Wednesday, December 22, 2010

IS KARPAL SINGH AND DAP TAKING BABY STEPS TOWARD ACCEPTING ISLAMIC STATE ?

At the recent Pakatan Rakyat Convention, DAP National Chairman, Mr Karpal Singh said that the issue of Islamic State “boleh dibincang dan dicari jalan penyelesaian “ (can be discussed and a way to be found to resolve).

That “boleh dibincang dan cari jalan penyelesaian” on the issue of establishing an Islamic state, has sent PAS into a state of euphoric dizziness, with PAS leaders interpreting Karpal Singh’s words to mean that that DAP has finally softened its long held objection and have resigned to accepting PAS’s holy grail of establishing an Islamic state.

As late as June 2010, Mr Karpal Singh in an exclusive interview with The Malaysian Insider is reported to have said “We cannot compromise for the country to turn into an Islamic state”. Mr Karpal Singh had always openly opposed Hudud laws and establishment of an Islamic state on the ground that it was unconstitutional. In fact, Mr Karpal Singh’s stand ( at least until now ) is also consistent with DAP’s constant, consistent and principled stand that Malaysia is a secular state and Islam as its official religion.

Even DAP’s Advisor Mr Lim Kit Siang is on record of stating that “Hudud laws and Islamic state are not Pakatan Rakyat policies”. Thus, when Mr Karpal Singh as the DAP national chairman now say openly that Islamic state “boleh dibincang”, it is surely a complete capitulation ( or sell out) from DAP’s long held stand and principle. Perhaps, Mr Karpal Singh and DAP owe an explanation to DAP members, supporters and Malaysians as to what is meant by “boleh dibincang” and state openly what is DAP’s stand on Islamic state.

Mr Karpal Singh’s “boleh dibincang” statement sends mixed signals. In the Common Policy Platform unveiled during the First Pakatan Rakyat Convention at Shah Alam there was no mention of turning Malaysia into an Islamic state. In fact in the Common Policy Platform, in the section “Transparent and Genuine Democracy”, Pakatan Rakyat made a pledge to “Defend the Federal Constitution, Islam as the religion of the Federation while other religions can be practiced peacefully anywhere in the country and protecting the special position of the Malays and the indigenous peoples anywhere including Sabah and Sarawak and the legitimate interest of other races in accordance with Article 153. While, in the section on “religion” Pakatan Rakyat made the following vow to “Defend the position of Islam as the religion of the Federation and guarantee of religion for every Malaysia.”

So with this iron cast pledge by Pakatan Rakyat and DAP making a promise to uphold and defend Islam as the religion of the Federation which is also consistent and constant with DAP’s long held acknowledgement that Islam is the official religion of Malaysia, why then capitulate and raise the issue of “ Negara Islam boleh bincang” when PAS has has not shown that it can “boleh bincang” to drop its goal to turn Malaysia into an Islamic state.

Norman Fernandez
anfalaw@streamyx.com

Tuesday, September 07, 2010

MEMBURUKKAN PAS. JERAT AKAN MAKAN DIRI

Pelbagai usaha sedang dijalankan untuk memburuk-burukkan PAS dewasa ini.


Pada mulanya, ditimbulkan isu perpaduan dan PAS diajak bersatu dengan UMNO-Barisan Nasional atas alasan bahawa kedudukan Melayu selepas PilihanRaya Umum-12 (PRU-12) sudah terancam. PAS yang tidak buta pada sejarah lampau, sedar bahawa UMNO-Barisan Nasional sebenarnya memerlukan PAS untuk memanjangkan hayatnya. Malahan, pepimpin-pemimpin PAS sebaliknya menjemput UMNO untuk masuk PAS.


Kemudian tertimbul isu kalimah Allah. Apabila mahkamah membenarkan suratkhabar Katolik menggunakan "Allah' UMNO meradang marah. Pemimpin-pemimpin UMNO berbaris memberi amaran dan berbuih kemarahan mereka terhadap orang Kristian. Disana sini demonstrasi atas nama kebebasan demokrasi berlaku. Tetapi, orang bukan Islam melihat bagaimana PAS menghujah tentang penggunaan kalimah "Allah" secara ilmiah dan mengambil pendekatan muwajahah silmiah (secara aman). Tiada aksi liar, provokasi atau menakutkan orang bukan Islam. Tuan Guru Nik Aziz, sendiri secara tenang dan rational memberikan penjelasan tentang pengunaan kalimah "Allah" oleh bukan Islam.


Isu pengunaan "Allah", kemudiannya membawa kepada pembakaran, merosakan dan mencemarkan beberapa gereja. Didalam keadaan genting sedemikian, apabila pemimpin-pemimpin Barisan Nasional berpeluk tubuh, Tuan Guru Nik Aziz datang dari Kelatan dan menziarahi sebuah gereja yang terbakar dan mengecam perbuatan membakar rumah ibadat. Hanya selepas itulah, keluar politikus-politikus UMNO-Barisan Nasional meluahkan rasa simpati dan menghulurkan bantuan kewangan dan sebagainya. Gambar Tuan Guru Nik Aziz dengan wajah suram meninjau gereja yang terbakar membuat orang bukan Islam sebak hati dan memikat hati orang Kristian. Seorang rakan kristian saya menyatakan " in the most trying period, it was PAS that came to our aid and support". Malahan, apabila saya mendengar berita tentang gereja dibakar, saya terus SMS Y.B Kubang Krian, Salahuddin Ayub, "Y.B, please help us, my churches are being burned." Serta merta saya menerima SMS, "we will protect your churches, tell me what help you want". Saya menitis air mata membaca jawapan.


Isu Allah disusuli pelbagai isu dan setiap masa jerat dipasang untuk PAS, tapi yang termakan jerat bukanlah PAS.


Beberapa minggu dahulu kecoh isu Y.B Serdang masuk surau. Begitu bertubi-tubi Y.B Serdang diserang dengan kata-kata yang menyakitkan hati sehingga ada yang sanggup melabelkan beliau berada 'sentiasa dalam hadas besar". Pemimpin-peminpin PAS daripada bertindak seperti kera tertelah mercun, sebaliknya dengan rational menghuraikan dan memperjelaskan isu mengenai samada orang bukan islam boleh atau tidak boleh memasuki masjid dan surau. Orang bukan Islam melihat bagaimana Tuan Guru Nik Aziz sempat meluangkan sedikit masa memberikan nasihat dan tunjuk-ajar kepada Y.B Serdang. Rakyat melihat, orang bukan Islam memerhatikan kesederhanaan PAS.
Belum cukup reda isu ini, mencetus isu oleh Tan Sri Zainuddin Maidin yang kononnya selepas insiden 13 Mei 1969, ada pemimpin PAS yang mencadangkan kepada Perdana Menteri seketika itu Tunku Abdul Rahman untuk merampas harta kaum Cina. Hmmm... boleh percaya atau tidak ? Jika ini satu lagi perang saraf ataupun bertujuan membangkitkan kemarahan orang Cina terhadap PAS, Zainuddin Maidin perlu tahu bahawa rancangan jahat memburuk-burukkan PAS akan bersudahan seperti isu-isu yang lain yang gagal dalam membangkitkan kemarahan atau rasa benci orang Cina terhadap PAS. Orang Cina masih ingat tentang insiden 13 Mei 1969. Di Kelantan tidak satu rumah orang Cina dibinasakan, tidak seorang Cina dicederakan, tidak ada sesiapa yang mengarahkan orang Cina keluar daripada Kelantan, malahan tidak ada mana-mana orang Cina di Kelantan kehilangan seurat rambut pun. Sejarah menunjukkan sebaliknya Menteri Besar Kelatan pada masa itu, mengarahkan bahawa keselamatan orang Cina di Kelantan menjadi tanggungjawab kerajaan Negeri. Jadi Zainuddin maidin dan suku- sakat yang sewaktu dengannya, paham-pahamlah, usaha memburukkan PAS hanya akan makan diri.
Berhentikan sahajalah, Zainuddin !

Monday, September 06, 2010

Hormatlah Bendera Sesebuah Negara

Kumpulan Benteng Demokrasi Rakyat (BENDERA) masih meneruskan protes dan demonstrasi terhadap Malaysia. Semua gara-gara mengikut kumpulan ini memprotes tindakan penguatkuasa Polis Marin Malaysia menahan tiga pegawai Kementerian Kelautan dan Perikanan yang telah menahan tujuh nelayan Malaysia. Sudah tentu kedua-dua pihak mempunyai versi tersendiri mereka mengenai apa yang sebenar telah berlaku dan apa yang membawa kepada penahan nelayan dan anggota penguatkuasa.

Rakyat Malaysia terkejut dengan aksi kumpulan BENDERA. BENDERA bukan sahaja setakat memprotes dan berdemonstrasi di hadapan Konsulat Malaysia di Jakarta, tetapi juga menunjukkan aksi liar seperti memijak dan meludah pada bendera Malaysia. Aksi yang paling kurang ajar dan menghina ialah tindakan memalitkan najis pada bendera Malaysia dan melemparkan najis ke perkarangan konsulat Malaysia. Hairan, juga mengapa polis Indonesia berpeluk tubuh dan tidak membuat sesuatu apabila tindakan memprotes dan berdemonstrasi menular kepada kebiadapan.

Justru itu tidak hairanlah rakyat dan politis-politikus di Malaysia yang tersinggung dan marah dengan tindakan BENDERA dan mengecam kumpulan BENDERA.
Bendera sesebuah negara adalah simbol kedaulatan negara dan wajib dihormati. Kita wajib menghormati dan setia kepada bendera negara kita, kita juga mengharapkan orang lain juga menghormati bendera negara kita dan lanjutan daripada itu, kita juga perlu menghormati bendera negara lain Kita boleh marah dengan kerajaan sesebuah negara kerana tidak setuju dengan keputusan ataupun tindakan kerajaan negara tersebut, tetapi kemarahan kita tidak patut terlanjur sehingga mencemarkan bendera negara tersebut.

