Ben Fogle accused of fronting propaganda ignoring Sarawak 'environmental destruction and exploitation'

The above video is an undercover film made by the NGO Global Witness on land sales in Sarawak

The television presenter Ben Fogle has been accused of taking part in an environmental propaganda campaign for a regime with one of the world’s worst records in deforestation. Fogle, known to millions of BBC viewers as a face of travel documentaries, has become the poster boy for tourism to the controversial state of Sarawak in Borneo, where vast amounts of industrial logging have left only five per cent of forests that have not been either logged or converted to palm oil plantations.

The presenter has made a series of films for the Sarawak Tourism Board under the title “Ben Fogle’s Sarawak Adventures” in which he is pictured playing with orang-utans and swimming in waterfalls. Fogle wrote about his trip to Sarawak, which is part of Malaysia, in his “Ben Fogle, The Adventurer” column for the Daily Telegraph and in a large article in Hello!

Fogle’s material has been widely promoted to a network of “mummy bloggers” encouraged to share the films and invited to meet the presenter at a champagne reception this week in London. Some believed they would be offered the chance to join a “Sarawak Blogger Ambassador Club” and go on a trip to Borneo.

Sarawak has the fastest rate of deforestation in Asia and exports more tropical logs than Africa and Latin America combined. It has only 0.5 per cent of the world’s tropical forest but accounted for 25 per cent of tropical log exports in 2010.

Fogle’s involvement in the PR campaign has shocked critics of the Sarawak government and its appalling record on conservation. “It seems Ben Fogle may have been made a pawn,” said Clare Rewcastle, founder of the Sarawak Report blog. “Anyone with the slightest knowledge of environmental matters should know the issues around Malaysian oil palm destruction and the culpability of the Sarawak state government.

“He should not be promoting them for responsible eco-tourism or pretending that they are protecting the jungle habitat of the orang-utan. The only place you can find orang-utan in Sarawak is in caged enclosures or in a few remaining patches of jungle where the state government is at loggerheads with the local tribes because it has issued licences to cut it down.”

Fogle told The Independent he has “postponed” the champagne event after being “horrified” by recent revelations, including an undercover investigation by the NGO Global Witness. He said he would not be making any more films for the Sarawak Tourism Board until he received answers to “many questions” that he now had.

In his travel piece in the Telegraph in February, Fogle talked of his adventure “deep in the primary rainforest of Malaysian Borneo” where he “came face to face with a ‘man of the forest’ – as the name orang-utan means in the local language”. He later explained that the orang-utans at the Matang Wildlife Centre, outside state capital Kuching, had been “uprooted by deforestation or poaching”. But the impression of a heavily forested region was reinforced by the description of a later journey in search of a rare flower. Another article appeared in Hello! Both pieces were proudly featured on the Sarawak Tourism Board’s website.

In the opening words to one of his films for the Sarawak Tourism Board, Fogle says: “This is one of the most beautiful rainforest regions on the planet... This is the future of conservation here in Sarawak... looking after this pristine environment and the riches this country has.”

The impression given is of a state that cares deeply about forest preservation. “Whoever advised Ben Fogle that doing PR for the Sarawak government on environmental issues was a good idea has let him down badly,” said Tom Picken of Global Witness. “Promoting tourism in Sarawak is positive in itself, but it must not gloss over the environmental destruction and exploitation that is devastating the region.” The images of the handsome presenter and the orang-utans have proved irresistible to a community of “mummy bloggers” who were encouraged to share the video by publicists, British travel PR firm Hills Balfour. “Ben Fogle in Sarawak with orphaned orang-utans – Ben compares them to his children! They’re so cute,” the PR firm tweeted.

Fogle revealed he would not be hosting any Sarawak event “until I have investigated further” and gave a lengthy response on his Sarawak “adventures”. He said he carried out “due diligence” on Sarawak and information from the International Tropical Timber Organisation suggested there had been “an improvement in forest management”, adding: “I visited Sarawak on the understanding that the environmental situation has been improving.”

Fogle said he stood by his description of Sarawak’s beauty: “It was breathtakingly beautiful. While I observed some palm oil from the air while flying into Kuching, I did not visit the areas of deforestation. I was in Sarawak to make some short films about adventurous travel for Sarawak Tourism’s website.”

He said he had not used the expression “eco-tourism” in relation to Sarawak. He said that the orang-utans he had seen had not been in the wild but said they were being well cared for. But he had been “horrified” by the Global Witness findings released last week, which he was only aware of after his visit: “I have been in touch with Global Witness to raise my concerns and to discuss what can be done. I was aware of online allegations of corruption, but most governments – including our own – have also had allegations of corruption levelled against them.

“I make a distinction between the Sarawak Tourism Board and Taib Mahmud [Sarawak Chief Minister]. I was in Sarawak to promote tourism which employs thousands of people and is estimated to be worth more than a billion pounds to the economy. I have never knowingly supported the ‘regime’.”

Fogle said he tried to avoid political issues: “There are those who firmly believe in sanctions and boycotts to resolve political issues but I have always believed in supporting tourism.”

He said he had been previously unaware of the plight of Sarawak’s indigenous people as a consequence of logging. “I was not aware until the publication of the Global Witness video. I am horrified by the revelations.”

Hills Balfour defended its own role for Sarawak. “As a travel PR company, we believe in promoting tourism as a growing part of Sarawak’s economy,” it said. “It creates thousands of jobs for Sarawakians and is the life blood of a developing industry which helps support many of the local communities.”

Mishcon de Reya, the London law firm representing Chief Minister Taib, issued a statement in response to the Global Witness film: “The government of Sarawak issues licences for land in very controlled circumstances... This is an administrative exercise, not political patronage. Our client never demands or accepts bribes for the grant of licences and leases.”

Sarawak: forest for sale

Sarawak is one of two Malaysian states on the island of Borneo and for the past 32 years has been run like a personal fiefdom by Taib Mahmud, 76, the Chief Minister. The state has the fastest rate of deforestation in Asia and exports more tropical logs than Africa and Latin America combined. Less than five per cent of its rainforest remains in a pristine state. Much of the logging has taken place on the ancestral lands of the state’s indigenous peoples.

For a hundred years from 1842, Sarawak was ruled by a British family – the Brooke dynasty of “White Rajahs” – appointed by the Sultan of Brunei. During the Second World War it was occupied by the Japanese and it became a British colony in 1946 before being granted independence and joining the federation of Malaysia in 1963.

Global Witness last week released an undercover film exposing how relatives of Taib were prepared to make corrupt deals with filmmakers posing as foreign investors looking to buy land that would be logged and cleared for oil palm plantations. The buyers were told by lawyers acting for Taib’s relatives that the money should be put through Singapore in order to avoid Malaysian taxes.

Taib is currently the subject of an official probe by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission. “This film proves for the first time what has long been suspected – that the small elite around Chief Minister Taib are systematically abusing the region’s people and natural resources to line their own pockets,” said Tom Picken, Forest Team Leader at Global Witness.

Taib’s lawyers said land licences were issued in “controlled circumstances” and that the Chief Minister “never demands or accepts bribes”.

Najib has delivered – A Malaysia More Corrupt!

by Martin Jalleh

Najib Meets State BN Heads As Dissolution Date Still In The Air

PUTRAJAYA, March 28 (Bernama) -- Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak Thursday met state Barisan Nasional (BN) chairmen at the Perdana Putra Complex here, raising speculation that dissolution of the Dewan Rakyat is getting closer.

It is believed the meeting was called to finalise the BN's candidates list and final preparations before the 13th general election.

Seen going into the complex were Johor Menteri Besar Datuk Abdul Ghani Othman, Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Seri Musa Aman, Terengganu Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Ahmad Said, Perak Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir and Melaka Chief Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Ali Rustam.

Others were Selangor BN deputy chairman Datuk Seri Noh Omar and Sepang MP Datuk Seri Mohd Zin Mohamed, who is also Selangor BN deputy election director.

Also present was BN secretary-general Datuk Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor.

However, none of those who attended the meeting were willing to stop for a moment to be interviewed by pressmen when they streamed out of the complex.

Parliament will face automatic dissolution on April 30.

The last general election was held on March 8, 2008.

Friday, the prime minister is expected meet the heads of BN component parties on the same matters.

Thailand and Muslim rebels begin peace talks

 

First round of talks between Thailand and separatist rebels was marred by violence killing five people [Al Jazeera]

Five people are reported killed as Thai government begins talks with separatists in neighbouring Malaysia.

Thailand and a Muslim rebel group have started peace negotiations aimed at ending nearly a decade of conflict in the country's three southern most provinces.

Thursday’s first round of talks between Thai security officials and representatives of the Barisan Revolusi Nasional rebel group in the Malaysian capital of Kuala Lumpur, however, was marred by a bomb explosion and a shooting incident that killed five people, according to Al Jazeera's Wayne Hay.

