Thursday, November 5, 2009
We are yet to hear of any Class E or Class F Indian contractors getting direct government projects and contracts. They merely get the crumbs from the main and sub malay muslim contractors. Most get to do only the sub sub to sub sub sub etc contracts to be able to merely earn a living. Especially the many Indian road and construction workers we see on the roads are the real work horses but UMNO makes the big bucks by using them to earn their big bucks by just being mere rent seekers. While being the workhorses, they do not get to enjoy the fruits of their real labour. UMNO refuses to abide by Article 8 of the Federal Constitution which provides for equality before the law and by extension equal opportunities before the law. But for UMNO Prime Minister Najib Razak, this is One Malaysia (but which implements two systems). End UMNO’s racism and religious extremism come the 2012/2013 general elections.
Police murderers of A. Kugan (in custody) goes scot free, Indian suspect prosecuted within 4 days.
The UMNO regime’s police force killed A. Kugan and hundreds of others in police custody but does not get prosecuted for murder. This police force also shoot and kill hundreds of mere suspects under an unofficial shooting order but also do not get prosecuted. But for sugar cane trader A. Murugan (35) he was speedily and within four days prosecuted for the murder of his Indonesian maid. (NST 4/11/2009 at page 11) All this can only happen under the UMNO regime, more so as they have continuously been ruling Malaysia for 52 years in a row.
Justice must not only be done but must manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done.
Deepavali: PKR Indian mandores follow MIC and UMNO style, giving away hampers to poor Indians (The Star Metro 3/11/2009 at page M11). This is no help. The Indians in the Pakatan ruled states of Kedah, Penang (formerly Perak) and Selangor were denied:-
1) Land titles for all 316 Tamil schools in these for P.R ruled states.
2) Land titles for all hindu temples in these four P.R ruled states.
3) Land titles for all hindu crematoriums in these four P.R ruled states.
4) Land titles for all Indian squatters in these four P.R. ruled states
The Menteri Besar (MB)/ Chief Minister(CM) of all these four states have almost absolute powers to grant land in their states especially so when it is for a public purpose. Even Prime Minister Najib, DYMM the Agong or the Sultans have to get these MB/CM’s seal of approval for any land by virtue of especially Sections 11, 12, 13 and 76 of the National Land Code. By the mere stroke of their pens, land can be given for all these Indian squatters and landless, Tamil schools, Hindu temples and crematoriums. This would in effect solve about half the Indian problems in Malaysian as an estimated 50% of the Indians in Malaysia live in these four states.
Especially the PKR, DAP, PAS and MIC mandores should stop misleading the Indians by making empty promises and by playing “paper politics” especially in Tamil newspapers of the odd land here and land there for Tamil schools, Hindu temples, crematoriums and squatters. We have had enough of this piecemeal media propaganda by the UMNO and MIC axis for over the last 52 years. We now want a permanent and lasting solution and not ad hoc and piecemeal solutions like giving out hampers, token cash, land here and land there media propaganda. As it stands there is no difference between PKR, DAP and PAS/P.R and the 52 year old UMNO regime rule vis a vis the critical Indian problems.
Media Statement (4/11/2009)
Kg Medan: “biased” Judge dismisses P. Uthayakumar’s “ethnic cleansing”
This morning the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Civil Court No 4 “biased” Judge
(but assigned to hear P. Uthayakumar’s criminal case) Sabariah Osman
dismissed the applications made by P. Uthayakumar’s lawyers N. Surendran
and M. Manogar as follows:-
1)The first Information Report, all police reports, the Investigation
papers, pictures etc of the Kg Medan racial attacks and the victims
2)The minutes containing the reasons as to why the UMNO government had
refused to hold a Royal Commission of Inquiry despite this Kg Medan racial attacks being the worst case of human rights violations in the history of Malaysia.
3)The minutes containing the reasons as to why even the Malaysian Human
Rights Commission (Suhakam) had refused to hold an Inquiry into this Kg
Medan racial attacks. Even the High Court dismissed a Kg Medan victim,
Subramaniam’s application for a Suhakam Inquiry without even the UMNO
government having to reply in their Afidavit in reply the real facts, the truth and the very serious allegations of state (UMNO) sponsored violence against the innocent working class Indians of Kg Medan.
4)The White Paper on Kg Medan which UMNO had promised to submit to
5)The Attorney General’s minutes as to why he had not seriously
prosecuted the criminals for the five cold blooded murders in Kg Medan and the injuries and grievous bodily injuries caused to the innocent Indians in Kg Medan.
“Berani kerana benar, takut kerana salah” is the reason why UMNO the
police and the Attorney General are frightened to hand over and reveal
Despite these documents being required to defend the very serious P.
Uthayakumar’s charges of especially the Kg Medan “ethnic cleansing”
allegations where five Indians were murdered in cold blood and in broad
daylight and 100 over innocent Malaysian Indians were caused injuries and grievous bodily injuries, many before the very eyes of the police force who had watched over silently this “blood letting” Why?
Article 8 of the Federal Constitution not only provides for equality
before the law but also for equal protection before the law. But this
seems to have no place in UMNO’s Malaysia.
P. Uthayakumar is prepared to face the maximum three years jail term for
this charge knowing that by this jail sentence, UMNO would not further
dare repeat this sort of their Kg Medan racial attacks in future
especially so when the world has started watching Malaysia after P.
Uthayakumar’s “ethnic cleansing” letter to British Prime Minister Gordon
Brown dated 15/11/2007.
Outside the Courtroom lawyer N. Surendran told reporters that he would be filing an appeal against this “biased” Judge’s decision to the Kuala
Lumpur High Court.
This “biased” Judge in her haste and perhaps under “orders” from UMNO all the way wants to speedily convict and sentence up to three years jail to instill fear and silence P. Uthayakumar and also so that he is
disqualified from standing for the 2012/2013 General elections.
This Judge insisted on a five day in a row “speedy gonzalez” hearing date right next month despite lawyer N. Surendran informing the court that his diary is full for December and that it was the new Chief Justices’ policy directive that lawyers should not park two cases in one day. This Judge then grudgingly fixed the 13th to 15th of January 2010 as the next hearing dates. Hopefully not to “fix up” P. Uthayakumar!
“Justice hurried is justice buried” and “justice must not only be done but must manifestedly and undoubtedly be seen to be done”.
But UMNO follows neither the law nor the Federal Constitution at least in this case.S. Jayathas
Muhyiddin Yassin says we're all equal under the sun. There are no first class, no second class citizens. What do you think?
News Item from NST of 2nd Nov2009. Quote “PORT DICKSON: Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin yesterday reiterated that there is no such thing as a first or second-class citizen in the country and that all citizens have equal rights. He stressed that the government would continue to ensure fairness and equality for a]] as stated in the Federal Constitution and uphold all the principles of the Rukun Negara.
“No Malaysian should feel neglected as every individual, regardless of race or religion and whether he lives in town or the oulsldrts, enjoys the same rights and privileges.There is no segregation of race or status here and there is certainly no such thing as a fIrst or second-class citizen,” he said at the national-level Deepavali open house at Ladang Siliau near here.
What liars these UMNO politicians are.
Now let him try and explain these situations:
A central feature of our system is our categorization into Bumiputras, Chinese, Indians and Others from birth to death.Everywhere we go we have to declare Bangsa, Ugama – at birth, at school registration, in all the applications we make, at marriage, at death and in many many more situations. Why do we need to do this if we are all equal under the sun?
Houses are sold with a 5% discount to the bumiputras. Why do we need to do this if we are all equal under the sun? And there is no first and second class of citizens?
In several housing areas State Consent is required if one wants to sell the property especially if it is in a predominantly Malay area. It is quicker to get consent for inter Bumiputra sale than it is for a sale across the Bumiputra /Non-Bumiputra divide. Why do we need to do this if we are all equal under the sun?
The bureaucracy is entirely made up of Bumiputras – a million and more of them. The Police force is almost entirely Malay, the Armed forces are almost entirely Malay. How can this happen if we are all equal under the sun?
Most Government businesses are off limits to non- Malays. There is a complete system of screening vendors that limits vendors to almost entirely Bumiputras. How can this happen if we are all equal under the sun? And he says there is no first and second class of citizens?