Dalam kita mengencam tindakan biadab kumpulan BENDERA, kita juga perlu imbas tindakan kumpulan-kumpulan, NGO-NGO dan penyokong-penyokong serta politikus-polititus di Malaysia yang sering kali apabila memprotes dan berdemonstrasi terhadap satu keputusan atau tindakan yang diambil oleh kerajaan tersebut menunjukan bantahan kita dengan memijak dan membakar bendera negara tersebut. Yang lucunya, mereka yang memijak dan membakar bendera negara negara lain tidak berhenti untuk seketika untuk berfikir bahawa negara tersebut menjana ekonomi negara kita. Ya, memang kita marah dengan sesuatu keputusan atau tindakan kerajaan mereka, tetapi perlukah kita menunjukan kemarahan sehingga memijak dan membakar bendera negara mereka. Apa salah rakyat biasa negara tersebut.

Jadi wajarlah kita ambil iktibar bahawa sekiranya kita terasa hina dan tersinggung dengan tindakan orang luar mencemar bendera kita, janganlah kita juga buat seperti yang dilakukan oleh kumpulan BENDERA terhadap bendera negara lain.

Wednesday, September 01, 2010

"Unclean Teo Nie Ching"- How much lower can one sink ?

How low can Barisan Nasional politicians go ?

Despite Serdang M.P expressing a heartfelt apology when she sincerely and genuinely reiterated that her visit to the surau al- Huda was not politically motivated and that she had no motive to put into question the sanctity of suraus and mosques, Barisan Nasional/UMNO politicians are in overdrive in their relentless spiteful attacks on a young, dedicated and first time Member of Parliament.
Instead of being more conciliatory or at the very least accept the M.P's apology in the spirit of Ramadan and give the young, hardworking first time M.P a timely advice just like what the Kelantan Menteri Besar, the Home Minister Hishammuddion Hussein, a vastly experienced politician sees fit to waddles into the issue and sink so low calling the M.P as "unclean". Perhaps, the good minister could explain why and how in the eyes of the minister the M.P is "unclean" or better still just retract the statement and apologise for the slur.
Baying for a pound of flesh, how low can some polticians go !

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

MERDEKA 2010 - A Brief Observation.

This must be the saddest Merdeka Day I ever felt in many years. Normally, beginning from the eve of Merdeka and even on Merdeka day, I would receive so many sms'es wishing a happy and selamat hari Merdeka . Not this year. All I received was a single sms from a police officer whom I know, wishing me " Happy Independent & Malaysia Day. may good bless our nation and all its citizens (sic)" and to which I replied " Let us treasure this beautiful land. Happy Merdeka."

But what has made the day even sadder is seeing how Merdeka day is reflected in the newspapers. Both the STAR and New Strait Times frontpaged picture of a group of smiling and joyous children of all races, waving Malaysian flags. It was a nice portrayal of one united Malaysia. The New Straits Times on its front page carried the clarion call of the Prime Minister calling on Malaysians to value peace and stability and asking the people "not to allow the Malaysian way of life based on diversity and moderayion to be undermined by extreme attitudes which manifest themselves through racial issues."

The STAR had on its front the Prime Minister telling that " every malaysian citizen is crucial to the country's development" and reminding Malaysians that " we should value the prevailing peace, harmony and stability in the country" and if all these are undermined then "everything which we have achieved, everything which we have built and things which are dear to us will be destroyed". I think these are sobering words and a timely reminder.

In contrast, Utusan Malaysia which reduced the Prime Minister's Merdeka message to the inside page, and instead front paged "Peringatan Raja Nazrin" the advice of the Regent of Perak Raja Dr Nazrin Shah to Muslims. Utusan Malaysia highlighted His Highness reminder " Pencerobohoan besar bermula daripada perbuatan kecil. Ia mungkin bermula dari surau, madrasah, masjid atau mimbar. Ia bermula daripada satu ungkapan, ucapan, khutbah, tazkirah atau doa. Ia bermula daripada pencerobohan kecil dan jika ketika itu orang Islam masih degil dan sombong mempertahankan ego serta memilih untuk bertelagah maka sebenarnya telah membeikan petanda yang salah seolah-olah menggalakan pencerobohan ;ebih besar boleh dilakukan ke atas umat dab institusi Islam".

Just a little reflection, could Utusan Malaysia not, on Merdeka day celebrate oneness of Malaysia and highlight the Prime Minister's rallying call to all Malaysian's instead of downplaying and reducing to almost insignificant the Prime Minister's Merdeka message to all Malaysians.

Saturday, August 28, 2010

SAIDINA UMAR SEMBAYANG DI DALAM GEREJA - DATO MAHFUZ OMAR. SEJAUH MANA BENAR ?

Laman web Harakah http://www.harakahdaily.net/ pada 28hb Ogos 2010 telah menerbitkan berita 'UMNO Tentang Majlis Fatwa' dimana dalam rencana memaparkan isu Ahli Parlimen Serdang Y.B Teo Nie Ching melawat dan memasuki surau Al- Huda di Kajang ahad lalu.

Mengulas isu tersebut, Naib Presiden PAS Dato Mahfuz Omar dilapurkan telah menyatakan " Umat Islam dibenarkan melakukan sembayang walaupun di dalam gereja kerana Saidina Umar al- Khattab telah pernah melakukannya".

Saya dengan rendah diri terpanggil untuk mengulas apa yang diutarakan Dato Mahfuz tentang Saidina Umar dikatakan pernah sembayang di dalam gereja.

Di dalam Kitab itman al-Wafa' fi sirah al-khulafa, tulisan as-Syeikh Muhammad Bin al- Affifi al- Banjuri, Darul Ibnu Haziam di m/s 14 dinyatakan:

" Dan apabila masuknya saidina Umar ke dalam kota, maka masuklah beliau ke dalam kanisah (gereja) al-Qiamah, dan beliau duduk di ruang utama gereja tersebut. Setelah tiba waktu solat asar, maka berkata saidina Umar kepada Patriach gereja tersebut, "saya ingin solat".
jawab patriach, "Solat sahaja disini".

Tetapi Saidina Umar menolak cadangan Patriach dan bersolat di luar tangga yang berada diluar hadapan pintu masuk gereja secara bersendirian. Selepas Saidina Umar selesaikan solat asar, beliau masuk ke dalam gereja dan mengatakan kepada Patriach, " sekiranya saya mengerjakan solat tadi didalam gereja tuan, saya merasa pasti bahawa umat Islam pada zaman akan datang akan menyatakan bahawa Saidina Umar mengerjakan solat didalam gereja ini, maka kita boleh menukarkan gereja ini kepada masjid untuk melaksanakan solat di dalamnya"

( Juga layari http://www.ibnuhasyim.com/)

Saya percaya inilah toleransi dan kibijaksanaan Saidina Umar, sehingga ada pemimpin bukan Islam seperti Ketua Menteri Pulau Pinang Lim Guan Eng ingin mencerminkan pentadbirannya mengikut pentadbiran Saidina Umar.

Saidina Umar sebenarnya boleh sembayang di dalam gereja, jika Saidina Umar ingin berbuat demikian apatahlagi telah telah dijemput dan di-izinkan Patriach gereja. Tetapi Saidina Umar menolak jemputan Patriach dan sebaliknya memikirkan tentang tindakan yang boleh berlaku dimasa akan datang jika Saidina Umar mengerjakan solat didalam gereja.

Justru itu apa yang diutarakan oleh Dato Mahfuz adalah tidak tepat apabila mengatakan Saidina Umar pernah sembayang dalam gereja dan adalah satu kenyataan tidak tepat. Lagipun, adalah kurang menyenangkan mendengar kenyataan yang selah-olah mengatakan orang Islam boleh sembayang di dalam gereja pun. Takut nanti ada orang berdasarkan kenyataan Dato Mahfuz menceroboh masuk ke dalam gereja dan melakukan ibadah di dalam gereja.

Bukan niat saya sama sekali untuk menegur Dato Mahfuz tetapi untuk menjelaskan yang sahih yang setakat saya tahu. I stand corrected.

Monday, August 23, 2010

DANGKALNYA MENYALAHKAN HARI VALENTINE UNTUK PEMBUANGAN BAYI

Ketua Dewan Pemuda PAS, Nasruddin Hassan baru-baru ini telah membuat satu pendedahan bahawa Valentine Day dan sambutan Tahun Baru adalah antara penyebab utama gejala pembuangan bayi. Lebih sensasi ialah dakwaan bahawa pembuangan bayi memuncak pada sekitar bulan Julai sehingga September yang mengikutnya ialah ‘musim pembuangan bayi’.

Tertarik saya untuk bertanya dari mana atau keputusan kajian mana yang digunakan Nasruddin untuk menyokong hujahan dangkal ini. Tidak salahlah apabila saya mengimbas kata-kata Abraham Lincoln yang pernah menyatakan “It is better to remain silent and be thought of a fool than to open one’s mouth and remove all doubt”.

Tidak dapat dinafikan bahawa gejala pembuangan bayi sudah mulai menjadi satu masalah sosial, tetapi tidak masuk akal sama sekali bahawa masalah pembuangan bayi boleh dan atau wajar dikaitkan dengan Valentine Day dan sambutan Tahun Baru. Mengambil analisis sibendul ini, malam mengawan sambutan Tahun Baru ialah 31hb Disember, seperti yang didedahkan sibendul ini dan musim pembuangan bayi adalah bulan Julai sehingga September. Tapi jika congak tolak-campur tempoh antara malam mengawan hingga musim membuang ialah lebih kurang 9 bulan yaakni bulan Oktober dan lebih tepat 10hb Oktober (Sembilan bulan sepuluh hari) dan jika pasangan mengawan pada 14hb Februari (Hari Valrentine) maka hasil membuah pada bulan November dan lebih tepat pada atau 24 hb November (sembilan bulan sepuluh hari). Mungkin salah kira kot ?

Tetapi itu bukan menjadi jawapan saya kepada hujahan dangkal. Persoalannya ialah mengapa hanya menyalahkan dan secara khusus Hari Valentine dan sambutan Tahun Baru. Mungkin lebih senang, kot untuk menyalahkan upacara kebaratan daripada upacara-upacara tempatan.
Jika hari Valentine hendak di sasarkan, mengapa tidak disasarkan juga karnival Jom Heboh, Gegaria dan lain-lain karnival tempatan yang berlangsung diseluruh negara hampir setiap bulan. Melihat anak-anak muda lelaki dan perempuan hayal syok dengan acara hiburan dan konsert yang menjadi sajian utama karnival-karnival ini dan kemudian berpeleseran sehingga embun pagi, mungkin juga boleh diandaikan aktiviti mengawan rancak juga berlaku. Kalau setiap bulan atau dua dulan sekali acara seperti ini diadakan, gejala pembuangan bayi pun mestilah sepanjang tahun.

