The Abolish ISA Movement (Gerakan Mansuhkan ISA, GMI) strongly refutes the statement by Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Tan Sri Bernard Dompok, who said that there has been no detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA) since Abdullah Ahmad Badawi took over as Prime Minister in 2003 (The Star, 22nd October 2007).
The statement by the Minister is a blatant lie. Since Abdullah Ahmad Badawi assumed office of the Prime Minister in October 2003, the ISA has continuously been used.
The statistics of arrests and renewal of detention orders under the ISA during Abdullah Badawi’s premiership thus far are as follows:
Year
New Arrests
Renewed Detention Orders
Total in Kamunting
2004
12
25
101
2005
16
30
107
2006
20
18
90
2007 (as of October)
9
Statistics not available
90
(GMI Monitoring)
In this year alone, four individuals were arrested for allegedly spreading rumors of racial riots in Johor Bahru recently. Another five were arrested for alleged involvement in Jemaah Islamiah - Mohd Faizul Bin Haji Samsudin, Mohd Amir Bin Mohd Hanafiah, Ahmad Kamil Bin Mohd Hanafiah, Zulkifli Bin Abu Bakar and Mohd Noor bin Abu Bakar.
The Minister’s statement is especially factually wrong when Abdullah Ahmad Badawi as the Internal Security Minister has personally signed the 2-year renewal detention orders of 73 ISA detainees since he came into power.
Many of these detainees are now having their detention without trial entering into the fifth or sixth years in Kamunting detention camp.GMI is also shocked and regrets that the Minister said that “Until today we have no opportunity to discuss this particular matter and we do want to know more about it.”
Since 2001, GMI, a coalition of 83 NGOs and community groups, have been actively campaigning against the ISA. Numerous reports and memoranda have been handed over to Suhakam, the PM’s office and the Internal Affairs Ministry to abolish the ISA.
GMI also wishes to highlight that besides press statements, at least more than three memoranda have been sent to the Prime Minister and his Ministry, the Internal Security Ministry during the past 3 years - none of which has been replied.
It is highly regrettable that now, with the judgment of Malek Hussein, the minister has misled the public by trying to project an image that the government of Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is less abusive with the cruel and draconian ISA.
GMI would like to point out to the Minister and Prime Minister that, as of today, there are no less than 90 ISA detainees continue to languish in the Kamunting Detention Camp.GMI would like to remind the Minister that the ISA is not only unfair and unjust to the detainees, but has also become one of the main root-causes of corruption, abuse of power and police brutality.
The lack of transparency and accountability and the secrecy of the use of the ISA provide a more than perfect environment for corruption, abuse of power and torture by the police as in evident and confirmed in the judgment of Malek Hussin’s civil suit case recently.
GMI strongly urges the Government to respect the right to trial for those who have been detained under the ISA in Malaysia. “Emergency” laws in Malaysia disregard human rights and violate the safeguards contained in the Federal Constitution and international human rights law.
Therefore, GMI calls for the following:The Minister and the Government to retract the previous statement or comments and make a public apology, especially to the ISA detainees and the families.
Abolish the ISA and all forms of detention without trial; charge all detainees in an open court or else release them immediately and unconditionally. Heed the call of SUHAKAM, the independent body which safeguards human rights in Malaysia, to review and abolish ISA.
Numerous international human rights bodies have also voiced the same for many years.A
bolish ISA!
Release All ISA Detainees!
Close Down Kamunting Detention Camp!
Yours sincerely,
Syed Ibrahim Syed Noh
Chairman GMI
http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/letters.php?blogid=5&archive=2007-10
Monday, October 29, 2007
Star : 2 cops deny doctoring witness’ statement in probe
Saturday October 27, 2007
Two cops deny doctoring witness’ statement in probe
JOHOR BARU: Two policemen claimed trial to doctoring a witness’ statement in investigations involving Johor businessman Goh Cheng Poh at the Sessions Court here.
Deputy Supt Baharin Mohd Rose, 52, an officer with the Internal Security and Public Order division, and Sjn Mejar Hasan Aman, 49, were charged with falsifying the statement of witness 34-year-old Chong Wah.
If convicted, they can be sentenced up to two years’ jail or face a fine or both.
They allegedly committed the offence at Pulai Springs Resort Berhad, Pulai, at 11am on June 5.
DSP Baharin also claimed trial to using the forged witness statement of Chong at the Internal Security Ministry in Putrajaya on July 2.
Anti-Corruption Agency Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohamad Jazamudin Ahmad Nawawi proposed that bail be set at RM10,000 for each accused.
Sessions judge Zanol Rashid Hussain allowed RM8,000 bail for each and fixed hearing for Feb 13 and Feb 14 of next year.
Abdul Halim Yahya and former Terengganu Deputy CPO Datuk Kamaruddin Mat Desa represented both the accused.
Recently, there has been a string of cases involving policemen being investigated for corruption.
On Thursday, at the Malacca Sessions Court, Sjn Mejar Hasan along with Asst Supt Hong Keng Hock, 42, of the Commercial Crime Department in Bukit Aman, also claimed trial to using forged statements of witnesses Siew Kok Seng, 55, and Chua Sia Heng, 40, in investigations involving the same businessman.
On Wednesday, ASP Hong was charged in Kuala Lumpur with two counts of using the forged statements of Siew and Chua at the Commercial Crime Investigation Department’s operation/technical assistance division in Bukit Aman.
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/10/27/courts/19294862&sec=courts
Two cops deny doctoring witness’ statement in probe
JOHOR BARU: Two policemen claimed trial to doctoring a witness’ statement in investigations involving Johor businessman Goh Cheng Poh at the Sessions Court here.
Deputy Supt Baharin Mohd Rose, 52, an officer with the Internal Security and Public Order division, and Sjn Mejar Hasan Aman, 49, were charged with falsifying the statement of witness 34-year-old Chong Wah.
If convicted, they can be sentenced up to two years’ jail or face a fine or both.
They allegedly committed the offence at Pulai Springs Resort Berhad, Pulai, at 11am on June 5.
DSP Baharin also claimed trial to using the forged witness statement of Chong at the Internal Security Ministry in Putrajaya on July 2.
Anti-Corruption Agency Deputy Public Prosecutor Mohamad Jazamudin Ahmad Nawawi proposed that bail be set at RM10,000 for each accused.
Sessions judge Zanol Rashid Hussain allowed RM8,000 bail for each and fixed hearing for Feb 13 and Feb 14 of next year.
Abdul Halim Yahya and former Terengganu Deputy CPO Datuk Kamaruddin Mat Desa represented both the accused.
Recently, there has been a string of cases involving policemen being investigated for corruption.
On Thursday, at the Malacca Sessions Court, Sjn Mejar Hasan along with Asst Supt Hong Keng Hock, 42, of the Commercial Crime Department in Bukit Aman, also claimed trial to using forged statements of witnesses Siew Kok Seng, 55, and Chua Sia Heng, 40, in investigations involving the same businessman.
On Wednesday, ASP Hong was charged in Kuala Lumpur with two counts of using the forged statements of Siew and Chua at the Commercial Crime Investigation Department’s operation/technical assistance division in Bukit Aman.
http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2007/10/27/courts/19294862&sec=courts
Ahmad Fairuz the most incompetent CJ
From limkitsiang.com :
I referred to the Malaysian Bar website listing the reported judgments written by Ahmad Fairuz as compared to his three predecessors, Tun Salleh Abas, Raja Azlan Shah and Tun Mohamad Suffian which placed the current Chief Justice in very poor light for being the most “unproductive” of the four.
The comparative figures for Ahmad Fairuz, Salleh Abas, Raja Azlan and Mohd Suffian for written judgments are as follows:
I referred to the Malaysian Bar website listing the reported judgments written by Ahmad Fairuz as compared to his three predecessors, Tun Salleh Abas, Raja Azlan Shah and Tun Mohamad Suffian which placed the current Chief Justice in very poor light for being the most “unproductive” of the four.
The comparative figures for Ahmad Fairuz, Salleh Abas, Raja Azlan and Mohd Suffian for written judgments are as follows:
*Table courtesy of Bar Council.
Friday, October 26, 2007
Kami Penan perlu tanah dan hutan
"Kami bukan pakai lesen, kami hanya pakai adat kami yang sudah ada sebelum syarikat dan sebelum lesen. "
http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/73752
Kami Penan perlu tanah dan hutan
Matu Tugang & Along JooOct 19, 07 7:47pm
Kami gembira mendengar syarikat Shin Yang berkata yang dia sangat mengambil berat tentang keperluan hidup dan hak adat kami kaum Penan (Logging firm: We're doing our best to help Penans). Tetapi kami tidak mengerti kenapa keadaan sebenarnya, jauh berbeza dengan apa yang dicakapkan oleh Shin Yang.
Terlebih dahulu, apa yang benar, kami memang mengaku benar. Memang Shin Yang ada membantu kami dengan belanja orang mati, tetapi tidak pernah sekali dengan pengangkutan membawa mayat pulang atau menghantar mayat ke kubur.
Begitu juga, Shin Yang ada membayar elaun kepada ketua kampung dan ahli JKKK (jawatankuasa kemajuan dan keselamatan kampung), tetapi syarikat ini tidak membayarnya kepada semua ketua kampung dan JKKK dalam kawasan lesennya.
Kami juga mengaku bahawa Shin Yang seperti dengan syarikat lain ada memberi buah tangan untuk kami merayakan Krismas. Tetapi, tidak seperti yang dikata oleh wakilnya, tidak ada buah tangan dalam bentuk wang dan dalam bentuk barang.
Kami diberi RM300 untuk satu rumah panjang yang seramai 40 keluarga dan kami boleh terima dalam bentuk wang atau bentuk barang. Selain ini, kata kata lain wakil Shin Yang jauh daripada benar, dan kami ingin membalas cakap mereka satu demi satu, dari perkara kecil hingga perkara besar.
Yang pertama, sebalik daripada membayar pemali, wakil Shin Yang sudah kata kepada kami bahawa pemali itu sudahpun selesai pada waktu syarikat balak mula masuk ke kawasan kami Penan dulu, dan dia tidak perlu lagi membayar pemali untuk kerja ladang sawit dan kayu kertas.
Yang benar, Shin Yang sawit ada memberi pemali kepada kampung Penan Lg Jaik, tetapi tidak kepada yang lain. Yang kedua, kami Penan di Seping, Plieran dan Danum berani berkata bahawa Shin Yang yang paling tidak membantu kami dengan pengangkutan ke Sg Asap, sama ada untuk menghantar anak ke sekolah atau membawa orang sakit ke klinik.
Sebaliknya, kami selalu dimarah dan dihina apabila kami cuba memohon bantuan ini daripada Shin Yang tidak kira Shin Yang Plantation atau Shin Yang Forestry.
Yang ketiga, kami Penan Seping, Plieran dan Danum juga berani berkata bahawa Shin Yang yang paling tidak membantu kita dengan keperluan perumahan.
Hanya pada tahun 2007 ini, baru Shin Yang ada membuat satu rumah panjang untuk Penan Lg Pelutan. Itupun bukan sebagai menolong, tetapi sebagai mengganti pulau hutan Penan Lg Pelutan, iaitu mereka menyerah hutan tersebut kepada Shin Yang untuk mengambil kayu balak dan membuat ladang kayu kertas.
Begitu juga dengan air paip di mana Penan Lg Jaik telah mendapat bekalannya dari medical (pihak perubatan). Kami Penan Lg Singu, Lg Luar dan Lg Tangau tidak ada air paip dan terpaksa menggunakan air hujan untuk masak dan minum dan air sungai yang kotor untuk mandi dan mencuci kain.
Keempat, kami berani mencabar Shin Yang supaya menunjukkan buku bukunya sebagai bukti bahawa 90 peratus pekerja di ladang sawit adalah orang Penan.
Kami Penan tidak bersekolah, tetapi kami ada mata dan kami sendiri dapat nampak majoriti pekerja (ladang) sawit adalah orang Indonesia atau bangsa lain daripada Penan.
Kelima, dan yang paling penting, kami menolak sama sekali cakap wakil Shin Yang bahawa mereka menghormati hak dan tanah adat kami. Sebaliknya, syarikat ini meninjak hak kami.
Bila Shin Yang Plantation mula masuk ke kawasan kami, wakilnya berkata kepada kami bahawa mereka memegang lesen bagi semua kawasan ini dan kami Penan tiada hak ke atas kawasan ini, selain tanah temuda dan kubur.
Mereka ada berkata bahawa kami tidak boleh menyimpan tanah atau hutan untuk kegunaan kami. Tambahnya lagi, Shin Yang Plantation bukan datang berrunding dengan kami dulu. Dia membuat sesuka hatinya, mengambil tanah temuda kami, lalu mahu membayar RM300 untuk satu hektar tanah temuda yang sudah mereka habis tolak.
Kami Penan tidak setuju and tidak mahu, tetapi apa boleh buat, tanah itu pun sudah mereka gundur dan tanam sawit atau kayu kertas. Jadi, terpaksalah kami terima RM300 untuk setiap satu hektar.
