- I swear
- Uthayakumar’s wife claims jailed Hindraf leader being tortured in prison
- Make syariah Malaysia’s only law, urges ISMA
- Najib and Dr M in battle to control Umno?
- Indonesia sees no rush despite push from Malaysia
- ‘Allah’ not exclusive to Muslims, stresses Dzulkefly
- The fight for the final Umno VP spot, and Najib’s reforms
- TPM nafi keluar kenyataan
Posted: 18 Oct 2013 09:05 PM PDT
Magistrates are to debate whether to do away with the swearing of oaths on the Bible and other holy books in courts in England and Wales. Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, former Bishop of Rochester, said: "This could be the slippery slope towards the increasing secularisation of society. Where will it end – with the Coronation Oath? The Bible is bound up with the constitution, institutions and history of this country," he told the Bristol Post.
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
Queries have been raised over whether the Bible is a necessity when asking people to being honest in court.
Magistrates are to debate whether to do away with the swearing of oaths on the Bible and other holy books in courts in England and Wales.
The move would see the end of the familiar sentence: "I swear by Almighty God, to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth."
Instead there would be a statement in which people would promise "very sincerely" to tell the truth.
Experts will discuss whether the current oath and affirmation are "fit for purpose" during the Magistrates' Association annual conference in Cardiff today.
Witnesses currently have the option of swearing an oath on a Bible or other holy book, or making a non-religious affirmation before a judge.
Other faiths can take the oath on their own holy books, for example, Muslims on the Koran and Jews on the Old Testament.
But now the Magistrates' Association is to debate whether the holy books hold any moral force in modern society.
The plan has been put forward by a Bristol magistrate, Ian Abrahams, who argues people are no more likely to tell the truth by using the Bible.
He believes what is needed is a greater sense of how seriously lying in court is treated, the BBC reported.
He told the Daily Mail: "More and more I see people shrug their shoulders or say 'whatever' when asked to take it.
"Instead, people will have to show they understand they could be sent to prison if they don't tell the truth," he said.
But critics point out non-believers already have the option of promising to tell the truth without any reference to a sacred text, and that the change would further erode Britain's Christian heritage.
Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali, former Bishop of Rochester, said: "This could be the slippery slope towards the increasing secularisation of society.
"Where will it end – with the Coronation Oath? The Bible is bound up with the constitution, institutions and history of this country," he told the Bristol Post.
"It is right for people to have a choice of oath, a religious or non-religious one.
"But we are being urged, in the name of tolerance and secularisation, to restrict that choice."
The practice is so old that it is not clear whether it is simply custom or if the move to alter it would require a change in the law. -- The Huffington Post UK, 19 October 2013
"Please raise your left hand and place your right hand on the Bible ……… Do you swear by Almighty God, to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?"
"Before I do that can I first ask the court a question?"
"Yes, of course you can."
"You want me to swear by Almighty God, to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, am I right?"
"Yes, that is correct."
"Do you mean you want me to tell the truth based on evidence or do you want me to tell the truth based on the unproven?"
"Of course the truth has to be based on evidence. If it is unproven then that would mean there would be no evidence to support whatever you say."
"Right. That is what I am driving at. There is no evidence of the existence of an Almighty God or that the Bible is the word of God. It is merely a belief based on faith. Hence if I raise my left hand and place my right hand on the Bible and swear by Almighty God, to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, would that be considered an act based on evidence or an act based on the unproven? Would that, therefore, be the truth or the untruth?"
"We have not come to your evidence yet. We are just swearing you in first. Then we will listen to your testimony after that."
"Yes, but if my oath is not based on the truth and then I swear an oath to tell the truth how can you be sure that I am telling the truth?"
"What do you mean your oath is not based on the truth? Do you intend to lie?"
"No, I do not intend to lie. I intend to tell the truth. But you are asking me to swear an oath in the name of an Almighty God that you cannot prove to me actually exists and on a Bible that is supposed to be the word of God but which you cannot also prove to me is really the word of God. Hence there is a doubt as to the existence of God or that the Bible is God's word. So can this then bind me and convince you that what I am about to say is the truth if the source of my oath is in doubt?"
"You are making this very complicated. This is just a formality that everyone who is about to testify in court has to go through. It does not really matter whether God does exist or not or whether the Bible is really the word of God. You need to swear an oath in the name of God and on the Bible."
"But why is this the formality and who started this?"
"I don't know who started this! It all happened so long ago that no one can remember who started it. It is just something we do before you are asked to testify."
