Selasa, 28 Ogos 2012

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan
Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info
Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News


Touché

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 06:47 AM PDT

Itulah. When I try to tell you, you cakap macam-macam. Now I diam. And now that I diam you all are foaming at the mouth like rabid dogs. Hey, just focus on the next general election. Just vote Pakatan Rakyat. Why worry whether Cina bertanding kawasan Melayu or Melayu bertanding kawasan Cina or whether after this we are going to get Hudud or Muslims keluar Islam masuk Kristian? All that never mindlah! What matters is asal bukan Umno. Itu saja.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

To the Malay-medium or Chinese- and Tamil-educated readers who think that 'the devil you know' refers to a verse in the Qur'an or Bible, touché means...oh what the hell, go look it up yourself.

Is it too early to write another 'I told you so' article? Well, as they say, the early bird catches the worm, so it is never too early to say 'I told you so'.

Now, for those of you who don't speak English at home or English is not your mother-tongue -- my late mother was British so I suppose I can claim that English is my mother's tongue -- I am NOT admitting that I am a bird or that I eat worms, although I do have a 'bird', if you know what I mean. This is what we English-speaking people would call an idiom, the latest topic of discussion in Malaysia -- alongside Hudud, crossovers, and other such matters.

Anyway, back to the early bird catches the worm thing.

I did try to tell you so many times about the unresolved issues facing Pakatan Rakyat. And I did not just write about it in Malaysia Today. I even said this to Anwar Ibrahim's face in a forum in London. I did not hold my punches (an idiom). I said it no holds barred (yet another idiom).

And this got not only Anwar but also all the other Pakatan Rakyat leaders hot under the collar (yes, another idiom). Finally, I decided to say what I had been trying to tell them in interviews in the mainstream media.

Boy, and did all hell break loose (correct, again, an idiom). They felt I was trying to teach grandfathers how to suck eggs (a Malaysian-Chinese idiom which means...hmm...not sure what that means because I am a grandfather of five grandkids and I certainly don't suck eggs).

Then they started accusing me of being on someone's payroll and demanded to know where my funding was coming from. And, today, Suaram has come out to admit that it is indeed being financed through foreign funding to the tune of RM100,000 a month for the last many years (read about it here).

So there you are. Touché.

Then there was the matter of crossovers plus the lack of quality of the people that Pakatan Rakyat was attracting that I spoke about. Now even the Pakatan Rakyat people are divided on whether it is morally right to poach politicians from the opposite side of the fence. And many voters have said that in the coming general election they will be voting based on candidates and not based on parties.

So, again, touché!

I also spoke about the lack of unity in Pakatan Rakyat and how DAP, PAS and PKR tidur satu bantal tapi mimpi lain-lain (a Malay idiom). I touched on the inter-party and intra-party bickering and how the issue of seat allocations and who should be taking the lead needs to be resolved.

And today, again, touché!

Then there is the matter of Hudud, which had earlier resulted in the breakup of the opposition coalition, Barisan Alternatif, followed by the 2004 general election disaster, and how this matter needs to be resolved before Pakatan Rakyat faces the coming general election (read about it here).

And, yet again, touché!

Okay, those are just some of the issues I have been screaming about. There are many more, of course. And when they responded with personal attacks against me, and allegations of mala fide and paid assassin and so on, I took to the mainstream media and that was the straw that broke the camel's back (yeap, one more in my string of idioms -- don't you just love this English language lesson?).

So, what more can I say other than touché? I am not really that silly after all, am I? Now I keep quiet. Now I just watch and snigger while all you buggers squeal like a stuck pig (you got it, another idiom).

So, why make so much noise about Hudud? You want ABU (anything but Umno), right? Hudud is not Umno. So why get so upset? As long as it is not Umno then diamlah!

Itulah. When I try to tell you, you cakap macam-macam. Now I diam. And now that I diam you all are foaming at the mouth like rabid dogs. Hey, just focus on the next general election. Just vote Pakatan Rakyat. Why worry whether Cina bertanding kawasan Melayu or Melayu bertanding kawasan Cina or whether after this we are going to get Hudud or Muslims keluar Islam masuk Kristian? All that never mindlah! What matters is asal bukan Umno. Itu saja.

Touché!

 

The trouble with mother-tongue education

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 04:11 PM PDT

I was puzzled. I asked my Chinese friends: why support the opposition and yet vote government? And these Chinese told me: "Barisan Nasional may be the devil, but better we vote for the devil we know than the angel we don't know. We know Barisan Nasional and we know how to handle them. We don't know the opposition and we are not sure what they will be like if they came to power."

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Kenyataan Mahathir memakan diri

Dalam al-Quran tiada istilah malaikat lebih buruk berbanding syaitan

Khaulah Azwar, FMT

Timbalan Mursyidul Am PAS, Datuk Dr Haron Din, menegaskan tidak ada istilah atau ayat di dalam Al Quran yang menjelaskan syaitan lebih baik dari malaikat.

"Di dalam al Quran juga tidak terdapat ayat yang mengatakan malaikat sama ada dikenali atau tidak dikenali sebagai makhluk Allah yang lebih buruk atau derhaka kepada perintah Allah."

"Malaikat dijadikan Allah sebagai makhluk yang patuh dan tidak derhaka akan perintah-Nya. Mereka akan kekal begitu sejak dari awal hingga ke akhirnya."

"Ia berlawanan dengan sifat syaitan kerana mereka memang diakui sebagai makhluk yang jahat dan derhaka kepada perintah Allah," katanya.

Pemimpin PAS itu mengulas kenyataan dibuat bekas Perdana Menteri, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad dalam blognya www.chedet.cc pada 22 Ogos lalu yang berharap rakyat tidak memberi mandat kepada Pakatan Rakyat (Pakatan) dalam pilihan raya akan datang.

Dr Mahathir menulis, "better the devil you know than the angel you don't" yang membawa maksud "lebih baik syaitan yang anda kenali daripada malaikat yang anda tidak kenali".

"Tiada istilah atau ayat di dalam al Quran yang menjelaskan  begitu", katanya.

Dr Haron seterusnya berkata, kenyataan Dr Mahathir itu ternyata memakan diri sendiri dan Umno-BN kerana umum terutamanya umat Islam mengetahui syaitan itu adalah makhluk Allah yang paling kejam dan derhaka.

Sebagai bekas pemimpin tertinggi negara dan pernah mengetuai Umno-BN untuk tempoh yang lama, tambahnya, adalah amat tidak wajar Dr Mahathir membuat kenyataan sedemikian rupa dengan melabelkan sesuatu pihak atau pertubuhan dengan nama seburuk itu.

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

Learn English Today

English Idioms & Idiomatic Expressions

Idioms are words, phrases or expressions which are commonly used in everyday conversation by native speakers of English. They are often metaphorical and make the language more colourful.

http://www.learn-english-today.com/idioms/idioms_proverbs.html

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

How many of you who went to a Malay-medium, Chinese or Tamil schools learned English? And did they teach you idioms or expressions in your English language class? Let me give you some examples of idioms:


Better the devil you know.

Letting the cat out of the bag.

Barking up the wrong tree.

Adding fuel to the flames.

Bite the hand that feeds you.

Breathe down your neck.

Build bridges.

Burn your bridges.

Burn the candle at both ends.

Bury your head in the sand.

Bury the hatchet.

The carrot and the stick.

Clipping someone's wings.

Cramp someone's style.

Cross the Rubicon.

Dig one's own grave.

Drag your feet.

Eat dirt.

Eat out of house and home.

Err on the side of caution.

Pardon my French.

Fall over backwards.

Fiddling while Rome burns.

Follow one's nose.

Follow in someone's footsteps.

 

Those are actually just some of so, so many 'colourful' sayings in the English language. And I just love these sayings and use them all the time, especially when I talk -- though not so much when I write because many readers do not understand English well enough to even detect sarcasm even when it bites them in the arse (another idiom).

When Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad first came out with his 'better the devil you know than an angel you don't know' idiom, every man and his dog (another idiom) jumped onto the bandwagon (yet another idiom) to whack the daylight out of him (I think this is an idiom also).

Actually, 'better the devil you know' is the shortened form of the full idiom, 'better the devil you know than the devil you don't'. That is the correct English version. In Malaysia, however, especially amongst the Chinese, they say 'better the devil you know than the angel you don't know'.

I learned the 'power' of this idiom back in 1999. That was soon after the birth of the Reformasi Movement and not long after the 10th General Election of 29th November 1999. The Malays voted opposition while the Chinese voted Barisan Nasional. Even those who hated Barisan Nasional and supported the opposition voted for the ruling party.

I was puzzled. I asked my Chinese friends: why support the opposition and yet vote government? And these Chinese told me: "Barisan Nasional may be the devil, but better we vote for the devil we know than the angel we don't know. We know Barisan Nasional and we know how to handle them. We don't know the opposition and we are not sure what they will be like if they came to power."

It was then when reality hit me. The Chinese, as my Chinese friends kept reminding me, are pragmatic people. They are not emotional like the Malays. So they use their head and not their heart to vote. And they will work with the 'devil' rather than the 'angel' if the 'devil' is a known factor and the 'angel' is an unknown factor.

In other words, stick with what you know even if the alternative may be better because there are uncertainties with the alternative.

Not many years later, Dr Mahathir said the same thing when he was interviewed soon after the retired in 2003. Dr Mahathir was asked about what he would consider as his greatest regret in his 22 years as Prime Minister and he replied: my greatest regret is I failed to change the Malays. And he lamented: the Malays are too emotional and too feudalistic. Why can't the Malays be more pragmatic like the Chinese?

Dr Mahathir was, of course, referring to the 1999 General Election where the Malays voted opposition while the Chinese voted for 'the devil they knew', which was Barisan Nasional.

Last week, when Dr Mahathir made that quip, many Malaysians jumped and said that Dr Mahathir admitted that Barisan Nasional is a devil while the opposition is an angel. I was so tempted to write this article but I knew that most readers would interpret this as a show of support for Dr Mahathir. So I refrained from writing about it.

Actually, this is not a show of support for Dr Mahathir but a show of opposition to stupidity. I am opposing stupidity, not supporting Dr Mahathir. But stupid people will view it as my support for Dr Mahathir rather than my opposition to stupidity.

Then the renowned cleric, Datuk Dr Haron Din, started quoting the Qur'an (read the news item above) and tells us that what Dr Mahathir said is not in the Qur'an. Then I thought I had better say something before people start whacking Islam, the Qur'an, Prophet Muhammad, etc., and bring ridicule to the religion.

Of course it is not in the Qur'an. Dr Mahathir was not quoting the Qur'an. Dr Mahathir was quoting an English idiom, which has been 'Malaysianised' from 'better the devil you know than the devil you don't' to 'better the devil you know than the angel you don't'.

Must we keep arguing Islam and quote the Qur'an for every issue? General elections are also not in the Qur'an. Choosing governments through the ballot box is also not in the Qur'an. Getting 222 Members of Parliament to formulate laws is not in the Qur'an either. There are millions of things not in the Qur'an -- such as detention without trial, hanging people who traffic in drugs, jailing people who drive dangerously and kill someone walking beside the road, and so on.

Bank accounts are not in the Qur'an. Paying your workers monthly salaries is not in the Qur'an. Paying your workers' salary by cheque is not in the Qur'an. Stocks and shares, Amanah Saham included, are not in the Qur'an. Driving licences are not in the Qur'an. Business licences are not in the Qur'an. Signboard permits are not in the Qur'an. Police permits for rallies are not in the Qur'an. Gun licences are not in the Qur'an.

If we follow the Qur'an, then you must pay your workers at the end of each and every working day in gold or silver (not with 'worthless' paper), and we can drive and own a gun without the need of licences. We can also carry bows-and-arrows, spears, swords and knives when we leave the house. The Qur'an does not allow the government to arrest us for carrying dangerous weapons in public.

Bersih is not in the Qur'an. ABU is not in the Qur'an. Islamic parties are not in the Qur'an. Pakatan Rakyat is not in the Qur'an. Election Commissions are not in the Qur'an. Anti-Corruption Commissions are not in the Qur'an. Human Rights Commissions are not in the Qur'an. State governments are not in the Qur'an. Prime Ministers are not in the Qur'an. Members of Parliament are not in the Qur'an. Income tax is not in the Qur'an. Import duty, sales tax and road tax are not in the Qur'an. Insurance and EPF are not in the Qur'an. You name it and most likely it will not be in the Qur'an.

Oh, and according to the Qur'an, we can also own slaves. We can either buy these slaves from the market or invade someone's territory and capture them. And slaves are our property so we can have sex with them. That is not zina (illicit sex).

Why pick and choose certain items from the Qur'an? If you want to talk about the Qur'an then there will be many things to talk about. And one thing that PAS will need to do is to announce that it will NOT be contesting the coming general election because this is not what the Qur'an says we must do and this is not the way that governments are chosen in Islam.

Will Pakatan Rakyat now just be PKR and DAP? At least that will solve the current impasse regarding Hudud. Problem solved. No more PAS in Pakatan Rakyat so no more Hudud.

 
Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News

0 ulasan
Klik GAMBAR Dibawah Untuk Lebih Info
Sumber Asal Berita :-

Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News


Touché

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 06:47 AM PDT

Itulah. When I try to tell you, you cakap macam-macam. Now I diam. And now that I diam you all are foaming at the mouth like rabid dogs. Hey, just focus on the next general election. Just vote Pakatan Rakyat. Why worry whether Cina bertanding kawasan Melayu or Melayu bertanding kawasan Cina or whether after this we are going to get Hudud or Muslims keluar Islam masuk Kristian? All that never mindlah! What matters is asal bukan Umno. Itu saja.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

To the Malay-medium or Chinese- and Tamil-educated readers who think that 'the devil you know' refers to a verse in the Qur'an or Bible, touché means...oh what the hell, go look it up yourself.

Is it too early to write another 'I told you so' article? Well, as they say, the early bird catches the worm, so it is never too early to say 'I told you so'.

Now, for those of you who don't speak English at home or English is not your mother-tongue -- my late mother was British so I suppose I can claim that English is my mother's tongue -- I am NOT admitting that I am a bird or that I eat worms, although I do have a 'bird', if you know what I mean. This is what we English-speaking people would call an idiom, the latest topic of discussion in Malaysia -- alongside Hudud, crossovers, and other such matters.

Anyway, back to the early bird catches the worm thing.

I did try to tell you so many times about the unresolved issues facing Pakatan Rakyat. And I did not just write about it in Malaysia Today. I even said this to Anwar Ibrahim's face in a forum in London. I did not hold my punches (an idiom). I said it no holds barred (yet another idiom).

And this got not only Anwar but also all the other Pakatan Rakyat leaders hot under the collar (yes, another idiom). Finally, I decided to say what I had been trying to tell them in interviews in the mainstream media.

Boy, and did all hell break loose (correct, again, an idiom). They felt I was trying to teach grandfathers how to suck eggs (a Malaysian-Chinese idiom which means...hmm...not sure what that means because I am a grandfather of five grandkids and I certainly don't suck eggs).

Then they started accusing me of being on someone's payroll and demanded to know where my funding was coming from. And, today, Suaram has come out to admit that it is indeed being financed through foreign funding to the tune of RM100,000 a month for the last many years (read about it here).

So there you are. Touché.

Then there was the matter of crossovers plus the lack of quality of the people that Pakatan Rakyat was attracting that I spoke about. Now even the Pakatan Rakyat people are divided on whether it is morally right to poach politicians from the opposite side of the fence. And many voters have said that in the coming general election they will be voting based on candidates and not based on parties.

So, again, touché!

I also spoke about the lack of unity in Pakatan Rakyat and how DAP, PAS and PKR tidur satu bantal tapi mimpi lain-lain (a Malay idiom). I touched on the inter-party and intra-party bickering and how the issue of seat allocations and who should be taking the lead needs to be resolved.

And today, again, touché!

Then there is the matter of Hudud, which had earlier resulted in the breakup of the opposition coalition, Barisan Alternatif, followed by the 2004 general election disaster, and how this matter needs to be resolved before Pakatan Rakyat faces the coming general election (read about it here).

And, yet again, touché!

Okay, those are just some of the issues I have been screaming about. There are many more, of course. And when they responded with personal attacks against me, and allegations of mala fide and paid assassin and so on, I took to the mainstream media and that was the straw that broke the camel's back (yeap, one more in my string of idioms -- don't you just love this English language lesson?).

So, what more can I say other than touché? I am not really that silly after all, am I? Now I keep quiet. Now I just watch and snigger while all you buggers squeal like a stuck pig (you got it, another idiom).

So, why make so much noise about Hudud? You want ABU (anything but Umno), right? Hudud is not Umno. So why get so upset? As long as it is not Umno then daimlah!

Itulah. When I try to tell you, you cakap macam-macam. Now I diam. And now that I diam you all are foaming at the mouth like rabid dogs. Hey, just focus on the next general election. Just vote Pakatan Rakyat. Why worry whether Cina bertanding kawasan Melayu or Melayu bertanding kawasan Cina or whether after this we are going to get Hudud or Muslims keluar Islam masuk Kristian? All that never mindlah! What matters is asal bukan Umno. Itu saja.

Touché!

 

Suaram funded by US, Finland, Canada

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 05:35 AM PDT

(Bernama) - Suara Rakyat Malaysia (Suaram) director Kua Kia Soong on Tuesday revealed that the non-governmental organisation has been receiving funds from foreign countries and individuals nationwide.

He said the human rights group was being funded by countries, namely the United States, Finland and Canada, as well as some Malaysian state governments and individual donations.

Kua, however, kept a close guard on the funding issue and the amount Suaram had so far received from funders and primary sponsors.

"Do I really need to tell you where our funds come from? Why does everyone want to know where our funds come from?" he asked at the unvealing of the Malaysia Human Rights Report 2011 here.

He also questioned a local Malay daily reporter whether he knew the daily's source of funding.

Kua urged any party dissatisfied with the NGO to lodge a police report.

In July, Suaram and its role as an independent NGO was questioned for being a recipient of annual allocations consistently from the US-based National Endowment for Democracy (NED) since 2006.

According to the AIDC portal, as stated in NED's annual report, Suaram had received a total amount of US$385,000 (RM1,218,328.65) for 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009.

Besides Suaram, other Malaysia-based NGOs being funded as listed by the NED include the International Republican Institute, National Democratic Institute for International Affairs, Southeast Asian Press Alliance, Centre for Independent Journalism, Open Dialogue Centre and Mkini Dot Com.

It had been widely reported that Suaram was not even registered as an NGO with the Registrar of Societies, instead it was registered as a company under the name of Suara Inisiatif Sdn Bhd with RM2 paid-up capital.

Since then, Suaram has remained tight-lipped over allegations concerning its NGO status, and its source of funding.

 

PAS will not push ahead hudud law without majority support in Parliament: Hu

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 05:27 AM PDT

(Sin Chew Daily) -- PAS Supporters Congress national chairman Hu Phang Chaw said PAS advocated the implementation of hudud law through democratic proceedings. In other words, if support from two thirds of MPs in the Parliament could not be secured in order to amend the Constitution to implement the hudud law, then it will be shelved.

He said that was the decision of the party's political bureau.

Hu pointed out that hudud law was a part of the Islamic penal code that could never be abolished, just like Buddhism's advocacy of vegetarianism and the Ten Commandments of Christianity, which must never be challenged. As such, he said PAS hoped to decide whether to implement the hudud law in the country through democratic proceedings.

He said during a media conference this afternoon that he was recently appointed a member of the party's central political bureau, becoming the first ever non-Muslim in the party's 61-year history to have the opportunity of taking part in the party's decision-making mechanism.

He believed the move showed that PAS was willing to accept the reality of Malaysia's plural society, and had thus adopted a more open and more plural political direction.

The membership of PAS' political bureau, which has just been established recently, comprises the party's president, deputy president, four vice presidents, secretary-general, Youth national chairman, Wanita chairman, national chairman of PAS Supporters Congress, election bureau chairman and central strategy research centre chairman.

Hu pointed out that other than the issue of hudud law, the political bureau also discussed Nasharudin Mat Isa's proposal that PAS withdraw from the opposition pact.

He also said the party would organise a seminar in Selangor early September to seek public opinion on the party's policies so that these policies could be implemented for the well-being of all Malaysians if it won the next general election.

He added that the chances of Pakatan taking the helm at Putrajaya was on the rise following changes in the political situation in East Malaysia and Johor.

He also urged the MCA to stop instilling Islamophobia among the people from the hudud law in a bid to solicit support from Chinese voters.

As a political party, he said MCA should instead highlight its own political ideologies and not persistently distort Islam just to win the election.

He said MCA was playing with fire trying to fan up emotions among the Chinese community by using the hudud law, adding that this would kill any chance of MCA candidates in Malay constituencies because no one would tolerate his religion being insulted and sabotaged by other people.

Besides, Hu also felt that the hudud law forum organised by MCA in the past was indeed a good beginning. He said MCA should organise more of such forums to allow the Chinese community and Muslims to look into this issue in a more macroscopic and rational approach.

He said if needed he would be willing to help make arrangements for PAS leaders to meet up with their MCA counterparts and to hear their views on various issues.

 

Report confirmed by Mat Sabu before going into print

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 05:24 AM PDT

(Sin Chew Daily) -- On the front page report on Tuesday, Sin Chew Daily reporter had on Monday repeatedly clarified with PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu, who confirmed that his party indeed had the intention of implementing the hudud law through constitutional amendment in the Parliament if it won the next general election. However, he said the party had yet to discuss tabling of constitutional amendment in the Parliament.

Online media have been playing up the news Tuesday morning that Mat Sabu had denied the report. We have, nevertheless, tried without success to contact Mat Sabu to get his further clarification on this matter.

As a matter of fact, we called up Mat Sabu on Sunday and forwarded him the question, "Can you explain the remark made by PAS president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang after the party's political and election bureau meeting on August , that PAS will implement the hudud law through democratic proceedings?"

The above remark was made by Hadi Awang on the party's Harakah Daily website last Saturday (August 25).

Mat Sabu replied, "Democracy is about forming the government through the ballot box. The amendment of any policy needs to go through the Parliament, and the support of two thirds of all MPs is required for constitutional amendment."

As such, we based on the reply of Mat Sabu to come up with the headline news of the evening edition whereby Mat Sabu said PAS had decided to seek constitutional amendment in the Parliament to implement the hudud law if Pakatan Rakyat won the next general election.

However, having learned that Mat Sabu denied to an English daily the report appearing on Sin Chew Daily, we called him again Monday afternoon to seek further clarification.

Mat Sabu said, "What I was saying was any law that needed to be amended had to go through the Parliament. I did not mention hudud law."

He also said PAS had not discussed tabling constitutional amendment in the Parliament.

However, since we sought the explanation from Mat Sabu in relation to the remark made by party president Hadi Awang, so we asked him again whether his so-called "any law" would include the hudud law, and he said affirmatively, "Yes."

We sought further clarification from him, "Can we say PAS indeed has the intention (memang berhasrat) to amend the Constitution to implement any law, including the hudud law, but then the party has yet to discuss tabling this motion in the Parliament?" He also replied affirmatively, "Yes, you can."

As such, we changed the headline on the morning edition of Sin Chew Daily to: "Mat Sabu says PAS has intention to seek constitutional amendment in the Parliament in order to implement the hudud law if the party wins the next general election."

PAS vice president Salahuddin Ayub said when contacted Tuesday that the political bureau's meeting last Saturday had decided that all issues related to the hudud law could only be answered by the party president alone and as such, he was not in any position to answer the question.

We tried again today (Tuesday) to call Mat Sabu for clarification, including ringing up Shamsuri Ahmad, political secretary for PAS president Hadi Awang, but unfortunately we still could not get the line through.

 

On Hudud

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 05:12 AM PDT

A person who has sexual intercourse with a dead body shall be dealt with as if it were alive; rather, the punishment will be even more severe. In the case of it being the body of his wife or slave girl, the punishment will be milder. The proof for this is the same as is required for adultery.

A REPUBLIC OF VIRTUE

Dr Azly Rahman

Something for Malaysians to think about with regard to the debate on "hudud". I invite readers and scholars to comment on this and  its relevance to multicultural Malaysia.

Penology (hudud)

Under an Islamic government, certain punishments are prescribed for certain crimes, so that the society may be kept healthy and the roots of corruption destroyed. Some of these penalties (hudud) are as follows according to Shi'ah fiqh.

1) The penalties for adultery (zina): If an adult, sane man knowingly and deliberately has sexual intercourse with a woman who is forbidden to him, it is then an obligation on the authorized judge to flog him with a hundred lashes; his head will be shaved and he will be forced to leave the city for a period of one year. If he is "muhsin", i.e. he is in a position to satisfy his sexual urges in conformity with the shari'ah, he will be stoned to death as well as being given a hundred lashes. If the woman consented, she shall, if also "muhsinah", be stoned, and if otherwise, she shall be given a hundred lashes. If a man has sexual intercourse with a forbidden woman of his relatives (mahram), or with a woman who has suckled at the same breast as he was (his rida'ih), or with his step mother, or if a dhimmah (a non-Muslim under the protection of a Muslim state) has sexual intercourse with a Muslim woman, he shall be beheaded; and the penalty is the same rape.