Business licences are largely awarded to Malays or must have mandatory minimum Malay participation – Bank Licences, Educational Institutions Licences, Permits in the Transportation businesses and so many more. How can this happen if we are all equal under the sun? And he says there is no first and second class of citizens?
Participation in all government development schemes are entirely for Malays – MARA, FELDA, FELCRA, RISDA, PERDA, KESEDAR, KEJORA to name just a few. How can this happen if we are all equal under the sun?
Educational opportunities in Public Educational Institutions are grossly in favour of Malays. How many places in Universities for Indians, how many scholarships to Indians. How many MARA institutions for Indians? How can this happen if we are all equal under the sun? And yet he says there is no first and second class of citizens?
I can go on like this. However the point is abundantly clear.UMNO and its leaders weave illusions and dreams for the Indians . They only want the Indian votes. They do not care two hoots what really happens to the Indians. They want us to be the coolies and third class citrizens. They have no interetst in making us equals. So while they put the Indians under delusion they are busy usurping the resources of the entire nation .
We have to wake up - we have to stop stop believing the lies of UMNO and begin work to totally throw them out of power. It is only when they are thrown out of power can we have a chance at becoming equal under the sun. With UMNO in the seat of power all we can have are dreams. That’s all.
The lying must stop and UMNO has to go. Our people must stop believing the lies and we as the middle class have a role to play to make it clearer to the poor and vulnerable who the real nemesis of the Indians are - UMNO, not anybody else. Everybody else are at best collaborators with UMNO. We must start doing this by first getting clear ourselves, and then we need to get the rest of the Indian community real clear about this one point. We have to severely combat the lies of UMNO and all its organs of control.
United we must stand………..United we must act.
The controversy involving Dr MAZA (Dr Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin), the ex-Mufti of Perlis, brings back memories of my own brush with the ‘religious police’ more than a year ago. I was then under ISA detention and this is part of what transpired during my interrogation by five Special Branch officers.
NO HOLDS BARRED
Raja Petra Kamarudin
Pak Raja, the way you write appears like you have a different view of Islam.
Which Islam are you talking about?
What do you mean ‘which Islam’? There is only one Islam.
There is not only one Islam. There are different interpretations of Islam. So which Islam are you talking about?
I don’t understand what you mean by different interpretations of Islam? Do you mean different schools of Islam? There may be different schools of Islam but there is still only one Islam.
Okay, so which school are you talking about then?
Sunni Islam. The Shafie school.
So you want to talk about the Shafie school of Sunni Islam then?
What exactly do you want to know?
How you interpret Islam.
Simple, I follow the Quran.
So you are anti-Hadith then?
I knew you were coming to that. Why do you people always use the word anti-Hadith? Why not pro-Quran?
So is Pak Raja saying you only accept the Quran and not the Hadith?
I am not a religious expert so I can’t go into details.
Okay. Then how many Hadiths are there?
I am not sure.
There are 700,000 Hadith.
Okay, 700,000 then if Pak Raja says so. I am not sure.
Ah, hold on. But only 7,000 Hadith are accepted as authentic. That means only 1% of the Hadith are undisputed. The balance 99% are disputed. Did you know that?
You want to debate about Hadith with me but you don’t even know there are 700,000 Hadith and that only 1% are sahih or undisputed?
I already said we are not religious experts.
If you are not religious experts then why do you debate Islam with me? You are not qualified to debate religion with me.
Okay, so do you accept the 7,000 Hadith?
Which one in particular?
You give me an example of one Hadith from the 7,000 and I will tell whether I can accept it or not. Let’s be specific. Quote me one Hadith and I will tell you if I accept it or reject it.
I can’t quote you any Hadith. As I said….
Yes, I know….you are not an expert on Islam. But yet you want to debate Islam with me.
(The Special Branch officers remain silent).
Dr Mahathir said we must re-evaluate the Hadith. Kassim Ahmad said the same thing. Each Hadith must be looked at one by one to see which can be accepted and which should be rejected. We are not saying that we reject outright all 7,000 Hadith. We are asking to re-evaluate the 7,000 to see which makes sense and which do not. What is wrong with that?
But how can you do that? The ulamak already agreed what is acceptable and what is not. As Pak Raja said, there are 700,000 Hadith and they have already been short-listed to 7,000 by the ulamak. So why do you want to re-evaluate them again?
The Maliki have re-evaluated them. They have only 1,720 Hadith in the Muwatta, not 7,000. Even then only 600 of the 1,720 are attributed directly to the Prophet. And quite a number of the Shafie and Maliki Hadith do not overlap. This means some of the Shafie Hadith are not accepted by Maliki while some of the Maliki Hadith are not accepted by Shafie. So which one do we accept? The Maliki or Shafie Hadith, where many are different and do not overlap?
We are Shafie so we talk about Shafie.
Why do we just talk about Shafie? Why can’t I talk about Maliki? Or talk about Salafi? In Perlis they are supposed to be Wahhabi, a branch of the Salafi. And the Wahhabi do not accept some of the things we are doing. Dr Asri, the Mufti of Perlis, is also said to be Wahhabi. I have spent time in Perlis and I find that things are a bit different there. The Muslims in Perlis say they follow the Wahhabi. If we are only allowed what JAIS, JAWI, JAKIM and JAKUN say then the Perlis Mufti should be arrested for following the wrong teachings.
Eh, mana ada JAKUN (where got JAKUN)?
(The five Special Branch officers laugh).
Why must I only follow what the government says? Why can’t I research and decide which interpretation of Islam I want to follow?
We can’t allow that. The ulamak have already decided what is correct and you have to follow that.
How do you know the ulamak are correct? What if they are wrong? And which ulamak do I follow? There are so many. Which ulamak is right?
That is not for you to decide. The ulamak knows best.
Islam says in the akhirat (the hereafter) you will follow your imam. If your imam goes to heaven then you go to heaven and if your imam goes to hell then you go to hell. The ulamak can’t save me from hell. I will have to save myself. So how would I save myself unless I research and decide which ulamak is correct and which are wrong.
But you are not qualified to research. You will have to let the ulamak do that.
But the first word in the first verse of the Quran revealed to Prophet Muhammad is iqraq (read). Did not Allah command us to read? The first word in the first verse revealed to Muhammad is not ‘follow your ulamak who knows best’. It is ‘read’. Furthermore, the Quran asks: do you still want to follow the majority when the majority may be wrong? The Quran also asks: when you are made to account for your actions are you going to offer the excuse that you just followed the religion of your ancestors when your ancestors are wrong and misguided? So the Quran has made it very clear that we must read and not follow the majority or simply accept the ways of our ancestors who may be wrong.
(The session goes on and on for days but allow me to stop here for now).
KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 4 — The Barisan Nasional federal government will pay Kelantan “goodwill payment” for oil extracted in its waters but PAS lawmakers are disputing it, saying it is akin to receiving alms instead of rightful oil royalty.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak told Parliament that Kelantan has no right to claim for royalties from national oil company Petronas since oil was extracted beyond the state’s waters, similar to the situation in Terengganu
“We have decided to give goodwill payment to Kelantan. This decision is made considering the need to develop Kelantan in line with the federal development programme,” he told the Dewan Rakyat, adding that the state will be receiving the allocation beginning next year.
But Najib’s statement immediately sparked an uproar, with Kubang Kerian MP Salahuddin Ayub saying the Kelantanese are not expecting goodwill payment but what is rightfully theirs.
“So all this while, Terengganu have been receiving goodwill payment and not royalties? Under Section 144 of the National Petroleum Act, Terengganu is receiving royalty and not courtesy payment, so how is this possible?” blasted Salahuddin.
“We are not beggars. We are demanding for what is ours,” the PAS vice-president said.
Najib, visibly annoyed by Salahuddin’s attack gave a smirk and merely replied, “You’re trying to politicise the issue. Tak habis-habis dengan politik (never-ending politics).”
However, the prime minister’s statement contradicts the Statistics Department’s State/District Data Bank which lists Kelantan as one of the four oil and gas producing states. The other three are Sabah, Sarawak and Terengganu.