"If I swear an oath in the name of God and on the Bible would that mean you will believe beyond any shadow of doubt what I am about to say?"
"No. We will still need to see whether any other witnesses contradict you and whether what you are about to say can be proven or not."
"So you are saying that even if I swear an oath in the name of God and on the Bible there would still be a possibility that I will lie?"
"So what is the purpose of this oath if you will still not accept my testimony as the 100% truth? That means even if I swear an oath my testimony will still be in doubt just as if I never swore an oath."
"Just because you swear an oath in the name of God and on the Bible that does not mean you may not be lying. So we still cannot consider your testimony as the 100% truth because you could still be lying."
"So my oath will mean nothing in the end then."
"That is correct."
"So can I then just give the court my testimony without swearing an oath?"
"No you cannot! You must first swear an oath in the name of God and on the Bible before you give the court your testimony."
"Even if my oath does not strengthen my testimony or makes my testimony more believable?"
"That is correct."
"And you do not know why I must do this and when this all started and who started it in the first place?"
"That is correct."
"Okay, and tell me Mr Zakaria, do you believe that the Bible is God's word?"
"Look Mr Waheed, it does not matter whether I believe that the Bible is God's word or not. This is my job and for more than 20 years as the clerk in the Birmingham Magistrates' Court no one has so far questioned this practice of taking this oath in the name of God and on the Bible. It is just a practice that we have had for more than 1,000 years. So please swear by Almighty fucking God, to tell the fucking truth, the whole fucking truth, and nothing but the fucking truth?"
SEE VIDEO ON YOUTUBE HERE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FIhpVUrhx4
Posted: 18 Oct 2013 05:23 PM PDT
(The Star) - The wife of jailed Hindraf leader P. Uthayakumar has called on the Government on Saturday to intervene on behalf of her husband, whom she alleges is being tortured and inhumanely treated in Kajang Prison.
S. Indra Devi, who was addressing Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and Home Minister Datuk Seri Dr. Ahmad Zahid Hamidi in a letter, claims that her husband who is a diabetic and suffers from a degenerative prolapsed disc in his spinal lumbar, has been locked up in dark isolation for 28-days and is forced to sleep on concrete despite his condition.
She claims that he was being fed food and water through unsanitary means.
"They put him in confinement, 24-hours a day, not seeing sunlight or fresh air and just one prison pants and shirt.
"The prison officers are also teasing, humiliating and verbally abusing my husband.
"I urge Najib or Zahid to please go and see what is being done to him at the Kajang Prison and address it. I don't deny he is a prisoner but at least treat him like a human," alleged Indra, adding that Uthayakumar had lost around 15kg since he was jailed in June.
On top of the gross treatment of the Indian rights leader, Indra also claims that prison officials were deliberately denying his family access of communication to him.
She claims officers would deny being responsible for her husband and would pass her to other departments for referral.
Uthayakumar's lawyer Avtar Singh Dhaliwal alleges that the treatment being meted to his client in prison was "selective prosecution".
"He is not being treated as a normal prisoner. This is a clear violation of basic human rights which is enshrined in our constitution," he said.
In a letter from Uthayakumar made available to The Star, he alleged that he was denied phone calls to his family and lawyers and warm water, to the point where he is force to drink "contaminated tap water".
"I am denied even a toothbrush, tooth paste, bathing and washing soap, towel, blanket and even the half-inch mattress to sleep on the cement floor.
"I am force to sleep on the bare cold cement floor despite also suffering from arthritis, forced to drink rice porridge using a dipper I and hundreds, if not thousands of other prisoners have used to wash their backsides."
On June 5, Uthayakumar was jailed for two years and six months over a sedition charge.
The former Internal Security Act detainee had on Dec 11, 2007 claimed trial to publishing a seditious letter on the Police Watch website, which was addressed to then British Prime Minister Gordon Brown.
Posted: 18 Oct 2013 05:01 PM PDT
(MM) - Islamist group Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (ISMA) suggested today for syariah to be the law of the land replacing the country's existing dual-track legal system.
This comes as ISMA lamented the lack of political will to champion a concept it called "ketuanan syarak" (syariah supremacy), which places Islam above all other considerations.
Posted: 18 Oct 2013 04:57 PM PDT
Whoever wins in the party polls at all levels of the hierarchy makes little difference because these made-by-Umno 'products' are rotten inside out.
