Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News
Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
- Kebebasan Agama atau Non Dialog: Yang Mana Satukah Ancaman?
- Sting in the tail (or at the end)
- Dato Ramli Yusuf given a ceremonial farewell by PDRM
- Road to hell
- High stakes general election
- The Ignorant Muslims In Ruins
- A monkey like Fernandez
- His Majesty's Most Loyal Opposition
- Some States Allow For The Renunciation Of Islam
| Kebebasan Agama atau Non Dialog: Yang Mana Satukah Ancaman? Posted: 17 Nov 2012 09:20 PM PST Dr Mohd Faizal Musa, Felo Penyelidik Kebebasan beragama adalah bahagian penting dari Deklarasi Hak Asasi Manusia 1948 (UDHR). Fakta sejarah menunjukkan pada tahun 1972 negara-negara Islam melalui OIC, telah bersetuju untuk mendokongi UDHR secara penuh. Ann Elizabeth Mayer yang menganalisis Resolusi OIC tahun 1972 tersebut menyatakan, negara-negara anggota OIC telah pun memperakukan yang UDHR bersesuaian dengan nilai-nilai agama Islam: The 1972 Charter of the Islamic Conference, the international organization to which all Muslim countries belong, expressly endorses international law and fundamental human rights, treating them as compatible with Islamic values. In the Preamble of the Charter, two adjacent paragraphs assert that the members are –
…we must realize that the legal position of the apostate in Islam does not come under the rubric of freedom of faith, but under what is nowadays called high treason, by taking up arms against society and the state. Those who talk about human rights today, with emphasis on the freedom of belief, do not mean by it freedom to betray one's own country, society and religion, or freedom to usurp other people's property, or freedom to collude with the enemy. Therefore, freedom is one thing, apostasy another. What the modern jurisprudents are expected to do is to decide whether or not a Muslim who chooses to follow another faith, on personal bases, which do not affect the Islamic society or the state, should be considered an apostate in the traditional jurisprudential sense or in the sense explained by the verses quoted above, where the apostates are threatened with great punishment in the hereafter, without reference to execution (Mohammed Abed al-Jabri , 2009: 196-200). Secara ringkasnya, pandangan Al-Jabri tersebut meletakkan gejala meninggalkan agama Islam sebagai satu jenayah politik, dan bukannya 'jenayah agama'. Kemurtadan, apostasia atau apa sahaja yang seerti dengannya dilihat sebagai satu pengkhianatan, malah penderhakaan terhadap agama Islam. Sebahagian besar perbincangan tentang kebebasan beragama dalam Islam, termasuk yang dianalisis oleh Al Jabri adalah sekitar ayat 256 surah al Baqarah; 'tidak ada paksa dalam ugama (Islam), kerana sesungguhnya telah nyata kebenaran (Islam) dari kesesatan (kufur). Oleh itu, sesiapa yang tidak percayakan Taghut, dan ia pula beriman kepada Allah, maka sesungguhnya ia berpegang kepada simpulan (tali ugama) yang teguh, yang tidak akan putus. Dan (ingatlah), Allah Maha Mendengar, lagi Maha Mengetahui' (Tafsir Pimpinan Ar Rahman).' Pandangan Al Jabri tersebut bukanlah baharu memandangkan Rachid Ghannouchi (1993: 44-50) dalam al Hurriyat al-'Ammah Fid Daulah al-Islamiyyah, telah pun menyamakan apostasia dengan 'jenayah hasutan'. Ghannouchi, justeru, dalam karya tersebut menyatakan tindakan meninggalkan agama Islam tanpa 'menjejaskan citra agama Islam' adalah sesuatu yang tidak dapat dielakkan, dan selalu berlaku hari ini. Selepas penerbitan al Hurriyat al-'Ammah Fid Daulah al-Islamiyyah, sekali lagi dalam kuliahnya untuk Cardiff Islamic Society pada tahun 1997, Ghannouchi menegaskan, hukuman terhadap seseorang Islam yang murtad hanyalah satu urusan ijtihad dan ini dikesan menerusi pertikaian antara para sahabat Rasulullah saw khususnya dalam menentukan perang terhadap golongan murtad ketika awal pemerintahan Abu Bakar. Tindakan memerangi golongan murtad yang dilancarkan oleh Abu Bakar tersebut, awalnya dibantah oleh beberapa sahabat ternama termasuk Umar al Khattab (Azzam S Tamimi, 2001: 191). Beza Ghannouchi dan Mohammed Abed al Jabri adalah, Al Jabri berpendapat 'kebebasan satu hal, apostasia satu hal berbeza.' Ghannouchi pula menegaskan apostasia hanya menjadi sesuatu yang serius jikalau maruah 'Islam dicemari'. Dua pandangan di atas, masih kelihatan samar. Al Jabri dan Ghannouchi malah tidak ditanggapi sebagai sarjana pengajian Islam. Dalam tahun 1992, Mohamed Talbi, seorang sarjana terhormat dari University of Tunis, Tunisia, dan mahir dalam bidang tafsir al-Quran menulis tentang hak-hak untuk memilih beragama. Menurut Talbi, pilihan beragama dan kepercayaan adalah urusan sukarela hatta ibu bapa tidak mempunyai hak untuk memaksakan ke atas anak-anak mereka pilihan kepercayaan mereka: To best of my knowledge, among all the revealed texts, only the Quran stresses religious liberty in such a precise and unambiguous way. Faith, to be true and reliable faith, absolutely needs to be free and voluntary act. In this connection it is worth stressing that the quoted verse was aimed at reproving and condemning the attitude of some Jews and Christians who, being newly converted to Islam in Medina, were willing to convert their children with them to their new faith. Thus it is clearly emphasized that faith is an individual concern and commitment and that even