The federal government has argued that oil and gas extraction activities are located about 150km off Kelantan’s shores and is jointly developed with Thailand, and thus beyond the legal limit of state/national boundaries. Also, the territory is being disputed by Thailand and Malaysia.
At a press conference later, Salahuddin said Najib was deliberately trying to mislead the House with his reply that Kelantan does not have rights to claim for oil royalty.
“Under the Act, it is clearly stated that oil producing states must receive 50 per cent of the revenues and it was clear that Najib lied when he said that Terengganu is receiving goodwill payment and not royalties,” he said.
He added that he will refer the prime minister to the privileges committee for misleading the House.
Meanwhile, Najib told reporters later that the goodwill payment will benefit the Kelantan government.
He also promised that talks about the payment, with the amount dependent on oil production and calculated according to the mechanism used in other oil producing states, will be done with transparency.
Kelantan, ruled by PAS since 1990, began seeking the oil royalty recently although the Cakerawala gas field began production in January 2005.
The entire 7,250-sq-km area in the Gulf of Thailand, in the oil-rich South China Sea, is called the Malaysia-Thailand Joint Development Area (JDA).
The JDA was created as an interim measure to exploit the natural resources in the seabed or continental shelf claimed by the two countries, with the proceeds shared equally.
The arrangement does not extinguish the legal right to claims by both countries over the area. This is one of the first applications of the joint development principle in territorial disputes in the world.
The two countries signed a memorandum of understanding on February 21, 1979 in Chiang Mai for joint development and later on May 30, 1990 in Kuala Lumpur to constitute the joint development authority.
As of the end of 2007, approximately 8.5 trillion standard cubic feet of gas reserves (proved and probable) from twenty two fields in the area have been discovered.
By Haris Ibrahim,
Some of you have taken exception to the ‘Malay Malaysian bring along a non-Malay Malaysian friend, non-Malay Malaysian bring along a Malay Malaysian friend’ requirement to get an invitation to the Saya Anak Bangsa Malaysia forum in Penang on 15th November. If you’ve missed that announcement on this blog, you can read about it HERE.
I’m going to try and explain here the rationale for that stipulation.
The first, and in my view, the most important message that the SABM roadshow carries is that we are all, first and foremost, born as equal citizens of planet Earth, and, in the context of this nation-state called Malaysia, we, anak-anak Bangsa Malaysia, are all equal citizens.
Now, try to recall the standard adverse stance taken whenever the proposition that all citizens of Malaysia are equal is advanced by any quarter in public space.
Is not “Jangan cabar ketuanan Melayu” or “Jangan cabar hak-hak keistimewaan Melayu” the ugly response that we have grown accustomed to hear?
UMNO and its legion of racist, bigoted NGOs.
No, not BN. The other BN component parties just hide in the shadows every time UMNO and its racist sloganeers go ballistic at the slightest mention of equality of citizenship.
Now, no prizes for guessing correctly who are the targets of UMNO and their race supremacist sidekicks.
We all know who they are.
Some of those targeted need no persuasion to incline to that race supremacist stance. They are themselves racists and bigots, to begin with, and beyond redemption. Thankfully, my experience on the ground leaves me convinced that these are but a small number, in comparison to the whole. I’ll call these the no-hopers.
And then there are others within the target group who are much too enlightened to fall prey to this racist call. The likes of Zaid Ibrahim, Malik Imtiaz and Dr. Azmi Sharom come to mind, to just name a few. These few speak up and are heard. Others, for a variety of reasons, mostly fear, sadly remain silent.
I am convinced that the majority within the target group are decent people, with the same concerns and aspirations of every other citizen of this nation. Most, though, may not have access to news sources other than the mainstream media, particularly Utusan and BH, which serve as the conduit to take the racist, hate messages of UMNO and their cohorts into the homes, the hearts and the minds of this majority within the target group. Decent as the people within this majority are, we should not be at all surprised if they are adversely impacted by this constant bombardment that rights guaranteed to them are under siege.
Let’s call the majority of the target group “VORS“, which stands for ‘Victims Of Racist Sloganeering”, for ease of reference.
How do we, you and I and every other anak Bangsa Malaysia who cares where this nation is headed, begin to try and undo the damage that UMNO and their hate-mongers inflict on VORS?
Speaking for myself, I truly believe that it is the responsibility of every right-thinking anak Bangsa Malaysia to reach out to every individual in VORS whom he or she knows and make every effort to undo the evil that UMNO and their racist NGOs inflict on race relations in our country.
Enter the SABM roadshow effort.
When the SABM roadshow hits Penang and the other cities and towns in the weeks and months to come, we want to take the message of equality to every single anak Bangsa Malaysia out there.
We want to meet everyone.
Except, perhaps, the no-hopers that I wrote about earlier, whose sole purpose for attending, more often than not, is to disrupt the forum.
Even if you are already sold on the idea that we are all of one race, the human race, and equal citizens of this nation, we still would like to meet you.
There’s much that we want to share with you through the forum.
Besides, my experience has been that many good people, for so long remaining silent in the face of injustice inflicted on others, derive encouragement and strength in meeting other like-minded people at forums like the one SABM is organising and discovering that there are others too who care and that they are not alone.
And yet, my friends and I in the SABM coregroup realise that we must prioritise.
Our resources are scarce, and hence we must optimise every opportunity we get to deliver this message beyond the converted and the like-minded.
The last thing we want is to preach this message of ‘One People, One Nation’ to a hall full of like-minded people.
It is my hope that with the stipulated ‘Malay Malaysian bring along a non-Malay Malaysian friend, non-Malay Malaysian bring along a Malay Malaysian friend’ requirement to get an invitation to the SABM forum, there is every likelihood that the forum will not end up as nothing more than a fellowship of the like-minded.
It also increases the odds on our being able to keep out the disruptive no-hopers that I spoke of and, with a bit of luck, help us unearth some budding ‘Malik Imtiaz’ out there who may now be emboldened to speak up at forthcoming forums.
How, you may well ask.
Let me illustrate the point with an imagined ‘Arumugam’.
Arumugam is your average, decent Penangite. He has no racist streak in him. He registers for the forum, also registering a Malay Malaysian friend, as we have asked. As Arumugam is no racist, it’s safe to assume, if not hope, that his friend, too, is not.
The converse, in theory at least, would also apply. A Malay Malaysian bringing along a non-Malay Malaysian friend gives us reason to hope that neither is an out and out racist, or no-hoper.
This, then, was the rationale for the stipulated requirement to get an invite to the forum.
The SABM coregroup is mindful that, like every other human endeavour, nothing is fool proof.
We can only try.
In stipulating the requirement in question, we had hoped that those of you who already share the aspiration of ‘One People, One Nation’ would help us to deliver our message to those who most need to hear it, by doing your part to get them into the forum hall.
Attorney-General Gani Patail should resign unless he can explain why he failed to take action against former Transport Minister Chan Kong Choy for cri
At long last, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) report on the mother of all scandals, the RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ), has been tabled in Parliament, together with several tombs of documents, viz verbatim minutes of 13 PAC meetings on the subject from 11th June to 3rd September 2009, Price Waterhouse Coopers’ report on position review of PKFZ and its appendices.
The PAC report has confirmed and vindicated my statements and allegations about the PKFZ not only as “a can of worms” but a “swamp of crocodiles” that I have made in Parliament since the last session, and raises the question why no action had been taken very much earlier to avoid the rotten state of the PKFZ scandal today.
The PAC report has confirmed that RM645.87 million would have been saved if the PKFZ land had been acquired under the Land Acquisition Act 1960, for then it would have cost only RM442.13 million and not RM1.088 billion before interest.
PAC recommended that former Transport Minister Datuk Seri Chan Kong Choy be investigated by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and the Police for unlawfully issuing three Letters of Support which has landed the country with the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal, citing the offence of criminal breach of trust under Section 14(1) of the Financial Procedure Act 1957 read together with Section 409B Penal Code.
I commend PAC for taking such a clear stand but I cannot wonder what is the use of such a reference to the MACC, when the MACC and previously the Anti-Corruption Agency had been aware of these facts as I had spoken about them many times in Parliament in the past three years.
