Share |

Saturday, October 24, 2009

Another 10 by-elections on the cards, warns Bersih - Malaysiakini

Up to eight Pakatan MPs and two state reps could lose their seats as a result of charges involving illegal assemblies and related offences.

NONEIn addition to PKR MP Tian Chua (left) - who was found guilty last week of Abiting@ a police officer when stopped on his way to the Parliament in 2007 - seven of his colleagues could face a similar fate.

They are Azmin Ali, Sivarasa Rasiah, N Gobalakrishnan (PKR), Tony Pua (DAP), Dr Dzulkifly Ahmad, Dr Hatta Ramli and Dr Lo=lo= Mohd Ghazali (PAS).

"This would mean Pakatan Rakyat may be left with only 74 seats in Parliament," lamented Bersih, a broad coalition political parties and NGOs which campaigns for free and fair elections. With that, the ruling Barisan Nasional will have regained its two-thirds majority.

"Two (Selangor) DAP state assemblypersons - Ronnie Liu and Lau Weng San - may also become the victim of this wave of 'judicial crackdown' for illegal assembly."

Any elected representative who is fined above RM2,000 or sentenced to more than one year's jail would automatically forfeit their seats and be banned from contesting for five years after having served the punishment.

Judicial 'force' used to disqualify reps

On Thursday, Chua was fined RM3,000 and jailed six months after being found guilty of biting a police officer and preventing the latter from discharging his duty.

The Kuala Lumpur Magistrate's Court, however, allowed a stay of execution pending Chua's appeal. If upheld, the sentence would disqualify Chua from holding his MP's post.

Bersih, which described the court decision as Aselective prosecution@, warned that if the public does not protest against such "repression", up 10 elected opposition representatives could be similarly disqualified.

"Unfortunately, like in Perak, the judiciary acts as an unelected institution, is again used to topple elected representatives," said Bersih's spokesperson Faisal Mustaffa.

"The magistrate has conveniently privileged the testimony of the plaintiff over that of Tian Chua, when there is no single objective evidence that points to Tian Chua's alleged biting the policemen. And despite the police officer's admission of beating up Tian, he is not charged or suspended."

Controversial mummies

An international argument brews over how three Incan children were killed when they were sacrificed 500 years ago.

Budget 2010: MP vox pop

Salahuddin gives thumbs up for proposed Whistle Blower Act

"The Other 20 Percent"

By Pakac Luteb

Dr. Porntip gave an 80 percent chance that Teoh Beng Hock had been murdered by the MACC.

I believe I have the remaining 20 percent.

Looking at the information available publicly since Teoh's death, including the findings of Dr. Porntip, I have made certain deductions about the matter:

Teoh was said to have fallen from the 14th floor to a roof at the 5th floor level. That's a fall of 9 floors.

A fall of that distance would often produce some splatter of blood at the scene, but such blood was apparently absent in the photos of Teoh's body on the roof.

Dr. Porntip testified that there were marks indicating dragging across a "hard and rough surface".

The stairs, doorways and pathways to and along roofs of a building don't receive the smooth beautiful finishes given areas inside the building, they are left rough, bare cement and gravel.

From the above, I think a reasonable deduction is that Teoh did not fall to where his body was shown on the roof, but rather was killed elsewhere and dragged to the point on the roof shown in the photos. That's the remaining 20 percent.

It appears that his body was placed on the roof below a window to attempt to make Teoh's death appear a suicide.

In other words, Teoh's death was 100 percent murder.

Why was Teoh killed?

Did he know "too much"?

Could he have implicated someone in a corruption case?

Perhaps he was called to the MACC not to give evidence but rather to learn what he knew and then permanently silence him.

Teoh's death will understandably make people reluctant to provide information to the MACC, which would hamper the ability of the MACC to combat corruption.

It appears that the MACC (formerly known as the ACA) is not really interested in combating corruption, but rather interested in
suppressing evidence of corruption, to the extent of committing murder to achieve that end.

What to call a country ruled by thieves and murderers? Malaysia has become such a country.

Subra considers life outside MIC

Subramaniam lost his bid for the deputy president’s post. — file pic

By Baradan Kuppusamy - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 24 — After failing to secure the deputy president’s post in the Sept 12 MIC elections, one of Datuk S. Subramaniam’s options was to lead an exodus of his supporters out of the party he had helped helm for over four decades.

That option is now starting to take shape after a senior MIC leader and Subramaniam supporter applied to set up a new Indian-based organisation that would act as an interim body to gather all of Subramaniam supporters under one umbrella.

The organisation, to be registered soon, can be easily converted into a political party or merged with other Indian-based political parties in time for the next general election.

Originally, Subramaniam’s supporters had planned to use the Makkal Sakti slogan to register the organisation but the emotive term was “usurped” by former Hindraf national co-ordinator R. S. Thanenthiran, who is now president of the Makkal Sakti Party Malaysia.

“Subramaniam is using the same method that the late (IPF founder Tan Sri M. G.) Pandithan had used when he was sacked from the MIC in 1988,” said a senior Subramaniam supporter who requested anonymity.

Pandithan first gathered his supporters under the “Natpani Mandrams” or friendly clubs, before converting it into the Indian Progressive Front (IPF) and taking it into the opposition Gagasan Rakyat headed by Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah.

Although IPF did not win any seats, its members helped to dramatically reduce the winning majorities of dozens of top Umno leaders all along the west coast.

“Subramaniam plans to do the same but only if the MIC door is firmly shut on him,” his supporters said.

Datuk Sery S. Samy Vellu, whose support in the MIC has eroded dramatically, plans to dissolve scores of branches and divisions on the grounds that they were “ineffective” – the same method used to cull branches supporting Pandithan and other rebel leaders in the MIC after 1990.

At the same time Samy Vellu is making it easier for his supporters to form new branches. “It is vintage Samy Vellu,” said senior another MIC leader. “Close one branch and form two new branches to stay in power.”

The MIC is also taking “disciplinary action” against key Subramaniam supporters on what MIC insiders say are “frivolous” grounds.

The Subramaniam backers behind the new organisation say getting registration is not a problem because the Barisan Nasional understands why they were leaving MIC.

“There is no room for us in the party anymore… the party is like a family property,” the backers said. “They don’t want us anymore.”

Subramaniam is also believed to be negotiating with all Indian organisations outside the MIC fold to gather them under one umbrella, including former Hindraf leaders like Vasantha Kumar, Ganapathy Rao and others.

Subramaniam is expected to reveal more about his plans in the weeks ahead, said a supporter.

“We are not resting but have been working hard since the Sept 12 elections,” a Subramaniam supporter said. “When we exit MIC it would end up as a shell.”

Several of the IPF factions are also expected to join up with Subramaniam in his new venture, his supporter’s said.

The BN would stand to gain even if the exodus from the MIC materialises as all factions will continue to support the ruling coalition.

Iskandar rocked by CEO’s resignation

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 24 — The country’s showpiece economic corridor, Iskandar Malaysia, has been rocked with the sudden resignation of chief executive officer Harun Johari just months after his appointment.

He also becomes the second CEO to exit the Iskandar Regional Development Authority (IRDA) since it was set up in November 2006, following the footsteps of Datuk Ikmal Hijaz. Harun’s departure will raise more red flags over a project which has been long on announcements and master plans but painfully short on visible changes on the ground.

It also calls into question Khazanah Nasional’s acumen in picking senior officials to drive this ambitious project.

The Malaysian Insider understands that Harun tendered his resignation on Thursday but talk of his possible departure has been swirling since it became apparent that he was not on the same page as senior Johor officials including the Johor mentri besar, the co-chairman of IRDA.

A stalwart at Shell for more than two decades, he was the CEO of the Port of Tanjung Pelepas before being tapped for the IRDA spot. An introvert, he brought in a clutch of former executives from Shell to shake up the lacklustre IRDA and focus the staff on achieving goals. His strength at Shell was to get the processes right but his critics argued that he lacked charisma and confidence for the senior position.

Powerful Johor civil service officials complained that he did not engage them directly. He also faced some resistance from IRDA staff who were loyal to Ikmal. In July, he became the target of a blog called IRDA Watch.

It is unclear who will replace Harun but Johor politicians feel that the position should be given to a senior official of the Johor civil service, instead of leaving the head-hunting to Khazanah Nasional.

In the Budget unveiled yesterday, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak announced an attractive tax structure for those working in Iskandar in an attempt to kick start a project which showed much promise when launched from Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in 2006.

But bureaucracy, politicking and lack of leadership has seen confidence about turning Iskandar Malaysia into a global metropolis and the country’s next engine of growth curdle into cynicism.

Kong downplays prospect of Tee Keat, Soi Lek retirement

One deputy presidency, two deputy presidents. — file pic

By Adib Zalkapli - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 24 — MCA vice-president Datuk Seri Kong Cho Ha has played down the prospects of the squabbling top two party leaders quitting their posts, saying the party president should be given more time to reveal details of a peace plan.

The plan, brokered by Barisan Nasional chairman and Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, would force Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat to work together with ousted deputy Datuk Dr Chua Soi Lek.