parents must refrain from interfering with it. The very nature of faith, as is stressed in the basic text of Islam is clear and indisputable words, is to be a voluntary act born out of conviction and freedom (Mohamed Talbi, 2009: 109). Tentu sahaja, dari pandangan Islam, seseorang yang memilih untuk keluar dari agama Islam melakukan 'kesilapan', akan tetapi itu adalah pilihan sendiri. Mohamed Talbi menegaskan, mereka yang memilih agama selain Islam telah diberi amaran bahawa Islam adalah agama kebenaran; dan keselamatan di akhirat tidak ada pada agama lain: Accordingly, the apostates are warned: those who choose apostasy, after being convinced in their innermost thoughts that Islam is the truth, are unjust, and as such they are bereft of God's guidance, with all the consequences that follow for their salvation (Mohamed Talbi, 2009: 115). Di hujung makalah beliau yang terkenal itu, Talbi menekankan, meskipun 'terkutuk secara moralnya'; urusan seseorang yang murtad bukan sama sekali urusan penguasa. Malah, pilihan untuk menukar agama tersebut harus dihormati, 'religious liberty is fundamentally and ultimately an act of respect for God's sovereignty and for the mystery of God's plan for humanity'. Sejarah juga menjadi bukti, pemerintahan Islam bersikap begitu longgar terhadap 'Crypto Jewish' dan 'Crypto Christian', malah ia pernah menjadi fenomena meluas ketika pemerintahan Othmaniyyah satu masa dahulu. Terminologi crypto merujuk kepada 'mereka yang pandangan keagamaan dan amalan mereka tidak bersesuaian dengan agama rasmi anutan mereka dan selalunya menyembunyikan hakikat tersebut dari masyarakat awam'. Terminologi ini tidak eksklusif untuk Yahudi dan Kristian sahaja, malah, setelah Sepanyol jatuh ke tangan Kristian, masyarakat Islam yang tidak berhijrah ke daerah-daerah di Afrika Utara dan memilih untuk menetap di Sepanyol turut menjadi Crypto Muslims (Moriscos). Maurus Reinkowski (2007: 416) menegaskan 'crypto Jews' dan 'crypto Christians' adalah golongan murtad, 'quite naturally should have been considered apostates; they had confessed to be a Muslims, and had then fallen away from Islam', tetapi pemerintah Islam khususunya Othmaniyyah bertolak ansur dengan mereka. Cryptos hanya dihukum apabila secara 'berterusan' mencabar 'kedaulatan Islam' (Selim Deringil, 2000: 547-575). Di Malaysia, semua urusan perihal Islam diurus, ditadbir, dikendali dan ditentukan secara penuh oleh pemerintah. Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom (2012), Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri sebagai misalan menyatakan Islam adalah agama rasmi menurut perlembagaan Malaysia, makanya setiap anak yang dilahirkan sebagai seorang Islam hendaklah kekal sebagai seorang Islam. Datuk Seri Mohd Shafie Apdal (2012), Menteri Kementerian Kemajuan Luar Bandar Dan Wilayah dengan nada yang hampir sama memberi jaminan yang 'untuk setiap Muslim, pemerintah bertanggungjawab memastikan nilai-nilai Islam dipraktik dan dilaksanakan. Oleh kerana itu madrasah (surau), sekolah agama, Universti Islam, ceramah agama dan kuliah agama di tv dan radio dipupuk oleh pemerintah demi memastikan orang Islam tidak terkeluar dari jalan Islam.' Malaysia seperti yang kita semua maklum, mengamalkan undang-undang Islam dan sivil (versi Malaysia) dan ia diurustadbir oleh Jabatan Kemajuan Agama Islam Malaysia dan Mahkamah Syariah. Fakta sejarah tidak dapat dimungkiri lagi bahawa urusan agama di dalam genggaman kerajaan sepertinya yang dilihat hari ini merupakan warisan penjajah Inggeris. Moshe Yegar, seorang penyelidik berbangsa Yahudi dan rakyat Israel dari Hebrew University of Jerusalem pernah menetap di Malaysia dari bulan November 1964 sehingga hujung 1965. Hasil penelitian Yegar, beliau menerbitkan sebuah buku akademik yang kandungannya memuji 'kebijaksanaan British' dalam memperkenalkan birokrasi Islam di Malaysia sehingga Islam akhirnya menjadi satu jurus yang tertentu dan terhad di bawah satu pentadbiran: In general, British tolerance of Islam, indirectly, knowingly and unknowingly, was most helpful in an expansion and consolidation of Islam by legislative and administrative means. But the preservation and reinforcement of the traditional bases of authority and social organization implicit in British policy, and improved communications and progressive centralization, combined to fashion a more authoritarian form of religious administration than any that the Peninsula had known before. Colonial rule thus made for the concentration of doctrinal and administrative religious authority in the hands of a hierarchy of officials directly dependent on the sultans for their posts and power. The rulers and their State Councils began to assume a wider responsibility for religious affairs. Written, codified systems of civil and criminal law generated pressure to establish a more formal system of Islamic law, which was duly enacted in State Councils; courts were set up, legal procedures laid down, and a legal bureaucracy built to administer therm. A new establishment of religious officials now functioned in the sultans' courts and in the villages no less. Many of these developments (notably the regulation of sharia courts), while responding to a real need, were also and emulation of administrative models of the West in a field which the Malays felt to be peculiarly their own. While there had been kathis, sharia law, and restrictive Islamic provisions at various times and places before, what the Malays added was the methodical application of law by an organized religious officialdom (Moshe Yegar, 1979: 266). Peninstitusian Islam seperti yang terlihat pada Jabatan Kemajuan Agama Islam hari ini, menurut Yegar membuahkan semacam 'authoritative Islam' yang dipertahan oleh Malaysia sebagai 'satu urusan di bawah takluk perlembagaan'. Tentulah sangat menjengkelkan buat ramai 'agamawan konservatif', hakikat bahawa seorang ahli akademik Israel seperti Moshe Yegar pernah hadir di negara ini dan 'memuji' pula warisan kepintaran British, iaitu pentadbiran agama Islam sebagai ber'model Barat'. 