special privilege consisted primarily in the reservation of land for Malays pursuant to State laws in gazetted areas in the Malay States (but not in Malacca or Penang). The specific provisions and the extent of the reservations varied from State to State; e.g. in Kelantan, nearly the whole State was reserved for the Malays, whereas in Trengganu, no reservations had been made.

Within the public service, qualified Malays were given preference over other applicants for employment. In addition, certain government departments applied a 4:1 or 3:1 ratio of Malays to non-Malays. But as the memorandum noted, these policies applied only to first appointments to the Service and not for subsequent promotions, pursuant to clause 152 of the 1948 Federation of Malaya Agreement, as 'racial considerations cease to count in respect of the promotion of officers who are already in the Government Service.'

In education, similar quotas also applied. The memorandum states that in 1948, due to the fact that there were few non-Malays who were federal citizens (Malays formed 85% of the electorate in the first nationwide election in 1955) a 3:1 ratio had been proposed 'to safeguard not only the special position of the Malays but also the legitimate interests of the other communities'.

Eventually, it was thought, the awards would be divided in accordance with the proportion of Malays and non-Malays among federal citizens as a whole. But the 3:1 quota came to be seen as fixed, and relaxing it required the consent of the Conference of Rulers.

Nevertheless, minimum standards were maintained: each year between 1952 and 1956, because of the shortage of qualified Malays in technical subjects, the British asked for, and Rulers consented to, the majority of overseas scholarships to be given instead to qualified non-Malays.

In the area of business licences and permits, the special privilege only applied to the road transport industry, where the policy was applied to licences and permits for taxis, buses and haulage lorries in each State or Settlement, in order to 'render the proportion of [Malay operators] equivalent to their proportion of the population of that State or Settlement as a whole'.

It is with this background in mind that we can now consider the agreed position of the Alliance parties at the time of Merdeka. The Alliance memorandum to the Reid Commission on 25 September 1956 provided:

Special position of the Malays

While we accept that in independent Malaysia, all nationals should be accorded equal rights, privileges and opportunities and there must not be discrimination on grounds of race or creed, we recognize the fact that the Malays are the original sons of the soil and that they have a special position arising from this fact, and also by virtue of the treaties made between the British Government and the various sovereign Malay States. The Constitution should, therefore, provide that the Yang di-Pertuan Besar should have the special responsibility of safeguarding the special position of the Malays. In pursuance of this, the Constitution should give him powers to reserve for Malays a reasonable proportion of lands, posts in the public service, permits to engage in business or trade, where such permits are restricted and controlled by law, Government scholarships and such similar privileges accorded by the Government; but in pursuance of his further responsibility of safeguarding the legitimate interests of the other communities, the Constitution should also provide that any exercise of such powers should not in any way infringe the legitimate interests of the other communities or adversely affect or diminish the rights and opportunities at present enjoyed by them.

The first point that we may note is that the special position of the Malays was meant to be a limited derogation from the general principle of equality and non-discrimination.

The extent of the derogation was to be limited, firstly, by the specified areas to which reservations could be made, and secondly, by the requirement that such reservations must be reasonable.

The second point that we may note is that the special position of the Malays was not intended to 'adversely affect or diminish' the rights and opportunities that were then available to the other communities.

Further clarification was obtained by Lord Reid on 27 September 1956, during submissions by the Alliance before the Reid Commission:

READ MORE HERE

 

By whose interpretation?

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 06:42 PM PDT

Why does the age of the person determine which court has jurisdiction over cases involving illicit sex or zina? Do you mean to tell me that if you are not yet 18 then you are not yet a Muslim? Only when you reach 18 you become a Muslim? Can those under 18, therefore, drink and eat pork and go to church since you are not yet a Muslim and the Sharia court has no power over you until you touch 18?

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

You may have noticed that I have not written a thing regarding former national youth squad bowler Noor Afizal Azizan's statutory rape case.

First of all, I thought that since every man and his dog was already talking about it you don't really need me to comment as well. I mean it is not quite the untold story that I normally like to dabble in. It is more like the 'over-told' story.

Furthermore, do you really need more 'noise'? There is such a thing called overkill and flogging a dead horse (an idiom). There is also such a thing called information overload, which makes people lethargic and sometimes immune to the issue. Hence 'too much' can be counter-productive.

Secondly, this appears to have turned into an opposition crusade, which is bad. Once it is perceived as a political issue rather than an issue of justice, people become divided on the issue based on political leanings and not because it is either the right thing or the wrong thing. People will oppose right or support wrong if the criteria is politics. Take crossovers as one example.

Anyway, what is my take on the issue?

Okay, are you outraged about the court's decision because you are an opposition supporter or because it is morally (or legally) wrong to not classify the case as statutory rape instead of consensual sex? (Note that even some of those in government feel the same way as you do although they speak 'gentler' in expressing their view and without the venom).

I think a more important question would be are you capable of setting aside politics when you talk about this issue -- or any issue for that matter that involves justice, civil liberties, etc? Can we leave our Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat hats outside the door and come to the table as Malaysians of common interests and concerns?

That is the one thing we find most difficult to do. It is always politics first and everything else second, even in matters such as Hudud, which is supposed to be above politics but is not.

Okay, so a man (or boy) has sex with an underage girl. My first question would be: are the men/boy and girl Muslims? If they are then this is zina (illicit sex or sex outside marriage). And is not zina a crime under the Sharia (Islamic law)? Hence should not the boy and girl be tried under the Sharia?

If the man/boy and girl were both above 18 they would have been brought to the Sharia court. Why are they not brought to the Sharia court just because one or both are below 18?

In Islam, the 'age of consent' would be the age of puberty. For girls that would be once she gets her period and that could even be when she is nine years old. According to the Hadith Sahih al-Bukhari, the Prophet Muhammad married Aishah when she was six but did not 'take her' until she was nine. And aren't Muslims supposed to believe in and strictly follow the Hadith and Sunnah or else they cease to be Muslims and would become kafir (infidels).

Hence if the girl is 13 and she already has her period, is she legally (in Islam, that is) a woman who can consent to sex or is she still a child? And hence, also, since she is a Muslim and 'legally a woman', is she accountable for her 'crime' of consenting to sex or is she blameless? In other words, if the Sharia court were to try them, would both be on trial or only the man/boy?

Okay, we can argue that the Sharia court does not come into play here. This matter does not involve the Sharia court.

Why not? If Muslims above 18 'get caught' for illicit sex they get dragged to the Sharia court. The common law court has no power to try Muslim adults who have sex outside marriage. In fact, sex outside marriage is not a crime under common law (even for Muslims) unless it is same-gender or gay sex.

Why does the age of the person determine which court has jurisdiction over cases involving illicit sex or zina? Do you mean to tell me that if you are not yet 18 then you are not yet a Muslim? Only when you reach 18 you become a Muslim? Can those under 18, therefore, drink and eat pork and go to church since you are not yet a Muslim and the Sharia court has no power over you until you touch 18?

Okay, what if the church or Christians preaches Christianity to Malay boys and girls of 13 or 14 (in short, below 18). Is this a crime? A crime under which law? Common law? Under common law it is not a crime to preach Christianity to Malay children. It is only a crime according to the Religious Department.

But the Religious Department does not have power over us until we are 18. Islam recognises 9-year olds as adults. Common law does not. We are adults only at 18. And common law decides whether we are adults. Not the Religious Department.

So how?

The question is: who has power over Muslims? The common law courts or the Sharia courts? And why does the common law court have power over us until we are 18 and then the Sharia court takes over after that? Is age 18 the 'legally adult' age in Islam? And if 18 were the legal adult age under Islam, can Muslims below 18 get married?

Yes, Muslims below 18 can get marriage on condition they are 'adults' (meaning reached puberty) and they have their parent's consent. Hence at that age they are already responsible for their own actions, even in crimes of illicit sex.

But then we are not talking about the Qur'an, Hadith, Sunnah or Islamic law here. We are talking about common law. Hence common law overrides the Qur'an, Hadith, Sunnah or Islamic law and will decide at what age you are an adult and at what age you are still a child. And you will face the common law court when you are legally a child and the Sharia court once you are legally an adult. And although Islam has decided the age of adulthood, Islam has no power over Muslims because the laws of the land and Islam do not work in tandem.

Crazy or not? In Islam, religion decides when we become an adult and hence can get married and have sex. But Islam does not have the power to decide at what age we would be considered as having consensual sex outside marriage. That the common law decides. And that age is 18.

Now, who decides when we cease being a child and legally become an adult although at the age of nine we already discovered the difference between a boy and girl and knew what to do with that thing between our legs? Well, the 222 Members of Parliament, of course. They pass all the laws and they have decided that only at age 17 we can drive and at age 18 we can have sex and at age 21 we can vote.

But why at age 17, 18 and 21 respectively?

Queen Isabella of Valois married Richard II when she was 6 years, 11 months and 25 days old.

David II married Joan, the daughter of Edward II, when he was 4 years and 134 days old.

Louis XIV of France became King at age 5 and took over full control at 23.

Joan of Arc led the French against the English at age 17.

And of course we have that story regarding Aishah, the wife of Prophet Muhammad.

In those days, you married as soon as you legally became a woman, which was when you got your period, and would have been around age 9-11. At age 10-13 boys joined the army and fought and died for their country. These were ages when you were no longer children.

I know, times have changed and we no longer consider girls of 10 or boys of 13 as adults. That may be so when it comes to common law but not if we consider religion.

So, are we outraged about the case of Noor Afizal Azizan because we perceive it as him having sex with an underage girl and the law says a girl of 13 cannot consent to sex and hence he broke the law? Okay, so it is the law that we are concerned about, am I correct?

The law says that a girl of 13 cannot consent to sex. This is a law passed by Parliament, the body that can legally pass laws, which we all must follow. And since Noor Afizal Azizan broke the law passed by Parliament we are outraged.

Okay, I can accept that. The law must be followed. After all this is a law passed by Parliament. But hold on, Parliament also passed a law that says we must get a police permit if we want to hold a demonstration. Should this law not also be followed since we are extremely concerned about the law? Was Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim therefore correct in that the law must be followed?

Hmm...touché or not touché?

 

Touché?

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 04:27 PM PDT

KTEMOC KONSIDERS

I read RPK's post titled Touché and must admit  wasn't aware his use of the word touché went beyond what I had in mind all along about the meaning of this word - goes to show I get to learn something new everyday.

To me, touché was a one-word admittance of one's error or absurd logic when countered by one's opponent's right-on-target sarcasm against one's statement, or perhaps a polite reminder for one to first look into the mirror before making such a statement. It's almost, though not quite, like a 'stone thrower' confessing to the proverb 'Yes, you right, those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones'.

Thus it's a word to be said by the person who has the table turned against his/her statement.

Okay, maybe the above explanation of my impression of  touché is too much of a mouthful so let me instead provide a few examples, starting from the general to the particular, to wit, episodes in our Malaysian lives.

If an American bloke says to you "Your English is damn good for a Malaysian", and you cheekily (or sarcastically) reply "And yours too for an American", he would, if he has a sense of humour or appreciation for witty conversation, say touché - meaning he admits he has been far too presumptuous in believing only he an American could speak good English.

Incidentally on the description 'American', if I may digress here a wee bit (being t'ng k'ooi or chong hei), I have an Argentinean friend who one day lamented that most people automatically assume that word points to a person-citizen of the United States of America (USA) when the term 'America' refers to two continents which have within them several countries.

He cried out that he too would be an American, and so too the Bolivians, Mexicans, Canadians, Ecuadorians, Cubans, etc. Why must the USA seize the word as a label for only its people? After all, the word 'America' was derived from the name of an Italian, Amerigo Vespucci (Latinised as Americus Vespucius), after he proved that Brazil and West Indies belonged to a new massive land mass totally separated from Asia, hence the term New World.

It was a German cartographer, Martin Waldseemüller, who first used the term 'America' to describe the new continent when he published a world map, stating:

"I do not see what right any one would have to object to calling this part, after Americus who discovered it and who is a man of intelligence, Amerige, that is, the Land of Americus, or America: since both Europa and Asia got their names from women".

In other words, the word 'America' was first used to name the southern continent mass, today known to us as South America.

I suggested to my matey that it might be a bit of a mouthful for the USA to call its people ... er .... United-States-ians, and when he rejected that as a poor excuse, offered a new description for citizens of the USA, namely, gringos wakakaka. My mate was finally mollified with that appellation for those Yankee gringos.

Okay, back to  touché.

Suppose a Chinese friend of Aneh who sells Indian mee-rebus in Ayer Itam, says, "Aisehman Maniam, for an Indian hoe liao lah, you sure know how to use Chinese mee noodles for your speciality", and he replies with a twinkle in his eyes, "You know Ah Chong, I just love your mum's curry", it would be appropriately gracious for Ah Chong to smile and  admit touché to the clever banter.

Hmmm, I wonder whether you've got this one? Never mind, one more.

But this one may not please anwaristas wakakaka. Recall that Perak debacle when the state government changed hands after 3 PKR and one DAP ADUNs defected to the BN. Let us say Anwar condemned Najib for dabbling in underhanded political defections, and Najib responded, "Don't Nasarudin Hashim, Jamaluddin Radzi and Osman Jailu ... reflect the sentiments of their voters, namely the Malays in their constituencies ... as the beginning of a new wave?"

That would have been a situation where Anwar Ibrahim could, if politically gracious, acknowledge touché wakakaka. But alas, the tussle was too bitter to be gracious because the political consequence of the mirrored actions of Anwar and Najib was far too traumatic.

Still don't get it? Wakakaka. Never mind, another one ler. 

READ MORE HERE

 

Courts sending out mixed signals over statutory rape

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 03:36 PM PDT

The Star

NOW that their trials are over, former national youth squad bowler Noor Afizal Azizan can go on to fulfil the promise of his bright future and electrician Chuah Guan Jiu can focus on his fixed job and many years ahead.

Through it all, no one spoke of the 13-year-old girl Noor Afizal took to a hotel to spend the night with, or the 12-year-old schoolgirl who was "coaxed" to go to her 21-year-old electrician boyfriend's flat instead of to school because he said he was too sick to take her.

These were prepubescent girls who were deemed to have consented to sex with the older boys they were dating and Court of Appeal president Justice Raus Sharif wrote in his written judgment that Noor Afizal had not "tricked the girl into submitting to him".

In the electrician's case, Sessions judge Sitarun Nisa Abdul Aziz also thought the "sexual act was consensual", even though DPP Lim Cheah Yit recounted how the girl had repeatedly asked Chuah to take her to school. If she did give consent, there was certainly trickery and fraud involved.

The fact remains that the girls were 12 and 13, children barely out of primary school.

They are not old enough to be able to legally buy cigarettes, or even obtain medical treatment if they had contracted sexual transmitted diseases.

The law on statutory rape was meant to protect these very girls. Section 375(g) of the Penal Code states unequivocally that a man has committed statutory rape if he has sexual intercourse with a girl under 16 years of age, with or without her consent.

It is rooted in the presumption that girls below 16 have not attained the mental maturity to consent to sex, and this law was enacted to protect children from abuse. It places the onus on those around her to not have sexual intercourse with her, even if she gives consent, because she is not deemed mature enough to give consent.

In other words, the older guys should have known better.

Noor Afizal and Chuah were found guilty of raping the underaged girls, but were not jailed. They were bound over for five years and three years respectively on a RM25,000 good behaviour bond.

The public uproar has been over how these young men got away with a slap on the wrist, and how the emphasis has been on not blighting their future.

Our teenagers are growing up inundated with overt sexual messages from the media and the Internet, without the benefit of a full-fledged sex education curriculum, or avenues to get answers.

Clearly, our young people are having sex with each other but there is a line drawn by the law. And that is sex with girls below 16 children is off limits, even to their peers.

By letting Noor Afizal and Chuah off lightly, are the courts sending out mixed signals?

Are they saying these two girls aged 12 and 13 are capable of giving consent for sex, and are they saying future good behaviour is sufficient punishment for having sex with minors? What is the message that teenage boys and younger men are getting?

At the root of it all, this is about protecting our children boys and girls.

