Erti persabahatan Pakatan

By
Wan Hamidi
 | May 13, 2011

The Malaysian Insider

Semua orang tahu PAS, DAP dan PKR tidak akan berganjak dari prinsip perjuangan masing-masing. Itu soal dasar parti. Komponen sekular MCA, Gerakan dan beberapa lagi parti dalam Barisan Nasional yang menolak Ketuanan Melayu pun masih boleh bersahabat dengan Umno walau pun dalam senyuman pahit.

Perbezaan ketara di antara PAS yang berpegang kepada Al-Quran dan Sunnah sebagai dasar politik dan DAP yang memperjuangkan demokrasi sosial bersifat sekular telah menjadi bahan kepada musuh politik mereka Umno untuk mengapikan permusuhan.

Yang tidak ditonjolkan oleh media arus perdana milik Umno dan Barisan Nasional ialah kesefahaman PAS, DAP dan PKR dalam Pakatan Rakyat yang berpegang kepada dasar bersama untuk menegakkan keadilan melalui demokrasi tulen yang menentang rasuah, salah guna kuasa, politik perkauman dan mempergunakan agama untuk kepentingan politik.

Sebaliknya apa yang sibuk digerakkan oleh kempen perang saraf Umno ialah mencipta fitnah dan pembohongan untuk menimbulkan syak wasangka sesama anggota komponen Pakatan Rakyat.

Tohmahan kononnya DAP terlibat dalam usaha sulit untuk menjadikan Kristian sebagai agama rasmi negara telah dijelmakan sebagai berita oleh Utusan Malaysia yang semata-mata memetik tuduhan liar blogger pro-Umno tanpa usul periksa.

Setelah beberapa hari isu ini dibangkitkan, ada kalangan pemimpin Umno sendiri yang mula menjauhkan diri daripada taktik kotor itu. Namun ia tidak akan menghentikan serangan propaganda Umno dan konco-konconya terhadap Pakatan Rakyat.

Serangan-serangan ini telah dimulakan sejak Umno dikejutkan dengan kekalahan beberapa negeri serta kehilangan majoriti dua pertiga Parlimen dalam pilihan raya umum 2008. Untuk menutup kelemahan diri, para pemimpin Umno cepat-cepat menuding jari menyalahkan orang lain.

Apabila isu konspirasi agama rasmi dibangkitkan, para penyebar fitnah menyangka ia adalah kejayaan besar untuk memecahbelahkan perpaduan Pakatan tanpa menyedari kesan jangka panjang hasutan sedemikian terhadap keharmonian rakyat pelbagai kaum dan agama.

Apa yang mereka tidak jangkakan ialah reaksi PAS dalam menangani pembohongan itu. Bukan sahaja para pemimpin PAS tidak berdiam diri, malah mereka berdiri teguh bersama DAP untuk mematikan serangan fitnah yang tidak munasabah itu.

Datuk Seri Abdul Haji Awang mengulangi pendirian Pakatan untuk terus mempertahankan Perlembagaan Persekutuan yang meletakkan Islam sebagai agama bagi Persekutuan serta kebebasan mengamalkan agama-agama lain dengan aman.

Dalam kenyataannya, Presiden PAS itu menyatakan: “Tekad ini adalah suatu ikrar yang terpahat dalam polisi bersama Pakatan Rakyat. Oleh yang demikian hiruk-pikuk yang dilemparkan oleh media tertentu bertujuan untuk membakar semangat rakyat terutamanya di kalangan orang Melayu beragama Islam, bahawa Malaysia akan menuju ke arah negara Kristian, adalah suatu pemberitaan yang sangat tidak beramanah”.

Naib Presiden PAS Datuk Mahfuz Omar pula menuntut Menteri Dalam Negeri Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussien dan Menteri Penerangan, Komunikasi dan Kebudayaan Datuk Seri Rais Yatim memohon maaf kepada seluruh rakyat Malaysia kerana menyokong laporan tidak berasas Utusan.

“Pada hal berita yang disiarkan oleh Utusan Malaysia itu bukannya berita benar. Perkara itu dinafikan sendiri oleh golongan paderi dan DAP. Berita itu ternyata bersifat provokasi yang boleh menimbulkan suasana huru-hara di dalam negara.”

Ahli Jawatankuasa PAS Pusat Mazlan Aliman yang membuat laporan polis terhadap berita palsu Utusan itu pula menganggapnay sebagai satu agenda yang didalangi UMNO yang sengaja mahu meniupkan api permusuhan antara masyarakat Islam dan bukan Islam.

“Mereka tahu bukan Islam tidak menyokong BN, mereka terpaksa untuk mendapat simpati dari pengundi Melayu,” katanya.

Suara Mazlan mewakili kebanyakan pemimpin dan ahli PAS yang sudah pun menghidu perang saraf Umno yang mahu memecahbelahkan perpaduan Pakatan.

Apabila Datuk Seri Najib Razak mencadangkan supaya PAS meninggalkan Pakatan atas alasan “adakah DAP boleh perjuangkan Islam?”, Naib Presiden PAS Salahuddin Ayub menyatakan:

“Kita ada Perlembagaan, agama rasmi adalah Islam dengan raja-raja adalah ketua… jadi tak timbul soal ini…kerajaan negeri Pulau Pinang (yang dipimpin oleh Setiausaha Agung DAP Lim Guan Eng)  juga tidak pernah mengabaikan soal berkaitan dengan Islam… tiada apa-apa masalah.”

Isu agama dan kaum akan terus dilontarkan oleh konco-konco Umno; tambahan pula menjelang muktamar agung PAS yang akan menyaksikan pemilihan kepimpinan parti pada Jun depan.

Ada kalangan Umno yang masih mengharapkan “wakil-wakil Umno” dalam PAS akan tunduk kepada hasrat untuk membawa keluar PAS dari Pakatan. Bagi mereka, hanya cara itu dapat menguburkan Pakatan melalui politik pecah dan perintah.

Namun, para pemimpin dan ahli PAS diingatkan oleh oleh AJK PAS Pusat Mohamad Sabu supaya berhati-hati dalam menghadapi tipu muslihat Umno yang semakin terdesak sejak kebelakangan ini.

“Kalau PAS keluar Pakatan Rakyat, BN akan memerintah sehingga hari kiamat sebab dia tahu kalau PAS bersama Pakatan Rakyat ini sahaja yang boleh menggugat BN.

“Sebab itu BN tiada jalan lain, jadi terpaksa mencari apa sahaja jalan bagi memastikan PAS keluar daripada Pakatan Rakyat, ini kerana BN bimbang kekuatan PAS dalam Pakatan Rakyat… tambahan yang boleh kalahkan Umno adalah PAS,” katanya dalam satu wawancara dengan The Malaysian Insider.

Pendirian sebeginilah yang menggusarkan pucuk pimpinan Umno; jarum hasutan mereka gagal mengubah pendirian kepimpinan PAS. Persahabatan erat PAS dan DAP dengan kerjasama PKR menyukarkan Umno dan konco-konconya untuk percaya kepada tohamahan-tohmahan perkauman serta keagamaan sempit.

Mungkin Umno tersalah jangka bahawa komponen-komponen Pakatan tidak akan membantu satu sama lain kerana pentingkan diri sendiri, dalam apa yang sering digambarkan oleh media arus perdana sebagai pakatan rapuh.

Yang nyata, formula Pakatan yang saling membantu serta mempertahankan sahabat dalam perkara-perkara yang benar dan baik sudah terbukti berjaya.

Jika pergeseran sesama sendiri dapat dikendurkan; jika perebutan kerusi dan jawatan dikurangkan; jika syak wasangka dileburkan; tidak mustahil kemantapan Pakatan akan dapat dipertingkatkan lagi.

——–

Wan Hamidi is a veteran journalist who has a penchant for rock music.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 1:03 pm and is filed under
Pakatan Rakyat
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Hisham: ‘Some basis’ to Utusan’s report

By
 S Pathmawathy

May 13, 11 | Malaysiakini

Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein says there is “some basis” to Utusan Malaysia’s report on is a conspiracy to make Christianity the official religion of the country and install a Christian prime minister.

Hishammuddin said this in view of new evidence provided in a police report lodged in Penang today.

It is believed that he was referring to a police report this morning by Mohamed Razali Abdul Rahman, a DAP member, who attended the function mentioned in the report.

Yesterday, the ministry issued Utusan a letter of reprimand over its front page article on May 7 titled ‘Kristian Agama Rasmi?’ (Christianity the official religion?).

The letter was handed to Utusan’s editor-in-chief Aziz Ishak yesterday, when he was called to the Home Ministry to give an exaplanation on the report.

Hishammuddin (right) said Aziz’s explanation was similar to the police report lodged today.

“He (Aziz) was saying that there is some truth to what is reported, and today I was informed that there is a police report (lodged) that there is some basis to (the Utusan report),” Hishammuddin told reporters at the launch of drug rehabilitation centre in Chow Kit, Kuala Lumpur.

“I understand that there is police report saying that what was reported by Utusan did happen so this is what I’m stressing on, lets not be emotional on issues that touch on religion and race, let the authorities handle (it), the police specifically, to investigate. (For) the issues that we are looking at, the truth takes time,” he said.

“There are two sides to the coin, DAP can say one thing but the police report says otherwise. (News) reports which are sensational and ignite the sentiments of the people only brings chaos. So I hope the police is allowed to investigate.”

He agreed that Utusan had similar role to play in avoiding reports on sensitivities.

The minister added that the police are probing the overall issue including Utusan and two bloggers over their allegations about the plot.

Utusan’s report, which was based two blog postings by pro-Umno bloggers, accused that Christian pastors were in cahoots with DAP and were committing sedition for questioning constitutional provisions.

“It’s about whether it happened, on the issue of reporting, issue on the role of the bloggers, issue of people that were at the function. It cuts across the board. We are not pointing fingers at anybody,” he said.

‘It’s about finding the truth’

Asked about accusations of biased action against other media, in this case in circumstances where their reports contravened the Printing Presses and publication Act (PPPA) and whether the ministry felt the reprimand letter was enough, Hishammuddin said:

“I don’t know but it is not about finding fault, it is about finding the truth. What I’m stating here is when we are finding the truth, don’t get emotional when it comes to race and religion, do not politicise it and don’t make it a polemic directive.

“This time it might be Utusan, tomorrow it might be (Chinese language newspaper) Sin Chew (Jit Poh), the day after it might be one of the websites.

“A Chinese issue today might be a Malay issue tomorrow, a Christian issue the day after that and a Hindu issue the week after.

“It is not easy running a country that is multiracial and multi-religious, if we go on only looking at issues like this”.

He also denied that Umno’s political bureau had a hand in deciding Utusan’s editorial direction.

Hishammuddin urged all media to be careful and sensitive in reporting matters on race and religion and not merely publish sensational news.

He added that the media should have an internal mechanism to decide the boundaries when it comes to reporting on race and religion.

“If there is a problem, you have to have your own internal mechanism to check each other,” he said.

“If we take action against Utusan, what about the allegations against the Chinese papers? Then the Chinese papers will say what about the contents of the Tamil papers. And the Tamil papers will then look at the English papers. It will never end,” he reiterated.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 6:37 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Islam
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Husam: Taktik ‘talam dua muka’ Najib makan diri

FMT Staff
 | May 13, 2011

Free Malaysia Today

PETALING JAYA: Ahli Jawatankuasa Kerja PAS Pusat Datuk Husam Musa menyifatkan pendirian Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak dalam menangani isu ‘konspirasi Kristian’ hanya memakan dirinya sendiri.

Husam berkata Najib sebelum ini ‘merestui’ agenda Utusan Malaysia memainkan sentimen ‘bimbang’ (fear psychology) hanya untuk memastikan supaya orang Melayu kekal menyokong Umno-Barisan Nasional (BN) dalam pilihan raya akan datang sama seperti isu ‘tengkolok bersalib’ yang dikenakan Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah menjelang pilihan raya umum tahun 1986.

“Namun apabila agenda ini bergerak memakan tuan dan langkah Utusan Malaysia ditolak oleh majoriti rakyat, Najib tiba-tba berubah mengambil watak bersikap lebih sederhana dan pertengahan,” kata exco kanan kerajaan negeri Kelantan itu.

Malah Najib kelmarin mengeluarkan kenyataannya bahawa teori menukar kedudukan Islam dalam perlembagaan negara adalah tidak nwujud dan menyeru ‘semua pihak membendung perasaan emosi untuk tidak membuat perkara yang boleh mengganggu-gugat keamanan, keharmonian serta kesejahteraan negara’.

“Persoalannya, jika Perdana Menteri sedar gerakan ini membahayakan negara kenapa Utusan Malaysia bebas menjadi ‘anak nakal’ yang tidak bertanggungjawab menabur api fitnah sesuka hati?

Dua watak PM

“Ini bermakna, Perdana Menteri selaku presiden Umno sebenarnya merestui agenda Utusan Malaysia. Perdana Menteri bermain dua watak sekaligus dan membawa ‘dua pancing satu umpan’.

“Sikap talam dua muka dengan isu sensitif ini dikuatkan dengan tiada sebarang tindakan tegas diambil ke atas Utusan Malaysia.

“Dengan itu, boleh dipastikan Utusan Malaysia akan terus-menerus menggunakan kad perkauman dan agama menjelang pilihan raya umum akan datang,” katanya dalam satu kenyataan hari ini.

Beliau berkata tindakan Utusan yang bersifat provokatif dan Najib dalam masa yang sama mengambil sikap lepas tangan adalah sama sekali menyalahi ajaran Islam dan berbahaya kepada norma kerukunan masyarakat Malaysia pada keseluruhannya.

“Ini adalah politik Machiavelli pada peringkat yang tertinggi,” katanya.

Surat teguran

Sementara itu, Utusan Malaysia semalam dikenakan surat teguran daripada Kementerian Dalam Negeri (KDN) berhubung laporan muka

hadapannya ‘Kristian agama rasmi?’ serta laporan yang disiarkan di halaman 5 pada Sabtu lalu.

Selain teguran, surat tersebut juga memanggil pengarang Utusan memberi penjelasan kerana menyiarkan perkara yang didapati bertentangan dengan Akta Mesin Cetak dan Penerbitan (AMCP) 1984.

KDN dalam satu kenyataannya berkata surat teguran tersebut telah diserahkan kepada Ketua Pengarang Kumpulan Utusan Melayu, Datuk Aziz Ishak.

“KDN akan terus memantau setiap akhbar yang dikeluarkan supaya tidak menyebarkan berita-berita yang boleh menggemparkan fikiran orang ramai atau kandungan-kandungan yang bertentangan dengan AMCP 1984,” menurut kenyataan itu lagi.

Laporan berkenaan yang memetik tulisan dalam blog mencetuskan kontroversi apabila mendakwa terdapat konspirasi sekumpulan pendita Kristian yang didakwa berikrar untuk melantik Perdana Menteri daripada penganut agama itu.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 4:46 pm and is filed under
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Lopsided emphasis on Islamic civilisation

By
FMT Staff
 | May 12, 2011

Free Malaysia Today

KUCHING: Five out of the 10 chapters in the currently used Form Four history book are dedicated to Islamic history and civilisation.

The Association of Churches in Sarawak (ACS), Sibu branch, which raised the issue, said the other religious civilisations were “sidelined”.

“ACS Sibu is not against the teachings of Islam.

“Our stand is for religions to be presented in a balanced manner instead of putting heavy emphasis on Islam while the other religions are sidelined, ” it said, adding that there appeared to be an attempt to condition the minds of the young to accept the syariah law as the “suitable and practical law for a multi-racial nation”.

The ACS said in a statement that the new modified history books contained “quite a number of factual errors and contradictions”.

“For example, out of the 10 chapters, five are on Islamic history and civilisation. The other religious civilisations are only given passing mention.

“It gives the impression that other religions are less favourable. There is scant mention of Sarawak and Sabah and the roles of non-Malays in the development of the country and independence has been downplayed,” the ACS said.

The association also expressed its concern over the decision to make History a compulsory subject in 2013.

It urged the government to immediately rectify the situation.

“We, as a people, as a nation, have come a long way and we hope our history books would reflect this development – promoting a balanced view of all our cultures and religions so that there is better cooperation among all people to bring this nation to greater heights.”

“We also urge the the government to review its decision to make History compulsory.

“With the present passing rate for History being around 60%, it means more students than ever will fail the entire SPM when History is made compulsory,” it said, echoing the views of the National Union of the Teaching Profession (NUTP) over History becoming a compulsory subject.

In a December 2010 report, textbook author Dr Ranjit Singh Malhi had said that the amount of text related to Christianity, Hinduism and Buddhism in the current Form Four history textbook had reduced by more than 25% compared to the earlier textbook.

He also said there was a lopsided emphasis on Islamic civilisation and that the current history textbooks did not tell the whole truth.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 11:53 am and is filed under
Education
,
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Mahathir’s thinking legacy

AB Sulaiman | May 11, 11

Malaysiakini

A friend had lent me Mahathir Mohamad’s memoir ‘A Doctor in the House’ to read. This was followed with the request for me to review it. I have read it but would decline his request for its review.

I have a reason for this refusal. It is that Barry Wain (the author of ‘Malaysian Maverick: Mahathir Mohamad in Turbulent Times’) has already made one such authoritative and well-reasoned review in Malaysiakini (April 4, 2011). Any additional attempt on my part would be sheer duplication.

Instead I’d now highlight one major point raised by Wain in his review and use it to ‘review’ Mahathir’s memoir.

It is that Wain claims that Mahathir has used facts mixed with fiction in his writing to become a mixture of both, a ‘faction’. Wain cites the case of the construction of the North-South Expressway of a Mahathir faction and I quote:

“Mahathir claims that ‘eventually a group of Malay contractors was persuaded to build and operate’ the North-South Expressway. Actually, United Engineers (Malaysia) Bhd did not take much persuading. The company was controlled – secretly, for a time – by his Umno and given the contract to build the road and collect the tolls for 30 years to secure the ruling party’s financial base.”

This revelation is very sobering, and I have noted too that Mahathir has used faction constantly during his tenure as prime minister.

I understand that faction is also known as a portmanteau. It is a familiar usage in English, like morphing or fusing ‘smoke’ and ‘fog’ to become smog, and ‘stagnation’ and ‘inflation’ to become stagflation.

I’d highlight another faction which occurred during Mahathir’s time. It’s the two words ‘information’ and ‘entertainment’ morphed to become ‘infotainment’.

I am not aware whether it was Mahathir himself who introduced this fusion to the Malaysian domain. But during his time he made use of the mass media, especially radio and television, to disseminate government information while providing entertainment to the general public.

At first glance there is nothing wrong there.

But soon enough the word ‘information’ had become ‘propaganda’ when only good news (i.e. good things done by the government) were disseminated and highlighted while bad ones suppressed.

It did not end there. ‘Government’ morphed into the ‘national ruling coalition’ or ‘political party’, namely Barisan National (and especially Umno).

When this happened the line between ‘government’ and ‘political party’ disappeared into thin air. Ever since then in this country ‘government’ has always been understood to mean ‘Umno’ and ‘Barisan Nasional’.

Disappearance of the line of separation

To wit, the disappearance of the line of separation between ‘government’ and ‘Barisan National’ has resulted in the people becoming beholden to the whims and designs of the political bureau.

Infotainment has been used by the political leaders to hide their shortcomings, exaggerate their achievements, while moulding the thinking of the people to conform to party design. More than this, the ruling party has gained control of what the people can hear, read, say, see, and most importantly, think.

I am of the opinion that the Mahathir has not only introduced the principle of portmanteau to the Malay thinking domain but had used it constantly, regularly and effectively.

The result has been spectacular. There was the breaking down of the check-and-balance or the separation of power inherent in the democratic system. This was followed by the breaking down of the rule of law, the tampering with the democratic process and the elimination of the transparency, responsibility, and accountability in governance.

Since then civil servants lost their bearing, and instead of showing loyalty to the people they show deference to the political leaders. Indeed the public perception today is that even the AG’s office, the MACC, and the police are beholden to political leaders but not to the national interest and people’s well-being.

Now Mahathir is no longer in the party hierarchy but has left the principle of portmanteau very much alive in the minds of the Malay polity. Portmanteau might well be Mahathir’s gift to the Malay intellect. It is practised even to this day!

To substantiate, let me highlight some ‘products’ of portmanteau gripping the country even now. As it is a product (i.e. the pattern of behaviour arising from the thinking) I have to introduce a new word, it being percefaction, morphed from the words ‘perception’, ‘fact’ and ‘fiction’ to label it; with thanks and deference to Wain.

In this case a perception is taken as fact, and this is then disseminated as the Quranic truth, i.e. the perception that everyone else has to subscribe to.

The country is now having a lot of percefactions, under the present Ketuanan Melayu leadership and management. I’d cite a few below examples to illustrate.

