Your children will be the next victims

I came across this article by Madhatter and i thought i should share it with you

Source : M’Kini
By : Madhatter

I refer to the Malaysiakini report French daily reveals grisly details of Altantuya's death.

In light of the latest revelation by the French journalist whose report appears credible, the government must now conduct a royal commission into the Altantuya case because the image of the country has been seriously tarnished.

Why was the police report mentioned in the French journalist's article not used as evidence in the Altantuya case? Why did the attorney-general not appeal the acquittal of Abdul Razak Baginda? You don't need to be a crime writer to know that it all smells fishy.

Soon all will come to light and those who think they can get away with murder will not be able to sleep peacefully at night. They don't deserve to and they will be brought to account sooner or later.

The world is a small place and those who run away to other countries should be put on notice that they can't run and hide from the truth and their murderous deeds.
The Altantuya case will be the undoing of Malaysia because never in the history of the nation has our image been so badly tarnished by the murder of an innocent woman who - when you consider the size of the arms deals she was involved in - was merely asking for peanuts.

Was her life worth only RM 500,000? I don't think so and the real murderers of this woman must be punished. Najib Abdul Razak must be asked to step down immediately and be asked to explain the allegations. It is not the first time he has been implicated in the murder of Altantuya and it is not the first time too that he is allegedly involved in corrupt defence purchases dealings.

How can such a leader whose reputation is in question continue on to become the country's next prime minister? It would be terribly irresponsible of Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi and Umno leaders to allow someone like Najib to pretend as if nothing is the matter and it is business as usual.

I'm positive more mud will be surface to make it totally unacceptable for Najib and his wife Rosmah Mansor to occupy the country's most important household. We will be the laughing stock of the world and only an independent inquiry involving foreign experts will be able to clear Najib.

No one should be able to act above the law and attached to the Altantuya murder is a murky and corrupt defence deal. The French company ought to be made to come clean and disclose what commissions were paid and to whom.

If a company owned by Abdul Razak Baginda gets such a hefty commission and Najib was the one who approved the purchase being the then defence minister, it makes a mockery of the government's pretense at arresting corruption. Since the MACC itself has come under cloud and become a tool of the administration, a royal commission is the only viable recourse to unearth the truth.

Najib does not have the character required of the top job and if former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad sacked Anwar Ibrahim for a lesser 'crime', the floundering Abdullah can in a last act of courage show he has the moral backbone to sack his embroiled deputy.

But so far, it seems all who have come out with the truth including Raja Petra Kamaruddin have landed in hot soup and the real guilty ones escaped punishment.
No one should be deceived that the Umno-led administration is rotten as Dr Mahahtir once remarked. Abdullah Ahmad Badawi himself was implicated in the Iraq food-for-oil scandal.

Many allegations of corruption involving those in government including the latest by a PKR politician that he was offered RM50 million by Najib to conspire the downfall of the Pakatan government in Perak have all not been satisfactorily explained.
It is this failure of the police and the MACC to do their job properly that makes the whole lot of them reek of nauseating stench.

The rakyat must be determined to vote out politicians that have destroyed the country. They have corrupted justice and think they can get away with it. They must not be allowed to pour scorn on the rakyat because we have the ultimate power and not the sultans or the government which decide what is good for the country.
When all who are entrusted with taking care of our rights and welfare fail us, it is time to get rid of the whole lot of them.

Some day, there will be a reckoning and those who have abused their power now will not be able to cover up their rotten deeds any more. When a new and decent government is in charge, then they must remember the dark deeds of the political criminals and even if justice is late in coming, they will meet it face to face and feel their shame.

But for now, the rakyat must rally behind the underdogs, those politicians with conscience including an Umno politician like Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah who dares to speak his mind. His sincerity will be tested when he is prepared to back rhetoric with convincing action, like former Umno minister Zaid Ibrahim.

The rakyat must rise above politics because the future of the nation is at stake and whether you are a Pakatan Rakyat or Barisan Nasional supporter, surely you can't support any politician who is corrupt and has done so many wrongs to destroy the country.

Enough is enough and all those who continue to support criminal politicians will only end up ensuring that their children will be the next victims.

Was Kugan really a Suspected Car Thief...??

By YennaMike
Image Source : M'Kini


Reading the article about Kugan’s post mortem report both from MalaysiaKini and The Star news paper it makes me to ponder – with all these cover ups by our Police Department and Pathologists both under oath to serve public and uphold the law....was Kugan really a Suspected Car thief. ..!!. If a suspected car thief had to go through such severe punishment why wasn’t Abdul Razak Baginda and co. (suspected murderers of Altantuya)wasn’t given a similar treatment to spell out the truth. How about Mat Rempits, you don’t hear them getting arrested and beaten to death but instead public are the ones getting beaten by these Mat Rempits.

The World is already laughing at Malaysia by the way Altantuya’s case was handled not to mention the recent revelations by Arnaud Dubus in The French Liberation newspaper. Our Perak crisis which seems to have lots of imbalance by the way things are being conduct and don’t forget another controversial “correct....correct...correct...” case i.e. our own judiciary manipulation crisis – the Lingam’s Case.

I really feel sorry for Kugan’s family for being put to the test by all these accusations and ongoing legal battle. Her son might have been labelled as “suspected car thief”, but i’m proud that she is fighting for her son’s justice...again was Kugan really a Suspected Car Thief or is this another cover up by our Police Department to hide the truth...??

What's next for Perak - ISA Arrest...??

Finally the Police came up with an idea on how to intimidate the Representatives attended and passed 3 motions on Tuesday....he...he...he... “ illegal gathering “ pulak...!!!. Nice try but keep trying – well if it was an illegal gathering to pass 3 motions outside of the State Building since our “friends” decided to lock it up...wonder would it have been legal to have it inside the compound of the State Secretariat Building.

I guess this must be the first attempt to overrule or invalidate the 3 motions passed during the “Historical” pokok democracy meeting held in our Silver state. Eeemmm will this work – i’m a bit worried but keeping my fingers crossed since the strings are being pulled again and again by our Federal Government to seize power in Perak. I’m just pondering what are the average “Perakians” think about what’s going around in their State. I’m also wondering why MACC not questioning the 3 PKR reps who decided to switch over side but instead going after Speaker V.Sivakumar...eerrrmmm.

The legal battles have started with favouritism more towards the ruling party and we all know why. Once again i’m still wondering why we are not given the opportunity to our fellow “Perakian” to decide who they want as their Menteri Besar and state representatives.

Soon it will be the usual ISA Arrest...for reasons you know what....haiyaaa...!!!. Will democracy “shine” in our Silver State.....let’s wait and see.....

ANOTHER BRILLIANT CHAPTER IN MALAYSIAN BOOK OF POLITICS

By : YennaMike

Malaysia Boleh is the word we all hail from time to time to remind ourselves what we are made of. Over the years since this word was first hailed the “Positivity“ of this chant has lost its shine but it shined very well in the Silver state of Malaysia this morning.

