Showing posts with label lawyer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lawyer. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Ignore letter to remove Bibles from hotel rooms, lawyers tell hoteliers


By V. Anbalagan, Assistant News Editor. Published by The Malaysian Insider on 29 April 2014.

Lawyers have urged hoteliers in Pahang to ignore the directive from the state Islamic council to remove non-Muslim religious materials from their premises as it has no authority over such matters.

The constitutional and administrative lawyers said the Pahang Islamic and Malay Customs Council (Muip) was not in any position to penalise any individual or company as hoteliers were not licensed by religious bodies.

They were responding to a recent directive from Muip prohibiting hotel proprietors in the state from placing religious reading materials of other religions other than Islam in their rooms.

Lawyer Razlan Hadri Zulkifli said hoteliers could just ignore the letter because the council had no jurisdiction over them. "They cannot raid to seize any non-Muslim religious material like the Bible," he told The Malaysian Insider.

Razlan said the council could be hauled to court if its officers conducted raids to seize non-Muslim religious books and literature. "The council as a public authority can be subjected to a judicial review and the court can make a declaration that its action was illegal," he said. Razlan said at this point of time, there was no reason for hoteliers to seek judicial intervention because they had not been adversely affected by mere issuance of the letter.

It was reported that the state religious body had sent a letter to 147 hotels across the state since March 6, warning that those who defied the directive could be subjected to legal action. The letter was issued under the Control and Restriction of the Propagation of Non-Islamic Religions among Muslims Enactment 1989, in line with Article 11 (4) of the Federal Constitution.

Muip deputy president Datuk Seri Wan Abdul Wahid Wan Hassan reportedly said the placement of the materials in the hotel rooms could be regarded as an act of spreading other religious beliefs to Muslims. If convicted, those involved could be fine up to RM5,000 or jailed for up to two years, or both.

Another lawyer Shukor Ahmad described the letter to the hoteliers as "irrational, unreasonable and unconstitutional". He said assuming even if the non-Muslims religious books, like the Bible, were banned by the Home Ministry, the council officer had no business to seize them. Furthermore, the council, he added, had no power to act against non-Muslims or business entities. "At best, they can only advise Muslims about non-Muslims religious books and symbols being placed in hotels. Anyway, it is for the hotel guests to decide where they would like to stay."

He said some hotels distributed mainstream newspapers to their guests but that did not mean the management compelled their guests to read the newspapers. "You have the option. Similarly, Muslim guests may have access to non-Muslim religious books but that does not mean they can be influenced by reading them in the hotel rooms," he said.

Shukor said the council was acting outside the scope of the enactment and misreading the article on freedom of religion under the Federal Constitution. "The council's action is so ridiculous that no reasonable person could accept," he added.

Hotel proprietors have called on Pahang Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Adnan Yaakob to intervene since Islamic matters came under the jurisdiction of the state.

Non-governmental organisation Centre for a Better Tomorrow (Cenbet) said the council directive went against the freedom of choice of the hotels to supply such materials in their rooms. "Conversely, it is the freedom of choice of anyone not to stay in such hotels if they disagreed with the hotel policy," said its co-presidents Lim Chee Wee and Gan Ping Sieu in a statement last week.

Politicians from both side of the political divide have also expressed concern over the council's directive.

Sunday, January 5, 2014

Shame on you UMNO bigots!


A coalition of Muslim non-governmental organisations, Klang Muslim Solidarity Secretariat, gathered at the Sultan Sulaiman Stadium on Sunday to protest the use of the word "Allah" by Christians.The coalition was protesting a statement allegedly made by Catholic priest and editor of The Herald weekly Father Lawrence Andrew, who had reportedly said that churches in Selangor would continue to use the word 'Allah' in reference to God in their weekend services. His remark sparked protests from several Muslim non-governmental bodies, including Selangor Umno members.

UMNO Kapar division deputy chief Datuk Saroni Judi said Sunday that Father Lawrence must apologise or face a “mega-demonstration” displaying their dissatisfaction. The issue came to the fore after the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais) officers raided and seized 351 copies of Bahasa Malaysia and Iban language versions of the Bible which contained the word 'Allah' from the Bible Society of Malaysia on Thursday.
Jais had earlier reminded all churches in Selangor to comply with the prohibition on the use of the word 'Allah' as provided for under the Selangor Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Among Muslims) Enactment 1988. "This is us Muslims giving our support to Jais to conduct raids and uphold the law against churches so that the latter complies with state laws," Saroni said.

