Digest on Malaysian News

It's a landmark case in Malaysia whereby, Perlis Syariah High Court allow Muslim converts to renounce Islam and return to their previous religion or faith.

And kudos to the Syariah Court chief judge Othman Ibrahim who decide to let a Muslim convert, a Chinese female Siti Fatimah Tan Abdullah to renounce Islam and go back to her previous faith.

Chief Judge of the Syariah Court granted Siti Fatimah a declaration that she was no longer a Muslim, and ordered the defendant, the state Islamic Religious Council (MAIPP), to cancel her certificate of conversion to Islam.

After years of waiting, Siti Fatimah's battle is however only half-won since her religious status on her identity card (MyKad) cannot be amended until she deal with the National Registration Department.

For decades, non-Muslim Malaysian have dreaded the Syariah law whereby a Muslim convert will forever remain a Muslim even though the convert no longer practice the religion due to circumstances like separation from their Muslim spouse.

Next on the spotlight would be regarding the case of a Sabahan lady by the name of Lina Joy, who also for years has renounce Islam and wanted to revert to her old faith. Both Syariah Court and civil High Court have yet to decided on the matter.

Related post:
* TheStar: Syariah High Court lets Muslim convert renounce Islam and go back to Buddhism




If you like this informative post, please subscribe to my full RSS Feed

Raja Petra Raja Kamarudin or better known as RPK, an Malaysian influential blogger is taken to jail after declining bail on sedition charge relating to his article "Let’s send the Altantuya murderers to hell" that he composed and posted in his Malaysia-Today.net site.

He is accused of publishing the article that alleged to have contained nine paragraphs of seditious words. Some of the paragraphs are personal ramblings of his and some are illustration made by others that he quoted.

When I read through the post, the following nine paragraphs could be:

1. "... Melayu babi, the whole lot of them". RPK is referring to the culprits and those who tried to cover up case evidences NOT all the Malays.

2. "... while the Altantuya murder trial is halfway through and long before we can see the end of what many consider a show-trial in a kangaroo court." Yes, Altantuya murder trial gain all the spotlights and some attempt by certain parties is making the trial into a circus.

3. "... the belief that there is some very damaging evidence in that Affidavit and which the government is trying to hide. ". High possibility unless the government reveal the real contents of the Affidavit to clear the air.

4. " Najib, Rosmah and Musa have also been implicated in this entire thing". For the time being, it a mere rambling speculation made by RPK.

5. "The Attorney-General made it appear like he knows the outcome of the trial even before the trail commenced?". Food for thought.

6. "The three accused deny killing Altantuya yet the police knew exactly where to go to look for the remains. How did the police know where to go when the three denied killing her?". Food for thought.

7. "It makes one wonder whether the police knew where to go because it is a ‘gazetted dumpsite’ where all ‘bumped off’ people are disposed. ". Another RPK rambling.

8. ".... were matters such as how Altantuya’s immigration records could be erased from the Immigration computers, the letters Najib wrote to the Malaysian embassy supporting Altantuya’s visa application, the photograph of Altantuya, Najib, Razak and Kalimullah taken during Altantuya’s birthday party in the Mandarin Hotel in Singapore, and much more.". The truth is out there.

9. "This is about the Prime Minister of Malaysia withholding crucial evidence in a murder trial.". RPK is making the old man pissed off.

RPK will be pull to court for sedition charges and Law of Sedition (i.e Malaysian version) can be very repressive and one-sided. This incident illustrates that RPK is very influential and the government really can't stand his rambling. Maybe some of his remark are true that the government want to silent him. This incident also show that RPK has many followers, that when he ask for donation to pay for his possible maximum fines of RM5,000, he received over RM30,000 within hours from fellow bloggers.



Malaysia Sedition Act

The Sedition Act in Malaysia is a law prohibiting discourse deemed as seditious. The act was originally enacted by the colonial authorities of British Malaya in 1948. The act criminalises speech with "seditious tendency", including that which would "bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against" the government or engender "feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races".