Kami Penan Seping, Plieran dan Danum ini memang takut dengan mereka dan takut dengan perintah. Lalu, walaupun kami amat sakit hati dan susah hati, kami tidak tahu buat apa apa.
Seorang daripada ketua kampung kami, iaitu Matu Tugang dari Lg Jaik, ada pergi berjumpa DO (district officer) Belaga dengan GM (general manager) Shin Yang. Sebelum itu, DO Belaga waktu itu ada memberitahu TR (Tui Rumah) Matu bahawa memang Penan perlu tanah dan hutan.
Tetapi, ketika berdepan dengan GM Shin Yang, DO Belaga kata apa yang boleh dia atur, dia akan atur. Lalu, diberitahu GM supaya jangan kacau pulau paip. Tetapi pasal tanah, dia memberitahu TR Matu supaya tunggu GM atur bagi tanah sama Penan kerana kami Penan tidak ada kuasa.
Apabila TR Matu dengar kata DO, dia pun diam diri kerana takut dengan perintah dan takut salah cakap, bukan kerana dia terima kata kata itu. Sudah beratus tahun kami Penan duduk di kawasan ini. Bagaimana pula kami Penan tidak ada kuasa dan tidak ada hak?
Kami bukan pakai lesen, kami hanya pakai adat kami yang sudah ada sebelum syarikat dan sebelum lesen.
Jadi, TR Matu pun bertanya dengan kawan kerana dia fikir cakap DO itu tidak patut. Kawan itu menasihatkan TR Matu supaya bertanya kepada orang yang lebih tahu tentang hak adat, tetapi dia juga fikir tidak patut rumah panjang tidak ada kuasa atas tanah mereka.
Dia memberi alamat Suhakam (Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia) kepada TR Matu dan dengan cara itu TR Matu dapat menyampaikan aduannya kepada Suhakam. Ikut cakap Suhakam, kami Penan tidak dapat tahan semua kawasan, mahu ada bagi kepada syarikat dan juga ada bagi untuk kami.
Kalau begitu, kami Penan Seping, Plieran dan Danum dapat terima. Tetapi, sekarang GM kata TR Matu mahu tahan terlalu banyak tanah. Sekian lama kami Penan menjaga hutan di kawasan ini.
Sekarang, dalam masa beberapa tahun sahaja, Shin Yang sudah tebang habis hutan itu, tinggal hanya sedikit di atas bukit dan dalam kawasan yang kami tahan. Bagi kami Penan, kawasan kami bukan setakat perkara penghidup kami tetapi juga penuh dengan kenangan pahit manis kami.
Sekarang, tempat itu semuanya sudah hancur musnah. Tambahan pula, penghidup kami pun syarikat mahu ambil. Kami Penan perlu tanah dan perlu hutan.
Kawasan yang kami cuba tahan sekarang tidak luas berbanding dengan berpuluh ribu hektar (kawasan) lesen Shin Yang.
Yang kami cuba tahan hanya sedikit hutan, tidak cukup pun untuk babi lalu, dan sedikit tanah untuk tanam padi. Itu hanya yang tinggal untuk kami dan keturunan kami.
Kalau sedikit itu pun tidak dapat, baik bunuh kami Penan sekarang daripada bunuh kami perlahan lahan.
Nota: Matu Tugang adalah Tuai Rumah Lg Jaik dan Along Joo adalah Tuai Rumah Lg Singu.
http://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/73752
Kami Penan perlu tanah dan hutan
Matu Tugang & Along JooOct 19, 07 7:47pm
Kami gembira mendengar syarikat Shin Yang berkata yang dia sangat mengambil berat tentang keperluan hidup dan hak adat kami kaum Penan (Logging firm: We're doing our best to help Penans). Tetapi kami tidak mengerti kenapa keadaan sebenarnya, jauh berbeza dengan apa yang dicakapkan oleh Shin Yang.
Terlebih dahulu, apa yang benar, kami memang mengaku benar. Memang Shin Yang ada membantu kami dengan belanja orang mati, tetapi tidak pernah sekali dengan pengangkutan membawa mayat pulang atau menghantar mayat ke kubur.
Begitu juga, Shin Yang ada membayar elaun kepada ketua kampung dan ahli JKKK (jawatankuasa kemajuan dan keselamatan kampung), tetapi syarikat ini tidak membayarnya kepada semua ketua kampung dan JKKK dalam kawasan lesennya.
Kami juga mengaku bahawa Shin Yang seperti dengan syarikat lain ada memberi buah tangan untuk kami merayakan Krismas. Tetapi, tidak seperti yang dikata oleh wakilnya, tidak ada buah tangan dalam bentuk wang dan dalam bentuk barang.
Kami diberi RM300 untuk satu rumah panjang yang seramai 40 keluarga dan kami boleh terima dalam bentuk wang atau bentuk barang. Selain ini, kata kata lain wakil Shin Yang jauh daripada benar, dan kami ingin membalas cakap mereka satu demi satu, dari perkara kecil hingga perkara besar.
Yang pertama, sebalik daripada membayar pemali, wakil Shin Yang sudah kata kepada kami bahawa pemali itu sudahpun selesai pada waktu syarikat balak mula masuk ke kawasan kami Penan dulu, dan dia tidak perlu lagi membayar pemali untuk kerja ladang sawit dan kayu kertas.
Yang benar, Shin Yang sawit ada memberi pemali kepada kampung Penan Lg Jaik, tetapi tidak kepada yang lain. Yang kedua, kami Penan di Seping, Plieran dan Danum berani berkata bahawa Shin Yang yang paling tidak membantu kami dengan pengangkutan ke Sg Asap, sama ada untuk menghantar anak ke sekolah atau membawa orang sakit ke klinik.
Sebaliknya, kami selalu dimarah dan dihina apabila kami cuba memohon bantuan ini daripada Shin Yang tidak kira Shin Yang Plantation atau Shin Yang Forestry.
Yang ketiga, kami Penan Seping, Plieran dan Danum juga berani berkata bahawa Shin Yang yang paling tidak membantu kita dengan keperluan perumahan.
Hanya pada tahun 2007 ini, baru Shin Yang ada membuat satu rumah panjang untuk Penan Lg Pelutan. Itupun bukan sebagai menolong, tetapi sebagai mengganti pulau hutan Penan Lg Pelutan, iaitu mereka menyerah hutan tersebut kepada Shin Yang untuk mengambil kayu balak dan membuat ladang kayu kertas.
Begitu juga dengan air paip di mana Penan Lg Jaik telah mendapat bekalannya dari medical (pihak perubatan). Kami Penan Lg Singu, Lg Luar dan Lg Tangau tidak ada air paip dan terpaksa menggunakan air hujan untuk masak dan minum dan air sungai yang kotor untuk mandi dan mencuci kain.
Keempat, kami berani mencabar Shin Yang supaya menunjukkan buku bukunya sebagai bukti bahawa 90 peratus pekerja di ladang sawit adalah orang Penan.
Kami Penan tidak bersekolah, tetapi kami ada mata dan kami sendiri dapat nampak majoriti pekerja (ladang) sawit adalah orang Indonesia atau bangsa lain daripada Penan.
Kelima, dan yang paling penting, kami menolak sama sekali cakap wakil Shin Yang bahawa mereka menghormati hak dan tanah adat kami. Sebaliknya, syarikat ini meninjak hak kami.
Bila Shin Yang Plantation mula masuk ke kawasan kami, wakilnya berkata kepada kami bahawa mereka memegang lesen bagi semua kawasan ini dan kami Penan tiada hak ke atas kawasan ini, selain tanah temuda dan kubur.
Mereka ada berkata bahawa kami tidak boleh menyimpan tanah atau hutan untuk kegunaan kami. Tambahnya lagi, Shin Yang Plantation bukan datang berrunding dengan kami dulu. Dia membuat sesuka hatinya, mengambil tanah temuda kami, lalu mahu membayar RM300 untuk satu hektar tanah temuda yang sudah mereka habis tolak.
Kami Penan tidak setuju and tidak mahu, tetapi apa boleh buat, tanah itu pun sudah mereka gundur dan tanam sawit atau kayu kertas. Jadi, terpaksalah kami terima RM300 untuk setiap satu hektar.
Kami Penan Seping, Plieran dan Danum ini memang takut dengan mereka dan takut dengan perintah. Lalu, walaupun kami amat sakit hati dan susah hati, kami tidak tahu buat apa apa.
Seorang daripada ketua kampung kami, iaitu Matu Tugang dari Lg Jaik, ada pergi berjumpa DO (district officer) Belaga dengan GM (general manager) Shin Yang. Sebelum itu, DO Belaga waktu itu ada memberitahu TR (Tui Rumah) Matu bahawa memang Penan perlu tanah dan hutan.
Tetapi, ketika berdepan dengan GM Shin Yang, DO Belaga kata apa yang boleh dia atur, dia akan atur. Lalu, diberitahu GM supaya jangan kacau pulau paip. Tetapi pasal tanah, dia memberitahu TR Matu supaya tunggu GM atur bagi tanah sama Penan kerana kami Penan tidak ada kuasa.
Apabila TR Matu dengar kata DO, dia pun diam diri kerana takut dengan perintah dan takut salah cakap, bukan kerana dia terima kata kata itu. Sudah beratus tahun kami Penan duduk di kawasan ini. Bagaimana pula kami Penan tidak ada kuasa dan tidak ada hak?
Kami bukan pakai lesen, kami hanya pakai adat kami yang sudah ada sebelum syarikat dan sebelum lesen.
Jadi, TR Matu pun bertanya dengan kawan kerana dia fikir cakap DO itu tidak patut. Kawan itu menasihatkan TR Matu supaya bertanya kepada orang yang lebih tahu tentang hak adat, tetapi dia juga fikir tidak patut rumah panjang tidak ada kuasa atas tanah mereka.
Dia memberi alamat Suhakam (Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia) kepada TR Matu dan dengan cara itu TR Matu dapat menyampaikan aduannya kepada Suhakam. Ikut cakap Suhakam, kami Penan tidak dapat tahan semua kawasan, mahu ada bagi kepada syarikat dan juga ada bagi untuk kami.
Kalau begitu, kami Penan Seping, Plieran dan Danum dapat terima. Tetapi, sekarang GM kata TR Matu mahu tahan terlalu banyak tanah. Sekian lama kami Penan menjaga hutan di kawasan ini.
Sekarang, dalam masa beberapa tahun sahaja, Shin Yang sudah tebang habis hutan itu, tinggal hanya sedikit di atas bukit dan dalam kawasan yang kami tahan. Bagi kami Penan, kawasan kami bukan setakat perkara penghidup kami tetapi juga penuh dengan kenangan pahit manis kami.
Sekarang, tempat itu semuanya sudah hancur musnah. Tambahan pula, penghidup kami pun syarikat mahu ambil. Kami Penan perlu tanah dan perlu hutan.
Kawasan yang kami cuba tahan sekarang tidak luas berbanding dengan berpuluh ribu hektar (kawasan) lesen Shin Yang.
Yang kami cuba tahan hanya sedikit hutan, tidak cukup pun untuk babi lalu, dan sedikit tanah untuk tanam padi. Itu hanya yang tinggal untuk kami dan keturunan kami.
Kalau sedikit itu pun tidak dapat, baik bunuh kami Penan sekarang daripada bunuh kami perlahan lahan.
Nota: Matu Tugang adalah Tuai Rumah Lg Jaik dan Along Joo adalah Tuai Rumah Lg Singu.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Aliran : Chief Justice must go – and go now
Aliran media statementhttp://www.aliran.com
Chief Justice must go – and go now
Wednesday, 17 October 2007
It would upset and disappoint Malaysians terribly if the tenure of the current Chief Justice, Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim, were to be extended. It would seriously undermine the confidence of the people in the judiciary to a point of no return.
The judiciary is already in a shambles and there is no need to degrade it further by extending the tenure of the Chief Justice of the Federal Court.
On behalf of all Malaysians, Aliran would like to politely and humbly appeal to His Majesty, the Yang diPertuan Agong, to reject Ahmad Fairuz’s application to His Majesty for a six-month extension of tenure. Article 125(1) states: Subject to the provisions of Clauses (2) to (5), a judge of the Federal Court shall hold office until he attains the age of sixty-six years or such later time, not being later than six months after he attains that age, as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may approve.
In this extension of tenure of office, the Prime Minister does not seem to have any role to play. It would appear that His Majesty, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, solely decides on this matter. It is the absolute discretion of His Majesty, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
By now it is very clear that it is the collective view of all thinking Malaysians that Ahmad Fairuz does not deserve to be in office even a minute longer. He must go - and go in the soonest time frame that is possible. After the disgraceful Lingam tape, it is only morally correct that he should not be around to denigrate an institution that is the custodian of justice. It is as simple as that.