Malaysia Boleh...yes we can have an Emergency State Meeting at the Car Park under a huge tree (pokok demokrasi) and managed to pass three motions – well done to those who supported this cause. This has proven that people who representing our fellow “Perakians” lived up to their voters expectations to show what they are made of not to mention Speaker V.Sivakumar who chaired the meeting despite the court cases filed against him.

Although many quarters are labelling this act as insulting the Sultan, in my own opinion it’s ‘rakyats’ representatives doing their best to be able to serve them and honour their term by the constitution and at the same time exercising their rights as elected representative to seek Sultan’s consent.

The “Rakyat” should be given their rights to choose who they want as their representatives. This political imbalance which will not settle down until an amicable solution is reached again my humble opinion is to let the “Rakyat” decide who they want as their representative and a motion should be passed to stop elected representatives from jumping “ship” until they complete their elected term to stop similar situation arising near future.

HINDRAF: FATHER'S DAY ISA WISH.

Source : via Makkal Sakti

HINDRAF
135-3 JALAN TOMAN 7
KEMAYAN SQUARE
70200 SEREMBAN

Y.A.B. Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim

Selangor Menteri Besar

Selangor State Secretariat Office,
Bangunan Sultan Salahuddin Abdul Aziz Shah, Tel: 03 5544 7013
40503 Shah Alam, Selangor Darul Ehsan. Fax: 03 5519 0032

08/06/08

Y.A.B.Tan Sri,

Re: Father’s Day ISA wish.
Weekly courtesy Public Transport for ISA detainees families from
KL to Kemta, Taiping, Perak.

We refer to the above matter and your statement in Utusan Malaysia last week offering transport and travelling expenses to Kemta prison Kamunting and school children’s allowances.

May we propose that the Selangor state government provides a free courtesy bus service belonging to the Selangor State Government from K.L. to Kemta prison once every week until all ISA detainees are released. This bus service could take off from outside Malaysiakini office in Bangsar, KL at 7am on every Sunday and ISA detainee families to be dropped back at the same point on the return journey. The Y.A.B. Menteri Besar could officially flag of this bus service on a date to be fixed preferably on or in conjunction with Father’s Day shortly. The Gabungan Mansuhkan ISA could be the co-coordinator to inform and publicise this bus service to the ISA detainee families.

This would help further create public awareness to the atrocities of ISA detention without trial besides enhancing family support groups and fellowship among ISA detainee’s families. We would then be able to create a multi-racial ISA family. There would literally be an 8 hour weekly meeting of the ISA families in the bus itself “without the risk of being arrested for unlawful assembly”. Wives and children who have been cruelly separated from their fathers and husbands would be able to show their love, care and affection with courtesy of the Selangor State Government.

This bus service would go a long way in easing the burden of the already financially drained out ISA detainee’s families especially so in the light of the 41% increase in petrol prices announced by the ISA Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi on 04/06/08.

Further this would also reduce the risk of a road traffic accident as what happened to the Kota Alam Shah State Assemblyman and ISA Detainee M.Manoharan’s wife and son who were injured in a road traffic accident last Sunday.

This proposal when approved would be the strongest ever Makkal Sakti “people power” support by the Selangor PKR, DAP and PAS State Government in putting to an end to the draconian ISA.

We seek your kind indulgence in this matter.

Thank you,

Yours faithfully,
P.Waytha Moorthy
(Chairman)

Uproar over ruling against prayer, statue

Source : NST


IPOH: At the beginning of every Bharatanatyam performance, artistes of this famous South Indian classical dance pay obeisance on stage to a statue of Lord Nadaraja.

This common practice is also carried out to invoke the deity's blessings so that the dancers perform well without any obstacle.

However, on Monday night, a group of Bharatanatyam dancers performed before a full gallery at the Taman Budaya public auditorium without the customary on-stage pooja (prayer) to Lord Nadaraja.

This was because the owner of the venue, the state Unity, Culture, Arts and Heritage Department, permitted the dance on condition they did not install a statue or portrait of the deity and offer their prayers on stage.

For the record, this is not the first time that dancers from the three Bharatanatyam schools of Nrityakalanjali, Natyakalamandir and Anandanarthana Choodamani in the state had performed at the venue.

In the past, the dancers were allowed to offer their prayers on stage, said P. Sasikumar, who acted as the spokesman for the three dance schools.

"This time we were not allowed because the department imposed this condition.

"This is ridiculous. The pooja is an integral part of the performance and has been practised for hundreds of years," he said before the start of the Bharatanatyam performance at Taman Budaya.

He said the practice of paying obeisance to Lord Nadaraja was important because the deity was worshipped as the king of dance.

In defence, the department said the organisers were informed beforehand of the conditions and chose to go ahead with the performance.

The department's public relations officer, Shaliza Azlin, said the organisers had agreed that the prayers would be performed backstage to respect the sensitivities of the audience, who also comprised Chinese and Malays.

"We did not stop them from doing the pooja. We did not want them to do it in public."

Shaliza said the same conditions had been imposed on other cultural groups.

Perak state assembly speaker V. Sivakumar, who was at the performance, said: "The prayer is very much part of the cultural performance and should have been allowed on the stage."

He said he would bring the matter up with the state government as well as his party so that such "intolerant behaviour" could be nipped in the bud before it became widespread.

Vigil di Kamunting

Source : Via Suaram Net

Vigil di Kamunting

Sempena Kempen Bebaskan Tahanan 6 Tahun ISA

Tarikh: 7 Jun 2008 (Saturday)

Masa: 8.00 pm

Tempat: Depan Kem Kamunting

Contact: Megat Shariffudin 012-5222664 or

Alex 016-5535003

MALAYSIA: IMPLEMENT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE ROYAL POLICE COMMISSION.

Source : MakkalSakti.blogspot.com


Human Rights & Policing Action

Background

The Royal Commission to Enhance the Operation and Management of the Royal Malaysia Police was established by the King on 4 February 2004 under the Commission of Inquiry Act, 1950. In its 576-page report, submitted to the Prime Minister on 29 April, and which was publicly released on 12 June 2005, the Commission made 125 recommendations focusing on three main areas of reform - crime reduction, eradicating corruption and observing human rights in policing the country.

Among the key recommendations were:

· Establish an Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) aimed at dealing with complaints regarding the police and seeking to improve the professionalism of the force and to ensure that doctrines, laws, rules and procedures are observed and implemented by the police.

· Establish reasonable grounds before arrest by carrying out test on informants’ allegation and surveillance before acting on a report of an alleged crime.

· Substitute section 113 of CPC which allows any statement taken from a suspect in custody to be used as evidence in court with new provision that specify clear exceptions.

· Record statements or confessions before magistrate pursuant to section 115 of CPC which allows for a right to a lawyer.

· Make compliance with human rights and prescribed laws one of the three top priorities for PDRM.

· Launch a human rights education and information initiative in PDRM.

· Amend section 27 of the Police Act 1967 which emphasise the need to have a police permit to organise gatherings.

· Amend section 73 of the Internal Security Act 1960 to allow a detained person to be produced before a magistrate within 24 hours and be allowed access to family and lawyers and limit the detention period to a maximum of 30days.

