Section 114A and legal presumptions: Are they fair?

By
Art Harun
 | August 15, 2012

The Malaysian Insider

AUG 15 ― Many may not realize this but the law does make many presumptions about the subject matter of its governance, namely, us.

The most famous (infamous?) and perhaps harshest presumption that our law makes is in respect of drug trafficking. Section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952 stipulates that whoever is found guilty of drug trafficking shall be punished by death.

Making things a lot easy for the prosecution is a legal presumption imposed by Section 37 of that Act that any person who is found in possession of, among others, 15g or more of heroin or morphine or 200g or more of cannabis will be presumed to be a drug trafficker unless proven otherwise.

Without that legal presumption, the prosecution would, regardless of the quantity of the drug being in possession of the accused person, have to prove that he or she is a trafficker. That means, the prosecution would have to prove that the accused person has been doing any of the following acts, namely, “manufacturing, importing, exporting, keeping, concealing, buying, selling, giving, receiving, storing, administering, transporting, carrying, sending, delivering, procuring, supplying or distributing any dangerous drug otherwise than under the authority of the Act.”

Only after those facts are proven by the prosecution beyond any reasonable doubt can the accused be said to be a trafficker and convicted accordingly.

In any prosecution, the general rule is that the prosecution has to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt. That is premised upon the maxim that a person is innocent until proven guilty. Apart from that it is thought that the prosecution represents the State and the State has all the powers, investigative authorities and resources to prove a charge and thus it is only fair that the burden of proof be discharged by the State prosecutors.

However, taking the drug trafficking offence as an example, it is thought that securing a conviction would really be a difficult task if we were to follow the said general rule. Hence, the presumption.

How does the presumption work, you may ask? In Court, in a drug trafficking case, the prosecution just needs to prove that the accused was caught having in his or her possession say, 18g of heroin. That is it. No further fact needs to be proven by the prosecution.

Upon those facts being proven, the law presumes that the accused person is a trafficker. The burden of proof than shifts to the accused person to prove his innocence, namely that he is not a trafficker.

How does he do that? Well he could say he wasn’t in possession. Or he could say that the drug was not heroin. Or that the heroin found was less than 15g. Or he could attempt to show that he is a hopeless drug addict who consumes 18g of heroin in a week and he was just stockpiling! IT may work.

It may not work. Either way, it is his duty to prove that he is not a trafficker. In other words, he is presumed guilty until he proves otherwise.

That is how it works.

There are many other instances where the laws make presumptions, rightly or wrongly. Fairly or unfairly. The most interesting legal presumption is contained in Section 113 of the Evidence Act 1950. Hold on to your seats, ladies.

That Section presumes that a boy of under 13 years of age is unable to commit rape. Unlike the drug trafficking presumption above, this presumption of inability to commit rape is irrefutable. Meaning, that presumption cannot in any circumstances be denied.

So we go to Court. A slender 42kg lady of, say, 18 years old, all of 5 ft 1 inch, describes to the Judge how this boy, of 12 years 10 months of age, 5 ft 5 inches, weighing 58kg pounced on her one night, with a knife in hand and started to molest her.

She was powerless to defend herself. He just pinned her and slashed her hand in the process. Then he penetrated her. She fought. She has got all the bruises and swollen eyes to show. Medical reports show that she was indeed raped. There were scars and lacerations all over. Trace of the boy’s semen could be found in her vagina. DNA testing proves that the boy was the person who raped her. In fact there was a video recording of the whole act because unknown to the boy, the girl had managed to leave her iPhone camera switched on for the duration of the attack.

Guess what? That boy cannot be convicted. Period!

Now, if we talk about the mother of all draconian laws in Malaysia, the erstwhile Internal Security Act, things would even get murkier. All it needs for you to languish in Kamuntingville for at least 2 years (which may be extended for a further period of two years over and over again till Kingdom Come) is a certificate signed by the home minister saying that you are a threat to national security.

That’s it. And BOOM, you are in Kamunting doing the squats. And Dr Mahathir Mohamad has ensured that you will not be able to challenge that certificate no matter how unreasonable, unfair, untrue and un-halal that minister’s certificate is by restricting the Court’s power to review that certificate.

The law prescribed that the Court can only review procedural non-compliance. That’s all. Meaning the Court can only see whether your name is wrongly spelt and things like that.

Thank God Prime Minister Najib Razak had opted to repeal the ISA. Of course Dr Mahathir now said that we need a strong government so that we can revive the ISA. Well, whatever it is, we shall presume that Dr Mahathir knows what he is talking about.

Apart from the above, there are many instances where the law presumes an intention to commit an offence.

Basically, in any crime, there are two elements, namely, the intention (in latin, the “mens rea”) and the act (in latin, the “actus reus”). Both elements must be proven by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. With either one, the charge is not proven and the accused cannot be found guilty.

However, there is a body of offences called “strict liability” offences. Here, the intention does not have to be proven.

For instance, when one is accused of being in possession of pornographic materials, the prosecution does not have to prove that he or she has the intention to possess pornographic material. All that is needed to be done is for the prosecution to show that the accused is in possession of the material in question and that would suffice.

Why is it like that? Because if intention needs to be proven, the accused (in fact all accused persons) would just say they never knew the material was pornographic and therefore they never intended to commit that offence.

Beating the traffic light is another instance. The prosecution just needs to show that the accused had beaten the light. Then the laws presume that he or she had intended to do so. Without that presumption, no case would end in a conviction because all accused persons would just say that they never intended to beat the traffic light. They would say they accidentally step on the accelerator for example. Or that their brakes were not working. Things like that.

All these presumptions may sound unfair. However, in passing such laws, the Parliament has to balance the interest of the society as a whole, taking into account the mischief that the law seeks to prevent and its impact on the society if is effectively prevented against the interests and rights of the accused person. It is not an easy thing to do, achieving this balance. And sometimes, any decision that is made in this respect reeks of a certain level of arbitrariness, which is inevitable.

That brings us to the latest legal presumption that saw netizens being up in arms over the last few days culminating in an internet black-out day yesterday, namely, the presumptions raised by Section 114A of the Evidence Act 1950.

This Section was passed by the Parliament, quite in haste, if I may say so, some weeks ago. No other than heavyweights from the ruling party itself, in the form of the Umno Youth Chief YB Khairy Jamaluddin and supreme council member Deputy Higher Education Minister Datuk Abdullah, had asked for this piece of law be reviewed and reconsidered. The reaction for cyber-space was almost inevitable and it would be entirely superfluous for me to state it here.

After the black-out day yesterday, or rather during it, the prime minister apparently tweeted from London saying that he had asked the Cabinet to review the said section.

Section 114A provides:

“(1) A person whose name, photograph or pseudonym appears on any publication depicting himself as the owner, host, administrator, editor or sub-editor, or who in any manner facilitates to publish or re-publish the publication is presumed to have published or re-published the contents of the publication unless the contrary is proved.

(2) A person who is registered with a network service provider as a subscriber of a network service on which any publication originates from is presumed to be the person who published or re-published the publication unless the contrary is proved.

(3) Any person who has in his custody or control any computer on which any publication originates from is presumed to have published or re-published the content of the publication unless the contrary is proved.

(4) For the purpose of this section—

(a) “network service” and “network service provider” have the meaning assigned to them in section 6 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998[Act 588]; and

(b) “publication” means a statement or a representation, whether in written, printed, pictorial, film, graphical, acoustic or other form displayed on the screen of a computer.”

While admittedly, offences involving publications and re-publications of offensive materials on the internet are difficult to prove and that may necessitate a certain level of legal presumption of guilt in order to achieve the balance which I’d written about above, it is the width and breadth of this section as it is presently worded that makes the presumptions rather disconcerting, if not offensive and repugnant to freedom of speech and freedom and liberty.

Under sub-section (1), anybody could be presumed to have published or republished offensive materials just because his or her name or even pseudonym appears in any publication on the internet! Even more, if his or her photograph appears with the publication, which could also invite a charge and a presumption that he or she is guilty.

So, imagine this. I decide to be naughty. I then publish an article that is seditious. I use your name and put your picture. That’s it. You are presumed guilty. And it is your duty to prove your innocence!

Sub-section 2 is even more worrying for those places with a shared network. I run an office for example. I have a network registered under my name. My staff uses the network to post some derogatory remark on a blog. I am presumed guilty. The same with those outlets that provide free Wi-Fi service.

The ridiculousness of sub-section 3 needs not be stated. I think everybody could see that sub-section 3 is so wide in its application that even internet café owners would now have to close down for fear of prosecution.

As I had stated earlier, the burden of proof rests on the prosecution and the State because the State is the one with the all the powers and investigative authorities and machineries. For the State to promulgate this kind of legal presumption gives new meaning to the word inefficiency and investigative disability.

By reversing the legal burden and shifting the burden of proving one’s innocence to him or herself, rather than discharging the burden of proof that should rightly rest with the State, the State is showing a wild disregard to its own function as a body with the all the investigative authorities and powers.

I have stated that in certain specific cases, legal presumptions may be a prudent way of prosecuting a criminal case in order to strike a balance between the interest of the society as a whole and the rights and interests of the accused person. However, Section 114A is hardly a showcase for such balance.

The call by the Honourable Prime Minister for his colleagues to review Section 114A could not thus come at more opportune a moment. ―
art-harun.blogspot.com

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 16 August 2012, 12:14 pm and is filed under
Court
,
IT
,
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


‘Tanda Putera’ doesn’t unite but divides

 — The Malaysian Insider

Aug 15, 2012

AUG 15 — The jury is already out on “Tanda Putera” even before the Datin Paduka Shuhaimi Baba film has hit the silver screen.

From the little scraps of information gleaned from one preview, the script, Shuhaimi herself and chatter within the crew, the movie presents one view of the May 13, 1969 race riot.

A view that is not shared by many, especially those who feel it is an inaccurate portrayal of events on that blood-spilled day in Kuala Lumpur.

And just like the riot, the movie has become divisive, not unifying.

The filmmaker denied today her movie was promoting a pro-Malay agenda or that it featured a character based on DAP lawmaker Lim Kit Siang that was portrayed in a negative light in scenes depicting the May 13, 1969 race riots, as suggested by some Umno blogs to the chagrin of Pakatan Rakyat (PR) leaders.

“This is not a movie to raise dissent. It is one to bring people together. It is just a movie about two great men. If they are from Umno, that’s just history. If they are also Malay, it is also our history.

“We are filmmakers, not an organ to produce propaganda,” Shuhaimi said.

One wonders if anyone else can produce another view of the May 13 race riot and get the same kind of funding that “Tanda Putera” received — RM4.8 million from the National Film Development Corporation (Finas) and the Multimedia Development Corporation (Mdec).

The issue is simple. The movie is about Malaysian history and two national figures are featured — the late Tun Abdul Razak Hussein and the late Tun Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman. Now if they are depicted accurately, why is the director taking artistic licence with other figures and movements linked to the bloody riot?

The complaints about the movie reflect the simple truth, that only official versions of history approved by the victors or the government of the day will be produced and shown, in this case this coming November.

But any other version or narrative is dismissed, ignored and shunned without even the remotest possibility of funding or a showing in local cinemas.

Malaysia and Malaysians deserve better than being fed the official drivel that the likes of Shuhaimi is putting out in “Tanda Putera”.

Let’s have a true flowering of the arts and encourage more to depict our history as accurately as possible. After all, May 13 belongs to all Malaysians, not just one view or the National Operations Council’s version of events.

Shuhaimi’s film also isn’t it, especially if it is just the Umno viewpoint because after all, there have been claims that some politicians from the party had a hand in it.

We haven’t learnt anything from May 13, 1969, have we? One wonders why such a movie was made in the first place.

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 16 August 2012, 1:14 am and is filed under
DAP
,
History
,
Media
,
nation building
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Why then am I featured and defamed in Tanda Putera’s official Facebook page as having urinated at flagpole bearing Selangor flag at  residence of the then Selangor Mentri Besar provoking May 13, 1969 riots?

I am supposed to be assured by the clarification of the director of the May 13 film,  Tanda Putera, Datin Paduka Shuhaimi Baba that I am not even featured in the footage of the film, but I am not.

This is because Shuhaimi has failed to give a satisfactory explanation why  I had been featured and defamed in
Tanda Putera’s
 original official Facebook page as having urinated at the flagpole bearing the Selangor flag at the residence of the then Selangor Mentri Besar Datuk Harun Idris and provoking the May 13, 1969 riots.

The caption of a photo portraying me being manhandled, which were later taken down, read:
“Lim Kit Siang telah kencing di bawah tiang bendera Selangor yang terpacak di rumah menteri besar Selangor ketika itu, Harun Idris”
. The photo and caption was posted in the album in the
“Tanda Putera” Facebook
 titled
“Peristiwa-peristiwa yang dimuatkan di dalam filem ini”
 (Events depicted in this movie).

Shuhaimi’s explanation that  the creators of the film had received many photographs from netizens which were shared on the Facebook page, including the offending picture, and that it was removed from the Facebook page after complaints were received about the photo, is neither credible nor acceptable.

This is because the defamatory and baseless allegation that I had urinated at the flagpole at the Selangor Mentri Besar’s residence, and provoked the May 13, 1969 riots,  was made by
Tanda Putera
 official Facebook page itself, and not a “shared information” from netizens – conveying  the very clear impression that it was abstracted from the film proper itself.

Unless there is a satisfactory and adequate explanation or accounting for the defamatory reference featuring me in the Tanda Putera official Facebook page, I reserve the right to take legal action against such defamation.

It is most deplorable and reprehensible that Shuhaimi had taken almost four long weeks since the first publication by Malaysiakini of its report
“New May 13 movie courts controversy”
 on 20th July 2012, to state that I am not even featured in the footage of the film – allowing the legion of UMNO/BN cybertroopers to escalate their campaign of downright lies and dangerous falsehoods based on the movie’s alleged  “urination” episode to accuse me of provoking the May 13, 1969 riots  although I had repeatedly explained that I was not in Kuala Lumpur on May 11, 12 and 13, 1969.

I was in Sabah on July 20 on a three-day visit with DAP MP for Segambut Lim Lip Eng when Malaysiakini first carried the report on the May 13 film.

On the very same night at the DAP Inaman Sepanggar ceramah, I referred to the Malaysiakini report on the May 13 film and denied in the strongest possible terms:

That I had “urinated at the foot of the flagpole bearing the Selangor flag at the then Selangor MB’s Harun Idris’ house” as claimed by the movie’s earlier Facebook page;

That I had  provoked the May 13 riots as I was simply not in Kuala Lumpur on May 11, 12 and 13 of 1969!

Even the photograph that was used in the movie’s earlier Facebook page was not a photograph taken in 1969 but was from a different incident in Sabah 15 years later in 1984!

Yesterday, Shuhaimi said much research had gone into ensuring her film was historically accurate, such as studying documented materials and photographs to make sure the scenes were backed by historical facts.  She referred to the NOC report and interviews with former Inspector-General of Police Tun Hanif Omar.

Did the White Paper issued by the National Operations Council (NOC) on 9th October 1969 or the book by Tunku Abdul Rahman “May 13 – Before and After” or interviews with Hanif, who was the Special Branch officer attached to the NOC, or Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, who was then the secretary of NOC,  produce any information on my urination at the Selangor Mentri Besar’s house or any such urination incident by anyone for that matter?

I have not seen the film “Tanda Putera” but from the trailer, legitimate questions are raised as to whether the film can lay claim to  being “historically accurate” with reference to the May 13 riots.

For instance, there was a scene of a procession of participants carrying posters bearing Mao Tse Tung’s picture. Is this historically accurate  when in 1969 it was an offence even possessing Mao’s books, let alone carrying Mao’s photograph poster?

Shuhaimi said that the controversial May 13 riot scene only lasts about 10 minutes of the 115-minute film, but she should know that any unfair and tendentious portrayal of the May 13 riots in these 10 minutes is  not only capable of overshadowing the rest of the 105 minutes of the film, but have the disastrous effect of dividing instead of uniting Malaysians.

Do we want to continue to allow the May 13 past to haunt and divide Malaysians or do we want to move forward as one united people building a better and brighter future for all Malaysians, learning from the lessons of May 13?

                This entry was posted on Thursday, 16 August 2012, 4:54 pm and is filed under
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Blaming Dr M’s faults on everyone else

— Pak Sako

The Malaysian Insider

Aug 16, 2012

AUG 16 — Erna Mahyuni’s opinion piece in The Malaysian Insider entitled “Why Dr M is Umno’s (and Anwar’s) fault” is almost faultless in its humour.

For readers who did not “get” it, I clarify below its satire. I number the relevant paragraphs from the article for easy cross-reference.

This commentator is of the belief that good humour should not go unnoticed or, worse, be mistaken for serious writing.

Joke No. 1: It’s all just “missteps”

Responding to a question about whether former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad should be condemned “for all he’s done”, the author asserts that Mahathir did not deserve to be vilified in spite of all of his “missteps” (paragraph 3).

“Missteps” should receive no vilification, so long as the person “really did believe his decisions were for the greater good” (paragraph 6).

Here are a couple of those missteps that Mahathir and his administration should never be vilified for:

•  the missteps that might have been involved in the loss of roughly RM100 billion in four financial scandals that occurred during his tenure (see Barry Wain, Malaysian Maverick);

•  the misstep of instructing journalists to deny the then-outgoing prime minister Hussein Onn media coverage (as alleged by Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in an NTV7 interview, available on YouTube as “Pak Lah balas serangan Tun Dr Mahathir”);

•  the role in the Operasi Lalang misstep in 1987 (see Lim Kit Siang, “Mahathir rewriting history on Ops Lalang”, blog.limkitsiang.com, 9 Feb 2011);

•  the missteps in the 1988 judicial crisis (see pages 140-142 in Shimon Shetreet et al’s The Culture of Judicial Independence);

•  missteps in the 1998 bailout of Konsortium Perkapalan Berhad, a corporation owned by Mirzan Mahathir (page 170 in S. Haggard’s book, The Political Economy of the Asian Financial Crisis).

John D. Rockefeller had once said: “Don’t blame the marketing department. The buck stops with the chief executive’’. Rockefeller was obviously wrong.

Joke No. 2: Blame everyone else but the culprit

The title of the author’s article, “Why Dr M is Umno’s (and Anwar’s) fault”, conveys the impression that all Mahathirian phenomena are explainable by Umno and Anwar Ibrahim. Or “circumstances”, as when “Umno” and “Anwar” are conflated into one word (paragraph 6).

The absurd implication is that it is Umno and Anwar Ibrahim who ought to accept responsibility for Dr Mahathir’s actions and possible character and personality flaws. A portent of a legal mess.

Or that it was Umno and Anwar Ibrahim who had sought out Dr Mahathir to begin with, and not the other way around. Here’s one for surrealism.

The author goes the extra mile in the final paragraph: we “should not condemn Dr Mahathir because in many ways, he reflects all the worst in ourselves”.

In other words, we are not shaped by an administration’s socioeconomic policies and the period’s political-party culture; we, the people, asked for these— money politics, mass privatisations, the nurturing of a corporate-capitalist elite, and so on.

Joke No. 3: Make a bad thing sound good with goofy hyperboles

Dr Mahathir, the “über-controlling, extremely paranoid individual we know” (paragraph 5).

Here the impression is had of the friendly (though admittedly strange) next-door neighbour who kindly offers the occasional home-made pie.

Being brief about it would have certainly aided readability, like editing the said clause down to “authoritarian prime minister” or (for über-brevity) “autocrat”. But that would defeat the purpose— the joke would be defused and all we’d be left with is feeling scared.

Joke No. 4: Worship. And madly

“Dr Mahathir is probably the greatest politician our country ever had or will ever produce” (paragraph 15).

The impact of the author’s joke relies on the word “greatest” being left undefined. No evidence is given to support the claim, except perhaps sheer captivation. Or perhaps it refers to the suggestion that no other Malaysian prime minister can lay claim to as many “missteps”.

But no matter. Another comic kick swiftly follows: The absolute degree of confidence that Malaysia will probably never have a great prime minister ever again. Which is more a reason to be depressed than to be merry (bear run on the stock market, ad perpetuum).

Joke No. 5: The comical contradiction

“Malaysia needs statesmen, not politicians… Not Anwar… Not court jesters like Perkasa” (paragraph 15).

Here a contradictory self-reference is invoked to elicit the laughter of disbelief. For observe that if we eliminate court jesters like Perkasa, who then shall entertain the patron saint of Perkasa?

Joke No. 6: Hilarity by resort to honesty

Politicians may play complex roles and be expected to manoeuvre in complex environments, but that is hardly excuse for binning ethics or playing games with the public trust.

To sum up, therefore, with the author’s words: “Malaysia needs… leaders with vision, compassion and a sense of honour. Sadly, those traits do not seem to manifest in Malaysian politicians” (paragraph 15).

Indeed, and so much for the greatest politician our country will ever produce.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 17 August 2012, 12:52 am and is filed under
Mahathir
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


‘DAP’s haram’ accuser ‘rewarded’ RM2m?

By
Teoh El Sen
 | August 17, 2012

Free Malaysia Today

 PETALING JAYA: A religious teacher who last week labelled DAP as haram (forbidden) to Muslims has apparently received a RM2 million cheque for his school from the government.

Abdullah Sa’amah, the founder of Pondok Geting (Pondok An Najmiah) in Tumpat, was photographed receiving a mock cheque for the amount from Umno supreme council member Mustapa Mohamed.

Mustapa, the International Trade and Industry Minister and Jeli MP, on Tuesday uploaded a photo of the handing-over ceremony on Facebook.

In the caption, Mustapa explained that he was “visiting pondok Hj Abdullah to hand over a contribution of RM2 million. Four months ago, Muhyidding Yassin visited and promised help”.

The cheque was from the Jawatankuasa Projek-projek Khas (JPPK), Jabatan Pembangunan Persekutuan Kelantan (Special Projects Committee, Kelantan Development Department), and the recepient was named as “Tetuan Pondok An Najmiah”.

The photo was picked up by pro-opposition blogs. Roketkini.com and keadilandaily.com asked if the RM2 million was a “reward” from BN-Umno.

They noted that the money was given just a week after the comments by Abdullah Sa’amah were published in Umno-owned Malay daily, Utusan Malaysia.

They also claimed Abdullah is often a ceramah speaker at Umno events.

On Mustapa’s Facebook page, some of the comments posted were: “Janji Ditepati” (Promises fulfilled), the Merdeka Day theme this year and BN’s most recent election campaign slogan.

One Muhammad Faris Mohamed Abidin wrote: “Wau bagi fatwa dapat 2juta eh.. best nye..” (wow, issue a fatwa receive two million eh… that’s so great) while a few others said that this was “rezeki from Allah” (sustenance from Allah]

Forbidden and sinful

On the Aug 7, Utusan front-paged a report where Abdullah was quoted as saying that it was “forbidden and sinful” for Muslims to support DAP as the party openly opposed an Islamic state and the implementation of hudud.

He also said that Muslims should not support any of DAP’s allies as it would help the predominantly Chinese party, which he alleged was filled with “kafir harbi”(belligerent infidels), gain more power.

The religious teacher had also told the Umno mouthpiece that it was acceptable to support the MCA and MIC as the two parties recognised Islam’s pre-eminence.

Meanwhile, Mustapa told FMT that the cheque had nothing to do with the Utusan report.

“It has nothing to do with [allegations of a reward]… the DPM was there four months ago. I was there to deliver that promise. That’s all I have to say,” he said.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 17 August 2012, 3:09 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Di manakah Lim Kit Siang pada 11, 12 dan 13 Mei 1969?

Lim Kit Siang dan 13 Mei – Episod 1

                This entry was posted on Friday, 17 August 2012, 4:44 pm and is filed under
DAP
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Lawyers instructed to institute legal proceedings against defamation against me in Tanda Putera’s official Facebook page

The accusation by Aida Fitra Buyong, the executive producer of the movie, Tanda Putera, that I was being “defensive”  over the publication of my photograph on the May 13 film’s official Facebook page alleging that I had urinated at the flagpole bearing the Selangor flag at the then Selangor Mentri Besar’s residence, provoking May 13, 1969 riots, is most scandalous, outrageous and offensive.

Do the creators of the May 13 film expect me to keep silent while they concoct lies about the May 13, 1969 riots, like the total fiction about my urination at the then Selangor Mentri Besar’s residence provoking May 13, 1969 riots when I was never in Kuala Lumpur on May 11, 12 and 13, 1969?

Would the film’s creators, including director Datin Paduka Shuhaimi and executive producer accept lies and falsehoods told about them without attempting to defend their own dignity and  integrity?

Aida’s accusation has in fact debunked the claim by Tanda Putera’s director Datin Paduka Shuhaimi Baba that the May 13 riot scene, which lasts about 10 minutes of the 115-minute film, was historically accurate.

Today’s “
The Malaysian Insider
” report “
Film producer calls Kit Siang ‘defensive’ over May 13 picture
” by Hafidz Baharom reads:

Pesona Pictures Sdn Bhd, the producer of the movie, is now accusing Lim of being defensive over the publication of his photograph which had sparked widespread condemnation from the DAP parliamentary leader and his political colleagues.

Lim has repeatedly pointed out that he was only a young politician in 1969 and was not even in the federal capital during the riots.

But Umno blogs have gone on overdrive, and have been pushing the message to voters that it was Lim who had sparked the riots.

Earlier this year, an administrator of the “Tanda Putera” social network fan page had posted a photograph of Lim being “manhandled”, with a caption alleging it was taken after he urinated on the flagpole in the Selangor mentri besar’s residential compound in Kuala Lumpur before the May 13 riots.

The picture was removed last month after personal attacks and threats were allegedly made against the cast and crew of the film.

Lim said yesterday that he reserved the right to take legal action against such defamatory references featuring him in the “Tanda Putera” official Facebook page.

“Why is he so defensive?

“All those photographs were already widely available on the Internet,” said Aida Fitri Buyong, Pesona Pictures executive producer.

She told The Malaysian Insider yesterday that the pictures and captions published on the “Tanda Putera” Facebook fan page were submitted by netizens and were already widely available before being posted on the site.

“We went through those photos to research on the wardrobe, the scenery, the cars used and such just to make the scenes in the film authentic,” she said.

I am not aware that apart from Tanda Putera’s official Facebook page which had used the caption:
“Lim Kit Siang telah kencing di bawah tiang bendera Selangor yang terpacak di rumah menteri besar Selangor ketika itu, Harun Idris”
, such a caption which is based on a wild and reckless lie had ever been posted anywhere on cyberspace.

In view of the reckless accusation by Tanda Putera’s executive producer, compounding the earlier defamation against me on the film’s official Facebook page, I am instructing my lawyers to institute legal proceedings relating to the defamation.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 17 August 2012, 4:53 pm and is filed under
Court
,
Media
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Putting ‘Tanda Putera’ in its place

— The Malaysian Insider

Aug 17, 2012

AUG 17 — Freedom of expression. That really is the right of all people. Be it the “Tanda Putera” movie producers or the public, the ones who will eventually watch the controversial film this November.

So, all Malaysians who feel that “Tanda Putera” is a) a political gimmick b) a potentially divisive movie funded by the government c) a skewed take on an event owned by all Malaysians should boycott the movie.

Just as the movie producers say that it is their right to make the movie, it is the right of every Malaysian to rebuff what they feel is politics masquerading as arts.

Yet, if there is anyone at fault, it must be those who financed the RM4.8 million movie, i.e. the National Film Development Corporation Malaysia (Finas) and Multimedia Development Corporation (MDeC).

One wonders if Finas and MDeC will finance other movies that have alternate takes on the May 13 riots.

After all, it is in the interest of freedom of expression and the right to make a movie.

But that is not likely to happen. Instead movies that promote the official narrative will be produced, ignoring historical facts and reality.

“Tanda Putera” is a work of fiction, not history. And as a work of fiction, it is a divisive take on our collective history.

See it if you must, but best dumped in the rubbish bin of history for its political fiction.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 17 August 2012, 9:47 pm and is filed under
Media
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Selamat Hari Raya Aidilfitri

                This entry was posted on Friday, 17 August 2012, 5:29 pm and is filed under
Personal
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


The mark of princes… or pretenders?

By
Rom Nain
 | 1:56PM Aug 16, 2012

Malaysiakini

Prominent, though not necessarily cerdik, Malaysians evidently love to make inane comments. And in public at that. It’s, like, become a national pastime.

Politicians do it all the time. And since the mainstream Malaysian media of the press and television virtually only provide coverage of BN politicians, it often seems as though it’s only BN politicians, invariably from Umno, who were born with foot in mouth disease.

Or were trained as performing berok.

That’s the small price you pay, I guess for not providing non-BN politicians and members of civil society access to the media that everybody knows you own.

But while BN politicians seem to have a monopoly on making stupid public statements, once in a while we do get others, often their apparatchiks, elbowing their way in, equally anxious to make utter ninnies of themselves.

And nowhere has this been more obvious in recent times than in the comments made by the makers of that new drama-zaman-ini, Tanda Putera.

I have no intention, of course, of falling into the trap of ‘reviewing’ a movie that I have not seen nor am likely to view.

But some of the comments made by the makers of the movie at a press conference yesterday, particularly those by its director, Shuhaimi Baba (centre in photo), were quite hilarious, in a kind of tragic comedy way, that I just felt they deserve some assessment.

The first was the rather dim assertion by the director that “We are filmmakers, not an organ to produce propaganda”.

Yeah, right.

Listen, as with most of these ‘artistic creations’, context is all-important.

First, this is NOT a Tom and Jerry cartoon feature that you produced.

Indeed, one report has the director stressing that “The movie is about our history…”. Another has her saying, “It is just a movie about two great men. If they are from Umno, that’s just history. If they are also Malay, it is also our history.”

Contentious accounts of the distant past

So, I’m sure it doesn’t require the author of Interlok  to tell these ‘filmmakers’ that when you deal with history, you are invariably dealing with different, often contentious, accounts, often of the distant past.

And no matter how much ‘research’ you may conduct, depending on the diversity and veracity of your sources, you are invariably going to come up with a particular account, more so when you have 115 minutes to tell your side of the story in a ‘dramatic’ way.

After all, history be damned, your 115-minute movie would also have to sell, right?

Or else there’d be another RM4.8 million more of the taxpayers’ money, courtesy of the funding from those national bodies, Finas and MDec, flushed down the toilet.

So, let’s cut out all this crap about film (historical film?), like other media, being about providing ‘random accounts of random events’.

Fact is, there’s always the element (and process) of selection. And journalists, broadcasters, even filmmakers like the makers of Tanda Putera would be wise to remember the title of the late, great Howard Zinn’s memoirs, You can’t be neutral on a moving train.

So, enough of all this silly, feigned innocence about “not knowing the implications of my work”.

Even my 11-year old daughter can’t get away with a line like that, let alone an ‘acclaimed’ film director who, indeed, has had some previous experience making ‘historical’ movies – this, after all, is the same director who, in 2007, came up with another ‘historical’ movie, 1957: Hati Malaya (1957: Heart of Malaya), isn’t it?

And when your movie is largely, if not totally, funded by particular state-related agencies, I think you should be just that wee bit circumspect about implying, if not exactly making bold claims of, “independence”, being “historically accurate” and “ideologically untainted”.

Come on, this is Malaysia, for heaven’s sake, a country where ideas of ‘artistic freedom’ and ‘creative licence’ need to be digested together with the less-appetising realities of authoritarian control and the implications of state funding .

All this aside, evidently  in order to belittle the many criticisms hurled at the accuracy of Tanda Putera’s depiction of the May 13, 1969 riots, at the same press conference, Shuhaimi stressed that only about 10 minutes of the 115 minutes plus movie were about May 13.

Let me make that more quantitatively impressive for her by stating that ‘only 8.69 percent of the movie deals with the May 13 riots’.

And even then, as Shuhaimi further stresses, this less than 10 percent of the movie merely functions as a ‘backgrounder’ to the bigger story of these two ‘putera’, one of whom coincidentally happens to be the late father of the present PM who, in turn, is facing a general election soon.

It’s not the duration that counts

But, as any student of film, semiotics or semiology, will tell us, it’s not the duration of the segment that counts.

Indeed, a particular film segment may only last for five minutes, yet, again depending on context, on the overall structure of the movie, on the underlying message provided by the segment, those five minutes – or 10 minutes/8.69 percent – of the movie could easily provide the very foundation of the movie.

Like personal memories of a horrific past, May 13, 1969 still resonates quite unhappily and uneasily for many of us who were around at the time.

It certainly needs to be discussed openly and rationally in many arenas and, possibly, may even serve as the backdrop to any romanticised  account of our dead ‘leaders’, as asserted by the makers of Tanda Putera.

But, when the date is  exploited by the racists in our midst to assert supremacy, to scare us from thinking of a more inclusive alternative future – as it is perennially done come election time, as it is being done now – whatever the protestations of the makers of Tanda Putera, we really need to be vigilant.

At the very least, we need to ask why such a movie was made in the first place.

________

ROM NAIN is a media analyst and academic who is weary of incompetent, unethical leaders and their apologists and spin doctors in the media who try to get away with murder while professing to rub shoulders with God’s angels.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 17 August 2012, 10:00 am and is filed under
Media
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Who have conned the Chinese in Malaysia?

CPI
 | 17 August 2012 08:20

CPI introduction

We are reproducing below an excerpt from a former MCA insider who has left the country for good. The excerpt is from his letter responding to a request from his friend asking him to consider a return to Malaysia.

The excerpt provides a personal but important perspective of the role of non-Malay parties in the Barisan Nasional. It has been reproduced with the consent of the writer whose identity we’re withholding.

An article from The Star provides the background to this disclosure.

YONG PENG: DAP’s long-term political agenda is to join Barisan Nasional in a bid to protect its supreme position in Penang, said MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek.

    “DAP politicians are like any other politicians, for them it is the thirst for power.

    “Penang has limited resources and how long can (Penang Chief Minister) Lim Guan Eng tender his land?” Dr Chua said, adding that the DAP hoped to see the MCA disappear and be replaced in Barisan.

    He urged the Chinese community not to be conned by the Opposition party.

 (extract from the newspaper on Aug 4)

Excerpt from letter by the MCA insider

From my experience with MCA and the people whom I had worked with in the party, I can only say that most of them (from Lee San Choon, Koon Swan, Liong Sik, Kim Sai, Ka Ting, Tee Keat and all the other people at federal and state level) KNOW that the Chinese in Malaysia is not ever going to be in a position to influence the direction of how the country is to be governed, i.e. to say anything that affects MAJOR policies.

There’s just this denial syndrome that non-Umno parties are just there for window-dressing; so the next best thing to do is scoop up the scraps Umno throw their way… except Taib and PBB who take the lion’s share as well!

From the many, many sessions of central committee meetings and brainstorming, seminars, courses, etc, the one main thing to emerge is to only defend or safeguard Chinese position in education and economic sectors … we’re down to TAR College, Utar and Chinese business interests which, sad to say, …is playing to Umno whims and patronage… macam crony business.

The rest in the SME (small and medium industries) can pray to God and hope to survive and are at the mercy of the idiots who run the bureaucracy.

There is NO hope ever under Umno that Chinese position will improve because the OVERRIDING philosophy since May 13 is that non Malay/Muslims are to be assimilated (much like the Borg in Star Trek).

That is why MCA is always fighting ghosts; Umno is always lying, even when the truth is exposed about their true intention.

MCA people know this and pretend to fight for Chinese when they know they are only protecting their personal interests/financial gain, through Umno patronage.

The BN was never a coalition; it is and always has been an illusion created by Umno to present an imaginary front to the world that the people represented by the various races and parties support them.

[Our elites] cheat and bribe their way in elections and steal what they can, when they can, with impunity. They not only do that, they find ways to criminalise the victims!! That takes them ten levels above the Somali pirates!

To cut a long story short, and to answer your question about going back, even if Penang booms further under DAP, the short answer is NO; I’ve burnt my bridges … It’s just too hard to ever hope that they will ever understand the meaning of a civil society, let alone try to forge one in the years ahead, even if PKR takes over Putrajaya… my prediction is that the worst is yet to come. I hope I’ll be proven wrong in my lifetime.

Hudud has always been used as a weapon to frighten the Chinese and some extremists in PAS may have been used by Umno/Perkasa to split PKR, so MCA is just playing the propaganda game to try to win back some Chinese votes. Umno on the other hand is using [the Malay fear of] Chinese political power to frighten Malays.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 17 August 2012, 5:13 pm and is filed under
MCA
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Hari Raya Aidilfitri 2012 Message: Rendezvous with greatness

I wish all Muslims in Malaysia Selamat Hari Raya Aidilfitri.

On this auspicious occasion, non-Muslims join their Muslim compatriots in Malaysia to make this important Islamic calender a national celebration.

With the 55th Merdeka Day/49th Malaysia Day around the corner, this is a fit occasion for all Malaysians regardless of race, religion, region, class, age or sex to reaffirm our common national identity and destiny to build a nation strongly founded on the principles of democracy, justice, soliidarity, integrity and good governance.

Malaysians are bound together to a common future – either all Malaysians regardless of race, religion, region, class, age or sex unite to forge a progreesive and prosperous future for all Malaysians, or we will all suffer from man-made weaknesses and divisions which will prevent the country from fully exploiting her human and natural resources.

Let all patriotic Malaysians answer the call of the times – to work to achieve Malaysia’s rendezvous with greatness as a people and nation.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 18 August 2012, 11:25 am and is filed under
Islam
,
nation building
,
Personal
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tweets from Sabah

Tweets
@limkitsiang

Aug 19, 10:43am

Selamat Hari Raya Aidilfitri, Maaf Zahir Batin. Semoga semua rakyat bergembira di hari yg mulia ini, berbahagia dgn kehidupan yg lebih cerah

Aug 18, 3:51pm

Otw to Kota Marudu but never come across worse road conditions than long Kukut/Mantanau stretch! Real shame – road to Fed Minister’s constituency

Aug 18, 4:09pm

Trip to Kota Marudu was homecoming for Sabah DAP Chmn Sri Tanjung State Assemblyman Jimmy Wong who was born here n spent his first 16 years

Aug 19, 12:15am

Attended Kg Bavang Jamal Kudat ceramah Shocked to hear water pipes installed since 1986 but without water for 26 years – real electioneer rip-off

Aug 19, 1:38am

Real shame ‘Tip of Borneo’, Msia’s great tourist attraction, neglected by Fed/Sabah state govts, Tribute to Chong Kah Keat for services to tourism

Aug 19, 9:59am

Very pleasant night at Tip of Borneo – indeed “best sunset, best surf, best wind in Borneo”. Highly recommended to all Msians- know your country

                This entry was posted on Sunday, 19 August 2012, 11:53 am and is filed under
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tweets from Sabah 2

Tweets
@limkitsiang

Aug 20, 2:04am

My Sabah interior trip proves 2b a Debunk “Janji Ditepati” tour – with every stop producing evidence Umno/BN Govt failed 2fulfill promises

Aug 20, 2:13am

Firstly in initial trip 2KotaMarudu, atrocious stretch of Ulu Kukut road which qualifies 2b described as worst in Msia 4 easily some 7years

Aug 20, 8:10am

(2) Prime tourist attraction Tip of Borneo pioneered/developed by ChongKahKiat neglected by Fed/state govts – Janji Tidak Ditepati!

Aug 20, 8:16am

(3)KgBavangJamal Kudat -water pipe provided since 1986 but no piped water in last 26 years. Janji Tidak DiTepati. Common phenomenon in Sabah

Aug 20, 8:27am

(4) Controversy 2build world’s tallest 10storey 108ft high RM5mil Mazu statue in Kudat unresolved despite 2006 approval by Kudat Town Board

Aug 20, 8:35am

Sad 2revisit abandoned Kudat site of Mazu statue – RM1mil 20ft platform completed with head n granite carvings parts of statue strewn @ site

Aug 20, 8:44am

End-2007 DPMNajib urged Kudat Mazu dispute be settled amicably. Will highlight freedom of religion n promote tourism. Janji Tidak Ditepati

Aug 20, 8:50am

(5)KgMasangkong Matunggong ppl collected rain water 4use – failure 2provide basic infrastructure facilities 49 yrs after Msia. Janji Tidak..

Aug 20, 8:57am

(6) In Ranau evidence galore Sabah afflicted problems of 2Cs n 2Is – crime corruption IllegalImmigrants Infrastructure . JanjiTidakDitepati

                This entry was posted on Monday, 20 August 2012, 11:52 am and is filed under
Najib Razak
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


On YouTube, Kit Siang opens up about Malaysia’s darkest chapter

The Malaysian Insider
 | August 19, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 19 — Claiming to have been maligned in the mainstream media and by pro-Umno bloggers over the film “Tanda Putera”, the DAP’s parliamentary leader Lim Kit Siang has taken to YouTube to recount his version of events surrounding the bloody racial riots of May 13, 1969 — one of the darkest chapters in the country’s history that is still shrouded in secrecy.