Datin Paduka Marina Mahathir took a swipe at the country's leadership for the handling of the JAIS raid and the Allah issue today, saying it is a shame that they are not making a stand against religious tolerence. "Everyone has been complaining that the leadership's silence is deafening. It's far from elegant and certainly incriminating."
"The last time when churches were burnt he wasn't present either," said the daughter of former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, declining to confirm if she was referring to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.
She described last Thursday's raid conducted by JAIS (Selangor Islamic Religious Department) on the Bible Society of Malaysia as "despicable" and something that should have never happened.
During the raid, about 300 copies of the Bible in the Malay and Iban languages were seized. "You should never enter others' house of worship without permission. I think they (BSM) should go ahead and take legal action against JAIS as they don't have jurisdiction (over Christians)."
"Forget Visit Malaysia 2014, who wants to visit a Bible grabbing country?" said Marina.
Several conservative Malay and Muslim groups also threatened to protest outside churches in Selangor but police persuaded them to demonstrate elsewhere while tightening security around the churches. 
Today, Father Andrew also thanked parishioners for getting together and guarding the church over the last two nights. Before and after mass, many parishioners went up to him and held his hands in theirs, offering him words of support and encouragement. One lady, who said she was from rights group Suaram, quietly walked up to him, clasped his hands in hers and said: "You have our support, Father".
More than the usual number of Catholic lawyers also attended the Sunday mass at the church today as a show of support and also to be at hand if any untoward incidents took place. One of them was KL Catholic Lawyers Society president Viola Decruz, who had gone to the church of Our Lady of Lourdes before coming to the church in Port Klang. "It was good to see Muslims there at Our Lady of Lourdes church who did not come to protest but who came to support the church's stand on freedom to be able to practise one's religion," Decruz said.
Another lawyer, Ramesh Supramaniam, said he came to defuse the situation in case protestors turned up. Klang MP Charles Santiago, who came to hear Father Andrew say mass, said when he was at the Our Lady of Lourdes church earlier in the morning, a Muslim wearing a songkok walked up to him and told him, "Please tell your priest we are here to support him". Santiago urged Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak to censure Selangor Umno chief Datuk Seri Noh Omar over his statements on the issue. "He should stop threatening the peace and security in the country. We know that Umno is doing this for its survival but as PM of all people, he should take stern action against Noh Omar," he added.
He also lambasted the burning of Father Andrew's effigy by protesters several days ago. "The Prime Minister must speak up on this issue or risk being labelled an extremist as well," Santiago said. A parishioner, Vanitha, 41, said she was pained to see Father Andrew's effigy being burned. "We are so hurt but we are not going to react because of our faith in God. Those people who did it are answerable to God," she said, looking downcast.
The very people the 'Allah' issue was centred on, the Bahasa Malaysia speaking community in peninsular Malaysia, also expressed sadness over the current goings-on affecting their faith. "How can it come to this. Go to the interiors of Sarawak, we all call God, Allah. We are the same people from those interiors who are here now working in small jobs as factory operators. All we want to do is to earn a decent living and pray in our language. Why are people denying us that basic right," said one mother holding a newborn baby in her arms after attending Father Andrew's mass. Her friend added, "Will they now come to our homes and threaten us like criminals because we use the Alkitab?" she asked, referring to the Malay translation of the Bible.
"Is this the 1Malaysia they are talking about, denying us our right to pray in our own language?" said the woman of Iban origin.
As parishioners left the church compound after Sunday school ended peacefully, it was not quite over yet for the church, in particular for Father Andrew. On Tuesday, he is scheduled to meet Selangor state councillor in charge of Islamic affairs, Sallehin Mukhyi. But he will not be alone. Santiago and Sri Andalas assemblyman Dr Xavier Jeyakumar, who was also in church today, told Father Andrew they would accompany him for the meeting.

Thursday, October 17, 2013

Allah Saga: It is Wrong to Deny Fundamental Rights on the Premise that Others May Be Confused


The Malaysian Bar is deeply concerned by the decision of the Court of Appeal delivered on 14 October 2013 in what is commonly referred to as the ‘Herald’ or ‘Allah’ case.

The concerns arise from the Court’s interpretation of Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution on the status of Islam and other religions and Article 11(1) and (4) on the fundamental right to profess and practice a religion.

Any interpretation of the Constitution must invite the greatest scrutiny as it impacts on the fundamental freedoms guaranteed to all citizens. 

We are particularly concerned with the following findings, that:

I. The insertion of the words “in peace and harmony” in Article 3(1) is to protect the sanctity of Islam and “also to insulate against any threat…to the religion of Islam”;

Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution expressly provides that “Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practiced in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation”. 

The Court of Appeal found that this Article was inserted as a byproduct of the social contract by our founding fathers, and that the purpose and intention of the words “in peace and harmony” was to protect the sanctity of Islam as the religion of the country and to insulate it against any threat. This is an unnatural reading of the provisions in Article 3(1). The words in their clear and ordinary meaning provides for the right of other religions to be practiced unmolested and free of threats.

In referring to the social contract, effect should be given to the understanding as at 1957 and not to the numerous amendments that have since been made to the Federal Constitution in violation thereof. Paragraph 57 of the White Paper in 1957 which gave rise to Articles 3(1) and 11(4) of the Federal Constitution provides as follows:

“There has been included in the proposed Federal Constitution a declaration that Islam is the religion of the Federation. This will in no way affect the present position of the Federation as a secular State, and every person will have the right to profess and practice his own religion and the right to propagate his religion, though this last right is subject to any restrictions imposed by State law relating to the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the Muslim religion.”

II. The use of the word ‘Allah’ in the Malay version of the Herald would cause or create confusion amongst persons professing the religion of Islam;

It is unreasonable and contrary to the Constitutional scheme that a fundamental liberty is liable to be denied on the basis that some person or persons would be confused. 