Ahmad Zamzamin, a former senior aide of Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak, is facilitating the talks.

Prior to talks, a roadside bomb exploded in the Chor Ai-rong district of Narathiwat province, 840 kilometres south of Bangkok, killing three soldiers who were patrolling the area, said the 4th Army Region commander, Lieutenant General Udomchai Thammasarorat.

Five other soldiers were also wounded in the ambush.

Authorities say the attack took place in a village that is home to a key leader of the Muslim separatist group taking part in talks with the Thai government.

"We suspect this was the work of local militants who want to discredit the peace talks under way in Kuala Lumpur," Udomchai said.

A separate shooting incident was also reported in Narathiwat killing two Buddhist civilians.

The husband and wife were shot in Tak Bai district, where in 2004 more than 80 Muslim men died in a confrontation with security forces.

"That kind of underscores the difficulty of these talks," Al Jazeera's Florence Looi, reporting from Kuala Lumpur, said.

More than 5,300 people have been killed in the conflict in the majority-Muslim provinces in Thailand, which are under emergency law.

Rebels have carried out shootings and bombings on monks, teachers and village officials as symbols of the majority-Buddhist state.

With friends like Mahathir, you don't need enemies

COMMENT Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak must be mulling the thought that with allies like Dr Mahathir Mohamad he does not need adversaries.

Almost daily, the retired former prime minister has something to say about current affairs, not all of it benign to the interests of the incumbent PM.

Few believed that when he retired in October 2003, after 22 years as PM, Mahathir would go gently into the good night of political retirement and memoir writing.

Still fewer expected that he would continue to stalk the political arena, spewing darts from his blowgun.

After all, he was an advanced septuagenarian when he retired, an age that's not exactly hospitable to a post-race lap. Further, he disclaimed any interest in a Lee Kuan Yew-like minister mentor role.

But just like General Carl Clausewitz's observation that war is the continuation of politics by other means, so too Mahathir's retirement from prime ministerial office is the resumption of political leadership from vantages other than the bully pulpit.

From the sidelines, Mahathir exerted his influence, especially when matters on successor Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's watch were not going according to his taste.

When and if they did, he was loud in remonstrance, even to the extent of threatening to quit Umno.

One is reminded of Kelantan Menteri Besar Nik Aziz Nik Mat's sally that Mahathir was more useful to the opposition if he was still a member of Umno than if he were out, which was what the ex-PM threatened to do at one stage of his harassment of the hapless Abdullah.

In high dudgeon over Abdullah's leadership, Mahathir at one stage threw in his resignation from Umno but was mollified by Najib enough to have it rescinded.

Noose tightening

Just now, Najib must be feeling rueful about that exercise in pacification of Mahathir because it has brought him no dividends.

From the start of his premiership four years ago, Najib has bent over backwards not to offend the supposed retiree, all in the euphoric hope that he won't court the fate of his predecessor Abdullah who had to run the gauntlet of Mahathir's carping criticisms until he caved in to the pressure.

With the latest comments by Mahathir that the PM would have to relinquish his position as Umno president if he but wins GE13 narrowly, Najib must have felt the noose tightening around his neck.

True, Mahathir is no respecter of the proprieties governing intramural political conversation - he only abides by the rules when it suits him - still, his reminder to Najib that the latter is dangling by a shriveling thread must be considered unhelpful, what with Najib facing a tight general election.

Talk of confidence-building measures, this is like telling a friend who faces the prospect of being hung in a few weeks' time that you have withdrawn your support for the abolition of capital punishment.

Najib has misjudged Mahathir's character which is the epitome of Charles de Gaulle's dictum that in politics there are no permanent friends or enemies; there are only permanent interests.

For GE13, Mahathir's interest lies in a Najib victory that is narrower than Abdullah's was at GE12.

That way, Najib will be challenged for the Umno presidency - Mahathir would prefer he vacates it as Abdullah did - by current deputy, Muhyiddin Yassin, whose elevation would pave the way for Mahathir's son, Mukhriz, to rise in the party hierarchy.

Mahathir has taken care to deny any interest in the prospects for upward mobility of Muhyiddin, but that is a denial that is more for the sake of form than for actual content.

Seen as weak and ineffectual

When Mahathir retired in October 2003, he exerted pressure from behind the scenes on successor Abdullah to name Najib as the deputy which Abdullah was reluctant to do, preferring to leave the selection to an elective assembly of Umno that he intended to convene only after seeking his own mandate at a general election.

But Mahathir, to forestall a possible Abdullah preference for Muhyiddin over Najib, forced the PM's hand and had Najib named as deputy PM in January 2004.

Two months later, in March 2004, Abdullah won an overwhelming endorsement at GE11, a victory that would have made his preference of a deputy, subtly conveyed of course, irresistible to Umno delegates at the subsequent elective assembly of the party.

Mahathir's leadership preferences chop and change, but his interests - self more than party-centred - remain permanent. That these are now running counter to Najib's best interests is clear.

Mahathir's comment yesterday that, if he were PM, he would have called the election last year is the sort of smart talk on hindsight that is disdained as cheap by incumbents and retirees alike from high office, especially when they belong in the same side of the political divide.

The comment only serves to emphasise Najib's ineptness in deferring the election to the point that it shows he is scared stiff of the probable results.

His disinclination to offend Mahathir and his dithering over when to call the general election has shown him up as weak and ineffectual.

They have brought him no benefits, underscoring the point that in politics, irresolution is a dead end.

---

TERENCE NETTO has been a journalist for four decades. He likes the occupation because it puts him in contact with the eminent without being under the necessity to admire them.

Impossible for BN to cheat

There is no way the Malaysian authorities would want the country to become another Myanmar.
COMMENT

Malaysia is abuzz with talks that the ruling Barisan National will never accept defeat, or that it is preparing to snatch victory by cheating at the polls with massive voting by foreigners.

However, due to the current global situation and the fact Malaysia plays a very important role in the global sphere, there is serious doubt on these allegations.

How true are claims that the BN will hijack the polls and twist the votes or that it will cause a massive blockade of Pakatan Rakyat voters, to allow pro-BN votes?

The opposition has accused the BN of filling the voter rolls with foreigners, whom it claims have been given Malaysian identity cards to vote for the BN. The number of foreigners set to vote for the BN, Pakatan says, varies between a few thousand and two million.

The opposition produced some ICs that appear to be dubious and fraudulent, and the ongoing Royal Commission of Inquiry on the IC fraud in Sabah does not help the BN.

The BN itself is aware of the limitations imposed on it to remain in power at all cost, and to try to cheat its way in the next general election.

Many of its top leaders have warned the opposition not to trigger an “Arab Spring”. By all means, this is indicative of the fears the BN leaders have of such a possibility.

The mounting criticism of the forceful ways the authorities handled the Bersih 2.0 rally to the disadvantage of the BN has been heard.

However, the Jan 12 rally at Stadium Merdeka was peaceful, successful and sent yet another message to the BN: that the international community is watching and the BN be better prepared to play fair.

The BN is now pretty much aware that the global forces of change will not allow it to twist and turn the results of the upcoming polls in its favour.

The United Nations, for the time being, is watching the situation in Malaysia very closely. There is no way the Malaysian authorities would want the country to become another Myanmar, for example.

The military junta in Myanmar stole the election from the powerful opposition, annulling the polls results and imposing emergency rule. This will not happen in Malaysia; such an act will only destroy the nation’s economy for good.

Malaysia, since the time of Dr Mahathir Mohamad, has depended heavily on foreign direct investment (FDI). This has helped raise the standard of living of the people, putting Malaysia firmly on the world map.

Would the BN do some foolish stuff to destroy this edge that it has helped the country achieve in the past decades?

BN must deliver its promises

The onus is on the BN indeed as any tainting and meddling in the upcoming polls will scare investors away, stop the influx of FDI and surely raise the ire of the population.

Any attempt by the BN to crush the angry mobs – if they were to appear after a BN win in the polls – would only turn Malaysia into a “rogue” nation in the eyes of the international community.

And what about the United States? The most powerful nation on earth has been behind, tacitly or openly, the Arab Spring since its inception on day one.

This country will not close its eyes, if there were to be trouble in Malaysia as a result of a flawed election.

Washington is watching over and any wrong move by the BN – stealing the election and maintaining its grip on power – will surely be unwelcome.

The Barack Obama administration would surely not bet its hands in favour of the BN. That is, if the BN were proven to have stolen the results, as is being feared by many within Pakatan.

Malaysia, being a nation rapidly progressing and developing, cannot afford to be belittled and looked upon as a pariah state. Thus the BN will have to deliver on its promises.