In the past few weeks, Lim Kit Siang’s political enemies have accused him of instigating the May 13 riots that took place 43 years ago after hype over local filmmaker Datin Paduka Shuhaimi Baba’s latest movie — a historical portrayal of Malaysia’s first two prime ministers amid the racial bloodbath — went into overdrive.

A photograph posted on the film’s Facebook page and its controversial caption painted Lim — then a budding politician in the DAP — as being arrested for desecrating the national flag by urinating on it, triggering an outcry from the Ipoh-Timor federal lawmaker and his colleagues in the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) opposition pact.

Lim has threatened to sue the filmmakers for defamation. But faced with repeated attacks over what he says is an inaccurate retelling of history, he has decided to mount his own defence through a six-part series of short interviews broadcast on popular video-sharing site, YouTube.

The video clips (
https://www.youtube.com/user/roketkinidotcom
), produced by the DAP’s publication unit, Roketkini.com, were first uploaded on August 12. In them, Lim narrates his experience of events leading up to and surrounding May 13, 1969.

In the first clip, he refutes allegations that he was in the national capital when the riots first broke out, relating that the closest to Kuala Lumpur he was before the ill-fated date was neighbouring Petaling Jaya, where he had returned from Malacca to rest after a punishing night of awaiting the results of the May 10, 1969 general elections.

“On May 11, 12, 13, I was never in Kuala Lumpur,” Lim said, adding that he had then headed back to Malacca where he had thanked supporters before flying out to Sabah for another round of party work in the country’s easternmost state.

Lim related that he first heard there were “troubles in Kuala Lumpur” on the night of May 13 at around 7pm, while giving s speech in Kota Kinabalu.

He also debunked allegations that he was a important DAP leader at the time, saying he held the position of secretary in the organisation and editor of party paper The Rocket, but said he felt few knew his role as the then national political landscape was filled with labour and socialist giants like former trade union secretary-general V. David and Tan Sri Dr Tan Chee Khoon, the leading opposition figure in Parliament from 1964 to 1978.

“I feel that in general, there were few who knew who I was,” Lim said in the interview.

In subsequent video clips, Lim recounted his activities while in Sabah on May 14, where he was approached by a group of immigration officials to be deported from the state on the next flight but had to spend an additional night there as he missed the plane.

“I was informed by the police that I was lucky because there were some people who were angry with me because of my speech at the get-together the previous night and wanted to come and take action against me. That was on May 14, so I had to spend another night in Kota Kinabalu,” he said.

“On the 15th, the police took me into custody so I would not miss the next plane out,” he said and then related that the plane he had boarded was redirected to land at the Singapore airport due to a curfew in force at Subang.

I feel that in general, there were few who knew who I was [at the time]. — Lim Kit Siang

He said he spent the next two days in Singapore and even held a press conference there after learning that he may be detained under the much-feared Internal Security Act (ISA).

“We said we were willing to work with the government to restore peace and tranquillity to the country. We all loved the country and should cooperate to face the unfortunate events that had occurred,” he said.

Lim narrated that party colleagues and his family had warned him to stay away from Kuala Lumpur but he was adamant on returning because he felt a responsibility to voters who had elected him as their representative, and that he had kept his homecoming a secret from his wife.

“They advised me against returning because my name was in the black list and I would certainly be arrested under the Internal Security Act,” Lim said.

In a rare account, the veteran politician also opened up a little about his fears and his private life, narrating how he had informed party colleagues that he would meet them in Ipoh unless he was detained under the ISA.

He also recalled mailing a postcard to his wife while in Singapore.

“It was an unusual experience — I remember sending a postcard to my wife to tell her that if something should happen, that she would understand because we didn’t know what to expect. But until now she has yet to receive the postcard. I don’t know what happened. Maybe it’s in the file of the Special Branch,” he said, referring to the police intelligence unit.

Lim recounted his tense return on May 17 to the Malaysian capital city, where armed policemen awaited his arrival at the Subang airport.

He remembered asking, “Are you waiting for me?”

And then being taken in a car to the Jalan Bandar police station, where along the way said he saw scenes of carnage — cars overturned and set alight on the roads.

“I told myself, if they took me somewhere and finished me, no one would know. But luckily that didn’t happen,” Lim said in the video clip, before relating his first detention under the ISA where he was spent close to 60 days locked-up in a cell in Kuala Selangor before being “officially detained” at the Muar detention camp.

“Tanda Putera” has not been released for cinema screenings yet, but a trailer of the film available on the internet has also sparked controversy because it appears to suggest the Chinese community was to blame for the riots.

Pesona Pictures Sdn Bhd, the producer of the movie, has defended the publication of Lim’s photograph which sparked widespread condemnation from the DAP parliamentary leader and his political colleagues.

Lim has repeatedly pointed out that he was only a young politician in 1969 and was not even in the federal capital during the riots.

Umno blogs have gone into overdrive, and have been pushing the message to voters that it was Lim who had sparked the riots.

Earlier this year, an administrator of the “Tanda Putera” social network fan page posted a photograph of Lim being “manhandled”, with a caption alleging it was taken after he urinated on the flagpole in the Selangor mentri besar’s residential compound in Kuala Lumpur before the May 13 riots.

The picture was removed last month after personal attacks and threats were allegedly made against the cast and crew of the film.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Part 4

Part 5 & 6 to be released.

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 August 2012, 4:08 pm and is filed under
nation building
,
Personal
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Tweets from Sabah (3) – Janji Tidak Ditepati

Tweets
@limkitsiang
:

Arr Tawau from KK continue Hari Raya visits. Tonite @ Sandakan DAP talk in Karamunting.Wind of change blowing strong/hard “Land Below Wind”

Aug 21, 12:23am

In Ranau at least 3 cases of Janji Tidak Ditepati (JTD) – 1st case, abandoned toxic wasteland left behind by Mamut Copper Mine (MCM).

Aug 21, 12:36am

MCM earned export revenue abt RM3.4b in 24yr ops (75-99) 4Jap Aussie Msian owners 4copper (also gold silver) but left toxic legacy 4Sabahans

Aug 21, 1:09am

MCM open-cast mine generated abt 250 million tonnes (Mt) overburden n wasterock dumped @ 4main dump near mine pit n some 150 Mt of tailings

Aug 21, 1:22am

Tailings deposited in tailings dam Lohan Tailing Dam (LTD) located in valley abt 1k metre below the mine. Visited 1.5km deep MCM pit n LTD

Aug 21, 1:30am

Both sites eco nightmare continue 2pollute waterways without rehab measures. Grand plans 2use site 4worldclass Univ/tourism resort abandoned

Aug 21, 1:40am

Abandoned MCM poses pollution issues:water quality degrdtn, siltation, acid mine drainage (AMD) ie highly acidic metal-contaminated leachate

Aug 21, 1:55am

Fed/state govts failed 2address environmental problems left behind by MCM – highly poisonous mining pit n LTD. Janji Tidak Ditepati!

Aug 21, 2:15am

2nd JTD case in Ranau- serious allegations of improper land alienation n abuses against local Ranau ppl after reversion of MCM lease 2state

Aug 21, 2:25am

3rd JTD Ranau- infamous “White Elephant” Ranau Sports Complex notorious 4nonsporting scandals esp substandard construction. Whats the cost?

Aug 21, 8:39am

Had rip-roaring ceramah @ Kepayang (Penampang) last nite. Sabahans like their compatriots in rest of Msia waiting impatiently 4 13GE 4 UBAH

Aug 21, 9:03am

Arr Tawau from KK continue Hari Raya visits. Tonite @ Sandakan DAP talk in Karamunting.Wind of change blowing strong/hard “Land Below Wind”

Aug 21, 9:31am

Janji Tidak Ditepati (JTD) – Tawau (1) Unresolved problem of water dam 4over 20 yrs 2ensure regular water supply 2Tawau since PBS govt

Aug 21, 9:37am

(2) 4mile Coastal Highway from Icebox Tawau 2Jln Atas Mile4 although planned/promised 4over 30 years 2resolve infernal traffic jam in Tawau

Aug 21, 9:44am

(3) RM200mil Flood Mitigation plan 2alleviate acute perennial flood in Tawau. Another 2decade broken promise although only 2km drainage left

Aug 21, 10:01am

(4) Tawau continues 2b top black area in Sabah 4constant power interruptions from 2 to 4 hrs (5) Broken promises 2build multistorey carparks

Aug 21, 11:05am

Attend PR Tawau/Kalabakan Hari Raya Open House @ Hotel Emas Tawau with Sabah PR leaders Jimmy Wong AminuddinAling (PAS) Kong Hong Ming (PKR)

                This entry was posted on Tuesday, 21 August 2012, 12:06 pm and is filed under
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Are inflammatory religious remarks now fair game?

 — Pak Sako

The Malaysian Insider

Aug 21, 2012

AUG 21 — Statements made by Mahathir Mohamad after a mosque function in Kedah as recorded by Sinar Harian (
‘Hudud boleh dilaksana jika Pas sertai Umno’
, August 17, 2012), if true, would constitute an unprecedented rebuff of the culture of religious respectfulness by any Malaysian politician of that reputation.

The report cites him as saying that:

•    PAS should leave Pakatan Rakyat as soon as possible because they embrace “infidels” who evidently reject hudud.
(“Pas harus keluar dari PR secepat mungkin kerana mereka saling berpelukan dengan orang kafir yang secara nyata menolak hudud.”)
;

•    PAS will not be able to implement hudud as long as they are with a political party that does not recognise that “Islam is a superior religion.”
(“Selagi Pas bersama parti yang tidak mengakui Islam adalah agama unggul, hukum hudud tidak dapat di laksanakan.”)
.

The first remark uses a derogatory term that no self-respecting Muslim Malaysian would cast in referring to his non-Muslim brothers and sisters, political differences notwithstanding. The second remark implies that all other religions are inferior to Islam.

Both are insensitive and divisive. They ought to have no place in our multi-religious political discourse.

It is regrettable that these words were issued by a former prime minister. They must nonetheless be censured. Silence would only signal that it is legitimate to engage in such religious mud slinging.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 7:33 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Mahathir
,
Religion
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Coretan rengkas dari Pahang

— Sakmongkol AK47

The Malaysian Insider

Aug 21, 2012

21 OGOS — Saya berada di Pahang beberapa hari raya ini. Disamping beraya, perbualan tetap berkisar pada politik. Kegilaan apa yang melanda Pahang?

Berapa kerusi pembangkang boleh menang? Mereka bertanya saya. Saya kata nanti dahulu. Saya akan tulis artikel khusus untuk Pahang. Kali ini Pahang akan hilang lebih banyak kerusi DUN dan kerusi parlimen. Hampir semua pemimpin MCA akan kecundang. Taruhlah siapa pun.

Pemimpin Umno masih lagi menyandarkan optimism kepada kaji selidik mereka. Tapi bolehkah hasil kajiselidik ini dipercayai? Semua orang tahu, kaji selidik Umno ditambah 30%. Ertinya, kajiselidik Umno hanya 70% tepat. Dalam bahasa mudah, jika kajiselidik Umno kata dia akan menang 100 kerusi parlimen, mereka akan menang 70 kerusi. Itu pun jumlah kerusi yang Umno akan menang kali ini.

Kenapa Najib lambat buat pilihanraya? Ramai orang lupa saya lama menjadi AJK Umno bahagian Pekan dan jadi ketua penerangan Umno bahagian. Najib lambat kerana dia tidak yakin dengan hasil kajian ejensi-ejensi yang diupah kerajaan. Kecuali dia sudah yakin, baharulah dia akan buat pilihanraya. Takkan kita lupa, Najib ini bukan nya orang berani.

Sayang sekali, Najib tidak akan bertemu dengan kaji selidik yang dikemukakan oleh ejensi-ejensi kerajaan yang tepat. Lapuran wanita Umno sudah lama tidak dipercayai oleh presiden Umno. Dia tahu ketua wanita duduk di rumah dan pangkah atas nama nama pengundi sebagai penyokong Umno. Itulah yang terjadi pada Najib dalam tahun 1999. Semua lapuran kata boss ok. Akhirnya boss hampir KO.

Lapuran Pemuda dan Pemudi adalah catatan boy scouts dan pandu puteri. Main masak masak. lapuran mereka macam main main. Jadi bagaimana kepala presiden Umno tak pening.

Umno hendak dapat undi dari mana? Dari kaum Cina undi mereka sudah 80% kepihak pembangkang. Dari golongan muda demikian juga 90% mirip pembangkang. Dan Umno lupa, bahawa sokongan mereka yang memihak kepada pembangkang dalam tahun 2008 diransang oleh keyakinan. Dan sokongan yang berdiri diatas keyakinan sukar digoncang. Sebaliknya, sokongan yang di perolehi dengan cara merasuah dan membayar sogokan amat mudah terbalik. Pemimpin Umno sedar hakikat ini. yang masih bebal dan degil ialah pemimpin bawahan seperti ketua-ketua bahagian.

MCA tidak lagi jadi pilihan utama kaum Cina. Jika orang Cina sudah menolak calon Cina, mengapa orang Melayu yang beragama Islam mahu menyokong mereka? Mereka kan orang kafir? MCA pun kafir harbi. Bukankah Chua Soi Lek terang-terang menentang agama Islam dan Umno bacul bila Soi Lek berkata hanya MCA yang berani menentang hudud?

Orang Umno takkan nak sokong hudud. Kita faham mengapa mereka bersikap demikian. Jika disokong nanti ramai pula anggota cabinet yang tidak ada tangan datang bermesyuarat termasuklah yang terlibat dalam skendel pembelian kapal selam Scorpene dan lain-lain kelengkapan tentera. Ramai ahli cabinet hilang tangan sebab mereka terlibat dalam mengkhianati negara ini dengan menjual IC Malaysia. Ramai pemimpin Umno akan hilang tangan kerana menjual bumi Melayu ini.

Saya sedang memerhati pergolakan Pahang sekarang. MB yang ada mahu disingkirkan. Panglima kanan Najib sedang buat counter balance kepada DSDR Adnan Yaakob. Jika calon-calon half-past six dikekalkan, maka riwayat Umno akan singkat. Berilah rakyat pemimpin Melayu yang berkaliber. Jika tidak boleh, maka ketepi. PR akan ambil alih.

Apa yang Umno ada? Teriakan kosong pembela bansga Melayu, agama dan negara ada lah. Orang lain boleh buat lagi baik dari Umno. PR ada track record untuk menyokong pengistiharan mereka. Umon tak ada.

Rakan-rakan bertanya kepada saya, kenapa masuk DAP? Ini soalan yang berulang kali ditujukan kepada saya. Apalah yang hendak ditaksubkan sangat pada Umno? Tiga presiden Umno yang awal sahaja yang memelihara asas perjuangan orang Melayu. Mulai presiden ke-empat perjuangan Umno sudah berbeza. Kepentingan Melayu yang di perjuangkan ialah kepentingan golongan elit dan Melayu terpilih. Mereka sedikit jumlah nya mengapa kita yang majority mahu tunduk kepada mereka. Jika presiden Umno tidak dengar keluhan orang melayu, kita gantikan mereka.

Ramai pemimpin Umno peringkat cawangan beritahu saya. Rumah pemuzik Alleycats terbakar Najib beri RM100 ribu. Kalau begitu, ayuh kita bakar rumah supaya Najib beri RM200 ribu. Bukankah itu kekuatan Najib? Bayar sana dan bayar sini. Kera dihutan Najib susukan, anak dirumah, Najib biarkan. — sakmongkol.blogspot.com

* Sakmongkol AK47 is the nom de plume of Datuk Mohd Ariff Sabri Abdul Aziz. He was Pulau Manis assemblyman (2004-2008).

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 10:43 pm and is filed under
DAP
,
Elections
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Crime Statistics – Let the truth be told!

By Sumun Osram

A policeman who wish to remain anonymous

Is the crime rate down? Yes, relying on the statistics provided by the Police and Pemandu. Is that a true reflection of the crime situation? The answer is certainly a big ‘NO’.

Crime is basically divided into two categories. One is ‘Index Crime’ and the other is ‘Non-Index Crime’. The statistics made available by the police are only those cases which come under the ‘index crime’ category. ‘Index crime’ is defined as crime which is reported with sufficient regularity and with sufficient significance to be meaningful as an index to the crime situation. Essentially, it means the index is the yardstick to gauge the crime situation of a given place, the District, State or the whole country. The index crime statistics will show whether the crime has increased, decreased or moving constantly.

‘Non-index crime’ on the other hand is considered as cases minor in nature and does not occur with such rampancy to warrant its inclusion into the crime statistics or as a benchmark to determine the crime situation.

‘Index crime’ consists of two categories. One is ‘Violent Crime’ and the other is ‘Property Crime’. ‘Violent Crime’ comprises of murder; rape; armed robbery with accomplice; robbery with accomplice; armed robbery; robbery; and causing hurt. Meanwhile ‘property crime’ comprises of theft; car theft; motorcycle theft; heavy vehicle theft; snatch theft; and burglary. These are the crimes used as statistics to portray the crime situation.

In 2009, the Government came up with the ‘Government Transformation Program’ (GTP) and ‘crime’ was amongst the ‘National Key Result Area’ (NKRA). The Key Performance Index (KPI) set for the police on the 27 July 2009 under the NKRA was to reduce crime by 20%.

That tall order to reduce crime by 20% was a dilemma for the police. The police knew that the demand is idealistic but not feasible to be achieved. Any criminologist will tell that crime is the product of socio-economic factors and the police being a part of the criminal justice system cannot alone tackle this issue.

However, in upholding the dignity and image, the police succumbed to the political pressure in agreeing to achieve the targeted KPI set under the NKRA. With the prevailing policing standard and practice the police may be able to contain the crime situation to a certain extent, but to reduce it by 20% is absolutely a feat impossible. So, in desperate times, desperate measures are taken.

The police then came up with an ingenious way of achieving the target. The principal behind the plan is, well, if this is what the political masters’ want, then we shall give it to them the way they want.

As said earlier, the crime statistics consist of only the index crime. Hence, they gradually lowered the crime statistics by shifting the index crime to the non-index crime. The shifting is done at the time the police report is lodged. The classification of the crime from index to non-index will be captured in the police reporting system as ‘non-index’ and thus not registering it as an index crime for the purposes of statistics. Lowering the index crime will show that the particular crime is on the decline.

There are several types of crime where the classification can be manipulated from index to non-index. The maneuvering begins at the police district level which receives the report and subsequently transmitted to the State Police Headquarters and Federal Police Headquarters. The crimes which were manipulated are:

(a)	Robbery cases under the Penal Code are classified as index crime. This offence will be classified as non-index under section 382 of the Penal Code. Since, section 382 of the Penal Code is a non-index crime, therefore will not be reflected in the crime statistics.

(b)	Burglary under section 457 of the Penal Code is an index crime. This offence will be classified as non-index under sections 452 or 453 of the Penal Code. Since, sections 452 and 453 of the Penal Code are non-index crime therefore will not be reflected in the crime statistics.

(c)	Causing hurt under sections 324 and 326 are index crimes. These offences will be classified under section 148 of the Penal Code. Since, section 148 of the Penal Code is a non-index crime therefore will not be reflected in the crime statistics.

The under classification of the index crime to non-index crime runs into several thousand cases. Of course, by removing these cases from the crime statistics will reflect that the crime has gone down.

A simple way of ascertaining the extent of cases taken off from the index crime category for the purpose of reducing the crime statistics is by asking the police to provide the statistics of cases classified under sections 148, 382, 452 and 453 of the Penal Code since the implementation of the NKRA to date. Then a comparison should be made with the statistics of cases under the said sections in the last three years preceding the NKRA. You will discover a sudden hike in the number of cases under those sections after the introduction of the KPI. This figure should then be compared with the figure of the same sections for the three years preceding the NKRA.  The result will confirm that for the period of three years prior to NKRA, cases classified under sections 382, 452 and 453 are almost nil and under section 148 may have only few reported cases. The number of cases recorded under the four sections for the 3 years after the NKRA minus the number of cases recorded for the 3 years before the NKRA will be the figure that has been manipulated.

Other factors that suppress the crime statistics during the NKRA period are:

(a)	There are many cases under the index crime category that are not opened for investigation and were closed with no further action (NFA). These cases involve robberies, snatch thefts and burglaries. Police take no further action for the reason there is no sufficient ground for proceeding with the matter if the suspect cannot be identified, the loss is minimal or there is no lead to proceed further. There are thousands of cases of this nature and since these cases are not opened for investigation, therefore, will not be reflected in the crime statistics. No profiling is done on these cases, but merely swept under the carpet. Without profiling then the trend, pattern, target areas and possible suspects could not be studied to address the recurrence of these incidents.

(b)	There are also cases short-changed in order to achieve the KPI. Say, for example, in a particular day there are 10 cases of burglaries reported in a certain housing area. Only one case will be opened for investigation and the other nine cases will be cross-referred to the one case that was opened. For the 10 cases of burglaries, the statistics should be 10 cases of index crime. Since, there is only one case that was opened for investigation therefore the other nine cases will not be reflected in the index crime statistics.

(c)	Dark figures (crimes not reported) are not factored into the crime statistics. There is a theory that for every 10 cases reported there will be one case not reported. People do not report crime when they have lost faith in the police. Lack of faith may arise when the people have the impression that the police will not treat the report seriously; ineffective investigation due to incompetence; practicing double standards; no confidence the police can solve the case or bring  justice to the victim or can recover the lost items; discriminative investigation based on the person’s background, influence, or status in society; minor trauma or losses treated with scorn; cases can be compromised by suspects getting away through bribery, influence be it political or social standing; exhaustive in going to the police station and lodging report; and last but not least is distrust and suspicion about the police.

Overall, the crime has indeed gone up. There are many flaws in the statistics dished out to the public. The statistics was tailored to justify the KPI and appease the powers that be. It is better for the police to tell the truth and shame the devil. In response to Dr. Lim Teck Ghee, the police said, “Crime statistics released by the PDRM are the actual figures of criminal cases reported to and investigated by the police department. These figures are auto-generated by the department’s computer system i.e. the Police Reporting System (PRS). In this way, no alteration or adjustment to the figures can be done, in order to portray a rosy picture of the crime situation as claimed by certain quarters.”

The rationalization of the computer system (PRS) to validate the crime figures is a flawed excuse. The system picks up only what has been fed into it. PRS system does not control classification of cases. To demonstrate that the GTP, NKRA and KPI are a success, classification of cases was doctored and entered into the system which will surely produce the result that was desired.

The police made another assertion, “All crime data and statistics generated within the PDRM system have been audited and verified by Pricewaterhouse Coopers Malaysia.” Do you expect accountants to audit and verify classification of cases? Are they going through all the police reports to ensure the nature of crime committed, categorizing the correct section of the offence under the law, and classification of the case as index or non-index? Be truthful on their role that is only limited to calculating the figures given by the police. In fact, it is a waste of public funds hiring accountants to just vet the figures if only the police are honest in the first place.

End the charade on public relations (PR) exercises to erase the fear of crime. Stop fooling the public with PR programs, like ‘high profile policing’, ‘high visibility patrol’ ‘walkabout’ ‘stop and talk, ‘meet and greet’, and ‘singing in shopping malls’, that won’t work when criminals are still milling around. Spending huge money hiring consultants with no background or expertise in criminal field to advise the police was the biggest blunder. It is a shame on the police organization of 205 years, having police officers of more than 30 years in service and experience with educational background from degree to PHD, unable to tackle the crime situation.

Police are not looking at the proper perspective in tackling crime. Victims of crime go to the police for what? To seek redress! Investigation is the area where most people are frustrated of, suspicious and lacks confidence in the ability of the police to apprehend the suspect and solve the case. This is the primary cause of dissatisfaction and the negative perception of the police. Poor investigation and inaction lead to more criminals on the streets and crime more prevalent and widespread. One of the ways to reduce crime is by removing as many criminals as possible from the society and sending them behind bars. Crack the whip on the investigators. Increase the staffing of investigators in all departments involved in investigations and the right officers to helm these departments at District, State and Federal levels. As a reminder, terminate at once the current distortion of the KPI on solving rate and charging rate before it develops into another controversy.

Another bone of contention is crime prevention. Instead of wasting manpower and time on PR exercises, the proven tried and tested methods must be invigorated. The mobile and beat patrols and roadblocks must be strengthened and energized. Poor planning, lackadaisical attitude of staffs, lack in knowledge and skills are the main problems afflicting this area. Ad hoc measures of crime prevention are ineffective and should be a thing of the past. Crime prevention through mobile and beat patrols should be constant and extensive with sufficient police presence, effective enforcement and result orientated.

It takes a thief to catch a thief. There was a time when detectives were very resourceful in intelligence gathering and have the ability to pin-point the culprit just by analyzing the modus operandi. They were all-rounded and like cats can smell the rats miles away. Good, capable and mind probing detectives have been displaced with insignificant desk jobs. The investigation departments are now filled with personnel who are expected to display noble attributes and source for information and intelligence on crime from temples and churches. This segment of the organization needs to be given importance and improvised. More personnel should be inducted with the necessary skills and agility to gather intelligence on criminal activities, detect and apprehend criminals.

Immediate and drastic move to improve on those three areas (investigation, crime prevention and detectives) will produce significant progress in alleviating the crime menace the people are experiencing now.

Criminals come from various ethnic backgrounds. The police organization should similarly be staffed with sufficient policemen from multi-ethnic backgrounds. The police organization is now filled with more than ninety percent consisting only of one ethnic group. Crime has no boundary or race barriers. The composition of the police should reflect the society they are dealing with. The police are unlike an organization that don’t deal or interact with the public. How do you expect policemen from one ethnicity to effectually communicate, source for information, deal with criminals, and address communal issues, with a person of different culture, customs, language and background in an effective and practical manner? This is not a racial issue, but voiced with a noble intention in the best interests of all Malaysians.

Policemen are hired to instill peace and security to the people. Police should not waste too much time, energy and manpower to preach religion and involve in religious activities. There is too much of religious activities in the police force now. All policemen subscribe to a religion at the time of employment and there is no reason for them to go wayward with the discipline of the Force in place. There is a unit called ‘Bahagian Agama dan Kaunselling’ (BAKA) established in all Districts, States and Federal level to organize religious functions, activities and sermons. This should be left to the experts in religion and counseling.  They can be roped in or hired to provide religious and counseling services instead of using so much of police manpower trained in fighting crime.

Police are responsible for the maintenance of law and order. They are answerable to the law and the law alone. The Home Minister has no business in occupying two floors of office building at Bukit Aman. His appropriate place is at the Home Ministry, Putrajaya. His role should be confined to policy making only and not getting involved in, directing, or supervising the day to day operations of the police. There is no guarantee that he won’t be under investigation if he transgresses the law. The IGP should not be put in a comprising position should a conflict of issue arises involving the Home Minister. One very senior police officer with the ranking of Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) is dedicated to chaperon the Home Minister. Many more senior officers and men are assigned to him in the name of NKRA. This is a sheer waste of manpower, tax payers money and abuse of power, whence these men should be on the ground maintaining law and order.

To fight crime, you have to take the bull by its horns. The police should not be parading in public, smiling; giggling; shaking hands; stop and talk; and meet and greet, to overcome the fear of crime or the negative perception. That is only a cosmetic appearance when the real grievance is unresolved and unattended. The police are a leading crime enforcement body and are not in the tourism industry or tasked with public relation functions. The police must appear serious and stern whilst executing their duties. Their sacrosanct oath of protecting the people and property must be honored.

There must be a climate of fear and respect towards the police. The fear must come from the wrongdoers and those who intend to contravene the law. Respect is from those who feel secured when seeing the men in blue. Are the police doing the right thing to earn that respect? People are feeling unsecured with the crime situation and the fear of being a victim keep increasing. Ironically, even the policemen are having the same sentiment. Camouflaging crime figures will only aggravate the situation further. Be honest and tell the truth.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 6:58 pm and is filed under
Crime
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


DAP to hold “Janji DiTepati” public hearings throughout Sabah on whether Barisan Nasional promises to people of Sabah have been fulfilled or broken

Together with DAP MP for Segambut Lim Lip Eng, and accompanied by Sabah DAP leaders headed by DAP Sabah Chairman and State Assemblyman for Sri Tanjong, Jimmy Wong Tze Phin, Sabah State Vice Chairman Edward Muji, Sabah State Secretary Dr. Edwin Bosi, Sabah State Organising Secretary Jeffrey Kumin, Sabah State Publicity Secretary Chan Foong Hin and DAP MP for Kota Kinabalu Dr. Hiew King Cheu, I have just completed a four-day 500-km visit to Sabah, covering Kota Marudu, Tip of Borneo, Kg Bavang Jamal, Kudat, Kg Masangkong Matunggong, Ranau, Penampang, Tawau and Sandakan.

The trip, planned as a DAP political reach-out programme to northern Sabah interior as well as visit to Tawau and Sandakan, turned out to be a “Janji Ditepati” study tour – or to be more accurate, a “Janji Tidak Ditepati” (JTD) study tour, as everywhere, we were told of the complaints and disappointments of Sabahans at  the broken promises and pledges by the Barisan Nasional governments, both Federal and State.

As I said to the Karamunting ceramah capacity crowd in Sandakan last night, the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak should establish a “Janji Ditepati” Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) in Sabah or lead Federal and Sabah State Ministers in public hearings in the 23 Sabah districts to hear the views of the people of Sabah whether the Barisan Nasional had fulfilled or broken its various promises in Sabah.

We are giving the Prime Minister 48 hours to respond to this proposal for a “Janji Ditepati” RCI or to spearhead a series of Public Hearings in Sabah.

If there is no response from Najib in the next 48 hours, Sabah DAP will plan to  hold “Janji Ditepati” public hearings throughout Sabah on whether Barisan Nasional promises to the people of Sabah have been fulfilled or broken.

The idea of a “Janji Ditepati” series of public hearings in Sabah was born out of the very widespread discontent and even exasperation expressed by Sabahans throughout the state at the failure of the Barisan Nasional to fulfil its numerous promises to the people of Sabah – to the extent that the slogan “Janji Ditepati” has become quite a joke among Sabahans.

Undoubtedly, one of the top issues among Sabahans where BN has failed to fulfil its promises is on the long-standing problem of illegal immigrants, despite the recent announcement by the Prime Minister on the establishment of a RCIII (Royal Commission of Inquiry into Illegal Immigrants) in Sabah.

In fact, in the various talks and ceramahs I had in the past four days in Kota Marudu, Kg Bavang Jamal in Kudat, Kg Masangkong in Matunggong, Ranau, Kepayang, Tawau and Sandakan, the Sabahans who attended were quite unanimous in expressing their lack of confidence in the RCI as a genuine and sincere solution to the grave four-decades old problem of illegal immigrants in the state.