A 12-year-old girl was lured by a man twice her age into his flat, and coaxed into having sex with him, and he got away with a promise to behave himself for the next three years.

Where does that leave her? What about her worth? What are we doing for these two girls?

How do we protect other naive young girls from being sweet-talked by an older teen into a sexual relationship if he knows he could be found guilty of statutory rape but walk away with a promise to behave?

If we do not uphold unequivocally our intolerance of sex with underaged girls, what does that say about us?

 

Najib: Six Umno divisions can spearhead recapture of Kedah

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 03:09 PM PDT

(The Star) - Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak wants the six Umno divisions in southern Kedah to be the catalyst for Barisan Nasional's victory in the general election.

He said the divisions of Baling, Merbok, Sik, Sungai Petani, Padang Serai as well as Kulim-Bandar Baharu formed the backbone of the party in the state.

"I chose to visit southern Kedah because this region has been our fort all this while.

"As Baling had played an important role in our country's history, then let the voice of Baling be etched in the history of Umno and Barisan Nasional in our struggle to return Kedah back to Barisan," he said when opening the Umno delegates conference for the six divisions here on Thursday.

He said other areas such as Alor Setar and Jerlun were equally important, stressing that the divisions should work together and fight hard to win back Kedah.

He said party members should have resolved all internal problems that by now.

"Enough is enough. It has been over four years since the last general election and they should stop pointing fingers at each other.

"We, at the top leadership, have spoken about this issue countless times and now its time for the members to fulfill their pledges of loyalty to the party.

"Let us not merely look at what the (Barisan) government had promised to do for us, but rather what we can do for the government," he said.

The premier stressed that if all Umno members and fellow Barisan component party members voted for Barisan's candidates in Kedah, there was no reason why the party could not win in the state.

He said party members should understand the meaning of unity and loyalty as well as put the party's interests above all else, including personal interests.

"Umno is 66 years old while the nation will be celebrating 55 years of Independence.

"People say we should be matured as a party by now, with a lifetime of experiences.

"But, we need to further explore the knowledge of rational thinking to make wise and acceptable decisions.

"That is what maturity should mean, where leaders know the true meaning of unity and loyalty, not merely by the party's age," he said.

Najib advised Kedah Umno members to take the party's defeat in the last general election as a valuable lesson to do better this time.

He said with an oath of loyalty that was earlier taken by Umno leaders from all six divisions in southern Kedah, led by Baling Umno division chief Datuk Abdul Azeez Abdul Rahim earlier, he was confident southern Kedah would return to Barisan.

 

A depressed Merdeka — Are you celebrating Merdeka?

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 02:50 PM PDT

Malaysians at this moment can't be bothered about politics. They're concerned about GE, but right at the top of their heads is how to make a living in Malaysia. If corporate professionals turn to multi-level marketing as a side-income, and journalists to tuition and freelance writing to make up for their pay, what about the average Malaysian? This year's Ramadan revealed the rising cost of food. A pitiful currypuff is now 50 sen, when it used to be RM1 for three currypuffs. And it seems that it is the same everywhere, from Bangsar to Keramat. Maggi Mee, a staple for Malaysians, has gone up, and a cup of very sweet Milo at a small mamak-like café at Giant Kota Damansara now cost RM4. Could this be why crime is rampant?

Dina Zaman, The Malaysian Insider

Seeing a headline shouting "Putrajaya offers cash rewards to N-Day event participation" does not encourage patriotism. It does not help that this year, just like the past few years, the atmosphere is muted. 

Very few Malaysians are in the mood to celebrate Malaysia's 55th year of Independence, and that is a truly sorry state for the country to be.

There are many factors related to this. A declining economy, rising costs of living, gutter politics, crime, and there is also a general air of hopelessness among Malaysians when asked if they were looking forward to August 31, 2012.

If one is to believe the noise on social media, and in forums, it would seem that Malaysians hate their country. There seems to be nothing positive about the country, and every effort the government puts, is met with ridicule.

What does the average Malaysian think about this year's Merdeka celebrations?

CS Tan of Terengganu finds that this year theme is a joke. "I 'created' a few phases to my Merdeka celebration. From primary to secondary school Merdeka was about how we managed to be independent, govern our country on our own terms, instead of being under British rule, and of course the colourful floats we saw on television. Tertiary – it's about holidays. Young working life – it's about holidays plus those outrageous uniforms from TNB and Telekom and other Malaysian companies we had to wear. Middle age phase – Merdeka is about able to think of myself after years of believing that the government can't do wrong. This year – it's about Merdeka from crime in Malaysia. Not optimistic huh?"

The 1Malaysia Merdeka logo provoked such outcry and ridicule, one can only feel sorry for the government. "I'm sure that our Government had the best of intentions when they commissioned the design …" a rather diplomatic professional who did not want to be named said.

Oso-San Anna disagrees. A Communications professional, she has worked in advertising agencies and in-house communications departments. She understands design and branding – she lives and breathes them. "Firstly, for something as important as Merdeka, the Government should leave it to the pros. I mean real pros (and not some crony's son) who has a solid understanding of the use of symbol and colour and collective expression of national pride."

"Secondly, branding is powerful when built and layered over time with consistency and commitment."

"Thirdly, where are the brand values? Both from the standpoint of the creator and the people it's meant for? Is there buy-in from the Rakyat? I feel all 3 are missing in the 1Malaysia logo that was designed. We are 55 years old as a Nation. Sure it's national pride but the meaning of real patriotism is already lost since it's seldom practiced in soul & spirit," she said.

Angelia Ong, who works in animation is saddened by recent celebrations. The idea of Merdeka has somehow lost its spirit, she says. "It used to be more alive and less about polishing the achievements of a particular political coalition. It used to come across as more inclusive and meaningful. The phrase "1Malaysia" has taken over so much, my youngest had one time thought our country was called 1Malaysia, rather than Malaysia. From a branding point of view, I guess they have succeeded in ensuring that it's everywhere and anywhere, to the point of oversaturation."

From a Malaysian's point of view (on what she thought of the logo), "it was just a major facepalm moment."

On Facebook, one lone friend is spotted asking on his status update, "Where can I get a Malaysian flag? I want to hang it from my balcony." Very few of his friends responded to the query.

No Money, No Merdeka Honey

Malaysians at this moment can't be bothered about politics. They're concerned about GE, but right at the top of their heads is how to make a living in Malaysia. If corporate professionals turn to multi-level marketing as a side-income, and journalists to tuition and freelance writing to make up for their pay, what about the average Malaysian?

This year's Ramadan revealed the rising cost of food. A pitiful currypuff is now 50 sen, when it used to be RM1 for three currypuffs. And it seems that it is the same everywhere, from Bangsar to Keramat. Maggi Mee, a staple for Malaysians, has gone up, and a cup of very sweet Milo at a small mamak-like café at Giant Kota Damansara now cost RM4. Could this be why crime is rampant?

Tania Leong, who runs a new age shop, is not confident of our economy. "Everyone I know who owns a business, has reported a decrease in revenue. Even my customers share a same complaint of their businesses, be it property, legal (clients unable to pay), travel agency, health spas, dvd shops, children's play facilities, restaurants etc. Sungai Wang Plaza in the city has always been golden hot property (probably one of the top 5 most expensive per sq.ft.), and even that is suffering."

"What I have observed is that this country is lacking qualified personnel in many areas of work from a sale assistant to corporate positions, a low standard of education system, many government workers are slow, inefficient and clueless, there is no minimum wage, corruption appears to be the norm in our judicial, police & government departments, religion has been made into law, sex education in schools are non-existent or minimal and so we have children bearing children. Crime rates seemed to have soared the last couple of years."

"If leaving the country was an option for me, I would leave in a heartbeat."

Hani B works in retail and has first-hand experiences with customer spending. Her customers range from the wealthy Middle Easterners to young college students, and understands their buying habits. "I used to be confident that our economy can weather most adversities, now I get totally scared when reading that our national debt amounted to 257 billion in 2011 … yikes!!

When I google about our economy, the results go on and on about how much it's growing bla bla bla but retail wise, I just don't see it and my salary certainly doesn't reflect it."

Like Tania, she notes that skilled workers are lacking. "I read that our country is among the top 20 nations to be labelled as losers of capital flight ... that is RM893 billion(!) siphoned out between 1970 and 2010, so why should we stay back and help with the improvement of wealth to the 1 per cent? Then again, what do I know, I'm just a shopgirl."

At the many open houses around the capital, the Malaysians asked, professed to forgetting that Merdeka was around the corner. This year is bad, they said, and their open houses reflect that.

Open houses are celebrated on a smaller scale now.

READ MORE HERE

 

Time for DAP to be a good partner

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 02:42 PM PDT

The Chinese-based party should not rock the Pakatan boat right now by harping on non-issues and should instead work towards winning the polls.

CT Ali, FMT

The 13th general election is there for Pakatan Rakyat to lose. And lose it they will if DAP does not get its act together. I never thought I would say that.

All this time I have watched DAP grow from strength to strength. Consolidating its considerable presence in Sabah and Sarawak while making inroads into the Peninsula in places where even Umno thinks Pakatan would not dare venture into or could hope to field a candidate against the Barisan Nasional and have a chance to win.

All this while, the DAP has made concerted efforts to take in Malays to boost its claims to be a party for all Malaysians. Its commitment on taking over the government in concert with PAS and PKR seems to be the order of the day.

And yet as the 13th general election nears, we see the real DAP is starting to unravel… to fray at its edges.

The memory of the controversial exit of its vice-chairman, Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim, has returned to haunt the party because now, through Tunku Aziz, we are privy to what has been said of Anwar Ibrahim by DAP's first-tiered leadership.

And what they say of Anwar is not flattering to DAP and to Anwar himself. Now, is DAP making use of Tunku Aziz to rein in Anwar after his acquittal of Sodomy II?

Or is Tunku Aziz making use of DAP to continue his public spat with Anwar over his insistence that the April 28 Bersih rally should not have proceeded at Dataran Merdeka? You tell me. Either way, it bodes ill for the Pakatan coalition.

Hudud a non-issue

The DAP also insists on mischievously harping on hudud – a non-issue as both BN and Pakatan are on record as having said that they will not and cannot implement. So why talk about something that is not going to be implemented?

Another non-issue is party hopping. It is a non-issue because anybody with an ounce of grey matter in his or her brain is against this.

But anybody with an ounce of grey matter also knows, understands and accepts that no matter what anybody says, any politician worth his salt will have to accept that in a democracy, elections are won in a number of ways – and party hopping is one of them.

Tell us, Karpal Singh and Lim Kit Siang, was there not a time when this Anwar was once your sworn enemy? Wasn't he your favourite target and whipping boy in Parliament? And now you are comrades in arms.

And do you not have within DAP ranks former Umno politicians? What do you call that? A change of heart, a marriage of convenience? Or has the time come even for sworn enemies to look again at each other's convictions and see if there is room to work together towards a common goal?

So please DAP, while it is a decent thing to do to be against frogs that go hopping from one party to another, the adherence to such sentiment might be a bit harder to do.

We are at war with BN. Almost anything that could assist us to win that war must be considered. When victory is in hand, these "questionable tactics" can be looked again with clear heads. Until then shut up.

READ MORE HERE

 

Janji dicapati?

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 01:42 PM PDT

Kosong

While the Home Ministry frets over huge crowd expected at Himpunan Janji Bersih at Dataran Merdeka...
http://www.thesundaily.my/news/475912?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+mycenews+%28MyCen+News%29

This is how Himpunan Janji Ditepati at Stadium Bukit Jalil will be 'supported' by civil servants...

 

Read at: http://kosongcafe.blogspot.com/2012/08/janji-dicapati.html

Corbett Report Radio 205 – Spotlight: Malaysia with Nile Bowie

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 12:59 PM PDT

http://image1.frequency.com/uri/w234_h132_ctrim_ll/_/item/5/8/3/4/Spotlight_Malaysia_with_Nile_Bowie_58341704_thumbnail.jpg

(The Corbett Report) - We are keeping an eye on the different politics in Malaysia specifically the nefarious activities to prop up the opposition. 

Tonight we talk to Nile Bowie of NileBowie.blogspot.com about the latest developments in Malaysia. From the Trans-Pacific Partnership to the foreign-funded political opposition to the latest activities in the South-China Sea, we explore the stories that are making news across the country and around the Asia-Pacific region.

We are keeping an eye on the different politics in Malaysia specifically the nefarious activities to prop up the opposition.

Listen or watch the video at: http://www.corbettreport.com/corbett-report-radio-205-spotlight-malaysia-with-nile-bowie/

Rafizi’s ‘NOW’ centre to make whistleblowing Malaysian culture

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 12:54 PM PDT

Rafizi and NOW director Akmal Nasir (right) pose outside the centre's entrance during an interview with The Malaysian Insider. — Pictures by Saw Siow Feng
(The Malaysian Insider) - KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 30 ― PKR's "exposé man" Rafizi Ramli will launch his latest pet project today ― the National Oversight and Whistleblowers Centre or "NOW" ― a non-profit outfit to encourage whistleblowers come forward at a time when public confidence in government agencies has reached an all-time low.

Rafizi told The Malaysian Insider that NOW will be a "civil society alternative" to government authorities like the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and the police, whose reputations have been marred by numerous reports of custodial deaths as well as assault and intimidation by armed officers.

"Malaysians have been spooked from coming forward, but whistleblowing should become a culture in Malaysia, and that is what we hope to create," he said in an exclusive interview.

Rafizi explained that the centre will prepare a step-by-step process for whistleblowing, which will include offering advice to informants on the legal risks they may face with their disclosures should they agree to proceed.

By providing a support structure for potential informants, the NOW centre aims to make whistleblowing a part of local culture.
Each facet of the disclosures must be thoroughly vetted, he said, from the credibility of the whistleblower to the validity of the documents provided, as well as a deeper probe into the case to uncover sufficient evidence before anything is revealed in public.

But the final step in the process ― publicly disclosing the scandal through the media ― is the stickiest of all, Rafizi admitted, as it would immediately open himself, the centre and the whistleblower to legal risks, if any law was broken in the process of investigation.

The country's sole whistleblower law ― the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010 (WPA) ― only offers protection to whistleblowers if they make a "disclosure of improper conduct" to an authorised enforcement agency.

As it does not accord protection to whistleblowers who go to the media, NOW's system will likely result in a mountain of lawsuits and prosecutions in court.

"That is why we need some funds raised for legal fees. Most probably, we will be sued left, right [and] centre," Rafizi said.

Rafizi is experiencing the lack of whistleblower protection firsthand.
The PKR chief strategist himself currently faces two court charges for his exposés on the RM250 million National Feedlot Centre (NFC) cattle farming scandal, after he disclosed confidential financial documents to the media.

"But we have to do it and take the risk. After all, the law is such that if you lodge a report with the MACC, for example, you have to submit all your evidence to them and you cannot speak to anyone else or go to anyone else.

"If the MACC actually functions well, we would not need NOW. But does it?" he questioned.

"So at this point, what we have are two choices: Either we live and work within the current framework of the WPA, which is used to suppress whistleblowing, or we prove to and convince the society that whistleblowing is actually good for the country.

"We can show them that there is a support system from the non-governmental organisations and the civil society movement to hopefully increase pressure on the government to amend the Act," he said.

Rafizi said another provision in the WPA renders the intention of the Act useless ― it stipulates that a whistleblower cannot break any other law when making his disclosure to the authorities.

"So if the documents disclosed are confidential, even if you are revealing them to the authorities, you have no protection," he said.

This is reflected in Rafizi's NFC court case, where he was charged for violating Section 97 of the Banking and Financial Institutions Act (Bafia) for exposing the confidential banking details of the National Feedlot Corporation (NFCorp), the firm that runs the NFC project.

But the politician is determined to push forward with NOW, saying the centre must serve as a civil society movement to help spread awareness of the importance of whistleblowing as a "Malaysian culture" and increase pressure on the government to move legislative reforms.

On this note, the politician said another primary objective of NOW was to be a legislative reform lobbyist and an "oversight" centre to make parliamentarians, governments and government-linked companies accountable for their actions.

Whistleblowing, he said, was only 50 per cent of the centre's main work.