The adultery can only be proven by:

1) a confession repeated four times;

2) the witnessing of four just men that they saw him actually in the act of penetration;

3) the witnessing of three just men and two just women.

If the adultery is witnessed by two just men and four women, it shall be deemed proven but the penalty may only be flogging, their being no capital penalty. If the evidence is less than this, it is not considered complete, and, what is more, if less than four men give evidence, they shall be punished for slander (qadhaf). For the evidence to be accepted there must be unanimity between the witnesses, and they must all have seen the actual penetration with their own eyes.

If a man is to be stoned after a confession, but then disavows his confession, he shall not be stoned; and if, after confession, he repents of his deed, the qadi may exercise his discretion. If he repents when four witnesses have seen his act, there will be no alteration in the penalty.

If a person is being punished for the third time for the some offence (adultery), he shall be beheaded. A pregnant woman or a sick person must not receive his or her punishment until the baby is born or the sickness goes away, respectively.

2) The penalties for homosexual acts: The punishment for sodomy between two males (liwat) is more severe than that for any other crime. It is the only case in which the offender may be burnt to death. The qadi may sentence that active partner in the act to one of four penalties: beheading, stoning to death, being thrown from a height so that his bones are all broken up, burning to death. The passive partner, if he is adult and responsible for his actions, is to be beheaded. If he is not yet of the age of puberty, he will be given a reduced punishment (ta'zir). The same conditions of proof hold here as in adultery.

In the female homosexual act (sihaq), both offenders will be given a hundred lashes. If they are married, it is not impossible for them to be stoned to death.

3) The penalty for the procurer: the procurer (qawwad) who arranges for an unlawful sexual act to take place, will be given seventy lashes, his head will be shaved, and he will be expelled from the city. The proof for this is met by the evidence of two just men or by a confession made twice.

4) The penalty for false witnessing and slander: if some one falsely accuses a sane, adult and free Muslim of a crime for which some sentence can be inflicted, for instance, adultery, sodomy or drinking wine, then the false accuser shall be punished with eighty lashes. In case of the proof being admissable on confirmation by the accused person, the sentence against the accuser shall become void. The crime shall be considered proved as long as there is "bayyinah)

(see above).

It is also a punishable offence for a person to call someone else with some undesirable epithet which he does not deserve, e.g. "sinner", "corrupter", "leper", etc. If someone claims to be a prophet, or curses or declares enmity with one of the fourteen pure ones ( the Prophet (s.a.w.), the twelve Imams (a.s.) and Hadhrat Fatima), he shall be beheaded.

5) The penalty for the drunkard: the penalty for anyone who avails himself of any intoxicating beverage of any kind is eighty lashes, to be given on his or her bare neck and arms.

If someone has been punished for three times and he commits the crime a fourth time, he or she shall be beheaded. One who considers wine lawful is liable to the same punishment.

If the dealer in wine repents and leaves his profession, it is well and good, otherwise he too shall be liable to beheading.

6) The penalties for theft: if an adult and sane person steals something from a "safe" place (i.e. somewhere which is locked or family closed, or someplace similar) which is valued at more than a quarter of a mithqal (about 1 gm - 1 mithqal is a little over 4.5 grams) of pure gold, he will have the four fingers of his right hand cut after duly being sentenced by a qadi on the evidence of double confession or "bayyinah" (see above). If he commits the crime a second time, his leg will be cut off under the knee. For the third offence, he shall be sentenced to life imprisonment. And, if he commits theft a number of times before he is subjected to the prescribed punishment, only one penalty shall be inflicted upon him. For children and insane people, there is no hadd only ta'zir (a lenient punishment). The theif must invariably have to pay compensation, and for this, one acknowledgement, or

the evidence and oath of one just witness is sufficient.

The "hands" of the father shall not be cut off for stealing the property of the son. But, if, conversely, the son steals, his "hands" shall be cut off.

7) The penalty for causing fear and terror (muharib): if someone causes fear among the people in a town or in the open country or at sea and/or intimidates them for the purposes of seizing what belongs to them, the qadi is empowered to have him or her executed, crucified, to have his right hand and left foot cut off, or to have him banished from the country.

God, the Most High, has said, "The recompense of those who war against God and His Messenger, and strive in the land spreading corruption, is only that they be slain or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off, from the opposite sides, or be banished from the land." (5:33)

In case of banishment, the people of the place to which the culprit has been deported must be informed in writing, so that they may refuse him entry to their meetings, to their meals, etc., till he repents.

The thief who attacks a house is also a "muharib". If he is killed, his blood will be considered shed with impurity.

If someone attacks the modesty of a woman or her child, these latter have the right of self-defence. If the assailant is killed in the struggle, (his blood too will have been shed with impunity. Thugs, ruffians and false witnesses (excluding those in 4 above) are liable to reduced punishment. The judge can give them any appropriate punishment.

8) Sundry penalties: anyone who perpetrates an indecent act with a quadruped shall be given a less severe punishment. If he persists in his activities, he may be executed. The meat of the animal (if it is a lawful animal) will become forbidden, and it must be slaughtered and its body burnt. In case it belongs to someone other than the perpetrator of the act, he must be awarded the cost of the cost of the animal. If the animal is of doubtful ownership, it should be decided by lots. If the animal is in any case unlawful, it must be sold in another city, and the price obtained given in charity. If the animal belongs to another, he must be suitably recompensed for his loss. The evidence of two just persons or a double confession is sufficient to prove guilt.

A person who has sexual intercourse with a dead body shall be dealt with as if it were alive; rather, the punishment will be even more severe. In the case of it being the body of his wife or slave girl, the punishment will be milder. The proof for this is the same as is required for adultery.

A person who indulges in masturbation also deserves a mild punishment.

As far as is possible, every person has the right to defend his own person as well as his property and the persons of his family. But he should start by adopting less severe measures, and he should only increase his precautions if necessary.

If someone looks without permission into someone else's house and the dwellers pelt him with stones causing his death, no penalty may be extracted from them, and his blood is considered shed with impunity.

Murder is the greatest sin and the greatest social crime. "And who so slays a believer wilfully, his recompense is Hell, therein dwelling forever, and God will be worth with him and will curse him, and prepare for him a mighty chastisement." (4:93) Crimes against the person, whether it causes death, loss of a part of the body, or not, can be divided into three kinds:

1) premeditated or wilful,

2) similar to (1),

3) by accident.

First, (1), premeditated or wilful, needs no explanation. (2) means that the attacker took the initiative, but did not intend to kill. For example, someone beats someone else as a warning, but this results in death, or a person is given some medicine to cure him, but it ends his life. (3) accidental means that there is neither any intention nor any initiative, yet someone is killed; for instance, somebody is aiming at a bird and, by mistake, a human being becomes the victim, or a man is lifting his gun and it accidentally goes off and kills somebody.

More clear examples are the actions of a man who is sleep walking, of an unconscious person, of a mad man or of an innocent child.

It must be clearly observed that as far as the crime and its punishment is concerned, there is no difference between the actual committer of the crime and the person who devised and ordered it to be done; nor does it make any difference if the crime is committed by one or many.

Retaliation (qisas) applies only in the case of wilful or premeditated murder or injury. In (2) and (3) there are only compensation (diyah). There can be no retaliation from the child or the lunatic, nor can there be any retaliation if the murdered person is a child or a lunatic. An adult who kills a child is subject only to the deliverance of compensation. However, some jurists are of the opinion that there is retaliation here, and also for the killing of a lunatic.

Another condition for retaliation is that the culprit was not compelled or under constraint, although this does not apply in tha case of death, for in matter of murder, there is no "taqiyah" (dissimulation). It is also necessary that the person murdered by "without sin", i.e. not someone whose death is permitted by the shari'ah. There is no retaliating against the father, the grandfather or the great grandfather, if the murder their son, grandson or great grandson, only compensation. A Muslim is subject to retaliation only in the case of the murder of another Muslim. Likewise, retaliation shall be taken against the freedman only for the murder of a freedman.

The blood money or compensation for a free Muslim is: a hundred camels, or two hundred cows, or a thousand sheep, or two hundred items of clothing, each consisting of two parts, or a thousand dinars. If the heirs of the murdered person agree to take the compensation, retaliation is voided, and the murderer must pay the compensation within one year. In (2), the period for payment is two years. In (3), the period is three years, with a third being payable each year.

In cases of parts of the body, retaliation can be extracted if the action was deliberate. The retaliation is like-for-like, i.e. an eye for an eye, an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth.

If the crime is of kinds (2) or (3), there are special compensations: some equivalent to the whole compensation for a man (i.e. 1000 dinars), some a half, and some less than a half. In general, organs and parts of the body which occur singly, such as the nose or the penis, demand the whole compensation). In (1) and (2) the compensation must be paid by the cluprit himself, but in (3) it may be paid by his 'aqilah (certain near relatives on the father's side).

SOURCE:

http://www.momin.com/Books/THE+ORIGIN+SHI039ITE+AND+ISLAM+PRINCIPLES-42/Part+Three+The+Shariah+-+the+Divine+Code+of+Living-659/14+Penology+hudud-3735.html

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

DR AZLY RAHMAN, who was born in Singapore and grew up in Johor Baru, holds a Columbia University (New York) doctorate in International Education Development and Master's degrees in the fields of Education, International Affairs, Peace Studies and Communication. He has taught more than 40 courses in six different departments and has written more than 300 analyses on Malaysia. His teaching experience spans Malaysia and the United States, over a wide range of subjects from elementary to graduate education. He currently resides in the United States.

https://www.facebook.com/#!/azly.rahman

http://azlyrahman-illuminations.blogspot.com/

 

Let’s go the whole nine yards

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 08:13 PM PDT

 

Almost two years later, in April 2011, TV3 aired an interview they did with me. What I said in my TV3 interview was basically a repeat of my YouTube video (below). This time it finally got the attention I wanted (which was why I did that TV3 interview in the first place). A few weeks later, the Malaysian police met up with me in Bangkok, Thailand, and took my statement, which I signed. You can read my statement to the police below.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Jaringan Melayu Malaysia (JMM) lodged a report at the Hulu Kelang police station on Saturday, 25th August 2012. JMM president Azwanddin Hamzah said the police were urged to investigate the revelation by blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin which alleged that M Puravalen, Abdul Razak Baginda's former lawyer; Subang member of parliament, R Sivarasa; and private investigator P Balasubramaniam were involved in a conspiracy to defame the prime minister and threaten national security.

(READ MORE HERE: http://www.malaysia-today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/51244-jmm-lodges-report-over-malaysia-today-post)

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

Dear Azwan, how are you? And how is your brother, Din? Is he still with Finas? Please send my salam to Din. It's been a long time since we last met and I thought I would write this open letter in response to the police report you made recently on 25th August 2012.

You are probably aware of my June 2008 Statutory Declaration and the host of problems I got into for signing it. What you are probably not aware about, though, is that when I was brought to court and the three charges of criminal defamation were read out to me, I told the judge that I was not going to respond to the charges on grounds that the charges are defective and mala fide.

The judge, in fact the whole court, was stunned and did not know how to respond. The judge then said he would take that as a 'not guilty' plea. I then raised my voice and told the judge that I did not enter a plea of 'not guilty'. What I said was I was not going to respond to the charges on grounds that the charges are defective and mala fide. The judge did not dare look up or look me in the face and he insisted that that would tantamount to a 'not guilty' plea.

The Prosecutor then asked the court to set bail at RM10,000 for each charge, which means totalling RM30,000. My lawyer then stood up and asked the court to reduced the bail to RM5,000. I shouted at the judge and told him that I did not authorise my lawyers to negotiate a reduction in bail, hence I am sacking my lawyers and will represent myself. I then told the judge I refuse to pay any bail even if it is a mere RM1.00.

The judge did not know what to do so he called for a short recess and asked the Prosecutors and my lawyers to meet in chambers. They then discussed what to do. The judge wanted to know whether my lawyers could convince me to accept bail. The Prosecutor told the judge that I am very stubborn so I would probably not back down.

After a few minutes the court resumed and the judge fixed the bail at RM3,000 for all three charges. Everyone in court was surprised. The Prosecutor had asked for RM10,000 while my lawyers had asked for RM5,000. The judge, however, on his own initiative, reduced it to RM3,000 for all three charges, something that the court had never experienced before.

When the judge announced the bail I walked out of the dock and headed for the court lockup. The police officer just stood there and did not know what to do. I then turned and shouted at the police officer to follow me. He tried to persuade me to stay in court but I shouted at him to just follow me to the lockup and to do his job.

The police officer, however, refused to put me in the lockup. He told my lawyer and my wife to talk to me and to try to persuade me to accept bail. After a bit of drama and with my wife reduced to tears, I agreed to accept bail and went home.

Not long after that I left the country and eventually the charges against me were dropped, as was the earlier charge of sedition. However, my SD was never investigated.

About six month later, in August 2009, I did a video, which was published in YouTube (see below). In that video I related the story regarding my SD. Still nothing was done in spite of the fact that almost 150,000 people have viewed the video.

Almost two years later, in April 2011, TV3 aired an interview they did with me. What I said in my TV3 interview was basically a repeat of my YouTube video (below). This time it finally got the attention I wanted (which was why I did that TV3 interview in the first place). A few weeks later, the Malaysian police met up with me in Bangkok, Thailand, and took my statement, which I signed. You can read my statement to the police below.

Again, what I said in my signed statement to the Malaysian police is exactly the same as what I said in my YouTube video of August 2009 and my TV3 interview of April 2011. The only difference is my statement was officially recorded and signed.

Hence, Azwan, seeing how concerned you are about the investigation regarding Altantuya's murder, you may want to go the whole nine yards (an English idiom such as 'better the devil you know') and also take up this issue and ask the Malaysian police what has happened to the recorded and signed statement they took from me in May 2011.

My salam aidil fitri to you and your entire family.

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

RPK Speaks His Mind - Altantuya Statutory Declaration

f4yE5vv73DA

SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4yE5vv73DA

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

My recorded and signed statement to the Malaysian police regarding the 18th June 2008 Statutory Declaration (SD) that I signed

In early June 2008, an old schoolmate of mine named Nik Azmi Nik Daud (Bul) phoned me and requested to meet. He did not tell me what the meeting was about. I not only knew Bul from my Malay College Kuala Kangsar (MCKK) school days of the 1960s but also know him as Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah's (Ku Li) campaign manager. Whenever Ku Li needs to reach me or he needs to pass me any information it is done though Bul.

We met at La Bodega in Jalan Telawi 2, Bangsar, Kuala Lumpur, for tea (about 3.00-4.00pm). I can't remember the exact date (maybe around the second week of June 2008 between the 3rd-5th), but it was about two weeks or so before I signed the SD and it was a working day, mid-week.

My wife, Marina Lee, accompanied me to the meeting and there was another person with Bul. I was not introduced to this fourth person and since Bul did not introduce us I took it I was not supposed to know who he is, so I did not ask. This fourth person did not speak a word throughout the meeting so I could not ascertain whether he was Malay or Chinese although he looked more Chinese than Malay (but then many Malays look Chinese so I could not be sure). As the discussion progressed I began to suspect that he may be from the military or military intelligence (he had that 'regimented' look) but this was only my suspicion based on the subject matter that we discussed.

Bul related the story regarding the number two in the Special Branch of the Military Intelligence, Lt. Kol. Azmi Zainal Abidin, meeting Ku Li to inform Ku Li about the night that Altantuya Shaariibuu was murdered. Bul said that Lt. Kol. Azmi told Ku Li that the Deputy Prime Minister's wife, Rosmah Mansor; and Rosmah's ADC, Lt. Kol. Norhayati Hassan; and Lt. Kol. Norhayati's husband, Lt. Kol. Aziz Buyong; were all present (all three of them) at the scene of Altantuya's murder the night she was murdered and blown up with C4 explosives.

Bul said he was present in the meeting when Lt. Kol. Azmi told Ku Li about this episode. He also told me that Ku Li would like this matter to be exposed, hence the purpose of the meeting that day.

After the meeting with Bul, Marina and I discussed the matter and she did not agree that I pursue this expose because she considered the story as farfetched, plus also because Bul was not reliable and in the past some of his stories have proven to be false. Hence, at the behest of Marina, I did nothing about the matter.

About ten days or so later, Bul again phoned me to ask me whether I was going to follow up on the matter we discussed. I told him I was not going to and he requested to meet again. We met the second time on Sunday, 15th June 2008, for lunch at the Selangor Club at Dataran Merdeka.

I arrived around noon and Bul was already there with about a dozen or so people. They were all having lunch on the veranda. Bul signalled to me to move to another table a bit farther from the group and he joined me there together with the fourth person whom he had brought when we first met at La Bodega. (This fourth person again did not say a word throughout the meeting).

Bul asked me why I did not want to expose the story he had told me earlier and I explained that I thought it was too risky and I would definitely get arrested and charged if I did that. Bul assured me that if that happens then he and Lt. Kol. Azmi would come forward to back up my story. They were prepared to go to court to testify in my defence if required to do so.

Marina told Bul that she was not prepared for me to take the risk in exposing the story. Bul assured Marina that he has all the documents to support the story. The documents are in the form of a confidential report by the Military Intelligence that confirms Rosmah, Lt. Kol. Nothayati and Lt. Kol. Aziz were all at the scene of Altantuya's murder the night she was murdered. This report is the same report that was given to the Prime Minister (Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi) and DYMM the Agong. Bul said that if the police took action against me they will then give me a copy of this report to use in my defence plus they will come forward to testify on my behalf.

After considering it for a while, I told Bul I would run the story. Marina, however, disagreed with my decision and she told Bul this. Bul assured Marina that all will be well and that he (Bul) will make sure of that ("We will never let Pet go to jail," Bul said). Marina told Bul that if I were to be sent to jail then Malaysia Today would be in trouble. Who would keep Malaysia Today running, in particular to pay for the cost of maintaining the server, which at that time came to about RM10,000 a month? Bul told Marina that if I get sent to jail then they would take over the RM10,000 a month cost of maintaining Malaysia Today.

Bul then asked me when I would be doing the expose. I replied that I would write the story in a day or so but Bul disagreed. It must not be just a story, he told me. It has to be in the form of a Statutory Declaration. The government can just ignore a story. But they can't ignore a SD, which is a legal document. They would have to take action if it was a SD. So Bul asked me to sign a SD instead of just writing a story.

I was still not fully satisfied that Bul's story was accurate. I was also not sure whether Lt. Kol. Azmi really existed (although Bul showed me his calling card), let alone whether his story is real and whether he is reliable. So I called John Pang, who also works for Ku Li, and told John Pang what Bul had told me. I then asked John Pang to confirm the story with Ku Li.

John Pang called me back and said that Ku Li is aware of the story and that this person called Lt. Kol. Azmi is very reliable. It seems he always goes to Ku Li's office to pass Ku Li classified information. According to John Pang, Lt Kol. Azmi is also close to Anwar Ibrahim.

I then called Din Merican, who at that time was working for Anwar Ibrahim, and asked Din Merican to also confirm the story with Anwar. Din Merican called me back and said exactly what John Pang had said. Din Merican added that Lt. Kol. Azmi is not only reliable but goes to meet Anwar very often to pass Anwar information, which had been very useful for the 2008 general election.

Based on these 'references' from Ku Li and Anwar, I then signed the SD on Wednesday, 18th June 2008, at the Kuala Lumpur High Court. My lawyer was present when I signed that SD and the following day he sent my SD to the Prosecutors in the Altantuya murder trial.

On Friday, 20th June 2008, an Umno Blog (http://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/) published a copy of my SD. That same day, the Blog owner, Zakir, phoned me to ask about the SD and whether I did sign it. I responded with a 'no comment'. He then published the SD and stated that he did call me and that I refused to comment. I do not know where Zakir got a copy of that SD from, as I did not send him a copy.

That same day, Friday, 20th June 2008, the Attorney General told the media that I had signed a false SD and that they will be investigating the matter. The following day, Saturday, 21st June 2008, the IGP told the media that they would be taking action against me for signing a false SD.

Both the AG and IGP based their comments on the copy of that SD that was published in http://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/. This is because they both referred to the SD published in http://bigdogdotcom.wordpress.com/ when they made their comments. This was reported in the mainstream media on Friday and Saturday, 20th and 21st June 2008 respectively.

Not long after that, I was arrested and charged for criminal defamation and on 11th September 2008 I was detained under the Internal Security Act and was subjected to a 10-day interrogation session where, amongst others, they wanted to know the details regarding the background to that SD. I told the Special Branch exactly what I had related above but no action was taken. In fact, Lt. Kol. Azmi was promoted from the number two to the head of the Special Branch of the Military Intelligence.

According to Datuk Zambri Ahmad, the Special Branch officer in charge of my interrogation, the information I was given by Bul was a red herring and was aimed at trapping me and to get me into trouble. I do not know where Datuk Zambri got that information from or why he told me that.

RAJA PETRA BIN RAJA KAMARUDIN

 

Janji Demokrasi gathering is definitely on

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 06:08 PM PDT

The organisers have decided to ignore a police warning that the gathering would be considered illegal.

Teoh El Sen, FMT

The Janji Demokrasi gathering on the eve of Merdeka Day will go on despite a police declaration that it would be illegal.

Gabungan Janji, the group organising the event, reiterated today that the gathering was being planned as a celebration of Independence Day, "not a demonstration, not a protest, and not a rally".

"Gabungan Janji" translates as "Coalition of Promises" and "Janji Demokrasi" as "Promise of Democracy".

Yesterday, referring to a statement by Gabungan Janji representative Maria Chin Abdullah, Dang Wangi district police chief ACP Zainuddin Ahmad denied that he had been vague about allowing or disallowing the gathering to go on.

Several hours before that, there was a meeting between Dang Wangi police and Gabungan Janji and another group—the Preservation of Jalan Sultan Committee, which is planning a march in the city, also on the eve of Merdeka Day.

Chin told a press conference afterwards that the meeting went well, adding that Zainuddin did not specifically say police was against the Janji Demokrasi gathering at Dataran Merdeka.

She maintained that position today. She told FMT that police briefed the two groups about the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA) and told them to maintain order during their events. Police "did not say yes or no" to the gatherings, she added.

In the FMT interview yesterday, Zainuddin said Chin had given reporters the wrong impression that police were agreeable to the Dataran Merdeka gathering. He said he had made clear during the meeting that Janji Demokrasi would be in violation of Section 9 (1) of the PAA, which requires any group planning a gathering to notify police 10 days before the event.

"Since that was not done, it is illegal under the law, and I did not allow it," he said. "But if they say they'll go ahead anyway, which I advised against, then I may have to take action based on public safety and order."

Chin confirmed today that Zainuddin did mention Section 9. "He did talk about it, but not at the beginning of the meeting. I would still say it was a friendly meeting and that there was no clear answer."

She called on the authorities to consider Janji Demokrasi as "part of the countdown" to the Merdeka Day anniversary.

"Every year there is a countdown at Dataran Merdeka," she said. "Are they saying every year people must have approvals? I mean, is Zainuddin saying that everyone who appears at Dataran Merdeka must have that approval?

"I'm going there just like any other citizen."

Self-imposed conditions

About the PAA, she said: "We disagree with it, but that doesn't mean we'd violate it on purpose.

"We've already put in so many conditions for ourselves. There is no elaborate programme except for Pak Samad (national laureate A Samad Said) reading a poem. That's about it. This is a very low-key event. Are the police saying we can't even wear yellow and celebrate Merdeka and be part of a national event?"

READ MORE HERE

 

UMNO, PAS and the hudud debate

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 05:44 PM PDT

UMNO keeps attacking PAS through state-controlled media in the hope that it would turn PAS and DAP against each other. Many too are waiting for PAS to fall apart before elections. At the same time, UMNO has not shown courage to respond to MCA's repeated rejection of Hudud. It is more interested to keep deceiving Malay voters, ensuring they remain in the dark.

Tuan Guru Abdul Hadi Awang, Harakah

Hudud form one of several of Islamic penal codes, along with qisas and ta'zir. It is divine prerogative, as codified in the Qu'ran and mutawatir hadiths (whose chain of narrations is solid making them authoritative), detailing specific offences covered in Hudud, the punishments they entail and the grounds of punishment.

It is obligatory upon Muslims to firstly believe that Islam is the way of life. This obligation is not just upon PAS supporters but is required of all Muslims, whether they belong to NGOs or political parties, including UMNO. Although UMNO is party based on race which is only open to Bumiputera, Muslim and non-Muslim, its Muslim members are nevertheless bound by this conviction. They are obligated to believe in and act on Islam as the way of life according to the Quran and Sunnah.

Qur'anic verses revealed in Madinah as contained in such surahs as Al-Maidah and Al-Nur have touched upon the issue of crimes and punishments.

It starts with a strong call:

O you who believe, fulfil all contracts. (Al-Maidah: 1)

These contracts include the declaration of faith or shahadah, the most essential requirement in being a Muslim. It is the point at which one declares his belief in God and His Messenger.