Awang Abdillah, FMT
For political parties that practice democratic principles and good leadership traits, it takes both the leaders and the grassroots members to ensure it can continue its' noble struggle for the party and country.
Such a system would provide the ordinary members who form the majority the right to apply an internal check and balance mechanism to ensure those elected to their respective posts would honour the mandate of the members/delegates to serve the party interests and country.
Differences of opinions, approaches or even policies among leaders are within the ambit of democracy.
Deviations from the original party objectives and the rule of law are the common causes of instability within a party.
When a party leader starts to deviate from the party struggle and replaces it with a personal agenda, it then directly cause instability from within in the long term.
He would strengthen his own position by building his own team that consists of his right-hand men at the top levels of the party hierarchy.
Under such prolonged power abuses it would likely lead to conflict among members and a power struggle for top positions may erupt and loyalists may turn foes and vice-verse.
Consequently factions emerge and in some cases, the internal power grab may lead to the break-up of the entity and splinter groups would establish their own parties.
Umno's history has been tainted with such undemocratic and unlawful practices during the tenure of Dr Mahathir Mohamad from 1981 to 2003 and until today.
The power abuse, corruption and racism have blended well to form the culture and lifeblood of the party.
Therefore whoever wins in the party polls at all levels of the hierarchy makes little difference. These made-by-Umno 'products' are rotten inside out.
Many within and outside Umno were expecting a showdown between the incumbent president and his deputy in the Umno election.
But Najib Tun Razak's challenger apparently is not ready and hence that possible challenge fizzled out.
Najib had already encircled himself with a strong team to protect his position in the party.
He has given his three incumbent vice-presidents more clout thereby ensuring that any attempt to challenge him would prove to be futile.
Lets look at each of the three incumbents.
Hishammuddin Hussein – Holds the post of Defence Minister. He is also assigned to head the transport portfolio which has been left vacant because of MCA's decision to shun all cabinets posts. Holding these two important ministries will definitely bolster his position in the party. Being a cousin to Najib and the son of late prime minister Tun Hussein Onn further add to his chances of not only retaining the VP post but being Najib's first choice as the future deputy president of Umno and Deputy PM post GE14.
Ahmad Zahid Hamidi - He is Najib's trusted loyalist. He's been given the special tasks to save Umno before and after the 13th general election. Since April 10, 2009, he was given the important post of Defence Minister, a post formerly held by Najib himself for reasons best known to the latter. But Zahid played his role effectively. He allegedly hatched "an external national threat" to ensure the people fell behind the Umno-led government to protect the country from the perceived foreign invasion. Pleased with Zahid's performance, Najib rewarded him with the more powerful Home Minister appointment. The GE13 results made Umno and Najib's positions shaky and thereby vulnerable. This time Zahid's task was to ward off the snowballing of several perceived national threats from within the country, which were:
Zahid was tasked with rescuing the Umno-led government by creating a political diversion. Someone purposely activated the rise in crime activities and acts of gangsterism to the point they would pose threats to national security.
It diverted the people's focus away from the hot current issues. Zahid is expecting to remain a vice-president for as long as it takes to ward off attempts to destabilise the Umno-led government.
In a nutshell Zahid is just a pawn in Najib's power game.
Shafie Apdal – His ascend to the post of vice-president is actually a move by the top hierarchy to appease Sabah Umno, nothing more. He will hold the post as long as it takes to retain the Sabah Umno loyalty.
Semenanjung Umno will not allow a Sabahan to reach beyond that level as this will create new problems later. One may equate him to Alfred Jabu anak Numpang of PBB who holds the deputy president 1 of PBB and deputy CM for life so to speak.
The posts are reserved for the leader of Pesaka wing of PBB, to appease the Dayak community.
Posted: 18 Oct 2013 04:49 PM PDT
Nurfika Osman, The Jakarta Post
Indonesia is in no rush to revive the controversial Malacca Straits Bridge project, which has been on hold since the Asian financial crisis back in 1998, a senior government official says.
The Public Works Ministry's director general for highways, Djoko Murjanto, said in Jakarta on Friday that the ministry, together with relevant ministries and departments, such as the Foreign Ministry and the National Counterterrorism Agency (BNPT), would need to comprehensively study the prospects for the bridge and its benefits for Indonesia.
Posted: 18 Oct 2013 04:43 PM PDT
Dzulkefly Ahmad disagrees with Haron Din's statement that "Allah" is exclusive to Muslims. Nevertheless he welcomes the difference in opinions.
