Share |

Friday, November 13, 2009

IGP Reveal

Flying doctors' chopper causes panic in native village

Malaysia Failed as Five Drank Paraquat - MPKapar

I have no choice but to write about Indian again as some commenter’s on my facebook feels why arising issues about one community rather then as a Malaysian. Well, they too Malaysian, unfortunately “Shoot and Kill” on the spot and brutal killing while under custody happens primarily to a particular group in Malaysia.

Today, one of my oral parliamentary question happen to be related to Indian youth , i.e:

Tuan Manikavasagam A/L Sundaram [ Kapar ] minta MENTERI BELIA DAN SUKAN menyatakan :-

(a) apakah langkah-langkah yang telah diambil untuk memastikan lebih ramai belia terutamanya belia dari masyarakat India untuk mengambil bahagian dalam program-program Kementerian; dan

(b) berikan pecahan mengikut kaum bagi tahun 2006-2009 peserta yang mengambil bahagian dalam program anjuran Kementerian dan jumlah perbelanjaan.

and asked additional question to the Deputy Minister as below :

Terima Kasih Yang Di Pertua and Yang Berhormat Timbalan Menteri. Seperti mana sedia maklum masyarakat India menduduki tangga teratas dalam kegiatan Jenayah Jalanan (atau street Criminal) dan sering menjadi Mangsa Tembakan Hantu oleh pihak Polis, sebagaimana terjadi di Kapar baru ini dengan 3 orang adik-beradik dari sekeluarga menjadi Mangsa bersama-sama dua orang rakan mereka.

Kalau terlepas Tembakan pun golongan ini akan merengukdi Penjara mengakibatkan masa depan mereka gelap selama-lamanya . Manakala, golongan penghisap najis Dadah yang lebih berbisa serta mengakibatkan kerugian ekonomi lebih serius diberi peluang untuk kembali kepangkuan masyarakat melalui pelbagai rawatan serta latihan kemahiran diri.

Soalan saya ialah kenapakan Kementerian tidak memberi penekanan kepada mereka yang terlibat dalam kegiatan jenayah jalanan terutamanya belia-belia peluang untuk memperbetulkan diri mereka serta latihan-latihan kemahiran diri sama seperti penagih-penagih dadah.

Unfortunately, just minutes after that received a call informing that Sister of Surendran a victim of recent police shootout incident Susheela drank paraquat whom feed her children the same after mixing some sugar on it.

suseela and her childran

The doctor treating Susheela and her children believe her chance survive is very slim as paraquat kills slowly. Whom to blame? The Police, the community or the politicians.

First , it the Politicians whom failed to develop proper social micro uplifting plan especially when Rubber/oil palm plantations earmarked for development. The poor’s whom woke up as early as 4am in morning and earns about RM200 per month suddenly found their so called ‘home” no longer secured and simply thrown out into urban slum. . No basic education, lack of government job opportunities, private employers too prefer other Malaysian in meeting rules and regulations, even place to lie down. How do they survive, gangsterism the only option as some politicians need them to create tense when necessary.

Susheela Childran in Critical condition

Second , the police whom most eager to meet their annual quota so that their statistical figure shows full colour. Street criminals whom majority are Indians as they have no income to feed their loved ones become their victim. No one, will voice out as it’s Indians whom was shot dead as Malaysian trust news reports by the main stream media. They fired towards us first so to protect we counter fire, the same old story to continue for centuries to come probably.

paraquat and sugar drank by children

Now we need to blame the community, whom continue to pour oil into burning fire. That’s the case of Susheela and her children from Seremban. Despite, my advise to the father of late Surendran we shall find legal avenue against the police after their family complete all religious matters, traumatize Susheela attempt to find truth from her late brother.

No doubt there was one criminal among them whom become more violent after punishment.

If Susheela and her children dies, that means Malaysia has failed. Join me to pray to the almight requesting HIS blessing to grace Susheela and her children return to their normal live.

Women and kids take poison after brother is shot dead.


PI Bala reiterates his first SD and says he was offered RM5 million to retract it

PI Bala claims offered RM5m to retract statement


KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 13 — Missing private investigator P. Balasubramaniam has claimed in a video clip that he was offered RM5 million to retract his statutory declaration that linked Datuk Seri Najib Razak to murdered Mongolian model Altantuya Shaaribuu, reigniting allegations that the prime minister has vehemently denied.

Balasubramaniam's claims were aired in an undated 88-second video clip today hosted by the website whose main contributor is the fugitive blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin. The first statutory declaration (SD) was also put up with the video clip.

"Deepak actually came to see me because he want me to retract my first SD... After that he offered me RM5 million for me to retract the SD," Balasubramaniam said in the video clip, referring to a person whom Raja Petra says is linked to Najib's wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor.

Balasubramaniam, a former police officer, disappeared with his family on July 4, 2008 after making a second SD that overturned the first declaration. His location remains unknown until now.

The website said there will be more video clips featuring the Balasubramaniam interview. In the first part, the private investigator also claimed he was asked to go to Putrajaya to meet certain individuals over his SD.

"He was asking me to go to Putrajaya with him but he never mentioned whom he wanted me to meet in Putrajaya," Balasubramaniam said, referring to the country's administrative capital.

July 3, 2008 file photo of Balasubramaniam at a news conference in Petaling Jaya. He disappeared with his family the next day. — Reuters pic

Balasubramaniam's two SDs had rocked the murder trial of Altantuya, who was killed on Oct 19, 2006. Three people, including political and defence strategist Abdul Razak Baginda, were arrested for plotting her death.

Abdul Razak, who admitted to an affair with the Mongolian model who also acted as an interpreter, claimed he did not order her death but wanted the policemen to stop her from harassing or blackmailing him over their affair.

He was acquitted without his defence being called while the two policemen charged, Chief Inspector Azilah Hadri and Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar, were sentenced to the gallows for killing her.

Balasubramaniam was initially hired by Abdul Razak to keep watch over Altantuya's movements when she was in Kuala Lumpur to allegedly blackmail the political strategist, who is a known close associate of then Deputy Prime Minister and Defence Minister Najib.

His first SD was announced in a press conference with opposition leaders on July 2, 2008 but a day later, he stunned the country when a different lawyer brandished a second SD that overturned the contents of the first declaration.

Balasubramaniam then went missing, according to his nephew who claims his uncle is now in an undisclosed location.

Zaid picks Nik Aziz to chair Pakatan Rakyat Malaysia


KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 13 — The opposition bloc should name Kelantan Mentri Besar Datuk Nik Aziz Nik Mat to be chairman of the Pakatan Rakyat Malaysia to foil any further attempts by Umno to have “unity government” talks with PAS, Datuk Zaid Ibrahim said today.

The maverick politician also wondered aloud why none of the three parties making up the Pakatan have mentioned the coalition except to clarify that he is the pro-tem chairman.

Writing in his blog today, Zaid also asked the coalition to review its ambitious plans to capture the Borneo states of Sabah and Sarawak and instead asked them to support local parties there.

He also confirmed The Malaysian Insider's report that the Pakatan Rakyat Malaysia submitted its registration on Nov 3.

"To make these efforts a success, we need 'sacrifices' from Anwar Ibrahim. Abdul Hadi Awang can also make a big contribution by asking Tok Guru Nik Aziz to be the leader or chairman of Pakatan Rakyat, just like Mahatma Gandhi was spiritual leader to the Congress Party," said Zaid, referring to the leaders of PKR and PAS who are seen as less popular than respected PAS spiritual leader.

He also said veteran DAP leader Lim Kit Siang could prove his "statesmanship" by agreeing to his suggestion and to be adviser for democratic and human rights affairs.