“We have to give him some time,” Kong told reporters when asked whether Ong had given any details of the peace plan.

On whether the plan would include a new succession in the party and the retirement of both Ong and Dr Chua, Kong said the issue was not relevant.

“We are talking about unity plan; it was about unity not retirement,” said Kong.

He added that the peace plan allows everyone in the party to play their roles.

“It’s good for the party to move forward, so that everybody will have role to play,” said Kong.

The latest MCA crisis started with the sacking of Dr Chua, for ostensibly smearing the party’s image with a sex DVD in 2007, but the sacking was later reduced to a four-year suspension

Dr Chua’s supporters subsequently forced an EGM where both camps’ had their resolutions voted out by the party’s central delegates, although the former health minister was reinstated as a party member.

Ong has refused to step down, as the motion of no-confidence requires the support of at least two-thirds of the delegates for him to lose the presidency.

Another party vice-president Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai was later elected deputy president by the central committee but Dr Chua has asked the Registrar of Societies (ROS) to reinstate him as MCA’s No 2.

Under the peace plan, Liow would remain deputy president for now pending a response from the ROS on Dr Chua’s application to be recognised as deputy president.

MCA leaders as great a focus as Najib in the 2010 Budget presentation in Parliament

By Lim Kit Siang,

MCA leaders were as great a focus as the Prime Minister and Finance Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak in yesterday’s 2010 Budget presentation in Parliament – the visibly uncomfortable MCA President Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat and the forlorn MCA Deputy President Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai.

This was a departure from the Budget Day in Parliament in previous years when the budget for the new year had no competitors for attention and would be the cynosure of all eyes and ears.

This distraction is highly pertinent to the relevance of theme of Najib’s first Budget, viz: “2010 Budget – 1Malaysia, Together We Prosper”.

The question that immediately comes to mind is how there can be a 1Malaysia Budget when it is founded on such shaky foundations like “1MCA”, with all top MCA leaders totally discredited after treating the MCA Central Committee members, over 2,300 MCA delegates, the Chinese community and the Malaysian people as “suckers”.

Does Najib’s 2010 Budget qualify to be described as a 1Malaysia budget? Using the term 1Malaysia for various programmes and proposals do not ipso facto make them “1Malaysia” – when there is even now a “1Malaysia Toilet”!

Najib has proposed a new maximum income tax rate of 15% for Iskandar Malaysia compared with 26 per cent for the rest of the country. The rationale is to attract local and foreign talent as well as intensify the development of Iskandar Malaysia, with the tax treatment eligible for those engaged in qualifying activities such as green technology, biotechnology, education services, healthcare, creative industry, financial advisory and consultancy services as well as logistic services and tourism.

How can this new tax incentive qualify to be 1Malaysia, when it discriminates against the other four development corridors and the rest of the country?

If Najib’s 2010 Budget is to be a 1Malaysia budget, then such a special tax rate to promote high-level knowledge workers should not be discriminatory in its application at all.

Malaysia is already divided into too many “Malaysias” without the creation of new dichotomies, which can only take the nation further away from the goal and objective of “1Malaysia”.

“Second wave of privatisation”: Now that’s scary - Anil Netto

I was paying only casual attention while Najib droned on over the radio when tabling his Budget in Parliament yesterday.

But my ears pricked up when he mentioned a “second wave of privatisation”.

The Bernama headline says it all: ‘Companies Under MOF Inc And Other Viable Agencies To Be Privatise’ (sic)

Why only the viable agencies? Is this going to be more of “privatisation of profits and socialisation of losses” – at the expense of the Malaysian public?

The first thing that crossed my mind was: which cash cow is going to be handed over to which crony now? Don’t tell me they are going ahead with plans to privatise cash cow Plus Expressways Bhd, which is owned by Khazanah (24 per cent directly and 40 per cent indirectly). .

Plus Expressways owns 100 per cent of Projek Lebuhraya Utara-Selatan Bhd, which operates the North-South Highway. Last year, Plus Expressways earned a profit before tax of RM1.5 billion on the back of RM2.2 billion in toll collection.

A low-profile firm, Asas Serba, recently made an audacious proposal to take over all 22 highway concessionaire firms for RM50 billion. (Where are they going to get the money from?) The firm is reportedly led by four businessmen, two of whom are former senior executives of the Renong conglomerate.

S Jayasankaran, writing in the Business Times on 19 October, reported:

IT APPEARS that the staggering RM50 billion (S$20.7 billion) proposal from little known Asas Serba to buy all 22 highway concessionaires in the country is a serious one.

The proposal – first reported by BT two months ago – calls for the company to buy over the tolled highways and cut tolls by 20 per cent on the premise that owning all of the nation’s tolled highways would result in economies of scale and, presumably, lower costs.

That this is a proposal considered seriously by the government cannot be denied. Nor Mohamad Yakcop, the minister of the Economic Planning Unit, dismissed the notion last month only to be contradicted by his boss Prime Minister Najib Razak.

Mr Najib, who is also finance minister, said he hadn’t seen the proposal yet, which implied that he was waiting to see it. This is a sharp reversal from the same Mr Najib who, two months ago, said that Khazanah, the investment arm of the federal government, had no intention of selling Plus Expressways, the biggest toll concessionaire in Malaysia. The premier is also the chairman of Khazanah.

You can check out some of the other likely targets of privatisation among Khazanah’s portfolio of companies here.

(Except for one share owned by the Federal Land Commissioner, Khazanah’s shares are owned by the Minister of Finance Incorporated.)

It looks as if the trend of neo-liberal policies is likely to continue

Have non-Muslims abandoned Pas? Or has Pas abandoned the non-Muslims?

Image My SinChew

It has been observed by some that during the recent Eidul Fitri open house held by Pas, the number of non-Malays and non-Muslims who attended the gathering could be counted 'on one hand'. That this deplorable turn-out has been lamented by some supporters of PAS is understandable, considering the fact that Pas has made many attempts to reach out to the non-Malay and non-Muslim voters of the country as part of its campaign to re-design itself as an Islamic party that is open to all.

Yet as it is with the case of the cosmetic shake-ups we have seen recently in Umno, the same can be said of PAS and its commitment to multiculturalism in Malaysia. Malaysians of all walks of life and ethno-religious backgrounds are now asking the same question: Which is the real PAS? The Pas that is represented by the moderate progressives made up of the likes of Husam Musa, Khalid Samad, Hatta Ramli, Dzulkefly Ahmad? Or the PAS that is led by conservatives like Mustafa Ali, Hassan Ali, Nashruddin Mat Isa and the like?

Judging by the PAS general assembly elections earlier this year, it would seem that the moderates in PAS have been effectively marginalised within their own party. Coming after five years of ineffective rule under the ineffectual leadership of former Prime Minister Badawi, Malaysia has reached a point where inter-religious and inter-communal dialogue, respect and accomodation is needed more than ever. Half a decade of Badawi's leadership has dished us a sordid serving of ethno-nationalist discourse accompanied by the waving of kerises in public, an overheated public domain wracked with communal distrust, an agitated public where minority concerns are being articulated as never before and an overall lack of faith in the political leadership in the country.

In the midst of all this, we need to remember that the election results of 8 March 2008 were a resounding rejection of the misguided politics of the Badawi era, and a call for change and consistency. PAS hopped on the same Pakatan Rakyat bandwagon with the promise of reform and democratisation, and it was on that basis that it received the support of the non-Muslims of the country. For the umpteenth time, we repeat this claim: The vote swing in 2008 was NOT an endorsement of an Islamic state to be slipped in through the back door.

Yet over the past one and a half years, what have we seen? Hasan Ali's unilateralism in Selangor has cost PAS the goodwill and trust it took the party years to cultivate, and his deafening silence over issues such as the death of Beng Hock and SELCAT lent the impression that the leaders of the Islamic party are more concerned about the sale of beer, courting couples and the bottom of Ms Beyonce Knowles than the political future of the country. Furthermore some - though not all - of PAS's leaders have also remained mum over recent controversies such as the 'cow head' protest in Selangor; and the treatment of minority groups such as the Ahmadis in Selangor as well. So in the midst of all this, it is hardly surprising if the Malaysian public is now asking: 'will the real PAS please stand up?'

Pas should remember that in the current climate of Malaysian politics where the Umno-led Federal government is attempting a serious overhaul of its political praxis and discourse, it too needs to change and reform with the times we live in. Gone are the days where empty Islamic rhetoric and promises of paradise will win PAS votes. Moreover, Pas today has to live and work in a Malaysian society where the Malaysian electorate are more connected, clued-up and informed than ever before thanks to better communications and information technology.