Daripada menyalahkan Hari Valentine dan sambutan Tahun Baru, mungkin elok kita bertanya mengapa masalah ini begitu berleluasa di kalangan masyarakat Melayu. Seorang blogger terkenal Syed Akbar Ali menulis dalam laman blognya www.outsyedthebox.blogspot.com melontarkan beberapa persoalan. Antaranya persoalan yang diajukan untuk penjelasan ialah :

1. Apa pasal orang Cina tidak ditimpa masalah kes buang bayi, pada hal orang Cina yang menyambut New Year’s Day, Valentine’s Day, Merry Christmas, Hari Raya China dan sebagainya secara besar-besaran?

2. Apa pasal wanita Cina yang tidak memakai jubah, tudung dan lebih selesa memakai baju skirt, seluar pendek, kemeja tanpa lengan, baju singlet dan sebagainya tidak ditimpa gejala buang bayi ini ?

3. Apa pasal orang Cina yang boleh minum arak, boleh menari berpesta, boleh bergaul bersama lelaki dan wanita terlepas gejala sumbang ini ?

Ya, ini jugalah soalan-soalan yang biasa dibisik-bisikkan masyarakat bukan Melayu melihat gejala pembuangan bayi yang begitu kerap berlaku. Jangan pula katakan bahawa masyarakat Cina lebih toleran atau boleh menerima anak luar nikah. Masyarakat Cina dengan kebudayaan dan tatasusila lebih 5000 tahun tidak menerima dan tidak setuju dengan anak luar nikah. Anak-anak Cina dididik dari awal tentang memelihara diri dan menjaga maruah dan tidak mengaibkan keluarga dan biarpun dibenarkan dan diberikan kebebasan begaul sosial tetapi dingatkan jangan sampai tahap menghamil.

Daripada menyalahkan Hari Valentine, Santa Klaus dan sebagainya, adalah lebih baik Nasruddin (dan seangkatan dengannya) mencari sebab dan punca mengapa gejala pembuangan bayi (dan sumbang mahram) begitu kerap berlaku di dalam masyarakat Melayu.

Pengamatan saya mendapati, institusi ikatan kekeluargaan dalam masyarakat Melayu telah banyak berubah. Jika dulu dikampung anak dijaga keluarga dan diawasi masyarakat setempat. Pergaulan ada batasnya dan tatasusila menjadi pegangan harian. Tetapi kini, kehidupan di bandar telah banyak membawa kepada perubahan. Ikatan kekeluargaan mula berlerai. Lihat sahaja anak-anak Melayu dan khususnya gadis-gadis Melayu yang berpeleseran dan merempat di pusat-pusat beli belah, tempat hiburan seperti arked video dan sebagainya. Tempat-tempat inilah menjadi tumpuan lelaki dan permulaan pergaulan bebas yang diakhiri dengan pembuangan bayi.

Selain daripada ini, tidak dapat dinafikan angka kes cerai paling tinggi dalam masyarakat Melayu. Apabila ayah dan ibu sudah bercerai, siapa pula yang menjaga dan mengawal anak. Anak bebas membawa diri dan bebas bergaul. Tambah pula bila ayah dan ibu bekerja, lagi bebas anak-anak untuk menjalin hubungan. Keadaan rumah juga tidak membantu. Anak 10, bilik 2.
Dengan suasana rumah sedemikian, tanyakanlah kemana anak-anak lebih selesa berada pada waktu lapang atau melepak? Sudah tentu ditempat-tempat awam. Anak orang kaya bolehlah pergi melepak ke kelab, main golf, duduk melayar komputer di Starbuck, bersenam di gym dan sebagainya. Tapi anak-anak muda Melayu, mereka hendak kemana kalau tidak berlegar di tempat awam. Adakah kemudahan riadah yang sesuai dan aktiviti-akti bermanfaat di rancang dan disediakan pihak berkuasa ditempat-tempat perumahan awam? Malam minggu lain pula ceritanya. Mulalah aktiviti merempit. Majoriti yang merempit biasanya dari kalangan orang Melayu.
Ini berlaku bukan sahaja di bandar-bandar besar, malahan di Kuala Terengganu juga. Gadis-gadis belasan tahun pula membonceng merempit dengan pacar mereka. Mungkin malam merempit berkesudahan dengan mengawan diranjang. Kesudahannya bermula selepas itu, apabila tong sampah, masjid dan luar rumah menjadi tempat pembuangan janin atau bayi.

Juga kajian perlu dibuat daripada mereka yang tertangkap membuang bayi. Tanyakan mengapa mereka terlanjur. Lakarkan profil golongan ini. Siasat latar belakang dari segi kerja dan pendidikan mereka. Jawapan mungkin diperolehi dan yang pasti ialah mereka tidak terlanjur kerana hari Valentine, sambutan Tahun Baru atau tergoda dengan Santa Klaus. Sebaliknya, mungkin golongan ini memerlukan perhatian pihak berkuasa.

Pendek kata, siasatlah dengan akal dan fikrah mengapa gejala pembuangan bayi kini begitu berleluasa dan kekerapan dan bukannya melontar melulu hujahan dangkal menyalahkan Hari Valentine, sambutan Tahun Baru. Dengan hujahan dangkal yang diutarakan Ketua Pemuda PAS, mungkinkah beliau akan menyalahkan minuman Coca-cola sebagai sebab mengapa sumbang mahram berlaku. Kita tunggu.

Postskrip
Pada hari Ahad, 22hb Ogos 2010, Ketua Pemuda PAS mengumumkan bahawa PAS kini menyarankan nikah khitbah atau nikah gantung sebagai satu cara untuk menangani pembuangan bayi.

Thursday, August 19, 2010

School Head Under Probe Over Racist Remarks

Special Reports
Monday, 16 August 2010 admin-s

"Pelajar-pelajar Cina tidak diperlukan dan boleh balik ke China ataupun Sekolah Foon Yew. Bagi pelajar India, tali sembahyang yang diikat di pergelangan tangan dan leher pelajar nampak seakan anjing dan hanya anjing akan mengikat seperti itu."

By Student of Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra, Kulai


(The Star) KULAIJAYA: Police are investigating a school principal who allegedly used racist remarks against non-Malay students during a Merdeka celebration at the school here recently.
Kulaijaya deputy OCPD Asst Supt Mohd Kamil said police had received 12 reports against the principal since Saturday and that the case was being investigated under Section 504 of the Penal Code.

Over 50 parents and students had lodged the reports against the principal, who allegedly described the non-Malays as “penumpang” (passengers) in the country during her speech at the start of the celebration on Aug 12.

“I was shocked that my principal had used such a word against non-Malay students in our school.

“This is not the first time that she had made racist comments against Chinese and Indian students in our school,” said 17-year-old student Brevia Pan.

She added that the principal, who joined the school early this year, would only target Chinese and Indian students.

“During the Merdeka celebration, she had told non-Malay students to go study in a Chinese school or go back to China,” she told reporters in a press conference organised by Senai assemblyman Ong Kow Meng.

Another student, Ashvini Thi-na­karan, 17, said many Malay students were influenced by the principal’s remarks and made similar comments and called them names.

“Before she came to my school, all the students got along well,” she said. Her father R. Thinakaran, 47, said this was a serious matter and that principals should not behave like this.
“This principal has caused racial disharmony at the school,” he said, adding that if no action was taken, he would take his daughter out of the school.

Ong called for stern action against the principal, adding that such school heads and educators would affect the minds of students.
A NOBLE PROFESSION IS DISGRACED

MARIAM MOKHTAR
Thursday, 19 August 2010.

Apart from our parents, it is our teachers who help lay the first foundations in life so as to guide and improve ourselves, for whatever it is we aspire to be.

On 12 August, Hajah Siti Inshah Mansor, the principal of Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra in Kulai, allegedly described her students as penumpang (passengers), told her Chinese students to return to China and compared her Indian students with dogs.

Her remarks are unacceptable and a disgrace to her profession – the teaching profession.

She should have done the right thing and tendered her resignation. But only after making a public apology and after writing a letter of apology to each of the students in the school.

So what is a letter to each of the 2,200 students? She has done much harm to young, vulnerable and impressionable minds. At the same time, a noble profession has been besmirched, and a nation’s fragile truce between the races, is threatened.

If she will not go willingly, then she ought to be sacked. I have worked in companies where racism is not tolerated and the punishment is instant dismissal.

The head teacher’s insensitive, racist and daft comments uttered at the school assembly, is an insult to the Merdeka day celebrations.

Does this woman know the significance of Merdeka? Is she too young to have studied history at school or too young to know about the struggle to achieve Merdeka? Is she a perfect example of our much maligned BTN system?

I come from a family of teachers. My paternal grandfather was a headmaster, a father-in-law was a teacher as was my aunt and mother who trained at the Malayan Teachers' Training College at Kirkby.

Can anyone imagine the uproar and diplomatic scandal if the English teachers were to tell the Malayan teacher trainees that they looked stupid in their rags (sarongs) and to go back to the colonies where they came from, and to where they live in the trees, like monkeys?

You only have to sit with my grandfather to know of the challenges he faced in Malaya, when schools, were a rarity. We have progressed far from those attap-school days.

As for my mother and her sister, the children they once taught in primary and secondary school, would keep in constant touch, decades later What is striking is how her Chinese ex-students would frequent our Raya open house yearly. There was nothing unnatural or affected by the gathering.

That is why it is wrong for this principal to remain in her profession. She is undermining the good work of the other teachers, including her religious and community leaders.

Prime Minister Najib may have championed his 1Malaysia message, but it is obvious that either his message is not filtering down to the population or that the extremist groups are more effective in creating disharmony.