"We need a centre like this now because if we rely on the government, we will continue to be stagnant. And the best way is to take the civil society route to it," he said.

He pointed out that it was through decades of pressure from civil society movements that the government finally agreed to repeal the controversial British-enacted Internal Security Act 1960, which allows for detention without trial.

"It has worked before. In this case, we want to change the way society views whistleblowing so that maybe five or six years down the road, there will be enough public pressure that no government can actually ignore it," he said.

Read more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/rafizis-now-centre-to-make-whistleblowing-malaysian-culture/

Government has fulfilled all promises through NEP

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 12:50 PM PDT

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/88/Bumi_discount_mod.jpg

(Bernama) - The New Economic Policy (NEP) has managed to free Malays from the clutches of poverty and allowed them to be counted among the prominent entrepreneurs, professionals and corporate figures of the country.

Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia's (UKM) Professor Dr Kamaruddin M. Said pointed out that the NEP is a development and socio-economic restructuring programme, geared towards eradicating poverty among the Malays as well as the Bumiputera people of the Sabah and Sarawak.

"It was also established to restructure the social economy of all Malaysians, by bridging the gap in their incomes, careers and standard of living during the last 20 years," he explained.

He added that Article 153 of the Malaysian Constitution has ensured the success of the NEP during the Second Malaysia Plan of 1971 to 1975. In addition, Article 152, which declares Bahasa Melayu as the national language and Islam as the official religion, has also been implemented well.

EFFECTIVE EDUCATION POLICY

Under the aegis of the NEP, the government had set up additional public tertiary education institutions (IPTA) like Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) and Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM) in addition to the already existent Universiti Malaya (UM) and the then Institut Teknologi Mara, which is now known as Universiti Teknologi Mara or UiTM.

Bumiputera students also profited from the scholarships and privileges granted by the government during the NEP, which were in accordance with Section (2) of Article 153 laid down in the Constitution, Prof Kamaruddin stated.

The policy also allowed the government to set up boarding schools for providing educational opportunities to Malay children, who had excellent academic results but were unable to afford a better education.

Matriculation colleges and technology institutes were also established by the government under this policy, he noted.

Interestingly, Prof Kamaruddin said he and his wife Prof Dr Solehah Ishak were also among those who have gained from the NEP.

"I belong to a poor rural family. My parents were poor. After primary school, I got placed in a boarding school called Sekolah Alam Shah at Jalan Cheras in Kuala Lumpur, which was for underprivileged Malay children wanting to obtain a secondary education. Everything was provided for and the scholarship I got was more than enough to supplement my expenses," he stated.

"I think that the majority of successful Malays grew up in boarding schools. Many have gone on to become academicians, scientists, professionals, entrepreneurs and corporate figures," he added.

FAST-PACED DEVELOPMENT

Prof Kamaruddin pointed out that Malaysia's development quickened during the prime ministerial term of Tun Abdul Razak from 1970 to 1976.

Tun Razak, who is known as the 'Father of Development' set up the Federal Land Development Authority (Felda) to develop the rural community, particularly that of the Malays.

NEP measures were continued to be implemented by the country's third prime minister Tun Hussein Onn under the Third Malaysia Plan of 1976 to 1980 and development peaked during the tenure of the fourth Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

During his 22 year-reign as prime minister, Dr Mahathir developed Putrajaya in 1995, Multimedia Super Corridor in 1996 and Petronas Twin Towers in 1998 among others.

He also left the legacy of Vision 2020 that was unveiled in 1991 and which, aims to make Malaysia a fully developed nation by the year 2020.

Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi took over as prime minister after Dr Mahathir stepped down in 2003.

He introduced the 'Islam Hadhari' approach that focuses on development and achievement in line with the global economic demands of the 21st century.

Badawi also made efforts to lift the quality of human capital, particularly among Malays.

RESTORING MALAYS' SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS

Prof Kamaruddin said the creation of the NEP also aimed at restoring the position of Malays in terms of socio-economic aspects.

Even though the NEP took a substantial amount of time to fructify, many Malays now enjoy a better socio-economic status because of this policy.

He stated that because of the successful implementation of governmental development initiatives, Malays and their children are now ready to face future challenges, including those at an international level.

The academician said this positive development has augured well for the concept of 1Malaysia and its spin-off programmes such as the Kedai Rakyat 1Malaysia, Klinik 1Malaysia, Perumahan 1Malaysia and Bantuan Rakyat 1Malaysia.

(1Malaysia People's Shop. 1Malaysia Clinic, 1Malaysia People's Housing and 1Malaysia People's Assistance).

"These programmes are continuing to fulfill the pledges made by the government," Prof Kamaruddin noted.

FOSTERING NATIONAL UNITY

Malaysia's sixth prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Abdul Razak introduced the 1Malaysia concept of 'People First, Performance Now' after assuming power.

This concept is geared towards fostering unity among Malaysians from various ethnic groups, religious beliefs and cultures.

"The concept prioritises the people of this country and gives the foremost importance to their performance and achievement," said Prof Kamaruddin.

He said the Economic Transformation Programme (ETP) and the New Economic Model (NEM) are among the government's latest efforts to inculcate unity among all Malaysians.

"Looking back at the past 55 years following the nation's independence, the government has truly fulfilled many of the pledges it made to the people," Prof Kamaruddin added.

Malaysia’s New Internet Law

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 12:48 PM PDT

http://thediplomat.com/asean-beat/files/2012/08/onternet-400x300.jpg

(The Diplomat) - Malaysians are right to protest the recent amendments that the government made to the Evidence Act of 1950. Although they deal specifically with the internet, the amendments could have wider implications on media freedom, democracy, and human rights.

Section 114A of the bill seeks "to provide for the presumption of fact in publication in order to facilitate the identification and proving of the identity of an anonymous person involved in publication through the internet." In other words, the section makes it easier for law enforcement authorities to trace the person who has uploaded or published material posted online.

According to the amended law, however, the originators of the content are those who own, administer, and/or edit websites, blogs, and online forums. Also included in the amendment are persons who offer webhosting services or internet access. And lastly, the owner of the computer or mobile device used to publish content online is also covered under section 114A. 

This means that a blogger or forum moderator who allows seditious comments on his or her site can be held liable under the law. An internet café manager is accountable if one of his or her customers sends illegal content online through the store's WiFi network. A mobile phone owner is the perpetrator if defamatory content is traced back to his or her electronic device. 

Critics of the amendment contend that under section 114A, a person is considered guilty until proven innocent. Their fear is not entirely baseless. Indeed, the Thai government has used a similar law to prosecute a blog moderator for an allegedly seditious comment which she approved to be posted on her website.  

The Malayisn government has rejected these criticisms with one cabinet member calling some of the objections "childish."

The Centre for Independent Journalism was quick to denounce the provisions of the bill which went into effect at the end of last month. It warned that "internet users may resort to self-censorship to avoid false accusations made under Section 114A. Bloggers, for example, may excessively censor comments made by their readers.  As a result, Section 114A inadvertently stifles public discussion about pertinent political or social issues and protects public authorities, such as the State, from public scrutiny."

Internet users signed a petition opposing the amendments and lectured the government about the importance of allowing online anonymity to protect the identities of human rights and democracy advocates. But the amendments, according to the petition, "reduce the opportunity to be anonymous online which is crucial in promoting a free and open Internet. Anonymity is also indispensable to protect whistleblowers from persecution by the authorities when they expose abuses of power."

When the petition was ignored by the government, netizens and media groups organized an online blackout on August 14, which succeeded in mobilizing thousands of internet users. The global attention which the action generated was likely what convinced the Prime Minister to agree to have the cabinet review the controversial amendments. Although this announcement was initially welcomed by opponents of the amendments, the Cabinet ultimately upheld the amended law.

The amendments are supposed to empower authorities to prosecute people publishing seditious, libelous, and harmful content on the internet. But it doesn't take a whole lot of imagination to envision how these same authorities could abuse the law to restrict media freedom, violate the privacy of individuals, and curtail the human rights of ordinary internet users.

Courts sending out mixed signals over statutory rape

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 11:57 AM PDT

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Noor-Afizal-Azizan-and-Chuah-Guan-Jiu.jpg

(The Star) - NOW that their trials are over, former national youth squad bowler Noor Afizal Azizan can go on to fulfil the promise of his bright future and electrician Chuah Guan Jiu can focus on his fixed job and many years ahead.

Through it all, no one spoke of the 13-year-old girl Noor Afizal took to a hotel to spend the night with, or the 12-year-old schoolgirl who was "coaxed" to go to her 21-year-old electrician boyfriend's flat instead of to school because he said he was too sick to take her.

These were prepubescent girls who were deemed to have consented to sex with the older boys they were dating and Court of Appeal president Justice Raus Sharif wrote in his written judgment that Noor Afizal had not "tricked the girl into submitting to him".

In the electrician's case, Sessions judge Sitarun Nisa Abdul Aziz also thought the "sexual act was consensual", even though DPP Lim Cheah Yit recounted how the girl had repeatedly asked Chuah to take her to school. If she did give consent, there was certainly trickery and fraud involved.

The fact remains that the girls were 12 and 13, children barely out of primary school.

They are not old enough to be able to legally buy cigarettes, or even obtain medical treatment if they had contracted sexual transmitted diseases.

The law on statutory rape was meant to protect these very girls. Section 375(g) of the Penal Code states unequivocally that a man has committed statutory rape if he has sexual intercourse with a girl under 16 years of age, with or without her consent.

It is rooted in the presumption that girls below 16 have not attained the mental maturity to consent to sex, and this law was enacted to protect children from abuse. It places the onus on those around her to not have sexual intercourse with her, even if she gives consent, because she is not deemed mature enough to give consent.

In other words, the older guys should have known better.

Noor Afizal and Chuah were found guilty of raping the underaged girls, but were not jailed. They were bound over for five years and three years respectively on a RM25,000 good behaviour bond.

The public uproar has been over how these young men got away with a slap on the wrist, and how the emphasis has been on not blighting their future.

Our teenagers are growing up inundated with overt sexual messages from the media and the Internet, without the benefit of a full-fledged sex education curriculum, or avenues to get answers.

Clearly, our young people are having sex with each other but there is a line drawn by the law. And that is sex with girls below 16 – children – is off limits, even to their peers.

By letting Noor Afizal and Chuah off lightly, are the courts sending out mixed signals?

Are they saying these two girls – aged 12 and 13 – are capable of giving consent for sex, and are they saying future good behaviour is sufficient punishment for having sex with minors? What is the message that teenage boys and younger men are getting?

At the root of it all, this is about protecting our children – boys and girls.

A 12-year-old girl was lured by a man twice her age into his flat, and coaxed into having sex with him, and he got away with a promise to behave himself for the next three years.

Where does that leave her? What about her worth? What are we doing for these two girls?

How do we protect other naive young girls from being sweet-talked by an older teen into a sexual relationship if he knows he could be found guilty of statutory rape but walk away with a promise to behave?

If we do not uphold unequivocally our intolerance of sex with underaged girls, what does that say about us?

 

Menetapkan Gaji Minimum Adalah Idea Yang Buruk Bagi Rakyat

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 11:53 AM PDT

Peningkatan ini akan mengakibatkan saya untuk menaikkan gaji bagi kesemua pekerja saya. Tidak mungkin pekerja yang sudah 5 tahun bekerja dengan saya akan bersetuju dengan gaji pekerja yang baru masuk kerja bulan lepas.

Shahabudeen Jalil

Ahli politik adalah individu-individu yang mereka sangka mereka mengenali masyarakat dan tahu apa yang baik dan apa yang buruk untuk mereka. Selain itu, mereka juga sangat pakar dan mahir dalam ilmu untuk memperdaya rakyat dalam menerima sesuatu perkara yang mereka mahukan ke atas rakyat.

Dari situ berlumba-lumbalah ahli politik dari kerajaan dan pembangkang untuk memperkenalkan gaji minimum pekerja. Kemahuan golongan persatuan pekerja ini tidak dilayan pada zaman pemerintahan Tun Dr. Mahathir kerana beliau mungkin tahu baik buruk polisi ini.

Atas desakan yang kuat, kerajaan Perdana Menteri sekarang terpaksa akur dan menetapkan gaji minimum ini kepada pekerja.

Dalam artikel ini, kita akan membincangkan kenapa penetapan ini adalah satu idea yang nampak berniat baik tetapi sebenarnya sesuatu yang buruk bagi masyarakat miskin dan orang berniaga.

 

1. Tidak Adil Bagi Semua

Jika benar kerajaan dapat meningkatkan pendapatan golongan miskin dengan menetapkan gaji minimum, kenapa kerajaan tidak hanya menetapkan gaji minimum ini kepada RM 5000 sahaja. Dengan mudah semua buruh akan mendapat gaji tinggi dan semua orang pun akan gembira.

Bagaimana gaji meningkat ? Gaji meningkat apabila produktiviti per kapita setiap rakyat di sesebuah negara itu meningkat. Apabila produktiviti meningkat, pendapatan meningkat, perniagaan berkembang dan seterusnya gaji pekerja akan meningkat dan ini meningkatkan taraf hidup rakyat secara keseluruhan.

2. Memusnahkan Perniagaan Kecil

Jika buah epal dijual dengan harga RM 1.00 meningkat kepada RM 2.00. Secara logik mudah, orang akan kurang membeli buah epal. Ini juga yang akan terjadi kepada pasaran buruh di sesebuah negara apabila kerajaan menetapkan gaji minimum.

Jika saya mempunyai 10 orang pekerja. Penetapan gaji minimum mungkin hanya mempunya kesan kepada 2 orang daripada pekerja saya. Tetapi peningkatan ini akan mengakibatkan saya untuk menaikkan gaji bagi kesemua pekerja saya. Tidak mungkin pekerja yang sudah 5 tahun bekerja dengan saya akan bersetuju dengan gaji pekerja yang baru masuk kerja bulan lepas.

Itu yang pertama, yang keduanya saya sebagai pemilik perniagaan akan memilih untuk mengurangkan penggunaan pekerja sebagai langkah untuk berjimat supaya saya tidak rugi dalam perniagaan yang saya sedang ceburi.

3. Peningkatan Jenayah dan Meningkatkan Pengangguran

Apabila peniaga mengurangkan bilangan pekerja kerana tidak mampu membayar gaji minimum. Golongan buruh bawahan ini tidak akan mendapat sebarang kerja dan ini akan meningkatkan pengangguran dikalangan masyarakat.

Seperti yang anda sudah ketahui, peningkatan pengangguran akan menyebabkan kadar jenayah juga meningkat.

4. Beban yang terpaksa ditanggung oleh semua

Penetapan gaji minimum akan menyebabkan peningkatan harga barang. Manakan tidak, kos pembuatan sesebuah barangan itu telah meningkat jadi sudah tentu kos ini akan digilirkan kepada pelanggan yang akan membeli sesebuah produk.

Dengan itu akan berlaku peningkatan harga barang serta peningkatan kadar inflasi. Ini akan menyebabkan semua orang terutamanya pengguna terpaksa menanggung kerugian

Dalam pasaran bebas, harga barangan dan gaji pekerja tidak seharusnya ditetapkan oleh sesiapa samada ahli politik atau kerajaan. Ianya seharusnya dibiarkan terapung dan bebas.

Pernah dalam satu pertikaian pada zaman Rasulullah, baginda dipanggil untuk menetapkan harga roti di pasar. Baginda bersabda

"Aku tidak mahu darah mereka ini di tangan aku di akhirat nanti"

("An Islamic economic system largely supports a market mechanism for coordination
of economic activity. This is based on a hadith reported by Ibn Majah and Tirmidhi
on bread prices in Medina where the Prophet refused to intervene to set prices (of
wheat) saying, "I don‟t want to have the blood of these men on my hands in the
hereafter" because there was a shortage due to natural causes (drought).")

