Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info

Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

---

• Doing battle over land deals
• BN confirms M’sia as a pariah state to the world
• PM: Pakatan being disrespectful of the Sultan is not surprising
• PR has lost direction, says Noh Omar
• Seat distribution in Pakatan almost complete
• Karpal: DAP to push for anti-hopping law
• About the next government
• Najib to offer oil royalty hike?
• MCA opposes Islam; what about DAP?
• I’m not returning to Barisan, says Lajim
• Three questions for Najib
• Get real, pundit tells Young Power
• No free ride for Najib in Sabah
• Umno MP denies jumping ship rumour
• Show some respect, DAP tells PKR
• PKR blames Najib, Umno for bus attack
• BN, PR: dua kali lima
• New York priest says child often seducer in sex abuse cases
• End hudud tiff, PAS told
• Nasharuddin not among PAS candidates
• Hadi: DAP cannot stop us
• Pahang PKR warns DAP about seat allocation
• Pakatan now aiming for more support from women
• Pakatan Rakyat: A new kind of opposition in Malaysia
• Merdeka: The end of the fairy-tale
• Secular or Islamic State? Dr Farouk and the Peacocks
• China editor's suicide sparks web debate
• Stop fanning rumours, DAP man tells PR
• 'Exodus if PBRS has to give up MP seat'
• PKR disagrees with Lajim
• The Special Position of the Malays (Part One)
• By whose interpretation?
• Touché?
• Courts sending out mixed signals over statutory rape
• Najib: Six Umno divisions can spearhead recapture of Kedah
• A depressed Merdeka — Are you celebrating Merdeka?
• Time for DAP to be a good partner
• Janji dicapati?
• Corbett Report Radio 205 – Spotlight: Malaysia with Nile Bowie
• Rafizi’s ‘NOW’ centre to make whistleblowing Malaysian culture
• Government has fulfilled all promises through NEP
• Malaysia’s New Internet Law
• Courts sending out mixed signals over statutory rape
• Menetapkan Gaji Minimum Adalah Idea Yang Buruk Bagi Rakyat
• Hudud: A PAS objective, not an agreed Pakatan agenda
• Malaysian Youth Rights Movement Urge the Youth Not to Vote for Pakatan Rakyat‏
• JAIS arrest of book distributor an abuse of power and disregards legal rights
• Statistics Manipulation Allegations
• Statement by Sin Chew Daily
• Jho Low's RM4.9 mil 'proposal' to Taiwanese singer makes waves (UPDATED with video)