'Pujian' Moshe Yegar terhadap legasi penjajah Inggeris ini bagaimanapun tidak disambut baik oleh antropologis terkenal di Malaysia. Abdullah Taib (1985: 226) misalnya pernah menyatakan, 'Sejak tahun 1920-an beberapa buah negeri di Tanah Melayu telah menubuhkan Majlis Agama dan Adat Istiadat Melayu. Hingga ke hari ini sudah hampir 60 tahun majlis itu berjalan atas nama seperti itu. Penubuhan Majlis Agama ini ialah hasil 'kebijaksanaan' penjajah Inggeris.' Penggunaan tanda kurung untuk ungkapan 'kebijaksanaan penjajah Inggeris' menunjukkan rasa kurang selesa Abdullah Taib. Bahkan dalam kajian beliau tersebut, peranan Jabatan Agama Islam dalam menyudutkan nilai-nilai lokal dikritik secara halus, dan secara akademik tentunya. 'Islam institusi' yang diperkenalkan oleh penjajah inilah yang perlahan-lahan mulai 'menggelisahkan' bahagian-bahagian hidup segelintir rakyat Malaysia yang bukan beragama Islam. Persoalan ini menjadi semakin dramatik dan kontroversial baru-baru ini, seperti yang terpapar dalam surat pembaca Steve Oh (2012) kepada Malaysiakini. Pandangan peribadi dan kebebasan berekspresi Oh boleh sahaja ditanggapi sebagai 'menghasut'. Namun demikian, 'kegelisahan' warga Malaysia yang bukan beragama Islam seperti Steve Oh mesti ditangani dengan dialog dan keterbukaan. Amalan mendiamkan orang seperti Steve Oh tidak membawa apa-apa manfaat jangka panjang. Kebebasan beragama di Malaysia memang sering menjadi sasaran kritikan luar. Sebagai contoh, Jabatan Negara Amerika Syarikat pada tahun 2007, dalam laporannya menyatakan: State authorities impose Islamic religious laws administered through Islamic courts on all ethnic Malays (and other Muslims) in family law and other civil matters. Muslims may generally not convert to another religion although article 11 of the Federal Constitution guarantees religious freedom, the country's highest court ruled during the reporting period that Muslims wanting to convert to another religion must first obtain approval from a Shari'a court (US Department of State, 2007). Sebagai catatan, pada tahun 2007 tersebut, Mahkamah Persekutuan telah menolak permohonan Lina Joy untuk menggugurkan kata Islam dari kad pengenalannya. Permohonan Joy, yang dilahirkan sebagai Azlina Jailani tersebut telah dinafikan kerana mahkamah memutuskan, oleh kerana agama asal Joy adalah Islam maka ia merupakan sebahagian dari urusan Islam. Justeru, hanya Jabatan Agama Islam sahaja boleh memutuskan secara rasmi kedudukan Joy sebagai seorang Kristian. Keputusan mahkamah tersebut disambut oleh World Muslim Congress dengan tempelak: Freedom of faith means not only freedom to choose a faith, but also freedom to change one's faith. While Islam regards apostasy a grave sin, but that is between God and the respective individual. When it is a matter of simple apostasy, .e, merely changing one's faith without any aggression or treason against an lslamic State or Muslims, the principle of freedom of faith in Islam requires that such apostate must be allowed to exercise their God-given freedom. The traditional position, which seems to have been the basis for the Malaysian civil court to defer the matter with treason or aggression. An encouraging thing is that the tide of opinion among Muslims in turning away from the traditional view to one that is in consonance with the message of the Quran and the legacy of the Prophet Muhammad (World Muslim Congress, 2007). Perenggan dari kenyataan media di atas, secara signifikan dikeluarkan oleh World Muslim Congress. Ia turut membantah pencabulan hak asasi manusia di Malaysia. Harus dinyatakan, World Muslim Congress mengundang Joy untuk kembali ke agama Islam, 'we invite our sister in humanity Lina Joy (Azlina Jailani) back to Islam' tetapi dalam masa yang sama menggesa kebebasan beragama diberikan dan menuntut supaya pemerintah Malaysia membuang pandangan apostasia sebagai 'treason or aggression'. World Muslim Congress tentu sahaja tidak membuat tuduhan liar dan serkap jarang, ia mungkin bersandarkan pandangan pegawai Bahagian Penyelidikan Akidah Jabatan Kemajuan Agama Islam Malaysia yang sering merujuk kepada pandangan-pandangan sempit ulama salafi: If a person's apostasy is announced to the public and his new faith advertised, then the person had declared an attack in the form of perceptions (al-harb al-fikriyyah) on Islam and its belief. His action will raise or plant seeds of doubts in the hearts of the other Muslims. At such time, the act of apostasy should not be seen from the angle of individual rights to change his religion, but from the aspect of the presence of "hirabah‟‟ element which is an attack on the fundamentals of religion that is the pillar