"In one stroke, this will silence any agenda for a 'unity government' with Umno," Zaid stressed.

The head of the Pakatan Common Policy Platform secretariat also asked for a review of the bloc's push to win Sabah and Sarawak.

"Political reality shows it is a heavy effort and we have seen negative reaction with the tussle for seats like in the 2008 general election.

"Political wisdom also shows its better for Pakatan to play its role by supporting parties that are in tune with it in Sabah and Sarawak," he said, adding that step would show respect to the locals and make them equal partners in the coalition.

"Isn't this more realistic?" he asked.

"Only a grand coalition like this can overcome the Barisan Nasional giant," Zaid said.

On the flip side, he said capturing Putrajaya would remain a daydream if the leaders of the three parties felt they were strong enough and wanted to continue using old ways such as electoral pacts to form the federal government.

Saying he hoped not to offend anyone, Zaid noted the important issue was to achieve change and it will not happen if the allies only prioritised their parties and positions.

"They are not change agents. This group only wants power for themselves.

"The people will see that this group is no different from Umno and Barisan Nasional leaders," said Zaid, who is noted for being blunt and outspoken.

Zaid is the pro-tem chairman of Pakatan Rakyat Malaysia. — File pic

He said they must make the same sacrifices that they demand from the people for reforms to happen.

"If the leaders are still stubborn, the people will punish us in the next general election," Zaid wrote.

He also noted it was the first time three major opposition parties in Malaysia united in a legal entity with a common logo and single political aim.

But Zaid lamented the joy for the historic moment has not been shared by leaders from PKR, DAP and PAS.

"There hasn't been an encouraging statement from the top leadership of the three parties. It is as if they don't want it made public," he said, noting the only statement made was to deny that he was the chairman of the coalition.

Zaid sarcastically thanked them for the clarification, saying Malaysians know that registering a group or party would require the name of sponsors or a pro-tem committee.

"Of course, it doesn't make sense for me to be leader to top leaders like Anwar Ibrahim, Abdul Hadi Awang and Lim Kit Siang.

"What the people want to hear but has yet to be told is the aim and hope of forming Pakatan Rakyat Malaysia as an alternative to Barisan Nasional," he said.

Zaid said explaining the substance was more important than the form of the organisation, adding that people want to know the aim, vision and joint strategies of Pakatan.

He noted the plans remained vague but Pakatan should work with like-minded individuals such as Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah as another "striker" to strengthen the pact.

"Ku Li might be a veteran but he has integrity and contemporary political views," he said, adding that the Gua Musang MP need not jump from Umno to still help Pakatan.

Zaid said the Kelantan prince could still be invited to speak at political ceramahs as his aims were similar — to eliminate corruption and move the country forward.

‘Divorce oath’ an isolated case, says PAS sec-gen

Khalid said he took a ‘divorce oath’ — File pic

By Adib Zalkapli - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 13 — PAS secretary-general Datuk Mustafa Ali today swiftly ended a brewing controversy over the “divorce oath” or bai'ah taken by Shah Alam MP Khalid Samad by calling it an isolated case.

Khalid had said last week he took the oath to divorce his wife should he quit the party after winning in the general election last year.

But Mustafa explained that all PAS candidates have to take an oath of loyalty before the state party leadership to show their commitment to the party and its Islamic struggle, but it does not include divorcing their wives.

Reading out the oath he took before Election 2008, Mustafa said all PAS candidates vowed to God that they will not “betray the party and Islam”.

“We do not separate politics from Islam, we are not only accountable to the people, but also to God,” he said at a press conference here.

He said it is a common practice among political parties in Malaysia to take action to prevent defections.

“Almost all political parties except for PAS demand that their candidates sign an undated letter addressed to the Speakers of Parliament or state assemblies, stating their intention to quit, and the letter will be used in the event of defection,” he said.

“But because PAS is an Islamic party, we have our own mechanism,” he added.

However, he admitted that the oath taken by the Shah Alam MP was different from the standard pledge drawn up by the party central leadership.

“Except for Selangor, the oath is slightly different and Khalid admitted he took a different oath. He did not elaborate, he said it is between him and the God,” Mustafa said.

He added that while the PAS central committee disagreed with the oath taken by Khalid, the party respected his choice and hoped that all candidates will use the standard oath.

“We look at it as his personal choice taken based on his belief,” said Mustafa.

He agreed to a suggestion that the divorce-linked oath is an insult to women.

On Tuesday, Khalid admitted that he was mistaken for his controversial statement that PAS candidates must pledge a loyalty oath or bai’ah to divorce their wives if they leave the party.

But, he added, his wife was honoured because the strength of their marriage could prevent him from being bribed.

Najib to personally monitor 2010 Budget implementation

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 13 — Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak will monitor personally the implementation of the first budget under his administration, namely the 2010 Budget which he tabled in Parliament on Oct 23.

He said the progress of the projects listed under the budget would be closely monitored by the Project Management Unit of the Finance Ministry with the support of the Implementation Coordination Unit to identify and resolve any “roadblocks delaying the completion of these projects”.

"I have also impressed upon the custodians of these initiatives the importance of maintaining proper communications between federal and state authorities to quickly resolve land issues or other issues concerning the state government," said Najib, who is also Finance Minister, in his blog

The 2010 Budget was Najib's maiden budget after taking his oath of office as the country’s sixth Prime Minister on April 3.

Najib said that to ensure the integrity of the implementation, all findings tabled by the Implementation Coordination Unit would be reported via the Economic Council.

"All these efforts are put in place so that the country remains on course to achieve its 2010 GDP (Gross Domestic Product) target.

"It is also in line with the government's commitment to deliver according to the People First, Performance Now concept," he said.

Najib said he had called for a meeting to discuss the budget implementation while attending the Asean Summit in Hua Hin, Thailand, just hours after the 2010 Budget presentation in Parliament.

"This decision is unprecedented. Usually the budget implementation is left up to the Ministry of Finance to execute and monitor.

"However, I believe that as the Prime Minister of all Malaysians, it is vital that I personally supervise the effectuation of the first budget under my administration," he said.

Najib said the main objective of the meeting was to study the implementation strategy for the 2010 Budget and to troubleshoot problem areas at the start.

Present at the meeting were all Cabinet ministers and representatives of the relevant agencies including the Securities Commission, the Governor of Bank Negara, as well as representatives from development corridors and regions, Telecom, Petronas and other major government-linked companies (GLCs).

"It was an arduous task to personally study each initiative, project by project, line by line, but I wanted to ensure all accountable parties are clear on the objectives and goals of each initiative, hence ensuring proper implementation," he said.

Najib also said he hoped that from the meeting there would be no doubt about his serious intention to see the goals of the 2010 Budget were achieved and the government delivery system improved for the long-term benefit of the people. — Bernama


This is the latest video from Youtube and Malaysiatoday, which clearly shows P. Balasubramaniam the missing private investigator speaking and claiming that he was offerred RM5 Million to keep quiet and retract the Statutory Declaration that was made in connection with the involvement of PM Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, his wife, Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor in the Altantuya Shariibuu murder.

Higher education: The worst aspect of policy discrimination of private universitie

By Dr. Lim Teck Ghee, Director CPI

Where is the public money for R&D going?

The following recent article caught my attention: “Universiti Malaysia Pahang has invested RM5 million in a state-of-the-art central laboratory that will focus on developmental research and industrial collaborations …. On financial grants for researchers, Prof Daing Nasir [Vice Chancellor] said they were entitled to a sum of up to RM40,000.” (The Star, 5 November 2009)

Whilst UMP is to be congratulated for having secured generous public funding, the article also raises a number of questions that are of interest to the public in view of the recent concerns raised by the Auditor General’s report focusing on irregularities in the procurement process and supply of equipment at illogically high prices.