Ahmad Fairuz has not openly and publicly denied that he is the person on the other end of the telephone conversation. He has not said any thing to dispel all the rumours that link him to various episodes in the promotion and elevation of judges. Neither is he spared from the negative and speculative judgments that he has been associated with. How could such a person who has miserably failed to put the record straight be considered for an extension of tenure of office?
We are not persuaded by Datuk Seri Nazri’s claim, according to the NST of today, that “the Yang di-Pertuan Agong has to act on the advice of the prime minister on extending the tenure of the chief justice”, who is due to retire at the end of the month. He further reiterates that the “king as a constitutional monarch was bound by the prime minister’s advice in the appointment and promotion of judicial officers. This includes whether to extend by six months the tenure of the chief justice after he attains the compulsory retirement age of 66”.
Nazri seems to conveniently forget that in the appointment and promotion of judicial officers, His Majesty is required to act “after consulting the Conference of Rulers”. “After consulting the Conference of Rulers” does not seem to suggest that it is purely an academic exercise. It is more than that. There has to be deliberation to arrive at a collective decision – no matter what Nazri may insist. There are others in the legal circle who do not share Nazri’s interpretation of the Federal Constitution.
We are not persuaded by Datuk Seri Nazri’s claim, according to the NST of today, that “the Yang di-Pertuan Agong has to act on the advice of the prime minister on extending the tenure of the chief justice”, who is due to retire at the end of the month. He further reiterates that the “king as a constitutional monarch was bound by the prime minister’s advice in the appointment and promotion of judicial officers. This includes whether to extend by six months the tenure of the chief justice after he attains the compulsory retirement age of 66”
Nazri seems to conveniently forget that in the appointment and promotion of judicial officers, His Majesty is required to act “after consulting the Conference of Rulers”. “After consulting the Conference of Rulers” does not seem to suggest that it is purely an academic exercise. It is more than that. There has to be deliberation to arrive at a collective decision – no matter what Nazri may insist. There are others in the legal circle who do not share Nazri’s interpretation of the Federal Constitution.
Under the Federal Constitution, when it comes to “tendering his advice as to the appointment of a judge”, the Prime Minister does not simply pluck out a name for consideration out of thin air. He “shall consult” the respective heads of the Federal Court, the Court of Appeal and the High Court before submitting the names to His Majesty, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. Just as in this case, “shall consult” does not mean a meaningless chat with the respective heads but refers to a constructive discussion and recommendation; this same process applies when His Majesty consults the Conference of Rulers
Aliran would like to advise Nazri not to confuse the public with his one-sided interpretation of the Federal Constitution
P Ramakrishnan
President
17 October 2007
Chief Justice must go – and go now
Wednesday, 17 October 2007
It would upset and disappoint Malaysians terribly if the tenure of the current Chief Justice, Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim, were to be extended. It would seriously undermine the confidence of the people in the judiciary to a point of no return.
The judiciary is already in a shambles and there is no need to degrade it further by extending the tenure of the Chief Justice of the Federal Court.
On behalf of all Malaysians, Aliran would like to politely and humbly appeal to His Majesty, the Yang diPertuan Agong, to reject Ahmad Fairuz’s application to His Majesty for a six-month extension of tenure. Article 125(1) states: Subject to the provisions of Clauses (2) to (5), a judge of the Federal Court shall hold office until he attains the age of sixty-six years or such later time, not being later than six months after he attains that age, as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may approve.
In this extension of tenure of office, the Prime Minister does not seem to have any role to play. It would appear that His Majesty, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, solely decides on this matter. It is the absolute discretion of His Majesty, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
By now it is very clear that it is the collective view of all thinking Malaysians that Ahmad Fairuz does not deserve to be in office even a minute longer. He must go - and go in the soonest time frame that is possible. After the disgraceful Lingam tape, it is only morally correct that he should not be around to denigrate an institution that is the custodian of justice. It is as simple as that.
Ahmad Fairuz has not openly and publicly denied that he is the person on the other end of the telephone conversation. He has not said any thing to dispel all the rumours that link him to various episodes in the promotion and elevation of judges. Neither is he spared from the negative and speculative judgments that he has been associated with. How could such a person who has miserably failed to put the record straight be considered for an extension of tenure of office?
We are not persuaded by Datuk Seri Nazri’s claim, according to the NST of today, that “the Yang di-Pertuan Agong has to act on the advice of the prime minister on extending the tenure of the chief justice”, who is due to retire at the end of the month. He further reiterates that the “king as a constitutional monarch was bound by the prime minister’s advice in the appointment and promotion of judicial officers. This includes whether to extend by six months the tenure of the chief justice after he attains the compulsory retirement age of 66”.
Nazri seems to conveniently forget that in the appointment and promotion of judicial officers, His Majesty is required to act “after consulting the Conference of Rulers”. “After consulting the Conference of Rulers” does not seem to suggest that it is purely an academic exercise. It is more than that. There has to be deliberation to arrive at a collective decision – no matter what Nazri may insist. There are others in the legal circle who do not share Nazri’s interpretation of the Federal Constitution.
We are not persuaded by Datuk Seri Nazri’s claim, according to the NST of today, that “the Yang di-Pertuan Agong has to act on the advice of the prime minister on extending the tenure of the chief justice”, who is due to retire at the end of the month. He further reiterates that the “king as a constitutional monarch was bound by the prime minister’s advice in the appointment and promotion of judicial officers. This includes whether to extend by six months the tenure of the chief justice after he attains the compulsory retirement age of 66”
Nazri seems to conveniently forget that in the appointment and promotion of judicial officers, His Majesty is required to act “after consulting the Conference of Rulers”. “After consulting the Conference of Rulers” does not seem to suggest that it is purely an academic exercise. It is more than that. There has to be deliberation to arrive at a collective decision – no matter what Nazri may insist. There are others in the legal circle who do not share Nazri’s interpretation of the Federal Constitution.
Under the Federal Constitution, when it comes to “tendering his advice as to the appointment of a judge”, the Prime Minister does not simply pluck out a name for consideration out of thin air. He “shall consult” the respective heads of the Federal Court, the Court of Appeal and the High Court before submitting the names to His Majesty, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. Just as in this case, “shall consult” does not mean a meaningless chat with the respective heads but refers to a constructive discussion and recommendation; this same process applies when His Majesty consults the Conference of Rulers
Aliran would like to advise Nazri not to confuse the public with his one-sided interpretation of the Federal Constitution
P Ramakrishnan
President
17 October 2007
Suaram : Death in Police Custody: Ulaganathan a/l Muniandy
http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/letters.php?itemid=9355
23/10: Death in Police Custody: Ulaganathan a/l Muniandy
Category: General
Posted by: Raja Petra
Inquest death of a 19 year old boyIn reference to above matter, Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) would like to inform you that an inquest into death in police custody case of Ulaganathan a/l Muniandy will be held after a delay of 4 years.
Ulaganathan Muniandy (19year old) an Emergency Ordinance detainee was detained at Kajang Police Station since 15 May 2003 and had died suddenly in 21 July 2003 at Kajang Hospital.
According to the Kajang hospital the cause of death "cannot be determined" while the family suspect foul-play.When the family finally with the help of SUARAM and Bar Council wanted to do a civil suit, now the Attorney general have finally requested for an Inquest being carried out - 4 years after the death.
The details of the inquest as below:
Date: 24 October 2007 (Wednesday)
Time: 8.30am
Venue: Magistrate Court Kajang (Bersidang Di Putrajaya) Aras 1 & 2, Zon Selatan (Bangunan Annexe)Palace Of Justice, Presint 3, 62506 Putrajaya
Death in Police custody is a fundamental human rights violation and goes against the rights to life. We very much hope that your press organization will cover the above event.For inquiries, please call SUARAM or Moon Hui (012-7209981). Thank you.
Yours sincerely,
Moon Hui
Coordinator
23/10: Death in Police Custody: Ulaganathan a/l Muniandy
Category: General
Posted by: Raja Petra
Inquest death of a 19 year old boyIn reference to above matter, Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM) would like to inform you that an inquest into death in police custody case of Ulaganathan a/l Muniandy will be held after a delay of 4 years.
Ulaganathan Muniandy (19year old) an Emergency Ordinance detainee was detained at Kajang Police Station since 15 May 2003 and had died suddenly in 21 July 2003 at Kajang Hospital.
According to the Kajang hospital the cause of death "cannot be determined" while the family suspect foul-play.When the family finally with the help of SUARAM and Bar Council wanted to do a civil suit, now the Attorney general have finally requested for an Inquest being carried out - 4 years after the death.
The details of the inquest as below:
Date: 24 October 2007 (Wednesday)
Time: 8.30am
Venue: Magistrate Court Kajang (Bersidang Di Putrajaya) Aras 1 & 2, Zon Selatan (Bangunan Annexe)Palace Of Justice, Presint 3, 62506 Putrajaya
Death in Police custody is a fundamental human rights violation and goes against the rights to life. We very much hope that your press organization will cover the above event.For inquiries, please call SUARAM or Moon Hui (012-7209981). Thank you.
Yours sincerely,
Moon Hui
Coordinator
Saturday, October 20, 2007
首相应告别压制人权黑暗期，废除恶法推动警察改革
吉隆坡暨雪兰莪中华大会堂民权委员会欣慰法庭宣判内安法令扣留者阿都马列胡先起诉政府非法扣留和暴力虐待胜诉。这是迟来的正义，证实了长期以来内安法扣留者遭暴力虐待的事实。然而，这项残酷的事实只是执法者暴力行径的冰山一角，更值得责问的是，何以政府竟然容忍如此不人道的举措维持多年。
今年10月27日是茅草行动二十周年纪念。过去这项大规模逮捕异议分子行动，是本国自 513以来最大的压制人权黑暗事件，连同1988年司法危机以及最高法院法官革职事件， 令民主制度破坏殆尽，其压制性效应一直延续到今天。
当年政府援引《1960年内安法令》扣留106名政党人士和社运工作者，却始终未能提出他们危害国家安全的证据加以提控。同样的，扣留者也投诉遭执法者暴力威胁，种种压制侵害人权，剥夺人性尊严。
面对种种的非法扣留以及执法者如此卑鄙无耻的暴力行径，政府应该立即向过去所有非法扣留和暴力虐待的受害者致歉，同时废除《1960年内安法令》，以根绝这种非人性的制度化暴力，以免执法者继续藉以侵犯人权。该法是我国最大的不公正，赋予部长过大的权力批准无审讯扣留，导致严重侵犯宪赋人权。这项恶法导致部长权限凌驾司法，行政权力恶性膨胀，恶法成为执政者对付异议分子的政治工具。
首相阿都拉誓言推动行政革新与听取真话，就应该接纳人权团体多年的呼吁，立即宣誓与过去压制人权的黑暗期划清界线，切实推动废除恶法，彻除腐败滥权。首要就是成立"真相调查委员会"彻查 1987年茅草行动真相，还原历史真相、恢复正义以及补偿受害者。
阿都马列胡先案子捎来远违的正义呼声，该案子不应仅以金钱赔偿结束，而让滥权、暴虐的涉案高级警官逍遥法外，应该重新开启当年有关高级警官施暴的调查报告，并将施暴者绳之以法，也追究时任总警长拉欣诺的行政责任。
种种警察滥权与暴力事例也证明政府推展警察改革的必要，首要就是落实皇家委员会建议 设立的"独立警察违例行为投诉委员会"（ Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission，IPCMC），以及限制政治部的权力。
首相阿都拉上台允诺听真话推动革新，但并未实际纠正和废止过去压制性的举措与体制，相反的，近年新闻自由严重受压制，贪污腐败日益严重，民生困难，大道路费以及百物价格上涨，令人民怨声载道。首相不应再漠视民瘼，而应大刀阔斧推展改革，肃清腐败，才能令国家走向民主开放、和平繁荣的道路。
民权委员会主席谢春荣 谨启
今年10月27日是茅草行动二十周年纪念。过去这项大规模逮捕异议分子行动，是本国自 513以来最大的压制人权黑暗事件，连同1988年司法危机以及最高法院法官革职事件， 令民主制度破坏殆尽，其压制性效应一直延续到今天。
当年政府援引《1960年内安法令》扣留106名政党人士和社运工作者，却始终未能提出他们危害国家安全的证据加以提控。同样的，扣留者也投诉遭执法者暴力威胁，种种压制侵害人权，剥夺人性尊严。
面对种种的非法扣留以及执法者如此卑鄙无耻的暴力行径，政府应该立即向过去所有非法扣留和暴力虐待的受害者致歉，同时废除《1960年内安法令》，以根绝这种非人性的制度化暴力，以免执法者继续藉以侵犯人权。该法是我国最大的不公正，赋予部长过大的权力批准无审讯扣留，导致严重侵犯宪赋人权。这项恶法导致部长权限凌驾司法，行政权力恶性膨胀，恶法成为执政者对付异议分子的政治工具。
首相阿都拉誓言推动行政革新与听取真话，就应该接纳人权团体多年的呼吁，立即宣誓与过去压制人权的黑暗期划清界线，切实推动废除恶法，彻除腐败滥权。首要就是成立"真相调查委员会"彻查 1987年茅草行动真相，还原历史真相、恢复正义以及补偿受害者。
阿都马列胡先案子捎来远违的正义呼声，该案子不应仅以金钱赔偿结束，而让滥权、暴虐的涉案高级警官逍遥法外，应该重新开启当年有关高级警官施暴的调查报告，并将施暴者绳之以法，也追究时任总警长拉欣诺的行政责任。
种种警察滥权与暴力事例也证明政府推展警察改革的必要，首要就是落实皇家委员会建议 设立的"独立警察违例行为投诉委员会"（ Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission，IPCMC），以及限制政治部的权力。
首相阿都拉上台允诺听真话推动革新，但并未实际纠正和废止过去压制性的举措与体制，相反的，近年新闻自由严重受压制，贪污腐败日益严重，民生困难，大道路费以及百物价格上涨，令人民怨声载道。首相不应再漠视民瘼，而应大刀阔斧推展改革，肃清腐败，才能令国家走向民主开放、和平繁荣的道路。
民权委员会主席谢春荣 谨启
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Return the judiciary to the rakyat
http://harismibrahim.wordpress.com/2007/09/25/return-the-judiciary-to-the-rakyat-a-petition-to-his-majesty-the-yang-dipertuan-agung/
Return the judiciary to the rakyat : A petition to His Majesty the Yang DiPertuan Agung
September 25th, 2007
To those who wrote in with suggestions for the petition, thank you.