of an Islamic government. Therefore, immediate steps should be taken to start the process of providing explanation to clear the person‟s doubts, asking him to repent and should he remain defiant and insist to apostate, the end is a death penalty on the grounds of "hirabah‟‟ (al-qatlu hirabatan). This means, apostates are not executed because of their infidelity but on the grounds of hirabah. This is clear based on verse 33 of surah al-Ma'idah which means: "Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land…". Even though the verse is defined by most Islamic scholars as a verse to carry out punishment on criminals and robbers, it cannot be denied that the public act of apostasy is an act that wage war against Allah s.w.t. and His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). As such, a few of Salaf scholars hold the opinion that the punishment to execute an apostate is taken from this verse too, apart from the sound hadiths that serve to clarify the matter (Mohd Aizam Mas'od, tanpa tarikh: 5). Pandangan ekstrim di atas tentu sahaja dapat dipermasalahkan untuk sebuah negara berbilang kaum dan agama di Malaysia. Mereka yang menuntut kebebasan beragama misalnya dengan mudah ditanggap sebagai penghasut dan penjahat dengan niat buruk terhadap Islam. Adakah pandangan di atas, pandangan Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaah? Atau hanyalah pandangan minoriti ulama wahabi yang terkenal sebagai pembantah dialog? Read more at: http://www.projekdialog.com/featured/kebebasan-agama-atau-non-dialog-yang-mana-satukah-ancaman/ | ||||||||
| Sting in the tail (or at the end) Posted: 17 Nov 2012 03:08 PM PST Malaysiakini - PAS ready to rule M'sia with Pakatan, declares Hadi reported: "PAS conducts tahaluf siyasi with an understanding that Pakatan Rakyat upholds the concept of commonality and not focus on differences," he said. "This tahaluf siyasi should not make us lose sight of PAS members' understanding towards the concept of Fiqh al-Taat (loyalty) to the party," he said. Harakah Daily - Hadi outlines ways to set right the economy Hadi said should PAS be given the mandate to rule as part of Pakatan Rakyat, the party would strive for a shift to an economic philosophy that was fairer. "In this regard, the fiscal as well as the fair monetary policy must be utilised fully to pace growth," he said, adding that future implementation of economic policy must be complemented by the concept of reward and punishment according to the Shariah, holistic accountability and preventive laws to prevent extravagance, leakage, fraud and corruption.
These are not just the words of a PAS President but that of a PM-in-waiting. Pak Haji has now projected his very very presidential prime ministerial persona, and proclaims he/PAS is "ready" to rule Malaysia …. er … together with Pakatan of course. Throughout his more than 2-hour speech at the PAS Muktamar, he studiously avoided any mention of the hudud word, and stressed instead on PAS' concept of an Islamic welfare state.
Coincidentally, The Malaysian Insider (TMI) had carried the news earlier that some leading PAS delegates want party leaders to tread lightly on sensitive issues where it reported: Several PAS delegates have expressed fear that the outspokenness and eagerness of some leaders to comment on sensitive issues would only invite trouble for the party ahead of the coming general election. Though they used Nurul Izzah's 'no compulsion in religion' as the example to showcase the improper, inappropriate and indiscreet haste of some over-eager PAS leaders to speak out, and unwittingly use words which could hurt PAS' election prospects, I suspect those PAS delegates have something more important in mind, namely, the implementation of PAS avowed hudud.
Today, TMI's Muktamar PAS lebih matang, elak bicara isu sensitif untuk kekal sokongan bukan islam left us in no doubt on that, reporting clearly PAS' pre-election strategy: Muktamar Tahunan PAS ke-58 yang terakhir menjelang pilihan raya umum (PRU) ke-13 akan melabuhkan tirainya hari ini dilihat lebih matang berbanding tahun sebelumnya, kata penganalisis politik tanah air. Mereka turut berpendapat, PAS dilihat mengamalkan sikap berhati-hati dalam menyentuh isu sensitif seperti hudud yang berkemungkinan akan memberikan kesan sokongan daripada penyokong bukan Muslim mereka. In short, ... (translated in kaytee's way) ... so far so good mateys, you've shown maturity but make sure you don't blurb out sensitive stuff that'll frighten away the non-Muslim votes for PAS. To be fair, PAS has never hidden the fact it is an Islamic party with an Islamic obligation to turn Malaysia into its vision of what an Islamic country should be.
And no matter how many examples or empirical evidence we present to it in hopes those would convince the Islamic party that a syariah system, inclusive of hudud, will not cure away or even minimize corruption, injustice and misrule or for that matter, install a better regime of social justice, proper governance and compassion (as per the Compassion of Allah swt), it will fall on their deaf ears ... ... as PAS firmly believes it's not only its Islamic duty to implement hudud successfully but that it can do what couldn't be done/achieved in other Islamic hudud-ruled countries like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and even Shia Iran, etc.