These questions include:

  • What is the selection process used to determine investment in R & D in the country’s universities?

  • Is there a fully competitive, transparent and accountable process in determining which universities/individuals receive funding?

  • Who are involved in the selection process and how rigorous are the selection procedures at the university and individual researcher level?

  • How is the monitoring of the scientific and commercial outcomes and deliverables conducted?

  • What has been the return on investment in the R & D allocations to date?

  • Are there issues related to leakages, wastage or inefficiencies of the allocations?

  • Are reforms necessary in the way public funds are being disbursed for R & D in the universities?

Who has benefitted from massive R and D allocations?

These questions are applicable not only to the universities but also to all the privileged institutional recipients of public funds for R & D. If these questions are not asked and answered then the danger of such allocations becoming part of an unaccountable public gravy train rapidly going downhill is going to be very real, if it has not already happened. We know that closed non-competitive tenders have for a long time been the norm in the Government and that this has led to cronyism and corruption on a massive scale. Is this also the case with R & D allocations?

These questions are more urgent now in view of the substantial increase in public funding for R & D. With the quantum increase comes also an increase in the scope for possible abuse. The allocation provided to UMP of $5 million is just a miniscule part of the allocations provided in the past decade for R & D, much of which has gone to the public universities.

Budget for R&D (9th Malaysia Plan)

Area Period (year) Amount (RM)
Science & technology and innovation 2001-2010 8.59 billion
Public expenditure on R&D 2005 1.5 billion
IRPA programme 2005 837 million

Increased expenditure on biotechnology initiatives

Period (year) Amount (RM)
2000-2005 574.4 million
2006-2010 2.02 billion

Note: It cannot be ascertained whether these figures overlap or not.

According to the 9th Malaysia Plan document, RM574.4 million was allocated between 2000-2005 solely for biotechnology initiatives with the allocation soaring to RM2.02 billion for 2006-2010 (Table 6-3, p.168). How much of this went into R and D specifically allocated to the public universities is not easy to work out. Other data in the 9th Plan document indicate that sectors other than biotechnology also received similarly generous support. Though it is not possible to compute the exact allocations provided to public universities on the basis of currently available data, there is some evidence that the sums are not small or inconsequential.

In the year 2005 alone, for example, public expenditure on R and D was estimated at RM1.5 billion (Table 12-1, p.264). At the same time, the Intensification of Research in Priority Areas (IRPA) programme funding mechanism approved RM837 million to fund 2,139 research projects (Table 12-2, p.265). Finally, it should be noted that the total development expenditure and allocation for science and technology and innovation for the period 2001-2010 amounted to RM8.59 billion! By way of comparison the sector budget for housing – a basic need in short supply for millions of poor Malaysians – was only RM17 billion for the same period.

Marginalized private higher educational institutions

Questions of how much funding allocation has gone to the public universities for R and D; the impact of these allocations; and related issues of possible leakages and inefficiencies are not the only ones that should receive scrutiny. The treatment meted out to the private higher educational system in the allocation of R & D funding also deserves re-examination.

Despite the role of the private higher education system in providing higher educational opportunities to a very large number of young Malaysians, it is a well known – though not widely discussed – fact that the private system is discriminated against in the higher education policies of the country.

Lack of support or discriminatory treatment of the private universities is manifested in many ways including in the array of unnecessary or unreasonable administrative requirements and processes, delays in government approval of courses, over stringent requirements relating to teaching permits, the accreditation process and other important areas.

One of the most important areas of policy discrimination is the lack of equitable access of the private universities to the public expenditure on R & D. Discrimination against private universities or bias in favour of the public universities takes the following forms.

  • Most selection committees for R and D funding are dominated by public sector officials, including representatives from the public universities

  • Private universities receive little or no support for the construction of research laboratories or other similar infrastructure such as that provided for public universities.

  • Academic staff from private universities are not available for the same generous public sector scholarships or leave time to undertake post-graduate studies.

  • This anomaly is found not only in the field of science and technology but also in the social sciences. For example, millions of dollars of public funds have been lavished on various special programmes and projects benefitting primarily researchers and staff of Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia.

Perhaps the most distressing development in this sorry state of affairs is that students in the private sector universities appear to be subject to the same discriminatory treatment that their lecturers and professors are subject to. Not only are these undergraduates not subsidized by public funds in the same way in which students in the public universities are in terms of tuition fees but they are also excluded from funds allocated for undergraduate research, etc. Such institutionalized discrimination going all the way down to the undergraduate level is deplorable and cannot be justified in any way.

We are fully cognizant that the development of the private higher education industry has not taken place solely due to altruistic reasons of wanting to spread knowledge or education. Nor are our educational entrepreneurs engaging in some kind of national or personal mission. The same may be said about the public higher education system even though its mission statement is more couched in the spin of serving national development objectives.

The owners of the private education industry in Malaysia are in the industry to generate profits for themselves and their shareholders. In the process of running a business and profit making, let us not forget that these entrepreneurs have taken enormous risks and also helped hundreds of thousands of young Malaysians who for various reasons were not able to find admission into the public universities. They are also responsible for attracting a growing number of international students to Malaysia; they pay taxes on their profits and they generate much needed income and jobs.

Level the playing field

At the same time as providing private educational institutions fair and equitable scope to expand, it is also necessary for our policy makers not to marginalize or discriminate against them especially in the vital area of R and D support and training.

It is not simply the interests of the owners of capital that will be served by fair government policies. Many tens of thousands of capable academic staff members and undergraduates of these institutions – some of them with higher research potential or capability when compared with their counterparts in the public universities will benefit – and when they benefit so too will the nation.

Most academic staff members from private universities already experience inferior service conditions compared to their counterparts from the public universities. These differences in job security, remuneration, leave and other career provisions could be made more bearable if they were provided equal opportunity to public funds for R and D. By way of example, it should be emphasized that many private universities elsewhere in the world routinely receive huge grants from Governments on the basis of competitive bidding.

A new policy that provides an even playing field for staff and researchers from public and private universities in R and D needs to be urgently implemented if the country is to fully harness and optimally utilize its higher level human resources.

This new policy needs to be based on principles of competence and performance. It should not be based on non-transparent politicized agendas of exclusion or whether the institution or individual is from the public or private sector higher education institution. When is this long overdue policy reform coming?

Note: This is the first of a two part commentary. The second will provide proposals for policy reform of R & D and private higher educational institutions.

Gender insensitive budgeting

By Ding Jo-Ann

IN 2006, then Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak launched on behalf of the prime minister a manual on gender budgeting in Malaysia. The manual was published a year earlier after the completion of a gender budgeting pilot project with five key ministries.

Najib's gender-sensitive budget goes 'poof'
Gender budgeting seems to have dropped off the government radar

Since then however, gender budgeting seems to have dropped off the government radar. Budgets, previous and current, demonstrate no gender framework. Additionally, there seems to be a lack of political will, both within the Barisan Nasional and the Pakatan Rakyat, about the importance of gender budgeting.

Fair distribution

A 1998 Commonwealth Secretariat report on gender budgeting says that gender budgeting is about breaking down data. With the disaggregated data, analysis can be done to determine how the subsidies and resources stated in the budget are allocated to women as compared to men. In this way, a government's commitment to gender issues can be evaluated in terms of dollars and cents.

"The budget reflects the values of a country — who it values, whose work it values and who it rewards ... and who and what and whose work it doesn't," the Commonwealth report says.