Among these promises, will both sides accept the results of the upcoming election? After all, if Pakatan wins, is it not a group of Malaysian politicians who will take over at Putrajaya?

Will the BN win, or will it lose? Needless to say, only the voters know the secret of their ballots they will cast and whoever comes out the winner, it should be for the betterment of the country.

Ali Cordoba writes extensively on local politics.

Dr M: Najib may need to step down if BN fares badly

Dr M: Najib may need to step down if BN fares badly

Like his predecessor Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak may have to step down if BN fails to do well in the coming polls, contends former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

"I say theoretically, if he does not do well, of course his position will not be stable," Mahathir told reporters at a press conference in Kuala Lumpur today.

He said this when asked to comment on his interview with foreign news service AFP, during which he made the same remark, though the veteran Umno leader explained that this was just his view of things, which may not necessarily pan out.

To another question, Mahathir refused to name any person who should replace Najib as prime minister if he did step down.

"I don't have any candidate (in mind). I don't expect that to happen... I said theoretically only," he explained.
Asked to comment on the ongoing wait for the dissolution of Parliament, Mahathir again said this was up to the PM of the day.

“I have been told that a certain state assembly will automatically dissolve and I think that soon Parliament will also dissolve (automatically).

“Maybe before that, if the PM wants to dissolve, then he can.”
If I was PM, I'd call GE last year
However, Mahathir repeated his belief that the ideal time to dissolve Parliament should have been last year.

“But I do not have power. If I was the prime minister, Parliament would have already been dissolved last year.”

Quizzed about the English language daily New Straits Times’ interview with former finance minister Mohd Daim Zainuddin, on “deadwood” that should be removed from the BN’s cabinet line-up, Mahathir agreed wholeheartedly.

“I agree entirely. Lots of deadwood should be chopped down and thrown away and new trees grown,” he said with his trademark sarcasm.
On the apparent do-or-die bliztkrieg of DAP parliamentary leader Lim Kit Siang and senior party leaders into the Umno stronghold of Johor, Mahathir said whether or not the opposition party’s belief in its splendid chance of capturing the state would come true remained to be seen.

“Johor is normally a stronghold of BN. Maybe they have found out something about the feelings of the people of Johor.

“So they think they can win in Johor, but they say the proof of the pudding is in the eating. We’ll see what happens when the election is on,” the wily former premier concluded drily.

Death in custody: Sivarasa quizzed

Subang MP R Sivarasa says the police should not misuse their resources in going only after opposition MPs.

PETALING JAYA: In January, Subang MP R Sivarasa and Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo raised the case of a death in custody of a mechanic at the USJ8 Subang Jaya police station.

For their pains, Sivarasa was summoned by the police here today for questioning over the case, while Gobind was called in last week.

At a press conference here today, Sivarasa criticised the police for “harassing opposition MPs”.

“… I think the [interrogation] is a waste of time…” he said.

“I urged the police not to misuse their resources in this manner [going after opposition MPs],” he said.

Lembah Pantai MP Nurul Izzah, who was also present, said the government should stop using the police force to attack the opposition MPs.

Sivarasa said Subang OCPD Yahya Ramli filed a report against him in relation to the death in police custody of mechanic Chang Chin Te, 30.

Chang was arrested together with three other suspects for allegedly being members of an armed robbery gang.

“Chang was arrested on Jan 10 and was found dead at the USJ8 Subang Jaya police station four days later,” Sivarasa said.

“His wife took photos of him when she found bruises on his face and body but was later ordered by the police and hospital staff to delete them,” said Sivarasa.

He said that Chang’s family who lives in Subang New Village approached him for help to get a second post-mortem done because they suspected foul play.

“They live in my constituency, and it would be a dereliction of my duty if I didn’t help them,” he said a press conference here today.

“But OCPD Yahya made a police report against me for criminal defamation [when Gobind and I raised the issue],” he said, adding that the police should put their resources to better use than to harass opposition MPs.

Sivarasa said that the first post-mortem was done at Universiti Malaya Medical Centre (UMMC), but the family wanted a second autopsy.

He said Chang’s family wanted the second post-mortem to be carried out at the Sungai Buloh Hospital, but was advised to contact UMMC for results of the first post-mortem.

“The first post-mortem by UMMC stated that Chang died of a severe heart attack,” he said.

“The family later decided not to take any action, so we let it be,” he added.

On C Sugumar’s case, Sivarasa said the case was still at an impasse.

“We have tried several ways [of solving the matter], but all have failed. We feel bad for the family. We will just give it one last push and hope for the best,” he said.

Sugumar was allegedly chased, handcuffed and beaten to death on Jan 23, by policemen and several members of the public.

The family wants a second post-mortem to be conducted on the security guard.

When Indians decide not to vote…

Hindraf leader Waythamoorthy, on his 18th day on hunger strike, writes about the option of strategic abstention by poor Indian voters.
COMMENT

P Waythamoorthy

This is the 18th day of my hunger viratham (hunger strike). Today I will be penning my thoughts on the option of strategic abstention by the Indian poor in the forthcoming elections.

Today there is still a lot of residual anger against Umno among the Indian poor. Pakatan Rakyat is capitalising on this and is thinking that the votes of the Indian poor have nowhere else to go but to them.

This thinking shows the way they have treated the Indian electorate recently in their election manifesto flip flops.

Pakatn believes they should get a majority of the Indian votes – not maybe as high as the last time, but still the majority.

Barisan Nasional for their part believe they can buy the Indian vote with the goodies they have planned.

Hindraf’s analysis however is this – the urban educated Indians will largely go for Pakatan. Add to that the beneficiaries from the last election who have personally gained and all those who potentially stand to gain in the forthcoming elections. These votes are with Pakatan.

Then on the BN side, the MIC machinery is preparing to reach out to the local warlords and through them to the poorest among the Indians. They will be throwing a lot of money in the process in doing this

In our estimate all of that will all probably account for 50% of the Indian voters. You can argue about the accuracy of that number, but it surely is in that ballpark, give and take a few percentage points.

The leverage for the Indian poor does not come from those foregone votes. When we say leverage, we mean leverage as in getting the politicians to commit to the specific bottom-up plans laid out in our five-year blueprint for the Indian poor.

This is the key point on which the decision as to where the remaining Indian votes will go will be determined. Hindraf will make sure of that. This is the key point that BN and Pakatan should focus on.

We have a few more days left for BN and Pakatan to take their respective positions, either explicitly or by default on the question of the endorsement of the Hindraf’s five-year blueprint.

If they remain silent or ambivalent, then we in Hindraf will project it to mean they do not support a program of comprehensive and permanent correction to the socio-economic problems of the Indian poor – that they do not care about the Indian poor.

This therefore will form the central message from us to our base.

On the contrary, if either, and I reiterate, if either Pakatan or BN comes up and is willing to endorse our blueprint in a clear binding way, our message to the Indian poor will be to throw their support behind them – whoever they are – Pakatan or BN.

Strategic abstention

What if Pakatan and BN have not endorsed the blueprint by the time Parliament is dissolved?

The message that this sends to the Indian poor is that they both do not have the interest of the Indian poor in their minds.

The proposals in the hindraf blueprint are entirely justifiable. And if they do not want to adopt them and do not show the necessary commitment to implement them, then it does not really make any difference who wins in these elections.

We will make absolutely sure that this is the message that the Indian poor will hear.

Under these circumstances, abstaining from voting either BN or Pakatan becomes a real option for the Indian poor. Both Pakatan and BN cannot complain on any count on the adoption of this option by the Indian poor.

To the Indian poor, the logic is simple. Neither care, so neither deserves anything in return.

What will be the consequence of this move? This strategic abstention effectively means a pullback in the number of votes for both BN and Pakatan in this GE.

What this means in turn is that, all those seats that were won marginally will all be affected. The uncertainty increases. If you take Selangor alone, we see at least (at least) 20 state seats that fall in this category – easily.

The same logic and formula apply in Kedah, Penang, Perak, Negeri Sembilan, Pahang and Johor.

All marginally won seats in the last elections with an Indian voter population of more than 10% are candidates to come into this category. And not all the Indian poor need to abstain. Even if 20% of the Indian voters abstain, the impact will be significant. Strategic abstention can prove to be quite impactful.

By this strategic abstention, the Indian poor will be determining new winners and new losers. The winners will know they won without those votes and the losers will know they lost without those votes.

To both the winner and the loser, the significance of the vote of the Indian poor would have become clearer. This adds to calculations for future elections.

A purposeful option

Will the contenders want to treat the Indian poor vote so cavalierly? Yes they can, but only at a cost. That will become plain.

Extending this logic to the next level, strategic abstention can also be applied to individual candidates in the elections.

