Son claims late father arrived in M’sia only recently, had no criminal record

 Source: Malaysiakini

The family of a Sri Lankan national shot dead by Malaysian police has produced proof to dispute the authorities’ claim about his immigration and criminal records.

Forty-year-old V…

More ► More ▼

 Source: Malaysiakini

The family of a Sri Lankan national shot dead by Malaysian police has produced proof to dispute the authorities’ claim about his immigration and criminal records.

Forty-year-old V Janarthanan was one of the three men killed in a Sept 14 shooting which took place in Batu Arang, Rawang.

Selangor police told the media that he had been killed in pursuit as part of a home robbery gang.

They said Janarthanan had also been involved in a robbery in Sentul back in 2016.

The police further cast aspersions on the family’s claim that the UK permanent resident had only recently arrived in the country, saying their checks had found no record of his arrival at any Malaysian entry point.

At a press conference today, Janarthanan’s teenage son P Logitharan said his father had been working as a manager in a supermarket in Portsmouth, the UK for the whole of 2016.

He said therefore, it was impossible for his father to have committed any crime in Malaysia as he was in the UK at the time.

Logitharan also showed his father's flight details to the media which revealed the travel itinerary of Janarthanan as well as the whole family.

The itinerary showed that they departed from London’s Gatwick Airport on Aug 26 this year and arrived at KLIA the next day on Qatar Airways flight QR852.

He also displayed a baggage tag bearing Janarthanan’s name and flight number. The flight details showed he was slated to fly back to London on Sept 23.

In light of these documents, the family’s lawyer P Uthayakumar accused the police of “tampering” with immigration records.

“Now, the Selangor police chief (Noor Azam Jamaludin) and CID chief (Adnan Azizon) are liars. Have they tampered with (the records)?

“Who erased the immigration records? Who erased it?” he asked.

Logitharan’s mother G Moganambal was also said to be involved in the shooting incident. She is now missing.

Why label my son a criminal?

Also present were Janarthanan’s mother, N Thanalakshmi and stepfather T Navaratnaraja, who arrived in Malaysia from Switzerland where they are permanent residents.

Speaking in Sri Lankan Tamil, Thanalakshmi was inconsolable as she mourned her son.

“We were so scared to come to Malaysia. My son comes from a decent family and now he is suddenly labelled as a criminal.

“I usually can’t sleep without first talking to my son. I do not know how to face life after this,” she said through her tears.

Navaratnaraja was upset that his stepson had not only been shot dead but was now being misrepresented as a felon, adding they had last met in June this year in the UK.

According to Selangor police, Janarthanan and two other men were involved in an armed robbery incident and were all killed during an exchange of fire.

Police said that they found two guns, three machetes and face masks in their vehicle.

The family today stood by their counterclaim that the three men and Moganambal had gone out for dinner in Serdang before they were “kidnapped” and shot by the police in Rawang.

They have demanded police to reveal footage from the dashboard cameras of their vehicles to set the record straight as to what happened.

▲

Tirukural 84

முகம் மலர்ந்து விருந்தோம்புபவர் இல்லத்தில் திருமகள் மகிழ்ச்சியோடு வாழ்வாள்.

Could Melaka have gotten its name from a tree?

PRECISELY why is Melaka called Melaka? This deceptively simple question is loaded with ideological baggage. It has been used to establish religious authenticity and to justify elevating certain groups over…

More ► More ▼

PRECISELY why is Melaka called Melaka? This deceptively simple question is loaded with ideological baggage. It has been used to establish religious authenticity and to justify elevating certain groups over others in Malaysian history. For the sake of an accurate reconstruction of the past, resolving it is therefore crucial.

The roots of this question lie in Melaka’s court chronicle, Sejarah Melayu. Written in 1612, this text provides two, quite separate etymons for “Melaka”.

The first (and most well-known) appears alongside the story of Melaka’s founder, Iskandar Shah. Also known as Parameswara, Iskandar was a descendant of the Buddhist rajas of Palembang, the old centre of Srivijaya.

After fleeing a Javanese attack on Singapore, he travelled to Sungai Bertam; while hunting there, he sheltered under a tree, where he saw a white mousedeer attack his hunting dog.

Impressed by the small animal’s bravery, Iskandar decided to establish his new capital on that very spot. Asking his officials which tree he stood under, he was told it was the Melaka tree, and so the new city gained its name.

The second etymon was, until recently, more obscure. Mentioned briefly in the context of Mansur Shah’s reign (1459-1477), it describes how Melaka’s commercial rise under that ruler prompted the Arabs to call it Malakat, “or the mart for collecting all merchants”.

So, which of these possibilities is the more plausible? And what might that tell us about Melaka? Beginning with the second, Sejarah Melayu’s “Malakat” is the Arabic mulaqah, meaning meeting or encounter.

In recent years, Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas has strenuously championed this etymon, claiming both Jawi and Portuguese texts originally spelt Melaka with a “q” not a “k”, thereby confirming mulaqah as the correct etymon.

This has allowed him to privilege Arabs in the conversion of both Melaka and the Malays.

There are, however, problems with this argument.

FIRST, the name “Melaka” does not originate from the period 1459-1477. The Chinese Ming shi-lu is clear that Melaka already bore this name in 1403, when it was still only a fishing village, long before the Arabs began to frequent it.

SECOND, early Portuguese authors could not speak Malay. Their renderings of Malay words were inconsistent, inaccurate, and incapable of informing us about early Malay spelling conventions.

Tomé Pires, for example, spelt Melaka as “Malaqa”, “Malaca” and “Malacca”. No reason exists to accept the first over the other two, especially as the latter became the accepted norm.

Finally, contrary to al-Attas’ claim, early Jawi manuscripts spelt Melaka with a “k” not a “q”. As this form also lacks the final alif and ta’ marbutah of mulaqah, little reason exists to equate it with the latter.

Indeed, mulaqah appears separately in Jawi (pronounced as mulakat). This only confirms a lack of equivalency. There is also no evidence the Arabs actually called Melaka “mulaqah”.

The navigational treatises of Ahmad ibn Majid and Sulayman al-Mahri are the only surviving early Arabic texts to mention Melaka. Neither author spells the city’s name “mulaqah”, instead calling it either malaqah, mala’qah, or ma’laqah.

Often appearing side-by-side, these differing forms suggest the Arabs — just like the Portuguese — were unsure of how to spell Melaka, presumably because it was a foreign word. This is hardly conducive to their having given the city its name. If we can therefore dismiss this etymon, what of the other?

It is entirely plausible that Melaka was named after a tree; many early Southeast Asian toponyms (a place name) were derived this way. Majapahit, for example, was named for pokok maja, whose fruit is very bitter (pahit).

Moreover, a pokok melaka does exist. Bearing the scientific name Phyllanthus emblica, its habitat extends across the Indian Ocean and into Southeast Asia.

Although some dismiss its Malay name as fiction, intended merely to conform to Sejarah Melayu’s story, in Sanskrit the plant is called “amalaka”. It is easy to see how amalaka could become “Melaka”, especially as Malays also call the tree laka, demonstrating a tendency to shorten its name from the front.

But, if “Melaka” derives from amalaka, what does this tell us? As mentioned, Melaka’s rulers hailed from Buddhist Srivijaya; when Melaka was founded, it too, was Buddhist.

According to Buddhist tradition, 24 Buddhas came before Gautama Buddha, the lives of whom were celebrated across mainland Southeast Asia, including in Thailand, which once dominated Melaka.

The 21st of these figures, Phussa Buddha, gained enlightenment under the amalaka tree. Given the Buddhist Iskandar Shah is similarly depicted under the Melaka tree, is Sejarah Melayu trying to identify him with Phussa Buddha?

Certainly, Buddhist symbolism permeates other sections of Sejarah Melayu. For example, Iskandar’s ancestry is traced to Sri Tri Buana, a semi-divine figure who descended from heaven atop of Palembang’s sacred Bukit Seguntang Mahameru.

The signs of sovereignty bestowed upon him, including the right to reside on the sacred mountain, an elaborate crown studded with jewels, and the ability to turn the hilltop into gold, replicate the sovereign powers of the Bodhisattva, Avalokitesvara. This suggests Sri Tri Buana was an incarnation of that figure.

Plausibly, Iskandar Shah represents something similar: an enlightened being, a bridge between Muslim Melaka and ancient Buddhist Srivijaya.

If so, he embodies the inherent cosmopolitanism of Malay society, a quality as important today as in past centuries.

The writer is Associate Fellow at the International Institute of Advanced Islamic Studies (IAIS) Malaysia

▲

PC: Pakatan Harapan Malaysian Police shoot dead Indian

PC: Pakatan Harapan Malaysian Police shoot dead British PR, British PR Indian Lady’s enforced disappearance,3 Indians shot dead in 1 day.3 orphaned children (UK citizens) aged 17,10 & 5 will…

More ► More ▼

PC: Pakatan Harapan Malaysian Police shoot dead British PR, British PR Indian Lady’s enforced disappearance,3 Indians shot dead in 1 day.3 orphaned children (UK citizens) aged 17,10 & 5 will be going home to UK empty handed & minus their shot dead by police father & enforced disappeared ‘for good’ mother."Who will comb my hair when i go to school" says Krishka (10), daughter orphaned, "Who do i say i will i complain to (now) if i am bullied in school says Sanjit (10) - by trigger happy now Pakatan Harapan Malay-sian police force! New Malaysia? Stop police shooting dead (of Indians) policy says widow of Thava Selvam in police report today.

HINDRAF 2.0
(Hindu Rights Action Force)
13-3-2, Taman Bukit Angkasa,
Jalan Pantai Dalam, 59200, Kuala Lumpur
Tel:03-20115620, 013-3504711

Press Conference

Malaysian Police shoot dead British P.R., British P.R. Lady’s enforced disappearance,3 shot dead in 1 day.

Date : 20.9.2019 (Friday)

Time : 12.00 noon

Venue : Suite C-5-5, 5th Floor, Tower C
Wisma Goshen, Plaza Pantai
Off Jalan Pantai Baru
59000 Kuala Lumpur

Note : Lawyers M.Manoharan & P. Uthayakumar, Mother & Father of deceased UK P.R., 3 orphaned children (UK citizens) aged 17,10 &5 will be going home to UK empty handed & minus their shot dead by police father & enforced disappeared ‘for good’ mother, sister and widow of Malaysian shot dead by Police, family & friends will be present.

Co-Ordinater
Baskaran
012-9760598

▲

74-year-old hospitalised after giving birth to twins

A 74-YEAR-OLD woman who gave birth to twins was hospitalized with complications while her 82-year-old husband suffered a heart attack, Makkal Osai reported.

The elderly couple in Andhra Pradesh, India,…

More ► More ▼

A 74-YEAR-OLD woman who gave birth to twins was hospitalized with complications while her 82-year-old husband suffered a heart attack, Makkal Osai reported.

The elderly couple in Andhra Pradesh, India, has been trying to have a child for the past 57 years.

She finally opted for an IVF procedure.

The woman became pregnant and delivered healthy twin girls after a three-hour labor.

Her husband, who was overjoyed after his daughters were born, suffered a heart attack the next day and had to be admitted to hospital.

▲

What is so special about fugitive Naik?

P Ramasamy - Penang deputy chief minister (II)

Is it true in a recent meeting between Prime Minister of Malaysia Dr Mahathir Mohammed and India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi in…

More ► More ▼

P Ramasamy - Penang deputy chief minister (II)

Is it true in a recent meeting between Prime Minister of Malaysia Dr Mahathir Mohammed and India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Vladivostok, Russia, the former requested for the extradition of the Islamic preacher and fugitive Zakir Naik?

I don’t really think we can understand what actually transpired in the one-hour conversation between Modi and Mahathir. Whether Modi requested for Zakir’s extradition is not important as India had formally made the request as early as 2018.

So whether Modi made the request and whether this was denied by Mahathir have become academic in nature. Therefore it serves no purpose in finding out the truth; in fact, the truth has become lost in the manner the media has covered the subject matter.

What is important for us is why Zakir, despite the havoc he has created in India and Malaysia, he has been given a VIP status in the country so much so he is regarded as one of the most influential persons in the country.

Apart from the fact no country wants to take him, there is fear that his expulsion might cause domestic problems in the country especially amongst sections who have come to regard him as a respected Islamic preacher.

More than two hundred police reports have been lodged against Zakir and police investigations are ongoing. However, if leaders like Mahathir are not inclined to extradite him, police investigations would make no impact.

It is clear that Naik has violated the conditions that were imposed in granting him a permanent residency status but the government still wants to bend over backwards to protect him.

It is not clear that the government would have extended the protection to others who have come in to make insensitive remarks about Muslims or non-Muslims.

The question is why this application of double-standard when it comes to Zakir?

Shouldn’t a responsible government of the day protect its citizens whether Muslims or non-Muslims from being hurt by the insensitive remarks from persons like Zakir?

Let not the government of Malaysia be ridiculed and made fun by the international community for bending over backwards in politics protecting a fugitive and runaway against its own citizens.

▲

ED to invoke Fugitive Economic Offenders Act against Zakir Naik

Sources in the Enforcement Directorate have said the probe agency is all set to invoke the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act against Zakir Naik who is currently in Malaysia.

In a…

More ► More ▼

Sources in the Enforcement Directorate have said the probe agency is all set to invoke the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act against Zakir Naik who is currently in Malaysia.

In a development in the extradition process of controversial Islamic preacher Zakir Naik, currently based in Malaysia, the Enforcement Directorate is all set to invoke the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act against him.

Sources in the probe agency have told India Today that the ED is all set to file an application before the court to declare Zakir Naik 'fugitive’ under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act.

Under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018, effective action can be taken against economic offenders who have fled Indian jurisdiction. It provides for attachment and confiscation of property of fugitive economic offenders and disentitles them from defending any civil claim.

If declared fugitive, the ED will have the power to attach his overseas properties. The development will also help probe agencies in extradition of Zakir Naik from Malaysia.

Fresh non-bailable warrant against Zakir Naik

On Wednesday, a Mumbai court had issued a fresh non-bailable warrant (NBW) against Zakir Naik in the 2016 alleged money laundering case.

The warrant was issued by Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) court judge PP Rajvaidya on a plea filed by the ED which is probing the case.

Last week, Naik had moved a plea through his lawyer seeking time for two months to appear before the court, which was rejected. The ED on Monday moved a fresh plea seeking the NBW.

The ED has claimed to have identified Rs 193.06 crore as the proceeds of crime in the 2016 case.

Who is Zakir Naik

Zakir Naik, a 53-year-old radical television preacher, left India in 2016 and subsequently moved to the largely Muslim Malaysia, where he was granted permanent residency.

The ED booked him in 2016 on an FIR filed by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA). The controversial preacher is wanted by authorities for alleged money laundering and inciting extremism through hate speeches.

▲