Doing battle over land deals Posted: 01 Sep 2012 11:27 AM PDT Cheap sale: Oh (in the foreground) showing the various public properties that he claimed the Lim administration sold off to private developers and individuals. Barisan Nasional politicians have been on the warpath over the way the Penang state government has been selling off land to private developers. Joceline Tan PENANG'S famous Esplanade has been quite a political hotspot ever since the Speaker's Square was located there. It is the Pakatan Rakyat government's gesture towards democracy and free speech in the state. But things got a little too hot last weekend when a blue truck drove up to the spot and the occupants on board launched an instant ceramah criticising the state for selling off land to private developers. It was the Barisan Nasional's mobile war truck, a refurbished mini lorry that opens up into a small ceramah stage, equipped with sound system and projection screen. The mobile war truck idea came about after Barisan was denied the use of public community halls and fields for ceramah purposes by the Pakatan government. It immediately drew a small crowd of mostly curious onlookers. But Speaker's Square is said to be patrolled by loyal DAP supporters, who hang around the place, ready to heckle speakers who criticise their party. That was more or less what happened last Sunday. Jeers and boos erupted from several people when state Barisan Youth chief Oh Tong Keong, who is a superb Hokkien speaker, began his "Penang For Sale" talk. "We know you were angry and decided to vote for them. But we must vote for a government that works hard, creates jobs, builds affordable houses, not a government that sells off the people's land. Penang people like to shop during cheap sales, but Penang land is not for cheap sale. One day, Lim Guan Eng may even decide to sell off Komtar," said Oh who is also Penang Gerakan Youth chief. Oh and his Gerakan colleagues have been a thorn in the side of the Pakatan government over the sale of public land. The most controversial transaction thus far has been Taman Manggis, a piece of land in the heart of George Town that the Barisan administration allocated for housing for the poor and which the Pakatan government has reportedly sold to a company to build a hotel and private medical centre. Dr Thor: 'DAP trying to sell Penang's land, sea and sky.' Oh said it was "taking from the poor to give to the rich" and named Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng "land broker of the year". Oh's team also asked about a certain "Miss P" who owns the bungalow rented out to Lim and who apparently has links to the hotel and medical centre project. Lim retaliated by slamming Oh as "brainless, childish, immoral, dirty and shameless" while also accusing him of dragging the owner of his rented residence into politics. But strangely enough, he did not deny the alleged connection of "Miss P" to the project. The string of names shot Oh to some degree of fame and as he stood on top of the truck last weekend, he held up the Chinese language newspaper of the report. "It's okay, he can scold me, I don't mind. It's also okay that Guan Eng couldn't build any low-cost houses. But it is not okay for him to take land from poor people to give to rich people," he said, as some people clapped while the DAP supporters booed. By then, one of the DAP guardians in the audience was using a loud hailer to shout down Oh. It was Malaysian-style democracy at work; people are all free speech but they only like it when the speaker is saying things that they want to hear. Incidentally, there was a "war casualty"; the man with the loud hailer was so worked up over the war truck ceramah, he suffered chest pains and had to be hospitalised. However, he had several VIP visitors the next day in the form of Lim, state exco member Phee Boon Poh and assemblyman Ng Wei Aik and there were bouquets of flowers around his bed. Ironic statement But the funniest part of the Barisan war truck incident was that Lim condemned it as an illegal assembly and threatened to use the illegal assembly law against them. This was coming from the man whose party used to condemn the illegal assembly legislation. "If they do it again, I will inform the police and MPPP (Penang Island City Council) to take action," Lim said. Jong: 'Penang people want sustainable development.' There has been too much emphasis on glamour projects and too little on rakyat-type of projects. It was only after the Taman Manggis case exploded that the state government quickly said they would allocate a site for low-cost housing. Among all the DAP YBs, only Jelutong MP Jeff Ooi has spoken out and made a stand on housing for the poor. After the 2008 victory, DAP strategists and advisers had the impression that Penangites were starved for development. The party's developer friends had complained about Tan Sri Dr Koh Tsu Koon's cautious approach on development and they thought the way into the hearts of Penangites would be through more development Lim announced a barrage of mega projects which he thought would impress Penang folk but proposals like the undersea tunnel and super-highways have backfired. The protests against unchecked hillslope projects also came as a shock to his government. Mega projects bring a lot of side effects and should not be rushed through without proper studies and planning. It is quite ironic that while people complained that Dr Koh did not bring more development, the complaint now is that Lim is too pro-development. "People do not mind development but it also means more people and cars. Penangites want assurances about traffic and the environment. They want sustainable development," said Datuk Richard Jong, the new deputy president of the Penang Chinese Chamber of Commerce. The Barisan side can understand why Lim is into mega projects he wants to build his legacy and leave a visible mark. But they are puzzled why Lim is selling off plots of land belonging to the state and MPPP from the sale of the 41ha Bayan Mutiara land to smaller lots in the city. Lim could have saved himself a lot of trouble by being more upfront about the land sales. It is possible some of these smaller properties are sitting there not generating any income. Selling them would add to the state's coffers and provide revenue to fund future projects. Instead, he has claimed that he is doing it to "save money for the people". Questionable transactions When the opposition queried him about the land sales, Lim demanded that they show proof of what they are saying which is ridiculous because the onus is on Lim and his team, as public servants, to explain and defend their decisions. All this has paved the way for his opponents to conclude that the state's Freedom of Information Act and its CAT policy to promote competency, accountability and transparency are just for show. Ooi: The only DAP man who fought for low-cost housing Basically, Lim's critics think it is wrong to sell off public land without a good reason. Land is a scarce commodity especially on the island and they think that it should be developed via joint-venture so that the property remains in public hands. Moreover, they claimed that some of these transactions were below market value. Gerakan publicity chief Dr Thor Teong Ghee has been very critical of the Bayan Mutiara deal for several reasons. He said the land, which the previous government had intended for the new state government complex, was sold at below market value. Secondly, it was sold to a developer whom he claimed did not have a sound track record. There has been no clear explanation about how the land is to be developed and Dr Thor's fear is that instead of developing it, the new owner may break it in smaller parcels and resell at a hefty profit. "Just imagine, it would be like Tun Dr Lim Chong Eu earmarking a huge tract of land to develop as the Free Trade Zone and selling it to one company to do as he likes," he said. Read more at: http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/9/2/nation/11930675&sec=nation

BN confirms M’sia as a pariah state to the world Posted: 01 Sep 2012 11:24 AM PDT Instead of investigating a national laureate for reciting a poem on the eve of Independence Day, the time and manpower can be put to better use to help reduce crime. But, to Najib and Muhyiddin, that is not so. Anyone or party that do not agree with BN, it is a crime. Lim Victor   AS MALAYSIANS' fear of deteriorating crime rate grows day by day, the government of the day, that is Barisan Nasional (BN), continues with its nonchalant ways. Instead of showing deep concern and care for public safety, the BN continues to deploy the police force personnel to clamp down on political rivals and dissent. On the eve of Merdeka Day (Independence Day) on Thursday (Aug 30, 2012), when all Malaysians proudly declared their pride and loyalty to the country, the BN government misuses and abuses the power of the police to clamp down on public dissent, so much for independence and freedom of speech. The BN government does not realise that its mindless use of the police to clampdown on national laureate A. Samad Said for reciting a poem on Merdeka eve tantamount to ridiculing Malaysia as a pariah state globally. This is a quote from an internet news portal: "PDRM (Royal Malaysian Police), it's not a crime to disagree with BN. I think PDRM has to get their brains checked." I like the quote but I do not think it is accurate. The police don't need to get its brains checked. It is the BN government, led by the fake 1Malaysia Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and his deputy, Muhyiddin 'Malay First Malaysian Second' Yassin, who need the brain scans. The police, like all other government enforcement agencies, and including the judiciary, are under the influence and control of BN-Umno (United Malays National Organisation) which has ruled Malaysia for 55 years. Instead of investigating a national laureate for reciting a poem on the eve of Independence Day, the time and manpower can be put to better use to help reduce crime. But, to Najib and Muhyiddin, that is not so. Anyone or party that do not agree with BN, it is a crime. However, there is still hope for Malaysians to pull themselves out of the rot. Despite an eleventh hour police declaration that the Janji Demokrasi (Democracy Promise) gathering on the eve of Merdeka is illegal, some 10,000 Malaysians turned up in yellow tee-shirts to defy and display their displeasure, swamping Merdeka Square (Independence Square). This time around, the police did not use force – chemical-laced water cannons and tear-gas canisters – on the Merdeka Day celebrants. At least there is still that pea bit of brains left in the police and the government not to blatantly expose its shameless abuse of power on the rakyat (people). To me, what the world witnessed, and without doubt, is the maturity of Malaysians of all races today – that they can gather peacefully in public for a cause if there is no violence or agitation from the BN-led police. As long as Malaysians - especially the Malays, Chinese and Indians – continue to be united and not swayed by the seditious racial and religious slurs spewed by the evil Umno-BN and its cohorts, we have hope to pull the nation out of the doldrums for a new dawn.