The first is the term ‘Ketuanan Melayu’ itself: just what does this mean and where does its legitimacy lie? Nobody seems to know but the Malays have absorbed it as a ‘given’ factor. To me it’s a coinage that has captured the imagination of the Malay community who then resorts to it to suit their advantage.

Secondly it’s the case of Ibrahim Ali of Perkasa. To him Malay ‘privilege’ (the word used in the constitution) is equitable with ‘right’. So he has been protecting Malay rights while accusing non-Malays of wishing to deny him of this right.

Thirdly, this country is secular with Islam identified as the religion it is associated with. This has been the background and content of the constitution pertaining to religion. But percefaction does not stop bigots from believing and insisting it is the official religion. It did not stop Mahathir from proclaiming Malaysia as an Islamic country in 2001.

The fourth case is the case of Pembela, the Muslim organisation in defence of Islam. Pembela has noted that there has been a decline of Islam in this country. This is of course a debatable point. But Malay percefaction has blamed Christianity as one of the biggest contributing factors for this perceived declined.

Then there is the swearing on the Quran i.e. when a person resorts to swearing on the Islamic holy book to establish a truth when conventional means (like producing facts, evidence, witnesses) are dicey. The on-going Datuk T saga is a case in point.

Re-writing of history

Next is the re-writing of history. This is when Malaysian history is re-written to get rid of unpalatable or non-existing Malay historical facts and replace them with myth, mystery and perhaps a bit of mysticism.

More tellingly, percefaction would tend to confuse the simple mind of the simple-minded Malay, as in the Allah case. Here the Malay would just forbid non-Muslims from using ‘Allah’ to mean ‘God’. To him the Islamic God is the One God Almighty, but in Christianity God comes in three forms, God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit. So when it is used by non-Muslims it confuses the Malay no end – and he hates to be confused!

There is a very long list of other percefactions taking place in this country. How could this be happening?

This was made possible when Mahathir made use of one form of percefaction – that ‘might is right’. He has made himself as the moderniser of the country and saviour of the Malay people, and persuade, coerce and force the people believe this. Woe to those who’d disagree and rebel. His memoir is full of this double claim.

To ensure he gets what he wants a whole series of laws were either renewed or legislated, all designed to silence or eliminate dissent. The list is equally long and I’d just mention the ISA, the Sedition Act and the OSA as immediate examples.

I am of course not at all in favour of faction when abused in the manner illustrated above. When improperly used it tends to produce percefaction. It’s might is right supporting stance protects the abusers, and overtly and truly pulled the ignorant by the nose. Quran swearing is a perfect example of such abuse.

Moreover social indices during Mahathir’s time would indicate the ills of percefaction and its precursor faction. The country prospered, yes, but crime rate went up and corruption soared. The economy plunged, the people splintered with many running away to more hospitable countries, investments both foreign and local dried. The entire social fabric of the country has been shaken.

International indices like transparency, per capita income, education standards, and corruption were also plunging down.

All of this happening with the people blissfully believing they were under the good care of a most benevolent, caring, just, fair, and democratic government: the country’s denial mode is rather spectacular, and for this I do not believe Mahathir’s thinking legacy is good for the country.

With this I hope to have appeased my friend who has thoughtfully lent me Mahathir’s memoir.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 11:15 pm and is filed under
General
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


MCA: Presumptuous to assume Utusan’s guilt

Malaysiakini
 | May 13, 11

MCA president Dr Chua Soi Lek said that it would be presumptuous to assume that Utusan Malaysia’s ‘Christian conspiracy’ report was wrong while investigations were still ongoing.

While stating that the party was of the opinion that the home ministry’s reprimand letter on Utusan Malaysia was insufficient, the proper way to address the issue was through a thorough police investigation.

Speaking during a press conference at the MCA headquarters today, Chua said that if the police probe concludes that the report was unfounded, then those who are responsible for the Utusan report should be suspended as a warning.

“I think police should investigate whether the report is true. If it is not true,whoever responsible for the article and the editor should be suspended.

“So, we don’t know yet, how are you so sure that what was carried (by Utusan) was not true? If is true, whoever responsible (for the conspiracy) should be investigated and exposed.

“We are being presumptuous that somebody is wrong, we don’t know yet,” he said.

Chua’s nuetral stance towards the veracity of the Utusan report comes at a time when some of his party colleagues are trying to call Utusan’s bluff outright.

Hisham, Rais might have ‘privileged information’

A flurry of police reports have been lodged over the Utusan article and it is understood that the police have recorded statements from some of the individuals involved.

On whether cabinet ministers Hishammuddin Hussein and Rais Yatim had jumped the gun in affirming the Utusan report soon after it was published, Chua said that this conclusion would be deemed presumptuous as well.

“They may have their source of information or are privileged to information that you and me don’t have. I would jumping to conclusion by casting judgement on what they said.

“One should not assume that whatever they said is all wrong, that is too presumptuous… They have information… and they made a conclusion and statements,” he said.

Critics have pointed out that Hishammuddin, who is home minister, and Rais, who is information, communications and culture minister, appeared to have taken the Utusan report at face value soon after it came out.

It was argued that the due was fanning the flames of an already volatile situation.

Will MCA boycott Utusan?

The Utusan report, citing two pro-Umno blogs, states that there was a conspiracy to turn Malaysia into a Christian country and install a Christian prime minister. Opposition DAP was allegedly part of the plot.

Until today, the newspaper had yet to furnish any evidence of its claims while one of two blogs used as sources has deleted the contentious posting.

To another question, Chua clarified that MCA did not formally discussed the possibility of boycotting Utusan, as earlier reported.

“Well that was the statement made by a leader, I won’t say it is not the stand of the party, it was never discuss in the party,” he said.

On April 23, MCA publicity chief Loh Seng Kok called on the public to boycott Utusan over an article which called for a ‘1Melayu, 1bumi’ movement.

The article said that all Malay and bumiputera groups should rally behind the movement because the Chinese community were now “united” behind DAP, as shown by the results of the April 16 Sarawak elections.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 3:48 pm and is filed under
MCA
,
Media
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Media syaitan eksploit isu Kristian agama rasmi

Oleh
Afiq Mohd Noor
 | May 13, 2011

Free Malaysia Today

Perkara 3(1) Perlembagaan Persekutuan memperuntukkan bahawa Islam adalah agama bagi Persekutuan tetapi agama-agama lain boleh diamalkan secara aman dan harmoni.

Saya pasti ramai di antara kita yang sering mendengar peruntukkan ini, bahkan Perkara 3 (1) seringkali dibaca bersama-sama dengan Perkara 11 berkenaan dengan kebebasan beragama.

Belum pun reda dengan kontroversi penggunaan nama Allah dan Al Kitab, baru–baru ini kita digemparkan sekali lagi dengan laporan separuh masak Utusan Malaysia tentang usaha untuk menjadikan Kristian sebagai agama rasmi di Malaysia.

Maka seperti biasa, banyaklah kumpulan–kumpulan ultra-Melayu seperti Perkasa dan Pembela bangkit kononnya untuk memberi peringatan kepada saudara–saudara Muslim lain tentang ancaman terbaru yang boleh menggugat kedudukan Islam di Malaysia.

Sebagai seorang Muslim, semangat tidak kena tempat kumpulan–kumpulan ini sangat membimbangkan saya. Bahkan ianya boleh menjejaskan imej Islam itu sendiri.

Masakan tidak, kita lebih senang mengambil sikap menyalahkan unsur–unsur luaran daripada mencari kesilapan kita sendiri. Ambil sahaja isu Al Kitab, ramai yang berfikiran dangkal dan sempit kononya dengan terbit Al Kitab maka ramai remaja–remaja Muslim akan lebih mudah terpengaruh dengan ajaran Kristian.

Sedangkan realitinya, berapa ramai di kalangan Muslim yang mula membaca Al Quran dari umur tujuh tahun sehingga 67 tahun terpengaruh dan terkesan peribadi dan tingkah lakunya dengan kehebatan Al Quran?

Majlis Raja-Raja

Berdasarkan kaca mata undang-undang Perlembagaan, untuk membolehkan Kristian dijadikan sebagai agama Persekutuan, satu pindaan kepada Perkara 3 Perlembagaan Persekutuan harus dilaksanakan. Dan sudah pasti ia memerlukan 2/3 majoriti dan kebenaran daripada Majlis Raja–Raja sebagai penjaga dan ketua agama Islam.

Justeru saya kira, sekiranya mana–mana parti politik dipilih untuk menjadi kerajaan persekutuan dan ingin meminda peruntukan– peruntukan penting ini, mereka harus mengikut prosedur yang telah ditetapkan oleh Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Sepanjang lebih dari 50 tahun memerintah, peruntukan–peruntukan penting di dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan telah beberapa kali dipinda oleh Barisan Nasional yang saya yakin cukup pakar dalam hal ini.

Pada tahun 1988, Perkara 121 yang memperuntukan bidang kuasa kehakiman telah dipinda dan dihakis sehingga kini, bidang kuasa Mahkamah tertakluk di bawah undang–undang persekutuan.

Begitu juga pada tahun 1993, kekebalan Raja–Raja Melayu telah dimansuhkan, dan yang paling tidak masuk akal mereka sanggup meminda Perkara 114 Perlembagaan Persekutuan bagi melanjutkan tempoh perkhidmatan Pengerusi Suruhanjaya Pilihanraya.

Sejarah telah terbentang dihadapan kita, dan saya kira Utusan Malaysia barangkali terlupa atau terlepas pandang insiden–insiden penting yang merobek Perlembagaan Malaysia selama lebih 50 tahun dilacurkan oleh Barisan Nasional sewaktu memegang tampuk kuasa.

Isu Kristian sebagai agama rasmi, adalah isu murahan yang dimainkan oleh pihak–pihak tertentu untuk melaga–laga dan mengapi–apikan keharmonian umat berbilang agama ini.

Hubungan rapat

Mengapakan kita seringkali menganggap Kristian sebagai musuh, sedangkan Allah (swt) telah mengiktiraf hubungan rapat di antara Muslim dan Kristian di dalam Surah Al Maidah ayat 82:

“Dan demi sesungguhnya engkau dapati juga (wahai Muhammad s.a.w.) mereka yang paling hampir kasih sayangnya kepada orang- orang yang beriman adalah orang-orang yang berkata, “Kami adalah orang-orang Nasara (Kristian), sebabnya mereka itu terdiri daripada kalangan orang alim dan ahli ibadat dan mereka itu tidak sombong.”