The latter provision includes the questioning of certain portions of the Constitution of Malaysia, namely those pertaining to the Malaysian social contract, such as Article 153, which deals with special rights for the bumiputra (Malays and other indigenous peoples, who comprise over half the Malaysian population). More on Malaysia Sedition Act (Law)

Updated:
* Aug 28, 2008: How to access RPK MalaysiaToday blog
* Aug 26, 2008: Raja Petra Kamarudin's blog MalaysiaToday blocked by the government

Related posts:
* Tan Sri Dr Nordin Kardi wins the first battle (against RPK)


If you like this informative post, please subscribe to my full RSS Feed

The Sedition Act in Malaysia is a law prohibiting discourse deemed as seditious. The act was originally enacted by the colonial authorities of British Malaya in 1948. The act criminalises speech with "seditious tendency", including that which would "bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against" the government or engender "feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races". The latter provision includes the questioning of certain portions of the Constitution of Malaysia, namely those pertaining to the Malaysian social contract, such as Article 153, which deals with special rights for the bumiputra (Malays and other indigenous peoples, who comprise over half the Malaysian population).


History

The law was introduced by the British in 1948, the same year that the autonomous Federation of Malaya came into being, with the intent of curbing opposition to colonial rule. The law remained on the statute books through independence in 1957, and the merger with Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore that formed Malaysia.

The Federal Constitution of Malaya and later Malaysia permitted Parliament to impose restrictions on the freedom of speech granted by the Constitution. After the May 13 Incident, when racial riots in the capital of Kuala Lumpur led to at least 200 deaths, the government amended the Constitution to expand the scope of limitations on freedom of speech. The Constitution (Amendment) Act 1971 named Articles 152, 153, and 181, and also Part III of the Constitution as specially protected, permitting Parliament to pass legislation that would limit dissent with regard to these provisions pertaining to the social contract. (The social contract is essentially a quid pro quo agreement between the Malay and non-Malay citizens of Malaysia; in return for granting the non-Malays citizenship at independence, symbols of Malay authority such as the Malay monarchy became national symbols, and the Malays were granted special economic privileges.) With this new power, Parliament then amended the Sedition Act accordingly. The new restrictions also applied to Members of Parliament, overruling Parliamentary immunity; at the same time, Article 159, which governs Constitutional amendments, was amended to entrench the "sensitive" Constitutional provisions; in addition to the consent of Parliament, any changes to the "sensitive" portions of the Constitution would now have to pass the Conference of Rulers, a body comprising the monarchs of the Malay states.

These later amendments were harshly criticised by the opposition parties in Parliament, who had campaigned for greater political equality for non-Malays in the 1969 general election. Despite their opposition, the ruling Alliance (later Barisan Nasional) coalition government passed the amendments, having maintained the necessary two-thirds Parliamentary majority. In Britain, the laws were condemned, with The Times of London stating they would "preserve as immutable the feudal system dominating Malay society" by "giving this archaic body of petty constitutional monarchs incredible blocking power"; the move was cast as hypocritical, given that Deputy Prime Minister Tun Abdul Razak had spoke of "the full realization that important matters must no longer be swept under the carpet..."

Provisions

The Sedition Act would be unconstitutional, as the Constitution guarantees freedom of speech, without Article 10(2) of the Constitution, which permits Parliament to enact "such restrictions as it deems necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of the Federation or any part thereof, friendly relations with other countries, public order or morality and restrictions designed to protect the privileges of Parliament or of any Legislative Assembly or to provide against contempt of court, defamation, or incitement to any offence". Article 10(4) also states that "Parliament may pass law prohibiting the questioning of any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative established or protected by the provisions of Part III, article 152, 153 or 181 otherwise than in relation to the implementation thereof as may be specified in such law".

These portions of the Constitution have been criticised by human rights advocates, who charge that "under the Malaysian Constitution, the test is not whether or not the restriction is necessarily but the much lower standard of whether or not Parliament deems the restrictions necessary or even expedient. There is no objective requirement that the restriction actually is necessary or expedient and the latter standard is much lower than that of necessity."