This is from the verbatim report of the PAC meeting of 23rd June 2009 in the exchange between PAC member and DAP MP for Petaling Jaya Utara Tony Pua and the MACC Director of Investigations Datuk Haji Mohd Shukri bin Abdull:
Pua Kiam Wee : Akan tetapi, sebelum ini, sebelum 2007 pun isu-isu salah guna kuasa telah pun dikemukakan dengan jelas terutamanya mengenai isu letter of support yang telah ditandatangani oleh pihak Menteri pada masa itu telah pun jelas dan telah pun diakui oleh ramai termasuk pihak-pihak daripada kerajaan bahawa seseorang Menteri Pengangkutan tidak mempunyai kuasa untuk memberikan apa-apa jaminan kewangan kepada pihak sesiapa dan apakah tindakan yang diambil pada masa itu? Kenapa pada masa itu tiada siasatan diambil untuk menyiasat sekiranya ada unsur-unsur salah guna kuasa. Sekurang-kurangnya salah guna kuasa dan boleh jadi isu penyelewengan pada masa itu.
Datuk Haji Mohd Shukri bin Abdull : Okey, Tuan Pengerusi dan Yang Berhormat, Letter of Support yang dikatakan dikeluarkan oleh Menteri kepada OSK untuk pinjam kepada Kuala Dimensi juga merupakan salah satu isu yang kita siasat dan kita complete siasatan itu dan Timbalan Pendakwa Raya berpendapat bahawa tiada kesalahan salah guna kuasa berlaku. Itu pendapat yang dikeluarkan oleh Timbalan Pendakwa Raya. Itu satu isu yang kita siasat Tuan Pengerusi.
From the above verbatim record, it is crystal clear that the fact of Chan Kong Choy having abused his powers as Transport Minister and committed breach of trust in unlawfully issuing the three letters of support were not new information to the MACC, as it had investigated them and found that no offence had been committed.
What purpose can be served by PAC recommending that SPRM should further investigate into Chan Kong Choy for the offence of criminal breach of trust when it had already investigated and cleared him of having committed any such offence?
What is urgently needed is a Royal Commission of Inquiry to build on the PAC findings as well as to investigate why the MACC, the Attorney-General and other key institutions and important officials had failed to discharge their duties in allowing the PKFZ scandal to reach the present astronomical scale.
Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail had appeared before the PAC to reiterate that Chan had unlawfully given an implicit government guarantee in the three Letters of Support which he had no power to give as Transport Minister. The question is why the Attorney-General had failed to take action against Chan for abuse of power or criminal breach of trust in illegally issuing three Letters of Support landing the country with the RM12.5 billion PKFZ scandal.
Gani Patail should resign as Attorney-General if he cannot give a satisfactory explanation.
Parliament should have a special debate on the PAC report on the PKFZ scandal, but the first step is for MPs to go through the tomb of PKFZ documents tabled in Parliament today.
Raising four kids is not easy even for homemakers in the current environment. But, not for Supermom Chitrakala who is juggling between raising four kids and venturing in 13 companies dealing in wide range of business from auto service to national service camp.
Not only that, Supermom is taking up law in a local institution, according to sources. Hat’s off to supermom.
Today, she has filed defamation law suits against Samy Vellu, his wife Indrani and Tamil Nesan.
Chithirakala sues Samy Vellu, wife and newspaper The Star
KUALA LUMPUR: Former chief executive officer of the Maju Institute of Educational Development (MIED) P. Chithirakala has filed three defamation suits against MIC president Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu, his wife and the publisher of a Tamil daily.
In the first suit, Chithirakala, 38, and her businessman husband, K. Vasu, 47, named Samy as the sole defendant.
In the second suit, she named Samy’s wife, Datin Seri R. Indrani as the sole defendant.
In the third suit, she named Tamil Nesan (M) Sdn Bhd and its editor-in-chief K. Padmanabhan as two defendants.
(MIED is the educational arm of the Malaysian Indian Congress and was incorporated on Feb 29, 1984).
Chithirakala filed the suits at the High Court civil registry on Wednesday through her lawyer V. Prem Shangar at 11.24am.
Speaking to reporters later, Chithirakala said she took legal action against the defendants for making derogatory statements against her and family.
“I want to clear my name. I owe it to my family and friends.
“I do not want to have words of war with them in media and have chosen to seek a judicial remedy to vindicate my position. I leave it to the courts to decide over this,” said Chithirakala, who claimed to have dismissed herself from her MIED post in July.
Chithirakala said she did not specify any amount in those suits as “no amount of money will compensate for what have been said about me.”
She also issued a media statement saying that she have been dragged into the public podium by the conduct of defendants.
“Being an ordinary person, I did not think that I should be subjected to this,” she said.
Her lawyer Prem said he would serve a copy of the suit to the defendants once he obtains a sealed document from the court, which he expects soon.
In the suit against Samy, Chithirakala said the defendant had caused the publication of articles containing defamatory statements against her on March 8 in relation to an insurance policy coverage.
She claimed that the statements had implied that she had hijacked the insurance coverage to a company owned by her husband without the knowledge, consent and approval of MIED.
In the suit against Indrani, the plaintiff said the defendant had maliciously given an interview to the Malaysiakini news portal’s representative about her on Oct 1 and caused her statement to be published. She said the words were also reproduced verbatim in the Makkal Osai newspaper on Oct 3.
In the suit against the Tamil Nesan and its editor, the plaintiff said the defendants had falsely and maliciously published an article on Oct 1 which was calculated to injure her reputation.
Chithirakala said those words meant that she is a fraud, liar, thief and was incompetent to discharge her duties as the CEO of MIED.
In her three suits, Chithirakala is asking for damages, costs and a complete retraction of all defamatory comments and a full unequivocal public apology.Among others, she is also seeking an injunction to restrain the defendants or their agents from further publishing any similar words on her or any information related to her private life
THERE are those who cheered for Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's now infamous 16 September 2008 plot to take over the federal government by defections. There are also those who initially cheered the 10-day defection of Datuk Nasarudin Hashim (state assemblyperson for Bota, Perak) from Umno to Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR). But do these people now have the moral high standing to condemn the quitting of Port Klang state assemblyperson Badrul Hisham Abdullah from PKR to become a BN-friendly independent?
While some will try to argue that some defections are more moral than others, the truth is that defection remains defection.
At one level, every citizen — including lawmakers — must be allowed to freely associate and disassociate themselves with any organisation. Therefore defence for defection on the grounds of freedom of association is simply a red herring.
Does the seat belong to the representative?
The real question at another level is: Can a lawmaker carry his or her mandate to a new political party? By analogy, if you decide to leave one street dance party for another party, can you carry the seat you were sitting on with you? Not unless the chair belongs to you.
Does a legislative seat — and the mandate it carries — then belong to a political party or the elected representative?
The answer really depends on the electoral system. If you are elected under the "closed party list proportional representation" electoral system, the seat is undoubtedly your party's and you should be disqualified the moment you quit the party.
For our first-past-the-post electoral system, even the political scientists are somewhat divided. Some believe that voters vote for candidates while others think that the votes are heavily driven by party labels.
What to do when you are in doubt? Ask the voters.
That's why Datuk Shahrir Samad resigned as an Umno parliamentarian and recontested as an independent candidate for the Johor Baru parliamentary seat in 1988. This was when those seen to be aligned with Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah and Tun Musa Hitam were excluded from Umno Baru by former Prime Minister and Umno president Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
Shahrir SamadBut Shahrir would be the last one to be allowed to resign and re-contest. After him, and really because of him, Article 48(6) of the Federal Constitution was added to disqualify a parliamentarian from re-contesting for five years if he or she were to resign.
Similar obstacles exist at the state level. In Selangor, Article 64(5) of the state constitution now has the same effect on Badrul Hisham. The three BN-friendly "independents" in Perak too are similarly constrained by the state constitution's Article 31(5).
If Article 64(5) of the Selangor constitution is not removed, insisting that Badrul Hisham resigns is in fact penalising his freedom of association.
But beyond removing the anti-reelection clauses, what options are available when a lawmaker changes his or her party affiliation?