Sekiranya, kita meneladani sejarah awal Rasulullah (saw) hubungan rapat di antara Muslim dan Kristian telah lama terwujud.

Ketika menghadapi tribulasi oleh Musyrikin Makkah, Rasulullah (saw) telah memerintahkan para sahabat untuk mencari perlindungan di Habsyah di bawah pemerintahan seorang Raja beragama Kristian yang bernama Najashi yang diiktiraf oleh Rasulullah (saw) sebagai raja yang adil.

Mengapakah hubungan baik ini ingin dicemari dengan sangkaan buruk orang–orang yang dangkal, sempit pemahaman Islamnya dan mempunyai motif politik yang jahat?

Islam telah menyediakan formula terbaik dalam menghadapi fitnah ini. Dalam Surah Al Hujuraat ayat 6 Allah (saw) telah berfirman yang bermaksud:

“Wahai orang-orang yang beriman! Jika datang kepada kamu seorang fasik membawa sesuatu berita maka selidikilah (untuk menentukan kebenarannya, supaya kamu tidak menimpakan sesuatu kaum dengan perkara yang tidak diingini – dengan sebab kejahilan kamu mengenainya) – sehingga menjadikan kamu menyesali apa yang kamu telah lakukan.

Saya menyeru agar kita berhati–hati dan berwaspada dengan media–media syaitan ini.

—

Penulis ialah ahli NGO Lawyers for Liberty.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 2:17 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Media
,
Religion
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Najib’s Animal Farm

By
David Martin

May 13, 2011 | MalaysianInsider

I read George Orwell’s Animal Farm when I was helping my brother out with his university assignment back when I was in secondary school.

The story seemed a bit nonsensical to me back then. Talking animals who revolted against their masters. Pigs taking over as the leaders of the farm. A pig named Napoleon, no less.

Then again, when you grew up in the Mahathir era, the rakyat were more gullible back then weren’t they? With the advent of technology in the 21st century, it’s harder to keep a lid on the truth.

I woke up early this morning to read on The Malaysian Insider that Utusan Malaysia was merely given a warning for publishing unsubstantiated news (read: lies) for its front page headline by the all-powerful Home Ministry.

My mind is cast back to several years back when the oldest newspaper in Sarawak, The Sarawak Tribune had its printing permit taken away merely for publishing a photo of a man looking at the infamous prophet’s cartoon. That was deemed serious enough for a suspension which ultimately led to the demise of the daily.

A couple of years back, the same ministry decided to stir things up a bit by hauling up the Catholic weekly, Herald, for using the word “Allah” in the publication. Their reason was a flimsy one at best, that the word was exclusive to Islam despite its widespread use worldwide by Christians predating even the formation of Malaysia.

The is the same ministry which clamped down on the publication by Parti Keadilan Rakyat for allegedly making unsubstantiated claims. Of course up until now, the renewal of the printing permit for PKR is still pending approval despite the year or so since its application was submitted.

Again, this is the same ministry that saw it fit to say and do nothing when two journalists from Al-Islam decided to conduct a covert infiltration operation at St Anthony’s Catholic Church Pudu to investigate alleged apostasy amongst Muslims.

Those allegations were promptly dispelled when it was proven that those attending Mass were Catholic students from Sabah and Sarawak. To add insult to the matter, the Communion wafer was desecrated by these ignorant and disrespectful buffoons in the name of their religion.

We all know how that ended. Al-Islam made a grudging apology by way of a short statement. And that only came after Archbishop Tan Sri Datuk Murphy Pakiam demanded it.

And now, we see Utusan discrediting Christians in Malaysia by portraying the community as challenging the status of Islam as the religion of the Federation. And they got a mere slap on the wrist and are still free to print rubbish fit only for nasi lemak wrapping.

So, is Najib the Malaysian version of Napoleon with Utusan the Squealer?

All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others. “Oink! Oink!” I say.

* David Martin reads The Malaysian Insider.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 10:00 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Islam
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Nurul Izzah gets threat to kidnap daughter

By
Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani
 | May 13, 2011

The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, May 13 — PKR vice president Nurul Izzah Anwar said today that she had received a text message containing a threat to kidnap her three-year-old, daughter.

The mother of two told reporters that the person warned her against continuing to support Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim or else her daughter would end up sharing the same fate as Sharlinie Mohd Nashar.

Sharlinie, 5, was abducted in 2008 at a playground near her house in Petaling Jaya and remains missing.

The Lembah Pantai MP, who is also Anwar’s eldest child, believes that the threat was politically motivated to end her father’s career.

“The person threatened that my daughter will share the same fate as Sharlinie. If I continue to support my father then I will not be able to save my child.

“The person also threatened that if I do not urge my father to stop from politics then something will happen to my daughter ,” she told reporters after lodging a report at Dang Wangi police station.

She added that she received her first SMS threat on May 11 and a second SMS on May 12 reminding her of the threat.

“On May 5th  2011, I received the first SMS from that individual stressing that there was something important to tell me. The person also asked me to call back immediately. The SMS was sent twice that same day.

“I am very worried on the safety of my children and family. This is not the first time that my family has been threatened with the sex video and sabotage of my father’s car,” she said.

On Tuesday, the PKR de facto leader’s driver lodged a police report on an alleged murder attempt on his boss after discovering that the brakes of the Mercedes Benz he was driving had been tampered with last month.

Last month, Datuk Shazryl Eskay Abdullah performed the sumpah laknat oath by swearing in God’s name that Anwar is the man featured in a sex video that was recently shown to journalists.

Shazryl, a key protagonist behind the sex video allegedly featuring Anwar, has insisted that the opposition leader is the actor in the 21-minute video.

Shazryl, former Malacca chief minister Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Thamby Chik, and Perkasa’s Datuk Shuib Lazim Abdul Rahim, collectively known as “Datuk T”, have claimed responsibility for the video.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 11:39 am and is filed under
Crime
,
PKR
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Our secular Federal Constitution, with its Islamic aspects

By Pak Sako | May 13, 2011

The Malaysian Insider

MAY 13 — I respond to Professor Abdul Aziz Bari’s view regarding Islam and the Federal Constitution.

He gives his opinions on why the Federal Constitution and the Federation of Malaysia are not secular. I comment on his opinions.

I show why our Constitution and the Federation is secular, even whilst it acknowledges and appreciates the social and historic context of Islam in modern Malaysia.

1. Does the Constitution fit the definition of secular?

Professor Aziz does not define ‘Islamic’ or ‘secular’. Yet in his calculation the Constitution “may not be Islamic” but is “certainly not secular”.

It is difficult to envisage a carefully drafted constitution containing indeterminate definitions on a basic character such as a state being secular or theocratic. Professor Aziz should know that deliberate account was taken of Islam in the drafting of the Constitution by the Reid Commission.

It therefore cannot be a willy-nilly ‘neither this nor that’, of the Federation of Malaysia being left constitutionally ‘neither Islamic nor secular’. It must be one or the other, whether rigorously defined or imbued in spirit. The Federation cannot be schizophrenic.

The ‘neither-this-nor-that’ condition is also improbable from the conceptual standpoint.

Consider a working definition of a secular constitution, or a constitution that defines a secular state. Such a constitution would be judged against these requirements: it (i) guarantees individual and corporate freedom of religion, (ii) deals with the individual as a citizen irrespective of his religion, and (iii) is not connected or defined by a religion nor does it sanction the state to promote or interfere with religion (based on D.E. Smith, 1963, ‘What is a secular state?’, pp. 3-22 in India as a Secular State, Princeton, Princeton University Press).

The Federal Constitution of Malaysia easily passes the first two tests. For the third, the answer is less clear. Islam features in 9 out of the 181 Articles in the Constitution (namely, Article 3, 11, 12, 34, 42, 76, 97, 150 and 160) but religious principles do not define and are not assigned for administrating the state. Where there are rules pertaining to the religious affairs of Muslims, a separation principle is apparent (in Article 97, zakat and other religious payments made by Muslims are to go into a fund separate from the Federal Consolidated Fund). The Constitution also clearly does not speak of promoting or interfering with any religion.

A score of 2½ out of 3 could therefore be given on this measure of secularity.

Even if we concentrate on the separation aspect of secularity alone, i.e., detachment from theocracy in terms of administration, democratic model and national laws (as opposed to personal laws), Malaysia is a secular country.

Professor Aziz’s assertion that the Constitution is definitely not secular does not hold water.

2. Article 3(1): Is it Islamic or secular?

The lawyer Syahredzan Johan showed that nowhere in Article 3(1) or elsewhere in the Constitution does it say that Islam is the “official religion” of the Federation.

Professor Aziz responds that the absence of the literal specification “official religion” or “state religion” in the Constitution is no sufficient condition for concluding that Malaysia is a secular state. This is fair.

Nevertheless, it can be argued that the absence of such an explicit indication tilts in favour of the secular argument, in that it negates the necessary theocratic condition for a state to be decidedly ‘not secular’.

To be considered a theocratic Islamic State the Federation should be properly and explicitly defined as such.

Syahredzan Johan argued that Malaysia is secular on grounds of it not being bound by the Quran or Islamic legal provisions. For an Islamic State, the supreme and guiding law of the land would be the Quran and the Sunnah.

Professor Aziz’s tentative “may not be Islamic” is here resolved. If by ‘Islamic’ he meant ‘Islamic State’, then this is not what the Federation is.

3. The spirit of the Constitution: Is it Islamic or secular?

Art Harun provides in his article some of the historical background necessary for ascertaining this. His piece should be read fully to appreciate the force of the argument. Here I paraphrase some key sentences and sources because they clarify so much:

The Alliance (the precursor to Barisan National) submitted a memorandum to the Reid Commission responsible for drafting the Federal Constitution. On Islam, the memo says:

“The religion of Malaysia shall be Islam. The observance of this principle shall not impose any disability on non-Muslim nationals professing and practising their own religion, and shall not imply that the State is not a secular State.”

Subsequently, the Reid Commission’s report which was published in February 1957 states the following on the position of Islam:

“We have considered the question whether there should be any statement in the Constitution to the effect that Islam should be the State religion. There was universal agreement that if any such provision were inserted it must be made clear that it would not in any way affect the civil rights of non-Muslims — ‘the religion of Malaysia shall be Islam. The observance of this principle shall not impose any disability on non-Muslim nationals professing and practising their own religion and shall not imply that the State is not a secular State’.”