One is reminded of the rumblings and grumblings in Pas in the early 2000s, when some of the more hot-headed members of the party were seen complaining about the non-Muslims and non-Malays of the country following the elections of 1999. In his book Umno Tidak Relevan (2000), the Pas writer Hussein Yaakub then wrote:

"Keadaan ini jelas menunjukkan bahawa orang Cina tidak mempunyai pendirian tetap dalam politik dan mereka boleh ditarik ke sana ke mari oleh pemimpin-pemimpin dalam masyarakat Cina yang ada kepentingan peribadi di negara ini. Benarlah apa yang dikatakan oleh ahli perniagaan Cina bahawa masyarakat Tionghua lebih mementingkan keamanan dan perniagaan daripada segala-galanya. Ini bererti, orang-orang Cina memikirkan soal wang, cari makan dan kekayaan sahaja tampa memikirkan soal moral, maruah dan keadilan." (pg. 120)

In the same book, Hussein Yaakub also registered the derogatory comments made by other PAS leaders immediately before and after the 1999 election. One leader, Haji Malik Yusof (Pas state assemblyman for Tahan, Pahang), stated: ‘Saya melihat orang Cina tidaklah begitu terikat dengan kepartian sangat. Mereka hanya hendak aman dan boleh berniaga.’ (pg. 121) Few of these Pas leaders appeared to have considered the negative effects of their own comments, and the consequences on Malay–Chinese and Muslim–non-Muslim relations in the country.

Pas today has to realise that it cannot have its cake and eat it. PAS may want to entertain its aspirations to be a national party, but to be a national party means living with the realities of multiculturalism in a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society. No, a substantial section of the Malaysian public does not want to see public executions, floggings and amputations in public: We are more concerned about good governance and transparency and the rule of law instead. If and when PAS forgets this, and starts going on its holier-than-thou moral bandwagon, it will invariably lose the support of many of us. And before PAS starts sulking in the corner, PAS's leaders need to remember: It was not the Malaysian electorate that abandoned Pas, but Pas that abandoned us.


PAS Faces Serious Leadership Problem, Says Muhyiddin

MUAR, Oct 24 (Bernama) -- The proposal by PAS Spiritual Leader Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat for a PAS special general assembly to cleanse the party of pro-unity government leaders shows that PAS is facing a serious leadership problem, Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said on Saturday.

Acknowledging that the Nik Aziz proposal was a PAS domestic affair, he said it nevertheless showed an obvious clash of opinions in the opposition party.

"This (PAS leadership problem) is serious. There is an obvious clash of opinions in PAS. Nik Aziz versus (Datuk Abdul) Hadi Awang versus (Datuk) Nasharuddin Mohd Isa versus Datuk Husam Musa," the Umno deputy president told reporters after launching the Edufest@Pagoh carnival here.

Muhyiddin, who is also Education Minister, was asked to comment on the proposal by Nik Aziz, who is the Kelantan menteri besar, in his blog http://www.blogtokguru.com calling for the special assembly to change "two or three" problematic party leaders.

Nik Aziz had named the three leaders as PAS deputy president Nasharuddin Mat Isa, secretary-general Datuk Mustafa Ali and Selangor PAS commissioner Datuk Dr Hassan Ali, and said he was saddened that they did not heed the decision of the PAS general assembly in Ipoh last year which had rejected cooperation with Umno.

Muhyiddin said PAS seemed to be united but it was actually not because of the two sides for and against the proposal for a unity government by PAS and Umno.

"At the Bagan Pinang state by-election (in Negeri Sembilan on Oct 11), the people knew that PAS was not united because of the many problems in the party," he said.

Muhyiddin said Umno, as party president Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak had said in his policy speech at the party's general assembly earlier this month, was concerned over the disunity of Muslims in the country but many in PAS did not heed Umno's efforts for a unity government.

The deputy prime minister dismissed the statement by Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim that the 2010 Budget was not comprehensive, saying the budget had taken into account all groups.

KBP Traitor Deepavali Open House for LGE,Ramasamy and Rayer



Santha, a well known betrayer of the Kg.Buah Pala Village and hate by almost 99% of the villagers will be organising a Deepavali Open house on the 24th Oct Saturday 3.00pm(GMT +8) at her new home in Taman Brown Gelugor.

This event is to honor the Kg.Buah Pala Demolition Traitors and Betrayers. Guest of Honor will be Kapitan Lim Guan Eng(Bapak Kemusnahan Negara), Ramasamy(Worse leader than Samy Vellu) and RSN Rayer@D'G`reat Indian Liar! This shows clearly that the DAP Government honors and supports the Traitors, Liars and Betrayers who has sold their own community! What is worse than RAPE?? BETRAYAL!!!

Santha is a DAP member, a woman that has framed a case against the Committee Asst.Sec.Tamaraj which leads to his arrest in jelutong Police station on the 29th Aug 2009. which also leads to a commotion in the same police station where the Warrior Ladies of Kg.Buah Pala Blocked a POlice Van until the committee members are released on police bail. ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3Bx4piVZRE ). Santha was running a Besi Buruk (scrap metal) Business in the Kg.Buah Pala village and remarried an ex-policewoman's man recently. She is well known as a "Ball Carrier" in Kg.Buah Pala. A video of her giving interview while the demolition process on the 3rd Sept 2009 will be release soon on youtube( please check on Santha Buah Pala Betrayer).

Rwindraj

Farmers sell wives to pay debts in rural India

BUNDELKHAND, India (CNN) -- The cattle slowly drag the old-fashioned plow as a bone-thin farmer walks behind, encouraging them to move faster with a series of yelps.

Drought, debt and desperation have pushed some farmers in rural India to sell their wives.

Drought, debt and desperation have pushed some farmers in rural India to sell their wives.

It is a scene from times of old, but still the way many farmers operate in rural India, where the harvest often determines feast or famine.

The region is called Bundelkhand, spanning the two northern Indian states of Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh. It is here that drought, debt and desperation have pushed people to extremes.

To survive the bad years, some farmers say they turn to the "Paisawalla" -- Hindi for the rich man who lends money. Farmers say the loans from these unofficial lenders usually come with very high interest.

When the interest mounts up, lenders demand payment. Some farmers work as bonded laborers for a lifetime to pay off their debts. Others here say because of years of little rain and bad harvests they are forced to give money lenders whatever they ask for.

Sometimes that includes their wives.

"It happens sometimes when somebody borrows money," says a farmer's wife who did not want to be identified. She should know, considering what police say she told them. She said a rich man bought her from her husband.

"He did buy me," she says. "That's why he told me he bought me."

For 30 days she says the man forced her to live with him.

When her case drew public attention, she retracted her police report and her husband took her back.

Ranjana Kumari with India's Center for Social Research says the exploitation of women is common in the region. And, she says, there is little support for women in India who have the courage to file a case with authorities.

"Nobody's going to support or help them," Kumari says. "If a family decides not to help them, the system is already not so sensitized towards them, whether it is police, judiciary, whether the legal system. So the women themselves tend to withdraw these cases."

In another village, another story involving another farmer, and money lender.

"I sold my water engine and land and gave back his 30,000 rupees," the farmer says, describing his $600 loan payment.

The farmer, whom CNN is not identifying to protect his wife and children, says the lender then asked him to send his wife to help with chores while the lender's wife was sick. The farmer says he complied, and his children -- including his daughter -- went too.

But the mother never returned. The farmer says he believes she was stolen from him. The daughter says the lender sold her mother to another man.

State authorities say they have investigated the matter and found that the mother denies she was sold and has simply gone to live with a lover.

The daughter says that's not true, and claims that she and her father were told to keep quiet by some of the village leaders. During CNN's interview with the family, officials with the state magistrate's office barged into the farmer's home and began videotaping.

An Indian government report completed in 1998 says the region is prone to what it calls "atrocities," including the buying and selling of women.

However no one can say just how common these kinds of incidents are.

Social workers say this isn't just about poverty, but also an indication of the low social status of women in poverty-stricken areas such as Bundelkhand.

"Those women are very vulnerable to all kinds of physical and sexual exploitation." Kumari says. "Also there is much higher level of violence against women in that area."

The government and charities have been trying to help but the status of women and girls, often illiterate and seen as a financial burden, remains low. Nevertheless, attitudes are slowly beginning to change, Kumari says.

A farmer's wife in yet another village in the region said she was sold by her own parents 14 years ago.

"My mother and father got 10,000 rupees (about $200)," she says. "That's why they sold me."

She says she was 12 years old at the time her husband bought her. She never considered going to authorities because she says she had no where else to go. She accepted it as her destiny.

But now she has a daughter of her own and her perspective has changed.

Would she allow her daughter to be sold?

She looked up and shook her head firmly.

"No," she said, "I would not want this for her. Let her marry however

Nik Aziz wants EGM to 'axe' Hadi?

PKR’s Latest Indian Mandore- Councillor Uthayasoorian

We all know that this PKR’s Indian Mandore who’s NGO has benifitted from Selangor the richest state in Malaysia. Now he is returning the favour and speaking up for his Tuan i.e. Tan Sri Khalid, Menteri Besar of Selangor. This PKR Indian Mandore trying to do damage control to water down this hindu temple demolishment which was given headlines and front page news in all three Tamil dailys.

After 25 Novenber 2007 we no longer need to convince the Malaysian Indian on what is a fact and what is fiction. This Indain Mandore should instead convince his Tuan to grant state land titles to all Hindu temples, crematorium and all 98 Tamil School in Selangor and gazete it accordingly.