If they will announce their stand on the Hindraf blueprint, whether they support it and what specifically they will do in support of the programmes for the Indian poor and put it down formally to Hindraf. Hindraf can then endorse some of these candidates in return. The logistics of this has to be worked out, but this is also another option.

My conclusion therefore is that strategic abstention becomes a purposeful option for the Indian poor in this election.

By this act the Indian poor would have taken the opportunity to show the significance of their votes. Whether we will issue the call for it will be determined over the next couple of weeks, depending on when parliament is dissolved.

Our position is very clear. We do not want to see just changes in faces at the helm of our country; we also want to see real changes in the lives of the Indian poor. And we will take any position that supports our motives.

We will make our decision on what we will do soon as the dust settles for us.

P Waythamoorthy is the Hindraf chairperson. He has been on his hunger strike since March 10.

Justices appear hesitant as they hear arguments over same-sex marriage

Washington (CNN) -- As partisans argued pointedly over same-sex marriage outside the U.S. Supreme Court, justices inside hinted at their disparate views on the hot-button issue -- though it's far from clear how they will rule.

The stakes, though, are decidedly clearer. In the case argued Tuesday and another to be heard on Wednesday, the nine justices could fundamentally alter how American law treats marriage.

On one extreme, the court could extend a constitutional right for gays and lesbians to wed in all 50 states. On the other, it could deal a major setback to the gay rights movement. And then there are options in between.

"This was a deeply divided Supreme Court, and a court that seemed almost to be groping for an answer here," said CNN Senior Legal Analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

Hear and read the arguments in full

Toobin was among those who followed 80 minutes of arguments Tuesday over California's Proposition 8, which bans same-sex marriage. Voters approved the proposal 52% to 48% in November 2008, less than six months after the state Supreme Court ruled marriage is a fundamental right that must be extended to same-sex couples.

The overriding legal question in the California case, Hollingsworth v. Perry (12-144), is whether the Constitution's 14th Amendment guarantee of equal protection under the law prevents states from defining marriage as that state has.

From their questioning, it appeared evident how a few justices were leaning. Four of the more liberal justices seemed at least open to the idea that same-sex marriage should be allowed in California. Three of the more conservative justices seemed aligned with the view that it should only be for a man and a woman, and it's likely they'd be joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, who doesn't speak at arguments.

That could leave Justice Anthony Kennedy as, has often been the case, the swing vote.

He was among those who weighed in on whether the advocacy group appointed to defend the initiative has standing to argue the case.

While admitting the law's defenders are "not just any citizens," Kennedy raised concerns about whether just the possibility of same-sex marriage was enough to establish they had suffered harm -- a key jurisdictional hurdle allowing them to appeal in the first place.

Key questions answered

Justice Sonia Sotomayor said it is the state's responsibility -- through its elected leaders -- to defend laws in court, and that private individuals could not establish "how their injury was separate from everyone else." California Attorney General Kamala Harris, the state's top lawyer, said Tuesday she "declined to defend Proposition 8 because it violates the Constitution."

If the court dismisses the appeal on the grounds its defenders don't have the standing to defend the case in court, it may mean lower federal court rulings declaring the proposition unconstitutional would stand.

But it wouldn't allow for a broader, final rule outlining the power of states to say who can or can't get married.

Announcement of rulings unlikely before June

The justices did probe that broader legal question, including an exchange between pro-Proposition 8 attorney Charles Cooper and Justice Elena Kagan.

"The concern is that redefining marriage as a genderless institution will sever its abiding connection to its historic traditional procreative purposes, and it will ... refocus the purpose of marriage and the definition of marriage away from the raising of children and to the emotional needs and desires ... of adult couples," Cooper argued.

To which Kagan said: "Mr. Cooper, suppose a state said that, because 'we think that the focus of marriage really should be on procreation, we are not going to give marriage licenses anymore to any couple where both people are over the age of 55.' Would that be constitutional?"

"No, your honor, it would not be constitutional," Cooper replied.

Tuesday's hearing was the first of back-to-back sessions on same-sex marriage laws.

The court will listen to arguments on Wednesday on U.S. v. Windsor, a separate challenge to the federal Defense of Marriage Act which, like the California law, defines marriage as between a man and a woman.

That 1996 law prevents legally married same-sex couples from getting federal benefits and privileges, like tax breaks and survivor benefits, that are extended to opposite-sex couples.

Couple at the center of epic high court fight

The court is unlikely to announce its decisions on both matters until June.

Andrew Pugno, general counsel for the Protect Marriage Coalition, the group defending Proposition 8, said its attorney had "credibly presented the winning case for marriage."

"We think the hearing went very well," he told reporters.

Attorneys representing the two couples seeking to overturn Proposition 8, meanwhile, said they couldn't tell how the court would rule.

"We are confident where the American people are going with this," said Theodore Olson. "We don't know for sure what the United States Supreme Court is going to do, but we're very, very grateful they listened, they heard, they asked hard questions, and there's no denying where the right is."

Spirited rallies on both sides of debate

One of the plaintiff couples -- Paul Katami and Jeff Zarrillo of Burbank, California, who want to marry but can't because of Proposition 8 -- contend the state is discriminating against them because of their sexuality.

"This is about our freedom and our liberty," Katami said. "We are not trying to topple marriage. We are not trying to redefine marriage. What we are trying to say is that equality is the backbone of our country."

This view was echoed by fellow same-sex marriage supporters, who rallied outside the court with the hope that the justices would eventually issue a broad ruling to strike down bans nationwide.

5 turning points in the debate

"We are not asking for anything more than our neighbors, friends and family, but certainly expect no less," said Todd Bluntworth, who spoke with his husband and their two children.

But opponents who rallied nearby -- some of them carrying signs reading, "Kids do best with a mom & dad" -- urged the court to keep out of the issue and leave the decision to states.

"If you want to get married, go to one of the states that allows gay marriage," said Carl Boyd Jr., a conservative Nashville talk-show host. "Stop trying to force your agenda down our throats. Quit trying to bully the American people with the homosexual agenda."

Patchwork state laws

The court could historically alter how the law treats marriage, striking down laws across the country banning same-sex marriage and matching an apparent cultural shift toward acceptance of same-sex couples.

Or it could leave the current patchwork of state laws in place, choosing to let state legislatures and state courts sort it all out.

Forty-one states now forbid same-sex marriage, although nine of them allow civil partnerships. Nine other states allow same-sex marriage, and about 120,000 same-sex couples have gotten married, according to estimates.

By the numbers: Same-sex marriage

California's ban seems to run counter to polls that show rising support overall for same-sex marriage.

A CNN/ORC International poll released on Monday found 53% of Americans now support same-sex marriage, up from 40% in 2007. As to how the federal government should handle the issue -- the subject of Wednesday's hearing -- another CNN/ORC International poll out Tuesday found 56% of the public feels the federal government should also legally recognize same-sex marriages.

The Justice Department will argue against the Defense of Marriage Act, a federal law, on Wednesday.

Plaintiff: 'We were like most couples'

This comes as President Barack Obama has changed positions on same-sex marriage over his political career. Now fully supportive, he's said would strike down California's law if he sat on the Supreme Court.

Other prominent politicians have voiced timely opinions in recent weeks, indicating the matter's importance in 21st century American politics.

Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state and possible 2016 Democratic presidential candidate, publicly backed same-sex marriage earlier this month.

The Republican party has historically backed efforts to define marriage as only between a man and a woman. But there's been notable movement of late among Republicans, including Sen. Rob Portman's recent shift to support same-sex marriage, which he made two years after his son revealed to him that he is gay.

"There is no putting this genie back in the bottle. It is undeniable. The shift is here, and we're not going back," Republican strategist and CNN contributor Ana Navarro said Sunday.

Past midnight, NS will have a caretaker gov't

COMMENT In our federal system of government, the general election has to be held every five years for Parliament and the 13 state legislative assemblies. There is no constitutional reason why the general election for the 14 legislatures must be held at the same time.

Indeed, since Merdeka, there have been instances when national and state elections were held at different times. Even in 2013, no state election needs to be held in Sarawak because that state had its last one in 2011, which would take the term of its legislature to 2016.

However, because of the centralisation of power in Putrajaya and its control over the Election Commission (EC), the political reality is that the BN federal government decides when the national election will be held this year.

The EC, as the BN government's mouthpiece, has already announced that elections to Parliament and all state assemblies (except Sarawak) would be held on the same day. For practical purposes, this means the four Pakatan governments of Kelantan, Kedah, Penang and Selangor have absolutely no say on the fixing of the dates of their state elections.

It does not follow from the fact that the 12 states that have to go to the election in the coming weeks are powerless under the federal constitution because they cannot decide on the date of their elections.

The fixing of the date must be contrasted with the earlier or prior decision of the menteri besar/chief minister of each of the 12 states to advise his Malay ruler or governor (Yang di-Pertua Negeri) to dissolve the state assembly before the expiry of its five-year term.

