Chinese brought to Tanah Melayu are ‘trespassers’, says Muslim group

 

Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia says Chinese migrants brought in by the British into Tanah Melayu are ‘trespassers’. – The Malaysian Insider file pic, May 6, 2014.

Islamist group Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (Isma) has claimed that Chinese migrants brought in by the British to Tanah Melayu were “trespassers” and this wrong had to be corrected.

Its president, Ustaz Abdullah Zaik Abd Rahman, said the Chinese who came to Malaya were “trespassers” and questioned the citizenship and wealth given to them but did not specify how it proposed to correct this purported wrong.

"Who gave them citizenship and wealth until the results of their trespassing are protected until this day?

"This was all the doing of the British, who were in cohorts with the Chinese to oppress and bully the Malays," he said in a statement today, as reported on the group's website.

Abdullah also said this was a mistake which had to be corrected but he did not say how. "Nobody has the right to mortgage the sovereignty of Islam and the Malays on this land."

Abdullah's remarks come on the heels of the hudud issue, which has been strongly opposed by non-Muslims like the predominantly Chinese parties – DAP, Gerakan and MCA.

He had recently lashed out at non-Muslims fighting against the proposal to implement hudud, saying that they had forgotten themselves and had no business meddling with the affairs of Muslims.

"If they want to remain as citizens of this country, they must pledge loyalty to the Agong and accept the position of Islam as the official religion and the sovereign rights of Malays.

"Standing in the way of Malay ambition and denying Malays their right in determining the future of the nation is a challenge and an act of overstepping by a foreign race," he said.

Abdullah also hit out at DAP veteran parliamentarian Lim Kit Siang for saying that Isma was spreading racial “poison”.

He said Lim's remark was groundless because the latter himself was causing disunity among the people.

"This is evident in the Malaysian Malaysia concept he has been advocating that goes against the Constitution.

"He is making the Chinese dissatisfied (with what they have) to the extent that they are making claims and demanding more than what they have obtained all this while.

"Whereas, the special privileges for the Malays have been provided under the Constitution since Merdeka," he said.

This is the second time this week Isma has made remarks against non-Muslims.

On May 1, Abdullah warned non-Muslims in the country that they had no right to oppose the plan to implement hudud and that they should understand that there were limitations to what they could say.

He said non-Muslims “should be thankful that they have more than what they need in this country”.

He said he failed to see what were their contributions were that they had been given so many privileges in the first place.

"Their strong stand against hudud gives the impression that they are in a dream world.

"They must realise that they have no say in determining the future of Muslims in this country," he had said.

Stop celebrating new year, saying ‘Merry Christmas’, Muslims told

(Malay Mail Online) – Muslims must refrain from celebrating New Year and stop saying “Merry Christmas”, a speaker at a University Teknologi Mara (UiTM) event said today.

“We shouldn’t wish Merry Christmas because it means that Jesus is reborn,” Irena Handano, manager of the Chinese Muslim Association of Indonesia or Pusat PITI said.

Uttering the greeting means one has acknowledged and agreed with it, she added.

She also questioned the practice of celebrating the new year on January 1 when Muslims have their own calendar, Hijriyah or Qomariyah.

Muslim New Year is on 1 Muharram, she added.

The Muslim convert also said Valentine’s Day, April Fool’s Day, Easter and Halloween are all part of Christian culture used to attack Islam by appearing to be “fun”.

“So it is important to arm yourselves with knowledge to protect yourselves from the Jewish or Christian influence,” she said.

There is already a long list of fatwas issued by each state’s religious bodies on the dos and don’ts for Muslims, including the ban on the poco-poco dance by the Perak Mufti and the ban on saying “Rest in peace”, by the National Fatwa Council.

Hudud – why now?

Why does Umno now appear more receptive to Pas’ attempt to push through private members’ bills on the hudud? Francis Loh discusses the backdrop. 

This was less than two years ago – What has changed?

The Kelantan state assembly passed the Kelantan Syariah Criminal Bill (II) to introduce hudud law in the state of Kelantan on 25 November 1993. This Bill was passed unanimously by all 36 State Assembly members, including two from the Barisan Nasional. That was more than 20 years ago.
But the law could not be implemented because it required an amendment to the Federal Constitution. For under Schedule Nine of the Constitution, “civil and criminal law and procedure, and the administration of justice” – except in the case of “Islamic personal law relating to marriage, divorce, guardianship, maintenance, adoption, legitimacy, family law…” etc. – falls under the purview of the federal, not the state government. 

Back then, Parliament which, was dominated by Umno-BN, was not in favour of amending the Federal Constitution to facilitate the implementation of hudud laws by the Pas government in Kelantan. So the Pas government did not try to introduce a private member’s bill in Parliament then. 

Admittedly, after its improved performance in the 1999 general elections, Pas tried to implement hudud laws in the states of Kelantan and Terengganu which had fallen under its control following the elections. This attempt led to divisions within the Barisan Alternatif (BA) coalition and ultimately to the withdrawal of one of its partners, the Democratic Action Party (DAP) from the BA. Perhaps drawing from this experience, Pas hesitated to push for hudud laws in the intervening years, until now.
 
Unconstitutional and discriminatory
 
However, then, like now, there occurred much public debate, resulting in much acrimony, over the matter. For the late Karpal Singh, the matter of introducing hudud law should not have arisen in the first place because Malaysia is a secular state. For Karpal, the Federal Court had ruled in 1988 (Public Prosecutor vs Che Omar Che Soh, with Tun Salleh Abbas presiding) that Malaysia operated on the basis of secular laws. Introducing hudud laws contradicted the present Constitution. Accordingly, the implementation of hudud laws required rewriting the entire Constitution. Karpal reiterated this stance in an interview, apparently his last, with The Rocket, his party’s organ, just before his untimely death.

Sisters in Islam (SIS) and other women’s groups then, and now, have argued that the implementation of the Kelantan Syariah Code, as proposed by the Pas government, infringes upon Article 8(1) of the Constitution, which declares that: “All persons are equal before the law and entitled to the equal protection of the law”. Further Article 8(2) provides that “there shall be no discrimination against citizens on the grounds of religion, race, place of birth or gender in any law…”. The presumption of zina (illicit sex) in the case of a woman who cannot find four male witnesses to back her allegation of rape is just one example which highlights how women can be discriminated against under the proposed Code. This certainly goes against the principle of justice that Islam (as in other revealed religions) categorically champions.

Medical practitioners have also been dragged into the debate this time. In reply to comments by Kelantan state authorities that surgeons would be responsible for amputating limbs as required once hudud is implemented, the Malaysian Medical Association (MMA) has unequivocally voiced its opposition to surgeons getting involved in the matter, stating that it goes against the Hippocratic Oath to which all doctors subscribe. The MMA’s position has been supported by Dr Ahmad Farouk, a surgeon and leader of the Islamic Renaissance Front. But groups like the Islamic Medical Association of Malaysia (Imam) and Ikram Health have come out to state that it is the duty of Muslim doctors to facilitate the implementation of hudud.
Non-Muslims also affected

The implementation of hudud law, we have also been told by its supporters, will not apply to non-Muslims. That might be so, theoretically speaking. In fact, however, there’s no doubt that the implementation of hudud laws will also impact upon the lives of non-Muslims who comprise about 38 per cent of the population, on several grounds.

What happens if both Muslim and non-Muslims are involved in a crime, say zina? Where will such a case be heard – in the civil or the sharia court? Will hudud law or civil law apply? Or two separate courts – which might result in two different court rulings and punishments? What kind of justice is this? Wouldn’t this go against the principle of equality before the law as enshrined under Article 8 of our Constitution? 

And suppose it is decided that a crime is to be heard in the sharia court and there are non-Muslim witnesses to the crime. Will non-Muslim witnesses be able to testify on behalf of a rape victim? What would be the weight of the evidence presented by a non-Muslim witness? A male one? A female one?
Recent well publicised controversies the past decade over various personal and family matters involving Muslims and non-Muslims have not given confidence to non-Muslims that their lives will not be affected by the implementation of hudud laws either.

The break-up of couples originally married according to civil law, as a result of one spouse’s conversion to Islam – which has sometimes resulted in the conversion of minors to Islam without the knowledge and permission of the other spouse – comes to mind. The recent dispute between S Deepa, a Hindu, and Izwan Abdullah, the husband who converted, over custody of their children, and the forced abduction of one of them, on the basis of two differing court orders, resulting in the police refusing to act against one or another party, comes to mind. 

And there have been cases of Muslim authorities carrying out ‘body snatching’ of deceased persons who when alive had reportedly converted to Islam without informing their families.
Regrettably, these incidents have caused the sense of religious suppression on the part of non-Muslims. For this reason, non-Muslims believe that the implementation of hudud law, like the increasingly frequent controversies mentioned above, will have spillover effects on non-Muslims too.
It follows that any state government or any party that intends to introduce hudud law is morally bound to engage all Malaysians – Muslims and non-Muslims alike – in public discourse and dialogue to convince them of the merits of hudud laws in a multicultural, multireligious society like ours. As well, we need to be informed whether and to what extent the implementation of hudud in countries like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sudan, or in the special region of Aceh in Indonesia and the 12 Sharia states of Nigeria have stopped crime in those places. After all, isn’t this the goal of implementing hudud? 

In the event, hudud is only a small part of the Sharia; so why are local ulama putting heavy emphasis into implementing the hudud?
Why now?

Back to our original question: Why, therefore, is Pas pushing for the introduction of two private members’ bills in the Dewan Rakyat to implement hudud laws in Kelantan in 2014, over 20 years later?

In this regard, it is significant that such a major amendment to our Constitution is being facilitated by a private member’s bill in Parliament. Who remembers the last time Umno-BN, which still commands a simple majority in Parliament, and the Speaker, nominated by Umno-BN, allowed the Opposition to introduce a private member’s bill? 

As far as we can recall, the Umno-BN majority and its nominated Speaker, have always dismissed previous attempts by any Opposition member of parliament to introduce a private member’s bill. Why, therefore, is Umno-BN acting otherwise now? 

This is why we must look beyond the rhetoric and the semantics of the proposed bills themselves. The answer is in politics! Of Old Politics vs New Politics! Umno, steeped in ethnic-based exclusivist Old Politics, is goading Pas to jettison the Pakatan Rakyat’s New Politics, as contained in its Buku Jingga, so as to become more exclusivist and ethno-religious, like Umno itself! We must be clear about this! 

New Politics has resulted in the virtual demise of the BN coalition, which performed poorly in the 2013 general elections. The BN polled fewer votes than the PR Opposition in GE13 and had to depend on its fractious BN partners in Sabah and Sarawak to win a majority of seats in Parliament. There is really no BN anymore, only Umno.

The writing was already on the wall with the arrival of Reformasi in 1998. So when Tun Abdullah Badawi took over as prime minister he introduced various reforms within Umno-BN as well as within his government. ‘Work with me, not for me!’ Time to change ‘the software’ instead of focusing on ‘the hardware’ of development like his predecessor did. Some of his predecessor’s mega projects which were benefiting certain cronies were set aside. Remember the ‘crooked bridge’ that was scrapped? 

Abdullah also launched the Royal Commission of Inquiry to look into the workings of the Royal Malaysian Police. He called upon the civil service to serve the rakyat better and government departments to be more transparent. He launched several parliamentary select committees which went around the country to listen to feedback from the rakyat, prior to presenting the new laws concerned in Parliament. The media were also allowed to be more critical without threat of closure. And in contrast to his predecessor’s arbitrary proclamation of Malaysia as a Muslim country, Abdullah launched his notion of Islam Hadhari.

Before you knew it, Abdullah was out! He was accused of being manipulated by a group of Oxford boys located on ‘the 5th Floor’ of the PM’s Department in Putrajaya, of favouring his own cronies, and of being weak. Thrown out with Abdullah were the attempts to reform Umno, to make it more inclusive minded, more CAT-like (competent, accountable and transparent), as the opposition was attempting to be in Penang and Selangor.

Seen from this perspective, the results of GE13 – declining performances of the BN, slight advances by the opposition PR but not enough to allow it to displace the Umno-BN once and for all, was not unexpected. A stalemate of sorts resulted, stuck between Old Politics and New Politics.
Part 2 tomorrow: Umno restrategises – back to Old Politics

Dr Francis Loh has been president of Aliran since 2011. He was formerly Professor of Politics at Universiti Sains Malaysia.

Karpal Singh - Will for Justice

by Liew Chin Tong

Karpal Singh- Will for justice

The funeral rites for Karpal Singh ended with family members scattering his ashes in the sea off Green Hall, Penang, but the national soul-searching to understand his legacy and to commemorate it has just begun.

The massive outpouring of grief, especially at the funeral on April 20, 2014, for a statesman who had actually never held executive power was indeed unprecedented. Karpal’s legacies as a human rights lawyer and a staunch defender of constitutional democracy, and his leadership in DAP will be remembered, studied and perhaps critiqued.

The cruel attempt that was ongoing when Karpal died, to disqualify him as MP and even to jail him, will continue to haunt the ruling party with his image as victim and martyr “sealed” with his demise. Karpal’s perseverance against physical disability will also continue to inspire many, and hopefully his tragic accident on the highway will help the push for better transportation.

Shocking death

It was one of those end-of-era deaths the news of which imprints itself so strongly into our memory that we will forever remember how and when we first heard it.

At 2.33am on April 17, 2014, an MP asked a private messaging group of DAP federal elected representatives whether it was true that Karpal had met with an accident, to which Gobind Singh Deo, Karpal’s second son and MP for Puchong, replied at 2.48am: “With regret I inform you that it is true.”

In a separate message minutes later, Gobind wrote: “Just been informed Mr Karpal and Michael (Karpal's aide) passed away.”

No words can describe the acute pain we all felt on receiving that sad confirmation.

This giant of a man was always expected to fight tirelessly and endlessly, and news of his demise could only come in one way – as an emotional shock. Having just been convicted and fined RM4,000 (which would disqualify him as an MP) for sedition on March 11, 2014, he was expected to battle it out and appeal to the higher courts – and all the while, the government appealed for heftier penalties.

Curiously, of his own volition, he resigned on March 29, 2014 as DAP chairman citing provisions in the Societies Act which disallowed a convicted person from holding public office.

Outpouring of grief

The outpouring of grief by Malaysians at the wake and the funeral was massive and caught many off guard. The funeral organisers had expected a couple of thousand at the funeral but were faced instead with a crowd multiple times bigger. At Karpal’s wake, Kerk Kim Hock, former DAP secretary-general who retired from politics in 2004, told me that it was unimaginable just a decade ago that the passing of a DAP figure could generate such an immense show of public emotions.

There were many dignitaries at the wake, no doubt, but the number of ordinary Malaysians who thronged the family house at Jalan Utama from April 17 to 19 was overwhelming and was testimony to how many hearts Karpal touched.

On April 20, Penang witnessed what was probably its largest funeral ever. True to Karpal’s folk hero image, the send-off was akin to a street parade, complete with placards, big bikes and cyclists. The day was notable also for being exactly a year since nomination day for the 2013 General Election. Tens of thousands of mourners from all over Malaysia lined the streets of Penang to have a last glimpse of Karpal’s casket, shouting “Karpal Singh! Karpal Singh!” as if it was a nomination procession. Many were frustrated at not being able to enter Dewan Sri Pinang to pay their last respects.

After leaving the state hall where the state-honour funeral ceremonies were held, Karpal’s body stopped at places important to his life – Penang State Assembly, Penang High Court and St Xavier’s Institution – before heading to the Batu Gantung crematorium.

The original plan included a stop at Green Hall, where Karpal’s legal office is, but that was not carried out due to the crowd size and lack of time. Most news reports missed the significance of Green Hall. It was not just where his office is located. According to Tim Donoghue’s Karpal Singh – Tiger of Jelutong, after being born at the Penang Maternity Hospital on Jalan Macalister on June 28, 1940, Karpal was first brought up at 23 Green Hall, a house that was soon damaged in the bombings of World War II.

His life story

Karpal’s story is fascinating and dramatic indeed. Born to a Penang City Council guard, he went on to become one of Penang’s and Malaysia’s most famous and respected lawyers and statesmen.

One day in December 2010 at Parliament, Karpal asked me to meet him at his Pudu office. We met at his library, and were joined by the New Zealand journalist, Tim Donoghue. Karpal and Donoghue asked me for publishing advice as my team had published a photo book on Karpal in three languages for his 70th birthday in June 2010 (Karpal Singh: True Malaysian by Malaissa Loovi; Malay: Karpal Singh – Pantang Undur; Chinese:卡巴星－真正的马来西亚人).

I had previously heard of a mysterious unpublished memoir of Karpal and had in fact been given a draft by Karpal in mid-2010. But it was a pleasant surprise to meet the author and be told that the project already started in 1988, that someone then had deemed it worthy to make Karpal’s life story a lifelong pursuit.

Donoghue met Karpal in 1987 when Karpal acted for New Zealanders Loraine Cohen and Aaron Cohen in a drug related death penalty case and saved them from the hangman’s noose. Karpal was already a well-known international name after the failed attempt to save Australians Kevin Barlow and Geoffrey Chambers, who were hanged in 1986.

Donoghue’s book was finally published by Marshall Cavendish and launched in KL in September 2013, 25 years after it was first commissioned. The intervening years saw many ups and downs in Karpal’s life.

He was detained under the Internal Security Act in 1987-1989. In the 1995 General Election, he was re-elected in Jelutong, scrapping through with the slimmest of margins. Then in 1999, both Karpal and Lim Kit Siang were not returned to Parliament for the first time in their political careers.

Karpal took public office for the first time in the Kedah State Assembly in 1974 and in Parliament and the Penang State Assembly in 1978. Kit Siang was first voted into Parliament in 1969. Both Karpal and Kit Siang were re-elected back into Parliament in the March 2004 General Election.

In January 2005, Karpal was involved in a car accident and was paralysed from the waist down. Indeed, his father Ram was killed in 1974 in a road accident in Amritsar, India.

Perhaps it was only after the 2008 General Election that swept DAP and its allies into power in five states, in the process breaking the two-thirds majority stranglehold that BN had had in Parliament, that the memoir of the “Tiger of Jelutong” was befittingly published, as it was only then that Karpal felt he had politically recovered.

Legacies

Karpal’s international reputation comes from his championing of human rights and his struggle against the death penalty and other cruel punishments such as judicial canning. Domestically, it was his steadfast belief in a constitutional democracy that earned him the respect of friends – and of foes.

In November 2013, Rasah MP Teo Kok Seong and I visited Karpal to discuss some political matters. Those matters were concluded within five minutes, and he gave us another hour of his precious time – at least 10 clients were waiting outside his room – to discuss the efforts to save people from the hangman. Many of these stories are recorded in Donoghue’s book. I remember asking Karpal whether he knew how many lives he had saved. He said “a couple of dozens”. I vaguely remember that there was talk of a “Karpal’s list of survivors” listed somewhere.

If there is none, one should be compiled. In an “Ubah” truck ceramah in Perlis in November 2012, while Karpal was speaking, I remember a man walking up to me and asking for an opportunity to thank Karpal for having saved his life.

Indeed, the inherent – and inspiring – humanism of this great man is most clearly seen in how he so willingly used his considerable wits to represent death row inmates – people with no one left to turn to.

In June 2011, with the help of Nazri Aziz, who was the Law Minister then, Gobind and I managed to organise a parliamentary roundtable that resolved to call for a moratorium on executions, pending a thorough review of the death penalty. Our hope is that, in the short term at least, with the removal of the mandatory death sentence, the discretion to pass judgment would be returned to the judges. In the long run, we still hope that the death penalty will be abolished.

I have reason to believe that the parliamentary roundtable we held in June 2011 had some bearing on the Singapore government’s decision to amend its equally tough drug laws to allow for drug mules or couriers to escape the death penalty. Sabahan Yong Vui Kong was spared the death sentence as a result. Unfortunately, the Malaysian government did not move an inch from its original position over the past three years.

Nevertheless, it is for us to continue the human rights legacy of Karpal and to be guided by his deep humanism.

Constitutional democracy

Much had been said about Karpal’s opposition to the hudud laws. But those who highlight his concern should note that he was opposed to hudud from the point of his steadfast belief in Malaysia as a constitutional democracy.

I had several fairly long private discussions with Karpal about hudud and political Islam. I am of the view that the most viable route to defeat BN at the polls is for both DAP and PAS to move to the political middle ground and bring their supporters to vote for each other.

The hudud issue does not allow for any middle ground and in fact threatens most seriously to divide the Opposition. From my conversations with Karpal, it was evident that he was fully aware that while his statements on hudud was often misconstrued as anti-Islam, he was seeing it from a constitutional point of view – that hudud was simply not constitutional.

By extension, his comments on the role of monarchs should be read in the same light. The Court of Appeal overturned the judgment of the High Court and fined Karpal RM4,000 on March 11, 2014 for his remarks during the Perak constitutional crisis in February 2009, which saw the removal of the Pakatan state government. Karpal’s various run-ins with royalty throughout the past three decades should not be misconstrued as anti-Malay but as the work of one who attempted to ensure that everyone – royalty included – followed the laws of a constitutional democracy.

In the last decade and a half, Karpal also represented Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim at the latter’s various cases on a pro bono basis, including the Sodomy II trials. Now, Karpal was probably not one of Anwar’s biggest fans especially during Anwar’s 16 years on the government bench. It was based on this same wish to effectuate genuine constitutional democracy that Karpal tirelessly fought for Anwar in court.

Leading the DAP

For Malaysians, Karpal was best known for decades as a top DAP leader. Karpal became national party chairman in September 2004, following Kit Siang’s stint in that position (1999-2004). Lim Guan Eng was elected the secretary-general at the same time. While the chairmanship may not have been the number one position in DAP, Karpal nevertheless brought much stature with him.

In Kit Siang’s tribute to his old brother-in- arms, he said that with Karpal’s passing, a light had gone out in Malaysia. The two of them had been a political pair since the 1980s, and at the three-day wake for Karpal, one could see how the press attempted to capture every expression they could on Kit Siang’s face.

For DAP secretary-general and Chief Minister of Penang Guan Eng, Karpal’s demise left a huge void. In private, Guan Eng considers himself the political son of Karpal. They had been close since the much younger man entered politics in the mid-1980s.

In the period following the 2008 General Election when DAP first got to taste some power, Karpal was keen to ensure that the party lived up to public expectations. He was against serving DAP representatives receiving honorific titles, a view shared by many Malaysians who had been complaining about the proliferation of such titles. He was also against representatives holding both parliamentary and state seats at once. Fielding leaders for seats at both levels before the 2008 election had been done out of necessity as the pool of electable candidates back then was very small.

He was justified in pushing to minimise such arrangements after 2008 because DAP’s talent pool had significantly expanded since then.

Karpal was not shy of controversies within his own party. His “Godfather versus Warlord” spat with Dr P. Ramasamy, Deputy Chief Minister II of Penang, as well as his public call to Jeff Ooi, MP for Jelutong, to withdraw the latter’s alleged derogatory remark of “kucing kurap” against MPPP officials are among the most remembered during his decade-long chairmanship.

I must confess that as a DAP leader, Karpal's choice of words and sometimes his choice of moments occasionally left me feeling uneasy, especially when it came to party matters as well as issues relating to coalition building. But his mission to uphold the integrity of the party was always crystal clear and well understood.

Karpal was a courageous soul who feared no one and stood up for the downtrodden, the dispossessed and the destitute. This legend lives on beyond his death. In his lifetime, he has inspired and given hope to at least two generations of Malaysians. His story – and his will to see justice done – will continue to inspire many more.


Liew Chin Tong is DAP Political Education Director and MP for Kluang. This article appeared in the latest issue of Penang Monthly (May 2014).

Parliament: GST Bill passed in Dewan Rakyat

The Star
by YUEN MEIKENG

KUALA LUMPUR: The Goods and Services Tax (GST) Bill 2014 was passed in the Dewan Rakyat on Monday after two bloc division votes were taken among the MPs.

The Bill, which seeks to implement the 6% tax was passed after the number of votes supporting it outnumbered those which were against it.

In the first bloc division vote, the Bill was passed for the second reading after a total of 119 MPs voted in support of it versus the 81 who opposed.

No debate was held for the Bill at the third reading or committee stage, prompting the Opposition to request for another bloc division voting to be conducted.

The Bill was passed by the Dewan after the results were 119 votes in favour of the law against 81 that were against it.

Deputy Finance Minister Datuk Ahmad Maslan wrapped up points raised in the debate, which saw its fair share of arguments from both sides of the divide.

Opposition MPs held up placards and banners with the words "Tolak GST (Reject GST)" to show their dissension.

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak (BN - Pekan) also showed up to vote for the Bill to be passed.

It was reported that the GST will replace the sales and services tax and is set to take effect from April 2015.

Abductors Of Chinese National Had Running Gun Battle With Police - Deputy IGP

Yang Zai LinKUALA LUMPUR, May 6 (Bernama) -- The five men in military fatigues who abducted a Chinese national in Lahad Datu, Sabah, early today had a running gun battle with the police before fleeing into the waters of a neighbouring country, said Deputy Inspector-General of Police Datuk Seri Mohd Bakri Mohd Zinin.

He said the gun battle took place in the waters close to Pulau Mataking after the police launched a manhunt for the kidnappers soon after the abduction.

"Two of the kidnappers were masked and two of them were armed, possibly with M16 rifles," he said in a statement.

Mohd Bakri said the police had intensified efforts to trace the kidnappers and free their victim Yang Zai Lin, 34, the manager of cage fish breeding company Wonderful Terrace Sdn Bhd in Silam, Lahad Datu.

The abduction of Yang, between 2.45 am and 2.55 am, came just over a month after a woman tourist, Chinese national Gao Hua Yun, 29, and a Filipina hotel employee, Marcy Dayawan, 40, were kidnapped from the Singamata Adventures and Reef Resort off Semporna by seven armed men on April 2.

PERKASA mahu Najib pecat menteri jaga perpaduan

Over ‘honour’: Prayer leader kills daughter

The prayer leader suspected his daughter was having an affair with someone in Karachi. 

PHOTO: FILE

TORGHAR: A prayer leader allegedly gunned down his daughter in the name of honour on Sunday morning.

Villagers said Maulana Taoos of Balyani village in Kandar tehsil suspected his daughter, 17-year-old Zubaida, of having an affair with a relative in Karachi.

On Saturday night, he reportedly subjected her to severe torture, forcing her to confess. After Fajr prayers on Sunday, the maulana shot her dead with an AK-47. Zubaida was later buried by villagers.

Coordinator for the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan Zahid Khan condemned the incident and said Torghar still has centuries-old traditions which have claimed the lives of several men and women in the name of honour. Police have yet to register a criminal case against the accused who fled the village after the incident as no one has lodged a complaint.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 5th, 2014.

Asian gets death for adultery in Abu Dhabi

An Abu Dhabi criminal court sentenced an Asian housemaid to stoning to death after she was found guilty of committing adultery while married.

The maid had been rushed to hospital following abdominal pains and tests showed she was pregnant after sleeping with another man.

Newspapers said the maid confessed in court that she committed adultery and the judge handed down the sentence on the basis of her confession in line with Islamic law.

It was the first time in many years that a person was sentenced to stoning to death in such a case in the UAE. Judicial sources said the maid can appeal the sentence.

http://www.emirates247.com/news/emirates/asian-gets-death-for-adultery-in-abu-dhabi-2014-05-04-1.547869

Winning GE13 convincingly, by jailing political foes a year later?

  

Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak with United States President Barack Obama. Najib had boasted about his reformist credentials during Obama’s visit to Malaysia two weeks ago. – AFP pic

One year after the Barisan Nasional (BN) won the 13th general election (GE13) with fewer votes and fewer seats, more lawmakers from the opposition Pakatan Rakyat (PR) find themselves at the wrong end of the law and risking jail time.

Tomorrow, Seputeh MP Teresa Kok will be charged with sedition, weeks after the late Karpal Singh was convicted of the same charge.

Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim faces the possibility of jail for a second sodomy conviction while his PKR party colleague Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad is expected to charged again under the Peaceful Assembly Act.

Just two weeks ago, the Court of Appeal had declared Section 9(5) of the Peaceful Assembly Act – which criminalises the failure to give 10-day notice before a gathering – to be unconstitutional.

And in July 2012, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak announced that the Sedition Act will be repealed and replaced by a National Harmony Act. That has yet to take place and instead, more people have been charged with sedition.

Will Malaysians, or the 51% of the electorate who voted for PR in GE13, stand on the sidelines as disinterested watchers as their elected reps are picked off one by one by an administration that obviously thinks the only way to win is by making the opposition "disappear"?

And this from a PM who was boasting about his reformist credentials during United States President Barack Obama's visit to Malaysia two weeks ago.

Can the government say that this is an independent decision of the public prosecutor, knowing full that even a standard operational procedure as searching the sea for a lost plane needs Putrajaya's approval.

Or is the public prosecutor's push to charge Kok with sedition over her “Onederful Malaysia” Chinese New Year clip and Nik Nazmi for an offence under a law now deemed unconstitutional shows recalcitrance on his part?

The reality is that the buck stops with the prime minister. Even research and development projects appear to need his approval or endorsement.

What more prosecuting politicians in court.

It might be another four years to the next polls but the systemic move to remove popular PR leaders shows an administration that has abandoned its reformist zeal and stripes in favour of the old playbook of intimidation and incarceration.

How else can BN win an election, if not by physically removing its foes from the political arena using archaic laws such as the Sedition Act?

Where does this leave Malaysians who were asked to believe in the 1Malaysia slogan and a prime minister who had proudly declared "the era of government knows best is over" when he took office in 2009?

It leaves them nowhere except to find ways to remind the government that it is the people who keep them in power, and it is the people who will unseat any government that fails to keep its promises. – May 5, 2014.

Remove PM of few words, says Zaid

 

 For months, speculation has been rife that the daggers are out for Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and that certain Umno stalwarts, both past and present, are authoring the plot for his ouster.

And now, former de facto law minister Zaid Ibrahim has also sounded a clarion call for the sixth prime minister's head to roll.
                      
"I know the PM is a man of few words. He seldom says what is expected of national leaders.

"But if this is indeed the way it's going to be then it's the duty of all Malaysians and the Malays who refuse to be doomed to start an active campaign to bring real change.

"That means to bring about change in leadership," he said in a blog posting titled "Malays are doomed", with a photograph of a downcast Najib.

"How much more travesty must we endure from leaders who are destroying the country we love?" he added.

Anwar is no different

Zaid, who has an axe to grind with Anwar Ibrahim as well, also took a swipe at the opposition leader.

"My friend Anwar is no different from Najib; they know when to keep their mouth shut because Putrajaya is everything to them.

"I urge the Malays to come forward. You need to break free from the fear that Najib, Anwar and Jakim (Malaysian Islamic Development Department) all suffer from. We can still be saved if we do not let ourselves be doomed by Malays like them," he added.

Zaid also criticised Najib over his stand regarding PAS' intention to implement hudud law in Kelantan.

"Look at the debates on hudud and you can see why the Malays are doomed. Even the prime minister had to 'play ball' with PAS because (according to his spokesperson and future cabinet minister Liow Tiong Lai) it’s inconceivable for any 'good' Muslim to be seen to oppose the introduction of hudud.

"If a Malay who holds the top post in the country can be overwhelmed by such political trickery, then what hope do we have? Is Liow and the PM telling us that they have no answer to an old political gambit (50 years old to be exact)?" he added.

Malays are doomed to fail

The ex-minister is convinced that the Malays are doomed to fail in their own country.

"This has little to do with their propensity to stab one another in the back while seeking the top positions, or with what the British did to them or to Malaya.

"It's not because the Chinese and Indians have taken the best out of the country, or have denied them their legitimate rights. The Malays are doomed because they do not think! They are afraid to think straight," he added.

As for the hudud issue, Zaid said "now these non-thinking Malays" have formed a committee comprising scholars supposedly steeped in Islamic jurisprudence to find ways to implement hudud in Kelantan.

"We know this is just a political ploy because there are no scholars steeped in hudud. Even in countries where hudud is allegedly used, no one knows the basis of the decisions made by the jurists of that country.

"Do we truly believe that if the person accused of theft is related to the Saudi king or knows Imam Khomeini, he would suffer amputation?

"Or that a member of the royalty who downs gin and tonic cocktails would be prosecuted? Or on what basis do they determine the quality of the witness who complained of the illicit sexual tryst?" he added.

Stating that there are no practical precedents to follow, Zaid, who once owned the country's largest law firm, added that scholars will have no answers to the pressing questions regarding the implementation of hudud.

"The most they can do is ridicule people like me. All this fanfare is going to waste a lot taxpayers’ money, and yet the PM sees no problem with this harebrained scheme just to protect his political image.

"Is the prime minister telling us that we are going to have a different set of shariah-based penal laws for Muslims in Kelantan, while Muslims in other states are spared?

"What is his real intention? This is the worst case of political irresponsibility this country has experienced since its birth," he added.

Kok to face sedition charge over video

 

Teresa Kok will be charged with sedition tomorrow over her Chinese New Year video parody titled "Onederful Malaysia".

Her lawyer Sankara Nair (right) confirmed that the Seputeh MP will be charged at the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court.

"Yes. Was informed to produce her at court tomorrow morning. Have contacted her," he told Malaysiakini.

Kok could not be contacted for an immediate response as she is currently flying back to Kuala Lumpur from Sabah after attending to party matters there.

In the 11-minute clip, Kok plays a talk show host who interviews a panel of experts on what to expect in the Year of the Horse.

Peppered with anecdotes familiar to Malaysians, the experts offer advice on several issues including security, wealth, education and the economy.

Among others, references were made to diamond rings, branded handbags and real estate in New York as well as several other news items pertaining to tourism and vernacular education.

Viewers may associate this with the prime minister's wife Rosmah Mansor's reported penchant for luxury goods and her son, Riza Shahriz Abdul Aziz's 2012 purchase of a RM100 million apartment in New York.

Ostensibly, one of the experts advised viewers to place a "lo-si-ma" (a horse made of nails and screws) to attract good fortune.

The DAP vice chairperson had received much flak over her video and was accused of insulting the Malays, Islam, the monarchy, the security forces and national leaders.

The leader, however, denied the accusations.

On Feb 6, a group calling itself the 'Coalition of Islamic NGOs' held a protest in Kuala Lumpur and offered a RM2,000 reward to anybody who dared to slap Kok.

They also slaughtered two chickens and smeared the blood on a poster bearing Kok's photo.

Two weeks later, Kok's service centre was splashed with red paint and a chicken carcass was left at the doorstep.

At the height of the controversy, Kok even re-posted the video with Malay subtitles on YouTube to prove that she did not mean to insult any particular race, religion or personality.

The Home Ministry had initially claimed that video ridiculed Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, but later retracted this.

Kok had also come under fire from BN MPs such Shamsul Anuar Nasrah (Lenggong) and Bung Moktar Radin (Kinabatangan), who claimed that the video destroyed racial unity.

Where’s the RM2bil for temples?

PKR asks MIC to explain how the alleged government grant was being distributed.

PETALING JAYA: A PKR leader has urged MIC to announce the names of Hindu temples that have benefited from a RM2 billion budget that it says the federal government has provided.

Malacca PKR vice chairman G Rajendran told FMT he was amazed when he read about the allocation in a Tamil Nesan report today.

The Tamil daily quoted MIC Youth chief C Sivarraajh.

“In his statement, Sivarraajh admitted that the government had given RM2 billion for temples,” Rajendran said. “Where is the money?”

He said it was strange that temple managements all over the country were still soliciting funds from the public despite the availability of so much money for renovations and other expenses.

“Why is the amount stated by Sivarraajh not distributed properly?”

Malaysian Hindu Sangam (MHS) president RS Mohan Shan told FMT he had no information about the alleged budget.

“We are really not aware about the RM2 billion allocation meant for Hindu temples,” he said.

He added that the lack of a proper mechanism to allocate funds for temples was a major issue that the government needed to resolve.

“Any allocation meant for temples or religious activities should not given through political parties,” he said.

Malaysian jihadist was a social media buff

He felt called to join the Syrian war after learning about it from Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, says a close friend.

KUALA LUMPUR: Social media played a fundamental role in influencing a young Malaysian from Perak to join the war in Syria.

This was what he told a close childhood friend recently when he returned to his hometown for a brief family visit.

The friend, speaking to FMT on condition of anonymity, referred to the 25-year-old combatant only as Mohamad.

“From my conversations with him, it was clear that he learned about the war almost exclusively from Facebook, Twitter and YouTube,” said the intermediary. “That was how he developed such a passionate hatred of Bashar al-Assad and his regime.

“He told me there came a point when he felt he could no longer ignore his religious duty to join the jihad to end the daily slaughter of his Sunni brothers in Syria. He kept saying he was doing it all in the name of Islam.”

The source said Mohamad was secretive about a few things despite their close friendship.

“For instance, he would not answer when I asked whether any Sunni preacher on social media had a particular influence on him. Neither would he give details about his journey to Syria through Turkey or reveal much about other Malaysian jihadists in his group.

“But he spoke enthusiastically about his combat training in Aleppo.”

Mohamad is a fighter for an al-Qaeda splinter group known as the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), which sometimes refers to itself as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL).

“Apparently the combat training was intensive and lasted several months,” said the source. “After they had gained some experience in handling weapons, he and fellow trainees had to guard the base camp when senior fighters were away seeking out the enemy.

“He told me he experienced combat several times when the camp came under attack by Bashar’s army.”

Born in wealth

Mohamad comes from a wealthy family. According to the source, his mother was devastated when she first learned that he was fighting in a war.

“Before he left for the first time, only a few close friends knew about it and some tried to discourage him. But he had made up his mind.

“He did not tell any member of his family. He knew that they, especially his mother, would have tried to prevent him from going. One of his friends broke the secret to her only when he was already in Aleppo. She was shocked, angry and deeply depressed.

“But I think she has now finally reconciled herself to the fact that her son is fighting for a cause he believes in.”

Malaysian police recently arrested 11 suspected jihadists in Selangor and Kedah. They said the suspects had received military training and were raising funds for attacks in Malaysia and other countries.

It is not clear whether the alleged plot involves recruitment of fighters for the Syrian war.

The sectarian war between Sunnis and Shi’ites in the Middle Eastern country broke out more than three years ago following a military crackdown on anti-government protesters.

Since then, according to Western intelligence sources, more than 100,000 people have been killed, millions forced out of their homes and entire towns reduced to rubble.

Hudud in a non-Islamic state

Syahredzan Johan, The Star

MUCH has been written about hudud. Many have pointed out that to implement hudud, or at least hudud as proposed by PAS to be carried out in Kelantan on Muslims, would be unconstitutional.

So far, we have not really seen a convincing rebuttal from PAS or others who want hudud to be implemented in Kelantan on how these legal and constitutional hurdles may be overcome. Even if Parliament passes the two Private Members Bills proposed by PAS, there is every likelihood that it will be struck down by the courts.

This article will not revisit the same legal and constitutional angles. Instead, it is an attempt to present a view on implementing hudud, as proposed by PAS, in our present, non-lslamic state.

Hudud is one part of Islamic criminal law. Islamic criminal law, meanwhile, is just one part of the Syariah, the entire legal system in an Islamic state.

In Islamic criminal law, there are generally three types of crimes. The most serious crimes are known as hudud – crimes “against God” or “against limits ordained by God”. In an Islamic state, the sovereign is tasked to punish these crimes if individuals have transgressed them. The punishments for these crimes are fixed and the judge cannot reduce or change them if the offender is found guilty.

Because of their seriousness, these crimes are limited in number. Most scholars agree that hudud crimes are theft, highway robbery, drinking alcohol, illegal sexual intercourse (zina) and false accusation of zina. Scholars are split on the crime of apostasy; some say it is a hudud crime while others disagree.

Apart from hudud crimes, other types of crimes under the Syariah are ta’zir, qisasand diyat. Ta’zir crimes are crimes against the state and they are discretionary; the state has the discretionary powers to punish these crimes. Qisas are crimes punishable on the principle of “an eye for an eye”. Diyat are crimes that may be punishable like qisas but instead, the victim may accept compensation or “blood money” instead.

The burden of proof to establish a hudud crime is extremely high. It is far heavier than the burden of proof that we have in our current system of “beyond reasonable doubt”. To find a person guilty of a hudud crime, there must no doubt at all as to the guilt of the person. If there is any doubt, the judge must not find the person guilty of a hudud crime and instead commute it down to ta’zir crime, for which the punishment is discretionary.

Hudud is one part of a whole system. Islam envisages a comprehensive system of values for society. Not just laws, but in terms of obligations to God, obligations to each other and obligations to the Islamic state. In such an environment, hudud is just one aspect, the extreme end that provides for punishments for the most serious of offences.

In such a system, hudud would be able to achieve its objectives, which include justice and deterrence of crimes. But what PAS is proposing instead is to lift one part of the whole and import it in our current, non-Islamic state and say that it will achieve justice.

To take one aspect of Islamic law and to import it into the current system would not do justice to hudud and the Syariah as a whole. Hudud should be implemented only in a state where all the institutions of the state are in line with the Syariah.

That is why we can immediately point to the problems that would occur if PAS’ hudud plans for Kelantan are implemented. Issues with Muslims in Kelantan being subjected to two sets of criminal laws. Issues where Muslims in Kelantan would be subjected to heavier penalties compared with non-Muslims in the state. Issues of crimes committed jointly by Muslims and non-Muslims. Issues of double jeopardy. Issues of compelling non-Muslims to attend the Syariah Court for trials of hudud when the Syariah Court has absolutely no jurisdiction over non-Muslims. Hudud, when implemented in an Islamic state, is not just for Muslims but is applicable to all. Instead of achieving justice, PAS’ plan would instead create inequality and breed injustice.

Islamic scholar Mohammad Hashim Kemali argues that any arbitrary and selective division of the general of Syariah is bound to harm the spirit and structure of the Syariah and would be tantamount to oppression, the opposite aim of what hudud should achieve. An Islamic political order should first be established, before hudud can be implemented.

He cites the example one of the rightly guided Caliphs, Umar al-Khattab, who suspended the hudud crime of theft during a year of famine. The rationale for this was that it would be unjust to enforce hudud in such circumstances, as people were more likely to commit theft when food was scarce. Many other Islamic scholars, including the respected and celebrated Tariq Ramadan, have also argued for a moratorium on hudud when the conditions are not suitable for such laws.

As mentioned by Hanipa Maidin, the PAS MP for Sepang, in his recent article, hudud is “…only capable of dispensing true and effective justice when it is implemented in a perfect Islamic environment where good governance and sound policy prevail. On the contrary, in the absence of good governance, hudud, despite its aim of bringing genuine law and order, may be counter-productive especially if such laws are implemented by a failed state.”

We are not yet a failed state. But there are many aspects in which the institutions of the state have failed. We have a crisis of confidence in our public bodies. We have not achieved social justice. Those who are in need of assistance and protection have not been adequately assisted and protected. We are still grappling with issues when it comes to having a dual system in the area of family law. We have not upheld constitutional guarantees. The list of woes is long and growing, and it needs our undivided attention.

Syahredzan Johan is a young lawyer and partner of a legal firm in Kuala Lumpur.

Malay groups hail latest ‘Allah’ ruling as victory for Muslims

(Malay Mail Online) – Muslims should celebrate the High Court’s ruling against the Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB) church as a validation of “Allah’s” exclusivity to the religion, Malay groups have said.

Earlier today, the High Court struck out Sabah SIB’s 2007 lawsuit against the Home Ministry for confiscating three boxes of Christian publications that contained the word “Allah”.

Right-wing groups Perkasa and Ikatan Muslimin Malaysia (ISMA) lauded the court’s decision, saying it was a “victory” for Muslims who have argued that the Arabic word ‘Allah’ cannot be used by any other faith in Malaysia.

“This is definitely a victory for us, for Muslims nationwide. We are not talking about who is right or wrong, just that ‘Allah’ has always been for Muslims,” Perkasa youth chief Irwan Fahmi Ideris told The Malay Mail Online when contacted.

The High Court said that it was bound by a Court of Appeal ruling last year saying the Catholic weekly, the Herald, could not use the word “Allah” to refer to God as the word was not an integral part of the Christian faith.

Today’s case demonstrates that the Court of Appeal ruling has set a precedent which will have wide implications.

“This is right, justice has been served, the courts are following what is in the Federal Constitution,” Irwan added.

Christian groups have argued from the outset that their right to use the word is enshrined in the Constitution which guarantees religious freedom.

ISMA president Abdullah Zaik Abdul Rahman said the High Court had done its job and that both rulings showed that there should not be any more confusion on who could use the word “Allah.”

“The decision today is consistent with the Constitution… the court’s interpretation on the matter is correct and just,” he told The Malay Mail Online when contacted.

The Sabah Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB) church filed its lawsuit on December 10, 2007, seeking to quash the Home Ministry’s decision to seize three boxes of Malay-language Christian educational books that contained the word “Allah”.

The books, imported from Indonesia, were seized at the international budget airport terminal in Sepang on August 15, 2007 while in transit.

They were later returned to the Sabah church on January 25, 2008. In an immediate reaction, Sabah SIB president Rev Datuk Jerry Dusing said the church will instruct its lawyers to file an appeal against the High Court decision.

He maintained that the SIB lawsuit, unlike the Herald’s case, covered a much broader scope as it deals directly with the practice of the faith by their Malay-speaking congregation.

Sabah SIB’s case is one of a string of legal challenges initiated by the Malaysian Christian community against the federal government over alleged infringement of their constitutional right to freely practise their religion.

On March 5, a seven-man panel in the Federal Court heard the Catholic Church’s application for leave to appeal a ruling preventing the Herald from publishing the word “Allah”, but has postponed its decision indefinitely.

Another lawsuit, brought by Sarawakian Christian, Jill Ireland Lawrence Bill, against the Home Ministry for seizing personal compact discs (CD) containing the word “Allah” back in May 2008.

Jill, a Melanau, filed her suit on August 20, 2008 seeking to quash the Home Ministry’s seizure of her CDs and a declaration that she has the right to own, use and import materials containing the word “Allah”.

The court is scheduled to review the ministry’s decision on May 15, nearly five years after she won leave for a judicial review in 2009.

Interview: Anwar Ibrahim

The Malaysian opposition leader talks about his impending return to jail, political oppression and Obama’s visit.

By Jarni Blakkarly

The Diplomat’s Jarni Blakkarly spoke recently with Malaysian opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim about the likelihood that he will return to jail, political oppression in Malaysia, and the upcoming visit to Malaysia by U.S. President Barack Obama.

You’ve recently had your prior acquittal on sodomy charges overturned by the courts and been sentenced to five years in jail. As this case has been going back and forth for many years now, how likely do you think it is that you will find yourself behind bars again?

Looking at the names of the judges and the way they expedited the process, they even disallowed me to ask for just a few days to get medical documents. So looking at the judgment I think it is clearly fundamentally flawed, because they did not deal with the facts that were abused. So I think that it is clear that the executive is acting under the instruction of their political masters.

Therefore I’m not too optimistic that I will get a fair hearing and I think that it is a foregone conclusion. Notwithstanding we are of course doing our very best to get the best team of lawyers to expose the whole fiasco in the courts. Since Karpal Singh died in the accident I am now faced also with the problem of getting new lead counsel.

So you do think it is quite likely you will go to jail again?

Yes. In fact colleagues I was with in London for the Al Gore group meeting as well as some friends and Muslim groups in the U.K., all of them without hesitation tried to persuade me to remain in London instead of coming back. They all know and assume that because of the opaque system here and the judiciary that I will go to prison. But I said to them, thank you very much, but I have made my decision, I will continue the fight from within Malaysia.

What do you think will be the political ramifications if you are sent to prison? Would we see Refomasi-like protests on the streets again?

Well the system is still oppressive and there are serious signs of it. It’s not just me and Karpal Signh they are trying to haul to prison, but also a few other MPs, assemblymen, party leaders and protest leaders and I think this trend will continue. Therefore you are giving people hardly any option for recourse. Where do you go if you have a problem? Are you going to go to the courts? You will not get a fair trial. So I think what the authoritarian leaders fail to realize is that there is a limit to what people and the society can endure.

However I think with the ineptitude in dealing with MH370, the international community and the international media are becoming aware of the opaqueness of the system and the failure of governance. So I think we are left with no option but to demand our rights not within the prescribed method of elections that are fraudulent or the courts.

So are you saying that Pakatan will be calling people to the streets if you are sent to jail again?

Well I’m not suggesting that; that is for people to decide. For now we are just organizing a series of meetings to explain what is going on. As you know, even the funeral of Karpal Singh—one of the great opposition leaders and icons—was not reported at all in the mainstream media. And during the final funeral possession not one leader from the ruling party or the government attended, so you can see the tendency to consider opposition leaders as the enemies of the state and I think it is very unhealthy. I can’t predict exactly what will happen. There is also this movement on the first of May for example. There is already this call to protest in opposition to new taxation, fraudulent elections, and the beginning for Reformasi 2.0 will be on the first of May.

Do you think the persecution of politicians like yourself, Karpal Singh prior to his death, Tian Chua and other politicians is strengthening or weakening the positions of Barisan National? 

I think that when they become more desperate they become more ruthless and this series of measures is unprecedented. We’ve seen it under Mahathir, we’ve seen it under Abdullah, but under Najib now it has gotten worse. The number of people denied entry to Sabah and Sarawack, even during a by-election, can you believe this? The election commission is just completely muted, when party leaders are denied entry to come and campaign, because they say this is the law, but this is the Election Commission acting like a small government department.

Now for example the number of MPs and State Assemblymen being hauled to court over unlawful assembly and sedition just keeps on increasing. It is also a sign of desperation, when the ruling party becomes weak they will resort to creating this enemy of the state business. I mean I’m for now [not being called] an “American CIA agent” only because Obama’s visiting. So now they are downplaying the American agent thing. In fact the ruling party UMNO’s paper Utusan even inferred that the MH370 is the work of the Americans and the CIA. They have now downplayed that too because of the Obama visit.

Do you think the ongoing infighting within your own party PKR will end after the party elections this coming month or will they continue?

These are democratic elections, there are of course major contenders for all the seats and all the major positions, which is very healthy. Initially in the formative period you have this consensus among the whole team of leadership. Now there are more qualified personnel, they are more critical and the environment is very democratic and I believe we will go through this process. Sure it will be messy and some may feel a bit disheartened but we are going through this, there may be one or two that say goodbye, but the rest will continue. But what is important to see is this huge groundswell of people coming to vote because it is the only party in the country that had one member, one vote.

Isn’t disunity within PKR a worrying sign for the unity of the broader opposition Pakatan Rakyat coalition?

I can’t see that, just because there are competing groups and factions vying for the deputy presidency or challenging the incumbent – I don’t read this as a sign of division. We have had problems with the leadership in the state of Selangor in the past and there have been criticisms, but still during the by-elections it went very smoothly and the whole party was together intact during the past month and I don’t foresee any problems. Because this is a democratic party, which is not too familiar here within the ruling establishment, we allow everyone to give their own agenda, speeches, and public meetings. That is not a sign of disunity; that’s a sign of healthy competition in a democratic party.

At the last general election you said that you would stand down if Pakatan lost. Do you have any plans for retirement or will you be leading the coalition in the 14th General Election? 

I don’t know; GE 14 is some way to go. For now, I am the leader coordinating the efforts of the opposition. Yes, I did say that in the event we lose the election I would retire, but we won the election, both the popular votes and the seats had there not been this fraudulent Election Commission. Thirty seats would have been won without early voting. Thousands of voters came in five days early and all the ballot boxes were kept under police custody and there was no monitoring by any other people. Then when these votes are being counted eighty percent go to the government. It’s not reflective of any of the constituencies.

So well technically, yes we lost, not that we accepted the result, but we said well we have to move on otherwise there will just be chaos. However this has not been reciprocated by Najib and his administration and their display of arrogance is just excessive. They know the votes we got, and they only blame the ethnic Chinese. Until today all calls for meetings with the prime minister or leaders of the government have been rejected. Can you talk about democracy when the leader of the opposition cannot have one minute of air time on television? Cannot have any meetings with any ministers?

So there are no plans for retirement then?

No, of course, I’ve been going on some time. Just because they are putting me in prison now I can’t announce my retirement. If I retired during the Federal courts deliberation then they would say it is a matter of conceding defeat. I have to then declare that I will fight.

The protests around GE 13 have died down and your move to become Selangor Chief Minister has been blocked by your conviction. Faced with at least another four years now till the next general election, what are the plans for Pakatan?

Well the general mood is not just to be complacent and wait for the next election; we should challenge the corrupt system now. That is why we are having this rally on the first of May and we will continue having rallies. Rallies to question the attempts by the Election Commission to reinforce the strength and dominance of UMNO through the re-delineation of constituencies, which is going to be crudely and clearly favoring the ruling party. Also the introduction of the GST, I’ve always seen the GST as a taxation system as transparent and efficient but not when there is so much wastage and so much corruption. Whereby the Attorney  General’s remarks suggest that there is almost close to twenty billion ringgit in leakages, you can’t start by talking about taxes. You should start by talking about wiping out corruption and the amassing of wealth by the UMNO leaders and their cronies. These issues are now being highlighted and we are just focused on the next elections and challenging the authoritarian regime now.

Since your move to become Menteri Besar [Chief Minister] of Selangor has been blocked, what are your plans personally, moving forward?

I’ll continue the same. I’ve never been Menteri Besar. I’ve been out of prison since 2004, I’m still leader of the opposition, I’m still general advisor to Keadilan [PKR],  Azizah [Wan Ismail]  is still the president now. Today I stepped aside, the UMNO leaders they think there is going to be a contest between Anwar and [his wife] Azizah. They get very excited and will drown the country with talk of division between husband and wife. The reason is of course purely legal because UMNO used the judiciary to first deny me a seat at the state elections and now to deny me the post of president in the party. I was prepared to take the risk personally but then they would use the Register of Societies to deregister the party

PKR and Pakatan in general had a very poor showing in East Malaysia at the last election. Why is it that East Malaysians are so hesitant to embrace Pakatan? What if anything will be done differently leading up to Sarawak’s state election next year and further on into GE14?

Well I think the question assumes that everything is clean, that the electoral process is transparent, which it is not. When you’re dealing with the rural heartland, the Dayak, the Bajau and the Kadazans, [they] do not have the alternative media. At least in the urban base we won 90 per cent of the seats, including in Sabah and Sarawak. Primarily because people have the choice and they do not rely on the mainstream media, which is controlled by the government. You’re talking about the rural heartland, they don’t have that alternative. Secondly they are the poorest and most vulnerable and 500 ringgit handouts by the government affects them. But there have been major inroads into Sabah and Sarawak and understand that there has never been that sort of a challenge in the past.

We have leaders that can’t go and campaign, we have had one after the other being denied entry into Sabah and Sarawak. So these curbs are being put in place because they know people are coming to listen. I don’t have a problem gathering crowds in Sabah and Sarawak which means people are now eager, and there is a hunger for information, news and change. But I do concede it is more problematic because we don’t have the alternative media and secondly because the grinding poverty which makes them vulnerable to government power.

It has been reported that U.S. President Barack Obama won’t be meeting with you on his visit to Malaysia later this week. Is this a disappointment? And would you like to see the us become more involved in promoting democracy in Malaysia? 

The U.S., Australia and Europe have been harping on about democracy and freedom. My view has been quite well known that there should be a consistent and coherent message. You can’t be like the Australians sending troops to Iraq and Afghanistan and then being completely muted when there are efforts for example to forestall democratic reforms in your own neighborhood. So our expectation of President Obama particularly after the very significant Cairo address is to give a clear, consistent and coherent message. Meeting Anwar is not the issue here but give a clear consistent message—that was our message in meeting with Susan Rice and we will keep sending key prominent party leaders to meet her with that message.

For example in his visit to Burma last year Obama met with Aung San Su Kyi and there was in a way a recognition that she was a leader in waiting and that there are fundamental flaws in the democratic system. Is that what you were hoping to see in Obama’s visit to Malaysia?

Yes of course, because if you are true to your foreign policy objectives then you cannot ignore the expression of 52 per cent of the Malaysian population and pretend that nothing is happening, everything is all right, this is a moderate Muslim country, democracy is at work and everything is all right like some of the Australian leaders express when they come here. This is not something that would be well received by the general public here. But I would say that Susan Rice clarified by her remarks in D.C. some days back said that though they are not meeting [me] there will be some clarity of the message, which means I think they will be true to the consistent position of the United States in promoting democracy and freedom.

Why is it that you think the U.S. have been inconsistent with their message in Malaysia? Do you think it is out of concern for Chinese influence in Malaysia and the region?

I’m not sure of the reason, but of course Obama is obsessed about the TPPA. Najib is quite unique in that he supports virtually every single policy objective or initiative of the U.S. Whether it is sending troops or civilians to support in Afghanistan or Iraq, or the Iranian nuclear program, or the TPP, I think Najib has been consistent in supporting the U.S. line and therefore they see him as a very important major ally and as always they will be willing to close one eye when it comes to political oppression, as of course we have seen in U.S. relations with [former Egyptian President Hosni] Mubarak in the recent past.

Double advice to Ka Siong – don’t tell a bare-faced lie and don’t be caught immediately for such downright dishonesty

By Lim Kit Siang,

Let me give a double advice to the MCA deputy president Wee Ka Siong: Don’t tell a bare-faced lie and don’t be caught immediately with such downright dishonesty.

Ka Siong committed both sins today when he rebutted my media conference statement in Batu Pahat yesterday that the MCA President, Liow Tiong Lai had missed a “golden opportunity” to say “No” to the Prime Minister and UMNO President, Datuk Seri Najib Razak who had attended the launch of the MCA’s “Stronger Together” programme at Tunku Abdul Rahman University College in Kuala Lumpur on Saturday that MCA cannot accept Najib’s unilateral and arbitrary announcement in Alor Star last Thursday that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud.

This was because what Najib said was not the original Barisan Nasional stand, and furthermore, violates an important BN principle that any change of Barisan Nasional policy must be the result of the consensus of all component parties and not unilaterally and arbitrarily by any one party, even if it is UMNO.

Ka Siong should know better than anyone that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government’s stand, even going back to the UMNO, MCA and MIC founders like Tunku Abdul Rahman, Tun Razak, Tun Hussein, Tun Tan Cheng Lock, Tun Tan Siew Sin and Tun V.T. Sambanthan was that hudud was inconsistent with the secular 1957 constitution.

When did the Barisan Nasional Federal Government change this fundamental position and why did the MCA support such a fundamental policy change?

Ka Siong’s bare-faced lie is claiming that Tiong Lai had said “No” to Najib in front of the Prime Minister on Saturday, rejecting Najib’s statement in Alor Star last Thursday that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud.

What is unfortunate for Ka Siong is that he is immediately caught telling a bare-faced lie, as this is easily proven by referring to Tiong Lai’s speech or the MCA newspaper Star’s report of the speech – which showed that Tiong Lai missed the “golden opportunity” to tell Najib in his presence that MCA repudiated the Prime Minister’s Alor Star statement that the Barisan Nasional Federal Government had never rejected hudud.

Hudud’s practical problems: The non-Muslim witness, state boundaries and the Constitution

KUALA LUMPUR, May 4 — Even if PAS wins Parliament’s nod for its hudud bid, lawyers say the Islamist party will face even greater hurdles when the controversial law is implemented in Kelantan.