Read more at: http://www.shahabudeenjalil.com/2012/08/menetapkan-gaji-minimum-adalah-idea-yang-buruk-bagi-rakyat/

 

Hudud: A PAS objective, not an agreed Pakatan agenda

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 11:35 AM PDT

http://i967.photobucket.com/albums/ae159/Malaysia-Today/mat_sabu2.jpg

Mat Sabu was telling the truth when he denied he said PAS would amendment the constitution to implement hudud. The word 'hudud' was planted into the conversation by the reporter, who was smart enough to put the questions in such a way that Mat Sabu could hardly answer in the negative.  

Kim Quek

Like any reader of The Sin Chew Daily, I was stunned by its front page headline on Aug 28, which reads: "PAS will implement Hudud when it rules". 

My split-second reaction was: "Gosh, this is serious!". Flashing instantly across the mind is the image of an Islamic state, mixed with the consternation that PAS might have suddenly changed course over the Islamic state issue and the devastating electoral repercussion that can be expected to ensue from the Chinese community following such a shocking turn of event.

Anxious to know more, I read through the entire two pages covering the event without pause, and was relieved that, as I expected, PAS has indeed held on to its policy of putting the pursuit of an Islamic state and implementation of Hudud as a long term objective – certainly not the current priority. I am happy that the alliance of PAS-PKR-DAP remains intact and on-course in its relentless march to Putrajaya.

Meanwhile Sin Chew's headline on Aug 28 has kicked up a mini-storm in the Internet.


MAT SABU DENIES, BUT SIN CHEW PERSISTS

PAS Deputy President Mat Sabu immediately denied that he said PAS would amend the federal constitution to implement Hudud should it come to power. 

"I did not say (we'll bring) hudud (to Parliament)," he told Malaysiakini.

He added that good governance and social justice must be practised in Malaysia before implementing the Islamic penal code.

However, Sin Chew on the other hand also defended its headline report by giving the following sequence of events through its website on Aug 28 (Tuesday):

Stage 1: On Sunday, Aug 26:

Sin Chew asked Mat Sabu to comment on PAS President Hadi Awang's statement on Saturday (Aug 25) that PAS would implement Hudud through the democratic process.

Mat Sabu answered: "Democracy is to govern through the ballot box, and change to any policy must be done through Parliament, and two-thirds support (in Parliament) is needed to amend the constitution."

Stage 2: On Monday, Aug 27:

Based on the above Mat Sabu answer, Sin Chew's evening edition said in its headline story: "Mat Sabu says PAS has decided to propose constitutional amendment to implement hudud should the Islamic party capture Putrajaya"

Upon learning from an English daily that Mat Sabu had denied saying so, Sin Chew called Mat Sabu to clarify further.

Mat Sabu reiterated that if any party wanted to amend "any Act", it would need to go through Parliament, and that he didn't mention hudud.

He also stated that the party had not discussed whether to table a motion to amend the constitution.

However, Sin Chew reporter pressed further and asked: "The 'any Act', does it include hudud?".  Mat Sabu answered: "Yes."

The reporter further asked: : "Can I say PAS 'memang berhasrat' (intend) to amend the constitution to implement any Act, including hudud, but at the moment has not discussed the matter of tabling a motion in Parliament?".  Mat Sabu answered: "Can."

Stage 3: (Tuesday, Aug 28)

Sin Chew splashed the headline "PAS will implement hudud when it rules", saying in its first line: "PAS Deputy President Mat Sabu says PAS intends to seek constitutional amendment in Parliament in order to implement hudud, when it rules in the central government". 


THE TRUTH

From the above sequence of events, we can see that Mat Sabu was telling the truth when he denied he said PAS would amendment the constitution to implement hudud. The word 'hudud' was planted into the conversation by the reporter, who was smart enough to put the questions in such a way that Mat Sabu could hardly answer in the negative. 

In fact, Mat Sabu was only making a general remark when he answered that a constitutional amendment needs to have two thirds support in parliament. He was certainly not specifically referring to hudud, so it is not fair to coin the words in such a way as to portray Mat Sabu as driving the point that PAS will seek parliamentary approval for implementing hudud upon taking over the federal government.

It is apparent that Mat Sabu didn't want to give a direct answer. The reasons are simple. 

In the first place, a parliamentary motion from PAS needs to go through the process of building consensus within Pakatan Rakyat, more so when it is a  constitutional amendment as momentous as the introduction of hudud and the conversion of the status quo into an Islamic state. There is no such consensus now or in the foreseeable future.

Secondly, social conditions are not ripe for implementation of hudud as exemplified by the lack of social justice and good governance in our country, as pointed out by Mat Sabu and other Islamic scholars.

Thirdly, it is suicidal for PAS to hammer home the hudud agenda at this sensitive election time when it says it is still in the process of building greater understanding among non-supporters of hudud,who in all likelihood, predominate the electorate.

So, with all these hurdles standing in the way, does it make sense for PAS to trumpet the message that upon reaching Putrajaya, it will implement hudud – as if this is currently its urgent priority?


HEADLINE MISLEADING

Perhaps what causes the furor most is not so much the details in Sin Chew's report as the grossly misleading and sensational title of "PAS WILL IMPLEMENT HUDUD WHEN IT RULES". It distinctly gives the impression that hudud is on the cards, the moment PAS steps into Putrajaya.

So, who among the non-Muslims wouldn't be alarmed and shocked by such a headline and the leading sentences of the story, when they have all along been assured that PAS will only move through consensus within Pakatan Rakyat and that the latter's prime political objective is to improve the people's welfare by replacing the corrupt and obsolete Barisan Nasional?

Considering that many readers do not read through all the relevant details or possess the analytical mind to sort out the wheat from the chaff, many must have already been misled and alienated by this sensational report.

(In all fairness to Sin Chew, despite the misleading headlines and the leading story on Aug 28, its entire coverage of the subject, particularly its exhaustive coverage spreading over five pages in the following day, Aug 29, do contain sufficient truthful information for the more discerning reader to form the correct conclusion).

Now that the damage has been done, it falls upon Pakatan Rakyat and democracy activists to dispel the misperception and spread the truth that hudud remains a PAS objective, but not an agreed Pakatan Rakyat agenda when it comes to power. And hence, a vote for PAS is not a vote for Hudud, but a vote for good governance.

Malaysian Youth Rights Movement Urge the Youth Not to Vote for Pakatan Rakyat‏

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 11:32 AM PDT

Shen Yee Aun

I would like to represent Malaysian Youth Rights Movement (Youth NGO) to condemn against PAS Youth Nik Abduh Nik Aziz ( PAS Malaysia Deputy Youth Chief ) for claiming that women that wear swimsuits and bikini are "animals", in reference to a recent pool party that was organized recently.

The full quote (translated) from the statement of the DPPM of PAS was "Humans can now be considered animals that hang around wherever they want doing whatever they want". The statement from Nik Abduh Nik Aziz also mentioned that the pool party "insulted Islam, and and tears apart the dignity and norms of humanity". It then went on to say that "Nothing can be expected from society other than unrestrained sex, sex outside of marriage, prostitution which leads to children born out of wedlock, abortion, baby dumping and the like".

The pool party had a dress code of "stylish, sexy, trendy & tasteful, swim wear allowed", thus swim wear was not a requirement – participants could choose what to wear and whether to enter the pool or not.The Pool KL has responded to this issue with a statement on their Facebook page (http://fb.com/thepoolkl), saying that the event was organized by a third party event organizer, and that they believe in a free and democratic Malaysia with freedom of religious choice. They apologized if they have offended any party that found it offensive, and in addition the event emcee made announcements that Muslim women should refrain from wearing outfits deemed inappropriate to the Muslim faith.

It is an insult to all the young men & women of Malaysia to equate them to animals. At the same time , PAS should also apologize for accusing the party venue (The Pool KL, Jalan Ampang) for claiming that they are organizing a "sex party". The Pool's main draw is a swimming pool in the middle of the club, hence the name.  The event is basically just a pool party – it is out of line for PAS to even bring up things like prostitution, abortion, abandoning babies in the same speech condemning the event, all because of what is essentially just an event at a licensed entertainment outlet that caters to people of legal age.

Malaysia has long enjoyed freedom – be it dress code & fashion, or even choices of lifestyle and entertainment. However in the states that PAS has held power for a long time, the freedom to dress and even mingle with others is severely restricted.

PKR claims that hudud law will not happen in Malaysia because they need a 2/3 majority in order to implement hudud in the country, however before they are even are in federal power, they have tried to ban Valentine's day celebrations in Malaysia, and in Kelantan they have instituted seperate supermarket checkout lanes for men and women, seperate park benches for men and women, and even requiring unmarried men and women to sit seperately when watching movies. There is also a ban on bikinis in Terengganu and Kelantan, and in addition, the Kota Bahru council has forbidden their employees to wear lipstick and certain types of high-heeled shoes to work.

This is an issue for every Malaysian to take note of, even in Selangor where PAS is the least dominant political party under the Pakatan Rakyat administration, Lotus Five Star, the only cinema in Kuala Selangor, has put up notices saying that unmarried Muslim couples are banned from sitting side my side. The controversial ruling was issued by the Kuala Selangor District Council, and was believed to have been advocated by the local authority's PAS councillors, who have already implemented regulations like that in Kelantan.

We are not alone in questioning these restrictions. A recent survey among 20-year old youths in the New Straits Times regarding the proposed gender segregation in cinemas quoted a law chambering student, Oazair Tyeb, as saying "the idea would also be questioned and opposed not just by Muslim youth but also those from other races". Another, Kishore Ramdas said that imposing such a controversial ruling on Malaysians would set the country back another 50 years and "I think Malaysians are mature enough not be told how to behave, where to sit and stand or even what to wear". Programme officer Mohani Niza, 25, is of the view that Islam should not be "hijacked" to control moments in people's daily lives. Though the rule is not enforced, we might be on a slippery slope towards a more intolerant society."

Read more at: http://1sya.com/?p=1467

 

JAIS arrest of book distributor an abuse of power and disregards legal rights

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 11:26 PM PDT

http://roketkini.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/31-300x300.jpg
Faisal who was today summoned for questioning, on advice by his lawyer Afiq M. Noor of Lawyers for Liberty had informed JAIS that he was exercising his right to silence as provided for under the law. In response JAIS informed Faisal that he was under arrest under section 215 of Enakmen Tatacara Jenayah Syariah (Negeri Selangor) 2003 for failing to answer the questions of religious officers.
 
Lawyers for Liberty  
Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (JAIS) today arrested Faisal Mustaffa, Managing Director of independent book distributor Merpati Jingga in connection with Irshad Manji's Bahasa Melayu translation of Allah, Liberty & Love - Allah, Kebebasan dan Cinta.  

Faisal who was today summoned for questioning, on advice by his lawyer Afiq M. Noor of Lawyers for Liberty had informed JAIS that he was exercising his right to silence as provided for under the law. 

In response JAIS informed Faisal that he was under arrest under section 215 of Enakmen Tatacara Jenayah Syariah (Negeri Selangor) 2003 for failing to answer the questions of religious officers. If convicted, he can be fined up to RM2,000 or one year imprisonment or both. His lawyer who was accompanying Faisal was also ejected from the interview for advising his client. Faisal was however released on the same day after bail was obtained.

The arrest makes a mockery and a serious contravention of Section 61 of the same enactment which prohibits any religious officers from making any threat, inducement or promise in order to obtain a statement.

This arrest followed JAIS' raid on Merpati Jingga office on 12 June 2012 where they confiscated 28 copies of books found in the premises including Allah, Kebebasan dan Cinta.  

Lawyers for Liberty views with serious concern JAIS' harassment, abuse of power and complete disregard for the legal rights of an accused person which amounted to a serious assault on the freedom of speech and the legal safeguards as guaranteed by the Constitution and the law. 

Statistics Manipulation Allegations

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 11:20 PM PDT

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/tony-pua.jpg
Based on statistics provided by PDRM, "index crime" has dropped from 209,572 in 2007 to 157,891 in 2011, or 24.7% over the period.  However, "non-index crime" has on the contrary, increased from 42,752 to 72,106 or a massive 68.7% over the same period.
 
Tony Pua
The clarification over crime statistics by the Royal Malaysian Police (PDRM) does not at all exonerate the government but instead clearly indicates data manipulation by the authorities.
 
After nearly a week of silence, the Royal Malaysian Police (PDRM) finally provided a lengthy reply to the allegations made in an anonymous letter that the authorities have manipulated crime statistics in Malaysia to give a brighter picture.
 
According to the letter, crime cases were being methodically shifted into "non-index" offences that were not registered as part of official statistics presented by efficiency unit PEMANDU.
 
Index crime is defined as crime which is reported with sufficient regularity and with sufficient significance to be meaningful as an index to the crime situation".  "Non-index crime", on the other hand, is considered as cases minor in nature and does not occur with such rampancy to warrant its inclusion into the crime statistics or as a benchmark to determine the crime situation.
 
For example, robbery cases, Section 392 (Robbery) and Section 397 (Gang Robbery), under the Penal Code are classified as index crime. This offence will be re-classified as non-index under Section 382 (Theft with Preparation to Cause Hurt or Death) of the Penal Code. Since, Section 382 of the Penal Code is a non-index crime, therefore will not be reflected in the crime statistics.
 
PDRM has defended itself from the above key accusation by claiming that even after taking into account non-index crime, "overall crime (Index + Non-Index) has in fact reduced in 2010, 2011 and 2012 (year-to-date)".  PDRM claimed that the total index and non-index crime has dropped 7%, 9% and 5.3% respectively in 2010, 2011 and 2012. Hence PDRM concluded that the allegation is erroneous.
 
On the contrary, this simplistic and misleading reply from PDRM has in fact exposed the likelihood that crime data manipulation had indeed taken place extensively.
 
The Government had in fact boasted its achievement of 15.4%, 11.1% and 10.1% reduction in the crime index over 2010, 2011 and 2012 respectively as its remarkable achievement under the Crime National Key Result Area (NKRA).  The fact that after non-index crime is taken into account, the crime-fighting performance dropped significantly provides strong evidence of manipulation.
 
Based on statistics provided by PDRM, "index crime" has dropped from 209,572 in 2007 to 157,891 in 2011, or 24.7% over the period.  However, "non-index crime" has on the contrary, increased from 42,752 to 72,106 or a massive 68.7% over the same period.
 
What is even more glaring is the fact that "non-index crime" is increasing annually as a proportion of total crime since 2007 based on PDRM data.  It has increased from 16.9% of total crime in 2007 to 21.9% (2008) to 22.8% (2009) to 29.8% (2010) to a record of 31.4% in 2011.
 
The clear-cut disjoint between the significant drop in "index crime" versus the drastic increase in "non-index crime" points strongly towards data manipulation, and validates the accusation by the anonymous letter writer that the PDRM is systematically re-classifying "index crime" to "non-index crime" cases.
 
If there is indeed no manipulation of data as claimed by PDRM, how else can they explain the shockingly divergent trends between index and non-index crime?  Under normal circumstances, if the crime situation in the country has improved as much as boasted by the authorities, then both index and non-index criminal cases should show a declining trend.
 
While the total index and non-index crime cases based on PDRM data has indeed dropped over the past 2-3 years, it appears that the data has been systematically manipulated to present an inflated over-achievement under the Najib administration.  The Government Transformation Programme (GTP) Annual Report 2011 has for example, boasted that street crimes have been reduced by a "phenomenal" 39.7%.
 
If the manipulation of crime data is indeed true, the there is no assurance that no other steps have been taken by PDRM or the authorities to use other measures to further reduce the crime index data in order to achieve the desired outcome under Najib's NKRA programme. 
 
There is hence a complete absence of credibility in the data presented by the Government and it explains clearly why all the chest-thumping by the authorities over its crime-fighting achievements are not translated into greater sense of security by the ordinary man-on-the-street.

Statement by Sin Chew Daily

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 09:37 PM PDT

The reporter sought to clarify from Mat Sabu, "Bolehkah kami kata sebegini, PAS memang berhasrat membuat amendment konstitusi melalui Parlimen untuk melaksanakan semua undang-undang, termasuk undang-undang Hudud?" Mat Sabu replied, "Boleh."

Sin Chew Daily

Sin Chew Daily published on its August 28 edition a news article titled "PAS to implement Hudud Law if it wins the election," quoting PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu.