[This is] a surah which We have sent down and made [that within it] obligatory and revealed therein verses of clear evidence that you might remember. (Al-Nur: 1)

It is a must that the implementation of Islamic law which incorporates hudud, qisas and ta'zir is carried out through a just system of judiciary. It is prohibited that they are implemented spontaneously by mere individuals or families or even by officials at district or state levels, without first having a proper structured system in place. This is especially so in Malaysia, where Islamic law is implemented by virtue of political power. This is not so different from the time of the Prophet (peace be upon him) when he was unable to implement Islamic law in the absence of political power during the early years of Makkah. Such a power was vested in him in Madinah, where Islamic law was supreme under the auspices of a sovereign state and a comprehensive legal system.

A multiracial and diverse society is not a hurdle for Islamic law; many verses in the Qur'an have been revealed specifically for the purpose of explaining the law to non-Muslims in Madinah who objected to Hudud. The Prophet did not wait until everyone in Madinah agreed or understood the law before implementing it, and ultimately, this understanding came together with implementation. The social effects of Islamic law have demonstrated to the suspecting non-Muslims in Madinah that it is just and effective in controlling crime and creating a sense of security in society.

We must not forget that even though Islamic punishments are harsh, the punishment thresholds are proportionately higher. The burden of proof that the accuser or the prosecutor has to bear is more stringent than that in most civil laws. A slightest shadow of a doubt would lead to acquittals from being subjected to Hudud punishment, and could lead to a clean acquittal or a sentence based on the principle of ta'zir (punishment meted out at the discretion of the judge). Ta'zir ensures that Hudud is not rendered ineffective due to its stringent application. In a way, it also ensures out of court settlements. That was why some criminals had indeed escaped Hudud during the times of the Righteous Caliphs, not because the authority deliberately dropped the Hudud, but because the ta'zir was opted instead.

PAS has ruled Kelantan through democracy and adherence to federalism, in  the same way it once ruled Terengganu. This is in contrast with UMNO which had undermined the principle of federalism, punishing the people of Kelantan over their choice of government. Faced with Federal pressure, PAS has consistently fulfilled its obligation to implement Islam as the way of life. These efforts culminated in the passing in Kelantan of the Shariah Criminal Code enactment at the state assembly. Kelantan has also implementing several Islamic laws at the municipal level, including the prohibition on gambling and the limitation of liquor to only non-Muslims. PAS has at the same time taken every care to respect the inviolable freedom of non-Muslims.

The process of compiling the Shariah enactment was done with the help of legal scholars and experts, and publicised to the public before being debated at the state assembly level. Political parties and NGOs were invited to debate the enactment. PAS members of parliament had several times sought to amend the constitution but stopped by the Standing Orders of the Dewan Rakyat and their motions were deliberately placed at the bottom of the agenda, making them unlikely for parliamentary approval.

PAS is determined to uphold its objectives through democratic channels and political alliances, as allowed by Islam as well as the party constitution. In the same spirit, PAS respects and acknowledges the differences of opinions among its allies in Pakatan Rakyat, and subscribes to a common policy platform to battle corruption, power abuse and oppression. In the past 50 years, Barisan Nasional at the federal government has shown little determination in bringing useful reforms where needed, instead, power play has become a central agenda.

UMNO is the largest component in BN, and it drew votes from the Malay Muslim community at every election. It controls governments at state and federal levels, is in charge of national institutes such as the Institute for Islamic Understanding Malaysia (IKIM),  the National Fatwa Council, the religious departments in most states and various institutes of higher learning. With all the resources and opportunities at its disposal, there is no doubt that UMNO bears a bigger responsibility to implement Islamic law. Clearly, this has only been used as UMNO's political tool against PAS to manipulate voter sentiments.

After more than half a century at the helm, UMNO should have been aware of its obligation to uphold Islamic principles, at the very least to nurture understanding of Islam among its allies in BN. If that obligation has been fulfilled by UMNO, PAS would be more than happy to support efforts to implement Islam, which include the fight against corruption and for justice in society. In such a situation, it will even be wrong for PAS to oppose UMNO, or any other BN components for that matter. Unfortunately, there is no sign that UMNO even wishes to go in that direction. In fact, it was the top UMNO leader who delivered the ultimatum to Kelantan to stop the implementation of Islamic law.

A Muslim's failure to fulfil the duty of implementing God's law amounts to a betrayal of God and His Messenger. The effects of such betrayals are clear for us to see; crime is on the rise, mainly due to the ineffectiveness of the current legal system to combat crime, and yet we continue to support the retention of such a flawed system.

UMNO keeps attacking PAS through state-controlled media in the hope that it would turn PAS and DAP against each other. Many too are waiting for PAS to fall apart before elections. At the same time, UMNO has not shown courage to respond to MCA's repeated rejection of Hudud. It is more interested to keep deceiving Malay voters, ensuring they remain in the dark.

The culture of subservience to UMNO must be ended. It is time that we rise to be better and more dignified. In that spirit, PAS will continue to welcome support and not be deterred by any obstacle, wherever it may come from, in order to uphold Islam. Because we believe that Islam is the way of life.

 

Hopping means betrayal

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 05:21 PM PDT

We are curious about the stand of Pakatan Rakyat leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is the leader behind the scene that caused the fall of the PBS state government in 1994 and planned the September 16 takeover attempt in 2008, over the proposed anti party-hopping Bill.

Lim Sue Goan, Sin Chew Daily

The Penang state government is planning to table an anti party-hopping Bill at the November sitting of the State Legislative Assembly. It has triggered the questions of whether preventing the people's elected representatives from changing parties is a violation of the freedom of association conferred by the Federal Constitution, and why Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng made such a proposal at this time?

It is not something new to have elected government being collapsed by party-hopping lawmakers. In the 1994 Sabah state election, Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) managed to stay in power after winning 25 of the total 48 state assembly seats. However, its members were induced and roped, and the state government fell two months later. It is a forever pain in the heart of its founding president Datuk Joseph Pairin Kitingan.

On January 25, 2009, Umno Bota state assembly member Datuk Nasarudin Hashim hopped to the PKR, causing the Pakatan Rakyat to have 32 seats in the Perak state assembly, five seats more than the BN's 27 seats. The BN and Umno rapidly launched a counterattack by pulling back Nasarudin to Umno, and roping in DAP Jelapang state assembly member Datuk Hee Yit Foong, PKR Behrang state assembly member Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi and Changkat Jering state assemblyman Mohd Osman Jailu. They quit the Pakatan Rakyat and supported the BN, allowing the BN to regain the Perak state regime.

Different people in different situations have different feelings for the proposed anti party-hopping Bill. Pairin believes that when a people's representative contests under the banner of a political party, he or she has "sealed" a social contract with the people. If he or she changes party after being elected, it means a betrayal to the commitment. However, other BN leaders do not agree with the anti party-hopping Bill and MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek even challenged the DAP to amend its party constitution to prohibit party-hopping lawmakers from joining the party.

We are curious about the stand of Pakatan Rakyat leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is the leader behind the scene that caused the fall of the PBS state government in 1994 and planned the September 16 takeover attempt in 2008, over the proposed anti party-hopping Bill.

If there is no law to prevent lawmakers from violating the commitments, the elected government might eventually fall, causing the election to lose its significance.

The Penang state government proposed the anti party-hopping Bill with the hope to gain public support and prompt the federal government to amend the Federal Constitution. The general view is, the BN and the Pakatan Rakyat are equal in strength and if the numbers of seats they gain in the next general election are close, the elected government would be unstable, if there is no law prohibiting lawmakers from changing parties. Can the BN be sure that betrayal will not happen within the ruling coalition?

Therefore, there must be an anti party-hopping law to clarify that the seat of a lawmaker who quits his or her party will be vacant, even if he or she does not join the rival party.

The people's right to vote should be prioritised over lawmaker's right of association. Moreover, the act of quitting and joining rival parties is related to the lawmaker's integrity and should not be simplified as democracy and freedom.

However, even if the anti party-hopping Bill is passed in the Penang state assembly, it would still be ruled invalid once it is brought to court.

In 1993, the PBS had foreseen a potential threat for the state government and thus, an anti party-hopping Bill was passed by in the Sabah state assembly. However, the Bill was challenged in court and eventually ruled invalid due to the violation of the Federal Constitution.

Similar to the restoration of local elections, lawmakers can still change parties as they like if the federal government refuses to cooperate. Such kind of democracy and freedom of association are not worth mentioning.

 

Pakatan: Sabah defections not party-hopping

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 05:07 PM PDT

PKR's Tian Chua claims that Sabah MPs Lajim Ukin and Wilfred Bumburing 'resigned' from Barisan Nasional, so there was "no party-hopping."

Syed Jaymal Zahiid, FMT

Under fire for what has been described as a 'contradictory' stand on party-hopping, Pakatan Rakyat leader Tian Chua said today he saw no wrong in the recent 'defections' by two Sabah lawmakers.

The PKR vice-president said the opposition pact are also against party-hopping but the defections of Umno's Beaufort MP Lajim Ukin and Tuaran UPKO MP Wilfred Bumburing were merely resignations following disillusionment with the ruling coalition's "failed" leadership.

"They just don't believe in the Barisan Nasional leadership anymore so they resigned and said they would back Pakatan. That is not party hopping," Tian, who is also PKR's vice-president, told a press conference after the pact's secretariat meeting here.

The duo's resignation from BN, followed by rumours of more possible resignations by lawmakers from the key state of Sabah, prompted some leaders from both sides of the political divide to call for an "anti-hopping" law.

Pakatan component party DAP said it would try and introduce the law in Penang where they head the administration in a move seen as critical of Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim's ongoing move to court more defections.

Sabah provides 25 out of the 222 parliamentary seats which makes it a crucial state to infiltrate for Pakatan in the upcoming polls.

With the pact winning just a few seats less than BN in the landmark 2008 elections, Sabah, known as the ruling coalition's "fixed deposit", became the ruling coalition's saving grace next to Sarawak when it provided the majority it needed to maintain power.

'Hypocritical'

The party secretary-general and Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng said his party's silence on Lajim and Bumburing's exit from their respective parties was "self-explanatory" of the DAP's position on the matter.

But the move came under immediate fire with rivals accusing Lim of being hypocritical for his alliance with Anwar who was seen as the architect behind the Sabah defections.

READ MORE HERE

 

Sin Chew harus siarkan penafian Mat Sabu tentang laporan hudud, kata Pakatan

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 05:00 PM PDT

Nomy Nozwir, The Malaysian Insider

Ahli parlimen Pakatan Rakyat (PR), Dr Hatta Ramli, meminta akhbar berbahasa Cina, Sin Chew Jit Poh, untuk menyiarkan penafian kenyataan Timbalan Presiden PAS, Mohamad Sabu, mengenai isu hudud seperti yang mereka laporkan.

"Mohammad Sabu telah membuat penafian, dan kita rasa laporan Sin Chew itu boleh mengelirukan rakyat, jadi kita mahu Sin Chew membuat penafian pada muka surat sama pada keluaran akan datang," kata Hatta dalam sidang medianya hari ini.

"Kita juga mahu pihak editor Sin Chew untuk menafikan kenyataan bahawa PAS akan bekerjasama dengan Umno seperti yang ditulis di kolum editorialnya."

Menurut Hatta, apa yang ditulis oleh Sin Chew adalah satu perangkap, dan mesejnya mengelirukan.

"Apa yang disiarkan di akhbar Cina tidak disiarkan di akhbar bahasa Melayu.

"Jadi kami dari PR mahu Sin Chew membuat penafian di ruang akhbar mereka," katanya lagi.

Pagi ini, The Malaysian Insider melaporkan Mohamad menafikan laporan muka depan akhbar Sin Chew Daily yang memetik beliau sebagai berkata, PAS akan melaksanakan hudud jika Pakatan Rakyat (PR) mengambil alih Putrajaya.

Mohamad, yang mesra dengan panggilan Mat Sabu, menjelaskan, semasa wartawan Sin Chew Daily menghubungi beliau melalui telefon, perkataan tentang hudud langsung tidak disebut oleh beliau.

"Saya diberitahu oleh seseorang kenalan berbangsa Cina, Sin Chew Daily, lapor kenyataan yang berbeza daripada apa yang saya sebut.

"Ketika wartawan surat khabar itu (Sin Chew Daily) menghubungi saya, perkataan tentang hudud langsung tidak keluar.

"Apa sekalipun yang ingin dibuat oleh PAS, perlu mendapat persetujuan PR.

"Kami (PAS) tetap dengan perjanjian yang telah dipersetujui oleh kesemua parti dalam PR," katanya.

Isu hudud menjadi pertikaian diantara PAS dan DAP semenjak PR ditubuhkan pada tahun 2008.

Baru-baru ini, pengerusi DAP, Karpal Singh dan bekas timbalan presiden PAS, Nasharudin Mat Isa, bertelagah secara terbuka didalam media dalam isu hudud.

Sebelum PR ditubuhkan, PAS, PKN (kini PKR) dan DAP pernah bersama dengan gabungan yang digelar Barisan Alternatif (BA) ditubuhkan menjelang pilihan raya umum (PRU) 1999.

PRU 1999 menyaksikan negeri Terengganu jatuh ketangan PAS dan Kelantan berjaya dikekalkan oleh parti tersebut.

DAP menarik diri daripada BA selepas presiden PAS, Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang, yang pada ketika itu menteri besar Terengganu mengumumkan Dokumen Negara Islam turut menyentuh tentang pelaksanaan hudud.

 

The trouble with mother-tongue education

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 04:11 PM PDT

I was puzzled. I asked my Chinese friends: why support the opposition and yet vote government? And these Chinese told me: "Barisan Nasional may be the devil, but better we vote for the devil we know than the angel we don't know. We know Barisan Nasional and we know how to handle them. We don't know the opposition and we are not sure what they will be like if they came to power."

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Kenyataan Mahathir memakan diri

Dalam al-Quran tiada istilah malaikat lebih buruk berbanding syaitan

Khaulah Azwar, FMT

Timbalan Mursyidul Am PAS, Datuk Dr Haron Din, menegaskan tidak ada istilah atau ayat di dalam Al Quran yang menjelaskan syaitan lebih baik dari malaikat.

"Di dalam al Quran juga tidak terdapat ayat yang mengatakan malaikat sama ada dikenali atau tidak dikenali sebagai makhluk Allah yang lebih buruk atau derhaka kepada perintah Allah."

"Malaikat dijadikan Allah sebagai makhluk yang patuh dan tidak derhaka akan perintah-Nya. Mereka akan kekal begitu sejak dari awal hingga ke akhirnya."

"Ia berlawanan dengan sifat syaitan kerana mereka memang diakui sebagai makhluk yang jahat dan derhaka kepada perintah Allah," katanya.

Pemimpin PAS itu mengulas kenyataan dibuat bekas Perdana Menteri, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad dalam blognya www.chedet.cc pada 22 Ogos lalu yang berharap rakyat tidak memberi mandat kepada Pakatan Rakyat (Pakatan) dalam pilihan raya akan datang.

Dr Mahathir menulis, "better the devil you know than the angel you don't" yang membawa maksud "lebih baik syaitan yang anda kenali daripada malaikat yang anda tidak kenali".

"Tiada istilah atau ayat di dalam al Quran yang menjelaskan  begitu", katanya.

Dr Haron seterusnya berkata, kenyataan Dr Mahathir itu ternyata memakan diri sendiri dan Umno-BN kerana umum terutamanya umat Islam mengetahui syaitan itu adalah makhluk Allah yang paling kejam dan derhaka.

Sebagai bekas pemimpin tertinggi negara dan pernah mengetuai Umno-BN untuk tempoh yang lama, tambahnya, adalah amat tidak wajar Dr Mahathir membuat kenyataan sedemikian rupa dengan melabelkan sesuatu pihak atau pertubuhan dengan nama seburuk itu.

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

Learn English Today

English Idioms & Idiomatic Expressions

Idioms are words, phrases or expressions which are commonly used in everyday conversation by native speakers of English. They are often metaphorical and make the language more colourful.

http://www.learn-english-today.com/idioms/idioms_proverbs.html

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

How many of you who went to a Malay-medium, Chinese or Tamil schools learned English? And did they teach you idioms or expressions in your English language class? Let me give you some examples of idioms:


Better the devil you know.

Letting the cat out of the bag.

Barking up the wrong tree.

Adding fuel to the flames.

Bite the hand that feeds you.

Breathe down your neck.

Build bridges.

Burn your bridges.

Burn the candle at both ends.

Bury your head in the sand.

Bury the hatchet.

The carrot and the stick.

Clipping someone's wings.

Cramp someone's style.

Cross the Rubicon.

Dig one's own grave.

Drag your feet.

Eat dirt.

Eat out of house and home.

Err on the side of caution.

Pardon my French.

Fall over backwards.

Fiddling while Rome burns.

Follow one's nose.

Follow in someone's footsteps.

 

Those are actually just some of so, so many 'colourful' sayings in the English language. And I just love these sayings and use them all the time, especially when I talk -- though not so much when I write because many readers do not understand English well enough to even detect sarcasm even when it bites them in the arse (another idiom).

When Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad first came out with his 'better the devil you know than an angel you don't know' idiom, every man and his dog (another idiom) jumped onto the bandwagon (yet another idiom) to whack the daylight out of him (I think this is an idiom also).

Actually, 'better the devil you know' is the shortened form of the full idiom, 'better the devil you know than the devil you don't'. That is the correct English version. In Malaysia, however, especially amongst the Chinese, they say 'better the devil you know than the angel you don't know'.

I learned the 'power' of this idiom back in 1999. That was soon after the birth of the Reformasi Movement and not long after the 10th General Election of 29th November 1999. The Malays voted opposition while the Chinese voted Barisan Nasional. Even those who hated Barisan Nasional and supported the opposition voted for the ruling party.

I was puzzled. I asked my Chinese friends: why support the opposition and yet vote government? And these Chinese told me: "Barisan Nasional may be the devil, but better we vote for the devil we know than the angel we don't know. We know Barisan Nasional and we know how to handle them. We don't know the opposition and we are not sure what they will be like if they came to power."

It was then when reality hit me. The Chinese, as my Chinese friends kept reminding me, are pragmatic people. They are not emotional like the Malays. So they use their head and not their heart to vote. And they will work with the 'devil' rather than the 'angel' if the 'devil' is a known factor and the 'angel' is an unknown factor.

In other words, stick with what you know even if the alternative may be better because there are uncertainties with the alternative.

Not many years later, Dr Mahathir said the same thing when he was interviewed soon after the retired in 2003. Dr Mahathir was asked about what he would consider as his greatest regret in his 22 years as Prime Minister and he replied: my greatest regret is I failed to change the Malays. And he lamented: the Malays are too emotional and too feudalistic. Why can't the Malays be more pragmatic like the Chinese?

Dr Mahathir was, of course, referring to the 1999 General Election where the Malays voted opposition while the Chinese voted for 'the devil they knew', which was Barisan Nasional.

Last week, when Dr Mahathir made that quip, many Malaysians jumped and said that Dr Mahathir admitted that Barisan Nasional is a devil while the opposition is an angel. I was so tempted to write this article but I knew that most readers would interpret this as a show of support for Dr Mahathir. So I refrained from writing about it.

Actually, this is not a show of support for Dr Mahathir but a show of opposition to stupidity. I am opposing stupidity, not supporting Dr Mahathir. But stupid people will view it as my support for Dr Mahathir rather than my opposition to stupidity.

Then the renowned cleric, Datuk Dr Haron Din, started quoting the Qur'an (read the news item above) and tells us that what Dr Mahathir said is not in the Qur'an. Then I thought I had better say something before people start whacking Islam, the Qur'an, Prophet Muhammad, etc., and bring ridicule to the religion.

Of course it is not in the Qur'an. Dr Mahathir was not quoting the Qur'an. Dr Mahathir was quoting an English idiom, which has been 'Malaysianised' from 'better the devil you know than the devil you don't' to 'better the devil you know than the angel you don't'.

Must we keep arguing Islam and quote the Qur'an for every issue? General elections are also not in the Qur'an. Choosing governments through the ballot box is also not in the Qur'an. Getting 222 Members of Parliament to formulate laws is not in the Qur'an either. There are millions of things not in the Qur'an -- such as detention without trial, hanging people who traffic in drugs, jailing people who drive dangerously and kill someone walking beside the road, and so on.

Bank accounts are not in the Qur'an. Paying your workers monthly salaries is not in the Qur'an. Paying your workers' salary by cheque is not in the Qur'an. Stocks and shares, Amanah Saham included, are not in the Qur'an. Driving licences are not in the Qur'an. Business licences are not in the Qur'an. Signboard permits are not in the Qur'an. Police permits for rallies are not in the Qur'an. Gun licences are not in the Qur'an.

If we follow the Qur'an, then you must pay your workers at the end of each and every working day in gold or silver (not with 'worthless' paper), and we can drive and own a gun without the need of licences. We can also carry bows-and-arrows, spears, swords and knives when we leave the house. The Qur'an does not allow the government to arrest us for carrying dangerous weapons in public.

Bersih is not in the Qur'an. ABU is not in the Qur'an. Islamic parties are not in the Qur'an. Pakatan Rakyat is not in the Qur'an. Election Commissions are not in the Qur'an. Anti-Corruption Commissions are not in the Qur'an. Human Rights Commissions are not in the Qur'an. State governments are not in the Qur'an. Prime Ministers are not in the Qur'an. Members of Parliament are not in the Qur'an. Income tax is not in the Qur'an. Import duty, sales tax and road tax are not in the Qur'an. Insurance and EPF are not in the Qur'an. You name it and most likely it will not be in the Qur'an.

Oh, and according to the Qur'an, we can also own slaves. We can either buy these slaves from the market or invade someone's territory and capture them. And slaves are our property so we can have sex with them. That is not zina (illicit sex).

Why pick and choose certain items from the Qur'an? If you want to talk about the Qur'an then there will be many things to talk about. And one thing that PAS will need to do is to announce that it will NOT be contesting the coming general election because this is not what the Qur'an says we must do and this is not the way that governments are chosen in Islam.

Will Pakatan Rakyat now just be PKR and DAP? At least that will solve the current impasse regarding Hudud. Problem solved. No more PAS in Pakatan Rakyat so no more Hudud.

 

Political heat to rise further

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 02:42 PM PDT

In the months leading up to the 13th general election, mud-slinging, allegations and all sorts of political brick-brats will be thrown about.

S Retnanathan, FMT

After more than a month of lull due to the fasting month and Hari Raya Aidilfitri, the country's political temperature is expected to rise further as political parties go, presumably, into the last lap before the 13th general election.

Both sides of the political divide are expected to crank up their engines in an effort to woo voters, especially fence-sitters, before registered Malaysians go to the ballots to pick 222 members of parliament and and 505 state assemblymen. The Sarawak state election for 71 seats was held in April, 2011 and would not be held simultaneously with the general election.

Political parties, be it the ruling Barisan Nasional or Pakatan Rakyat – a coalition made up of PAS, DAP and PKR – are expected to up the tempo to win the hearts and minds of voters and signs are abound that they would use the next few months to run down each other and prove that they can or should govern the nation for the next five years.

Prime Minister and BN chief Najib Tun Razak has yet to make any significant announcement on the date of the crucial election although political pundits had began the guessing game on the date of the polls since late last year.

The ruling BN won 140 parliamentary seats at the last election while the opposition mustered 82 seats. Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim had said just before the fasting month that Pakatan is poised to form the next federal government, winning more than 100 seats.

Whether this prediction would come true depends on this last lap. Najib has until March next year to dissolve Parliament and call for fresh polls.

"He now has two options. Go for full term or dissolve Parliament after tabling the 2013 Budget. If he does the latter, then we are looking at October or November election. If he misses this, then election would be next year," a BN component party head told FMT.

Najib, who is also the Finance Minister, is expected to table the 2013 Budget late next month in Parliament. Many are expecting him to use the budget to bolster support for the ruling coalition.

"The budget would be a sweetener. It would be a people's budget. I am certain he would give out incentives, subsidies and such. He would also announce one or two drastic measures to bolster support. It would be good for the people.

"Although the opposition would criticise this move as campaigning, it is Najib's right as prime minister. It has happened before during the time of Dr Mahathir Mohamad. He tabled the budget and subsequently called for election. We think Najib would take the same route," said the leader, who declined to be named.

BN firing salvos

It would also be interesting to see if the opposition-ruled states would dissolve their State Legislative Assemblies when Najib dissolves Parliament before March next year. Kelantan, Kedah, Penang and Selangor are in the hands of the opposition.

Pakatan had said that it would follow the federal dissolution if BN decides to call for polls after September this year and this is more likely to happen.

Although BN has been on the receiving end – and in some cases back-peddling – on issues brought up by the opposition, it has begun firing against Pakatan, targeting mismanagement of states ruled by the opposition.

Starting from Kedah, the BN claimed that the state was lagging in development and the bickering among Pakatan partners is a cause for concern. The PAS-led government in the northern state is also unstable after rebels in the party, who are also state assemblymen, openly asked Menteri Besar Azizan Abdul Razak to step down.

The BN is also firing salvos against the Kelantan PAS-led government, complaining of slow development and the lack of proper basic amenities. Over in Penang, the state government spearheaded by DAP is also under fire for various allegations of mismanagement.