“The majority of us think that it is best to leave the matter on this basis, looking to the fact that the Counsel for the Rulers said to us — ‘It is Their Highnesses’ considered view that it would not be desirable to insert some declaration such as has been suggested that the Muslim Faith or Islamic Faith be the established religion of the Federation.”

Justice Hamid, a member of the Reid Commission from Pakistan, commented:

“It has been recommended by the Alliance that the Constitution should contain a provision declaring Islam to be the religion of the State. It was also recommended that it should be made clear in that provision that a declaration to the above effect will not impose any disability on non-Muslim citizens in professing, propagating and practising their religions, and will not prevent the State from being a secular State.

The British Government White Paper of June 1957, containing the Constitutional Proposals for independent Malaya, states:

“There has been included in the Federal Constitution a declaration that Islam is the religion of the Federation. This will in no way affect the present position of the Federation as a secular State, and every person will have the right to profess and practise his own religion and the right to propagate his religion, though this last right is subject to any restrictions imposed by State law relating to the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the Muslim religion.”

In the case of Che Omar bin Che Soh v. Public Prosecutor in 1988, the Malaysian Supreme Court, which comprised of (among others) the Lord President Tun Salleh Abbas maintained that Malaysia is a secular country:

“It is the contention of Ramdas Tikamdass that because Islam is the religion of the Federation, the law passed by Parliament must be imbued with Islamic and religious principles…

Needless to say that this submission, in our view, will be contrary to the constitutional and legal history of the Federation and also to the Civil Law Act which provides for the reception of English common law in this country.

However, we have to set aside our personal feelings because the law in this country is still what it is today, secular law, where morality not accepted by the law is not enjoying the status of the law.”

4. What does Article 3(1) mean?

Professor Aziz opines that “the position of Islam as “the religion of the Federation” in Article 3(1) could be taken to mean that Islam is a national or constitutional ideology”. But this would be reading too much into it. Ideology is a strong word and a reading of the constitution does not justify such a proposition.

An alternative take on Article 3(1), one that is harmonious with the Reid Commission conclusions, is as follows. “Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation” could be taken to mean that even though Islam is the socially dominant religious identity prevailing across the Federation, e.g., in terms of the number of its adherents and history (the first part of the Article), this should in no way impede the freedom to practice other religions in Malaysia (its second part).

This interpretation is operationally compatible with Professor L.A. Sheridan’s view of what he believes is the meaning of the first part of Article 3(1), that is, “insofar as federal business (such as ceremonial business) involves religious matters, that business is to be regulated in accordance with the religion of Islam”. This is common sense. It would be out of place, even to a non-Muslim Malaysian, if state ceremonial affairs where cultural symbolism is unavoidable (such as when a Malay Muslim ruler is present) were conducted according to another religion.

This matter of ceremony helps explain away what Professor Aziz supposes is a constitutional anomaly, namely, that a secular constitution would surely forbid the constitutional requirement that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong take the Islamic oath of “wallahi, wabillahi and watallahi”. A secular constitution that gives due respect to cultural significances in this way is not any less secular. Note how Thailand’s constitution is a secular one in spite of Section 8 of the constitution which states that the Thai “King is a Buddhist” (and the “defender of all faiths”). Note also that Scotland is a part of the United Kingdom, but the Scottish Parliament had declared Scotland a secular state even as it maintains a religious monarch.

5. Does Article 12(2) discredit the secular argument?

Professor Aziz goes on to suggest that the constitution cannot be secular since Article 12(2) “has allowed the authorities to use public funds for Islam”. He says so without explaining why this is not secular.

What Article 12(2) as a whole says is that while every religious group is free to create and operate “institutions for the education of children in its own religion”, it will be deemed legal (i.e., it shouldn’t be taken as illegal) if the Federation or a State chooses to create and operate Islamic institutions or incurs expenditure to provide assistance in Islamic instruction.

The first part of the Article is a statement of religious freedom that is not in conflict with secularity. The second part implies that it is of no harm (and it might in fact be socially fair) for the Federation or State to specially assist in the provision of such institutions for its Muslim citizens where necessary.

This could be understood in the context of historic economic conditions. A secular state aiding an economically disadvantaged religious group does not make it non-secular.

Professor Aziz has suggested that Article 12(2) “does not mean that the state is prevented from assisting other religions”. This case only underlines the kind of treatment that a secular state, by conceptual implication, would accord to religions.

6. Can a secular state have syariah courts?

Professor Aziz argues that “a secular state would not allow religious courts, such as the syariah courts”.

This is incorrect.

Nothing prevents a constitutional framework that is secular from accommodating religious courts to meet the needs of its citizens.

Hence syariah courts operate in constitutionally secular India. The United Kingdom, with its “mainly secular culture”, has Jewish courts that are in daily use. Secular Singapore has its own government-run syariah court.

7. Does a theocracy protect religious rights and freedoms better than a secularist system?

One of Professor Aziz’s points sidetracks from the debate at hand. He claims that “secularism is not necessarily the means to protect non-Muslims”, and “that countries professing secularism are somehow unable to guarantee the equality and protection of minorities”.

A brief response is in order.

In spite of the difficulties, many secular countries do earnestly strive to ensure equality and protection for different religious groups.

Their sincerity and effort might be better appreciated when the situation in some theocratic countries is considered.

There is institutionalised intolerance where minority religions are concerned in some places (the public practice of non-Muslim religions is outlawed in Saudi Arabia) and uneasy tolerance susceptible to violent conflict in others (murder and the burning of places of worship in Egypt).

On balance, religious freedoms and diversity fare better in secular countries than in theocratic ones.

8. Conclusion

Malaysia can be described as a constitutionally secular country with a state religion.

The Islamic aspects of the Constitution appreciate the cultural and historical context of the nation and its people. A healthy nation state cannot be begun on a blank slate. Its flavour should be acknowledged.

The implied secularity of the Federal Constitution does not at all mean that the state is valueless or unIslamic. The values that a secular, progressive state would commit to, such as justice, incorruptibility, compassion, reason, fairness and respect for diversity are all underlying values found in Islam and other belief systems.

Professor Abdul Aziz Bari’s narrow conception of ‘secular’ — a conception held also by some of the religious — refers to the Communist tradition motivated by hostility towards religion or God (anti-religion or anti-God). It might be inaccurate to label this ‘secular’. But this definition is favoured by some because it serves the interest of a certain religious ideology.

The kind of secular political system that we actually see in practice in the progressive world is different. Being secular is about striving to treat citizens equally regardless of religion and avoiding preferential treatment for a citizen from a particular religion or belief system over other religions or belief systems. The diversity of religions is accepted and may sometimes be celebrated.

The secular-versus-Islamic conflict surrounding our Federal Constitution is a mirage rather than there being any actual constitutional problem.

The reluctance and resistance towards accepting the secular nature of the Constitution is really due to the rise and influence of political Islam in the last 30 years.

This has become embodied in competitive party politics, a growing religious bureaucracy flexing its authority, and heightened feelings of religious exclusivity and religious supremacy in society.

In the interplay of the above-mentioned factors, certain Articles (e.g., Article 12(2)), state laws or by-laws could have been interpreted and practiced in a way that possibly exceed the content and spirit of the Constitution (e.g., the overreaching powers of the religious bureaucracy on at about 60% of the population and their influence on the instruments of governance). Points are scored in bucking against the secular spirit of the Federal Constitution. Fearful of losing support, politicians do not dare to publicly acknowledge the secular quality of the Constitution, much less speak in support of it.

Consider the length to which PAS goes. In declaring its position on Article 3(1), PAS has implied that all the federated states of Malaysia have Islam as their official religion because they belong to the Federation whose religion is Islam (rather than the other way around). PAS clutches at straws to justify an official religion status. PAS does not even bother that this goes against Sarawak and Sabah’s 20/18-point agreement that there shall be no state religion for these states!

Such precedents are dangerous. A multicultural country like Malaysia could do well to revert and properly adhere to the Federal Constitution as originally envisioned.

This is an inescapable responsibility for any government in power. — CPI (Centre For Policy Initiatives)

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 1:58 pm and is filed under
Constitution
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


PM-Christian meet confounds more than clarifies

By
Terence Netto

May 13, 11 | Malaysiakini

One headline ‘
Christian leaders pledge to respect Islam’s status
‘ was intimation enough about what went on at yesterday’s meeting between Christian leaders and Prime Minister Najib Razak.

Ostensibly called to sooth ruffled Christian feathers over allegedly inflammatory reports in Utusan Malaysia, the meeting, as some had feared, did not just fail to come to grips with the underlying issue; it confounded it, if Najib’s remarks to the media afterwards were a guide.

The PM said he was encouraged by two undertakings given by the Christian leaders he met: one, that they will respect the status of Islam as the official religion of this country; and two, that they will cooperate in nurturing peace and harmony among the various faiths.

By implication, these undertakings had to be rendered because there have been doubts about the track record of Christians in respect of the two matters.

Two chapters of our very recent history ought to be noted for perspective.

Early last year, when the ‘Allah’ issue was rife, a series of arson attacks on churches occurred without stirring Christians to high dudgeon: they knew agent provocateurs were at work and that an adverse reaction would only aggravate matters.

These arson attacks were followed by what appeared to look like retaliatory attacks on Muslim places of worship, such as the desecration of a mosque through the dumping of pig heads on the premises.

Like the Christians, the Muslim community was not moved to anger by these incidents of arson and desecration: they knew devious elements were exploiting matters for base political ends.

These incidents and the general public reaction suggested that the maturity of the ordinary man in the street was of a higher vintage than that of certain politicians and assorted columnists of decidedly incendiary bent.

A radical leap?

More than a year on from the inflammatory incidents that had petered out on the national consciousness like a dud grenade, the public are propositioned by Utusan Malaysia to believe that some Christians are plotting to supplant Islam with Christianity as the official religion and that they are praying for a Christian to be PM of Malaysia.

This hypothesis must represent a radical leap in the Malaysian Christian outlook – from a community that only a year ago was rather nonchalant in the face of arson attacks on churches, it has supposedly metamorphosed into sinister and seditious subversives, plotting to down Islam.

It would be more plausible to believe that the Dalai Lama has suddenly become a fire-breathing Tibetan radical than for Christian Malaysians to plot a Christian makeover to their country.

Still, Christian church leaders yesterday felt obliged, presumably at PM Najib’s request, to assure that they harboured no subversive intentions to the constitution and country, and would not cease to be a willing party to efforts at national concord and reconciliation.

Presumably, upon receipt of the assurance, the Home Ministry rapped Utusan’s editor across the knuckles for the reports that had led to the whole controversy.

No doubt, novelists of the mettle of Abdullah Hussein, the author of ‘Interlok’, would find in these details grist for another work of imagination that would be commended to a later generation of Form 5 students in Malaysia.

It would be anybody’s guess which community would then take umbrage at the slurs the work may well contain.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 9:54 am and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Islam
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Police receive new account of ‘Christian conspiracy’

Aidila Razak
Malaysiakini

May 13, 11

Deputy Inspector-General of Police Khalid Abu Bakar today said that a police report has been lodged which may contain new details on the alleged ‘Christian conspiracy’ as reported by Utusan Malaysia.

“I can confirm that a report was lodged in Penang this morning at 8.50am regarding the issue and the content has variasi (is different) from the other (reports lodged before).

“I urge all parties to not speculate as we are currently investigating the matter,” he told reporters at an urgent press conference in Bukit Aman.

As a result of the report, he said, more people will be called for their statements.

On May 7, Utusan ran a front page report quoting two pro-Umno blogs that said Christian leaders held a meeting in Penang to plot to make Christianity the official religion of the country.

It is believed that Khalid was referring to a police report lodged this morning by Mohamed Razali Abdul Rahman, a DAP member, who attended the function mentioned in the report.

However, Khalid remained tightlipped on the content of the police report, saying he did not want to inflame the issue further.

“We don’t need to go into the details of the report… I understand there are press members who even interviewed the person who lodged the report this morning,” he said.

Asked if the report affirmed allegations that there had been discussions to usurp the position of Islam, Khalid said: “I don’t want to comment on that, it is under investigation.”

Case investigated under Sedition Act

He said the matter was being probed under the Sedition Act 1948 and is given priority.

“This is a serious matter and should not be blown up, that’s why I had warned you earlier…there should not even be parties trying to give clarification,” Khalid added.

When contacted, Penang CPO Deputy Commissioner Ayop Yaakob refused to divulge any information on the matter, saying that Khalid had commented about it in KL.

Meanwhile, on the case of Customs assistant director Ahmad Sarbani Mohamed who fell to his death at the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s Kuala Lumpur headquarters on April 6, Khalid said police were ready to hand over the investigation papers to the Attorney-General’s Chambers for further action.

He said this would be the “second or third” time for the investigation papers to be handed over. They had been returned previously for further investigations.

On another matter, Khalid said there was a news report today on the acid splasher who has terrorised the Klang Valley area in the past few months.

The latest, in Wangsa Maju, brings the total to 23 cases.

Khalid said the perpetrator acted at random and targeted mostly women of all races, by splashing them with corrosive liquid from a mineral water bottle, while riding on a motorcycle.

Police are yet to identify the make of the machine but warned that the culprit has even attacked those seated in cars.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 7:33 pm and is filed under
Islam
,
Media
,
Police
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Putrajaya directed media to attack ‘Buku Jingga’

By
Jimadie Shah Othman
 | May 13, 11

Malaysiakini

An internal memo leaked from Utusan Malaysia appears to point to the possibility that Putrajaya and Umno have a major say in the daily’s editorial direction.

The internal memo dated March 21, obtained by Malaysiakini, states that the Prime Minister’s Department had issued a special directive to all news organisations to attack two key documents of the opposition coalition Pakatan Rakyat.

The first is Pakatan’s joint policy statement, better known as the Buku Jingga (Orang Book), and a list of immediate reforms it has pledged to implement within 100 days of taking over the federal administration.

According to a Utusan source, the internal memo was issued after a briefing at the PM’s office, where participants were informed that Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak would broach on the two documents in his speech the next day (March 22).

The memo states that the premier will speak about the “negative effects” of Pakatan’s pledges and policies stated in Buku Jingga.

Najib’s speech at PICC

It adds that all news organisations are to source comments from several groups, including BN party leaders, economists and academicians to support Najib’s claims.

“These comments can be published in stages beginning tomorrow until Sunday,” says the internal memo, which was written by one of Utusan’s senior journalists.

During that period from March 23, Utusan published at least seven articles on the topic, based on Najib’s speech delivered at the 12th Civil Service Premier Gathering at the Putrajaya International Convention Centre.

In his speech, Najib said election pledges come in documents printed in various colours and the latest was now orange, which he said was filled with populist policies that would bankrupt the country in the long term.

In follow-up reports, Utusan sourced comments from BN leaders such as Rural and Regional Development Minister Mohd Shafie Apdal, Information, Communications and Culture Minister Rais Yatim and MIC Youth chief T Mohan.

‘Agenda set by Umno’

During the period mentioned in the internal memo, Utusan also carried comments from academician Chandra Muzaffar, USM lecturer Sivamurugan Pandian and also published similarly toned commentaries from the daily’s stable of columnists, including Awang Selamat.

Allegations of government interference in Utusan’s editorial policies have been a common allegation of opposition leaders, as well as National Union of Journalists (NUJ) president Hata Wahari (left), who was a senior journalist with the daily until his recent sacking.

A report by Free Malaysia Today (FMT) on Wednesday quoted Hata as saying that Utusan’s editorial direction is decided by Umno’s political bureau, chaired by Najib, during meetings held on Mondays.

Hata said the newspaper’s weekly agenda would be communicated through the Prime Minister’s Department and Utusan would run an issue for three days, unless it receives strong responses.

Once other news organisations pick up on the issue, Utusan would then be free to start writing on other issues, reported FMT.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 1:27 pm and is filed under
Media
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Swiss President Orders an Investigation into Taib’s Assets! – Exclusive

Sarawak Report
 | May 12th, 2011

In a fullsome letter to the Swiss-based NGO, the Bruno Manser Foundation, the President of the Swiss Federation Micheline Calmy-Rey has revealed that she has forwarded information about Taib Mahmud’s assets in Switzerland to the regulatory body FINMA (the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority) for investigation.

Calmy-Rey (pictured left at the Davos World Economic Forum, which is hosted annually in Switzerland) is the country’s Head of State.

The letter, sent on April 8th, is revealingly entitled: “Freezing of possible assets of Abdul Taib Mahmud, head of government of the Malaysian state of Sarawak, in Switzerland”.

In the letter the Swiss President makes clear that the country’s authorities take extremely seriously the concerns that have been raised internationally about Taib’s profiteering from timber corruption and are unhappy that such assets may have been invested in Switzerland.

Letter from the President of the Swiss Federation entitled “Freezing of possible assets of Abdul Taib Mahmud, head of government of the Malaysian state of Sarawak, in Switzerland”

Praise for the Bruno Manser Foundation

The President begins by thanking the Bruno Foundation for its commitment to the fight against corruption.  The foundation was set up in memory of Bruno Manser, the Swiss environmental campaigner who mysteriously disappeared in Sarawak after years of campaigning against logging on behalf of the indigenous Penan tribespeople.  It has recently  spearheaded an international anti-timber corruption campaign, which saw demonstrations outside a number of  property assets linked to the Chief Minister across the globe, including London, Seattle, San Francisco, Tasmania, Sydney, Adelaide and Ottawa.

One of the protests – in Sydney

The Bruno Manser Foundation had also pointed out that Taib Mahmud is believed to have invested heavily in the Swiss Banking system and has a family member married to a Swiss national (Elia Geneid), who has profited from a contested alienation of Native Customary Rights Lands.  Taib is believed to have invested a great deal in the once secretive Swiss banks over past decades, although, following recent reforms, he has more recently focussed his attention on Monaco which remains famously lax on the matter of money-laundering.

Prince Albert of Monaco ‘goes native’ in Mulu, while a guest of Taib last year.

Indeed, the Taib family has publicly fostered its relations with Prince Albert of Monaco over the past couple of years,  including heavily sponsoring the Prince’s own Foundation, which is meant to serve the interests of the environment!

Prince Albert enjoyed a luxury visit only last year to the Mulu Resort, which is owned largely by the Taib family, after the region was forcibly requisitioned from the native Berawan tribe.

The entire surrounding jungle has already been cut down, thanks to Taib, and is now faced with large-scale flooding, owing to his latest plans to dam most of the rivers of Sarawak.  This is all part of the so-called SCORE project, which promises to further hugely enrich Taib’s own family businesses.

As a result, the UN has already made clear that it is actively considering withdrawing the World Heritage status that was originally conferred on the Mulu site.  Concerns such as this, along with recent exposes about the Taib family landgrabs and wider corruption, has clearly been feeding in to the international perception of Abdul Taib Mahmud and his 30 year domination over Sarawak.

English translation of the letter from the President of the Swiss Federation to the Bruno Manser Foundation.

Key letter

In the letter to the Bruno Manser Foundation the President of the Swiss Confederation states that she is referring to a letter mentioning:

“the suspected overseas assets of the head of government of the Malaysian state of  Sarawak, Abdul Taib Mahmud, and of persons from his entourage”.

The letter goes on to thank the foundation for its “comittment against corruption” and confirms the comittment of the Swiss state also to the “restitution of potentates’ embezzled funds to the respective countries”.  Calmy also points out that Switzerland has already restituted 1.7 billion Swiss Franks in such fashion (admittedly this sum only represents a small fraction of the suspected value of Abdul Taib Mahmud’s suspected personal wealth):

“The fight against corruption and the restitution of potentates’ embezzled funds to the respective countries is also of great concern to the Swiss government“, writes Calmy-Rey in the lengthy and personally signed letter. “For years, we have been fighting for a clean financial centre, e.g. with a comprehensive anti-money laundering legislation which contains far-reaching due diligence and reporting obligations for the financial institutions, particularly concerning funds from politically exposed persons (PEP). If, despite these precautionary measures, assets of criminal origin should get to Switzerland, these assets are to be identified and, if possible, restituted to the countries in question. By applying such measures, Switzerland has, during the last 15 years, restituted approximately 1.7 billion Swiss franks, more than any other financial centre of comparable size”.

Switzerland gets clean

In the letter the Swiss President makes clear that she has fully absorbed the issues raised by the anti-timber corruption campaign and that the matter is taken extremely seriously by this, one of the world’s top banking centres and a facility which has been used by Taib to manage his finances.  She confirms that she has formally passed on the matter to FINMA, the powerful Swiss authority charged with investigating money-laundering.

good intentions and progress, Swiss President will initiate a key investigation.

We can further report that FINMA has already contacted the Bruno Manser Foundation to acknowlege that it has been tasked with an investigation into Taib Mahmud’s assets and will be proceeding with that investigation.

FINMA has followed up the President’s instructions and informed the Bruno Manser Foundation that it will be investigating Taib Mahmud’s assets in Switzerland

Key role of the Malaysian Government

Calmy-Rey in her letter also makes clear that under international money-laundering agreements the burden remains on the Malaysian Government to make a request to Switzerland to freeze potentially illegal assets. Otherwise, countries such as Switzerland might normally be constrained to wait until Taib has been ousted.

On the other hand the Swiss President specifically refers in her letter to the recent freezing of assets belonging to the potentates of Lybia, Egypt and Tunisia, which have been possible under existing provisions of Swiss legislation.

Demonstration against Taib in London earlier this year

The question is whether Najib Razak will be prepared to move against his key fundraiser?  Taib dominates BN as “the tail that wags the dog” in Malaysia, because of his ability to deliver key seats through his dictatorial control over Sarawak’s “rotten” rural seats.

If Najib fails to do act, in the face of an investigation and requests by the Swiss authorities, this alone will become a contentious issue.

Signed by the President of the Swiss Confederation

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 10:00 am and is filed under
Corruption
,
Foreign
,
Sarawak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Utusan Malaysia does not enjoy legal immunity

By
G Vinod
 | May 13, 2011

Free Malaysia Today

PETALING JAYA: The consensus is that Utusan Malaysia does not and should not enjoy immunity for its irresponsible reporting. Political party leaders feel that what the paper ran could have caused religious discord.

A common stand among the party leaders is that a mere warning to the paper is not enough.

DAP’s assistant national publicity secretary, Teo Nie Ching, said this was because its headline could have triggered a religious discord among Malaysians.

“(Prime Minister) Najib (Tun Razak) should prove to the public that Utusan Malaysia does not enjoy legal immunity for its irresponsible reporting,” Teo said in a statement.

On Saturday, Utusan Malaysia carried a front-page article headlined “Kristian agama rasmi?” (Christianity the official religion?), claiming that DAP was conspiring with Christian leaders to instal Christianity as the religion of the federation instead of Islam.

The report drew criticisms from the public, prompting the home ministry to issue a warning letter to its editor-in chief Aziz Ishak yesterday.

Teo, who is also Serdang MP, said many other dailies suffered worse punishment from the home ministry for lesser offence.

“Last year, China Press was slapped with a two-week suspension over the daily’s ‘inaccurate report’ on the resignation of then-Inspector-General of Police Musa Hassan, even after the daily published an apology on its front page.

“Similarly, Sin Chew Daily’s senior journalist ,Tan Hoon Cheng, was arrested under the Internal Security Act in 2008 for reporting a speech by Bukit Bendera Umno division chairman Ahmad Ismail during the Permatang Pauh by-election, where he referred to the Malaysian Chinese as immigrants,” she said.

Teo reminded the home ministry that the damage done by Utusan Malaysia was serious enough to compel Najib to meet the Christian Federation of Malaysia (CFM) yesterday.

“Yet, Utusan was let off the hook with a mere a warning from the ministry,” she said.

Yesterday, Najib met CFM chairman Bishop Ng Moon Hing to speak about the matter and reportedly said the Christians have pledged to respect Islam as the religion of the federation.

Teo criticised Utusan Malaysia for reporting news based on unsubstantiated blog postings by two pro-Umno bloggers, without even trying to verify the details.

“They even accused Jelutong MP Jeff Ooi of being in cohoots with some pastors to turn Malaysia into a Christian nation. Worse, Utusan did not even seek clarification from DAP on the matter,” she said.

PAS Youth leader Nasrudin Hassan called Utusan Malaysia a daily which was “possessed” in reporting wild and provocative news without thinking of the consequences.

“It is clear that Utusan wants to show that it works as a mouthpiece for certain quarters so badly that it is willing ignore basic jounalistic principles,” said Nasrudin.

‘Only for Umno members’

Accusing Utusan Malaysia of demeaning itself, Nasrudin was disappointed that the daily’s management which was highly regarded in the past had lost its maturity and rational thinking.

“Utusan Malaysia has now become Umno’s mouthpiece. I suggest the daily indicate on the front page that it is solely for Umno members .

“Sooner or later, Utusan Malaysia will lose its readership and other Malay dailies will take its place,” he said.

Meanwhile, Gerakan vice-president Mah Siew Keong praised Najib for holding a meeting with Christian leaders to discuss the controversy.

“His immediate response had reduced tension to a certain level. It shows that the premier is a moderate leader who is fully committed to the spirit of 1Malaysia,” said Mah.

He also said that a mere warning letter was insufficient and urged the government to wield the axe against Utusan.

“Many non-governmental organisations have told me that a reprimand letter is too mild in view of the seriousness of the problem,” he said.

                This entry was posted on Friday, 13 May 2011, 2:11 pm and is filed under
Media
,
Najib Razak
,
UMNO
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


‘Emotionally mature’ leaders put Najib to shame

by
Jeswan Kaur

May 14, 2011  | Free Malaysia Today

COMMENT
: ‘Rakyat diutamakan’ or people first tagline parroted by current prime minister Najib Razak is an out and out lie.

If the people are indeed Najib’s priority, he would stop discriminating one race from the other.

The Umno-owned Malay daily, Utusan Malaysia has once again stirred the hornet’s nest through its May 7 article alluding that Christianity would soon oust Islam as the official religion of this country.

Needless to say the report, which Utusan lifted from postings by bloggers, heated up the already tense racial-relationship between Malaysians of different faiths.

And what does Prime Minister Najib do? He continues playing politics, asking the Malays to give their undivided loyalty to Umno so that the party is able to continue its lordship over Malaysia.

That done, he demands a pledge from local leaders of Christianity that they will respect Islam as Malaysia’s official religion.

The leaders were also made to give an undertaking that they will never challenge the provision enshrined in the Federal Constitution.

Why did Najib pressure the leaders to give their pledge when Christians have never been disrespectful towards Muslims and Islam?

No respect

If all that was not enough to mislead the rakyat, Najib also made the Christian leaders give their word – that they will nurture peace and harmony between the various faiths to ensure peace and prosperity never deserted the country.

Such a cowardly act and one that can only come from premier Najib.

Najib has failed the rakyat many times and this May 7 Utusan Malaysia episode takes the cake.

Letting Utusan Malaysia off the hook with a mere warning is evident that Najib refuses to respect the sentiments of the non-Malays, in this respect the Christians.

Why has the Home Ministry stopped short of revoking Utusan Malaysia’s publication permit, for this is not the first time this Malay daily has gone to town with its dubious and slanderous article?

Obviously, as Utusan Malaysia is Umno’s propaganda mouthpiece, the government i.e. Najib will albeit shamelessly be biased towards this newspaper.

But for how long?

Najib’s folly

The idea that pressuring Christian leaders to profess their undivided respect to Islam is going to help appease the Malays is Najib’s folly.

The non-Malays have never deliberately disrespected Islam even when the churches and the Sikh gurdawara or temple were vandalised.

The Hindus were hurt beyond measure when a group of unhappy Muslims severed the head of a cow and stomped on in a show of anger.

The Muslims know the cow is regarded as a sacred animal by Hindus but still…

And just what did Najib’s government do?

The Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein had no qualms siding with the Muslims who stomped on the head of cow.

Where was Hishammuddin’s objectivity then as a Minister in restoring calm?

Is Hishammuddin like deputy prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin telling the rakyat that he is a Muslim first and then the Home Minister?

Perhaps Hishammuddin and Muhyiddin can ask Najib’s extravagant think-tank Apco for some advice on how to refrain from displaying their racist streak to the very people who voted them in place.

Or perhaps they can take a cue from the leaders of Christianity who in spite of such tribulations, carried themselves with great emotional maturity, putting  premier Najib to shame over his unwillingness to punish the real culprit behind the ‘oust Islam’ drama.

Never ending lies

Najib, who is president of ruling party Umno, is already busy galvanising party members to stay loyal to Umno, which as reality goes, has long deviated from its true purpose of uniting the Malays.

As always, making fraudulent claims has come easy to Najib. This time it was the  claim that Umno still retained its “high quality brand” among the voters due to its superb track record.

High quality brand? Superb track record? Who is Najib trying to fool?

As far as memory serves the non-Malays,  they will always remember the many threats Umno leaders have made and keep making in safeguarding Malay privileges, in particular the episodes concerning the Malay dagger called ‘keris’.

The manner in which Najib and Hishammuddin dealt with the Utusan Malaysia article defaming Christianity hardly point to any superb track record.

Cousins Najib and Hishammuddin have closed an eye to Utusan’s bigotry and instead decided that is the bloggers who must be punished.

Does this newspaper enjoy immunity, the kind that has left it swollen headed and  highly irresponsible?

When the country’s racial ties are far from harmonious, there is no room for arrogance for Umno to bask in.

To get the police to issue traffic summonses to cars parked along Jalan Bukit Nanas in Kuala Lumpur by patrons attending mass at the St.John’s Cathedral church reflects Umno’s disinterest in ensuring  relationship between people of different races in the country flourishes.

Pathetic revenge

By the way, was the move to issue traffic summonses a way of punishing the church leadears for making police reports against Utusan Malaysia’s racist and sleazy reporting?

If it was, what a pathetic way to seek revenge. What happens when the Muslims in their rush to attend the obligatory Friday prayer park their cars haphazardly,  causing great inconvenience to other road users?

Why is there no police in sight to issue the mosque goers summonses for illegal parking?.

Why this double standard, premier Najib?

And you keep claiming that rakyat diutamakan.

The truth as the people know is otherwise, is it not?

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 14 May 2011, 1:40 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Islam
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


10 Days in May (8)

Tweets
@limkitsiang
:-

Utusan Malaysia headlines: Hishammuddin “Isu Kristian: Ada kebenaran”.”Saya tahu apa yg sebenar berlaku” – Ahli DAP Mohd Razali Abdul Rahman

Hisham (nose-drag CSL) is single-handedly re-igniting Utusan Christian Msia bogey which Najib tried 2put 2rest though most one-sidedly.

What remedy when it is Home Minister who play politics n pose greatest threat 2national harmony security w irresponsible stmts actions?

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 14 May 2011, 8:26 am and is filed under
General
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


10 Days in May (9)

Tweets
@limkitsiang
:-

Hishammuddin shld retract/apologise 4baseless “some basis” assertion re: Utusan Christian Msia bogey. Is he prepared 2resign if no “basis”?

Is Hisham prepared 2rely on 1 2 dubious individuals 2jeopardise wellbeing welfare 29 million Msians n credibility of Najib’s 1Msia concept?