This is a decision of great constitutional significance, and it is disappointing, from the perspective of the constitution, that the Negri Sembilan menteri besar did not advise the Yang di-Pertuan Besar to dissolve the state legislature.

Instead, Article 56(4) of the Second Part of the Negri Sembilan constitution goes into effect today, and the assembly will automatically be dissolved at midnight. Historians would have to advise whether this is the first occasion that this has happened in Malaysia.

Our parliamentary democracy is established on the basis that a government elected at the general election is a government responsible to the legislature, and one of the prerogatives of the leader of such a government is to advise his constitutional monarch to dissolve the legislature before the automatic dissolution clause is triggered.

One hopes that the other 11 state governments will not follow the Negeri Sembilan precedent and allow automatic dissolution to occur. Rather, each of them should exercise their privilege and immediately advise on dissolution.
The significance is this: a conscious and deliberate decision of the state executive, as contemplated in the Westminister system, is far more preferable than automatic dissolution, which sends the unmistakable signal that the government is frightened to meet the electorate on a date of its choosing.

A gov't with minimum powers

The EC has already announced that general election for all the legislatures (save Sarawak) must be held before May 27, 2013. It has also declared that past midnight today, the Negri Sembilan government will be a caretaker government.

The binding effect of decisions and contracts made by a caretaker government in the Westminister system must be contrasted with that of a normal government.

Much learning on the nature of caretaker governments is freely available online: a sample can be found at the end of this article. The EC should publicly announce at once the do's and don'ts of what the Negri Sembilan government can do in the next 60 days.

Some plain and basic illustrations will help. The Negri government can continue to pay its civil servants and honour contracts entered into before March 27, 2013. Thus, if the Negri government had entered into a tenancy agreement in 2012 with a private sector party to rent the latter's office block in Seremban, that agreement is valid and the state must pay the rentals to the landlord for the next two months.

However what the Negeri government cannot do is to enter into new contracts, transactions or deals in the next 60 days. If a third party is reckless to execute such a contract, it does so at its peril. And if the people of Negri elect a Pakatan state government, it is entitled, in the public interest, to terminate such a contract.

This is the public law that is equivalent to the inability of an agent to bind its principal in certain circumstances that one finds in private law, such as that of directors committing their company to a contract when the company is facing winding-up.

As the name suggests, a caretaker government is just taking care of the state by virtue of the doctrine of necessity. Every state must at all times have a government, and the Negri government becomes a government with minimum powers.

The essence of the concept of a caretaker government is to equalise the positions of the ruling party and the opposition in the lead-up to the election. The objective is to have a level-playing field in order to promote fair elections. It will always be temporary in nature, that is, only until May 27, 2013.

When campaigning for votes, the Negri state government (and all the other governments in the coming weeks) should not be using public property, such as helicopters, motor vehicles and government halls, which belong to the people because they are paid for with taxpayers' funds.

Because the opposition cannot use such public property, neither can the ruling government. A clear demarcation between government work and party work must be applied.
Likewise, access to the mass media. Equal time and access must be given to both coalitions since the mass media (state-owned TV and radio) are funded with taxpayers' money.

The BN has been treating Angkasapuri as its private property: it is not, and must be shared with the opposition coalition in the next two months. One need not multiply examples to make this point.

---

TOMMY THOMAS specialises in constitutional law.
UNITED KINGDOM

General Election Guidance (2010) Cabinet Office, United Kingdom.

The Cabinet Manual - Draft (2010) Cabinet Office, United Kingdom.

AUSTRALIA

Guidance on the Caretaker Conventions (2010) Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, Australia.

Guidelines on the Caretaker Conventions, Premier and Cabinet, State Government of Victoria, Australia.

'Caretaker' Conventions and other Pre-Election Practices (2010) Premier and Cabinet, Government of New South Wales, Australia.

Guidance on Caretaker Conventions (2012) Government of Australian Capital Territory, Australia.

CANADA
Guidelines on the conduct of Ministers, Secretaries of State, Exempt Staff and Public Servants during an Election (2008) Privy Council Office, Canada.

Pakatan lancar Majlis Penasihat keselamatan

Hindu Jagran Manch urged mourning in Holi as a mark of protest over atrocities upon Hindus in West Bengal and Bangladesh.

How can we celebrate a colourful Holi right now? Observe Mass Mourning.

Hindu Existence Bureau, Kolkata | 26 March 2013:: Hindu Jagran Manch, West Bengal urged Bengali Hindus for observing a day-long mourning in Holi festivity as a mark of protest for increasing atrocities upon Hindus in West Bengal in Naliakhali Viloence and Bangladesh after Shahabag Protest demanding the execution of Bangladesh War Criminal in Bangladesh Liberation in 1971.

While Hindus Naliakhali in Canning Subdivision in West Bengal saw a repetition of Noakhali (1946), where villagers of four villages (GoladahoraManiktala, Gopalpur, Herobhanga-Satmukhi and Naliakhali) were uprooted for some days and more than 200 Hindu house-holds were arsoned by the outsiders after a killing of a Muslim Cleric by some unknown person on 19 Feb 2013. The severity of torture upon Hindus crossed the limit and it was a harrowing reminiscence of Noakhali Genocide of 1946. God saved the casualties anyway this time. But, Hindus in West Bengal are regularly being attacked in a same pattern as the Hindus of Deganga (North 24 District) were also attacked and tortured in 2010 by the Muslim hooligans led by a Criminal TMC leader Hazi Nurul Islam, MP of Bashirhat.

The sate ruling parties and the TMC led Govt in West Bengal has not paid any special attention to the Hindu victims and humiliated them by giving them some Rs. 10,000/=, like this while the family of the murdered Imam, Ruhul Kuddus got mor than Rs. 2,00,000/= without any delay. Hindu victims of Naliakhali violence are still in grief and hazards. Many of them are still homeless and helpless. There is no meaning Colour of Holi in Naliakhali at all.

The plight of minority Hindus inn Bangladesh has no limit for ever. After the Shahabag movement, the International Tribunal for War Criminal pronounced the execution of Delwar Hossai Sayedee. After that the Islamic fundamentals of Jamaat-e-Islami in Bangladesh has plundered the Hindu areas of Bangladesh only to drive away them from Bangladesh out of a dangerous plan to make Bangladesh as Kaffir Free and Hindu-less.

A reputed Bengali newspaper in Bangladesh, ‘Prothom Alo‘ has published the horrible account of the torture upon the minority Hindus in the pot Shahbag period. The accounts include the attack upon 319 Hindu temples, Hindu house-holds and shops in last 24 days. Hindus are affected in 32 districts in Bangladesh. But, this reflection of the plight of BD Hindus in newspaper is more than true though partial. Actually, thousand small, medium and big temples, house-holds, shops, properties, valuables of Hindus in Bangladesh have been desecrated, torched, looted and vandalized including the pleasurable and pious Islamic game of destroying Hindu Gods and Goddesses in temples and Hindu homes. The Hindus in Bangladesh have also no meaning of Holi Celebration as an obvious point of their frightened and persecuted atmosphere.

On the other hand the repression upon the Hindu Organizational members and Hindu leaders by TMC (Total Muslim Congress) Supremo, Mamtaz Banu Arjee in these days are all time high.

All these odd happenings in Bengal and Bangladesh include blood-shed of Hindu brothers, rape of Hindu Women and unchecked tears of Hindu Mothers. The apathy or the anti-pathy in this situation is very shocking. These victims of Jihad have no colour of Holy in their grief stricken phase of life.

Activists of Hindu Jagran Manch are hanging the placards of ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,“Observe a Mass Mourning on Holi this year”.               Pic. Source: Shyama Charan Roy.

In this context, the Hindu Jagaran Manch and Hindu Existence Forum jointly gave a call a call to observe mourning and reject all colours of Holi in protest to Islamic Violence in Noliakhali, Canning, West Bengal; Post Shahabag attack on minority Hindus in 32 districts in Bangladesh and unlawful detention of Hindu activists in West Bengal Jails by autocrat-&-pro-Islamic maroon Mamataz Banu Arjee. Let the children play Holi, they know nothing. But what should we do?

YES, WE CAN NOT CELEBRATE HOLI THIS TIME , IGNORING THE BLOODSHED OF OUR BROTHERS, MODESTY OF OUR SISTERS AND TEARS OF OUR MOTHERS. WE MAY CAN OBSERVE ARANDHAN (NO COOKING), TOKEN HUNGER STRIKE, PROTEST RALLY, STREET CORNERS, LEAFLETING, POSTERING ETC. TO EXPRESS OUR SOLIDARITY WITH THE GLOBAL HINDU BENGALIS EVERYWHERE ALONG WITH STRUGGLING PEOPLE AT SHAHBAG.

SAY NO COLOUR OR ENJOYMENT IN THIS HOLI. OBSERVE A MASS MOURNING AS IT IS EXPECTED IN 1000 PLACES IN BENGAL, TO CONVEY THAT WE REMAIN COLOUR-LESS THIS YEAR WITH OUR FRIENDS IN CRISIS AT NALIAKHALI OR NOAKHALI.

Hindu Jagran Manch has made a huge postering and leafleting to refrain Bengali Hindus from celebrating Holi for a chief enjoyments.

The facebook community ‘Shahbager pashe amrao‘ and Some social media groups are unitedly conducting the signature campaign in support of Shahbag movement with protesting the gross violence upon minorities in Bangladesh in post Shahbag period.

Some organisations like Hindu Jagran Manch, RSS, facebook community ‘Shahbager pashe amrao‘ and others have planned to lead a candle march for peace, equality, fraternity in Bangladesh on the very liberation day of Bangladesh on 26th March from the clutch of fundamental rulers of Pakistan. The Candle march is scheduled to start at 4 pm from Academy of Fine arts and will end at the statue of Gandhi at Red Road, Kolkata.

Clerics attack Ahmadi house, torture family in Punjab

Mob reportedly attacked an Ahmadi man's house over his refusal to convert, PHOTO: FILE 

KASUR: Local clerics attacked a house belonging to an Ahmadi family in the Kasur district of Punjab on Tuesday and subjected the family members to violence allegedly over their religious belief, The Express Tribune has learnt.

A mob led by a local cleric chanted slogans against Ahmadi families, their religious beliefs and their community before breaking into Mansoor’s* house in the Shamsabad area.

The five members of Mansoor’s family tried to take refuge in a room but the mob broke into the room as well.

Police personnel were reportedly present at the spot but did not take any action against the mob.

Mansoor was severely tortured after which he lost consciousness, while his wife and his 70-year-old uncle were also beaten.

Mansoor was shifted to a hospital where authorities claimed that he is in critical condition.

Sheikh Yousaf, Head of the Ahmadi community in Kasur, told The Express Tribune that he had repeatedly asked the DPO Kasur to establish a police check post in the area as they had been receiving threats since six months. He said that the DPO had agreed to his demands but the local MNA created hurdles in establishment of the check post.

He claimed that the police had deliberately left the Ahmadi family at the mercy of the mob, and the clerics who attacked that threatened the family to convert to their religion or face consequences.

The house was attacked when Mansoor refused to convert, Yousaf added.

*Name has been changed to protect identity

 Read more: ahmadipersecution

Hisham is endorsing political violence, says Pakatan

PETALING JAYA, March 26 — Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein's recent remarks that he expects more disruption of opposition events soon is tantamount to endorsing political violence, Pakatan Rakyat (PR) leaders alleged today.

The federal opposition coalition said that since the home minister had failed to give his assurance that the authorities will do its bit to protect them, PR is bracing for more political violence prior to and during Election 2013.

"The politics of slander and violence is definitely on the rise and we the leadership of PR is bracing for this," Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim told reporters after chairing the pact's leaders council meeting at PKR's headquarters here.

Anwar, the de facto leader of PR's anchor party PKR, said the anticipation comes amid the pact's preparation to launch its polls campaign nationwide.

Speaking at the same press conference, DAP stalwart Lim Kit Siang blasted Hishammuddin's statement as unbecoming of a minister tasked to protect internal security.

"This will make it the dirtiest elections. This trend must be checked and stopped. We are becoming the laughing stock of the world," Lim said.

The Ipoh Timur lawmaker added that Hishammuddin (picture) had also indirectly supported violence against the opposition by inciting hatred among government supporters in his speech on Sunday.

Party workers had shouted "Kill Tian Chua" when the Umno vice-president urged them to rally behind Barisan Nasional (BN) and "eliminate traitors" like PKR vice-president Chua Tian Chang, better known as Tian Chua, whose allies in Pakatan Rakyat (PR) have been accused of instigating the Sulu invasion of Sabah.

Hishammuddin admitted yesterday that political violence in the country was worsening, but accused PR of exploiting the situation to sow hatred for the government and the police.

He also noted that more incidents of violence might occur during the campaign period of Election 2013, which is expected to be held in weeks, due to the shortage of policemen.

His statement drew flak from poll reform group Bersih 2.0 who urged the minister to censure Umno supporters for the threat or risk being blacklisted by polls watchdog Bersih 2.0 for condoning political violence.

PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu echoed Lim's view that Hishammuddin as a minister should adopt a non-partisan stand against political violence.

"But instead he said we should expect more violence," he said.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, along with leaders from BN component parties, signed Transparency International-Malaysia's Election Integrity Pledge last month in a move they claimed displayed their seriousness in playing fair in the upcoming polls.

But Najib and his coalition have come under heavy fire for their muted response to several violent attacks on the opposition, allegedly perpetrated by BN supporters or members of hardline groups linked to Umno, the ruling coalition's Malay lynchpin.

Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim's tour in Johor was attacked with nails and stones last September.

At another incident in Pahang last month, Anwar's daughter, Nurul Izzah, was almost physically assaulted by Umno supporters. Although her supporters managed to prevent it, the PKR vice-president continued to be verbally abused.

On March 12, suspected Umno members were again implicated in a violent attack on the opposition, including a threat to torch PKR's headquarters in Petaling Jaya just days after the party's leadership alleged assault by BN supporters in Malacca.

Members from right-wing groups pelted rocks, sticks and traffic cones on the PKR building. A few torched the party's flag. The incident took place under police observation. No action, however, was taken.

Address minority issues, BN and Pakatan told

Neither coalition has shown any genuine interest in tackling their plight, say two Hindu American right groups.

GEORGE TOWN: Two Hindu American right groups called on Malaysia’s main coalitions of political parties to urgently address minority rights issues ahead of the 13th general election.

In a joint statement, Washington-based Hindu American Foundation (HAF) and California-based Malaysian American Foundation (MAF) pointed out that neither Barisan Nasional nor Pakatan Rakyat have initiated any pro-active steps to resolve inequality in Malaysia.

Despite its portrayal as a model Muslim democracy with a highly successful economy, HAF-MAF alleged that Malaysia had instituted deeply divisive policies that institutionalised discrimination against the country’s ethnic and religious minorities.

“The Indian-Hindu minority, in particular, faces systematic inequality, but neither political coalition has shown any genuine interest in addressing their plight,” said HAF director Samir Kalra Kalra, who is also a senior fellow for human rights.

Posted on the HAF website, the joint statement stated that Hindraf chairman P Waythamoorthy’s ongoing hunger strike was to draw national and international attention to the disparaging conditions facing the majority of the Indian-Hindu community in Malaysia.

Local Hindraf branches are currently holding candle light vigils across the country calling on either BN or Pakatan, or both to endorse Hindraf’s five-year blueprint, which outlines permanent solutions to end marginalised Indian plight.

“Ahead of the upcoming election in Malaysia, the hunger strike renews focus on religious discrimination in Malaysia,” stressed the HAF-MAF statement. “Waythamoorthy’s effort is a means to bring world attention to the suffering of the Indians.”

Article 153 of Federal Constitution

MAF co-founder Muralitharan Samy said that since independence in 1957, successive Malaysian governments had refused to provide basic civil rights to the Indian population.

Most of them who were originally brought to Malaysia as indentured labourers by British colonialists since early 1800s, remained politically silent until 2007 when they first challenged the Malaysian government’s discriminatory policies.

On Nov 25, 2007, a mammoth rally led by Hindraf was brutally suppressed by the government through use of tear gas and water cannons. Subsequently, Malaysian security forces cracked down on Indian-Hindu activists and several Hindraf leaders were arbitrarily detained.

HAF and MAF stressed that much of the inequality in Malaysia can be traced back to Article 153 of Federal Constitution which officially enshrined discrimination against minorities while providing benefits for the majority Muslim Malay population, including quotas in government jobs and educational institutions.

“Known as the bumiputera (son of the soil) policy, this constitutional provision effectively relegated Indians and other minorities to second-class citizens. Restrictions on religious freedom and the expansion of syariah (Islamic) law courts further marginalised non-Muslims,” said HAF and MAF.

Now, for the first time Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak held talks with Hindraf leaders in Putrajaya yesterday on possibility of endorsing the movement’s blueprint. More dialogues are expected to be held in coming days to reach a consensus.

Many fence-sitters are expected to back Najib if, unlike Pakatan de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim, endorses the blueprint. Najib can win over the “nambikkai” (trust) of Indian voters if he implements certain features of Hindraf’s blueprint agenda before the dissolution parliament.