So far, DAP secretary-general and Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng has been on top of things, deflecting a barrage of criticisms thrown against the state government.

Selangor, the state led by PKR's Khalid Ibrahim, is reeling from revelations of mismanagement in the state government-owned Talam Corporation.

The problem with Pakatan-ruled states is that there is no concerted effort to deflect criticisms.

"The state organs are not utilised to the fullest due to politics. They should answer all issues brought up. They should not push them under the carpet or just blame the previous BN-led state governments. They should stand up and defend themselves. So far only Penang is doing it but in doing so, it blames the former state government for almost everything," a political observer noted.

While Pakatan had made inroads into Sabah by enticing two BN MPs to jump ship last month, it is very unlikely to create a huge dent on BN in the land below the wind.

READ MORE HERE

 

Not a sweet dream but a nightmare

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 02:36 PM PDT

When BN took over the state government in 1994, it promised a new Sabah within 100 days, but 18 years later, Sabah is the poorest state in the country.

Raymond Tombung, FMT

KOTA KINABALU: Barisan Nasional's "Janji DiTepati" slogan won't sell in Sabah, claims opposition State Reform Party deputy chairman Daniel John Jambun.

"There's just too long a list of unfulfilled promises by BN. I could list it out and it will fill a book. But for now I can list seven reasons why the slogan will be rejected," he said.

Topping Jambun's list is Sabah's security within Malaysia.

He said when Sabah was invited to join in the formation of Malaysia, the rationale bandied about at that time was the supposed threat from the Philippines, which had been claiming Sabah, and the threat by Sukarno's Konfrontasi to "Ganyang Malaysia" before the cockerel crowed on the dawn of Sept 16, 1963.

"The fear at that time was that without Malaysia, Sabah would be invaded and colonised by Indonesia.

"But strangely history has shown that these threats didn't go far as proven by the fact that Brunei not only survived but prospered.

"And when we became part of the federation, we didn't really get the security that we were promised.

"Ironically, it was the Filipinos and Indonesians who actually invaded Sabah, not as military forces, but as illegal immigrants. All the security forces of Malaysia – the army, the border police, the immigration officials – couldn't or wouldn't stop them!

"Where was the promise to guarantee us security?" he asked.

Not an equal-partner nation

Next on the list was the peninsula's promise not to "colonise" Sabah.

"(Former chief minister) Donald (Fuad) Stephens' biggest worry was that Sabah would escape from the clutches of British colonialisation and fall into being a colony of Malaya.

"But Tunku Abdul Rahman made a promise [to him] that Sabah and Sarawak would not become the 12th and 13th states of Malaya.

"But now this is what had happened. We are now unitary states instead of being independent, equal-partner nations in the federation as was originally understood.

"The promise not to colonise Sabah was flagrantly broken," Jambun said.

The third reason Jambun pointed out was the federal government's non-compliance with the terms of the Malaysia Agreement signed in 1963.

He said there was no compliance by the federal government on the five constitutional documents and/or constitutional conventions (the Federal Constitution, the Malaysia Agreement, the 20 Points, the IGC Report, and the Oath Stone) which formed the basis for Sabah and Sarawak's equal partnership as nations in Malaysia.

(The Oath Stone was erected in Keningau town to acknowledge Sabah's acceptance of joining the federation.)

The fourth point was that no proper constitution was drafted or passed.

"What we have is actually the constitution of the federation of Malaya amended to become what is now the 'Federal Constitution', which is the real reason why it is not called the 'Malaysian Constitution.'

"When they came up with the decision to use the Malayan constitution as the basis for the [Federal] Constitution we have now, there was already a hidden agenda.

"We were played out from even before the start of Malaysia," Jambun said.

Rights denied

His fifth reason was the rights and autonomy for Sabah.

"The 20-Point Agreement has many points which promised certain rights and autonomy for Sabah.

"These have now been taken away, eroded or simply denied, often without any proper legal process.

"That's why we no longer have freedom not to have any official religion, no longer have the right to arrange our own education system, to determine our own immigration rules and to retain the collection of our own taxes and use the money in accordance with our own economic plans.

"The 20-Point Agreement in fact is a list of not only broken promises but a list of rights and autonomy which were taken away unceremoniously," Jambun said.

The sixth reason, he added, was that Sabah was not consulted when the decision was made to expel Singapore from Malaysia.

READ MORE HERE

 

Will SNAP ‘succeed’ SPDP in BN?

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 02:31 PM PDT

Sarawak National Party has written to BN chairman Najib Tun Razak to enquire about its membership.

Joseph Tawie, FMT

KUCHING: If Sarawak National Party (SNAP) leaders chose to return the party to the Barisan Nasional fold, then it must be prepared to face the wrath of its Central Executive Committee (CEC) who have threatened to resign enmass in protest.

A senior SNAP leader, who delined to be named, told FMT that if SNAP president Stanley Jugol went ahead with his plans, then there will be 'war' within the party.

"If Jugol insists in joining BN, then many of us will resign from the party… There is no point in returning to the fold of Barisan Nasional.

"Firstly, they will bully you and treat you even worse than a dog.

"Secondly, SNAP is not likely to be allocated a seat to contest in the next general election if they join BN," he said.

The leader was commenting on reports that SNAP is studying the possibility of rejoining BN.

Jugol had reportedly said that SNAP was "mostly likely" to rejoin the BN instead of Pakatan Rakyat, which it had unsuccessfully engaged with last year.

Asked to elaborate on SNAP's intention, Jugol admitted that he had written a letter to the chairman of the Barisan Nasional to find out the status of SNAP membership with BN.

He said that it was vital to know if SNAP's status was still intact following the deregistration of the party in 2002 and the ensuing court cases which later rejected the decision of the Registrar of Societies to deregister the party.

Jugol reasoned that SNAP has never been expelled from BN nor did it quit the coalition.

Collective decision

According to Jugol, the answer from the BN chairman is important, because if the membership was still intact, then SNAP should be invited to attend BN functions and meetings.

"So far there is no reply from the BN chairman.

"But it is wrong to say that SNAP insists in rejoining, because the power of acceptance is with BN.

"Suppose BN rejects our application, then we feel 'malu'. What we want to find out is whether we are still with BN. That is all," he said.

And if the membership was no longer there, then the party would consider as one of its options to apply rejoining the BN.

"This is one of the options which we have discussed in our central executive committee (CEC) meeting last month," he said.

The other options are to maintain its status quo as an independent opposition party or apply to join Pakatan Rakyat (PR).

"There is nothing definite yet. We are still studying the options," Jugol said.

On the threats of resignation by some CEC members, Jugol said that whether the party would rejoining BN or align itself with Pakatan Rakyat, it would be discussed with the CEC members.

"All of us will decide what to do. It will be a collective decision," he added.

New lease in life

SNAP was given a new 'life' by the Court of Appeal in June 2010 after it was deregistered in November 2002 following a serious leadership tussle.

The tussle then was between a group led by the president James Wong and secretary-general Justine Jinggut, and another led by deputy president Peter Tinggom and by vice-president William Mawan Ikom (now president of Sarawak Progressive Democratic Party).

After SNAP was deregistered, its position and role in the BN was taken over by the SPDP.

SPDP was registered soon after SNAP was declared illegal by the ROS.

READ MORE HERE

 

AG to explain Section 114a: Nazri

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 01:23 PM PDT

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTmLkEtktfpEKP501HrbqlTAI0n9a84YS8raLY9VNQHMkuMbdxJJQ&t=1

(The Sun) - The Attorney-General's Chambers (AGC) has been asked to explain to the public the government's clarification over the confusion surrounding the controversial Section 114a of the Evidence Act.

Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Mohd Nazri Aziz told theSun however it is up to the AGC on how it intends to communicate to the people.

"They are (already) engaging stakeholders, such as the Bar Council.

"I have also arranged a meeting on Wednesday between (Umno Youth chief) Khairy Jamaluddin and the AGC as Khairy met me last week and requested for a meeting with the AGC," he said.

Last week, Khairy had in a tweet called for the section to be revoked.

This came after the Centre of Independent Journalism (CIJ) had organised Malaysia's first Internet Blackout Day on Aug 14.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak tweeted on the same day that the cabinet had been told to look into the legislation.

However, a cabinet meeting chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin last week decided to maintain it.

Critics and lawmakers from both sides of the divide have been lobbying for the law to be repealed after it came into force last month, stressing that internet users are now automatically presumed guilty for any offensive content posted through their registered networks, hand-held devices, blogs and web portals.

It was reported that last Friday, the Bar Council had met the AG to discuss the amendments made to the Evidence Act.

Nazri said there has been much confusion as many do not understand the legal terms of the amendment, and the matter is taken out of context.

"People are free to talk but be more responsible, (don't cause) unsubstantiated fear," Nazri said. "I think most (people) who write (or talk) about this don't understand. It's not presumption of guilt.

"It is presumption of fact and the safeguard is the court. If in any situation the court is convinced, only then the burden of proof will shift to the accused and he (the accused) can challenge this later through a balance of probabilities.

"People who are legally trained will know that the threshold in rebutting on the balance of probability is very much lower than trying to prove beyond reasonable doubt.

"But if you come and say you don't trust the court, then there is nothing I can do because in any developed country, the court is the arbiter of all this... You need to trust the court … If you come up to me and say you don't trust the court, then you are being childish," he said.

Citing the case of Umno Youth where a seditious message was posted on a Facebook page created in Umno Youth's name, Nazri said since the wing has lodged a police report the presumption of probability has shifted.

Nazri reiterated that the amendment was meant to protect the country's security, adding that people must look at the spirit of amendment as a whole as 114a is to complement the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012, Penal Code (amendment) Act 2012 and Criminal Procedure Code (amendment) (No2) Act 2012.

He added that people should be more responsible and prudent, especially when lending their smartphones or gadgets to others.

Asked on the presumption that even the owner of a coffee shops or outlets that offered a free Wi-Fi facility could be presumed to have published an online publication originating from a computer using the Wi-Fi facility, Nazri said it does not automatically mean that the owner will be charged.

"The only thing that will happen is that we will get your cooperation to trace to the person (who allegedly posted matters deemed seditious), we are not going to charge you because someone else used your Wi-Fi facility," he said, rubbishing claims that the amendment curtails people's freedom.

Hudud not just a religious issue

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 01:19 PM PDT

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Hudud-1-300x202.jpg

Muslims must recognise that people of other religions have the right to their own beliefs. They must also recognise that a person's belief does not hinder him from associating and or cooperating with – what is now a commonly used term – "kafirs" if the purpose is beneficial to all.

Awang Abdillah

According to the Quran, there is no compulsion in the freedom of faith.

The hudud issue is one of those opportunistic topics that snakes its way into the mainstream every time conniving politicians hit a wall.

As a Muslim, let me share a simple truth enshrined in the Quran.

The Surah AlKafirun affirms that for a Muslim "his religion is his" and for a non-Muslim "his religion is his", which basically means "to you your religion and to me mine".

It is crystal clear that there is no compulsion in this freedom of faith. As such, persons with different beliefs can still work together

Beliefs are a set of values about the spiritual or physical things that a person has faith in such as truth, strength, guidance and benefits.

Hence everyone has his own beliefs, be it factual, real or mythical.

Muslims must recognise that people of other religions have the right to their own beliefs.

They must also recognise that a person's belief does not hinder him from associating and or cooperating with – what is now a commonly used term – "kafirs" if the purpose is beneficial to all.

Which brings me to the politics of the day.

Prophet lived with a Christian

If the DAP does not accept the hudud Islamic law, so be it. The question of prohibiting Muslims from supporting DAP does not arise at all.

As a political party, DAP has its own struggle – in the pursuit of its own principles and objectives.

And being a non-Muslim party, its beliefs will in many ways run contrary to that of a Muslim.

Nevertheless in the political cause, the party can still work together with Muslim parties for the benefit of the nation.

As far as cooperation – for justice, good governance and nation building – is concerned, there is no reason why different political parties cannot work together.

The Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) lived with his uncle Abu Talib who was not a Muslim and assisted the latter in the trade business.

The first Hijrah of the Muslims was to Habsyah (now modern Ethiopia), which was a Christian country at that time, to seek protection from persecutions from the Meccans.

Let me enlighten you with this insight: on the issue of the implementation of hudud law, even many Umno stalwarts are not in favour of it.

What is happening now is that certain PAS hardliners are believed to be using the issue for their own political ends.

Read more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/opinion/2012/08/28/hudud-not-just-a-religious-issue/

 

What should we call Afizal?

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 01:13 PM PDT

Are there any technicalities in the case of Afizal? In relation to sex with the minor, what should we call Afizal? Fool? Idol? Monster? Neighbour? Statutory Rapist? Stud? Rapist? Unlucky? Victim?  When we look in the mirror, what do we see?

Rama Ramanathan

Several who read my last post have asked me to repeat the comment which was deleted. First, I must repeat that the administrator of the site has informed me that my comment was not deleted, and it was most likely lost due to an FB glitch. I must add that the administrator said some very kind words about my posts and my comments, for which I am grateful.

Second, I don't remember exactly what I had written.

Third, and more importantly, I think it was unwise of me to post the comment: I think I should have written it as another article. Here I will attempt to do so.

My comment was about our responses to Afizal, the national bowler who pleaded guilty to statutory rape, but was not jailed. The preceding sentence could be written in several ways. If I had written "pleaded guilty to rape" or "was not jailed for committing rape," some would accuse me of suggesting the bowler committed a violent crime.

According to some, the bowler committed statutory rape, not rape. They say he's not a rapist. They say if we must label him, we must call him a statutory rapist, not a rapist. They say that if we don't do as they say, we lack compassion. They are unimpressed by our arguments that statutory rape is classified as rape, so the offender is a rapist.

They say the two 'offences' (they are reluctant to use the word 'crime' for what the bowler did) are dissimilar, so we should distinguish between them.

They say rape involves violence and an unwilling party, whom they agree is "a victim."

They say statutory rape doesn't always involve a victim – they say it could be consenting sex. They recognize that by law a minor (under 16 years of age, not 18), by law, cannot give consent. But they argue that this is a technicality.

They bring us to the edge. They ask "what if she were 16 yrs plus 1 day old?" They ask "what if she were 16 yrs minus 1 day old?" They take it further. They ask "who, by looking, can accurately tell the age of a person?" They say it's not significant that there is a five year difference in age between the bowler and the minor (she was 13+, he was 18+).

[I'm ignoring those whose arguments are centred on the 18 year age which legally separates boys from men.]

They remind us that we ourselves routinely break laws – we beat the lights, cheat on taxes, exceed speed limits. They say that just as we give ourselves a break, we should give others a break. Especially in cases involving sex and minors.

They want us to look in the mirror and see just how grotesque we are for insisting upon respecting the technical definition of a minor: a "technicality," according to them.

We know there is some truth to what they say. I think back to an occasion when I was embarrassed to learn a girl whom I thought was an adult was only 14.

We know what cosmetics, clothes and conversation can do to mask age. We know young people who "experiment" and do the silliest things. We know the age of consent is not the same everywhere: marriage at 13 is permitted in some nations.

But we cringe at the word "technicality."

We cringe when "the compassionate" say we are appealing to a technicality when we suggest that the prosecutor was right to expect the court to send the bowler to prison. [Though we know Malaysian prisons are dangerous places, where the number of deaths in custody is extremely high.]

We cringe at the word "technicality" because we know it can be used to hound people.

We know, we are sure, that if Rafizi's release of National Feedlot Corporation (NFC) bank transactions is in breach of the BAFIA (Banking and Financial Institutions Act), the breach is a "technicality" and the AG should not prosecute Rafizi. After all, Rafizi was acting as a whistle blower – even though the Whistle Blower Act only allows Rafizi to report the information to the authorities, not to the public.

"The compassionate" know, and are sure, Afizal should be given the benefit of the doubt. After all, he admitted guilt (actually he changed his plea to guilty after the minor's father spoke during the first hearing). After all, it's possible that he didn't know the girl was a minor. After all, it's possible that she was the one who wanted it (she may even have written something to this effect). After all, many countries have created a special category of offences which they call "young people's offences." This is the world we live in.

What kind of world do we live in? Let me put it to you bluntly.

We live in a world in which many girls get to use make-up, go to spas, dress like adults, watch television and surf the web unsupervised, etc. before they reach the age of consent. We live in a world where males just want to have fun, and women think of men as playthings: remember Sex in the City?

We live in a world which pays more attention to image than to substance. We live in a world which looks for people to idolize – whether film stars, CEO's or athletes. We live in a world which focuses on individual rights, not the common good.

We live in a world which pretends that premarital sex is the norm. In all the ranting and raging, how much have you heard about refraining from sex before marriage? Are those who promote "no sex before marriage" just silly?

Many secretly approve what the bowler's girlfriend said: "if you're not involved, butt out." People don't think that what they do in private affects the fabric of the community.

Many think you can do anything and get away with it – all you need is a team of lawyers who can find "technicalities" to get you off the hook.

Are there any technicalities in the case of Afizal? In relation to sex with the minor, what should we call Afizal? Fool? Idol? Monster? Neighbour? Statutory Rapist? Stud? Rapist? Unlucky? Victim?  When we look in the mirror, what do we see?

Postscript: I awoke with a deep sense that this article will never satisfy me this side of heaven, for there is a tension between compassion and justice which will remain unresolved. The word which chokes in our throats is not "technicality;" it's "justice."

We choke because we know laws and justice this side of heaven are imperfect, but necessary: for evil must be restrained if we are to live in community. We choke because we know we are superficial if in all our thinking about Afizal and the minor we don't consider God, justice, laws, heaven, earth and hell. We choke because we know the very existence of laws implies a place of punishment for those who willfully disobey.

Also, we choke because we don't want to talk about chastity, the "elephant" that was in that hotel room together with Afizal and the minor, past midnight one day 3 years ago in Malacca. I end with a quote from C S Lewis (the man who wrote the Narnia chronicles):

"The monstrosity of sexual intercourse outside marriage is that those who indulge in it are trying to isolate one kind of union (the sexual) from all the other kinds of union which were intended to go along with it and make up the total union.

The Christian attitude does not mean that there is anything wrong about sexual pleasure, any more than about the pleasure of eating.

It means that you must not isolate that pleasure and try to get it by itself, any more than you ought to try to get the pleasures of taste without swallowing and digesting, by chewing things and spitting them out again."

C S Lewis, Mere Christianity

Banks and Bank Negara have a fiduciary duty

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 01:08 PM PDT

http://www.mole.my/sites/default/files/images/IMG_1762.storyimage.JPG

Was Rafizi Ramli really only aided by a lone bank clerk in his exposure of confidential customer information, or were more people involved? (Photo by Hussein Shaharuddin/The Mole)

It is very puzzling that a bank clerk with no access to privileged customer information was able to extract confidential data. There are concerns if serious weaknesses exist. If there are, would our wealth be equally vulnerable to prying hands – stolen at the click of a mouse?

Fabiani Azmi

What exactly is meant by fiduciary duty? Fiduciary duty, according to a law dictionary, simply means an individual in whom another has placed the utmost trust and confidence to manage and protect property or money. It stems from the Latin fiducia, meaning "trust," a person (or a business like a bank) who has the power and obligation to act for another (often called the beneficiary) under circumstances which require total trust, good faith and honesty. To ensure the upholding of their fiduciary duty, banks in Malaysia are bound by a solid framework of best practices determined by Bank Negara Malaysia. It's known as the Banking and Financial Institutions Act, 1989 (BAFIA) wherein lie the terms of reference on how banks and financial institutions shall operate to the highest integrity in their fiduciary duty. Fabiani Azmi still has many questions to ask…

In recent weeks, more attention has been drawn to BAFIA than ever before since PKR Strategy Director Rafizi Ramli was charged in the sessions court on 1 August for violations of the Act. It began on 7 March this year when Rafizi made public, at a news conference, the confidential information of 21 bank accounts belonging to companies and individuals. He did so illegally without the permission of the account holders, the bank or Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM). Police reports were lodged in March and April, and complaints were also filed with both Public Bank Berhad and BNM.

Despite BAFIA being in place to protect the security of bank customers' information and transactions, there were obviously weaknesses in which the opposition was able to pry, spy or buy. Banks have a fiduciary duty to protect and safeguard the information in their custody and many, like top-class, award-winning Public Bank, even have a client charter and a privacy policy in place to guarantee customers of their fiduciary duty.

What is the promise by Public Bank Berhad to its customers? Its client charter specifically states, "We highly respect and thoroughly appreciate your concerns on the privacy and security of all personal information and financial transactions handled by us. We will employ the tightest security architecture to prevent unauthorised access and ensure your peace of mind concerning all your transactions with us. We will pursue the strongest form of preventive and punitive measures against any party which attempts to compromise your right to transaction security and confidentiality."

It would appear that Public Bank has failed on these accounts. Notably, it has failed to demonstrate that it "will pursue the strongest form of preventive and punitive measures against any party which attempts to compromise your right to transaction security and confidentiality" for it failed to take action against the main culprit, Rafizi Ramli, who had infiltrated its systems and exposed its customers' confidential information to journalists. Why Public Bank has yet to take action against Rafizi is puzzling. The strongest punitive measure has just been to investigate the bank clerk. The bank did not even have the chance to fire him. The bank clerk resigned.

If it were not for Rafizi, there would really be no blatant abuse of the bank and BAFIA. Rafizi, with his passion for dramatics, wielded and distributed the documents to chalk up his political points - much to the detriment to the sterling reputation of award-winning Public Bank Berhad. 

So how did a bank clerk gain access?

It is very puzzling that a bank clerk with no access to privileged customer information was able to extract confidential data. There are concerns if serious weaknesses exist. If there are, would our wealth be equally vulnerable to prying hands – stolen at the click of a mouse?

One can only deduce that there are more senior people behind the BAFIA breach than just a mere clerk. Could tellers, officers, managers, branch managers, regional managers, general managers right up to the executive directors have had a hand? Did any of them collude to provide a back door for the bank clerk to pry into the 21 bank accounts? Were there opposition sympathisers from within the bank? Enquiring minds would really like to know. 

The plot can get quite convoluted. Let's suppose a senior bank official well-connected with the opposition did go into cahoots with Rafizi. He might have given the access password to the bank clerk to print. Having done so, the information is then passed to Rafizi. But because the customer complained of the leak to the bank and BNM, internal audit and security had to investigate. The audit trail would point to the terminal that was used to download the information. CCTV cameras would focus in on the perpetrator. Such evidence cannot be ignored or dismissed. Internal auditors work independently, reporting only to the very top echelons in the bank. Public listed companies like Public Bank Berhad would have their internal auditors report directly to the Board Audit Committee. So the clerk is apprehended and interrogated by the bank and BNM. His handphone is seized. He denies wrongdoing. He says he had no access as he is only a clerk. So the plot must go deeper into how he managed it. Was it really the bank clerk? Or is he just a smoke screen to something more devious?

The bank has confirmed in its Privacy Policy Statement that there is limited employee access. Section 1.3 reads, "The PBB Group maintains stringent procedures authorising only such employees as are strictly relevant or required to access the Customer's information on a need-to-know basis. The PBB Group's employees have been educated on the Customer's right to privacy and confidentiality. Any breach by the employee of the PBB Group's policies would subject the employee to such disciplinary action as the PBB Group may consider appropriate."

This would certainly suggest that there is obviously someone else senior in the bank that has committed the heinous crime to violate the customers and betray the bank through his privilege and access. It just wasn't the bank clerk on a solo mission. It just couldn't be. He had no privileged access.

BNM may have been misled by the bank and even by Rafizi into believing it was just the clerk. In a 14 May news conference organised by the opposition, Rafizi tried to shift blame and public perception on the BAFIA breach to the bank clerk, claiming the bank clerk was the whistleblower. Why only the clerk when he had no access? One needs to ask, is there a lot more going on than BNM initially suspected?

Section 2 of the bank's Private Policy Statement reads, "In accordance with strict compliance to the Banking and Financial Institutional Act 1989 (BAFIA), and apart from the sharing of information between members of the PBB Group, the PBB Group will not disclose the Customer's information to any third party or external organisations."

BNM governor Tan Sri Dato' Sri Dr Zeti Akhtar Aziz was also clear on this when she said, "The confidentiality of customer information is clearly protected by the Banking and Financial Institution Act 1989 (BAFIA)."

Zeti said it s only when there is a suspected offence under federal law or if there is a court order or where a customer has given consent, that relevant law enforcement agencies are authorised under the law to obtain information. This information must be obtained through Bank Negara Malaysia, and if the central bank says there is no foundation for it, the information will not be given.

Read more at: http://www.mole.my/content/banks-and-bank-negara-have-fiduciary-duty

 

Merdeka Day bash at Bukit Jalil Stadium

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 12:56 PM PDT

A set-back for nation-building by 55 years when Malaysian public  excluded from the 100,000-seat capacity stadium which is reserved for "BN invites" only

The Malaysiakini report last night stated that Kamaruddin, when asked why opposition parties were not included in the seating plan, said that "opposition party members could join the rest of the crowd outside the stadium".