Not doing anything, which is the status quo now, means that the lawmaker is allowed to treat his or her mandate as private property which may be easily sold or pledged for personal benefit.
The other extreme is the so-called anti-hopping law, which forces automatic by-elections. This means the party leadership would be given tremendous power to discipline its lawmakers. And so, unless they are confident of overwhelming public support, lawmakers may simply toe the party's line to avoid being sacked.
A more ideal solution is perhaps to give the power to neither the elected representatives nor the party leadership, but to the electorate instead. After all, if the voters want the elected representative to go against his or her own party, why should he or she not follow the voters' desires?
Recall elections 101
Recall elections are a viable alternative to anti-hopping laws (© vancity197 / sxc.hu)
Recall elections, common in the US, allow voters to remove an elected representative before his or her term in office expires. Not limited to defection, this form of direct democracy allows voters to sack any representative who misbehaves or simply underperforms.
In California, to recall a statewide public office holder like the governor requires only an initial petition by as many voters as 12% of those who voted in the last election for that office.
If a recall election is held, voters will be asked to cast two ballots at once. The first would be to decide whether the incumbent should be recalled, and the second to determine his or her successor from a list of new contenders should the incumbent be recalled.
(© Nate Mandos / Wiki Commons)In 2003, former Democratic Governor Gray Davis, blamed for a financial crisis and electricity woes, was recalled and Arnold Schwarzenegger was voted in. A bare 1.3 million voters who signed the petition — making up less than 10% of the total registered electorate — made that possible.
The threshold to recall a politician of course can be made higher to check the threatening or blackmailing power of a concentrated minority.
(Corrected) In British Columbia, Canada, the only jurisdiction in the Commonwealth which allows recall elections, the threshold is 40% of the registered electorate. Unlike in California, only when the recall motion is passed will a by-election be held later on. To date, the best result in a demand for a recall was 34% of the electorate, hence no recall election has been held.
If Malaysians want to stop party hopping, a clear option is to have recall elections with a reasonable threshold. This could be set at say 40% of the voters, not the registered electorate, in the last election.
Is the Pakatan Rakyat serious?
So, if Pakatan Rakyat (PR) is serious and sincere about political integrity, this is what they should do: propose an amendment to the state constitution to remove Article 64(5) — the anti-reelection clause — and introduce recall elections.
If this is passed in Selangor, it would create pressure for other state legislatures and Parliament to follow suit. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak's 1Malaysia would be put under a real test on integrity. Lawmakers such as Kinabatangan Member of Parliament Datuk Bung Mokhtar Radin, of "bocor" fame, would have to check their tongues before speaking.
Now, wouldn't Barisan Nasional legislators defeat the amendment as the PR does not control the two-thirds majority in the house? Well, let them do it, and let the voters decide on their fate come the next elections.
And the PR does have a two-thirds majority in the Penang and Kelantan state assemblies. So, these states can set successful examples even if Selangor fails. Pressure would then certainly be mounted for the same to happen in Perak where defections have sunken the state into chaos.
If the PR, however, refuses to be different from its opponents, as has become apparent with their non-introduction of local government elections, they should stop complaining and protesting. We are sick of all politicians who break promises and betray our trust, not only Badrul Hisham.
The questioning was carried out this afternoon at the Commercial Crimes Investigation Department headquarters at Bukit Perdana in KL. (’Sedition’ and blogging fall under ‘commercial crimes’ jurisdiction?) Zorro was accompanied by fellow blogger Haris Ibrahim, a lawyer.
Meanwhile, Aliran president P Ramakrishnan has called for a full panel of 11 Federal Court judges to hear Nizar’s appeal tomorrow on the issue of who is the rightful Perak Mentri Besar. See Rama’s statement here.
The StarOnline reports that the PM has questioned the motive behind Dr Mohd Asri’s arrest. The PM reportedly said:
“Najib said that Dr Mohd Asri was a truthful speaker whose talks were always backed by proof and clear dalil (quaranic and Hadith verses).
“I don’t know what is the motive of the arrest. It was done by the state religious agency. It has nothing to do with the Federal Government,” he told reporters on Monday after launching a Pasar Tani convention”
While it is comforting to hear the PM assure the public that the “DrMaza Fiasco” has nothing to do with the Federal Government, it is disturbing to hear the entry of Jakim into this fiasco. Jakim is a Federal Institution and any act by Jakim will certainly be interpreted as having the tacit or direct approval of the federal Government.
If the Federal Government does not set the record straight by taking bold actions, the public perception will move in one direction.
Dr Asri’s unthinkable arrest is the tip of the iceberg and a trailer of a greater show to come.
What is more worrisome is the question – do our leaders know what is going on behind the very tightly closed doors of the powerful religious corridors? I have raised this matter many times over the past many years to many leaders (ministers, prime ministers and a deputy minister – will not mention names) but they seem to be in the blur and/or too “fearful” to interfere where the word “Islam” is uttered. Only last month, I have raised the need for Muslim political leaders to be aware of the trend “Islam” is taking in this country and the quiet but effective quest for control over the Malays by non-elected individuals with the religious tag. I will call this “hidden group” as “religious dominators”.
There appears to be a hidden movement to convert this country into a type “Islamic state” as dictated by the religious dominators. It is as if a conspiracy has been going on under the very noses of the public and the leaders. One day we may wake up in a country that we do not recognize – and this includes the Muslims! I am sincerely afraid that the current crop of leaders does not seem to understand the issues and the gravity of the movement. At the end, the sensible and peace loving people may suffer.
It is of concern to the Muslim populace of this country because the unthinkable conclusion is that the determination of “things Islamic” is completely in the hands of paid “religious civil servants”. It is frightening that while in all areas we are clamoring for accountability and transparency, in matters concerning Islam (and I am a Muslim), those who are given the responsibility (and paid to do so) to “develop things Islamic” are going about it in a much unseen manner.
Are political leaders impotent when the people voice out their views on “matters Islamic”? I think people generally want to see the Government showing leadership, and under Najib, it appears to be showing some signs of leadership but in areas touching religion – what happened?
It is about time that we seriously, honestly and intellectually address the issue of where “Islam” is going in this country and “who” is dictating its form in the larger interests of those who want to practice Islam in peace and the Nation.
Dr Asri, I wish you strength in this test.
UNTUK EDARAN SEGERA
Tarikh: 4 November 2009
Penahanan Dr Mohd Asri Zainul Abidin bekas Mufti Negeri Perlis oleh pihak Jabatan Agama Islam Negeri Selangor (JAIS) telah menimbulkan kekeliruan dikalangan masyarakat Islam terutama di Negeri Selangor.
Selaku individu yang berada ditempat berlakunya majlis ilmu berkenaan, saya rasa terpanggil untuk menjelaskan beberapa perkara yang mengelirukan berdasarkan kepada beberapa laporan akhbar yang saya rasa telah memetik dari sumber yang cuba melindungi kejadian sebenar yang berlaku.
Tetapi apa yang dikesalkan ialah cara pihak JAIS menjalankan operasi penahanan adalah tidak professional dan mempamerkan kelemahan yang tidak sepatutnya wujud dalam organisasi yang tinggi tarafnya seperti JAIS.
Lebih menghairankan apabila ditahan, pihak JAIS gagal menyediakan kertas pendakwaan bagi mengaitkan Dr Asri dengan sebarang kesalahan melainkan dengan alasan mengajar tanpa tauliah.
Sepatutnya penahan dibuat setelah terbukti sesorang itu telah melakukan kesalahan. Agak menyedihkan dalam kes ini sewaktu mahu menahan Dr Asri, kelihatan pegawai JAIS sendiri tidak membuat persediaan dan sering menggunakan telefon bagi mendapat arahan dari pegawai atasan yang dipercayai ialah Pengarah JAIS sendiri iaitu Datuk Mohammed Khusrin Munawi.
Bagi saya tindakan JAIS yang menggunakan khidmat polis pada malam kejadian juga adalah satu tindakan yang melampau dan meletakkan Dr Asri pada kedudukkan yang tidak sepatutnya memandangkan sebelum ini beliau telah diberi kepercayaan oleh Tuanku Raja Perlis untuk menjaga persoalan berkenaan agama Islam di Negeri Perlis sendiri.
