Malaysians Protest Against Changes to Internet Law #Stop114A

Picture taken from http://stop114a.wordpress.com/get-involved/website-owners-and-bloggers/

Published by BBC News on 14 August 2012.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-19251896

Malaysian activists and bloggers are staging an online black-out for one day to protest against changes to a law they say restricts free speech online. They have replaced their home pages with black screens critical of the Evidence Act, revised in April, for Internet Black-out Day.

Critics say the law makes people unfairly liable for content published from networks and personal devices.

Officials deny the change is meant to silence critics ahead of an election. The revised law means that Malaysians could get into trouble even if their devices or internet connections have been hacked into, critics say.

The Centre for Independent Journalism in Malaysia said the revision was "a bad law passed in haste and does not take into account public interest and participation", said the Agence-France Presse news agency.

Critics want the law to be changed or scrapped completely. Premesh Chandran, founder of online news site Malaysiakini, said that the burden of proof on internet users was unfair. "In other words, if defamatory comments are posted on a blog, the blog owner is likely to be sued or charged with criminal defamation," Malaysiakini said in a statement on its website.

The internet has been key to helping sway a large number of voters from supporting the governing coalition, says the BBC's Jennifer Pak in Kuala Lumpur. Online media has also exposed corruption scandals among the governing parties, who have been in power for nearly 55 years, our correspondent adds.

Related reports:

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_asiapacific/view/1220057/1/.html#.UCoFysgoa28.twitter

Malaysia's prime minister said he would review a legal amendment that critics claim threatens free expression online after they staged a one-day "Internet blackout" on Tuesday. Prime Minister Najib Razak, facing mounting pressure ahead of looming elections, said on Twitter that he had asked the cabinet to discuss the controversial new section of the Evidence Act.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444042704577589001501616464.html?mod=WSJ_hp_us_mostpop_read

A series of prominent websites, including those of the Malaysian Bar Council, the opposition Democratic Action Party, and news portals Malaysiakini, Free Malaysia Today and BFM Radio, were either blacked out voluntarily or featured a pop-up message: Stop 114A. In the early evening, Mr. Najib responded on his personal Twitter account, saying "I have asked Cabinet to discuss section 114A of the Evidence Act 1950. Whatever we do we must put people first."

http://www.malaysianbar.org.my/press_statements/repeal_section_114a_of_the_evidence_act_1950.html

The Malaysian Bar appreciates that the problem of anonymity on the Internet is of a different nature to that in the print media.  Persons hiding behind the cloak of a false persona can incite racial hatred, incite and organise violent hate crimes and commit fraud and escape being identified.  Hence there is a need for some statutory intervention to ensure criminal elements do not exploit the anonymity that the Internet can provide to escape the consequences of their actions. However, the Malaysian Bar is of the view that the recently-introduced section 114A of the Evidence Act of 19501, which came into force on 31 July 20122 , is not the answer to these problems, and should be repealed.  Suitable replacement legislation can be enacted later, if necessary, but only after full consultation with all stakeholders.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/najib-cabinet-to-discuss-controversial-evidence-law

Deputy Higher Education Minister Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah, Umno Youth chief Khairy Jamaluddin, and MCA Senator Gan Ping Sieu added their backing to a growing chorus of protest against the new law.

http://www.thesundaily.my/news/463385

The blackout also garnered international attention with Wikileaks and BBC picking up on the issue yesterday, while the Association of the Computer and Multimedia Industry of Malaysia (Pikom) also echoed the need for a review of the law. In a statement to Digital News Asia, Pikom president Shaifubahrim Saleh said the amendment may "appear to lower the bar for the prosecution of potentially innocent parties".

http://news.malaysia.msn.com/regional/malaysia-to-review-law-after-web-blackout-protest-2
Malaysia has long been known for its authoritarian rule but Najib, who came to power in 2009, has launched a campaign to repeal some repressive laws to gain voter support. However, the opposition and rights groups have dismissed the drive as a sham, saying that various laws introduced to replace the previous legislation have been little better than the old statutes.

Why Gay Marriage Is More Than a Legal Issue

Published by Christianity Today on 27 July 2012. 

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2012/july-august/why-gay-marriage-is-more-than-a-legal-issue.html?paging=off

The marriage debate shouldn't drive us to outrage or panic.

The gay marriage debate continues to boil over, tempting our nation to inaugurate a new era of McCarthyism. Back in the 1950s, anyone suspected of communism became a pariah. Now that seems to be true of anyone who supports traditional marriage.

Chick-fil-A president Dan Cathy, in answer to an interview question about the principles of the popular fast-food company, said, “We are very much supportive of the family—the biblical definition of the family unit.” This set some people’s teeth on edge. But the heat rose when some discovered Cathy said a couple of weeks earlier, “I think we are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes marriage.’”

That may be prophetic, but in our culture it is impolitic to say this. Cathy’s comments raised the ire of Chicago alderman Joe Moreno, who said he would block the company from building a restaurant in his ward. He was supported by Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel, and, from a distance, Boston mayor Thomas Menino, who wants Chick-fil-A to vacate the premises of his town ASAP. As Menino put it, he’s “angry” about such “prejudiced statements.”

And this, even though Chick-fil-A followed up with a statement saying it strives to "treat every person with honor, dignity and respect—regardless of their belief, race, creed, sexual orientation or gender.” And then there’s this not unimportant fact: There is absolutely no proof that Chick-fil-A has ever practiced prejudice of any sort.

So apparently how you actually treat homosexuals is not a sufficient test of one’s Americanism. Now you need to think right to get into the good graces of government. This has struck even some pro-gay marriage advocates as a bit over the top--some would say Stalinist. As the Chicago Tribune’s Eric Zorn put it, “Don’t ask The Man to do the dirty work of attempting to marginalize and silence your opponents.”

Back in the spring, there was a similar dustup over the issue. On May 8, North Carolina citizens voted to ban gay marriage by a hefty margin of 61 to 39 percent. The next day, President Obama said on national television, "I think same-sex couples should be able to get married."

The comments following both events were predictable. From gay marriage advocates, there was talk about civil rights and history being on their side. Proponents of traditional marriage, meanwhile, resonated with this statement from Cardinal Timothy Dolan, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops: "We cannot be silent in the face of words or actions that would undermine the institution of marriage, the very cornerstone of our society."

To sum up what we at Christianity Today have said before: We believe gays and lesbians should not be denied fundamental rights granted to every other American, nor should they suffer slurs or intimidation in any shape or form (and neither should those who oppose gay marriage). Further, we continue to believe that marriage should be defined in our nation as a moral and legal bond between a man and a woman. For, among other reasons, societies that fail to shape themselves by the most basic and universal of divine laws and institutions cannot have a happy future (Cathy is right to be concerned). This seems built into the very order of creation by our loving Creator.

Careful readers will notice that we do not get panicked or outraged when gay marriage sometimes gets the upper hand in the ebb and flow of national debate. As much as we want the state to recognize and protect traditional marriage, we're not depending on the state to do so. In fact, the state has already done plenty to undermine traditional marriage—no-fault divorce law being perhaps the most egregious example. Since its advent in 1970, this policy has destabilized marriage like no other.

Nor do we think that the future of marriage or the American experiment hinges on how we as a nation decide the gay marriage debate. The on-the-ground understanding of marriage was weakened long ago. While the formal conversation around marriage is often about making a commitment to love and serve another for life, in practice it is clear that the cult of self-fulfillment drives many if not most of today's marriages.

It is impossible to find accurate numerical data that report the reasons for divorce, due to states having different requirements, terminology, and reporting methods for divorcing couples. But reasons commonly cited on legal and counseling websites include infidelity, communication breakdown, sexual incompatibility, boredom, and differences in priorities and expectations. The clichéd response, "We grew apart," is not a bad summary of all these reasons. It strongly suggests, "I'm not interested in pursuing this relationship if you're not interested in what I'm interested in."

Far more than the protection of the legal definition of marriage, what our society needs is a fresh understanding of marriage. One does not have to be a Christian to see how much richer and deeper marriage can be if it is primarily entered into for the sake of others, certainly the spouse but especially for the offspring of a marriage.

Nor does one have to be a theist to recognize that there is something fitting, unique, and precious about the sexual union of a husband and wife. For the Christian, of course, marriage is more than all this (a sacramental witness to God's covenant with his people, for example). But we can happily join hands with people of other faiths or no faith who recognize the tangible, natural dimensions of marriage that seem to be built into the very order of things.

While we continue to strive to convince our nation of the value of traditional marriage, we must not get discouraged on the legislative front, and should take in stride the prejudice against those who publicly support traditional marriage. While proponents of gay marriage will make it sound like history is on their side, in fact, history keeps surprising us. Not long ago, many thought that communism was the inevitable future, others, that religion was on its last legs. No, our nation's formal definition of marriage still hangs in the balance.

But rather than put all of our eggs in the basket of constitutional amendments or judicial opinion, we Christians would be wise to shore up marriage in our churches. Doing this would be both an act of repentance for our narcissism (for we Christians succumb to this temptation as much as the next sinner) and a witness to what marriage at its best can be. That calls for continued efforts by church and parachurch ministries to strengthen marriages, and to offer winsome public arguments for a deeper and richer understanding of marriage than our culture can possibly imagine.

Six of the best law books

By Ros Taylor. Published by The Guardian on 8 August 2012.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/aug/08/six-best-law-books

We asked you to tell us which books a future law student should read. Here are the top nominations - and some of the other contenders:-


The Rule of Law by Tom Bingham

Whatever did inquiring legal minds read before Lord Bingham published The Rule of Law? This slim volume has rapidly become the book Guardian-reading lawyers are most likely to recommend to anyone interested in the profession. As Joshua Rozenberg put it: "Bingham's definition of that much-used term is now entirely authoritative and will probably remain so for the next 120 years or more. In summary, it is 'that all persons and authorities within the state, whether public or private, should be bound by and entitled to the benefit of laws publicly made, taking effect (generally) in the future and publicly administered in the courts.'

Letters to a Law Student by Nicholas McBride

"Dear Sam, I hope you don't mind me writing to you in this way..." The only book to receive as many nominations as Bingham's was Letters to a Law Student, by All Souls fellow and director of studies at Pembroke College, Cambridge. Solicitous, authoritative and hardly discounted even by Amazon, it knows its audience - those who already have a place to read law are advised to skip the first chapters.

Glanville Williams: Learning the Law (ATH Smith)

Welsh legal scholar Williams died in 1997, but Learning the Law lives on - though much of the rest of his prolific output is out of print. His support for legalising abortion and euthanasia, as well as his role in decriminalising suicide in 1961, earned his reputation as a reformer. But not everyone is a fan. "I read it once and I've never touched it again," wrote Stephen Clark (LLB Exeter and about to start his BPTC). "This is supposedly the standard introductory text, but I couldn't encourage students enough to stay away from it. It really won't help when it comes to knowing the law, it won't help when it comes to understanding the law and it won't impart you with the skills necessary to do well on the LLB."

What About Law? by Catherine Barnard et al

Recommended by - among others - Southampton University lecturer Mark Telford, What About Law? describes the various fields of law in engaging detail, though is less forthcoming with practical advice. Opens with the legal implications of the wild party 17-year-old Laura throws while her parents are away for the weekend.

Eve Was Framed by Helena Kennedy

Baroness Kennedy, as listeners to her current Radio 4 series will know, is as much concerned with justice as the law. Much of this lively and highly readable book is devoted to exploring the myriad ways in which the legal system has let down women - as lawyers, victims and defendants - though there is also plenty of optimism, particularly about the ability of women to rise to the top of the legal establishment. Kennedy's Just Law was also nominated.

Bleak House by Charles Dickens

Somewhere in the new Rolls Building, a modern Jarndyce v Jarndyce is doubtless lumbering - or perhaps the Technology and Construction Court is hosting a particularly lengthy dispute involving tree roots. Dickens was a court reporter for four years and undoubtedly drew on his experiences, particularly at the Old Bailey, for his fiction - this coining trial may have inspired part of Great Expectations.

Other nominations

Cardiff and UCL academic Richard Moorhead: The End of Lawyers by Richard Susskind

UK Human Rights Blog editor and 1COR barrister Adam Wagner: Geoffrey Robertson's The Justice Game

Carrie Alcott: How Law Works by Gary Slapper ("Absolutely brilliant. Have just read it now, going in to my final year, and really wish I'd come across it before I began studying")

Lila Lamrabert: The Law Machine by Clare Dyer and Marcel Berlins

Michael Zymler and Jennie Evans: How To Win Every Argument: The Use and Abuse of Logic by Madsen Pirie

Jason Miller and Emma Morris: The Case of the Speluncean Explorers by Lon Fuller (Miller: "Jurisprudence isn't everyone's cup of tea but it shows a variety of legal and moral viewpoints.")

Stacey Roden: Learning Legal Rules by James Holland

Paul O'Grady: A Short History of Western Legal Theory by John Kelly

Marika Giles Samson: The Best Defense by Paul Dershowitz

Jack Gilbert: The Colour of Law by Mark Giminez ("on a purely motivational basis")

Johor Orang Asli to get Compensation over Eviction

Published by The Malaysian Insider on 7 August 2012.

The Johor government will compensate the Orang Asli of Orang Selat descent over eviction from their land in Stulang Laut and demolition of their chapel nine years ago.

This follows the withdrawal of an appeal by the Johor Land and Mines Department represented by state legal adviser Datuk Abdul Rahman Putra against the decision of the Johor Baru High Court which had in 2010 awarded compensation to 50 Orang Asli which was to be assessed by the High Court.

The High Court had ruled that the eviction of Khalip Bachik Kelah Lah and 49 others from their land by the authorities was unlawful and the demolition of the chapel was an act of trespass. 

A three-member Court of Appeal panel led by Datuk Seri Abu Samah Nordin struck out the appeal and awarded RM5,000 in costs to the Orang Asli. Justices Datuk Clement Allan Skinner and Datuk Aziah Ali were the other two judges presiding on the panel.

Steven Thiru representing the Orang Asli said that following the withdrawal of the appeal the High Court’s decision stood. He said the next move was to go back to the High Court for assessment of damages to determine the amount of compensation.

Khalip and others are of Orang Asli Laut descent and members of the Orang Asli Christian congregation. They were originally residents of Kampung Orang Asli Stulang Laut. They received a directive from the Johor Baru City Council in 1993 to relocate to Kampung Orang Asli Kuala Masai on the grounds that the site they occupied was earmarked for development. 

Khalip and Kelah claimed that the Orang Asli Affairs Department (JHEOA) director-general had given them an assurance that they could build a place of worship at the new settlement and had done so upon relocation in 2003.

In 2005, 10 days before Christmas the chapel was demolished when the community was busy making preparations for the celebration.

In their civil suit filed in December 2008 the Orang Asli had named as defendants the state Land and Mines Department director Johor Baru City Council and JHEOA. However the city council and JHEOA chose not to participate in the proceedings in the High Court. The city council did not file affidavits in defence despite reminders and then failed to enter an appearance when the hearing dates were fixed. On September 22, 2010 the Johor Baru High Court ruled in favour of the Orang Asli and ordered the state Land and Mines Department director and city council to pay compensation to the Orang Asli.

Read more here: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/johor-orang-asli-to-get-compensation-over-eviction/

Chick-fil-A: Religious Freedom vs Gay Rights

Illustration by Ted McGrathPublished by Bloomberg Businessweek on 2 August 2012. By Drake Bennett.

Gay-rights groups, which for years have pointed out that Chick-fil-A’s charitable arm gives millions of dollars to Focus on the Family, the Eagle Forum, the Family Research Council, and other organizations that agitate against gay marriage, pounced on Cathy’s comments. The quotes spread in the usual ways, through blogs and the websites of watchdog groups, and the political haymaking commenced. 

On July 20, Boston Mayor Thomas Menino sent a letter to Chick-fil-A urging the company to back out of plans to locate in Boston and told the Boston Herald that he would make it “very difficult” for the restaurant to come to town. (He later admitted he had no power to do so.) A few days later a Chicago alderman announced that he would block a planned Chick-fil-A location in his ward, and Mayor Rahm Emanuel chimed in that “Chick-fil-A’s values are not Chicago’s values.” 

On Twitter, San Francisco Mayor Edwin Lee declared that Chick-fil-A wasn’t welcome in San Francisco, even though the restaurant hadn’t announced any plans to open a location there, and Washington mayor Vincent Gray called the chain “hate chicken.” New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, a favorite to be the city’s next mayor, wrote a letter last Saturday to New York University president John Sexton, whose campus hosts the only Chick-fil-A in the city, asking him to boot out the restaurant.

Against this array of urban Northern and coastal liberals, a red-state chorus arose to defend the honor of Chick-fil-A. Its partisans pointed out, among other things, that the chain was being attacked even though there’s no evidence it discriminates against gay customers or job applicants. Rick Santorum and Sarah Palin voiced their support for the chain, as did Billy and Franklin Graham. Former Arkansas Governor and talk-show host Mike Huckabee took to Facebook (FB) to declare himself “incensed at the vitriolic attacks” on the restaurant. He declared Wednesday, Aug. 1, to be Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day; more than 600,000 people pledged on Facebook to attend, and on the appointed day TV news channels showed lines outside certain franchises.

Read more here: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-08-02/chick-fil-a-deep-fried-civil-war#p1
Related report: http://www.christianitytoday.com/thisisourcity/richmond/another-kind-of-christian-witness-at-chick-fil-a.html?paging=off Franchise owner Erik Devriendt doesn't have much to say about the recent imbroglio over Dan Cathy's comments. He just wants to help local refugees.

Malaysians recoil with SHOCK & ANGER at Rafizi's arrest

Written by  Maria Begum, published by Malaysia Chronicle on 1 August 2012.

http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=37458:msians-recoil-with-shock-anger-at-rafizis-arrest-move-to-suppress-whistle-blowers&Itemid=2

News of the arrest of PKR strategy director Rafizi Ramli has shocked Malaysians, who have reacted angrily to the news. Among the most cited reasons for their anger was why should Rafizi, who was trying to expose corruption, be penalized while the wrongdoers were let off.

Indeed, corruption-tainted Prime Minister Najib Razak may have opened a new can of worms for himself. Already embattled and facing pressure from possible loss in general elections due to be called latest by April next year, many believe he was out to "scaremonger" his way through.

His two main targets are believed to be whistle blowers - many of whom come from the investment and financial community - so that they will stop exposing the misdeeds of his Umno-BN coalition.

The second target are politicians - including from his own government. Leaders from the Pakatan Rakyat opposition do not expect another crackdown like the Operations Lalang effected by former premier Mahathir Mohamad against political rivals in the 1980s.

However, they do not discount the possibility that Najib was also trying to scare BN leaders who have begun defecting to the opposition amid rising concern at Umno's growing extremism as the 13th general election neared.

From leaders

Anwar Ibrahim, Opposition Leader

Applaud his courage on the Cow-Condo case and GeorgeKent involvg dSNajib! .

Tian Chua, PKR MP for Batu

No, we don't expect Ops Lalang. That would be political suicide for Najib and he knows it. This is another ill-advised stunt to discourage whistle blower from coming forward. It is  real shame for Malaysia's image to investors, who are watching closely. We also see him trying to warn BN leaders who are switching out from his coalition that they can expect rough and tough action like this. But he has missed the pulse of the nation. Everyone is fed up and this latest arrest only confirms the need to change the current regime.

Nurul Izzah, PKR MP for Lembah Pantai

Despite expose, despite arrest, despite being charged, George Kent prevails. Shame on you

Shamsul Iskandar Akin, PKR Youth chief

Shahrizat's family, when? RT

Hannah Yeoh, DAP assemblywoman for Subang Jaya

Woke up to news of @rafiziramli being arrested by police. We stand by you

Ambiga Sreenevasan, co-chairman of the Bersih movement for clean polls

The nation is watching! We stand by those brave enough to expose wrongdoing and condemn those who suppress the truth!

Dzulkefly Ahmad, PAS MP for Kuala Selangor

We knew it was coming but why the sudden rushed timing. Was it coincidental with the George Kent news? This is Ramadan, a fasting ad holy month to observe restraint and righteousness. But Umno seems so desperate it is committing blunder after blunder. We also note that such hypocritical action is coming from Najib who has been promising reforms and a clean government.

From Netizens

very very angry rakyat

This is so damn WRONG SO WRONG !!! Rakyat Malaysia , terutamanya saudara dan saudari dari luar bandar tolonglah tengok dengan mata sendiri is this the govt that you wanna cast your vote on ?? Jom mulakan kempen "" BEBAKAN RAFIZI , Hero Rakyat !!! "'

Change

What do you expect from a Third Country like Malaysia. The person who reported the crime get arrested but the criminal got off free. Remember the ex CM of Melaka case!!!!!!!!!!

Susie

Stupidest thing for Najib to do. The whole nation loves Rafizi for his courage in exposing the corrupt at the top level... God is with those who are righteous too. Keep on doing what is right, everyone!

LEE

WE ARE WITH U , RAFIZI !! BE STRONG !!

TANNER

Trying to do the Mahathir? Equivalent of Operation Lalang? More arrests of oppositions. People realise Mahathir's authoritarianism, stupidity and vanity after he retires. But they could see Najib's authoritarianism, stupidity and vanity now.

Related reports:

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/rafizi-detained-over-alleged-bafia-breach/

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2012/08/01/rafizi-arrested-to-be-charged/

http://www.malaysia-chronicle.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=37457:rafizi-arrested-after-george-kent-awarded-lrt-deal-scorpene-fear-grips-najib?&Itemid=2

City Council Loses Appeal in 'Chapel Demolition' Case

http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/204997

Published by Malaysiakini on 30 July 2012. By Hafiz Yatim.

The Court of Appeal in Putrajaya has struck out an appeal by the Johor Baru City Council (MBJB) over the demolition of an Orang Asli chapel, describing the application as an abuse of the court process.

The three-member bench headed by Justice Syed Ahmad Helmy Syed Ahmad, along with Abdul Wahab Patail and Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim, was unanimous in the decision. 

The court also ordered MBJB to pay RM10,000 in costs.

In September 2010, the Johor Bahru High Court had ordered the MBJB to pay damages to Khalip Bachik, Kelah Lah and 49 others of Kuala Masai, Johor, following the demolition of their chapel. 

Khalip had filed the civil suit in December 2008 against the MBJB, Johor Land and Mines Department and the Orang Asli Affairs Department (JHEOA).

The MBJB failed to file affidavits in defence despite reminders being sent, and then failed to enter an appearance when the hearing dates were fixed. As a result, the council was ordered to pay damages.

It appeared alone in its appeal today. The other two appellants will have their application heard next week.

The council had claimed that the suit had been filed under the ‘Johor Bahru Town Council’ and not ‘Majlis Bandaran Johor Bahru’. Hence, it was not bound by the order imposed by the Johor Bahru High Court.

Khalip's lawyers argued to strike out the application, saying the appeal proper was incompetent and that the memorandum of appeal was defective. This made the appeal frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the court process.

The Orang Asli were represented by Steven Thiru and Aron Matthews, while Roger Tan and CP Lee appeared for the appellants.

Permission given for place of worship

Khalip and others are of Orang Asli Laut descent and members of the Orang Asli Christian congregation. They were originally residents of Kampung Orang Asli Stulang Laut.

They received a directive to move to Kampung Orang Asli Kuala Masai from the Johor Bahru City Council in 1993 on the ground that the site they occupied was to be developed.

Khalip and Kelah claimed that the JHEOA director-general had given them an assurance that they could build a place of worship at the new settlement, and had done so upon relocation in 2003.

When the demolition was carried out in 2005, the state failed to show any court order or proof that the chapel was sitting on state land.

Eight of the 20 families living in Kampung Orang Asli Kuala Masai are of the Christian faith.