In those and any other Islamic countries, you will not find one single Islamic country which can demonstrate those aspired Islamic qualities of social justice, proper governance and compassion, as ironically can be found in many secular nations. Hudud! Aiyah, PAS obviously hasn't heard of the non-Islamic advice given by: (a) Lord Acton who said "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men", or
(b) British PM William Pitt the Elder who advised "Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it", or (c) French poet Alphonse Marie Louis de Prat de Lamartine who gave us "It is not only the slave or serf who is ameliorated in becoming free ... the master himself did not gain less in every point of view, ... for absolute power corrupts the best natures." And that's what a hudud-ruled nation would confer on its leaders, total unchallengeable unquestionable absolute power as witnessed in Afghanistan under the Taliban, Iran under the ayatollahs, Saudi Arabia, etc, and even a whiff of that in our own Kedah where PAS has passed legislation stating its fatwa's may not be questioned or challenged.
The common denominator of hudud-ruled countries seems to be the 3-P's, that of 'prohibit', 'persecute' (note, not 'prosecute') and 'punish'. Missing instead are the 3-C's of 'counselling', 'care' and 'compassionate' (a la the Compassion of Allah swt). Nonetheless, for PAS to achieve its religious dream it must first be in (majority) rule, and that in turn relies on two equally important factors. Firstly, it must win for itself mucho federal parliamentary seats, on which it is fairly dependent on non-Muslim votes, to help secure, say, around 60-ish federal parliamentary seats if not more. Every single vote counts a la Julia Fietcher Carney's:
Little drops of water, little grains of sand, make the mighty ocean and the beauteous land
Yes, every non-Muslim vote helps if it is to realize its desire to emerge as the Pakatan component party with the most number of parliamentary seats and thus, with the loudest say in the coalition, in other words, as Pakatan's primus inter pares (first among equals).
Naturally, at this most crucial moment (on the eve of GE-13) it most certainly doesn't want some inflexible (immature, wakakaka) hardcore ulama to say stuff that will frighten away its non-Muslim supporters ... ... non-Muslim supporters whom it has now gained substantially for the first time in its long history, thanks to a combination of the brilliant strategy by its Erdogen faction (one which Pak Haji Hadi Awang joined late, perhaps after his ulama eyes were opened to the 'bigger picture') and the support of its Pakatan allies.
The ABU campaign which I only support with much reservation and many qualifications has also contributed greatly to the pro-PAS non-Muslim supporters' blind rage to get rid of everything and anything BN, even if the consequences can in some cases be far more forbidding. In this, PAS' Erdogan-ists have to be complimented for brilliantly projecting to the non-Muslims that it's an inclusive political party with the welfare of the rakyat foremost in mind. Of course in the process it had to marginalize those obdurately blinkered Myrmidon ulamas within its fold. So basically, it's a crucial juncture in time that calls for the following reminders:
| ||||||||
| Dato Ramli Yusuf given a ceremonial farewell by PDRM Posted: 16 Nov 2012 12:41 AM PST I felt I it was not necessary for me to attend as I would have done the same thing for any Malaysian who is a victim of injustice. I did that for Lawyer Rosli Dahlan, and the six Police Officers who were victimized and charged in court when Musa Hassan was Inspector-General of Police (IGP) for revealing Musa's link to a crime syndicate in Johor Bahru. When justice beckons, we Malaysians must come together to fight for the Rule of Law and Justice. Being indifferent or silent is not an option. As Edmund Burke says,"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." It may be recalled that the former IGP conspired with the Attorney-General (A-G), and the MACC to destroy Dato' Ramli's reputation and career. But they failed as Dato Ramli was acquitted by our courts on all charges. I did not tell Ramli that I would not attend. I just thanked him for the invitation . I later discovered that the current IGP, Tan Sri Ismail Omar, gave him a grand send off (Hafiz Yatim's article below) in the best traditions of the PDRM. I was told that he was given a guard of honor salute and was sent off in the Police ceremonial Land Rover accompanied by PDRM bagpiper's march past with the IGP himself walking behind the Land Rover and all the PDRM Directors and Police Chiefs in tow. Apparently it was a very emotional send off. I am sure Dato' Ramli was very moved by this gesture of atonement by the Force, belated as that may be.
If I had previously thought that Dato' Ramli Yusuf had sold out, I must to apologize because the former CCID Director did not mince his words in his farewell speech . It was a hard hitting speech where he singled out the "devious behavior" of the former IGP and the current A-G. Let us hope that today's ceremonial send off has brought about a good end to the humiliation and indignities Dato Ramli Yusuf suffered for half a decade. The Force which had obviously abandoned him (and his five officers too) when he needed its support has now expressed its regret openly. That should be good enough at least for the time being. Tan Sri Ismail Omar can now focus on rebuilding PDRM's image and morale. As for Dato Ramli Yusuf, I wish him all the best in his retirement. I am hopeful, however, that at the appropriate time, he will not hesitate to initiate legal proceedings against both the former IGP Musa Hassan and the incumbent A-G Abdul Gani Patail.–Din Merican
| ||||||||
| Posted: 15 Nov 2012 12:19 PM PST Recently, there was much ado about a letter to Malaysiakini by Steven Oh, where our world famous (but domestically infamous) Police wanted from the online news portal, details about that letter and its writer … or else. Malaysiakini held on courageously to its policy of confidentiality on the identity of letter writers, which lamentably for our policed state ... with that 'or else' Damocles' Sword hanging over MKINI's head … would have resulted in the seizure of its computer equipment, because our men in blue just love forensic IT and would go to any lengths to dabble in that discipline (the forensic science, not 'police discipline', wakakaka).