Wasn’t it a few days ago that DPM Muhyiddin Yassin warned the MCA to “be sensitive to the needs of other races in the country”? However, he forgot to inform his own people – the Malays - to do the same. Didn't he say, “In Barisan, we always take a similar stand on issues affecting all races.”?

Perhaps, Malays do not listen to their leaders any more. Maybe the extremists have successfully turned insecure Malays like this school-principal into arrogant creatures.

It would be interesting to know if any of the teachers made a police report. If none of them did, then it just shows how we have been conditioned by peer pressure and office politics, that we have forgotten our basic values.

A few minutes of berating and insulting the non-Malay students will now condemn this principal to a life of ignominy. Rather than being remembered for her guidance and teaching abilities, she will be known for her racist comments and the humiliation of being jeered at, during her attempts to apologise to the school assembly. Teenagers can be merciless when provoked.

Hajah Siti will come to realise the full meaning of ‘insult in haste and repent at leisure’. Her teaching career is in tatters as she will no longer be held in high regard by her students, their parents and her fellow teachers.

Instead of being an inspiration, she has disgraced her noble profession.

Friday, June 25, 2010

TREAT OUR FLAGS WITH MORE RESPECT

RECENTLY, I was in Bandung, Indonesia, and I observed the security guards at the hotel I was staying in hoisting the Sang Saka Merah Putih, the Indonesian flag, at sunrise.

When the sun set, the guards lowered the flag. Then, it was folded without ever touching the ground and handed over to the reception counter. Apparently, in all government offices, it is the duty of the guards to raise and lower the flag.

I was also told that schoolchildren in Indonesia are taught not only what the colours red and white on the Indonesian flag mean, but also the history of the flag, the protocols and etiquette and even what the correct measurement should be.

During my five days in Bandung, I never once saw a tattered or worn-out Indonesian flag. Here, in Malaysia, have you ever seen security guards at government offices hoisting and lowering the Malaysian and state flags?

The next time you go to government departments or the local council offices, have a look at the worn out and faded Malaysian and Johor flags fluttering on the flagpoles.

In fact, most of us don't even know whether it is lawful to place those miniature Malaysian flags on cars, like what is done during the Merdeka celebration. I always thought that only royalty and army generals were allowed to place a flag on their cars.

I have also seen children dressed in Baju Jalur Gemilang, made from the Malaysian flag. I remember seeing the late singer, Sudirman Arshad, wearing a Baju Jalur Gemilang. Can we sew a Baju Jalur Gemilang?

The question is, how much do we know about the Malaysian and state flags, and the protocols and etiquette involved?

Last week, I took a drive from Johor Baru to Kulai. As I passed government departments, local council offices and business premises, I was disappointed to see so many tattered, soiled and worn-out Malaysian and Johor flags at these premises.

However, nothing prepared me for the ultimate insult - a Johor flag being used to wrap papayas on a tree.

I did a search on the Internet and there is a dearth of information on the subject. I found out that if a flag is to be flown at a certain spot, the static flag pole must not be less than 6.1m high.

If the flag is used as a decorative piece or flown for a certain period, the pole must be 3m high and no part of the flag must touch the ground. Did you know that a static flag is only allowed to be flown from 7am to 7pm, unless there is a floodlight on?

Flags at government departments are to be raised when the offices open in the morning and lowered after office hours (have you ever seen this done?). In schools, the flag is to be raised in the morning and lowered at the end of the last class.

When the national or state flag is flown from houses or shops, the flag should face the road and secured on a pole at 45 degrees. If two flags are flown, the Malaysian flag must be on the left side of the premises.

Most business premises can be seen flying a flag. However, many of the flags have seen better days. Some even position the flags at the wrong places, like on the air-conditioning compressor.

In Johor, the late Sultan Iskandar had decreed in 1985 that the Johor flag must be given prominence and flown on the right side of the Malaysian flag. However, on Merdeka day, the Malaysian flag takes precedence and is flown on the right side of the state flag.

If there are three flag poles, the Johor flag is flown in the centre, the Malaysian flag on the right while the departmental, corporate or institutional flag is flown on the left.

On Merdeka day, the Malaysian flag is raised in the centre and the Johor flag on the right.

During the Merdeka celebrations or official federal events, the Johor flag follows after every third Malaysian flag flown as decorations.

The cluster of miniature flags on a utility post also follows the same arrangement.

All flags used for decoration are to be removed two weeks after the event. How often is this done?

I hope the local councils know about this rule and ensure that the contractors engaged to put flags on utility poles also remove and dispose of the flags respectfully.

In its bid to to instil patriotism and love for the country, the government encourages all citizens to fly the Malaysian flag, especially during the run up to Merdeka day.

However, I think it is time the government also starts educating the public on the proper protocols and etiquette for hoisting and flying the Malaysian and state flags, and the right way to dispose them.

Frankly, I doubt anyone knows what to do with tattered or worn out flags. A friend told me that he burned his faded Malaysian flag and threw the ash in the sea across Lido beach. Is "cremation" the correct way?

With Merdeka day just two months away and after seeing so many tattered and worn-out flags fluttering in the city, I hope the authorities will carry out a spot check.

At the very least, it should send a circular to all government department and business premises directing that all tattered or worn-out flags be removed and replaced.

I believe the Ministry of Information, political parties and non-governmental organisations can play a role in educating the public on the protocols and etiquette for the flag.


Friday, June 11, 2010

WOULD DAP- LED PENANG HEED PAS’s DEMAND AND REVOKE GAMBLING PREMISES LICENCES ?

PAS Youth Chief, Nasrudin Hassan, at the PAS Youth Congress has now called on all Pakatan Rakyat ruled states not to renew licences for gambling premises. What started with a campaign to ban sports betting and a demand that the government withdraw the sports betting licence to Ascot Sports Sdn Bhd, a Tan Sri Vincent Tan’s company has now moved beyond sports betting with PAS Youth now demanding the total banning of gambling. Pas Youth now call on all Pakatan Rakyat ruled states government not to renew the licences for gambling premises.

DAP who had cavorted with PAS on the issue of sports betting now must state its stand if it agrees with PAS Youth that all forms of gambling must be banned. Would, DAP now rise to the PAS’s challenge and ban gambling in DAP led Penang. Would the Chief Minister direct all local councils in Penang not to renew the licences of gambling premises. Perhaps, the Chief Minister should direct that the Penang Turf Club to cease operation.

What a vote winner this would be for the Chief Minister a strong proponent of “amar makruf nahi mungkar” if DAP were to heed PAS’s latest demand or has the DAP which had been pandering to PAS on the issue of football betting has now found itself entrapped in PAS’s main agenda to ban all forms of gambling.
MALAYSIAN ENGLISH MOVING OPPOSITE DIRECTION SAYS HRH SULTANAH

HRH Raja Zarith Sofiah al-Marhum Sultan Idris Shah, the Sultanah of Johor’s is well known for her eloquent and thought provoking articles which usually appear in the STAR newspaper. HRH’s articles written in flawless English not only displays her excellent command of the language but also articulates her intellectuality.

HRH when delivering a royal lecture at the recent 19th Malaysian English Language Teaching Association International conference highlighted the present standard of the English language in the country. According to HRH, even countries such as China and Indonesia are now fast catching up with Malaysia and are becoming more proficient in the English language. HRH spoke about the many youth who could hardly speak or write well in English and of youth who are reluctant to participate in international conferences because they have no confidence in speaking up and writing reports in English.

What HRH said is hardly surprising at all.

At independence, Malaysia inherited English as the language of public education. However, English language soon became a politically sensitive issue and was viewed as a vestige of the colonial past. Thus, in the aftermath of the 1969 race riots and in the upsurge of Malay nationalism, government capitulated to the demands of the nationalist. The National Education Policy formulated thereafter made Bahasa Malaysia the medium of instruction in schools. That ill-thought of decision taken more than 30 years ago, started the slide of the English language proficiency in Malaysia. Once in the region, only Singapore came close to Malaysia with regard to the high standard of English . Today, we are haunted by large segment of the population who can hardly speak good English let alone write.

Like many other advantages Malaysia had at independence, Malaysia clearly has lost its language competitive advantage it once had over many countries. If the average Malaysian’s proficiency of the English language at present is at par with the Indonesians or Thai’s, why would investors and particularly those in high tech and knowledge based industries would want to invest in Malaysia. A few years ago, the then Human Resource Minister made a starling admission that there are some 60,000 unemployed graduates and mostly Malays and most of them not proficient in English.

Unless there is an admission by the government that the standard of English has really deteriorated and there is a strong will by the government to take action to stop the slide, perhaps even reversing the entrenched policies with regard to English and teaching of English (even in the face of opposition from those myopic nationalists) the standard of the English language will only deteriorate even further. The day may come when people in other countries in the region will be speaking English well while Malaysians will only be able to mutter incoherent gibberish !

Now here is an example of a write-up by a prominent Malaysian university which appeared in one of the Malaysian newspaper!.
(Enjoy reading but a health warning do not eat and drink while reading the article !)
Horror of Malaysian Education System

ADVERTORIAL
New Straits Times
23 August 2008, page 43

HONORARY DEGREE AWARD7TH CONVOCATION CEREMONY UNIVERSITY TUN HUSSEIN ONN MALAYSIA

TO

YANG AMAT MULIA RAJA ZARITH SOFIAH BINTI ALMARHUMSULTAN IDRIS AL-MUTAWAKIL ALALLAHI SHAHD.K.II, S.P.M.J., S.P.C.M.

Yang Amat Mulia Raja Zarith Sofiah binti Almarhum Sultan Idris Al-Mutawakil Alallahi Shah has born on 14th of August 1959 in Hospital Batu Gajah, Perak. Yang Amat Mulia Raja Zarith is a third son to Duli Yang Maha Mulia Paduka Seri Sultan Perak Darul Ridzwan and Duli Yang Maha Mulia Raja Mazuwin binti almarhum Raja Arif Shah.

Yang Amat Mulia Raja Zarith Sofiah get early education in Sekolah Rendah Jenis Kebangsaan Datin Khadijah Kuala Kangsar in the state his birthplace namely in Perak. After end of the education in primary school, Yang Amat Mulia continue the education to form one at Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan Raja Perempuan Kalsom Kuala Kangsar, Perak.

In the month of September 1972, Yang Amat Mulia Raja Zarith Sofiah have set forth to England for further education in Chaltenham Ladies College, Gloucestershire to form six. Then, Yang Amat Mulia continue learning it in Davies College London in September 1977 and his following year in receive enter to Somerville College, London after having passed Oxford Entrance Examination.

After graduated at Oxford University with Bachelor of Art in June 1983 and follow the traditional University of Oxford, Yang Amat Mulia Raja Zarith will receive Master of Art after three years in 1986. Yang Amat Mulia also is a linguist follow several courses including language Mandarin at the tertiary level, French and Italy language.As his father, Yang Amat Mulia Raja Zarith Sofiah is a person that talented in picture arts. Refinement of soul, Yang Amat Mulia always watching natural beauty environment immortalize in the form photograph and painting to make look and reference. Yang Amat Mulia Raja Zarith performance become guide to deliver the message education to general public. Yang Amat Mulia concern on women and natural world and it custody aspect in become deep theme in painting.

Yang Amat Mulia Raja Zarith Sofiah comply have interest profoundest field documentation. Apart from producing book, Yang Amat Mulia Raja Zarith doubled up guest writer in the The New Straits Times newspapers and in personal column it “Mind Matters” in The Star newspaper. Besides writing, Yang Amat Mulia comply active presenting a working paper at the conference national level and international.

Education from her father and mother over concern to the people, make Yang Amat Mulia Raja Zarith Sofiah likes engaged in voluntary activities about as Deputy President of Majlis Wanita Johor (ROSE), Chief of Persatuan Pandu Puteri Malaysia Johor branch, Chairman of Nationalistic Community Service Red Crescent Malaysia, Patron of Spastic Children School in Johor Bahru, Patron Rotary Club of Tebrau Foundation, Advisor of Traditional Arts School International in London and become Pro Chancellor University Technology Malaysia (UTM) and becomen Royal Felllow Faculty of Language and Linguistic University Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM).

As the appreciation towards her contributions of ideas and efforts in the development of education in Malaysia, Chancellor of University Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Duli Yang Amat Mulia Tunku lbrahim lsmail lbni Sultan lskandar, Tunku Mahkota Johor, has approbation to presented the awards to Yang Amat Mulia Raja Zarith Sofiah binti Almarhum Sultan Idris Al-Mutawakil Alallahi Shah the Honorary Doctorate of Philosophy in Education at 7th Convocation Ceremony of University Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia in this year. Congratulation from us, University Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia members.


While on the lighter side, this may very well be is a conversation in Malaysian style English between room service and a hotel guest, if no steps are taken to remedy the problem highlighted by HRH.

TELEPHONE CONVERSATION BETWEEN A HOTEL GUEST AND ROOM SERVICE IN A MALAYSIAN HOTEL.
Room Services: Morny, ruin sorbes.
Guest : Sorry, I thought I dialled room services.
RS : Rye, ruin sorbes! Morny! Djewish to ordor sun teen ?
G : Ah yes. I’d like some sausages, toasts and eggs.
RS : How July dunn?
G : What!
RS : How July dunn? Pry, boy or pooch?
G : Oh, the eggs! How do I like them? Scrambled please.
RS : Ow July dee soarass…crease?
G : Crisp will be fine.
RS : Hokay. An santos?
G : What?
RS : Santos. July santos?
G : I don’t think so.
RS : No? Judo one toes?
G : I feel really bad, but I don’t know what ‘judo one toes’ means.
RS : Toes! Toes! Why dju Don Juan toes? Ow bow Singlish mopping we bother?
G : English Muffins? I’ve got it. You were saying ‘toast’ and English Muffins would be fine.
RS : Copy?
G : Sorry?
Rs : Copy … tea … mill?
G : Coffee please, and that’s all.
RS : One Minnie, asruin torino fee, strangle ache, crease baychem, tossy Singlish mopping, we
bother honey sigh, and copy… rye?
G : We bother what? You mean with butter! Thanks!
RS : Tendjewberrymud!
G : You’re Welcome!

Tuesday, June 08, 2010

GREAT QUOTE BY OLIVER CROMWELL

I came across this great quote be Oliver Cromwell. For more information about Oliver Cromwell go to http://www.olivercromwell.org/ and other similar websites.


“You have too long for any good you have been doing lately. Depart, I say and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!”.













Oliver Cromwell
Address to the Rump Parliament
20.04.1653





Images of Oliver Cromwell

This great words spoken more than 200 years ago still hold true for many sell by date politicians who do not heed the call to step down and relinquish power, but instead claim that they still have unfinished matters, never mind that by refusing to go, they are leading their party to perdition.

Friday, June 04, 2010

TIME TO CONDEMN EGYPT IN ITS COMPLICIT WITH ISRAEL BLOCKADING GAZA

Malaysia and most Malaysians has been robust in their condemnation of Israel for its lethal seizure the Turkish flagged ship the Mavi Marmara which was attempting to deliver humanitarian aid to blockaded Gaza and for the tragic death of nine civilians onboard who were killed when Israeli commandos stormed the ship. As usual, we witness the all too common demonstration, burning of the Israeli and United States flags and which culminates with a march to the United States embassy to handover memorandum and protest.

While we rightly condemn Israel for its latest act and denounce Israel for continuing with its blockade of Gaza, the Malaysian government, Malaysians, political parties and Muslim NGO fail to condemn Egypt which has enjoined Israel in blockading Gaza. Never are there, demonstrations and denunciations against the Egyptian government, burning of the Egyptian flag or the march to handover memorandum and protest note to the Egyptian embassy.

Following Hamas’ military coup in 2007, Israel has since then imposed a full blockade of Gaza, turning the coastal territory of 45 km long by 5-12 km into an open air prison. However, those vociferous in condemning Israel conveniently ignore and fail to denounce Egypt’s role and its complicit in Israel’s blockade of Gaza. If Israel maintains a complete siege and blockade of Gaza, Egypt further tightens the blockade by constructing a 14km- long wall made of super strength steel and which extends 18 metres underground.

For Gazans’, the movement of people and goods (unless through the illegal smuggling tunnels) to and from Gaza into Egypt is through Rafah- which does not pass through Israel. Even then this entry point is policed, secured and kept closed by Egypt, only to be opened intermittently.

Thus, it is high time those demonstrating in the streets of Kuala Lumpur and other towns in Malaysia and condemning Israel and the United States, reroute instead their anger, protest against the Egyptians. Egypt too is guilty for causing Gaza and Gazans’ to suffer. Malaysians for a change must condemn and denounce Egypt.

Wednesday, June 02, 2010

PAKATAN RAKYAT’S HYPOCRISY

Not to be outdone and outshined by PAS, DAP is planning to move a motion in Parliament to ban sports betting. Earlier, PAS had also expressed its objection to the government’s decision to allow sports betting. PAS launched a signature campaign, handed over memorandum to the state muftis, pleaded for the Sultans' intervention, held demonstrations and a leaflet blitz and not to mention the stationing of PAS members outside gambling outlets.

Next came the Pakatan Rakyat states which said that sports betting will not be allowed in their states and that no sports betting licence will be allowed. The Penang Chief Minister, a strong proponent of ‘Amar Makruf Nahi Mungkar’ referred to s.101(v) of the Local Government Act which apparently empowers the local council to deal with issues concerning the municipal’s safety health and convenience. Note the reasoning – municipal’s safety, health and convenience !. What a codswallop !

What Pakatan Rakyat should do is to be honest and admit that its objection to sports betting is because the sports betting licence has been granted to Ascot Sports Sdn Bhd, a Tan Sri Vincent Tan’s company. To Pakatan Rakyat, Tan Sri Vincent Tan is a BN crony and a beneficiary of BN ( and maybe one of BN’s benefactor).

If Pakatan Rakyat is so concerned for its citizen’s safety, health and convenience, then why not also ban gambling and betting totally, why don’t they gazette and enforce the 1995 national Fatwa on smoking, why not ban the sale of alcohol and liquor from convenience and provision stores. Oh yes, what about condoms? Yeah, that too ought to be banned. Perhaps, Pakatan Rakyat state governments can also reveal the number of massage parlours, health centres and pusat urutan traditional in their respective states and how many new licences have been issued and how many outlets have opened since taking over. Maybe, Pakatan Rakyat’s state governments can also reveal the number of pubs and bars in their respective states and the how many new licences have been issued. Should not these establishments be closed down.

If Pakatan Rakyat states are so concerned about their citizen’s safety, health, why the half measure of focusing only sports betting ? Go the full monthy and ban all other activities which can effect the safety, health and convenience of its citizens.

When all these ‘vice’ activities are still available, Pakatan Rakyat and Pakatan Rakyat states focuses only on banning sports betting. What hypocrisy and what hypocrites !

What is worst is that DAP puts on the worst grandstanding crusade simply to pander to PAS and Malay voters. A political brinkmanship against the Federal government and Barisan Nasional. Now that, DAP is a strong proponent of Amal Makruf Nahi Mungkar and also is deeply concerned for the well being of its citizens safety, health and convenience, surely DAP should not object if the Federal government or for the matter their fellow partners PAS and PKR were to propose banning of gambling outlets and other ‘vice’ activities.

Sheeesh…..

Norman Fernandez *
anfalaw@streamyx.com
Note:
Lest I be accused to be a proponent for gambling and vice, let it be known that I am not a gambler and agree that the number of draws be reduced.

Thursday, May 27, 2010

EXTRADITION PROCEDURES IN THE UK.

Many senior Malaysian lawyers, the Malaysian Bar Council Vice-President included, appear unable to comprehend how to ‘transfer’ my case to the UK and get me tried in a UK court. So that they do not continue embarrassing themselves by making silly statements, maybe I can assist them by giving them a short crash-course on how the system works. Consider this part of my community service.


NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Summary of the extradition procedure

  1. Extradition requests from Malaysia should be made to the Secretary of State.
  2. Some countries are not required to provide prima facie evidence in support of their request for extradition. Malaysia does not fall within this category so evidence will be required.
  3. If the request is 'valid' the Secretary of State will issue a certificate and send the request to the court. If the court is satisfied that the request contains the required information an arrest warrant may be issued. It is sent to the police for execution.
  4. After the person has been arrested, he is brought before the court as soon as is practicable and the judge sets a date for the extradition hearing.
  5. The judge must satisfy himself that the request meets the requirements of the 2003 Act, including dual criminality and prima facie evidence of guilt, and that none of the bars to extradition apply.
  6. Finally, the judge is required to decide whether the person’s extradition would be compatible with the convention rights within the meaning of the Human Rights Act 1998. If he decides all of these questions in the affirmative, he must send the case to the Secretary of State for the latter’s decision whether the person is to be extradited. Otherwise, he must discharge the person.
  7. The condition of “speciality” requires that the person must be dealt with in the requesting state only for the offences in respect of which the person is extradited and for no other charges other than that.
*************************************************
FURTHER READING
On 1 January 2004, the Extradition Act 2003 came into force. Requests made on or after 1 January 2004 are dealt with under the 2003 Act.

However, with the exception of Gibraltar, unless or until the Crown dependencies and British Overseas Territories amend their legislation, the Extradition Act 1989 (the legislation repealed by the Extradition Act 2003) will still apply to them. Currently, only Jersey has enacted its own extradition legislation.

Extradition relations with category 1 territories are governed by part 1 of the 2003 Act. Part 1 implemented the framework decision on the European arrest warrant (EAW). The Secretary of State has no role in these proceedings.
Extradition Partners under the EAW
Territories designated as category 1 territories as of 2 August 2007 are:
Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Gibraltar, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden.
Territories under part 2
Territories designated under part 2 are non-EU members of the European Convention on Extradition; or the London Schememe for Extradition within the Commonwealth; or else they are parties to bilateral extradition treaties with the UK. The countries involved are:
Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, The Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Cook Islands, Croatia, Cuba, Dominica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Fiji, The Gambia, Georgia, Ghana, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Haiti, Iceland, India, Iraq, Israel, Jamaica, Kenya, Kiribati, Lesotho, Liberia, Liechtenstein, Macedonia (FYR), Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritius, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Nauru, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Paraguay, Peru, Russian Federation, Saint Christopher and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Serbia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, Switzerland, Tanzania, Thailand, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Tuvalu, Uganda, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, the United States of America, Uruguay, Vanuatu, Western Samoa, Zambia and Zimbabwe.
Extradition request
Extradition requests from category 2 territories to the United Kingdom should be made to the Secretary of State. If the request is 'valid' the Secretary of State will issue a certificate and send the request to the court. The request is valid if it states that it is a request for a person accused or convicted of an offence and it is made by an appropriate authority of the requesting territory such as a diplomatic or consular representative.
Documentation require
Generally the information required to accompany the request will include:
  1. particulars of the person whose return is requested
  2. particulars of the offence of which he is accused or was convicted
  3. in the case of a person accused of an offence, a warrant or a duly authenticated copy of a warrant for his arrest issued in the requesting state, or for a provisional arrest, details of such a warrant
  4. in the case of a person unlawfully at large after conviction of an offence, a certificate or a duly authenticated copy of a certificate of the conviction and the sentence, or for provisional arrest, details of the conviction
  5. evidence or information that would justify the issue of a warrant for arrest in the UK, within the jurisdiction of a judge of the court that would hold the extradition hearing.
If the court is satisfied that the request contains the required information an arrest warrant may be issued. It is sent to the police for execution.
Requesting states are advised to submit a draft request to the Crown Prosecution Service to ensure potential difficulties are resolved before the request is finally submitted
Evidence require
Some countries are not required to provide prima facie evidence in support of their request for extradition. These countries are (as of 1 January 2007):
Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Canada, Croatia, Georgia, Iceland, Israel, Liechtenstein, Macedonia FYR, Moldova, Montenegro, New Zealand, Norway, Russian Federation, Serbia, South Africa, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine and the United States of America.
Preliminary hearing
After the person has been arrested, he is brought before the court as soon as is practicable and the judge sets a date for the extradition hearing.
Extradition hearing
The judge must satisfy himself that the request meets the requirements of the 2003 Act, including dual criminality and where appropriate, prima facie evidence of guilt; and that none of the bars to extradition apply (the rule against double jeopardy; extraneous considerations; passage of time or hostage-taking considerations).
Finally, he is required to decide whether the person’s extradition would be compatible with the convention rights within the meaning of the Human Rights Act 1998. If he decides all of these questions in the affirmative, he must send the case to the Secretary of State for the latter’s decision whether the person is to be extradited. Otherwise, he must discharge the person.
Secretary of State
Where a case is sent to the Secretary of State she must consider whether surrender is prohibited because:
  1. the person could face the death penalty: This is an absolute prohibition unless the Secretary of State receives an adequate written assurance from the requesting state that the death penalty will not be imposed, or will not be carried out, if imposed
  2. there are no speciality arrangements with the requesting country: The condition of “speciality” requires that the person must be dealt with in the requesting state only for the offences in respect of which the person is extradited (except in certain limited circumstances)
  3. the person was earlier extradited to the UK: this might require the Secretary of State to obtain the consent of the earlier extraditing country, before the person can be extradited on to the requesting state.
With effect from 15 January 2007, the defence has to make any representations within four weeks of the case being sent to the Secretary of State (28 days, including the day on which the case was sent). The Secretary of State’s decision has to be made within eight weeks of the day the case is sent to him, otherwise the person may apply to be discharged. This equalises the time within which representations must be made to the Secretary of State with the time in which the Secretary of State has to consider those representations, (previously, the defence had six weeks to submit representations.)
However, if the representations are complex and require enquiries being made of the requesting state, the Secretary of State may apply to the High Court for an extension of the decision date, of any length but usually of no more than two months – it is a matter for the court as to whether and for how long this is granted, although it has not to date refused any such application. More than one extension may be sought in any one case; and granted if it appears necessary.
If the Secretary of State does find that surrender is prohibited, she must order the discharge of the person. If none of the three prohibitions apply, or appropriate assurances have been given, the Secretary of State must order the person to be extradited.
KENAPA PAS TIDAK GEMPUR PREMISES JUAL ROKOK

PAS sebelum ini telahpun menyatakan bantahan terhadap keputusan kerajaan meluluskan pemberian lesen judi bola sepak kepada Ascot Sports, syarikat milik Tan Sri Vincent Tan dan juga telah menghantar memorandum kepada Mufti- Mufti Negeri serta memohon campurtangan kebawah duli Raja-Raja Melayu. Terkini, hari ini, Dewan Pemuda PAS mengambil tindakan lebih drastik untuk “gempur” premises judi.

Mengikut berita yang disiarkan dalam laman web www.harakahdaily.net, Ketua Dewan Pemuda PAS memaklumkan bahawa (ahli) pemuda PAS akan ditempatkan disemua premises judi diseluruh negara dan akan bergilir shif mengedarkan risalah kepada pengunjung dan tindakan ini akan berterusan sehingga kerajaan membatalkan judi bola sepak.

Saya kesal dengan tindakan yang diambil PAS yang juga secara tidak langsung campurtangan dengan hal-ehwal orang bukan Melayu dan bukan Islam.

Jika PAS yang membantah pemberian lesen judi bolasepak sehingga mahu menggempur premises judi dan mengacau pengunjung ke premises judi yang telah di lesenkan kerajaan, mengapa PAS tidak mengambil tindakan yang sama ke atas premises dan kedai-kedai yang menjual rokok dan atau menangkap orang Islam dan Melayu yang merokok. Paling kurang pun mengapa ahli-ahli PAS tidak diarahkan berdiri ditempat-tempat ini secara shif bergilir mengedar risalah ?

Saya terpanggil untuk bertanya kerana, muzakarah Jawatankuasa Fatwa Majlis Kebangsaan Hal Ehwal Islam Malaysia ke-37 pada 23 Mac 1995 memutuskan bahawa amalan merokok adalah haram menurut Islam. Berdasarkan fatwa ini, merokok adalah HARAM. Malahan saya dimaklumkan ada juga beberapa negeri yang telah menggazetkan fatwa ini.

Selanjutnya, izinkan saya untuk memberi sedikit fakta tentang gejala rokok yang boleh merangsangkan PAS untuk menggempur kedai-kedai yang menjual rokok. Pada tahun 2006, rakyat Malaysia membelanjakan kira-kira RM3 juta sehari atau RM90 juta sebulan membeli rokok. Kira-kira 10,000 daripada empat rakyat Malaysia yang merokok mati setiap tahun antara lain kerana barah paru-paru dan lain-lain sakit kronik yang berpunya dari tabiat merokok. Asap dan kandungan rokok didapati mengandungi 4000 jenis bahan kimia dan 60 daripadanya penyebab utama kanser. Kajian Persatuan Pengguna Pulau Pinang mendapati 45-50 remaja mula merokok setiap hari dan 8% daripada mereka adalah pelajar sekolah.

Pernahkah PAS bertanya berapakah peratusan orang Islam dan Melayu yang merokok. Berapakah jumlah yang dibelanjakan wang sehari atau sebulan membeli rokok oleh orang Islam dan Melayu. Berapakah peratusan orang Islam dan Melayu yang meninggal dunia kerana sakit barah paru-paru dan lain-lain kesakitan yang disebabkan dari merokok. Teringat juga firman Allah yang bermaksud “Dan janganlah kamu menjatuhkan dirimu sendiri ke dalam kebinasaan” (al-Baqarah : ayat 195). Juga, sabda Rasullah yang bermaksud “ Tidak boleh (menimbulkan) bahaya dan juga tidak boleh merbahayakan (orang lain) (Hadis Riwayat Ibnu Majah).

Kenapa PAS berdiam diri dalam isu rokok dan merokok? Tidak kelihatan dan atau mendengar tentang tindakan-tindakan drastik yang diambil menangani isu rokok dan terhadap perokok. Kenapa Ketua Dewan Pemuda PAS tidak mengarahkan ahli-ahli PAS untuk menggempur kedai-kedai runcit, kedai makan mamak ataupun kedai serbanika seperti 7-11. Kenapa tidak ditempatkan ahli-ahli bergilir shif berdiri diluar kedai-kedai ini ? Kenapa tidak bergilir memantau anak-anak muda yang berpeleseran di kompleks membeli-belah.

Bukankah rokok dan merokok telah diharamkan dengan fatwa kebangsaan. Dimana memorandum-memorandum kepada Mufti-Mufti Negeri meminta negeri-negeri untuk menggazetkan fatwa melarang merokok. Tidak kedengaran, Dewan Pemuda PAS, mememohon kepada duli Sultan-Sultan untuk berkenan menggazet fatwa kebangsaan ini.

Sebaliknya dalam isu judi bolasepak, PAS berpendirian berbeza. Orang Islam dilarang agama berjudi. Dalam premises kedai judi ada papan maklum yang jelas memaklumkan orang Islam dilarang masuk ke premises ini. Jika orang Islam masih hendak masuk berjudi, pihak berkuasa patut tangkap mereka. Tetapi untuk orang bukan Islam dan bukan Melayu, tidak ada larangan berjudi selagi mereka berjudi ditempat yang mempunyai lesen. Walaupun dalam agama dan budaya orang-orang bukan Islam dan bukan Melayu juga nas-nas yang tidak menggalakkan perjudian, tetapi ia tidak sampai menetapkan hukuman jika seseorang berjudi. Jadi saya nak tanya apa PAS nak sibuk-sibuk ni ?

PAS perlu tahu bahawa lesen judi bolasepak yang diberikan kepada Ascot Sports mempunyai syarat-syarat yang ketat. Ascot Sports tidak mendapat apa-apa kelonggaran syarat sampai boleh membenarkan orang Islam dan Melayu untuk masuk premises Ascot Sports dan membuat petaruhan. Orang Islam dan orang Melayu tetap dilarang bukan sahaja berjudi tetapi dilarang masuk premises judi.

PAS perlu tahu bahawa judi bolasepak adalah industri yang bernilai berbilion-billion. Terdapat ribuan situs-situs dalam laman web yang membolehkan kaki bola untuk membuat wang pertaruhan judi bolasepak. Amatlah mudah untuk seorang yang samada tinggal di ceruk Pengkalan Chepa ataupun berlegar di tepi jalan Petaling Street untuk berjudi melalui internet. Selagi dia ada kemudahan internet ( sekarang sudahpun ada modem mudah-alih) dan mempunyai akaun bank, dia mudah membuat pertaruhan. Ini realiti. Berjudi melalui internet begitu mudah.

Di Malaysia, judi bolasepak melalui internet dan lain-lain cara yang tidak sah dianggarkan RM20 Billion setahun. RM20 Billion !. Ini satu jumlah yang besar. Kerajaan pula kehilangan cukai lebih kurang RM4 Billion setahun. Ini fakta.

Justru itu, suka atau tidak, samada judi bolasepak dibenarkan atau tidak, judi bolasepak tetap akan berterusan. Daripada kerajaan kehilangan cukai judi (perolehan cukai dari judi juga tidak digunakan untuk orang Islam ataupun Melayu) adalah lebih baik jika judi bolasepak dibenarkan tetapi judi bola dikawal dan dipantau oleh pihak berkuasa dan melalui undang-undang.

Tan Sri Vincent Tan, sudahpun mempunyai lesen judi untuk Sports Toto. Ascot Sports yang juga dimiliki Tan Sri Vincent Tan, juga boleh menjalankan operasi dari premises yang sama. Tiada perlu buka premises judi yang baru untuk Ascot Sports. Jika pun perlu ada, cukup sekiranya premises Ascot Sports dibuka ditempat-tempat yang sudahpun ada kedai-kedai judi nombor ramalan.

Daripada PAS menggempur premises judi lebih elok jika PAS mendidik orang Islam dan orang Melayu tentang larangan berjudi mengikut Islam. Orang bukan Islam dan orang bukan Melayu tidak memerlukan didikan tentang baik buruk judi dari PAS. Mungkin PAS bermula hari ini boleh mengarah ahli-ahli menggempur kedai-kedai yang menjual rokok dan berdiri diluar bergilir shif mengedar risalah kepada orang Islam dan orang Melayu yang merokok. Jika PAS tidak dapat membantu melaksanakan fatwa kebangsaan mengharamkan merokok, mengapa PAS begitu lantang membantah judi bola sepak?

Mungkin PAS boleh fikir bagaimana hendak menangani lain-lain isu seperti suami yang ghaib atau enggan membayar nafkah, kes-kes buang bayi ataupun gejala rogol anak kandung oleh ahli keluarga yang terdekat, gejala mat rempit dan bohsia dan sebagainya. Bila ada isu-isu seperti ini yang masih belum ditangani atau diselesaikan oleh PAS mengapa isu pemberian lesen judi bolasepak perlu di perdahulukan.

Ini adalah pendirian peribadi Norman Fernandez.
Norman Fernandez adalah kaki bola dan menggilai
pasukan Manchester United tetapi beliau BUKAN
kaki judi bolasepak dan untuk piala dunia
tahun ini akan menyokong Sepanyol.

Wednesday, May 26, 2010

Raja Petra can't be tried in Britain

(The Star) PETALING JAYA: The Government cannot bring fugitive blogger Raja Petra Raja Kamarudin to trial in Britain even if it wanted to.

Bar Council vice-president Lim Chee Wee said Malaysia would have to bring Raja Petra back to prosecute him.

“Essentially, it can’t be done,” he said when asked about Raja Petra’s challenge to the Malaysian Government to try him in Britain.

“You have to bring him back to prosecute him. To do that, you have to check if there is an extradition treaty with Britain.

“And if there is, it depends whether UK gives consent. One factor is whether he can get a fair trial in Malaysia,” said Lim.

It was reported on Monday that an online news portal had written that Raja Petra said he would seek a level playing field in his fight against charges of defamation and sedition as well as his appeal against his detention under the Internal Security Act.

Raja Petra refuted the notion that he should return home to defend himself at a Malaysian court, adding that it was the prosecution’s job to prove guilt.

He has two warrants of arrest issued against him for not attending up for his sedition trial in April and May last year.

Another lawyer, Norman Fernandez concurred with Lim that Raja Petra cannot be tried in Britain. “There is no provision to try him in UK. He is not a war criminal.

“And if he is tried there, and found guilty, can he serve his sentence in a UK prison?” he said.

Fernandez said Raja Petra was merely taunting the Malaysian authorities after he managed to slip out of the country.

“He’s thumbing his nose at the Malaysian authorities and saying ‘Catch me if you can’. He knows it is not easy to bring him back to Malaysia,” he said.

Fernandez said nobody knew Raja Petra’s residential status in Britain.

“If he is a visitor, then his term of stay in the country is limited. He could have entered Britain through special documents. Or as a refugee.

“We don’t know, and the British authorities have yet to shed light on this,” he said.

Former Selangor PKR Youth chief Hamidzun Khairuddin, who joined Umno in 2004, called Raja Petra a traitor to Malaysians.

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

CHURCH SHOULD RETURN THE RM1.75 MILLION BY-ELECTION GRANT.
In the recent Sibu by-election, it was reported that four Methodist churches in the final hours of the by-election campaign received a RM1.75million grant from the Federal government. The four lucky churches chosen to receive the grant were En Tao Methodist Church (RM500,000), Tien Tao Methodist Church (RM500,000), Sing Ang Tong Methodist Church (RM400,000) and Hwai Tong Methodist Church (RM350,000). The grant was for upgrading and extension of the church buildings.

Almost all churches in Malaysia are self funding and not surprisingly virtually all are cash strapped. Some churches have to collect donations from its followers and well-wishers for years before the church can even put up a building or even an extension. Thus, had the Methodist churches in Sibu in ordinary circumstances received this Federal grant for upgrading and renovation work, that grant must be received with gratitude and thanks. To get such a grant out of blue, has to be heaven sent and the Federal government must be praised for the noble act and magnanimity.

But, in Sibu, the Federal grant was given in the final hours of the by-election campaign and selectively only to Methodist churches in a predominantly Methodist town and in a town where a by-election was to take place. Surely, this sudden magnanimity must have been made with a purpose and that is to win over the hearts of the Christian voters. What other way is there to construe that grant. To the Federal government it may be a special grant but to many it is nothing but an instant gratification or even worst an executive bribery. Still I do not blame the Federal government for the grant, after all the end justifies the means and during by-elections it is common for the voters to be overwhelmed by sudden and excess generosity.

I believe that the Methodist churches ought to have realized the actual purpose for this sudden generosity. The Methodist churches ought to have politely rejected the grant. The Church preaches to its followers to uphold high moral values and standards in all things. The Church takes the moral high ground and extols the followers to walk in Christ ways. Therefore, the Church too must be subjected to the same high standard.

Unfortunately, the recipient churches, who preach about maintaining and preserving the high moral and ethical standards, it would seem the churches capitulated and momentarily cast aside its principles. It is said money talks and everyone and everything has a price. Well, in the case of the Methodist churches it only took RM1.75 million.

I believe that the most decent thing for the Methodist churches which received this sudden grant to do is to return the money back to the donor. Show them what is called from a Christian and what Christian living is. Painful it may be to return the money, but have faith and walk the faith. God will provide. If the good Lord can provide the little birds with its daily feed, why would the Lord not help the church in its intentions? The RM1.75 million grant surely was not God send or was the answers to the churches prayer.

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

INSTANT GRATIFICATION AND EXECUTIVE BRIBERY DAYS ARE OVER

Barisan Nasional (BN) must be in a state of shock after last week end’s loss in the Sibu by-election. Sibu is after all BN’s stronghold in a state which BN refers to as BN’s safe deposit. Well, it looks like it is no more.

The Sibu electorate has sent one clear message. The days of offering a cornucopia of goodies are over. In Sibu, BN thought that the usual executive bribery will sway the voters to vote BN. After all, instant gratification succeeded in the recent Hulu Selangor by-election and also previously during the Ijok by-election. (By the way whatever happened to Cikgu Partiban ?)

The Sibuans were seduced with RM18 million grant to 65 Chinese schools – RM10 million to Chinese Primary Schools, RM5 million to Chinese Independent schools and RM3 Million to Christian missionary schools. Divide RM18 million with 65 schools, that’s peppercorns.