Sepatutnya sebagai seorang bekas Mufti dan memiliki pendidikan sehingga kepada peringkat Doktor Falsafah berkenaan Islam, beliau dialu-alukan untuk mendidik masyarakat. Adakah semua ini masih lagi tidak melepasi kelayakan yang diperlukan oleh JAIS untuk seorang seperti beliau bagi menyampaikan dakwah di Selangor.
Disini saya bertegas mendesak Pengarah JAIS menjelaskan apakah garis panduan yang digunapakai oleh pihaknya untuk melayakkan seseorang itu boleh ditauliahkan untuk memberi kuliah di Selangor.
Berdasarkan kepada maklumat yang diperolehi, sehingga kini terdapat lebih kurang 7 orang Ustaz yang diantaranya adalah pensyarah Universiti Islam Antarabangsa dan telah gagal mendapat tauliah untuk mengajar di Selangor tanpa alasan yang kukuh dan bertulis.
Dengan adanya garis panduan tersebut JAIS akan dapat membendung amalan mengikut selera Pengarah JAIS dan memberi keadilan kapada cendekiawan seperti Dr Asri untuk menyampaikan ilmu.
Dalam tempoh terdekat, pihak ahli parlimen Pakatan Rakyat Selangor akan menghantar petisyen kepada Duli Yang Teramat Mulia Sultan Selongor agar menilai semula kedudukan dan fungsi Pengarah JAIS yang jelas telah menjejaskan kedudukan Baginda selaku penaung kepada perkembangan Islam di Negeri Selangor yang bertuah ini.
Melalui kenyataan media ini juga saya ingin menafikan laporan Malaysiakini yang memetik kenyataan Pengarah JAIS bahawa saya dan seorang lagi rakan YB Shaari Sungip telah menghalang tugas pegawai JAIS untuk menjalankan tugas sehingga terpaksa menggunakan polis.
Apa yang berlaku ialah saya dan YB Shaari Sungib cuba untuk menenangkan keadaan kerana para jemaah ketika itu terkejut dengan serbuan yang dilakukan dengan kasar dan biadap oleh saudara Shahrom penolong pengarah penguatkuasa JAIS yang mengaku mempunyai ijazah dari Universiti Al Azhar.
Untuk itu, saya mengesa agar Pengarah JAIS yang bertanggungjawab mengeluarkan kenyataan ini menarik balik dakwaan beliau. Sebaliknya beliau perlu lebih teliti dalam mengeluarkan kenyataan kerana beliau membawa imej JAIS yang dipandang tinggi oleh umat Islam.
Ahli Parlimen Ampang
Ketua Wanita Parti Keadilan Rakyat
2. Many have asked what can this conference and the hearings by the commission and tribunal do.
3. If I may be allowed to explain there are many things which were common, normal and accepted in the past which the whole world rejects now. The rejection was achieved actually by the people gradually realizing that these practices were wrong and unacceptable.
5. Torture was acceptable in the past but is now considered illegal and criminal. Human rights were unknown before but now the world accepts that every man or woman has a right to be treated well. And many more.
6. All those changes in human perceptions and values have been brought about mostly by people agitating against these practices, forcing their Governments to pass laws to abolish them.
7. But war is still accepted today although certain acts are regarded as criminal even in war. If war itself is made a crime than automatically war crimes cannot be committed.
8. To make war a crime, the people must condemn it as unacceptable, just like they did with slavery etc. Why should war be condemned now when it has always been a common means of settling disputes between nations?
9. War is basically about killing people. Everyone regards killing people a crime. How can we consider killing a person a crime but killing thousands of people not to be criminal. In the past the capacity to kill and damage was limited because of the weapons being less lethal.
10. But today the weapons can actually wipe out the population of the world and destroy it physically. Even the use of depleted uranium has been shown to cause cancer and diabetes. The nano-particles carried by dust storms, wind and stratospheric air currents can affect lives and carry the diseases hundreds of miles away. Therefore wars also endanger neighbouring and distant countries not involved in the war.
11. Now the big powers have developed nuclear bombs and missiles many times more powerful than the Hiroshima bomb. Even if they explode deep in the ground the dust blown up would still be carried far and wide. The inclusion of small amounts of nuclear material in conventional bombs would also spread the effect to distant places.
12. Conventional weapons have also increased in power. The 15 megaton bombs can cause the same damage and deaths as the Hiroshima bomb. Guided missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles have also increased the range and effectiveness of aerial weapons.
13. Where before wars were fought by soldiers on battlefield, today's wars kill more non-combatants than combatants. The whole country would become the battlefield. Casualties would number in their hundreds of thousands and the whole country would be devastated. Neighbouring countries and even distant countries which are not involved would also be affected by radiation fallouts and people would be attacked by diseases which are fatal.
14. War today is massive, widespread and lethal to whole populations. No one would be spared, belligerent or non-belligerent.
15. War is now no longer limited to the adversaries. Nor are they controllable.
16. That is why war must be of concern to everyone. The 1st and 2nd World Wars were supposed to end all wars. Obviously they haven't. The only way to stop wars is to make them a crime - to make those who resort to war guilty of a serious crime, to punish them.
17. Only Governments can put a stop to wars. But Governments will not stop wars until the people pressure the Governments to do so. If they do and they sustain the pressure, it is likely that war can be made a crime just as slavery has been made a crime.
18. That is why we have initiated a campaign to make war a crime. We are doing this on a worldwide scale.
Some idle speculations on Najib and MCA:
He seems to have come out fairly strongly for Chua Soi Lek, but why?
Let’s not consider sympathy for womanisers to be an option (a pot shouldn’t call the kettle black).
I also noted today his non-committal response about pursuing the PKFZ wrong-doers.
Are these things related? Is Najib looking for a foil and counterbalance to Ong Tee Keat and his machinations?
Is Najib hoping to stop the kind of investigations into scandals like PKFZ, the likes of which Tee Keat has been at the forefront of?
Might be start of a disturbing trend for Najib eh? What with out Scorpene subs, Sukhoi jets, etc etc…
Noh said the Selangor Umno had no power to decide on Abdul Rahman's position.
He said that Abdul Rahman could still perform his duties as usual despite facing charges of making false claims.
"A person being charged is not necessarily guilty," he told reporters after attending the opening of the inaugural meeting of the Badan Amal dan Kasih Negeri Selangor by wife of prime minister Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor here Wednesday.
On Tuesday, Abdul Rahman pleaded not guilty at the Sessions Court here to eight counts of making false claims when he was the Sungai Ayer Tawar assemblyman last year
Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein said the decision by ROS was based on three main factors -- the country laws, the Societies Act 1996 and the MCA constitution.
"Should the matter be taken to court, we, at the ministry, and ROS will explain and defend the decision," he told a news conference at the Parliament lobby here on Wednesday.
Yesterday, ROS announced that Dr Chua, who was sacked as MCA deputy president last August and later reinstated only as a member in the party, was still the party deputy president.
Registrar Datuk Md Alias Kalil said being that there was no vacancy for the post as the decision on the resolution of the MCA Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) on Oct 10 did not fulfill the requirement for a two-thirds majority as provided for under Article 35 of the MCA Constitution.
The Deputy Prime Minister said the Barisan Nasional (BN) would not interfere in the party problems because it was confident that it could be resolved through consensus among the leaders at all levels in the MCA.
"It will be better for Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat, Datuk Seri Chua Soi Lek, Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai, the top leaders including MCA Youth and Wanita heads to sit down together and discuss, and there must be a period of calmness to avoid chaos, so that there will be no dissatisfaction. I believe there is a solution to it," he told reporters, here on Wednesday.
Yesterday, the MCA Central Committee (CC) meeting accepted the decision of the Registrar of Societies (ROS) that Dr Chua remained as the deputy president of the party which automatically placed Liow back as vice-president of the party after he was appointed by the CC as the deputy president when Dr Chua was removed from the post previously following disciplinary action taken against him.
Liow, who was not happy with the decision and planned to challenge the decision of the ROS, was reported as saying that he would take the matter to court.