Lim Kit Siang 

Last night, in response to the Malaysiakini report "Bukit Jalil Merdeka Day bash for invites only", I penned five tweets, viz:

1.     Scandalous! Outrageous! What Merdeka D bash is this? http://goo.gl/H1IpV Bukit Jalil Merdeka Day bash is invite only- Sara Ghazie(Mkini)

2.     "Got like that one meh?" exclamation will be heard throughout country when Malaysians read "Bukit Jalil Merdeka Day bash is invite only"

3.     No better proof of BN hijacking Merdeka Day celebrations - 1st BN election slogan of "Janji Ditepati" n now 100k Stadium largely BN invites

4.     With MerdekaDay bash BtJalil Stadium hijacked by BN pumped up by rent-MerdekaDay-crowds, all pretence of 1Malaysia inclusive thrown 2winds

5.     What irony 4Najib's 1Msia signature slogan! "Bukit Jalil Merdeka Day bash is invite only" has set back nation-building in Msia by 55 years!

This morning, the Minister for Information, Communications and Culture, Datuk Seri Dr. Rais Yatim "clarified" that the official Merdeka Day celebration at Bukit Jallil Stadium on Friday is opened to the public, saying:

"The allegation made by certain people that the Merdeka 55 gathering at Bukit Jalil will be only for invitees is not true.

"It is deplorable for certain opposition leader to try to foil what is to be the rakyat's right to commemorate nation's 55th birthday."

Rais need not be so coy as he could name me as the one who had responded to the Malaysiakini report on the Malaysian twitterverse.

if I am wrong or mistaken, I am prepared to retract and apologise as I have no intention to spoil, foil or sabotage the Merdeka Day bash planned by the Barisan Nasional government at Bukit Jalil Stadium, although I strongly disagree with the manner in which the Barisan Nasional is hijacking the 55th Merdeka Day/49th Malaysia Day celebrations, causing even greater division and dissension among Malaysians instead of sparking a transcending sense of Malaysian one-ness rising above race, religion, region or political affiliation in keeping with Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak's 1Malaysia policy on both these national celebrations.

However, as a result of Rais' comments, I have revisited the Malaysiakini report last night as well as my five tweets to ascertain whether I have inadvertently made any mistakes or whether the Malaysiakini report had erred.  But I have found neither.

There is no denial or retraction of the statement attributed to the Information, Communications and Culture Ministry secretary-general Kamaruddin Siaraf that members of the public could only witness the 55th Merdeka Day "bash"  from four screens outside the Bukit Jalil stadium.

This has been further confirmed by the seating arrangement released by Kamaruddin yesterday where only VIPs, BN component party members, civil servants, schoolchildren and other specially-picked groups - including two minor BN-friendly political parties, Indian Progressive Front (IPF) and Malaysian Indian Muslim Congress (Kimma) – have been allocated seats in the 100,000-seat capacity stadium.

The Malaysiakini report last night stated that Kamaruddin, when asked why opposition parties were not included in the seating plan, said that "opposition party members could join the rest of the crowd outside the stadium".

He said dismissively: "They can come on the 'tiket rakyat (people's ticket)' No problem."

After reviewing the Malaysiakini reports last night and Rais' comments today, I stand by my five tweets last night that the Merdeka Day bash at  Bukit Jalil Stadium is scandalous, outrageous and a set-back for nation-building by 55 years when Malaysian public are excluded from the 100,000-seat capacity stadium which is reserved for "BN invites" only.

Clearly the Najib administration has never heard or understood the statement "The People Are the Boss" in a parliamentary democracy.

How much would the Merdeka Day bash at Bukit Jalil Stadium cost? Would Barisan Nasional pay for the bash from the BN coffers?

As the Malaysian taxpayers will have to pay for the Merdeka Day bash at Bukit Jalil Stadium, how can the Malaysian public be treated as "outsiders", relegated to outside the stadium to watch from four screens?  They might as well stay at home to watch the live telecast instead!

 

Dinesh Could Have Been My Son

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 12:51 PM PDT

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/d-dinesh-300x225.jpg

First, they pull wool over our eyes where crime statistics are concerned. When we got around it, they then, decide to "reduce" these statistics by puffing out those whom they suspect. Is that the case? Suspect. Judge. Execute! No legal redress?

May Chee Chook Ying

I, too, have a son. If my son went out for supper and not come back, I would die. How can any of
this make sense? How do I go on living?

This is not just another death. It's not just another statistic. Someone got killed in cold-blood. And he was someone's son. He was engaged to be married. There's some girl out there, happily waiting for her Big Day. It's the day she has been waiting for, all her life. Then, she receives a call, telling her the love of her life was gunned down, just like that. Will it make any sense to her? What is she to think? Or feel?

I can't even begin to imagine what his loved ones are going through. Can you?

Now and then, in the most democratic country in the world, you hear of these extrajudicial killings. Wikipedia defines an extrajudicial killing as "the killing of a person by government authorities without the sanction of any judicial proceeding or legal process. Extrajudicial punishments are by their nature, UNLAWFUL, since they bypass the due process of the legal jurisdiction in which they occur".

First, they pull wool over our eyes where crime statistics are concerned. When we got around it, they then, decide to "reduce" these statistics by puffing out those whom they suspect. Is that the case? Suspect. Judge. Execute! No legal redress?

Is Malaysia the most democratic country in the world or a lawless jungle? Are our law enforcers so ill-trained that they cannot use due process to first apprehend, question and if necessary, throw the book at the suspects, etc? Or so cowardly that they had to shoot to kill? You had guns, guys, they didn't!

There are ways to subdue suspects, no? There are better ways to enforce the law, no? Must kill? NO! Another life lost is one, too many. These extrajudicial killings have got to stop! Period!

Our cops have to be better vetted, recruited and trained. We can't see a cop and fear for our lives, can we? Between robbers that rob and cops that kill, are we not sandwiched between the devil and the deep blue sea? I believe most of all would prefer to lose things than to be snuffed out, just like that!

You know what I'm thinking? All that's been happening lately? Our public institutions and powers-that-be lack COURAGE! It is so telling! Cops shoot to kill when they only suspect. Detractors to the powers-that-be are falsely accused of atrocities, left and right. Unfounded fears forced down our throats. An education and grading system that render the majority of our children incompetent globally. Mainstream media that lie, again and again. Decisions by the courts that are wanting. The list goes on.

Who is lacking courage, here in Malaysia? The majority? Or only those who want to hang onto something they don't deserve or are ill-equipped for? Some dopes here in Malaysia, talk so big and loud but all I see are fools preying on the fears and insecurities of another. You call yourself courageous? Look into the eyes of your kids and tell them, everything you did, you did it for the good of the nation. If you are that intelligent, how come our coffers are empty and we are borrowing so much? If you care so much for other Malaysians or even for just your own kind, how come the poor are getting poorer and you, richer and responsible for the massive capital flight out of the country?

We had rubber. We had tin. We, then turned to palm oil. We still have some oil. Everything we brought in or dug out turned to gold. We were so blessed. What happened? Some dopes gambled our fortune away. When they hit jackpot, they kept the winnings for themselves. When they lost and they lost, big time, they pulverized the country's coffers. Do we still want to be with them?

I don't know about you but I intend to live my life in the Light. I intend to seek the Truth. I don't intend to live with radioactive elements making their way into my body. I don't intend to have rogues gunning down my kids in broad daylight. I don't want to see my neighbour go naked, hungry and uneducated anymore.

But I can't do this alone. Please, help me.

Malaysians, please arise and demand change. Change for the better before it's too late. Do it for our precious children. We brought them into this world to give them life; to embrace life as they should with wander and in awe. If we stick to the status quo, what's there to look forward to?

Remember, #Dinesh could have been your son.

God bless.

Johor cop jailed, fined RM1.7m for money laundering

Posted: 27 Aug 2012 04:15 AM PDT

(Bernama) -  A police superintendent was today sentenced to two years jail for each of the four counts of money laundering by the Sessions Court here.

Azmi Osman, 55, was also fined RM1.75 million for the offences committed between 2002 and 2005.

Johor Baru Sessions Court Judge Salawati Djambari ordered the sentence on Azmi to run concurrently after finding him guilty under the Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001.

Salawati later allowed Azmi to be freed on RM900,000 bail in two sureties and a stay of execution pending an appeal on the decision.

In November last year, Johor Baru High Court Judge Datuk Abdul Halim Aman had set aside the decision of the Sessions Court and directed the case to be transferred back to the Sessions Court in which Salawati had acquitted Azmi following the failure of the prosecution to prove a prima facie against the accused.

Azmi, who is currently suspended from duty, was alleged to have committed the four offences of money laundering totalling RM3.8 million between 2002 and 2005 when he was an officer of the Secret Societies, Gambling and Vice Division in Johor.

For the first and second charges, the accused was alleged to have received RM2.08 million and RM679,850 proceeds from money laundering through his Maybank current account in Mentakab, Pahang between February 6 and December 20, 2002 as well as January 15 and October 2 in 2003.

For the third and fourth charges, he was alleged to have received RM941,930 and RM250,000 for the same activity through another Maybank current account at the City Square Shopping Centre, Johor Baru on January 13, 2004 and April 5 in 2005, respectively.

Prosecution was conducted by Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission deputy public prosecutors Hazril Harun and Mohd Farez Abd Rahman while the accused was represented by Adam Yap and CN Sritharan.

 

The Sultans’ Daulat is a Myth

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 09:43 PM PDT

Even though it has deep roots in Malay society, this daulat thing is a myth. The Japanese, despite their own "Sun Goddess" tradition, had no difficulty disabusing Malay rajas and their subjects of this myth. The surprise was not how quickly the sultans lost their power and prestige, or how quickly they adapted to their new plebian status during the Japanese Occupation, rather how quickly the Malay masses accepted this new reality of their rajas being ordinary mortals sans daulat.

M. Bakri Musa
(First of Three Parts)

Book Review: Ampun Tuanku. A Brief Guide to Constitutional Government. Zaid Ibrahim. ZI Publications, Petaling Jaya, 2012. ISBN 9 789675 266263 256 pp, RM

As a youngster in 1960 I had secured for myself a commanding view high atop a coconut tree to watch the funeral procession of the first King, Tuanku Abdul Rahman. My smug demonstration of my perched position drew the attention of the village elders below. They were none too pleased and immediately ordered me down. "Sultans have daulat," they admonished, "you cannot be above them." Apparently even dead sultans maintained their daulat. I did not dare challenge my elders as to what would happen once the king was buried; then we all would be above him.

To put things in perspective, this attribution of special or divine powers to rulers is not unique to Malay culture. The ancient Chinese Emperors too had their Tianming, Mandate from Heaven. That however, was not enough to protect them.

Even though it has deep roots in Malay society, this daulat thing is a myth. The Japanese, despite their own "Sun Goddess" tradition, had no difficulty disabusing Malay rajas and their subjects of this myth. The surprise was not how quickly the sultans lost their power and prestige, or how quickly they adapted to their new plebian status during the Japanese Occupation, rather how quickly the Malay masses accepted this new reality of their rajas being ordinary mortals sans daulat.

Only days before the Japanese landed, any Malay peasant who perchance made eye contact with his sultan, may Allah have mercy on him for the sultan certainly would not. When the Japanese took over, those rajas had to scramble with the other villagers for what few fish there were in the river and what scarce mushrooms they could scrape in the jungle. Nobody was bothered with or took heed of the daulat thing. So much for it being deeply entrenched in our culture!

To pursue my point, had the Malayan Union succeeded, our sultans today would have been all tanjak (ceremonial weapon) and desta (headgear); they would have as much status and power as the Sultan of Sulu. Across the Strait of Malacca, hitherto Malay sultans are now reduced to ordinary citizens. They and their society are none the worse for that.

Today's slightly better educated Malay sultans and crown princes (there are no crown princesses, let it be noted) would like us to believe in yet another myth, this time based not on our culture but constitution. They believe that it provides them with that extra "something" beyond their being mere constitutional head.

This new myth, like all good fiction, has just a tinge of reality to it. The Reid Commission had envisaged the Conference of Rulers to be the third House of Parliament, after the elected House of Representatives and the appointed Senate. It would be a greatly reduced House of Lords as it were, to provide much-needed "final thought" to new legislations.

That assumption had considerable merit, at least in theory. As membership is hereditary, those rulers would be spared from having to pander to the masses as those elected Members of Parliament, or please their political patrons as with the senators. Additionally, this third house would be non-partisan.

An expression of this "Third House of Parliament" function is that all senior governmental including ministerial appointments have to be ratified by the Conference of Rulers. However, unlike the transparent deliberations of the "advice and consent" function of the United States Senates where senior appointees are subjected to open confirmation hearings, the proceedings of the Conference are secret. We know only those who have been accepted, not those rejected or why.

Zaid Ibrahim's Ampun Tuanku. A Brief Guide to Constitutional Government addresses what should be in his view the proper role of sultans in the Malaysian brand of constitutional monarchy, specifically whether they have this "something extra" beyond what is explicitly stated in the constitution. As a lawyer Zaid is uniquely qualified to write on the matter. He is no ordinary lawyer, having once headed the country's largest legal firm and served as the nation's de facto Law Minister.

The title notwithstanding, this highly readable book is more persuasive than descriptive; more political science treatise, less legal brief. The expository flow is smooth, logical and highly convincing. It is refreshingly free of legal jargon or references to court cases that typically pollute commentaries by lawyers. To Zaid, the constitution does indeed grant Malay sultans that something extra, but not in their capacity as the titular head of the government, rather as their being head of Islam and defender of the faith.

Zaid explores the many wonderful opportunities possible as a consequence of this second function without having to invoke additional "special powers." I will pursue his novel ideas and wonderful suggestions later. At 40 pages, his chapter on this issue ("The Rulers and Islamization") is the longest, and deserves careful reading especially by the royal class. He puts forth many innovative ideas that if pursued would benefit not only Malays but also all Malaysians.

With active and enlightened engagement by the rulers and Agong, Islam would emancipate Malays just as it did the ancient Bedouins, and in the process enhance race relations. That would be a pleasant if somewhat radical departure from the current environment where Islam not only deeply polarizes Malays but also sows much interfaith and interracial distrust.

In all other aspects the sultans and Agong are bound by what is explicitly stated in the constitution. Malaysia is a constitutional monarchy, Zaid stresses, and our sultans and Agong must abide by the wishes of the rakyat as expressed through their elected representatives in the executive branch. If citizens have made their wishes clear through an election that they would prefer a certain party and individuals to lead them or certain legislations enacted, the sultan must abide by that decision regardless of where his personal sympathy lies.

In short, there are no penumbras of rights and privileges emanating from those hallowed clauses of our constitution. The matter is clear: Sultans are bound by the law. Sultans cannot claim a penumbra of power based on daulat or divine mandate, as the Sultan as well as the Raja Muda of Perak tried to argue recently. Daulat is fiction.

READ MORE HERE

 

‘Suspend all who attended meeting’

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 09:23 PM PDT

The recent leak of a closed-door meeting involving Penang DCM Mansor Othman was a 'clear act of sabotage', claims PKR. 

Athi Shankar, FMT

GEORGE TOWN: PKR's top brass must immediately suspend those who attended the now leaked closed-door unofficial meeting with state chairman Mansor Othman, pending a probe on their alleged internal misconduct.

State PKR information chief Johari Kassim insisted that the leadership should not hesitate to sack any of them if found guilty as charged in the internal investigation.

He said the leak was a clear act of sabotage on the party that the central leadership cannot ignore and step aside.

He said it was obvious that one or more among them could have leaked out the information to serve own selfish interests and the party disciplinary committee must act fast to punish them.

"Obviously the culprits who leaked the meeting details did not hold dear the party's best interests.

"All those who attended the meeting should be hauled up to the dock and suspended immediately pending investigation.

"If anyone is found guilty, sack instantly to teach others a lesson. It's the best way to deal with it or else it will happen again," warned Johari.

Lim 'cocky and arrogant'

Details of the closed-door meeting between Mansor and party local grassroots Chinese leaders, including elected representatives, were posted in a blog Gelagat Anwar in June.

The meeting was held in May in Mansor's DCM office in Komtar.

In the leaked details, Mansor had allegedly described Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng as "cocky and arrogant".

However, last Friday, Mansor denied describing Lim as "cocky and arrogant" but admitted saying that Lim was being revered like a "tokong" (deity) by Chinese voters in Penang.

In its postings in June 16, 18 and 19, the blog revealed that PKR's state deputy chief and Batu Kawan division chief Law Choo Kiang; Bukit Bendera division deputy chief Felix Ooi; Bayan Baru deputy chairman Tan Seng Keat; 2004 candidate for Bayan Baru parliament seat Raymond Ong; Tanjung Youth chief Ng Chek Siang; Batu Uban branch chief Cheah Peng Guan and Mansor's assistant John Ooi attended the meeting.

Party insiders and political observers view the controversy as part of a conspiracy by certain PKR local reps to kick out Mansor from state PKR altogether.

 

Police disallow Janji Democracy

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 09:20 PM PDT

It will violate Peaceful Assembly Act, says top Dan Wangi cop. 

Teoh El Sen, FMT

Police today declared as illegal the Bersih-linked Promise of Democracy (Janji Democracy) gathering to be held at Dataran Merdeka on the eve of Merdeka Day.

Dang Wangi district police chief ACP Zainuddin Ahmad has told the organisers to cancel it and warned the public against participating in it.

Speaking to FMT, Zainuddin said the statements made this afternoon by Maria Chin Abdullah, a representative of the Coalition of Promises (Gabungan Janji), were inaccurate.

Chin's statements came after the group had a dialogue with the police chief.

"I did not give them the green light actually, if that was the impression given [in her press conference]," he said. "In fact, the first words that came out of my mouth were that they had already violated the law."

He said that under Section 9(1) of the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012, the organisers should have submitted an official notification to the police of their gathering 10 days before the event.

"Since that was not done, it is illegal under the law, and I did not allow it. But if they said they would go ahead anyway, which I had advised against, then I may have to take action based on public safety and order," he said.

Asked if anyone would be charged with the violation, he replied: "We shall see. If they
go anyway, we will open up investigations."

The law provides for a maximum fine of RM10,000.

Asked if police would make arrests, Zainuddin said it was possible under the law.

"We will monitor it," he said. "We have the right to detain or take action against those who break the rules."

He added that under Section 83 and 84 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which deals with unlawful assemblies, the police were empowered to order the dispersal of such assemblies and use reasonable force if such orders were ignored.

He said that so far no police station in the Dang Wangi district had received any complaint against the gathering.

Asked if he accepted the group's argument that the gathering was simply to celebrate Merdeka, Zainuddin said the group was obviously promoting Bersih, which "has done all sorts of things".

Referring to plans by the Preservation of Jalan Sultan Committee (PJSC), Zainuddin said the group was celebrating their community and heritage and he did not see any problems arising from them having a gathering.

However, he said this group too would be breaching Section 9(1).

READ MORE HERE

 

Senator Syed Husin Ali sued over alleged defamation in book

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 09:14 PM PDT

(NST) - Kulim-Bandar Baru member of parliament Datuk Zulkifli Noordin has sued Senator Dr Syed Husin Ali over alleged defamation contained in the latter's Malay language book entitled 'Memoir Perjuangan Politik Syed Husin Ali'.

Zulkifli, who filed the suit through Messrs Kamarul Hisham and Hasnal Rezua on Friday, alleged in his statement of claim that the book implied that he had agreed to resign as Kulim Bandar Baru MP in order to allow Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim to contest in a by-election.
 
He further alleged that the words in the book implied that he had asked Parti Keadilan Rakyat for RM60,000 to vacate the seat and that he had conspired with Umno to gain politically and financially by smearing PKR and Anwar.
 
Zulkifli added that the allegations were not true and had damaged his reputation.
 
He is claiming for general, exemplary and aggravated damages and an injunction to stop the defendant from re-producing the said words.
 
Zulkifli's lawyer Hasnal Rezua told reporters yesterday that this suit emanated from the defamation suit filed by Syed Husin against Zulkifli and two others earlier this year.
 
In that suit, Syed Husin alleged that Utusan Melayu (Malaysia) Bhd and its editor in chief Datuk Abdul Aziz Izhak had, with malicious intent, published words defamatory to him in an article dated Nov 20, 2011 headlined, "Zul Noordin nafi dakwaan Syed Husin" (Zul Noordin denies allegation by Syed Husin).
 
Syed Husin had also claimed that Zulkifli had posted the same article in his personal website although under a different heading, "Anjing-anjing Pencen" (Retired Dogs).
 
Yesterday, Hasnal and Syed Husin's lawyer N. Surendran, met High Court judge Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera in chambers for case management.
 
The suit by Syed Husin against Zulkifli, Utusan Malaysia and Abdul Aziz is fixed for trial on Thursday. 
 

Battle Royale in Lembah Pantai (UPDATED WITH BANK ACCOUNT DETAILS)

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 08:28 PM PDT

 

If the total number of registered voters is about 70,000, we can expect a voter turnout of about 50,000, plus-minus. That would be an increase in voter-turnout of about 9,000. Now, Nurul Izzah's majority in March 2008 was less than 3,000 votes or just 7%. This does not give her too much room to play with. It is certainly touch and go from where I am sitting, even though I am sitting thousands of miles away.

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Is Nurul Izzah losing her grip?

The Malay Mail

In the last general election, Nurul Izzah Anwar was 'David' against Datuk Seri Shahrizat Abdul Jalil's 'Goliath' in the battle for Lembah Pantai. The eldest daughter of Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim achieved what opposition colleagues Zainur Zakaria and Tun Salleh Abas could not -- wrest the parliamentary constituency from the charismatic Shahrizat.

However, four years later, words on the ground have it that Nurul Izzah is losing support to Umno's Datuk Seri Raja Nong Chik Raja Zainal Abidin. In what can be called a role reversal, the Barisan Nasional (BN) senator has been hard at work turun padang, speaking to the people and using his position as Federal Territories and Urban Well-being Minister to address their problems, ranging from City Hall issues, housing and business related problems.

Seri Pahang flats resident Mohd Shardi Hashim, 34, an ardent fan of Raja Nong Chik, pointed out that the latter was more 'people savvy' and had contributed a lot to the Lembah Pantai folks.

"He made a lot of changes and assisted us in many ways. He goes to the ground often and talks to the people. He also listens to our problems and addresses them, especially on housing. On the other hand, I seldom see Nurul Izzah. I don't know what she has done for the constituency. What I do know is, she just started appearing again quite recently."

Sue Anna Tan, 34, agreed with Mohd Shardi and said she was surprised when Raja Nong Chik sent her an SMS wishing her happy birthday recently.

"I have no idea how he got my number but it was rather sweet of him to text me," she said. The main concern of Tan -- a victim of snatch thefts three years ago -- was the 'ever increasing crime rate'.

"I must say Bangsar nowadays seems to turn into a hotspot for criminals. Every day residents hear of snatch thefts and, almost every week, burglary cases. My neighbour's house was broken into recently and it happened on a Sunday afternoon."

"In my case, the first incident was in 2008 outside my home, the second in 2009 while I was walking along Jalan Telawi, and the third was in 2010 when they smashed my car window at Bangsar Shopping Centre," Tan said.

Shop owner Norzilla Abdullah, 66, would also root for Raja Nong Chik because it would be easier for her to run her business since he held a Cabinet post. "I like Nurul Izzah but I have to be practical when it comes to business. I would rather have an MP who is also the minister who supervises City Hall," she said.

She said Nurul Izzah, who defeated Shahrizat in the 2008 general election, was seen by many Lembah Pantai residents as 'not doing anything much' for the constituency. To this, Nurul Izza said: "We (Pakatan Rakyat) are rendered powerless by City Hall, which is answerable to the minister. This affects our job in Kuala Lumpur itself, let alone Lembah Pantai."

"I find it challenging to do good work for my constituents because most complaints are directly related to City Hall. Sometimes I feel like I'm just the middle person trying to push City Hall to provide better services to the constituents."

"It doesn't help that BN has a service centre near Seri Pahang flats as well. This confuses the people. Who do they go to for help? Me or my political nemesis? I'm the rightful MP but he's the minister."

The 31-year-old, who is also PKR vice-president, also claimed that City Hall and various administrators of public facilities were 'unfriendly' towards her programmes, projects and campaigns.

"It has come to a point where we just try to do it. Can you imagine the Bangsar mosque is not allowing us to distribute charity to the poor? They say we should not have 'political activities' in a mosque," she said.

However, when The Malay Mail brought the matter up with Raja Nong Chik, he firmly denied it, saying that Nurul Izzah 'must adhere procedures just like everyone else'. "Even Umno members are sometimes denied facilities by City Hall. It depends on a lot of factors," he said.

"I have been doing my best to assist the poor of Lembah Pantai for 25 years. My opponent has only been doing it for the past two to three years as an MP. I was here even when I lost the division chief's post for Umno but I stayed on to serve."

Raja Nong Chik said he knew the issues concerning the poor. "It is housing, It has always been the case and I've been on top of it to provide low-cost housing for the squatters."

"I basically want to improve their overall living conditions, including better pensions for the elderly and providing better homes for everyone, especially the poor."

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

When you pray five times a day, you remember Allah and Raja Nong Chik, not necessarily in that order of priority, though.

