Rabu, 29 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


Let the class war begin

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 08:24 PM PDT

 

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

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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


Government Has Fulfilled All Promises Through NEP

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 12:50 PM PDT

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

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

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

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

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

EFFECTIVE EDUCATION POLICY

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

FAST-PACED DEVELOPMENT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

RESTORING MALAYS' SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS

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

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

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

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

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

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

FOSTERING NATIONAL UNITY

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

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

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

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

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

Malaysia’s New Internet Law

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 12:48 PM PDT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Courts sending out mixed signals over statutory rape

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 11:57 AM PDT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Menetapkan Gaji Minimum Adalah Idea Yang Buruk Bagi Rakyat

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 11:53 AM PDT

 

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

Shahabudeen Jalil

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

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

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

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

 

1. Tidak Adil Bagi Semua

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

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

2. Memusnahkan Perniagaan Kecil

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

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

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

3. Peningkatan Jenayah dan Meningkatkan Pengangguran

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

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

4. Beban yang terpaksa ditanggung oleh semua

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Hudud: A PAS objective, not an agreed Pakatan agenda

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 11:35 AM PDT

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

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

Kim Quek

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

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

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

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


MAT SABU DENIES, BUT SIN CHEW PERSISTS

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

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

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

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

Stage 1: On Sunday, Aug 26:

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

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

Stage 2: On Monday, Aug 27:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Stage 3: (Tuesday, Aug 28)

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


THE TRUTH

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


HEADLINE MISLEADING

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted: 29 Aug 2012 11:32 AM PDT

Shen Yee Aun

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 11:26 PM PDT

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

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

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

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

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

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

Statistics Manipulation Allegations

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 11:20 PM PDT

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

Statement by Sin Chew Daily

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 09:37 PM PDT

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

Sin Chew Daily

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

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

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

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

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

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

Mat Sabu replied, "Boleh."

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

The above had become the basis of our article.

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 09:16 PM PDT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Let the class war begin

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 08:24 PM PDT

 

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

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Chinese businesses give Najib thumbs-down

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 06:24 PM PDT

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

Syed Jaymal Zahiid, FMT

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

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

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

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

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

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

Negative performance

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

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

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

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

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

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

READ MORE HERE

 

Hudud law: Truth or illusion?

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 03:55 PM PDT

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

Tay Tian Yan, Sin Chew Daily

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

The bankruptcy of the Islamic vs secular state debate

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 03:35 PM PDT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

A sensitivity towards history

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

READ MORE HERE

 

PAS intensifies push for hudud

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 03:17 PM PDT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Datuk Dr Mujahid Yusof Rawa Datuk Dr Mujahid Yusof Rawa

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

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

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

He later denied making the statement to Sin Chew Daily.

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

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

 

Discord in SNAP over BN membership

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 03:11 PM PDT

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

Joseph Tawie, FMT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

'Naughty rumours'

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

READ MORE HERE

 

‘Young Power’ wants Indian-based Pakatan party

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 03:03 PM PDT

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

B. Nantha Kumar, FMT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Did Taib ‘surrender’ oil right to BN?

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 02:55 PM PDT

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

Free Malaysia Today

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Taib's silence

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

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

But the question is: Did the nephew and the uncle "surrender" Sarawak's rights over oil and gas to the federal government in order to please the then prime minister Abdul Razak in return for political and financial support?

Sarawak was at that time in turmoil following the sacking of its chief minister Stephen Kalong Ningkan in 1966.

At the time there were incessant allegations by the Parti Pesaka anak Sarawak president Temenggong Jugah anak Barieng that the Ibans were shabbily treated by Abdul Rahman and Taib.

Abdul Rahman was also facing an "internal rebellion" against his leadership from within Pesaka, which had by then (in 1973) merged with Parti Bumiputera to form Parti Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu (PBB).

At the point of signing the oil agreement, Sarawak was said to be politically unstable and needed the support of the federal government.

READ MORE HERE

 

‘Unseen hands involved in leak’

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 02:50 PM PDT

The leaking of minutes of a private meeting between the Penang deputy chief minister (I) and Chinese representatives was the work of ambitious politicians within the party, claim some PKR insiders.

Athi Shankar, FMT

GEORGE TOWN: The unseen hands of some master plotters are at work again within the Penang PKR. This time the fall guy is Deputy Chief Minister (I) Mansor Othman.

Those out to drive a wedge between DAP and PKR have succeeded to an extent. Minutes of a private meeting between Mansor and several Chinese representatives were published verbatim in a blog, namely Gelagat Anwar, in its June 16, 18 and 19 postings.