· Amend section 3 of the Dangerous Drugs (Special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 to allow a detained person to be produced before a magistrate within 24 hours and be allowed access to family and lawyers. The Commission also recommends limiting the detention period to a maximum of 30days.

· Repeal Restricted Residence Act 1933 that allows the preventive detention of suspected criminals in a specific residential area that may extend up to the lifetime of a person.

· Repeal Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crime) Ordinance 1969.

· Partially repeal the Prevention of Crime Act 1959.

· Amend section 117 CPC to allow for a maximum of 7 days for an arrest without warrant and not more than 24 hours for arrest with warrant and be allowed access to a lawyer and in cases where there is no lawyer present, the magistrate must enquire from a detainee if he wishes to make any complaint regarding his arrest and detention.

· Adopt code of practice relating to the arrest and detention of persons.

· Conduct inquiries into all cases of custodial deaths and make the process more expeditious, transparent and accountable.

· Enhance Special Branch accountability with its powers and responsibilities spelt out in law so that it can function impartially and independently and to clearly define the term ‘security’ to avoid misconception and abuse of power.

The implementation process

The report renewed the hope of an independent, accountable and professional police in Malaysia. The public and concerned groups celebrated these recommendations and looked forward to their immediate implementation.

In June 2005, a Task Force headed by the Prime Minister was set up to study the Commission's report and to determine the order of priority in the implementation of the recommendations.

Unfortunately, until today, civil society and the public at large have been kept in a dark on the specific status of the various recommendations despite the clear and specific timelines set by the Commission.

There is also a major concern on lack of transparency in the process of implementing these recommendations. The lack of progress in implementing the Royal Commission’s recommendations especially the matters dealing with human rights is due to the lack of political will on the part of the Malaysian government.

In spite of these recommendations instances of police violence, abuse of power and human rights abuses continued as usual since the report of the Royal Commission were made public. Cases of death in custody, violent dispersal of peaceful demonstrators and other form of human rights violation continued to be reported.

What you can do

Write to the Prime Minister of Malaysia

· Call for a total implementation of the Royal Commissions Report without further delay.
· Emphasize that there are major concern on lack of transparency in the process of implementing these recommendations especially the matters dealing with human rights and
· Ask him demonstrate the political will on the part of the Malaysian government to make the long awaited reform process to this crucial public service to become a reality.

YAB Dato' Seri Abdullah bin Haji Ahmad Badawi
Prime Minister and Minister of Internal Security
Prime Minister's Office Malaysia
Perdana Putra Building,
Federal Government Administrative Centre,
62502 PUTRAJAYA Malaysia.
Tel: + 60 3 8888 6000
Fax: + 60 3 8888 3444

Write to the Attorney General to:

·Immediately finalise and table the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) Bill without any delay and major amendments to the Parliament.

Tan Sri Abdul Ghani Patail
Attorney General
Attorney General's Chambers of Malaysia
Level 1-8 Block C3, Parcel C,
Federal Government Administrative Centre,
62512 Putrajaya
Malaysia
Phone No: 03 - 8885 5000
Fax No: 03 - 8888 9362

Write to the Inspector General of Police and call on him to:

· To make compliance with human rights one of the three top priorities for PDRM.
· To launch a human rights education and information initiative in PDRM.
· Support the establishment of the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) aimed at dealing with complaints regarding the police and seeking to improve the professionalism of the force and to ensure that doctrines, laws, rules and procedures are observed and implemented by the police.

Tan Sri Musa Hassan
Ketua Polis Negara
Ibu Pejabat Polis,
Bukit Aman,
50560 Kuala Lumpur
Phone: 03 2262 6015
Fax: 03 2272 5613

Temple demolition: Report lodged against police 'inaction'

Source : M'Kini


A police report was filed today against Klang district police chief ACP Mohamad Mat Yusop for allegedly not acting on "tens of police reports" that have been lodged over a land transfer and clearance works involving the Sri Maha Nagamuthu Karumariamman temple near Jalan Kapar.

PKR's Kapar member of Parliament S Manikavasagam filed the report this morning, a day after residents living near the 80-year-old temple and activists demonstrated against its planned demolition by the ‘owner' of the temple.

"Tens of police reports have been lodged over several years, but nothing has been done," Manikavasagam told Malaysiakini.

According to Manikavasagam, workers for the current owner - who allegedly acquired the one-hectare land on which the temple stands through dubious means - had already broken parts of the roof of the temple and broken or taken down the statues contained inside.

"We're still doing research regarding the owner, but we believe the owner is connected to a local state assemblyperson and has development plans for the land. We believe the land costs up to RM3 million, maybe more," said Manikavasagam.

He said numerous police reports had been lodged since the temple caretaker E Muthu Kumar discovered the land was transferred to somebody else.

Muthu claimed that he had lived on the land for over 50 years and that his father had been given the land by its original landowner.

A protracted struggle

The original landowner, Harbhajan Singh, is said to have migrated to India in 1973 and died there in the 1980s.

In 1996, however, Muthu found that the land had earlier been transferred to one ‘Lin Chee Yong', who obtained in 2000 a Shah Alam High Court order for the land to be vacated.

A protracted struggle then ensued between Lin and Muthu, which saw contempt charges as well as a spate of police reports being filed between the parties against the other.

In 2007, Muthu applied for the Shah Alam High Court to set aside its earlier decision on the basis that the land transfer was allegedly "fraudulently obtained".

Muthu's lawyer Dr SN Pathmanabhan said this claim was based on the finding that Harbhajan's identity card (IC) number as contained in the memorandum of transfer to Lin actually belonged to a Chinese woman residing in Kuala Lipis, Pahang.

He also said that contrary to the practice of Punjabis of his generation, Harbhajan - who would have been in his 80s in 1996 - had written in "very precise English".

"The signature, furthermore, did not look like that of an 80-plus year old but that of a much stronger, younger person," he told Malaysiakini.

Pathmanabhan also said the payment of RM850,000 that Harbhajan allegedly received for the sale of his land actually never materialised.

Over and above all of these reasons, he added, was the fact that Harbhajan had died in India in the 1980s but supposedly entered in 1996 into a transaction to sell the land concerned.

A police report was filed today against Klang district police chief ACP Mohamad Mat Yusop for allegedly not acting on "tens of police reports" that have been lodged over a land transfer and clearance works involving the Sri Maha Nagamuthu Karumariamman temple near Jalan Kapar.
MCPX
PKR's Kapar member of Parliament S Manikavasagam filed the report this morning, a day after residents living near the 80-year-old temple and activists demonstrated against its planned demolition by the ‘owner' of the temple.

"Tens of police reports have been lodged over several years, but nothing has been done," Manikavasagam told Malaysiakini.

According to Manikavasagam, workers for the current owner - who allegedly acquired the one-hectare land on which the temple stands through dubious means - had already broken parts of the roof of the temple and broken or taken down the statues contained inside.

"We're still doing research regarding the owner, but we believe the owner is connected to a local state assemblyperson and has development plans for the land. We believe the land costs up to RM3 million, maybe more," said Manikavasagam.