That was what The Malay Mail had to say about the matter. Now read what I have to say, not that I have not written about this matter a couple of times already. However, as Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad likes to say: Melayu mudah lupa. I say all Malaysians mudah lupa. So sometimes we need to repeat what we have already said to keep reminding you.

There were almost 57,000 registered voters in Lembah Pantai in March 2008. I do not know what the exact figure is now but I am guesstimating that it should be roughly 70,000, plus-minus. I am basing this estimate on the ratio of the national increase in voters and am assuming that the increase in voters for the parliamentary constituency of Lembah Pantai is in tandem with the national figure. If it is higher, then we should begin to worry and suspect that something devious is happening here -- such as 'phantom' voters.

Anyhow, whatever it may be, slightly over half those voters are Malays, say 52-54%, and less than half are non-Malays -- mainly Chinese, about a quarter, and Indians, about 20% or so. Hence the Malay voters would probably decide the outcome of the coming general election in Lembah Pantai.

I would not put too much weight on The Malay Mail report above. I mean, a swallow does not make a summer and interviewing one or two people for their comments does not reflect the majority view. Nevertheless, The Malay Mail is not entirely wrong and there are certainly some areas of concern. And I am definitely concerned about them -- although Nurul Izzah's 'machinery' is very gung-ho about the situation.

We must remember that the PKR Youth machinery is always gung-ho. In the Indera Kayangan by-election ten years ago in 2002 -- the campaign that was run by the PKR Youth Movement -- I said that PKR was going to lose by at least 2,500 votes. PKR Youth, however, said it was going win by not less than 3,000 votes, maybe even 5,000 votes.

Even Rafizi Ramli, who at that time was still studying in the UK, said that PKR was going to lose by at least 2,500 votes, and he spoke to me about it. Nevertheless, the PKR Youth election machinery was still confident it was going to win. Finally, Rafizi and I were proven right. PKR lost by 2,593 votes, worse than in 1999 when they lost by less than 2,000 votes.

Hence I am always very worried about these Young Chicos in PKR. They are too confident and always end up wrong in the end. So why should I not be worried about Lembah Pantai when it is the same Young Chicos who are running the campaign and who look down on us Old Cocks as out of touch with what is happening on the ground?

And Indera Kayang is just one of many examples of how wrong these PKR Youth campaigners have been. They always forecast a win and the result turns out the opposite. And I fear we may see this happening in the coming general election as well if they don't pull their heads out of the sand and look at reality.

Let me make one thing very clear. Places such as Lucky Gardens in Bangsar used to always vote Barisan Nasional. For the first time in 2008 they voted Pakatan Rakyat. And this is because of ABU or 'anything but Umno'. Will they still vote ABU this time around or will they go back to what they used to do in the many elections before 2008 -- that is, vote ruling party?

When the Bangsarians voted ABU it was mainly because they hated Umno. Hence it is not so much because they loved Nurul Izzah as much as because they hated Umno, and by extension the Umno candidate, meaning Shahrizat Abdul Jalil.

One question we need to ask is: did they hate Umno or did they hate (or 'did not like' in case 'hate' is too strong a word to use) Shahrizat? If they hated Umno, then well and fine. But if it were Shahrizat rather than Umno that they hated (or disliked), would they still feel the same way if it were not Shahrizat who is contesting but someone else instead -- such as Raja Nong Chik Raja Zainal Abidin?

Now, I personally know Raja Nong Chik. In fact, I have known him since back in the 1980s. And I must admit that he is a very likeable character. It is very difficult to hate him just because he happens to be in Umno and is Umno's candidate for Lembah Pantai. And, being a very successful businessman, he has good PR and knows how to rub you the right way.

Another important thing is Raja Nong Chik is wealthy and can afford to throw his money around. And when you have a pleasant personality, are always smiling, walk around with an aura of humility, and are spreading hard cash all over the place, it becomes very difficult to find fault with you.

Other than that, Raja Nong Chik is the Federal Territories and Urban Well-being Minister and Lembah Pantai comes under the Federal Territory. Hence he can do 'favours' for the residents of Lembah Pantai that Nurul Izzah cannot do (and Nurul Izzah does not deny this fact, and neither do the voters).

Is this an abuse of power, and hence corruption? Those who are receiving favours and cash handouts do not care whether it is abuse of power or corruption. They will just take the favours and money and vote for whoever it is giving them these favours and cash. That is the reality of the situation. I mean those who scream corruption are the same people who bribe a policeman to escape a fine, is this not so? Hence it is corruption only when others benefit, not when you benefit.

An even greater obstacle facing Nurul Izzah is the fact that, while the Bangsar residents (meaning mainly non-Malays) may have been voting ABU in the last election, the Malays in the Pantai Dalam area were not voting ABU. They were voting ABS -- anything but Shahrizat. I know this because I was involved in 'bribing' some of the Malay Umno members to cross over and become 'turncoats'.

You see, for a long time, Raja Nong Chik had been working the ground and was building his support amongst the Malays in Pantai Dalam in the hope that he would be selected to contest the 2008 general election. When Shahrizat was retained instead, many of Raja Nong Chik's Umno supporters were pissed off. Hence they voted for Nurul Izzah just to teach Umno a lesson.

And all we did was to capitalise on this and give them more reason not to vote for Shahrizat -- money being that icing on the cake. But the cake was already there. We just provided the icing. So they took the money and voted Nurul Izzah not because they wanted Nurul Izzah but because they did not want Shahrizat. And they did not want Shahrizat because they wanted Raja Nong Chik.

Sounds very complicating, no?

This normally happens when the candidate is not the choice of the ground but the choice of the 'higher-ups' in the Umno hierarchy. And this is Umno's main worry in the coming general election as well. And that is why the 13th General Election is facing a delay. Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak is having a headache trying to sort out the candidates list to avoid internal sabotage if they field the 'wrong' candidate.

So the delay in the 13th General Election has nothing to do with Altantuya Shaariibuu, as some PKR people would have us believe. It is because they need to sort out the candidates list and see how they can 'reward' (also meaning 'bribe') those candidates who are going to be dropped so that they will not sabotage their own party, Umno.

And now do you know why some Umno Sabah people are jumping? They are going to be dropped and they are not happy with the 'retirement package' they are being offered. So they cross over to the opposition. But I will talk about this matter later in another article. I already have all the shit and will soon be revealing it.

Anyway, back to Lembah Pantai. If the total number of registered voters is about 70,000, we can expect a voter turnout of about 50,000, plus-minus. That would be an increase in voter-turnout of about 9,000. Now, Nurul Izzah's majority in March 2008 was less than 3,000 votes or just 7%. This does not give her too much room to play with. It is certainly touch and go from where I am sitting, even though I am sitting thousands of miles away.

The biggest issue to the Malays is housing. If Raja Nong Chik can sort out the housing problem that the Malays are facing (which he certainly can and is doing so) then I fear all is lost. Would the Malays take these houses (and the cash that Raja Nong Chik is dishing out) and still vote opposition? I doubt it. The Malays suffer from this 'disease' called 'terhutang budi'. Once you show kindness to them they repay in kindness.

And this I strongly believe is also Nurul Izzah's main concern.

Nurul Izzah needs a better election machinery. But is it too late for that? I really don't know. But better late than never I always say. The campaign should no longer be just about ABU. We must remember that many who voted for Nurul Izzah in the last general election were Umno people. ABU will not work on Umno people. They will take it as a personal attack. How do you expect to get their votes when you attack them, meaning scream ABU?

Malays have this other 'disease': tak kenal maka tak cinta. And this is Raja Nong Chik's strong point. He makes the voters cinta him but getting them to kenal him. And never visit them empty-handed -- as the Malays would say, bawa air lior basi. But to visit them with gifts means you need to have a deep pocket, something which Raja Nong Chik has and which Nurul Izzah will be hard-pressed to match.

Nurul Izzah has to stop all her gallivanting. No need all those trips and going around the country to ceramah. Focus on Lembah Pantai, which is a large enough territory as it is. The voters need to see your face and shake your hand. Kiss babies if need be. Just make sure that your presence is felt. What you lack in Ministerial powers and millions in cash you need to make up for in personal touch.

And get rid of those Young Chikos. Get some Old Cocks onto your team. And go poach some Umno people as well. Pay them to work for you if need be. You need to pull every trick in the book at this stage. And if you need more money just holler. With 500,00 readers, and if each Malaysia Today reader donated just RM10 on average, that can already come to RM5 million.

You need to fight Raja Nong Chik using his own weapon. And his weapon is money. So you must use that same weapon. And if this is something you are not prepared to do then get out of Lembah Pantai and contest somewhere else.

It is now in the hands of you, Malaysia Today readers. If you want Nurul Izzah to win then open your cheque books now. If not, then bye-bye Nurul Izzah and hello Raja Nong Chik. And do not say I did not tell you when I write my 'I told you so' article the day after the 13th General Election.

NOTE: Bank account where you can send money to is "AHLI PARLIMEN LEMBAH PANTAI", Maybank, account number 5641 2834 5008

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

By the way, on another note, I have spoken to my lawyer to form a Board of Trustees and to open a bank account where people can donate money towards the coming general election. I will not interfere in its operation and will leave it to the Board of Trustees to manage the funds and to make the decision where the funds will go. This will be a group of lawyers and accountants that are wealthy in their own right.

So stay tuned and I will keep you posted once things are up and running. The rest will be up to you. I can only do so much but without money Pakatan Rakyat will be hard-pressed in fighting the coming general election. Will you guys and gals promise me at least RM10 million? If you can't even do that then Barisan Nasional deserves to win.

 

Rosli Dahlan triumphs again!

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 05:10 PM PDT

Rosli Dahlan triumphs  again as Bank Negara loses Appeal

by Din Merican

I was deeply troubled when I read the news reports that in Karpal Singh's trial for uttering seditious words against HRH Sultan of Perak, DPP Noorin Badarudin insulted the court when she submitted that "The Attorney-General has the sole discretion and absolute power in deciding who to prosecute…. and the A-G's discretion cannot be questioned in Court "HERE

That is a startling arrogant statement that A-G Gani Patail can show his middle finger to the courts of this country and there is nothing the courts can do about it  because A-G Gani will definitely not allow himself to be charged before any court of law. No wonder A-G Gani Patail seems invincible despite the expose' on his Hajj exploits with Tajuddin Ramli's proxy, Shahidan Shafie; his interference with the Ho Hup Bhd Boardroom tussle and even the highly explosive book by Zainal AbidinAhmad titled 'Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail: Pemalsu, Penipu, Penjenayah?'  

 

It seems that A-G Gani Patail can fix people up and practise selective prosecution (more like persecution) and there is nothing anyone can do about this.

 

Was that why, five years ago A-G Gani Patail dared to sanction the brutal arrest of  lawyer Rosli Dahlan and then make the Anti-Corruption Agency (now known as the the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission [MACC]) to charge him on Hari Raya's eve?

 

Was that why the MACC was not bothered about losing that case badly despiteits Deputy Director of Prosecution, DPP Kevin Anthony Morais, being exposed as a LiarWas that why A-G Gani Patail remained unperturbed and made the MACC appeal against Rosli's acquittal and kept that hanging on for two more long years but withdrew it last minute on the very day the appeal came up for hearing? Is it because A-G Gani Patail feels his conduct cannot be questioned by anyone, even by the Prime Minister? considered that as an abuse of power, malicious prosecution and prosecutorial misconduct and made that the central theme in my recent writings in these links: HERE, HERE, HERE

 

To my mind, abuses must be exposed and checked by the Courts– that simple! That is why I posted Tan Sri Robert Phang's Statutory Declaration describing how the MACC knew they had no case but was made to continue persecuting Rosli by A-G Gani Patail. I now understand why Rosli had filed multiple law suits against those him he considered "Rogues in Government" to seek accountability from them. Despite initial disappointments when dirty tactics were used in Rosli's criminal trial and goal posts were changed several times, Rosli was vindicated by the criminal courts.

 

Rosli is now pursuing civil claims against his perpetrators – 17 Defendants were named in his RM50 million law suit filed in 2008 including the Government of Malaysia. He also sued big mainstream media like Utusan Malaysia, The Star and The NSTUtusan Malaysia had published a public apology admitting that "their news article was untruthful and written in a sensational manner to generate publicity which exceeded the parameters of ethical journalism".

 

Rosli seems to be taking on the whole establishment. As I have seen how his family and career suffered during his incarceration and persecution, perhaps he should step back and think about his family. Many will be cheerleaders but eventually he will be standing alone in facing the onslaught from those in the corridors of power. That is my friendly advice because his path towards vindication has been quite a rocky climb and he has had to go through a baptism of fire.   

READ MORE HERE

 

Why I joined the DAP

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 05:00 PM PDT

Ong Kian Ming, The Malaysian Insider

Before joining the DAP, I have never been a member of any other political party despite having worked for two think-tanks that were linked to the MCA and Gerakan. Why am I making the decision to join a political party now and why did I choose the DAP?

I believe that our country is at a critical juncture in its history where for the first time since achieving our independence, we have a credible and strong opposition capable of governing at the federal level. This has been most clearly demonstrated in the state governments in Penang and Selangor which have vastly outperformed their predecessors in terms of delivering transparent, accountable, responsiveness and caring governments.

At the same time, despite the various transformation initiatives which have been rolled out by our Prime Minister Najib Razak, there is still a glaring absence of fundamental structural reforms that are necessary to spark a genuine process of transformation. Not only is there the business-as-usual way of ill-conceived and murky deals being done — via the various 1MDB-linked land and asset acquisitions, just to name one — we also see a disturbing ramp-up in fear-mongering attempts by the BN-linked papers such as Utusan in order to raise feelings of ethnic insecurity.

Things seem to be getting worse for the country as a desperate regime clings to power, seemingly at all costs. As such, the time for sitting on the academic sidelines and commentating as an analyst is over. It is time, at least for me, to take the plunge and to play a more active role to bring about a necessary regime change in the country.

While some may say that I could have continued to be a critical voice in the public sphere without joining an opposition political party, especially in the area of evaluating government policy, there are some natural limitations to what one person working in a non-political context can achieve. Playing the role of a check and balance on those in power can be most effectively carried out by opposition political parties and politicians, because that is one of their primary responsibilities. 

Coming up with coherent alternative government policies needs to occur within the context of opposition political parties because they are the ones who have the power to implement these policies if they come to power. The important process of discussing and debating policy platforms and political positions can only take place within the context of political parties and one needs to be a member of a party to contribute effectively. While I very much value the voice of civil society, I feel that I can play a more effective role, moving forward, as a member of a political party in providing inputs in my areas of expertise.

Why do I choose to join the DAP specifically?

Firstly, the position which the DAP has taken and continues to take, on major national issues, is consistent with my own political beliefs. The DAP's vision of a more equitable and just Malaysia that is secular, free from corruption, governed democratically and by the rule of law is a vision which I very much share in. My many columns and comments in newspapers will reflect this, I feel, starting from the time when I was working in two BN-linked think-tanks — the Institute of Strategic Analysis and Policy Research (INSAP) and the Socio-Economic Development and Research (SEDAR) Institute. For example, I have been writing and researching on the issues of electoral reform and of ensuring a clean electoral roll since 2001.

Secondly, I have great respect for the many sacrifices which many of the DAP leaders have made because of their political beliefs including being beaten up, humiliated and even jailed under the various repressive laws that continue to exist in this country. Leaders like Lim Kit Siang, Lim Guan Eng, Karpal Singh and Teresa Kok, just to name a few, have demonstrated their willingness to walk the walk during their many years of struggle in the political arena.

Thirdly, I have utmost confidence in the leadership of the DAP in its intention to renew its ranks and to bring in fresh perspectives and ideas. My experience in interacting and working with many of the younger DAP leaders including Tony Pua (who invited me to blog about education-related matters way back in 2006), Anthony Loke, Liew Chin Tong, Teo Nie Ching, Chong Chieng Jen, Hannah Yeoh, Wong Kah Woh and Teo Kok Seong has been very positive and has reinforced my confidence that the DAP will be in very good hands in the future. Furthermore, I am very encouraged by the DAP's efforts in recruiting young and capable future leaders into their ranks including Zairil Khir Johari, Steven Sim and Kasturi Patto.

What kind of role do I see myself playing within the DAP?

I remain committed to the issues which I am passionate about and will continue to highlight issues pertaining to electoral reform, education policy, decentralisation and other aspects of economic policy. Thankfully, I will not be alone as I will have the opportunity to supplement and complement what other DAP leaders have said on these issues. If the opportunity arises, I will also highlight other policy-related issues which are timely and important but which I feel sufficient attention has not been given to.

I will also continue my work as an elections analyst to provide insights and analysis to the DAP.

It will be an interesting learning experience as I navigate the demands of being a member of a political party and to make whatever contributions I can to the DAP as a member. I will obviously have to give up my "hat" of a political analyst but it is a small sacrifice to play in the larger scheme of things.

I look forward to the new challenges that are coming my way and I am excited about the prospects of playing a small but hopefully meaningful role in the context of bringing about positive change to our country as part of the DAP.

(I am in the process of completing the final report on the findings of the Malaysian Electoral Analysis Project (MERAP) which will be published online. I am on sabbatical leave from UCSI University until the end of the year.)

* Ong Kian Ming holds a PhD in political science from Duke University and economics degrees from the University of Cambridge and the London School of Economics (LSE). He recently joined the DAP. He can be reached at im.ok.man@gmail.com

 

DAP says has always been against defections

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 04:53 PM PDT

Clara Chooi, The Malaysian Insider

Lim Guan Eng today deflected criticisms of hypocrisy against the DAP's plan to enact anti-hopping laws in Penang, insisting that the party has always been against defections as a means to gain political power.

The DAP secretary-general acknowledged that in Pakatan Rakyat's (PR) September 16 takeover attempt in 2008, Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had pre-empted Barisan Nasional's (BN) fall in Putrajaya through mass defections into PR, but said that even then, the DAP had been against the idea of using crossovers to wrest federal power.

"This was suggested by Anwar, when he mentioned the disillusionment of some MPs but DAP's position is clear.

"Anyone can jump parties but it is important that there should be a fresh mandate," Lim said today.

The September 16 affair led by Anwar has continued to haunt the federal opposition, and was raised again recently when Lim's DAP-led administration in Penang proposed an anti-hopping law to prevent such crossovers.

Lim repeated today that his government's proposal would not curb an individual's right to free association under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution as it does not forbid the individual from joining another party.

What is most important, he said, was to uphold the democratic right of voters by allowing the electorate to re-elect their representative if a parliamentarian or assemblyman decides to switch political camps.

The Bagan MP questioned BN's rejection of the DAP's anti-hopping law proposal, suggesting that this meant the ruling pact was still keen on trading elected representatives to help them gain political power when needed.

Lim again cited the case of Perak, which saw a shift in government in 2009 from PR to BN when two PKR and one DAP assemblymen left their respective parties to become BN-friendly independents.

"Why does BN refuse to have this anti-hopping law? Do they still want to trade in defections?" he asked.

The DAP's proposal in Penang has been met with harsh criticism from several BN leaders, with MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek sniping at the party for maintaining silence when PR welcomed defectors from BN into its fold.

The most recent case was the crossover of two senior Sabah BN MPs — Datuk Seri Wilfred Mojilip Bumburing and Datuk Seri Lajim Ukin — who left their posts in BN to form PR-friendly political movements in the east Malaysian state.

But Lim pointed out today that the DAP has not made any direct statements regarding the duo's twin defections, insisting again that the party was still opposed to crossovers that do not result in re-elections.

"We have not commented on their decisions. We have only said that there should be an anti-hopping law.

"By leaving BN, it just shows that they have lost confidence in the prime minister and the Sabah chief minister... but what we add is this — let us have an anti-hopping law," he said.

Asked if the DAP planned on raising the issue in the PR leadership council to push for similar laws to be enacted in all PR-led state governments, Lim said: "Let us start with Penang first. Let this be the first step."

He said the DAP's proposal in Penang will soon be formalised during the next state executive council meeting.

 

‘Free water policy unwise’

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 04:39 PM PDT

(Bernama) - The Selangor Government's policy of giving free water over the last four years is unwise and non-sustainable, says an academic.

Prof Dr Suhaimi Abdul Talib said the policy had resulted in shrinking revenue for the state that would have been useful for improving infrastructure facilities.

"Although free water looks good as a short-term gain, from the long-term view we are not educating the people to value water," he said in an interview.

Dr Suhaimi, who is assistant vice-chancellor for Development, Facilities Management and ICT of Universiti Teknologi Mara, warned that "we don't have the luxury of infinite supply of water. We have to realise that our sources of water are depleting simply on account of a sharp increase in demand."

He said the state would also come to a stage where it could no longer draw raw water from outside sources and new sources of water would have to come from how it could manage its own internal sources best.

Dr Suhaimi said he was against a free water policy because the question of affordability was not an issue.

"If we have to pay our water bill at RM40 per month, what is RM40? Your kids spend more than RM40 on their (handphone) prepaid (bills). So it's not a question of affordability. We should be paying for our water."

Dr Suhaimi said the people of Selangor must be made to change their perception on water by appreciating the true value of water and this could not be done as long as they get free water.

"The people of Selangor must use water wisely so that each resident can reduce consumption by 20%. This means the capacity at our reservoirs can increase accordingly by 20%. This is something that we have overlooked."

Dr Suhaimi explained that if a water tariff increase was inevitable, it had to be justified and with the agreement of the government.

He said water, being a basic necessity for everyone, should not be given free because it would mean that the precious commodity did not have a value.

 

Anwar urged to resolve dispute over allocation of seats

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 04:11 PM PDT

(The Star) - Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim should step in and resolve the alleged dispute between PKR and DAP over seat allocation in Penang for the coming general election, said Penang Malay Congress president Rahmad Isahak.

"It has become clear that segments in PKR do not like the overbearing style of Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng based on the transcript of a conversation among PKR leaders.

"This is not some NGO or Barisan Nasional making callous remarks. It came supposedly from within the Pakatan Rakyat ranks - allegedly from Penang PKR chairman Datuk Mansor Othman," he said.

Rahmad was referring to the news reports which quoted Mansor as describing Lim as "cocky, arrogant and tokong (deity)", in what was apparently a leaked citation from a conversation with other Chinese PKR leaders here.

He said the congress was not bothered by the name-calling or the alleged criticism of Lim, as it was part of politics.

"What's important is that Anwar must be aware that there is a declining interest within PKR over the need to field more Malay candidates."

The congress is said to be an impartial civil movement entity, but Rahmad stressed that it was formed to uphold the Malay political rights in Penang which he claimed had eroded.

 

DAP recruits political analyst

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 04:05 PM PDT

(The Star) - DAP has welcomed more new recruits to the party, including political analyst Dr Ong Kian Ming and oil and gas engineer Yeo Bee Yin.

Both University of Cambridge graduates, Ong and Yeo are one of the few high-profile young professionals that the party has been aggressively recruiting.

Ong in particular is famed for his political analysis published in Malaysiakini, apart from his day job as a lecturer at UCSI University.

In announcing their entry, party secretary-general Lim Guan Eng said Ong will be helping him in the party's election strategy while Yeo, will be assisting DAP in crafting social media strategies in their effort to woo young voters.

Meanwhile, in the press conference here Monday, Lim said the party will be pressing on with its effort to legislate anti-party hopping laws in Penang.

"We're not denying the basic human rights in their freedom of association. But we are talking about the democratic choice of the voters who have voted for the party," he said.

 

Guan Eng denies DAP at war with PAS

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 03:33 PM PDT

The DAP secretary-general was responding to the public spat between his party chairman Karpal Singh and PAS heavyweight Nasharuddin Mat Isa over hudud.

Syed Jaymal Zahiid, FMT

DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng today denied that his party is at war with its Islamic ally PAS over hudud.

"No, its business as usual," said the Penang chief minister when asked by reporters if the public spat between DAP chairman Karpal Singh and former PAS No 2 Nasharuddin Mat Isa had driven a deeper wedge between the two parties.

Karpal is mulling to sue Nasharuddin after he accused the DAP leader's staunch anti-hudud stand as being "anti-Islam".

The hatchet over PAS' plan to implement the controversial Islamic penal law was again unearthed after Nasharuddin criticised the party for what he described as a subservient posture and said he would continue to speak out on the subject.

Nasharuddin had first made the statement during a controversial meeting with Saudi Arabia's ulamas in the presence of Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and repeated his criticism upon returning to Malaysia two weeks ago.

The meeting drew accusations of disloyalty from within PAS since Nasharuddin had suggested that he was prepared to break ranks in pursuit of implementing hudud.

Some claimed that the former PAS deputy president's statement was aimed at creating internal friction and was engineered by Umno.

The federal opposition bloc had been forced to contain the damage over the long-standing hudud debate several times following PAS' insistence that the law would remain as part of its core agenda.

The pact then agreed that hudud was no longer an issue after the Islamist party said it would respect the Common Policy Framework that excluded implementing the Islamic penal law.

Lim said Karpal's plan to sue Nasharuddin was done on his own accord and had nothing to do with the party.

"I think we should just leave what Karpal said to himself," he added.

 

Guan Eng continues to push for anti-hopping law

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 03:27 PM PDT

Penang chief minister Lim Guan Eng says the anti-hopping law proposal will be formalised to include views from other fellow Pakatan Rakyat state reps.