If Najib can stage this pre-election “coup” and pull the carpet from underneath Pakatan, observers felt “the incumbent premier can retain Putrajaya with a comfortable victory.”

Meeting with PM historic but nothing concrete yet

This is the 17th day of P Waythamoorthy's hunger strike. Today he writes about Hindraf's meeting with the prime minister yesterday.
COMMENT

By P Waythamoorthy

Yesterday was a tiring day. I left the temple for Putrajaya for a meeting with Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak on his invite. Now, let me share my thoughts with you on this meeting.

My journey into human rights activism started in 2005 with the formation of Hindraf. Hindraf was formed directly as a response to the accelerating demolition of hindu temples by the Umno-led government of the day.

We gave expression to the extreme anger of the rural sections of the Indian community at this stage and we led the resistance to the demolitions.

Then when this converged with the rampant killing of an Indian youth in police custody, the cauldron really began to boil.

The stage was set for an explosion. The explosion began with the first demonstration in Putrajaya in August 2007 where several thousand Indians gathered to submit our 18-point demands to the government.

The big explosion took place at the grand Hindraf rally of November 2007. The Indians in the country were at war with Umno.

Umno was Hindraf’s nemesis. They hounded us, harassed us and went to extreme measures to kill us off.

They jailed our activists, they linked us to the LTTE, they confiscated my passport and put me in effective exile, they banned us and they used the police to harass us at every turn. They refused to recognize us or have anything to do with us at all.

Yet we did not buckle. We resisted, we fought back, we got better organised as a group of activists and we kept going.

Then after reaching a crescendo, Umno started to roll back on all of that when Najib took over. They released the activists from Kamunting Detention Center, they reduced and finally stopped the harassments, they lifted the ban on us, returned my passport and allowed me to return, and now reaching a new peak of this trend, Najib invited us for a meeting yesterday.

Hindraf has come a long way to this point of being able to agree to this overture and to sit at the same table with its nemesis and to talk to them.

This was something that was never considered possible. A lot of bad blood had flowed in these last five years and Hindraf has to set aside all of that to accept the invitation.

Hindraf had been the trigger for change and accelerator of new political developments in the country. Hindraf has been a vocal and leading opponent of many fundamental policies of the government.

Historic meeting

Najib for his part had also come a long way to meet us at this point – he probably had to overcome significant resistance from various segments within his domain to get to the point of inviting us for this meeting.

This was indeed a risky move for him personally. So, it can be said that the meeting yesterday was truly a historic meeting.

This meeting, historic as it may be, however has to be understood for what it really represents. It is effectively only a preliminary meeting to decide if we should proceed.

Subsequent meetings are really the key, should they take place. They will provide opportunity to explore the possibilities of meeting respective objectives by movements of positions on both sides.

Those meetings are yet to take place and there is no certainty they will take place at all, as all we have up to this point is a verbal undertaking.

If there is a true commitment for rapprochement on Najib’s side, then this is the first place that it will tell.

The rest will become apparent during the talks. We go into the talks with our eyes and minds wide open.

Our focus is the proposals in our blueprint. We have been very consistent on this point.

I reiterate, whichever of the two coalitions accepts and endorses the blueprint will get our total support.

This is not decided as yet. There is still some time before Hindraf will come off this ambiguity and take a firm position in this issue.

P Waythamoorthy is the Hindraf chairperson. He has been on his hunger strike since March 10.

Exposed! Mass killing of macaques

A PKR leader and leaders of animal rights group allege that the Department of Wildlife and National Parks had culled macaques en masse last year in discreet.

PETALING JAYA: The Department of Wildlife and National Parks (Perhilitan) culled 97,300 macaques last year, alleged PKR vice president N Surendran today.

Speaking at the press conference held at the party headquarters here, Surendran said that Selangor recorded the highest number of killings, at a staggering 18,800.

“Selangor exco Elizabeth Wong confirmed that the state government has a ‘no kill’ policy in place for macaqaues and practise trans-location system to rehome the animals.

“So why is the federal government carrying out such a heinous mass killing programme?” asked Surendran.

Also present were the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) president Christine Chin and Malaysian Animal Welfare Society (Maws) president Shenaaz Khan.

On where he got the figures, Surendran said that it was from Perhilitan’s own records.

He also alleged that the killing could not have taken place under the supervision of the Department of Veterinary Services (DVS) due to the high numbers.

“We cannot allow this continue any longer as it will will affect our image in the global arena. In fact, it is also illegal under the Wildlife Act 2010,” said the PKR leader.

Surendran said that with the vast development taking place in Malaysia, it is inevitable that humans and macaques may come into conflict but insisted there were more humane ways to deal with the primate population.

“Even in the case of over population, we can sterilise them or trans-locate them to other jungles, not kill them indisriminately,” he said.

On how they primates are being culled, Surendran said he was in the dark as Perhilitan had not divulged details on it.

“The whole thing is shrouded in secrecy but from what I have heard, the government had employed private contractors to deal with the macaques,” he alleged.

Echoing Surendran’s sentiments, Chin said that killing macaques indiscriminately would not solve any problems related to development.

“We need to live with nature rather than destroying them. Even in 2007, several experts from Hong Kong told us they were ready to help Perhilitan to sort out the matter but till today, the latter didn’t get back to us,” she said.

Training her guns on Perhilitan, Shenaaz urged the government body to reveal details on how they had killed the macaques.

“You can spend tens of millions to bring pandas, a non-native species to Malaysia, but at the same time you kill our native species en masse,” she said.

Surendran urged Natural Resources and Environment Minister Douglas Uggah Embas to come clean on the matter.

“Perhilitan could not have done this without Douglas’ knowledge,” he alleged, adding he would lodge a police report on the matter soon.

Kulasegaran’s exit causes concern

Perak DAP members are pinning for the return of their unsung hero Kulasegaran to once again be their vocal voice but the party veteran might not return.

TAIPING: The departure of DAP veteran leader M Kulasegaran from Perak to Johor has cast doubts on the bargaining and political clout of the 20% Indian members in the state party.

Some Indian party leaders have expressed fear that their political voice may not be heard in DAP as their “Indian Godfather” moves his base to Johor.

Kulasegaran was instrumental in ensuring that the voice of Indian members was heard in the silver state after the 2008 political tsunami.

According to a DAP source, it was Kulasegaran who brought in Teluk Intan MP M Manogaran, Sungkai assemblyperson A Sivanesan, Tronoh and Buntong lawmakers V Sivakumar and A Sivasubramaniam respectively, into the Perak political arena.

The source said Kulasegaran, who is close to party superemo Lim Kit Siang, ensured that an executive post be given to Sivanesan and that the state speaker post goes to Sivakumar by the newly minted Pakatan Perak state government in 2008.

Kulasegaran also advocated that the post of Ipoh City mayor should be given to an Indian but it failed to materialise.

The Ipoh Barat MP also ensured that Indian representation in the DAP silver state had at least a minimum of two parliamentarians and four state lawmakers.

One party leader even opined that the Ipoh Barat MP might come back to Perak to defend his seat as Kulasegaran only wanted to challenge Segamat incumbent cum MIC deputy chief Dr S Subramaniam in Johor.

However, with the PKR Gelang Patah parliamentary seat given to Kit Siang and in the exchange the DAP Segamat seat was instead given to Johor PKR chief Chua Jui Meng.

Perak DAP members are pinning for the return of their unsung hero Kulasegaran to once again be their vocal voice but the party veteran might not return as the bad political experience of Perak still remains in his mind.

Team A vs Team B

It was smooth sailing between Kulasegaran and party secretary Nga Kor Ming before the 2008 general election as they were united in their political standing.

But after the win of the silver state, cracks appeared in the friendship which saw DAP being divided into two camps with Nga and Ngeh Koo Ham in Team A and Kulasegaran in Team B.

What was disheartening to Kulasegaran was that two of the three Sivas (Sivanesan, Siva Kumar and Sivasubramaniam) that he had groomed had betrayed him and crossed over to Team A.

Both these two DAP leaders’ argument for switching camps was that they had to support the stronger team for their own political survival.

The internal political struggle ended when Team A took control in the state party election in which most of Kulasegaran’s supporters were wiped out and were sidelined in the process.

Kit Siang had tried his best to patch up the simmering feud between the two groups but failed.

The silent internal party war continued, with most of Kulasegaran’s supporters being sidelined as candidates for the 13 general election.

The outspoken Batu Gajah MP Fong Po Kuan and Kulasegaran decided to move from Perak to Johor and start a fresh political frontier.

According to a DAP source, the alleged victimisation continued with even a question mark hanging over the political life of Sivanesan who had stood neutral in the party’s civil war.

Another casualty in this party war is Kulasegaran’s supporter, Jalong assemblyperson Leong Mee Meng, who is from Pahang and is being persuaded to return to her home state as the party leadership has prepared another candidate to replace her.