On the following day, Mat Sabu told the online media that Sin Chew Daily had published a news report which was factually incorrect. He also pointed out in the party's mouthpiece Harakah that Sin Chew Daily had misinterpreted him.

Some online media had accused Sin Chew Daily of intentionally marring the image of Pakatan Rakyat through the manipulation of this issue.

As a matter of fact, our reporter conducted an interview with Mat Sabu pursuant to a statement issued by PAS president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang after the party's political and election bureau meeting on August 25, stating that the party had the intention of implementing the Hudud Law through democratic process, as reported on Harakah.

Since the issue is a major concern of the Chinese community, our reporter followed up the issue to fulfill his journalistic obligations.

The reporter sought to clarify from Mat Sabu, "Bolehkah kami kata sebegini, PAS memang berhasrat membuat amendment konstitusi melalui Parlimen untuk melaksanakan semua undang-undang, termasuk undang-undang Hudud?"

Mat Sabu replied, "Boleh."

Mat Sabu also said his party had yet to discuss tabling the motion in the Parliament, and would only take the next course of action after Pakatan had won the next general election.

The above had become the basis of our article.

Immediately after Mat Sabu made the accusation through other media that Sin Chew Daily had misinterpreted him, the paper had been trying to contact him through phone and SMS in hope of obtaining clarification from him but to no avail.

Prior and after this incident, Sin Chew Daily also reported the views of other PAS leaders such as the party's spiritual leader Nik Aziz, secretary-general Mustafa Ali, information chief Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man and PAS Supporters Congress president Hu Pang Chaw. Their views are consistent with what had been reported in our news article.

Hu Pang Chaw, a member of PAS' political bureau, confirmed that the bureau had indeed made a decision to try to implement the Hudud Law.

On August 28, Sin Chew Daily also published the full statement issued by PAS president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang on the Harakah webiste about the implementation of the Hudud Law. The article included many advantages and positive aspects of the Islamic faith.

In addition, we also interviewed several leaders from other Pakatan parties such as DAP and Keadilan Rakyat, and published their feedback on the issue.

We strongly believe that all our news reports on this matter have been written in compliance with the principles of comprehensive, objective and factual news reporting as required by the journalism ethic.

 

Jho Low's RM4.9 mil 'proposal' to Taiwanese singer makes waves (UPDATED with video)

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 09:16 PM PDT

NOT ENOUGH? Hsiao apparently thinks of Low as a brotherNOT ENOUGH? Hsiao apparently thinks of Low as a brother(Malaysian Digest) - Jho Low, the young Malaysian millionaire who partied with the likes of Paris Hilton and Jamie Foxx, has been thrust into the spotlight again.

This time, the 30-year-old is the star of a video which features what is claimed to be an elaborate marriage proposal to Taiwanese singer Elva Hsiao.

The Penangite, whose full name is Low Taek Jho, is reported to have blown a cool RM4.9 million on the private function, which is set on a private beach at the super-exclusive hotel resort Atlantis, The Palm – the most opulent hotel on the island of Palm Jumeirah off Dubai.

Hong Kong tabloid Apple Daily recently reported that a video had surfaced on popular video-sharing site Vimeo, titled 'Atlantis Engagement, Dubai', with the caption 'Surprise Engagement Proposal Rumoured To Cost Over £1m.'

Tender moment...Tender moment...The 5:27-minute long video, which appears to be professionally-produced, opens with the couple arriving in a black Rolls Royce and making their way to the beach, where lit candles formed a giant heart-shape.

The couple then proceed to an elaborately-designed canopy while laser lights project the couple's silhouette. As the two enjoy their meal, they are serenaded by a violinist and harpist.

The couple are then surprised by parachutists who descend from above, only to present Hsiao, 33, with Chopard jewellery.

However, Apple Daily reported that even the extravagant demonstration wasn't enough to sway Hsiao, who allegedly only saw Low as a "brother".

The paper quoted her spokesman as saying that the event was just a romantic dinner, and no proposal took place.

Heart-shaped candle arrangements on the beach...Heart-shaped candle arrangements on the beach...It is also understood that Hsiao is currently dating hunky actor Kai Kho, the star of Taiwan hit movie You Are The Apple Of My Eye.

Low first came into public prominence in 2010, when pictures of him partying with socialite Paris Hilton made waves on the internet.

In a subsequent interview with The Star, Low, the son of Penang businessman Datuk Larry Low, disclosed that his wealth originated from his investment fund.

The Wynton Group, he said, was started from US25$ million from his family and nine other investors comprising schoolmates from the Middle East.

The group is now understood to be based in Abu Dhabi.

niiYU1KBuBw
Or watch at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=niiYU1KBuBw

 

Let the class war begin

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 08:24 PM PDT

 

And why are the Chinese businessmen so unhappy? It was we in the opposition who have been fighting for a minimum wage since more than a decade ago. It is we who have been pressuring the Barisan Nasional government to implement a minimum wage policy. If Pakatan Rakyat comes to power I am hoping that the minimum wage will be increased a further 50% from what it is now.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

One thing that I have been fighting for over more than a decade since 1999 is for Malaysia to implement a minimum wage policy like here in the UK. That was one of the points in The People's Declaration that we launched in early 2008 plus for the Malaysian Civil Liberties Movement (MCLM) that was launched in late 2010.

As far as I am concerned, that has never changed.

I also once wrote that if May 13 Version 2.0 does hit Malaysia, it is not going to be à la May 13 of 1969. This time it is going to be a clash between the haves and the haves-not, basically a class war.

I remember writing about His Highness the Sultan of Selangor summoning me to the Palace soon after my release from Internal Security Act (ISA) detention in June 2001. His Highness was concerned that I was 'rampaging in the streets' and involved in Reformasi demonstrations and getting arrested and jailed. His Highness was a bit puzzled about what I was trying to achieve and what it is that I am aggrieved about.

His Highness stated that he is worried if I continued like this I would again get detained and the Palace is powerless to do anything about it and can't help me. Hence is it worth all the trouble of getting arrested or detained for a cause, which, His Highness said, he did not quite understand?

I then spent the next two hours, very politely but with great passion, in briefing His Highness about where I was coming from and where I was headed. I not only tried to help His Highness understand my cause but also why such a cause is necessary. I admit that in my passion I may have exceeded what protocol allows -- in that I raised my voice and flung my arms all over the place while pointing at His Highness to emphasis my point.

On hindsight I might have been a bit biadap (insolent), though there was no such intention other than I 'lost myself' in my passion. His Highness, however, remained calm and collected and did not appear perturbed about the 'high drama' he was witnessing.

At the end of that session, His Highness said he understood what I was saying and was trying to do but the question still remains: is it worth getting arrested for?

I closed that 'debate' by responding: Tuanku, someone has to do it. This is a rakyat's fight. Do we, the members of the royal family, just stand aside and not get involved? If we do not support the rakyat then what is the purpose of our existence? How do we justify the existence of the Monarchy if the Monarchy serves no purpose? At least some of us from the royal family need to go down to the streets and, shoulder-to-shoulder with the rakyat, fight together with them. How can we expect the rakyat to love the Monarchy if the Monarchy does not love the rakyat?

His Highness pondered on that 'closing statement' for quite a while and I must admit I found the silence deafening. Finally, His Highness nodded, a sign of his approval, and just said: okay, but try to stay out of jail.

Of course I did not and after that I was arrested a few more times, as what His Highness feared would happen.

Through all that time, amongst the various issues that we were fighting for was for Malaysia to impose a minimum wage. Ten years ago we were talking about a figure of at least RM1,000-1,200 a month. Today I suppose that amount would no longer be sufficient because for a family of five or six to live a decent life, especially in the urban areas, you would need a household income of at least RM2,000-3,000 a month.

RM1,000-1,200 a month is only RM250-300 a week or RM6.25-7.50 an hour on a 40-hour working week. That is about what we earn as minimum wage here in the UK, about 6-7 pounds an hour (although the Chinese establishments in Chinatown sometimes pay as low as 5 pounds an hour).

Now, in the UK, if you earn 6-7 pounds an hour, and if you work 40 hours a week, you take home 240-280 pounds before tax. If you work 10 hours a day, say from 10am to 8pm, then you take home 300-350 pounds a week before tax. So you can earn roughly 1,000-1,400 pounds a month before tax, which is 20%.

Note, however, when you are paid weekly, you earn 13 months a year salary in the UK (meaning 52 weeks) and not just 12 months a year like in Malaysia (equivalent to only 48 weeks).

Now, what can you do with a net after-tax pay of 1,000 pounds a month? You can buy a new car for about 10,000-15,000 pounds, depending on the make and model. You can buy an apartment for less than 100,000 pounds or a house for slightly over 100,000, if outside London, of course.

However, with the RM1,000 you earn in Kuala Lumpur, can you but a new car for RM15,000 and a house or apartment for RM100,000? You need RM500 to fill up your shopping cart in KL while in the UK it is only 80-100 pounds.

Hence your RM1,000 in KL is pittance compared to the 1,000 pounds in the UK. Hence also, even if you are paid a minimum wage of RM7.50 per hour or RM1,000-1,200 per month in Malaysia, you are still very poor compared to the 7 pounds per hour or 1,000 pounds per month we earn in the UK.

Getting the Malaysian government to agree to a minimum wage was an uphill battle as it is. Now the Chinese businessmen are against it (read about it here). And the Associated Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry (ACCIM) is not happy with Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak because of this.

So what do these Chinese businessmen want? They want Malaysians to continue earning RM800 a month, is it? What can you do with RM800 a month? For that matter, what can you do with RM1,200 a month? You can't even do much with RM2,000 a month.

And why are the Chinese businessmen so unhappy? It was we in the opposition who have been fighting for a minimum wage since more than a decade ago. It is we who have been pressuring the Barisan Nasional government to implement a minimum wage policy. If Pakatan Rakyat comes to power I am hoping that the minimum wage will be increased a further 50% from what it is now.

Do I take it that these Chinese businessmen will now not support Pakatan Rakyat? Do I take it that making more money by keeping wages low is more important than good governance, transparency, accountability, etc?

What more can I say about these Chinese capitalists and blood-sucking leeches? Am I right or am I right about the Chinese? At the end of the day it is all about money.

 

Chinese businesses give Najib thumbs-down

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 06:24 PM PDT

A survey conducted by the Chinese trade chambers also showed most are not happy with the minimum wage policy. 

Syed Jaymal Zahiid, FMT

Chinese businesses have given Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak's economic policies the thumbs-down, according to a survey conducted by the Associated Chinese Chambers of Commerce and Industry (ACCIM).

The report revealed that many of the community's small and medium enterprises (SMEs) or industries believe they have not benefited from the prime minister's economic initiatives despite the raft of reforms introduced since Najib took office in April 2009.

"This has led to many respondents not believing that Malaysia is on its way to being successful in moving its economy out of the middle-income trap," said the survey.

Najib had made the promise to drive Malaysia into a high-income economy by 2020 as one of his policies under the grand Economic Transformation Programme (ETP).

The blueprint, which promises to strengthen and make the local market its primary drive, is seen as a key election push as Najib aims to score a stronger mandate at the upcoming national polls.

His administration has so far managed to weather the global economic turmoil with a strong back-to-back growth that surpassed expectations, giving him the boasting rights against heavy opposition criticism that he has done little to improve the ailing economy.

Negative performance

Heavy government spending under the ETP – to create a strong local market to help offset dipping exports – was said to be a major factor behind Malaysia's steady growth.

The ACCIM survey, however, said 73% of its respondents are discouraged by the country's economic outlook leading up to the 13th general election.

Much of the survey indicated negative performance, and slowing demands and employment among the Chinese businesses. Close to half of the 374 respondents polled blamed it on weak government policies.

"It should also be noted that despite efforts to transform the Malaysian economy, the effects and benefits appear to have not filtered down more significantly to the SMEs," said the survey.

More than half of the respondents said they are pessimistic with this year and 2013′s economic outlook although they are cautiously optimistic for 2014.

The ACCIM also urged the Najib administration to reconsider its minimum wage policy, with close to 60% of the respondents saying it would affect their businesses.

READ MORE HERE

 

Hudud law: Truth or illusion?

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 03:55 PM PDT

Our reporter called him again after the evening edition of Sin Chew Daily hit the street, and wanted to reconfirm with him the content of his speech. Mat Sabu offered to change the tone from "decided" to "had the intention" (berhasrat) which our reporter agreed. As a result, some minor changes appeared on the morning edition of the newspaper: "PAS has the intention of seeking constitutional amendment in the Parliament in order to implement the hudud law once the Pakatan takes the helm of the federal administration."

Tay Tian Yan, Sin Chew Daily

In an open society, everything is laid out under the sun for public scrutiny.

I personally have nothing against what PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu has said. On the contrary, I used to have very high regards for his candidness, and his relatively open and pragmatic attitude towards things.

Such a perception has been reflected in many of my past commentaries on PAS.

This time, we have to really thank Mat Sabu for accepting an interview from Sin Chew Daily, during which our reporter requested him to expound the remarks made by party president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang on Harakah that the party had the intention of implementing the hudud law through democratic process.

Mat Sabu explained, "PAS has decided that it will seek constitutional amendment in the Parliament to implement the hudud law once the Pakatan takes the helm of the federal administration."

Our reporter called him again after the evening edition of Sin Chew Daily hit the street, and wanted to reconfirm with him the content of his speech. Mat Sabu offered to change the tone from "decided" to "had the intention" (berhasrat) which our reporter agreed.

As a result, some minor changes appeared on the morning edition of the newspaper: "PAS has the intention of seeking constitutional amendment in the Parliament in order to implement the hudud law once the Pakatan takes the helm of the federal administration."

In the meantime, we also interviewed PAS information chief Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man to get him to clarify on the party's stand on this issue. His response was consistent with that of Mat Sabu and the same was published on the day's edition of Sin Chew Daily.

We have later acquired the official statement of PAS president Hadi Awang on August 13, as well as his August 25 statement published on the party's mouthpiece Harakah on the implementation of the hudud law.

We later clarified with PAS secretary-general Mustafa Ali on the same issue.

Unfortunately, after the report went into print, Mat Sabu denied the following day what he had said, and claimed that Sin Chew Daily had distorted his speech.

We tried contact him with the hope of seeking further clarification from him but have so far not been able to get him.

It appears that politicians' customary ways of doing things have been repeated on Mat Sabu. Although this is nothing new in politics, I am still somewhat disappointed. I thought Mat Sabu was a responsible man who would loyally adhere to his principles.

To support our case that we have not misquoted or distorted anyone's speech, we published the statement Hadi Awang has made on today's Sin Chew Daily, along with an exclusive interview with Mustafa Ali for public scrutiny.

We have to make it very clear that our reports on the hudud law have not been tailored in such a way to baffle PAS or Pakatan but to deliver accurate and essential information to the reading public.

As a public medium, we are in no position to conceal any piece of important information from public knowledge, especially something that involves public interests, and incidents that may transform our society in one way or another.

It is imperative that PAS' stand on the implementation of hudud law be exposed under the sun so that members of the public could comprehend, evaluate and make their options.

The worst thing we could do is to selectively hide the truth, glorifying the most beautiful parts and covering up the rest of it.

The most despicable and deceitful way of doing things is to tell one side of the story to the Muslim community, and the other side to the non-Muslims.

PAS used to enjoy a respectable repute and should therefore treasure its own credibility. If the party insists that the hudud law is correct and appropriate, it should then publicly proclaim its political agendas in the same tone, be it to the Muslim or non-Muslim society, and go on to promote and lobby for them among the Chinese voters.

That said, the party must make its agendas unreservedly open to all Malaysians. This is the most fundamental way of doing things justly.

Meanwhile, PAS' allies in the opposition pact must never attempt to create a glamorous illusion among the Chinese community with their own interests and ballots as prime considerations. While political parties have every right to pursue their goals and objectives, they have to be accountable to the rakyat in so doing.

Whether the hudud law is eventually good or detrimental to our nation, once it is put into implementation, it will stay in effect for generations, even as electoral ballots and political parties do not last forever.

Malaysians are entitled to the whole truth to make sensible judgements and choices that will shape their common future.