PM: Pakatan being disrespectful of the Sultan is not surprising Posted: 01 Sep 2012 01:53 AM PDT (The Star) - It is hardly a surprise for the Pakatan Rakyat-led Selangor government to be disrespectful of the state Sultan, said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak. "They would rather show more respect to the state's economic adviser, who has no locus standi, than the Sultan, the symbol of sovereignty in the country," he said. Selangor's economic adviser is Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is also PKR leader. Najib was responding to reports that Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim had not issued an invitation to the Sultan to attend state-level Merdeka eve celebration in Shah Alam. The Sultan's private secretary Datuk Mohamad Munir Bani had claimed that it was a norm to invite the Sultan to the event, adding that it had been a common practice of the previous Selangor government. "It is also weird that they want to do things like change the flag," Najib said, referring to reports of individuals waving "alternative flags" to the Jalur Gemilang during the Janji Demokrasi gathering at Dataran Merdeka on Aug 30. Firing more salvos at Pakatan, Najib said winds of change were also blowing in Selangor with more people responding positively to Barisan Nasional. Speaking at the Selangor Barisan Hari Raya open house at the Rubber Research Institute here Saturday, he said this year's crowd, estimated at 100,000, was a lot more than last year's attendance. "And it is definitely more than the state government's Merdeka eve celebration. This proves that the people of Selangor are ready to make that change so that the state's administration will return to Barisan," he said. Najib said while the state government had not fulfilled its promises to the people, the Federal Government had gone above and beyond that was promised in its manifesto with various aid programmes for the people. Meanwhile, in SHAH ALAM, Khalid defended the state-level National Day celebration against criticisms that the Sultan of Selangor was not invited. He said the celebration was held according to all common practices and guidelines put into place by the previous state government. "There was nothing surprising in the way the celebration was held. I did not see anything wrong in the way the function was planned and executed. "Planning for the event was undertaken by a special task force under the purview of the Selangor state secretary (Datuk Mohd Khusrin Mohd) and it has been doing it this way before 2008," he said at the Shah Alam Gallery here. Khalid said that although he would meet the Sultan every Wednesday to discuss various issues, they never talked about the celebration. "There was no need to discuss the matter as the planning for the celebration was under the state secretary. Besides, there are many other important issues that need attention," he said. On Saturday, members of the Selangor Perkasa, including its president Abu Bakar Yahya, lodged a report at the Shah Alam police headquarters on the matter.

PR has lost direction, says Noh Omar Posted: 01 Sep 2012 01:43 AM PDT Mohd Farhan Darwis, The Malaysian Insider Agriculture and Agro-based Industry Minister Datuk Seri Noh Omar today took a swipe at Pakatan Rakyat (PR), saying the opposition bloc has started to lose its direction in wanting to replace the national flag, the Jalur Gemilang. The Selangor Barisan Nasional (BN) deputy chairman also said it was impossible to do so as the flag is enshrined in the Federal Constitution. "They have started to lose direction... until they even want to change the flag. I want to remind them that we cannot change matters enshrined in our Constitution such as the flag; whoever rules it is still our symbol. And the national anthem 'Negaraku', it is the song of whoever is in power.  "They are not yet ruling (but) already want to do extraordinary things," Noh told reporters at the Selangor BN open house at the Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia (RRIM) in Sungai Buloh here. The Tanjung Karang MP also expressed sorrow at the way PR celebrated National Day. "I feel very sad at the attitude and the way they celebrate Merdeka Day, we should raise flags, but they make other flags," he said, in apparent reference to a group of individuals who were spotted waving flags sporting alternative designs to the Jalur Gemilang during the massive public countdown to the country's 55th National Day in Kuala Lumpur last Thursday. "They are rude, not yet in power but they are already power crazy, their supporters and followers don't respect our rules." The individuals were spotted carrying flags sporting the familiar crescent moon and 14-pointed star against a red-and-white striped background — similar to the national flags of neighbouring Singapore and Indonesia — which were alleged to be the alternative to the Jalur Gemilang. Some of the street party-goers were also reported to have stepped on or tore posters bearing the images of Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, his wife and the Election Commission chairman that night. However, the organisers of the Janji Demokrasi rally — which took place at the same venue at Dataran Merdeka — has distanced themselves from the individuals who had allegedly demanded the national flag be replaced. Noh also commented on Selangor PR ignoring the Sultan of Selangor in its National Day celebrations, saying that it shows that the federal opposition bloc did not uphold the Rukun Negara principle of "Loyalty to King and country". "Before BN carried out today's programme, the organiser informed the Sultan of Selangor that the prime minister will come to celebrate with the people. "Not like the opposition, their state-level Merdeka Day celebrations ignored the Sultan and turned this celebration into a political arena," Noh said, adding "we practise the Rukun Negara principle of loyalty to King and country." Noh said: "In this life there are two things, morals and laws. Morally, they have to respect our culture, other people's functions, but they try to take advantage to carry out politicking activities including in the programme on Merdeka Day eve".

Seat distribution in Pakatan almost complete Posted: 31 Aug 2012 08:46 PM PDT (Bernama) - Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim said today allocation of seats to be contested by parties in the opposition coalition for the upcoming 13th general election was about completed. He said they would negotiate based on consensus should there be additional suggestions. "We will discuss if there are new suggestions. In Kelantan it is complete, while Penang is almost done," he told reporters after speaking at a programme here today. On the implementation of Hudud law, Anwar said implementation at the national-level depended on amendments to the Federal Constitution. In another development, DAP will submit a private members bill in pushing for an anti-hopping law when Parliament reconvenes on Sept 25. Party chairman Karpal Singh said this was necessary as Article 10 (1)(c) of the Federal Constitution would have to be amended first to enable an anti-hopping law to be enacted. "To bring in the anti-hopping law, you have to amend Article 10 (1)(c) which says there is right of association including the right to join or leave a party," he told a press conference in Penang today. He said the Penang government was looking at enacting an anti-hopping law in November but it would be unconstitutional unless there was a change in the Federal Constitution. To make the (anti-hopping) law constitutional, he said there must be either a change to Article 10 (1)(c) or bring up to the Federal Court to review its 1992 decision whereby it decided that an anti-hopping law enactment passed by the Kelantan state assembly was unconstitutional.

Karpal: DAP to push for anti-hopping law Posted: 31 Aug 2012 07:57 PM PDT (Bernama) - The DAP will submit a private members bill to push for an anti-hopping law when Parliament reconvenes on Sept 25, said its chairman Karpal Singh. He said this was necessary as Article 10 (1)(c) of the federal constitution would have to be amended first to enable an anti-hopping law to be enacted. "To bring in the anti-hopping law, you have to amend Article 10 (1)(c) which says there is right of association including the right to join or leave a party," he told a press conference here on Saturday. He said the Penang government was looking at enacting an anti-hopping law in November but it would be unconstitutional unless there was a change in the federal constitution. To make the (anti-hopping) law constitutional, he said, there must be either a change to Article 10 (1)(c) or it must be brought up to the Federal Court to review its 1992 decision where it decided that an anti-hopping law enactment passed by the Kelantan state assembly was unconstitutional.

About the next government Posted: 31 Aug 2012 07:22 PM PDT   This is not about whether Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat is worse. This is about doing the honest thing. When you do party work the rakyat must not be made to pay for it. And when Parliament and the State Assemblies have been dissolved you are committing criminal breach of trust by continuing to use the government facilities for your personal political campaigns and party work. THE CORRIDORS OF POWER Raja Petra Kamarudin First have a look at the Google Analytical graphic below. Those are Malaysia Today's figures for the pre-Raya, Raya, and post-Raya period. On Friday, 17th August 2012, Malays began to leave town to return to their kampung. That was when the figures started declining. By Saturday, more people left town (even many non-Malays) and the figures dropped even further. The non-Malays did not return to work until Wednesday last week, and that was when the figures started to increase again. Most Malays, however, stayed away the entire week until Sunday. On Monday this week, the figures returned to normal when everyone was back in town. Now, while the figures over last week were down quite a bit because many people were still back in their kampung, the comments, however, did not suffer. And even when the figures went up again this week, the comments more or less remained the same. From these figures I can only assume two things. First is that Malaysia Today's Malay readership is quite large. And that is why the figures drop when the Malays are away. Secondly is that most of those who comment are non-Malays. And that is why while the Malay readership declines the comments do not. Of course, thirdly, based on the type of comments posted, we can also assume that most of those who comment are not yet of the age of maturity. And that is why many comments are very childish. (You should read the ones we deleted. They will shock you). Anyway, what I want to talk about today is regarding the next government. You see, when Parliament is dissolved to make way for the next general election, in principle Malaysia no longer has a government. What we have is merely a caretaker government and a caretaker Prime Minister. Now, even Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said this back in 2006. Dr Mahathir explained that in principle there is no longer any government but just a caretaker Prime Minister. But he could not understand, Dr Mahathir said, why no one realises this and never challenged it. In short, the Cabinet no longer exists, as everyone would have already been 'sacked', so to speak. Parliament has been dissolved so technically we no longer have any Members of Parliament. Hence, if we no longer have any Members of Parliament, then we no longer have a Prime Minister or Ministers. Can the Prime Minister still use his office and other facilities such as the private jet, helicopter, etc., which are for the use of the Prime Minister? What about all those Ministers who still use their office, government car, etc? Many Malays regard our First Prime Minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, as fasiq (bad Muslim) because of his drinking and gambling. But did you know that the Tunku took six months no-pay leave to campaign for the general election? He handed the government to his Deputy, Tun Abdul Razak Hussein, to take over as Acting Prime Minister. Whatever you might say about the Tunku, at least he was honest enough to separate his party post from his government post and he did not abuse his government post to do party work. Has any Prime Minister since then taken no-pay leave when they campaign for their party? Even the Merdeka celebration is treated as a party campaign. And please don't start screaming 'that is why we need to get rid of Umno'. Many now in the opposition -- not only from Umno but also from MCA, Gerakan and MIC as well -- did the same thing when they were in government. They talk only now that they are with the opposition. When they were in government serupa saja. Take the Menteris Besar from the Pakatan Rakyat states, as an example. Would these MBs take no-pay leave whenever they are campaigning for their party or would they use their post as MB to campaign for Pakatan Rakyat? Of course Umno also does this. That, I don't deny. But do two wrongs make a right? Tok Guru Nik Aziz Nik Mat, the MB of Kelantan, switches of the 'government' light when he prays (which is a personal duty and has nothing to do with the government). And how much electricity does his light bulb consume when he prays? This is not about whether Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat is worse. This is about doing the honest thing. When you do party work the rakyat must not be made to pay for it. And when Parliament and the State Assemblies have been dissolved you are committing criminal breach of trust by continuing to use the government facilities for your personal political campaigns and party work. Do you remember when Datuk Ramli Yussuf, the Director of the CCID, faced charges in Sabah for using a police plane to fly over his land? He was alleged to have taken a detour while on official duty to fly over his land. Just a slight detour in a government plane and he was arrested and charged. No doubt he was eventually acquitted of that charge but the fact he could he sacked, arrested and charged for taking a 'joyride' in a police plane was enough to show the difference between personal and official work. What makes the Prime Minister or Ministers immune from this same 'crime'? Once Parliament is dissolved it should be hands-off all public property. No more using public facilities for your personal or party work and campaigns. I do not know how better to explain this point without sounding cheong hei but understand one thing: once Parliament is dissolved you are now sacked from your job. Hence we no longer have a government and you can no longer use what belongs to the government -- meaning, of course, what belongs to the rakyat. Now, in that same spirit, since we no longer have a government, when we go to the polls we are choosing a new government. Whether we choose Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat does not matter. Both are new governments. The old government no longer exists. Everyone has been sacked from his/her job. Okay, so we no longer have a government and we go to the polls to choose a government. Never mind that Barisan Nasional has ruled Malaysia for 55 years. That was before. For all intents and purposes, if they win the election they are going to be a new government, jut like how Pakatan Rakyat would be if they win the election. Hence we need to ask both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat what type of new government they are going to be. We do not care what they did in the past. Don't try to impress us with what you have been doing over the last 55 years (actually it's 53 years because the First General Election was in 1959, not 1957). That government no longer exists. We are about to choose a new government so we want to know what type of new government we are going to choose. Let's look at it this way. We wipe the slate clean and start from scratch (not to include any corrupt acts, of course, which should still be on the slate). Then we are giving both a level playing field (or else Barisan Nasional can boast about what they have done over 55 years compared to Pakatan Rakyat who never ruled at federal level). Let's assume Malaysia never had a government before. So now tell us why we should vote for you. And that would mean we would need to look at so many unresolved issues and hear from both sides what they have to offer us. As I said, there are just so many issues but maybe for purposes of this article we can talk about some of the more pressing ones. And my list is certainly not in order of priority. And I am addressing this list to both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat. 1. Will Malaysia adopt in its entirety the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted and proclaimed by the United Nations on 10th December 1948? 2. Will Malaysia practice meritocracy to replace the system of quotas and preferential treatment and will Article 153 in the Constitution be abrogated? 3. Will fundamental liberties be respected and will it include the right to choose your religion, the right to have no religion, the right to your sexual preference, the right to a civil partnership, and much more? 4. Will Malaysia remain a Constitutional Monarchy or will it opt to become a Republic? 5. Will the oil royalty for those states that have oil and gas be increased to 20% or more or will it remain at 5%. 6. Will Sabah and Sarawak be given autonomy and will Federalisation in those states be reduced/limited in line with the 20- and 18-Point Agreements? 7. Will the Human Rights Commission, Anti-Corruption Commission, Police Force Commission, Judicial Commission, Election Commission, etc., be restructured so that the appointments can be made by Parliament and so that they can be responsible to Parliament and will include Commissioners from both sides of the political fence in equal numbers? 8. Will the Constitution be amended to make Malaysia more Secular with the removal of Islam as the religion of the Federation? 9. What is the position of the Sharia -- Hudud included, of course -- and which legal system will be supreme and will Malaysia remove the dual system, which appears to be running parallel, in favour of a single legal system? 10. Will the anti-hopping act, freedom of information act, freedom of association act (to include students), anti-discrimination act, anti-racism act, freedom of religion act, etc., be introduced and will the death sentence be abolished? Those are just ten points that both sides need to tell us about. Of course there are many more and some of you may want to add to that list. The bottom line, however, is that we want to hear from all those who are going to offer themselves for election what their position about all these issues are. We can't accept the 'vote first and talk later' argument. We need to know before we go to the polls the stand of all these people who want our vote. Hence no shocks and surprises later once we choose our new government.

