Fatal flaw in the RM180 million allocation to Indians

By Jeyaseelen Anthony

Recently our Prime Minister had announced an allocation of RM180 million to uplift the economic standing of the Indian community.

It was indeed a major announcement and a big step forward on the part of the government to help the Indian community. However in practice whether this allocation will help Indians in the long run is doubtful.

Malaysia is still plagued by discriminatory policies which favour the majority bumiputera races. Announcing an allocation is rather easy but making the money usable for business or social purposes is another.

Take for example a real incident highlighted by Senator Dr S Ramakrishnan recently and I quote:

"One of my cousins wanted to import goats from Myanmar sometime in 2006. When he went to the Customs and Agriculture department for permits to import, he was told that he can only import under a bumiputera name.

"My cousin then went looking for a trusted bumiputra partner to import goats or at least lend his name for that purpose and he managed to find one. He imported goats and sold them in Malaysia.

"After the first import the bumiputera partner went to Myanmar and started importing himself. My cousin lost a reliable source of supply and income.

"This is how many small time Indian businessmen incur losses and face difficulty in doing business in Malaysia. My cousin was so frustrated that he brought many friends to the Hindraf rally on 25th November 2007.

"He also has buses transporting workers. He has to get a bumiputera to get a permit and pay a monthly fee to him for doing nothing. No other country in the world has this kind of cunning and malicious restrictions on its own citizens to do business."

Article 153: Intent, spirit and unfair implementation

Many non -bumiputeras face this problem. All this is done in the name of Article 153 of the Federal Constitution which provides for preferential treatment in favour of the bumiputera. Let's take a look at what Article 153 is all about.

It is implicit in Article 153(1) that "It shall be the responsibility of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (YDPA) to safeguard the special position of the Malays and the natives of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interest of other communities".

To set the record straight, the phrase ‘legitimate interest of other communities' means that it does not allow simply any kind of preferential treatment in favour of the ‘bumiputera'.

It is not a ‘blank cheque' but it merely confers limited powers on the government and Parliament, pursuant to Article 153, to derogate from the principle of equality and equal protection of the law.

The implementation of Article 153 has often been the bone of contention as many have argued that its implementation has been at expense of the other races in Malaysia.

For example, although Article 153 provides for quotas only for the issuance permits and licenses to the bumiputera, however, even government commercial contracts have been awarded solely to bumiputera companies, which is clearly not sanctioned under the Federal Constitution.

Even government linked companies (GLCs) and statutory bodies assign their work solely to bumiputera companies and some major banks assign their legal work only to bumiputera legal firms.

GLCs and local authority procurement and infrastructure building contracts are mostly given to bumiputera companies.

For example, local authority contracts for infrastructure building are solely given to Class F (not to forget the other types licenses like Class A etc under the purview of the Finance Ministry) licensed contractors, which is a type of license only given to bumiputera contractors although nothing in Article 153 of the Federal Constitution permits Parliament to restrict business and trade solely to bumiputeras for the purpose of reservation of quotas.

The issuance of vehicle AP's solely to the bumiputera is another example of a policy and system that is unconstitutional as it is against Article 153.

I now question how is the RM180 million allocation useful to the Indian community in view of these restrictions?

Allow me to digress here: The majority of employees at the GLCs and some major banks are Malay bumiputeras although the Federal Constitution only provides for reservation of quotas in the public service.

Ethnic quotas are imposed on private companies by government agencies and licensing is used as a way to get private companies to observe bumiputera quotas, a policy which is clearly against the Federal Constitution as Article 153 only provides for reservation of quotas in the public service.

Although Article 136 of the Federal Constitution provides for impartiality in the public sector, there have been complaints by the non-bumiputeras in the various government departments that they have been deprived from getting promotions or have been sidelined in favour of bumiputera candidates.

This explains why the non-bumiputeras shy away from seeking employment in the government sector and unfortunately it also explains the current brain drain that is currently plaguing our country.

These are several examples where the implementation of affirmative action policies has clearly gone beyond the limits of Article 153 of the Federal Constitution and has gone wrong.

The problem that is quite apparent here is that although the Yang Dipertuan Agong, after acting on advice of the Cabinet, is bound to give binding directions to the relevant authorities to ensure the reservation of quotas in the public sector, scholarships and permits or licenses in favour of the bumiputera, no one knows for certain what the percentage of the quotas are.

Is it 50%, 70% or 95% in favour of the bumiputera?

It is surprising to note that the Prime Minister had announced this RM180 million allocation without even looking at the realities on the ground.

I believe that the weaknesses of the government's policies must be repaired first before announcing any allocations to uplift any community.

With the type of restrictions and limitations pervading the non-bumiputera communities under the guise of Article 153 of the Federal Constitution, it would not be difficult to realize that the allocation given to the Indian community for business purposes will be futile.

Deterioration in race relations: What is the cause?

It cannot be denied that the improper and arbitrary application of affirmative action policies as provided under Article 153 has contributed significantly to the deteriorating race relations in Malaysia.

The deprivation of equal opportunities has caused racial tensions to run high in recent years. Therefore in order to improve race relations between the bumiputera and the non-bumiputera in Malaysia there should be legislative intervention.

The number of quotas and restrictions and qualifications in favour of the bumiputera are not well defined or specified under the Federal Constitution.

This loophole has led to the unfair, unbalanced and unreasonable implementation of Article 153. A race relations law must be introduced in Malaysia in order to remedy the imbalances and unfairness that has led to discrimination.

The intention and purpose of Article 153(1) when read as whole clearly provide for a balance between two competing interests, namely the protection of the special position of the bumiputera and at the same time safeguarding the legitimate interest of other communities as well.

However ambiguity arises when one realizes that the scope and meaning of the words "legitimate interest of the other communities" are not defined in the Federal Constitution.

Even the courts have not decided on this issue as the scope and ambit of provisions like Article 153 has not been litigated before in Malaysia, in the way it has been done in the USA and India. This lacuna in the Federal Constitution poses a problem to good race relations in Malaysia.

This is where I believe that an effective and well drafted Race Relations Act is needed.

Reasons for enacting race relations law

A comprehensive race relations law will provide the balance that the original drafters of the Federal Constitution had intended when they inserted the words "legitimate interest of the other communities" into Article 153 of the Federal Constitution.

A law on race relations would help prevent discrimination and promote equality in all spheres of life which affect Malaysians from all the different races.

There are two sides of the coin in support of this argument. On the one side, the bumiputera are protected from discrimination and at the same time their special position under the Federal Constitution is also preserved.

On the other, the non-bumiputera are also protected against discrimination in the spirit of protecting the legitimate interest of other communities as provided under Article 153.

A race relations law will not affect the special position of the bumiputera as widely believed by many i.e. a reasonable reservation of quotas can still be maintained in the areas specified under the Federal Constitution but if there are areas where a particular racial group is under represented in a particular trade or work area then the governing authority on race relations or the minister tasked to manage and regulate race relations under a race relations legislation will be empowered take remedial actions to solve the problem.

The Race Relations Act 1976 and the Race Relations Amendment Act 2000 (now replaced by the Equality Act 2010) in the UK, for example provides for such measures.

A Race Relations Commission can be created under the Act to implement the provisions of the Act and ensure the enforcement of the Act.

In fact the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong under Article 153 is bound to act on the advice of the Cabinet or a Minister acting under the authority of the Cabinet.

As such if the cabinet or the minister finds that there is indeed under representation of a particular racial group in a particular vocation or trade or sector and decides to take remedial actions, the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong is bound to act on that advice.

The current system clearly shows that the bumiputeras are over represented in many areas of employment in the public sector, in the government and the local authorities, in government and local authority procurement and in the public universities, etc.

This over representation has created a perception that the government is imposing exorbitant and unreasonable reservation of quotas in the areas mentioned in the Federal Constitution.

Surely, this is not what the Reid Commission had intended. In fact it is clear from the wordings of Article 153(1) that the drafters of the Federal Constitution did not envisage a system where reverse discrimination would be the order of the day.

The time has indeed arrived to see whether implementing quotas under affirmative action provisions are the way to go in light of the fact that globalisation has created a more competitive world where meritocracy is the order of the day, as compared to the time when the Federal Constitution was drafted in 1957 in particular Article 153.

Affirmative action should not be cause for economic stagnation. In fact the Reid Commission had intended that the communal-based policies would be eventually eradicated from the country's political and economic spheres.

Malaysia aspires to become a high income nation and to achieve this status we need to do away with raced-based policies that are currently plaguing our system.

The only way to create a conducive and market friendly business environment and to get the private sector to be the catalyst for the creation of a high income nation is to ultimately eliminate race based policies in all sectors of business and society.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Jeyaseelen Anthony is an advocate and solicitor (non-practicing) and was also a member of the Bar Council Law Reform Committee. This article first appeared in Centre for Policy Initiatives( CPI).

No cop hurt during Bersih rally, Suhakam inquiry told

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 13 — No policeman was injured in the chaotic April 28 rally for free elections here, contrary to reports that officers were wounded by demonstrators and which were allegedly used to encourage reprisals by the force, the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) inquiry heard today.

Insp Norazmee Mohamed, from the Dang Wangi police station here, said he was not aware of any police officer being injured in clashes that had sprouted in several spots leading to Dataran Merdeka and the venue of the rally organised by electoral reform group Bersih.

“I was not informed of any injuries sustained by my officers,” he told a three-man panel led by Suhakam vice-chairman Datuk Dr Khaw Lake Tee (picture).

“If indeed an officer was injured, it is the standard operating procedure (SOP) to inform me but I did not receive any information,” he said.

Norazmee was the second person called to testify today, after another police officer, ASP Ahamad Jais Ujang.

Norazmee said he had been briefed earlier in the day on April 28 by Ahamad, who was his superior, and told to form a human barricade around Dataran Merdeka.

“I was there to monitor 300 officers under my control. We received orders to form a human barricade outside Dataran Merdeka.

“We were told to stand and guard the barricade,” he said.

Norazmee told the panel the crowd began dismantling the barbed wire barricade at 1pm, forcing policemen to retreat and take cover behind a Federal Reserve Unit (FRU) truck.

“The crowd marched in and threw stones and bottles at us. They also uttered profanities.

“I ordered my men to retreat, fearing for their safety,” he added.

The inspector said he did not make any arrests that day.

