Coroner releases new details about Michael Jackson's death

Dr. Conrad Murray has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter in Michael Jackson's death

Los Angeles, California (CNN) -- With Dr. Conrad Murray officially charged in Michael Jackson's death, the Los Angeles coroner has released the autopsy report that said it was a homicide.

The 51-page report gives vivid detail supporting last August's conclusion that Jackson died from "acute propofol intoxication."

Murray told investigators he gave Jackson propofol, a powerful anesthetic, to help him sleep.

An anesthesiology consultant hired by the coroner to review the findings of the investigation said that "there are NO reports of its use for insomnia relief, to my knowledge," according to the report.

"The only reports of its use in homes are cases of fatal abuse (first reported in 1992), suicide, murder and accident," Dr. Selma Calmes wrote.

"The standard of care for administering propofol was not met," she wrote.

Autopsy report lists details of Jackson's death (PDF)

Murray, who was with Jackson when he died, is charged with involuntary manslaughter by acting "without malice" but also "without due caution and circumspection."

Jackson, who hired Murray as his physician while he prepared for what was to have been a series of comeback concerts, called the doctor to his rented Holmby Hills mansion last June 25 at about 1 a.m., the report said.

"The decedent complained of being dehydrated and not being able to sleep," it said.

A police affidavit previously made public said that the doctor told investigators he gave Jackson three anti-anxiety drugs to help him sleep that morning.

Murray told them he had been treating Jackson for insomnia for six weeks at the time of the singer's death. He had given Jackson 50 milligrams of the sedative propofol diluted with the local anesthetic lidocaine every night via an intravenous drip.

The doctor told police he was worried that Jackson was becoming addicted to the drug and was trying to wean him off it.

During the two nights before Jackson's death, Murray said, he put together combinations of other drugs that succeeded in helping Jackson sleep.

Coroner investigators first examined Jackson's body at UCLA Medical Center less than three hours after he was pronounced dead. They used the picture on his California driver's license to confirm it was the singer.

"The decedent's head hair is sparse and is connected to a wig. The decedent's overall skin has patches of light and dark pigmented areas," an investigator wrote.

Jackson suffered permanent hair loss when his scalp caught fire while he was taping a Pepsi commercial in 1984. He was known to wear wigs in public after the mishap.

Jackson's dermatologist, Dr. Arnold Klein, told CNN last year that he had treated Jackson for vitiligo, a skin condition that causes irregular patches of white skin.

Jackson weighed 136 pounds and was 69 inches tall, according to measurements taken during the autopsy the morning after his death.

The front of Jackson's scalp, from his hairline, was tattooed with dark ink over "frontal balding." His eyebrows and the border of his eyelids were also tattooed.

"There is a pink tattoo in the region of the lips," the report said.

The autopsy report noted several broken ribs, apparently suffered during the efforts to revive him.

The autopsy also said that Jackson's left lung was affected by "widespread respiratory bronchiolitis and chronic lung inflammation" that could have had an "adverse health effect." But it was not "considered to be a direct or contributing cause of death," a pathologist hired as a consultant concluded.

Calmes, the consultant, concluded that propofol was administered without the recommended equipment being present, including a "continuous pulse oxymeter, EKG and blood pressure cuff."

Use of the anesthesia requires "full patient monitoring by a person trained in anesthesia," she wrote. Murray is a cardiologist.

"There was no evidence of an infusion pump for control of an IV infusion. No monitors were found at the scene; a blood pressure cuff and portable pulse oxymeter were recovered from a closet in the next room," Calmes wrote.

The consultant said supplemental oxygen "should always be delivered" when propofol is being administered.

An oxygen tank was found near where Jackson slept, but it was empty when the coroner investigator checked it two weeks after Jackson died, Calmes said.

"Multiple opened bottles of propofol were found with small amounts of remaining drug," Calmes said. "A used bottle should be discarded six hours after opening, to avoid possible bacterial growth."

"The levels of propofol found on toxicology exam are similar to those found during general anesthesia for major surgery," Calmes said.

During such surgery, any patient would be "intubated and ventilated by an anesthesiologist," she said.

The consultant's report said the level of lorazepam, a powerful anti-anxiety agent found in Jackson's body, "would have accentuated the respiratory and cardiovascular depression from propofol."

An involuntary manslaughter charge against a physician is a "very unusual thing to see," according to Dr. Bruce Cranner, a New Orleans defense lawyer in medical cases.

Cranner said prosecutors may have a "pretty good case" against Murray if they can show he did not take proper precautions when giving Jackson the propofol.

Hindraf rules out selection pact with Pakatan Rakyat

Sodomy II delayed again

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim speaking to reporters at the High Court this morning.