P. Uthayakumar’s public interest criminal cases in three different criminial Courts in three days in a row:-

News Update: 23/10/2009

P. Uthayakumar’s public interest criminal cases in three different criminial Courts in three days in a row:-

1) On 23/10/2009 before the Kuala Lumpur High Court at 9.00 a.m on the transfer of his case from the “bioused” Sessions Court Judge to the Kuala Lumpur High Court.(refer to our earlier postings)

2) On 26/10/2009 before the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court “bioused” Judge at 9.00 a.m on his ethnic cleansing criminal prosecution. (decision on a technical objection)

3) Appeal by the Attorney General against the High Court Judge Datuk Kadir Musa’s decision quashing and setting aside the Warrant of arrest and his subsequent arrest in 2006. This hearing is to be on 27/10/2009 at 9.00 a.m at the Putrajaya Court of Appeal.

lawyer-puthayakumar-in-the-dock

PKR/P.R’s Deepavali present, demolishing hindu temple

Re: PKR/P.R’s Deepavali present, demolishing hindu temple

We refer to the aforesaid matter which was reported in Tamil Nesan (headlines 23/10/2009) Mathuraiveeran Temple demolished (Nanban front page 23/10/2009) Mathuraiveeran Temple demolished (Makkal Osai 23/10/2009 front page). (But none of the other non Tamil media reported the same).

After the recent infamous demolishment of the last Indian traditional village in Penang ie Kg Buah Pala, it is now the PKR led Selangor state government’s turn to demolish this Mathuraiveeran Hindu temple by the Shah Alam City Council. When even the wounds of the Kg Buah Pala had not healed, now PKR/P.R chooses to ruthlessly, unconstitutionally and unlawfully demolish yet another Indian symbol.

This despicable act is not only in violation of Article 11 of the Federal Constitution which provides for freedom of religion but is also a crime by virtue of the Penal Code ie Section 295 (Injuring or defiling a place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class) which carries a maximum jail term of two years and a fine. Section 296 (Disturbing a religious assembly, Section 297 (Trespassing on burial places etc) and Section 298 A (Causing etc disharmony, disunity of feelings of enmity, hatred, ill – will or prejudicing etc, the maintenance of harmony or unity an grounds of religion). Why is it in Malaysia that almost always it is a Hindu temple, hindu crematorium or Tamil school that is demolished or forced to be relocated in Malaysia. Why not a Mosque, Chinese temple, Buddhist temple or a Church?

We now call upon your goodself as the Chief Executive Officer of the State of Selangor to lodge a police report with the view that the Attorney General prosecutes the Mayor of the City of Shah Alam, the enforcement director of the Shah Alam City Council and the Selangor State EXCO Member in charge of the Local Council for the aforesaid criminal offences.

As it stands this your PKR/P.R. State government has been not very much different from your UMNO predecessor Dato Seri Khir Toyo vis a vis the critical Indian problems in especially Selangor.

To prove that your goodselves are different and to stop the crimes of hindu temple demolishments etc the PKR, DAP and PAS State governments must within two weeks from the date hereof compulsorily acquire by virtue of Section 76 of the National Land Code and issue letters by the Menteri Besar of Selangor and Kedah and also the Chief Minister of Penang that all hindu temples, tamil schools and hindu crematoriums and all other Malaysian Indian symbols in the states of Kedah, Penang and Selangor that they would all be granted state land in situ, grant them land titles within six(6) months and gazette these land as hindu temples, hindu crematoriums and tamil schools accordingly. This would in effect solve half the critical Indian problems in Malaysia. But is there a political will by PKR, DAP and PAS in doing so.

This is the only and sure way for these state crimes to come to a complete full stop and which would in turn be emulated by the UMNO/BN Federal and the other UMNO/BN state governments.

After all P.R has granted state land to 102, 000 Chinese new villagers in Perak 110, 000 Rancangan Kampong Tersusun ( almost all Malay village heads) 3 hectres each for every orang asli family in Perak, 1, 000 hectres of land for nine Chinese Independent schools in Perak, 30hectres of land for the Premier International School, in Perak 30 hectres and RM 100 Million for the Sepang Pig Project in Selangor. All of this was within one month of taking over the state government. But almost zero land allocations had been granted for the Indians in Kedah, Penang and Selangor by the very same P.R. state governments.

Kindly take the appropriate action forth with and notify us accordingly.

Thank you.


Your faithfully,

_______________________

P.Uthayakumar

Secretary General (pro-tem).

temple-11

temple-21

copy-of-temple-3

Why Isa won

By Concerned Malaysian,

I have been reading all that has been written about the Bagan Pinang by-election results and the implications and thought I should say something. Let's look at what factors influenced the voters.

The Isa factor had a major influence on how the voters picked their candidate. Isa is immensely popular among the voters of all races. Whether it is rightly or wrongly placed it was very clear that he was popular.

Why I say it is rightly or wrongly is because, he just like every other politician, used tax payers money to gain that popularity through handouts. For a matured electorate this practice should be unacceptable as the money is ours anyway and who are you to use our money at your discretion?

The Indians in particular was disenchanted with the way Pakatan Rakyat government handled the Kampung Buah Pala situation. A promise was made during the election campaign in 2008 and there was no real effort to fulfill that promise.

All sorts of excuses were given on why Kampung Buah Pala could not be saved. Compromise and compensation was simply not good enough. It was like a betrayal to the community.

Lim Guan Eng had won a lot of respect when he was prepared to go to jail for the cause of a underaged Malay girl - a true reflection of the Malaysian spirit but where did this go in Kampung Buah Pala?

He also won a lot of respect when he was featured as the chief minister who travelled economy class. This differentiated him from the way BN politicians spend lavishly on themselves. However the perception I got from the many reports, is that he was arrogant and laid conditions for his meeting with the residents.

That was uncalled for as the famous saying that "everyone matters" was ignored. Anwar Ibrahim, the default leader of Pakatan Rakyat, was as usual missing in action when controversies crop up.

The postal votes had a major bearing on the outcome of the results. It was a forgone conclusion that the majority of the votes will go to BN.

Pakatan's commitment against corruption in the states that they govern has not been impressive. One, here we have the champions of corruption suddenly exposed to corrupt practices themselves as in the case of Perak, Penang and Selangor.

Although it has not been proven but the fact that the two assembly men are charged in court (who have also defected) does not bode well for Pakatan in Perak.

In Selangor, we have MACC investigating several Pakatan state assemblymen and if there is even the slightest evidence of corrupt practice, it will be enough to kill the anti-corruption champions.

We have a PJ councillor who made a public statement that all contracts will be divided 40-30-30. We have a Pakatan MP who defends such practices by claiming that politicians can make recommendations but that does not mean that it has to be awarded to those organisations. Again this smells of acceptance of such corrupt practices.

How different is Pakatan from BN although one might argue that this is a lot smaller scale then what BN does? Even at this point if Pakatan has corrupt practices creeping in, what will happen to them if they are given the Federal government? As a champion of anti-corruption, it is imperative that Pakatan should not tolerate any form of corruption even if it is at such a small and insignificant scale.

Pakatan is not a single entity but has three components - PKR, DAP and PAS. Each one of them has different principles, ideologies and objectives. Trust among them even at the highest level of leadership is perceived to be lacking. This has been demoralising to the electorate who for once believed there was an viable alternative to BN after the 2008 elections but now have lost their confidence.

Till today Pakatan has not even announced their shadow cabinet and this is perceived as the three component parties being unable to agree on which portfolios they will take. Can we trust them to take over the federal govenrment and run it well?

Performance has to be seen by the common folks and where it can begin and have an impact, is at the local , town and city councils. The maintenance of the environment, drains, roads and pavements would be a good place to start where the common folks would see the immediate results. Unfortunately there has been no change from BN to Pakatan

I believe all these factors have contributed in varying degrees to Pakatan's loss in Bagan Pinang. If these trends continue unabated, then the tide is bound to change and you will see a lot of Pakatan supporters going back to BN based on the principle that it is better to sleep with devil you know than the devil you don't.
It is also important to understand that the tsunami in 2008 was not because the people choose Pakatan for its ability but simply because of the ABN (Anything but Barisan Nasional) principle. So the ball is now in Pakatan's court and how you react in the next 24 to 36 months will determine your fate. The people are watching.

Rift in Islamic opposition party

THE spiritual head of Malaysia's Islamic opposition group has demanded the ouster of key party leaders, intensifying a factional feud following attempts to form an alliance with the federal government.

The infighting in the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party comes amid a string of similar disputes in other political parties - both in the government and the opposition - that have undermined hopes of boosting political stability amid an economic downturn.

Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat said the Islamic Party should convene a special congress for members to elect a fresh set of top officials and get rid of what he called 'problematic leaders.'

'I strongly feel there must be changes in the key players who hold seats in the party's core,' Mr Nik Abdul Aziz said in a statement late Thursday.