What appears below is the English text of the substance of the petition that will be sent to His Majesty.
The actual petition will be in Bahasa Malaysia, complete with the requisites to meet the requirements of protocol for a communication from the rakyat to ruler.
The final text will be posted once the translation and protocol requirements have been completed.
If you want to lend your support to this petition to His Majesty, please send an e-mail to :
savethejudiciary@gmail.com
As this is a petition to our Agung, I do not think that it is proper if pseudonyms are used. As such, I must ask that you state your name in full together with your NRIC number.
_________________________
The People’s Appeal To His Majesty The Yang DiPertuan Agung
On 19/9/2007, the nation was rocked by another scandal, this time in the form of a video clip which exposed what appears to be a telephone conversation between senior lawyer VK Lingam and another person, allegedly fixing the appointment of ‘friendly’ senior judges.
A careful study of the monologue presented in the video clip leaves a very clear impression that the telephone conversation is indeed between VK Lingam and the present CJ, Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim and relates to the appointment and promotion of judges. Other judges are also named in the course of the conversation.
That Tun Ahmad Fairuz had, subsequent to the release of the video clip, first responded that he would need to first view the video clip before saying anything, then issuing a ‘no comment’ response and only lately and that too through a third party making a bare denial of being a party to the conversation leaves us, the rakyat with a sense that Tun Ahmad Fairuz has not responded with complete candour on this matter.
This scandal now casts serious doubts on the suitability of Tun Ahmad Fairuz to head the judiciary as well as on the propriety of the appointments and promotions, made on the recommendation of Tun Ahmad Fairuz, of several judges of the High Courts, the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court.
We, the rakyat, no longer have any confidence whatsoever in the judiciary.
We, the rakyat have noted for some time that some very senior judges have been constantly overlooked in the numerous promotion exercises that have proceeded during the tenure of Tun Ahmad Fairuz, with junior judges being preferred.
We the rakyat have also noted that it was recently reported that Their Royal Highnesses acting through the Conference of Rulers rejected two nominations by Tun Fairuz for the position of President of the Court of Appeal and the Chief Judge of Malaya although these positions had been vacant for a long time. It is rumoured that those nominated by Tun Fairuz were junior in comparison with many other more senior serving judges.
We, the rakyat, have further noted that there is at least one judge promoted to the Federal Court who, it is reported, has failed to deliver written judgments in up to as many as 35 cases, with the result that appeals by many who have been convicted of offences and are in prison are unable to have their appeals heard.
This most recent scandal also raises again real concerns about the sudden change of the trial judge in an ongoing murder trial in Shah Alam.
We, the rakyat, are also gravely concerned about the recent decisions in several high-profile cases and whether these were ‘fixed’ by Tun Ahmad Fairuz and, if so, the implications it has in relation to the other judges of our superior courts.
The reaction of the Prime Minister, other members of his cabinet and the Attorney-General to the matter of this video clip give us, the rakyat, no reason at all to believe that this scandal will be honestly investigated so that the truth of the matter will never be known.
We, the rakyat, do not believe that the Prime Minister and his present government are committed to getting to the bottom of this scandal and, if ascertained to be the truth, to take all necessary steps to restore the judiciary as a constitutional institution emplaced to independently defend the constitution, the rights of the rakyat, and to uphold the rule of law.
In this regard, the announcement on 25/9/2007 by the Deputy Prime Minister of a 3-man panel to be headed by one who was implicated in the sacking of Tun Salleh Abas in 1988 to now investigate this scandal fortifies our belief that the present government is determined that the truth in relation to this scandal never becomes known.
We, the rakyat, are gravely concerned that if this scandal is left to be investigated by the administration of the Prime Minister, the police or the Anti-Corruption Agency, the rakyat will only witness another cover-up, leaving us, the rakyat without any recourse to justice, ever suspicious whether the judiciary is to protect the rakyat or the interests of a chosen few.
This most recent scandal raises concerns whether the corruption that has become so prevalent in the management of this country has now also made its way into the judiciary.
For these many reasons, we, the rakyat, now pray that Your Majesty may be so moved and in the exercise of the full powers conferred on Your Majesty to :-
direct the establishment of a Royal Commission to inquire into, consider and/or determine whether in fact the conversation reflected in the said video clip did occur between VK Lingam and Tun Ahmad Fairuz and the veracity of the assertions made by VK Lingam in the said video clip and, if found to be so, that the Commission be further mandated to enquire into, consider and/or determine:-
1.1 the involvement of all those named in the said video clip in connection with the appointment and promotion of judges;
1.2 cases in which VK Lingam was involved and which were heard and / or decided by Tun Ahmad Fairuz and / or any of the other judges named in the said video clip;
1.3 all acts carried out by Tun Ahmad Fairuz during his tenure as Chief Judge of Malaya, President of the Court of Appeal and Chief Justice, more particularly:-
the basis of the appointment and / or promotion of judges by Tun Ahmad Fairuz with particular emphasis on the other judges named in the said video clip;
the manner in which the members of the panels of the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court were selected by Tun Ahmad Fairuz during his tenure as President of the Court of Appeal and Chief Justice; and
the manner in which files were allocated to the panels of the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court by Tun Ahmad Fairuz during his tenure as President of the Court of Appeal and Chief Justice.
2. the Royal Commission having ascertained that the conversation reflected in the said video did occur between VK Lingam and Tun Ahmad Fairuz and assertions made by VK Lingam in the said video clip to be true, to :-
direct the Prime Minister to take all necessary steps to appoint a tribunal under Article 125 of the Federal Constitution to remove Tun Ahmad Fairuz and/or any and all judges found by the Commission to have been implicated, directly or otherwise by the acts of misconduct of Tun Ahmad Fairuz; and
direct the Prime Minister to take all necessary steps to suspend Tun Ahmad Fairuz and/or any and all judges found by the Commission to have been implicated, directly or otherwise by the acts of misconduct of Tun Ahmad Fairuz, pending the reference to and/or report of the tribunal.
3. direct the immediate establishment of an independent Commission for the appointment and promotion of judges to the High Courts, the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court.
Return the judiciary to the rakyat : A petition to His Majesty the Yang DiPertuan Agung
September 25th, 2007
To those who wrote in with suggestions for the petition, thank you.
What appears below is the English text of the substance of the petition that will be sent to His Majesty.
The actual petition will be in Bahasa Malaysia, complete with the requisites to meet the requirements of protocol for a communication from the rakyat to ruler.
The final text will be posted once the translation and protocol requirements have been completed.
If you want to lend your support to this petition to His Majesty, please send an e-mail to :
savethejudiciary@gmail.com
As this is a petition to our Agung, I do not think that it is proper if pseudonyms are used. As such, I must ask that you state your name in full together with your NRIC number.
_________________________
The People’s Appeal To His Majesty The Yang DiPertuan Agung
On 19/9/2007, the nation was rocked by another scandal, this time in the form of a video clip which exposed what appears to be a telephone conversation between senior lawyer VK Lingam and another person, allegedly fixing the appointment of ‘friendly’ senior judges.
A careful study of the monologue presented in the video clip leaves a very clear impression that the telephone conversation is indeed between VK Lingam and the present CJ, Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim and relates to the appointment and promotion of judges. Other judges are also named in the course of the conversation.
That Tun Ahmad Fairuz had, subsequent to the release of the video clip, first responded that he would need to first view the video clip before saying anything, then issuing a ‘no comment’ response and only lately and that too through a third party making a bare denial of being a party to the conversation leaves us, the rakyat with a sense that Tun Ahmad Fairuz has not responded with complete candour on this matter.
This scandal now casts serious doubts on the suitability of Tun Ahmad Fairuz to head the judiciary as well as on the propriety of the appointments and promotions, made on the recommendation of Tun Ahmad Fairuz, of several judges of the High Courts, the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court.
We, the rakyat, no longer have any confidence whatsoever in the judiciary.
We, the rakyat have noted for some time that some very senior judges have been constantly overlooked in the numerous promotion exercises that have proceeded during the tenure of Tun Ahmad Fairuz, with junior judges being preferred.
We the rakyat have also noted that it was recently reported that Their Royal Highnesses acting through the Conference of Rulers rejected two nominations by Tun Fairuz for the position of President of the Court of Appeal and the Chief Judge of Malaya although these positions had been vacant for a long time. It is rumoured that those nominated by Tun Fairuz were junior in comparison with many other more senior serving judges.
We, the rakyat, have further noted that there is at least one judge promoted to the Federal Court who, it is reported, has failed to deliver written judgments in up to as many as 35 cases, with the result that appeals by many who have been convicted of offences and are in prison are unable to have their appeals heard.
This most recent scandal also raises again real concerns about the sudden change of the trial judge in an ongoing murder trial in Shah Alam.
We, the rakyat, are also gravely concerned about the recent decisions in several high-profile cases and whether these were ‘fixed’ by Tun Ahmad Fairuz and, if so, the implications it has in relation to the other judges of our superior courts.
The reaction of the Prime Minister, other members of his cabinet and the Attorney-General to the matter of this video clip give us, the rakyat, no reason at all to believe that this scandal will be honestly investigated so that the truth of the matter will never be known.
We, the rakyat, do not believe that the Prime Minister and his present government are committed to getting to the bottom of this scandal and, if ascertained to be the truth, to take all necessary steps to restore the judiciary as a constitutional institution emplaced to independently defend the constitution, the rights of the rakyat, and to uphold the rule of law.
In this regard, the announcement on 25/9/2007 by the Deputy Prime Minister of a 3-man panel to be headed by one who was implicated in the sacking of Tun Salleh Abas in 1988 to now investigate this scandal fortifies our belief that the present government is determined that the truth in relation to this scandal never becomes known.
We, the rakyat, are gravely concerned that if this scandal is left to be investigated by the administration of the Prime Minister, the police or the Anti-Corruption Agency, the rakyat will only witness another cover-up, leaving us, the rakyat without any recourse to justice, ever suspicious whether the judiciary is to protect the rakyat or the interests of a chosen few.
This most recent scandal raises concerns whether the corruption that has become so prevalent in the management of this country has now also made its way into the judiciary.
For these many reasons, we, the rakyat, now pray that Your Majesty may be so moved and in the exercise of the full powers conferred on Your Majesty to :-
direct the establishment of a Royal Commission to inquire into, consider and/or determine whether in fact the conversation reflected in the said video clip did occur between VK Lingam and Tun Ahmad Fairuz and the veracity of the assertions made by VK Lingam in the said video clip and, if found to be so, that the Commission be further mandated to enquire into, consider and/or determine:-
1.1 the involvement of all those named in the said video clip in connection with the appointment and promotion of judges;
1.2 cases in which VK Lingam was involved and which were heard and / or decided by Tun Ahmad Fairuz and / or any of the other judges named in the said video clip;
1.3 all acts carried out by Tun Ahmad Fairuz during his tenure as Chief Judge of Malaya, President of the Court of Appeal and Chief Justice, more particularly:-
the basis of the appointment and / or promotion of judges by Tun Ahmad Fairuz with particular emphasis on the other judges named in the said video clip;
the manner in which the members of the panels of the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court were selected by Tun Ahmad Fairuz during his tenure as President of the Court of Appeal and Chief Justice; and
the manner in which files were allocated to the panels of the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court by Tun Ahmad Fairuz during his tenure as President of the Court of Appeal and Chief Justice.
2. the Royal Commission having ascertained that the conversation reflected in the said video did occur between VK Lingam and Tun Ahmad Fairuz and assertions made by VK Lingam in the said video clip to be true, to :-
direct the Prime Minister to take all necessary steps to appoint a tribunal under Article 125 of the Federal Constitution to remove Tun Ahmad Fairuz and/or any and all judges found by the Commission to have been implicated, directly or otherwise by the acts of misconduct of Tun Ahmad Fairuz; and
direct the Prime Minister to take all necessary steps to suspend Tun Ahmad Fairuz and/or any and all judges found by the Commission to have been implicated, directly or otherwise by the acts of misconduct of Tun Ahmad Fairuz, pending the reference to and/or report of the tribunal.
3. direct the immediate establishment of an independent Commission for the appointment and promotion of judges to the High Courts, the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court.
内安令首次人民胜利 政府须赔偿250万
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/73682
高庭判政府非法扣留暴力施虐
前内安法令扣留者获赔250万
郭史光庆07年10月18日 中午12:49
经过8年的漫长审讯后，前内安法令扣留者阿都马烈胡先（Abdul Malek Hussin，左图中）终于起诉政府得直！吉隆坡高庭今日裁决警方和政府在1998年对他进行非法扣留和暴力施虐，必须付出高达250万令吉的损失赔偿。
这也是大马史上，首宗成功起诉政府的内安法令民事诉讼案。 吉隆坡高庭法官希山慕丁（Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus）今早裁决，当年政府在“烈火莫熄”政改运动高潮时期对阿都马烈所进行的57天扣留是非法的、具有恶意和政治企图。
“在联邦宪法第5条文下，这项逮捕和扣留行动是具有恶意的，所进行的盘问也明显是出于政治目的，与国家安全完全无关。” 法官也表示，有充足的证据证明阿都马烈在扣留期间，曾遭到警方暴力施虐，同时也不被允许会见代表律师。
法官在长达41页的判词中严厉谴责警方行径不人道、残忍及卑鄙，因为阿都马烈不只被非法逮捕及扣留57天，也被殴打、遭受到无法言喻的羞辱以及冗长的身体和精神虐待。 根据法官裁决，阿都马烈在非法扣留方面可获得100万令吉的赔偿；至于所蒙受的虐待及殴打、精神痛苦及羞辱，则另获50万令吉赔偿。
另外警方也必须为滥权付出100万令吉的惩罚性赔偿。阿都马烈也可获得从周四开始计算的8%年利率以及堂费。 没告知逮捕理由违反宪法 现年51岁的阿都马烈是在1998年9月25日中午於国家回教堂出席一场示威活动和发表演说后，就当天晚上被警方援引《1960年内安法令》逮捕。
他被扣留57天获释后，于1999年3月入禀法庭，并将警察政治部官员波汉（Borhan Daud） 、当时的总警长拉欣诺（Abdul Rahim Noor）和大马政府列为答辩人。 在宣誓书中，阿都马烈指自己在扣留期间被迫脱光衣服，在冷气房内淋冷水、遭殴打超过60次直到昏迷、遭性骚扰、被迫喝尿，以及面对注射爱滋针的威胁。
法官今早宣读措辞强烈的判词时指出，警方在逮捕阿都马烈时，仅向阿都马烈重复内安法令的内容，没有说明他可能或即将以什么方式危害国家安全。 “（马烈）从来没有获得警方告知他为何会被逮捕，（波汉）没有详细说明逮捕他的理由”。
法官认为，警方的做法已违反联邦宪法第5（3）条文，被捕者必须被告知逮捕的理由。 指警方内部调查是“骗局” 法官也接受阿都马烈的证词，即警方在扣留期间并没有向他盘问有关国内安全的问题，反集中盘问有关“烈火莫熄”政改运动、前副首相安华以及其他政改运动领袖的情报。
“他在19天单独囚禁期间所接受的盘问内容无关国内安全，但却是政治问题。” 针对阿都马烈指自己在扣留期间多次遭警察人员，包括拉欣诺本人殴打与虐待的指责，也一一获得法官的接纳。 法官解释说，除了医疗报告证实马烈确实曾遭到殴打与虐待之外，警方证人的证词也出现许多相互矛盾的地方。
况且警方和副检察司，在接获阿都马烈投诉遭拉欣诺殴打的严重指责后，竟然没有提控阿都马烈报假案。 “我认为可以做出合理的结论说，副检察司和警方早已知道，起诉人针对拉欣诺和警方的投报内容，拥有许多真实的地方。”
对于警方指他们已针对马烈的报案书展开内部调查，却没有发现任何滥权行为的说辞，法官将之形容为一项“骗局”。 “很遗憾的我必须说明，警方针对起诉人的投报所展开的调查，纯粹是一个骗局。”
谴责前总警长行为卑鄙无耻 在宣读此案的惩罚性赔偿（exemplary damages）时，法官也对前总警长拉欣诺（左图）处理此案的手法做出强烈的谴责。 “当时总警长拉欣诺的卑鄙行为是一项羞耻和侮辱，对他所管辖的部门立下一个恶劣的示范。法庭所判处的惩罚性赔偿，是为了显示法庭对警方严重滥权和使用内安法令的厌恶。”
辩方律师依斯南（Isnan Ishak）在听闻判决后难掩失望之情，当记者趋前询问其全名时，他甚至不愿告诉记者，只表示说“我只是无名小卒”。 他也没有表明辩方是否将会上诉。根据法庭程序，若辩方要进行上诉，就必须在30天内入禀法庭。
高庭判政府非法扣留暴力施虐
前内安法令扣留者获赔250万
郭史光庆07年10月18日 中午12:49
经过8年的漫长审讯后，前内安法令扣留者阿都马烈胡先（Abdul Malek Hussin，左图中）终于起诉政府得直！吉隆坡高庭今日裁决警方和政府在1998年对他进行非法扣留和暴力施虐，必须付出高达250万令吉的损失赔偿。
这也是大马史上，首宗成功起诉政府的内安法令民事诉讼案。 吉隆坡高庭法官希山慕丁（Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus）今早裁决，当年政府在“烈火莫熄”政改运动高潮时期对阿都马烈所进行的57天扣留是非法的、具有恶意和政治企图。
“在联邦宪法第5条文下，这项逮捕和扣留行动是具有恶意的，所进行的盘问也明显是出于政治目的，与国家安全完全无关。” 法官也表示，有充足的证据证明阿都马烈在扣留期间，曾遭到警方暴力施虐，同时也不被允许会见代表律师。
法官在长达41页的判词中严厉谴责警方行径不人道、残忍及卑鄙，因为阿都马烈不只被非法逮捕及扣留57天，也被殴打、遭受到无法言喻的羞辱以及冗长的身体和精神虐待。 根据法官裁决，阿都马烈在非法扣留方面可获得100万令吉的赔偿；至于所蒙受的虐待及殴打、精神痛苦及羞辱，则另获50万令吉赔偿。
另外警方也必须为滥权付出100万令吉的惩罚性赔偿。阿都马烈也可获得从周四开始计算的8%年利率以及堂费。 没告知逮捕理由违反宪法 现年51岁的阿都马烈是在1998年9月25日中午於国家回教堂出席一场示威活动和发表演说后，就当天晚上被警方援引《1960年内安法令》逮捕。
他被扣留57天获释后，于1999年3月入禀法庭，并将警察政治部官员波汉（Borhan Daud） 、当时的总警长拉欣诺（Abdul Rahim Noor）和大马政府列为答辩人。 在宣誓书中，阿都马烈指自己在扣留期间被迫脱光衣服，在冷气房内淋冷水、遭殴打超过60次直到昏迷、遭性骚扰、被迫喝尿，以及面对注射爱滋针的威胁。
法官今早宣读措辞强烈的判词时指出，警方在逮捕阿都马烈时，仅向阿都马烈重复内安法令的内容，没有说明他可能或即将以什么方式危害国家安全。 “（马烈）从来没有获得警方告知他为何会被逮捕，（波汉）没有详细说明逮捕他的理由”。
法官认为，警方的做法已违反联邦宪法第5（3）条文，被捕者必须被告知逮捕的理由。 指警方内部调查是“骗局” 法官也接受阿都马烈的证词，即警方在扣留期间并没有向他盘问有关国内安全的问题，反集中盘问有关“烈火莫熄”政改运动、前副首相安华以及其他政改运动领袖的情报。
“他在19天单独囚禁期间所接受的盘问内容无关国内安全，但却是政治问题。” 针对阿都马烈指自己在扣留期间多次遭警察人员，包括拉欣诺本人殴打与虐待的指责，也一一获得法官的接纳。 法官解释说，除了医疗报告证实马烈确实曾遭到殴打与虐待之外，警方证人的证词也出现许多相互矛盾的地方。
况且警方和副检察司，在接获阿都马烈投诉遭拉欣诺殴打的严重指责后，竟然没有提控阿都马烈报假案。 “我认为可以做出合理的结论说，副检察司和警方早已知道，起诉人针对拉欣诺和警方的投报内容，拥有许多真实的地方。”
对于警方指他们已针对马烈的报案书展开内部调查，却没有发现任何滥权行为的说辞，法官将之形容为一项“骗局”。 “很遗憾的我必须说明，警方针对起诉人的投报所展开的调查，纯粹是一个骗局。”
谴责前总警长行为卑鄙无耻 在宣读此案的惩罚性赔偿（exemplary damages）时，法官也对前总警长拉欣诺（左图）处理此案的手法做出强烈的谴责。 “当时总警长拉欣诺的卑鄙行为是一项羞耻和侮辱，对他所管辖的部门立下一个恶劣的示范。法庭所判处的惩罚性赔偿，是为了显示法庭对警方严重滥权和使用内安法令的厌恶。”
辩方律师依斯南（Isnan Ishak）在听闻判决后难掩失望之情，当记者趋前询问其全名时，他甚至不愿告诉记者，只表示说“我只是无名小卒”。 他也没有表明辩方是否将会上诉。根据法庭程序，若辩方要进行上诉，就必须在30天内入禀法庭。
Friday, October 12, 2007
“首相听真话”不适用于媒体
真话该是耳边絮语，不能公诸于众？
首相啊，您可是支２千６百万人民的薪水啊，跟人民打工，不必负责的吗？
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/73523
新闻部长再努丁本周三召见主流媒体编采高层，指示媒体勿过度渲染负面新闻，更表示首相发出的听真话及透明度承诺，并不适用于媒体。
再努丁是在大马电台与电视台总部（RTM），召见各报章、电视台和《马新社》等高层进行约一小时的会面。
政府最近动作频频，本周内一连两天安排高官召见各主流媒体编采高层，“劝告”媒体别只“报忧不报喜”以及渲染太多负面新闻。
继再努丁之后，政府首席秘书莫哈末西迪也於昨日召见各主流媒体高层及记者，以汇报《2006年国家总稽查司报告》引起的议论，并且要求传媒应多报道正面的新闻。
受首相指示“不时召见媒体”
根据消息转述，再努丁（左图）劈头就告诉媒体，他已获得首相阿都拉的指示，以便在日后不时召见各媒体决策人，针对各种国家课题给予劝告。
不过，他强调，他会见媒体只是给予劝告，而不是警告。
接着，再努丁强调，虽然首相阿都拉自上任后宣布要听真话和秉持透明度的作业，但是首相此言是说给政府内部和国阵成员党听的，以便在内阁会议上坦诚提出讨论，而不是要通过报章和媒体上公开大肆报道，因为一些课题是非常敏感的。
他说，内阁经常都密切关注媒体的报道，发现媒体有时候会误解首相的谈话。但是，他并没有详细指出，究竟首相哪方面的谈话受到误解。
点名两电视台玩弄种族课题
再努丁更点名两家私营电视台，警告不要玩弄种族课题的新闻，并表示以前的报章从来不会以种族角度报道新闻，但是现在的报章“不是在卖报纸，而是卖种族”。
他也重提513种族冲突事件，提醒媒体若继续玩弄种族课题将会引起种族暴动。
他把人民对警方办事能力没有信心，归咎於媒体的负面报道和舆论，同时要求媒体给予警方公平的报道，因为警方并非完全没有破案。
日后不会现场直播巫统大会
针对去年巫统代表大会出现种族极端言论，再努丁坦言，去年的现场直播“是一个大错误”，并表示日后将不会再现场直播巫统大会的辩论环节。
此外，《星洲日报》今日报道，上个月的巫统最高理事会议，已经一致决定取消直播下月初的巫统大会中央代表辩论过程。
报道表示，新闻部去年首次直播巫统大会开会过程，没料到代表们“坦率”的言论竟掀起风波。巫统宣传主任莫哈末泰益证实此事，并表示这主要是因为大马人还没有做好聆听“坦率谈话”的准备。
首相啊，您可是支２千６百万人民的薪水啊，跟人民打工，不必负责的吗？
| 首相听真话”不适用于媒体 再努丁：直播巫统大会是大错 |
| 黄凌风 07年10月12日 下午1:12 |
http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/73523
新闻部长再努丁本周三召见主流媒体编采高层，指示媒体勿过度渲染负面新闻，更表示首相发出的听真话及透明度承诺，并不适用于媒体。
再努丁是在大马电台与电视台总部（RTM），召见各报章、电视台和《马新社》等高层进行约一小时的会面。
政府最近动作频频，本周内一连两天安排高官召见各主流媒体编采高层，“劝告”媒体别只“报忧不报喜”以及渲染太多负面新闻。
继再努丁之后，政府首席秘书莫哈末西迪也於昨日召见各主流媒体高层及记者，以汇报《2006年国家总稽查司报告》引起的议论，并且要求传媒应多报道正面的新闻。
受首相指示“不时召见媒体”
根据消息转述，再努丁（左图）劈头就告诉媒体，他已获得首相阿都拉的指示，以便在日后不时召见各媒体决策人，针对各种国家课题给予劝告。
不过，他强调，他会见媒体只是给予劝告，而不是警告。
接着，再努丁强调，虽然首相阿都拉自上任后宣布要听真话和秉持透明度的作业，但是首相此言是说给政府内部和国阵成员党听的，以便在内阁会议上坦诚提出讨论，而不是要通过报章和媒体上公开大肆报道，因为一些课题是非常敏感的。
他说，内阁经常都密切关注媒体的报道，发现媒体有时候会误解首相的谈话。但是，他并没有详细指出，究竟首相哪方面的谈话受到误解。
点名两电视台玩弄种族课题
再努丁更点名两家私营电视台，警告不要玩弄种族课题的新闻，并表示以前的报章从来不会以种族角度报道新闻，但是现在的报章“不是在卖报纸，而是卖种族”。
他也重提513种族冲突事件，提醒媒体若继续玩弄种族课题将会引起种族暴动。
他把人民对警方办事能力没有信心，归咎於媒体的负面报道和舆论，同时要求媒体给予警方公平的报道，因为警方并非完全没有破案。
日后不会现场直播巫统大会
针对去年巫统代表大会出现种族极端言论，再努丁坦言，去年的现场直播“是一个大错误”，并表示日后将不会再现场直播巫统大会的辩论环节。
此外，《星洲日报》今日报道，上个月的巫统最高理事会议，已经一致决定取消直播下月初的巫统大会中央代表辩论过程。
报道表示，新闻部去年首次直播巫统大会开会过程，没料到代表们“坦率”的言论竟掀起风波。巫统宣传主任莫哈末泰益证实此事，并表示这主要是因为大马人还没有做好聆听“坦率谈话”的准备。
Sunday, October 7, 2007
52 Groups :Restore the Malaysian Judiciary’s Independence
We, the undersigned civil society organizations and political parties, views with extreme concern and alarm, the recent exposé via video recording of controversial lawyer V.K. Lingam speaking on the telephone, allegedly with the then-Chief Judge of Malaya Ahmad Fairuz in 2002 (now Chief Justice) – on the issue of appointment and promotion of judges – spoken with apparent planning with key political and business figures. This episode is one of the most outrageous, scandalous and shameful in the history of the Malaysian Judiciary. It stands as evidence of the present shambles in the Judiciary. The steady decline of the Judiciary can be traced to the unlawful sacking of former Lord President Tun Salleh Abas and two other Supreme Court Judges in 1988, an event which the Judiciary never recovered from. The reputation of the Judiciary has since then been continuously tarnished by numerous controversial decisions and perception of Government control and interference.
The appointment and promotion of judges has long been a controversial issue as there is manifestly a lack of transparency and clear application of universally accepted principles. Numerous senior and deserving judges, as perceived by the general public, with faultless records have not been promoted; instead undeserving and surprising appointment and promotion of judges, including junior ones, have consistently pointed towards political manipulation and maneuvering by the Government in order to secure their influence in the Judiciary and thus favorable judgments. The Judiciary, a fundamental makeup of a democratic, just and fair state, no longer commands international and public confidence but instead seen as weak, corrupt and not free from political control and interference. Immediate steps must be taken to address the judicial rot, restore public confidence and reform the Judiciary.
We also express our strongest reservations on the three-member panel appointed by Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak to investigate the authenticity of the video clip. We find it highly unacceptable that a video clip which implicates members of the cabinet should be investigated by a panel appointed by and reporting to the cabinet. Even more insulting is the fact that the panel is led by former Chief Judge of Malaya Haidar Mohd Noor, whose direct involvement as the then-Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court had led to the unlawful sacking of Lord President Tun Salleh Abas in 1988.
We therefore call for the following actions:
1. To set up a tribunal under Article 125 of the Federal Constitution and for the immediate suspension of the Chief Justice pending the hearing of charges of corruption against him.
2. Setting up of an Independent Royal Commission of Inquiry to investigate the overall state of the Judiciary including but not limited to the following:
· the judicial sacking of Tun Salleh Abas, Tan Sri Wan Suleiman and Datuk George Seah in 1988;
· the swift and questionable promotions of several Federal Court judges;
· the controversial decisions which include the criminal cases involving Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Sukma Darmawan and Munawar Anees; Lim Guan Eng; the Ayer Molek case; the Metramac case, the defamation cases involving V.K. Lingam; the Altantuya case and others, and;
· An investigation into former judge, Syed Idid’s letter which implicates 12 judges by citing 112 serious allegations of corruption and malpractice.
3. Setting up of an Independent Judicial Commission on the Appointment and Promotion of Judges.
Endorsed by:
1. Alaigal
2. Aliran Kesedaran Negara (ALIRAN)
3. All Women’s Action Society (AWAM)
4. Angkatan Muda Parti Keadilan Rakyat (AMK)
5. Artis Pro Activ
6. Center for Independent Journalism (CIJ)
7. Center for Orang Asli Concerns (COAC)
8. Chinese Language Society University Malaya
9. Chinese Language Society University Putra Malaysia
10. Chinese Students Council University Technology Malaysia (CSC UTM)
11. Citizen Think Tank
12. Community Development Center (CDC)
13. Empower (Pusat Janadaya)
14. Food Not Bombs KL
15. Gabungan Anak Muda dan Pelajar (GAMP)
16. Gabungan Pekerja Kilang & Kesatuan(GPKK)
17. Gabungan Peneroka Bandar & Perumahan(GPBP)
18. Group of Concerned Citizen (GCC)
19. Institut Kajian Dasar (IKD)
20. Jaringan Rakyat Tertindas (JERIT)
21. Jawatankuasa Kebajikan Mahasiswa/i (JKMI)
22. Jawatankuasa Sokongan Masyarakat Ladang(JSML)
23. LLG Cultural Development Center (LLG)
24. Malaysian Trade Union Congress (MTUC)
25. Malaysian Voters Union (MALVU)
26. Malaysia Youth and Students Democratic Movement (DEMA)
27. RAKAN, UTM
28. Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR)
29. Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM)
30. Penang Watch
31. Persatuan Alumni PBTUSM Selangor
32. Persatuan Ibubapa SJK(C) Malaysia
33. Persatuan Masyarakat Selangor & Wilayah Persekutuan (PERMAS)
34. Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor
35. Pesticide Action Network Asia and the Pacific (PAN AP)
36. Pusat Khidmat Pekerja Tanjung (PKPT)
37. Pusat KOMAS
38. Selangor Hokkien Association Youth Section
39. Sisters In Islam (SIS)
40. SOS Damansara Committee
41. Save OurSelves (SOS) Penang
42. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM)
43. Tamil Foundation
44. Tenaganita
45. The Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH)
46. The National Human Rights Society (HAKAM)
47. University Malaya Association of New Youth (UMANY)
48. Women Development Collective (WDC)
49. Writers Alliance Media Independence (WAMI)
50. Yayasan Kajian & Pembangunan Masyarakat (YKPM)
51. Youth for Change (Y4C)
52. Youth Section of The KL & Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH-Youth)
http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/letters.php?itemid=8893
The appointment and promotion of judges has long been a controversial issue as there is manifestly a lack of transparency and clear application of universally accepted principles. Numerous senior and deserving judges, as perceived by the general public, with faultless records have not been promoted; instead undeserving and surprising appointment and promotion of judges, including junior ones, have consistently pointed towards political manipulation and maneuvering by the Government in order to secure their influence in the Judiciary and thus favorable judgments. The Judiciary, a fundamental makeup of a democratic, just and fair state, no longer commands international and public confidence but instead seen as weak, corrupt and not free from political control and interference. Immediate steps must be taken to address the judicial rot, restore public confidence and reform the Judiciary.
We also express our strongest reservations on the three-member panel appointed by Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak to investigate the authenticity of the video clip. We find it highly unacceptable that a video clip which implicates members of the cabinet should be investigated by a panel appointed by and reporting to the cabinet. Even more insulting is the fact that the panel is led by former Chief Judge of Malaya Haidar Mohd Noor, whose direct involvement as the then-Chief Registrar of the Supreme Court had led to the unlawful sacking of Lord President Tun Salleh Abas in 1988.
We therefore call for the following actions:
1. To set up a tribunal under Article 125 of the Federal Constitution and for the immediate suspension of the Chief Justice pending the hearing of charges of corruption against him.
2. Setting up of an Independent Royal Commission of Inquiry to investigate the overall state of the Judiciary including but not limited to the following:
· the judicial sacking of Tun Salleh Abas, Tan Sri Wan Suleiman and Datuk George Seah in 1988;
· the swift and questionable promotions of several Federal Court judges;
· the controversial decisions which include the criminal cases involving Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Sukma Darmawan and Munawar Anees; Lim Guan Eng; the Ayer Molek case; the Metramac case, the defamation cases involving V.K. Lingam; the Altantuya case and others, and;
· An investigation into former judge, Syed Idid’s letter which implicates 12 judges by citing 112 serious allegations of corruption and malpractice.
3. Setting up of an Independent Judicial Commission on the Appointment and Promotion of Judges.
Endorsed by:
1. Alaigal
2. Aliran Kesedaran Negara (ALIRAN)
3. All Women’s Action Society (AWAM)
4. Angkatan Muda Parti Keadilan Rakyat (AMK)
5. Artis Pro Activ
6. Center for Independent Journalism (CIJ)
7. Center for Orang Asli Concerns (COAC)
8. Chinese Language Society University Malaya
9. Chinese Language Society University Putra Malaysia
10. Chinese Students Council University Technology Malaysia (CSC UTM)
11. Citizen Think Tank
12. Community Development Center (CDC)
13. Empower (Pusat Janadaya)
14. Food Not Bombs KL
15. Gabungan Anak Muda dan Pelajar (GAMP)
16. Gabungan Pekerja Kilang & Kesatuan(GPKK)
17. Gabungan Peneroka Bandar & Perumahan(GPBP)
18. Group of Concerned Citizen (GCC)
19. Institut Kajian Dasar (IKD)
20. Jaringan Rakyat Tertindas (JERIT)
21. Jawatankuasa Kebajikan Mahasiswa/i (JKMI)
22. Jawatankuasa Sokongan Masyarakat Ladang(JSML)
23. LLG Cultural Development Center (LLG)
24. Malaysian Trade Union Congress (MTUC)
25. Malaysian Voters Union (MALVU)
26. Malaysia Youth and Students Democratic Movement (DEMA)
27. RAKAN, UTM
28. Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR)
29. Parti Sosialis Malaysia (PSM)
30. Penang Watch
31. Persatuan Alumni PBTUSM Selangor
32. Persatuan Ibubapa SJK(C) Malaysia
33. Persatuan Masyarakat Selangor & Wilayah Persekutuan (PERMAS)
34. Persatuan Sahabat Wanita Selangor
35. Pesticide Action Network Asia and the Pacific (PAN AP)
36. Pusat Khidmat Pekerja Tanjung (PKPT)
37. Pusat KOMAS
38. Selangor Hokkien Association Youth Section
39. Sisters In Islam (SIS)
40. SOS Damansara Committee
41. Save OurSelves (SOS) Penang
42. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM)
43. Tamil Foundation
44. Tenaganita
45. The Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH)
46. The National Human Rights Society (HAKAM)
47. University Malaya Association of New Youth (UMANY)
48. Women Development Collective (WDC)
49. Writers Alliance Media Independence (WAMI)
50. Yayasan Kajian & Pembangunan Masyarakat (YKPM)
51. Youth for Change (Y4C)
52. Youth Section of The KL & Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH-Youth)
http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/letters.php?itemid=8893
警察无责，难道政治人物也无责吗?
婦孺被毆性侵 雪蘭莪最嚴重
-6th Oct 2007（吉隆坡5日訊）武吉安曼警察總部資料顯示，青少年及婦女遭暴力及性侵犯案件在過去3年，雪蘭莪成為全國之冠！
全國刑事調查主任拿督尹樹基表示，從資料顯示，無論強姦、亂倫、非禮、肉體虐待、違反自然行為的案件，雪州是全國最嚴重的州屬之一。
他說，單單青少年強姦案，雪州在過去3年共發生695宗，其中2006年發生最多即259宗。緊接下來的州屬包括柔佛（676宗）及吉打（439宗）。相反的，玻璃市是眾多州屬中，青少年強姦案機率最低，警方過去3年只接獲50宗案。
拿督尹樹基今日受邀出席由婦女、家庭與社會發展部召開的一項《與媒體討論兒童保護措施》會議時，發表上述最新的數據。
4309宗未成年者被強姦
警方綜合過去3年的數據，發現全國18歲以下的未成年少年，受到強姦、亂倫、非禮、肉體虐待及違反自然行為的機率偏高。其中未成年強姦案共發生4309宗，而成年強姦案則發生1870宗；不過，成年非禮案則比未成年非禮案多，分別接獲2802宗及2225宗。
尹樹基較后向《東方日報》指出，雪州成為兒童及婦女暴力案件的全國之冠，是警方無法作出任何防範的罪案，警方只能配合各部門在學校等場合進行教育運動。
「警方無法防範強姦案，因為這關係到家庭教育的問題，我們只能夠配合政府部門展開教育運動，改變民眾的思維。」
他指出，數據中也顯示，年齡介于13歲至15歲的青少年最容易受到性侵犯，在過去3年，共有818人遭受強姦，至于16至18歲青少年，有368人被強姦。未成年的強姦案在2006年首7個月最為嚴重，即1708宗，而今年則報1327宗，相比去年已有明顯下降趨勢。
至于肉體虐待方面，男性青少年遠比女性青少年所承受的虐待機率高，男孩在過去3年共有74人被虐待，而女子則有42人被虐待。
http://www.orientaldaily.com.my/
Aliran : Stop harassing the whistle-blowers
Aliran calls upon the ACA to stop harassing people who come forward in the national interest to provide incriminating evidence in an attempt to expose corruption in high places. This was what R Sivarasa did when he made a report to the ACA. His action must be deemed as a citizen’s national service. It must be viewed as a patriotic duty. Sivarasa’s action must be commended.
But why is the ACA threatening him and his colleague, Sim Tze Tzin, with a penalty of two years jail, a fine of RM10,000 or both if they do not reveal the source of their information? Why can’t they appreciate that sometimes information is given in the strictest confidence and that has to be honoured? When once this trust is betrayed, it only means that others will not come forward to provide any information.
This prompts us to ask: Is that what the ACA is trying to do? Are they trying to discourage concerned citizens from acting in the national interest? Why should they do this? Are they trying to protect the image of the BN government and put a lid on corruption by going after the whistle-blowers?
Their conduct suggests this. It also seems to imply that they are nothing but stooges of the government. This perception does them no good neither does it put the BN government in good light.
Why are they so interested in the recorder of the tape rather than the content of the tape? Lingam has been caught trying to fix certain appointments in the judiciary. From the way he is seen talking, it appears that it is not a one-off incident. He must have been playing this role all the while. He can even get you a Tan Sri award just like that!
Shouldn’t the ACA go after Lingam to confirm the contents of his conversation? Logically, that would be a very important first step. Secondly, he should be asked to confirm if he was speaking to the Chief Judge of Malaysia. Thirdly, the ACA should investigate whether all the names mentioned were promoted or appointed in the judicial hierarchy. Fourthly, the ACA should find out when the Chief Judge of Malaysia was conferred his Tan Sri-ship.
If we followed this path of investigation, the role of the person who recorded the conversation becomes not all that important compared to what he recorded to expose corruption.
In addition, we should not overlook the fact that when a Royal Commission of Inquiry is appointed, the people with this vital information have agreed to disclose the identity of their informant. Anything said or anyone appearing before such a Commission is given immunity from prosecution. Another important aspect of this Commission of Inquiry is that evidence is given in open court and that provides protection. If for some reason or other, any untoward incident were to happen to the informant, then the whole world would know why that took place. This is an important guarantee that must be insisted on. Is this too difficult to understand?
Aliran calls upon the BN government to disband the three-man committee and appoint a Royal Commission of Inquiry that can be expected to produce results - that is if it is really interested in finding out the truth.
P Ramakrishnan
President
http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/letters.php?itemid=8891
But why is the ACA threatening him and his colleague, Sim Tze Tzin, with a penalty of two years jail, a fine of RM10,000 or both if they do not reveal the source of their information? Why can’t they appreciate that sometimes information is given in the strictest confidence and that has to be honoured? When once this trust is betrayed, it only means that others will not come forward to provide any information.
This prompts us to ask: Is that what the ACA is trying to do? Are they trying to discourage concerned citizens from acting in the national interest? Why should they do this? Are they trying to protect the image of the BN government and put a lid on corruption by going after the whistle-blowers?
Their conduct suggests this. It also seems to imply that they are nothing but stooges of the government. This perception does them no good neither does it put the BN government in good light.
Why are they so interested in the recorder of the tape rather than the content of the tape? Lingam has been caught trying to fix certain appointments in the judiciary. From the way he is seen talking, it appears that it is not a one-off incident. He must have been playing this role all the while. He can even get you a Tan Sri award just like that!
Shouldn’t the ACA go after Lingam to confirm the contents of his conversation? Logically, that would be a very important first step. Secondly, he should be asked to confirm if he was speaking to the Chief Judge of Malaysia. Thirdly, the ACA should investigate whether all the names mentioned were promoted or appointed in the judicial hierarchy. Fourthly, the ACA should find out when the Chief Judge of Malaysia was conferred his Tan Sri-ship.
If we followed this path of investigation, the role of the person who recorded the conversation becomes not all that important compared to what he recorded to expose corruption.
In addition, we should not overlook the fact that when a Royal Commission of Inquiry is appointed, the people with this vital information have agreed to disclose the identity of their informant. Anything said or anyone appearing before such a Commission is given immunity from prosecution. Another important aspect of this Commission of Inquiry is that evidence is given in open court and that provides protection. If for some reason or other, any untoward incident were to happen to the informant, then the whole world would know why that took place. This is an important guarantee that must be insisted on. Is this too difficult to understand?
Aliran calls upon the BN government to disband the three-man committee and appoint a Royal Commission of Inquiry that can be expected to produce results - that is if it is really interested in finding out the truth.
P Ramakrishnan
President
http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/letters.php?itemid=8891
Suaram : Protect whistle blowers instead of targeting them
The Steering Committee to Free the Judiciary, comprising of various organizations, political parties and individuals, views with increasing serious concern and alarm the recent development concerning the video clip scandal and the independence of the judiciary.
We are outraged and appalled that the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) has threatened PKR (National Justice Party) vice-president Sivarasa Rasiah and assistant to Anwar Ibrahim, Sim Tze Tzin with prosecution under Section 29(c) of the Anti-Corruption Act 1997, if they fail to reveal the source of the video clip. If convicted, under Section 58 of the same Act, they face a fine of up to RM10,000 or two years imprisonment.
The source of the video clip should not be the ACA’s utmost concern. The ACA, instead of targeting the whistle blowers, should instead investigate the content of the video clip and the persons mentioned in the same, as very serious allegations of corrupt practices and abuse of power have prima facie been committed. As the ACA is generally not able to protect whistle blowers, Sivarasa and Sim have every right to protect the source of the video clip and they have been proven right by the ACA’s action. This development has once again reinforced the long held perception that while influential officials and businessmen are able to get away with serious crimes, whistle blowers are instead made to pay for daring to expose the wrong doings.
We further view this scandalous and disgraceful threat as politically motivated and done in bad faith. It is an act calculated to intimidate and silent Sivarasa and Sim, and also to send a strong message to other potential whistle blowers and human rights defenders. This trend of targeting whistle blowers and human rights defenders will unfortunately bring about a chilling effect and discourage others from coming forward and exposing the wrong doings of influential officials and businessmen.
If the ACA is serious in combating corruption and salvaging whatever little credibility and confidence it still retain, it must immediately revoke the threat of prosecution against Sivarasa and Sim and protect whistle blowers. The ACA instead must investigate the content of the video clip and the persons mentioned in the same.
Yap Swee Seng
Executive Director
SUARAM
http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/letters.php?itemid=8887
We are outraged and appalled that the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) has threatened PKR (National Justice Party) vice-president Sivarasa Rasiah and assistant to Anwar Ibrahim, Sim Tze Tzin with prosecution under Section 29(c) of the Anti-Corruption Act 1997, if they fail to reveal the source of the video clip. If convicted, under Section 58 of the same Act, they face a fine of up to RM10,000 or two years imprisonment.
The source of the video clip should not be the ACA’s utmost concern. The ACA, instead of targeting the whistle blowers, should instead investigate the content of the video clip and the persons mentioned in the same, as very serious allegations of corrupt practices and abuse of power have prima facie been committed. As the ACA is generally not able to protect whistle blowers, Sivarasa and Sim have every right to protect the source of the video clip and they have been proven right by the ACA’s action. This development has once again reinforced the long held perception that while influential officials and businessmen are able to get away with serious crimes, whistle blowers are instead made to pay for daring to expose the wrong doings.
We further view this scandalous and disgraceful threat as politically motivated and done in bad faith. It is an act calculated to intimidate and silent Sivarasa and Sim, and also to send a strong message to other potential whistle blowers and human rights defenders. This trend of targeting whistle blowers and human rights defenders will unfortunately bring about a chilling effect and discourage others from coming forward and exposing the wrong doings of influential officials and businessmen.
If the ACA is serious in combating corruption and salvaging whatever little credibility and confidence it still retain, it must immediately revoke the threat of prosecution against Sivarasa and Sim and protect whistle blowers. The ACA instead must investigate the content of the video clip and the persons mentioned in the same.
Yap Swee Seng
Executive Director
SUARAM
http://malaysia-today.net/blog2006/letters.php?itemid=8887
Friday, October 5, 2007
Solidarity to Burma People Series
In Solidarity with Burma People , Do Come Joint Us!
The uprising of the anti-junta protests began when more than 100,000 Buddhist monks and their supporters flooded the streets of Burma's biggest city Rangoon on 24 September 2007. The violence began two days ago later when the security forces fired tear gas and live bullets into the streets and beat protesters. The death in toll is now in the hundreds and some media have estimated this to be thousands in the crackdown on demonstration of Buddhist monks and Burma's people.
The crackdown has triggered protests and demonstrations throughout the world. We as civil society in Malaysia very concern on this issue and would like to give our solidarity support to the people of Burma. So that, we call for the following programs:
Solidarity to Burma People Series
Organizer : Civil Rights Committee of Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH-CRC), Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM), Youth For Change (Y4C), Amnesty International Malaysia (AI Malaysia)
1. Solidarity Vigil In Support of Burma’s People
Date: Friday, 5 October 2007
Time: 8 p.m.
Venue: KLCC (entrance nearest to Menara Maxis, opposite Avenue K)
The peaceful solidarity vigil is to support of Burma's people, who are unable to exercise their human rights in their country, and to express our opposition towards the Burma military junta's bloody crackdown on anti-government protests. The death in toll is now in the hundreds and some media have estimated this to be thousands in the crackdown on demonstration of Buddhist monks and Burma's people.
Please come to show your solidarity. Please bring candles, candle-holders and banners. For further information, please contact SUARAM (MoonHui) at 03-77843525 or Amnesty International (K.Shan) at 03-79552680.
2. Forum on Burma: Road to Democracy (English)
Date : 8th ,October,2007 (Monday)
Time : 7:30pm (video showing) ; 8.00pm (forum starts)
Venue : Auditorium, KLSCAH, 1 Jalan Maharajalela, , 50150 Kuala Lumpur.
(beside the Monorail stesen Maharajalela ) For detail,please visit scah
Languages : English
Speaker:
1. Lim Kit Siang (ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus Committee Member)
2. Mohammad Sadek (Burmese refugee, General Secretary of Rohingyah Youth Development Forum (Malaysia))
3. Charles Santiago（Director ,Monitoring Sustainability of Globalization (MSN)）
4. Aegile Fernandez (Tenaganita)
5. Representative from Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHS)
Some Speakers are yet to be confirmed
Chairperson : Elizabeth Wong (Secretariat Member of SUARAM)
3. Forum on Burma: Road to Democracy (Chinese)
Date : 9th ,October,2007 (Tuesday)
Time : 7:30pm (video showing) ; 8.00pm (forum starts)
Venue : Auditorium, KLSCAH, 1 Jalan Maharajalela, , 50150 Kuala Lumpur.
(beside the Monorail stesen Maharajalela ) For detail,please visit scah
speaker : Ven. Shih Miao Jan(director , Prajnagraha）
Josh Hong (Malaysiakini columnist)
Yap Swee Seng (Executive Director ,SUARAM )
Chairperson : Liau Kok Fah (member, KLSCAH-CRC )
Languages : Chinese
For further information, please contact KLSCAH secretariat, Mr Chan 03-22746645 or SUARAM ,03-77843525.
The uprising of the anti-junta protests began when more than 100,000 Buddhist monks and their supporters flooded the streets of Burma's biggest city Rangoon on 24 September 2007. The violence began two days ago later when the security forces fired tear gas and live bullets into the streets and beat protesters. The death in toll is now in the hundreds and some media have estimated this to be thousands in the crackdown on demonstration of Buddhist monks and Burma's people.
The crackdown has triggered protests and demonstrations throughout the world. We as civil society in Malaysia very concern on this issue and would like to give our solidarity support to the people of Burma. So that, we call for the following programs:
Solidarity to Burma People Series
Organizer : Civil Rights Committee of Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH-CRC), Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM), Youth For Change (Y4C), Amnesty International Malaysia (AI Malaysia)
1. Solidarity Vigil In Support of Burma’s People
Date: Friday, 5 October 2007
Time: 8 p.m.
Venue: KLCC (entrance nearest to Menara Maxis, opposite Avenue K)
The peaceful solidarity vigil is to support of Burma's people, who are unable to exercise their human rights in their country, and to express our opposition towards the Burma military junta's bloody crackdown on anti-government protests. The death in toll is now in the hundreds and some media have estimated this to be thousands in the crackdown on demonstration of Buddhist monks and Burma's people.
Please come to show your solidarity. Please bring candles, candle-holders and banners. For further information, please contact SUARAM (MoonHui) at 03-77843525 or Amnesty International (K.Shan) at 03-79552680.
2. Forum on Burma: Road to Democracy (English)
Date : 8th ,October,2007 (Monday)
Time : 7:30pm (video showing) ; 8.00pm (forum starts)
Venue : Auditorium, KLSCAH, 1 Jalan Maharajalela, , 50150 Kuala Lumpur.
(beside the Monorail stesen Maharajalela ) For detail,please visit scah
Languages : English
Speaker:
1. Lim Kit Siang (ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Myanmar Caucus Committee Member)
2. Mohammad Sadek (Burmese refugee, General Secretary of Rohingyah Youth Development Forum (Malaysia))
3. Charles Santiago（Director ,Monitoring Sustainability of Globalization (MSN)）
4. Aegile Fernandez (Tenaganita)
5. Representative from Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism (MCCBCHS)
Some Speakers are yet to be confirmed
Chairperson : Elizabeth Wong (Secretariat Member of SUARAM)
3. Forum on Burma: Road to Democracy (Chinese)
Date : 9th ,October,2007 (Tuesday)
Time : 7:30pm (video showing) ; 8.00pm (forum starts)
Venue : Auditorium, KLSCAH, 1 Jalan Maharajalela, , 50150 Kuala Lumpur.
(beside the Monorail stesen Maharajalela ) For detail,please visit scah
speaker : Ven. Shih Miao Jan(director , Prajnagraha）
Josh Hong (Malaysiakini columnist)
Yap Swee Seng (Executive Director ,SUARAM )
Chairperson : Liau Kok Fah (member, KLSCAH-CRC )
Languages : Chinese
For further information, please contact KLSCAH secretariat, Mr Chan 03-22746645 or SUARAM ,03-77843525.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
1988年司法危机新内情 哈密为保权位同意审沙列 'If I don't accept, I'll be sacked'
| 07年10月1日 下午2:38 |
当时出任代最高法院院长的哈密奥玛所领导的仲裁庭，裁决前最高法院院长（今称联邦法院首席大法官）沙列阿巴斯“司法行为不当”的罪名成立，最后导致后者遭中止职权。
哈密奥玛的做法受到司法界强烈的批评，因为哈密奥玛是沙列阿巴斯的下属，也是继承沙列阿巴斯职位的下一位人士，拥有明显的利益冲突。
“谁来赔偿我失去的酬劳？”
在1988年司法危机发生时刚卸下律师公会主席职的巴兰，上周六在吉隆坡一场讲座上，首次揭露当时他率领代表团与哈密奥玛会晤的情况。
“我们去会见哈密奥玛，劝告他不要接受委任（领导仲裁委员会），原因很明显，他是继承（沙列阿巴斯）的下一人......我劝告哈密奥玛‘请不要（接受），你将让司法界非常难堪’。”
“他的反应是，‘巴兰，你言重了，如果我不接受，我将会被开除；如果我被开除，你或你的律师公会会赔偿我失去的酬劳吗？’”
巴兰透露，当时他并未放弃，进一步建议哈密奥玛向最高元首进言，结果对方却回敬他，“巴兰，如果你要这么做，你自己可以去劝告最高元首”。
曾出任联合国司法独立特派专员的巴兰表示，上述的谈话内容不曾对外公开或记录过。
他也解释说，当时的律师公会主席拉惹阿兹（Raja Aziz Addruse）无法率领与哈密奥玛会晤的代表团，因为拉惹阿兹正是沙列阿巴斯的代表律师。
这 场题为“从努琳到首席大法官，法律与秩序的崩溃？”的讲座，由政策研究机构（Institut Kajian Dasar）主办，吸引约250名出席者。另外3名主讲人分别是人民公正党实权领袖安华 、国际透明大马分会前主席东姑阿都阿兹（Tunku Abdul Aziz）和大马律师公会秘书林志伟。
全文：http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/73051
Why did former lord president Hamid Omar refuse to withdraw from chairing a tribunal that led to the removal of his boss, Salleh Abas, during the 1988 judicial crisis?
The answer was revealed by Param Cumaraswamy - the immediate past president of the Bar Council during the 1988 crisis - at a forum in Kuala Lumpur on Saturday.
In 1988, Salleh, the former lord president, was found guilty of judicial misconduct by a special tribunal chaired by Hamid. At that time, Hamid was acting lord president and next in line to succeed Salleh.
Strong objections, especially from the Bar Council, were raised then over Hamid’s role in the tribunal.
At Saturday’s forum, attended by some 250 people, Param disclosed what had transpired at a meeting between a Bar Council delegation led by him and Hamid.
“We went to see Hamid to advise him not to accept the position for the obvious reason that he was next in line. I advised Hamid ‘please don’t (accept), you will cause a very ugly embarrassment to the judiciary,” he said.
“His (Hamid’s) response was ‘Param, if I don’t accept, I will be sacked. If I am sacked, will you or your Bar Council compensate my losses of remuneration?’” he added.
He further quoted Hamid as telling him, “Param, if you want, you can go and advise the King.”
Param, who is also the former UN special rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, said he retorted by telling Hamid that the latter was in a better position to advise the King.
According to him, this conversation with Hamid was never made public or documented until now.
Monday, October 1, 2007
缅甸军政府威胁区域稳定 应该重新启动民主路线图
缅甸军政府威胁区域稳定
应该重新启动民主路线图
日期／Oct 01, 2007 ■时间／03:48:45 pm■新闻／党团观点 ■作者／隆雪华堂
【党团文告/吉隆坡暨雪兰莪中华大会堂】吉隆坡暨雪兰莪中华大会堂严厉谴责缅甸军政府近期血腥镇压国内僧侣发起的和平民主运动，如此之暴行背离国际人道精神与民主潮流，同时也威胁亚洲区域稳定与和平发展。
军政府应该回归2003年提出的民主路线图，放弃专断，容纳民主力量，召开不分党派的全国制宪大会，举行大选，还政予民。为示诚意，军政府应该解除民主领袖昂山素姬的软禁，并实行大赦，释放政治犯。
隆雪华堂认为，缅甸军政府多年不顾国际社会反对，强行铁腕政策压制民主与边疆部族，造成社会撕裂，民不聊生，民怨积深难解，因此才引发近期庞大的示威浪潮。僧侣阶层这次站出来表达不满，发挥了社会良知的巨大作用，这种道德勇气值得各方嘉许与支持。
隆雪华堂呼吁各界关注缅甸的形势发展，同时支持该国的民主运动。缅甸军政府应该公布近期遭射杀示威民众的实际人数，同时承担镇压责任，向全国人民道歉。另外，军政府应调查日本籍记者长井建司遭枪杀事故，以解释其是否遭近距离射杀。
隆雪华堂也谴责缅甸军政府封锁国内情势讯息，上述外国通讯记者遭不明枪击死亡，表明新闻讯息自由流通受到严重威胁，在事实真相受到压制之际，可能使镇压举措更加毫无顾忌，愈加赤裸。隆雪华堂认为缅甸的情势攸关东盟区域的稳定发展，缅甸军政府的强硬举措等于自绝于东盟的合作精神之外，并对区域合作与团结构成最大的伤害。
隆雪华堂欣慰东盟遵从民主人道大义，谴责缅甸军政府的血腥镇压，东盟应该进一步采取更实际有效的举措，迫使该国停止暴行。中国长期与缅甸军政府保持友好关系，应该在此关键时刻予以劝戒，不应继续袒护其暴行。中国乃本区域大国，近年提倡和平崛起与和谐社会，更应发挥其道义责任，促进区域和平稳定
http://www.merdekareview.com/news.php?n=5047
Myanmar Military Junta Should Restore The "Road Map To Democracy"
The Kuala Lumpur and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH) strongly condemns the bloody crackdown by the military junta in Myanmar on the recent peaceful democracy movement led by the Buddhist monks. Such atrocity defies the global trend of humanitarianism and democracy, as well as threatens the stability of Asia-Pacific region.
The military junta in Myanmar should revert to the democratization road map proposed by its former Prime Minister Khin Nyunt in 2003. It should abandon authoritarianism and restore democracy by convening a cross-party national constituent assembly and holding democratic elections with full participation of all democratic forces in the country. To show its good faith, the military junta should also immediately free all political dissidents and prisoners of conscience including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of National League for Democracy(NLD)which won the 1990 elections who had been under house-arrest for years.
Years of the military junta’s suppression of democracy and Myanmar’s ethnic minorities are what have triggered the recent wave of massive demonstrations. Therefore, the Burmese monks who have stood up to express their discontents and functioned as the nation’s conscience deserve commendation and support from the international community.
KLSCAH urges the public to express their concern on the situation in Myanmar as well as the support for the democratic movement there. KLSCAH also calls on the military junta in Myanmar to disclose the actual casualty figures, to take full responsibility and to apologize to the Myanmarese people for the brutal crackdown. The military junta should also carry out a thorough investigation into the death of a Japanese video journalist, Mr Kenji Nagai, apparently shot dead from a close distance.
KLSCAH also condemns the military junta for imposing information blockade in the country. The death of Mr Nagai under gunfire underlines the grave threat on press freedom. The suppression may accelerate and intensify when the truth is suppressed.
As the development in Myanmar affects the stable development in the ASEAN region, the bloody repression by the military junta has caused great damage on regional cooperation and solidarity, hence alienating itself from the rest of the regional group.
KLSCAH is therefore glad to see ASEAN condemning the military junta’s bloody repression on the grounds of humanitarianism and democracy. However, KLSCAH insists that ASEAN should take more practical and effective measures to end the atrocities. China, a close ally and strong backer of the military regime in Myanmar, should at this critical moment advise the latter against any more violent crackdown instead of indirectly condoning it. As a key player in the Asia-Pacific region which actively portraits its “peaceful rise” overseas and promotes a “harmonious society” at home, China has the moral duty to play a greater role in ensuring the peace and stability of the region.
President of KLSCAH,Dato’ Bong Hon Liong
The military junta in Myanmar should revert to the democratization road map proposed by its former Prime Minister Khin Nyunt in 2003. It should abandon authoritarianism and restore democracy by convening a cross-party national constituent assembly and holding democratic elections with full participation of all democratic forces in the country. To show its good faith, the military junta should also immediately free all political dissidents and prisoners of conscience including Daw Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of National League for Democracy(NLD)which won the 1990 elections who had been under house-arrest for years.
Years of the military junta’s suppression of democracy and Myanmar’s ethnic minorities are what have triggered the recent wave of massive demonstrations. Therefore, the Burmese monks who have stood up to express their discontents and functioned as the nation’s conscience deserve commendation and support from the international community.
KLSCAH urges the public to express their concern on the situation in Myanmar as well as the support for the democratic movement there. KLSCAH also calls on the military junta in Myanmar to disclose the actual casualty figures, to take full responsibility and to apologize to the Myanmarese people for the brutal crackdown. The military junta should also carry out a thorough investigation into the death of a Japanese video journalist, Mr Kenji Nagai, apparently shot dead from a close distance.
KLSCAH also condemns the military junta for imposing information blockade in the country. The death of Mr Nagai under gunfire underlines the grave threat on press freedom. The suppression may accelerate and intensify when the truth is suppressed.
As the development in Myanmar affects the stable development in the ASEAN region, the bloody repression by the military junta has caused great damage on regional cooperation and solidarity, hence alienating itself from the rest of the regional group.
KLSCAH is therefore glad to see ASEAN condemning the military junta’s bloody repression on the grounds of humanitarianism and democracy. However, KLSCAH insists that ASEAN should take more practical and effective measures to end the atrocities. China, a close ally and strong backer of the military regime in Myanmar, should at this critical moment advise the latter against any more violent crackdown instead of indirectly condoning it. As a key player in the Asia-Pacific region which actively portraits its “peaceful rise” overseas and promotes a “harmonious society” at home, China has the moral duty to play a greater role in ensuring the peace and stability of the region.
President of KLSCAH,Dato’ Bong Hon Liong
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)