Fortunately, Steve Oh agreed to MKINI releasing his details. The whole brouhaha was of course related to Nurul Izzah's statement about 'freedom of religion, even for Malays' (or 'no compulsion in religion') utterance. I believe she has since regretted making that impetuous statement ('impetuous' for a Malaysian Muslim, especially one from Pakatan), which in mitigation, was uttered in the adrenalin-flowing exuberance during a campaign forum. We know that subsequently, a no-doubt  Anyway, Siti Kasim, a member of the Bar Council human rights committee and Orang Asli rights advocate, the very person who asked Nurul that fatal question, had expressed her disappointment with Nurul for backing away from her statement, that of freedom of religion, even for Malays' (or 'no compulsion in religion'), and opined the young politician had wanted to 'impress' her audience. Siti Kasim had been right in saying that statement effectively translated - in the past tense of course as Nurul has since denied such a meaning - into Malay-Muslims having the right to leave the religion, or that dreaded word in Islam, commit apostasy. Siti Kasim, having experienced the tap-dancing antics of Mr Manmanlai, lamented that Nurul has failed to stand firm on her remark. But as I stated in an earlier post in mitigation of Nurul's hypersonic back-pedalling: ... maybe Nurul indeed wanted to impress her audience but alamak, Siti, cut her some slack lah as Nurul is still young and really, a babe in the political woods. Besides, to a Muslim, apostasy is an extremely serious issue, in which the punishment could well be death, though of course the authorities in Malaysia won't go to that extent. Okay, that brings us back to Steve Oh's letter to MKINI titled Nurul's watershed idea for the nation where he referred to Nurul's "original" (wakakaka) statement with unrestrained glee, going on to was eloquence over Nurul's courage and brilliant perception, etc etc ad nauseum. Alamak, this man didn't care that there was NOT even one teeny weeny itsy bitsy swallow for a summer make, wakakaka.  All this means that Steve Oh's extravagant effusive ebullient praises for Nurul was a bit premature, because as we know, Nurul has backed away from that pro-apostasy statement pronto, and given Malaysia's draconian boleh-ness, we most certainly don't blame her. But Nurul's statement provided a wonderful springboard (titik tolak) for Steve-Oh's agenda-driven train, so how to stop it ler, wakakaka. Thus, as if that religious freedom thingy was not bad enough, he used Nurul's faux pas to commandeer a larger landscape than mere 'freedom of religion'. Whether his points reflect his own sentiments or that of non-Malays are irrelevant because in his discourse he has screwed up Nurul's positionkau kau, and only succeeded in lending fuel to those out to get the poor girl. Each time I read arguments by people like Steve Oh or some Church leaders or non-Muslims coming out to defend Nurul, I cringed even before she did, because I believe without any doubt that their secular or Western-Christian based arguments would rile many Muslims. No matter how brilliant and sincere their unwitting (perhaps even deliberate and opportunistic) arguments might be, they won't move nor convince most Muslims. Read more at: http://ktemoc.blogspot.com/2012/11/road-to-hell.html
| ||||||||
| Posted: 14 Nov 2012 07:54 PM PST In a stirring address at the forum organised by Aliran on 7 October 2012, Ambiga thanked the audience in Penang for their impressive turnout at the Bersih 3.0 solidarity gathering at the Esplanade on 28 April. She highlighted the harassment experienced by Suaram after it had exposed the Scorpene submarine scandal and noted that the brouhaha about the human rights group's sources of funding mirrored Bersih's own experience not long ago. But after the Bersih 2.0 rally last year, she said Bersih had been funded entirely by Malaysians, she noted. "In fact, I even get SMSes from ordinary Malaysians asking, where can I send money to Bersih; I want to help." Ambiga noted the irony of politicians complaining about sources of funding: "Who are they to question these groups about their sources of funding when they have practised dirty money politics for the longest time?" The former two-term Bar Council chairperson complained that postal votes are easily manipulated and lamented the lack of integrity of the electoral rolls, which now cannot even be challenged in court. Even the media are not free and during election campaigns they fail to display party manifestos over television, keeping the public in the dark. "It's a disgrace!" she said. High stakes involved Meanwhile, the government is ignoring 'the elephant in the room': corruption. "All of you are here because you are concerned about the level of integrity in public life." At the same time, she pointed to selective prosecution, the most glaring of which was the one that eventually resulted in the death of political aide Teoh Beng Hock over an investigation into just RM2000. Meanwhile, she said it is ridiculous that our politicians are not saying anything about political aggression or violence. "It shows me there is tacit support for it." On the other hand, the young woman who stepped on the Prime Minister's image was handcuffed and publicly condemned. Free and fair elections are important because they bolster democracy and they encourage a respect for fundamental rights, she said. People are now more engaged and interested in what is happening as they realise that the rot has to stop now. "Vote for people who will uphold the Federal Constitution, for those who will do something to curb corruption, for goodness sake," Ambiga urged the participants. Undemocratic governments will not be able to survive for long, as people have more access to information. But although three million have registered as voters since 2008, another three million have not yet voted. "We need to reach out and draw these people in." The next general elections are going to be very contentious, and people are getting more interested and engaged because they realise that the rot has to stop now. "Dictatorships have elections too but it doesn't mean they are democracies; but if you have clean and fair elections, you will be working your way to a vibrant democracy. If you have clean and fair elections, it makes your MPs more accountable and reduces corruption." Studies have found that the poor will also be better represented, she said. A game-changer Is there hope at the end of the day? Yes, there's a lot of hope, she said, "because there are a lot of good right-thinking Malaysians who want to put things right. They are not going to accept second best or people talking rubbish." Ambiga referred to an International Crisis Group report, which noted the strengthening of civil society and pointed to the Bersih movement as a "game-changer". Also present was Bersih Steering Committee member Dr Wong Chin Huat, who