They said not only does the Islamic penal code run contrary to the Federal Constitution, it would also have limited reach in that it could not prescribe punishment on criminals who flee the state’s borders.

To complicate things further, the Shariah Court cannot compel a non-Muslim witness to testify before it and cannot cite them for perjury or contempt of court as its jurisdiction only covers Muslims, they said.

“It’s unworkable because non-Muslims will not be subject to those provisions, which means your witnesses, your accomplices who are non-Muslims, will not appear in those cases,” Malaysian Bar president Christopher Leong told The Malay Mail Online.

“It’s non-compellable. I don’t have to answer your questions, let alone attend court,” he added.

PAS is attempting to enforce an Islamic penal code in Kelantan as early as next year, which comprises “hudud” and “qisas” (retribution) laws that cover offences like murder, causing hurt, rape, robbery and theft.

Leong also noted that according to the Federal Constitution, criminal law falls under federal jurisdiction.

Syarie lawyer Nizam Bashir said the Ninth Schedule of the Federal Constitution states that the Shariah court only has jurisdiction over “persons professing the religion of Islam”, and thus would need to be amended if Kelantan desired to allow the Islamic court to hear non-Muslims.

Kelantan Deputy Mentri Besar Datuk Mohd Amar Nik Abdullah said recently that cases involving Muslim perpetrators and non-Muslim victims would still go to the Shariah Court under the state’s Islamic criminal justice system.

“I find it repugnant for any rules relating to evidence that a person not subject to the control of the court can come to court, and the court can’t do anything if the person lies,” Nizam told The Malay Mail Online.

The syarie lawyer highlighted the recent controversial child custody disputes between non-Muslims and Muslim converts, where calls for the Shariah court to be given jurisdiction over such cases were problematic because the Islamic court could not hear non-Muslims.

He also pointed out that under an Islamic criminal justice system in Kelantan, a state-born resident who commits a crime in another state can only be arrested once they enter Kelantan.

“Keeping that in mind, pursuant to the 9th Schedule, every state has jurisdiction to enact legislation only within the confines of its state. In other words, it cannot enact an enactment with extraterritorial effect,” said Nizam.

Civil liberties lawyer Syahredzan Johan said that implementing Islamic criminal laws violated the Federal Constitution as Muslims in the country would be subjected to two legal systems.

“That in itself is inequality and is not in conformity with Article 8 of the Federal Constitution which guarantees equality,” Syahredzan told The Malay Mail Online.

“When it comes to criminal laws, a Muslim person is liable to suffer a more severe punishment for the same act compared to a non-Muslim,” he added.

Syahredzan cited an example where a pair ― a Muslim and non-Muslim ― commit theft together, but the Muslim is liable to lose his hand, while the non-Muslim may just receive a fine or a jail sentence.

“The issue of unconstitutionality arises in the implementation, and that is when it will be ripe for a constitutional challenge,” he said.

Constitutional lawyer Edmund Bon said an Islamic criminal justice system ― which mandates punishments like death by stoning, amputation, and 100 lashes ― violates Article 5 of the Federal Constitution that protects one’s freedom from torture.

“Article 5 of the Constitution encompasses the right to life. The right to life includes the right not to be subject to torture, inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment.

“We would be ready to challenge hudud laws under the constitution should it come into force,” he said.

Bon also pointed out that the Federal Constitution limits the Shariah court’s jurisdiction to family law, personal law and offences against the “precepts” of Islam for Muslims.

But hudud, the lawyer argued, was not envisaged to be part of the offences that violate Islamic precepts.

In 1993, the PAS state government passed the Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code Enactment II, allowing it to impose the strict Islamic penal code in the state. But the laws have not been implemented.

PAS is now looking for parliamentary approval to implement hudud. It plans to put forward two private members’ bills in Parliament. One seeks approval for unconventional punishments, some of which are for offences already covered in the Penal Code. The other seeks to empower Shariah courts to mete out the unconventional punishments.

According to the Shariah Courts (Criminal) Jurisdiction Act 1965, the Islamic court cannot sentence offenders to more than three years in jail or fine them more than RM5,000. It also cannot sentence offenders to be whipped more than six times.

Court Dismisses Application Over Import Of Christian Books With The Word 'Allah'

KUALA LUMPUR, May 5 (Bernama) -- The High Court today dismissed an application by Sidang Injil Borneo (SIB) for leave for a judicial review to challenge a Home Ministry order prohibiting the import of Christian books containing the word "Allah".

Justice Datuk Zaleha Yusof ruled that the High Court was bound by the Court of Appeal's decision that the word 'Allah' is not an integral part of faith and practices of Christianity.

In her judgement, which was read out by Senior Assistant Registrar N. Arun in chambers, Zaleha said the court had no choice but to refer to the Court Of Appeal's decision in the case of the Home Ministry against the Roman Catholic Church involving a prohibition on the use of the word "Allah" in its 'Herald' weekly publication.

"So, although the decision, was particular to the weekly Herald, all the learned judges held that the word "Allah" is not an integral part of faith and practices of Christianity and, therefore, the prohibition by the minister is not unconstitutional.

"As long the decision stands, the doctrine of 'stare decisis' (precedent), this court is bound by the decision of the superior court," she said.

She said the court dismissed the application with no order as to costs.

On Dec 10, 2007, SIB and its president, Rev Jerry W. A. Dusing alias Jerry W. Patel, filed a leave application for a judicial review against the Home Ministry and the government to challenge the Customs Department's seizure of its books brought in from Surabaya, Indonesia, at the Low-Cost Carrier Terminal in Sepang on Aug 15, 2007.

The books were, however, returned to the church on Jan 25, 2008.

They had sought a declaration that they had the constitutional right to use the word "Allah" in all their religious publications and practices, and not just within the church.

Lawyer Lim Heng Seng represented the church and Dusing while senior federal counsel Shamsul Bolhassan acted for the government.

Migrate if you are not happy, says Ridhuan Tee

Controversial lecturer Dr Ridhuan Tee Abdullah (pic) today said those who were not happy living in Malaysia should pack their bags and head for greener pastures.

In his Sinar Harian column, Ridhuan said this was an easy issue for him – if Malaysia was not a paradise for certain parties, then they should leave.

"Why do these irresponsible parties not move abroad? Because Malaysia is heaven. Why are they still making insistent demands? Because they want a better heaven," he said.

He also criticised several leaders of non-governmental organisations for exposing Malaysia's negative points to US President Barack Obama.

"Malaysia is essentially a good country, but certain quarters are responsible for criticising the country's system," he said.

The National Defence University Malaysia lecturer said these non-Islamic NGOs had avidly questioned Obama about the US.

"Their questions and views did not even take the country they are residing in into consideration, how easy it is for them to make a living in Malaysia," Ridhuan said.

During his recent visit to Kuala Lumpur, Obama had held an hour-long meeting with 10 community groups who had raised human rights issue and political accusations made against opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

Former Bersih 2.0 chairperson Datuk S. Ambiga had said issues raised with Obama included racial and religious polarisation, political divisions in Putrajaya, free elections and media restrictions.

Ridhuan also claimed that Malaysia did not have the characteristics of an Islamic country due to the increase in the number of temples and churches.

"Not only have the number of non-Muslim places of worship exceeded the number of mosques and surau, but Bahasa Malaysia has also lost its essence.

"Places of worship in Malaysia will soon make the country look more like a non-Muslim country with the increasing number of churches, kuil and temples," he wrote in his column.

Ridhuan said the institutions of higher learning in Malaysia no longer practised Bahasa Malaysia as the national language, but placed priority on English and Chinese.

He also defended Majlis Amanah Rakyat (Mara) for questioning non-Muslim scholarship applicants about Islam.

"What was done is not wrong, especially as the 'Allah' issue is being fiercely debated by various quarters," Ridhuan said.

"Where is the harm if the interview includes the subject of Islam? If the applicant can answer, it is considered a credit. If cannot answer, no problem."

Ridhuan said if an applicant was unable to answer questions about Islam, it did not mean that he would be sidelined or rejected.

"I am not saying what the interviewer did was right, but the quarters which have raised the issue and criticised Mara are too much.

"Sometimes in an interview, we are also asked to compare religions. The Muslim students have never made a fuss."

Last week, deputy Mara director for Sarawak Mariam Mokhtar told The Malaysian Insider that an officer from the Kuala Lumpur headquarters was under investigation after he had allegedly quizzed non-Muslim Bumiputera scholarship applicants about Islam during the interviews.

Mariam had said that non-Muslim students who attended the scholarship interview did not have to be questioned about Islam.