Syed Jaymal Zahiid, FMT

KUALA LUMPUR: Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng will go ahead with his "anti-hopping" law enactment plan, even though it will go against Anwar Ibrahim's pursuit of more defections in Sabah.

Lim said that he will bring his plan to the state's top-level meeting to formalise a proposal.

Lim had announced the proposal last week, a move that drew flak from the ruling coalition who described the move as hypocritical when the opposition leader, his ally, is openly courting lawmakers in the key state of Sabah ahead of national polls.

Two Barisan Nasional MPs, one of them a deputy minister, had recently resigned from the ruling coalition citing as reasons their disillusionment with Putrajaya's inability to deal with the state's longstanding illegal migrants issue.

While Umno's Beaufort parliamentarian Lajim Ukin is vague about his political leaning, Upko's Tuaran representative Wilfred Bumburing said he will be campaigning for the federal opposition bloc Pakatan Rakyat.

Anwar was believed to have engineered the defections. The PKR de facto leader also said that more "surprises" are expected in the near future.

Lim was questioned on his position on the defections but avoided criticising it openly, saying the DAP's silence on the two defections is "self-explanatory".

"Have we commented on that? I believe that is self-explanatory," the Bagan MP told a press conference at the party's headquarters here.

Legal blockade

Pakatan leaders had said that any proposals for new policies will have to observe its binding Common Policy Framework which adheres to only what is provided in the Federal Constitution. The anti-hopping law is not one of them.

Lim's decision will only be proposed in Penang where his party controls two-thirds of the state's legislative assembly. He said there are no plans to raise this with Pakatan's top leadership.

READ MORE HERE

 

Why re-negotiate oil deal in private?

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 03:13 PM PDT

Why is Chief Minister Taib Mahmud, who has been silent about the 5% oil royalty for the past 30 years, keen to look at the issue again?

Joseph Tawie, FMT

KUCHING: Sarawak opposition has questioned the need for secrecy in the re-negotiations of the existing oil agreement with the federal government.

"I am curious to know as to why Chief Minister [Taib Mahmud] should think royalty negotiations are better done in private. Why is that so?" asked Sarawak PKR chief Baru Bian.

Bian, who is a senior lawyer and Ba Kelalan assemblyman, said oil and gas issue was of public concern.

"The oil and gas in Sarawak is not the property of the chief minister – it belongs to all the people of Sarawak, hence we have a right to know what is being discussed.

"We want to know what the chief minister intends to do about it… we would like to remind him that he is a servant of the people and is accountable to them," Bian said.

He pointed out that Sarawak has been lagging behind the Peninsula in every aspect including roads and infrastructure, education, healthcare, jobs, transport, industry and development.

"One could say that Peninsular Malaysia and many individuals have prospered or benefited via Petronas at our expense.

"Sarawakians now say kini masa balas budi to quote a line from the infamous Barisan Nasional Merdeka theme song 2012.

"The former prime minister (Dr Mahathir Mohamad), in a Freudian slip, had referred to the current administration as the 'devil' and the opposition as the 'angel'. That in itself says it all.

"I trust that the rakyat are astute enough to judge for themselves whether to choose more of the same or to give themselves the hope of a better and brighter future with the Pakatan Rakyat," he said.

Why now Taib?

Bian also questioned the timing of Taib's decision to re-negotiate the 5% oil royalty, when he knew about the imbalance and unjust agreement these past 30 years.

READ MORE HERE

 

‘Musa making same mistake as Harris’

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 02:44 PM PDT

Neither Chief Ministers, Musa Aman nor Taib Mahmud, have any right to re-negotiate the states' oil rights; "only" the respective State Legislative Assemblies can do that.

Joseph Bingkasan, FMT

KOTA KINABALU: The Sabah Barisan Nasional government will be making the same 'mistake' it did more than 30 years ago by agreeing to negotiate its oil rights with the federal government, a politician here has warned.

Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP) Liawan vice-chairman Joseph Wilfred Lakai said today that there was no necessity to re-negotiation terms between the East Malaysian states and federal government on the Petroleum Agreement 1976 .

"Why should Sabah and Sarawak renegotiate the Petroleum Agreement when even in the first agreement Malaya did not honour the terms?"

He said that being the main producers of oil, Sabah and Sarawak should rightly be the sole beneficiary of the oil income.

Lakai claimed that the terms of the agreement are not only lopsided but grossly unfair to the oil-producing states.

He said records showed that in 1976 Sabah and Sarawak's right to their oilfields were signed away for just 5% "royalty" which seems not to be what it really is.

"Malaya did not honour the agreement and all the other agreements including the 20 Points Malaysia Agreement for Sabah and 18 Points Malaysia Agreement for Sarawak. Malaya had repudiated the terms.

"Sabah and Sarawak are not bound by these Agreement to the extent where they are entirely for the benefit of Malaya. If these agreements are voided then Sabah and Sarawak are free from all the legal lies with Malaya," he told FMT today.

Lakai, a pilot, accused the Malaya-centric government of acting as a colonial master by annexing, Malayanising and looting Sabah and Sarawak since 1963 to fulfill its objective to create a "Greater Malaysia".

"Today, both the Chief Minister of Sabah and Sarawak wants to re-negotiate…(but) the issue is that the petroleum belongs to the people not the leaders.

"They have no right to re-negotiate on behalf of the people," Lakai said.

He pointed out that only the State Legislative Assembly of both states have that power to re-negotiate on this matter.

What about export tax?

The SAPP leader also questioned the need to export petroleum from Labuan and gas from Bintulu.

"Who collects the export tax? Why does Sabah and Sarawak have no say to the export tax? What about tax on petroleum products into Sabah and Sarawak? Why is Sabah and Sarawak not getting any of it," Lakai said.

On the 5% royalty Sabah and Sarawak are now being paid by the federal government, Lakai said it was never a royalty but total sale based on FOB.

"The global petroleum and gas price for the last two decades was excellent. Why does the amount paid to the state government remain constant," he said.

Meanwhile, the SAPP leader agreed with Sabah State Reform Party (STAR) chief Jeffrey Kitingan that the 5% is a cash payment payable by Petronas under Section 4 of the Petroleum Development Act, 1974 and had nothing to do with royalties.

READ MORE HERE

 

Do ghosts and spirits exist?

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 02:40 PM PDT

Is there any truth in the Chinese folklore that during the Zhong Yuan festival the gates of hell are opened allowing all wandering and suffering spirits to enter the earthy realm? 

Stanley Koh, FMT

Do ghosts or earth-bound spirits exist? If so, why do they exist? Is there any truth to the belief that after death, humans are reincarnated into the spirit world? Is their existence a part of the human spiritual evolutionary process in the cycle of life and death?

The curious mind can go on generating a list of perplexing questions on the mysterious and puzzling existence of invisible beings that continue to influence and shape religious-cultural practices since the dawn of human civilization.

Perhaps, the answers are within our human psyche and not externally out there.

Millions of people with diverse cultural and religious backgrounds across the globe have some sort of personal life and death experience which shapes their views and beliefs on the existence of invisible beings and the spirit world.

A student on spiritualism will swear that suicides and other victims of sudden death (that is, accidents and murders), including executed criminals, having been cut off in the full flush of physical life, are likely to be earth-bound in the hope of satisfying their deeply rooted desires or thirst for life.

Some scholars of occultism also claim that passionate sorrow and desires of friends on earth tend to draw departed spirits down to the earth-sphere again, thus, often causing acute suffering to the deceased as well as interfering with the normal course of their evolution.

Furthermore, the uninitiated ordinary folk are unable to distinguish the major difference between an astral body and an earth-bound reincarnated spirit (that is, ghost) during paranormal encounters.

Perhaps, there are clues to this perplexing question. This is provided by author and student of theosophical studies, Lieut Colonel Arthur E Powell, in his publication titled, "The Astral Body."

Some define the "astral body" as a duplicate of the physical body, though this may not necessarily be true as it is composed of "subtle" or ethereal substances which are much less grosser than physical matter.

An astral body leaves the physical body upon death of a person and often, encounters with an astral body apparition with swirling colours are mistaken for ghosts.

"Astral matter exists in seven grades or orders of fineness, corresponding to the seven grades of physical matter which is solid, liquid, gaseous, etheric, super etheric, sub-atomic and atomic.

"Being much finer, the astral body's matter interpenetrates physical matter. Every physical atom therefore floats in a sea of astral matter which surrounds it and fills every interstice in the physical matter.

"Thus a being living in the astral world might be occupying the same space as a human being living in the physical world. Each entirely unconscious of the other and in no way impeding the freedom of movement of the other," according to the theosophical interpretation.

'Many kinds of heavens and hells'

In short, the astral body of man is a vehicle and every living man possesses and is capable of using an astral body. Most humans are able to use their five physical faculties of sense, taste, touch, hearing and sight but lack the knowledge in developing their astral senses which can reap the special powers of clairvoyance and astral travelling.

Hence to the uninitiated they lack the ability to distinguish the difference when they see an "astral body" and often mistake it for a "ghost" which is completely another different entity, another form of spiritual reincarnation.

In actuality, an astral shell of a deceased person is not immortal unlike the life span of a "ghost".

An auric astral shell will eventually disintegrate and dissolve into its original elements just as the physical body decomposes into different earthy elements upon death – corresponding to the five elements, namely earth, fire, water, air and metal as stipulated in the Taoist text on metaphysics.

Are there more interpretations on "ghosts" in other religions? According to Buddhist scriptures and texts, there are different types of ghosts while in Taoist metaphysical studies, the principle of "ying" and "yang" gives a clearer picture of human life after death.

"Hence, the many kinds of heavens, hells and purgatorial existences believed by followers of innumerable religions, all fall naturally into place and become intelligible as we understand the nature of the astral body and of the astral worlds," wrote Powell in his famous publication depicting in detail the characteristics and nature of the human astral body.

In a nutshell, there is a growing realisation and awareness of Man's true spiritual nature and the complexities in the human evolutionary process after life on earth, with interludes in other and subtler worlds.

With the dawn of the 21st century, there is little doubt the human species is steadily evolving and becoming more and more aware of their spiritual knowledge and needs.

"Physical science, with its ions and electrons, is on the threshold of the astral world, while the researches of Einstein and others are rapidly making acceptable the conception of the fourth dimension, which so long has been familiar to… students particularly of the astral and spiritual worlds.

"In the realm of psychology, modern analytical methods are giving a promising future of being able to reveal this true nature of human spiritual journey… the lower fraction of man's psychic mechanism, confirming incidentally some of the statements and teachings put forward by ancient Eastern books and by Theosophists and occultists of today."

Modern sciences and the enormous vogue of spiritualism, physical science and the realm of psychology are beginning to unfold the true psyche of the human species being not just a physical body endowed with merely physical senses.

Modern clinical sciences are beginning to understand the existence of other "bodies" encasing the human physical forms – the etheric astral and casual bodies including all the other complex interplaying different levels of human consciousness.

'We are indeed spiritual beings'

We are indeed spiritual beings on a human path, drifting on the broad current of the evolutionary stream on an eternal life voyage. Is it not logical to accept the principal truth that our life and death cycles involved an unbroken consciousness during rebirth, alternating between the physical and invisible astral planes or even other "lower or higher" spirit-bound dimensional worlds?

It is therefore fascinating when prominent psychiatrist Dr Brian Weiss through his scientific clinical studies on his patients opened an unexpected door into the astonishing realm of past-life regression.

His professional findings proved that life after death is not mere superstition or a myth of ancient wisdom.

Whatever profound yet simple truth on human evolutionary existence unveiled by Brian is nothing new. But the fascinating fact is, the truth of his clinical findings has finally pointed scientifically to the evidence of reincarnation.

Reincarnation can take place in many invisible dimensions of existence as some religions have described and narrated in their scriptures.

The existence of "etheric beings", ghosts or aggrieved spirits cannot be proven by chemistry. Spirits of the ghostly types or spiritual beings do exist in different levels at varying higher to lower hierarchies in the cycle of rebirths. It is sheer ignorance or arrogance even to ponder that human beings are the only spiritual, visible and living creatures on Earth.

In his publication, "Messages from the Masters," Brian wrote, "Humans always think of themselves as the only beings. This is not true. There are many worlds and many dimensions… many, many more souls…."

Brian is convinced of life after death despite his initial scepticism of "unscientific" fields in parapsychology and he confessed he knew nothing about the concept of past lives or reincarnation, nor did he initially desire to during the early years of his profession.

His scepticism changed 20 years ago when one of his patients inexplicably began recalling what seemed to be her past-life memories. Since then Brian regressed more than 2,000 patients to perinatal, in-utero or past life memories.

Do these evidential documented cases shed any light about the cycle of life and death involving the passage of time – past, present and future? Do they provide a scientific logical explanation on the existence of other beings, namely, ghosts, spirits, souls, angels, demons, vampires, elves, bogeymen, unicorns, phoenixes, energies of karma, chi, holy-spirit and guardian angels, to mention some examples of supernatural beings amid our human existence?

Anything unknown is generally fascinating, even to the sceptics.

READ MORE HERE

 

Merdeka ‘no relevance’ to Sabah, Sarawak

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 02:24 PM PDT

The true 'National Day is Sept 16, according to Sabah opposition STAR as that was when Sabah, Sarawak and Malaya committed themselves to a 'common identity.

Michael Kaung, FMT

RANAU: The federal government should stop duping Sabah and Sarawak into celebrating Merdeka Day when the 55th anniversary had "no relevance" to the two states, STAR Sabah chairman Jeffrey Kitingan said.

"How can these leaders continue to twist history to suit their political interests without considering our feelings and the truth?

"How could they [federal government] insist we must celebrate Malayan independence which has no relevance to Sabah and Sarawak?" asked Kitingan when launching STAR's Kundasang zone in Pinampadan near here.

He said what was important and relevant to Sabah and Sarawak is their own independence – July 22, 1963 for Sarawak and Aug 31, 1963 for Sabah – and that of Malaysia Day or the formation of Malaysia on Sept 16, 1963.

"This date – Sept 16, 1963 – is the true 'National Day' that gives all three territories of Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak, a common identity as Malaysians", said Jeffrey.

He said that by continuing to impose Malaya's version of history on Sabahans and Sarawakians, "the government is alienating the two territories".

"By insisting that Malaysia is 55 years old now and not 49, the federal government is sending the wrong message to the people.

"Firstly, what the government is doing is teaching the people how to lie and manipulate the facts of history.

"Secondly, the Peninsula-controlled federal government is now telling Sabahans and Sarawakians [intentionally or not] that Malaysia was nothing more than a 'takeover' project for Malaya and that Sabah and Sarawak are now Malayan states/territories so they [Sabah and Sarawak] must now adopt Malayan historical independence," he said.

READ MORE HERE

 

British paper fires pro-Israel columnist over undisclosed Malaysia news fixing

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 01:18 PM PDT

Trevino reportedly called a Gaza flotilla a 'Nazi convoy'. — Picture courtesy of globalpost.com

British newspaper The Guardian has terminated the services of conservative American columnist Joshua Trevino as its United States correspondent over his alleged relationship with a company implicated in a news-fixing campaign financed by the Malaysian government and for running a website that attacked Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and other opposition interests here.

In a short statement issued over the weekend, the newspaper said it had recent learned that Trevino "was a consultant for an agency that had Malaysian business interests and that he ran a website called Malaysia Matters. In keeping with the Guardian's editorial code this should have been disclosed."

Trevino had recently been hired by The Guardian to be its conservative columnist in the United States. His appointment drew a firestorm of protests from liberal activists after it emerged he had urged Israel to shoot at the humanitarian flotilla in 2011 that was seeking to break its naval blockade of Gaza.

When boats carrying unarmed civilian activists attempted in June 2011 to break the blockade of Gaza, Treviño tweeted out a message to the Israeli army: "Dear IDF: If you end up shooting any Americans on the new Gaza flotilla — well, most Americans are cool with that. Including me." 

Trevino also reportedly called the flotilla a "Nazi convoy." 

The Guardian made no mention of the criticisms, but instead pointed to Trevino's previous ties with an "agency" it did not name but is alleged to be FBC Media, the now-defunct company at the centre of the Malaysia news-fixing scandal involving broadcasters BBC and CNBC last year.

"Under our guidelines, the relationship between Joshua and the agency should have been disclosed before the piece was published in order to give full clarity to our readers," said Janine Gibson, editor-in-chief, Guardian US.

In response Trevino said: "I vigorously affirm that nothing unethical was done and I have been open with the Guardian in this matter. Nevertheless, the Guardian's guidelines are necessarily broad, and I agree that they must be respected as such."

Trevino is a well-known conservative commentator and a former speechwriter in the President George W. Bush administration.

He has reported extensively in the past few years on Anwar's Sodomy II trial on his Malaysia Matters website, which is now defunct.

Trevino had also frequently criticised Anwar in his other columns in other publications such as the Huffington Post.

FBC Media, the company alleged to have been referred to by The Guardian, made eight programmes for the BBC about Malaysia while failing to declare it was paid £17 million (RM85 million) by the Malaysian government for "global strategic communications" which included positive coverage of Malaysia's controversial palm oil industry.

The BBC also used FBC to make a documentary about the spring uprising in Egypt without knowing the firm was paid to do PR work for the regime of former dictator Hosni Mubarak.

The BBC was forced to make a public apology over the matter.

Read more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/british-paper-fires-pro-israel-columnist-over-ties-with-malaysia/

 

The debt driven 5.4% GDP growth in Q2 2012

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 01:04 PM PDT


In fact, the GDP numbers hide the ever increasing debts – national debts which have to be paid by tax payers, housing and personal loans which also have to be paid by tax payers. This is no more than debt fuelled pumped up growth
Lee Wee Tak
The Q2 2012 Gross Domestic Product growth of 5.4% seems to be a pleasant surprise from 1Malaysia administration.
The Second Finance Minister who is on top of the numbers pointed out the oil rigs are responsible.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tuesday August 21, 2012
Husni: 5.4% Q2 growth a boost for Malaysia
IPOH: The better-than-expected 5.4% growth in gross domestic product (GDP) in the second quarter is a confidence booster for Malaysia to perform better for the rest of the year.
Second Finance Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Husni Hanadzlah attributed the current positive growth to the resumption of operations at oil rigs, which had affected the country's production of crude oil previously.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 According to Jabatan Statistik Malaysia, however, has more to say:
ECONOMIC GROWTH
The Malaysia's economy strengthened further to 5.4 per cent against 4.9 per cent in the preceding quarter led by continued expansion in the Services and Manufacturing sectors. The robust growth in Gross Fixed Capital Formation (GFCF) has driven the demand side.



The statistic seems to point to services as the catalyst, rather than oil rigs.
Notice also that the Perbelanjaan Penggunaan Akhir Kerajaan growth vs Perbelanjaan Penggunaan AKhir Swasta growth. For 2010, the government's growth in spending was 2.9% vs private at 6.6% but starting from 2011, the government spending growth exceeded the private sector and morphed onto double digits! Look at Q3 and Q4 2012 at 21.1% and 22.95% respectively.
The increase in Najib administration's expenditure is getting at very significant pace. When BN administration spend our tax payers' money, the usual stuff like Auditor General's horror stories, contracts awarded without open tender comes to mind.
With regards to services sector, the Jabatan Statistik has this to say:
SERVICES
The Services sector rose to 6.3 per cent supported by Wholesale & Retail Trade and Finance & Insurance. The growth of 5.9 per cent in Wholesale & Retail Trade was led by the Retail segment. In addition, the growth in Motor Vehicles segment accelerated to 8.4 per cent during the quarter (Q1 2012: 0.2 per cent) propelled by the higher sales of motor vehicles.
Finance & Insurance expanded to 6.6 per cent boosted by the higher fee income on banking activities and increase in premium income on insurance activity. Meanwhile, Business Services picked up to 8.8 per cent underpinned by professional services related to engineering activities.
The growth in motor vehicles sales is due to lack of viable public transport, the need to preserve Proton and hence the Malaysian public is burden with overpriced cars that build on hire purchase loans  and interest repayment.

The banking activities, however, have to be interpreted with the explanation on Construction further below:
CONSTRUCTION
The Construction sector expanded remarkably at 22.2 per cent from 15.5 per cent in the previous quarter. The growth was spearheaded by the robust performance in the Civil Engineering and Residential.
The vibrant performance of Civil Engineering at 39.8 per cent was spurred by major infrastructure projects mainly in Sabah, Melaka, Pulau Pinang and Perak. During the quarter, Residential continued the strong momentum at 20.1 per cent driven by the high-end residential projects in Klang Valley.
So residential housing is the key driver of growth but is this "growth" a quality growth i.e. improving the quality of life of the people? For a minority per yes but for the majority, house prices increase have far outstripped salary/earnings growth. Try asking for a salary increment that matches the house price increase and see what your boss say.
Therefore, while it looks good when economic growth is measured on inflated house prices, the sentiment on the ground is very much different.
Property market in certain parts of Malaysia, notable Klang Valley are subject of speculation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Efforts to curb property speculation
By Zaidi Isham IsmailPublished: 2012/08/15Share  PDF 
 THE government will initiate measures to address various issues gripping the property sector, including curbing rampant speculative activities in the market.
Metro Kajang Holdings Bhd group managing director Datuk Eddy Chen Lok Loi said for example, a house built in Perlis cost RM250,000 but the same house using the very same materials but built in KLCC would cost RM1 million
Meanwhile, National House Buyers Association secretary general Chang Kim Loong said all parties, including the government and developers, need to launch proactive measures to stop steep price increases in the property market due to false demand and excessive speculation fuelled by easy mortgages and low real property gain tax.
"There is a huge mismatch between what the average household income can afford to buy compared to what is available in the market. A homeless generation will emerge and create various social problems," said Chang.
Chang said the average rakyat in a major urban area was struggling to buy his dream home where the average household with income of RM5,962 in 2009 would not be able to qualify for a 90 per cent loan over a 30-year period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The crazy property prices mean crushing housing loan debts. And it will also deprive families of having more money to be spent elsewhere, curtailing their purchasing power hence hindering other consumer commercial activities. The crazy house prices have made many Malaysians bearing housing loan debts at beyond reasonable level compared to their earning as well as what their counterparts in other countries as the article below shows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Generally a  debt service ratio of 30% is acceptable, i.e. one third of a household income is used to pay off debt (principal and interest). However, the Malaysian household debt service ratio was 9.1% in 2006, rose to  49.0% in 2009 and dropped slightly to 47.8% in 2010. This means that on average almost half of a household's income goes to repaying debts.  Thus after paying off the debt there is not much left to spend on food, transport, education, and for emergencies. Should the breadwinner fall sick or lose his job, the family will find it hard to make ends meet and loans may be defaulted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In fact, the GDP numbers hide the ever increasing debtsnational debts which have to be paid by tax payers, housing and personal loans which also have to be paid by tax payers. This is no more than debt fuelled pumped up growth
That is why bankers are having a great day and it shows in their contribution to growth in GDP
 

We Need You on 308

Posted: 26 Aug 2012 01:03 PM PDT

Hawkeye
 
My Fellow Malaysians, the journey towards regaining our rights, our freedom and our nation has been a long road of struggle but we are almost there, this is the time when we need to be united and to stay close together as we push on further.

We must once again, get together to show our might as one force, as an Anak Bangsa Malaysia leading to the final shove when the wall will crumble and fall, over the other side is a new beginning where hopes are renewed, where our dreams of a nation of brothers and sisters are realised and where opportunities are in abundance and sufferings no longer seen.

This is a dream that could only be achieved if enough of us believe in it and are willing to participate in action towards it. When we get together in pursuit of our dream we generate a powerful energy that permeates all strata of our society that will instinctively share the energy of the dream that we so desire.

To do this we must overcome whatsoever remnants of fear that stands to deny us of what is rightfully ours, if we can overcome this plastic fear that veils us from the truth we would be able to see in reality the power of our dream which will be clearly visible and within touching distance.

I beg you to understand one simple fact that this nation belongs to all of us and the fact that it is up to every single one of us, we should know that we need to act and not just talk or worse still, leaving it to others to fight for what we want. We are not spectators in this episode of our nation, we are not watching a movie with a box of popcorn, we are all the real actors that will decide the outcome of the conflict between good and evil, between failures and success, between ruins and opportunities, ruins if we leave it to others and opportunities if we were to act ourselves and in the words of my friend Haris Ibrahim is "to take ownership".

There are yet those who claims to be leaders yet holds half a pint of faith, their faith in their fellows is lacking and their sincerity unbinding, they fail to listen and their sights are blurred, they fail to seek out the people and see only numbers in creation when it should be in cohesion. They don't keep their house and don't understand the principles of sharpening their ax, which is shared by Abraham Lincoln here quoted; "If you give me 6 hours to chop down the tree i will spend 4 hours in sharpening the ax".

They them self add to the fear when they should be open to the challenges and remove all doubts from their fellows, their doubts are created when too much of self is in play, they must see the bigger objectives and the dreams of the people so that the power of the dream could be tapped and generated. This nation is not about political parties but about the people, the rakyat, it is not the call of the politicians but the call of the rakyat. And a good leader is in sync with the heart of the people and gets his own people prepared for the eventuality.