At the same time, the Malaysian government manual adds that gender budget work does not mean having a separate budget for women or even separate budgets for women and men. "Instead, it looks at the impact of every part of the budget on women and men, girls and boys," the manual, published by the Women, Family and Community Development Ministry and the United Nations Development Programme, explains.

Speech bubbles with unhelpful statements like 'gender what?'

What gender budgeting?

According to the Malaysian report, the ministries of education, higher education, human resources, health, and rural and regional development were to implement gender-responsive budgeting from 2006 onwards.

However, obtaining information on the progress of gender sensitive budgeting and how it has influenced Budget 2010 proved to be challenging.

"I have no idea," said a Finance Ministry corporate communications official when asked about gender budgeting in the various ministries. "Call the budget management division."

Calls to the budget management division were also fruitless. Budget department officials were either away, claimed ignorance or referred the call to another official. Seven to eight calls later, an official agreed to respond. However a week later, he had still not done so.

The Women, Family and Community Development Ministry proved no different. When contacted by phone to comment on whether Budget 2010 was gender sensitive, the Women's Development Department director-general said she was in Sabah and was "busy". Although The Nut Graph was later informed that a response was being prepared, a week later, no response was forthcoming.

Khalid Ibrahim

Not PR's priority either

Gender sensitive budgeting also does not seem to be a focus for Pakatan Rakyat (PR).

Selangor Menteri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim seemed to be caught off guard when questioned about gender sensitive budgeting for Selangor at a recent PR forum about Budget 2010.

When asked whether he thought the federal government was committed to improving women's participation in the labour force and to achieving gender equality through the budget, Khalid responded: "I think if the economy moves towards a direction where it is based on high skills and services, gender inequality will become less."

Tony Pua with steepled hands
Tony Pua
The two other forum participants, Petaling Jaya Utara Member of Parliament (MP) Tony Pua from the DAP and Kuala Selangor MP Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad from PAS did not respond to the questions.

Allocations too general

Budget 2010 does provide allocations for training in entrepreneurial skills for a mere 3,000 women. But women's rights advocate Rozana Isa argues additionally that as far as she can see, there was no gender analysis in Budget 2010 about the different ways that expenditure would affect men and women.

The Sisters in Islam Musawah coordinator says that Budget 2010's key result areas of crime, corruption, affordable education, standard of living and transport did not specify how it would assist women, especially those who are vulnerable.

"For example, for single mothers, a lot of them may not have gone into employment before and during marriage. When something happens, they are left to fend for themselves. How much is allocated to providing training, education and skills for them so they can be economically independent?" she asks.

Rozana says that even where an allocation was made, for example RM100 million for a corporate social responsibility fund for community services, it was hard to tell how much would benefit women.

"How is it targeted to help women? The community is very wide — [senior citizens], children, communities with disabilities. How will this fund be divided and disbursed, according to the states or the corporations? Among the 14 states, how much is that per state?"

Rozana also observes that although RM100 million could look like a lot of money, when divided between districts and communities, the portion actually allocated to women could be very small.

Zuraida Kamaruddin (file pic)

PKR Wanita chief Zuraida Kamaruddin agrees that Budget 2010 is not at all gender sensitive. "They talk about cross-cutting, that the budget for women is placed in all the other ministries. No doubt, but there is no specific plan. There is no monitoring on how much is allocated to women," she says in a phone interview.

Bukit Mertajam MP Chong Eng also released a press statement that gender provisions were missing in the budget. The DAP Wanita chief's statement, however, only made reference to more direct expenditure for women and did not touch on gender sensitive budgeting per se.

Gender insensitive

Rozana says that gender sensitive budgeting is not just about allocating money specifically for women but also on educating society about gender issues. "There should be an allocation for gender sensitisation programmes nationwide for the police, immigration, judges and [all the government training institutes]."

"At the end of the day, if women use public services like the hospital or the police, will the first person they meet have the sensitivity to understand what they've gone through and provide the support and services accordingly? If she's been beaten up [at home], what do they need to do to help? If they are not gender sensitive, they might not have empathy for the woman."

Zuraida notes that Malaysia has been slipping in the rankings of the World Economic Forum's global gender gap report. Out of over 130 countries, Malaysia ranked 92nd in 2006. Since then however, it has progressively slipped to the 96th, 99th and 101st position every year after.

"This shows that there's no political will to monitor or keep a close watch on this," Zuraida says. Truth is, she is likely to be right.

Mengorak langkah memartabatkan Perlembagaan

Imageoleh Syahredzan Johan

Pada hari Jumaat, 13 November 2009, kita akan mengorak langkah yang sepatutnya kita ambil lama dahulu. Pada hari tersebut, Kempen PerlembagaanKu / MyConstitution akan dilancarkan pada pukul 3.00 petang, di Oditorium Majlis Peguam.

Ramai yang bertanya, apakah sebab Jawatankuasa Undang-Undang Perlembagaan, di bawah naungan Majlis Peguam, mengambil inisiatif ini? Sebenarnya Jawatankuasa ini baru ditubuhkan pada awal tahun 2009 sebagai reaksi kepada isu-isu perlembagaan yang timbul sejak beberapa tahun yang lepas. Lebih-lebih lagi selepas pilihanraya umum yang ke-12, rakyat Malaysia semakin ingin tahu tentang hak-hak mereka yang terkandung di dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan (“Perlembagaan”).

Mungkin ada yang berpendapat bahawa Perlembagaan itu banyak kelemahannya. Mungkin ada yang mempunyai pandangan bahawa Perlembagaan itu hanyalah bayang-bayang lesu Perlembagaan yang asal yang dirangka beberapa dekad dahulu. Saya sendiri merasakan bahawa Perlembagaan itu sememangnya boleh diperbaiki. Banyak peruntukan yang terkandung di dalamnya mungkin harus dipinda. Tetapi kita juga harus ingat, undang-undang buatan manusia tiada yang sempurna. Perlembagaan itu seharusnya menjadi dokumen yang ‘hidup’ dan mencerminkan aspirasi rakyat mengikut aliran masa.

Namun sebelum kita boleh berhujah mengenai bagaimana kita boleh menjadikan Perlembagaan itu lebih baik, kita sendiri harus kenalinya dahulu. Mustahil untuk kita berwacana tentang Perlembagaan jika kita tidak tahu apa itu Perlembagaan.

Malangnya, apa yang rakyat tahu tentang Perlembagaan dibentuk oleh apa yang dilaporkan di media. Dan apa yang dilaporkan adalah pandangan-pandangan ahli politik dan juga pertubuhan-pertubuhan yang selalunya mempunyai kepentingan sendiri. Maka maklumat yang diterima oleh rakyat, oleh kerana disalurkan daripada pihak-pihak yang berkepentingan, menjadi tidak tepat, berat sebelah dan kadangkala palsu!

Ini semua berlaku kerana tahap kesedaran kita tentang Perlembagaan masih di tahap yang tidak memuaskan. Kita, sebagai rakyat Malaysia, masih tidak melihat Perlembagaan itu secara menyeluruh. Apa yang kita tahu hanyalah peruntukan-peruntukan tertentu dan yang selalu mengundang kontroversi. Pandangan kita tentang apa itu Perlembagaan bergantung pada apa yang kita fikir kita tahu dan apa yang disajikan kepada kita. Bagaikan cerita orang buta dengan gajah, jika kita umpamakan Perlembagaan itu sebagai gajah di dalam cerita, maka kita bagaikan orang buta yang membuat kesimpulan tentang Perlembagaan hanya berdasarkan dengan apa yang didedahkan kepada kita.