He said numerous police reports had been lodged since the temple caretaker E Muthu Kumar discovered the land was transferred to somebody else.

Muthu claimed that he had lived on the land for over 50 years and that his father had been given the land by its original landowner.

A protracted struggle

The original landowner, Harbhajan Singh, is said to have migrated to India in 1973 and died there in the 1980s.

In 1996, however, Muthu found that the land had earlier been transferred to one ‘Lin Chee Yong', who obtained in 2000 a Shah Alam High Court order for the land to be vacated.

A protracted struggle then ensued between Lin and Muthu, which saw contempt charges as well as a spate of police reports being filed between the parties against the other.

In 2007, Muthu applied for the Shah Alam High Court to set aside its earlier decision on the basis that the land transfer was allegedly "fraudulently obtained".

Muthu's lawyer Dr SN Pathmanabhan said this claim was based on the finding that Harbhajan's identity card (IC) number as contained in the memorandum of transfer to Lin actually belonged to a Chinese woman residing in Kuala Lipis, Pahang.

He also said that contrary to the practice of Punjabis of his generation, Harbhajan - who would have been in his 80s in 1996 - had written in "very precise English".

"The signature, furthermore, did not look like that of an 80-plus year old but that of a much stronger, younger person," he told Malaysiakini.

Pathmanabhan also said the payment of RM850,000 that Harbhajan allegedly received for the sale of his land actually never materialised.

Over and above all of these reasons, he added, was the fact that Harbhajan had died in India in the 1980s but supposedly entered in 1996 into a transaction to sell the land concerned.

Police inaction

Pathmanabhan said the Shah Alam High Court had set Aug 27 this year to hear the application to set aside the 2000 court order.

Parallel to the case, said Manikavasagam, his concern today was for the police to address the questions of Muthu and the patrons of the temple as to why they had not acted on the numerous reports lodged on Lin's efforts to clear the land.

These efforts were taken despite the ongoing court proceedings and included efforts to dislodge Muthu, the disconnection of the temple's water supply, and damage done to the gates and other parts of the temple building, he said.

On Oct 1, 2007, a police report was lodged claiming threats had been made to the lives of the Muthu and his family, Manikavasagam added.

"We lodged the police report against ACP Mohamad Mat because the police had not acted on that and the many other reports that had been lodged," said Manikavasagam.

ACP Mohamad Mat could not be reached for comments.

Cheras barricade goes down again

Source : M'Kini


YennaMike Says : "I was very shocked when i first came to know about the fracas in Cheras. I'm reall sad to see the way my fellow Malaysians being treated by our Police, FRU and Hired "Thug" as claimed. What Suhakam got to say about this...??, Suhakam are you really listening to peoples' plea...??"

Bandar Mahkota Cheras residents have torn down the controversial wall built by toll operator Grand Saga which blocked access to the Cheras-Kajang Highway late last night.

This was the third time that the five-foot wall, consisting of table-size boulders and erected across the two-lane toll-free slip road, was demolished.

In a significant about-turn, Selangor police chief Khalid Abu Bakar was at the scene at about 7.30pm to give the jubilant residents the green light to remove the wall.

The residents, with the help of tractors, eventually cleared the access road for motor vehicles to pass by 9.30pm.

The police, who had earlier been accused of siding with toll operator, kept a close watch on the operation. Khalid had also warned Grand Saga not to rebuild the wall.

On Tuesday, about a dozen residents were seriously injured at a fracas after Grand Saga re-erected the barricade. Residents have accused the toll operator of hiring ‘gangsters’ armed with sticks to stop them from tearing down the wall.

According to Bernama, police have launched an investigation to identify the ‘thugs’ who had beaten the residents - one of whom were hospitalised with a broken hand, while another were given seven stitches after a blow on his head.

A group of BMC residents are presently in Parliament asking for a meeting with Works Minister Mohd Zin Mohamed.

Lims calls for inquiry

Meanwhile DAP leader Lim Kit Siang condemned the violence which resulted in the injuries of several residents two nights ago.

He also lambasted the presence of thugs to stop the residents from pulling down the barricade.

He also criticised the police for not only their "hands-off" policy during the rampage by the thugs, but also in going on a rampage of their own in assaulting innocent bystander Chang Jiun Haur.

"An independent public inquiry into the spate of physical violence against the protesting public by thugs and police personnel is fully warranted," he added.

He said that DAP MP for Serdang Teo Nie Ching will be raising the issue in Parliament today.

Uthaya's new bid for freedom, this time for medical negligence

Source : M'Kini

A fresh habeas corpus has been filed by a detained Hindu Action Rights Force (Hindraf) leader against the Internal Security Ministry and Kamunting detention centre authorities for medical negligence and endangerment to life.

Lawyer N Surendran filed the habeas corpus application at the Kuala Lumpur High Court today on behalf of P Uthayakumar who claimed he has been denied medication for his diabetes.


Uthayakumar is also claiming that the camp authorities refused to admit him into the National Heart Institute (IJN) despite being told by doctors to do so.

The hearing is set for June 25.

Uthayakumar is among the five Hindraf leaders currently detained in Kamunting under the Internal Security Act for alleged terrorist links.

Habeas corpus is a writ ordering prisoners to be brought before a court or judge to ascertain if there are any procedural defects which could render their detention unlawful.

WAYTHA:SYED HAMID LIED ABOUT MY PASSPORT.

Hindu Rights Action Force chairperson P Waythmoorthy today accused the Malaysian government of lying over the status of his passport.He said that it was "absolutely ridiculous and a blatant lie" for the Home Minister Syed Hamid Albar to claim that his passport was not revoked.

Waythamoorthy was also upset with Syed Hamid in shrugging off the issue by stating that a misunderstanding could have occurred over the status of the passport.Syed Hamid had earlier said that "probably because the passport had expired"."How can he lie like this?

Aren't his officers briefing him on what's happening to Malaysians abroad?" asked Waythamoorthy.He said that his passport was to expire in 2010 and that he, of all persons, would know the validity of his travel document.

"The problem started when I returned to London from Zurich on April 21 and was informed by the UK immigration officer at Gatwick Airport that the Malaysian government had revoked my passport," he told Malaysiakini.

"Is Syed Hamid saying that the British immigration authorities are lying?" he asked when contacted by telephone today.Waythamoorthy had revealed the cancellation of his travel document in a press statement on Friday.

On the same day, Syed Hamid, when asked to comment on the issue, rejected the claims, stating that Waythamoorthy's passport had not been revoked.Syed Hamid added that the "misunderstanding" was probably because Waythamoorthy's passport had expired and he could have his passport renewed at the Malaysian High Commission in London.

Forcing his return

Responding to the minister's remarks today, Waythamoorthy said Syed Hamid was trying to mislead the public on the matter."I'm indeed surprised that the senior cabinet minister would issue a statement based on probabilities without verifying the facts..."Waythamoorty said he was given a "fresh leave to enter and remain in the United Kingdom for six months" upon his return from India on April 2.