Najib to offer oil royalty hike? Posted: 31 Aug 2012 04:43 PM PDT Fearing for his future, that of his party and ruling alliance, the PM has come to Sabah bearing gifts, according to Umno insiders.  (FMT) - KOTA KINABALU: Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, fearing for his future, that of his party and ruling alliance, has come to Sabah bearing gifts, according to Umno insiders. One of them is an offer of an increase in the 5% oil royalty the state presently gets which the opposition Pakatan Rakyat has pledged to raise substantially if it takes over Putrajaya in the next general election. According to the grapevine, Najib will announce the increased oil payments the state would receive for outflow of its resources. However, while no figure was forthcoming, speculation is that the premier would offer "more than 10%" oil royalty to the must-win state for Barisan Nasional and Umno. Sabah BN coalition partner United Pasokmomogun KadazanDusun Murut Organisation (Upko) said as much recently. According to party president Bernard Dompok, under the Petronas agreement the royalty payment was set at 10% but was to be split between Sabah and Kuala Lumpur. "I think the immediate doable figure, to my mind, is 10%. For a start, we can almost have another 5%. This is my thinking. Beyond that there will have to be some negotiation with the oil companies" he was quoted as saying last week. However, those critical of the move warned that all the offer, counter-offer and wheeling and dealing being made is a sell-off of national assets for political expediency. "If it is true (raising the oil royalty) then it is a shameless buyout … like a bribe that is not his to give but already belongs to the state," said a political analyst who added that the rumour of such an offer being made was known for some time. "They know that people are fed up with this government. Fifty years is a long time and people are thinking its time… change the government, they are saying, and Najib and BN know this and are trying to buy more time with the country's resources. "But it's up to the people… will they buy this? The BN federal government is giving to the BN state … from one pocket to the other pocket … apa macam (what do you think)? "It will definitely come as a shock that federal is toying with Sabah… its wealth. Now coming begging for another chance. Now is the time for Sabahans … their leaders to twist the dagger," the person said. The gift comes even as Sabahans debate the federal government's role in surrendering Sabah's oil-rich territories to Brunei as well as their small share in their own resources. STAR chief Jeffrey Kitingan has urged state government leaders to study the oil agreement carefully as he believes many of them do not understand the underlying commitments of the deal and would be simply going to the negotiating table with the federal government without much thought of the future repercussions of renegotiating Sabah's oil resources. READ MORE HERE

MCA opposes Islam; what about DAP? Posted: 31 Aug 2012 04:10 PM PDT (The Star) - MCA Youth has challenged the DAP to state its stand on the hudud issue instead of misleading the public by remaining silent. As the PAS leadership is clearly not backing down on its plan to implement hudud if Pakatan Rakyat takes over Putrajaya in the coming general election, DAP leaders must state their stand, said its chief Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong. "We feel Pakatan Rakyat should be honest about what they are going to do and the implications of their actions to the community," he told a press conference after the wing's 23rd central committee meeting here yesterday. Dr Wee was commenting on a recent interview published in a Chinese daily which quoted PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu as saying that the party would propose constitutional amendments in Parliament to implement the Islamic law if it formed the Federal Govern­ment. He later denied making the statement to Sin Chew Daily. Following that, several PAS senior leaders had stated that hudud remained on the party's agenda. They said that it was no longer a question of whether hudud should be implemented but how it was to be enforced. PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang said on Thursday that the party 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. He also said the DAP had no authority to compel PAS to forgo its hudud agenda. Dr Wee said PAS had never lied about its intention to implement hudud and questioned why the DAP had remained quiet. "We don't want the Chinese community to be misled on this issue," he said. On another matter, Dr Wee thanked the Cabinet and the Higher Education Ministry for offering some 600 STPM and Matriculation high-achiever scholarships for further studies in local private universities. "The Government wants to retain these talents so they can contribute to the development of the country," he said. He added that the youth wing would be holding its general assembly on Sept 20.

I’m not returning to Barisan, says Lajim Posted: 31 Aug 2012 04:03 PM PDT (The Star) - KOTA KINABALU: Beaufort MP Datuk Lajim Ukin has denied talk that he is returning to Barisan Nasional. "I have not met any Barisan leaders either at the state or Federal level to talk about returning to Barisan," he told reporters here on Thursday. Several bloggers have claimed that he was returning to Barisan because he was not given any "incentives" promised by the Opposition and that he failed to deliver more crossovers. He believed such bloggers were trying to discredit him and make people lose faith in him. He reiterated that his July 28 move to align himself with Pakatan Rakyat was done without any "incentives". "Let me make it clear that I joined the Opposition not because of monetary gains. That is not how the Opposition works, they do not buy anyone," he added. Lajim, who has formed non-governmental organisation Coalition for Change in Sabah, claimed that there would be more Barisan members leaving at the "right time".

Three questions for Najib Posted: 31 Aug 2012 03:54 PM PDT The PM is known to avoid answering difficult questions. Selena Tay, FMT There are three questions pertaining to the 13th general election which Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak must answer immediately. These three questions are: 1. Will the movie 'Tanda Putera' be shown in the cinemas while the election campaign is going on? 2. Will the voter rolls be cleaned up before the election is held? 3. If Pakatan Rakyat were to win the 13th GE, will PM Najib hand over power graciously in a smooth transition of power? "If the PM fails to answer the above three questions immediately, then his credibility and sincerity as a leader who strives for the good of the nation is seriously in doubt," opined PAS strategist and Kuala Selangor MP, Dzulkefly Ahmad. The PM is known to avoid answering difficult questions. No one knows the reason why. The PM must give a reasonable and acceptable answer as to why 'Tanda Putera' is being screened during the election campaign period if it is to be screened during that particular period in question and he must state clearly the purpose of doing so. Question No 2 in regards to the voter rolls has been asked many times. Still, the PM has turned a deaf ear to this said question. Is this question so very difficult to answer? If the voter rolls have been cleaned up, then just say so. If not, then please state the reason why and when action will be taken to clean them up. There is no reason not to answer this question unless one has something to hide. Not answering the said question does indeed give rise to the suspicion that there is something highly irregular with the voter rolls. "Winning the general election is one thing but by not answering the question pertaining to the voter rolls, then there will be a suspicion that the victory was achieved via dubious methods," remarked Dzulkefly. Then what can the citizens do? Call for international observers to be on duty before and during the polls is one. And if that is disallowed, then it is highly suspicious. We should also play an active role by volunteering to keep our eyes and ears open to monitor the electoral process by joining electoral watchdog groups. A smile and a wave The PM is only concerned with sprucing up his image as a leader. A smile here and a wave there is all that matters instead of really providing answers to tough questions especially in regards to the voter rolls. Each time this issue is raised, BN leaders will inevitably reply that the voter rolls are clean by saying "If not, then how can the opposition win five states in the previous general election?" The BN leaders always give that same reply. Well, if the voter rolls are clean, the margin of BN's victory would have been much narrower. BN can still win of course and this is due to the tricky delineation of electoral boundaries. Therefore there are many questionable goings-on in the electoral process, not only in regards to phantom voters but also in regards to the constituency mapping. As for Question No 3, it has been asked before earlier this year. Till today the PM has avoided answering this particular said question. Why? This is a very simple question. Just answer 'yes' or 'no'. The PM's reluctance to answer the question pertaining to the smooth transition of power is most telling. Is this an ominous sign? As we have just celebrated the 55th year of Independence, it is time to look forward to meeting the challenges facing the nation. With the advent of instant technology, no one can easily hide their misdeeds. Thus we as citizens must demand that our leaders be forthright and honest. Double-talk and dodgy answers are unacceptable. No two-ways about it. PM Najib owes the citizens, including the Pakatan lawmakers frank and straightforward answers. He must put aside partisan politics and be fair to all. He has to strive to improve in all areas of administration as has often been proclaimed in the much-touted GTP (Government Transformation Programme) and the various NKRAs (National Key Result Areas). READ MORE HERE

Get real, pundit tells Young Power Posted: 31 Aug 2012 03:51 PM PDT It's unlikely for Pakatan to accept an Indian-based party, says analyst A Thiruvengadam. B Nantha Kumar, FMT A prominent analyst of Malaysian Indian politics has poured cold water on the idea of an Indian-based party within Pakatan Rakyat. A Thiruvengadam, who writes a column for a Tamil daily, said today that the proposal was unrealistic in the light of Pakatan's stand against race-based politics. He was commenting on a proposal by a group calling itself Young Power and claiming to represent Indian youths. One member, G Krishnan, told FMT on Wednesday that the group was disappointed that neither Barisan Nasional nor any party in Pakatan was doing enough to address issues of concern to Indians. Krishnan also said Young Power had raised the proposal with several Indian leaders in Pakatan by text message and had received positive responses. "It's a mission impossible," said Thiruvengadam, noting that Pakatan leaders have often spoken against raced-based politics and that it is not easy to get registered as a political party in Malaysia, especially one that aligns itself with the parliamentary opposition. Furthermore, he added, it was doubtful that any Indian currently holding a leadership position in any of the Pakatan parties would resign to join the new party. Thiruvengadam is a former PKR member and former municipal councillor for Petaling Jaya. His advice to Young Power was that it should instead support a two-party system for the country. "Indians can benefit more via the two-party system since they are the third largest community in the country, which makes them an important deciding factor in the polls," he said. However, Young Power's proposal has the support of P Jenapala, the pro-tem president of the Indian Justice Party. Sambal belacan Jenapala, a former PKR deputy secretary, said he saw nothing wrong in Pakatan accepting an Indian-based party since the bloc includes PAS, which he described as a "one hundred percent Malay-dominated party". He rejected the Pakatan claim that it is a coalition for all races. "PAS will say, 'Let's go towards a better Malaysia as long as Muslims are supreme.' DAP will say, 'Malaysia for Malaysians as long as the Chinese are supreme.' And PKR is a Pakatan version of Umno upholding Malay supremacy." READ MORE HERE

No free ride for Najib in Sabah Posted: 31 Aug 2012 03:45 PM PDT It has now become a trend where every time Najib comes to Sabah, Pakatan top leaders will also be around town at the same time.  Luke Rintod, FMT KOTA KINABALU: If the number of Peninsular Malaysia VIPs heading to Sabah today is any indication, the state holds a major trump card going into the impending general election that has to be called by mid next year. Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak arrives in the state today, but Pakatan Rakyat top guns are hot on his heels and they will also be here from this weekend until mid-September to put a damper on his party and raise the stakes on what Sabah leaders can demand in return for support. As Najib touches down in Sandakan for a two-day visit, PAS president, Hadi Awang, is scheduled to grace Sabah's Pakatan Rakyat Aidilfitri celebration at Sulaman Central not far from Kota Kinabalu. Sabah Pakatan liaison chief, Ahmad Thamrin Jaini, when contacted, said Hadi is also scheduled to be at a Himpunan Hijau gathering in Beaufort, later this evening. Beaufort is supposedly the bastion of Lajim Ukin who left Umno recently to align himself with Pakatan. According to Thamrin, Sabah Pakatan would also be holding a Malaysia Day Celebration on Sept 15 where PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim would be present to deliver a speech together with DAP's Lim Kit Siang and other Pakatan leaders. Though general election is not due until April next year, these Peninsular-based warlords had off late increasingly made Sabah their priority as the state, which has 25 parliamentarians out of a total 222, could well tilt the equation at the federal level after the election. It has now become a trend where every time Najib, who is also Barisan Nasional chairman and Umno president, comes to Sabah, Pakatan top leaders would also be around town at the same time, grabbing attention from Sabahan electorates. Karnival Rakyat Malaysia Meanwhile, a FMT survey found out that giant billboards costing thousands of ringgit featuring pictures of Najib and his wife, Rosmah Mansor, have sprouted along the 75km-road from the state capital to Kota Belud where the couple are expected to attend a Hari Raya do on Sunday. READ MORE HERE