It was not immediately clear if Mr Nik Abdul Aziz can gain sufficient support in his call for a leadership revamp because the party only just held its last elections in June. But his statements are certain to fuel concerns that the party is headed for a split.

He singled out several party officials whom he said had tried earlier this year to hold high-level talks with Prime Minister Najib Razak's ruling coalition to build cooperation as the talks never materialised after other party members voiced dismay that the idea was an effort by the National Front to destabilise the three-party opposition alliance that made stunning gains in March 2008 general elections. -- AP

Photos released by MBSA on the demolished "temple"





Malaysia Inc. and turnaround management

Image

What is the top ten? I would say a failing education system, state-endorsed or institutionalised racism, abuse of power, corruption, wastage of public funds, lack of transparency and accountability, attitude problem, no civility or courtesy, serious crime problem, and arrogance, though not necessarily in that order.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Malaysia has launched many slogans in the past. Does anyone remember Malaysia Inc., Look East Policy, Buy British Last, and whatnot? Well, today I want to talk about Malaysia Inc., which is basically Malaysia Incorporated or about turning the country and government into a business ‘machine’.

Now, in a business, when it is failing or is suffering continuous losses over many years or the company is in disarray or the staff suffers from a low moral problem or the management lacks direction and innovation, etc., you call in the turnaround managers to assess the company as to what is wrong with it.

There may be many things wrong with the company. And the problem may be a combination of many things. And some problems are brought on or aggravated by other problems. But you can’t or need not solve all the problems. You just identify the top three, top four, or top five issues that contribute to about 80% of the problem.

Most companies suffer losses because of various reasons. First could be the product or service the company is dabbling in may be outdated or overpriced or the competition is just too great or the competitors are price-cutting and whatnot.

So you first evaluate the business of the company and see if it is still viable. The company may have been the leading horse-and-carriage business more than 150 years ago. Today, however, no one buys horses and carriages any more so this means your business is no longer viable in this day and age.

Electronic calculators were another rave, say 30 years ago. Today, however, people use computers to do their work and not electronic calculators and certainly not mechanical adding machines like in the 50s and 60s.

So, companies need to move on and keep up with the times. A business may have been great 50 years or 100 years ago. But unless it innovates and keeps up with technology and consumer demands it is going to be left behind.

And the same goes for countries, governments and political parties that do not understand the market and the demands of the consumers. They too will be left behind. And voters are ‘consumers’ just like any other consumers of perishables, clothes and whatnot. They want the latest and if you can’t offer the latest then the consumer goes elsewhere.

Assuming that the company has got its act together and is actually marketing a great product or service but it still loses money. You then search elsewhere for the problem. It is apparent it costs the company more money to operate than its income can cover. So it is a problem of cost being higher than revenue. And if you can’t increase the sales, or profit on the sales, you will have to reduce the operating cost instead.

You then look at the top three, four or five cost items, which would most likely come to about 80% of the company’s total cost. Say, the top cost is salaries and number two is bank interest while number three is rental, electricity and telephone charges while number four is travelling and entertainment. And these four items come to about 80% of the company’s total cost.

So you attack these four items and try to reduce the cost. Can you reduce bank borrowings by reducing your inventory and work on a JIT (just in time) basis? Say your sales are about RM1 million a month and you carry RM7 million in stocks. This means you have a seven months inventory, which is way too high. And that is why your bank interest is high. A JIT system means your stocks come in just in time to be delivered to the buyer and you carry maybe at the most 45 days worth of stocks.

So your sales people must be on the ball and able to forecast what they need just before they need it and they must move the stocks as soon as they come in. But you need a sales team that knows what it is doing and knows the market trend plus the buying habits of their customers. Lazy or stupid salesmen would not bother and this will end up with the company ordering and stocking items it actually does not need.

Salaries, again, need to be looked into to see whether you are overstaffed or you have three people doing the job of one person or you could automate certain things and reduce the need for all that manpower.

Does the company own assets it does not need or could actually get by with leasing assets such as cars, machinery, equipment, etc? And can some assets be sold to reduce the bank loans so that bank interest can be reduced? Does the company own the office, warehouse, factory, etc., and if they were sold they could actually wipe off the bank borrowings?

Sometimes, renting is cheaper than owning as the bank interest alone can come to as much as the rental cost. So you are actually not saving money by owning but instead tie up idle assets, which could be turned into cash. That is why many multinationals rather rent than own, especially in ‘unstable’ countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, etc.

Are your people travelling and entertaining too much but they bring back very little business in return? Sometimes the claims are higher than salaries so the staff may actually be living on overtime and claims.

Yes, these are the issues we need to look into in a turnaround exercise. We need to get our finger on the pulse and see how the company ticks and where it is not ticking properly. If we can do that the company can be turned around and brought back to viability.

And Malaysia Inc. is no different. It is a dying company. It is bleeding profusely and losing tons of money. The management is in disarray and lacks direction and innovation. The management is also milking the company. The moral of the staff is very low. And the market no longer believes in the product/service the company is selling, not to mention the product is so outdated and was only relevant during the time of Merdeka and is no longer relevant today.

But what does the management do? It keeps trying to flog a dead horse. And instead of attacking the top three, four or five cost items that contributes to 80% of the total cost, it sacks the tea lady, it abolishes the free coffee during coffee break, it terminates the contract to supply fresh flowers once a week every Monday, and all those other trivia that hardly come to 1% of the total cost. And it leaves the top three, four or five cost items that contribute to 80% of the total cost untouched.

And that is how the management is running Malaysia Inc. Worse still; it actually increases the cost in areas that are unnecessary. And the ‘independent directors of the board’, the opposition Members of Parliament, get sucked along. And they too demand that the tea lady get sacked and the free coffee and fresh flowers get abolished.

Unfortunately, this is how some Members of Parliament and State Assemblypersons from the opposition are acting. They want to make Malaysia Inc. viable by controlling the sale of condoms and beer and by banning ‘sexy’ performers from coming to Malaysia. That is just the tea lady, coffee and flowers. That is not going to save Malaysia Inc. We need to address the bigger issues. We need to attack the top three, four of five items that suck 80% of the cost and is causing Malaysia Inc. to go down the drain.

This, neither the management nor the ‘independent board members’ seem to understand.

List down the top ten problems this country is facing. List down the top ten cost centres. And then attack the top three. Attack the top five if possible. But do not, I repeat, do not attack number 65 on the list. Number 65 can wait. In fact, number 65 may even disappear by itself once we attack the top three, four or five.

What is the top ten? I would say a failing education system, state-endorsed or institutionalised racism, abuse of power, corruption, wastage of public funds, lack of transparency and accountability, attitude problem, no civility or courtesy, serious crime problem, and arrogance, though not necessarily in that order.

Now, if we can attack those top ten items, in particular the top five or six, 80% of the country’s problems will be solved. And many of the other problems will also automatically solve themselves.

Can you see that condoms and beer is not amongst my list of top ten problems? I did not say they are not problems. I am saying they are not in the list of top ten. So people like the Member of Parliament for Kulim and all the others of his ilk better wise up. The market, meaning the voters, are no longer like the voters of 1957. The market has changed. What you are trying to sell, the buyers no longer want. And, unless you keep up with the times, the buyers are going to go elsewhere and you are going to be left behind.

SABM Roadshow heads out to Penang

By Haris Ibrahim,

Penangites, block out 15th November, 2009 in your diary.

The Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia Roadshow, which has been planned as a full-day event, hits Penang on that day.

The venue : Hu Yew Seah Hall, 43 Madras Lane, Penang

We will kick off the event with a half-day youth workshop “Ada Apa Dengan Bangsa?” that morning, anchored by our smart partner, KOMAS. Participants will be urged to explore our identity, who we really are and what we believe in as Malaysians.

Numbers at the youth workshop, which is scheduled to start sharp at 9.00am, to be conducted with a mix of both Bahasa Malaysia and English, will be limited to 30 participants so that there will be greater scope for interaction.

If you’re aged between 17 – 25 and would like to participate in the youth workshop, send your details ( name, i.c. number, address, telephone contact number, and what you are presently doing ) to admin@sayaanakbangsamalaysia.net

The SABM forum, simply entitled “Bring Along A Friend”, kicks off in the afternoon, tentatively scheduled to start at 2.30pm, with the screening of “Sepuluh Tahun Sebelum Merdeka”, an excellent documentary by Fahmi Reza, who will himself be at the forum to share some of his thoughts with us. The documentary gives an insight into the state of politics some 10 years before Malaya attained independence from the British. This documentary makes for an excellent backdrop for the forum and Q & A session that will follow immediately after.

A panel of speakers is being assembled to deliver some thought-provoking ideas whereafter participants will be given ample time during the Q & A session to get in on the healthy discussion that we hope will happen. The names of panellists will be announced at a later date.

We will serve light refreshments after the forum and Q & A session and then we will be screening KOMAS’ “Gaduh”. If you have not yet watched this short film, this screening in itself may be reason enough for you take make the effort to attend the forum.

Why is the forum entitled “Bring Along A Friend”?

Quite simply, because that’s what you’ll have to do to attend the forum.

This is how it works.