Muhyiddin said the ROS decision was made based on the provisions of the MCA constitution, and if there were people who were dissatisfied, they had the right to take action.
"If there is any conflict, the people do not go to court, they ask the ROS (to determine). Many other parties do it too, so the ROS studies it from the aspect of the constitution, not from the legal aspects.
"If Liow does not agree, he too has an avenue to take the matter to other parties to determine whether the decision is right or wrong," he said.
The ROS had announced that Dr Chua remained as the deputy president because the decision of the MCA extraordinary general meeting (EGM) on Oct 10 did not meet the requirement of two-thirds majority for his removal as provided for under Article 35 of the MCA Constitution.
NST 04/11: Coroner's court allows Teoh Beng Hock's body to be exhumed for second post mortem. Thai forensic expert Dr Pornthip will observe
I still think there should be at least one other foreign expert to observe the 2nd post-mortem. Gobind Singh has said "NO" to the idea but I agree with Malaysian Medical Association president Dr David Quekreally: WHY NOT?
In the interest of justice and of all parties, Dr Pornthip should not be left to observe the 2nd post-mortem all by herself.
Apakah benar, beliau berdarah putih? Apakah benar, Makndak mengandungkan Mahsuri setelah makan kerak nasi yang sebenarnya maya padi?
Apakah benar, 7 hari selepas makan kerak nasi, seekor ular cinta mani (sejenis ular sakti, berkepala itik) berlegar-legar sekeliling rumah dan ular itu tidur di bawah rumah?
Apakah benar, Mahsuri cuma mati jikalau ditikam dengan sebilah keris khas yang dibalut dengan kain kuning? Inilah yang dipersembahkan dalam teater bangsawan Mahsuri yang dipentaskan di Panggung Bandaraya Kuala Lumpur bermula 9 - 11 Oktober lalu.
Kisah Mahsuri, isunya bukan darah putih, ular cinta mani atau keris keramat. Hal itu, tak diketahui tentang letak duduk kebenarannya. Ia boleh disebutkan sebagai dongeng.
Hal dongeng jika didebatkan, tidak pergi ke mana-mana. Hal yang tidak bersifat dongeng itulah yang terlebih baik untuk kita bahaskan bersama.
Dalam kisah Mahsuri, ada hal yang nyata, tidak bersifat khayalan. Hal yang nyata dan tak boleh ditolak itu adalah sifat dengki, iri hati, rasa cemburu, dendam serta sakit hati yang akhirnya membawa kepada kematian Mahsuri.
Kematian Mahsuri lambang kezaliman pemerintah
Watak-watak Mahura, Deraman dan lain-lain watak yang berkonspirasi untuk membunuh Mahsuri masih wujud sehingga ke hari ini, tetapi ia dilakonkan watak yang lain pula.
Mereka berkomplot dan oleh kerana komplot ini berlaku dalam kalangan pembesar, maka Mahsuri tidak mendapat sebarang pembelaan.
Keadaan mungkin berbeza jika kes Mahsuri melibatkan pertikaian orang-orang bawahan, dan pihak penguasa tidak terlibat dalam pertikaian tersebut.
Oleh kerana kes purba ini berprofil tinggi, maka kepada siapa lagi keluarga Mahsuri ingin mengadu segala permasalahan ketika penguasa yang diharap dapat memberikan keadilan, telah berbuat kezaliman, tidak menghukum manusia secara adil dan tidak membicarakan dakwaan ke atas Mahsuri dengan telus.
Mahsuri dibunuh ketika suaminya berperang demi mempertahan negeri Kedah daripada serangan Thai. Ini bermaksud, memang ada perancangan yang tersusun dan mereka yang berniat jahat itu memang menunggu waktu yang sesuai untuk membunuh Mahsuri.
Jika suami Mahsuri masih ada di sisi, maka tuduhan tohmahan terhadap Mahsuri tentulah terbatal. Ini kerana, tuduhan itu ialah � Mahsuri berlaku serong dengan lelaki lain, wanita itu menduakan suaminya ketika suaminya pergi berperang.
Bentuk hukuman ke atas Mahsuri secara tergesa-gesa ini menunjukkan bahawa penguasa pulau lagenda itu telah mengambil keputusan untuk segera membunuh Mahsuri sebelum suami Mahsuri, Wan Derus kembali ke Langkawi.
Kalau benar Mahsuri berlaku curang dengan lelaki lain, maka hukumannya bukan bunuh, tetapi ia mestilah disesuaikan dengan hukum syarak seperti direjam dengan batu.
Antara Altantuya dan Mahsuri, siapa lebih dizalimi?
Tidak boleh diukur kekejaman itu dengan keris yang menikam Mahsuri. Tidak boleh juga kita menyukat kezaliman dengan membandingkan bisanya keris dengan kuatnya ledakan bunyi dentuman bom C4 yang digunakan untuk meletupkan tubuh Altantuya.
Akal logik tidak boleh membuat hukuman bahawa oleh sebab dentuman C4 itu lebih kuat hingga menghancurkan tubuh Altantuya, maka kes Altantuya dibunuh itu lebih zalim dan kejam berbanding pembunuhan Mahsuri, kerana tubuh Mansuri tidak hancur.
Tidak betul cara berfikir begitu. Kita mesti ukur kezaliman serta menyukat kekejaman itu bersandarkan cara kes itu dikendalikan dan bukanlah disebabkan faktor keris dan bom C4 tersebut. Akal kita mesti lebih hadhari ketika membuat kesimpulan dalam kes ini.
Altantuya tidak dihakimi, tidak dibicarakan. Maka adalah satu jenayah untuk membunuh beliau. Sebaliknya, kes Mahsuri itu telah dibicarakan dengan berat sebelah. Dia difitnah, dia diburuk-burukkan, diaibkan oleh sekian banyak tuduhan yang tidak berasas.
Barangkali, Altantuya lebih dizalimi kerana sosok yang jelita lagi menawan putera Bugis ini dilayani sebagai haiwan, boleh dibunuh sesuka hati tanpa perkiraan dosa, pahala.
Mungkin ada orang yang mahu menyanggah pendapat ini. Hal itu, bolehlah kita debatkan kemudian jikalau ada pihak yang beranggapan bahawa Mahsuri dibunuh lebih kejam lagi berbanding kes Altantuya. Wallahu alam.
Bagaimanapun, pendapat bahawa Mahsuri dibunuh lebih zalim berbanding Altantuya itu bukanlah bermaksud bahawa Najib Razak lebih baik berbanding Mahura dan pihak-pihak yang membunuh Mahsuri. Ini kerana, zalim tetaplah zalim.
Bukan ada neraca yang menetapkan bahawa berat kezaliman ke atas Altantuya itu seberat 1 kg, sementara kezaliman ke atas Mahsuri cuma seberat segantang cuma. Kejam tetaplah kejam. Keadaan mungkin berubah jika watak Mahura disamakan dengan Rosmah.
Sentimen-sentimen seperti menyamakan Mahura dan Rosmah mungkin mengundang satu pendapat lain pula yang melihat kes pembunuhan Altantuya itu lebih kurang setara kejam dan zalimnya dengan kes pembunuhan Mahsuri. Wallahu alam.
Oleh kerana perbincangan seperti ini boleh menelan waktu yang panjang, maka ada lebih baik kita khatam dulu bicara di sini.
Terima kasih kepada pelakon teater Mahmud Jelani yang maklumkan mengenai hal teater percuma baru-baru ini. Juga kepada Kumpulan Bangsawan Sri Kedah yang bergiat cergas mementaskan teater purba, bangsawan yang makin kurang dipentaskan sekarang.
Semoga kita tidak lagi memandang kes Mahsuri dengan darah putihnya dan keris keramat yang digunakan untuk membunuhnya, tetapi ia dinilai sebagai satu peristiwa gelap dalam lipatan sejarah yang patut dielakkan pada masa depan.
Hendaknya, kisah purba sebagai pengajaran kepada masyarakat ini janganlah dikapankan dalam ingatan kita, sebaliknya sentiasa dibahas daripada sudut lain pula.