 

The bankruptcy of the Islamic vs secular state debate

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 03:35 PM PDT

Those who ignore ― whether deliberately or otherwise ― the civilizational, historical, intellectual and spiritual dimensions of Islam risks projecting their own prejudices and fantasies onto their understanding of Islam wherever they employ the words "Islam" or "Islamic" in their utterances or writings, thus betraying their superficial grasp of the religion which they (falsely) claim to represent.

Imran Mustafa and Wan Mohd Aimran Wan Mohd Kamil, The Malaysian Insider

We read with interest the article by Dr Farouk Musa entitled "Arguing for a secular state" published on August 22 in The Malaysian Insider.

The idea of the Islamic state, as mentioned by Farouk, is indeed a modern creation. It did not appear, or even conceivable, prior to the total fall and destruction of the Caliphate, as Muslims have always understood polity and politics to be intimately linked to some form of authority which upholds systems that are congruent with principles in Islam.

This is of no surprise, as there had never been any point in Muslim history in which there was a total loss of sovereignty in almost all Muslim lands, and of which Muslims can do nought but watch as their precious way of life, their entire being, were unrecognizably altered to fit a system whose history and philosophy they did not share.

In fact, according to Shaykh Seraj Hendriks, a Mufti in South Africa, the adjective "Islamic" was never truly used for organisations or entities prior to the fall of the Caliphate, including "Islamic Renaissance", whatever that might mean. Indeed, the use of the adjective came first in Muslim majority countries, rather than non-Muslim countries, indicating the severity of the trauma that the Ummah suffered at that time.

A tangential but crucial point that needs to be made on the meaning and scope of the word 'Islamic' is that it should be not understood simply as a prefix, the addition of which automatically transforms the subject-matter into agreement with the requirements of the religion of Islam.

This is especially true if one reduces and restricts the meaning of the word 'Islam' and 'Islamic' to an external show of piety without a conscious and knowing submission, or to a private choice without an outward and social manifestation of religious belief, or to an intellectual form of religious understanding severed from its spiritual and intuitive wellsprings, instead of conceiving the word 'Islam' or 'Islamic' as standing for a religion founded upon Divine Revelation, transmitted by Holy Prophets and Messengers (upon them be peace!) and nurtured by learned scholars and men and women of spiritual discernment and of pure and upright character.

Those who ignore ― whether deliberately or otherwise ― the civilizational, historical, intellectual and spiritual dimensions of Islam risks projecting their own prejudices and fantasies onto their understanding of Islam wherever they employ the words "Islam" or "Islamic" in their utterances or writings, thus betraying their superficial grasp of the religion which they (falsely) claim to represent.

Indeed, inserting the word "Islam" or "Islamic" into the name of one's movement or organization does not necessarily mean that words and deeds of the movement or organization will be in harmony with the teachings and practices of Islam nor does it guarantee that everything it stood for faithfully represents the religious and intellectual traditions of Islam, especially if those in movement or organization of such kinds are themselves confused about the fundamental elements of the worldview of Islam and completely unmoored from the living tradition of Islam as constituted by its scholars and saints, in addition to men and women of spiritual discernment.

In evaluating the validity and soundness of the proposals made by such movements or organizations pertaining to the direction and future of the Ummah, one doth well to remember that even the devil can quote Scripture.

A sensitivity towards history

The study of history is only as useful as it contributes to a true and correct perspective of the present, upon which a proper and clear path to the future may be charted. This alone should be sufficient in justifying the need for a sensitive awareness of the historical context and a critical assessment of historicity whenever one wishes to discuss ideas and theories, peoples and nations.

The attitude that readily marginalizes the historical perspective and analysis on the assumption that everything that has happened are of no value to our predicaments today and which pretentiously declares the obligation to respect and care for our intellectual inheritance amounts to a form of 'medievalism' which is regressive and archaic, is predicated on a shallow concept of what being medieval represents and entails.

There is, in fact, nothing wrong with being 'medieval' ― some of the best buildings in the world are medieval buildings, as are some of the best poetry. One only needs to point to the great Gothic churches of Europe; to Chaucer and Rumi as obvious examples.

In fact, the Mu'tazilites, whom Farouk is fond of mentioning, were also 'medieval' rather than classical, being influenced primarily by Plotinus, a neo-Platonist, due to a misattribution in the title of the book, "The Philosophy of Aristotle".

The same is also true of Muslim thought and matters of fiqh (jurisprudence). One cannot, for example, take a text such as al-Mawardi's al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyyah out of context and assume universality ― this is in fact an inversion of fiqh, which literally translates to understanding.

One also cannot, by virtue of the same reasoning, throw away such works due to some misappropriation of some quarters in society. What is required, obviously, is a proper understanding of the historical context and a critical examination of the text. There can be errors in reasoning, and we shall deal with this in due course, but it is the principle still stands, nonetheless.

Therefore, when discussing the so-called "Islamic state" and the way it was understood by past Muslims, one needs to look at how medieval Muslim polities operated, and whether or not such contexts and elements that existed then still exist in the same form today. Then, a critical evaluation and interrogation of the current, accepted system need also be made in order to best fit the purposes of the din, which is ultimately, submission to the Almighty.

Now, traditional Muslim polities are known to be relatively decentralised. In fact, the appropriation of the hudud laws in traditional Muslim societies have been mainly local, even though the Qadis might be appointed by the government. The fact that Qadis are normally local means that they would normally understand the local context, and therefore are able to exercise discretion in the way the Law is exercised.

There is, after all, a distinction made within Islamic Law between hudud and ta'zir, and it was also related by Shaykh Hamza Yusuf that the dishing of punishment, whether hudud or ta'zir, very much depended upon the understanding of the local qadi of both the Law, which requires an understanding of the Principles of Jurisprudence (Usul al-Fiqh) as well as the local context.

Therefore, the objection that, "The formulation, adoption and implementation of legislation are always matters of human judgment and reasoning. Therefore their intended implementation is subject to human error and fallibility and can always be challenged and questioned", has always been understood within the Muslim intellectual tradition, and jurists traditionally have been acutely aware of their own fallibility as human beings; hence all treatises on fiqh always ends with the phrase "Allahu a'lam" or "God Knows Best". Indeed, to a certain extent, this is no different than today's justice system, whereby cases of miscarriages of injustice is not unknown to have occurred.

If it argued that the mere fact that somebody is a human being automatically renders his judgement and conclusion on matters of religion suspect in terms of its validity and truth, then is not the questioner himself open to similar charges of human fallibility?

After all, if the mere fact that a scholar is also a human being impairs him from giving valid and correct solutions to a particular religious problem, how can it be guaranteed that those who are challenging the scholar will be immune from the same failings, especially if the intellectual and spiritual qualities of the challenger is nowhere near compared to the scholar against whom he rails upon?

Therefore, in brazenly imputing the fallibility of the learned of the past due to the self-evident fact that there are merely human beings, the challenger leaves himself open to the same charge of fallibility by others, which then calls into question the validity of his challenge in the first place since he too is a mere human being.

Now, in the specific case of hudud, the intrinsic flexibility and robustness of the system which takes into account the diversities and weaknesses of human reasoning was radically altered with the permeation of Western ideas of nation states into the minds of the Muslims at the turn of the 20th century, which among other things, calls for a singular and uniform codified law within the political boundaries of the state.

The reduction of legal principles to strict and clear rules in a legal code disrupts and impairs the ability of the jurists to exert his or her own opinion to the fullest, disempowering them by shifting the judicial-legislative powers to a centralized state bureaucracy.

An example of this occurred when the Ottomans, as part of programmatic response to external Western threats, initiated a series of internal reform in the early 19th century, the most significant being an attempt to codify the Syariah, which involves compiling large amounts of authoritative Hanafi legal rulings and codifying it into a single body of work. As Noah Feldman explained in his book, "The Fall and Rise of the Islamic State":

"This Westernizing process, foreign to the Islamic legal tradition, sought to transform Syariah from a body of doctrines and principles to be discovered by the human efforts of the scholars into a set of rules that could be looked up in a book."

What transpired was that the jurist were, to a very large extent, forced to make their own rulings based on previous ones (simple precedents), thereby removing their traditional flexibility in applying principles of justice and significantly diminishing their role as the source of legal authority.

This, coupled with the breakdown of the Millet system ― which divided the population of the vast Ottoman Empire into several quasi-autonomous groupings according to their religious affiliations, with each groupings enjoying comparative legislative, judicial, fiscal and religious freedom, thus granting security, stability and self-confidence to the members of each grouping, securing the preservation of religious and cultural identity across successive generations within the same religious community ― due to the rise of nationalism, were among the factors which contributed to the failure of the multiracial, multiethnic, and multireligious Ottoman system.

As the 19th century progressed into the 20th century and the idea of nation states with their fixed borders and single codified law became the norm, the conception of what a "state" is and of "Islamic law" crystallised around these accepted models of "nation states" and now should be and, indeed are, critically evaluated so as to test its validity in light of the intellectual and religious traditions of Islam and more importantly, to determine the extent to which it can be made to serve the needs of Muslims living in the modern world.

READ MORE HERE

 

PAS intensifies push for hudud

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 03:17 PM PDT

(The Star) - PAS is intensifying its push for the implementation of hudud law with more of its senior leaders coming out to say it is on their agenda.

They said that it is no longer a question of whether hudud should be implemented but how it is to be enforced.

Datuk Mohd Nik Amar Nik Abdullah Datuk Mohd Nik Amar Nik Abdullah

More than that, the leaders hope the non-Muslims would accept Islamic law in due course.

Kelantan PAS deputy commissioner Datuk Mohd Nik Amar Nik Abdullah said: "Although only applicable to Muslims, it will be ideal if non-Muslims one day accept hudud and Islam jurisprudence towards the creation of a just society."

Mohd Nik Amar, who is also a PAS central committee member, maintained that hudud would remain the clarion call of the party.

PAS national unity bureau chairman Datuk Dr Mujahid Yusof Rawa said there should not be any dispute over hudud.

"It is not whether hudud is right or wrong but how it can be implemented in a broader context to encompass Islamic principles of good governance," he said.

"Not all Muslims may agree with hudud but I believe the majority of Muslims in the country want to see it implemented after seeing the failure of secular laws in dealing with crime," he added.

Datuk Dr Mujahid Yusof Rawa Datuk Dr Mujahid Yusof Rawa

On the opposition of the DAP to hudud, Dr Mujahid, who is Penang PAS deputy commissioner, said no party in Pakatan Rakyat could force its views on another.

"As much as they cannot force us to abandon our ideals, we also cannot force them to accept ours," he said.

The assertions on hudud came a day after PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu was quoted as saying that the party would propose constitutional amendments in Parliament to implement Islamic law if it forms the Federal Government.

He later denied making the statement to Sin Chew Daily.

In a related development, Terengganu PAS Youth chief Mohd Nor Hamzah said that hudud would be implemented in the state if the party captured it.

Perak PAS Dewan Ulama chief Noz Azli Musa, meanwhile, said that the party had always been fighting for hudud and would continue to strive for it.

 

Discord in SNAP over BN membership

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 03:11 PM PDT

According to SNAP secretary-general Frankie Nyumboi, the party has 'chosen to remain independent' but its president appears to have other ideas. 

Joseph Tawie, FMT

KUCHING: Sarawak National Party (SNAP) president Stanley Jugol and secretary-general Frankie Jurem Nyumboi appear to be on a collision course over the issue of SNAP returning to the fold of Barisan Nasional.

Jugol wants SNAP to return to BN, while Nyumboi is against it.

"If he insists I will resign because I disagree with the direction he is taking with the reasoning that SNAP officials may be appointed senators and to other government posts.

"I do not subscribe to that brand of politics for personal gains and grandeur.

"I believe in protecting the rights and autonomy of Sarawak under the 18-Point Agreement…," Nyumboi told FMT.

He added that rumours that the party's recent central executive committee (CEC) meeting was stormy is not true.

"The recent CEC meeting was not stormy except for my reminder that any change of policies must have the consent of the CEC members in accordance with the [party's] constitution, but he [Jugol] said that CEC had already agreed to return to BN.

"This puzzled me and other CEC members," he said.

Nyumboi said that Kebing Wan, SNAP deputy president and a couple of others, had expressed their disappointment at the unilateral decision of the president.

"As far as I know, Kebing Wan cannot support BN because of the Baram dam issues," he said, pointing out that Jugol had the support of the immediate past president Edwin Dundang.

'Naughty rumours'

The disagreement over the issue of returning to the BN fold is certain to undermine SNAP's preparations to contest in at least four seats in the coming general election.

It has named Mas Gading, Lubok Antu, Saratok and Baram as the seats it wants to contest.

Earlier in his statement, Nyumboi said that SNAP will remain as an opposition party and this position will continue until a new direction is decided by the CEC in accordance with the party's constitution.

"There will be no about-turn on SNAP's position as an opposition party

"Any rumours of SNAP being BN-friendly or rejoining BN are naughty rumours. Furthermore, the party abides by its constitution which does not allow unilateral decisions to be made on the party's policies.

"The party has chosen to remain independent because it wants to voice out issues affecting Sarawak.

"Among others there is the issue of non-fulfilment of the 18-Points Agreement, which has given rise to numerous policies and actions detrimental to Sarawak.

"As a result, progress in structural and human development was painfully slow," he said, adding that SNAP is in a better position to address all these issues, because it is homegrown and does not need to report or answer to anyone else.

Nyumboi said that SNAP is an old and a respectable political party that does not betray its members and supporters as well as its friends in the Borneo alliance with whom it shares a common Borneo agenda on the 18- and 20-Point Agreements.

"If there is 'Jangi Ditepati', why is the 18-Point Agreement unfulfilled for 49 years?" he asked, referring to this year's Merdeka Day theme.

"SNAP shall continue to provide Sarawakians with a channel to voice their dissatisfaction over their rights and autonomy," he said.

READ MORE HERE

 

‘Young Power’ wants Indian-based Pakatan party

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 03:03 PM PDT

Fed up with way things are, a group of young Indians are planning to form an Indian-based component party in the opposition coalition.

B. Nantha Kumar, FMT

A group of young Indians are planning to form an Indian-based component party in Pakatan Rakyat.

Talking to FMT, one of the members G Krishnan said they were fed-up with both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan leaders with regard to issues affecting the Indian community.

"We call our group 'Young Power' and our goal is to help the Indian community become on par with the other races. Look at our nation. It is a Malay-dominated Chinese-controled nation," he added.

He insisted that Young Power was not against the Malays and Chinese but focussed on upholding the rights of Indians.

"It is unfair to talk about multi-racialism when the Indians live in deplorable conditions compared with other races," he added.

Krishnan said that Young Power had been collecting feedback from community leaders regarding the possibility of forming a new party within the Pakatan framework.

"We sent SMS to about 30 Indian Pakatan and BN elected reps, NGO leaders, businessmen, celebrities on Aug 25," he added.

According to Krishnan, the response was positive with even DAP MPs welcoming the move.

He said that on Aug 26 and 28, Young Power sent text messages to grassroots leaders, who also mostly backed the suggestion.

Krishnan pointed out that there was only one Indian in Pakatan's 30-member council.

"Is Pakatan going to say that there are no capable Indians to be members in the council. How many state chairmen or bureaus are headed by Indians in PKR or DAP?" he asked.

"Do not ask why we [Young Power] did not raise the same issue with BN because we voted for Pakatan and not for BN in the last general-election," he said.

"The issue is not not about how many seats Pakatan is going to give to the Indians but how are they going to treat the community," he added.

Krishnan also said that Young Power had identified several business tycoons who were willing to fund their movement and more details would be made public soon.

 

Did Taib ‘surrender’ oil right to BN?

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 02:55 PM PDT

Taib Mahmud was the federal-level Primary Industries Minister in charge of oil and gas when the Petroleum Development Act 1974 was passed by Parliament.

Free Malaysia Today

KUCHING: Chief Minister Taib Mahmud's turnaround on the oil royalty issue after 31 years in power and the fact that he preferred "private" and "amicable discussions" with the federal government have raised more questions.

Uppermost on the list is whether Taib and his predecessor and uncle, Abdul Rahman Yakub, had knowingly "surrendered" Sarawak's rights over oil and gas to the federal government.