Section 4 of the Sedition Act specifies that anyone who "does or attempts to do, or makes any preparation to do, or conspires with any person to do" an act with seditious tendency, such as uttering seditious words, or printing, publishing or importing seditious literature, is guilty of sedition. It is also a crime to possess a seditious publication without a "lawful excuse". The act defines sedition itself as anything which "when applied or used in respect of any act, speech, words, publication or other thing qualifies the act, speech, words, publication or other thing as having a seditious tendency".

Under section 3(1), those acts defined as having a seditious tendency are acts with a tendency:
“ (a) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against any Ruler or against any Government;

(b) to excite the subjects of the Ruler or the inhabitants of any territory governed by any government to attempt to procure in the territory of the Ruler or governed by the Government, the alteration, otherwise than by lawful means, of any matter as by law established;

(c) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in Malaysia or in any State;

(d) to raise discontent or disaffection amongst the subjects of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or of the Ruler of any State or amongst the inhabitants of Malaysia or of any State;

(e) to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different races or classes of the population of Malaysia; or

(f) to question any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or prerogative established or protected by the provisions of part III of the Federal constitution or Article 152, 153 or 181 of the Federal Constitution.
”

Section 3(2) provides certain exceptions, providing examples of speech which cannot be deemed seditious. It is not seditious to "show that any Ruler has been misled or mistaken in any of his measures", nor is it seditious "to point out errors or defects in the Government or Constitution as by law established". It is also not seditious "to attempt to procure by lawful means the alteration of any matter in the territory of such Government as by law established" or "to point out, with a view to their removal, any matters producing or having a tendency to produce feelings of ill-will and enmity between different races or classes of the population of the Federation". However, the act explicitly states that any matter covered by subsection (1)(f), namely those matters pertaining to the Malaysian social contract, cannot have these exceptions applied to it.

Section 3(3) goes on to state that "the intention of the person charged at the time he did or attempted (a seditious act) ... shall be deemed to be irrelevant if in fact the act had, or would, if done, have had, or the words, publication or thing had a seditious tendency". This latter provision has been criticised for overruling mens rea, a legal principle stating that a person cannot be guilty of a crime if he did not have the intent to commit a crime.

A person found guilty of sedition may be sentenced to three years in jail, a RM5,000 fine, or both.

Implementation

In recent times, the law has been invoked to quell political opposition to the government. Famously in 2000, Marina Yusoff, a former vice president of the National Justice Party (Parti Keadilan Nasional) was charged with sedition for alleging that the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO), the leading party in the ruling Barisan Nasional coalition, had provoked the massacres of Chinese in the May 13 Incident. The editor of an opposition organ was charged with sedition for alleging a government conspiracy against Anwar Ibrahim, a former Deputy Prime Minister, had led to his political downfall; Anwar's lead counsel, Karpal Singh, who was also deputy chairman of the opposition Democratic Action Party (DAP), had also been charged with sedition after claiming Anwar had been poisoned by "people in high places". Lim Guan Eng, a former Member of Parliament from the DAP, had likewise been found guilty of sedition in 1998 for accusing the Attorney General of failing to properly handle a case where the Chief Minister of Malacca had been charged with statutory rape of a schoolgirl.

In 2003, the act was also invoked by then Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi (who succeeded Mahathir bin Mohamad as Prime Minister of Malaysia later that year); Abdullah stated that the government would charge those who opposed the change in educational policy emphasising the teaching of science and mathematics in English with sedition. That same year, the online publication Malaysiakini was temporarily shut down under the Sedition Act after it published a letter criticising Malay special rights and compared the Youth wing of a government party to the Ku Klux Klan. Previously in 1978, the Sedition Act had been invoked in another case of educational policy, when Mark Koding argued in Parliament that the government ought to close down Chinese and Tamil vernacular schools.