Kita semua dahagakan maklumat tentang Perlembagaan. Tetapi dokumen tersebut bukanlah dokumen yang mudah untuk difahami. Seperti undang-undang yang lain, ia mengandungi perkataan-perkataan yang sukar dan konsep-konsep yang kompleks. Di kalangan para peguam sendiri, yang dikatakan sebagai ‘pakar’ undang-undang, ramai yang tidak mengetahui tentang peruntukan-peruntakan, bahagian-bahagian, perkara-perkara dan jadual-jadual yang terkandung di dalam dokumen tersebut. Apatah lagi rakyat di luar sana, yang sememangnya tidak mendapat pendidikan dalam bidang perundangan?

Apa yang kami ingin lakukan dengan kempen ini adalah membawa Perlembagaan itu kepada rakyat. Kami mahu rakyat mengenali Perlembagaan itu. Kami mahu rakyat faham tentang apa yang terkandung di dalamnya. Kami berharap, satu hari, kita semua akan menyanjungi dan menghormati Perlembagaan. Orang kata, kalau tak kenal maka tak cinta, maka bagaimanakah hendak kita sanjung dan hormat Perlembagaan jika kita tidak dekati ia?

Ramai juga yang bertanya, bagaimana pula dengan masalah interpretasi? Jika sesuatu perkara itu itu mempunyai interpretasi yang berbeza-beza, apakah interpretasi yang akan digunapakai oleh kempen ini?

Tujuan kempen ini bukanlah untuk memberitahu rakyat apakah interpretasi yang harus diterimapakai. Tidak adil jika kami mengatakan ‘nah, ini maksud baris itu, jangan dengar pandangan lain!’. Kita hanya mahu rakyat tahu apa yang terkandung di dalam Perlembagaan. Jika terdapat isu interpretasi, dengan adanya pengetahuan asas rakyat akan dapat membuat kesimpulan yang berpengetahuan. Dengan forum, debat dan kuliah “Bual-bual Perlembagaan”, salah satu daripada komponen kempen ini, kami juga berharap untuk membincangkan isu-isu tersebut di dalam suasana yang ilmiah. Forum “Bual-bual Perlembagaan: Apa itu Perlembagaan Persekutuan?” akan dilangsungkan sejurus selepas pelancaran kempen ini.

Secara peribadi, penglibatan saya di dalam kempen ini adalah satu keputusan yang saya ambil setelah saya tidak sanggup lagi duduk di kedai kopi atau di hadapan komputer dan mengeluh tentang apa yang sedang berlaku di negara kita. Saya mengambil keputusan untuk memberi sumbangan kepada perjuangan untuk menjadikan negara ini negara ini lebih baik. Apa gunanya hanya bersembang di kedai kopi atau menulis blog di internet, jika kita tidak bangun dari kerusi selesa kita dan menyalurkan usaha kepada sesuatu yang kita percaya?

Jadi saya nekad untuk menyumbangkan daya usaha saya kepada kempen ini. Saya mahu terlibat di dalam satu pergerakan yang bertujuan memartabatkan Perlembagaan, meletakkan ia di paksi yang sewajarnya sebagai undang-undang utama dan tertinggi di Malaysia.

Saya berharap begitu ramai lagi pendukung-pendukung Perlembagaan, yang telah berikrar untuk meluhurkannya, sama-sama terlibat di dalam pergerakan ini. Datanglah ke Oditorium Majlis Peguam. Penuhkan ia, sehinggakan kami terpaksa menyediakan kerusi-kerusi tambahan.

Jadikan Majlis Pelancaran Kempen PerlembagaanKu sebagai satu titik tolak perjuangan suci dan murni, supaya setiap seorang daripada 27 juta rakyat Malaysia akan menjadikan Perlembagaan itu hakmilik kita.

*Majlis Pelancaran Kempen PerlembagaanKu akan diadakan pada 13 November 2009, jam 3 petang, di Oditorium Majlis Peguam. Orang ramai dijemput hadir. Masuk adalah percuma.


1. Pahang will soon be selling water to Selangor/KL. I don't think Pahang would be happy to receive 3 sen per thousand gallons.

2. Melaka has been paying Johore 30 sen per thousand gallons and is still doing so and will continue to do so I suppose. Would Johore be asking for more than 30 sen in the future? God knows.

3. In 2011 the first agreement with Singapore to sell 350 million gallons of raw water daily at 3 sen per thousand gallons will end. What would we do then? I suspect despite Singapore's famous Newater, it would still need the 350 million gallons daily.

4. The other treaty would end by 2060 in which the price is also 3 sen per thousand gallons. But without the 350 million gallons daily according to the first treaty, Singapore's rapidly increasing population of new immigrants would not have enough water.

5. So, the amount supplied according to the first treaty would be even more crucial despite Newater and desalination.

6. The Government of Tun Abdullah had very cleverly decided not to raise any of the issues outstanding with Singapore after the bridges were jettisoned. I suppose this charitable act would help cement friendship with that city-state with a per capita income of US$36,000 (Malaysia's per capita incidentally is US$7,000, i.e one-fifth of Singapore).

7. 2011 is not too far away. Have we thought about extending the 2011 treaty or not extending it or negotiating a new water supply agreement? Are we going to be charitable again and sell raw water at 3 sen per thousand gallons to our rich neighbour?

8. Being charitable and not raising prickly issues is a good way to make friends. But what is the cost to the people of Malaysia.

Two Men Sent To Gallows For Murdering Former UiTM Lecturer

KUALA LUMPUR, Nov 13 (Bernama) -- Sales Executive, Sulkarnain Alias, 32, and fork-lift driver, Noorman Ab Wahab, 31, were sentenced to the gallows by the Kuala Lumpur High Court on Friday after they were found guilty of murdering former UiTM lecturer, Bakarudin Busu on February 12, 2002.


penyokong Kelantan buat PAS yang salah ?

By Chegu Bard,

Pagi ini masih di Bandung. Sebelum bermula kuliah, membaca beberapa email lama yang belum sempat dibaca.

Ada teman yang mengirim email dengan menghantar petikan beberapa laman Umno yang komen mengenai perlawanan akhir Piala Malaysia.

Kononya salahkan PAS kerana penyokong Kelantan merusuh dan puji Umno kerana penyokong Negeri Sembilan disiplin malah NS telah menang.

Tahu tak kita pengurusan bolasepak Kelantan diterajui oleh Datuk Anuar Musa (orang Umno). Inilah sikap hipokrit kalau menang akan kata orang Umno bagus urus bola tapi kalau kalah salahkan kerajaan negeri.... ?

Sikap keterbukaan kerajaan PAS Negeri Kelantan harus dipuji kerana berjaya mengadaptasi konsep keadilan. Anuar Musa sememangnya antara yang baik untuk mengurus KAFA maka beliau didokong dalam menguruskan KAFA. Bayangkan kalau PBNS di ketuai oleh orang PAKATAN tentu sekali tidak mungkin. Bukan orang PAKATAN tetapi jika ia orang Umno bukan dari kem yang menguasai negeri juga sudah akan menyebabkan keadaan kelam kabut.

Tuduhan penyokong Kelantan bawa bendera PAS tidak boleh disangkal....tetapi ada juga penyokong NS bawa bendera Umno malah ditemui juga penyokong NS yang turut bawa bendera PAS dan KEADILAN.

Hakikat tahap disiplin penyokong yang mengecewakan tidak boleh disangkal, sesuatu harus dilakukan sama ada dalam aspek penguatkuasaan undang - undang atau kempen berterusan. PAS tidak memerintah England tetapi penyokong England tetap dikenali dengan sikap fanatik dan merusuh...maka ia bukan salah PAS.

Apa pun tahniah pasukan Negeri Sembilan....

Cuma nak komen sedikit malam tersebut polis bersikap cukup berlainan, hanya melihat kerusi dibakar dan mercun dibaling. Jika polis bertindak cepat menahan 2-3 orang yang memulakan provokasi tentu yang lain akan mula berfikir dua kali. Namun sehingga keluar stadium ada penyokong NS dipukul tetapi polis gagal bertindak dan seolah tidak cukup anggota...... ini berbeda dengan aksi polis mengawal protes rakyat sebelum ini.

Police shot dead 5 Indians Sister & 4 children attempts suicide

Sexual harassment still a big, big problem - Malaysiakini

Malaysia is undoubtedly home to many a male chauvinistic pig. One of them is the Labour Department director-general Ismail Abdul Rahim who recently remarked that having a sexual harassment bill "could lead to a dull and rigid environment in the workplace".jag anti sexist parliament protest 150507 mca women

His statement was in reaction to a stand taken by Women, Family and Community Development Minister Shahrizat Abdul Jalil who wants to legislate laws against sexual harassment at the workplace.

With his callous statement, Ismail has only made it obvious that gender discrimination is still a big, big problem in Malaysia. There is no political will power to consciously tackle this workplace menace if the views of Government servants in the likes of Ismail is considered.

Ismail's remark goes to show that sexual harassment is viewed as a 'remeh' or trivial matter. One that is harmless and needs no action to be taken against. How could saving a woman's self-respect and honour make any work place environment dull and rigid?

Is the Labour Department chief categorically saying that he condones sexual harassment at the workplace? In that case, one can only wonder how many sexual harassment cases have taken place at the Labour Department, without any action taken against the perpetrator.

'... dull, rigid working environment'

Having reflected his ignorance on the issue of sexual harassment, the Labour Department director-general has only made it clear that the issue of gender biasness is a problem that must be addressed immediately without any political interference. To 'pep up' the working environment at the expense of women employees is an insult to all women, be they working or home makers.

The Labour Department director-general is 'blur' to the commitments made to preserve women's dignity at the Beijing Platform for Action at the United Nations Fourth World Conference on Women in 1995. One of the 'vow' taken is to remove legal obstacles and gender discriminatory practice.

The Labour Department head it appears is just as ignorant about the fact that Malaysia is signatory to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) when he let out his thoughts that a bill on sexual harassment at workplace "could only lead to a dull and rigid working environment".

NONEIsmail's sexist outlook reminds us of the sexual harassment charge brought against former Science, Technology and Innovation Minister Dr Jamaluddin Jarjis (left) in April last year. The case, however, was closed after the victim retracted her statutory declaration saying she was "used" to Jamaluddin's "rough way" and jokes . Do such display of power lead to victims of sexual harassment becoming 'paralysed' under threats and fear of losing their jobs?

If power is used to silence women who suffer sexual harassment, then an Act must be put in place to protect all women, but the Act itself must in no way come with loopholes that instead cause women to keep silent each time they experience sexual harassment because seeking justice then becomes a joke.

Not 'trivial' issue

For over a decade now, the women's groups in Malaysia have been advocating for the Sexual Harassment Act in place of the Code Practice on the Prevention and Eradication of Sexual Harassment in the Workplace. The latter was introduced by the Human Resources Ministry in 1999 and was adopted by only a small percentage NONEof employers.

Women's Development Collective in its book 'A Pioneering Step - Sexual Harassment and The Code of Practice in Malaysia published in 2003 states that two years after The Code was launched (in 2001) only about one percent of employers nationwide had set up internal mechanisms to combat sexual harassment in the workplace, a mere 4,500 companies out of the 400,000 employers registered with the Social Security Organisation.

In spite of the many pleas from women's groups on why sexual harassment needs to be addressed seriously, there has been little support from employers on implementing the Code at their workplaces. Sexual harassment instead is viewed as a 'small matter' between office colleagues or between female employees and their male employers.

Why is sexual harassment not taken seriously by employers? Why is the issue of sexual harassment a butt of jokes to the male politicians? Does sexual harassment not denote an act of violence against women at the workplace? Do male employees and male employers feel threatened with the capabilities of their female staff that they have to resort to sexual harassment?

Respect women's rights

There is no denying that sexual harassment has become a threatening problem with serious repercussions facing women workers. A research carried out from 2000 to 2001 revealed that 35% of the 1,483 respondents from six pioneer companies had experienced one or more forms of sexual harassment at their workplace.

The sexual harassment ranged from verbal lewd jokes to physical harassment. It leaves the victims feeling fear, confused, shocked and angry.

Until and unless legal force is employed in eradicating sexual harassment at workplaces, cases of women suffering, and most of them in silence from such harassment will continue, severely affecting the productivity of these women.

In 2001, a coalition of Women NGOs, Joint Action Group Against Violence against Women (JAG-VAW) submitted a memorandum, a thoroughly researched proposal for sexual harassment bill to the Human Resource Ministry.

The bill is intended to replace the existing voluntary Code Practice on the Prevention and Eradication of Sexual Harassment in the Workplace.

At present, women represent 36% of the Malaysian workforce and it is their physical, emotional and mental well being at the workplace that will determine the level of their productivity.

JESWAN KAUR is a journalist who spent many years writing for the mainstream media before deciding to 'break free' and put pen to paper to focus on and fight for issues that are conveniently marginalised by the powers-that-be.

DPM orders Siputeh rep to attend assembly sitting

This is not a story you or I want to hear

Seetha, could not take the grief of her little brother Surendran’s death . Surendran was shot dead by the police on the 8th of November. In her grief she decided to take her life and those of her 4 children yesterday morning. At about 8.30 am she gave everyone Paraquat to drink, telling her children that they will be able to meet their Uncle if they all drank the medicine. All of them drank it. Their lives are now in limbo as I write this article. They are all in the ICU.

Can you imagine Seetha’s state of mind that she should make such a decision. Not only her life but all her little ones as well. Can you imagine?

It pains me even to think about the state of her mind as she was giving them all the poison. Can I ever imagine doing this myself – what would make me ever to do such a thing. You kill the people you love and take your own life when you feel it is totally the end of the road, that there is no more hope or purpose to living. Is this what Seetha had in her mind when she decided at that fateful moment?

I do not know enough to write about the exact circumstances. But some facts are undeniable. Attempted suicide here happened in a circumstance of relative poverty. Seetha’s husband is a lorry driver. Her father is a Security Guard. She was a housewife. This is so typical of the Indian poor , Security Guards and Lorry Drivers are all what they can get up to. Surendran was 24 years old like so many others of his age group who fall victims to crime.

How did Surendran get involved in crime – what took him there. For young Indian men who do not see much upward mobility in a life as a lorry driver or as a security guard(that is all that is available to them for their academic accomplishments in the Apartheid Malaysian system), crime seems to be an answer. Young as they are, they are oblivious or just plain unthinking about the incumbent risks and this is where they land up .

I cannot but conclude that this is really a crime committed against this family and against so many others like them , This story is not about Surendran’s crime or about Seetha’s attempted suicide but about the racist UMNO regime’s crime of causing the literal obliteration of Seetha’s family. You may accuse me of being mad, of being totally foolish to say this, to assign blame wily nily. Audacious as my blaming may be, give me an alternative esxplanation for this repeating pattern in these problems.

It is so blatantly clear to me that it is UMNO’s policy of continuing and total neglect of the Indian poor that leads the Indian poor to this end. They pay no attention to this problem. They are in total denial. They just do not care. They sentence these Indians to a life of deprivation and abandonment.

Why does the UMNO regime not acknowledge this line of reasoning and open up opportunities for the young Indians in this high risk group. There are thousands of development programs that the UMNO regime administers in the country – why do they not open them up and allow these young men into that mainstream.

My answer is plain and simple. It serves UMNO no purpose to do that. In fact the opposite effect serves them a better purpose. As more Indian young men go crime’s ways, they are all condemned one way or another to the dregs of Malaysian society to be finally disposed off like this. End of story for UMNO, no more problem. UMNO has divided up this country for that, the result being such tragedies.

Why does Seetha for her part see this as the end of the road? What is her background? How does she see this world? What is her state of knowledge? What is she looking at being a mother of 4 at the age of 31 and a wife to a lorry driver? Lorry driving is back breaking, long hours, away from home for long stretches, a low social status. What is the implication of all this to her? What does her brother mean to her? Is she not entitled to a luxury of some love for a little brother, no matter that he may be all wrapped up in crime now? I do not have answers to all these questions but having been through life myself I can venture some guesses. It comes back to the same answer. Seetha has been denied an even shot at life.

I hope Seetha and her little ones come through over the next few days. What this maens to the rest of us is that we have to wake up from our slumber and start asking some real hard questions. It is time that the likes of Seetha get what is their due.


A National Tragedy In The Making. Dare You Stop It?

There is a terrible decay occuring in our system. This decay shows itself up in so many ways. The latest situation which warrants this comment is about the increasing crime rate in the country. The crime situation that we see is really only the tip of the iceberg of our system. And the police are trying to blow that tip off every now and then with a spate of encounter killings. The ice below that tip just comes up afterwards every time and replaces the blown off tip without any effort. So, what has been achieved. The iceberg only keeps getting bigger.

Hindraf is and has always been at the forefront of things. Our analysis of the social and political situation and the conclusions we come to are the same conclusions that the larger sections of our society come to, only later. Take the way we focused on UMNO as the main protagonist in the Malaysian political scene just before the 12GE – when everyone else was running scared of confronting the giant. Everyone after that then jumped on the bandwagon in targeting UMNO..

Then after PR took over in four States, the conclusion that we came to, that there is really no substantial difference between PR and BN policies as far as the working people are concerned, was an early one, within a year of its taking over. Then we have others getting on to that band wagon now. Yong Teck Lee, Jeffrey Kitingan from Sabah to name two significant personalities, and now even pro-PR political analysts are beginning to reluctantly admit it.

Uthayakumar has been saying for several years now that the Police are the ones really running this country. Najib tries to keep the people mollified with his histrionics while Musa Hassan manages the real power that runs the country. Take Hitler, take Saddam Hussein, now take the Myanmarese Junta . They are all just raw versions of what is happening in Malaysia. The people have to realize this very soon. More and more people are coming to this awareness. But the racial angle to all this hubris makes it more difficult for all to see what is happening clearly.

In the last thirty days at least 10 suspects have been brutally killed by the police. In today’s Utusan the PDRM issued an explanation. They say, the police had no choice. I say this is the usual police lie. They say the police did it in self defence. I say show me the police dead. They say that this kind of killing will teach other potential criminals a lesson. I say this does not make any sense as the crime rate has not gone down. They say that if the police hesitated and the suspects shot back that could harm the bystanders. I say, so how many times have the suspects shot back and how many bystanders have been hurt? They say that if a policeman is killed they will not be sung as heroes. I say, if they were killed honorably, surely we will sing them as heroes. Not when they act worse than the criminals they are supposed to protect us from. Then they say why do we question these police actions for such questioning will hurt the morale of the police. I say the only thing that I know that will hurt the morale of the police is a reduction of their incomes. They do not care two hoots about all this questioning. They know they reign supreme..

You may in turn ask me - why am I standing up for these terrible criminals. Where is my sense of rectitude. Let me first say, that even if they are criminals, they are citizens of this country, only wayward citizens. They are victims of the system in more ways than one. Killing them off is no answer. What we need is a real problem solving approach. What we need is to understand the sources of this phenomenon of crime. As what the Malay elite keep repeating about the suicide bombing Islamic terrorists – we need to understand the root causes, we need to understand the root causes, they say. They ask why would anybody want to kill themselves by blowing themselves up. They keep repeating this in the media, in International Fora, everywhere. What we need is something similar here at home.

But that is far from happening here.

Most of the suspected criminals are Indians. This logic of looking for the root cause doesn’t apply here with the Indians in Malaysia. The Indian criminals and suspects are to be shot like dogs. They deserve no better. This is a way of hastening the process of self destruction of a community – a way of killing it off without trying. At the lower sections of Indian society this self destruct process is well under way. It is indeed gathering momentum – as evidenced by the many deteriorating social indicators. Now who is taking this up for a solution? Who will protest that nothing is being done?

Do we simply allow it to happen and beg and plead for a solution. Haven’t we done enough of that for the last half century. What has been the outcome, an acceleration of this deterioration –that’s all. That is all, that strategy can get. We have to change our tack now. We have to change strategy to really change this situation.

We need now a strong voice to change this state of affairs. And we need to demand it as a fundamental right, only we are asking it half a century late. If we want a real say in determining our destinies, and if our fundamental rights are to be guaranteed, then we have to fight to get it. We have to coalesce under one big umbrella to struggle for what is ours. We need to put in place a government that will give us all a say in determining our destinies. We have to learn how decadent this system really is from every single episode such as the recent encounter killings and equip ourselves to do the needful to bring about change, when the time comes. We have not to be taken in by the lies that the mass media carries. We are not to be taken in by the promises that politicians repeat every general election and every by election.

Hindraf/HRP offers that umbrella. How many of you can see this. How many of you are willing to subscribe to this. If we want change, we have to make it happen. It is not going to happen by itself. We, in Hindraf/HRP have signed up to lead change. If you want real change come join us. Only through uniting under an umbrella that truly represents the wishes of the Indian people can we hope to gain control over our destiny. The alternative scenario is a tragedy waiting to happen.

There is no other way.

Manoharan: Pakatan Rakyat no different than BN (Malaysiakini)

DAP assemblyperson M Manoharan today described Pakatan Rakyat-led Selangor as no different than the previous government run by Barisan Nasional.

manoharan first visit to selangor state assembly building 110509 04In his 20-minute Selangor 2010 debate debut, the former ISA detainee and Kota Alam Shah assemblyperson said the Pakatan government should have rewarded the Indians the most. His reasoning was that ‘they are the ones who contributed to the coalition’s huge win in the last general elections’.

Manoharan also chided Menteri Besar Abdul Khalid Ibrahim for only having one Indian exco in the government leadership lineup.

“The government is supposed to appoint two Indian excos. Instead, they only gave one (to Dr Xavier Jayakumar).”He asked why Bukit Melawati assemblyperson M Muthiah wasn’t appointed as well. Manoharan said that as Muthiah is an engineer, he would be qualified to be an exco.

Manoharan also attacked the menteri besar for giving a ‘less-important’ porfolio to Jayakumar, a dentist. The latter was tasked with the health, estate workers, poverty and caring government portfolio.

“If a dentist from Umno (Dr Mohd Khir Toyo) could be made a menteri besar, why isn’t a dentist in Pakatan given a more important portfolio?” said Manoharan.

MB’s defence of Umno unacceptable

Manoharan said the menteri besar should not have commented on a case sub judice (under judgement) when Khalid rebutted the accusation that Umno was involved in the infamous ‘cow-head’ protest last August.