Sarawakians who have read Taib's biography – "A Soul You Can See" – written by Douglas Bullis and who remember their history, would recall that Taib was the federal-level Primary Industries Minister who was in charge of the nation's oil and gas resources.

This being the case, was Taib responsible for the lopsided oil agreement and the Petroleum Development Act passed in Parliament in 1974?

The Act was passed following a confrontation between Opec (Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) and oil companies over oil price policies in 1973.

Expounding on the 1973 "crisis", Taib was quoted by Bullis as saying: "By 1973 I realised Malaysia and the oil companies were headed for a confrontation over their purchase price policies.

"There was too much take and too little give, and Malaysia's people have an ethic based on balance," Taib had said in page 88 of the book.

"Eventually I came up with the idea that we should base Malaysia's oil concession policy on shared production agreements.

"Naturally I was snubbed by oil companies who claimed the Malaysian government was moving towards nationalisation."

Taib's silence

Bullis said that it was obvious that Malaysia's post-1974 policy on taking control of Malaysia's petroleum interests from oil companies was largely Taib's works.

It is well known in Sabah that its then chief minister Mustapha Harun and his successor Fuad (Donald) Stephens refused to sign the oil agreement giving 5% of oil royalty to Sabah, but Sarawak under Abdul Rahman was said to be "too willing" and signed the agreement.

But the question is: Did the nephew and the uncle "surrender" Sarawak's rights over oil and gas to the federal government in order to please the then prime minister Abdul Razak in return for political and financial support?

Sarawak was at that time in turmoil following the sacking of its chief minister Stephen Kalong Ningkan in 1966.

At the time there were incessant allegations by the Parti Pesaka anak Sarawak president Temenggong Jugah anak Barieng that the Ibans were shabbily treated by Abdul Rahman and Taib.

Abdul Rahman was also facing an "internal rebellion" against his leadership from within Pesaka, which had by then (in 1973) merged with Parti Bumiputera to form Parti Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu (PBB).

At the point of signing the oil agreement, Sarawak was said to be politically unstable and needed the support of the federal government.

READ MORE HERE

 

‘Unseen hands involved in leak’

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 02:50 PM PDT

The leaking of minutes of a private meeting between the Penang deputy chief minister (I) and Chinese representatives was the work of ambitious politicians within the party, claim some PKR insiders.

Athi Shankar, FMT

GEORGE TOWN: The unseen hands of some master plotters are at work again within the Penang PKR. This time the fall guy is Deputy Chief Minister (I) Mansor Othman.

Those out to drive a wedge between DAP and PKR have succeeded to an extent. Minutes of a private meeting between Mansor and several Chinese representatives were published verbatim in a blog, namely Gelagat Anwar, in its June 16, 18 and 19 postings.

Some insiders say the leak was to trap Mansor and expel him from the state PKR. The sabotage and back-stabbing is nothing new within the state PKR.

Since the 2008 general election, there have been two other such cases. Internal politicking has resulted in Mohammad Fairus Khairudin been booted out as Penang deputy chief minister (I) and Penanti assemblyman in April 2009. Then Bayan Baru MP Mohd Zahrain Hashim was removed as state PKR chief in November 2009.

In the latest episode, the leak revealed that Mansor had described Chief Minister and DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng as "cocky and arrogant". He had also said that Lim was revered like "tokong" (deity) by Chinese voters in Penang.

Mansor's depiction of Lim as "cocky and arrogant" is not a surprise as there is no love lost between the two parties.

Local PKR leaders have always felt marginalised under the DAP-helmed Pakatan Rakyat state government.

Although Mansor denied saying "cocky and arrogant" in last Friday's press conference, the damage was already done.

It's learnt that Mansor's colleagues in the state executive council have persuaded him to "eat humble pie" by reading out a prepared text before an army of pressmen.

But if only Mansor had sought a second opinion from other PKR grassroots leaders, he could have avoided the embarrassing situation.

Some party loyalists suggested that Mansor should have instead instructed those who attended the meeting to clear the air at a press conference.

"It would have put the conspirators in an embarrassing situation instead," said insiders.

Conspiracy to oust Mansor

Mansor aside, the blog disclosed that PKR's state deputy chief and Batu Kawan division chief Law Choo Kiang, Bukit Bendera division deputy chief and island municipal (MPPP) councillor Felix Ooi Keat Hin, and Bayan Baru division appointed vice-chairman and MPPP councillor Tan Seng Keat attended the meeting

Others at the meeting were PKR's 2004 general election candidate for Bayan Baru parliamentary and Batu Uban state seats Raymond Ong Ting Cheow; Tanjung Youth chief Ng Chek Siang; Batu Uban branch chief Cheah Peng Guan and Mansor's assistant John Ooi.

They are representatives of an internal all-Chinese group called "Pasukan Keadilan".

Party grassroots are now pointing accusing fingers at "Pasukan Keadilan" for the leak.

READ MORE HERE

 

Weary nation keeps guessing

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 02:47 PM PDT

Why is the prime minister still toying with the polls date if he is so popular judging by the large numbers who attend his official functions?

Selena Tay, FMT

For readers who enjoy the 13th general election date-guessing game, the latest from the rumour mill is that Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak is now also considering an October/early November date besides the September option.

"However, the October or November date is dangerous for him as that is the Haj season and holding the polls during the Haj season will ruin his image as a Muslim leader as it infringes on Muslim sensitivity," said PAS strategist and Kuala Selangor MP Dzulkefly Ahmad.

PAS Shah Alam MP Khalid Samad concurred, saying that "if the Barisan Nasional government holds the general election during the Haj season, it will only serve to reveal the true colours of Umno which claims to champion Islam".

Besides, why is the prime minister still toying with the polls date if he is so popular judging by the large numbers who attend his official functions? Why is he still dragging his feet over the election date?

Moreover, Najib has also urged the rakyat to stick to certainty with the BN government which has a proven track record instead of choosing the opposition and uncertainty. An important point to note is that it was the prime minister himself who has proclaimed that this date-guessing is a national past-time.

"By certainty does the prime minister mean that we must stick to the certainty of rising corruption and soaring crime rate?

"It is certainly the ultimate in stupidity if, by certainty, we must stick to the same trajectory leading to the abyss of destruction. Is this what the prime minister meant when he said that we must stick to certainty?" asked Dzulkefly.

Dzulkefly also said that Najib has really no choice but to use the September date if he still wants to hold the polls this year because holding the polls during the Haj season will make him lose his credibility as a Muslim leader.

Or else, Najib should just simplify matters and hold the general election next year. But the major problem with holding the polls next year is that the global economic climate has become unstable.

Economy looks bleak

Dzulkefly also said that the current macro-economic figures of growth cannot be used to predict the health of the nation's economy in the long term as US, Europe and even economic powerhouse China are experiencing a slowdown.

"Malaysia's economy is powered by domestic consumption and right now the number of non-performing loans of individuals is steadily rising. This is an unhealthy trend. In addition, Malaysia's debt ratio which stands at RM653 billion is now at a very dangerous level as it has risen past the 55% benchmark of the GDP, which is the level set by Parliament that the nation must not surpass," he added.

This shows that the situation in Malaysia is not what it seems. There is more to it than meets the eye where economic figures are concerned. Besides, statistics are always debatable. One can always present one set of figures to debunk another set of figures.

Meanwhile, the federal government is daily issuing statements proclaiming the healthy state of the nation's economy. Does this sound reassuring?

Be that as it may, Najib is cornered where the general election date is concerned and it is due to his own doing. He has lost the element of surprise in the game that he himself initiated. Henceforth, the polls can be held anytime and Pakatan Rakyat is now standing ready.

Also, the Royal Commission of Inquiry set up to look into the problem of the illegals in Sabah obtaining citizenship needs six months to complete its work and the same can be said of the Oil Royalty Payments Committee. Both the RCI and the Oil Royalty Payments Committee will only complete their work next year.

Lacking innovative ideas

The federal government is also lacking innovative ideas on running the nation. When Pakatan or the rakyat bring up an issue, sometimes the government will respond and react. Otherwise, there is total silence as in the case of the dirty electoral rolls. Nothing exciting or awe-inspiring is coming from the BN leaders.

READ MORE HERE

 

Musa remains our leader, says Umno man

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 02:45 PM PDT

Umno insiders are warning of serious repercussions should Najib Tun Razak refuse to reinvigorate the BN in Sabah, which is fast losing support.

Luke Rintod, FMT

KOTA KINABALU: Sabah Umno has brushed off claims of a shake-up in the party and that its strongman Musa Aman could well be on the way out ahead of the crucial general election.

Senior Sabah Umno leader, Masidi Manjun, quickly dismissed the news report in FMT as mere rumour, claiming even Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak was impressed by Musa's performance, both as Umno head and chief minister.

"Musa is doing an excellent job leading the party and the state government and the prime minister himself has complimented Musa's leadership," he said recently.

"Sabah Umno and Barisan Nasional (BN) are fully behind Musa to continue leading the state," he insisted when reporters asked him on the FMT article that the chief minister was marking time and could be replaced soon.

Local newspapers here yesterday carried Masidi's denial prominently but party insiders whom FMT contacted insisted that many in Sabah Umno do not subscribe to the party line that Musa is doing an excellent job.

Said one: "If Musa is doing an excellent job as Masidi claimed, how come leaders like Lajim Ukin and Wilfred Bumburing had left? Please explain too why the Kadazandusuns and Chinese and even more Muslims in Sabah are leaving BN?"

According to the report, an increasingly embattled Umno could well be forced to do a rescue reshuffle in its "fix-deposit" Sabah's party hierarchy and state leadership.

The rationale for the reshuffle getting the go-ahead from Najib is reportedly due to grumbling among the business community in the state as well as a series of high-profile defections from Umno as well as other BN parties.

According to well-placed sources, the shake-up would involve Musa taking leave and either Masidi or Hajiji Mohd Noor acting as Sabah chief minister until the general election.

Serious repercussions

However, talk of a shake-up in Sabah Umno is also being seen as a gambit by those close to another Sabah Umno strongman and Musa rival, Shafie Apdal, the current Semporna MP who is a trusted man of Najib, to eventually pave the way for him to helm the state.

This is plausible but Umno insiders are warning of serious repercussions should Najib refuse to reinvigorate the BN in the state which is reportedly steadily losing the support of almost all the communities in the state.

They claimed that party's interest must be put first and ahead of personal agenda and failure to do so would result in more defections as the election looms.

READ MORE HERE

 

Touché

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 06:47 AM PDT

Itulah. When I try to tell you, you cakap macam-macam. Now I diam. And now that I diam you all are foaming at the mouth like rabid dogs. Hey, just focus on the next general election. Just vote Pakatan Rakyat. Why worry whether Cina bertanding kawasan Melayu or Melayu bertanding kawasan Cina or whether after this we are going to get Hudud or Muslims keluar Islam masuk Kristian? All that never mindlah! What matters is asal bukan Umno. Itu saja.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

To the Malay-medium or Chinese- and Tamil-educated readers who think that 'the devil you know' refers to a verse in the Qur'an or Bible, touché means...oh what the hell, go look it up yourself.

Is it too early to write another 'I told you so' article? Well, as they say, the early bird catches the worm, so it is never too early to say 'I told you so'.

Now, for those of you who don't speak English at home or English is not your mother-tongue -- my late mother was British so I suppose I can claim that English is my mother's tongue -- I am NOT admitting that I am a bird or that I eat worms, although I do have a 'bird', if you know what I mean. This is what we English-speaking people would call an idiom, the latest topic of discussion in Malaysia -- alongside Hudud, crossovers, and other such matters.

Anyway, back to the early bird catches the worm thing.

I did try to tell you so many times about the unresolved issues facing Pakatan Rakyat. And I did not just write about it in Malaysia Today. I even said this to Anwar Ibrahim's face in a forum in London. I did not hold my punches (an idiom). I said it no holds barred (yet another idiom).

And this got not only Anwar but also all the other Pakatan Rakyat leaders hot under the collar (yes, another idiom). Finally, I decided to say what I had been trying to tell them in interviews in the mainstream media.

Boy, and did all hell break loose (correct, again, an idiom). They felt I was trying to teach grandfathers how to suck eggs (a Malaysian-Chinese idiom which means...hmm...not sure what that means because I am a grandfather of five grandkids and I certainly don't suck eggs).

Then they started accusing me of being on someone's payroll and demanded to know where my funding was coming from. And, today, Suaram has come out to admit that it is indeed being financed through foreign funding to the tune of RM100,000 a month for the last many years (read about it here).

So there you are. Touché.

Then there was the matter of crossovers plus the lack of quality of the people that Pakatan Rakyat was attracting that I spoke about. Now even the Pakatan Rakyat people are divided on whether it is morally right to poach politicians from the opposite side of the fence. And many voters have said that in the coming general election they will be voting based on candidates and not based on parties.

So, again, touché!

I also spoke about the lack of unity in Pakatan Rakyat and how DAP, PAS and PKR tidur satu bantal tapi mimpi lain-lain (a Malay idiom). I touched on the inter-party and intra-party bickering and how the issue of seat allocations and who should be taking the lead needs to be resolved.

And today, again, touché!

Then there is the matter of Hudud, which had earlier resulted in the breakup of the opposition coalition, Barisan Alternatif, followed by the 2004 general election disaster, and how this matter needs to be resolved before Pakatan Rakyat faces the coming general election (read about it here).

And, yet again, touché!

Okay, those are just some of the issues I have been screaming about. There are many more, of course. And when they responded with personal attacks against me, and allegations of mala fide and paid assassin and so on, I took to the mainstream media and that was the straw that broke the camel's back (yeap, one more in my string of idioms -- don't you just love this English language lesson?).

So, what more can I say other than touché? I am not really that silly after all, am I? Now I keep quiet. Now I just watch and snigger while all you buggers squeal like a stuck pig (you got it, another idiom).

So, why make so much noise about Hudud? You want ABU (anything but Umno), right? Hudud is not Umno. So why get so upset? As long as it is not Umno then diamlah!

Itulah. When I try to tell you, you cakap macam-macam. Now I diam. And now that I diam you all are foaming at the mouth like rabid dogs. Hey, just focus on the next general election. Just vote Pakatan Rakyat. Why worry whether Cina bertanding kawasan Melayu or Melayu bertanding kawasan Cina or whether after this we are going to get Hudud or Muslims keluar Islam masuk Kristian? All that never mindlah! What matters is asal bukan Umno. Itu saja.

Touché!

 

Suaram funded by US, Finland, Canada

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 05:35 AM PDT

(Bernama) - Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram) director Kua Kia Soong on Tuesday revealed that the non-governmental organisation has been receiving funds from foreign countries and individuals nationwide.

He said the human rights group was being funded by countries, namely the United States, Finland and Canada, as well as some Malaysian state governments and individual donations.

Kua, however, kept a close guard on the funding issue and the amount Suaram had so far received from funders and primary sponsors.

"Do I really need to tell you where our funds come from? Why does everyone want to know where our funds come from?" he asked at the unvealing of the Malaysia Human Rights Report 2011 here.

He also questioned a local Malay daily reporter whether he knew the daily's source of funding.

Kua urged any party dissatisfied with the NGO to lodge a police report.

In July, Suaram and its role as an independent NGO was questioned for being a recipient of annual allocations consistently from the US-based National Endowment for Democracy (NED) since 2006.

According to the AIDC portal, as stated in NED's annual report, Suaram had received a total amount of US$385,000 (RM1,218,328.65) for 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009.

Besides Suaram, other Malaysia-based NGOs being funded as listed by the NED include the International Republican Institute, National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, Southeast Asian Press Alliance, Centre for Independent Journalism, Open Dialogue Centre and Mkini Dot Com.

It had been widely reported that Suaram was not even registered as an NGO with the Registrar of Societies, instead it was registered as a company under the name of Suara Inisiatif Sdn Bhd with RM2 paid-up capital.

Since then, Suaram has remained tight-lipped over allegations concerning its NGO status, and its source of funding.