By Shazwan Mustafa Kamal

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 10 — Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy trial faced further delays today, and is adjourned until February 18 for a decision on whether the judge should be disqualified from hearing the case.

High Court judge Datuk Mohd Zabidin Mohd Diah adjourned the trial today after hearing submissions from the defence and prosecution on whether he should recluse himself.

“I need time to look at the arguments and cases put forth by the defence and the prosecution,” said Mohd Zabidin.

Lead counsel for Anwar’s defense team Karpal Singh had sought to disqualify the judge on Monday, citing dissatisfaction with the way the court has dealt with Utusan Malaysia’s coverage of the case against Anwar.

The Opposition Leader is accused with sodomising former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan at the Desa Damansara Condominium on June 26, 2008. Anwar has denied the charge, the second he has faced in 12 years.

The original application to disqualify the judge was based on dissatisfaction over how the judge had dealt with the Utusan Malaysia coverage of Anwar’s trial which “brings to surface an element of danger of bias on the part of the learned trial judge.”

Karpal had applied to court to cite Utusan for contempt of court as he argued that what was published on Feb 4 was tantamount to contempt of court.

However, Zabidin had dismissed Karpal’s application on the grounds that “the said reports were not carried with the intention of being mischievious and to disrupt trial proceedings when clearly there was no evidence on affidavit or otherwise to show such intention or mischief by Utusan Malaysia.”

Similarly the judge had with regards to the Feb 5 coverage by Utusan declined to caution the newspaper despite the defence’s contention that the news report was misleading.

Zabidin’s basis of reasoning was that the publication of the picture as evidence regarding the bed had been given in open court the previous day, which Karpal argues did not actually occur.

Malaysia veering towards instability, says PERC

By Lee Wei Lian - The Malaysian Insider

Malaysia needs to get its house in order to entice foreign investment and equities into the country. - Reuters pic

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 10 — Events since New Year’s Day have given the Hong Kong-based Political and Economic Risk Consultancy (PERC) the impression that the situation in Malaysia is becoming increasingly unstable.

In a blistering report on Malaysia released at the end of January, PERC also asserted that a group of elite minorities were dominating the national agenda to the extent that it was hurting Malaysia’s attractiveness to investors.

The consultancy, which also publishes reports on the risk ratings of other Asian countries, said it is “probable” that no other Asian country is suffering from as much bad press as Malaysia. Among the developments that caught its attention were the theft of military jet engines, detention of terror suspects from a number of African and Middle East countries following warnings that Islamic militants were planning attacks on foreigners at resorts in Sabah, renewed ethnic and religious “violence” that included arson at some churches and desecration of mosques, and controversy over the integrity of key institutions like the judicial system in the sodomy trial of opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

“Events of the past month give the impression that pressures are building and the entire situation is becoming much more unstable,” said PERC.

The report noted that the government is blaming the international media for exaggerated reporting and Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak had argued that the focus should not be on the fringe groups that are causing problems but on the majority of Malaysians who are coming together to condemn the recent acts of violence following the ‘Allah’ controversy. But PERC maintained that the root of the problem was a vocal minority that is dominating the national agenda.

“Mr. Razak’s attempt to put the best spin on a bad situation is understandable. He is fighting for his political life and is trying to stop the erosion in confidence in Malaysia’s prospects,” said PERC. “However, he is wrong in saying that Malaysia is being defined by the way the majority of the population are coming together. It is being defined by the ability of a minority to dominate the political agenda, shaping policy and compromising the reputation of key institutions in ways that hurt Malaysia’s reputation as a stable, attractive place for foreign investors.”

The report also said that while Islamic activists which are “threatening Malaysia’s secular credentials” are getting the widest coverage, it was the Umno elites, described as “a fringe group of insiders who have been able to profit disproportionately from the policies of the ruling coalition” that deserved the most attention.

“They are threatened with a loss of political power that could also impinge directly on their substantial business interests. Malaysia’s future will be determined largely by the tactics this group of insider elites resort to in order to stay in power and the success of those tactics. Their commitment to democracy is a major question mark. If they blatantly manipulate the system in order to remain in power, the public backlash could be worse than anything Malaysia has seen in its modern history.”

PERC added Najib’s strategy is looking “increasingly unworkable” as a way to defuse pressures in the country.

“He is trying to be all things to all people, but in the end he might satisfy no one,” it noted.

Malaysia’s risk index as calculated by PERC rose slightly from 5.24 out of a possible maximum score of 10 in December to 5.4 in January. It however, remained well below the risk index in January last year which stood at 6.42. Countries that score higher on the index are deemed to have a higher level of risk.

The PERC report comes as the Najib administration is grappling with a budget deficit and is trying to formulate a new economic model in which private investment plays a bigger role in driving the economy towards developed status.

The consultancy pointed out however that even if the opposition were to be in charge come the next election, foreign investors and others would wait and see if the opposition could govern the country effectively.

“So far the only thing uniting these (opposition) parties is their opposition to the ruling coalition, not matters like dealing with Malay entitlements, the extent that there should or should not be a broader Islamisation of Malaysia, or an economic programme for promoting the country’s development,” said PERC.

PERC maintained in its report that foreign investments into Malaysia have not been forthcoming, either in direct form or in the equity markets.

“Foreign companies and investors are remaining cautious until they see how Malaysia gets its own house in order,” it added.

Anwar’s sodomy trial meant to hurt us, says Izzah

Nurul Izzah (second left) seen accompanying her parents and sibling into the Kuala Lumpur High Court. - Picture by Jack Ooi

By Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani - The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 10 — Today will be the seventh day of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s second sodomy trial as Nurul Izzah and family walk through the swarm of photographers and reporters to show support for their well-loved father.

Izzah was only 18 years old when her father was first implicated for sodomy in 1998 and 12 years later, Anwar is accused of sodomising his former aide Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan at a posh condominium in the exclusive Bukit Damansara suburb in Kuala Lumpur.

Anwar’s eldest child is now a mother of two and a first-term MP for Lembah Pantai which she won in Election 2008.

She explained to The Malaysian Insider that her current situation is different from the last sodomy trial because she is now not only responsible for her family but also supporters.

“All of us are older now and I have my husband by my side and my two children. It was very much more complex having a constituency and you really carry the hopes and inspiration of our supporters including Pakatan Rakyat supporters,” Izzah said while sitting beside her husband Raja Ahmad Shahrir at the Kuala Lumpur High Court.

However, she admitted being angry that her family has to go through and witness her father on trial again.

“On a personal level, I would say it is very difficult and I am angry as well when I first heard his (Saiful) testimony in court to a point that it is almost unbelievable that we have to go through this again, are you kidding me? When the trial should have stopped immediately looking at the evidence.

“So it is harrowing and we just have to remain focused because they mean to do this, they mean to hurt us and basically make us feel that that there is no hope for the future,” she said.

Izzah said that the sodomy trial proves that her father is still a threat to Barisan Nasional.

“I think it is a continuation and it is better choreographed this time around but it still came as a shock to the family. We were focusing on the reform agendas especially the March 8 election results and it just reaffirms two things. The first is my father is still very much a threat to the ruling government and they will do whatever it takes to destroy his political career and the political future of Pakatan Rakyat.

“Second there is no way, you can get around unfinished reform; basically you need to implement reforms in the judiciary, in the police force and even parliamentary reforms because the same players who are responsible for ‘98 have been promoted, and again play a vital role in this episode so that is basically what my take is,” she said.

Izzah is still confident that her father would not be “put behind bars”.

“We shouldn’t assume that all hope is lost. We have a very very good case and a good team of lawyers basically almost all Malaysians know what is happening. They can see the transgression that has taken place but I believe it is also a wake-up call for Pakatan Rakyat to really strengthen the party. Our structure and position.

“I remain optimistic but of course now we are asking for the judge to recuse himself so as you can tell we are doing our best so that he is not put behind bars,” she said.

Izzah said that her family understand the situation better now and vow that her father will be “vindicated”.

“I would say that it is very difficult, because the kids have grown up so everyone understands the term conspiracy. So that is helpful. And my daughter can say ‘masalah politik’ (political problem) and ‘kesian papa tuk’ (poor grandfather). So I think we have more family support in that sense. But I think we do what we can to support him and we will not waiver in our resolve to vindicate my father,” she said.

Bala confirms it: Nasir Safar among last to see Altantuya alive

(Free Malaysia Today) SHAH ALAM: Private investigator P. Balasubramaniam has confirmed that Nasir Safar (picture) was at the scene when policemen abducted Mongolian beauty Altantuya Shaariibuu, according to his lawyer, Americk Sidhu.

Sidhu, in an email to the Pakatan Rakyat weekly Suara Keadilan, said the private eye — known throughout Malaysia by his nickname Bala — made the connection recently when he saw a photograph of the former special aide to the Prime Minister posted on a blog.

Nasir was thrust into notoriety last week after delivering a talk that many have described as full of racial slurs. He has had to resign over the incident, which embarrassed premier Najib Abdul Razak’s 1Malaysia project.

Both Bala and Sidhu live outside Malaysia for fear of persecution by the Najib regime, to which the police force, the attorney-general and the judiciary are widely suspected to be fiercely loyal.

In the now famous statutory declaration that he made in July 2008, Bala said he was at the scene when police took Altantuya away in a car from outside the home of her Malaysian lover, Abdul Razak Baginda, then an aide of Najib.

A few minutes before Altantuya was taken into the car, he said, “a blue Proton Saga, driven by a Malay man, passed by slowly. The driver’s window had been wound down and the driver was looking at us.”

Bala did not know then who the Malay man was, but was able to describe his facial features to police when he was interrogated. According to Sidhu, the interrogators told his client the man was just one of Abdul Razak’s neighbours.

However, Bala instantly recognised Nasir as the man in the blue car when he saw his picture on the Internet, Sidhu said.

• Why Bala made a second statutory declaration

Hey BN, less drama please

By Concerned Citizen

I have been watching closely the state of affairs in Malaysia following the 12th general elections held last March 2008. I’m saddened at the immaturity of the ruling coalition in focusing their funds and efforts in reoccupying the lost states. I notice so much of money is utilized to promote themselves in these areas.

There are so many instances and I guess I could go on rattling about them from ends on. I might jolt a few memories by mentioning the floods that hit the opposition held states last year during the monsoon; Barisan National was the first to respond and gloat about their contribution to the flood victims and they even got the residents to put in a few good words for them and dismay due to the lack of promptness from the opposition on TV. Talk about a sincere obligation or perhaps hidden motives? Even a child would guess it right.

I notice recently that certain ridiculous petty issues are blown out of proportion and purposefully used to create unnecessary racial and religious tensions. For what particular reason, I do wonder? Perhaps to reassure the people that their governance is still pertinent to ensure racial and religious stability in the country? My personal view from what I observe is a deplorable deliberate attempt in igniting the situation and then showing up at the end of it as the promised saviour. I find the ruling coalition to be a spoilt rotten drama queen from the yesteryears but trapped in a contemporary world with critiques. The only problem is usually people respond to constructive criticism but some don’t, perhaps they are so used to being thick skinned.

Another thing I’ve noticed is the ridiculous and bizarre accusations of sodomy on a prominent politician. What puzzles me most is not the case itself but the immense interest of the government in the case therefore hinting a hidden agenda. I would like the public to take a step back and notice the idiosyncrasies of this case. How does someone not learn from a past mistake if at all it was a proven accusation? Why would someone who was sodomized go to 3 different hospitals to be examined? What happened to that poor Myanmarese doctor at Hospital Pusrawi whose report was apparently negative? Why isn’t there an independent laboratory review of the alleged semen specimen? Could it have been a 10 year old specimen? Why does a sodomised victim keep himself from not passing motion for 2 days ?

There’s lots more to touch upon, but it is such a waste of time. As a concerned citizen I’m voicing out my opinion because I’m afraid that the current ruling coalition has wasted so much time on petty issues and are busy rebranding themselves at the expense of the poor taxpayer’s money. If they were sincere in their current programs and campaigns we would see less of this drama on TV.

Should offensive ideas be penalised?

thenutgraph.com

I AM offended by Datuk Nasir Safar's "beggars and sex-workers" remark about non-Malay Malaysians. But I would not agree with those who have called for him to be charged under the Sedition Act, detained without trial or stripped of his citizenship. I am therefore pleased by the sober voices of DAP parliamentary leader Lim Kit Siang and Ding Jo-Ann.

What's so wrong with penalising someone who makes hurtful statements in order to hurt him or her back, you ask? Well, it means that we cannot refute such statements by reason and defeat them through debate.

By seeking to penalise those who make these statements, we indirectly give them recognition, and therefore make their opinions look valid and powerful — at least to some.

There are two different issues here: that something is wrong, and that it should be banned. I strongly think it is politically immoral to question the citizenship of anyone who has acquired his or her citizenship legally. But if anyone were to question an individual's citizenship, or engage in any discussion on sensitive issues in general, should that discussion be banned?

Truth, hurt and violence

For those who seek to ban or penalise such discussions or opinions, two grounds are usually offered. Firstly, that the opinion is inherently wrong. Secondly, that it brings about negative consequences, such as damaging the reputation of others, or provoking violence.

You mean the earth's not flat?? To me, it is not valid to ban an opinion on the grounds that it is "wrong". It is wrong to believe that the earth is flat or that the sun goes around the moon, but do we need to ban such beliefs? Clearly, truth needs no protection.

The issue of truth aside, we may be tempted to punish the offender because the victim feels hurt. But then again, anyone would feel hurt when his or her interests are threatened. If the purpose of the law is to protect everyone's emotions, then its net effect would be to defend those who cry the loudest. In other words, the law would preserve the status quo.

If this is not what the law intends, then the only valid reason to ban an opinion would lie in its consequences. For example, spreading rumours during an emergency may need to be banned because it could cause chaos. Even then, whether banning is the best way to stop such rumours is questionable.

Let's say the argument is that a purveyor of offensive opinions needs to be punished should the offended parties retaliate. The implication here is even more absurd: if the retaliation were greater, would it make the holder of the opinion "more wrong"? If this were so, then the law would, in essence, consist of nothing but the politics of running amok.

But perhaps there is something in this logic. Perhaps it is valid to say that an opinion needs to be banned because it brings about violence. But it needs to be clearly demonstrated how exactly the opinion does this. For example, does an opinion incite violence from those who hold it? Or does it provoke violence from those who oppose it?

Ahmad Ismail (Courtesy of Oriental Daily) What's the consequence of Nasir's insult to non-Malay Malaysians, or Datuk Ahmad Ismail's questioning of non-Malay Malaysians' citizenship? Did either of these statements incite Malay Malaysians to attack non-Malay Malaysians? Clearly not.

Conversely, what about the response of the targets of these attacks, the non-Malay Malaysians? Were they hurt? Clearly, they were. Were they hurt enough to attack Malay Malaysians in retaliation? Clearly not.

Let's recap. There are four grounds for not penalising those who make offensive statements, such as questioning the citizenship of non-Malay Malaysians:

if the statement is inherently wrong, it can be refuted and therefore needs no legal penalty or prohibition;

the individual should not be penalised merely for hurting the feelings of the target recipients unless the purpose of the law is to protect everyone's emotional well-being;

if a legal penalty is applied to an opinion that provokes violence from those offended by it, it means the law rewards violence;

there should not be a penalty unless the statement incites violence by the opinion's supporters — in other words, if it constitutes hate speech.

Current realities

So why are non-Malay Malaysians, including Barisan Nasional politicians, so keen on baying for Nasir's blood, or Ahmad Ismail's before him?

The answer is to get even. If a non-Malay Malaysian politician were to question the special status of Malay Malaysians, you can bet that the politician would face legal penalties.

But then we'd have to analyse this situation on its own merits. Couldn't the special status of Malay Malaysians instead be defended by debate?

Would any questioning of it cause non-Malay Malaysians to attack Malay Malaysians? Highly unlikely. Would it hurt Malay Malaysians? Yes. How would we know — because they might run amok?

Bingo.

Eventually, this ends up as the single reason to penalise offensive opinions in Malaysia: that the offended parties may resort to violence.

And so, in this case, penalising such "offensive" opinions is essentially equal to providing impunity for violent responses to these opinions.

(Source: openclipart.org) Sadly, this is perhaps the most powerful idiom in Malaysian politics. Remember the numerous protests in the name of religion? Weren't they essentially threatening violence, instead of upholding freedom of expression?

Remember the infamous cow-head protest? Why were the culprits charged for sedition, and not for inciting violence?

Perchance it was simply part of a larger ploy to protect violence and shift the blame onto the "dangers" of freedom of expression. As long as freedom is demonised and violence is selectively protected, this nation will embrace fear and despise freedom.

Knowingly or not, those who call for Nasir's detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA) are legitimising violence. They are essentially excusing impunity for violence and instead attacking freedom of expression.

At the end of the day, those who threaten to use private violence, and those who advocate state-sponsored violence, are partners in crime against peace, freedom and reason. In fact, state and non-state advocates of violence have a strangely symbiotic relationship, something like the bond between al-Qaeda and former US President George W Bush.

But one would be silly to think Malaysian society can still be cowed by the politics of running amok. The burning of churches and the desecration of surau only exposed the weaknesses of the Home Ministry, not society at large. There has been no escalation of religious tensions, as some international media reports would have us think.

(Pic by fdsths / sxc.hu) In fact, there is a surprisingly accurate indicator of the growing irrelevance of the ISA: the availability of Maggi instant noodles. In the past, the mere hint of a crackdown or emergency would get homemakers stocking up on Maggi noodles. Do you personally know anyone who still does this now?

The nation is growing up. In Maggi mee we trust.

Justice is done in by the Federal Court

By Martin Jalleh

Once again justice is shamelessly sacrificed on the altar of political expediency by judicial shenanigans of the highest court in Bolehland. It is a sad day indeed to see how five “blind” men of supposed legal stature strove so hard not to see and sense what was staring at them in the Federal and Perak constitutions.

The judiciary – the very portal of justice continues to be reduced to a convenient playground for the ruling elite to legitimize their power grab, persecute their opponents and promote their political agenda, through the perversion of the rule of law by certain court jesters.

The Federal and Perak Constitutions are dead, done in by those who decided to disregard, desecrate and discard constitutional provisions to treat the doctrine of separation of powers with deference. They are rigorously and rightly interpreted only when it best suits Umno.

In stark comparison to the courageous, cogent and convincing judgment of High Court judge Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim, the cowed five-member bench caved in and conveniently decided to take the cue from the powers that be.

It comes as no surprise that their “collective written judgement is apparently riddled with contradictions”.The five judges surely qualify for retired Justice N H Chan’s classic category of “recalcitrant” and “Humpty Dumpty” judges in the Perak conundrum.

Today the reputation of the judiciary or whatever was left of it, has been sullied irreparably. In the eyes of the public the judiciary has sunk so low as to allow itself to be intimidated, its independence and impartiality interfered with, and its integrity reduced to ignominy.

The judiciary has made a decision ignoring the overwhelming implications. As toppled Perak MB Nizar Jamaluddin said: “If this decision goes on and becomes the law of the day, it will lead to an absolute monarchy (which) means the ruler can now dismiss the prime minister or the mentri besar at any time.”

The winds of change promised by the PM have turned into a stench of contemptuous compromise emanating from the corridors of the Palace of Justice. The rhetoric of the Chief Justice on a judicial renaissance and the Attorney-General on a “war against injustice” stink to high heaven.

In the halls of the Palace of Justice hangs a heavy suffocating air of hypocrisy whilst supposed men of honour with hollow character hang on to their high and lofty positions and holler, hype and harp on upholding and interpreting the constitution to the hilt as they hand out whimsical and warped judgments!

The Federal Court decision was merely the next logical step after the historic haste with which the judiciary helped Zambry back to the helm. Less than a day after the KL High Court had ruled in Nizar’s favour, and three hours after Zambry had filed for a stay of execution, a one-man Court of Appeal readily heard the latter and granted him a stay two hours later! Zambry won his appeal 11 days later!

The Federal Court ruling is the climax of the shocking and scandalous manner the judiciary has handled the Perak crisis. It has left behind a dead constitution, “bad” and “perverse” decisions, dubious declaratory orders, judgments devoid of reasoned grounds, and disgraceful double standards.
The judiciary was bursting with bias which even the blind could see!

The added fact that the “Perak cases” were made the exclusive domain of a few judges in the High Courts and especially the Appellate Courts strongly suggests a hidden hand of one who obediently followed the instructions of the same Umno elite who hijacked the Perak state government by high-handed, hideous and heinous means.

What is next fellow Perakians? Yes it was a very unfair judgment but then again life is unfair! Shall we move on and win the war in spite of having lost the battle today? Let us leave the judiciary and the those who make a mockery of our justice system to swim and drown in their own judicial vomit.

Surely the past one year had drawn the rakyat of Perak closer together and made us more daring and determined to dream and drive ourselves towards a Government we really want in Perak. Personally, I have never been to so many PAS ceremahs before in my whole life!

Indeed the Perak Constitutional crisis had forged and fostered formidable comradeship amongst the leaders and members of the parties of Pakatan Rakyat (PR) in Perak. Who can forget the kind of support the PR Aduns gave to one another as they tried to enter the State Assembly or the historic raintree State Assembly? The crisis also revealed the real friends and foes of PR.

The struggle made us Perakians realize that there were heroes amongst us – an MB with an indomitable spirit, a Speaker whose courage became an inspiration to many, a retired judge intensely committed to the law, intrepid principled politicians in the coalition and unknown individuals willing to risk involvement – surely in continued synergy we will be able to serve up a surging and unstoppable wave of change…in the next General Elections!

Mahfuz: Tidak mengejutkan

Hindraf: Please return money

Nizar: Saddest moment in the history of Malaysia

Near pandemonium at the 'Palace'

When a Malaysian is not a Malaysian

When a Malaysian is not a Malaysian (Malaysiakini)

PR-status student unable to attend school

Salhan K Ahmad (Malaysiakini)

Unlike other children, 14 year old Darshin Ponnuthurai has been unable to attend school for the past few weeks due to complications with her application to attend school, according to her adoptive parents.

“We submitted the necessary forms on Jan 11. However, the Selangor state education department did not get back to us till today,” said a worried Ponnuthurai Manickam, her adopted father.

He said that his daughter had not encountered any schooling problems thus far, but things changed when she tried to apply for a transfer to SMK Taman Tasik in Ampang.

He added that the matter has also been brought up with the Prime Minister’s Department Public Complaints Bureau, but had later been informed that it was under the deliberation of the Home Affairs Ministry.

Ponnuthurai spoke to reporters today at a press conference organised by the Human Rights Party Malaysia (HRP) in Kuala Lumpur.

He explained that Darshin holds permanent resident status although she was born in Kuala Lumpur, as they could not trace her biological father.