When questioned by Bar Council lawyers, he said the situation at Dataran Merdeka would have been more chaotic if the FRU did not fire tear gas.

“That was the only thing we had to make the crowd disperse,” he said.

Ahamad, who was in charge of keeping demonstrators from entering the blocked-off Dataran Merdeka, testified earlier that he had been informed that two officers had been injured by demonstrators.

“My OCPD told me in a briefing that a PEMANDU officer and a traffic policeman were also injured when the police made arrests during the rally,” said Ahamad.

He did not disclose the identities of the injured or offer further information on the PEMANDU official, but was likely referring to a representative from the government’s Performance and Delivery Unit, the efficiency agency under the Prime Minister’s Department.

Ahamad, who heads the police’s religious and counselling unit, said he was only informed of the incident from his superior officer after he went back to the Police Training Centre (Pulapol) in Jalan Semarak.

Ahamad also told the inquiry that he directed the policemen under his charge against being violent or reacting emotionally towards the crowd and to stay calm, even if they were provoked.

“My orders were clear. I told all my 1,000 officers not to react in any unruly manner.

“I also told them not to make any arrests, if possible,” he said.

Despite his orders, Ahamad said a few officers had arrested several people after the crowd broke through a barbed-wire barricade and entered Dataran Merdeka. He noted that the time then was about 3pm.

“I saw an officer arresting a man wearing a yellow T-shirt. I asked him who gave him orders to make arrests but my officer kept mum,” he said.

“The arrests may have happened when my officers felt things were getting out of control and felt they should make arrests,” he said.

He added that he then took those detained to Pulapol for further action.

Ahamad said he saw many of the detainees were injured and bleeding.

“My officers should not have used violence on the crowd. They were ordered to use minimal violence to control them,” he said.

Ahamad did not submit any reports or videos of his operations that day as he was unsure if it was needed.

“I was merely looking out for the well-being of my officers. I did not see anything wrong happen that day, except for incidents where my officers injured a few detainees.

“Arresting people was not my job, so I did not submit any reports to the OCPD,” he said.

However, Ahamad said he believed the perpetrators who tore down the barricade outside Dataran Merdeka had been arrested.

He also added he has no knowledge of any journalist being arrested that day.

The inquiry continues on August 15.

Anwar gives proof of Umno’s hand in Utusan

In his RM50 million defamation suit against Utusan, PKR leader Anwar Ibrahim provides the court with Utusan's 2010 annual report.

KUALA LUMPUR: PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim revealed today that Umno owned 49.77 % of Utusan Malaysia’s shares, adding that this proved that the newspaper was owned by the party.

Anwar told the High Court that based on Utusan’s 2010 annual report, Umno owned some RM55 million worth of shares and therefore had a say in the newspaper’s direction.

“All parties that have an interest in a company control more than 33% of its shares. The names of the Utusan directors were all determined by Umno.

“All of this is enough to prove that Umno has full control over Utusan,” he said.

In January, Anwar had filed a RM50 million suit against Utusan and its editor-in-chief Abdul Aziz Ishak for allegedly implying that he wanted to legalise homosexuality.

The Utusan front page article, published on Jan 15, referred to a BBC report and alleged that Anwar had said the laws on homosexuality in Malaysia were “archaic” and “not relevant”.

The articles were titled “Tolak Anwar-Hassan” (Reject Anwar-Hassan) and “Parasit ancam PAS, Anwar mesti ditolak” (PAS threatened by parasites, Anwar must be rejected).

Anwar had said the defendants had falsely and maliciously printed words defamatory of him, and claimed that this was due to the fact that the broadsheet was Umno-owned.

He was then asked to furnish proof of this by Utusan’s legal counsel, Firoz Hussein.

Today, Firoz challenged Anwar by pointing out that at 49.77%, Umno did not own the majority of Utusan’s shares and was not the owner of the daily.

“If the lawyer is asking that, this means he does not understand that ownership of a company means having the control to guide the company,” Anwar responded.

“Utusan is a public-listed company, so not all shareholders must be Umno members. But there is one major controller, which is Umno,” he added.

Anwar also claimed that many of the other shareholders in the annual report were linked to Umno, citing Hussein Nordin Sdn Bhd as proof.

However, he did not bring any evidence to back up his claim, pointing out that he had only been requested to bring proof of Umno’s links to Utusan.

“Umno owns Utusan, and this is the first time in history someone has denied it,” Anwar joked.

‘PM’s rep on Utusan’s board’

Anwar also told the court that Tengku Sariffuddin Tengku Ahmad, who is on Utusan’s board of directors, was a representative of Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak.

“He is the prime minister’s media and press official. He has been given important responsibilities such as signing the Malaysian government’s agreement with APCO Washington,” he told the court.

“Usually such a task is the responsibility of the Finance Ministry. Yet Sariffuddin was the one to sign it, and he sits on Utusan’s board of directors,” said Anwar.

Anwar was represented by N Surendran, Latheefa Koya and Murnie Hidayah Anuar. Utusan was also represented by Hafarizam Harun and Wan Azmir Wan Majid.

High Court judge VT Singham presided over the case.

‘Wrong to spy on wrongdoers’

Anwar also defended his statement to BBC that current laws were “archaic” and needed to be reviewed.

Citing three texts by Islamic scholars Dr Yusuf Qardawi and Al Mawardi, Anwar said that it was wrong for public officers to interfere in people’s private domain.

“With regard to acts that are haram [forbidden], the public officer cannot try to spy [on the people] or expose the people’s wrongdoings,” he said.

However, he agreed with Firoz that the texts stated there were exceptions to this ruling if an “honest eyewitness” reported the acts of transgression to the public officer.

Also read:

Female workers refused leave to appeal

The court rules that the issue of gender has been addressed.

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court here today refused an application of leave to appeal by eight former female workers who claimed gender discrimination on their retirement age.

Noting that the government had addressed the issue of gender in view of the recently passed Bill on the minimum retirement age for the private sector, Court of Appeal president Md Raus Shariff, who chaired a five-member panel, said, “As far as we are concerned, the government has taken steps and the issue of gender has been addressed.”

He also noted that the applicants, who were former employees of Guppy Plastic Industries Sdn Bhd, had failed to meet the requirements under Section 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964.

The panel, which also comprised Chief Judge of Malaya Zulkefli Ahmad Makinudin, Federal Court judge Suriyadi Halim Omar, Ahmad Ma’arop and Jeffrey Tan Kok Wha unanimously dismissed the group’s application.

The eight – Gan Soh Eng, 61, M.Janama, 64, I Iyyamah, 65, V Pereyarka, 64, S Danalachumy, 63, S Tolasiamah, 63, P Marri, 65, and S Letchmi, 62 – had sought leave to appeal a March 21 Court of Appeal decision which did not favour them.

The Court of Appeal had upheld a High Court decision allowing Guppy Plastic Industries a judicial review to quash an Industrial Court’s decision that the women were dismissed without just cause or excuse.

The eight women, who were employed as production operators, cleaners and general workers by Guppy Plastic Industries, claimed they were forced to retire in June 2001 after the company enforced a rule stipulating 50 and 55 as the retirement ages for female and male employees respectively.

The women were represented by lawyer Ragunath Kesavan, who had earlier contended that there were two legal issues concerning Article 8 of the Federal Constitution and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), which required the determination of the Federal Court.

Counsel Wong Keat Ching, who appeared for the company, however, submitted that the legal questions posed were academic in view of the Bill passed by Parliament in June this year, stating that the retirement age was 60 years for all private sector employees.

She added that at the material time, there was no law or ministerial guideline to set the retirement age and her client had adopted the policy used by other plastic companies.

Wong said with the newly passed Bill, the collective agreements of the company would now change.

Bernama

PTPTN loans: RM70.2m allocated to students

The government committed in providing education funding to all Malaysians, says the corporation

TEMERLOH: The National Higher Education Fund Corporation (PTPTN) has allocated RM70.2 million in Sponsorship Advanced Payment (WPP) to 46,824 students for the September intake into public and private higher learning institutions, said its chairman, Ismail Mohamad Said.

He said the WPP of RM1,500 per student would allow them to make various payments, thus reducing their burden, adding that up till July 31, PTPTN had distributed RM856.9 million in WPP to 583,634 students.

“Up till July, PTPTN had given out loans totalling more than RM44 billion to 1.94 million students to further their studies locally and abroad,” he told reporters at the breaking of fast gathering in Kampung Peragap Kerdau, here yesterday.

He said the allocation increased every year following the large number of students who managed to get places for further studies.

According to him, the allocation proved that the government was committed in providing education funding to all Malaysians regardless of race or political affiliation.

Bernama

Uthayakumar’s bail forfeited

For failing to turn up in court on time, the Hindraf leader had to cough up a new RM15,000 bail today after the sessions court hearing his sedition trial forfeited RM7,000 from his previous bail amount

PETALING JAYA: The Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court which is hearing the sedition trial of P Uthayakumar today forfeited RM7,000 of the Hindraf leader’s RM10,000 bail for failing to turn up at a previous hearing.

Judge Ahmad Zamzani Mohd Zain today also imposed a new bail of RM15,000 upon Uthayakumar, who had to be detained until he could pay up the bail amount.

Complaining about this new turn of events to FMT, Uthayakumar said that this was “unprecedented” move by the court that “does not show that justice is being done”.

Uthayakumar said that on the July 27 hearing, in which he turned up one hour and 10 minutes late, the court had even issued a warrant of arrest against him (it was subsequently cancelled).

“I turned up late because I was waiting for a High Court judge to obtain an interim stay on the proceedings that day. This was unheard of; normally when you are held up by a higher court, the lower court should wait for you,” he said.

According to Uthayakumar, he made four applications today in his attempt to defend himself against the sedition charge.

“First, I submitted that there is double jeopardy in this case as I was already detained two days later under the Internal Security Act [ISA] when I was charged with sedition in 2007. I have already been punished for 17 months. It overlapped,” he said.

Uthayakumar said that he also made applications to say that the charge against him was “groundless” as there are elements, such as the existence of the website where he allegedly wrote the seditious article, that cannot be proven.

He had also submitted that the charge against him was a “politically motivated charge” and a “malicious prosecution”.

The judge, according to Uthayakumar, had dismissed all four applications. He he said that he will be appealing to the High Court.