 

PAS will not push ahead hudud law without majority support in Parliament: Hu

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 05:27 AM PDT

(Sin Chew Daily) -- PAS Supporters Congress national chairman Hu Phang Chaw said PAS advocated the implementation of hudud law through democratic proceedings. In other words, if support from two thirds of MPs in the Parliament could not be secured in order to amend the Constitution to implement the hudud law, then it will be shelved.

He said that was the decision of the party's political bureau.

Hu pointed out that hudud law was a part of the Islamic penal code that could never be abolished, just like Buddhism's advocacy of vegetarianism and the Ten Commandments of Christianity, which must never be challenged. As such, he said PAS hoped to decide whether to implement the hudud law in the country through democratic proceedings.

He said during a media conference this afternoon that he was recently appointed a member of the party's central political bureau, becoming the first ever non-Muslim in the party's 61-year history to have the opportunity of taking part in the party's decision-making mechanism.

He believed the move showed that PAS was willing to accept the reality of Malaysia's plural society, and had thus adopted a more open and more plural political direction.

The membership of PAS' political bureau, which has just been established recently, comprises the party's president, deputy president, four vice presidents, secretary-general, Youth national chairman, Wanita chairman, national chairman of PAS Supporters Congress, election bureau chairman and central strategy research centre chairman.

Hu pointed out that other than the issue of hudud law, the political bureau also discussed Nasharudin Mat Isa's proposal that PAS withdraw from the opposition pact.

He also said the party would organise a seminar in Selangor early September to seek public opinion on the party's policies so that these policies could be implemented for the well-being of all Malaysians if it won the next general election.

He added that the chances of Pakatan taking the helm at Putrajaya was on the rise following changes in the political situation in East Malaysia and Johor.

He also urged the MCA to stop instilling Islamophobia among the people from the hudud law in a bid to solicit support from Chinese voters.

As a political party, he said MCA should instead highlight its own political ideologies and not persistently distort Islam just to win the election.

He said MCA was playing with fire trying to fan up emotions among the Chinese community by using the hudud law, adding that this would kill any chance of MCA candidates in Malay constituencies because no one would tolerate his religion being insulted and sabotaged by other people.

Besides, Hu also felt that the hudud law forum organised by MCA in the past was indeed a good beginning. He said MCA should organise more of such forums to allow the Chinese community and Muslims to look into this issue in a more macroscopic and rational approach.

He said if needed he would be willing to help make arrangements for PAS leaders to meet up with their MCA counterparts and to hear their views on various issues.

 

Report confirmed by Mat Sabu before going into print

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 05:24 AM PDT

(Sin Chew Daily) -- On the front page report on Tuesday, Sin Chew Daily reporter had on Monday repeatedly clarified with PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu, who confirmed that his party indeed had the intention of implementing the hudud law through constitutional amendment in the Parliament if it won the next general election. However, he said the party had yet to discuss tabling of constitutional amendment in the Parliament.

Online media have been playing up the news Tuesday morning that Mat Sabu had denied the report. We have, nevertheless, tried without success to contact Mat Sabu to get his further clarification on this matter.

As a matter of fact, we called up Mat Sabu on Sunday and forwarded him the question, "Can you explain the remark made by PAS president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang after the party's political and election bureau meeting on August , that PAS will implement the hudud law through democratic proceedings?"

The above remark was made by Hadi Awang on the party's Harakah Daily website last Saturday (August 25).

Mat Sabu replied, "Democracy is about forming the government through the ballot box. The amendment of any policy needs to go through the Parliament, and the support of two thirds of all MPs is required for constitutional amendment."

As such, we based on the reply of Mat Sabu to come up with the headline news of the evening edition whereby Mat Sabu said PAS had decided to seek constitutional amendment in the Parliament to implement the hudud law if Pakatan Rakyat won the next general election.

However, having learned that Mat Sabu denied to an English daily the report appearing on Sin Chew Daily, we called him again Monday afternoon to seek further clarification.

Mat Sabu said, "What I was saying was any law that needed to be amended had to go through the Parliament. I did not mention hudud law."

He also said PAS had not discussed tabling constitutional amendment in the Parliament.

However, since we sought the explanation from Mat Sabu in relation to the remark made by party president Hadi Awang, so we asked him again whether his so-called "any law" would include the hudud law, and he said affirmatively, "Yes."

We sought further clarification from him, "Can we say PAS indeed has the intention (memang berhasrat) to amend the Constitution to implement any law, including the hudud law, but then the party has yet to discuss tabling this motion in the Parliament?" He also replied affirmatively, "Yes, you can."

As such, we changed the headline on the morning edition of Sin Chew Daily to: "Mat Sabu says PAS has intention to seek constitutional amendment in the Parliament in order to implement the hudud law if the party wins the next general election."

PAS vice president Salahuddin Ayub said when contacted Tuesday that the political bureau's meeting last Saturday had decided that all issues related to the hudud law could only be answered by the party president alone and as such, he was not in any position to answer the question.

We tried again today (Tuesday) to call Mat Sabu for clarification, including ringing up Shamsuri Ahmad, political secretary for PAS president Hadi Awang, but unfortunately we still could not get the line through.

 

On Hudud

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 05:12 AM PDT

A person who has sexual intercourse with a dead body shall be dealt with as if it were alive; rather, the punishment will be even more severe. In the case of it being the body of his wife or slave girl, the punishment will be milder. The proof for this is the same as is required for adultery.

A REPUBLIC OF VIRTUE

Dr Azly Rahman

Something for Malaysians to think about with regard to the debate on "hudud". I invite readers and scholars to comment on this and  its relevance to multicultural Malaysia.

Penology (hudud)

Under an Islamic government, certain punishments are prescribed for certain crimes, so that the society may be kept healthy and the roots of corruption destroyed. Some of these penalties (hudud) are as follows according to Shi'ah fiqh.

1) The penalties for adultery (zina): If an adult, sane man knowingly and deliberately has sexual intercourse with a woman who is forbidden to him, it is then an obligation on the authorized judge to flog him with a hundred lashes; his head will be shaved and he will be forced to leave the city for a period of one year. If he is "muhsin", i.e. he is in a position to satisfy his sexual urges in conformity with the shari'ah, he will be stoned to death as well as being given a hundred lashes. If the woman consented, she shall, if also "muhsinah", be stoned, and if otherwise, she shall be given a hundred lashes. If a man has sexual intercourse with a forbidden woman of his relatives (mahram), or with a woman who has suckled at the same breast as he was (his rida'ih), or with his step mother, or if a dhimmah (a non-Muslim under the protection of a Muslim state) has sexual intercourse with a Muslim woman, he shall be beheaded; and the penalty is the same rape.

The adultery can only be proven by:

1) a confession repeated four times;

2) the witnessing of four just men that they saw him actually in the act of penetration;

3) the witnessing of three just men and two just women.

If the adultery is witnessed by two just men and four women, it shall be deemed proven but the penalty may only be flogging, their being no capital penalty. If the evidence is less than this, it is not considered complete, and, what is more, if less than four men give evidence, they shall be punished for slander (qadhaf). For the evidence to be accepted there must be unanimity between the witnesses, and they must all have seen the actual penetration with their own eyes.

If a man is to be stoned after a confession, but then disavows his confession, he shall not be stoned; and if, after confession, he repents of his deed, the qadi may exercise his discretion. If he repents when four witnesses have seen his act, there will be no alteration in the penalty.

If a person is being punished for the third time for the some offence (adultery), he shall be beheaded. A pregnant woman or a sick person must not receive his or her punishment until the baby is born or the sickness goes away, respectively.

2) The penalties for homosexual acts: The punishment for sodomy between two males (liwat) is more severe than that for any other crime. It is the only case in which the offender may be burnt to death. The qadi may sentence that active partner in the act to one of four penalties: beheading, stoning to death, being thrown from a height so that his bones are all broken up, burning to death. The passive partner, if he is adult and responsible for his actions, is to be beheaded. If he is not yet of the age of puberty, he will be given a reduced punishment (ta'zir). The same conditions of proof hold here as in adultery.

In the female homosexual act (sihaq), both offenders will be given a hundred lashes. If they are married, it is not impossible for them to be stoned to death.

3) The penalty for the procurer: the procurer (qawwad) who arranges for an unlawful sexual act to take place, will be given seventy lashes, his head will be shaved, and he will be expelled from the city. The proof for this is met by the evidence of two just men or by a confession made twice.

4) The penalty for false witnessing and slander: if some one falsely accuses a sane, adult and free Muslim of a crime for which some sentence can be inflicted, for instance, adultery, sodomy or drinking wine, then the false accuser shall be punished with eighty lashes. In case of the proof being admissable on confirmation by the accused person, the sentence against the accuser shall become void. The crime shall be considered proved as long as there is "bayyinah)

(see above).

It is also a punishable offence for a person to call someone else with some undesirable epithet which he does not deserve, e.g. "sinner", "corrupter", "leper", etc. If someone claims to be a prophet, or curses or declares enmity with one of the fourteen pure ones ( the Prophet (s.a.w.), the twelve Imams (a.s.) and Hadhrat Fatima), he shall be beheaded.

5) The penalty for the drunkard: the penalty for anyone who avails himself of any intoxicating beverage of any kind is eighty lashes, to be given on his or her bare neck and arms.

If someone has been punished for three times and he commits the crime a fourth time, he or she shall be beheaded. One who considers wine lawful is liable to the same punishment.

If the dealer in wine repents and leaves his profession, it is well and good, otherwise he too shall be liable to beheading.

6) The penalties for theft: if an adult and sane person steals something from a "safe" place (i.e. somewhere which is locked or family closed, or someplace similar) which is valued at more than a quarter of a mithqal (about 1 gm - 1 mithqal is a little over 4.5 grams) of pure gold, he will have the four fingers of his right hand cut after duly being sentenced by a qadi on the evidence of double confession or "bayyinah" (see above). If he commits the crime a second time, his leg will be cut off under the knee. For the third offence, he shall be sentenced to life imprisonment. And, if he commits theft a number of times before he is subjected to the prescribed punishment, only one penalty shall be inflicted upon him. For children and insane people, there is no hadd only ta'zir (a lenient punishment). The theif must invariably have to pay compensation, and for this, one acknowledgement, or

the evidence and oath of one just witness is sufficient.

The "hands" of the father shall not be cut off for stealing the property of the son. But, if, conversely, the son steals, his "hands" shall be cut off.

7) The penalty for causing fear and terror (muharib): if someone causes fear among the people in a town or in the open country or at sea and/or intimidates them for the purposes of seizing what belongs to them, the qadi is empowered to have him or her executed, crucified, to have his right hand and left foot cut off, or to have him banished from the country.

God, the Most High, has said, "The recompense of those who war against God and His Messenger, and strive in the land spreading corruption, is only that they be slain or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off, from the opposite sides, or be banished from the land." (5:33)

In case of banishment, the people of the place to which the culprit has been deported must be informed in writing, so that they may refuse him entry to their meetings, to their meals, etc., till he repents.

The thief who attacks a house is also a "muharib". If he is killed, his blood will be considered shed with impurity.

If someone attacks the modesty of a woman or her child, these latter have the right of self-defence. If the assailant is killed in the struggle, (his blood too will have been shed with impunity. Thugs, ruffians and false witnesses (excluding those in 4 above) are liable to reduced punishment. The judge can give them any appropriate punishment.

8) Sundry penalties: anyone who perpetrates an indecent act with a quadruped shall be given a less severe punishment. If he persists in his activities, he may be executed. The meat of the animal (if it is a lawful animal) will become forbidden, and it must be slaughtered and its body burnt. In case it belongs to someone other than the perpetrator of the act, he must be awarded the cost of the cost of the animal. If the animal is of doubtful ownership, it should be decided by lots. If the animal is in any case unlawful, it must be sold in another city, and the price obtained given in charity. If the animal belongs to another, he must be suitably recompensed for his loss. The evidence of two just persons or a double confession is sufficient to prove guilt.

A person who has sexual intercourse with a dead body shall be dealt with as if it were alive; rather, the punishment will be even more severe. In the case of it being the body of his wife or slave girl, the punishment will be milder. The proof for this is the same as is required for adultery.

A person who indulges in masturbation also deserves a mild punishment.

As far as is possible, every person has the right to defend his own person as well as his property and the persons of his family. But he should start by adopting less severe measures, and he should only increase his precautions if necessary.

If someone looks without permission into someone else's house and the dwellers pelt him with stones causing his death, no penalty may be extracted from them, and his blood is considered shed with impunity.

Murder is the greatest sin and the greatest social crime. "And who so slays a believer wilfully, his recompense is Hell, therein dwelling forever, and God will be worth with him and will curse him, and prepare for him a mighty chastisement." (4:93) Crimes against the person, whether it causes death, loss of a part of the body, or not, can be divided into three kinds:

1) premeditated or wilful,

2) similar to (1),

3) by accident.

First, (1), premeditated or wilful, needs no explanation. (2) means that the attacker took the initiative, but did not intend to kill. For example, someone beats someone else as a warning, but this results in death, or a person is given some medicine to cure him, but it ends his life. (3) accidental means that there is neither any intention nor any initiative, yet someone is killed; for instance, somebody is aiming at a bird and, by mistake, a human being becomes the victim, or a man is lifting his gun and it accidentally goes off and kills somebody.

More clear examples are the actions of a man who is sleep walking, of an unconscious person, of a mad man or of an innocent child.

It must be clearly observed that as far as the crime and its punishment is concerned, there is no difference between the actual committer of the crime and the person who devised and ordered it to be done; nor does it make any difference if the crime is committed by one or many.

Retaliation (qisas) applies only in the case of wilful or premeditated murder or injury. In (2) and (3) there are only compensation (diyah). There can be no retaliation from the child or the lunatic, nor can there be any retaliation if the murdered person is a child or a lunatic. An adult who kills a child is subject only to the deliverance of compensation. However, some jurists are of the opinion that there is retaliation here, and also for the killing of a lunatic.

Another condition for retaliation is that the culprit was not compelled or under constraint, although this does not apply in tha case of death, for in matter of murder, there is no "taqiyah" (dissimulation). It is also necessary that the person murdered by "without sin", i.e. not someone whose death is permitted by the shari'ah. There is no retaliating against the father, the grandfather or the great grandfather, if the murder their son, grandson or great grandson, only compensation. A Muslim is subject to retaliation only in the case of the murder of another Muslim. Likewise, retaliation shall be taken against the freedman only for the murder of a freedman.

The blood money or compensation for a free Muslim is: a hundred camels, or two hundred cows, or a thousand sheep, or two hundred items of clothing, each consisting of two parts, or a thousand dinars. If the heirs of the murdered person agree to take the compensation, retaliation is voided, and the murderer must pay the compensation within one year. In (2), the period for payment is two years. In (3), the period is three years, with a third being payable each year.

In cases of parts of the body, retaliation can be extracted if the action was deliberate. The retaliation is like-for-like, i.e. an eye for an eye, an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth.

If the crime is of kinds (2) or (3), there are special compensations: some equivalent to the whole compensation for a man (i.e. 1000 dinars), some a half, and some less than a half. In general, organs and parts of the body which occur singly, such as the nose or the penis, demand the whole compensation). In (1) and (2) the compensation must be paid by the cluprit himself, but in (3) it may be paid by his 'aqilah (certain near relatives on the father's side).

SOURCE:

http://www.momin.com/Books/THE+ORIGIN+SHI039ITE+AND+ISLAM+PRINCIPLES-42/Part+Three+The+Shariah+-+the+Divine+Code+of+Living-659/14+Penology+hudud-3735.html

**********************************

DR AZLY RAHMAN, who was born in Singapore and grew up in Johor Baru, holds a Columbia University (New York) doctorate in International Education Development and Master's degrees in the fields of Education, International Affairs, Peace Studies and Communication. He has taught more than 40 courses in six different departments and has written more than 300 analyses on Malaysia. His teaching experience spans Malaysia and the United States, over a wide range of subjects from elementary to graduate education. He currently resides in the United States.

https://www.facebook.com/#!/azly.rahman

http://azlyrahman-illuminations.blogspot.com/

 
Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan

Langgan: Catat Ulasan (Atom)
 

Malaysia Today Online

Copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved