Call on Pairin, Harris as well as Najib to confirm that 30 years ago, the Berjaya Sabah State government was on the verge of surrendering the state’s autonomy powers on immigration to the Federal Government

The report in today’s Free Malaysia Today must be a shock to Sabahans and Malaysians, for it was revealed for the first time that some 30 years ago, the Sabah state government was on the verge of surrendering the state’s autonomy powers on immigration to the Federal Government.

This came about in the ongoing polemics betwee  two former Sabah Chief Ministers, Datuk Harris Salleh and his nemesis, Tan Sri Joseph Pairin Kitingan.

The Free Malaysia Today report
“Pairin tells Harris not to harp on ‘lost’ Sabah rights”
 quoted Joseph Pairin as reminding Harris that it was under Harris’ Berjaya Sabah State government that Sabah’s state rights were “slowly eroded until very little was lieft”.

Joseph Pairin said that if it had not be him as Chief Minister from  1985 to 1994,  even the special immigration powers vested in the state would have been taken away.

Pairin alleged: “The Berjaya Government was on the verge of surrendering Sabah’s immigration powers before it was ousted from power.

“Some of us in Berjaya stopped it and asked for three years to think it over.”

Pairin said that “luckily”, his 45-day-old Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) wrested the reins of power from Berjaya and that “put paid to the Federal Government’s plan to abolish the state’s immigration powers”.

I never knew and have never heard that the Federal Government under the then Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Dr.  Mahathir Mohamad was planning to abolish Sabah’s immigration powers, although Harris as Sabah Chief Minister surrendered Labuan to the Federal Government in 1984 which was subsequently declared a Federal Territory.

I have asked around and nobody seemed to know that there were plans from 1983-1985 involving both the Federal and Sabah State Governments to abolish Sabah’s immigration powers.

Pairin, Harris and the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak (as there must be documentation on such a matter in the Federal Government)  should confirm whether 30 years ago, the Berjaya Sabah State government was on the verge of surrendering the state’s autonomy powers on immigration to the Federal Government.

As the then Prime Minister, Tun Mahathir – who is still very active and alert in the public domain, even plotting  to scalp another Prime Minister –  should throw light on another long-kept secret in Malaysia on the circumstances and history of attempts in his first four years as Prime Minister in the eighties to abolish Sabah’s state immigration powers as revealed by Joseph Pairin.

In this connection, Joseph Pairin should explain why he had kept secret  the plot to abolish Sabah’s state immigration autonomy for three decades!

(Speech at the forum “How many are REAL Sabahans – Report on RCI Report on Illegal Immigrants in Sabah” at the LLG Centre, Kuala Lumpur on Monday, 16th March 2015 at 9 pm)

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 18 March 2015, 4:29 pm and is filed under
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Dyana Sofya hits back at critics over photo in women’s magazine

by Melati A Jalil

The Malaysian Insider

18 March 2015

DAP’s Dyana Sofya Mohd Daud hit back at her critics today, saying that a change in mindset is needed if people still associate bed with sex.

The former Teluk Intan by-election candidate recently received heavy criticism for taking part in a magazine photoshoot to raise awareness on violence against women.

She had posed on a bed for the campaign, called “Wake Up To A Good Cause” which aims to collect donations for Women’s Aid Organisation (WAO).

Her critics, which included the likes of Puteri Umno and social media users were quick to attack her, saying that it was a shameful act and young women should not pose “like that” to attract attention.

Dyana said it is this type of mindset that needed to be changed if people can misinterpret a message she was trying to sent through the photoshoot.

“If you see a bed, and you don’t think of sleep but of sex, then there is something wrong with you.

“There is nothing wrong with the photo, (but) there’s definitely something wrong with your mindset. It is this kind of mindset that we are combating against,” Dyana said.

“The sad reality is that our society is very misogynistic… For example, when I was in Teluk Intan, I have been getting all kinds of sexists remarks.

“Worse of all, some people think it is normal. It is okay, they said, because you are in politics. You (just) have to face it.

“But the thing is, it is wrong,” she told The Malaysian Insider when met at the launch of the campaign by Marie Claire magazine today.

The campaign is aimed at creating awareness on violence against women while raising funds for WAO. It encourages the public to post an out-of-bed bare faced selfie of themselves and subsequently upload it to Instagram with the correct hashtags and caption. Marie Claire will then donate RM10 for each uploaded photo up to a total of RM21,000 to the WAO.

Dyana, who is also the political secretary to DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang, added that society is still unaware of the different types of abuse that women faced.

“For example, the one that I faced because of the photograph. I did not get it only from the men but women as well. There were negative comments with some even saying that it is very seductive and suggestive,” she said.

Dyana said she had not expected such negative comments over the photograph as her intention was to fight for a good cause.

“Honestly, I was not expecting that. So when I received the negative comments, it hit me. This is the main reason why we are fighting violence against women, because it is so apparent.

“And this is not even political,” she said.

Dyana also denied talks that her involvement with the campaign was the beginning for her venture into a modeling career, saying that one does not have to be a model to pose in a magazine for a good cause.

“It is for a good cause… and this is not just about women’s issues. This is about the community.

“As a politician, I believe I can help educate, raise awareness among the people. Because this is a real thing,” she said. – March 18, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 18 March 2015, 10:47 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
women
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Hammering the hudud wedge into Pakatan

By Liew Chin Tong

Malaysiakini

Mar 17, 2015

MP SPEAKS
 To drive a wedge is to cause hostility or disagreement between two parties. In Malaysia, the implementation of the Islamic criminal code or hudud is one such wedge that is designed to break Pakatan Rakyat, and to bolster the position of the pro-Umno elements in PAS vis-à-vis the pro-Pakatan leaders.

I may be a DAP leader but I write this piece as a former academician who has devoted four years of my younger life, a decade and half ago, to understand the internal dynamics of PAS, with several academic publications on the subject.

I see myself as a long-time friend of the PAS that strives to defeat Umno at the ballot boxes, together with all Malaysians. For me, the PAS faction that is working secretly with Umno on the basis of asabiyyah (racial allegiance) should be regarded as a common enemy by all those who wish to see a Malaysia with a new clean, trustworthy, democratic and fair government.

The hudud debate did not figure much in the national discourse, even among the circle of top leaders in PAS, since 1950s. Phrases such as “Negara Islam” and “hudud” only became popular from the 1980s onward, especially after Anwar Ibrahim joined Umno.

This was just before the April 1982 general election, which gave the then new government of Dr Mahathir Mohamad an “Islamic” credential, and during the young ulama revolt against Asri Muda’s leadership of PAS, which was seen as more Malay nationalist in orientation, at the party’s muktamar (general assembly) in October 1982.

That era of Islamisation – the battle between PAS and Umno to out-Islam each other – more or less ended with the jailing of Anwar in September 1998 when the grounds for competition between the ruling Umno and the opposition shifted to more painfully realistic issues, such as economic downturn, justice, good governance, and the well-being of the people.

Globally, even Islamists discuss real problems of every life in a holistic manner, rather than putting the focus on specific legal agenda. Most mainstream Islamists, from Maududi to al-Qaradawi and many others, stress on maqasid – the overriding objectives of syariah (Islamic jurisprudence) – rather than just hudud as a form.

Deception and backdoor

The recent hudud debate was given a new lease of life in March 2014 when Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Jamil Khir Baharom dangled a Private Member’s Bill option at the PAS-led Kelantan government.

The discussion between Kelantan Deputy Menteri Besar Nik Amar Nik Abdullah and the federal government took the form of a “government-to-government” arrangement, thus avoiding the scrutiny of the PAS national leadership and the Pakatan leadership council.

Without having any intention to brief the party’s central committee as well as the top Pakatan leaders, the Kelantan PAS leaders were adamant about tabling the hudud enactment on Dec 29, 2014. Alas, it was stalled by the great floods of Kelantan, which swamped even the state government offices in Kota Bharu.

Nik Amar (right) was later instructed by the PAS central leadership to attend the Pakatan leadership council meeting on Feb 8, 2015, chaired by Anwar, two days before the de facto PKR chief was jailed.

Nik Amar explained that the exercise was a minor amendment to the 1993 enactment, and Pakatan leaders were assured that they would be allowed to have a look at the draft.

On March 12, two junior Kelantan state executive councillors were sent to attend the Pakatan leadership council meeting with “no mandate” to change anything, and allegedly “too late” to do anything.

The purpose was clear. It was meant to present a fait accompli by deception.

It is sad that some people would do such a thing despite the Quranic warning that one should never resort to unfair and dishonest means.

The reasons why

The rush to present the hudud bill in the Kelantan assembly without much consultation within PAS and with its allies in Pakatan indicates certain ulterior motives.

While I believe PAS leaders and members support hudud in principle, I do not believe all of them agree with the way the issue is being handled at present. I believe Nik Amar has his own motives.

First, he is positioning himself vis-à-vis PAS leader Husam Musa (left) in Kelantan politics.

Second, from the impression I got from his briefings at Pakatan meetings, Nik Amar believes that the hudud enactment would save PAS Kelantan from electoral defeat. This means he has no confidence that PAS can win the next general election.

Third, he is preparing for a rematch with PAS deputy president Mohamad Sabu in a tussle for the party’s No 2 position in the coming party elections. He lost to Mat Sabu two years ago.

Fourth, Nik Amar is of the view that hudud can improve PAS’ vote share nationally, despite the fact that many of the PAS seats outside of the Malay heartlands were won with non-Muslim votes.

Why the rush?

Pushing the hudud enactment by deception as well as using the back door without wider consultation can only serve Umno’s interest. The timing is so perfect for Umno, which is facing numerous scandals and crises, and on the verge of losing power in the coming general election.

Therefore, the collapse of Pakatan would mean Umno wins by default when there is no more alternative coalition contesting against it.

Perhaps the enthusiastic rush for the Kelantan hudud enactment is not really about expanding justice. If it is, why the rush? Why can’t more deliberations and consultations be held?

It is all about political positioning.

Sadly, it’s the people of Malaysia, including Muslims, who will suffer yet again, if or when Pakatan breaks up over this badly-managed issue. And Umno will return with a vengeance.

LIEW CHIN TONG is the MP for Kluang and DAP political education director.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 18 March 2015, 7:24 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Kelantan
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Impossible to trust PAS again, says Ambiga

by Looi Sue-Chern

The Malaysian Insider

18 March 2015

Civil society leader and former Bar Council president Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan said PAS has betrayed the trust of the people who had voted for them on Pakatan Rakyat’s (PR) platform, after the Islamist party went ahead to table a bill in the Kelantan state legislative assembly to reintroduce hudud in the state.

She said she was shocked and disappointed at PAS for what bringing back the Islamic penal code – a move which she said was in breach of PR’s common policy and a betrayal of voters who had supported PAS based on a shared platform with allies DAP and PKR.

“After this, it will be near impossible for them to regain that trust,” she told The Malaysian Insider today.

Ambiga said the PAS-led Kelantan administration should seriously look at its priorities, considering that the state was only recently hit by its worst floods in decades.

“The state and its wonderful people have not even begun to recover from the devastating floods and yet that does not seem to be at the top of the agenda for the state government,” she said.

Ambiga, a former president of the Bar Council and former co-chair of electoral reform watchdog Bersih 2.0, said the hudud legislation had also offended the Federal Constitution.

She said Kelantan’s lawmakers should not have tabled such a bill at the state legislative assembly.

“They have sought to assure non-Muslims that hudud will not be imposed on them but given the manner in which they have breached the common agreement and the revelations in the Jakim paper revealed in the media… it is difficult to be comfortable with that assurance.”

It was reported last year that a working paper by Jakim, the Malaysian Islamic Development Department, had said that non-Muslims can be subjected to Shariah laws and that all laws should be harmonised with Islamic principles.

“Regardless of this, the main issue in my view is the constitutionality of this bill,” Ambiga said today.

Ambiga said she was also shocked that the amendments include the death penalty for apostasy, and that it was unacceptable for terms like “heathens” to be used.

When tabling the bill, Kelantan Menteri Besar Datuk Ahmad Yakob said the Islamic penal code should not be opposed, adding that those who called it cruel and inhuman were making wild allegations.

He also said critics were those who “had no faith” (orang tidak beriman) and hudud was the answer to crime as it was determined by God.

“Man has no right to reject or change Shariah laws that have been set in Islam. Muslim rulers are duty-bound to implement them as they can resolve any type of crime that is happening in the country.

“Implementing Shariah criminal laws is also not about preserving political power, as alleged by some quarters,” Ahmad reportedly said. – March 18, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 18 March 2015, 10:24 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Jawi, is this what you call Islamic justice?

P Ramakrishnan, Aliran

Free Malaysia Today

March 18, 2015

Why is Jawi hounding an innocent woman who has committed no crime or violated the tenets of Islam?

By persistently pursuing Borders bookshop manager Nik Raina Nik Abdul Aziz who had been discharged by the Syariah High Court, Jawi, the Federal Territory Islamic Affairs Department, is doing a great disservice to Islam.

Islam, as understood by many, is just and fair. It does not judge others unfairly and does not deny the just dues of others.

Jawi’s action in this case is contrary to Islamic justice and virtues. Its action is un-Islamic and goes against the common perception of what justice is all about.

It is hell-bent on criminalising an action that is not criminal. It is determined to punish someone who has not committed any wrong.

Its tenacious legal pursuit to punish Nik Raina, borders on an obsession to hound her for no justifiable reason at all.

She has committed no crime and her action has in no way violated the tenets of Islam. And yet, Jawi is intent on vilifying her.

Jawi has been at it for nearly three years without any let up. It raided the Borders outlet in Mid Valley Megamall on 23 May 2012, and seized copies of Canadian author Irshad Manji’s book, “Allah, Liberty and Love” and its Bahasa version, “Allah, Kebebasan dan Cinta”.

At that point in time, the book had not been banned. Therefore, it wasn’t wrong to buy, sell or read it.

As such, the raid by Jawi and confiscation of the books was illegal. Its action was wrong by law and could not be sustained on any legal basis.

It was only six days later, on 29 May 2012, that the Home Ministry issued a prohibition order banning the book. The book ban came into effect on 14 June 2012 – three weeks after – with the publication of the prohibition order.

Raina was arrested on 30 May by Jawi and charged on 19 June under Section 13 (1) of the Federal Territory Syariah Offences Act 1997 for selling a publication deemed to go against Islam.

Her arrest and subsequent charge were illegal because on 23 May 2012 she had not committed any crime. The contrary argument would allow the law of crime to have a retrospective effect, a rule that almost all lawyers consider repugnant.

The sale of the said book on that day was permissible because it had not been banned. The ban only took place three weeks later.

The Kuala Lumpur High Court ruled on 22 March 2013 that Jawi had acted illegally in raiding Borders and seizing the books, as well as in charging Nik Raina. Jawi was then ordered to withdraw its charges against Nik Raina in the Syariah court.

The Court of Appeal also ruled in favour of Nik Raina on 30 December 2014, and said the prosecution against her was “unreasonable, irrational” and done in bad faith, and that it was against the “principle of fairness and justice” for Jawi to charge Nik Raina for an offense in the Syariah court simply because she was a Muslim, and because it could not charge the company and her non-Muslim supervisor.

On 26 February, the Syariah High Court judge Mohd Aman Mat Zain granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal when he ruled that the court had taken into consideration the appeal by the syariah prosecutor to the Federal Court had not proceeded in getting leave to appeal.

Following the Syariah High Court’s decision, Nik Raina’s lawyer Rosli Dahlan said the decision today was unexpected as there had been many disappointments earlier in the case, but he said the Syariah Court today showed a full understanding of constitutional principles.

In the face of such judicial decisions, it didn’t make sense for Jawi’s chief prosecutor to file its appeal at the Syariah Court of Appeal on 9 March.

Strangely the notice was served on Nik Raina at her place of work instead of addressing it, as required by procedure, to her lawyer, Rosli.

It appeared that they wanted to hound and harass Raina. It was therefore legitimate for Nik Raina to ask, “I continuously kept asking myself, why do they have to do this to me? What are they trying to prove?”

She found herself in a harrowing situation which affected her and her family.

“It is not easy for me to keep calming my parents every time this case is mentioned.

“They are too old to keep thinking about my safety and future. This indirectly makes me feel guilty and uneasy every time they see me in court, as they would become worried,” said Nik Raina.

Her lawyer meanwhile slammed Jawi’s chief prosecutor for going against procedure by serving the notice of appeal at Borders Gardens bookstore, ignoring the fact that his firm Lee Hishammuddin Allen and Gledhill were the solicitors on record.

“The chief prosecutor breached the rule that they should not communicate with my client directly.

“But more importantly, they displayed arrogance and deliberately wanted to inflict fear and oppression on Nik Raina by serving directly on her instead of on my firm,” he said.

Thinking Malaysians are fundamentally upset at this harassment of an innocent woman who is unjustly subjected to so much pressure. They are justified in asking, “Is this Islamic justice? Where is the fairness?”

Aristotle put it correctly when he said, “All virtue is summed up in dealing justly.”

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 18 March 2015, 9:50 pm and is filed under
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib should come to Parliament himself to answer personally criticisms by Mahathir  and others and not through a proxy or underling

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Shahidan Kassim told Malaysiakini that he would answer former Prime Minister Tun Mahathir’s criticisms about the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, especially with regard to the RM42 billion 1MDB scandal and Najib’s family wealth in Parliament tomorrow.

Najib should come to Parliament himself to answer personally criticisms by Tun Mahathir and others and not through a proxy or underling, even though a Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department.

I do not believe  previous Prime Ministers in Malaysia, or Prime Ministers and heads of government in other countries, need to depend on their underlings to answer criticisms directed at them.

Why is the Prime Minister not prepared to face Members of Parliament to answer the mountain of criticisms against him, from both inside UMNO and outside?

Najib should give advance notice of his appearance in Parliament to answer personally criticisms against him so that all MPs who are interested in the subject could be present in the House.

In fact, I would suggest the suspension of Dewan Rakyat Standing Orders on Question Time to allow the Prime Minister an extra one full hour to answer all criticisms as well as supplementary questions that MPs would want to pursue on the subject.

In the past two days, the PKR Secretary-General and  MP for Pandan had been pressing for answers about the new private jet, Airbus ACJ 320, costing RM465 million, commissioned by the government for the use of the Prime Minister.

If Najib comes to Parliament to answer  all criticisms made against him as Prime Minister, whether by Mahathir or others, this will also be an excellent and most appropriate occasion for him to inform the nation whether  the Federal Government has commissioned a new RM465 million Airbus 320 for his own use, over and above a fleet of private jets owned and operated by Putrajaya.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 18 March 2015, 2:07 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Parliament
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Unable to handle GST, 68-year-old shuts up shop

by Looi Sue-Chern

The Malaysian Insider

18 March 2015

Moey Kok Meng and his family are clearing out his sundry shop in Air Itam. His final day of operation is next Wednesday.

“I am shutting down because of the GST (goods and services tax). I don’t think I can do business with the tax implemented,” he said.

Moey, 68, said he made the decision to close his shop, which has been in operation for 48 years, before Chinese New Year last month.

He said one of his three daughters had asked him if he was able to deal with the GST, and the question made him realise that he could not.

“I don’t know (how to operate) a computer. I don’t understand the system… how it works. Even after reading it and getting others explain to me, I am still unsure of how to do my business with it.

“I am just running a small, simple business. It is all giving me a headache, so I surrender,” he said.

Asked why he would not hire professional help to assist him with the GST, Moey said the cost would likely be too much for his business to bear, so he rather clear out.

“It would take a chunk from my earnings and savings. So I rather not go through with it.

“Some companies have agreed to take back their items that I have not sold. The rest I am selling off cheap. The neighbourhood here knows I am having a cheap sale and closing down,” he said.

Moey said his family will discuss later what to do to the shop, and he was looking forward to a retiree’s life.

“There is nothing to do but retire. My wife and I can now visit Penang Hill. We haven’t been up there for ages,” he told reporters.

Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng visited Moey and his wife Wong Ngan Hai, 68, earlier this afternoon and listened to their troubles with the GST.

He gave the couple two free season tickets to go up Penang Hill, which are valid for a month, as a token of appreciation for the couple’s many years of service to the local community.

He said it was a shame that old businesses like Moey’s were forced to close down because of the GST, adding that several sundry shops in Balik Pulau had also closed down recently.

“Moey told me he learned from the Customs Department that over 10 small businesses like hardware shops, traditional medicine shops and sundry shops had closed down.

“The Barisan Nasional (BN) government really does not understand the people. I hope non-governmental organisations (NGOs) will also take up this issue and speak up for the interest of the people,” he said.

Lim said the state government would look into countermeasures such as increasing the revenue of the people to help cushion the effects of the GST.

“We will make the announcement on these measures later,” he said, adding that the state would also collect data to see how many businesses were being negatively affected by the GST once it was implemented beginning April 1.

The Penang government had been criticising Putrajaya’s move to implement the GST and had been calling for it to be postponed, if not cancelled.

Yesterday in Parliament, veteran BN lawmaker Tan Sri Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah also called for the new consumption tax to be deferred, arguing that now was not the right time to implement it in view of the critical state of the country’s economy and financial situation. – March 18, 2015.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 18 March 2015, 4:58 pm and is filed under
Budget Debate
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Amendment to Motion of Thanks to direct the PAC and the Police to immediately investigate the RM42 billion 1MDB  scandal without waiting for Auditor General’s Report on 1MDB

There are many other issues which explain why Malaysia is now teetering on  a crisis as a result of the economic and political gridlock paralyzing the country.

As time does not permit a discussion of all these issues, I will just quickly refer to some of them:

* Malaysia’s reputation as a country safe for investors received a grievious blow when a series of judicial decisions raised national and international questions as to whether Malaysia had restored its previous high international repute for a truly independent judiciary and just rule of law because of the following cases:

i. the Federal Court’s 5-0 unanimous decision to dismiss Anwar Ibrahim’s appeal and five-year jail sentence in Sodomy II trial;

ii. the Federal Court’s decision to convict and sentence to death former police commando Azila Hadri and Sirul Azhar Umar for the 2006 murder of Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu, while leaving completely open the question of motive for the murder and who had ordered Azila and Sirul to murder Altantuya;

iii. the expose by retired Court of Appeal judge Justice K.C. Vohrah that former Chief Justice Eusoff Chin had caused a miscarriage of justice in the infamous Ayer Molek Rubber Company vs Insas Bhd case two decades ago;

iv.the black-listing, discrimination and continued by-passing of Court of Appeal judge Justice Mohamad Hishamudin Mohd Yunus from elevation to the Federal Court;

v. the victimization of the country’s first judicial whistleblower, former High Court judge Datuk Syed Ahmad Idid, who was penalized instead of being rewarded.

* Yesterday we saw another case of grave injustice when 13 persons were sent to jail for 10 months by the Court of Appeal for illegal assembly when they demonstrated against the unconstitutional toppling of the Pakatan Rakyat Perak State Government in February 2009 after  being fined RM5,000 each for the offence.

The double standard in the jailing of the 13 protesters was a gross injustice, compared to the kid’s-glove treatment received by 15 Umno members who had stormed the Penang state assembly last year and were fined only RM1,500 each.

* another case of injustice is the hounding by JAWI, the Federal Territories Islamic Affairs, of an innocent woman in persistently pursuing Borders bookshop manager Nik Raina Nik Abdul Aziz, who had been discharged not amounting to acquittal  by the Syariah High Court from a Shariah charge that could have seen her jailed for up to two years or fined a maximum of RM3,000.

Nik Raina is a Malay and a Muslim. I am a Chinese and a non-Muslim. But we are both Malaysians and belong to the human race.

The Malaysian Dream all Malaysians share of a country for all Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, region or class must be one where the injustices suffered by one is felt by all other Malaysians, regardless of race, religion, region or class.

In other words, an injustice suffered by a Muslim Malaysian is also felt unjust by a non-Muslim Malaysian, and an injustice suffered by a non-Muslim Malaysian is also felt unjust by a Muslim Malaysian.

Are we closer to this goal since Merdeka in 1957 and Malaysia in 1963 or further from this goal?

*the 45-year nightmare of Sabahans for more than four decades – the illegal immigrant problem in Sabah state.

Ten months have passed since the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Illegla Immigrants in Sabah (RCIIIS) presented its report to the Yang di Pertuan Agong and the Federal Government, and more than three months have passed since the RCIIIS report was made public in Kota Kinabalu, but up to now, nothing has been done to resolve the 45-year Sabah Illegal Immigrants nightmare.

Malaysia needs a RCI on RCIs – to decide on the do’s and don’ts of RCI and to ensure that the authorities act seriously to implement the recommendations of the RCI so that RCI are not used as an excuse to buy time or to avoid responsibility, as seems to be the case with the UMNO/BN government.

*Finally, I wish to move an amendment to the Motion of Thanks in the name of MP for Tanjong Karang on the issue of the RM42 billion 1MDB financial scandal.

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak has finally instructed the Auditor General to vet the 1MDB accounts and to submit its report to the Parliamentary Accounts Committee (PAC).

 However, the Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin has asked the PAC to immediately investigate the 1MDB  without having to wait for the Auditor General’s Report.

Former Prime Minister Tun Dr. Mahathir has gone one step further and has asked the police to commence investigations without waiting for the Auditor-General’s Report.

My amendment to the Motion of Thanks is to give support to both proposals by Muhyiddin and Mahathir, and the add to the motion of thanks the following words:

“and resolve that (1) the Public Accounts Committee should immediately investigate the 1MDB scandal and (2) instruct the Police to launch immediate investigation into the 1MDB scandal without having to wait for the report of the Auditor-General”.

I hope Barisan Nasional MPs will prove their patriotism by supporting this amendment, to show that their loyalty is to the country and not just any political party.

(Part 5 of Speech on the motion of thanks for Royal Address in Parliament on Thursday, 19th March 2015)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 19 March 2015, 5:17 pm and is filed under
Financial Scandals
,
Islam
,
Judiciary
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Committee of Privileges should haul up IGP Khalid over the police breach of parliamentary privilege over false arrest of Nurul Izzah and to decide how the police could purge itself for utter contempt for institution of Parliament

I hope to highlight several issues which the veteran MP from Gua Musang Tengku Razaleigh on Monday said has caused a “historic juncture” as Malaysia’s economic and political situations are in a “gridlock” and teetering on crisis.

Firstly, the police arrest of two MPs, the DAP MP for Rasah Teo Kok Seong on Saturday and the PKR MP for Lembah Pantai Nurul Izzah Anwar on Monday, and their overnight remand at the Jinjang Police Station, and in the case of Kok Seong, the police sought another four-day remand but the magistrate only allowed remand for another day.

The police knew well beforehand that Kok Seong and Nurul would be reporting at the Dang Wangi Police station but on the day in question, the police did absolutely nothing to record their statements after their formal arrest, in order  to justify an overnight remand for both at the Jinjang Police Station.

This is not police efficiency and professionalism at their best, but police pettiness and vindictiveness at their worst.

Nobody blames the police personnel at Wang Dangi for such petty and vindictive abuse of  police powers, showing utter contempt and disrespect not only to Kok Siong and Nurul but also the institution of Parliament!

Nobody believes that the ordinary police rank and file are capable of such pettiness and vindictiveness against MPs. I do not believe that senior police officers would want to exhibit such police pettiness and vindictiveness which do not reflect well on police efficiency and professionalism – and such police abuses of power and contempt for MPs, particularly from Pakatan Rakyat, can only come from the command of one person, the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar.

Khalid  had been abusing his powers and the high office of IGP carrying out a misguided war on Pakatan Rakyat leaders and NGO activists,  who are patriots exercising their democratic rights to make Malaysia a better society, when he should be declaring war on Islamic State, which is using Malaysia as a centre to  lure impressionable recruits to its terroristic cause of inhumanity marked by beheadings, public stonings and mass massacres.

But the police arrest of Nurul for what she spoke in Parliament during the debate on the Royal Address on 10th March on behalf of her father, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Parliamentary Opposition Leader and MP for Permatang Pauh,  is doubly reprehensible.

Is the IGP so ignorant that he does not know that MPs enjoy parliamentary immunity for what they say in Parliament, except for the four entrenched “sensitive” which cannot be questioned as a result of the Constitution Amendments in 1971 as they constituted offences of sedition, namely the provisions on sovereignty of Malay rulers, citizenship, Article 152 on the National Language and the position of the languages of other communities and Article 153 on the special position of the Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interests of other communities?

Is the IGP ignorant that Nurul’s speech did not touch on any one of these four entrenched subjects, and that questioning the Federal Court’s decision in the Anwar Ibrahim Sodomy II case is not sedition at all?

In arresting Nurul on the ground of sedition for what she said about the Federal Court  decision in the Anwar Ibrahim Sodomy II case, the Police had itself broken the law – Section 7 of the Houses of Parliament (Privileges and Powers) Act 1952, which reads: “Immunity of Members from civil and or criminal proceedings for any thing done or said before the House. 7. No member shall be liable to any civil or criminal proceedings, arrest, imprisonment or damages by reason of any matter or thing which he may haved brought by petition, bill, resolution, motion or otherwise, or have said before the House or any committee.”

The Police is to uphold the law, but here the Police is breaking the law – Section 7 of the Houses of Parliament (Privileges and Powers) Act 1952.

The House set up the Committee of Privileges under Standing Order 80 to protect the “powers and privileges” of the House, and here we have a blatant case of breach of privileges of MPs as set out in Section 7 of the Houses of Parliament (Privileges and Powers) Act 1952.

I want to ask the Speaker, who is the Chairman of the Committee of Privileges, and the six members, what it proposes to do with such a blatant attack on the privileges of MPs; and I want to ask the Prime Minister who is the Leader of the House whether he proposes to move a motion to refer the Inspector-General of Police to the Committee of Privileges for the breach of parliamentary privilege in the case of the police arrest of Nurul Izzah, so that the Committee of Privileges can summon the IGP to account for the police breach of parliamentary privilege.

I still remember sometime in the eighties or nineties, the police wanted to investigate me for what I said in Parliament, and I told them that they were breaking the law, the Houses of Parliament (Privileges and Powers) Act 1952, and that they should go back and obtain advice from the Attorney-General. The Police officers went back and never came back.

In this case, the Committee of Privileges should haul up Khalid  to ask the IGP to explain why the Police have committed a grave breach of parliamentary privilege in the case of the false arrest of Nurul Izzah for her speech in Parliament, which had not touched on any one of the four entrenched issues, and to decide how the IGP could purge the police contempt of Parliament.

(Part I of Speech on the motion of thanks for Royal Address in Parliament on Thursday, 19th March 2015)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 19 March 2015, 2:47 pm and is filed under
Parliament
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


IGP’s English  standard incomparably low

Thirdly, On Monday,  DAP MP for PJ Utara, Tony Pua, tweeted in anger when he heard that Nurul Izzah was arrested under the Sedition Act in relation to her speech in Parliament last week when she went to the Dang Wangi Police Station to keep an appointment with the police for her statement to be taken over the #KitaLawan rally in Kuala Lumpur on March 7.

This attracted a tweet directive from the IGP, namely: “@PDRMsia akan panggil YB ini menjelaskan apa maksud beliau dgn ‘Royal my foot’. Adakah ditujukan kepada Raja2 Melayu?” (@PDRMsia will call this YB and ask him to explain what he means by ‘Royal my foot’. Is this aimed at the Malay Rulers?)

Khalid was referring to Pua’s tweet “Bastards. Real bastards. Royal my foot”.

I agree that Pua’s tweet was in bad taste. But it was not a crime.  Was Pua’s tweet aimed at the Malay Rulers?

Not to mention the police officers, I believe the overwhelming majority of school children with decent command of English language will give the IGP a strong unambiguous answer – No, it is not aimed at the Malay Rulers but the Royal Malaysian Police.

Something is really very rotten with the educational system in the country, and in particular with the shocking drop and decline of English standards in Malaysia, when the top cop in the country could ask the question whether Pua’s “Royal my foot” was aimed at the Malay Rulers when everybody with average IQ will know that is not directed at the Malay Rulers.

As a result, the IGP is setting off more police officers on a wild goose chase to determine whether Pua’s tweet is aimed at the Malay Rulers, when the police should be focusing on how to make Malaysians safe from crime and the fear of crime by keeping crime rate low as well as to snuff out the growing  Islamic State danger and threat in the country.

When will the IGP get his priorities right, which is to make Malaysians safe from crime and free from the fear of crime?

(Part 3 of Speech on the motion of thanks for Royal Address in Parliament on Thursday, 19th March 2015)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 19 March 2015, 3:08 pm and is filed under
Education
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


IGP’s misguided war against PR leaders/NGO activists when he should declare war on IS

Secondly, the IGP’s misguided war against PR leaders and NGO activists when he should have declared war on Islamic State, which is misleading Malaysian Muslims to join them Iraq and Syria to commit atrocities like beheadings, public stonings and mass massacres.

On Monday, the Wall Street Journal in its opinion piece titled
“Malaysia’s Creeping Authoritarianism”
 following more police crackdown marked by the arrest of two MPs, referred to 19 Islamic State supporters who had been arrested for plotting attacks around Kuala Lumpur last year.

Up to now, Malaysians have not been told the full story of the 19 Islamic State supporters who had been arrested for plotting attacks around Kuala Lumpur last year, but the twitter trigger-happy IGP seemed to be more pre-occupied with his “war” against PR leaders and NGO activists, who only wanted to expand the democratic space for Malaysians to qualify as a fully developed nation in 2020. than the serious war waged by Islamic State in Malaysia.

Early this month, the Police announced that “A civil servant said to be one of the most senior Islamic State (IS) members in Malaysia and a 29-year-old housewife who recruited a 14-year-old girl into the militant movement are among three people detained by Bukit Aman”.

The 39-year-old civil servant was arrested by the Bukit Aman Special Branch Counter-Terrorism Division in Kuala Lumpur while the housewife was picked up in Muar.

The third suspect – a 22-year-old trader – was also arrested in Perak around the same time.

The civil servant, described by the police as “a senior IS member with direct links to Malaysians in Syria”, is believed to have used his position to recruit members to ensure the local militant network ran smoothly.

This is most shocking news. How “senior” is the civil servant who was arrested, and who are the more “senior” IS leaders in Malaysia?

Malaysia are entitled to ask: Why is the Police fighting a losing war with Islamic State – has IS developed a local leadership structure in Malaysia with dedicated recruiters scouting for new recruits for the terrorist movement in Syria and Iraq?

It would appear that while the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar was busy fighting imaginary enemies, combing the social media and tweetering instructions to police officers in his new Sedition Unit to harass and investigate Pakatan Rakyat leaders and NGO activists, he was allowing the real enemies, the IS leaders and activists in Malaysia a field day to recruit potential terrorists for the IS atrocities in Syria and Iraq.

Do the Police know how many Malaysians have slipped through the police surveillance net to leave Malaysia to join IS in Syria and Iraq?

In July last year, the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Ahmad Zahid Hamidi gave an assurance to Malaysians that the IS threat was under control.

He said the “militant groups” were trying to band together as a single “terror coalition” but they will not succeed in Malaysia as the authorities will not allow these groups to gain a foothold in Malaysia.

In August last year, the Police said that between January and June of the year, they arrested 19 people including two women for involvement in militant activities and that at least 50 Malaysians were believed to be in Syria, fighting alongside the IS terrorists.

However, by end of January this year, support for IS terrorists have further increased, with a total of 120 people who supported IS detained in prisons in Tapah and Bentong who have to be detained in special cells to stop them from spreading their ideology and train the others to become terrorists. The authorities believed that 67 Malaysians have joined the IS cause in Syria and Iraq.

Last month, Zahid intimated that the IS was so organised in Malaysia it could plot the kidnap of wealthy tycoons and to stage bank robberies to raise funds and early this month, the latest revelation that the IS has advanced to new stage of structure and organisation in Malaysia with the arrest of a civil servant who is a “senior IS member”.

These are all the marks of a failed police operation to check IS from spreading its terrorist tentacles in Malaysia.

What is most galling to Malaysians is that such dismal police failures in national security is taking place when the IGP is on a frolic playing with his tweets to harass PR leaders and NGO activists in exercise of their peaceful, lawful and democratic rights to freedom of assembly and expression – giving a field day to potential terrorists who would have no qualms participating in atrocities like beheadings, crucifixions,  public stonings and mass massacres.

The IGP must be more professional and stop his frolics with tweets and harassment of PR leaders, NGO activists and even cartoonists like Zunar and focus on the security threat posed by the IS in Malaysia.

It is deplorable that Zahid has taken the attitude that MPs should not only accept but support the proposed Prevention of Terrorism Act (Pota), “unless they want to see terrorist acts happening here”.

Zahid has no right to demand a blank cheque in the fight against IS and he should not doubt the patriotism of any MP or Malaysian who may disagree with the proposed Pota as the most effective way to fight the threat of IS terrorism.

It is most deplorable that although Parliament has met for two weeks, MPs and the Malaysian public have not been given copies of the proposed Pota and the new bill on Foreign Fighters.

The Home Minister can take BN MPs for granted, but he should not expect PR MPs to blindly support his POTA and Foreign Fighters Bill, without a full briefing on the Islamic State threat as well as assurances that these legislative proposals can be effective in fighting the threat from Islamic State and other terrorist organizations.

What Parliament should do ay is to set up a Parliamentary Select Committee on Terrorism, which should not only oversee police efforts to fight terrorism, but should also discuss in depth the proposed Pota and Foreign Fighters Bills and present its report and recommendations before these two Bills are  debated in Parliament.

(Part II of Speech on the motion of thanks for Royal Address in Parliament on Thursday, 19th March 2015)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 19 March 2015, 2:59 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
,
Police
,
Zahid
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Malaysia’s Creeping Authoritarianism

Opinion

Wall Street Journal

March 16, 2015

Malaysian politics are moving down a dark path. A month after the country’s highest court upheld the conviction of opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim on trumped-up charges of sodomy, police on Monday arrested Mr. Anwar’s daughter for violating the Sedition Act, a colonial-era law increasingly used to chill political debate.

Nurul Izzah Anwar’s apparent offense was to criticize the judiciary last week in Parliament, where she is opposition vice president. In addition to reading a statement from her father condemning his trial as a political conspiracy, Ms. Nurul Izzah condemned Malaysia’s Federal Court for “bowing to political masters” and being “partners in a crime that contributed to the death of a free judiciary.”

Western diplomats have also criticized her father’s prosecution. “The decision to prosecute Mr. Anwar, and his trial, have raised serious concerns regarding the rule of law and the independence of the courts,” the U.S. State Department said last month.

Mr. Anwar was convicted on similar sodomy charges in 1999, only to have the conviction overturned after six years in prison. This time his accuser met with senior government officials—including Prime Minister Najib Razak, then the deputy prime minister—days before the alleged incident, but judges blocked Mr. Anwar’s lawyers from questioning those involved.

Mr. Anwar is 67, so a five-year prison sentence and additional five-year ban from politics could end his career. His multireligious coalition won 53% of the popular vote in 2013 but never took power from the ruling United Malays National Organization (UMNO), which has controlled Malaysia during its nearly six decades since independence.

The persecution of the Anwar family is a further blot on UMNO’s reputation. Mr. Najib promised to repeal the Sedition Act in 2012 but has since used it against more than a dozen opposition politicians, academics and even cartoonists such as Zulkiflee Anwar Ulhaque, known as Zunar. In November he proposed strengthening the law with new provisions “to protect the sanctity of Islam and other religions.”

Creeping authoritarianism won’t slow UMNO’s rising unpopularity among young people, urbanites and ethnic minorities. Nor will it help Malaysia’s ties with the U.S., which are important for combating terrorism; Malaysian police arrested 19 Islamic State supporters plotting attacks around Kuala Lumpur last year. Nurul Izzah Anwar and Anwar Ibrahim should be released for their own sake and that of a democracy sliding into repression.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 19 March 2015, 1:25 am and is filed under
Anwar Ibrahim
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


PAS’s hudud folly – a political putsch

By Bridget Welsh

Malaysiakini

Mar 17, 2015

COMMENT
 Tomorrow the Islamist party PAS is scheduled to introduce ‘minor’ amendments to the hudud legislation it introduced in Kelantan in 1993.

The bill cannot be implemented as the constitution currently prevents the legislation from having effect. Although limited in scope, the move nevertheless will have significant consequences as it brings to the fore political dynamics within the party and showcases how the PAS would govern.

At its core, the amendment introduction is a political exercise aimed at shoring up a Kelantan PAS state government that has lost its moral authority with the passing of respected leader Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat and in the wake of devastating floods where the state government proved to be completely ineffectual.

This process of introducing the amendments and the political implications signal that the current conservative ulama leadership of PAS is apparently no longer meaningfully interested in democratic principles and holding national power.

This action of moving to strengthen hudud if fully realised will have negative electoral implications even within Kelantan itself.

To say that this a folly is perhaps an understatement, as it potentially marks a turning point for PAS as a trusted and viable party in national government. This is the first article of a three part series that looks at this issue.

Breaking trust – a democratic betrayal

The process through which these amendments have been carried out have raised serious questions about the PAS conservative ulama’s leadership respect for democracy. Not only does the introduction of new amendments break from the agreed common policy framework of the opposition Pakatan coalition, they were formulated in collaboration with Umno and without proper transparency.

It was less than a week before the amendments were to be introduced that they were reluctantly shared with the opposition partners. The original intention in December was not to share them at all.

There was no open debate with the public at large or proper feedback, including consultations with civil society or legal practitioners. Even when the amendments were shared behind closed doors, meaningful inputs were not solicited from its opposition allies.

The partner for these amendments in the technical committee was clear – Umno.

It is not enough that the trust was broken within Pakatan, the same pattern happened within PAS itself. The Islamist party is not a monolith, as the splits within the party have manifested themselves clearly in the painful ongoing party contest.

The original decision in Kelantan was apparently taken without prior consultation of the PAS elected leadership committee, done in contradiction to the principles of decision consensus making inside the party and with dismissal of objections.

While most of the progressives in PAS support hudud in principle and support the Kelantan amendments (for reasons developed in part two of this piece), there are real reservations within PAS about how the amendments have been handled, as the ulama leadership opted for dictate rather than discourse.

There is no real respect for difference and minority views over this issue or a willingness for accommodation, as the conservative PAS ulama believe they ‘know best’.

The ulama leadership calculatingly know that it is difficult for other PAS members to oppose the amendments and process openly, as this would lead to accusations of undermining of the leadership of the party.

The irony is that by going ahead as they have, the conservative ulama have betrayed the principles of democracy and consultation in PAS.

Insecure defensive political motivations

This raises questions of why? Why would the PAS ulama leadership opt to disrespect its coalition partners and fellow party members, to partner with their claimed political enemy? The first part of the answer is simple – power. The introduction of the Kelantan amendments is arguably a putsch within PAS itself.

The decision appears to be based on the calculations of the weak ulama Kelantan state leadership and paty president Hadi Awang to secure their own positions and to discredit alternative views.

Since 2008, the conservative ulama leadership broadly in the party has been displaced. This has not been intentional, but rather an evolution with PAS having a more prominent role in governing and policy-making.

Ulama generally are not trained to govern. Sadly some of the PAS’ conservative ulama group are not even properly trained religious scholars and many do not understand the complexities of managing the economy.

While there is considerable diversity in views and skills of PAS’s religious leaders and all ulama are not the same in outlooks, most PAS ulama do not have technocratic skills to resolve problems, and often lack administrative and management skills.

They have been increasingly insecure in their positions as the shortcomings and demands of governing have become more apparent, especially after the devastating floods.

This has fed deep-seated insecurities that have grown with support for different leadership of PAS within and outside of the party. The open urgings by its coalition members especially the DAP to replace its ulama leadership have particularly enhanced these fears.

The criticism has centred around Hadi Awang (right), whose decisions around GE 2013 weakened the party electorally and whose performance did not meet expectations, but have included the more conservative ulama leadership faction broadly.

The conservative ulama response has been defensive, to turn to religion to protect themselves and their positions. The hudud amendments are part of this reaction, to assure that they have a role in the state, in government, as hudud strengthens the role of ulama in government.

At the same time, they know that going down the divisive hudud road they will assure that the other more progressive PAS leaders who have gained in influence and forged a national alternative in Pakatan will be discredited and weakened.

This introduction of hudud amendments has also come at the time when many conservative ulama are losing their moral authority. The loss of Nik Aziz is keenly felt, with no other leader able to fill his shoes.

The conservative ulama have lost their moral compass. Many of the conservative ulama appear focused on materialist wealth and positions abroad, so much so that they do not appear to be fulfilling the roles assumed locally.

There appear also to be sharp contradictions between statements about principles and actions, with the use of vicious personal attacks in the party contest and encouragement of division and even hatred. The conservative ulama response to dealing with criticism is to stubbornly plough ahead.

Compromised moral principles

Others may believe the introduction of the amendments are about beliefs, the aim of PAS to introduce their ideological agenda. This suspicion of Islamist parties runs deep and many view PAS exclusively as a party with hudud as its goal.

Hudud in Malaysia has always been primarily political, not principled. In 1993 the aim was to fulfil a political promise. Today, the first goal is secure political position. The ulama leadership are using hudud as a political weapon to slay their enemies within the party, not to bring about genuine moral governance.

Genuine moral principles in Kelantan PAS over hudud and governance are missing. If indeed there was a goal of strengthening the moral fabric of society then there would be efforts to bring people together, not divide them.

If there was a recognition that the amendments would bring justice, then there would be more concern with what is happening to issues of rule of law in the country before moving ahead.

If there were concerns about fairness, than all views would be allowed to be heard, incorporated and respected. If there was concern about the welfare, then there would be more concern with the economic negative impact of introducing hudud on the well-being of Kelantanese.

Make no bones about it, this decision will lead to a loss of tourist revenue and investment. No study of these effects has been reported or reportedly even considered. If there was meaningful concern about Islam, then there would be more appreciation of the negative implications these measures bring to the perceptions of the faith.

The internal political motivations of these amendments stand out, and have already negatively affected PAS’ standing as a democratic party. They potentially take PAS down a path of democratic decline.

Part II:
PAS’s hudud folly – it’s not chosen by all

BRIDGET WELSH is a Senior Research Associate at the Center for East Asia Democratic Studies of National Taiwan University and can be reached at
[email protected]

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 19 March 2015, 6:49 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Zahid’s skeletons in the cupboard  and the “stacks of letters and agreements” to US

Fourthly, we have the tragedy that the Home Minister, Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi  cannot put the IGP on the right path, because he has his own skeletons in the cupboard.

Malaysians are still no nearer to the mystery of Zahid’s infamous letter to the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) vouching for the character of an alleged international gambling kingpin without the knowledge or sanction of the Police, the Foreign Ministry, the Cabinet or the Prime Minister.

In fact, the whole episode has become very much  murkier with the latest contortion by the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Shahidan Kassim that the federal government is satisfied “in principle” with explanations provided by Zahid regarding his infamous letter to FBI on Paul Phua.

The country was told by Wisma Putra after the Cabinet meeting of 14th January which heard a report by Zahid on his infamous letter to FBI that the Cabinet did not “accept”  Zahid’s explanation, but merely heard it.  This was a clarification of an earlier statement  by the Foreign Minister, Datuk Anifah Aman that the Cabinet had heard Zahid’s explanation  and the Cabinet agreed to accept explanation.

Shahidan has now come out with a third version  of the Cabinet stand on Zahid’s infamous letter to the FBI. First, Cabinet on 14th January heard Zahid’s explanation and Cabinet accepted the explanation to a clarification the same day that Cabinet merely “heard” but did not “accept” Zahid’s explanation.

Now Shahidan says that the federal government is satisfied “in principle” with Zahid’s explanation. Is Shaidan referring to Cabinet, if so, when did the Cabinet meet after the 14th January Cabinet to resolve its satisfaction “in principle” with Zahid’s explanation?  If it is not the Cabinet, then what is this “federal government” which Shahidan is referring to.

Recently, Zahid announced that he has a “stack of letters and agreements” his predecessors as Home Minister had signed with the United States which are like his infamous letter to the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) vouching for the character of an alleged international gambling kingpin.

This  is a real shocker, especially as his two immediate predecessors Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein and Tan Sri Syed Hamid Albar (March 2008 – May 2013) had publicly denied that they had ever sent any such support letter unilaterally to the FBI.

Zahid had insisted that his predecessor Home Ministers had written to the FBI like him.

Is Zahid suggesting that his two immediate predecessors as Home Minister have publicly lied?

Do we have liars as Ministers, present and past?

This matter has gone beyond the realm of internal power rivalry in a political party as it now concerns not only national security and Malaysia’s international reputation as well.

If Zahid is referring to either Hishammuddin or Syed Hamid Albar, then there is only one final solution – let the truth be out and it is either Zahid on one side or Hishammuddin and Syed Hamid Albar on the other who have to bow out of public life.

Or is Zahid referring to Home Ministers before Hishammuddin and Syed Hamid Albar?

The Home Ministers before Hishammuddin and Syed Hamid were: Datuk Seri Mohd Radzi Sheikh Ahmad (2006-2008), Datuk Azmi Khalid (2004 – 2006) and Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (1999 – 2004).

Or should we go further back to the longest 13 years the Home Ministry was ever helmed by one person – the country’s fourth Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir who doubled up as Home Minister from 1986-1999.

Lets hear the truth from Zahid and all the six Home Ministers before him, going back to some three decades ago in 1986.

Zahid has made a most astonishing claim about the “stack of letters and agreements” signed by his predecessors, especially after the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Shahidan Kassim has heightened the mystery in his parliamentary answer to the DAP MP for Segambut, Lim Lip Eng, refusing to disclose the information relating to the gambling kingpin Paul Phua, saying that it was a “huge secret” classified under the Official Secrets Act.

Since being elected as a Member of Parliament in 1969, this is the first time any Minister has refused to disclose any information in Parliament on the ground that it is a “huge secret” under the Official Secrets Act.

What is this “huge secret” with regard to “national security project” involving Paul Phua when information on mega defence procurements had never been denied on the basis that they were “huge secrets” but merely “secrets” under the Official Secrets Act?

However, with the most incriminating statement by Zahid that the “stack of letters and agreements” his predecessors had signed with the United State would, if revealed, caused them “great shame”, national interests and justice to all the previous Home Ministers from Mahathir to Abdullah demand only one course of action to be taken.

I call on the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak to declassify the “stack of letters and agreements’” all the previous Home Ministers have signed with the United States like Zahid’s infamous letter to FBI to vouch for the character of the alleged international gambling kingpin and for the Prime Minister to present a White Paper and to make a Ministerial statement on the matter in Parliament.

(Part 4 of Speech on the motion of thanks for Royal Address in Parliament on Thursday, 19th March 2015)

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 19 March 2015, 3:16 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Dad pens anguish over ‘burn, rape’ daughter calls

by Prof Dr Mohamad Tajuddin Mohamad Rasdi

Malaysiakini

Mar 20, 2015

The latest incident about a BFM newsreader being threatened with death, rape and being burnt alive by those whom  I assume to be Malay-Muslim netizens brings forth serious questions for this country. Is this country safe for our children to live in?

If a simple point of view is raised against such issue as hudud or even such issue as democracy and clean elections can produce outbursts of murder, rape and burning people alive, what does it say about our country, its citizens and our leadership? Where did this culture come from?

I have noticed that the ones making threats of this nature come from mostly Malays who I assume are Muslim. Where did we, as a nation go wrong in educating these Malays? What are we teaching in our  secondary schools? More importantly are our public universities producing people of such culture?

I sincerely hope that those who made the threats have never stepped foot in our public universities because if not I would like to ask these vice chancellors, what kind of Malay Malaysians are you producing?

Yes, they are passable engineers and architects but are they barely passable Malaysian citizens, or passable Muslims or worse are they even passable human beings with a humane conscience? Apa sudah jadi? (What has happened?)

I have been to mosques and I have listened to thousands of You Tube ceramah by our so called eminent ustazs and I know that  their understanding of Islam is a strong contributor to the kinds of comments made by these young netizens.

Although I feel anger towards these netizens that have made the threats like it was just a “terminator” movie of mowing people down with a big machine gun, but I am ready to forgive them  because I know it was our society that has created such a culture.

When the Prophet Muhammad was faced with the persecution of the young people of Taif till his body was bloodied, he stood in front  of the angel Gabriel at the command of a host of a heavenly army ready to eliminate the people of Taif, he said, “No, do not do anything against these people because they knew not what there are doing. Perhaps future generations may accept my message if these people do not at the present time.”

The Prophet had the magnanimity to forgive these people because he knew those that threw the stones and rocks are teenagers and young adults being influenced by their elders.

I am afraid, our religious scholars  may be teaching a brand of Islam that is very much distant from the examples of the holy Prophet himself.

With this incident I ask Malaysians again…are we safe to raise our children in this country? If not, should we start looking elsewhere and create a much safer place for our children to have a future?

I write these words with a heavy heart. I write these words as a concerned Malaysian citizen and as a simple Muslim for the sake of  all our children. And finally, I write these words as the father of Aisyah Mohd Tajuddin, the BFM girl.

Prof Dr Mohamad Tajuddin Mohamad Rasdi was a former UTM lecturer.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 20 March 2015, 7:29 pm and is filed under
Education
,
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Federal Government must accelerate its post-floods relief and reconstruction to ensure that it will not take a whole year for Kelantan to fully recover from the devastation of the worst floods in living memory last year

Revisiting Kampong Manek Urai Lama with the Ketua Gabungan Impian Kelantan (GIK) and DAP MP for Seremban Anthony Loke and other GIK Committee Members including Young Syefura (Rara), Dr. Tajuddin Shaffee and Vincent Wu, and just now Kuala Krai is like  returning to the Ground Zero zones of the worst floods disaster in Kelantan in living memory at the end of last year.

During the two-week parliamentary meeting, Pakatan Rakyat MPs have raised many questions and issues about the floods catastrophe in Kelantan at the end of last year.

It was not possible to avoid the 2014 floods catastrophe, but the damage could have been minimized as not to lead to the loss of 25 lives, creating a million floods victims with quarter of million flood evacuees, and causing billions of ringgit of damages if there had been better floods management preparedness and plans in all three phases of response, relief and reconstruction.

In Parliament yesterday, I had queried the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Shahidan Kassim to seek an assurance from the Federal Government  that it would not take a whole year for Kelantan to fully recover from the devastation of the worst floods in living memory last year.

In his answer in Parliament to my question asking for the amounts the Federal Government had allocated and distributed for repair and restoration works in Kelantan, Terengganu and Pahang after last year’s floods, Shahidan also mentioned about the Federal Government’s plans to build 1,346 houses in Kelantan state.

However, not a single house had yet been built by the Federal Government although nearly three months have passed since the floods catastrophe.

This was why I queried whether  the Federal Government would take up to a year or more before Kelantan can fully recover from the devastation of the floods catastrophe at the end of last year.

In the recent floods catastrophe, the NGOs and NGIs rose up to the occasion to the  rescue of the flood-stricken flood  victims some of whom  were left without food, water, shelter, electricity or communications for several days at a stretch.

Shahidan should give an assurance in Parliament in the reply stage next week that such a shocking breakdown of Federal and State Government floods disaster management plans in  response, relief and rehabilitation will not be allowed to recur in the future.

(Media Statement after visiting  Kg Manek Urai Lama amjd  Kuala Krai on Friday,20th March 2015)

                This entry was posted on Friday, 20 March 2015, 6:54 pm and is filed under
Kelantan
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


PAS’s hudud folly – it’s not chosen by all

By
Bridget Welsh | 2:56PM Mar 18, 2015

Malaysiakini

The introduction of the hudud amendments today in Kelantan have yet another origin beyond democratic dynamics within the party. They are based on a calculated effort to win votes, namely to strengthen the support of PAS’s core supporters and to strengthen the position of PAS vis-à-vis the coalition partners inside Pakatan.

Ironically, the hudud measures do neither, and potentially undermine the party’s standing as a national party and within its own electoral base. In this second piece, I lay out how misguided the revitalized hudud initiative is for a political party whose stated aim is to hold national power.

Over-reacting to Umno pressure

In the defensive mode of the PAS party leadership, the party have been responding to others rather than setting its own course. The most effective actor influencing PAS has been Umno.  Opting for offensive attacks, Umno has successfully convinced PAS that is it losing ground among Muslims.

Despite winning more of the popular vote nationally in GE2013 and winning more seats and gains in their vote share in Malay heartland seats (except Kedah and Perak where party infighting affected results), many in PAS have the perception that they lost ground.

They have also been made to believe that the have lost their core support base among devout Muslims and rural Malays, as they have taken to heart the Umno propaganda and concentrated on developments in Kelantan and Kedah, where the losses were most evident. The numbers for PAS’s performance are much more positive than the public framing of their performance.

Collectively PAS lost 3 percent of Malay support, considerably less than in most of the elections historically except 1969, 1999 and 2008. In most of the states their gains were among Malays in termsof numbers. Significant gains in support were also gleaned from non-Muslims, ranging over 7 percent. Of the 21 seats PAS won, 14 of these would not have been possible without non-Muslim support.

But in politics, it is not reality that matters, but perception. Malaysian politics still centres around Malay politics, and for PAS there has been a growing sense that it is not winning Malays. In fact, there is a deep-seated fear that they are losing their core supporters. In fact, in some ways, they are right. PAS did lose among some devout Muslims, it lost in some rural areas, and it lost among women.

Part of the explanation lies with the appeal of other Pakatan parties for Malay votes, as PKR and even DAP has won over support. The main reason is Umno’s successful efforts to infiltrate PAS’s core through support for religious education, funding to religious organizations and more effective engagement with young voters on the issues that matter to them, notably with a concentration on bread and butter issues.

For some analysts there has been a focus on Umno’s confrontational race and religious campaign as the decisive factor undermining PAS, with PAS portrayed as betraying Islam. My own view places greater emphasis on Umno’s calculated efforts to cut off PAS from its social networks, the critical use of resources and the ineffectiveness of PAS’s electoral campaign on a national scale.

These issues remain open for debate, but what is relevant for the revitalisation of hudud is that PAS believes it needs to appeal to its core – devout Muslims and rural Malays.

Standing tall, winning respect

In going back to hudud, PAS is also responding to another set of insecurities, the Democratic Action Party in particular and its discomfort in Pakatan more generally. The issues here are complex – racism, religious differences, style, strategy and personalities.

All the parties in Malaysia are grappling with an electorate that is less race oriented, but a political context that continues to be racially analyzed and framed. Racism is still deeply embedded, and had been stoked intensely in the past two years as Umno fans discord for political ends.

Pakatan parties are also not immune from the issues of race as well, with considerable misunderstandings and cultural differences. The challenges of bridge-building on religion are even more challenging, particularly for PAS.

The GE13 campaign and its aftermath has left an imprint on PAS, who has been portrayed as weak vis-a-vis its Pakatan partners.  It is seen as the weakest link. PAS was blamed by some for ‘not performing’ in the last election and it has been consistently portrayed as ‘the problem’.

This has fed insecurities. The image of PAS in the Malay language press has fanned these sentiments by building up the portrayal of the ‘weakling’. As the hudud issue has evolved the non-Muslim mediums have moved to portray PAS as the ‘villain’, with ‘aggressive’ DAP seen to be leading the accusations.

This has not sat well in PAS, even among the more progressive elements. PAS wants respect, it wants to be treated fairly and many feel that the response of its Pakatan partners have crossed lines. Hudud is in part about fighting back, for the party to be seen out of the shadow of others. Thus hudud has become yet another political tool to show Umno, DAP and PKR that it is its own party.

Hudud is push, not pull

Sadly, this is a counterproductive strategy. By going forward with the hudud amendments, PAS has neither secured its Malay core nor secured its electoral gains. To explain my argument, I draw on surveys on hudud and focus groups.

Let me unpack my analysis. First of all, hudud is not as important a pull factor for Malays and even devout Muslims as PAS believes. Second, hudud is more alienating for some Malays and non-Muslims than PAS believes. Third, hudud serves to showcase PAS’ shortcomings as a party in national government, with a narrow focus that excludes and portrays negativity.

There have been two surveys conducted on the hudud issue, the Merderka Centre’s Survey of April 2014 reported in the press and the Asia Barometer Survey last September-October, coming out in a book later this year and outlined here. The findings are reasonably consistent.

I draw from the ABS findings, as I have run a series of tests to examine how hudud compares to other electoral issues such as the economy and corruption and importantly this survey includes East Malaysia.

Some observations:

The majority of Malaysians do not agree that the country is ready for hudud.

While a majority of Malays do agree the country is ready for hudud, there is a large share of Malays – 30.6 percent, who do not and many who have a lukewarm support for hudud, 28.8 percent. This is by way of saying only a third of Malays strongly support hudud.

Overwhelmingly, non-Muslims do not support hudud, with a larger share of non-Muslims strongly disagreeing with hudud than Malays who strongly support hudud.

A small share of non-Muslims believe the country is ready for hudud.

Females, including Malay females, disproportionately do not believe the country is ready for hudud.

There is considerable regional variation in the support for hudud, with support in the Eastern states of Kelantan and Terengganu considerably higher than the northern (Kedah, Perlis and Penang) and southern regions.  Strong support in the Eastern states for hudud does not translate into a majority.

East Malaysians have the least support for hudud.

Returning to the argument about why hudud amendments hurt PAS electorally, let me draw from the survey and my other analyses. To the point of attracting voters, numerically, the core strong support for hudud remains a minority nationally and even in the Eastern states of Kelantan.

Importantly, however, when these voters were asked – as they were in The Malaysian Insider survey and multiple other surveys such including the ABS – what is important in voting and whether hudud is important vis-à-vis other factors, hudud is less important. Religion generally only ranks high as a determinant for voting for a small share of the electorate, less than 15 percent, with this divided equally among Muslim and non-Muslim voters.

To put this differently, hudud is not a vote-getter – resolving problems, bread and butter issues, good governance, honest government, good respected leaders and much more count more. Hudud does not win votes – good policies and good government do!

Introducing hudud does however lose votes for PAS as a party. There is serious trust deficit for this Islamist party, among non-Muslims, women and among some Malays. Focus groups identify the main source of distrust as hudud. It is not religion specifically, as many Malaysians across faiths want a moral government, but the perception that hudud is about ‘restrictions and control’, ‘unfairness’ and ‘backwardness’ – the respondent’s words.

When voters were asked why they voted for PAS that never had before, the reasons were ‘Pakatan,’ ‘ABU’, ‘Change the government’. The affinity to PAS specifically was weak. Hudud never came up.

When it was broached and voters were asked how they would vote if hudud was implemented, the response that emerged as ‘ABP’ – Anything but PAS. This provoked much stronger negative reactions than support for hudud among even the strongest PAS supporters.

The take-away is that hudud pushes away the voters that offer PAS an opportunity to move out of its core political base or even to strengthen its base within its core. With hudud, at this time based on these surveys, PAS, would not be elected on the national level and definitely not on its own.

A final finding is that by moving forward with hudud PAS has reinforced a negative image of itself among the electorate. It is seen as a one-note party – hudud, hudud, hudud – with many people not liking the rhythm or the song. The image of hudud remains significantly negative among the majority of the electorate who see this about punishment rather than empowerment, backwardness rather than the future and inadequate as a basis of government.

The Kelantan amendments may change this perception, but based on the studies to date, negative perceptions dominate.

The Kelantan and ulama leaders in PAS are going ahead. There has been little in-depth study of the impact of the hudud messaging on voters and this will be crucial as the situation evolves. The message sent so far is that the PAS leadership seems to prioritize their core support base rather than being a national party, and may not even bring them the gains they hope for.

Part I:
PAS’s hudud folly – a political putsch

Part III will look at the implications of hudud for Pakatan and PAS’s longer term, highlighting that this experience offers opportunities to strengthen PAS and Pakatan.

____

BRIDGET WELSH is a Senior Research Associate at the Center for East Asia Democratic Studies of National Taiwan University and can be reached at
[email protected]

                This entry was posted on Friday, 20 March 2015, 12:13 pm and is filed under
Bridget Welsh
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Impact of Kelantan’s hudud on all of us

By Wong Chin Huat

Malaysiakini

Mar 20, 2015

COMMENT
 The most common myth on the Kelantan syariah criminal code, hudud, that was passed by its state assembly yesterday and spread by its proponents – including the so-called moderates in PAS  – is that it will not affect non-Muslims.

 Legal apartheid between Muslims and non-Muslims will allow the proponents to accuse the non-Muslim critics of the syariah criminal system of “intervening in Muslim affairs”, “obstructing Muslims from fulfilling their religious authorities” and even “opposing Islam”.

The silence of the non-Muslims is vital in turn for the silencing of Muslim criticism.

 While the world’s top Islamic scholars, such as Prof Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi and Prof Tariq Ramadhan have argued directly against the implementation of hudud punishments on grounds this will cause injustice to the powerless among the Muslims, many Muslims in Malaysia who do not want hudud however fall back instead on the presence of the non-Muslims in our country.

To avoid directly saying “no” to hudud and being attacked for lack of being pious, they argue that since Malaysia is a multi-religious country with a substantial non-Muslim minority, it is not fair to impose this syariah system of punishment on non-Muslims or to have two sets of law for Muslims and non-Muslims. The non-Muslim objection then validates this indirect line of objection.

 Legal apartheid – if implementable – then removes not only the non-Muslims’ objection by appealing to their “not in my backyard” human nature, but also those of Muslims by denying them the opportunity to object in others’ name.

 Notwithstanding the growing disputes over custody of children when one parent becomes Muslim and struggles for bodies of alleged Muslim converts, legal apartheid is how personal and family laws are administered, not just for Muslims under a state’s syariah court, but also for Bornean natives under the Native Courts.

Relationship between criminals and victims

 However, criminal law is fundamentally different from personal and family laws in two ways.

 Personal and family laws normally govern individuals of the same faith. Where family matters such as marriage, divorce and inheritance are concerned, civil/religious law is like a specific contractual framework binding the voluntary or natural contracting parties.

Crime involves involuntary parties, at least for the victims. As a victim, you don’t get to choose your criminals – and criminals won’t choose to prey on those in the same legal-religious categories just to protect the judicial system from complications.

 Unless, perhaps, all potential criminals take oaths, such as: “As a Muslim/non-Muslim, I shall not prey on a victim who is a non-Muslim/Muslim to avoid any legal mismatch in the criminal justice system.”

If so, we will see cases involving non-Muslim victims and Muslim criminals being tried in a syariah court and not civil court.

 Right at the beginning, Section 2 of the Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code II (1993) 2015 states clearly: “This Code shall apply to every Muslim who is mukalaf [aged 18 years and above and of sound mind] for any offence under this Code committed by him In the state of Kelantan.”

Nowhere in the enactment does it state that cases involving non-Muslims as victims will be exempted.

 Those who claim that non-Muslims have no business in discussing the Syariah Criminal Code must have been thinking of non-Muslims as criminals, never as victims.

 It fits perfectly with the opt-asked rhetorical question by the proponents of Kelantan’s hudud: “Why should you fear harsh punishments if you don’t intend to commit crime?”

It seems that the interests of victims – at least where non-Muslims are concerned – are not a key consideration in law-making for the State Legal Adviser’s Office and the lawmakers.

 Surprisingly, most critics of hudud are similarly blind to not notice the underlying assumption that “non-Muslims have only the stake as potential criminals”.

Thus, the involuntary nature of involvement in criminal cases is the first reason why legal apartheid is not feasible.

Spillover effect of criminal justice system

 Most critics do recognise the problem arising when partners in the same crime – some being Muslim and the others non-Muslim – are tried under different judicial systems and given different punishments.

 Most ask if that would be fair for the criminals. Human rights lawyers will point to Article 8 of the Federal Constitution, which prohibits “discrimination against citizens on the ground only of religion… in any law …”

Politically speaking, can the Muslim community accept such inequality in the long run? Will pressure not gradually mount to have non-Muslim criminals tried under syariah law too, if the victims are Muslim?

 The implication is actually even wider than that.

 If trials under syariah criminal law turn out to deliver harsher punishments than those under

 common law, will there not be a tendency for Muslim criminals to engage and outsource the crimes to non-Muslims?

 On the other hand, if trials under syariah criminal law turn out to be more merciful, perhaps due to the evidence requirement, will not the reverse take place, that is non-Muslims outsourcing crimes to Muslims?

 Look at it this way: “crimes” are like “goods” for criminals, and punishments are the price they pay for committing crimes.

 When there are two different crime punishment systems, the one offering lower effective punishments (combining both the severity of punishments and the likelihood of getting convicted) will attract more crimes.

 The “spillover” effect is the second reason why legal apartheid is impossible.

Rightful stakeholders in syariah criminal code

 Analogously, within the same territory, vehicles can only drive on the left or on the right – you cannot say let those using fossil fuel drive on the right and those using biofuel drive on the left.

 You are bound to have catastrophes! If legal apartheid between these two is a myth, then syariah criminal law is either for all or for none. It cannot be only for some!

 Then, the decision whether to have hudud cannot be rested with just the Muslims alone. The non-Muslims have every right to speak up and be heard in the debate. Their objection must not be demonised as anti-Islam.

 Consumers buying electric appliances need not have knowledge about electrical engineering, or even be bothered about the complex design. They just need to know if the appliances will serve them well.

 Likewise, while the Islamic scholars – the functional equivalent of the electrical engineers in the analogy – may cite the Quran and Islamic sources in the debate, the ordinary citizens must be allowed to just employ a utilitarian attitude to the issue: will it deliver a better quality of justice?

 The Quranic requirements can be the frame of reference, but they must not be the premise of discussion, for the non-Muslims especially. After all, if I accept the Quran as the ultimate guide, I should have embraced Islam – why am I then remaining a non-Muslim?

 WONG CHIN HUAT earned his PhD on the electoral system and party system in West Malaysia from the University of Essex. He is a fellow at the Penang Institute, and a resource person for electoral reform lobby, Bersih 2.0.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 21 March 2015, 4:47 am and is filed under
Islam
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Mastermind of UMNO’s “UG”conspiracy achieved an unexpected coup within a year  when the Kelantan hudud enactment question completely drowned out all issues currently haunting UMNO and Najib

The mastermind of UMNO’s “UG” (Unity Government between UMNO and PAS) conspiracy achieved an unexpected coup within a year when the Kelantan hudud enactment question completely drowned out all the issues currently haunting UMNO and the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak – the 1MDB scandal; Anwar Ibrahim’s five-year jailing; Mongolian Altantunya Shaariibuu’s 2006 murder and conviction of two former police commandos Azila Hadri and  Sirul Azhar  with motives neither established nor pursued; the new jet for PM; the lavish spending on wedding of Najib’s daughter and above all, Najib’s survival as Prime Minister and UMNO President.

The latest bait in the UMNO UG conspiracy was unveiled only on March 27 last year when the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department in charge of Islamic affairs, Datuk Seri Jamil Khir Baharom, surprised even PAS leaders with his completely unanticipated overture in Parliament that the UMNO/Barisan Nasional federal government was ready to work with the PAS Kelantan state government to implement the hudud law in Kelantan.

The first  fruit of the latest gambit in the UMNO UG conspiracy was the re-enactment of the 1993 Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code as the 2015 Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code with slight amendments on 19th March 2015 and the second fruit, the notification by the PAS President, Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang to Parliament on March 18 to move a private member’s bill to implement  hudud law in Kelantan.

As orchestrated by the deep plot of the UMNO UG conspirators, these two fruits were achieved in furtherance of their real objective to destabilise, divide and destroy Pakatan Rakyat because PAS had to break ranks not only with Pakatan Rakyat parties but also betrayed its commitments to Pakatan Rakyat, viz:

*Firstly, violation of the Pakatan Rakyat Common Policy Framework 2010, which sets out the core principles and objectives of Pakatan Rakyat coalition, which does not include hudud law and implementation.

*Secondly,  violation of the Joint Statement of the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council on 28th September 2011 on hudud.

*Thirdly, violation of the report  made by the PAS Deputy  Mentri Besar, Dato Mohd Amar Abdullah to the  Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council of 8th February 2015 on four amendments to  the PAS Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code 1993, as what was presented to the Kelantan State Assembly and passed was an entirely new 71-clause Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code 2015.

*Fourthly, violation of the decision of the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council of March 12, 2015 that there should not be a new 2015 re-enactment of the 1993 Syariah Criminal Code but only the proposed amendments to the 1993 Enactment  by PAS Kelantan State Government.

*Fifthly, violation of the unanimous decisions of the Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council of Feb.8, 2015 that the proposed amendments to the Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code and proposed Private Member’s Bill on hudud implemantion should first be presented  to PR Majlis Pimpinan for discussion. Neither undertaking was met.

Hadi’s submission of a Private Member’s Bill on hudud implementation had come as a total surprise not only to DAP and PKR leaders and MPs, but to the majority of PAS leaders and MPs as well.

PAS secretary-general Datuk Mustafa Ali told The Malaysian Insider yesterday (20th March) that he had no knowledge of Hadi’s letter to Parliament when in yesterday’s New Straits Times PAS Assistant Secretary-General Datuk Takiyuddin Hassan was quoted as saying that Hadi would likely table the bill, although PAS headquarters had yet to decide which of its MPs would be asked to do it.

In actual fact, Hadi had on 18th March given notice to Parliament in his name to move a Private Member’s Bill on hudud implementation in the current meeting of Parliament which ends on April 9, 2015.

It would appear that despite the unanimous decision of Pakatan Rakyat Leadership Council on Feb. 8, 2015 that any Private Member’s Bill on hudud implementation should be presented first to the Council, not only were DAP and PKR leaders and MPs kept in the dark, even PAS leaders and MPs knew nothing about Hadi’s Private Member’s Bill beforehand until it was reported by the media.

It is for PAS leadership to decide on how  it runs its own party matters and arrive at its party decisions, but this is clearly an open defiance and violation of PR leadership decisions and operational principles.

The PAS leadership under Hadi had in fact  chalked up a longer list of violations of the two basic principles on which Pakatan Rakyat had operated for the past seven years since the formation of PR in April 2008 – the PR Common Policy Framework and the operational principle of consensus whereby every decision of PR must be by way of consensus of the three component parties of DAP, PKR and PAS.

The best example of PAS under Hadi violating these principles  was the Pakatan Rakyat Selangor crisis over a new Selangor Mentri Besar, where Hadi overruled a decision made by the PR Leadership Council which was fully attended PAS representatives – and after that, Hadi boycotted the PR Leadership Council meeting except for the Feb. 8, 2015 meeting held at PAS headquarters.

Hadi also did not attend the March 12, 2015 PR Leadership Council meeting, although it was scheduled specially so that he could be able to attend – but he subsequently  claimed that he had not been informed that there was such a meeting.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 21 March 2015, 12:41 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Pakatan Rakyat
,
PAS
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.