Lisa J. Ariffin, FMT
PAS leader Dzulkefly Ahmad today stressed that the party's collective stand on the term "Allah" was that it is not only exclusive to Muslims, but could be used by those of other faiths.
He was responding to PAS' deputy spiritual leader Haron Din's insistence today that "Allah" belongs exclusively to Islam, contradicting Pakatan Rakyat's official stand that non-Muslims have the right to use the Arabic word to describe their god.
"What is important is the collective stand of the party and majlis syura (the party's highest decision-making body), and the collective stand of Pakatan," Dzulkefly told FMT.
However, he said Haron was entitled to express personal views that may not necessarily coincide with the collective stand of the party.
"Anyone of any standing and leaders of any discipline can state their own particular stand. In short, he is free to state his own views.
"I, for one, will not criticise him nor vilify him for stating a different view. I have seen so many differences and variations in Muslim scholarships," he added.
Dzulkefly explained that the Islamic religion encourages differing opinions through discourse and scholarly debates.
"The Islamic discourse and scholarship is willing to accept differences by even a single voice or by a few," he said.
"In fact, we celebrate differences. All arguments to me are logical," he added.
Dzulkefly reiterated that the party's collective stand was to allow non-Muslims to use the term "Allah", however he urged those who do use the term "not to abuse it".
"Allah celebrates the plurality of religious belief. As such, we allow the use of Allah by people of other faiths provided they do not abuse it," he said.
"I believe this is a very objective and principled stand," he added.
Posted: 18 Oct 2013 04:34 PM PDT
Zubaidah Abu Bakar, TMI
As 146,000 Umno delegates vote in the party polls today, attention will be on the race for the final vice-presidential slot as both Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi and Datuk Seri Shafie Apdal are seen as shoo-ins for two of the three spots.
At risk is Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein's rising seniority in the party and his cousin and party president Datuk Seri Najib Razak's leadership and reform agenda.
Party insiders say Najib needs Hishammuddin to be a vice-president, not just to continue a family legacy but more as an assurance of support should there be retaliation from the Mahathir faction in Umno against his leadership in future.
Hishammudin's defeat would mean one less Najib loyalist in Umno's powerful decision-making supreme council.
In his own defence, the 52-year-old has been meeting party grassroots leaders in the past week, trying to convince them of his relevance to the Umno top echelon after unfavourable ground reports on his chances in the six-cornered fight.
Umno sources believed he might just scrape through now that his campaign had been boosted with the help of Najib and senior leaders like Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin and Wanita chief Datuk Seri Shahrizat Jalil, among others.
Najib has been adamant about keeping Zahid, Shafie and Hishammuddin in their posts to ensure continuity of his reform agenda, which has been derailed by repeated pandering to the party's right wing.
It is understood that he has personally made phone calls and met some division chiefs to get them to help maintain the status quo in the 3.5 million-strong party.
Would anyone reject a favour asked by the party chief to keep an unpopular leader?
Party insiders say division chiefs are aware some delegates are not happy with Hishammuddin's performance as minister and Umno leader but they also do not want to risk their relations with Najib.
A state Umno leader said division chiefs who are MPs will make sure delegates from their divisions vote for the incumbents for fear of being sidelined in a much anticipated Cabinet reshuffle said to take place soon after the party elections.
"They fear that if their divisions do not toe the line, they might be out should Najib reshuffle his Cabinet," said the division chief on condition of anonymity.
Najib is not worried about Zahid and Shafie as both look set to be re-elected.
The Home Minister has remained the popular choice since day one because his no-nonsense way of handling political opponents and crime plays well in Umno.
Votes that are going to Sabah chieftain Shafie are seen as a reward for the state's strong support of Barisan Nasional in the last general election.
Posted: 18 Oct 2013 04:34 PM PDT
(Bernama) - Timbalan Perdana Menteri Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin hari ini menafikan mengeluarkan kenyataan yang dibuat dalam satu akaun Facebook mengenai dakwaan adanya keputusan Jawatankuasa Disiplin Umno ke atas Datuk Mukhriz Tun Dr Mahathir.
Muhyiddin yang juga timbalan presiden Umno menegaskan akaun Facebook itu bukan milik beliau dan telah meminta Suruhanjaya Komunikasi dan Multimedia Malaysia (SKMM) menyiasat akaun Facebook itu yang menggunakan nama 'Tansri Muhyiddin Yasin'.
|You are subscribed to email updates from Malaysia Today - Your Source of Independent News |
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.
|Email delivery powered by Google|
|Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610|