People, fellow brothers and sisters, we must take charge of this nation if you share the same dream that i think we share, the dream of a better nation for the next generation and we are the builders of that dream, all of us, let not others tell you otherwise, let not others tell you how it should be done, where they doubt your intellectual capacity and treat us like just another number and of lesser mind.

We need leaders of man not leaders of parties and groups where the play is in within and not with the rakyat at large, we need leaders who will share the truth and not those that treat you as a lesser being, yet again overlooking the power of the dream of the rakyat.
 

Bersih activist Maria Chin summoned by cops

Posted: 25 Aug 2012 07:31 PM PDT

Amin Iskandar, The Malaysian Insider

Bersih 2.0 activist Maria Chin Abdullah has been summoned to police station tomorrow, possibly in response to a plan by supporters of the polls watchdog group to rally during next week's National Day events in the city.

The Gabungan Janji group's programme involves some 47 non-governmental organisations, including the Persatuan Kesedaran Komuniti Selangor (Empower), where Maria Chin is executive director.

"Maria Chin has been asked by police to report to the Dang Wangi district police headquarters tomorrow at 2pm.

"She will be escorted by a lawyer (Honey Tan) from Empower," said Hishamuddin Rais, spokesperson of Gabungan Janji, when contacted by The Malaysian Insider.

Gabungan Janji will gather at Dataran Merdeka, clad in yellow, on the evening of August 30, which coincides with the eve of Malaysia's national day.

In a press conference on Friday, Gabungan Janji said that simultaneous gatherings will be hosted in other states, including Perak, Negeri Sembilan, Malacca and Johor.

The gatherings aim to lobby the government to implement Bersih's eight demands, such as cleaning up the electoral roll, using indelible ink, a minimum period of 21 days for campaigning, free access to the media for all parties, strengthening public institutions, stopping corruption and bringing an end to dirty political campaigning.

When contacted, Maria confirmed that she was contacted by police on Friday to discuss Gabungan Janji's programme.

"The police contacted me last Friday evening.

"They wanted to ask about the Gabungan Janji programme which we announced during the press conference that morning," she said.

National literary laureate, Datuk A. Samad Said, who is also the joint chairman of Bersih, will read a special poem on the evening of August 30.

On April 28, a gathering sponsored by Bersih to demand free and fair elections was peppered with incidents of violence.

Razor wire barricades placed to stop participants from entering Dataran Merdeka were cut, resulting in police firing teargas into the crowd.

A few journalists and photographers were also casualties of the violence that broke out during the rally.

 

‘Dinesh was shot like in the Wild West’

Posted: 25 Aug 2012 07:24 PM PDT

PKR duo maintains that businessman Dinesh's death was a cold blooded murder.

K Pragalath, FMT

Kapar MP S Manikavasagam today described the ruthless police killing of businessman, D Dinesh, as akin to the shooting in the Wild West.

"Dinesh was shot ruthlessly by the police near Ampang Point traffic light," he said after attending the 26-year-old's funeral in Prima Damansara, Selangor.

Dinesh, who was the youngest child in his family, was shot on Aug 21 while travelling with six of his friends and two relatives.

According to Manikavasagam, the police shot Dinesh, engaged to be married next month, at a close range.

"The post mortem report shows one shot went through his skull and another went through his shoulder.

"The police are claiming gang clash but we have eyewitnesses to prove otherwise," said Manikavasagam.

Dinesh was sent to Ampang Hospital and then to Kuala Lumpur Hospital for post-mortem.

The funeral held today attracted a large crowd.

Dinesh's body was taken from his home in Prima Damansara to his car-wash outlets in Damansara Damai and Sungai Buloh before the burial ceremony was held in Jalan Loke Yew.

PKR vice president N Surendran, who also attended the funeral, meanwhile described Dinesh's death as a "cold blooded murder".

"We want an explanation from the police on this cold blooded murder and we urge them not to cover up the case.

"We will also prove that this is a cold blooded murder since we have eye witnesses," said Surendran.

A press conference would be called tomorrow in PKR headquarters where eye-witnesses are expected to debunk police allegations of a gang clash.

 

I believe, hence I am right

Posted: 25 Aug 2012 06:51 PM PDT

Not even a priest or an imam will 'serve God' if they are not being paid a salary. It's all about money, even those who claim to be serving God. So get off your high horse and stop all this self-righteous bullshit. Every single one of you does things for money. So stop slandering this person and that person as doing things for money. You too are as much money-motivated as the other person you are accusing.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

I can't understand why Malaysia Today's readers are foaming at the mouth and whacking Hudud. Some have even gone beyond just attacking Hudud and have even whacked Muslims and Islam. A police report has already been made against Malaysiakini. Do you also want a police report to be made against Malaysia Today?

Most of you may think that Malaysia allows freedom of expression. Well, Malaysia may allow freedom of expression up to a certain extent but that freedom is not absolute. There are limits. And that is why Malaysia has many laws that are aimed at 'ensuring the peace and stability' of the nation, the Sedition Act being one of them.

This means you cannot simply say what you like, not even in America or Britain. For example, if you start talking about Muslim terrorists, Jihad and bombs while in a plane you can get into trouble anywhere in the world. You might argue that it is your fundamental right to talk about whatever it is you want to talk about. The police, however, will not agree with you as they drag you away in handcuffs. Try it if you don't believe me.

So perish the thought regarding absolute freedom of expression. It does not exist. There are boundaries and you must navigate within these boundaries. I, for one, can tell you that this is absolutely true. I, too, have learned that you cannot say everything that is on your mind. There are some things you can say and there are many things you cannot say. And if you violate this rule you will get vilified like hell. I am speaking from experience here.

Look at what happened to Tunku Abdul Aziz Tunku Ibrahim. His party expressed support for the Bersih 3.0 rally while he said that although he is for clean elections he does not feel that breaking the law is the way to send the message to the government. And for saying that he was whacked kaw-kaw until he felt so hurt he left the party. I suppose anyone who is called foul names would feel the way he felt. I mean people do have feelings, even Pakatan Rakyat leaders.

In the first place, Tunku Aziz should not have joined a political party. He is not a politician, period. And he should have realised that once you join a political party you must toe the party line. You cannot do what the people would view as breaking ranks. They will kill you, figure of speech, of course. And once you join a political party and then resign, you will be accused of being bought off, of selling out, and all sort of foul things. It is better you had not joined in the first place. Then you can say what you like.

Once you join a political party you need to sacrifice certain freedoms for the sake of party unity. Even when you talk in closed-door meetings or unofficial meetings you need to watch what you say. In politics everyone is an enemy, even the person sitting next to you in the meeting. And what you say will be leaked to embarrass you. And the Penang PKR chief, Datuk Dr Mansor Othman, has found out the hard way what damage these leaks can do.

Of course, Dr Mansor has denied saying what he is alleged to have said. The minutes, though, appear to prove otherwise. But minutes can be forged. After all, only those who attended the meeting would know.

No doubt, none of the others who attended that meeting have come forward to reveal that they had attended the meeting and that the minutes had been forged and that no such thing was ever said in the meeting. Nevertheless, whether the people believe that denial is another thing. After all, politicians deny allegations all the time. Clinton denied. Nixon denied. And in the end it was proven that these denials were all lies. In fact, Najib Tun Razak has also denied the allegations against him but we all don't believe his denials -- am I not correct?

The golden rule in politics is when cornered deny or say 'no comment'. Of course, most people are of the opinion that when politicians deny it then it must be true and when they say 'no comment' that means they are admitting the allegation. But the most important thing is no one can prove it. And this is what matters in the end. Can you prove the allegation?

What you need to do, before they even deny it or say 'no comment', is to challenge them to prove that the allegation is false. Under normal circumstances one is assumed innocent until proven guilty. But if you want to corner a politician you twist it the other way. You ask them to prove that the allegation is false. That is actually quite impossible to do.

Anwar was convicted and sentenced to a total of 15 years jail because he could not prove his innocence. The Federal Court later overturned that conviction on grounds that the Prosecution failed to prove his guilt. Nevertheless, Anwar had already served six years of the 15 years before he saw freedom. Thus, sometimes, the guilty until proven innocent rule does work in certain cases.

New laws are being introduced in Malaysia where you will need to prove you are innocent or else you are presumed guilty. We had 52 years of the Internal Security Act where an estimated 10,000 people had been detained without trial on that same assumption -- guilty until proven innocent. They detain you first and then later you need to convince them that you deserve to be released. It is impossible to prove you deserve to be released when your detention is on the basis that one man, the Minister, believes you are a threat to national security.

I mean how do you prove a belief wrong? You have a belief, and that belief is I am a threat to national security. How do I prove this belief wrong? How do I prove any of your beliefs wrong? You believe that Hudud is God's law and is mandatory. You believe that the Qur'an came directly from God and is God's word. You believe the Bible is the Holy Book of God (in fact, you swear an oath on the Bible although it may have been printed by a printer in Jalan Chan Sow Lin). You believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God and was crucified and died for our sins. How do I prove all these beliefs wrong?

So, I can't prove any of your beliefs wrong, even the belief that I am a threat to national security. And that means I will remain under detention without trial until your beliefs change and you now believe that I have reformed and have turned over a new leaf and am no longer a threat to national security.

Such are beliefs. And beliefs are impossible to prove wrong. If you had to prove your belief right, that would be another thing altogether. To prove your belief right you will need evidence, which you may or may not have. But for me to prove your belief wrong is a non-starter never mind what that belief may be. Beliefs do not require evidence. Hence you can believe something even if there is no evidence. And for me to prove your belief wrong when your belief is void of evidence would mean I would not have the evidence to prove your belief wrong.

Can you see how it works?

Many friends have been in touch with me to ask me to clear the air on what people are saying about me. These friends tell me that people believe I am this or I am that or I have done this or I have done that. But that is just it. This is what people believe. How do I prove this belief to be false?

Most of those people who believe these things about me also believe in God and believe in a religion. Is there any basis for these beliefs? Is there any evidence to support these beliefs? Can they prove that their beliefs are facts and not myths?

Of course they can't. They just believe it, that's all. There is no basis for these beliefs. They heard stories and they believe these stories. These are all stories without evidence. Then they support these stories and justify their beliefs by showing us a Holy Book, which they said came from God but was printed by a printer in Jalan Chan Sow Lin who himself does not believe in God and is printing this 'Holy Book' just to make money from the printing contract

Thus this is the mindset of these types of people. They are susceptible to believing things that cannot be proven. And these same people also believe certain things about me. So how do we talk to such people when they are already prone to believing things that they imagine to be true even when it cannot be proven true?

Can you see the futility in trying to turn these people? It is as difficult as trying to convince a Catholic that Prophet Muhammad is a Prophet of God or trying to convince Muslims that Jesus is the Son of God -- or trying to convince readers of Malaysia Today that Hudud is God's command and is mandatory for all Malaysians.

The best would be to just let people believe what they want to believe. Most of these people believe that they are sincere and noble while all the rest are scumbags anyway. Only they are true. All others are false.

Look at the party hopping issue as one example. Most believe that it is wrong for people to leave their party to join the other side. But it is not wrong for those from the other side to leave the other side to join their party.

If they leave the other side to join their side then it is a sincere and noble gesture. But if they leave their side to join the other side it cannot also be because of a sincere and noble gesture. It can only be because of money and for no other reason.

This is the belief.

You do things out of sincerity and for noble reasons. Others are not noble or sincere and do things merely for money. You do not do things for money.

As I said, this is the belief and they believe that their belief is right. But is it?

Their parents sent them to school to receive an education. I have Chinese friends who tell me that education is at the top of the Chinese priority list. Education comes first and everything else comes after. This is what my Chinese friends tell me and since so many seem to tell me the same thing I am inclined to believe it.

Then I ask them, why? To the Malays, religion comes first. That is way at the top of the priority list of the Malays. Go ask the Malays and see what they say. But why do Chinese put education and not religion at the top of their priority list?

And they tell me it is because you need a good education to be ensured a good future. Only a good education can ensure a good future. And many Malaysians, after they have received that good education, choose to stay overseas to work. They have spent so much money on their education that they need to work overseas because the salary they will earn back in Malaysia would be too low and they will never be able to recover the cost of their education.

So people get an education. But they go and get an education not because they seek knowledge. They go and get an education so that they can get a good job that pays good money.

Everybody works. And they all work because they want money. Only with money can they buy things and live a good life. They want a house. They want a car. They want to get married. They want power, position, prestige, recognition, and whatnot. And all this requires money.

Why do they want all these? Are these not all for selfish reasons? You can go live in a jungle and not starve. There is food everywhere. You can live off the land. You can build a roof over your head from what you find in the jungle. You can use the streams and rivers to wash and bathe. You do not need money. You do not need a job. You do not need to spend so much money getting educated.

So, yes, everyone does things for money, even those of you who believe you are sincere and noble. Do you need money? Actually you do not. You don't need money. You just want money. And you want money because you want the good things in life.

Are you prepared to resign from your job and go work in one of the African countries for no salary? They will provide you a tent to sleep in and three meals a day. They will also provide you with khaki uniforms. But other than that you will receive no money.

Is that not a noble and sincere thing to do? You work for no money but only to serve humankind. You get to eat and sleep in a tent, that's all.

Not even a priest or an imam will 'serve God' if they are not being paid a salary. It's all about money, even those who claim to be serving God. So get off your high horse and stop all this self-righteous bullshit. Every single one of you does things for money. So stop slandering this person and that person as doing things for money. You too are as much money-motivated as the other person you are accusing.

At least a prostitute is honest about what he or she is. That is more than I can say for you.

 

Hudud: PAS akan laksana ikut saluran demokrasi

Posted: 25 Aug 2012 04:34 PM PDT

(Harakah) - Presiden PAS Datuk Seri Tuan Guru Abdul Hadi Awang berkata PAS akan melaksanakan hukum hudud melalui proses demokrasi yang sedia ada.

Malah ujarnya, usaha itu telah dimulakan sejak tahun 90-an lagi apabila Enakmen Jenayah Syariah II Kelantan 1993 dan Enakmen Jenayah Syariah Terengganu 2003 diperkenalkan dikedua-dua negeri itu.

Sebelum itu lagi katanya, mereka telah memperkenalkan draf undang-undang itu kepada NGO Islam dan bukan Islam dan pernah mengemukakan usul agar isu perlaksanaan hudud dibincangkan di parlimen.

"PAS terima hudud secara positif dan hudud ini kewajipan orang Islam.

"Kita akan terus langsungkannya melalui ruang demokrasi," katanya pada sidang media selepas mempengerusikan Mesyuarat Biro Politik dan Pilihan Raya PAS di Pejabat Agung parti itu petang ini.

Ditanya berhubung Pengerusi DAP Karpal Singh yang sering mengeluarkan kenyataan menentang perlaksanaan hudud, presiden PAS itu berkata ianya bukan sesuatu yang pelik bagi PAS.

"Masalah Karpal lawan tak pelik. Sebab itu Allah menurunkan surah Al-Maidah yang mana orang Yahudi dan kafir tidak menyokong Islam dan Allah turunkan ayat itu.

"Yang kita peliknya Umno yang lawan. Malah ambil langkah-langkah yang menyekat," katanya.

Beliau turut memberi contoh surat amaran dari pusat yang dihantar kepada kerajaan Kelantan apabila menyatakan hasrat mahu melaksanakan hudud di negeri itu.

Malah katanya Umno sanggup kempen kepada pelabur asing agar tidak datang melabur kerana negeri ini akan dilaksana hukum hudud.

"Karpal bukan kerajaan, tidak ada kuasa, yang ada kuasa ni BN yang dikuasai Umno. DAP berhak berhujah dan PAS mendokong demokrasi.

"Bahkan kalau PAS ada kuasa (memerintah) macam Umno sekarang, PAS tak akan tutup mulut sesiapa yang nak tegur termasuk kakitangan kerajaan," katanya.

 

Leaked minutes see fallout in PKR

Posted: 25 Aug 2012 04:24 PM PDT

(NST) - A STORM is brewing in Parti Keadilan Rakyat, with Machang Bubuk assemblyman Datuk Tan Hock Leong demanding answers from the party leadership over leaked information that he would be dropped as a candidate in the next general election.

Tan, who is Penang deputy speaker, said he was shocked on learning that his name had been raised as the only Chinese PKR elected representative in Penang who would be replaced.

The matter was apparently discussed at an informal PKR meeting, which has sparked controversy after the minutes were leaked.

"I have come to understand that they plan to give my seat to a younger candidate, who will be parachuted in from Selangor.

"My so-called replacement is not even active in Penang," he said when contacted yesterday.

Tan said he was sad to learn that state PKR chief Datuk Mansor Othman had allegedly said all other Chinese PKR elected representatives in Penang would be retained.

"They say I need to go because of my age. I was dumbfounded on learning about this ridiculous decision. But no one, including Mansor, has contacted me and I have yet to get any official confirmation from the central leadership."

Tan dismissed fears that he could not deliver because of his age or health. "They better come up with a far more convincing reason.

"I am only 57 and there are others who are much older than me. If age is the factor, then the criterion should apply to all others, too."

On his health, Tan said he suffered a mild stroke about a year ago but it had not affected his work.

"I still carry out my work. I attend and chair state sittings, and I have fulfilled all my responsibilities to the people in the last 10 months. The only thing I cannot do is run."

The controversy has put Mansor and the state PKR in an embarrassing position. It was reported that the minutes of the meeting involving Mansor and other state PKR leaders had been posted on the "Gelagat Anwar" website.

The meeting, it appears, was centred around seat allocations and problems faced by Penang PKR.

During the meeting, Mansor, who is Penang Deputy Chief Minister 1, was quoted as saying that except for Tan, others would defend their seats. He then urged other party leaders to convince Tan to make way for a younger candidate.

"It is not that we don't like him as he has done a good job. You, as a group, have to think... must prepare names and leave it to the central (leadership) to decide," he was quoted as telling those present.


Don’t pass the buck on hudud, Mustapa tells PAS

Posted: 25 Aug 2012 03:49 PM PDT

(The Star) - PAS should explain why they are unable to implement hudud laws in Kelantan and not "pass the buck" to Umno at their convenience, said Kelantan Umno chief Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamad.

He said although the laws had been passed by the Kelantan state assembly in 1993, they were still in the "implementation" stages and were not enforced.

"Kelantan government even set up a hudud technical committee in October last year but until now it has yet to convene the first meeting. This proves that the state government is insincere in implementing such laws.

"Their flip-flop policies to set up an Islamic state and then switching to a welfare state shows inconsistency in their decisions which reflect the stand of their coalition partners on this thorny issue," he told reporters after attending a Hari Raya open house organised by Kelantan Umno here yesterday.

Mustapa, who is also International Trade and Industry Minister, was asked to comment a front page report by a Malay daily quoting Mentri Besar Datuk Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat as blaming Umno for being a stumbling block to implementing hudud laws in Kelantan.

Mustapa said it was not easy to implement such laws without any planning.

"It is also evident that those interested in implementing such laws did not focus on explaining to the masses the mechanics of the hudud laws," he said.

 

MCA-DAP hudud spat will lead to Islamophobia, warns Muslim group

Posted: 25 Aug 2012 03:43 PM PDT

Lisa J. Ariffin, The Malaysian Insider

One of the country's most influential Muslim group came out today to publicly castigate both MCA and DAP for their protracted dispute over hudud, accusing the Chinese-based rival parties of propagating the spread of Islamophobia in Malaysia.

Malaysian Muslim Youth Movement (ABIM) president Amidi Abdul Manan said statements made recently by both MCA and DAP leaders were in complete disregard for the sensitivities of Islam and the hudud law, the religious criminal code that prescribes, among others, the amputation of hands as punishment for theft.

He accused both parties of using the hudud issue to garner political support from the country's non-Muslims ahead of the coming general election.

"If the situation persists and is not looked upon, the phenomena of Islamophobia which mirrors the unsteady relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims around the world will spread to the country," Amidi warned today in a press statement.

He strongly emphasised that Islam would not deny the rights and freedom of non-Muslims and this assertion was clearly outlined in Islamic jurisprudence.

"Hence, any attempt to polemicize Islamic law (hudud) to create prejudice among non-Muslims should be stopped," he urged.

"Instead, all parties should be prepared to understand this (law) to prevent misunderstanding among society," he added.

Amidi said his organisation is extending offers to clarify the issue in the forms of discussion, as well as academic and scholarly discourse.

"ABIM is also set to hold a series of explanatory discourse with the public, especially the non-Muslim communities," he said.

Yesterday, opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim described the incessant focus on hudud and Islamic state issues in the mainstream media as Barisan Nasional's "last desperate attempt" to deflect from its own corruption and abuses.

The opposition leader said BN was attempting to sow racial and religious strife as well as "intimidate" voters with reminders of racial unrest, via the media outlets its parties own in the run-up to the general election.

The BN-friendly media has also been highlighting the disparate stances of Pakatan Rakyat (PR) partners DAP and PAS on the emotive issues: The former opposes the Islamic state and penal code that the latter aspires to realise.

Last week, influential former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said that PAS could realise its goal to set up an Islamic state and enforce hudud if it joined Umno, in a bid to woo the Islamist party to BN's side.

His remarks came in the wake of a recent controversy after religious conservatives, including the state muftis of Pahang and Perak, dubbed the DAP "kafir harbi" or belligerent infidels for its consistent opposition to hudud, dragging PAS and PKR into a heated debate.

The controversy prompted PAS president Datuk Seri Hadi Awang to rise to its ally's defence, pointing out that while the DAP opposed hudud, Umno had already rejected its implementation.

Hudud and the Islamic state were two issues that tore asunder the fledgling Barisan Alternatif — the precursor to the present day PR — following Election 1999, when DAP and PAS went their separate ways after failing to reach a compromise.

But the focus on the two issues has also put the spotlight on the mixed messages sent by BN. Umno has often courted PAS by offering to help it realise its Islamic state aim, while MCA openly rejects hudud and any form of Islamic rule.

 

Crying wolf again?

Posted: 25 Aug 2012 02:51 PM PDT

Low-income earners have been suffocated by car loans. The Insolvency Department recorded 116,379 bankruptcy cases in the country between 2005 and April 2012. Some 25 per cent of them were due to debts over vehicle loans, with 2,000 below the age of 25. 

Lim Sue Goan, Sin Chew

I returned to my hometown during the Hari Raya holiday and the highway was filled with cars on my way back. It is a common traffic landscape in Malaysia during festive holidays. 

If there is a high-speed rail in Peninsula, I believe that many would not choose to drive. Underdeveloped transportation causes crowded highways during long public holidays and the people would have to pay the of fuel consumption, environment pollution and accelerating the process of turning the country into a net oil importer. 

The surge in the number of road vehicles and the underdeveloped public transport are due to the unsound National Automotive Policy (NAP). The government has exerted great efforts to develop and protect national cars and thus, not keen in upgrading the public transport system, particularly in developing high-speed rail. 

Moreover, in addition to protecting national cars, the government also earns a great amount of income from car excise duty. Each imported car contributes at least RM10,000 to the Treasury and the government earns RM7 billion each year. 

The government does not impose restriction to limit car purchase. There are more and more tolled highways but the traffic is increasingly crowded. If the number of vehicles in Kuala Lumpur is not limited, even the Mass Rapid Transit Corp (MRT) project would not be able to solve traffic problems in the capital. 

It was reported recently that one of the main focuses of the upcoming NAP might include car price reduction in the next three or four years. However, the credibility of the report is not high if we calculate based on the benefits the government gets from car duties. 

In fact, car price reduction has long been speculated but it always ended up as the wolf crying story due to the protection of national cars and other factors. The previous NAP only increased the automotive industry incentives but did not touch the status of national cars. 

The car price reduction rumour this time might be related to the Pakatan Rakyat's commitment of relaxing car excise duty after taking over the office. 

Low-income earners have been suffocated by car loans. The Insolvency Department recorded 116,379 bankruptcy cases in the country between 2005 and April 2012. Some 25 per cent of them were due to debts over vehicle loans, with 2,000 below the age of 25. 

The BN government might adopt other strategies to compete with the car price reduction commitment of the Pakatan Rakyat and it is unlikely to narrow the price gap between national and imported cars, to avoid setting a blow to national car sales, which has already been falling, and related industries. 

Moreover, reducing car prices will affect the situation as a whole. Car loan borrowers might end up overpaying the bank after the fall of car marker values. 

Comprehensive consideration is necessary for the adjustment of the NAP. It must not only protect national cars and duty revenues, but at the same time, also solve the people's problem, including developing the public transport system to lighten the people's heavy burden of car loans. 

Deviation in the NAP would also lead to the waste of resources. For example, bus services in Putrajaya gained less than RM2 million of annual income, causing them to suffer a loss of RM18 million each year. Ultimately, the government would be the one who pays the bill. 

In addition, the government also approved a RM400 million fund to help stage bus operators which are finding it difficult to continue with their services in various states. 

For ordinary citizens, food, clothing, housing and transportation are the basic necessities of life and thus, it is the government's responsibility to solve the people's traffic problems.

 

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net
 

Malaysia Today Online

Copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved