Hindu conversions: Families plead for meeting with their daughters

The chairperson of the Pak-Hindu Welfare Association, Mangla Sharma said that they would appeal to the federal Shariat court against the “brainwashing” of Hindu girls. PHOTO: MOHAMMAD SAQIB/ EXPRESS 

KARACHI: On Monday, Lata and Rinkle Kumari’s families wept and appealed to the government to let them meet their daughters, while 15-year-old Asha’s family demanded that the authorities should find and rescue their missing daughter.

While speaking in Sindhi at a press conference at Karachi Press Club, Rinkle’s mother begged and pleaded for an opportunity to meet her daughter. According to Asha’s mother Reshma, her daughter went missing 18 days ago from Jacobabad. While wiping her tears with her dupatta, she said that it was cruel that the authorities had not found her as yet. While talking to The Express Tribune, Asha’s brother Vinod Kumar said that he used to drop and pick his sister from the parlour where she was doing a course. “When I went to pick her up on March 3, the parlour owner told me that she had already left,” he said. “She was so tired of the course. She did not want to go there anymore but I kept pushing her to do so.”

The family registered the FIR and nominated the parlour owner. So far the case is still under investigation.

According to Lata Kumari’s father, the Hindu doctor who converted to Islam, his wife was in the hospital because of what had happened.

The patron of the Pakistan Hindu Council, Ramesh Kumar, spoke out against the recent incidents of abduction and forced conversion in the Hindu community. “Girls from our peace loving community get scared when they see a bullet,” he said. “Imagine how Rinkle felt when she went to court with 500 people carrying weapons! Can we ever say that her statement was recorded of free will?” He added that if Asha was not rescued soon, 20 days later they would find out that she had also converted.

According to Ramesh, the country’s economy was dependent on the minorities. “There are eight million Hindus in Pakistan, out of which seven million live in Sindh,” he said. “Their current state is forcing them to leave their homes. So far 200 to 250 families have moved from Jacobabad. We don’t want to leave the country.” The chairperson of the Pak-Hindu Welfare Association, Mangla Sharma said that this was not the first time the community had to step forward to raise their voice against injustice. Sharma added that they would appeal to the Federal Shariat Court against the forced conversions. “Our girls are being brainwashed,” said Sharma. “They need counselling.”

Rinkle’s uncle Raj said that protests were being held by religious extremists every day in Mirpur Mathelo. “They are threatening us that if Rinkle returns home, four Hindu women will go missing,” he said. “What will we do now? Where will we go now?”

According to Qadir Khan, a lawyer, under Article 36 of the Constitution minorities should be protected but were not given security.

Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf’s wing chief in Sindh, Michael Javed said that a judicial commission should be set up to look into these cases. The patron of the Pakistan Hindu Council clarified that they were satisfied with the court proceedings but wanted a judicial inquiry of the policeman who mishandled the cases in Ghotki. He said that it was no use to approach the minority parliamentarians as they were not representatives of the minorities. “We prefer to lodge our complaints with top government officials,” he said. “However, it is only the Supreme Court that takes notice of such cases.”

Published in The Express Tribune, March 20th, 2012.

Ex-ISA detainee Yazid says he met Osama

Top 100 Indian students should be sent to top 100 universities

Senator S. Ramakrishnan

The prime minister announced that top 100 Indian students with 1st class honors will get to do post graduate studies with local universities. Well Mr. PM why only top 100 can do their post graduate studies with local universities. Any Indian or Malaysian with 1st class honors should be given the opportunities to do their post graduate degree. Mr. PM why not send the top 100 Indian students to at least one of the top 100 universities to do their post graduate studies and offer important positions when they return so that they can be actively involved in nation building. But on the other hand, if an Indian student can get 1st class honors, he or she will be offered more post graduate opportunities by MNCs or Singapore government. They don’t discriminate like your BN government.

For the information of our Prime Minister, I would like to highlight the plight of Malaysian Indian medical students in Indonesia. Many Indians along with Malay students are studying for medicine in universities in Sumatra and Bandung. As we all know many of the Indians are from poor economic background. Quiet a number of students pay their upfront fees payment and enter the universities. After that their parents apply for loans all over to pay the balance. Some manage to get but there are also some don’t get the support anywhere. I was told by the Malaysian student’s association committee members whom I met during my recent visit to Indonesia that every year 5/6 Indian students dropped after year 3 or 4 due to non-payment of fees. All the payments made for the first few years wasted. There are students doing part time work in Indonesia for living expenses. Overseas students are not eligible for PTPTN. Some of these students are disgruntled because of the financial predicament. Mr. PM Can you please look into financial support for overseas medical students?

There is one student struggling all the way to pay college fees, but now has reached year 6. He may not be able finish his medical studies because he owes the Bandung University about RM40000. His father passed away due to depression and worries while looking for loan for his son. Poor Indian parents go through hell to see that their children get proper education. They don’t have any one place to turn to. Can you Mr. PM resolve this issue of loan or scholarship that haunts the poor Indians year in year out when SPM and STPM results are announced? How can the Indians support you when your government openly discriminate them?

Every year many top Indian students are denied PSD scholarships. It’s only after March 2008 election results that the PM without UMNO’s support going to Indians to offering election goodies. Indian community is not overwhelmed by one off offers but looking for inclusion in policies. Indian students’ intake in local university is only 2.6% last year. In terms of basic rights Malaysian Indians are regressing every year. Mr. PM please improve our fundamental rights and needs before Indian community walk with you.

‘Singh is not king for Indians’

A group of furious Indian opposition supporters is calling on the DAP stalwart to quit because he has become a liability.

PETALING JAYA: Lashing out at DAP national chairman Karpal Singh, a group of Pakatan Rakyat Indian supporters has called on the veteran politician to resign.

Speaking at an emotionally-charged press conference here, PKR member K Saminathan said Karpal has now become a liability to DAP and the opposition.

“Because of his vengeance towards (DAP deputy secretary-general) P Ramasamy, Karpal is indirectly bringing down DAP and Pakatan.

“He may be a ‘King’ to the Sikh community but not to the Indian community,” he said, alleging that the DAP stalwart had overlooked the woes of the Indian community over the past 40 years.

Samy also said that a nationwide road show would be organised to pressure Karpal to step down.

The press conference was held in response to Karpal’s criticism of the DAP disciplinary committee for letting Ramasamy, who is also Penang deputy chief minister, off the hook.

Ramasamy, who had been embroiled in a recent verbal salvo with Karpal, was accused of masterminding a demonstration against Karpal in last December.

Pro-Karpal assemblymen rapped

Meanwhile, Malaysian Tamil Students’ Development Organisation representative A Kalaimugilan took Penang DAP assemblymen A Thanasekaran (Bagan Dalam) and RSN Rayer (Seri Delima) to task.

He said the duo, who are known to be aligned to Karpal, were “traitors” of the Indian community.

He said when Pakatan won Penang in the 2008 general election, DAP had offered two exco posts to the Indian community.

“While Ramasamy was given one of the posts, both Thanasekaran and Rayer refused to accept the other post due to conflict of interest that might arise with their respecetive legal practice,” he said.

“Because of their selfishness, the Indian community lost a golden opportunity (of having another exco) in Penang,” he added.

MIC Youth chief T Mohan also came under fire during the press conference for interfering in Pakatan’s internal issue with regard to the spat between Karpal and Ramasamy.

“He is a ‘toothless tiger’ in his party. He should concentrate on MIC’s problems,” said Kalaimugilan.

‘If you can’t solve, we’ll throw you out’

Residents of Kampung KTM Railway Line in Sungai Buloh want Selangor MB to issue solve their 20-year-old housing problem swiftly.



SHAH ALAM: About 25 former residents of the Kampung KTM Railway Line in Sungai Buloh arrived at the Selangor state secretariat (SUK) yesterday to compel menteri besar, Abdul Khalid Ibrahim to give them plots of land promised by the state government in 1992.

The group, which arrived at about 9am, was led by 61-year-old S Muniandy.

Speaking at a press conference later, Muniandy said that 229 families of the former railway line residents were promised plots of land by the then menteri besar Muhammad Muhammad Taib, before being asked to move to longhouses in Rawang.

“The then state government told us that it was a six months transition period. Twenty years have passed but we have not seen our lands yet,” said Muniandy.

After waiting at the SUK for about four hours, Selangor exco for housing Iskandar Abdul Samad met the residents and promised to get them a meeting with Khalid on March 29.

Disappointed by Khalid’s absence, Muniandy accused the current Pakatan Rakyat state government of being no different from the previous administration.

“We will not give up. We will change the MB if Khalid fails to resolve our woes,” said Muniandy.

Catch more in our video.

An example of bad damage control

This is just like how Ibrahim Ali and Perkasa talk. Who are you? You are nothing. You Chinese and Indians are pendatang. This country belongs to the Malays. Don’t be so sombong. If you don’t like it you can go back to China or India. Don’t try to demand this and that. Stop asking to be treated equal. You are not equal. Malays are first-class citizens. Chinese and Indians are second-class citizens.

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

The PKR people are embarking on some serious damage control. And to cover their arses they are distorting what really happened in the hope that they can confuse the people. See what Chua Jui Meng, N Surendran, and S I Tan said below. These were all carried in Malaysiakini, The Malaysian Insider, Harakah, as well as pro-opposition Blogs, Din Merican’s included.

Here we are screaming about the lies and distorted news from Umno and the government- and Umno-controlled mainstream media. Then we find the opposition doing exactly the same as what they accuse Umno and the government- and Umno-controlled mainstream media of doing.

This is what I mean when I say that the opposition must walk the talk. How can a priest stand up in the pulpit during Sunday mass and scream that you must be a good Christian and then go and bugger the choirboys and bonk the nuns? Wouldn’t this be called hypocrisy?

Chua Jui Meng is allegedly a Born Again Christian. I don’t know when he died (maybe when MCA kicked him out) but he got born again when he joined the opposition and decided to fight corruption. Considering he was the most corrupted Health Minister Malaysia has ever seen, I can appreciate that he, of all people, would be the expert when it comes to corruption. Would you not employ the best robber to advise you on how to prevent robberies?

The only problem is when he decided to become born again and then join the opposition to fight corruption he refused to give back all the money he robbed when he was the Health Minister. Aiyah! How can you keep all those millions and then whack others for being corrupted? You must first give back all the money you stole before talking about how corrupted other people are.

Chua Jui Meng, N Surendran, and S I Tan are from Chinese and Tamil schools or what? How come they can’t understand a simple thing like the difference between a debate and an interview?

‘Debate’ means two or more people take opposite positions on an issue and they argue and defend the position they have taken. ‘Interview’ means one person asks another person questions and you reply to those questions.

So, Chua Jui Meng, N Surendran, S I Tan, don’t get confused. More importantly, don’t try to mislead others. That is something Umno and the government- and Umno-controlled mainstream media are supposed to do. The opposition people are supposed to be honest, sincere and trustworthy. If you all also act just like Umno people then why the need to vote opposition? We might as well just vote Barisan Nasional. We want to vote opposition so that we can get something different and something better. But now you all are acting just like Umno -- lying and distorting things.

How many times must I repeat the same story before you can understand? Aiyah! Chinese and Tamil schools so bad one or what? Anyway, let me for the umpteenth time tell you what happened.

Wikileaks is producing a documentary and they are interviewing many people for the documentary. Many people mah! Two of these people are Anwar Ibrahim and me. The issue is, do they interview Anwar and me in separate sessions or can they kill two birds with one stone and interview us both at the same time?

When they asked me I said no problem, can do both at the same time. When they asked Anwar he said big problem, must do separate interviews. So the decision was it would be two separate interviews. When they asked me who shall go first, I told them to interview Anwar first and I will take the next session.

So, where got debate one? Why do you keep saying I invited Anwar to a debate? I never invited Anwar! Wikileaks invited Anwar. And it is not a debate between Anwar and me. It is an interview. Julian Assange asks questions and you reply. Simple!

Anyway, whether it is a debate or interview is one issue. But why so sombong one? Why are you all talking like Umno and Perkasa?

Wah! Garang! Who is Raja Petra Kamarudin? He is nobody. Anwar is somebody, a great man. How can Raja Petra want to share the same stage with Anwar? Anwar is way up there. Raja Petra is way down there. Raja Petra is not the same level as Anwar. Raja Petra is just a Blogger. Anwar is the opposition leader.

Imagine if I talk like that.

Who are Chua Jui Meng, N Surendran, and S I Tan? They are just Chinese and Indians. They are pendatang. They are not even Bumiputeras. I am from the Selangor Royal Family. My cousin is the Sultan of Selangor. My uncle was the Agong. My grandfather was the Governor of Penang. Why you call me RPK? Bad manners mah! You must address me as Yang Mulia, not RPK.

Is that the way to talk? Sound sombong or not?

Now the NFC directors refuse to appear before the PAC. They have snubbed the PAC Committee. Who are you? You are just a Committee. Why must we appear before your Committee? We are Directors of the NFC. We are bigger than you. You are nothing. We are orang besar. We have Umno backing. We can walk in to the PMs and DPMs office any time. No need to even make an appointment. We no need to layan you one. We can just snub you.

Can you see how many Malaysians have this same attitude?

Siapa awak? Awak ni rendah. Awak tahu saya siapa? Saya Datuk. Saya Tan Sri. Saya Tun. Saya wakil rakyat. Saya Yang Berhormat. Saya ada kuasa. Saya orang besar. Awak apa? Awak ni Blogger saja. You are nobody. I am somebody.

When I walked into the police station in 2001, Bakri Zinin, the current CID Chief whacked me for no rhyme or reason (he just likes whacking people). When I stood up and asked him why he beat me up, he charged at me and wanted to beat the shit out of me. Luckily three of his officers held him back while my wife held on to me. If not I would have killed him.

“I am the OCPD here!” Bakri Zini screamed.

That’s right. Another case of who are you? I am the OCPD here. I am a big man. You are nothing!

Later, when they looked at my IC, they discovered who I was. To cover their mistake, they arrested and handcuffed me and threw me into the lockup. When I demanded to know under what charge, they replied that they are going to arrest me first and then decide later what to charge me with.

So you see how this ‘who are you, I am a big man’ works?

No lah. Don’t act like this. This is a very sombong attitude. Umno also talks like this. In March 2008, the voters punished Umno for talking like this. So don’t make the same mistake like Umno or else the voters might also punish you like they punished Umno in 2008.

This is just like how Ibrahim Ali and Perkasa talk. Who are you? You are nothing. You Chinese and Indians are pendatang. This country belongs to the Malays. Don’t be so sombong. If you don’t like it you can go back to China or India. Don’t try to demand this and that. Stop asking to be treated equal. You are not equal. Malays are first-class citizens. Chinese and Indians are second-class citizens.

Sound sombong or not? Well, this is exactly how you also sound. So be careful how you talk. If everyone also talks like you, you don’t like it. You will scream that we are all equal. We are all Malaysians. Where got first-class and second-class citizens?

Got! Raja Petra Kamarudin is second-class, maybe even third-class. He is just a Blogger. He not the same taraf as Pakatan Rakyat leaders. Pakatan Rakyat leaders are higher class. How can Raja Petra Kamarudin share same stage as Pakatan Rakyat leaders?

*****************************************

Chua Jui Meng: Raja Petra bukan taraf Anwar untuk di ajak berdebat

“Bukan takut rahsia bocor tapi bukan taraf Anwar (Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim). BN (Barisan Nasional) cuba ubah isu kerana orang yang sepatutnya berdebat dengan Anwar adalah Najib (Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak),” kata Pengerusi PKR Johor, Datuk Chua Jui Meng.

Beliau berkata demikian ketika diminta mengulas berkenaan kenyataan Timbalan Perdana Menteri, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin yang melabelkan Anwar sebagai penakut kerana keengganannya berdepan dengan pengendali portal Malaysia Today, Raja Petra Kamarudin.

"Saya yakin BN sengaja mengubah topik kerana mahu mengelak kerana khuatir banyak rahsia mereka bakal terbongkar sekiranya menerima pelawaan itu.

“Sekarang kita cabar pula sama ada Najib berani menyahut cabaran untuk berdebat dengan Anwar. Kenapa pula mengubah isu Raja Petra dengan Anwar? ini bukan soal keberanian tetapi kita mahu individu yang layak,” katanya semalam.

Dalam perkembangan lain, Jui Meng enggan mengulas sama ada beliau akan bertanding di Parlimen Gelang Patah kerana menganggap ia masih terlalu awal, selain menyerahkannya kepada kepimpinan Pakatan Rakyat untuk memilih.

“Sama ada DAP atau PKR yang bertanding di kerusi itu bukan masalahnya. Hubungan kami masih mesra seperti dulu, malah terus bekerjasama erat untuk menang dalam pilihan raya umum akan datang,” katanya.

*****************************************

Anwar shouldn't debate Najib by proxy, says PKR

PKR vice-president N Surendran is bemused by the flap arising from his party supremo’s imputed refusal to debate maverick blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin (RPK).

“I’m amused as to how the controversy has enabled two escape artists to evade the more pressing compulsions for debate,” allowed the busy lawyer-politician in remarks made to Malaysiakini.

“One, of course, is RPK himself: Has there been a more compelling need for the two diametrically opposed parts of him to debate each other, seemingly absurd as that may sound,” offered Surendran.

“On the one hand, the public had for years seen the part of him prior to February last year, just before the Sarawak state elections, when he was a significant voice in the medley that was for reform and change in the country,” he continued.

“After an astonishing statement he made last February, the man struck an about-face, a turnaround which he has sustained to this day, thus showing a face radically different to the one he held up to Malaysian netizens prior to February 2011,” observed Surendran.

Surendran, a likely PKR candidate for the 13th general election, argued that since there has been no distinct change to the political structures of the nation, RPK’s volte-face - its mystery, its puzzle - is prime material for a public airing.

“Seriously, a public debate between the two sides of RPK’s persona is a way to dispel that mystery, though I’m afraid it would give political ventriloquism a bad name.

“But can that be any worse that what he has given to the crusading reformist spirit on the net with his astonishing somersault of the last year,” queried Surendran.

The PKR veep held that the other escapee from the contretemps over Anwar Ibrahim’s imputed refusal to debate RPK was Prime Minister Najib Razak.

“The PM has chosen to ride pillion in this matter by imputing cowardice on Anwar’s part but it is he who is ducking out of a debate with Anwar,” charged Surendran.

“His remarks to foreign correspondents yesterday had plenty of allusions to the American political scene but he missed the elephant in the room which is the prevalence of public debates between leading contestants,” he asserted.

“He wants Anwar to debate his proxy, RPK, which is typical of the rentier culture he represents,” quipped Surendran. -- Malaysiakini, 20 March 2012

*****************************************

Why the hell should Anwar debate RPK? — S I Tan

Why should the Leader of the Malaysian Opposition debate a discredited blogger?

In any democracy, the incumbent PM debates the leader of the Opposition, not some blogger who has illusions about his own influence.

Raja Petra Kamarudin may think that he is worthy of acclaim but he is not. He has not stood for elections and is not representing any constituency. In fact, he is just another blogger who owes his loyalty to himself and whoever gives him the time of day.

If you layan him, he is very happy and will be friendly towards you. But if you don’t listen to his advice, then he gets all worked up.

Of course, some people argue that he has crossed over to BN and that is his choice. Maybe they find him more useful in bringing down the Opposition but he is nothing more than someone who puts his views across on his blog.

He is not the Leader of the Opposition, an Opposition which has managed to shake BN’s hegemony. Anwar is the leader and therefore the PM should show some spine and debate him.

But asking Najib Razak to show some spine would be asking too much. So Najib now takes this side issue of Anwar not debating the blogger as his escape route.

After more than 50 years, this is what Malaysia has been left with: a prime minister unable to act prime ministerial and constantly looking for his script from public relations advisors. -- The Malaysian Insider, 19 March 2012

MONEY

1. I wrote recently on the financial problems of Europe at the invitation of the Financial Times. Of course it is not erudite as would those who studied economics and finance would write. Strangely some people agreed with my views.

2. During the financial crisis of 1997-1998 I was forced to read up on the subject. Today I know a bit more about money and finance. But the most important thing about money which everyone of us knows without need to be an economist or financial expert is that if you spend more money than you have you will be in trouble. Simply put, if you have one hundred Ringgit but you spend one hundred and ten Ringgit, you will be in debt to the amount of ten Ringgit. But if you have 100 RM and spend 90 RM you will not face trouble.

3. No big deal. But when you have a million or a billion, your 10% overspending will put you in debt to a level which you may not be able to pay and the person you owe money to may not be so ready to forgive.

4. Greece is now bankrupt. The reason is simple enough, Greece overspent. It borrowed more money than it is able to pay. The sums are big, running into billions of Euro. The creditors cannot forgive.

5. Why did Greece borrow beyond what it could pay. Well, Greece is a member of the European Union, a collection of developed countries. So it must live by the standards of the European Union. It must practice the welfare state principles of the European countries.

6. The revenue of the Greek Government was not enough to support the high standards of living, the high pay, pension and other benefits of the Europeans. So the Government borrowed money to cover the high salaries, short working hours and days, early pensions, unemployment benefits and other perks that European Governments offered their workers.

7. The private sector had to follow the Government, which results in raising the cost of production until the products of their labour are no longer competitive and either they earn less profits or became unsaleable altogether.

8. Loans unfortunately have to be paid when matured. When the loans amounting to hundreds of billions cannot be paid, the Greek Government, the borrower, must be made bankrupt.

9. Somewhere in the story of Greece, there is a lesson for other countries. The lesson as I pointed out earlier is very simple. When you spend more than the money you have, you will become a debtor. And when you cannot pay your debt you will become bankrupt.

10. Once upon a time when I was Prime Minister I had the responsibility of approving the budget before it was presented to Parliament.

11. Roughly I knew I had to make provision for operation, for debt servicing and for development. Despite allegedly being profligate, I managed not to overspend. In fact the reason why we did not go down during the financial crisis was because we had no big debts to pay.

12. Of the three elements of the Government budget, only development spending can be reduced. Debt servicing and operations (salaries, pensions and other statutory expenditure must be paid on time if we are not going to default). If we increase salaries too much, and we have more than a million Government employees, there is a likelihood that we will not have enough for even minimal development.

13. We may announce a big development budget but there will simply be not enough money to implement them.

14. We may borrow. But there is a limit to borrowing. When you borrow the debt servicing charges will increase. A point will be reached when we will not be able to service debts or pay the lender when the loans become mature.

15. All these elementary things must be known to the Government. So we will not become like Greece. But people do not seem to know about this. Demands for pay increases, for higher non-taxable pensions, for abolition of tolls ( the Government has to make up for the loss of revenue by toll concessionairs), more holidays, more subsidies etc will continue to be made.

16. The opposition, wishing to become popular and win elections will always support these demands. Not having to be responsible for the overspending and the possible bankruptcy of the nation, it is easy for them to support. I hope the people will see through their lack of a sense of responsibility to the nation.

17. The incumbent Governments cannot be irresponsible and try to be popular always. The people must understand this.

18. When a demand is made the Government has to examine the implication not only to the Government in terms of its capacity to meet the demand, it must also consider the effect on the whole nation. If the Government cannot approve the demand it must be because it does not want to bankrupt the nation.

Islam membenarkan bapa kahwin anak kandungnya?

ADAKAH Islam membenarkan seorang bapa mengahwini anak kandungnya? Menurut sesetengah pendapat Mazhab Shafi’e, begitulah. Anak yang dilahirkan di luar pernikahan, boleh dikahwini oleh bapa kandungnya sendiri.

Di Malaysia, yang lebih memberatkan pendapat Mazhab Shafi’e, Fatwa Kebangsaan Malaysia 1971 menyatakan bahawa anak tak sah taraf tidak boleh dibin atau dibintikan bapanya dan bapanya tidak boleh menjadi wali untuk anaknya. Ini bermakna bapa kandungnya dianggap bukan muhrim anak itu. Di Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara (JPN), walaupun kedua ibu bapa mengakui bayi itu anak mereka, pegawai-pegawai masih tidak akan mencatat nama bapa di sijil kelahiran anak tersebut.

Isu anak tak sah taraf ini dibincangkan semasa forum dianjurkan Sisters in Islam bertajuk Apa Ada Pada

Dr Juanda Jaya (Wiki commons)

Nama. Ketua Hakim Syariah Terengganu Datuk Ismail Yahya dan mufti Perlis Dr Juanda Jaya adalah antara panelis. Mereka memanggil untuk penamaan anak tak sah taraf disemak semula kerana dikatakan tidak menepati konsep Islam serta mengaibkan. Mengapa di Malaysia masih tidak boleh membenarkan seorang bapa mengakui anak kandungnya sendiri di sisi undang-undang?

Nasab yang penuh kekeliruan

Dr Juanda Jaya (Wiki commons)

Semasa saya sendiri memperbaharui kad pengenalan di Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara baru-baru ini, di papan kenyataannya ada keratan akhbar soal jawab bersama Jabatan Kemajuan Islam Malaysia (Jakim). Ia menerangkan bahawa tujuan anak tak sah taraf tidak boleh dibin atau dibintikan bapanya ialah agar tidak wujud kekeliruan dalam nasab keturunannya.

Alasan kekeliruan itu menjadikan saya keliru. Takut keliru nasab keturunan, tapi tidak takut kalau anak itu terkahwin dengan bapa kandungnya sendiri? Atau dengan adik beradiknya sendiri, iaitu anak-anak bapanya dengan isteri lain, atau dengan adik beradik bapanya? Bukankah itu lebih huru-hara jadinya?

Mungkin saya saja yang keliru. Jakim sepertinya tidak keliru. Dengan jelas, Jakim menerangkan bahawa anak yang dilahirkan di luar pernikahan dianggap bukan muhrim bapa kandungnya dan juga bukan muhrim pada ahli keluarga bapa kandungnya.

Maka, oleh kerana secara perundangan fiqah, mereka tiada pertalian keluarga, bermakna dari segi hukum Syariah di Malaysia, seorang anak boleh mengahwini bapa kandung atau ahli keluarga bapa kandungnya.

Orang Islam takut ilmu?

Orang Islam suka benar petik hadith Nabi “Carilah ilmu sampai ke negeri Cina”. Nak tunjuklah betapa Islam cintakan dan meraikan ilmu pengetahuan. Tapi, apakah yang memetik hadith itu sendiri sebenarnya mahu mengikut saranan Nabi ini? Sepertinya ramai yang tidak.

Ramai orang Islam di Malaysia seolah-olah takut dengan ilmu. Seperti ada ilmu yang halal dan ada ilmu haram, ada ilmu yang datang dari Allah dan ada ilmu yang bukan datang dari Allah.

Jadi bila ada masalah dalam masyarakat, yang dicari hanyalah “sumber-sumber Islam” iaini kitab-kitab lama dan pendapat ulama zaman silam yang hidup beratus atau lebih seribu tahun dahulu.

Itu pun ditapis lagi, iaitu yang diambil sebagai sumber rujukan hanyalah ulama yang dia setujui sahaja. Jadi, jangankan nak baca buku-buku dan pendapat sarjana dari Cina, India atau Barat, malah kitab-kitab tulisan dari mazhab-mazhab lain dalam ahli sunnah wajamaah sendiri pun dia takut nak rujuk. Takut terkeliru.

Ulama Islam dulu pelajari pemikiran Barat

Ibnu Rushd (Wiki commons)

Umat Islam juga suka benar berbangga tentang kehebatan saintis-saintis Islam, yang semuanya hidup di zaman silam, seperti Ibnu Sina dan Ibnu Rushd. Tapi mereka lupa bahawa ramai saintis Islam agung itu juga menimba ilmu dari Barat seperti Yunani (Greece) atau kerajaan Rom. Ramai ulama besar seperti Imam Ghazali dan Al-Farabi juga mempelajari falsafah Aristotle, Plato dan Socrates. Sama ada mereka setuju dengan kesuluruhan pemikiran ahli falsafah Barat itu atau tidak, itu hal kedua. Yang penting, mereka tidak sensor atau mengharamkan diri mereka atau orang lain dari terdedah pada pemikiran Barat yang hebat.

Berapa ramai agaknya tokoh agama di Malaysia yang pernah baca dan pelajari ilmu falsafah Barat?

Saya pernah mengunjungi Formaci (Forum Mahasiswa Ciputat), sebuah persatuan mahasiswa di Universiti Islam Negeri, Jakarta dan bertemu dengan beberapa mahasiswa di sana. Saya rasa nak menangis bila melihat di papan putih mereka tersenarai jadual diskusi yang membincangkan buku pemikir-pemikir hebat seperti Plato dan Aristotle dan juga Karl Marx, Friedrich Hegel, Immanuel Kant dan sebagainya. Mahasiswa dari pelbagai jurusan bertemu beberapa hari sekali untuk berdiskusi kerana mereka mengatakan semasa di pesantren (madrasah), mereka hanya terdedah pada ilmu-ilmu keagamaan. Maka, bila sudah di universiti mereka mahu mengambil peluang untuk memahami dan terdedah pada pemikir-pemikir hebat dari Barat.

Maka tidak hairanlah mengapa Indonesia boleh mempunyai pemikir dan sarjana yang hebat seperti Cak Nur (Nurcholis Majid) dan Gus Dur (Abdur Rahman Wahid). Mereka tidak takut pada ilmu.

Membolehkan anak dibin atau dibintikan bapanya

Ulama dahulu bukan saja tidak takut mencari ilmu, tapi mereka juga tidak gentar atau cepat keliru dengan perbezaan pendapat.

Ramai ulama besar dalam Mazhab Maliki, Hanbali, dan Hanafi yang berpendapat anak yang dilahirkan di luar pernikahan boleh dibin atau dibintikan bapa kandungnya. Mereka juga menggunakan dalil-dalil agama yang kuat.

Apa berani kita mengatakan mereka salah atau ilmu mereka cetek? Mengapa tidak kita kaji apakah hujah-hujah yang mereka utarakan? Manalah tahu ada antara pendapat mereka lebih bersesuaian dengan konteks masyarakat kita di Malaysia sekarang ini. Lagipun, banyak juga pendapat mazhab lain yang turut digunapakai di Malaysia seperti dalam hal pembayaran zakat fitrah.

Bukankah Islam meraikan kepelbagaian pendapat, dan objektif utama Islam ialah untuk memudahkan dan mencapai keadilan?

Hak asasi anak

Jakim dan undang-undang Mahkamah Syariah di Malaysia menetapkan bahawa bapa kandung anak tak sah taraf tidak dipertanggungjawabkan untuk menafkahi anaknya. Tanggungjawab memberi nafkah, saraan dan penjagaan kanak-kanak tak sah taraf adalah semata-mata pada ibu dan saudara mara ibu. Anak tak sah taraf juga tidak boleh mewarisi harta bapa kandungnya.

Adilkah undang-undang ini terhadap anak yang tidak berdosa?

Bukankah orang Islam sendiri yang selalu kata setiap bayi yang dilahirkan itu suci bersih? Dia tidak berdosa dan tidak menanggung dosa orang lain.

(agastecheg / sxc.hu)

Setiap bayi yang dilahirkan di dunia ini mempunyai banyak sekali hak-hak asas. Di peringkat antarabangsa, inilah yang dinamakan sebagai hak asasi manusia. Antara hak-hak asas setiap bayi atau kanak-kanak di muka bumi ini ialah hak untuk mendapatkan:

perlindungan dan kasih sayang;
makan dan minum;
pendidikan;
kehormatan diri (self-dignity);
perlindungan dari penganiayaan;
keadilan.

Jadi, jika anda mengatakan hak asasi itu ciptaan Barat dan merupakan sesuatu yang asing dalam Islam, maka bermakna anda sendiri yang mengakui sememangnya Barat lebih hebat dari Islam.

Teladan Indonesia

Alhamdulillah, tidak perlu menoleh ke Barat, negara jiran kita pun telah mengambil langkah berani dalam memberi keadilan kepada anak yang berstatus tak sah taraf.

Pada 17 Feb 2012, Mahkamah Konstitusi Indonesia telah meminda undang-undang perkahwinan Indonesia. Pindaan itu mengiktiraf hubungan darah dan hubungan sivil antara anak tak sah taraf dengan bapa dan keluarga bapa kandungnya, yang boleh dibuktikan berdasarkan ilmu pengetahuan, teknologi atau alat bukti lain.

Ketua Mahkamah Konstutusi Mahfud MD berkata bahawa dengan itu, beban bukan lagi ditanggung oleh ibunya saja tetapi juga bapa anak itu. Ia juga bermakna bahawa anak tak sah taraf juga mempunyai hak penuh sebagai anak kandung, termasuk hak waris.

Bilakah Malaysia mahu melangkah ke depan seperti Indonesia?

Masyarakat Islam Malaysia masyarakat penghukum?

Bila ada kes perempuan buang bayi, maka berteriaklah sesetengah orang Islam mencaci maki dan mahu menghukum perempuan yang membuang bayinya. Marahlah juga mereka pada rumah-rumah perlindungan untuk wanita-wanita yang hamil di luar pernikahan kerana dikatakan menggalakkan zina.

Apabila ada wanita yang belum berkahwin hamil, masyarakat terus menghukum dan tidak peduli apakah mungkin wanita itu telah diperkosa, diperdaya atau terjebak dalam pemerdagangan manusia. Tiada langsung belas ihsan. Mereka juga tidak mahu mempertanyakan mengapa mahkamah syariah tidak mempertanggungjawabkan bapa kandung anak itu untuk menafkahinya.

Orang Islam suka kata Islam itu adil, tapi masalahnya ialah ramai antara kita sendiri yang tidak tahu bagaimana menterjemahkan keadilan itu. Tambah celaka lagi bila kita yang tidak berupaya memahami dengan mendalam dan merealisasikan keadilan itu mengatakan “inilah Islam”.

Kadir Sheikh Fadzir sempat keluar Umno sebelum parti itu diketepikan

Oleh Aspan Alias | The Malaysian Insider

20 MAC — Tan Sri Kadir Sheikh Fadzir telah rasmi meninggalkan Umno. Ini disahkan oleh Setiausaha Agung Umno Tengku Datuk Seri Adnan Mansor. Tindakan beliau itu telah dijangkakan dari awal lagi kerana beliau telah meluahkan banyak perkara yang beliau tidak persetujui berlaku didalam Umno. Beliau telah menyertai Umno pada tahun 1956 dan bersama-sama menyertai Umno Baru pada bulan Februari 1988 yang lalu.

Saya memahami apa yang dirasakan oleh TS Kadir itu kerana beliau sudah begitu lama terlibat didalam kedua-dua parti (Umno asal dan Umno Baru), dan tentulah beliau nampak dan merasakan perbezaan diantara dahulu dengan sekarang. Saya menganggap dan boleh mengagak yang beliau lebih selesa berada diluar Umno untuk bersama-sama menyatukan Melayu diluar parti yang kian hari kian lemah itu.

Tindakan TS Kadir keluar dari parti itu merupakan bayangan menifestasi sebenarnya yang berlaku didalam Umno. Sebagai seorang yang telah bersama dengan parti itu selama 5 dekad lebih itu, tindakan beliau itu tentunya didasarkan kepada masalah-masalah yang berlaku didalam Umno kerana saya secara peribadi merasakan apa yang diresahkan oleh TS Kadir itu.

Meninggalkan parti itu adalah satu-satunya pilihan TS Kadir kerana tidak ada maknanya jika berada didalam parti yang meresahkan beliau. Tentulah berbagai-bagai tohmahan akan dilemparkan kepada beliau oleh penyokong dan penjilat pimpinan parti itu tetapi biarkan sahaja mereka berbuat apa yang mereka suka. Kita sahaja yang tahu perbezaan berada diluar parti yang kini sedang menuju kepada penghujung perjuangannya.

Saya telah dihubungi oleh ramai juga rakan-rakan kenalan dan yang tidak saya kenali bertanyakan tentang tindakan TS Kadir ini untuk mendapat komen saya. Saya hanya memberikan pandangan yang berlainan. Orang lain biarlah dengan pandangan mereka. Ia bergantung kepada matlamat masing-masing. Jika matlamatnya ialah untuk meneruskan agenda memusnahkan rasuah tegar dan menjauhi dari penjajahan pemikiran oleh pimpinan yang hanya mementing perut mereka sahaja, meninggalkan Umno itu merupakan jalan yang terbaik.

Menentang kegiatan rasuah didalam parti dan kerajaan didalam Umno akan hanya mengundang diri kita dihina dan dinesta kerana mereka didalam parti itu tidak lagi mahu melihat rasuah itu dihapuskan. Saya pernah menyatakan dengan jelas yang Umno dan rasuah itu ibarat aur dengan tebing yang saling menyandar diantara satu dengan lain. Rasuah tidak akan berkembang pesat tanpa Umno dan Umno pula tidak akan hidup tanpa rasuah. Rasuah itu sudah menjadi pakaian kepada pemimpin-pemimpin Umno disetiap peringkat.

Isu negara sejak tiga dekad dahulu adalah rasuah. Rasuah inilah yang membawa kepada masalah-masalah yang lain kerana apabila pemimpin politik dan pelaksana mengamalkan rasuah mereka tidak akan membuat keputusan dengan baik lagi. Bagi melindungi rasuah maka pimpinan terpaksa berbohong dengan rakyat. Mereka terpaksa berbohong beribu kali kerana bohong mereka yang pertama dahulu.

Dulu mereka boleh berbohong sekehendak hati, tetapi apabila rakyat sudah menjadi rakyat yang bermaklumat maka pimpinan sudah tidak lagi boleh melindungi perkara mungkar yang mereka lakukan.

Kini TS Kadir meninggalkan parti dan beliau tidak kesaorangan. Ratusan ribu “card-carrying members” Umno tidak memberikan sokongan terhadap parti itu lagi. Mereka adalah diantara ahli yang sudah merasa jemu dengan kerenah pemimpin-pemimpin mereka. Minggu ke minggu, tahun berganti tahun, pemimpin-pemimpin Umno telah memberikan masalah kepada parti. Sepatutnya pemimpin yang menahan ragam ahli-ahli yang ramai ini.

Tetapi sekarang keadaan sudah terbalik. Pemimpin-pemimpin mereka pula yang memberi masalah kepada parti. Pemimpin parti sekarang tidak berkelayakan untuk dituakan (hormati). Sepatutnya kita ikut perbilangan; yang muda membuat ragam dan yang tua menahan ragam. Banyak kritikan terhadap TS Kadir ini datangnya dari orang-orang baru, yang sedang cuba-cuba mengenali Umno itu.

Kebanyakkan dari mereka ini jika diperbandingkan dengan usia dan pengalaman dalam Umno ini tidak lebih dari orang yang masih belum mengenali yang mana satu tangan kanan untuk makan dan yang mana tangan kiri untuk beristinjak. Umno kata orang, Umno kata mereka. Tetapi mereka tidak tahu dan masih belum mengenali Umno yang sebenarnya.

Itulah sebabnya ramai diantara yang menulis dialam maya ini menulis mempertahankan Umno itu bukan kerana mereka mengenali parti itu sebaliknya kerana mempertahankan apa yang mereka ada atau apa yang mereka boleh perolehi. Malahan setengahnya mendapat imbuhan untuk mencarut dan menggunakan bahasa yang tidak menunjukkan ketamaddunan mereka.

Tindakan TS Kadir keluar parti itu merupakan cebisan dari perasaan tidak puas hati dengan “conduct” Umno sekarang ini. Perasaan itu dirasakan juga oleh ramai ahli-ahli Umno yang lain. Hanya mereka tidak berani bersuara kerana salah satu kejayaan Umno ialah untuk membentuk sindrom bisu dikalangan ahli-ahlinya. Ada mata pandang ada telinga dengar sahaja.

Dalam keadaan beginilah yang membuatkan orang Melayu terbantut daya pemikiran mereka. Itu jelas merupakan sumbangan besar Umno terhadap orang Melayu. Saya berkeyakinan ramai lagi ahli-ahli Umno akan mengikut jejak langkah TS Kadir itu. Seperti pilihanraya 2008 yang lalu, lebih dari sejuta ahli Umno keluar parti di dalam bilik mengundi disaluran masing-masing nanti.

Lain-lain perkataan TS Kadir sempat keluar sebelum parti itu diketepikan oleh rakyat tidak lama lagi. — aspanaliasnet.blogspot.com

'Syariah lawyers must be Muslims'

The New Straits Times 
by ILI LIYANA MOKHTAR, LING POH LEAN AND NUR ADILLA NOORAZAN

SYARIAH lawyers need to be Muslim, because if non-Muslims were appointed, the syariah court rulings will be non-binding towards them.

Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom, however, welcomed non-Muslims who wanted to study syariah to enhance their knowledge of Islamic law.

Jamil was replying to Nasharudin Mat Isa (Pas-Bachok) who wanted the government to state when it would implement the Legal Syariah Act.

Jamil said he agreed with Nasharudin that the laws regarding syariah lawyers in the country should be streamlined.

Currently, each state has different laws governing the conduct of syariah lawyers, making it difficult for them to practise in different states.

Jamil said the government was working closely with the Malaysian Syariah Lawyers' Association to draft a suitable legislation for the Syariah Legal Profession Act.

He said the government had distributed concept papers of the proposed Syariah Legal Profession Act to state governments to receive feedback from law practitioners.

All Parties Have To Work Together To Expand Green Energy R&D, Says Najib

NILAI, March 20 (Bernama) -- Research institutes and institutions of higher learning have to work together with businesses and the government to expand research and development (R&D) in green energy, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said today.

With the aim of placing Malaysia as the focal scene for regional solar energy research and development, the support from key industry players and businesses was of paramount importance, he said.

"The government is taking decisive steps to ensure that our energy future is green, sustainable and diverse and that Malaysia uses energy in the most efficient manner.

"Malaysia's embracing of green technology is not only to conserve and preserve its resources, but is also envisaged to act as a new economic impetus for the country," he said in his speech at the launch of the First Completion of Economic Transformation Programme (ETP) Solar at Cypark Integrated Renewable Energy Park in Pajam, near here.

The text of his speech was read out by Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Mohamad Hasan.

By practising energy efficiency, which is expected to lead to saving of RM14 billion in Gross National Income by 2020, "we can preserve the environment and energise the Malaysian economy towards becoming a developed nation by the year 2020," he said.

Najib also praised the Solar Panel Industry Alliance (SPINAL) for their efforts to promote the widespread and increased adoption and sustainable use of all forms of energy and focusing on solar.

With SPINAL efforts to further strengthening regional and international cooperation would benefit the rapid renewable energy deployment around the globe, he said.

The prime minister said the renewable energy target under the 10th Malaysia Plan was 5.5 per cent of the total capacity mix in 2015 or 985 megawatts of generating capacity, from less than one per cent of the energy mix today.

"Out of this, 5.5 per cent solar power would contribute at least 65 megawatts, he said.

By 2020, solar power is expected to contribute to a minimum of 220 megawatts, as per the target under the National Renewable Energy Policy, he said.

"Solar power is one of the more viable energy alternatives because if its advantages such as independence from fossil fuels and zero carbon gas emissions, increased energy security, high job creation potential and significant foreign direct investment," said Najib, who is also Finance Minister.

"Furthermore, Malaysia has ample supply of natural sunlight, which is currently not utilised to its full potential," he added.

The solar park project is part of a 15 megawatts Integrated Renewable Energy Park project and the first solar project completed under the Entry Point Projects (EPPs) of the Economic Transformation Programme (ETP).

The project, undertaken by Cypark Resources Bhd, is producing eight megawatts green energy currently and has the capacity to produce 11,712 megawatts annually for the next 21 years, with annual sales value of more than RM11 million.

MPSP, MPPP implement gender-responsive budgeting

The Penang state government has set up a Penang Women’s Development Corporation, which is working with the Penang Island and Seberang Perai municipal councils to implement gender-responsive budgeting.
This report from theSun:

Penang promoting gender interest policies
Posted on 7 March 2012 – 05:16pm
Last updated on 7 March 2012 – 05:27pm
Himashu Bhatt
GEORGE TOWN (March 7, 2012): Penang government has set up a special state-run body to promote gender interests through the policies and programmes of the public and private sectors.
Called Penang Women’s Development Corporation (PWDC), it will function to advice the state government in formulating policies to realise gender and social equality, as well as undertake advocacy to promote good governance.
“It will monitor laws and policies which are gender discriminatory,” Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng said during a press conference to introduce the corporation here today.
“It will also conduct programmes to empower women in various sectors of society as well as commit itself to raising the consciousness of women and men in Penang on gender equality and justice, human rights and good governance,” he added.
The state government has allocated RM1.5 million for the PWDC’s programmes and operations for 2012.
The amount is in addition to RM800,000 allocation channelled through the State Women, Family and Community Development Committee.
The PWDC’s board of directors, comprising activists, academics and social workers, is chaired by Ong Kok Fooi, the state executive councillor for youth and sports, and women, family and community development.
As a flagship programme, a 3-year Gender Responsive Budgeting project is being implemented by the PWDC together with the Penang island and Seberang Prai municipal councils.
The pilot project will work to make gender concerns become part of the mainstream focus of the budgetary process and policies of the two local government bodies, beginning with services related to cleanliness and safety, Lim said.
Both Penang and Seberang Prai councils have contributed RM63,000 and RM200,000 respectively for the pilot project.
One of the expected outcomes of this project is to have “sex-disaggregated data,” which contains core gender indicators, in the databank and statistics collected by the two local councils, Lim said.
These would then be used as evidence in making gender responsive policies and in their output-based budgeting, he stressed.
Lim also noted that Penang’s female labour force participation at 53.4% is much higher than the national average of 45.7%. “However, they are concentrated in low and semi-skilled positions in the manufacturing and services sectors,” he said.

UN resolution on war crimes: India to vote against Sri Lanka

Abduction cases, forced conversions frighten Hindus

Around 50 families reported to have migrated from Quetta. 

DESIGN: JAHANZAIB HAQUE

QUETTA: Forced conversions to Islam and increasing incidents of kidnapping have instilled a deep sense of insecurity among the Hindu community in Balochistan, said Minister for Human Rights and Minority Affairs Basant Lal Gulshan.

As many as four girls and three boys of the Hindu community forcibly converted to Islam in 2011. “At least 50 Hindu families have migrated from Quetta alone,” Gulshan told The Express Tribune. “The families migrated to rural Balochistan and Sindh because their rights were not safeguarded in Quetta.”

The minister claimed that investigations have not begun in the conversion cases reported in Loralai, Chaman and Sibi.

He criticised the Balochistan government for its lack of interest on minority rights and said: “I took up the issue with Chief Minister Aslam Raisani and also discussed it on the provincial assembly floor, but they are not serious in addressing the grievances of minorities.”

He added that at least 25 people of his community have been kidnapped for ransom this year. “There were 55 cases last year and we are witnessing a sharp rise this year.”

Dr Rajesh Kumar, a pharmacist, was kidnapped in broad daylight from outside the Bolan Medical College Complex in Quetta approximately one and half month ago. His whereabouts are still unknown.

According to a rough estimate, around 200,000 Hindus reside in different parts of Balochistan and most of them are either businessmen or traders. “Criminals consider Hindus an easy target for earning money.”

Gulshan assured that as a member of the provincial cabinet, he will continue to raise his voice for his community, regardless of his reservations being ignored. “My colleagues in the cabinet often say that this is not happening only with Hindus and that Muslims are being kidnapped as well. In some way, they justify the abductions.”

In a statement, the Human Rights Organisation of Pakistan (Balochistan chapter) expressed strong concern over the kidnapping of Hindus and urged the government to curb this menace. The kidnapped pharmacist was also a member of the HRCP. They organisation has blamed influential people for the kidnappings.

Published in The Express Tribune, March 19th, 2012.

War crimes: BN accused of hypocrisy

When it comes to atrocities committed in war, all the government seems to care about is Palestine, ignoring other places like Sri Lanka, alleges Pakatan Rakyat.

KUALA LUMPUR: If there’s a war crime taking place in the world today, and if it’s not happening in Palestine, don’t expect Malaysia to take a stand against it.

This is what Pakatan Rakyat MPs are saying today after the Speaker of Parliament rejected an emergency motion to debate Malaysia’s stand on the United Nations resolution calling for investigations into human rights violations during the final months of the 26-year Sri Lanka civil war.

According to Subang MP R Sivarasa (PKR), Putrajaya does not seem to understand the universality of human rights.

“It should not matter if you’re Tamil, Singhalese, Muslim, Christian or Buddhist,” he told reporters at Parliament House.

“If war crimes have been committed against you, it doesn’t matter whether you’re Palestinian attacked by Israeli tanks or whether you’re Sri Lankan attacked by Sri Lankan tanks. It doesn’t make a difference.”

“By remaining silent or supporting the Sri Lankan government on this issue, it shows that our human rights position is completely hypocritical.”

The resolution on Sri Lanka, moved by the United States, is due for a vote this Friday at a meeting of the UN Human Rights Council. Malaysia is one of the 47 members of the council. The resolution calls on the government in Colombo to probe alleged atrocities caused by both government troops and Tamil rebels.

As many as 40,000 people are estimated to have been killed in the last months of the conflict, which ended in May 2009 with the defeat of the Tamil Tigers. The resolution does not sit well with Colombo, which denies that government troops committed war crimes.

Affecting ties with Sri Lanka

The motion rejected in the Malaysian Parliament was submitted last week by DAP’s M Manogaran, the MP for Teluk Intan.

Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia, who made his decision in chambers this morning, said discussing the matter would affect Malaysia’s “good relationship” with Sri Lanka.

Manogaran tried to raise the matter when the Dewan Rakyat was in session, but Deputy Speaker Ronald Kiandee said his motion had already been rejected.

“I’m not raising a question on Sri Lanka,” Manogaran told reporters afterwards. “I’m just giving a notice to move the house to be adjourned to debate on the resolution given by the US. I don’t agree that it has to do with internal affairs. If we can’t debate it here, where can we debate it?”

Sungai Petani MP Johari Abdul (PKR), who visited Sri Lanka a few months ago, said the case of the South Asian nation was no different from that of Palestine.

He deduced, however, that the Barisan Nasional government was less concerned with Sri Lanka because most Malays were oblivious of the sufferings of people there “even though a lot of them are Muslim”.

As far as the government was concerned, he said, the Sri Lankans held no political mileage.

Klang MP Charles Santiago (DAP) accused Malaysia of being opportunistic when it came to human rights.

“We all support the Palestinian cause because we believe in the sovereignty of the nation, the people,” he said. “That same foreign policy must be extended to be people of Sri Lanka. But when it comes to Sri Lanka, it’s really opportunistic foreign policy making.”

Manogaran urged MIC to state its official stand on the resolution.

He said Malaysian Indians would want the MIC ministers to raise the issue in the next cabinet meeting, which is this Friday, the same day of the UN vote.

MIC Secretary General S Murugessan said that his party would state its official stand in two days’ time.

“We will conduct a meeting this evening to discuss the matter,” he told FMT.

Double standards

Manogaran, pointing to the Malaysian support for Muslim insurgents in southern Thailand and the southern Philippines, said: “It is clear that the BN government practises double standards in foreign policy.”

He also said Indians in Malaysia would be embarrassed if Malaysia were to vote against the UN resolution.

A political analysist sharing Pakatan’s view warned the BN government of a possible backlash if it failed to support the resolution.

A Thiruvengadam, who writes a political column for Tamil dailies, said the coming general election might turn out to be “another political tsunami” brought on by the Sri Lanka issue.

Bring Justice To Sri Lanka

UN Secretary General’s Panel of Experts (PoE) report in 2010  found credible allegations of serious violations of international humanitarian human rights law were committed both by the Government of Sri Lanka and the LTTE during the last phase of the war in 2009, some of which would amount to war crimes and crimes against humanity.

“Amnesty International believes that given Sri Lanka’s long history of impunity, lack of apparent political will to address ongoing violations and enormous backlog of unresolved cases of violations, effective investigation and prosecution of all wrongdoers (including commanding officers) is very unlikely without the active support of the international community.”

Yes! You can bring justice to the victims of war in Sri Lanka by urging/demanding our Malaysian Government to vote in favour of a resolution at the current 19^th Session of the UN Human Rights Council Meeting in Geneva:-

a) To establish an independent international mechanism to investigate war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in Sri Lanka;

b) To address accountability for the violations of international human rights and humanitarian law committed by all sides in the final phases of the war in Sri Lanka in 2009.

c) To discuss and implement both Sri Lankan Government’s  Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC) report and the UN Secretary General’s Panel of Experts (PoE) report in 2010 in order to bring lasting peace, justice and reconciliation to the people of Sri Lanka.

Hard evidence on war crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the last phase of the war can be seen on videos of UK’s Channel 4 network at

http://www.channel4.com/news/sri-lanka-civil-war

Nalla attacks Anwar’s sexual orientation

Speaking at the Perkasa office, the opposition leader’s former confidante dares him to sue over the allegation.

KUALA LUMPUR: Senator KS Nallakaruppan, a former confidante and now political opponent of Anwar Ibrahim, claimed today that he had evidence that the opposition leader was bisexual.
“Anwar is a bisexual,” he said. “Sue me in court if you are man enough.”

Speaking at a press conference held at the Jalan Pahang office of the Malay rights group Perkasa, he said he would reveal the “names of people’s wives and boys who slept with him” if Anwar took him to court.

He asked Anwar to explain why he had not sued SH Alattas, the author of Tuhan, Politik dan Seks, the cover of which features the opposition leader wearing lipstick.

He also criticised PAS spiritual leader Nik Aziz Nik Mat for not issuing an edict to disallow bisexuals from being opposition leader.

He said he had briefed three PAS leaders on Anwar’s activities. “I have explained to them but I don’t want to name them.”

Nallakaruppan, who leads the Malaysian Indian United Party, also claimed to have witnessed Anwar having illicit sex at Tivolli Villa.

“I was the one who brought him there,” he said.
Asked to explain his motive for making the accusation, he said he wanted to save the country from Anwar.

“In 1998, he told me that he would destroy the country if he could not be prime minister,” he claimed.

Nallakaruppan in 1998 faced the death sentence for arms possession. Many believe his arrest was an excuse to hold him in custody so that he could be pressured to defame Anwar.

“I safeguarded a friend then,” he said. “Now I am safeguarding the country.”

M’sia must ratify UN convention on discrimination

Malaysia is only one of 16 countries not to have ratified the UN Convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination.
COMMENT

By Denison Jayasooria

On March 21, the global community celebrates the International Day for the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination set apart by the United Nations.

On that day in 1960, police opened fire and killed 69 people at a peaceful demonstration in Sharpeville, South Africa, against the apartheid “pass laws”.

The General Assembly which proclaimed the Day in 1966, called on the international community to redouble its efforts to eliminate all forms of racial discrimination. It is also important to note that the UN has built an international framework namely the UN Convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination.

175 countries of the world are parties to this convention. There are only 16 countries which have not signed or ratified the convention. Malaysia is one alongside Angola, North Korea, Myanmar & Singapore.

Why has Malaysia not ratified the convention? Why is Malaysia not among the major Asean or Asian countries or not among the OIC countries or Muslim majority countries?

All the major OIC countries are party to this convention. For example Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, Turkey, Kuwait & United Arab Emirates.

Therefore this convention being inconsistent with Islam cannot really hold water as these leading Islamic countries are already party to this convention

In the case of Asean countries – Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia, even Cambodia and Laos are parties to it.