The decision does not in any way aid in addressing or resolving the alleged confusion amongst persons professing the religion of Islam, when in fact that word ‘Allah’ is used by more than one community in this country and by peoples of different faiths in the Arab world and other Muslim countries. Rather, the effect of the decision would be to encourage a perpetual state of confusion or ignorance as justifiable grounds for denying the rights of others. The course that ought to have been taken should be to educate those persons who would be confused and not to restrict or injunct the exercise of rights by others.

III. The use of the word ‘Allah’ in the Malay version of the Herald would have the potential to threaten or harm public order and safety; and

Having recited that religious sensitivities are a threat to public order and safety, the decision unfortunately serves to reinforce the notion that the use or threat of violence would win the day in court. It is unacceptable that citizens are denied their Constitutional rights of religious freedom and expression on the basis that others who disagree or who are confused would resort to aggression.

The law should not be interpreted and declared so as to condone, encourage, and perpetuate such aggression and threats of violence. Rather, the law ought to be visited upon those who would resort to threats or violence. 

IV. The finding that the word ‘Allah’ is not an essential and integral part of the faith and practice of Christianity.

There appears to be no basis for the findings by the Court of Appeal that the word is not an integral part of the faith or practice of Christianity other than what has been described in the written judgments as “a quick research” and research conducted on the internet.

It is troubling that the court would conduct research on its own via the internet and come to conclusions of alleged facts with respect to a person’s religion without its veracity being tested.

In any event, it is for a party asserting exclusive rights to the use of the word ‘Allah’ to establish that they have such exclusive rights, rather than for others to have to establish that the use of the word is integral to their faith. By most accounts, there is no prohibition on the use of the Arabic word ‘Allah’ by peoples of different faiths in the Arab world and other countries. It is difficult to discern how we are able to declare exclusivity of a word over which we do not have proprietary rights.

The Malaysian Bar calls upon all quarters to address the issue with maturity and calmness. It must be reminded that everyone must respect the right of the publishers of the Herald to seek to appeal the matter to the Federal Court, if they so wish. They should be permitted to pursue this without any threats or intimidation.

Christopher Leong
President
Malaysian Bar

16 October 2013

Tuesday, May 14, 2013

IGP’s got it wrong, rally is legal



By K Pragalath. Published by Free Malaysia Today on 8 May 2013.

The Inspector General of Police is working with a wrong understanding of the law relating to protest rallies, said a lawyer today. IGP Ismail Omar’s declaration that a rally tonight by Pakatan Rakyat is illegal shows he is still working with the mindset of section 27 of the Police Act.

“Section 27 of the Police Act has been replaced with the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012. There is no such thing as permits under the PAA,” said civil liberties lawyer, Syahredzan Johan. He said this in response to Ismail’s declaration that the rally led by Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim tonight in Kelana Jaya Stadium is illegal.

“The organiser must comply with the PAA. Marching without a permit, aimed at arousing anger, is wrong according to the law,” declared the IGP. “Comply with the law and use the correct channel to apply for a permit from the district police chief,” national news agency Bernama quoted Ismail Omar as saying yesterday. Ismail added that those who took part in the rally tonight will be arrested.

Police cannot declare rally illegal

Anwar called for the rally following allegations that the 13th general election that took place on Sunday was fraught with cheating and irregularities.

Syahredzan also explained the limitations of the police under the PAA. Among others, he said the police cannot declare a rally illegal. “No rallies can be declared illegal under the PAA. The organisers can only be charged for not notifying the OCPD of the rally.” The act states that rally organisers are required to notify the police 10 days prior to the rally. “Rally participants cannot be charged for attending the rally. They are not committing an offence unless they bring their underaged children."

Link:

Friday, April 12, 2013

Forum: From Johor to Putrajaya



Dato' Ambiga Sreenevasan, a prominent human rights lawyer, former president of the Malaysian Bar Council and current co-chairperson of Bersih 2.0 Steering Committee will be in Johor Bahru to speak in a forum entitled - From Johor to Putrajaya. 

The other panelists for this forum are all the Pakatan Rakyat parliamentary candidates for the JB area seats like Lim Kit Siang (Gelang Patah), Salahuddin Ayub (Pulai), Tan Sri Hashim Hussein (JB), Steven Choong (Tebrau) and Dr. Ahmad Faidhi Saidi (P. Gudang). 

Apart from hearing from Ambiga about her take on the coming General Election, you would also be able to hear from the candidates and ask them questions.  

This forum is organised by Tuntutan Rakyat Johor (TRJ) a coalition of 21 Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO) and our purpose is to help those who are undecided as to how they want to vote to vote wisely.  As such, please bring along such a friend, let them hear from the candidates and ask them questions themselves.

Details of the event:

Date : 14th April 2013 (Sunday)
Time : 5pm sharp till 7pm.
Venue: Wisma PKK, Persisiran Danga 1, Tmn Sutera Utama, Skudai, Johor. (Near to SJKC Kuo Kuang 2 and Sri Omega International School)
Cost : Free admission but a freewill donation will be collected to help defray expenses.