highlighted discrepancies in the electoral rolls. He said Bersih had moved beyond an electoral reform movement to a movement to renew the nation. He stressed the importance of a high voter turnout to send a clear cut message that this country wants to move forward, not backwards. Chin Huat then described how ordinary Malaysians cast aside their old fears and came out in their tens of thousands for the Bersih 3.0 rally. "You have more and more Malaysians coming out. You know you are not alone." "We need to renew our independence and reclaim our country." Focus on clean and fair elections, added Ambiga. "Everything we do from now will help, I promise you." Change is needed Earlier, Aliran president Francis Loh welcomed the crowd and then Aliran secretary Mustafa K Anuar took over as emcee. He promised the participants that images of the audience would not be photo-edited to show a much larger crowd squeezed like sardines! The crowd roared knowingly. A heavy downpour outside the hall did not dampen the crowd's enthusiasm for the forum as they hung on to every word. Before Ambiga took the floor, the immediate past president of Aliran, P Ramakrishnan, in his welcome address mentioned that the only way electoral reforms could be achieved would be via a change of government in the upcoming general election. Rama pointed out that civil servants once had to retire at the age of 55. Now the ruling parties have ruled for 55 years. It is time for them to retire at the general election! The voters are the masters and the politicians are the servants, he said. Malaysians are the torch-bearers of freedom and it is our duty to bring about change.
| ||||||||
| Posted: 13 Nov 2012 04:26 PM PST Brader Anon, this is not about the Egyptians eating grass or eating sand alone. The Pyramids have been standing there from before the time of Islam or Christianity. Jesus Christ and the christians did not destroy them. Neither did the Prophet of Islam or the Caliphs who came after the time of the Prophet. If there was a need to destroy them, surely Jesus Christ or the Prophet would have advocated destroying them. That did not happen. Are you cleverer than the Prophet of Islam or the Caliphs of Islam about whom you are so proud? Why didn't the Rasul destroy or break these ancient ruins that are found not just in Egypt but also in many other places in Jordan, Arabia, Syria, Yemen and elsewhere? You must ask yourself this question. Why didn't the Rasul break these ancient ruins? The answer lies in the following verses in the Quran :
After the people of Lot were destroyed, some of the ruins or signs (ayat) of their existence were left standing as a profound lesson for people who understand. So we should visit and study the ruins of the past generations to understand what happened to the previous generations. This is called archeology, history, social anthropology and such. Also known as using your brains. Unfortunately the Muslims like you are very short in this area. Brains are a rare commodity. If you go and destroy the pyramids, then how are you going to study what happened in the past? Also you do not know your own Quran. Hence you talk stupid. When you dont know the Quran and you dont believe in the Quran you have no choice - you will become stupid. Here are a few more verses from the Quran : [29:38] Similarly, 'Aad and Thamoud (were annihilated). This is made clear to you through their ruins. The devil had adorned their works in their eyes, and had diverted them from the path, even though they had eyes. Again the ruins of the Aad and the Thamood people were made clear to the Rasul. The devil had adorned their works in their eyes - and consequently the Aad and the Thamood met with disaster. So we have to travel and see the ruins of the past like that of the Aad and the Thamodd to see what happens to people who do not use their brains. Here is another verse in the Quran that talks about observing ancient ruins : [28:58] Many a community we annihilated for turning unappreciative of their lives (wealth). Consequently, here are their homes, nothing but uninhabited ruins after them, except a few. We were the inheritors. So again we must visit and study the dwellings and the ruins of the past societies and see what happened to them when they turned unappreciative of their own lives, their wealth and comforts. We must study them. You can only study them if you preserve them. 20:128 Does it ever occur to them how many previous generations we have annihilated? They are now walking in the homes of those before them. These are signs for those who possess intelligence. 32:26 Does it ever occur to them how many generations we have annihilated before them? They now live and walk in their ancestors' homes. This should provide sufficient proofs. Do they not hear? Some people still live and walk in the dwellings of their previous generations who were destroyed - because of their ignorance and their arrogance. So you may even live in the ruins of your grandfathers. Easier for you to realise the mistake made by your grandparents.
| ||||||||
| Posted: 13 Nov 2012 04:13 PM PST I don't know who Derek Fernandez is trying to attack with his remarks - the Federal government run by his political foes or the Malaysian Civil Service - but I know it's uncalled for. I also know there are just too many monkeys like him around. Orang Melayu panggil perangai macam ni kurang ajar. PJ mayor 'promoted', says Ali Hamsa MONDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2012 - 17:42 by Terence Fernandez THE transfer of Petaling Jaya City Council (MBPJ) Mayor Datuk Mohamad Roslan Sakiman to the State Secretariat is a promotion. Chief Secretary to the government Datuk Seri Ali Hamsa attempted to clear the air over the controversial transfer saying that it was not a lateral transfer as suggested by certain parties. "We are promoting him to a higher position. He will head the State Economic Planning Unit (UPEN)," Ali told The Malay Mail. "We had spoken to the mayor and he feels the move to the State will be good for him as it is a promotion with more benefits," Ali said, adding that several candidates had been identified to take over from Mohamad Roslan, who is scheduled to be appointed deputy state secretary (development) on Dec 1. Councillor Derek Fernandez said while MBPJ was against a lateral move by the Public Services Department (PSD), it would have no objection if it was a promotion that would benefit Mohamad Roslan. However, he insisted that the choice of mayor, including Mohamad Roslan's transfer must be on the endorsement of the state. "If what the chief secretary said is true, then it is good for Mohamad Roslan. "If he is moving up to a Superscale B (from the present Superscale C) then it is good for him," he said. However, he said with regards to the federal authorities' list of successors, "let's see who the candidates are. If they are going to nominate some monkeys, we will reject."