At the Asian level, India and China are parties to this convention. Many countries which have ratified have specific reservations and the UN system allows for this provision too.

Special measures

Could the issue of affirmative action policies of Malaysia of article 153 of the federal constitution be a hurdle for Malaysia? This however is a missunderstanding as the UN Convention makes specific provision in article 4 for ‘special measures’.

The UN went further to issue a General Recommendation No 32 (August 2009) to explain “the meaning and scope of special measures”.

India which is a party to the convention has constitutional provisions of affirmative action to schedule caste and tribal groups. In a similar way the United States have special affirmative action policies for the blacks.

Therefore there is no logical reason why Malaysia has not ratified the convention. Malaysia has now reached a status in the global community as member of the Human Rights Council and therefore we must be a shining example by not only ratifying the convention but role modelling as a progressive moderate nation.

Being a party to the UN Convention is a clear indication of our seriousness of the 1Malaysia slogan.

Failure to do so or any further delay indicates our non-committal approach for structural transformation is fostering a truly Malaysian nation

By way of a concrete action on March 21, please email the PM a short message urging him to ratify the UN Convention for the elimination of all forms of Racial discrimination on March 21- email: press@1malaysia.com.my and admin@1malaysia.com.my

Dr Denison Jayasooria is a Principal Research Fellow at the Institute of Ethnic Studies, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia and Exco member of Proham, a human rights advocacy group established by former Suhakam members.

What type of a PM says this: “Malaysia is at war” - with its own citizens?

If what has been reported is true, then Malaysians have everything to fear. Hopefully we get some immediate clarification from the PM himself.

The Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib when addressing close to 700 former senior civil servants is reported to have said that the government (meaning the BN political party - without doubt), “we are at war, the mother of all battles.”

That is most damaging a statement to make – especially coming from the top leader of a nation. The PM has affirmed that the country is heading for disaster.

In the first place, why does the PM allude to the coming general elections as if a country has to go to war? He even went on to state that there has to be a chain of command.

It is reported that he said “if the general says attack, you must attack at the same time.” Now that is a most intimidating statement would you not agree?

The rakyat are certain to put two and two together and you cannot condemn them for thinking even the worst of the BN coalition, can you?

An election is not a war to be won at all costs

Elections as enshrined within the sanctified principles of democracy, and as practiced in the civilized world over by good governments is not about “attacks”, “war” and “winning at all costs”. On the contrary it is about your ability to not only safeguard but to also do all that it takes to deliver humanity from the claws of tyranny, abuse of civil liberties and to provide every citizen a right to life and let live.

So why is the PM going around canvassing for battle-ready support and killing-machine build-ups? Is this the politics that can transform Malaysia?

It is about time that his advisers told the top most leader of the nation – the PM, to speak and encourage the citizens more like a leader for all and not as a battle-hardened commander out on a killing spree to finish-off any opposition to his or his political party’s agendas.

If he wants to canvas and recruit militant-like followers who will “attack when the general says attack”, then he better step down as the PM of a nation and wear only the hat of leader of his political party. The people will have no qualms even if he screams for blood as political party President.

Malaysia Chronicle

Seksualiti Merdeka: Threat to national security?

The Nut Graph

As published in The Nut Graph on 12 Mar 2012

Holding Court by Ding Jo-Ann

ON 1 March 2012, the High Court dismissed Seksualiti Merdeka‘s leave application to judicially review a police ban on their annual festival. The November 2011 festival was banned under section 27A(1)(c) of the Police Act. The section (since superseded by the Peaceful Assembly Act) allowed the police to stop any activity on private premises “likely to be prejudicial to the interest of the security of Malaysia or any part thereof or to excite a disturbance of peace”.

High Court judge Rohana Yusof said the police were clearly empowered under this section to stop the festival. She said they were acting within their powers to investigate the matter and that the investigation process was not open to review.

But can a festival about sexuality rights be a threat to Malaysia’s security and public order? And in the light of the constitutional guarantee to freedom of assembly, shouldn’t a court require strong evidence from the police about how an event is likely to jeopardise national security?

Defining national security

The interest of the security of Malaysia or “national security” and public order are important terms in this country. Article 10(1)(b) of our Federal Constitution guarantees the right of citizens to assemble peacefully and without arms. But this freedom can be restricted on the basis of national security and public order. Restrictions on this basis can also be imposed on the constitutional guarantees to freedom of expression and association.

So what exactly do national security and public order mean?

Conventionally, threatening national security would constitute jeopardising the existence of the state. One example might be a plot to assassinate the country’s leaders. Or, simultaneous bomb attacks on the transport system, like in London on 7 July 2005. Or, planning to violently take over Parliament, kidnap the prime minister and hold him hostage, like in Fiji in 2000. These are all good examples of real threats to national security.

What about disturbance of peace, or threat to public order? In modern times, this usually refers to threats to life and property. The UK Public Order Act, for example, prohibits unlawful violence, rioting and threatening behaviour that would cause people of reasonable firmness to fear for their personal safety.

So, under the Malaysian constitution, citizens are free to meet as long as they are peaceful and don’t bear arms. But if they engage in activities such as plotting to blow up Parliament or threatening to cause physical harm to others, then they can be restricted from engaging in such activities. And the authorities, like the police, can enforce laws that prohibit and restrict such gatherings.

Security and sexuality

Which brings us to the question — just how does Seksualiti Merdeka constitute a threat to national security and public order?

As far as I know, the festival organisers were not planning a violent coup d’etat nor were they hatching a devious plot that could threaten the state’s existence. I also did not hear of festival attendees rioting or damaging property or threatening anyone’s personal safety.

Sure, there are many in our community who disagree with openly discussing one’s sexual orientation. Seksualiti Merdeka is a festival on sexuality and the right of everyone to be free from discrimination, harassment and violence due to their sexual orientation. This includes talking about being lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. Some religious groups believe that being in a same sex relationship is a sin. Others may feel that culturally, we shouldn’t be talking about such topics in public. Some others may not have liked it that Bersih 2.0 chairperson Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan was scheduled to officiate the event.

But none of these are lawful reasons to ban the event. Our constitution did not say that if lots of people disagree with what a group is doing, then that group’s activities can be banned. It says that if the group’s activities are a threat to national security and public order, then, and only then, can it be restricted. And our constitution is the supreme law of the land.

What our constitution does allow for those who disagree with Seksualiti Merdeka is to speak up about it. They can dialogue with the organisers on why they disagree. They can organise campaigns about morality, if they so wish, and on not speaking about sexuality openly. They can protest, if they must, against the event, but peacefully and without resorting to any threatening or abusive behaviour and language.

In banning the event, Deputy Inspector-General of Police Datuk Seri Khalid Abu Bakar said: “Let us not look into the interest of minority groups and end up infuriating the majority.”

Forgive me, but that’s just tyranny. The constitutional guarantee on freedom of assembly is there precisely to protect the minority against the majority. So that even if a whole lot of people disagree with what you’re doing, you are still protected as long as you do it peacefully and without threat to others’ life and safety.

Who is the court protecting?

So should the court have decided differently? Well, there are always legal arguments to justify a decision and in this case, the judge held that reviewing a criminal investigation was not within the court’s purview. She also upheld the Attorney-General Chamber’s objection that as the event was in the past, the application was academic and need not be heard.

Despite these legal justifications, in my view,  I am uncomfortable with how easily it was accepted that it was “clearly” within the police’s power to ban the event on the grounds that they did. The police said 28 police reports and complaints from religious groups were lodged against Seksualiti Merdeka. But I still don’t see how that makes Seksualiti Merdeka a likely threat to national security and public order. If anything, it’s some of the groups that had threatened Seksualiti Merdeka which were themselves threats to public order, not the other way around.

In restricting fundamental freedoms in the name of national security, courts must perform a balancing act — to impinge as little as possible upon the guaranteed freedom while achieving the aim of protecting the state. In this case, it is firstly unclear why the state needed to be protected from Seksualiti Merdeka. And secondly, from what can be gathered from news reports, it does not appear that the constitutional guarantee of freedom of assembly was even weighed in the balance.

Protecting us all

This has serious implications for all of us. The courts are meant to protect us from the arbitrary use of power by the authorities. Surely it cannot be left entirely to the police to decide when something is a threat to national security and public order. What if they get it wrong? As is often cited, “Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?” Or, who will guard the guards? If the courts won’t intervene to call the police to account for their actions and decisions, then who will?

Adakah Zahid akan senasib Sharizat ?

Mahkamah Rayuan hari ini menolak dengan kos permohonan Menteri Pertahanan Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi bagi membatalkan saman yang dibawa oleh seorang ahli perniagaan, yang didakwa mempunyai hubungan sulit dengan anak perempuan menteri itu.

Panel tiga hakim yang diketuai oleh Datin Paduka Zaleha Zahari sebulat suara mengekalkan keputusan Mahkamah Tinggi Shah Alam, dan mengarahkan menteri itu untuk membayar RM5,000 sebagai kos.

Ahli-ahli panel yang lain ialah Hakim Datuk Clement Allan Skinner dan Datuk Aziah Ali.

Ahli perniagaan Amir Bazli Abdullah, 40, memfailkan saman itu pada 4 Julai 2007, mendakwa bahawa beliau telah dipukul dan ditumbuk pada mukanya oleh Ahmad Zahid pada 16 Januari, 2006.

Keputusan itu dicapai selepas mahkamah mendengar penghujahan peguam Shamsul Bahari Ibrahim yang mewakili Ahmad Zahid, dan memutuskan bahawa ia tidak perlu bagi peguam, Amir Bazli, Karpal Singh, untuk membuat penghujahan.

APA SEBENARNYA BERLAKU

Ini adalah percintaan antara Amir Bazli Abdullah, seorang duda dengan anak kepada Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi, Nurul Hidayah seorang janda. Percintaan ini tidak direstui oleh Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

Bukti percintaan ini bukan susah untuk pihak polis temui dan mungkin amat mudah untuk pihak polis menerbitkan motif serangan terhadap Amir Bazli Abdullah.
Percintaan ini berlaku pada awal tahun 2005. Kronologi bermulanya perkenalan antara Amir Bazli Abdullah dan Nurulhidayah Ahmad Zahid Hamidi telah diterangkan dalam Afidavit guaman Sivil No MT1-22-1151 Tahun 2007 setelah dinasihatkan oleh peguam agar tuntutan sivil di buat memandangkan sehingga ke waktu ini, Polis gagal bertindak terhadap laporan jenayah terhadap Dato Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

Kronologi pertemuan antara Amir Bazli Abdullah dan Nurulhidayah Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

1. Saya telah menyertai konvoi “Big Biker” pada sekitar bulan Ogos 2005 dengan menaiki sebuah motosikal kepunyaan adik saya;


2. Pada masa tersebut, saya tidak mengenali anak defendan bernama Nurul Hidayah tersebut ataupun anak kecilnya;

3. Saya hanya mula mengenali Nurulhidayah pada sekitar bulan September 2005 dan beliau telah pun memaklumkan kepada saya bahawa beliau telah pun bercerai dengan suaminya di sebuah cafe bermana “saloma” di Kuala Lumpur.

4. Selepas itu saya dengan NurulHidayah telah menjalinkan satu perhubungan di mana Nurulhidayah telah pun memaklumkan bahawa beliau telah pun jatuh cinta dengan saya;

5. Nurulhidayah telah pun dengan sendiri bercadang ke Kota Bharu dengan saya secara rela pada bulan Disember 2005 bersama anak kecilnya tersebut;

6. Justeru itu, Nurulhidayah juga telah pun bercadang agar saya menyewa sebuah rumah pangsa di Kajang seperti yang dinayatakn di dalam perenggan 5 Afidavit tersebut dan saya telah pun berbuat demikian pada bulan November 2005 di mana Nurulhidayah dengan sendirinya telah menandatangani Perjanjian Sewa yang berkenaan tersebut sebagai seorang saksi yang dilampirkan bersama di sini sebagai aksibit “AB-1”

7. Saya juga menyatakan bahawa selepas saya menyewa rumah pangsa di Kajang tersebut, Nurulhidayah dengan sendirinya telah pun secara rela datang tinggal di sana dengan anaknya dan juga pembantu-pembantu rumahnya;

Lampiran keseluruhan writ saman, afidavit pertama Dato’ Zahid Hamidi dan Afidavit jawapan Amir Bazli Abdullah disertakan. Perlu diingat ini adalah tuntutan sivil Amir Bazli Abdullah atas nasihat peguam “Karpal Singh and Company” kerana kes laporan polis terhadap jenayah Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidimasih belum diselesaikan oleh polis.

Tuntutan dalam writ saman Amir Bazli Abdullah ada menyatakan dengan jelas apa yang sebenarnya berlaku pada 16.01.2006. Berikut kami dedahkan writ saman Amir Bazli Abdullah dalam melihat apa sebenarnya berlaku. Berikut adalah kronologi insiden pemukulan Amir Bazli Ahmad dan pembabitanDatuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.

APA YANG BERRLAKU PADA 16.01.2006

1. Pada 16.01.2006, jam lebih kurang 10 malam, apabila plaintif (Amir Bazli Abdullah) sedang mengisi petrol ke dalam keretanya di Stesen Petrol sebelah UNITEN, Bangsi, agen-agen Defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi) telahmengugut dan membawa plaintif dengan paksaan, ke sebuah kelab rekreasi di kawasan kediaman Country Heights, Kajang.

2. Apabila dibawa ke kelab rekreasi tersebut, plaintif (Amir Bazli Abdullah) telah melihat Defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi) bersama suami anaknya,Hisham dan seorang anaknya yang dikenali sebagai KK di sana. Bersama-sama mereka juga terdapat beberapa orang yang merupakan agen dan pekerja Defendan (Dato Ahmad Zahid Hamidi).

3. Plaintif plid (maklum) bahawa apabila beliau menghulurkan tangan untuk bersalam dengan Defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi), Defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi) telahmenumbuk plaintiff dengan kuat di mukanya menyebabkan tulang hidungnya patah.

4. Plaintif juga plid (maklum) bahawa akibat daripada tumbukan daripada Defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi) tersebut, mata kiri plaintif (Amir Bazli Abdullah) telah menjadi bengkak sehingga beliau tidak lagi dapat membuka mata kirinya.

5. Setelah menerima tumbukan pertama daripada Defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi), agen-agen defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi) yang berada di sana telah mula memukul plaintif bersama-sama dengan Defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi)

6. Plaintif memplid (maklum) bahawa Defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi) dan/atau agen-agen Defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi) telah mendatangkan kecederaan teruk kepada bahagian muka plaintif (Amir Bazli Abdullah) dengan sebuah objek keras.

7. Defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi) telah mengugut untuk membunuh plaintif (Amir Bazli Abdullah) berulang kali apabila berkata kepada plaintif (Amir Basli Abdullah)“kau akan ditanam”

8. Agen Defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi) bernama Hisham di bawah arahan Defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi) telah mengugut untuk membunuh plaintif (Amir Bazli Abdullah) apabila berkata “aku dah ingatkan kau, aku sanggup mandi darah dengan kau”
9. Defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi) dan atau agen-agen defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi) telah mengurung plaintif (Amir Bazli Abdullah) secara tidak sah di kediaman defendan (Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi) di 389, Jalan Bayu Nyaman, Country Height, 43000 Kajang, Selangor sehingga jam 2 pagi hari berikutannya iaitu 17.1.2006.

Inilah sebenarnya berlaku. Malang sehingga ke hari ini masih tidak terdapat tanda-tanda bahawa Amir Bazli Abdullah akan mendapat pembelaan yang setimpal dan paling malang adalah anggapan yang boleh kita lihat mengenai sistem kepolisan kita yang nampak gagal berfungsi dengan sewajarnya.

Sebelum kita pergi lebih lanjut untuk membuktikan bahawa semua urusan untuk mendapatkan pembelaan bagi Amir Bazli Abdullah gagal maka kita perlu melihat bentuk kecederaan yang dialami dan laporan Hospital yang membuktikan kesahihan kecacatan dan keadaan yang menimpa Amir Bazli Abdullahakibat di pukul.

Berikut adalah kecederaan yang ditimpa oleh Amir Bazli Abdullah atas perbuatan Dato Ahmad Zahid Hamidi.
Dalam writ saman Amir Bazli Abdullah, berikut adalah kecederaan yang di alami oleh beliau:

1. Plaintif telah mengalami DEPRESSED FACIAL BONE FRACTURE dan NASAL BONE FRACTURE dengan DEVIATED NASAL SEPTUM

2. Plaintif telah mengalami MULTIPLE FACIAL BONE FRACTURES WITH LEFT SUPERIOR OBLIQUE AND SUPERIOR RECTUS MUSCLE INVOLVEMENT

3. Plaintif telah mengalami TRAUMATIC SUBCONJUNCTIONAL HEMORRHAGE di sebelah kiri mukanya dan DEPRESSED FRONTAL BONE FRACTURE

4. Plaintif telah mengalami kecederaan yang tetap di mana keadaan mukanya kini adalah dengan jelas cacat.

Berikut adalah laporan perubatan Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia. Laporan ini diterima setelah mangsa berkali-kali memohon laporan tersebut untuk diserahkan kepada mangsa. Amir Bazli Abdullah telah meminta peguamnya Karpal Singh and Co untuk memohon laporan dan akhirnya laporan itu telah diterima.

Laporan itu kami lampirkan untuk menunjukkan kecederaan Amir Bazli Abdullah dan kenapa dengan kecederaan sebegitu hebat tidak ada pembelaan terhadap mangsa.



Perbuatan jenayah Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi ini telah memberi kesan seumur hidup terhadapAmir Basli Abdullah. Beliau bukan sahaja mengalami kecacatan fizikal tetapi telah mengalami trauma akibat insiden tersebut.

Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi sepatutnya bertanggungjawab dan sepatutnya dibawa ke muka pengadilan. Kita kita mahu ada “double standard” dalam sistem perundangan ini dan kita mahu orang seperti Amir Bazli Abdullah ini mendapat pembelaan yang sewajarnya.

Lihatlah apa yang terjadi pada muka Amir Bazli Abdullah:




Dengan kecederaan yang begini, apa yang mengharukan adalah ketidakprihatinan pihak polismengenai kecederaan Amir Bazli Abdullah sungguhpun Amir Bazli Abdullah telah memaklumkan kepada pihak hospital bahawa beliau adalah mangsa yang dipukul.

Laporan Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (HUKM 12) menunjukkan bahawa Amir Bazli Abdullahtelah memaklumkan kepada pihak hospital bahawa beliau telah dipukul.

Anda nak tahu cerita lanjut tentang Zahid Hamidi? anda layari di sini.