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

Burn #Alkitab Day on Jan 27?



By G Vinod. Published by Free Malaysia Today on 22 January 2013.
Bishop Ng Moon Hing, executive secretary of the Christian Federation of Malaysia (CFM), said a copy of the flyer was found in the mailbox of a Christian priest residing in Butterworth. The flyer, printed by a group called Pasukan Bertindak Anti Bible Bahasa Melayu (Anti-Malay-Bible Action Force), urges Muslims to join in the “Malay Bible burning festivities” scheduled at 10am.
“Our children and grandchildren will end up being apostates if you want to wait for our impotent government to act,” reads the flyer. “To Muslims who have copies of al-Kitab, bring them over to make our Bible burning session merrier.” It says Sunday has been chosen for the burning because “that’s the day Christians go to church to pray to their gods.”
Ng described all religious scriptures as “valuable” and said no one should threaten to desecrate a holy book in any manner. “CFM abhors this action, which was first proposed by Perkasa president Ibrahim Ali,” he said. “Now this group has decided to make it a reality on a sacred day for Christians.”
He said Christians were peace loving people who would always strive to bring harmony and peace to multi-religious Malaysia.
He alleged that extremist groups planning such “vile acts” were doing so only to score political brownie points. “We pray that good sense will prevail during these trying times. May the Lord confound the plans made by these irresponsible people.”
Perkasa’s Ibrahim, in calling for the burning of Bibles last Saturday, alleged that Christians were provoking the Muslims by using Arabic religious terms in their scripture. The call drew brickbats from both opposition and Barisan Nasional (BN) component parties.



Related reports:
Perkasa president Ibrahim Ali has called on Muslims to seize and burn copies of Bibles which contain the term “Allah” or other Arabic religious words.
“Muslims must unite to protect their religion. They must seize those Bibles, including the Malay editions, which contained the term Allah and other Arabic religious terms, and burn them.
“This is the way to show our anger against disrespect to our sensitivity,” he told a press conference after delivering his presidential speech at a Perkasa convention here today.

http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2013/01/22/hasan-ali-defends-ibrahim-ali/
Selangor state lawmaker Hasan Ali today supported Ibrahim Ali’s struggle to uphold the word “Allah” for Muslims but disagreed with the latter’s call to burn Bibles.
The president of NGO Jati said the Perkasa chief’s call on Saturday for Muslims to burn Bibles using the word “Allah” was not intended to stir violence but was just “a reflection of anger”.
The Attorney-General’s (A-G) Chambers will only act on Perkasa president, Ibrahim Ali’s controversial call to burn copies of the Malay Bibles if the books are actually burnt.
According to a civil liberties lawyer, Perkasa president Ibrahim Ali’s speech on the Allah issue on Saturday was a hate speech and contravened the Penal Code and Sedition Act.
“Ibrahim Ali may have committed several offences under Sections 298 and 505 of the Penal Code,” said Syahredzan Johan.
Section 298 states that it is an offence to utter words that deliberately wound religious feelings. If found guilty, an offender can be imprisoned for a year, or fined or both.
Section 505 meanwhile states that it is an offence to make statements that that are conducing public mischief. Those found guilty under this section can be imprisoned for a span of two years, fined or both.

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/prosecute-ibrahim-ali-over-bible-burning-call-bar-council-urges/

“This statement by Ibrahim is an incitement or abetment to commit criminal offence under Section 107 of the Penal Code, whilst the seizure and burning of bibles is an offence under Section 441 of the Penal Code,” Bar Council president Lim Chee Wee said.

http://www.themuslimtimes.org/2013/01/countries/malta/everybodys-right-to-use-religious-terms
The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, which believes and acts on the true teachings of Islam and promotes peace, love, tolerance and mutual respect towards all mankind, strongly rejects and condemns this violence towards the Malaysian Christian Community. The very idea that Allah or any other religious term should be reserved only for Muslims is absurd.
The Ahmadiyya Community also strongly supports the court’s decision to grant Christians the right to use the word Allah to refer to God.
http://www.themuslimtimes.org/2013/01/countries/malaysia/malaysia-bans-use-of-word-allah-by-non-muslims#ixzz2Ihyw6rvG


We, in the Muslim Times stand for the religious freedom for everyone.  I suggest that the Christians can start using web-based version of the Bible to demonstrate the small mindedness of the Sultan to the whole world. They should host their Bible, with the world ‘Allah,’ free of charge in the Muslim Times, until the Sultan begins to respect the Universal Declaration of the Human Rights.

http://aliran.com/11367.html

In a joint statement, Aliran, Sisters in Islam, Islamic Renaissance Front and Projek Dialog have condemned Perkasa’s call to burn Malay-language Bibles as an abominable provocation.


We are appalled by the vile exhortation of right-wing Perkasa president Ibrahim Ali to fellow Muslims to burn Malay-language Bibles containing the word “Allah” in the continuing saga of the contentious use of the term in Malaysia.
This dangerous and reckless provocation will only court the zealotry of the bigots and consequently tear apart the existing fragile harmony among Malaysians of various ethnic and religious backgrounds. Religious conflicts do not get resolved amicably and effectively by rabble rousing and dangerous antics such as the proposed torching of the holy books of believers.
The alleged distribution of Malay Bibles to Muslim children in a secondary school in Penang – yet to be verified – may have understandably caused deep concern among the Muslim community and requires immediate investigation, but it certainly doesn’t justify the burning of the Holy Bible. The provocation is mischievously intended to ignite hatred and extremism.
An understanding and appreciation of non-Muslim communities, which is so necessary for unity and harmony, cannot be promoted effectively by committing a sacrilegious act of burning holy books that are revered by their respective believers. In fact, this proposed act by Perkasa goes against the very teachings of most revealed religions including Islam.

Sunday, November 25, 2012

UK court vindicates Christian demoted for opposing gay ‘marriage’



By Hilary White.

MANCHESTER, November 23, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A court in Manchester has ruled that when Adrian Smith wrote on Facebook that he objected to government plans to create “same-sex marriage.” he was not committing an act of “professional misconduct.” Smith, 55, a property manager in Manchester, was demoted and had his pay cut by his employers, who alleged that his comment constituted an act of “gross professional misconduct.”

Smith had commented on his Facebook page that the redefinition of marriage planned by the coalition government is “an equality too far.”

“The Bible is quite specific that marriage is for men and women,” Smith wrote. “If the State wants to offer civil marriages to the same sex then that is up to the State; but the State shouldn’t impose its rules on places of faith and conscience.

The court ruled that Smith’s employer, Trafford Housing Trust, a branch of the local municipal government, had acted unlawfully in breaching the terms of its contract with Smith, and had no right to demote him. Mr. Smith made the comments on his own time and in a venue where they could not be read by the general public, the court observed. The Trust claimed, however, that he had broken the code of conduct for employees by making comments that “might offend co-workers”.

Mr. Smith said he was “pleased” with the outcome of the year-long case. “Britain is a free country where people have freedom of speech, and I am pleased that the judge’s ruling underlines that important principle,” Smith said. “But this sad case should never have got this far. Long ago, Trafford Housing Trust should have held their hands up and admitted they made a terrible mistake.”

The case prompted lawyer and religious discrimination law expert Neil Addison to comment that “the obsession with hate crime and hate speech has created a new generation of publicly paid heresy-hunters.”

Link:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/uk-court-vindicates-christian-demoted-for-opposing-gay-marriage

Wednesday, October 10, 2012

French lawyers debunk Bernama report on Scorpenes hearing



Written by  Stan Lee, published by Malaysia Chronicle on 9 October 2012.

It looks like Prime Minister Najib Razak and his Umno party are pulling out all stops to convince Malaysians that the Scorpenes corruption trial in Paris is a mere figment of the Opposition's imagination.

With the 13th general election looming and the stakes high, resolving the public perception that Najib had pocketed a massive illicit kickback is a necessity if he is to to be assured of a comfortable win over arch rival Anwar Ibrahim, who leads Malaysia's Pakatan Rakyat opposition front.

On Monday, quoting a 'prominent' French Government prosecutor Yves Charpenel, national news agency Bernama reported that Yves had denied there was an 'ongoing trial in France'. "I am aware about all the fuss kicked up by certain media (organisations) in Malaysia over this matter but what I can say is that this is nothing more than a trial by the media," Bernama reported Yves as saying. "A trial is a trial with all the rules. Investigation is another thing."

Contradictory

Whether Yves was accurately quoted and reported in the right context remains to be seen. However, William Bourdon, the French lawyer acting for Malaysian NGO SUARAM has debunked the Bernama report.

"Yves Charpenel's statement is absolutely contradictory with the current investigations. The Tribunal deGrande Instance has convened a criminal inquiry of which SUARAM has been accepted as a civil party since March 2012," Bourdon, who was deported from Malaysia when he came to brief his client last year, said in a statement released by SUARAM late on Monday night.

"Upon completion of the inquiry will the investigating judge make the decision of whether the case goes to full trial. It's the investigating judge that makes the decisions not the prosecutor. To our knowledge the current prosecutors in charge of the case have not made any such statements as suggested by Charpenel. The two Judges, Roger Le Loire and Serge Tournaire continue their investigations on the Scorpene inquiry”.

Najib and the Umno-led federal government had hammered through a RM7.3 billion purchase of 2 Scorpene submarines from DCNS in 2002 despite public protest that the ships were unsuitable for the shallow local waters. There was also uneasiness over the exorbitant price tag.

In 2010, SUARAM lodged a complaint with the French authorities, resulting in the current investigative trial against DCNS. The French naval giant is believed to have paid Najib and his Umno party an illegal kickback worth at least 114 million euros to secure the sale of the two submarines to the Malaysian government. The payment was allegedly made through a firm controlled by Najib's close friend Razak Baginda.

Guilty conscience? Why so SCARED?

The Umno-controlled press has repeatedly insisted that there was no proof of any wrongdoing but Najib and his administration have failed to convince Malaysians, largely because they kept rebuffing all efforts by civil society groups to hold a public inquiry.

The latest attempt to make Najib and Umno account for the murky deal is an invitation by Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim to the lawyers of both Suaram and DCNS to come to Kuala Lumpur and brief the Malaysian Parliament on the case.

"I refer to the above ongoing judicial inquiry at the Tribunal De Grande Instance in Paris presided over by Judge Roger Le Loire and Judge Serge Tournaire into the complaint by SUARAM. a Malaysian human rights non-governmental organization alleging that corrupt and illegal payments were made by the French suppliers DCNS and Thies and their joint venture company Armaris to Malaysian citizens and officials in relation to the purchase of the submarines in 2002 which were at the material time authorized by the then Malaysian Defence Minister and current Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak. where payments of up to 700 milliom ringgit were received by companies (Perimekar Sdn Bhd and Terasasi) owned by his adviser and close associate, Abdul Razak Baginda," Anwar wrote in his letter dated October 2, 2012.

"I am informed that you are representing the interest of DCNS in the above inquiry. As Leader of Opposition in the Malaysian Parliament. 1 have on this same date issued an invitation to the lawyers acting for SUARAM viz Messieurs William Bourdon and Joseph Breham to deliver a briefing on the status and development of the inquiry to interested Malaysian Members of Parliament during this current session of the Malaysian Parliament which will run until 22" November 2012. I will be inviting all members of the Malaysian Parliament to attend this briefing. As the allegations are in respect of the conduct of DCNS. I am of the view that it is appropriate that you are also invited to attend in order that interested Members of Parliament may also hear from DCNS."

Najib's penchant for false public relations and media spin

However, Defense Minister Zahid Hamidi has been quick to object to the invitation on the grounds that the acquisition had followed "legal procedure". Umno-linked groups too have rushed to shoot down Anwar's invite, rather illogically accusing him of trying to sabotage the nation by inviting "foreign interference" in domestic affairs.

In response, opposition leaders have expressed disappointment and concern over the "desperation" revealed by Najib, accusing him of doubletalk as he had just last week vowed to rid Malaysia of corruption and even donated RM1 million to the Vienna-based International Anti-Corruption Academy (IACA).

"The proof of the pudding is in the eating. If Najib and Umno are innocent, let the lawyers from both sides - DCNS as well as SUARAM - come to Malaysia and clarify everything to Parliament. But obviously, this is what Najib and Umno fear most. Their reaction is very revealing," PKR vice president Tian Chua told Malaysia Chronicle.

"As for the Bernama report, they could have twisted Yves Charpenel's comment - we don't know. But what we do know is that in the wake of the Bersih 3.0 rally in April, the Umno-controlled media tried to discredit Australian Senator Nick Xenophon by accusing him of describing Islam as a criminal organisation rather than a religion. Then there is Najib's contract with FBC Media and US poison blogger Josh Trevino. The fact is Najib has the worst record of abusing the media than any other leader. He has given Malaysia a really bad name overseas. Let's see if the Yves Charpenel report will blow up in his face."

Investigative trial stage: Different system, witnesses will be subpoenaed

Tian was referring to Xenophon, a member of the international observer team invited by Bersih to assess if its demands for electoral reform were reasonable. The Australian leader had expressed shock at the Malaysian police brutality towards peaceful Bersih protesters during the April 28 demonstration for clean polls.

For his chiding comments, the Umno-owned NST had deliberately misquoted a speech he made to the Australian Parliament back in 2009. In fact, Xenophon had not referred at all to Islam, but had instead been criticizing Scientologists and their money-raising tactics. The newspaper just substituted the word Islam instead of Scientologist.

As for UK-based consultancy FBC Media and blogger Josh Trevino, both have been disgraced and dropped by various top international media including BBC and the Guardian for not disclosing they had underlying deals to churn out false positive publicity for Najib and Sarawak Chief Minister Taib Mahmud.

Indeed, going through the latest Bernama report and the Yves Charpenel quotes, it is evident that all the French prosecutor may have said was that the Scorpenes case had not gone into FULL trial yet but was still at the investigative trial stage.

This is actually in line with all the disclosures made by Bourdon and SUARAM so far. In fact, SUARAM has made it very clear that what was now taking place was an investigative trial, overseen by 2 investigative judges. The French judiciary system is different from the British, on which Malaysia's own legal system is based.

Sinking with Najib & the Scorpenes

Industry practitioners question whether Bernama had led Yves on by asking whether a full trial was now ongoing. Hence his denial. The Malaysian news agency could then have written up its report to highlight Yves' denial, but deliberately omitting to put into full context his statement.

But as Bourdon pointed out, the investigative trial is in full swing and the first witness already subpoenaed to take the stand to answer all the queries the investigative judges wish to make on the case.

Apart from Najib's foreign media consultants and the NST, Bernama too has attracted controversy of late. Just weeks ago, it was forced to deny it had 'doctored' photos depicting a much larger crowd at Najib's recent Hari Raya open house so as to give the impression that the PM was more popular that he really is.

However, due to the angry reaction of the Malaysian public and the slew of 'photo-shop mistakes' pointed out by netizens, Bernama's chief editor had no choice but to finally admit the photos had indeed been "tampered" with.

Friday, August 24, 2012

Public appeal for funds: BERSIH 2.0 needs your support



http://www.bersih.org/?p=5389 Press Statement, 23 August 2012.

When BERSIH 2.0 was launched in April 2010 as a fully non-partisan movement asking for urgent electoral reforms, no one anticipated just how strongly the Malaysian public would respond. The swift and courageous support from all walks of life, many of whom also braved the streets of Kuala Lumpur (and in many other places around the world) on 9 July 2011 and again on 28 April have made it clear that the call for free and fair elections is a sentiment which echoes strongly in our nation.

BERSIH 2.0 has seen an outpouring of support from the public in the last two years and it has enabled the push for reforms to be made, to the point where the government has finally begun to respond. However, their response has not always been positive. In fact, the government often appears more interested in “shooting the messenger” rather than focusing on the message of hand: cleaning up the electoral system.

RM1 campaign for clean and fair elections

As the next general elections looms closer, BERSIH 2.0 seeks your support. The work still needs to continue and we need to work together for all of us to carry on. Therefore, BERSIH 2.0 is now launching a fund raising campaign to ask every Malaysians to support us by donating to the BERSIH 2.0 “Make a difference with RM1” campaign for Clean and Fair Elections. We aim to raise RM250,000 to reflect the 250,000 brave Malaysians who turned up for BERSIH 3.0 : Duduk Bantah on 28 April 2012.

Specifically, the funds will go to:

Medical and Legal Expenses of Victims of Police Brutality
  1. Supporting the victims of police brutality during and after 28 April who have courageously come forward to seek justice. BERSIH 2.0 wishes to support them if they choose to file lawsuits against the authorities as well as to cover their medical expenses.
  2. The authorities have decided to launch a civil suit against 10 members of the BERSIH 2.0 steering committee for alleged damages amounting to RM122,000 that were incurred during the Bersih 3.0 “duduk bantah” assembly. The government also wants general damages, interest and a declaration that Bersih breached Section 6(2)(g) of the Peaceful Assembly Act (PAA), despite the fact that the government also declared the PAA as a revolutionary law which would facilitate peaceful assemblies.
  3. Meanwhile, DBKL has also has sent a notice of demand to co-chairperson Ambiga Sreenevasan and committee member Maria Chin Abdullah, demanding compensation of RM351,203.45 for “losses” incurred during the same event. This includes damage to “landscaping and trees, the cost of setting up metal barricades, cost of transport and support staff, damage to signboards and barriers, as well as overtime allowances, food, drink and transport costs for law enforcers”.

The two wholly unfair charges by the government are seen as targeted attacks against BERSIH 2.0 aimed at derailing the call for free and fair elections. Thus, BERSIH 2.0 urgently appeals to all Malaysians to maintain its focus on this crucial issue and support the effort in whatever ways that they can.

Many lawyers have come forward to volunteer their legal services to BERSIH 2.0 victims as well as to the Steering Committee members who had been sued by the government. While their services are free, there are still expenses to be paid out especially filing fees, transportation and other administrative costs.

Funds raised will cover bail money (where applicable), legal administrative expenses and medical costs. [RM150,000]

BERSIH Awareness Campaign – Keluar Mengundi Lawan Penipuan

Funds are also required for the continued awareness of the various issues surrounding the 8 demands of BERSIH 2.0 to be spread to greater numbers of Malaysians. The awareness campaign activities will cover Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak. We will be printing leaflets, producing short cartoon video clips for easy dissemination, conduct workshops and ceramahs to highlight the eight demands of BERSIH 2.0, activities to encourage young voters to vote and be involved, and lastly for BERSIH 2.0 to develop our own BERSIH.TV so that we can have our voices heard.

We are embarking on campaigns throughout the country to bring the message to as many people as possible. With your backing, the core message of “Keluar Mengundi Lawan Penipuan” will reach far and wide, thus putting pressure on the authorities to implement the necessary changes and for you as a voter to decide wisely.

Funds raised will cover BERSIH 2.0 awareness campaign and communications [RM100,000]

The funds collected will be regularly updated on our website with audited accounts made available.

SUPPORT “BERSIH RM1 CAMPAIGN” AND SEND YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO EMPOWER, BERSIH 2.0 Secretariat at:

Account No: 12380000661-10-0

Account Name: Persatuan Kesedaran Komuniti Selangor

Bank: CIMB Islamic, Section 52, Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia

Thank you. Salam BERSIH!

Steering Committee

Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections 2.0 (BERSIH 2.0)

The Steering Committee of BERSIH 2.0 comprises:

Dato’ Ambiga Sreenevasan (Co-Chairperson), Datuk A. Samad Said (Co-Chairperson), Ahmad Shukri Abdul Razab, Andrew Ambrose, Andrew Khoo, Anne Lasimbang, Arul Prakkash, Arumugam K., Awang Abdillah, Dr Farouk Musa, Hishamuddin Rais, Liau Kok Fah, Maria Chin Abdullah, Matthew Vincent, Niloh Ason, Richard Y W Yeoh, Dr Subramaniam Pillay, Dato’ Dr Toh Kin Woon, Dr Wong Chin Huat, Dato’ Yeo Yang Poh and Zaid Kamaruddin.