"It is a known fact that no country would admit a person into its territory without a six months' validity period on the passport."For that matter, Switzerland wouldn't have admitted me into its country on the April 17, nor would any airline allow me to board the flight, without a six months' validity," he said.

Waythamoorthy, who is in self-imposed exile in United Kingdom since the government's crackdown on Hindraf last November, said the government was seeking to lure him back to this country to detain him under the Internal Security Act.Five other Hindraf leaders, including the movement's most popular face and Waythamoorthy's brother Uthayakumar, are presently being held without trial since Dec 13.

"It is obvious my traveling to lobby for Hindraf and the ethnic minority Indian community had caused the Malaysian government to revoke my passport to curtail my movement," he said.

Passport cancellation: 'Gov't owes an explanation'

Source : M'Kini

MIC information chief M Saravanan said there was no need for the government to revoke the passport of Hindu Rights Action Force leader P Waythamoorthy though he is known to be severely critical towards the authorities.

The Federal Territories Deputy Minister when contacted said that the Hindraf leader should not be likened to a criminal by his passport being revoked simply for his criticism towards the government.

"The government owes an explanation to the public as to why they revoked his passport because it involves a Malaysian citizen. They have to justify their action.

"In my eyes, he's not a terrorist. He just condemned the government, but that does not mean the government can revoke his passport," argued Saravanan.

Waythamoorthy revealed today that he had been informed by the British immigration officials that his Malaysian passport has been revoked, rendering him in as a stateless person. He is presently in Britain after leaving Kuala Lumpur last November to escape a givernment dragnet on Hindraf leaders.

Amnesty International's Washington-based Asia-Pacific advocacy director T Kumar had earlier told AFP that Waythamoorthy has applied for asylum in the UK.

According to the British Home Office website, asylum is given under the 1951 United Nations Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees.

To be recognised as a refugee, one must have left one's country and be unable to go back because he or she have a well-founded fear of persecution because of his or her race, religion,nationality, political opinion, or membership of a particular social group.

The British authorities is reported to be contemplating to hold hearings to consider Waythamoorthy's application for political asylum.

More reactions

Apart from Saravanan, various quarters also expressed their shock towards the matter.

Below are the excerpts of what these people had to say:

N Surendran, human rights and Hindraf lawyer

This act amounts up to nothing but a clear indication of political prosecution. It is a vindictive step taken by the home ministry. Not only is he under Internal Security Act threat back home (but now) he is getting harassed abroad as well. He doesn't deserve to be treated this way, all he did was raise valid concerns of the Indian minority of this country. This act shows clearly that the government cannot take criticism.

John Liu, Suara Rakyat Malaysia's managing coordinator

It's a blatant attempt by the government to stop his movement. They have no right to revoke his passport. The government is just trying to get him so that he could be detained under ISA.

Simon Sipaun, Suhakam vice chairperson

As to what reason the government has revoked his passport. Did they (revoke) the passport under certain law, or any particular legislation, and what under condition of federal constitution?

If the government wants to revoke his passport, they have to state the actual reason (according to the law).

Anil Netto, Aliran activist

I think it's unfortunate for him because he has not been found guilty of any crime. So, he also should be allowed of any movement and the government should be accountable for the decision and should make public the reason why they revoked his passport.

Waythamoorthy: I'll be back

Source : M'Kini

The following is the full statement from Hindraf chairman P Waythamoorthy on the revocation of his passport at London’s Gatwick Airport two weeks ago.


I was travelling back to London from Geneva after the Hindraf briefing with the United Nations High Commission for Human Rights on April 21, 2008 and was totally shocked to be informed by the UK immigration officer at Gatwick Airport that the Malaysian government had revoked my passport thus making me de facto stateless.

I see only one purpose. The Malaysian government had intended that I be deported back to Malaysia by the British authorities so that I too could be arrested under the draconian Internal Security Act and be detained for unspecified period of time without trial and be subject to torture and inhumane treatment for my political beliefs.

I have not committed any offence or crime other than to champion the cause of the systematically marginalised, discriminated and alienated ethnic Indian community in Malaysia who remained a permanently colonised community despite achieving independence 51 years ago.

It is most distressing to learn that, the land that my forefathers toiled as indentured labourers and one that I had been made citizen by the will of the unavoidable circumstances has decided to banish and exile me for speaking and advocating the truth that was never spoken off before.

The government has once again acted according to its whims and fancy without a second thought of the public or for the good of the public.

The Malaysian government repetitively had oppressed, suppressed and persecuted all causes of Hindraf by their act of totalitarianism from the very beginning but nevertheless the will and spirit of the Hindraf supporters have been the beacon of hope for the new strength founded upon our new found ‘Makkal Sakthi’ (people’s power).

The callous and cowardly acts of the government against me not only undermine their credibility domestically but also internationally. The government needs to realise that the Malaysian public can no longer be cowed as the public are no longer the sheep that begets the government wolves.

The government may use its best weapon in attempting to stall and break me but they fail to realise that I derive my strength from my ‘Makkal Sakthi’, and that is all that I need to carry on the torch and fight for the unjust cause of the ethnic Indians in Malaysia even if it means championing my cause from exile.

As much as I have been coerced, castigated by the Malaysian government, so have the Hindraf supporters. Hindraf supporters have shown unprecedented courage and character for the truth. It only motivates me further to pursue our goals.

They will never break my spirit

The revocation of my passport is probably the last ditch desperate effort by the Malaysian government in crippling my international lobby for the cause of the Indian Malaysians.

This unwarranted act has given me a greater "inner" strength to continue to fight for the struggle of Indian Malaysians and for the unconditional release of my fellow brothers held unjustly in Kamunting.

The government can unleash all the man made mechanism to stifle and silence me, but I have the backing of ‘Makkal Sakthi’ and that alone is sufficient for me to continue my fight for the people.

In ‘Makkal Sakthi’, I have found the truthness of my cause for the people. In today's world, utterance of truth is seen as a revolutionary action, and my quest for the truth is considered as a hindrance for the government. My judge is the people not the government.

I will continue this struggle until my last breath. They may break me but they will never be able to break my will and spirit that is derived from the people for the truth is in it.

I shall continue the struggle for the "freedom" of the ethnic Indian Malaysians from London and urge all Hindraf supporters to remain calm as they have always been. I shall forever remain a loyal Malaysian and will return to Malaysia soon to continue and accomplish what I had started.

Malaysian government revokes rights activist's passport: Amnesty

Source : Yahoo News
Image : M'Kini


WASHINGTON (AFP) - The Malaysian government has revoked the passport of a Malaysian human rights lawyer campaigning for minority rights and the abolition of a tough security law, Amnesty International said.

Ponnusamy Waytha Moorthy, the chairman of the Malaysian rights group Hindraf who has been living in London since he fled the country in December, has sought asylum in Britain, Amnesty's Washington-based Asia-Pacific advocacy director T. Kumar told AFP.

The activist had planned to visit Washington for talks with leaders of the US Congress and Amnesty and other rights groups, "but it has been put off because of his passport's cancelation," Kumar said.

Waytha Moorthy had sought the talks to highlight alleged discriminatory policies against minority ethnic Indian Malaysians as well as the arrest under the powerful Internal Security Act of five senior Hindraf members at home.

The five, who led a massive anti-discrimination rally in Kuala Lumpur in December, are being held without trial and for an indefinite period.

Kumar said Waytha Moorthy only became aware of his passport's revocation when he returned to London from Geneva after talks recently with the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

"He was shocked to be informed by British immigration officers that Kuala Lumpur has revoked his passport," Kumar said. "This makes him de facto stateless."

"This is the first time I have heard of a political activist's passport being revoked by his own country's government," he said.

Kumar called on Malaysian Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to give a "full explanation on the rationale for the cancellation."

The British authorities will hold hearings to consider Waytha Moorthy's application for political ayslum, he said.

Waytha Moorthy said in a statement to Amnesty that the Malaysian government revoked his passport in the belief that the British authorities would deport him to Kuala Lumpur where he could be arrested under the Internal Security Act.

"This unwarranted act has given me greater 'inner' strength to continue to struggle for the Malaysian Indians and for the unconditional release of my fellow brothers held unjustly under the Internal Security Act," he said.

Malaysia's highest court on Wednesday refused to release the five activists, including a newly sworn-in state lawmaker.

Ethnic Indians make up less than eight percent of the 27 million population of the mainly Muslim-Malay country.

Lawyers for the five said they would appeal on Monday for the Federal Court to review its decision.

Rights groups say 70 people, mainly alleged Islamic militants, are being held under the Internal Security Act.

Suhakam pushes for review of 'unreasonable' restrictions

Source : NST

KUALA LUMPUR: The Malaysian Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) has called on the government to review the Police Act and other preventive legislation to reflect international standards.


In its 2007 report released earlier this week, it said currently, such laws "unreasonably" restrict freedom of assembly and freedom of speech as guaranteed by the Federal Constitution.

The call by Suhakam came following numerous street protests held last year by various non-governmental organisations.

Among them were the Bar Council's Walk of Justice in Putrajaya on Sept 26, the Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (Bersih) to demand for election reforms on Sept 8 and Nov 10, as well as the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) rally on Nov 25.

"Suhakam observed that applications for permits to hold the assemblies were rejected by police on the basis that these could lead to public disorder and posed security risks.

"While it is recognised that the police have a duty to ensure peace and security, they should adopt a holistic approach in handling requests for permits. Their actions must be consistent with the principles of human rights."

The 312-page report said citizens are increasingly demanding recognition of their democratic rights and measures to ensure peace and security should not be at the expense of human rights.

It noted that Section 27 of the Police Act 1967 clearly entrusted the police with unfettered powers to determine who can organise a peaceful assembly.

"The provision, however, does not set out the criteria and guidelines on meeting requirements for a permit. Discretionary powers are fully vested in the police," said Suhakam.

These are among the seven key issues identified by Suhakam that the government needed to improve on.

The other issues are:

Freedom of Religion

Suhakam said the right to freedom of religion is protected by the Federal Constitution and it is unacceptable to interpret any law relating to religion in any way that leads to injustice.

In lauding a Federal Court decision last December that the (civil) High Court has jurisdiction to hear matrimonial disputes, even if one party has converted to Islam, the commission called on judges to be bold, impartial and unequivocal in dealing with complex interfaith cases, while urging the police and the local authorities to be more sensitive in law enforcement.

Administration of Justice

The commission noted that delays in court proceedings and the delays in handing down written judgments were among the main concerns that required immediate attention.

It pointed out that more than 1,000 prisoners are languishing in jail and unable to appeal because judges and magistrates had been slow in providing written judgments.

It also expressed concern that judicial review had been ousted in a number of instances, including habeas corpus challenges, which it said will undermine the right to justice and the right to a fair trial.

Additionally, it reiterated its call to repeal arbitrary clauses in the Internal Security Act and that detention without trial must be subject to judicial review and agencies authorising detention must be held accountable.

Detention Without Trial

Suhakam reiterated its call to the government to release detainees or prosecute them, and to abolish the practice of detention without trial which is contradictory to the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

According to data from the Kamunting detention centre, there are 70 ISA detainees with more than half serving out their second detention order.

Free and Fair Elections

Suhakam urged the government to amend the relevant laws to ensure free and fair elections.

In expressing its concern, it noted that certain fundamental rights pertaining to free and fair elections, such as freedom of expression, freedom of association and freedom of assembly, were either curtailed or ignored during election campaigns.

"Suhakam observed, too, that there is no level playing field, particularly in terms of access to the media, permission to hold political rallies, delineation of constituencies and redress in the courts," it said.

It noted the authorities must immediately address allegations such as the existence of phantom voters, as well as the inefficacy of the electoral system.

"Candidates should not be allowed to resort to undemocratic means to win elections, including vote-buying, providing non-cash incentives and using public funds and facilities," it further stated.

Suhakam said free and fair elections were crucial to lend legitimacy to a democratic society.

"Public confidence in the fairness of the electoral process is far more important than a massive mandate. While elections in Malaysia have been free, it cannot be claimed that the process had been completely fair," it noted.

Law Enforcement

The report addressed complaints by the public against Rela. Suhakam said it had extended training programmes for law enforcement personnel to include Rela officers nationwide.

The Commission suggested that the government should deploy professionally-trained law enforcement personnel, such as from the police and Immigration Department, to accompany Rela personnel on future operations.

Rights of Vulnerable Groups

It had identified four sub-groups under this group and outlined what it hoped could be achieved for these four.

For Orang Asli and Orang Asal, Suhakam recommended the government amend the Sarawak Land Code 1958 to include the Penan community's unique way of establishing land ownership and stewardship, in light of the fact that such customs have not been factored into the Code.

For migrant workers, Suhakam proposed that the government and foreign embassies in Malaysia thoroughly study the current recruitment process and provide adequate monitoring, regulation and punishment of recruiting agencies that violate human rights.

This is because the commission observed most of the complaints by migrant workers were due to exploitation by agencies.

In view of increasing number of refugees and asylum-seekers, Suhakam recommended that relevant government agencies work together with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees to resolve related issues.

For persons with disabilities, Suhakam hoped the drafting of the Persons with Disabilities Bill signalled a step towards Malaysia's ratification of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

For Women and Children, Suhakam said the passage of the Anti-Trafficking of Persons Act 2007 and its gazetting is another positive development in the protection of the rights of women and children.

However, Suhakam suggested that more must be done to protect children in view of the increasing number of cases of abuse and violence against children.

The commission also expressed its frustrations at the government's cold response to its various proposals.

"Since its inception (in 2000), Suhakam had made numerous suggestions to improve the protection of human rights.

"The commission hoped that the government would give attention to the recommendations made through various reports to date. As a member of the United Nations Human Rights Council, Malaysia should play a leading role in upholding human rights."

Academics debate the 'social contract'

Source : M'Kini

Academicians may differ on the meaning of the country's 'social contract' but their opinions were unison when saying

Ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy) does not exist.

Malaysiakini contacted several academicians to comment on royal professor Dr Ungku Abdul Aziz’s claim that there was no physical social contract between Malaysia's diverse ethnic communities.