Some insiders say the leak was to trap Mansor and expel him from the state PKR. The sabotage and back-stabbing is nothing new within the state PKR.

Since the 2008 general election, there have been two other such cases. Internal politicking has resulted in Mohammad Fairus Khairudin been booted out as Penang deputy chief minister (I) and Penanti assemblyman in April 2009. Then Bayan Baru MP Mohd Zahrain Hashim was removed as state PKR chief in November 2009.

In the latest episode, the leak revealed that Mansor had described Chief Minister and DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng as "cocky and arrogant". He had also said that Lim was revered like "tokong" (deity) by Chinese voters in Penang.

Mansor's depiction of Lim as "cocky and arrogant" is not a surprise as there is no love lost between the two parties.

Local PKR leaders have always felt marginalised under the DAP-helmed Pakatan Rakyat state government.

Although Mansor denied saying "cocky and arrogant" in last Friday's press conference, the damage was already done.

It's learnt that Mansor's colleagues in the state executive council have persuaded him to "eat humble pie" by reading out a prepared text before an army of pressmen.

But if only Mansor had sought a second opinion from other PKR grassroots leaders, he could have avoided the embarrassing situation.

Some party loyalists suggested that Mansor should have instead instructed those who attended the meeting to clear the air at a press conference.

"It would have put the conspirators in an embarrassing situation instead," said insiders.

Conspiracy to oust Mansor

Mansor aside, the blog disclosed that PKR's state deputy chief and Batu Kawan division chief Law Choo Kiang, Bukit Bendera division deputy chief and island municipal (MPPP) councillor Felix Ooi Keat Hin, and Bayan Baru division appointed vice-chairman and MPPP councillor Tan Seng Keat attended the meeting

Others at the meeting were PKR's 2004 general election candidate for Bayan Baru parliamentary and Batu Uban state seats Raymond Ong Ting Cheow; Tanjung Youth chief Ng Chek Siang; Batu Uban branch chief Cheah Peng Guan and Mansor's assistant John Ooi.

They are representatives of an internal all-Chinese group called "Pasukan Keadilan".

Party grassroots are now pointing accusing fingers at "Pasukan Keadilan" for the leak.

READ MORE HERE

 

Weary nation keeps guessing

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 02:47 PM PDT

Why is the prime minister still toying with the polls date if he is so popular judging by the large numbers who attend his official functions?

Selena Tay, FMT

For readers who enjoy the 13th general election date-guessing game, the latest from the rumour mill is that Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak is now also considering an October/early November date besides the September option.

"However, the October or November date is dangerous for him as that is the Haj season and holding the polls during the Haj season will ruin his image as a Muslim leader as it infringes on Muslim sensitivity," said PAS strategist and Kuala Selangor MP Dzulkefly Ahmad.

PAS Shah Alam MP Khalid Samad concurred, saying that "if the Barisan Nasional government holds the general election during the Haj season, it will only serve to reveal the true colours of Umno which claims to champion Islam".

Besides, why is the prime minister still toying with the polls date if he is so popular judging by the large numbers who attend his official functions? Why is he still dragging his feet over the election date?

Moreover, Najib has also urged the rakyat to stick to certainty with the BN government which has a proven track record instead of choosing the opposition and uncertainty. An important point to note is that it was the prime minister himself who has proclaimed that this date-guessing is a national past-time.

"By certainty does the prime minister mean that we must stick to the certainty of rising corruption and soaring crime rate?

"It is certainly the ultimate in stupidity if, by certainty, we must stick to the same trajectory leading to the abyss of destruction. Is this what the prime minister meant when he said that we must stick to certainty?" asked Dzulkefly.

Dzulkefly also said that Najib has really no choice but to use the September date if he still wants to hold the polls this year because holding the polls during the Haj season will make him lose his credibility as a Muslim leader.

Or else, Najib should just simplify matters and hold the general election next year. But the major problem with holding the polls next year is that the global economic climate has become unstable.

Economy looks bleak

Dzulkefly also said that the current macro-economic figures of growth cannot be used to predict the health of the nation's economy in the long term as US, Europe and even economic powerhouse China are experiencing a slowdown.

"Malaysia's economy is powered by domestic consumption and right now the number of non-performing loans of individuals is steadily rising. This is an unhealthy trend. In addition, Malaysia's debt ratio which stands at RM653 billion is now at a very dangerous level as it has risen past the 55% benchmark of the GDP, which is the level set by Parliament that the nation must not surpass," he added.