‘Withdraw the charge’

Uthayakumar, whose case is still ongoing today and will be heard again on Sept 18, is represented by lawyer M Manoharan while deputy public prosecutor Noorin Badaruddin prosecuted.

The 49-year-old former ISA detainee was charged in the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court on Dec 11, 2007, with publishing a seditious letter on the “Police Watch Malaysia” website, dated Nov 15, 2007, addressed to then prime minister of Britain, Gordon Brown.

Meanwhile, Uthayakumar is also seeking a review of the ruling of the Federal Court which had validated his sedition charge, in view of the recent announcement made by Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak to repeal the Sedition Act 1948.

In his notice of motion filed last week, Uthayakumar had argued that there were special circumstances for the Federal Court to review the June 25 decision to dismiss Uthayakumar’s appeal and rule that the Sedition Act was a valid Act.

Previously, the Kuala Lumpur High Court rejected Uthayakumar’s application to declare the Sedition Act unconstitutional. He also lost both his appeals at the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court.

Uthayakumar said today: “If the government is announcing the abolishing of the death penalty, you can’t be sending people to the gallows. Similarly, in the spirit of Najib’s recent announcement, the charge against me ought to be withdrawn,” he said.

What are the Islamic authorities up to?

IN 2011, Islamic authorities raided a church suspected of proselytising to Muslims. In 2012, it was Borders and ZI Publications (ZIP), over Irshad Manji’s book Allah, Liberty and Love. These institutions are non-Muslim entities. Yet, because Islam or Muslims were somehow involved, this seemed to give licence to religious authorities to enter non-Muslim premises, conduct searches, confiscate items, carry out interviews and charge individuals.
It would seem that over the past years, the powers of the Islamic religious authorities have inexorably expanded. At the same time, non-Muslims and non-Muslim organisations, including the civil court, are often told they cannot intervene in matters pertaining to Islam.
But does the law give Islamic authorities an automatic say the moment Islam or Muslims are involved? Does only the syariah court have jurisdiction over Islamic matters?
Islam and syariah courts
To answer this question, let’s look at the Federal Constitution, the supreme law of the land, and judgements by the Federal Court, the highest court of the land.
The constitution tells us that not all matters relating to Islam fall under the syariah court’s jurisdiction. The constitution gives states the power to make laws on Islamic law, and personal and family law of persons professing the religion of Islam. The constitution’s ninth schedule spells out what this means by listing out matters such as succession, marriage, divorce and zakat. States also have the power to set up syariah courts to adjudicate on these laws.
But the constitution doesn’t give syariah courts exclusive jurisdiction over all Islamic matters. It only gives syariah courts powers to determine those matters spelt out in the ninth schedule, which states have legislated upon.
This was made clear in the 2007 Federal Court decision of Abdul Kahar Ahmad v Kerajaan Negeri Selangor. The Federal Court was petitioned to declare several state enactments pertaining to Islamic law invalid for being unconstitutional. The Majlis Agama Islam Selangor objected, stating this was a question for the Syariah Court, not the Federal Court.
Tun Abdul Hamid Mohamad, who was Chief Justice then, firmly rejected this. He said that nowhere in the constitution did it state that interpreting the constitution was something within the syariah courts’ jurisdiction. Conversely, the constitution does give the Federal Court exclusive power to determine whether any law is invalid, including laws pertaining to Islam.
The Majlis Agama had cited Article 121(1A), which states that civil courts will not have jurisdiction over matters within the syariah court’s jurisdiction. The Chief Justice said yes, that was correct. But if the syariah court didn’t have jurisdiction in the first place, as was the case in Abdul Kahar Ahmad v Kerajaan Negeri Selangor, then that article could not apply. Article 121(1A) was never meant to oust the civil court’s jurisdiction in existing areas in favour of the syariah court.

The next point to consider is that just because something is deemed un-Islamic doesn’t automatically make it illegal. The constitution stipulates that the state needs to make a law calling something an offence against Islamic precepts before it can be deemed illegal. And that offence needs to be within the state’s powers under the ninth schedule.
Hence, the state, for example, cannot make laws that stipulate that stealing or murder is an offence under Islamic precepts. Undoubtedly, stealing and murder are sinful in Islam and other major religions. But under our constitution, such crimes are for Parliament to legislate, not the states. This is why both Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat politicians keep insisting that implementing hudud law would be unconstitutional.
Similarly, even though a Sisters in Islam-published book infringed Jabatan Kemajuan Islam Malaysia (Jakim) guidelines, that didn’t make it illegal. And that also didn’t mean the Home Ministry could ban the book, Muslim Women and the Challenges of Islamic Extremism, for being prejudicial to public order. Indeed, this was the High Court’s decision on 25 Jan 2010, which was upheld by the Court of Appeal on 27 July 2012.
The High Court lifted the ban despite Jakim’s view that the book should be prohibited because it would “confuse” Muslims, particularly Muslim women. Jakim is, of course, entitled to its view and perfectly entitled to discourage Muslims from reading the book. But our constitution doesn’t require the government to follow Jakim’s lead and make the book illegal. If the government wants to declare something illegal, it still needs to base it on established laws and procedures, not solely on the fact that it is deemed “confusing” or un-Islamic by one body.
Syariah offences and non-Muslims
Even if religious authorities deem that a syariah enactment has been broken, they cannot act against non-Muslims. The Federal Constitution couldn’t be clearer on this. States may enact laws to set up syariah courts

which shall have jurisdiction only over persons professing the religion of Islam.

The Syariah Criminal Offences (Federal Territories) Act 1997, enacted under the ninth schedule, is equally clear. Article 1(2) states that the act shall

apply only … to persons professing the religion of Islam.

Other state enactments establishing syariah criminal offences have similar provisions.
Yet, we now see Islamic authorities questioning non-Muslims and even summoning them to their offices for further interrogation. This is what the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais) did over the Manji book ban.
According to publisher ZI Publications (ZIP), after the raid on ZIP’s office, between 20 and 30 Jais officers raided its printing company, which is predominantly run by non-Muslims. Jais officers asked to go through the printers’ office documents and demanded that a senior staff, a non-Muslim, go to the Jais office for questioning. In early August, Jais continued to harass non-Muslims by summoning two non-Muslim ZIP employees for questioning at the Jais office.
Merdeka
Then there are articles 5 to 12 of the constitution, which protect citizens’ fundamental liberties. They protect, among others, citizens’ right to life, right to a fair trial and the right to be treated equally before the law regardless of religion, race or gender. Nothing in the constitution says that syariah criminal offences enacted by the states may depart from these fundamental liberties.
So, when legislating syariah offences, state assemblies should bear in mind that the offences must abide by these constitutional provisions, which were put in place at independence, to ensure that Muslim citizens’ fundamental liberties are respected.
Clearly, Malaysia is not as Islamic as we could be, according to some. If it were, there wouldn’t be so much to debate about on the Islamic state aspirations of PAS or Umno. But our founding leaders conceived of a Malaya and Malaysia that was secular, in which Islam is acknowledged as the federation’s religion, but with clear demarcations of what can be legislated and when exactly citizens can be affected by Islamic laws.
Increasingly, it seems that those in power want a state where religious authorities and syariah courts can intervene the moment an Islamic matter or a Muslim is involved. But that’s not the state our Muslim and non-Muslim founding leaders agreed to, as the constitution reveals.
And unless our constitution is changed, religious authorities have no business unilaterally expanding their scope of powers.

PLUS Introduces Hari Raya Travel Schedule

PETALING JAYA, Aug 13 (Bernama) -- PLUS Expressways Bhd (PLUS) uneviled its time travel advisory (TTA) to ensure smooth traffic flow on its expressways in conjunction with the upcoming Aidilfitri and Merdeka Day celebrations.

PLUS Chief Operating Officer Mohammad Fuad Khusairi said the move was to help its road users plan their travel throughout this coming festive season. "PLUS expects traffic on the North-South Highways to increase by 30 per cent to 1.4 million vehicles a day compared to 1.1 million vehicles on normal days," he told a media conference, here Monday.

Mohammad Fuad said PLUS was retaining the previous travel schedule for this year by dividing vehicles with registration plate numbers ending with odd or even numbers on the Johore Causeway, Second Link Expressway and the Penang Bridge.

"For vehicles with odd plate numbers, motorists are advised to use those bridges at odd hours, such as 9 am, 1 pm and 7 pm. For vehicles with even plate numbers, the suggested travel time is even hours, such as 10 am, 2 pm and 8 pm during this festive season," he said.

Those from Klang Valley heading north on Friday (Aug 17) and Saturday (Aug 18) or on Aug 30 and 31 are advised to start their journey as follows:

* Before noon for Perlis, Kedah and Penang;

* Between noon and 3 pm for Taiping, Kuala Kangsar and Changkat Jering;

* Between 3 pm and 6 pm for Ipoh, Simpang Pulai and Gopeng;

* After 6 pm for Tapah, Bidor, Sungkai, Slim River and Tanjung Malim.

The TTA for those head south, the proposed schedule for Johor is as follows:

* Before noon for Johor (via Skudai, North Senai, Ayer Hitam, Yong Peng and Tangkak); * Between noon and 3 pm for Melaka via Ayer Keroh; * Between 3 pm and 6 pm for Tampin and Alor Gajah via Simpang Ampat;

* After 6 pm for Senawang, Port Dickson and Seremban.

Mohammad Fuad said PLUS was also introducing a return travel schedule after the Aidilfitri celebration, beginning Aug 21 to 26 and Sept 1 and 2.

"From the North and South Highway, Klang Valley users are advised to enter expressways before noon or after 6 pm. For others, who do not travel through the Klang Valley, it is between noon and 6 pm," he said.

"About 3,000 PLUS staff and 432 members of the police, the Civil Defence Department, St John Ambulance and Red Crescent Society will be placed at 12 strategic locations along the expressways, while 153 PLUSRonda team personnel will be on patrol 24 hours, besides more than 1,500 toll counters opened to facilitate payment of toll," he said.

The public can obtain the latest traffic information from PLUS through the toll-free PLUSLine at 1800-88-0000 and Twitter site, www.twitter.com/plustrafik.

Besides the TTA, PLUS is also providing a 30 per cent toll rebate on Aug 15, 16, 22, 23 and 31 to encourage road users to start their journey at off-peak hours and switch to electronic payment systems (Touch n Go, Plus Miles).

SJK (T) Sungai Bakap memerlukan tanah dan bangunan baru

By Satish Kumar
SJK(T) Sungai Bakap telah ditubuhkan pada tahun 1946 diatas tanah seluas 0.5 ekar milik Kee Toh Euah.
Sekolah yang berusia 66 tahun ini masih lagi sedang beroperasi sebagai sekolah bantuan modal dengan kemudahan-kemudahan yang tidak menepati standard Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia.
Tambahan pula, isu keselamatan warga SJK(T) Sg Bakap terancam kerana lokasinya di penjuru selekoh yang tajam yang menjadi laluan utama bagi kenderaan-kenderaan berat seperti lori dan traktor yang melombong pasir di tempat berhampiran.
Sejak beberapa tahun kebelakangan ini masalah anai-anai menyebabkan bumbung sekolah hampir runtuh dan situasi ini membimbangkan seluruh warga sekolah dan ibu-bapa.
Dalam satu sidang media baru-baru ini, Pengerusi PIBG SJK(T) Sg Bakap Mohan Sinniah, menegaskan bahawa perhatian yang serius harus diberi oleh pihah kerajaan persekutuan dan negeri serta Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia untuk menangani masalah yang dihadapi oleh sekolah ini dengan serta merta.
Menurut beliau masa depan murid-murid tidak terjamin dan PIBG tidak lagi boleh berkompromi dengan janji-janji manis yang diberikan oleh ahli-ahli politik.
“Ramai ibu-bapa dari masyarakat India mula menghantar anak-anak mereka ke sekolah kebangsaan kerana kekurangan kemudahan asas di sekolah Tamil dan ini merupakan satu situasi yang menyedihkan kami.
Apa yang kami harapkan adalah penyelesaian yang mutlak dan bukannya yang sementara” tegas beliau.

Pengerusi LPS Dr Shanker Kumar mengeluh dengan sikap Jabatan Pelajaran Negeri yang tidak membimbing pihak sekolah dengan cara profesional untuk memohon tanah baru untuk sekolah. Jabatan-jabatan kerajaan menuding jari pihak lain dan kami tidak mengetahui prosedur yang lengkap untuk memohon tanah dan bangunan baru untuk sekolah kami.
“Prestasi sekolah tentunya akan bertambah baik jika kemudahan sekolah diperbaiki” tegas beliau.
Beliau meminta agar satu rombongan khas dari Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia melawat sekolah mereka dalam masa yang terdekat untuk melihat sendiri keadaan sekolah dan mengambil tindakan yang sewajarnya.
Menurut beliau Pihak LPS sentiasa bersedia untuk bekerjasama dengan pihak kementerian untuk memastikan masa depan anak-anak murid terjamin.
Selain daripada itu, SJKT Sg Bakap tidak mempunyai kemudahan-kemudahan asas seperti kantin, tapak perhimpunan, pejabat dan bilik guru yang kondusif, bilik darjah yang luas dan padang yang sesuai.
Masalah tangki najis yang melimpah seringkali membawa masalah kesihatan kepada murid-murid. Semak-samun yang berhimpun di kawasan sekeliling sekolah seringkali mengundang binatang-binatang liar seperti ular dan serangga-serangga beracun memasuki bilik-bilik darjah.
Semak samun ini juga menjadi sarang penagih dadah dan pencuri yang seringkali memecah masuk ke dalam kawasan sekolah untuk mencuri barang-barang milik sekolah.
Pihak PIBG dan LPS SJK (T) Sg Bakap mengharapkan bahawa tanah alternatif yang dikenalpasti di kawasan Sungai Bakap yang milik kerajaan persekutuan diperuntukkan kepada sekolah mereka, agar bangunan baru dengan kemudahan-kemudahan asas mampu menjana modal insan yang cemerlang pada masa depan.
Mampukah rungutan warga SJK(T) Sungai Bakap didengar dan diberi penyelesaian yang mutlak oleh kerajaan? Kita tunggu dan lihat!

Ladang Bukit Jalil workers waiting for the final score

COMMENT It is exactly one month since the Ladang Bukit Jalil committee met the prime minister. Many people who saw the news of the committee finally having a date with the PM would have concluded that the issue of Ladang Bukit Jalil estate workers is over and done with. There was also the feeling that if the PM met them, definitely it would not be to disappoint them.

Now exactly one month later, the issue of Ladang Bukit Jalil is still not resolved. The PM asked for some time to study the issue. When the office of the powerful PM himself asks for more time to study the issue, it seems the problem in hand is a complex one.

The meeting with the PM did not just come so easily. The Bukit Jalil workers camped outside the PM’s office until they got an appointment. After spending 30 hours, they finally got news that the PM will give an appointment to meet them. It was a climax of their long struggle.

Not taking away credit from Najib, the PM did actually meet them (janji ditepati) though there was initially the speculation that he will only promise but not meet them. A meeting was held at the estate on the eve of the PM’s meeting. The feedback from the people at the meeting was that they were all very hopeful that the issue will be finally resolved.

Politically, the Bukit Jalil issue is torn in the flesh issue for the MIC and it is one of the major national issue confronting them as the plight of the Bukit Jalil ex-plantation workers is a national concern. The issue received lots of coverage in the Tamil dailies as well as sympathy from most Malaysian Indians. For the PM, it is important for him to portray that he is accessible and is listening to the voices of the people.

Now one month after the PM’s meeting, some fear has crept in. There is now a feeling  that the PM’s meeting was just a drama and once the election is over and if the BN come to power, then they will use all their might to demolish the houses. There is many instances in history when urban poor houses being demolished just after elections. Therefore any solution to the Bukit Jalil estate workers has to be done now.

Legally Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) has won the case. Only political pressure seems to have stop them from carrying out an eviction.

But again DBKL got the eviction order by stating that the ex-plantation workers were just squatters and they used the draconian Emergency clearance of squatter ordinance on these workers. But today, this law has been lifted after Najib announced the lifting of the four emergencies. It would look very bad for DBKL to demolish the homes using the Emergency ruling today.

Stumbling block

Having said that, what is then keeping the prime minister for giving the former workers 4 acres of land out of the 26 acres of land which is currently available. There seems to be several factors which seem to be the stumbling block.

I raise three pertinent questions.

1. Not wanting to set a precedent

One of the main reasons given for not supporting the Bukit Jalil worker’s  demand  is that they don’t want to set a precedent. The DBKL and MIC think that it would be a bad precedent. DBKL has a history of not giving plantation workers landed property and they claim that many other kampong and some estates will ask for landed property if they were to give in.

Here once again capitalist interest becomes the deciding factor. Though when the Government acquired Ladang Bukit Jalil (LBJ) in 1980, there were 1,800 acres. The government upon acquiring the land, sold the land piece by piece to private developers such as Berjaya group, Talam and Ho Hup.

The LBJ land was used to develop luxury houses, tolled highways and golf courses among others. Never did it cross their mind that they must resolve first the housing needs of the community where they are developing the land.

Now after all the prime land being sold for profits, there remain today 26 acres of land which they plan to make it into a burial ground. What about those living?

What the Ladang Bukit Jalil ex workers are asking is only 4 acres of the last remaining 26 acres.  Why is there a problem in giving in to these people? Why cannot the people who have been the longest on the land be allocated land in the same place?

As we are well aware, this country was built on the toil and sacrifice of,  amongst others, hundreds of thousands of  estate workers. Up to 1980s, the income from rubber and oil palm played a major role in financing the development of our country.

Our country prospered, and plantation companies reaped fabulous profits, but plantation workers lived in abject poverty and deprivation generated by below poverty line wages and the most backward of wage structures. Four acres of land as a social wage to compensate for their contribution towards the nation is surely not too much to ask for.

Why is then that such a fair and noble idea of giving land to the poor and the most deserving being seen as bad precedent? Bad precedent in whose eyes? It seems that for the elite classes, these are bad precedents when prime land is given to poor people. And sadly BN and MIC share this vision.

It is time to set good precedent. Will the ruling party have the political will to do it?

2. The internal MIC power play

It is no secret that MIC’s Deputy FT Minister M Saravanan is strongly against the ex-workers getting the land. Saravanan was instrumental in getting a huge group of people to accept the relocation to the flats. Here once again, politicians internal interest in helping supporters and building bases override the question of justice.

The Minister, Raja Nong Chik Raja Zainal Abidin, himself acknowledged in an official statement that of the 71 who have moved to the flats, only 10 are former plantation workers while the others are ’squatters’. Whereas he stated that the remaining 39 who are still living on the estate are all former plantation workers.

These problems are not new. In many cases, politician interfere in helping their chosen people to get benefits, manoeuvre official census, help cronies etc. In this case, Saravanan’s support base is in those who have moved to the flats. On the other hand, MIC Youth leader T Mohan has supported the four acres of land asked by the Bukit Jalil workers.

Now the question being asked for those opposing the 4acres demand is - if we give land to the 41 families, what about those who have already left to the flats? This issue is used to divide and rule the people. Even now, those who have left the estates are promised another bulk of compensation but with condition that only if the remaining 41 also accepted the flats offer.

It is time MIC come out in the open and state if they support Bukit Jalil workers getting four acres of land or not? In the Buah Pala incident, MIC fought so hard that the people there should be given a landed property in a private land. Here we are talking about government land. Why can’t MIC put forward the same argument here?

MIC president G Palanivel also had suggested that urban hardship is worse than plantation hardship and suggested those facing these problems go back to the estates. Therefore it would only make sense that they go back to a piece of land or home which belongs to them in a community system. Giving Bukit Jalil plantation workers that 4 acres will preserve their community life.

Now the time is right for MIC to put the record straight. But it seems between Saravanan, Mohan and Subramaniam, they seems to have differing views and differing interest. It is time the MIC state their position clearly.

3. Najib a neo-liberal unlike his dad who was a social democrat?

During the meeting with the PM, Najib smiled when he was reminded about the Abdul Razak Hussein plantation workers house ownership scheme.

Razak then introduced one of the most remarkable solutions for plantation poverty -  the estate workers house ownership scheme. If this had been implemented in 1973, today most plantation workers will be staying in a landed property like the Malay traditional villagers, Felda scheme participants and  Chinese new villages.

But sadly 90 percent of all plantations and all the major plantation companies in which the Government had major shares did not want to implement this scheme.

Razak lived in the cold war era when he had to give in to many people orientated demands like land reforms, felda scheme, introduce  Socso, etc. The political left was much stronger then. Today Najib lives in a world who believes in TINA – there is no alternatives. Najib is a powerful supporter of new liberal capitalism.  He promotes privatisation, cuts down subsidies and supports FTAs.

Therefore ideologically Najib will not support the Bukit Jalil demand for four acres. He has to weigh it very carefully and any consensus will be only in the context of his political survival. That is why he would need much time to study it before agreeing.

The final score?

Has the Bukit Jalil ex-estate workers solution put the PM and the BN in a dilemma? It is a question of whose interests are they going to protect. Is it the people or profits? It would have been a foregone conclusion if BN was strong politically. Today they are forced to consider the demands of the Ladang Bukit Jalil workers simply for their own survival.

It is going to be a difficult decision. The ex-workers have decided to remind the prime minister on every 10th day of the month that they are waiting for the final score.

---

S ARUTCHELVAN is a social activist and founder member of the Plantation Workers Support Committee, and secretary-general of PSM.

Hindraf will not go into politics, says Waytha

Hindraf leader P Waythamoorthy - who just returned from overseas exile - has continued to dismiss speculation that he would follow in the footstep of his elder brother into the world of politics.

His elder sibling - former ISA detainee and vocal Hindu rights lawyer P Uthayakumar - is the pro-tem secretary-general of Hindraf's political vehicle - the Human Rights Party.

When asked if there is any chance of him becoming a candidate - perhaps under an independent ticket - since the 13th general election is around the corner, Waythamoorthy expressed a firm 'no'.

"Why should I? I am happy as I am, with my work. I have a good team. I do not want to be dragged into that arena," Waythamoorthy told Malaysiakini when met after his talk at a Hindraf event to welcome him home from exile.

His statement elicited a round of applause from supporters who accompanied him down the stage after he gave a rousing talk to about 500 supporters at Perkampungan Juru in Penang last night.

On Hindraf's role in the coming polls, Waythamoorthy said it would depend on what Pakatan Rakyat wants from the movement.

He did not elaborate but when asked to clarify Hindraf's political support - whether it is towards BN or Pakatan, Waythamoorthy asked crisply "since when (did) we support Barisan?"
"I just spoke about Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak's 'nambikei' (hope). It's been 50 years, the Indians were given hope by the British (colonisers) and now the BN government wants to do the same," he said.

"Najib must be joking. Enough of hope, after 50 years. Now we want to know what they can do to resolve the issues of the Indian poor," he added.
Hindraf supporters gave Waythamoorthy a hero's welcome when he arrived at the multi-purpose hall at about 8.30pm, where he was greeted with a Tamil solidarity number and waves of orange flags.

Hindraf to take things step-by-step

The Hindraf leader, who was on a four-year exile in the United Kingdom - which he said had been forced on him by the government - is on a national roadshow to update his supporters about the movement's future plans.

The event, which went on for about two hours and was also attended by Hindraf's national adviser N. Ganesan, went unhindered although a group of policemen stood watch outside the hall.

When asked what is his next course of action, now that he has ended his exile from April 2008 until Aug 1, Waythamoorthy said, "We have to take things step by step".

"A lot of people are anxious, because elections are coming, I understand. But we are fighting for human rights and for those who are voiceless people, especially the Malaysian Indians," he said.

"We want the government to tell us how they want to resolve the problems of the Indian poor," he added.

Niat lists GE demands - seeks M'sian Indian DPM

(Malaysiakini) The National Indian Rights Action Team (Niat) has listed out its demands for the next general election today, including calls for a Malaysian Indian deputy prime minister.

This was among the NGO’s five demands that it wants the next government to implement within the first 100 days in office.

The proposal calls a Malaysian Malay prime minister and deputy prime minister, plus two addition deputy prime minister posts.

The first post would be held a Malaysian Chinese and a Sabahan, each serving for half a term. A Malaysian Indian or Sarawakian, also swapping places mid-term, would hold the other office.

“We do not want other people to sideline us. We must make sure that what comes under the ‘Indian’ category should be brought together.

“Otherwise you do not have any justification to ask people to do thing that you won’t do yourself,” said Niat secretary Arun Dorasamy (left), who was also the project director to put together the group’s 42-page booklet to explain the demands.

The booklet also explained that the marginalisation of Malaysian Indians was due to under-representation in government - a fact also acknowledged by former prime ministers Dr Mahathir Mohamad and Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.
Arun: Indian DPM, why not?
The booklet, titled “Indian Malaysians’ Calls for GE13: Undo the History – Redo the Plan”, was unveiled in Kuala Lumpur today at a function attended by some 80 representatives from Indian NGOs and several politicians, including Subang MP Sivarasa Rasiah and Gerakan Wanita chief Jayanthi Devi Balaguru.

It also calls for three Malaysian Indian cabinet ministers and four deputy ministers, most of whom would be elected representatives, while the rest are picked from NGOs and appointed to the cabinet.

There should be at least one Malaysian Indian Muslim and one Malaysian Punjabi amongst the deputy ministers, read the booklet.

Pre-empting criticism that the plan demand is “too idealistic”, Arun said, “I think it’s about to ask what is wrong with it. I think it is nothing criminal, it is totally legal. I am waiting to hear the excuses why not.”

In addition, the proposed line-up calls for Malaysian Indian deputy chief ministers in Selangor, Perak, Penang and Negri Sembilan, assuming that the states are ruled by the same parties as the federal government.

Arun explained that this was because the four states collective houses 73 percent of the nation’s Malaysian Indian population.
Curb alcoholism

Another of Niat’s five main demands is to form a Minority Affairs and Development Department, which is to be placed under the Prime Minister’s Department.

“We ought to opt for a permanent institutionalised solution rather than throwing quick fixes for issues that need greater understanding and complex manoeuvring pertaining to the minorities, especially the Indian Malaysian,” the booklet read.

Its other demands include opening boarding schools to all students and not just those from National Schools, tackle alcoholism with measures such as rehabilitation centres and banning the sale of alcoholic drinks in convenience shops and to end to statelessness by 2013.
Complementing the five main demands are 44 additional ‘supplementary requests’, which is to be implemented by the next government throughout its five-year mandate.

These tackle a wide variety of issues, ranging from economic and education policies, to the placement of police officers in schools where gangsterism had been rife.

Ambiga: End race politics

Niat chairperson Thasleem Mohamed Ibrahim said the booklet has already been sent to political parties with Indian representation two weeks ago, and a revised version was sent a week after.

These include the People’s Progressive Party (PPP), MIC, DAP, and Gerakan.
Commenting on Niat’s proposals, Bersih co-chairperson Ambiga Sreenevasan said that she agreed with most but not all of the proposals and praised it for trying to propose solutions rather than being merely a list of problems.

“It is absolutely proper and timely that we ask the next government, or whoever seeks office in the next government, that they will give us (at least) Item #1 in this booklet. Nothing less,” she told the audience, referring to Niat’s proposal for the Minority Affairs and Development Department.

She also said that while she believes racial politics should end and all races should be given assistance equally, it is ‘absolutely appropriate’ for her to promote the booklet although it specifically deals with Malaysian Indian issues.

The former Bar Council president explained that this was because the community had been marginalised for a long time, thus measures should be taken to rectify it.

Indian Muslims cry for illegal Bangladeshi Muslims in Assam and Mayanmar. Trying Riot in every corner in India. Red Alert for Mumbai.

2 dead, 55 hurt as protest over Assam riots turns violent in Mumbai.

Protesters carried Pakistani Flag as alleged. Indian Muslims for illegal BD and Maynmar Muslims to rehabilitate them in India. Photo – Agen

MUMBAI | 11 August, 2012 | PTI | Agencies :: Two persons were killed and at least 55 injured, including 45 policemen, when a protest here against Assam riots turned violent here today as demonstrators clashed with the police which opened fire to disperse the mob.

Hundreds of people poured in at Azad Maidan in south Mumbai this afternoon on a call given by a city-based outfit, Raza Academy, to denounce the riots in Assam and also alleged attacks on a minority community in Myanmar. [Some 10 Thousand Rohingya Muslims from Mayanmar are staying illegally in Delhi and other places in India. - ed.]

The protesters torched vehicles of the media and the police and pelted stones.

Unconfirmed reports said one of the deceased could have been hit by a bullet fired by the police.

Police spokesman Nisar Tamboli said only a postmortem would bring out what exactly caused the deaths.

Hundreds of people turned up at Azad Maidan Ground, the popular protest venue, in south Mumbai this afternoon on a call given by a city-based outfit, Raza Academy, to denounce the riots in Assam and also alleged attacks on minority community in Myanmar. Awami Vikas Party (AVP), a political outfit floated by former police officer Shamsher Khan Pathan, also took part in the protest.

The protesters suddenly turned unruly and set afire vehicles, damaged buses and indulged in stone-pelting.

Police opened fire and resorted to lathi-charge to disperse the mob, said a policeman deployed at the Azad Maidan.

At least 55 persons were injured of whom two succumbed in a government hospital at south Mumbai.

“Two youths, Mohammed Umar (22) and Altaf Shaikh (18), who were injured in the violence and were in critical condition, died while undergoing treatment at St George Hospital,” a civic body official told PTI.

Among the injured were some mediapersons, including Prashant Sawant of `Sakal Times’ and Vivek Bendre of `The Hindu’. All injured were shifted to J J Hospital, St George Hospital, GT Hospital and Bombay Hospital, police said.

Maharashtra Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan said in a statement that the Crime Branch has been asked to probe “whose hand was behind the violence and how the protest turned so violent”.

He said altogether 45 police personnel and 10 others have been injured.

Assam violence protest in Mumbai: 23 arrested, police claim women constables molested by mob at Azad Maidan

The rioters from Raza Academy who set police and media vehicles on fire at the Azad Maidan in Mumbai on Saturday also molested women constables during the violence.

The Mumbai Crime Branch has arrested 23 rioters from among those who had gathered around Azad Maidan to protest against the recent Assam violence. All 23 arrested have been charged with rioting, molesting police constables and damaging public property.

The initially "peaceful" protest by the Raza Academy against the violence in Assam turned ugly after some of the miscreants set fire to OB vans of the television channels and began attacking policemen trying to control the mob. The mob went on to thoughtlessly destroy the Amar Jawan Jyoti memorial in South Mumbai in their fit of unwarranted rage.

Several BEST buses were damaged just like media and police vans were set on fire. The Mumbai Crime Branch has also charged 23 of the mob with charges relating to molestation of women constables who were deployed as part of the additional security to control the situation. Police sources said that the mob manhandled women constables and shoved them around inappropriately while being restrained by the force. Two police constables are reportedly missing while 47 have been injured.

The police had reportedly fired 26 aerial rounds of bullets and used about 30 tear gas shells to control the mob that also ran into CST station to stop and damage suburban train operations, but luckily the services resumed after 20 minutes as the mob was brought under control.

The state government of Maharashtra has also deployed extra security personnel at train stations where trains enter the city from the north-eastern states. A delegation of BJP leaders also met with Chief Minister Prithviraj Chavan, seeking a stricter action against the rioters.

The state is on a high alert ahead of Independence Day on Wednesday. Chavan told reporters, "A statewide alert has been issued to ensure there is no adverse fallout of the incident. Rapid Action Force and the state police have been deployed at sensitive locations. The crime branch will probe just how the situation suddenly took a violent turn."

Malaysia groups angered by bowler’s release over “raping” 13-year-old

Malaysia women angered by court ruling to free bowler who raped 13-year-old.

KUALA LUMPUR: Anger is on the rise in Malaysia after a court released bowler Noor Afizal Azizan on probation in a case that saw the man plead guilty to statutory rape of a 13-year-old girl in the country.

The three-judge panel of the Court of Appeals on Thursday overturned a lower court’s decision to jail the man.

More shocking to many Malaysians was the reasoning behind the release.

The judges were reported to have agreed with Azizan’s lawyer, who argued that “public interest would not be served if Noor Afizal was sent to jail as he had a bright future.”

The Joint Action Group For Gender Equality, which comprises 6 leading Malaysian women’s groups, in a statement on Sunday called on the judiciary to clarify its decision.

“We are troubled that the perpetrator’s potential for ‘a bright future’, presumably derived from his status as a national athlete, was used as one of the grounds for sentencing,” it said.

“On the surface, the judgment appears to hint at the application of a double standard by implying that anyone with the right ‘credentials’ can commit a crime, and get away with a rap on the knuckles,” it added.

Making matters worse, online Malaysians took aim at the court with the hashtag #BrightFutureRapeOK. They argued that the ruling shows double standards in the country and gives tacit approval for rape in Malaysia.

“I just don’t get it. You rape a 13-year-old and then because of national interest, you get freed. So we just have to be important enough so we can rape women and get away with it,” said activist Mahammad Aziz, who told Bikyamasr.com that he was “shocked” at the decision.

“I find it very scary what the court has done. And to claim national interest for a bowler? Really? Since when is Malaysia a big bowling country?” he added.

The bowlers’ lawyer, Hisyam Teh Poh Teik, said the Court of Appeal, whose decision is final and cannot be appealed, had merely sided with an initial court verdict, releasing Noor Afizal, that had taken into account all the factors.

“Noor Afizal is not a criminal,” he told AFP. “There was no force, no violence, nothing whatsoever … and he owned up after the incident.”

Azizan pleaded guilty to having sex with the girl at a hotel in 2009 when he was 19.

A district court had initially released him on a 25,000 ringgit ($8,000) bond for five years of probation, taking into consideration that the girl had agreed.

But women’s rights activists question the logic of the court, asking if a 13-year-old girl can honestly decide if she is willing to have sex.

“I work all the time with battered women and girls and in my experience there is no way that a 13-year-old young girl can choose to have sex. She was most likely manipulated. The man responsible should be in prison for a long time,” said one social worker in Kuala Lumpur.

The case has once again highlighted what many in Malaysia perceive as a growing divide between the courts, the people and women’s rights.

A number of activists online pointed to the fact that had the case been tried in Europe or elsewhere, Azizan would have been tried for pedophilia and “there would have been no questions about that. But in Malaysia it seems to be different.”

It’s either orangutans or cheap palm oil

Orangutan survival is seriously threatened by palm oil plantations.
ANALYSIS

By Kafil Yamin

JAKARTA: When four men were sentenced to eight months in jail in March for the ‘murder’ of orangutans, it was the first time that people associated with Indonesia’s booming palm oil industry were convicted for killing man’s close relations in the primate family.

Conservationists were not happy with the ‘light’ sentences handed down by the court in Kutai Kertanegara district, East Kalimantan, on March 18, to Imam Muktarom, Mujianto, Widiantoro and Malaysian national Phuah Cuan Pun.

“As expected, the sentences were light, much lighter than what the prosecutors demanded. Such punishments will not bring any change to the situation of orangutans,” Fian Khairunnissa, an activist of the Centre for Orangutan Protection, told IPS.

Indonesia’s courts have generally looked the other way as the palm oil industry relentlessly decimated orangutans by destroying vast swathes of Southeast Asia’s rainforests to convert them into oil palm plantations.

In April, a court in Banda Aceh, Sumatra, dismissed a case filed by the Indonesia Environmental Forum (WALHI) against PT Kallista Alam, one of five palm oil firms operating in Tripa, and Irwandi Yusuf, former governor of Aceh province, for the conversion of 1,600 hectares (3,950 acres) of carbon-rich peat forests into palm oil plantations.

The court admonished WALHI saying it should have sought an out-of-court settlement with PT Kallista Alam – which never paused clearing its 1,600-hectare concession, granted in August 2011.

Mysteriously, just before the WALHI case was to be heard in court, numerous fires broke out in the Tripa peat swamps, including in the concession granted to PT Kallista Alam.

Community leaders in Tripa point out that the concessions fly in the face of a presidential moratorium on new permits to clear primary forests, effective in Indonesia since last year as part of a billion dollar deal with Norway to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

“The issuance of a license to Kallista is a crime, because it changes the Leuser ecosystem and peat land forests into business concessions,” Kamarudin, a Tripa community spokesman, told IPS.

The Leuser Ecosystem, in the provinces of Aceh and North Sumatra, covers more than 2.6 million hectares of prime tropical rain forest and is the last place on earth where Sumatran sub-species of elephants, rhinoceros, tigers and orangutans coexist.

The survival of orangutans, a ‘keystone species’, is critical for the wellbeing of other animals and plants with which they coexist in a habitat.

Orangutan seen as encroachers

A statement released in June by the Sumatran Orangutan Conservation Programme estimated that there are now only 200 of the red-harired great apes left in Tripa compared to about 2,000 in 1990 and said their situation was now ‘desperate’ as result of the fires and clearing operations carried out by palm oil companies.

During the last five years, the oil palm business has emerged as a major force in the Indonesian economy, with an investment value of close five billion dollars on eight million hectares.

Indonesia plans to increase crude palm oil (CPO) production from the current 23.2 million tons this year to 28.4 million tons by 2014. This calls for an 18.7 percent increase in plantation area, according to Indonesia’s agriculture ministry.

But the price of the planned expansion would be further shrinkage of orangutan habitat by 1.6 million hectares because oil companies find it cheaper to burn forests and chase away or kill the orangutans.

“If you find orangutans in palm oil plantations, they are not coming there from somewhere else… they are in their own homes that have been changed into plantations,” said Linda Yuliani, a researcher at the Centre for International Forestry Research.

“But plantation company people see the orangutans as the encroachers,” she said. “Confused orangutans can often be seen wandering in plantations, and with their habitat gone, they forage on young palm trees,” she said.

A joint survey by 19 organisations, including The Nature Conservancy, WWF and the Association of Primate Experts, found that some 750 orangutans died during 2008-2009, mostly because of conflict with human beings.

It has not mattered that Indonesia is one of the signatories to the Convention on Illegal Trade and Endangered Species, which classifies orangutans under Appendix I which lists species identified as currently endangered, or in danger of extinction.

“Clearing peat land also releases huge volumes of carbon dioxide, similar to amounts released during volcanic eruptions,” Willie Smits, a Dutch conservationist who works on orangutan protection, tells IPS.

Enforcement needed

Reckless clearing of peat swamp forests has already turned Indonesia into the world’s largest emitter of carbon dioxide, after the United States and China.

“The government may earn some money from oil palm investment, but there are far bigger losses from environmental destruction,” says Elfian Effendi, director of Greenomics Indonesia. “There is a multiplied effect on the local economy and loss of biodiversity.”

But, even to some conservationists, stopping the oil palm business in Indonesia – which feeds a vast range of industries from fast food and cosmetics to biodiesel – is impractical.

“What is needed is enforcement of schemes that allow the palm oil business and orangutans to co-exist,” Resit Rozer, a Dutch conservationist who runs a sanctuary for rescued orangutans, told IPS.

Palm oil companies that are members of the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil (RSPO), a convention to encourage importers to buy only RSPO-certified CPO, see no advantage in the scheme that requires them to set aside a forest block for orangutans within plantations and provide safe corridors for the apes to move from one spot to another.

“US and several European countries still buy non-certified CPO as the RSPO certificate does not gurantee purchase,” Rozer told IPS. “The West told us to practice environmentally-sound business, but they do not buy RSPO-certified CPO because implementation has been delayed till 2015,” Rozer said.

“For companies that have invested in RSPO certification, the delay has been a heavy blow. They feel cheated,” said Rozer who helps palm oil companies in creating orangutan refuges and corridors.

- IPS

It’ll be a new govt in Putrajaya

Umno doesn’t have the fortitude to publicly say what it is thinking.
COMMENT

We are going to see a new government in Putrajaya after the 13th general election.

My prediction is that Barisan Nasional will end up with between 97 to 114 seats. There are 222 seats in parliament.

BN chairman Najib Tun Razak knows that with just a three percent swing in popular votes, Umno will be left with 71 seats.

With the same vote swing, MCA will end up with 10 seats and MIC will be reduced to two parliamentary seats. But it is more likely, MCA may only end up with two parliamentary seats having lost its legitimacy among Chinese.

When this happens we will see a new team move into Putrajaya.

When this happens, we can expect the current Chief Secretary Dr Ali Hamsa to tender his resignation.

We will request former chief secretary Sidek Hassan to relinquish his post as chairman of Petronas.

We will let Najib know the business of government is not like playing musical chairs.

Najib stops the music and shoves a chair underneath Sidek while pulling away some seats meant for other people.

There’s no telling what Sidek will and can reveal if he were allowed to fall.

‘Umno thinks in private’

It’s almost a protocol nowadays for former senior servants to kiss and tell all.

We will also deal with Azman Mokhtar and see what Khazanah has been up to.

We will put their books under the knife and allow accountants to look at how and what the Ivy-leagued university boys have done with our funds.

We will ask all loss making government-linked companies (GLCs) to stand and be counted and if after the count, they can’t stand, we will close them.

We will ask Syed Mokhtar Bukhary to reduce his debt exposure because we cannot allow such huge debt exposure to threaten our financial system and bring this country to economic collapse.

We will also haul the bank that breached the limit in lending to one particular borrower.

Probably the Umno leaders have talked themselves into becoming block-headed to deny the overwhelming rejection of Umno/BN by the people.

Let me tell you 90% of the Chinese reject Umno-BN. So Umno tries to stop the rising tide of discontent by pitting Malays against Chinese.

I hope the majority of Malays are sensible enough to be aware that numerically the Chinese will never be able to replace Malays.

As for the Malaysian Indians, only the most insensitive among them will want to support Umno-BN after the “hang (Bersih co-chairman) Ambiga” outburst.

Believe me that statement was not done in a fit of absent-mindedness.

It was a calculated statement designed to create fear in those who opposed Umno thinking.

The Umno MP who said it, said what Umno thinks in private but doesn’t have the testicular fortitude to say it out in the open.

The writer is a former Umno state assemblyman but joined DAP earlier this year. He is a FMT columnist.

13,215 days ago

Imagine a state government possessing the half billion Ringgit to develop the state or to give it to its people. Now imagine the same state government in possession of four times that amount. So, instead of only having the monetary resources to provide aid to a quarter of the state’s population, the state government can now do the same to everybody. Total coverage. Let’s not even get to the full 100% i.e. the ten billion Ringgit.

Hakim Joe

What is the difference between 5% and 20%? Well, anyone who has half a brain and who had not been asleep during math class in school will tell you that the answer is 15%, as in 20% minus 5%.

Let us convert this to figures and let us hypothesize the figure as ten billion Ringgit. 5% of ten billion is half a billion and 20% is exactly four times that number, i.e., two billion Ringgit. Witness how vast this difference is now.

Imagine a state government possessing the half billion Ringgit to develop the state or to give it to its people. Now imagine the same state government in possession of four times that amount. So, instead of only having the monetary resources to provide aid to a quarter of the state’s population, the state government can now do the same to everybody. Total coverage. Let’s not even get to the full 100% i.e. the ten billion Ringgit.

Now assume that someone powerful within that same state, a tribal leader of sorts, has the influence and capacity to take that state out of the federation. This would mean an income shortfall ranging between 80% and 95% of ten billion Ringgit. Well, money isn’t everything but an action as such could propel other states into mimicking parallel actions and this is unquestionably something that must be prevented at all cost, collateral damage be damned.

On another note, where were you 13,215 days ago?

On June 6, 1976, an Australian manufactured GAF-Nomad N.22B-type twin turboprop engine passenger plane operated by Sabah Air with the tail number 9M-ATZ took off from Labuan Airport (LBU) on its 113-km route to Kota Kinabalu International Airport (BKI) with ten passengers onboard. A routine short flight except for two things. One, almost the entire Sabah state government’s top leadership were on the plane and two, the plane stalled and crashed into the sea approximately 2-km from its destination airport killing the pilot and its ten VIP passengers.

The reign of Tun Fuad Stephens (Donald Aloysius Marmaduke Stephens) as Sabah’s fifth Chief Minister abruptly ended a mere seven weeks from the day he took office for a second term. The lists of fatalities include Sabah State Ministers Datuk Salleh Sulong, Datuk Peter Mojuntin & Chong Thien Vun; Darius Binion (assistant State Minister), Datuk Wahid Peter Andau (Secretary of State for the Ministry of Finance of Sabah), Dr. Syed Hussein Wafa (Sabah’s Director in the state’s Economic Planning Unit), Isak Atan (Private Secretary to Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah), Corporal Said Mohammad (Tun Fuad’s bodyguard), Johari Stephens (Tun Fuad’s eldest son) and Captain Gandhi Nathan (pilot).

Mechanical problems? Perhaps so but then again the original investigation reports should have been immediately published and the coroner should have declared the “accident” as a misadventure. However, this report was promptly classified by the Federal Government (it still remains classified up to this day) and the coroner, En. Ansari Abdullah, returned an open verdict.

Aviation Safety Network (ASN) reported that the aircraft “stalled and crashed on approach.” However, in its narrative, ASN stated that “This information is not presented as the Flight Safety Foundation or the Aviation Safety Network’s opinion as to the cause of the accident. It is preliminary and is based on the facts as they are known at this time.” What the ASN report did not say was that ground witnesses saw the plane “drop like a stone”. What the experts also failed to inform you is that fixed-wing aircraft do not drop vertically but glide to its impact point unless the wings dropped off and the wings on a fixed wing aircraft do not just drop off by themselves when the engines purportedly stalled.

Non-mechanical problems? There is no way of knowing the truth until the original investigation report is declassified but a few officials have put forth the theory that the aircraft was overloaded.

Overloaded? Let’s just put it this way. The N.22B variant is rated for up to 1 or 2 pilots with a maximum of 12 passengers and unless the pilot and its 10 passengers gorged themselves silly during lunch, there is no way the plane could have exceeded its weight limitations.

Problematic aircraft? Yes, the GAF-Nomad N.22B variant aircraft can be considered so. Since its production, the Nomad has been involved in a total of 32 total hull-loss accidents, which have resulted in 76 fatalities including its chief test pilot and the assistant head designer during the design and testing stage.

Conspiracy? One, the fact that Tun Fuad wanted a 20 percent oil royalty for the state, and two, the open secret that Tun Fuad may bring Sabah out of the Federation following Singapore’s footsteps does add spice to the concoction. Three, it is additionally not a secret that Tun Fuad wanted to become the Malaysian Prime Minister some time in his political future.

Three strikes and you are out. Permanently out with a bang.

Did I say “bang”? Well, ground witnesses remembered hearing two distinct explosions. They are the ones who said “bang”… not me.

Additionally, why was Tun Fuad’s aircraft requested to circle the airfield awaiting an imaginary RMAF C-130 Hercules to take off? (Airport logs did not show the existence of any RMAF planes on the tarmac at the time of the accident, let alone a humungous C-130).

Shouldn’t the Chief Minister’s flight take preference over everybody, especially in Sabah and especially when it is the Chief Minister’s aircraft with the Chief Minister in it? Were there really two explosions (one in midair and the other when the aircraft crashed) as indicated by witnesses of the crash? How is Lee Kang Yu, a trusted aid and trustee to Harris Salleh who had fled to Hong Kong prior to his death, involved in the crash? Why did a senior communication officer (T.K. Wong) living near the crash site and who was the first to arrive at the crash site tell everybody that the police arrived almost immediately after him and instantaneously condoned off the entire crash site instead of organizing search and rescue teams?

Perhaps an unfortunate (but fatal) coincidence? Nonetheless and regardless of what has actually transpired, the direction of Sabah’s fortunes has been altered forever. From a sovereign state albeit under British rule (after the sushi-eaters have surrendered) to a BN “fixed deposit” does not augur well for its inhabitants. Sabah, with its bountiful natural resources, should have been an extremely rich independent country with limitless opportunities. Why settle for a pittance 5 percent when one can have the entire cake (and eat it too)? Why must the people of Sabah allow Kuala Lumpur to select its Head of State instead of its inhabitants choosing on its own? Why allow foreigners to become citizens of the state without any decision making of its own?

Land Below The Wind? More like “Land Below Putrajaya’s Feet”. But then again, that is solely my opinion and does not reflect any other individual’s view or attitude.

Coming back to the “so-called” conspiracy theory. Who was it that ill convinced Tun Fuad to join the Federation (to form Malaysia) in the first place? This individual is none other than Singapore’s Lee Kuan Yew. At the time when a decision was required, Tun Fuad was opposed to Sabah uniting with Malaya, Sarawak and Singapore to form Malaysia, and in a place where tribal inclinations were strong Tun Fuad could have easily convinced the people of Sabah to reject the Federation. A lot of people might say that Sabah can never stand on its own two feet with the Philippines and Indonesian authorities aggressively laying claims on Sabah but that remains an unproven conjecture that can never be established now.

In what is now known as the Double Six Tragedy, Sabah’s top leadership was wiped off the face of the earth in one fell stroke. Suddenly the deafening silence can be heard everywhere as there is now no questioning the 5% allocated share of the oil royalties and the question of whether Sabah should opt out from the Federation is permanently deferred as Deputy Chief Minister Harris Salleh was sworn in as the sixth Chief Minister of Sabah on the afternoon following the accident. Talk about efficiency.

The fact that Harris Salleh, along with Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, Datuk Rahman Yaakub (Chief Minister of Sarawak) and a member of the Pahang Royalty were present with Tun Fuad in Labuan for the aborted signing ceremony (the ceremony was deferred to be held in Kota Kinabalu later in the day), is not lost on the people screaming conspiracy. The fact that these three lucky people were suddenly called to inspect some cattle farm there augments the conspiracy theory and the fact that Harris Salleh immediately agreed to the 5% oil royalty, and not the 20% as required by Tun Fuad, spells something sinister in the background. The reality that Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah and Datuk Rahman Yaakub were already strapped into their seats and later urgently requested to disembark from the aircraft by Harris Salleh should be investigated, if not for the break in protocol. One does not insist its superiors to change the official itinerary unless it is of vital importance and visiting some cows in Banggi Kudat cannot be counted as such.

Matter of note: The Oil Agreement was signed between Harris Salleh and Petronas 8 days later on June 14, 1976 and the decision was arrived at without the official consent of the remaining Sabah State Legislative Council. Additionally, with an Open Verdict from the coroner, the Magistrate concerned requested a full reinvestigation into the crash. However no official reinvestigation was ever performed or even initiated but the pertinent issue is why the Magistrate concerned did not follow through on his decision but instead permit the court’s decision to pass.

When Tun Fuad was the Chief Minister of Sabah, a working relationship was agreed upon by the Sabah coalition parties to rotate the post of CM between its partners. After Tun Fuad died in the accident, the rotational system came to a screeching halt. Instead of a one-year tenure for everybody, Harris Salleh governed Sabah from the exact day Tun Fuad died until his eventual retirement on April 22, 1985.

It is not a question of why the rotational system was abruptly terminated but the fact that it was canceled immediately after Tun Fuad’s demise. Yes, rotating the CM seat is not exactly a brilliant idea but one does not change what that has been agreed upon immediately after an accident regardless of whether it is good or bad for the state.

Tun Fuad is no political lightweight. With Sabah as his trump card, he could have easily asked for and obtained the post of the deputy premiership from Tunku (during his first tenure as the CM of Sabah) or from Tun Hussein Onn (during his second term). In 1963, right after Sabah joined the Federation, Tun Fuad had no intentions of being anything other than the first CM of Sabah. However, his friendship with Lee Kuan Yew soon perked his political ambitions and there were rumors that Lee will choose him as the Deputy PM should he become the Malaysian PM after Tunku and Tun Fuad becoming the Malaysian PM after Lee retires. Some even said that this was the basis of how Lee managed to convince Tun Fuad to bring Sabah into the Federation, a secret agreement thrashed out between Tunku, Lee Kuan Yew and Tun Fuad.

History will tell us that this was not to be as Tunku was himself ousted by Tun Razak. Lee was now in limbo and so was Tun Fuad but Sabah was by now already in the Federation. To make matters worse, Singapore was chased out of Malaysia and it was during this time that Tun Fuad’s mentor and best friend Datuk OKK Sedomon Gunsanad, who initially opposed Sabah’s entry into the Federation, died and it was during this same period of time that Tun Fuad harbored intentions of taking Sabah out of Malaysia since “Sabah joined Malaysia because of Singapore and now that the island was out of the Federation, there was no longer any reason for the Borneo state to continue to be in the Federation.”

In this same period of time, there emerged another politician on the fast track and it is none other than Mahathir Mohamad. With the Tunku-Lee-Stephens private accord out of the picture and the discovery of petroleum reserves in East Malaysia, Sabah soon became a cash cow for the nation and any intentions or plans by anyone to make Sabah a self-governed nation must be promptly nipped in the bud.

Tun Fuad has suddenly become a very dangerous adversary and when he became the fifth CM of Sabah for a second term, Kuala Lumpur soon found his position an extreme risk to the very existence of Malaysia, let alone trying to make a few more bucks on it.

Let’s look at Sabah now. In 1970, Sabah was the second richest state. In 2010, it is the poorest state, even with its massive oil reserves, huge palm oil plantations and colossal timber exports. GDP growth is a mere 2.4%, even lower than Kelantan under PAS rule.

When Datuk Yong Teck Lee (SAPP President) made a comment whereby he reiterated that the Double Six Tragedy must be reopened for reinvestigation following Tengku Razaleigh’s revelation that he was seated and strapped into his seat behind Tun Fuad before being invited by Harris Salleh to disembark from the plane to inspect a cattle farm, Datuk Yong was hit by a RM50 million defamation lawsuit from the 81-year old Harris Salleh. When the courts ruled in favor of Harris, this sent a very loud message to everybody in Malaysia that the Double Six Tragedy is off limits.

Question: Why classify the findings of an air crash and why persecute those who wish to know the truth? Why was the official signing ceremony aborted in Labuan (to be held a few hours later in KK) when everybody concerned was already present? What actually transpired in the meeting in Labuan?

So many questions but no answers forthcoming. Malaysians will never know the answers unless Pakatan takes over in Putrajaya. Sabahans, cast your votes wisely.

Anwar: Sabah RCI tailored to protect ‘citizenship-for-votes’ culprits

KOTA MARUDU, Aug 12 – Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim suggested today that the government had deliberately refused to have the Sabah Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) probe those responsible for the alleged “citzenships-for-votes” deal with foreigners in order to protect certain personalities.

The opposition leader (picture) said the entire RCI was flawed as its terms were lacking details and do not include identifying those responsible or recommending punishment on them.

“These are major criminal acts, particularly when it involves corruption and cheating and falsifying documents... these are serious flaws, but of course, these are not part of the RCI’s terms of reference,” he told reporters after a function announcing the crossover of another senior Barisan Nasional (BN) here.

The newly-established RCI on Sabah’s illegal immigrants has been tasked to investigate if foreigners in the state have been unlawfully awarded Malaysian ICs or citizenships and included in the electoral roll.

But the panel’s terms, announced in Kota Kinabalu yesterday by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, do not include a probe to identify those involved in handing out citizenships unlawfully.

The opposition have often laid blame on former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad for the state’s extraordinary spike in migrant population, claiming he had spearheaded “Project IC” or “Projek M”.

The “Projek IC” initiative was purportedly kicked off in the early 1980s during Dr Mahathir’s tenure to give out Malaysian ICs to illegal immigrants in Sabah, in order to help the ruling BN stay in power.

“Yes, it seems Dr Mahathir is clearly nervous about the RCI,” Anwar said here.

“But they (BN) must have given their assurance that they will not pick at who is at fault, who are the people taking money or falsifying documents and why... so that means the entire RCI is just flawed,” he said.

Anwar added that Sabah voters were likely to have little regard for the RCI, noting the government’s years of refusal to set up the panel.

He pointed out that the decades-old problem could not be so easily resolved within the six months deadline given to the panel to make its recommendations to the government.

The PKR de facto leader suggested that the RCI was merely a political ploy, referring to its formation so close to the coming polls, and added that like the Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on electoral reforms, the panel was unlikely to solve Sabah’s problem with illegal immigrants.

“This is just like a gimmick. They (the government) are not serious. I believe most Sabahans would not have any regard for this RCI because they have learned from the past on how their request to form the panel was not heeded,” he said.

Najib’s announcement on the RCI’s reference terms yesterday comes just two weeks after the twin exits of two senior Sabah BN lawmakers – Tuaran MP Datuk Seri Wilfred Mojilip Bumburing and Beaufort MP Datuk Seri Lajim Ukin.

Both men cited their dissatisfaction with the government’s delay on the RCI, which the Cabinet had already agreed to form on February 8 this year.

In Sabah, the problem of illegal immigrants has been dominating every election since 1970 as the local natives believe that foreigners are to blame for the state’s economic, social and security problems.

Some 27 per cent of Sabah’s 3.12 million population are said to be foreigners.

'Kafir harbi' umpama lampu hijau untuk membunuh

Saya ingin merujuk kepada kenyataan Abdullah Samaah yang dikeluarkan oleh Utusan Malaysia berkaitan haram menyokong DAP kerana mereka merupakan kafir harbi.

Istilah kafir harbi merupakan istilah fiqh yang membawa konotasi suasana zaman perang di antara wilayah Islam di zaman dahulu dengan negara musuh.
Kafir harbi adalah merujuk kepada negara musuh yang berperang dengan Muslim di mana darah mereka adalah halal ditumpahkan kerana ianya di dalam suasana perang, di mana kafir harbi itu sendiri berusaha membunuh umat Islam.
Kafir harbi adalah wajib diperangi di peringkat negara di atas dasar peperangan.

Di zaman ini, warga atau rakyat bukan Islam yang tinggal bersama umat Islam tidak dikira sebagai kafir harbi. Malah pengklafikasian harbi atau dhimmi yang digunakan oleh ulama klasik telah diperbaiki oleh ulama moden, memandangkan negara-negara moden mempunyai konsep kewargenegaraan yang memberikan hak dan tanggungjawab yang saksama di antara Muslim dan bukan Islam.

Pengkelasan Abdullah Sama'ah bahawa DAP adalah kafir Harbi adalah tidak tepat sama sekali, malah membahayakan. Beliau seolah-olah memberikan lampu hijau untuk umat Islam memerangi parti DAP dan membunuh ahli-ahli dan kepimpinannya.
Bahkan di dalam DAP terdapat juga di kalangan pemimpin dan juga ahli mereka yang Muslim. 'Fatwa' Abdullah yang direstui oleh Utusan itu juga memberikan konotasi bahawa umat Islam di Malaysia sekarang hidup dalam suasana peperangan dan permusuhan dengan rakyat bukan Islam.

'Fatwa' liar dan membahayakan seperti ini perlu dibendung. Majlis Fatwa Kebangsaan perlu berani menegur beliau dan juga Utusan kerana mencetuskan provokasi yang berkemungkinan akan membuka jalan bagi para ekstrimis bangsa dan golongan subversif untuk menumpahkan darah ahli-ahli DAP.

Saya menggesa agar pihak keselamatan segera menahan Abdullah dan membuat siasatan terhadap kenyataannya yang berbau ekstrimisme dan boleh menyemarakkan api perkauman sekaligus menggerakkan para penggganas di atas nama Islam untuk bangkit melancarkan jihad membunuh ahli-ahli DAP.
Sudah tentu kita tidak mahukan pertumpahan darah berlaku di antara kaum di Malaysia. Tindakan perlu diambil ke atas Abdullah.

Pihak media, terutamanya Utusan Malaysia sepatutnya lebih peka dengan laporan mereka. Mereka hendaklah tidak menjadi agen kekacauan dan ketegangan kaum, sebaliknya sepatutnya menjadi agen keharmonian dan perpaduan kaum.
Mengeluarkan tajuk berita utama di muka hadapan seperti yang telah berlaku hanya akan membuka ruang kepada pelampau perkauman untuk menghalalkan darah ahli-ahli DAP di atas nama jihad. Ini perlu dielakkan demi menjaga kesejahteraan negara Malaysia yang kita cintai bersama.

---

Dr Maszlee Malik merupakan seorang pensyarah di UIAM. Tulisan ini merupakan pandangan peribadi beliau dan tidak menggambarkan pendirian rasmi Malaysiakini.

MCA Needs To Keep Engaging Rakyat, NGOs

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 12 (Bernama) -- MCA deputy president Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai today urged party members to keep engaging the rakyat (people) and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) to ensure that their views are being heard.

"MCA should be with the people and should be with the NGOs to fulfill their needs. As part of the government, we are able to be the channel for all to voice their views.

" We will definitely take concerted efforts and good approached to resolve the problems (faced by them)," he told reporters after opening MCA Wilayah Persekutuan's Annual General Meeting here.