| ||||||||
| His Majesty's Most Loyal Opposition Posted: 13 Nov 2012 03:26 PM PST According to him, that situation worsened with an increasing population as it would render the individual's voice even more insignificant. It was a prognosis that called for a 'papa knows best' remedy, wakakaka. Until recent times, national strongmen (to borrow Josh Hong's term in his criticisms of Dr Mahathir Mohamad), especially though not exclusively those in Asia's SE Asian and Far East regions (with the possible exception of a US controlled and democracy-indoctrinated Japan) took on the role of 'papa' who knew best. We are more familiar with the strongmen of our own SE Asian region, blokes and blokesses like Dr Mahathir, Lee Kuan Yew, Suharto, Sihanouk, and the oligarchy in the Philippines - am leaving out the communist and military dictatorships in Vietnam, Laos, Myanmar and until recently Thailand (and f* Brunei, wakakaka).
Probably the Malaysian votes for 'Top Papa' would go down to the wire between (Tun) Dr Mahathir and (Knight of The Most Distinguished Order of Saint Michael and Saint George, wakakaka) Lee Kuan Yew or Sir Harry*. * The British knighthood system is weird in that by convention the knighted person is addressed by his personal name rather than his surname, eg. Sir Cliff for Cliff Richard, Sir Sean for Sean Connery, thus Sir Harry (Lee Kuan Yew's western name) or if you like, Sir Kuan Yew. I personally feel that the title of 'Top Papa' should go to Sir Harry (Lee Kuan Yew) because he was more "innovative" than our own Dr Mahathir, in his Singapore variant of Westminster democracy, as follows:
In 1984 Singapore had a constitutional amendment which allocated the opposition with a minimum of 3 seats in Parliamentary regardless of whether it won those seats or not. However,the member occupying those (awarded) seats were not allowed to vote in the new Parliament. It was a fortunate constitutional amendment because after the results of the Singapore 1988 elections were announced, there was only one opposition MP, namely Chiam See Tong of the Democratic Party. The embarrassment for Sir Kuan Yew's majority ruling PAP was that it won 80 out of 81 seats with just 61.8% of the votes. Alamak, just one opposition MP to show for 40% of the Island State's votes? Thank goodness, the 1984 constitutional amendment allowed Parliament to top up the opposition numbers to a more though superficially respectful 3, but in real terms, only one had voting rights in Parliament. But those face saving (for Singapore's democracy) seats didn't provide legal immunity for their occupants. Indeed after that election, Lee Siew Choh (Workers' Party) and Francis Seow respectively faced legal damages for comments (Lee) made about PAP during the 1984 election and trial for (Seow's) alleged tax evasion.
Anyway, my post is more about what Westminster democracy termed His/Her Majesty's "Most Loyal Opposition". John Cam Hobhouse, 1st Baron Broughton, was credited with this term in 1826 when he attacked George Canning, the Foreign Secretary, in the House of Commons, stating: "It is said to be hard on His Majesty's Ministers to raise objections of this character but it is more hard on His Majesty's Opposition to compel them to take this course." In mature Westminster democracies such as in Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, the Opposition Leader of Her Majesty's "Most Loyal Opposition" is picked from the political party (after the ruling party) with the largest number of seats and who, traditionally, comes from the Lower House (Dewan Rakyat).
Our current federal Opposition Leader was originally an unelected person but who is now a MP though not from a political party (after the ruling party) with the largest number of seats in Dewan Rakyat, wakakaka. But I must admit his selection has been by consensus among the Pakatan allies. The Opposition Leader in mature western democracies is treated as the PM-in-waiting and accordingly, provided with all the privileges/perks such as salary/allowance/staff and status, meeting foreign dignities (together with or separately from the PM) and being briefed on intelligence and national security issues. The Canadian Leader of the Opposition even has an official residence in the capital, known as Stornoway.
| ||||||||
| Some States Allow For The Renunciation Of Islam Posted: 13 Nov 2012 03:18 PM PST One should distinguish between what the Islamic law in some States is from what it ought to be. This post is about the former, not the latter. In Perlis, Selangor, Perak, Penang, Malacca and Negeri Sembilan, the relevant State laws provide that the Syariah High Court shall in its civil jurisdiction, hear and determine actions and proceedings that relate to, among others, a declaration that a person is no longer a Muslim and/or a declaration that a deceased person was a Muslim or otherwise at the time of his death. See:
In Johore, section 141(2), Enactment No. 14/1978 (wef 16.2.1979) is a mandatory provision wider in scope than those of the aforesaid States and reads as follows: Read more at: http://www.loyarburok.com/2012/11/13/states-renunciation-islam/
|
| 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 | |
0 ulasan:
Catat Ulasan