Attendance is by invitation.

So you’ll have to e-mail us for an invitation, both for yourself and a friend of yours.

Now if you’re a Malay Malaysian, you’ll also have to register a non-Malay Malaysian friend, besides registering yourself for the forum. Conversely, if you’re non-Malay Malaysian, we will require you to also register a Malay Malaysian friend.

As with the youth workshop, if you’d like to attend the forum, send your and your friend’s details ( name, i.c. number, address, telephone contact number, and what you and your friend are presently doing ) to admin@sayaanakbangsamalaysia.net

Looking forward to seeing you in Penang.

Budget 2010

KUALA LUMPUR, 23 Oct 2009: Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak today tabled Budget 2010, themed "1Malaysia, Together We Prosper", which totalled RM191.5 billion.

The budget, Najib's first as Finance Minister, has a three-pronged strategy to drive the nation towards a high-income economy, and ensure holistic and sustainable development, and the people's well-being.

The proposed budget allocated RM138.3 billion or 72.2% for operating expenditure and RM53.2 billion or 27.8% for development expenditure.

The expenditure allocation for Budget 2010 is 11.2% less than the 2009 budget allocation of RM215.7 billion, Najib said when tabling Budget 2010 in the Dewan Rakyat this evening.

Najib said that to drive the country towards a high-income economy, the government would encourage increased private investment, provide a business-friendly environment, and implement privatisation initiatives.

The government will also enhance implementation of public-private partnership initiatives; intensify foreign direct investment; intensify research, development and commercialisation; and fully leverage on niche areas.

To fully leverage the niche areas, the government will boost the tourism industry; strengthen the information and communication technology industry; and intensify the halal industry.

In order to create a high-income economy, Najib said the government will also advance the agriculture sector; promote the construction industry; strengthen small and medium industries; develop green technology and promote construction of green buildings; and promote the creative industry.

The prime minster said to ensure holistic and sustainable development, highly skilled human capital would be enhanced while access to quality and affordable education expanded.

Najib said the government will safeguard the welfare of students, enhance skills of the workforce, expand the Permata programme and strengthen public institutions of higher education.

This strategy will also see the strengthening of the banking and financial system by invigorating the stock market; further developing the Islamic finance system and Ar-Rahnu micro credit programme; and the combating of corruption.

Najib said the government will also stress on the development of the regional corridors, Putrajaya and Cyberjaya.

He said under the operating expenditure, RM42.2 billion was allocated for emoluments and RM20.8 billion for supplies and services.

A total of RM73.9 billion was for fixed charges and grants while RM524 million was provided for purchase of assets, and the remaining RM800 million for other expenditures.

As for development expenditure, a sum of RM25.4 billion is provided for the economic sector to support the needs of infrastructure, industry and agriculture, and rural development.

The prime minister said RM20.3 billion was allocated to the social sector encompassing education and training, health, welfare, housing, and community development.

A total of RM3.7 billion is for the development of the security sector, RM1.8 billion for general administration and RM2 billion for contingencies.

Najib said federal government revenue in 2010 is expected to reduce 8.4% to RM148.4 billion compared with RM162.1 billion in 2009.

However, he said the federal government deficit in 2010 is expected to be in a better position at 5.6% of gross domestic product compared with 7.4% in 2009.

Najib said although Budget 2010 was the last budget for the Ninth Malaysia Plan, it was the essential foundation for the development of a new economic model and a precursor to the 10th Malaysia Plan.

He said since assuming leadership of the government, he has taken steps to stimulate the economy.

Referring to the 1Malaysia concept of "People First, Performance Now", he said it was based on positive values centred on social justice and acceptance of a multiracial society.

"This means the needs of the people must always take precedence. Therefore, every step requires sacrifice and strong cooperation from every segment of society," he said.

The prime minister said in advancing towards a high-income economy, the government would take a new approach based on innovation, creativity and high-valued activities.

"These measures will more than double per capita income of the people in the next 10 years," he said.

At the end of his speech which took more than two hours, Najib urged everyone to come together with one voice, one hope and one aspiration.

"Our recent success in Bagan Pinang has sparked our zeal to embark on this journey of transformation to lift our beloved nation to greater heights," he said referring to Barisan Nasional's big win in the Bagan Pinang by-election recently.

He ended his speech to thunderous applause from government supporters in the Dewan Rakyat. — Bernama

The demolished temple that never was

Themalaysianinsider.com,
By Neville Spykerman

SHAH ALAM, Oct 23- The Shah Alam City Council (MBSA) said today an illegal structure demolished by its enforcement officers on Wednesday cannot be called a Hindu temple, “by any stretch of the imagination”.

Deputy Mayor Mohtar Hani said the structure in Persiaran Kerjaya, Jalan Glenmarie, Seksyen U1, Shah Alam, was a place where gamblers went to get predictions for 4D or numbers and not a house of worship.

Pictures of the site distributed to the press today showed Chinese deities and altars, along with a picture of a Hindu deity, in what looked like an old oil palm estate.

An appeal letter from the “temple” caretaker, K. Muniandy, asking for a month’s grace period to move, dated Feb 19, described the site as a “Tokong Datuk” or deity altar.

The revelations by MBSA today cast doubts on a statement by MIC president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu, who yesterday denounced the demolition of the “temple”.

He said the demolition of the Mathurai Veeran temple was an act of treachery by Pakatan Rakyat (PR) against the Hindu community.

However MBSA councillor K. Uthayasoorian today said he was disappointed that MIC was resorting to such tactics for political mileage.

“They have twisted the facts,” he said, adding the embattled Indian party, which has lost the support of the majority of the community, was using the incident for its political survival.

According to him, the picture of the Hindu deity was brought to the site after the temple was demolished.

He said it was also disgrace for anyone to call the site a Mathurai Veeran temple and MBSA would not hesitate to lodge a police report and take legal action against the culprits which were raising such sensitive allegations.

Earlier this morning, about a dozen members from the Selangor MIC youth held a press conference at the site.

State party youth chief Shanker Raj Ayanger told the press they had lodged a police report about the incident yesterday.

He demanded the resignations of Selangor Executive Councillor Dr Xavier Jayakumar, who oversees non-Muslim places of worship, for failing to protect the ‘temple’.

He added they would be handing over a memorandum of protest to the Selangor mentri besar, next Wednesday.

He also called on PR to honour it promise that no places of worship would be demolished, which was made after they took over state administration last year.

Pas EGM to weed out "problematic" leaders?

Nik Aziz now wants an EGM so that “problematic” Pas leaders, who have been largely blamed for the party’s Bagan Pinang setback, can be ousted.

It’s not a moment too soon. These problematic leaders have certainly damaged the party’s image.

Nik Aziz could have read Farish Noor’s timely article here.

Comment

Dear PAS, please tell your exco to explain why there is temple demolition in Selangor. Is it because of PAS “malay majority concept” again?

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/index.php/malaysia/41160-mic-blames-pakatan-government-for-temple-demolition

Transkrip Perbahasan Rang Undang-Undang Etika Hakim

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim [Permatang Pauh]: Terima kasih Tuan Yang di-Pertua.

Saya bangun untuk membahaskan Rang Undang-Undang Jawatankuasa Etika Hakim 2008. Ini ada kaitan dengan soalan saya hari pertama sidang Parlimen ini menyentuh tentang isu integriti institusi-institusi utama dalam negara kita dan kita dapati dalam jawapan Timbalan Menteri masih dalam sindrom penafian. Etika ini ada kaitan dengan integriti dan saya juga agak dalam keadaan yang lebih sukar kerana berdiri di sini membahaskan isu hakim dan seperti mana ramai teman saya di Pakatan Rakyat sentiasa terpaksa berdepan dengan hakim. Kita akui tidak semua hakim yang tercemar dengan isu perilaku yang salah menjadi boneka ataupun rasuah dan ramai yang mempunyai integriti tetapi yang kita bicara pada hari ini ialah soal sistem salah satu tunggak utama dalam Perlembagaan Negara kita. Yang kita bicara hari ini etika hakim adalah satu isu yang ada kaitan dengan Perlembagaan Negara.

Saya juga hendak rujuk kepada jawapan bertulis semalam oleh Menteri berkaitan dengan isu yang heboh selama hampir satu dekad atau lebih iaitu jawapan Menteri kepada Yang Berhormat Tuan Lim Guan Eng, Bagan, tentang tindakan ke atas syor-syor Suruhanjaya Diraja mengenai Pita Lingam. Jawapannya bahawa Peguam Negara dapati tidak ada kes dan tidak ada pendakwaan yang perlu.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, yang menganggotai suruhanjaya yang diangkat oleh Yang Amat Berhormat Perdana Menteri dan Kabinet ini bukan bertaraf budak suruhan. Mereka terdiri dari kalangan pemuka yang mempunyai pengalaman yang besar termasuk pengerusinya Tan Sri Haidar Mohamed Noor, Pendaftar kemudian Hakim Mahkamah Persekutuan.