This shows that the situation in Malaysia is not what it seems. There is more to it than meets the eye where economic figures are concerned. Besides, statistics are always debatable. One can always present one set of figures to debunk another set of figures.

Meanwhile, the federal government is daily issuing statements proclaiming the healthy state of the nation's economy. Does this sound reassuring?

Be that as it may, Najib is cornered where the general election date is concerned and it is due to his own doing. He has lost the element of surprise in the game that he himself initiated. Henceforth, the polls can be held anytime and Pakatan Rakyat is now standing ready.

Also, the Royal Commission of Inquiry set up to look into the problem of the illegals in Sabah obtaining citizenship needs six months to complete its work and the same can be said of the Oil Royalty Payments Committee. Both the RCI and the Oil Royalty Payments Committee will only complete their work next year.

Lacking innovative ideas

The federal government is also lacking innovative ideas on running the nation. When Pakatan or the rakyat bring up an issue, sometimes the government will respond and react. Otherwise, there is total silence as in the case of the dirty electoral rolls. Nothing exciting or awe-inspiring is coming from the BN leaders.

READ MORE HERE

 

Musa remains our leader, says Umno man

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 02:45 PM PDT

Umno insiders are warning of serious repercussions should Najib Tun Razak refuse to reinvigorate the BN in Sabah, which is fast losing support.

Luke Rintod, FMT

KOTA KINABALU: Sabah Umno has brushed off claims of a shake-up in the party and that its strongman Musa Aman could well be on the way out ahead of the crucial general election.

Senior Sabah Umno leader, Masidi Manjun, quickly dismissed the news report in FMT as mere rumour, claiming even Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak was impressed by Musa's performance, both as Umno head and chief minister.

"Musa is doing an excellent job leading the party and the state government and the prime minister himself has complimented Musa's leadership," he said recently.

"Sabah Umno and Barisan Nasional (BN) are fully behind Musa to continue leading the state," he insisted when reporters asked him on the FMT article that the chief minister was marking time and could be replaced soon.

Local newspapers here yesterday carried Masidi's denial prominently but party insiders whom FMT contacted insisted that many in Sabah Umno do not subscribe to the party line that Musa is doing an excellent job.

Said one: "If Musa is doing an excellent job as Masidi claimed, how come leaders like Lajim Ukin and Wilfred Bumburing had left? Please explain too why the Kadazandusuns and Chinese and even more Muslims in Sabah are leaving BN?"

According to the report, an increasingly embattled Umno could well be forced to do a rescue reshuffle in its "fix-deposit" Sabah's party hierarchy and state leadership.

The rationale for the reshuffle getting the go-ahead from Najib is reportedly due to grumbling among the business community in the state as well as a series of high-profile defections from Umno as well as other BN parties.

According to well-placed sources, the shake-up would involve Musa taking leave and either Masidi or Hajiji Mohd Noor acting as Sabah chief minister until the general election.

Serious repercussions

However, talk of a shake-up in Sabah Umno is also being seen as a gambit by those close to another Sabah Umno strongman and Musa rival, Shafie Apdal, the current Semporna MP who is a trusted man of Najib, to eventually pave the way for him to helm the state.

This is plausible but Umno insiders are warning of serious repercussions should Najib refuse to reinvigorate the BN in the state which is reportedly steadily losing the support of almost all the communities in the state.

They claimed that party's interest must be put first and ahead of personal agenda and failure to do so would result in more defections as the election looms.

READ MORE HERE

 

Touché

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 06:47 AM PDT

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

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

So there you are. Touché.

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

So, again, touché!

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

And today, again, touché!

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

And, yet again, touché!

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

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

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

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

Touché!

 

Suaram funded by US, Finland, Canada

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 05:35 AM PDT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 05:27 AM PDT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Report confirmed by Mat Sabu before going into print

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 05:24 AM PDT

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

On Hudud

Posted: 28 Aug 2012 05:12 AM PDT

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

A REPUBLIC OF VIRTUE

Dr Azly Rahman

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

Penology (hudud)

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

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

The adultery can only be proven by:

1) a confession repeated four times;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(see above).

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

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

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

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

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

the evidence and oath of one just witness is sufficient.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

1) premeditated or wilful,

2) similar to (1),

3) by accident.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

SOURCE:

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

 

Kredit: www.malaysia-today.net
 

Malaysia Today Online

Copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved