SUMBER MALAYSIAKINI

30,000 Hindraf protesters rally in KL streets

About 30,000 protesters demonstrated under the shadows of Kuala Lumpur’s iconic Twin Towers after their efforts to petition the British High Commission was thwarted by the police with tear gas and chemical-laced water cannon. The protesters had attempted to gather outside the high commission early this morning but thousands were pushed back by the riot police to outside a two-kilometre radius of the venue. Crowds quickly grew at various points in the city, and were blocked by police and Federal Reserve Unit officers. At its height, there is an estimated 30,000 people scattered over a number of areas in the vicinty of the high commission. An estimated 10,000 gathered along Jalan Ampang, near Hotel Maya, with a further 5,000 on Jalan P Ramlee just before Kuala Lumpur City Centre (KLCC). Another 10,000 demonstraters were at the Jalan Tun Razak-Jalan Ampang interchange. About 5,000 people were stopped at the Jalan Ampang and Middle-Ring-Road intersection. The protesters – a mix of young and old Indian Malaysians - seemed to have come from all over the country. At about 10am, the crowd along Jalan Ampang, near Hotel Maya, were addressed with loudhailers by Hindraf leaders, including P Uthayakumar. PKR information chief Tian Chua and DAP leader Ronnie Liu also addressed the rally. At 10.30am, the Hindraf leaders ended their speeches. But thousands of protesters continue to mill around the KLCC areas playing a cat-and-mouse game with the police water cannon. However at 11am, the crowd has moved from KLCC to edge closer to the British High Commission. Thousands faced off riot police at the key Jalan Ampang and Jalan Tun Razak intersection near Ampang Park. At 1pm, after negotiations with the police, Uthayakumar arrived to give a short speech and urged the crowd to disperse peacefully. The crowd was seen walking back down towards Jalan Sultan Ismail, away from the British High Commission. 'This is outrageous' Hindraf leader A Sivanesan condemned the police for turning Kuala Lumpur into a war zone. "Things are getting out of hand. We blame the police. They have beaten women and children. This is outrageous," he told Malaysiakini. Lawyer Haris Ibrahim, who led a 10-member Bar Council monitoring team, was stunned by the heavy-handed police action against the protesters. "I'm not happy with the way the police are handling the crowd,' he said. DAP member of parliament M Kulasegaran was also upset with the crackdown. "Over the last 50 years Indian have been marginalised in this country. And we now want the same rights as enjoyed by other communities," he told AFP. "They have no right to stop us from protesting today. This is the will of the people," he added. Petition to Queen Elizabeth II The planned protest is to support a US$4-trillion (RM14-trillion) lawsuit by the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) against Malaysia's former colonial power for bringing Indians to Malaysia as indentured labourers and exploiting them for 150 years. Furthermore, the suit sought a declaration that the Reid Commission Report 1957 failed to incorporate the rights of the Indian community when independence was granted, resulting in discrimination and marginalisation to this day. The quantum being sought is about US$2 million for every Indian currently residing in Malaysia. Following the filing of the suit, Hindraf held nationwide roadshows explaining to grassroots about the case. Coupled with their work to prevent rampant state-sanctioned demolition of Hindu temples, Hindraf won over a wave of support for their cause. Today's memorandum was to petition Queen Elizabeth II to appoint a Queen's counsel to argue the case on their behalf.

YouTube - lagu baru umno

YouTube - lagu baru umno

PAS kesal Umno guna sekolah untuk kepentingan parti

Salman Hussin Sat | Nov 24, 07 | 1:57:09 pm MYT

MUAR, 24 Nov (Hrkh) - Yang DiPertua (YDP) PAS Muar, Ustaz Abu Bakar Mohd Lajat, kesal dengant indakan Umno Bahagian Muar yang menggunakan premis kerajaan bagi mengadakan kegiatan parti mereka.

Beliau juga kesal dengan sikap pengetua sekolah terbabit yang membenarkan premis sekolah mereka digunakan untuk mengadakan majlis rasmi parti, katanya semasa ditemui di sini.

Beliau berkata demikian sebagai membantah tindakan Umno Bahagian Muar, mengadakan Majlis Sambutan Hari Raya Aidil Fitri di Sekolah Menengah Tengku Mahkota, dekat sini, 21 Oktober lalu.

Difahamkan, Menteri Besar Johor, Dato’ Haji Abdul Ghani Othman, turut hadir pada majlis ini.

Menurut Ustaz Bakar, surat bantahan berhubung perkara tersebut telahpun dihantar kepada Setiausaha Bahagian Sumber Manusia Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia, Pengarah Pelajaran Negeri Johor, Pegawai Pelajaran Daerah Muar dan juga Badan Pencegah Rasuah (BPR).

Bagaimanapun katanya, sehingga kini pihaknya masih belum menerima apa-apa maklum balas secara rasmi daripada pihak-pihak berkenaan berhubung bantahan ini.

Katanya, sebagai pengetua atau pentadbir sekolah yang termasuk dalam kategori kumpulan A, beliau tidak boleh sama-sekali melibatkan diri dengan mana-mana parti politik.

Perkara ini jelas terkandung di dalam Bahagian II, (Tatakelakuan) bil. 21(1) – bab D (Peraturan-Peraturan Pegawai A – Kelakuan dan Tatatertib 1993), yang mana antara lain menjelaskan, "Pegawai-Pegawai Kumpulan Pengurusan Tertinggi dan Kumpulan Pengurusan dan Profesional adalah dilarang mengambil bahagian dalam aktiviti politik atau memakai mana-mana lambang parti politik".

"Dalam hal ini pengetua sekolah terbabit dengan jelas telah melanggar peraturan ini dan saya mendesak supaya tindakan tegas diambil terhadap beliau," katanya.

Katanya, selain membenarkan Umno Bahagian Muar mengadakan program di sekolah tersebut, mereka juga membenarkan bendera-bendera Umno dipasang dalam kawasan sekolah, seolah-olah premis ini milik Umno.

Ustaz Bakar yang juga bekas pegawai kerajaan beranggapan, tindakan pengetua sekolah tersebut membenarkan parti politik mengadakan majlis di sekoah mereka sebagai amat bertentangan dengan Peraturan Pegawai Awam – Kelakuan dan Tatatertib 1993.

Sehubungan itu beliau mendesak Kementerian Pelajaran Malaysia mengambil tindakan tegas terhadap pengetua sekolah terbabit yang secara jelas telah melanggar peraturan ditetapkan kerajaan. - mns

10,000 Hindraf protesters rally in KLCC

About 10,000 protesters demonstrated under the shadows of Kuala Lumpur’s iconic Twin Towers after their efforts to petition the British High Commission was thwarted by the police with tear gas and chemical-laced water cannon. The protesters had attempted to gather outside the high commission early this morning but thousand were pushed back by the riot police to outside a two-kilometre radius of the venue. However, the protesters later joined the another crowd gathered in Kuala Lumpur City Centre (KLCC) which surged to between 10,000 and 15,000 by 9.30am. The protesters – a mix of young and old Indian Malaysians from all parts of the country - were addressed with loudhailers by Hindraf leaders, including P Uttayakumar. Meanwhile, the police are firing tear gas and chemical-laced water into the defiant crowd every 10 minutes. Each time, the crowd retreated and then surged forward. By 10.30am, the demonstration appeared to have ended after Hindraf leaders stopped their speeches. However, thousands of protesters continue to mill around the KLCC areas playing cat-and-mouse game with the police water cannon. 'This is outrageous' Hindraf leader A Sivanesan condemned the police for turning Kuala Lumpur into a war zone. "Things are getting out of hand. We blame the police. They have beaten women and children. This is outrageous," he told Malaysiakini. "But this will not stop us from submitting the memorandum and we will try to find a way to do that." Lawyer Haris Ibrahim, who is leading at 10-member Bar Council monitoring team, was stunned by the heavy-handed police action against the protesters. "I'm not happy with the way the police are handling the crowd." DAP member of parliament M Kulasegaran was also upset with the crackdown. "Over the last 50 years Indian have been marginalised in this country. And we now want the same rights as enjoyed by other communities," he told AFP. "They have no right to stop us from protesting today. This is the will of the people," he added. Petition to Queen Elizabeth II The planned protest is to support a lawsuit by the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) against Malaysia's former colonial power for bringing Indians to Malaysia as indentured labourers and exploiting them for 150 years. Furthermore, the suit sought a declaration that the Reid Commission Report 1957 failed to incorporate the rights of the Indian community when independence was granted, resulting in discrimination and marginalisation to this day. The quantum being sought is about US$2 million for every Indian currently residing in Malaysia. Following the filing of the suit, Hindraf held nationwide roadshows explaining to grassroots about the case. Coupled with their work to prevent rampant state-sanctioned demolition of Hindu temples, Hindraf won over a wave of support for their cause. Today's memorandum was to petition Queen Elizabeth II to appoint a Queen's counsel to argue the case on their behalf.

Tear gas fired to disperse defiant protesters

Hours before the protest organised by Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) is due to take place, the police have already begun firing tear gas to disperse crowds in three areas in Kuala Lumpur - Jalan Ampang, the KLCC and Batu Caves. The police fired tear gas at Jalan Ampang at about 7.40am today to disperse a large crowd who had gathered there. The area has been declared a curfew zone by the police, who have issued a ‘arrest on sight’ order. Earlier, the police also used tear gas to disperse a crowd at Batu Caves and the KLCC areas. Despite roadblocks and a tight police cordon to seal off the city, thousands of Indians from all around the country have arrived in Kuala Lumpur since last night. Some of the protesters were already at Jalan Ampang near Nikko Hotel early this morning. Despite repeated firing of chemical-laced water against the 2,000-strong crowd, the protestors appeared defiant and refused to budge. Police presence is heavy and a few arrests have been made. Part of Jalan Ampang is already closed but protesters continue to filter in from all sides. March to begin at 10am The rally has been declared illegal by the police, who have also obtained an unprecedented court order to prohibit people from taking part in it. Large groups of people are gathering at various spots around the city centre, all hoping to break the police cordon to march towards the British High Commission in Jalan Ampang at about 10am. Jalan Ampang and three other roads have been closed since 3am to stop the crowd from arriving near the High Commission. The security is also tight at KL Sentral, the hub for public transportation in the city. However inter-city commuter train services and the Putra LRT services are operating as usual as of 7am. The planned protest is to support a lawsuit against the former colonial power to denounce what they say is the continuing discrimination of Indians in Malaysia. The lawsuit filed recently seeks US$4 trillion (RM14 trillion) compensation for the estimated two million ethnic Indians whose ancestors were brought over here as labourers by Britain in the 1800s.

MY BROTHER VK LINGAM

Rocky's notes: The following is the content of Police Report [report no Kelana Jaya A/002187/07] lodged on 19 March 2007 by Thirunama Karasu a/l Kandar Velupillai against Dato V. Kanagalingam. Mr Karasu claimed to be Dato VK Lingam's brother. This report was lodged with the Brickfields police station.

Pengadu menyatakan:
FURTHER TO MY REPORT DATED 16 MARCH 2007 KELANA JAYA REPORT NOMBER 2115/07, I NOW WISH TO ADD FURTHER BECAUSE THE I.O TUAN SAIFUL IN THIS CASE FROM KELANA JAYA REFUSE TO TAKE MY STATEMENTS IN DETAILS AND THEREFORE I HAD TO LODGE THIS FURTHER REPORT TO SET OUT DETAILS. I FEAR MY LIFE AND THE SAFETY OF MY FAMILY BECAUSE I WANTED TO LODGE A POLICE REPORT AT BUKIT AMAN ON 6 MARCH 2007 ON ALL CORRUPTION CASES OF MY BROTHER DATUK V. KANALINGAM AND THOSE INVOLVED IN THESE CORRUPTION CASES WITH MY BROTHER ARE AS FOLLOWS.

1) I WAS USED BY MY BROTHER V. KANAGALINGAM TO CORRUPT THE FORMER CHIEF JUDGE TUN EUSOFF CHIN, THE FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL TAN SRI MOHTAR ABDULLAH, THE FORMER IGP TAN SRI RAHIM NOOR, THE PRESENT COURT OF APPEAL JUDGES DATUK MOHTAR SIDIN, THE PRESENT COURT OF APPEAL JUDGE DATO LOW HOP BING AND A FORMER JUDGE DATO K.L REKRAJ.

2) IN 1995 I WITNESS MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM CORRUPTING A FORMER INDUSTRIALIST COURT CHAIRMAN MR SATCHI WHERE I SAW MY BROTHER HANDING OVER A CHEQUE IN THE SUM OF RM 50,000.00.

3) IN 1995 I WITNESS A DINNER HOSTED BY MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM AT HIS HOUSE NO 1 JALAN SS 7/24 KELANA JAYA 47301 PJ FOR THE FORMER CHIEF JUDGE TUN EUSOFF CHIN'S WIFE AND CHILDREN WERE PRESENT. ALSO PRESENT IN THIS DINNER WERE THE FORMER COURT OF APPEAL PRESIDENT TAN SRI LAMIN YUNUS AND HIS WIFE, MY OTHER BROTHER DATO V. SIVAPRANJOTHI A LAWYER, MY BROTHER V. PANJARATNAM A ENGINEER, DATO V. KANAGALINGAM'S BODYGUARD ENCIK RAMLI AND BUDIMAN, AND A MALAY SECURITY GUARD. MY BORTHER'S WIFE DATIN GHANAJOTHY AND CHILDREN SIVASAKTI, SIVAJOTHI WERE ALSO PRESENT IN THIS DINNER. I WAS TOLD BY MY BROTHER DATUK V.KANAGALINGAM TO COME FOR THIS DINNER BECAUSE TO CLEAN UP THE HOUSE AND GARDEN, ARRANGE THE TABLE AND CHAIRS PRIOR TO THE DINNER.

4) IN 1996 I DELIVERED A NEW LEATHER BRIEFCASE, A WALLET, A LADY'S LEATHER HAND BEG, SOME DOCUMENTS WERE IN THE BRIEFCASE. I PERSONALLY DELIVERED THIS THINGS TO TUN EUSOFF CHIN IN PERSON IN HIS HOUSE. I WAS TOLD BY MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM TO DELIVER THIS THINGS.

5) I WAS TOLD BY MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM TO GO TO TUN EUSOFF CHIN'S HOUSE WITH MY OTHER BROTHER V. PANJARATNAM TO DELIVER 3 BOWLS OF SOUP WHICH WAS PREPARED BY V. PANJARATNAM'S WIFE REBECCA FOR TUN EUSOFF CHIN WIFE WHO WAS SICK AT THAT TIME. I AND MY BROTHER V. PANJARATNAM WENT THERE IN A PROTON WIRA BEARING NO BDV 1862 BELONGING TO PANJARATNAM.

6) I HAVE ALSO SENT MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM USING MY CAR A NISSAN SUNNY 130Y BEARING NO PLATE WBS 9443 TO TUN EUSOFF CHIN'S HOUSE. I HAVE ALSO WENT WITH MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM A NUMBER OF TIMES USING HIS CAR A BMW 988 A MERC 320 WED 5 A HONDA CAR BELONGING TO DATIN GHANAJOTHY, A VOLVO CAF 45, A OLD WHITE MERZ (8101) ANOTHER BMW (WDN) A PROTON WIRA BDV 1862 BELONGING TO V. PANJARATNAM. THE FORMER DRIVER MR CHANDRAN HAVE ALSO SENT DATO V. KANALINGAM TO EUSOFF CHIN'S HOUSE. WHENEVER I SENT MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM TO EUSOFF CHIN'S HOUSE, HE DATO V. K WILL BE CARRING A VERY BIG BUNDLE OF FILES AND WHEN I GO BACK TO PICK HIM UP HE WILL BE CARRYING BACK A SINGLE FILE. I USUALLY SENT MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM AT ABOUT 11.30 PM AND PICK HIM UP AT ABOUT 12.30 PM TO 1.00 AM.

7) IN 1996 CASH WAS GIVEN TO ME BY MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM TO PURCHASE HANDPHONE FROM MUTIARA TELECOMMUNICATIONS SDN BHD LOT 1 LEVEL 1 SHAHZAN PRUDENTIAL TOWER AT NO 30 JALAN SULTAN SIMAIL KL. FOR TUN EUSOFF CHIN. THIS PHONE WAS DELIVERED TO TUN EUSOFF CHON'S HOUSE BY A FAMILY FRIEND MR FRANCIS KOK CHEE KHOON.

8) I HAVE ALSO IN 1996 GIVEN A CASH CEHQUE BY MY OTHER BROTHER DATO V. SIVAPRANJOTHI A LAWYER TO PURCHASE A HANDPHONE FOR FORMER JUDGE K.L REKRAJ. I DELIEVERED THIS HANDPHONE IN PERSON TO DATO K.L REKRAJ AT HIS HOUSE. HE DATO K.L REKRAJ ASKED ME FOR EXTRA BATTERIES. THIS PHONE WAS REGISTERED UNDER DATO K.L REKRAJ WIFE.

9) A FAMILY FRIEND MR FRANCIS KOK CHEE KHOON HAVE ALSO TAKE MY BROTHERS DATO V. KANAGALINGAM AND DATO V. SIVAPRANJOTHO TO TUN EUSOFF CHIN'S HOUSE.

10) IN 1996 I WAS TOLD BY MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM TO SENT A OLD HEAVY BRIEFCASE (A DARK BROWN) TO THE PRESENT COURT OF APPEAL JUDGE DATO LOW HOP BING. HE DATO V. KANAGALINGAM TOLD ME TAHT DATO LOW HOP BING ACCIDENTALLY LEFT THE BRIEFCASE IN THE CAR BEARING NUMBER PLATE CAF 45 A VOLVO. MR FRANCIS KOK CHEE KHOON WAS PRESENT WHEN I COLLECTED THE BRIEFCASE IN FRONT OF DATO V. KANAGALINGAM'S HOUSE.

11) IN 1996 I AND MR FRANCIS KOK CHEE KHOON WAS TOLD BY MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM TO DELIVER 2 NOS HANDPHONE TO THE PRESENT COURT OF APPEAL JUDGE DATO MOHTAR SIDIN AT JALAN GURNEY KUALA LUMPUR. I AND MR FRANCIS KOK CHEE KHOON WENT THERE IN A VOLVO CAF 45. I HAVE ALSO GONE TO DATO MOHTHAR SIDIN'S HOUSE WITH MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM. I HAVE ALSO GONE TO DATO MOHTAR SIDIN'S HOUSE IN JALAN GURNEY USING MY MOTORBIKE BEARING NO PLATE WAX 6191 A YAMAHA TO SENT DOCUMENTS AND ALSO DELIVER A HANDPHONE.

12) IN 1996 CASH WAS GIVEN TO ME BY MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM TO SETTLE A HANDPHONE BILL IN THE NAME OF FORMER IGP TAN SRI RAHIM NOOR. SOMETIMES THE HANDPHONE BILLS OF FORMER IGP TAN SRI RAHIM NOOR IS SETTLE BY MY SISTER CHINMAYA DEVI WHO IS EMPLOYED WITH V.K LINGAM & CO AND SOMETIMES BY MR FRANCIS KOK CHEE KHOON AND ALSO BY A FORMER COLONEL.

13) IN 1996 MAY I WAS AT MY BROTHERS OFFICE AT SHAHZAN TOWER WITH MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM AND MY SISTER CHINMAYA DEVI. ALL A SUDDEN MY UNCLE MR. PERINCURAMASAMY CAME RUSHING TO INFORM MY BOTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM THAT THE ACA IS COMING TO MY BROTHER'S OFFICE TO INVESTIGATE CORRUPTION ON PERWAJA STEEL.
BEFORE THE ACA CAN COME TO MY BROTHER OFFICE DATO V. KANAGALINGAM TOLD ME, CHINMAYA DEVI (MY SISTER) AND FRANCIS CHEE KOON TO WITHDRAW LARGE SUM OF MONEY FROM ORIENTAL BANK JALAN SULTAN ISMAIL UNDER THE ACCOUNT OF DATO V. KANAGALINGAM. DATO V. KANAGALINGAM OLSO TOLD ME TO TAKE 5 NOS BANK DRAFT EACH AMOUNTING 60,000.00 POUNDS. I ALSO WAS TOLD BY MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM TO OPEN A ACCOUNT UNDER MY NAME IN PUBLIC BANK AND BANK IN RM 275,000.00 WHICH I DI. MR FRANCIS KOK CHEE KHOON ALSO WITHDRAW A LARGESUM OF MONEYWHICH HE PUT IN THE BLACK BIG BAG AND LATER BANK IN INTO HIS ACCOUNT. MY SISTER CHINMAYA DEVI ALSO WITHDRAW A LARGE SUM OF MONEY AND FOLLOWED MR FRANCIS KOK CHEE KHOON. I DID NOT KNOW WHAT MY SISTER CHINMAYADEVI DID WITH THE MONEY.
LATER THE FIVE BANK DRAFTS OF 60,000.00 POUNDS EACH WAS BANK IN TO THE ACCOUNT OF THE FOLLOWING PERSON IN LONDON. THIS PEOPLE FOLLOWED DATO V. KANAGALINGAM TO LONDON BEFORE GOING TO USA MAYO CLINIC IN ROCHESTER MINNESOTA.
1) MR K SUPPIAH 60,000.00 POUNDS WAS BANK INTO HIS ACCOUNT IN LONDON
2) DATIN GHANAJOTHI 60,000.00 POUNDS WERE BANK INTO HER ACCOUNT IN LONDON
3) MR RAJENDRA VELLUPILLAI 60,000.00 POUNDS WAS BANK INTO HIS ACCOUNT IN LONDON
4) THIRUNAMA KARASU VELLUPILLAI 60,000.00 WAS PUT INTO MY ACCOUNT IN LONDON
5) DATO V. KANAGALINGAM 60,000.00 POUNDS WAS PUT INTO HIS ACCOUNT IN LONDON
6) V. KANAKALASHIMI RM 100,000.00 GIVEN CASH AT NO 28 SECTION 21/1 SEA PARK PJ AT HER HOUSE.

14) IN 1998 MY BROTHER DATO V. KANAGALINGAM CAME TO MY HOUSE AND TOOK ME IN HIS VOLVO (940) TO CHINESE RESTAURANT IN SEA PARK SECTION 21/1. MY SISTER V. KANAKALASHMI ALSO CAME TO THE RESTAURANT. IN THIS RESTAURANT MY BROTHER DATO K. KANAGALINGAM THREATENED ME NOT TO TELL THE ACA ABOUT HIS DEALING WITH THE JUDGES, THE FORMER IGP TAN SRI RAHIM NOOR AND ALSO THOSE INVOLVED. HE TOLD ME THAT I MAKE SURE SOMETHING WILL HAPPEN TO ME AND THAT I HAVE MENTIONED THE JUDGES AND FORMER IGP. THE POLICE WILL ARREST ME AND MY CHILDREN WILL BE KIDNAPPED BY THE JUDGES. HE THREATENED BECAUSE I HAVE GIVEN A FULL STATEMENT TO A LAWYER NOW KNOWN AS DATO SAFEE ABDULLAH OF SAFEE & CO IN 1997 AT HIS HOUSE TOGETHER WITH MR SULAIMAN ABDULLAH A LAWYER PRESENT. FURTHER MORE IN 1997 DECEMBER I WAS FORCED TO SIGN A STATUTORY DECLARATION WHICH WAS PREPARED BY MY BROTHER DATO V. SIVAPRANJOTHI AND DATO V. KANAGALINGAM AT A HOTEL VALUE INN KELANG SELANGOR. OTHERS WHO FORCED ME SIGH THE STATUTORY DECLARATION WERE MR SATCI, SISTER V. KANAGALASHMI, SISTER CHINMAYADEVI AND BROTHERV. PANJARATNAM.
IN 1998 MARCH MY BROTHER SENT 3 LAWYERS MR C. VIJAYAKUMAR, DATO SITHAMBARAM, DATO KUMARENDRAN WHO FORCED ME INTO MAKING A FALSE STATEMENT AND MADE ME SIGN THE STATEMENT ON 81 PAGES. THEY THEN TOLD ME TO GET ADMITTED FOR TWO YEARS IN HOSPITAL BAHAGIA IPOH. I REFUSED. THEY THEN TOLD ME TO PUT UP A ACT THAT I AM VERY DEPRESSED AND MENTALLY UNSTABLE AND GET ADMITTED TO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL. THEY PUT FEAR INTO ME DURING THE 1998 ACA INVESTIGATION. I TOLD THEM THAT IN 1998 THE FIRST STATEMENT AND THE THIRD STATEMENT WHICH I GAVE TO THE ACA IN 1998 IS TRUE AND THE SECOND STATEMENT IS FALSE.

Rakyat Malaysia Semakin Gila
Oleh Keris Silau - Laman M@RHAEN

Tiga juta rakyat Malaysia gila
Menteri Kesihatan dipetik berkata
Perlukan ramai pakar sakit jiwa
Macam-macam jenis gila
Gila talak gila babi dan syok gila
Yang suka tengok EPL tu gila bola
Macam mana boleh jadi gila
Ada satu skru longgar di kepala
Atau wayar terputus jadi dua
Syiok giler bermain dimulut sentiasa
Majalah yang paling laku pun Gila-Gila

Linggam pun kata adik dia gila
7 jam BPR siasat VK Thirunama
7 jam BPR cakap dengan orang gila
Mungkin BPR pun juga gila
Tapi kalau Thirunama tu gila
Hari ni BPR nak guna penyaksian dia
Linggam bagi rasuah kat hakim takguna

Di parlimen pun ramai yang gila
Selain dari yang suruh pejam satu mata
Kebanyakkannya gila kuasa
Gila pangkat dan gila takhta
Ada yang berperangai macam orang gila
Sampai nak ajak lawan MP wanita
Ingat tak sembelih lembu punya cerita
Bukan ka tu kerja gila

Begitu juga di Pusat Dagangan Dunia Putera
Badarudin sebagai Pengerusi sementara
Kata hidung Hisham boleh kopek kelapa
Dan nampak terowong pramugari Air Asia
Heran orang macam ni pun Pak Lah suka
Sharizat pun diam tak kata apa
Kalau Tok Guru yang kata
Tentu melompat sakan di media

Gila yang paling bahaya
Pendapat aku ialah gila kuasa
Sanggup lakukan apa saja
Sanggup khawin walau tak bercinta
Sanggup buat-buat langgar kereta
Kononnya macam Hollywood punya cerita
Tergamak panggil orang kera
Kononnya nak tunjuk terra
Kat sapa lagi kalau bukan Pak mertua
Semua kerana nak capai cita-cita
Nak jadi Perdana Menteri paling muda

Keris Silau
23 November 2007

PKR bantah pinda Perlembangaan untuk sambung khidmat Rashid

Azamin Amin Sat | Nov 24, 07 | 12:48:37 pm MYT

KUALA LUMPUR, 24 Nov (Hrkh) - Parti Keadilan Rakyat (KeADILan) membantah tindakan kerajaan membentangkan Rang Undang-undang ( RUU ) bagi meminda umur persaraan pegawai Suruhanjaya Pilihanraya (SPR) dari 65 tahun kepada 66 tahun di bawah Artikel 114(3) Perlembagaan Persekutuan bagi menyambung perkhidmatan Pengerusi SPR sekarang Tan Sri Abdul Rashid.

Menurut Presiden PKR, Datin Seri Dr Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, pindaan Perlembangaan tersebut adalah satu perkara yang serius dan perlu dibahas secara keseluruhan.

"Tindakan ini merupakan satu tamparan hebat kepada sistem demokrasi negara kerana BN cuba meminda Perlembagaan khusus untuk kepentingan seseorang individu," kata beliau.

KLpos.com sebelum ini memetik sumber mengatakan perkhidmatan Abdul Rashid tidak akan disambung semula selepas kontraknya tamat 31 Disember ini.

Menurut Wan Azizah, PKR membantah penyambungan perkhidmatan Tan Sri Abdul Rashid yang dijangka bersara wajib pada 31 Disember ini.

"SPR di bawah pimpinan Tan Sri Rashid telah menunjukkan perkhidmatan yang tempang. Perkhidmatan Rashid telah mencemar kewujudan SPR bukan sahaja dari kaca mata parti-parti bukan pemerintah juga kebanyakan badan pemerhati politik dalam dan luar negara," katanya.

Mengulas lanjut, kata beliau, kepincangan sistem pilihan raya negara telah terbukti dalam pilihan raya Dun Likas di Sabah, pilihan raya kecil Dun Lunas di Kedah, dan pilihan raya 2004 di mana bilangan pengundi hantu mencecah ratusan ribu orang.

"Meskipun demikian Rashid masih gagal memperbaiki segala kepincangan yang telah acap kali diketengahkan oleh banyak pihak.

"Lebih memalukan beliau semakin angkuh dan memberi ugutan kepada rakyat dan parti pembangkang bahawa beliau mempunyai kuasa untuk menentukan jangka masa berkempen dan menjanjikan PRU 12 adalah jangka masa yang terpendek dalam sejarah pilihan raya Malaysia," katanya.

Justeru, KeADILan berpendirian bahawa langkah pertama yang kerajaan harus lakukan ialah dengan melantik Pengerusi SPR yang baru kerana Pengerusi hari ini telah merobek kewibawaan pemerintah.

"Hanya dengan reformasi dalam SPR kepercayaan rakyat dapat dipulihkan. Namun tindakan kerajaan meminda Perlembagaan Persekutuan lantas menjangkaui kuasa Yang Di Pertuan Agong jelas membuktikan kerajaan pimpinan Abdullah Badawi begitu lemah hingga perlu memperalatkan SPR bagi mengekalkan kuasa," jelas beliau. - m

Hukum gantung pelajar UPM dibantah, prosiding tatatertib dipertikai

Abdullah A Karim Fri | Nov 23, 07 | 8:14:38 pm MYT

Saya merujuk kepada keputusan Pihak Berkuasa Tatatertib Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM) pada Khamis 22 November 2007 yang telah menjatuhkan hukuman gantung satu semester ke atas Lee Song Yong, mahasiswa tahun dua setelah beliau didapati bersalah di atas tuduhan menghalang pegawai universiti dari menjalankan tugas, kewajipan dan fungsinya.

Saya tidak bercadang untuk membangkitkan tentang merit pertuduhan tersebut, tetapi apa yang sangat dikesalkan ialah sikap angkuh pentadbir UPM yang berkeras untuk meneruskan perbicaraan tatatertib ke atas pelajar terbabit, meskipun terdapat permintaan daripada daripada Suruhanjaya Hak Asasi Manusia (Suhakam)supaya prosiding ke atas Lee digantung sementara Suhakam menjalankan penyiasatan terhadap dakwaan berlaku perlanggaran hak asasi manusia oleh pihak UPM.

Seolah-olah ada perkara yang ingin disembunyikan oleh pihak UPM hingga tidak mempertimbangkan langsung permintaan UPM. Sekiranya UPM mendakwa mereka mempunyai bukti kukuh berkenaan kesalahan yang didakwa dilakukan oleh Lee, maka apa perlunya perbicaraan tersebut dilakukan secara tergesa-gesa.

Saya percaya ada tekanan politik tertentu dalam kes ini memandangkan pertuduhan ke atas Lee berkait rapat dengan insiden kekecohan menjelang pilihanraya kampus UPM beberapa bulan yang lalu. Tambahan pula Lee merupakan seorang pelajar yang aktif dengan kumpulan yang menentang kumpulan Aspirasi yang propemerintah.

Prosedur perbicaraan ini juga jelas menampakkan perlanggaran hak asasi ke atas pelajar terbabit. Bukan sahaja Lee diserahkan notis yang singkat menjelang perbicaraannya hingga menyukarkan beliau membuat persiapan, bahkan Lee turut dinafikan hak untuk diwakili oleh peguam pilihannya yang mana ini adalah satu perlanggaran terhadap right to counsel yang diperuntukkan oleh Perkara 5 (3) Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Sesiapa pun, termasuk pihak berkuasa tatatertib UPM tidak mempunyai hak langsung untuk menafikan mana-mana pelajar yang dituduh di hadapannya dari menggunakan khidmat peguam yang sememangnya dijamin oleh Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

Saya juga ingin mempertikaikan tentang komposisi pihak berkuasa tatatertib UPM yang membicarakan Lee. Dewan Pemuda PAS sejak dari dahulu lagi telah membangkitkan berkenaan dengan bidangkuasa pihak berkuasa tatatertib di semua IPTA, termasuklah di UPM.

Ini adalah kerana berdasarkan kepada Akta Universiti dan Kolej Universiti 1971 (Auku) dan juga Kaedah Tatatertib Pelajar-Pelajar, kuasa jawatankuasa tatatertib adalah amat luas dengan meliputi kuasa untuk:

1. menyiasat;
2. menjalankan pendakwaan;
3. mendengar kes tatatertib dan menghakimi kes tersebut, dan
4. membuat keputusan serta menjatuhkan hukuman sekiranya pelajar yang dituduh itu didapati bersalah.

Perkara ini amatlah bertentangan dengan kaedah rules against bias yang menjadi tonggak utama kepada prinsip keadilan semulajadi (rules of natural justice) yang mesti dipatuhi oleh mana-mana adjudicatory body termasuklah mahkamah atau pun mana-mana tribunal dan lembaga tatatertib.

Tidak ada jaminan pelajar yang dipertuduh oleh Jawatankuasa Tatatertib akan mendapat perbicaraan yang adil oleh kerana komposisi Jawatankuasa Tataterttib tersebut adalah terdiri daripada orang yang sama yang menjalankan segala kuasa yang diperuntukkan di bawah Auku dan Kaedah Tatatertib.

Oleh itu, Dewan Pemuda PAS telah lama mencadangkan agar peruntukan di dalam Kaedah Tatatertib ini diteliti oleh Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi dan dipinda supaya kuasa-kuasa yang disebutkan di atas dijalankan oleh pihak yang berbeza bagi menjamin keadilan ke atas pelajar yang dituduh.

Dalam konteks kes di UPM ini, hal ini saya percaya tidak terkecuali dari berlaku. Lee Song Yong dibicarakan oleh jawatankuasa tatatertib yang merupakan pihak yang sama yang akan memberikan keputusan dan menjatuhkan hukuman.

Justeru, Dewan Pemuda PAS Negeri Pahang mendesak supaya UPM membatalkan hukuman ke atas Lee serta segala prosiding berkenaan di antung sehingga segala kecacatan dari segi prosedur diperbetulkan.

Kami juga mendesak Kementerian Pengajian Tinggi supaya segera menjalankan semakan terhadap AUKU dan juga Kaedah Tatatertib Pelajar supaya segala peruntukan yang bertentangan dengan Perlembagaan Persekutuan dan juga hak asasi manusia dimasukhkan sama sekali.

Kami juga menasihatkan kepada Lee dan juga para pelajar lain yang terlibat supaya segera membawa perkara ini ke mahkamah melalui prosedur Semakan Kehakiman (Judicial Review) atau lain-lain cara yang difikirkan sesuai selepas segala remedi yang terdapat dalam Auku dan Kaedah Tatatertib di puaskan terlebih dahulu.

Hanya ini sahaja cara untuk mengajar pentadbir universiti yang angkuh, sombong dan buta undang-undang.

* Abdullah ialah Ketua Penerangan Pemuda PAS Pahang merangkap Exco Dewan Pemuda PAS Pusat.

Three Hindraf leaders arrested

The police have arrested three key leaders behind the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) - lawyers P Uthayakumar, P Waythamoorthy and V Ganapathy Rao, just as the movement is preparing for a mass rally this Sunday. Waythamoorthy, who is Hindraf chairperson, informed Malaysiakini of his arrest via SMS (Short Messaging Service). According to the lawyer, he was arrested at the Shah Alam toll plaza at about 3pm and was taken to the Selangor police headquarters in Shah Alam. Ganapathy was arrested around the same time at the police headquarters where he had gone to see Hindraf’s legal adviser and Waythamoorthy’s brother, Uthayakumar. Uthayakumar was picked up at his office in Kuala Lumpur under the Sedition Act this morning. “If I am charged, I don’t want to be bailed out as a matter of protest,” Waythamoorthy told Malaysiakini in a SMS, adding that the Indian community should be able to handle the Sunday rally on their own. The trio were later charged with sedition at the Klang Sessions Court. The arrests come ahead of a Hindraf-organised mass rally slated for this weekend outside the British High Commission in Kuala Lumpur. First to be arrested Uthayakumar was arrested at his legal firm in Bangsar in Kuala Lumpur at about 10.30am, said the lawyer’s employee K Vasan. “He was arrested under the Sedition Act. Five police officers from IPK Shah Alam picked him up,” he said. On Monday, the police had raided Uthayakumar’s law office in Kuala Lumpur with a warrant, in search of a publication deemed to be seditious in content. Five police officers conducted a search of his office, while about 10 officers searched another office operated by his brother and Hindraf chairperson Waythamoorthy in Seremban, Negri Sembilan. While the police left Uthayakumar’s office empty handed, they were said to have seized certain documents from Wathyamoorthy's office. The brothers are key activists in the planning of a mass rally on Sunday, which has been banned by the police. The rally is organised by Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf), in which Uthayakumar serves as legal adviser. Hindraf plans to gather 10,000 Indians to hand a memorandum addressed to the Queen of England to support a class-action suit against Her Majesty’s government for bringing Indians to Malaysia as indentured labourers and exploiting them for 150 years. A total of US$4 trillion (RM14 trillion) is being sought for US$2 million for every Indian residing in Malaysia. Restraining order Prior to the arrest, the police had gone to Uthayakumar's house in Bangsar to serve him with a restraining order against participating in the rally. The order, obtained from the Kuala Lumpur magistrate’s court, restrains Uthayakumar, Waythamoorthy, lawyers M Mahonaran, Ganapathy, R Kengadharan and all Hindraf supporters from participating in the gathering, on grounds that the rally could endanger the public. When contacted, Manoharan said he too has been served with the order which prevents him and the others from going to the British High Commission for seven days beginning on Nov 22. “The notice was served on me at 7.50am today. The order was made under Section 98 of the Criminal Procedure Code by the Kuala Lumpur magistrate's court,” he said. Section 98 grants the court powers to issue an immediate order in urgent cases of potential nuisance. According to Manoharan, the application for the restraining order was made by the Cheras police station and served on him by officers from police headquarters in Kuala Lumpur. He said he will be making the necessary application to set aside the court order. Manoharan was one of four lawyers - the others being Uthayakumar, Waythamoorthy and S Ganabathi Rao - arrested in Kampung Rimba Jaya in Padang Jawa, near Shah Alam, during a fracas surrounding the demolition of a century-old Hindu temple on Oct 31. They were later released.

Bersih terus desak kempen pilihan raya diadakan selama 21 hari

Roy Rasul Fri | Nov 23, 07 | 3:19:24 pm MYT

KUALA LUMPUR, 23 Nov (Hrkh) - Gabungan Pilihanraya Bersih dan Adil (Bersih) mengulangi tuntutan supaya tempoh kempen rasmi bagi pilihan raya umum diadakan sekurang-kurangnya 21 hari.

Berhubung perkara itu, Ahli Jawatakuasa Bersih, Liew Chin Tong menggesa Pengerusi Suruhanjaya Pilihan raya (SPR), Tan Sri Abdul Rashid Abdul Rahman bersikap professional dan konsisten di atas perkara tersebut.

"Ini kerana Tan Sri Abdul Rashid menyatakan dalam sidang medianya bahawa tempoh kempen lebih singkat jika ada pihak-pihak tertentu berterusan untuk membuat huru-hara dan menjerit di jalanraya," katanya dalam satu kenyataan, hari ini.

Beliau berkata apabila Rashid memilih untuk tidak mengendahkan desakan untuk menjalankan reformasi dalam sistem pilihan raya seperti yang dibuktikan dalam Perhimpunan 10 November ia sangat mengecewakan. Bahkan katanya, pengerusi SPR itu seolah-olah mengugut pembangkang dan rakyat Malaysia apabila beliau akan menjadikan jangka masa kempen pilihan raya akan datang terpendek dalam sejarah Malaysia.

"Atau adakah Rashid hanya menjalankan arahan yang diterima daripada kerajaan sebagai balasan kepada peruntukkan yang dibuat bagi memanjangkan umur persaraan anggota SPR dari 65 ke 66, yang secara efektifnya memberi penambahan setahun lagi buat Rashid," tegasnya.

Katanya, kebanyakan amalan demokrasi yang matang membenarkan tempoh kempen yang bersesuaian kepada calon-calon yang terlibat dalam pilihan raya.

Namun katanya, dalam kes Malaysia, agak malang kerana ia cuba melangkah satu tapak ke belakang sedangkan katanya Pilihan raya Persekutuan pertama di Malaya pada 1955 kempennya selama 42 hari.

Begitu juga katanya, dalam tiga pilihan raya pertama selepas merdeka (1959, 1964 dan 1969), tempoh kempen diadakan selama lima minggu.

Manakala pilihan raya tahun 1974, 1978 dan 1982 kempen boleh diadakan dalam tempoh melebihi dua minggu, katanya.

Seterusnya katanya, tempoh berkempen bagi empat pilihan raya berikutnya (1986, 1990, 1995 dan 1999) di bawah pentadbiran Perdana Menteri Tun Mahathir Mohamad, tempoh berkempen ialah antara sembilan atau 10 hari.

Pada tahun 2004 pula katanya tempohnya tujuh setengah hari sahaja.

"Bersih mendesak supaya kempen pilihan raya dibenarkan untuk diadakan selama 21 hari, separuh daripada tempoh yang diadakan pada 1955, bagi membenarkan para pengundi mengenali calon-calon mereka dan mesej yang hendak disampaikan semasa pilihan raya," katanya

Perkara ini katanya, penting apabila media elektronik perdana bersikap berat sebelah dalam laporan mereka.

Tempoh kempen yang lebih panjang katanya, membantu ke arah satu pertandingan dalam lapangan yang sama rata (level playing field) dan memperkasakan rakyat supaya dapat menilai calon mereka melalui cara yang lebih bermakna. - mns

TAG SP 116 Kim Quek:
Terajang Keluar Itu Eusoff Chin - Laman M@RHAEN

[Eusoff Chin yang berusia 66 tahun itu sudah pun bersara tetapi gambarnya bagai satu keluarga bersama VK Lingam tidak akan padam sampai bila-bila. Bagi pakar psikologi foto itu menggambarkan satu hubungan yang sungguh erat sekali sehingga terdiam Eusoff beberapa hari bila Rais membising perihal gambar yang diambil pada tahun 1994 itu di New Zealand. Akhirnya Eusoff mengatakan beliau 'terserempak' secara kebetulan sahaja dengan Lingam tetapi laporan Bowman mendedahkan mereka terbang bersama dengan Singapore Airlines dari Singapura ke Auckland pada 22/12/1994. Eusoff menaiki MAS untuk menemui Lingam di Singapura. Sampai hari ini beliau gagal membersihkan namanya dengan mencabar laporan Bowman itu. - Editor]

Kempen Seluruh Negara Menggesa Tindakan Ke atas Eusoff Chin

Hadiahkan tendangan maut buat Eusoff Chin
(Give Eusoff Chin A Flying Kick Out)
Oleh: Kim Quek
12.06.2000

Semua rakyat Malaysia yang cintakan keadilan sudah tentu menghargai tindakan tegas dan tepat oleh Majlis Peguam terhadap skandal salah laku Ketua Hakim Negara. Pengerusi Majlis Peguam telah mengumumkan bahawa satu pertemuan yang ditetapkan pada 23 Jun akan diadakan bagi membincangkan:-

a) Penubuhan satu Tribunal atau Suruhanjaya Diraja bagi menyiasat perlakuan Ketua Hakim Negara Eusoff Chin, dan
b) Penggantungan Eusoff sementara menunggu hasil siasatan.

Skandal salah laku Eusoff secara tiba-tiba memuncak apabila wartawan MGG Pillai mendedahkan beberapa hari lalu tentang butir-butir yang membabitkan salah laku Eusoff itu di mana beliau telah menaiki sebuah kapal terbang bersama-sama Lingam untuk ke New Zealand dan juga semasa di New Zealand, yakni berlawanan sama sekali dengan cerita Eusoff bahawa 'mereka telah bertembung secara kebetulan'. Sungguh pun pada 10 Jun Pengerusi DAP Lim Kit Siang telah menggesa Eusoff untuk meletakkan jawatan atau membuktikan bahawa dakwaan tersebut tidak benar, beliau langsung tidak memberikan maklum balas terhadap perkara itu sehingga ke hari ini.

Kegagalan Eusoff untuk segera memberikan maklum balas pada saat-saat yang kritikal seperti ini membayangkan sesuatu yang serius dan tidak sihat - Ketua Hakim Negara mungkin telah terang-terangan berbohong kepada negara! Jika benar, penyiasatan kes Eusoff perlu pergi lebih jauh lagi dari hanya 'bersosial secara tidak wajar' kepada aspek-aspek lain yang bersifat jenayah. Supaya dapat diterima akal, sila jelaskan kepada kita bahawa Ketua Hakim Negara ini sepatutnya tidak boleh sekali-kali terdesak sehingga sanggup melakukan pembohongan kepada negara, jika kesalahan itu hanyalah 'hubungan sosial yang tidak wajar' - pasti ada banyak lagi yang dipertaruhkan.

Perkembangan terakhir yang menggesa supaya Badan Pencegah Rasuah menyiasat kemungkinan berlaku satu persetujuan yang tersembunyi dan rasuah terhadap bukan sahaja di antara Eusoff dan Lingam, tetapi juga pelanggan Lingam, Vincent Tan (pengawalnya didapati mengembara bersama-sama Eusoff dan Lingam di New Zealand, menurut MGG Pillai). Latar belakang kepada siasatan ini adalah kes saman malu bernilai jutaan dollar di mana Vincent telah dianugerahkan sejumlah wang yang besar iaitu RM10 juta, di dalam satu kes rayuan yang telah dijalankan di Mahkamah Persekutuan dan dipengerusikan oleh Eusoff.

Maklum balas (atau lebih tepat lagi, ketiadaan maklum balas) dari BPR terhadap skandal ini tidak langsung memberangsangkan, kerana sehingga kini tiada sebarang kenyataan umum yang dikeluarkan, sekalipun pada 6 Jun menurut Eusoff BPR dan Peguam Negara telah menyiasat dan mendapatinya tidak bersalah. Kini apabila skandal tersebut telah berkembang dengan cepatnya sehingga menjadi satu krisis yang menggemparkan, menarik perhatian negara dan antarabangsa, maka BPR dan Peguam Negara tidak akan mampu bersarang di tempat persembunyian mereka. Rakyat mesti mendesak mereka agar berpegang teguh kepada ikrar sumpah jawatan mereka dan mengumumkan pendirian secara terbuka kepada rakyat pada saat ini juga.

Di pihak yang satu lagi, Menteri yang bertanggungjawab terhadap hal ehwal undang-undang Rais Yatim seolah-olah cuba mengelakkan diri secara tergopoh-gopoh. Menurut Sin Chew Jit Poh bertarikh 11 Jun, Rais telah menggesa supaya 'pertikaian terbuka' di antara dirinya dengan pihak kehakiman, tentunya Eusoff, dihentikan dan menyerahkan kepada masyarakat untuk menjadi hakim. Beliau berharap badan kehakiman akan mengambil kira perasaan rakyat dan membaiki imej dan ketelusannya. Kata beliau 'Marilah kita semua memberikan perhatian kepada tugas-tugas kita sendiri. Usahlah hiraukan apa yang telah diperkatakan sebelum itu'.

Nada berdamai Rais itu mungkin boleh diterima sekiranya kontroversi yang berlaku adalah mengenai perdebatan terhadap perkara-perkara biasa di antara dirinya dan Eusoff, tetapi sama sekali tidak boleh diterima apabila seorang Ketua Hakim Negara didapati terbabit dengan bukti-bukti yang telah menimbulkan krisis kepercayaan terhadap badan kehakiman negara ini. Pendirian yang diambil oleh Rais itu menunjukkan bahawa pihak Kabinet cuba mengelak dari tanggungjawabnya untuk menegakkan kewibawaan sistem kehakiman. Lebih teruk lagi, ia seolah-olah bersubahat untuk menutupi kemerosotan di dalam badan kehakiman.

Sistem kehakiman kita telah banyak kali dicedera dan dicacatkan oleh badan Eksekutif pada masa-masa lampau sehinggakan ramai rakyat Malaysia yang seolah-olah terpaku apabila berhadapan dengan satu lagi perbuatan yang melampaui batasan. Namun saya merayu kepada semua yang mencintai negara ini untuk bangun berbuat sesuatu. Marilah kita sama-sama bersatu untuk menghalang kemusnahan pengawal terakhir kepada jaminan hak-hak kita - badan kehakiman. Marilah kita mengambil peluang yang sepenuhnya dari penggunaan teknologi maklumat yang amat berfaedah ini dengan menyedarkan mereka yang berkuasa itu akan kemahuan rakyat. Biar rakyat negara ini membanjiri Perdana Menteri dan pemimpin-pemimpin lain serta pihak akhbar dengan emel-emel, faks-faks dan surat-surat menyatakan kesungguhan kita untuk melihat keadilan dilaksanakan dengan berkesan pada kali ini, sebagai tanda bermulanya proses memulihkan kembali sistem kehakiman kita yang telah rosak. Dan biarlah parti-parti politik dan badan-badan NGO menerajui jalan dengan mengadakan aktiviti-aktiviti bagi menyemarakkan kempen ini.

-Kim Quek-

"Saya akan kempen untuk PAS habis-habisan" - Ketua Wanita Umno Paloh

Buletinonline Thu | Nov 22, 07 | 8:06:59 am MYT

KUALA TERENGGANU, 22 Nov (Hrkh) - Kezaliman kerajaan Umno Terengganu semakin bermaharajalela apabila pihak penguatkuasa telah merobohkan tiga buah kedai yang sedang menjalankan perniagaan baru-baru ini.

Tiga buah kedai tersebut terletak di Paloh, Jalan Kelantan, Kuala Terengganu, menjalankan perniagaan kedai makanan, bengkel motosikal dan pembuat plet kenderaan.

Laman web Buletinonline melaporkan, operasi meroboh dimulakan pada jam 9.45 pagi dengan dua buah jentolak, polis dan penguatkuasa Pejabat Tanah dan Galian (PTG). Pemilik kedai dan orang ramai yang berurusan terpaksa keluar dari kedai tersebut apabila penguatkuasa muncul secara tiba-tiba.

Pemilik kedai makan, Abdul Rahman Muda dan isterinya Maimun Abd Ghani ketika ditemui melahirkan tidak puas hati dan kecewa atas tindakan roboh tersebut.

"Kami sedang berniaga, dia mari robohkan. Tengok ni semua kuih-kuih ada belaka,"Abd Rahman berkata sambil menunjuk kepada barang-barang yang dipunggah dari kedainya.

"Saya baru sekali diberi notis, lebih kurang dua bulan yang lalu," kata Abdul Rahman lagi.

"Sesen bayaran pun tak dapat,"katanya bila ditanya sama ada dia menerima sebarang bayaran pampasan.

"Kedai depan tu, bayaran dah dapat, notis dah tiga kali, tapi tak roboh pun,"tambah isterinya, Maimun Abd Ghani.

Maimun Abd Ghani juga adalah Ketua Wanita Umno Cawangan Kg Paloh. Walaupun dia seorang pimpinan wanita peringkat cawangan, namun rayuannya supaya diperimbangkan sedikit bayaran saguhati tidak diendahkan oleh kerajan Umno.

"Ada dia panggil sekali, ingatkan nak berbincang pasal bayaran, tapi dijamu dengan nasi minyak sahaja,"keluh Maimun.

"Eloklah dia orang buat begini, dekat pilihan raya. Kali ni saya akan pangkah PAS dan akan kempen untuk PAS habis-habisan,"katanya dengan nada marah.

Pada zaman PAS memerintah kerajaan negeri Terengganu dulu, memang ada kedai dan rumah yang dirobohkan untuk tujuan pembesaran jalan. Tetapi kerajaan pada ketika itu memberikan bayaran saguhati atas kesusahan dan bebanan yang ditanggung oleh pemilik walaupun, tanah tersebut terletak atas tanah kerajaan. - mks.

KeADILan dakwa Timbalan Menteri terima wang haram 10 juta

Saadon Akshah dan Roy Rasul | Wan Zahari Wan Salleh Thu | Nov 22, 07 | 3:27:00 pm MYT

KUALA LUMPUR, 22 Nov (Hrkh) - Sebuah syarikat pengangkutan kargo dipercayai milik Timbalan Menteri didakwa menjalankan pemindahan wang secara haram (money laundering) melebihi RM10 juta dari Bangladesh

Bagaimanapun Parti Keadilan Rakyat (KeADILan), Bahagian Kelana Jaya, Selangor, mendakwa polis dan Badan Pencegah Rasuah (BPR) masih enggan mengambil tindakan undang-undang terhadap syarikat tersebut.

Setiausaha Bahagian tersebut, Faizal Mustaffa mendakwa walaupun laporan dibuat sejak tahun 2001 yang lalu tetapi sehingga sekarang tiada sebarang tindakan diambil.

Beliau mendedahkan perkara tersebut kepada pihak media dalam satu sidang di ibu pejabat KeADILan, Jalan Tun Sambanthan, Brickfields, dekat sini, hari ini.

Dakwanya Timbalan Menteri berkenaan memiliki saham sebanyak 49 peratus dengan syarikat itu.

"Semasa memegang jawatan Timbalan Menteri wang tersebut dipindahkan ke akaun setiausahanya.

"Timbalan menteri itu adalah seorang Ahli Majlis Tertinggi Umno menyalahgunakan kuasanya sebagai Menteri Kabinet dalam mendapat kontrak dengan syarikat berkenaan," dakwanya.

Beliau yang turut mengedarkan beberapa salinan dokumen kepada wartawan berhubung pendedahan kes tersebut mendakwa, Timbalan Menteri itu masih menjalankan urus niaga melalui sebuah syarikat asing biarpun perbuatannya bertentangan dengan sumpah semasa dilantik sebagai timbalan menteri.

Pemindahan wang haram itu dakwa Faizal bercanggah dengan peraturan bank negara Bangladesh dan Bank Negara Malaysia.

Dalam pada itu, Timbalan Menteri tersebut turut didakwa memiliki empat buah kediaman mewah di sekitar Shah Alam dan Subang Jaya.

Selain itu dakwanya Timbalan Menteri itu dipercayai mempunyai lapan buah kereta mewah termasuk sebuah Porche dan motosikal Harley Davidson. - mns

Wee: ACA never cleared Lingam

Lawyer Wee Choo Keong has shot down fellow lawyer VK Lingam’s claim of having been “cleared” of graft allegations following Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) investigations in 1998. Wee said the ACA has confirmed that it had a case against Lingam when it forwarded its findings to the Attorney-General’s (AG) Chambers, as revealed by the agency’s deputy director-general Abu Kassim Mohamad yesterday. “I challenge Lingam to produce evidence stating that he was cleared by ACA. The ACA has never made such a statement,” Wee said in a statement today. Lingam, who had been questioned for about five hours yesterday, told reporters later that he believes that the ACA had cleared him of any wrong doing. However, Wee pointed out that, in 1998, the AG was Mokhtar Abdullah whose name had also been mentioned in ACA reports lodged by Lingam’s younger brother Thirunama Karasu. “Therefore, even if there was a decision made by Mokhtar to clear Lingam, such decisions would be extremely questionable and contrary to the rules of natural justice,” said Wee, adding that one must not be a judge in his own cause. “In the spirit of transparency and good governance, I call upon the Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail to act on the recommendations of the ACA, which are nine years overdue, on the allegations against Lingam in 1998.” Thirunama had, in his report, detailed Lingam’s alleged links with former chief justices, several judges, Mokhtar and a former inspector-general of police. A similar report, lodged in March this year and publicised by Wee on Sunday, led to Thirunama and Lingam being called up on Tuesday and Wednesday respectively for questioning. Wee accompanied Thirunama during the seven-hour marathon interrogation and was himself questioned.

Nation for sale

Any local authority exists to protect and preserve the public interest of the area under its jurisdiction. The Local Government Act amply empowers the head of the council, to protect and preserve this public interest for the benefit of the people’s welfare. How is it that, in selected cases, the local authority ends up closing one eye conveniently and serving the private, not the public interest? How can there be blatant rape of our green lung of 30 years in my Kampung Tunku area, all in the name of development? What and how does the predefined public interest in these public spaces get hijacked for private and profit-motivated purposes? The most recent case reported about the community hall in SS15 in Subang Jaya being acquired to make way for a private and profit motivated development project is my specific concern. KJ John served in public service for 30 years and took optional retirement to work in his own consulting group. He hopes to see transparent and open, new governance practiced in Malaysia some day. Let me borrow the Jerry Harvey thesis that such activities can only happen when there is collusion and connivance by the very officers who are responsible to prevent the crime. Harvey calls it the ‘Trip to Abilene’. Wikipedia defines the Abilene paradox as: “A paradox in which a group of people collectively decide on a course of action that is counter to the preferences of any of the individuals in the group. It involves a common breakdown of group communication in which each member mistakenly believes that their own preferences are counter to the group's and do not raise objections.” How else can local councillors suddenly become blinded by the private and vested interests of those who want to steal the land for reasons of profit? How else can the local authority even propose the ‘theft’ of public land for private interests? I understand that there were alternative proposals for public use of this site, but that these were rejected in favour of the private party’s interests. Why? I further understand that councillors were even offered excellent ‘inducements’ to favour the private proposals, more than three years ago. Is this not corruption? More so, is this not visible corruption? Wikipedia, defines corruption “as a general concept describing any organised, interdependent system in which part of the system is either not performing duties it was originally intended to, or performing them in an improper way, to the detriment of the system's original purpose”. Pattern of theft How then a local authority and its councillors support, collude and approve the public acquisition of public land for private purposes? The pattern of such theft is always identical. First the developer hands over land surrendered as part and parcel of the development plan to be gazetted for a specified public or community purpose. Inevitably, the local authority forgets to gazette the land. Over time, the developers move on, the house buyers move in, and a community develops their ordinary life. In many cases this land is never properly maintained or developed or serves as storage ground for the developer’s equipment. Very often, residents have no specific knowledge that this is community land so, over time, ‘land vultures’ move in to acquire the site with help from ex-staff of the local council who have retired and who have entered the ‘connect and collect’ business. Even the need for bumiputera participation is factored in. Now all they need is some agreeable councillors and serving staff to create a storyline for approval. Concurrently, they find a patron at the state level - in the case of Selangor, within the economic action council. Once the relevant approvals are received, many people become richer and happier. In the case of a development project in SS15, Subang Jaya, approval was given for a 25-storey building of service apartments and five levels for a car-park. The project was approved as a ‘joint venture’ between the local council and a private developer. The Sun columnist R Nadeswaran has asked pertinent questions: “Is the council in the construction business? Does it have the expertise? Does it have the money?” Let me add my questions: Under what authority can and should a public agency go into a joint-venture project with a private developer? Under what rules and guidelines can such authority make a decision to go into business in the first place? Is it the business of a local authority to develop service apartments; even its officers? In short, does the Local Government Act empower a council to undertake business of any kind? Is it not merely responsible for good maintenance and governance? Why is the ministry of housing and local government not asking similar questions? Based on reports in The Sun, it is now obvious that the ministry’s secretary-general, the chief secretary to the government and the cabinet secretary are all aware of this situation. Are they going to take any action to protect the public interest? Slippery slope To me, the whole issue is related to the deterioration of rule of law. If the Blind Lady of Justice is really not blind any more, why should even the third-tier of governance be concerned with the rule of law? And we wonder why corruption and bribery are at its peak currently! It appears that almost anyone in public service has a price. But from my experience of more than 30 years, this is not true. Many civil servants are honest and straight-forward officials who have no pecuniary interests, even if most fear to stand up against politically motivated bosses and politicians. To my mind, such systemic failures started about 15 years ago when Daim Zainuddin (photo) transferred the first PTD officer, within 24 hours, out of his ministry of finance for disobeying a clearly wrongful instruction. We have since been on a slippery slope, compounded by a culture of fear. Most PTD officers, especially those who have received the ‘broom’ award, are too ashamed to speak up for truth. Perviously, many of these expedient projects were directly related to interests related to the New Economic Policy (NEP) but, over the last 15 years or so, it has translated into particular interests of individuals wanting to get rich under the NEP banner. Unless such theft of public land is not stopped under the rule of law, our nation could one day be up for sale because some individual interests can be served. By keeping quiet, we too are participating and colluding in this, if you follow Harvey’s paradox. The tip of the iceberg is already visible, but the captains our Titanic believe that their leadership and systemic structure are invincible. They need to be accountable and responsible for three elements of the bottom-line - financial, social and good governance. All three define the public interest and the common good.