Mereka dalam laporan suruhanjaya itu menyatakan laporan itu terperinci menemu duga semua yang terlibat tetapi yang ternyata yang terlibat itu semua tokoh besar. Bekas Presiden UMNO, Setiausaha Agung UMNO dan peguam ini. Apakah mungkin kita hendak bicara soal etika hakim yang dipertahankan oleh Ahli-ahli Yang Berhormat? Serta kewibawaan hakim apabila hakim didapati
oleh suruhanjaya termasuk Ketua Hakim Negara bersubahat, bersekongkol menjadi alat perkakas kepada peguam Datuk V K Linggam dengan rekod yang sedemikian dan peguam Datuk V K Linggam untuk makluman Ahli Yang Berhormat, Tuan Yang di-Pertua bukan perkara baru. Berkait dalam Laporan Perwaja, audited Pricewaterhouse Report, tentang claim dia yang
exorbitant, yang berlebih lipat ganda.

Kemudian dalam kes Ayer Molek. Jadi ada yang mengatakan ini kes lama tapi ini saya jelaskan jawapan semalam maknanya bongkarlah, keluarkanlah apa bahan pun, tubuhlah suruhanjaya, gambar video keluar pun masih dalam sindrom penafian. Kata Datuk V K Linggam, looks like me, talkes like me,
probably walks like me but that is not me.

Ini ingatkan saya lagu P. Ramlee look like an angel, talk like an angel but you are devil in disguise.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua: Elvis Presley.
Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim [Permatang Pauh]: Elvis Presley, Tuan Yang di-Pertua ingat ya? Jadi kalau begitu apakah dengan wujudnya etika ini akan ada political cloud, political will untuk mengambil tindakan? Serah balik kepada Peguam Negara. Peguam Negara dengan rekod dan integritinya untuk siasat dan semuanya pass. Walaupun laporan itu Laporan Suruhanjaya
Diraja dengan jumlah anggota ahli-ahli yang dianggap oleh kabinet paling kanan dalam dunia kehakiman dan laporan ahli-ahli yang paling kanan dalam dunia kehakiman dianggap tidak berharga kerana Peguam Negara mengatakan no case, no further action. Ini bukan rules of law. Ini law of the jungle.

Yang Berhormat Bukit Gelugor menyebut tentang Bowman Investigations Report, dengan izin, a UK based private investigation agency has raised a number fresh allegations regarding the New Zealand holiday of Chief Justice, Tun Mohd Eusoff Chin and prominent lawyer Datuk V K Linggam in 1994. Bangkit lagi tahun 2009. Ini tersebar di seluruh dunia. Tanya
kerajaan, tanya peguam negara no case, no evidence because ternyata Datuk V K Linggam seorang peguam yang maha berkuasa. Jadi letak etika. Sebab itu orang kata kalau hendak menang kes jangan kira fakta dan jangan kira undang-undang, kira lawyer sahaja, peguam dan hakim.

Ada rakan-rakan Ahli Yang Berhormat yang membangkitkan ini fitnah. Ini pandangan yang serong walaupun tidak disebut dengan begitu nyata tapi Yang Berhormat Batang Sadong pun kata kita harus positif. Janganlah singgung, janganlah pertikaikan dan Yang Berhormat Sri Gading sebut janganlah bohong dan fitnah dan hakis keyakinan dengan sengaja. Sebab itu saya memilih di sini untuk menyebut berdasarkan fakta bukan sahaja kenyataan saya.

Bukan soal tadi disebut Yang Berhormat Kubang Kerian pemecatan Ketua Hakim Negara Tun Salleh Abbas tahun 1995, kes Insas Berhad, dan Anor versus Ayer Molek Rubber Company Berhad yang melibatkan peguam Datuk VK Lingam dan rumusan, something is rotten in the House of
Denmark. Court in Hamlet kerana bangunan Denmark pada masa itu tempat Mahkamah Sivil bersidang. Oh, tidak mengapa itu lama.

Kemudian skandal percutian 1995. 1996, Hakim Dato’ Ahmad Aidid pernah dating menemui saya dan membawa surat itu kepada Perdana Menteri kerana tuduhan salah laku dan rasuah. 112 tuduhan terhadap hakim-hakim, 39 tuduhan rasuah, 21 tuduhan salah guna kuasa, 52 tuduhan salah laku misconduct dan amalan tidak bermoral. No further action. 2007, rakaman video klip. Tuan Yang di-Pertua ingat bila saya dedahkan kali pertama,
saya diserang dengan begitu kuat oleh Menteri-menteri mengatakan, “Ah! Ini satu lagi penipuan dan fitnah.” Akhirnya suruhanjaya ditubuhkan.

Alhamdulillah dengan segala tekanan terhadap suruhanjaya itu disahkan ianya bukan fitnah tetapi nyata dengan bukti dan diusulkan supaya
tindakan diambil terhadap tokoh-tokoh yang terlibat. Sebab itulah jawapannya semalam Yang Berhormat Menteri tidak ada kes.

Akan tetapi yang baru VK Lingam ini, bukan melibatkan hanya Tun Eusoff Chin. Ia melibatkan Ketua Hakim Negara, Tun Haji Ahmad Fairuz bin Dato’ Sheikh Abdul Halim. Suruhanjaya bagi pengakuan dilepaskan kerana undang-undang negara ini yang sepatutnya satu tetapi ada two sets of laws. Satu untuk orang kaya atasan, satu untuk rakyat dan pengkritik kerajaan. 1Malaysia, dua undang-undang.
Dibangkitkan sekali lagi, ini kenyataan agak bias sebab itu wajar kita teliti kenyataan-kenyataan yang dibuat oleh orang-orang yang dianggap
punyai kewibawaan dalam bidang ini. Tun Suffian, Tuanku Sultan Azlan yang berulang kali menegaskan, Tun Sufian tentunya jauh lebih keras dan juga Tuanku Sultan Azlan. Tun Suffian pertamanya mengatakan dengan izin, I had predicted that our judiciary would take a whole generation to recover from the assault. Now that more than twelve years have elapsed, I doubt if the judiciary would recover in a generation from today. Memangnya dua dekad.

Judges who joined in downing their bosses or their boss have been rewarded by promotion. Judges who did not have been cowered into silence. Pidato beliau itu banyak diikuti. Saya tidak bermaksud menambah cuma hendak menyatakan bahawa beliau pernah mengatakan bahawa seandainya begini corak badan penghakiman, beliau tidak sanggup berdepan dalam mahkamah,
berdepan mereka apatah lagi sekiranya beliau tidak bersalah. Tuanku Sultan Azlan Shah tidak sampai dua tahun yang lalu mengatakan di antara lain
dengan izin, “the mere existence of court and judges in every ordered society proves nothing. It is their quality, their independence and their powers that matter.” Dia tekankan soal impartiality, dia tekankan soal perception masyarakat tentang terhakisnya kewibawaan dan kewibawaan atau
integriti badan kehakiman. Tuanku Sultan Azlan Shah bukan sahaja sebagai Sultan tetapi juga sebagai bekas Ketua Hakim Negara. Baginda menambah, “It is sad that public confidence in judiciary is based on four evaluating criteria, independent, impartiality, fairness of trial, integrity of the adjudicator”.
Ini empat perkara. Bila ditanya bagaimana penilaian? Tuanku Sultan Azlan Shah menjawab, sadly, malangnya I must acknowledge, Beta mengakui, “there has been some disquiet about our judiciary over the past few years and in more recent past. In 2004, I have stated that it grieved me having been a member of the judiciary whenever I had allegation against the judiciary and the erosion of public confidence in judiciary.”

Inilah yang di antara lain menyebabkan kita kata, itulah sebab kita hendak kemukakan etika ini, Jawatankuasa Etika. Ini saya tidak sebut International Bar Association, Centre for the Independent of Judges and Lawyers, International Commission of Juries, Commonwealth Lawyers Association, Union International De Avoca. Jadi sekarang kata rumusan mereka ialah
bahawa powerful executive di negara kita telah mengambil tindakan sehingga mengorbankan ciri- ciri kebebasan demokrasi negara kita. Berikut daripada itu ada beberapa laporan yang dibangkitkan.

Saya tekankan kita boleh tubuh jawatankuasa. Kita boleh sebut dengan nama
etika. Etika itu akhlak. Akhlak ini istilah Quran. Dengan beberapa kekurangan tidak apa kalau kita baiki. Katalah Yang Amat Berhormat Timbalan Menteri ada kekuatan hari ini, dia boleh bawa pindaan yang bagi satu jawatankuasa etika yang cukup menyeluruh.

Akan tetapi apakah ada keupayaan di pihak jawatankuasa untuk mengambil tindakan yang wajar. Dato’ Param Cumaraswamy dengan track record beliau di Pertubuhan Bangsa- Bangsa Bersatu meneliti soal kebebasan hakim, menulis kepada Ketua Hakim Negara Dato’ Mohd Fairuz pada Julai 2007.