World watching. Utusan’s seditious Christian Msia bogey put on trial Najib Hishammuddin.More entire BN Cabinet/leadership as CSL led by nose

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 14 May 2011, 4:29 pm and is filed under
Hishammuddin
,
Media
,
Najib Razak
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Bar Council says unconstitutional for Islamic laws to skip legislative approval

By
Boo Su-Lyn

May 14, 2011 | The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, May 14 — The Bar Council has dismissed a call by Muslim lawyers for Islamic laws to be legislated solely by the Malay Rulers instead of Parliament, saying it is unconstitutional.

Bar Council president Lim Chee Wee said all laws have to be passed by elected members of Parliament and the respective state assemblies as Malaysia is a constitutional democracy.

“This is a fundamental and basic structure of the federal constitution,” Lim (picture) told The Malaysian Insider via e-mail last night.

“Such fundamental and basic structure cannot be bypassed,” he stressed.

He said the Malaysia Muslim Lawyers Association’s (PPMM) proposed memorandum to the government contradicted the legislative process and the federal constitution.

He also pointed out that matters pertaining to Islamic law are enacted by the state legislative assembly, except for the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Putrajaya which are under the purview of Parliament.

“This is provided under Article 74 read together with the Second List set out in the Ninth Schedule in the federal constitution,” said Lim.

“Thus, legislative powers as regard Islamic law are generally under the state’s legislative jurisdiction,” he said, adding that certain laws like the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 was passed by Parliament.

Lim also said the constitution did not make a distinction between the type of laws that Parliament was empowered to make.

He said Article 66(1) stated that the “power of Parliament to make laws” shall be exercised by Bills passed by the Dewan Rakyat and Senate.

Utusan Malaysia recently reported PPMM president Datuk Zainul Rijal Abu Bakar as saying that his proposal was to avoid debate by non-Muslims on Islamic laws.

Zainul Rijal suggested that proposed laws or Bills be approved by the Conference of Rulers or the Yang di-Pertuan Agong before they are presented to the Cabinet and Parliament for mere endorsement.

The Muslim lawyer also said the Bills do not need to be debated in their first and second reading as they have already been approved by the Conference of Rulers.

Zainul Rijal added that his proposal would put Article 11(3) of the federal constitution into effect for Muslims to administer their own religious affairs exclusively.

Lim, however, called Zainul Rijal’s use of the mentioned article “wholly misplaced”.

“The said provision does not allow religious groups (in this case, Islamic groups) the right to legislate Islamic laws,” said the senior lawyer.

“The power lies with the respective legislative bodies (either State Legislative Assembly or Parliament as the case may be) and does not and cannot be extended in the context put forth by Mr Zainul,” Lim added.

He pointed out that if Article 11(3) were to be interpreted in the extreme, any religious group may make laws as they please and thus spark “legislative anarchy”.

“Article 11(3) of the federal constitution provides that every religious group has the right to ‘acquire and own property and hold and administer it in accordance with the law’,” said Lim.

“‘Administer’ under the said provision must be read in the context of the whole provision… ‘it’ refers to ‘property’, not ‘administering their religion’ (which is a wider and incorrect interpretation),” he added.

PPMM’s proposal came even as a raging debate swirls over whether Muslim-majority Malaysia can be headed by a non-Muslim prime minister.

Some Malay-Muslim groups have been pushing the view that the constitution proclaims Islam to be its “official” religion and that only a Muslim can be the prime minister.

Barisan Nasional (BN) Cabinet member Tan Sri Bernard Dompok said recently, however, that there was nothing wrong with a Christian prime minister, pointing out that the federal constitution has never made race or religion a criteria.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 14 May 2011, 12:17 pm and is filed under
Constitution
,
Islam
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Christian conspiracy: Special branch link suspected

By
Aidila Razak

May 14, 11  | MalaysiaKini

DAP-Jelutong MP Jeff Ooi suspects possible coercion of the DAP member, who filed a police report on the alleged ‘Christian conspiracy’ yesterday just after the ministry had said there was “some basis” to the allegations.

Speaking to reporters in Kuala Lumpur today, Ooi said they believe that the man, DAP Bukit Tumba branch committee member Mohamed Razali Abdul Rahman, may have been convinced to do so by his relative who is a special branch police officer who monitors political activities in the Jelutong area.

“We were told Mohamed Razali and this officer are relatives, and that it was this officer who was instrumental in helping Utusan Malaysia get the story. I hope the police can start to look into this angle and make a fair and just investigation into the case.

“We don’t know his motive or intention for filing his police report some five days after we filed our police report denying the allegations made in Utusan,” he said.

Ooi added that Mohamed Razali had accompanied Ooi when the MP lodged his police report on May 8, showing a press photograph of the two together at the station.

Yesterday, police confirmed that they received a report regarding the incident that they said gave a “different” account of the events. Both Mohamad Razali and the authorities have, however, refused to reveal the report’s contents.

“The (news coverage) in Utusan and TV3 (on Mohamed Razali’s report) were short of details. Both mentioned that (he) was at the scene where the dinner organised by the Christian community was held, and he said, ‘I know what actually took place.’ He is hiding behind a police report.

“We’ll be truly glad if Mohamed Razali were to repeat what he said in the police report so that if it threatens the DAP’s position, and the position of the Christian community, perhaps we can seek legal redress,” he said.

Utusan on May 7 ran a front page story quoting two pro-Umno bloggers, claiming that Christian religious leaders are plotting to make Christianity the religion of the federation and appoint a Christian Prime Minister.

DAP and implicated pastors have vehemently denied the allegations.

Relations with Razali ‘good’

Ooi said he last spoke to Mohamed Razali on May 8, and that the two had good relations after the latter joined DAP in 2008 after having left Penang Umno.

The MP said that he has tried to contacted the man whom he described as a “loyal DAP member” but to no avail.

“Mohamed Razali has helped us in many by-elections and campaigned for us in Miri for the Sarawak election,” said Ooi.

He added that DAP will reserve any action against Mohamed Razali (photo above, top right corner) until they know the content of his police report.

“We are challenging him to reveal it within 24 hours….but if he doesn’t it is between him and God,” adding that Mohamed Razali’s actions has put the country “under this cloud for much longer”.

He noted that Utusan Malaysia and the two Umno bloggers it quoted, Zakhir Mohamad and Shamsul Yunus, have failed to issue an apology for their reports.

But the fact that Shamsul Yunus has removed all his blog postings on the matter, Ooi said, is an admission of guilt.

DAP legal advisor Gobind Singh Deo said that the party will soon decide if it will take legal action against the daily and the two bloggers.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 14 May 2011, 1:11 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Islam
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.


Church leaders take one step forward, two steps back

By
Terence Netto

May 14, 11 | MalaysiaKini

COMMENT
“Two steps forward, one step backward’ was a staple of communist strategy where cagey negotiators make two hard-to-meet demands and then retract one to show they are flexible and reasonable.

Christian church leaders who met Prime Minister Najib Razak on Thursday over reports in Utusan Malaysia of an alleged Christian plot to dethrone Islam as the country’s official religion, were inveigled into a reversal of this negotiating strategy: they took two steps backward and as a sop, were conceded one step forward.

‘Backward’ here is not intended as a description of the nature of the two assurances they gave the PM – that they will respect the status of Islam as the official religion and they will continue to cooperate in fostering interreligious harmony in the country.

Instead, the word is used to describe the concessions Church leaders had to make when there was no substantive reason to suspect them of disrespecting Islam’s special status and being only dubiously for interreligious concord.

In return for the two steps backwards, Church leaders, upset over rabble rousing reports in Utusan, had the meager satisfaction of knowing that the Home Ministry had reprimanded the paper’s editor for irresponsible reporting. Ditto, one step forward for the Church leaders.

Barely had they time to savour this measly gain than Perkasa’s Ibrahim Ali pops up to tell them that as an earnest of their unwavering respect for Islam’s special status, Church leaders should drop their insistence on the use of the term ‘Allah’ and on the dissemination of the Malay Bible, Al-Kitab.

Sure, Perkasa is not Umno, though it is widely suspected of being its proxy, and Ibrahim is not Najib, though the latter is unable to repudiate the rabid right-winger if only to convincingly demonstrate what the PM means by his slogan ‘1Malaysia’.

Unsuspecting Church leaders now find themselves boxed in simply from having conceded two assurances when there were no substantive grounds to suspect their deportment on both counts.

A convoluted situation

Their ‘two steps backward, one step forward’ predicament has now opened the way for pressure to be brought to bear where they may well have to retreat further simply as demonstration of the sincerity of their avowals.

It’s a convoluted situation: it is implied that you have been found wanting on two counts; you are asked to give two undertakings on which your deportment has been attacked before but never proven to be false; whereupon you are meagerly conceded a point; after which you asked to concede on two other points which have always been yours by constitutional right.

It’s a fine mess that Church leaders find themselves in. But they can opt for the final simplicity of excessive complication.

All they have to do is lever the evolving two-coalition system to their advantage. This they can accomplish by meeting up with the leadership council of Pakatan Rakyat. It would help they don’t impose any pre-conditions, such as no pictures are taken or no press conference is held afterwards.

Church leaders already know Pakatan has no problem with Christians using the term ‘Allah’ for God. Likewise Pakatan has no anxiety over Christians importing or disseminating the Al-Kitab amongst Malaysians except Muslims.

Church leaders can easily obtain Pakatan’s reaffirmations on the two scores. They need not give Pakatan any assurances that they would continue to be unswervingly for interreligious harmony because Pakatan has not suspected them of being otherwise.

In fact, one Pakatan leader, the deposed Perak menteri besar, Nizar Jamaluddin, has been on record as embracing Christians as fellow legatees of the Abrahamic dispensation when he hosted an open house during Christmas celebrations in Ipoh in 2008, the first time such an open house was hosted by a state chief minister.

In sum, there’s every reason for Church leaders to shed the clamps of their present tangled situation by discussing things with the Pakatan leadership.

Should they approach in the spirit of the Old Testament prophet Isaiah, “Come, come let us reason together,” they are likely to find in Pakatan an interlocutor with a rather more inclusive vision of patriarch Abraham’s progeny.

TERENCE NETTO has been a journalist for close on four decades. He likes the occupation because it puts him in contact with the eminent without being under the necessity to admire them. It is the ideal occupation for a temperament that finds power fascinating and its exercise abhorrent.

                This entry was posted on Saturday, 14 May 2011, 12:24 pm and is filed under
1Malaysia
,
Islam
,
nation building
. You can follow any responses to this entry through
RSS 2.0
.