Pulau Utusan, part II 29 May 2008

Taken from Malaysiakini:

Pakatan Rakyat gesa boikot Utusan

Pakatan Rakyat menggesa pembaca dan pengiklan supaya memboikot akhbar Utusan Malaysia dan Mingguan Malaysia yang didakwanya terus-menerus menyiarkan laporan yang cuba merosakkan gabungan tersebut.

Gesaan itu terkandung dalam satu kenyataan yang ditandatangani bersama oleh presiden PKR Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, timbalan presiden PAS Nasharuddin Mat Isa dan setiausaha agung DAP Lim Guan Eng yang juga ketua menteri Pulau Pinang.

Ketika membaca kenyataan tersebut di bangunan Parlimen pagi ini, Wan Azizah berkata, kini nampaknya sudah ada “pembukaan kecil” dalam laporan media arus perdana terhadap berita-berita mengenai Pakatan Rakyat.

Bagaimanapun, tambah kenyataan itu lagi, media perdana masih bersikap tidak adil dan terus menyiarkan lebih banyak laporan untuk BN berbanding dengan Pakatan.

Namun begitu, tegasnya, laporan mengenai Pakatan mempunyai unsur-unsur keterlaluan dan bersifat merosakkan parti-parti dan para pemimpin gabungan tersebut.

Kenyataan itu mendakwa, akhbar paling teruk Utusan Malaysia dan Mingguan Malaysia yang didakwanya masih menggunakan cara tidak adil untuk mengkritik dan merosakkan Pakatan dan pemimpin-pemimpin utamanya, seolah-olah kempen pilihanraya masih berjalan.

Kenyataan itu juga mendakwa, Utusan cuba mengapi-apikan sentiman perkauman sempit, terutama membangkitkan kemarahan orang Melayu terhadap Pakatan dan pemimpin-pemimpin utamanya.

Oleh sebab sikap yang tidak adil dan tidak bertanggungjawab itu, maka Pakatan menggesa semua orang mulai hari ini memboikot dua akhbar kumpulan Utusan Melayu (M) Bhd.

Dalam kenyataan itu, mereka menggesa para pengiklan yang prihatin supaya segera berhenti daripada mengiklan dalam akhbar-akhbar berkenaan.

Well, in this matter, I’m faster than Pakatan Rakyat. I urged for a boycott way back in March, as can be seen here.

Forum Y2Y – After the 12th General Elections 17 May 2008

GERAKAN BELIA 4B PETALING JAYA UTARA

DAMANSARA KIM

Forum Y2Y

“After the 12^th General Elections: Our hopes for the future.”

Date : 24 Mei 2008 (Saturday)

Time : 2.30p.m. to 4.30p.m.

Venue : Transport Workers Union, Petaling Jaya (above Victoria Station)

On 8 March 2008, Malaysians went to the polls. After the votes were counted, we discovered that the ruling coalition did not obtain its customary two-thirds majority and the opposition parties garnered seats to form the government in 5 state assemblies.

More than two months after the elections, it is time that we take stock of the future. What are our hopes for the future with this paradigm shift that has reset our political landscape?

Light refreshments will be served. For more information, click here.

“Muhibbah” unity: VK Lingam & friends 17 May 2008

Taken from the Star, May 17 edition:

Cabinet wants Dr M and five others investigated

PUTRAJAYA: The Cabinet has agreed that investigations be conducted into all allegations against former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and five others identified in the Royal Commission of Inquiry report on the V.K. Lingam video clip.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Mohd Zaid Ibrahim said the five others were lawyer Datuk V.K. Lingam, tycoon Tan Sri Vincent Tan, Umno secretary-general Datuk Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor and former Chief Justices Tun Eusoff Chin and Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim.

Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail said he would go through the report before announcing whether he would be ordering a probe.

“I will study the recommendations in the report very carefully, after which I will issue a statement at the appropriate time.

“Please give us time to do our job properly,” he said.

Zaid said the six would be investigated for offences under the Sedition Act, Official Secrets Act and the Penal Code, which included obstruction of justice.

“All the recommendations in the report are advisory in nature so we have to have another investigation,” he said, adding that the Government had taken note of the recommendations for judicial reform and the establishment of a Judicial Appointments Commission.

“The Government is in the process of finalising the relevant laws to set up this commission and it will be made known soon,” he said, adding that the Government also proposed to include the recognition of “judicial power” as proposed by the Commission.

He said these moves were vital to help restore the people’s confidence in the judiciary.

The Cabinet, he said, had urged the public, including the media, to allow uninterrupted investigations without undue pressure and prejudice against any individual identified in the report.

“It must be reiterated that in our legal system, an accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law,” he told reporters at the Legal Affairs Division of the Prime Minister’s Department here yesterday.

The Royal Commission was formed to verify the authenticity of the video clip purportedly showing prominent lawyer Lingam on the phone brokering judicial appointments with a senior judge. Twenty-one witnesses testified at the 17-day inquiry which began on Jan 14.

Zaid also said that the Cabinet had agreed for the contents of the report to be released and sold to the public.

The report, which comes in four volumes comprising 2,889 pages, will cost RM541.60; of which the main report costs RM161.40 while the notes of proceedings, statutory declaration and lists of exhibits are priced at RM123.30, RM120 and RM136.90 respectively.

The public can buy the report at the Legal Affairs Division from Tuesday afternoon.

In its report, the commission said that the video clip, made by businessman Loh Gwo Burne, was indeed recorded at Lingam’s house in December 2001.

It said it had no hesitation in finding that the clip to be genuine, real, reliable and trustworthy and its contents true in substance and material particulars.

In examining Lingam and Fairuz’s testimonies, which they described as bare denials, against the direct evidence elicited from the phone conversation as well as the evidence of Gwo Burne and his businessman father Loh Mui Fah, the commission found that it was none other than Fairuz that Lingam was speaking to on the telephone.

The panel also said the evidence showed that Lingam was not intoxicated during the conversations, as he had suggested.

It added that the evidence also militates against Lingam’s other suggestion that he could have been “bullshitting” or bragging.

The commission said that, in the final analysis, there was conceivably an insidious movement by Lingam with the covert assistance of his close friends Tan and Tengku Adnan to involve themselves actively in the appointment of judges, in particular that of Fairuz as Chief judge of Malaya and later Court of Appeal president.

In the process, the panel added that Dr Mahathir was also entangled.

While noting that the group’s ultimate aim could not be ascertained, given the limitation of the terms of reference, the commission said it was reasonable to suggest that it could not be anything but self-serving.

The panel said the collective and cumulative actions of the main characters concerned had the effect of seriously undermining the independence and integrity of the judiciary as a whole.

At long last, that elusive unity that we Malaysians we were looking for has indeed been found. In fact, it has been around for a long time. We just never knew it existed. But this has proven to us that indeed, Malays, Chinese and Indians can work together without prejudice, without racism and without discrimination.

One Malay politician, one Chinese businessman and one Indian lawyer sets the example to all Malaysians on the ‘power’ of unity. In the spirit of the nation they have set aside their racial and religious differences for a common goal: the fixing of the appointment of judges.

Jalur gemilang di bawah naunganmu
Jalur gemilang kami semua bersatu
Perpaduan ketaatan
Amalan murni rakyat Malaysia

Begone, May 13 1969 13 May 2008

I was born into a Malaysia that was peaceful. A Malaysia in 1983 that was growing. In a decade or more, Malaysia would be one of the rising ‘Asian tigers’. I grew up in a multi-cultural Malaysia, a Malaysia that for the most part tolerates and accepts, if not celebrates, the differences between it’s citizens.

I was not around when May 13 1969 occurred. Yet the fear conjured up by May 13 can be felt even today, decades later.

But no one really knows what really happened that fateful day. Yes we’ve heard stories. Yes, there’s the official version of events. But ‘official history’ is a fallacious concept written by those in power. The fact of the matter is, whilst the ‘effect’ of May 13 is quite clear, we don’t quite know it’s ’cause’.

Yet time and time again, I have been told of the atrocities of the racial riots of 1969. A time when Malaysians turned on Malaysians, when countrymen fought on the basis of race. I have been told, time and time again, of what would occur should the fragile balance of the races is tipped. If the status quo is questioned, I have been told that the streets of Kuala Lumpur will once again see blood.

Enough is enough.

May 13 was a tragic time. It was an important lesson on nation-building for our young country. Yet I want to move forward. I do not want to be shackled by the past.

It’s time we as Malaysians come together as one. Not as a homogeneous society, but as a multi-cultural, multi-religious society that celebrates its diversity. Let us accept each other for who they are, regardless of whatever differences they may have compared to us. Each and every Malaysian has a rightful place under the Malaysian sun, and by God, let us defend that rightful place.

No, of course we cannot deny May 13. Nor can we forget it. But let it no longer haunt us. Let no one use the fear of it for their own advantage.

Let us together say that come what may, we will never resort to violence to resolve our sectarian differences. Let us confidently tell each other that the proverbial ‘parang’ will never be used. Far too long have we lived with each other, laughed together, cried together, cheered together, got angry together, loved together, worked together, ate together, drank together, struggled together, traveled together and called each other ‘countrymen’ that we swear that we will never ever let May 13 be repeated on our tanah air. Our tanah tumpahnya darahku.

39 years later, let us together banish the specter of May 13 1969 to the annals of history.

When UMNO defends the Rulers 8 May 2008

Remember this?:

Terengganu MB Crisis

New Straits Times -

24 March 2008 – There was no swearing-in after all today for embattled Terengganu Mentri Besar-designate Datuk Ahmad Said. The assemblyman, who was picked by the Sultan of Terengganu to be the new Mentri Besar, merely received a letter of appointment from the State Royal Regency Advisory Council and was told that his swearing-in has been scheduled in three days, which would be this Wednesday.

Ahmad, the Kijal assemblyman, had turned up at the Istana Tetamu here at 7.25am expecting to be sworn in after yesterday’s stunning turn of events when the palace announced that he would be the new Mentri Besar following the Sultan’s invoking of Clause 14 paragraph (2) (a) of the state constitution.

The ceremony, held under tight security with policemen maintaining order outside the palace grounds, started at 8.20 am and ended at 8.28am. Ahmad, who is also the Kemaman Umno division head, was seen entering the palace at escorted by Chief Police Officer Datuk Ayub Yaakob. The media, except for the photographer and cameraman from Bernama, were prevented from entering the palace to cover the event.
Thirty minutes later, the 22 Umno assemblymen opposed to Ahmad’s appointment turned up at the palace, led by state Umno liaison secretary Datuk Rosol Wahid, to hand over to a palace official a letter signed by all 22. The letter also insisted that Datuk Seri Idris Jusoh should be sworn in as the rightful Mentri Besar.

At 8.15am, Ahmad received his letter of appointment from council head Tengku Sri Panglima Raja Tengku Baderulzaman, witnessed by two other members of the Council, Tengku Sri Laksamana Raja Tengku Sulaiman Sultan Ismail and former Federal Court Judge, Datuk Abdul Kadir Sulaiman.

The ceremony was also attended by other members of the council – State Secretary Datuk Mokhtar Nong, State Legal Adviser Mohamad Sekeri Mamat and Ayub.

Ahmad was also advised to be ready for his swearing in on Wednesday. He left the palace at 8.45 am in a four-wheel-drive vehicle.

Rosol, who was not allowed to enter the palace, later handed over the letter to the Secretary of the Terengganu Regency Advisory Council, Shafie Ali.

When met by reporters, Rosol said the letter, among other things, stated that all the 22 BN elected representatives fully supported the re-appointment of Idris as the Menteri Besar and rejected Ahmad’s appointment as the new MB. “Our support for Datuk Seri Idris is unanimous,” he said. “There is no other person qualified to hold the Menteri Besar’s post apart from him (Idris).”

Rosol insisted that Ahmad’s appointment was invalid and hoped that those involved would take a serious view on the matter as it involved the interest of the people in the state.

“If Ahmad were to proceed with his intention to take the oath of office as Menteri Besar, he would be violating the party rules and action could be taken against him, including expulsion from the party,” he said.

“That’s why we sent the letter of protest because Umno secretary-general had informed me last night that Ahmad would be contravening the Umno constitution should he take the oath of office.”

The three-day gap to the swearing-in has left the state buzzing with speculation on what would happen between now and Wednesday. Some expect that Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi will speak personally with the Ruler anytime soon to find a solution to the impasse while others think an emissary will be sent to seek an audience with the Sultan and listen to terms.

When the palace announced Ahmad’s appointment yesterday evening, it was immediately met with a threat to boycott the swearing-in ceremony by the 23 BN assemblymen, including Idris. Constitutional law expert Prof Shad Saleem Faruqi opined in an immediate reaction that the state is faced with a royal constitutional crisis.

BN had retained 24 of the 32 seats in the Terengganu assembly in the March 8 polls. Ahmad, 51, who has been the assemblyman for Kijal since 1990, succeeds Idris, also the Terengganu Umno chief and Jertih assemblyman who was Mentri Besar for one term from 2004.

Terengganu has been without a government for 14 days since the March 8 general election, despite a convincing victory by the BN, until the palace announcement yesterday.

So, that’s one story. Then came this:

PM: Terengganu MB Appointment Unconstitutional

Bernama -

SEPANG, March 23 (Bernama) — The appointment of Kijal assemblyman Datuk Ahmad Said as the new Menteri Besar of Terengganu is unconstitutional, said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.

“Datuk Seri Idris Jusoh (who was slated for the post) commands majority support (among the elected representatives). This has not changed.

“As such, the appointment of any other person to the post is unconstitutional,” Abdullah said when asked to comment on the action by 22 Terengganu Barisan Nasional assemblyman in the state who have protested Ahmad’s appointment to lead the state.

Earlier, Abdullah had witnessed the 2008 Petronas Formula One Grand Prix held at the Sepang Circuit here, Sunday. He had also presented the winner’s trophy to the race’s winner, Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro’s Kimi Raikkonen.

The Kijal assemblyman received the letter of appointment as the new Terengganu Menteri Besar from the state’s Regency Advisory Council at a closed-door meeting at Istana Tetamu in Kuala Terengganu this morning.

The date for his swearing-in, however, had yet to be fixed.

But now:

Malaysiakini -

UMNO Buat Laporan Polis Terhadap Karpal

Presiden Umno, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi telah mengarahkan setiausaha agung Umno, Datuk Tengku Adnan Mansor supaya membuat aduan polis terhadap pengerusi DAP, Karpal Singh yang mempersoalkan kuasa Sultan Perak dalam pentadbiran negeri tersebut.

Ahli Parlimen Bukit Gelugor itu sebelum ini mempersoalkan kuasa Sultan Perak khususnya dalam kes pertukaran Pengarah Jabatan Agama Islam Perak (JAIP) Datuk Jamry Sury.

Bercakap kepada pemberita di ibunegara petang ini, Abdullah berkata, kenyataan Karpal itu mempunyai unsur-unsur hasutan

“Saya telah memberitahu Tengku Adnan supaya membuat aduan di balai polis supaya dibawa kepada Peguam Negara dan mahkamah mengenai Karpal Singh,” katanya kepada pemberita selepas merasmikan “Mihas Showcase 2008″ di Tapak A, Pameran Mihas, Matrade di ibunegara hari ini.

Abdullah berkata, beliau juga diberitahu bahawa yang lain lagi – bukan sahaja orang Melayu, tetapi juga bukan Melayu – membuat laporan polis yang sama.

Katanya, mereka membuat laporan tersebut kerana merasa tersinggung dan marah terhadap kenyataan Karpal Singh yang telah menimbulkan kemarahan ramai orang.

Menurut laporan, Karpal mendakwa arahan Sultan Perak supaya Jamry dilantik semula adalah tidak sah mengikut undang-undang dan sepatutnya keputusan terdahulu kerajaan negeri mengarahkan pertukaran Jamry dikekalkan.

“(Kenyataan) Karpal itu dilihat  oleh rakyat sebagai menghina Sultan, seolah-olah Sultan tidak tahu tugasnya. Ramai rakyat, termasuk Umno marah dengan tindakan tersebut,” kata Abdullah.

Seriously, why do they do this?

To me, Mr. Karpal should not have said what he said. Regardless of what he thought the legal position was, he should have known better. He should have known that certain quarters, especially the ‘jaguhs‘ would jump at the opportunity to politicize the issue. UMNO will again bring up the bogeyman of the DAP being anti-Malay and of course, our favorite bunch of old men with inflated sense of worth, the Badan Bertindak Perpaduan Melayu, will have fuel to add to their fire.

No, Karpal should not have said what he said. I don’t believe that we should place the Rulers ‘above’ any sort of criticism, but to do so without stepping on some sensitive feet is nigh impossible. When all said and done, due respect must be accorded to the Sultans, as their powers have been enshrined in the Constitution.

And besides, the Sultan has no way of responding to Karpal’s comments, does he?

But at the same time, what the heck is UMNO trying to conjure up? He without sin cast the first stone, and for UMNO, with their ’sins’ on the Rulers, they should not even be throwing a tantrum, let alone a stone.

Used: The Sedition Charge? 6 May 2008

The sedition charge against blogger Raja Petra today left a bad taste in my mouth.

I’m not a fan of RPK, I don’t really follow his ‘Malaysia-Today’ blog. In fact, I think RPK is a ’sensationalist’ writer, who uses bits and pieces of facts that he obtains and fills in the gaps to connect those facts. An entertaining blogger, to say the least. And a wildly popular one.

But regardless how much credibility I attach to RPK, I still respect his right to freedom of expression. His freedom of speech. If he wants to put forth his views, let him do so. Whether you agree with his views or not is a different matter altogether.

So to charge RPK with the Sedition Act goes against everything that I believe in. There is no justification for doing so. His post, “Let’s Send the Altantuya Murderers to Hell”, does not incite racial hatred. It will not cause an uprising. It does not threaten the security of the country.

What it does is implicate a certain senior leader of our country and his wife in the Altantuya case.

I doubt if he has any proof for what he implied in his post. RPK is again being RPK, writing straight from the hip. He doesn’t care about being politically correct. He will air his views whether you like it or not.

But of course, he must not be allowed a free reign, to write whatever he wishes, be it the truth or not. No one should be allowed to do so. One must be accountable for what one says.

Everyone has a right to clear his/her name. If someone has written lies about you or has defamed you, then you have the right to bring legal action against the person. Similarly, if what RPK has written was libelous, then the concerned persons should seek legal redress in civil law. That is why we have defamation laws.

But RPK was not sued because of his Altantuya post. RPK was charged for a crime because of the said post. A criminal offence is an offence committed against the state. A civil matter, between two private parties, has now become a criminal one.

Can we be blamed if we think that the AG’s Chambers has been used to ‘retaliate’ against RPK for his post? In the absence of contrary evidence, people tend to connect the obvious. And what is obvious is this: RPK blogged about Altantuya, implicating a certain leader and his wife and now RPK is charged with sedition.

This time, we won’t need RPK to fill in the gaps for us.

12th Parliament of Malaysia 1 May 2008

On 28 April 2008, the 12th Parliament of Malaysia officially began with the swearing in ceremony of the newly elected Members of Parliament (MPs). As we all know, the latest composition of our august house is unprecedented in our nations history: 82 Opposition MPs, comprising of the Pakatan Rakyat (PKR-DAP-PAS) and one independent member as oppposed to the 140 Barisan Nasional members. For the second time in history, the ruling coalition does not have the two thirds majority in the Dewan Rakyat. Many are predicting that we will see a far livelier Parliament than ever before.

And as far as being ‘lively’ is concerned, our MPs did not disappoint. The first full day of Parliament saw BN and Opposition MPs shouting and trading choice words at each other. The general public consensus was that the behavior of our MPs that day was quite shameful, to the extant that the Information Minister, Datuk Shabery Cheek threatened to scrap the live telecast of proceedings if things did not improve.

I do admit that what transpired yesterday was ‘un-Parliamentarian’, to say the least. Our MPs, whether from BN or from the Opposition, must improve on their Parliamentary decorum. The rakyat has shown maturity in casting our votes last March, so our representatives must themselves show maturity in Parliament. What is the point of having a functioning democracy if Parliamentary proceedings remain third world?

But all is not lost, of course. I’m willing to chalk of Wednesday’s facade as a ‘first-time jitters’, so to speak. Both sides, with the house delicately balanced, see the need to ’show their strength’, and some MPs may have tried to take advantage of the 30-minute telecast. Both sides must, however, settle down as fast as possible and get to the business of legislating.

Having a stronger Opposition in Parliament bodes well for the country. In any democracy, there must be a system of checks and balances upon the Executive. In light of a subdued Judiciary here in Malaysia, the Legislative must take up this mantle. With a stronger Opposition, the government cannot bulldoze their way to enact laws. At the same time, a more diverse Parliament will also promote accountability. Both sides will have to be on their toes all the time.

It is my wish to see a dynamic Parliament, where bills are questioned and justified before becoming law. A Parliament where issues are debated and discussed in the interests of the nation. A Parliament that serves the rakyat, regardless of race, religion or political ideology. I want to see a Parliament that Malaysians can be proud of.

Yang Berhormats, please show us that Parliament.