Laporan kepada Dato’ Abu Kassim, pada ketika itu Timbalan Pengarah BPR. Sampai sekarang tidak ada tindakan. Saya tidak akan membaca semua rekod-rekod yang saya bawa di sini. Baru-baru ini timbul krisis Perak. Keputusan hakim dalam isu ini dibahas kerana mempertikai peruntukan Perlembagaan 72(1) yang menyebut dengan jelas, ‘Sahnya apa-apa
perjalanan dalam mana-mana dewan negeri tidak boleh dipersoalkan dalam mana-mana mahkamah.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua jangan nampak terlalu yakin kerana kalau mahkamah berbuat begini kepada Dewan Negeri Perak, saya bimbang kalau Parlimen juga kebebasan dan integritinya dipertikaikan. Artikel atau Perkara 72(1) Perlembagaan bila dilanggar tidak boleh dipertahankan. Lord Denning menyebut may not the judges themselves sometime abuse or misuse their
power. It is their duty to administer and apply the law of the land. If they should divert it or depart from it and do so knowingly they themselves would be guilty of misuse of power.

Maka mengikut Dato’ N.H Chan umpamanya di antara lain. Dato’ N.H Chan ini menarik Tuan Yang di-Pertua. Dia yang memutuskan dalam kes Ayer Molek yang memberi satu keputusan yang cukup keras terhadap hakim peringkat rendah dan penyelewengan yang dilakukan atas tindakan peguam VK Lingam yang diselamatkan oleh Peguam Negara dan Kerajaan Barisan Nasional hari ini. Jadi kalau ini yang berlaku ke mana kita sekarang? Maka kita berdepan dengan isu kewibawaan sebahagian dari hakim-hakim kanan dan hakim-hakim dan yang diperlukan ialah suatu komitmen yang jelas, yang kita hendak dengar dari Yang Berhormat Timbalan Menteri, kalau Timbalan Menteri uzur sekejap ialah apakah kelulusan Jawatankuasa Etika Hakim ini benar-benar menjamin untuk mengangkat dan menambah keyakinan sistem perundangan dan badan kehakiman yang terhakis?
Sampai bila bukti siapa lagi, hendak tunggu bekas Ketua Hakim Negara berapa orang, Sultan berapa orang dan laporan peringkat antarabangsa berapa banyak untuk meyakinkan kita bahawa something is rotten in the house of Denmark untuk kita ambil tindakan yang sewajarnya.

Jadi, ini penegasan yang kita perlukan kerana dalam undang-undang yang kita kemukakan hari ini ada kelemahan yang besar. Tuan Yang di-Pertua, apabila kita bicara soal badan kehakiman dan etika, kita terpaksa melihat beberapa dokumen penting dalam negara- negara yang agak maju, yang mempunyai sistem dan badan kehakiman yang bebas dan berwibawa.

Maka kita rujuk umpamanya di antara lain, The Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct 2002. Ini kerana dipersetujui oleh Ketua-ketua Hakim Negara, dibahaskan dan diterima sekarang sebagai satu dokumen yang cukup penting. Kalau kita ambil daripada sistem perundangan United Kingdom, dia kata mungkin tidak sesuai, ada baiknya disebut Bangalore, kerana sidangnya di Bangalore.

Namun, apa yang ditekankan etika tidak bermakna kalau badan kehakiman itu tidak dapat pertahankan prinsip kebebasan. Etika tidak bermakna kalau kewibawaan hakim-hakim dalam menjalankan tugas itu tidak dapat dijamin. Ini termasuk isu-isu lain yang dirumuskan sebagai propriety, equality, competence and diligence. Ada dokumen yang begini, tetapi apabila
kita lihat cadangan, ini cadangan hanya sekadar melepaskan batuk di tangga.

Jangan orang sebut dalam keadaan gawat soal integriti badan kehakiman, jangan tidak ada undang-undang, ada! Maka Menteri pun datang, bagi jaminan dan kita akan tangani dan ada Ahli-ahli Parlimen Barisan Nasional pun kata, tengok, kita dengar dan kita ambil tindakan. Akan tetapi, ambil ikhtiar sedikit, baca undang-undang kita, fasal-fasalnya berbanding dengan semua peruntukan yang ada di negara-negara yang sudah maju dan pertahankan prinsip kebebasan badan kehakiman ini. Kalau nampak banyak sangat hendak diteliti, termasuk dengan sistem di United Kingdom yang agak terlalu tebal, baca sekurang-kurangnya Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct 2002 kerana bagi saya, ia memberikan rumusan yang cukup padat.

Fasal empat dalam peruntukan yang ada sekarang ini, yang memberikan kuasa, bidang kuasa dalam perkara yang berhubung tata kelakuan dan tatatertib semua hakim, selain dari pemecatan. Akan tetapi, jawatankuasa tidak jelas, punyai kuasa menghukum, mengambil tindakan yang wajar kerana sifat jawatankuasa sekadar siasatan dan bukan bentuk perbicaraan.
Ini yang disebut di fasal 4 yang agak perlu dijelaskan oleh Menteri.

Apakah jawatankuasa-jawatankuasa terhadap apa-apa salah laku atau pelanggaran mana-mana peruntukan Kod Etika Hakim oleh seseorang hakim. Maka penjelasan secara sah menurut undang-undang, saya kira perlu kerana bentuk hukuman, apakah penggantungan tugas, pelucutan keistimewaan, amaran atau denda. Fasal 8 memaktubkan prosiding jawatankuasa secara tertutup. Apakah dalam semua kes ia harus tertutup? Kalau kesnya itu fitnah atau sengaja mengaibkan atau bukti itu lemah,
maka kita tidak mahu menyinggung ia.

Apa dalam kes yang cukup nyata, dalam kes sepertimana dalam penghakiman N.H Chan atau dalam keputusan usul Suruhanjaya Diraja pita
rakaman VK Lingam? Apakah prosiding itu juga harus rahsia? Kita lebih pentingkan keadilan untuk hakim, dan kita persetankan keadilan untuk rakyat. Sistem ini harus telus, saya hanya akui kalau dianggap satu surat layang menyerang hakim, maka kita adakan tribunal secara terbuka. Saya tidak fikir wajar kerana kita harus juga menjaga maruah para hakim, tetapi ia mesti dijelaskan supaya dalam kes-kes yang nyata, tidak ada usaha untuk melindungi.

Fasal 9 adalah mengenai siasatan. Peruntukan dalam rang undang-undang menyebut bahawa prosiding jawatankuasa merupakan satu siasatan mengenai pelanggaran mana-mana peruntukan Kod Etika yang akan dirujuk kepada Ketua Hakim Negara. Soalnya, mengapa dihadkan secara mutlak kepada seorang Ketua Hakim Negara dalam semua kes? Apakah pula
prosedur jika ia membabitkan Ketua Hakim Negara? Walaupun ada disebut tentang tribunal, tetapi tidak dijelaskan.

Fasal 15 tentang keputusan jawatankuasa ini muktamad, tidak boleh dicabar, dirayu, dikaji semula atau dibatalkan. Saya kira aneh kerana keputusan jawatankuasa, apatah lagi melibatkan hakim harus memberikan kelonggaran, kebebasan kepada hakim untuk mencabar. Saya tidak fikir wajar untuk kita mengandaikan keputusan itu muktamad kerana tidak boleh berdasarkan pengalaman kita yang banyak dan kenyataan Tun Suffian, Sultan Azlan, puluhan laporan bahawa keputusan-keputusan itu masih banyak yang boleh dipertikaikan, apatah lagi dengan bukti-bukti dikemukakan sebelum ini.
Jadi, kebijaksanaan keputusan kita mempertahankan fasal 15 yang menghalang hakim mencabar keputusan, saya fikir tidak wajar dan harus membolehkan mereka mengemukakan rayuan. Mekanisme untuk membetulkan keputusan pincang, penganiayaan atau diskriminatif
yang disebut oleh Yang Berhormat Kubang Kerian, saya tidak akan ulang. Apakah mekanisme untuk membetulkan kezaliman dan ketidakadilan sedemikian? Menteri boleh tutup mengatakan kita sudah bayar ganti rugi. Mengapa kita bayar ganti rugi kalau dia tidak salah? Kita bayar kerana pastinya dia sudah diaibkan. Mengapa tidak dipohon maaf dan dibetulkan keputusan itu? Ini yang disebut integriti, bukan sahaja hakim, tetapi melibatkan pemerintah itu sendiri. Tidak bersedia akui bahawa kita telah berlaku curang, membiarkan hakim yang tidak bersalah digugurkan, 15 tahun kemudian datang, bayar ganti rugi sedikit, kes tutup.

Jadi, sebab itu Tuan Yang di-Pertua, selagi asas dan prinsip utama ini tidak
dipertahankan, pembahagian kuasa, pengiktirafan hak asasi semua rakyat dan juga suatu peruntukan yang saya minta Menteri memberikan penjelasan. Mengapa kita dalam kerajaan sekarang bimbang sangat untuk mengesahkan ICCPR, International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights? Ini kerana ia juga akan menjamin bukan sahaja integriti para kehakiman, tetapi juga ada kaitan dengan rakyat. Terima kasih Tuan Yang di-Pertua.