Umno MP denies jumping ship rumour Posted: 31 Aug 2012 03:42 PM PDT Salleh Kalbi quashes the rumour, saying even if he is not nominated to defend his Silam seat in the next polls, he will remain loyal to Umno. Thomas Pi, FMT LAHAD DATU: Silam MP Salleh Kalbi has denied allegations that he is prepared to move to the opposition if he is not nominated as the Barisan Nasional candidate in the coming general election. He also denied having met with any opposition leaders recently to discuss the matter. He believed that such speculations by Silam Umno members was aimed at reducing his chances of being re-nominated as a candidate. "I had told Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and Sabah Chief Minister Musa Aman that I will not cross over to the opposition after such allegations surfaced recently. "No matter what happens, I will remain with BN and Umno," he stressed. As the guest of honour in a fund raising activity organised by San Long Dian temple here, Salleh made it a point to tell the media present that lies were being spread about him and those doing so had an agenda against him. The speculation surfaced after Salleh failed to secure any post within the Silam Umno division recently. With the crossover of two other BN leaders to the opposition last month, word spread that Salleh had secret discussions with PKR here. It is understood that some PKR members here held an open survey of Salleh's popularity should he represent the opposition in the coming general election. A close aid to Umno Silam division chairman Nasrun Mansur said the party had received such information and would leave it to the top leadership to decide on this matter.

Show some respect, DAP tells PKR Posted: 31 Aug 2012 03:38 PM PDT Pahang DAP takes its PKR counterpart to task over the latter's remarks with regard to DAP wanting extra seats.  Athi Shankar, FMT CAMERON HIGHLANDS: Pahang PKR's leadership should learn to respect DAP as a senior partner in Pakatan Rakyat. State DAP vice-chairman J Apalasamy also reminded PKR state chairman Fauzi Abdul Rahman that it was his party that gave seats to PKR to contest in Pahang in the 2008 general election. "He should not forget that when lashing out against DAP in the media. He should remember DAP is a much more senior party than PKR in Malaysian politics. He should learn to show some respect to senior partners in Pakatan, especially to DAP," he told FMT. Apalasamy was irked by Fauzi's media outburst against DAP for requesting extra seats in Pahang – one parliament and two state from PKR for the next general election. DAP was keen to contest the Damak and Teruntum state seats as well as the Bentong federal constituency. PKR contested those seats in 2008. Fauzi had criticised DAP for lacking discipline in asking the seats. He said that although it was not wrong for DAP to request for additional seats, it must be done through the proper channels and with mutual consent. Apalasamy returned fire, reminding Fauzi that DAP proved to be more discipline as the party allowed unelected PKR supremo and Permatang Pauh MP Anwar Ibrahim to be the Opposition Leader despite having 29 MPs which was more than PKR's 26. "Moreover PKR is prevalent with defections than DAP," he said. In 2008, DAP contested two federal – Cameron Highlands and Raub – and seven state seats, winning only the Triang and Tras state constituencies. PKR contested six federal and 13 state seats, winning only the Indera Mahkota and Kuantan parliamentary constituencies. Apalasamy argued that DAP had better candidates to win those seats it was requesting. Moreover, he reminded Fauzi that the results of the Sarawak election last year and a series of by-elections since 2008 have shown that DAP performed better than other Pakatan partners. "So Fauzi should show some respect to us and be more disciplined," he added.

PKR blames Najib, Umno for bus attack Posted: 31 Aug 2012 03:36 PM PDT The bus which is being used for the party's "Jelajah Rakyat Merdeka" campaign was splashed with red paint and its windscreen cracked. K Pragalath, FMT PKR deputy president Azmin Ali has blamed Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and Umno over an attack on the party's bus that is being used for the party's "Jelajah Rakyat Merdeka" campaign. "The culture of gangsterism and threats has been the practice and main weapon of enemies, especially Umno to curb PKR and Pakatan Rakyat's march forward. "Najib's silence clearly approves these actions. It is a culture brought by Najib," he said. "Even former prime ministers Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Abdullah Ahmad Badawi never protected gangsters," he told a press conference at the PKR headquarters this morning. The "Jelajah Rakyat Merdeka" campaign is a PKR initiative led by Opposition Leader and PKR advisor Anwar Ibrahim to garner support from the masses. In the 4.30am incident that took place in Kota Bharu, Kelantan, the bus was splashed with red paint and its windscreen cracked. The attackers threw bricks towards the front left corner of the bus, specifically aiming at the bus driver. A police report on the attack was lodged at 5.15am. The bus is currently on the way to Grik which marks Anwar's campaign in Perak.

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: 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: 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   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 (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 (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 (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 (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 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 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 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 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...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...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

You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.	Email delivery powered by Google
Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net