"There is no such thing as social contract. It was a fantasy created by politicians of all sorts of colours depending on their interest," said Ungku Aziz at a forum in Shah Alam over the weekend.

He also said the social contract should rightly be called an "economic contract" to justify affirmative action in areas of education and health for groups that needed it most.

While some academicians diverged on the matter, many of them systematically noted that the constitution and the ‘social contract’ does not imply any form of Malay mastery or dominance in relation to power.

Here are their views:

Professor Shamsul Amri Baharudin, UKM's Institute of Ethnic Studies (KITA) director

First of all I would like to say he is giving an economist response whereby he goes by the letter of the law and he’ll look at statistics and the cost-benefit analysis of things. I don’t know what he reads aside from economic books but political scientists and historians have said that we do have a social contract.

Our constitution has a general and miscellaneous section. No other constitution in the world has this section and it shows that the Reid Commission acknowledged the right of Malay rulers, customs and language. The social contract is a convergence of different opinions. It is an agreement to be different by the people.

The translation of ketuanan Melayu is wrong. It is not Malay supremacy, it is Malay sovereignty. Ketuanan is a very colonial term. Abdullah Ahmad had very little knowledge as to what it means when he first raised it in 1986. Sovereignty is not a foreign concept as it is prevalent in other countries such as Belgium and England with monarchs. The idea that Malays are the boss and the rest is not, is a misconception.

Nobody is dominant. The social contract was raised when the constitution was created and the Reid commission included the condition to satisfy all groups possible. The people then began to see it as a form of agreement and convergence. However, later on, people started seeing it as a contract. Not in a legalistic sort of way but how it was made and how the terms are constantly being renegotiated.

(PKR de facto leader) Anwar (Ibrahim)’s ketuanan rakyat (people supremacy) is no different from ketuanan Melayu. If rakyat means demographics and clearly Malays and bumiputeras being the majority at 60 percent. It is just another idiom to hide the point that Malays are sovereign. Don’t just focus on Malay sovereignty because otherwise it would just be ethnic talk and not a constitutional or Malaysian talk. We have to get rid of such racist perceptions.

Has anyone asked why Sabah has 20 extra conditions like requirement of work permits from those in Peninsula Malaysia? Why don’t we talk about that? We have to look at the social contract from the larger context and not just at the Malays. Peninsula Malaysians should demand for work permits to be abolished if Sabah wants more royalties. The problem is that the issues are skewed and people are blinded by it.

In 1969, the consultative councils made up of 100 representatives around the country thought of formulating this policy in addressing the problems of backwardness faced by the ethnic groups. They were thinking of solving the ownership problems as almost 60 percent of property belonging to foreigners and 21 percent to the Chinese. The NEP was about increasing property ownership so that it reflected the demographics equitably. The majority at that time did not have majority ownership so to change this, they started with the economy.

Article 153 of the constitution provides the basis which creates the paradigm for NEP. NEP provided the package that stated the target and objectives but there are other ways of doing this. The discussion and debates that we have now is how the package is not working. It is creating unhappiness all around. This is why ‘Umnoputera’ is now a word, not bumiputera. If you want to go back and change things, the Parliament will have to change it and make it clearer. The social contract will remain relevant so long as the constitution is relevant. The social contract is realised in the constitution which gives us the symbol of the contract.

The NEP was created from the understanding of Article 153 and it ended in 1990. But it persisted until now so it is known as ‘Never Ending Policy’. However, I think it warrants another name - ‘Never Ending Polemic’ as it continues to divide society. Society is already divided ethnically and to proceed to the next stage, the politicians should use rational thinking instead of exploiting the emotional thinking of the people. The nature of political parties that are ethnicise is that they have to go on being emotional to garner votes.

To me, (Umno Youth chief) Hishammuddin (Hussein) and (DAP chairperson) Karpal (Singh) are no different. They are voicing different voices but it’s all the same and it’s divisive. Our politicians organise themselves on differences. Hussein Onn from Umno is the greatest example. After two years he was expelled from his party which shows that if you took a non-ethnic stand, it’s goodbye for you.

Professor James Chin, Head of Arts, Monash University

Historically, Ungku Aziz is correct. If you look at the historical documents deposited in London regarding the formation of Malaya, you won’t find it. As far as I know, the word ‘social contract’ was first used in the 1980s.

The understanding of the social contract depends on which elites you look at. The documents deposited in ISEAS (Institute of Southeast Asian Studies) library by MCA elites states clearly that the Malays will get special help in things like the civil service and scholarships but there will be a time when these will stop.

This cannot be confused with the constitutional rights that was agreed to in Article 150 to 153 because it has no details. The constitution does not spell out the operations of the special rights like the New Economic Policy (NEP) on quotas and equity ownership. All it says is that Malay will have special privileges.

Look at any historical official documents like the minutes of the Alliance meeting and the Reid Commission from the 1940s to 1960s - you will not find the word social contract ever being used.

The context of the 'social contract' that it is being used now implies that non-Malays, in return for their citizenship, have to acknowledge that the Malays are politically supreme and cannot be challenged, ever.

Keeping the ‘social contract’ alive implies that non-Malays can never ask for equality. The implication is quite clear as it means that the current argument in having a more equal Malaysia will not succeed.

Dr Mavis Puthuceary, Associate Research Fellow at Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM)'s Institute of Malaysian and International Studies (IKMAS)

Ungku Aziz is right. It is not a social contract which implies the relationship between the state and the people. If you look at the Western concept of social contract like John Locke, the idea of a social contract is that people give up some powers to their political representatives in return, the state will protect them.

There is no social contract because it involves the leaders of the Alliance and the bargain was then placed in the constitution but that does not represent a social contract. The social contract did not come into debate until Abdullah Ahmad raised it in 1986 that there was something that was agreed to by a few people in the past that binds future generations. I’ve challenged it.

The whole question on power sharing is very relevant. One needs to spell it out and it must be agreed upon but some leaders still disagree on what it means. Some say the non-Malays agreed to ketuanan Melayu in this so-called social contract but some say non-Malays only agreed to some kind of bargain without conceding their right to liberal democracy, equal rights and justice.

Political parties are using the social contract out of this context and it has no meaning in Malaysia. So that’s why we need a discourse and debate on this. We need to work out a national consensus in figuring out what and where do we go from here and now. We can all agree that something more than a bargain was made when the state was formed but I won’t call it a social contract.

Dr Azmi Sharom, Associate Professor, Law Faculty, University Malaya

In the context of the constitution, there is a certain give and take because the constitution provides for special privileges to Malays. In any normal or ordinary constitution, there would not be any racial bias in it. But this was agreed to by the non-Malays so these special privileges is the beginning of the so-called social contract.

However, to a certain extent it is true - the special privileges involves safeguarding the Malay language, the Sultanate and Islam on the surface appears to be going against the grain of equality. The non-Malay Malaysians were happy to accept this then. But the idea of give and take does not extend to the concept of Malay supremacy created by political parties, namely Umno.

The original constitution has elements of compromise but that compromise is from the layman’s perspective, the document does not suggest Malay supremacy or mastery. Ketuanan Melayu is a fallacy. I just don’t see the justification for this. The so-called social contract is relevant only to racists and people who want Malaysians to continue to be divided along racial lines.

But I am also uncomfortable with Ungku Aziz’s view that the social contract should be called an economic contract. The society made a compromise and it is not a contract which implies the people are bound to it for life. Citizenship is not about the economy but the society.

Dr Johan Saravanamuttu, visiting researcher at ISEAS, Singapore

It is obviously a term used by political analysts and there is no formal or legal contract. But the 1957 constitution was written based on a considerable amount of negotiations including various ethnic and political groups. Not all of their demands could have been included therefore when the constitution was agreed upon by all parties after the entire process, for all intents and purposes is the social contract of Malaysians. The constitution incorporated many of these provisions which people have generally learned to accept.

The relevance of this is that the constitution is a document that is historical and represents the agreement by particular political parties at that particular era. The impact in reading beyond the document is that it lays out provisions of a pact that is not meant to be absolutely permanent. After all, the constitution has been amended hundreds of times, it means the conditions are not cast in stone.

On ketuanan Melayu, there si no such thing as ketuanan Melayu. It is a concoction by political entrepreneurs by Umno on promoting Malay supremacy. The constitution does not say anything about Malay supremacy but only on the special privileges such as land and language afforded to them. It is the jaundiced Malay politicians who use it too embed themselves in position or create and perpetuate power for themselves.

Dr Chandra Muzaffar, academician and political scientist

Well I think that it is true that the social contract doesn’t exist as a physical document which is drafted and sealed or has a label that tells us it is a social contract. What we have is the Merdeka constitution which is an attempt to balance interests between different communities and ethnic interests within a framework for a certain vision of what a nation state is.

It is very clear that the nation state would be called Malaysia and the basis of the state was from a Malay polity that features the Malay monarch, Islam as the religion of the federation and the Malay language. On the special position of the Malays and indigenous communities is part of the Merdeka constitution, there was a feeling by the Reid commission that the massive accommodation of recent domiciled non-Malays required some sort of protection of the Malay community which was economically weaker than say the Chinese. The special position was a socio-economical condition.

I don’t see ketuanan Melayu as part of the social contract or Merdeka constitution. By accepting the Malay polity, it does not make Malays and non-Malays unequal and it doesn’t make non-Malays second-class citizens. Ketuanan Melayu is an idea that is an impediment to ethnic relations for the country. It does not mean one race is dominant and another race is subordinate or a master-servant connotation.

Uthayakumar refuses 'secret date' with heart institute

Source : M'Kini


Detained Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) legal adviser P Uthayakumar is “being pressured to secretly undergo treatment” at the National Heart Institute, claimed his brother Waytha Moorthy.

In a statement issued from London, where he is living in self-imposed exile, Waytha Moorthy (photo) said his brother is being compelled to do so without his family members being informed.

“Uthayakumar fears for his life and does not wish to be treated without the presence and knowledge of his family members at the National Heart Institute,” he wrote.

Uthayakumar is one of five Hindraf leaders being detained for two years at the Kamunting detention camp in Taiping, Perak. They were arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA) on Dec 13 last year, which allows for detention without trial.

A diabetic for 12 years, Uthayakumar is said to have developed a heart ailment. He has been admitted twice to the Taiping hospital, in January after a hunger strike and again from April 7-10.

Waytha Moorthy, who is Hindraf chairperson, alleged that the “prison director and other government officers” have been applying pressure on Uthayakumar.

“He has written to the prison director, requesting (that) his family be informed and for access to his lawyers while in hospital. His lawyer (N Surendran) had also written to the prison director on Uthayakumar’s requests.

“We are puzzled why the prison director is compelling him to undergo secret treatment and is threatening to lodge a police report against Uthayakumar for wilfully refusing treatment. (This is) still a democratic country and there should be transparency and openness (about) his treatment.”

Urging Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi to look into the situation, Waytha Moorthy also posed the query if a “silent agenda” is involved.

‘He’s no terrorist’

Contacted today, Surendran said some irregularities were detected during Uthayakumar’s last visit to Taiping Hospital and “there may be some damage to his heart”.

“He wants to go as soon as possible because he is anxious about his health but he wants his family there because he is worried as to whether major procedures will be involved,” said Surendran.

“They refuse to tell us when they (intend to) take him, saying that this must be kept secret for security purposes.

“What is there a need for security? He is no terrorist. This is an excuse to traumatise the family and make things as difficult as possible for him.”

Hindraf supporters have held rallies demanding the release of their leaders, as well as access to medical attention for Uthayakumar.

Hindraf rally turned Malaysian Indians against government

Source : Thethaindian.com


Kuala Lumpur, May 14 (IANS) Malaysia’s ethnic Indians staged “a silent revolution” against the government, “triggered” by the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf), during the March general elections, a minister has said. Malaysian Human Resource Development Minister S. Subramanian Tuesday described a rally organised by the Hindraf in November last year as the “trigger factor” that turned the Indian community against the government.

Hindraf had organised the protest rally on behalf of Malaysia’s two million Tamil Hindus. The rally of an estimated 10,000 people was declared illegal and forcibly dispersed by police using water cannons. Five Hindraf leaders were jailed for two years for organising it.

“They were listening all this while and we were just oiling the spring. But the bursting point arrived. We have to rectify this fundamental problem to regain their support,” Subramanian told members of his Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC) at a party meet in Malacca.

The MIC, part of the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition, lost badly in the March polls. The BN itself lost the two-thirds majority advantage, emerging victorious but weaker with simple majority.

The simmering of discontent had been going on for a long time. The MIC was aware of the discontent but could not do much, except to manage it, the minister said.

Subramanian urged BN leaders to accept “the new reality” and change their mindset to ensure that ethnic minorities did not feel “not equal” to majority Malays, he was quoted as saying by The Star newspaper.

“There must be a massive change in the mindsets of BN leaders, particularly those from the United Malay Nasional Organisation (Umno), for the coalition to regain the people’s support,” Subramanian said.

“There must be a conscious effort to provide this sense of equality. This is the secret recipe to solve the problem. The thinking of all leaders should be this: I must be multi-racial in nature,” he added.

He urged MIC leaders at the grassroots level to hold dialogues with the leaders of Umno and other component parties “on the need to change their political thinking in line with new realities”.

Hindraf 5's appeal dismissed

Source : M'Kini


The Federal Court today dismissed the appeal by five Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) leaders to be released from detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA).

The five are P Uthayakumar, V Ganabatirau, R Kenghadharan, T Vasantha Kumar and M Manoharan.

The Hindraf leaders were arrested on Dec 13 after the government accused them of being a threat to national security.

On Nov 25, they had organised a mammoth rally which drew some 30,000 disgruntled Indian Malaysians to the streets.

Their supporters however argued that the five - four of whom are lawyers - were merely raising issues concerning the community.

Numerous quarters, including Barisan Nasional (BN) component parties such as MIC, MCA and Gerakan, have called for their release.