Human rights advocates have alleged that the Sedition Act has an "excessively vague" definition of sedition. These critics charge that this vagueness constitutes "an invitation to abuse and authorities may seek to apply them in situations which bear no relation to the original purpose of the law". Although they concede that the act provides exceptions that would "clarify and narrow the scope of the offence", they allege that "Any rule which needs an exception in favour of pointing out that the rulers are misled is quite obviously unacceptably vague." It is also claimed that the Malaysian judiciary has "given an extremely wide interpretation to the crime of sedition", with the result of a chilling effect on open dissent to government policies.

In 2006, the DAP, which had been a vocal opponent of the Sedition Act and the Internal Security Act (ISA), filed a police report against UMNO, whose annual general assembly had been noted for its heated rhetoric, with delegates making statements such as "Umno is willing to risk lives and bathe in blood to defend the race and religion. Don't play with fire. If they (non-Malays) messed with our rights, we will mess with theirs." In response, Information Minister Zainuddin Maidin said that this indicated that the Sedition Act continued to remain relevant to Malaysian society. He also denied that the government intentionally used the act to silence dissent or to advance particular political interests.

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition_Act_(Malaysia)




If you like this informative post, please subscribe to my full RSS Feed

Asean-Wildlife Enforcement Network (Asean-Wen) and the United States are establishing information-sharing channels in order to stop East-West wildlife crime.

In Sarawak and Sabah, where the two states are well known for its natural beauty and exotic wildlifes, the endangered animals are being slaughtered by poaching and illegal hunting. Their meats destined to cooking pots in restaurants in Kota Kinabalu or Kuching as well as overseas cities.

And to make matter worst, black market for exotic meats in East Malaysia even thrive due to absence of enforcement from the local authorities such as the National Park departments, Forestry departments, Custom and Immigrations and the Police.

It was also reported that some rich taukay in the states kept endangered animals as pet in their backyard. Some rich man even have a mini zoo. These goes on without the authority taking any action.

And it also a fact that crime rates in major towns in East Malaysia is up even when the Police forces headcount were increased but they also could not contain the crime. So it become worst for the animal in the jungle where they are protected by law but not from merciless hunters and poachers.

Related posts:
* Crimes in Sabah jungle




If you like this informative post, please subscribe to my full RSS Feed

I received the photos below from a friend. A creative composition, I must say.




























If you like this informative post, please subscribe to my full RSS Feed
-

Rais Yatim, Malaysia new Foreign Minister need to get his eyesight check. He is not looking at the actual problems.

There were cases where young Malaysian women are being used to trafficking drug to overseas. He has proposed to the Cabinet to get women traveling alone to get consent from their guardian. Not only his proposal does not make sense and not practical, it also violate women's rights.

The real issues would be asking ourselves, why the drug syndicates are targeting the young women as drug carriers. Why the government is not creating any awareness programme or campaign about the menace of drugs and the consequences of carrying luggages for strangers.

And why the Polis Diraja Malaysia is not investigating how the drugs landed on Malaysian soils before it is trafficked elsewhere.

So when you look deeper at the problem, it has nothing to do with Foreign Ministry if the root of the problem are tackled from the beginning. That would be more on social and education level.

Updated:
* May 06, 2008: Badawai said "Better to issue travel advisory"




If you like this informative post, please subscribe to my full RSS Feed

Badawi is advising the rakyat to be prudent in their spending due to the gloomy global economy, rising oil prices and disruption of staple food supplies such as rice and wheat.

Has he forgotten that during his last term, he has a spending spree without considering that Malaysia economy is weak. Some of the mega projects only benefited the politicians as those politicians usually have vested interests by being the middleman between Badawi and crooked businessmen.

Due to the wasteful nature of those mega projects which does not benefited the rakyat, Malaysia is on the brink of bankruptcy. No much cash reserve to spare and that's why Badawi is urging the rakyat to be mindful of their spending. Total bull. Badawi and his cronies are the one who should tie their stomach and fast, and stop their habits of giving free money to his politicians (read: mis-use of funds).

As the head of the government, Badawi should be telling himself to spend within Malaysia's means.

Listed below as some of his spending spree that constitutes to misappropriation of funds:
* Send a space flight participant for a space ride to International Space Station
* Send Malaysian army to guard England's Buckingham palace
* Held the RM300 million Moonsoon Cup in Terengganu
* Bail out of Malaysia Airlines
* Bail out of Proton
* Proposal for a bullet train track from Kuala Lumpur to Singapore
* Paying compensation for canceling the "crooked bridge" linking Johor and Singapore
* RM47 Billion Iskandar Malaysia Project

Other whooping MEGA projects (at least RM90 Billion) under Badawi's administration includes:

1 ) Trans-Peninsular Oil Pipeline

• Cost: RM25 billion (US$7.5 billion)
• Beneficiary: Trans Peninsular Sdn Bhd, Ranhill Bhd
• Financing: PFI

2 ) Ipoh-Padang Besar Double-Track Railway

• Cost: RM10 billion (Land cost not determined)
• Beneficiary: MMC-Gamuda
• Financing: PFI

3 ) Extension of Existing LRT Lines in Klang Valley

• Cost: RM10 billion
• Beneficiary: Bombardier Canada, Scomi Engineering and UEM Builders
• Financing: Government bonds

4 ) New 40km LRT Line with Underground Tunnel Across KL

• Cost: RM10 billion
• Beneficiary: Scomi Engineering, MMC, MAA, Gamuda, IJM and UEM Builders
• Financing: Government bonds

5 ) The Bakun Undersea Cable

• Cost: RM9 billion
• Beneficiary: Sime darby-MRCB
• Financing: PFI

6 ) High-Speed Train to Singapore

• Cost: RM8 billion (Land cost not determined)
• Beneficiary: YTL
• Financing: Not determined, probably PFI

7 ) Hulu Langat Water Treatment Project, Selangor

• Cost: RM5 billion
• Beneficiary: Kumpulan Prangsang Selangor
• Financing: Government funding

8 ) Pahang-Selangor Inter-state Water Transfer

• Cost: RM4 billion
• Beneficiary: UEM,Gamuda and Japanese consortia
• Financing: Not determined, probably JBIC loan

9 ) West Coast Highway

• Cost: RM3.05 billion
• Beneficiary: Kumpulan Europlus and IJM
• Financing: PFI

10 ) Penang Monorail

• Cost: RM1.2 billion to RM1.6 billion
• Beneficiary: 4 companies have responded to RFP
• Financing: Government funding

11 ) River Cleaning Project

• Cost: RM1 billion
• Beneficiary: YTL, Progressive Impact
• Financing: Not determined, probably government

This entry showcase another government idiocy of blatant abuse of rakyat money. A private company conned the government and either the government officers are into the fraud or they are incompetent on approving such "contract" where the government is subsiding the operation of Express Rail Link. See supporting articles at the second half of this post.

According to The Sun conservative estimates, at least RM80 million has been "given" to Express Rail Link since 2002.

Express Rail Link is owned by YTL Corporation Bhd (Equity share 50%), Lembaga Tabung Haji and Trisilco Equity Sdn Bhd (Equity share 10%). YBhg. Dato' Mohd Nadzmi B. Mohd Salleh. Mohd Nadzmi is also the chairman of JT International Bhd and is associated with NU SKIN MALAYSIA HOLDINGS SDN. BHD.

That money (RM80 million) could have been used to upgrade the airports in East Malaysia such as Sandakan Airport, Lahad Datu Airport, Mulu Airport, Limbang Airport, Mukah Airport and Bario Airstrip.

So, who is the culprit in this scandal ? Ministry of Transport or Malaysia Airport Holding Bhd ? Or perhaps YTL or Lembaga Tabung Haji ?

Below is the photos of airports for your comparison:


The grand Kuala Lumpur International Airport


Long Lellang Airport, courtesy of internetplumber.org.uk




Mukah Airport, courtesy of im-bia.blogspot.com


Mulu Airport, courtesy of dca-sarawak.gov.my


Marudi Airport, courtesy of thissheep.blogspot.com



Sandakan Airport, courtesy of picasaweb.google.com





If you like this informative post, please subscribe to my full RSS Feed