HRP pro-tem information chief S Jayathas urged the National Registration Department to issue Darshin an identity card within two months as she was born in this country after Sept 1962.

He argued that under the federal constitution, Darshin is a citizen and should have an identity card as she was born here.

When contacted today, SMK Taman Tasik headmaster Zaini Mohammad Zain advised the parents to follow the proper procedures set by the Home Affairs Ministry.

See Video:- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRQtWLOAvPU

Photos: HRP Nibong Tebal forum on 24/1/2010

We arrived a little bit late at about 9.00 p.m at the Vinayagar Hindu Temple, Nibong Tebal. The focus point at this forum was the demolishment of the oldest and only Indian traditional village of Kg. Buah Pala in Penang and the 28 Tamil schools in Penang that has been denied Penang state government land. And how the Towkay Lim Guan Eng uses his DCM II Indian mandore to divert attention away from Kg. Buah Pala to the Hindraf Accounts and the civil suit against the British government.

After this forum we had a private meeting with about 30 key members of the Nibong Tebal support group. This meeting ended at 12.30 a.m and we arrived home at 4.00 a.m.

P. Uthayakumar.

Photos: HRP Paya Besar,Kedah forum on 24/1/2010

HRP Paya Besar forum on 24/1/2010, Kedah M.B targetted for demolishing Ladang Batu Pekaka, Kuala Ketil Hindu cemetary.

At about 3.00 p.m we began with the Paya Besar HRP Forum at the local Mariaman Hindu Temple. About 200 people were in attendance. After P. Uthayakumar’s 180 slide show presentation on the exclusion of the ethnic minority Malaysia and the critical Indian problems highlighted by the Human Rights Party. The National Adviser Mr. N. Ganesan rounded up by asserting our forward action plan that is the Indian political empowerment strategy, which would lead to securing 15 Indian majority Parliamentary and 38 state seats. A question and answer followed and a closed door meeting with key HRP members of the Padang Serai Parliamentary Constituency.

S. JAYATHAS

HRP Information Chief

Photos: Henreta Estate, Padang Serai Muneswarar Temple Annual Festival (Thiruvila). 24/1/10

HRP team comprising P. Uthayakumar, S. Jayathas and P. Karuna arrived at about 1.00 p.m and was greeted by the temple President. After a short prayers and a brief address and on our way out we could not help but again noticieng only three lamp posts were outside the Henreta Tamil school which was located next door. Otherwise there were no street lights from the main road to the Henrata Tamil school or from this tamil school to the next door where a hundred year old said Muneswaraer temple is. This extent of discrimination even involving street lights does not happen in any part of the world, the last having taken place in apartheid South Africa in 1989.

S. JAYATHAS

HRP Information Chief

Single mum Saroja denied welfare aid

S’gor PKR Indian Exco mandore and his tuan MB mocking Indians with mock cheque

The very same mock cheque is used again and again, over and over again to mislead and cheat the Indian community by the PKR DAP and PASs’ mandore politics which they inherited from BN. Menteri Besar Tan Sri Khalid and his Indian Exco mandore has the cheek to even carry the mock cheque over their heads which even UMNO and their MIC mandores had never done in their 52 year old reign and regime had never done.

Why merely a RM 50,000.00 mock cheque?

We have received numerous complaints of this RM 50,000.00 donations never actually reaching the said Hindu temples, Tamil schools and crematoriums.

In conclusion why can’t this Tuan Selangor Menteri Besar allocate and grant land to all Hindu temples, crematorium and tamil schools in one go and permanently settle and solve this problem once and for all, rather than in a piecemeal basis. This can be done by merely a stroke of the Selangor Menteri Besar’s pen further to Section 76 of the National Land Code, where he is empowered to do so.

The primary issue and need is for tamil schools and Hindu temples to be located on their own land. For this to happen, and to enable the tamil schools to become fully government assisted, the state governments must acquire the land on which the schools are situated and hand it over to the school. In certain circumstances the school needs to be relocated to a piece of land allocated to the school. This is the only sure way to resolve the perennial problem with schools and temples. Grants and donations are a subsidiary matter. No amount of donations is going to resolve the primary issue. The question of schools and temples residing on their own land is the primary issue, and that is what HRP is concerned with. And this does not require federal rule but simply a signature to acquire the land by the menteri besar.

P. Uthayakumar

We are not shocked, only disappointed — P. Ramakrishnan

FEB 9 — The Federal Court’s unanimous decision declaring Datuk Seri Zambry Abd Kadir the rightful mentri besar of Perak does not do justice to the judiciary. It only confirmed that the Constitutional provisions mean nothing and that the decisions of our courts need not be rooted in a sense of fairness and justice.

Nearly a decade ago, we witnessed with horror how the Federal Court headed by the then Chief Justice Tun Eusoff Chin handed over a valuable piece of land in Penang belonging to one Boonsom Boonyanit to a thief and a fraudster.

Amazingly — in spite of specific provisions protecting the rights of legitimate land owners — the Federal Court, defying common sense and ignoring the views of the legal fraternity, deprived the legitimate land owner of her ownership to the property.

The language in the relevant section of the National Land Code (NLC) and the intention of the provision was so simple and obvious that it could not be misunderstood. It didn’t require the best legal minds to interpret this law. And yet this outrageous decision was delivered. This injustice was perpetrated by people qualified enough to understand the law.

When people who are entrusted with the sacred duty to safeguard justice fail us miserably and trample upon it in such a blatant manner, we have every reason to be concerned whether the right people are appointed as judges.

In 1995 the Federal Court was also guilty of another astounding decision that did no credit to its integrity or its standing as the custodian of justice. In the Insas Bhd vs Ayer Molek Rubber Co, the Federal Court once again ignored the obvious and simple provisions which, according to the Bar Council “raised very serious questions as to the administration of justice in Malaysia…”

That decision was perceived to have been manipulated. Even the composition of the Federal Court which heard and decided the appeal on 1 August 1995 was unconstitutional.

With its tainted past and discredited history, Malysians will find it hard to accept the latest decision of the Federal Court. This decision will not restore their confidence in the judiciary neither will it be accepted as a decision that reflects truth and justice.

Zambry and Co may have won their day in this court today but the people’s court will deliver its verdict that will embarrass this court and give the boot to the pretenders who have been legitimised by the so-called judgment. — www.aliran.com

* This article is the personal opinion of the writer or publication. The Malaysian Insider does not endorse the view unless specified.

* P. Ramakrishnan is president of Aliran.

Did the Federal Court contradict itself in Perak MB ruling?

By Debra Chong - The malaysian insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 9 — The Federal Court today may have denied Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin his Perak mentri besar’s post but its just-released collective written judgment is apparently riddled with contradictions, a retired judge said.

Nizar, 53, who had previously been declared the rightful mentri besar, lost the job when a three-man panel of Court of Appeal judges reversed the High Court’s decision last May 22.

The Pasir Panjang assemblyman then took it to the Federal Court and asked the Bench to address three issues based on the Perak Constitution, which, in plain English, translates to:

1. Whether the MB’s post is vacant when he did not resign; none of his peers had passed a vote of no confidence against him; he had asked the Sultan to dissolve the state assembly and start the process for fresh elections and was rejected.

2. Who decides that he has lost the confidence of the state assembly?

3. Who has the right to sack him if he refuses to resign?

The five apex court judges who replied were Tan Sri Alauddin Mohd Sheriff, Tan Sri Arifin Zakaria, Datuk Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin, Datuk Wira Ghazali Mohd Yusoff and Datuk Abdull Hamid Embong.

In declaring Datuk Seri Zambry Abd Kadir the rightful Perak MB, the coram summarised their reply, found at the end of 40-pages, as follows:

• Yes. (To quote: “The answer to the first question will be in the affirmative;)

• Yes. (“As for the second question, our answer is that under Article XVI(6) the question of confidence in the MB may be determined by means other than a vote of no-confidence in the LA;”)

• Yes. (“As for the third question our answer is that if the MB refuses to tender the resignation of the Executive Council under Article XVI(6) the MB and the Executive Council members are deemed to have vacated their respective offices.”)

But a closer look at the full judgment, made available to reporters a few hours after the decision was pronounced in Putrajaya, showed several seemingly contradicting statements, prompting a former judge to question the soundness of the top court’s reasoning in one of the most critical cases to affect the highest law of the land — the constitution.

Datuk Chan Nyarn Hoi was puzzled at a certain section that had earlier been read out in open court by the third highest-ranking judge in the country, Chief Judge of Malaya Arifin.

“However, we would add that this is by no means the end of the matter, as it is always open to the appellant [Nizar] to bring a vote of no confidence against the respondent [Zambry] in the LA [Legislative Assembly] or make a representation to HRH [His Royal Highness the Sultan of Perak] at any time if he thinks that the respondent does not enjoy the support of the majority of the members of the LA,” it said.

To the retired Court of Appeal judge, more popularly known as NH Chan, that particular section “sounds strange”.

“On the face of it, it sounds like they are contradicting themselves, isn’t it?” the 74-year-old asked The Malaysian Insider over the phone.

“They say [Nizar] can take a vote of no confidence now, but why couldn’t they do it earlier?” he wondered.

“And if it’s really contradicting, then the whole judgment is rubbish,” he added.

Chan, who now lives in Ipoh, refrained from commenting further until he had read through the full written judgment.