Kulasegaran’s seniority and the good support that he received from the party central executive committee had managed to weather the political crisis in the state but his fellow supporters may have their political careers cut short.

However, many of Kulasegaran’s supporters are optimistic in saying that the preliminary candidate list by the state leadership is not the end of their political careers as the list has to be first vetted and approved by the party’s executive central committee.

Many DAP members are worried that with Kulasegaran’s departure, there might be a decrease in power of Indian representation in Perak if Pakatan takes the state in the coming polls.

One Indian member asked: “Will the two (parliamentary) plus four (state seats) ratio be maintained after his departure?”

Pakatan states may dissolve assemblies on April 22

Selangor to convince other Pakatan states to dissolve state assemblies together on April 22 if parliament is not dissolved by then.
VIDEO INSIDE

PETALING JAYA: The Selangor state government will meet with other Pakatan Rakyat-led states to convince them to dissolve their state legislative assemblies together on April 22.

In a bid to pressure Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak to call for the dissolution of Parliament, Selangor Mentri Besar Khalid Ibrahim hopes that the states of Selangor, Penang, Kedah and Kelantan would dissolve in unison next month.

The Selangor state assembly would automatically dissolve on April 22.

“If the dissolution of parliament is not called by April 22, Selangor’s state assembly would dissolve on that day and we will ask the other Pakatan state governments to do the same,” Khalid told a press conference after attending the federal opposition pact’s leadership council meeting at PKR headquarters here.

“I thought it would be best for Selangor to initiate and we will do it together,” he added.

Asked why wait until April 22 as the Selangor assembly would automatically dissolve then, Khalid said the decision was made so as not to confuse Selangor voters and Malaysians on the possibility of different dates for elections held at state and federal level.

He admitted the other three states have not formally agreed to the proposal and said the idea was still being considered.

The Selangor state assembly mandate ends on April 21, six days prior to Kelantan.

Penang’s DAP-controlled state assembly will automatically dissolve on May 5 while the mandate for PAS-led Kedah expires three days later.

Parliament will automatically dissolve on April 27 and elections must be held 60 days from then.

Rundingan Najib Dengan Wakil Sulu, Dia Yang Runding, Saya Yang Salah

No need for Pakatan Rakyat-controlled states of Penang, Kedah, Kelantan and Selangor to dissolve ahead of Parliament – as 13GE must be held latest by May 25 if there is going to be simultaneous Parliament/State GE

Lim Kit Siang

Should the Pakatan Rakyat-controlled states of Penang, Kedah, Kelantan and Selangor dissolve ahead of Parliament if the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak continues to be indecisive despite the automatic dissolution of the Negri Sembilan State Assembly?

There are respective pros and cons but on the balance, I do not think there is any need for the Pakatan Rakyat-controlled states of Penang, Kedah, Kelantan and Selangor to dissolve ahead of Parliament as the 13th General Elections must be held latest by May 25 if there is going to be simultaneous Parliament/State general elections.

It is the prerogative for each state government through the Chief Minister or Mentri Besar and the Ruler concerned to decide when to dissolve the respective State Assemblies as there is nothing in the Federal or State Constitutions which require any State Government to wait for the cue from the dissolution of Parliament before there could be a dissolution of any State Assembly.

However, as Parliament and the various State Assemblies have already been pushed to the last lap of their tenures, with Parliament already exceeding its five-year natural life and the Negri Sembilan State Assembly to be automatically dissolved on midnight tonight, followed by Pahang (April 5), Johor and Malacca (April 19), Selangor (April 20), Perak, Perlis and Kelantan (April 26) before Parliament is automatically dissolved (April 27), no distinct advantage is likely to be accrued from any early dissolution of the Pakatan Rakyat-state governments.

Malaysia Not Getting Gripen Fighter Jets On Lease - Ahmad Zahid

LANGKAWI, March 26 (Bernama) - Defence Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has rubbished a report that Malaysia plans to boost air power by getting Gripen fighter jets on lease.

"I want to emphasise that the report is not true as Malaysia is only interested in buying defence assets," he told a press conference at Langkawi International Maritime and Aerospace (LIMA) Exhibition here Tuesday.

An international defence magazine published in March reported that Malaysia will get 24 to 32 Swedish-made Gripen aircraft on lease.

Gripen multi-role combat aircraft (MRCA) is currently used by the air force of Sweden, South Africa, Hungary, Czech Republic and Thailand.

Ahmad Zahid said as the buyer, Malaysia has the right to decide the best aircraft for the country and not decided by the defence industry company.

On the upgrading of Nuri helicopter, he said several of the American made Sirkosky would be used by the army.

Asked by reporters whether Nuri would be sold to third countries, Ahmad Zahid did not dismiss the possibility once upgrading was completed.

"Several Nuri may be sold to third countries and the proceeds used to buy more sophisticated assets," he added

Pope Francis ‘supports sainthood for Oscar Romero’: The Tablet

Pope Francis is said to be strongly in favour of the canonisation of Archbishop Oscar Romero of El Salvador, who was shot dead while celebrating Mass in 1980 after he had spoken out against the brutal regime in that country.

The unforgettable words in the movie above: “I cannot love God whom I do not see if I do not love my brothers and sisters whom I can see!”

Two days ago, it was the 33rd anniversary of Romero’s martyrdom, and it is about time that this Latin American icon who paid with his life for speaking out against the repression and oppression of the ordinary people is recognised by the universal church. In fact, Romero’s canonisation is long overdue. He is already widely regarded as the ‘Prophet to the Americas’.

Like Pope Francis, Romero identified the mission of the Church with the poor.

The Tablet has the story.

Romero’s death was not in vain. Today, an entire continent has awoken to address economic injustice, and a Latin American now leads the church.

Gani Patail to consider reopening Altantuya case

 The Attorney-General's Chambers will consider the Bar Council's proposal for the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder case to be re-opened, Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail said today.

However, he said there must be new evidence that the prosecution considers justifiable to reopen investigations into the murder of the Mongolian national.

"We will consider the Bar Council's suggestion, but we just cannot re-open all cases, including those of the 1960s. There must be new evidence to justify the re-opening of a case. The case has gone through a trial, where everything was adduced," Gani (right) said.

“We have to be careful for fear it may create a bad precedent ... There are thousands and thousands of cases. We have to be cautious and review them (the cases) properly. If there is only talk, we cannot re-open. There must be (true) evidence.”

The Bar Council, immediately after its 66th annual general meeting, had called for the Altantuya case to be reopened.

It had also recommended that senior lawyer Cecil Abraham be referred to the Advocates and Solicitors Disciplinary Board.

This follows a revelation by lawyer Americk Sidhu that Cecil had admitted to him that the second statutory declaration related to Altantuya's murder had been made by private investigator P Balasubramaniam on the instructions of Najib Abdul Razak, then the deputy premier.

Gani also said that Balasubramaniam's death earlier this month is not an issue, but the question is whether there is sufficient evidence to warrant the reopening of the case.

“It must be tangible evidence for me to reopen the case. That is my view. It does not matter what happens around us,” he reiterated.

“The first SD and second SD have been brought up before. The issue brought by Americk concerns a counsel that the Bar itself (is handling). If we look and understand, the Bar is referring the matter to the disciplinary board. So let them handle it.”

‘Bar has sufficient powers’

Cecil was present at today's event but was seen leaving the hall as soon as a press conference was called.

The AG said he would rather see the Bar Council handle the matter as it has own disciplinary board.

“That is what the Bar Council is doing, and I admire and respect them for that,” he added.

He had earlier witnessed a signing ceremony between the government and the Asian African Legal Consultative Organisation secretary-general Dr Rahmat Mohamad, for the body to operate arbitration cases at the Kuala Lumpur Regional Centre Arbitration (KLRCA).

Gani is the adviser to the KLRCA.

Yesterday, he had said that he has no power to probe Balasubramaniam's second SD which was purportedly prepared by Cecil.
'Why kill Altantuya?'
In an immediate comment, the DAP's Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo said that since Gani "would like us to believe that everything was adduced" during the trial and therefore the case has been solved, he should have no difficulty in understanding that it is important in solving a case to know the reasons for the murder.
"Equally important would be the question as to who exactly ordered the killing and why, especially in a case where the evidence shows that the accused did not know the deceased. So why kill the deceased?" he asked in a statement.

"Perhaps he (Gani) could tell us then who gave the instructions to kill Altantuya and what was the motive behind it."
Throughout the written judgment by Shah Alam High Court judge Mohd Zaki Md Yasin did not allude to the motive for the murder.
"Whatever the motive was, it is a matter of law that the motive, although relevant, has never been the essential to constitute murder," said Mohd Zaki in his 70-page judgment.