Persembahan teater Mahsuri sebenarnya menarik. Semoga pemilihan dialognya itu lebih mencapah, menyentuh perihal ketidakadilan penguasa dalam menjatuhkan hukuman. Ini kerana, roh dan semangat asal kisah ini memperihalkan kezaliman penguasa.
Mungkin, persembahan teater yang memberikan pengajaran ini perlu menggunakan suatu pendekatan seperti teater Menunggu Kata Dari Tuhan, karya Dinsman di mana akhir dari pementasan itu, penonton diajak berdialog, bertukar fikiran dan bertanyakan soalan.
Mahsuri wanita suci?
Di sana masih kedengaran pendapat yang menyatakan bahawa ada kemungkinan Mahsuri adalah wanita yang tidak menjaga kehormatannya.
. Kalau pun Mahsuri itu tidak melakukan perbuatan terkutuk, bagaimana pula dengan sikap isteri orang yang dilihat berdua-duaan dengan lelaki asing sambil bermain bunyi-bunyian di luar rumahnya sehingga menjolok mata masyarakat setempat?
Jawapan ke atas soalan seperti ini tetap ada. Seperti biasa, kita akan melakukan kesilapan. Tetapi, adakah hukuman ke atas kita itu setimpal?
Kenapa kita harus meneropong ke atas kesilapan Mahsuri saja tetapi seperti terlupa untuk membahaskan kekejaman penguasa dan hasutan Mahura?
Sebesar-besar dosa Mahsuri sekali pun dan kalau darahnya tidak putih bagi menunjukkan bahawa dia wanita suci tetapi kita tak boleh menolak kebenaran bahawa dia telah melafaz sumpah bahawa Langkawi akan dilanda musibah 7 keturunan.
Maka, lafaz sumpah itu adalah doa daripada seorang wanita yang telah dizalimi. Mungkin juga dia berdosa, tapi peruntukan Allah ke atas Mahsuri tetap ada. Iaitu peruntukan untuk berdoa agar dilimpahkan kecelakaan ke atas pihak-pihak yang telah menzaliminya.
Mungkin, azab yang menimpa Langkawi itu, bukan disebabkan oleh kedudukan Mahsuri sebagai wanita keramat seperti yang difahami orang. Lagi pun, bukankah doa orang yang dizalimi itu akan dimakbulkan Tuhan tanpa sebarang hijab?
Mahsuri itu mungkin berdosa, tapi peruntukan Allah untuk membela orang yang dizalimi itu tidak diperhitungkan melalui dosa Mahsuri sebelum ini. Sabda rasul, takuti doa orang yang dizalimi, kerana doa antara mereka dengan Tuhan tiada hijab.
Tidak disebut kedudukan orang dizalimi di sini sama ada mereka sendiri pernah berdosa atau tidak. Bermaksud, jika seseorang itu berdosa kepada Tuhan, tetapi dalam masa yang sama, mereka dizalimi pemerintah, maka dosa mereka itu bukan hijab untuk Tuhan kabul doa mereka yang meminta dilimpahkan keburukan ke atas pemerintah yang zalim itu.
Penduduk Kg Berembang mungkin juga berdosa. Tapi, ketika mereka dizalimi Khir Toyo yang menumbangkan surau, rumah mereka, Allah kabulkan doa, sumpah seranah mereka dengan menjatuhkan Khir Toyo dalam pilihan raya umum ke-12. Alhamdulillah!
Tuhan tak membuat perkiraan seperti ini � oleh kerana mereka yang dizalimi itu pun ada dosa, maka Dia pun tidak akan mengabulkan doa mereka ke atas pihak yang menzalimi mereka itu. Tuhan tidak berat sebelah. Penzalim lebih awla mendapat hukumanNya.
Apabila mempertimbang semua ini dengan teliti dan sehalus-halusnya. Hanya ada suatu hal sahaja yang menendang-nendang akal fikir kita. Pertanyaan demi pertanyaan, soalan demi soalan sedang berlari-lari, menari-nari dan melantun-lantun dalam kepala.
Jika Mahsuri bersumpah yang buruk-buruk ke atas Langkawi sebelum kematiannya, kita ingin bertanya soalan saja, apakah Altantuya pernah bersumpah bahawa Malaysia akan menjadi padang jarak padang tekukur sebelum tubuhnya diletupkan C4?
oleh H Fansuri
5:26 a.m, 12 Oktober
Sekolah Pemikiran Kg Baru
By Jeff Ooi,
GLOBAL human rights movement in protection of tribal minorities may have dealt a huge blow to gigantum economic forces in Malaysia.
The latest to come down under the pressure of human rights advocates is the palm oil industry.
According to an update on the website of Survial International yesterday, it was reported that the advertising regulator in the United Kingdom had banned an advertisement placed by the Malaysian Palm Oil Council (MPOC).
The magazine advertisement claimed that Malaysian palm oil was ‘sustainable’ and contributed to ‘the alleviation of poverty, especially amongst rural populations'.
However, The UK’s Advertising Standards Agency banned the advertisement, ruling that those claims, and many others, were misleading and could not be substantiated.
Incidentally, the tribal minority highlighted as the victims of the palm oil industry profiteering is the Penan community in the Malaysian state of Sarawak, or a part of the forlorn Borneo remembered in its colonial history.
Over decades, the Penans had been fighting a losing battle to stop the massive chopping down of forests, their natural habitat, to benefit the timber-logging companies and to make way for oil palm plantations.
Advocates of the Penans' human rights have been calling on the Malaysia government to halt deforestation activities and logging on the Penans' land without their consent. But to no avail.
Meanwhile, palm oil has grown to make Malaysia the most dominant vegetable oil producer in the global market. On the flip of the coin, it has also become target of anti-tropical oil lobbyists, notably in the developed economies in the US and Euro Community, where inherent players in the edible oil market faced apparent threats.
Manufacturing of consent
In the face of such competitive environment, the palm oil industry and the Malaysian government employed a phenomenon well-described by Noam Chomsky in the 1980s: The manafacturing of consent using the media.
Numerous reactive measures were taken to counter the lobbyists' manoeuvres, which included the hiring of public relations specialists in the US to address the issues of negative perception and allegations over the nutritional characteristics of palm oil produced in Malaysia.
Subsequently, MPOC was set up as a state-sponsored entity to take the lobbyists head on in their territories. Its regional offices are now present in California in the US, Brussels in the EU, Shanghai in People's Republic of China, South Africa, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Turkey and Egypt.
Homafwever, the ban of the advertisement in the UK market may have taken a new nuance, in that manufactured consent to favour palm oil is now linked to violation of human rughts of a tribal minority.
In a statement issued yesterday, Survival International director Stephen Corry said: "Claims that Malaysian palm oil is green and people-friendly will not wash, especially with the Penan. The industry’s expansion onto their land is a disaster."
"Oil palm plantations and logging are destroying the forests the Penan hunt and gather in, and polluting the rivers they fish in," Survival International said. "Without their forests they have difficulty finding enough food."
In what looks like a public relations exercise by the human rights advocate, the statement carried a reaction on behalf of the Penans:
"Our people welcome the ban on the magazine advert by the Malaysian Palm Oil Council. How come the advert claimed that palm oil helps alleviate poverty, when from the very beginning oil palm plantations have destroyed our source of livelihood and made us much poorer? A lot of people are hungry every day because our forest has been destroyed."
Of late, the Penans had faced serious threats besides destruction of their natural habitat. There were cases of Penan young girls sexually assaulted without any justice given.
As a legislator, I have submitted a motion in the current sitting of the House of Representative in the Malaysian Parliament. The motion was cued under Motion No. 64 [Ref: PR-1223-U34075] which says:
Thus far, the Home Affairs Minister,who is entrusted to uphold public safety, had taken no action on the issue.
"THAT the House shall acknowledge that reports relating to young girls of the Penan tribe in the territory of Baram, Sarawak, who are exposed to the threats of rape, violation of modesty and sexual torture perpetrated by the operators of timber logging warrant immediate attention, and efforts should be swiftly taken to summon the authorities to commit to providing them protection, and to mete appropriate punishment to the perpetrators who terrorised the Penans."