Wednesday, August 1, 2012

City Council Loses Appeal in 'Chapel Demolition' Case



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.

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

Bersih 2.0 is LEGAL: Court quashes Hisham's "tainted" ban, time for BN to APOLOGISE




Written by  Maria Begum, published by Malaysia Chronicle on 24 July 2012.

The Kuala Lumpur High Court has ruled that Bersih 2.0 was not an unlawful society, quashing a Home Ministry order aim to derail the free and fair election's movement decision to hold a mass protest on July 9, 2011.

While the court decision will surely be savored by many Malaysians and civil society alike, it is also a slap in the face for Home Minister Hishammuddin Hussein and his cousin, Prime Minister Najib Razak.

The two men are regarded as the prime movers behind the BN government's brutal crackdown on some 50,000-odd peaceful demonstrators.

"This vindicates the Bersih 2.0 steering committee and the rally goers. All they ever wanted to do was to show that they supported clean elections but many were cruelly beaten through no fault of their own. If anyone should be blamed, it should be the BN for its flawed conduct, policies and desperate attempts to cling to power," PKR vice president Chua Jui Meng told Malaysia Chronicle.

Calling Hisham's decision a "tainted" one, Justice Rohana Yusuf said the Bersih 2.0 coalition of civil societies, though not officially registered, could still be considered a society under the Societies Act.

“The minister’s order is quashed because Bersih is a lawful society,” Rohana said.

She added that even if it could be proved Bersih 2.0 was a society that had been used for purposes prejudicial to the security of Malaysia, the order was unreasonable and not valid.

Hisham had declared Bersih 2.0 unlawful, citing section 5 of the Societies Act 1966 as investigations had shown that Bersih 2.0 was not a registered organisation and that it was creating unease among the people.

Bersih 2.0 chairman Ambiga Sreenevasan and 13 of her colleagues had in response filed a judicial review seeking to get the Najib administration to lift its July ban.

"It's the right decision. It affirms what has been said by the brave people who attended the rally all along. The government must be acciuntable and held responsible for all the unlawful arrests made against the innocent people under the pretext of 'illegal Bersih'," PKR legal bureau director Latheefa Koya told Malaysia Chronicle.

"Now that the court has made its ruling, I think it is only fitting that the BN government and the police issue a public apology to Bersih, and of course to the thousands of Malaysians who attended the protest."

Sunday, May 20, 2012

Fundamental misinterpretation of the Equality Act (UK)



Published by The Telegraph on 11 May 2012. Reported by John Bingham.

The Law Society has banned a conference on family issues to be addressed by a senior High Court judge because debating gay marriage breached its “diversity policy”.


Sir Paul Coleridge, the Family Division judge who recently launched a new charity to combat marital break-up, had been lined up as the main speaker at the annual event at the Law Society’s London headquarters later this month.
But organisers were forced to cancel it at short notice after the Law Society ruled that the programme reflected “an ethos which is opposed to same sex marriage”.
They accused the Society, which represents solicitors in England and Wales, of an “extraordinary” attempt to stifle debate on current affairs and warned that the cancellation itself could be against equality laws.
Lawyers, journalists and think tank chiefs were due to speak alongside Sir Paul at the annual conference organised by the World Congress of Families, a US-based non-religious group which promotes traditional family values.
Around 120 people were expected to attend event which this year took as its theme: “One Man. One Woman. Making the case for marriage, for the good of society.”
Sir Paul, who made headlines last week as he launched a new charity, the Marriage Foundation, was due to speak on the effects of divorce on society.
A follow-up event for MPs was being planned take place in Parliament after the conference.
Organisers said the conference had been booked for up to six months and a deposit of around £4,700 has already been paid.
But in an email on Thursday, Adam Tallis, general manager of Amper&and, the company which organises hospitality at The Law Society, informed them that the booking was being cancelled and the deposit refunded.
“We regret the need to take this step,” he wrote.
“I can assure you that it is not something we do lightly.
“However, where an event does not fit within this company’s diversity policy, it is a step we must take.
“The nature of your event has recently been drawn to our attention, and it is contrary to our diversity policy, espousing as it does an ethos which is opposed to same sex marriage.”
Same-sex marriage is not currently legal in Britain, although a consultation is under way on a possible change in the law.
Andrea Williams, director of Christian Concern, which is a member of the World Congress of Families said: “It is just extraordinary that the professional body that regulates solicitors in this country is censoring debate on a major change in the law that will inevitably have massive consequences for society.
“It does seem to be a fundamental misreading of the Equality Act.
“This was supposed to be a genuine open debate on the issues, constructing a case for marriage in the public sphere, and they seem to be closing it down.
“Of all the places in society where you might expect freedom of debate to be protected, the regulatory body of the legal profession would surely be at the top of the list.
“This statement is highly political, highly charged and wholly inappropriate.
“A lot of lawyers will be very alarmed by this and ashamed of their regulatory body.”
But Desmond Hudson, chief executive of the Law Society, said: “We are proud of our role in promoting diversity in the solicitors’ profession and felt that the content of this conference sat uncomfortably with our stance.
“Through our events and venues supplier, we have assisted the organisers in identifying an alternative, non Law Society venue.”