Last Tuesday, Khalid defended Umno over the recent protests against the relocation of a Hindu temple in Section 23. Though he admitted that the protestors were from Umno, he stopped short of accusing the party of orchestrating the protest.

Continuing his tirade, Manoharan said the budget presented by the state government should have addressed more plights among the Indian community.

“Selangor still does not make Indians as its priority. I hope they will come up with their own think-tank so that they would not lose the Indian support in the next election,” he said. He cited Hindraf’s think-tank as a deciding factor in Pakatan’s win in the last election.

Champion other races too

At this juncture, PKR rep Azmin Ali (Bukit Antarabangsa) interjected, saying that any Pakatan assemblyperson should champion every race, rather than focusing only on one race.

azmin ali pc in parliament 020709 02“I am a Malay, but I don’t champion my own race. I am concerned about the Indians and the Chinese too,” said Azmin (left).

He also said that the menteri besar, although he did not come out with specific programmes for the Indian community in the budget, still allocated RM4 million to Indian vernacular schools.

Azmin also said that Khalid had allocated RM2 million to estate workers’ children who were mostly from Indian families.

“I can assure you that throughout the time we have governed the state, the state government is always concerned about the Indian community and other races as well,” added Azmin.

However, Manoharan remained unconvinced, saying that such arguments were also made by BN previously.

3 coffins in one house, Uthayakumar cries foul (Malaysiakini)

Human Rights Party (HRP) leader P Uthayakumar today lambasted the police for allegedly carrying out “summary executions” as a shortcut measure to deal with crime.

The lawyer was responding to the police shooting in Klang on Monday which led to the deaths of five suspected armed robbers, aged between 17 and 24. Three of them were brothers.

The deceased were said to be members of the ‘PCO Boy’ gang which is responsible for a spate of robberies.

NONEUthayakumar also criticised the English and Malay media for not covering the human rights aspect of the case.

“Can you imagine three coffins in one family house for their mother to grieve. Even in the case of a sudden death in ordinary circumstances, the mother may take a lifetime to get over her grief.

“Here, three sons are killed in the most tragic manner i.e. shot dead in cold blood for merely being a suspect,” he said in a statement.

“But the scores of corrupt policemen actually involved in crime are not shot dead. Why?” he asked.‘Sack IGP and CID chief’

The former Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) leader also recalled how even ‘Botak Chin’, the nation’s most wanted man in the 1980s, was captured alive, put on trial and only then sent to the gallows.
According to the rule of law, Uthayakumar said, even a criminal sentenced to death must be treated with respect.

He also questioned the rationale behind the government’s decision to allocate RM1 billion to the police department in the 2010 national budget.

“What for? To practice short cuts, lower down their efficiency rates, take the law into their hands and to give the police force the wrong signal that they are above the law and can get away with murder?

“And to shoot dead and kill especially Indian youths as a means to reduce the crime rate?” he said.

bakri zinin police cid chiefIn view of the latest shooting, Uthayakumar reiterated the call for Inspector-General of Police Musa Hassan and CID director Mohd Bakri Mohd Zinin to be sacked.

The police on Tuesday denied that they were “trigger-happy”.

“When police officers shoot, they do not shoot to kill, but rather they shoot to stop the deadly force threat,” said Bakri (left) in a statement.

“It is clearly within the right of the police to act in self-defence and protect the lives of innocent bystanders,” he added.

Malay-sian UMNO police forced Indian family to suicide

According to her father R. Rampathy, Seetha (31) could not bear to digest the injustices caused by the Malay-sian UMNO police force who shot dead in cold blood five Indian youths in Klang on 8/11/2009 including her brother Surendran (24), and a 17 year old juvenile Loganathan.

According to her father R. Ramapathy mourning and grieving Seetha who had come for her brother’s funeral from Gemenceh, Negeri Sembilan on 8/11/2009 was crying and looking at her brother’s photograph. Knowing that she could not fight the bully and tyranny of UMNO and the Malay-sian police force and that she would not get justice even from the Malay-sian Courts, at about 8.30 a.m this morning she decided to take her own life and that of her four children Darshini(8), Usharani(7), Kugan(5) and Navina(3). Seetha, Usharani and Kugan are fighting for their lives in the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of the Klang Tengku Ampuan Rahimah General Hospital. Usharani and Navina who were at the normal word have at about 5.30 p.m today also been transferred to the ICU according to Rampathy.

This is the height of the atrocities and tyranny by the Malay-sian UMNO and their police force against the poor working class and underprivileged Indians.

The Hospital doctors were acting more like the police FRU and chased P. Uthayakumar and S. Jayathas out of the ward despite P. Uthayakumar informing them that he was the family’s lawyer and was there under the family’s instructions. The police arrived shortly and tried to throw their weight around on the about 20 Hindraf and HRP supporters but it did not work. In fact it no longer works after the 25th November 2007 Hindraf rally. The Hindraf power power makkal sakhti forces are no longer frightened of UMNO and their Malay-sain police force. The police are now at the hospital in full force and have cordoned off the hospital wards from Hindraf and HRP supporters to suppress all matrial evidence and so that the truth would not surface.

Seetha’s father R. Ramapathy (61) a Security guard at a hastily called Press Conference at 3.00p.m today (by HRP) questioned as to why the police could not arrest his son and the other youths alive or shoot them on the legs. P. Uthayakuamr at this juncture added that for this the Malay-sian police force was rewarded with a RM 1 Billion allocation in the 2010 Malaysian budget.

P.Uthayakuamr told the press that the accepts the invitation of the Federal CID Director Dato Bakri Zinin who had on the 8.00 p.m news on 11/11/2009 invited critical of the police individuals on their next ‘trigger happy trip’. P. Uthyakumar said that he, his camera crew and video team would take up the offer and record all the evidence and investigate for themselves these police muders. But he is sure that Bakri would back off.

We are against the spiralling crime rate in Malaysia but not by murdering the working class Indians.

Article 5 of the Federal Constitution provides Liberty of the persons:- (1) No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty save in accordance with law.

Section 15(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code provides “Nothing in this section gives a right to cause the death of a person who is not accused of an offence punishable with death or with imprisonment for life”.

But UMNO’s Malay-sian police force do not follow the law or the Federal Constitution.

Should the worst happen to Seetha which we pray will not happen on Seetha’s family’s instructions we will accordingly bring her to the currently in session Malaysian Parliament as the last resort to register our protest.

At the home of Seetha’s father R. Ramapathy a group of 15 policemen led by Chief Inspector Mazui rudely stormed into their house and took photographs without their consent. The family members of this mourning and grieving family was immediately thereafter then taken to and are now (at as 5.00p.m) held at the Kapar police station as if these victims are the criminals. Reason as usual the Malay-sian UMNO police won’t tell you anything. No humanity or compassion shown even at this hour of grief and when the family is still in mouring. This racist Malay-sian police and UMNO high handedness is getting worse by the day after UMNO’s 52 years old continues rule of Malaysia.

We also register our regret that the PKR, DAP and PAS leaders and their 82 Members of Parliament and their about 200 State Assembly members did not bother to pass an emergency motion in Parliament which is now in session. (Note: at the Selangor State Assembly yesterday an emergency motion was filed on the sacking of the ex Perlis Mufti Dato Asri. In the Teoh Beng Hock murder PKR, DAP and PAS went all out and within one week both an Inquest and a Royal Commission of Inquiry was formed. But when and where the victims are the Indians a different rule applies. PKR, DAP and PAS not racial parties?

A classical police high handed and above the law mindset and mentality which will not change as long as the 52 year old continuous rule of UMNO is not changed.

P. Uthayakumar