Add to this, were the sudden magnanimous gesture of giving RM1.7 million to Methodist Churches namely Eng Tao Methodist Church RM500,000, Tien Tao Methodist Church RM500,000, Sing Ang Tong Methodist Church RM450,000 and Hwai Ang Tong Methodist Church RM350,000. This kind gesture is bewildering since churches are usually self funding.
Suddenly out of the blue, the Methodist churches in a town where a by-election takes place gets money. Surely this act was designed to appease the Christians and the Churches. Christians in Sibu would have appreciated had the government resolved the bigger issues, namely the Allah issue and the ban and confiscation of Bahasa Malaysia Bibles. For Christian these issues remains contentious, unresolved and the government unrelenting in their stand.

Then there is that now most famous “deal” by the PM to the voters when it is alleged that the PM openly told the voters that “ If Robert Lau becomes MP on Sunday, on Monday, I will ask the cheque to be prepared. Do we have a deal ? We do ! You want RM5 Million. I want Robert Lau to win”. Imagine how the Election Commission would have reacted if Lim Guan Eng were to utter such words.

Perhaps the PM forgot that RM5 million offered for Rejang Park flood mitigation, was an insult to the long suffering Rejang Park and the Sibu voters who in the past had voted BN. BN may have thought that this “deal or no deal” will work in Sibu. Afterall, in Hulu Selangor similar method when the PM promised RM3 Million to SRJK (C) if BN’s P.Kamalanathan won. Well, P. Kamalanathan won and the PM immediately moved to fulfill the promises. The Sibu voters or rather the voters in Rejang Park just did the opposite so the chagrin of the PM when the day after the election the PM is reported to have said that that deal may have to be considered though the Deputy Prime Minister went on damage control to assure that whatever was promised will be fulfilled.

Unfortunately, these election goodies was not what the voters and people of Sibu wanted. The wanted to know why despite decades of supporting and voting for BN, Sibu still had to suffer from terrible flooding, land issues remain contentious and are yet to be settled, basic infrastructure are lacking, those in the interior and a very large percentage of the Iban community despite being BN’s staunchest supporters still wallow in poverty and there is an economic malaise permeating Sibu . The truth is that Sibu had been long ignored until the by election awakening. The say reap what you sow. Well BN had sowed nothing and thus there was nothing to be reaped. In the aftermath of the by-election, SUPP said that they do not know what went wrong. Strange fellows these SUPP chaps. Imagine, SUPP’s George Chan is Sarawak Deputy Chief Minister and yet SUPP do not know was happening in their own backyard!

The Sibu by election must become an eye opener and a lesson for BN that the days of descending on by election week and promising election goodies are over. Voters now days will not easily be swayed by instant gratification and executive bribery.

Monday, May 17, 2010

BUKTI MELAYU MENYOKONG DAP



(gambar dari www.malaysiakini.com)

Gambar penyokong Pakatan Rakyat/DAP di pilihanraya kecil Sibu.
RM70 FOR A VOTE (IS IT TRUE)?

The Election Commission and the police must investigate if there were attempts to buy votes during the Sibu by election.

On polling day, Bakri MP Er Teck Hwa claimed that “one of the local resident even showed us a RM70 received from BN half an hour ago and gave us his IC number as proof ”

Friday, May 14, 2010

GAMBLING LICENCE TO ASCOT SPORTS IS A CORRECT DECISION.

The government’s decision to award a sports betting licence to Ascot Sports is a right decision. No doubt there are social ills associated with gambling, nevertheless, the perceived ills must be weighed against present realities.

The fact is, for a gambler, there are hundreds of internet online gambling sites offering easy access to gamble, including sports betting. It is a near impossibility to curb online betting. While online gambling and sports betting may be illegal, the truth of the matter is that illegal sports betting in Malaysia is thought to be worth as much as RM20 Billion per annum. Even, the Deputy Finance Minister has recently admitted that the government as a result of these illegal betting losses almost RM4 Billion in tax revenues per annum. That represents a huge loss of potential revenue.

Thus, in the circumstances, it is better to legitimize sports betting, at least it will mitigate the loss of tax revenue. Like it or not, to continue banning sports betting, will only drive it underground and where presently it is really thriving.
Let’s face up to reality.

Tuesday, April 13, 2010

PEGUAM BELA TERTUDUH MASUK NERAKA?



Petikan dari Akhbar Metro Ahad bertarikh 11 April 2010 oleh Zaharuddin Abd Rahman.

HUKUM BELA ORANG SALAH.

Baru-baru ini saya menerima soalan berkaitan kerjaya peguam.

Ringkasan soalannya:
“Saya seorang pelajar undang-undang sivil dan syariah sebuah Institusi pengajian tinggi (IPT).”

“Baru-baru ini, saya ikuti satu ceramah berkaitan ‘Bolehkah peguam Muslim mempertahankan individu yang sudah mengaku kesalahannya’.

“Saya terperanjat apabila penceramah mengatakan Muslim boleh membela semua jenis anakguam yang datang kepada mereka walaupun mereka mengakui kesalahan dilakukan.”

“Antara hujahnya: Pertama, kerana tiada istilah bersalah terhadap seseorang selagi mana dia tidak disabitkan bersalah oleh hakim”.

“Kedua, si peguam hanya mendengar pengakuan daripada satu pihak (anakguam) bukan daripada kedua-dua belah pihak dan ketiga, kita tetap tidak akan disoal di akhirat kerana kita menjalankan tugas kita iaitu menegakkan kebenaran (terhadap anakguam)”.

“Adakah betul kita boleh membela semua anakguam yang datang kepada kita walaupun dia membunuh, merogol atau sebagainya, terutama bagi mereka yang mengaku (kerana penceramah tetap menghalalkannya atas dasar setiap insan ada hujahan di atas perbuatan)”.

“Jika itu tugasan yang dilakukan, bagaimana pula pendapatannya.”

Bagi saya, soalan itu sangat baik dan realistik. Menarik untuk dikaji dan dihurai lebih mendalam, cuma di ruangan ini saya hanya mampu memberi pandangan ringkas.

Memang benar, ada jenis kesalahan yang perlukan lebih daripada pengakuan seseorang. Contoh, Rasulullah SAW menolak pengakuan Maiz Bin Malik yang mengaku berzina sehingga pengakuan dibuat sebanyak empat kali, barulah baginda memutuskan hukuman terhadapnya.

Begitulah, mungkin benar, pengakuan seseorang masih belum mencukupi untuk kita meyakini dia bersalah dan tidak layak dibantu. Memang benar juga selepas segala pengakuan, bukti yang terpampang di depan kita semuanya menjadi saksi.

Tatkala itu, kita mungkin masih boleh membantunya dengan mempertahannya di Mahkamah selaku anakguam. Itu benar dan tugasan menjatuhkan hukuman akan tertanggung diatas bahu hakim.

Namun begitu, dalam Islam, peguam itu tidak boleh sama sekali terbabit dalam menyembunyi beberapa fakta dan bukti yang sudah kita peroleh ketika bersama anakguam kita.

Fakta dan bukti berkenaan sebahagiannya jika diperoleh oleh pihak pendakwa bakal membawa kepada sabit kesalahan terhadap anakguam kita.

Jika ia disembunyikan, ia jelas termasuk dalam perkara yang haram, manakala pendapatan hasil pembelaan itu juga menjadi haram.

Sebabnya, ia termasuk bantu membantu dalam perkara dosa, maksiat dan permusuhan serta menggagalkan keadilan daripada ditemui juga ditegakkan.

Sebagaimana Allah SWT mengharamkan seorang saksi enggan menjadi saksi dalam pembelaan keadilan : “Janganlah saksi-saksi itu enggan (memberi keterangan) apabila mereka dipanggil”. (al-Baqarah:282)

Maka tatkala peguam bela itu menjadi saksi kepada pengakuan anakguamnya walau di luar Mahkamah, peguam berkenaan sepatutnya menjadi saksi bagi menegakkan keadilan dalam kes terbabit.

Memang benar, keputusan akan dibuat oleh hakim tetapi cuba peguam bela memaklumkan dengan jelas dan terang kepada hakim juga mahkamah, bagaimana pengakuan anakguamnya di sebalik tabir berserta bukti yang mungkin ditemui peguam berkenaan sendiri.

Tatkala itu, seorang peguam yang bertanggungjawab sendiri faham dan tahu apakah hukuman yang bakal dijatuhkan oleh hakim.

Malangnya peguam bela, disebabkan dirinya mewakili anakguamnya, kerap menyembunyikan apa saja fakta serta data yang boleh menyebabkan anakguamnya didapati bersalah.

Ketika itu jelas kerja dan gajinya dalam kes terbabit akan sama ada jatuh syubhat atau lebih jelas lagi menjadi haram.

Bukankah jelas Rasulullah SAW pernah menjelaskan, jika seseorang peguam itu bijak berbicara sedangkan ia mengetahui anakguamnya bersalah.

Bagaimanapun, dia tetap menjalankan ‘tugasnya’ membela dengan segala jenis kepintarannya berhujah, sehingga akhirnya hakim meyakini perbahasannya lalu menjatuhkan hukuman yang salah.

Apakah yang akan menimpanya? Bacalah erti hadis dibawah : “Sesungguhnya aku hanya manusia, dan kamu sentiasa membawa kes pertikaian untuk diselesaikan olehku, dan mungkin sebahagian kami lebih cekap berhujah dari sebahagian lainnya, maka aku memutuskan hukuman berdasarkan apa yang ku dengar saja.

“Barang siapa yang ku jatuhi hukuman dan hukuman itu mengambil hak yang lain (akibat kurang cekap pihak yang benar dalam berhujah), janganlah kamu mengambilnya, sesungguhnya ia bakal menjadi sepotong api neraka.” (Riwayat Abu Daud, Tirmidzi dan lain-lain : Rujuk Naylul Awtar, 8/632, no 392)

Justeru sangat jelas daripada hadis itu, tindakannya berhujah membantu si pesalah adalah salah di sisi Islam dan dikira melayakkan dirinya untuk dibakar oleh sepotong api neraka. Jika itu keadaannya, nescaya pendapatan daripadanya juga pasti haram.

Wednesday, April 07, 2010

How Different Countries Debate in Parliaments/Congress