The areas where Barisan Nasional had failed to live up to its 55th Merdeka Day/49th Malaysia Day theme of “Janji Ditepati” could generally be referred to as the 2Cs and 2Is in Sabah.

The 2Cs are crime and corruption and 2Is are illegal immigrants and infrastructure neglect in Sabah.

For instance, the stretch of road from Kota Belud to Kota Marudu (the latter the parliamentary constituency of a Federal Minister) at Ulu Kukut must rank as one with the worst road conditions in the country with the atrocious condition lasting  for years – which is a crying shame for Sabah which formed Malaysia 49 years ago as one of the richest states in the federation.

In Kota Marudu and throughout the state, the NCR controversy cries out as a prominent and priority  example where BN has failed to live up to its slogan of “Janji Ditepati”.

At Kg Bavang Jamal, “Janji Ditepati” again became a joke as  water pipes were provided there since 1986 but with no piped water supply in the past 26 years!

At Tip of Borneo, which can rightfully boasts of having “best sunset, best surf, best wind of Borneo”, “Janji Ditepati” became a subject of mockery as since the time of Tan Sri Chong Kah Keat as Chief Minister and Tourism Minister, this great tourist attraction had been neglected by both the Federal and state governments.

In Ranau, there were evidence galore where BN had failed to measure up to “Janji Ditepati” – whether the poisoned wasteland left behind by the Mamut Copper Mine (MCM) after earning some RM3.4 billion export revenues in 24 years (1974-1999) for the Japanese, Australian and Malaysian owners or the serious allegations of power abuses about land use and alienation against local Ranau people after the reversion of the MCM land lease to the state government.

In Tawau and Sandakan, the people could themselves list out the major items where BN had failed in “Janji Ditepati” – in  both places, the most basic infrastructure needs of  water, power and highways.

Sandakan is particularly pathetic and the time is long overdue to check Sandakan’s decline and to restore some of its former glory.

Sandakan was once the premier centre of Sabah. It was the former capital of British North Borneo for 62 years from 1884 to 1946 until World War II when the capital was transferred to Jesselton (later named Kota Kinabalu).

Today Sandakan has lost out to Tawau and even to Miri and Bintulu in Sarawak as all the trio have international airports but not Sandakan.

This is why I said in Karamunting last night that if Pakatan Rakyat forms the federal government in Putrajaya in the 13th general election, the new PR government will in the first 100 days approve the construction of an international airport for Sandakan.

Yesterday, the Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Seri Musa Aman followed the Sarawak Chief Minister Tan Sri Taib Mahmud and said that the state’s five per cent petroleum royalty review issue is open for discussion.

Taib said a day earlier that the Sarawak state government would discuss the need to review the five per cent petroleum royalty paid to Sarawak with the federal government.

This is a vindication of the relevance and role of Pakatan Rakyat and demonstration of People’s Power.

The people of Sabah and Malaysia will remember that it was only two weeks ago that Musa dismissed Pakatan Rakyat’s demand for increase of state oil royalty from five to 20 per cent as “illogical”, but he has now to change position because of Pakatan Rakyat, the relevance and legitimacy of PR demands and the approaching 13th General Election.

But it is not good enough for the Sabah and Sarawak chief ministers to talk vaguely about “open for discussion” as what the people of Sabah and Sarawak want is for them to endorse Pakatan Rakyat’s demand for the increase of state oil royalty from five to 20 per cent.

Will the Sabah and Sarawak Chief Ministers do it?

Otherwise, the oil royalty issue will feature as one of the top issues where Barisan Nasional has failed in its slogan of “Janji Ditepati”.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 5:28 pm and is filed under
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Kit Siang and May 13

By
Ahmad Mustapha Hassan
 | August 21, 2012

The Malaysian Insider

AUG 21 — Allow me to explain about the above controversy.

I was there on that fateful day as an executive member of Umno Youth. The gathering was organised by Selangor Umno Youth whose leader was Harun Idris and the secretary then was Ahmad Razali Ali.

The whole area was dominated by Umno Youth members and no non-Malay could ever enter the place. That being the case, it was impossible for Lim Kit Siang to be there and did what he was purportedly accused of. If he did, he would have been killed by the mob.

In fact the first killing that I witnessed was outside the gate, on the road. A young coffeeshop boy, about 13 or 14 in age, was slaughtered by the mob and his body kicked into the drain running by the road. He was an innocent boy trying to earn some pocket money.

I mentioned the May 13 incident in my book “The Unmaking of Malaysia”.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 12:32 am and is filed under
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Questions abound over RCI

FMT Staff
 | August 22, 2012

Free Malaysia Today

KOTA KINABALU: Former Sabah state secretary Simon Sipaun has again sounded the alert that the federal government is hoodwinking Sabahans into believing the current government is serious about solving Sabah’s long-standing illegal immigrant problem.

He accused the federal government of having an agenda in allowing illegal immigrants to settle in the state.

Sipaun served as chairman of the Sabah Public Service Commission, was vice-chairman of the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia, member of Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Advisory Board, and a founding member of Demokrasi Sabah (DESAH).

“The mother of all problems in Sabah is the presence of unusually large population of illegal immigrants. By my estimation, they have already outnumbered the local Malaysians who are living in Sabah.

“It (the illegal immigrant problem) is quickly and surely changing the economic, social, political and cultural landscape of the state,” he said in a radio interview by “Inspire FM” that was aired last week.

While acknowledging that illegal immigrants had participated in the development of the state, he said this was no excuse for the federal government to behave as it had done on the issue.

“They [illegal immigrants] contribute to the development of the state, but that does not mean you can allow them to walk in and out of Sabah with impunity.

“I believe this is happening because this has been allowed by the federal government which is in charge of immigration from foreign countries and security.

“Why have they been allowed in? You have also this type of problem in the peninsula.”

He cited the posturing by the federal government in the 1970s when the Vietnamese boat people came to Peninsular Malaysia but were quickly dealt with.

Sipaun said this was the same time Sabah started to feel the influx of refugees from the Southern Philippines.

However, he said unlike in the peninsula, where within two years all those who landed in the peninsula were dealt with, those who landed here about the same time are still here.

“Why? This is what I call a federal government agenda. That’s the mother of all problems,” he said.

He believes the setting up of a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) on illegal immigrants in Sabah is an insincere attempt to mollify Sabahans as the general election draws near, with a likelihood of protest votes taking place in the state.

Task bigger now

“The federal government is showing the people of Sabah that it is doing something about it… it has done all sorts of things – task force, deportations… but it has not produced the desired result.

“The task force was established when I was still a civil servant and that was about 35 years ago. Until today the task force is there but the task is bigger now. The problem is more complicated but it [task force] has not resolved the problem.

“The latest now is the RCI. From what I read in the newspaper… the federal government decided to have a RCI for Sabah on Feb 8, this year. It took four months for the federal government just to make the announcement. What does that indicate? That does not indicate urgency, that does not indicate seriousness.

“Now you [the government] talk about the terms of reference. Terms of reference means what is the RCI going to do? What are its objectives? The terms of reference should have been prepared before you decide on the RCI.

“RCI was a Cabinet decision. As far as I know, a Cabinet decision is based on a comprehensive Cabinet paper. The next thing to do after a decision is made by the Cabinet is to implement it.

“This is not the case…you talk of terms of reference for the RCI. That to me is as simple as putting the cart before the horse so it doesn’t move.

“So I think because of the election, the federal government just wants to show it is doing something about it but without the intention of really doing something about it.

“You know why? Because those people who have a hand in the creation of this problem are in government and surely they don’t want the truth to be out just as they were reluctant to act on [the recommendations of] the commission on the Lingam case, Teoh Beng Hock case, the police commission case… so many recommendations but not acted on.”

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 2:48 pm and is filed under
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


‘Sabahans can select next PM’

By
Azman Habu
 | August 22, 2012

Free Malaysia Today

TAWAU: DAP adviser Lim Kit Siang has encouraged Sabahans to embrace the chance to chart a new direction for Malaysia by taking the opportunity in the coming general election to dictate who would be the prime minister of the country.

Speaking at the Pakatan Rakyat Hari Raya open house in Tawau, Lim said the chance for Sabahans to determine their future was at hand and they should not waste it.

“With the current federal government shaken and unsure, Sabahans can determine their path and determine who will head Putrajaya,” he told the huge crowd that turned up at the open house held at a hotel here yesterday.

Lim said that in the past, Sabahans had only voted for their assemblymen or Members of Parliament without having the chance to choose the nation’s prime minister

“But this 13th general election, we have power to determine the seventh prime minister. This time we have a chance… before we didn’t,” he said.

The veteran opposition leader also urged the people of the state to consider the past and all the missed opportunities for a developed and progressive Sabah due to corruption, oppression and uncaring governments that did not know how to solve the people’s problems.

“So we need to use that power to change. We [Pakatan] are ready, but there are those who are not ready. Najib is not ready, he is scared, not brave, scared of losing power. He has lost the support of many,” he said.

Lim said the anniversaries of Merdeka and Malaysia Day were approaching and while the Barisan Nasional government and its leaders were trumpeting they had “Janji Ditepati” (promises fulfilled), he asked if this was really so.

Unfulfilled promises

He said he has visited and heard from the people from the interior in Marudu, Kudat, Matunggong and Ranau and they were disheartened and angry that their situation had not improved after almost 50 years since the formation of Malaysia.

“In Ulu Kukut, we have the worst road in Malaysia. Is this ‘Janji Ditepati’,” he asked, adding that if government promises were fulfilled, such roads will not exist anymore.

“There is piping, but no water; where is the promise fulfilled? Ranau’s Mamut copper mine, after more than RM3.4 billion had been taken out of it, the place now is very toxic. What is the state and federal governments doing about it? Nothing,” he said.

He said there is a long list of unfulfilled promises, one of them being the Tawau dam which was promised about 30 years ago but still not built.

Lim said that if Najib took the trouble to tour Sabah he would be able to see all this but he would not do this for obvious reasons.

Among the opposition politicians seen at the gathering were Tawau MP, Chua Soon Bui, from the Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP), Sabah PAS commissioner Aminuddin Aling, PKR Tawau divisional head Kong Hong Ming as well as Sabah DAP head Jimmy Wong.

                This entry was posted on Wednesday, 22 August 2012, 2:38 pm and is filed under
Elections
,
Sabah
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.